20180307 Ver 2_Add Info Emails_20180228

L
From: Jason Marshall <)ason]ManhaU@ghdzmm/
Sent: Wednesday, February 28,20l83:39PM
To: 8hatta.Sbashi
Cc -Lindsay K4atthy;Fenenbaugh.ChristynL
^ RE: [External] FW: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance W[S
Shashi,
Thanks you foryour response and I hope the following will address any concern or issues to be resolved.
Our specification for sewer references C908which references C605 and K823 and Charlotte Water will only accept
materials and installations that meet all applicable industry standards. Below is a clipped image from JM Eagle's product
brochure for PVC pipe. All applicable standards are listed on the cut sheet and this is typical of what we would look for
during our shop drawing review, VVe reference UNI -Bell for our testing standard |oour specification
df
So I would like to address DWQ!s concerns and also want to be certain that the issue is over leakage concerns,is this
correct? | was looking back at some other project specifications for local projects on Brier and McAlpine Creek both
mention ezero leakage inthe testing specification.SpecificaN Brier states ° Passing the joint air test shaHnot preclude
required tan��rdiszero
rejection fthe xvnrkifgromndxvaterin��n*tinnsubsequently nccuoatthe joint, Th The s
e
�|eakage.".'Vou|dadding language 10our specification thattheaOowab|e|eakageisOgaHonsforbnthpipeandnanholes
help meet the requirements? Wecould also add imaddiion to passing the air test that there should bemnvisible leakage
or mowing water observed in the pipe and invert. Infiltration testing and add or additional air testing and repairs vvVu|d
be required prior tofinal acceptance inthese situations occur. We can update the specifications to address and send
over for review if acceptable?
Please let meknow if there is anything else I can do to address any concerns for our resubmittal to Christyn.
~ ~ ^ -/^� �u~-L'
��
Thanks, �������)J�' ,�c�ui�w\�� `�c� �~�wc�
( »rV /����"&�����
�~_~~~ ^ `~~1/ , -- ~
Jason

ZI z-
% XNN
T
E,
Assembly Mark
I.D., Inside Danneter El : Distan between Ist Insertion/
0,D,: Outside Diameter. Assembly Mark to the end of spigot,
T.: Wall Thickness E2: 0iistance between 2nd Insertion/
0`1: Bell Outside) Diameter Assernbly Mark to the end of spigot,
Pipe Compound: ASTM D! 784 Cells Class 12454
Gasket: ASTM F477
Integral Bell joint: ASTM D3139
Certifications: ANSI/NSF Standard 61 1� UL Standard 1285
Pipe Length: 20 feet (+/- 1 ") laying length, AWWA C605
Installation.- JIVI EagleInstallation Guide
-1 ev i s ed 1, 2 01,_ T his s in10rm n ,iia, , V$�
From: 13hatta, Shashi Imailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 2:03 PM
To: Jason Marshall <Jason. M a rsha [e-mail]>
Cc: Lindsay Matthy <Lindsay. [e-mail]>; Fertenbaugh, Christyn L <[e-mail]>; l3hatta,
Shashi <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] FW: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance WCS
Hello Mr. Marshall, I understand the difficulties with applying the water main testing standards for sanitary sewer
lines. Therefore; I do not have a definite answer as to if the sanitary sewer testing procedure that you proposed would
be equal to the water main testing procedure.,, Since the issue is to reduce the potential of leaking sanitary sewer lines, I
recommend focusing on installing PVC sewer lines with less joints (or no joints if possible, e.g. HDPE), and making sure
the joints and PVC sewer lines are installed as specified in AWWA C605 and AWWA Manual M23. I hope this helps. -I also
had a discussion with Christyn about your proposal just a few minutes ago. Thanks.
Shashi \jex-�-(:�crA as V a Uf Vi G VVeVet—j
S ru
Oak \\A-aJe"CX1Vta 'or& -s
"a4cy- riicun sitAn&acc§s
From, Jason Marshall [rnailto:Jason.Marshalf@gh(J.coi-n] F J
LA.�tt V.X— 4V\�, YYAOS�— (�eUttvCLUr4—
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 4:27 PM 4`
To: To: Bhatta, Shashi <shashi.bhatta@ncdenr-gov> Oao-)
Cc: Lindsay Matthy <[e-mail]>; Fertenbaugh, Christyn L <christyn.fertenbailg�[e-mail]>
Subject., RE: [External] FW: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance WCS

Thanks and see my responses below,
Jason
Sent:_gilltoshashi -YJ
2018 3:46 PM
— Tuesday, February 27,
0hat1u
To: Jason
Fer��nbau�h Chr�YnL '
Cc: dndsayK0�thy<^
Shashi |mfornmationforStevensCreekVmrianceVvCS
[External] RE: ic^,u�.� ...: Additional
posing? Same standard bell and spigot with gaskets utilized for water
Hello Mr, ��arshaU,xvhottype ofjoints are you pro
ins
See page 4ofproduct b/ochurefor typical joints web _df is i i �o heinsta|\edvvithdirectional drillingnd cover construction. Havegravity service by conventional cut anot specified HDPE for gravity service, other than pipe bursting,HDD contractors are using it for pressure lines but I would needinput. Charlotte Water had issues getting contractors to bid on anto spea w t con ot as familiar with the material and installation. I have read throughHDPE water main�becau:se local contractors are n e proposed would be considered "equal" tothe proposal but need a little more time. I will let you know if what you havwater main standard tomorrow. I still need to review some AWWA standards and manuals to decide. Thanks.
dt/filesJBlue-Rrute__ --p
Shashi
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 11:09 AM
To Vnana Snus/» nbau�h �hr�\ynL
Cc: Undsuym«am'Y~ mnfor Stevens Creek Variance V«C)
Subject: FW: [External] FW: Additional
Shashi,
Have you had achance tmlook over the eo�ai|7lmehave our res pmnselo[hr�tynFer��uh�u�hreadyamdvvouk�Uketo
send in our response to
haveyou/connmemtsaddressed-Qdmenmisevvecam�atethatyourcomme,'p�.`p=.....",-�_
the other comments. Please let meknow ifthere isanything you need.
Jason
From: Jason Marshall
Sent: Thursday, February l5,2O18l1:l3AKX
3

Cc: Fertenbaugh, Christyn L <christyn.fertenbaugb �a Matthy��d.c�orn
@ncdenr.go >; Lindsay Matthy <.Lindsa >
Subject: RE: [External] FW: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance WCS
Shashi,
A map of the project area is attached for reference, Figure 5. No water mains are present at this location just gravity
sewer and there are no conflicts with separation between water and sewer. We are installing DIP under creeks but the
buffer rules for this area state that DIP be used at all locations per 15A NCAC 02B.0607, Page 5. We are requesting a
variance for the approval of PVC for al:l areas other than creek crossings. I've also attached our permit letter for the
original request.
The reason for the deviation is that Charlotte Water prefers PVC over DIP for sewer due to corrosion issues. PVC is also
easier to work with and we believe the rules may have been written at a time when PVC was less robust and there were
issues with quality.
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Thanks
Jason
From: Bhatta, Shashi mailto:shashi.bhatta,@,n.cdenr.go
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 9:55 AM
To: Jason Marshall <Jason. Marsha ll@?ghd.com>
Cc: Fertenbaugh, Christyn L <[e-mail] >; Lindsay Matthy <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] FW: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance WCS
Hello Mr, Marshall, can you please provide additional information on this before I can provide an answer? is there a
water main proposed at this location that does not meet the separation requirements of the Rules Governing Public
Water Systems, Section .0906? or is itjust a sewer line project under a creek and you are proposing to install PVC line
instead of DIP? What is the reason for the deviation? Thanks.
Shashi
ShasKm. Fhqtt-a, P.F.
PZapi. Review 7-eaku ","der
public water siqp1gSection.
,r)ZvZsiok,i, of wqterresoarces
1634 meqiZ service cektter, Raleigh, mr, 2�6_yq-26-34
Epnaii r-orrespokidexze to atLd front tK-- address is s"Yeet to the North r—qrOzzPta 7>1'(Wo Records Lawqk,�d nca be
disclosed to third Parties.

From: Jason Marshall LTailtojason -Marshal I@ghd corn]
Sent: Wednesday, February 14,ZO18S:2OPK8
To: Bhatta, Shashi
Cc: Fedcnbaugh,[hrbtynL >; Lindsay Ma1Whv >
Subject: [External] FW: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance VV[6
Shashi,
GHD is working on a variance application and have been asked to respond to the comment highlighted below from
Christyn Fertenbaugh. I've attached a letter and specification to address this comment and request your approval as part
of our variance application. If you have any questions or comments please let me know and we will work to address
them. I appreciate your assistance.
From- Fertcnbaugh,ChristynL
Sent: Friday, January 1A,Z0184:S1PM
To: Jason Marshall
Cc: Higgins, Karen
Subject: Additional Information for Stevens Creek Variance WCS
Hello,
VVehave reviewed the variance request regarding the Stevens Creek Trunk Sewer Phase 1,with avariance needed for
construction utilizing PVC within a stream buffer. In accordance with the provisions of 15A NCAC 02T01056dfor
alternative design criteria, please provide the following information:
General Comments:
As the entirety of this project is shown to be constructed within the 200 -foot buffer as required by 15A NCAC
U2B,and multiple areas constructed within the S&-fuotbuffer, please provide clarification astuwhat design
alternatives were considered to potentially avoid these impacts. Please also provide more information about
how the project construction/materials as depicted on the provided plans shall meet the requirements of 15A
NCAC 02TO105(n); and specifically, how they shall provide equal or better protection of the environment in this
area.
Itappears that the alignment of the buffers as shown omthe plans (30 -,S0 -, and 200 -feet) is based on
proposed stream alignment, not the existing alignment. Please provide more information regarding the
proposed realignment of the stream, as this affects the buffer zones through which this project is proposed to
be constructed.
a. It also appears that the 100 -year flood elevation lines are based on the existing creek alignment rather
than the proposed alignment. Please provide more information, as this affects the installation of
different manhole -types, per 15A NCACO2TO305(e).
3. As this project requests the usage of PVC in most locations whereas both the 02Tand 02B rules require ductile

4. The provided VAR 10-2013 form indicates that sewer lines located in wetland areas shall have anti -seep on|lao
installed, however, it was not clear where wetland areas are impacted nor where anti -seep collars may be
installed. Please clarify.
I. All plans and specifications -submitted for the variance must hesigned/sealed 6naPnofessiona|EnQinee/|ioensed
topractice in North Carolina. Please revise.
2. Brief sections of specifications were provided. Please clarify if these are parts of Charlotte Water's standard
specifications, which are referenced by the provided plan sheets. All specifications to be referenced by this
variance that are not part of Charlotte Water's standard specifications must be signed/sealed by a Professional
Engineer licensed tnpractice inNorth Carolina.
3. Have the quality testing methods for gravity lines outlined in the provided specifications been approved by the
Public Water Supply Section — Plan Review Group asbeing equivalent to water main standards asfound ln15A
NCAC 18C, per 15A NCAC 02TO305(g)(5)? if so, please provide a copy of the letter or email approving the testing
methods. If this has not yet been verified, please contact the Plan Review Team Leader Shashi Bhatta at
.
4. It appears that multiple manholes depicted as being located within the current 100 -year flood elevation are
listed as having vented covers (e.g. IMH'17, 19, 20, 24, 25)./\U manholes located within the 100'yearflood
elevation must have awatertight sca|,per 1SAN[A[Q2T.O3O564.Please revise such that all manholes located
within the 100-yearflood elevation are depicted as having watertight covers and frames, and ensure that the
manhole schedule located on plan sheet 2 correctly reflects which type of manhole cover shall be installed.
a. Please note General Comment #2, asitappears that inmany locations, the location ofthe 100'yemr
flood elevation may change significantly if the stream is realigned as shown on the plans.
S. Unplan sheets 9 and 11,atemporary stream crossing bdepicted. Please clarify if these tributary streams shall
permanently cross the sanitary sewer after construction bcomp|eted,andifs4p{easems/isexuchthatihexe
sections of sewer are constructed of DIP as the provided VAR 10-2013 form for variance requests to the 15A
NCAC 02B rules indicates that ductile iron shall be used for all stream crossings,
6` On plan sheet 14, the distance between MH -28 and MH -29 appears to be greater than 425 linear feet (measured
at approximately 465 linear feet). Per 15A NCAC 02T.0305N(2), please provide documentation from Charlotte
Water indicating that they have the capability to provide routine cleaning and maintenance on the sewer at the
specified manhole separation.
If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks!
ChristynL Fertenbaugh, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
PERCS Unit
Division ufWater Resources
Department ofEnvironmental Quality
3l8-8O7-6312—Office
919-807-6489 — Fax
K4aiUuK: 1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC27699-1617
Physical: SIZN.Salisbury Street, Rm. 925l
Raleigh, NC 27604'1170