WQCS00324_Report_20190301

• 11 . E
11 •
r
r lJug.,
`ill rr . �
• jEe. 1 y i� i''�� v:��a. ri� 1� .i77i=s►►�,'i
�l r I i�
.; WWI
Amall ..
" �.:�r
15,
's U�°` ::.:v;•
t r Suit'
1'e��r■sr -N-N. {�- ir+ ��tii•;.:.. �_,' a�
.:v.++ 'il:'• r_4:'ry iA�� �
aa it
NN NOW
�J a,�A ,�,rl"r,�i �+rrAl� r nr a���!'i•rs���r�� 4 �{` Nor,
r
■a■rt r��y::. �f �r:r� _.r -"�!Swill
R�r�kam
'
ffin
Ron
oil �■_irr;' r � '��f'1.� a .,�......
�.., ,.. �'��_ . •_fir..

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
ProjectBackground ..................................................................................................1-1
Overview...................................................................................................................1-1
ProjectApproach ......................................................................................................1-1
Definitions and Abbreviations...................................................................................1-2
2. MANHOLE INSPECTIONS
ManholeInspections .................................................................................................2-1
Above Ground Inspections ................................................................................2-1
Results ................................................................................................................2-4
3. FLOW METERING
SiteSelection ............................................................................................................3-1
FlowMeters ..............................................................................................................3-1
Hach-Sigma Flow Meter Principles....................................................................3-1
Hach-Sigma Meter Calibration...........................................................................3-1
Exhibit 1 -Burke County 1/1 Study Meter Locations
Installation and Maintenance ....................................................................................3-2
Analysisand Results ................................................................................................3-2
Dry-Weather Flow .............................................................................................3-2
Inflow Projection and Source Data Analysis and Results ..................................3-2
Infiltration and Source Data Analysis and Results ............................................3-4
4. CONCLUSION
Conclusion and Recommendations...........................................................................4-1
Exhibit 2—Drowning Creek Manhole Locations
LIST OF TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
1 Manhole Inspection Summary ............................................................2-2
2 Rainfall Summary ...............................................................................3-3
3 Flow Monitoring Results with 1/1 Summary..................End of Section 3
1JST OFAPPENDICES
TITLE DESCRIPTION
A Manhole Rehabilitation Recommendations Recommended Manhole Repairs and Associated
and Cost Estimates Cost Estimate
B Flow Metering Graphs and Summary Flow Summaries,Rainfall, and Graphs for Each
Sheets Meter Location
Flow Metering Information(On CD)
Tableof Contents .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. i

E INTRODUCTION
C
T
I
O
N
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Burke County has experienced sanitary sewer overflows(SSO)that have resulted in spills
into Island Creek. This creek is tributary to Lake Rhodiss,which has been identified as being
impaired, according to the 2004 Catawba River Basin Report by the NC Division of Water
Quality. The SSO's were attributed to the poor condition of the Island Creek Pump Station
(PS) and infiltration/inflow(1/1) entering the collection system. The pump station and sewer
manholes are adjacent to Island Creek. 1/1 tributary to Island Creek PS is not the only
contributing source of extraneous flow into the collection system,but also includes I/I that is
tributary to the pump stations and collection system upstream of the Island Creek PS.
To eliminate spills, improve water quality in Island Creek, and reduce hydraulic loading, a
project was undertaken to rebuild the pump station and to perform an 1/1 study to prioritize
rehabilitation of the existing sewers. Rebuilding of the pump station was completed in
October 2008.
OVERVIEW
An 1/1 study is a cost-effective method to evaluate the condition of the sanitary sewer mains
and the access structures using various intensive field procedures and data analyses.
1/1 reduces the effective capacity within the collection system that should be reserved for
sewer flows. In addition, funds spent treating 1/1 entering the collection system could be
more productively utilized elsewhere. Finding and removing 1/1 therefore becomes a matter
of return on investment and timing of corrective measures.
Inflow may enter the sanitary sewer system during moderate storm events,while infiltration
occurs when groundwater enters sewer lines and manholes. Inflow occurs when storm water
runoff enters the sanitary sewer system through both public sector and private sector sources.
These sources include cross connections with storm sewers, main line defects,unconcealed
pickholes in manhole covers,defective manhole seals,defective cleanouts, and direct
connections to the sanitary sewer from downspouts and/or area drains.
The scope of this project was to involve inspections, smoke testing, and flow measurements
to identify possible illicit connections and source points of 1/1.
PROJECT APPROACH
To satisfy the flow measurement and inspection tasks of this I/I study, flow metering and
manhole inspections were performed to determine source points and areas contributing 1/1 to
the Island Creek PS. Smoke testing was not performed because the County's sewer lines are
trunk/main lines,which typically do not have service lines connected to them or have cross
INTRODUCTION.. .. .... . . .... . ..... . ..... . .... . . .... . . ..... ...... ...... ..... . . .. . . ... . . . ..... .. 1- 1

connections with storm sewers. In place of smoke testing and yet satisfy the identification of
source points of I/I for this study,the inspections were expanded to a system-wide above
ground manhole inspections task. The identification focused on sources contributing directly
to the County's main lines and were tributary to the Island Creek PS.
Metering was completed in pump station basins that were tributary to the Island Creek PS or
where flow problems were known to exist during significant storm events.
The data collected from the field investigations was analyzed to identify 1/1 problem areas,
and to generate a plan to effectively reduce 1/1. Reducing I/I results in restoring lost capacity,
which in effect saves money in the form of eliminating costs to treat excess sewer flows.
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Definitions and abbreviations associated with this report and typical sanitary sewer
investigations are as follows:
Sanitary Sewer Terms
Basin Tributary sanitary sewers within a defined boundary. Typically a boundary
encompasses sewers that are tributary to a particular pump station.
Bench Concrete base at the bottom of the manhole that functions as the working space
for sewer line service personnel.
Cleanout Access point to a service line.
Cone/Corbel Section of the manhole between frame or riser adjustment and wall.
Force main Pipeline used to transport wastewater under pressure from a pumping station.
Frame Seal Seal between frame and riser or cone section.
Interceptor Sewers Portion of a collection system that connects main and trunk sewers with the
wastewater treatment plant,thereby controlling the flow into the plant.
Main Sewer A larger pipe in which smaller branch and submain sewers are connected. Also
called a trunk sewer.
Pick Hole Lifting hole in conventional manhole cover,which may be concealed or open,
for opening the manhole with a pick. Open pickholes may be point sources for
inflow.
Pipe Seals Concrete or gasket seals between the sanitary sewer pipe and manhole walls.
Trough A trench between pipes at the bottom of the manhole to direct and carry flow.
Trunk Sewer A larger pipe in which smaller branch and submain sewers are connected. Also
called a main sewer.
INTRODUCTION.. .. .... . . .... . ..... ...... . .... . . .... . . ..... ...... ...... ...... .... ...... ...... .. 1-2

Cost Analysis Terms
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Systematic comparison of alternative rehabilitation solutions that meet given
objectives while minimizing costs over a period of time. The cost-effectiveness
of rehabilitating the sewer system is based on a comparison between the cost-
effective cut-off point(cost of continuing to treat I/I)and the rehabilitation unit
cost of removable I/I. The results of this comparison determines whether it is
more cost-effective to continue treatment of 1/1 or to rehabilitate the defects
within the sewer system.
Cost-Effective Ratio Rehabilitation cost($/gpd)per gallon of I/I removed. This ratio is used to
establish a cut-off point where rehabilitation is not considered cost-effective to
perform based solely on rehabilitation cost.
Infiltration/Inflow Evaluation Study Terms
1-Year/60-Minute Storm A storm event that produces X amount of inches of rain per hour for a
particular region and is expected to occur once in any given year.
5-Year/60-Minute Storm A storm event that produces X amount of inches of rain per hour for a
particular region and has a 20 percent probability of occurring in a given year.
Average Daily Dry-Weather Dry-weather/low-groundwater flow exclusive of dry-weather/high-groundwater
Flow (peak infiltration) and wet-weather(inflow)flow. Includes base flow and
permanent infiltration only.
Average Daily Dry-Weather The ratio between the peak hourly flow rate and the average daily flow.
Flow Peaking Factor
Base Flow Wastewater flow exclusive of infiltration or inflow. Generally determined
from water records during months when most of the water consumption is
returned to the wastewater collection system.
Design Storm Event A storm event selected for purposes of analyzing its effect on the wastewater
collection system.
Excessive Infiltration and The extraneous clean water that enters the sanitary sewer system which can be
Inflow(1/I) eliminated on a cost-effective basis.
Gpd Gallons per day.
Gpd/idm Gallons per day per inch-diameter-mile.
Hydraulic Pertaining to the energy,momentum, and continuity effects of liquid in motion.
Hydrograph The variation of the flow of liquids over time
Idm Inch-diameter-miles. The product of sewer pipe diameter in inches and length
of sewer in feet divided by 5,280 feet.
Infiltration (as defined by Water entering a sewer system and service connections from the ground
USEPA) through such means as,but not limited to, defective pipes,pipe joints, service
connections, service laterals, or manholes; walls,bench,pipe seals.
Infiltration and Inflow(1/1) A combination of infiltration and inflow wastewater volume in sanitary sewer.
Inflow Extraneous flow that is a direct result of stormwater runoff that is discharged
into a sewer system, including the following sources: cleanouts, service
connections,roof leaders; cellar,yard, and area drains; foundation drains, and
manholes(through covers, defective seals,riser and cone sections)
INTRODUCTION.. .. .... . . .... . ..... . ..... . .... . . .... . . ..... ...... ...... ...... .... ...... ...... .. 1 -3

Infiltration/Inflow Evaluation Study Terms
Mgd Million gallons per day.
Peak Flow Maximum flow expected to be discharged to a treatment facility.
Peak Infiltration The maximum extraneous flow that enters the wastewater collection system
during high groundwater conditions after the inflow effects of a rain event have
ended. Generally determined by subtracting average dry weather/low
groundwater flow from average daily dry-weather/high groundwater flow.
Permanent Infiltration Extraneous flow that enters the sewer system through the ground during
periods of dry weather/low groundwater. Generally determined by subtracting
base flow during winter months from the average daily dry-weather monitored
flow.
Surcharge Condition When the sewer flow depth equals or exceeds the diameter of the discharging
sewer lines. (WEF Manual of Practice FD-6)
Rainfall Simulation Simulation techniques include smoke testing, dyed water flooding, and
television inspection in conjunction with dyed water flooding. Although
primarily an identification tool, it can also be utilized with flow measurements
to quantify inflow from identified source defects.
Rain Induced Infiltration Residual elevated flow as a result of temporarily surcharged groundwater
(RII) conditions following a significant storm event.
INTRODUCTION.. .. .... . . .... . ..... ...... . .... . . .... . . ..... ...... ...... ...... .... ...... ...... .. 1 -4

E MANHOLE INSPECTIONS
C
T
I
O
N
2,
MANHOLE INSPECTIONS
The purpose of this task was to visually inspect sanitary sewer manholes and record the
materials and condition of the manhole. Observations were recorded on a inspection form
and entered into a database. Inflow sources in a manhole structure are located in the
frame/cover, frame adjustment(chimney), and corbel(cone)area. Infiltration sources are
located below the cone section.
Above Ground Inspections CORRELATION OF I/I WITH MANHOLE PARTS
FRAME 6 COVER/ADJUST.R[NG
Above ground inspections were completed ,.PICK I+DLes
2.CRACKEDlBRDKEN COVER
in the collection system upstream to the 1 FRA14 SEAL
Island Creek PS,which included the 2 o
collection system tributary to Drowning
Creek PS,Eckard PS, and the Huffman PS. CORBEL
i LGRACKED
This type of manhole inspection is 2.DETERIORATED
3.STUND
conducted at grade and does not include °.LROOTS
EAX]
5.LEA NTINTS
6.LEAX NO STEP
pipe seal or visual pipe inspection,but does 7.LOOSE/MISSING BRICKS
include wall inspection of visible defects.
However, if observable,pipe seal
conditions were recorded. WALL
L CRACKED
BENLMliRODGM 2.DETERIORATED
3 SOUND
a I.CRACK"D q,ROOTS
2.DE TER]DRR iED
Manhole inspections focus on specific a 3.SODNO 5.LEAKING STINTS
p 6.LEAKING STEP
a.UNFINISHED
areas of observations such as the condition, a
type of defect(e.g. cracked or deteriorated), ED
construction, and evidence of inflow in the
frame, frame seal, and corbel. The
manhole inspection procedure includes
ALS
recording the following observations: ;'OUPE ND
2.CRACKED
3.NONE
1. Location and location characteristics
2. Potential for ponding or sheeting on manhole cover
3. Cover type, fit, and description
4. Condition and construction of frame adjustment and seal, and evidence of inflow
5. Cone construction, condition, evidence of inflow
6. Wall construction, condition, evidence of infiltration
7. Bench/trough construction, condition, deposition
8. Pipe seal condition, evidence of infiltration(where observable)
9. Surcharging or evidence of surcharging
MANHOLE INSPECTIONS.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 2-
1

Results
West Consultants attempted 180 manhole inspections and completed 152 inspections.
Twenty-eight manhole inspections were not completed due to manholes that could not be
opened or could not be located as shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Manhole Inspection Summary
Manhole Outfall Completed Could Not Locate Could Not Open
Curville Flume 21 1 1
Island Creek PS 27*
Drowning PS 37 3 1
Eckard Creek PS 27 7 9
Huffman PS 40 6
152 17 11
*Six manholes were surcharged at the time of inspection
Photos were taken at manholes where defects were observed. These are included in a
separate CD to the County. Typical defects include:
Frame and Covers
- a Open pickholes
Cover below grade and subject to ponding
Cover subject to sheeting
Broken or deteriorated frame/cover
Frame/cover offset from riser or cone section
Poor cover to frame fit
MH 22—Island Creek Outfall
Riser Adjustment
Defective frame to riser seal
Deterioration -�
Cracks I
Roots
Loose riser ring
Leaking joints (riser adjustment to cone seal)
The most common defect was the displacement of the frame from its original position and no
seal between frame and riser/cone sections,thus creating a potential for inflow to enter the
sewer system. To reduce the frequency of this occurring in the future as repairs are made, it
is recommended that frames be bolted to riser/cone sections and a butyl rubber mastic sealant
MANHOLE INSPECTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-
2

be applied between each manhole section. Shown below is a recommended detail.
Appendix A shows the 518" BOLTS FOR EACH BOLT
recommended manhole HOLE, LENGTH AS REQUIRED
rehabilitation in each outfall,
along with a cost estimate.
The shaded manholes indicate *APPLY 2 ROWS OF BUTYL
RUBBER MASTIC SEALANT
the manhole repairs currently MATERIAL BETWEEN EACH
MANHOLE SECTION.
under construction. There are {
an additional 63 manholes \:\
within the collection system \i
that are tributary to the Island \
Creek PS,which are
recommended for repair. The
estimated repair cost is
$1 1 6,00/. MANHOLE RISER ADJUSTMENT (TYP.)
NTS
*NOTE
Based on revious drawin S ALL SURFACES SEALANT MATERIAL WILL BE IN CONTACT WITH SHALL BE
p g CLEAN AND FREE OF ALL DEBRIS (ROOTS, SOIL, ETC.) PRIOR TO SEALANT
and projects,knowledge of the APPLICATION. ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE 8"0 STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS OR 8"0
STAINLESS STEEL ALL THREAD ROD USING REDHEAD OR EQUAL CONCRETE
existing system, and manhole ANCHORS WITH MIN. 3" EMBEDMENT.
inspections, a County sewer system map was created and presented to the County.
During the manhole inspection process,West Consultants used a hand-held GPS unit during
the inspections of the manholes tributary to the Eckard Creek and Huffman pump stations.
These manhole locations were updated in the County sewer system map to reflect the actual
location as determined by the GPS.
MH 6—Island Creek Pump Station Outfall
After Repairs
MH 6—Island Creek Pump Station Outfall
Roots Throughout Manhole
t
w
MANHOLE INSPECTIONS.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-
3

MH 29—Hufman Pump Station Outfall
MH 18 w/Active Leaks—Drowning Creek Pump Station Outfall
MH 38B—Hufman Pump Station Outfall
Roots throughout Manhole
i
l -
•f h�:
'F
1'
Drownl-nTrreeKrump Vanon unyan
w/Severe Roots,Frame Offset,and Outgoing Pipe Invert — car ree ump a ron u, a
Higher Than Incoming invert w/Severe Active Leakage
MANHOLE INSPECTIONS.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-
4

S
E
C
T
I
O
N
FLOW METER/NG
SITE SELECTION
Meter site selections were based on isolating flows in basins of the pump stations tributary to the
Island Creek PS or where there were known flow problems. Metering was completed at six
locations, of which five were tributary the Island Creek PS. One was placed in the Drowning Creek
PS basin, two in the Eckard Creek PS basin, and two in the Huffman PS basin. The six meter was
placed in the Indian Hills PS basin and measured flow that previously caused high water alarms and
SSO's at the pump station. In addition, sewer flows have reached the nearby Drowning Creek,
which flows into the Catawba River downstream from Lake Rhodiss.
All the meters were installed by February 12, 2009 and removed on March 17, 2009. The meter
locations are shown on Exhibit 1 on the next page.
FLOW METERS
The Hach Sigma 910 Area Velocity Flow Meter, an open -channel flow meter, was used to collect
flow data at each location. The meter is powered by a 6-volt battery and is sealed and designed for
temporary installation inside the harsh environment of a manhole.
Hach -Sigma Flow Meter Principles
The meter utilizes Doppler technology to sense
flow velocity. High frequency signals are sent
from the velocity sensor through the flow, which
reflect off particles in the flow back to the velocity
probe to measure velocity. The 910 meter
measures the depth by a pressure transducer.
The sensors are enclosed in a probe mounted near the pipe invert and are hard wired to the meter
housing. A stainless steel, expandable band secured the depth/velocity probe to the channel. A
communication cable is connected to the meter to access the memory and remove stored data.
Flows are calculated using the continuity equation, which is
expressed as Q = AV, where Q is flow, A is cross sectional
area, and V is velocity. The meter records velocity and
depth at five minute intervals and averages them over a
fifteen minute period.
Hach -Sigma Meter Calibration
Flow is calculated using the Continuity Equation:
Flow = Average Velocity x Area
The meters were calibrated on site by comparing the depth and velocity measurements recorded by
the meter to manual measurements. Depth readings were verified with a ruler and adjustments were
made directly to the meter as necessary.
FLowMETERING.............................................................................. 3
-1

A Marsh-McBirney Model 2000 portable velocity meter was used to obtain velocity measurements
independently of the flow meter. The velocity meter is factory calibrated and records velocity by
an electromagnetic velocity transducer that operates on the Faraday principle. This principle states
that a conductor moving through a magnetic field produces a voltage directly proportional to the
velocity of the conductor. Velocity readings were confirmed by sampling the pipe flow with
individual point velocity readings over the flow cross section. The readings were used as a basis
for velocity adjustments during the analysis phase, if needed.
INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE
Each meter was checked and calibrated prior to installation and calibration measurements
performed again during the installation. The operation and calibration of each meter was checked
weekly during the monitoring period. During the site visit the data stored in the meters was
retrieved, the meter inspected for proper operation, calibration measurements taken, batteries
changed if necessary, and the probes cleaned of debris.
The gravity meter body was secured to the wall or steps. A stainless steel,
expandable band secured the depth/velocity probe to the channel. The probes
were placed in the incoming pipe, unless the probe was installed in the
outgoing pipe in order to measure all tributary flows from incomingKe
pipes.
ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Sigma Meter Band and Probe
For this section the following abbreviations will denote: dry-weather/low groundwater (DW/LG),
dry-weather/high groundwater (DW/HG), and wet-weather/high groundwater (WW/HG). The
analysis consisted of using dry -weather and wet -weather flows as measures for determining the
estimated amount of 1/I entering the sewer collection at the metered locations. In Appendix B are
flow summaries for each meter location, which includes averages for level, velocity, and flow; and
the peak 15-minute flow for each day the meters collected data. Graphs showing flow and rainfall,
for each meter location, were generated and are provided in Appendix B.
Dry -Weather Flow
Average daily dry -weather flow is defined as flow exclusive of flows resulting from wet -weather
(peak infiltration and inflow). It consists of base flow (sanitary sewer) and permanent infiltration
only. Permanent infiltration can occur in the system even under relatively low groundwater
conditions.
Dry -weather periods were selected based on the following criteria and priority:
• Occurred early as possible in the monitoring period prior to rain events
• Similar days of the week to the wet -weather days (for example, if a rain event occurred
on a Saturday, similar dry -weather Saturdays were selected for comparison to the wet -
weather days)
• Two dry -weather days were averaged and used for comparison to wet -weather days so
that there was not reliance on one dry -weather day representing dry -weather
conditions. In addition, comparison of dry -weather days to each other was completed to
ensure consistency in the results and to eliminate skewing of the results due to
unexplained drops or increases in flow, or pumping from upstream pump stations
FLowMETERING.............................................................................. 3
-2

Inflow Projection and Source Data Analysis, and Results
Inflow in a sanitary sewer system is defined as extraneous flow that is a direct result of stormwater
runoff. Inflow may enter the sanitary sewer through numerous sources in the private sector such as
downspouts, area drains, service lateral cleanouts and foundation drains. In the public sector,
inflow enters the sewer system through sources such as cross connections between the sanitary
sewers and storm sewers, catch basins, and storm ditches; and sources such as manhole defects at
the cover, frame seal, and cone area.
During each flow metering phase several rain events occurred, but not enough events with
significant peak intensities of at least one hour duration occurred. Thus, the typical peak one -hour
inflow patterns expected during significant rain events was not easily correlated to the target peak
rainfall intensity period. However, sustained increases in flow over a 24-hour period resulting from
the rain were visible, so the inflow to rainfall correlation analysis was centered on the increased
extraneous flow that occurred during 24-hour periods. For this analysis a 24-hour period is defined
as the start of a storm and not at the beginning of a day.
A relationship between rainfall intensity and 24-hour inflow rate (Q vs I) was developed for each
meter basin. The 24-hour inflow, the rate at which extraneous flow (inflow) enters the sewer
system, was plotted against the total 24-hour rainfall intensity for the corresponding storm event. A
regression analysis was performed to determine the "best fit" relationship between the various sets
of data points or an average fit analysis was determined between the recorded rain events and
corresponding 24-hour flows.
Several storm events of various intensities were used to establish the rainfall intensity/inflow
relationship. Storms resulting in system surcharging were not used for Q vs I analyses, as the flow
to rainfall relationship changes under those conditions and may skew the analysis results.
Once the rainfall/inflow relationship was established, the inflow from each basin was projected to a
one-year/24-hour design storm, which was determined to be 2.99 in/24-hr for the east Burke
County area (Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates From NOAA Atlas 14). Rain events which
recorded 24-hour intensities greater than 0.50 inches/24-hour were used for the analysis. These
intensities ranged from 0.53 to 1.77 inches/24-hour, of which there were five as shown in Table 2.
Rainfall data was obtained from the rainfall data collected at the Hickory Airport.
In Table 3 are the results of the metering. As an example
of the inflow analysis, the largest 24-hour rainfall intensity
recorded for the monitoring period is shown on Table 3
with the resulting measured inflow from that rainfall event.
For Table 3, the largest rain event occurred on March 1,
2009. The table includes the following:
Meter
• Pump Station Meter Location
• Pump Station Identification
For Largest Intensity Storm
• Dry -Weather Flow Gross ADF (mgd)
• Dry -Weather Net ADF (mgd)
TABLE 2
Rainfall Summary
Date
Total Rainfall (in)
2/18/2009
0.58
2/28/2009
0.53
3/1 /2009
1.77
3/14/2009
0.55
3/15/2009
0.78
FLowMETERING.............................................................................. 3
-3

• Wet -Weather Gross ADF (mgd)
• Wet -Weather Flow Net ADF (mgd)
• Gross Measured Inflow (mgd)
• Net Measured Inflow (mgd)
Predicted Inflow Based on All Collected Inflow Data
• Gross Inflow 1-Yr/24-Hour (mgd)
• Net Inflow 1-Yr/24-Hour (mgd)
• Net Inflow 5-Yr/24-Hour (mgd)
Gross flows are defined as reported flows that include flows from upstream tributary meter
locations. Net flows are defined as the gross flow minus any upstream flow that was also metered.
The inflow associated with a five-year/24-hour storm (4.60 in/hr) was subsequently estimated from
measured flows and the one-year storm projection. This storm projection was calculated through a
direct relationship from the one-year/24-hour storm results and projected to a 4.60 in/hr storm. A
five-year/24-hour storm is a typical design storm used for planning, such as for capacity or for
expected peak flow.
The total estimated inflow of 2.147 mgd, from a projected 5-year storm, represents potential
additional extraneous flow resulting from inflow related defects that may be realized under
sustained WW/HG conditions. However; the quantification represents the potential inflow
produced from a 5-year/24-hour re-ocurring storm event, not necessarily the amount of inflow that
will enter the sewer system at one time. There may be effects that reduce this amount of inflow,
such as throttling of the inflow into the sewer system, surcharging within the sewer system,
regional rain, or limited wet well capacity.
Unit rates were established for inflow, expressed in gallons per day per 1,000 linear feet
(gpd/1,0001f) of sewer line within each metered basin, which allows the magnitude of inflow to be
compared proportionally with the rates determined from other metered locations. The unit rates are
based on the projected inflow from a five-year/24-hour storm and basin pipe length as shown in
Tables 3.
All of the metered locations showed evidence of inflow during the March I't Sunday storm event,
with the Indian Hills meter location showing the most significant increase in flow due to inflow.
Based on average flow from previous weekends (approx. 0.050 mgd), this location experienced
almost 7.5 times the average daily flow (0.371 mgd) and a peak flow of 0.685 mgd. There was a
SSO that occurred upstream of this location at the Indian Hills PS as a result of the March 1st storm
event.
Infiltration and Source Data Analysis and Results
High groundwater infiltration is defined for this report as the maximum extraneous flow that enters the
sanitary sewer system during DW/HG conditions minus the flow at DW/LG conditions. High
groundwater conditions occur as a result of elevated groundwater due to continuous rainfall and dry -
weather conditions are considered to be a time period at least 24-hours after a significant rain event.
Infiltration enters the sanitary sewer through pipe joints, sewer line defects (including main sewer lines
and service laterals), and defective manhole walls, benches, and pipe seals.
FLowMETERING.............................................................................. 3
-4

As previously mentioned, dry -weather flows were selected from a period as early as possible in the
monitoring period to reduce influence from rain events, similar days of the weeks were used, and
two dry -weather days were averaged to form a representative dry -weather day. In determining the
DW/HG flows, a time period at least 24-hours after a significant rain event was used to avoid days
immediately following storm events that may lead to an over -estimation of infiltration.
To determine high groundwater infiltration, the DW/LG minimum flow for each metered basin was
subtracted from the DW/HG minimum flow. Determining the minimum flow consisted of
averaging the flow from 1:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. This time frame was chosen because the domestic
sewage component is minimal and the flow is mostly infiltration. The results of the infiltration
analysis are included on Table 3.
Unit rates were established for infiltration, expressed in gallons per day per inch -diameter -mile
(gpd/idm) of sewer line, which allows the magnitude of infiltration to be compared proportionally
with the rates determined from other metered locations.
None of the metered locations show excessive infiltration unit rates. However, the flows measured
at the Indian Hills location remained elevated beyond the typical weekday flows following the rain,
indicating infiltration. A typical excessive infiltration rate cut-off point is 3,000 gpd/idm, but the
analysis resulted in an infiltration unit rate of 1838 gpd/idm, primarily because of the large tributary
area that the metering encompassed.
FLowMETERING.............................................................................. 3
-5

co Fr�
I
�
O
m
,
m
+
a ro
CIDO
w /
Cy m
z
"'
e
r-
.,.
c,
a
'
+►4mm.
in
m
z
\
1
0
o
,♦0
N
O
�
�
r
m
co
m
m
=
I
D
~
y
C
i
NI..�.,
�7
p
z
ri
rm
`
c
ao
—'.
CD
(/)
Cb
r
�
\
ci
m
z
1%
D
t„
m
U)
m
Z
m
w
D
r
w
Z
0
o
o
a
.1
Z
0
0
y
O
0
ON
z
C)
r
z
z
m
Y
;
I
;
o
�
ro
14
!
cl
`
O
co
v
z
N Z
m
=
N
� Z
>
w
C7
�•.j
z
r
(l)
♦
z
_.._•._
m
z
o
CIO
m
m
z m
0
Ci r
CA
V
t£jn
Z
CD
Co `\�
�_
CO
[
'"
N
>
22
Co O
Cam
r
Z
a
�\
cc]s
z D
w
m Cn
IUM Hpy
AM"
00

TABLE 3
Flow Monitoring Results with 1/1 Summary
Pump Station
Basin
Meter
Location
Dry -Weather Flow
Wet -Weather Flow
Measured Inflow
Projected 1-Year Storm
Projected
Net 5-Year
Storm
(mgd)
Inflow Unit rate
Infiltration
Gross
ADF
(mgd)
Net ADF
(mgd)
Gross
ADF
(mgd)
Net ADF
(mgd)
Gross
Inflow
(mgd)
Net Inflow
(mgd)
Gross
Projection
(mgd)
Net
Projection
(mgd)
Length (ft)
1-Year Storm
Unit Rate
(gpd/1000 ft)
5-Year Storm
Unit Rate
(gpd/1000 ft)
WW
Flow
(mgd)
DW Flow
(mgd)
Gross
Infiltration
(mgd)
Net
Infiltration
(mgd)
Unit Rate
(gpd/idm)
Drowning Creek
MH 54
0.031
0.031
0.053
0.053
0.022
0.022
0.030
0.030
0.047
4,913
6,192
9,526
0.032
0.031
0.001
0.001
151
Eckard Creek #1
MH 1
0.078
0.058
0.214
0.109
0.136
0.052
0.254
0.123
0.190
NA
m
NA
0.061
0.014
0.047
NA
NA
Eckard Creek #2
MH 15
0.021
0.021
0.105
0.105
0.084
0.084
0.131
0.131
0.201
7,431
17,620
27,108
0.051
0.009
0.042
0.042
3,070
Huffman #1
MH 19
0.023
0.023
0.155
0.155
0.132
0.132
0.286
0.286
0.440
22,641
12,627
19,427
0.039
0.012
0.027
0.027
773
Huffman #2
MH 38C
0.037
0.037
0.143
0.143
0.106
0.106
0.203
0.203
0.313
35,107
5,790
8,908
0.061
0.015
0.045
0.045
855
Indian Hills
MH 318
0.049
0.049
0.436
0.436
0.387
0.387
0.622
0.622
0.957
F 53,878
11,542
17,756
0.189
0.033
0.156
0.156
1,887
Total 1.396 2.147
1/ Meter placed in outgoing pipe w/ anticipation of subtracting Huffman PS flow.
However, it is unknown how much flow was diverted to the Indian Hills PS.
Note: As an example of the infiltration and inflow analysis, the table
shows the resulting measured 1/1 from the March 1, 2009 rain event.

S
E
T CONCLUSION
I
O
N
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As a result of the I/I study, which included a system -wide manhole identification and inspection,
critical manhole repairs to be completed have been identified. The manhole inspections included
completion of a manhole inspection form, defect identifications, defect photos, and mapping
manhole locations.
To prevent future structural failures, reduce I/I into the sewer collection system, and to reduce SSO
potentials, it is recommended to perform the repairs in Appendix A. To date 18 manholes within
the Rutherford College town limits have under gone rehabilitation. There are 63 other manholes in
the Burke County sewer collection system, which are tributary to the Island Creek PS, that are
recommended to be repaired, at an estimated cost of $116,007. Various repairs are recommended,
such as relining, frame and cover replacement, addition of manhole risers to elevate frame and
covers, and reseal frames to cone or riser sections. The rehabilitation needs are to alleviate
problems associated with I/I, like loss of pipe capacity, treatment costs, potential overflows,
excessive pump run times, and maintenance costs.
There are some manholes that are a rehabilitation priority, as can be seen in the photos at the end of
Section 2. MH 18 in the Drowning Creek PS basin and MH 1 in the Eckard Creek PS basin are
actively leaking, particularly at MH 1 where there is a steady flow of infiltration between the bench
and wall. The estimated repair cost for each is $1,800 and $1,455, respectively. The manholes just
downstream of the forcemain discharge from the Eckard Creek PS are a priority due to deterioration
from HzS gas, as can be seen in the photo for MH 11 at the end of Section 2. As a rehabilitation
priority, it is recommended to reline the manholes from MH 9 to MH 23 as shown on Exhibit 2 at
the end of this section. There are eight manholes that total approximately 84.1 vertical feet, of
which four need a new frame/cover. The estimated cost is $23,013, which consists relining with a
cementitious liner for structural stability and a protective epoxy coating to protect against corrosion
from HzS gas. The protective coating will extend the life of the manhole, cementitious liner, and
the investment made in repairs.
The results of the metering showed an increase in flow at all the sites due to inflow during the
March 1 st storm event. This is particularly evident at the Indian Hills meter location, where flows
increased 7.5 times the average daily flow and further evident by the SSO that occurred at the
Indian Hills PS. The flow to this meter location is from the Hildebran area.
The inflow unit flow rates are excessive enough at each location metered to be of concern, and are
recommended for further field investigations, such as,
Inspect manholes that were buried, could not be located, or could not be opened during
the I/I study.
CONCLUSION....................................................................... ........... 4
-1

• Perform dye testing of manholes with known frame seal defects to quantify and determine
extent of inflow from defective frame seals during significant rain events. Defective seals
were the most common defect recorded during the manhole inspections.
• Perform random dye testing of manholes to determine the extent of the frame seal
conditions for manholes that were recorded as satisfactory condition.
• Perform visual inspection of manholes, particularly junction manholes, during significant
rain events to observe and record areas of concern, and to identify active sources of
inflow.
• Meter at these locations again once the repairs are complete.
It is recommended to identify all manholes in easements with a marker, such as a PVC pipe as some
currently are, to prevent manholes from being hit during easement maintenance and to make
locating the manhole easier, if needed, in the future. This will aid in reducing inflow that may enter
the collection system due to an offset frame or broken frame seal, as well as reduce the number of
future repairs.
In summary, I/I reduces effective capacity within the collection system and additional costs are
incurred to treat these same flows that could be more productively utilized elsewhere. Additionally,
excessive I/I, particularly during significant rain events, strains the system relative to peak flow
rates and pump station capacities. While there are many rehabilitation needs, such as offset frames,
defective frame seals, and defective covers, all of which can be a source point for inflow, West
Consultants recommends completing first, as a rehabilitation priority, the repairs for the active leaks
at MH 1 and MH 18 as previously mentioned. The manholes downstream of the Eckard PS
forcemain would be the next priority, followed by the remaining repairs listed in Appendix A.
As a separate recommendation from this study, West Consultants recommends that Burke County
contact the Town of Hildebran to form a plan that would consist of smoke testing the Hildebran
sewer system, particularly the sewer lines tributary to the Indian Hills meter location.
CONCLUSION....................................................................... ........... 4
-2

EXHIBIT 2
DROWNING CREEK PS BASIN
ICARD
ELEMENTARY
' SCHOOL
r'
❑ROWNING CREEK
PUMP STATION 30
�q 29
28
8 2
54 y
52
10 2 Forca� p N
13A
r
]3
14 15
S 16
w
MH 22 — Drowning Creek Pump Station Oufall
Deteriorated Frame and Cover
MH 22 —Drowning Creek Pump Station Outfall
Deteriorated Manhole
CONCLUSION....................................................................... ........... 4
-3

RECOMMENDED MANHOLE REHABILITATION
BURKE CO, NC
Completed Manhole Repairs Under Construction
Basin
MH ID
Approx.
Depth (ft)
Street (or nearest)
Location
Comment
Repair
Cost Estimate
IC-Curville Outfall 10 6.5
:ESTES DR
:ESMT W OF ESTES DR
e/cone- eal,
Frame loose, heavy roots in frame/cone seal, top step broken__
Reseal frame to cone
$975
------------------------i
IC-Curville Outfall
-------------
:
4-------------
8.0
f--------------------------------------------
:ESTES DR
i---------------------------------------------------------------------------i-----------------------
'ESMT W OF ESTES DR
---- ---
'Moderate roots in frame/cone seal
i-------------------------------------------------f-----------------------
'Reseal frame to cone
$1 200
IC-Curville Outfall
_____
17
8.0
:ESTES DR
;ESMT E OF ESTES DR
;Subject to drainage, poor cover fit, minor roots in frame/cone
,seal, MH deteriorated
Reline and reseal frame to cone
$2,000
-------------------------y-------------•---------------------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------y----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------------------------------
IC-Curville Outfall
20
9.5
:BENFIELD DR
ESMT NW OF BENFIELD DR
�CNO, no seal between frame and cement, cement broken off
;on outside
;Replace frame and cover
$2,375
-------------------------,-------------,-------------T--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------�
IC-Curville Ouffall
; 21 ; 21.0
------------,-------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
;BENFIELD DR ;20' Nw OF BEN. DR AND GIDEON ST ;Poor cover to frame fit due to frame deterioration, brick riser ;Replace frame and cover, replace 2 VF
;
-------------------------
J------------- 1-------------
deteriorated, leak at wall to corbel joint :of brick riser w/ precast
J--------------------------------------------- J--------------------------------------------------------------------------- J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------y-----------------------
$1,000
IC-Curville Outfall
6.5
�MALCOLM BLVD
IE OF MALCOLM BLVD IN SIDEWALK
'Riser deteriorated, previous liner eelin
:Re lace riser 1.0' VF w/ recast
R------------5--------�---
$975
-------------------------J-----
IC-PS Outfall
----
6
-------------J---------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J-----------------------
8.0
IRODRICK ST
:ESMT S OF RODRICK ST
---------------�--------------------------------J---
:Frame offset, roots throughout MH
-----------------i-----------------------
lReplace cone section, raise 4"
$2,500
-------------------------J-------------J-------------J---------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
IC-PS Outfall
9
6.0
:WOODLAWN DR
;ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR
;Frame offset at_qrade__________________________________________________
;Reseal frame to cone
$500
-------------------------y-------------y---------------------------------------------------------y---------------------------------------------------------------------------y-------------------
IC-PS Outfall
;
10
9.0
:WOODLAWN DR
;ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR
y-------------------------------------------------------------------------
;Frame loose (above grade), moderate/heavy roots in cone/wall I
;
--------------------------
'-------------- '------------'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------'Reseal
frame to cone and cone------ ----
$1,000
IC -PS Cutfall
12
6.0
:WOODLAWN DR
ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR
Frame offset 2" w/ mud and minor roots
Reset and reseal frame to cone
$900
------------------------A
IC -PS Outfall
-------------------------J-------------J-------------J---------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
------------- 4-------------
15 4.0
�---------------------------------------------i---------------------------------------------------------------------------4----------------------------------------------------------------------------i
:WOODLAWN DR
ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR
Roots in frame to cone
-------------- -----------------------------------------------------------
Reseal frame to cone
$500
IC-PS Outfall
-------------------------
16 9.0
J-------------1-------------
�WOODLAWN DR ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR Frame offset 6" :Reset and reseal frame to cone
j���DR -----------
$500
Outfall
16A
0.0
:WOODLAWN DR
ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR
No frame/cone seal, lar a root extends into MH
:Reset and reseal frame to cone
� $500
-------------------------J-
IC-PS Outfall
- - ----J-------------J---------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
19
5.0
ISRAEL CHAPEL RD
:ESMT W OF ISRAEL CHAPEL RD
:Roots in frame to cone
Reseal frame to cone
i $500
-------------------------J-------------J-------------J---------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
IC-PS Outfall
22
8.0
:ISRAEL CHAPEL RD
:ESMT W OF ISRAEL CHAPEL RD
Frame offset 6" - inside of MH visible from outside, minor roots
-------------------------
--------------------------------------------
;in frame to cone
----------------------------------------------------------
:Reset and reseal frame to cone
$500
IC-PS Outfall
,-------------
'-------------'
,-------------
23
9.5
r
:ISRAEL CHAPEL RD_____________________;ESMT
'
,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,------------------
W OF ISRAEL CHAPEL RD
Frame offset 4" w/ minor roots, roots in cone/wall joint
,-------------------------------------------------r-----------------------
Reset and reseal frame to cone
; $500
------------------------
IC -PS Outfall
----
; 24 ; 8.0
-------------- - - - -- - ------------------------------------------' 9 9 p
;ISRAEL CHAPEL RD ;ESMT W OF ISRAEL CHAPEL RD ;Frame offset 4" w/ minor roots, signs of as buildup on walls,
-------------------------
J-------------
1-------------
J---------------------------------------------
J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J---
:but structurally food ___________________________________________________
----- -----
Reset and reseal frame to cone
J-- -- -- -- - -- --- ---- - - -- ---------------J------------
$500
-----
IC-PS Outfall
26
8.0
HWY 70
:N OF HWY 70
Below grade, 2 pick holes -signs of inflow on bench
MH Insert or gasket
$150
IC-Curville Outfall
3
3.5
.KATHLEEN DR
S OF KATHLEEN DR
Roots throw out MH
Reline
$875
-------------------------y-
IC-Curville Outfall
---
4
--------------------------
6.5
-___________________________yESMT
;KATHLEEN DR
------------------------------------------------------------------y--------------
;ESMT S OF KATHLEEN DR
------------------_-----------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------------------------------
:Moderate roots throughout MH
:Reline
$1,625
Outfall
-------
5
10.0
---------------------------
:KATHLEEN DR
;ESMT S OF KATHLEEN DR
;Moderate/heavy roots throughout MH
:Reline
$2,500
----------------------------------------------------r--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,------------------
IC-Curville Outfall
-------------------------,-------------,-------------r--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------r-----------------------
6
7.0
;LOVELADY DR
;ESMT S OF LOVELADY DR
--------------- -----------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------r----------------------
;Moderate roots throughout MH
:Reline
$1,750
IC-Curville Outfall
;_
7 ;
10.0____
;LOVELADY_DR ___________________________
;ESMT S OF LOVELADY DR
Heavy roots throughout MH
:Reline
$2,500
IC-Curville Outfall
8 :
4.5
:LOVELADY DR
ESMT S OF LOVELADY DR
Moderate roots throughout
Reline
$1 125
------------------------A
IC-Curville Outfall
--------- ----4-------------
: 9 7.0
�---------- -----------------------------------i---------------------------------------------------------------------------4--------------------------
:LOVELADY DR
'ESMT S OF LOVELADY DR
_MH_______________________________________
'Heavy roots throughout MH
i-------------------------------------------------
'Reline
�-------------'---------
$1 750
IC-Curville Outfall
; 9.0
:ESTES DR 'ESMT W OF ESTES DR :Minor roots in cone/wall joint (just below grade)___________________ _Grout_ Interior ________________________________:
$1,350
IC-Curville Outfall
13 1
10.0
ESTES DR
ESMT W OF ESTES DR
J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------
�Lt roots in frame seal (above rade ,roots in 4" lateral
Reseal frame to cone
$500
-------------------------J-------------J-------------J------------------
IC-Curville Outfall
14 1
14.0
---------------------------
ESTES DR
ESMT W OF ESTES DR
- ----------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J--------------
Frame loose, Lt roots in frame seal, above grade
Reseal frame to cone
---------
$500
-------------------------J-------------J-------------J---------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
IC-PS Outfall
8I
4.5
�RODRICK ST
;ESMT S OF RODRICK ST
;Frame offset, above grade
;Reset and reseal frame to cone
$500
-------------------------y-------------y---------------------------------------------------------y---------------------------------------------------------------------------y-------------------------
IC-PS Outfall
11
8.0
:WOODLAWN DR
;ESMT E OF WOODLAWN DR
--------------------------------------------------y-------------------------------------------------------------------------
;Roots in cone/wall joint all around
:Grout interior
$1,200
-------------------------y-------------y---------------------------------------------------------y---------------------------_
Creek PS :
2 :
12.0
:HWY 70
-------- _ ---------------------------------------
;ESMT - RR ROW, N OF HWY 70
------------------------------------------
:Poor cover to frame fit, frame offset >2", It. roots in frame/cone
;and cone/wall joint, minor roots in wall joint
;Reline
$3,000
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - y -
Drowning Creek PS
- - - - - - - - - - - - y
3
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
9.0
y _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
:HWY 70
y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
:25' N OF HWY 70
y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
:Frame deteriorated, cover fit poor, large pick openings, subject
y _ - - - - - - - _
:to drainage, frame offset > 2", minor roots cone/wall joint
:Reline
$2,250
-------------------------
'-------9 ----'-------------r--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------r----------------------
:Above grade 4" in ditch, large pick holes; cone, wall and bench
Drowning Creek PS ;
7.0
:HWY 70
:N OF HWY 70
:deteriorated
:Reline
$1,750
----------- ------------r------------,-------------,---------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------r-----------------------
Drowning Creek PS ; 10 ; 7.0 ;HWY 70 ;12' N OF HWY 70, W EDGE OF BURKE OIL GRAVEL DR
i
;Cone/wall joint deteriorated (stains on walls), steps rusted away; Reline
$1,750

Basin
MH ID
Approx.
Depth (ft)
Street (or nearest)
Location
Comment
Repair
Cost Estimate
Drowning Creek PS
11
10.9
;HWY 70
;N OF HWY 70, W OF BURKE OIL CONCRETE DR
;Poor cover to frame fit (frame rim deteriorating), roots in
:frame/cone seal, walls deterorating, active leak between
:
:incoming pipe and wall
(Replace frame and cover, reline
$3,213
Drowning Creek PS ;
12
15.7
;HWY 70
;5' N OF HWY 70 IN GRAVEL DR
Cover loose fit w/ large pickholes and subject to some
;drainage, previous liner deteriorating, steps rusted away, active;
-------------------------4-------------y----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------y-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
leak between wall and pipe
Reline
$3,925
Drowning Creek PS ;
13
13.2
:HWY 70
:30' N OF HWY 70, EAST EDGE OF GRAVEL DR
:
:Active wall leaks, 2" below grade, frame rim starting to
:deteriorate, previous liner deteriorating, leaks between wall and:
:
;both pipes
;Replace frame and cover, reline
$3,800
-------------------------,-------------,-------------T--------------------------------------------,--7_S_--T
Drowning Creek PS :
13A :
14.0
;HWY 70
---------------------------------------------------------------,-----elow
;50' S OF RAILROAD TRACKS
grad ------me ri---------ng to deteriorate, l-----,-------------------------------------------------T----------------------
:3" below grade, frame rim starting to deteriorate, previous liner
:deteriorated, leak between wall and both pipe, steps
J_ 1_
J__ J_ __________________________________________________________________________deteriorated
Replace frame and cover, reline
J_
J__ ______3,500
Drowning Creek PS ;
18
9.7
;ICARD CHURCH OF GOD RD
:20' WEST OF I.C.O.G. RD
15 active wall leaks and leaking all round between bench and
wall, slightly above grade, cover w/ two large pick holes and
loose fit, frame offset >4", lateral from Zenda
J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
Grout MH wall and bench
$1,455
-------------------------J-------------1--------------L--------------------------------------------J
Drowning Creek PS ;
20
5.4
;ICARD CHURCH OF GOD RD
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
:20' S OF INTERSECTION W/ CARLOLINA TOOL DRVWAY
:Pipe seal leak -incoming pipe, minor roots in frame/cone seal
-------------------------4-------------y----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------y----------------------------------------------------------------------------y--
.Raise 4", grout pipe seals
_________________________-----------------________________
$1,310
Drowning Creek PS ;
22
9.1
:SPARTA CRAFT DR
:10' S OF RD, 50' NORTH OF RR
:
:Poor frame to cover fit -very corroded and subject to drainage,
:previous liner deteriorating, minor active leaks in wall and wall
-------------------------
;to bench
;Replace frame and cover, reline
$2,775
,-------------
,-------------
T--------------------------------------------
,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
Poor frame to cover fit -very corroded and subject to drainage,
Drowning Creek PS ;
----------------------------------------------------T--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------T----------------------
23
7.2
;SPARTA CRAFT DR
;S OF S.C. DR, 20' WEST OF STOP SIGN
;liner pulling away from wall
:Replace frame and cover, reline
$2,300
Drownin Creek PS
25 �_
8.5
ICARD SCHOOL RD
1.E OF I.S. RD, 20' N OF ICARD RHODISS RD
:Oka at grade -subject to draina a
�MH Insert or asket
$150
--------- ---'-------------'------------'
Drowning Creek PS 45 3.5
- - - - - - - - -----------------------'-------------------------------------------------------------------------' ----------------------------------g------------------------------------;----------------
;EAST BURKE BLVD ;W OF E.B. BLVD :Subject to drainage, roots throughout MH, no wall, outgoing
-------------------------------;------------------------
;Raise 8"7 remove/reset cone to clear
;
------------------- ----- J-------------
J-------------J---------------------------------------------J-
___________________________________________________________________________invert
appears to be_hiaher than incoming inv______________________;roots,
---------
reform channel_
----------------------J--------________________
$1,000
Drowning Creek PS ;
47
7.3
:EAST BURKE BLVD
;N OF I-40, 20' E OF CREEK BANK
WH sits below 1-40 and 20' E of creek, cover has 34 holes,
J-------------
J-------------
A--------------------------------------------
J---------------------------------------------------------------------------
:signs of leaks on walls from joints and mud buildup on bench
J------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reline, add insert or replace cover
J-------------------------------------------------A-----------------------
$1,975
-------------------------
Drowning Creek PS ;
48
10.0
:EAST BURKE BLVD
:W OF E.B. BLVD, 20' E OF CREEK BANK
----
;Frame offset >2"-roots and soil coming in from open gap
between frame/cone, roots in cone/wall joint, signs of leaks on
:wall and mud on bench
;Reline
$2,500
--------------------------------------y----------------------------------------------------------
Drowning Creek PS ;
49
7.5
:EAST BURKE BLVD
---------------------------------------------------------------------------y----------------------------------------------------------------------------___________________--------------------------------------________________
:W OF E.B. BLVD, 30' E OF CREEK BANK
:Signs of leaks in wall joint -roots, stains, mud buildup on bench
:Reline
$1,875
------------------------a-------------
Drowning Creek PS ;
J-------------
52
8.0
—--------------------------------------------
:HWY 70
J---------------------------------------------------------------------------
:S OF HWY 70, 20' E OF CREEK BANK
J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J------------------------------------------------------------------------
:Surcharged, roots in: frame/riser seal, riser/cone joint, and top
steps
:Reline
$2, 000
------------------------a-------------J-------------
Drowning Creek PS
--------------------------------------y------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------y-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
53
9.0
--------------------------------------------J-
HWY 70
--------------------------------------------------------------------------a
IS OF HWY 70, 15' E OF CREEK BANK
---------------------------------------------------------------------a
Surcharged, frame offset >6" w/ open gap
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reseal frame to cone
1 $500
Drowning Creek PS ;
54
8.0
:HWY 70
:S OF HWY 70, 12' E OF CREEK BANK
:Surcharged, above grade but mud buildup on cover -creek is 12;
IE, roots in frame/cone seal and wall/bench joint
:Reline
$2,000
Eckard Creek PS
1
9.0
;ECKARD CREEK CIRCLE
;ESMT BEHIND FENCE OF P.S.
;Heavy infiltration in bench/wall joint
:Grout and seal
$1,350
-Eckard Creek Creek PS
9
5.7
:HWY 70, SR 1675
:ESMT BETWEEN OLD BUS AND TRAILER
Deteriorated frame/riser seal, roots at bench, mud build up, leaN
----
aQ 4" service
:Reseal frame to riser
$500
Eckard Creek PS :
19 :
5.3
:SR 1763, INT 40
:ESMT @ TOE OF SLOPE FOR INT 40, NEAR BOX CULVERT
frame/cone seal, possible 4" service seal leak_____:
Reseal frame to cone, grout pipe seal
$1 295
-------------------------------------- f-------------
Eckard Creek PS : 8.7
f--------------------------------------------
:OLD HWY 10
;------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ______:Deteriorated
'RW @ EDGE OF RW OF OLD HWY 10
i-------------------------------------- i---------------------------- ___:
'Frame knocked off, frame/cover are bent from being hit ---------'Replace frame and cover------------------:
-------------'---------
$500
Eckard Creek PS :
27
:INT OF OLD HWY 10 AND MILLER BRID:RW @ EDGE OF PAVEMENT OF INTERSECTION
J
:No frame/cone seal
J
:Reseal frame to cone
J
: $500
J-
Eckard Creek PS
8A
11.9
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
:OLD HWY 10
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
:60' SE OF KR FURNITURE BLDG
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
:Deteriorated frame/cone seal, minor crack in cone/wall joint,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
.......................
-------------------------,-------------,-------------T--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
:vertical crack in wall
:Reseal frame to cone
$500
Eckard Creek PS 7A 9.6
- -
;OLD HWY 10, HWY 70 ;ESMT IN FIELD BEHIND COMMERCIAL BLDG'S ;Possible wall leaks ;Grout
$2,400
Creek PS :
8 :
6.0
:HWY 70
:ESMT @ EDGE CK IN WOODS________________________________________:Subject
to ponding__ low I�ing_area near edge of creek
:Raise 4"
: $500
-------------------------------------- f-------------
Eckard Creek PS : ____ 11_ : 12.4
-------------------------J- -----J-------------J----------
f------- -------------------------------------
:SR 1675____________________________________ESMT
;------------ - - ---------------
IN BACKYARD @ TB_ __________________________________________:Subject
- --
i---------------- - - - ---------- i-------------------------------------------------
to_ponding _- low lying in backyard __________________ _MH Insert or gasket-------------------------:
J - J
f----------------------
$150
-------------------------
Eckard Creek PS 1
-------------------------J-------------J-------------J------
22
8.5
:OLD HWY 10______________________________jRW
@ EDGE OF RW OF OLD HWY 10
--------------------------------------------------------------------J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------J------------------------
:Buried 2"
:Raise 4"
: $500
Eckard Creek PS
10A
7.5
:OLD HWY 10
:S OF ARTCRAFT BLDG, 110' W OF HWY 10
:Subject to ponding - at grade in pavement
�MH Insert or gasket
-------------------------J-------------J-------------i--------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------J----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------1-----------------------
Eckard Creek PS
11A
10.9
SOLD HWY 10
�E OF HWY 10 50'
:.Subject to pondinq - below grade
Raise 4"
$500

Basin
MH ID
Approx.
Depth (ft)
Street (or nearest)
Location
Comment
Repair
Cost Estimate
Huffman PS
'------------------------T------------,
36
7.5
--------------------------------
;HUFFMAN AVENUE
---------------------------,------------------------------------------------------------------
;ESMT
---------,---------------------------------------------------------------
;Heavy roots
-------------,--------------------------------------------------
;Reline
------------------------
$1,875
Huffman PS
38B
5.9
HUFFMAN AVENUE AND RAILROAD
ESMT, IN HILDEBRAN CITY LIMITS
Heavy roots
Reline
$1 463
------------------------A-------------i-------------
Huffman PS
; 34
-P -------------
6.2
---------------------------------------------i---------------------------------------------------------------------------i------
HUFFMAN AVENUE
ESMT
---------------------------------------------------------------------i-------------------------------------------------f-----------------------
Moderate roots and minor leaks around pipes Reline
$1,538
PS
-----------------
35
I 9.1
:HUFFMAN AVENUE -------
ESMT
Moderate roots
Reline
$2,263
PS
11A
9.7
HUFFMAN AVENUE AND RAILROAD
ESMT
JJ
Moderate roots
Reline
J i
$2,425
Huffman PS
30
8.5
HWY 70
ESMT PARALLEL TO RR ON S SIDE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moderate roots
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reline -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
$2,113
------------------------
Huffman PS
-------------y-------------�
37
10.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------y-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;HUFFMAN AVENUE AND RAILROAD
;ESMT
;Moderate roots
;Reline
$2,613
--------------------
PS
--------------------------------------+-------------r--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------r----------------------
I 38A
------
8.9
;HUFFMAN AVENUE AND RAILROAD
;ESMT
;Minor to moderate roots
;Reline
$2,225
Huffman PS
'----------------------------------------------------T--------------------------------------------1---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------1-------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
8
7.0
;HUFFMAN AVENUE
;ESMT
;Frame/cone joint w/ minor roots and mud
;Reseal frame to cone
$500
Huffman PS
'-----------------------------------------------------
38
10.4
;HUFFMAN AVENUE AND RAILROAD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
;ESMT
;Minor to moderate roots
;Reline
$2,588
Huffman PS
5
8.6
HUFFMAN AVENUE
:R/W S SIDE OF HUFFMAN AVE
Partly below grade in ditch, riser/cone joint w/ minor roots
Raise 4", reseal riser/cone joint
$900
------------------------A
Huffman PS
-------------
; 9
i-------------
7.1
�------- --------------------------------------i---------------------------------------------------------------------------4----------------------------------------------------------------------------i------------------------;
;HUFFMAN AVENUE
;ESMT
------------------------------------
;Cone/wall joint w/ minor roots, possible bench leak ;Reseal cone/wall joint, possible bench I
---------
:leak
$1,000
------------------------
A -------------
i-------------
---------------------------------------------
i---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4----------------------------------------------------------------------------
i------------------------------------------------- -----------------------
Huffman PS
10A
9.1
HUFFMAN AVENUE AND RAILROAD
ESMT
Possible pipe seal leak
Reline
$2 275
------------------------
Huffman PS
'-uffm-----------------J-------------1----10.8
-------------
I 12
i-------------
I 10.8
---J-------------
f------ --------------------------------------i---------------------------------------------------------------------------i------------
�RAILROAD--------------------------------�ESMT--------------------------------------------------------------------;Frame
------------------------------------------------i-------------------------------------------------f------------'---------
offset 4"--------------------------------_________________________;:Reset frame, reseal frame to cone -------
-
-----------$500-----
Huffman PS
16
8.3
:HWY 70
:ESMT
Frame offset 6"
:Reset frame, reseal frame to cone
$500
'------------------------J-------------1-------------1--------------------------------------------J---------------------------------------------------------------------------1----------------------------------------------------------------------------J-------------------------------------------------1-----------------------
Huffman PS
28
5.9
ITEX'S FISH CAMP RD
:ESMT PARALLEL TO RR ON S SIDE
:Conc. busted around outside of frame, moderate root
;penetration @ frame/cone joint
;Reseal frame to cone
$500
'------------------------
Huffman PS
4-------------
2
y-------------
8.4
---------------------------------------------
;HUFFMAN AVENUE
---------------------------------------------------------------------------y-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;ESMT S OF R/W OF HUFFMAN AVE
;No frame/cone joint seal
;Reseal frame to cone
$500
�r6iF��a--n --- PS
21
5.5
:HWY 70
:ESMT N SIDE OF HWY 70
:No frame/riser seal
;Reseal frame to riser, reseal riser/cone
-----------------------
'--------------------------------------y----------------------------------------------------------y---------------------------------------------------------------------------+-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------y�oint
--
------------------------------------------- '
---------- $500
-----
Huffman PS
'------------------------y-------------+---------------------------------------------------------y---------------------------------------------------------------------------y----------------------------------------------------------------------------y-------------------------------------------------�-----------------------
10
10.3
;HUFFMAN AVENUE
;ESMT
;Frame/cone joint seal w/ light root penetration and no seal
;Reseal frame/cone and cone/wall joint
$1,000
Huffman PS
--------------------------
3
----,-------------T--------------------
10.1
HUFFMAN AVENUE----------------------
:R/W S SIDE OF HUFFMAN AVE
Below rade 2", frame offset 2"
------------------------------------------------------------------4-------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
Raise 4"
$500
Huffman PS
'----------------------------------------------------T--------------------------------------------,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,----------------------------------------------------------------------------,-------------------------------------------------T-----------------------
18
6.0
;HWY 70
,---------------------------------------------------------------------------,---------
;ESMT
;Frame offset 3", no seal frame/riser joint
;Reset frame, reseal frame to riser
$500
Huffman PS
29
7.2
:TEX'S FISH CAMP RD
:ESMT PARALLEL TO RR ON S SIDE
Frame offset 1'
:Reset frame and seal
$500
'-------------------------1
-------------
4--------------
-------- --------------------------------------
---------------------------------- ------------------------------------------I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- ------------------------------------------
No. of Manhole Repairs Completed To Date
-----------------------
18
Total No. of Manholes Recommended To Be Repaired
66
Total Estimated Cost
$96,673
Engineering
$9,667
Contingency
$9,667
Total
$116,007

Burke Co, NC
Meter Site No.
1
Daily- Flow, Level, and Velocity
Location:
DC PS
Wastewater Collection System
Diameter (in):
8
Avg, Avg.
Avg.
Max
Daily Daily
Daily
Minimum Peak Depth as
Daily
Level Velocity
Flow
15-min 15••min % of Pipe
Rainfall
Date (in) (fps)
(mgd)
Flow (mgd) Flow (mgd) Diameter
(in)
02Ul
02/02
0.11
02/03
02/04
02/05
02/06
02/07
02/08
02/09
02/10
02/11
0.16
02/12
1.58
1.10
0.036
0.009
0.107
28%
02/13
1.73
1.21
0,046
0.017
0.147
32%
02/14
1.40
1.00
0.027 ,-
,, 0.013
0.089 ,
30%
0.04
02/15
1.46
1.09
0.031 -
0.017
0.051
22%
0.10
02/16
173
1.13
0.042
0.014
0.191
63%
02/17
1.63
1.05
0.036
0.015
0.179
36%
02/18
1.63
1.03
0.036
0.014
0.164
30%
0.58
02/19
1.45
0.97
0.030
0.011
0.183
31%
02/20
1.47
1.04
0.033
0.011
0.195
33%
02/21
1.34
0.93
0024
0.013 ,-
0.074
22%
02/22
1.41
9 02
0.029
0.013
OA42
42%
02/23
1.48
1.09
0,033
0.013
0.145
29%
02/24
1.48
1.01
0.031
0.012
0.130
30%
02/25
1.48
0.98
0.031
0.014
0.167
30%
02/26
1.49
0.98
0.030
0.016
0.182
31 %
02127
1.52
1.09
0.036
0.015
0.182
32%
0.41
02/28
148
1.16
0.034
0.016
0.082
22%
0.53
03/01
2.07
1.11
0.053
"0.013
0.157
65%
118
03/02
1.77
0.94
0,035
0.016
0.098
46%
03/03
1.82
1.05
0.041
0.017
0.163
75%
03/04
1.75
0.99
0.036
0.015
0.129
71 %
03/05
1.85
0.99
0.041
0.014
0.224
64%
03/06
1.74
1.03
0.038
0.014
0.165
55%
03/07
1.50
0.94
0,028 --
0.016
0.143
48% -
03/08
1.53
70 94
0.029
0.013
0.106
47%
03109
1.66
0.97
0.034
0.015
0.162
56%
03/10
1.74
0.99
0.037
0,016
0.143
65%
03/11
1.71
0.96
0.035
0.015
0.133
66%
03/12
1.71
0.96
0.035
0.018
0.098
53%
03/13
1.84
1.01
0.042
0.016
0.271
61%
0.06
03/14
1.61
0.90
0.031 -
0.016
0.150
66%
0.54
03/15
1.84
0.99
0.041
0.018
0.190
79%
0.79
03/16
1,85
1.06
0.044
0.018
0.133
46%
03/17
1.90
1.13
0.048
0.024
0.118
44%
Monthly Report Statistics
Min. 1.340 0.933 0.024 0.009 0,051 22% 0.000
Avg. 1.572 1.048 0.035 0.014 0.141 36% 0.120
Max. 2.068 1.208 0.053 0.017 0.195 75% 1.780

Burke Co, INC
Meter Site No.
2
Daily- Level,
Velocity, and
Flow
Location:
Eckard #1
Wastewater Collection System
Diameter (in):
12
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Max
Daily
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Peak
Depth as
Daily
Level
Velocity
Flow
15-min
15-min
% of Pipe
Rainfall
Date
(in)
(fps)
(mgd)
Flow (mgd)
Flow (mgd) Diameter
(in)
02/01
02/02
0.11
02/03
02/04
02/05
2.08
2.32
0.147
0.025
0.617
29%
02/06
1.90
2.07
0.119
0.024
0.439
27%
02/07
1.70
1.80
0.093
0.008
0.548
31 % -
02/08
1.66
1.74
0.081
f 0.021
0.282
26%
02109
1.76
1.90
0.102
0.005
0.574
29%
02/10
1.73
1.82
0.099
0.002
0.501
27%
02/11
1.77
1.80
0.096
0.004
0.345
70%
0.16
02112
1.81
2.01
0.115
0.005
0.579
31 %
02/13
1.81
1.98
0.110
0.015
0.488
33%
02/14
1.72
1.75
0.094
" 0.006
0.473
- 33%
0.04 - -
02/15
1.61
1.59
0.074
[ 0.005
0.330
27%
0.10"
02/16
203
1.83
0.108
0.019
0,373
51%
02/17
2.34
1.68
0.139
0.008
0,656
51%
02/18
1.95
1.88
0,116
0.018
0.483
29%
0.58
02/19
1.94
1.95
0.116
0.022
0.439
30%
02/20
1.97
1.96
0.117
0.029
0.402
29%
02/21
1.82
1.79
0,097
0.025
0.503
31% --
02/22
1,98
1.73
0.103
0.003
0.469
- 50%
02/23
1.93
1,99
0.113
0.028
0.256
22%
02/24
2.00
1.97
0.117
0.035
0.361
25%
02/25
1.93
1.89
0,108
0.016
0.277
22%
02/26
1.86
1.74
0.098
0.006
0.261
21 %
02127
1.93
1.98
0.115
0.013
0.344
23%
0.41
02/28
2.04
2.11
0.126 -
- 0.029
0.225
21 % -
0.53
03/01
2.45
2.30
0.187
0.028
0.469
31 %
1.78
03/02
2.90
2.30
0.202
0.103
0,359
68%
03/03
2.72
2.23
0.177
0.060
0.323
110%
03/04
2.57
2.07
0.161
0.048
0.533
76%
03/05
2.47
2.01
0.149
0.051
0.270
51%
03/06
2.60
2.07
0.160
0.047
0.629
58%
03/07
2.45
1,91
0138
0.041
0.366
80%
03/08
2.35
1.98
0.141
0.041
0.436
50%
03/09
2.36
2.16
0.157
0.018
0.350
26%
03/10
2.10
2.03
0.125
0.006
0.361
36%
03111
1.98
2.01
0.114
0.019
0.248
42%
03/12
1.93
1,94
0,109
0.014
0.258
27%
03/13
2.15
2.07
0.122
0.030
0.243
71%
0.06
03/14
2.16
1.95
0.120 ''-
0-027
0,300
70% -
0.54- -
03/15
2.21
2.28
0.152
0.026
0.451
63%
0.79
03/16
2.32
2.21
0154
0.031
0.434
45%
03/17
2.29
2.07
0.137
0.010
0.287
47%
Monthly Report Statistics
Min. 1.611 1.587 0.074 0.002 0,225 21% 0.000
Avg. 1.975 1.930 0.117 0.021 0.421 36% 0.120
Max. 2.896 2.316 0.202 0.103 0.656 110% 1.780

Burke Co, NC
Meter Site No.
3
Daily- Flow, Level, and Velocity
Location:
Eckard #2
Wastewater Collection System
Diameter (in):
12
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Max
Daily
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Peak
Depth as
Daily
Level
Velocity
Flow
15-min
15-min
% of Pipe
Rainfall
Date
(in)
(fps)
(mgd)
Flow (mgd)
Flow (mgd) Diameter
(in)
02/01
02/02
0.11
02/03
02/04
02/05
2.05
0.67
0.042
0.014
0.113
26%
02/06
1.84
0.56
0.030
0.002
0.095
22%
02/07
1.71
0.47
0.022
0.006
0.064
20%
02/08
1.65
0.44
0.019
< 0.011
0.041
18%
02/09
1.72
0.59
0.029
0.010
0.094
22%
02/10
1.77
0.57
0.029
0.009
0.084
22%
02/11
1.78
0.56
0.028
0.009
0.085
21 %
0.16
02/12
1.89
0.56
0.031
0.011
0.096
22%
02/13
1.95
0.58
0.035
0.012
0.101
25%
02/14
1.76
0.45
0.021
0.012
0.045
19% -
0.04
02/15
1.71
0.48
0.022
0.012
0.062
20%
0.10
02/16
1.88
0.61
0.034
0.011
0.103
22%
02/17
1.87
0.66
0.037
0.010
0.100
22%
02/18
2.05
0.68
0.044
0.010
0.108
23%
0.58
02/19
2.02
0.64
0.039
0.012
0.103
22%
02/20
1.95
0.60
0.034
0.012
0.081
20%
02121
1.77
0.54
0.026
0.009
0.060
18%
02/22
1.74
0.54
0.026
0.010
0.133
18%
02/23
1.92
0.67
0.037
0.010
0.090
21 %
02/24
1.84
0.64
0.035
0.011
0.094
21 %
02/25
1.86
0.64
0.034
0.009
0.127
20%
02/26
1.81
0.59
0.031
0.007
0.099
22%
02/27
1.97
0.64
0.038
0.011
0.093
22%
0.41
02/28
2.07
0.75
0.048
r 0.012
0.097
- 23%
-0.53
03/01
2.53
102
0.091
0.011
0.166
27%
1.78
03/02
2.40
1.02
0.074
0.041
0.107
23%
03/03
2.17
0.80
0.052
0.017
0.106
22%
03/04
1.99
0.76
0.044
0.015
0.102
21 %
03/05
1.81
0.74
0.037
0.014
0.117
22%
03/06
1.76
0.68
0.033
0.011
0.103
22%
03/07
1.58
0.55
0.022 ;
0.009
"-0.049
16% ,--
03/08
1.56
0.55
0.022
0.009
0.049
17%
03109
1.63
0.63
0.027
0.010
0.057
17%
03/10
1.70
0.56
0.025
0.010
0.061
20%
03/11
1.82
0.61
0.030
0.011
0.076
19%
03/12
1.82
0.63
0.031
0.014
0.077
22%
03/13
1.74
0.63
0.029
0.020
0.039
17%
0.06
03/14
1.78
0.71
0.033
- 0,021
0.046
17% -
0.54--
03/15
1.98
0.81
0.045
0.026
0.126
' 23%
0.79
03/16
1.96
0.84
0.047
0.026
0.106
24%
03/17
1.79
0.82
0.040
0.022
0.088
23%
Monthly Report Statistics
Min. 1.650 0.444 0.019 0.002 0.041 18% 0.000
Avg. 1.913 0.629 0.037 0.012 0.094 22% 0.120
Max. 2.529 1.022 0.091 0.041 0.166 27% 1.780

Burke Co, NC
Meter Site No.
4
Daily- Flow,
Level, and Velocity
Location:
Huffman #1
Wastewater Collection System
Diameter (in):
8
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Max
Daily
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Peak
Depth as
Daily
Level
Velocity
Flow
15-min
15-min
% of Pipe
Rainfall
Date
(in)
(fps)
(mgd)
Flow (mgd)
Flow (mgd) Diameter
(in)
02/01
3.12
0.39
0.032 '
0.012
0.056
44% `
02/02
2,72
0.32
0.022
0.005
0,038
40%
0.11
02/03
2.84
0.33
0.024
0.005
0.049
44%
02/04
2.79
0.35
0.025
0.009
0.106
41%
02/05
2.78
0.34
0.024
0.010
0.048
42%
02/06
2.86
0.32
0.024
0.004
0.054
45%
02/07
2.95
0.35
0.027 -
0.002
- 0.059
48%
02/08
2.77
0.30
0.021
0.007
0051
45%
02/09
2.88
0.36
0.027
0.009
0.450
43%
02/10
2.88
0.29
0.022
0.004
0,041
43%
02/11
2.89
0.31
0.023
0.006
0.143
47%
0.16
02/12
2.99
0.28
0.022
0.006
0.040
46%
02/13
3.04
0.31
0.025
0.004
0.053
50%
02/14
2.89
0.34
0.025
-- 0.004
0.099
59% ,
0.04
02/15
2.70
0.35
0.024
0.005
0.084
44%
0.10
02/16
3.06
0.32
0.025
0.005
0.046
47%
02/17
3.47
0.23
0.022
0.011
0.047
59%
02/18
3,39
0.29
0.027
0.007
0.052
59%
0.58
02/19
2.79
0.34
0.024
0.006
0.037
42%
02/20
2.83
0.42
0.030
0.012
0.051
50%
02/21
2.69
0.48
0,032 ''
- 0.005
0.249
46%
02/22
2.39
0.38
0.022
0,004
0.055
39%
02/23
2.54
0.28
0.018
0.005
0.044
46%
02/24
2.65
0.32
0.021
0.007
0.039
43%
02/25
2,58
0.33
0.021
0.007
0.033
40%
02/26
2.59
0.32
0,021
0.005
0.037
40%
02/27
2.79
0.34
0.024
0.005
0.046
45%
0.41
02/28
3.06
0 52
0.042
0.019
0.081
57%
0.53
03/01
3.51
1.06
0.117
0.011
0.325
65%
1.78
03/02
3.66
116
0.120
0.068
0.259
60%
03/03
3.42
0.80
0.074
0.053
0.234
62%
03/04
3.54
0.58
0.056
0.032
0.098
49%
03/05
3.40
0.46
0,042
0.021
0.094
49%
03/06
3.25
0.50
0.043
0.021
0.095
48%
03/07
3.11
0.43
0.036
0.007
0.086
44%
03108
2.96
0.39
0.030
0.016
0.098
45%
03/09
3.13
0.41
0.035
0.017
0.105
50%
03/10
2.92
0.35
0.027
0.017
0,116
43%
03/11
03/12
03/13
0.06
03/14
4.34
0.36
0.045
0,024
=0.068
60%
0.54
03/15
3.70
0.44
0.044
0,019
0.079
60%
0.79
03/16
3.90
0.43
0.047
0.020
0.087
62%
03/17
3.50
0.48
0.044
0.022
0.086
66%
Monthly Report Statistics
Min. 2,393 0.230 0.018 0.002 0.033 39% 0.000
Avg, 2.921 0,404 0.032 0.010 0.097 48% 0.120
Max. 3.663 1.160 0.120 0.068 0.450 65% 1.780

Burke Co, NC
Meter Site No.
5
Daily- Flow,
Level, and Velocity
Location:
Huffman #2
Wastewater Collection System
Diameter (in):
8
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Max
Daily
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Peak
Depth as
Daily
Level
Velocity
Flow
15-min
15-min
% of Pipe
Rainfall
Date
(in)
(fps)
(mgd)
Flow (mgd)
Flow (mgd) Diameter
(in)
02/01
1.45
1.35
0.040
0.004
0.097
26%
02/02
1.54
1.43
0.051
0.007
0.178
32%
0.11
02/03
1,55
1.31
0.050
0,002
0.224
35%
02/04
1.60
1.44
0.054
0.005
0.221
36%
02/05
1.57
1.63
0.053
0,018
0.151
34%
02/06
1.56
1.49
0.050
0.002
0.183
34%
02/07
1.52
1.39
0.045 (
0.003
0.127
30%
02/08
1.63
1.10
0.038
': 0.000
0.107
37%
02/09
2.02
1.07
0.055
0.003
0.233
45%
02/10
1.75
1.12
0.049
0.003
0.224
43%
02/11
1.40
1.12
0.034
0.000
0.111
30%
0.16
02/12
1.77
1,10
0.048
0.001
0.166
37%
02/13
1.73
1.11
0.046
0.001
0.169
32%
02/14
1.52
1.17
0.039 I
I 0.002
" 0,163
33%
0.04
02115
1.52
1.10
0.037
0.006
0.137
32%
0.10
02116
t62
1.13
0.042
0.002
0.184
35%
02/17
1.23
1.09
0.028
0.000
0.142
28%
02/18
1.46
1.33
0.044
0.005
0.175
30%
0.58
02/19
1.39
1.30
0.037
0.004
0.147
33%
02/20
1.29
1.22
0.029
0.001
0.159
29%
02/21
1.19
1.04
0.021
0.000
=' 0.082
27%
02/22
1.18
1.02
0.021
: 0.001
0.067
23%
02/23
1.52
1.05
0.038
0.001
0.231
36%
02/24
1.85
1.03
0,049
0.002
0.231
38%
02/25
1.82
1.20
0.052
0.000
0.189
33%
02/26
1.76
1.19
0.048
0.004
0.139
34%
02/27
1.72
1.34
0.051
0.005
0.163
38%
0.41
02/28
184
1.46
0.067
0.007
0.192
37%
0.53
03/01
2.76
1.75
0.134
0.016
0.366
56%
1.78
03/02
2.39
1.46
0.084
0.033
0.188
40%
03/03
2.21
1.24
0.072
0.007
0,177
42%
03/04
2.24
1.25
0.063
0.022
0.163
38%
03/05
2.20
1.34
0.066
0.021
0.146
36%
03/06
2.12
1.29
0.062
0.018
0.166
38%
03/07
2.02
1.25
0.055
0.021
0.128
36%
03/08
2.04
1.19
0.053
`: 0.021
0.126
37%
03/09
2.05
1.22
0.054
0.017
0.131
36%
03/10
2.06
1.35
0.061
0.024
0.183
40%
03/11
2.05
1.24
0.056
0.018
0.120
36%
03/12
2.05
1.23
0.056
0.017
0.128
35%
03/13
2.03
1.15
0.052
0.017
0.171
41%
0.06
03/14
2.51
1.05
" 0.061
0.017
0.237
- _52% :
0.54
03/15
3.10
138
0.118
0.033
0.286
55%
0.79 =
03/16
2.43
1.65
0.103
0.023
0218
41 %
03/17
2.20
1.36
0.076
0.021
0.183
38%
Monthly Report Statistics
Min. 1,182 1.019 0.021 0.000 0.067 23% 0.000
Avg. 1.657 1.252 0.049 0.005 0.172 35% 0.120
Max. 2.756 1.751 0.134 0.033 0.366 56% 1.780

Burke Co, NC
Meter Site No.
6
Daily- Flow,
Level, and Velocity
Location:
Huffman #3
Wastewater Collection System
Diameter (in):
12
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Max
Daily
Daily
Daily
Minimum
Peak
Depth as
Daily
Level
Velocity
Flow
15-min
15-min
% of Pipe
Rainfall
Date
(in)
(fps)
(mgd)
Flow (mgd)
Flow (mgd) Diameter
(in)
02/01
02/02
0.11
02/03
02/04
02/05
1.77
2.93
0.142
0.057
0.574
29%
02/06
1.57
2.27
0,096
0.023
0.484
33%
02/07
1.20
1.83
0.050 -;
0.019
0.092
12%
02/08
1.19
1.83
0.049
'-. 0.022
0.083
12%
02/09
156
2.38
0.102
0.018
0.205
19%
02/10
2.34
2.07
0.161
0.028
0.371
28%
02/11
2.93
1.32
0,130
0.006
0.265
29%
0.16
02/12
3.45
1.43
0.184
0.017
0.434
43%
02/13
3.44
0.98
0.155
0.011
0.400
43%
02/14
2.66
0.48
0.044 -
: - 0.009
0,143
31 %
0.04
02/15
2,34
0.61
0.045 :-
0.008
0.082
27%
- 0.10
02116
3.63
1.09
0.182
0.012
0.468
46%
02/17
3.77
1.09
0.184
0.009
0.410
44%
02/18
3.76
1.19
0.197
0.003
0.472
47%
0.58
02/19
3.65
1.09
0,171
0.015
0.355
41 %
02/20
3,15
1.01
0.132
0.008
0.383
42%
02/21
2.38
0.67
0.054
0.006
0.157
31 % -
02/22
2.12
0.66
0.045
0.002
0.152
31 %
02/23
3.19
1.03
0.144
0,002
0.336
40%
02/24
3.53
1.19
0,194
0.010
0.416
44%
02/25
4.05
1.33
0.211
0.083
0.389
43%
02/26
4,17
1.32
0.218
0.099
0.433
44%
02/27
3.80
1.29
0.189
0,099
0.393
42%
0.41
02/28
3.55
1.19
0.153 ;>
0.084
0.242
36% --
0.53 .
03101
4.71
1.80
0.371
0.087
0,685
53%
1.78
03/02
4.79
1.75
0.335
0.206
0.510
46%
03/03
4.64
1.64
0.307
0.166
0.505
46%
03/04
4.36
1.56
0.273
0.061
0.481
44%
03/05
3.87
1.38
0.218
0.032
0.411
42%
03/06
3.60
1 A 9
0.184
0.023
0.403
42%
03/07
2.75
0.69
0.063 -'-
- 0.017
0.161
30%
03/08
"-2.42
0,51
0.039
: 0.007
0.086
26%
03/09
3.40
1,21
0.182
0.003
0.389
40%
03/10
3.75
1.21
0.194
0.011
0.389
43%
03/11
4.08
1.23
0.212
0.041
0.380
43%
03/12
3.93
1.18
0.197
0.030
0.389
44%
03/13
2.81
0.55
0.054
0.009
0.129
31 %
0.06
03/14
3,00
0.59
0.065 --
> 0.007
0.173
34%
0.54
03/15
3 54
0.89
0.124 "'
0.025
0.359
" 42%
0.79
03/16
4.61
1.24
0.254
0.052
0.527
52%
03/17
4.76
1.26
0.260
0.028
0.480
50%
Monthly Report Statistics
Min. 1.194 0.484 0.044 0.002 0.082 12% 0,000
Avg. 3.087 1.388 0.157 0.041 0.350 36% 0.120
Max. 4.793 2.934 0.371 0.206 0.685 53% 1.780

O
O
O
rx
w
'I
(u[) [[e;u[en
O O N Nm OM d' OLn
O O O O O O O O O O
h M O o0 7 M O Vl M
N N N O O O
O O O O O O O O O O
(P2m) Mo[3
L I/£
9I/£
SI/£
bT/£
£II£
ZI/£
T I/£
0I/£
6/£
8/£
L/£
9/£
S/£
t/£
£/£
Z/£
I/£
8Z/Z
LZIZ
9Z/Z
SZ/Z
bZ/Z
£Z/Z
ZZ/Z
I Z/Z
OZ/Z
6T/Z
81/Z
LI/Z
9I/Z
SI/Z
b I/Z
£ /Z
ZI/Z
I I/Z
O I/Z
6/Z
8/Z
L/Z
9/Z
S/Z
ti/Z
£/Z
Z/Z
I/Z
0
O
O

0
O
O
I�
�
w
'
i
(ul) lle;uleg
n o n o kn o v, o V')
N
O O O O O O O O O
0 0 o O O Cl o 0 o O
V V V M N
O O O O O O O O O
(O ul) MOIA
LI/£
9T1£
SI/£
bt/£
£ I/£
ZU£
I I/£
OI/£
6/£
81£
L/£
9/£
S/£
b/£
£/£
Z/£
IIC
8Z/Z
LZ/Z
9Z/Z
SZ/Z
bZ/Z
£Z/Z
ZZ/Z
IZ/Z
OZ/Z
6I/Z
8I/Z
L I/Z
9 UZ
S I/Z
ti/Z
£I/Z
ZI/Z
I I/Z
OI/Z
6/Z
8/Z
LIZ
9/Z
S/Z
tr/Z
£/Z
Z/Z
I/Z
0
0
O

0
O
O
r.�
w
O O O
i�S) tte3uteg
N N M
O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(p&U) moll
LI/£
9I/£
SI/£
f U£
£ U£
WE
II/£
O IN
6/£
8/£
L/£
I
9/£
S/£
- WE
£/£
Z/£
IN
8Z/Z
r LZIZ
- 9Z/Z
SZ/Z
tZ/Z
r £Z/Z
ZZ/Z
IZ/Z
OZ/Z
6I/Z
8I/Z
LI/Z
9I/Z
SI/Z
ti/Z
£ UZ
ZI/Z
II/Z
O I/Z
6/Z
-I'F 8/Z
LIZ
9/Z
1
- S/Z
b/Z
£/Z
Z/Z
I/Z
0
a
0

1113JUIR I
0
O
O
0
0
i
M
O
9I/£
t7j/£
WE
Zt/£
TT/£
WE
r 6/£
8/£
L/£
9/£
S/£
WE
£/£
- Z/£
I/£
- 8Z/Z
LZ/Z
F 9Z/Z
SZ/Z
bZ/Z
£Z/Z
ZZ/Z
tZ/Z
OZ/Z
6T/Z
8 t/Z
L IlZ
9 t/Z
ST/Z
-'- t7l/Z
r £t/Z
- ZI/Z
I I/Z
ON
6/Z
' r 8/Z
L/Z
j 9/Z
S/Z
- b/Z
£/Z
Z/Z
I/Z
0
0
0
(Ul) Ile;aleg / (PSm) mol3

3
�
w
�I
III) I(EJIIIuH
O O O O O O O O O O
LI/£
9I/£
S I/£
17 I/£
£U£
ZT/£
IT/£
WE
61£
81£
L1£
9/£
S/£
t/£
£/£
Z/£
I/£
8Z/Z
LZ/Z
9Z/Z
SZ/Z
tiZ/Z
£Z/Z
ZZ/Z
I Z/Z
OZ/Z
6I/Z
8 t/Z
LT/Z
9I/Z
SI/Z
bi/Z
£ I/Z
ZT/Z
IT/Z
OT/Z
6/Z
8/Z
LIZ
9/Z
S/Z
b/Z
£/Z
Z/Z
T/Z
O
0
O

O
O
O
•�
o
i
(II!) I[�3aleg
O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0
-
-+ O O O O O O O O O
(P8m) nio13
LI/£
9 U£
SI/£
tI/£
£ I/£
ZI/£
II/£
WE
6/£
8I£
LIE
9!£
S/£
t/£
£/£
Z/£
U£
8Z/Z
LZ/Z
9Z/Z
SZ/Z
tZ/Z
£Z/Z
ZZ/Z
IZ/Z
OZ/Z
6I/Z
8I/Z
LIIZ
9 t/Z
SI/Z
t UZ
£I/Z
Z I/Z
I I/Z
0 L/Z
6/Z
8/Z
LIZ
9/Z
9/Z
t/Z
£/Z
Z/Z
I/Z
0
0
O