19910211 Ver 1_Complete File_19920529

• d j?? LAtck?_ 1YU%A_\ 'r U-19 F TV
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
,fir. Undy Shook
Star Route, Aox 268
Permittee Tnur n" , Koxth Carolina 18781
Permit No
Action lid. 1"102043
Issuing Office
CESAW--CO-13
RECEIVED
MAY 2 9 1992
?(tTOF?Y BRANCH
NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term
"this office" refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted
activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description:
To eauplets construction of a trout rearing facility an Otter Creek cuff
S.S. 1363.
Project Location:
griartown, Macon County, Sorth Carolina
Permit Conditions:
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on 9eceaiber 31, 1995 . If you find that you need
more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for consideration at least
one month before the above date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and condi-
tions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make
a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain
the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification of
this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area.
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by
this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordina-
tion required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register
of Historic Places.
ENG FORM 1721, Nov 86 EDITION OF SEP 82 Is OBSOLETE. (33 CFR 325 (Appendix A))
1

4. If you sell the property associated with this permit, you must obtain the signature of the new owner in the space provided
and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization.
b. It a conditioned water quality certification has been issued for your project, you must comply with the conditions specified
in the certification as special conditions to this permit. For your convenience, a copy of the certification is attached if it con-
tains such conditions.
6. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure
that it is being or has been accomplished in accordance with the terms and conditions of your permit.
Special Conditions:
So* anclan*d &beet*
Further Information:
1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to:
( ) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).
A Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
( ) Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1413).
2. Limits of this authorization.
IL This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law.
b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
d. This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
3. Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any liability for the following:
a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural
causes.
b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf
of the United States in the public interest.
c. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by. the activity
authorized by this permit. ' ' "
d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
t
2
P
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.
4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public
interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances
warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or
inaccurate (See 4 above).
c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation
procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The
referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms
and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any
corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations
(such as those specified in 33 CFR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the
cost.
6. Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless
there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest
decision, the Corps will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit.
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
piR. 13f SHOOK 011
(PERMITTEE (DATE)
becomes effect''v? when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below.
G
'RICT ENGINEER) I/
;TER S. TULLOC'd, COLONEL
( ATE)
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and
conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit
and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.
(TRANSFEREE)
3
(DATE)
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19M - 717-425
704 d 7 f - °?r z? ?-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. The permittee will maintain the authorized work in good condition and
in conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The permittee is
not relieved of this requirement if he abandons the permitted activity without
having it transferred to a third party.
2. The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent a
significant increase in turbidity outside the area of construction or
construction-related discharge. Increases such that the turbidity in the
waterbody is 25 NTU's or less are not considered significant.
3. If the permittee discovers any previously unknown historic or
archeological remains while accomplishing the authorized work, he will
immediately notify the Wilmington District Engineer who will initiate the
required State/Federal coordination.
4. This Department of the Army permit does not obviate the need to obtain
other Federal, State, or local authorizations required by law.
5. The permittee shall construct a fishway on his dam/intake structure so
that fish passage past the dam is possible. The fishway should be either a
v pool and weir or a vertical slot type. Solid baffles (pool-weir type) should
not be over 1-foot higher than the water level in the pool below the baffle.
Measures should be taken in the design and construction of the fishway to
establish attracting flows through the fishway and at the entrance of the
fishway.
6. All material removed from the ponds and settling boxes should be
removed to high ground, and not placed within otter Creek.
_, 7. Under no conditions may the entire flow of Otter Creek be diverted to
t supply the permittee's fish propagation facility.
8. All fill material in excess of that needed to provide vehicle access _
and raceway support shall be removed from the stream side of the raceway area.
9. A mitigation plan shall be developed to create a vegetated wetland
area in the pre-existing high flow channel now isolated by the diversionary
berm. The permittee should contact our Asheville Regulatory staff at (704)
259-0856 for technical advice on developing and implementing such mitigation
plan.
10. All in-stream construction activities shall take place outside of the
spawning season (no work from 1 November thru 15 April).
11. Stringent erosion control measures should be implemented where soil
is disturbed and maintained until the project site has been stabilized.
12. Construction will be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact water entering or flowing into otter Creek.
13. Native vegetation such as willow, alder, hemlock, and rhododendron
should be planted along disturbed streambanks for stabilization and shading of
the creek.
ORIGINAL
PLANS
Action I.D. 1 3 9 1 4i 6
y?
XUCV ,(i??,liiiiiii \l?l

o ?/ ? ?. /jj'r l! _ ' ??-- •, ??,G ?,l ?? \?,?-?/. 'FIJI , i ?_!
l 1 C?
ul,
0
r
91
?0
? v 1-??Af
9!'
•=w 2 <1
b r
?_ P?a1GC? -z1O C- `/ o?
Was7G hY?aT?Fie ?N
H
? f i
copvc
pj?
1
I
3oaD Psr c..,? e? t? (8 "rL,..?
wj'``3' RE6>,?. Iz"O.c• E.J.
l.?Np, o r F00
V

l /
3s9o psr co ..Ac GNtli?(c
W_/ Rtiv?u?ry ti? NJf?,
.9proo,k. 66 l7a,dl
.w?taw co?Ir?fNN ??
-i5-Acess_W l fta- lzcrvv,- r,. (,*Se c.
Inc c r? /S C % o ? cIh e d y ? ? `_-; „ . - _-?
P. -
A\
-ppPiton- i.s cy Qvzej54' `
Qr44 it
Otf'eR Gnac?G ? _._' _ _ 1
- .Effyc. L "We 1'e R w-c- 's
j ..
O \
?Typ.
? j
R,.1 y 54.OL ?4t-.321- a7!!7_
ntts-- ,T gk Ra,r1
?.a }``r?1 i 9r. 119291..
$cwlo, %?a /
SEAT 3 n,C' !1

I ^C VRP- / r I/K-,

,Q.R?? .J?o? lay ,3Z/- S7 y7

sir ? oF- ?
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Action ID. 199102043 January 9, 1991
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
AND STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
Applicant: Mr. Randy Shook, Star Route, Box 268, Topton, North Carolina
28781.
This permit action is being taken under authority delegated to the
Wilmington District Engineer by the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of
Engineers by Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 325.8, pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Proiect Description: The project consists of the construction of a trout
rearing facility in and adjacent to Otter Creek off S.R. 1365 near Briartown
in Macon County, North Carolina. The facility was constructed without the
required Department of the Army authorization and therefore in violation of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Upon inspection by regulatory staff,
Mr. Shook was advised of the violation, and given the opportunity to submit
an after-the-fact application for processing. The applicants request is for
retention of the unauthorized discharges as well as additional mitigation
work to offset habitat losses.
Specifically, the project consists of an approximate 75-foot-long by 6-8-
foot-wide earth and rock diversionary berm within the creek channel to
narrow water flow into an 18-foot-wide concrete dam/intake structure.
Approximately 60 linear feet of creek channel downstream of the dam and
adjacent to two lower raceways was narrowed by placement of rock and
boulders. A concrete distribution box, and three earthen raceways were
constructed adjacent and parallel to Otter Creek on upland property. The
diverted hatchery water is returned to the creek through a concrete settling
box at the end of the system.
-2-
Environmental Setting: The project site is located in a rural mountainous
area in northwestern Macon County. The area consists of sparse residential
development surrounded by pasture and open woodland. White Oak Creek is
tributary to the Nantahala River, has a wild rainbow trout population, and
may support brook trout. Bankfull width of otter Creek is approximately 10-
12 feet. The stream substrate is composed primarily of cobble. The stream,
adjacent wetlands and bordering riparian environment affords benefits to a
variety of aquatic and terrestial wildlife species.
Environmental Impacts: Approximately 1600 square feet of in-stream habitat
has been altered by construction activities. The diversionary berm within
otter Creek has isolated an approximate 8-10-foot by 60-foot high flow
channel from the streamcourse. The dam/intake structure is a barrier to
fish migration upstream. Instream work, particularly at the dam site and
adjacent to the lower raceways, resulted in temporary sedimentation of
aquatic habitat below the work site. Diversion of the creek into the
aforementioned high flow channel, during pouring of concrete for the dam and
intake structure, avoided potential fish kills downstream. Our after-the-
fact permit will be conditioned to require that a fish ladder be
incorporated into the dam design to allow continued fish passage through the
creek segment. Various special conditions incorporated into our permit,
including a requirement to mitigate the habitat losses on-site;
implementation of stringent erosion control measures until the site has been
stabilized; maintenance of minimum flows downstream; planting of native
vegetation along all disturbed streambanks; and a moratorium on in-stream
construction during the trout spawning season should offset previous adverse
impacts. A fish propagation permit, NPDES discharge permit, and Section 401
Water Quality Certification issued by the N.C. Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources will insure that water quality standards are
not degraded.
Alternatives: The only practicable alternative with less impacts would be
the "no build" alternative. Design changes to avoid or further minimize
adverse impacts to waters and/or wetlands would not achieve the desired
results of a gravity-fed trout rearing facility.
Summary: I have reviewed the after-the-fact application and plans furnished
by the applicant and the environmental assessment. The proposed project has
had extensive review through our normal public notice process, and there are
no substantive objections to the project as of the writing of this
statement. The U.S. Environmental Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and the National Marine Fisheries Service have reviewed this application and
have no unresolved concerns, provided that our permit is conditioned as
stated previously.

-3-
I have reviewed the application and plans and the public interest record,
and I find that the proposed work is not controversial and will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
I find that this action is not a major Federal action significantly
affecting the human environment; and hence, the preparation of a detailed
statement under Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 is not required.
The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management issued a Section 401
Water Quality Certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
and in accordance with the North Carolina Water Quality Standards.
An evaluation of the EPA's 404(b)(1) guidelines, 40 CFR Part 230, has been
performed. I have determined that the discharge of fill material complies
with the guidelines with the inclusion of appropriate special conditions.
I have given full consideration to this application. After weighing
favorable and unfavorable aspects, I find that the issuance of an after-the-
fact permit to Mr. Randy Shook will not be contrary to the public interest
provided that they adhere to the condi;onel, incorporat into this permit.
U
r . Tulloch
Corps of Engi ers
ict Engineer

APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMI,jgi B APPROVAL NO. 0710-o003
(33 CFR 325) PP s 30 September 1992
Pubic reporting burden for ante collection of information is estimated to average b hours per response for the maloft ne tine for reviewing insttuctlons,
searching existing dais sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the anion: Applications for larger
«mare complex
projects, or those In ecologically sensitive areas, could take UP to 500 hours. Send comments regarding this bur mete or an otller
pact o (this collection of
Information.
2
including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information
15 Jefferson
Reports,
Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arington, VA 22202.4302 and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), ft? ashln Washington, DC
206503. 03. Please DO
NOT RETURN your completed form to either of these addresses. Send your completed form to: Department of Defense, U.S. Am
y Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW OR, 20 Mass.
Ave., N.W. Washington, DO 20314-1000.
The Department of the Army permit program is authorized by Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and
Section 103 of the Marine, Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act These laws require permits authorizing activities in or affecting navigable waters of the
United States, the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, and the transportation of dredged material for the purpose of dumping it
into ocean waters. Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a permit Information in this application is made a matter of
public record through issuance of a public notice. Disclosure of the information requested is voluntary; however, the data requested are necessary in order to
communicate with the applicant and to evaluate the permit application. If necessary information is not provided, the permit application cannot be processed nor
can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of ft proposed activity must be attached to this application
(see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity. An application
that is not completed in full will be returned.
1. APPLICATION NUMBER (To be assigned by Corps) 3. NAME, ADDRESS, AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT
Tele
hone no
durin
b
i
h
p
.
g
us
ness
ours
2. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT

Randy Shook A/C ( 1 (Residence)
A/C ( ) (Office)
Star Route
268
Bo
,
x
Topton, N. C. 28781 Statement of Authorization: I hereby designate and authorize
to act in my
Telephone no. during business hours behalf as my agent in the processing of this permit application and to
furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of the application.
A/C(704)321-5747 (Residence) SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
A/C (704) 479- d31 (Office)
4. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY
4a. ACTIVITY
Construct a 2216" x 4'11" concrete wall across stream with a 121 x 31611 intake box.
Escavate 611 x 601 x 121 from creek to create a diversion berm.
4b. PURPOSE
Commercial Trout Farm with concrete distribution box and three earthern raceways with
sediment box. Work was completed 9/90.
4c. DISCHARGE OF DREDGED OR FILL MATERIAL
Removed 20 CY of creek stone and fines from creek bed and placed in diversion berm
approximately 60 foot long 6 to 8 foot wide. Approximately 60 linear foot of creek
channel downstream of the dam and adjacent to the two lower raceways were narrowed
by placing 20 CY of waste material mostly large boulders.

ro......a... ,.?, ,., ,,.,,
ENG FORM 4345_ Jan 91 EDITION of APA se Is cwLqmFTF
L
5. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. LESSEES, ETC., WHOSE PROPERTY ALSO ADJOINS THE WATERWAY
Ed Cross John Ibach
Star Route, Box 251 12362 Mandarin Rd.
Topton, N.C. 28781 Jacksonville, FLA. 32223
6. WATERBODY AND LOCATION ON WATERBODY WHERE ACTIVITY EXISTS OR IS PROPOSED
Otter Creek off S.R. 1365 near Briartown in Macon County
LOCATION ON LAND WHERE ACTIVITY EXISTS OR IS PROPOSED
ADDRESS: Randy Shook
Star Route, Box 268
Topton, N.C. 28781
STREET. ROAD. ROUTE OR OTHER DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
Mvu-nn N C. 28781
COUNTY STATE
ZIP CODE
M?nnn (!rn,nt
LOCAL GOVERNING BODY WITH JURISDICTION OVERSfTE
8. Is any portion of the activity for which authorization is sought now complete?
If answer is 'yes' give reasons, month year t act 'ty led. the exiaC YES 0 NO
I : was not aware ot??the zacT 90 neel`?e? a peek °?'E>t°1°E? department of Army Corp of
Engineers to do work in creek. I do want to be in compliance with section 404 of the
clean water act.
Project was completed in September 1990
9. List as approvals or certifications and denials received from other federal, interstate, state or local agencies for any structures, construction,
activities described in this application. discharges or other
ISSUING AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL IDENTIFICATION NO. DATE OF APPLICATION DATE OF APPROVAL DATE OF DENIAL
10. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the activities described herein. 1 certify that 1 am familiar with the information contained in the
application, and that to the beat of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to
undertake the proposed activities or 1 am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applimL
SIGMA APPLICANT
DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The app/icadon must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 3 has been filled out and signed.
k8 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of The United States
r owin* and wMuuy Waft conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material tact or makes any false. fictitious or fraudulent
statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any Was fictitious or
fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. " -
(Revtr s of. ENO FORM 4345)
?i
0
J
IM,

r ;
0

oc a".

0 i
C .ri i?VR I ti;

0
r r
•\\ l r---' "?" ?\\ \ ? ? ?\i\\ \????/ ??\ ? cif „? ?' ?J ;??I ? ? '^?? /??
t ( (' ,??
'U \n
m \Q
\_\;:?-.o??..r ?n ??? ?\.?:?11(?'••.;cl?%?'?,)I?; l,t_ 1??.?r????%Ill`"???I?l?l????-J?ll?\\\`; :`'`(???('??i?l./ll??:i??
? ' 0

e-?
moo=
• '*;..v s ;`t f
J b' ?? lij q
L-L
H
?' , OL
m
I
S?«nn?? .? ?n?7
72'A? a1 r kA 7 ryA Y?YJ SfA77l -
I I '?
I
•? aS as ???^ ' ?d.l
i
.1 • ??{•PN CM t-Inviniol b 1f
o e
'ZPd
? N
h? oo? ?o ?/??`j _? ?V992?f -/ -LAt V
/ • • -- • • • e -- s --- e ? - •- e ----... - o - • -- • -- a -- •
/'? / wad - ?Y ®? o • i
- JAI
10-
\ r
?Da?A7 VS-ao
94
s
l?
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Action ID. 199102043 August 22, 1991
PUBLIC NOTICE
MR. RANDY SHOOK, Star Route, Box 268, Topton, North Carolina 28781, has
applied for an after-the-fact Department of the Army (DA) permit TO AUTHORIZE
THE PLACEMENT OF EXCAVATED/FILL MATERIAL IN THE WATERS/WETLANDS OF OTTER CREEK
FOR INSTALLATION OF A CONCRETE DAM/INTAKE STRUCTURE, A CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
BOX, THREE EARTHEN RACEWAYS AND A CONCRETE SETTLING BASIN ASSOCIATED WITH A
TROUT REARING FACILITY, NEAR BRIARTOWN, Macon County, North Carolina.
This public notice does not imply, on the parts of the Corps of Engineers
or other agencies, either favorable or unfavorable opinion of the work
performed; but it is issued to solicit comments on the factors listed above on
which a final decision will be based. Legal action has been suspended pending
the outcome of this consideration.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the
applicant and from observations made during an onsite visit by a
representative of the Corps of Engineers. Plans submitted with the
application show the completed construction of an approximate 75-foot-long,
6 to 8-foot wide, earth and rock, diversionary berm within the cheek channel
to narrow water flow into an 18-foot-wide concrete dam/intake structure.
Approximately 60 linear feet of creek channel, downstream of the dam and
adjacent to two lower raceways, has been narrowed by 4 to 5 feet. The purpose
of the work, which was completed in 1990, was to establish a commercial trout
farm. Plans showing the completed work are included with this public notice.
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine
the need for the applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No
DA permit will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal
has been received and reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued
until the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has
determined the applicability of a Water Quality Certificate as required by
PL 92-500.
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within the
comment period specified in the notice, that a public hearing be held to
consider this application. Requests for public hearing shall state, with
particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
}
-2-
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the
National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered
properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and
this worksite is not registered property or property listed as being eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register
constitutes the extent of cultural resource investigations by the District
Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the presence of such resources.
Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or historical
data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer, based on available information, is not aware that
the proposed activity will affect species, or their critical habitat,
designated as endangered or threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of
the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity
and its intended use on the public interest. Evaluation of the probable
impacts which the proposed activity may have on the public interest requires a
careful weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each particular
case. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The
decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so the conditions under which
it will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome of the
general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national concern
for both protection and utilization of important resources. All factors which
may be relevant to the proposal must be considered including the cumulative
effects thereof. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general
environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards and flood plain values (in accordance with Executive Order
11988), land use, navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water
supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber
production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and, in
general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving the
placement of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, a
permit will be denied if the discharge that would be authorized by such permit
would not comply with the Environmental Protection Agencies, 404(b)(1)
guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other applicable
guidelines or criteria, a permit will be granted unless the District Engineer
determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal,
State and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes and other interested
parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed
activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers
to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this
proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on

-3-
endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental
effects and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used
in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental
Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments
are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the
overall public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this DA permit will not be made
until the DEM (DEM) issues, denies, or waives State certification required by
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The DEM considers whether or not the
proposed activity will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the DA permit
serve as application to the DEM for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be
reviewed at the offices of the Environmental Operations Section, DEM,
Salisbury Street, Archdale Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such
materials will be furnished to any person requesting copies upon payment of
reproduction costs.
The DEM plans to take final action in the issuance of the Clean Water Act
certification on or after September 13, 1991.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for
Clean Water Act certification should do so in writing delivered to the DEM,
Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687, on or before
September 9, 1991, Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will
be received in this office, Attention: Mr. David Baker, until 4:15 p.m.,
September 23, 1991, or telephone [phone].
r • ? ? ` \??1 ? O3 1 Y _
0
0
I t

0

✓moi.�f� Y �t xw Y a 'i.. »' ,�'1'T3 }i��x vek:5,'ki iS'.'» rt trt.:y-} <:vC J -$^Y +tALs' +n I-r�.v..- uS}y�cy.F •;, yw,
f i IX :lk ...( 4 G, dict' kz.� (Iv - �' a �' _ ✓ k' Y m r'i ic'ai' -w f .A+ 1 �"-i+•k< K � I
xt.�n *� 3':� + i k +
7k s i. ?`f4 B '' w
it
' �puCr� �isTia��T�ax+ px
x1 f ;X s S�. t i �• � 1. S {f � 1 I f`' h -x.�� r i,, a*^'q e7: ' r7.f '� _� IK'i M4�y �' �
7 em
r` is a 7
1.1 5 � " +�L �� ' Fj'�c �•� = of � � �Fi`j�+'�+t{
{ i frt it
_ Pjio 4r
at' ieru eew�cy �1 t �„ A¢ 144 �
f
r�r 3'10
too - F;
a � , a .i• r tit.,,, �{ r � r ,:. t J2ik'�� 7 r: s � , tt�t}ri'. i
ql
_-.t -;, of 3 ,. � f � i J k •� . ! y+ 4 k�, +,� t *,yF �� * � _ 1 X t f F ak r a L bf tf4 4 �F k ,a
40*A.4P
f 7� � ° _ I;�' .',20 �� s',�� }�$l�'�� � � � i Ku s x e9oy .�s•���f b
s `.�' I x �•+, z G aps ain r✓?,F+f a'i,
C
!►
OOYOTC ��Y�►iGV/ {6�x /;" F � W ��C `"Tri4T
t/'!d •� ��: �► s 4*ta
_ X
./a/ilCiv '40CCa/.a _

Ot'I"eR Gnec?
I -
I
i
I
?
?TVP
3DDD ASr C...e ?r fe 8 ~7`.(i..lc ._ / Q7=lo
w/ 05 Ra4.K z"O?c • E, cJ, /
eGaN l,,utr e P .Al,
•
I ?? ? 7 Pr?? SPA way
N
_35aa ps r• Ge«.e.eeTi G"ti...lc
° yJl. ?ttiv?eru?? A•.'. NJyIi4.
?1FC8w--Grac?i Rd' lygw-?wtnw?l?
SST 3 0?' ?
?'/ ?, - ?xccss W k-Fvti CZti'v?,u f e Caez?C.
i
i ? Whtzw ce?IC?f»N ??
I
?? ;APP°rok S`? l74??gt

Y
:r

4
-Cv??ac'rlowl
I ?
iPpM - - ---
-Is-"PVC PIPE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Action ID. 199102043
PUBLIC NOTICE
August 22, 1991
MR. RANDY SHOOK, Star Route, Box 268, Topton, North Carolina 28781, has
applied for an after-the-fact Department of the Army (DA) permit TO AUTHORIZE
THE PLACEMENT OF EXCAVATED/FILL MATERIAL IN THE WATERS/WETLANDS OF OTTER CREEK
FOR INSTALLATION OF A CONCRETE DAM/INTAKE STRUCTURE, A CONCRETE DISTRIBUTION
BOX, THREE EARTHEN RACEWAYS AND A CONCRETE SETTLING BASIN ASSOCIATED WITH A
TROUT REARING FACILITY, NEAR BRIARTOWN, Macon County, North Carolina.
This public notice does not imply, on the parts of the Corps of Engineers
or other agencies, either favorable or unfavorable opinion of the work
performed; but it is issued to solicit comments on the factors listed above on
which a final decision will be based. Legal action has been suspended pending
the outcome of this consideration.
The following description of the work is taken from data provided by the
applicant and from observations made during an onsite visit by a
representative of the Corps of Engineers. Plans submitted with the
application show the completed construction of an approximate 75-foot-long,
6 to 8-foot wide, earth and rock, diversionary berm within the cheek channel
to narrow water flow into an 18-foot-wide concrete dam/intake structure.
Approximately 60 linear feet of creek channel, downstream of the dam and
adjacent to two lower raceways, has been narrowed by 4 to 5 feet. The purpose
of the work, which was completed in 1990, was to establish a commercial trout
farm. Plans showing the completed work are included with this public notice.
The State of North Carolina will review this public notice to determine
the need for the applicant to obtain any required State authorization. No
DA permit will be issued until the coordinated State viewpoint on the proposal
has been received and reviewed by this agency, nor will a DA permit be issued
until the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has
determined the applicability of a water Quality Certificate as required by
PL 92-500.
This application is being considered pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Any person may request, in writing within the
comment period specified in the notice, that a public hearing be held to
consider this application. Requests for public hearing shall state, with
particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing.
I
-2-
The District Engineer has consulted the latest published version of the
National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of registered
properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, and
this worksite is not registered property or property listed as being eligible
for inclusion in the Register. Consultation of the National Register
constitutes the extent of cultural resource investigations by the District
Engineer, and he is otherwise unaware of the presence of such resources.
Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical, or historical
data may be lost or destroyed by work under the requested permit.
The District Engineer, based on available information, is not aware that
the proposed activity will affect species, or their critical habitat,
designated as endangered or threatened pursuant to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973.
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of
the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed_activity_
and its intended use on the public interest. Evaluation of the probable
impacts which the proposed activity may have on the public interest requires a
careful weighing of all those factors which become relevant in each particular
case. The benefits which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. The
decision whether to authorize a proposal, and if so the conditions under which
it will be allowed to occur, are therefore determined by the outcome of the
general balancing process. That decision should reflect the national concern
for both protection and utilization of important resources. All factors which
may be relevant to the proposal must be considered including the cumulative
effects thereof. Among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general
environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values,
flood hazards and flood plain values (in accordance with Executive Order
11988), land use, navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water
supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber
production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and, in
general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving the
placement of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, a
permit will be denied if the discharge that would be authorized by such permit
would not comply with the Environmental Protection Agencies, 404(b)(1)
guidelines. Subject to the preceding sentence and any other applicable
guidelines or criteria, a permit will be granted unless the District Engineer
determines that it would be contrary to the public interest.
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal,
State and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes and other interested
parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed
activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers
to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this
proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on
C
-3-
endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental
effects and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used
in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental
Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments
are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the
overall public interest of the proposed activity.
Generally, the decision whether to issue this DA permit will not be made
until the DEM (DEM) issues, denies, or waives State certification required by
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The DEM considers whether or not the
proposed activity will comply with Sections 301, 302, 306, and 307 of the
Clean Water Act. The application and this public notice for the DA permit
serve as application to the DEM for certification.
Additional information regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be
reviewed at the offices of the Environmental Operations Section, DEM,
Salisbury Street, Archdale Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies of such
materials will be furnished to any person requesting copies upon payment of
reproduction costs.
The DEM plans to take final action in the issuance of the Clean Water Act
certification on or after September 13, 1991.
All persons desiring to make comments regarding the application for
Clean Water Act certification should do so in writing delivered to the DEM,
Post Office Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687, on or before
September 9, 1991, Attention: Mr. John Dorney.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will
be received in this office, Attention: Mr. David Baker, until 4:15 p.m.,
September 23, 1991, or telephone [phone].

SCE
0
0
0
0
C
0

Ov,
?,vorfs ?/,'00?
? r/ro t i SOY 26S'
C, .2 97W /
Sca1c b&d ?o
Sir 2 0? ¢
17-1
.
?pPxo? is?y Dee
Ott'eR GrtaeK '
Z2 ? (v
i
,i
i
I
i
_i (9 Typ. /
• / 9
w( 3" Rc6nt I7''41C, E-0.
I -? '- '7 pr?? .SPA w.?y
., N t 1
- 35x0 P!S_r Gea.e.ae?G 11G ii>?i??
ur•7 l7a6c??jt
t
_._. J5' Svc Lltic to Roce-75
r
/ ? __?XCGSS ?R-?Gh. lG?1V?w ?e Ca,EG'?
wht??, co?1C?f»N ??
i
_
RA.,17 6l w) L 3Zr- S-70
Q?fB ..Gea?i?i Ra, ' hd-,4-I*
.p.aµwJ J3 ; G, f{6R91.1J
SST 3 0?' ¢
F

.4R?? ???o? any-.?Z/- S7y7
_ 22? l?'? 8 =tom" -?
' ?«6N .i ? ? Ipwm ? i
0
_?s"PVC P,
pE
?4?EygR ?? t7L, !f? /
q
-- T-95-1
_-
----- ----- =----------- -- --------------
` i
----_
-- -
I
__.._._.._...__?__.?__?_R._ ?_.____.?e__.__,_ _ -.
---- _ ? __
__ - ?
Cow rm,?: /a m?iiga{-?o? Plsn_sIt he_{,?tctpel ?eYm?i?
-- ?.-
contutt 2?fi-N-? ofi?ice C? ??-'`?) 25? ? b {ter rcctA . ?.?d.v i?t? ? n cttu'e-ILt'I 'k3
? Slluu.icl Oil
Flan ,
?? ?? All 11 Mitigation Project Evaluation Sheet
(circle all that apply)
1. PERMIT FILE
DEM #: COE #: 0910.2-043
Applicant/Project Name: (- k r-A y $kr r K
Project Description: I YD u--t Re (A (r(? 4 : cLC? ?,•t.s?S
Permit Type: fter-the-F-a'c? Individu _ NW GP CAMA
Contact: R a m kq Pv" K Phone: 7c l _ 17`)
Address: E f ax 9Z_o v- f e , County: Macon
Direction to site:
Quad. Map:
OffrCrce-K of ?PA 13U5 hear I3riafrc?yr?
Acres Requested (Public Notice): J (ooGJ4 2.OS? Wetland Type: Sf IZ-
Acres Permitted (404 Permit): 16CC> ? 2 .031 Functions Impacted:
Date--Public Notice Issued: ,2a 404 Permit Issued:
H. MITIGATION PLAN
Is mitigation a speck permit condition? no <Yz?) voluntary
Which agency requires mitigation? DEM (5Q0 DCM Voluntary
Is there a formal Mitigation Plan? <bRD yes
Is an equivalent Mitigation Plan contained in correspondences or permits? yes
Mitigation Plan prepared by: Applicant Consultant (name:
Type of Mitigation: Restoration Creation Enhancement Preservation Bank: CS or PF
Mitigation Wetland Type: in-kind out-of-kind both
Location of Mitigation:
Timing of Mitigation:
Mitigation Size: acres
Mitigation Ratio:
on-site off-site both
up-front concurrent after-the-fact

Planning 245 Michael Delaney
Exercise 4 February 18, 1994
1. Effect of Southern Village on demand for freshwater
When Southern Village is,_completed, the average new demand..will_increase by 503,307:5 gallons
per day. (387,307.5 for residential, 116,000 for non-residential). The maximum use will increase by
1,094,996 gpd (762,996 for residential, 332,000 for non4esidential) '"(All figures based, on' 1388 :units
at average density of 2.18 people, and 580 employees; computations done on handheld calculator).
However, as Chapel Hill currently has an excess treatment capacity of 1;500;000 gpd, the present``
OWASA water treatment facilties could handle the completed Southern Village even without being
enlarged: 'As OWASA plans to increase its treatment capacity to 15,000,000 gpd, this will mean the
system will have an excess treatment capacity of 4;000,000 gpd even before Southern Village is
completed. Hence there will not be a need to change the capacity of OWASA's treatment facilities due
-to -Southern Village.
2. Maximum Dad! Water Flow Demand
The current data (pre-Southern Village) is on ° sheets; 4 3. Sheets 476 . show •the' effect of using the :
average daily. demand on the system, wi6no change to any other parameter except the demand at node
1 being increased to 7.9 mgd. Sheets 7-9 show the effect of using the peak daily demand (1,094,996
gpd) in the model without any other changesa the system except increasing the flow at node I' td7 9,:`,.- `
mgd.
Maximum average daily. demand will increase to 1.673 mgd from. the present 1 170 mgd due to
Southern Village. ' At this level the PSI at node 14 will be 103.63; the velocity in link I6 will be 171
FPS and in link 17. it. s 3.10 FPS.
When the maximum demand is put into the model, the PSI decreases to 99.916,-at node. 14,. and the. ;
velocities in the links decreases to 1.37 FPS for link 16, and increases to 3.78 FPS for link 17. Although
the water pressure remains healthy, the drop.in velocity at link 16 could lead to sedimentatim problems:l
One solution may be to slightly change the incline of the pipe in this link; alternatively you could pump
the water up higher at_node 13_which, will provide more velocity.

Current Status: in planning planning complete no construction const. begun
cont. complete # growing seasons complete
Goals: None Acreage Wet. Type Function(s)
Are the Goals? - Specific _ Measurable _ Attainable
III. SUCCESS CRITERIA
Vegetation: none (list)
Hydrology: none
Soils: none
IV. VEGETATION
What method of vegetaion establishment was specified?
Were plant species listed?
Were "local" plants specified?
Was appropriate plant spacing specked?
Was community composition/species composition defined?
Was a planting season specked?
When did planting occur? (date)
V. HYDROLOGY
Is the water source specified?
Are target elevations included in plan/drawings
natural revegetation
planting
no yes
no yes
no yes
no yes
no yes
both
no yes
no yes
/n
PROJECT TITLE: Chapel Hill 1994
L I N K D A T A
FROM TO HEAD PEAK
LINK NODE NODE LENGTH DIAM, K ;. ,.: .,LOSS: :FLOW, VELOCITY . %
# # # (FT) (FT.),--, CORE ,(MGD) (FPS)
1 1 2 7540.0 2.00 120 ;. . -0;:.,39 10.'.34 '-• +5:.9.1 2 .91
2 2 3 6410.0 2.00 120 0.33 8.05 +5.63 2.77
3 3 4 7240.0 1.33 120 2.70 15.89 +2.60 2.90
4 _ 4 5 3040.0 1.50 120 0.63 1.17 -1.40 1.22
5 5 1 4660.0 1.50 120 0.97 33.12 -6.74 5.90
6 3 6 4320.0 1.00 120„ 6.4:6. . 22,.41 +:1,;96
7 6 7 4640.0 1.00 120 6.94 15.76 +1.56 3.07
8 7 8 4880.0 0.67 120 51.30 30.68 +0. 76•i , 3.3:3
9 8 9 8840.0 0.67 120 92.92 0.98 +0.09 0.38
10 9 10 7660.0 0.67 120 80.52 37.99 -0,,6:7 2.93 ,..._.:,._ ,
11 10 4 7470.0 1.00 120 11.17 15.91 -1.21 2.38
12 9 11 %10780.0 0.67 120 %113.32 1.0`6 +0.06 0.35

13
11
12
4910.'0
0.67
120
51.61
32.87
-0.78 ......... ..
3.44
14 12' 1 5320.0 1.00 120 7.95 15.94 -1.46 2.87
15 ' 4 302 .0 1.'00 12 4.52 6.24 -1.19 2.35
16 13 14 3170.0 0 120 0.66 0.74 -1.0 ,0.9
17 14 5 2790.0 1.50 120 0.58 6.67 -3.74 3.28
PROJECT TITLE:Chapel Hill 1994
- N 0 D E D A T A
PEAK GROUND
NODE DEMAND. ELEV..... HGL PRE"SSURE... .. . HEAD
# (MGD) ... (FT) (FT) (PSI)- . (FT)
1 +12.64 450.0 680.0 98.90 230.00
2 -0.27,._; 40,0..0 66.9.7 ;,. 115.95 26,9,,.66 ,; .
3 -1.07 450.0 661.6 90.99 211.61
4 -1.60 480.0 645.7 71.26 165.72
5 -1.60 480.0 646.9 71.76 166.89
6 -0.40 500.0 639.2 59.86 139.20 ;...
7 -0.80 550.0 623.4 31.58 73.43
8 -0.67 450.0 592.8 61.38 142.75..
9 -0.67 270.0 591.8 138.36 321.77
10 -0.54 300. 0. 629.8 141.80, 3?9. 76 ...,
11 -0.86 320.0 590.7 116.40 270.71
12 -0.67 300.0 623.6 139.14 323.58
13 -0.80 450.0 639.5 81.49 189.52
14 -2.68 500.0 640.3 60.31 140.26,.
f!x c
VI. AGENCY/APPLICANT SITE ANALYSIS (other than delineation)
Wetlands to be impacted: no yes
Which aspects were investigatied? vegetation hydrology soils wildlife other
What assessmrent procedures were used? NCDEM rating WET HEP other
Mitigation Site: no yes
Which aspects were mvestigatied? vegetation hydrology soils wildlife other
What assessmrent procedures were used? (describe)
VII. LANDSCAPE CONSIDERATIONS
What land uses occur within a 1 mile radius (estimate % of each type):
What is the watershed zoned (include source)?
VIII. MONITORING
Is there a Monitoring Plan? no yes
Describe:
Are remedial actions specified? none what:
when:
Were/will "As-Built" plans provided? no yes
PROJECT TITLE: Chapel Hill 1994
L I N K D A T A
C.J
FROM TO HEAD PEAK
LINK NODE NODE LENGTH DIAM HW K - '; - •;<LOSS •. FLOW ., -:. VELOCITY:
# # # (FT) (FT) COEF (FT) (MGD) (FPS)
1 1 2 7540.0 2.00 120 0.39 10.54 +5.97 2.94
2 2 31 . 6410,. 0 :.2.. 00 , ;,.•120 0;.3,3 S. 22; . f5.7,0
3 3 4 7240.0 1.33 120 2.70 16.31 +2.64 2.94
4 4 5 3040.0 1. 50 120,- , 0.63 2. .5,3 72.12 :. , . ,.1,..85 ;.
5 5 1 4660.0 1.50 120 0.97 32.55 -6.68 5.85
6 3 6' 43200
. 1.00 120 .6.46 22.93 +1.98 3.90
7 _ 6 7 4640
.0 1.00 120 6.94 16.22 +1.58 3.12
8 7 8 4880.0 0.67 120 51..30 32.54 +0.78 3.43
9 8 9 . 8840.0 0.67 120 92.92 1.56 +0.11 0. 48.
., . ,
10 9 10 7660.0 0.67 120 80.52 40.42 -0.69 3.02
11 10 4..,, 747;0...0 1.00 12,0 11:.,17 16. 47 „-1: 23 ,•: ,,2.43; ,
12 9 11 %10780.0 0.67 120 %113. 32 2.49 +0.13 0.56
13 11 12 4910.0 0.67 1;20... .,+51.61 29.3,0 . , 7 0. 7.4,.. 3.23.,
14 12 13 5320.0 1.00 120 7.95 15.00 -1.41 2.78
15 13 -" 4 3020.0 1.00 120 4.52 15.19' =1.9 . 3.79-
16 13 14 3T70.0 <9? 120 %138. 5913.40. -0.2 0
17 14 5 2790.0 1.50 120 0.58 4.32 -2.96 2.59

PROJECT TITLE:Chapel Hill 1994
_ .. N O. D E D A. ..T A
PEAK` GROUND
NODE DEMAND ELEV HGL PRESSURE HEAD
# (MGD) ..... . (FT)-.._ (FT) (PSI) .. (FT)
1 +12.64 450.0 680.0 98.90 230.00
2. _. _..._.._0..27 400.0 _ 669':5 115.87 ... 269:46._ .
3 _1..07... 450:0 661.2... . 90:83 211.24'
4 .. .,. ..-1.60 _ 480.0. 644.9 70.92 16493
5 .. . _..-1.60. .480.0 647 :.5 -72 .01 167.46
6 -0.40 500.0 638.3 59.47 138.31 ;
7 -0.80 550.0 622.1 31.00 72.09
8 -0.67 450.0 589.5 60.00 139.54
9 -0.61' `270.0 588.0 136.73 317.98
10 -0.54 300.0 628.4 141.21 328.40
11 -0.86 320.0 585.5 114.16 265.49
12 -0..-6.7_ 3'00.,0 614.8 -135.3'6. 314.79.
13_ ... -0.R0.... .._-"450.0.. 629.8.. 77.31 179.79-_..
14 -2--.68. ... .....50'0:.0 ..64.3._..2 61.57..... 143. 19

ti
Are there provisions for long-term protection/management?
Have responsible agencies made compliance checks?
Have enforcement actions been taken?
none
no yes (date: )
no yes
ci??'E'? is res?.1? of er?Qor22YYte§?
f uv? c? u 1'h c .^? 2t ?i Il .
PROJECT TITLE: Chapel Hill 1994
L I N K D A T A

FROM TO HEAD PEAK
LINK NODE N ODE LENGTH DIAM HW.,,„. LOSS,.: . , FLOW .VELOCITY..;; .
# # #. (FT)... ..(FT).._ COEF (FT) (MGD) (FPS)
1 --1.. _ 2 7540.0 2....00. 120....._:0..39 .. 10.54.._. _..+5.97 2.94-
2 . 2 a3 .6410.0 2.00 120 0.33 -8.22_- +56.79
..:8.
1,
3 3 "4 1240.0 1.33 120 2.70 16.31 +2.64 2.94
4 4 5 3040.Q 1.50 120 0.63 2.53 -:2 .,12 ,,1...85,... ,
5 5 1 4660.0 1.50 120 0.97 32.55 -6.68 5.85
6 3 6 4320.0 1.00 120 6.46 22.93 +1.98 3.90
7 6 7 4640.0 1.00 120 6.94 16.22 +1.58 3.12
8 7 8 4880.0 0.67 120 51.30 32.54 +0.78 3.43
9 8 9 8840.0 0.67 120 92.92 1.56 +0.11 0.48
10 9 10 7660.0 0.67 120 80.52 40.42 -0.69 3.02
11 10 4 7470.0 1.00 120 11.17 16.47 -1.23 2-43
12 9 11 %10780. 0 0.67 120 %113.32 2.49 +0.13 0.56
13 11 12 4910.0 0.67 120 51.61 29.30 -0.74 3.23
14 12 13 5320.0 1.00 120 7.95 15.00 -1.41 2.78
15 13 4 3020.0 1.00 120 4.52 15.19 -1.93 3.79
16 13 14 3170.0 0.50 120 %138.59 13.40 -0.28 2.23
17 14 5 2790.0 1.50 120 0.58 4.32 -2.96 2.59
PROJECT -TITLE:_Chap el Hill 1994
N O D E D A T A
PEAK GROUND
NODE DEMAND ELEV HGL PRESSURE HEAD
# (MGD) (FT) (FT) (PSI) (FT)
1 +12.64 450.0 680.0 98.90 230.00
2 -0.27 400.0 669.5 115.87 269.46
3 -1.07 450.0 661.2 90.83 211.24
4 -1.60 480.0 644.9 70.92 164.93
5 -1.60 480.0 647.5 72.01 167.46
6 -0.40 500.0 638.3 59.47 138.31
7 -0.80 550.0 622.1 31.00 72.09
8 -0.67 450.0 589.5 60.00 139.54
9 -0.67 270.0 588.0 136.73 317.98
10 -0.54 300.0 628.4 141.21 328.40
11 -0.86 320.0 585.5 114.16 265.49
12 -0.67 300.0 614.8 135.36 314.79
13 -0.80 450.0 629.8 77.31 179.79
14 -2.68 30 643.2 147.57 343.19