NC0044423_Modification_20220221

i
Appalachian
RECEIVED
January 25,2022 Facilities Management
FEB 21 ASU Box 32105
2921 Boone,NC 28608-2105
NPDES Wastewater Program 828-262-3190
NCDE Department of Environmental Quality QJDWRJNPDES facilitiesmanagement.appstate.edu
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699
RE: Appalachian State University NPDES Permit NCoo44423 Modification Request
To Whom It May Concern:
Appalachian State University(ASU)is submitting this major permit modification request and supporting
information to move the discharge outfall location. The ASU Water Treatment Plant(WTP)discharges
backwash and CIP waste to Norris Branch Reservoir under the auspices of NPDES Permit NCoo44423.
The existing permit expired March 31,2021 and ASU has applied for but has not yet received a renewed
permit.The current permit has been administratively extended,and as such ASU is submitting a permit
application addendum to request a change in the discharge outfall location.
The current NPDES discharge outfall is located close to the WTP's intake structure in Norris Branch
Reservoir.ASU desires to move the discharge outfall location to Howards Creek adjacent to the existing
Howards Creek influent pump station.The primary driver to move the outfall is to reduce impact from the
discharge on the water intake.A secondary benefit to moving the outfall will be move the discharge from a
water supply reservoir to a larger receiving water with more assimilative capacity.
ASU has evaluated three options to manage the effluent:
• Effluent treatment with ion exchange and continued discharge into Norris Reservoir
• Relocating the discharge outfall to Howards Creek in the vicinity of the existing Howards Creek
influent pump station
• Relocating the discharge outfall downstream of the Norris Creek Reservoir in the vicinity of
Highway 194 N
ASU,with the assistance of Dewberry,had previously evaluated the cost for implementing ion exchange
and reverse osmosis to remove metals from the effluent. To further support the treatment evaluation,
Dewberry performed bench treatability tests to verify the treatment options can achieve effluent
concentrations as low as the existing numerical limits.The results of the bench scale treatability tests are
summarized in Attachment A.The treatability tests confirm that ion exchange can meet the current
numerical effluent limits.The opinion of probable costs for the ion exchange system previously developed
and provided to DEQ in a submittal dated o7/07/2o2i is still applicable,with a projected capital cost of
$2,l00,000.When considering the recurring costs of resin replacement,chemical costs,and
maintenance,the 20-year life cycle cost of ion exchange is$4,260,000.Also,intangible items associated
with ion exchange not included in the presented cost estimates are the additional labor required for
operation and the environmental impact of frequent generation of spent resin for disposal.
A MEMBER INSTITUTION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Page 1 of 2

•
NPDES Wastewater Program
January 25,2022
ASU also considered two options for alternative discharge locations.Option i is to relocate the outfall to
Howards Creek in the vicinity of the ASU Howards Creek influent pumpstation.Option 2 is to relocate the
outfall to Norris Branch downstream of the reservoir and in the vicinity of Highway 194 N. The objective
of the alternative discharge locations is to prevent the effluent from being discharge directly into the
reservoir and to identify a receiving water with sufficient assimilative capacity that allows effluent to
comply with applicable regulations without requiring additional pretreatment.The memorandum
provided in Attachment B from Dewberry provides a summary of the alternative discharge locations,
infrastructure requirements,water quality consideration,and projected capital costs for the two
alternatives.When considered maintenance costs for each alternative,the 20-year life cycle cost for
Option i is$1,76o,00o and the 20-year life cycle cost for Option 2 is$2,37o,000.
ASU requests the effluent outfall be moved to Howards Creek in the vicinity of the existing ASU Howards
Creek influent pumpstation.This alternative offers many advantages including the lowest life-cycle cost,
reuse of existing infrastructure,minimal disruption to the neighboring community for construction,lower
operation and maintenance costs relative to ion exchange,and improved compliance with discharge to a
larger receiving water with more assimilative capacity.
Sincerely,
sati
Daniel Gryder
Cc: Anthony Miller,PE
Leigh-Ann Dudley,PE
Robert"Skip"Notte,PE
Enclosed:
Appendix A-Bench Test Results Memo
Appendix B-Sludge Basin Outfall Relocation Memo
g
Page 2 of 2

Dewberry;
DATE: January 26, 2022
TO: Mr. Daniel Gryder(Appalachian State University)
FROM: Leigh-Ann Dudley, PE
Anthony D. Miller, PE
SUBJECT: Effluent Treatability Bench Testing Results
Message
1.0 Background
Appalachian State University(ASU)water treatment plant(WTP)currently discharges membrane system
backwash for the ASU WTP to Norris Branch Reservoir(Appalachian State Reservoir)under the auspices
of NPDES Permit NC0044423.ASU is subject to numerical effluent discharge limits for copper and zinc
and at times the effluent exceeds the numerical limits.The monthly average permitted effluent zinc and
copper limits are 63 ug/I and 4 ug/I, respectively.ASU is evaluating multiple options to manage the
wastewater discharge, including alternative discharge locations or treatment. The evaluation of alternative
discharge locations is provided in a separate submittal Sludge Basin Outfall Relocation dated January 26,
2022.
Dewberry initially performed a desktop evaluation of ion exchange and reverse osmosis(RO)for metals
removal from the ASU WTP effluent.The results of the desktop evaluation were provided to ASU and
subsequently to NCDEQ in the Metals Treatment Alternatives Analysis dated July 7, 2021 prepared by
Dewberry.The projected capital costs for the ion exchange and RO treatment system were significant,
ranging from$2,100,000-$4,200,000. Ion exchange and RO were selected for the desktop evaluation
because they are proven technologies expected to be capable of achieving the low concentrations
necessary to meet the current effluent discharge limits.
To further evaluate potential treatment options, to specifically identify more cost-effective options,
Dewberry performed treatability testing to evaluate the efficacy of other treatment methods. The results
presented in subsequent sections do not indicate the more cost-effective treatment options will be as
effective at reducing copper and zinc in the effluent. The ion exchange system and opinion of probable
costs presented in the July 7, 2021 Metals Treatment Alternatives Analysis are still applicable.
2.0 Protocol
Bench testing was performed on WTP effluent discharged from the sludge thickener basin. Dewberry
performed bench scale testing of five (5)treatment alternatives:
• Ion Exchange (with and without prefiltration)
• Clay Blend Media Adsorption
• Activated Carbon Adsorption
• Sodium Hydroxide Precipitation
Bench scale tests were planned for sulfide precipitation, however due to supply chain issues Dewberry
was unable to obtain the sulfide chemical necessary to perform the testing. Thus, the test was not
performed.
Test protocols were developed as proof-of-concept testing,which is intended to determine if a particular
treatment method is effective, and not to obtain sizing criteria or optimize treatment options.
Ion exchange tests were performed on the Lewatit MonoPlus TP207 ion exchange resin provided by
EFFLUENT TREATABILITY BENCH TEST RESULTS 1 OF 3

Lanxess. Ion exchange resin was dosed at concentrations of 2.5 g/L(grams per liter)and 20 g/L resin
into a 2-liter volume of WTP effluent. Ion exchange tests were performed at each dose on filtered effluent
and unfiltered effluent. Samples were filtered with a 0.45 micrometer glass fiber lab filter. For each test,
the reactors were mixed on a stir plate, and samples were collected from the ion exchange reactors at 30
minutes and 2 hours.
Clay beads and rice hull activated carbon were the two adsorption medias tested.The clay blend media
tested was AquaPure Quick Drop supplied by Hubbard Hall.The clay beads were dosed at
concentrations of 3.75 g/L and 30 g/L into a 2-liter volume of WTP effluent. The rice hull activated carbon
was a powdered activated carbon also supplied by Hubbard Hall.The activated carbon was dosed at
concentrations of 7.5 g/L and 12 g/L into a 2-liter volume of WTP effluent. For each test, the reactors
were mixed on a stir plant, and samples from the adsorption reactors were collected at reaction times of
30 minutes and 2 hours.
Sodium hydroxide precipitation was performed at pH targets 8.5 and 9.5 based on the minimum solubility
pH of copper and zinc hydroxides. Sodium hydroxide was used to adjust the pH of a 2-liter reactor of
WTP effluent to achieve the target pH. For each test, the reactor mixed for 30 minutes at the target pH,
then aluminum chlorohydrate settling aid was added to promote solids settling, and a sample was
collected from the supernatant on in the top of the rector.
Treated effluent samples from each bench test were submitted to Enthalpy Analytical, a certified
commercial laboratory, for low level total and soluble copper and zinc analysis.
3.0 Results
Dewberry performed the testing in the Raleigh laboratory on November 8, 2021.The zinc and copper
concentrations in the initial effluent sample were below the current effluent discharge permit limits for
zinc. The total copper concentration was above the current permit limit for copper.
Table 1. Initial Effluent Sample
SAMPLE ID COPPER ZINC
Daily Maximum Permit Limit, ug/L 4 63
Monthly Average Permit Limit,ug/L 5.2 63
Sample Dissolved Metal, ug/L 1.77 < 10
Sample Total Metal,ug/L 6.56 19.2
At such low initial concentrations, treatment efficiencies are significantly reduced. Table 2 provides the
treated water total copper and total zinc concentrations for each treatment method for the 2-hour contact
period.
it Dewberry. EFFLUENT TREATABILITY BENCH TEST RESULTS 2 OF 3

Table 2.Treated Effluent Total Copper and Zinc Data
COPPER COPPER ZINC ZINC
TREATMENT TECHNIQUE CONCENTRATION, PERCENT CONCENTRATION, PERCENT
UG/L REMOVAL UG/L REMOVAL
Ion Exchange with 2.5 g/L 4.05 38% < 10 48%
Prefiltration 20 g/L 3.37 49% <10 48%
Ion Exchange 2.5 g/L 3.28 50% 21.7 -13%
without Prefiltration 20 g/L 2.45 63% 33.0 -72%
3.75 g/L <1 85% 10.8 44%
Clay Media
—
30 g/L 4.29 35% 50.1 -161%
Rice Hull Activated 7.5 g/L 7.11 -8% 38.2 -99%
Carbon 12 g/L 14.4 -120% 30.4 -58%
Hydroxide pH 9.5 7.25 -11% 20.0 -4%
Precipitation ( pH 8.5 6.75 -3% 19.7 -3%
The results of bench testing indicated the following:
• The concentration of copper and zinc increased in the hydroxide precipitation and rice hull
activated carbon reactors. It is anticipated that this is due to normal variability in the analytical
method at such low concentrations and represents zero removal from these treatment options.
• Ion exchange and clay media adsorption removed copper from the effluent, achieving
concentrations below the 5.2 ug/I monthly average permit limit for all samples and below the 4
ug/I daily maximum limit for several conditions tested.
• Ion exchange with a prefiltration step resulted in zinc being reduced to non-detect while zinc
concentrations increased in the reactors without prefiltration.
The lower doses of the clay media reduced the zinc concentration by 44 % but at the higher doses the
zinc concentration in the reactor nearly doubled.At such low initial concentrations, treatment efficiencies
are significantly reduced; however, for the purpose of demonstrating proof-of-concept, the results indicate
ion exchange, an originally evaluated treatment technique and well-established treatment technique for
metals removal, is effective for reducing concentrations of copper and zinc. For copper, the testing
demonstrated ion exchange is effective for meeting current permit limits. If ASU implements a full-scale
ion exchange system, resin bed sizing would be further evaluated based on desired resin life and
projected breakthrough. Additional testing on effluent with higher copper and zinc concentrations is
recommended to properly size a system. The ion exchange system and opinion of probable costs
presented in the July 7, 2021 Metals Treatment Alternatives Analysis are still applicable.
Dewberry° EFFLUENT TREATABILITY BENCH TEST RESULTS 3 OF 3

eff Dewberry'
DATE: January 25, 2022
TO: Mr. Daniel Gryder(Appalachian State University)
FROM: Robert S. Notte, PE, LEED AP
Anthony D. Miller, PE
SUBJECT: Appalachian State University Water Treatment Plant—Sludge Basin Outfall Relocation
Message
9
1.0 Introduction
Appalachian State University (ASU) is submitting a major permit modification request and supporting
information to move the current sludge thickener discharge outfall location. The ASU Water Treatment
Plant(WTP)currently discharges backwash and CIP waste to Norris Branch Reservoir under the
auspices of NPDES Permit NC0044423. The existing permit expired March 31, 2021 and ASU has
applied for but has not yet received a renewed permit. The current permit has been administratively
extended, and as such, ASU is submitting a permit application addendum to request a change in the
discharge outfall location.
The current NPDES discharge outfall is located near the WTP's intake structure in Norris Branch
Reservoir. ASU desires to move the discharge outfall location. The purpose of this memorandum is to
evaluate the infrastructure requirements and water quality considerations, and to provide opinion of
probable costs for each alternative.
2.0 Existing Conditions
Figure 1 attached shows the WTP and the existing sludge thickener basin. The existing sludge thickener
located at the WTP currently sends its discharge to the north of the site to Norris Branch Reservoir. The
existing reservoir is currently used as a monitoring station and holding area. The location of the sludge
thickener discharge raises concerns due to impact from the discharge on the water intake.
3.0 Proposed Improvements
Proposed improvements for this project include two options to address the relocation of the existing
sludge thickener basin outfall. See attached Figure 1 and Figure 2 for a diagram of the proposed options.
The proposed options include:
• Option 1: Relocate the outfall to Howards Creek in the vicinity of the ASU Howards Creek influent
pump station
• Option 2: Relocate the outfall to Norris Branch downstream of the reservoir and in the vicinity of
Highway 194 N
Option 1: Proposed improvements associated with this option include utilizing the existing 12" Ductile Iron
Pipe (DIP) bypass and the existing 16" raw water main from Howards Creek pump station. This option
would tie the existing sludge thickener outfall pipe to the existing 12" DIP bypass. Based on conversations
with ASU, the condition of this existing 12" DIP bypass is unknown as it has not been used since raw
water has been pulled from the reservoir. As such, it is anticipated that approximately 2,000-LF of this
existing 12" DIP will need to be investigated and potentially rehabilitated to allow it to be used for this
option.
The existing 12" DIP will gravity flow downstream to a proposed duplex pump station near the discharge
of the 16" DIP raw water main into the Norris Branch reservoir. From the new pump station, the existing
ASU WTP SLUDGE BASIN OUTFALL RELOCATION 1 OF 3

12" DIP will transition to a force main until it tees into the 16" raw water main from Howards Creek pump
station. The wet well within the proposed pump station is anticipated to be approximately 15-FT deep.
Using an assumed flow rate of 1,300 GPM in the 16" DIP raw water main (approximately 2 FPS)and
utilizing existing as-built drawings and information provided by ASU, a pump would need be selected to
handle approximately 1 300 GPM of flow at 36.70-FT of total dynamic head. Cut sheets of the proposed
PP Y Y P P
pump can be found in the attachments. Preliminary pump calculations can be found on Figure 1.
Additional valves will be added on the existing lines to allow for ASU to conduct routine maintenance and
isolate the existing holding reservoir when the sludge thickener basin is drained.
Based on the outlined approach above, the existing 16" DIP raw water main will serve two purposes; to
convey flow from the sludge thickener basin to Howards Creek, and convey raw water from Howards
Creek to the reservoir during drought years when the reservoir cannot fill itself. Conveyance of raw water
from Howards Creek to the reservoir occurs infrequently. When it is necessary to convey raw water, the
16" DIP line will need to be fully flushed prior to conveyance of raw water from Howards Creek to the
reservoir to prevent the sludge decant from entering the reservoir. To allow for the full flush of this line, a
proposed finished water connection from the ASU Water Treatment Plant will need to be connected to the
existing 12" DIP bypass which flows to the proposed pump station.ASU will need to discharge
approximately 28,200 gallons of finished water to the pump station to complete a full flush of the 16" line
to Howard Creek. Preliminary probable construction cost for Option 1 is$1,172,000.
Option 2: Proposed improvements associated with this option include the installation of approximately
3,440 LF of 24" RCP to convey the discharge from the existing sludge thickener basin downstream to NC
Highway 194 N. Improvements associated with this option will include limited clearing for the pipe trench,
new 24" RCP, and associated manholes. The proposed 24" RCP segments will require routing through
privately owned properties. It is assumed that there will be a 30-LF wide permanent easement along the
routing of the new 24" RCP segments. Utilizing Watagua County GIS, a cost for easements was
determined by comparing surrounding property values and property sizes. Note, this cost for easement
acquisition is based on publicly available information. Easement acquisition costs may change once
negotiations with property owners takes place. Preliminary probable construction cost for Option 2 is
$1,661,000.
4.0 Water Quality Considerations
In addition to the infrastructure and project costs, Dewberry also considered the characteristics of the two
receiving waters to accept the discharge. The current discharge to Norris Branch Reservoir is to a zero-
flow receiving water with a classification of WS-I I, Tr, HQQ, CA.
Howards Creek, discharge Option 1, is classified as Class C, Tr, HQW (Stream Index 10-1-9-(6)). The low
flow statistics provided by USGS for Howards Creek indicate a drainage area of 8.26 square miles and an
annual 7Q10 low flow average discharge of 2.6 cubic feet per second (cfs). The low flow statistics
evaluation from USGS is provided as an attachment. Howards Creek is a much larger receiving stream
than the current discharge and will have a larger assimilative capacity to receive a discharge and result in
improved compliance.
Norris Branch at the Option 2 discharge location is classified as Class C, Tr(Stream Index 10-1-9-7-(2)).
The drainage area to the Option 2 outfall location is 0.94 square miles, significantly smaller than the
drainage area to Howards Creek. The Stream Stats report for the Norris Branch discharge location is
provided as an attachment.As the drainage area for the Norris Branch outfall location is only 11% of the
drainage area to Howards Creek, the 7Q10 flows are anticipated to also be significantly reduced and
Dewberry did not make a request of USGS to provide flows.
! Dewberry. ASU WTP SLUDGE BASIN OUTFALL RELOCATION 2 OF 3

5.0 Conclusion
Advantages of Option 1 include the reuse of existing infrastructure, a lower capital cost, and is the larger
receiving water with more assimilative capacity. Option 2 would require significantly greater new
infrastructure and land disturbance, would be disruptive to the neighboring community for easement
acquisition and construction, has a higher capital cost, and would result in the discharge still being within
a smaller receiving water. As such, it is recommended that between the two alternative discharge
locations ASU pursue a discharge to Howards Creeks (Option 1).
Attachments
1.Figure 1: Outfall Option 1
2.Figure 2: Outfall Option 2
3.Option 1 Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
4.Option 2 Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
5.Pump Selection Cut Sheets
6.USGS Low Flow Statistics for Howards Creek
7.StreamStats Report for Norris Branch
19 Dewberry. ASU WTP SLUDGE BASIN OUTFALL RELOCATION 3 OF 3

1 I 2 3 4 5
PRELIMINARY PUMP STATIONy
/', _;i i,', /JJ7/.^t`t It ' I ' \{\�r h ' i --'"11\\` 'r \\‘\\� ' \\+ ;�;+,}1 i t\ � ;: .\\4\ /;1,J' s _ = rr
CALCULATIONS ;'t/ t >~ �'" t l/ ,\ ,+�\\,\ I „ s_=
�=\ ._'__/rl r I r - - ----�, ,- ,It1 ,1\L\ ;. \ , , 1 I I, 1J, Ifh,`/� .\ , ;I \ \\ ,\• \•, .�,\ \\ \\ -;,'s.s _ --__ _-„
FLOW CALCULATIONS
o `" -�J \ (, \ \\ I ' f i"� ram✓ 7 I^11 l \ \♦ / , ,�,f 1 •'. II J \\♦ / 'I l�.l,. \l \\♦♦ ♦ ♦\ \\\\`\ �� J!.%-=5=� ='=._--
\ 4'-- \t !\ / 'J II __T�1 ` \ - / 1 u t! �i \ \\ \ \\\ '' l i�' '3Y�; - Dewberry Engineers lnc.
SLUDGETHICKENERS a� ___=\ -��_ L�\ {\ �� I �\ EXISTING - .�� r��`�\�\\�>>\\� 1\ I\1.i�r r�` ' r T ♦`\ ail\\'�� �'r%'/+ '\{\`\.♦`fi� �`\',�ti\ \\��\�: i III I�i; y 9300ParrsCo�r.v.m•-Sa4F.,
BASIN - � \ \ \ \ \ i I 1 I 1 \ \ \\ \ \\ , ~.. ... I I / _ _-__
EXISTING CONDITIONS=400 GPM INFORMATION PROVIDED BYASU .m `-`�t \♦ 1 \ - , 1 \\ , 1 ! ' \ \ `- li \\\ / \\ —� \\\ \,t\, _ J 1 I /� ..--- _�/, cn"nons,I+c z9zse
( ) zo _\ } 1 HOWARDS CREEK \ �� �, ,,Ire ' I \ \ I \\ / ' ` \ \ - \ , `\1.\ ,' - - III ''r rt � ---- - vn«a.Tasa9.99ae
wa ,�. -.`\�;_�` -_I \4' \ V �,/,\\\\.\ y111 ,. 1 I` \\\\\\\1, I\`.._ '_ , \ \ \ ,\\ 1 ,`\\ -� 1t/' JI r, `=-�--" Fax ioa.sosss3i
°o . 1--i PUMP STATION ` , \ , \ ` \ -f/ '.; \ \\\\\l\\ti \ \\ ,� `� �r t///li�✓ _ Fax70509
-
SCOUR FLOW=1,300 GPM(FLOW TO ACHIEVE 2 FPS IN I6'FORCE MAIN) `^'+_- / �, ,lr�, ,\ \3\,\\`♦� \\ �111\ ~• l \ _ 5 `�", + ,>\. Y\\�\'\\'\\t\I\\\,\\\t\\` \'t.�' -_�j„C /II l,' -,---, 1ICeELs xrzsm
E DESIGN PUMP RATE=1,300 GPM zz __ ♦ , r ,f \ I,1--:::----7,-.
♦. 1 1 i -_ I r \\ \`‘,\‘‘.„‘,\::„.,,,,\\\, \ \ i 1 V I , !t
t ♦\ ' 1. is: ` , ,\l \\\ \�`t, ! / \ \� __ ' .•'''\ \ ,141, .I / IGtr�i��� �'i I1!�:POTENTIAL VALVE . -_ -='�,i. «,.T'�!/l//_- r \t ,jl,i.\ � ` ,\ � �: Ir/ \r`. � \ c- �\ 11 ?i \\ " y:ty i /I /: i/,�.� � �'1,1�f'<---: Z
rorgL OVNAMIC HEAD CALcuLAnot4s ASSEMBLIES AT =_1---POTENTIALNEW ` LL\ ` `� _=_ \♦ --- IA - \ < ` -./ \ _ \�\i\ \\`\\\ ,\ I�,r% ' , ,,,r'�
STATIC READ=35.50 FT ^^.� - / _ \\\ 1 \1 .� ^ \ ♦ ♦ V \ \\\\\ \\\4 \ / t, I !//rrr% i/.�'r,/ r•�- O
HOWARDS CREEK_ --_-_ ,\ \ \ --- ,—, \ \\ , , /y rrr r r. /i! l�l
_ •:DISCHARGE TO k f 1 \ _ w .x z�`\,\\�\\�\� � \ II r% r r/ ,r , �'r'Il � r l/-__
FRICTION HEAD LOSS AT DESIGN PUMP RATE=1.19 FT(C FACTOR=100) \- - - _ d1 lII+ \\�.'^_--- \.` '.� `„�♦- t\ _' ;-.\\\_ `�\\ \, l\ 1-\ . 1 \^t. i,,,dizli,f//J// i /7/,, rrtl!`( I�
TOTAL DYNAMIC HFAD=36.70 FT PUMP STATION _ ^ \! ` _ \ jk \' /,t / ',�'r' !
�; _� HOWARDSCREEK \ Imo/# II>\` �`` �`♦'♦ ^ T \\,\ ` t I�a` u' \ i�iili{ui/ rrr/,r//�" ,1 Q
1.` "�: _ I S ,,:,V.,,.\\\ \'. `\ 1_ �\`♦ ♦ _ I,L+}ti fj i �, r t /rr / /rr a �' U
..:, .. \ -_ -_-^-yi y .- a-J ,/,` - 4444 \ k.` t 1 7 / /, r/--i r 7 r
PUMPSTATIONDESIGNPOINT ��___ - i�_ a��� _ __' t I1 ♦\` y- l_ �.. , / �L` +. !✓ 1I i�rlll ,'t\ ��:,,IJ/i//�(Ij ll!/ ! 'rl/1lI it
{+ ! Z O
OPERATING POINT 1:1.300GPM 36.70'TDH - .. __ _ Qy,' \\\\\ �`� \ - _ `.�\- \♦`` Y _-^- - ' /tJ '{ '/ fr7l�''+ 1 _ t {I / / r /! y ! I,r�'/ _
--- !1 --_ - --' \\\\ ♦� S'_- :\��; `♦\\, \. i \\ ' ``� `, ♦I<f _ /t4 ,fI a1 + \\ . >l/�rji rit ll�rli / /'1/lrt/i''%�iiir - J
3200 _.` < _ \ -_./ \111 /,/, JJ I\ h /// I r / rr ' , / /t r', �y
EXISTING HOWARDS ' \\ ~` \, /'--' F1 r rrlMk PUMP SELECTION .: ♦ ,( .: , � a �^ -- ?:,;\. ,.. �/ ` \\`_ \. � \ �' ti ,'�a f �, t -_ ',Uri
II( I \- ]%yam-�1 �'
PUMP: NP 3153 MT 3-434 ,,{,.., ., 1 _. -�<CREEK \\\\\--`�.�" 4 \\\ � '♦ ,' 4'1`t l.!- 1 is !ll/I111111.� I i ,/ //.//',loll'
/ 111 a
- MOTOR: 20 HP .. - _ .- ♦ .\ \\ t/ /11/r �',r / 111 f/ /j,r r/ /'- z J
IMPELLER 327 min DIA �'\ \\�\ \\\ �_^ l ' , s r AD 1., /l! 'i i /'1
/ + \ \\:�-\ _ ♦ \\♦ ,\\\\\ \ Ja/r;lb': //1,Y 1 \ _i' r I I r i I / r / /
< t• 1 ym'`l , - \ \\,\\ J\\. �\\\\\-..` i { Jt'rjf,r rl 'tll r\ l �'' //r„//rn '/ •, , P�J J I- O
SUCTION:B'DIA ^`\ �> \ . ^y— \ y\\♦ y y1 a,i1 \1' .T.,.., mil//1, //, //i//i/irii%! ! w Q a
`
c
DISCHARGE:6'DIA. '1 �/ I1/ I ' \\, .'\\ \ `���``�`♦\♦\'♦� \\ \ ��,\\ ' `/ 1 II I"\ i \,,\ .\�\ \ `+_ 1", r�a�r r//II/r7/r/!'//l t'//, /,(, c. -� G LL O
DUTY POINT:1,3713 GPM@36.6'C 60 Hz I`� t /}r`._, W.^ _'� \/ `� \ \\� ` ‘1\ \ \ };II d I t 1\, \`\ \ \ \' ]\ ✓Jilt i'Il�, " r,/j171,rlt l///r I �' 1"' 1-
POWERREDUIREMENT:60 Hz-3 PHASE460V .` \ , a '_'. / '� \. _ �\� � \ { ! i� \\ \ \♦\� ^ - -T/ r/1\l\\ 'ice / l 'l lr i O
\ J
♦ ./ - ♦`.‘‘‘‘\‘‘‘,..‘
\\i\ , , i // / , ! I 1 , t\ ��'1_ -�' ,\ \\t/ ,/ i� /ir /1/ En-J Z
PUMP STATION LEVEL CONTROL ELEVATIONS i''I a I ' \' \, _ _i i1 i ,' 0 111
^ ` � �.1 // k 1, / '\ \\ \ �f J\\,l 1 fr /.. Z
TOP OF SLAB =3450.00(PER GIS TOPO) ' 1"' -- ` _ `` \ \�� ^/j/ I I ' 'i k \4 \ `' ^ , j1Tf:i,,;,t>/ /:
INLET 344a.sD Ir I. / , / r---� . �` � ,�'- I - �- __ . It \♦\`. l�i�, l ' '�- - - �� = '%5i�y✓ I / z
HIGH WATER ALARM =3450.00 � IJ fil +J\ �.'_�-..� .- _ �1- -- -.—�`-.\„ _ _1_ - _ _,,\ __- ...1 '\\\3\\ / t,/ 1 t i - _ ____'--l'..i��ryi _L 1_
/ \J2 ..ri _ , «L ,__ 1-♦`\. i \i\\�`\♦<<, / I,} •1 3^ ____1_ ��, !lt/� C/
D LAG PUMP ON =3442.50 ,.' ,t d"I ^•.\ �•�� - • n\\ •�j� ♦\\\^�/r�' i1111 Al+1 II _ `_ _ __ � � r�_L =_- 'il��rl/� I }I LLI Q
LEAD PUMP ON =3441.50 . r �; I/ --^'_`� "l � ' 1'- I \� '\\\\\\-{ t. ,! -- _ ._ Ir l m
ALL PUMPS OFF =3436.50 1� �',-_ice-,--.. ,-- _ \, r ��' �_^ii \II 6! ✓ �r% � �'�/I7 r r'/ 14.1 Q
CD
PUMP BENCH =3435.50 APPROXIMATE LOCATION'. -� f I.. ��r�- .� y'i;-- "- '~ i\\'` �` i li '1 ,' -"` -- -! w
OF EXISTING 2,400-LF 16" a / _; _ �1, vv 1 � 11`i1 v' I I 1 1 1 I '- ,,\ _
PROPOSED WET WELL SIZE:96'(6')DIA RAW WATER MAIN FROM_—/\\I II Y', �� ,'ill\\, \♦ -'\ \\ ^\\\♦��`�♦ j '\'\4� ` '� r''�` —>~`_�r \r> f/ _J
HOWARDSRMAINF CREEK UMP" - r`-_-,- �'Y: �— ,,�: \,\\,`\ ''\ ) , \:.`.�:`_= _, \ \ '.:,_. %N i r1J a U)
FORCE MAIN DATA -- ` dLa- t i __-�.\ 1 > - . ,
STATION_- /,// `.-,.--.,;'�'�',„__;.:�,,/ \111 , -`�-- �Illt, `\�\\\ \.r�..� `\�.•`;'.G=____' ,\.\ \, ,- •��;{�` �J r J
DIAMETER:16 INCHES `'\tl �- , � �_,,,/ _ \\`\n� e,I ,,\\1 b\ 1. _ _ J ,\\\ > '>l'ir"� -
TOTAL LENGTH:T,700 LF _
HIGH POINT ELEVATION=3472,00'(PER AS-BUILT DRAWINGS) e;- -f" "^L y"`` =y-1\\� I I 1 t, ,r/�'-)-•^�`'� \\�`�� -\. ,\1;\\`\t ,l\\♦. 70 �.•:\ .�`` _/',\`\\ s. , SEAL
VELOCITY AT PUMP RATE=2.0 FEET/SECOND(C FACTOR=100) ! '\ ''q '-'� '` I\ \\ ,J
I T
/
•,f„ .1' •-_. \\ \\,\',,. ':::. 1 ''�l _ _'_J 1-2\. ,,,, ;, PRELI RY
L �' �'F _ y. ` \\\,\,I ; III — _ MINA` EXISTING 16"LINE POTENTIALVALVE\ _ ` _ \ ll\.,,,.....\11\'\11:‘,_:\\:\.;:::..\,....3...t‘\:‘\
' '\ r^^+`\\ - ii lil/ rf HIGHPOINT ASSEMBLIES AT : �ii}\,ti+ \`g\:\♦\\ . \ _ �ONOTUSEFOR
�' / Ili,I' '1' �` i >, ONNECTIONPOINT \\ ,\ CONSTRUCTION
'_� V _ r __ /�//r � _� _ .v1t11� ,\ 1: ♦ -. . : _ --)\ 1 , ili1� C Vti\51
r,/ ^•� ��.� ` � fit, ! '- 1 / `� _ \ _ _ ._
r >- �� ^ / /71/! i, IIIl -l1 r Y' . 1 _ <
^_ /,/,r,7"` h: '.` — t','!/I, , /�j11i POTENTIAL NEW ' t ` � J \tI�\+� .��aac> ,a �< - �"..
,�`/ / \\\\,`gal \.'` _ L\, rl _- -` PUMP STATION _ _ - _ -_��`\*` ,aa^Tr`� ,�- -- ' Jr fs KEy PLAN
r t - - / /, —3560- ,,„i :---' \.\y� ♦ EXISTING RAW T -- - r \zq
i, EXISTING SLUDGE BASIN ;
C.
0 r�/Ifr1 X '\1\ti\\��_�� ;-� -\ r,� / r �- 1 � ��` _�\\` :WATER INTAKE ==-r;�:^ � .- _.-_--'"'�,` r`� /,'_`�� \\'� �� ,
l
'1 ,` \\ , ,b: - T;' \\' 'EXISTING SLUDGE __ ` \J- ;\\` ----I:-
t ,\t 1
a 1 liter-_- \\\\\ - ` -- .. _ ." ,/' ., , , /;'�' ��._. ;BASIN OUTFACE _ - \�.f -- _ J3 .4 \I;l -r I i 111;11
`II II , ,. �� . -_ `_. - - ` %� \ 1 \1 / POTENTIAL VALVE ' ". -'-`-� .. \\ - \`:�\ � 1 ,III I {F
Jill /r:; ..�.. - -
.-_ - -=-_--�-A 1 A-- - V`::. _ `/� !��•.. _ jp'� .`\Ai I4
\ till' !r /— `;\l �\ \ ASSEMBLIES :.^ \ 7
f:
l
e`",f/, / <� �,�;- -- --_—•�` ���:�\�.. UPSTREAM OF_ -,.` - \^^���, /-�. �i��\\\\ �,- -{ .{ ��It si xt\a V' scALE:
, ,,ltf�ro %` `\�-e \\\\ \\O PUMP STATION - '-"'\ ---- - - � ^ '�t_. Y,, '- -i \,\'\\\ 'I' 4-slam\\ F,\\„1 t,�
\l
1 ' t , _`\-: \r----= +` _ \`\\\\` '' -' r„ �`� \ \ ,��`e_^' _� _ 'r /- \' ro \\ \i11♦`✓'- \ \\`,\\ \ re �:-f 0' 300' 600'
s.
A
f�J'��i,li!1� --���� ^`-c-�f-�_ _ . \\\\iS{ .. " \ �•. _ - _ _,\ x \ ♦\ � - ♦. , SCALE: 1'=300'
, r- , \ vv,Ifsv:'�- 'k APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF � " -^- ���_ -—�--- --- -y v v ��'yA _ - v �'''?\‘‘"It
^
�%,,_,..',I�,rr,'; _- - -i,��-�-- v � 111'1�v `; EXISTING2,000.LF12"DIP -s•� - - `�` =?;�_^_-=`_' ��: vI v �.':� vA:w ^r^ ,� '; ,l,'i /'ll / Jr ��,
":r. 'ram-�..�,/rr/ -- -�-- ` �_ � 1 ///1,� to,� - ._. ��t}, -- -- --= = l/��vvv: _� A ='=r,. rt/,r /July / // /`�.
r4 —`� ) frrl ��� BYPASS FROMHOWARDSI__ �` �/ . V. __' \v r�` li;,t/j / f '//
: ::,
, .., ' `� �--� vAy t+l+ v "- _. CREEK PUMP STATION �� �` '1 _ ^�Avv �r, ` v ---_'vim y' ='i//l,/,t . s ,r t� •
ill +fir. \�', %" \ � ... . ....\�_ - �.r1 Y -_ __ +' \\��� \�`�_ _ /r/ if'l�ii,/, REVISIONS
1 r/I>r _., r , ,', ;'-,`i„_ r\\\\. ,II\ :.-_'. �ke� \- \��"-i��`- ___ \:` __ _''' /��-mil Ir // f
v.
III 1 ,/ �_ / ,'''' _ \ \' \ I \- --" -- �—760 ,.4'.., .l^ � 11 t\\\ =%%'i/r'rr^.., illy //j/ / ,, :3-. .
� ,, t �� r , / - , .I � EXISTING RAW WATER� ��- / / I
r'I,,rl` /; �t ,/, -- vv v; vl "/I' v`;�- -;- _ _^ _ __�-��-.� ,,/,� - ,�,,_�--- _-- �� -= 111 - ' 1l
/,II, ,-- -.r_--', ,'_s RESERVOIR .� \" f�-� v + _ /
--__ _ ( , __ v \A I III �♦♦v ��_�/_ -=� G =�_;,,+V '�--..� v ., , .vv v ___ -OA v `_ __ _;1/ /�'_ _'r,l�ll ,
- -`-.'/ 'IIf31{r----- // 1 ...` / ' ^ '_-i -- V ' __ -� ^----_- '.:`���-ter- r/ to ��
il
:B _-�.- /1ljaliIt �- -' ' I vV, r . .. v -'' _ _ _ - � ti t AA Al 1 V- ^V' _. �= _ Ar/� / ,t /I
/I ? '/ - .� 11I r,tl A .�_�,%%' 7._ __ =t POTENTIAL FINISHED WATER Ivt�•._,..- _ �, �`:� >� .sily ,`Vv ,,.., I �, _,_ __ - _ �, _ l r i4 I .4
-^ems`:.-/,I�I�t/�riltr�� A., Ili I , -_--�.v:,,�'"� CONNECTION AT WATER � vvv vvvtti, �1 _ `v l„ I t1.1 i / \ -� '' � �ytllil' It'v i �/ -
�� :�.„I,,/ / // \I41 v.: A`v^ �,%'' -_ - , TREATMENT PLANT WITH 1 v��7_L \,v , _ 4 --_ itvtA ;
` \\\\\/l7at� , f�, -- `.' \, 1'''- = )..♦♦,`-_;"- Ii EXISTINGNORCH i i \rlji1.11 I 1 r x;^.
\ \` ,; ` BACKFLOW PREVENTION a U \ BRANCH ' \\ 'r r \
1",---",,,‘\\\ ,,r((r,/, t I I :\< � \\\ >. \ \ ` f �i` "i� llllll}I / 1 T — 'k � \\`\
,..,\\\„ 1, 1 \ .---'-`'-:1'
, . - __ ASSEMBLY AND VALVE A, i. / \\♦ \
'^�., ,\\\\ " i!III 1 1.. 1 1 /� \\\�\.\\•- \�. �r'�- _..,4 _ \t ``.♦\I `Y� �1 110, 77/ / _ r I \ No. DATE BY Description
\lil}tI1\\J I,\ 1 1 7 �- , `. <:�. r . _ --`>-_".' ,:\.: \ \`�\.t" ♦ "''€ �.\ ''} \\1"' \ k„ - , P
\-. \;'_-:�,\�'-:- / ; ' `` '-..:".;;-'2-‘�.` . • '>\ I, Ir\`': \_ ,,r, 1+ 1 -mot �' --."- A 1 ,'/ �.;'=— .(/ \'.C'♦•� �\�•
II11 III 1 VA \t \V\ t 1 , l / A \1 - ' ."`_ '._ C\ V v�. ,�,. / _ /v, \. I _/ V ♦v..
1!/I'(LIi, ll \1 I I ' <� ,' -�`_ — v '1�' '-----;� EXISTING WATER .,y 7 I - ._.---_-.� I _ , yvv vA v♦. DRAWN BY JGL
,Ili, i / i I h r. \^ %'v -- _ ~\\\ �. ~\^ \\t\ \\ \ .\.:„..„...._,, d �:../'_ 1 _ _ - \ l 1 ♦�
,_
1 A V i 1 , / , -�v� -. .A -_',+ �- - - .`V `r v1; C t l A v A 4 \� 'V -':,, \ \
)AV'111+++,�Iv ' III i ir/ / / — ♦vv _',- 4 _- v vv ,TREATMENT PI-ANT v` vv v . v - -- `//';' -_ ^_- - • ' I RSN
lti 1 r. f I rr /r ! ,--^„�_`^` \\\ �� "i r- \:\\l\♦\ \ 'T \` '\ ?1 ♦\l \‘‘'.. ...": . \ \\\\ \ I -\' _ �.�.'_.^ - -.� \!J, ,.. \ 1 APPROVED BY
\ � ',F�' -__ _ —� .. vv, � ` `vvv.Vv,♦ �vv� 'e_, s v♦�•w v I..�I\ v --------is'''.--"---_.-- I --- - �' - _ �- �����
1,,,1i�) / /111 i31a/ f,' '�'r-` .�„, ' -_-_ ^ ♦ \ .� \\\ .`\ ,\\\ ,.,.`�^` \` \ ,„,„ j` \ \ y / _ mil .- -' \\ - __ CHECKED BY
IA 1 J i I I !I{! / '/ -_- � .` \ % . �` ♦\\ . ,• \ `\^\ � �\ \a- ♦ \\ \\\1�C1, ' - ^ � r � \ f1SN
r' _ -___ >_:c `w.L w�;.` ^ � ���:.A♦vv _��vv�dl.v vv<v 4 v t!>/� � \,,,,_,,,,___:.__...... .,,,,_
y ` v �S .- .v vvh. .
��iil j I1j1� /. I ,v; tv t1v I 1 , r / v^ ��,y},1`,.yv�t.- � ' �'-v a `yA �`V` v . vvv�yy .ro• 2v.^: �,V t rr''�� is -- �� � __ ��`
i \ ' " \`1` ` ' \ t♦ `^` ` ♦ \ \` / \:\ ( �\ \�^. . .�% .1 11l/ i/ \ \ T..:_� DATE JANUARY 26�2022
/ llik 1 1AV AA A I r ., --..% '� �V �v '`V'-�` v�♦ vv t \ v' I � v A. -/ _ I vv � I ti"� i \^
/ \ lv vv:v`. / '`�Y vv^ �', _ �__ \�vvA: �Avy� � A :. vvv �Jv. ^ trv.,vv,ttyvA� �' = '�rr . ,c ✓
V,1VAt'1.1 � / t �71 '\\ I , , f vA\II , r '�1`vAA ,. tivvv �^__ V"'�:`^`� '�....�A�V ' ri
vv'v v1 � r i 1 tl / I/�/ r /`-�• II �_-',// '•, .r." all ', vvVv\.A � ---��' �:`\ ` �'`� vv vY�,v`^ .�Av♦' A``�t vy`. v�11 1 .v , 1 r - v � ->` A - �-+-�%� `� �.y:, TITLE
. v v \A i t(1 1 1!f t,/t / l � I . ', � A: A _�_- ^ vvv . .\• v� v��A•.,.A11 1[A 1 \\ _ .a` /! ,.". v t
Al_.; -- ' vvvv ,.v ��_ _�Vvv`:,v.v�` . vvAvvtivvvv`O��w�'` i� v v tv v vv -\ �rit'r%„ �-/t/ y � tl} �./.
V /� „ �, vvv\
r t
\ r,'_._a1w,� ';:;'-'";-2.., '::--� .` _ �: v vvv v < v �``:`'�.vv \ vv v A v - .vv `-' �' l<- �:-/ :1----'--'-';
:A� I /-� /il x '"v x
\\\\,t\, \\\\' ,'. , III FI�Iij ftll�,rl: ,�'. \5 \\ �.-' 'r. ,/'',r_ _^ . \\\ ,.\�� \\ \ \ .\ \\ \ 1 l ,\\. \ , - '/ / \ tl III 'Y � 1 ,5r < f,.-^� ��.
1A_ ,,V \A � , -, ,/ 1/ ,�t - '' � c�" � . ,`_- � � v , ♦ v �, _� 1 _ .�, „�I., OUTFALL
/ t'� vv __ r ,/ ,_- _`,.4Vv� �- , ;ti. :yam`.` � ��.`�A`.`� �`vvV•vw v v;�vAvv .�- �/,. � i'l ' �.v� v
,,,\vvv ,vv v"_ //l,lltt7Jr I r'� -.vAv` . - -t �_ ♦ -_-�. A ♦vv vv .. `♦. , v'\-- vv 1 � `' t 't1i,lnvrr/ r' / �' v` Its �,"9
\ \ yi r t //zz1 i+1 i 1 -- 'r , / , - -...._ \ s _ _^ .\\ \\�\. \ 1. \ \��\\\\\\ \\ \ \ \ 1 Y�. . ,. ' fi �='--' y" I 1 t\- r {� p
\,,,,..1,\ \ / ' /f/ (1/V / l/1' \ - '. .. ' '- '- __-- �," --��� \\\.\\ \\ \ ;,'' �;� ,\.. \\,�.\\ \`♦ \\\ ,+\, --'''2-
\ `\ ,,j1\�i,'q\JI)�;��` , iIi I,I + <,-, ,..�<, ' ' '`��`.``A,'I Fri '`- OPTION 1
\j" l fr/ / u/�rr / r — .:\\\\\ \\ `' ' \:\\ ‘`' \ '-'•\\\I,o-, ' ..•' � \"'ii _/r '/ 1 ,' r II1 _, Q ��
.`._ ' ' ` , !�?�Q�' {��j .. ,..v y . �\. .. ,��`�. \ S / '- �/ III„A\II ,I-�y ,.. 1� 1 7r 1 t
A 1111 11 I'\}Av /./t/�f///l J,r/,/. r r ,/ \vv , , ,�i r, _'i==sic�ti�` �:�.� ��� C .:�i♦��vvv vA• ��`v���".: ♦�A.`vv\ ,Ala vvv � � ^vi��.a r _ - �I.i IA �I , r�'�-' �^ ;1 / �t/�`/1'
�;/;1 IAy\A ,' lr ; Jill JI,/.11,'/!l / / ,A` - �,'i,�',;;,'�'„'-'_�^.aA`,, �� +�'�' � "A\ ,vA�� `��: .;A.v ,v�, ,v„ � �� ,� l',-� _ _-.V 1, / „ \` 1�1, ., ,�_
( ( r V AA /%/ ! /,!l�ll ! t / i I , A �:'// _ ^�4.: .i \�� ��.���`♦ .A`�.` . (I 11 A\ 1 ; f I / 1-. 'i1 , �''S !\ 1 11A
vvv�v vA�r. / / l , 1 1 �'�. f"-- �m v .v.\. I , v a .,/� ,t�----/---------_---:---`"
I /ty may` ♦` . I IIII r / >
� � \ \\\_„�i,„ f/ N /j %/ , / � {'t' � /i.,•���� / s,�,, '!��-=:_.,.\ lA ` �."�\. •. �� .\ 1 I t\1 F \\ 'fib': �^�:� _ - I �1 :y�1- »/r •- �. �. \ 4\ ../ - . DEI PROJECT N6.501a0]92
\ /, ri,„ /r///// I / ,\ _,,_, i ',/!ii,, /' 'i-_ &-=` ,, ^\f Q ` ���` \� : �•..♦ ♦ \�\ it's\i11 \�\\1 Il{/ / _ \,I'i �\I I i `'S. r/r .,ir��.._--!,.,, \\``\/r -.„`�'
\\\�,\_---'./r 2 ' /.. a f '„ rr ,r',- -. ��i�^.:�\ �pA'. `\0'... `'`\.` \,,. \.♦\ •. \ \2 \\\♦\ ri,/ !r` ----1--_,„,. ' _ l 1 v r :\` \\\ \\
\ \1 /� //// J l '/ rrr __-_ ^.\�..�\� -� \ \\\ ..�`-�� \ .,\`�\\♦ , \\,1,0-\\\�\�\\\\I ice/,- /` ��\\ \ __ \'1 \t i/' 1', r I'f;T f - §. ti '41\.\ r ` I I},\_
/ \ \ 1 \ / -: ♦1 / SHEET NO.
�-- , //t�l� ! , I./ f ,/ � ,- --1-,--",-,-,/ v ?J/ Ilt//rt -- -.\\\.\��.. \\�\\\ �� /�l 1\\\`I\\\.1\-,-, li ll�t� '1�I�\J,1/\,\\� 1,11\'\��\\'11'IIIh411\ ii� \\��\��y'♦ ' �-'-_ �`\ \\I ,} Il :��III IJfr if ��\\.''',','/ :---."'-'--'
l i+\- �� ir, �i\�
��� � . \
, _,_-_,,/7,!, .__, ^1 ! , ;j! / t :i\1:, `•♦\ Jl�'1 ,'J•-� J''•�.:-'-'/''''''
;�;-'�, =r _,,,f},i\\\,.1 JII 11111i0,\\, ;,11/ \. ` .- /,r7, /,;;I „ 1,,_),/, ' - 1,11;�, ,;`_� I, , I_,
r l ,' ' 71 , 1,/, , ,\\ \\\,� 11/�r,G,tl � mot'%. - ,�, ,l/, 'j '_, i„\ i ,f1113„\\,\\\` - �' �'�...� _ t/ I!li /'.,'!/,,r /�'. "}I;it�r� \\�, e f l l '
r l , -.�.s. l r / ! / I r`i ` \ i r Y e ''%��� ' %.. I tl i \
/ \ - \' -t-1_l r f l rl / , / /-1 \� `,\\U loli� % .... --s%/%•:/r - Jirf 1)r rf/! 1 1\ `\„ r ':Illr' - - '7 , it++.
\. �J\ I I',/ ,�, t , '_\ lI/,fr„ - P 1 \'�1`=„_ FIGURE 1
_ „-;_-_:.-2,...
_""h-a.., I t l I I ^" _ : o:/'�/1 ,t I I fir : •"'�^.;
�- r,ti� _� \ \ \\\' I; i __ 1/i//i ,/ri is �S ji = /,r S - 'IIII IIU I/ `\:\�\ -.
r
't `

9 Dewberry`
Dewberry Engineers Inc.
93W Hers Comers 90*0 • Suite 220
Charlotte. NC 29269
Phone: [phone]
Fax [phone]
ewoemy.cam
NreELS 21-0929
FEASIBILITY STUDY
SEAL
PRELIMINARY
DO NOT USE FOR
CONSTRUCTION
PI AN
SCALE
0' 300' 600'
REVISIONS
No.
DATE
SCALE. 1"= 300'
DRAWN BY
APPROVED BY
— CHECKED BY
DATE
TITLE
BY
JGL
RSN
RSN
Description
JANUARY 25,2022
OUTFALL
OPTION 2
DEI PROJECT N0: 50140792
SHEET NO.
FIGURE 2

Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost _ Dewberry
ASU Sludge Basin Outfall Feasibility-Option 1 Dewberry Engineers Inc.
PROJECT NO.: 50140792 TRADE: SITE 9300 Harris Corners Parkway-Suite 220
PHASE: Preliminary Cost Estimate DATE: 01/25/21 Charlotte,NC 28269
LINE ITEM MATERIALS LABOR EQUIPMENT _ TOTAL
NO. ITEM NO. UNITS) $/UNIT NO. ' UNITS $/UNIT NO. k1NITI $/UNIT COST
Misc.Items
Mobilization 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000.00
Demolition/ESC
Temporary Silt Fence L -2,100 LF $4.15 $8,715.00
Stone Outlets 1 EA $250.00 $250.00
Temporary Seeding and Mulching 0.01 AC $4,000.00 $40.00
Inlet Protection 1 EA $500.00 $500.00
Erosion and Sediment Control Maintenance 1 MO $1,500.00 $1,500.00
Site Work
Permanent Seeding 0.01 AC $4,500.00 $45.00
Utilities
Connect to Existing 12"DIP 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00
12"Pipe Rehabilitation or Replacement 2,000 LF $200.00 $400,000.00
New Pump Station 1 LS $250,000.00 $250,000.00
12"Gate Valve 2 EA $2,500.00 $5,000.00
16"Gate Valve 4 EA $3,500.00 $14,000.00
Pipe Excavation 85 LF $25.00 $2,125.00
16"Headwall 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000.00
16"DIP 85 LF $220.00 - $18,700.00
Electrical Work 1 LS $130,000.00 ' $130,000.00
SUB-TOTAL $900,875,00
30.0% Construction Contingency $270,262.50
SUB-TOTAL $270,262.50
TOTAL S 1,171,137.50
ESTIMATE $1,172,000.00
NOTES:

Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost i___• Dewberry
ASU Sludge Basin Outfall Feasibility-Option 2 Dewberry Engineers Inc.
PROJECT NO.: jjll 50140792 TRADE: SITE 9300 Harris Corners Parkway-Suite 220
PHASE: 'Preliminary Cost Estimate DATE: 01/25/21
Charlotte,NC 28269
LINE ITEM MATERIALS LABOR EQUIPMENT TOTAL
NO. ITEM NO. I UNITS I $/UNIT NO. 1 UNITS $/UNIT NO. k1NIT4 $/UNIT COST
_Misc.Items
Mobilization 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000.00
Demolition/ESC ,
Site Clearing&Grubbing 0.25 AC $6,000.00 $1,500.00
Tree Removal 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000.00
Flagging of Clearing Limits 2,164 LF $1.25 $2,705.00
Temporary Silt Fence 3,440 LF $4.15 $14,276.00
Stone Outlets 15 EA $250.00 $3,750.00
Temporary Seeding and Mulching 0.25 AC $4,000.00 $1,000.00
Inlet Protection 5 EA $500.00 $2,500.00
Erosion and Sediment Control Maintenance 3 MO $1,500.00 $4,500.00
Site Work
Permanent Seeding 0.25 AC $4,500.00 $1,125.00
Utilities
Connect to Proposed Manhole 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Pipe Excavation 3,440 LF $25.00 $86,000.00
24"RCP 3,440 LF $200.00 _ $688,000.00
Precast Storm Manhole 10 EA $7,500.00 $75,000.00
30'Wide Easement 86,550 SF $4.00 $346,200.00
SUB-TOTAL $1,277,556.00
II
30.0%' Construction Contingency $383,266.80
SUB-TOTAL $383,266.80
TOTAL $1,660,822.80
ESTIMATE $1,661,000.00

NP 3153 MT 3—434
Patented self cleaning semi-open channel impeller,ideal for pumping in
waste water applications.Modular based design with high PLYGT
adaptation grade.
a xylem brand
Technical specification
Curves according to: Water,pure,39.2°F,62.42 lb/ft3,1.6891E-5 ftz/s
[ftl-Head
88=
84
76-
72
68-
64-
i! 60-
ark
52-
48—
44— 77.4%
40
36
32—
28—
24-
20-
16-
12
4••227mm
4—
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 [US g.p.m.]
Curve:Is0 9906
Configuration
Motor number Installation type
N3153.185 21-18-4AA-W P-Semi permanent,Wet
20hp
Impeller diameter Discharge diameter
227 mm 6 inch
Pump information Materials
Impeller diameter Impeller
227 mm Hard-Iron"
Discharge diameter
6 inch
Inlet diameter
150 mm
Maximum operating speed
1755 rpm
Number of blades
2
Max.fluid temperature
40°C
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

f
NP 3153 MT 3- 434
Technical specification FLYGT
Motor-General xylem F ti
Motor number Phases Rated speed Rated power
N3153.185 21-18-4AA-W 3 1755 rpm 20 hp
20hp
ATEX approved Number of poles Rated current Stator variant
No 4 26 A 5
Frequency Rated voltage Insulation class Type of Duty
60 Hz 460 V H S1
Version code
185
Motor-Technical
Power factor-1/1 Load Motor efficiency-1/1 Load Total moment of inertia Starts per hour max.
0.83 87.5% 2.07 lb ft2 30
Power factor-3/4 Load Motor efficiency-3/4 Load Starting current,direct starting
0.77 89.0% 148 A
Power factor-1/2 Load Motor efficiency-1/2 Load Starting current,star-delta
0.66 89.0% 49.3 A
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

NP 3153 MT 3"'434
Performance curve FLYGT
Duty p oint a xylem brand
Flow Head
1380 US g.p.m. 36.8 ft
Curves according to: Water,pure39.2°F,62.42 Ib/ft3,1.6891E-5 ft2/s
IN Head
92
ee
sa
so-
76
72=
68—
64=
60=
56=
52= ■E11
44- 77.4'.
•
40= 78 2
36= ■ 136.8 ftl
1
32- 74.8
28=
24=
20
16-
12= Siiqnlrirnm
8-
4— 37 194mm
roll Pump Efficiency 73.6%I
70_Overall Efficiency • �1■lri.,►••�
_..,.��
50=
40= .F..iffr:mm
•
20
10=
0
(hp:_:Power input P1
-Shaft power P2
20= 714mr, 19.7 h
..............
162 — _... d�-tt RR�i (p7 434227mm P.17.5 h•
12— — '41 I94mm(P23
4-
0-
-NPSHRAolues 433 234mm
[ftr '34 227mm
40=
36= 121.8
.8 ftl Hdd=°32.809 ft
28—
24= 13.78US(y.p.m.20 ' I ' I ' I r
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 [US e.o.m.]
Curve:ISO 9906
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

NP 3153 MT 3^' 434
Duty Analysis
rzsroT
a xylem brand
Curves according to: Water,pure[100%];39.2°F;62.421b/ft3;1.6891E-5ft2/s
[ft]:Head
88-
84_
80-
76-
72-
68-
64-
60-
56-
52-
48-
■
77.4°0
44_
•
40- 77.4°
36- 36.8 ft
32- 77.4°�
28- • l
77.4°0
24-
•
20- 77.4°0
16-
12_
55 Hz 434 227mm
8- 50 Hz
45 Hz
4 40 Hz
1378 US g.p.m.
0 .1 r 1 1 ' ' ' 1 ' ' ' , r
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 [US g.p.m.]
Operating characteristics
pumps/ Flow Head Shaft power Flow Head Shaft power Hydr.eff. Spec.Energy NPSHre
Systems
US g.p.m. ft ho US q.p.m. ft hp kWh/US MG ft
1380 36.8 17.5 1380 36.8 17.5 73.6% 178 22.8
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

1
NP 3153 MT 3"434
VFD Curve FLYGT
a xylem bray !
Curves according to: Water,pure,39.2°F,62.42 Ib/ft3,1.6891E-5 ft2/s
[f t]=Head
88=
84=
80-E
76=
72.
68= -
64= -
60
56- -
52
48S
44_ __ _77.4°0
40= 77.4 .- -
36. -
32. 77.4 °
28=
= 77.4°0
20 77.4°0 \`
16.
8= — \\�45 Hz 'S0 H� ° L
34 227nm
4- 40 H7
[° Pimp Efficiency -"
70 Overall Efficiency ""
60' —
50
// ! 5 gQ 22z
40; �f Z. 14;'��_" 34 iFf
30.
20=
10
[hp]--:Power input P1
-Shaft power P2 494 227mm(P1)
16_ 227mm(P2)
_`1
12
I
[f 'NPSHR-values _- 34 227rrrn
I
r i-t
35=
30= NPSHR=32.809 ft
25_
15f.
I I I , I I - 1 I , , , I I I r
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 [US g.p.m.]
Curve:ISO 9906
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

NP 3153 MT 3-434
VFD Analysis
FLYGT
a xylem brand
Curves according to: Water,pure[100%1;39.2°F;62.421b/ft3;1.6891E-5ft2/s
[ft]-Head
88-
84-
80-
76-
72-
68_
64- - h.
60
56 \
52= L-
48- , _
, 77.4°0
44_
40 � of —1 1✓
36.8 ft
36
32- 77 4°0
28- __
77.4°0
24=
20: - 77.4°.- _ II..
16
12- _ '` ,
434 227mm
5 N:
8= 50 Hz
45 Hz
4= '`•4O Hz
1378 US g.p.m
0 i 1 , . I , , i . ' , " 1 I . . 1 1 . i t
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 [US g.p.m.]
Operating Characteristics
Pumps/ Frequency Flow Head Shaft power Flow Head Shaft power Hydr.eff. Specific energy NPSHre
Systems
USg.p.m. ft hp USg.p.m. ft hp INVWUSMG ft
1 60 Hz 1380 36.8 17.5 1380 36.8 17.5 73.6°% 178 22.8
1 55 Hz 1100 36.4 13.2 1100 36.4 13.2 76.9% 167 19.2
1 50 Hz 784 35.9 9.39 784 35.9 9.39 75.9% 167 16.7
1 45 Hz 398 35.6 6.16 398 35.6 6.16 58.2% 220 15.4
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

NP 3153 MT 3-434
VFD Analysis FLYGT
a xylem brand
Curves according to: Water,pure[100%];39.2°F;62.421b/ft3;1.6891E-5ft2/s
[ft]_Head
88-
84-
80-
76-
72- -,— -
68-
I
64= .
60-
567 - ,hi
52-
487 .
44- 77.4°0
71111111111
40- , .._ ,
1--
I
36- 36.8 ft
-
■
32- - ___ _
28-
- 77.4°o
24-
■
207 177.4°0
16-
12= - '
434 227mm
5[ ;
8 �40 Hz 45 Hz
4- -t -i
1378 US g.p.m
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 [US g.p.m.]
Operating Characteristics
Pumps/ Frequency Flow Head Shaft power Flow Head Shaft power Hydr.eff. Specific energy NPSHre
Systems
US o.o.m. ft hp US g.p.m. ft hp kVvh/US MG ft
1 40 Hz 71.7 35.5 3.96 71.7 35.5 3.96 16.3% 827 14.6
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

NP 3153 MT 3 ' 434
Dimensional drawing FLYGT
.,xylem
43' (TOR.Rf-EST KM')
REF.UNE 291
61 83
��11
ffipir►, e1 11M
12
ReF.uw I
11"
1s
9
2' GLACE BARS
Jd v MN LEVEL
i =— '
40/
43 REF.UNE
8
VIEW ❑Z —❑Z ► _ _
f
L.11"..] BT°3(44
* DICtE1451CN TO ENDS CF GLACE BARS Wzight tibs)
Rim"PuDisch
485 175
Diffusion x. IW �a CJS R 14
ALROC.AD MP,FP3153MT 5399
99
DRNNNG { 6504300 I 12
Project Created by PETER CARLSON
Block Created on 12/1/2021 Last update 12/1/2021

From: Weaver.John C
To: Dudlev.Leiah Ann
Cc: Hill,David A;gduana.kebede( ncdenr.aov;Montebello.Michael J;Dowden,Doug;Albertin.Klaus P;Weaver,
John C
Subject: USGS response to DWR USGS Low Flows request#2022-152(dated 2021/10/01)for Norris Branch Watauga
County...RE: [EXTERNAL] Low-flow request approval
Date: Friday,October 8,2021 9:26:22 AM
Alert"button to report all suspicious emails.
Ms. Dudley,
In response to your inquiry about the low-flow characteristics for a location on Howard Creek
adjacent Howards Creek Road near Boone in central Watauga County, the following information is
provided:
A check of the low-flow files here at the USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center(SAWSC, Raleigh
office) does not indicate a previous low-flow determination for the point of interest, identified by
the lat/long coordinates (36.246227, -81.675717) associated with the email dated 10/01/2021 from
the DWR USGS Low Flow portal following your request submission.
No USGS discharge records are known to exist for the point of interest. However, per USGS Water-
Supply Paper 2403 (Giese and Mason, 1993), there is a USGS partial-record site on Howard Creek at
Sands (station id 03160310, NWIS drainage area = 10.3 sqmi) located downstream from the point of
interest. The USGS discharge records for this site indicate 13 miscellaneous measurements obtained
during the 1954, 1956-60, and 1962 water years.
In the absence of site-specific discharge records sufficient for a low-flow analysis, estimates of low-
flow characteristics at ungaged locations are determined by assessing a range in the low-flow yields
(expressed as flow per square mile drainage area, or cfsm) at nearby index sites where estimates
have previously been determined.
A basin delineation completed using the online USGS StreamStats application for North Carolina
(https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/) indicates the drainage area for the point of interest (StreamStats
adjusted coordinates 36.24615, -81.67572 NAD83) is 8.26 sqmi.
For streams in Watauga County, low-flow characteristics published by the USGS are provided in
two reports:
(1)The first is a statewide report completed in the early 1990's. It is USGS Water-Supply Paper 2403,
"Low-flow characteristics of streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Mason, 1993). An online version
of the report is available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/2403/reoort.pdf. The report provides the low-
flow characteristics (based on data through 1988) via regional relations and at-site values for sites
with drainage basins between 1 and 400 sqmi and not considered or known to be affected by

regulation and/or diversions.
(2)The second is a statewide report published in March 2015. It is USGS Scientific Investigations
Report 2015-5001, "Low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected USGS
continuous-record streamgaging stations in North Carolina through 2012" (Weaver, 2015). The
report is available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2015/5001/. The report provides updated low-
flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for 266 active (as of 2012 water year) and
discontinued streamgages across the state where a minimum of 10 climatic years discharge records
were available for flow analyses.
Low-flow characteristics estimated for point of interest:
Inspection of the two reports indicates the presence of four(4) nearby selected USGS partial-record
site (4) and continuous-record streamgages (0) in the general vicinity of the point of interest where
low-flow characteristics were published. This group of index sites includes the USGS partial-record
site on Howard Creek at Sands (station id 03160310, NWIS drainage area = 10.3 sqmi) located
downstream from the point of interest. Among these 4 sites, the low-flow discharge yields for the
indicated flow statistics are as follows:
Annual 7Q10 low-flow yields ==>from 0.23 to 0.42 cfsm (average about 0.32 cfsm, median about
0.33 cfsm)
Annual 30Q2 low-flow yields ==>from 0.49 to 0.91 cfsm (average about 0.72 cfsm, median about
0.74 cfsm)
Winter 7Q10 low-flow yields==>from 0.31 to 0.57 cfsm (average about 0.46 cfsm, median about
0.48 cfsm)
Annual 7Q2 low-flow yields ==>from 0.39 to 0.7 cfsm (average about 0.57 cfsm, median about 0.61
cfsm)
Average annual discharge yields ==>from 1.9 to 3.2 cfsm (average about 2.3 cfsm, median about 2
cfsm)
Application of the above range in yields to the drainage area (8.26 sqmi) for the point of interest
results in the following estimated low-flow discharges:
Annual 7Q10 low-flow discharges ==>from 1.9 to 3.5 cfs (average about 2.6 cfs, median about 2.7
cfs)
Annual 30Q2 low-flow discharges ==>from 4 to 7.5 cfs (average about 5.9 cfs, median about 6.1 cfs)
Winter 70.10 low-flow discharges ==>from 2.6 to 4.7 cfs (average about 3.8 cfs, median about 4 cfs)
Annual 7Q2 low-flow discharges ==>from 3.2 to 5.8 cfs (average about 4.7 cfs, median about 5 cfs)
Average annual discharge discharges ==>from 15.7 to 26.4 cfs (average about 19 cfs, median about
16.5 cfs)
Please note:

(1)The estimated flows are provided in units of cubic feet per second (cfs).
(2)The low-flow yields provided above are rounded to 2 significant figures. Estimated low-flow
discharges less than 1 cfs are rounded to 2 significant figures. If between 1 and 100 cfs, then
rounded to 1 decimal place; if greater than 100, then rounded to the nearest whole number(zero
decimal places).
(3)The information provided in this message is based on a preliminary assessment and considered
provisional, subject to revision pending collection of future data and further analyses.
These provisional streamflow statistics are provided via the DWR USGS Low Flows cooperative
agreement between the USGS and the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water
Resources.
Hope this information is helpful.
Thank you.
Curtis Weaver
J. Curtis Weaver, Hydrologist, PE Email:icweaver(dusas,gov
USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center Online:https://www.usgs.gov/centers/sa-water
North Carolina -South Carolina -Georgia
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone:[phone] // Fax: [phone]
From:Albertin, Klaus P<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 11:13 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc:Albertin, Klaus P <[e-mail]>; Hill, David A<[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]; Weaver,John C<[e-mail]>; Montebello, Michael J
<[e-mail]>; Dowden, Doug<[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Low-flow request approval
This email has been received from outside of DOI-Use caution before clicking on links,opening attachments,
or responding.
Your request has been approved and will be forwarded to USGS. A response from USGS
usually takes 7 - 10 business days.

Request Flow Statistic Approval
Request ID: 152
Requestor: Leigh-Ann Dudley
Requestor e-mail: [e-mail]
Requestor Phone: [phone]
Local Government:
Public Water Supply:
Consultant: Dewberry
Contact: Leigh-Ann Dudley
Reason: Permit
River/Stream: Howards Creek
Drainage Area(sq. mi.): 8.27
Latitude: 36.246227
Longitude: -81.675 717
Other Information:
Statististics: ["7Q10","7Q10 -Winter","30Q2","Average Annual"]
Approved by: Albertin, Klaus P

9/27/21. 2:39 PM StreamStats
StreamStats Report
Region ID: NC
Workspace ID: NC20210927183610129000
Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 36.23809, -81 .65618
Time: 2021-09-27 14:36:31 -0400
Basin Characteristics
Parameter
Code Parameter Description Value Unit
DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 0.94 square
miles
PCTREG1 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 1 - Piedmont / 0 percent
Ridge and Valley
PCTREG2 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 2 - Blue Ridge 100 percent
PCTREG3 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 3 - Sandhills 0 percent
PCTREG4 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 4 - Coastal 0 percent
Plains
https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 1/3

9/27/21, 2:39 PM StreamStats
Parameter
Code Parameter Description Value Unit
PCTREG5 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 5 - Lower 0 percent
Tifton Uplands
Peak-Flow Statistics Parameters [Peak Southeast US over 1 sqmi 2009 5158]
Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit
DRNAREA Drainage Area 0.94 square miles 1 9000
PCTREG1 Percent Area in Region 1 0 percent 0 100
PCTREG2 Percent Area in Region 2 100 percent 0 100
PCTREG3 Percent Area in Region 3 0 percent 0 100
PCTREG4 Percent Area in Region 4 0 percent 0 100
PCTREG5 Percent Area in Region 5 0 percent 0 100
Peak-Flow Statistics Disclaimers [Peak Southeast US over 1 sqmi 2009 5158]
One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with
unknown errors
Peak-Flow Statistics Flow Report [Peak Southeast US over 1 sqmi 2009 5158]
Statistic Value Unit
50-percent AEP flood 104 ft^3/s
20-percent AEP flood 199 ft^3/s
1 0-percent AEP flood 276 ft^3/s
4-percent AEP flood 381 ft^3/s
2-percent AEP flood 458 ft^3/s
1-percent AEP flood 551 ft^3/s
0.5-percent AEP flood 632 ft^3/s
0.2-percent AEP flood 760 ft^3/s
Peak-Flow Statistics Citations
Weaver, J.C., Feaster, T.D., and Gotvald, A.J.,2009, Magnitude and frequency of rural floods
in the Southeastern United States, through 2006—Volume 2, North Carolina: U.S. Geological
https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 2/3

9/27/21,2:39 PM StreamStats
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5158, 111 p.
(http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5158/)
USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated,all data,metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality
standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected.Although these data and associated metadata have
been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S.Geological Survey(USGS),no warranty
expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes,nor on all computer systems,
nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.
USGS Software Disclaimer:This software has been approved for release by the U.S.Geological Survey(USGS).Although the
software has been subjected to rigorous review,the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to
further analysis and review. No warranty,expressed or implied,is made by the USGS or the U.S.Government as to the
functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore,
the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S.Government shall be held liable for any damages
resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.
USGS Product Names Disclaimer:Any use of trade,firm,or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not
imply endorsement by the U.S.Government.
Application Version:4.6.2
StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22
NSS Services Version: 2.1.2
https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 3/3

From: Weaver.John c
To: Dudley, Leiah-Ann
Cc: fill.David A;adugna.kebedencdenr.gov;Montebello.Michael J;Dowden. Douq;Albertin.Klaus P;Weaver.
)ohn G
Subject: USGS response to DWR USGS Low Flows request#2022-152(dated 2021/10/01)for Norris Branch Watauga
County...RE: [EXTERNAL]Low-flow request approval
Date: Friday,October 8,2021 9:26:22 AM
:Alert"button to report all suspicious ernails.
Ms. Dudley,
In response to your inquiry about the low-flow characteristics for a location on Howard Creek
adjacent Howards Creek Road near Boone in central Watauga County,the following information is
provided:
A check of the low-flow files here at the USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center(SAWSC, Raleigh
office) does not indicate a previous low-flow determination for the point of interest, identified by
the lat/long coordinates (36.246227, -81.675717) associated with the email dated 10/01/2021 from
the DWR USGS Low Flow portal following your request submission.
No USGS discharge records are known to exist for the point of interest. However, per USGS Water-
Supply Paper 2403 (Giese and Mason, 1993), there is a USGS partial-record site on Howard Creek at
Sands (station id 03160310, NWIS drainage area = 10.3 sqmi) located downstream from the point of
interest. The USGS discharge records for this site indicate 13 miscellaneous measurements obtained
during the 1954, 1956-60, and 1962 water years.
In the absence of site-specific discharge records sufficient for a low-flow analysis, estimates of low-
flow characteristics at ungaged locations are determined by assessing a range in the low-flow yields
(expressed as flow per square mile drainage area, or cfsm) at nearby index sites where estimates
have previously been determined.
A basin delineation completed using the online USGS StreamStats application for North Carolina
(https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/) indicates the drainage area for the point of interest (StreamStats
adjusted coordinates 36.24615, -81.67572 NAD83) is 8.26 sqmi.
For streams in Watauga County, low-flow characteristics published by the USGS are provided in
two reports:
(1)The first is a statewide report completed in the early 1990's. It is USGS Water-Supply Paper 2403,
"Low-flow characteristics of streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Mason, 1993). An online version
of the report is available at htto://Dubs.usgs.gov/wsp/2403/reoort.odf. The report provides the low-
flow characteristics (based on data through 1988)via regional relations and at-site values for sites
with drainage basins between 1 and 400 sqmi and not considered or known to be affected by

regulation and/or diversions.
(2)The second is a statewide report published in March 2015. It is USGS Scientific Investigations
Report 2015-5001, "Low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected USGS
continuous-record streamgaging stations in North Carolina through 2012" (Weaver, 2015). The
report is available online at htto://oubs.usgs.gov/sir/2015/5001/. The report provides updated low-
flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for 266 active (as of 2012 water year) and
discontinued streamgages across the state where a minimum of 10 climatic years discharge records
were available for flow analyses.
Low-flow characteristics estimated for point of interest:
Inspection of the two reports indicates the presence of four(4) nearby selected USGS partial-record
site (4) and continuous-record streamgages (0) in the general vicinity of the point of interest where
low-flow characteristics were published. This group of index sites includes the USGS partial-record
site on Howard Creek at Sands (station id 03160310, NWIS drainage area = 10.3 sqmi) located
downstream from the point of interest. Among these 4 sites, the low-flow discharge yields for the
indicated flow statistics are as follows:
Annual 7Q10 low-flow yields ==>from 0.23 to 0.42 cfsm (average about 0.32 cfsm, median about
0.33 cfsm)
Annual 30Q2 low-flow yields==>from 0.49 to 0.91 cfsm (average about 0.72 cfsm, median about
0.74 cfsm)
Winter 7Q10 low-flow yields==>from 0.31 to 0.57 cfsm (average about 0.46 cfsm, median about
0.48 cfsm)
Annual 7Q2 low-flow yields ==>from 0.39 to 0.7 cfsm (average about 0.57 cfsm, median about 0.61
cfsm)
Average annual discharge yields==>from 1.9 to 3.2 cfsm (average about 2.3 cfsm, median about 2
cfsm)
Application of the above range in yields to the drainage area (8.26 sqmi) for the point of interest
results in the following estimated low-flow discharges:
Annual 7Q10 low-flow discharges ==>from 1.9 to 3.5 cfs (average about 2.6 cfs, median about 2.7
cfs)
Annual 30Q2 low-flow discharges==>from 4 to 7.5 cfs (average about 5.9 cfs, median about 6.1 cfs)
Winter 7Q10 low-flow discharges ==>from 2.6 to 4.7 cfs (average about 3.8 cfs, median about 4 cfs)
Annual 7Q2 low-flow discharges ==>from 3.2 to 5.8 cfs (average about 4.7 cfs, median about 5 cfs)
Average annual discharge discharges ==>from 15.7 to 26.4 cfs (average about 19 cfs, median about
16.5 cfs)
Please note:

(1)The estimated flows are provided in units of cubic feet per second (cfs).
(2)The low-flow yields provided above are rounded to 2 significant figures. Estimated low-flow
discharges less than 1 cfs are rounded to 2 significant figures. If between 1 and 100 cfs, then
rounded to 1 decimal place; if greater than 100, then rounded to the nearest whole number(zero
decimal places).
(3)The informationprovided in this message is based on a preliminaryassessment and considered
g
provisional, subject to revision pending collection of future data and further analyses.
These provisional streamflow statistics are provided via the DWR USGS Low Flows cooperative
agreement between the USGS and the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water
Resources.
Hope this information is helpful.
Thank you.
Curtis Weaver
J. Curtis Weaver, Hydrologist, PE Email:[e-mail]
USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center Online:httos://www.usgs.aov/centers/sa-water
North Carolina -South Carolina -Georgia
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone] // Fax: [phone]
From:Albertin, Klaus P<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 11:13 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc:Albertin, Klaus P<[e-mail]>; Hill, David A<[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]; Weaver,John C<[e-mail]>; Montebello, Michael J
<[e-mail]>; Dowden, Doug<[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Low-flow request approval
This email has been received from outside of DOI-Use caution before clicking on links,opening attachments,
or responding.
Your request has been approved and will be forwarded to USGS. A response from USGS
usually takes 7 - 10 business days.

Request Flow Statistic Approval
Request ID: 152
Requestor: Leigh-Ann Dudley
Requestor e-mail: [e-mail]
Requestor Phone: [phone]
Local Government:
Public Water Supply:
Consultant: Dewberry
Contact: Leigh-Ann Dudley
Reason: Permit
River/Stream: Howards Creek
Drainage Area(sq. mi.): 8.27
Latitude: 36.246227
Longitude: -81.675717
Other Information:
Statististics: ["7Q 10","7Q 10 -Winter","30Q2","Average Annual"]
Approved by: Albertin, Klaus P

9/27/21,2:39 PM StreamStats
StreamStats Report
Region ID: NC
Workspace ID: NC20210927183610129000
Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 36.23809, -81 .65618
Time: 2021-09-27 14:36:31 -0400
Basin Characteristics
Parameter
Code Parameter Description Value Unit
DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 0.94 square
miles
PCTREG1 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 1 - Piedmont / 0 percent
Ridge and Valley
PCTREG2 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 2 - Blue Ridge 100 percent
PCTREG3 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 3 - Sandhills 0 percent
PCTREG4 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 4 - Coastal 0 percent
Plains
https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 1/3

9/27/21,2:39 PM StreamStats
Parameter
Code Parameter Description Value Unit
PCTREG5 Percentage of drainage area located in Region 5 - Lower 0 percent
Tifton Uplands
Peak-Flow Statistics Parameters [Peak Southeast US over 1 sqmi 2009 5158]
Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit
DRNAREA Drainage Area 0.94 square miles 1 9000
PCTREG1 Percent Area in Region 1 0 percent 0 100
PCTREG2 Percent Area in Region 2 100 percent 0 100
PCTREG3 Percent Area in Region 3 0 percent 0 100
PCTREG4 Percent Area in Region 4 0 percent 0 100
PCTREG5 Percent Area in Region 5 0 percent 0 100
Peak-Flow Statistics Disclaimers [Peak Southeast US over 1 sqmi 2009 5158]
One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with
unknown errors
Peak-Flow Statistics Flow Report [Peak Southeast US over 1 sqmi 2009 5158]
Statistic Value Unit
50-percent AEP flood 104 ft^3/s
20-percent AEP flood 199 ft^3/s
1 0-percent AEP flood 276 ft^3/s
4-percent AEP flood 381 ft^3/s
2-percent AEP flood 458 ft^3/s
1-percent AEP flood 551 ft^3/s
0.5-percent AEP flood 632 ft^3/s
0.2-percent AEP flood 760 ft^3/s
Peak-Flow Statistics Citations
Weaver, J.C., Feaster, T.D., and Gotvald, A.J.,2009, Magnitude and frequency of rural floods
in the Southeastern United States, through 2006—Volume 2, North Carolina: U.S. Geological
https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 2/3

9/27/21,2:39 PM StreamStats
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5158, 111 p.
(http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5158/)
USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated,all data,metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality
standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected.Although these data and associated metadata have
been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S.Geological Survey(USGS),no warranty
expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes,nor on all computer systems,
nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.
USGS Software Disclaimer:This software has been approved for release by the U.S.Geological Survey(USGS).Although the
software has been subjected to rigorous review,the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to
further analysis and review. No warranty,expressed or implied,is made by the USGS or the U.S.Government as to the
functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore,
the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S.Government shall be held liable for any damages
resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.
USGS Product Names Disclaimer:Any use of trade,firm,or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not
imply endorsement by the U.S.Government.
Application Version: 4.6.2
StreamStats Services Version: 1.2.22
NSS Services Version: 2.1.2
https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ 3/3