NC0086070_Permit Issuance_19971201

" State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A14
1:3 E F=10
December 1. 1997
Mr. James S. Erwin, Jr.
Director of the Henderson County Utilities Department
101 East Allen Street
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Permit No. NCO086070
Western NC Justice Academy
Henderson County
Dear Mr. Erwin:
In accordance with the application for a discharge permit received on February 21,
1997, the Division is forwarding herewith the subject NPDES permit. This permit is issued
pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency dated December 6, 1983.
In response to concerns raised by members of the public, the Division of Water
Quality held a public hearing regarding the subject permit on September 25., 1997. After
considering the recommendations of the hearing office, the Director has made the decision to
issue the permit with the location amendment as requested. The final NPDES permit
contained herein is issued for the facility to be located in Edneyville, with discharge to Lewis
Creek at a location shown on the attached map.
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, Post Office Drawer 27447, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27611-7447. Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please take note that this permit is not transferable. Part II, EA. addresses the
requirements to be followed in case of change in ownership or control of this discharge. 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 or any
other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper
86070 cov ltr

A
If you have any questions regarding this permit, please contact Steven D. Pellei at
telephone number [phone], extension 516.
cc: Central Files
Asheville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Mr. Roosevelt Childress, EPA
Roger Thorpe
NPDES Unit
Compliance Enforcement Unit
Technical Assistance & Certification Unit
Sinc rely,
A. 0000
Preston Howard, J , P.E.

El
Permit No. NCO086070
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,
Henderson County Utilities
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Edneyville WWTP
on U.S. Highway 64
Edney-ville
Henderson County
to receiving waters designated as Lewis Creek in the French Broad 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 January 1,1998.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on October 31, 2000.
Signed this day December 1,1997.
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Direct0
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

14
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Henderson County Utilities
is hereby authorized to:
Permit No. NC0086070
1. After receiving an Authorization to Construct permit, operate a 0.030 MGD wastewater
treatment facility consisting of a dual train extended aeration package plant with bar screen,
flow recorder, equalization basin, dual aeration basins, dual secondary clarifiers, tertiary
filters, post aeration, disinfection, effluent flow measurement, and aerated sludge holding
tank located at the Edneyville Community, on US Highway 64, Edneyville, Henderson
County (See Part III of this Permit), and
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into the
Lewis Creek which is classified Class C Trout in the French Broad River Basin.

+l- I r � � •, �♦ • . • .� 1Yf !( 1 , � 'JL Pa�l>;'C •
)00�
01
R I r . Q •• rLn
�E EYKLfrL E, C 1 , .. - > '• (n 1' - -� r• . .
fn
18 i Edneyville' r %/.,% ° ' �� _ J ' (• �--r
` J Ch ✓ \ `_
-
I ,, _ a� i • � • .' � %ice / j• •\ Q
. l
'Edneyville ! BM LHT •� /
c
1850
7
!,'/ �� . i / / 2200 ✓ / `/ 228 A J C rl-
/ \ , J .: ,•� C 1 ; •ate a
8M' T •1851
j \ 215•t
I i
Discharge point
- BLUE RIDGE 1'
37
1F228
N
376
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
PRIMARY HIGHWAY LIGHT -DUTY ROAD, HARD OR
HARD SURFACE IMPROVED SURFACE --
SECONDARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE UNIMPROVED ROAD
Latitude - 35023_ 02" Longitude 82°21'27"
Map # F9NE Sub -basin 4-03-02
Stream Class C-Trout
Discharge Codes i 1
Receiving Stream Lewis Creek
Design Q 0.03 MGD Permit expires 10/31/00
1,000,000 FEET
:4N
378
SCALE 1:24 000
20' 379
0 1 MILE
malt
0 7000 FEET
1 0 1 KILOMETER
CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET
QUAD LOCATION Henderson County Utilities
NCO086070
Henderson County
Edneyville WWTP

A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
Permit No. N
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(
serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHABACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING
HF_UU1K1ZMtN
r b
Sample
Location'
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
Measurement
Sample
Average
Avera a
Maximum
Fre uenc
T e
or E
E, I
0.030
Continuous
RecordingI
Flow MGD
BOD52 (April 1 - October 31) VJ6 <_:�0
5.0 mg/I
7.5 mg/l
Weekly
Composite
E, I
BOD52 (Novemberl -March 31) <
10.0 mg/l
15.0 mg/1
Weekly
Composite
E, I �
Total Suspended Solids2
30..0 m /l
45.0 m /l
Weekl
Weekly
Composite
Composite
E
NH3 as N (April 1 -October 31) 06i WAI
2.0 mg/l
Weekly
Composite
E r
NH3,, as N (November 1 - March 31)WIQ NN
4.0 mg/l
ml
400/100 ml
Weekl
Grab
Grab
E, U, D
E
FecMColiform(geometric means rg Lo200/100
Tota`Resi al Chlorine4 Wt� W
28 /l
Dail
Grab
'
Tern rature- °C s V
M11J.6.0_m
Weekly
Grab
Grab
Dissolved x e
WeeklyGrab
U, D
ivit ' �L
Total Nitro en �L
Semi -Annual
Composite
Com oSite
E
E
:1
Total Phosphorus � �
,Semi-annual
,.
"
01
N.-e2 -_W1 9"P4'-- 4-(.t 'Z 9 0 5"
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U- Upstream- 50 ft. upstream of discharge point, D - Downstream- 0.5 miles downstream of
discharge point. '
2 e monthly average BOD and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
The y g 5
+
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
"J
1 cr j
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
5 Instream monitoring for temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and fecal coliform shall be conducted weekly on a year round basis. ;..,
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
7 November 1997
TO: Preston Howard
DirectorifF
f
FROM: Roger Thorpe •) it
Water Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office 1997.
SUBJECT: Meeting Officer's Report & Recommendations bOJ�C Bi'�titVC!
NPDES Permit Meeting N0086070
Henderson County Utilities
Western North Carolina Justice Academy
In November 1996 an application for a NPDES permit was submitted by
Henderson County Utilities for a proposed discharge of 40,000 gpd of domestic
wastewater to Lewis Creek, a class C-Trout stream in the French Broad River Basin. The
proposed treatment plant would serve a soon to be constructed Western North Carolina
Justice Academy and the surrounding community. The Western North Carolina Justice
Academy is to be located at an old Edneyville school site and is proposing to train 150
students initially. In addition to the academy, the treatment plant would serve the sewer
needs of 28 residential and commercial customers.
The Permits and Engineering Unit reviewed the application package and
determined that the engineering alternatives analysis was incomplete and the package
was therefore returned. The package was resubmitted in February 1997 and at that time
the Division began its own investigation of disposal alternatives. During the evaluation
process, the applicant twice requested changes in the discharge point location in response
to local community concerns. Based on the Division's investigation it was determined
that only a plant of 30,000 gpd could be justified, but a stream discharge was determined
to be the most cost effective alternative.
Due to much public concern, a public meeting was noticed and as the appointed
meeting officer, I conducted the meeting on 25 September 1997. Four people made
comments. The county's consultant spoke on behalf of the county and explained the
process it had gone through and explained that a site for location of the treatment plant
had not been selected. This apparently has been a major concern of some people in the
community. One community resident spoke in favor of the project: Two other
community residents spoke against the project. They were basically opposed to all
wastewater treatment plants and were afraid of malfunctions, noise and odors. No one

spoke about a concern that the proposed receiving stream is used for irrigation of
farmland which is what I understood was a concern.
Just a couple of days before the public meeting was held, the county submitted a
request to move the proposed discharge point about a 1000 feet upstream. Based on this
information, I decided to hold open the meeting record for two additional weeks to allow
additional written comments to be submitted. This was explained at the meeting and the
audience was encouraged to contact anyone they knew who might be affected by moving
the proposed point of discharge.
Eight letters were received following the hearing; one supporting and seven
opposed. Of those opposed, two say that the creek is used for irrigation by other people,
but they don't mention by whom. One person says that he irrigates out of Clear Creek.
Lewis Creek is a tributary to Clear Creek at a point approximately 1.5 miles downstream
of the point of discharge. Clear Creek has a 7Q10 of 6.0 cfs. Therefore there is
significant dilution at this point. One person says that she does not currently irrigate out
of Lewis Creek but plans to irrigate fruits, vegetables and herbs in the future. Her
property is located at the confluence of Lewis and Clear Creeks. Again this is
approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the proposed discharge point. Other reasons
mentioned for opposing the discharge included fear of mechanical failure, effect on trout
populations and creek flooding.
Recommendations
The effluent limits proposed for this permit are BOD-5mgl1, NH3 as N-2mg/l,
TRC-28ug/l, D.0-6mg/l, and Fecal Coliform-200/100 mi. These stringent effluent limits
would not normally be imposed where the receiving stream has a summer 7Q10 of 1.2 cfs
as this one does. However, these more stringent limits are being proposed as an extra
safety precaution due to the possibility of the stream flow being lower due to crop
irrigation.
With the stringent effluent limits proposed and the amount of dilution available, I
would not anticipate any water quality standard violations, and the quality of the stream
should be adequate as an irrigation source. Therefore, I recommend that the permit be
issued.
cc: -PSave Goodrich

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
Permit No.: NCO086070
Permittee Name: Henderson County Utilities
Facility Name:
Western NC Justice Academy
Facility Status:
Proposed
Permit Status:
New
Major:
Minor:
Pipe Number:
001 ,030
Design Capacity:
0.92!rKm
Domestic Flow:
100 percent
Industrial Flow:
0 percent
Comments: This location -formerly the Edneyville School
The applicant requested limits for flow at 0.04 MGD, however P & E
can only justify flow to 0.022 MGD. The regional office says that
irrigation water is taken upstream of proposed discharge local, but
downstream there is still farmland.
Reeving Stream: Lewis Creek
Class:
C -Tr
Sub -Basin:
04-03-02
USGS Quad:
F 9 NE (see attached map)
County:
Henderson
Regional Office:
Asheville
Previous
Treatment
Expiration Date:
00/00/00 Plant Class: II
Classification changes
within three miles: None
index:
6-55-11-6
Requested by Steve Pellei Date: 07-21-97
Prepared by: ✓`Date: 8�/t/Y7
Reviewed : C Date:
�� G• � s 33 �, � �� (9
Modeler: Date Rec: INumber#
at. 1 u q SS
Drainage Area (s* mi.) `�•7 Avg. Stream "
flow (cfs) 8
7QI0 (cfs) 1 R Winter 7Q10 IJ t 30Q2 (CFS) 2•(
Toxicity Limits: IWC % Acute / Chronic
Instream Monitoring: ?'
Parameters:.
Upstream / i Location
Downstream y Location:
Effluent Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (mg/I)
j
j0
NH3 as N (mg/1)
D.O. (mg/l)
6
6
TSS (mg/1)
.30
30
Fecal Col. (/100 ml)
Zda
Zoo
H(SU)
' ^7
(�-9
17 /9

Western NC Justice Academy jmn
Lewis Creek C-TR 3/ 14/97
040302
The proposed facility is a 50,000 GPD plant that discharges into Lewis Creek in the French
Broad River Basin. According to Linda Wiggs of ARO, Lewis Creek is a tributary to
upper Clear Creek. There has already been some public concern about the discharger
going into this stream.
Forwarded messages via Steve Pellei from Dave Goodrich and Paul White,
ARO
Dave's interpretation of message from Paul: That the farmers are drying up Lewis
Creek by irrigation. He recommends that Steve meet with Ruth and Carla about the stream
being at zero based on the information received from the public. This info should
override USGS flow estimates and he recommends that we give 5&2 limits
with 5 mg/l DO and 17 ug/l chlorine, to ensure the maximum level of
treatment. Also alternatives analysis needs to be completed by the
applicant.
Message from Paul White: ARO has received a number of calls from Henderson Co.
about this permit,. Evidently, Preston had agreed to hurry along this project and the County
is asking what additional info is needed to get things going. Paul indicated that 1) there
needs to be a revision of the alternatives analysis that has been submitted.
He received copy of the analysis on Feb. 20th but it is obviously incomplete. He says that
he has not received a request for a staff report from P&E but he intends to go and visit the
site very soon. 2) He also says that there seems to be a problem with the receiving
stream. It is used for irrigation and farmers say that they sandbag the stream and
dry it up to get water during drought conditions. They are concerned that
below this point, the effluent from the Academy plant will comprise 100 %
of the stream.
March 17,1997 - Rec'd Staff Report from ARO Paul White has visited site and
there are numerous issues that need to be resolved before permit finalization.
ie -site is located in 100 year flood plain, no flood info provided, this needs to be
considered
-facilities do not meet current regs for a 50,000 gpd extended aeration treatment plant
because of requirements for dual path aeration and clarification and reliablity measures.
-all the non discharge options available have not been evaluated.
- (design) flow estimates appear to be higher than needed.
-no present worth comparison of alternatives
-consideration of temporary non discharging system for the Academy
-land cost is high at $22,000/acre
-potential for zero flow during droughts due to up stream irrigation

Western NC Justice Academy jmn
page 2 4/9/97
Other issues addressed in staff report, not listed here. Evidently, Preston Howard wrote
letter (12/12/96) to facility requesting resolution of several of these issues.
Model Results
Using estimated flows of s7Q10=1.2 cfs, w7Q10=1.8 cfs and QA = 7 cfs
Level B modeling analysis: For summer, effluent limits of BOD5=30 mg/l, N113=13
mg/l (for toxicity) predicts DO min. of 7.19 mg/l, 0.6 mi. downstream of outfall. End DO
= 7.29 at milept. 1.6 mi.
For winter, effluent limits of 30/30 protects w/ DO min. of 9.30 mg/1 at outfall.
If assume that s7Q10 = 0.05 cfs, because of irrigation, not quite drying up
the stream completely but with minimal flow enough to consider it with
positive flow.
1) @ BODS=5, NH3=2, DO = 6, DO min. = 6.67 mg/1 @ outfall.
2) @ BOD5=17.5, NH3=6.5, DO =69 DO min. = 6.11 mg/l, 0.5 mi below outfall.
3) @ BOD5=13.5, NH3=7.5, DO =6, DO min. = 6.11 mg/l, 0.5 mi below outfall.
4) @ BOD5=27.5, NH3=4, DO =6, DO min. = 6.13 mg/l, 0.5 mi below outfall.
***In order to protect Lewis Creek from any potential DO problems
because of the irrigation practice, will recommend that tertiary limits be
given because of the assumption of 7Q10=0 (or very close to 0 ) and
30Q2>0. The other limits recommended by modeling predict the DO min.
so close to 6 mg/l that I do not think that these limits will give the best
protection for Lewis Creek.
4/29/97
Dave Goodrich says that Western NC Justice will be changing the discharge
location from Lewis Creek to Clear Creek. Preston Howard has promised a
quick turnaround on the new location. Map was submitted and the new site
was Clear Creek at Gilliam Road. There is still some discrepancy about the
amount of wasteflow, does not appear that 50,000 GPD of flow can be
justified. P&E came up with Only 10,000 GPD needed, but Preston has
said that he will allow an additional 11,000 GPD for any future connections
to this plant. Wants to be considered as a regional facility.
Ran two models at the Clear Creek discharge point. 1) Qw=0.025
MGD, P&E can justify 10,000 GPD and Director will allow an
additional 11,000 GPD for future tie-ons that Academy has
indicated will occur, will round up this 22,000 GPD to 25,000
GPD. 2) Previously requested Qw of 0.050 MGD. Level B
model results indicate that secondary treatment of 30/30 limits
will protect DO in Clear Creek. Also recommend fecal limit of
200/100ml and TRC limit of 28 µg/l.

Western North Carolina Justice Academy page 3
8/ 15/97
Facility requested another WLA back on Lewis Creek downstream about
0.5 miles from the original site on Lewis Creek. Concerns are still the
same with farmers using Lewis Creek for irrigation during drought seasons
and completely sandbagging the stream. Lewis Creek is also designated as
a trout stream and must be protected for instream DO of 6 mg/l.
Will again recommend tertiary limits for the Justice Academy for protection
of stream during these farming practices. These limits initially
recommended in 4/97 WLA for Lewis Creek discharge. They were never
finalized because the permittee then requested that site be changed for a
discharge point in Clear Creek and the WLA (#8552) for Lewis Creek was
deleted. ME is in agreement with assignment of tertiary limits and will
discuss with Paul White of ARO for their confirmation.

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION. Steve Pellei
DATE: August 18, 1997
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
COUNTY Henderson
PERMIT NUMBER NC0086070
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Western North Carolina Justice Academy
Mailing: Henderson County Utilities
101 East Allen Street
Hendersonville, NC 28792
2. Date of Investigation: July 7 & 18, 1997
3. Report Prepared By: Paul White
4. Persons Contacted and Tel. No.: James S. Erwin, Jr. 704-697-4818
Utilities Director
Jon Laughter 704-692-9089 Engineer
S. Directions to Site: Site is located in the Edneyville Community
approximately 7 miles east of I-26 on Hwy 64. The proposed
treatment plant site is 1 mile west of Edneyville on Lewis Creek,
approximately 1200 feet north of Hwy 64.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 350 23' 10" Longitude: 820 21' 35"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. F 9 NE U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Bat Cave
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X_ Yes No If No, explain:
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Site is located
in a flood plain. No 100 year flood information was provided in the
application to indicate if the site is in the 100 year flood plain.
Soil mapping indicates frequent flooding in the general vicinity.
Flooding would have to be taken into consideration for location of
the plant facilities and access road.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: 250 feet
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Lewis Creek
a. Classification: C Trout
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: French Broad 04-03-02
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream
Page 1

uses: Receiving stream is approximately 20•- 30 feet wide bank
to bank with a wetted channel of 5 - 15 feet at average flow.
Stream bed is gravel and sand. Stream banks are tree -lined
except for areas adjacent to plowed fields and pastures. Berms
have been constructed adjacent to the creek in some areas to
help prevent flooding. A primary use in the area of the
proposed discharge is for irrigation of adjacent farm land. It
is understood that common practice during drought periods is to
place sandbags in creek to create enough depth to pump from,
essentially drying up the creek immediately downstream.
Other uses include aquatic and wildlife propagation, fishing,
and swimming in Clear Creek, less than 2 miles downstream.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted: Requested: 0.040 MGD
(Ultimate Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater
Treatment facility? none
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current
design capacity none
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by Authorizations
to Construct issued in the previous two years: none
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially
constructed wastewater treatment facilities: none
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment
facilities: The description in the engineering report is
limited to a package plant for activated sludge.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: chlorine, ammonia,
janitorial chemicals.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): n/a
in development approved
should be required not needed
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: none specified
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ Permit
Residuals Contractor
Telephone Number
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP PFRP OTHER
C . Landfill:
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): II
4. SIC Codes (s) : 8221
Primary 11 Secondary
Page 2

a f 0 4
Main Treatment Unit Code: 0607
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or
are any public monies involved. (municipals only)? yes
2. Special monitoring or limitations including toxicity requests: none
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates: none
Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all of
the non -discharge options available. Please provide regional
perspective for each option evaluated.
Spray Irrigation: Applicant has not fully evaluated this option.
Connection to Regional Sewer System: Due to the required 7 miles of
sewer line, this is not likely to be the least costly option, unless
the cost is met by other users as well.
Subsurface: This option has not been fully evaluated by the
applicant. Work by staff indicated that this option is not
competitive is cost.
Other disposal options:
An alternatives analysis was completed by staff which indicated that
surface discharge is the most cost effective alternative.
5. Other Special Items:
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This staff report is in response to an application by Henderson County
Utilities, revised to a requested discharge location on Lewis Creek
approximately 1200 ft. north (downstream) of Hwy 64. Insufficient
information was submitted to make a determination on the issue. Division
staff completed an alternatives analysis based on information supplied by
the applicant and gathered by staff.
The following items concerning the application were of concern and were
addressed before a recommendation was made:
1. Flow estimates in the application appear to be high. Flows
generated from different areas of the facility are added as if the
total number of people were at different locations at the same time.
Section 0.10 states that the dormitory will not be a part of the
initial construction project, yet Section 0.11 lists the 1998 flow
at 22,500 gpd, which includes dormitory flows. Flows from the
proposed justice academy are estimated to be approximately 13,000
gpd, including the.dormitory. This assumes that no commercial
laundry facility will be on site. The total including anticipated
community sewer connections would be 27,500 gpd. Cost estimates
Page 3

v ! 11 4P
2.
3.
4.
5.
werebased on a revised flow of 30,000 gpd.
The proposed land requirement of 50 acres in the application appears
to be high even for a flow of 40,000 gpd. Cost estimates by staff
for on -site disposal were based on 26 - 27 acres.
A cost of $60,000 for septic tankage in the application appears to
be high. This was addressed in the cost estimates completed by
staff.
A 3001 contingency cost in the application adds significantly to the
total cost without indicating what this covers. A contingency of
15% was reserved in staff cost estimates.
The present value of costs in the application does not provide a
breakdown of the recurring costs and is erroneous. This was
completed by staff.
6. As stated in the December 12, 1996 letter from Preston Howard, spray
irrigation does not require an equal area for repair as does the
subsurface option. This was addressed by the analysis comleted by
staff.
7. With additional treatment, land application under the water re -use
rules would allow a significant reduction in required land area due
to reduced buffers. This option was not addressed by the applicant.
This option was discussed by staff, but was not estimated to
significantly change the viability of spray irrigation as an option.
8. The emergency storage lagoon for the spray irrigation option is
proposed by the applicant to be 4 feet deep. A deeper lagoon would
reduce the land area requirement. A deeper, more compact lagoon
configuration was considered by staff.
9. The cost of the off site spray irrigation system in the application
appears to be high, specifically item No. 5 Retention Pond and item
No. 8 Installation. These items were addressed in the analysis
completed by staff.
10. The wastewater treatment plant cost estimate list in the application
does not include an influent lift station or auxiliary generator.
These were included by staff.
11. It is not logical to assume no land cost associated with the
discharging option. A land cost was included by staff.
12. Cost of site work for the treatment plant site should be included.
Protection from flooding and access should be considered. It was
concluded that for the purpose of comparing alternatives, this cost
could be avoided and was not included in the alternatives analysis.
13. The treatment plant described on pages 17 and 18 does not meet
current regulations due to the requirements for dual path aeration
and clarification and reliability measures. The method of sludge
disposal should also be provided. These issues were addressed by
Page 4

the alternatives analysis completed by staff.
The alternatives analysis completed by staff indicates that surface
discharge is the least costly option, including annual recurring costs.
It was discussed with the Point Source Branch and recommended that the
project be sent to public notice with the intent to issue. Due to local
public involvement, a public hearing should be noticed simultaneously.
Signature of Report Preparer
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
7
Date
Page 5

Nc0oIrP0,70
ENGINEERING PROPOSAL
EVALUATION OF
WASTEWATER DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
PROPOSED DISCHARGE
TO
LEWIS CREEK
FOR
WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA
.. JUSTICE ACADEMY
HENDERSON COUNTY
I�
EDNEYVILLE, NC
JOB NO. 95-211
REVISED JANUARY 30, 1997
REVISED APRIL 18, 1997
REVISED JUNE 27, 1997
FOR
�. HENDERSON COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
HENDERSONVILLE, N.C.
.. (CLEAR CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT)
PREPARED BY
LAUGHTER, AUSTIN AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
131 FOIRJHeAI ENUE EAST
E HENDERSO P40j4�+)�AROLINA 28792
.. SEAL NO. 4066
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
N.C. REGISTRATION NUMBER 4066
1
D:\winwor&swrhm\SDA5211 b.dx
cn
r

ABBREVIATIONS
LAA
Laughter, Austin and Associates, P.A.
WNCJA
Proposed Western North Carolina Justice Academy
NCDEHNR-DEM
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
�+
Resources - Division of Environmental Management
MGD
Million gallons per day
GPD
Gallons per day
FM
WWTP
Wastewater Treatment Plant
NCDOT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
•�
Division of Highways
SR
State Route
ROW
Rights -Of -Way
HCC
Henderson County Commissioners
CCWSD
Clear Creek Water and Sewer District
managed by Henderson County Utilities Department
for Henderson County Board Of Commissioners
MBAJ
Martin, Boal, Anthony & Johnson, Architects
a Charlotte based Architectural Design Firm engaged by the State
HCHD Henderson County Health Department
2
MR

MW
am
,m
EVALUATION OF WASTEWATER DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
No
0.0
GENERAL INFORMATION
0.1
Facility/Project Name: WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA
JUSTICE ACADEMY
0.2
Location: Henderson County
Edneyville Community
U.S. 64
0.3
Owner: State Of North Carolina
0.4
Prepared For: Henderson County Utilities Department
(Clear Creek Water and Sewer District)
0.5
Prepared By: LAUGHTER, AUSTIN AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
JON H. LAUGHTER, P.E.
N.C.P.E. 4066
131 Fourth Avenue East
fe„
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
Telephone: [phone]
[phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
0.6
This proposed project will serve:
A) Western North Carolina Justice Academy
Head count/Sanitary Demands:
Sanitary GPD
Total
Number Requirement
San. GPD
no
Cafe/Classroom
Meals/Day 500 7
3 500
PM
People/Day 175 20
3500
Administration
People/Day 25 20
500
Gymnasium
People/Day 150 25
3750
4

WN
Dormitory(Future)
�. Beds 150 75 11250
Gallons Per Day - Sanitary 229500
(These numbers were provided by 1fartin, Boal, Anthony & Johnson, Architects of Charlotte;
the Project Architect hired by the State for the IVNCJA project.)
�+ B.) Properties/Potential Users for Wastewater Services:
Additional Wastewater Services will be provided to private and public property
�+ owners who adjoin the location/route of the proposed gravity sewer main from the
Academy to WWTP. The WWTP will provide the community with needed sewer
system.
The chart on the next page will provide an overview of the wastewater service
needs/demands proposed for the affected and potential sanitary sewer users:
I"
MR
M"
0"
FM
5
R"

qa
,
so
MW
s1
wo
Am
POTENTIAL USERS of a COMMUNITY WASTEWATER SERVICE
PARCEL #
OWNER/NAME
CLASSIFICATION
ANTICIPATED SEWER NEEDS (GPD)
1
060144-2828
Boy Scouts
Public (domestic)
120
2
060144-1862
Margaret Saltz
Commercial (domestic)
360
3
060144-0463
Leon Lamb
commercial (domestic)
500
4
0601-34-7198
James McCraw
Commercial (domestic)
400
5
0601-33-6857
Otis Haynes
Residential
420
6
0601-33-3638
Otis Haynes
Residential
420
7
0601-33-2611
Hamid Owenby
Residential
420
8
0601-33-2243
Harold Owenby
Residential
420
9
0601-23-8365
Henderson County Library
Public (domestic)
400
10
0601-23-4254
Gaylerd Davis
Residential
420
11
0601-23-1343
Donald Laughter
Commercial (domestic)
420
12
0601-23-0352
Donald Laughter
Commercial (domestic)
' 420
13
0601-13-7263
Julianne Thompson
Residential
420
14
0601-134187
Terry Rhodes
Commercial (domestic)
420
15
0601-13-2182
Terry Rhodes
Commercial (domestic)
i 420
16
0601-12-0935
Stuart Belcher
Residential
420
17
0601-02-9814
Gaylerd Davis
Residential
420
18
0601-02-8769
Martha Donaldson
Residential
420
19
0601-02-8702
Ida Rogers
Residential
420
20
0601-02-7621
Gaylerd Davis
Residential
420
21
0601-02-5496
Trinidad Salgado
Residential
420
22
0601-02-4430
Lois Broom
Residential
420
23
0601-024161
David Coston
commercial (domestic)
420
24
0601-02-2006
David Coston
commercial (domestic)
420
25
9691-91-8703
Rebecca Dalton
Residential
420
26
9691-90-9419
Ida Rogers
Residential
360
27
0601-34-9528
Peter A. Thon
commercial (domestic)
360
28
9691-82-8112
Riley Jones
commercial domestic
3,600
Total Anticipated Sewer Needs in Gallons per Da GPD
14,500
(1ve=enSeWerW3Z11ublels ms)
0601-45-2312 WNC Justice Academy Educational
Combined Total Required and Anticipated (Potential) Sewer Flow =
22,500 GPD
379000 GPD
0.7 Estimated Wastewater Flow (Design): 402000 gallons per day
WNCJA - 22$500 GPD + Potential Users - 14,500 GPD = 37,000 GPD.
This anticipated peak flow combines the design flow needs for the WNC Justice
Academy with an added amount for potential existing and proposed area
development which would benefit from a community wastewater service (sewer
system) installation.
6

am
am
am 0.8 A Wastewater Treatment Package Plant is proposed adjoining Lewis Creek. The
Package Plant consists of a prefabricated steel sewage treatment plant to include
aeration tank, clarifier, air compressors, diffuser, bar screen, chlorine contact
GM chamber, skimmers, grinder pumps and all necessary appurtenances and electrical
control equipment.
am 0.9 This WWTP will serve the WNCJA and other development in the general area.
Adequate sizing for a WWTP to treat the expected combined wastewater flows
should not be sized to less than 10% of the plant capacity. This requires
Ow the selection of a minimum of 40,000 GPD WWTP capacity whereas 10% of this
volume would be (40,000 x 10% = 4,000 or 40,000 less 4,000 = 36,000 GPD)
412000 GPD and the 10% demand constraint would equal 36,000 GPD.
In order to avoid unnecessary load demands for the first year on the proposed
treatment plant option, it is recommended to select a WWTP capable of treating at
least 40,000 GPD.
0.10 At the WNCJA site, the proposed Dormitory will be delayed and not be a part
of the initial construction project. All other aspects of the project are expected to
be in -place at the start of the 1998 operational period.
0.11 Time Constraints:
• Building construction for the Academy is under construction. Demolition has
already begun on the WNCJA site.
• Sewer system must be "in place" by December 1997 to begin final testing and
inspection prior to start-up and authorization for in-service operation.
• Water must be "in place" by December 1997.
• Classes at the academy will begin in Spring 1998; initially there will be 150
students plus 36 faculty members plus 14 visitors for a total of 200.
• Treatment considerations for WNCJA :
First year (1998)..............................222500 GPD
(* See General Information, Section 0.6A of this Evaluation Report)
• Treatment considerations for the Potential Users:
First year(1998)...............................10,900 GPD **
(** See General Information, Section 0.6B of this Evaluation Report)
• Funding for a proposed 150 bed dormitory has not been appropriated to date.
Academy students will likely be housed in motels for the first year.
• Construction of a proposed WWTP and gravity sewers to Lewis Creek will
require approximately 4 months once initial construction has begun.
• In respect to the sewer deadline, several property and business owners in the
7

general area that would be affected by the improvements of sewer service (a
service that a majority of property owners have expressed a positive interest)
have stated that the main concern is the affects of the construction and
installation to their business(es).
• The North Carolina General Assembly has enacted legislation and mandated the
WNCJA project.
Mn 0.12 Existing on -site well pumps and an existing on -site wastewater treatment are
unserviceable and cannot be considered for temporary or permanent use by
qft the proposed WNCJA.
0.13 The 22.7 acre WNCJA site has been conveyed to the State of North Carolina.
qQ
MM 1.0 EVALUATION
ENVIRONMENTAL FEASIBILITY of DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES
0
The following non -discharge alternatives have been considered:
No
MN 1.1 CONNECTION TO EXISTING SEWERAGE SYSTEM
1.1.1 FEASIBILITY
Existing sewer collection mains are located (nearest possible connection)
approximately 7 miles away near I-26.
Proposed WNCJA site is higher in elevation relative to the nearest sanitary sewer
collection system. The City of Hendersonville Water and Sewer Department owns
and operates the nearest public utility. Rights -of -way and easements would be
necessary to connect to the existing sewer system.
Three methods of connection to the existing City owned collection system have
been studied and are listed below:
A.) Large Diameter Gravity Interceptor
This alternative would be sized and located in accordance with Henderson
County's Wastewater Masterplan.
Rl
ma

7
NIR
B.) Smaller Gravity Main
This alternative would be a smaller sized gravity sewer main, located along
Lewis Creek.
C.) Force Main System
This alternative would require the installation of a pump station on the
WNCJA site and force main along US 64 to serve just the Academy.
1.1.2 COST
Cost Estimate for Large Diameter Gravity Interceptor, which would connect to
City Of Hendersonville at Interstate 26, follows:
Installation of Large DiameterInterceptor to Serve Clear Creek
Drainage Basin and Proposed Western North Carolina Justice Acadenn
Work Item Description
............................................................................................................
Unit
_ _
Estimated
Unit
...
Quantity
Price
Total
Land for Easements
Acre
18 _
$5,000.00
$90,000.00
24" PVC Gravity Sewer
LF
4800
$85.00
$408,000.00
21"PVC Gravity Sewer
LF
6800
$77.00
$523 600.00
18" PVC Gravity Sewer
LF
14,800
$69.00
.............
$1,021,200.00
_.................. .._................_..
15" PVC Gravity Sewer
. .._.........................................
LF
3500
$62.00
$217,000.00
12" PVC Gravity Sewer
LF
1400
$58 00
$81,200.00
8" PVC Gravity Sewer
.................. ........................ _.........._....................... _.._........._........_
.. ..........
LF ....... ....
.... . _ _
6800
....._...---___ _
...............
$38.00
..............
$258,400.00
Enginee ' &Construction
.... _._._.........
... ..................................
Management
LSran
1
$393,240.00
$393,240.00
LSum
25% Contingency
1
$655,400.00
$655,400.00
Total Estimated Cost =
`$3,648,040.00
Figure A
a
& bvimvor&rdjusts.doc

a
r
Cost Estimate for Smaller Size Gravity Sewer Main, which would connect to City
of Hendersonville at Interstate 26, follows:
histallation of Smaller Size Gravity Sewer Main to Serve North Carolina
Justice Academy and a Portion of Clear Creek Drainage Basin
Work Item Description
Unit
Estimated
Unit
Quantity
Price
Total
Land for Easements
ACRE
18
$5,000.00
$90,000.00
12" PVC Gravity Sewer
LF
31,300
$58.00
$1,815,400.00
8" PVC Gravity Sewer
LF
6,800
$38.00
$258,400.00
Engineering & Construction
Management
LSum
1
$324,570.00
$324,570.00
25% Contingency
LSum
1
$540,950.00
$540,950.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST =
$3.029,320.00
Nigure tt c: 4xcelltable4s.xls
Cost Estimate for Pump Station and Force Main, which would connect to City Of
r Hendersonville at Howard Gap Road and US 64, follows:
r
M
r
r
r
Insttrllatioo of Pump Station and Force. Main to Serve the
Proposed Western North Carolina Justice Academy
r
Work Item Description
Unit
Estimated
Unit
Quantity
Price
Total
Pump Station
LS
1
$85,000.00
$85,000.00
6" PVC Force Main
LF
34,320
$18.00
$617,760.00
Engineering & Construction
Management
LS
I 1
1 $105,414.00
$105,414.00
25% Contingency
LS
1
$1751690.00
$175,690.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST =
$983,864.00
Figure C
c:lexeeAtab1e5s.x1s
Approximately 21 to 23 months to construct approximately 7 miles of gravity
sewer tine. Approximately 18 months to construct a sewer pump station and force
main. Therefore these options are not considered at the present time as viable
sewer service options in order to provide sewer service to the WNCJA site which
10
r

has a limited time constraint to meet the required date for the facility to be in
operation. Time schedules for the project demands other options be considered.
Water and sewer must be "in place" by December 1997.
Postponement of the opening of the WNCJA is not an option.
1.2 SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL SYSTEM
1.2.1 FEASIBILITY
The existing school facility was operated for years on a package waste water
treatment plant. The necessity for a WWTP to serve the former school was
due to the fact that the area containing soil satisfactory for installing a
subsurface system was not sufficient to accommodate the former school's needs.
The expanded waste water disposal capacity needed by the WNCJA greatly
exceeds area available for an on -site subsurface disposal system.
It has been determined by local agencies the existing wastewater system is not
serviceable and cannot be considered for temporary or permanent use by WNCJA.
Other options have been considered to include:
A.) On -Site Septic Tank and Sub -surface drain field
Existing Treatment System:
AM
Henderson County Planning Board has stated that existing on -site well
pumps and existing on -site wastewater treatment are deemed unserviceable
MR and cannot be considered for temporary or permanent use by the proposed
WNCJA.
NI" The Henderson County Health Department has evaluated the WNCJA site
in the past for alternative educational uses. At that time, there was limited
space on the property due to existing wells on the property, fill material, and
soil wetness conditions in various areas of the property. HCHD was able to
find a small area on the property that could accommodate a 700-gallon per
AM day system. At 700 GPD divided by 74 GPD/person recommended by
DEHNR, this area could only meet the wastewater demands of 9.5 people.
Soil conditions on -site are far from being acceptable according to HCHD.
Im The WNCJA will require a 22,500 GPD system. A 22,500 GPD system
would require approximately 12 acres to accommodate this system and
repair area. There is currently not sufficient area to accommodate this system
at the WNCJA site. In addition, there is fill material on the property and soil
wetness conditions at various depths. Some area even contain saprolite
requiring further investigation. Adequate space to install a 22,500 GPD
11
NM

system is the number one problem. HCHD will not permit this size system
on -site. If an on -site sewage system is to be built to serve the WNCJA, it
would require the acquisition by the State of additional land.
HCHD recommends proceeding with permitting process to install a WWTP
or connection to the City sewer which is approximately seven miles from the
WNCJA site.
This option would require construction of approximately 22,500 gpd soil
absorption drain field on 50 acres with septic system. Approximated time to
construct would be 9 months at an estimated cost of $1.1 million. On -site
no available space for a drain field this size. This option would only provide
wastewater service for the first year and would not provide any long-term
benefits. This option is not feasible because of the lack of sufficient land area
on -site to install this system and should not be considered as an option.
B.) Off Site Septic Tank and Sub -surface drain field (Permanent service)
This option would require adjacent land(s) to be acquired to provide
the required area needed for this method of wastewater treatment due to lack
of available land/space on -site as discussed above.
For the initial start-up of the WNCJA facility, treatment considerations are
expected to be 22,500 GPD. This would require acquisition of approximately
50 acres off -site to accommodate a soil absorption treatment system.
It has been determined that only one tract of land is available for purchase in
the general vicinity of the WNCJA. This is a 3.2 acre parcel of land and is
listed on the real estate market at $1351000 dollars. This finding establishes
the fact of the land cost as advertised is too costly to consider realistically.
A 221500 gpd soil absorption drain field would be required in order to provide
adequate wastewater treatment for the WNCJA which is approximately 50
^� acres of land needed off -site. Approximately 2 years to construct at an
estimated cost of $1.1 million dollars, land purchase cost estimate at $22,000
dollars per acre would be $220,000 dollars. Total estimated cost at $1.3
million dollars. There are no short-term benefits and the long-term would
only serve the WNCJA site with no benefits to any surrounding land
owners for improved wastewater treatment services. See Figure E.
Am
MW
12
MW

1.2.2 COST
Cost Estimate For Off -Site Sub -Surface System:
ITEM #
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
AMOUNT
1
Cleann , Stumping, Hauling & Grading
AC
25
$ 2,400.00
$ 60,000.00
2
Package Duplex Pump Station
EA
5
$ 25,000.00
$ 125,000.00
3
Concrete Septic Tank
EA
1
$ 60,000.00
$ 60,000.00
4
Conventional Drain Field
LF
24,600
$ 12.00
$ 295,200.00
5
D-Boxes
EA
20
$ 1,550.00
$ 31,000.00
6
Manifold
EA
10
$ 2,200.00
$ 22,000.00
7
Fin. Grade, Mulch, & Reseed
AC
5
$ 1,200.00
$ 6,000.00
8
30% Contingency
LS
LS
LS
$ 179,760.00
SUBTOTAL
$ 778,960.00
9
Land Purchase (off -site)
AC
50
$ 4,550.00
$ 227,500.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED SYSTEM COST
$ 1,006,460.00
Figure E
PRESENT VALUE OF COSTS
Cost incurred in the present year
Cost incurred in time
Period of time
Ending year of facility
Discount rate (1997)
PV = $711081347.00
13
d. lexcel ftES211.xls
$190061460.00
$724X0.00
present year 0
20 years
0.08

me
0.
1.3 SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM
1.3.1 FEASIBILITY
The expanded waste water disposal capacity needed by the WNCJA greatly
exceeds the capacity for an on -site spray irrigation system.
The Spray Irrigation area needed to treat the wastewater demands of the WNCJA
will require an application area of an estimated 2952000 square feet with proper
setbacks for the primary disposal area, and an equal amount dedicated for reserve,
or repair area. An additional dedicated area will be required for the installation of
the tanks/pumps/spray unit at or near the Irrigation area.
A 30-day storage requirement would mean an area to facilitate a holding pond
approximately 4 ft. deep with a capacity of approximately 900,000 gallons.
This is not a feasible option and should not be considered.
The WNCJA (land owner) does not own land that is suitable to meet spray
irrigation requirements. Additional land, which would meet the spray irrigation
requirements is not available to WNCJA for acquisition to facilitate this disposal
method.
This alternative has been considered to provide a treatment process for WNCJA
only and was not evaluated as a means of wastewater treatment for any of the
surrounding properties or land owners.
14

An
1.3.2 COST
�- Cost Estimate for Off -Site Spray Irrigation System
am
P"
Im
AM
MR
no
x"
AM
ITEM #
DESCRIPTION
QTY./UNIT
UNIT PRICE
AMOUNT
1
LAND PURCHASE/COST
20
AC
$6,400.00
$128,000.00
2
PUMP STATION (ON -SITE)
1
EA
$60,000.00
$60,000.00
3
PVC FORCE MAIN TO
OFF -SITE LOCATION
3000
LF
$10.00
$30,000.00
4
WWTP 35,000 gpd
On -Site
1
EA
$170,000.00
$170,000.00
5
RETENTION POND
LS
LS
$80,000.00
$80,000.00
6
EQUIPMENT: PERC UNIT,
SPRAY HEADS, PUMPS,
TUBING, ADAPTERS,
CONNECTORS, AIR VALVES,
SOLENOID VALVES, FOOT
VALVES, FLOAT SWITCHES,
AUXILLARY HIGH WATER
ALARM, AUTO DIALER UNI
LS
LS
$150,000.00
$150,000.00
7
STARTUP SUPPORT
LS
LS
$17,500.00
$17,500.00
8
INSTALLATION:
SPRAYLINE, MANIFOLDS,
SUPPLY MAIN, RETURN MAIN,
CONTROL WIRING, PLUMBING &
ELECTRICAL, AIR RELEASE &
VALVE BOXES, 2 PUMP
TANKS
LS
LS
$444,398.00
$444,398.00
9
10% CONTINGENCY (INST)
LS
LS
$107,990.00
$107,990.00
10
CONSULTING ENGINEERING
SERVICE
LS
LS
$118,000.00
$118,000.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED SYSTEM COST
INSTALLED
$1,3059888.00
Figure F
PRESENT VALUE OF COSTS
Cost incurred in the present year
Cost incurred in time
Period of time
Ending year of facility
Discount rate (1997)
PV = $14122611586.00
15
c:lmsofficelexceliflgF521 J.x1s
$1,3051888.00
$113162000.00
present year 0
20 years
0.08
RM

OMM
am
1.4 PROPOSED DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS
MN 1.4.1 FEASIBILITY
Discharge to Lewis Creek which is a Class "C" stream indexed at 6-55-11-(5).
rim Procurement of rights -of -way and easements will be necessary to transmit
flows from point of origin to the WWTP, and will require Encroachment
Application and approval from NCDOT along US 64. A land parcel
'n= acquisition or lease will be necessary for WVVTP installation.
The nearest known residence is approximately 300 feet in distance. The
FM proposed location of the WWTP is situated along the bank (off -sets
considered) of Lewis Creek and surrounded by farmland.
an 1.4.2 COST
qM The following is a detailed cost estimate of an installed wastewater treatment
facility (WWTP). Outlined in the estimate is a cost breakdown for these items.
,m WWTP, installed; effluent outfall to the discharge location (materials and labor);
pump station(s) if applicable (materials and labor); estimated operating expenses
of the WWTP (materials, utilities, maintenance and operator costs) for the design
period.
Also provided is a cost/environmental benefit statement.
no
am
IM
no
am
16

1.4.2.1 COST ESTIMATE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT and GRAV. SEWER MAINS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY;
UNIT PRICE
AMOUNT
1
'WWTP, Prefab., 40,000 GPD EA
1 $ 120,000.00 $ 120,000,00
2
Installation: Materials/Labor
LS
LS
$ 60000.00 : $ 60,000.00
3
8" Dia. Sch35 PVC Gray. Swr.Pi a
LF
6,000
$ 30.00
$ 180,000.00
4
Precast 4'Dia.Manholes w/curs.
EA
20
$1,500.00
$ 30,000.00
5
Mulch & Reseed along Swr. line
SY
20,000
$ 0.35
$ 7.000.00
6
Access Road
LS
1
$ 30,000.00
$ 30,000.00
7
Engineering
LS
1
$ 51,240.00
$ 51,240.00
8
Administrative/Legal
LS
1
$ 17,080.00
$ 17,080.00
9
20% Contingency
LS
LS
LS
$ 75,800.00
10
Land Lease
AC
0.5
$ 1.00
$ 1.00
1
TOTAL Estimated System COST =
$ 571,121,00
Figure G
PRESENT VALUE OF COSTS
Cost incurred in the present year
Cost incurred in time
Period of time
Ending year of facility
Discount rate (1997)
PV = $5,269,385.00
1.4.2.2 Cost/Environmental Benefit Statement
d:lemellfigG5211sls
$571,121.00
$400,000.00
present year 0
20 years
0.08
In regards to the information obtained and collected for this project, Laughter,
Austin and Associates, PA recommends the installation of a new 40,000 GPD Wastewater
Treatment Plant to serve the Academy and others within the Clear Creek Basin.
Henderson County Utilities Department (agents/managers for Clear Creek Water & Sewer
District) must proceed with the method of Wastewater Pretreatment and Discharge (a
Discharge Permit is required) by means of an Extended Aeration Package Sewage
_ Treatment Plant and controlled discharge into Lewis Creek.
17

The plant shall be capable of treating 40,000 gallons per day of raw sanitary
�► sewage or waste with a 5-day BOD not to exceed 240 ppm. This treatment capacity shall
be provided in one (1) sewage treatment unit.
END OF EVALUATION.
Sincerely,
Laughter, Austin and Associates, PA
Jon H. Laughter
..........................................................................................................................................
References: A.) NCDEHNR-DEM Admin. Code 15A NCAC 2H .0105(c)
B.) "Engineering Economic Analysis Wastewater Treatment Options
- Proposed Discharges".
C.) "Preliminary Engineering Report" - Wastewater Service to
Proposed Western North Carolina Justice Academy, dated
April 22, 1996 by Jon H. Laughter, P.E.; Laughter, Austin and
Associates, P.A.
D.) Martin, Boal, Anthony & Johnson, Architects
18

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NCO086070
PERMITTEE N Western North Carolina Justic W
ME: , FACILITY NASept UNI IU
Facility Status: 12f' dsdl
Permit Status: f uJ
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 6. 0,ZS R6P
Domestic (% of Flow): 100
Industrial (% of Flow): —
Comments:
RECEIVING STREAM: l IW C;11� 81L
Class: l ' %/
Sub -Basin: 0 3- O Z
Reference USGS Quad: F.?N (A) (please attach)
County: Y141dflsdN
Regional
Previous Exp. Date: 00/00/00 Treatment Plant Class:
Classification changes within three miles:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
�Lc3�w
stir 1
Steve Pellei
Date: 4/30/97
Date: 6 G 1
DateL
Modeler Date Rec. #
Drainage Area (miz) 2,? Avg. Streamflow (cfs): -77
7Q10 (cfs) 6.0 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 9, / 30Q2 (cfs)
Toxicity Limits: IWC % Acute/Chronic
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters
Upstream
Location
Downstream Location
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
�ti'intcr
BOD5 (mg/1)
3co
NH3-N (mg/l)
rx�rla✓
D.O. (mg/1)
r
TSS (mg/1)
30
F. Col. (/100 ml)
200
pH (SU)
G - 9
�f. 4r. (y,favi J 6
28 u. �Q

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NC0086070
PERMITTEE NAME: a Western North Carolina
FACILITY NAM]
Facility Status: _
Permit Status:
Major
Pipe No.: 001
Minor X
Design Capacity: 0, O6-6 A16..D
Domestic (% of Flow): 100
Industrial (% of Flow): —
Comments:
RECEIVING STREAM: Vol- �u -
Class: � - %✓-
Sub -Basin: - Oqd 36 2-
Reference USG'SL Quad: F9 AlW (please attach)
T! b County: d i✓SM
Regional Office: 1q XQ
Previous Exp. Date: 00/00/00 Treatment Plant Class: Jr
Classification changes within three miles:
Requested by:,
Prepared by:
Steve Pellei
Date:
4/30/97
Modeler
I Date Rec.
I#
_L v
I YZL/9'71�SSy
B
Drainage Area (mil ) 2,2 Avg. Streamflow (cfs): 37
7Q10 (cfs) 6.6 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 7, l 30Q2 (cfs) I Z. 9
Toxicity Limits: IWC
Instream Monitoring:
% Acute/Chronic
Parameters
Upstream Location
Downstream Location
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (mg/1)
36
NH3-N (mg/1)
m6rtr(a�
D.O. (mg/1)
n/
TSS (mg/1)
30
F. Col. (/100 ml)
Z60
pHLL (SSU)
6 _?
,n //
6T AiJ CA INrN 6
Z B u
7111a�
Comments:
Reviewed

APPLE JP� Ab
S1? 237
a: �
!Western
a . cd demr 5lte
w �f
C4 OD
�`4" ::r• ." ` '�' w l �y~ ==fir d "•. ,�" wr ,,,
oe
•�''q it ! *",�`� °� haw W .#wa IarY
zzis
na
t
nw-
w 1 =
o
SIF
K
.,� ,
rye
ww. got
uMr •".iw _ 'pia:,'" rr.
wr •'
m
NPD,f5 FERII!IT NU1113ZE NCO096070
MAP TO ACCOMPANY
ENGINEERING REPORT
HENDER508 COUNTY UTILITY DEPARTMENT
PROP05ED D15CHARGE POINT INTO
CLEAR CREEK
HE ND. R S O N COUNTY
JOB NO, 97-117
DATE OF LAST eeNWN APR2 14 1997
HPNOMOM COUNTY. N.C.
1 AU( H7rR AU577N AND A550CW95, P.A.
131 FOURTH AVENUE 645T
HEND6R50NI U4 NORTH CAROUNA 28792
(704) 692-90.99
CREW CHEF CHECKED BY DATE MT NO.
JHL —1- = 1A90 fT. f/f/97 I OF I
eDoei F°'E 99Z59305 97JJ7

ass
Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit
FACILITY INFORMATION
Facility Western N.C. Justice Academy
NPDES No. NCO086070
Design Flow (MGD) 0.050
Facility Class II
STREAM CHARACTERISTICS
Stream Name
Clear Creek
Stream Class
C-Tr
Sub -basin
040302
Drainage Area (mil)
22 (estimated)
S7Q10 (cfs)
6 (USGS Report)
W7Q10 (cfs)
9.1 (USGS Report)
30Q2 (cfs)
12.9 (USGS Report)
IWC M
Instream Assessment Comments:
The proposed facility has submitted a relocation of the first discharge point in Lewis Creek to a
larger site at Clear Creek (C Tr). There are still some questions about amount of wasteflow
that the Academy will need. Ran two models at the Clear Creek discharge point. 1) Qw=0.025
MGD, P&E can justify 10,000 GPD and Director will allow an additional 11,000 GPD for
future tie-ons that Academy has indicated will occur, will round up this 22,000 GPD to 25,000
GPD. 2) Previously requested Qw of 0.050 MGD. Level B model results indicate that
secondary treatment of 30/30 limits will protect DO in Clear Creek. Also recommend fecal
limit of 200/100m1 and TRC limit of 28 µg/l.
Prepared by: , /�' "'
Date
Regional Office Evaluation and Recommendations:
ls�-er Gov Cf%o/)/iCd"t,s C�vrp;t�eer fpr; j /131 1947 feezlesfs
Go,o o �cQ, 1�ecomnr�s� l uhnif2/� �� jl el `ct G6�oc�a
h&
r
�( �ow�
r�(Vlew ���� � V9
6 � 91>
KTU2.p -cb ' u— ,Gar-$vaaCL U�3: .iU�� Q -t i3);

A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
Permit No. NCO086070'
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 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:
..;�K� .
r.•.
Jr• • . Y. x . J}• rJ J •!AVG}} ....•• • V��W •• • .%... ty{••�•.r.J.,:•.••.JAi:..']]}.M1M1{r
�11tfi'�`�• Y r
41�., J �..
M��l'�'t3�� : C:`' .�:�f�����R��N:�'S.. A :.�.J..'!}ti��.�
A •J . •A .A. • L. • 'A.A. .V.A..
•. A• J.,•..•}:y. r..•..A�.J.{Y. {•. AAA. }•yXv�y�•j.�A'J=f(�f•�{fAf•. Y.. . r
���
WN-1-11-11
j•.SS• • �
• J •�jj"yj•(•�r•Y.V V.• •r��•'Jj•••,Jj•,'•• • •JWEX-11
'rAfj• VH•A s(J,j•r•�
..
;'•; •L ,,L�i. •�••J�ti:�f''�.••��••�.•..�.,.•�•'♦;''i]•yY/}�'•�}•',r•{' .tyty}}{•YJ.•L{r••�.' ..'•. h.. �...:v
Flow MGD
0.025
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD52
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 m 1
45.0 m I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N
monitor
Weekly
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E
H3
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlodne4
28 /I
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
I Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent,
2 The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

a
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
Permit No. N00086070
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 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:
'{::^ �,y iJ ♦. 'r { ! .••••Tr1
:y:�!.,'Yy�'•h'.{'{�:..'-J��}rS�r�{�J{�[pY1SAU'Sti1Y"h1•H[ �•. N
iAfrJtiY:,. '•:f.'T � {.{r{
-------------
h �: •: •I .:•J'{lA.#{•Y.}•�..J[•i.iAt:4 {
���
r�:L:.S�Y?V •.y.'�J}(L,..f•'..2r ,}}V,f} r} ::i:: • � •!'•'Tf •�{JFY.YJ,A
•:.YX•:'
7�•�mm
�.h�vY-.r}•:.r•jh'•I{'_�:�R•."�1!:vL;�14{yC.•..
�5SS}�yij; K .75/; y11 {{trf Y.•• {•A{L • h•. Y. jV`\� �.N :K•.rY.AJ.'r�S�G��:}(Y.{1,' • J,{•• • .l
fY Y •,
! V•• f IfY
J::: •••
..
• Y
• t�•Y
�•v: •rBONN,
. •\'• r: • • •••
r_!{;}
.'...
h 1,01
Flow MGD
0.050
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD?
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
Total Sus ended Solids2
30.0 m I
45.0 mg/1
Weekly
Composite'
E I
NH3 as N
monitor
Weekly
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform eometric mean
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E
H3
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
28 /I
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature.0C
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nitro en
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent,
2 The monthly average BODS and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

(AASTwN V
C/£A,, a if lc
OYa 3()z
0, 0 r0
Wes = 6.ortM�,o
.E'
AEG OLAca
Or
Ate.
Grhtn : 4f
iUf4 �J % 9 o
' QU : 0 , 0 Su f,44)

SUMMER
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger
WNC JUSTICE
Receiving Stream
CLEAR CREEK
__----__________-__--_____________-____..____--___-__----_-_____-_______
The End G.O.
is 7.98
mg/1.
The End CBDD
is 2.47
mg/1.
The End NBOD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
is 2.05
mg/1.
WLA
WLA
WLA
DO Min
CBDD
NBOD
DO Waste Flow
(mg/1)
Mi1epoint Reach #
(mg/1)
(mg/1)
(mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1
7.62
0.00 1
Reach 1
45.00
90.00
0.00 0.05000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : WNC JUSTICE Subbasin : 040302
Receiving Stream : CLEAR CREEK Stream Class: C-TR
Summer 7Q10 : 6.0 Winter 7Q10 : 9.0
Design Temperature: 23.0
ILENGTHI SLOPE1 VELOCITY I DEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KHR I K11R I SOD I SOD I
I mile I ft/mil fps I ft (design) @201 Idesignl @201 Idesignl @201 Idesign{ @201 ldesignl @201 1
------------------------------------------------------------------=------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.501 11.801 0.277 1 1.21 1 0.30 1 0.26 1 6.29 1 5.891 0.38 1 0.30 1 0.38 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1
Reach 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i
F1 ow
I
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1
0.077
NeadwatersI
6.000
Tributary 1
0.000
* Runoff 1
0.000
I CBOD
I NBOD I
D.O.
I mg/l
I mg/l I
mg/l I
145.000
1 90.000 1
0.000
I 2.000
( 1.000 1
7.720
2.000
I 1.000 (
7.720
I 2.000
1 1.000 1
7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mil e

SUMMER
Seg # ( Reach #
j Seg Mi I
D.C. I
CBOD I
NBOD I
Flog I
1 1
0.00
7.62
2.55
2.13
6.08
1 1
0.05
7.67
2.54
2.13
6.08
1 1
0.10
7.71
2.53
2.12
6.08
1 1
0.15
7.76
2.52
2.11
6.08
1 1
0.20
7.79
2.52
2.10
6.08
1 1
0.25
7.83
2.51
2.09
6.08
1 1
0.30
7.86
2.50
2.08
6.08
1 1
0.35
7.90
2.49
2.07
6.08
1 1
0.40
7.93
2.48
2.07
6.08
1 1
0.45
7.95
2.47
2.06
6.08
1 1
0.50
7.98
2.47
2.05
6.08
I Seg # I Reach #
I Seg Mi I
D.C. I
CBOD I
NBOD I
Flog I

Western NC Justice Academy
Residual Chlorine
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
7010 (CFS)
6
7010 (CFS)
6
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.022
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.022
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0341
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0341
STREAM STD (UG/L)
17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (%)
0.57
IWC (%)
0.57
Allowable Concentration (ug/1)
3008.20
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
1138.24
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7010 (CFS)
9.1
Fecal Limit
200/100ml
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.022
Ratio of 176.0 :1
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0341
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (%)
0.37
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
423.44
4/30197

Western NC Justice Academy
Residual Chlorine
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
7010 (CFS)
6
7010 (CFS)
6
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.05
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.05
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0775
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0775
STREAM STD (UG/L)
17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (%)
1.28
IWC (Q/o)
1.28
Allowable Concentration (ug)
1333.13
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
61.39
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7010 (CFS)
9.1
Fecal Limit
200/100m1
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.05
Ratio of 77.4 :1
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0775
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (%)
0.84
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
187.32
4130/97

Western NC Justice Academy
Residual Chlorine
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
7Q10 (CFS)
6
7010 (CFS)
6
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.025
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.025
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.03875
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.03875
STREAM STD (UG/L)
17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (%)
0.64
IWC (%)
0.64
Allowable Concentration (ug/1)
2649.26
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
121.77
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7010 (CFS)
9.1
Fecal Limit
200/100m1
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.025
Ratio of 154.81
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.03875
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (0/0)
0.42
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
372.85
4/30/97

Fad*: Western NC Justice Academy
NPDES#:
Receiving Stream: Clear Creek
Comment(s):
race number not available
Low Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7010 Low Flow Record Station:
w7010 Low Flow Record Station:
3002 Low Flow Record Station:
must be < 4W sq. mites
Drainage Area New Site:
22.00 sq. miles
MAR New Site:
1.7 cfs/miles squared
Qave per Report Equation:
37 cfs
s7010 per Report Equation:
6.01 cfs
w7Q10 per Report Equation:
9.09 cfs
3002 per Report Equation:
12.87 cfs
Continue
Drainage Area Ratio: #VALUE!
[ new DA / Da at gage ] #VALUE!
Weighted Ratio: #VALUE!
Over -ride Inappropriate Site ( y ):I I
Drainage Area New Site: 22.00 miles squared
MAR New Site: 1.7 cfs/miles squared
Weighted Qave per Report Equation: #VALUE!
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation: #VALUEI
Weighted w7010 per Report Equation: #VALUE!
Weighted 30Q2 per Report Equation: #VALUE!

4-J
,d

Jv
2'308 •-iv -•--
Aapped and edited by Tennessee Valley Authority
?ublished by the Geological Survey
control by USC&GS, USGS, and TVA
-opography by USGS by photogrammetric methods.
Aap field checked by TVA, 1946
'olyconic projection. 1927 North American datum
:0,000 foot grid based on North Carolina rectangular
:oordinate system
:000-metre Universal Transverse Mercator Grid ticks,
=one 17, shown in blue
evisions shown in purple and recompilation of woodland
-eas compiled by the Tennessee Valley Authority from aerial
notographs taken 1969. This information not field checked
'ine.purple dashed lines indicate selected fence and field fines
Bible Orraerial photographs. This information is unchecked
MN
GN
1 . 04 - 03 0 Z
27 MILS 0.46'
14 MILS
UTM GRID ANO 1969 MAGNETIC NORTH
DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET
Map photoinspected 1987
No major culture or drainage changes observed
.J.
4&54 IV SE
(a 172 SCALE 1:24 000
1 o
�' I, t"le
FOR SALE BY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER,.COLORADO 80225, OR RESTC
AND U.S. .ENNESSEE,VALLEY.AUTHORTTY,'CHATTANOOGA,TENN.
A FOLDER DESCRIBING TOPOGRAPHIC'MAPS AND SYMBOLS IS AVAILABLE ON
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60-
0 1 .5 0.5 0
CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929

11blii,/
Gf63a�
6))�
ll;l,7

TAN
--
- 2 ci'
%C
•z
R2;4

Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit
FACILITY INF
Facility Western N.C. Justice Academy
NPDES No. NCO086070
Design Flow (MGD) 0.050
Facility Class II
STREAM CHARACTERISTICS
Stream Name Lewis Creek
Stream Class C-Tr
Sub -basin 040302
Drainage Area (mi2) 4.6 (measured)
S7Q10 (cis) est.1.2 (used 0.05 cfs in Level
B modeling analysis)
W7Q10 (cfs) est. 1.8
30Q2 (cfs) est IWC (%) In t5 lh � � ll LS
APR 15 g i
Instream Assessment Comments:
The proposed facility is a 50,000 GPD plant that discharges into Lewis Creek, with a
classification of C Tr. There is much public concern about the discharge. First, the public
feels that the Academy could connect to the Hendersonville W WTP and not discharge to this
creek. Second, during droughts, Lewis Creek is used for irrigation by farmers and it is
reported that the creek is dry, downstream of the irrigation site. They are concerned that at
these times, the effluent from the proposed Academy plant will comprise 100% of the stream
and could negatively impact the stream.
If the irrigation practices are completely ignored, USGS regression equations indicate that
Lewis Creek has a a 7Q10 flow of 1.2 cfs and an average flow of 7 cfs. The Level B model
predicts that the Academy could receive summer limits of BOD5=30 mg/1 and NH3=13 mg/1
based on tonicity, and secondary limits in the winter that would protect the DO standard of 6
mg/1 for a trout stream.
The Instream Assessement Unit has concerns because without actual instream measurements,
there is no way to determine the flow in the stream during the irrigation practices. 1) If it is
assumed that the "dry creek" has 7Q10=0 and that 30Q2 is >0 during the times of irrigation,
Division procedure would recommend tertiary limits of 5/2/6 with a fecal limit of 200 and a
chlorine limit of 17 µg/1. 2) Without actual instream measurements during irrigation, it is only
a guess as to whether the 30Q2 flow is greater than or equal to zero. If the 30Q2 = 0 during
this time, then should the Academy discharge be denied. 3) Are there no laws or regulations
regarding the practice of sandbagging Lewis Creek for irrigation and drying up the stream,
when it impacts the stream for other potential uses?
Wj
v
JI
To simulate a low, almost zero, flow scenario for modeling purposes, a headwater flow
of 0.05 cfs was input and effluent limits were determined. In order to protect Lewis Creek from any
potential DO problems because of the irrigation practice, the model recommends tertiary limits of 5/2/6 in
the summer and 10/4/6 in the winter would have to be given.

Staff Review and Evaluation
NC0086070
Page 2 of 2
Because of the uncertainty about stream flow during the times of irrigation, Instream
Assessment recommends that BPJ limits equal to tertiary treatment be given to the
Western N.C. Justice Academy to insure protection of Lewis Creek for the DO standard
for trout streams. It is also recommended that alternative analysis issues as denoted by
ARO be readdressed by the applicant.
Prepared K�r" 4/9/97 r�euiew '� � 1116#7
P Y
I/ Jaca6elKn M. Nowef 1 Date _ ,.,..W--ra..,,eui-
Regional Office Evaluation and Recommendations:
C- ,IoPi n.e S•w ut , e grab sa- �We.
Evl &� CViw+e,— M2r64 3/.
i /k -/5 > r-ea121 COAC$/!l5
®� U�et'a6�2 Crop-5 �'
L
litre
o'j

A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -SUMMER (April 1 -October 31) Permit No. NCO086070
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 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:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
`s
LIMITS
MONITORING RECUIREMENTS
Monthly
Avera e -
Weekly
Avera e
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Fro uenc
Sample
T e
Sample .i
Location'
Flow MGD
0.050
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD52
5.0 mg/I
7.5 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 m I
45.0 mqA
Weekly
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N
2 m I
Weekly
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygens
6 m I
Weekly
Grab
E ,U,D
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean 5
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E ,U,D
H3
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
17 I
Daily
r osite—
E
Temperature °CS
Weekly
Grab
E ,U,D
Conductivit 5
Weekly
Grab
U,D
Total Nitro en
Semi -Annual
Com osite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Notes:
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream- 50 ft. upstream of discharge point, D - Downstream- 0.5 mile downstream of discharge point.
2 The monthly average BODS and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only N chlorine is added for disinfection.
5 Instream monitoring for temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and fecal coliform shall be conducted weekly on a year round basis.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

p1 a r 6u, 3
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -WINTER (November 1 ;.W- 6) Permit No. NCO086070
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit 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:
FFLUEN'T CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING 'REQUIREMENTS
Monthly .
Avera °e
........ ..
Weekly
Avera e
Daily.
9iaximum
Measurement
Fre uenc
Sample
T e
Sample
Location'
Flow MGD
0.050
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD52
10.0 mg/I
15 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 m /I
45.0 mq1I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N
4 m I
Weekly
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen5
6 m I
Weekly
Grab
E ,U,D
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean 5
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E ,U,D
1..13
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
17 I
Daily
E
Temperature OC 5
Weekly
Grab
E,U,D
Conductivitv 5
Weekly
Grab
U,D
Total Nitro en
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Notes:
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream- 50 ft. upstream of discharge point, D - Downstream- 0.5 mile downstream of discharge point.
2 The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 150/6 of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
5 Instream monitoring for temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and fecal coliform shall be conducted weekly on a year round basis.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

CuM
el�v. dish
Z166 o dish S
1'lQtrlst
S 1�Q C C4l � v 14..�1 O r1 S
•P�
A((0

"WStJGfo#'`
SUMMER
@ 5/2/6 LIMITS, 7Q10=0.05 CFS
BECAUSE OF IRRIGATION
------------ MODEL RESULTS -----------
.-Discharger WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY
-Receiving Stream LEWIS CREEK
____________..__-______________________________-_________-____-_..__w--_
The End D.C. is 7.43 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 2.31 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 1.61 mg/1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste F1©w
(mg/1) Mi 1 ep©i nt Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 5.67 0.00 1
Reach 1 7.50 9.00 6.00 0.05000

*IV* MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger- : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY Subbasin : 040302
.Receiving Stream : LEWIS CREEK Stream Class: C
- Summer% 7Q1 0 : 0.05 Winter 7Q10 1.8
'Design Temperature: 23.0
ILENGTHI SLOPEI VELOCITY I DEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KHR I KNR I SOD I SOD I
I mile I ft/mil fps I ft Idesignl @201 Idesignl @201 Idesignl @20° Idesignl @200 Idesignl @200 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 1.601 6.351 0.100 1 0.67 1 0.27 10.24 1 1.22 1 1.141 0.38 1 0.30 1 0.38 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1
Reach 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I F1 ow
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Taste 1 0.077
Headwatersl 0.050
Tri butar,y ( 0.000
* Runoff I 0.250
I CBCD 1
NBOD !
D.O. I
I mg/l I
mg/7 I
mg/l 1
I 7.500 1
0.000 I
6.000
i 2.000 1
1.000 I
7.720
1 2.000 I
1.000 1
7.720
I 2.000 I
1.000 I
7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mi 1 e

SUMMER
•
@ 5/2/6
LIMITS$ 7Q10=0.05 CFS
'
BECAUSE
OF IRRIGATION
' Seg # Reach #
Seg Mi
D.O.
CBOD
NBOD j
Flow �
• 1 1
0.00
6.67
5.34
5.86
0.13
' 1 1
0.10
6.78
4.72
4.95
0.15
1 1
0.20
6.87
4.26
4.29
0.18
1 1
0.30
6.94
3.92
3.80
0.20
1 1
0.40
7.00
3.65
3.41
0.23
1 1
0.50
7.06
3.42
3.10
0.25
1 1
0.60
7.10
3.24
2.84
0.28
1 1
0.70
7.15
3.09
2.63
0.30
1 1
0.80
7.19
2.95
2.45
0.33
1 1
0.90
7.23
2.84
2.29
0.35
1 1
1.00
7.26
2.74
2.16
0.38
1 1
1.10
7.29
2.65
2.04
0.40
1 1
1.20
7.32
2.57
1.93
0.43
1 1
1.30
7.35
2.49
1.84
0.45
1 1
1.40
7.38
2.43
1.75
0.48
1 1
1.50
7.41
2.37
1.68
0.50
1 1
1.60
7.43
2.31
1.61
0.53
j Seg # I Reach #
Seg Mi
D .O.
CBOD
NBOD
Floe j

0
3C
fa
s
79,E : o, offs 6cca+�n
Facility Wcr .d Wasteflow (MGD) ' S
Summer/Winter (circle one)
i1s11mmmmmmmmm'mmmm
mmmm���omm
■■■■H■■
OEM•
.
■ERNE
.....
■■■EE■■N■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�■■J■■■■H
■■Eso■■■■i■■.■■EC■..■.■■■■■....NONE
..............................NONE
■■■MEN.■■■o■.....■..■.......■.■...■■.■
SOMME
■■.■■ONEEN■■■■■■N■E■■N■■■N■EN■■E■o■
■■■■■■■■■■■S■■■■■■■■■■E■E■NENmom
■■■■■■■■■■■N■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NNE
■NEMESES
Nmom
■■■■■■■■■■NEE�aO:Es:
SEEN
■NNE
EN■■■■■N■■E■■■■■■H■■■■■■■
■■N■■PNOP
w
■■w■w■■ww■w
ENDOWS
NEmom
■■■■■ENrnr■■mom
NE■■■■■■■■
EE■O■■■no■■■■N■O■■■N■s■■■No■E■s■n■
■■■E■EN
'mom
■EMEN
■■■■■NME0
■■nE■■■■■■
mom
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■NH■■■■■■■■■■
mom
NNE■■■■■■■■N■N■N■■N■■■■n■o■■NE
■
■■■■oN■■■
SENSE
■■■■■■■■N■■u■■E■■■
Eio■■■■■■■■■N■n■■s■n■■nN■nn■■ENN
NNE■■■■■■■■
OEM
■■■■■■■N■■■SEEMS
H■■■
■■■■■N■EN■■
mom
N■■■■■NNW■■KRONE
■■H■
no
0
No
■■■.soon
■.■■NNE■■■■■■NEE■■.OEM
N
...■.......NEE............MI
■ns■ENsso■o■■■■■nnnn■■sNNE
■N■■■■■■NN■NMONO
■■■N■
E■■■■■■NMONO"
■■■NE■■■■E■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■EN■■NNE
■mE■SEEN
sN■■■■E■N■N■E■EE■■■■■■EN
■ENE■■■■■■n■■■►�NE■■N■■■■NEn■■■nN
■■EN■N■NE■n■■■■E■■■nsnN■■NNnE■■
GGGGG
GGri
GG
GGGGG
GiHGGG
GGGGG
GGGGG
NGGGG
N■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■HNRSME�
m■■■■N■
■
NN■N■N■
son
N■■Nt�n■N■■�
■■NE■
■E
■■■WEN■
■
■
■■N■N■■■ENN■NNE■Nn
GNiNG■ENsGGE■■■■N■GNGGME■■■KENO
No
mom
N■■
OMEN
Ns■■■OEs■mom
■■■■■■o■
■■■
Oman
N■■N■■■■n■■EN■N■E■ENs■■ENN■
s■smom
■■■onns■Nmounn■onEn■■■
MEMO
E
n
■■■■N■■■■■■N■■NN■■N■■N■■■■■■■■■■■■■
LgE
moo
■Nso■n■N■E■■Mormon
■■
NH3-N (mg/1) \
Potential effluent limit. combinations:
436n*.*.
CfSdo; 1fi 13J)Or c -?Or /)/)"d= lb
/ Nll3; 3,i
BOD C")0v NH -N - lviw wrfev ='I9
(241 5 3 C'✓iw✓;
/ NY) ; /0, 9
J 3S r ze. z T�:_ �L. � �( 33.75� ' ✓ttr� /. 2.

lit, d1k 10 Z" rb t O, K ac
SUMMER
@ LIMITS OF 17.5/6.5/6 TO PRO-
TECT 6 MG/L, NOT TERTIARY
---------w-- MODEL RESULTS ----------
-Discharger : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY
'Receiving Stream : LEWIS CREEK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D.U. is 6.55 mg/1.
The End CBUD is 4.42 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 3.66 mg/1.
__________________________-___--w____-___.._________-___________-______
WlLA WLA W1LA
DU Min CBUD NBUD DU Waste Flow
(mg/1 ) Mi 1 epoi nt Reach # (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mgd)
------ --------- ------- ____ _-__ __ ____----_-
Segment 1 6.11 0.50 1
Reach 1 26.25 29.25 6.00 0.05000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
'Discharger : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY Subbasin : 040302
'Receiving Stream : LEWIS CREEK Stream Class: C
Summer 7Q10 : 0.05 Winter 7Q10 1.8
Design Temperature: 23.0
ILENGTHI SLOPEI VELOCITY I DEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KNR I KNR I SOD I SOD I
I mile I ftfmil fps I ft Idesignl @201 Idesignl @201 Idesignl @20° Idesign) @201 Idesignl @201 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 1,601 6.351 0,100 1 0.47 1 0,27 1 0.24 1 1.22 1 1.141 0.38 1 0.30 1 0.38 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 1
Reach 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
Flow
I
c f s
Segment 1 Reach
1'
Waste 1
0.077
Headwaters)
0.050
Tributary I
0.000
* Runoff I
0.250
I CBOD 1
NBOD 1
D.O. I
I mg/l I
mg/l I
mg/1 i
26.250 129.250
1
6.000
i 2.000 I
1.000 I
7.720
1 2.000 1
1.000 I
7.720
1 2.000 I
1.000 (
7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mil e

SUMMER
@ LIMITS OF 17.5/6.5/6 TO PRO-
PRO-
TECT 6
MG/Ls NOT TERTIARY(
• ( Seg #
( Ruch # ( Seg P4�i (
D.O.CBOD
(
NBOD (
Flow
1
1 0.00
6.67
16.74
18.17
0.13
1
1 0.10
6.40
14.09
15..01
0.15
• 1
1 0.20
6.25
12.18
12.74
0.18
1
1 0.30
6.16
10.74
11.03
0.20
1
1 0.40
6.12
9.62
9.70
0.23
1
1 0.50
6.11
8.72
8.64
0.25
1
1 0.60
6.12
7.98
7.77
0.28
1
1 0.70
6.14
7.36
7.04
0.30
1
1 0.80
6.17
6.84
6.43
0.33
1
1 0.90
6.21
6.39
5.91
0.35
1
1 1.00
6.25
6.00
5.46
0.38
1
1 1.10
6.30
5.65
5.06
0.40
1
1 1.20
6.35
5.35
4.71
0.43
1
1 1.30
6.40
5.08
4.41
0.45
1
1 1.40
6.45
4.84
4.13
0.48
1
1 1.50
6.50
4.62
3.88
0.50
1
1 1.60
6.55
4.42
3.66
0.53
j Seg #
( Reach # ( Seg Mi (
D.O. (
CBOD (
NBOD (
Flow

a`WUf'11jC1j OL
SUMMER
30/13 LIMITS, 7Q,10 = 1.2 CFS
ESTIMATED USrS
____w_____ MODEL RESULTS ----------
.-'Discharger : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY
.Receiving Stream LEWIS CREEK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D .O. is 7.29 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 3.33 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 2.80 mg/1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepaint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 7.18 0.60 1
Reach 1 45.00. 58.50 0.00 0.05000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
.Discharger : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY Subbasin 040302
.Receiving Stream : LEWIS CREEK Stream Class: C-TR
-'Summer 7Q10 : 1,2 Winter 7Q10 1.8
-Design Temperatur%e : 23.0
ILENGTNI SLOPEI VELOCITY I OEPTNI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KNR I KNR I SOD I SOD I
I mile I ft/mi ( fps I ft (design) @20° Idesign) @20° Idesign) @201 Idesign) @201 Idesign) @201 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 1.601 6,351 0,134 1 0.86 1 0.26 1 0,23 1 1.64 1 1.531 0.38 1 0.30 1 0.38 1 0.00 1 0,00 1 0.00 1
Reach 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
Flow
I CBCD
( NBOD 1
D.O. 1
1
cfs
I mg/l
I mg/l I
mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach
1
Waste 1
0.077
1 45.000
( 58.500 1
0.000
Headwaters)
1.200
1 2.000
1 1.000 1
7.720
Tributary 1
0.000
( 2.000
I 1.000 1
7.720
* Runoff 1
0.250
I 2.000
1 1.000-1
7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mil e

SUMMER
@ 30/13
LIMITS, 7Q10 = 1.2 CFS
ESTIMATED USGS
I Seg #
I Reach # j Seg Mi I
D.O. j
CBOD I
NBOD I
Flow I
• 1
1 0.00
7.25
4.61
4.49
1.28
• 1
1 0.10
7.23
4.50
4.35
1.30
' 1
1 0.20
7.22
4.40
4.21
1.33
1
1 0.30
7.20
4.31
4.08
1.35
1
1 0.40
7.20
4.22
3.96
1.38
1
1 0.50
7.19
4.13
3.84
1.40
1
1 0.60
7.19
4.04
3.72
1.43
1
1 0.70
7.20
3.96
3.61
1.45
1
1 0.80
7.20
3.88
3.51
1.48
1
1 0.90
7.21
3.80
3.41
1.50
1
1 1.00
7.21
3.73
3.31
1.53
1
1 1.10
7.22
3.66
3.22
1.55
1
1 1.20
7.24
3.59
3.13
1.58
1
1 1.30
7.25
3.52
3.04
1.60
1
1 1.40
7.26
3.46
2.96
1.63
1
1 1.50
7.27
3.39
2.88
1.65
1
1 1.60
7.29
3.33
2.80
1.68
Seg #
I Reach # I Seg M; I
D.O. I
CBOD I
NBOD I
Flow I

'Uitt�� jd�
WINTER
30/30 LIMITS, 7Q10=1.8 CFS
ESTIMATED USGS
----------- MODEL RESULTS ----------
.'Discharger : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY
-Receiving Stream : LEWIS CREEK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D .O. is 9.82 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 3.04 mg/l .
The End NBOD is 3.38 mg/l.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flog
(mg/1) Mi l epoi nt Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
------ --------- _______ _-__ ____ w_ __________
Segment 1 9.30 0.00 1
Reach 1 45.00. 90.00 0.00 0.05000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : WESTERN NC JSUTICE ACADEMY Subbasin 040302
.Receiving Stream : LEWIS CREEK Stream Class: C
Summer 7Q10 : 1.2 Winter• 7Q10 1.8
'Design Temperature: 12.0
ILENGTHI SLOPE{ VELOCITY I DEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KNR I KNR I SOD I SOD I
I mile I ft/miI fps I ft Idesign) @201 Idesign{ @201 Idesign{ @201 (design{ @20° Idesign{ @201 I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 1.601 6,351 0,183 10.90 10.16 10.24 11.75 1 2.091 0.16 10.30 10.16 10.00 10.00 10.00 I
Reach 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
F1 ow I
c f s I
Segment 1 Reach
1
Waste I
0.077
Headwater%sl
1.800 {
Tributary I
0.000
* Runoff I
0.438 I
CBOD
{ NBOD {
D.O. {
mg/l
I mg/l I
mg/1
45.000
{ 90.000 (
0.000
2.000
{ 1.000 {
9.700
2.000
( 1.000 (
9.700
2.000
{ 1.000 i
9.700
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mil e

WINTER
@ 30/30
LIMITS, 7Q10=1.8 CFS
ESTIMATED USG.S
Seg #
Reach # Seg Mi
D.O.
CBOD
NBOD j
Flog
1
1 0.00
9.30
3.77
4.67
1.88
1
1 0.10
9.35
3.71
4.57
1.92
- 1
1 0.20
9.39
3.66
4.46
1.97
1
1 0.30
9.44
3.60
4.36
2.01
1
1 0.40
9.48
3.55
4.27
2.05
1
1 0.50
9.52
3.50
4.18
2.10
1
1 0.60
9.55
3.45
4.09
2.14
1
1 0.70
9.59
3.40
4.01
2.18
1
1 0.80
9.62
3.35
3.93
2.23
1
1 0.90
9.65
3.31
3.85
2.27
1
1 1.00
9.68
3.27
3.77
2.32
1
1 1.10
9.70
3.22
3.70
2.36
1
1 1.20
9.73
3.18
3.63
2.40
1
1 1.30
9.75
3.15
3.57
2.45
1
1 1.40
9.77
3.11
3.50
2.49
1
1 1.50
9.80
3.07
3.44
2.53
1
1 1.60
9.82
3.04
3.38
2.58
Seg #
Reach it j Seg M1 j
D.O.
CBOD
NBOD
Flow �

western nc justice academy
Residual Chlorine
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
7010 (CFS)
1.2
7010 (CFS)
1.2
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.05
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.05
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0775
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0775
STREAM STD (UG/L)
17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
IWC (%)
6.07
IWC (%)
6.07
Allowable Concentration (ug/l)
280.23
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
13.08
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
1.8
Fecal Limit
200/100m1
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.05
Ratio of 15.5 :1
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.0775
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
0.22
[WC (%)
4.13
Allowable Concentration (mg/1)
38.50
NC0086070 4/7/97

Facility: western nc justice academy
NPDES#:nc0086070
Receiving Stream: lewis creek
Comment(s):
Low Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
w7010 Low Flow Record Station:
3002 Low Flow Record Station:
numoer not avanaoie
HAII0
must be < 400 sq. miles
Drainage Area New Site:
4.60 sq. miles
MAR New Site:
1.6 cfs/miles s uared
Qave per Report Equation:
7 cfs
s7010 per Report Equation:
1.16 cfs
w7010 per Report Equation:
1.82 cfs
3002 per Report Equation:
2.53 cfs
Continue
Drainage Area Ratio: #VALUE!
[ new DA / Da at gage j #VALUE!
Weighted Ratio: #VALUE!
Over -ride Inappropriate Site (y ):
Drainage Area New Site:
4.60 miles squared
MAR New Site:
1.6 cfs/miles squared
Weighted Qave per Report Equation:
#VALUE!
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation:
#VALUEI
Weighted w7010 per Report Equation:
#VALUE!
Weighted 3002 per Report Equation:
#VALUE!

Facility:
NPDES#:
Receiving Stream: lewis creek @ mth
Comments):
Low Flow Record Station Number.
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
w7010 Low Flow Record Station:
3002 Low Flow Record Station:
nurnuer riur UVWW U
HA10
must be < 400 sq. miles
Drainage Area New Site:
5.97 sq. miles
MAR New Site:
1.7 cfs/miles squared_____
Qave per Report Equation:
10 cfs
s7Q10 per Report Equation:
1.61 cfs
w7010 per Report Equation:
2.50 cfs
3002 per Report Equation:
3.49 cfs
Continue
Drainage Area Ratio: #VALUEI
[ new DA / Da at gage ] #VALUEI
Weighted Ratio: #VALUEI
Over -ride Inappropriate Site (y ):
Drainage Area New Site: 5.97 miles squared
MAR New Site: 1.7 cfs/miles squared
Weighted Qave per Report Equation: #VALUEI
Weighted s7010 per Report Equation: #VALU El
Weighted w7Q10 per Report Equation: #VALUEI
Weighted 30Q2 per Report Equation: #VALUEI

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION: Steve Pellei
DATE: March 13, 1997
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND
COUNTY Henderson
PERMIT NUMBER NC0086070
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Western North Carolina Justice Academy
Mailing: Henderson County Utilities
101 East Allen Street
Hendersonville, NC 28792
2. Date of Investigation: March 12, 1997
3. Report Prepared By: Paul White
4. Persons Contacted and Tel. No. James S. Erwin, Jr. 704-697-4818
5. Directions to Site: Site is located in the Edneyville Community
approximately 7 miles east of I-26 on Hwy 64. The proposed
treatment plant site is 1 mile west of Edneyville on Lewis Creek.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 350 23' 03" Longitude: 820 21, 27"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. F 9 NE U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Bat Cave
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X Yes No If No, explain:
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Site is located
in flood plain. No 100 year flood information was provided in the
application. Soil type indicates frequent flooding is likely.
Flooding would have to be taken into consideration for location of
the plant facilities and access road.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: 250 feet
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Lewis Creek
a. Classification: C Trout
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: French Broad 04-03-02
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream
uses: Receiving stream is approximately 20 - 30 feet wide bank
to bank with a wetted channel of 5 - 15 feet at at average
flow. Stream bed is gravel and sand. Stream banks are tree -
Page 1

lined except for areas adjacent to plowed fields. Berms have
been constructed adjacent to the creek to help prevent
flooding. The primary use in the area of the proposed
discharge is for irrigation of adjacent farm land. It is
understood that common practice during drought periods is to
place sandbags in creek to create enough depth to pump from,
and that effluent from the treatment facility could be loot of
the stream flow due to upstream irrigation.
Other downstream uses include aquatic and wildlife propagation,
fishing, and swimming in Clear Creek, less than 2 miles
downstream.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted 0.050 MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater
Treatment facility? none
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current
design capacity none
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct issued in the previous two years:
none
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially
constructed wastewater treatment facilities: none
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment
facilities: 10,000 gal. flow equalization tank.
40,000 gal. aeration basin
6666 gal. clarifier
3000 gal. sludge holding tank
These facilities do not meet current regulations for a 50,000
gpd extended aeration treatment plant due to the requirements
for dual path aeration and clarification and reliability
measures.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: chlorine, ammonia,
janitorial chemicals.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): n/a
in development approved
should be required not needed
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: none specified
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ Permit
Residuals Contractor
Telephone Number
Page 2

b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP PFRP OTHER
C. Landfill:
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): II
4. SIC Codes(s): 8221
Primary 11 Secondary
Main Treatment Unit Code: 0607
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or
are any public monies involved. (municipals only)? yes
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests:
none
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates: (Please indicate)
none
Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all of
the non -discharge options available. Please provide regional
perspective for each option evaluated. no
Spray Irrigation: Applicant has not fully evaluated this option.
Connection to Regional Sewer System: Due to the required 7 miles of
sewer line, this is likely to be the most costly option, unless the
cost is met by other users as well.
Subsurface: This option has not been fully evaluated.
Other disposal options:
S. Other Special Items: It is understood that farmers in the area "dry
up" Lewis Creek upstream of the proposed discharge point by placing
sandbags and pumping for irrigation.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Sufficient information has
not been submitted to make a determination on the issue. The following
items should be addressed before a recommendation is be made:
1. Flow estimates appear to be high. Flows generated from different
areas of the facility are added as if the total number of people were at
different locations at the same time. Section 0.10 states that the
dormitory will not be a part of the initial construction project, yet
Section 0.11 lists the 1998 flow at 22,500 gpd, which include dormitory
flows. The source of the 29,915 gpd flow for 1999 is not given. Cost
estimates should be revised based on revised flows.
Page 3

2. Flows will depend on whether there is -a laundry on site. This should
be confirmed.
3. There is no present worth comparison of alternatives. Operational
costs should be included.
4. The alternative of providing a temporary non -discharging system for
the Academy alone should be considered. The statement that the required
land area is not available is not sufficient to disregard this option.
The following options should be considered to decrease the land area
required:
a. As stated in the December 12, 1996 letter from Preston Howard,
spray irrigation does not require an equal area for repair as does
the subsurface option.
b. With additional treatment, land application under the water re-
use rules would allow a very significant reduction in required land
area due to reduced buffers. This option should be considered.
c. The emergency storage lagoon for the spray irrigation option is
proposed to be 4 feet deep. A deeper lagoon would reduce the land
area requirement.
5. The cost of the off site subsurface system in the narrative is not
consistent with the table. In the narrative, the total cost is given at
$594,920, whereas in Figure E the total cost is given as $709,920.
6. The land cost appears to be very high at $22,000 per acre.
Justification for this figure should be provided.
7. Cost of site work for the treatment plant site should be included.
Protection from flooding and access should be considered.
8. The treatment plant components described in the October 31, 1996 and
January 30, 1997 revision of the Evaluation of Wastewater Disposal
Alternatives do not meet current regulations for a 50,000 gpd extended
aeration treatment plant due to the requirements for dual path aeration
and clarification and reliability measures. The method of sludge
disposal should also be provided.
9. The fact that the receiving stream may be zero flow during dry
periods due to upstream irrigation should be taken into account.
10. Items
the letter
1996.
number 1, 3, 4a and 4b, and 6 were requested or pointed out in
from Preston Howard to James S. Erwin, Jr. dated December 12,
Signature of Report Prep er
�� �?IZZA�
W ter 7.1;73;F-7
Regional Supervisor
7
Date
Page 4

/RATING
Name of
Owner or
SCALE FOR CLASSIFICATION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS
Facility: Wes-MRA/ G'lPoi.ma lug ecF A4611 NE/ny
Contact Person: 7A- DES 121lyili
Mailing Address: R641 - - yes 97/ jr-Air Aleew rr 79 W;L
County: 14E� D6(ZS 0w Telephone: 7b
Present Classification: &V-.,9 New Facility *_-Existing Facility_
NPDES Per. No. NCONondisc. Per.' No.WQ_ Health Dept.Per No.�
Rated by: _ P,4vt G 0, 4/ i E Telephone: -70 (,Zd Date:,.;?-//-97
Reviewed by: Health Dept. Telephone:
o► 14 Regional Office Telephone: -7oyz z5/-6W 1r
Central Office Telephone:
ORC: Grade: Telephone:
Check Classification(s): Subsurface Spray Irrigation Land Application
r• -•
Wastewater Classification: (Circle One) I II III IV Total Points: E
SUBSURFACE WSSIFICATiON
(check all units that apply)
1 ` septic tanks
2. pump tanks
3. siphon or pump -dosing systems
4 sand filters
5. grease trap/interceptor
6` oiVwater separators
7_ gravity subsurface treatment and disposal:
8, pressure subsurface treatment and disposal:
SPRAY IRPJGATION CLASSIF€CATIOIN
(check all units that apply)
1.
preliminary treatment (definition no. 32 )
2._lagoons
3.
septic tanks
4,
pump tanks
5.
pumps
6`
sand filters
7
grease trapfinterceptor
8.
oiVwater separators
9,
disinf ectlon
10._,chemlcai
addition for nuldent/algae control
11.
spray Irrigation of wastewater
In addition to the • above classifications, pretreatment of wastewater In excess of these components shall
be rated using the point rating system and will require an operator with an appropriate dual certification.
LAND APPLICATiONMESIDUALS CLASSIFICATION (Applies only to permit holder)
1. Land application of biosol€ds. residuals or contaminated soils on a designated site.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACIUTY CLASSIFiCATION
The following systems shall be assigned a Class I classification. unless the flow Is of a significant quantity or the technology Is unusually
complex. to require consideration by the Commission on a case -by -case basis: (Check If Appropriate)
1. O€Vwater Separator Systems consisting only of physical separation, pumps and disposal;
2. Septic TanIdSand Finer Systems consisting only of septic tanks, dosing apparatus, pumps.sand filters. disinfection
and direct discharge;
3. Lagoon Systems consisting only of preliminary treatment, lagoons. pumps. disinfection. necessary chemical treatment for
algae or nutrient control, and direct discharge;
4. Closed -loop Recycle Systems;
5. Groundwater Remediation Systems consisting only of olVwater separators, pumps, air -stripping. carbon adsorption, disinfection
and disposW;
6. Aquaculture operations with discharge to surface waters;
7_ Water. Plant sludge handling and back -wash water treatment:
8. Seafood processing consisting of screening and disposal.
9. Single-family discharging systems. with the exception of Aerobic Treatment Units. will be dassilied it permitted after July 1.
1993 or €f upon Inspection by the Division, it is found that the system Is not being adequately operated or maintained. Such
systems will be notified of the classification or reclassification by the Commission. In writing.

The following scale is used for rating wastewater treatment facilities: (circle appropriate points)
REM POINTS
(1) Industrial Pretreatment Unhs or Industrial Pretreatment Program (see deltnhion No. 33)...................................................4
(2) DESIGN
FLOW OF PLANT IN gpd [not applicable to non-caontarrinatod cooing waters. sludge handling facilities for
water purification plants. totally dosed cycle systems(see definition No. 11). and facilities consisting only of hem
(4)(d) or
Items (4)(d) and (11)(d))
0 - 20.000.................... ..........................................................:..N..........................•.............................
20.001 - 50.000.............N.............................................................................................................. 2
50.001 - 100.000........... .................................. .....N.».....»......._.......................................................
100.001 - 250.000..NN..N»........................................... N..........N........................................... ................. A
250.001 - 500.000......N.........N.............:.................»....»....»..-.........N..................................................6
500.001 - 1.000.000.... ...... ..............................NN.-.N-».........N...................................... ... ......... ... .....a
1.000.001 - 2.000.000....... ...N.............N..........NN..............N.....,..-.....................................................10
2.000.001 (and up) rate 1 point additional for each 200.000 gpd rapacity, up to a maximum of .._...NN.N..3 0
Design Flow (gpd)
(3) PRELIMINARY UNiTS/PROCESSES (see deknitlon No.32)
(a)
Bar Screens......-.N_.....N..................-..............N.».»N».....NN....-.......N................................................1
(b)
or
Mechanical Screens. Static Screens or Comminuting Devices...»._.N.N.N..N.N.N.......N.......N.N.........N......N....�
(c)
Grit Removal ........... N.N... ...N..................................»....-N...............N...........................•.............................1
(d)
or
Mechanical or Aerated Grl Removal .......................... ...... .....N.... N...................................... ......................... 2
(a)
Flow Measuring Device ......N.N.-................N............NN..-N.......... N-.-............................... N........................ 1
or
(1)
Instrumented Flow Measurement..........................N»N.N.-....N.....NN........................................... ..............
(g)
Preaeratlon.. .--.-.»».....NN................................. »............N....... N.................................................
(h)
Influent Flow Equalization .»........................NN....N....N....._N_................................................... ... 2
(1)
Grease or Oil Separators - Gravity.-...-...-...»... NN... N....».NNN.NN..N...N....N...N...N....N...»...N....N...N...2
MechanicalN-.-....-...N......NN.N«......«...........-.N.-..N.N...N...N.N.«.,...,-......................N...NN....N..N.............3
Dissolved Air FlotationNN...».»..-.N.N.-....N.....-......»N..-.-N....N.NN.N.......N.....»......N...-..N....-.....-.....-...5
())
P. isVM.brtnafbn..NN.NNNNN.N.N..NN.N....«...N.N....«.N.N.N-N.N.N....N...N....N..N.........N.N....NN..N.....N.....N......5
(4) PP MARYTREATME NT U NITSIP MESSES
(a)
Septic Tank (see deftnitbn No. 43)-NN-..N-..... NN..N.N.N.............N.........................2
(b)
Imhoff Tank.N....-.-.-NN.N.N................. N.N.N..NN....N.NN.N...N.N..-..NN..N..................................................5
(c)
Primary C!ar!ile�s N. N..N.......N.......N.N .N.....N ......................................................................5
(d)
Settling Ponds or Settling Tanks for Inorganic Non-toxIc Materials (sludge handling Iacilkles for water
purification plants, sand. gravel. stone. and other mining operations except recreational activities such as gem
or gold mining).......................-........N-....N-.N.....-.N...N.N.NN........N...-................N.......-.......................2
(5) SECONDARYT REikTMENT UNiTSi 4UCESSES
(a)
Carbonaceous Stage
(1) Aeration-Mgh Purity Oxygen System. .-N....N..........-......NN».N-.-..».N...
t o
DiffusedAir System..-...N.N-.....- N.-N.-.N....N..NNN...........-- .....:............-.-..»..
Mechanical Air System (fixed. floating or rotor)_N......N..N....N...NNN...N....N...N...».NNN.N...9
Separate Sludge Reaeratbn..NN.NNN.N.....N.N..N.N-............N. ... ...... ........ .... ..........
(11) ?ridding R4er
•
HighryJ� RatoN..-.....NN...NN...«...NNNNNN.NN.N...NN.«-..NN-.............N..................................7
Standard Rate- NN-.N.N«.NN.NNYN..NN.N...MINWN..-N.NNN.......... NN...N«....N.. N.N......... N...5
Packed Tower--.-- . . . . . . ............ . .......... NN.. N.....N.... N...5
(Ili) Biological Aerated Filter or Aerated Biological Filter 0
(Iv) Aerated lagconsN... NNNN......N«.NN»N.N.»N...N................ .N..N....N..N....... N«N.10
NN-..«.N.
(v) Rotating Biological Contactors..N.N.NN....N..NN.NN.M......N.-............-...._N-.-...-........-.10
(VI) Sand FRters -Intermittent biological ... .... N....... N..... -.- ....... ........... N....2
Recirculating biological—..»».-N-....N. N...-............... N..... - .......................... 3
(v}t�i) Stabilization L.agoons.N.NN.NN«NN.N.....N.NNN.M...... NNN............NN.NNN.......NN..NNNN
I��
(vtll) � Iaff ..NN.N..«N N.NN.....N..NN......... ..... ..NNN...................... NN........................ ../
(Ix) Single stage system for combined carbonaceous removal of BOD and nitrogenous removal by
nkdficafion (see definition No. 12)(Polnts for this item have to be In addition to hems
(5)(a)(i) through (5)(a)(vtli).
uUMft the extended aeration process (see defirdilon No.3a)«N....... ...... ..... ....... N.N...�2 ,
utilizing other than the extended aeration process......--..».....-.....-....N.....N.....N............
WNutrient additions to enhance BOD removal»......N...N.N.........N....N..NNN..«N.N......«.«.N.N.S
(xl) Biological Culture (super Bugs•)addltbn.N.N...N.N.N.N..................N....NN.N.N.N.........N....S
(b)
Nitrogenous Stage
(1) Aeration - High Purity Oxygen SystemN...N»..._N.....«.«....»....N..........»....NN..».N.-..-N..20
Dtffused Air System ..N.N...... N...... .........N.......N-.-.-..N.......................... - ....... .............. 10
Mechanical Air System (fixed. floating or rotor) N...N.NN...N.,.»...N...N...»...»...N...N...... N-... A
SeparateSludge Reaerallon.N.... N.N... N.N.... »....-N...... ............ -.....................................3
(11) Trickling Fltter--High Rate_ ...N.-............NN..NN.NNN.N.......................N.-....... ......... ........ 7
Standard Rate...N......N.NNN.-..NN.............N.......N....-..... N...............- ... -N..- ........... ......S
Packed Tower....»..NN.-...-N»NN»»»NNNNNN.NN.NNNNNNN..N..........N..N.........N.....N........5
(E[I) Bbbgical Aerated Fitter or Aerated Biological FgIerNN..»-.---.«-.««.»».-N.»N.NN.»-.N-.N.10
(Iv) Rolating Biological Contactoas«N..NNNNN....NN....NN.... .................... -... .N......... ..:....... 10
(v) Sand Filter - Intermittent bblogkatN.N..NN-....N.wN.N.NN.....................-..-N..N-..............2
Rectrculating biological..-..........NN.».N....NN...... N...................................... ................
(VI) Clarifier ...... N.N..N....N..NN..........-.N..........................................................6
(6) TERTIARY ORADVANCEDT REATMENTU NRS"IX.ESSES ES
(a)
Activated Carbon Beds -
without carbon regeneration..».NNN.N.NN.N........N...-...-.-.-N..«...........NN..NN....M. .................
with carbon regeneration .-.-..NN...N..N.N...NN..NM.N.N....«.M.N.NN.N....N.N....NN..NN.N.N..N.NNN16
(b)
Powdered or Granular Activated Carbon Feed-
Wthout carbon regeneration-..........-.N.N.-............».NN..N...NN...... .............. -.............
,with carbon regeneration..N.....-..N.... N........-..... ........... N..-........................................ - ..... 15
(c)
Air N........................-.....-....N.N.»N....N.-......-.N.................................-.........-.......5
(d)
Denitrificatlon Process......-._..- .................. N....-....».-N.......-....N....N...................................................... 10
(8)
Electmdlalysls.._...N..._..N.N..... .........N................ N..-.N......»-............................. -......................... .......... 5
(1)
Foam Separation ..... ......N..-.................... NN.......... N...... -... N.NN....... N...................................................
(9)
Ion Exchange.........N.N.N............................. N... --..-.».....--......... ............................................ -.-.......
(h)
Land Application of Treated Effluent (see definition No. 22b) (not applicable for sand. gravel. stone
and other slmliar mining operations) by high rate Wutratlon.».-»»....N.N»...N...»........»...N...N....»...»...»....4
(1)
Microscreens............. .................N-....... »N.»NN-...... ..NNN............................. ........................... 5
(j)
Phosphorous Removal by biological Processes (See dellnhbn No. 26)N......................................................2 0
(k)
Polishing Ponds - without aeration ......................... 2
_
with aeration ................. N............. .....N.......................................................................... 5

- post Anrasion cascade ...........................................
(1) .....»Sdiffused or mechanca..............................................
(m) Reverse Osmosis.! : .......................................... ..........................».........................».............................
i Mgh rat._ .2
(n) Sand or Mixed•Media Filters - !ow rate ..............•••. ...... rate . ................................................................N...S
(e) Treatment processes for removal of metal or cyanide................................................................................N.t 5
(P) treatment processes for removal of toxic materials other than metal or cyanide..N.»........N.»».N.....»•»•-•»»N»t 5
(7) SLLWE TREATMGNT »....10
(a) Sludge Digestion Tank - Heated (anaerobic) ...... ............................................. ......................
Aerobic...............................................................................NN..
Unheated (anaerobic)..............................................................................................................................3
(b) Sludge Stabilization (chemical or thermal)...............................................................................................NN5
(c) Sludge Drying Beds - Gravity ..................... ...... N......................................................................... ..........N.2
VacuumAssisted.....................................................................................N................................NN.
(d) Sludge Efutrlation... N..........................................................................................................................._...5
a Sludge Conditioner (chemical or thermal).....N.....N........N.....N.NN.........NN.N-N--------------N..--..-.NN........_N.5
f) Sludge Thickener (gravity) ..... N........ :....NNN.N................. N.N................N...
....»..N.........N.............NN.N.N._.
Dissolved Air Flotation Unit (not applicable to a unit rated as(3)(1)).................N........................................8
(9) N.....N.»...................................N....N..NN..2
(h) Sludge Gas Utilization (Including gas storage) .N.N.N.........N..........
(I) Sludge Holding Tank - Aerated ... ........ N......:................N...N................................................................N.N5
Non -aerated ........ ......................... N..................................................... .................................................
N.. 0
Sludge Incinerator (not Including activated carbon regeneration) .................. N.......................................
(k)
Vacuum Flier. Centrifuge. or Fitter Press or other similar dewatsting devices.•N....NNNN...N..••N••••~»~•~~»-----10
(8) RESIDUALS UrfLIZATIOMISPOSAL (including Incinerated ash)
(alagoons.. .N..... ....................N.........N....2
b) Land Application (surface and subsurface) (see de[irsitlon 22a) Iication smut
by contracting to a land application operator or landfill operator who holds the land app P
orlandfill permitN N... ........ N. .............. N............................N........................................�2�
(c) Dedicated t andfill(budal) by the psrmittee of the wastewater treatment facility N.N....N..N..».NNN•-N»••---~-
(9) oGrFECTIcxv .,
(a) Chlorination...............................................................................................N.............................N.......N.
(b) Dechlodnadon.......................................... NNNNN.....N.NN.N...N..o..N.N..N.N....N................
...
...NN....NN.N. 5
(c Ozone...— .1..N.N..N.N.N.N..NNNN.....NN..N...NN.N.N..N.NN.NN.N...N...NN...........NNNN....N.NN.NNN.N.N..NN....N..S
(d) Radiation .... N..NNN.N.N..NN..NN.....N..NN.NN.N.NN.N..N...N.......N.NN.NN.....N...NN............NNN.Np.....N.NNNNS
(10) CHEMICAL ADDITION SYSTEM(S) ( see definition No. 9) (not applicable to chemical additions rated as Item (3)0).
(5)(a)(A). (6)(a). (6)(b).. (7)(b)• (7)(8)• (9a). (9)(b) or (9)(c) 5 points each:
List.N.....N..............N..N...N....NN.N.N.N.......N.............N... N.......N...N...........NN....N............NN..S
N..N .... ............................... N. N..N.....N....N....N..N.NN NNN..NN.NN..........M...N NNNN.N.N...NN5
.N.....N........................NNN....N...... ............ N.... NN..
..............NN.............................NNNNS
'..NN...........NN..N.....N....N..N..N.NN....N..N.....N..N..NN.........NNN..................NN...NNN.NNNNS
(11) MISCSI eCUS UNRWROCEssEs
(a) Hoidng Ponds, Holding Tanks or Settling Ponds for Organic or Toxic Materials Including wastes from mining
operations containing nitrogen or phosphorus compounds In amounts significantly greater than Is common
I" domestic wastewater.........N..................................... N..N....................... N..................................... .......4
(b) Effluent Flow Equalization (not applicable to storage basins which are Inherent In land application systems)—.2
(c) Stage Discharge (not applicable to storage basins inherent in land application systems)NNN.N.NN...�NNN.-.-
(d) Pumps.N.N....NNNN..NN.....N...........NN..NN..N.NN....NN.N.N...N.N..NN..»N.N.N.....N..N......N..NN..NN.N.N.N.NN
(a) Stand -By Power Suppiy.N.NNN....N....N.N.N.N.......NN..N.N...N.N..N.NN.N.N.NN.N.N..N...N....N.N.......•.N.NN.•�•• 3
(f) Thermal Pollution Control Device ....... N..... N..�N.N��.N.'�.Q...NN.N....N.NN........N......N.N.N.NN.N.N...N.N..NN.......N N.
TOTALPOUYTS.N..NNN..N.NN.N.NN.N..N.N.NN.NN..N.N.NN.N.NN..NNN
Class 1..N.....N.......................N...................................................................... 5-26 Points
Class 11......N............................................................ N.................. .................26-60 Points
Ctasstti........................................................................................................51-65 Points
Class N N.......................................................N.............N...........................66-Up Points
Facilliles having a rating of one through four points. Inclusive. do not require a certiiled operator.
Faciiltles having an activated sludge process wig be asslgned a minimum classHkatlon of Class IL
r
Facilities having treatment processes for the removal of metal or cyanide will be assigned a minimum classification of Class 11.
Facilities having treatment processes for the biological removal of phosphorus will be assigned a minimum classittcatlon of Class III.
-------------------N--- -----N----- ----------Na—�
400..4 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply throughout this Subchapter. The column -type beds used In this
(1) Activated Carbon Beds. A physlcallchemical method for reducing soluble organic material from wastewater effluent;
method will have a flow rase varying from two to eight gallons per minute per square toot and may be either upflow or downflow carbon beds. Carbon may or
may not be regenerated on the wastewater treatment plant site;
(2) Aerated Lagoons. A basin In'which all solids are maintained In suspension and by which biological oxidallon or organic matter is reduced through artificially
accelerated transfer of oxygen on a flow -through basis;
(3) Aeration. A process of bringing about Intimate contact between air or high purity oxygen In a liquid by spraying. agitation or dlffuslon;(3a) Extended
Aeration. An activated sludge process utilizing a minimum hydraulic detention time of 16 hours. ��� trees. etc.);
(4) Agriculturally managed site. Any site on which a crop Is produced. managed. and harvested (Crop Includes grasses. g
(5) Aft Stripping. A process by which the ammonium Ion Is first converted to dissolved amrnonla (pH adjustment) with the arnnonla then released to the
atmosphere by physical means: or other similar processes which remove petroleum products such as benzene. toluene. and xytene;
(6) Carbon Regeneration. The regeneration of exhausted carbon by the use of a furnace to provide extremely high temperatures which volatilize and oxidize the
absorbed Impurftles;
(7) Carbonaceous Stage. A stage of wastewater treatment designed to achieve 'secondary' effluent limits;
(a) Centrifuge. A mechanical device In.which centrifugal torte Is used to separate solids from liquids or to separate liquids of different donsidas;
(9) Chemical Addition Systems- The addition of chemicalre
s) to wastewater at an application point for purposes of improving solids removal. pH adjustme
mnt.
alkalinity control. etc.; the capability to experiment with diffferent chemicals and different application points to achieve a specific result will be considered one
system; the capability to add chemlcal(s) to dual units will be rated as one system; capability to add a chemical at a different applleatlon points for different
purposes will result in the systems being rated as separate systems:
' (10) Chemical Sludge Conditioning. The addition of a chemical compound such as time. ferric chloride. or a polymer to wet sludge to coalesce the mass prior to
Its application to a dowatertng device;
`1) Cloned Cycle Systems. Use of holding ponds or holding tanks for containment of wastewater containing Inorganic. nowt -toxic materials from sand. gravel.
'Vwd stono a other similar operations. Such systems shall carry a maximum of two points regardless of pumping facilities or any other aMurtenancos:
'Combined Removal of Carbonaceous 800 and Nitrogenous ftoinoval by Nitrification. A single stage system required to achieve permit effluent limits on BOD
..vf a.mrmnla nlirnnnn within tho came btoloolcal reactor.

(15) Eloctrodlalysts. Process for removing Ionized salts Irom water through the use of ton -selective ton•exchango membranes;
(16) Filter Press. A process operated mechanically for partially dewatering sludge;
(17) Foam Separation. The planned frolhing of wastewater or wastewater effluent as a means of removing excessive amounts of detergent materials through
the Introduction of air In the form of fine bubbles; also called loam fractionation;
(18) Grit Removal. The process of removing grit and other heavy mineral matter m wastewater; Ion chamber and a barer sludge digestion chamber.
(19) Imhoff Tank. A deep two story wastewater tank consisting of an upper
(20) Instrumented Flow Measurement. A device which Wicatos and records rate of flow;
(21) Ion Exchange. A chemical process in which Ions from two difforent molecules are exchanged:
(22) Land application:
(a) Sludge Disposal. A final'sludge disposal method by which wet sludge may be applied to land either by spraying on the surface or by subsurface Injection
Q.e.. chisel plow); [not applicable for types of sludge described In (11) of this Rule];
(b) Treated Effluent. The process of spraying treated wastewater onto a land area or other methods of application of wastewater onto a land area as a
means of final disposal or treatment;
(23) Microscreen. A low speed. continuously back -washed. rotating drum filler operating under gravity conditions as a polishing method for removing
suspended solids Irom effluent;
(24) Nitrilicatlon Process. The biochemical conversion of unoxidized nitrogen (ammonia and organic nitrogen) to oxidized nitrogen (usually nitrate):
(25) Nitrogenous Stage. A separate stage of wastewater treatment designed for the specific purpose of converting ammonia nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen;
(26) Phosphate Removal. Biological. The removal of phosphorus from wastewater by an oxlclanoxic process designed to enhance luxury uptake of phosphorus
by the microorganisms;
(27) Polishing Pond. A holding pond following secondary treatment whh sufficient detention time to allow settling of finely suspended solids;
(28) Post Aeration. Aeration following conventional secondary treatment units to Increase effluent D.O. or for any other purpose;
(29) Post Aeration. (Cascade) A polishing method by which dissolved oxygen Is added to the effluent by a nonmecharticaL gravity means of flowing down a
series of steps or weirs; The flow occurring across the steps or weirs moves In a fairly thin layer and the operation of the cascade requires no operator
adjustment; thus. zero points are assigned even though this Is an essential step to meeting the limits ol the discharge permit;
(30) Powdered to Granular Activated Carbon Food. A blophyslcal carbon process that utilizes biological activity and organic absorption by using powdered or
granular activated carbon; Virgin or regenerated carbon Is feed controlled Into the system;
(31) Preaeratfon. A tank constructed to provide aeration prior to primary treatment; Operations;
(32) Preliminary Units. Unit operations In the treatment process. such as screening and comminution. that prepare the liquor for subsequent ma.j°f p
(33) Industrial Pretreatment.
te at Its uW8
treatment
tment Pro-treatment
to effectLThe a partial reductionInIn loaof a d on ft treattment process which o before �is operated by the same governing body ave or to neutralize substances sthewastewater a�
treatment processes
treatment plartt being rated;
b) Pre-treatment Program. Industrial - must be a State or EPA required program to receive points on the rating shee; of removing settleable and suspended
(34) Primary Clarifiers. The first settling tanks through which wastewater Is passed In a treatment works for the purpose
solids and BOO which Is associated with the solids:
(35) Pumps. All Influent. effluent and in -plant pumps;
(36) Radiation. Disinfection or sterilization process utilizing devices ambling ultraviolet or gamma rays;
(37) Reverse Osmosis. A treatment process In which a heavy contaminated liquid Is pressurized through a membrane tormirg Weary pure ifqutd free from
suspended solids;
(38) Rotating Biological Contractors. A fixed biological growth process In which wastewater flows through tanks In which a series of partially submerged circular
surfaces are rotated;
(39) Sand Filters:
nt process In which further bbdecomposribn Is
(a) Intermittent Biological. Filtration of effluent following septk tanks. lagoons. or some other treatme
expected to produce destred offluents; Hydraulic loading rates on these fiflem are computed In gpd/ac and have a resulting low gpm►st (less than one);
b) Redrrulading biological •the sartte type of sand airier as defined In Subparagraph (39) ( a) of this Rule with the added capability to recycle effluent back
through the sand filter;
(40) Sand or Mixed -Media Fitters. A polishing process by which effluent Qmris are achieved through a further reduction of suspended solids;
(a) low rate •- gravity. hydraulically loaded filter with loading rates In the one to three gprNsf range: the loading rate will exceed three gpntld;
(b) high rate — a pressure, hydraulically loaded filter with loading rates In the five gpm/si range; At any rate. dip slu es associated wwiththe
(41) Secondary Clartilers. A tank which follows the biological unit of treatment plant and which has the purpose of removing
biological treatment units;
(42) Separate Sludge Reaerallon. A part of the contact stabilization process where the activated sludge is transferred to a tank and aerated before return .
to the contact basin;
(43) Septic Tank A single -story settling tank In which settled sludge Is In contact with the wastewater flowing through the tank; shaft not be applicable or
septic tank systems serving single family residences having capacity of 2.000 gallons or less which discharge to a nitrification field;
(44) Sludge Digestion. The process by which organic or volatile matter and sludge Is gasified. liquefied, m1nerallzed or converted Into more stable organic matter
though the activity of Iiving organisms. which Includes aerated holding tanks;
(45) Sludge Drying Beds. An area comprising natural or artificial layers of porous materials upon which digested sewage sludge Is dried by drainage and
evaporation;
(46) Sludge Elutriation. A process of sludge conddiorting In which certain constituents are removed by successive washings with fresh water or plant a uen
(47) Sludge Gas Uaftation. The process of using sewage gas for the purpose of heating buildings. driving engirles, etc.;
(48) Sludge Holding Tank (Aerated and Nonaerated). A tank utilized for small wastewater treatment plants not containing a digester In which sludge may be
be done adding a trap amount et air simply to keep the
kept fresh. and supernatant withdrawn prior to a drying method (Le. sludge drying beds); This may by be used to
sludge fresh. but not necessarily an amount that would be required to achieve stabilization of organic matter. A nonaerated tank would simply
decant sludge prior to dewatering and would not allow long periods (several days of detention) without resulting odor problems;
(49) Sludge Indnamtors. A furnace designed to bum sludge and to remove all moisture and combustible materials and reduce the sludge to a stedle ash;
(60) Sludge Stabilization (Chemical or Thermal}. A process to make treated sludge less odorous and putrescible, and to reduce the pathogenic organism
content; This may be done by pH adjustment. chlorine dosing. or by heal treatment;
(51) Sludge Thickener. A type of sedimentation tank In which the sludge Is permitted to settle and thicken through agitation and gravity:
(52) Stabilization Lagoon. A type of oxidation lagoon In which biological oxidation of organic matter Is effected by natural transfer of oxygen to the water from
air (not a polishing pond);
(53) Stand -By Power Supply. On she or portable electrical generating equipment;
(54) Static Screens- A stationary screen designed to remove soft. Including nor>•biodegradable particulate (fbviable solids. suspended solids and BOO
reduction) from municipal and Industrial wastewater treatment systems;
(55) Tertiary Treatment. A stage of treatment following secondary which Is primarily for the purpose of effluent polishing; A settling lagoon or sand or coal filter
might be employed for this purpose;
(56) Thermal Pollution Control Device. A device providing for the transfer of heat from a fluid flowing In tubes to another fluid outside the tubes. or vice versa;
or other means of regulating liquid temperatures;
(57) Thermal Sludge Conditioner. A condl lonlnng process by which heat Is added for a protracted period of time to improve the dewalerabiifty of sludge by the
sofubiliztng and hydrauiizing of the smaller and more highly hydrated sludge particles; discharge i Ingestion.
(56) Toxic Materials. Those wastes or combinations ol wastes. Including dlsease-causing agents which after die a and u exposure. �halation
or asslmllation Into any organism, either directly from the environment or Indirectly by Ingestion through food chains. will cause death. disease,
abnormalities. cancer. genetic mutations. physiological malfunctions (including malfunctions In reproduction) or physical deformations. In such organisms or their
offspring; Toxic materials Include. by way of Illustration and not gmhatlon: lead. cadmium. chromium. mercury. vanadium. arsenic. zinc. ortho-ndtro-chlorobenzene
(ONCE). polychlorinated btphenyls (PCBs) and dkhlorodlphhenyl tdchloroethane (DOT); and any other materials that have or may hereafter be determined to have
toxic properties; rase trickling
(59) Trickling Filter. A biological treatment unit consisting of a material such as broken stone or rock over which wastewater Is distributed; A high at acre:
filter is one which operated at between 10 and 30 mgd per acre. A low tale trickling filter Is one which Is designed to operate at one to lour mgd p
er (60) Trickling Filter (Packed Tower). A plug flow type of operation In which wastewater flows down through successive layers of media or filtrate material; Organic ,f
material Is removed continually by the active bbloglcal fixed growth In each successive layer. This method may produce •secondary• quality effluent. or may be
43daV,pd 4% produce a nitrified effluent; riot to disposal
(61) Vacuum Filter. Centrifuges. or Filter Presses. Devices which are designed to remove excess water from ehhor digested or undigosled sludgo p
or further treatment.

141b
2'3d•
'dapped and edited by Tennessee Valley Authority
'ublished by the Geological Survey
.ontrol by USC&GS. USGS, and TVA
Topography by USGS by photogrammetric methods.
dap field checked by TVA, 1946'
olyconic projection. 1927 North American datum
0,000 foot grid based on North Carolina rectangular
:oordinate system
-000-metre Universal Transverse Mercator Grid ticks.
:one 17. shown in blue
evisions shown in purple and recompilation of woodland
••eas compiled by the Tennessee Valley Authority from aerial
.otographs taken 1969. This information not field checked
'ine.purple dashed lines indicate selected fence and field lines
►,n 'awial nhotoaranhs. This information is unchecked
�GJ��►���I / �1611 T [1 q P'0 L./ A 7u `J i (G C: �L /7 V C/' '� SIiALC 1:L�F llUu
� 0
1
* 2000 3000 4000 5000 �.
MN ,l 1000 0 1000
GN U(; �uR 1 .5 0
1 l CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET
2i MILS 0'a6'
la MiL NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
UTM GRID AND 1969 MAGNETIC NORTH
DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET
Map photoinspected 1987
No major cuiture or drainage changes observed
J.
FOR SALE BY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, DENVER-.COLORADO 02 COOR/ E
AND U.S. MNNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, CHA
A FOLDER DESCRIBING TOPOGRAPHIC'MAPS AND SYMBOLS IS AVAILABLE 0

Page 1
Note for Jackie Nowell
From: Jackie Nowell
Date: Wed, Mar 12, 1997 2:10 PM
Subject: RE: WNC Justice Academy (NC0086070)
To: Steve Pellei
Thanks, Steve. Last week, I talked to Linda Wiggs, a technician, in the ARO, who told me
that there was some public concern about this facility. She had attended a public meeting
where the proposed discharger was discussed quite a bit. They would prefer the facility
connect to the Hendersonville plant. She also mentioned that farmers used this stream,
Lewis Creek, for irrigation but at that time, no one indicated that the stream would be dry.
They did not have an idea of how much water was withdrawn for irrigation.
While talking with Linda, I determined that I would probably have to estimate the flow using
USGS equations. If my calculations indicate that there is positive flow, and these citizens
want to say that at 7Q 10, this stream has zero flow, they may have to do some stream
measurements to prove their case. I did tell Linda that public concern and outcry, is one
alternative that will be considered, if they are seriously opposed to the Justice Academy
discharging.
I will be looking for a copy of the letter and will discuss with Carla and Ruth on how we can
handle this.
From: Steve Pellei on Wed, Mar 12, 1997 1:54 PM
Subject: WNC Justice Academy (NC0086070)
To: Jackie Nowell
FYI.... Received a call from a concerned group of local community members saying that the
stream to which the WNC Justice Academy (NC0086070) is proposing to discharge to often
has no flow. in it due to irrigation. I requested that they send in a letter stating this and
provide us with additional information. I have not received anything yet but will pass it onto
you when I do.
Just a heads up.
Thanks,
Steve

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
VXV
•'FAA
A,N!
Aoo..o �
E� H R
Asheville Regional Office WATER QUALITY SECTION
February 6, 1997� L
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Pellei
NPDES Group
FROM: Paul R. White, P. E.
Environmental Enginee
SUBJECT: Western North Carolina Justice Academy �
Pending application
Henderson County
As we are waiting on resubmittal of the application for the WNC Justice
Academy discharge permit, some additional information has come up that coull'.
affect the issuance of the permit. I was informed by a farmer in the area -<
that Lewis Creek, the proposed receiving stream, is used extensively for
irrigation, to the extent that it is "dried up" at the point of the propose' =
discharge during dry periods.
This may need to be considered in running the waste load allocation. I
will try to find out more information to include in the staff report when it
is requested.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Interchange Building, 59 Woodfin Place �`y� FAX [phone]
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 N�.C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 704-251-6208 MW 50% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary WATER QUALITY SECTION
January 13, 1997
Mr. Jon Laughter
Laughter, Austin, and Associates
131 Fourth Avenue East
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Dear Mr. Laughter:
,Tk.?WA
10 0111111114,�2ji
NC ENR
NORTH CAROUNA * or
ENvtROMMEW AND KauRAL REsouRCES
Subject: Western NC Justice Academy
Plans and Specifications
NPDES Permit No. NCO086070
Henderson County
I have begun a review of the plans and specifications of the above
referenced project and would like to request additional information.
This information is needed for us to complete our review. These comments
have been forwarded to Mr. Steve Pellei in Raleigh. He -may have
additional requests when he reviews -the project.
GENERAL:
1. If possible, the influent lift station should be avoided by.
providing the flow equalization volume in its place. Depending on
the elevation of the flow equalization facility, the backwash
wastewater may be routed to this basin by gravity rather than
providing another basin and another set of pumps and controls to
transfer the wastewater into the equalization basin. The volume
needed for backwash storage would have to be incorporated into the
flow equalization basin. Even if the flow equalization basin had to
be located separate from the treatment plant at a more downhill
position, this would be preferable due to the elimination of up to
two sets of pumps and controls which can malfunction and cause
overflows.
2. The ground elevation in relation to the top of the plant should be
shown:" This will determine if steps are needed for access.
3. Either full grating or guard rails are needed, or some combination
of both. Mounting the blowers and controls on the ground would
reduce the amount of grating necessary for access.
4. The lift station piping is shown to be $4-inch. How is this to be
connected to the 6 inch connection on the plant?
5. Where is the water hydrant to be located? A vacuum breaker is not
sufficient for backflow prevention if the plant is higher than the
hydrant.
6. The plans do not show the following required items:
- Dechlorination facilities to meet the chlorine limit.
59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Jon Laughter
January 13, 1998
Page 2
- Post aeration to meet the dissolved oxygen limit.
- Flow measurement equipment for instantaneous monitoring and
continuous recording of flow.
- Auxiliary power reliability requirements.
7. The specifications on pages 11.6 and 12.6 refer to a timer to "limit
the operation of the pumps under control of the float switches to at
least six periods in a 24-hour period. Further explanation of how
this works is needed.
FLOW EQUALIZATION
1. More detail on the bar screen should be shown to illustrate the bar
size and spacing and the drying area.
2. The start and stop controls and elevations for the flow equalization
pumps should be shown. For a float system, the first pump start
position should be as low as possible and the second pump start
position and alarm position should be as high as possible.
S. Details of the flow equalization and splitter box should be shown.
4: The specifications refer to only 1 blower for the flow equalization
basin. Back-up blower capacity is needed for this unit.
.5. The specifications refer to the capacity of the flow equalization
pumps as 14 gpm, which is inadequate. Each pump must be able to
pump 21 gpm plus the amount that is recirculated into the
equalization basin. Calcl_atji
o.s are needed to indicate the
necessary capacity based on the configuration of the flow splitter
box weirs.
6. The specifications indicate that the flow from the splitter box to
each aeration basin is 6.94 gpm. A flow of 10.5 gpm to each basin
is . needed.
AERATION BASIN
1. The aeration basin capacity is 53,000 gala based on the dimensions
shown. Is this intended? If so, blower capacity will need to be
sized accordingly. Also, algae growth during low flow stages is a
potential problem which should.be addressed.
2. Calculations on the air requirements for aeration and all other
operations supplied'by the blowers should be provided. It appears
that the 115 cfm specified in 12.2 of the specifications may be
insufficient for the main blowers.
3. The blowers must have isolation valves to allow for maintenance on
individual blowers.
CLARIFIERS
1. More detail on the sludge returns is needed. Provisions for
cleaning out the returns should be shown. The size of the return
should be shown, with a minimum of 3 inches. Both returns should
allow wasting to the sludge holding basin.
2. Sufficient detail should be shown to determine if the clarifiers can

Jon Laughter
January 13, 1998
Page 3
be operated in series as well as in parallel. The option of series
operation might be advantageous during low flow periods to minimize
solids loading on the filter.
FILTRATION
1. More detail of the filters is needed including the following
information:
- height of walls.
- overflow conditions.
- filter size and media depth.
- piping for air scour and backwash, including backwash return.
- blowers and controls.
2. Provisions should be made to allow backwashing filters for 10
minutes. The clearwell volume specified would require that the
filters be backwashed individually, with a clearwell refill time
between backwashings. This is an operational concern which should
be considered. If more flexibility in backwashing is desired by the
ermitte3. The 1060egal. specifiedvolume lfor backwash ubackwash wastewaterme should be storageis
inadequate. Additional volume should be provided to allow for
inflow during backwash.
CHLORINATION AND DE -CHLORINATION
1. More detail is needed for the chlorine detention tank showing
dimensions and baffling. The option of disinfecting prior to the
filter should be provided. The 50o gallons specified in 16.33 of
the Specifications does not allow a full 30 minutes of detention.
2. The specifications indicate a 500 gal. basin for dechlorination.
This detention time is unnecessary for dechlorination reactions and
it would be preferable to use much of this volume for additional
chlorine detention..
If you have any questions, please call -me at 704-251-6208. I would
be glad to meet with you to review these items.
Sincerely,
P"'� Q urn
Paul R. White, P. E.
Environmental Engineer
xc: Jim Erwin /
Steve Pellei V

0
1:rULLr-y V iLi-�+
NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURC9S AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT C0KMISSION .
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM APPLICA110N 011MO R
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DISCHARGE - SHORT Fo�M G folk
AGENCY
USE DATE Bf C f 1 n D
14 be filed only by services, mmwholesale
rotoll adet ,
and other commercial establishmen psyEA� DAY
Do not attempt to complete this form without reeding the aceampanyin instructions
plpase print or type'
1, Name address and telephone number of facility producing 400orge
A. Name Henderson County Utilities Department
�St Street
6. Street address ,
4
C. City ; Hendersonville-, ' D. too. U0 - -- .
- i r�i rrrrr
Henderson F; ZIP
28792
E. County.
G. Telephone No, _.704._
fig
Area
Code
r
20 sic w
i
(Leave blank)
3
3. "umber of employees ....
q. Nature of business Goverment - Count Sewer District
' z
5. (a) Checl here if discharge occurs all year ], or
(b) Check the month($) discharge occurs:
1. o January 2,13 Febru#ry 13t a March 4, P April 5? a May
6.0 June 7, 0 July Bt 0 August, 9,o September 10. el October
11.0 November 12, o December
(c) How many days per week; �
1.931 2. Q 2-3 3, Q 4-5 : q, 6-J
6. Types of Waste water discharged to surface Waters only (cheCK as applicable)
Flow, gallons per operating day
Voluwo treated Petore
discharging (percent)
Discharge per
operating day
0.1-999 1000-4999 5000-S999 100000- 50,000
499999 or Mare
None
0.1—
29.9
30-
64.9
65-
94.9
95-
140
(1) (2) J3) (4) (5)
(6)
(7)
(a)
(9)
(10)
0 , 000
101
A. Sanitary daily
average
B. Cooling Waterq etc.I
daily average
Ct Qther discharge($),
daily average'
Specify
D, Maximum per operat-
ing day for combined
discharge (all types)
95-211

7, If any of the types of waste identified in item 6, either treated or un-
treated* are discharged to places other than surface waters, check below
as applicable.
waste water is discharged to:
0.1-999
(1j
1000-4999
(2$
5000-9999
(3)
10.000-49;999
(4)
50,000 or more
(S)
A. Mien i i. I Ira 1 %ewet• -.ys tenr
It. Ilittle- rtlrr1rrnrl w1•II
r. Septic. tank
U. Evaporation lagoon or pond
E. Other, specify:
B. Number of separate discharge points:
A. Yj 1 B. 0 2-3 C.0 4-5 D.0 6 or more
9. Name of receiving water or waters
LEWIS CREEK
.10. does your discharge contain or is it possible for your discharge to contain
one or more of the following substances adddej as a result of your operations,
activities, or processes: ammonia, cyanide. aluminum.' berylliums, cadmriumo
chromium, copper, lead, mercur i nickel, selenium, zinc& phenols, oil and
grease; and chloripe (residual.
A. o yes b. t]`no
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and
that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information i3 true, comlplete6 and
accurate.
James S. Erwin, Jr.
Printed Name of Person Signing
Director. of the Henderson County Utilities Department
Title
bate Application Signed
r
Si nature of Applicant
North Carolina General Statute 143--215&6(b)(2) provides that: Any person who knowingly makes
any fg se statement representat one or certification in any applicatton,'record, report, plan,
or other do6ument files or requited to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the
En-lritonaenttal 4anagement Commis.4 .on impledenting that Articles or who falsifies, tampers with,
ur kricoly rendetrs ineccurdte eany. r6cdtd1n# of r3o'nitoriiig Opvice or method required to be
operated 'tlY: main gined under Art oie 2 :�bt teguittioris •of the Environmental Management Cornm_is.; = or.
impletn6titing that Aiticlej g 'mi lbdemeanot punishable by a -fine not to exceed
$jo,nn�, or by itnprisonm�t ribt td eXc6od .fist tnonth8f or by both& (18 L%SX. Section 1001 pro,.r:-
a puriishtlertt by a fine of` -.riot mate thfiti lit).000 dr itaptisonment not tiore than 5 years, or bath,
Eor a similar- offense.)