The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0020559_INSTREAM ASSESSMENT_19880630NPDES DOCUWENT SCANNINS COVER ;iMEET NPDES Permit: NC0020559 Henderson WWTP Document Type: Permit Issuance Wasteload Allocation Authorization to Construct (AtC) Permit Modification Complete File - Historical Correspondence •,V Instream Assessment (67b) Environmental Assessment (EA) Permit History Document Date: June 30, 1988 Thie docume=Yt ie printed oa reuse paper - j,gxxowe any conterit on the reYeree iaide • • r] I DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT June 30, 1988 QION[N.7:►01Bill 61 TO: Robert Van Tilburg FROM: Randy_ Dodd QC> Ruth Clark '2Ct, THROUGH: Trevor Clements Steve Tedder Wr SUBJECT: Instream Assessment Creek WWTP NPDES No. NCO020559 Vance County Summary for City of Henderson's Nutbush An assessment has been completed to determine the impact of wastewater additions to the Henderson-Nutbush Creek WWTP. The plant discharges to Nutbush Creek and the Nutbush Creek arm of Kerr Lake with a design flow of 4.14 MGD. At flows greater than 3 MGD,, hydraulic washout of solids occurs, and the final sum- mer/winter effluent limits (BODS = 5/8 mg/l, NH3--N = 3/4 mg/1) cannot be met. As a result, a controlled bypass of nitrification was authorized under EMC 87-04, a -rid SOC limits of-BOD_, = 6/10 mg/i and NH3-N = 3/6 mg/l were developed. Subsequently, the WWTP has been out of compliance with SOC requirements because of the inability to obtain necessary funds for an equalization basin. The 1987 SOC allowed for the addition of 135,500 gpd from domestic sources. The current JOC request is for the maximum allowable additional flow at the requested limits. A Level B model was run to determine the effects of the JOC request on the instream dissolved oxygen levels. The model did not identify the DO sag point since the DO levels continued to decrease at the end of the model_ The model ended at Kerr Lake, and it could not be accurately extended into the lake to determine the sag since previous studies indicated that algae greatly affect the lake dynamics. -An intensive survey will be completed later this year to calibrate a Level-C model. The stream standard was protected for the area modelled in each scenario. Nutrient and chlorophyll a values indicate hypereutrophic conditions in the Nutbush Creek arm of Kerr Lake. A study has been initiated to develop -recommendations for nutrient management for this area of the lake. The -results of DEM tests and self -monitoring indicated that the effluent from the facility would cause significant acute and chronic toxicity in the stream. The Biological Monitoring Group also sampled the stream in May, 1988. The site downstream of the WWTP received a rating -of very poor while an upstream station received a rating of poor. The difference in the two ratings indicates that the facility has a toxic impact on the stream. Because of the toxic impacts, it is recommended that no industrial process wastewater be allowed until compliance with the current toxicity target is achieved. The JOC should include a toxicity reduction plan (TRE) to achieve compliance with the final permit limits by the end of the order. A statement allowing for moratorium if toxicity is not addressed through a TRE should also be included. Due to eutrophication, it is -recommended that the City be informed of DEM's study and the potential need for nutrient removal in the future. Dissolved Oxygen The City of Henderson discharges to Nutbush Creek, a class C stream in the Roanoke River Basin. At the outfall, the receiving stream drains an area of 3.80 square miles and is characterized by an average flow of 3.2 cfs , a summer 7Q10 of 0.2 cfs , .and a winter 7Q10 of 0.4 cfs. A Level B model was used to simulate dissolved oxygen from the outfall to a point 2.6 miles downstream located at the edge of Kerr Lake. The model was run for both summer and win- ter at wasteflows of 2.0559 MGD.(pre-SOC), 2.1914 MGD (post-SOC of 10/9/87), and 4.14 MGD (design flow) at summer/winter limits of BODS = 6.0/20.0 mg/1 and NH.-N = 3.0/20.0 mg/1. Other model inputs are shown in Table 1. The model was divided into 6 reaches based on a QUAL-II model which was calibrated from data collected in the 1970's. Since the model was calibrated while Heinz Pickle was discharging upstream of the Henderson outfall, the rate coeffi- cients probably do not reflect the current system dynamics. Hydraulic characteristics were assumed to be correct and were used to input velocity and depth in the Level-B model for each of the six reaches. In each of the six model runs (3 summer, 3 winter), the DO sagged at the end of the model. The model should be extended in order to adequately model the dissolved oxygen, but previous surveys indicate that algae play a major role in the lake dynam- ics, and this cannot be adequately simulated with the Level-B model. A new QUAL-II model will be developed upon the completion of an intensive survey which is scheduled for this summer. None of the DO levels fell below 5.0 mg/l, the stream standard, but violations may occur in the lake. Table 1 summarizes the model output. Eutrophication DEM and UNC researchers studied the trophic status of the Nutbush Creek arm in the 1970's, and observed a marked trophic gradient with hypereutrophic conditions in the upper reach of the embayment. Review of these studies resulted in the development of a study plan to further document eutrophication problems and nutrient sources (attached). This work has begun and will be completed this summer. An extensive bloom was occurring during a site visit in April. Assuming "clean water" background stream duality and average effluent values based on self -monitoring data, total phosphorus and total nitrogen inputs have been estimated (all in mg/1): Current Wasteflow Design Wasteflow Current Wasteflow Design Wasteflow Nutbush arm Effluent Influent TP TN TP TN 7.1 24.2 1.24 4.61 7.1 24.2 2.30 8.25 2.0 10.0 0.37 2.19 2.0 10.0 0.67 3.69 Without nutrient removal, the plant is expected to contribute over 90% of the phosphorus and nitrogen. Lake influent concen- trations are more than an order of magnitude above desirable lev- els. The N to P ratio indicates nitrogen limited conditions. 37% of chlorophyll a values collected in the 1974 study exceeded the standard of 40 pg/l. Toxicity On -site toxicity'testing took place May 23-28, 1988 due to acute toxicity displayed by self -monitoring 48-hour Cerioda hnia tests. The results of the self -monitoring tests are as follows: Date LCa 1/88 28.3 2/88 71 3/88 No Report 11/88 98.5 5/88 79 The results of the DEM on -site toxicity tests indicate that the facility will cause significant toxic impact on Nutbush Creek. The 96 hour fathead minnow flowthrough toxicity test showed no toxicity. A 48 hour Cerioda hnia static toxicity test resulted in an LC, of 79.4% while a 7 day Cerioda hnia chronic toxicity test produced an LC,,, of 35%, a no observed effect (NOEC) on reproduc- tion of 25%, a lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC) of 50%, and a chronic value of 35%. All of the analyses were done at an instream waste concentration (IWC) of 100% since the new flow estimates from the USGS were not available. The updated flow estimates (7Q10 = 0.2 cfs) result in an IWC of 94% for current waste flaw. This IWC indicates that the effluent is still domin- ating the stream, and the test results should not be greatly affected. Data collected in May, 1988 by the Biological Monitoring Group also indicate that toxicity is a problem at the WWTP. Two sites were sampled on Nutbush Creek-- the first at NC 39 above the outfall and the second at SR 1317 approximately 1.2 miles below the facility. The upstream station was rated as poor since only one intolerant taxa was abundant. The poor rating was probably due to urban runoff since approximately one half of downtown Hend- erson drains into this portion of Nutbush Creek. The downstream station received a rating of very poor with, all intolerant taxa being rare. Although the difference between the two sites is probably not as great as it would be if urban runoff did not affect the watershed, the decreased rating at the downstream site indicates that the WWTP has a toxic impact on the stream. CC: Ken Eagleson Chuck Wakild Kent Wiggins Steve Reid Table 1: Instream Assessment Summary for the City of Henderson Wasteflow Assumotions Design Capacity 4.14 MGD Pre-JOC (10/86-9/87) 2.0559 MGD Post JOC (SOC Date 10/9/87) 2.1914 MGD Model Input Summary Headwater. conditions 7Q10 (Summer) 0.2 cfs 7Q10 (Winter) 0.4 cfs Design Temp. (Summer) 26°F Design Temp. (Winter) 14°F CBOD 2.0 mg/1 NBOD 1.0 mg/1 DO (Summer) 7.6 mg/l DO (Winter) 9.2 mg/1 Wastewater Inputs Flow See Above Summer CBOD (2*recommended BODS) 12 mg/1 Winter CBOd (2*recommended BOD5) 40 mg/l Summer NBOD (4.5*recommended N113-N) 13.5 mg/l Winter NBOD (4.5*recommended NH,--N) 90.0 mg/1 DO (Summer) 7.0 mg/l DO (Winter-) 7.0 mg/l Model Output Summary Summer DO min Net Change (mg/1) (mg/1) Pre-JOC 6.61 ---- Post 10/9/87 SOC Request 6.60 0.01 Design Flow 6.57 0.04 Winter DO min Net Change (mg/1) (mg/1) Pre-JOC 5.53---- Post 10/9/87 SOC Request 5.51 5'`4q 0.02 Design Flow 5.39 6.31p 0.14 •• All DO minimums occurred at end of -model. Actual sag point may be in lake. Appendix IV.A Kerr Lake Nutbush-Creek Arm Background From its headwaters, :Nutbush Creek flows northeast under I-85 and NC 39 before receiving effluent from Henderson's 6.14 mgd municipal WWTP, and continuing, to the backwaters of John H. Kerr Reservoir (Fi.g- ur:e5 1 wYd 2). The upper drainage consists mostly of suburban .and highway lands, while the lower drainage is mostly forested. A well developed canopy inhibits photosynthetic Activity above the reservoir pool. There is a distinct beginning to the backwater portion of the creek below a riffle area about two miles below the WWTP. Three adja- cent embayments follow the submerged flood plains of Crooked Run, Indian, and Flat Creeks (Table 1), .and entir the `:ut€rush Creel: Farm in the vicinity of SR L308. s? popular wildlife refuge area, Cishing loca- tion, aId campground exists in this area. In the 1970's, two separate intensive studies were completed on NuLbush Creek End in the Nutbush Creel: arm of Kerr Lake (1 .2) . The Corps of Engineers sponsored a comprehensive limnologi al stud_- of hoth the Roanoke and Nutbush arms to characterize trophic patterns. Efforts included waiter quality, sediment, phytoplankton. algal assay, zooplank- ton, and m acroinvertebrate analyses. All trophic parameters indicated highly enriched conditions in the uppermost portion of Nutbush Creek, with rapid reductions in nutrients ::and associated changes in trophic. parameters along the length of the embayment. Selected results from the study are included in Appendix 1 V , a , 1 . a , Because of the long retention time (1500-2000 clays) and the lack of Light limitation, nutrients were directly limiting primary productivity-. A gradient from nitrogen limitation in -the upper arm to phosphorus limitation in the lower: arm was observed. While high chlorophyll a values were measured, .a generally healthy phytoplankton community was observed throughout the arm. Although densities approachad Lypia,::rl nuisance bloom levels, a shift cowards noxious species was not observed. In to comparison with other water bodies .i.n North Carolina, Weiss and Kuen7ler (3) classified the reach above SR 1.308 as one of only two locations in the state to be hypereuLrophic. The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management completed a study (Appendix IV.A.l.b) directed at determining wasteloacl allocations for oxygen -demanding waste for two dischargers to Nutbush Creek; Heinz Pickle and the Ilenderson WWTP, Sampling and subsequent modeling focused primarily on factors affecting DO is the free -flowing portion of Nutbush Creek. However, seater quality data related to the Lrophic state of the Nutbush Creek arm weve :also collected, and supported the. Corps study (see Figure 3), Subsequently, Heinz Pickle ceased dis- charge, and a major upgrade was completed at the Henderson plant to attempt to meet effluent limits of BOW = 5 mg/l and N€I3-N=3 mg/l based on the modeling study. Nutrient limits have not been included in pre- vious permits, and specific nutrient removal provisions leave not been designed into treatment processes. (Effluent data are attached (Table 2)). Cur'rently,.the plant is not in compliance with final effluent limits, and is discharging nutrients at levels typical of biologically created domestic wastewater. Treatment processes include primary clar- ification, roughing (trickling) filters, extended aeration (pure oxy- gna) , nertiary filtration, disinfection. and post -aeration. The permit. was reissued in 1985. and expires in March, 1989. Immediately below the INVTP, rcaration maintained relatively high DO levels. DC; decreased markedly upon entering the lake's backwaters. The creels maintains a channel in the backwaters for about 114 mile iwith gradually increasing stratification) , before entering the quies- cent open eater system. Concomitantly, photosynthetic acLivits' begins to dominate oxygen dynamics. Time -cif --travel to the lake's edge was measured to be 8.8 hours when flows averaged about `? Us. Water quality data collected during the study are summarized in Table 3 :and Appendix 18 . To summarize. a considerable effort was completed in the mid 1970's to develop :t°asteload allocacions and document the troahic state of the :`!u.tbush Creek arm. Degraded conditions in the free -flowing stream have been addressed r.hrough requirements for reductions in. DOD inputs. The issue Ot the potential Sprover'ments with reductions in ni.ltriew inputs has act been addressed. Was.teload allocation verification data and continued ;monitoring of the trophic state of Nratbush Creek has not been completed (Frank Yelverton, personal communication). PeMittinm and WLA Issues 1) Is the current Ii'LA for oxygen -demanding substances appropriate ? In specific, are kinetic assumptions accurate, since plat upgrades can affect instream reaction rates ? 2) Are nutrient inputs resulting in degraded (unacceptably eutrophic) conditions at any location in the Nu.tbush Greek arm ? (water quality- regulations require ;maintenance of classifications and stan- dards for all classified surface waters,) That affect would reductions in nutrient loading have on the system ? Classification Issue If technical analyses indicate that reductions in nutrients are warranted, what process (NSW or other ?) would have to be followed to enable limits to be placed in an NPDES permit ? (This issue is being addresser) as part: of the triennial review of water quality standards and classifications.) Water Quality Issues 1) Iiow has the water qualityltrophic state of the Nutbush aerate changes) since the 1970's ? In particular, are contraventions of water quality standards occurring ? Are nuisance algal blooms occurring ? Has the zone of highest impact increased, as might be hypothesized as the system becomes "saturated" with nutrients ? What is the long-term assimilative capacicy of the system ? 2) A related .issue regards assimilative processes as Free -flowing nutrient rich waters enter quiescent, deeper waters. Are these areas the most likely to experience warner quality degradation What prob- lems car be anticipated ? Depressed daily average Do ? Algal blooms What assimilative processes are occurring. and at What rates ? ) A broader issue involves the quality of the upper `dutbush Creek :arm (a hypercutrophic system) relative Lo adjacent (relat_ively unim- pacted) em.bayments. What differences in water quality exist between the Natbush Creels arise and Tndiaa Creek. Crooked Run Creek, and Flat Creep. arms ? To what, extent can any differences be attributed to dif- ferences in nutrient loading ? This question is relevant to addressing nutrient ioading to embaymcnts in North Carolina in general, Proposed methods in order to address these issues, it is recommended that book field and modeling studies be carried out, Efforts should focus on stud., completion prior to permit re.i.ssuance. The current permit expires in `3arch . 1959, Modeling Studies A QUAL-IT BOD/Do model, extending to the boundary of the conserva- tion :pool has been cali.bratcd. Initial efforts should focus on review- ing the calibration and transferring the input to QUAL2C format, and. if ,:arranted, attempLing Lo extend the model into the reservoir pool and calibrate parameters relating to algal growth. This wiII require review of transport mechanisms, water quality data, and consideration of alternative modeling frameworks, such as QUAL2i_ (4) , WASP (5). Corps of Enginecrs (6), Chapra (7), EPA (8) or other frameworks. Preliminary modeiing should be completed to aid in sampling design. After samp- ling, model validation should be attempted, design conditions chosen, and model runs completed Lo 1) develop a wastcload allocation for oxy- gen demanding waste; 2) assess the impact of reductions in nutrient loading; and 3) compare the four owbayments under various nutrient loading scenarios. Field Stud), Field studies should focus on obtaining; data for modeling efforts and reassessing the trophic state of the upper Nutbush Creek arm. Sampling should occur during 1988. Table 4 outlines a proposed program which documents nutrient loading, the trophic condition of the embay- meats, and factors affecting dissolved oxygen. Figure 4 indicates pos- sible sampling sites. As part of the -study, the Henderson WivTP should be required to monitor TP and TN at upstream and downstream monitoring stations. Table 1 Characteristics of Embaymcnts Drainabe Average Length average. *lean -Max Tau rmbayment Area (mil) Plow (c.fs) (Et.) Width (f0 Depth (.ft) (days) Nutbush Czeek /.5 6.7 6000 800 7.0 / 14 77 (to Indian Cre-00 Indian Creek 4.3 3100 600 7.1 /14.2 25 Crooked Run Creek 8.7 4700 SOO 5.O / 10 61 Fl.:it Creek '`18.0 15.7 1' 000 .1000 8.7 /17. S 30 USES Natural Flow Estimates Drainage Average 7Q1O Average Yield 7QlO Yield Location area (mi`) Flow (cfs) (cfs) (cfs/mil) (cfs/mil) Nutbush Creek fir- 3 , % o , 2- to W14TP Nutbush Creek -67� 5 O--fib O.8t t)-- :rrt @ pool level S-a v, 0. al. Flat Creek (� lZ. 0 O o-� Z @ pool level J Crooked Run Creek 6 g 0 W a ,43 @ pool level Indian Creek 3' 1C �,�{ 6,�Z5� $� 0,06 @ pool level Nutbush Creek Z �� `0 below Flat Creek �KEX78/MY 8i/28/88 COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALY�I% REPORT PERMIT--NCOO2O559 PIPE--OOi REPORT PERIOD� 8612 -87i1 LOC---E ACILITY--HENDER%ON NUTBU%H CREEK WWTP DE%I�N FLOW-- 4.i4OO CLA��-� OCATION--HENDER%ON �Ef"ION/COUNTY--05 VANC� 5OO5O 0O310 OO53O 0O6i0 316i6 5OO60 003O0 iONTH Q/MD BOD RE%/T%% NH3+NH4- FEC COL.], CHLORINE DO :6/i2 1.9775 8.7O i4.8 7.42F 2 2.245 9.62 Oi 2^5497 i6.i4F i6.5 7.33 F 2.3 i.3O4 9.3O 7/O2 2.49i3 23.iOF i9.i 3.93 2.5 .645 9.O3F 7/03 2.4353 24.22F i7.5 2.47 5^1 .568 8.3OF 7/04 2.5948 i3.i4F 21 .7 2.75 2.7 2^i38 7.45F 7/85 i.8852 6.7iF 26.1 i.68 2.6 1.47i �7/O6 i.8420 4.50 31.7F .21 8.i 1.295 8.04 7/07 i.8O2i 2.45 14.0 .10 2.9 1.195 7.94 ` 7/08 i.6i64 2.8O i4.7 .02 2.5 i.5O 4 7.8iF |'/O9 2.06ii 3.O9 i8.8 .O4 i3.i i.98O 8.5i 7/1O i.6565 2.84 8.8 .00 2.�5 2.372 8.45 VERA�E 2.O829 9.71 i8.4 2.35 4.2 1.519 8.36 AXIMU. 5^9B70 44.O0 124.6 18.40 iOiO.O 7.900 11.70 �INIMUM 1.O690 LE%ETHAN .6 LE%%THAN 2.8 .100 6.20 NIT Mf."D MG/1- MG,/L MG/L iOOML MG/L MG/1- 1974 1975 1916 Table 3 DEM Data 1974-1976 Total Type Dates(s) 4 samples,_ ;notations Comments Water Quality 1.1 parameters 4-8/74 15 19 parameters 5-6/75 11 Hydraulic Plow 9/13-14/76 Time -of -travel 7/6-10 76 Slater Quality BON,, 6 / 3 0 / 76 7/15/76 9 Parameters 7/6-8/76 9/13-14/76 r, 2 3 21 3 r, 1 6 3] Entire Nuthush arm Upper Nu CUush axroi Free flowing; portion Table 4 Recommended Intensive Survey Design One survey, July -September) j) Parameter Location Depth Samples Comments Time -A -travel NuLbush Creek 11111 1 Traced into reservoir w0i SR 1317. - Flow U I T 1 With TOT study HO BCD wr- E S 2 - BOW E S 2-3 TSS. US E, S, Lo PZ, BO 2 Nitrogen Series E, S. L PZ, BO 2 Morning, evening Phosphorus, E, S, L PZ' BO 2 (OP & TPJ Chlorophyll a MO, L PZ 2 PH E. St L IM 3 Morning. afternoon, evening DO It I? It Temperature Chloride E, S, L SU, BO 2 Secchi depth L 2 Lake worphometcy All arms Lake level Obtain from Corps Phytoplankton TBD TBD Tn all arms Macrophyze TBD TBD % coverage AGPT TBD TBD I = filtered & unfiltered -I run IM = I meter intervals S = stream 2 = I lake staCion/arm PZ = phoLic zone L = lake TBD = to be determined U = upstream- SU = surface M = mix BO = bottom MO = above c pool on all Cribs Table 4 (cpnc) Routine Monitorii Faramecea, Acquency Location Phosphorus (OP & TP) Monthly NuSush, Flat, GLooked Run, INPUTS Indian Crocks Nitrogen series Monthly " Phosphorus (OP & TP) Monthly One location j arm SU, BO NKrogen series Monthly " Chlorophyll a monthly DO Monthly iM Temperature Monvhly P111 Monthi." Phy noplankton T2D 1 = filtcred & unfiltered -I run IM = I mcter intervals S = surewn 2 = I lake statloniarm PZ = photic zone L = lakc TBD = to be determined U = upstream St1 = surface N = mix BO = bottom MO = above conservation pool on all tri.bs 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) T 25' 132 733 134 •2 180000 FEET 735 78°22'31 Y. J;.n �-' ~� `' - �'`' rJOFf4 Ili-'Hih'EXh'� "t��_'_� --� ^��- �- �• �`, ,i R,ESERVOAR � r.� ' ;.5<» f -. 350 r- r; /• � j` `-:I' 1. � I a mac:;-= - 1;_` �' - - '�eV �• •'"•i�'. )r'' `�� _"�_1yr1!�l I! - - earl 1' I 4� ` FE la `, 1. ., cJr• I'1 _J � � F'�� `-"�� i �� _. t � �..�4^,ri t.' -�.' t• 1.. r1 !iC � ]9�.: d 4 k rik; (.n7 ri Tower 1$ewdge �i ` ,\ l gi J �!r C1 _-� �, � I ISBI *0l l 1 . ' • � �-- - - ,�� ii r�/ ,1 � � Ln—N,�•� i = .\� LINE:: ,� f lily ,Alp a _``'�' \�" ��/ ■ --�'< -1 \ �0: . gym., _ - ' .. �• '-- 3. :L.:'r Ow, �p a srj Ret�3ersoTi r _. / ti •L' ' SL �� - R ARRrS,;'Sr./r I'I h�_-- a •= 2 r 'ti' ti � .r��a\.�^+-� " J � �• L ' -l� l 11 . ---�`� �f � I I °hra r' O . . -�� _�L ' ir-Y^= :i �.j o / f. ..ft�a'tlyv,T _ 'i`' � .i°_ i ;i �� . y.�' �''r• F' '� _:��r;�WT,� ',� _i d' �.. �] � � rr. �.,m. ' •��i\� ✓�_1)�\-� 5/ a C3� 7 _ '%/ inL.� rI �, j/: • J 4IIr ;r .'�• �� f( a .�\-= �n � '�,r ��Z �A 1-• `�� fl p, ' � 4 .%:1�. 1-. r, .! �C;�1. y,. �9x_� .' n 'p l • ; \ S (� 2t L\A` -\ _ p : LGi ' � ��. -; I, '� 1 I �� ii�r-- ' q'- 4' l• 111 r ` \ _ � _ \ ///� rf IVG! ' - 1' ', ti��o '. y,5•'�-, '��: .v'c� . 2ii drys'J3ter�,y S ,� c' _ 1yyT:? f o: - : ' �' �h `4y .`� <•� . ' �s /� S' \' lI �h �.II� :Tank% �. O � - O� P4 RN.'M :'• �� fi. �.�9 Q. �, 'v "fC��'.� !� !I �p ,�1,, —1 � CSurk t �a:: a-, oa., �a :f + ,,,� `^'\ ;�• o , x' ,ti �� Cis ��-.• ti4t . r,`•. :0t - ,r� s�.�'\ ! ��° '' '�L -\� ! r. �� ,�••%S .' ' rj r_' _`Y'�'.i� . /�rf' • •�'} - ' yL.' / ` n\` ' .t`.'U .� ~ u.iti,•-'"~_ `/1 .. J.' ".��4\r�,!�i .'[H4�v� G 1�`G, +. + • �'- !1 -Rot�[ns ., �'�` \ -'+T...,7s�c_,,,:-\ •r^i!'�'r+ n `n, Y.� i 1! �,', i! �J H 1 G L -j '0 pus 8';dj J v\ p" 11� L"p AGt IA I 1A V A1FI ,HE C X( j f 21. f 1301 f W 36 Ha ris k _—W.5 3 -.I ��- -a. .�,11r �.�' 2,� •''ill '1)'�',. \�' .J - ( ,��•-'� _ `j'. l'_'.+1 • 11'>.� ',7 /:ii _ A r M I .J_ _Y (M. AN "road"; I 'I V� /* k r I 411/�__ 7'% IV ! got '2 129 IHE"DEPSON) 731 7 25' 132 33 • rNTCR16N—cEOLOGIrll. SU4V". WIS-116YON D c — 1.13 78 .5j56 Iv SW 134 135om- E SCALE 1:24000 ROAD CLASSIFICATION 0 Primary highway, Light -duty road. hard or 1000 20010 )000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEEZ hard surface improved surface b� r— � &?j 9, 5 0 1 KILOMETER 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)• �I �?5' 732 133 '34 z Ia000U rr-Cz 135 78"22'31 J . .loan Not ��'1; -�. 'SEl? VOlIR /�' ,.�� 'r � .f � '`� 1 • - 4,; .�i" '. '�;,j l � � -_ref // f h ,�. �� 0. • � � •, yyyr. � � , + -L, '�o ,s, ower. y • _ 't -nR V�lap„ !' ! �' ``1 I~ y �, �' —en- �:� jNd cemf `76rI y '�..., ., '-•'�_ r �1� ..• _\- `i�. `- �` r4 /J i{ t,.<96 --- FE - .! Z r! \ _ Y4�'. J/!! f��. f % I� / 7 ��r ~'' i - ♦ Ra'dlp 4 {I II _ Air R Tower �. \ r" ill.wr.., " �- I Jy:� .a, tf0 �� \ ,. - \'\�� z •f15941{ �1,Y11 _ 1 .�' . . .tl :%l r •r \5, Ff \ v+, f \�` `f �1NEIr r- ' �� \� ^/ �r1/r.`ti �' 'J / �� .� `ems"• r:' �' �" �'._ II 13 4 / AIP Omega \ J' Y` I - -/ ® k [ f \ 40' rrphs: uOP �i•��^4 ��`.�� ` � r•Ir �111 j�� l .l,_ n.' /_I� r�'•hXi4 1'/ � �' `� �', �'�j'�� I.,{ � J _ N " �( ¢ `^� �, \ I I 5r' r. 'V IL._ - I ,�;'� 40• iJ t ��` �-� ��` Y-��I L7] 1 1 r f _ :�/: { /. IJ�1. I •.� �O i S.i. 0a ��1 ' `— Al 1L.' �f •r --- � �� 'r/1 ��_, Y- .-- 1 !I - �� fk p.{; C.5 \ /4iQ -;q, it �r ---x l� •'%/' -i w ,n �Q Pf�B`. - �-��' �,1 ' r � ' 7" ` 0 'N !� �•'• tir �1 p - ,p, iq G) �. 4I `I � ` ty:=:a :li . r.lr: n i .- .� ✓.•• �f . i I 1f� �- `:�' � �C� \� 'S' �\ r,. /r . O i ,I, � ` `,._- 4� •J. �'--- . •_.. ��.m - i �, ��• \ f f r ''� ♦1\ v �l '•:!r'kh Y . 1. T +' J a, ` rj � Ch f `' ,Tank; 5• \ f, .y L'\\�%c. .�-'S � .. P�.: r r ) t` �r' ; I ! ; '"r', ` f ' /i _iS l�?_,CY T.{�7� t•7\ /\ O ` ..� ;3r.. �.-t.lxrlu-��-T-ovi:r'-} `-HL+ i DERSON 1> � Or e (•.- -j 1 �a •\, :: i \. .,,ti (� � r• , i ' V �'{;� . 'r Jr ' `' . 1, .> •-� '\ / y /`\ �/ • ' 1N+�� ._ • t��\.' r n`. _ ��>�:" ..'i�.r/ /` fl --f,, �� L �' ".h Senxl •i / S-t "•�` r 5\r�� ,gM . _ ` r j :� `�j!' �" f�� p'k•_ ,.� ` �..�� ir,:� .1 �� o-„] ••/� I fy. ` i aifins \' Ir, ' 9 �r •11�,( C . -�(£'%� --�} Sch ,� __ r' / h IT r . ,� l�j �Vr /. �.:'�Fair foun\ �G i f .1R, `'1� i 1 y r ` 0 1 11 ,_ I ' ,_ _+ ~`, �),Ijl�)Il��irr � If '1• y � •5^ yi ilr.,.�.�'� �\4 xr��;� 1! ,1_._ ,�1y« •_ _` '� > �� '�� . r,. ,l :o r �i i� '� .L l�C1a'1, f ! � { � ��"•r�.i jC /l �f1 �� JC .� r�v'�. I �i.-� !- •.I ,. t', ��' �4 _ .ill I ..,. t� - Y Y /q / , a� - '1 r' 'ti ��j; 'o( f�.iL ��1� .111 ,`_.�-Y�' r�^.�� ' ri��'�';,Z.Irj \), 'S� �.( }•r / i' `l' +`y 'V+ /r� J}�I AjR! / S, ,_. r ' CAn A-hie):Gm• {• �• , �\ •t I 1,/ rrl ' 's} I �� ' 'r I 1fr- t I H'r r.rr Tt>�r: n.r. I, �- ��" r ! 4. .�!1 l,"isrf�l�.�f`'../I !, .r' ..1 _ � .\v,\],i ' • / 'l•� ({ � (� {`.r; r �. • {�' _�• � �I.� ��. _I r(.y�'J. SfIf;1i It I. • . �l`i ! �. i I>4J20_/�` • \1�'y�0' !:�` i ` \ r ��/ - 4 t`J i`1 '-•� 11f S �'J ]s !I j r� :\ rr 1- t.: _r4`r �\ •'7 i �,! i_ ,4 l�. �r] \t ( ]83 S �� _ _ (! •v- - r � - ��E 1" _ � . '-`....`•` � '�`, ��;�- -- ��f (r� i ILl �`�, / ��%}� ,}'`-� �!� . - ' 'girl r 4 _`) i �'y� 1 Golf, cowse 1 ,VV � ` � � \1. l ,'�. ijJl\11- •r � '� � II't,� �� 1 ,I ; .. �`J-� 384 4\ R�' x 1Isr ris r � ,'�� - 'i \ 1 f rt.r'I{ a i/ � .r�• �l��l_ r �?•\�'t,(S 'i-•14 ('.c _:1`'} •)j•�. \1� '\\' .f i' rC• �, _ f,' :Y. `,! '� ''! ,_,'r.',�--7 V �I � � _ •?f4. 'lr l- ;�� \'� ' .1 �11w�. I,S t rr °ro �� W� •,4i!=: n, li 1i + ' �' '-' }yI1 1 iJc'A`;d ,'\• �15' i l/ �' ^`'.` - X �r�, 4 .i, ;14 �. f7. t Q I -{� -Ir,(; J.,. 4�, 1 ` 1l \' �f.if-_. /.. � �• y7� ] r'a� , 'T� � D,t ;% 1_ _ - / 14 }',, ( •, ` _ \ I I+ .. - . E ' I ! •5J j ♦ "L° / ' r L, \ : r - � - Jl. f ;., , `11 -.' 1!• , ,�,; I ', � r 1 ! `) , �..-'s .I ,� ,:, • Aso ..z*5�. l;f, � \ it �1tii\' OAF.- •�ytii �:E� 1 \ .` ��_� \,.i~ '..:r-...,1 �b �( /� 1 1 - { _� r ' �1L 4 } (! .:,• �, 111 l't 360 !(\ V .,.•� t. lr ,�� '�4 c..f�` ^�41�`\.�� 1' rr„�j �\ �.\ ,:. I: ti,11 +'.1\- i//rh•r r -'i S -/� r •'Ili, � r; L_i' � �51' .l�i !t �1l4t ��~ T �� III ��II } r. }I �, 4'.± / -y� '�',t.�)_� , 1�~�-��` '�r rlf ��5� �,i. �A I}' f t�\, - - � r,J"" ". y., • \ r k I- JJ i 1 �' ')1 �.. r XJ '\ f. - _ nl°, _� r.'.v;,_ �.• I ! 'v .�, rf', �:�'-.-...- as ;J is �l h• +1 { ,J i �' ",'� _ J 1`L,' L 11/� `I Iir.�^., 1 i t �• `' ,�,: ,I • �_`' `I � }.ref.\, ZZ p ` �s 1`, J i '' ,, �' n •��' � r' �, 1 t ' '• ` �! �' •� •t,rJ J`yt j�r \\\] ��i !��)>�11r:�.+1 it .1 '�� \ ;j{ rr` T4.i," r�.�' ; ; �-• \(r• • � r• `z`-• . 40�f Jr��J t �i��. ��,7 M1�-.'_.l`�}�C( .•r 1 ��7~ ?A -) �� `lr - I �i I c i rr '•' '-I r I1��4V `j' �11\ 7 -�.. 'V•� `ram \� I� 37 ``_ � If 1 ! // (f..-`.,�. __ a..-� �'}� '.'1r�y� ./� _�� ( r�1,(�' �_• ��`.� ` T� _�, /7 , �ryl1 '-- L, � - I � 1!' } `\r� `` I -.;•fit, l'�" fi`;I,/} • �; f' )� r�•;-;r;' a i , �> - ,. .l - ,s-,, - L.,, �. v", Ill �. 4 , _ °..5•'`� ` - + I_ ' I�. _ `'•7 f •,�' 'f f r `1'1. t.- '/ '. ;aF"t�'- sot h i ala x; - .\ v! C',` \/i'�?` I�r l/i- '7 �i)` it (; '6 .� ,','•i:' i i .•Y 5'.` ._ II : �' jh ,..s� :'i•�.l,4lyl �, - ,l. �. )}r� � 150 ' ��`jr } 11r ''� " _f-J '. ir\}`� !~ate 'r y�r/!' •} r 6YU� --- 119 fNENDEASON) 131 r33 • iNr[+l.o� o[o�do,ca� w�vcr, wws ., crow o c ,+rr 5.355 ry 5w ... l rid r350mn E 78 ° ,' SCALE 1:24000 X T 4 .44 ROAD CLASSIFICATION _ a Mu E S 1 il`C. ST'F'� a ti,s _r _ _ < , Primary highway, Light -duty road, hard or 1000 2000 3000 4000 soo0 6000 7000 FEET [� l.L hard surface improved surface s —0 — 1 KILOMETER c._._J__.G:..a 1. Weiss. C,M., Campbell, P.H., Pfaender, S.L., and D.Y. Conlin. Water Quality Surveillance Program. John H. Kerr Reservoir: Limnological Study. School of Public Health, UNOCH, May. 1978. 2. NCDN€R. Water: Quality Section. Water QualLty Studies, 1974, 1975, 1976, Raleigh, N.C. 3. Weiss. C,M, and E,J, Itucnzler. Tzophic :hate of `forth Carolina Lakes. 'WRRI ReporL No, 119, July, 1976. 4. Brown, L , C . and T , O . Barnwell, J r . The Enhanced Stream Water Quality Models QUAL2E and QUAL2E-UNCAS. CPA Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, GA. May, 1987. 5, _ mbrooe, R.€3. , Vandergrift, S.A. , and T.A. Wool. WASP3, A IlydrodynamLc and Water_ Quality Model. Model Theory, User's Manual, and Programmer's Guide. EPA ERL, Athens, GA. September, 1986, 6, Walker, W.W. Empivival Methods for Predicting Eutrophi.cation in !,pound- ments. March, L985, US Army Corps of Engineers. Waterways Experiment station, Vicksburg, miss. 7. Chapr: S. Models presented at Labe :Modeling Intensive Course, November, 1985, Duke Universty School of PuresCry and Env. Studies, Durham. N& Mancini— J.L. , Kaufman, GC, , Margarella, P.A. , and E.D. Driscoil. Techni- wol Guidance Manual for Performing Wasteload Allocations, Book IV: Lakes and Impoundments, Chapter 2. { uLrophicatiun. EPA. Washington, DX. August, 1983, a Q� NUTBUSH CREEK = o o 4,,,,74 — 12,.,,74 n [100. 8 0. r SLOPE = 293.71 • d INTERCEPT - 9'48- - .05 .10 .15 .20 .25 .30 35 .40 .45 o 4 TOTAL1f P MSG/ .(AVE' TOP TEN FEET Ij1 15 III I. 't1oz hr X uo _. O) Sec, 3Li5 j 1� f I1� 1 tz- II hr 3�00 acc 7 m j' ce I , 61-€q ws h 0,h C�n - , 09 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES & COMMUNITY �- IY DEVELOPMENT �- ,r �r Date MEMO: To �J}Subject 14.) 3A 3-7, z ' E I �- --U - w - _4 -- r AJ I �� ]t� �04� ara �;►�c�C. - �Do/ — i0io- 27/r- - _$C4tCd-- a5 hy:: _-Cerb�rapha CL rf-pr.CC44chon, el f) _ I - -------!�;�ic��i��---�_G�D=_'�S..Q_� Ch_'�Ghra,}��-char--... 3`?.� '��► - - ' �vr [COS Coo f Toc cc�v o f4 I� I cgig`6 r7I --- - SE- --- -9 -- - -- ------ - -- —_ - - __ ___ -- - - 6!1 r4 -Y 1Jo - _ . -- -- - -- -- -- -- ----- _.. . r ��'jti� �,t�CaCtG��741rV G C�Vta__ pep. �t 7f2r� ��,� 01 00 C�,��} G� �v• �� m lcy ;i 1 f I � i c,&4-��. CV— �X)C, PAC. whL)e, _ . Hei,117- PCkJO- OW _ -'S O-- CJL�chcv5-e (-ii- me d(,1 _a3 44)el ICU;4k-_ .L2 Leaches- A3.��ume[I—_ d4O- d- ve-)L iILJ-- u)Cvf-- iaCC-LLfCde-_ �-Lljm ou-qi--Z. . -_ -_ ,,., _-...-�I�L�_, L�I L:V �11'��3-�-.� .�-�-�I.��+•-�_.,-.�./L�+.[! _�j�_ J _'"�""�Tl�_ ___�----_ __-_._.- ._ ._._ ._ _. _____ _ _ III Ai CIS IL 7 0(-mccie! L L)LI�- Ctte_ rio ----------;�,P.�f�r�d.---��ce��]r_e��,+.s--- �t...�eyJ---1nd�cr�-ecP._�hczt___Gi[�C.�2�.�G��._ rr��c�.r _►:�1 i i. �i P er0e v,-Or 30 c. --� - ly� T��c own d�' �lc�dev;�on Joc Cfeek 03020a 6 '7010 = 0 . z cis G.a [p(e-JCC )% Jo,55G Mc:>D = 3.lq C6 3,40 C6 T1'` c yosl •JOci `- �, r G 11' 3,ko CFa �;I'qc &/231SS SUMMER SAVED AS SNUTBSH1 QW=2.0559 Sag # | Reach # | Geg ]'Ili | D.O. | CBOD | NBOD | FIow | 1 1 0.00 7.02 11.41 12.76 3.39 1 1 0.05 7.02 11.35 12.69 3.39 1 1 0.10 7.02 11.29 12.61 3.39 1 1 0.15 7.03 11.23 12.54 3.39 1 1 0.20 7.03 11.17 12.46 3.39 1 1 0.25 7.03 11.11 12.39 3.39 1 1 0.30 7.04 11.05 12.32 3.39 1 1 0,35 7.04 10.99 12.24 3°39 1 1 0.40 7.04 10.94 12.17 3.39 1 1 0.45 7.05 10.88 ' 12.10 3.39 1 1 0.50 7.05 10.82 12'03 3.39 1 1 0.55 7.06 10.76 11.96 3.39 1 1 0.60 7.06 10.71 11.89 3.39 1 1 0.65 7.07 10.65 11'82 3.39 1 1 O.70 7.07 10.59 11.75 3.39 J. 1 0.75 7.08 10.54 11.68 3.39 1 1 0.80 7.08 10.48 11.61 3.39 1 1 0.85 7.09 10'43 11.54 3.39 1 1 0.9O 7.09 10.37 11.47 3.39 1 1 0.95 7.10 10.32 11-41 3.39 1 1 1.00 7.10 10.26 11.34 3.39 1 2 1.00 7.10 10.26 11.34 3.39 1 2 1.05 7.10 10.23 11.30 3.39 1 2 1.10 7.09 10.19 11.26 3.39 1 2 1.15 7.08 10.16 11.22 3.39 1 2 1.20 7.08 10.12 11'18 3.39 1 2 1'25 7.07 10.09 11'14 3.39 1 2 1.30 7.07 10.06 11.10 3.39 1 2 1.35 7.07 10.02 1k.06 3..39 1 2 1.40 7.06 9.99 11.02 3.39 1 2 1.45 7.06 9.95 10.98 3-39 1 2 1.50 7.06 9.92 10.94 3.39 1 3 1.50 7.06 9.92 10.94 3.39 1 3 7.06 9.89 1.0.90 8.39 1 3 1.60 7.06 9.86 10.87 3.39 1 3 1.65 7.06 9.83 10.83 3.39 1 3 1.70 7.06 9.80 10.79 3.39 1 3 1.75 7.07 9.77 10.75 3.39 1 3 1.80 7.07 9.74 10.71 3.39 1 3 1.85 7.07 9.71 10.67 3.39 1 3 1.90 7.07 9.68 10.64 3.39 1 3 1.95 7.07 9.65 10.60 3.39 1 4 1.95 7.07 9.65 �0.60 3.39 1 4 2.00 7'05 9.61 10.55 3.39 1 4 2.05 7.04 9.57 10.50 3.39 1 4 2.10 7.02 9.53 10'45 3.39 1 4 2.15 7.00 9.49 1U.40 3.39 1 4 2-20 6.99 9.46 10.35 3.39 1 5 2.20 6.99 9.46 10.35 3.39 1 5 2.25 6.94 9.41 10.27 3.39 1 5 2.30 6.90 9.35 10.20 3.39 1 5 2.35 6.85 9.30 10.12 3.39 1 5 2.40 6.82 9.25 10.05 3.39 1 6 - 2.40 6.82 9.25 10.05 3.39 1 6 2.45 6.76 9.20 9.95 3.39 1 6 2.50 6.70 9.15 9.86 3.39 1 6 2.55 6.65 9.10 9.76 3.39 1 6 2.60 6.61 9.05 9.67 3.39 ON LBDATA 26 SUMMER SAVED AS SNOTBSHI ON LBDATA 86 QW=2.0559 ---------- MODEL RESULTS ---------- Discharger : CITY OF HENDERSON Receiving Stream : NUTBUSH CREEK The End D.O. is 6.61 mg/l. The End CBOD is 9.05 mg/1. The End NBOD is 9.67 mg/l, ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WLA QLA QLA DO Min CBOD NBOQ , DO Waste Flow (mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd) Segment 1 6.61 2.60 6 Reach 1 12.00 13.50 7.00 2.05590 Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00000 Reach 8 0100 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 *** MODEL. SUMMARY DATA ** Discharger H CITY OF: HEN.DE1 SOi'%l SubbaGsi.'n : 030206 Receiving Stream : NUTBUSH CREE1-.:: Stream Class: C Summer 7010 : €:).r:.:` Winter 7010 n 0.,4 Design Temperature: E6. :LENSTH: SLOPE, VELOCITY DEPTH: Kd 1 Kd ; Ka > Ka > KN 1 KN 1 KNR I KNR i : mile 1 ft/rtri: fps 1 ft ,design: 320Q Ae5ign: �204 :design: 2201 idesign: 320' 1 1 I 1 i 4 1 1 k 1 1 1 k I Segment 1 1 1.001 20.101 0.410 1 0.42 1 0.71 : 0.54 116.?O : 14.831 0.79 : 0.50 1 0.73 1 0.00 1 Reach I: i 1 1 : i 1 1 1 1 1 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment 1 1 0.501 10.701 0.410 1 167 1 0.46 1 OX 1 9.00 1 1901 OA8 : ON 1 OAS 1 OAO 1 Reach 2: 1 : : 1 : 1 1 1 : i : 1 -----------------------------------------------------------___--------------------------------------- 1 1 k F 1 1 I 1 r 1 ! I 1 1 5 1 1 4 1 1 Y ! 1 1 1 4 Segment 1 : 0.451 10.701 0.410 1 0.87 1 0.41 : 0.31 1 9.00 1 7.901 OAS : 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 4 3 I ! ] I 1 1 5 ! 1 1 ! 1 1 Reach 3 1 1 i i I 1 1 k 4 i 1 4 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment 1 1 0.251 10.701 0.300 1 0.30 : OAO 1 OAO 1 608 1 5.78: OAS 1 OAO! OAS 1 OAO 1 Reach 1 , 1 i 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 F ReL�{h 4 1 F f k ! i 1 i I 1 I F ! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1 i 1 1 i 1 i i 1 I 4 I Segaent 1 1 0.201 10.701 0.200 1 0.70 1 0.35 1 0.27 1 4.39 1 3.851 0.48 : 0.30 1 0.49 : 0.00 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 Reach .C r 1 1 i 1 , i F 1 ! i 1 Segment 1 : 0.201 10.701 0.150 1 4.00 : 0.28 1 0.21 1 3.29 : 2.09: 0.48 : 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 Reach 6 1 1 1 : 1 : 1 1 : 1 1 1 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- : F 1. o w : Segment I Reach 1 Waste_ i 3,.187 : Headwaters! 0.200 Segment 1 Reach a Segment I Reach 3 Waste 1 0.000 C:B DD : i4J B O D i D.O. : mgr'1 1 mg/I 1 mg/II 1 12.000 : :13„500 1 7,.000 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300 1 2.000 0 1 1.000 )4. 0 1 7.30C) 1 2.000 i 1.000 0 1 7.300 Waste ! 0.000 : 0.000 ! 0.o00 0.000 Tributary ; 0,000 ; E.000 ! 1.000 . 7.]00 * Runoff ; 0.000 ; 2 000 | 1.000 | 7.e00 Segment 1 Reach 5 Waste ; 0.000 | 0.000 ; 0,000 0.000 Tributary ; 0.000 | 2.000 I.000 7.800 f Runoff : 0,000 : 2 000 : 1,000 ! 7.800 Segment 1 Reach 6 Waste , 0.000 . 0.000 ; 0,000 0.000 Tributary ; 0.000 | 2.000 1 l.000 | 7,30/ * Runoff ! 0.000 ! 8.000 ; 1.000 : 7.800 * Runoff flow Is in cfs/mile SUMMER SUMMER QW=2.1914 MGD CBOD=12, NBOD=13.5, DO--7 Seg # | Reach # | Seg Mi.| D.O. | CBOD t NBOD | Flow � 1 1 0.00 7.02 11.44 12.80 3.60 1 1 0.05 7.02 11.38 12.73 3.60 1 1 0.10 7.02 11.32 12.65 3.60 1 1 0.15 7.02 11.26 12.58 3.60 1 1 0.20 7.03 11.20 12.51 3.60 1 1 0.25 7.03 11.14 12.43 3.60 1 1 0.30 7.03 11.09 12.36 3'60 1 1 0.35 7.04 11.03 12.29 3.60 1 1 0'40 7.04 10.97 12.31 8.60 � 1 0.45 7.05 10.91 l2.14 3.60 1 1 0.50 7.05 10.85 12.07 3.60 1 1 0.55 7.06 10.80 12.00 3.60 1 1 0.60 7.06 10.74 11.93 3'60 1 1 0.65 7.06 10.68 11.86 3.60 1 1 0.70 7.07 10.63 11.79 3.60 1 1 0.75 7.07 10.57 11.72 3.60 2 1 0.B0 7.0B 10.51 11.65 3.60 1 1 0.85 ' 7.09 10.46 11.58 3.60 1 1 0.90 7'09 10.40 11.51 3.60 1 1 0.95 7.10 10.35 11'44 3.60 1 1 1.00 7.10 10.29 11.38 3.60 1 2 1.00 7.10 10.29 11.38 3.60 1 2 1.05 7.09 1O.26 1].34 3.60 1 2 1.10 7.09 10.22 11.30 3.60 1 2 1.15 7.0B 10.19 11.26 3.60 1 2 1.20 7.08 10.15 11.22 3.60 J. 2 1.25 7.07 10.12 11.18 3.60 1 2 1.30 7.07 10.09 11.14 3.60 1 2 1.35 7.06 10.05 11.10 3.60 1 2 1.40 7.06 10.02 11.06 3.60 1 2 1.45 7.06 9.98 11.02 3.60 1 '2 1.50 7.06 9.95 10.98 3.60 1 3 1.50 7.06 9.95 10.9B 3.60 1 3 1.55 7.06 9'92 10.94 3.60 1 3 1'60 7.06 9.89 10.90 3.60 % 3 1.65 7.06 9.86 10.86 3.60 1 3 1'70 7.06 9.83 10.83 3.60 1 3 1.75 7.06 9.80 10.79 3.60 1 3 1.80 7.07 9.77 10.75 3.60 1 3 1.85 7.07 9.74 10.71 3.60 1 3 1.90 7.07 9.71 10.67 3.60 1 3 1.95 7.07 9.68 10.64 3.60 1 4 1.95 7'07 9.68 10.64 3.60 1 4 2.00 7.05 9.64 10.58 3.6O 1 4 2.05 7.03 9.60 10.53 3.60 1 4 2.10 7.02 9.56 10.48 3.60 1 4 2.15 7.00 9.52 10.43 3.60 1 4 2.20 6.99 9.48 10.38 3.60 1 5 2.20 6.99 9.48 10.38 3.60 1 5 2.25 6.94 9.43 10.31 3.60 1 5 2.30 6.89 9.38 10.23 3.60 1 5 2.35 6.85 9.33 10.16 3.60 1 5 2.40 6.81 9.28 10.0B 3.60 1 6 2.40 6.81 9.28 10.08 3.60 1 6 2.45 6.75 9.23 9.99 3.60 1 6 2.50 6.70 9.18 9.89 3.60 1 6 2.55 6.65 9.13 9.79 3.60 1 6 2.60 6.60 9.08 9.70 3.60 SUMMER SUMMER QW=2.1914 MGD CB00=12, NBOD=13.5, D0=7 ---------- MODEL RESULTS ---------- Discharger : CITY OF HENDERSON Receiving Stream : NUTBUSH CREEK ______________________________________________________________________ The End D.O. is 6.60 mg/1. The End CBOD is 9.08 mg/l. The End NBOD is 9.70 mg/l. ______________________________________________________________________ WLA WLA WLA DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow (Mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/l> ____ (mg/1) (mg/l) (mgd) ----------- Segment ______ _________ _______ 1 6.60 2.60 6 ' ____ __ Reach 1 12.00 13.50 7.00 2.19140 Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 3 0.00 0'00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 5 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00000 Reach 6 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 -x.** MODEL_ t� UMMARY DATA *** Di lsc= 3 is{f ar l I T'`r' f:il::: 1-1E::NDEIR, j(:1N '.3u bbaS:i.r'1 a #)3t::)2')t:)I_, ReF- w i v i rtg St-E=-zt1T1 hiU"1'3=:sUSH (IREEk:: atreaq, Class: as : C St-urjiTc r- 70 t (-) () . 12" W i -F tc r- 7010 , 0.4 Design 26 1LENGTl31 SLOPE! VELOCITY 1 OEPTRI Kd 1 Kd 1 Ka 1 Ka 1 KN 1 KN 1 KNR 1 KNR 1 Mile 1 ftfei: fps 1 ft design. 3204 :designi 3201 Aesignl 4201 ldesignl Z201 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i 1 1 1 i i 1 3 i i 1 S k segilent 1 1 1.001`20.10; 0.410 1 0A 2 1 0.71 1 0.54 116.90 ; 14.83i 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.77 1 0.00 1 Reach I 1 1k 11 1 ! I 1 1 1 1 i I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 i r SegMent1t 0.501 10.701 0.410 0.67 1 0.46 i 0.35 1 4.00 i 7.901 0.4E i 0.30 i 0.48 1 0,00 1 Reach 2 i i i i i i i i i i i i11 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------= r 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 r F Segment 1 1 0.451 10.701 0.410 0.87 1 0.41 1 0.31 1 9.00 1 7.9E 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.49 1 0.00 1 Reach 3 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i 1 1 F I I 1 1 ] 1 i 1 i f i i 3 segment I 1 0.251 10.701 0A 00 .1 0.70 1 0.40 1 0.30 1 6.58 1 5.7G1 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.013 {� f ] 1 1 1 , F 1 I , I i Reach '} 4 1 1 1 i 1 , I 1 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1 1 1 1 I 1 ] 1 I 1 1 1 Segeent 1 1 0.20: 10.7E 0.200 0.70 1 0.35 1 0.L7 1 4.35 1 3 ZG 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 Reach S: 4 1 1 11 ] ! F 1 111 ! 1 � 1 i 1 i 1 1 4 1 ! 5 SegEent 1 1 0.20: 10.70: 0.150 1 4.00 1 0.28 1 0.21 1 3.29 1 2.891 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 Reach 6 --------------.-------------------------------------------------------------------------.-------------- F= 1. c, vi 1 C l-3O D 1 I' BO D 1 D. O. 1 1 cfs 1 f g I 1 n-sq I 1 Er:g 1 ^ ri _:'�: {•::: i w3 « w39% i 1 ;-} 1 1 "'.3 . L:'`i )i..] i 7 11 �=�:ccfw�t'L ?}-=. 1 {:) .. ?t )E:? 1 1' , C)t s() 1 J. 7. 34 ( T 'I' 11- U t E"i'F y i L) . t)#„)t„) i 2 , E_)(_)C) i 1.. 000 ? . 000 1 1.. ()00 i 7 . 2700 ',:�#-��fnE�s...i'L 1. l-is•-;•�:rt�:P"i c:'. ici'i•E i t_) . t ]#,)) ; () , C-) 0 .'1-i i t3l.i'L %11 �� i C). E,)i_)() 1 2. #,}( )l) i 1. . #_)#_}0 ; 7» r�!� 0 Ru-,--Io f' 1' 1 {.) , (_)#-)#") C) C) 1 1 , 00(.) 1 7 . 300 Seg1Y1f- vit 1. RLac:h 3 Wa St e 1 0 » 0{)#:) 1 t:) , C)t»)Q C) . t:)C)i i 1 £1 Ts-i.hi..)tas-y 1 c)„E::)k:)0 1 2.000 1 t,(icli) 7»300 F,I..i-I..)c:1•t'1., 1 0 waste � o.Von / V.uoo � o.ouu i o.000 Tributar0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.3O0 * Runoff | 0'000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.300 Segment 1 Reach 5 Waste | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 Tributary | 0.O00 | 2.000 1.000 | 7.300 * Runoff | U.000 | 2.000 | 1'000 | 7.300 Segment 1 Reach 6 Waste | 0.0O0 | 0.0.000 Tributary | 0.000 * Runoff | 0.000 7.300 * Runoff flow is in cfs/mile SUMMER SUMMER QW=4.14 MGD CBOD=12, NBOD=13.5, S e g *1:| Reach # | Seg Mi | D.O. | CBOD | NBOD � Flow | 1 1 0.00 7.01 11.70 13.12 -6.62 1 1 0.05 7.01 11.64 13.04 6.62 1 1 0.10 7.01 11.57 12.97 6.62 1 1 0.15 7.01 11.51 12.89 6.62 1 1 0.20 7.01 11.45 12.82 6.62 1 1 0.25 7.01 11.39 12.74 6.62 1 1 0.30 7.02 11.33 12.66 6.62 1 1 0.35 7.02 11.27 12.59 6.62 1 1 0.40 7.02 11-21 12.52 6.62 1 1 0.45 7.03 11.15 12.44 6.62 1 1 0.50 7.03 11.09 12.37 6.62 1 A. 0.55 7.03 11.04 12.30 6.62 1 1 0.60 7.04 10.98 12.22 6.62 1 1 0.65 7.04 10.92 12.15 6.62 1 1 0.70 7.05 10.86 12.08 6'62 1 1 0.75 7.05 10.80 12.01 6.62 1 1 0.80 7.06 10.75 11.94 6.62 l 1 0.85 7.06 10.69 11.87 6.62 1 1 0.9O 7.07 10.63 11.80 6.62 1 1 0.95 7.07 J. 11.73 6.62 1 1 1.00 7.08 10.52 11.66 6.62 1 2 1.00 7.08 10.52 11.66 6.62 1 2 1.05 7.07 10.49 11.62 6.62 1 2 1.10 7.06 10.45 11.58 6.62 1 2 1.15 7.06 10.42 11.54 6.62 1 2 1.20 7.05 10.38 11.49 6.62 1 2 1.25 7.05 10.34 11.45 6.62 1 2 1.30 7.04 l0.31 11.41 6.62 1 2 1.35 7.04 10.27 11.37 6.62 1 2 1.40 7.04 10.24 11.33 6.62 1 2 1.45 7'03 10.21 11.29 6.62 1 2 1.50 7.03 10.17 �1.25 6.62 1 3 1'50 7.03 10.17 11.25 6.62 1 3 1.55 7.03 10.14 11.21 6.62 1 3 1.60 7.03 10.11 11.17 6.62 1 3 1.65 7.04 10.0B 11.13 6.62 1 3 1.70 7.04 10.05 11.09 6.62 1 3 1.75 7.04 10.02 11.05 6.62 1 3 1.80 7.04 9.99 11.02 6.62 i 3 %.85 7.04 9.95 10.98 6.62 1 3 1'90 7.05 9'92 10'94 6'62 1 3 1.95 7.05 9.89 10.90 6.62 l 4 1.95 7.05 9.89 10.90 6.62 1 4 2.00 7.03 9.85 10.85 6.62 1 4 2.05 7.01 9'81 1O.79 6.62 J. 4 2.10 6.99 9.77 10.74 6.62 1 4 2.15 6.97 9.73 10.69 6'62 1 4 2.20 6.96 9.70 10.64 6.62 1 5 2'20 6.96 9.70 10.64 6.62 1 5 2.25 6.91 9.64 10.56 6.62 1 5 2.30 6.86 9.59 10.48 6.62 1 5 2.35 6.82 9.54 10.41 6.62 1 5 2.40 6.78 9.49 10.33 6.62 1 6 2.40 6.78 9.49 10.33 6.62 1 6 2.45 6.72 9.44 1O.23 6.62 1 6 2.50 6.66 9.38 10.13 6.62 1 6 2.55 6.61 9.33 10.04 6.62 1 6 2.60 6.57 9.28 9.94 6.62 Seg # \ Reach # | Seg Mi | D.O CBOD | NBOD | Flow | DO=7 SUMMER SUMMER QW=4.14 MGD CBOD=12, NBOD=13.5, DO=7 ---------- MODEL RESULTS ---------- Discharger : CITY OF HENDERSON Receiving Stream : NUTBU8H CREEK ______________________________________________________________________ The End D.O. is 6.57 mg/l. The End CBOD is 9.28 mg/l. The End NBOD is 9.94 mQ/l. ______________________________________________________________________ DO Min (mg/1) Milepoimt Reach # ______ _________ ------- Segment 1 6.57 2.60 6 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Reach 5 Reach 6 WLA WLA WLA CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow (mg/1) (mgd) __________ 12.00 13.50 7.00 4.14000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0'00 0'00 0.00 0'00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 *** MODEL.. 231..1Mh'#ARY DA-rA **4 Di--,ct,,ar ciy- . C IT'Y OF HEIADERSON ai_tbb,-t ;ir1 : 0302C)6 Receivirsr.T Sty-eant NU-FF3U15H C;REEk: streafn glass. C; 2 W S. 1 }t:C's- 7010 . #.S . 4 I:)+:_'sxgri2). CJ,i _. 14,H 1LENGTHI SLOPE: VELOCITY 1 dEPTH1 Kd 1 Kd 1 Ka 1 Ka 1 KN 1 K,N 1 KNR 1 KNR ; 1 mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft Aesignl @204 Nesignl 8201 Ne5ignl 3201 :design! S201 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 I 1 i F Segment 1 1 1.00: 20.101 0.410 1 0.42 0.71 1 0.54 116.90 1 14.831 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.77 1 0.00 1 Reath 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 # 1 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ! I I 1 3 , ,1 1 , 1I ! i 1 1 1 ] i 1 ] i Segment 1 1 0.501 10.701 0.410 1 0,67 1 0.46 1 0.35 1 9.00 7.901 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1• 1 Segaer,t 1 1 0.451 10.701 0.410 1 0.87 1 0.41 1 0.31 1 9.00 1 7.901 OAS 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 ReRrn 3 Segment 1 1 0.251 10.701 0.300 1 0.70 1 0.40 1 0.30 1 6.58 1 5.781 OAR 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 RedCi# 4 1 I 1 1 1 / 4 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SSegment 1 1 0.201 10.701 0.200 1 0.70 1 0.35 1 0.27 1.4.39 1 3.851 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.49 1 0.00 1 Reach , 5 I , 1 1I i I 1 11 , 1 , 11 1 i 1 i Segmerit 1 1 0.2-01 10.701 0.150 1 4.00 1 0.28 1 0.P1 1 3.27 1 2.841 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 Reach 6 1 1 , 1 I i 1 1 1 , 1 ! , 1 3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 i t"f s , .ilT1 pt. Wa 1. #:: f.»tw 417 1 HEadWat;C'rs1 t_S.L[_SO 1 Tributary 1 t_S.C)00 1 * Rt..trw' f s' 1 0 . CSt"SCl i Se9ritl-,t;t 1 RFcar_1-, S wa F:-�tE_? 1 U . (.-.)00 1 0 . 0C.}C J 1 C:DOD 1 NBOD 1 D.O. 1 :t 2. 000 i 13 5#:.l# 1 1 7. i„St jC S L. i:JCit"} 1 1 .00CS 1 1 7. 300 2»0 0 1 1.00 1 1 7»:30#.) 0 „ E_)1_t£1 i 0 „ OCW) i t S , 00() i. 000 1 1. t 1s.J#.1 1 7» :30Cs 3C.".ga-,: 1"it .1 1ii i1:::it 4 ' Tributary 1 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.300 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.300 Segment 1 Reach 5 Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 0.000 1 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 < 2.000 < 1.000 | 7.300 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.{«]0 | 1.000 | 7.300 Segment 1 Reach 6 Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 | 0'000 | 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.300 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.300 * Runoff flow is in cfs/mile WINTER WINTER QW=2.0559 MGD CBOD=40, NBOD=90, DO=7 Seg # | Reach # | Seg Mi | D.O' | CBOD | NBOD | Flow � 1 � O.00 7.13 37.76 84.74 3.39 1 1 0.05 7.13 37.64 84.55 3.39 1 1 0.10 7.12 37.53 84;35 3.39 1 1 0.1s 7.12 37.41 84.15 3.39 1 1 0.20 7-12 37.30 83.95 3.39 1 1 0.25 7.12 37.18 83.75 3.39 1 1 0.30 7.12 37.07 83.56 3.39 1 1 0.35 7.12 86.96 83.36 3.39 1 1 0.40 7'12 36.85 83.17 3.39 1 1 0.45 7.12 36.73 82.97 3.39 1 1 0.50 7.13 36.62 82.78 3.39 � 1 0.55 7.13 36.51 82.58 3.39 1 1 0.60 7.13 36.40 82.39 3.39 1 1 0.65 7.14 36.29 82.20 3.39 1 1 0.70 7.14 36.1E\ 82.00 3.39 1 1 0.75 7.14 36.07 81.81 3.39 1 1 0.80 7.15 35.96 81.62 3.39 1 � 0.85 7.16 35.85 81.43 3.39 1 1 0.90 7.16 35.74 81.24 3.39 1 1 0.95 7.17 35.63 81.05 3.39 1 1 1.00 7.17 35'52 80.86 3.39 1 2 A. 7.17 35.52 80.86 3.39 t 2 1.05 7.15 35.45 80.74 3.39 1 2 1.10 7.13 35.38 80.63 3.39 1 2 1.15 7.11 35.31 80.52 3,39 1 2 1.20 7.10 35.24 80.40 3.39 1 2 1.25 7.08 35,17 80.29 3'39 1 2 1.30 7.07 35.11 80.18 3.39 1 2 1.35 7.05 35.04 B0.06 3.39 1 2 1.40 7.04 34.97 79.95 3.39 1 2 1.45 7.03 34.90 79.84 3.39 1 2 1.50 7.02 34.83 79.72 3.39 1 S 1.50 7.02 34.83 79.72 3.39 1 3 1.55 7.01 34.77 79.61 3.39 1 3 1.60 7.01 34.71 79.50 3.39 1 3 1.65 7.01 34.65 79.39 3.39 1 3 1.70 7.01 34.59 79.28 3.39 1 3 1.75 7.00 34.53 79.17 3.39 1 3 1.80 7.00 34.46 79.05 3.39 1 3 1.85 7.00 34.40 78.94 3.39 � 3 1'90 7'00 34'34 7883 3'39 1 3 1.93 7.00 34.28 78.72. 3.39 1 4 1.95 7.00 34.28 7B.72 3.39 1 4 2.00 6.94 34.20 78.57 3.39 1 4 2.05 6.88 34.12 78.42 3.89 1 4 2.10 6.83 34.04 78.27 3.39 1 4 2.15 6.78 33.96 78.12 3.39 1 4 2.20 6.74 33.88 77.97 3.39 1 5 2.20 6.74 33.88 77.97 3.39 1 5 2.25 6.60 33.78 77.74 3.39 1 5 2'30 6.46 33.67 77.52 3.39 1 5 2.35 6.34 33.57 77.29 3.39 1 5 2.40 6.22 33.46 77.07 3.39 A. 6 2.40 6.22 33.46 77.07 3.39 1 6 2.45 6.03 33.36 76.77 3.39 1 6 2.50 5.B5 33.25 76.4B 3.39 1 6 2'55 5.69 33.14 76.19 3.39 1 6 2.60 5.53 33.03 75.89 3'39 Seg # | Reach # | Seg Mi | D.O. | CBOD NBOD | Flow | WINTER WINTER QW=2-0559 MGD ---... ..... ..... ... --- Discharger : CITY OF HENDERGON Receiving Stream : NUTBUSH CREEK The End D.�. is 5.53 mg/l. The End CBOD is 33.03 mg/l, The End NBOD is 75.89 mQ/l. __..... ... ....... .... .... ____________________________ WLA WLA WLA DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow (mg/l} Milepoint Reach # (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/I mgd) Segment 1 5.53 2.60 6 Reach 1 40.00 9O.00 7.00 2.05590 Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0'00000 Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.0O 0.00000 Reach 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 6 0.00 O.00 0.00 0.00000 I)7.Iwi.l"i<::trger 4 Ci...l..YS OF 1-1EIdDE_RS01w1 Si.k1:}1: asin : 0:30206 Receiving Stream . NUT I=s l iS H C R E E I:*: Stream Class: C' SU1r"ifnet 7G31. 0 : 0. 2 Winter 7010 0.4 !LENGTH: SLOPE! VELOCITY ; DEPTHI Kd 1 Kd ; Ka ! Ka ; KN 1 KN : KNR : KNR 1 : File 1 ftfmi: fps 1 ft :design! �201 :design! 3201 ;design! a20° :design:: Z201 1 Segment 1 1 1.001 20.10; 0.410 ; 0.42 : 0.41 : 0.54 :13.02 : 14.831 0.32 ; 0.50 ! 0.32 1 0.00 : Reach 1 : 1 Segment 1 : 0.50: 10.70: 0.410 017 : 1016 1 0.35 : 633 1 I W 10.19 : 010 : 00 1 0. 00 ; Reath 2 1 14 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 i ] ] i ] 7 1 i Segment, 1 : 0.45s: 10.70: 0.410 : 017 1 M 24 ; 0.31 1 613 : 7.90! 0.19 ; 010 1 007 1 0.00 ; Reath 3 , ! 1 1 F i I 1 , i ] 1 1 I 1 1 1 ! > Segment 1: 0.251 10.701 0.300 ; 0.70 1 013 1 010 1 5.07 1 1 7E 0.0 1 0.30 1 00 1 0.00 1 Reach 4 1 1 : 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment 1 1 0.201 10.70: 0.200 : 0 10 I 0 10 1 017 1 3.38 : 3.85! 0.19 ; 0.30 1 0.19 ; 0.00 1 r 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! i 1 4 i Reach .l , 1 I ] i I 1 , 1 1 1 ! I 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 I 1 i F Segment 1; 0.20; 10.70: 0.150 : 4.00 1 0.16 : 0.21 1 204 : L HI 0.19 : 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 1 Reach 6 ! 1 4 1 ! 1 1 1 ! I 1 1 F 3 i ] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ! 1= 1 c., : i f= # :� , Headwaters! 0.200 1 Segment 1 Reach F Tributary 1 0„000 1 Segment 1 Reach 3 Waste 1 i i. r. 0 0 1 C!€OD : s6,1B111) 1 D.0 ! Ihg % .1 : IT.sg f 1 I mg f 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280 2.000 .f1i)tS 1 9.280 Segment :I. Reach 4 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280 �� , v.vvv , v.uvv ' Tributary | 0.000 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.2230 * Runoff 9.280 Segment 1 Reach 5 Waste | 0.000 | 0 000 | 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2 000 | 9.280 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 1.0O0 | 9.2B0 Segment 1 Reach 6 Waste | 0.00{ | 0.000 0.000 .000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.00 280 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.0D0 9.280 * Runoff flow is in cfs/mile WINTER WINTER QW=2.1914 M8D CBOD=40, NBOD=90, DO=7 Seg # | Reach # | Seg Mi | D.O. | CBOD | NBOD | Flow | 1 1 0.00 7.13 37.89 85.05 3.60 1 1 0.05 7.12 37.77 84.85 3.60 1 1 0'10 7.12 37.66 84.65 3.60 1 1 0.15 7.11 37.54 84.45 3.60 1 1 0.20 7.11 37.43 84.26 3.60 1 1 0.25 7.11 37.31 84.06 3.60 1 1 0.30 7.11 37.20 83.86 3.60 1 1 0.35 7.11 37.09 83.66 3.60 1 1 0.40 7.11 36.97 83.47 3.60 1 1 0.45 7.11 36.86 83.27 3.60 1 1 0.50 7,12 36.75 83.08 3.60 1 1 0.55 7.12 36.64 82.88 3.60 1 1 0.60 7.12 36.52 82.69 3.60 1 1 0.65 7.13 36.41 82.49 3.60 1 1 0.70 7.13 36.30 82.30 3.60 1 1 0.75 7.13 36.19 82.11 3.60 1 I 0.B0 7.14 36.08 81.91 3.60 1 1 0.85 7.14 35.97 81.72 3.60 1 1 0.90 7.15 35.86 81.53 3.60 1 1 0.95 7.16 35.75 81.34 3.60 1 J. 1'00 7.16 35.64 81.15 3.60 1 2 1.00 7.16 35.64 81.15 8.60 1 2 1.05 7.14 35.57 81.03 3.60 1 2 1.10 7.12 35.50 80.92 8.60 1 2 1.15 7.10 35.43 80.81 3.60 1 2 1.20 7.09 35.37 80.69 3.6O 1 2 1.25 7'07 35.30 80.58 3.60 1 2 1.30 7.06 35.23 80.47 3.60 1 2 1.35 7.04 35.16 80'35 8.60 1 2 1.40 7.03 35.09 80'24 3.60 1 2 1.45 7.02 35.02 80.13 3'60 1 2 1.50 7-01 34.95 80.01 3.60 1 3 1.50 7.01 34.95 80.01 3.60 1 3 1.55 7.00 34.89 79.90 3.60 1 3 1.60 7'00 34.83 79.79 3.60 1 3 1.65 7.00 34.77 79.68 3.60 1 3 1.70 6.99 34.71 79.56 3.60 1 3 1.75 6.99 34.64 79.45 3.60 1 3 1.80 6.99 34.58 79.34 3.60 1 3 1.85 6.99 34.52 79.23 3.60 1 3 1.90 6'99 34.46 79.12 3.60 1 3 1.95 6.99 34.40 79.01 3.60 1 4 1.95 6.99 34.40 79.01 3.60 1 4 2.00 3 34,32 78.85 3.60 1 4 2.05 6.87 34.24 78.70 3.6U 1 4 2.10 6.82 34.16 78.55 3.60 1 4 2'15 6.77 34.08 78.40 3.60 1 4 2.20 6.72 34.00 78.25 3.60 1 5 2.20 6.72 34.00 78.25 3.60 1 5 2.25 6.58 33.90 78.02 3.60 1 5 2.30 6.45 33.79 77.80 3'60 1 5 2'35 6.32 33.69 77.57 3.60 1 5 2.40 6.20 33.58 77.35 3.60 1 6 2.40 6.20 33.58 77.35 3.60 l 6 2.45 6.01 33.47 77.05 3.60 1 6 2.5O 5.84 33.36 76'76 3.60 1 6 2.55 5.67 33.26 76.46 3.60 1 6 2.60 5.51 33.15 76.17 3.60 Seg # 1 Reach 0 1 Seg Mi 1 D.O. 1 CBOD 1 NBOD 1 Flow | WINTER WINTER QW=2.1914 M8D CBOD=40, N1301)=9{° 1)0=7 ---------- MODEL RESULTS ---------- Discharger : CITY OF HENDERSON Receiving Stream : NUTBUSH CREEK The End D.O'. is 5.51 mg/l. The End CBOD is 33.15 mg/T. The End NBOD is 76.17 mg/l. WLA WLA WLA DO Min CBOD I'll BOD DO Waste Flow (mg/l) Milepoint Reach # (mg/I) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mgd) �egment l 5.51 2.6O 6 Reach 1 40.O0 90.00 7.00 2.19140 Reach 2 0.00 0.0O 0.00 0.00000 Reach 3 0'00 0'00 0'00 0'00000 Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 5 0.00 0.00 0.O0 0.00000 Reach 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 *.�-* I10DE:L.. ;- l.JMM('iRY l.)A'T'A X-Y-x. D i. schar qr-zr" : C.' 11-Y C:IF= HENID -::F: SDIN S s s 2 C) F'rr cc- iuifsg Str-t-,Etrrt NU-FBUSH C-F:EE:V" S-treW�m class:= CBk illrts,Il I[►1.t") 0,2 Wi-s)-tCrs- "f`Ui.i) 0.4+ DEsigls TerrpE'ratl_t:-e - :1 , 1LENGTH1 SLOPE; VELOCITY OfFTH; Kd ; Kd ; Ka ; Ka ; KM ; KN I KNR 1 K1.1R 1 mile ; ftfmi; . fps 1 ft ;design; ,3201 ;design; 9201 ;design; @20' Nesigrll 920' I i 1 1 i 1 1 i F 1 1 I I Segment 1 ; .1.00; 20,10; 0.410 ; 0.42 ; 0.41 1 0.54 113.02 ; 14,83; 0.32 1 0.50 ; 0.22 ; 0,00 Reach 1 1 1 1 i 1 I } { 1 I F I 11 1 1 ---------------------------------------------..-----»-_----------------------_----------------------- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ] ! ! 1 1 I 1 Segment i 1 0.501 10.70; 0,410 ; 0.67 1 0.26 ; 0.35 ; 6.93 7.90; 0.19 ; 0.30 ; 0.19 1 0.00 Reach 1 1 , 1 I 1 , i 1 ]it{iG1i 2 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 ! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment 1 ; 0.451 W.70; 0.410 10.87 1 0.24 ; 0.31 M3 ; 7.40; 0.19 ; 0.20 ; 0.19 ; 0.00 Reach 3; 1 1 ; 1 1 1 Seement 1 1 0.251 10,M 0.300 ; 0.70 1 0.23 ; 0.30 1 5.07 ; 5.781 0.19 1 0.30 ; 0.19 ; 0.00 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 f I i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 Segment 1 ; 0,201 10.701 0.200 ; 0.70 ; 0.20 1 0.97 1 3.39 1 3.851 0.19 1 MO 1 0.19 ; 0.00 1 Reach I ! F 1 1 1 l 1 1 ! F 1 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 1 1 f 1 1 3 1 1 ! f 1 ! Segmsent 1 ; 0.201 10.701 0.150 ; 4.00 ; 0.16 ; 0,21 ; 2.54 1 2.831 0.19 1 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 Reach 6 1 ! 3 f 1 1 1 --------------------------------....-------------_---------------------_--_---------------------------- f= i cltia i CL'i0D ; 1*11B01) i D. 0 . 1 illg. i s MQ .1 Wi is-(. 3 ., .. V7 ; 40 . r')(")r_) 1 9i"y . i-}i" 0 ; 'i 11e rs Cl l'l ettE"i'L ; f.l.?E„)i"y 1 i?.IM} }t} i 1..CIC)i} ; 9,230 "I r" :L 't1.3'l:,_ir"y i) . C)i.)41 ; E! C)i_)i,.) ; 1 . Cl .lt_i ; wf „ 28C) * RL s-01- 7 1 E,1 , i„)t„)t) ; ? . ()i li) ; f . t li_}Cl i 9 . c"f.'�i_4_) Sega,evit 1 F= eE't&-, 2 l las. f-L• 1 C) 00C) 1 ,") . (=}i')(i i { 1. i }!.�i 1 i t:} _F- ibl..l'rary 1 0.000 1 2.000 ; 1..E.,0c.l 1 9.280 2 . i )t )C) ; 1 1.1 Eis-te C) ()C)I_) 1 C) . C )C)C) ; C) , C)C)C_) I...i"'J.h:)Lt•1•:i::1r"y ({l.11 l(:l l ; } . i )i )i.) ; F.? . ClE }i 1 i 1 . ; }t'_)f.) 1 ` . F,3i_) S (, ? g rn e i-s t 1 F: e a c: h-i 4 W=06= . v.v"v , u..." . "^."" . °.""" Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 1 9.280 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.280 Segment 1 Reach 5 Waste | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 1 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.280 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 P 9.280 Segment 1 Reach 6 Waste | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.280 * Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.280 * Runoff flow is in cfs/mile WINTER WINTER QW=4.14 MGD CBOD=40, NBOD=90, DO=7 Seg # | Reach # | Beg Mi | D.O. | CBOD | NBOD | Flow | 1 1 0.00 7.07 38.85 87.31 6'62 1 1 0.05 7.06 38.73 87.11 6.62 1 1 0.10 7.05 32.61 86.90 6.62 1 1 0.15 7.05 38.50 86.70 6.62 1 t 0.20 7.04 38.38 86.49 6.62 1 1 0.25 7.04 38.26 86.29 6.62 1 1 0.30 7.04 38.15 86.09 6.62 1 1 0.35 7.04 38.03 85.89 6.62 1 1 0.40 7.04 37.91 85-69 6.62 1 1 0.45 7.04 37.80 85.48 6.62 1 1 0,50 7.04 37.68 85.28 6.62 1 1 0.55 7'04 37.57 ' 85.08 6.62 1 1 0.60 7.05 37.45 84.88 6.62 1 1 0.65 7.05 37.34 84.68 6.62 1 1 '0.70 7.05 37.23 84.49 6.62 1 1 0.75 7.06 37.11 84.29 6.62 1 1 0.80 7'06 37.00 84'09 6.62 1 1 0.85 7.07 36.89 83.89 6.62 1 1 0.90 7.07 36.77 83.70 6.62 1 1 0.95 7.08 36.66 83.50 6.62 1 1 1.00 7.08 36.55 83.30 6.62 1 2 1.00 7.08 36.55 83.30 6.62 1 2 1.05 7.06 36.48 83.19 6'62 1 2 1.10 7.04 36.41 83.07 6.62 1 2 1.15 7.02 36.34 82.95 6.62 1 2 1.20 7.01 36.27 82.84 6.62 1 2 1.25 6.99 36.19 82.72 6.62 1 2 1.30 6.97 36.12 82.60 6.62 1 2 1.35 6.96 36.05 82.49 6.62 1 2 1.40 6.95 35.98 82.37 6.62 1 2 1.45 6.93 35'91 82.25 6.62 1 2 1.50 6.92 35.84 82.14 6.62 1 3 1.50 6.92 35.84 82'14 6.62 1 3 1.55 6.92 35.78 82.02 6.62 1 3 1.60 6.91 35.72 81.91 6'62 1 3 1.65 6.91 35.65 81.79 6.62 1 3 1'70 6.91 35.59 81.68 6.62 1 3 1.75 6.91 35.53 81.56 6.62 1 3 1.80 6.91 35.46 81.45 6.62 1 3 1.85 6.90 35.40 81.33 6.62 1 3 1.90 6.90 35.34 81.22 6.62 1 3 1.95 6.90 35.28 81.10 6.62 1 4 1.95 6.90 35.28 81.10 6.62 1 4 2.00 6.84 35.19 80.95 6.62 1 4 2.05 6.78 35.11 80.79 6.62 1 4 2.10 6.73 35.03 80.64 6.62 1 4 2'15 6.68 34.95 80.48 6.62 1 4 2.20 6.63 34.87 80.33 6.62 1 5 2.20 6.63 34.87 80.33 6.62 1 5 2.25 6.49 34.76 80.10 6.62 1 5 2.30 6.35 34.65 79'86 6.62 1 5 2.35 6.22 34.54 79.63 6.62 1 5 2.40 6.10 34.44 79.40 6.62 1 6 2.40 6.10 34.44 79.40 6.62 1 6 2.45 5.90 34.32 79'10 6.62 1 6 2.50 5.72 34.21 78.79 6.62 1 6 2.55 5v55 34.10 78.49 6.62 1 6 2.60 5.39 33.99 78.19 6.62 Seg # 1 Reach 0 | Seg Mi | D.O. 1 CBOD 1 NBOD 1 Flow | WINTER WINTER QW=4.14 MCA) CBOD=40, 114B01DI=90, D0=7 ---------- MODEL RESULTS ---------- Discharger : CITY OF HENDERSON Receiving Stream : NUTBUSH CREEK The End D.O. is 5.39 mg/l. The End CBOD is 33.99 mg/l' The End I'd BOD is 78.19 mg/l. WLA W L A WLA DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow <mg/l) Milepoint Reach # (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mgd) Segment 1 5.39 2.60 6 Reach 1 40.00 90.00 7.00 4.14000 Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach 3 0.00 0.00 0,00 O.00000 Reach 4 O.000.00 Reach 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 Reach' 6 0.00 0.00 O.00 0.00000 -*** MODEL.. DATA *-X-* 1)i. iac f l; i rg !r C; I •}"Y C:11 I•-1E1'� )EEaf�11�1 3t_)l:Fbzi!, i. r€ (::)3()2� )6 Recei.viriy 3t}_.earn h1U3BU";H C;REEI<:: wt:}-c>aaY C:las, t_, 10 0= 2 wi.rlt:car• 7010 y 0.4 1LENGINI SLOPE VELOCITYDEPTH! Kd Kd ; Ka : Ka 1 KN : K14 I KNR 1 KNR : mile : ftlmi: fps 1 ft idesign; ;201 ;design: a201 :desigM 320° idesignl Z201 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1 i 1 F 1 1 1 1 F I 1 i 1 1 i 1 I i f 1 1 i I 5egraent 1 1 1,001 20.10: 0.410 : 0.42 1 0.41 : 0,54 :'13.02 : 14.831 0.32 : 0.50 ; 0.32 1 0.013 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment 1 : 0.501 10.701 0.410 1 0.67 : 0.20 : 0.35 : 6.93 : 7.90: 0.19 : 0.30 1 0.19 : 0.00 : Reach 2 : : : : : : 1 : : 1 : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5egrse]nt 1 1 0.451 10.701 0.410 : 0.97 1 0.24 : 0.31 : 6.93 : 7.901 0.19•: 0.30 ; 0.19 : 0.00 1 Reach 3 , , 3 I F 1 1 , F 1 1 F 1 I 1 1 , 1 4 1 1 4 1 , 4 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------_---------------------- 3 Segment 1 1 0.25; 10.70: 0,300 1 0.70 1 0.23 1 0.30 1 5.07 : 5,791 0.19 : 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 ; Reach 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Segment 1 1 0.20: 10.701 0.200 1 0.70 1 0.20 1 0.27 1 3.39 : 3.851 0.19 ; 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 1 Reach 5 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5eemr:nt 1 : 0.201 10,701 0.150 1 4.00 : 0.16 : 0.21 : 2.54 1 2.89: 0.19 : 0.30 1 0,13 : 0.00 1 Reach 6 1 i i 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- waists 1 6.417 : 1-14W' r5 (1 vi 8a t: r_ 'r Ea : # } „ i } 0 I,) : 3egsi}eYlt• 1 F-,'c-ach E' t+`,1 i t Ei I; e : - #: � , #.} # } 'i i bl.i -t Ft 'y 1 0 „ rj(;)C.) 1 C,8 0D : 1%Ji:!C.11) 1 L) . iT . i rng €i}gi l : rng/1 : G. ()f 0 1 1 (_)f }t) : 9« 2 8f) ��^- . ..... . �..... .. ' �.11.. ' .'- 11 Il- ^ ' Tributary | 0.O00 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.280 * Runoff | O.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 9.280 Segment 1 Reach 5 Waste 0.00O | 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 < 9.280 * Runoff Segment 1 Reach 6 Waste | 0.000 | 0.000 ( 0.0O0 | 0.000 Tributary | 0.000 | 2.000 { 1.000 | 9.280 * Runoff | 0.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 9.280 * Rumoff flow is in cfs/mile U "tip �7 UgUr l V l E! - -1''�� - - u - - - - ,r - ._ - . _ - cup h I ac1►,�,.t :�x. re j4e,->� received. - ,�,L Oa-t no - t� _ to WA�t � 3.� s CkeL 1 LGCs - ['fir, (C>uNA • F� DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT June 2, 1988 C'� �° - M E M O R A D U M 3�)k 1 7 TO Steve Tedder „s C`�'��'•r��''�'�' Assistant Chief Technical Services Branch FROM Bill Kreutzberger Regional Water Quality Supervisor Raleigh Regional Office SUBJECT Instream Request Consent Judgement City of Henderson NPDES Permit No. NC0020559 Vance County The subject wastewater treatment plant is currently under review for issuance of a Judicial Consent Judgement. Attached is the request form for the Instream assessment. Please provide me with the maximum flow above which significant impacts are expected to occur under the JOC effluent limitations. If any additional information is needed for your review, please advise. Request Form for In -stream Assessment for JOC Name of Faciltiy: City of Henderson Subbasin:03:03:01 Nutbush Creek WWTP County: Vance Design Flow: 4_.14MGD_(existing) Receiving Stream: Background Data : Nutbush Creek A. Why is JOC needed? The City of Henderson experiences cold and wet periods in the winter months in which inflow and infiltration wash out the nitrification basin and the temperatures are not conducive to growth of nitrifying organisms. Therefore the plant has monthly averages in December through March which exceed the final effluent limitations for NH -N and sometimes other parameters. To solve the noncompliancA of the facility in cold and wet weather, the City of Henderson will be required to rehabilitate the sewer system, install additional treatment and perhaps install equalization facilities. B. History of SOC requests: 1. Monthly Average waste flow prior to any SOC? 2.0559mgd Pre-SOC Period:8610 through 8709 Avg: 2.0559 mgd Post-SOC Period:8710 through 8804 Avg. 2.2504 mgd 2. Previously approved SOC's: EMC WQ NO. 87-04 Date: 871009 flow: 0.1355 mgd Total of previously approved SOC flow: 0.1355 mgd 3. Flows lost from plant -flow: 0 mgd (facilities off line) 4. Current JOC request flow: mgd The maximum allowable flow at the JOC limits above which significant instream impacts may be expected. 5. Total Plant flow post-SOC ( sum of original flow and i SoC minus losses) flow: 2.2914 mgd J - 2 - 6. Is this an accurate flow balance for plant? Why or why not? Yes. The current flow is only slightly under this amount. C. A copy of the data is attached for your review (October 1986 through April 1988). CURRENT SOC REQUEST: A. Request is for domestic or industrial waste? If it is a combination, please specify percentages. Domestic gpd 100 % Industrial gpd o B. What type of industry? Please attach any pertinent data. n/a. Only domestic type waste will be allowed. C. The region proposes the following SOC limits: Cizmmar Wi ntar *(May 1-October 31)(November 1-April 30) BOD5 6.0 mg/1 20.0 mg/1 NH3 3.0 mg/1 20.0 mg/1 DO 7.0 mg/1 7.0 mg/1 TSS 30.0 mg/l 30.0 mg/1 Fecal Coliform 1000 #/100ml 1.000 #/100 ml pH 6.0-9w.0 s.u. 6.0-9.0 s.u. other parameters Flow 4.14 mgd 4.14 mgd * Please note that the summer/winter periods have been altered from the months usually included in permits. D. What is the basis for these limits? These are limits which the staff of the Raleigh Regional Office feels that the facility can meet if properly operated and maintained. They are based upon plant performance in previous years. of NENnz CITY OF HENDERSON r.,.......zf�, NORTH .CAROLINA y , 8 41 oF�rc or �� 0� +� April 19, 1988 CITY MANAGER S kl 4 Mr. R. W. Van Tillburg,j�. Regional Supervisor Division of Environmental Management N. C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development ��'► �, 7 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 RE: Request for Instream Analysis in Relation to•'Complaint and Consent Judgment (JOC) Dear Mr. Van Tillburg: Please accept this correspondence as an official -request from the City of Henderson.to arrange.for an Instream Analysis to be run relative to the City's.Nutbush Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant and our current NPDEP permit #NC0020559. We would request that our Instream Analysis be performed on the basis of adding an additional discharge of 800,000 GPD of wastewater to our Nutbush Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant between the effective period of the Complaint and Consent Judgment (JOC) extending from July 1, 1988 to July 1, 1993. Attached for your information is a copy of our currently contemplated Winter/Summer discharge limitations to be used as part of your analysis. Members of my staff have spoken directly to Mr. Trevor Clements, Supervisor of the Technical Support Unit in the Water Quality Branch, and he has indicated that once.an Instream Analysis is performed, your office will be provided the maximum allowable°additional wastewater flow which can be apportioned to our Nutbush Wastewater Treatment Plant as soon as the results are available.. I am forwarding under separate cover the formal request'by our City Council for a JOC and the draft documents we have developed based on our prior negotiations. Thank you for your attention to,this very critical matter for the City of Henderson and should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, CITY ND�ERS`ON EI�IW/dew Eric M. Williams Attachments Cj.ty Manager CC: (wi,th_attachments)_ C-Mr...or CZements.,__DEM`=-- Mr. Mike Guarini, City Mr. Kent Wiggins, DEM Mr. Jerry Davenport, City M.s..YCarolyn McCaskill, DEM Mr. Tom Spain, City P.Q. BOX 1484, HENDERSON, N.C. (919) 492.6111 =tachment A (2) 'FLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim Winter: November 1 firing the period beginning on the effective date of this Order and lasting until May 1, 1994 ie permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number (a) 001. Such discharges call be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:. 'fluent Characteristics . ow 1D, 5 Day, 200C -tal'Suspended Residue .3 as N ssolved Oxygen (minimum) cal Coliform (geometric mean) sidual. Chlorine mperature tal Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN). tal Phosphorus Discharce Limitations Other Units (Specify) "- ' Monthy Avq._ Weekly Avg. ** 4«14 MGD ** 20.0 mg/1 30.0 mg/1 30.0 lug/1 45.0 mg/1 ** 2-0.0 mg/1 25.0 mg/1 7.0 mg/1 7.0 mg/1 1000.0/100 ml 200D.0/l00 ml Page 2 of 2 Permit No. NC0020559 Monitoring Requirements Measurement Sample * Sample . Frequency TyRe Location Continuous Recording I or E Daily Composite E,I Daily Composite E .Daily Composite E Daily Grab .., .. E,U,D - Daily Grab E,U,D Daily Grab E Daily Grab E,U,D Monthly Composite E Monthly Composite E * Sample Locations: E-Effluent, I -Influent, U=Upstream, D'Downstream i Upstream and downstream samples shall be. grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected three times per week during June, July, August and reptember and once per week during the remaining months of the year. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater'than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. "* During high rainfall events causing instantaneous flows in excess of 3.00 MGD these limits shall not apply and these parameters shall be monitored in accordance with Section 9(C) of the Order. Data shall be reported as a separate parameter during periods of bypass as specified by the Division. i tachment A (1) Page 1 of 2 Permit No. NCO020559 FLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Interim Summer: Mftp=4 - October 31 ring the period beginning on the effective date of this Order and lasting until May 1, I.994.; a permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial nur,+bers (s) 001. Such discharges all be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:' Fluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring_Requiremerts Other Units (5 ecif ) Measurement Sample * Sample Monthly Avq. Weekly Avg. Frequency_ Type Location )w ** 4.14 r1GD Continuous Recording I or E' )y 5 Day, 20*C *• 10 A mg/1 I5.0 mg/1. Daily Composite E,I :al Suspended Residue 30..0 rag/1 45.0 mg/1 Daily Composite E as N ** 6.0•mg/l 9.0 mg/1 Daily Composite E .solved Oxygen •(minimum) 7.0 mg/1 • 7.0 mg/1 Daily Grab E,U,D al Coliform (geometric mean) 1000.0/100 ml 2000.0/100 ml Daily Grab - -E,U,D idual Chlorine Daily Grab E perature - "` Daily Grab E,U,D al Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN) Monthly Composite E al Phosphorus Monthly Composite E * Sample Locations: E-Effluent, I -Influent, U-Upstream, D-Downstream Upstream and.downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected-thre•a times per week during June, July, August and September and once per week during. the remaining months of the year. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample. There'shallbe no discharge of floating solids or visible foam"in other than trace amounts. ** During high rainfall events causing instantaneous flows in excess of 3.00 MGD these limits shall not apply and these parameters shall be monitored in accordance with Section 9(C) of the Order. Data shall be reported as a separate parameter during periods of bypass as specified by the Division. Vim. i' NC�ozo��5 New✓xn ,.�utb n_G�eeK. L,,Ji 'o P,-fcco ,z5 2.b 32 mar. u 6.3 7. + 3 Q 2-9 2070 lo.q -7.0 2.0 ++ < U {. 1 izj87 ave. 1� ![?. 2.0 ��r► -u. �i.� -7.,/ zD 3S 20tO ids-) aye 1 1 z -7.4 3 32. ,3qo m n 7 7, z 7A + q 4 2Q qlq 5. (S < 1 lz� YZ ,1+Z .rU <,+ wn�t,-ec�r 51 r� Yale_ _s�c�. r3►�d — ---. �_.D ++ &)Q5 `COD f ecO' 04 �4 NY -7 3,5 -7 r5. f I 10. u AM 9 Ids +z g. 2. 2 z �, 9 + -7. CQ u.,+ 8 3 z8 9.3 _ q.3 22 z.o,--- 33 U 1 3, 'l zLx - <q _—, zU- 7.? 3 41 two - -- 7.5 + i5 <�# gh4--- 1.8� b,0 eu � ' �5 ao i s 7 - + t) rnrr� �e _ -7. °r i .7 rN < 1 7 4 i ay G.1. t ,+.r__ < I 32- _ - DIS�_ cwe. � z �. + 2-1 3g-- z M2Z Jr.^l 5 Viz. c:eo { 2z G.-7 (� !— 'f�7 21' ri•au, 23 7.5 le., _ _12_ _Ul rryZ ,_ 23 8.5 CC.? ,u -- 8� -2 - ,45Z . _ min. 2 3.�T 5.7 _ << 1r (g- zQ _ A4•S� _ U.2 �< i 2 3s ,z ------ ZI _-- [s.1— - 'S- - - 2Le -`3'`�7 - ---�ii zf-- mij-4 �.5 5,$ 2- 8 713S I ,S G.4 (�.i z 22 <Z �erm< �- rtilC CO2.o55S� nlr�rCm Spf'� V� IIcL, i erylp _[�U aN c7 CoJ Feel �, imp lea +{ __COD �eccz _ qk6 Cue. l ry ter. Z 3 �y a73 4 15 q.3 _ 2— -'So -z - ma.x I) ID,2 blo Ili 32- M�n. , I �.3 5.(' + 15 ?.(., &,2 r Lk Le 4 :zg < L 3 7 10 k 10, Z-- ►7t�aL, +` !+. L .S +O 35 C k ,)5 +.!e La-7 m,n 5 Lt,q 5.� 1 15 40 -r �.� c�. + 3 3B Z 21 j aped, i !+,t 5 2Z zogr — - 1p fi -; ---- te' ._ _ -- Le S- - - - 10, C2 I < z - min. i B.9 0,o z. r l /8�i3 3 1o.g l� 3 z Nt < Z 12- f UU 9, r 7S ro, b 2 U 14 - 5 - - rY 1 2 SD Tn17-r~- r� Ir, S` � � _ _ 3 9 Le 2033 - rnn, �'Z ' Z <z tkf Goc.. 11 W a +� qu r44 9,4 17 9.3 Z mtn ddlg 2—& 0 7. 2 + �O fl� _ m __+ 3 'R z Le. to 2. & z 3 1?• - - (R .5 - -3..__ Nq SOO - - 3 Ike----- 39 a3 7'� 3S- 8l --r -- -- - - 7,15 rz 131�r - �Nre --l%'� — 14 _ ZC2icj 2