20051457 Ver 1_Re Buffalo Creek7Q10WWTP.msg_20130327

Strickland, Bev
From: Reeder, Tom [tom.reeder @ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 4:01 PM
To: Tarver, Fred
Subject: Re: Buffalo Creek /7Q10 /WWTP
Attachments: ncflagsmall[6].png
Fred A Those comments look fine to me. Thanks for getting them done so quickly.
Tom Reeder
Director, NC Division of Water Resources
Phone: 919 - 707 -9027
email: tom.reeder @ncdenr.gov
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to
third parties.
From: <Tarver >, Fred <fred.tarver @ncdenr.gov>
Date: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 3:51 PM
To: Tom Reeder <tom.reeder @ncdenr.gov>
Subject: FW: Buffalo Creek /7Q10 /WWTP
Tom,
I ve attached my comments on EA. Please review and let me know if it *s okay.
I ve attached this to the email stream below if you wish to review the history on the 7g10 issue.
Thanks. Fred
Email: fred.tarver @ncdenr.gov
Phone: 919 - 707 -9029
Fax: 919 - 733 -3558
From: Roddy, Jackie
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 8:13 AM
To: Tarver, Fred
Subject: RE: Buffalo Creek /7Q10 /WWTP
Are you still working on comments to be submitted in response to the latest draft of the EA?
1

E-mail correspondence toondƒrom this address may besubject to the North Carolina Public Records Low and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From:Taner, Fred
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 4:25PM
To: BeInick,Tom; Headrick, Hannah; Stecker, Kathy; Mckay,]ames; NoweU,]acWe; Kebede,Adugna; Rodriguez, Teresa
Cc: Roddy, ]ackie;Peele,Linwood
Subject: RE: Buffalo Creek/7QlO/WWTP
*Why do data centers use so much water? The move to cloud computing is concentrating enormous computing power
in mega-data centers containing hundreds of thousands of servers. In many designs, all the heat from those servers is
managed through cooling towers, where hot waste water from the data center is cooled, with the heat being removed
through evaporation. Most of the water that remains is returned to the data center cooling system, while some is
drained out of the system to remove any sediment, a process known as blowdown.*
In reference to the drop in 7Q10 from 12 to 8.2 cfs. If one assumes that 12 cfs is the minimum flow from the dam, then
the 7Q10 should remain 12 ds in perpetuity except for the potential influence of periodic cut-backs during extreme
drought conditions. | believe that this lowering is the result of HDRvvatershed/reservoir modeling, see note. HDR used
four near-by gages for the synthesized flow record. You may need to speak with HDR for clarification.
*We [HDR] had been previously modeling minimum releases out of the dam at approximately 8.9 CFS or the 7Q10 for
the synthetic inflow hydrograph.*
Fred RTarver|||
Division of Water Resources
N[ Department of Environment 6> Natural Resources

Email:
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
From: Benick,7om
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 1:17 IPM
To: Tarver, Fred; Headrick, Hannah; Stecker, Kathy; Mckay, ]ames; Nowell, ]acWe; Kebede, Adugna; Rodriguez, Teresa
Cc: Roddy, ]ackie
Subject: RE: Buffalo Creek/7Q10/WWTP
Fred- I don*t have a quick, easy answer as there are 3 downstream NPIDES dischargers on Buffalo Creek prior to the
NC/SC line, and for which vvedo not have anexisting model that ties them all together. This would take some effort, so
1*11 need to know the timeframe for this project.
Nevertheless, one major question first. |f the projected decrease in7[l1OstreamMow from 12dstoQ.2ds(3296
reduction) is due to a water withdrawal (my guess at this point from the email string), has there been any estimate of
how much of that water withdrawal will ultimately be returned back tothe stream via the Kings Mountain VVVVTP? Or is
this projected withdrawal expected to be a 100% consumptive loss? Thanks for any additional info you can provide.
NCIDENR/Division of Water Quality
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
From:Taner, Fred
Sent: Thursday, March O7 2O1]4:]5IPM
To: Headrick, Hannah; Be|nick, Tom; Stecker,Kathy
Cc: Roddy, ]ackie
Subject: RE: Buffalo Creek/7Q10/WWTP
AU,
My apologies but in transferring notes I flipped the 6, so the 7Q10 for the Pilot Creek WWTP NPIDES is 19 cfs not 16 cfs.
IDWQ should let DWR know if a reduction in the 7Q10 from 12 to 8.2 cfs will significantly impact the assimilative capacity
of Buffalo Creek.
Sorry for the error. Again, let me know if you have any additional questions.

Fred RTarver|||
Division of Water Resources
N[ Department of Environment 6> Natural Resources
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. N[27699-1611
Email:
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
From: Headrick, Hannah
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 10:59 AM
To: Be|nick, Tom; Stecker,Kathy
Cm: Roddy,]acWe; Taner, Fred
Subject: FW: Buffalo Creek/7QlO/WWTP
Kathy and Tom *
Below is the information from Fred Tarver with DWR that I discussed with you earlier.
Attached are the flow study and EA. (I really don*t think it is necessary for you to review the EA, just attaching it for
you to have a full record.)
Please have comments tome regarding Fred*s concerns on Friday, March 29. |f you need longer to review, please let
me know.
Thanks.
7. F. offs".
Hannah Headrkk
SEPA Coordinator
NC Division of Water Quality Planning Section
Physical location: 512 N, Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604 [Archdale Building Office 625J]
Mailing address: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Phone: [phone] — Fax: [phone]/
E-mail correspondence toondƒrom this address may besubject to the North Carolina Public Records Low and may be disclosed to
third porties.
From:Taner, Fred
Sent: Thursday, March 07 2013 10:52 AM
To: Headrick, Hannah
Cc: Roddy, ]acWe
Subject: RE: Buffalo Creek/7QlO/WWTP
As stated in the flow study report accompanying the EA, there is no gaging on Buffalo Creek, so the consultant created a
synthesized flow record based on existing flow records at 4 near-by USGS gages.
Based on the consultants (HDR) synthesized record, HDR determined that the 7Q10 at the dam was 8.2 cfs. The current
flow requirement from Moss Dam is 12 cfs, which is the 7q10 value estimated in the 70*s.

There are 2 NPIDES permits belonging to 0np*s Mountain for discharge into Buffalo Creek below Moss Dam: Ellison
WTP (NCO079740), immediately below the dam, and Pilot Creek WWTP (NCO020737), just downstream of the Muddy
Fork tributary confluence.
The drainage area at the dam is6Q.1mi2 and 116mi2at Hwy 74 which is just downstream of the VVVVTP discharge. The
drainage area for Muddy Fork is 45.1 mi2.
The Dam Safety rules [154 N[A[O2K .0502(6)] only allow aflow requirement of no more than the 7Q10 in the lowest
tier release from a dam.
DVVQshou|d let DVVR know ifa reduction in the 7[l1Ofrom 12toQ.2ds (or 9.3toQ.2ds) will significantly impact the
assimilative capacity of Buffalo Creek.
|*ve included some excerpts from emai|sduring DVVR*sinstream flow study below. | can find no evidence that Jim
consulted with DVV[l during the modeling effort.
|f you need to discuss further, please let meknow.
Thanks.
Fred
From: Mead, Jim
Sent: Tuesday, February O1,2O113:2OPM
To: Goudreau, Chris ].;Tarver, Fred; Reed, Steven
Cc: Stand|, Vann F
Subject: RE: Kings Mountain IFIM study - flow regime proposals
Chris, Fred and Steve:
I*ve attached a spreadsheet with two flow regime options for Moss Lake, based
on the time series analyses todate. The tier 2 and tier 3 flows and triggers are
just a first cut/best guess and vve will need to get model output from HDRfor
the tiered approach to evaluate habitat effects. This will give them something
to evaluate from the water supply yield perspective.
Note that for the flat minimum approach I used 8.2 cfs �O the 7Q10 using
unregulated flows produced by HDR modeling. However, the existing 12 cf
minimum is supposedly based on the 7Q10 (back when the dam was
built.1,. Before—&-�, the bottom tier at a lower 7J*- 10 we will need to consul
with DWQ regarding downstream waste assimilation. I
Let me know if you have any comments. | would like to send this toHDRbynext
Tuesday,2/8

Thanks
Jim
From: Mead, Jim
Sent: Thursday, September O3,2OO9Q:55AM
To: B|andford, Patrick
Cc: Reed, Steven; Geiger, Ronald A.
Subject: RE: Kings Mountain Water Supply - reservoir model
Note that |will need flows for a location downstream ofthe
reservoir ata drainage area of127 square miles (our study
site). The dam isata drainage area of6Q.1 square miles. The
existing minimum release requirement for the dam is12ds.
From: B|andfon±Patrick
Sent: Wednesday, September O9,2OO93:1QPM
To: Mead, Jim
Cc: Reed, Steven;
Geiger, Ronald A.
Subject: RE: Kings Mountain Water Supply
reservoir model
Jim,
| want to seek clarification on two points before producing the
data and passing it onto you for inclusion in your model. It is
mentioned in your email that the minimum passing flow
requirement for the dam at Moss Lake is12[FS however, in
previous discussion it was relayed tous that this number isa
minimum flow requirement for the VVVVTP plant several miles
downstream of the dam. VVe had been previously modeling
minimum releases out of the dam at approximately Q.9[FSor
the 7[l1O for the synthetic inflow hydrograph. The Q.9[FSplus
yield from the additional drainage Buffalo Creek picks uponthe
way downstream should meet the 12[FS passing flow
requirement at the VVVVTP.
�

Fred R Tarver III
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environment & Natural Resources
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. NC 27699 -1611
Email: fred.tarver @ncdenr.gov
Phone: 919 - 707 -9029
Fax: 919 - 733 -3558
From: Headrick, Hannah
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 7:51 AM
To: Tarver, Fred
Subject: RE: Buffalo Creek
Hannah Headrkk
SEP A Coordinator
NC Division of Water Quality - Planning Section
Physical location: 519 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 9/694 [,Archdale Building - Office 695..[)
Mailing address: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27/699-1617/
Phone: [phone] -- Fax: [phone]/
http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /wq /ps /sepa
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Low and may be disclosed to
third parties.
From: Tarver, Fred
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 5:05 PM
To: Headrick, Hannah
Subject: Buffalo Creek
Hold on to your Kings Mtn comments until we talk. Thanks. Fred
Fred R Tarver III
Division of Water Resources
NC Department of Environment & Natural Resources
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. NC 27699 -1611
Email: fred.tarver @ncdenr.gov
Phone: 919 - 707 -9029
Fax: 919 - 733 -3558
7