Avon Feasibility Study

LOCALIZED SEWER DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY TOWN OF AVON AVON IDUSTRIAL PARK AVON, MA PREPARED FOR:

TOWN OF AVON 65 EAST MAIN STREET AVON, MA Coler & Colantonio, Inc. Project #27-109

MARCH 29, 2013

Prepared By: Coler & Colantonio, Inc. – a CHA Company 101 Accord Park Drive Norwell, MA 02061 p (781) 982-5400 f (781) 982-5490

TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION 1. BACKGROUND 1.1

INTRODUCTION 1.1.1 PROJECT SUMMARY 1.1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1.3 BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND DEFINITION OF STUDY AREA 1.1.4 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT – COLLECTION & CONVEYANCE SYSTEM 1.1.5 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT – WASTEWATER FACILITY 1.1.6 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT – WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AREA

2. DESIGN OPTIONS 2.1

SANITARY COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE SYSTEM 2.1.1 CONVENTIONAL GRAVITY COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE 2.1.2 PRESSURE COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE

2.2

WWTP OPTIONS 2.2.1 ROTATING BIOLOGICAL CONTACTOR (RBC) 2.2.2 MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR (MBR) 2.2.3 SUBMERGED ATTACHED GROWTH BIOREACTOR (SAGB) (AMPHIDROME® SYSTEM)

2.3 2.4

SLUDGE MANAGEMENT DISPOSAL SYSTEMS 2.4.1 DRIP DISPERSAL 2.4.2 OPEN SAND BED 2.4.3 FIELDS/BEDS 2.4.4 TRENCHES 2.4.5 CHAMBERS

3. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS 3.1 COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE SYSTEM 3.2 WWTP 3.3 DISPOSAL SYSTEM 4. PERMITTING APPROACH 4.1 4.2

4.3

INTRODUCTION DUE DILIGENCE PHASE 4.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY/RESOURCE AREA DELINEATION 4.2.2 SOIL TESTING 4.2.3 REFINEMENT OF WWTP CAPACITY. TREATMENT TYPE, AND PHASING APPROACH 4.2.4 PRELIMINARY SEWER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN DESIGN MASSACHUSETTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (MEPA)

SEWER COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE SYSTEM AND WWTF DESIGN AND PERMITTING 4.4.1 HYDROGEOLOGIC REPORT – DEP BRP WP-83 4.4.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN 4.4.2.1 DESIGN PLANS 4.4.2.2 ENGINEERING REPORT 4.4.3 GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT APPLICATION – DEP BRP WP-79 4.4.4 ADDITIONAL PERMITTING 4.4.4.1 SITE ASSIGNMENT 4.4.4.2 DETERMINATION OF NEED 4.4.4.3 SEWER PERMITTING 4.5 SPECIAL PERMIT 4.6 ZONING VARIANCE/RE-ZONING 4.7 NOTICE OF INTENT 4.8 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 4.9 CONSTRUCTION RELATED PERMITS 4.9.1 NOTICE OF INTENT NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT (ENOI) 4.9.2 STREET OPENING 4.9.3 BUILDING PERMITS

4.4

5. ANTICIPATED PROJECT TASK TIMELINES 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

INTRODUCTION DUE DILIGENCE PRELIMINARY DESIGN INITIAL PERMITTING CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PREPARATION BIDDING & CONSTRUCTION

6. BUDGETARY PROJECT COSTS 6.1

ANTICIPATED PROJECT COSTS 6.1.1 COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE SYSTEM 6.1.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT 6.1.3 WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AREAS/SOILS ABSORPTION SYSTEM 6.1.4 DESIGN AND PERMITTING COSTS 6.1.5 WASTEWATER TREATMENT ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS

7. APPENDIX A. B. C. D. E. F.

FIGURES CONCEPTUAL PLANS WASTEWATER TREATMENT SCHEMATICS REGULATORY FORMS SOIL TESTING RESULTS WATER USAGE CALCULATIONS

SECTION 1 BACKGROUND

1.1

INTRODUCTION

1.1.1

PROJECT SUMMARY

This Localized Sewer District Feasibility Study is being conducted on behalf of the Town of Avon (Town) to explore the feasibility of creating a localized sewer district to serve the Avon Industrial Park located on Bodwell Street and the surrounding area. The purpose of the localized sewer district is to allow for future expansion or change in use of the parcels within the district; such that their use or expansion will not be limited by the capacity of on‐site sanitary systems. The localized sewer district would create a sewer conveyance system servicing all existing buildings and parcels in the target area, eliminating the need for individual septic systems. The wastewater would be conveyed to a wastewater treatment facility located on town owned land, and finally to a wastewater disposal area. The conveyance system, treatment facility and disposal system would be designed to accommodate future expansion of the Avon Industrial Park. Based on our discussions with the Town, it is our understanding that the existing on‐site wastewater disposal systems have limited the potential for growth and redevelopment within the Avon Industrial Park, and in turn, the Town’s tax base.

1.1.2

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Coler & Colantonio, Inc. – a CHA company has prepared this localized Sewer District Feasibility Study on behalf of the Town of Avon to serve the Avon Industrial Park. Avon Industrial Park currently is comprised of a mixture of retail, office, and industrial buildings on Bodwell Street and various surrounding side streets. A detailed locus is provided in the attached figures. Each building, as it exists now, has its own individual sanitary disposal system.

In preparation of this feasibility study, existing conditions were researched, initial soil testing was conducted, and a conceptual layout plan was prepared. The conceptual layout plan outlines a proposed sewer conveyance system, a proposed wastewater treatment facility and associated wastewater disposal area. The proposed conveyance system is within both private and public right‐of‐ways and the wastewater treatment facility and associated disposal area are located on town owned land located at 0 Rear Page Street (assessors map C7 parcels 2‐5 and 3‐27). The limiting factor associated with the wastewater treatment plant for the District, was determined to most likely be the wastewater disposal area. This is a result of available land outside of the flood plain. As such, the wastewater treatment facility for the district was sized based on the amount of area available for the SAS, as well as potential wastewater flows for the future redevelopment of the Avon Industrial Park.

This study also addresses anticipated permitting and design requirements to further the project.

Estimated timelines and costs, based on our experience with similar projects, have been included to provide an initial analysis to the Town of possible schedules and costs, should the project move forward.

1.1.3

BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND DEFINITION OF STUDY AREA

Coler & Colantonio, Inc. – a CHA company received from the Town, property cards and water records for the properties proposed to be included in the study area. A summary of this information is attached.

This information was utilized to define the area of the Localized Sewer District. The general area of this study encompasses the Avon Industrial Park located on Bodwell Street, all connecting side streets, and portions of Page Street (see attachments for figures defining the study area). For the purpose of this study, residential connections and associated design flows have been excluded based on discussion with the Town. Additionally, it should be noted that easements will be necessary for portions of the sewer collection / conveyance system within private right‐of‐way areas; land taking and associated permitting is not addressed in this study.

As part of the background research, and through discussions with the Town, it was determined that wastewater flows would be directed towards a number of Town owned properties in proximity to one another, located in the area of Page Street. These properties were determined to be the most suitable location for providing the area necessary to accommodate wastewater treatment and disposal due to their size and proximity to one another.

Preliminary research was conducted on the disposal area, such as NRCS soil mapping, FEMA flood mapping, MassGIS wetland mapping, and other environmental and soil constraints. A Site Plan showing the environmental and soil constraints, mapped on these properties is included (see attachments).

Based on this preliminary research, it appears that a significant portion of the area falls within a Zone A FEMA flood zone designation. A Zone A designation is for areas with a 1% annual chance of flooding.

According to MassGIS wetland database, there are also large areas of bordering vegetated wetlands within the Town owned parcels.

A preliminary location for the wastewater system was chosen that has the least impact to the environmentally regulated areas. This includes both the location for the treatment plant building as well as the leaching areas. Since there appears to be enough property located outside of the environmentally regulated areas to site the wastewater system, it is our recommendation to remain outside of all regulated areas, to the extent practicable.

It should be noted that the primary environmental restraints are bordering vegetated wetlands and 100‐ year flood plain as noted above. WWTP regulations specify that treatment facilities shall be located outside the 100‐year flood level. Wetland crossings or filling of bordering vegetated wetlands may be required as part of the project. It is possible to permit this work, as well as filling flood plain; however this leads to additional permitting requirements, timelines and costs. The Town would have to provide replication of bordering vegetated wetlands and compensatory flood storage, as applicable. Since there appears to be enough property located outside of the environmentally regulated areas to site the wastewater system, it is our recommendation to remain outside of all regulated areas, to the extent practicable. Permitting requirements addressed later in this study, are based on limited wetland impacts and no work within the 100‐year flood plain.

The wastewater design flow is used to determine whether the project is subject to the requirements of the State Environmental Code (Title 5) – 310 CMR 15.000 or the Groundwater Discharge Permit Program – 314 CMR 5.00. If the calculated flows are less than 10,000 GPD, the system can be designed in

accordance with Title 5. If the flows are greater than 10,000 GPD, then the requirements of the groundwater discharge permit program govern. When a project is subject to the requirements of the groundwater discharge permit program, there are three different methods that may be used to evaluate wastewater flows for designing treatment unit processes.

The standard method for calculating the design flow is to utilize Title 5 Sewage Flow Design flows set forth at 310 CMR 15.203(2)‐15.203(5). Using this method, office buildings specify a design flow of 75 GPD per 1,000 square feet, while retail uses specify a design flow of 50 GPD per 1,000 square feet, and Industrial / Warehouse Facilities specify a design flow of 15 GPD per employee. Another way to evaluate wastewater flows for designing treatment unit processes is to evaluate the actual metered flows. With this method, the design of the wastewater treatment plant and disposal area shall be based on 200 percent of the average daily meter readings. The third method for calculating flow is to use a Per Capita flow; however with this approach the per capita day flow is typically associated with mixed uses and residential uses while flow rates for commercial and industrial uses are typically based on water use. Since the study area excludes residential parcels, the third flow calculation method would be consistent with actual water use (method two), and therefore has not been separately evaluated in this study.

The total water use for the proposed area based on the records provided is approximately 38,500 gallons per day (GPD). The total existing square footage of all of the buildings within the study area is approximately 3,263,000 SF. Utilizing 200% of the actual flow rates, the existing design daily flow for the study area is 77,000 GPD (38,500 GPD x 2). The majority of these existing facilities are warehouse / industrial uses, which have low water usage. It is our understanding that to help facilitate redevelopment and growth, these buildings may be converted to office space as redevelopment continues. The design flow for an office use of the existing space is approximately 245,000 GPD (3,263,000 SF x 75 GPD/1000 SF). Because the purpose of the localized sewer district is to facilitate the redevelopment and expansion of the Industrial Park, the Title 5 flows should be used to most accurately reflect the wastewater needs in the future. Based on discussions with the Town, we understand the goal is to provide as much capacity as possible with the available land and environmental constraints.

Therefore, for the purpose of this study, the design flow of 245,000 GPD was utilized for the wastewater treatment unit processes. This provides for all of the existing facilities (square footage) to be converted to office uses.

This study does not address potential wastewater needs associated with demolition of existing single and two‐story facilities and replacement with multi‐story office buildings. As previously mentioned, the soil absorption system area is anticipated to be the limiting factor for system capacity, and preliminary investigations indicate there is likely not significant capacity beyond that of the 245,000 GPD capacity utilized in this study.

1.1.4

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT – COLLECTION & CONVEYANCE SYSTEM

Utilizing the information gathered as part of the background research, a conceptual layout of the potential collection system was prepared (see attachments). Existing topographic information gathered from MassGIS (10’ contours) was utilized to depict existing topographic conditions of the existing area.

These contours shall be considered approximate, but provide an overall view of the existing contours.

A sewer conveyance system consisting of both gravity sewer mains and pressure force mains will be necessary based on the existing contours within the study area. For the purpose of this study, it has been assumed that individual property owners will be responsible for connecting to the conveyance system; however, it should be noted that a mix of gravity and pressure connections are anticipated to be required for the building connections. The conveyance system was then directed towards the proposed WWTP and disposal area properties. One of the Town‐owned properties was selected to house a potential wastewater treatment facility. This parcel was selected because of its proximity to the recommended disposal leaching area property and the fact that it is outside of jurisdictional resource areas. From this facility, the wastewater is conveyed towards disposal leaching areas on an adjacent Town owned parcel. The soil absorption system areas depicted have been sized to be capable of treating the target wastewater flows based on preliminary soil testing results.

1.1.5

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT – WASTEWATER FACILITY

A Town owned property located at Town Assessor’s Map ID C7/2/5 was selected as a possible location for the facility, based on its location outside of all environmentally regulated areas, and its proximity to the property selected for the disposal area. Based on our past experience with similar projects, this parcel is anticipated to be of adequate size to support the facility; however adjacent parcels are also controlled by the Town and could be utilized as needed to comply with dimensional requirements of the zoning code. A description of the various types of facilities and treatment processes can be found within Section 2 of this feasibility study.

1.1.6

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT – WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AREA

A Town owned property located at Town Assessor’s Map ID C7/3/27 was selected as a possible location for the disposal area, based on the large amount of area it provided outside of all environmentally regulated areas. A conceptual layout of the wastewater disposal area is included (see attachments).

After defining the most suitable area to support the wastewater disposal system, Coler & Colantonio, Inc. – a CHA company in conjunction with the Town, performed a day of soil testing on site. Two main areas had been identified for soil testing in order to better understand the site’s consistency with published information as well as the site’s suitability for the support of the wastewater disposal system.

Only one of these areas was accessible at the time of soil testing due to the available equipment and property access limitations.

Four test pits and one percolation test were conducted on the proposed disposal area. The soils were found to be primarily loamy sands containing lots of boulders. This is consistent with the published soil

survey information (422B ‐ Canton fine sandy loam, extremely stony). The 4 test pits were dug to a depth of approximately 6 feet with no signs of groundwater. Due to the available equipment, and site conditions, the test pits were not able to be dug any deeper. A groundwater well was located on‐site, and therefore used to measure groundwater. Groundwater was measured to be approximately 10.5’ below ground surface within the well.

A percolation test was conducted on test pit TP‐3 (See attachment for soil test pit plan). Percolation testing is conducted to help determine the infiltration rate of the proposed disposal system. For systems greater than 20,000 gallons per day, an infiltration test shall ultimately be performed, however, percolation tests are good indicators of the final infiltration rate. The percolation rate was determined to be 8 minutes per inch. This rate was used to help size the disposal area.

A conceptual layout has been provided for the wastewater disposal area utilizing the 245,000 GPD design flow determined previously. The wastewater disposal area utilized in the conceptual layout is comprised of 2’ wide trenches with the reserve area located in between trenches. This is a standard type of effluent disposal. Other types of effluent disposal include leaching chambers, open sand beds, and leaching pits. A description of the different types of effluent disposal has been included within the design section of this Feasibility Study. Leaching trenches with reserve were utilized in this study, as they utilize a conservative allowable loading rate per the WWTP regulations. Leaching trenches are also a standard type of disposal, and could allow for utilization of the area above them for other purposes, such as recreational areas, if desired. The leaching trenches would consist of a pressure distribution system with the effluent being pumped from the wastewater facility to the disposal area. The conceptual layout provides for a 100 percent reserve area. Although it is preferred that a 100 percent reserve area be provided whenever possible, there are instances when this requirement can be reduced through discussions with DEP. The results of the background research represent a preliminary representation of a sewer conveyance system and wastewater disposal area. This information is preliminary only, and will be impacted by further on‐site delineations, assessment and soil testing. Further design, permitting, and construction processes will be required if the project is to move forward.

SECTION 2 DESIGN OPTIONS

2.1

SANITARY COLLECTION / CONVEYANCE SYSTEM

Wastewater generated in the Avon Industrial Park will be conveyed to the proposed WWTF via several methods. The methods include gravity collection system consisting of various sizes of gravity pipe and manholes, and pumped systems consisting of small diameter force main pump stations and large diameter force main pump stations. Each method has advantages and disadvantages, and together they provide flexibility in collecting all of the wastewater generated. It should be noted that ledge is likely to be encountered and though not addressed in this study, if the project moves forward, further assessment is recommended to establish potential ledge removal quantities to facilitate the conveyance system.

2.1.1

CONVENTIONAL GRAVITY COLLECTION / CONVEYANCE

A conventional gravity system relies on elevation difference to allow for flow of the solids and liquids to be conveyed to the wastewater treatment plant. Conventional gravity sewer systems have been used for many years and procedures for their design and construction are well established. When properly designed and constructed, conventional gravity systems perform reliably. One concern is the depth to which gravity systems need to be constructed in order to provide proper slope for the sewage. Also, the collection system is typically located within the pavement which will require patching trenches or repaving. Please note that standard trench patch is assumed for the purpose of the study, specifically timelines and potential project costs. The conceptual layout plan developed for this study utilizes gravity systems where grade appears conducive.

2.1.2

PRESSURE COLLECTION / CONVEYANCE

The two pumping systems often utilized consist of low pressure pumps and larger diameter pump stations. A benefit of pumped systems is that they can follow hilly terrain in narrow trenches reducing construction cost and disturbance to the landscape. The pumped systems also provide more flexibility than a conventional gravity with any potential utility and grading conflicts as well as causing less disruption to trees, lawns and sidewalks. The above is important in situations where conventional gravity sewers might otherwise be too destructive or expensive.

Low pressure pumps stations consist of small pump stations located at the individual property (either in the building or just outside the foundation) which pump through small diameter pipe systems. Low‐ pressure systems were developed to provide a low‐cost sewer collection system to facilities in remote locations or with high groundwater or ledge restrictions. Low‐pressure systems can transport wastewater over relatively long distances through small diameter pipes. The progressing cavity, semi‐ positive displacement pumps can lift to heads of 185 feet with a low horsepower, low speed (1725 rpm) motor. The pumps are able to develop high cutting torque at these low speeds to reduce wastewater solids to a ¼ inch particle size. This system enables the use of small diameter pipelines which are sized on hydraulic needs and not governed by the ability to pass solids. This feature reduces retention time and improves pipe‐scouring velocity. It is anticipated that many of the individual facility connections to the public system will need to utilize low pressure pump systems.

Large diameter pump stations typically consist of a larger containment tank where wastewater would collect at a low‐point to pump up to a higher location. The use of large diameter pump stations is to lift higher volumes of flows to higher terrain to a conventional system or over longer distances where there may be utility or ledge conflicts where a conventional system is too costly.

Utilizing all the information gathered as part of the background research, a conceptual layout of the potential collection system was prepared (see attachments). Existing topographic information gathered from MassGIS (10’ contours) was utilized to depict existing topographic conditions of the existing area.

These contours shall be considered approximate, but give an overall view of the existing contours.

Based on our Conceptual Site Plans, we anticipate the materials for conveyance to include 12,106 linear feet of gravity sewer main, 8,967 linear feet of pressure force main, 52 sewer manholes, and 11 pump stations. The conceptual layout does not address pressure collection/conveyance associated with minimizing disturbance; however this should be evaluated based if the project moves forward.

2.2

WWTP OPTIONS

The treatment systems evaluated in this study include Rotating Biological Contactor, Membrane Bioreactor, and the Amphidrome System. A description of each type of system is provided below. It should be noted that Sequencing Batch Reactors were not evaluated as part of this study. Sequencing Batch Reactors were determined to be unsuitable for this project as they do not perform well if they do not receive the design flow. It is anticipated that this project would see a phased approach as opposed to receiving the full 250,000 GPD design flow when it is brought on‐line. For the purpose of this study, it has been assumed that the system will need to handle approximately 80,000 GPD when it is first brought on‐line with full build capabilities to handle 250,000 GPD. This assumes that the first phase will see flows similar to those of the current conditions, while allowing for the full build out in future phases.

The systems evaluated below are all suitable for a phased approach.

2.2.1

ROTATING BIOLOGICAL CONTACTOR (RBC)

RBCs are a type of attached growth biological treatment process that typically consists of a series of closely spaced circular disks that are submerged in the wastewater and slowly rotated through it. The RBC unit is partially submerged (approximately 40%) in a tank containing the wastewater and the disks are slowly rotated using a mechanical drive. The high surface area of the RBC disks provides a large area for biofilm to develop. As the RBC discs rotate out of the wastewater, aeration is accomplished through exposure to the atmosphere. Waste water flows down through the disks in contact with the biofilm and also causes solids to slough off and be returned to the waste stream. RBC systems require pretreatment with primary clarification or fine screens and secondary clarification for liquid / solids separation. In addition, denitrification filters are also required for denitrification.

The advantage of using RBC’s is that there is a long history and proven track record for this technology.

The disadvantages are increased capital cost for equipment, buildings and mechanical equipment that requires maintenance and operator attention. To prevent algae growth, protect the plastic disks from

the effects of exposure to ultraviolet light, and prevent heat loss in cold weather, the RBC’s are typically located inside a building or fiberglass enclosure.

An RBC treatment system for the purposes of this study is anticipated to support a phased approach for build out. Phase 1 would accommodate 84,000 GPD, suitable for the capacity needs of the existing facilities within the study area. The system could be expanded in 84,000 GPD increments, until the maximum design capacity of 252,000 GPD is reached (or 3 potential phases). As noted above, the treatment components and tanks are typically enclosed within the WWTP building with this type of treatment method. The anticipated facility size for full build out capacity is approximately 135’ by 180’.

With this type of treatment process wastewater is open to the air within the facility and therefore more extensive construction and MEP/HVAC requirements are necessary, leading to a higher building cost.

Schematic process diagrams developed for this study have been included in the Appendices.

2.2.2

MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR (MBR)

MBRs typically consist of a biological reactor (bioreactor) with suspended biomass, followed by solids separation by microfiltration through membranes with nominal pore sizes ranging from 0.1 to 0.4 microns. The combination of a bioreactor with microfiltration results in replacing or reducing the need for secondary filtration or clarification. MBR’s have been utilized for treatment of wastewater from municipal and industrial uses as well as in reuse applications.

The advantages associated with this technology are higher loading rates, which result in a smaller overall footprint for the treatment system as well as a relatively high quality effluent in terms of low turbidity, bacteria, TSS and BOD. The tanks may be installed inside a building, which increases the overall size requirements for the treatment system building, or may be installed below grade outside. The disadvantages associated with this technology are the cost of membrane replacement and higher electrical costs due to the continuous air scouring of the membranes.

MBR treatment specific to the design needs of this study has been reviewed. This treatment method can also be phased to accommodate existing design flows as well as those of the full build capacity upon expansion / redevelopment of the facilities within the district. The MBR would be designed to accommodate 125,000 GPD of flow for Phase 1, with the ability to expand in another phase to accommodate the full build out capacity of 250,000 GPD. It is anticipated that the WWTP building associated with this treatment method would also be substantial in size, approximately 100’ by 150’; however a process flow schematic specific to this project was not able to be obtained an therefore this is a rough estimate based on necessary tanks and other primary components.

2.2.3

SUBMERGED ATTACHED GROWTH BIOREACTOR (SAGB) (AMPHIDROME® SYSTEM)

The Amphidrome® System is a submerged attached growth bioreactor that operates as a sequencing batch reactor. It is categorized as a submerged attached growth bioreactor (SAGB) because the media is submerged in the process flow. The two primary advantages of SAGBs are the high biomass concentrations that may be achieved and short hydraulic retention times, which result in compact

reactors. The reactor media also provides filtration and therefore the need for solids separation after the treatment process is eliminated.

The Amphidrome® System utilizes underground tanks for primary settling, bioreactors, and clearwells. It also requires a small building to house components such as blowers, odor control unit, and electronic controls. The simplicity of design and reduced need for complicated equipment and controls is reflected in the comparatively lower capital cost of equipment for this system when compared to RBC’s and MBR’s. In addition, the building requirements are smaller than the other systems. Due to the size associated with the full capacity the system will be designed for, the associated tankage costs will be high and could offset lower equipment capital costs.

We have reviewed an Amphidrome® System for this project, and note the following phasing is anticipated for this type of system. Phase 1 would accommodate 84,000 GPD, which is sufficient to address the needs of the existing facilities proposed to be included in the district. The WWP could be expanded in 42,000 GPD increments until the maximum design capacity of 252,000 GPD has been constructed (or a total of 5 potential phases). The building associated with this system would be anticipated to be approximately 48’ by 60’ which is recommended to be constructed during Phase 1. In this type of treatment process, no wastewater is open to the air within the WWTP building, and therefore less stringent building and MEP/HVAC requirements are necessary. Schematic process flow and schematic layout figures for Phase 1 and the Full Build capacity are included in the Appendices.

2.3

SLUDGE MANAGEMENT

The sludge associated with the treatment is handled differently for the various treatment methods.

Membrane Bioreactors typically utilize an aerated sludge holding tank for all design flows. Rotating Biological Contactors and Amphidrome systems would typically retain sludge in process tanks for smaller design flow, however would require the incorporation of an aerobic sludge holding tank for the full build out design flow. On‐site sludge thickening is recommended for all processes prior to removal. The appropriate sludge thickening method would be determined in conjunction with the treatment method.

Sludge process on‐site is not anticipated to be practical or economical for initial phases seeing less than the 250,000 GPD maximum flow. As the facility is expanded in phases, we would recommend that on‐ site sludge handling be evaluated for use when the system is operating at full capacity. This evaluation should be performed when the system reaches approximately 125,000 GPD and it is anticipated that the facility will be running at capacity within a few years.

2.4

DISPOSAL SYSTEMS

The disposal system for the wastewater treatment facility consists of the area which the treated wastewater is disposed to be adsorbed into the ground. The design of the disposal systems is governed

by Title 5 and TR16 as well as the Guidelines for the Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Land Disposal was utilized as a guideline. The disposal system consists of both a primary area and a reserve area set aside if there is an issue with a primary

area. The loading requirements of the disposal systems are determined by on‐site soil testing including percolation and infiltration tests. Below are discussed the different types of effluent disposal systems which were evaluated for the proposed site.

2.4.1

DRIP DISPERSAL

Drip dispersal consists of modified irrigation tubing to disperse wastewater into the ground. The technology of current systems includes the use timers, cleaning mechanisms, and filters. The site conditions including soil characteristics, vertical and horizontal setbacks, and vegetative cover drive the ability of the use of drip dispersal. The drip dispersal tubing is placed in the upper horizon of the soil therefore information on the existing soils is paramount. The treated effluent is pumped through the small tubing and evenly distributed along the designated leaching area.

An advantage is that in soils with low absorptive properties, drip dispersal has a small dose volume and provides even distribution. Another advantage is that existing terrain can be maintained because the installation is typically through a ditch witch along the existing topography. A disadvantage is that the tubing is close to the surface requiring special considerations. Another potential disadvantage is that drip dispersal loading rates associated with WWTP use are still undergoing review by MA DEP and the project may be required to utilize more conservative loading rates until drip dispersal is formally incorporated into the regulations by the DEP.

2.4.2

OPEN SAND BED

An open sand bed is an area which is exposed to the elements where the effective leaching area is the bottom area only. The area for the bed is prepared by removing all top soils and subsoils and providing a two foot berm around the perimeter. At least two feet of clean sand is placed within the beds. The area adjacent to the bed should be sloped away to prevent accumulation of surface water. The bed design must accommodate a four foot separation between the bottom of the bed and the maximum ground water elevation including mounding.

An advantage of open sand beds is that they have the highest design loading rate of the effluent disposal systems. A disadvantage of the open sand bed is that disinfection is required at all times which is not required of below ground methods. The beds must also have a maintenance plan to prevent weed and plant growth. The use of the land for supplemental purposes would also be limited.

2.4.3

FIELDS/BEDS

A field or bed consists of the installation of stone in a rectangular configuration with the effective leaching area being the bottom only. The wastewater effluent is dispersed by pipes overlaying the field/bed length. Pressure distribution would be required to be utilized with the size of the fields/beds which would be utilized for this project. Venting would also be required for beds/fields sized to accommodate this project. The field/bed must accommodate a four foot separation between the bottom of the system and the maximum ground water elevation including mounding.

Disadvantages include the fact that the effective leaching area is the bottom only and additional reserve areas require the same footprint. Fields/Beds have the same design loading rate as a trench but less than an open sand bed.

2.4.4

TRENCHES

Leaching trenches consist of installation of stone trenches with either existing soil or Title 5 soil in between depending on the existing soil characteristics. The minimum separation of trenches is two times the effective width or depth (whichever is greater). If the area of separation is to be utilized for the reserve area then the requirement is three times the greater of width or depth. The wastewater effluent is dispersed by pipes overlaying the trench length. Venting would again be required based on the anticipated trench length. The trench must accommodate a four foot separation between the bottom of the system and the maximum ground water elevation including mounding.

An advantage of trenches is that the area between trenches may be utilized for reserve. This requires less land to be set aside for the primary and reserve areas than any of the other effluent disposal methods. Another advantage is the effective leaching area is the bottom and the side areas of the trench.

2.4.5

CHAMBERS

Chamber leaching systems utilize precast or plastic chambers for distribution of the effluent. The chambers are installed in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendation for the base material and preparation. A maximum of two feet of sidewall depth below the invert can be utilized for calculating the effective leaching area. Separation distance between the units is two times the effective width or depth, whichever is greater. The chamber leaching system must accommodate a four foot separation between the bottom of the system and the maximum ground water elevation including mounding.

An advantage of chamber is if they are installed in a trench configuration then the area between trenches may be utilized for reserve. A disadvantage is that if the chamber is utilized in a field/bed configuration, then the effective leaching area shall include the bottom only. The use of leaching chambers allows for a greater design loading rate than leaching trenches.

SECTION 3 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS

3.1

COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE SYSTEM

The conceptual collection/conveyance system was prepared based on the information gathered during the background research phase (see attachments). The conceptual system consisting of both gravity sewer mains and pressure force mains is based on general topographic conditions of the study area.

More detailed survey will allow refinements of the system, but generally the system is designed to meet the topographic requirements. The materials for conveyance system include 12,106 linear feet of gravity sewer main, 8,967 linear feet of pressure force main, 52 sewer manholes, and 11 pump stations as indicated on the Conceptual Site Plans. It should be noted that the conceptual collection/conveyance system does not address utilizing pressure collection/conveyance in minimizing disturbance.

The pump stations will consist of duplex pump systems (for redundancy) with back‐up power to provide for smaller tanks (back‐up power allows for less emergency storage per TR‐16). Where possible, the small diameter pumped systems may be utilized to allow flexibility within the system as well as overcome obstacles such as large changes in elevation, land disturbance, or utility conflicts.

3.2

WWTP

As previously noted, various wastewater treatment methods were reviewed for suitability associated with this project. Three treatment methods were determined to be suitable for the potential project.

Each treatment method has advantages and disadvantages. Based on our review of these three methods as part of this feasibility study, it has been determined that each method is suitable for the phased approach anticipated to be necessary for this project. Though all technologies can accommodate the phased approach, each has different phasing capabilities based on the individual treatment process. Therefore, it is paramount for the Town to better understand the re‐development opportunities and associated timelines of the Industrial Park/ localized sewer district. This will help best determine the most suitable and cost effective treatment method for both initial construction as well as long term, full capacity build‐out. Design and permitting timelines noted in later sections are generally consistent for the various treatment methods. Costs, however, will vary by treatment type. Budgetary project costs for the various treatment methods have been included to give the Town a comparison.

3.3

DISPOSAL SYSTEM

For the purposes of this study, we have utilized leaching trenches for the conceptual layout of the disposal systems (see attachments). The loading rate associated with trenches is conservative compared to other disposal types; therefore trenches were utilized due to the limited soil information obtained during this study.

Additional soil information may allow for greater minimization of the disposal systems. The benefit of the use of trenches is that they allow for the reserve in between trenches, and they also have a high effective leaching area making them less land intensive than some of the other options. An additional benefit to subsurface disposal is that the land can still be utilized as open space including walking trails, sports fields, or other uses which will not impact sub‐grade.

SECTION 4 PERMITTING APPROACH

4.1

INTRODUCTION

This section is intended to address the anticipated design and permitting steps which would be necessary to facilitate the project. The design and permitting approach included herein is based on the information developed during this feasibility study. This section outlines the general design and permitting components, in the chronological order which is recommended for the project. As with any project of this size and complexity, should the project move forward, the project should be reassessed as it progresses through these steps as additional requirements may become necessary if the project develops. This information is not intended to identify every detailed task necessary to complete the project, but rather provide an overview of what is anticipated to be necessary, based on the information obtained in this study. Additionally, should this project move forward, additional legal and municipal coordination, not addressed herein, would be required to facilitate the establishment of the localized sewer district, establish sewage rates, funding, access and maintenance agreements, entitlements and other project components.

4.2

DUE DILIGENCE PHASE

4.2.1

EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY / RESOURCE AREA DELINEATION

Topographic and boundary survey of the localized sewer district will be required. It is anticipated that the area to be surveyed will include all streets proposed to be within the localized sewer district as well as portions of the Town owned parcels off Page Street. It is anticipated that survey of town owned parcels off Page Street, which would be utilized for the WWTF would be limited to the project area, encompassing approximately 35 acres. Existing conditions survey would also include survey of utility information, both field obtained data as well as incorporating data collected from research with local utility companies and Town records. Wetland delineation would also be performed by a wetland scientist and the wetland line would be obtained by the survey crew and depicted on the existing conditions plan. The survey would also include an approximation of the FEMA flood plain mapping.

Boundary survey, topographic survey and utility survey are all critical to the design of the sewer conveyance system and WWTF. For the purpose of this study, it has been assumed that the individual lot owners will be responsible for connecting to the collection/conveyance system within the street, and therefore, individual lot and building finished floor elevations are not anticipated to be required as part of the project.

4.2.2

SOIL TESTING

We recommend further soil testing be performed and witnessed by the DEP. Upon completion of the survey, we recommend confirming the potential location of the disposal areas, and performing additional testing witnessed by the DEP. This will give the Town a better understanding, early on in the project, of the soil capacity for disposal and will allow the project to be refined to maximize the capacity of the system while minimizing the footprint. Additionally, having more data regarding the soil conditions will help the project team better understand potential regulatory requirements and allow for early discussions with the DEP regarding items such as reducing reserve area, etc. Based on our knowledge of the area and preliminary soil testing performed as part of this study we would anticipate

ten days of testing would be required, and recommend that the Town contract with a private contractor to perform this work (allowing for use of larger equipment). Load tests may also be required to establish the acceptable design loading rate for the disposal system. This type of testing is typically performed by a hydrogeologist.

4.2.3

REFINEMENT OF WWTP DESIGN CAPACITY, TREATMENT TYPE, AND PHASING APPROACH

Upon completion of the existing conditions survey and soil testing, the project team will have a better understanding of the land suitable for use as well as capacity of that land to accept the wastewater. At this time, the team should work with the Town to refine the WWTP capacity needs and / or limitations, WWTP treatment type and project phasing. Though we have provided background and conceptual information in this study, the diligent approach is to re‐evaluate and confirm that the site conditions do not warrant modifications to the project approach upon completion of obtaining this information. The due diligence phase is also necessary to establish project needs and in turn assess the most appropriate and cost effective treatment method for the project.

4.2.4

PRELIMINARY SEWER CONVEYANCE SYSTEM AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN DESIGN

Utilizing the existing conditions survey, wetland delineation, soil testing, and refined WWTP data obtained above, the conceptual design should be modified to reflect actual site conditions and restrictions. At this time, additional impacts to resource areas would be indentified, as needed, as well as refining the layout of the WWTP, SAS and conveyance system. Utilizing the field survey, the preliminary layout of the collection / conveyance system should be updated to clarify extents of gravity and pressure components. Additionally, the WWTF layout should be refined to address any environmental restrictions, lot setback restrictions, etc. Modifications to the layout should address refinement of the WWTP design capacity, treatment type and phasing approach identified above.

4.3

MASSACHUSETTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (MEPA)

MEPA requires that state agencies and private proponents study the environmental consequences of their proposed project and take measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate for any damage created by those proposed project. MEPA applies to projects that exceed the MEPA thresholds presented in 301 CMR 11.00 and also a state agency action – a permit, financial assistance, or land transfer from state agencies. MEPA review is not a permitting process, but does require public study, disclosure, and development of the feasible mitigation for a proposed project. MEPA review occurs before permitting agencies act, to ensure that they are fully cognizant of environmental consequences of their actions.

The staff of the Secretary of Energy & Environmental Affairs (EEA) is responsible for the review process.

The process is public and the staff of the EEA solicits comments from the general public and agencies; represent the Secretary at the public consultation sessions on projects; coordinates project review with the proponent, consultants, and interested agencies and citizens; and make a recommendation to the Secretary regarding the adequacy of environmental documentation submitted for a project.

The review thresholds are identified based on categories and the impacts of the project within those categories. The thresholds determine whether MEPA review is required as well as the type of review whether they be an Environmental Notification Form (ENR), Environmental Impact Report (EIR), or other MEPA review if the EEA requires.

Based on our review of the project, we anticipate an ENF is required. Construction of a new wastewater treatment and/or disposal facility with a capacity of 100,000 or more gallons per day triggers a MEPA filing of an ENF. An additional threshold which the project is anticipated to exceed is greater than 5,000 square feet of wetland disturbance, which also triggers an ENF. An ENF is a simple form and report where the proponent is required to give detailed information on the project and the potential impacts.

The ENF is distributed to other agencies for their review and comment. Each agency is expected to review, analyze, and comment on how the project complies with the applicable regulatory standards and requirements. At the close of the review period, the EEA must decide if the project needs additional information in the form of an EIR otherwise the project requires no further information.

If, as the project develops, it is necessary to disturb more than an acre of wetland, an EIR would be required. Additional thresholds requiring further permitting are creation of more than 10 miles of sewer or disturbance of greater than 50 acres of land. Based on our study, we do not anticipate these thresholds to be exceeded; however, they are the thresholds of components most likely to be applicable to this project, beyond those already noted.

4.4

SEWER COLLECTION / CONVEYANCE SYSTEM AND WWTF DESIGN AND PERMITTING

MADEP regulates discharged of pollutants below ground surface through the Ground Water Discharge Permit Program regulations, 314 CMR 5.00. The regulations require potential proponents for discharges to submit an application to MADEP for approval and to obtain a discharge permit. The permit provides limits on the amount and types of pollutants to be discharged and monitoring and reporting requirements to verify the permit is complying with their permit limitations and conditions. This design and permitting process is comprised of a Hydrogeologic Assessment and Report and the design and permitting of the collection / conveyance system, WWTP and disposal area through a Groundwater Discharge Permit.

4.4.1

HYDROGEOLOGIC REPORT - DEP BRP WP-83

A hydrogeologic study is the first step in the groundwater discharge process. The hydrogeologic study assesses the site characteristics and provides details on the fate and transport of the effluent discharged from the wastewater treatment facility. The report is prepared by a qualified geologist or engineer. A methodology (scope of work) is submitted to DEP addressing the study and the proposed locations for monitoring wells. The methodology typically includes a cover letter and narrative along with a conceptual site plan showing the proposed location/type of soil absorption system and the proposed locations of the monitoring wells to be used for the hydrogeologic assessment. A pre‐scoping meeting with DEP is also a requirement. For the proposed project, it is anticipated that 6 monitoring wells would

be required, due to the dis‐jointed nature of the two disposal areas (a minimum of three wells in triangular fashion surrounding the disposal area is typically required). Once the methodology is approved, the wells are installed and the hydrogeologic study identified commences.

A hydrogeologic study and groundwater mounding analysis is performed to assess the suitability of soil and groundwater conditions to support the discharge of treated effluent in the subsurface disposal system area defined on the preliminary plan developed above.

The work should be performed in accordance with DEP Guidelines for Hydrogeologic Evaluations posted

by DEP. Grain size analysis and analysis curves should be performed along with, conducting and analyzing aquifer tests, determining seasonal high groundwater, conducting the groundwater mounding analysis and preparing a groundwater monitoring plan and final report. A travel time analysis is also recommended to be performed due to the site’s proximity to resource areas. A groundwater travel time analysis is typically only required for sites in proximity to a Zone II; however, we believe it will be required if this project moves forward. It should be noted that based on discussions with town personnel, it is our understanding that the Town has limited availability for locating a public drinking water supply well, and that the land off Page Street has been studied for this purpose. This feasibility study does not address additional design and permitting needs which would be required if a drinking water supply were to be located in proximity o the WWTP. Upon completion of the study, a DEP BRP WP 83 Permit Application and submittal package is submitted to DEP for their review and approval.

4.4.2 4.4.2.1

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN DESIGN PLANS

Utilizing the information developed above, including the preliminary design and hydrogeological assessment, the Localized Sewer District design should be completed. This would include full permitting level design of the gravity and pressure collection / conveyance system, wastewater treatment plant and disposal areas.

Plan and profile design should be completed for the collection / conveyance system, along with lift station designs. Necessary construction details should be included. The collection / conveyance system is a required component of the groundwater discharge permit.

The plans for the WWTF should contain detailed information on the layout and construction of the facility. This includes plan views, elevations, and information which combined with the specifications provides information on the plant operation and construction. Information such as pipe sizes, ground elevation, hydraulic profiles of the tanks and soils absorption system (SAS) should be included.

Technical specifications for the WWTF should include information from civil, sanitary, structural, electrical, mechanical, HVAC, and survey perspectives in regards to the construction of the sewers, pump stations, and treatment and disposal systems. The specifications should provide any information

not explicitly indicated on the plans. It should be noted that DEP conditions the GWDP Approval requiring construction of the WWTF be in accordance with the plans, unless prior written approval from MADEP is received in advance. Although the full design plan package is not technically required until after permit is issued, we recommend providing this with the permit application to streamline the process. Additionally, much of the design is required to be completed to facilitate the required Engineering report (described below), such as a profile of the proposed WWTF and design of the SAS.

4.4.2.2

ENGINEERING REPORT

The purpose of the engineering report is to present details on the project, site information, basis for design, and the impacts to public health and the environment. The report becomes a written record of the principle information for the MADEP to review and approve of the permit. The report should be consistent with DEP requirements for a Groundwater Discharge Permit Application and include all necessary documents, forms, calculations, narratives and exhibits.

4.4.3

GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT APPLICATION - DEP BRP WP 79

A Groundwater Discharge Permit is required for this project. The GWDP Application along with supporting information noted above should be submitted to DEP for their review and approval. There are various types of GWDPs; however, a BRP WP 79 ‐ Individual Permit for Sewage Treatment Plant is required for this project. Since the WWTF will be owned and operated by the municipality, application fees and annual compliance fees are waived. The GWDP application cannot be submitted until the project has received approval of the Hydrogeologic Evaluation (BRP WP 83). Additionally, the technical review of the GWDP will not be completed by MA DEP until the MEPA process has been completed.

4.4.4

ADDITIONAL PERMITTING

The following permits are not anticipated based on the data obtained during the feasibility study, however they are included for your reference as they may become applicable as the project progresses.

4.4.4.1

SITE ASSIGNMENT

Site Assignment is the means a determination by a Board of Health or by MADEP which designates a piece of land for use of the disposal of sewerage. The process requires a public hearing in which the extent, character, and nature of the facility must be declared. The Site Assignment process is not likely to be required for the proposed WWTF since the Town has control of the land on which the WWTF will be placed. Also, it is anticipated that the Town will get easements over any properties that they do not have control over. If for some reason the Town needs to purchase a piece of land or perform a taking, then this process will likely be required.

4.4.4.2

DETERMINATION OF NEED

A Determination of Need is a letter sent to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MASSDOT) due to proximity of the project to the State Highway to determine if an Indirect Access Permit is needed. Based on the information obtained in this feasibility study, it is not anticipated that an

Indirect Access Permit will be necessary; however, it may be recommended to request a Determination of Need, as some of the collection / conveyance system work proposed is adjacent to State Highway.

4.4.4.3

SEWER PERMITTING

It is our understanding based on discussion with officials from MADEP that the permitting requirements for Sewer Permitting are being phased out by next year. Thus the permitting requirements would not likely be applicable. It is our understanding that the state will soon defer to the local authorities for this permitting.

4.5

SPECIAL PERMIT

A special permit is anticipated to be necessary for the project. Based on the information and conceptual layout prepared under this feasibility study, the WWTP would be located within a Residence B zoning district. Though not specifically defined by the zoning by‐law, the facility would be consistent with “public utility” which is not an allowed use, by right, in the Residence B district. Public Utilities, is however, a use which may be permitted upon issuance of a Special Permit by the Special Permit Granting Authority. Based on our review of the local by‐law the Board of Appeals would be the Special Permit Granting Authority in this instance.

4.6

ZONING VARIANCE OR RE-ZONING

Based on the conceptual layout and recommendations prepared in this report, the WWTP facility is anticipated to exceed the allowable maximum building coverage and maximum height allowed in the Residence B zoning district. Additionally, setback requirements may be exceeded depending on type of treatment method utilized moving forward in the project. The Town controls multiple adjacent parcels; however, so it may be possible to comply with Zoning regulations by combining multiple adjacent lots to create a single larger lot to support the WWTP. Another consideration is to re‐zone the parcels proposed for use in the project and create a zoning district where this is an allowed use by right, with limited dimensional requirements, such that the project would comply by right.

4.7

NOTICE OF INTENT

The purpose of the Notice of Intent (NOI) is to protect the wetland resources of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (WPA) (General Law Chapter 131, Section 40) it is prohibited to remove, fill, dredge, or alter wetlands without a permit. In order to obtain a permit (Order of Conditions), a proponent for the project must submit an application to the jurisdictional Conservation Commission and to the Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP).

The NOI application provides an accurate description of the project site including type and boundaries of resource areas, and the proposed work including all design to meet the performance standards as required by the Wetlands Protection Act Regulations, 310 CMR 10 for each resource area.

A NOI would be filed for any work within 100’ of a wetland buffer jurisdictional under the local bylaws and/or the WPA. Even if work is to be performed within a paved roadway or parking lot, if it falls within

a buffer zone, it is required to submit to the Conservation Commission and MADEP. Based on the conceptual plans, it will be required.

4.8

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

Upon completion of the permitting, construction documents should be developed. Construction level plans and specifications suitable for public bid should be prepared. Comments, conditions and other requirements of approvals should be incorporated into the documents. Construction level plans, details and specification for the gravity and pressure collection / conveyance system, WWTP, SAS, and WWTP building should be prepared to facilitate bidding. The construction documents for the WWTP building should include architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and HVAC construction level plans and specifications. These documents are required in addition to the civil engineering plans and specifications which would address the collection / conveyance system, WWTP, and SAS.

4.9

CONSTRUCTION RELATED PERMITS

4.9.1

NOTICE OF INTENT NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT (ENOI)

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program regulates stormwater discharges from three potential sources: municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), construction activities, and industrial activities. Most stormwater discharges are considered point sources, and operators of these sources may be required to receive an NPDES permit before they can discharge. The permitting requirement is provided to prevent stormwater runoff from washing harmful pollutants into local surface waters such as streams, rivers, lakes or coastal waters. Operators of construction sites that disturb one acre or larger are required to obtain authorization to discharge stormwater under an NPDES construction stormwater permit. Where EPA is the permitting authority, operators must meet the requirements of EPA's Construction General Permit (CGP).

The ENOI will be filed after there is a Contractor determined for the construction project. The Contractor acts as the responsible party and prepares or has prepared the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which acts as a guideline for maintaining the site during the construction process.

4.9.2

STREET OPENING

Local street opening permits will need to be obtained for each street which will require construction of the sewer conveyance system. Completion of the design will give greater detail on which locations will require permits. Since the project is a Town project, this will not require fees.

4.9.3

BUILDING PERMITS

Standard Building related permits including an actual building permit, plumbing permit and electrical permit will be required or the project. These permits are anticipated to be necessary for the WWTP itself; however, if above grade facilities are necessary in conjunction with eth conveyance system lift stations, they may require permits as well.

SECTION 5 ANTICIPATED PROJECT TASK TIMELINES

5.1

INTRODUCTION

Timelines listed herein are provided to give a general overview of potential timeframes. Also noted is general detail associated with each task; in conjunction with and to supplement the Design and Permitting approach. All time frames indicated herein shall be considered approximate and are based on our past experiences with similar projects. Statutory timeframes for permitting have also been included below. Each project is unique and would have its own specific needs and associated timeline that would be further developed as the project progresses.

The results of the study represent a preliminary representation of a sewer conveyance system and wastewater facility and disposal area. This is a summary of these processes and their anticipated timelines based on our experience with similar projects.

5.2

DUE DILIGENCE - 6 MONTHS

The tasks indicated below are anticipated to take approximately six months; however the coordination with the Town and interested parties to refine the capacity needs, treatment types, etc. is likely to be the component which could most directly impact this schedule. We understand that there are a number of parties and substantial coordination that will be necessary and therefore could add to an increased duration for the Due Diligence phase.

• • • •

5.3

An existing conditions survey would be performed of roadways and land associated with the project.

All wetland/resource areas would be delineated to identify regulated areas.

Additional soil testing would be performed, witnessed by MassDEP, to better understand capacity for the disposal system.

During this period the consultant would work with the Town and all interested parties to finalize capacity needs, access requirements, treatment types, and all other concerns.

PRELIMINARY DESIGN – 4 MONTHS

A four month duration has been assumed for this task to allow for coordination with manufacturers and suppliers. This early coordination with manufacturers will help to better define the treatment components early in the project which will be beneficial to streamlining the design and permitting moving forward.

•

•

The preliminary design would be prepared utilizing the information obtained during the due diligence phase. The design would further define the collection/conveyance system, the wastewater facility, and the disposal area.

Permit needs would be re‐evaluated based on the preliminary design prior to moving forward.

5.4

INITIAL PERMITTING – 18 MONTHS

This permitting duration is estimated based on our understanding of the project needs from this feasibility study and our experience with similar projects. This is a reasonable duration for the project, in our opinion; however this could easily be extended by regulatory review and or public comments during the process. The MEPA process is recommended to be started first, with the hydrogeologic evaluation beginning while the MEPA process is on‐going. The WWTP design is typically begun in the middle of the hydrogeologic evaluation process. The GWDP can not be submitted until hydrogeologic approval has been received, and can not be reviewed technically until the MEPA process is complete.

•

•

•

•

As previously noted, this project will require MEPA (Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act) review. An ENF (Environmental Notification Form) will have to be filed, and other MEPA Review could be necessary if the secretary so requires. A notice is published in the Environmental Monitor and the ENF review period lasts for 30 Days following publication, unless extended by the Secretary on account of the Proponent's failure to meet circulation or Public Notice requirements or with the consent of the Proponent. We would anticipate the MEPA process to take 3 months for this project, but could take up to 6 months if additional review is required.

Additionally, as noted in other sections, if additional thresholds are triggered and alternate MEPA permits are required, the duration would be extended.

A Hydrogeological Study will be prepared for the proposed disposal loading area. According to MassDEP’s Schedule of Timelines and Fees, the administrative review process can take up to 45 days, followed by a 90 day period to respond to comments, and a final technical review period of 30 days. In our experience, the response to comments period for a project of this size is typically closer to 30 days. Therefore, we would expect a total of approximately 5 months for the overall hydrogeologic process. It should be noted that this task may begin while MEPA permitting is on‐going.

A wastewater treatment plant design plan set and engineering report will be prepared in conjunction with the GWDP, including all of the necessary treatment and disposal calculations.

The plan set will include both the conveyance system design, as well as the complete wastewater treatment system. An engineering report will be completed, as required, consistent with DEP requirements for a groundwater discharge permit application. It is anticipated that this task would take approximately 6 months. This task typically begins while the hydrogeologic study task is still on‐going.

A groundwater discharge permit application will be prepared and submitted to DEP for their approval utilizing form BRP WP‐79. All comments made by DEP during their administrative and technical review process will be addressed and updates to the plans, reports, etc. will be made in order to facilitate the processing of the groundwater discharge permit. According to DEP’s schedule of timelines and fees, the administrative review process can take up to 34 days with an additional 36 days for technical review, followed by a 90 day period to respond to comments. A second technical review period of 30 days is followed by a 30 day public comment period and an additional 60 days of review for public comments. Finally, there is a 30 day appeal period after the permit has been issued. In our experience, a project of this size should anticipate receiving

•

•

•

5.5

comments from DEP during their first review. Though statutorily the timeframe is longer, we would anticipate this process to take approximately 7 months overall.

A Special Permit Application would be required as the Wastewater treatment facility is not an allowed use, by right in the existing zoning district; however, it may be allowed through the issuance of a Special Permit by the Board of Appeals. This filing is anticipated to be made concurrently with on‐going permitting listed above, and is anticipated to take approximately two months for permitting. It is anticipated due to the proximity to residential homes, that there will be comments by abutters which may increase the permitting period for this task.

A zoning variance for the project is also anticipated to be required from the Dimensional and Density regulations. It is recommended that this be filed concurrently with the Special Permit, and should take a similar time to permit.

A DEP Notice of Intent shall be filed with the Town Conservation Commission and DEP for work being conducted within the regulated buffers. Where the project is a Town project, a one month duration is recommended for the NOI permitting; this assumes that because it is a Town project, the project will be heard on the first available hearing. Additionally, it is assumed that the project team will be working with the various Town agencies, and therefore, the Commission and project team will both have a good handle on the project prior to the hearing.

This filing can be made concurrently with other permitting listed above.

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PREPARATION – 6 MONTHS • • • •

5.6

This task duration anticipates that the civil design, plans and specifications will be brought to construction level detail during this time.

Additionally the architectural, structural, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, and HVAC design would be completed in full including plans and specifications.

Coordination with manufacturers would be performed to obtain and implement necessary specifications and other information.

A bid package would need to be prepared in conjunction with the Town.

BIDDING & CONSTRUCTION – 21 - 27 MONTHS

The bidding and construction duration is highly dependent on both the Town’s coordination for bidding as well as the construction aspect. As noted below, construction duration can be highly variable depending on the contractor, and given that the project will be public bid, with award to the low bidder, this duration is anticipated to have a broad variation.

•

Per the Massachusetts General Laws, the contract for construction will require the Town to conduct a formal advertised competition by issuing an invitation for bids or a request for proposals. This process includes writing a formalized proposal, public notice, evaluating proposals, and awarding the contract. The bidding process is anticipated to take approximately 3 months.

•

•

An EPA Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will have to be prepared for this project which involves greater than 1 acre of land disturbance. In conjunction with this stormwater pollution prevention plan, an EPA Notice of Intent will have to be filed under the construction general permit. This task would begin during the bidding phase, and be completed prior to the start of construction. It is anticipated this task would take approximately 2 months to complete.

It should be noted that the ENOI is required to be filed 14 calendar days prior to the start of construction.

Once a contract has been awarded construction of the project can begin. This will include the construction of the collection/conveyance system, the wastewater facility building and associated tanks, as well as the wastewater disposal area. Construction duration is highly dependent on the contractor, number of crews, etc. For the purpose of this study, it has been assumed that multiple crews can be utilized and that sewer collection / conveyance work and WWTP/SAS work will all be on‐going concurrently. Construction is anticipated to take approximately 18 ‐ 24 months. For reference, some typical durations for construction tasks include: force main – approx. 400 lf/day; gravity sewer – approx. – 200 lf/day; SAS – approx. 2 weeks/bed; WWTF – approx. 10 months.

SECTION 6 BUDGETARY PROJECT COSTS

6.1

ANTICIPATED PROJECT COSTS

The following section provides general budgetary numbers associated with the project based on the results of the feasibility study. This section is intended to provide a general understanding of project costs which may be anticipated, but is not intended to provide a full and complete cost estimate, as the costs will be highly dependent on the actual design of the system and project needs. Project costs should be re‐evaluated during the due diligence phase as the project moves forward. Budgetary construction costs indicated below include standard mark‐up of 15% (10% profit and 5% overhead).

6.1.1

COLLECTION / CONVEYANCE SYSTEM – $ 3.1 MILLION

Budgetary costs provided for the collection / conveyance system are based on our experience in constructing similar projects. The costs indicated herein, do not account for substantial ledge removal.

Ledge removal can significantly impact project costs, and it is highly recommended that borings be performed during the design phase to establish depth to ledge for quantitative purposes, should the project move forward. This budgetary cost is based on the quantities of components associated with the collection / conveyance system which have been identified in this study.

6.1.2

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT – $5.5 MILLION

This preliminary budgetary cost includes necessary treatment equipment, tanks and building construction costs. Ancillary costs for piping and setting equipment have not been included at this time.

The cost listed above is an anticipated average cost based on the three treatment methods reviewed as part of this study. A table of costs specific to each treatment method is included below to provide a better comparison of costs for each treatment method.

Estimated Budgetary WWTP Costs Equipment Phase 1 Equipment To Bring to Full Build Tanks Building Total

6.1.3

RBC $950,000 $1,475,000 $900,000 $4,300,000 $7,625,000

MBR $720,000 $635,000 $1,100,000 $2,625,000 $5,080,000

Amphidrome® $485,000 $975,000 $1,600,000 $500,000 3,560,000

WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AREAS / SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM – $1.7 MILLION

The disposal area costs indicated herein are based on leaching trenches evaluated as part of this study.

This cost includes an allowance for some removal and replacement of material, but does not address all possible site conditions which may be encountered. This budgetary cost is based on the size and quantity of leaching trench systems identified in this study.

6.1.4

DESIGN AND PERMITTING COSTS - $650,000

Typically design and permitting costs can be estimated at 6‐10% of the construction cost of a project.

Based on information obtained during this feasibility study, as well as our experience with similar projects, we estimate that the design and permitting costs associated with this project would be at the lower end or approximately 6% for a reasonable budgetary number.

6.1.5

WASTEWATER TREATMENT ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS - $92,000

These are anticipated operating hard costs for the selected recommended treatment method; these costs include electrical use, process chemicals and sludge disposal. An average annual full build capacity operating cost has been identified above, based on information obtained for this study. Operations soft costs (operation personnel and laboratory testing, etc) have not been included at this time; however, based on our experience costs associated with contract operations of an Amphidrome® System and MBR are similar while an RBC typically requires approximately 25% more time for operations. MBR systems typically have higher maintenance and service costs, in addition to the higher operating hard costs. A cost comparison table is provided below for the various treatment technologies.

Estimated Annual Operating Hard Costs RBC MBR Amphidrome®

Phase 1 $42,500 Data Not Available $46,500

Full Build Capacity $80,500 Data Not Available $103,000

SECTION 7 APPENDIX

APPENDIX A FIGURES

APPENDIX B CONCEPTUAL PLANS

APPENDIX C WASTEWATER TREATMENT SCHEMATICS

APPENDIX D REGULATORY FORMS

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office

Environmental Notification Form For Office Use Only

EEA#: MEPA Analyst: The information requested on this form must be completed in order to submit a document electronically for review under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, 301 CMR 11.00.

Project Name: Street Address: Municipality: Watershed: Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: Latitude: Longitude: Estimated commencement date: Estimated completion date: Project Type: Status of project design: %complete Proponent: Street Address: Municipality: State: Zip Code: Name of Contact Person: Firm/Agency: Street Address: Municipality: State: Zip Code: Phone: Fax: E-mail: Does this project meet or exceed a mandatory EIR threshold (see 301 CMR 11.03)?

Yes No If this is an Expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) (see 301 CMR 11.05(7)) or a Notice of Project Change (NPC), are you requesting: a Single EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.06(8)) a Special Review Procedure? (see 301CMR 11.09) a Waiver of mandatory EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.11) a Phase I Waiver? (see 301 CMR 11.11)

Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No No No

(Note: Greenhouse Gas Emissions analysis must be included in the Expanded ENF.)

Which MEPA review threshold(s) does the project meet or exceed (see 301 CMR 11.03)?

Which State Agency Permits will the project require?

Identify any financial assistance or land transfer from an Agency of the Commonwealth, including the Agency name and the amount of funding or land area in acres:

Effective January 2011

Summary of Project Size & Environmental Impacts LAND

Existing

Change

Total site acreage New acres of land altered Acres of impervious area Square feet of new bordering vegetated wetlands alteration Square feet of new other wetland alteration Acres of new non-water dependent use of tidelands or waterways

STRUCTURES Gross square footage Number of housing units Maximum height (feet)

TRANSPORTATION Vehicle trips per day Parking spaces

WASTEWATER Water Use (Gallons per day) Water withdrawal (GPD) Wastewater generation/treatment (GPD) Length of water mains (miles) Length of sewer mains (miles) Has this project been filed with MEPA before?

Yes (EEA # ) No Has any project on this site been filed with MEPA before?

Yes (EEA # ) No

-2-

Total

GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION – all proponents must fill out this section PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

Describe the existing conditions and land uses on the project site:___________________________ Describe the proposed project and its programmatic and physical elements: _________________ NOTE: The project description should summarize both the project’s direct and indirect impacts (including construction period impacts) in terms of their magnitude, geographic extent, duration and frequency, and reversibility, as applicable. It should also discuss the infrastructure requirements of the project and the capacity of the municipal and/or regional infrastructure to sustain these requirements into the future.

Describe the on-site project alternatives (and alternative off-site locations, if applicable), considered by the proponent, including at least one feasible alternative that is allowed under current zoning, and the reasons(s) that they were not selected as the preferred alternative: _____________________ NOTE: The purpose of the alternatives analysis is to consider what effect changing the parameters and/or siting of a project, or components thereof, will have on the environment, keeping in mind that the objective of the MEPA review process is to avoid or minimize damage to the environment to the greatest extent feasible. Examples of alternative projects include alternative site locations, alternative site uses, and alternative site configurations.

Summarize the mitigation measures proposed to offset the impacts of the preferred alternative: ______________________________________________________ If the project is proposed to be constructed in phases, please describe each phase: ______________________________________________________ AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN: Is the project within or adjacent to an Area of Critical Environmental Concern?

Yes (Specify__________________________________) No if yes, does the ACEC have an approved Resource Management Plan? ___ Yes ___ No; If yes, describe how the project complies with this plan. _______________________________________________________ Will there be stormwater runoff or discharge to the designated ACEC? ___ Yes ___ No; If yes, describe and assess the potential impacts of such stormwater runoff/discharge to the designated ACEC. _________________________________________________ RARE SPECIES: Does the project site include Estimated and/or Priority Habitat of State-Listed Rare Species? (see http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/regulatory_review/priority_habitat/priority_habitat_home.htm) Yes (Specify__________________________________ ) No HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Does the project site include any structure, site or district listed in the State Register of Historic Place or the inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth?

Yes (Specify__________________________________ ) No If yes, does the project involve any demolition or destruction of any listed or inventoried historic or archaeological resources?

Yes (Specify__________________________________) No

-3-

WATER RESOURCES: Is there an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) on or within a half-mile radius of the project site? ___Yes ___No; if yes, identify the ORW and its location. ______________________________________________ (NOTE: Outstanding Resource Waters include Class A public water supplies, their tributaries, and bordering wetlands; active and inactive reservoirs approved by MassDEP; certain waters within Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, and certified vernal pools. Outstanding resource waters are listed in the Surface Water Quality Standards, 314 CMR 4.00.)

Are there any impaired water bodies on or within a half-mile radius of the project site? ___Yes ___No; if yes, identify the water body and pollutant(s) causing the impairment:____________________________________.

Is the project within a medium or high stress basin, as established by the Massachusetts Water Resources Commission? ___Yes ___No STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: Generally describe the project's stormwater impacts and measures that the project will take to comply with the standards found in MassDEP's Stormwater Management Regulations:____________________________

MASSACHUSETTS CONTINGENCY PLAN: Has the project site been, or is it currently being, regulated under M.G.L.c.21E or the Massachusetts Contingency Plan? Y site (including Release Tracking Number (RTN), cleanup phase, and Response Action Outcome classification):__________________ Is there an Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) on any portion of the project site? Yes ___ No ___; if yes, describe which portion of the site and how the project will be consistent with the AUL: _____________________.

Are you aware of any Reportable Conditions at the property that have not yet been assigned an RTN? Yes ___ No ___ ; if yes, please describe:____________________________________ SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE: If the project will generate solid waste during demolition or construction, describe alternatives considered for re-use, recycling, and disposal of, e.g., asphalt, brick, concrete, gypsum, metal, wood:_______________________ (NOTE: Asphalt pavement, brick, concrete and metal are banned from disposal at Massachusetts landfills and waste combustion facilities and wood is banned from disposal at Massachusetts landfills.

See 310 CMR 19.017 for the complete list of banned materials.)

Will your project disturb asbestos containing materials? Yes ___ No ___ ; if yes, please consult state asbestos requirements at http://mass.gov/MassDEP/air/asbhom01.htm Describe anti-idling and other measures to limit emissions from construction equipment: _________________ DESIGNATED WILD AND SCENIC RIVER: Is this project site located wholly or partially within a defined river corridor of a federally designated Wild and Scenic River or a state designated Scenic River? Yes ___ No ___ ; if yes, specify name of river and designation: If yes, does the project have the potential to impact any of the “outstandingly remarkable” resources of a federally Wild and Scenic River or the stated purpose of a state designated Scenic River?

Yes ___ No ___ ; if yes, specify name of river and designation: _____________; if yes, will the project will result in any impacts to any of the designated “outstandingly remarkable” resources of the Wild and Scenic River or the stated purposes of a Scenic River.

Yes ___ No ___ ; if yes,describe the potential impacts to one or more of the “outstandingly remarkable” resources or stated purposes and mitigation measures proposed.

-4-

ATTACHMENTS: 1.

2.

3..

4

5.

6.

7.

List of all attachments to this document.

U.S.G.S. map (good quality color copy, 8-½ x 11 inches or larger, at a scale of 1:24,000) indicating the project location and boundaries.

Plan, at an appropriate scale, of existing conditions on the project site and its immediate environs, showing all known structures, roadways and parking lots, railroad rights-of-way, wetlands and water bodies, wooded areas, farmland, steep slopes, public open spaces, and major utilities.

Plan, at an appropriate scale, depicting environmental constraints on or adjacent to the project site such as Priority and/or Estimated Habitat of state-listed rare species, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, Chapter 91 jurisdictional areas, Article 97 lands, wetland resource area delineations, water supply protection areas, and historic resources and/or districts.

Plan, at an appropriate scale, of proposed conditions upon completion of project (if construction of the project is proposed to be phased, there should be a site plan showing conditions upon the completion of each phase).

List of all agencies and persons to whom the proponent circulated the ENF, in accordance with 301 CMR 11.16(2).

List of municipal and federal permits and reviews required by the project, as applicable.

-5-

LAND SECTION – all proponents must fill out this section I. Thresholds / Permits A. Does the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to land (see 301 CMR 11.03(1) ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify each threshold: II. Impacts and Permits A. Describe, in acres, the current and proposed character of the project site, as follows: Change Total Existing Footprint of buildings ________ ________ ________ Internal roadways ________ ________ ________ Parking and other paved areas ________ ________ ________ Other altered areas ________ ________ ________ Undeveloped areas ________ ________ ________ Total: Project Site Acreage ________ ________ ________ B. Has any part of the project site been in active agricultural use in the last five years? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, how many acres of land in agricultural use (with prime state or locally important agricultural soils) will be converted to nonagricultural use?

C. Is any part of the project site currently or proposed to be in active forestry use? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, please describe current and proposed forestry activities and indicate whether any part of the site is the subject of a forest management plan approved by the Department of Conservation and Recreation: D. Does any part of the project involve conversion of land held for natural resources purposes in accordance with Article 97 of the Amendments to the Constitution of the Commonwealth to any purpose not in accordance with Article 97? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe: E. Is any part of the project site currently subject to a conservation restriction, preservation restriction, agricultural preservation restriction or watershed preservation restriction? ___ Yes___ No; if yes, does the project involve the release or modification of such restriction? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe: F. Does the project require approval of a new urban redevelopment project or a fundamental change in an existing urban redevelopment project under M.G.L.c.121A? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe: G. Does the project require approval of a new urban renewal plan or a major modification of an existing urban renewal plan under M.G.L.c.121B? Yes ___ No ___; if yes, describe:

III. Consistency A. Identify the current municipal comprehensive land use plan Title:__________________________ Date___________________ B. Describe the project’s consistency with that plan with regard to: 1) economic development _______________________ 2) adequacy of infrastructure _____________________ 3) open space impacts ___________________________ 4) compatibility with adjacent land uses_______________ C. Identify the current Regional Policy Plan of the applicable Regional Planning Agency (RPA) RPA: ____________________ -6-

Title:__________________________ Date___________________ D. Describe the project’s consistency with that plan with regard to: 1) economic development ________________________ 2) adequacy of infrastructure _______________________ 3) open space impacts ____________________________

-7-

RARE SPECIES SECTION I. Thresholds / Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to rare species or habitat (see 301 CMR 11.03(2))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: (NOTE: If you are uncertain, it is recommended that you consult with the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) prior to submitting the ENF.) B. Does the project require any state permits related to rare species or habitat? ___ Yes ___ No C. Does the project site fall within mapped rare species habitat (Priority or Estimated Habitat?) in the current Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas (attach relevant page)? ___ Yes ___ No. D. If you answered "No" to all questions A, B and C, proceed to the Wetlands, Waterways, and Tidelands Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Rare Species section below.

II. Impacts and Permits A. Does the project site fall within Priority or Estimated Habitat in the current Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas (attach relevant page)? ___ Yes ___ No. If yes, 1. Have you consulted with the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP)? ___Yes ___No; if yes, have you received a determination as to whether the project will result in the “take” of a rare species? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, attach the letter of determination to this submission.

2. Will the project "take" an endangered, threatened, and/or species of special concern in accordance with M.G.L. c.131A (see also 321 CMR 10.04)? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, provide a summary of proposed measures to minimize and mitigate rare species impacts 3. Which rare species are known to occur within the Priority or Estimated Habitat?

4. Has the site been surveyed for rare species in accordance with the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act? ___ Yes ___ No 4. If your project is within Estimated Habitat, have you filed a Notice of Intent or received an Order of Conditions for this project? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, did you send a copy of the Notice of Intent to the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, in accordance with the Wetlands Protection Act regulations? ___ Yes ___ No

B. Will the project "take" an endangered, threatened, and/or species of special concern in accordance with M.G.L. c.131A (see also 321 CMR 10.04)? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, provide a summary of proposed measures to minimize and mitigate impacts to significant habitat:

-8-

WETLANDS, WATERWAYS, AND TIDELANDS SECTION I. Thresholds / Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wetlands, waterways, and tidelands (see 301 CMR 11.03(3))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits (or a local Order of Conditions) related to wetlands, waterways, or tidelands? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Water Supply Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Wetlands, Waterways, and Tidelands Section below.

II. Wetlands Impacts and Permits A. Does the project require a new or amended Order of Conditions under the Wetlands Protection Act (M.G.L. c.131A)? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, has a Notice of Intent been filed? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, list the date and MassDEP file number: ______; if yes, has a local Order of Conditions been issued? ___ Yes ___ No; Was the Order of Conditions appealed? ___ Yes ___ No. Will the project require a Variance from the Wetlands regulations? ___ Yes ___ No. B. Describe any proposed permanent or temporary impacts to wetland resource areas located on the project site: C. Estimate the extent and type of impact that the project will have on wetland resources, and indicate whether the impacts are temporary or permanent: Coastal Wetlands

Area (square feet) or Length (linear feet)

Temporary or Permanent Impact?

Land Under the Ocean _________________ Designated Port Areas _________________ Coastal Beaches _________________ Coastal Dunes _________________ Barrier Beaches _________________ Coastal Banks _________________ Rocky Intertidal Shores _________________ Salt Marshes _________________ Land Under Salt Ponds _________________ Land Containing Shellfish _________________ Fish Runs _________________ Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage _________________

___________________ ___________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ___________________ ____________________ ____________________

Inland Wetlands Bank (lf) Bordering Vegetated Wetlands Isolated Vegetated Wetlands Land under Water Isolated Land Subject to Flooding Borderi ng Land Subject to Flooding Riverfront Area

____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________

_________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________

D. Is any part of the project: 1. proposed as a limited project? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, what is the area (in sf)?____ 2. the construction or alteration of a dam? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe: 3. fill or structure in a velocity zone or regulatory floodway? ___ Yes ___ No 4. dredging or disposal of dredged material? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe the volume -9-

of dredged material and the proposed disposal site: 5. a discharge to an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) or an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)? ___ Yes ___ No 6. subject to a wetlands restriction order? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, identify the area (in sf): 7. located in buffer zones? ___Yes ___No; if yes, how much (in sf) ______

E. Will the project: 1. be subject to a local wetlands ordinance or bylaw? ___ Yes ___ No 2. alter any federally-protected wetlands not regulated under state law? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, what is the area (sf)?

III. Waterways and Tidelands Impacts and Permits A. Does the project site contain waterways or tidelands (including filled former tidelands) that are subject to the Waterways Act, M.G.L.c.91? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, is there a current Chapter 91 License or Permit affecting the project site? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, list the date and license or permit number and provide a copy of the historic map used to determine extent of filled tidelands: B. Does the project require a new or modified license or permit under M.G.L.c.91? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, how many acres of the project site subject to M.G.L.c.91 will be for non-water-dependent use?

Current ___ Change ___ Total ___ If yes, how many square feet of solid fill or pile-supported structures (in sf)?

C. For non-water-dependent use projects, indicate the following: Area of filled tidelands on the site:_____________________ Area of filled tidelands covered by buildings:____________ For portions of site on filled tidelands, list ground floor uses and area of each use: ______________ Does the project include new non-water-dependent uses located over flowed tidelands?

Yes ___ No ___ Height of building on filled tidelands________________ Also show the following on a site plan: Mean High Water, Mean Low Water, Waterdependent Use Zone, location of uses within buildings on tidelands, and interior and exterior areas and facilities dedicated for public use, and historic high and historic low water marks.

D. Is the project located on landlocked tidelands? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe the project’s impact on the public’s right to access, use and enjoy jurisdictional tidelands and describe measures the project will implement to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse impact: E. Is the project located in an area where low groundwater levels have been identified by a municipality or by a state or federal agency as a threat to building foundations? ___Yes ___ No; if yes, describe the project’s impact on groundwater levels and describe measures the project will implement to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse impact: F. Is the project non-water-dependent and located on landlocked tidelands or waterways or tidelands subject to the Waterways Act and subject to a mandatory EIR? ___ Yes ___ No; (NOTE: If yes, then the project will be subject to Public Benefit Review and Determination.)

G. Does the project include dredging? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, answer the following questions: What type of dredging? Improvement ___ Maintenance ___ Both ____ What is the proposed dredge volume, in cubic yards (cys) _________ - 10 -

What is the proposed dredge footprint ____length (ft) ___width (ft)____depth (ft); Will dredging impact the following resource areas?

Intertidal Yes__ No__; if yes, ___ sq ft Outstanding Resource Waters Yes__ No__; if yes, ___ sq ft Other resource area (i.e. shellfish beds, eel grass beds) Yes__ No__; if yes __ sq ft If yes to any of the above, have you evaluated appropriate and practicable steps to: 1) avoidance; 2) if avoidance is not possible, minimization; 3) if either avoidance or minimize is not possible, mitigation?

If no to any of the above, what information or documentation was used to support this determination?

Provide a comprehensive analysis of practicable alternatives for improvement dredging in accordance with 314 CMR 9.07(1)(b). Physical and chemical data of the sediment shall be included in the comprehensive analysis.

Sediment Characterization Existing gradation analysis results? __Yes ___No: if yes, provide results.

Existing chemical results for parameters listed in 314 CMR 9.07(2)(b)6? ___Yes ____No; if yes, provide results.

Do you have sufficient information to evaluate feasibility of the following management options for dredged sediment? If yes, check the appropriate option.

Beach Nourishment ___ Unconfined Ocean Disposal ___ Confined Disposal: Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) ___ Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) ___ Landfill Reuse in accordance with COMM-97-001 ___ Shoreline Placement ___ Upland Material Reuse____ In-State landfill disposal____ Out-of-state landfill disposal ____ (NOTE: This information is required for a 401 Water Quality Certification.)

IV. Consistency: A. Does the project have effects on the coastal resources or uses, and/or is the project located within the Coastal Zone? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe these effects and the projects consistency with the policies of the Office of Coastal Zone Management: B. Is the project located within an area subject to a Municipal Harbor Plan? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, identify the Municipal Harbor Plan and describe the project's consistency with that plan:

- 11 -

WATER SUPPLY SECTION I. Thresholds / Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to water supply (see 301 CMR 11.03(4))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to water supply? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Wastewater Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Water Supply Section below.

II. Impacts and Permits A. Describe, in gallons per day (gpd), the volume and source of water use for existing and proposed activities at the project site: Change Total Existing Municipal or regional water supply ________ ________ ________ Withdrawal from groundwater ________ ________ ________ Withdrawal from surface water ________ ________ ________ Interbasin transfer ________ ________ ________ (NOTE: Interbasin Transfer approval will be required if the basin and community where the proposed water supply source is located is different from the basin and community where the wastewater from the source will be discharged.)

B. If the source is a municipal or regional supply, has the municipality or region indicated that there is adequate capacity in the system to accommodate the project? ___ Yes ___ No C. If the project involves a new or expanded withdrawal from a groundwater or surface water source, has a pumping test been conducted? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, attach a map of the drilling sites and a summary of the alternatives considered and the results. ______________ D. What is the currently permitted withdrawal at the proposed water supply source (in gallons per Will the project require an increase in that withdrawal? ___Yes ___No; if yes, then how day)? much of an increase (gpd)? ____________________ E. Does the project site currently contain a water supply well, a drinking water treatment facility, water main, or other water supply facility, or will the project involve construction of a new facility? ___ Yes ___No. If yes, describe existing and proposed water supply facilities at the project site: Permitted Flow Capacity of water supply well(s) (gpd) _______ Capacity of water treatment plant (gpd) _______

Existing Avg Daily Flow ________ ________

Project Flow

Total

________ ________

________ ________

F. If the project involves a new interbasin transfer of water, which basins are involved, what is the direction of the transfer, and is the interbasin transfer existing or proposed?

G. Does the project involve: 1. new water service by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority or other agency of the Commonwealth to a municipality or water district? ___ Yes ___ No 2. a Watershed Protection Act variance? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, how many acres of alteration?

3. a non-bridged stream crossing 1,000 or less feet upstream of a public surface drinking water supply for purpose of forest harvesting activities? ___ Yes ___ No - 12 -

III. Consistency Describe the project's consistency with water conservation plans or other plans to enhance water resources, quality, facilities and services:

- 13 -

WASTEWATER SECTION I. Thresholds / Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wastewater (see 301 CMR 11.03(5))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to wastewater? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Transportation -- Traffic Generation Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Wastewater Section below.

II. Impacts and Permits A. Describe the volume (in gallons per day) and type of disposal of wastewater generation for existing and proposed activities at the project site (calculate according to 310 CMR 15.00 for septic systems or 314 CMR 7.00 for sewer systems):

Discharge of sanitary wastewater Discharge of industrial wastewater TOTAL

Discharge to groundwater Discharge to outstanding resource water Discharge to surface water Discharge to municipal or regional wastewater facility TOTAL

Existing

Change

Total

________ ________ ________

________ ________ ________

________ ________ ________

Existing ________ ________ ________

Change ________ ________ ________

Total ________ ________ ________

________ ________

________ ________

________ ________

B. Is the existing collection system at or near its capacity? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, then describe the measures to be undertaken to accommodate the project’s wastewater flows:

C. Is the existing wastewater disposal facility at or near its permitted capacity? ___ Yes___ No; if yes, then describe the measures to be undertaken to accommodate the project’s wastewater flows:

D. Does the project site currently contain a wastewater treatment facility, sewer main, or other wastewater disposal facility, or will the project involve construction of a new facility? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe as follows:

Wastewater treatment plant capacity (in gallons per day)

Permitted

Existing Avg Daily Flow

Project Flow

Total

_______

________

________

________

E. If the project requires an interbasin transfer of wastewater, which basins are involved, what is the direction of the transfer, and is the interbasin transfer existing or new?

(NOTE: Interbasin Transfer approval may be needed if the basin and community where wastewater will be discharged is different from the basin and community where the source of water supply is - 14 -

located.)

F. Does the project involve new sewer service by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) or other Agency of the Commonwealth to a municipality or sewer district? ___ Yes ___ No

G. Is there an existing facility, or is a new facility proposed at the project site for the storage, treatment, processing, combustion or disposal of sewage sludge, sludge ash, grit, screenings, wastewater reuse (gray water) or other sewage residual materials? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, what is the capacity (tons per day): Existing ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

Storage Treatment Processing Combustion Disposal

Change ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

Total ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

H. Describe the water conservation measures to be undertaken by the project, and other wastewater mitigation, such as infiltration and inflow removal.

III. Consistency A. Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with applicable state, regional, and local plans and policies related to wastewater management: B. If the project requires a sewer extension permit, is that extension included in a comprehensive wastewater management plan? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, indicate the EEA number for the plan and whether the project site is within a sewer service area recommended or approved in that plan:

- 15 -

TRANSPORTATION SECTION (TRAFFIC GENERATION) I. Thresholds / Permit A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to traffic generation (see 301 CMR 11.03(6))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to state-controlled roadways? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Roadways and Other Transportation Facilities Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Traffic Generation Section below.

II. Traffic Impacts and Permits A. Describe existing and proposed vehicular traffic generated by activities at the project site: Change Total Existing Number of parking spaces _______ ________ _______ Number of vehicle trips per day ________ ________ ________ ITE Land Use Code(s): ________ ________ ________ B. What is the estimated average daily traffic on roadways serving the site?

Existing Change Roadway 1. ___________________ ________ ________ 2. ____________________ ________ ________ 3. ____________________ ________ ________

Total ________ ________ ________

C. If applicable, describe proposed mitigation measures on state-controlled roadways that the project proponent will implement: D. How will the project implement and/or promote the use of transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and services to provide access to and from the project site?

C. Is there a Transportation Management Association (TMA) that provides transportation demand management (TDM) services in the area of the project site? ____ Yes ____ No; if yes, describe if and how will the project will participate in the TMA: D. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation facilities? ____ Yes ____ No; if yes, generally describe: E. If the project will penetrate approach airspace of a nearby airport, has the proponent filed a Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission Airspace Review Form (780 CMR 111.7) and a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (CFR Title 14 Part 77.13, forms 7460-1 and 7460-2)?

III. Consistency Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with municipal, regional, state, and federal plans and policies related to traffic, transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services:

- 16 -

TRANSPORTATION SECTION (ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES) I. Thresholds A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to roadways or other transportation facilities (see 301 CMR 11.03(6))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to roadways or other transportation facilities? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Energy Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Roadways Section below.

II. Transportation Facility Impacts A. Describe existing and proposed transportation facilities in the immediate vicinity of the project site:

B. Will the project involve any 1. Alteration of bank or terrain (in linear feet)?

2. Cutting of living public shade trees (number)?

3. Elimination of stone wall (in linear feet)?

____________ ____________ ____________

III. Consistency -- Describe the project's consistency with other federal, state, regional, and local plans and policies related to traffic, transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services, including consistency with the applicable regional transportation plan and the Transportation Improvements Plan (TIP), the State Bicycle Plan, and the State Pedestrian Plan:

- 17 -

ENERGY SECTION I. Thresholds / Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to energy (see 301 CMR 11.03(7))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to energy? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Air Quality Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Energy Section below.

II. Impacts and Permits A. Describe existing and proposed energy generation and transmission facilities at the project site: Total Existing Change Capacity of electric generating facility (megawatts) ________ ________ ________ Length of fuel line (in miles) ________ ________ ________ Length of transmission lines (in miles) ________ ________ ________ Capacity of transmission lines (in kilovolts) ________ ________ ________ B. If the project involves construction or expansion of an electric generating facility, what are: 1. the facility's current and proposed fuel source(s)?

2. the facility's current and proposed cooling source(s)?

C. If the project involves construction of an electrical transmission line, will it be located on a new, unused, or abandoned right of way? ___Yes ___No; if yes, please describe: D. Describe the project's other impacts on energy facilities and services: III. Consistency Describe the project's consistency with state, municipal, regional, and federal plans and policies for enhancing energy facilities and services:

- 18 -

AIR QUALITY SECTION I. Thresholds A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to air quality (see 301 CMR 11.03(8))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to air quality? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Solid and Hazardous Waste Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Air Quality Section below.

II. Impacts and Permits A. Does the project involve construction or modification of a major stationary source (see 310 CMR 7.00, Appendix A)? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, describe existing and proposed emissions (in tons per day) of:

Particulate matter Carbon monoxide Sulfur dioxide Volatile organic compounds Oxides of nitrogen Lead Any hazardous air pollutant Carbon dioxide

Existing

Change

Total

________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

B. Describe the project's other impacts on air resources and air quality, including noise impacts: III. Consistency A. Describe the project's consistency with the State Implementation Plan: B. Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with other federal, state, regional, and local plans and policies related to air resources and air quality:

19

SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION I. Thresholds / Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to solid or hazardous waste (see 301 CMR 11.03(9))? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to solid and hazardous waste? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered "No" to both questions A and B, proceed to the Historical and Archaeological Resources Section. If you answered "Yes" to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Section below.

II. Impacts and Permits A. Is there any current or proposed facility at the project site for the storage, treatment, processing, combustion or disposal of solid waste? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, what is the volume (in tons per day) of the capacity: Change Total Existing Storage ________ ________ ________ Treatment, processing ________ ________ ________ Combustion ________ ________ ________ Disposal ________ ________ ________ B. Is there any current or proposed facility at the project site for the storage, recycling, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, what is the volume (in tons or gallons per day) of the capacity:

Storage Recycling Treatment Disposal

Change Total Existing ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

C. If the project will generate solid waste (for example, during demolition or construction), describe alternatives considered for re-use, recycling, and disposal: D. If the project involves demolition, do any buildings to be demolished contain asbestos? ___ Yes ___ No E. Describe the project's other solid and hazardous waste impacts (including indirect impacts):

III. Consistency Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with the State Solid Waste Master Plan:

20

HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SECTION I. Thresholds / Impacts A. Have you consulted with the Massachusetts Historical Commission? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, attach correspondence. For project sites involving lands under water, have you consulted with the Massachusetts Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources? ____Yes ____ No; if yes, attach correspondence B. Is any part of the project site a historic structure, or a structure within a historic district, in either case listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, does the project involve the demolition of all or any exterior part of such historic structure? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, please describe: C. Is any part of the project site an archaeological site listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, does the project involve the destruction of all or any part of such archaeological site? ___ Yes ___ No; if yes, please describe: D. If you answered "No" to all parts of both questions A, B and C, proceed to the Attachments and Certifications Sections. If you answered "Yes" to any part of either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Historical and Archaeological Resources Section below.

II. Impacts Describe and assess the project's impacts, direct and indirect, on listed or inventoried historical and archaeological resources:

III. Consistency Describe measures that the proponent will take to comply with federal, state, regional, and local plans and policies related to preserving historical and archaeological resources:

21

CERTIFICATIONS: 1.

The Public Notice of Environmental Review has been/will be published in the following newspapers in accordance with 301 CMR 11.15(1): (Name)____________________________________(Date)______________________

2. This form has been circulated to Agencies and Persons in accordance with 301 CMR 11.16(2).

Signatures:

Date

Signature of Responsible Officer or Proponent

Date

Signature of person preparing NPC (if different from above)

Name (print or type)

Name (print or type)

Firm/Agency

Firm/Agency

Street

Street

Municipality/State/Zip

Municipality/State/Zip

Phone

Phone

22

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs MEPA Office 100 Cambridge St., Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 Telephone 617-626-1020

The following should be completed and submitted to a local newspaper : PUBLIC NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT:___________________________________________________ LOCATION: _________________________________________________ PROPONENT: _______________________________________________ The undersigned is submitting an Environmental Notification Form ("ENF") to the Secretary of Energy & Environmental Affairs on or before _____________________________ (date) This will initiate review of the above project pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act ("MEPA", M.G.L. c. 30, s.s. 61-62I). Copies of the ENF may be obtained from: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ (Name, address, phone number of proponent or proponent's agent) Copies of the ENF are also being sent to the Conservation Commission and Planning Board of ________________________________(Municipality) where they may be inspected.

The Secretary of Energy & Environmental Affairs will publish notice of the ENF in the Environmental Monitor, will receive public comments on the project for 20 days, and will then decide, within ten days, if an environmental Impact Report is needed. A site visit and consultation session on the project may also be scheduled. All persons wishing to comment on the project, or to be notified of a site visit or consultation session, should write to the Secretary of Energy & Environmental Affairs, 100 Cambridge St., Suite 900, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, Attention: MEPA Office, referencing the above project.

By _________________________________________________________(Proponent)

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges A. General Information Important: When filling out forms on the computer, use only the tab key to move your cursor - do not use the return key.

1. Which permit category are you applying for?

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from Sewage Treatment Plant BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharge Please Note: In accordance with 314 CMR 5.09, these permit categories may require that a Hydrogeological Evaluation be submitted to the Department prior to the submittal of the permit application. Please see the application form and instructions for BRP WP 83.

2.

Applicant Information: Contact Name

Company Name (If applicable)

Address City/Town

State

Telephone

Email

Zip Code

3. Applicant Contact Information (if different from above): Contact Name

Company Name (If applicable)

Title Address

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

City/Town

State

Telephone

Email address

Zip Code

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 1 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges A. General Information (cont.)

4. The legal entity which owns this facility is: Individual

Private

Corporation

State/County

Municipality

Other:

Federal

Please provide legal ownership documents with this application.

5. Facility Information: Name of facility Address City/Town

State

Telephone

Email

Zip Code

6. Facility Operator Information: Give the name, as it is legally referred to, of the person, firm, public organization or other entity which will operate the facility described in this application. If the facility owner is also the operator, write owner and list mailing address only if different from that listed in number 1 above.

Operator Name

Operator Company

Address City/Town

State

License Number and Operator Grade

Email address

Zip Code

Telephone

B. Project Information 1. Does the project affect a site of historic or archeological significance, as defined in regulations of the Massachusetts Historical Commission, 950 CMR 71.00?

Yes

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

No

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 2 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges B. Project Information (cont.)

2. Does this project require a filing under 301 CMR 11.00, the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act? Yes

No

If yes, has a filing been made? (Please indicate the EOEA File Number) Yes

No

EOEA File Number

3. Is this a RCRA facility as defined in 314 CMR 8.03?

Yes

No

If yes, submit the information on Form HW contained in 314 CMR 8.20 in accordance with the provisions of 314 CMR 8.08.

4. Is the discharge for this facility within: a. The Zone I, Zone A, Zone II, or Interim Wellhead Protection Area of a public water supply?

Yes

No

b. A private water supply area?

Yes c.

No

A sole source aquifer?

Yes

No

d. 100 feet of an Outstanding Resource Water designated in 314 CMR 4.00, a Special Resource Water designated in 314 CMR 4.00, a cold-water fishery as defined in 314 CMR 9.02, a bathing beach as defined in 104 CMR 445.000, or a shellfish growing area as defined in 314 CMR 9.02?

Yes

No

e. A nitrogen-sensitive area as designated by the Department in accordance with 310 CMR 15.215?

Yes f.

An area where the Department has determined based on a Total Maximum Daily Load or other technical report that more stringent effluent limits than those set forth in the General Permit are required to achieve or maintain compliance with the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards, 314 CMR 4.00?

Yes

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

No

No BRP WP 11-85 • Page 3 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges B. Project Information (cont.)

5. Improvements - Are you required by any Federal, State or local authority to meet any implementation schedule for the construction, upgrading or operation of wastewater treatment equipment or practices or any other environmental programs which may affect the discharges described in this application?

This includes, but is not limited to, permit conditions, administrative or enforcement orders, enforcement compliance schedule letters, stipulations, court orders, and grant or loan conditions.

Yes

No

If yes, answer the following: Description of order or agreement (include enforcement document number, if applicable):

Identification No. of Affected Treatment Facility Description of Project

Final Compliance Date

6. Has a hydrogeologic study been performed to determine the potential impact on the groundwater of the discharge or activity?

Yes - Application Transmittal Date of Number: Approval: Please attach copy of the DEP Hydrogeologic Report Approval Letter.

No – STOP: Please Note: In accordance with 314 CMR 5.09, these permit categories may require that a Hydrogeological Evaluation be submitted to the Department prior to the submittal of the permit application. Please see the application form and instructions for BRP WP 83.

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 4 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges B. Project Information (cont.)

7. Are there any groundwater monitoring wells currently in place in the vicinity of the discharge or proposed discharge?

Yes If yes, please attach information on the type and location of the wells and available monitoring data.

No 8. Have plans and specifications for the treatment works been approved (see instructions) by the Department or if approved prior to July 1975, by the Department of Public Health?

Yes

If yes, please attach copy of plans and specifications and approval letter.

No 9. Is there a local regulation governing the construction of wastewater treatment facilities?

Yes

If yes, please include a copy of the local approval.

No 10. Have opportunities for reclaimed water been evaluated?

Yes

No

C. Facility Information 1. Facility Status: 2. When did or when will this discharge begin?

Existing

Proposed

Date of Startup

3. Check type of establishment producing or contributing to discharge: Residential: Condominium Apartment Elderly Housing Nursing Home Other (specify): Total # of Bedrooms: wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 5 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges C. Facility Information (cont.)

Municipality Business

Nature of Business:

School Other (specify): 4. Design Flow: a)

Daily Maximum gpd

Check here if discharge occurs all year, or

b) List months discharge occurs c) Number of days per week discharge occurs 5. Basis for design flow: The State Environmental Code – Title 5 Other:

Specify

6. Type of treatment and disposal system:

7. Location and method of wastewater treatment solids disposal:

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 6 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges C. Facility Information (cont.)

8. If a commercial establishment: A. Are any types of wastewater other than sanitary sewage produced?

Yes If yes:

No Specify type of wastewater Quantity gpd Method and location of disposal

B. Are any hazardous wastes generated?

Yes

No

9. Does or will the treatment/disposal facility receive industrial wastes?

Yes

No

10. Location of Facility: A. GPS Coordinates: 1) Enter Latitude and Longitude to the nearest whole second for both the wastewater treatment facility and the effluent disposal area.

Latitude:

Longitude:

2) Provide a narrative description of the site and the feature to be permitted. As an example: “The site is on the west side of Main Street, the third building north of High Street. The disposal field lies 100 feet off the southwest corner of the building.”

3) Attach a site map based on the MassGIS Coordinate Information Tool that clearly indicates the site. The Coordinate Information Tool is available at http://maps.massgis.state.ma.us/images/dep/xyinfo/get_xy.html.

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 7 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges C. Facility Information (cont.)

B. Provide a topographic map or maps of the area extending at least to one mile beyond the property boundaries of the facility which clearly show the following: 1) The legal boundaries of the facility; 2) The location and serial number of each of your existing and proposed intake and discharge structures; 3) All hazardous waste management facilities; 4) All springs and surface water bodies in the area, plus all drinking water wells within one mile of the facility which are identified in the public record or otherwise known to you.

5) All Zone II’s or IWPA’s.

If an intake or discharge structure, hazardous waste disposal site, or injection well associated with the facility is located more than one mile from the plant, include it on the map, if possible. If not, attach additional sheets describing the location of the structure, disposal site, or well, and identify the U.S. Geological Survey (or other) map corresponding to the location.

C. Please list any public or private drinking water supply wells within 2,500 feet of the discharge area: Type of Well Status Well Location Safe Yield (Public/Private) (Active/Inactive)

11. Water Supply Data A. List sources of water supply and annual water consumption for the past five years.

Water Sources

Year 1

Year 2.

Year 3.

Year 4.

Year 5.

1.

2.

3.

Total: B. Please show the location of your water sources on the map described in question 10. wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 8 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges D. Additional Information for WP85 – Other Groundwater Discharges 1. Flows, Sources of Pollution and Treatment Technologies A. Attach a line drawing showing the water flow through the facility. Indicate sources of intake water, operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, and treatment units labeled to correspond to the more defined descriptions in Item D.1.B. Construct a water balance on the line drawing by showing average flows between intakes, operations, treatment units and outfalls. If a water balance cannot be determined provide a pictorial description of the nature and amount of any sources of water and any collection or treatment measures.

B. For each discharge, provide a description of: 1) All operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, cooling water and runoff; 2) The average flow contributed by each operation; and 3) The treatment received by the wastewater. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)

4) With the exception of storm water runoff, leaks, or spills please note if any of the discharges described are intermittent or seasonal.

Operations Contributing to Flow: Identification Number

Operations

Average Flow

Treatment

2. Effluent Limitations: A. List any pollutant you know or have reason to believe is discharged or may be discharged from the treatment facilities. For every pollutant you list, briefly describe the reason you believe it to be present, its approximate concentration in the discharge and any analytical data in your possession, which will support your statement. Additional wastewater analysis may be required as part of this application.

Pollutant

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

Concentration

Source

Available Data

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 9 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges D. Additional Information for WP85 – Other Groundwater Discharges B. Are your operations such that your raw materials, processed, or products can reasonably be expected to vary so that your discharges of pollutants may during the next five years exceed three times the approximate concentrations reported in item 2A? Yes (please explain)

C.

No

Are you planning on adding any new processes over the next five years?

Yes (please specify)

No

D. Are organic compounds used at your facility?

Yes (please explain)

No

3. Were any of the analyses or testing reported in item D.2.A. performed by a contract laboratory or consulting firm?

Yes (provide contact information)

No

Name of Laboratory or Consulting Firm/Contact Person Address City/Town

State

Telephone

Email Address

Zip Code

For Reclaimed Water System Permits and renewals of those permits, please complete and attach the Supplemental Application Form for Reclaimed Water System (BRP WP 84). For all other individual permits complete Section E on this form. wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 10 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection – Individual Permits Groundwater Discharge Permits, Reclaimed Water Use Permit or Permit Renewal/Modification Application for Permit to Discharge to Groundwaters of the Commonwealth or for Reclaimed Water Use

Transmittal Number # Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

BRP WP 11 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification with Plan Approval BRP WP 12 Individual Permit Renewal/Modification without Plan Approval BRP WP 79 Individual Permit for Groundwater Discharge from a Sewage Treatment Plant

BRP WP 84 Individual Permit for Reclaimed Water Use BRP WP 85 Individual Permit for Other Groundwater Discharges E. Certification “I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my diligent inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. I will be responsible for publication of public notice of the applicable permit proceedings identified under 314 CMR 2.06(1)(a) through (d).”

Signature of Applicant

Printed Name of Applicant

Date Signed

wp1185ap.doc • rev. 11/11

Name of Preparer

Telephone

Title of Preparer

Email

BRP WP 11-85 • Page 11 of 11

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection–Groundwater Discharge Permit Program Transmittal Number #

BRP WP 83 Application to Prepare a Hydrogeological Evaluation

Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

A. General Information Important: When filling out forms on the computer, use only the tab key to move your cursor - do not use the return key.

1.

Applicant Information: Name

Company Name (If applicable)

Address City/Town

State

Telephone

Zip Code

Email address

2. Applicant Contact Information (if different from above): Contact Name

Company Name (If applicable)

Title Address City/Town

State

Telephone

Zip Code

email address

B. Project Information 1. Has a pre-scoping meeting been held with MassDEP personnel?

Yes

No

If yes, date of pre-scoping meeting:

2. Has a public notice been placed in the Environmental Monitor that the scope of work has been prepared and will be submitted to MassDEP in accordance with 314 CMR 5.09(1)(b)?

Yes

No

If yes, date of Environmental Monitor:

3. Is there a discharge presently located on the site?

Yes

No

When did the discharge begin?

If yes, answer the following: Date of startup:

Description of discharge:

wp83ap.doc • rev. 09/09/09

BRP WP 83 • Hydrogeological Evaluation • Page 1 of 3

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection–Groundwater Discharge Permit Program Transmittal Number #

BRP WP 83 Application to Prepare a Hydrogeological Evaluation

Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

B. Project Information (cont.)

4. Improvements - Are you required by any Federal, State or local authority to meet any implementation schedule for the construction, upgrading or operation of wastewater treatment equipment or practices or any other environmental programs which may affect the discharges described in this application?

This includes, but is not limited to; permit conditions, administrative or enforcement orders, enforcement compliance schedule letters, stipulations, court orders, and grant or loan conditions.

Yes

No

If yes, answer the following: Description of order or agreement (include enforcement document number, if applicable):

Identification No. of Affected Treatment Facility Description of Project

Final Compliance Date

C. Site Information 1. GPS Coordinates: a) Enter Latitude and Longitude to the nearest whole second for the proposed site.

Latitude:

Longitude:

b) Provide a narrative description of the site and the feature to be permitted. As an example: “The site is on the west side of Main Street, the third building north of High Street. The disposal field lies 100 feet off the southwest corner of the building.” c) Attach a site map based on the MassGIS Coordinate Information Tool that clearly indicates the site. The Coordinate Information Tool is available at http://maps.massgis.state.ma.us/images/dep/xyinfo/get_xy.html.

wp83ap.doc • rev. 09/09/09

BRP WP 83 • Hydrogeological Evaluation • Page 2 of 3

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection–Groundwater Discharge Permit Program Transmittal Number #

BRP WP 83 Application to Prepare a Hydrogeological Evaluation

Facility ID/Permit # (if known)

C. Site Information (cont.)

2. Provide a topographic map or maps of the area extending at least to one mile beyond the property boundaries of the site which clearly show the following: 1) The legal boundaries of the site; 2) All hazardous waste management facilities; 3) All springs and surface water bodies in the area, plus all drinking water wells within one mile of the facility which are identified in the public record or otherwise known to you.

4) All Zone II’s or IWPA’s.

3. Please list any public or private drinking water supply wells within 2,500 feet of the proposed site: Well Location

Type of Well (Public/Private)

Status (Active/Inactive)

Safe Yield

D. Certification “I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. I will be responsible for publication of public notice of the applicable permit proceedings identified under 314 CMR 2.06(1)(a) through (d).”

Signature of Applicant

Printed Name of Applicant

Date Signed

wp83ap.doc • rev. 09/09/09

Name of Preparer

Telephone

Title of Preparer

email

BRP WP 83 • Hydrogeological Evaluation • Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX E SOIL TESTING RESULTS

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal A. Facility Information Town of Avon Owner Name

0 Rear Page Street

Map: C7 Parcel: 3-27

Street Address

Map/Lot #

Avon

MA

02322

City

State

Zip Code

B. Site Information 1. (Check one)

New Construction

2. Published Soil Survey Available?

Upgrade

Yes

No

Repair If yes:

12/12* see notes Year Published

Canton fine sandy loam, extremly stony

None

Soil Name

Soil Limitations

3. Surficial Geological Report Available?

Yes

No

Geologic Material

If yes:

Year Published

422B Publication Scale

Soil Map Unit

Publication Scale

Map Unit

Landform

4. Flood Rate Insurance Map Above the 500-year flood boundary?

Yes

No

Within the 100-year flood boundary?

Yes

No

Within the 500-year flood boundary?

Yes

No

Within a velocity zone?

Yes

No

5. Wetland Area:

National Wetland Inventory Map

Map Unit

Name

Wetlands Conservancy Program Map

Map Unit

Name

6. Current Water Resource Conditions (USGS): 7. Other references reviewed:

12/12 Month/Year

Range:

Above Normal

Normal

Below Normal

USGS *USDA Web Soil Survey Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (minimum of two holes required at every proposed primary and reserved disposal area) Deep Observation Hole Number:

TP-1

12/12/12

9:15 AM

30°s Sunny

Date

Time

Weather

1. Location Ground Elevation at Surface of Hole:

224±

Location (identify on plan):

TP-1

Woods

2. Land Use

4

(e.g., woodland, agricultural field, vacant lot, etc.)

Surface Stones

Slope (%)

Trees Vegetation

3. Distances from:

4. Parent Material: If Yes:

Landform

Position on Landscape (attach sheet)

Open Water Body

feet

Drainage Way

feet

Possible Wet Area

feet

Property Line

feet

Drinking Water Well

feet

Other

feet

Glacial Till

Unsuitable Materials Present:

Disturbed Soil

5. Groundwater Observed:

Yes

Estimated Depth to High Groundwater:

Fill Material

Impervious Layer(s)

No

If yes:

< 72

< 218

inches

elevation

Yes

No

Weathered/Fractured Rock

Bedrock

Depth Weeping from Pit

Depth Standing Water in Hole

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (continued) Deep Observation Hole Number: Soil Horizon/ Soil Matrix: ColorDepth (in.)

Layer Moist (Munsell)

TP-1 Redoximorphic Features (mottles) Depth

Color

Soil Texture (USDA)

Percent

Coarse Fragments % by Volume Gravel

Cobbles & Stones

Soil Structure

Soil Consistence (Moist)

0-8

A

10YR 3/3

L

Massive

Friable

8-30

B

10YR 5/6

SL

Massive

Friable

30-72

C

2.5Y 5/4

LS

Massive

Friable

< 15

< 15

Other

Additional Notes:

Soil was dry at bottom. Excavation stopped due to machine limitations. Soil extremely bouldery.

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (continued) Deep Observation Hole Number:

TP-2

12/12/12

10:00 AM

30°s Sunny

Date

Time

Weather

1. Location Ground Elevation at Surface of Hole:

226±

Location (identify on plan):

TP-2

Woods

2. Land Use

4

(e.g., woodland, agricultural field, vacant lot, etc.)

Surface Stones

Slope (%)

Trees Vegetation

3. Distances from:

4. Parent Material: If Yes:

Landform

Position on Landscape (attach sheet)

Open Water Body

feet

Drainage Way

feet

Possible Wet Area

feet

Property Line

feet

Drinking Water Well

feet

Other

feet

Glacial Till

Unsuitable Materials Present:

Disturbed Soil

5. Groundwater Observed:

Yes

Estimated Depth to High Groundwater:

Fill Material

Impervious Layer(s)

No

If yes:

Yes

No

Weathered/Fractured Rock

Bedrock

Depth Weeping from Pit

< 66

< 220.5

inches

elevation

Depth Standing Water in Hole

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (continued) Deep Observation Hole Number: Soil Horizon/ Soil Matrix: ColorDepth (in.)

Layer Moist (Munsell)

TP-2 Redoximorphic Features (mottles) Depth

Color

Soil Texture (USDA)

Percent

Coarse Fragments % by Volume Gravel

Cobbles & Stones

Soil Structure

Soil Consistence (Moist)

0-8

A

10YR 3/3

L

Massive

Friable

8-30

B

10YR 5/6

SL

Massive

Friable

30-66

C

2.5Y 5/4

SL

Massive

Friable

< 15

< 15

Other

Additional Notes:

Soil was dry at bottom. Excavation stopped due to machine limitations. Soil extremely bouldery.

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (minimum of two holes required at every proposed primary and reserved disposal area) Deep Observation Hole Number:

TP-3

12/12/12

11:00am

30°s Sunny

Date

Time

Weather

1. Location Ground Elevation at Surface of Hole:

226±

Location (identify on plan):

TP-3

Woods

2. Land Use

4

(e.g., woodland, agricultural field, vacant lot, etc.)

Surface Stones

Slope (%)

Trees Vegetation

3. Distances from:

4. Parent Material: If Yes:

Landform

Position on Landscape (attach sheet)

Open Water Body

feet

Drainage Way

feet

Possible Wet Area

feet

Property Line

feet

Drinking Water Well

feet

Other

feet

Glacial Till

Unsuitable Materials Present:

Disturbed Soil

5. Groundwater Observed:

Yes

Estimated Depth to High Groundwater:

Fill Material

Impervious Layer(s)

No

If yes:

< 66

< 220.5

inches

elevation

Yes

No

Weathered/Fractured Rock

Bedrock

Depth Weeping from Pit

Depth Standing Water in Hole

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (continued) Deep Observation Hole Number: Soil Horizon/ Soil Matrix: ColorDepth (in.)

Layer Moist (Munsell)

TP-3 Redoximorphic Features (mottles) Depth

Color

Soil Texture (USDA)

Percent

Coarse Fragments % by Volume Gravel

Cobbles & Stones

Soil Structure

Soil Consistence (Moist)

0-8

A

10YR 3/3

L

Massive

Friable

8-30

B

10YR 5/6

SL

Massive

Friable

30-66

C

2.5Y 5/4

LS

Massive

Friable

< 15

< 15

Other

Additional Notes:

Soil was dry at bottom. Excavation stopped due to machine limitations. Soil extremely bouldery.

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (continued) Deep Observation Hole Number:

TP-4

12/12/12

11:30 am

30°s Sunny

Date

Time

Weather

1. Location Ground Elevation at Surface of Hole:

226±

Location (identify on plan):

TP-4

Woods

2. Land Use

4

(e.g., woodland, agricultural field, vacant lot, etc.)

Surface Stones

Slope (%)

Trees Vegetation

3. Distances from:

4. Parent Material: If Yes:

Landform

Position on Landscape (attach sheet)

Open Water Body

feet

Drainage Way

feet

Possible Wet Area

feet

Property Line

feet

Drinking Water Well

feet

Other

feet

Glacial till

Unsuitable Materials Present:

Disturbed Soil

5. Groundwater Observed:

Fill Material

Impervious Layer(s)

No

If yes:

Yes

Estimated Depth to High Groundwater:

72

< 220

inches

elevation

Yes

No

Weathered/Fractured Rock

Bedrock

Depth Weeping from Pit

Depth Standing Water in Hole

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (continued) Deep Observation Hole Number: Soil Horizon/ Soil Matrix: ColorDepth (in.)

Layer Moist (Munsell)

TP-4 Redoximorphic Features (mottles) Depth

Color

Soil Texture (USDA)

Percent

Coarse Fragments % by Volume Gravel

Cobbles & Stones

Soil Structure

Soil Consistence (Moist)

0-8

A

10YR 3/3

SL

Massive

Friable

8-30

B

10YR 5/6

SL

Massive

Friable

30-72

C

2.5Y 5/4

LS

Massive

Friable

< 15

< 15

Other

Additional Notes:

Soil was dry at bottom. Excavation stopped due to machine limitations. Soil extremely bouldery.

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal D. Determination of High Groundwater Elevation 1. Method Used: Depth observed standing water in observation hole Depth weeping from side of observation hole Depth to soil redoximorphic features (mottles) Groundwater adjustment (USGS methodology)

A.

B.

inches

inches

A.

B.

inches

inches

A.

B.

inches

inches

A.

B.

inches

inches

2.

Index Well Number

Reading Date

Adjustment Factor

Adjusted Groundwater Level

Index Well Level

E. Depth of Pervious Material 1. Depth of Naturally Occurring Pervious Material a. Does at least four feet of naturally occurring pervious material exist in all areas observed throughout the area proposed for the soil absorption system?

Yes

No

b. If yes, at what depth was it observed?

Upper boundary:

varies inches

Lower boundary:

varies inches

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon

Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal Field Diagrams Use this sheet for field diagrams:

Form 11 – Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal

Commonwealth of Massachusetts City/Town of Avon Percolation Test Form 12 Percolation test results must be submitted with the Soil Suitability Assessment for On-site Sewage Disposal. DEP has provided this form for use by local Boards of Health. Other forms may be used, but the information must be substantially the same as that provided here. Before using this form, check with the local Board of Health to determine the form they use.

Important: When filling out forms on the computer, use only the tab key to move your cursor - do not use the return key.

A. Site Information Town of Avon Owner Name

Rear Page Street Map: C7 Lot: 3-27 Street Address or Lot #

Avon

MA

02322

City/Town

State

Zip Code

Michael McCue, Town Administrator

(508) 588-0414

Contact Person (if different from Owner)

Telephone Number

B. Test Results

Observation Hole # Depth of Perc Start Pre-Soak End Pre-Soak Time at 12” Time at 9” Time at 6” Time (9”-6”) Rate (Min./Inch)

12/12/12

11:24 am

Date

Time

Time

Date

TP-3 46" 11:09 am 11:24 am 11:24 am 11:39 am 12:03 pm 24 mins 8 min/inch

Test Passed: Test Failed: Andrew Pojasek, Coler & Colantonio, Inc. (781) 792-2218

Test Passed: Test Failed:

Test Performed By:

Unwitnessed Witnessed By:

Comments:

t5form12.doc• 06/03

Perc Test • Page 1 of 1

APPENDIX F WATER USAGE CALCULATIONS

Avon Localized Sewer District Feasibility Study Water Usage Report Owner

Street Address

Map & Parcel

B.C. Tent & Awning James K. Paquette, Jr. First Bodwell Nominee Trust Brockton Furnace & Duct Dist.

R&O Realty LLC Masterpiece F.V. Corporation Dresser RE Inc. Weiss Sheet Metal Inc. DNS Realty Inc. Davis Realty Trust Davis Realty Trust Davis Realty Trust Lawrence Siegel Vanguard Realty Trust 155 Bodwell Street Realty Trust AIP Bodwell Realty Trust Orion Bodwell, LLC Cingular Wireless Lionel Diaz CSMP Realty Trust KDSM LLC Estes Express Lines Cuming Corporation Cuming Corporation MGPG LLC Bodwell Street LLC 244 Bodwell LLC 254 Bodwell Realty Trust J.G. LLC Elvis Usumanu Elvis Usumanu Elvis Usumanu Atlantic Management Atlantic-Bodwell Realty, LLC Atlantic-Bodwell Realty, LLC Kamco Supply Corp.

Bodwell Equity Partners LLC Ventures Belknap White Group FedEx Freight East Aqua Leisure IND AJM Realty Trust Rubin Family Properties, LLC Blackwood Realty LLC Carrier Enterprise Northeast Bodwell Extension LLC Sheehy Realty Inc Accurounds Inc Atlantic Southborough Realty Ranfac Corp Quitri III LLC Con-Avon Limited Parthnership Cuming Microwave M&R Realty Trust Jo-Anne E. Koenig Boston Brace INT'L, Inc.

25 Bodwell Street 35 Bodwell Street 45 Bodwell Street 54 Bodwell Street 55 Bodwell Street 65 Bodwell Street 75 Bodwell Street 85 Bodwell Street 105 Bodwell Street 108 Bodwell Street 145 Bodwell Street 145 Bodwell Street 145 Bodwell Street 150 Bodwell Street 154 Bodwell Street 155 Bodwell Street 175 Bodwell Street 180 Bodwell Street 185 Bodwell Street 190 Bodwell Street 200 Bodwell Street 210 Bodwell Street 215 Bodwell Street 225 Bodwell Street 230 Bodwell Street 235 Bodwell Street 238 Bodwell Street 244 Bodwell Street 254 Bodwell Street 255 Bodwell Street 258 Bodwell Street 258 Bodwell Street 258 Bodwell Street 264 Bodwell Street 275 Bodwell Street 284 Bodwell Street 304 Bodwell Street 355 Bodwell Street 500 Bodwell Street Ext 520A Bodwell Street Ext 525 Bodwell Street Ext. 540 Bodwell Street Ext. 625 Bodwell Street Ext 650 Bodwell Street Ext 655 Bodwell Street Ext 660 Bodwell Street Ext 675 Bodwell Street Ext 15 Doherty Avenue 27R Doherty Avenue 32 Doherty Avenue 1 Kiddie Drive 30 Kiddie Drive 1 Ledin Avenue 11 Ledin Avenue 12 Ledin Avenue 20 Ledin Avenue

C5-1-5 C5-1-4 C5-1-3 B5-2-2 C5-1-1 B5-3-4 B5-3-3 B5-3-2 B5-3-1 B5-1-7 B6-2-6 B6-2-6 B6-2-6 B6-1-2 B6-1-3 B6-2-5 B6-2-3 B6-1-5 B6-2-2 B6-1-12 B6-1-13HHH B6-1-14 B6-2-1 B7-3-3 B7-1-1 B7-2-1 B7-1-2 B7-1-3 B7-1-4 B7-2-2 B7-1-5 B7-1-5 B7-1-5 B7-1-6 B7-3-1 B7-1-9 B7-1-7 B7-3-18 B8-1-1 B8-1-2 B8-3-7 B8-1-8 B8-4-9 B8-4-10 B8-4-6 B8-4-4 B8-4-5 B5-1-5 B5-1-2 B5-2-3 B6-1-1 B5-1-8 B6-1-21 B6-1-20 B6-1-15 B6-1-16

Average Daily Water Use (gal) 110 62 305 289 505 54 0 2,610 252 335 259 195 334 267 947 220 180 238 2,870 95 167 108 228 1,615 400 115 502 60 856 20 21 14 24 533 598 344 260 331 165 388 529 24 539 186 45 565 168 489 134 210 1,268 94 599 210 306 306

Page 1

200% Average Daily Water Usage (gal) 221 124 611 578 1,009 107 0 5,220 504 671 517 389 667 534 1,894 441 361 476 5,740 190 334 217 457 3,230 800 230 1,005 120 1,711 41 42 29 49 1,067 1,196 687 520 663 330 776 1,058 49 1,078 371 89 1,130 335 979 267 421 2,537 187 1,197 421 612 612

Avon Localized Sewer District Feasibility Study Water Usage Report Owner

Street Address

Map & Parcel

Jacobs Precision Corp.

Waste Management 41 Ledin Avenue LLC Terry L. Edwards B.E. Peterson B.E. Peterson GE Credit Equities Inc. Priscilla Whittall TPFP Realty Trust TPFP Realty Trust Grocap LTD Partnership Grocap LTD Partnership Avon Corp CTR Condo Assoc New Avon LTD Partnership Strafello, Inc. Avon Realty LJS LLC Avon Realty LJS LLC K&K Realty Trust Bodwell St. Trust Portal Metal Products National Fire Protection Assoc Wales Avenue Real Estate Trust Thatcher Realty LLC T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards Casey Brothers Trust T.I. Edwards

21 Ledin Avenue 40 Ledin Avenue 41 Ledin Avenue 1 Mack Drive 40 Murphy Drive 40 Murphy Drive 55 Murphy Drive 600 Page Street 21 Parker Drive 21 Parker Drive 291 Pond Street 291 Pond Street 11 Robbie Road 40 Robbie Road 20 Strafello Drive 40 Strafello Drive 40 Strafello Drive 50 Strafello Drive 61 Strafello Drive 10 Tracy Drive 11 Tracy Drive 33 Wales Avenue 91 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 101 Wales Avenue 140 Wales Avenue

B6-1-19 B6-1-17 B6-1-18 B8-1-5 B6-2-7 B6-2-7 C6-2-20 B8-2-2 B7-3-2 B7-3-2 B5-2-1 B5-2-1 B6-1-10GGG B6-1-9 B6-1-6 B6-1-7 B6-1-7 B6-1-8 B6-1-11 C5-1-6 C5-1-7 B7-4-1 B8-4-2 B9-1-2 B9-1-2 B9-1-2 B9-1-2 B8-4-1 B9-1-1

TOTAL (gallons)

Page 2

Average Daily Water Use (gal)

200% Average Daily Water Usage (gal)

85 591 473 232 1,102 209 1,786 1,069 173 585 259 68 606 1,361 319 225 298 172 159 603 331 465 142 105 205 822 448 2,540 511

171 1,181 945 463 2,204 418 3,573 2,137 346 1,169 519 136 1,211 2,722 638 450 595 343 319 1,207 663 931 283 210 410 1,643 896 5,080 1,022

38,493

76,986

Avon Localized Sewer District Feasibility Study Title 5 Calculations - Existing Conditions Owner

Street Address

Map & Parcel

Atlantic Southborough Realty Accurounds Inc DNS Realty Inc. Con-Avon Limited Parthnership Grocap LTD Partnership Brockton Furnace & Duct Dist.

Ranfac Corp Weiss Sheet Metal Inc. Dresser RE Inc. F.V. Corporation Masterpiece Quitri III LLC Avon Corp CTR Condo Assoc Bodwell St. Trust Lionel Diaz CSMP Realty Trust KDSM LLC Jo-Anne E. Koenig Boston Brace INT'L, Inc. Waste Management 41 Ledin Avenue LLC Jacobs Precision Corp.

Lawrence Siegel M&R Realty Trust Cuming Microwave Vanguard Realty Trust Orion Bodwell, LLC Strafello, Inc. Avon Realty LJS LLC K&K Realty Trust New Avon LTD Partnership Estes Express Lines Cingular Wireless AIP Bodwell Realty Trust 155 Bodwell Street Realty Trust Davis Realty Trust Davis Realty Trust Davis Realty Trust B.E. Peterson B.E. Peterson Cuming Corporation Bodwell Street LLC 244 Bodwell LLC 254 Bodwell Realty Trust Elvis Usumanu Elvis Usumanu Elvis Usumanu Atlantic Management Kamco Supply Corp.

Atlantic-Bodwell Realty, LLC MGPG LLC J.G. LLC Atlantic-Bodwell Realty, LLC Bodwell Equity Partners LLC

27R Doherty Avenue 15 Doherty Avenue 108 Bodwell Street 30 Kiddie Drive 291 Pond Street 54 Bodwell Street 32 Doherty Avenue 105 Bodwell Street 85 Bodwell Street 75 Bodwell Street 65 Bodwell Street 1 Kiddie Drive 11 Robbie Road 61 Strafello Drive 190 Bodwell Street 200 Bodwell Street 210 Bodwell Street 12 Ledin Avenue 20 Ledin Avenue 40 Ledin Avenue 41 Ledin Avenue 21 Ledin Avenue 150 Bodwell Street 11 Ledin Avenue 1 Ledin Avenue 154 Bodwell Street 180 Bodwell Street 20 Strafello Drive 40 Strafello Drive 50 Strafello Drive 40 Robbie Road 215 Bodwell Street 185 Bodwell Street 175 Bodwell Street 155 Bodwell Street 145 Bodwell Street 145 Bodwell Street 145 Bodwell Street 40 Murphy Drive 40 Murphy Drive 230 Bodwell Street 238 Bodwell Street 244 Bodwell Street 254 Bodwell Street 258 Bodwell Street 258 Bodwell Street 258 Bodwell Street 264 Bodwell Street 304 Bodwell Street 284 Bodwell Street 235 Bodwell Street 255 Bodwell Street 275 Bodwell Street 355 Bodwell Street

B5-1-2 B5-1-5 B5-1-7 B5-1-8 B5-2-1 B5-2-2 B5-2-3 B5-3-1 B5-3-2 B5-3-3 B5-3-4 B6-1-1 B6-1-10GGG B6-1-11 B6-1-12 B6-1-13HHH B6-1-14 B6-1-15 B6-1-16 B6-1-17 B6-1-18 B6-1-19 B6-1-2 B6-1-20 B6-1-21 B6-1-3 B6-1-5 B6-1-6 B6-1-7 B6-1-8 B6-1-9 B6-2-1 B6-2-2 B6-2-3 B6-2-5 B6-2-6 B6-2-6 B6-2-6 B6-2-7 B6-2-7 B7-1-1 B7-1-2 B7-1-3 B7-1-4 B7-1-5 B7-1-5 B7-1-5 B7-1-6 B7-1-7 B7-1-9 B7-2-1 B7-2-2 B7-3-1 B7-3-18

Office Area (SF)

Industrial Area (SF)

4,800 3,600 0 4,150 10,976 4,020 10,720 1,800 21,760 0 800 31,680 0 5,848 4,828 0 1,800 1,836 4,000 8,000 9,376 2,184 2,500 1,986 1,736 13,380 6,840 4,000 11,520 3,000 17,702 3,800 2,900 4,736 2,400 7,744 2,436 3,076

27,200 22,700 50,890 34,250 107,863 62,088 28,880 24,168 113,500 0 6,400 79,638 0 54,264 10,800 0 13,798 17,475 20,020 81,012 25,424 9,816 13,100 5,050 16,384 44,900 18,480 40,000 79,990 10,000 126,549 23,712 27,840 20,850 2,700 5,924 26,584 16,924

2,170 4,250 4,000 4,980 1,800 5,254

13,358 12,550 18,000 14,720 7,760 94,276 10,203 55,300 36,434 34,000 13,120 25,200 168,000 10,232

9,700 6,400 6,000 2,320 0 22,000 9,012

Retail Area (SF)

3,800

1,200

1,200

Page 1

Total Area (SF) 32,000 26,300 50,890 38,400 118,839 69,908 39,600 25,968 135,260 0 7,200 111,318 0 60,112 15,628 0 15,598 19,311 25,220 89,012 34,800 12,000 15,600 7,036 18,120 58,280 25,320 44,000 91,510 13,000 144,251 27,512 30,740 25,586 5,100 13,668 30,220 20,000 0 0 15,528 16,800 22,000 19,700 9,560 99,530 10,203 65,000 42,834 40,000 15,440 25,200 190,000 19,244

Office: 75GPD/1000 SF 360 270 0 311 823 302 804 135 1,632 0 60 2,376 0 439 362 0 135 138 300 600 703 164 188 149 130 1,004 513 300 864 225 1,328 285 218 355 180 581 183 231 0 0 163 319 300 374 135 394 0 728 480 450 174 0 1,650 676

Industrial: 15GPD/Person 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Retail: 50GPD/1000 SF 0 0 0 0 0 190 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total (GPD) 510 420 150 461 973 642 954 285 1,782 150 210 2,526 150 589 512 150 285 288 510 750 853 314 338 299 280 1,154 663 450 1,014 375 1,478 435 368 505 330 731 393 381 150 150 313 469 450 524 285 544 150 878 630 600 324 150 1,800 826

Avon Localized Sewer District Feasibility Study Title 5 Calculations - Existing Conditions Owner

Street Address

Map & Parcel

TPFP Realty Trust TPFP Realty Trust Cuming Corporation Wales Avenue Real Estate Trust Ventures Belknap White Group FedEx Freight East Terry L. Edwards AJM Realty Trust Priscilla Whittall Aqua Leisure IND Casey Brothers Trust Blackwood Realty LLC Thatcher Realty LLC Bodwell Extension LLC Sheehy Realty Inc Carrier Enterprise Northeast Rubin Family Properties, LLC T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards T.I. Edwards R&O Realty LLC First Bodwell Nominee Trust James K. Paquette, Jr. B.C. Tent & Awning Portal Metal Products National Fire Protection Assoc GE Credit Equities Inc.

21 Parker Drive 21 Parker Drive 225 Bodwell Street 33 Wales Avenue 500 Bodwell Street Ext 520A Bodwell Street Ext 1 Mack Drive 540 Bodwell Street Ext. 600 Page Street 525 Bodwell Street Ext. 101 Wales Avenue 650 Bodwell Street Ext 91 Wales Avenue 660 Bodwell Street Ext 675 Bodwell Street Ext 655 Bodwell Street Ext 625 Bodwell Street Ext 140 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 100 Wales Avenue 55 Bodwell Street 45 Bodwell Street 35 Bodwell Street 25 Bodwell Street 10 Tracy Drive 11 Tracy Drive 55 Murphy Drive

B7-3-2 B7-3-2 B7-3-3 B7-4-1 B8-1-1 B8-1-2 B8-1-5 B8-1-8 B8-2-2 B8-3-7 B8-4-1 B8-4-10 B8-4-2 B8-4-4 B8-4-5 B8-4-6 B8-4-9 B9-1-1 B9-1-2 B9-1-2 B9-1-2 B9-1-2 C5-1-1 C5-1-3 C5-1-4 C5-1-5 C5-1-6 C5-1-7 C6-2-20

Office Area (SF)

Industrial Area (SF)

7,800

87,600

4,995 0 8,980 0 2,290 0 0 8,020 14,500 8,700 12,000 3,480 5,130 900 15,264 600 900 2,574

71,370 33,300 16,000 16,200 21,010 3,512 3,879 79,980 85,500 20,000 36,000 67,320 23,600 27,400 100,540 5,400 11,600 12,375 988

10,000 1,820 724 2,900 7,350 11,284 0

40,000 20,440 7,993 15,260 41,724 33,515 150,995

Retail Area (SF) 4,800

2,648

3,500

TOTAL (SF)

Page 2

Total Area (SF) 100,200 0 76,365 33,300 24,980 16,200 23,300 6,160 3,879 88,000 100,000 28,700 48,000 70,800 28,730 31,800 115,804 6,000 12,500 14,949 988 0 50,000 22,260 8,717 18,160 49,074 44,799 150,995

3,263,006

Office: 75GPD/1000 SF 585 0 375 0 674 0 172 0 0 602 1,088 653 900 261 385 68 1,145 45 68 193 0 0 750 137 54 218 551 846 0

Industrial: 15GPD/Person

Retail: 50GPD/1000 SF

150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

240 0 0 0 0 0 0 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL (GPD)

Total (GPD) 975 150 525 150 824 150 322 282 150 752 1,238 803 1,050 411 535 393 1,295 195 218 343 150 150 900 287 204 368 701 996 150

45,560