HomeMy WebLinkAboutNC0030210_Wasteload Allocation_19930427NPDES DOCYNENT SCANNINS COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0030210
Charlotte / Mallard Creek WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Staff Comments
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
April 27, 1993
This document is printed on reuse paper -ignore any
content on the reszerse side
NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NCO030210
PERMITTEE NAME: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utility Department
FACILITY NAME:
Mallard Creek WWTP
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status:— Modification
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity:
6.0 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 98.3 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 1.7 %
Comments:
construction to 6.0 MGD should be complete late 1991
pretreatment information attached
RECEIVING STREAM:Mallard Creek
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 03-07-11
Reference USGS Quad: F16SW (please attach)
County; Mecklenburg
Regional Office: Mooresville Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 12/31/91 Treatment Plant Class: Class IV
Classification changes within three miles:
PLOTTEI
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
5
'l
qt
403Sa
SRB 2
Drainage Area (mi ) 3 7 _. - Avg. Streamflow (cfs): Ff /. 0
7QI0 (cfs) 6• `N Winter7Q10 (cfs) D, 1 30Q2 (cfs) 2, q
Toxicity Linnts: IWC 8B %/ q y %a Acute/ bromic
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters lam' l�G, kc<f Cal, ., Gid LdT
Upstream y Location doa' abn.t 6 <ll
Downstream Y Location JA /300
Effluent
Characteristics
3.0 i; : i '-
- u'
00
C.D ,'
,iW
!'
'W.4k,
Y.wK�
BOD5 (m )
q
! ?
5
10
NE3-N (mg/1)
��
�
a
D.O. (mg/1)
,5`
.5_
6
TSS (mg/1)
'? 0
30
30
30
F. Col. (/100 ml)
a 00
a 00
a a0
Z&0
PE (SU)
1�- Q
4041
A&Aed Cut/,e)
s 7
.S7
Le ,t (4/):
aP
- eV
7
a
CaJV+iUm 11/,J)'
�owiw
Mo.,A,
a_ I
Q. /
/iq '
M r
Q. b/3
D.O/3
Requested by:
Rosanne Barona
Date: 7/25/91
Prepared by:
&W �
Date: `l/a3
Comments:
Reviewed by:
CO u.
Date:
33c) ,
Q3
wcy�t-L
waf
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
April 26, 1993
ut ZIVAGJ g�I= 1u
TO: Brenda Smith, MRO
FROM: ,StephenBevingt(Vi J1
SUBJECT: Correction to factsheet for Mallard Creek W W'IP
NPDES No. NC0030210
Mecklenburg County
As noted by MRO staff, the existing and proposed chromium limits listed on the
April 8, 1993 factsheet were incorrect. The existing and proposed conditions should
match the existing permit requirement of monthly monitoring. Also, the cyanide limit was
in error. The existing and proposed limit should be 5.3 ug/l, as in the existing permit.
I have enclosed a copy of the corrected factsheet. Please call me if you have further
comments or questions. Thank you.
enclosure
cc Greg Nizich, P&E w/enclosure
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION 4 3 S Q
CMUD - Mallard Creek W WTP
NCO030210
98.3% Domestic, 1.7% Industrial
Existing
Renewal
Mallard Creek
C
03-07-11
Mecklenburg
Mooresville7�
Rosanne Barn
7/25/91
F16SW
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Request # 21,
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
0212415000
Date:
5/2189
Drainage Area (mi2):
37.54
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
0.64
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
2.10
Average Flow (cfs):
41.0
30Q2 (cfs):
2.90
IWC (%):
88%, 94%
The recommended BOD, DO, and NH3 limits are consistent with the recommendations of
the March 31, 1993 Rocky River QUAL2E model report. For other water quality parameters,
existing permit limits and monitoring requirements should be renewed as in the existing permit.
The facility will be sent a letter concerning future control of chlorine.
29
Recommended by: Date: ' 13
Reviewed by
Instream Assessment:
Regional Supervisor:
Permits &
MAY 11 1993
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY: iff_ V- DEPT. OF NATURAL
. BS90URCE5 AND
COMMUNITY DEVE! t' '
APR 1 4 033
WISION OF VVIFIN.
0RESVIIEE t WW i
�roM um a �yati'Gle re�u�rcownlr
wcr
.Iw,`- CLL .
CONVENTIONAL AND TOXIC PARAMETERS
Existing Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BODS (mg4):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
Nickel (ug/1):
Lead (ug/1):
Chromium (ug/1):
Cadmium (ug/1):
Mercury (ug/1):
Cyanide (ug/1):
Silver (ug/1):
Zinc (uM)!
TN (mg/1):
Wasteflow (MGD):
BODS (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 nil):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
Nickel (ug)1):
Lead (ug/1):
Chromium (ug/1):
Cadmium (ug/1):
Mercury (ug/1):
Cyanide (ug/1):
Silver (ug/1):
Zinc (uzft
A) Monthly Average
Summer Winter
3.0
3.0
9.0
18.0
4.0
8.0
5.0
5.0
30
30
200
200
6-9
6-9
57.0
57.0
28.0
28.0
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
A) Monthly Average
Summer Winter
3.0
3.0
9.0
18.0
4.0
8.0
5.0
5.0
30
30
200
200
6-9
6-9
57.0 57.0
28.0 28.0
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Limits Changes Due To:
Change in wasteflow
QUAL2E Water Quality Model x
New facility information
B) Monthly Average
Summer Winter
6.0
6.0
4.5
9.0
2.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
30
30
200
200
6-9
6-9
blonitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
B) Monthly Average
Summer Winter
6.0
6.0
5.0
10.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
30
30
200
200
6-9
6-9
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Parameter(s) Affected
B) BOD, NH3, DO.
(See page3 for miscellaneous and special conditions, if applicable)
B) Daily Max.
Summer/Winter
94.0
27.0 \r
2.1
0.013
S2
B) Daily Max.
Summer/Winter
94.0
27.0
2.1
0.013
.S-3
T
TOXICITY TEST
Type of Toxicity Test: Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaophnia)
Existing Limit: A) 88%, B) 94%
Recommended Limit: A) 88%, B) 94%
Monitoring Schedule: Feb., May, Aug., Nov.
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: 200 feet above discharge point
Downstream Location: SR 1300
Parameters: DO, Temp., Fecal Coliform, Conductivity,
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
0
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment
facilities? Yes No x
If no, which parameters cannot be met? Residual Chlorine
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the regional
office recommendations:
If no, why not?
For additional information, refer to the March 31,1993 Rocky River QUAL2E report for
discussion of BOD and NH3 assimilative capacity.
Facility Name V� f � � Ila / "lrfrok Pernrut # ItIc J 3CQ10 pipe # o Q j
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASSIFAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicityusingtest
procedures outlined in:
1') The North Carolina _Cmkdaphnia c
Procedure - Revised *September 981`g or e effluent bioassay proot►.dum (North Carolina-- ) subsequent versions. Chronic Bioassay
The effiuent concentration al which there may be no observable inhibition is� (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina of reproduction or significant mortality
- monitoring using this procedure to establish pument). The permit holder shall perform
Performed er thi days from the effective date of this compliance during the pernut condition. Tye first test will be
. 1. permit dunn the monthsOf
permitted final effl nt discharge below AU Effluent t processes. for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES
treatment processes
All toxicity testing results required as part of this t
Monitoring Form OYIR-1) for the month in which ip t war condition will be pit on the Effluent Discharge
Additionally, DEM Form AT 1(original) is to be sent tD� o�: using the peter code TGP3B.
wing address
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all
association with the toxicity tests, as well'as all dose/re Supporting ,chemicalfphysicaI measurements performed in
sample must be measured and rep�� �' chIorine is employed�far disinfection residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity
u�fectlon of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified I t begin imm,ed�ately.untll such time that a single test is passed. U sin � then monthly monitoring will
revert to quarterly in the months specified above, pop g, s ID°nY test requirement will
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests rfonned b Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving s y �North Carolina Division of
modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits. g s pemnit �y be re -opened and
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document such
survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid :Pst and as minunum control organism
retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test red re,��ur •�•�med�ate
noncompliance with monitoring requirements. sults will constitute
PQ� d c o`� cfs
IWC ti_ei FlowMGD
Basin & Sub -basin
Receiving Stream /14 a // , C Ic
County At h
Recommended by:
QCL P/F Version 9/91
a
Facility Name �/ -' U� i"'/q l°t� G,_,k
Permit # A 0 03 oa I o pipe # d �
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity usingtest Procedures outlined in:
1b Now Carolina �Ahnia chronic effluent bioassay um Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions. p d (NOnb Carolina Chronic Bioassay
The effluent concentration at which there may be no
' Y observable uiiubrtzon of reproduction or si '
is Z1% (dcfined:as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure gnificant mortality
0�Pd lY monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance wi Dent). The permit holder shall perform
P�Q� after thirty days from the effective date of this p in the permit o condition. The first test will be
b• � • Effluent sampling for tng the months of
Pm tted final uent discharge below all treatment p octsses. testing shall be performed at the NPDES
All toxicity results required as Monitoring testing
-1 forte pad of ft permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Disc ( ) the month in which it was performed: using the parameter code TG barge
Additionally, DEM Form AT 1 (original) is to be sent to the following�B•
'
Attention Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina DivWon of
Environmental management
4401 Reedy Q mk Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical
association with the toxicity tests, as wellas all dose/response data Total residual chlorine measurements performed in
sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the wasteostr�e eeam. ffluent toxicity
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limit then gin rnnmediatelyuntil such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly to t ly monitoring will
revert to quarterly in the months specified above• g y test requirement will
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed b the N
Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this Carolina Division of
modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or ' gam' permit may be re -opened and
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document such asminimum
survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will ire e control organism
retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results �•;zmedrate
noncompliance with monitoring requirements, will constitute
7Q10 _ D. 6 q cfs
Perms tted Flown ,�• a �Mr GD
IWC ro
Basin & Sub -basin 1} _47-11
Receiving Stream A, �
County
Recommended
QCL P/F Version 9/91
,. I
WLA Notes
SRB
4/9/93
CMUD Mallard Creek WWTP
NCO030210
- CMUD has applied for an expansion of the Mallard Creek WWTP from 3.0 to 6.0
MGD. September 25, 1989, a permit was issued for flows of 3.0 and 6.0 MGD with a
condition stating that the permit may be re -opened for possible change in effluent limits
pending instream information including the calibration of a QUAL2E water quality model.
Since that time, a QUAL2E model has been calibrated and was released on March 31,
1993.
- Over the past 12 months the Mallard Creek WWTP has been in compliance. No DO
violations were recorded at the upstream or downstream self monitoring stations over the
past 12 months. As of November, 1992, monthly flows have averaged over 3.0 MGD.
- The QUAL2E model predicts that at 6.0 MGD, the Mallard Creek WWTP should
receive the following summer limits in order to prevent the facility from contributing to
DO violations in Mallard Creek and the Rocky River: 5.0 mg/l BOD5, 2.0 mg/1 NH3 N,
and 6.0 mg/1 DO. It is recommended that winter limits be bases upon the same summer to
winter ratio as in the current permit. This will result in winter limits of 10.0 mg/1 BOD5,
4.0 mg/1 NH3 N, and 6.0 mg/l DO.
- To prevent chlorine toxicity instream, the facility at 6.0 MGD should meet 18.1 ug/l
chlorine.
- According to Joe Pearce, Mallard Creek has not yet identified all of their Industrial
Users. Therefor there is insufficient data available to update the toxics spreadsheet.
Toxics limits will be renewed at existing limits.
r 1 + r
- •m Seff-Monitoring Data
Monthly Averages
Discharger: CMUD Mallard Creek
PermR Number: NCO030210
Receiving Stream: Mallard Creek
030711
Me TIOM
•
-
-
--
-
-
FT, mool
• o
---
---
75
---
---
Dr— rM • •
-
-
--
-
Facility: Mallard Creek WWTP
AMMONIA ANALYSIS:
SUMMER
7010:
0.64 cfs
NH3-N Effl. Conc:
9.00 mg/I
Standard (1 mg/1):
1000 ug/I
Upstream NH3-N Conc.:
#### ug/I
Design Flow:
6.00 MGD
Predicted NH3-N Instream:
8435 ug/I
8.43 mg/I
NH3-N Limit:
1054 ug/I
1.05 mg/I
7010: 2.10 cfs
NH3-N Effl. Conc: 20.00 mg/I
Standard (1.8 mg/l): 1800 ug/I
Upstream NH3-N Conc.: #### ug/I
Design Flow: 6.00 MGD
Predicted NH3-N Instream: #### ug/I
16.4 mg/I
NH3-N Limit: 2157 ug/I
2.16 mg/1
CHLORINE:
7010:
0.64 cfs
cfs
Effluent Concentration:
1.00 mg/I
mg/I
Standard (1 mg/1):
17 ug/I
ug/I
Upstream NH3-N Conc.:
0.00 ug/I
ug/I
Design Flow:
6.00 MGD
MGD
Predicted NH3-N Instream:
#### ug/I
ug/I
0.94 mg/I
mg/I
LIMIT:
#### ug/I
ug/I
0.02 mg/I
mg/I
04/07/93
ever
3.1
T 0 X I C
S R E V
I EW
Facility:
CMUD Mallard Creek
NPDES Permit
No.:
NCO030210
Status
(E, P,
or M) :
M
Permitted
Flow:
6.0
mgd
Actual
Average
Flow:
3.7
mgd
Subbasin:
1030711
Receiving Stream:
Mallard Creek
I--------- PRETREATMENT DATA -------------- 1---- EFLLUENT DATA---- I
Stream
Classification:
C
I
ACTUAL
PERMITTEDI
1
7010:
0.6
cfs
I
Ind. +
Ind. + I
FREQUENCY I
IWC:
93.56
I
Domestic
PERMITTED
Domestic I
OBSERVED
of Chronicl
Stn'd /
Bkg
1 Removal
Domestic
Act.Ind.
Total
Industrial
Total I
Eflluent
Criteria I
Pollutant
AL
Conc.
( Eff.
Load
Load
Load
Load
Load I
Conc.
Violationsl
(ug/1)
(ug/1)
I 16
(#/d)
(#/d)
(#/d)
--------
(#/d)
(#/d) I
(ug/1)
--------
(#vio/#sam)l
Cadmium
S
2.0
I--------
1 9294
0.1200
0.0000
0.1200
---------
-------- I
I
--------- I
Chromium
S
50.0
1 55%
0.1200
0.0570
0.1770
I
I I
Copper
AL
7.0
I 61$
0.3600
0.0450
0.4050
I
I N
Nickel
S
88.0
1 29%
0.3600
0.0090
0.3690
I
I P
Lead
S
25.0
I 55%
0.5800
0.0490
0.6290
I
1 U
Zinc
AL
50.0
1 6746
0.2700
0.0610
0.3310
I
I T
Cyanide
S
5.0
1 59$
0.2400
0.0000
0.2400
I
Mercury
S
0.012
i 86%
0.0000
0.0000
I
I S
Silver
AL
0.06
1 94%
0.0600
0.0000
0.0600
1
I E
Selenium
S
5.00
I 50%
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
I
I C
Arsenic
S
50.00
1 40%
0.0400
0.0000
0.0400
1
I T
Phenols
S
NA
I 99%
I
1 1
NH3-N
C
I 0%
I
1 0
T.R.Chlor.AL
17.0
i 0%
1
I
I
I N
I
I
I---------------
I
I
ALLOWABLE
PRDCT'D
PRDCT'D
PRDCT'D
I
I
--------- MONITOR/LIMIT ---------
I
1--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S-- I
I
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Instream
I Recomm'd I
l
Conc,
using
using
Conc.
Based on
Based on
Based on
I FREQUENCY INSTREAM 1
l Allowable
CHRONIC
ACTUAL
PERMIT
using
ACTUAL
PERMITTED
OBSERVED
I Eff. Mon. Monitor.
Pollutant
I
Load
Criteria
Influent
Influent
OBSERVED
Influent
Influent
Effluent
I based on Recomm'd ? 1
I
(#/d)
(pg/1)
(ug/1)
(ug/1)
(ug/1)
Loading
--------
Loading
--------
Data
---------I
I OBSERVED (YES/NO) 1
--------- -
---------
cadmium
--
S
I---------
I
0.86
--------
2.138
---------
0.311
--------
0.000
--------
0.00
Limit
( I A
Chromium
S
1
3.81
53.441
2.580
0.000
0.00
Monitor
I I N
Copper
AL
(
0.62
7.482
5.116
0.000
0.00
Monitor
I I A
Nickel
S
I
4.25
94.056
8.485
0.000
0.00
Monitor
I ( L
Lead
S
l
1.91
26.720
9.167
0.000
0.00
Limit
I I Y
Zinc
AL
1
5.20
53.441
3.538
0.000
0.00
Monitor
( I S
Cyanide
S
1
0.42
5.344
3.187
0.000
0.00
Limit
I I I
Mercury
S
1
0.00
0.013
0.000
0.000
0.00
I I S
Silver
AL
1
0.03
0.064
0.117
0.000
0.00
Monitor
I I
Selenium
S
1
0.34
5.344
0.000
0.000
0.00
1 I R
Arsenic
S
1
2.86
53.441
0.777
0.000
0.00
Monitor
I I E
Phenols
S
I
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
( I S
NH3-N
C
1
0.000
0.00
I I U
T.R.Chlor.AL
I
18.170
0.00
Limit
I I L
I
I I T
1
I
I I S
.° -
CMLA 0 mpc(-A2D C2EEK ,RF
— ��U< < o p
rr-�tc�c7[Er w/
CM LA p
P (C-4 I--)A,7 Q)
6� l cKh�r r TFd LG,4,0r
�J i o i
< Er7c`T
TE.
ttowEvF2
�� 2(LE&stGN�Flcol r ZNOvs- 9c
VISE 2 ?c�
r c A i
3 c n E7E2H-t r,-Fn�
�P T NFS F
P 6 c_
c U c/-�--7f c_o
P-DT /h2r- A-i
I.1- 6 l L- ..✓S
c i �( 3
�1 /
/
rC-7LJ, L-
��[� 1�
Cc
. L�1 y
j��w_dr/�ct
'�
C
OCfS
,/
N;
op q
<<
[ 3 Z
0C(1
[
,58 sS
-2-
�/
6 %
oZ'7
�s �*j
- s
•i� :i 1 r
CMUD IDMR 6/92-12/921
Plrf Retrieval Template
NPDES/ND #
Pie Number
IU Number
Sample Date
Town
IU Name
NCO030210
1
487
920915
CMUD
ROHM & HAA
NCO030210
1
487
920916
CMUD
ROHM & HAA
NCO030210
1
487
920917
CMUD
ROHM & HAA
NCO030210
1
487
920918
CMUD
ROHM & HAA
NCO030210
1
557
920623
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920624
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920625
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920626
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920914
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920915
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920916
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
920917
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
921027
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
921028
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
921029
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
557
921030
CMUD
CLINIPAD CO
NCO030210
1
593
920609
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920610
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920611
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920612
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920714
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920715
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920716
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920717
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920825
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920826
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920827
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920828
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920915
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920916
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
920917
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NC0030210
1
593
920918
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
921020
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
921021
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
921022
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
NCO030210
1
593
921023
CMUD
IBM CORPOR
Actual Industrial Pounds
Page 1
r
CMUD IDMR 6/92-12/921
Previous Sam
Flow
Process Flow
BOD
TSS
pH
108.9
95
136
7.8
920915
22.51
113
144
7.8
920916
8.182
110
164
8.3
920917
8.835
110
230
7.5
#DIV/01
37.10675
107
168.5
7.85
10.38
200
51
6.86
920623
6.27
494
41
6.92
920624
9.43
160
14
6.21
920625
10.53
201
10
7.4
920626
8.527
2000
110
6.5
920914
8.587
8250
50
8
920915
11.617
1505
100
5.3
920916
8.662
9820
73
9
9.2
362
72
8.9
921027
2.206
193
76
7.1
921028
1.832
184
48
2.8
921029
1.406
333
64
6.9
7.38725
7.38725
1975.16667
59.0833333
6.82416667
920410
67.66
21
1
920609
59.12
18
1
920610
47.83
20
15
920611
36.39
14
1
59.76
20
1
57.19
12
1
920715
61.6
14
1
55.06
14
1
56.74
16
5
920825
59.24
10
5
920826
58.33
32
5
920827
62.6
20
8
920828
58.2
18
10
7.3
920915
58.35
16
1
6.7
920916
63
17
1
6.6
920917
62.33
14
136
6.6
920918
49.35
43
7
921020
55.74
28
5
921021
51.87
26
6
921022
65.85
17
27
#DIV/01
57.3105
19.51
11.9
6.8
164.123085F
61.473687
6.09996951
Page 2
1
CMUD IDMR 6/92-12/921
Ammonia
Cr-Total
Cu
Ni
Pb
Zn
53.6
0.013
0.008
0.012
55.3
0.008
0.029
0.012
55.1
0.01
0.013
0.025
55.5
0.009
0.02
0.005
54.875
0.01
0.0175
0.0135
0
0
0.03
0.204
0.05
0.5
0.43
0.26
0.06
0.5
0.27
0.694
0.14
0.5
0.86
0.052
0.05
0.5
0.07
0.095
1.85
0.342
0.05
2.08
0.017
1.45
0.144
0.03
1.21
0.027
0.253
0.028
0.017
0.605
0.091
0.549
0.051
0.03
1.094
0.02
0.17
0.02
0.02
0.407
0.02
0.09
0.02
0.02
0.184
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.106
0.02
0.11
0.02
0.02
0.182
0
0.03777778
0.47766667
0.07875
0.18391667
0.62483333
0.01
0.01
0.1
0.138
0.01
0.01
0.112
0.047
0.01
0.024
0.114
0.096
0.01
0.01
0.11
0.065
0.005
0.005
0.052
0.013
0.005
0.005
0.084
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.084
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.076
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.092
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.062
0.03
0.007
0.015
0.17
0.048
0.007
0.016
0.17
0.015
0.009
0.016
0.08
0.066
0.019
0.033
0.08
0.085
0.03
0.03
0.005
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.005
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.005
0.03
0
0.01844444
0.02133333
0
0.0795
0.04627778
16.9821824
0.01423806
0.0450413
0.00902961
0.04932963
0.06061514
Page 3
9/07-o3g/
NPDES PRETREATMENT INFORMATION REQUEST FORM
'FACILITY NAME: NPDES NO. NCO 0 a
'REQUESTER: -71 REGioN: /AOUO.464,
This facilityhas no SIUs and should not have
pretreatment language.
This facility should and/or is developing a pretreatment program.
Please include the following conditions:
Program Development
Phase I due
Phase II due
Additional Conditions '
(attached) '
This facility is currently implementing a pre eatment program.
Please include the following conditions:
Program Implementation
Additional Conditions
(attached)
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USERS ` (SIUs) CONTRIBUTIONS
SIU FIAW - TQ►I'AL : 0, D i
Mtn
- COMPOSITION: TEXTILE: • MGD
METAL FINI M® '
i
i OTHER:( s O MCD
y ooMim
M®
FIEADWORKS REVIEW
PASS
b1P
vac=
'THROUGHDAILY LOAD IN LBS/DAY ACTUAL
• • • : r •. i TUair IND.U$TRIAL % REMOVAL
. i
Cr
r� r I • •' •
fir r �', �r + t
Pb
Zn
CN
n�
• - . s
Other
rL -0.i i
•C)------
RECEIVED: / / REVIEWED BY :AREZURNED ://
i
The SAS System 12:28 Tuesday, July 23, 1991
2
------------------------------ NPDES=NC0030210----------------------------
Variable Sum
PIPE
3.0000000
_TYPE_
0
_FREQ_
32.0000000
MCDL
MCRL
0.0043285
MCUL
0.0330869
MNIL
0.0018296
MPBL
0.0255048
MZNL
0.2149197
MCNL
j MHGL
MAGL
MAS
MPHENOL
MFL
BODL
495.1518465
CODL
1304.54
TSSL
310.7771730
MFLOW
----------------------
0.0224250
The SAS System 12.:28 Tuesday, July 23, 1991
-r 1
T
1 , T
N I T F
P U P Y R M M M M M
0 D N I P E C C C N P
•B E U P E Q D R U I B
S S M E L L L L L
1 NC0030210 0487 1 0 8
2 NC0030210 0557 1 0 12 .0012427 0.006858 .0018296 0.000818
3 NC0030210 0593 1 0 12 .0030858 0.026229 0.024686
M
P
H M
M M M M E B C T F
0 Z C H A M N M 0 0 S L
B N N G G A 0 F D D S 0
S L L L L S L L L L L W
1
2 0.01434 245.356 657.452 9.912 0.003925
3 0.20058 249.796 647.092 300.865 0.018500
A QUAL2E-UNCAS APPLICATION TO THE
ROCKY RIVER AND MALLARD CREEK.
CABARRUS, IREDELL, AND MECKLENBURG COUNTIES ,
NORTH CAROLINA.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
This report has been approved for relea
Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
N.C. Division of Environmental Management
Date 3IR1
v 4lyd
.01
CMGfn R9al[�w.� G�,
� ----
6MGa �a
air
ever RcZ-,d
R 17 ----- ---
29-�D
1
i
Table of Contents
Listof Fiaures........................................................................................... i
Listof Tables............................................................................................ i
ExecutiveSummary .................................................................................. u
Introduction.............................................................................................. 1
CalibrationMethods................................................................................. 4
SensitivityAnalysis.................................................................................... 4
WasteloadAllocation................................................................................ 7
Recommendations..................................................................................... 16
References................................................................................................. 20
Appendix............................................................................................... 21
List of Figures
Figure 1 Rocky River Study Area ...................................................... 2
Figure 2
Schematic Showing USGS Flow Estimates ...........................
3
Figure 3
Instream w ...... ................. rite Concentrations ......................
5
Figure 4
Model and USGS Estimated 7Q 10 Flow .............................
6
Figure 5a
Predicted DO profiles of the Rocky River ............................
13
Figure 5b
Predicted DO profile of Mallard Creek ................................
13
Figure 6
Predicted BOD profile, existing permit conditions .................14
Figure 7
Predicted BOD profile at maximum allocation .......................15
List of Tables
Table 1 a. � First Order Error Analysis, DO ............................................. 8
Table lb
First Order Error Analysis, BOD..........................................
9
Table I c
First Order Error Analysis, NH3 ..........................................
10
Table 2a
Permit Limits for Major Facilities ..........................................
I I
Table 2b
Actual Discharge Conditions for Major Facilities ...................I
I
Table 3
Summary of Model Results...................................................17
EXECUTIVE SUNRAARY
Water quality models for three sections of the Rocky River and its tributaries were
joined to produce one calibrated model for 47.6 stream miles in the Yadkin River basin.
This model was used to predict dissolved oxygen and biochemical oxygen demand
concentrations at low flow conditions for both permitted and summer average discharge
conditions.
The general objective of this project was to provide a tool to assist with
management of wastewater discharge issues in the upper watershed of the Rocky River.
A more specific objective of the project was to provide a model that could be used to
determine the appropriate waste load allocation for the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utility
Department (CMUD) Mallard Creek WWTP. CMUD has applied for an expansion of the
Mallard Creek WWTP from 3 to 6 MGD.
Results from this model indicate that water quality in the upper watershed of the
Rocky River is not adequately protected by the current NPDES permit effluent limits.
Under current operating conditions, that are well below permitted loads, the DO standard
is not predicted to be violated in the Rocky River study area. However, three DO sags are
predicted to drop to or near the stream standard, indicating that little assimilative capacity
remains for oxygen consuming wastes. It is recommended that no new or expanded
discharges be permitted in the study area unless an evaluation of engineering alternatives
shows that it is the most environmentally sound alternative. If new or expanding
discharges are permitted, they should receive best available technology limits in the
watersheds above the confluence of Mallard Creek and the Rocky River, due to severely
limited assimilative capacity. Any new or expanding discharge in the lower watersheds of
the Rocky River should receive a total BODu limit of 32 mg/1 or less, equivalent to 10
mg/l BOD5 and 4 mg/1 NH3 for typical domestic discharges. This level of treatment will
protect the DO standard as well as preventing any one discharge from using up 100
percent of the available assimilative capacity of the river.
In addition, it is recommended that Mooresville WWTP, Mallard Creek WWTP,
and Concord'' WWTP be encouraged to continue to meet advanced treatment levels. Upon
expansion or modification, Mooresville WWTP and Concord WWTP should receive more
advanced treatment requirements that will protect water quality in the Rocky River. This
will mean advanced tertiary treatment at the Mooresville WWTP and limits at least as
stringent as 10 mg/l BOD5 (5.7 mg/1 CBOD5) and 4 mg/1 NH3 at the Concord WWTP.
ii
I. INTRODUCTION
A QUAL2E river model covering 47.6 total stream miles in the Rocky River basin
has been developed. This model will allow DEM to evaluate interaction among
wastewater treatment facilities in the region. Three major facilities in the area
(Mooresville WWTP, CMUD Mallard Creek WWTP, and Concord Rocky River Regional
WWTP) have expressed interest in expansion. In addition, CMUD is considering a new
3.0 MGD facility (River Run) above the confluence with the West Branch Rocky River,
Cabarrus County has proposed an 1.8 MGD facility below the confluence with Muddy
Creek, and the City of Kannapolis is considering its own 5.0 MGD WWTP.
Previous modeling efforts on the Rocky River were limited to relatively small
sections of the river so that no one model was capable of integrating the effects of each of
the major discharges to the river system. This left doubts as to whether additional waste
discharges could be permitted, even at state of the art treatment levels. Thus, this larger
scale effort was undertaken to fill gaps between models and to develop a basinwide
planning tool that would utilize the best available information to examine the study area
more closely.
Three QUAL2E models calibrated for adjacent segments of the Rocky River were
combined into one model for the purposes of waste allocation. The allocation model
contains reaches from the following calibrated models; the Mooresville WWTP model,
completed November 1988, the Mallard Creek WWTP model, completed October 1992,
and the Concord Regional WWTP model, completed January 1988. The allocation model
covers 42.8 miles of the Rocky River as well as short segments of Dye Branch, West
Branch Rocky River, and Mallard Creek.
II. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
The Rocky River drains 3 subbasins of the Yadkin River Basin; 03-07-11 through
03-07-13.1 The river flows from its headwaters near Mooresville, NC, to its confluence
with the Pee Dee River below Lake Tillery. This study focused on a 42 mile section
towards the upper end of the Rocky River. The study area includes the Rocky River from
its confluence with Dye Branch downstream to 2 miles below the confluence with Muddy
Creek. Three tributaries are also modeled; Dye Branch below the Mooresville WWTP,
West Branch Rocky River below the Mid South discharge, and Mallard Creek below the
Mallard Creek WWTP (Figure 1).
The 7Q 10 on the Rocky River rises from 0.3 cfs above Dye Creek to 28 cfs below
Muddy Creek. Including the three modeled tributaries; Dye Branch, West Branch, and
Mallard Creek, 10 major tributaries join the Rocky River in the study area. These
tributaries and their average and 7Q 10 flows, as estimated by the USGS, are presented in
Figure 2.
Three major facilities discharge to streams in the study area. Mooresville WWTP
is currentl' permitted to discharge 5.2 MGD to Dye Creek and is considering an
expansion to 7.8 MGD. The Mallard Creek WWTP currently discharges 3.0 MGD to
Mallard Creek and is building an expansion to 6.0 MGD. Concord Regional is permitted
Dye Branch
Mooresville
wwra
Figure 1. Rocky River Study Area
ocky River
-4--! U5GS Gage at SR 2420
Mallard Creek
?Rivermile 43
Downstream
Study Boundary
2
Figure 2. Schematic of Study Area Showing USGS Estimated Flows.
% Rocky River
s
Mooresvfle WWTP ",
Dye Branch
West Branch
Avg. Flow: 23 cfs
7010. 2.5 cfs
DA: 21 sq. mi.
Clark Creek
Avg. Flow: 31 cfs
7010: 1.6 cfs
DA: 28 sq. mi.
USGS Gaging Station
:02123.881
Avg. Flow: 15 cfs, 7010: 1.5 cfs.
DA: 13 sq. mi.
Mallard Creek WWTP
Avg. Flow: 41 cfs,' 7010: 0.64 cfS.
DA: 37 sq. mi.
Mallard Creek
0
n�
Back Creek
Avg. Flow: 1 1 cfs
7010: 0.4 c f s
DA. 9.9 sq. mi.
Reegy Lreerc
Avg. Flow: 52 cfs
7010: 2.3 cfs
DA: 43 sq. mi.
3
Coddle Creek
Avg. Flow: 80 cfs
7010: 8.3 cfs.
DA: 74 sq. mi.
Concord Regional WWTP
Avg. f low: 306 cfs,
7010: 14 cf s.
DA: 278 sq. mi.
Avg. Flow: 116 cfs
7010: 8.0 cfs
DA: 1 1 1 sq. mi.
Dutch Buffalo Creek
Avg. Flow: 101 cfs
7010: 7.1 c f s
DA: 98 sq. mi.
Muddy Creek
to discharge 24 MGD to the Rocky River. In addition, there are numerous minor
dischargers in the study area. Even without considering these minor facilities, wasteflow
dominates streamflow at 7Q 10 conditions throughout much of the study area (Figure 3).
Clearly, the Rocky River is heavily utilized for the assimilation of wastewater.
III. CALIBRATION METHODS
Calibration of this model was done in three phases, each discussed under separate
covers. Calibration of the four upstream reaches, covering Dye Creek, West Branch, and
the Rocky,'River from Dye Creek to West Branch, is presented in the Mooresville Model,
dated November 30, 1988 (NCDEM 1988a). Calibration of the middle eleven reaches,
including Mallard Creek, is presented in the Mallard Creek Model, dated October 14,
1992 (NCDEM 1992). Calibration of the bottom four reaches is presented in the Concord
Model, dated January 14, 1988, and in an addendum to that memo, dated April 3, 1989
(NCDEM 1988b).
Linking the three models into one allocation model was done without changing any
of the reach specific hydraulic or decay rate parameters. Headwater elements for the two
downstream models were replaced with the downstream element of the respective
upstream model. This resulted in new "headwater" conditions for these downstream
reaches which allowed for the analysis of interaction between all dischargers in the study
area.
The only reach specific parameter that was changed in the allocation model was
incremental flow. This was necessary to achieve a flow balance of predicted 7Q10 flow
throughout the study area in agreement with USGS flow estimates. A comparison of
upstream and downstream USGS flow estimates indicated that an incremental flow of
0.052 cfs/mile was appropriate under 7Q 10 conditions. This incremental flow, in
combination with tributary flows provided by the USGS, produced a flow profile that
follows the pattern of USGS flow estimates (Figure 4). The model predicts higher flows
than the USGS estimates at the bottom of the study area. This is primarily a result of high
USGS estimates of tributary flow. However, the difference is less than 10 percent.
IV. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
A first order error analysis was used to determine the relative sensitivity of the
model to parameter estimates. QUAL2E-UNCAS was run to determine which inputs
most influenced model estimates of DO, BOD, and ammonia (NH3). Every model
parameter was independently varied by 5 percent and the response in terms of DO, BOD,
and NH3 was recorded at five locations throughout the study area. The five locations
chosen to evaluate model sensitivity are: the three DO sags observed in the calibration
data sets (reaches 8, 13, and 18), at the bottom of Mallard Creek, and at the bottom of the
study area.,
The sensitivity of predicted DO concentrations to model perturbation is presented
in Table 1 a. Predicted DO was most sensitive to the initial temperature of the river. This
sensitivity is expected due to the relationship between temperature and DO saturation and
is not a limitation to the predictive ability of the model. Predicted DO was also sensitive
4
Figure 3. Instream Waste Concentration throughout the Rocky River Study Area
100
90
80
70
60
IWC % 50
40
30
20
10
0
Mooresville WWTP _ Mallard Creek WWTP Conwrd WWTP
Upstream Rivermile Downstream
WI
Figure 4. Model and USGS Estimated 7010 Flow throughout the
Rocky River Study Area
35
30
25
= 20
3
15
U.
10
5
0
West Branch Coddle Creek Dutch Buffalo Creek
- Model Estimate
USGS Estimate
0 Distance (miles)
6
to the equations describing the hydraulics, especially velocity. This also is not surprising
since the reaeration rate is determined by the hydraulics. Point load BOD, BOD decay,
point load DO, and sediment oxygen demand (SOD) also displayed a significant effect on
predicted DO throughout the study area. In general, initial temperature and the velocity
exponent had significantly greater effect upon DO than any other parameters. Point load
DO had the next highest effect, an encouraging result since good estimates are available
for this control parameter.
The sensitivity of predicted BOD concentration to model perturbation is presented
in Table lb. Predicted BOD was most sensitive to Point load BOD, clearly to be expected
considering the high instream waste concentration throughout the study area. As with
predicted DO, initial temperature and hydraulic equations were important to predicted
BOD. Predicted BOD was also sensitive to BOD decay and BOD settling.
The sensitivity of predicted NH3 concentration to model perturbation is presented
in Table 1 c. As with predicted DO and BOD, predicted NH3 was most sensitive to initial
temperature and point source loading. Not surprisingly, predicted NH3 concentrations
were also somewhat sensitive to NH3 and NH2 decay rates.
In general the model showed sensitivity to initial temperature, the hydraulic
equations, and point source loading. Confidence in these parameters tends to be high
since estimates of initial temperature and point source loading are defined by design
conditions, and the hydraulic equations were developed from field studies. This suggests
that the model is relatively unsensitive to variation of parameters for which default or
literature values were used.
V. WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
1. Background Conditions
Design conditions for allocation model runs were defined as 7Q 10 flows (see
Figure 2), 75th percentile temperature for the Sub -basins (26 degrees C.), 90% DO
saturation, and the following chemical concentrations; 2.5 mg/1 CBODu, 0.40 mg/1 organic
nitrogen, 0.1 mg/l NH3-N, and 0.28 mg/1 NOx. These background estimates designed to
reflect typical background surface water quality in North Carolina during low flow
conditions and are consistent with typical values reported by the EPA (Brown and
Barnwell 1987). Further discussion of background conditions can be found in the three
calibration documents (NCDEM 1988a, 1988b, 1992).
2. Wastewater Conditions.
Effluent characteristics of facilities discharging to the study area were modeled
using current permit limits, flow information from the permit modification, and
information from compliance monitoring data. Permit limits for DO, BOD, and NH3 for
the three major facilities are listed in Table 2a. Actual effluent discharge conditions were
determined by examining compliance monitoring data and are presented in Table 2b.
Actual conditions were estimated by the 1991 mean NH3 and BOD concentrations and the
1991 minimum monthly average DO for each major facility.
For model input, BOD5 values were converted to CBODu estimates using
CBODu to BOD5 ratios. CBODu/BOD5 ratios were calculated from ultimate BOD
7
Table 1 a. First Order Error Analysis, Response of Predicted Dissolved Oxygen
to a Five Percent Perturbation of Model Parameters.
A. TITLE OF DATA SET.
ROCKY RIVER - ALLOCATION
LINKED MODEL - 2/20 1992
B. RESPONSE VARIABLE: DO
C. NORMALIZED SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENT MATRIX: DO
INPUT VAR LOCATION
REACH 8
REACH 13
REACH 18
REACH 12
REACH 20
ELEMENT 17
ELEMENT 11
ELEMENT 9
ELEMENT 2
ELEMENT 19
INITTEM P
-1.83
-1.689
-1.691
-1.647
-0.978
EXPOQV-B
0.805
0.91
0.067
0.692
-0.46
PTLDBOD
-0.328
-0.277
-0.431
-0.25
-0.242
COEFQV-A
0.44
0.42
0.016
0.429
-0.219
COEFQH-C
-0.557
-0.55
0.025
-0.225
0.057
BOD DECA
-0.224
-0.177
-0.365
-0.234
-0.122
K2-OPT1
0.037
0.004
0.465
0
0.359
PTLDDO
0.047
0.123
0.139
0.521
0.002
SOD RATE
-0.219
-0.24
-0.084
-0.173
-0.069
PTLDFLOW
0.121
0.192
-0.022
0.258
-0.098
EXPOQH-D
-0.113
-0.095
0.029
-0.056
0.067
HWTRFLOW
0.116
0.083
0.022
0.035
0.007
OTHER INPUTS WITH NORMALIZED SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENTS LESS THAN 0.10 EACH.
NH30XYUP
N020XYUP
AGYGROMX
AGYRESPR
LSATCOEF
LAVGFACT
TC/BODST
TC/REAER
TC/NH3DC
TC/NH3SC
TC/PO4SC
TC/ALGRO
BOD SETT
CQK2-OP7
NH3 DECA
NO2 DECA
INCRTEMP
INCRDO
INCRN02N
INCRN03N
HWTRNH2N
HWTRNH3N
PTLDNH2N
PTLDNH3N
AGYOXYPR
AGYQXYUP
AGYNCON
NHALFSAT
AGYEXTLN
AGYEXTNL
APREFNH3
A/TFACT
TCBODDC
TC/SOD
TC/NH2DC
TC/NH2ST
TC/NO2DC
TC/PRGDC
TC/PRGST
TC/ALRES
TC/ALSET
MANNINGS
EQK2-OP7
NH2 DECA
NH2 SETT
CHLA/ART
LTEXTNCO
INCRFLOW
INCRBOD
INCRNH2N
INCRNH3N
HWTRTEMP
HWTRDO
HWTRBOD
HWTRN02N
HWTRN03N
PTLDTEMP
PTLDN02N
PTLDN03N
8
Table 1 b. First Order Error Analysis, Response of Predicted BOD
to a Five Percent Perturbation of Model Parameters.
A. TITLE OF DATA SET.
ROCKY RIVER - ALLOCATION
LINKED MODEL - 2/20 1992
B. RESPONSE VARIABLE: BOD
C. NORMALIZED SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENT MATRIX: BOD
INPUT VAR LOCATION
REACH 8
REACH 13
REACH 18
REACH 12
REACH 20
ELEMENT 17
ELEMENT 11
ELEMENT 9
ELEMENT 2
ELEMENT 19
PTLDBOD
0.974
0.977
0.998
0.985
0.997
IN ITTE M P
-0.946
-0.952
.0.453
-0.297
-1.313
EXPOOV-B
0.688
0.864
0.478
0.238
1.595
COEFOV-A
0.49
0.51
0.244
0.149
0.75
BOD DECA
-0.407
-0.409
-0.182
-0.122
-0.533
PTLDFLOW
0.383
0.398
0.169
0.156
0.393
BOD SETT
-0.109
-0.122
-0.077
-0.039
-0.241
HWTRFLOW
-0.107
-0.068
-0.034
-0.043
-0.021
OTHER INPUTS WITH NORMALIZED SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENTS LESS THAN 0.10 EACH.
TC/BODDC TC/BODST
INCRFLOW INCRTEMP
PTLDTEMP
COEFOH-C EXPOOH-D
INCRBOD HWTRTEMP
9
MANNINGS
HWTRBOD
Table 1c. First Order Error Analysis, Response of Predicted Ammonia
to a Five Percent Perturbation of Model Parameters.
A. TITLE OF DATA SET.
ROCKY RIVER - ALLOCATION
LINKED MODEL - 2/20 1992
B. RESPONSE VARIABLE: NH3N
C. NORMALIZED SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENT MATRIX: NH3N
INPUT VAR LOCATION
REACH 8
REACH 13
REACH 18
REACH 12
REACH 20
ELEMENT 17
ELEMENT 11
ELEMENT 9
ELEMENT 2
ELEMENT 19
IN ITTEM P
-1.531
-1.701
-1.457
-0.661
-3.207
PTLDNH3N
0.743
0.756
0.904
0.935
0.761
EXPOQV-B
0.465
0.688
0.707
0.22
1.985
NH3 DECA
-0.509
-0.553
-0.439
-0.202
-1.067
COEFQV-A
0.329
0.402
0.365
0.136
0.924
PTLDFLOW
0.305
0.346
0.219
0.156
0.462
TC/NH3DC
-0.161
-0.176
-0.139
-0.063
-0.347
PTLDNH2N
0.219
0.218
0.091
0.058
0.233
NH2 DECA
0.186
0.166
0.072
0.057
0.2
HWTRFLOW
-0.103
-0.072
-0.027
-0.051
-0.013
OTHER INPUTS WITH NORMALIZED SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENTS LESS THAN 0.10 EACH.
AGYNCON
AGYGROMX
AGYRESPR
AGYEXTNL
LSATCOEF
LAVGFACT
TC/NH2DC
TC/NH2ST
TC/NH3SC
TC/PRGST
TC/PO4SC
TC/ALGRO
COEFOH-C
EXPOOH-D
MANNINGS
CHLA/ART
LTEXTNCO
INCRFLOW
INCRNH3N
INCRN02N
INCRN03N
HWTRNH3N
HWTRN02N
HWTRN03N
PTLDN03N
NHALFSAT
APREFNH3
TC/NO2DC
TC/ALRES
NH2 SETT
INCRTEMP
HWTRTEMP
PTLDTEMP
AGYEXTLN
A/TFACT
TC/PRGDC
TC/ALSET
NO2 DECA
INCRNH2N
HWTRNH2N
PTLDN02N
10
Table 2a. Permit Limits for Major Facilities Discharging to the Rocky River.
Facility
Flow (MGD)
BOD5 (mgA)
NH3-N (mg/1)
DO (mgA)
Mooresville
5.2
24
13
5
Mallard Creek (A)
3.0
9
4
5
Mallard Creek (B)
6.0
4.5
2
5
Concord
24.0
CBOD: 17
4
5
Table 2b. Actual Discharge Conditions for Major Facilities Discharging to the Rocky River,
1991 yearly average wasteflow, BOD, and ammonia, and miminum monthly DO.
Facility Flow (MGD) BOD5 (mgA) NH3-N (mg/1) DO (mgA)
Mooresville 3.1 6.1 0.07 6.5
Mallard Creek 2.2 4.1 0.48 7.7
Concord 13.8 CBOD: 6.5 1.29 7.0
11
samples taken from the effluent of each WWTP. The CBODu/BOD5 ratios calculated
were 3.5 for the Mooresville and Mallard Creek WWTPs, and 2.5 for the Concord
WWTP.
3. Results
Predicted DO profiles of the Rocky River study area for existing permit and actual
conditions are presented in Figures 5a and 5b. Permit conditions are predicted to result in
two DO sags which drop below the 5.0 mg/l DO standard. The first sag occurs 16 miles
below the Mooresville WWTP in an area where river velocity is at its minimum. The
second sag occurs directly below the Concord WWTP. Because actual effluent
concentrations are well below permit levels the depth of both of these sags is greatly
reduced. No DO violations are predicted under current discharge conditions although DO
is predicted to drop to the stream standard of 5.0 mg/l below the Mooresville and Mallard
Creek WWTPs.
Predicted BOD profiles indicate that under existing permit conditions, Mooresville
WWTP and Concord WWTP control BOD concentrations throughout the study area
(Figures 6 and 7). Under actual conditions Concord is less important and loading from
Coddle Creek and Back Creek contribute to the shape of the BOD profile. Mallard Creek
WWTP, while dominating BOD concentrations in Mallard Creek below the outfall, does
not significantly effect BOD concentrations along the Rocky River under existing permit
or actual conditions.
The model was used to determine what effluent limits would prevent DO
violations at 7Q 10 conditions. The effluent concentrations of NH3, DO, and CBOD for
the three major WWTPs were varied to determine the maximum allowable concentrations
to maintain DO standards. The following sets of effluent concentrations were obtained:
Mooresville WWTP Mallard Creek WWTP Concord WWTP
Flow: 5.2 MGD Flow: 6.0 MGD Flow: 24 MGD
DO: 6.0 mg/l DO: 6.0 mg/I DO: 6.0 mg/l
NH3: 1.0 mg/1 NH3: 1.0 mg/l NH3: 4.0 mg/1
BOD5: 7.0 mg/l BOD5: 5.0 mg/l (4 mg/l CBOD5) BOD5:20 mg/l (11 mg/1 CBOD5)
These maximum discharge concentrations that protect the DO standard can be
used to determine the total maximum daily load (TMDL) during 7Q 10 conditions for
specific river, reaches. Because these discharge conditions are the result of an allocation
procedure that allowed DO to drop to the DO standard, any additional loading is
predicted to result in DO violations. The instream concentration of total BOD at the
beginning of each DO sag represent the predicted TMDL for that point under the given
background and wastestream conditions. The instream concentration of total BOD at the
minimum of each DO sag represents the predicted DO equilibrium point for the stream
DO standard': Total BOD concentrations above the equilibrium point will eventually drive
DO below the stream standard. Therefore, the total BOD concentration where an
equilibrium i reached at the stream standard can be considered as a TMDL for the stream
12
Figure 5a. Predicted DO Profiles of the Rocky River for Existing
Permit Conditions and Actual Discharge Conditions.
8
7
6
5
E4
0
3
2
1
0
Mooresville WWTP Mallard Ck WWTP
Concord WWTP
—� Actual Conditions
--a— Existing Conditions
(Permit)
• .. Stream Standard
D Distance (miles)
Figure 5b. Predicted DO Profile of Mallard Creek for Existing Permit
Conditions.
8
7
6
5
E 4
O
0 3
2
1
0
0
Mallard Ck WWTP
1 2 3
Distance (miles)
—'-- Existing Conditions
(Permit)
— — — Stream Standard
13
Figure 6. Predicted BOD Profiles of the Rocky River for Existing
Permit Conditions and Actual Discharge Conditions.
50
45
40
35
30
25
O
U 20
15
10
5
0
Mooresville WWrP
Mallard Ck WWTP
Concord WWTP
—'*— Existing Conditions
(Permit)
-0 Actual Conditions
D Distance (miles)
14
Figure 7. Predicted BOD Profiles of the Rocky River with
Mooresville WWTP, Mallard Creek WWTP and Concord WWTP at
Maximum Allocation limits that would Protect DO Standard.
45
40
35
�30
25
s
2°
15
10
5
0
- BOD Total
CBOD
NBOD
Distance (miles)
Mooresville VAWP Mallard Ck VAWP Concord WWTP
15
reach as long as hydraulic and chemical processes remain constant. This estimate of the
total BOD TMDL does not include a margin of safety but can be used to guide
management decisions.
Using this method to determine the TMDL for total BOD, it is clear that the
TMDL has been approached or exceeded for the upper reaches of the study area. Under
existing conditions, the DO sag below the Mooresville WWTP reaches a minimum of 5.0
mg/l. At 5.0 mg/1 DO, equilibrium is predicted at 12 mg/1 total BODu. Any change in
wastewater discharge conditions that increases the IWC of total BODu above 12 mg/1 in
the region of the DO sag is predicted to result in a DO violation.
A similar case exists on Mallard Creek where the DO minimum reaches 5.0 mg/l.
DO violations are predicted in Mallard Creek if the IWC of total BODu is raised. DO
Equilibrium is not reached because DO levels are still falling in Mallard Creek at its
mouth.
The TMDL of total BOD for the lower reaches of the study area is considerably
higher than the TMDL above Mallard Creek due to higher stream velocities and greater
flow. Waste allocation performed at the Concord WWTP outfall indicates that at 5.0 mg/1
DO, the equilibrium total BODu concentration is 32 mg/l. Below the recovery zone for
the Concord WWTP, an IWC of approximately 45 mg/1 BODu is required to -drop DO
back to 5.0 mg/l during 7Q 10 conditions.
The model was also used to evaluate the effect on DO of ten scenarios of possible
discharge conditions in the study area. A brief description of these scenarios and the
predicted impacts on DO concentrations are presented in Table 3.
VI. RECOM ENDATIONS
At present, water quality in the upper watershed of the Rocky River is not
protected by the permitted wastewater flow. Wastewater discharge from the Mooresville
and Concord WWTPs at permitted discharge conditions are predicted to result in
downstream DO violations during 7Q 10 conditions. Because both of the facilities
presently meet effluent BOD concentrations below permitted levels, the DO standard is
not expected to be violated in the Rocky River study area under current operating
conditions. However, even with the three major WWTPs in the study area operating at or
near tertiary treatment levels, the model predicts two DO sags that drop to the stream
standard of 5.0 mg/l. This suggests that the total maximum daily load (TMDL) for
oxygen consuming wastes has been met or exceeded for portions of the study area.
Because of the heavy use of the Rocky River for the assimilation of wastewater
and the likely future demand for additional wastewater discharge, it is recommended that a
basinwide wasteload allocation strategy be developed. Such a plan would consider
potential interaction between all sources of oxygen consuming wastes in the basin and
allow for anticipated future wastewater discharge needs. This general strategy will be part
of DEM's basinwide plan for the Yadkin River basin, due to be completed July of 1998.
The following proposed basin strategy for the Rocky River study area is intended as a
watershed component of a larger and more general basinwide plan for the Yadkin River
basin.
16
Table 3. Summary of General Results from the Rocky River QUAL2E Model
Discharge Scenario
1) Existing Permit Conditions
2) Mooresville expands to 7.8 MGD
3) Mooresville moves to Rocky River.
4) Mooresville moves to Rocky River
and expands to 7.8 MGD.
5) Mooresville moves to below West Branch.
6) Mooresville moves to below West Branch
and expands to 7.8 MGD.
7) Proposed 3.0 MGD River Run facility
comes on line, Rocky River mile 5.2.
8) Numerous small facilities on Back Creek
and Reedy Creek collected by major facility.
9) Proposed 1.8 MGD Muddy Creek facility
comes on line, Rocky River mile 43.
10) Mallard Creek WWTP moves to the Rocky
River below Mallard Creek.
Results
Two sags result in DO violations.
Mooresville and Concord need
more stringent limits.
5 and I* limits recommended, Mooresville
meets ammonia toxicity limit and does not
contribute to DO violation.
5 and 1.1 * recommended.
Mooresville does not contribute to DO violation.
5 and 1 * recommended.
Mooresville does not contribute to DO violation.
5 and 1.4* recommended.
Mooresville does not contribute to DO violation.
5 and 1.3 * recommended.
Mooresville does not contribute to DO violation.
At tertiary limits DO levels are increased due to
increased velocity. Interacts strongly with Mooresville.
No significant effect on Concord's allocation.
Ammonia tox. limit dependent on Concords limit.
BOD only a concern when addressing WLA equity.
No significant change in DO concentrations in the
Rocky River.
* Limit based on ammonia toxicity.
17
Two issues that should be addressed in a basinwide plan for the Rocky River study area
are the high instream concentrations of oxygen consuming wastes throughout the study
area and the DO sags below each of the three major WWTPs in the study area.
The Rocky River study area can be divided into four regions where distinct
assimilation processes exist. These are, 1) the Rocky River watershed above Mallard
Creek, 2) the Mallard Creek watershed, 3) the Rocky River and tributaries from Mallard
Creek to below the Concord WWTP DO recovery zone, and 4) the Rocky River below
the Concord WWTP DO recovery zone. For each of the river regions the TMDL for
oxygen consuming wastes can be estimated and a management strategy developed.
The DO sag below Mooresville is predicted to reach a minimum of 5.0 mg/1
during 7Q 10 conditions. This indicates that under existing discharge conditions, no
further assimilative capacity is available in the Rocky River from the Mooresville WWTP
outfall to the confluence with Mallard Creek. This reach of river is sensitive to oxygen
consuming wastes due to relatively slow velocities. It is recommended that new and
expanding discharges to the Rocky River and Dye Branch be permitted only if no
reasonable alternative exists, and then only at best available technology treatment levels.
New and expanding discharges to tributaries to the study area above Mallard Creek should
be permitted only at best available technology levels unless modeling shows that DO sag is
complete before entering the Rocky River or Dye Branch.
The Mallard Creek WWTP takes up essentially all of the available assimilative
capacity for oxygen consuming wastes in Mallard Creek, as shown by the predicted DO
sag to 5.0 mg/1. For this reason is recommended that new and expanding discharges to
Mallard Creek only be permitted if no reasonable alternative exists, and then only at best
available technology treatment levels. New and expanding discharges to tributaries to the
study area above Mallard Creek should also be permitted only at best available technology
levels unless modeling shows that DO sag is complete before entering Mallard Creek.
The section of the Rocky River from below Mallard Creek to below the Concord
WWTP DO recovery zone has significantly more assimilative capacity than upstream
reaches. This is due to greater flow and relatively high stream velocities. Still, the TMDL
for this river segment has been exceeded by the existing Concord WWTP permit limits.
Examination of the allocation model indicates that at 7.Q10 conditions, DO will recover
from 5.0 mg/l only if the ultimate BOD (BODu) concentration is less than 32 mg/l. It is
therefore recommended that no new or expanded discharges be allowed unless an
evaluation of engineering alternatives shows that it is the most environmentally sound
alternative. For this river region the minimal level of treatment for new or expanding
wastewater discharges should include a total BODu concentration of 32 mg/l, equivalent
to 10 mg/l BOD5 and 4 mg/1 NH3 for typical domestic discharges (or 12 and 3). This
limit will allow new and expanded facilities to discharge to the Rocky River without
contribution to further demands on the already heavily utilized assimilative capacity.
Below the Concord WWTP DO recovery zone, assimilative capacity is presently
available. However, the instream waste concentration is above 60% at 7Q10 conditions
and future demands may increase it further. It is recommended that all new and expanding
discharges receive a total BODu limit of at least 32 mg/1, equivalent to 10 mg/1 BOD5 and
4 mg/l NH3 for typical domestic discharges. This concentration is equal to the predicted
instream concentration below the Concord WWTP that would just protect the DO
18
standard. This level of treatment will protect the DO standard as well as preventing any
one discharge from using up 100% of the available assimilative capacity of the River.
In addition to these watershed specific recommendations, it is recommended that
the three major WWTPs be encouraged to continue to meet or exceed their current level
of treatment. Upon expansion or modification, Mooresville WWTP and Concord WWTP
should receive permit limits that will protect water quality in the Rocky River. This will
require tertiary treatment at the Mooresville WWTP as well as improved treatment
technologies at the Concord WWTP.
19
REFERENCES
Brown, L. C., and T. O. Barnwell, 1987. The Enhanced Stream Water Quality Models
QUAL2E and QUAL2E-UNCAS : Documentation and User Model. U.S. EPA,
Athens, Georgia.
NCDEM, 1988a. QUAL2E Model for Mooresville WWTP. Unpublished file document,
dated November 30, 1988.
NCDEM, 1988b. Rocky River WWTP Model Calibration and Preliminary Wasteload
Allocation. Unpublished file document, dated January 14, 1988 and amended
April 3, 1989.
NCDEM, 1992. QUAL2E-UNCAS Model for Mallard Creek WWTP. Unpublished file
document, dated October 14, 1992.
20
APPENDIX I. QUAL2E Input data file: Mooresville to Concord.
QUAL-2E STREAM QUALITY ROUTING MODEL
* * * EPA/NCASI VERSION
$$$ (PROBLEM TITLES) SS$
CARD TYPE
QUAL-2E PROGRAM TITLES
TITLE01
ROCKY RIVER - ALLOCATION
TITLE02
CMUD MODEL - 10/20 1991
TITLE03 NO
CONSERVATIVE MINERAL I
TITLE04 NO
CONSERVATIVE MINERAL II
TITLE05 NO
CONSERVATIVE MINERAL III
TITLE06 * NO
TEMPERATURE
TITLE07 YES
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND IN MG/L
TITLE08 NO
ALGAE AS CHL-A IN UG/L
TITLE09 NO
PHOSPHORUS CYCLE AS P IN MG/L
TITLE10 NO
(ORGANIC-P; DISSOLVED-P)
TITLE11 YES
NITROGEN CYCLE AS N IN MG/L
TITLEI2 YES
(ORGANIC-N; AMMONIA-N; NITRITE-N; NITRATE-N)
TITLEI3 YES
DISSOLVED OXYGEN IN MG/L
TITLEI4 NO
FECAL COLIFORMS IN NO./100 ML
TITLEI5 NO
ARBITRARY NON -CONSERVATIVE
ENDTITLE
$$$ DATA TYPE 1 (CONTROL DATA) $$$
CARD TYPE
CARD TYPE
LIST DATA INPUT
0.00000
0.00000
NO WRITE OPTIONAL SUMMARY 0.00000
0.00000
NO FLOW AUGMENTATION
0.00000
0.00000
STEADY STATE
0.00000
0.00000
DISCHARGE COEFFICIENTS 0.00000
0.00000
NO PRINT SOLAR/LCD DATA 0.00000
0.00000
NO PLOT DO AND SOD
0.00000
0.00000
FIXED DNSTRM CONC(YES=1)= 0.00000 5D-ULT BOD CONV K COEF =
0.23000
INPUT METRIC (YES-1)
m 0.00000 OUTPUT METRIC (YES-1) m
0.00000
NUMBER OF REACHES
= 20.00000 NUMBER OF JUNCTIONS =
2.00000
NUM OF HEAD'HATERS
3.00000 NUMBER OF POINT LOADS
14.00000
TIME STEP (HOURS)
= 0.00000 LNTH. COMP. ELEMENT (DX)-
0.20000
MAXIMUM ROUTE TIME (HRS)= 100.00000 TIME INC. FOR RPT2 (HRS)=
0.00000
LATITUDE OF BASIN (DEG) = 35.37000 LONGITUDE OF BASIN (DEG)-
80.71000
STANDARD MERIDIAN (DEG)
= 78.00000 DAY OF YEAR START TIME
180.00000
EVAP. COEF..(AE)
= 0.00068 EVAP. COEF..(BE) =
0.00027
ELEV. OF BASIN (ELEV)
= 520.00000 DUST ATTENUATION COEF.
0.13000
ENDATAI
0.00000
0.00000
$$$ DATA TYPE lA (ALGAE PRODUCTION AND NITROGEN OXIDATION CONSTANTS) $$$
CARD TYPE
CARD TYPE
0 UPTAKE BY NH3 OXID(MG O/MG N)=
3.5000
O UPTAKE BY NO2 OXID(MG O/MG N)=
O PROD BY ALGAE (MG O/MG A) =
N CONTENT OF ALGAE (MG N/MG A)
1.6000
0.0850
0 UPTAKE BY ALGAE (MG O/MG A) =
ALG MAX SPEC GROWTH RATE(1/DAY)=
1.3070
P CONTENT OF ALGAE (MG P/MG A) _
ALGAE RESPIRATION RATE (1/DAY) _
N HALF SATURATION CONST (MG/L)-
0.2000
P HALF SATURATION CONST (MG/L)=
LIN ALG SHADE CO (1/fT-UGCHA/L=)
0.0088
NLIN SHADE(1/FT-(UGCHA/L)**2/3)=
LIGHT FUNCTION OPTION (�FNOPT) =
2.0000
LIGHT SATIN COEF (BTU/FT2-MIN) _
DAILY AVERAGING OPTION(LAVOPT) =
1.0000
LIGHT AVERAGING FACTOR(AFACT) _
NUMBER OF DAYLIGHT HOURS (DLH) z
ALGY GROWTH CALC OPTIO4(LGROPT)=
13.0000
2.0000
TOTAL DAILY SOLR RAD (BTU/FT-2)a
ALG/TEMP SOLAR RAD FACT(TFACT) =
0.4500
ALGAL PREF FOR NH3-N (PREFN) _
NITRIFICATION INHIBITION COEF
ENDATAlA
0.0000
1.2000
2.0000
0.0120
0.1500
0.0300
0.0540
0.2000
0.9200
624.0000
0.5000
10.0000
0.0000
21
$$$ DATA TYPE 1B (TEMPERATURE CORRECTION CONSTANTS FOR RATE COEFFICIENTS) $$$
CARD TYPE RATE CODE THETA VALUE
THETA( 1)
BOD DECA 1.047
DFLT
THETA( 2)
BOD SETT 1.024
DFLT
THETA( 3)
OXY TRAN 1.024
DFLT
THETA( 4)
SOD RATE 1.060
DFLT
THETA( 5)
ORGN DEC 1.047
DFLT
THETA( 6)
ORGN SET 1.024
DFLT
THETA( 7)
NH3 DECA 1.083
DFLT
THETA( 8)
NH3 SRCE 1.074
DFLT
THETA( 9)
NO2 DECA 1.047
DFLT
THETA(10)
PORG DEC 1.047
DFLT
THETA(11)
PORG SET 1.024
DFLT
THETA(12)
DISP SRC 1.074
DFLT
THETA(13)
ALG GROW 1.047
DFLT
THETA(14)
ALG RESP 1.047
DFLT
THETA(15)
ALG SETT 1.024
DFLT
THETA(16)
COLI DEC 1.047
DFLT
THETA(17)
ANC DECA 1.000
DFLT
THETA(18)
ANC SETT 1.024
DFLT
THETA(19)
ANC SRCE 1.000
DFLT
ENDATAIB
$$$ DATA TYPE
2 (REACH IDENTIFICATION)
SSS
CARD TYPE
REACH ORDER AND IDENT
R. MI/KM
R. MI/KM
STREAM REACH
1.0 RCH=DYE BRANCH
FROM
43.4
TO
42.8
STREAM REACH
2.0 RCH=ROCKY RIVER
FROM
42.8
TO
39.6
STREAM REACH
3.0 RCH=RR1 WB RR2
FROM
39.6
TO
38.0
STREAM REACH
4.0 RCH=WEST BRANCH
FROM
39.4
TO
38.0
STREAM REACH
5.0 RCH=RR2 TO RR4
FROM
38.0
TO
35.4
STREAM REACH
6.0 RCH=RR4 TO RR5
FROM
35.4
TO
34.2
STREAM REACH
7.0 RCH=RR5 CLARKE RR7
FROM
34.2
TO
32.2
STREAM REACH
8.0 RCH=RR7 2.4 MILES
FROM
32.2
TO
28.2
STREAM REACH
9.0 RCH=TO RR9
FROM
28.2
TO
27.4
STREAM REACH
10.0 RCH=RR9 TO RR10
FROM
27.7
TO
24.6
STREAM REACH
11.0 RCH=MALLARD CREEK
FROM
27.4
TO
25.0
STREAM REACH
12.0 RCH=MC2 TO RR10
FROM
25.0
TO
24.6
STREAM REACH
13.0 RCH-RR10 TO RR12
FROM
24.6
TO
22.4
STREAM REACH
14.0 RCH=RR12 CC RR14
FROM
22.4
TO
18.8
STREAM REACH
15.0 RCH=RR14 RC 4 MILES FROM
18.8
TO
14.8
STREAM REACH
16.0 RCH=TO RR16
FROM
14.8
TO
13.8
STREAM REACH
17.0 RCH=COLDWATER CK.
FROM
13.8
TO
12.0
STREAM REACH
18.0 RCH=DUTCH BUFFALO
CK FROM
12.0
TO
8.0
STREAM REACH
19.0 RCH=
FROM
8.0
TO
4.0
STREAM REACH
2O.0 RCH=
FROM
4.0
TO
0.0
ENDATA2
0.0
0.0
0.0
$$$ DATA TYPE
3 (TARGET LEVEL DO AND FLOW AUGMENTATION
SOURCES)
$$$
CARD TYPE
REACH AVAIL
HDWS TARGET
ORDER OF
AVAIL
SOURCES
ENDATA3
0. 0.
0.0 0.
0. 0.
0.
0. 0.
22
$$$ DATA TYPE 4 (COMPUTATIONAL REACH FLAG FIELD) $$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
ELEMENTS/REACH COMPUTATIONAL FLAGS
FLAG FIELD
1.
3.
1.6.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
2.,
16.
6.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.6.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
3.
8.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.3.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
4.
7.
1.6.2.2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
S.
13.
4.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
6.
6.
2.2.6.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
7.
10.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.6.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
8.
20.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.
FALG FIELD
9.
4.
2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
10.
14.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.3.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
11.
12.
1.6.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
12.
2.
2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
13.
11.
4.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
14.
18.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.6.2.2.2.2.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
15.
20.
6.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.6.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.
FLAG FIELD
16.*
5.
2.2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
17.
9.
6.2.6.2.2.2.2.2.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
FLAG FIELD
18.
20.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.6.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.
FLAG FIELD
19.
20.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.
FLAG FIELD
20.
20.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.5.
ENDATA4
0.
0.
0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.
$$$ DATA TYPE 5
(HYDRAULIC DATA
FOR DETERMINING VELOCITY AND DEPTH) $$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
COEF-DSPN
COEFQV EXPOQV COEFQH-EXPOQH CMANN
HYDRAULICS
1.
0.00
0.250 0.640 0.360 0.260 0.025
HYDRAULICS
2.
0.00
0.377 0.428 0.172 0.469 0.025
HYDRAULICS
3.
0.00
0.377 0.428 0.172 0.469 0.025
HYDRAULICS
4.
0.00
0.377 0.428 0.172 0.469 0.025
HYDRAULICS
5.
0.00
0.330 0.360 0.340 0.240 0.020
HYDRAULICS
6.
0.00
0.150 0.400 0.700 0.200 0.020
HYDRAULICS
7.
0.00
0.090 0.540 1.210 0.060 0.020
HYDRAULICS
8.
0.00
0.060 0.630 1.360 0.050 0.020
HYDRAULICS
9.
0.00
0.060 0.630 1.360 0.050 0.020
HYDRAULICS
10.
0.00
0.050 0.690 1.370 0.050 0.020
HYDRAULICS
11.
0.00
0.060 0.700 1.000 0.100 0.020
HYDRAULICS
12.
0.00
0.060 0.700 1.000 0.100 0.020
HYDRAULICS
13.
0.00
0.050 0.690 1.510 0.050 0.020
HYDRAULICS
14.
0.00
0.140 0.380 0.440 0.360 0.020
HYDRAULICS
15.
0.00
0.160 0.420 0.380 0.320 0.020
HYDRAULICS
16.
0.00
0.160 0.420 0.380 0.320 0.020
HYDRAULICS
17.
0.00
0.120 0.470 0.460 0.250 0.020
HYDRAULICS
18.
0.00
0.120 0.470 0.460 0.250 0.020
HYDRAULICS
19.
0.00
0.120 0.470 0.460 0.250 0.020
HYDRAULICS
20.
0.00
0.120 0.470 0.460 0.250 0.020
ENDATA5
0.
0.00
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
$$$ DATA TYPE 5A (STEADY STATE TEMPERATURE AND CLIMATOLOGY DATA) $$$
CARD TYPE DUST CLOUD DRY BULB WET BULB ATM
REACH ELEVATION COEF COVER TEMP TEMP PRESSURE
ENDATA5A 0. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SOLAR RAD
WIND ATTENUATION
0.00 0.00
23
$$$ DATA TYPE 6 (REACTION COEFFICIENTS FOR DEOXYGENATION AND REAERATION) $$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
K1
K3
SOD
K20PT
K2
COEQK2 OF
RATE
TSIV COEF OF
.FOR OPT 8
REACT COEF
1.
0.30
0.07
0.190
1.
6.50
0.000
REACT COEF
2.
0.30
0.07
0.150
5.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
3.
0.30
0.07
0.150
5.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
4.
0.30
0.07
0.064
7.
0.00
3.800
REACT COEF
5.
0.40
0.07
0.064
1.
4.00
0.000
REACT COEF
6.
0.20
0.07
0.064
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
7.
0.20
0.07
0.064
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
S.
0.20
0.07
0.064
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
9.
0.20
0.07
0.064
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
10.
0.20
0.07
0.064
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
11.
0.20
0.07
0.070
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
12.
0.20
0.07
0.070
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
13.
0.20
0.07
0.100
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
14.
0.20
0.07
0.100
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
15.
0.20
0.07
0.100
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
16.
0.20
0.07
0.100
6.
0.00
0.000
REACT COEF
17.
0.50
0.25
0.100
1.
7.00
0.000
REACT COEF
le.
0.50
0.25
0.100
1.
7.00
0.000
REACT COEF
19.
0.50
0.25
0.100
1.
7.00
0.000
REACT COEF
20.
0.50
0.25
0.100
1.
7.00
0.000
ENDATA6
0.
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.
0.00
0.000
$$$ DATA TYPE 6A (NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS
CONSTANTS)
$$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
CKNH2
SETNH2
CKNH3
SNH3
CKNO2
CKPORG
N AND P COEF
1..
0.07
0.10
0.40
0.00
1.00
0.00
N AND P COEF
2.
0.07
0.10
0.40
0.00
1.00
0.00
N AND P COEF
3.
0.07
0.10
0.40
0.00
1.00
0.00
N AND P COEF
4.
0.07
0.10
0.40
0.00
1.00
0.00
N AND P COEF
5.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
6.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
7.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
8.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
9.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
10.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
11.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
12.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
13.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
14.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
15.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
16.
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
N AND P COEF
17.
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.00
1.10
0.00
N AND P COEF
18.
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.00
1.10
0.00
N AND P COEF
19.
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.00
1.10
0.00
N AND P COEF
20.
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.00
1.10
0.00
ENDATA6A
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
EXPQK2
SLOPE
FOR OPT 8
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.42800
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
SETPORG
SP04
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
24
$$$ DATA TYPE 6B (ALGAE/OTHER COEFFICIENTS) $$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
ALPHAO
ALGSET
EXCOEF
CKS
CKANC
SETANC
SRCANC
CKCOLI
ALG/OTHER COEF
1.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
2.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
3.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
4.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
5.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
6.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
7.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
8.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
9.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
10.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
11.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
12.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
13.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
14.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
15.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
16.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
17.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
18.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
19.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ALG/OTHER COEF
20.
15.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ENDATA6B
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$$$ DATA TYPE 7
(INITIAL CONDITIONS)
$$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
TEMP
D.O.
BOD
CM-1
CM-2
CM-3
ANC
COLI
INITIAL COND-1
1.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
2.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
3.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
4.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
5.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
6.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
7.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
8.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
9.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
10.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
11.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
12.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
13.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
14.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
15.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
16.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
17.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
18.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
19.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-1
20.
75.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ENDATA7
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$$$ DATA TYPE 7A
(INITIAL
CONDITIONS
FOR CHOROPHYLL A,
NITROGEN,
AND PHOSPHORUS)
$$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
CHL-A
ORG-N
NH3-N
NO2-N
NO3-N
ORG-P
DIS-P
INITIAL COND-2
1.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
2.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
3.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
4.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
5.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
6.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
7.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
8.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
9.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
10.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
11.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
12.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
13.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
14.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
15.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
16.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
17.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
18.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
19.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INITIAL COND-2
20.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ENDATA7A
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25
$$$ DATA TYPE 8 (INCREMENTAL INFLOW CONDITIONS) $$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
FLOW
TEMP
D.O.
BOD
CM-1
CM-2
CM-3
ANC
INCR INFLOW-1
1.
0.031
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
2.
0.165
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
3.
0.082
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
4.
0.072
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
5.
0.134
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
6.
0.062
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
7.
0.103
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
8.
0.206
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
9.
0.041
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
10.
0.144
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
11.
0.124
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
12.
0.021
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
13.
0.113
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
14.
0.185
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
15.
0.206
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
16.
0.052
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
17.
0.093
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
18.
0.206
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
19.
0.206
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-1
20.
0.206
75.20
7.58
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ENDATAB
0.
0.000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
$$$ DATA TYPE 8A (INCREMENTAL INFLOW CONDITIONS
FOR CHLOROPHYLL A, NITROGEN,
AND PHOSPHORUS)
$$$
CARD TYPE
REACH
CHL-A
ORG-N
NH3-N
NO2-N
NO3-N
ORG-P
DIS-P
INCR INFLOW-2
1.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
2.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
3.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
4.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
5.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
6.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
7'.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
8.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
9.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
10.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
11.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
12.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
13.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
14.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
15.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
16.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
17.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
18.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
19.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
INCR INFLOW-2
20.
0.00
0.40
0.10
0.00
0.28
0.00
0.00
ENDATA8A
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$$$ DATA TYPE 9 (STREAM JUNCTIONS)
$$$
CARD TYPE
JUNCTION ORDER AND IDENT
UPSTRM JUNCTION
TRIB
STREAM JUNCTION
1.
WEST BRANCH
27.
35.
34.
JUNCTION-1
2.
MALLARD CREEK
101.
116.
115.
ENDATA9
0.
0.
0.
0.
$$$ DATA TYPE 10
(HEADWATER SOURCES) $$S
CARD TYPE HDWTR
NAME
FLOW
TEMP
D.O.
BOD
CM-1
CM-2
CM-3
ORDER
HEADWTR-1 1.
DYE BRANCH
0.50
75.20
9.46
3.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
HEADWTR-1 2.
WEST BRANCH
2.50
75.20
7.60
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
HEADWTR-1 3.
MALLARD CREEK
0.64
75.20
7.10
4.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
ENDATA10 0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
COLI
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
26
SSS DATA
TYPE 10A
(HEADWATER CONDITIONS FOR CHLOROPHYLL,
NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS,
COLIFORM AND SELECTED NON -CONSERVATIVE CONSTITUENT) $$$
CARD TYPE
HDWTR ANC
COLI CHL-A
ORG-N
NH3-N
NO2-N
NO3-N
ORG-P
ORDER
HEADWTR-2
1.
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.46
0.04
0.00
0.24
0.00
HEADWTR-2
2.
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.22
0.00
0.00
0.00
HEADWTR-2
3.
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.28
0.06
0.01
0.26
0.00
ENDATA10A
0.
0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SSS DATA
TYPE 11
(POINT SOURCE
/ POINT SOURCE
CHARACTERISTICS) $$$
POINT
CARD TYPE
LOAD NAME
EFF
FLOW
TEMP
D.O.
BOD
CM-1
ORDER
POINTLD-1
1.
MOORSVL WWTP
0.00
8.06
75.20
6.06
24.50
0.00
POINTLD-1
2.
ROCKY RIVER
0.00
0.30
75.20
7.30
1.38
0.00
POINTLD-1
3.
RIVER RUN
0.00
0.00
75.20
6.00
32.50
0.00
POINTLD-1
4.
MID SOUTH
0.00
0.93
75.20
6.00
34.50
0.00
POINTLD-1
5.
W.R. ODELL
0.00
0.02
75.20
6.68
17.58
0.00
POINTLD-1
6.
CLARKE CREEK
0.00
1.60
75.20
6.00
2.50
0.00
POINTLD-1
7.
MALLARD WWTP
0.00
9.30
75.20
6.00
17.50
0.00
POINTLD-1
8.
CODDLE CREEK
0.00
4.20
75.20
7.74
12.46
0.00
POINTLD-1
9.
BACK CREEK
0.00
0.99
75.20
7.45
9.49
0.00
POINTLD-1
10.
REEDY CREEK
0.00
3.38
75.20
8.14
28.49
0.00
POINTLD-1
11.
CONCORD WWTP
0.00
37.20
75.20
6.00
50.00
0.00
POINTLD-1
12.
COLDWTR CK
0.00
8.00
75.20
7.50
2.00
0.00
POINTLD-1
13.
DUTCHBF CK
0.00
7.10
75.20
7.50
2.00
0.00
POINTLD-1
14.
MUDDY WWTP
0.00
0.00
75.20
5.00
75.00
0.00
ENDATAll
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$$$ DATA
TYPE 11A
(POINT. SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS - CHLOROPHYLL A,
NITROGEN,
PHOSPHORUS,
COLIFORMS AND SELECTED NON -CONSERVATIVE CONSTITUENT)
$$$
POINT
CARD TYPE
LOAD
ANC
COLI
CHL-A
ORG-N
NH3-N
NO2-N
NO3-N
ORDER
POINTLD-2
1.
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.60
1.00
0.00
6.20
POINTLD-2
2.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.08
0.03
0.00
0.32
POINTLD-2
3.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.30
0.00
0.00
POINTLD-2
4.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.10
0.00
0.00
POINTLD-2
5.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.63
0.00
0.00
POINTLD-2
6.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
POINTLD-2
7.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
1.00
0.00
0.00
POINTLD-2
8.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.27
0.08
0.01
0.24
POINTLD-2
9.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.47
0.85
0.01
0.37
POINTLD-2
10.
0.00
0.00
.0.00
0.00
5.20
0.00
2.35
POINTLD-2
11.
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.80
5.00
0.00
2.15
POINTLD-2
12.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.02
0.00
0.02
POINTLD-3
13.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.02
0.00
0.02
POINTLD-2
14.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.40
0.00
0.00
ENDATA11A
0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
S$S DATA
TYPE 12 (DAM CHARACTERISTICS)
$$$
DAM
RCH ELE
ADAM
BDAM
FDAM
HDAM
ENDATA12
0.
0. 0.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$SS DATA
TYPE 13 (DOWNSTREAM BOUNDARY
CONDITIONS-1) $$$
CARD
TYPE
TEMP
D.O.
BOD
CM-1
CM-2
CM-3
ENDATA13
DOWNSTREAM
BOUNDARY
CONCENTRATIONS ARE UNCONSTRAINED
$$$ DATA
TYPE 13A
(DOWNSTREAM BOUNDARY
CONDITIONS-2) $$$
CARD
TYPE
CHL-A
ORG-N
NH3-N
NO2-N
NH3-N
ORG-P
ENDATA13A
DOWNSTREAM BOUNDARY
CONCENTRATIONS ARE UNCONSTRAINED
27
ORG-P
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
DIS-P
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
�WWI
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ANC
DIS-P
DIS-P
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CM-3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
COLI