Epac 3-4-15 PDF

AGENDA
ENVIRONMENTALPLANNINGADVISORYCOMMITTEE
March4,2015
3:00PM
CMCOGConferenceRoom

1. Welcome,Introductions,andCalltoOrder......Chair

Action 2. Approvalofminutesfromlast
EPACmeetingOctober22,2014(Enc.1).........Chair

Action 3. PlanAmendmentRequest:PalmettoUtilitiesPlantExpansion
and6MGDSurfaceWaterDischargetoSpearsCreek,RichlandCounty(Enc.2)

A. Introduction.................................G.Sprouse

B. PresentationofProposal....NiAmerica/PalmettoUtilities

C. PublicComment.Open

D. CommitteeDiscussion...Chair

4. UpdateontheBroad,Lower
Saluda,andCongareeUODReallocation.G.Sprouse

5. Old/NewBusiness...Chair

6. Adjourn........Chair

Serving Local Governments in South Carolinas Midlands

236 Stoneridge Drive, Columbia, SC 29210 (803) 376-5390 Fax (803) 376-5394 www.centralmidlands.org
Enclosure1
ENVIRONMENTALPLANNINGADVISORYCOMMITTEE
MinutesOctober22,2014

TheEnvironmentalPlanningAdvisoryCommittee(EPAC)metonOctober22,2014at3:00pmat
CentralMidlandsCouncilofGovernments.

MEMBERSPRESENT
BlakeBridwell,CityofCayce
MikeDawson,RiverAlliance
JayNicholson,JointMunicipalWaterandSewerCommission
BrittPoole,TownofLexington
DavidRhoten,EnvironmentalGroups
JoeyJaco,CityofColumbia
RonAnderson,PrivateDeveloper
RayPeterson,RichlandCountyUtilities
GwenGeidel,CitizenatLarge
AndyMetts,TownofChapin

STAFFPRESENT
GregorySprouse
OTHERSATTENDING
RyanNevius,SustainableMidlands
ChrisClauson,SanteeLynchesCouncilofGovernments
JeffdeBessonet,DHEC
HopeHasty,RichlandCounty
HollandLeger,RichlandCounty
BillStangler,CongareeRiverkeeper
CraigSherwood,NiAmerica

1.Welcome,IntroductionandCalltoOrder
GregorySprousecalledthemeetingtoorderat3:06pm.Committeemembersandguestsintroduced
themselves.

2.ApprovalofminutesfromlastEPACmeetingJuly17,2013
A motion was made to approve the minutes for the July 17, 2013 meeting. The motion was seconded. All
wereinfavorandtheminuteswereunanimouslyapproved.
EnvironmentalPlanningAdvisoryCommitteeMeetingMinutesOctober22,2014

3. EPACMembershipUpdate

Gregory Sprouse provided an overview of EPAC membership guidelines as set forth in the committee
rules of procedure which describes the organizations with current voting membership rights. Mr.
Sprousepresentedthelistofcurrentmembersbyorganizationandpointedoutthattherewasanopen
seatforaprivateutilitywhichwasvacatedbyAlpineUtilitieswhentheywerepurchasedbyNIAmerica.
Committee discussion took place about options for filling the seat which included a proposal for Ni
AmericatofilltheseatsincetheypurchasedAlpineUtilitiesandarenowoneofthelargestwastewater
providersintheCentralMidlandsRegion.ItwaspointedoutthatNiAmericaalreadyhasaseatonthe
committee representing Richland County. The committee asked if any other private wastewater
providersexpressedaninterestedinserving.

A motion was made for CMCOG staff to ask some of the other private utilities if they had an interest in
serving on the committee and to bring their response back to EPAC for consideration. The motion was
seconded.Allwereinfavorandthemotionwasapproved.

4. FormationofaSubcommitteetoUpdatethe208Management/ServiceAreaMap

GregorySprouseinformedthecommitteethatoverthenextyearCMCOGstaffwillbeworkingtowards
updatingvariousaspectsofthe208WaterQualityManagementPlanincludingtheManagement/Service
Area Map. Mr. Sprouse explained that this map has changed some over the years as aresult of plan
amendmentsandthatit wasneverdrawnatadetailedenoughscaletomakespecificdeterminations
regardingsewerserviceareas.Severalsewerprovidershaveexpressedaninterestincreatingaparcel
basedserviceareamapinaGeographicInformationSystems(GIS)environmentthatcanbeusedtohelp
resolve service area disputes. Mr. Sprouse informed the committee that the 208 plan and rules of
procedureallowforthecreationofsubcommitteestoworkonspecificissuessuchasthis.Mr.Sprouse
then asked the committee for volunteers to serve on a subcommittee to assist in updating the map.
Several entities including the City of Columbia, the Town of Lexington, and Richland County Utilities
offered to serve and assist with the process. Mr. Sprouse explained that CMCOG staff and sub
committee volunteers would begin by delineating existing service area boundaries, and would then
proceedtoidentifyareasinneedofclarification,workwiththeimpactedpartiestoresolveanydisputes,
andmakethenecessarychanges.Allmapmodificationswouldbebroughtbacktothecommitteefor
finalapproval.

5. Impactofnew7Q10sonWasteloadAllocationsfortheSaluda,BroadandCongareeRivers

Jeff deBessonet from DHEC provided an overview of the impacts of new 7Q10 data on the wasteload
allocationsfortheSaluda,Broad,andCongareeRivers.Mr.deBessonetexplainedthatDHECdetermines
the total maximum point source load in pounds of ultimate oxygen demand (UOD) that can be
discharged to a surface water body segment without causing a water quality violation. A computer
modelisnormallyusedinthisprocess.Ifthemodelpredictsawaterqualityviolationanewwasteload
allocation must be established in order to meet the more stringent effluent limits set for that water
body segment. DHEC recently conducted a basin review wasteload allocation for the wastewater
discharges to the Broad, Lower Saluda, and Congaree Rivers. As a result of this model update the
CongareeRiverisnowshowingadropinDissolvedOxygenbelowtheminimumwaterqualitystandard.
2
EnvironmentalPlanningAdvisoryCommitteeMeetingMinutesOctober22,2014
One reason for this is the 25% decrease in the 7Q10 low flow data. As a baseline scenario DHEC has
determinedthata48%cutinUODforeachdischargerwouldbesufficienttomaintainthewaterquality
standard. Because the model is showing values below the standard for this stream classification Mr.
deBessonetexplainedthatDHECwillbeaskingCMCOG(perthe208grantagreement)tohelpfacilitate
theUODreallocationprocessamongtheimpacteddischargersandthatCMCOGshouldexpectaformal
request and all associated documentation from DHEC within the next couple of weeks. A discussion
took place and specific questions were asked of DHEC regarding the 7Q10 update and the UOD
reallocationprocess.

6. UpdateonRegionalWastewaterProjects

Gregory Sprouse provided an update on the Hacienda/Sandy Haven Mobile Home Park consolidation
issue which was brought before EPAC on July 17, 2013. Mr. Sprouse explained that the new owners
workedoutanagreementwithPalmettoUtilitiestotieintotheircollectionsystemandcloseouttheir
existing wastewater treatment facility. The connection to the regional sewer system is currently
underway. Britt Poole from the Town of Lexington provided the committee with an update on the
consolidationoftheTownofLexingtonCoventryWoodsWWTP.BlakeBridwellfromtheCityofCayce
provided the committee with information regarding a sewer service agreement between Calhoun
CountyandtheCityofCaycewhereflowfromaCalhounCountywastewatertreatmentfacilitywouldbe
divertedtotheCityofCaycefortreatment.

7. Old/NewBusiness

Therewasnooldornewbusinesstodiscuss.

8.Adjourn

Themeetingwasadjourned.

3
Enclosure 2
Memorandum
TO: MembersoftheEnvironmentalPlanningAdvisoryCommittee
FROM: GregorySprouse,DirectorofResearch,Planning,andDevelopment
DATE: February28,2015
SUBJECT: PlanAmendmentRequest:PalmettoUtilitiesPlantExpansion
and6MGDSurfaceWaterDischargetoSpearsCreek,RichlandCounty
CMCOGstaffwillintroduceaplanamendmentrequestbyNiAmerica/PalmettoUtilities
toincreasetheirwastewatertreatmentcapacityattheSpearsCreekWastewater
TreatmentPlant,locatedsouthofElgininKershawCounty,to18MGD.Theplan
amendmentproposalincludesanew6MGDsurfacewaterdischargetoSpearsCreekin
RichlandCounty.RepresentativesfromNiAmerica/PalmettoUtilitieswillprovidean
overviewoftheirproposalandwillbeavailabletoanswerquestions.
Background
TheSpearsCreekWWTPcurrentlyutilizesa6.0MGDNoDischargepermit(ND0068411)
with100%landdisposalthroughaseriesofrapidinfiltrationbasins.Ni
America/PalmettoUtilitiesalsoholdsa6MGDNPDESpermit(SC0043451)todischarge
treatedwastewaterdirectlyintotheWatereeRiverinordertoaccommodatefuture
growth,thoughthispermitisnotcurrentlybeingused.Basedonexistingandfuture
wastewaterdemandNiAmerica/PalmettoUtilitiesarenowrequestinganadditional6
MGDintreatmentcapacitythroughanewsurfacewaterdischargetoSpearsCreek,a
tributaryoftheWatereeRiver.IfthisnewNPDESpermitisissuedbyDHEC,thethree
permitscombinedwillgiveNiAmerica/PalmettoUtilitiesatotalwastewatertreatment
capacityof18MGD.
Enclosure
A. CMCOGPlanAmendmentSubmissionSummary
B. RequestforPlanAmendmentLetter
C. PreliminaryEngineeringReport(includingDraftNPDESandNDPermits)
D. PalmettoUtilitiesWastewaterFacilitiesPlanUpdate
E. SpearsCreekTMDLDocument
Serving Local Governments in South Carolinas Midlands
236 Stoneridge Drive, Columbia, SC 29210 (803) 376-5390 Fax (803) 376-5394 www.centralmidlands.org
CMCOG 208 Water Quality Management Plan Plan Amendment Request
Palmetto Utilities Spears Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion and Surface
Water Discharge to Spears Creek, Richland County
Plan Amendment Submission Requirements February 27, 2015
1. Detailed description and scope of the project.
Palmetto Utilities, Inc. is proposing to expand its Spears Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant,
located south of Elgin in Kershaw County, from its present 6.0 Million Gallon per Day (MGD)
capacity with 100 % land disposal to 18 MGD to include a surface water discharge to Spears
Creek, a tributary of the Wateree River, in Richland County. If approved by DHEC the surface
water discharge to Spears Creek will result in a new 6 MGD NPDES permit which will be in
addition to the existing 6 MGD No Discharge permit (ND0068411) and an existing 6 MGD
NPDES permit (SC0043451) currently being held for a surface water discharge into the Wateree
River. These three permits combined will give Palmetto Utilities a total wastewater treatment
capacity of 18 MGD.
More detailed information can be found on pages 2-6 of the PER.
2. Preliminary engineering data regarding facility design and cost.
The proposed treatment capacity expansion will be accomplished through an upgrade to the
existing Spears Creek WWTP. Detailed preliminary engineering data and information on facility
design can be found on pages 7-12 of the PER and in the PER appendices.
No estimated project cost information has been provided by the applicant.
3. Financing strategy and/or feasibility analysis.
The project will be fully funded by Palmetto Utilities, Inc. Rates will be set by the Public
Service Commission.
4. Potential fiscal or engineering impact on existing facilities.
No information on fiscal or engineering impacts on existing facilities has been provided by the
applicant.
5. Associated environmental risks or impacts.
Spears Creek is an impaired stream listed on the state 303(d) list. A TMDL has been developed
for Fecal Coliform for Spears and Kelley Creeks. The applicant has stated that the proposed
treatment process will provide the treatment necessary to meet the parameter limits listed in the
relevant Waste Load Allocation (WLA) and in the draft NPDES permit.
No further information on environmental risks and/or stream impacts have been provided by the
applicant.
6. Project justification or need.
The applicant has stated their project justification in the attached update to the 2003 Palmetto
Utilities Wastewater Facilities Plan which cities continued growth and development of northeast
Richland County as the justification for requesting additional domestic sewer treatment capacity.
According to this document the existing Spears Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility is expected
to be at capacity in the near future and expansion and/or upgrading of this facility is considered
to be the only cost effective solution to addressing these needs.
7. Summary examination of alternative options, where appropriate
No examination of alternative options has been provided by the applicant other than a discussion
on page 5 of the Wastewater Facilities Plan Update of earlier alternative analyses that were
conducted.
8. Timing and phasing of project or proposal.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Preliminary Engineering ReportSubmitted to CMCOG on February 25, 2015

Draft NPDES Permit..Issued by DHEC in January 2015
SCDHEC Approval...Pending
Construction..Pending
SPEARS CREEK
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
UPGRADE TO 18 MGD
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
Prepared for
Ni South Carolina Palmetto Utilities
MBD Project No. 35002
February 2015
1300 2nd Ave, Suite 211

Conway, SC 29526
SPEARS CREEK WWTP UPGRADE TO 18 MGD
FEBRUARY 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1 General Information
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Project Description
1.3 Service Area and Design Flows
1.4 Qualifications
Section 2 Existing Treatment Facility

2.1 General
2.2 Headworks
2.3 Extended Aeration Oxidation System
2.4 Clarification
2.5 Effluent Pumping
2.6 Sludge Handling
Section 3 Proposed Facility Upgrade

3.1 General
3.2 Influent Pump Station
3.3 Headworks
3.4 ICEAS
3.5 Deep Bed De-Nitrification Filters
3.6 Ultraviolet (UV) Disinfection System
3.7 Effluent Pump Station
3.8 Sludge Handling
Section 4 Proposed Construction

4.1 General
Appendix
Appendix A Design Calculations
Appendix B Cost Estimate
Appendix C Maps
Appendix D ND and NPDES Permits
1
FEBRUARY 2015
SECTION 1
GENERAL INFORMATION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
In 1986 a group of developers funded a study to address sewer service to a portion of
Northeastern Richland County. The area had received only minimal wastewater planning
attention due to its location on the periphery of metropolitan Columbia. Interstate 20 was a
new highway and Interstate 77 was only in the planning stage at this time.
The study was prepared for the Central Midlands Regional Planning Council (now CMCOG)
by B. P. Barber and Associates (now AECOM) and presented to the Environmental Planning
Advisory Committee and then to the full Council. The study was approved unanimously. At
the completion of the study, an agreement was reached with Richland County to allow Palmetto
Utilities to serve the planning area proposed in the study. The planning process has continued
with several major updates, the latest full amendment in 2005.
In January 2010 NIAMERICA purchased the system and has been operating it as Palmetto
Utilities ever since.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In 1990 the first phase of the Spears Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant was completed and
place into operation. The initial facility was a 0.75 MGD facility and the effluent from the facility
discharged onto an existing approved land disposal area. As the area continued to develop, the
waste water treatment plant was expanded to 2.25 MGD in 1995 with the subsequent discharge
in to Rapid Infiltration Basins (RIBs). In 2002 the plant as expanded to a capacity of 4.5 MGD
and expanded again in 2008 to its current capacity of 6.0 MGD. The facility continues to
discharge to the RIBs at this time.
In 2008, Palmetto Utilities received an NPDES permit for discharge of 6 MGD to the Wateree
River. In 2014, an NPDES application was submitted for a 6 MGD discharge into Spears Creek
at a discharge location west of the WWTP in Richland County. Draft Permits have been issued
by SC DHEC for both NPDES discharges as well as a Draft Permit for the Non-Discharge (ND)
2
FEBRUARY 2015
permit for discharge to the RIBs. Copies of the Draft Permits are included in the Appendix of
this report.
1.3 SERVICE AREA AND DESIGN FLOWS

The area served by Palmetto Utility has continued to expand in Northwest Richland County
and Western Kershaw County. A service area map is included in Appendix C - MAPS. A study
has been prepared by Mike Burkhold entitled Wastewater Facilities Plan Update, Population
and Flow Projections, Palmetto Utilities, to be included in the Metro Columbia Facilities Plan,
February, 2015. A copy of this report will be submitted separately from this document. Flow
determinations and justifications are included in the reports and apply to the capacity
determinations included in this Preliminary Engineering Report.
The design flow used in the preparation of this PER is 18 MGD. The combination of the two
NPDES permits and the ND permits would allow for the disposal of up to 18 MGD of treated
wastewater. The projections provided in the above referenced study justify the need to 18 MGD
of treatment capacity at the Spears Creek Facility.
1.4 QUALIFICATIONS
This report was prepared by MBD Consulting Engineers, P.A. with assistance from Ni-America
/ Palmetto Utilities and Mr. Mike Burkhold. MBD reserves the right to review any additional
data or supplemental comments regarding the contents of this document and revise the
document accordingly.
3
FEBRUARY 2015
SECTION 2
EXISTING TREATMENT FACILITY
2.1 GENERAL
The existing Spears Creek WWTP is a 6 MGD facility that discharges to Rapid Infiltration
Basins (RIBs) located approximately 2 miles from the treatment facility. The current Non-
Discharge (ND) permit is currently being reviewed by South Carolina DHEC. Proposed limits
for discharge to the RIB system have been prepared for review by the Owner. In addition, the
treatment facility has an active NPDES permit for a 6 MGD discharge into the Wateree River
(NPDES No. SC 0043451).
At the present time, all of the flow treated at the existing facility is discharged to the RIBs. Ni
America/Palmetto Utilities has applied for an NPDES discharge permit into Spears Creek. This
permit requests a discharge of 6 MGD. Proposed limits have been provided for review and the
draft permits are included as an appendix to this document.
2.2 HEADWORKS
The existing facility includes a headworks facility followed by a pump station. The headworks
are sized for the current treatment capacity of 6 MGD. The current headworks are in need of
upgrade at this time.
The existing headworks includes two automatic step screens that are sized for the current peak
flow. The headworks does not currently include a grit removal system.
Submersible influent pumps located in two wet wells transfer flow into the treatment processes.
Current pumping capacities are capable of meeting the 6 MGD design flow but the system may
not be capable of meeting the 2.5 design peak for influent pumping.
2.3 EXTENDED AERATION OXIDATION SYSTEM

Flow from the Headworks is evenly divided hydraulically between four (4) Extended Aeration
Oxidation Ditches. Each of the four basins has a volume of approximately 1.2 MGD and is
divided by an inner wall and an outer wall. The circular tanks include an Anoxic Zone in the
4
FEBRUARY 2015
center and Extended Aeration Zone on the perimeter. Mix liquor can be returned from the
aeration zone to the Anoxic Zone. Return sludge can also be returned to the Anoxic Zone from
the clarifiers.
The existing aeration basins are steel, above ground structures, constructed of steel. The basins
periodically have to be removed from service for maintenance. The Owner has also modified one
of the basins to include additional mixing in the Anoxic Zone and a through-the-wall pump in
the Aeration Zone to improve the operation of the basins.
The basins have adequate capacity to meet the discharge limits but lack an adequate source of
carbon for de-nitrification to occur. Plans and specifications have been submitted to SC DHEC
for the addition of a supplemental carbon source. The carbon source will be added at the existing
headworks prior to entering the Anoxic Zone.
2.4 CLARIFICATION
The Spears Creek facility includes three clarification units, one 90 foot diameter tank and two
60 foot diameter tanks. The total surface area of clarification for the treatment process is 12,017
square feet for a surface loading rate of approximately 500 gallons per day per square foot.
Sludge can be returned from the Clarification Units to the Anoxic Zone or wasted to sludge
digesters located on site.
2.5 EFFLUENT PUMPING

The existing effluent pump station transfers the treated flow from the process to the Rapid
Infiltration Basins located approximately 2 miles from the treatment site. The treated flow is
not disinfected prior to discharge to the RIBs.
2.6 SLUDGE HANDLING

The existing 6 MGD facility consists of 4 separate tanks used for sludge digestion. There is one
large rectangular tank (134,649 gallons), one small rectangular tank (22,400 gallons) and two
circular tanks (each with a volume of 220,300 gallons) for a total digester volume of 597,650
gallons. The tanks include aeration and mixing equipment.
5
FEBRUARY 2015
Sludge from the digesters can be routed through sludge belt presses prior to discharge in a land
fill.
6
FEBRUARY 2015
SECTION 3
PROPOSED FACILITY UPGRADE
3.1 GENERAL
The design flow for the proposed upgrade of the Spears Creek WWTP is 18 MGD. All of the
systems listed below will be designed to handle a hydraulic peak of 2.5 times the design flow.
3.2 INFLUENT PUMP STATION

The existing and proposed forcemains and gravity collection systems will terminate in a new
influent pump station. Pump Station will be designed to meet the current flow projections, but
shall also be expandable to an ultimate capacity of 18 MGD. The pump station design capacity
will be based on being able to pump 2.5 times the design flow with the largest pumping unit out
of service.
The proposed pump station wet well and discharge piping will be sized based on the ultimate
build out of the treatment plant. Pumps will be selected to optimize flow conditions and still
meet the DHEC peak flow requirements. Based on hydraulic conditions, it is not anticipated
that variable frequency drives will be beneficial in this design; therefore, the pump selection is
critical.
Based on the capacity of the wet well, the pumps will be designed to be cycled to match the
incoming flow. Because the headworks will follow the pump station in the flow schematic, the
wet well will be designed as a self cleaning station to minimize build up in the wet well.
The pump station will be configured for up to 6 pumps to be installed. The initial capacity will
be based on the design flow selected. The peak must be pumped with the largest pump out of
service. If the initial capacity is in the range of 12 MGD, the initial pump selection may include
two (2) 6 MGD pumps, and three (3) 10 MGD pumps. At the 18 MGD design capacity and
45 MGD peak flow, one of the 10 MGD pumps could then be changed out to a 13 MGD pump
and a new 13 MGD pump will be added to the station.
7
FEBRUARY 2015
3.3 HEADWORKS
The headworks will be elevated and will establish the hydraulic grade line for the treatment
facility. The headworks will consist of fine screens, grit removal, flow control, and flow
measurement.
Screening will be provided by a inch step screen. The screens will operate automatically based
on a differential in the water levels, as well as based on time. The initial installation will be based
on the design flow. At a flow of 12 MGD, the screens would include two automatic step screens
with space provided for the installation of a third screen. A bypass will also be provided.
The grit removal system will consist of two 16 foot diameter vortex grit units. The two units
will be capable of handling flows for up to 18 MGD of flow through the treatment facility.
As the flow leaves the grit units, the flow will split between three potential discharge points.
Each train will include an influent gate that can be modulated to control the flow and parshall
flumes for flow metering.
The headworks will include all of the ancillary sludge and grit handling equipment including a
ram press and comminutor for the bar screen and grit classifier for the vortex grit unit.
3.4 INTERMITTENT CYCLE EXTENDED AERARATION SYSTEM (ICEAS)

Spears Creek proposes to use the Sanitare ICEAS SBR System for biological treatment. The
ICEAS provides several advantages in the treatment of wastewater, as well as in the operation
of the facility.
The ICEAS SBR System is a continuous flow, biological treatment system that is fully
automated. The facilities will include a Pre-React Zone, a Main React/Aeration Zone, a decant
system, and equalization all contained in one tank. Below is a description of the different phases
of operation.
React Phase Screened and de-gritted flow from the headworks flows continuously (flow is not
interrupted at any time) into the pre-react zone and enters the Main React/Aeration Zone
8
FEBRUARY 2015
through submerged openings in a divider wall. Aeration is provided in both zones, but
controlled throughout the cycles. Biological oxidation and reduction occurs through aeration,
anoxic, and anaerobic sequences during the React Phase to achieve the desired level of treatment.
The operation and duration of the systems during this phase are automatically controlled based
on the level of treatment required.
Settle Phase The aeration and mixing provided during the React Phase is stopped to allow
solids to settle to the bottom of the basin. During this period, raw wastewater continues to enter
the Pre-React Zone while the Main React Zone settles. As the solids settle, a clear layer of water
develops on top of the basin.
Decant Phase During the Decant Phase, the decanter descends gradually downward to drawoff
the clarified supernatant. During this phase, raw waste water flow continues to flow into the
Pre-React Zone as the treated and clarified effluent is decanted from the Main React Zone at a
constant rate. Waste activated sludge is typically removed during this phase. Due to the rate of
discharge from the decanters, an equalization basin is provided to allow for a constant discharge
from the system.
The layout of the facility includes basins sized at 3 MGD. Each basin can be continuously
operated therefore a continuous flow of 3 MGD can be treated. The ICEAS decanters will
discharge into an equalization basin that will serve to equalize the flow being discharged to
downstream treatment units. The initial plant capacity constructed should be in increments of
3 MGD.
3.5 DEEP BED DE-NITRIFICATION FILTERS

The ND permit for discharge to the RIBs will include a Total Nitrogen limit that may require
additional treatment to reduce total nitrogen, insuring the Nitrate discharge to the RIBs is
minimized. This may require additional treatment that would not be required for the NPDES
discharges. For this reason, De-Nitrification Filters are included in the process and hydraulic
design for the facility.
9
FEBRUARY 2015
The proposed design will allow a portion of the flow treated in the ICEAS to be directed into
the De-Nitrification filters. The filters are designed to create an Anoxic Zone where with the
use of a supplemental carbon source, De-Nitrification may be accomplished.
The flow from the De-Nitrification filters may be directed back into the flow stream that is
disinfected through the UV system or may be discharged to the existing effluent pump station
to be pumped to the RIBs.
The filters will also serve to protect the surface of the RIBs by reducing the Total Suspended
Solids in the discharge. Reducing the TSS reduces the buildup on the surface of the basins,
extending the operation times between cleanings. Discharge from the De-Nitrification Filters
will be disinfected prior to discharge to the RIBs. If the flow is proposed to be discharged
through the NPDES permit locations, the flow from the filters will be routed through the UV
disinfection system.
3.6 ULTAVIOLET LIGHT (UV) DISINFECTION SYSTEMS

The NPDES permits for the discharge to Spears Creek or the Wateree River will require
disinfection. This process will be accomplished with the use of UV disinfection systems. DHEC
requirements for the design of the UV systems require 100% backup for the systems. This will
be provided in the design and selection of the UV channels and UV equipment.
Flow to the RIBs does not require disinfection and should disinfection be required, the use of
chlorine would be acceptable. For this reason, the UV system will be designed primarily for the
NPDES discharges. It is anticipated that up to 12 MGD may be discharged through NPDES
permits. The UV system will be designed for an ultimate capacity of 12 MGD plus peak flows,
incorporating the DHEC requirement for redundancy.
3.7 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION

The NPDES discharge will require pumping to the discharge locations. Due to the difference in
the location, the hydraulic requirements for the system will vary greatly. The distance to the
discharge location on the Wateree River will require additional Total Dynamic Head versus the
discharge into the relatively close Spears Creek.
10
FEBRUARY 2015
The pumping system will carry a similar capacity requirement based on SC DHEC requirements.
The combination of pumps and discharge locations must be capable of disposing of a peak
hydraulic flow of 2.5 times the design flow with the largest pumping unit out of service. Due to
the TDH requirement for the discharge to the Wateree River, redundant pumping for this
discharge could be used in the event one of the Spears Creek discharge pumps were out of
service.
It may also be possible to utilize Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) for the Wateree discharge
based on the ratio between Friction Head Loss in the system and the Static Head Requirements.
With the increased Friction Head Loss, VFDs become more efficient and more cost effective.
3.8 SLUDGE HANDLING

The proposed options for the upgrade of the Spears Creek WWTP all include the utilization of
the existing Extended Aeration Basins for sludge digestion and storage. The basins will be
modified to provide aeration and mixing with the installation of Sanitaire systems.
Each basin has a capacity of approximately 1.2 MG which based on a thickened sludge
concentration of approximately 2.26% will allow each tank to process waste activated sludge
from 6 MGD of ICEAS treatment systems. Three of the four basins would process 18 MGD of
treatment plant sludge with one basin as a backup. This allows service or maintenance on the
steel tanks.
Additional sludge de-watering will also be required as the plant flow increases. The existing
sludge treatment building will be expanded as necessary to accommodate additional belt presses
or sludge dewatering systems.
11
FEBRUARY 2015
SECTION 4
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
4.1 GENERAL
The proposed project includes the construction of an 18 MGD Wastewater Treatment System
capable of meeting the proposed NPDES and ND discharge permits. The De-Nitrification Filters
are provided to assist in meeting the ND permit for wastewater discharged to the RIBs. The
proposed project will include the following processes:
18 MGD Influent Pump Station with a Peak Pumping Capacity of 45 MGD,
18 MGD Headworks with three automatic fine screens, two grit systems, and the ability
to measure regulate flow for discharge to three different treatment locations,
Six (6) 3 MGD ICEAS Treatment Systems capable of meeting the discharge limits for
the most stringent NPDES discharge permit,
6 MGD De-Nitrification Filters with a supplemental Carbon Source for discharge to the
Rapid Infiltration Systems (ND permit),
12 MGD Ultraviolet Disinfection System with 100% Redundancy,
12 MGD Effluent Pump Station capable of pumping to two (2) different NPDES
discharge locations. The pump station shall have a peak capacity of 30 MGD,
Modifications to the existing Aeration Basins for utilization as sludge
storage/thickening prior to Belt Presses, and
Upgrade to the Sludge Dewatering System to match the plant flow.
Design calculations for the processes are included in Appendix A Design Calculations. A site
plan of the proposed facility is included in Appendix C Maps.
12
FEBRUARY 2015
APPENDIX A
DESIGN CALCULATIONS
A-1
DESIGNPROPOSAL
SpearsCreek,SCSanitaire#2536014a
TableA:INFLUENTWASTEWATERCHARACTERISTICSANDSITECONDITIONS
AverageDryWeatherFlow 12,000,000 GPD
PeakDryWeatherFlow 22,000,000 GPD
PeakWetWeatherFlow 30,000,000 GPD
BOD5 (20C) 200 mg/l
BOD5 (20C) 20,016 lb/day
SuspendedSolids 200 mg/l
TKN 40 mg/l
TotalPhosphorus 6 mg/l
MaxWastewaterTemperature 20 C
MinWastewaterTemperature 10 C
AmbientAirTemperature 2090 F
SiteElevation 250 ft
TableB:ICEASEFFLUENTQUALITY(MONTHLYAVERAGE)
BOD5 (20C) 14 mg/l
SuspendedSolids 30 mg/l
NH3-N 2 mg/l
TN* 10* mg/l
TotalPhosphorus 3.0 mg/l
*DailyMaximum
TableC:ICEASPROCESSDESIGNCRITERIA
F/M 0.044 lbBOD5/lbMLSS/day
SVI(after30minutessettling) 150 ml/g
MLSSatBottomWaterLevel 5,341 mg/l
WasteSludgeProduced(Approx.) 14,859 lb/day
VolumeofSludgeProduced(Approx.,0.85%solids) 210,000 GPD
NormalDecantRate 15,538 GPM
PeakDecantRate 20,833 GPM
HydraulicRetentionTime 1.00 Days
SludgeAge 28.6 Days
Alkalinity 164 mg/l
Bold,italicizedtextindicateassumptionsmadebySanitaire
CYCLE AIROFF AIRON SETTLE DECANT TOTAL

Normal 72min 96min 48min 72min 4.8hour
Storm 54min 72min 36min 54min 3.6hour
Spears Creek, SC
25360-14a 1 2/16/2015
TableD:KEYICEASDESIGNDETAILS
NumberofICEASBasins 4
TopWaterLevel 20.0 ft
BasinWidth(Inside) 145.0 ft
BasinLength(Inside) 157.0 ft
BottomWaterLevel 15.0 ft
ICEASEQUIPMENT MotorHP No.Req.

DecanterMechanism 40 'Weirlength 3 /Basin 12
DecanterDriveUnit 3/4 4
ICEASBlower 5,950 SCFM 9.2 PSIG 300 3
ICEASFineBubbleAerationSys 3,861 DiscDiffusers/Basin 4
AirControlValve 20 " 4
WasteSludgePump 350 GPM 5.0 4
SubmersibleMixer 6.2 12
ICEASControls 1
ICEASPOWERREQUIREMENTS (AtAverageAerationDepth) Kwh/Day

DecantDriveUnit 0.6 BHP 4 run @ 6 Hrs/day 10.7
ICEASAirBlowers 287.0 BHP 2 run* @ 16 Hrs/day 6,851.3
ICEASAirBlowers #REF! BHP run** @ Hrs/day
WasteSludgePump 4.0 BHP 4 run @ 2.5 Hrs/day 29.8
SubmersibleMixer 5.0 BHP 12 run @ 6 Hrs/day 266.4
KWH/DAY 7,158.2
AVERAGE KWH/HR 298.26
*SharedICEASBlowers
**DedicatedICEASBlowers
Spears Creek, SC
25360-14a 2 2/16/2015
Diffused Aeration Equipment
for
Spears Creek, SC
SHT
Sanitaire #25360-14a
February 18, 2015
mo
9333 N. 49th Street Brown Deer, WI 53223 USA

www.sanitaire.com
Sanitaire Aeration Design Inputs for: Spears Creek, SC, Sanitaire #25360-14a
Tank Geometry
1 Train Consisting of:
Parameter Units Pass 1 Pass 2
Parallel Reactors 1 1
Pass Process Aerobic Aerobic
SWD ft 14.0 14.0
Submergence ft 12.9 12.9
Volume ft 99,740.8 58,595.4
Reactor Geometry: Annulus Annulus
Diameter ft 73.0
Outside Diameter ft 120.0
Inside Diameter ft 73.0
Degrees 360
Oxygen/Air Distribution
Zone 1 2 3 4
Pass 1 1 1 2
A1 21.0% 21.0% 21.0% 37.0%
Oxygenation
Parameter Units 30 scfm/kcf
No. Trains Operating 1
Air Rate scfm 4,750.1
Unit Air Rate scfm/kcf 30.0
Standard Oxygen Correction Factor Parameters

Parameter Units 30 scfm/kcf
Site Elevation FASL 250
Ambient Pressure PSIA 14.58
Water Temperature C 20
Notes:
Bold, Italicized text indicate assumptions made by Sanitaire
A - Indicates Actual (AOR) Requirement.
S - Indicates Standard Condition (SOR) Oxygen requirement.
If the AOR/SOR parameter is not given, then its value will be evaluated later if suitable alpha,
beta, D.O., theta, pressure, and temperature data is supplied.
Round tanks are evaluated as rectangular tanks diameter equal to length and equal surface area.
Annular tanks are evaluated as rectangular tanks of width equal to the annular width and equal surface area.
SHT Aeration Sanitaire, A Xylem Brand Page 2 of 5

Sanitaire Project Name: Spears Creek, SC
Sanitaire Project #25360-14a
Design Summary
30
scfm/kcf
Units A1
No. Trains in Operation 1
No. Grids in Operation 4
No. Operating Diffusers 2,656
SOR lb/day 32,314
SOTE % 27.2
Total Air Rate scfm 4,750
Min.Diffuser Air Rate scfm/diff. 1.76
Max. Diffuser Air Rate scfm/diff. 1.81
Static Pressure psig 5.61
Diffuser DWP @ Min Air psig 0.26
Diffuser DWP @ Max Air psig 0.26
Turbulent Headloss psig
Pressure @ Top of Dropleg psig 6.11
Est. Blower Efficiency 70%
Est. Motor Efficiency 90%
Shaft Power Bhp 166.6
Est. Motor Electrical Load kW 138.1
Est. Standard Aeration Efficiency #SOR/BHP-hr 8.08
Notes:
(1) Design air is the maximum of process air or mixing air
(2) Delivered oxygen based on design air
(3) Brake Horsepower based on adiabatic compression, 70% mechanical efficiency and 0.30 psi lineloss
(4) Performance based on diffuser density (At/Ad), submergence, and diffuser unit air flow.
(5) Diffuser Air Flow based on Active Valve Modulation
(6) Blower Pressure Capability also requires consideration of:
A. The Air Main headloss (piping, fittings, valves, instrumentation, etc.) between the
blower and the aeration assembly dropleg connections.
B. Potential for increased headloss resulting from diffuser fouling and/or aging. Please refer to the US EPA Fine Pore
Design Manual (EPA/625/1-89/023), WEF Manual of Practice FD-13, and other
technical publications for a detailed discussion on this subject. Note that this headloss consideration relates to all
Fine Pore systems regardless of supplier or type of diffuser element.
C. Increased diffuser submergence during Peak Flow conditions.
(7) Air Flow defined at 20C
(8) Fine Mixing air based on MOP/8 0.12 scfm/ft

Consulting Engineer:
Operating Condition: 30 scfm/kcf
Oxygen Distribution: A1
Aeration System Design

Parameter Units Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Totals/Overall
Pass 1 1 1 2
SWD ft 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00
Subm ft 12.95 12.95 12.95 12.95
Volume ft 33,246.9 33,246.9 33,246.9 58,595.4 158,336.2
No. Parallel Tanks 1 1 1 1
No. Trains in Operation 1 1 1 1
Grid Count 1 1 1 1 4
Dropleg Diameter inches 6 6 6 8
At/Ad 10.493 10.493019 10.493019 10.208261
Diffuser Density % Floor 9.53% 9.53% 9.53% 9.80%
Diffusers/Grid 552 552 552 1,000 2,656
Oxygen Transfer
Diffuser Type SSLP SSLP SSLP SSLP
Alpha
Beta
Theta
D.O. mg/l
Water Temp C 20 20 20 20
AOR/SOR
Oxygen Distribution %/Zone 21.0% 21.0% 21.0% 37.0% 100.0%
AOR lb/day
SOR lb/day
Air Rate (7) scfm 997.5 997.5 997.5 1,757.5 4,750.1
Performance
Mixing Criteria scfm/ft 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
Safety Factor %
Mixing Air (8) scfm 285.0 285.0 285.0 502.2
Process Air (for SOR) scfm 997.5 997.5 997.5 1,757.5
Design Air (1,7) scfm 997.5 997.5 997.5 1,757.5 4,750.1
Diffuser Air Rate scfm/Diff. 1.81 1.81 1.81 1.76 1.79
Delivered SOR lb/day 6,773.1 6,773.1 6,773.1 11,994.5 32,313.8
Delivered SOTE % 27.1% 27.1% 27.1% 27.2% 27.2%
Pressure @ Top of Dropleg psig 6.10 6.10 6.10 6.11 6.11
Shaft Power Bhp 34.9 34.9 34.9 61.6 166.6
Notes:
(1) Design air is the maximum of process air or mixing air
(2) Delivered oxygen based on design air
(3) Brake Horsepower based on adiabatic compression, 70% mechanical efficiency and 0.30 psi lineloss
(4) Performance based on diffuser density (At/Ad), submergence, and diffuser unit air flow.
(5) Diffuser Air Flow based on Active Valve Modulation
(6) Blower Pressure Capability also requires consideration of:
A. The Air Main headloss (piping, fittings, valves, instrumentation, etc.)
between the blower and the aeration assembly dropleg connections.
B. Potential for increased headloss resulting from diffuser fouling and/or aging.
Please refer to the US EPA Fine Pore Design Manual (EPA/625/1-89/023), WEF Manual of Practice FD-13,
and other technical publications for a detailed discussion on this subject. Note that this headloss
consideration relates to all Fine Pore systems regardless of supplier or type of diffuser element.
C. Increased diffuser submergence during Peak Flow conditions.
(7) Air Flow defined at 20C
(8) Fine Mixing air based on MOP/8 0.12 scfm/ft

Headloss Summary by System Operating Point
Consulting Engineer:
Operating Condition: 30 scfm/kcf
Oxygen Distribution: A1
Grid Design
Units Grid 1 Grid 2 Grid 3 Grid 4
Diffuser Count 552 552 552 1,000
Dropleg Diameter inches 6 6 6 8
Line Count 6 6 6 20
Line Spacing ft 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.67
Manifold Diameter inches 6 6 6 8
Manifold Length ft 20.00 20.00 20.00 69.67
Header Length ft Varies Varies Varies Varies
Manifold Location Center Center Center Center
Manifold Elevation Inline Inline Inline Inline
Dropleg Location End End End End
Header Orientation Length Length Length Length
Grid Pressure
Grid Air Flow scfm 997.5 997.5 997.5 1,757.5
Diffuser Air Flow scfm 1.81 1.81 1.81 1.76
Submergence ft 12.95 12.95 12.95 12.95
Orifice Diameter inches 13/64 13/64 13/64 13/64
Static Header Pressure Differential in
Assembly psig 3.41E-02 3.41E-02 3.41E-02 5.59E-02
Average Header Pressure in
Assembly PSI 6.02 6.02 6.02 6.01
A: Average Headloss from
Top of Dropleg To Headers PSI 7.84E-02 7.84E-02 7.84E-02 9.88E-02
B: Diffuser Orifice Headloss psi 1.51E-01 1.51E-01 1.51E-01 1.43E-01
C: Diffuser Dynamic Wet Pressure psi 2.63E-01 2.63E-01 2.63E-01 2.62E-01
D: Static Pressure psig 5.61 5.61 5.61 5.61
Total Pressure Required at
Top of Dropleg (A+B+C+D) psig 6.10 6.10 6.10 6.11
Friction Headloss (A+B) PSI 2.29E-01 2.29E-01 2.29E-01 2.42E-01

PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
FOR AN
INTERMITTENT CYCLE
EXTENDED AERATION SYSTEM
FOR THE
SPEARS CREEK, SC
WWTP
ENGINEER:
MBD CONSULTING ENGINEERS, P.A.
1300 SECOND AVENUE SUITE 211, CONWAY, SC 29526
843-488-0125
REPRESENTATIVE:
COMBS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
1600 ELIZABETH AVENUECHARLOTTE, NC 28204
704 374-0450
ABJ FILE # 25360-14a
FEBRUARY 16, 2015

ABJ ICEAS PROCESS
Introduction
Sanitaire, a division of ITT Industries, headquartered in Brown Deer, WI, USA is the
supplier of the ABJ ICEAS process and Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) systems.
Since 1985, more than 500 ICEAS plants are in operation in municipalities and industries
throughout the world and are processing flows ranging from 35 m3/day (0.01 MGD) to
522,000 m3/day (130 MGD). A copy of the current installation list can be accessed on our
website abjwastewater.com.
Theory of the ICEAS Process
The ABJ ICEAS process is a modification of the superior technology of conventional SBR
systems. The ICEAS process allows continuous inflow of wastewater to the basin. Influent
flow to the ICEAS basins is not interrupted during the settle and the decant phases or at
any time during the operating cycle.
The continuous flow feature provides equal flow and loadings to all basins at all times,
which results in smaller basins, enables single basin operation and/or allows basins to be
taken out of service for maintenance purpose and requires less operator attention.
The typical ICEAS cycle consists of Aeration, Settle and Decant phases as illustrated in
Figure 1.
Aeration: Raw wastewater from screening and grit removal flows into the basin and mixes
with the mixed liquor. The basin is aerated while filling and biological oxidation takes
place simultaneously.
Settle: Aeration is stopped and the solids settle to the bottom of the basin leaving a layer of
clear water on top. The basin continuously receives the influent.
Decant: The clear water is discharged from the top of the basin while the basin is
continuously receiving the influent. Typically, sludge is wasted during this phase of the
cycle.
ICEAS Basin Layout
The ICEAS basin is divided into two zones, the pre-react zone and the main react zone as
shown in Figure 2. A non-hydrostatic baffle wall with openings at the bottom is
constructed to divide the ICEAS basin into two zones. The influent flows continuously into
the pre-react zone and is directed down through engineered orifice openings at the bottom
of the baffle wall into the main react zone. The pre-react wall baffles the incoming flow
and prevents short-circuiting.
Spears Creek, SC WWTP 2 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a

Pre-React Zone Biological Selector
The pre-react zone also provides pre-treatment of the wastewater before it enters the main
react zone. Since influent flows continuously into the pre-react zone, a high concentration
of soluble BOD is available to the microorganisms in a relatively small basin volume. This
situation creates a high Food to Microorganisms (F:M) ratio. The high F:M ratio
encourages the maximum bio-sorption of food by the microorganisms. The pre-react zone
therefore acts as a biological selector encouraging the proliferation of the most desirable
organisms and minimizes the growth of filamentous bacteria that cause sludge bulking and
poor settling.
Basin Hydraulics
Time based cycles are used in sizing the ICEAS process. A normal cycle is designed to
handle the Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) and Peak Dry Weather Flow (PDWF) to
the plant. A storm cycle is used to handle the Peak Wet Weather Flow (PWWF) conditions.
The storm cycle operates with a shorter duration compared to the normal cycle so that
higher flows can be processed by the system. However, the total duration of aeration, settle
and decant phases remain the same as those in the normal cycle operation.
Buffer Zone
A Buffer Zone is included in the design as a safety factor to ensure the ICEAS processs
ability to withstand the unusual flows and loadings, that are typical in wastewater
treatment plants. This zone is typically a minimum of three feet deep, extending from the
top of sludge blanket to the bottom water level (BWL).
ICEAS Equipment
Operation of the ICEAS process is facilitated through the use of simple mechanical
equipment and state-of-the-art controls. Although the ICEAS process technology is
conceptually sophisticated, its mechanical simplicity is elegant and is operationally reliable.
The system uses a limited number of moving or powered components and a simple control
system. The ICEAS process uses the following equipment to provide a completely
functional system.
Decant Mechanism
The decanter is designed to remove clarified effluent from the top of the basin during the
decant phase of the operational cycle. It is installed on the basin wall at the end opposite
from the pre-react zone. The decanter is lowered and raised using an electro-mechanical
actuator. The actuator moves between top and bottom limit switches whenever the
decanter is in operation ensuring that the decanter travels from the park position to the
bottom water level (BWL). The decanter is parked above top water level (TWL) during the
aeration and settling phases of the cycle, thereby eliminating any possibility of solids
carryover during these periods.
The decanter speed is controlled by a series of pulses or through use of a variable frequency

drive (VFD). As a result, the decanter discharge rate is relatively constant from the time
the decanter enters the water to the time it reaches the bottom water level (BWL).
Aeration System
The aeration system in the basins is sized to provide necessary oxygen for BOD removal
and nitrification. Typically, either a fixed grid fine or coarse bubble aeration system is
used. The aeration system is typically supplied with necessary accessories.
Air Blowers
Air is supplied to the aeration system in the basin using aeration blowers. The blower
system is designed to provide sufficient air flow to meet the oxygen demands defined by
the aeration system based on the design influent flow and loadings. Typically, either
positive displacement or centrifugal blowers are used. The blower system is typically
supplied with all necessary accessories.
Air Control Valves
The typical two-basin ICEAS process is designed such that only one basin receives air at a
time. Essentially, one blower operates continuously while air is cycled back and forth
between basins through the use of automatic air control valves.
Waste Sludge Pump
Sludge wasting from the ICEAS basins is typically accomplished during the decant phase of
the cycle using submersible pumps. The plant operator must monitor the MLSS level in the
basin in conjunction with the system sludge age and adjust the waste sludge pump run time
accordingly. The waste sludge pump start time and run time are operator adjustable
through the Human Machine Interface (HMI) mounted on the ICEAS control panel.
Submersible Mixers:
The anoxic mixing in the ICEAS basins is achieved using submersible mixers in the main-
react zone of each basin. The submersible mixers run-time are operator adjustable though
the HMI on the ICEAS control panel.
ICEAS Control System:
The control system for the ICEAS process includes a control panel with control switches,
pilot lights and human machine interface with SCADA system. The motor starters are
either mounted in the control panel or housed in a separate motor control center.

Proposed ICEAS Facility
Based on the design criteria presented to us, Sanitaire, proposes a four basin ICEAS-NIT
process for the Spears Creek, SC WWTP.
In the proposed design, the ICEAS-NIT process operates on two (2) cycles, Normal and
Storm. The normal cycle is 4.8-hours in duration with a 3.6-hour storm cycle.
Normal Cycle: 4.8 Hours
The ICEAS-NIT process shall be operated under normal cycle up to the flow of 22. 0
MGD as follows:
Aeration: 96 Minutes
Anoxic Mixing: 72 Minutes
Settle: 48 Minutes
Decant 72 Minutes
Storm Cycle: 3.6 Hours
The ICEAS-NIT process automatically shifts to a storm cycle operation whenever the flows
exceed 22. 0 MGD to a maximum of 30. 0 MGD.
Aeration: 72 Minutes
Anoxic Mixing: 54 Minutes
Settle: 36 Minutes
Decant 54 Minutes
The ICEAS process is sized based on the influent & site conditions presented in Table A to
produce the effluent requirements listed in Table B. The design criteria used in sizing of the
ICEAS process is shown in Table C along with the mass and volume of the sludge
produced. The normal and peak decant rates out of the ICEAS process are also listed in
Table C. The corresponding basin sizing and equipment listing is provided in Table D of
the proposal.

ADVANTAGES OF THE ICEAS PROCESS
Process Advantages
Biological Effluent Quality

Proven effluent quality below 10 mg/l BOD5 and TSS
Proven nutrient removal quality below 1 mg/l Ammonia-N, 1 mg/l total phosphorus and
5 mg/l total nitrogen
Suitable for municipal/industrial wastewater treatment
Pre-react Zone Biological Selector

Confines floating material for manual removal
Enhances bacterial growth with good settling characteristics while minimizing the
formation of filamentous organisms
Allows continuous operation without short-circuiting
Hydraulic and Organic Loading

Can be designed to accommodate hydraulic peaks up to 6 times average design flow
without sludge washout
No separate influent equalization basin needed, redundant tankage eliminated
Automatic activation of storm cycle during storm flows
Equal loading to all basins at all times
Easily expandable for future needs (modular system)
Equipment Design Advantages
Decanter Design
In Park position, acts as safety overflow weir
Stainless steel design robust/corrosion resistant
Prolonged life
No flexible, costly, high maintenance knee joints, as needed for floating decanters
No submerged valves or orifices, which are prone to plugging
Simple to install
Easy accessibility from basin walkway with constant check on effluent quality
Electrical Design
In-house electrical engineers to coordinate control requirements with biological functions
to maximize flexibility with ease of maintenance
Control system designed to suit overall plant control needs
Modem to facilitate fault finding
SCADA system for remote access
Cost Advantages
Reduced capital cost when designed an ICEAS continuous flow process

Up to 30% less basin volume to achieve same operating performance as an SBR
Less concrete

Less excavation
Smaller land area
If others size basins as an SBR, then operating the process as an ICEAS will allow up to
30% greater flow
Reduced Operating Cost

No supplemental mixing required for aeration system
Proven D.O. control system for optimizing energy usage
Ultra high efficient SANITAIRE Fine Bubble Aeration minimizes energy used for
aeration
Facilities single basin operation during plant start-up or low flow and loading conditions
Reduced Installation Cost

No influent or effluent control valves
No retrievable equipment required
Decanter simple to install
Reduced Maintenance Cost

No influent or effluent control valves
Continuous flow enables shut down of one basin to facilitate maintenance of equipment
when required
Retrievable aeration facilities not required
Decanter easy to service from walkway

Figure 1
ICEAS OPERATING CYCLE

CONTINUOUS
FLOW OF
SCREENED
AND
DEGRITTED
INFLUENT
1. AERATE 2. SETTLE
TREATED
EFFLUENT
3. DECANT
WASTE SLUDGE

Aquaray 3X High Output Vertical Lamp
Ultraviolet Disinfection Equipment
Preliminary Budget Proposal

For
Spears Creek WWTP
Palmetto Utilities
Elgin, SC
Prepared for
MBD Consulting Engineers
February 17. 2015

OZONIA NORTH AMERICA, LLC
600 WILLOW TREE ROAD
LEONIA, NJ 07605 USA
TEL 201 676-2525 | FAX 201 346-5460
February 17, 2015
Joseph W. McGougan, P.E.

MBD Consulting Engineers, P.A.
1300 Second Avenue, Suite 211
Conway, SC 29526
Re: Aquaray 3X Vertical Lamp Ultraviolet Disinfection Equipment

Spears Creek WWTP
Elgin, SC
Ozonia is pleased to submit our preliminary budget proposal for the Aquaray 3X High Output
Vertical Lamp ultraviolet disinfection system for the above referenced project. The proposed design
is based on our latest Aquaray 3X System which features vertically mounted high output amalgam
lamps with variable output for greater power conservation.
Ozonia North America is a world leader in UV and ozone disinfection technologies, with over 600
Aquaray Vertical Lamp UV installations in North America, and meets or exceeds the design
requirements for this project. Some of the proposed Aquaray 3X Vertical Lamp UV Systems
features include:
Third-Party validated system performance by Hydroqual Inc in Johnstown, NY

Easy maintenance without the need to remove equipment from channel for lamp and ballast
replacement.
Highest turndown of any UV system in the market. Automatic dose control is achieved by
turning on/off lamps in combination with dimming in relation to a flow signal, ensuring that the
plant is operated economically while still providing the required performance.
Made in the USA
If you have any questions or require additional information, please don't hesitate to contact our local
Representative:
LOCAL OZONIA REPRESENTATIVE OZONIA REGIONAL MANAGER
Tony Combs, PE Bryce Carter

Telephone 704-374-0450 ext 16 Regional Business Manager
Telefax 704-375-6618 Tel: 804-756-7706
Cell 704-650-6953 Fax: 804-756-7643
email: Bryce.carter@infilcodegremont.com
Sincerely,
For OZONIA NORTH AMERICA
Pedro DaCruz
Sales Director
DEGREMONT TECHNOLOGIES
Degremont Technologies is a world leader in the water and wastewater treatment market
and offers a full array of integrated water solutions. The group is composed of several
leading equipment companies such as Ozonia North America, Infilco Degremont and
Anderson Water Systems and is part of the larger Degremont Group, which employs more
than 3,000 people in over 70 countries, serving over 1 billion people with water and
wastewater solutions. Degremont is subsidiary of SUEZ ENVIRONMENT, the leading
water and waste services company with sales of over $18 billion per year.
Degremont Technologies provides solutions in the areas of headworks, biosolids,

disinfection, membrane filtration, separations and biofiltration. Ozonia North America has
its headquarters in Leonia, New Jersey and is the disinfection equipment and solutions
provider for the group offering a wide range of UV and ozone products. Other companies
within the group offer a variety of products with longstanding market names such as the
Climber Screen Mechanical Bar Screen, ABW Traveling Bridge Filter, and Cannon
Digester Mixing System.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Aquaray 3X Ultraviolet Disinfection System Page 2
Date: 2/17/2015
AQUARAY 3X VERTICAL LAMP SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Since the inception of Ultraviolet light disinfection technology for wastewater treatment
plants, the Aquaray 3X Vertical Lamp System has remained the premier industry leader.
To meet the growing needs of the market, Ozonia North America has taken the next step
forward and introduced its newest and most advanced technology, the Aquaray 3X High
Output Vertical Lamp System.
Aquaray 3X HO Vertical Lamp System Applications
The New Aquaray 3X Vertical Lamp System has been developed specifically for larger
Secondary Treatment, Reuse Water & CSO/SSO Applications. The break through
development of the new High Output Amalgam UV Lamps, has allowed UV to be an
economical disinfection solution. The UV-C Watt output of the High Output Amalgam UV
Lamp is three times the existing low pressure high output technology and can handle larger
capacities with far fewer UV lamps. Fewer lamps guarantee considerable savings on capital,
operation and maintenance costs.
Larger plant capacities can now be treated within a reduced footprint while providing the
degree of disinfection required for even the most stringent of effluent criteria.
Aquaray 3X System Advantages
The Aquaray 3Xs vertical open channel configuration, unique staggered lamp array, and
perpendicular flow enables the plant operators to service the system with ease and
simplicity. Regular maintenance such as lamp and ballast replacement can be done
without removing the UV module from the channel. All of the electrical components and
connections are mounted within the confines of the NEMA-4X enclosure above the water
line or in separate NEMA-4X Power Center Panels (PCPs) allowing easy access to all
electrical components for maintenance.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Typical UV System Layout
The vertical UV modules can be arranged with in the channel in several different
combinations and layouts based on the dose and plant hydraulic requirements. Each UV
bank can consist of one module or as many as five (5) UV modules.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
FEATURES UV LAMP MODULE
The heart of the system is the Aquaray 3X lamp module are the thirty-six (36) high output,
low pressure amalgam lamps vertically mounted in a uniform staggered array of six rows of
six lamps each. Each lamp in the Aquaray 3x system is guaranteed for 12,000 hours of
operation. At the end of its lamp life, the UV lamps will have a minimum of 90% its original
output.
The lamps are housed in quartz jackets, which have dome-shaped test tube ends
supported by neoprene holders. The top end of the quartz jacket is open and terminates
inside at the top of the enclosure. It is sealed using a neoprene compression gland.
The UV module support structure includes a top enclosure, four support legs and a bottom
support pan, which are all manufactured from 316 stainless steel.
All electrical connections are out of the water and within the protection of the NEMA 4X
Power Center Panels. Unlike other designs, electrical components and lamps can be easily
and quickly accessed through the open lid of the enclosure. This allows routine service
such as lamp changes to be made without having to remove the lamp modules from the
water. This significantly reduces maintenance time and minimizes the possibility of
breakage.
One UV intensity monitor is provided per bank of modules which continuously monitors and
stores the UV intensity data and the status of each lamp. Data collected includes the
number of hours in operation of each lamp, the number of on and off cycles, and the date it
was installed. This information is passed on to the control system and held in memory for
subsequent recovery and integration.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
THE AQUARAY 3X OPERATING SYSTEM
Each module in the disinfection system receives its power from the Power Center Panel
(PCP) via three power cables. A separate MCP (Main Control Panel) is equipped with a
CompactLogixPLC and Panelview 1000 Plus Color Touchscreen operator interface (other
PLCs types and OTI are available as needed to match those existing at the plant). Both the
Power Center and Main Control Panel have NEMA 4X enclosure ratings for outdoor
installation.
The UV system can be operated manually or in automatic mode. The operator interface
displays up-to-date UV system information such as number of modules in service and the
number of lamps within the modules that are in use. Other system information, such as
channel flow and individual module status, can also be accessed. A representative UV
intensity reading is displayed continuously on the OI based on information being received
from a sensor mounted in each bank of modules.
Should it become necessary, the operator can assume manual control of the system. In this
mode, the operator has the ability to check all the system functions and to control the lamp
array.
In the event of an alarm indication, the operator is quickly advised so that he can locate and
identify the problem by pressing the alarm key. The display shows the reason for the alarm
and the components requiring attention.
Screens for other general specific information are available and are automatically displayed
when the appropriate key is pressed.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Energy Conservation / Flow Pacing:
The Aquaray 3X System incorporates a unique way of conserving energy via a

combination of turning on/off and dimming of UV lamps. The UV system is able to switch
UV lamps on or off and vary between lamp output (dimming lamps from 100% to 60%) in
response to the flow pattern of the wastewater treatment plant through a 4-20mA signal
received from the plant flow meter.
This feature minimizes power consumption of the system and extends lamp life by ensuring
that only the minimum number of lamps are used to treat a certain flow at a preset UV dose.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Level Control
The UV System has to react to a wide variety of flows, from minimum to peak wet weather.
Regardless of this wide flow variation, a constant water level has to be maintained in the
disinfection channels. Three methods are generally used:
Flap gate level controllers provide a reasonable degree of control and are usually used
when space is at premium.
Fixed straight edge weirs are recommended whenever possible.
On larger or more sophisticated systems motorized weir gates can be employed.

Through the use of level sensors and a control signal, the weir height is adjusted to
maintain the correct lamp immersion.
For this project, fixed weirs are recommended and will be provided by Ozonia.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Quartz Jacket Fouling, Reduction and Removal
In any UV system the primary cause of fouling is the deposition of minerals under the
influence of heat from the ultraviolet lamp. Calcium bicarbonate forms a precipitate that is
deposited as scale on the outside of the lamps quartz jacket. The rate of deposition is a
site-specific and is temperature dependent: the higher the temperature, the greater the
deposition.
For low-pressure high output amalgam lamps, the wasted energy given off as heat is
minimal, and therefore fouling is significantly lessened. Furthermore, the UV system is
equipped with an automatic mechanical wiping system to remove the deposits on the quartz
jacket. Under normal operating conditions, Ozonia recommend running the in-channel
cleaning system two wipes per day (default factory setting).
The automatic wiping system is driven by an electrical motor located in each module and
has been field tested and proven to maintain a fouling factor in excess of 95%.The Aquaray
3X wipers are normally parked above the water and away from the intense UV light and
heat. The mechanical wipers are guaranteed for 2,000 wipes and need only be replaced
once every three years.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
Every piece of equipment within a wastewater plant requires service. The Aquaray 3X
System has been developed to allow easy troubleshooting and quick replacement of
components. The majority of maintenance activities can be carried out while the equipment
is still located within the channel. The recommended spares included in this proposal will
ensure that the system can be maintained efficiently and brought back to full operation in the
shortest possible time.
Lamp Access and Replacement:
Lamps need to be accessible for two reasons: routine electrical failure (typically when a
filament burns out) and at the end of useful lamp life when the lamp UV output has
depreciated.
It is inevitable that some lamps will fail electrically. In the event of routine failure, the UV
monitoring system will signal an alarm and precisely identify the lamps location.
In the case of the Aquaray 3X, lamp change is a simple affair requiring no special tools.
The operator walks to the UV disinfection channel and removes the grating, if used, and
opens the lid of the appropriate module. Upon the release of the latches, a safety interlock
automatically switches off the lamps to protect the operator from exposure to ultraviolet light.
The operator can now check all the numbered lamp connections. It is a simple matter of
unplugging the failed lamp and pulling it out from its quartz jacket using the lamp leads. A
new lamp is then pushed into place and plugged in. With the closing of the lid and the
fastening of the latches, the UV lamps are automatically switched back on. The grating, if
any, can then be replaced and the maintenance is completed. Typically, this procedure
takes less than two minutes.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
AQUARAY 3X ULTRAVIOLET SYSTEM
DESIGN BRIEF
PLANT INFORMATION AND DESIGN BASIS
Plant Name .............................................................. Spears Creek WWTP

Plant Location .......................................................... Elgin, SC
Peak Hour Flow..30 MGD

Average Flow..12 MGD
UV Transmittance...65% minimum (assumed)

Influent SS, mg/L...................................................... less than 30 mg/l
Influent, MPN/100ml:
E. Coli ........................................................... less than 200,000 (Assumed)
Required Effluent, MPN/100ml:
E. Coli ........................................................... less than 126 MPN (30 day average)
E. Coli ........................................................... less than 349 MPN (single sample max)
Minimum UV Dose..30,000 watt-secs/cm2
SUMMARY:
Based on the information in the design table below, the system proposed will provide a
minimum UV dosage of 30,000 uWatts-secs/cm2 with all lamps in service. The dosage
calculation takes into account several factors including the end of lamp life, the quartz
sleeves transmittance factor at the peak capacity.
Based on a Peak Flow of 30 MGD and UV transmittance of 65%, three (3) UV disinfection
channels are proposed, each with two (2) UV modules mounted one (1) across by two (2)
banks in series. The total number of modules is six (6) each with 36 Low Pressure High Output
Amalgam Lamps.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
PROPOSED AQUARAY 3X VERTICAL LAMP SYSTEM DESIGN:
Peak Hour Flow 30 MGD
% UV Transmission 65%
Delivered Dosage at Peak Flow, watt-secs/cm2 30,000
System Designation Aquaray 3X
Number of Channels 3
Number of Modules Across 1
Number of Modules in Series 2
Channel Width 29.5 inches
Channel Length 19 feet
Channel Depth 84 inches
Water Depth Range 62-69 inches
Aquaray Modules/Channel 2
Total Number of Modules 6
Number of Lamps/Module 36
Total Number of Lamps 216
Headloss at Peak Flow 2.73 Inches @ 30 MGD
Power Consumption per Lamp 406 watts
Power Consumption at Peak Hour Flow 87.6 kW @ 30 MGD
Power Consumption at Average Flow 38 kW @ 12 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
SCOPE OF SUPPLY AND BUDGET PRICE
We propose to furnish the following equipment for the Aquaray 3X VLS ultraviolet
disinfection system described in the previous sections:
Aquaray 3X vertical lamp UV modules with Cleaning Wipers, 316L stainless steel
components
Power Center Panels (PCP)
Main Control Panel with Allen Bradley CompactLogix PLC and Panelview 1000 Plus
interface
Stepdown Transformers
Cable trays
Interconnecting Cables between the Modules and the Data Control Station(s) and
between the Modules and Power
Distribution Center(s)
Flow Pacing and Variable Lamp Output
Level Control, weir sets
In-Channel Cleaning System (automatic cleaning wipers)
Cleaning Tank Liner (Station Cleaning)
Lifting Spreader Bar
Anchor Bolts
Recommended Spare Parts
The following will also be included:
Freight to the jobsite

Start-up service: Eight (8) days in three (3) trips
O&M manuals
Note that the following items are to be provided by others (unless indicated otherwise
above):
1/2 ton Overhead Lifting Equipment (crane)

UV Channels
Any Channel Grating
Any Slides Gates
Any Air Piping and Valves
Remote Computer System
Installation
Performance testing
Any Embedded Conduits
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
BUDGET PRICE: Our current budget estimating price, not including the optional adders
above, is (PRICE TO BE PROVIDED BY OZONIA REPRESENTATIVE). This price will be
valid for one (1) year; payment terms will be as below and commercial terms and conditions
are given on the following page. The price is in accordance with the Scope of Supply and
terms of this proposal and any changes may require the price to be adjusted.
Payment Terms:
10% Net Cash, Payable in thirty (30) days from date of submittal of initial drawings for
approval;
80% Net Cash, Payable in progress payments thirty (30) days from dates of
respective shipments of the Products;
10% Net Cash, Payable in thirty (30) days from Product installation and acceptance
or Ninety (90) days after date of final Product delivery, whichever occur
SCHEDULE: Approval drawings and data can be submitted approximately 6 weeks after
agreement to all terms, as evidenced by OZONIAs receipt of this proposal, fully executed;
or, in the event that Purchaser issues a Purchase Order, OZONIA's receipt of fully executed
letter agreement. OZONIA estimates that shipment of the Products can be made in
approximately 16-18 weeks after OZONIA has received from Purchaser final approval of all
submittal drawings and data.
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Typical Aquaray Vertical Lamp
Ultraviolet Disinfection System Installations
Plant Location: Pearland, TX
Peak Flow: 16 MGD
Number of Channels: 2
Number of Modules: 3 per channel (6 total)
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Plant Location: Harnett County, NC
Peak Flow: 20 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Plant Location: Madison, AL
Peak Flow: 34 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Plant Location: Stratford, CT
Peak Flow: 39 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Plant Location: Jefferson City, MO
Peak Flow: 66.6 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Plant Location: Hartford, CT
Peak Flow: 120 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
Plant Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Peak Flow: 135 MGD
Spears Creek WWTP

Elgin, SC
Date: 2/17/2015
FEBRUARY 2015
APPENDIX B
COST ESTIMATE
B-1
FEBRUARY 2015
APPENDIX C
MAPS
C-1
Y
NTY W
Y
LD COU
FAIRFIE AT
NT
ER
21 EE
C
OU
MAGNETIC
D
W C OUNT
AN
HA
HL
RS
77
E
RIC
K
34 RIV
ER
227
P.S.
2059 60
2549 936
LUGOFF
P.S.
.
21
RD
283 220
RD
PE
WA
RS P.S.
IM RD
AD
. S-
28-3
M
8
RO
BLYTHEWOOD
ON
321
FORK
UNPAVED
CR
P.S.
EE
33
K P.S.
S-28-1
RD.
P.S. 1
.
K RD
EC
SN
ND
FRIE
54 601
54
P.S.
2200 P.S.
P.S.
1856 20
EJW ROAD 25 MILE CREEK GRAVITY
21
536 P.S. BEASLY CREEK 2 LEGEND
21
1041
25 MILE CREEK FM
BEASLEY CREEK 1
W
AT
TS
P.S. BO
HIL
L
WE
N
HILL RD.
RD.
P.S. N
555 ST.
GREE
P.S.
W
AT
SO
N
10 ELGIN
WHITE
21 UNPAVED P.S. ST.

12
P.S.
ROAD P.S.
KE
321 1694
LLEY
P.S.
1282
1352 MILL
PO
AUTUMN HILL
ND
SUMMER CHASE
HIGH
RD
.
WAY
RIDGE CREST
STONE CHAPEL PEPPER KNOLL
FAWN RIDGE
.
RD
.
RD
RD.
HUNTERS POND
P.S.
P.S.
PHASE 5
RS
CH
77 PHASE 4
JEFFE
555 83 UR
CH
PHASE 15
PHASES 1 & 3
PHASES 2
LARR
Y
21
SPEARS CREEK
1
DISCHARGE
IVAL
LINE RC
PE
RD.
PONTIAC
TOWER
RD.
P.S.
RD.
20
SH
RU
P.S.
RD. S-28-1
02
P.S.
RD. S-40-1904
P.S. 12 K
ER PALMETTO UTILITIES, INC.
P.S.
RI
CH SH 601
FORT JACKSON LA AW NORTHEAST RICHLAND AND
N CO
D WESTERN KERSHAW CO.
CO UN
P.S.
UN TY SERVICE AREA
TY
EXISTING AND PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENTS
1000 0 2000 4000 6000
BASEMAP-R10.dwg - REVISED: 1/31/11 (View: BASE MAP) SCALE: 1" = 2000'

1 2 3
-
SPEARS CREEK WWTP
12 MGD - 18 MGD CAPACITY
DC
UPGRADE PER
1
JWM
35002
KERSHAW COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA CONSULTING
E N G I N E E R S, P.A.
1
FEB. 2015
AS SHOWN
FEBRUARY 2015
APPENDIX D
ND AND NPDES PERMITS
D-1
Wastewater Facilities Plan Update
Population and Flow Projections
Palmetto Utilities
To be included in the Metro Columbia Facilities Plan
February, 2015
Prepared by Burkhold Planning & Management
February, 2015 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION:
DATA ANALYSIS:
KEY POINTS FOR DESIGN AND WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION PURPOSES:
KEY RESULTS OF SYSTEM SIZING:
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS/USAGE PROJECTIONS/SYSTEM DEMANDS:
APPENDIX A: February 2015 Residential REUs
APPENDIX B: February 2015 Non-residential REUs
APPENDIX C: Planning Area Map for use with Appendix D
APPENDIX D: Sizing Tables
February, 2015 2
INTRODUCTION:
Based on data obtained from the Central Midlands Council of Governments (CMCOG)
Regional Population Projections 2005 to 2035, growth areas 9a and 9b are two of the
most rapidly developing areas within the region. Note, the data cutoff date was
December 1, 2007. The data presented later in this report will substantiate those
statements. The Report says:
Sector 9a Richland Northeast. This sector has been and will remain one of the
hottest growth areas in the region, due to its good schools, available land near I-20 and
planned extension of sewer service by the City of Columbia and Richland County. The
rate of growth in the future will not be at the same torrid 170% increase from 1980
2000, but it will rise substantially (78% or 34172 persons) from 2000 to 2035. New
commercial growth on lands formerly belonging to the Clemson Experimental Station off
Clemson Road will attract additional residential development out to 2035. Maps of single
family building permits actively . show the intensity of construction in this Sector over
the past several years, with 10,000 single family permits and 2000 multi-family permits
issued from 1994 to 2004 for Richland Northeast.
Sector 9b Blythewood. Sectors 9a and 9b lie in the booming Richland County School
District 2. With substantial available land for development and with employment
growing in the I-77 corridor north of Columbia, the Sector will grow sharply through the
planning period. Utility extensions in the area by the Town of Winnsboro and Palmetto
Utilities will help support rapid population growth in what has become one of the fastest
growing and wealthiest Sectors in the metropolitan area. From 1994 to 2004 there were
1,100 single family permits and even 200 multi-family permits issued in Sector 9b. The
activity is expected to continue and increase during the planning period, with a projected
186% increase in population (+23,646) by 2035.
Much if not most of Sectors 9a and 9b are served by Palmetto Utilities. Again, the data
presented below will support the statements made by the CMCOG. In reality, the data
below enhances the growth as projected by CMCOG/
February, 2015 3
DATA ANALYSIS:
As noted above, the northeastern portion of Richland County is an area of the county that
has experienced a period of high growth over the past 20 years. This has been evidenced
by the growth in the Palmetto Utilities Service Area in the past 29 years of operation.
This growth is manifested in the existing developments within the study area and the
developments that have been announced for the area. As an example, in February 2007,
the number of Residential Equivalent Units (REU) served by Palmetto Utilities was
11,616. In February of 2015, the REU number was 17,174, an increase of 5,558 or 694
per year, a growth of 48% over the 8 year period. This represents, at 350 gallons per unit,
a flow of 1,945,300, a significant growth rate for any system to support.
The known developments, not new developments, within the planning area will generate
significant flows with an estimated 1.5 to 2.0 million gallons of wastewater in the next
ten years. The 2005 Plan Amendment, as originally developed, was designed to satisfy a
2020 flow demand, represented by a wastewater generation flow of 22,894,515 gallons
per day (GPD) of domestic wastewater within the service area as defined in a 2003
Wastewater Facilities Plan prepared by Burkhold Planning and Management and J. E.
Wood and Associates. This flow included commercial/industrial demands as well as
non-excessive infiltration/inflow with the flow is peaked using standard SCDHEC
approved factors.
A significant portion of the City of Columbia wastewater system at the headwaters of

Crane Creek, as well as the headwaters of Spears Creek, which flows into the Wateree
River Basin, is proposed to be diverted into the Palmetto Utilities from the Crane Creek
Interceptor Sewer Line. The diversion of this flow currently served at the City of
Columbia Wastewater Treatment Plant will add an existing 12,186 customers (not
REUs, but customers with some representing more than one REU) to the Palmetto
Utilities system, bringing the total to 29,360 REUs (17,174 existing and 12,186
proposed). This combined number of REUs, using 350 gallons per REU, represents
10,276,000 gallons of wastewater, before any allowable Infiltration and Inflow is
accounted for.
The 2003 design flow identified in Appendix D is 22,894,515 based on 24,006 REUs for
the Palmetto Utilities Service Area as it was identified in 2003. This was based on an
average density of .2 units per acre. Based on the growth that has occurred in the study
area, it is felt that a density of .25 or .3 units per acre for build out is more feasible and
needs to be evaluated in detail in the near future. The impact of changing to .25 units per
acre would increase the REUs to 30,008 and the flow demand to 28,618,144 while an
increase to .3 units per acre would result in 36,009 REUs and result in a peaked demand
of 34,341,775. It should be noted that the transfer of 12,186 units from the City of
Columbias Service Area to the Palmetto Utilities Service Area represents 648 units, only
slightly less than the 694 REUs Palmetto Utilities has added over the past eight years.
February, 2015 4
The system presented in this 2015 plan update is intended to provide service to the entire
study area, including the diverted flow from the Crane Creek Interceptor. All of the lines
within the Palmetto Utilities service area will be within the proposed developments and,
as such, will be funded as part of the internal development cost and not as part of the
regional cost.
In the 1986 study (to which this is an update), there were eight conceptual alternatives
addressed. Once each was evaluated, it was determined that there were only three
alternatives that should be addressed in detail. They were:
1. Project specific land application

2. Regional land application
3. Regional WTP one or more surface discharges.
The recommended alternative in 2003 was a regional waste treatment plant with land
disposal of 6.0 million gallons per day (MGD) of treated wastewater and followed
ultimately with a surface discharge to the Wateree River if sufficient land disposal area is
unavailable. Since that time, actual growth has surpassed the rate of growth proposed in
the 2003 plan, resulting in a need for a discharge into Spears Creek with a future
discharge in to the Wateree River at some point in the future. Should the intense
development within the Palmetto Utilities Service Area continue at the same pace as the
past eight years, and should the City of Columbia divert even more flow due to the
continued growth within its service area in the headwaters of the Crane Creek Basin, the
land disposal system and multiple discharges into Spears Creek and the Wateree River
will be needed. The data contained in the KEY POINTS section support this assessment.
The phasing into this regional system has been accomplished by implementing sections
of the Alternative I from the 1986 plan with initial disposal by spray irrigation on golf
courses and agricultural land.
February, 2015 5
KEY POINTS FOR DESIGN AND WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION PURPOSES:
1. Existing or known developments were projected to generate 24,006 REUs by

2020. Assuming the 694 EEUs per year growth continue, the additional 3,470
REUs will bring the total to 22,818, which is 1,188 less than the proposed 2020
number of units. This does not include any growth within the new Columbia
service area transferred to Palmetto Utilities.
2. There is an existing 6.0 MGD land disposal capability.
3. The 20 year need for the proposed service area was 22,894,515 MGD based on
only 0.2 units per acre for the service area. When the 12,186 customers from the
Columbia system area are added, that flow is greatly exceeded.
4. The 2020 REUs is projected at 24,006 units.
5. The 2030 REUs were not projected in the study, however at the current rate of
growth, an additional 6,940 would be added.
6. Using SCDHEC flow per household of 350 gallons per household, each person
uses 140 gallons per day (2.5 persons per household).
7. The 2020 REUs of 24,006 people equates to 8.40 MGD. When adding the
Columbias 12, 186 at 350 per customer, the flow is 10.276 MGD.
8. The 2030 REUs would add an additional 2.43 MGD.
9. The need for a 6.0 MGD wastewater discharge into Spears Creek is needed at this
time to serve the growing Palmetto Utilities Service Area, especially now that
flow from the Crane Creek Interceptor is added.
10. A peaking factor of 2.8 was used for ADF<335,000 GPD
11. A peaking factor of 2.5 was used for ADF>335,000 GPD
12. The lines were sized based upon the flows projected in Appendix D. The sizing
program sets the line sizes to allow for the design flow, allowable infiltration and
inflow, and flowing 0.8 full. This allows for growth and placement of specific
systems throughout a given sub-area without significantly affecting the line sizes.
KEY RESULTS OF SYSTEM SIZING: (Palmetto Utilities only)
1. Total acres to be serviced 41,309

2. Units per acre (1986) 0.03
3. Units (1986) 12,595
4. Units per acre (2020) 0.2
5. Units (2020) 24,006 (19,348 as of February,
2015)
6. 1986 Average Daily Flow 4,420,500
7. 2020 Average Daily Flow 8,479,450 (for WTP Design
Flow Only)
8. 2020 Peak Daily Flow 22, 894,515 (for Line and
Pump Station Design Only)
February, 2015 6
BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS/USAGE PROJECTIONS/SYSTEM DEMANDS (Palmetto
Utilities only)
The base Build out Methodology was presented in Appendix A of the 2003 report.
The initial problem in preparing the build out projections was the collection and
assimilation of the data as outlined in Section C of Chapter III of the 2003 report.
Once that step was accomplished, it was possible to project build out flows. In
order to project build out flows, the proposed planning sectors were evaluated and
the maximum densities were developed based on the following general
assumptions:
a) The allowed and proposed units per acre would be based on the updated
population statistics from the 2000 Censes projections, assuming 2.5
people per dwelling unit and allowed zoning; (This needs to be revised to
represent the 19.9% growth of the county between 2000 and 2010)
b) The density for a given drainage basin would vary depending on the
existing development; and
c) It should be noted that the development projected in the 2003 report was
based upon an even distribution of dwelling units for general demand
analysis. It should be understood that the development that will occur
would be concentrated in developable parcels throughout the area, with a
substantial portion of those areas remaining rural/agricultural/forested for
the foreseeable future.
The base build out projections, which were developed from the data found in
Appendix D and contain the projected flow by drainage basin for the entire
planning area and is explained as follows (see Appendix C of this report for
drainage basins used in the density flow projections):
Column 1 Planning Sections

Column 2 Acreage for each tract
Column 3 Units per acre in 1986
Column 4 1986 units
Column 5 Proposed units per acre in 2020
Column 6 Projected units in 2020
Column 7 1986 average daily flow
Column 8 2020 average daily flow
Column 9 2020 peak daily flow
February, 2015 7
APPENDIX A: February 2015 Residential REUs
(Palmetto Utilities only)
February, 2015 8
APPENDIX B: February 2015 Non-residential REUs
February, 2015 9
APPENDIX C: Planning Area Map for use with Appendix D
February, 2015 10
APPENDIX D: Sizing Tables
February, 2015 11
EPA FINALIZED TMDL
South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control
Total Maximum Daily Load Development for

Spears and Kelly Creeks (Hydrologic Unit Code:
03050104-090 & Stations: CW-154 and CW-166)
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
September 1, 2004
Bureau of Water
In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C 1251 et.seq.,
as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987, P.L. 400-4, the U.S Environmental
Protection Agency is hereby establishing a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for fecal
coliform bacteria in Spears Creek and Kelly Creek. Subsequent actions must be consistent
with this TMDL.
__________________________________________ ____________
James D. Giattina, Director Date

Water Management Division
ii
Abstract
Kelly Creek, in Kershaw County, drains into Spears Creek, in Kershaw and Richland Counties.
Spears Creek in turn drains into the Wateree River. Both creeks have been placed on South
Carolinas 303(d) list of impaired waters for violations of the fecal coliform standard. Kelly Creek
is impaired at water quality monitoring station, CW-154 (Kelly Creek at S-28-367). Spears Creek is
impaired at water quality monitoring station CW-166 (Spears Creek at US-601 near Elgin). During
the assessment period for the 2004 303(d) list (1998-2002), 13 % of samples from Kelly Creek and
25 % from Spears Creek violated the standard. The watersheds of these creeks are largely rural and
agricultural. At the time of the NLCD data collection (early 1990s) the Spears Creek watershed
was 58 % forest and 19 % cropland, with the balance wetlands, transitional, and developed. Kelly
Creeks watershed is similar somewhat less forest and much higher percentage of cropland.
However, a windshield survey of both watersheds found little cropland and much pasture. There
are no active point sources in either watershed. Small areas of both watersheds have been
designated as MS4s. The probable sources of fecal coliform bacteria in these two creeks are runoff
from pasture land, failing septic systems, and cattle-in-streams.
The load-duration curve methodology was used to calculate the existing loads and the TMDL loads
for Spears and Kelly Creeks. The existing load for Spears Creek was estimated to be 6.6E+11
cfu/day and for Kelly Creek, 2.2E+11 cfu/day. The TMDL loads were determined to be 2.7E+11
and 7.9E+10 cfu/day, respectively. The WLA for Kelly Creek MS4s, which is expressed as a
percent reduction, is 65 %; for the MS4s in the Spears Creek watershed the TMDL is 61 %.
Resources and several TMDL implementation strategies to bring about this reduction are suggested.
iii
Table of Contents
Chapter Page Number
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Watershed Description 1
1.3 Water Quality Standard 4
2.0 Water Quality Assessment 6
3.0 Source Assessment and Load Allocation 9
3.1 Point Sources in the Spears Creek Watershed 9
3.1.1 Continuous Discharge Point Sources 9
3.1.2 Municipal Separate Stormwater Systems 9
3.2 Nonpoint Sources in Spears Creek Watershed 10
3.2.1 Wildlife 10
3.2.2 Land Application of Manure 10
3.2.3 Grazing Animals 10
3.2.4 Failing Septic Systems 11
3.2.5 Other Nonpoint Sources 11
4.0 Load-Duration Curve Method 12
5.0 Development of Total Maximum Daily Load 13
5.1 Critical Conditions 15
5.2 Existing Load 15
5.3 Margin of Safety 15
5.4 Total Maximum Daily Load 15
6.0 Implementation 16
7.0 References 17
Appendix A Fecal Coliform Data 18
Appendix B DMR Data 20
Appendix C Calculation of Existing and TMDL Load 23
Appendix D Selected Figures and Tables 31
Appendix E Public Notification 33
iv
Tables and Figures
Table Title Page Number
Table 1. Water quality monitoring sites in the Spears Creek watershed. 5
Table 2. Land uses in the Spears Creek watershed above CW-166. 5
Table 3. Land uses in the Kelly Creek watershed above CW-154. 6
Table 4. Water quality stations and associated USGS gauging stations. 12
Table 5. Trend line equations and information. 13
Table 6. TMDL components in Spears and Kelly Creek.. 16
Figure Title Page Number
Figure 1. Map of the Spears and Kelly Creek watersheds. 2
Figure 2. Map showing land use in the Spears Creek watershed

.above CW-166. 3
Figure 3. Map showing land use in the Kelly Creek watershed above
CW-154. 4
Figure 4. Comparison between precipitation at Clemson Sandhills Exp
Sta and fecal coliform concentration in Spears Creek at CW-166. 7
Figure 5. Comparison between precipitation at Clemson Sandhills Exp

Sta and fecal coliform concentration in Kelly Creek at CW-154. 8
Figure 6. Fecal coliform concentrations at CW-154, Kelly Creek, and

CW-155 and CW-166, Spears Creek. 8
Figure 7. MS4 areas in Spears and Kelly Creek watersheds. 11
Figure 8. Load-Duration Curve for Spears Creek at CW-166. 13
Figure 9. Load-Duration Curve for Kelly Creek at CW-154. 14
v
Spears and Kelly Creeks (HUC 03050104-090)
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
1.1 Background
Levels of fecal coliform bacteria can be elevated in water bodies as the result of both point and
nonpoint sources of pollution. Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and EPA's Water Quality
Planning and Management Regulations (40 CFR Part 130) require states to develop total maximum
daily loads (TMDLs) for water bodies that are not meeting designated uses under technology-based
pollution controls. The TMDL process establishes the allowable loadings of pollutants or other
quantifiable parameters for a water body based on the relationship between pollution sources and in
stream water quality conditions so that states can establish water quality-based controls to reduce
pollution and restore and maintain the quality of water resources (USEPA 1991).
1.2 Watershed Description
Spears Creek is in Richland and Kershaw Counties, in the Southeastern Plains Ecoregion of South
Carolina (Figure 1). Kelly Creek (Kershaw County) is a tributary of Spears Creek, which flows into
the Wateree River some 10 miles upstream of its confluence with Congaree River. These TMDLs
apply to the parts of the watersheds upstream of the monitoring station indicated in Table 1.
References to either of the watersheds apply only to the cited parts of the watershed.
The predominant land uses in the Spears Creek watershed (91.3 km2 or 35 mi2) according to EPAs
MLRC database (Figure 1 and Table 2) from the mid 1990s are forest (58 %), cropland (19 %),
wetlands (8.5 %), transitional (6.4 %), and developed (6.1 %). Pasture according to this data is
insignificant (1.5 %), however a windshield survey of the watershed shows much more pasture than
cropland. Cropland may have been converted to pasture since 199 or the analytical method cannot
distinguish between crop and pasture lands. Kelly Creeks watershed has similar land uses (Figure
2, Table 3), though there is nearly twice as much, by percent, cropland/pasture as in the larger
watershed. The population in the Spears Creek watershed in 2000 was about 7500 people. Most of
the watershed does not have sewer service and therefore most houses must use septic systems or
other on-site wastewater treatment.
The upper part of the Spears Creek watershed, including Kelly Creek, is experiencing development
pressure as growth extends along US-1 from Columbia. Urbanization of this watershed will tend to
adversely impact these creeks by increasing runoff, making the stream flow flashier, and increasing
the load of pollutants (including fecal coliform bacteria) available to be washed into the creeks.
1
Figure 1. Map of the Spears Creek watershed above CW-166.
2
Figure 2. Map showing land uses in the Spears Creek watershed above CW-166.
3
Figure 3. Land use in the Kelly Creek watershed upstream of CW-154.
1.3 Water Quality Standard
The impaired stream segments of Spears and Kelly Creeks, are designated as Class Freshwater.
Waters of this class are described as follows:
Freshwaters suitable for primary and secondary contact recreation and as a source for drinking
water supply after conventional treatment in accordance with the requirements of the Department.
Suitable for fishing and the survival and propagation of a balanced indigenous aquatic community of
fauna and flora. Suitable also for industrial and agricultural uses. (R.61-68)
4
Table 1. Water quality monitoring sites in the Spears Creek watershed.
Station ID Location Description Samples collected % Samples Excee-

in 1998 - 2002 ding Standard
CW-154 Kelly Creek at S-28-367, 2.9 miles SE of Elgin 31 12.9%

CW-155 Spears Creek at SC-12, 3.6 miles SE of Elgin 48 8.3%
CW-166 Spears Creek at US-601 32 25.0%
Table 2. Land uses in the Spears Creek watershed above CW-166.
Land Use Class Land Use Area Percent Area (mi2)

(km2)
Water 1.0 1.1% 0.4

Developed Residential Low Density 3.4 3.7% 1.3
Residential High Density 0.7 0.7%
Commercial, Industrial, & 2.1 2.3% 0.8
Transportation
5.5 6.1% 2.1
Transitional etc. Barren 0.2 0.2% 0.1
Mining, Quarries 1.6 1.8% 0.6
Transitional 4.0 4.3% 1.5
5.8 6.4% 2.2
Forest Forest Deciduous 17.3 18.9% 6.7
Forest Evergreen 18.9 20.7% 7.3
Forest Mixed 16.6 18.2% 6.4
52.8 57.8% 20.4
Pasture Pasture 1.4 1.5% 0.5
Cropland Cropland 17.0 18.6% 6.6
Wetlands Woody Wetlands 7.8 8.5% 3.0

Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 0.0 0.0% 0.0
7.8 8.5% 3.0
Total for Watershed 91.3 100.0% 35.3
5
South Carolinas standard for fecal coliform in Freshwater is:
Not to exceed a geometric mean of 200/100 ml, based on five consecutive samples during any 30
day period; nor shall more than 10% of the total samples during any 30 day period exceed 400/100
ml.(R.61-68).
Primary contact recreation is not limited to large streams and lakes. Even streams which may seem
to small to swim in will allow small children the opportunity to play and immerse their hands and
faces. Essentially all perennial streams should therefore be protected from pathogen impairment.
Table 3. Land use in the Kelly Creek watershed.
Land Use Class Land Use Area Percent Area (mi2)

(km2)
Water 0.3 1.8% 0.1

Developed 1.2 8.0% 0.5
Transitional etc. Barren 0.0 0.2% 0.0
Forest 6.8 44.8% 2.6
Pasture 0.3 1.7% 0.1
Agricultural 5.3 35.1% 2.1
Wetlands 1.3 8.4% 0.5
Total for Watershed 15.2 100.0% 5.9
2.0 WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT
There are three water quality monitoring stations in the Spears Creek watershed (Figure 1 and Table
1). Kelly Creek has one monitoring site (CW-154). Spears Creek has two sites (CW-155 and CW-
166) both downstream of the confluence with Kelly Creek. An assessment of water quality data
collected in 1996 through 2000 at these stations indicated that Spears Creek at CW-166 only was
impaired for recreational use. The assessment for the 2004 303(d) list using 1998-2002 data found
that Kelly Creek at CW-154 was also impaired. Waters in which no more than 10% of the samples
collected over a five year period are greater than 400 fecal coliform counts or cfu / 100 ml are
considered to comply with the South Carolina water quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria.
Waters with more than 10 percent of samples greater than 400 cfu/ 100 ml are considered impaired
and listed for fecal coliform bacteria on South Carolinas 303(d) list. The percentage of samples
collected during the assessment period (1998-2002) that exceeded the 400 cfu/100ml standard are
shown in Table 1. Stream fecal coliform data are provided in Appendix A.
A comparison of fecal coliform concentrations at the three sites is provided in Figure 4. Where
there are data for all three sites, they tend to track together, which suggests that Spears Creek at
CW-155 would be considered impaired if it had been sampled only during the warm months as
were the other two. Conversely if Kelly Creek had been sampled year round it probably would not
6
be considered impaired. The increase in percentage of violations between CW-155 and CW-166
suggests that fecal coliform sources are located in the watershed between these two sites.
All three sites exhibit a linear relationship between precipitation and fecal coliform concentration in
the water (Figures 5, 6, and D-1). Precipitation was measured at the Clemson Sandhills Experiment
Station, which is at the western edge of the watershed. Fecal coliform concentrations tended to
increase with rainfall. The location of the rain gauge so near the watershed is unusual and makes the
rainfall data quite representative of the whole watershed.
10000
CW-155
CW-154
CW-166
Standard
1000
FC (cfu/ 100ml)
100
10
1-Jan-98 2-Jul-98 1-Jan-99 2-Jul-99 1-Jan-00 1-Jul-00 31-Dec-00 1-Jul-01 31-Dec-01 1-Jul-02 31-Dec-02
Date
Figure 4. Fecal coliform concentrations at CW-154, Kelly Creek, and CW-155 and
CW-166, Spears Creek.
7
10000
Fecal Coliform (cfu/100ml)
1000
y = 2139x + 244.96
2
R = 0.6661
100
10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Rainfall (in)
Figure 5. Comparison between precipitation at Clemson Sandhills Experiment Station and

fecal coliform concentration in Spears Creek at CW-166.
10000
1000
FC (cfu/ 100ml)
y = 2002.4x + 142.93
R2 = 0.7683
100
10
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Rainfall (in)
Figure 6. Comparison between precipitation at Clemson Sandhills Experiment Station and

fecal coliform concentration in Kelly Creek at CW-154.
8
3.0 SOURCE ASSESSMENT AND LOAD ALLOCATION
Fecal coliform bacteria are used by the State of South Carolina as the indicator for pathogens in
surface waters. Pathogens, which are usually difficult to detect, cause disease and make full body
contact recreation in lakes and streams risky. Indicators such as fecal coliform bacteria,
enteroccoci, or E. Coli are easier to measure, have similar sources as pathogens, and persist a
similar or longer length of time in surface waters. These bacteria are not in themselves usually
disease causing.
There are many sources of pathogen pollution in surface waters. In general these sources may be
classified as point and nonpoint sources. With the implementation of technology-based controls,
pollution from point sources, such as factories and wastewater treatment facilities, has been greatly
reduced. These point sources are required by the Clean Water Act to obtain a NPDES permit. In
South Carolina NPDES permits require that dischargers of sanitary wastewater must meet the state
standard for fecal coliform at the point of discharge. Municipal and private sanitary wastewater
treatment facilities may occasionally be sources of pathogen or fecal coliform bacteria pollution.
However, if these facilities are discharging wastewater that meets their permit limits, they are not
causing the impairment. If one of these facilities is not meeting its permit limits, enforcement of the
permit limit is required. A TMDL is not necessary for this purpose. Pathogen or fecal coliform
TMDLs are therefore essentially nonpoint source TMDLs even though the TMDL may include a
wasteload allocation for a point source.
3.1 Point Sources in the Spears Creek Watershed
3.1.1 Continuous Discharge Point Sources
There are no currently active NPDES facilities in this watershed. Prior to 2001 Palmetto Utilities
operated the Valhalla WWTP on Spears Creek (SC0043494) (Figure 1). This facility had problems
meeting its permit limits for fecal coliform, however the location of the facility far upstream of the
monitoring station suggests that it is not a contributor to impairment. Wastewater data for this
facility are provided in Appendix B.
3.1.2 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
Small parts of these watersheds, in the headwaters, have been designated as Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems or MS4s (Figure 7). Richland County has responsibility for a small area in
the upper Spears Creek watershed. Kershaw County also has responsibility for a small MS4 area in
the Kelly Creek watershed. These permitted sewer systems will be treated as point sources in the
TMDL calculations below. However for modeling purposes all urban areas will be evaluated
together as urban nonpoint sources.
9
3.2 Nonpoint Sources in Spears Creek Watershed
3.2.1 Wildlife
Wildlife (mammals and birds) are contributors of fecal coliform bacteria to surface waters. Wildlife
wastes are carried into nearby streams by runoff following rainfall or deposited directly in streams.
Deer are the largest and probably most noticeable mammals in this area. The SC Department of
Natural Resources (Charles Ruth, DNR Deer Project Supervisor, personal communication, 2000)
has estimated a density of between 30 and 45 deer/mi2 for this area. Deer habitat includes forest,
cropland, pastures, and some suburban areas. Waterfowl also may be significant contributors of
fecal coliform bacteria, particularly in urban and suburban ponds, which often provide a desirable
habitat for geese and ducks. Forest lands, which typically have only low concentrations of wildlife
as sources of fecal coliform bacteria, usually have low loading rates for fecal coliform bacteria.
3.2.2 Land Application of Manure
Turkey or chicken litter that is not properly stored or applied to land is a potential source of fecal
coliform bacteria. Application of excessive amounts of litter, that is adding more nitrogen or
phosphorus than the crop can use, and applying the litter too close to streams are the principal
methods by which litter can pollute streams. The Spears Creek watershed has no active permitted
livestock operations. There are three fields in the watershed that are permitted for land application
of poultry litter.
3.2.3 Grazing Animals
In South Carolina livestock such as cattle and horses spend most of their time grazing on pasture
land. Runoff following rainfall may wash some of the manure deposited in the pastures into nearby
by streams. There are about 150 to 200 cattle in the Kershaw County portion of the watershed
(Mike Newman, NRCS District Conservationist, personal communication, 2004). Most of these
livestock are south of SC-12, which is downstream of CW-155 and upstream of CW-166. There are
also approximately 30 bison in the watershed. Using the ratio of the portion of pasture land in the
Richland County part of the watershed to that of the county, there is an estimated 100 cattle and
calves in the Richland County part of the Spears Creek watershed. The Richland County part of the
watershed does not appear to be causing the impairment at CW-166, because the stream is not
impaired at CW-155.
Grazing cattle and other livestock may contaminate streams with fecal coliform bacteria in two
ways. Runoff from pastures may carry the bacteria into streams following rain events. Cattle that
are allowed access to streams deposit manure directly into the streams because they use the stream
as a water source and if it is deep enough as a cooling off spot during hot weather. Manure
deposited in streams can be a significant source of fecal coliform bacteria. Fecal coliform bacteria
from cattle in pastures and in the streams is apparently the major source of these pollutants to both
Kelly and Spears Creeks.
10
3.2.4 Failing Septic Systems
Septic systems that do not function properly may leak sewage unto the land surface where it can
reach nearby streams. Failing septic systems may be improperly designed or constructed or they
maybe systems that no longer function. The number of households that have septic systems was
estimated using a GIS. The 2000 census database files for Kershaw and Richland Counties were
compared to the watershed. The population was estimated to be approximately 7600 people in 2800
households. Most of this watershed does have not have sewerage service. If each household has its
own system, there would be about 2800 septic systems in the watershed. With a failure rate of 10 %
(Schueler, 1999) for the septic systems, there could be 280 septic systems that are failing. Failing
septic systems may be a significant source of fecal coliform loading to Spears and Kelly Creeks.
3.2.5 Urban Nonpoint Sources
Parts of this watershed are being urbanized as sprawl from Columbia spreads. The increase in
impervious surfaces increases runoff and reduces infiltration. The population of pets increases.
Sewer lines are subject to leaking and overflows. However there are at present few sewer lines in
this watershed. Another potential source of the fecal coliform bacteria in Spears Creek is illicit
discharges into creeks, ditches, or storm sewers.
Figure 7. MS4 areas in the Spears and Kelly Creek watersheds.
11
4.0 LOAD-DURATION CURVE METHOD
Load-duration curves provide a method of developing TMDLs that applies to all hydrologic
conditions. The load-duration curve method uses the cumulative frequency distribution of stream
flow and pollutant concentration data to estimate the existing and the TMDL loads for a water body.
Development of the load-duration curve is described in this chapter.
Neither Kelly nor Spears Creek are gauged for flow. Therefore USGS flow data from two similar
sized watersheds was used to estimate flow in the creeks. Flow data from USGS 02172640 on the
Dean Swamp Creek near Perry, SC was used for Spears Creek. For Kelly Creek, data from USGS
02102908 on Flat Creek in Fort Bragg, NC was used to generate the flow-duration curve.
Information about the gauging stations is presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Water quality stations and associated USGS gauging stations.
Station USGS Stream Period of Record DA (km2) Land Uses (%)

Gauge #
Forest Agri- Transi- Wet-
cultural tional lands
CW-154 02102908 Flat Creek 6/1/68 - 12/31/02 19.8 65 <1 28 7
CW-166 02172640 Dean Swamp Creek 10/1/80 - 9/30/00 80.8 56 27 10 <1
Dean Swamp Creek, a tributary of the South Edisto River in Aiken County, has a similar sized
drainage area, land uses, and topography to Spears Creek (92.3 km2). Flat Creek is a tributary of
Little River and is also similar to Kelly Creek (15.2 km2). All watersheds are in the Southeastern
Coastal Plain ecoregion.
The flows for Spears and Kelly Creeks were estimated by multiplying the daily flow rates from
respective gauged stream by the ratio of the TMDL Creek drainage area to that of gauged creek
(1.14 and 0.77 respectively). The flows were ranked from low to high and the values that exceed
certain selected percentiles determined. The load-duration curves were generated by calculating the
loads from the observed fecal coliform concentrations, the flow rate that corresponds to the date of
sampling, and a conversion factor. The loads were plotted against the appropriate flow recurrence
interval to generate the curve (Figures 8 and 9). The target lines were created by calculating the
allowable load from the flow and the appropriate fecal coliform standard concentration in the same
manner. Sample loads above this line are violations of the standard, while loads below the line are
in compliance.
Trend lines were determined for loads that were above the target line (load values that violated the
water quality standard). The equations for the best-fit trend lines determined by the Excel
spreadsheet are presented in Table 5. The existing loads to Kelly and Spears Creeks were
calculated from the mean of all loads that were between the 0.1 % and 80 % flow recurrence
12
intervals. This range favors the high flows that occur infrequently, but where two of the five
violations occurred.
Table 5. Trend line equations and information.
Station Stream Trend Line Equation Type r2

CW-154 Kelly Creek y = 5E+10 x X -1.013 Power 0.7411
CW-166 Spears Creek y = -2E+11 x Ln(X) + 4E+11 Log 0.9335
The TMDL load is calculated from the target line. Load values at 5 % occurrence intervals along
the target line from 10 to 90 % were averaged and this value was reduced by 5 %, which represents
the Margin of Safety. The Load Allocation (LA) values are 95 % of the loads from the target line,
that is the TMDL load minus the Margin of Safety. Calculations for both existing and TMDL loads
are provided in Appendix B.
5.0 DEVELOPMENT OF TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD
A total maximum daily load (TMDL) for a given pollutant and water body is comprised of the sum
of individual wasteload allocations (WLAs) for point sources, and load allocations (LAs) for both
nonpoint sources and natural background levels. In addition, the TMDL must include a margin of
1.00E+13 Samples Not Violating Standard

Samples Violating Standard
Target Line
Power (Samples Violating Standard)
-1.013
y = 5E+10x
2
R = 0.7411
1.00E+12
Load (cfu/day)
1.00E+11
1.00E+10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent Flow Exceeded (%)
Figure 8. Load-Duration Curve for Spears Creek at CW-166.
13
safety (MOS), either implicitly or explicitly, to account for the uncertainty in the relationship
between pollutant loads and the quality of the receiving water body. Conceptually, this definition is
represented by the equation:
TMDL = 3 WLAs + 3 LAs + MOS
The TMDL is the total amount of pollutant that can be assimilated by the receiving water body
while still achieving water quality standards. In TMDL development, allowable loadings from all
pollutant sources that cumulatively amount to no more than the TMDL must be established and
thereby provide the basis to establish water quality-based controls.
For most pollutants, TMDLs are expressed as a mass load (e.g., kilograms per day). For bacteria,
however, TMDLs are expressed in terms of number (#), cfu, or organism counts (or resulting
concentration), in accordance with 40 CFR 130.2(l).
1.00E+13 Samples Not Violating Standard

Target Line
Log. (Samples Violating Standard)
y = -2E+11Ln(x) + 4E+11
2
R = 0.9335
1.00E+12
Load (cfu/day)
1.00E+11
1.00E+10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent Flow Exceeded (%)
Figure 9. Load-Duration Curve for Kelly Creek at CW-154.
14
5.1 Critical Conditions
Critical conditions for Spears and Kelly Creeks occur when a long period of low flow is followed
by rainfall event that produces runoff. Most violations of the water quality standard for fecal
coliform occur in both creeks during medium to high flow events. During dry periods, fecal
coliform bacteria build up on the land surface and are flushed into the creeks by rainfall. The
inclusion of all flow conditions in the load-duration curve analysis insures that the critical
conditions are protected.
5.2 Existing Load
Existing loads were calculated from the 0.1 % 80 % flow exceedence intervals for Spears Creek
and 0.5 % to 80 % for Kelly Creek. That is the load was calculated from the trend line of observed
values that exceeded the water quality standard that was between and including the 0.1 or 0.5 and
80 % reoccurrence limits. Loadings from all sources are included in this figure: failing septic
systems, cattle-in-streams, and loading from runoff. The total existing load for CW-154 (Kelly
Creek) is 2.16E+11 and for CW-166 (Spears Creek) it is 6.57 E+11 cfu/day.
5.3 Margin of Safety
The margin of safety (MOS) may be explicit and/or implicit. The explicit margin of safety is 5 %
of the 400 cfu/ 100 ml or 20 counts/ 100ml. For CW-166 this is equivalent to 1.34E+10 cfu/day.
For CW-154 the MOS is 3.9E+09 cfu/day. Through the use of conservative assumptions in
developing the TMDL, such as determining the percent reduction in load required, on the highest
part of the trend line and calculating point source loads from permit limits, the margin of safety also
has an implicit component.
5.4 Total Maximum Daily Load
The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) represents the maximum load the stream may carry and
meet the water quality standard for the pollutant of interest. For this TMDL the load will be
expressed as cfu/day (colony forming units/day) and as a percent reduction for the MS4 WLA.
There is one Waste Load Allocation (WLA) for this TMDL. This WLA is the allocation for the
MS4s (Kershaw and Richland Counties). Richland County became covered under NPDES Phase I
in April of 2000. A designated part of Kershaw County will eventually be covered under a NPDES
phase II stormwater permit. The reduction percentages in this TMDL apply also to the fecal
coliform waste load attributable to those areas of the watershed which are covered or will be
covered under NPDES MS4 (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) permits. Compliance by
these municipalities with the terms of their individual MS4 permits will fulfill any obligations they
have towards implementing this TMDL
The target loading value is the load to the creek that it can receive and meet the water quality
standard. It is simply the TMDL minus the MOS. The target loading for Spears Creek requires a
15
reduction of 61 % from the current load of 6.57E+11 cfu/day for CW-166. The target loading for
Kelly Creek at CW-154 requires a reduction of 65 % from the existing load of 2.16E+10 cfu/day.
Table 6. TMDL components for Kelly and Spears Creek.
Impaired WLA-MS4 LA cfu/day MOS cfu/day TMDL Target

Station % Reduction cfu/day cfu/day
CW-154 65 % 7.47E+10 3.9E+09 7.9E+10 7.47E+10
CW-166 61 % 2.57E+11 1.3E+10 2.7E+11 2.57E+11
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION
As discussed in the Implementation Plan for Achieving Total Maximum Daily Load Reductions
From Nonpoint Sources for the State of South Carolina (SCDHEC,1998), South Carolina has
several tools available for implementing this nonpoint source TMDL. Specifically, SCDHECs
animal agriculture permitting program addresses animal operations and land application of animal
wastes. In addition, SCDHEC will work with the existing agencies in the area to provide nonpoint
source education in the Spears Creek watershed. Local sources of nonpoint source education and
assistance include Clemson Extension Service, the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS),
the Kershaw and Richland Counties Soil and Water Conservation Services, and the South Carolina
Department of Natural Resources. Clemson Extension Service offers a Farm-A-Syst package to
farmers. Farm-A-Syst allows the farmer to evaluate practices on their property and determine the
nonpoint source impact they may be having. It recommends best management practices (BMPs) to
correct nonpoint source problems on the farm. NRCS can provide cost share money to land owners
installing BMPs.
SCDHEC is empowered under the State Pollution Control Act to perform investigations of and
pursue enforcement for activities and conditions, which threaten the quality of waters of the state.
In addition, other interested parties (universities, local watershed groups, etc.) may apply for section
319 grants to install BMPs that will reduce fecal coliform loading to Kelly and Spears Creeks.
TMDL implementation projects are given highest priority for 319 funding.
In addition to the resources cited above for the implementation of this TMDL in these watersheds,
Clemson Extension has developed a Home-A-Syst handbook that can help rural homeowners
reduce sources of NPS pollution on their property. This document guides homeowners through a
self-assessment, including information on proper maintenance practices for septic tanks. SCDHEC
also employs a nonpoint source educator who can assist with distribution of these tools as well as
provide additional BMP information.
16
The iterative BMP approach as defined in the general storm water NPDES MS4 permit is expected
to provide significant implementation of this TMDL. Discovery and removal of illicit storm drain
cross connection is one important element of the storm water NPDES permit. Public nonpoint
source pollution education is another
Using existing authorities and mechanisms, these measures will be implemented in the Spears
Creek and Kelly Creek watersheds in order to bring about 61 % and 65 % reductions in fecal
coliform bacteria loading to these creeks. DHEC will continue to monitor, according to the basin
monitoring schedule, the effectiveness of implementation measures and evaluate stream water
quality as the implementation strategy progresses.
7.0 REFERENCES
Horsley & Witten, Inc. 1996. Identification and Evaluation of Nutrient and Bacterial Loadings to Maquoit
Bay, Brunswick, and Freeport, Maine. Casco Bay Estuary Project, Portland, ME
Novotny, V. and H. Olem. 1994. Water Quality Prevention, Identification, and Management of
Diffuse Pollution. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
SCDHEC. 1999. Watershed Water Quality Assessment: Catawba River Basin. Technical Report No. 011-99.
SCDHEC. 1998. Implementation Plan for Achieving Total Maximum Daily Load Reductions From
Nonpoint Sources for the State of South Carolina.
SCDHEC. 2001. Total Maximum Daily Load Development for Rocky Creek and the Catawba River at
Great Falls, SC.
Schueler, T. R. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban
BMPs. Publ. No. 87703. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC.
Schueler, T. R. 1999. Microbes and Urban Watersheds: Concentrations, Sources, and Pathways.
Watershed Protection Techniques 3(1): 554-565.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1983. Final Report of the Nationwide Urban
Runoff Program, Vol 1. Water Planning Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
DC.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991. Guidance for Water Quality-
Based Decisions: The TMDL Process. Office of Water, EPA 440/4-91-001.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2001. Protocol for Developing Pathogen
TMDLs. First Edition. Office of Water, EPA 841-R-00-002.
US Geological Survey. 1999. 1999 Water-Resources Data South Carolina Water Year 1999. United
States Geological Survey
17
APPENDIX A Fecal Coliform Data
Water Quality Data for Spears and Kelly Creeks

Fecal Coliform
Spears Kelly (cfu/100ml)
Fecal Coliform Date CW-166 CW-154
(cfu/100ml) 25-Aug-94 20 30
Date CW-166 CW-154 15-Sep-94 60 180
18-Oct-94 60 40
21-May-90 160 140 6-Dec-94 60
12-Jun-90 100 290 15-Dec-94 30
16-Jul-90 220 140 5-Jan-95 14
7-Aug-90 900 300 2-Feb-95 25
18-Sep-90 150 230 30-Mar-95 39
16-Oct-90 140 60 26-Apr-95 86
29-May-91 80 110 9-May-95 130 290
12-Jun-91 45 40 13-Jun-95 390 170
2-Jul-91 86 130 5-Jul-95 130 150
12-Aug-91 3400 1600 10-Aug-95 130 220
10-Sep-91 100 190 20-Sep-95 210 160
21-Oct-91 90 20 4-Oct-95 6400 8300
20-May-92 100 60 30-Nov-95 90
17-Jun-92 50 40 7-Dec-95 100
28-Jul-92 110 140 30-Jan-96 60
26-Aug-92 180 150 8-Feb-96 55
15-Sep-92 10 40 20-Mar-96 80
22-Oct-92 40 40 10-Apr-96 90
18-Nov-92 60 14-May-96 80 150
8-Dec-92 50 26-Jun-96 210 300
19-Jan-93 60 22-Jul-96 210 420
11-Feb-93 15 5-Aug-96 270 790
4-Mar-93 230 10-Oct-96 220 140
1-Apr-93 45 13-Nov-96 800
18-May-93 100 200 11-Dec-96 70
2-Jun-93 100 140 15-Jan-97 80
13-Jul-93 470 520 12-Feb-97 25
18-Aug-93 140 330 4-Mar-97 70
8-Sep-93 420 240 17-Apr-97 50
2-Dec-93 120 14-May-97 30 80
12-Jan-94 290 19-Jun-97 90 130
2-Feb-94 20 1-Jul-97 100 200
8-Mar-94 50 6-Aug-97 66 170
7-Apr-94 20 2-Sep-97 250 280
5-May-94 540 180 9-Oct-97 70 70
8-Jun-94 180 140 24-Nov-97 37
9-Aug-94 340 90 11-Dec-97 40
18
Fecal Coliform Fecal Coliform
(cfu/100ml) (cfu/100ml)
Date CW-166 CW-154 Date CW-166 CW-154
8-Jan-98 200 30-Oct-00 320 340
19-Feb-98 30 7-Nov-00 250
9-Mar-98 28-Dec-00 140
11-Mar-98 40 9-Jan-01 100
2-Apr-98 6-Feb-01 10
7-Apr-98 50 5-Mar-01 450
27-May-98 180 100 17-Apr-01 300
15-Jun-98 90 80 8-May-01 260
18-Jun-98 14-Jun-01 6700
16-Jul-98 760 560 2-Jul-01 2800
30-Jul-98 9-Aug-01 210
5-Aug-98 4-Sep-01 230
11-Aug-98 280 80 15-Oct-01 260
9-Sep-98 140 160 14-Nov-01 220
24-Sep-98 110 3-Dec-01 170
6-Oct-98 20 90 23-Jan-02
21-Oct-98 29-Jan-02 20 30
23-Nov-98 60 19-Feb-02
17-Dec-98 200 26-Feb-02 90 86
14-Jan-99 70 19-Mar-02 100
1-Feb-99 160 25-Mar-02 83 54
16-Mar-99 60 8-Apr-02
26-Apr-99 130 10-Apr-02 2200 2100
4-May-99 150 55 22-May-02 80 200
14-Jun-99 170 240 23-May-02 640
26-Jul-99 260 260 12-Jun-02 380 110
24-Aug-99 120 220 17-Jun-02
14-Sep-99 200 130 18-Jul-02
6-Oct-99 110 50 22-Jul-02 580 200
2-Nov-99 320 13-Aug-02
1-Dec-99 90 19-Aug-02 360 400
4-Jan-00 100 8/27/02 1100
10-Feb-00 50 3-Sep-02
20-Mar-00 2100 26-Sep-02 320 470
25-Apr-00 60 15-Oct-02 100 180
17-May-00 150 350 18-Nov-02 50 40
20-Jun-00 250 250 16-Dec-02 30 55
11-Jul-00 350 70
3-Aug-00 150 220
14-Sep-00 290 200
19
APPENDIX B DMR Data
Fecal Coliform Load calculated from DMR Data for Palmetto Utlilities -
Valhalla WWTP (SC0043494)
Permit Inactivated April 3,
2000
Flow (mgd) Fecal Coliform (cts/ Load

100ml)
Date Mean Max C Mean C Max cts/day
5/31/91 0.25 10 10 9.46E+07
7/31/91 0.26 60000 60000 5.91E+11
11/30/91 0.189 0.23 889 3800 6.36E+09
12/31/91 0.245 148.3 220 1.38E+09
7/31/92 0.235 16.4 27 1.46E+08
8/31/92 0.256 19.7 39 1.91E+08
9/30/92 0.258 15.2 23 1.48E+08
10/31/92 0.262 122.4 125 1.21E+09
11/30/92 0.267 17.9 32 1.81E+08
12/31/92 0.246 41 105 3.82E+08
1/31/93 0.255 498 1200 4.81E+09
2/28/93 0.29 165.9 > 6000 1.82E+09
3/31/93 0.249 10.7 58 1.01E+08
4/30/93 0.237 158.7 210 1.42E+09
5/31/93 0.266 5.57 60 5.61E+07
6/30/93 0.247 < 2< 2 1.87E+07
7/31/93 0.245 < 2< 2 1.85E+07
8/31/93 0.256 < 2< 2 1.94E+07
9/30/93 0.272 7.75 30 7.98E+07
10/31/93 0.245 61.6 450 5.71E+08
11/30/93 0.237 < 2< 2 1.79E+07
1/31/94 0.249 < 2< 2 1.89E+07
2/28/94 0.239 71.8 3500 6.50E+08
3/31/94 0.281 5.29 14 5.63E+07
4/30/94 0.262 4.9 12 4.86E+07
5/31/94 0.289 < 2< 2 2.19E+07
6/30/94 0.258 3.46 6 3.38E+07
7/31/94 0.253 < 2< 2 1.92E+07
8/31/94 8 16 0.00E+00
10/31/94 0.261 50.4 320 4.98E+08
11/30/94 0.254 200 360 1.92E+09
12/31/94 0.282 5.66 16 6.04E+07
1/31/95 0.247 < 2< 2 1.87E+07
2/28/95 0.253 12.8 82 1.23E+08
3/31/95 0.266 392.4 2200 3.95E+09
20
100ml)
5/31/95 0.277 21.2 32 2.22E+08
6/30/95 0.293 8 16 8.87E+07
7/31/95 < 2< 2 0.00E+00
8/31/95 0.287 7.48 14 8.13E+07
9/30/95 0.276 243.3 740 2.54E+09
10/31/95 0.287 33.5 56 3.64E+08
11/30/95 0.261 179.5 260 1.77E+09
12/31/95 0.258 6.63 22 6.48E+07
1/31/96 0.263 < 2< 2 1.99E+07
2/29/96 0.258 < 2< 2 1.95E+07
3/31/96 0.259 113.4 270 1.11E+09
4/30/96 0.273 353 20000 3.65E+09
5/31/96 0.297 98.1 370 1.10E+09
6/30/96 0.296 91.7 200 1.03E+09
7/31/96 0.326 4 8 4.94E+07
8/31/96 0.317 2 2 2.40E+07
9/30/96 0.308 5.29 14 6.17E+07
10/31/96 0.279 7.21 26 7.61E+07
11/30/96 0.266 121.3 230 1.22E+09
12/31/96 0.3 30.7 94 3.49E+08
1/31/97 0.302 59.3 88 6.78E+08
2/28/97 0.285 47.3 56 5.10E+08
3/31/97 0.301 2 2 2.28E+07
4/30/97 0.295 < 2< 2 2.23E+07
5/31/97 0.295 15.5 120 1.73E+08
6/30/97 0.28 6.93 24 7.35E+07
7/31/97 0.259 0.267 2.83 4 2.77E+07
8/31/97 0.256 0.27 16.1 130 1.56E+08
9/30/97 0.246 0.253 4.47 5 4.16E+07
10/31/97 0.232 0.282 14.4 52 1.26E+08
11/30/97 0.221 0.235 8.94 20 7.48E+07
12/31/97 0.22 0.231 2 2 1.67E+07
1/31/98 0.227 0.24 < 2< 2 1.72E+07
2/28/98 0.216 0.227 < 2< 2 1.64E+07
3/31/98 0.22 0.23 4 8 3.33E+07
4/30/98 0.223 0.226 2 2 1.69E+07
5/31/98 0.227 0.244 26 349 2.23E+08
6/30/98 0.244 0.26 13.3 88 1.23E+08
7/31/98 0.25 0.253 2.8 4 2.65E+07
8/31/98 0.265 0.296 20 200 2.01E+08
9/30/98 0.234 0.256 38 254 3.37E+08
10/31/98 0.227 0.239 100 318 8.59E+08
21

100ml)
11/30/98 0.219 0.225 21 74 1.74E+08
12/31/98 0.218 0.25 2 2 1.65E+07
1/31/99 0.213 0.224 14.4 16 1.16E+08
2/28/99 0.207 0.234 15 28 1.18E+08
3/31/99 0.214 0.235 106 963 8.59E+08
5/31/99 0.221 0.224 7 10 5.86E+07
6/30/99 0.223 0.262 74 82 6.25E+08
7/31/99 0.244 0.265 20.7 60 1.91E+08
8/31/99 0.24 0.259 434 450 3.94E+09
22
APPENDIX C Calculation of Existing and TMDL Loads
Spears Creek at CW-166:
Calculation of Existing Load
From equation of Trend Line: y = 9E+12 e ^ -4.2373 x
Percentile Load
0.10 5.89E+12
0.15 4.77E+12
0.10 5.89E+12
0.20 3.86E+12
0.25 3.12E+12
0.30 2.52E+12
0.35 2.04E+12
0.40 1.65E+12
0.45 1.34E+12
0.50 1.08E+12
0.55 8.75E+11
0.60 7.08E+11
0.65 5.73E+11
0.70 4.64E+11
0.75 3.75E+11
0.80 3.03E+11
0.85 2.45E+11
0.90 1.99E+11
Mean Load 1.99E+12 cfu/day
23
Calculation of TMDL Load
Target Conc 380 cfu/100ml
From Target Line
% Exceeded Load (cfu/day) Flow (cfs)
0.10 5.53E+11 59.50

0.15 4.59E+11 49.42
0.20 4.03E+11 43.36
0.25 3.66E+11 39.33
0.30 3.38E+11 36.31
0.35 3.09E+11 33.28
0.40 2.91E+11 31.26
0.45 2.63E+11 28.24
0.50 2.44E+11 26.22
0.55 2.25E+11 24.20
0.60 2.06E+11 22.19
0.65 1.88E+11 20.17
0.70 1.69E+11 18.15
0.75 1.50E+11 16.14
0.80 1.41E+11 15.13
0.85 1.22E+11 13.11
0.90 1.09E+11 11.09
Mean Load 2.67E+11
Data used to calculate Load-Duration curve:
Samples Not Violating Standard
Date FC Flow Rank Percen- Load
(cfu/100ml) tile (cfu/day)
15-Sep-93 120 6.4 214 97.8% 1.88E+10

28-Oct-93 300 11.1 1024 89.3% 8.15E+10
18-Jul-94 350 16.1 2139 77.6% 1.38E+11
6-Oct-94 390 16.1 2139 77.6% 1.54E+11
14-Oct-94 300 64.5 8697 8.8% 4.73E+11
6-Oct-95 80 72.6 8863 7.0% 1.42E+11
28-Jun-96 320 17.1 2403 74.8% 1.34E+11
19-Sep-96 330 14.1 1497 84.3% 1.14E+11
29-Oct-96 180 15.1 1808 81.0% 6.65E+10
7-Jul-97 400 17.1 2403 74.8% 1.67E+11
17-Sep-98 280 12.1 1024 89.3% 8.29E+10
Mean Load of Samples Not Violating Standard: 1.43E+11
24
Date FC Flow Rank Percen- Load

(cfu/100ml) tile (cfu/day)
30-May-90 1000 23.2 4130 56.7% 5.68E+11

19-Jun-90 31000 15.1 1808 81.0% 1.15E+13
23-Jul-90 7100 12.1 1024 89.3% 2.10E+12
9-Aug-90 20000 9.2 553 94.2% 4.50E+12
14-Sep-90 440 8.6 461 95.2% 9.26E+10
11-Oct-90 2200 11.1 1024 89.3% 5.97E+11
9-May-91 5700 40.3 7176 24.7% 5.62E+12
20-Jun-91 2000 30.3 5710 40.1% 1.48E+12
11-Jul-91 3300 17.1 2403 74.8% 1.38E+12
8-Aug-91 1000 13.1 1273 86.6% 3.21E+11
25-Sep-91 190000 20.2 3427 64.0% 9.39E+13
16-Oct-91 4900 13.1 1273 86.6% 1.57E+12
17-May-93 620 33.3 6232 34.6% 5.05E+11
16-Jun-93 3600 24.2 4130 56.7% 2.13E+12
20-Jul-93 720 20.2 3427 64.0% 3.56E+11
4-Aug-93 820 10.1 832 91.3% 2.03E+11
26-May-94 460 15.1 1808 81.0% 1.70E+11
16-Jun-94 2300 21.2 3670 61.5% 1.19E+12
24-Aug-94 500 27.2 4844 49.2% 3.33E+11
16-May-95 880 25.2 4370 54.2% 5.43E+11
2-Jun-95 1200 23.2 4130 56.7% 6.81E+11
27-Jul-95 44000 7.6 343 96.4% 8.18E+12
3-Aug-95 1500 6.4 214 97.8% 2.35E+11
6-Sep-95 1300 34.3 6449 32.3% 1.09E+12
31-May-96 420 35.3 6623 30.5% 3.63E+11
26-Jul-96 5700 41.3 7305 23.4% 5.76E+12
9-Aug-96 700 16.1 2139 77.6% 2.76E+11
23-May-97 450 24.2 4130 56.7% 2.66E+11
6-Jun-97 600 24.2 4130 56.7% 3.55E+11
7-Aug-97 1000 35.3 6623 30.5% 8.64E+11
26-Sep-97 2800 42.4 7554 20.8% 2.90E+12
16-Oct-97 6000 13.1 1273 86.6% 1.92E+12
6-May-98 3100 55.5 8441 11.4% 4.21E+12
16-Jun-98 4200 28.2 5094 46.6% 2.90E+12
21-Jul-98 500 25.2 4370 54.2% 3.08E+11
14-Aug-98 8600 15.1 1808 81.0% 3.18E+12
26-Oct-98 620 12.1 1024 89.3% 1.84E+11
Mean Load of Samples Violating Standard: 4.40E+12
25
Kelly Creek at CW-154:
Calculation of Existing Load for Kelly Creek at CW-154
Trend Line:
Exponential
Equation: y = 5E+10 x X -1.013
x y
% Ex- Load
ceedence
0.05 1.04E+12
0.10 5.15E+11
0.15 3.42E+11
0.20 2.55E+11
0.25 2.04E+11
0.30 1.69E+11
0.35 1.45E+11
0.40 1.26E+11
0.45 1.12E+11
0.50 1.01E+11
0.55 9.16E+10
0.60 8.39E+10
0.65 7.74E+10
0.70 7.18E+10
0.75 6.69E+10
0.80 6.27E+10
Mean: 2.16E+11
Existing Load: 2.16E+11 cfu/day
26
Calculation of TMDL Load
% Exceed- TMDL Load

ed
MOS: 0.05 %
10% 1.44E+11
15% 1.15E+11
20% 1.01E+11
25% 9.36E+10
30% 8.64E+10
35% 8.64E+10
40% 7.92E+10
45% 7.20E+10
50% 6.98E+10
55% 6.55E+10
60% 6.26E+10
65% 5.90E+10
70% 5.54E+10
75% 5.11E+10
80% 4.75E+10
85% 4.32E+10
90% 3.82E+10
7.47E+10 cfu/day
Date FC (cfu/ Flow Load Rank Exceed

100ml) ence
7-Aug-90 900 21.7 4.78E+11 12499 4.3%

12-Aug-91 3400 14.7 1.22E+12 11589 11.2%
13-Jul-93 470 4.1 4.71E+10 1204 90.8%
8-Sep-93 420 10.1 1.04E+11 9966 23.7%
5-May-94 540 10.1 1.33E+11 9966 23.7%
4-Oct-95 6400 32.5 5.09E+12 12850 1.6%
13-Nov-96 800 9.3 1.82E+11 9292 28.8%
16-Jul-98 760 5.2 9.67E+10 2829 78.3%
20-Mar-00 2100 13.2 6.78E+11 11392 12.8%
10-Apr-02 2200 4.7 2.53E+11 2008 84.6%
22-Jul-02 580 1.2 1.70E+10 9 99.9%
27
Samples Not Violating Standard

100ml) ence
21-May-90 160 6.4 2.51E+10 4646 64.40%

12-Jun-90 100 6.2 1.52E+10 4338 66.80%
16-Jul-90 220 5.7 3.07E+10 3497 73.20%
18-Sep-90 150 3.9 1.43E+10 1037 92.10%
16-Oct-90 140 5.6 1.92E+10 3390 74.00%
29-May-91 80 4.7 9.20E+09 2008 84.60%
12-Jun-91 45 3.6 3.96E+09 712 94.50%
2-Jul-91 86 24 5.05E+10 12603 3.50%
10-Sep-91 100 5.6 1.37E+10 3390 74.00%
21-Oct-91 90 6.8 1.50E+10 5357 59.00%
20-May-92 100 5.3 1.30E+10 2944 77.50%
17-Jun-92 50 16.3 1.99E+10 12025 7.90%
28-Jul-92 110 6.2 1.67E+10 4338 66.80%
26-Aug-92 180 8 3.30E+10 6494 50.30%
15-Sep-92 10 6.7 1.64E+09 5216 60.10%
22-Oct-92 40 6.2 6.07E+09 4338 66.80%
18-Nov-92 60 6.8 9.98E+09 5357 59.00%
8-Dec-92 50 8.5 1.04E+10 7469 42.80%
19-Jan-93 60 10.8 1.59E+10 9966 23.70%
11-Feb-93 15 10.1 3.71E+09 9966 23.70%
4-Mar-93 230 35.6 2.00E+11 12897 1.20%
1-Apr-93 45 11.6 1.28E+10 10477 19.80%
18-May-93 100 6.7 1.64E+10 5216 60.10%
2-Jun-93 100 7.6 1.86E+10 6734 48.40%
18-Aug-93 140 24.8 8.49E+10 12665 3.00%
2-Dec-93 120 6.1 1.79E+10 4060 68.90%
12-Jan-94 290 16.3 1.16E+11 12025 7.90%
2-Feb-94 20 7.7 3.77E+09 6850 47.50%
8-Mar-94 50 10.8 1.32E+10 9966 23.70%
7-Apr-94 20 7.7 3.77E+09 6850 47.50%
8-Jun-94 180 4.3 1.89E+10 1477 88.70%
9-Aug-94 340 4 3.33E+10 1117 91.40%
25-Aug-94 20 4.8 2.35E+09 2109 83.80%
15-Sep-94 60 5.8 8.51E+09 3603 72.40%
18-Oct-94 60 7.4 1.09E+10 6395 51.00%
6-Dec-94 60 7.3 1.07E+10 6269 52.00%
15-Dec-94 30 6.7 4.92E+09 5216 60.10%
5-Jan-95 14 6.7 2.29E+09 5216 60.10%
2-Feb-95 25 11.6 7.10E+09 10477 19.80%
30-Mar-95 39 8.5 8.11E+09 7469 42.80%
26-Apr-95 86 7 1.47E+10 5785 55.70%
28
100ml) ence
9-May-95 130 6.6 2.10E+10 5093 61.00%

13-Jun-95 390 23.2 2.21E+11 12546 3.90%
5-Jul-95 130 15.5 4.93E+10 11919 8.70%
10-Aug-95 130 7 2.23E+10 5785 55.70%
20-Sep-95 210 5.5 2.83E+10 3294 74.80%
30-Nov-95 90 9.3 2.05E+10 9292 28.80%
7-Dec-95 100 13.9 3.40E+10 11392 12.80%
30-Jan-96 60 10.1 1.48E+10 9966 23.70%
8-Feb-96 55 11.6 1.56E+10 10477 19.80%
20-Mar-96 80 13.2 2.58E+10 11392 12.80%
10-Apr-96 90 8.5 1.87E+10 7469 42.80%
14-May-96 80 6.7 1.31E+10 5216 60.10%
26-Jun-96 210 4.6 2.36E+10 1895 85.50%
22-Jul-96 210 5 2.57E+10 2477 81.00%
5-Aug-96 270 8.5 5.61E+10 7469 42.80%
10-Oct-96 220 13.9 7.48E+10 11392 12.80%
11-Dec-96 70 10.1 1.73E+10 9966 23.70%
15-Jan-97 80 9.3 1.82E+10 9292 28.80%
12-Feb-97 25 8.5 5.20E+09 7469 42.80%
4-Mar-97 70 9.3 1.59E+10 9292 28.80%
17-Apr-97 50 6.5 7.95E+09 4755 63.60%
14-May-97 30 6.3 4.62E+09 4491 65.60%
19-Jun-97 90 7.5 1.65E+10 6494 50.30%
1-Jul-97 100 5.7 1.39E+10 3497 73.20%
6-Aug-97 66 5.8 9.37E+09 3603 72.40%
2-Sep-97 250 5 3.06E+10 2477 81.00%
9-Oct-97 70 4.1 7.02E+09 1204 90.80%
24-Nov-97 37 7.1 6.43E+09 5921 54.70%
11-Dec-97 40 7.3 7.14E+09 6269 52.00%
8-Jan-98 200 18.6 9.10E+10 12273 6.00%
19-Feb-98 30 21.7 1.59E+10 12499 4.30%
11-Mar-98 40 17.8 1.74E+10 12122 7.20%
7-Apr-98 50 12.4 1.52E+10 11171 14.40%
27-May-98 180 8.5 3.74E+10 7469 42.80%
15-Jun-98 90 6.4 1.41E+10 4646 64.40%
11-Aug-98 280 11.6 7.95E+10 10477 19.80%
9-Sep-98 140 6.3 2.16E+10 4491 65.60%
6-Oct-98 20 5.3 2.59E+09 2944 77.50%
23-Nov-98 60 5.4 7.93E+09 3062 76.50%
17-Dec-98 200 6.7 3.28E+10 5216 60.10%
14-Jan-99 70 6.3 1.08E+10 4491 65.60%
1-Feb-99 160 10.8 4.23E+10 9966 23.70%
16-Mar-99 60 9.3 1.37E+10 9292 28.80%
26-Apr-99 130 4.7 1.49E+10 2008 84.60%
29

100ml) ence
4-May-99 150 5.3 1.95E+10 2944 77.50%

14-Jun-99 170 3 1.25E+10 312 97.60%
26-Jul-99 260 6.4 4.07E+10 4646 64.40%
24-Aug-99 120 3 8.81E+09 312 97.60%
14-Sep-99 200 3.7 1.81E+10 803 93.90%
6-Oct-99 110 9.3 2.50E+10 9292 28.80%
2-Nov-99 320 13.9 1.09E+11 11392 12.80%
1-Dec-99 90 7.7 1.70E+10 6850 47.50%
4-Jan-00 100 7.7 1.88E+10 6850 47.50%
10-Feb-00 50 10.8 1.32E+10 9966 23.70%
25-Apr-00 60 7.3 1.07E+10 6269 52.00%
17-May-00 150 3.8 1.39E+10 942 92.80%
20-Jun-00 250 5 3.06E+10 2477 81.00%
11-Jul-00 350 3.2 2.74E+10 412 96.80%
3-Aug-00 150 13.9 5.10E+10 11392 12.80%
14-Sep-00 290 4.1 2.91E+10 1204 90.80%
30-Oct-00 320 4.4 3.44E+10 1583 87.90%
7-Nov-00 250 4.9 3.00E+10 2348 82.00%
28-Dec-00 140 6.5 2.23E+10 4755 63.60%
29-Jan-02 20 5.9 2.89E+09 3846 70.50%
26-Feb-02 90 4.2 9.25E+09 1407 89.20%
25-Mar-02 83 4.1 8.33E+09 1204 90.80%
22-May-02 80 2.7 5.28E+09 213 98.40%
12-Jun-02 380 1.5 1.39E+10 30 99.80%
19-Aug-02 360 1.9 1.67E+10 68 99.50%
26-Sep-02 320 2.6 2.04E+10 185 98.60%
15-Oct-02 100 4.9 1.20E+10 2348 82.00%
18-Nov-02 50 13.9 1.70E+10 11392 12.80%
16-Dec-02 30 6.5 4.77E+09 4755 63.60%
30
APPENDIX D Selected Figures and Tables
APPENDIX D
10000
1000
FC (cfu/ 100ml)
y = 1394.2x + 136.94
2
R = 0.7091
100
10
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Rainfall (in)
Figure D-1 Rainfall at Clemson Sandhills Station and fecal coliform concen-
trations in Spears Creek at CW-155, which is not impaired.
31
Table D-1. Flat Creek Watershed, NC Land Uses (USGS Gauging
Station #02102908).
Land Use Class Drainage Percentage

Area
(hectares)
Urban
3.6 0.2%
Transitional
568.1 28.0%
Forest
1308.4 64.6%
Wetlands 146.4 7.2%
Totals 2027 100.0%
Table D-2. Dean Swamp Creek Watershed, SC Land Uses (USGS Gauging
Station #02172640).
Land Use Class Area Percentage

(hectares)
Water 33.1 0.4%

Built-up 90.7 1.1%
Transitional 758.7 9.6%
Forest 4440.7 55.9%
Pasture 170.7 2.1%
Agriculture 2179.8 27.4%
Wetlands 269.0 3.4%
Total 7942.8 100.0%
32
APPENDIX E Public Notification
PUBLIC NOTICE
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4

61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303-8960
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY
TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS (TMDLS)
FOR WATER AND POLLUTANTS IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Section 303(d)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1313(d)(1)(C),

and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys implementing regulation, 40 CFR
130.7(c)(1), require the establishment of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for
waters identified by states as not meeting water quality standards under authority of
303(d)(1)(A) of the CWA. These TMDLs are to be established levels necessary to
implement applicable water quality standards with seasonal variations and a margin of
safety, accounting for lack of knowledge concerning the relationship between pollutant
loading and water quality.
The waterbody impairments on South Carolinas 303(d) list that will be addressed
by the TMDLs are listed below. These impaired waterbodies are located in the Wateree
Basin in Kershaw and Richland Counties.
Waterbody Name Station ID 303(d) List Pollutants

Spears Creek CW-166 Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Kelly Creek CW-154 Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Persons wishing to comment on the proposed TMDLs or to offer new data or

information regarding the proposed TMDLs are invited to submit the same in writing no
later than May 14, 2004 to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Water
Management Division, 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960,
ATTENTION: Ms. Sibyl Cole, Standards, Monitoring, and TMDL Branch.
33
A copy of the proposed TMDLs can be obtained through the Internet or by
contacting Ms. Cole at (404) 562-9437 or via electronic mail at cole.sibyl@epa.gov.
The URL address for the proposed TMDLs is:
http://www.epa.gov/region4/water/tmdl/tennessee/index.htm#sc.
The proposed TMDLs and supporting documents, including technical information, data,
and analyses, may be reviewed at 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia, between the
hours of 8 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. Persons wishing to review this
information should contact Ms. Cole to schedule a time for that review.
http://www.epa.gov/region
/s/
James D. Giattina, Director Date
Region 4
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
No Comments Received
34

Epac 3-4-15 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Epac 3-4-15 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AGENDA

Serving Local Governments in South Carolinas Midlands

Plan Amendment Submission Requirements February 27, 2015

1. Detailed description and scope of the project.

More detailed information can be found on pages 2-6 of the PER.

2. Preliminary engineering data regarding facility design and cost.

No estimated project cost information has been provided by the applicant.

3. Financing strategy and/or feasibility analysis.

4. Potential fiscal or engineering impact on existing facilities.

5. Associated environmental risks or impacts.

6. Project justification or need.

7. Summary examination of alternative options, where appropriate

8. Timing and phasing of project or proposal.

Preliminary Engineering ReportSubmitted to CMCOG on February 25, 2015

PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT

1300 2nd Ave, Suite 211

Section 2 Existing Treatment Facility

Section 3 Proposed Facility Upgrade

Section 4 Proposed Construction

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.3 SERVICE AREA AND DESIGN FLOWS

2.3 EXTENDED AERATION OXIDATION SYSTEM

2.5 EFFLUENT PUMPING

2.6 SLUDGE HANDLING

3.2 INFLUENT PUMP STATION

3.4 INTERMITTENT CYCLE EXTENDED AERARATION SYSTEM (ICEAS)

3.5 DEEP BED DE-NITRIFICATION FILTERS

3.6 ULTAVIOLET LIGHT (UV) DISINFECTION SYSTEMS

3.7 EFFLUENT PUMP STATION

3.8 SLUDGE HANDLING

CYCLE AIROFF AIRON SETTLE DECANT TOTAL

ICEASEQUIPMENT MotorHP No.Req.

ICEASPOWERREQUIREMENTS (AtAverageAerationDepth) Kwh/Day

9333 N. 49th Street Brown Deer, WI 53223 USA

Standard Oxygen Correction Factor Parameters

SHT Aeration Sanitaire, A Xylem Brand Page 2 of 5

SHT Aeration Sanitaire, A Xylem Brand Page 3 of 5

Aeration System Design

SHT Aeration Sanitaire, A Xylem Brand Page 4 of 5

SHT Aeration Sanitaire, A Xylem Brand Page 5 of 5

ABJ FILE # 25360-14a

FEBRUARY 16, 2015

Theory of the ICEAS Process

ICEAS Basin Layout

Spears Creek, SC WWTP 2 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a

Spears Creek, SC WWTP 3 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a

Air Control Valves

Waste Sludge Pump

ICEAS Control System:

Spears Creek, SC WWTP 4 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a

Normal Cycle: 4.8 Hours

Storm Cycle: 3.6 Hours

Spears Creek, SC WWTP 5 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a

Biological Effluent Quality

Pre-react Zone Biological Selector

Hydraulic and Organic Loading

Equipment Design Advantages

Reduced capital cost when designed an ICEAS continuous flow process

Spears Creek, SC WWTP 6 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a

Reduced Operating Cost

Reduced Installation Cost

Reduced Maintenance Cost

Spears Creek, SC WWTP 7 Sanitaire Project No. 25360-14a