NCS000454_OTHER_20080512

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
M54 PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
i V CS o � � 46 -1
DOC TYPE
El FINAL PERMIT
❑ ANNUAL REPORT
❑ APPLICATION
❑ CP MPUANCE
3-,OTHER
DOC DATE
❑ (�,fb T 17i
YYYYMMDD

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
May 6, 2008
Lucy Drake
Mayor, "town of Stallings
P.O. Box 4060
Stallings, North Carolina 28106
Subject: NPDES Permit Number NCS000454
Compliance Status Water Quality Recovery Program (WQRP)
Union County, 'Town of Stallings
Dear Ms. Drake:
Coleen 11. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
MAY 1 2 2008
IBC DENR MRQ
m-Surface %later Protection
This document provides the compliance status pursuant to the terms and conditions of
NPDES Permit, Number NCS000454, Part II, Final Limitations and Controls for Permitted
Discharges, Section A, Program Implementation, Paragraph 11, to establish a TMDL Water
Quality Recovery Program (WQRP) within two years after receiving notice that the permittee
was subject to an approved'TMDL.
The WQRP and the Stream Walk Final Report submitted and approved by the Division
identifies potential sources of fecal coliform, lays out a monitoring plan for fecal coliform,
identifies the location of all known MS4 outfalls, provides a schedule for identifying unknown
MS4 outfalls with the potential of discharging fecal coliform and meets the requirements to
establish a "I'MDL Water Quality Recovery Program (WQRP) within two years after receiving
notice that the permittee was subject to an approved TMDL.
Should you have any questions related to this inspection please feel free to contact me at
919/733-5083, extension 545.
Sincerely,
7 V,,--4V
Mike Randall
cc: Central Files
Stormwater Permit Unit Files
Q"N{ooresvl lle.Regional"O
NN- r hCarolina
ntIrra!!l
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone]
Customer Service Internet; www.newaterauality.org Location; 512N.SaIishurySt.
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/AffirmaEve Action Employer — 50% Recycled/i 0% Post Consumer Paper

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Mike Randall, Stormwater Permits Unit
Div�sio�Water Quality y�
FROM: — Shari L. Bryant, Purred unt Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: 23 April 2007
SUBJECT: Draft NPDES Permit to Discharge Stormwater for Town of Stallings, Union County,
North Carolina, NPDES Permit No. NCS000454.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
document and we are familiar with the habitat values of the area. Our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended), Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d), North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et
seq.), and North Carolina Administrative Code 15A NCAC 101.0102,
The Town of Stallings has applied for an NPDES permit to discharge stormwater runoff from
their municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) into North Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked
Creek, Goose Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek and their tributaries in the Catawba and Yadkin -Pee
Dee River basins. There are records for the federal and state endangered Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona
decorata) in Goose Creek. Goose Creek is on the State's 303(d) list due to impaired biological integrity
and violation of fecal coliform standards. The potential sources include construction, urban runoff/storm
sewers, minor non -municipal and agriculture.
The draft permit states for those portions of the Goose Creek watershed present within the
permittee's local jurisdiction:
a) The permittee shall maintain two -hundred foot undisturbed buffers on perennial streams; one -
hundred foot undisturbed buffers on intermittent streams; and a ten percent impervious surface
threshold for engineered stormwater management controls in the interim period until the
comprehensive plan for the protection of the Carolina heelsplitter in the Goose Creek watershed
is adopted; or
b) The permittee shall comply with the conditions and management measures of the site -specific
comprehensive plan for protection of the Carolina heelsplitter in the Goose Creek watershed
when adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
. Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

ti
Page 2
23 April 2007
NPDES Permit — Town of Stallings
NPDES Permit No. NCS000454
c) Exceptions can be granted as provided in Session Law 2006-246.
We are very pleased to see the riparian buffers we recommended have been incorporated into the
draft permit. While we are encouraged by a ten percent impervious surface threshold for the use of
engineered stormwater controls, we question whether this is sufficient to protect the Carolina heelsplitter
and its habitat. in our comments on the draft permit (15 December 2004), we detailed several measures
that we felt should be incorporated as permit conditions to reduce impacts to the Carolina heelsplitter and
its habitat. We continue to believe all of the measures detailed that correspondence are important to
protect the species and its habitat. However, we feel the following measures are crucial to ensure the
continued survival of the species within the Goose Creek watershed and that these should be incorporated
as permit conditions and in the site -specific comprehensive plan.
I . New developments and existing developments for which modifications or expansion are proposed
that exceed 6% site imperviousness include stormwater controls designed to mimic, using best
available technology, the hydrographic condition at the site prior to the change in landscape. These
should be designed to maintain subsurface infiltration, stream recharge, and stream stability.
2. Stormwater treatment systems should be designed to achieve a minimum of 85% average removal of
total suspended solids and consider systems that would result in reducing the levels of fecal coliform,
ammonia, phosphorus, nitrogen, copper, and pesticides as these pollutants have been identified as
concerns.
3. Maintain and establish a 200-foot native forested buffer along each side of perennial streams and 100-
foot native forested buffer along each side of intermittent streams. Buffers should be measured
horizontally from the edge of the stream bank. if wooded buffers do not exist, these areas should be
allowed to naturally revegetate (so long as the area is pervious) to increase the functionality of the
forested buffer.
4. -Prohibit development within the 100-year FEMA floodplain and jurisdictional water floodplains and
protect these areas as undisturbed forested areas.
5. Sewer line, water line and other utility infrastructure construction and maintenance follow the
measures detailed in NC WRC's Guidance Memorandum to Address and Mitigate Secondary and
Cumulative Impacts to Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Resources and Water Quality (August 2002).
This document is located on the web at:
htip_//www.ncwildlife.or pg07_WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg_7e3_impacts.pd£
ec: John Fridell, USFWS
Ryan Heise, WRC
Ron Linville, WRC

SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER
200 WEST FRANKLIN STREET, SUITE 330
CHAPEL HILL, NC 27516-2520
Telephone [phone] Charlottesville, VA
Facsimile 919-929-9421 April 1, 2005 Chapel Hill, NC
[e-mail] Atlanta, GA
Bradley Bennett
Stormwater Permitting Unit p
North Carolina Division of Water Quality t"t f
1617 Mail Service Center APR 0 4 ilia.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
'ETL� bSAND T0R iW4TER 'ry
RI DRAFT P1?RMIT NO. NCS000454, Town of Stallings H
Dear Mr. Bennett:
These comments are submitted to supplement and amplify our previous comments
on the above referenced application for a Stormwater discharge permit. Since we
submitted our previous comments, the NC Division of Water Quality has issued a
proposed total maximum daily load ("TMDL) for fecal coliform for Goose Creek. See
Total Maximum Daily Loads for Fecal Coliform for Goose Creek, North Carolina, Public
Review Draft, February 2005 ("Goose Creek TMDL") (attached). North Carolina's 2002
Integrated Report (305(b) reports and 303(d) lists of impaired waters) identifies the 17.0
mile segment of Goose Creek from its source to the Rocky River as impaired due to
elevated/fecal coliform concentrations. `rhe proposed TMDL allocates allowable
pollutant loads from known sources so that required actions may be taken to restore the
water to its intended uses.
The Goose Creek TMDL has several important implications for the pending
application for stormwater permits within the Goose Creek watershed. The Goose Creek
TMDI. allocates a 92.4% reduction in fecal coliform discharges to MS4s in order to
achieve the 'TMDL necessary to restore water quality in Goose Creek to maintain existing
uses. (Goose Creek TMDL. p.31). This waste load allocation specifically includes the
MS4 designated areas of Mint Hill, Stallings, Indian Trail, and Hemby Bridge, all of
which have pending applications for Phase II stormwater discharge permits within the
Goose Creek watershed.' (Goose Creek TMDL_ p.30). LI'A requires that NPDES-
regulated stormwater discharges be addressed by the waste load allocation component of
a TMDL. (EPA Memorandum, Establishing Tolal Maximum Daily Load ('!'MDL) Waste
Load Allocalions (WLAs) for Stormwater Sources and NPDES Permit Requirements
Based on Those WL_As (November 22, 2002)(attached): see also 40 C.F.R. § 130.2(h)),
"Stormwater discharges that are regulated under Phase I or Phase 11 of the NPDES
Stormwater Program are point -sources that must be included in the WLA portion of a
"TMDL." (EPA Memorandum p.3). "Where a'fMDL has been approved, NPDES
permits must contain effluent limits and conditions consistent with the requirements and
1 Mint Hill, Stallings, Indian "frail, and Hemby Ridge have land areas of 11.2 mi'', 2.2 mil, 1.3 ini2, and 0.47
mil respectively within the Goose Creek watershed.
10096 recycled paper

assumptions of the waste load allocations in the 'FMDL." (EPA Memorandum p.4; see 40
C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1)(vii)(13)).
The Goose Creek TMDL requires that permits for MS4 stormwater discharges
within the Goose Creek watershed include effluent limitations and conditions that would
achieve the required 92.4% reduction in fecal coliform in Goose Creek. Although the
Goose Creek TMDL is not final, its purpose is to allocate waste loads for a water quality
impaired stream. NPDLS stormwater discharge permits for MS4s in the 9MVd
�kz3 W7watershed are water quality limited and must comply with water quality s _j ,2 . op
including the water quality standard for fecal coliform. The Goose Creek TM
although not final, defines the reductions in fecal coliform discharges required o achicvc'(;I;j
water quality standards and thus dictates the effluent limitations and conditi% the
permits must include. WEiLAN ANVVATERQ ALL
BRANCHATER
The proposed stormwater permit does not includes conditions or limitations that
would achieve the required 92.4% reduction in fecal coliform necessary to meet water
quality standards. The Goose Creek TMDL suggests measures that should be taken to
attain water quality standards:
The most prevalent sources of fecal coliform loading appear to be
stormwater runoff from forests, agriculture, and urban land uses.... Urban
sources can be addressed by the implementation of structural BMI's.
Possible increased fecal coliform levels from new development can be
addressed by the adoption of' post -construction ordinances that require
riparian buffers and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques.
Goose Creek TMDL p.32.
'these recommendations are consistent with recommendations of the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission to protect special aquatic habitats discussed and
summarized in our previous comments. The stormwater discharge permit must include
limitations and conditions necessary to meet water quality standards, respond to the data
conclusions in the Goose Creek "fMDI., and protect the endangered Carolina Heelsplitter
and its critical habitat.
We appreciate the opportunity to present these additional comments. If you have
any questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely yours,
04xx 5 e�741
Derb S. Carter, Jr.
Senior Attorney
17"nclosures
67i�,CJc'�S rG� 2
f
�[�bc�f IaGJ� �w;Ust eel' ors

J�'''KEo sty's
z
UNITED STATES .ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
:� o= WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
~rq1 PR01F"G�`
NOV 22 W OFFICE OF
WATER
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Establishing Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Wasteload Allocations
(WLAs) for Storm Water Sources and NPDES Permit Requirements B ed on
Those WLAs
FROM: Robert H. Wayland, III, Director.AP
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds' -'-'=' `' - R D
James A. Hanlon, Director N SrpRMQU
Office of Wastewater Management !tiq �� 7Y
` � �RBRgNC
n y
TO: Water Division Directors
Regions I - 10
This memorandum clarifies existing EPA regulatory requirements for, and provides
guidance on, establishing wasteload allocations (WLAs) for storm water discharges in total
maximum daily loads (TMDLs) approved or established by EPA. It also addresses the
establishment of water quality -based effluent limits (WQBELs) and conditions in National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits based on the WLAs for storm water
discharges in TMDLs. The key points presented in this memorandum are as follows:
NPDES-regulated storm water discharges must be addressed by the wasteload
allocation component of a TMDL. See 40 C.F.R. § 130.2(h).
NPDES-regulated storm water discharges may not be addressed by the load
allocation (LA) component of a TMDL. See 40 C.F.R. § 130.2 (g) & (h).
Storm water discharges from sources that are not currently subject to NPDES
regulation may be addressed by the load allocation component of a TMDL. See
40 C.F.R. § 130.2(g).
It may be reasonable to express allocations for NPDES-regulated storm water
discharges from multiple point sources as a single categorical wastcload allocation
when data and information are insufficient to assign each source or outfall
individual WLAs. See 40 C.F.R. § 130.2(1). In cases where wasteload allocations
Internet Address (URL) • http:llwww.epalgov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)

arc developed for categories of discharges, these categories should be defined as
narrowly as available information allows.
The WLAs and LAs are to be expressed in numeric form in the TMDL. See 40
C.F.R. § 130.2(h) & (i). EPA expects TMDL authorities to make separate
allocations to NPDES- regulated storm water discharges (in the form of WLAs)
and unregulated storm water (in the form of LAs). EPA recognizes that these
allocations might be fairly rudimentary because of data limitations and variability
in the system.
NPDES. permit conditions must be consistent with the assumptions and
requirements of available WLAs. See 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1)(vii)(B).
WQBELs for NPDES-regulated storm water discharges that implement WLAs in
TMDLs may be expressed in the form of best management practices (BMPs)
under specified circumstances. See 33 U.S.C. § 1342(p)(3)(B)(111); 40 C.F.R.
§ 122.44(k)(2)&(3). If BMPs alone adequately implement the WLAs, then
additional controls are not necessary.
EPA expects that most WQBELs for NPDES-regulated municipal and small
construction storm water discharges will be in the form of BMPs, and that
numeric limits will be used only in rare instances.
When a non -numeric water quality -based effluent limit is imposed, the permit's
administrative record, including the fact sheet when one is required, needs to
support that the BMPs are expected to be sufficient to implement the WLA in the
TMDL. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 124.8, 124.9 & 124.1 S. ,
The NPDES permit must also specify the monitoring necessary to determine
compliance with effluent limitations. See'40 C.F.R. § 122.44(i). Where effluent
limits are specified as BMPs, the permit should also specify the monitoring
necessary to assess if the expected load reductions attributed to BMP
implementation are achieved (e.g„ BMP performance data).
The permit should also provide a mechanism to make adjustments to the required
BMPs as necessary to ensure their adequate performance.
This memorandum is organized as follows:
(I). Regulatory basis for including NPDES-regulated storm water discharges in
WLAs in TMDLs;
(IL). Options for addressing storm water in TMDLs; and
2

(M), Determining effluent limits in NPDES permits for storm water discharges
consistent with the WLA
M. Regulatory Basis for Includin(,� NPDES-regulated Storm Water Dischar�es_in_WLAs
in TMDLs
As part of the 1987 amendments to the CWA, Congress added Section 402(p) to the Act
to cover discharges composed entirely of storm water. Section 402(p)(2) of the Act requires
permit coverage for discharges associated with industrial activity and discharges from large and
medium municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4), i.e., systems serving a population over
250,000 or systems serving a population between 100,000 and 250,000, respectively. These
discharges are referred to as Phase I MS4 discharges.
In addition, the Administrator was directed to study and issue regulations that designate
additional storm water discharges, other than those regulated under Phase 1, to be regulated in
order to protect water quality. EPA issued regulations on December 8, 1999 (64 FR 68722),
expanding the NPDES storm water program to include discharges from smaller MS4s (including
all systems within "urbanized.areas" and other systems serving populations less than 100,000)
and storm water discharges from construction sites that disturb one to five acres, with
opportunities for area -specific exclusions. This program expansion is referred to as Phase IT.
Section 402(p) also specifies the levels of control to be incorporated into NPDES storm
water permits depending on the source (industrial versus municipal storm water). Permits for
storm water discharges associated with industrial activity are to require compliance with all
applicable provisions of Sections 301 and 402 of the CWA, i.e., all technology -based and water
quality -based requirements. See 33 U.S.C. §1342(p)(3)(A). Permits for discharges from MS4s,
however, "shall require controls to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent
practicable ... and such other provisions as the Administrator or the State determines appropriate
for the control of such pollutants." See 33 U.S.C. § 1342(p)(3)(B)(111).
Storm water discharges that are regulated under Phase I or Phase 1I of the NPDES storm
water program are point sources that must be included in the WLA portion of a TMDL. See 40
C.F.R. § 130.2(h). Storm water discharges that arc not currently subject to Phase I or Phase TT of
the NPDES storm water program are not required to obtain NPDES permits. 33 U.S.C.
§ 1342(p)(1) & (p)(6). Therefore, for regulatory purposes, they are analogous to nonpoint
sources and may be included in the LA portion of a TMDL. See 40 C.F.R. § 130.2(g).
(II). Options for Addressing Storm Water in TiNTDLs
Decisions about allocations of pollutant loads within a TMDL are driven by the quantity
and quality of existing and readily available water quality data. The amount of storm water data
available for a TMDL varies from location to location. Nevertheless, EPA expects TMDL
authorities will make separate aggregate allocations to NPDES-regulated storm water discharges
3

(in the form of WLAs) and unregulated storm water (in the form of LAs). It may be reasonable
to quantify the allocations through estimates or extrapolations, based either on knowledge of land
use patterns and associated literature values for pollutant loadings or on actual, albeit limited,
loading information. EPA recognizes that these allocations might be fairly rudimentary because
of data limitations.
EPA also recognizes that the available data and information usually are not detailed
enough to determine waste load allocations for NPDES-regulated storm water discharges on an
outfall-specific basis. :In this situation, EPA recommends expressing the wasteload allocation in
the TMDL as either a single number for all NPDES-regulated storm water discharges, or when
information allows, as different WLAs for different identifiable categories, g.&., municipal storm
water as distinguished from storm water discharges from construction sites or municipal storm
water discharges from City A as distinguished from City B. These categories should be defined
as narrowly as available information allows (e.g., for municipalities, separate WLAs for each
municipality and for industrial sources, separate WLAs for different types of industrial storm
water sources or dischargers).
(III). Determining .Effluent Limits in NPDES Permits for Storm Water Discharges
Consistent with the WLA
Where a TMDL has been approved, NPDES permits must contain effluent limits and
conditions consistent with the requirements and assumptions of the wasteload allocations in the
TMDL. See 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1)(vii)(B). Effluent limitations to control the discharge of
pollutants generally are expressed in numerical form. However, in light of 33 U.S.C.
§ 1342(p)(3)(B)(iii), EPA recommends that for NPDES-regulated municipal and small
construction storm water discharges effluent limits should be expressed as best management
practices (BMPs) or other similar requirements, rather than as numeric effluent limits. See
Interim Permitting Approach for Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations in Storm Water
Permits, 61 FR 43761 (Aug. 26, 1996). The Interim Permitting Approach Policy recognizes the
need for an iterative approach to control pollutants in storm water discharges. Specifically, the
policy anticipates that a suite of BMPs will be used in the initial rounds of permits and that these
BMPs will be tailored in subsequent rounds.
EPA's policy recognizes that because storm water discharges are due to storm events that
are highly variable in frequency and duration and are not easily characterized, only in rare cases
will it be feasible or appropriate to establish numeric limits for municipal and small construction
storm water discharges. The variability in the system and minimal data generally available make
it difficult to determine with precision or certainty actual and projected loadings for individual
dischargers or groups of dischargers. Therefore, EPA believes that in these situations, permit
limits typically can be expressed as BMPs, and that numeric limits will be used only in rare
instances.
4

Under certain circumstances, BMPs are an appropriate form of effluent limits to control
pollutants in storm water. See 40 CFR § 122.44(k)(2) & (3). If it is determined that a BMP
approach (including an iterative BMP approach) is appropriate to meet the storm water
component of the TMDL, EPA recommends that the TMDL reflect this.
EPA expects that the NPDES permitting authority will review the information provided
by the TMDL, see 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1)(vii)(B), and determine whether the effluent limit is
appropriately expressed using a BMP approach (including an iterative BMP approach) or a
numeric limit. Where BMPs are used, EPA recommends that the permit provide a mechanism to
require use of expanded or better -tailored BMPs when monitoring demonstrates they are
necessary to implement the WLA and protect water quality.
Where the NPDES permitting authority allows for a choice of BMPs, a discussion of the
BMP selection and assumptions needs to be included in the permit's administrative record,
including the fact sheet when one is required. 40 C.F.R.§§ 124.8, 124.9 & 124.18. For general
permits, this may be included in the storm water pollution prevention plan required by the
permit. See 40 C.F.R. § 122.28. Permitting authorities may require the permittee to provide
supporting information, such as how the permittee designed its management plan to address the
WLA(s). See 40 C.F.R. § 122.28. The NPDES permit must require the monitoring necessary to
assure compliance with permit limitations, although the permitting authority has the discretion
under EPA's regulations to decide the frequency of such monitoring. See 40 CFR § 122.44(1).
EPA recommends that such permits.require collecting data on the actual performance of the
BMPs. These additional data may provide a basis for revised management measures. The
monitoring data are likely to have other uses as well. For example, the monitoring data might
indicate if it is necessary to adjust the BMPs. Any monitoring for storm water required as part of
the permit should be consistent with the state's overall assessment and monitoring strategy.
The policy outlined in this memorandum affirms the appropriateness of an iterative,
adaptive management BMP approach, whereby permits include effluent limits (ems., a
combination of structural and non-structural BMPs) that address storm water discharges,
implement mechanisms to evaluate the performance of such controls, and make adjustments i.e.,
more stringent controls or specific BMPs) as necessary to protect water quality. This approach is
further supported by the recent report from the National Research Council (NRC), Assessing the
TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management (National Academy Press, 2001). The NRC
report recommends an approach that includes "adaptive implementation," i.e., "a cyclical process
in which TMDL plans are periodically assessed for their achievement of water quality standards"
... and adjustments made as necessary. NRC Report at ES-5.
This memorandum discusses existing requirements of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and
codified in the TMDL and NPDES implementing regulations. Those CWA provisions and
regulations contain legally binding requirements. This document describes these requirements; it
does not substitute for those provisions or regulations. The recommendations in this
memorandum are not binding; indeed, there may be other approaches that would be appropriate

in particular situations. When EPA makes a TMDL or permitting decision, it will make each
decision on a case -by -case basis and will be guided by the applicable requirements of the CWA
and implementing regulations, taking into account comments and information presented at that
time by interested persons regarding the appropriateness of applying these recommendations to
the particular situation. EPA may change this guidance in the future.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact us or Linda Boornazian, Director of
the Water Permits Division or Charles Sutfin, Director of the Assessment and Watershed
Protection Division.
cc:
Water Quality Branch Chiefs
Regions 1 - 10
Permit Branch Chiefs
Regions I - 10
M

Total Maximum Daily Loads for
Fecal Coliform for
Goose Creek,
North Carolina
[Waterbody ID NC-13-17-18a and 13-17-18b]
Public Review Draft
February 2005
Prepared by:
Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program (MCWQP)
Mecklenburg County Water Quality
700 North Tryon St
Charlotte, NC 28202
[phone]
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone]

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Drag _ February 2005
Table of Contents
List of Tables ii
Listof Figures ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ ii
Summary Sheet ---- - _-_____-_ [II
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Background--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
1.2 Watershed Description----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
1.3 Water Quality Monitoring Programs ......... -------------------------------------- ----------------- 3
1.4 Water Quality Target ----------------------------- ___4
1.5 Water Quality Assessment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4
2.0 Source Assessment 8
--------------------------
2.1 Point Source Assessment 8
2.1.1 NPDES Permitted Dischargers ---------------------------------------------------------
2.2 Non -Point Source Assessment 10
-------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
2.2.1 Failing Septic Systems.--------- - 11
2.2.2 Ground Water 14
2.3 Water Quality Monitoring--------------------------------------------------------------------------14
2.3.1 Bacterial Source Tracking _______________________ ______
3.0 Modeling Approach_____________-------------------------------------------------------------------
-_-__-_________-_.18
3.1 Modeling Freamework------- ---_-_-_
____18
3.2 Model Setup ------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------19
3.3 Fecal Coliform Source Representation. ---- ----------------------------------------------------
--__21
3.3.1 NPDES Discharges______________
------------------------------- 21
3.32 Land Uses-------------------
22
3.3.3 Failing Septic Systems..__---------------------- -------------------------------------------
22
3.4 Model Calibration
22
3.5 Model Output ----------- -----
-26
3.5.1Current Conditions
26
3.5.2 Critical Conditions
28
4.0 Allocation 28
4.1 Total Maximum Daily Load---- --------------------- ---------- ••----------------------------------28
4.2 Waste Load Allocations 30
4.3 Load Allocations (Non -Point Source)-_ ________-____-31
---------------------------------------------
5.0
Implementation Plan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.0
Stream Monitonng ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 32
7.0
Future Efforts _.____-•-_--_._.._
32
8.0
Public Participation_ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
33
9.0
References
34
10
Appendices -------------------------------------------------------•--------------------------------------
---
35
Appendix A-1. NCDENR fecal coliform monitoring results ---------- _
____35
Appendix A-2. Fecal Coliform data from WWTP effluent samples -----------------------
37
Appendix A-3. Fecal coliform concentrations and 30-day geometric me -an ------------
38

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February_2005
Appendix A-4. Phase II Source Assessment Monitoring Results ---------------------------- 41
Appendix B. HSPF *.uci File ----------------------- 42
List of Tables
Table 1.
USGS Water Discharge Stations for the Goose Creek Watershed--------------3
Table 2.
NPDES Permitted Dischargers in Goose Creek Watershed------------------------9
Table 3.
Rate of Accumulation and Maximum Storage of
Fecal Coliform by Land -Use ---------------------------------------------------------------------
10
Table 4.
Known Livestock Operations in the Goose Creek Watershed --------------------
10
Table 5.
Septic Loading System-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- 13
Table 6.
Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Source Assessment Monitoring Sites -----------
15
Table 7.
Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Phase 1I Source Assessment
MonitoringSites ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16
Table 8.
BST Analysis Results, -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17
Table 9.
Percent [mpervious by Land -Use for TMDL Water Quality Model._ __
...- 20
Table 10.
Basic Hydrologic Calibration Data for Goose Creek ---------------------------
23
Table 11.
Basic Temperature Calibration Data for Goose Creek-•,-••-•-----------•----------
23
'Fable 12.
Basic Fecal Coliform Calibration Data for Goose Creek
24
Table 13.
Critical Model Parameters and Ranges------------------------------------
Table 14.
Simulated Total Fecal Coliform Load for entire
Simulation Period (0 1/0 1/2000 - 06/01/2004)------------------------------------------
27
Table 15.
Critical Condition for the Goose Creek Watershed ---------------- --------------------
28
Table 16.
Critical Condition Loading by Source Category
(Total Loading 4/12/02 - 5/1112002)--•-----------------------------------------------------
28
Table 17.
Data Used in Flow Correlation Analysis ----------------------------------------------------
Table 18.
TMDL for Goose Creek at SR 1524 ------------------------------------------------------
• 30
---
Table 19.
Percent Reduction for MS4 Areas to Achieve TMDL
30
Table 20,
Percent Load Reductions necessary to meet TMDL
requirements for Goose Creek Watershed -------------------------------------------------
31
Table 21.
TMDL components to meet the water quality target ----------------------------------
31
List of Figures
Figure 1.
Location of Goose Creek Watershed in Mecklenburg
and Union Counties
2
Figure 2.
Goose -Stevens Creeks Sampling Sites in Mecklenburg
and Union Counties
3
Figure 3.
Duck Creek Fecal Coliform Data---------------•••------,••,•.-„----.---.5
Figure 4.
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform Data----------------------------------------6
Figure 5.
Goose/Duck NPDES Discharger Fecal Coliform Data----------------- --
Figure 6.
Land Use Sampling Results-------------------------------------------------------------------8
Figure 7.
Analysis of Number of Isolates From Monitoring Sites -----------------------------
18
Figure 8.
Goose Creek Watershed Delineations --------------------------------------------------------
20
Figure 9.
Goose Creek Watershed Land Use Distribution-- --------- --------- -------------
21
Figure 10.
Simulated vs. Observed Flow Goose Creek at 601 (Union County)---------
24
Figure I l .
Frequency Distribution Plot of Simulated and Observed Flow------------------
25
Figure 12.
Simulated vs. Observed Fecal Coliform Concentration at SR 1524............
25
Figure 13.
Simulated Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform
Concentration at SR 1524
27
Figure 14.
Correlation of USGS Gage Data ----------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 15,
Current and TMDL Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform
Concentration at SR t524
32

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Summary Sheet
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
1. 303(d) Listed Watershed Body Information
State: North Carolina
Counties: Mecklenburg, Union
Major River Basin: Yadkin-Peedee River Basin
Watershed: Goose Creek Watershed, HUC 03040105, Waterbody ID 13-17-18a,
13-17-18b
Impaired Waterbody (2003 303(d) List):
Waterbody Name -
(Segment ID) s
: Water Quality.".
= Classirlcataon
Impairment
Length (mi)
13-17-18a
Class C (aquatic
Fecal Coliform
3.2
life secondary
contact recreation)
NSW
13-17-18b
Class C (aquatic
Fecal Coliform
13.1
life secondary
Impaired Biological
contact recreation)
Integrity
NSW
Constituents of Concern: Fecal Coliform Bacteria
.Designated Uses: Biological integrity, propagation of aquatic life, and secondary contact
recreation.
Applicable Water Quality Standards for Class C Waters:
Fecal coliforms shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100mL (membrane filter count) based
upon at least five consecutive samples examined during any 30-day period, nor exceed 400/100
ml in more than 20 percent of the samples examined during such period.
2. TMDL Development
Analysis/Nlodeling:
WinHSPF Version 2.2 in conjunction with WISe (Watershed Information System) Version 2.0.3
(used for topographic data processing) were used to develop the TMDL.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Critical Conditions:
Highest predicted instream fecal coliform concentrations occur during wet weather periods
preceded by a period of dry weather. The period of highest risk to public health is during dry
weather periods in the summer when recreational use of the waters is greatest and human sources
of bacterial contamination dominate watershed loads.
Seasonal Variation:
WinHSPF Version 2.2 is a continuous simulation model, which contains seasonal fluctuation for
the period modeled (01/01/2000 --- 06/01/2004).
3. Allocation Watershed/Stream Reach
Segment 13-17-18a
Wasteload Allocation (WLA): 7.81x1012 counts
Load Allocation (LA): 1.14x 1014 counts
Margin of Safety (MOS): More stringent geometric mean target of 180 counts/ 100 mL, as
opposed to the 200 counts/100 mL standard; conservative modeling assumptions.
TMDL (WLA+LA+MOS): 1.22 x 10" counts
TMDL Component
TMDL Allocation
Category
Fecal Coliform Load
Reductions
Wasteload Allocation
MS4
92.5%
Load Allocation
Nonpoint Sources
92.5%
Wasteload Allocation
Permited WWTP's
NIA
SeEment 13-17-18b
Wasteload Allocation (WLA): 2.34x1013 counts
Load Allocation (LA): 2.06x 1015 counts
Margin of Safety (MOS): More stringent geometric mean target of 180 counts/ 100 mL, as
opposed to the 200 counts/100 mL standard; conservative modeling
assumptions.
TMDL (WLA+LA+MOS): 2.08x1015 counts
TMDL Component
TMDL Allocation
Catc�OEZ
Fecal Coliform Load
Reductions
Wasteload Allocation
MS4
92.5%
Load Allocation
Nonpoint Sources
92.5%
Wasteload Allocation
Permited WWTP's
NIA
4. Public Notice Date: Febraury 15, 2005
5. Submittal Date:
b. Establishment Date:
7. Endangered Species (yes or blank): yes
8. EPA Lead on "l'MDL (EPA or blank):
9. TMDL Considers Point Source, Nonpoint Source, or both: Both
-1V-

Goose Greek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
1.0 INTRODUCTION
North Carolina's 2002 Integrated Report, which includes 305(b) reports and 303(d) lists of
impaired waters, was approved by EPA Region IV on March 18th, 2003. The 2002 list identified
the t7.0 mile segment of Goose Creek from its source to the Rocky River as impaired due to
elevated Fecal coliform concentrations. The objective of this study is to develop a fecal coliform
TMDL using a watershed approach for Goose Creek, This TMDL encompasses all the stream
segments listed in the 2002 303(d) list for this watershed.
1n response to the high level of interest in this TMDL fiom local government officials and
concerned citizens, a stakeholder group was formed in 2003. The stakeholder group, lead by the
Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program (MCWQP) and the NC Division of Water Quality
(DWQ), took an active role in the TMDL development process. MCWQP has a well developed
and respected water quality management program and was able to take the lead role in both the
source assessment and model development.
1.1 Background
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop a list of waters not
meeting water quality standards or which have impaired uses. This list, referred to as the 303(d)
list, is submitted biennially to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for review. The
303(d) process requires that a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) be developed for each of the
waters appearing on Part I of the 303(d) list. The objective of a TMDL is to allocate allowable
pollutant loads to known sources so that actions may be taken to restore the water to its intended
uses (EPA 1991). Generally, the primary components of a TMDL, as identified by EPA (1991,
2000) and the Federal Advisory Committee (FACA 1998), are as follows:
Target identification or selection of pollutant(s) and end-point(s) for consideration. The pollutant
and end -point are generally associated with measurable water quality related characteristics that
indicate compliance with water quality standards. North Carolina indicates known pollutants on
the 303(d) list.
Source assessment. All sources that contribute to the impairment should be identified and loads
quantified, where sufficient data exist.
Assimilative capacity estimation or level of pollutant reduction needed to achieve the water
quality goal. The level of pollution should be characterized for the waterbody, highlighting how
current conditions deviate from the target end -point. Generally, this component is identified
through water quality modeling.
Allocation ofpollutant loads. Allocating pollutant control responsibility to the sources of
impairment. The wasteload allocation portion of the TMDL accounts for the loads associated with
existing and future point sources. Similarly, the load allocation portion of the TMDL accounts
for the loads associated with existing and future non -point sources, storm water, and natural
background.
Margin of safety. The margin of safety addresses uncertainties associated with pollutant loads,
modeling techniques, and data collection. Per EPA (2000), the margin of safety may be
expressed explicitly as unallocated assimilative capacity or implicitly due to conservative
assumptions.
Seasonal variation. The TMDL should consider seasonal variation in the pollutant loads and
endpoint. Variability can arise due to stream flows, temperatures, and exceptional events (e.g.,
droughts, hurricanes).
Section 303(d) of the CWA and the Water Quality Planning and Management regulation (USEPA
-1-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
2000a) require EPA to review ail TMDLs for approval or disapproval. Once EPA approves a
TMDL, the waterbody may be moved to Part III of the 303(d) list. Waterbodies remain on
Category 4a of the list until compliance with water quality standards is achieved. Where
conditions are not appropriate for the development of a TMDL, management strategies may still
result in the restoration of water quality.
The goal of the TMDL program is to restore uses to water bodies. Thus the implementation of
bacterial controls will be necessary to restore uses in these creeks. Although an implementation
plan is not included in this TMDL, reduction strategies are needed. The involvement of local
governments and agencies will be needed in order to develop implementation plans.
1.2 Watershed Description
The Goose Creek watershed is located in Mecklenburg County and Union County, North
Carolina. The headwaters of the watershed originate in Mecklenburg County and flow into Union
County, North Carolina and into the Rocky River. Stevens and Duck Creeks, which originate in
Mecklenburg County, are both tributaries to Goose Creek. Stevens Creek flows into Goose Creek
at the Mecklenburg -Union County line west of Stevens Mill Rd. while Duck Creck joins Goose
Creek just upstream of Brief Rd: Figure l shows the location of the Goose Creek watershed
within Mecklenburg and Union Counties.
Figure 1:
Location of Goose Creek Watershed in Mecklenburg and Union Counties
.. a
.. ..•,q 'd=„�, irk .' �
;f, ,'.Mecklenburg County
r. ,
5 D 5 10 Miles
-2-
Goose Greek watershed

Goose Creek Fecal Cofiform TMDL Public Review Drag February 2005
Each compliance point utilized for this TMDL is associated with ambient monitoring that occurs
in the watershed. Water quality and quantity data is collected at multiple locations by different
agencies. For the purposes of assessing TMDL compliance, the DWQ ambient monitoring station
on Goose Creek was used (Q8360000). The location of this monitoring station is illustrated in
Figure 2. Other monitoring is discussed below.
Figure 2: Goose -Stevens Creek Sampling Sites in Mecklenburg and Union Counties
LEGE11a GOC-SE - STEVENS UREEEK=
TMOz S•'.! i 13:a a1r�E
40 .�,.,o.. ?AF_KLE48lJf?G ZINC. �?!iL`J �I]ilrlP;E3
i ;tea
tip' Y sr
1.3 Water Quality Monitoring Programs
The ,vICWQP, DWQ, Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities (CMU) and USGS collect ambient data in
the Goose Creek watershed at regular intervals. However, CMU analyses do not include fecal
coliform bacteria. DWQ maintains one ambient monitoring; location in the Goose Creek
watershed located in Union County on SR 1524. MCWQP maintains a monitoring location on
both Goose and Stevens Creeks. The USGS maintains a flow gauge located in Goose Creek and a
data summary are presented in Table 1. The USGS gauge location is shown in Figure 2.
Table 1: USGS Water Discharge Stations for the Goose Creek Watershed.
Station number
Description
Period of Record
Mean -Flow for
Period of Record efs
02124692
GOOSE CR AT
November 1999 to
7.03
FAIRVIEW, NC
current year
-3-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
1.4 Water Quality Target
The North Carolina fresh water quality standard for fecal coliform in Class C waters
(TI5A:02B.0211) states: Organisms of the coliform group: fecal coliforms shall not exceed a
geometric mean of 200/100 mL (membrane filter count) based upon at least five consecutive
samples examined during any 30-day period, nor exceed 400/100 mL in more than 20 percent of
the samples examined during such period; violations of the fecal coliform standard are expected
during rainfall events and, in some cases, this violation is expected to be caused by uncontrollable
nonpoint source pollution; all coliform concentrations are to be analyzed using the membrane
filter technique unless high turbidity or other adverse conditions necessitate the tube dilution
method; in case of controversy over results, the MPN 5-tube dilution technique will be used as
the reference method.
Note that there are two quantitative criteria in the standard: Geometric mean of 200 and an
instantaneous value of 400.
All TMDLs include the establishment of in -stream numeric endpoints, or targets, used to evaluate
the attainment of water quality goals and designated use criteria. The target represents the
restoration objective to be achieved by implementation of the load reductions specified by the
TMDL. For the TMDLs presented in this document, the fecal coliform 30-day geometric mean of
200 c.f.u.1100 ml. with no more than 20 percent of samples exceeding 400 c.f.u./100 ml. is
applicable, as referenced in NC's water quality standard for fecal coliform in Class C waters
(15ANCAC 2B .0211 (3)(e)).
Secondary recreation is the designated use being addressed in this TMDL. Secondary recreation
is defined in NC's standards (15A NCAC 2B .0202 (57)) as including "wading, boating, other
uses not involving human body contact with water, and activities involving human body contact
with water where such activities take place on an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental basis."
One compliance point has been established for this TMDL, representing the DWQ ambient
monitoring station located in the watershed. Compliance points are physical locations within a
watershed that are used to monitor water quality conditions and assess progress in achieving the
TMDL goal.
1.5 Water Quality Assessment
Phase I water quality monitoring was collected at a total of twenty sites, including five
wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) (See Figure 2). Phase I monitoring was conducted
between June 2003 and December 2003. Table 6 provides the location and a site description for
the Phase I monitoring sites located on Duck and Goose Creeks. Seventy-five samples were
collected from three sites in the Duck Creek watershed and 172 samples, from seven locations,
were collected in the Goose Creek watershed. Fifty-seven samples were collected from five
WWTPs.
The median and average fecal coliform concentrations for the Duck Creek samples were 530 and
1923 colonies/100 ml, respectively (Figure 3). The median concentration for the Goose Creek
samples was 510 colonies/100 ml and the average concentration was 1954 colonies/100 ml
(Figure 4).
-4-

Goose Creek Feca/ Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure 3.Duck Creek Fecal CuUboonDuta
-Average Concen-
20000
3.5
3 ID
2.5
1.5
0/1/2003 7721/2003 9/8/2003 10C29/2002 12/1882003
Date
-5-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 20Q5
Figure 4. Goose Creek Fecal Coliform Data
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform Data
25000
G1 - Headwaters G3-Headwaters
G7 - Midstream - ---G9 - Headwaters
G11 - Mid/Downstream G12 - Downstream
_ G13 - Goose/Duck Confluence -200 Standard
20000 400 Standard Rainfall
o Median Concentration = 520 c.f.u.1100 ml (all
Average Concentration = 1945 c.f.u.1100 ml (all
Median Concentration = 510 c.f.u.1100 ml (Goose)
Average Concentration = 1954 0,0100 ml (Goose)
0 15000
A
c
m
•O
10000 -
4 5000
-' u.
rA
5
4.5
4
3.5

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
There are 5 W WTPs in the watershed that were monitored during the Phase I monitoring (Table
2). Results are graphed in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Goose/Duck NPDES Discharger. Fecal Coliform Data
GooselDuck NPDES Discharger Fecal Coliform Data
Phase II monitoring included monitoring of streams downstream of specific land use sites. A
total of five (5) sites were identified that are representative of the targeted land uses present in the
Goose Creek watershed as listed in Table 7 and shown in Figure 2. Fecal coliform monitoring
results are shown in Figure 6.
-7-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure b: Land Use Sampling Results
Land -Use Sampling
8000 . 4 West Br - Low Density Residential
—*--Horse Farm
7000 Upstream Cattle Operations??
--X—Downstream Cattle Operations
c 6000 —Downstream Land Application of Poultry Waste
5000
ei
a 4000 —
L)
Value = 37,000 e.f.u.1100
E
.
3000
i� 1-
t -
0 2000
-
� t
Y
^`p
ib;. 1
M
2.0 Source Assessment
Potential sources of fecal coliform in a water body are numerous and often times transient. For
the purpose of this report, the sources of fecal coliform have been divided into two broad
categories; point sources and non -point sources. Point sources can be defined as sources, either
constant or time transient, which occur at a fixed location in a watershed. Non -point sources are
generally accepted to be diffuse sources not entering a water body at a specific location. An
example of a point source is wastewater treatment plants (WWTP). Examples of non -point
sources are storm water runoff, dry weather flow from storm drains and ground water.
The source assessment presented in this document represents the best estimation of the sources of
fecal coliform in the TMDL watershed at this time. Additional investigation into the sources and
distribution of sources of fecal coliform is critical to achieving the water quality target.
Therefore, it is expected that, in the future, the source assessment will be modified to reflect
additional data. Specifically, there needs to be a better understanding of seasonal changes and
variation in the watershed.
2.1 Point Source Assessment
All documented point source dischargers were included in the source assessment except the
Fairfield Elementary School WWTP, which was not sampled. Actual discharge values for fecal

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
coliform concentration and effluent flow rates were used throughout the TMDL. In the absence of
direct measurements, permit limit values were used. Furthermore, it was assumed that discharges
recorded during 2003 are typical and effectively estimate future conditions.
2.1..1 NPDES Permitted Dischargers
Table 2 identifies the permitted NPDES point source dischargers in the Goose Creek Watershed.
Figure 2 is a map of the watershed showing the locations of the permitted point source
dischargers_
Discharge Monitoring Reports were obtained for each NPDES permitted discharger from January
2003 to May 2004. From these reports an average flow rate and hourly fecal coliform loading
rate was determined. Table 2 presents this data for each of the NPDES permitted dischargers.
Table 2: NPDES Permitted Dischargers in Goose Creek Watershed.
Facility ID
Address
Sub-
NPDES ID
Flow
FC Loading
watershed
Rate
(cfu/hr)
ID
cfs
Oxford Glen
15349 Bexley Pl.
76
NCO063584
0.024
2.49E+04
0.075
2.37E+07
Ashe Plantation
Quarters Ln.
88
NCO065749
0.056
5.7E+04
0.154
3.15E+07
Fairview Elementary
l 10 Clontz Rd.
125
NCO030538
No flow
No load
0.00
1.26E+0
Country Woods
Country Woods
108
NCO065684
0.213
2.43E+05
Dr.
(1.036)
(2.11E+08)
Hunley Creek
Stevens Mill Rd.
105
NCO072508
0.305
2.36E+07
0.294
5.99E+07
Fairfield Plantation
Stoney Ridge
106
NCO034762
0.148
1.59E+06
Rd
(0.108)
(2.21 E+07)
Note: permit limits are shown in parentheses.
The NPDES Phase I rule requires large and medium municipal separate storm sewer systems
(MS4s) greater than 100,000 people to obtain an NPDES storm water permit. The NPDES Phase
II addressed small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) serving a population of less
than 100,000 people in urbanized areas. This rile applies to a unit of government such as a city or
county, which owns or operates an MS4. Each permitted entity is required to develop a Storm
Management Program (SWMP). Within the Goose Creek Watershed four municipalities have
been designated into the Phase II program. These municipalities are Stallings, Indian Trail and
Hemby Bridge within Union County and Mint Hill within Mecklenburg County. In addition to
the aforementioned municipalities Mecklenburg County has also been designated into the Phase
II program. The land areas of Stallings, Indian Trail and Hemby Bridge within the Goose Creek
Watershed are 2.2 miz, 1.3 mi2 and 0.47 miz respectively. The land area of Mint Hill within the
Goose Creek Watershed is l 1.2 mil. The land area of the Goose Creek Watershed within
Mecklenburg County is completely contained within Mint Hill's jurisdiction.
A recent EPA mandate (Wayland, 2002) requires NPDES permitted stormwater to be placed in
the wastload allocation (WLA), which had previously been reserved for continuous point source
wastewater loads. Since portions of the Goose Creek Watershed are subject to MS4 permits, the
WLA in the Goose Creek TMDL will include loads from both continuous discharge facilities and
wet weather discharges.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
2.2 Non -Point Source Assessment
Typically, assessment of the contribution of storm water runoff is based upon estimations of
wildlife, agricultural operations and typical accumulation rates on built up (urban) areas. _
However, for this report, build-up and wash off rates for each land -use in the TMDL watersheds
were adopted from a highly calibrated water quality model for the McDowell Creek Watershed
(located approximately 15 miles to the northwest of the Goose Creek Watershed) (Tetra Tech,
2003). Originally, these values were calculated from local in -stream storm water samples
collected by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) from December 1993 to September
1997 (Bales et. Al, 1999). The calculated values were adjusted to obtain necessary calibration
tolerances for the McDowell Creek Model. These values were directly integrated into the Goose
Creek Watershed model. Table 3 presents the build-up and maximum accumulation levels used
in this study.
Table 3: Rate of Accumulation and Maximum Storage of Fecal Coliform by Land -Use.
Rate of
Accumulation of
Fecal Coliform
(count/acre/day)
Maximum Storage
of Fecal Coliform
(count per acre)
Rate of
Accumulation of
Fecal Coliform
(count/acre/day)
Maximum
Storage of Fecal
Coliform
count acre
Pervious Lands
Impervious Lands
>2 Acre Residential
1.20E+10
1.20E+10
6.20E+07
1.90E+08
0.25 - 0.5 ac res
1.30E+09
1.70E+10
1.90E+08
5.80E+08
0.25 ac res
2.50E+09
1.70E+10
1.90E+08
5.80E+08
0.5 - 2 ac res
2.50E+09
1.70E+10
6.20E+07
1.90E+08
Agricultural
2.50E+09
2.60E+10
320E+08
9.70E+08
Forest
2.50E+09
3.50E-10
3.20E+08
9.70E+08
Golf Course
2.50E+09
6.84E+It
6.20E+07
1.90E+08
Institutional
5.50E+09
7.50E+09
6.20E+07
1.90E+08
Road/Transportation
5.50E+09
7.50E+09
6.20E-07
1.90E+08
Industrial
7.60E+09
7.50E+09
6.20E+07
1.90E+08
Commercial
8.60E+10
7.50E+09
620E+07
1.90E+08
While the total number of livestock operations is unknown, several in the Goose Creek watershed
have been identified and are shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Known Livestock Operations in the Goose Creek Watershed
Animal T e
Estimated #
Location::
Equestrian
8
Lawyers Rd. at Goose Ck. Union Co.
Equestrian
7-10
7300 West Duncan Rd.
E uestrian
10
8500Fairview Rd.
Equestrian
4
12300 Bain School Rd.
Bovine
150-200
13500 Lawyers ers Rd.
Bovine
40
12000 Bain School Rd.
Poultry
100,000
Bret Hai ler Rd.
[P-0--ultry
75,000
Unionville -Brief @ Brief Rd.
- 10-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMl7L Public Review Draft February 2005
2.2.1 Failing Septic Systems
Failing septic systems have been cited in many TM.DLs as a significant contributor of fecal
coliform to water bodies (Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of
Water Pollution Control, Watershed Management Section, 2000). Previous studies have used
failure rate values ranging from 4% to 50% of all septic systems. The Mecklenburg County
Health Department has estimated the local septic system failure rate to be 1%, (Daniel, 2000).
The Health Department cited the following reasons for this estimate (Daniel, 2000):
• In general, Mecklenburg County soils are highly conducive to septic system operation;
• Areas where soil types are not conducive to septic system operation have been excluded from
septic system use and existing systems in these areas have been targeted for integration into
the CMU sanitary sewer system; and
• Mecklenburg County has been a leader in enacting septic system regulation in North
Carolina, which has prevented the installation of sub -standard systems.
Many stakeholders, including Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities, have questioned the validity of a
1% failure rate for septic systems. Personal observations and anecdotal evidence appear to
indicate a much higher value. However, no documentation of a local investigation to establish a
more accurate or reproducible value exists. Because of the lack of direct evidence to refute the
1% value cited by the Health Department, that value was initially adopted for the TMDLs
presented in this document. However, during water quality model calibration the simulated fecal
coliform concentrations during baseflow conditions were consistently lower than observed data.
Because of the discrepancy in observed versus simulated, the septic system failure rate was
increased to 2.4%. It is possible that the discrepancy could be due to wildlife sources that were
unaccounted for in the model. However, direct inputs of fecal coliform bacteria by wildlife
during baseflow conditions could not be directly accounted for in the model.
No direct accounting of the number of septic systems in use in the Goose Creek Watershed was
available. An estimate of the possible number of septic systems was completed through analysis
of Mecklenburg County and Union County parcel data. Essentially, a listing of all parcels was
amassed, each meeting the following criteria:
1. The parcel must be at least 2 acres. The basic requirement of space for the septic system and
repair field was used to eliminate parcels less than 2 acres.
2. The parcel must be built upon. Database fields in the parcel coverage indicated the presence
of buildings. Any indication of a building was assumed to indicate the necessity of a septic
system.
3. The parcel must not be located in an area known to be served by a wastewater treatment
plant.
The resultant parcel coverage meeting the aforementioned criteria was then intersected with the
watershed coverage used to construct the water quality model. Those parcels bisected by a
watershed boundary were assumed to be located in the watershed containing the bulk of the
parcel. An estimated 2.8 individuals were served by each septic system (Daniel, 2000), an
estimated flow rate per person of 70 gallons per individual per day (Horsely.and Witten, 1996)
and an estimated fecal conform concentration of 10,000 c.f.u./100 nil (Horsely and Whitten,
EN!

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
1996) were used to calculate the loading and flow rates. Table 5 presents the loading rates by
watershed.
-12-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Table 5: Septic System Loading.
67
71
2.8
198.8
2.4%
4.771
10000
334
1.26E+08
68
41
2.8
11.2
2.4%
0.27
1 1 100001
191
7.12E+06
69
11
2.8
30.8
2.4%
0.74
10000
521
1.96E+07
70
42
2.8
117.6
2.4%
2.82
10000
1981
7.486+07
72
26
2.8
72.8
2.4%
1.75
10000
122
4.63E+07
73
24
2.8
67.2
2.4%
1,61
10000
113
4.27E+07
75
741
2.8
207.2
2.4%
4.97
10000
348
1.32E+08
76
100
2.81
280
2.4%
6.72
10000
470
1.78E+08
77
70�
2.8
196
2.4%
4.70
10000
329
1.25E+08
79
501
2.8
1401
2.4%
3.36
10000
235
8.90E+07
80
31
2.8
8.4
2.4%
0.20
10000
14
5.34E+06
81
31
2.8
86.8
2.4%
2.081
10000
146
5.52E+07
82
21
2.8
5.6
2.4%
0,131
10000
9
3.56E+06
83
43
2.81
120.4
2.4%
2.891
10000
202
7.66E+07
845
2.8
14
2.4%
0.34
10000
24
8.90E+06
85
15
2.8
42
2.4%
1.01
10000
71
2.67E+07
86
8
2.8
22.4
2.4%
0.54
10000
381
1.42E+07
87
3
2.8
8.4
2.4%
0,20
10000
14
5.34E+06
88
83
2.8
232.4
2.4%
5.58
10000
390
1.48E+08
89
23
2.8
64.4
2.4%
1.55
10000
108
4.10E+07
90
13
2.8
36.4
2.4%
0.87
10000
61
2,31E+07
91
8
2.8
22.4
2.4%
0.54
10000
381
1.42E+07
93
55
2.8
154
2.4%
3.70
10000
259
9.79E+07
95
151
2.8
42
2.4%
1.01
10000
7i
2,67E+07
96
8
2.8
22,4
2.4%
0.54
10000
381
1.42E+07
97
4
2.81
11.2
2.4%
0.27
10000
19
7.12E+06
98
61
2.8
16.8
2.4%
0.40
10000
28
1.07E+07
99
32
2.8
89.6
2.4%
2.15
10000
151
5.70E+07
l00
171
2.8
47.6
2.4%
1.14
10000
80
3.03E+07
101
91
2.8
25.2
2.4%
0.60
10000
42
1.60E+07
102
371
2.8
103.6
2,4%
2.49
10000
174
6.59E+07
104
1
2.8
2.8
2.4%
0.07
10000
5
1.78E+06
105
12
2.8
33.6
2.4%
0.81
10000
56
2.14F,+07
106
7
2.8
19.6
2.4%
0.47
10000
33
1.25E+07
107
17
2.8
47.6
2.4%
1,14
10000
801
3.03E+07
108
5
2.8
14
2.4%
0.341
10000
241
8.90E+06
109
5
2.8
14
2.4%
0.34
10000
241
8.90E+06
110
9
2.8
25.2
2.4%
0.60
10000
42
1.60E+07
111
331
2.81
92,41
2.4%
2.22
10000
155
5.88E+07
112
21
2.8
58.8
2.4°/9
1.41
10000
99
3.74E+07
- 13 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Basin
Estimated
Number of
systems
Individuals
per System
Individuals
Served
Failure
Rate
Individuals
per Failing
S stem
Fecal Coliform
Concentration
Flow
gal/day
FC Load
(cfufday)
113
13
2.8
36.4
2.4%
0.87
10000
61
2.31 E+07
114
42
2.8
117.6
2.4%
2.82
10000
198
7.48E+07
115
1
2.8
2.8
2.4%
0.07
10000
51
1.78E+06
116
13
2.8
36.41
2.4%
0.87
10000
61
2.31 E+07
Ill
19
2.8
53.2
2.4%
1.28
10000
89
3.38E+07
118
49
2.8
137.2
2.4%
3.29
10000
230
8.72E-+-07
119
5
2.8
14
2.4%
0.34
10000
24
8.90E+06
120
34
2.81
95.2
2.4%
2.28
10000
160j
6.05E+07
121
7
2.8
19.6
2.4%
0.47
10000
33
1.25E+07
122
31
2.8
86.8
2.4%
2.08
10000
146
5.52E+07
123
34
2.8
95.2
2.4%
2.28
10000
160
6.05E+07
124
15
2.8
42
2.4%
1.01
10000
71
2.67E+07
125
14
2,81
39.2
2.4%
0.94
10000
66
2.49E+07
126
13
2.8
36.4
2.4%1
0.871
10000
61
2.31E+07
127
9
2.8
25.2
2.4%
0.601
10000
42
1.60E+07
129
15
2.8
421
2.47%
1.011
10000
71
2.67E+07
2.2.2 Ground Water
No direct monitoring of ground water was conducted for this TMDL. Literature values for fecal
Coliform concentration in ground water range from <10 to over 1000 e.f.u.1100 ml. Initially a
groundwater concentration of 35 e.f.u./100 ml was adopted (HSPF default value). However,
during the calibration process simulated fecal Coliform concentrations during base flow were
consistently lower than observed values. Because of the discrepancy, the value was raised to 50
e.f.u./100 ml for the model. It is possible that the discrepancy could be due to wildlife sources
that were unaccounted for in the model. However, direct inputs of fecal coliform bacteria by
wildlife during baseflow conditions could not be directly accounted for in the model.
2.3 Water Quality Monitoring
Phase I of the Goose Creek Source Assessment Strategy was initiated in June 2003 and was
concluded on December 2003. A total of 304 samples were collected from 15 sites (including
five (5) waste water treatment plants) during the sampling period. Table 6 presents a total of ten
(10) sites that were identified as being representative of the varying land uses present in the
Duck/Stevens/Goose Creek watersheds. The sites are mapped on Figure 2. All baseline
monitoring sites listed in Table 5 were sampled weekly for fecal Coliform and E. coli.
-14-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Table 6: Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Source Assessment Monitoring Sites.
Site
Stream
Segment 10
Location
Deserit ion
G1
Stevens Creek
13-17-18a
I-485 Bridge: Upstream
To define water quality in
(NW side of I-485); 0.5
Stevens Creek
miles SW of Lawyers
Road
G3
Goose Creek
13-E7-18a
1-485 Bridge: Upstream
To define water quality in
(NW side of 1-485); 0.7
upper Goose Creek
miles SW of Lawyers
Road
G7
Goose Creek
13-17-18b
Mill Grove Road @
To define water quality in
USGS station
Goose Creek between G1,
G3 and Mill Grove Rd.
G9
Paddle Branch
Mill Grove Road: 0.5
To define water quality in
miles E of Lawyers
Paddle Branch
Road
Gil
Goose Creek
13-17-18b
Concord Hwy (Hwy
To define water quality in
601) @ USGS station
Goose Creek between G7,
G9 and Hwy 601
G12
Goose Creek
13-17-18b
Unionville Brief Rd.
To define water quality in
Goose Creek between G I
and convergence with Duck
G13
Goose Creek
13-17-18b
Brief Road between
To define water quality at
Unionville Brief Road
mouth of Goose Creek
and Hopewell. Church
D3
Duck Branch
NC 218: Between Mill
To define water quality in
Grove Road and
Duck Creek
Russell Road
D5
Duck Creek
Private Road @ 9902
To define water quality in
Mill Grove Road:
upper Duck Creek
Bridge at bottom of hill
D8
Duck Creek
Hopewell Church
To define water quality in
Road: 0.2 miles S of
Duck Creek between D5
Brief Road
and convergence with
Goose Creek
In January 2004, Phase 11 of the source assessment monitoring was initiated. The Goose Creek
Phase 1I source assessment monitored specific land uses to determine baseline conditions. The
Phase II monitoring was used to help determine to what extent livestock and septic tanks are
contributing to fecal coliform loads in Goose Creek. A total of five (5) sites were identified that
are representative of the targeted land uses present in the Goose Creek watershed as listed in
Table 7 and shown in Figure 2. The monitoring sites are located upstream and downstream of a
cattle operation, downstream of a horse farm, downstream of an area where chicken waste has
been land applied and downstream of a residential area that utilizes septic systems. The sites are
mapped on Figure 2. Phase 1I monitoring sites were sampled weekly for fecal coliform and E.
coli for a period of six (6) weeks between February and March 2004.
-15-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Table 7: Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Phase II Source Assessment Monitoring Sites.
Site
Stream
Location
Description
GT1
Goose Creek
12051 Bain School
To define water quality in a tributary of
Tributary
Rd.
Goose Creek downstream of
residential community
GT2
Goose Creek
12325 Bain School
To define water quality in a tributary of
Tributary
Rd.
Goose Creek downstream of a horse
farm
GC 1
Goose Creek
12309 Bain School
To define water quality in Goose Creek
Rd
u stream of a cattle farm
GC2
Goose Creek
13816 Lawyers Rd.
To define water quality in Goose Creek
downstream of a cattle farm
GC3
Goose Creek
Goose Creek at Hwy.
To define water quality in Goose Creek
218
downstream of a chicken farm
2.3.1 Bacterial Source Tracking
Bacterial Source Tracking (BST) using Antibiotic Resistance Analysis (ARA) was also used in
the development of the TMDL to assess the contribution of specific bacteria sources to fecal
Coliform loads in the watershed. BST analysis was conducted by MapTech Inc. in their
Blacksburg, VA laboratory. One hundred thirty six known source isolates from 17 livestock fecal
samples collected in the Goose Creek watershed were combined with 168 known source isolates
from 21 human and wildlife fecal samples previously collected in the Little Sugar Creek
watershed. The isolates were analyzed to develop a library for discriminating between human,
livestock and wildlife resources of E. coli bacteria. The livestock sample included 6 each from
cattle and horses, and 5 from poultry. Eighty-eight human isolates were extracted from I 1
samples. The 80 wildlife isolates were collected from 1 sample each of rabbit, deer, goose,
raccoon and fox, 2 samples from squirrel and 3 from ducks. Statistical analysis of the resulting
data showed a 76% correct classification rate. This is slightly below the Division of Water
Quality's preferred level of correct classification (> 80%).
One thousand three hundred forty unknown isolates from five sampling locations were analyzed
using the database developed with the known sources. The BST monitoring sites are shown on
Figure 2. Results of the analysis are given in Table 8 and graphed in Figure 7. The results
indicate that a significant number of the isolates are from livestock and wildlife.
I,

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Table 8: BST Ana:
Lab No.
Location
No.
Di
Sa
3NC4
D8
2/2-
3NC9
D8
3/2
3NC14
D8
3/1,
3NC19
D8
3/1,
3NC24
D8
3/2:
3NC29
D8
3/31
TO'
3NC5
DCBST5
2/2,
3NC10
DC13ST5
3/2
3NC15
DCBST5
3/11
3NC20
DCBST5
3/11
3NC25
DCBST5
3/2:
3NC30
DCBST5
3/31
TO'
3NC3
G12
2/2,
3NC8
G12
3/2
3NC13
G12
3/1(
3NC18
G12
3/1R
3NC23
G12
3/2:
3NC28
Gil
3/3(
T O"
3NC1
GCBSTI
2/2z
3NC6
GCBST 1
3/2
3NCII
GCBSTI
3/1(
3NC16
GCBSTI
3/1(
3NC21
GCBST 1
3/2:
3NC26
GCBSTI
3/3(
TO'
3NC2
GCBST2
2/2,
3NC7
GCBST2
3/2
3NC12
GCBST2
3/1(
3NC17
GCBST2
3/1(
3NC22
GCBST2
3/2'
3NC27
GCBST2
3/3(
TO"

Goose Creek Fecal coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure 7: Analysis of Number of Isolates From Monitoring Sites
lea
Goose Creek and Duck Creek
212412004-313012004
,.. -
•! :• � y- C' !•.}:: _ ..
.Ni f p-r
�.[-.
140
7.
, -
f`
-•
O Wildlife
o
5
16a-i`1
..
■Human
ro
BO
L
—
r
©Livestock
T
60
r
� �= z t
�•
40
Y
:.� : .t��
�•1
i
ci
De
Dcssrs cis Gcasrl
Gcesr2
Sample Sites
3.0 MODELING APPROACH
3.1 Modeling Framework
Win HSPF was selected for use in preparation of the fecal coliform TMDLs for the Goose Creek
watershed. HSPF was selected for the following reasons:
1. Mecklenburg County has constructed several tools within its WISe system to mine
data for direct input to HSPF. These tools allow for the relatively rapid
parameterization of basic 1-ISPF input decks with up to date local information.
Namely, the datasets include topography, land -use, land -cover and impervious area.
2. Mecklenburg County staff has significant experience preparing HSPF models as well
as supervising consultant preparation of HSPF models. This experience provides and
ability to cross check model parameters to other calibrated models. To date, HSPF
models have been prepared for the following watersheds in Mecklenburg County:
McDowell Creek: A FISPF model was prepared for McDowell Creek to determine
the effects of runoff on downstream water quality (Tetra Tech, 2003). Modeled
parameters included fecal coliform bacteria, temperature and sediment
Sugar, Little Sugar and McAlpine Creeks: HSPF models were prepared for fecal
coliform TMDL calculations in the Sugar, Little Sugar and McAlpine Creek
watersheds (MCDEP, 2002). Modeled parameters included fecal coliform bacteria
and temperature.
3. 1-ISPF is a spatially distributed, lumped parameter, continuous simulation model used
to model water quality conditions in watersheds and river basins. HSPF calculates
non -point source loadings of selected pollutants for specified land use categories in a
-18-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
watershed; represents subsequent pollutant runoff response to hydrologic influences,
such as precipitation; simulates point sources as constant or variable flow and load;
and simulates flow and pollutant routing through a stream network. These
capabilities make it well suited to modeling a largely rural watershed where non -
point sources of pollution are likely to outweigh point sources. .
For the Goose Creek watershed model the following elements of the model were used:
Pervious Land:
ATEMP — Air Temperature Elevation Difference
SNOW — Accumulation and Melting of Snow and Ice
PWATER — Water Budget Pervious
SEDMNT — Production and Removal of Sediment
PQUAL — Quality Constituents Using Simple Relationships
Impervious Land:
ATEMP—Air Temperature Elevation Difference
SNOW — Accumulation and Melting of Snow and Ice
IWATER — Water Budget Impervious
SOLIDS — Accumulation and Removal of Solids
IQUAL — Quality Constituents Using Simple Relationships
Reaches/Reservoirs:
HYDR—Hydraulic Behavior
ADCALC — Advection of Fully Entrained Constituents
I-ITRCH — Heat Exchange and Water Temperature
SEDTRN — Behavior of Inorganic Sediment
GQUAL — Generalized Quality Constituents
3.2 Model Setup
Figure 8 shows the sub -watershed delineations for the Goose Creek Watershed. Sub -watershed
delineation was based upon factors such as the presence of a USGS gauging station, presence of a
water quality monitoring site, presence of a NCDENR compliance point and confluence of major
stream segments. Sub -watershed delineation, stream cross section geometry, slope and length
were determined using Mecklenburg County's version of the Watershed Information System,
which is a GIS based application that allows the manipulation of digital elevation data for
modeling applications. Locally developed land use data (based upon individual land parcels) was
simplified and used for model preparation. For the portion of the watershed in Mecklenburg
County, 2004 land -used data generated from individual parcels was used. For the parts of the
watershed in Union County, 2003 parcel data in combination with 2001 aerial photography was
used. Table 9 shows the land uses applied in the TMDL model along with percent imperviousness
and total area of each land use represented. Figure 9 shows the distribution of the land uses
throughout the watershed. Meteorological data was adopted from Charlotte/Douglas
International Airport.
- 19-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure 8:
Goose Creek Watershed Delineations
Table 9. Percent Impervious by Land -Use for TMDL Water Quality Model.
Land Use in TMDL Model"
Percent Impervious
Area
Percent of Total
>2 Acre Residential
5
3945.7
14.23%
0.25 — 0.5 Acre Residential
18
957.161
3.45%
0.25 Acre Residential
30
58.431
0.21 %
0.5 — 2 Acre Residential
12
1591.688
5.74%
Agricultural
2
6460.73
23.31%
Commercial
55
77.662
0.28%
Forest
2
12827.792
46.28%
Golf Course
5
289.26
1.04%
Industrial
28
113,363
0.410
Institutional
28
67.359
0.24%
Road/Transportation
55
1330.389
4.80%
-20-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure 9:
Goose Creek Watershed Land Use Distribution
3.3 Fecal Coliform Source Representation
Both point and non -point sources of fecal coliform are represented in the water quality model.
Certain non -point source categories are not associated with land loading processes and are
represented as direct, in -stream source contributions in the model. These include failing septic
systems. Land loading non -point sources are represented as indirect contributions to the stream
through build-up and wash -off processes (see Section 2.2 above). The following sections
describe the assumptions used for the various sources described in Section 2.0.
3.3.1 NPDES Discharges
There are 5 NPDES point source dischargers in the Goose Creek Watershed. All NPDES
dischargers were represented in the model as constant (do not vary with time) sources of both
flow and fecal coliform. The fecal coliform loading and discharge rate were determined from
Discharge Monitoring Reports filed for each of the facilities. Long term average flow and fecal
coliform concentrations were used to determine the continuous inputs for the model.
-21 -

Goose Greek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February
3.3.2 Land Use
Fecal coliform loading from urban areas was represented in the model as both pervious and
impervious surfaces. Typically, urban loading rates are adjusted as a primary calibration
parameter in the water quality model. However, for the water quality model developed for the
TMDL watershed discussed in this report, loading rates were determined from a highly calibrated
HSPF model prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. for the McDowell Creek Watershed (approximately 15
miles to the Northwest). The loading values used for the Goose Creek watershed model are
presented in the calibrated HSPF *.uci file included as Appendix B.
3.3.3 railing Septic Systems
Fecal coliform loading values from failing septic systems were input to the water quality model
as continuous point sources by sub -watershed. The fecal coliform loading rates are presented in
Section 2.2.1 above.
3.4 Model Calibration
Calibration of a dynamic loading model involves both hydrologic and water quality components.
The model must be calibrated to accurately represent hydrologic response in the watershed before
reasonable water quality simulations can be performed. The hydrologic calibration involves
comparison of simulated stream -flows to observed stream -flow data from stream gauging stations
in the watershed. Simulated stream -flows are generated by the model using both meteorological
data and the physical characteristics of the watershed. Typically, certain model parameters are
altered until a reasonable match is developed between simulated and observed stream flow.
Similar techniques are used to calibrate the water quality portion of the model.
Hydrologic and water quality calibration for the Goose Creek watershed model was limited from
January 1, 2000—June 1, 2004. Significant recent land -use changes occurred which would
substantially impact flow and water quality; therefore, the calibration was limited to this time
period.
The calibrated water quality model (*.uci file) is included as Appendix B. A condensed
presentation of the hydrologic calibration data is included as Table 10 for the Goose Creek
watershed. Much of the difference presented in Table 10 may be attributable to the use of a
single rain gage. Table 11 presents the temperature calibration statistics for Goose Creek at SR
1524. Table 12 presents the fecal coliform calibration statistics for Goose Creek at SR 1524.
Figures 10 and I I are Cartesian and Frequency Distribution plots of the hydrologic calibration for
the Goose Creek watershed model, respectively. Figure 12 is a plot of the water quality (fecal
coliform) calibration for the Goose Creek Watershed (at SR 1524). Figure 13 is a plot of the
simulated fecal coliform concentration presented as a 30-clay geometric mean.
-22-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Table 10: Basic Hydrologic Calibration Data for Goose Creek at Hwy 601.
Flows
Goal
Simulated
Observed
Difference
Total of Highest 10% of Flows
15%
1.70E+09
1.97E+09
13.6%
Total of Lowest 50% of Flows
10%
1.10E+08
1.02E+08
7.4%
Observed Summer Flow Volume
30%
3.73E+08
3.57E+08
4.5%
Observed Fall Flow Volume
30%
2.78E+08
2.72E+08
2.3%
Observed Winter Flow Volume
30%
5.73E+08
6.69E+08
14.4%
Observed Spring Flow Volume
30%
8.45E+08
9.95E+08
7.7%
Observed Total Volume
10%
2.33E+09
2.65E+09
11.9%
Simulated Mean (cfs)
17.37
Observed Mean (cfs)
17.95
Simulated Range (cfs)
0.1 - 1 170
Observed Range (cfs)
0 - 15 l0
Relative Error (cfs)
1.13
Absolute Error (cfs)
11.15
RMS Error (cfs)
39.2
R2 (unitless)
0.85
Note: Goal was adopted from FISPEXP.
Note: Units in cubic feet unless noted
Table 1 1: Basic Temperature Calibration Data for Goose Creek at SR 1524
Simulated Mean (F)
17.37
Observed Mean (F)
17.95
Simulated Range (F)
33.4 - 83.3
Observed Range (F)
36.1 - 83.3
Relative Error (F)
0.3
Absolute Error (F)
1.69
RMS Error (F)
3.3
R2 (unitless)
0.97
Number of values
46
-23-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMOL Public Review Draft February 2005
Tablc 12: Basic Fecal Coliform Calibration Data for Goose Creek at SR 1524
Simulated Mean (cfu/100 ml)
1042
Observed Mean (cfu/100 ml)
378
Simulated Range (cfu/100 ml)
53 — 19,000
Observed Range (cfu/ 100 ml)
69 — 3,220
Relative Error (cfu/100 ml)
664
Absolute Error (cfu/100 ml)
880
Number of values
46
RMS Error (cfu/100 ml)
2963
Figure 10:
1600
1400
1200
1000
N
O
800
O
V.
600
400
200
Simulated vs Observed Flow
Goose Creek at 601 (Union County)
Observed
simulated
0 .
1/112000 7/19/2000 2/4/2001 6/23/2001 3/11/2002 9/27/2002 4115/2003 11/1/2003 5/19/2004
Time
-24-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure 11:
�••..�rf4L.tfl
L'
a
F
Figure 12:
100000
10000
0 1000
U
100
10
tiw r�riT'rb��..■�...�
■.L'�' ar �T 1111
Simulated vs. Observed Fecal Coliform Concentration
at SR 1524
■ NC-DENR Samples
— simulated
■
■
■
■
■
1-
1/112000 71192000 2142001 8232001 3/11/2002 9I2712002 4115/2003 1111/2003 5/192004
Date
-25-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
In order to assess the status of the hydrologic calibration of the model the goals presented in
Table 10 were adopted from HSPBXP (Lumb et. Al., 1994). Similarly, for water quality
calibration, model parameters (primarily the first order decay coefficient) were adjusted until the
closest match of simulated and observed concentrations were made. The closeness of the match
was evaluated using the sum of the squares of the differences between simulated and observed
values.
The model was evaluated by sources outside Mecklenburg County for reasonableness,
completeness and basis in reality. As a result of the outside evaluation, improvements to the
model were suggested and adopted.
Table 13 presents typical values for critical model parameters and values used for the Goose
Creek HSPF model.
Table 13: Critical Model Parameters and Ranges
Parameter Name
Description
Typical
Ran c
Modeled
Value
Hydrology Calibration Parameters
DEEPFR
Fraction of groundwater inflow lost to deep
percolation
0 - 0.2
0.1
LZSN
Lower zone nominal story e
3.0 - 8.0
4
LZETP
Lower zone evapotranspiration parameter
02 - 0.7
0.4 - 0.6
SLSUR
Sloe for overland flow
0.01 - 0.15
0.035
NSUR
Mannin 's roughness coefficient
0.15 - 0.35
0.32
LSUR
Overland flow length
200 - 500
375
INFILT
Infiltration
0.01 - 0.25
0.09
INTFW
Interflow
1.0 - 3.0
0.4
IRC
Baseflow recession parameter
0.5 - 0.7
0.3
AGWRC
Groundwater recession rate
0.92 - 0.99
0.999
Water Oualitv Calibration
FSTDEC
First order decay rate for Fecal Coliform
0.00001 -
1.152
TI IFST
Temperature correction coefficient for first
order decay of Fecal Coliform
1.0 - 2.0
1.07
Note: Typical range values for Hydrology Calibration Parameters taken from Basins Technical
Note 6: Estimating Hydrology and Hydraulic Parameters for HSPF. Unites States Environmental
Protection Agency - Washington D.C., EPA-823-R00-012. Water Quality Calibration typical
range values are the absolute maximum and minimum allowed by Win HSPF.
3.5 Model Output
3.5.1 Current Conditions
Figure 13 presents a rolling 30-day geometric mean of predicted fecal coliform concentrations at
SR 1524. Table 14 presents the relative fecal coliform loading of each of the sources accounted
for in the model from 0 1/0 1/2000 thru 06/01/2004.
-26-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Figure 13:
Simulated Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform Concentratin
at SR 1524
350
300
E
c 250
w
200
E
`
'2 150
0
U
100
LL
50
1/1/2000 7119/2000 2/4/2001 8/23/2001 3/11/2002 9/27/2002 4/15/2003 1111/2003 5/19/2004 12/5/2004
Date
Table 14: Simulated Total Fecal Coliform Load for entire Simulation Period (01/01/2000-
06/01 /2004)
Source Category
Total Simulated Load
1 x 109 c.f.u.
Percent of Total Load .
A. Non -Point Sources (LA):
1,520,500
99.86%
B. Point Sources (WLA)
2,100
<0.14%
C. Grand Total
1,522,600
100.00%
An interpretation of the results presented in Table 14 indicates that non -point source runoff is by
far the largest contributor of fecal coliform in the Goose Creek Watershed. It is critical to note,
however, that as flows in Goose Creek approach 0, fecal loading from ground water, septic
systems and point sources greatly impacts in -stream fecal coliform concentrations. Typically, the
highest fecal coliform concentrations predicted by the WinHSPF model occurred during runoff
events. However, several high concentrations of simulated fecal coliform were noted during low
flow conditions. This may partially be the result of very dry conditions, particularly during the
summer/fall of 2002, which caused the model to nearly "dry up." Although similar conditions are
witnessed in the USGS gage history, the model tended to under -predict stream flow during
extended periods without rain.
-27-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
3.5.2 Critical Conditions
Results of the three and a half year long water quality simulation of the 30-day geometric mean
concentration for existing conditions at SR 1524 and Goose Creek are presented in Figure 13.
Critical conditions (period of maximum exceedance) for the watershed occurred on 03/06/2003,
which was the result of several runoff events, which occurred in rapid succession. The date of
maximum exceedance and predicted in -stream fecal concentration are presented in Table 15.
Table 15: Critical Condition for the Goose Creek Watershed
Watershed
Date of Predicted
Value of Predicted Maximum
Maximum
Exceedance (30 day geomean FC
Exceedance
Concentration Cc.f.u./100 ml
Goose Creek at SR
03/06/2003
592
1524
Table 16 presents the contribution of each of the source categories to the date of maximum
exceedance listed in Table 15,
Table 16: Critical Condition Loading by Source Category (Total Loading 4/ l 2/02 — 5/ 1 1/2002).
Source Category
Total Simulated Load
1 z 109 c.f.u.
Percent of Total Load
A. Non -Point Sources (LA :
129,318.0
99.97%
B. Point Sources (WLA)
26.4
0.03%
C. Grand Total
129,344.4
100.00%
4.0 Allocation
4.1 'Total Maximum Daily Load
The TMDL process quantifies the amount of a pollutant that can be assimilated by a water body,
identifies the sources of the pollutant, and recommends regulatory or other actions to be taken to
achieve compliance with applicable water quality standards based on the relationship between
pollution sources and in -stream water quality conditions. A TMDL can be expressed as the sum
of all point source loads (Waste Load Allocations [WLAs]), non -point source loads (Load
Allocations [LA]), and an appropriate margin of safety (MOS), which takes into account any lack
of knowledge concerning the relationship between the effluent limitations and water quality:
TMDL = I WLAs + Y, LAs + NIOS
The objective of a TMDL is to allocate loads among all of the known pollutant sources
throughout a watershed so that appropriate control measures can be implemented and water
quality standards achieved. 40 CFR § 130.2 (I) states that TMDLs can be expressed in terms of
mass per time, toxicity, or other appropriate measure. For fecal coliform, TNtDLs are expressed
as counts per 30 days to be consistent with the water quality standard. Therefore, the TMDL
represents the maximum fecal coliform load that can be assimilated by the stream during the
critical 30 day period while maintaining the fecal coliform water quality standard of the
geometric mean of 200 c.f.u./100 ml over 30 days.
-28-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
In November 2002 EPA headquarters published guidance which clarifies the regulatory
requirements for establishing wasteload allocations for stormwater discharges (USEPA, 2002). In
summary, this guidance states that sources which are transported to a stream via a NPDES
regulated stormwater system must be considered point sources, and thus be addressed in the
wasteload allocation component of a T1VIDL. Since Goose Creek watershed (or part of the
watershed) is located in an NPDES Phase 11 community, pollutant loads, which are discharged to
a stream reach via the stormwater conveyance system, must be considered as point sources.
The total maximum daily load of fecal Coliform was determined by adding the WLA and LA. A
10% MOS was explicitly included in the TMDL analysis, functionally this made the standard 180
c1u./100 ml. To determine the TMDL, all permitted NPDES dischargers were modeled at
permitted levels of flow and fecal Coliform. These values are presented in Table 2. Model runs
to determine the TMDL with NPDES dischargers at permitted levels resulted in an inability to
meet the water quality standard at SR1524 during the summer of 2002. This is largely because of
extreme drought conditions that existed across the North Carolina Piedmont during this time.
Essentially this caused the NPDES dischargers to comprise nearly all of the flow in Goose Creek
at 1524, which rendered the 180 c.f.u./100 nil (includes 10% MOS) standard to be unachievable.
In order to determine the TMDL an analysis suggested by NC DENR DWQ staff to exclude the
lowest flows from the TMDL analysis was performed. Unfortunately, the USGS gage in the
Goose Creek Watershed (02124692) had not been in existence for the minimum 10 years to
accomplish the analysis. For this reason, a nearby stream gage with a long flow history (USGS
Gage #0214657975) was analyzed to determine the lowest 5% of flows at that gage. A
correlation of the observed flows at USGS Gage 02124692 with the observed flows at USGS
Gage 0214657975 is presented as Figure 14. The drainage area upstream of USGS Gage
#0214657975 (39.6 miz) was compared to the drainage area upstream of SR1524 (8.69 mil) to
determine the drainage area ratio. The drainage area ratio was then used to calculate the flow in
Goose Creek that would be exceeded 95% of the time. The results of this analysis are presented
in Table 17. Using the value determined from the analysis, all modeled flows at or below 0.6
c.f.s. were excluded from the TMDL analysis. The TMDL,, excluding modeled flows at or below
0.6 c.£s, is listed in Table 18.
Figure 14:
250
Correlation of USGS Gage Data
s - 7 w � � r; � �s.•;. � 7 - 4 h R lu1 � r" s, h a �. ,r,�y f ,
200D.0 _ t.�...a�,- i..�i...'t'+s _ . i' Se'h i,.5 _. - Y.g..- ;� 'r.'tr,......�.a1•,�:e,...�
S1 a a F Yr -l��r �i a 05g51 ,
•C`x " f } 1� .1¢i�f F✓43� 5 Y
. tall r:y j Y, J. i. t i,,S
{�� ��1 ����• � ;rr C `w t`� tA'4v�-� m. .. ?``,^E �`� p1t ;j, '1 ti.
� yes�W r
a };:. s +r . = r 1 = r..• ��:,. _ b-'..t � i 1 .a f w. yf t �}
000 0 fir, , d' ..✓'_ _ [ 1, s�». '� x..:ti. .?„,
t �
0.�
200 400 boa 600 1000 1200 1400 1600
Goose Creek Gape 02124692
-29-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Table 17: Data used in Flow Correlation Analysis
Watershed
Drainage Area
Flow Exceeded 95% of the
time
USGS Gage 0214657975
39.6 mi
2.6 c.f.s. (observed)
(McAlpine Creek
Goose Creek Upstream at SR
8.69 mi2
0.6 c.f.s. (calculated)
1524
Table 18: TMDL for Goose Creek at SR 1524
Watershed
Predicted
30 Day Geometric
Predicted TMDL
Number of exceedances
Critical
Mean during;
(e.f.u./30 days)
of 4001100 ml during
Condition
critical condition
Simulation Period (% in
parentheses)
Goose Creek
06/17/2002
177
1.58E+11
56 (3.4%)
at SR1524
Note: after source reduction scenario applied, critical condition shifted to 06/17/2002. All values in Table
14 reflect the shift.
In addition to the 30-day geometric mean standard, the daily model output was also evaluated for
compliance with the 400/100 ml in more than 20 percent of the samples portion of the standard.
For this evaluation model output (with flows excluded) was evaluated for the number of predicted
in -stream concentrations in excess of 360 c.f.u./ 100 ml (400 c.f.u.1100 ml plus a 10% MOS
equates to an effective standard of 360 c.f.u./100 ml) during any 30-day period. The standard was
interpreted to mean that only 6 exceedances of 400 c.f.u.1100 m1 daring any 30 day period would
be considered compliant with the standard and that 7 exceedances would be considered non
compliant. The maximum number of exceedances of the 400 c.f.u.1100 ml standard in model
output (flows excluded) was 6. Therefore, the TMDL as presented was considered to be
compliant with both parts of the standard.
4.2 Waste Load Allocations (Point Sources)
The WLA for the Goose Creek Watershed is identical to the existing Waste Load Allocation. In
other words, for the TMDL current conditions should be maintained. Several of the point source
dischargers discharge fecal coliform at levels much less than their permit allows. If these
dischargers increase the level of fecal coliform in their effluent to permitted levels, it is likely the
TMDL presented here would not be met. In addition to permitted point source dischargers, MS4
communities required to obtain a Phase II Storm Water Permit are included in the WLA. Table
19 presents the percent reductions for the MS4 areas in the Goose Creek Watershed.
Table 19: Percent Reduction for MS4 Areas to Achieve TMDL.
MS4 Designated Area
Area in Goose Creek
Watershed
Percent of
Watershed Area
Percent Reduction
Mint Hill
7195 ac
26%
92.5%
Hemby Bride
298 ac
1%
92.5%
Indian Trail
855 ac
3%
92.5%
Stallings
1400 ac
5%
92.5%
-30-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
4.3 Load Allocations (lion -Point Sources)
The LA for the Goose Creek Watershed is presented in Table 19. Modeling results indicate the
vast majority of fecal coliform loading is from build-up and wash -off of pollutants from the land
surface. Because of this, the TMDL has focused on this source. Table 20 presents the percent
reductions needed from the major allocation categories to meet the TMDL requirements. Table
21 presents the TMDL components necessary to meet the water quality target. Figure 15
displays the 30 geometric mean fecal coliform concentration for the Goose Creek Watershed for
both current conditions and TMDL conditions. Note that the day exhibiting the highest 30
geometric mean concentration during current conditions (with permitted dischargers discharging
at permit limits) was 03/06/2003. This 30-day period was typified by higher than average flows
with several runoff events. After the load reductions necessary to achieve the water quality
standard were input to the model the period of maximum exceedance shifted to 07/07/2002 (30
day geometric mean value of 177), which was a period of very low flows dominated by WWTP
effluent and ground water flow to the stream. The cause of the shift was the drastic reduction of
NPS fecal coliform in the model to achieve the water quality standard. This drastic reduction
shifted the critical condition from a 30-day period of wet weather (NPS dominated sources of
fecal coliform) to a 30-day period of dry weather (WWTP dominated sources of fecal coliform).
"fable 20: Percent load reductions necessary to meet TMDL requirements for Goose Creek
Watershed.
Source Category
Percent
Reduction
MS4
92.5%
Permitted WWTPs
N/A
Nonpoint Sources
92.5%
Table 21: TMDL components to meet the water quality target.
Segment
WLA
LA
MOS
TMDL
13-17-18a
7.81x10
1.14x10
Explicit &
14
1.22x10
Implicit
13-17-18b
2.34x10
2.06x10
Explicit&
2.08xlO"
Implicit
-31-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft _ _ February 2005
Figure 15:
Current and TMDL Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform Concentration
at SR 1524
Goo
-90%RedL alonlnNPS - Flow Exduded
700
_ 600
a
r Soo
400
O
O
V 300
4
200
100
IM000 vV2001 8/5/2001 2nMO2 9/92002 3/20/2003 10/14/2003 5/1/2004
Date
5.0 Implementation Plan
The TMDL analysis was performed using the best data available to specify the fecal Coliform
reductions necessary to achieve water quality criteria. The intent of meeting the criteria is to
support the designated use classifications in the watershed. A detailed implementation plan is not
included in this TNLDL. The involvement of local land owners and agencies will be needed in
order to develop an implementation plan. In general, reductions in fecal coliform loads should be
sought through identification and installation of additional agricultural and urban BM.Ps to reduce
loads during runoff events.
6.0 Stream Ylonitoring
NCDENR will continue monthly monitoring on Stevens Mill Rd. in Union County. MCWQP
will continue monthly fecal coliform monitoring on Stevens Creek at Thompson Rd. and on
Goose Creek at Country Woods Dr. The continued monitoring of fecal coliform will allow for the
evaluation of progress towards the goal of achieving water quality standards and intended best
uses. Moreover the Storm Water Management Program (SWMP) required in MS4 permits is a
good means of achieving the continued and enhanced monitoring.
7.0 Future Efforts
The most prevalent sources of fecal coliform loading appear to be storm water runoff from forest,
agriculture and urban land uses. Addressing the agricultural sources will require voluntary
adoption of BMPs, facilitated by existing cost -share programs and educational efforts. Urban
sources can be addressed by the implementation of structural BMPs. Possible increased fecal
coliform levels from new development can be addressed by the adoption of post construction
ordinances that require riparian buffers and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques.
-32-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
8.0 Public Participation
Mecklenburg County involved an interactive stakeholder group involving individuals
representing diverse community interests from the Mecklenburg and Union Counties, Charlotte
Mecklenburg Utilities, Sierra Club, DENR-DWQ, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
local developers, and community members. A series of stakeholder group meetings were held to
communicate and discuss TMDL development.
A draft of the TMDL will be publicly noticed through various means, including notification in the
local newspapers. DWQ will electronically distribute the draft TMDL and public comment
information to known interested parties. The TMDL will also be available from the Division of
Water Quality's website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/ during the comment period. The public
comment period will last for a minimum of 30-days.
- 33 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
9.0 References
Bales, Jerad D., J. Curtis Weaver and Jerald B. Robinson, 1999, Relation of Land Use to
Streamflowand Water Quality at Selected Sites in the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina, 1993-98. U.S. Geological Survey Water -Resources Investigations Report 99-
4180, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Daniel, Sylvia, 2001, Personal Communication, Mecklenburg County Health Department,
January 31, 2001.
FACA. 1998. Federal Advisory Committee (FACA). Draft final TMDL Federal Advisory
Committee Report.
Horsley & Whitten. 1996. Identification and Evaluation of Nutrient and Bacteriological Loadings
to Maquoit Bay, Brunswick, and Freeport, Maine. Final Report. Casco Bay Estuary Project,
Portland, M E.
Lumb, A.M., McCammon, R.B., and Kittle,'J.L., Jr., 1994, Users manual for an expert system
(HSPEXP) for calibration of the Hydrologic Simulation Program --Fortran: U.S. Geological
Survey Water -Resources Investigations Report 94-4168, 102 p.
Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protection, 2002, Fecal Coliform Total
Maximum Daily Load for the Irwin, McAlpine, Little Sugar and Sugar Creek Watersheds,
Mecklenburg County. Prepared for NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section — Planning Branch, Raleigh, NC,
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control,
Watershed Management Section, 2000, Total Maximum Daily Load for Fecal Coliform in
Sinking Creek, Watauga River Watershed, Tennessee (RUC 06010103). Nashville,
Tennessee.
Tetra Tech, Inc., 2003, Calibration Report for the McDowell Creek HSPF Model. Prepared for
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.,
USEPA. 1991. Guidancefor Water Quality -Based Decisions: The TiVIDL Process. Environmental
Protection Agency, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, Washington D.C.
USEPA. 2000. Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation and
Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program in Support of
Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation; Final Rule. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C+. Fed. Reg. 65:43586-43670 (July 13, 2000)
-34-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februa 2005
10.0 Appendices
Appendix A-1. Fecal coliform results from the NCDENR monitoring site located on Goose
Creek at Stevens Mill Rd.
Date...
1/28/1997
6300
2/18/1997
10
3/26/1997
120
4/ 16/ 1997
450
5/20/1997
81
6/23/ 1997
290
7/30/ 1997
1600
8/26/1997
300
9/24/ 1997
820
10/28/1997
160
11 /20/1997
27
1 /5/ 1998
200
1 /20/1998
750
2/ 18/ 1998
340
3/ 12/ 1998
81
4/27/1998
300
5/20/1998
600
6/15/1998
180
7/21 / 1998
2600
8/6/1998
210
9/29/1998
340
10/13/1998
73
11 /5/1998
80
12/8/1998
310
1 /25/1999
380
2/4/1999
230
3/4/1999
27
4/28/1999
6300
5/ 11 /1999
1400
6/15/1999
110
7/21 /1999
54
8/19/ 1999
170
9/8/1999
60
10/18/1999
110
11/18/1999
600
12/29/1999
60
1/19/2000
210
2/3/2000
340
3/6/2000
210
4/4/2000
240
5/30/2000
440
6/22/2000
210
7/25/2000
720
-35-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februag 2005
Date
FC Observation (#1100ml)
8/14/2000
120
9/11/2000
19000
10/17/2000
6000
11 /20/2000
130
12/12/2000
73
1/4/2001
140
2/7/2001
200
4/5/2001
53
5/3/2001
100
6/12/2001
270
7/10/2001
280
8/6/2001
440
9/6/2001
190
10/2/2001
640
11/7/2001
200
12/10/2001
530
1/7/2002
2000
2/12/2002
250
3/6/2002
120
4/9/2002
320
5/9/2002
1400
6/4/2002
230
7/10/2002
170
8/5/2002
2000
9/3/2002
530
10/3/2002
1500
11 /5/2002
1100
1/21/2003
660
2/6/2003
2000
3/10/2003
150
4/1/2003
350
5/21 /2003
1200
6/23/2003
340
7/16/2003
390
8/6/2003
1200
9/24/2003
150
10/8/2003
730
11/6/2003
200
12/3/2003
240
-36-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februag 2005
Appendix A-2 Fecal Coliform data from WWTP effluent samples
-
Fecal
Fecal
Fecal
C Fecal oliform
. Fecal Coliform
_. 'Coliform
-" Coliform :
Coliform .
S
Date
(Coloniesl1 Oif m1)
(Colonies/l00 ml) (Colonies/10Q
m_ I) (Co1onies/1_00 rril)
(Colonies/100 ml)
APWWTP
CWWWTP
FPWWTP
OGWWTP
HCWWTP
6/11 /2003
230
6/18/2003
2000
6/25/2003
5
7/2/2003
5
7/9/2003
5
APWWTP
7/23/2003
25
6
5
APWWTP
7/30/2003
25
50
5
APWWTP
8/6/2003
10
5
31
7300
APWWTP
8/13/2003
6
5
44
1380
APWWTP
8/20/2003
40
10
5
60
5
APWWTP
8/27/2003
10
10
5
10
5
APWWTP
9/312003
19
13
5
13
• 5
APWWTP
9/10/2003
10
6
5
5
5
APWWTP
9/17/2003
0
5
5
APWWTP
9/24/2003
10
19
5
25
5
APWWTP
10/1/2003
10
10
5
10
5
APWWTP
10/8/2003
10
10
5
20
5
APWWTP
10/15/2003
10
10
5
10.
5
APWWTP
10/22/2003
10
10
5
20
5
APWWTP
10/29/2003
10
20
5
10
5
APWWTP
11/5/2003
10
6
10
APWWTP
11/12/2003
5
10
5
APWWTP
11/19/2003
40
960
6
APWWTP
12/3/2003
10
1500
10
APWWTP
12/11/2003
10
180
10
APWWTP
12/17/2003
10
10
10
-37-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Appendix A-3 Fecal coliform concentrations and 30 day geometric mean
G1 30 day G3 30 day G7 30 day G9 30 day
�,, Date_ G1
geomean
_ G3
_ geomean
G7,.
geomean
G9 �_geomcan
6/11/2003 21C
1400
500
400
6/18/2003 72C
1130
860
1000
6/25/2003 300
920
540
6700
7/2/2003 4600
676
2600
1395
5100
1043
2800
1655
7/9/2003 590
875
580
1119
470
1027
760
1943
7/16/2003
934
1115
1090
2425
7/23/2003 640
1202
2500
1556
2900
1908
2600
1769
7/30/2003 2800
1019
10000
2438
6000
2015
11900
2865
8/6/2003 760
1108
2300
3860
2500
3517
4000
4983
8/13/2003 310
806
2700
3530
600
2260
10000
5931
8/20/2003 60
446
30
1168
60
857
90
2558
8/27/2003 140
211
420
529
190
362
150
857
9/3/2003 400
180
490
359
450
236
3700
841
9/10/2003 193
•160
250
198
330
203
310
353
9/17/2003
221
372
304
556
9/24/2003 450
326
400
366
395
389
4300
1702
10/1/2003 350
312
480
363
960
500
112
530
10/8/2003 4100
864
6200
1060
380
524
38
264
10/15/2003 40
401
320
786
380
484
1000
368
10/22/2003 220
335
310
737
700
558
60
126
10/29/2003 980
434
2800
1146
4200
807
5800
339
11/5/2003 330
231
370
566
400
818
1370
831
11/12/2003 200
345
380
591
480
867
160
526
11/19/20032800
652
21000
1696
4600
1388
13000
2016
12/3/2003 370
511
720
1207
180
631
1200
1360
12/11120032400
840
3900
2176
3200
1062
4800
1860
12/17/2003 370
979
1100
2838
220
874
560
2545
-38-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform 7MDL Public Review Draft February 2005
Appendix A-3 Fecal colitorm concentrations and 30 day geometric mean
Date G11 G11 30 day geomean G12 G12 30 day geomean G13 G13 30.day geomean
6/11/2003 210
190
200
6/18/2003 620
460
540
6/25/2003 220
320
390
7/2/2003 4700
606
4600
599
8800
780
7/9/2003 310
668
410
726
370
910
7/16/2003
684
845
1083
7/23/2003 4600
1885
4100
1977
4700
2483
7/30/2003 6000
2045
6000
2161
6000
2185
8/6/2003 2250
3960
2500
3947
1700
3633
8/13/2003 5250
4249
6000
4383
6000
4118
8/20/2003 70
1492
60
1524
60
1384
8/27/2003 140
583
240
682
210
599
9/3/2003 450
390
240
379
280
381
9/10/2003 600
227
250
171
190
161
9/17/2003
336
243
224
9/24/2003 290
428
240
243
370
270
10/1/2003 88
248
250
247
210
245
10/8/2003 280
193
850
371
400
314
10/15/2003 200
194
210
322
140
257
10/22/2003160
168
340
351
160
208
10/29/20035300
467
5800
770
4700
453
11/5/2003 280
467
1480
885
310
425
11 /12/2003 410
559
360
1012
420
559
11/19120037400
1457
14000
2565
849
12/3/2003 260
686
1200
1730
880
486
12/11/20033900
1324
3300
2114
3100
1046
12/17/2003 560
1432
520
2317
520
1124
-39-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft _ February 2005
Appendix A-3 Fecal coliform Concentrations and 30 day geometric mean
Date D3 D3 30 day geomean , D5 _ D5 30 day geomean,,D8 D8 30 day geomean
6/11/2003 70
131
160
6/18/2003 640
640
1550
6/25/2003 194
260
194
7/2/2003 4000
432
4000
543
3200
626
7/9/2003 120
494
380
709
730
915
7/16/2003
453
734
768
7/23/2003 2200
1018
3000
1658
6100
2424
7/30/2003 6000
1166
8600
2140
6000
2990
8/6/2003 4200
3813
3000
4262
3900
5226
8/13/2003 550
2350
2000
3527
6000
5410
8/20/2003 25
767
80
1425
110
1982
8/27/2003 250
347
600
733
150
788
9/3/2003 250
171
480
463
300
415
9/10/2003 590
174
1140
403
240
186
9/17/2003
333
690
221
9/24/20031040
535
450
627
390
304
10/1/2003 5
145
250
504
169
251
10/8/2003 360
123
19700
1304
260
258
10/15/2003 230
144
570
1060
130
217
10/22/2003 460
117
350
996
90
151
10/29/20034800
654
1700
1608
7200
385
11/5/2003 150
525
680
693
70
277
11/12/2003100
427
240
558
2300
568
11/19/20031200
542
8500
1239
1500
1148
12/3/2003 640
328
130
652
210
475
12/11/20038200
891
3500
982
5500
1413
12/17/2003 400
1260
220
960
530
979
-40-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review ,Graft February 2005
Appendix A-4 Goose/Stevens Creek TyIDL Phase H Source Assessment Monitoring Results
Date Site FC Concentration (co11100 ml)
02f 10104 G T 1
4600
02/17/04 GT1
2700
03/02/04 GT 1
800
03/10/04 GT 1
2200
02/10/04 GT2 480
02/17/04 GT2 760
03102/04 GT2 570
03/10/04 GT2 1500
02/10/04 G C 1
1100
02/17/04 G C 1
1300
03102104GC1
1080
03/10/04 GC 1
37000
02110/04GC2
900
02/17/04 G C2
1300
03102104GC2
1100
03110104GC2
3800
02/18/04 GC3 120
03102/04GC3 940
03110104GC3 570
-41 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL public Review Draft February 2005
Appendix B: HSPF UCI File
RUN
GLOBAL
UCI Created by WinHSPF for Exist hyd
START 2000/01/01 00:00 END 2004/06/15 23:00
RUN INTERP OUTPT LEVELS 1 0
RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNITS 1
END GLOBAL
FILES
,<FILE> SUN#>***< ---- FILE NAME -----------------------------------------
-------- >
MESSU 24 wq-ca12.Exist_hyd.ech
91
wq-ca12,Ex.ist_hyd.out
WDMI
25
exist-hyd.wdm
WDM2
26
..\..\..\BASINS\data\met_data\gooseall.wdm
BINO
92
Exist_hyd.hbn
END
FILES
OPN
SEQUENCE
INGRP
INDELT 01:00
PERLND
101
PERLND
102
PERLNd
103
PERLND
104
PERLND
105_
PERLND
106
PERLND
107
PERLND
108
PERLND
109
PERLND
110
PERLND
ill
PERLND
112
IMPLND
101
IMPLND
102
IMPLND
103
IMPLND
104
IMPLND
105
IMPLND
106
IMPLND
107
IMPLND
108
IMPLND
109
IMPLND
110
IMPLND
J.11
IMPLND
112
RCHRES
67
RCHRES
71
RCHRES
69
RCHRES
70
RCHRES
72
RCHRES
73
RCHRES
86
RCHRES
75
RCHRES
76
-42-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
RCHRES
77
RCHRES
89
RCHRES
79
RCHRES
88
RCHRES
81
RCHRES
91
RCHRES
83
RCHRES
82
RCHRES
93
RCHRES
92
RCHRES
87
RCHRES
95
RCHRES
78
RCHRES
100
RCHRES
85
RCHRES
99
RCHRES
96
RCHRES
97
RCHRES
98
RCHRES
94
RCHRES
80
RCHRES
101
RCHRES
103
RCHRES
105
RCHRES
106
RCHRES
108
RCHRES
109
RCHRES
102
RCHRES
110
RCHRES
104
RCHRES
112
RCHRES
84
RCHRES
114
RCHRES
116
RCHRES
117
RCHRES
118
RCHRES
74
RCHRES
119
RCHRES
120
RCHRES
121
RCHRES
122
RCHRES
123
RCHRES
124
RCHRES
125
RCHRES
90
RCHRES
126
RCHRES
127
RCHRES
128
RCHRES
107
RCHRES
111
RCHRES
113
RCHRES
115
RCHRES
129
END INGRP
END OPN SEQUENCE
PERLND
MICE

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMOL Public Review Draft February 200.5
ACTIVITY
*** <PLS > Active Sections
***
*** x - x ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC
***
101 112 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
END ACTIVITY
PRINT -INFO
*** < PLS> Print -flags
PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 9
END PRINT -INFO
BINARY -INFO
*** < PLS> Binary Output Flags
PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 9
END BINARY -INFO
GEN-INFO
*** Name Unit -systems Printer BinaryOut
*** <PLS > t-series Engl Metr Engl Metr
*** x - x in out
101 >2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
102 0.25 - 0.5 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
103 0.25 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
104 0.5 - 2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
105 Ag 1 1 0 0 92 0
106 Forest 1 1 0 0 92 0
107 Golf 1 1 0 0 92 0
108 Institutional 1 1 0 0 92 0
109 Road 1 1 0 0 92 0
110 Transportation 1 1 0 0 92 0
ill Industrial 1 1 0 0 92 0
112 Commercial 1 1 0 0 92 0
END GEN-INFO
SNOW-PARM1
*** < PLS> LAT MELEV SHADE SNOWCF COVIND KMELT
TBASE
*** x - x degrees (ft) (in) (in/d.F)
(F}
101 112 40. 800. 0.3 1.2 10. 0.
0.
END SNOW-PARM1
PWAT-PARMI
*** <PLS > Flags
*** x - x CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE IFFC HWT IRRG
101 112 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0
END PWAT-PARM1
-44-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
PWAT-PARM2
*** < PLS> FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY
AGWRC
*** x - x (in) (in/hr) (ft) (1/in)
(1/day)
101 0.25 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1_
0.999
102 104 0. 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
105 107 0.25 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
108 112 0. 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
END PWAT-PARM2
PWAT-PARM3
*** < PLS> PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP
AGWETP
*** x - x (deg F) (deg F)
IC1 112 40. 35. 2, 2. 0.1 0.15
0.01
END PWAT-PARM3
PWAT-PARM4
*** <PLS > CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP
*** x - x (in) (in) (1/day)
101 0.02 0.4 0.32 C.4 0.3 0.6
102 104 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.4
.105 107 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.6
108 112 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.4
END PWAT-PARM4
PWAT-STATEI
*** < PLS> PWATER state variables (in)
*** x - x CEPS SUBS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS
GWVS
101 112 0. 0. 0.35 0. 4.2 1.
0.
END PWAT-STATEI
MON-INTERCEP
*** <PLS > Interception storage capacity at start of each month (in)
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
102 104 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.15
105 107 C.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
108 112 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.15
END MON-INTERCEP
MON-UZSN
*** <PLS > Upper zone storage at start of each month (inches)
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.1 0.08
END MON-UZSN
MON-INTERFLW
*** <PLS > Interflow inflow parameter for start of each month
-45-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
*** x - x JAN FEE MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.25 0.25 0.25
END MON-INTERFLW
MON-IRC
*** <PLS > Interflow recession constant at start of each month (/day)
*** x - x JAN FEE MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.35 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.35 0.35 0.3 0.1 0.1
END MON-SRC
MON-LZETPARM
*** <PLS > Lower zone evapotransp parm at start of each month
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.15 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.15
END MON-LZETPARM
SED-PARM2
*** <PLS > SMPF KRER JRER AFFIX COVER NVSI
*** x - x (/day) lb/ac-day
101 1. 0.552 1.81 0.06 0.25 0.45
102 104 1. 0.552 1.81 0.001 0.25 1.75
105 107 1. 0.552 1.81 0.06 0.25 0.45
108 112 1. 0.552 1.81 0.001 0.25 1.75
END SED-PARM2
SED-PARM3
*** <PLS > Sediment parameter 3
*** x - x KSER JSER KGER JGER
101 112 1. 1.25 0.1 1.5
END SED-PARM3
NQUALS
*** <PLS >
*** x - xNQUAL
101 112 1
END NQUALS
PQL-AD-FLAGS
*** Atmospheric Deposition Flags
*** < PLS> QUAL1 QUAL2 QUAL3 QUAL4 QUAL5 QUAL6 QUAL? QUALS
QUAL9 QUAL10
*** x - x <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C>
<F><C> <F><C>
101 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
END PQL-AD-FLAGS
QUAL-PROPS
*** <PLS > Identifiers and Flags
*** x - x QUALID QTID QSD VPPW VPFS QSO VQO QIFW VIQC QAGW
VAQC
101 112FECAL COLIFO LES 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
0
END QUAL-PROPS
QUAL-INPUT
*** Storage on surface and nonseasonal parameters
-46-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
*** SQO POTFW POTFS ACQOP SQOLIM WSQOP IOQC
AOQC
*** <PLS > qty/ac qty/ton qty/ton qty/ qty/ac in/hr qty/ft3
qty/ft3
*** x x
ac.day
101 1.7E+07 0. 0. 8.6e9 2.6E+10 2.5 14160.
14160.
102 104 1.7E+07 0. 0. 5.5E+09 1.7E+10 2.5 14160,
14160.
105 1.7E+07 0. 0. 7.6E+106.84E+11 2.5 14160.
14160.
106 1.7E+07 0. 0. 1.2E+10 3.5E+10 2.5 14160.
14160.
107 1.7E+07 0. 0. 1.3E+09 1.2E+10 2.5 14160.
14160,
108 112 1.7E+07 0. 0. 2.5E+09 7.5E+09 2.5 14160.
14160.
END QUAL-INPUT
END PERLND
IMPLND
ACTIVITY
*** <ILS > Active Sections
*** x - x ATMP SNOW IWAT SLID IWG IQAL
101 112 1 1 1 1 0 1
.END ACTIVITY
PRINT -INFO
*** <ILS > ******** Print -flags ******** PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *********
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END PRINT -INFO
BINARY -INFO
*** <ILS > **** Binary -Output -flags **** PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW TWAT SLD IWG IQAL *********
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END BINARY -INFO
GEN-INFO
*** Name Unit -systems Printer Binary0ut
*** <ILS > t-series Engl Metr Engl Metr
*** x - x in out
101 >2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
102 0.25 - 0.5 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
103 0.25 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
104 0.5 - 2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
105 Ag 1 1 0 0 92 0
106 Forest 1 1 0 0 92 0
107 Golf 1 1 0 0 92 0
108 Institutional 1 1 0 0 92 0
109 Road 1 1 0 0 92 0
110 Transportation 1 1 0 0 92 0
ill Industrial 1 1 0 0 92 0
112 Commercial 1 1 0 0 92 0
END GEN-INFO
-47-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL_Public Review Draft _ February 2005
SNOW-PARM1
*** < ILS> LAT
MELEV
SHADE
TBASE
*** x - x degrees
(ft)
{F)
101 112 40.
800.
0.3
32.
END SNOW-PARMI
TWAT-PARMI
*** <TLS > Flags
*** x - x CSNO RTOP
VRS VNN
RTLT
101 112 1 0
1 0
0
END IWAT-PARMI
IWAT-PARM2
*** <ILS > LSUR
SLSUR
NSUR
*** x - x (ft)
101 110 500.
0.0027
0.05
ill 500.
0.0012
0.05
112 500.
0.0025
0.05
END IWAT-PARM2
IWAT-PARM3
*** <ILS > PETMAX
PETMTN
*** x - x (deg F)
(deg F)
101 112 40.
35.
END IWAT-PARM3
TWAT-STATEI
*** <ILS > IWATER state
variables (inches)
*** x - x RETS
SURS
101 112 0.2
0.01
END IWAT-STATEI
SLD-PARM2
*** KEIM
JEIM
ACCSDP
*** <ILS >
tons/
*** x - x
ac.day
101 0.1
2.
0.014
102 0.09
2.
0.02
103 0.08
2.
0.028
104 0.08
2.
0.016
105 107 0.1
2.
0.014
108 110 0.08
2.
0.015
ill 0.09
2.
0.028
112 0.08
2.
0.015
END SLD-PARM2
NQUALS
*** <TLS >
*** x - xNQUAL
101 112 1
END NQUALS
IQL-AD-FLAGS
- 48 -
SNOWCF COVTND KMELT
(in) (in/d.F)
1.2 J.O. 0.
RETSC
(in)
0.05
0.05
0.05
REMSDP
/day
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085
0.085

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februpa 2005
*** Atmospheric Deposition Flags
*** < ILS> QUAL1 QUAL2 QUAL3 QUAL4 QUAI,5 QUAL6 QUAL7 QUALB
QUAL9 QUAL10
*** x - x <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C>
<F><C> <F><C>
101 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0
0 0 0
END IQL-AD-FLAGS
QUAL-PROPS
*** <ILS > Identifiers and Flags
*** x - x QUALID QTID QSD VPFW QSO VQO
101 112FECAL COLIFO 0 0 1 0
END QUAL-PROPS
QUAL-INPUT
***
Storage
on surface and
nonseasonal
parameters
***
SQO
POTFW
ACQOP
SQOLIM
WSQOP
*** <ILS >
qty/ac
qty/ton
qty/
qty/ac
in/hr
*** x - x
ac.day
101
5E+08
0.
6.2E+07
1.9E+08
0.8
102 103
5E+08
0.
1.9E+08
5.8E+08
0.8
104
5E+08
0.
6.2E+07
1.9E+08
0.8
105 106
5E+08
0,
3.2E+08
9.7E+08
0.8
107 112
5E+08
0,
6.2E+07
1.9E+08
0.8
END QUAL-INPUT
END IMPLND
RCHRES
ACTIVITY
*** RCHRES Active sections
*** x - x HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG QXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG
67 129 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
END ACTIVITY
0
PRINT -INFO
*** RCHRES Printout level flags
*** x - x HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR
67 129 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END PRINT -INFO
BINARY -INFO
*** RCHRES Binary Output level flags
*** x - x HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR
67 129 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END BINARY -INFO
GEN-INFO
*** Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer
*** RCHRES t-series Engl Metr LKFG
*** x - x in out
67 67 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
69 69 1 1 I 91 0 0 92
0
-49-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februa 2005
70
70
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
71
71
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
72
72
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
73
73
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
74
74
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
75
75
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
76
76
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
77
77
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
78
78
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
79
79
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
80
80
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
81
81
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
82
82
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
83
83
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
84
84
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
85
85
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
86
86
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
87
87
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
88
88
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
89
89
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
90
90
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
91
91.
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
92
92
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
93
93
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
94
94
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
95
95
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
96
96
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
97
97
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
-50-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
96
93
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
99
99
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
100
100
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
101
101
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
102
102
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
103
103
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
104
104
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
105
105
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
106
106
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
107
107
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
108
108
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
109
109
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
110
110
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
111
111
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
112
112
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
113
113
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
114
114
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
115
115
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
116
116
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
117
117
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
118
118
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
119
119
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
120
120
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
121
121
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
122
122
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
123
123
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
a
124
124
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
125
125
1
1
1
91
0
0
92
0
-51 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
126
126
1
1 1
91
0
0 92
0
127
127
1
1 1
91
0
0 92
0
128
128
1
1 1
91
0
0 92
0
129
129
1
1 1
91
0
0 92
0
END GEN-INFO
HYDR-PARM1
***
Flags
for
HYDR section
***RC HRES
VC Al
A2
A3 ODFVFG for
each
*** ODGTFG
for
each
FUNCT
for each
*** x - x
FG FG
FG
FG possible
exit
*** possible
exit
possible
exit
67 129
0
1 1
1 4 0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0 0
1 1
1 1 1
END HYDR-PARM1
HYDR-PARM2
*** RCHRES
FTBW
FTBU
LEN DELTH
STCOR
KS
DE50
*** x - x
(miles)
(ft)
(ft)
(in)
67
0.
67.
1.7
127.
3.2
0.3
0.01
69
0.
69.
2.55
157.
3.2
0.3
0.01
70
0.
70.
2.1
89.
3.2
D.3
0.01
71
0.
71.
0.29
0.
3.2
0.3
0.01
72
0.
72.
1.56
103.
3.2
0.3
0.01
73
0.
73.
2.34
166.
3.2
0.3
0.01
74
.0.
74.
0.15
3.
3.2
0.3
0.01
75
0.
75.
1.53
115.
3.2
0.3
0.01
76
0.
76.
2.7
143.
3.2
0.3
0.01
77
0.
77.
1.69
124.
3.2
0.3
0.01
78
0.
78.
0.2
B.
3.2
0.3
0.01
79
0.
79.
2.03
155.
3.2
0.3
0.01
80
0.
80.
0.13
7.
3.2
0.3
0.01
81
0.
81.
1.82
132.
3.2
0.3
0.01
82
0.
82.
0.43
8.
3.2
0.3
0.01
83
0.
83.
2.45
88.
3.2
0.3
0.01
84
0.
84.
0.56
28.
3.2
0.3
0.01
85
0.
85.
0.71
23.
3.2
0.3
0.01
86
0.
86.
0.89
27.
3.2
0.3
0.01
87
0.
87.
1.01
34.
3.2
0.3
0.01
88
0.
88.
2.86
177.
3.2
0.3
0.01
89
0.
89.
1.07
31.
3.2
0.3
0.01
90
0,
90,
0.85
23.
3.2
0.3
0.01
91
0.
91.
1.05
32.
3.2
0.3
0.01
92
0,
92,
0.02
1.
3.2
0.3
0.01
93
0.
93.
0.88
23.
3.2
0.3
0.01
94
0.
94.
0.31
13.
3.2
0.3
0.01
95
0.
95.
1.05
30,
3.2
0.3
0.01
96
0.
96.
1.74
64.
3.2
0.3
0.01
97
0.
97.
0.35
13.
3.2
0.3
0.01
98
0.
98.
0.5
10.
3.2
0.3
0.01
99
C.
99.
0.97
43.
3.2
0.3
0.01
100
0.
100.
0.66
16.
3.2
0.3
0.01
101
0.
101.
0.84
19.
3.2
0.3
0.01
-52-

Goose Creek Feca! CaGform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
102
O.
102.
1.08
19_
3.2
0.3
0.01
103
0.
103.
0.71
17.
3.2
0.3
0.01
104
0.
104.
0.76
11.
3.2
0.3
0.01
105
0.
105_
0.54
6.
3.2
0.3
0.01
106
0.
106.
0.56
13_
3.2
0.3
0.01
107
0.
107.
1.37
17_
3.2
0.3
0.01
108
0.
108.
1.05
12.
3.2
0.3
0.01
109
0.
109.
0.72
19,
3.2
0.3
0.01
110
0.
110.
0.55
14.
3.2
0.3
0.01
111
0.
ill.
1.06
16.
3.2
0.3
0.01
112
0.
112.
0.77
B.
3.2
0.3
0.01
113
0.
113.
1.
11.
3.2
0.3
0.01
114
0.
1.14.
0.4
5,
3.2
0.3
0.01
115
0.
115,
0.5
3.
3.2
0.3
0.01
116
0.
116.
0.81
7.
3.2
0.3
0.01
117
0.
117.
0.6
6.
3.2
0.3
0.01
118
0.
118.
0.15
2.
3.2
0.3
0.01
119
0.
119.
0.68
7.
3.2
0.3
0.01
120
0.
120.
0.49
7.
3.2
0.3
0.01
121
O.
121.
0.82
5.
3.2
0.3
0.01
122
0.
122.
0.9
8.
3.2
0.3
0.01
123
0.
123,
0.59
5.
3.2
0.3
0.01
124
0.
124.
0.1
1.
3.2
0.3
0.01
125
0.
125,
1.03
14.
3.2
0.3
0.01
126
0.
126,
0.6
6.
3.2
0.3
0.01
127
0.
127_
0.88
9.
3.2
0.3
0.01
128
0.
128.
0.04
C.
3.2
0.3
0.01
129
0.
129.
0.89
5.
3.2
0.3
0.01
END HYDR-PARM2
HYDR-INIT
***
Initial
conditions
for HYDR section
***RC HRES
VOL
CAT Initial value of
COLIND
initial value
of OUTDGT
*** x - x
ac-ft
for each possible
exit
for each
possible
exit,ft3
67 129
S.
4.
4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2
2.1
1.2 0.5
1.2 1.8
END HYDR-INIT
SED-GENPARM
*** RCHRES
BEDWID
BEDWRN
POP,
*** x - x
(ft)
(ft)
67 129
25.
10.
0.4
END SED-GENPARM
SAND -PM
*** RCHRES
D
W
RHO
KSAND
EXPSND
*** x - x
(in)
(in/sec)
(gm/cm3)
67 129
0.014
1.5
2.65
0.005
4.
END SAND -PM
SILT -CLAY -PM
*** RCHRES
D
W
RHO
TAUCD
TAUCS
M
*** x - x
(in)
(in/sec)
gm/cm3
lb/ft2
lb/ft2
lb/ft2.d
67 129
0.0011
0.001
2.2
0.15
0.195
1.25
END SILT -CLAY
-PM
-53-

Goose Creek Fecal Colifann TMOL Public Review Draft FebruaW 2005
SILT -CLAY -PM
*** RCHRES D
W
RHO
TAUCD
*** x - x (in)
(in/sec)
gm/cm3
lb/ft2
67 129 0.00001
0.0001
2.2
0.1
END SILT -CLAY -PM
SSED-INIT
*** RCHRES Suspended
sed concs (mg/1)
*** x - x Sand
Silt
Clay
67 129 1.
10.
10.
END SSED-INIT
BED-INIT
*** RCHRES BEDDEP
Initial bed
composition
*** x - x (ft)
Sand
Silt
Clay
67 127 8.
0.38
0.26
0.36
128 6.
0.38
0.26
0.36
129 8.
0.38
0.26
0.36
END BED-INIT
GQ-GENDATA
*** RCHRES NGQL TPFG PHFG ROFG CDFG SDFG PYFG LAT
*** x - x deg
67 129 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 0
END GQ-GENDATA
GQ-AD-FLAGS
*** Atmospheric Deposition Flags
*** RCHRES GQUALI GQUAL2 GQUAL3
*** x - x <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> '
67 129 0 0 0 0 0 0
END GQ-AD-FLAGS
GQ-QALDATA
*** RCHRES
GQID
DQAL CONCID
*** x - x
concid
67 129FECAL COLIFO
10. #
END GQ-QALDATA
GQ-QALFG
*** RCHRES HDRL OXID PHOT
VOLT
BIOD GEN SDAS
*** x - x
67 129 0 0 0
0
0 1 0
END GQ-QALFG
GQ-GENDECAY
*** RCHRES FSTDEC
THFST
*** x - x (/day)
67 129 1.152
1.07
END GQ-GENDECAY
END RCHRES
FTABLES
FTABLE 67
-54-
TAUCS M
lb/ft2 lb/ft2.d
0.075 2.25
CONV QTYID
0.0035 #

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
❑.
0.
0_
1.1
5.1
0.6
3.4
2.3
6.1
4.4
36.2
3.4
6.9
11.6
135.1
4.6
7.7
20.9
322.4
5.7
14.7
36.6
619.7
6.8
23.5
62.7
1129.5
8.
31.3
98.
1924.7
9.1
36.2
139.8
3033.3
25.
40.4
4000.
50000.
END FTABLE
67
FTABLE
71
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
c.
0.
0.
0.
2.2
5.3
4.2
47.9
4.4
5.5
13,
215.3
6.7
5.7
23.6
522.6
8.9
5.9
35.1
947.8
11.1
6.1
47.4
1463.5
13.3
6.2
60.6
2124.8
15.5
6.4
74.5
2871.2
17.8
6.6
89.
3724.4
20.
6.8
104.1
4682.1
END FTABLE
71
FTABLE
69
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
20.2
2.5
9.2
1.6
22.9
16.9
118.3
2.3
28.
34.1
323.8
3.1
43.2
54.5
616.8
3.9
46.6
81.8
1006.8
4.7
52.6
117.
1524.2
5.4
58.3
157.1
2170.7
6.2
64.3
202.8
2956.6
7.
65.1
251.3
3893.5
END FTABLE
69
FTABLE
70
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
3.3
0.7
5.2
1.6
7.6
2.3
32.8
2.4
22.3
15.9
105.2
3.2
30.6
34.7
249.6
4.
48.5
65.6
506.5
-55-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februa a 2005
4.8
52.8
105.2
932.
7.2
53.8
146.8
1504.2
7.6
53.8
189,
2205.6
20.
53.8
231.5
3023.7
END FTABLE
70
FTABLE
72
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.4
23.9
38.3
516.1
4.7
38.5
108.1
2291.4
7.1
57.5
227.5
5767.5
9.5
77.1
386.2
11548.6
11.9
84.
581.8
20054.9
14.2
90.7
794.2
31197.9
16.6
101.2
1024.9
44944.2
19.
110.8
1281.2
61492.3
21.3
131.
1564.3
60997.
END FTABLE
72
FTABLE
73
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
9.4
0.9
5.
2.
23.3
11.6
70.9
3.
31.8
36.2
290.2
4.
38.
68.5
713.6
5.
42.9
106.8
1340.9
6.
47.2
149.8
2173.8
7.
51.3
197.2
3216.2
8.
54.9
248.7
4483.2
9.
57•.4
303.1
5975.7
END FTABLE
73
FTABLE
86
rows cols
**;
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.9
0.9
0.3
4.9
1.8
5.1
1.9
34.9
2.8
5.8
6.6
112.6
3.7
7.1
12.2
241.4
4.6
10.1
19.5
426.5
5.5
13.5
29.9
693.6
6.5
16.9
43.7
1068.1
7.4
19.5
60.6
1568.3
8.3
21.2
79.5
2220.2
END FTABLE
86
FTABLE
75
rows cols
***
1c 4
-56-

Gooso Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februaly 2005
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.6
4.2
2.6
48.7
3.7
7.2
9.6
210.
5.5
11.
26.
600.2
7.4
13.3
49.2
1383.9
9.2
16.3
78.
2571.9
11.
20.2
113.3
4229.9
12.9
24.1
155.8
6412.5
14.7
28.1
205.7
9176.7
16.6
32.2
264.4
12606.7
END FTABLE
75
FTABLE
76
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
3.4
24.4
26.3
202.2
6.8
59.
160.2
1699.8
10.1
80.5
403.5
5764.1
13.5
99.4
715.9
12813.5
16.9
129.3
1122.8
23223.7
20.3
150.4
1621.7
37416,
23.7
161.4
2175.7
55441.7
27.
175.1
2775.3
77272.8
30.4
199.9
3448.3
103110.8
END FTABLE
76
FTABLE
77
rows Cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.
4.2
3.7
47.9
4.
19.6
35.
586.9
5.9
35.
101.8
2310.1
7.9
42.5
196.4
5675.9
9.9
47.6
302.9
10644.4
11.9
51.9
418.1
17140.5
13.9
57.3
542.8
25154.6
15.8
65.5
681.7
34784.7
17.8
71.
833.9
46165.
END FTABLE
77
FTABLE
89
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
2.1
0.1
1.4
1.9
2.5
0.9
10.5
2.9
2.8
2.3
34.2
3.9
3.5
4.3
73.7
4.8
8.5
7.1
132.8
5.8
18.6
16.7
252.1
6.8
22.6
34.5
528.1
-57-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
7.7
24.2
56.4
967.5
20.
26.1
500.
8500.
END FTABLE
89
FTABLE
79
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.2
11.
2.
22.1
2.4
21.3
17.3
222.3
3.6
31.6
46.8
695.3
4.8
42.8
87.6
1485.7
6.
45.7
136.9
2616.8
7.2
49.2
191.3
4113.8
8.4
51.8
249.1
5960.
9.6
53.6
309.7
8139.5
10.7
55.4
372.7
10650.9
END FTABLE
79
FTABLE
88
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.8
12.5
6.9
84.7
3.7
23.2
44.
683.5
5.5
32.8
101.2
2071.8
7.4
54.9
185.1
4390.1
9.2
67.1
301.3
7890.8
11.1
72.2
432.6
12646.2
12.9
76.2
574.2
18636.9
14.8
79.9
725.2
25891.8
16.6
83.8
885.1
34431.1
END FTABLE
88
FTABLE
81
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
a.
0.
0.
0.
1.1
12.8
1.
7.3
2,2
16.3
111
106.7
3.3
23.1
27.8
353.5
4.4
26.5
51.1
784.2
5.5
29.4
79.
1422.5
6.6
34.
110.9
2290.3
7.7
39.
148.5
3404.6
8.7
43.6
191.2
4782.3
9.8
46.5
237.4
6439.
END FTABLE
81
FTABLE
91
rows cols**
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
1.4
1.6
1.
22.4
2.9
3.9
4.5
97.7
4.3
9.2
13.8
282.2
5.7
12.
33.
731.7
7.2
19.5
56.7
2454.5
8.6
21.3
85.1
2458.6
10.
22.5
116.
3740.7
11.5
23.7
148.7
5294.
12.9
24.6
183.4
7123.7
END FTABLE
91
FTABLE
83
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.9
4.3
1.4
7.5
1.8
43.1
16.
70.1
2.8
61.5
60.9
316.7
3.7
70.2
122.2
804.7
4.6
76.4
190.8
1521.7
5.5
81.7
266.2
2463.3
6.5
87.4
348.8
3635.5
7.4
91.6
437.5
5054.4
8.3
115.
532.1
6717.2
END FTABLE
83
FTABLE
82
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
0.5
0.1
2.6
1.6
0.6
0.5
17.3
2.4
0.9
1.
42.3
3.2
1.4
1.6
77,
4.
2.2
2.6
124.
4.8
5.3
4.6
193.9
5.6
7.7
8.8
325.
6.4
10.2
15.4
540.8
7.2
10.7
23.7
863.1
END FTABLE
82
FTABLE
93
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.1
1.5
2.
40.8
4.2
7.6
11.9
239.7
6.3
17.
35.8
828.4
8.5
22.
82.5
2159.4
10.6
31.6
147.5
4440.3
12.7
37.2
227.5
7892.5
14.8
39.1
315.8
12507.5
16.9
41.
408.1
18204.6
19.
43.2
504.6
24949.8
-59-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
END ?TABLE 93
FTABLE
92
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
0.
0.
0.2
1.6
0.
0.
3.2
2.4
0.1
0.
14.3
3.2
0.1
0.1
53.6
4.
0.2
0.2
146.8
7.2
0.2
0.3
306.4
7.4
0.2
0.4
529.7
7.8
0.2
0.6
B04.6
20.
0.2
20.
3500.
END FTABLE
92
FTABLE
87
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.9
2.4
0.5
7.
1.8
5.
2.7
41.2
2.8
8.2
8.3
122.3
3.7
15.2
18.8
281.
4.6
19.9
34.3
570.6
5.5
21.7
52.9
1007.8
6.4
22.9
73.2
1586.9
7.4
23.7
94.6
2311.
8.3
24.5
116.9
3167.6
END FTABLE
87
FTABLE
95
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.9
8.2
5.4
91.7
5.9
22.8
49.9
819.7
8.8
29.8
129.3
3009.5
11.8
38.1
233.
6832.8
14.7
45.8
362.3
12571.9
17.7
53.
518.6
20486.4
20.6
59.
693.
30702.9
23.6
66.4
888.4
43337.5
26.5
75.1
1103.5
58549.6
END FTABLE
95
FTABLE
78
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.2
0.6
0.1
2.7
2.4
0.8
0.6
38.2

Goose Creek Fecal_Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
3.7
0.9
1.5
124.7
4.9
2.5
2.9
293.9
6.1
2.9
6.1
648.7
7.3
3.2
9.7
1190.8
8.5
3.6
13.8
1930.
9.7
4.1
18.5
2893.4
11.
4.5
23.6
4064.6
END FTABLE
78
FTABLE
100
rows cols
***
l0 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0_
0.
0.
0.
2.1
3.2
3.2
50.1
4.2
11.3
24.
442.4
6.3
16.9
65.5
1670.4
8.5
24.8
125.3
3991.3
10.6
27.1
195.
7498.
12.7
30.1
272.3
12198.6
14.8
32.4
355.9
18087.1
16.9
34.9
446.5
25193.
19.
37.5
544.5
33578.5
END FTABrE100
FTABLE
85
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
3.2
4.8
3.2
63.9
6.5
17.1
35.6
983.4
9.7
22.6
100.3
3687.6
13,
26.5
182.6
9099.6
16.2
29.3
274.6
16531.1
19.4
32.5
376.3
26169.4
22.7
35.8
488,
38096.2
25.9
38.5
609.4
52404.4
29.2
42.6
741.6
69185.7
END FTABLE
85
FTABLE
99
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.7
3.4
1.9
45.2
3.5
8.4
10.
238.2
5.2
11.8
25.6
683.8
7.
23.8
60.3
1693.
8.7
32.7
110.5
3664.7
10.5
42.
177.2
6760.
12.2
46.6
255.3
11059.
14,
49.8
339.5
16516.
15.7
54.1
429.9
23129.
END FTABLE
99
-61-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
FTABLE
96
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.3
5.
4.2
46.3
4.5
32.4
28.
341.8
6.8
45.4
115.9
1516.9
9.1
52.2
225.3
3812.5
11.3
59.1
350.1
7321.2
13.6
66.7
491.3
12114.8
15.9
80.7
656.8
18316.6
18.1
116.9
861.8
26140.4
20.4
124.9
1124.8
35935.9
END FTABLE
96
FTABLE
97
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.9
0.9
0.1
3.4
1.9
1.
0.8
31.4
2.8
1.6
1.9
98.7
3.8
2.4
3.6
208.2
4.7
3.7
6.1
376.2
5.7
4.9
10.
627.9
6.6
7.
15.4
1001.9
7.6
8.1
22.3
1534,
8.5
8.4
30.2
2248.6
END FTABLE
97
FTABLE
98
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.2
0.9
0.2
S.
2.4
1.2
1.
35.7
3.6
3.1
3.5
114.9
4.8
5.2
8.6
347.5
6.
5.5
15.
744.2
7.2
6.1
22.2
1265.9
8.4
7.4
30.3
1969.6
9.6
9.3
39.7
2806.9
10.8
12.6
51.6
3817.3
END FTABLE
98
FTABLE
94
rows cols
***
10 .4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.2
1..1
0.2
5.1
2.5
1.3
1.
46.2
3.7
1.4
2.4
141.4
4.9
3.
5.4
331.6
-62-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
6.1
3.4
9.6
705.7
7.4
4.3
15.1
1261.3
8.6
4.7
21.3
2005.3
9.8
6.5
28.2
2944.2
11.1
7.5
37.
4130.3
END FTABLE 94
FTABLE 80
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.3
1.5
0.2
10.4
2.5
1.8
1.7
191.3
3.8
2.
3.9
623.9
5.1
2.2
6.4
1284.4
6.4
2.4
9.2
2173.1
7.6
2.6
12.3
3298.1
8.9
2.9
15.8
4705.2
10.2
3.2
19.7
6408.2
11.4
3.3
23.8
8405.1
END FTABLE 80
FTABLE 101
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0_
0.
0.
0.
2.5
1.2
1.6
47.7
4.9
1.5
4.4
157.9
7.4
1.9
8.1
347.6
9.9
4.1
15.8
659.7
12.4
16.
26.3
1173.
14.8
16.7
45.7
1950.7
17.3
17.2
71.1
3087.6
19.8
17.8
99.7
4592.7
22.2
18.5
131.9
6494.7
END FTABLE101
FTABLE 103
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0_
0.
1.7
2.2
1.8
26.6
3.3
3.3
6.9
168.6
S.
4.3
15.4
468.1
6.7
6.6
27.8
999.2
8.3
8.
46.5
1876.1
10.
9.2
66.7
3099.2
11.6
10.6
88.8
4639.3
13.3
14.9
112.8
6495.7
15,
17.5
140.3
8693.5
END FTABLE103
FTABLE 105
rows cols
***
- 63 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.3
1.
0.4
8.4
2.7
1.5
1.7
40.8
4.
2.3
3.8
100.4
5.3
3.4
7.
192.1
6.6
6.2
12.3
335.2
8.
8.5
21.8
595.
9.3
9.8
34.1
1004.6
10.6
12.1
47.8
1564.9
11.9
13.1
64.1
2284.4
END FTABLE105
FTABLE 106
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
C.
0.
0.
1.5
1,6
1.5
31.1
3.1
4,9
8.1
212.8
4.6
5.4
20.9
742.7
6.1
5.8
34.6
1601.6
7.7
6.4
49.1
2742.6
9.2
9.2
64.9
4153.1
10.7
10.
83.1
5853.1
12.3
12.
102.4
7835.1
13.8
13.7
124.
10118.4
END FTAELE106
FTABLE 108
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
3.5
2.8
4.6
82.1
6.9
8.2
19.7
307.7
10.4
28.7
77.3
1115.1
13.9
35.
188.8
3438.4
17.4
39.6
319.5
7314.6
20.8
47.4
469.1
12717.5
24.3
52.7
642.5
19805.6
27.8
58.1
832.
28626.9
31.2
67.2
1047.8
39327.2
END FTABLE108
FTABLE 109
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
4.2
3.
6.2+
171.2
8.5
15.1
38.7
1467.
12.7
24.3
118.9
5711.7
17,
28.2
226.3
13322.6
21.2
30.4
344.6
24135.5
25.5
31.9
470.6
38057.1
-64-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
29.7
34.9
607.7
55246.8
34.
36.7
755.
75980.8
38.2
53.3
915.1
100346.9
END FTABLE109
FTABLE 102
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl ***
C.
0.
0,
0.
1.
1.8
0.7
8.8
2.1
3.2
2.8
44.1
3.1
4.5
6.6
114.1
4.2
5.8
12.2
230.3
5.2
7.5
20.4
416.6
6.2
10.8
30.2
687.4
7.3
12.2
42.
1044.1
8.3
17.1
56.2
1488.9
9.4
23.2
74.8
2042.3
END FTABLE102
FTABLE 110
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl ***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.7
2.7
2.2
57.7
3.4
4.7
7.6
261.6
5.2
5.7
19.
737.5
6.9
6.1
31.5
1535.1
8.6
7.7
45.1
2600.1
10.3
8.3
60.5
3954.5
12.
8.8
76.8
5594.9
13.8
10.2
94.
7504.9
15.5
12.4
113.2
9713.3
END FTABLE110
FTABLE 104
rows cols
10 4
depth area
0. 0.
1.1 5.5
2.2 5.8
3.3 6.7
4.4 15.1
5.5 19.2
6.6 19.6
7.7 19.7
8.8 19.9
9.9 20.1
END PTABLE104
FTA13LE 112
rows cols
10 4
depth
***
volume.
outflowl ***
0.
0.
0.5
3.2
3.1
29.9
7.8
100.
17.3
238.
34.5
520.6
55.7
996.7
78.1
1637.4
101.
2425.6
124.2
3351.2
area volume outflowl ***
- 65 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
4.7
0.6
5.3
2.
5.5
3.7
37.4
3.
6.2
7.9
97.
4.
6.8
13.1
184.9
S.
7.4
19.2
302.6
6.
10.
27.5
456.9
7.
12.
38.7
676.1
8.
12.9
51.7
968.4
9.
17.
66.9
1332.4
END FTABLE112
FTABLE 84
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.8
3.3
2.6
75.5
3.6
10.9
13.3
520.2
5.3
11.8
30.8
1581.9
7.1
12.5
50.4
3239.9
8.9
12.9
71.1
5474.6
10.7
13.3
92.8
8246.6
12.4
13.6
115.4
11529.1
14.2
14.
138.8
15335.3
16.
14.4
163.2
19664.4
END FTABLE 64
FTABLE 114
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.9
0.9
0.3
8.8
1.8
1.6
1.3
36.3
2.8
1.8
2.7
82.7
3.7
2.
4.3
145.4
4.6
2.2
6.1
225.2
5.5
2.5
8.1
323.3
6.5
4.4
10.5
441.6
7.4
16.4
17.5
622.5
8.3
19.5
34.4
1057.
END FTABLE114
FTABLE 116
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
3.
0.2
2.
1.7
3.9
1.3
12.6
2.5
4.3
3.1
34.2
3.3
4.7
5.6
67.6
4.2
5.1
8.6
114.3
5.
5.4
12.1
173.5
5.8
6.1
16.2
246.9
6.6
10.3
21.4
337.3
•=

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februanv 2005
20. 18.2
END FTABLE116
FTABLE 117
rows cols
10 4
depth area
C. 0.
1.9 1.9
3.8 7.8
5.6 11.3
7.5 11.7
9.4 11.9
11.3 12.3
13.1 16.5
15. 18.2
16.9 20.9
END FTABLE117
FTABLE 118
rows cols
10 4
depth area
0. 0.
0.9 0.6
1.9 0.8
2.8 0.8
3.6 0.9
4.7 1.
5.7 1.1
6.6 4.5
7.6 5.6
8.5 6.5
END FTA8LE118
FTABLE 74
rows cols
10 4
depth area
0. 0.
0.8 0.2
1.6 0.3
2.4 0.4
3.2 0.4
4. 0.6
4.8 1.2
5.6 2.6
6.4 2.7
7.2 3.
END FTABLE 74
FTABLE 119
rows cols
10 4
depth area
0. 0.
'2.3 2.7
150, 2500.
volume outflowl ***
0. 0.
2. 34.7
12.4 178.7
40.1 821.7
68.7 1888.8
98.1 3311.2
128.6 5063.5
161.3 7137.9
198.8 9566.1
240.3 12377.8
***
volume outflowl ***
0.
0.
0.1
6.3
0.7
43.2
1.3
105.9
2.
190.5
2.8
297.5
3.8
428.8
4.9
585.3
7.3
805.1
12.6
1232.7
volume
outflowl ***
0.
0_
0.1
6.9
0.2
21.5
0.3
44.5
0.6
77.5
1.
124.3
1.7
199.1
3.1
334.8
5.1
556.2
7.4
856.7
***
volume outflowl ***
0. 0.
2.6 69.7
-67-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februa 2005
4.5
4.9
12.9
402.6
6.8
3.3
28.9
1280.6
9.
5.7
45.5
2582.2
11.3
6.
62.8
4256.5
13.6
6.4
81.1
6275.5
15.8
11.7
101.
8636.4
18.1
16.1
126.2
11368.7
20.3
21.1
157.8.
14514.9
END FTABLE119
FTABLE 120
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.9
2.6
1.9
43.1
3.7
3.3
6.4
191.9
5.6
4.8
12.6
446.6
7.4
7.2
25.2
937.9
9.3
9.2
40.9
1778.8
11.1
9.6
57.6
2915.8
13.
10.1
75.6
4336.6
14.8
10.5
94.7
6040.3
16.7
11.9
115.6
8028.7
END FTABLE120
FTABLE 121
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0_
0.
0.
0.
2.
4.
3.4
36.7
4.
7.8
14.4
172.1
6.
8.4
37.5
588.2
8.
9.
61.8
1246.5
10.
9.7
87.5
2119.3
12.
10.5
114.7
3191.1
14.
13.5
143.6
4460.6
16.1
17.4
176.1
5938.6
18.1
19.8
214.3
7654.3
END FTABLE121
FTABLE 122
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.1
3.2
0.8
11.6
2.2
4.
3.
40.5
3.3
5.
6.2
85.8
4.4
11.9
10.9
153.3
5.5
15.3
23.6
292.9
6.6
16.9
42.5
572.3
7.7
24.3
65.8
996.5
8.8
26.5
93.9
1572,
10.
27.5
124.
2297.
END FTABLE122

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
FTABLE 123
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.3
3.9
1.3
29.6
4.5
4.5
8.1
156.2
6.8
6.7
23.7
587.9
9.1
8.
45.3
1373.6
11.4
8.5
68.
2490.2
13.6
11.1
91.7
3898.2
15.9
11.7
117.2
5587.4
18.2
12.3
144.4
7564.1
20.5
13.2
174.1
9841.4
END PTABLE123
FTABLE 124
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
0.1
0.
0.7
1.6
0.2
0.1
3.8
2.4
0.2
0.2
8.4
3.2
0.2
0.4
14.4
4.
0.6
0.6
21.8
4.8
0.7
1.
32.4
5.6
0.8
1.5
46.8
6.4
0.9
2.1
65.9
20.
1.1
20.
20000.
END FTABLE124
FTABLE 125
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.6
1.4
1.7
33.1
3.3
2.7
5.
105.6
4.9
4.6
11.2
232.4
6.6
7.6
23.5
496.9
8.2
9.9
39.
939.
9.8
10.8
55.8
1534.5
11.5
11.6
73.9
2273.1
13.1
15.6
93.4
3151.6
14.8
20.7
116.7
4176.4
END FTAELF125
FTABLE 90
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
1.1
0.3
4.4
1.6
3.6
1.3
26.7
2.4
12.3
4.8
74.8

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
3.2
17.5
15.1
211.7
4.1
21.3
30.2
480.5
4.9
21.8
47.1
878.3
5.7
22.1
64.4
1388.1
6.5
22.4
B2.1
2000.
7.3
22.8
100.2
2709.1
END FTABLE 90
FTABLE 126
rows cols
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.4
7.3
0.8
6.4
2.8
7.7
3.6
47.9
4.2
8.
7.6
137.9
5.6
23.5
22.5
343.5
7.1
24.1
63.3
1087.6
8.5
24.8
106.
2327.1
9.9
25.4
149.6
3979.8
11.3
29.2
194._7
6012.4
12.7
34.3
242.5
f 8421.1
END FTABLE126
FTABLE 127
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.6
2.5
3.4
53.5
5.2
6.9
15.
2E1.9
7.9
12.8
42.6
858.
10.5
14.4
79.2
1973.9
13.1
15.3
119.3
3534.6
15.7
16.1
162.1
5512.4
18.4
18.6
207.3
7898.4
21.
19.8
256.
10694.1
23.6
20.6
307.5
13904.
END FTABLE127
FTABLE 128
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.8
0.2
0.
1.2
1.7
0.2
0.1
7.7
2.5
0.2
0.2
19.2
3.3
0.3
0.3
35.1
4.2
0.3
0.5
55.7
5.
0.3
0.6
81.1
5.8
0.3
0.8
111.8
6.7
0.3
1.1
148.8
20.
0.5
20.
5000.
END FTABLE128
FTABLE 107
-70-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl**
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.8
5.4
3.8
30.2
3.7
12.8
19.2
165.5
5.5
25.2
52.3
533.6
7.3
26.2
96.3
1194.5
9.2
27.1
144.3
2121.6
11.
28.3
194.7
3294.9
12.9
29.5
247.7
4712.4
14.7
30.9
303.4
6374.5
16.5
32.7
362.6
8285.9
END FTABLE107
FTABLE 111
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.4
7.3
5.4
44.1
2.9
17.9
21.2
304.2
4.3
20.6
45.
791.2
5.7
25.'
72.7
1495.5
7.1
26.2
103.5
2426.5
8.6
27.4
135.7
3561.5
10.
27.9
169.1
4889.5
11.4
28.3
203.2
6407.
12.9
29.1
238.7
8115.2
END FTABLE111
FTABLE 113
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.4
1.
0.7
14,
2.8
2.2
2.2
48.4
4.2
5.6
6.5
118,
5.6
7.
19.2
354.1
7.
7.7
34.1
783.3
8.4
8.8
49.9
1375.7
9.8
16.
67.4
2123.
11.2
17.6
90.4
3037.8
12.6
21.5
116.5
4130.2
END FTABLE113
FTABLE 115
rows cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl
***
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.6
0.8
1.
33.7
5.1
4.3
4.7
137.7
7.7
6.
21.6
633.6
10.3
6.5
40.9
1628.2
12.8
7_
61.3
3025.6
- 71 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Drag Februarx 2005
15.4
9.8
83.
4797.2
18.
10.3
106.9
6935.3
20.5
12.4
133.
9443.8
23.1
12.8
161.1
12329.8
END FTABLEIIS
FTABLE 129
rows Cols
***
10 4
depth
area
volume
outflowl ***
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.9
6.1
0.7
3.7
1.8
7.2
4.
26.1
2.7
7.9
8.4
67.1
3.6
8.8
13.9
127.3
4.6
10.
20.9
209.7
5.5
13.8
30.3
321.5
6.4
15.5
43.4
477.3
7.3
16.9
58.4
688.1
20.
21.1
75.2
5000,
END FTABLE129
END FTABLES
EXT SOURCES
<-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> x <Name> x tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> x x <Name>
x x ***
*** Met Seg GOOSE
WDM2
11
PREC
ENGL
SAME
PERLND
101
112
EXTNL
PREC
WDM2
13
ATEM
ENGL
SAME
PERLND
101
112
EXTNL
GATMP
WDM2
17
DEWP
ENGL
SAME
PERLND
101
112
EXTNL
DTMPG
WDM2
14
WIND
ENGL
SAME
PERLND
101
112
EXTNL
WINMOV
WDM2
15
SOLR
ENGL
SAME
PERLND
101
112
EXTNL
SOLRAD
WDM2
16
PEVT
ENGL
SAME
PERLND
101
112
EXTNL
PETINP
*** Met Seg GOOSE
WDM2
11
PREC
ENGL
SAME
IMPLND
101
112
EXTNL
PREC
WDM2
13
ATEM
ENGL
SAME
IMPLND
101
112
EXTNL
GATMP
WDM2
17
DEWP
ENGL
SAME
IMPLND
101
112
EXTNL
DTMPG
WDM2
14
WIND
ENGL
SAME
IMPLND
101
112
EXTNL
WINMOV
WDM2
15
SOLR
ENGL
SAME
IMPLND
101
112
EXTNL
SOLRAD
WDM2
16
PEVT
ENGL
SAME
IMPLND
101
112
EXTNL
PETINP
***
Met Seg
GOOSE
WDM2
11
PREC
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
PREC
WDM2
13
ATEM
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
GATMP
WDM2
17
DEWP
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
DEWTMP
WDM2
14
WIND
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
WIND
WDM2
15,SOLR
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
SOLRAD
WDM2
18
CLOU
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
CLOUD
WDM2
12
EVAP
ENGL
SAME
RCHRES
67
129
EXTNL
POTEV
WDM1
7072
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
67
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7073
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
69
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7074
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
70
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7075
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
72
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7076
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
73
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7087
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
86
INFLOW
IDQAL
-72-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februaa 2005
WDM1
7077
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
75
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7078
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
76
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7001
FLOW
ENGL
0.0826SAME
RCHRES
76
INFLOW
IVOL
WDM1
7002
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
76
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7079
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
77
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7090
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
89
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7080
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
79
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7089
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
88
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7007
FLOW
ENGL
0.0826SAME
RCHRES
88
INFLOW
IVOL
WDM1
7008
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
88
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7082
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
81
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7092
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
91
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7084
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
83
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7083
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
62
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7093
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
93
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7088
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
87
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7094
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
95
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7099
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
100
INFT.OW
IDQAL
WDM1
7086
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
85
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7098
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
99
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7095
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
96
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7096
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
97
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7097
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
98
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7081
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
80
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7100
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
101
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7103
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
105
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7011
FLOW
ENGL
0.0826SAME
RCHRES
105
INFLOW
IVOL
WDM1
7012
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
105
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7104
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
106
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7003
FLOW
ENGL
0.0826SAME
RCHRES
106
INFLOW
IVOL
WDM1
7004
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
106
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7106
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
108
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7005
FLOW
ENGL
0.0826SAME
RCHRES
108
INFLOW
IVOL
WDM1
7006
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
108
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7107
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
109
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7101
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
102
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7108
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
110
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7102
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
104
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7110
FECA
ENGL
❑IV
RCHRES
112
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7085
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
84
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7112
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
114
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7114
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
116
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7115
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
117
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7116
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
118
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7117
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
119
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7118
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
120
INFLOW
IDQAL
WOM1
7119
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
121
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7120
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
122
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7121
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
123
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7122
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
124
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7123
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
125
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7009
FLOW
ENGL
0.0826SAME
RCHRES
125
INFLOW
IVOL
WDM1
7010
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
125
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7091
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
90
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7124
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
126
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7125
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
127
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7105
FECA
ENGL
DIV
RCHRES
107
INFLOW
IDQAL
- 73 -

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
WDM1
7109
FECA
ENGL DIV
RCHRES
111
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7111
FECA
ENGL DIV
RCHRES
113
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7113
FECA
ENGL DIV
RCHRES
115
INFLOW
IDQAL
WDM1
7126
FECA
ENGL DIV
RCHRES
129
INFLOW
IDQAL
END EXT SOURCES
SCHEMATIC
<-Volume->
<--Area-->
<-Volume->
<ML#> ***
<sb>
<Name>
x
<-factor->
<Name>
x
***
x x
IMPLND
101
12.9
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
101
245.17
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
102
0.98
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
102
4.47
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
103
0.03
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
103
0.07
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
104
5.98
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
104
43.88
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
105
1.21
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
10S
59.08
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
112
4.29
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
112
3.51
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
106
3.37
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
106
164.97
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
108
2.88
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
108
7.4
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
109
43.65
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
109
35.71
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
110
0
RCHRES
67
1
PERLND
110
0
RCHRES
67
2
IMPLND
105
0.07
RCHRES
71
1
PERLND
105
3.6
RCHRES
71
2
IMPLND
106
0.27
RCHRES
71
1
PERLND
106
13.06
RCHRES
71
2
IMPLND
101
1.4
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
101
26.66
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
102
24.72
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
102
112.61
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
103
0.91
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
103
2.12
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
104
6.73
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
104
49.38
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
105
0.76
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
105
37.45
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
106
6.8
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
106
333.14
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
107
0.13
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
107
2.53
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
110
0.01
RCHRES
69
1
PERLND
110
0.01
RCHRES
69
2
IMPLND
101
8.1
RCHRES
70
1
PERLND
101
153.94
RCHRES
70
2
IMPLND
102
0.24
RCHRES
70
1
PERLND
102
1.1
RCHRES
70
2
IMPLND
103
0.06
RCHRES
70
1
PERLND
103
0.14
RCHRES
70
2
-74-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
IMPLND
104
3.57
RCHRES
70 1
PERLND
104
26.19
RCHRES
70 2
IMPLND
105
5.75
RCHRES
70 1
PERLND
105
281.61
RCHRES
70 2
IMPLND
106
2.78
RCHRES
70 1
PERLND
106
135.96
RCHRES
70 2
IMPLND
109
22.64
RCHRES
70 1
PERLND
109
18.52
RCHRES
70 2
IMPLND
101
4.62
RCHRES
72 1
PERLND
101
87.71
RCHRES
72 2
IMPLND
104
1.72
RCHRES
72 1
PERLND
104
12.61
RCHRES
72 2
IMPLND
105
6.74
RCHRES
72 1
PERLND
105
330.53
RCHRES
72 2
IMPLND
106
4.08
RCHRES
72 1
PERLND
106
199.96
RCHRES
72 2
IMPLND
109
10.65
RCHRES
72 1
PERLND
109
8.72
RCHRES
72 2
IMPLND
101
3.01
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
101
57.16
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
102
3.34
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
102
15.21
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
103
0.2
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
103
0.46
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
104
9.01
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
104
66.05
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
105
0.12
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
105
5.99
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
106
8.05
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
106
394.38
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
107
4.07
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
101
77.4
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
109
14.94
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
109
12.22
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
110
0
RCHRES
73 1
PERLND
110
0
RCHRES
73 2
IMPLND
101
3.14
RCHRES
86 1
PERLND
101
59.71
RCHRES
86 2
IMPLND
102
0.19
RCHRES
86 1
PERLND
102
0.87
RCHRES
86 2
IMPLND
104
1.03
RCHRES
86 1
PERLND
104
7.58
RCHRES
86 2
IMPLND
105
1.8
RCHRES
86 1
PERLND
105
88.22
RCHRES
86 2
IMPLND
106
3.29
RCHRES
86 1
PERLND
106
160.96
RCHRES
86 2
IMPLND
109
2.55
RCHRES
86 1
PERLND
109
2.09
RCHRES
86 2
RCHRES
69
RCHRES
86 3
IMPLND
101
17.19
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
101
326.62
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
102
6.86
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
102
31.25
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
103
5.9
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
103
12.76
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
104
5.94
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
104
43.59
RCHRES
75 2
-75-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform 7MDL Public Review Draft February 2005
IMPLND
112
8.13
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
112
6.65
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
106
3.49
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
106
170.81
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
108
2.31
RCHRES
75 I
PERLND
108
5.93
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
109
28.23
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
109
23.1
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
110
0.24
RCHRES
75 1
PERLND
110
0.19
RCHRES
75 2
IMPLND
101
10.04
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
101
190.76
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
102
7.05
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
102
32.12
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
103
0.03
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
103
0.06
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
104
1C.21
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
104
74.87
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
105
1.14
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
105
55.65
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
112
9.15
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
112
7.49
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
106
4.47
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
106
218.8
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
108
10.45
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
108
26.87
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
109
21.99
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
109
17.99
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
110
1.31
RCHRES
76 1
PERLND
110
1.07
RCHRES
76 2
IMPLND
101
11.65
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
101
221.45
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
102
5.56
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
102
25.34
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
103
0.13
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
103
0.31
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
104
10.98
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
104
80.56
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
105
1.46
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
105
71.54
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
112
2.88
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
112
2.36
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
106
4.32
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
106
211.65
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
108
2.73
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
108
7.01
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
109
23.59
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
109
19.3
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
110
0
RCHRES
77 1
PERLND
110
0
RCHRES
77 2
IMPLND
101
1.2
RCHRES
89 1
PERLND
101
22.76
RCHRES
89 2
,IMPLND
102
RCHRES
89 1
PERLND
102
4.54
RCHRES
89 2
IMPLND
103
0.03
RCHRES
89 1
PERLND
103
0.06
RCHRES
89 2
IMPLND
104
1.16
RCHRES
89 1
-76-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
PERLND
104
8.55
RCHRES
89
2
IMPLND
105
1.33
RCHRES
89
1
PERLND
105
65.22
RCHRES
89
2
IMPLND
106
6.91
RCHRES
89
1
PERLND
106
338.33
RCHRES
89
2
IMPLND
107
1.65
RCHRES
89
1
PERLND
107
31.35
RCHRES
89
2
IMPLND
108
0.01
RCHRES
89
1
PERLND
108
0.04
RCHRES
89
2
IMPLND
109
43.04
RCHRES
89
1
PERLND
109
35.22
RCHRES
89
2
IMPLND
110
0.01
RCHRES
89
1
PERLND
110
0.01
RCHRES
89
2
RCHRES
67
RCHRES
89
3
IMPLND
101
13.96
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
101
265.29
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
102
0.31
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
102
1.39
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
104
2.93
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
104
21.5
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
105
1.3
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
105
63.83
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
106
5.88
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
106
287.86
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
111
5.2
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
111
13.38
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
109
13.23
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
109
10.83
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
110
0.08
RCHRES
79
1
PERLND
110
0.07
RCHRES
79
2
IMPLND
101
5.76
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
101
109.36
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
102
8.06
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
102
36.7
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
103
2.51
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
103
5.85
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
104
9.64
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
104
70.68
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
105
3.35
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
105
164.31
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
112
12.62
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
112
10.33
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
106
11.86
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
106
581.13
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
107
3.75
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
107
71.32
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
109
40.09
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
109
32.8
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
110
0.6
RCHRES
88
1
PERLND
110
0.49
RCHRES
88
2
IMPLND
101
3
RCHRES
81
1
PERLND
101
56.92
RCHRES
81
2
IMPLND
104
1.94
RCHRES
81
1
PERLND
104
14.24
RCHRES
81
2
IMPLND
105
6.13
RCHRES
81
1
PERLND
105
300.26
RCHRES
81
2
IMPLND
106
7.31
RCHRES
81
1
-77-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform 7MDL Public Review Draft February 2005
PERLND
106
358.2
RCHRES
81 2
IMPLND
109
7.49
RCHRES
81 1
PERLND
109
6.13
RCHRES
81 2
IMPLND
101
0.63
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
101
11.97
RCHRES
91 2
IMPLND
104
0.63
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
104
6.11
RCHRES
91 2
IMPLND
105
2.96
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
105
145.05
RCHRES
91 2
IMPLND
112
0.75
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
112
0.61
RCHRES
91 2
IMPLND
106
2.61
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
106
127.84
RCHRES
91 2
IMPLND
111
0.77
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
111
1.98
RCHRES
91 2
IMPLND
109
3.04
RCHRES
91 1
PERLND
109
2.48
RCHRES
91 2
RCHRES
86
RCHRES
91 3
IMPLND
101
8.36
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
101
158.77
RCHRES
63 2
IMPLND
102
0.28
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
102
1.29
RCHRES
83 2
IMPLND
103
0.34
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
103
0.8
RCHRES
83 2
IMPLND
104
4.2
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
104
30.76
RCHRES
83 2
IMPLND
105
5.34
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
105
261.89
RCHRES
83 2
IMPLND
106
6.24
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
106
305.97
RCHRES
83 2
IMPLND
111
1.01
RCHRES
63 1
PERLND
111
2.61
RCHRES
63 2
IMPLND
109
18.3
RCHRES
83 1
PERLND
109
14.97
RCHRES
83 2
IMPLND
104
0.14
RCHRES
82 1
PERLND
104
1.04
RCHRES
82 2
IMPLND
105
1.83
RCHRES
82 1
PERLND
105
89.76
RCHRES
82 2
IMPLND
106
0.42
RCHRES
82 1
PERLND
106
20.47
RCHRES
82 2
IMPLND
109
0.15
RCHRES
82 1
PERLND
109
0.12
RCHRES
82 2
RCHRES
72
RCHRES
82 3
IMPLND
101
7.4
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
101
140.55
RCHRES
93 2
IMPLND
102
8.01
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
102
36.48
RCHRES
93 2
IMPLND
104
9.28
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
104
68.03
RCHRES
93 2
IMPLND
112
0.49
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
112
0.4
RCHRES
93 2
IMPLND
106
6.26
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
106
306.58
RCHRES
93 2
IMPLND
109
22.01
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
109
18.01
RCHRES
93 2
IMPLND
110
0.02
RCHRES
93 1
PERLND
110
0.02
RCHRES
93 2
-78-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft _February 2605
RCHRES
75
RCHRES
93 3
IMPLND
105
0.17
RCHRES
92 1
PERLND
105
8.09
RCHRES
92 2
IMPLND
106
0.01
RCHRES
92 1
PERLND
106
0.3
RCHRES
92 2
RCHRES
91
RCHRES
92 3
IMPLND'101
0.67
RCHRES
87 1
PERLND
101
12.74
RCHRES
87 2
IMPLND
104
0.24
RCHRES
67 1
PERLND
104
1.74
RCHRES
87 2
IMPLND
105
2.21
RCHRES
87 1
PERLND
105
108.49
RCHRES
87 2
IMPLND
106
3.58
RCHRES
87 1
PERLND
106
175.64
RCHRES
87 2
IMPLND
109
0.09
RCHRES
87 1
PERLND
109
0.07
RCHRES
87 2
RCHRES
83
RCHRES
87 3
IMPLND
101
1.88
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
101
35.7
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
102
0.83
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
102
3.79
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
104
7.63
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
104
55.96
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
105
1.01
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
105
49.63
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
112
3.46
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
112
2.83
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
106
4.91
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
106
240.53
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
107
0.25
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
107
4.83
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLN❑
109
12.86
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
109
10.52
RCHRES
95 2
IMPLND
110
0.85
RCHRES
95 1
PERLND
110
0.7
RCHRES
95 2
RCHRES
88
RCHRES
95 3
IMPLND
106
0.06
RCHRES
78 1
PERLND
106
2.84
RCHRES
78 2
IMPLND
108
0.49
RCHRES
78 1
PERLND
108
1.25
RCHRES
78 2
IMPLND
109
0.02
RCHRES
78 1
PERLND
109
0.01
RCHRES
78 2
IMPLND
110
0
RCHRES
78 1
PERLND
110
0
RCHRES
78 2
RCHRES
76
RCHRES
78 3
IMPLND
101
2.17
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
101
41.3
RCHRES
100 2
IMPLND
102
0.5
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
102
2.28
RCHRES
100 2
IMPLND
104
3.55
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
104
26.03
RCHRES
10C 2
IMPLND
106
1.57
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
106
76.67
RCHRES
100 2
IMPLND
107
0.21
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
107
3.95
RCHRES
100 2
IMPLND
108
0
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
108
0
RCHRES
100 2
-79-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft Februna 2005
ZMPLND
1D9
19.73
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
109
16.15
RCHRES
100 2
IMPLND
110
16.18
RCHRES
100 1
PERLND
110
13.24
RCHRES
100 2
RCHRES
89
RCHRES
100 3
RCHRES
78
RCHRES
100 3
ZMPLND
101
2.35
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
101
44.7
RCHRES
85 2
ZMPLND
102
0.79
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
102
3.58
RCHRES
85 2
IMPLND
104
1.94
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
104
14.2
RCHRES.
85 2
IMPLND
105
0.79
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
105
38.84
RCHRES
85 2
IMPLND
106
1.85
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
106
90.42
RCHRES
85 2
IMPLND
109
5.06
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
109
4.14
RCHRES
85 2
IMPLND
110
0
RCHRES
85 1
PERLND
110
0
RCHRES
85 2
RCHRES
77
RCHRES
85 3
ZMPLND
101
2.99
RCHRES
99 1
PERLND
101
56.9
RCHRES
99 2
IMPLND
104
0.74
RCHRES
99 1
PERLND
104
5.46
RCHRES
99 2
IMPLND
105
1.25
RCHRES
99 1
PERLND
105
61.15
RCHRES
99 2
IMPLND
106
6.32
RCHRES
99 1
PERLND
106
309.89
RCHRES
99 2
IMPLND
109
8.01
RCHRES
99 1
PERLND
109
6.55
RCHRES
99 2
IMPLND
110
0.07
RCHRES
99 1
PERLND
110
0.05
RCHRES
99 2
RCHRES
95
RCHRES
99 3
IMPLND
101
2.48
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
101
47.21
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
102
3.07
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
102
13.98
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
103
0.27
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
103
0.62
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
104
2.19
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
104
16.06
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
105
2.74
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
105
134.34
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
106
4."l
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
106
230.26
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
107
0.24
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
107
4.63
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
109
10.88
RCHRES
96 1
PERLND
109
8.9
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
101
0.69
RCHRES
97 1
PERLND
101
13.16
RCHRES
97 2
IMPLND
104
0.04
RCHRES
97 1
PERLND
104
0.29
RCHRES
97 2
IMPLND
105
0.36
RCHRES
97 1
PERLND
105
17.76
RCHRES
97 2
IMPLND
106
2.06
RCHRES
97 1
-80-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
PERLND
106
100.73
RCHRES
97 2
IMPLND
109
1.32
RCHRES
97 1
PERLND
109
1.08
RCHRES
97 2
RCHRES
96
RCHRES
97 3
IMPLND
101
0.58
RCHRES
98 1
PERLND
101
11.04
RCHRES
98 2
IMPLND
104
0.44
RCHRES
98 1
PERLND
104
3.22
RCHRES
98 2
IMPLND
105
0.51
RCHRES
98 1
PERLND
105
25.19
RCHRES
96 2
IMPLND
106
2.28
RCHRES
98 1
PERLND
106
111.47
RCHRES
98 2
RCHRES
97
RCHRES
98 3
IMPLND
101
0
RCHRES
94 1
PERLND
101
0.04
RCHRES
94 2
IMPLND
102
1.72
RCHRES
94 1
PERLND
102
7.83
RCHRES
94 2
IMPLND
104
2.08
RCHRES
94 1
PERLND
104
15.22
RCHRES
94 2
IMPLND
106
0.85
RCHRES
94 1
PERLND
106
41.61
RCHRES
94 2
IMPLND
109
4.32
RCHRES
94 1
PERLND
109
3.54
RCHRES
94 2
RCHRES
93
RCHRES
94 3
IMPLND
101
0.61
RCHRES
80 1
PERLND
101
11.51
RCHRES
80 2
IMPLND
106
0.37
RCHRES
80 1
PERLND
106
17.93
RCHRES
80 2
IMPLND
109
0.78
RCHRES
80 1
PERLND
109
0.64
RCHRES
80 2
RCHRES
79
RCHRES
80 3
IMPLND
101
1.17
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
101
22.27
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
102
1.85
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
102
8.44
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
103
0.18
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
103
0.42
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
104
0.88
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
104
6.46
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
105
0.17
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
105
8.55
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
106
3.06
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
106
149.97
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
107
1.33
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
107
25.27
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
109
17.91
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
109'
14.65
RCHRES
101 2
IMPLND
110
0.12
RCHRES
101 1
PERLND
110
0.09
RCHRES
101 2
RCHRES
85
RCHRES
101 3
RCHRES
94
RCHRES
101 3
IMPLND
101
0.05
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
101
0.95
RCHRES
103 2
IMPLND
102
17.58
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
102
80.1
RCHRES
103 2
IMPLND
103
0.33
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
103
0.78
RCHRES
103 2

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
IMPLND
104
9.51
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
104
69.71
RCHRES
103 2
IMPLND
106
0.69
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
106
33.59
RCHRES
103 2
IMPLND
107
0.23
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
107
4.41
RCHRES
103 2
IMPLND
109
18.17
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
109
14.87
RCHRES
103 2
IMPLND
110
0.28
RCHRES
103 1
PERLND
110
0.23
RCHRES
103 2
RCHRES
100
RCHRES
103 3
RCHRES
101
RCHRES
103 3
IMPLND
101
0.05
RCHRES
105 1
PERLND
101
0.93
RCHRES
105 2
IMPLND
105
0.29
RCHRES
105 1
PERLND
105
14.42
RCHRES
105 2
IMPLND
106
5.14
RCHRES
105 1
PERLND
106
252.12
RCHRES
105 2
IMPLND
107
0.5
RCHRES
105 1
PERLND
107
9.52
RCHRES
105 2
IMPLND
109
46.94
RCHRES
105 1
PERLND
109
38.4
RCHRES
105 2
IMPLND
110
0.05
RCHRES
105 1
PERLND
110
0.04
RCHRES
105 2
RCHRES
103
RCHRES
105 3
IMPLND
101
0.5
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
101
9.59
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
102
18.45
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
102
84.04
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
103
1.13
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
103
2.64
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
104
7.39
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
104
54.17
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
106
7.1
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
106
348.08
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
107
0.23
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
107
4.45
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
109
19.09
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
109
15.62
RCHRES
106 2
IMPLND
110
0.26
RCHRES
106 1
PERLND
110
0.21
RCHRES
106 2
RCHRES
105
RCHRES
106 3
IMPLND
102
3.35
RCHRES
108 1
PERLND
102
15.27
RCHRES
108 2
IMPLND
103
3.92
RCHRES
108 1
PERLND
103
9.16
RCHRES
108 2
IMPLND
104
2.86
RCHRES
108 1
PERLND
104
21
RCHRES
108 2
IMPLND
106
10.67
RCHRES
108 1
PERLND
106
522.88
RCHRES
108 2
IMPLND
109
8.25
RCHRES
108 1
PERLND
109
6.75
RCHRES
108 2
RCHRES
106
RCHRES
108 3
IMPLND
102
7.26
RCHRES
109 1
PERLND
102
33.06
RCHRES
109 2
IMPLND
103
0.08
RCHRES
109 1
PERLND
103
0.2
RCHRES
109 2
-82-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDC Public Review Draft February 2005
IMPLND
104
5.55
RCHRES
109
1
PERLND
104
40.74
RCHRES
109
2
IMPLND
106
4.21
RCHRES
109
1
PERLND
106
206.38
RCHRES
109
2
IMPLND
109
13.12
RCHRES
109
1
PERLND
109
10.74
RCHRES
109
2
RCHRES
108
RCHRES
109
3
IMPLND
101
3.07
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
101
58.29
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
103
0.03
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
103
0.07
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
104
3.12
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
104
22.86
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
105
1.86
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
105
91.2
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
106
8.48
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
106
415.46
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
111
4.08
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
111
10.48
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
109
10.35
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
109
8.47
RCHRES
102
2
IMPLND
110
0.07
RCHRES
102
1
PERLND
110
0.06
RCHRES
102
2 w
RCHRES
99
RCHRES
102
3
RCHRES
98
RCHRES
102
3
IMPLND
101
0.02
RCHRES
110
1
PERLND
101
0.36
RCHRES
110
2
IMPLND
102
6.65
RCHRES
110
1
PERLND
102
30.28
RCHRES
110
2
IMPLND
104
3
RCHRES
110
1
PERLND
104
22.02
RCHRES
110
2
IMPLND
105
0.59
RCHRES
110
1
PERLND
105
28.84
RCHRES
110
2
IMPLND
106
3.73
RCHRES
110
1
PERLND
106
182.78
RCHRES
110
2
IMPLND
109
8.71
RCHRES
110
1
PERLND
109
7.13
RCHRES
110
2
RCHRES
109
RCHRES
110
3
IMPLND
101
0.05
RCHRES
104
1
PERLND
101
0.94
RCHRES
104
2
IMPLND
105
1.66
RCHRES
104
1
PERLND
105
81.41
RCHRES
104
2
IMPLND
106
2.47
RCHRES
104
1
PERLND
106
121.22
RCHRES
104
2
RCHRES
102
RCHRES
104
3
IMPLND
101
4.08
RCHRES
112
1
PERLND
101
77.47
RCHRES
112
2
IMPLND
102
0.03
RCHRES
112
1
PERLND
102
0.11
RCHRES
112
2
IMPLND
103
0.02
RCHRES
112
1
PERLND
103
0.04
RCHRES
112
2
IMPLND
104
1.46
RCHRES
112
1
PERLND
104
10.7
RCHRES
112
2
IMPLND
105
1.9
RCHRES
112
1
PERLND
105
93.05
RCHRES
112
2
IMPLND
106
5.41
RCHRES
112
1
PERLND
106
265.08
RCHRES
112
2
-83-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
IMPLND
109
5.26
RCHRES
112 1
PERLND
109
4.3
RCHRES
112 2
RCHRES
110
RCHRES
112 3
IMPLND
101
C.27
RCHRES
84 1
PERLND
101
5.2
RCHRES
84 2
IMPLND
105
0.48
RCHRES
84 1
PERLND
105
23.34
RCHRES
84 2
IMPLND
106
1.26
RCHRES
84 1
PERLND
106
61.54
RCHRES
84 2
IMPLND
109
1.92
RCHRES
84 1
PERLND
109
1.57
RCHRES
84 2
RCHRES
81
RCHRES
84 3
IMPLND
101
2.98
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
101
56.69
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
102
0.3
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
102
1.37
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
103
0.02
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
103
0.04
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
104
5.37
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
104
39.37
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
105
1.18
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
105
58.09
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
106
8.94
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
106
438.1
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
111
0
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
111
0
RCHRES
114 2
IMPLND
109
10.12
RCHRES
114 1
PERLND
109
8.28
RCHRES
114 2
RCHRES
112
RCHRES
114 3
IMPLND
101
0.81
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
101
15.39
RCHRES
116 2
IMPLND
103
0.01
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
103
0.03
RCHRES
116 2
IMPLND
104
1.78
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
104
13.03
RCHRES
116 2
IMPLND
105
0.69
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
105
34.06
RCHRES
116 2
IMPLND
106
2.79
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
106
136.85
RCHRES
116 2
IMPLND
111
12.39
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
111
31.85
RCHRES
116 2
IMPLND
109
2.21
RCHRES
116 1
PERLND
109
1.81
RCHRES
116 2
RCHRES
114
RCHRES
116 3
IMPLND
101
3.11
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
101
59.16
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
102
0.06
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
102
0.29
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
103
0.13
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
103
0.3
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
104
3.3B
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
104
24.81
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
105
4.24
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
105
207.8
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
112
0.94
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
112
0.77
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
106
4.39
RCHRES
117 1
-84-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
PERLND
106
214.95
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
111
0
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
Ill
0.01
RCHRES
117 2
IMPLND
109
14.15
RCHRES
117 1
PERLND
109
11.58
RCHRES
117 2
RCHRES
92
RCHRES
117 3
RCHRES
116
RCHRES
117 3
IMPLND
101
5.34
RCHRES
118 1
PERLND
101
101.44
RCHRES
118 2
IMPLND
103
0
RCHRES
118 1
PERLND
103
0.01
RCHRES
118 2
IMPLND
104
4.75
RCHRES
118 1
PERLND
104
34.85
RCHRES
118 2
IMPLND
105
3.57
RCHRES
118 1
PERLND
105
174.92
RCHRES
118 2
IMPLND
106
4.65
RCHRES
118 1
PERLND
106
227.97
RCHRES
118 2
IMPLND
109
13.78
RCHRES
118 1
PERLND
109
11.27
RCHRES
118 2
RCHRES
117
RCHRES
118 3
IMPLND
101
0.5
RCHRES
74 1
PERLND
101
9.53
RCHRES
74 2
IMPLND
104
0
RCHRES
74 1
PERLND
104
0.03
RCHRES
74 2
IMPLND
106
0.1
RCHRES
74 1
PERLND
106
5.03
RCHRES
74 2
IMPLND
109
0.75
RCHRES
74 1
PERLND
109
0.61
RCHRES
74 2
RCHRES
70
RCHRES
74 3
IMPLND
101
1.52
RCHRES
119 1
PERLND
101
28.93
RCHRES
119 2
IMPLND
104
0.48
RCHRES
119 1
PERLND
104
3.52
RCHRES
119 2
IMPLND
105
0.28
RCHRES
119 1
PERLND
105
13.65
RCHRES
119 2
IMPLND
106
3.74
RCHRES
119 1
PERLND
106
183.16
RCHRES
119 2
IMPLND
109
2.75
RCHRES
119 1
PERLND
109
2.25
RCHRES
119 2
RCHRES
118
RCHRES
119 3
IMPLND
101
4.41
RCHRES
120 1
PERLND
101
83.8
RCHRES
120 2
IMPLND
103
0.03
RCHRES
120 1
PERLND
103
0.08
RCHRES
120 2
IMPLND
104
2.46
RCHRES
120 1
PERLND
104
18.02
RCHRES
120 2
IMPLND
105
5.72
RCHRES
120 1
PERLND
105
280.11
RCHRES
120 2
IMPLND
106
4.26
RCHRES
120 1
PERLND
106
208.58
RCHRES
120 2
IMPLND
109
8.16
RCHRES
120 1
PERLND
109
6.68
RCHRES
120 2
RCHRES
119
RCHRES
120 3
IMPLND
101
1.49
RCHRES
121 1
PERLND
101
28.3
RCHRES
121 2
IMPLND
104
0.11
RCHRES
121 1
PERLND
104
0.82
RCHRES
121 2
W-M

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft FebruaW 2005
IMPLND
105
7.16
RCHRES
121 1
PERLND
105
351.09
RCHRES
121 2
IMPLND
106
1.17
RCHRES
121 1
PERLND
106
57.58
RCHRES
121 2
IMPLND
109
6.07
RCHRES
121 1
PERLND
109
4.96
RCHRES
121 2
RCHRES
82
RCHRES
121 3
RCHRES
120
RCHRES
121 3
IMPLND
101
6.45
RCHRES
122 1
PERLND
101
122.52
RCHRES
122 2
IMPLND
102
0.14
RCHRES
122 1
PERLND
102
0.66
RCHRES
122 2
IMPLND
104
9.01
RCHRES
122 1
PERLND
104
66.07
RCHRES
122 2
IMPLND
105
5.89
RCHRES
122 1
PERLND
105
288.46
RCHRES
122 2
IMPLND
106
1.54
RCHRES
122 1
PERLND
106
75.39
RCHRES
122 2
IMPLND
109
13.57
RCHRES
122 1
PERLND
109
11.1
RCHRES
122 2
RCHRES
121
RCHRES
122 3
IMPLND
101
4.04
RCHRES
123 1
PERLND
101
76.77
RCHRES
123 2
IMPLND
104
3.15
RCHRES
123 1
PERLND
104
23.09
RCHRES
123 2
IMPLND
105
3.99
RCHRES
123 1
PERLND
105
195.41
RCHRES
123 2
IMPLND
106
3.97
RCHRES
123 1
PERLND
106
194.38
RCHRES
123 2
IMPLND
111
3.54
RCHRES
123 1
PERLND
111
9.1
RCHRES
123 2
IMPLND
109
7.41
RCHRES
123 1
PERLND
109
6.06
RCHRES
123 2
RCHRES
122
RCHRES
123 3
IMPLND
101
1.09
RCHRES
124 1
PERLND
101
20.76
RCHRES
124 2
IMPLND
104
0.51
RCHRES
124 1
PERLND
104
3.78
RCHRES
124 2
IMPLND
105
3.16
RCHRES
124 1
PERLND
105
154.94
RCHRES
124 2
IMPLND
106
1.99
RCHRES
124 1
PERLND
106
97.64
RCHRES
124 2
IMPLND
111
2.63
RCHRES
124 1
PERLND
111
6.77
RCHRES
124 2
IMPLND
109
4.87
RCHRES
124 1
PERLND
109
3.98
RCHRES
124 2
RCHRES
123
RCHRES
124 3
IMPLND
101
6.15
RCHRES
125 1
PERLND
101
116.89
RCHRES
125 2
IMPLND
104
0.28
RCHRES
125 1
PERLND
104
2.03
RCHRES
125 2
IMPLND
105
3
RCHRES
125 1
PERLND
105
147.21
RCHRES
125 2
IMPLND
106
4.85
RCHRES
125 1
PERLND
106
237.68
RCHRES
125 2
IMPLND
111
1.95
RCHRES
125 1
PERLND
111
5.01
RCHRES
125 2
-86-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
1MPLND
109
8.01
RCHRES
125
1
PERLND
109
6.55
RCHRES
125
2
RCHRES
74
RCHRES
125
3
RCHRES
124
RCHRES
125
3
IMPLND
101
1.11
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
101
21.03
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
102
10.58
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
102
48.19
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
103
0.37
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
103
0.86
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
104
5.36
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
104
39.28
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
105
0.84
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
105
41.29
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
106
7.69
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
106
376.93
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
107
1.52
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
107
28.87
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
109
16.71
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
109
13.67
RCHRES
90
2
IMPLND
110
0.01
RCHRES
90
1
PERLND
110
0.01
RCHRES
90
2
RCHRES
73
RCHRES
90
3
IMPLND
101
2.17
RCHRES
126
1
PERLND
101
41.25
RCHRES
126
2
IMPLND
104
0.7
RCHRES
126
1
PERLND
104
5.12
RCHRES
126
2
IMPLND
105
5.17
RCHRES
126
1
PERLND
105
253.28
RCHRES
126
2
IMPLND
106
2.52
RCHRES
126
1
PERLND
106
123.43
RCHRES
126
2
IMPLND
111
0.17
RCHRES
126
1
PERLND
111
0.43
RCHRES
126
2
IMPLND
109
12.49
RCHRES
126
1
PERLND
109
10.22
RCHRES
126
2
RCHRES
125
RCHRES
126
3
IMPLND
101
1.73
RCHRES
127
1
PERLND
101
32.82
RCHRES
127
2
IMPLND
104
0.67
RCHRES
127
1
PERLND
104
4.89
RCHRES
127
2
IMPLND
105
4.75
RCHRES
127
1
PERLND
105
232.85
RCHRES
127
2
IMPLND
106
1 5.77
RCHRES
127
1
PERLND
106
282.61
RCHRES
127
2
IMPLND
109
2.61
RCHRES
127
1
PERLND
109
2.13
RCHRES
127
2
RCHRES
126
RCHRES
127
3
IMPLND
106
0.01
RCHRES
128
1
PERLND
106
0.47
RCHRES
128
2
RCHRES
84
RCHRES
128
3
RCHRES
127
RCHRES
128
3
IMPLND
101
5.64
RCHRES
107
1
PERLND
101
107.18
RCHRES
107
2
IMPLND
102
0.12
RCHRES
107
1
PERLND
102
0.54
RCHRES
107
2
IMPLND
104
0.12
RCHRES
107
1
PERLND
104
0.88
RCHRES
107
2
-87-

Gcose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
IMPLND
105
0.33
RCHRES
107 1
PERLND
105
16.24
RCHRES
107 2
IMPLND
106
4.24
RCHRES
107 1
PERLND
106
207.91
RCHRES
107 2
IMPLND
109
2.66
RCHRES
107 1
PERLND
109
2.17
RCHRES
107 2
RCHRES
87
RCHRES
107 3
RCHRES
104
RCHRES
107 3
IMPLND
101
5.75
RCHRES
III 1
PERLND
101
109.19
RCHRES
111 2
IMPLND
102
D.06
RCHRES
111 1
PERLND
102
0.26
RCHRES
111 2
IMPLND
104
2.89
RCHRES
111 1
PERLND
104
21.22
RCHRES
Ill 2
IMPLND
105
1.09
RCHRES
111 1
PERLND
105
53.5
RCHRES
Ill 2
IMPLND
106
7.62
RCHRES
Ill 1
PERLND
106
373.18
RCHRES
111 2
IMPLND
109
14.49
RCHRES
111 1
PERLND
109
11.85
RCHRES
111 2
RCHRES
80
RCHRES
Ill 3
RCHRES
107
RCHRES
111 3
IMPLND
101
3.82
RCHRES
113 1
PERLND
101
72.49
RCHRES
113 2
IMPLND
104
0.2
RCHRES
113 1
PERLND
104
1.45
RCHRES
113 2
IMPLND
105
6.62
RCHRES
113 1
PERLND
105
324.44
RCHRES
113 2
IMPLND
106
4.45
RCHRES
113 1
PERLND
106
217.93
RCHRES
113 2
IMPLND
109
4.73
RCHRES
113 1
PERLND
109
3.87
RCHRES
113 2
RCHRES
111
RCHRES
113 3
IMPLND
101
0.08
RCHRES
115 I
PERLND
101
1.44
RCHRES
115 2
IMPLND
104
0.44
RCHRES
115 1
PERLND
104
3.21
RCHRES
115 2
IMPLND
105
2.58
RCHRES
115 1
PERLND
105
126.45
RCHRES
115 2
IMPLND
106
1.14
RCHRES
115 1
PERLND
106
55.7
RCHRES
115 2
IMPLND
109
3.49
RCHRES
115 1
PERLND
109
2.85
RCHRES
115 2
RCHRES
113
RCHRES
115 3
IMPLND
101
1.07
RCHRES
129 1
PERLND
101
20.28
RCHRES
129 2
IMPLND
102
0.05
RCHRES
129 1
PERLND
102
0.22
RCHRES
129 2
IMPLND
104
0.84
RCHRES
129 1
PERLND
104
6.16
RCHRES
129 2
IMPLND
105
4.06
RCHRES
129 1
PERLND
105
198.78
RCHRES
129 2
IMPLND
106
6.96
RCHRES
129 I
PERLND
106
340.98
RCHRES
129 2
IMPLND
109
11.28
RCHRES
129 1
PERLND
109
9.23
RCHRES
129 2
RCHRES
128
RCHRES
129 3
-88-

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
RCHRES 115
RCHRES 129 3
END SCHEMATIC
EXT TARGETS
<-Volume-> <-Grp>
<-Member-><--Mult-->Tran
<-Volume->
<Member> Tsys
Aggr Amd ***
<Name> x
<Name> x
x<-factor->strg
<Name>
x <Name>qf
tem
strg strg***
RCHRES 105 HYDR
RO 1
1 AVER
WDMI 1002
FLOW I ENGL
AGGR REPL
RCHRES 105 GQUAL
DQAL 1
1 AVER
WDM1 1152
DQAL 1 ENGL
AGGR REPL
END EXT TARGETS
MASS -LINK
MASS -LINK
2
<-Volume-> <-Grp>
<-Member-><--Mult-->
<-Target
vols> <-Grp>
<-
Member-> ***
<Name>
<Name> x
x<-factor->
<Name>
<Name>
x x ***
*** Factor converts acre -in to acre-ft 1/12
PERLND PWATER
PERO
0.0833333
RCHRES
INFLOW
IVOL
PERLND PQUAL
POQUAL 1
RCHRES
INFLOW
IDQAL
1
END MASS -LINK
2
MASS -LINK
1
<-Volume-> <-Grp>
<-Member-><--Mult-->
<-Target
vols> <-Grp>
<-
Member-> ***
<Name>
<Name> x
x<-factor->
<Name>
<Name>
x x ***
IMPLND IWATER
SURO
0.08333333
RCHRES'
INFLOW
IVOL
IMPLND IQUAL
SOQUAL 1
RCHRES
INFLOW
IDQAL
1
END MASS-L--NK
1
MASS -LINK
3
<-Volume-> <-Grp>
<-Member-><--Mult-->
<-Target
vols> <-Grp>
<-
Member-> ***
<Name>
<Name> x
x<-factor->
<Name>
<Name>
x x ***
RCHRES ROFLOW
RCHRES
INFLOW
END MASS -LINK
3
MASS -LINK
4
<-Volume-> <-Grp>
<-Member-><--Mult-->
<-Target
vols> <-Grp>
<-
Member-> ***
<Name>
<Name> x
x<-factor-->
<Name>
<Name>
x x ***
SMPRAC ROFLOW
RCHRES
INFLOW
END MASS -LINK
4
MASS -LINK
5
<-Volume-> <-Grp>
<-Member-><--Mult-->
<-Target
vols> <-Grp>
<-
Member-> ***
:1

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL Public Review Draft February 2005
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor->
x x ***
IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.08333333
IMPLND IDUAL SOQUAL 1
1
END MASS -LINK 5
MASS -LINK 6
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->
Member-> ***
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor->
x x ***
PERLND PWATER PERO 0.0833333
PERLND PQUAL POQUAL 1
1
END MASS -LINK 6
END MASS -LINK
END RUN
<Name> <Name>
BMPRAC INFLOW IVOL
BMPRAC INFLOW IDQAL
<-Target
vols> <-Grp> <-
<Name>
<Name>
BMPRAC
INFLOW IVOL
BMPRAC
INFLOW IDQAL

imap://ken.pickle°Io40dwq.denr.ncmail.net @cros.ncmail.net:1431fetc...
Subject: Stormwater Permits
From: "Amy Pickle" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:45:45 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <bradley.bennet@ncmail. net>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
CC: "Jim Stephenson" <[e-mail]>, "Heather Jacobs" <[e-mail]>,
"David McNaught"<DMcNaught@env ironmentaldefense.org>, "Brianna Bond" <[e-mail]>,
"Derb Carter" <[e-mail]>, "Trip Van Noppen" <[e-mail]>
All
I have attached 8 comment letters for your consideration —one letter addressing both general permits and seven
comment letters on eight different individual permits. All letters have significant exhibits, which are attached to the
hard copies that were mailed yesterday.
We remain disappointed that North Carolina's Phase II Stormwater Program will have no beneficial impact on
water quality and concerned that the permits authorize discharges that contravene the Clean Water Act and state
law. As discussed in more detail in the letters, discharges of stormwater pursuant to the general permits and the
individual permits, especially to sensitive waters and waters providing aquatic habitat for endangered species,
likely will cause water quality violations and degradation of existing uses. Furthermore, the Department's decision
to deem existing stormwater programs compliant with the Phase II post -construction standards is particularly
troubling, and clearly violates federal law and the Phase II session law.
As you review our letters, please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions.
Sincerely,
Amy
Amy Pickle
Staff Attorney
Southern Environmental Law Center
200 West Franklin Street, Suite 330
Chapel Hill, NC 27516-2559
[phone]
This email may contain confidential information and is intended to be received solely by the
addressee(s) above. If you believe that you have received this message in error, please delete it
immediately and contact sender.
i1of 1 2/25/2005 9:48 AM

pwbue cow.,r.P0.�s i�actxw-Qlrt conk-T-al, -:#7-218
December 30, 2004
Bradley Bennett
Stormwater Permitting Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699- l 617
RE: DRAFT PERMIT NO, NCS000454, Town of Stallings
Dear Mr. Bennett:
We appreciate the opportunity to review the draft NPDES Stormwater Permit
NCS000454 for the Town of Stallings. Our comments focus on the effects of the
proposed stormwater permit on the endangered Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmrgona
decorata) and the obligations of the Division of Water Quality ("DWQ") to issue the
permit with adequate protection of the species. These comments are submitted on behalf
of the North Carolina Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club.
The Southern Environmental Law Center ("SELC") is a non-profit legal advocacy
group dedicated to protecting the environment of the South. SELC works with more than
100 partner groups in its six state coverage area. SELC has been actively involved in a
variety of efforts to improve water quality in the Swift Creek watershed, including work
on protections for the Carolina heelsplitter. To that end, we are closely involved with the
efforts of local environmental groups to protect water quality and the habitat of the
Carolina heelsplitter in the Goose Creek watershed.
The Sierra Club is the nation's oldest grassroots environmental organization.
Alone among environmental groups, it is organized at the national, regional, state and
local levels. The North Carolina Chapter was formed in 1977, after having been part. of
the North/South Carolina LeConte Chapter since 197 t. The North Carolina Chapter has
17,000 members in 13 local groups across the state. The mission of the Sierra Club is to
explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; to practice and promote the
responsible use of the earth's ecosystems and resources; to educate and enlist humanity to
protect the quality of the natural and human environment; and to use all lawful means to
carry out these objectives. To those ends, the Sierra Club has been very involved in
efforts to protect endangered mussel habitat in North Carolina.
The North Carolina Wildlife Federation ("NCWF") is a non-profit environmental
advocacy group working to protect wildlife and natural habitats in North Carolina. The

mission of NCWF is to be the leading advocate for all North Carolina wildlife and its
habitat. The goals of NCWF are to advocate the conservation and enhancement of all
wildlife and its habitat; to advocate ethical and biologically sound hunting, fishing, and
other outdoor activities; to advocate education, for children and adults, that increases
public awareness of wildlife, its dependence on habitat, and the importance of both to
human existence; in affiliation with our member organizations, to communicate,
cooperate, and partner with the North Carolina General Assembly, state resource
agencies, corporations, and other interested groups to advance the well being of wildlife
and its habitat; and in affiliation with the National Wildlife Federation, to support
national and international issues of mutual interest. To those ends, NCWF is very
concerned about the effects the draft NPDES permit will have on the Carolina
heelsplitter.
As explained below, the conditions and limitations in the draft permit is
inadequate to ensure compliance with water quality standards. The federal Clean Water
Act and North Carolina law require that all NPDES permits include limitations necessary
to comply with applicable water quality standards. North Carolina law places the burden
on the applicant to demonstrate compliance with water quality standards. Issuance of a
permit without adequate measures to protect federally listed endangered species may
result in a prohibited taking in violation of the Endangered Species Act.
1. The area subject to stormwater limitations affects waters that provide habitat to a
federally -listed aquatic species that would be adversely affected by stormwater.
The Carolina heelsplitter was listed as endangered on June 30, 1993. 58 Fed.
Reg. 34926 (June 30, 1993) (attached as Exhibit 1). The Goose Creek watershed
contains one of the four remaining populations of this species. Id.; see also Goose Creek
Map (attached as Exhibit 2). In July 2002, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ("USFWS")
designated critical habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter, including the main stems of Goose
Creek and Duck Creek in Union County. 67 Federal Register44502-44521 (July 2,
2002) (attached as Exhibit 3). In proposing critical habitat, the Service concludes:
Available information indicates that several factors have contributed to the
decline and loss of populations of the Carolina heelsplitter, and threaten
the remaining populations. These factors include pollutants in wastewater
discharges (sewage treatment plants and industrial discharges); habitat loss
and alteration associated with impoundments, channel ization, and
dredging operations; channel and streambank scouring associated ivith
increased storm -water run-off,- and the run-off of silt, fertilizers,
pesticides, and other- pollutants front various land disturbance activities
with inadequate or poorly maintained erosion and stornovater control.
Many of the streams in the area of Charlotte, North Carolina, that are
known to have historically supported the Carolina heelsplitter, but which
no longer do, have been degraded by a combination of the factors listed
above and appear to no longer support, or be capable of supporting, any
species of native mussels.

The rung1l'of storm waterfrom cleared areas, roads, rooftops, parking
lots, and other developed areas, which often is ditched or piped directly
into strectms, not only results in stream pollution, but also results in
increased water volume and velocity during heavy rains. This change irl
water volione and velocity causes charnel and stream -bank scouring that
leads to degradation and eliminatiolt of Mussel habitat.
Id. at 36230 (emphasis added) (for more information on the Carolina heelsplitter, see
Exhibit 4). The receiving waters for stormwater from Stallings include Goose Creek.
The draft NPDES permit will result in the adverse impacts to the Carolina heelsplitter
from stormwater identified by the USFWS.
2. Endangered or threatened aquatic species require enhanced protection from
stormwater.
Scientific information and conclusions that formed the basis for designation of
critical habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter establish that the impacts from stormwater
runoff associated with new development are the types of impacts that will appreciably
reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the endangered mussel. The North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ("WRC"), in consultation with the USFWS,
has identified measures that if implemented and enforced would avoid adverse impacts
from stormwater. WRC, Guidance Memorancltan to Address and Mitigate Secondary
and Cumulative Impacts to Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Resources and Water Quality
(August 2002) (attached as Exhibit 5). These measures constitute the best scientific
information available on actions to avoid adverse modification of critical habitat and
jeopardy of the Carolina heelsplitter. DWQ and the permit applicant must assure that
these measures are included in the final NPDES permit.
For watersheds that support federally listed species, the WRC recommends that
certain measures be implemented to provide a higher degree of protection. The WRC
encourages the maintenance and establishment of 200 foot native, forested ripariall
buffers on perennial streams and 100 foot forested buffers o11 interllilttent streams.
WRC, Guidance Memorandum (August 2002) (emphasis added). These buffer widths are
based on detailed studies that establish the need for wider buffers to protect endangered
aquatic species.' The WRC also recommends that if forested buffers do not exist, the
buffer area should be allowed to revegetate naturally to increase its functionality. Id. The
WRC also advocates maintenance of the natural predevelopment hydrograph. In order to
do so, the guidelines recommend that "new developments can build using traditional
designs at a level of 7% imperviousness, or build more densely, using dedicated open
t Knutson, K.L., and V.L. Naef, Management recommendations for Washington's priority habitats:
riparian. Washington Department ol'Fish and Wildlife, Olympia (1997); Martin, C.O., R.A. Fischer, &
E i.11. Allen, Riparian Issues on Corps of Engineers and DOD Military Lands (2000); Todd, Makin
Decisions About Ri )arian Buffer Width, Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association
International Conference on riparian ecology and management in multi -land use wastersheds, 445-450,
Portland, OR (2000) (attached as Exhibit 6).
3

space and other stormwater practices to mimic the hydrograph which would occur at only
7% imperviousness." It/ (emphasis added).
3. The proposed NPDES stormwater permit fails to Provide adequate protection to
endangered or threatened aguatic species.
The draft NPDES permits include conditions and limitations that fall well short of
the WRC's guidelines. The following table compares —with emphasis added —the
stormwater permit's wholly inadequate requirements with the WRC's guidelines for the
protection of mussel populations.
Imperviousness
Low -Density Option
In order to maintain
prede; elopment
No more than 2
dwelling units per
hydrographic
acre or 24% built-
conditions, including
upon area ("BUA")
flow volumes, new
for all residential and
developments can
nonresidential
build using traditional
developments.
designs at a level of
7% imperviousness, or
High -Density Option
build more densely,
Install structural best
using dedicated open
management
space and other
practices ("BMPs")
stormwater practices
designed to control
to mimic the
and treat the
hydrograph which
difference in storm
would occur at only
water runoff volume
7% imperviousness.
leaving the project
site between the pre
and post development
conditions for the I -
year, 24-hour storm
event.
All structural BMPs
used to meet these
requirements must be
designed to have an
85% average annual
removal for Total
Suspended Solids.
General engineering
design criteria for all
rolects must be in
4

accordance with 15
NCAC 2H .1008(c).
Riparian Buffers
Low -Density Option
Maintain a 200 foot
All BUA must be at a
nalurally forested
minimum of 30 feet
buffer on all perennial
landward of all
streams and a 100 foot
perennial and
forested buffer on all
intermittent surface
intermittent streams in
waters.
new developments. if
wooded buffers do not
High -Density Option
exist, then these areas
All BUA must be at a
should be revegetated
minimum of 30 feet
to allow development
landward of all
of a naturally forested
perennial and
buffer.
intermittent surface
waters.
DWQ must require the more stringent measures recommended by the WRC in
order to protect the endangered Carolina heelsplitter. The draft NPDES permit sets a
definition for low -density development at 24% or less BUA. Low -density developments
are not required to implement engineered stormwater management controls, such as
infiltration systems or detention ponds. Well documented scientific studies have found
that sensitive waters begin to lose uses and sensitive values decay once built upon areas
reach 10 %.z For areas with endangered and threatened aquatic species, the studies
suggest that BUA be limited to 7% imperviousness. This can be achieved through the
use of conventional design at a level of 7% imperviousness or using conservation clusters
with higher densities which incorporate dedicated open space and other controls to
preserve the natural hydrograph. In the Chesapeake Bay area of Maryland, these
measures have been implemented with much success.3
2 Paul, M.J., J.L. Meyer, Streams in the Urban Lurdscape, ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECOLOGY AND
SYSTEMATICS 32:333-365 (2001); Stewart, J.S., ct. al., Influences of riparian corridors oil aquatic biota in
agricultural watersheds, Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association International
Conference on riparian ecology and management in multi -land use wastersheds, 209-214, Portland, OR
(2000); May, C.W., and R.R. Horner, The cumulative Impacts of watershed urbanization on strcanr-
ripai*m ecosystems, Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association international Conference
on riparian ecology and management in multi -land use wastersheds, 281-286, Portland, OR (2000); Doll,
B.A., et, al., llydreudic geomeit-y relationships for w-ban streams throughout the piedmont of North
Carolina, Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association International Conference on riparian
ecology and management in multi -land use wastersheds, 299-304, Portland, OR (2000), Arnold, C.L. and
C.J. Gibbons, Impervious surface coverage —the emergence of rr key environmental indicator, .JOURNAL OF
THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 62: 243-258 (1996); Schueler, T., Die importturc•e of
iImperviousrress, WATERSHED PItOTL:CTION'rECIINIQUES 1(3):100-1 1 1 (1994). (Impervious studies are
attached as t:xhibit 7).
3 Prince Georges County, Maryland, Department of Environmental Resources, Low hnpact Development
Design Strategies (1999) (attached as Exhibit 8).
5

DWQ must also require the more stringent buffer requirements. The draft permit
for Stallings sets the riparian buffer requirements at 30-Feet for all perennial and
intermittent streams. These requirements are not stringent enough to ensure survival of
the Carolina heelsplitter. WRC guidelines recommend 200-foot forested buffers for -
perennial streams and 100-foot buffers for intermittent streams. DWQ must require these
more stringent measures in order to protect the endangered mussel population.
4. The NPDES permit must include limitations necessary to meet water uj! t
standards.
The NPDES permit violates federal requirements in several important respects.
The NPDES permits must satisfy the federal Phase 11 requirements. The Clean Water
Act prohibits discharges that violate water quality standards. The rules promulgated
pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 5 1342 (p) by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA") require regulated entities to "develop, implement, and enforce a stormwater
management program designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants ... to the maximum
extent practicable, to protect water quality, and to satisfy the appropriate requirements
of the Clean Water Act." 40 C.F.R. § 122.34 (a) (emphasis added).
Based upon existing case law, "maximum extent practicable" means to the fullest
degree technologically feasible for protection of water quality, except where costs are
wholly disproportionate to the potential benefits. See Naeuser v. Department of Law, 97
F.3d 1152, 1155 (9`h Cir. 1996) ("practicable" has been defined as "capable of being
done: feasible"); Rybac•hek v. United States E.P.A., 904 F.2d 1276, 1289 (9" Cir. 1990)
(EPA must select best level of technology unless costs are "wholly disproportionate" to
the benefits); Assn of Pac. Fisheries v. United States E.P.A., 615 F.2d 794, 805 (9`h Cir.
1980). In the stormwater context, these stringent definitions of the term "practicable" are
further narrowed by the use of "maximum," clearly indicating that the measures to be
required must be more protective than standard practice, or than ordinary measures,
where those measures are failing to protect water quality. Such a definition would also
comport with the recent Ninth Circuit decision interpreting Phase II program
requirements. The court there suggested that the "maximum extent practicable" standard
may require more of permittees than mere compliance with water quality standards or
numeric effluent limitations designed to meet such standards. Envd. Def: Or., Inc. v.
United States EPA, 319 F.3d 398, 425-26 (9"' Cir. 2003) (noting that although general
permits will explicitly require compliance with numeric effluent limitations designed to
ensure compliance with water quality standards, additional review of permittees' notices
of intent is required to ensure that permittees have also designed programs that do in fact
reduce their stormwater pollution to the maximum extent practicable).
The NPDES permit violates federal rules because it fails to define adequately the
criteria by which permits are to be judged: whether plans proposed by applicants reduce
stormwater pollution to the "maximum extent practicable." The NPDES permit also
violates federal rules because it fails to require stormwater measures that achieve the
standards of Phase II to reduce the discharge to the maximum extent practicable.
ro

Furthermore, because the stormwater management program is regulated through a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit other requirements
apply. "Since 1973, EPA regulations have provided that an NPDES permit shall not be
issued `when the imposition of conditions cannot ensure compliance with the applicable
water quality requirements of all affected States.' n 10 40 C.F.R. § 122.4(d) (1991); see
also 38 Fed. Reg. 13533 (1973); 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(d) (1991). Arkansas v. Oklahoma,
503 U.S. 91, 105 (1992). Federal and North Carolina law require that NPDES permits
ensure compliance with water quality standards. NPDES regulations issued under the
Clean Water Act "specifically require that each NPDES permit contain `any
requirements... necessary to : (1) achieve water quality standards established under
Section 303 of the Act.' 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1). Thus any permit that fails to contain
conditions necessary to achieve water quality standards violates both the Act and 40
C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1)." Champion Int 'l Corp. v. United States FPA, 648 F. Stipp. 1390,
1395 (D.N.C. 1986) (vacated and remanded for different reasons by 850 F.2d 182, 186
(4th Cir. 1988).4
North Carolina law prohibits the discharge of waste to waters of the state in
violation of water quality standards. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(6). Permitted
stormwater discharges (direct or indirect) must not result in "water pollution" or
"alteration of the ... biological ... integrity of waters of the state." N.C. Gen. Stat. §§
143-215. 1 (a)(1 1), 213(19). The EMC's permitting regulations place the burden on an
NPDES permit applicant to demonstrate a proposed system will meet water quality
standards. North Carolina NPDES permitting regulations state:
The permit applicant has the burden of providing sufficient evidence to
reasonably ensure that the proposed system will comply with all
applicable water quality standards and requirements. No permit may be
issued when the imposition of conditions cannot reasonably ensure
compliance with applicable water quality standards and regulations of all
effected states.
15A N.C.A.C. 21-1.0112(c).
4 The Preamble to LPA's stormwater permitting regulations describe the circumstances in which
stormwater permits must comply with water quality standards:
...small MS4 permittees should modify their programs if and when available information
indicates that water quality concentrations warrant greater attention or prescriptiveness in
specific components of the municipal program. If the program is inadequate to protect
water quality, including water quality standards, then the permit will need to be modified
to include any more stringent limitations necessary to protect water quality.
64 Fed. Reg 68753.
7

5. North Carolina water cluality standards require protection and maintenance of
threatened or endangered aquatic species.
Water quality standards applicable to all waters identify "best usage of waters" to
include "maintenance of biological integrity" and further state "[t]he waters shall be
suitable for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity..., sources of
water pollution which preclude any of these uses on either a short-term or long-term basis
shall be considered to be violating a water quality standard." 15A N.C.A.C. 2B.0211(1),
(2). `Biological integrity means the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and
maintain a balanced and indigenous community of organisms having species
composition, diversity, population densities and functional organization similar to that of
reference conditions." 15A N.C.A.C. 2B.0200(11). Loss of endangered or threatened
aquatic species, often the most sensitive and vulnerable organisms in an aquatic
ecosystem, contravenes the requirement of water quality standards that the biological
integrity of all waters must be maintained.
North Carolina's antidegradation policy also requires that "existing uses" of all
waters be maintained. t5A N.C.A.C. 2B.0201(b). "Existing uses mean uses actually
attained in the water body, in a significant and not incidental manner, on or after
November 28, 1975, whether or not they are included in the water quality standards..."
15A N.C.A.C. 2B.0200(30). North Carolina's water quality regulations recognize that a
use of a water may include providing habitat for endangered or threatened species:
"Certain waters provide habitat for federally -listed aquatic animal species that are listed
as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service or National Marine
Fisheries Service under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531-
1544 and subsequent modifications. Maintenance and recovery of the water quality
conditions required to sustain and recover federally -listed threatened and endangered
aquatic animal species contributes to the support of maintenance of a balanced and
indigenous community of aquatic organisms and thereby protects the biological integrity
of the waters."5 15A N.C.A.C. 2B.01 t0
6. Issuance of stormwater permits without adequate protection for federally -listed
endangered or threatened species violates the Endangered Species Act.
Under Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act, it is "unlawful for any person" to
"take any [endangered] species within the United States...." 16 U.S.C. § 1538(a)(1)(B).
It is also "unlawful for any person" to "attempt to commit, solicit another to commit, or
cause to be corlmrittecl' a taking of any endangered species within the United States. 16
U.S.C. § 1538(g) (emphasis added). The term "person" is defined to include "any
officer, employee, agent, department, or instrumentality of the Federal Government, [or]
of any State..." and thus includes DWQ. 16 U.S.C. § 1532(13). "Take" under the Act
s 15A N.C.A.C. 2B.01 10 directs the Division of Water Quality to develop site -specific management
strategies under the provisions of 15A N.C.A.C. 213.0225 (Outstanding Resource Waters) or 15A N.C.A.C.
28.0227 (Water Quality Management Plans) to protect the endangered or threatened aquatic species in
these waters. Although the rule was adopted in August 2000, the Division has yet to propose or designate
any waters under these provisions.
8

includes any "harm" to an endangered species and specifically includes habitat
degradation,6 Section 9 prohibits not only the actions of those who directly exact the
taking of endangered species, "but also bans those acts of a third party that bring about
the acts exacting a taking." Strahan v. Core, 127 F.3d 155, 1.63 (Ist Cir. 1997). In
Strahan, the State of Massachusetts was found to have exacted a taking of endangered
Northern Right Whales through its licensing and permitting of certain fishing practices
that exacted a taking of the species.7 In Loggerhead Turtle v. County Council of Volu,sia
Comity, a federal district court in Florida held that the Volusia County government
caused takings of endangered sea turtles through its authorization of vehicular beach
access during turtle mating season. 896 F. Supp. t 170, 1180- l 181 (M.D. Fla. 1995). As
currently proposed, the draft permit for Stallings would "cause to be committed" a taking
of the endangered Carolina heelsplitter in violation of federal law.
7. Additional Comments
The permit application for the Town of Stallings lists as receiving waters Goose
Creek, North Fork Crooked Creek, and South Fork Crooked Creek. Although the
application states that there are no water quality issues in these stream segments, DWQ
has listed all of these stream segments as impaired in the proposed 2004 303(d) Impaired
Waters List. See DWQ, North Carolina 303(d) Impaired Waters List— 2004, t09-1 10
(attached as Exhibit 9). Goose Creek was placed on the 303(d) list in 1998 for fecal
coliform violations. From its headwaters to SR 1524, Goose Creek remains impaired
overall due to fecal coliform from construction sites and urban stormwater runoff. From
SR 1524 to its confluence with the Rocky River, Goose Creek is impaired for aquatic life
due to organic enrichment, fecal coliform, and other as yet unidentified stressors. North
Fork Crooked Creek was first listed as impaired for aquatic life due to impaired
biological integrity from unidentified stressors in 1998 and remains on the 2004 303(d)
list. The sources of impairment in North Fork Crooked Creek are urban runoff and storm
sewers. South Fork Crooked Creek was also listed as impaired overall for biological
integrity in 1998 and remains on the 2004 303(d) list. The sources of impairment for
South Fork Crooked Creek are agriculture and construction. Clearly, there are water
quality issues in these receiving streams.
DWQ must require more stringent stormwater management measures in the
NPDES permit for the Town of Stallings in order to prevent further degradation of these
impaired waters. The draft NPDES permit sets a definition for low -density development
at 24% or less BUA. Low -density developments are not required to implement
engineered stormwater management controls, such as infiltration systems or detention
ponds, to control stormwater runoff. Numerous scientific studies have found that
sensitive waters begin to lose uses and sensitive values decay once built upon areas reach
6 Babbitt v. Sweet Honre Chatter of Conm unitiies for a Great Oregon, 515 U.S. 687 (1995).
7 See also Sierra Club v. Yuetter, 926 F.2d 429, 438-39 (51h Cir. 1991)(iinding Forest Service caused take of
endangered red -cockaded woodpecker by permitting logging practices near nesting colonies); Defenders of
Wildlife v. Adnrinistrator, iSnot Protection Agency, 882 F,2d 1294, 1300-01 (8`h Cir.1989)(finding IPA
caused take of endangered species through its registration of pesticides for use by others).
9

10 %.8 Scientific research indicates that a decline in ecological integrity of stream -
riparian ecosystems begins at very low levels of watershed development and continues
with increased watershed development.`' Impaired waters are sensitive waters that have
already begun to lose important uses. DWQ must set the definition for low -density
development at lower percent BUA in order to protect these streams from stormwater
runoff from watershed development.
Because of the significant public interest evidenced by the vital issues raised in
the above comments, we also request a public hearing on the merits of granting this
proposed permit. As you know, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1 requires DWQ to consider
all written requests for a public hearing made within thirty days following the notice of
intent to take action on a permit application and to grant such a request if there is
significant public interest. The permits will allow significant degradation of water
quality in the Goose Creek watershed and will have a significant effect on the survival of
the Carolina heelsplitter. DWQ should carefully weigh the effects of its permitting
decision before implementing lax stormwater controls in the critical habitat of the
endangered mussel. Considering the potential effects the permit may have on Goose
Creek and more specifically on the Carolina heelsplitter, we respectfully request that
DWQ hold a public hearing on the proposed NPDES stormwater permit for Stallings.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments on the permits. If you
have any questions please feel free to call us at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
Derb S. Carter, Jr.
Senior Attorney
Amy Pickle
Staff Attorney
Brianna Bond
Associate Attorney
8 Supra note 2.
9 May, C.W., and R.R. Horner, The cumulative impacts of watershed urbanization on stream -riparian
ecosystems, Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association International Conference on
riparian ecology and management in multi -land use watersheds, 281-286, Portland, OR (2000).
10

cc. Molly Diggins, Sierra Club
Richard Hamilton, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Bill Kane, North Carolina Wildlife Federation
Asheville Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Set -vice

12/29/04 WED 17:55 FAX [phone] USFWS-RALEIGH,NC
2..
United States Department of the Interior .
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
. Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
December 29, 2004
Mr. Bradley Bennett
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Point Source Branch
Storrawater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Dear W. Bennett:
The U.S.- Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed nine draft National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) storfnwater pen -nits, listed in the attached table, and are providing the
following comments in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.). The
North Carolina Division'of Water Quality (DWQ) has'proposed the issuance of these permits to
meet requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Storm Water Phase II
Final Rule. Under Section IX. A. (Coordination Procedures Regarding Issuance of State or Tribal
Permits) of the Memorandum of Agreement Between the Environmental Protection Agency, Fish
and WildlycService and National Marine Fisheries Service Regarding Enhanced Coordination
Under the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act (USEPA 2001), the Service is to contact
the Stag when we are concerned that an NPDES permit is likely to,have a more than nunor
detrimental effect on a federally -listed species or critical habitat. This letter provides our concerns
and information in support of them.
We are generally supportive of this next step in the niianagement of stormwater in North Carolina,
and appreciative of DWQ's efforts in persevering with public -involvement and Hiles to' implement
this program since 2000., We are concealed about two issues: 1) the lack of watershed -specific
information in'any of these permits regarding sensitive natural resources, important waters, and
conservation measures; and 2) the potential for actions permitted under this program to adversely
affect federally -listed threatened and endangered species. We believe each of these shortcomings
can be addressed through revised permits that incorporate information from the natural: resource
management agencies, including the Service, which DWQ has enlisted to help prepare site -specific
water quality management plans far waters supporting federally -listed species (15A NCAC 02B
.0110). Our two concerns are discussed briefly below. These comments apply to all thepermits
listed in Table 1 and will ultimately apply to any permits proposed for waters with listed species or
critical habitat (see eoclosed map). We use the hermits proposed for the Goose Creels watershed as
an illustration of how the permits could be improved. We will be glad to discuss how best to
provide' similar details for the other watersheds to resolve our concerns.

I.Z/Z9/04 WED 1'1:bt) k'A3 1 ilia Cap 4000 UStT►5-t[Al.>Wllin,ivli
Jj Lack of watershed specfc information in draft permits .
We are aware that the EPA's Phase Il Stormwater Program requirements are basic and are designed,
to accommodate a general permit approach as well as provide the owner / operator of small
municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) a great deal of local flexibility in selecting Best
.Management Practices (BMPs) to meet national program .requirements. We also know that each
permit requires a specific stormwater management plan and that those plans can contains
considerably more information on a conditi f loca ters, the importance of sensxia natural
resources in those waters, and the cific tormwater management BW s to be applied. , We are
concerned, however, that the individual permits do not provid any o this important oca ions C e.
s ecific information, the absence of which leaves interested stakeholders with no assurances that
they *11 be addressed.
Permits proposed for municipalities in the Goose Creek watershed are a good example. The draft
permits for the Town of Stallings (NCSOOO454); Town of Indian Trail (NCS00O454), Town of
Hemby Bridge (NCS0O049O) and Mecklenburg County'(NCS00395, includes also Towns of
Matthews and Mint Hill) do not mention,. much less highlight, a) impaired waters needing
restoration, b) waters known to be impaired by%stormwater now, or c) waters meriting additional
protection due to sensitive natural resources... The Goose Creek watershed has all of these attributes,
and DWQ's Point Source, Branch has the opportunity, to highlight the importance of Goose Creek in
those permits. In the recent Yadkin-Pee.Dee River Basinwide. Water Quality Management Plan, the
DWQ's Planning Branch (2003)'appropriately lists the Carolinaheelsplitter (Ldsmigona decorata)
as one. of the only two federally protecred rare aquatic species in the entire Yadkin-Pee.Dee River
.basin (Table A-12). Goose Creek is appropriately identified as one of only six significant aquatic
habitats within the basin (Section 2.6.3), and nonpoint source pollution problems associated with
stormwater runoff are noted among the causative agents in Goose Creek's Clean Water Act 303(d)
listing as impaired (Section 12.2.1)...
The Service recommends that waters` such as Goose Creek, which have been identified as priority
concerns by the DWQ Planning staff and others, be focal points in the Phase Il storrwater permits
in order to help guide targeted and eCfcctive local stormwater plans. While DWQ could do this in-
house by referring to available water quality planning documents, we suggest DWQ incorporate
material fronm -i the emerging site -specific management plans for streams supporting federally -listed
species. The intent of those plans is to provide for maintenance and recovery of the water quality
conditions required to sustain these species, and the Service; NC Wildlife Resources Commission,
the NC Natural Heritage Program and others have working drafts for three basins. ,A draft site -
specific plan for Goose Creek was shared with the Point Source Branch in' September 2003; it
provided a great deal of information on the Carolina heelsplitter, water quality parameters of
concern, sources of local water quality impairment, and potential corrective actions. We believe
that highlighting the need to protect.these resources should be a component of the permitting
process; both as technical assistance to the MS4 owners 1 operators for their planning as well as a
mechanism to help ensure progress on previously identified water quality priorities.
2) Potential to adversely affect federally -listed threatened and endangered species
The Model Practices section of each draft permit contains basic requirements related to stream
setbacks (30-feet), development densities that would trigger more aggressive stormwater
A koll
a

12/L8/U4 WEI) .17:57 Y'Ab 1 VIV 860 4556 U5YlY5-KAL,r;1(;}i,N(: 10004,
management (24°fo built -upon area), and the design storm for high density development (I-year24-
hour storm). While we realize the draft permits indicate these requirements are the minimum, and
that the stormwater management plans must equal or exceed these, we are concerned that they are
not protective minimum criteria for many waters that provide habitat to federally -listed aquatic
species. The lack of any specifics on the type and frequency of monitoring (a typical component of
NPDES permits) is also 'a concern.
Recent research compiled by the Center for Watershed protection indicates that the biological and
physical integrity of streams can be significantly degraded when impervious cover within the
watershed exceeds 10% (Zielinski 2002), and the Service has previously recommended that
stormwater controls in listed mussel habitat should be implemented under density options similar to
those of the Critical Area WS-11 Watershed Protection Hiles (Low Density Option of 1 dwelling unit
12 acre or 6% built -upon area; High Density Option of 6-24% built -upon area provided stormwater
controls in place). Ln a, recent review of literature and'application of professional judgment for
protecting North Carolina's endangered fauna, the Wildlife Resources Commission (2002) and
partners advocated maintenance of the natural predevelopment bydrograph. In order to do so, the
Guidelines recommend that new developments can build using traditional designs at a level of 7%
imperviousness, or build more densely, using dedicated open space and other stormwater practices
to mimic the hydrograph which would'occur at only 7% imperviousness. The draft: stormwater
permits set a definition for low density development at 24%; this is too high, especially if
low -density developments are not required to implement engineered stormwater management
control.
Maintaining vegetated riparian buffers is a well-known method of reducing stream sedimentation
and other runoff. Riparian buffers are particularly important for freshwater mussels (Neves et al.
19.97). Several recent reviews of riparian buffer widths, extent, and vegetation are available io
guide evaluation of buffer design and efficacy (Palone and Todd 1998, Wenger 1999, North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 2002). Because we do not think a 30-foot one -size fits all
minimum buffer width ensures the continued survival of federally endangered and threatened
aquatic species, we have advocated variable -width buffers tbat incorp6mte a portion of the
functional floodplain, taking into consideration the natural topography to establish buffer widths. In
most cases, buffers equal to or exceeding 100-feet would be needed to adequately protect water
quality in developing watersheds such as those affected by these stormwater permits; the 30-foot
setbacks are not adequate. The permits should also note a requirement for attainment of diffuse
flow at the edge of buffers.
Finally, tkie lack of specifics on what will be required to monitor efficacy of stor nwater
management programs is a concern. - The permits would benefit from explicit statements regarding
water quality parameters to monitor, monitoring locations, the frequency of monitoring, and the
targeting of stormwater events as a component of monitoring. Without specifics, it is not possible
to determine if monitoring data will help guide determination of overall program efficacy.
Again, we realize that the DWQ's permits are delivering an EPA program -with basic requirements
and that some municipalities may choose to exceed these foundation level requirements. For
example, we have been pleased with the efforts of Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program
staff to conduct chemical and biological monitoring, develop much more protective buffers and
include natural resources managers (including the Service) on a stakeholders group to help develop

12/29/04 WED 17:58 FAX [phone] USFWS-RALEIGH,NC SODS
the post -construction stormwater ordinance. We also recognize that the DWQ is encouraging
watershed protection planning 'as an alternate vehicle for achieving permit compliance and that
Wake County and others have used this approach. We remain concerned, however, that the
template of each draft permit has a core of model practices that is in many cases already less
protective than existing regulations and potentially► harmful to species we help manage.
Thank you for the opportunity to piovide these comments. We appreciate DWQ's consideration of
federally -listed species in crafting of the current State stormwater rules. for triggering additional
stormwater management plans/permits (15A NCAC .0126) andthe oppot-tunities to work with
DWQ to help improve water quality in listed species habitat through the new site -specific water
quality management plans (15A NCAC.02B .0110). While the permits we reviewed are a small
component of overall water quality management affecting listed species, they are important and we
urge your consideration of our comments to improve thern.. Should you have,questions or would
like to meet to discuss our comments, please;contact Tom Augspurger of our staff in Raleigh at
919/856-4520 x-21. Mr. Mark A. Cantrell of our staff in Asheville is available for technical
assistance on species in the western part of the State at $28/258-3939 x. 227.
Peter eng jamw
Ecological Services Supervisor
Raleigh Field Office
4,('VBriau Cole
Ecological Services Supervisor
Asheville Field Office
Attachments
cc:. Jeff Manning, NCDWQ, Raleigh
Shannon Deaton — NCWRC, Raleigh
Linda Pearsall. NCNHP, Raleigh
Duncan Powell - USEPA, Atlanta
Derb Carter -- Southem Envirownental Law Center

12/29/04 WED 17:55 YAA. t ala 504 4000 UDrTYa-nal.civn,n. . UUVO
r5
References:
Neves, R.J., A.E. Bogan, J.D. Williams, S.A. Ahlstedt and P.W. Hartfield.1997_ Status of mollusks
in the southeastern United States:'A downward spiral of diversity. Pages 31-85 1n GX Benz
and D.E. Collins, eds., Aquatic Fauna in Peril: The Southeastern Perspective. Special
Publication 1, Southeast Aquatic Research Institute, Lenz Designs and Communications,
Decatur, GA.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2003. Yadkin -Pee Dee River basinwide water quality
Management plan .Water Quality Section, Planning Branch, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 2002_ Guidance memoraudurn to address and
mitigate secondary and cumulative impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and
water quality. NCWRC, Division of Inland Fisheries, Raleigh, NC.
Palone, R.S. and A.H. Todd (eds.) 1998. Chesapeake Bay riparian handbook: A guide for
establishing and maintaining riparian forest buffers (Revised). USDA Forest Service
Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry NA-TP-02-97. Morgantown WV.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001.' Memorandum of Agreement Between the
Environmental lrotection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service'and National Marine Fisheries
Service Regarding Enhanced Coordination Under the Clean Water Act and Endangered
Species Act. EPA-823-F-01 -002. Office. of Water, Washington, DC.
Wenger, S. 1999. A review of the scientific literature on riparian buffer width, extent, and
vegetation. office of Public Service and Outreach, Institute of Ecology, University of
Georgia. Athens, GA.
Zielinski, J. 2002. Watershed vulnerability analysis. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City,
MD

11/ZU/U4 WEV 1'1:00 rAA 1 VIV 000 4000 uDrn�-s�ni,r,lan,ir�.
RLl VV1
Attachment 1: Draft NPDES Phase II Stormwater Permits with the Potential to Affect Federally -
listed Threatened and Endangered Species
Species
Waters Affected
Draft Permits
Carolina heelsplitter
Goose Creek
NCS000454, Town of Stallings
(Lasmigona decorata)
(Yadkin Basin)
NCS000453, Town of Indian Trail
and Designated Critical
NCS000490; Town of Hemby Bridge
Habitat
NCS00395, Mecklenburg County
(includes also Towns of Cornelius,
Davidson, Huntersville, Matthews,
Mint Hill and Pineville)
Dwarf wedgemussel
Swift Creek
NCS000446, Town of Apex
(Alasmidonta heterodon)
(Neese Basin)
NCS000433, Wake County
NCS004247, Town of Cary
NCS000420, Town of Garner
Tar spinymussel
Swift Creek
NCS000442, Town of Rocky Mount
(Elliptic steinslansana)
(Tar Basin)
Appalachian elktoe
Pigeon.River
NCS, Town of Asheville, Town of Canton
(Alasnildonta raveneliarca)
(French Broad Basin)

Basins with Listed Aquatic Animals
Legend
Designated critical habitats
® Basins with rare aquatic species
Courdy Boundaries
20 0 20 40 Miles
N
Map by: Mark A Cantrell W E
US Fish & Wildlife Service
T September 2004,
S

Z l6
Town of Indian Trail
Planning & Zoning Department
P.O. Box 2430
100 Navajo Trail
Indian Trail, North Carolina 28079
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
December 10, 2004
Ken Pickle
DENR — DWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1617
RE: NPDES Permit Number NCS000453, Town of Indian Trail
NPDES Permit Number NCS00045own of Stallings
DP
0EC
c...As
On behalf of the Town of Indian Trail and the Town of Stallings, I would like to express our thanks in receiving
the opportunity to review and comment on the draft permit for the NPDES Phase II program. Please refer to
the letter you received from the Town of Stallings on December 9, 2004, regarding the agreement between the
Town of Indian Trail and the Town of Stallings.
I appreciate the time you spent with me on the phone on Thursday, November 18, 2004, to answer the Towns'
questions regarding the permit. Most of the comments we have are general word changes and clarifications in
comparison to the Federal Rule 40 CFR § 122.34. Comments that require more detail or consideration are
noted below.
1. Part II: Many of the first BMPs listed for each minimum measure describe a plan of
implementation. This verbiage is now above the BMP box, because the plan or program will be
implemented by applying arose BMPs.
2. Part II Section E: A disclaimer was added regarding the DENR Sediment and Erosion Control
Program, to clarify that the Town will not assume operations of that program at this time.
3. Par II Section F: Neither Town is located in a subject watershed as defined in Item 3, so
paragraph (a) has.been deleted. The remaining paragraphs have been reformatted for easier
understanding.
4. Part III Program Assessment: All references to required monitoring and sampling have been
modified to read "may include" or similar.
5. Part V Section A Item 1 (d) refers to "the Act" and "this Act". Assuming "the Act" is the Clean
Water Act as defined in Part VII, what does "this Act" refer to?

6. Part V Section A Item 3 has confusing verbiage. "Furthermore, the Town is responsible for
consequential damages, such as fish kills, even though the responsibility for effective compliance
may be temporarily suspended." If it is changed to read, "If this permit is temporarily suspended,
the Town shall be responsible for consequential damages of noncompliance," does it state the
same thing?
Please feel free to contact me at 704.821.5401 if you need any further clarification of these comments.
Sincerely,
Susan L. Habina, P.E.
Staff Engineer
C: Lee Bailey, Planning Director, Town of Indian Trail
Brian Matthews, Town Manager, Town of Stallings
Jason Mayo, Town Planner, Town of Stallings
File: Stormwater Phase II Permit
Enclosures
December 10, 2004 Page 2 of 2 Town of Indian Trail

l � NCS000453 ��nd��n trail
I NCS000454
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION of WATER QUALITY
PERMIT NO. NCS000453
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
r•
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute`143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North.Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; as amended,
Town of Indian Trail
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from their municipal separate storm sewer system
located: '
within the Town of Indian Trail'Jurisdictional Area
j,
Union County
to receiving waters Crooked Creek, North Fork'Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek,
Davis Mine Creek, Goose Creek, Price Mill'Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek, and unnamed
tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River basins in accordance with
the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts 1, II,
III, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII hereof.
This permit shall become effective Month Day, Year.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on Month Day, Year.
Signed this day Month Day, Year.
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

� NCS000453
NCS000454
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION of WATER QUALITY
PERMIT NO. NCS000454
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General. Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; as amended,
Town of Stallings'.
,w
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from their municipal separate storm sewer system
located:
f �•iFy,a
within the Town of Stallings'Ju'risdictional Area
,..Union County
to receiving waters North Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Goose Creek, West
Fork Twelvemile Creek, and unnamed tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -
Pee Dee River basins in accordance with the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements, and
other conditions set forth in Parts 1 I1,111, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII hereof.
This permit shall become effective Month Day, Year.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on Month Day, Year.
Signed this day Month Day, Year.
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

NCS000453
NCS000454
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
PART II FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR PERMITTED DISCHARGES
SECTION A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
SECTION B: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
SECTION C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
SECTION D: ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
SECTION E: CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
SECTION F: POST -CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
SECTION G: POLLUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
PART III PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
PART IV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
PART V STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A: COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
SECTION B: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION
CONTROLS
SECTION C: MONITORING AND RECORDS
PART VI LIMITATIONS REOPENER
PART VII ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
PART VIII DEFINITIONS

NCS000453
��, NCS000454 _ - Deleted: NCS000453
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
1. During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until
expiration, the Town of,tallings is authorized to_discharge stormwater from the _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - Deleted: s,a11ingw
municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) to receiving waters North Fork Crooked
Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Goose Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek, and
unnamed tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River basins.
Such discharge will be controlled, limited and monitored in accordance with the Town's , _ - Deleted: permimm
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report, herein referred to as the
j Stormwater Plan. The Stormwater Plan includes components of the Town's Phase II De _ - Deleted: penniltee
Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit Application, Comprehensive Stormwater
Management Program Report, and any approved modifications.
All discharges authorized herein shall be adequately managed in accordance with the
terns and conditions of this permit. Any other point source discharge to surface waters
of the state is prohibited unless it is an allowable non-stonmwater discharge or is covered
by another permit, authorization, or approval.
3. This permit does not relieve the _LQ= from responsibility for compliance with _any other _ _ - Deleted: pmniticc
applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or
decree.
4. This permit covers activities associated with the discharge of stormwater from the MS4
within the jurisdictional area of the Town and surrounding areas as described in the _ _ - - - Deleted: pin.
approved Stormwater Plan to control potential pollution from the MS4. The permit
applies to current and future jurisdictional areas of the Town, as well as areas that seek _ _ - Deleted: ptrmiltee
coverage under this permit through inter -local or other similar agreements with theTown. _ - _ _ Deleted: �e,,,,inee
Agreements for coverage under this permit must be approved by the Division of Water
Quality, herein referred to as the Division.
5. The Division may deny or revoke coverage under this permit for separate entities and
may require independent permit coverage as deemed necessary. In addition, the Town Deleted: p=iuee
may petition the Division to revoke or deny coverage under this permit for specific
entities.
Under the authority of Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act and implementing
regulations 40 CFR Part 122, 123 and 124, North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1
and Session Law 2004-163 and in accordance with the approved Stormwater Plan, all
,provisions contained and referenced in the Stormwater Plan are enforceable parts of this
permit. The Town will develop and implement its approved Stormwater-Plan in _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - Deleted: penninee
accordance with Section 402(p)(3)(B) of the Clean Water Act, provisions outlined by the
Director, and the provisions of this permit.
Discharges authorized under this permit shall not cause or contribute to violations of
water quality standards.
Deleted: 3
Deleted: 2
Part I Paged of

NCS000453
ECS000454 - Deleted: NC5000453
8. The permit authorizes the point source discharge of stormwater runoff from the MS4. In
addition, discharges of non-stormwater are also authorized through the MS4 of theme _ _ - Deleted: pmndme
if such discharges are:
(a) Permitted by, and in compliance with, another NPDES discharge permit including
discharges of process and non -process wastewater, and stormwater associated
with industrial activity; or
(b) Determined to be incidental non-stormwater flows that do not significantly impact
water quality and may include:
• water line flushing;
• landscape irrigation;
• diverted stream flows;
• rising groundwaters;
• uncontaminated groundwater infiltration;
• uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
• discharges from potable water sources;
• foundation drains;
• air conditioning condensate (commerciaVresidential);
• irrigation waters (does not include reclaimed water as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0200);
• springs;
• water from crawl space pumps;
• footing drains;
• lawn watering;
• residential car washing;
• flows from riparian habitats and wetlands;
• dechlorinated swimming pool discharges;
• street wash water;
• flows from emergency fire fighting.
The Division may require that non-stormwater flows of this type be controlled
by the sStormwaterPlan_________________________________________ Deleted:per,ninee
Deleted: 3
Deleted: 2
Part I Paged ofI----------------------------%'',

NCS000453
NCS000454 -J Deleted: NCS000453
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until
expiration, the Town of Indian Trail is authorized to discharge stormwater from the
municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) to receiving waters, Crooked Creek, North
Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Davis Mine Creek, Goose Creek, Price
Mill Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek and unnamed tributaries to them, all within the
Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River basins. Such discharge will be controlled, limited
and monitored in accordance with the Town's Comprehensive Stormwater Management
Program Report, herein referred to as the Stormwater Plan. The Stormwater Plan
includes components of the Town's Phase II Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit
Application, Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report, and any
approved modifications.
2. All discharges authorized herein shall be adequately managed in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this permit. Any other point source discharge to surface waters
of the state is prohibited unless it is an allowable non-stormwater discharge or is covered
by another permit, authorization, or approval.
3. This permit does not relieve the Town from responsibility for compliance with any other
applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or
decree.
This permit covers activities associated with the discharge of stormwatcr from the MS4
within the jurisdictional area of the Town and surrounding areas as described in the
approved Stormwater Plan to control potential pollution from the MS4. The permit
applies to current and future jurisdictional areas of the Town, as well as areas that seek
coverage under this permit through inter -local or other similar agreements with the Town,
Agreements for coverage under this permit must be approved by the Division of Water
Quality, herein referred to as the Division.
5. The Division may deny or revoke coverage under this permit for separate entities and
may require independent permit coverage as deemed necessary. In addition, the Town
may petition the Division to revoke or deny coverage under this permit for specific
entities.
Under the authority of Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act and implementing
regulations 40 CFR Part 122, 123 and 124, North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1
and Session Law 2004-163 and in accordance with the approved Stormwater Plan, all
provisions contained and referenced in the Stormwater Plan are enforceable parts of this
permit. The Town will develop and implement its approved Stormwater Plan in
accordance with Section 402(p)(3)(B) of the Clean Water Act, provisions outlined by the
Director, and the provisions of this permit.
Discharges authorized under this permit shall not cause or contribute to violations of
water quality standards.
Deleted: 3
Deleted: 2
Part I Paged off,_______

NCS000453
NCS000454 - Deleted; NC5000453
8. The permit authorizes the point source discharge of stornwater runoff from the MS4. In
addition, discharges of non-stormwater are also authorized through the MS4 of the Town
if such discharges are:
(a) Permitted by, and in compliance with, another NPDES discharge permit including
discharges of process and non -process wastewater, and stormwater associated
with industrial activity; or
(b) Determined to be incidental non-stormwater flows that do not significantly impact
water quality and may include:
• water line flushing;
• landscape irrigation;
• diverted stream flows;
• rising groundwaters;
• uncontaminated groundwater infiltration;
• uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
• discharges from potable water sources;
• foundation drains;
• air conditioning condensate (commercial/residential);
• irrigation waters (does not include reclaimed water as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0200);
• springs;
• water from crawl space pumps;
• footing drains;
• lawn watering;
• residential car washing;
• flows from riparian habitats and wetlands;
• dechlorinated swimming pool discharges;
• street wash water;
• flows from emergency fire fighting.
The Division may require that non-stormwater flows of this type be controlled
by the Town's Stormwater Plan.
Deleted: 3
Deleted: 2
rr
Part I Page 4 of,

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART II FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR PERMITTED
DISCHARGES
Deleted: perminee
Deleted: permiuee
SECTION
A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
Formatbed: Indent: Left: 0",
The Jg&a will im lemen mana a an_d oversee all rovisions of its Stormwater Plan to reduce
_ P L, _ g _ _ _ _ _P
Hanging: 0.5", Numbered + Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, .., +
pollutants discharged from the MS4. This includes, but is not limited to, the following areas: ;'
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
ned at: 0.5" + Tab after: 0,75'
1.
The wn will develop and maintain adequate le a] authorities to implement all
---_-------
g-
�+Indentat: 6.75", Tabs: Not at
-- --- -q ------- ----I
provisions of the Stormwater Plan. The T will keep the Division advised of the
ted:pmnirue
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
status of development of appropriate ordinances and legal authorities and will pursue
these authorities in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Stormwater Plan. Any
Hanging: 0.5", Numbered +Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... +
changes to the schedule must be approved by the Director.
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Tab after: 0.75"
2.
'
TheZn's Stormwater Plan will be implemented and managed such that di_sch_arge
+Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at
_the
of pollutants from the MS4 is reduced to the maximum extent practicable. It is
Deli' ""ace
Delebed: pamie
anticipated that in order to meet this provision, implementation of the Stormwater Plan
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
will occur with emphasis given to priority areas and to management measures and
programs that are most effective and efficient at varying stages of the plan's ��
Hanging: ng S Numbered +Level: 1
+Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... +
implementation. ;'
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Tab after: 0.75"
3.
,�
The Town will implement the appropriate_ pone
comnts of the Stormwater Plan to assure -,
+Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0^,
that, to the maximum extent practicable, illicit connections, spills, and illegal dumping _
into the MS4 are prohibited.
Hanging: 0.5", Numbered +Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
4.
The w will im lement rovisions of the Stormwater Plan as a ro riate to monitor
To n__P __ P_ _ ___ PP_ P _ ________
Aligned at: 0,5" +Tab after: 0.75"
+Indent at: 0.75",Tabs: Not at
and assess the performance of the various management measures that are a part of the -
Stormwater Plan. This will include the provisions of this permit.
Deleted: pmninee
Formatted: Indent: Left: D",
5.
The - — maintain adequate funding and staffing to implement and manage the •'
-
Hanging: D,5", Numbered + Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... +
provisions of the Stormwater Plan.
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Tab after: 0.75"
6.
The J w.-n will implement appropriate education, training, outreach, and public
+ Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at
_
involvement programs to support the objectives of this stormwater discharge permit and
e�
Deleted: p,;nee
the Stormwater Plan.
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
�
Hanging: 0.5", Numbered +Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... +
7.
The Jown will implement a program to reduce pollution from construction_ site_ runoff as
Start at:1 + Alignment: Left +
in the Stormwater Plan and in accordance with this permit. - - - - -
� `
0.described
Aligned at: 0.5" +Tab after: at
+Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at
Deleted: perrnittee
8.
�+
The Town will implement an appropriatc post -construction site runoff control program to
regulate new development and redevelopment by requiring structural and non-structural ;,
mil' permittee
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
best management practices to protect water quality, to reduce pollutant loading, and to ;,
t,
minimize post -development impacts. This program will include provisions for long-term
Hanging: 0.5", Numbered +Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, .,. +
operation and maintenance of BMPs.
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Tab after: 0.75"
t }
+ Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at
Formatted 1
Deleted: permittec
Part It Page I of 12

N S000453
NCS000454
9. The TjjW2 will evaluate municipal operations and develop and implement an appropriate-- - -
program for municipal activities and ongoing operation and maintenance of municipal
facilities to reduce the potential for stormwater pollution.
10. Proposed permit modifications must be submitted to the Director for approval.
Part II Page 2 of 12
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
hanging: 0.5", Numbered + Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: t, 2, 3, .., +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0.S" + Tab after: 0.75"
+ Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
Hanging: 0.5", Numbered + Level: 1
+ Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0.5" + Tab after: 0.75"
+ Indent at: 0.75", Tabs: Not at

NQ$UQpA51
NCS000454
SECTION B: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
1. Objectives for Public Education and Outreach
- Deleted: (a) . Distribute educational
materials m the community,
- -- ------_---___---- __ - - - -- - - - - --- -- - - - - -- _____----__ Deleted:{b}.Conduct public outreach
Raise publ>c awareness on the causes and lm acts of stormwater ollution activities.1
- - Deleted: c
(� Inform the_public on steps they can take to reduce or prevent stormwater _ _ - Deleted: d
pollution.
2. BMPs for Public Education and Outreach
The Towr>_shall v�implemenL& i _ - Deleted: permnee
the following BMPs we v i e a nd shall notify the �� Deli:
Division prior to modification of any goals.
Deleted: .
BMP j Measurable Goals { YR
I 1
Public education material j)istribute }written material that satisfies �(
dissem'nal tion i
V S e
(b) informational Web Site Develop and maintain an internet web site X
that satisfies the obiectiyes and provides
(e) • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1- _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - X_
Target s ecific audiences Identify target audiences aid create
- educatio I material for them t tisfies
Part 11 Page 3 of 12
Deleted:
YR
YR
YR
YR'
Deleted: and enforce
2
3
4
5
Deleted: to meet the objectives of the
Public Education and Outreach Program
y1,
Deleted: Establish a Public Education
and Outreach Program
I'
Deleted: Develop a public education
program and implement within 12 months
X
X
X
x.
of the permit issue date. Incorporate
,,,1
outreach elements for significant minority
'
disadvantaged rommunities.
X
�l
X
V
X
1' X5}I
l"d�
Deleted: X
i°
Deleted: X
Deleted: X
}
Deleted: X
<`}
Deleted: X
<
Deleted: .
1
Deleted: Post newsletter articles on
stormwater, information on water quality,
stormwtacr projects and activities, and
ways to contact stomrwater management
program staff.
Deleted: Public education materials for
}
schools, homeowners, and/or businesses
Deleted: Develop general stormwaler
educational material targeting school
children, homeowners, and/or businesses.

SECTION C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
1. Objectives for Public Involvement and Participation
(a) Provide opportunities for the public to participate in program development and
implementation.
(b) Reach out, O tarl;et aU(11erECeS. - _ _ - Deleted: and engage major economic
- - - and ethnic groups
- _ - - Deleted: (c) . Comply with applicable
2. BMPs for Public involvement and Participation state and coral public notice
requurmcnts.9
TheFTown shall evelonan_d implem_en� ublic InvolvemenLud ParticiQati9nPrggr m by _
the following BMPs; -
regWrement and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any goals. -�
,
BMP
Measurable Goals
(a) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Conduct at least_one-public meeting pJ_ _ _
Conduct a public hearing Jpwri Council MQQliaLto allow the public
an opportunity to review and comment on
the Stormwater Plan.
'(I
Part II Page 4 of 12
YR YR I YR YR
1 2 3 4
X X A X -X
-
-'n
YR
5
X
Deleted: permitee
Deleted:
Deleted:, and enforce
Deleted:
Deleted: to mea the objectives of the
Public Invoivcmnt and Participation
Prom
Formatted: Font: Bold
Deleted: Administer a Public
involvement Proeam
Formatted: Outline numbered +
Level: I + Numaering Style: a, b, c,
... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 0" + Tab after: 0.25" +
Indent at: 0.25', Tabs: Not at 0.25"
N X-
Deleted: organize a voluniccr
p `
community involvement program
s
Formatted: Bullets and Numberi:
Deleted: Organize and implement a
111
volunteer stormwatcr related program
designed to promote ongoing citizen
participation.
Deleted: X
Deleted: X

NCS000453
NCS000454
SECTION D: ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
Formatted: Indent: Hanging:
0.51", Numbered + Level: 2 +
f
1. Objectives for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Numbering Style: a, b, c, ... + Start
at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at:
0.75" + Tab after: 1.01" + Indent
'
at: 1.01"
y,!
1 R
Deleted: Address significant
contributors of pollutants to the MS4.
(b) Prohibit non -storm water di5charQes_intQthtM3 andimplement annronriate
The permittee
1 S r
Deleted: may require specific controls
(Cl Detect and eliminate illicit discharges, including spills and illegal dumping,
for a category of discharges, or prohibit
fdl_ __-TownInform employees, businesses, and the general public of -hazards associated_ -y`'
that discharge completely, if one or more
of these categories of sources are
with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste.
identified as a significant contributor of
pollutants to the MS4.¶
<p>lmpku=t appropriate cnforc ., 2
2. BMPs for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Deleted: pennittee
Town
The shall 1m lement�and enforce arLIllicit Discharge<Detection_and�,jimii1.ligil_
Deleted:
. _ _ -P fs�`
Program by aDnlvine the followingBMPs nd shall noti the Division ricr to modification of -
p
to m�"�e ob�xtives s
-------- -- ----- -------------------
any goals. The Division may require that non stormw ows. as def ned ink_ ection A of this _ -
°� per'?°f l5A Ncnc zx
nermit. bQ cglitrollgJ bX tfig lowli'5W r Phin
Deleted: (a) Developllmplem q
Deleted: Develop and implem 5
a a BMP% r r �`ri,
ti"` � ,ter MeasuraLble'Goals { �" 1"� 'y a
-
t-.. G... 1']•`'tf.��j
:YR;
YR
a N
YR t
1L�.` t.
YR
.tp,:.«_,
E YR!
4 ,,
Deleted: x
.-u.:a 1§�3,� }� �.i,V
,a
PF? Er Ci7l. i �. bL _._ _l.u.
`ia.1.
, 33.
3 . $
a.
Deleted: X
Deleted: X
Use GIS _to creat4La_bas�nr
includes_outfalls draina,pe a��,�.p�
Deleted. x
Sewer Svstem Ba.�
xQ6ying stream,
Deleted: X
b Establish and
{ }�In�11CBS
to rohlbit ilhclt
X
X "
Deleted: Establish and maintain 6
Deleted: Create
maintain appropriate
_P--------------
discharges and enforce the approved Illicit
---
_
;� -
Deleted: ordniances
legal authorities
Discharge Detection and Elimination
,
Program.
Deleted: X
(�Jjmplement illicit
Implement an inspection program to
X _
. Wes: d)
discharge detection
detect dry weather flows at system
procedures
outfalls,,&gablish procedures for tracing
Deleted: x
the sources of illicit discharges and for
Deleted: x
Meted' E
removing the sourcesn"evelop _ -
-
_
Deleted: • D
procedures for identification of priority
areas like) to have illicit discharges.
-
Deleted: Continue to update the ,• 7
Up—Lailish a public
Create and publicize a renortine
mech
-
Formatted fol
renortine mechanism
Deleted: Conduct employee c • g
S
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Deleted: Conduct training for
L%JProvide ducatlon-and
�--------_--------p-----
Inform public em ]o ees businesses and
P Y
X
X
°mot x
trainine.
-- -
the general public of hazards associated
°�eted ' x
with illegal discharges and improper
d„ '
Deleted: X
disposal of was and train public
]
Deleted: public
` Deleted: X
Deleted: X
Deleted:
Part II Page 5 of 12

NCS000454
SECTION E: CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
1. Objectives for Construction Site Runoff Controls ;
r
r
(a) Reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff from construction activities disturbing one
or more acres of land surface and those activities less than one acre that are part of
a larger common plan of development.
r
r
(b) �ea� Il�tand sanction sites haS�ve_ex�e5sivl�of _Dolluta ts.
(c) ,Control waste jhat may cause adverse impacts to water quality_ r _
2. BMPs for Construction Site Runoff Controls
w
�. _t��1��Ii�I _± -� _.. • 1 _: �i[-I�11>[.�i�ii�i71 + - � ?37.UliG�Ii[7iGTlT`JF !t �-!Fi�i�f:
t!-n.±. 1.0 . NA
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
1
'YR
2
YR
3
YR
4
YR/
(a) LaLLi&it _ _
unlatax
I1mgChani m (Q
the pmgmn
Adopt An ordinance that willlequig
X
X
X
C
I
construction site erosion and sediment controls
AS '1 anctlons or non-compliance. n
(b) Develop BM
requirements&E_
construction siters
S'rovide constriction site operators YW _ - - _ - _
r�eauirenlents Tplementia& erosion and
sediment control BMPs,
_ -,�
_,_
X
X
X
\
(c) on wa
coo„ ntrol
requirements for
site
Provide construction site operators with
X
X
X `
reauir�ments to_contro]_constniction site
wastesLatmayutl�e ve aua{ity
—water
(d) Improve the
plan review,
urocess
kstablish procedures that incorporate water
quality considerations in construction site plan _
reviews and require a Stormwate P__ o� 13ution
Prevention Plan for sites thatdisturb—more than
_ _ -
-
-
X
`X
\ -
one acre.
(e) Establish public
information
procedures
eate >zu 'cite procedures for receipt
and consideration of erosion and
sedimentation information submitted by the
public.
X_
/
(f) Establish
inspection and
Iden ifv priority sites f)rjnspection and_ _ _ _ _ _
enforcement of control measure require ents
_ _,_
X
X
X
-X"
—"
Part II Page 6 of 12
Deleted: Provide procedures for public
input, sanctions to ensure compliance,
requirements for construction site
operators to implement appropriate
erosion and sediment control practices,
for review of site plans which
incorporates consideration of potential
water quality impacts, and procedures for
site inspection and enforcement of control
measures.
Deleted: Establish requirements for
construction site operators to c
Deleted: such as discarded building
materials, concrete truck washout,
chemicals, litter, and sanitary waste at the
construction site
Deleted: , either as administered by the
DLR, or as delegated by the
Sedimentation Control Commission
(SCC) to another entity with appropriate
jurisdiction, including the Town.
Deleted: T... perrnittee ...to mat tie
objectives of the Construction Site
Runoff Controls Program Ull
Deleted: Implement a program and
establish a regulatory mechanic jt21
Deleted: X 13
Deleted: at construction sites and
providing for ...to ensure ...The
permittee.-has elected to comply by
relying on the NCDENR Division of
Land Resources (DLR) Erosion and
Sediment Control Program, either as
administered by the DLR, or as delegated
by the Sedimentation Control
Commission (SCC) to another entity with
appropriate jurisdiction, including the
permittee, The permittee may rely on the
DLR program only to the extent that that
program satisfies all of the follo=
Deleted: Require ...to ... and to control
construction site wastes that may cause
adverse-4aterquality impacts... ,••t151
Deleted: on ... operator ,, f 161
Deleted: X ... t171
Deleted: Provide educational and
training materials for eanstruction site
operators ... 11B1
Deleted: Institute
Deleted: Review construction
• Formatted
Deleted: s
Formatted [21]
r
Deleted: Establish ...Publicize the
procedures and contact informal
Y
Formatted tZ3l
Deleted: Establish procedures for site
The procedures should include

NCS000453
NCS000454
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
1
YR
2
YR
3
I YR
4
YR
5
enforcement
procedures
b !jS"n the nature of con truction_actLvity.
-
tQ mgmmhv and tkc a=eristics of soi A nd
receiving waters._Coordinalp with DLR fir
ype aptenforcement.
Part II Page 7 of 12
Deleted: The procedures should include
prioritizing areas of inspections based on
]Deal criteria

NCS0004U
NCS000454
SECTION F: POST -CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
Deleted: Manage
1. Objectives for Post -Construction Site Runoff Controls
D"lebed' f
Deleted: that drains to the MS4 and
(a) nt stormwater runoff_ from new development r
Deleted::
redevelopment�isturbi�gplig or more acres of land surface and those which
are
_ -
Deleted: an ape or more
less than an acre that are part of a larger common plan of development
_ - _ -
- - ` •
Deleted:, including projects
Deleted: or sale
(b) Ensure long term operation and maintenance of BMPs.
i
Deleted: permincc
{c Ensure controls are in lace to minimize water quality impacts.
} p 4 tY p
Deleted: to mat the objectives ofthe
Post -construction Site RunotrControis
, r
Program
2. BMPs for Post -Construction Site Runoff Controls
`
Formatted: Indent: left: 0.13",
Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering
The shall v tm lement and enforce aPost-Constru�e�u4pf Controls
_ _ _ �_ _ P ~ — --- - - - - - -
Style: a, b, c, ... + Start at: 1 +
Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" +
hrnurarn within thg, first twenty-four ( 4) months from the date gf,2,lM14 is5palice by
mplyine
Tab after: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.25",
the following �- - BMPs nd shall noti the Division prior to modification of anyg-----= goals.
' p
-- ------ --- ------------- -
Tabs: 0,38", List tab + Not at 0.25"
ivisav mr Dion rnrequire more stringent stormwater manatiement measures_As n5AUCAC2IT
Deleted: to address sionrtwaterrunaff
from new development and
redcvc]opmrnt
BMP Measurable Goals YR YR
YR YR
XR`
Deleted; x
1 2
3 4
' 51, Deleted: x
fa) Estnhlish an tJ�iate Develop and imvlemenistratc,7ie�lhatinfIldc
Rau a�9MhinatLc2n�f stru�SurabadlQLNIL-
Formatted'. Indent: Left: 0.t9",
Hanging: 0.13", Numbered + Level:
StT1lCtur�) $MQS. EnSUC�cl�e4jltate -
1 + Numbering Style: a, b, c,... +
Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left +
y
Aligned at: 0" + Tab after: 0.25" +
'
Y
Indent at: 0.25", Tabs: Not at 0.25"
uallfied i4feSSl.OnaL
Deleted: Develop, adopt by
(,h_Establish a
�dg an ordinance >�mu[�thats�ntr9ls_arc _
X
X
X
, _
; ,
Deleted: (or similar regulatoryulatory
rnec
in place to prevent or minimize watcr_uuality
Itik[)aCI - j}};,f�eve] iJUn1E[lLatl� -
-
-
-
mechanism)
Deleted:, implement, and enforce a
---------- -- -----
redevelonmen . The ordinance must be program
reviewed and approved by the AiY1�4ll Deleted: Posi-Consnuclion Site Runoff
Director prior to implementation. _ Controls Program (hcreatler the Program)
(c) lndiyiduaukayucalLY_Js5uW_awnit_coveral e_for_aU X y�
gam; new dcvclonmentor�edevclonmcnt
andjhQs ctiYW_esles5-thar-eLthaLare
rt_ofa l r—com lap ofdCYCl4 .malt.
,Establish a Pyyt lop and implement an oversight program ,
pgLgmprograrn, ",t"ml the sources of fecal coliform to the
maximum extent practicable by coordinetin¢
with the co)A enartmcnt fo
jensuri�gproper operation -and maintenance -of -------------
on -site wastewater treatment systems for
domestic wastewater. _
Part II Page 8 of 12
Deleted:
Deleted: Ensure that controls are in
place to prevent or minimize water
quality impacts,
Formatted 25
Formatted ,.. 26
Deleted: Control the sources o 27
Deleted: X
Deleted: x
Deleted: to control thi sources 28
Deleted: to
Deleted: e .
Deleted: Mtmicioalitim must rr

. e NCS000453
NCS000454
3. The evaluation of Post -construction Stormwater Management Program measures
I Model Practices. For those areas within the jurisdictional area of the Town that are not subject to
_ -
Deleted: (a) 'nrosearcaswitbinthe
the post -construction stormwater management provisions of another existing state stormwater `
+
jurisdictional o he the a is ing that
are already subject to the existing start
management program, the_Iown's Post -construction Stormwater Management Program must_
stormwater mmugement programs listed
equal or exceed the stormwater management and water quality protection provided by the
herein are deemed compliant with the
following model practices.
post -construction stormwater
management model practices identified in
(b) below. 'rhe listed programs are: the
Water Supply watershed
I The. own may issue a local stormwater management permit to a development or
protection
programs for ws-I - ws-ry waters, the
redevelopment project as either a low density project or a high density project. It
, ',
EiQW and ORW waters management
strategies, the Nntsc River Basin nutrient
1?ro ect may be permitted as a low densi ro ect if it meets the followin criteria:
-----y-- --------------- — ,------------------ g ---
l
Semitivc Waters Management Strategy,
+t
(A) No more than two dwelling units per acre or 24% built -upon area;
o- ' ,
�
the Tar -Pamlico River Basin Nutrient
Sensitive Water Management Strategy,
(B) Use of vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent practicable;
and the Randleman Lake Wntcr Supply
(C) All built -upon areas are at least 30 feet landward of perennial and intermittent
„,
Watershed program. ¶
surface waters; and,
;+ "
(b)
(D) Deed restrictions and protective covenants are required by the locally issued
;1'
Deleted: pennince
permit and incorporated by the development to ensure that subsequent
Deleted: pamince
development activities maintain the development (or redevelopment) consistent
with the approved plans.
'
Deleted: (i)
A.Pro ect not consistent with the requirements for a low densi ect ma be
_i------------- ---------------- - - -ty-ro Y ------__---__,
Deleted: pa7ninee
permitted as a high density project if it meets the following requirements:
Deleted: (ii)
(A) The stormwater control measures must control and treat the difference between
Deleted: (iii)
the pre -development and post -development conditions for the 1-year 24-hour
storm. Runoff volume drawdown time must be a minimum of 24 hours, but not
more than 120 hours;
(B) All structural stormwater treatment systems must be designed to achieve 85%
average annual removal of total suspended solids;
(C) Stormwater management measures must comply with the General Engineering
Design Criteria For All Projects requirements listed in 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c);
(D) All built -upon areas are at least 30 feet landward of perennial and intermittent
surface waters; and,
(E) Deed restrictions and protective covenants are required by the locally issued
permit and incorporated by the development to ensure that subsequent
development activities maintain the development (or redevelopment) consistent
with the approved plans.
Watershed Protection Plans. Public bodies may develop and implement comprehensive
_ - Deleted: (c)
watershed protection plans that may be used to meet part, or a11, of the requirements for
post -construction stormwater management.
A regulated entity may develop its own comprehensive watershed plan, may use the _ - Deleted: (d)
model ordinance developed by -the-C- ommission, may design its own post -construction
practices based on the Division's guidance and engineering standards for best
management practices, or it may incorporate the post -construction model practices to
satisfy, in whole or in part, the requirements for post -construction stormwater
management.
Part la Page 9 of 12

' , • NC5000453
NCS000454
SECTION G: POLLUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
1. Objectives for Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations
(a) Prevent or reduce stormwater pollution from municipal operations
maintenance.
e i 1
From municinal_activities.
2. BMPs for the Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping; for Municipal
Operations
The Town shall devcion andand implement a Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Program
-
Deleted: permittee
the following BMPsand shall notify the Division prior to mo_ d_ificat_io_n_o_f_a_ny goals_
-------
_ - _ .
Deleted: to med the objective of the
Pollution Prevention and Good
BMP Measurable Goals YR YR YR
YR
YR
Housc"ing Program
1 2 3
1 4
5
-
Deleted: Develop an operation and
`r'ai""a""pro�"'
i„ Inspection and
Develop an inventory of all facilities and
,J
X
3�,
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
evaluation of facilities
operations owned and operated by the
;;o `
Deleted: Develop an operation and
and operations
p
w with the potential for generating;a
_ ------ �------- - - - -- -------
polluted stormwater runoff ecificall
i� _ _ y_ - _
- _ .. _
-
_ _ - -
--
.
-
_
', , `,
, 't
maintenance proFlam that has the
ultimate goal of preventing or reducing
torinwater control and conve ance
k `,,,
pollutant runoff from. municipal
systems.
---I
options.
(.�Conduct staff training
Conduct staff training specific for
'lX';;
Deli: x
Deleted: x
pollution prevention and good
;,4',l,+'`
housekeeping procedures that §pegifical lv
r++ ,, o
Deleted: x
ppddrg�ses the i ealif
- - —
0'+';,5
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
1: Deleted: x
t ,+`
Deleted: perrmuce
Deleted:. s
p ,'
Deleted: inspect the potential sources
of polluted runotr, the
Deh:bed:,
,
Deleted: Evaluate the sources,
document deficiencies, plan corrective
„t
actions, and doetunent the
, accomplishment of corrective actions.
u'
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Deleted: x
Deleted: x
Part 1I Page 10 of 12

• ,� NCS000453
NCS000454
PART III PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
l . Implementation of the Stormwater Plan will include documentation of all program
components that are being undertaken. u ne i
- Deleted: including, but nat li nitcd lo,
of UMPs, educational orgPram� s inss,ectjon& maintcnaUe_actiyiiiomonitoring and
sampling,,and enforcement actions. Documentation will be kept on file by the Town for_ -
- - Deleted: inspections, maintenance
period of five ears and made available to the Director or uthorized re resentative
P Y �_-A__�;,
acta tie ntatioaofB pm grams,
impkmen>BtionofBMPs,
implementation
immediately upon request.
Deleted:-
2. The Stormwater Plan will be reviewed and updated as necessary,but at least on
Deleted: perminee
_s
1_____________ __ _____
an annual basis. The will submit a ort of this evaluation and monitoringDeli:
his
information to the Division on an annual ba is. This information will be submitted by
Deleted:permittee
[Set date two months after permit year's end] of each year and cover the previous year's
Deleted: perminee
activities from [Insert start date] to [Insert end date]. The T�'s reporting will include
_ _ - Deleted: perminee
appropriate information to accurately describe the progress, status, and results of the
ma's Stormwater Plan ands+ include, but is not limited to, the following _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ - - Deleted: perminee
components:
Deleted: will
(a) Thew wili.give a detailed description of the status of implementation of the
- Deleted: pamince
Stormwater Plan. This will include m inforation on development and
implementation of XAjLcpTppnqrjr,of the Stormwater Plan for they st year and
- - Deleted: atl
schedules and plans for the year following each report.
- - Deli.,
(b) The Town will adequately describe and justify any proposed -changes -to the _
_ - - Deleted: permincc
Stormwater Plan. This will include descriptions and supporting information for
the proposed changes and how these changes will impact the Stormwater Plan
(results, effectiveness, implementation schedule, etc.).
(c) The own will document any necessary changes to programs or practices for
_ - Deleted: pertinee
assessment of management measures implemented through the Stormwater Plan.
In addition, any changes in the cost of or funding k; the Stormwater P_ lan will_be_
- Deleted: ,
documented.
Deleted:,
(d) The wn will include a summary of -W data eatheredas part of the Stormwate_r_
- Deleted: penninee
Plan throughout the year along with an assessment of what the data indicates in
Deleted: accumulated
light of the Stormwater Plan.
(e) Thejg&,a will provide information on the annual expenditures and budget
- Deleted: perntittee
anticipated for the year following each report along with an assessment of the
continued financial support for the overall Stormwater Plan.
Deleted: permillee
(f) The Z"w will provide a summary of activities undertaken as part of the_ _ _ _ _
Deleted: information on the
Stormwater Plan throughout the year. This summary will include, but is not
establishment of appropriate legal
outhorities, project assessments,
limited to„informaljgQ g an etivi is Wr each comnonent of the Stormwater Plan J
inspections, enforcement actions,
Ij -
f�gr t S
continued inventory and review of the
storm sewer system, education, training,
and results of the illicit discharge
detection and elimination program.
Part III Page I of 2

NC5000453
NCS000454
(g) he Town will provide information
- Deleted: T
concerning areas of water quality improvement or degradation. Depending on the
-d; pen,,;nee
level of implementation of the Stormwater Plan, this information may be
submitted based on pilot studies, individual projects, or on a watershed or sub -
watershed basis.
the when the Stormwater Plan does not meet one or ore
3. The Director h _ noti- �m
-- -----------•-----------------
Deleted:
- may
of the requirements of the permit. Within 30 days of such notice, the Town will subm_it_a_
Deleted: pam«,ce
plan and time schedule to the Director for modifying the Stormwater Plan to meet the
Deleted: permime
requirements. The Director may approve the corrective action plan, approve a plan with
modifications, or reject the proposed plan. The J= will provide certification in writing
_ - Deleted: permiuee
(in accordance with Part IV, Paragraph 2) to the Director that the changes have been
made. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the Director's ability to
conduct enforcement actions for violations of this permit.
4. The Division may request additional reporting information as necessary to assess the
progress and results of the own'%5tormwater Plan_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - Deli: pmitiee
Deleted:
Part III Page 2of2

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART IV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
1. Monitoring Records
I i i s trlot eTown shall retain records of al monitoring__,, Deleted:T _
information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original chart owe; p ,.intt
recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, and copies of all reports required
by this permit for a period of at least five years from the date of the sample,
measurement, report, or application. This period may be extended by request of the
Director at any time prior to the end of the five year period.
2. Report Submittals
(a) Duplicate signed copies of all reports required herein, shall be submitted to the
following address:
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Stormwater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
(b) All applications, reports, or information submitted to DWQ shall be signed by a
principal executive officer, ranking elected official, or duly authorized
representative. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(i) The authorization is made in writing by a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official;
(ii) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having
responsibility for the overall operation of a regulated facility or activity or
an individual or position having overall responsibility for
environmental/stormwater matters; and
(iii) The written authorization is submitted to the Director.
(c) Any person signing a document under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section shall
make the following 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 fines and imprisonment for knowing
violations."
Part IV Page I of 3

NCS000453
NCS000454
Recording Results
For each iosnection. measurement performed or . - Deteoea: measurement
collected pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the�Tgwp shall record the fo_ll_ow_in_g Deleted: , sample, inspection, or
information: Deleted: maintenance activity
(a) The dates, exact place, and time of insoe t' n. ma intenanQuaivity. sampling, gt Deleted: petmiace
measurernents�_ - _ _ - - - - - f Deleted: , inspection, or maintenance
act'"y
(b) The individual(s) who performed the insnection.tntenal�ce acy�rity. ��] ing.
or Mea5urgmg Deleted: sampling, measurements,
--------------------------------- --------- Pa
ins flan, or maintenance activity
(c) The date(s)analyses were perfoqrledZ _ _ _ _ - Fotmatted: Four. Italic
(d) The individual(s) who performed theanaly eg_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Formatted: Font: Italic
(e) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
(f) The results of such analyses.
4. Planned Changes
The, wn shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned changes or - . - Deleted: perminee
activities which could significantly alter the nature or quantity of pollutants discharged.
This notification requirement includes pollutants which are not specifically listed in the
permit or subject to notification requirements under 40 CFR Part 122.42 (a).
5. Anticipated Noncompliance
The Town shall give notice to the Director as soon -as -possible -of any y planned_ changes _ _ - Deleted: perminee
which may result in noncompliance with the permit requirements.
6. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
The Town shali report to the central office or the appropriate regional office any _ - - - - Deleted: permittee
noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall
be provided orally within 24 hours from the time the Town became aware of the _ _ _ _ - - Deleted: pemtinee
circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the
becomes aware of the -circumstances -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted: permirw
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance, and its causes;
the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance
has not been corrected, the anticipated time compliance is expected to continue; and steps
taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
The Director may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis if the oral report has
been received within 24 hours.
Part IV Page 2 of 3

NCS000453
NCS000454
7. Annual Reporting
The Town will submit reporting and or monitoring information on an annual basis per - Deleted: p„mincc
Part III of this permit on forms provided by the DWQ. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8. Additional Reporting
The Director may request reporting information on a more frequent basis as deemed
necessary either for specific portions of the„Town's Stormwater Plartor for the entire - Deleted: Pennincz
Program. - - - - - - ^ ` ` Deleted:,
9. Other Information
Where the Town becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in applying to - Deleted:�na
be covered under this permit or in any reportto the Director, it steal! promptly submit
such facts or information.
Part IV Page 3 of 3

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART V STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A: COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
1. Duty to Comply
Theme must comply with all conditions of this permit._ Any permit noncompliance - Heisted: pem,ittee
constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for
permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or denial of permit
coverage upon renewal application.
(a) TheTg= shall comply with standards or prohibitions established under section _ - Deleted: p.ittee
307(a) of thCl e ean Water Act -for-to- x-i-
ortoxic pollutants within the time provided in the
regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even if the permit has
not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
(b) The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition is
subject to a civil penalty not to exceed the maximum amounts authorized by
Section 309(d) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
(28 U.S.C. §2461 note) as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act (31
U.S.C. §3701 note) (currently $27,500 per day for each violation). Any person
who negligently violates any permit condition is subject to criminal penalties of
$2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for not more than 1 year,
or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit conditions is subject to
criminal penalties of $5,000 to $50,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for
not more than 3 years, or both. Also, any person who violates a permit condition
may be assessed an administrative penalty not to exceed $11,000 per violation
with the maximum amount not to exceed $137,500. [Ref: Section 309 of the
Federal Act 33 USC 1319 and 40 CFR 122.41(a)]
(c) Under state law, a daily civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000) per violation may be assessed against any person who violates
or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit. [Ref: North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.6A]
(d) Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for
violating sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318 or 405 of thislAct, or any permit - ;comment [NAII: PI6k—cierify`
condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under '.whichiaisto6 irefe Wd'i6! ;nthcAct'i;.:
-as i6 the Clcan Waier'Aa oi, this Acts?Ft i
section 402 of this fiAct. Pursuant to_ 40 CFR Part 19 and the Act, administrative ahe Fadeial'Aci 33, USC,1319 �W�;;
penalties for Class I violations are not to exceed the maximum amounts - - tComment [NA21: Pleascciiriry�t lti'
authorized by Section 309(g)(2)(A) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties ywhicti=isbiOjrefrGdto t;theAct.
Inflation Adjustment Act 28 U.S.C. 2461 note as amended b the Debt th'is m the -Ac Water Act 1 '1 Act ,��;
� ( § ) y the Federal Act 33 USC,l3 i 9a
Collection Improvement Act (31 U.S.C. §3701 note) (currently $11,000 per
violation, with the maximum amount of any Class I penalty assessed not to
exceed $27,500). Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 19 and the Act, penalties for Class 1I
violations are not to exceed the maximum amounts authorized by Section
309(g)(2)(13) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page 1 of 8

N 50�. _ 0{1453
NCS000454
(28 U.S.C. §2461 note) as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act (31
U.S.C. §3701 note) (currently $11,000 per day for each day during which the
violation continues, with the maximum amount of any Class I[ penalty not to
exceed $137,500).
Duty to Mitigate
TheTown shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge in - Deleted: p,,nittee.
violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human
health or the environment.
3. Civil and Criminal Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the Town from any responsibilities, _ - Deleted: pmuittee
liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3, 143-215.6A, 143-
215.613, 143-215.6C or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1319. Furtherm6i'Ttl e
.. -�' �serrw:x-- _ �'nn_-ir..-,-� r a.�trtieJ,,.� P
Town is respgnslble for consequentlal`damages� such as fish-killsZ even though the Deleted: perm;nee
res iirisibtli `foi.'effective com llaricerrri'a be to"tn raiYl su's ended -� w
i? ty p___ _ Y+ pa Y �l? _ _ -- -- -- _ _ - -- _ _ - _ -- Comment [Na3] Can this ph se do;
� rewrtttrnw be molt char as I.
to whet 'G'".
specifically [he town is izsponsihle for f7:
4. OR and Hazardous Substance Liability '�aW,had the even though clause really+
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
relieve the Town from any responsibilities,_liabilities,_or penalties to which theTQwn is - Deleted: pmninee
or maybe subject to under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of the Federal Act, 33 - Deleted; petmittee
USC 1321.
5. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal
property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property
or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or
regulations.
6. Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit; or the _ _ - Deleted: ,
application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the_ _ _ _ p��,:
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, -------
Deleted:
_ - _ Deleted:
--------- - -
shall not be affected thereby.
Dde�a:
Parts V, Vl, VIl & VHI Page 2 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
7. Duty to Provide Information
Thejjown shall famish to the Director, within a reasonable time, any information which_ - Deleted: Pmnimc
the Director may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and
reissuing, or terminating the coverage issued pursuant to this permit or to determine
compliance with this permit. The Town shall also furnish_to the Director upon request,_ _ _ _ _ - Deleted: mince
copies of records required to be kept by this permit. _
8. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this
permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both. If a
conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person
under this paragraph, punishment is a fine of not more that $20,000 per day of violation,
or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both.
9. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false
statement, representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or
required to be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or reports of
compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more
than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation,
or by both.
10. Permit Actions
This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit
condition.
SECTION B: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE of POLLUTION CONTROLS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The IS= shall at all times properly operate and maintain _all facilities and systems of _ _ - Deleted: p ilne
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are owned and/or operated by
thej=_to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit_ Proper operation and _ - Deleted: pam8uo
maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance
procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or
similar systems which are installed by a T� only when the operation is necessary to _ _ - J Deleted: mina
achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page 3 of 8

NCS040453
NCS000454
2. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
It shall not be a defense fora in an enforcement action that it would have been _ _ _ _ - . - Deleted: pam;gee
necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the
condition of this permit.
SECTION C: MONITORING AND RECORDS
Representative Sampling
When required herein, stormwater samples collected and measurements taken shall be
characteristic of the volume and nature of the permitted discharge. Analytical stormwater
sampling shall be performed during a representative storm event. These samples shall be
taken on a day and time that is characteristic of the discharge. Where appropriate, all
stormwater samples shall be taken before the discharge joins or is diluted by any other
waste stream, body of water, or substance. When specified herein, monitoring points
established in this permit shall not be changed without notification to and approval of the
Director.
2. Flow Measurements
Where required, appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with
accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and
reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored discharges.
3. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations
published pursuant to NCGS 143-215.63 et. seq, the Water and Air Quality Reporting
Acts, and to regulations published pursuant to Section 304(g), 33 USC 1314, of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as Amended, and Regulation 40 CFR 136.
To meet the intent of the monitoring, all test procedures must produce minimum _ - - - - - _ - - - Deleted: required by this Permit
detection and reporting levels and all data generated must be reported down to the
minimum detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.
4. Inspection and Entry
The shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an _ - Deleted: pernlinee
Town_---- - - - - - -----
authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Director), or in the case of a facility
which discharges through a municipal separate storm sewer system, an authorized
representative of a municipal operator or the separate stone sewer system receiving the
discharge, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required
by law, tcq - _ _ Deleted:
(a) Enter upon the TQw 's premises where a regulated_ facility or activity is located_ or - oefeted: pamitice
conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page 4 of 8

v' *
�,,, N SC Q004S3
NCS000454
(b) Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under
the conditions of this permit;
(c) Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and
control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this
permit; and
(d) Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit
compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or
parameters at any location.
Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2) or Section
308 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms
of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Division of
Water Quality. As required by the Act, analytical data shall not be considered
confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the
imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-215.613 or in Section 309
of the Federal Act.
PART VI LIMITATIONS REOPENER
The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and modifying the
permit, revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit as allowed by the laws,
rules, and regulations contained in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 122 and 123;
Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H .0100; and North Carolina
General Statute 143-215.1 et. al.
PART VII ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
The Town must pay the administering and compliance monitoring fee_within 30 thirty days after . - - - Deleted:ittee
being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee in a timely manner in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H .0105(b)(4) may cause this Division to initiate action to revoke the permit.
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page 5 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART VIII DEFINITIONS
1. Act
See Clean Water Act.
2. Best Managemcnt Practice (B.
Measures or practices used to reduce the amount of pollution entering surface waters.
BMPs can be structural or non-structural and may take the form of a process, activity,
physical structure or planning (see non-structural BMP).
3. Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), as
amended, 33 USG 1251, et. seq.
4. Department
Department means the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
5. Division (DWQ)
The Division of Water Quality, Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
6. Director
The Director of the Division of Water Quality, the permit issuing authority.
7. EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
8. Grab Sample
An individual sample collected instantaneously. Grab samples that will be directly
analyzed or qualitatively monitored'must be taken within the first 30 minutes of
discharge.
• - - - Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering
Style; 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 +
Alignment: Left - Aligned at: 0.25"
+ Tab after: 0.75" + Indent at:
0.75", Tabs: Not at 0.75"
Hazardous Substance
Any substance designated in 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water
Act.
10. Illicit DsscharEe
Any discharge to a MS4 that is not composed entirely of stormwater except discharges
pursuant to an NPDES permit (other than the NPDES MS4 permit), allowable non-
stormwater discharges, and discharges resulting from fire -fighting activities.
11. Industrial Activity
For the purposes of this permit, industrial activities shall mean all industrial activities as
defined in 40 CFR 122.26.
12. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page 6 of 8

rfy.f
NCS000454
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(8) means a conveyance or system of conveyances
(including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters,
ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains):
(i) Owned or operated by the United States, a state, city, town, county, district,
association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to state law) having
jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other
wastes, including special districts under state law such as a sewer district,
flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe
or an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved
management agency under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that
discharges to waters of the United States or waters of the State;
(ii) Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater;
(iii) Which is not a combined sewer; and
(iv) Which is not part of a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) as defined
in 40 CFR 122.2.
- - ' Formatted: Indent: Left: 1",
Flanging: 0.38", Numbered + Level:
1 + Numbering Style: a, b, c, ... +
Start at: 9 + Alignment: Left +
Aligned at: 1" + Tab after: 1.25" +
Indent at: 1.25, Tabs; Not at 1.25"
13. Non-stormwater Discharge Categories
The following are categories of non-stormwater discharges that the Town must address -if_ - Deleted: permiam
it identifies them as significant contributors of pollutants to the storm sewer system:
water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising groundwater,
uncontaminated groundwater infiltration, [as defined in 40 CFR 35.2005(20)],
uncontaminated pumped groundwater, discharges from potable water sources, foundation
drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water from crawl space
pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car washing, flows from
riparian habitats and wetlands, dechlorinated swimming pool discharges, and street wash
water (discharges or flows from fire fighting activities are excluded from the definition of
illicit discharge and only need to be addressed where they are identified as significant
sources of pollutants to waters of the United States).
14. Non-structural BMP
Non-structural BMPs are preventive actions that involve management and source controls
such as: (1) Policies and ordinances that provide requirements and standards to direct
growth to identified areas, protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas,
maintain and/or increase open space, provide buffers along sensitive water bodies,
minimize impervious surfaces, and/or minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation; (2)
policies or ordinances that encourage infill development in higher density urban areas,
and areas with existing storm sewer infrastructure; (3) education programs for
developers and the public about minimizing water quality impacts; (4) other measures
such as minimizing the percentage of impervious area after development, use of measures
to minimize directly connected impervious areas, and source control measures often
thought of as good housekeeping, preventive maintenance, and spill prevention.
15. Outfall
Parts V, VI, V1I & Vlll: Page 7 of 8

•� I • i •• NCS000453
NCS000454
The point of wastewater or stormwater discharge from a discrete conveyance system.
See also point source discharge of stormwater.
16. Permittee
The owner or operator issued this permit.
17. Point Source Discharge of Stormwater
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance including, but not specifically limited
to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, or discrete fissure from which
stormwater is or may be discharged to waters of the state.
18. Redevelopment
Means any rebuilding activity other than a rebuilding activity that results in no net
increase in built -upon area, and provides equal or greater stormwater control than the
previous development.
19. Representative Storm Event
A storm event that measures greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall and that is preceded by at
least 72 hours in which no storm event measuring greater than 0.1 inches has occurred. A
single storm event may contain up to 10 consecutive hours of no precipitation. For
example, if it rains for 2 hours without producing any collectable discharge, and then
stops, a sample may be collected if a rain producing a discharge begins again within the
next 10 hours.
20. Stormwater Runoff - - - - Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
The flow of water which results from precipitation and which occurs immediately Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering
followingrainfall or as a result of snowmelt. style: en : L 03, ... + Start at:.2 +
Alignment: Left +Aligned at: 0.25"
+ Tab after: 0.75" + Indent at:
21. Toxic Pollutant 0.75", Tabs: Not at 0.75"
Any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.
Parts V, V1, VII & V1II Page 8 of 8

Gait
to %
Town of Stallings
- ` { Union County }
G �
o ►+►4►�.stailingsnc.org
nn Coa
(704 ) 821-8557
(704) 921-686841 fax RECEIVED
41
Stallingsnc a Otel.net t1
Mailing address: DEC 15 2004
Post Office Box 4030
Stallings, NC 28106 December 9, 2004 P E RC S UNIT
Street address:
323 Stallings Road
Stallings, NC 28105 Ken Pickle
Mayor: Permit Writer
Lucy U. Drake NCDWQ
Council: 1617 Mail Service Center
Mark E. Franza Raleigh NC 27699-1617
Mayor or Pro Tem
R. Barry Forrester
Carolyn I-underburk Re: Letter authorizing the Town of Indian Trail to represent the Town of
Rence I lartis
I'l,clma Privette Stallings regarding the NPDES Permit
Gary Sides
'['own Manager; Mr. Pickle,
Brian W. Matthews
bmatihc+vs u)alitcl.ncs
The Town of Stallings gives the Town of Indian Trail the authority to act
Chief of Police: as an agent regarding the Phase II Stormwater Permitting Process. You
I_arke Plyler Sr.
iryler�ralitel.ntt may contact Susan Habina, Jason Mayo, or myself with any questions or
Assistant Chief of Police: comments relative to this matter.
David l leame
dhcamc(2,allte1.net
Town Clerk & Regards,
Finance Officer:
Maric K. Garris
maarris rr,alkcl.not �N� /;Z."
Deputy Town Clerk &
Tax Collector: Brian Matthews
Deborah K. Wagenhauser Town of Stallings
dwaacnhauseri alltel.net
�� - Town Manager
Assistant Town Clerk:
Karen B. Williams _
karcnbw a alitel.net - '. _ --" �o:.rn. rav►^�^K•'b.
Town Planners:
Tammy Tucker
EITDEC
tanun 't r�alltcl.nei
Jason Mayo
iasonmayo «aii5 2004Code Enforcement Officer:Ed Deason
edeason r�ailtel.netER QUALITYAdministrative Asst, SPD: CE BRANCH
Susan Dellinger
sdcllini4cr u.alltel.nct

F W AT
Michael F. Easley, Governor
RQG
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
'O�O
lam-
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
pColeen
H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
November 8. 2004
Brian Matthews. 'Town Manager
POB 4060
Stallings, North Caroling 281-06
Subject: NPDES Permit Number NCS000454
Town of Stallings
Dear Mr. Matthews:
On July 12, 2004 the North Carolina General Assembly ratified Senate Bill 1210 (S 1210)
- Phase II Stormwater Management. The Governor signed the bill on August 2, 2004. This bill
addresses implementation of the federal NPDES Phase II stormwater program in North Carolina,
In S 1210, the General Assembly provided a framework that will allow state and local
government agencies to begin implementing the program. The bill establishes minimum
stormwater management requirements for municipal storm sewer systems and also applies
stormwater controls to some developing areas around these municipalities.
Phase Q Draft permits for local governments were publicly noticed the week of
November 1, 2004 for those communities identified in the 1990 U.S. Census. Your community's
permit has been noticed and copies of the draft permit are available at:
http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/su/phase2—draft_permits.htm
We look forward to receiving your comments on this draft permit and continuing to work
together for the benefit of your community and North Carolina. All comments and request
should reference draft permit number NCS000454. Please provide your comments by Friday,
December 10, 2004. If you have any questions about this draft permit don't hesitate to contact
me at [phone], ext. 584.
Sincerely,
Ken Pickle
cc: Stormwater Permitting Unit
Mooresville Regional Office
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 [phone]
NCDENR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

rP
F WAP Michael F. Easley, Governor
�� 9Q William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
�O Q. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r^ Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
�? A ja Division of Water Quality
Q C Coleen H. $ullins,�DeQuty Director
D v ion of,Wate`r. Qualitjr tNT
A U NATURAr rmon+,r,CE$ i`
STAFF REVIEW AND EVALUATION
NPDES Stormwater Permit
Facility Name: Town of Stallings
•' OCT 0 1 20
�
NPDES Permit Number: NCS000454
Facility Location: Town of Stallings
Type of Activity: Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
Receiving Stream: North Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, '��
Goose Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek, and
unnamed tributaries to them.
River Basin: Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basins
Stream Classification: C
Proposed Permit Requirements: See attached draft permit .
Compliance Schedule: See Part V, Section A of the attached draft permit
Basis for Monitoring: Not applicable
Basis for Other Requirements: Not applicable
Response Requested by (Date): October 15, 2004
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
NPDES Stormwater Permit Application Form
Narrative Application Supplement: Stormwater Management Program Report
Recommendation: Based on the documents reviewed, the application information submitted
on March 28, 2003 is sufficient to issue an Individual Stormwater Permit.
Prepared by (Signature) `�—�/ Date g 3o b4—
Stormwater Permitting Unit Supervisor Date 9 /�O �D �—
n
Concurrence by Regional Offic //fle`G!� Date f �'
Water Quality Supervisor
Date
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 [phone]
14CDENR
Cuslnmer Service
1-877-623-6748

ISCL41VI ICII V11 IL.0 JLO1I L-U1III IICI ILJ

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
September 28, 2004
Brian Matthews, Town Manager
POB 4030
Stallings, North Carolina 28016
Subject: NPDES Permit Number NCS000454
Town of Stallings
Dear Mr. Matthews:
Enclosed for your review and comment is the draft Phase II NPDES
Stormwater Permit for the Town of Stallings. Fallowing an appropriate public
notice and comment period, we anticipate this permit will become effective in the
4th quarter of 2004.
We believe that this draft permit will provide your community with the
flexibility vital for your community, while at the same time safeguarding and
protecting our natural environment for future generations of North Carolinians.
We look forward to receiving your comments on this draft permit and
continuing to work together for the benefit of your community and North
Carolina. Please provide your comments by Friday, October 15, 2004. You will
also have an opportunity to submit comments during the public comment period
in November, 2004. If you have any questions about this draft permit please
contact me at [phone], ext. 584.
Sincerely,
41, � .Cc
/ &
Ken Pickle
Permit Writer
cc: Stormwater Permitting Unit
Mooresville Regional Office
a
NCDENR
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 [phone] Custonzar Service
1-877-623.6748

Stallings MS4 Review, NC5000454
May 20, 2004
KBP
Background
The Town of Stallings reports 8140 permanent residents. The town is in Union County and the City's
MS4 drains into the Catawba River Basin and the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. The jurisdictional area
is 6.3 square miles and the MS4 area served is the same. Land use is reported as 700/0 residential,
10% industrial, 5% open, and 15% commercial. The application identifies four primary receiving
waters, all classified C. The responsibilities for elements of the Stormwater Management Program
Plan fall to four city employees, the Town Manager, Town Clerk, an engineer, and a planner.
Application review
a) The four -page permit application has been signed and sufficiently completed. OK
b) Section 7.1 Public Education - Sufficient content (year one actions, minorities and
disadvantaged included by virtue of targeting schools, educational program, utility mail
outs, PLUS public meeting.) OK
c) Section 7.2 Public Involvement - Sufficient content (public meeting requirement captured
in Public Education Program, volunteer Adopt -a -Stream, PLUS volunteer drain stenciling,
volunteer Adopt-a-Greenway/Trail.) OK
d) Section 7.3 illicit Discharges - Sufficient content (develop program, establish ordinance,
mapping, enforcement provisions promised, inspections by new staff or contract PLUS
public education aspect captured in Public Education Program.) OK.
e) Section 7.4 Construction Site Runoff - Sufficient content (reliance on NCDENR Sediment
and Erosion Control program, PLUS pre -construction plan review, inspections, builder
education program.) OK
f) Section 7.5 Post Construction Management - Sufficient content (All the elements identified
in the temporary rule for post construction runoff control, PLUS builder education
program.) OK
g) Section 7.6 Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping - Sufficient content (Stallings
reports that it does not own, operate, or maintain any municipal operations, however,
employee education efforts are proposed under this program.) OK
h) Staffing and budget - Sufficient. Most of the Stormwater Management Program Plan
activities fail to the previously identified town employees. The Plan recognizes a need to
hire or contract for several other tasks within the Plan. For this small town, and the limited
scope of activity, Stallings' staffing seems appropriate. No budget information is provided.
OK
i) Timing - Sufficient. Some public education BMPs start in the first year. Other minimum
measures are timely. OK
j) Measurable goals - Sufficient. OK
k) The Plan is consistent with the temporary rules in effect at the time of submittal
and the instructions provided with the application form. Plan approvable as is.
September 7, 2004 subsequent review of Stalling's MS4 Stormwater Management Program Plan
against the final provisions of Session Law 2004-163 and the Stormwater Management Rule (SMR):
OK. Plan is consistent with the Law and the SMR. Plan is approvable as is.
September 7, 2005 final permit prepared for signature incorporating selected comments from the
applicant. Effective date October 1, 2005.
June 7, 2007 revised and reissued permit in accordance with EMC agency decision in response to SELC
lawsuit. Added 100' & 200' buffers and 10% BUA in Goose Creek watershed.
END

WA7'F
RQt!i
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
_O��
�
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
-_4
Division of Water Quality
4 <
11/6/2002
THE TOWN OF STALLINGS
LUCY DRAKE, MAYOR
P.O. BOX 4030
STALLINGS, NC 28106-4030
Subject: NPDES Phase II Stormwater Program
Lucy Drake:
In 1990 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Phase I stormwater program was promulgated under the
Clean Water Act. Phase I relies on National Pollutant discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit coverage to
address stormwater runoff from: (1) "medium" and "large" municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) generally
serving populations of 100,000 or greater, (2) construction activity disturbing 5,acres of land or greater, and (3) ten
categories of industrial activity. The NPDES Stormwater Phase II Final Rule was promulgated in December 1999 and is
the next step in EPA's effort to preserve, protect, and improve the Nation's water resources from polluted storm water
runoff. The Phase II program expands the Phase I program by requiring additional operators of MS4s in urbanized areas
and operators of small construction sites, through the use of NPDES permits, to implement programs and practices to
control stormwater runoff. Phase I1 is intended to further reduce adverse impacts to water quality and aquatic habitat by
instituting the use of controls on the unregulated sources of stormwater discharges that have the greatest likelihood of
causing continued environmental degradation.
The NPDF__S Stormwater Phase lI Final Rule requires nationwide coverage of all operators of small MS4s that are
located within the boundaries of a Bureau of the Census defined "urbanized area" based on the latest decennial Census.
We are writing to you to remind you that the Town of Stallings has been identified as being located within a census
designated urbanized area in both the 1990 and 2000 decennial census. As a regulated community, you are required to
develop a stormwater management program and apply for stormwater permit coverage, if you own and operate a small
MS4 or file a certification that the Town of Stallings does not own or operate a small MS4. The deadline for submitting
your application package or non -ownership certification is March 10, 2003. Application and certification documents, as
well as additional information on the NPDES stormwater program, are available for download at our web site, Our web
address is http:llh2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/stormwater,htmI- You may also contact us for hard copies of the documents. If
you have any questions about this letter, please feel free to contact me (919-733-5083, ext.525) or Darren England
(919-733-5083, ext. 545)
Sincerely,
Bradley Bennett, Supervisor
Stormwater and General Permits Unit
cc: Central Files
Stormwater and General Permits Unit Files
Mooresville Regional Office
NCDENR
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone] Customer Service
1-800-623-7748

NCS000454
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION of WATER QUALITY
PERMIT NO. NCS000454
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANTI)ISCHARGI: ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina GeneralS�ta UtCT4-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act�as amended,
Town of Stallin
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from their rnl nicip 11 separate storm sewer system
located:
r '
within the Tow\nof Stallings Jurisdictional Area
Union C`y�'unty
to receiving waters North Fork Crooked Creek —,South Fork Crooked Creek, Goose Creek, West
Fork Twelvemile Creek, and unnamed tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -
Pee Dee River basins in accordance with'the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements, and
other conditions set forth in Parts III; 11I IV, V, VI, VII and Vlll hereof.
This permit shall become effective Month Day, Year.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on Month Day, Year.
Signed this day Month Day, Year.
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

NCS000454
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
PARTII FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR PERMITTED DISCHARGES
SECTION A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
SECTION B: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
SECTION C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
SECTION D: ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
SECTION E: CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
SECTION F: POST -CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
SECTION G: POLLUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
PART III PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
PART IV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
PART V STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A: COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
SECTION B: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION CONTROLS
SECTION C: MONITORING AND RECORDS
PART VI LIMITATIONS REOPENER
PART VII ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
PART VIII DEFINITIONS

NCS000454
PAR rr S PERMIT COVERAGE
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until
expiration, the Town of Stallingw is authorized to discharge stormwater from the
municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) to receiving waters North Fork Crooked
Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Goose Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek, and
unnamed tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River basins.
Such discharge will be controlled, limited and monitored in accordance with the
permittee's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report, herein referred to
as the Stormwater Plan. The Stormwater Plan includes components of the permittee's
Phase fl Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit Application, Comprehensive Stormwater
Management Program Report, and any approved modifications.
2. All discharges authorized herein shall be adequately managed in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this permit. Any other point source discharge to surface waters
of the state is prohibited unless it is an allowable non-stormwater discharge or is covered
by another permit, authorization, or approval.
This permit does not relieve the permittee from responsibility for compliance with any
other applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or
decree.
4. This permit covers activities assoclated with the discharge of stormwater from the MS4
within the jurisdictional area of the permittee and surrounding areas as described in the
approved Stormwater Plan to control potential pollution from the MS4. The permit
applies to current and future jurisdictional areas of the permittee, as well as areas that
seek coverage under this permit through inter -local or other similar agreements with the
permittee. Agreements for coverage under this permit must be approved by the Division
of Water Quality, herein referred to as the Division.
5. The Division may deny or revoke coverage under this permit for separate entities and may
require independent permit coverage as deemed necessary. In addition, the permittee may
petition the Division to revoke or deny coverage under this permit for specific entities.
6. Under the Authority of Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act and implementing
regulations 40 CFR Part 122, 123 and 124, North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1
and Session Law 2004-163 and in accordance with the approved Stormwater Plan, all
provisions contained and referenced in the Stormwater Plan are enforceable parts of this
permit. The permittee will develop and implement its approved Stormwater Plan in
accordance with Section 402(p)(3)(B) of the Clean Water Act, provisions outlined by the
Director, and the provisions of this permit.
Discharges authorized under this permit shall not cause or contribute to violations of
water duality standards.
Part I Page 1 of 2

NCS000454
$. The permit authorizes the point source discharge of stormwater runoff from the MS4. In
addition, discharges of non-stormwater are also authorized through the MS4 of the
permittee if such discharges are:
(a) Permitted by, and in compliance with, another NPDES discharge permit including
discharges of process and non -process wastewater, and stormwater associated
with industrial activity; or
(b) Determined to be incidental non-stormwater flows that do not significantly impact
water quality and may include:
• water line flushing;
• landscape irrigation;
• diverted stream flows;
• rising groundwaters;
• uncontaminated groundwater infiltration;
• uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
• discharges from potable water sources;
• foundation drains;
• air conditioning condensate (commercial/residential);
• irrigation waters (does not include reclaimed water as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0200);
• springs;
• water from crawl space pumps;
• footing drains;
• lawn watering;
• residential car washing;
• flows from riparian habitats and wetlands;
• dechlorinated swimming pool discharges;
• street wash water;
• flows from emergency fire fighting.
The Division may require that non-stormwater flows of this type be controlled
by the permittee's Stormwater Plan.
Part l Page 2 of 2

NCS000454
PART II FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR PERMITTED
DISCHARGES
SECTION A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The permittee will implement, manage and oversee all provisions of its Stormwater Plan to
reduce pollutants discharged from the MS4. This includes, but is not limited to, the following
areas:
The permittee will develop and maintain adequate legal authorities to implement all
provisions of the Stormwater Plan. The permittee will keep the Division advised of the
status of development of appropriate ordinances and legal authorities and will pursue
these authorities in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Stormwater Plan. Any
changes to the schedule must be approved by the Director.
2. The permittee's Stormwater Plan will be implemented and managed such that the
discharge of pollutants from the MS4 is reduced to the maximum extent practicable. It is
anticipated that in order to meet this provision, implementation of the Stormwater Plan
Will occur with emphasis given to priority areas and to management measures and
programs that are most effective and efficient at varying stages of the plan's
implementation.
3. The permittee will implement the appropriate components of the Stormwater Plan to
assure that, to the maximum extent practicable, illicit connections, spills, and illegal
dumping into the MS4 are prohibited.
4. The permittee will implement provisions of the Stormwater Plan as appropriate to
monitor and assess the performance of the various management measures that are a part
of the Stormwater Plan. This will include the provisions of this permit.
5. The permittee will maintain adequate funding and staffing to implement and manage the
provisions of the Stormwater Plan,
6. The permittee will implement appropriate education, training, outreach, and public
involvement programs to support the objectives of this stormwater discharge permit and
the Stormwater Plan.
7. The permittee will implement a program to reduce pollution from construction site runoff
as described in the Stormwater Plan and in accordance with this permit.
The permittee will implement an appropriate post -construction site runoff control
program to regulate new development and redevelopment by requiring structural and non-
structural best management practices to protect water quality, to reduce pollutant loading,
and to minimize post -development impacts. This program will include provisions for
long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs.
Part II Page I of 12

NCS000454
9. The permittee will evaluate municipal operations and develop and implement an
appropriate program for municipal activities and ongoing operation and maintenance of
municipal facilities to reduce the potential for stormwater pollution.
10. Proposed permit modifications must be submitted to the Director for approval.
Part II Page 2 of 12

NCS000454
SECTION It: PUBLIC EDUCATION ANI) OUTRFACI-1
1. Objectives for Public Education and, Outreach
(a) Distribute educational materials to the community.
(b) Conduct public outreach activities.
(c) Raise public awareness on the causes and impacts of stormwater pollution.
(d) inform the public on steps they can take to reduce or prevent stormwater
Pollution.
2. BMPs for Public Education and Outreach
The permittee shall implement the following BMPs to meet the objectives of the Public
Education and Outreach Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any goals,
BMP
Measurable Coals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
1
2
.'3
4
5
(a) Establish a Public
Develop a public education program and
X
X
X
X
X
Education and
implement within 12 months of the permit
Outreach Program
issue date. Incorporate outreach elements
for significant minority and disadvantaged
communities.
(b) Informational Web Site
Develop and maintain an internet web
X
X
X
X
X
site. Post newsletter articles on
stormwater, information on water quality,
stormwater projects and activities, and
ways to contact stormwater management
program staff.
(c) Public education
Develop general stormwater educational
X
X
X
X
X
materials for schools,
material targeting school children,
homeowners, and/or
homeowners, and/or businesses.
businesses
(d) Public education
Distribute written material through utility
X
X
X
X
X
material dissemination
mailouts, at special events, and at high
traffic businesses.
Part 1.1 Page 3 of' 12

NCS000454
SECTION C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
1. Objectives for Public Involvement and Participation
(a) -Provide opportunities for the public to participate in program development and
implementation.
(b) Reach out and engage major economic and ethnic groups.
(c) Comply with applicable state and local public notice requirements.
2. BMPs for Public Involvement and Participation
The permittee shall implement the following BMPs to meet the objectives of the Public
Involvement and Participation Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any
goals.
_ , •:, :' BMP
Measurable Goals
YR •
-YR
YR'
YR
YR
.
..
1
2
°3
=4
5
(a) Administer a Public
Conduct at least one public meeting to
X
X
X
X
X
Involvement Program
allow the public an opportunity to review
and comment on the Stormwater Plan.
(b) Organize a volunteer
Organize and implement a volunteer
X
X
X
X
X
community
stormwater related program designed to
involvement program
promote ongoing citizen participation.
(c) Establish a Citizens
Establish a citizens advisory panel to
X
X
X
X
X
Advisory Panel
review the Stormwater Plan, to review the
annual report, and to advise the permittee
on the Stormwater Plan.
Part 11 Page 4 of 12

NCS000454
SECTION D: 1LILICI'I' DISCHARGi�DL'I'rC'1'iON AND ELIMINATION
1. Objectives for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
(a) Detect and eliminate illicit discharges, including spills and illegal dumping.
(b) Address significant contributors of pollutants to the MS4. The permittee may
require specific controls for a category of discharges, or prohibit that discharge
completely, if one or more of these categories of sources are identified as a
significant contributor of pollutants to the MS4.
(c) Implement appropriate enforcement procedures and actions.
(d) Develop a storm sewer system map showing all outfalls and waters receiving
discharges.
(e) Inform employees, businesses, and the general public of hazards associated with
illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste.
2. BMPs for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
The permittee shall implement the following BMPs to meet the objectives of the Illicit Discharge
Detection and Elimination Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any
goals.
- BNL1I ; ;
1Vleasurable,Goals
; YR'°.
YR •
' Y'R+
`YR '
• YR'
(a) Develop/Implement
Develop and implement an Illicit
X
X
X
X
X
Illicit Discharge
Discharge Detection and Elimination
Detection and
Program. Include provisions for program
Elimination Program
assessment and evaluation.
(b) Establish and
Establish Lind maintain adequate legal
X
X
X
maintain appropriate
authorities to prohibit illicit discharges
legal authorities
and enforce the approved Illicit Discharge
Detection and Elimination Program.
(c) Develop a Storm
Complete identification, locations of, and
X
X
X
X
X
Sewer System Base
mapping of, stormwater drainage system
Map
components. At a minimum, mapping
components include outfalls, drainage
areas, and receiving streams.
(d) implement illicit
Implement an inspection program to
X
X
X
discharge detection
detect dry weather flows at system
procedures
outfalls. Establish procedures 1'01- traCing
the sources of illicit discharges and for
removing the sources. Develop procedures
For identification of priority areas likely to
have illicit discharges. Continue to update
the map of drainage system components
on a priority basis per the approved Illicit
Discharge Program,
Part 11 Page 5 of 12

NCS000454
BMP�
_ a" Measurable CoalsYR'
°YRYiR
I'RyYR
(e) Conduct employee
Conduct training for municipal staff on
X
X
X
cross -training
detecting and reporting illicit discharges.
(f) Provide public
Inform public employees, businesses, and
X
X
X
X
X
education
the general public of hazards associated
with illegal discharges and improper
disposal of waste.
(g) Establish a public
Establish and publicize a reporting
X
X
X
X
X
reporting mechanism
mechanism for the public to report illicit
discharges.
Part 11 Page 6 of 12

NCS000454
SECTION E. CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
1. Objectives for Construction Site Runoff Controls
(a) Reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff from construction activities disturbing one
or more acres of land surface and those activities less than one acre that are part of
a larger common plan of development.
(b) Provide procedures for public input, sanctions to ensure compliance, requirements
for construction site operators to implement appropriate erosion and sediment
control practices, for review of site plans which incorporates consideration of
potential water quality impacts, and procedures for site inspection and
enforcement of control measures.
(c) Establish requirements for construction site operators to control waste such as
discarded building materials, concrete truck washout, chemicals, litter, and
sanitary waste at the construction site that may cause adverse impacts to water
quality.
2. BMI's for Construction Site Runoff Controls
The permittee shall implement the following BMPs to meet the objectives of the Construction
Site Runoff Controls Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any goals.
BMI'
Measurable Goals
YR
1
YR
2
YR
3
YR
4
YR
5
(a) implement a
Develop a regulatory mechanism and
X
X
X
X
X
program and
implement a program requiring erosion and
establish a
sediment controls at construction sites and
regulatory
providing for sanctions to ensure compliance.
mechanism for
The permittee has elected to comply by relying
erosion and
on the NCDENR Division of Land Resources
sediment control
(DLR) Erosion and Sediment Control
Program, either as administered by the DLR,
or as delegated by the Sedimentation Control
Commission (SCC) to another entity with
appropriatejurisdiction, including the
permittee. The permittee may rely on the DLR
program only to the extent that that program
satisfies all of the following BMPs.
(b) Develop
Require construction site operators to
X
X
X
X
X
requirements on
implement erosion and sediment control BMPs
construction site
and to control construction site wastes that
Operators
may cause adverse water quality impacts.
Part II Page 7 of 12

NCS000454
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR..
YR
YR
YR
-YR'-
(c) Provide
New materials may be developed by the
X
X
X
X
X
educational and
permittee, or the permittee may use materials
training materials
adopted from other programs and adapted to
for construction
the permittee's construction runoff controls
site operators
ro ram.
(d) Institute plan
Review construction plans and establish
X
X
X
X
X
reviews
procedures that incorporate water quality
considerations in construction site plan
reviews.
(e) Establish public
Establish procedures for receipt and
X
X
X
X
X
information
consideration of erosion and sedimentation
procedures
information submitted by the public. Publicize
the procedures and contact information. The
procedures must lead directly to a site
inspection or other timely follow-up action.
(f) Establish
Establish procedures for site inspection and
X
X
X
X
X
inspection and
enforcement of control measure requirements.
enforcement
The procedures should include prioritizing
procedures
I areas of inspections based on local criteria.
Part II Page 8 of 12

NCS000454
SECTION F: POST -CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
1. Objectives for Post -Construction Site Runoff Controls
(a) Manage stormwater runoff from new development 1 redevelopment that drains to
the MS4 and disturbs an acre or more of land surface, including projects less than
an acre that are part of a larger common plan oh development or sale.
(b) Ensure long term operation and maintenance of BMPs.
(c) Ensure controls are in place to minimize water quality impacts.
2. BMPs for Post -Construction Site Runoff Controls
The permittee shall implement the following BMPs to meet the objectives of the Post -
construction Site Runoff Controls Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification of
any goals.
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
1
2
3
4
5
(a) Establish a Post-
Develop, adopt by ordinance (or similar
X
X
X
X
X
Construction Site
regulatory mechanism), implerent, and
Runoff Controls
enforce a program to address stormwater
Program (hereafter
runoff from new development and
the Program)
redevelopment. The ordinance must be
reviewed and approved by the Director prior
to implementation. Ensure that controls are
in place to prevent or minimize water quality
impacts.
(b) Establish strategies
Develop and implement strategies that
X
X
X
which include 13MPs
include a combination of structural and/or
appropriate for the
non-structural BMI's. Ensure adequate long-
MS4
term operation and maintenance of structural
13MI's. Require annual inspection reports of
permitted structurai I3MPs performed by a
c ualified professional.
(c) Establish a program to
Control the sources of fecal coliform to the
X
X
control the sources of
maximum extent practicable. Develop and
fecal coliform to the
implement an oversight program to ensure
maximum extent
proper operation and maintenance of on -site
practicable
wastewater treatment systems for domestic
wastewater. Municipalities must coordinate
this program with the county health
department,
Part 11 Page 9 of 12

NCS000454
I The evaluation of Post -construction Stormwater Management Program measures
(a) Those areas within the jurisdictional area of the permittee that are already subject
to the existing state stormwater management programs listed herein are deemed
compliant with the post -construction stormwater management model practices
identified in (b) below. The listed programs are: the Water Supply Watershed
protection programs for WS-I — WS-IV waters, the HQW and ORW waters
management strategies, the Neuse River Basin Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Management Strategy, the Tar -Pamlico River Basin Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Management Strategy, and the Randleman Lake Water Supply Watershed
program.
(b) Model Practices. For those areas within the jurisdictional area of the permittee
that are not subject to the post -construction stormwater management provisions of
another existing state stormwater management program, the permittee's Post -
construction Stormwater Management Program must equal or exceed the
stormwater management and water quality protection provided by the following
model practices.
(i) The permittee may issue a local stormwater management permit to a
development or redevelopment project as either a low density project or a
high density project.
(ii) A project may be permitted as a low density project if it meets the following
criteria:
(A) No more than two dwelling units per acre or 24% built -upon area;
(B) Use of vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent practicable;
(C) All built -upon areas are at least 30 feet landward of perennial and
intermittent surface waters; and,
(D) Deed restrictions and protective covenants are required by the
locally issued permit and incorporated by the development to
ensure that subsequent development activities maintain the
development (or redevelopment) consistent with the approved
plans.
(iii) A project not consistent with the requirements for a low density project may
be permitted as a high density project if it meets the following requirements:
(A)The stormwater control measures must control and treat the
difference between the pre -development and post -development
conditions for the 1-year 24-hour storm. Runoff volume
drawdown time must be a minimum of 24 hours, but not more than
120 hours;
(B) All structural stormwater treatment systems must be designed to
achieve 85% average annual removal of total suspended solids;
(C) Stormwater management measures must comply with the General
Engineering Design Criteria For All Projects requirements listed in
15A NCAC 2H .1008(c);
(D)AI1 built -upon areas are at least 30 feet landward of perennial and
intermittent surface waters; and,
Part II Page 10 of 12

NCS000454
(E) Deed restrictions and protective covenants are required by the
locally issued permit and incorporated by the development to
ensure that subsequent development activities maintain the
development (or redevelopment) consistent with the approved
plans.
(c) Watershed Protection Plans. Public bodies may develop and implement
comprehensive watershed protection plans that may be used to meet part, or all, of'
the requirements for post -construction stormwater management.
(d) A regulated entity may develop its own comprehensive watershed plan, may use
the model ordinance developed by the Commission, may design its own post -
construction practices based on the Division's guidance and engineering; standards
for best management practices, or it may incorporate the post -construction model
practices to satisfy, in whole or in part, the requirements for post -construction
stormwater management.
Part 11 Page 1 1 or 12

NCS000454
SECTION G: POI,LUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
1. Ob,jective for Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations
Prevent or reduce stormwater pollution from municipal operations.
2. BMPs for the Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations
The permittee shall implement the following BMPs to meet the objective of the Pollution
Prevention and Good Housekeeping Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification
of any goals.
BMP
- :-gMeasurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR',
1
2-.
3
4
1-5
(a) Develop an operation
Develop an operation and maintenance
X
X
X
and maintenance
program that has the ultimate goal of
program
preventing or reducing pollutant runoff
from municipal operations.
(b) Inspection and
Develop an inventory of all facilities and
X
X
X
evaluation of facilities
operations owned and operated by the
and operations
permittee with the potential for generating
polluted stormwater 3•unoff. Specifically
inspect the potential sources of polluted
runoff, the stormwater controls, and
conveyance systems. Evaluate the sources,
document deficiencies, plan corrective
actions, and document the
accomplishment of corrective actions.
(c) Conduct staff training
Conduct staff training specific for
X
X
X
pollution prevention and good
housekeeping procedures.
Part 11 Page 12 of 12

NCS000454
PART III PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
Implementation of the Stormwater Plan will include documentation of all program
components that are being undertaken including, but not limited to, monitoring and
sampling, inspections, maintenance activities, educational programs, implementation of
BMPs, and enforcement actions. Documentation will be kept on -file by the permittee for
a period of five years and made available to the Director or his authorized representative
immediately upon request.
2. The permittee's Stormwater Plan will be reviewed and updated as necessary, but at least
on an annual basis. The permittee will submit a report of this evaluation and monitoring
information to the Division on an annual basis. This information will be submitted by
1Set date two months after permit year's end] of each year and cover the previous year's
activities from [Insert start date] to [Insert end date]. The permittee's reporting will
include appropriate information to accurately describe the progress, status, and results of
the permittee's Stormwater Plan and will include, but is not limited to, the following
components:
(a) The permittee will give a detailed description of the status of implementation of
the Stormwater Plan. This will include information on development and
implementation of all components of the Stormwater Plan for the past year and
schedules and plans for the year following each report.
(b) The permittee will adequately describe and justify any proposed changes tothe
Stormwater Plan. This will include descriptions and supporting information for
the proposed changes and how these changes will impact the Stormwater Plan
(results, effectiveness, implementation schedule, etc.).
(c) The permittee will document any necessary changes to programs or practices for
assessment of management measures implemented through the Stormwater Plan.
In addition, any changes in the cost of', or funding for, the Stormwater Plan will be
documented.
(d) The permittee will include a summary of data accumulated as part of the
Stormwater Plan throughout the year along with an assessment of what the data
indicates in light of the Stormwater Plan.
(e) The permittee will provide information on the annual expenditures and budget
anticipated for the year following each report along with an assessment of the
continued financial support for the overall Stormwater Plan.
(t) The permittee will provide a summary of activities undertaken as part of the
Stormwater Plan throughout the year. This summary will include, but is not
limited to, information on the establishment of appropriate legal authorities,
project assessments, inspections, enforcement actions, continued inventory and
Part III Page I of 2

NCS000454
review of the storm sewer- system, education, training, and results of the illicit
discharge detection and elimination program.
(g) The permittee will provide information concerning areas of water quality
improvement or degradation. Depending on the level of implementation of the
Stormwater Plan, this information may be submitted based on pilot studies,
individual projects, or on a watershed or sub -watershed basis.
3. The Director may notify the permittee when the Stormwater Plan does not meet one or
more of the requirements of the permit. Within 30 days of such notice, the permittee will
submit a plan and time schedule to the Director for modifying the Stormwater Plan to
meet the requirements. The Director may approve the corrective action plan, approve a
plan with modifications, or reject the proposed plan. The permittee will provide
certification in writing (in accordance with Part IV, Paragraph 2) to the Director that the
changes have been made. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the
Director's ability to conduct enforcement actions for violations of this permit.
4. The Division may request additional reporting information as necessary to assess the
progress and results of the permittee's Stormwater Plan.
Part III Page 2 of 2

NCS000454
PART IV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
t. Monitoring Records
The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration
and maintenance records and all original chart recordings for continuous monitoring
instrumentation, and copies of all reports required by this permit for a period of at least
five years from the date of the sample, measurement, report, or application. This period
may be extended by request of the Director at any time prior to the end of the five year
period.
2. Report Submittals
(a) Duplicate signed copies of all reports required herein, shall be submitted to the
following address:
Department of' Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Stormwater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
(b) All applications, reports, or information submitted to DWQ shall be signed by it
principal executive officer, ranking elected official, or duly authorized
representative. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(i) The authorisation is made in writing by a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official;
(ii) The authorization specifies either an individual or it position having
responsibility for the overall operation of a regulated facility or activity or
an individual or position having overall responsibility for
environmentallstormwater matters; and
(iii) The written authorization is submitted to the Director.
(c) Any person signing a document under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section shall
make the following certification:
"I certify, tinder 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
Part IV Page 1 of 3

NCS000454
information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing
violations."
3. Recording Results
For each measurement, sample, inspection, or maintenance activity performed or
collected pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall record the
following information:
(a) The dates, exact place, and time of sampling, measurements, inspection, or
maintenance activity;
(b) The individual(s) who performed the sampling, measurements, inspection, or
maintenance activity;
(c) The date(s) analyses were performed;
(d) The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
(e) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
(f) The results of such analyses.
4. Planned Changes
The permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned changes
or activities which could significantly alter the nature or quantity of pollutants discharged.
This notification requirement includes'pollutants which are not specifically listed in the
permit or subject to notification requirements under 40 CFR Part 122.42 (a).
5. Anticipated Noncompliance
The permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned changes
which may result in noncompliance with the permit requirements.
6. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
The permittee shall report to the central office or the appropriate regional office any
noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall be
provided orally within 24 hours from the time the permittee became aware of the
circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the
permittee becomes aware of the circumstances.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance, and its causes;
the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance
has not been corrected, the anticipated time compliance is expected to continue; and steps
taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
Part IV Page 2 of 3

NCS000454
The Director may waive the written report on it case -by -case basis if the oral report has
been received within 24 hours.
7. Annual Reporting
The permittee will submit reporting and monitoring information on an annual basis per
Part II.I of this permit on forms provided by the DWQ.
S. Additional Reporting
The Director may request reporting information on it more frequent basis as deemed
necessary either for specific portions of the permittee's Stormwater Plan, or for the entire
Program.
9. Other Information
Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in applying
to be covered under this permit or in any report to the Director, it shall promptly submit
such facts or information.
Part IV Page 3 of 3

NCS000454
PART V STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A: COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
Duty to Comply
The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit noncompliance
constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for
permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or denial of permit
coverage upon renewal application.
(a) The permittee shall comply with standards or prohibitions established under
section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants within the time
provided in the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even if
the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
(b) The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition is
subject to a civil penalty not to exceed the maximum amounts authorized by
Section 309(d) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties inflation Adjustment Act
(28 U.S.C. §2461 note) as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act (31
U.S.C. §3701 note) (currently $27,500 per day for each violation). Any person
who negligently violates any permit condition is subject to criminal penalties of
$2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for not more than 1 year,
or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit conditions is subject to
criminal penalties of $5,000 to $50,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for
not more than 3 years, or both. Also, any person who violates a permit condition
may be assessed an administrative penalty not to exceed $11,000 per violation
with the maximum amount not to exceed $137,500. [Ref: Section 309 of the
.Federal Act 33 USC 1319 and 40 CFR 122.41(a)]
(c) Under state law, a daily civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000) per violation may be assessed against any person who violates
or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit. [Ref: North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.6A]
(d) Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for
violating sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318 or 405 of this Act, or any permit
condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under
section 402 of this Act. Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 19 and the Act, administrative
penalties for Class I violations are not to exceed the maximum amounts
authorized by Section 309(g)(2)(A) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties
Inflation Adjustment Act (28 U.S.C. §2461 note) as amended by the .Debt
Collection Improvement Act (31 U.S.C. §3701 note) (currently $11,000 per
violation, with the maximum amount of any Class I penalty assessed not to exceed
$27,500). Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 19 and the Act, penalties for Class II violations
Parts V, VI, VI1 & VLIl Page I of 8

NCS000454
are not to exceed the maximum amounts authorized by Section 309(g)(2)(I3) of
the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act (28 U.S.C. §2461
note) as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act (31 U.S.C. ti3701
note) (currently $1 1,000 per day for each day during which the violation
continues, with the maximum amount of any Class 11 penalty not to exceed
$137,500).
2. Duty to Mitigate
The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge in
violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human
health or the environment.
3. Civil and Criminal Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3,
143-215.6A, 143-215.68, 143-215.6C or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1319.
Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for consequential damages, such as fish kills,
even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily suspended.
4. Oil anti Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the
permittee is or may be subject to under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of the
Federal Act, 33 USC 1321.
5. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal
property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property
or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or
regulations.
6. Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or the
application of any provision of this permit to any circumstances, is held invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit,
shall not be affected thereby.
Parts V, Vi, VII & VIIi Page 2 of 8

NCS000454
7. Duty to Provide Information
The permittee shall furnish to the Director, within a reasonable time, any information
which the Director may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying,
revoking and reissuing, or terminating the coverage issued pursuant to this permit or to
determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Director
upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit.
8. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this
permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both. if a
conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person
under this paragraph, punishment is a fine of not more that $20,000 per day of violation,
or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both.
9. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement,
representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or required to
be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or
noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both.
10. Permit Actions
This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit
condition.
SECTION B: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE of POLLUTION CONTROLS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are owned and/or operated by
the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation
and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality
assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary
facilities or similar systems which are installed by a permittee only when the operation is
necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
Parts V, V1, V1I & V111 Page 3 of 8

NCS000454
2. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
It shall not be a defense fora permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been
necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the
condition of this permit.
SECTION C: MONITORING AND RECORDS
I. Representative Sampling
When required herein, stormwater samples collected and measurements taken shall be
characteristic of the volume and nature of the permitted discharge. Analytical stormwater
sampling shall be performed during a representative storm event. These samples shall be
taken on a day and time that is characteristic of the discharge. Where appropriate, all
stormwater samples shall be taken before the discharge joins or is diluted by any other
waste stream, body of water, or substance. When specified herein, monitoring points
established in this permit shall not be changed without notification to and approval of the
Director.
2. Flow Measurements
Where required, appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with
accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and
reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored discharges.
3. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations
published pursuant to NCGS 143-215.63 et. seq, the Water and Air Quality Reporting
Acts, and to regulations published pursuant to Section 304(g), 33 USC 1314, of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as Amended, and Regulation 40 CFR 136.
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this permit, all test procedures must
produce minimum detection and reporting levels and all data generated must be reported
down to the minimum detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.
4. Inspection and Entry
The permittee shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an
authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Director), or in the case of a facility
which discharges through a municipal separate storm sewer system, an authorized
representative of a municipal operator or the separate storm sewer system receiving the
discharge, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required
by law, to,
(a) Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located
or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
Parts V, VI, VII &. Vlll Page 4 of 8

NCS000454
(b) Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under
the conditions of this permit;
(c) Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and
control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this permit;
and
(d) Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit
compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or
parameters at any location.
5. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2) or Section
308 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of
this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Division of Water
Quality. As required by the Act, analytical data shall not be considered confidential.
Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of
criminal penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-215.6B or in Section 309 of the Federal
Act.
PART VI LIMITATIONS REOPENER
The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and modifying the
permit, revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit as allowed by the laws, rules,
and regulations contained in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 122 and 123; Title 15A
of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H .0100; and North Carolina General
Statute 143-215.1 et. al.
PART VII ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
The permittee must pay the administering and compliance monitoring fee within 30 thirty days
after being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee in a timely manner in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H .0105(b)(4) may cause this Division to initiate action to revoke the permit.
Parts V, V 1, V I I& V I ll Page 5 of 8

NCS000454
PART VIII DEFINITIONS
Act
See Clean Water Act.
2. Best Management Practice (BMP)
Measures or practices used to reduce the amount of pollution entering surface waters.
BMPs can be structural or non-structural and may take the form of it process, activity,
physical structure or planning (see non-structural BMP).
3. Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), as
amended, 33 USC 1251, et. seq.
4. Depgrtment
Department means the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
5. Division DW
The Division of Water Quality, Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
6. Director
The Director of the Division of Water Quality, the permit issuing authority.
7. EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
8. Grab Sams
An individual sample collected instantaneously. Grab samples that will be directly
analyzed or qualitatively monitored must be taken within the first 30 minutes of
discharge.
9. Hazardous Substance
Any substance designated in 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section 3 11 of the Clean Water
Act.
10. Illicit Discharge
Any discharge to a MS4 that is not composed entirely of stormwater except discharges
pursuant to an NPDES permit (other than the NPDES MS4 permit), allowable non-
stormwater discharges, and discharges resulting from fire -fighting activities.
11. Industrial Activity
For the purposes of this permit, industrial activities shall mean all industrial activities as
defined in 40 CFR 122.26.
Parts V, V 1, VII & V I Il Page 6 of 8

NCS000454
12. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System MS4
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(8) means a conveyance or system of conveyances
(including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters,
ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains):
(i) Owned or operated by the United States, a state, city, town, county, district,
association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to state law) having
jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other
wastes, including special districts under state law such as a sewer district,
flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe
or an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved
management agency under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that
discharges to waters of the United States or waters of the State;
(ii) Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater;
(iii) Which is not a combined sewer; and
(iv) Which is not part of a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) as defined
in 40 CFR 122.2.
13. Non-stormwater Discharge Categories
The following are categories of non-stormwater discharges that the permittee. must
address if it identifies them as significant contributors of pollutants to the storm sewer
system: water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising
groundwater, uncontaminated groundwater infiltration, [as defined in 40 CFR
35.2005(20)1, uncontaminated pumped groundwater, discharges from potable water
sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water
from crawl space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car
washing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, dechlodnated swimming pool
discharges, and street wash water (discharges or flows from fire fighting activities are
excluded from the definition of illicit discharge and only need to be addressed where they
are identified as significant sources of pollutants to waters of the United States).
14, Non-structural BMP
Non-structural BMPs are preventive actions that involve management and source controls
such as: (1) Policies and ordinances that provide requirements and standards to direct
growth to identified areas, protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas,
maintain and/or increase open space, provide buffers along sensitive water bodies,
minimize impervious surfaces, and/or minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation; (2)
policies or ordinances that encourage infill development in higher- density urban areas,
and areas with existing storm sewer infrastructure; (3) education programs for developers
and the public about. minimizing water quality impacts; (4) other measures such as
minimizing the percentage of impervious area after development, use of measures to
minimize directly connected impervious areas, and source control measures often thought
of Lis good housekeeping, preventive maintenance, and spill prevention.
Parts V, VI, VIl & V1II Page 7 of 8

N C S 000454
15. Outfall
The point of wastewater or stormwater discharge from a discrete conveyance system. See
also point source discharge of stormwatcr.
16. Permitter
The owner or operator issued this permit.
17. Point Source Discharge of Stormwater
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance including, but not specifically limited
to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, or discrete fissure from which
stormwater is or may be discharged to waters of the state.
18. Redevelopment
Means any rebuilding activity other than a rebuilding activity that results in no net
increase in built -upon area, and provides equal or greater stormwater control than the
previous development.
19. Representative Storm Event
A storm event that measures greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall and that is preceded by at
least 72 hours in which no storm event measuring greater than 0.1 inches has occurred. A
single storm event may contain up to 10 consecutive hours of no precipitation. For
example, if it rains for 2 hours without producing any collectable discharge, and then
stops, a sample may be collected if a rain producing a discharge begins again within the
next 10 hours.
20. Stormwater Runoff
The flow of water which results from precipitation and which occurs immediately
following rainfall or as a result of snowmelt.
21. Toxic Pollutant
Any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(i) of the Clean Water Act.
Parts V, VI, VII & Vill Page 8 of 8

Permit processing summary and public comments record
The Town of Stallings, NCS000454
KBP
I. Application undated, received at DWQ 3/28/03.
2. Permit writer's review 5/20/03, rev. 9/7/04.
3. Advance courtesy copy of permit sent to Stallings 9/28/04.
4. MRO sign -off on draft permit 10/20/04.
5. Public notice of draft permit 11/1/04. Public notice confirmed by affidavit.
6. 11/8/04 letter notifying Stallings of public notice of the draft permit.
7. 12/10/04 comments from Stallings on the draft permit, including an extensive mark
up of the draft permit. Public comment document control number 216.
a. General comment - request that establishment of programs for the six
minimum measures be moved out of the BMP boxes and up above as an
introductory statement, leaving the more specific BMPs in the boxes.
b. Part I and following - request replace "permittee" with "Town".
c. Part II.B.1. - request revise objectives, moving "distribute materials" and
"conduct outreach" into boxes.
d. Part II.B.2, - request relocate "establish program" to introductory statement,
leaving just three BMPs.
e. Part II.13.2. - request revise (b) to less specific goals; revise (c) to less
specific goals; revise (d) to replace high traffic businesses with the library.
f. Part II.C.1. - relocate (c) to introductory statement in 2; revise (b) to remove
reference to economic and ethnic groups.
g. Part II.C.2. -- relocate (a) to introductory statement and reword new (a) to
specify a Town Council meeting; substitute Town Planning Commission in (c)
for the citizens advisory panel; reword (b) and delay to year 3.
h. Part II.D.1. - eliminate (b); reword (c) to include "prohibit".
L Part II.D.2. - reword introductory section to include provision that the
Division may require permittee to control non-stormwater flows; reword and
move (a) up into the introductory section; reword (b) to specify ordinances
and delay until year 4; reword (c) and delay until year 3; reword (d) and
delay until year 5; combine (e) and (f) and delay until year 3; delay (g) until
year 4.
j. Part II.E.1. - omit (b); reword (c); substitute "regulate and sanction sites
that have excessive runoff pollutants" as an objective.
k. Part II.E.2. - reword to clarify the town's liability and relocate (a) to
introductory sentence; reword and delay (a) to year 2; reword (b) and delay
to year 3; omit (c); reword (d) and delay to year 4 and require a SPPP;
reword (e) and delay to year 5; reword (f) and delay to year 2.
I. Part II.F.1(a) - replace "Manage stormwater" with "Reduce pollutants in".
m. Part II. F.2. - move program requirement in (a) up into an introductory
sentence; reword (a) and schedule for years 1 - 3; reschedule (b) to years 1
- 3; reword (c) and reschedule to years 1 - 3; additional BMP - "Individual
site permitting" with additional Measurable Goals of "Require locally -issued
permit coverage for all new development or redevelopment..." beginning in
year 1.
n. Part II.F.3. - omit (a) since no other stormwater program is applicable in the
town.
o. Part II.G.1. - reword to include maintenance; add (b) for training of municipal
employees.
p. Part II.G.2. - reword and relocate (a) to introductory sentence; reword (b)
and delay until year 4; reword (c) and delay until year 5.

q. Part III.1. - minor rewording.
r. Part III.2. - reword to "may include"; reword (f) for brevity; reword (g) to "If
monitoring or sampling is performed..."
s. Part IV.1. - reword to "If monitoring and sampling is performed..."
t. Part V.A.1(d) - comment: What does "this Act" refer to as distinct from the
definition of "the Act"?
u. Part V.A.3. - comment: please clarify what the town is responsible for here.
v. Part V.C.3. - request delete "by this permit".
8. 12/29/04 comments from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The comments were not
arranged to tie directly to a section of the permit. Public comment document control
#217.
a. USFWS is concerned about the lack of watershed specific information in the
permit. There is no location -specific information in the permit on impaired
waters, or sensitive natural resource -waters. Specifically, these concerns
apply to Goose Creek, one of Stallings' receiving waters, because of the
presence of the Carolina heelsplitter, a federally -protected rare aquatic
species. USFWS believes it appropriate for the permit to highlight this need.
b. USFWS is concerned about the potential for actions permitted to adversely
affect threatened and endangered species or critical habitat. Specifically, the
Model Practices provisions of 30' set back, 24% built -upon area, and the 1-
year, 24-hour storm design basis are not protective for many waters that
provide habitat to federally -listed aquatic species.
c. Specifically, wrt built -upon area, despite recent reports of and
recommendations of significant degradation at 10% BUA (Center for
Watershed Protection), and low density threshold of 6% and high density of
6% - 240/b for listed mussel habitat (USFWS), and an effective 7% BUA for
protection of endangered fauna (NC WRC), the permit provides by comparison
24%.
d. The 30' buffer is not adequate.
e. The lack of monitoring in the permit is a concern, and monitoring specifics
should be added to the permit
f. The core Model Practices are less protective than existing regulations and are
potentially harmful to species that the USFWS manages.
9. 12/30/04 comments from the Southern Environmental Law Center and the North
Carolina Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club. Numerous comments are specific to
the Phase II program as distinct from NCS0000453 or seem to me to be legal and
policy issues not resolvable at the permit writer level, and are not repeated in this
summary of comments on the draft permit. Public comment document control #218.
a. DWQ is obligated (under several provisions of rule and law) to revise the
permit to protect the Carolina heelsplitter, an endangered mussel in Goose
Creek.
b. The specific measures to be employed to protect the mussel can be found in
the Wildlife Resources Commission Guidance Memorandum of August 2002.
These measures include 100' - 200' buffers, and 7% built -upon threshold.
10. 12/31/04 public comment period expires.
11. 9/07/05 final permit prepared for signature, incorporating selected comments from
the applicant. Effective date October 1, 2005.
12. 6/7/07 revised and reissued in accordance with EMC agency decision from SELC
lawsuit. Added 100' & 200' buffers and 10% BUA in Goose Creek watershed.
END

r
NCS000453
NCS000454
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION of WATER QUALITY
PERMIT NO. NCS000454
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the ITV
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution/
Town of Stallings
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from
located: i
tatuteilI'43-215.1, other lawful
th`Carolina Environmental
�nt`o1"Ac�stmended,
separate storm sewer system
within the Town of Stullings.Jurisdictional Area
'.'Union ou_nty
to receiving waters North Fork Crooke South Fork Crooked Creek, Goose Creek, West
Fork Twelvemile Creek, and unnamed tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -
Pee Dee River basins in accordance. with, the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements, and
other conditions set forth in Parts i;.I1�III, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII hereof.
This permit shall become effective Month Day, Year.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on Month Day, Year.
Signed this day Month Day, Year.
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

NCS000453
NCS000454
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION of WATER QUALITY
PERMIT NO. NCS000453
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute I°43-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollutiolitontrol Act; asO7amended,
Town of Indian Trail''
i
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from their municipal separate storm sewer system
located:
within the Town of Indian Trail Jurisdictional Area
_-Union-C -ounty
to receiving waters Crooked Creek, North F&kACrooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek,
Davis Mine Creek, Goose Creek, ljice Mill Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek, and unnamed
tributaries to them, all within the Catawba,and Yadkin -Pee Dee River basins in accordance with
the discharge limitations, monitoringtrequirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II,
III, IV, V, V1, VII and VIII hereof.
This permit shall become effective Month Day, Year.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on Month Day, Year.
Signed this day Month Day, Year.
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

NCS000453
NCS000454
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
PART II FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR PERMIrITED DISCHARGES
SECTION A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
SECTION B: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
SECTION C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
SECTION D: ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
SECTION E: CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
SECTION F: POST -CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
SECTION G: POLLUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR
MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS
PART III PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
PART IV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
PART V STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A. COMPLIANCE AND LIABILITY
SECTION 13: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION
CONTROLS
SECTION C: MONITORING AND RECORDS
PART VI LIMITATIONS REOPENER
PART Vll ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
PART VIII DEFINITIONS

NCS000453
NC,S000453NCS000454
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until
expiration, the Town of Stallingw is authorized to discharge stormwater from
the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) to receiving waters North Fork
Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Goose Creek, West Fork Twelvemile Creek,
and unnamed tributaries to them, all within the Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River
basins. Such discharge will be controlled, limited and monitored in accordance with the
penitteeTown's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report, herein
referred to as the Stormwater Plan. The Stormwater Plan includes components of the
perteeTown's Phase 1I Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit Application,
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report, and any approved
modifications.
2. All discharges authorized herein shall be adequately managed in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this permit. Any other point source discharge to surface waters
of the state is prohibited unless it is an allowable non-stormwater discharge or is covered
by another permit, authorization, or approval.
This permit does not relieve the perteeTown from responsibility for compliance with
any other applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order,
judgment, or decree.
4. This permit covers activities associated with the discharge of Stormwater from the MS4
within the jurisdictional area of the pefff6 teeTown and surrounding areas as described in
the approved Stormwater Plan to control potential pollution from the MS4. The permit
applies to current and future jurisdictional areas of the peFmitteeTown, as well as areas
that seek coverage under this permit through inter -local or other similar agreements with
the peFni4eeTown. Agreements for coverage under this permit must be approved by the
Division of Water Quality, herein referred to as the Division.
The Division may deny or revoke coverage under this permit for separate entities and
may require independent permit coverage as deemed necessary. In addition, the
pef:rnitte Town may petition the Division to revoke or deny coverage under this permit
for specific entities.
6. Under the authority of Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act and implementing
regulations 40 CFR Part 122, 123 and 124, North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1
and Session Law 2004-163 and in accordance with the approved Stormwater Plan, all
provisions contained and referenced in the Stormwater Plan are enforceable parts of this
permit. The per-itteeTown will develop and implement its approved Stormwater Plan in
accordance with Section 402(p)(3)(P) of the Clean Water Act, provisions outlined by the
Director, and the provisions of this permit.
7. Discharges authorized under this permit shall not cause or contribute to violations of
water quality standards.
Part I Page 3-1 of 42-

NCS000453
"Trcn 03NCS000454
S. The permit authorizes the point source discharge of stormwater runoff from the MS4. In
addition, discharges of non-stormwater are also authorized through the MS4 of the
perteeTown if such discharges are:
(a) Permitted by, and in compliance with, another NPDES discharge permit including
discharges of process and non -process wastewater, and stormwater associated
with Industrial activity; or
(b) Determined to be incidental non-stormwater flows that do not significantly impact
water quality and may include:
• water line flushing;
• landscape irrigation;
• diverted stream flows;
• rising groundwaters;
• uncontaminated groundwater infiltration;
• uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
• discharges from potable water sources;
• foundation drains;
• air conditioning condensate (commerciallresident] al);
• irrigation waters (does not include reclaimed water as described in 15A
NC AC 2H .0200);
• springs;
• water from crawl space pumps;
• footing drains;
• lawn watering;
• residential car washing;
• flows from riparian habitats and wetlands;
• dechlorinated swimming pool discharges;
• street wash water;
flows from emergency fire fighting.
The Division may require that non-stormwater flows of this type be controlled
by the pefR+44eeTown's Stormwater Plan.
Part I. Page -3-2 of 4-2

NCS000453
NGS00045qNCS000454
PART I PERMIT COVERAGE
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until
expiration, the Town of Indian Trail is authorized to discharge stormwater from the
municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) to receiving waters, Crooked Creek, North
Fork Crooked Creek, South Fork Crooked Creek, Davis Mine Creek, Goose Creek, Price
Mill Creek. West Fork Twelvemile Creek and unnamed tributaries to them, all within the
Catawba and Yadkin -Pee Dee River basins. Such discharge will be controlled, limited
and monitored in accordance with the Town's Comprehensive Stormwater Management
Program Report, herein referred to as the Stormwater Plan. The Stormwater Plan
includes components of the Town's Phase 1I Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit
Application, Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report, and any
approved modifications.
2. All discharges authorized herein shall be adequately managed in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this permit. Any other point source discharge to surface waters
of the state is prohibited unless it is an allowable non-stormwater discharge or is covered
by another permit, authorization, or approval.
3. This permit does not relieve the Town from responsibility for compliance with any other
applicable federal, state, or local law, rule, standard, ordinance, order, judgment, or
decree.
4. This permit covers activities associated with the discharge of stormwater from the MS4
within the jurisdictional area of the Town and surrounding areas as described in the
approved Stormwater Plan to control potential pollution from the MS4. The permit
applies to current and future jurisdictional areas of the Town, as well as areas that seek
coverage under this permit through inter -local or other similar agreements with the Town.
Agreements for coverage under this permit must be approved by the Division of Water
Quality, herein referred to as the Division.
5. The Division may deny or revoke coverage under this permit for separate entities and
may require independent permit coverage as deemed necessary. In addition, the Town
may petition the Division to revoke or deny coverage under this permit for specific
entities.
6. Under the authority of Section 402(p) of the Clean Water Act and implementing
regulations 40 CFR Part 122, 123 and 124, North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1
and Session Law 2004-163 and in accordance with the approved Stormwater Plan, all
provisions contained and referenced in the Stormwater Plan are enforceable parts of this
permit. The Town will develop and implement its approved Stormwater Plan in
accordance with Section 402(p)(3)(B) of the Clean Water Act, provisions outlined by the
Director, and the provisions of this permit.
7. Discharges authorized under this permit shall not cause or contribute to violations of
water quality standards.
Part I Page 3-3 of 42

NCS000453
NGS880453NCS000454
8. The permit authorizes the point source discharge of stormwater runoff from the MS4. In
addition, discharges of non-stormwater are also authorized through the MS4 of the Town
if Such discharges are:
(a) Permitted by, and in compliance with, another- NPDES discharge permit including
discharges of process and non -process wastewater, and stormwater associated
with industrial activity; or
(b) Determined to be incidental non-stormwater flows that do not significantly impact
water quality and may include:
• water line flushing;
• landscape irrigation;
• diverted stream flows;
• rising groundwaters;
• uncontaminated groundwater infiltration;
• uncontaminated pumped groundwater;
• discharges from potable water sources;
• Foundation drains;
• air conditioning condensate (commercial/residential);
• irrigation waters (does not include reclaimed water as described in 15A
NCAC 21-1 .0200);
• springs;
• water from crawl space pumps;
• footing drains;
• lawn watering;
• residential car washing;
• flows from riparian habitats and wetlands;
• dechlorinated swimming pool discharges;
• street wash water;
• Mows from emergency fire fighting.
The Division may require that non-stormwater flows of this type be controlled
by the Town's Stormwater Plan.
Part I Page 3-4 of 42

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART II FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR PERMITTED
DISCHARGES
SECTION A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
The peteeTown will implement, manage and oversee all provisions of its Stormwater Plan to
reduce pollutants discharged from the MS4. This includes, but is not limited to, the following
areas:
The per-mitteeTown will develop and maintain adequate legal authorities to implement all
provisions of the Stormwater Plan. The peitteeTown will keep the Division advised
of the status of development of appropriate ordinances and legal authorities and will
pursue these authorities in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Stormwater Plan.
Any changes to the schedule must be approved by the Director.
2. The per-*ReeTown's Stormwater Plan will be implemented and managed such that the
discharge of pollutants from the MS4 is reduced to the maximum extent practicable. It is
anticipated that in order to meet this provision, implementation of the Stormwater Plan
will occur with emphasis given to priority areas and to management measures and
programs that are most effective and efficient at varying stages of the plan's
implementation.
The pef:fnttteeTown will implement the appropriate components of the Stormwater Plan
to assure that, to the maximum extent practicable, illicit connections, spills, and illegal
dumping into the MS4 are prohibited.
4. The pei:FnitteeTown will implement provisions of the Stormwater Plan as appropriate to
monitor and assess the performance of the various management measures that are a part
of the Stormwater Plan. This will include the provisions of this permit.
5. The pefmiaeeTown will maintain adequate funding and staffing to implement and
manage the provisions of the Stormwater Plan.
6. The pefmitteeTown will implement appropriate education, training, outreach, and public f
involvement programs to support the objectives of this stormwater discharge permit and
the Stormwater Plan.
7. The pef4:nitteeTown will implement a program to reduce pollution from construction site
runoff as described in the Stormwater Plan and in accordance with this permit.
The PeFfflitteeTown will implement an appropriate post -construction site runoff control
program to regulate new development and redevelopment by requiring structural and
non-structural best management practices to protect water quality, to reduce pollutant
loading, and to minimize post -development impacts. This program will include
provisions for long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs.
Part II Page I of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
9. The pe-rfflitteeTown will evaluate municipal operations and develop and implement an
appropriate program for municipal activities and ongoing operation and maintenance of'
municipal facilities to reduce the potential for stormwater pollution.
10. Proposed permit modifications must be submitted to the Director• for approval.
Part II Page 2 of I?

NCS000453
NCS000454
SECTION B: PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
1. Objectives for Public Education and Outreach
(ea) Raise public awareness on the causes and impacts of stormwater pollution
(db) Inform the public on steps they can take to reduce or prevent stormwater
pollution.
2. BMPs for Public Education and Outreach
The permitteeTown- shall develop and, implement; and a Public Education and
Outreach Program by applying the following BMPs within the first twelve months of permit
issue date, t^ meetthe ob eeti of the Publie Ed .,t; and QutFe eh n, and shall notify
the Division prior to modification of any goals.
'_ 'BMP -
' - Measurable Goals,,YR
YR
YR.
YR
4
YR'
5
(a) EstabbI:�L, Public
Etc
Ouweaeh ProgFam
hl: .,t:
Develop d
x
x
x
x
x
a ed Pfegfam
rl:,..,rl...,ntageeefflfflun1
faiF
signif;eant rn Fit.. and
:t;
Public education material
dissemination
Distribute written material that satisfies
the objectives through utility mail outs, at
special events, and at the local library.
X
X
X
X
X
(b) Informational Web Site
Develop and maintain an internet web site
that satisfies the objectives and provides
links to stormwater resources.: P-es-t
newsletief:ai4iel on st .,t,
info.,l:t.,, StOFFR.,,.,te
X
X
X
X
X
e e or ater
st-a€m
(e)Publ: ed ..r;
J
,to.•; is 69f- Seh. ols
hemeewnefs,'a-nd/or
husifles
Target specific audiences
Develop ...-,.,efal .,to ed ..t: l
X
X
X
X
X
1LJ y,v t.2V rl MillVl lli ste
ataigal tai:geting sehael eh;l.-1Fe
hemeown fs, and/of b u sses.
Identify target audiences and create
educational material for- them that satisfies
the objectives
Part II Page 3 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
SLCTION C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
1. Ob,iectives for Public Involvement and Participation
(a) Provide opportunities for the public to participate in program development and
implementation.
(b) Reach out and engageto target audiences
2. BMPs for Public Involvement and Participation
The petmittee-Town shall develop; Lind implement, afld enfei-ee a- Public involvement and
Participation Program by applying the following BMPs
shall comply with applicable state and local public
notice requirement; and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any goals.
limp
Goals
YR.
YR
YR
YR
YR
1
2
3
4
5
(a) "dF-inistei- ° Publie
Conduct at least one public meeting at
X
X
X
X
X
involvement Pregr-
Town Council meeting to allow the public
Conduct a public hearing
an opportunity to review and comment on
the Stormwater Plan.
(b) Establish an advisory
Use the Town Planning Commission to
X
X
X
X
X
panel
review the Stormwater Plan and the
annual report, and advise the Town on the
Stormwater Plan,
x
x
X
X
X
promote
-Create hands-on volunteer
involvement
preg+-affl(c) Hands-on
community
opportunities for citizens.
involvement
Part lI Page 4 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
SECTION D: ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
1. Objectives for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
(a) Develop a storm sewer system map showing all outfalls and receiving waters.
(b) Prohibit non -storm water discharges into the MS4 and implement appropriate
enforcement procedures and actions.
(a)(c) Detect and eliminate illicit discharges, including spills and illegal dumping.
(b)Adrdr-ess signifleant eentr-ibutoizs of pollutants o Town-"
b
(6)lfflply .,t aPPFOPFiate .,fr „t pr-eeedur-es and actions
(EI)Develap a storm sewer system map showing all eatfails and waters re
,a' ..h
T.
W(d) Inform employees, businesses, and the general public of hazards associated with
illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste.
2. BMPs for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
The wee Town shall develop, implement, and enforce an- Illicit Discharge Detection and
Elimination Program by applying the following BMPs to meet the objeetives of the 11lieit
and shall notify the Division prior to modification
of any goals. The Division may require that non-stormwater flows, as defined in Daft ? f 1 c'N
WAG z' 4Section A of this permit, be controlled by the Town's Stormwater Plan
BMP " w
.W Measulsrable Goa
-Call
YR
YR
�YR
�YRr
Y-R
x
x
x
Detection a
.,t and evaluation.
(a) Develop a Storm
Use GIS to create a base map that
X
X
Sewer System Base
includes outfalls, drainage areas, and
Map
receiving streams.
(b) Establish and
X
X
maintain appropriate
authOFitiesGfeatoAdopt
legal authorities
er-dinianee ordinances to prohibit illicit
discharges and enforce the approved Illicit
Discharge Detection and Elimination
Program.
(c) d}—Implement illicit
Implement an inspection program to
X
X
discharge detection
detect dry weather flows at system
procedures
outfalls, establish procedures for
tracing the sources. of illicit discharges
and for removing the sources, and -
Ddevelo rocedures for identification of
Part 11 Pagc 5 of 12

NCS000453
NCSO00454
' !BMP. S
Measurable Coals ,
YR',
`,Yli
Y'R'
-Y'1
.YR''
t
� r
priority areas likely to have illicit
discharges. Continue to update the map
drainage
(d) Establish a public
Create and publicize a reporting
X
reporting mechanism
mechanism for the public to report illicit
dischar es.
eress t,.
x
(C) Provide publie
Inform public employees, businesses, and
x
x
X
X
education and training.
the general public of hazards associated
with illegal discharges and improper
disposal of waste, and train public
employees on detection and reporting-.
Part 11 Page 6 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
SECTION E: CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
1. Objectives for Construction Site Runoff Controls
(a) Reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff from construction activities disturbing one
or more acres of land surface and those activities less than one acre that are part of
a larger common plan of development.
(b)
Regulate and sanction sites that have excessive
runoff pollutants.
(c) Control construction site
waste ,
littff, Mid Skif14afy Waste at the Gonstruction that may cause adverse impacts to
water quality.
2. BMPs for Construction Site Runoff Controls
The Town has elected to comply by relying on the NCDENR Division of Land Resources (DLR)
Erosion and Sediment Control Program, either- as .•a..,inistefed by the DLR, or as delegated by
............ .. _ _ �... ...... _rr..,r.­.. Jw.­..,.. .,
ineluding the Town. . The Town may rely on the DLR program only to the extent that that
program satisfies all of the following BMPs. Actions and program implementation by the Town
that are above the standards and scope of the DLR program shall not express or imply liability
and operation of the DLR Erosion and Sediment Control program by the Town. For the BMPs
that are not satisfied by the DLR program, Tthe penn4tee-Town shall develop, implement, and
enforce a Construction Site Runoff Controls Program by applying the following BMPs to met
and shall notify the Division
prior to modification of any goals.
BMP
-.Me"surabie Goals "
YR
YR
. YRu
�YRr
r YR-
1
2
`3-
4'
5
(a) implement..
RregFUM and
DeVeIE)p H Fe,-,lilat0fy ffle6haHiSFA
implement a PFOgram..Adopt an ordinance that
X
X
X
X
X
establish
will-requirei*g construction site erosion and
reguldter-
hamsm
sediment controls at eenstraefien site • nd as
well as sanctions te OnSffe for
erosion an
��
non-compliance. The -puttee has elected to
by the NGDENR Division
r-elying on
Land n,,...,.,.ees rr,T R) gi- . , a
ea neemply
eentrelEstablish
of sion
a regulatory
mechanism for
delegated by
, or as
the program.
the S d:,. Geflt.- I C—OffiffliSSiO (,SCC4
entatie fl
Part I I Page 7 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
13Mi'
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
1
2
3
4
5
The
pet-Faittee ma
te the
preg!- in en y extent
that that the fallowing
pi-ogi-am satisfies all of
B"
(b) Develop BMP
Rye Provide construction site operators
X
X
X
X
X
requirements an
with requirements for te-implementing erosion
for construction
and sediment control BMPs and to ,.entr-
site epeiatets
(c) Develop waste
Provide construction site operators with
x
x
X
X
X
control
requirements to control construction site
requirements for
wastes that may cause adverse water quality
construction
impacts.
Site5PFE)Vide
,opted to the ittee'.
r,•,,; ,;.,b Fnato,•iak
for- Gonstr-UG
$$H StFH.-r;.,,•.. ()f
Controls progi-affl.
(d) histit Improve
Establish
x
x
X
X
X
the plan reviews
procedures that incorporate water quality
process
considerations in construction site plan
reviews and require a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan for sites that disturb more than
one acre.
(e) Establish public
Establish Create and publicize procedures for
x
X
x
x
X
information
receipt and consideration of erosion and
procedures
sedimentation information submitted by the
public.
(f) Establish
Identify priority sites for Establish proeed j,e
x
X
X
X
X
inspection and
fez site inspection and enforcement of control
enforcement
measure requirements based on the nature of
procedures
construction activity, topography and the
characteristics of soils and receiving waters.
Coordinate with DLR for inspection and
enforcement. The preeedLifes should inelude
a
Part 1I Page 8 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
SECTION F: POST -CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF CONTROLS
1. Objectives for Post -Construction Site Runoff Controls
(a) Manage Reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff from new development /-and
redevelopment that dFains to the "484 ••disturbings one or more acres an
or -mere of land surface, iH6lHdiR8 PFOjeets and those which are less than an acre
that are part of a larger common plan of developmentof e.
(b) Ensure long term operation and maintenance of BMPs.
(c) Ensure controls are in place to minimize water quality impacts.
2. BMPs for Post -Construction Site Runoff Controls
The petffliEtee-Town shall develop, implement, and enforce a Post -Construction Site Runoff
Controls Program within the first twenty-four (24) months from the date of permit issuance by
applying the following BMPs to Fneei the objeetives of the Pest eenstr-Hetion Site Runof
Gentfols Program and shall notify the Division prior to modification of any goals. The Division
may require more stringent stormwater management measures as per 15A NCAC 2N.
-` 13MP
Measurable Goals
YR ,
YR
YR
_ YR
YR.
.- .
q ...:
1: ,
2,
�3
4
5.4
(a) Establish appropriate
Develop and implement strategies that include
X
X
X
BMPs
a combination of structural and/or non-
structural BMPs. Ensure adequate long-term
operation and maintenance of structural BMPs
by requiring annual inspection reports of
permitted s1111ctural BMPs performed by a
qualified professional.
(-a)(b) Establish a I
D Adopt an ordinances
X
X
X
x
Runoff Gent.-. 1 s
Pregr-Hn�regul atory
a„f. a
to aElEl..eSS 5t8Fffl..,ater
ee
and ffeffaff
ff 4em no", development - and
-edeyel,.pmen to ensure that controls are in
mechanism
place to prevent or minimize water quality
impacts.- from new development and
redevelopment. The ordinance must be
reviewed and approved by the Division
Director prior to implementation. gnsure tha
(c) Individual site
Require locally -Issued permit coverage for all
X
X
X
X
X
permitting
new development or redevelopment
disturbing one or more acres of land surface
and those activities less than one acre that are
part of a larger common plan of development.
{t}(d) Establish a
[o.eal to rL,v
Gentfel the
X
X
X
X
x
sourees of celiferni
Part Il Page 9 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
-BMP
Measurable Goals. •
YR
11
YR
2
YR
3
YR
4
-YR
5
fecal coliform program
. Develop and
to ,,entfel '"e sources
implement an oversight program control the
of fecal ^olil;o m to th
sources ol' fecal colllorm to the maximum
teat
extent practicable by coordinating with the
prat�iEa�le
county health department for te-ensuringe
proper operation and maintenance of on -site
wastewater treatment systems for domestic
wastewater.
!his prograni with the my health
3. The evaluation of Post -construction Stormwater Management Program measures
NOW
f •
/
• •
■
1 1
r
(b) —Model Practices. For those areas within the jurisdictional area of the pefm4teeTown that
are not subject to the post -construction stormwater management provisions of another existing
state stormwater management program, the pet-mitteeTown's Post -construction Stormwater
Management Program must equal or exceed the stormwater management and water quality
protection provided by the following model practices.
(01. The perrn4 +eeTown may issue a local stormwater management permit to a
development or redevelopment project as either a low density project or a high density
project.
(4)2. A project may be permitted as a low density project if it meets the following criteria:
(A) No more than two dwelling units per acre or 24%n built -upon area;
(B) Use of vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent practicable;
(C) All built -upon areas are at least 30 feet landward of perennial and intermittent
surface waters; and,
(D) Deed restrictions and protective covenants are required by the locally issued
permit and incorporated by the development to ensure that subsequent
development activities maintain the development (or redevelopment) consistent
with the approved plans.
O-i-i43. A project not consistent with the requirements Fora low density project may be
permitted as a high density project if it meets the following requirements:
(A) The stormwater control measures must control and treat the difference between
the pre-cevelopment and post -development conditions for the l-year 24-hour
Part II Page 10 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
storm. Runoff volume drawdown time must be a minimum of 24 hours, but not
more than 120 hours;
(B) All structural stormwater treatment systems must be designed to achieve 85%
average annual removal of total suspended solids;
(C) StUrmwater management measures must comply with the General Engineering
Design Criteria For All Projects requirements listed in 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c);
(D) All built -upon areas are at least 30 feet landward of perennial and intermittent
surface waters; and,
(E) Deed restrictions and protective covenants are required by the locally issued
permit and incorporated by the development to ensure that subsequent
development activities maintain the development (or redevelopment) consistent
with the approved plans.
(e)-Watershed Protection Plans. Public bodies may develop and implement
comprehensive watershed protection plans that may be used to meet part, or all, of the
requirements for post -construction stormwater management.
`d) A regulated entity may develop its own comprehensive watershed plan, may use
the model ordinance developed by the Commission, may design its own post -construction
practices based on the Division's guidance and engineering standards for best
management practices, or it may incorporate the post -construction model practices to
satisfy, in whole or in part, the requirements for post -construction stormwater
management.
Pail II Page 11 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
SECTION G: POLLUTION PREVENTION AND GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR
MUNICIPAL OPERA'CIONS
Objectives for Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations
(a) Prevent or reduce stormwater pollution from municipal operations and
maintenance.
(b) Train municipal employees about preventing and reducing stormwater pollution
from municipal activities.
2. BM-11's for the Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations
The peitteeTown shall develop and implement a Pollution Prevention and Good
Housekeeping Program by applying the following BMPs to Fneet the oi�eetive of the l2ellutien
and shall notify the Division prior to modification
of any goals.
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
I-
2
3
4
5'
x
x
Y that has the „ltiffl ,te
goal 0
Ur- reduGing pollutant run
ffluflieipal
�)(a) Inspection and
Develop an inventory of all facilities and
x
X
X
evaluation of facilities
operations owned and operated by the
and operations
L ReeTown with the potential for
generating polluted stormwater runoff,
Sspecifically inspeet the potential sokffees
of polluted i-uneff, the stormwater
controls; and conveyance systems.
Evaluate the sourees, doe n
defieieneies,plan
eerweetliveions, and
doeument the aGoomplishment EA
tive eti
ko(h) Conduct staff
Conduct staff training specific for
x
X
X
training
pollution prevention and good
housekeeping procedures that specifically
addresses the identified sources.
Part 11 Page 12 of 12

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART III PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
Implementation of the Stormwater Plan will include documentation of all program
components that are being undertaken. This documentation may include ineluding,
r^t limited t^ implementation of BMPs, educational programs, inspections, maintenance
activities, monitoring and sampling, in ti , rflaintenan aetiVities, ad..eati&Fl l
and enforcement actions. Documentation will be
kept on- file by the pefmitteeTown for a period of five years and made available to the
Director or 4�s-authorized representative immediately upon request.
2. The per-mitteeTown's Stormwater Plan will be reviewed and updated as necessary, but at
least on an annual basis. The per�itteeTown will submit a report of this evaluation and
monitoring information to the Division on an annual basis. This information will be
submitted by [Set date two months after permit year's end] of each year and cover the
previous year's activities from [Insert start date] to [Insert end date]. The
pefitteeTown's reporting will include appropriate information to accurately describe the
progress, status, and results of the peFmitteeTown's Stormwater Plan and WA4-may
include, but is not limited to, the following components:
(a) The pef:mitteeTown will give a detailed description of the status of
implementation of the Stormwater Plan. This will include information on
development and implementation of afl-each components of the Stormwater Plan
for the past year and schedules and plans for the year following each report.
(b) The permftteeTown will adequately describe and justify any proposed changes to
the Stormwater Plan. This will include descriptions and supporting information
for the proposed changes and how these changes will impact the Stormwater Plan
(results, effectiveness, implementation schedule, etc.).
(c) The penis tteeTown will document any necessary changes to programs or f
practices for assessment of management measures implemented through the
Stormwater Plan. In addition, any changes in the cost of; or funding for; the
Stormwater Plan will be documented.
(d) The per-mitteeTown will include a summary of any data gathered aelzated-as
part of the Stormwater Plan throughout the year along with an assessment of what
the data indicates in light of the Stormwater Plan.
(e) The per-mitte Town will provide information on the annual expenditures and
budget anticipated for the year following each report along with an assessment of
the continued financial support for the overall Stormwater Plan.
(f) The pei-mi-tteeTown will provide a summary of activities undertaken as part of the 1
Stormwater Plan throughout the year. This summary will include, but is not
limited to, ,"
Part III Page 1 of 2

NCS000453
NCS000454
disehai-g deteetion and elm Ffli aii I- . --information on activities for each
component of the Stormwater Plan for the past year.
(g) If monitoring and sampling is performed. Tthe per-mi-ttee town will provide
information concerning areas of water quality improvement or degradation.
Depending on the level of implementation of the Stormwater Plan, this
information may be submitted based on pilot studies, individual projects, or on a
watershed or sub -watershed basis.
3. The Director rna;�-shall notify the pei-mitteeTown when the Stormwater Plan does not
meet one or mare of the requirements of the permit. Within 30 days of such notice, the
per-mitteeTown will submit it plan and time schedule to the Director for modifying the
Stormwater Plan to meet the requirements. The Director may approve the corrective
action plan, approve a plan with modifications, or reject the proposed plan. The
per-mitteeTown will provide certification in writing (in accordance with Part IV,
Paragraph 2) to the Director that the changes have been made. Nothing in this paragraph
shall be construed to limit the Director's ability to conduct enforcement actions for
violations of this permit.
4. The Division may request additional reporting information as necessary to assess the
progress and results of the per-mittee'rown's- Stormwater Plan.
Part III Page 2 of 2

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART IV REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
1. Monitoring Records
If monitoring and sampling is performed, Tthe p tteeTown shall retain records of all
monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original
chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, and copies of all reports
required by this permit for a period of at least five years from the date of the sample,
measurement, report, or application. This period may be extended by request of the
Director at any time prior to the end of the five year period.
2. Report Submittals
(a) Duplicate signed copies of all reports required herein, shall be submitted to the
following address:
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Stormwater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
(b) All applications, reports, or information submitted to DWQ shall be signed by a
principal executive officer, ranking elected official, or duly authorized
representative. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(i) The authorization is made in writing by a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official;
(ii) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having
responsibility for the overall operation of a regulated facility or activity or
an individual or position having overall responsibility for
environmental/stormwater matters; and
(iii) The written authorization is submitted to the Director.
(c) Any person signing a document under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section shall
make the following 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 fines and imprisonment for knowing
violations."
Part IV Page 1 of 3

NCS000453
NCS000454
I Recording Results
For each inspection, maintenance activity, sarnple, or, sal pie, ins}eetiet -e+'
measurement maintenanee aettvity performed or collected pursuant to the requirements of
this permit, the pe+ rittee'I own shall record the following information:
(a) The dates, exact place, and time of inspection, maintenance activity, sampling, or
measurements, W maintenanee aetivi!;
(b) The individual(s) who performed the inspection, maintenance activity, sampling,
or measurements g, ;
(c) The date(s) analyses were performed;
(d) The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
(e) The analytical techniques or methods used; and
(f) The results of such analyses.
4. Planned Changes
The PermitteeTown shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned
changes or activities which could significantly alter the nature or quantity of pollutants
discharged. This notification requirement includes pollutants which are not specificaliy
iisted in the permit or subject to notification requirements under 40 CFR Part 122.42 (a).
S. Anticipated Noncompliance
The permitteeTown shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned
changes which may result in noncompliance with the permit requirements.
6. Twenty-four Hour Reporting;
The pea-mitteeTown shall report to the central office or the appropriate regional office any
noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall
be provided orally within 24 hours from the time the pe++ii4eeTown became aware of the
circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the
perTAftteeTown becomes aware of the circumstances.
The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance, and its causes;
the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance
has not been corrected, the anticipated time compliance is expected to continue; and steps
taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
The Director may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis if the oral report has
been received within 24 hours.
Part IV Page 2 of 3

NCS000453
NCS000454
7. Annual Reporting
The peffilitteeTown will submit reporting and/or monitoring information on an annual
basis per Part III of this permit on forms provided by the DWQ.
8. Additional Reporting
The Director may request reporting information on a more frequent basis as deemed
necessary either for specific portions of the peFa+i+teeTown's Stormwater Plan, or for the
entire Program.
9. Other I nforrnation
Where the perniitteeTown becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in
applying to be covered under this permit or in any report to the Director, it shall promptly
submit such facts or information.
Part IV Page 3 of 3

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART V STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A: COMPLIANCE AND LIAi3ILITY
1. Duty to Comply
The teeTown must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit
noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and is grounds for
enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or
denial of permit coverage upon renewal application.
(a) The pef-mitteeTown shall comply with standards or prohibitions established under
section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants within the time
provided in the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even if
the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
(b) The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition is
subject to a civil penalty not to exceed the maximum amounts authorized by
Section 309(d) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
(28 U.S.C. §2461 note) as amended by the Debt Collection improvement Act (31
U.S.C. §3701. note) (currently $27,500 per day for each violation). Any person
who negligently violates any permit condition is subject to criminal penalties of
$2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for not more than I year,
or both. Any person who knowingly violates permit conditions is subject to
criminal penalties of $5,000 to $50,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for
not more than 3 years, or both. Also, any person who violates a permit condition
may be assessed an administrative penalty not to exceed $1 1,000 per violation
with the maximum amount not to exceed $137,500. [Ref: Section 309 of the
Federal Act 33 USC 1319 and 40 CFR 122.41(a).]
(c) Under state law, a daily civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000) per violation may be assessed against any person who violates
or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a
permit. [Ref: North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.6A]
(d) Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for
violating sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318 or 405 of this tNni lAct, or any
permit condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit
issued under section 402 of this ENA2jAct. Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 19 and the Act,
administrative penalties for Class I violations are not. to exceed the maximum
amounts authorized by Section 309(g)(2)(A) of the Act and the Federal Civil
Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act (28 U.S.C. §2461 note) as amended by the
Debt Collection Improvement Act (31 U.S.C. §3701 note) (currently $1 1,000 per
violation, with the maximum amount of any Class i penalty assessed not to
exceed $27,500). Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 19 and the Act, penalties for Class II
violations are not to exceed the maximum amounts authorized by Section
309(g)(2)(B) of the Act and the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page I of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
(28 U.S.C. §246 t note) as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act (31
U.S.C. §370 t note) (currently $1 1,000 per day for each day during which the
violation continues, with the maximum amount of any Class lI penalty not to
exceed $137,500).
2. Duty to Mitigate
The pefn+4teeTown shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge
in violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human
health or the environment.
3. Civil and Criminal Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the peitteeTown from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3,
143-215.6A, t43-215.6B, 143-215.6C or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1319.
Furthermore, the perteeTown is responsible for consequential damages, such as fish
kills, even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily
suspended.INA3]
4. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
relieve the perteeTown from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the
per-mitteeTown is or may be subject to under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of
the Federal Act, 33 USC 1321.
S. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal
property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property
or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state, or local laws or
regulations.
6. Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or the
application of any provision of this permit to any circumstances, is held invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances; and the remainder of this permit,
shall not be affected thereby.
Parts V, Vl, VII & V1II Page 2 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
7. Duty to Provide Information
The penn4teeTown shall furnish to the Director, within a reasonable time, any
information which the Director may request to determine whether cause exists for
modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating the coverage issued pursuant to this
permit or to determine compliance with this permit. The per-mitteeTown shall also
furnish to the Director upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit.
8. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to be maintained Linder this
permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both. If a
conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person
under this paragraph, punishment is a fine of not more that $20,000 per day of violation,
or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both.
9. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false
statement, representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or
required to be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or reports of
compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more
than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation,
or by both.
10. Permit Actions
This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit
condition.
SEcTiON B: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE of POLLUTION CONTROLS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The per-mitteeTown shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and
systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are owned and/or
operated by the permitteeTown to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit.
Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and
appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-
up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by a pe o4teeTown only
when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit.
Parts V,V1,Vll&VIIIPage 3of8

NCS000453
NCS000454
2. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
It shall not be a defense for a permitteeTown in an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance
with the condition of this permit.
SECTION C: MONITORING AND RECORDS
1. Representative Sampling
When required herein, stormwater samples collected and measurements taken shall be
characteristic of the volume and nature of the permitted discharge. Analytical stormwater
sampling shall be performed during a representative storm event. These samples shall be
taken on a day and time that is characteristic of the discharge. Where appropriate, all
stormwater samples shall be taken before the discharge joins or is diluted by any other
waste stream, body of water, or substance. When specified herein, monitoring points
established in this permit shall not be changed without notification to and approval of the
Director.
2. Flow Measurements
Where required, appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with
accepted scientific practices shall be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and
reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored discharges.
3. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations
published pursuant to NCGS 143-215.63 et. seq, the Water and Air Quality Reporting
Acts, and to regulations published pursuant to Section 304(g), 33 USC 1314, of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as Amended, and Regulation 40 CFR 136.
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this permit, all test procedures must `
produce minimum detection and reporting levels and all data generated must be reported
down to the minimum detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.
4. Inspection and Entry
The pefmitteeTown shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an
authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Director), or in the case of a facility
which discharges through a municipal separate storm sewer system, an authorized
representative of a municipal operator or the separate storm sewer system receiving the
discharge, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required
by law, to;:
(a) Enter upon the penn4*,eTown's premises where a regulated facility or activity is
located or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this
permit;
Parts V, V1, VII & VIII Page 4 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
(b) Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under
the conditions of this permit;
(c) Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and
control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this
permit; and
(d) Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit
compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or
parameters at any location.
5. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2) or Section
308 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms
of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Division of
Water Quality. As required by the Act, analytical data shall not be considered
confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the
imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-215.6B or in Section 309
of the Federal Act.
PART VI LIMITATIONS REOPENER
The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and modifying the
permit, revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit as allowed by the laws,
I•ules, and regulations contained in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts-122 and 123;
Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H .0100; and North Carolina
General Statute 143-215. t et. al.
PART VII ADMINISTERING AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
The per-mitte Town must pay the administering and compliance monitoring flee within 30 thirty
days after being bilked by the Division. Failure to pay the fee in it timely manner in accordance
with 15A NCAC 2H .0105(b)(4) may cause this Division to initiate action to revoke the permit.
Pails V, V1, Vli & Vill Page 5 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
PART VIII DEFINITIONS
Act
See Clean Water Act.
2. Best Mana ement Practice BMP
Measures or practices used to reduce the amount of pollution entering surface waters.
BMPs can be structural or non-structural and may take the form of a process, activity,
physical structure or planning (see non-structural BMP).
Clean Water Act
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), as
amended, 33 USC 1251, et. seq.
4. Department
Department means the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
Division (DWQ)
The Division of Water Quality, Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
6. Director
The Director of the Division of Water Quality, the permit issuing authority.
7. EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
8. Grab Sample
An individual sample collected instantaneously. Grab samples that will be directly
analyzed or qualitatively monitored must be taken within the first 30 minutes of
discharge.
9. Hazardous Substance
Any substance designated in 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the Clean Water
Act.
10. 111icit Discharge
Any discharge to a MS4 that is not composed entirely of stormwater except discharges
pursuant to an NPDES permit (other than the NPDES MS4 permit), allowable non-
stormwater discharges, and discharges resulting from fire -fighting activities.
11. Industrial Activity
For the purposes of this permit, industrial activities shall mean all industrial activities as
defined in 40 CFR 122.26.
12. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
Parts V, VI, VII & V11I Page 6 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(8) means a conveyance or system of conveyances
(including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters,
ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains):
(1) Owned or operated by the United States, a state, city, town, county, district,
association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to state law) having
jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other
wastes, including special districts under state law such as a sewer district,
flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe
or an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved
management agency under Section 208 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) that
discharges to waters of the United States or waters of the State;
(ii) Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater;
(iii) Which is not a combined sewer; and
(iv) Which is not part of a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) as defined
in 40 CFR 122.2.
13. Nan-stormwater Discharge Categories
The following are categories of non-stormwater discharges that the peffflitteeTown must
address if it identifies them as significant contributors of pollutants to the storm sewer
system: water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising
groundwater, uncontaminated groundwater infiltration, [as defined in 40 CFR
35.2005(20)], uncontaminated pumped groundwater, discharges from potable water
sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, springs, water
from crawl space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car
washing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, dechlorinated swimming pool
discharges, and street wash water (discharges or flows from fire fighting activities are
excluded from the definition of illicit discharge and only need to be addressed where they
are identified as significant sources of pollutants to waters of the United States).
14. Non-structural BMP
Non-structural BMPs are preventive actions that involve management and source controls
such as: (1) Policies and ordinances that provide requirements and standards to direct
growth to identified areas, protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas,
maintain and/or increase open space, provide buffers along sensitive water bodies,
minimize impervious surfaces, and/or minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation; (2)
policies or ordinances that encourage infill development in higher density urban areas,
and areas with existing storm sewer infrastructure; (3) education programs for
developers and the public about minimizing water quality impacts; (4) other measures
such as minimizing the percentage of impervious area after development, use of measures
to minimize directly connected impervious areas, and source control measures often
thought of as good housekeeping, preventive maintenance, and spill prevention.
15. Outfall
Parts V, V I, V I I& V I II Page 7 of 8

NCS000453
NCS000454
The point of wastewater or stormwater discharge from a discrete conveyance system.
See also point source discharge of stormwater.
16. Permittee
The owner or operator issued this permit.
17. Point Source Discharge of Stormwater
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance including, but not specifically limited
to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, or discrete fissure from which
stormwater is or may be discharged to waters of the state.
l8. Redevelopment
Means any rebuilding activity other than a rebuilding activity that results in no net
increase in built -upon area, and provides equal or greater stormwater control than the
previous development.
19. Representative Storm Event
A storm event that measures greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall and that is preceded by at
least 72 hours in which no storm event measuring greater than 0.1 inches has occurred. A
single storm event may contain up to 10 consecutive hours of no precipitation. For
example, if it rains for 2 hours without producing any collectable discharge, and then
stops, a sample may be collected if a rain producing a discharge begins again within the
next 10 hours.
20. Stormwater Runoff
The flow of water which results from precipitation and which occurs immediately
following rainfall or as a result of snowmelt.
21. Toxic Pollutant
Any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.
Parts V, VI, VII & VIII Page 8 of 8