NC0050342_Wasteload Allocation_19940210

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0050342
Muddy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
February 10, 1994
Thies document iss printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the resrerse Bide

CITY OF WJ\STOY-SALEM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Y.O. BOX 2511, \\'INSTON-SALEM, NORTH C:AROLINA 27102
Mr. Preston Howard, Director
Division of Environmental Management
P. 0. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re:
February 10, 1994
Request to Renew NPDES Permit
Muddy Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
(NC0050342)
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Howard:
FEB 15 1994
7W QF ENVIRO E TAL Van
.DIRECTORS ,QFFICE
FEB 16 1994
'•1
The City of Winston-Salem formally requests that the Division of Environmental
Management rJnew the NPDES permit for its Muddy Creek Wastewater Treatment
Plant. The plant's current permit expires on ugust 1, 1994. The
application for a renewal, its supporting documentation, and the processing
fee will be submitted to DEM's Permits and Engineering Section very shortly.
Winston-Salem is also requesting that DEM increase the permitted flow limit
for this facility from 15 MGD to 21 MGD. This increase in flow is necessary
to assure our compliance with NCAC 2H.0223 (Demonstration of Future Wastewater
Treatment Capacities).
Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. recently completed an engineering evaluation of the
facilities at the Muddy Creek Plant and concluded that the plant can be rated
for 21 MGD. On the basis of this evaluation, Winston-Salem does not need to
construct additional treatment facilities to guarantee permit compliance at
the requested 21 MGD flow limit. A copy of the engineer's report will be
attached to the renewal application.
Should you or your staff have any questions or need additional information
regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Stan Webb at 910/784-4700.
/sw
cc:
Sincerely,
--P. W. Swann
Assistant City Manager/Public Works
Tom Griffin
Stan Webb
Larry Coble, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Coleen Sullins, DEM, Permits and Engineering

su,sc
N
CO
tO
CC
11/23/93 PLOT SCALE
MUDDY CREEK
INTERCEPTOR
SOUTH FORK CREEK
INTERCEPTOR
DB
ML
PE
PS
RAS
SC
SCD
SE
SU
TMUW
TS
WAS
P
PLANT
INFLUENT
I9.3MGD
INFLUENT
PUMP
nSTATION
(1)
SCD
LEGEND
NORMAL OPERATION
ALTERNATE OPERATION
DIGESTED BIOSOUDS
BELT PRESS FILTRATE
MIXED LIQUOR
PRIMARY EFFLUENT
PRIMARY SOLIDS
RETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE
SCUM
SCUM DRAIN
SECONDARY EFFLUENT
SUPERNATANT
THICKENER MAKEUP WATER
THICKENED SOLIDS
WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE
PUMP(S)
HAZENAND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
4 I
sc
SCREENING AND
GRIT REMOVAL
FACILITIES
SCUM
STRAINERS
(2)
SCREENINGS,
GRIT AND SCUM
TO LANDFILL
PRIMARY
CLARIFIERS
(4)
WAS
PS
PRIMARY
SOLIDS PUMP
STATION (1)
PS
AERATION
TANKS
(3)
RAS CIoMGD)
ML
1 J
ML
Sc
SECONDARY
CLARIFIERS
(4)
SE
4
TS
(—Ws G
D)
SU
RAS PUMP
STATION (1)
ANAEROBIC
DIGESTERS
(4)
SU
GRAVITY
THICKENER
(1)
-- CL
TMUW
NPW
PUMP STATION
DIGESTED BIOSOLIDS
— STORAGE LAGOONS
(3)
DB
DB t•ia,d mGi)1
f BELT FILTER
PRESSES
(3)
PLANT EFFLUENT
TO YADKIN RIVER
19.3 MGD
F
SU,F
SOLIDS APPLICATION
BLENDING
TANKS
(3)
TO LAND
NMUDDY CREEk ALEM NC
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
PROCESS
FLOW SCHEMATIC

` 1):"? '-
loPlnIG3 11(.°Ar�, for'?ropDspd (�ucovtavue�>( t-e.ol- ;r (,65.
(elbowLUirtsiavvgoleln,_ W '4 aisda �v-d2 10 '('Q9r-)
1444enk.Oees Qtni J i Vu illkivAJe
tYJ' 1/tovUcaq. Elto mf144eAl 14zuNitA. - 5c-we II el.egi
�.
Ceute-Ia.
(Jc* g, NLc.k-a c
[k) -S61.471&. °Cr:\ fekAAPJ
- Tatas, Gucts 6c1L -iv Nit) 4-6 6-5-zicg .
Do-vtlif 01(4kow how ni- nusud, can't/ up
I,Ur `l4A- y'k-io
06's
tWU-1-; in Lit4- /LJC)JS
1k64 CZY1U1 Lkki0 a
0,•DWt olde otk-ko
o `1y4 vv061660 (off Ldct ceae( I
Sit
� n C(`) -J-65tco — PtiVikle-//) NYE d:5 cussed biAk
CD
\�� �+.r� i,�4 v�cxo�l bQ 5e-rn.e ty�e/1Q 4jt
4tu2- f1ocisi
r4eryvt ZizAvid -+ ti);-pix.6vetaib0
TvoPoEect 1--,2 w `1'1 c-6 C6) rr$ \)

Officer -in -Charge
City of Winston-Salem
Project Coordinator
John L. Roberts, P.E.
S. Wayne Miles, P.E.
Technical Manager
Deborah Hadden
Environmental Assessment
Deborah Hadden
Jane W. Wheeler
William B. Dowbiggin, P.E.
Technical Review Committee
John F. Willis, P.E.
Carlton S. Wilder, P.E.
Hydraulics
George F. McMahon, 111, P.E., P.H.
S. Wayne Miles, P.E.
Structural Design
Bilgin Erel, Ph.D., P.E.
David M. Heiser, P.E.
Roger H. Wood, P.E.
George F. McMahon III, P.E., P.H.
Intakes
Roger H. Wood, P.E.
David M. Heiser, P.E.
William B. Dowbiggin, P.E.
Fishery Resources
Fish and Wildlife Associates
Geotechnical Investigations
GE! Consultants, Inc.
Recreational Resources
Robert J. Goldstein, Ph.D.
CDM Camp Dresser & McKee
Project Organization

CUM
, *s,Vwa.ar r onsinewr, a i.Mi4
pray rt, & marwporran! oonsuuau
Transmit To:
Locc ioru
From:
FAX TRANSMITTAL FORM
CAMP DRESSER 84 McKEE
L4-plitt Q,
vfor, o`'L✓�s
Charge (Project No.):
c«a;►,a Corporal. Comer
6+00 Gi.nwood Avsnw. s1A. and
Ralaiph. Noun Caroruw 27(312
9191O -602o. Fa= gip 791-6730
Date:
Time:
io/ZZ/93
7
FcLwNo: ors 3zV�-
Phone: (919)-787-S€20
Far: (919)-781-5730
6452- F-T- c,
Client - Job - Sub - Activity
Number of Sheets: (including Transmittal Sheet)
Il

CAMP DRESSER & McKNE
CDM
environmental engineers. eolenttats,
pennons, & management consuhente
October 22, 1993
Carolina Corporate Centre
5400 Glenwood Avanue. suite 300
Raleigh. North Carolina 27812
919 787.5620, Fax: [phone]
Ms. Linda Sewall
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Health
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Re: City of Winston-Salem
Proposed Yadldn River Water Intake and Diversion Weir
Dear Ms. Sewall:
Enclosed please find a draft scope of work for an Environmental Assessment of the
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir project that is proposed by the City of
Winston-Salem. As we have discussed with you, this scope of work contains a greater
level of detail in addressing several issues that have been raised during previous
correspondence related to this project We believe that completion of this scope of
work will result in an Environmental Assessment that will address these issues to t,ne
satisfaction of those involved in the review process.
We look forward to meeting with you and representatives of other regulatory agencies
on Tuesday October 26 to discuss this project and scope of work. Please review the
enclosed scope of work and distribute it to other regulatory agencies as appropriates so
that we may discuss its contents at our meeting on Tuesday. If you have questions
prior to our meeting, please feel free to call me or Deborah Hadden at your
convenience.
Sincerely yours,
CC:
Barry Shearin
Deborah Hadden
John Roberts

CITY OF WINSTON-SALEM
PROPOSED YADKIN RIVER WATER INTAKE AND DIVERSION WEIR
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SCOPE
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The City of Winston-Salem proposes to construct a new raw water intake and low
head diversion structure in the Yadldn River to meet the water supply needs of the
city and Forsyth County bey.ond the year 1998. Currently, the city operates one intake
on the Yadkin River downstream of Interstate 40 and US 421. However, the intake
and treatment capacities at this location are insufficient to meet the city's long-term
water needs. In addition, the proximity below two major roadways is undesirable i
terms of water supply protection.
In September 1991, the city submitted an Environmental Assessment (EA) to the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEPINR)
for the proposed wcir and raw water intake in compliance with the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). This document was circulated throughout the
Department for comment, and the city subsequently provided supplemental informs ion
and a revised EA in response to various comments. In September 1993, the city
retained Camp Dresser & McKee (CDM) to provide technical support related to iss les
raised during the previous EA and to assist the city in complying with SEPA. This
document outlines the proposed scope for an EA that will comply with SEPA.
OVERVIEW OF SCOPE
The EA will be prepared in accordance with the North Carolina Environmental PoLcy
Act of 1971 (G.S. 113A-I through 113A-10) and Chapter 25 of the North Carolina
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir Page 1

Administrative Code. The key issues that will be addressed in this document, as
identified by
extensive verbal and written correspondence with the reviewing agencio,
include the following:
Fishery Resources. The existing fishery resource and habitat in he
Yadkin River, and the impact of the .proposed intake and weir on t'tis
resource, will be evaluated. Mitigation measures will be considered
and, if appropriate, proposed.
Recreational Resources. The existing recreational use ofthe
Yadkin River, and the impact of the proposed impact on
resource, will be evaluated. Various mitigation measures -will be
considered and proposed.
. Water Quality and Flow. The impact of the proposed project on
water quality upstream and downstream of the proposed weir will be
addressed. The impact on river flows will be assessed, particularly
in terms of maintenance of minimum instrearrl flows and the
feasibility of releasing water from the Kerr Scott Reservoir to
supplement downstream flows.
• Alternatives to the Proposed Project. Numerous project
alternatives have been proposed by various reviewing agencies.
These alternatives, and other reasonable alternatives identified byh e
city and CDM, will be evaluated in terms of environmental pa
cost, technical feasibility, and ability to fulfill the project need.
Design Details_ Although the preliminary design will not be
initiated' until. the EA is completed, conceptual design information
n the
will be developed and presented as necessary in order to e
project impacts and identify appropriate mitigation measures.
Conceptual. design details will be provided for the diversion structure
(e.g., weir height and configuration), the canoe slot, the intake,d
any proposed mitigation measures (e.g., replacement of riffle habitat
or improved public access facilities).
Each of these issues are addressed in the scope presented below.
City of Winston-Salem age 2
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Web'

PROPOSED SCOPE
I. Description of Proposed Project
The proposed project -- construction of a newwater water supply intake and diversion weir
to meet the city's long term water needs -- will be described in detail. Project detals
that will be provided include conceptual design of the weir and raw water intake
•
(including ludin the weir height and intake configuration), the proposed construction method
and sequence, the anticipated operation and maintenance requirements, the related
upstream impact area under average flow and 100-ycar flood conditions, and
conceptual design information for the related canoe slot and boat portage.
X. Purpose and Need for Proposed Activity
The purpose and need for the proposed intake and weir will be discussed in terms of
ensuring a safe, plentiful, and reliable water supply to meet the city's projected long-
term demands. This discussion will be based on available information related to the
safe yield of the city's existing supplies, reliability of the old existing darn at the cL ty's
water intake, population projections for their existing and proposed service area, and
accepted water supply planning and protection guidelines.
Alternatives to Proposed Activity
Reasonable alternatives to fulfill the project purpose defined. above will be presented
and evaluated. The alternatives that will be evaluated and compared to the proposed
project include the following:
• A lower dam height (less than 10 feet) at the proposed location.
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir ”age 3

Expansion of the existing Idols Dam intake.
Alternative intake locations where potentially a lower dam or no d
would be needed and/or where less valuable fishery habitat would
flooded. The specific alternative locations that will be considered
just below the SR 1525 bridge and at a river bend approximately
2,000 feet below the proposed intake location.
Alternative intake or weir configurations at the proposed location.
Such alternatives include an artificial aquifer, a direct instream
intake, or a partial or wing -dam.
• The "no action" alternative
Each alternative will be described and compared co the proposed project in terms of
environmental impact, cost, technical feasibility, and ability to address the project
need_
IV. Affected Environment
The existing environment in the defined project impact area will be described to
provide a. basis for the impact assessment. This section will focus on water quality
and flows, fishery resources and habitats, and recreational uses of the upper Yadkin
River. The proposed scope for these studies is as follows:
Water Quality and .Flows
irn
be
ire
The existing water quality in the proposed project area will be characterized based o
water quality data collected by the city and/or the state, and other available data.
Existing water quality data will be used to evaluate the existing conditions in the
Yadkin River at the project site in terms of its suitability for aquatic habitat, for
recreational uses, and as a raw drinking water supply.
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir Pa
4

The existing river flows will be characterized under various flow scenarios. Flow
records are available since 1964 for a US Geological Survey gaging station (Yadkin
River at Enon, NC) that is located approximately 5000 feet downstream of the project
site. These flow records will be used to develop a flow -frequency relationship for :he
Yadkin River at the project site.
Fishery Resources and Habitat
The baseline fishery resource assessment will consist of the following tasks:
1.
Conduct a literature survey to identify aquatic conditions including
the dominant fish species and benthic species inhabiting the Yadkin
River between the upstream limit of the impact area and Idols Dam.
Literature from state and local publications, as well as studies
conducted by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
Duke Power Company, and state and private universities, will be
used.
2. If no existing fish species data is available, a fishery survey using
electrofishing equipment, nets, and seines may be conducted_
3. Conduct a field survey of the proposed impact area and the
downstream areas, noting the overall quality of the habitat and •
substrate characteristics and generally mapping the location of all
pools, riffles, and runs.
4. If suitable benthic species data is not available, then a qualitative
benthic survey will be conducted at two representative locations
within the proposed impact area -- one at a riffle area and one in the
deeper water near the proposed weir location. The purpose of this
task is to characterize the benthic community in the impact area, not
to conduct a detailed, quantitative survey.
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir Pige 5

Recreational Resource
The existing recreational resource along the affected reach of the Yadkin River will by
assessed _ by conducting the following tasks:
1. Collect and review available literature and data related to recreational
uses of the Yadkin River trail in the proposed project area.
2. Canoe the entire affected reach, documenting the chaxacter of the
river in terms of recreational use. Specific observations will relate to
the quality, location, and accessibility of public access points;
observed recreational use; and the depth and velocity of water,
including the number of riffle areas.
3. Conduct interviews with state and local agencies, local recreational
groups, and/or local canoe rental stores regarding recreational use of
the river.
Other environmental parameters that will be discussed in this section include the
following:
•
•
land use
wetlands
prime or unique agricultural lands
public lands
scenic areas
areas of archaeological or historical value
air quality
groundwater quality -
noisc levels
water supplies
wildlife and plants, including Tare or endangered species
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir Pao 6

V. Environmental Consequences
The short- and long-term and direct and indirect impacts of the proposed intake aryl
weir structure on each of the environmental parameters listed above will be evaluated.
For most of the parameters, the impact assessment will be qualitative because the
impa
cts are expected to be minor. Secondary impacts will also be considered, for
example whether or not the city has sufficient wastewater treatment capacity to trest
the additional water, and whether or not the proposed project will lead to increased
development and related impacts.
The proposed impact assessment related to water quality and flows, fishery resources
and habitats, and recreational resources is described below.
Water Quality and Flows
Assessment of the water quality impact related to the proposed project will addres a the
following issues, using quantitative or qualitative techniques as appropriate:
Increased sedimentation/siltation upstream of the weir, and decreased
turbidity below the structure.
The potential for eutrophication, DO fluctuations, and/or algal
blooms upstream of the weir.
The potential for temperature changes upstream of the weir.
The potential for introduction or accumulation of toxic substances.
• The potential impact on downstream water quality due to decrea$ed
flows available for dilution of point and non -point source pollutants.
Assessment of the impact in terms of river flows will address the following:
City of Winston-Salem Page
'Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir

The ability to maintain minimum instream flows (e.g., 7Q10)
downstream of the intake. As part of this assessment, the feasibility
of releasing water from the Kerr Scott Reservoir to supplement
downstream flows will be discussed.
• The impact of the weir on upstream flood flows.
Fishery Resources Habitats
The impact assessment of the proposed project on fisheries will focus on the following
two considerations:
•
The types of species in the impact area, and the degree to which they
will be affected by the altered hydrologic regime or water quality _
The quality of the habitat in the area, and the degree to which it will
be affected by the altered flows or water quality. (The impact or,
each pool, riffle and run identified will be assessed.).
Recreational Resources
The impact of the proposed project on recreational use of the Yadkin River will be
assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative assessment will involve
estimating the number of riffle areas that will be flooded, acid the change in water
depth and velocity. The qualitative assessment will consider the likely increase or
decrease in public access to and/or use of the river.
VI. Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures will be proposed for any impacts expected to be significant
Based on a preliminary analysis, it appears that the only project impacts that will
warrant mitigation are those related to construction and recreational use of the river.
Mitigation measures that are expected to be considered include:
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water intake and Diversion Weir Page 8

. Co
nstruction mitigation measures such as siltation and sedimentation
controls.
Construct a boat chute over the diversion structure and/or a boat
portage around the structure.
Improve existing public access points and boat launch facilities along
the Yadkin River.
Releases from, Kerr Scott Reservoir to off -set water withdrawals
during low flows.
Create riffle habitat to mitigate any fishery impacts.
Install a fish ladder over the weir.
Conceptual design
information for each proposed mitigation measure will be provid _td
in the EA.
City of Winston-Salem
Yadkin River Water Intake and Diversion Weir
Page 9

1361c-
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Planning & Assessment
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Linda Sewall
Division of Environmental Health
FROM: Melba McGee i�
Project Review Coordinator
RE: Yadkin River Diversion Dam and Raw Water Intake City of
Winston-Salem, Forsyth County, Addendum to Environmental
Assessment, #542
DATE: June 17, 1993
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the addendum to the Environmental Assessment for the
proposed raw water intake on the Yadkin River.
In the past year, EHNR divisions and Winston-Salem
representatives have met and conducted site visits to investigate
numerous alternatives for this project. The evaluation of
environmental concerns offered by our divisions, continue to be the
same after reviewing the addendum. Divisions agree that the
proposed dam will significantly alter the flow of the river,
thereby, affecting water quality, oxygen, and siltation.
Consequently, these changes in the river could result in the loss
of aquatic habitat. The development of the proposed project is also
in sections of the Yadkin River State Water Trail which raises
concern with recreational use of the river and navigational and
safety problems.
Based on the information provided by the City of Winston-
Salem, and the potential impacts of theproject, this department
cannot support a Finding of No Significant Impact. It is
recommended that a more detailed environmental review be conducted
in the form of an environmental impact statement (EIS). The
attached comments from our divisions clearly focus on the
deficiency of the addendum EA and should assist in the preparation
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 1 O% post -consumer paper

of the EIS. We ask that the EIS be more specific in addressing the
potential impacts of the project and that an effective mitigation
plan be incorporated.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. It is also
recommended that the City of Winston-Salem continue to work with
our divisions prior to circulating the EIS through out internal
review process.
MM:bb
Attachments
cc: Monica Swihart
John Dorney
Susan Wilson

North Carolina Wild 1 i fe Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
Richard B. Hamilton {g, �4
Assistant Director 1`�
June 10, 1993
DPA Project No. 542, Addendum to Environmental
Assessment for Yadkin River Diversion Dam and Raw
Water Intake, Forsyth County
This correspondence responds to a request by you for
our review and comments on the Addendum to the Environmental
Assessment for the proposed Yadkin River diversion dam and
raw water intake in Forsyth County. These comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d.) and the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 through 113A-10; 1 NCAC 25).
The City of Winston-Salem proposes to place a diversion
dam spanning the width of the Yadkin River approximately
5,000 feet upstream of the Old Yadkinville Highway bridge
(SR 1605) in conjunction with a new raw water intake.
The Addendum provides information regarding expected
backwater distance and number of riffles inundated at three
dam heights. Study results show that a 10-foot dam would
have a backwater effect extending 9,400 feet upstream and
inundate seven riffles; an 8-foot dam 7,800 feet and six
riffles; a 6-foot dam 6,000 feet and six riffles. Project
sponsors conclude that height of the dam has little impact
on the number of riffles impacted and more of a backwater
effect may result than previously calculated.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has
been concerned with this project since we became aware of it
in July 1991 through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404
permit process. We are aware that issuance of the permit

has been delayed until environmental concerns have been
adequately addressed. Our agency has previously expressed
concerns regarding adverse impacts to fish habitat (loss of
riverine habitat including riffles, blockage of fish
movement upstream and downstream) and to the Yadkin River
State Water Trail used by recreational boaters.
Upon review of information included in the Addendum, we
continue to believe the project will have significant
impacts on fish habitat and recreational boating in the
project area and a considerable distance upstream.
Therefore, a Finding of No Significant Impact is not
appropriate for this project. We recommend that project
sponsors prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for
this project. Preparation of an EIS should include
mitigation measures, to reduceunavoidable adverse effects
and allow increased public input through the review process.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on
this project. If you have any questions regarding these
comments, please contact Ms. Stephanie Goudreau at 704/652-
4257.
cc: Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Coordinator
Mr. Joe Mickey, District 7 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. Steve Reed, DWR

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
June 9, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Monica Swihartf� V4404 Vt,
FROM: Susan A. Wilson
THROUGH: Ruth Swanek
Carla SandersonrY
SUBJECT: City of Winston-Salem Proposed Water Supply Dam
Addendum to Environmental Assessment
Yadkin River, Yadkin River Basin
Stokes County
Based on the City's comments in their revised Environmental Assessment, the
Technical Support Branch (TSB) cannot offer any comments with regard to the proposed
minimum release. The facility has not yet provided enough information to ensure that the
flow below the dam will be 554 cfs (especially at the Winston-Salem WWTP downstream
on the Yadkin River).
TSB would not be opposed to the Corps of Engineers releasing an equivalent
amount of flow from Kerr Scott Reservoir as long as the 554 cfs criteria is met. Once the
City has decided on an appropriate option to meet the minimum release, the supporting
information should be documented and provided to the state.
cc: Jim Mead, DWR

State of North Carolina
Health
Department rtment of Environment,
ea h and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
June 7, 1993
Amar•
EHNF
C.'
789
MEMORANDUM
TO:'
Melba McGee
FROM: John Sutherla
SUBJECT: Yadkin Rir Diversion Dam and Raw Water Intake
City of Winston-Salem, Forsyth County
Addendum to Environmental Assessment
EHNR No. 542
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) has completed its
review of the additional information submitted by the City of
Winston-Salem for inclusion in the Environmental Assessment (EA)
for construction of a new water supply intake on the Yadkin
River. We have attached our response to the previous EA for
background information. Our comments are as follows:
The additional information developed by staff for the City
and their consultants includes an inventory of riffle areas in
the 6.5 mile reach of the Yadkin River between the NC Highway 67
and SR 1525 bridges. This inventory was conducted at a flow of
3120 cfs (compared to a typical summer flow of 1000 to 1500 cfs)
because low flow events did not occur this spring. This
investigation concluded that a diversion dam ranging in height
from 6 to 10 feet would submerge 4 of 8 "large" riffles, 1 of 4
"medium" riffles, and 1 or 2 of 11 "small" riffles. A 10 foot
dam would pond a longer reach of the river than a 6 foot dam, but
no riffles were noted in this increment of pond between the 6 and
10 foot heights. It is possible that some riffles were not
observable at the flow of 3120 cfs.
Consultants for the City performed additional analysis of the
length of backwater created by 6, 8 , and 10 foot high diversion
dams. Their calculations indicate that these increasing dam
heights result in upstream ponding for 6000, 7800, and 9400 feet
of the river channel. These revised distances are an increase
over those estimated earlier.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Memorandum to Melba McGee, dated 6/7/93
EHNR No. 542
Page Two
This addendum to the EA contains a discussion of alternative
locations which were rejected for various reasons. The City is
committed to the lowest dam feasible at the preferred location,
but analyses to determine this height have not yet been
conducted. An evaluation of intake openings which might
eliminate the dam or minimize its height has also not been
conducted.
The Yadkin River between NC Highway 67 and SR 1525 (Old
Highway 421) is a heavily used section of the Yadkin River State
Water Trail and has developed access areas at both bridges. The
proposed project would convert up to 1.8 miles of this 6.5 mile
reach from flowing water to a flat -water pond. The City proposes
to mitigate the impacts on recreation by providing a portage
around the dam, designing the dam to prevent creation of an
hydraulic "keeper" at its base, and including a "slot" in the dam
to allow passage of canoes. Design details for these measures
have not yet been developed. While these design steps have the
potential to mitigatefor the presence of the dam itself, they do
not address the unavoidable adverse impact of the ponding of up
to 1.8 miles of the Yadkin River. In effect, the recreational
usage of this entire segment of the water trail will be altered.
The proposed project will also have unavoidable impacts on
aquatic habitat for which no mitigation measures have been
proposed. The diversion dam would permanently alter upstream
habitat by reducing velocities, increasing depths, and causing
sediment deposition throughout the ponded area, except for the
immediate vicinity of the flushing gates. The effect of these
changes on macro -invertebrates and fish species would be
significant. The ponding could also affect habitat by potential
changes in water quality, including temperature and dissolved
oxygen. The presence of the dam will also block the upstream
movement of resident fish.
The addendum to the EA discusses the issue of making releases
from Kerr Scott Reservoir to maintain minimum flows for water
quality at the Winston-Salem wastewater treatment plant
discharge. Maintaining adequate flows for wastewater
assimilation is an important consideration for the City's
existing discharge, and also for other potential future
discharges. The Corps of Engineers has not yet completed its
review of the impact of additional releases on reservoir levels
and recreation at the lake. The possibility of additional
releases is uncertain at this time.

Memorandum to Melba McGee, dated 6/7/93
EHNR No:.. 542
Page Three
Based on the information contained in the EA and this
addendum, the impacts of the proposed project are significant and
a FONSI would not be appropriate. If the City plans to proceed
with relocation and expansion of its water supply. intake, an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared which
examines all alternatives. Once a preferred alternative is
selected, sufficient design details should be developed to allow
full evaluation of its impacts and proposal of mitigation
measures for all unavoidable impacts. Involvement of the general
public and state and federal agencies during preparation of an
EIS should further enhance the evaluation of alternatives and
development of mitigation measures.
We appreciate this opportunity to comment and will be glad to
discuss our comments with you or the City.
cc: John Morris, DWR
Leesha Fuller, Winston-Salem RO
John Wray, DWR
Steve Reed, DWR
Dennis Stewart, WRC
Stephanie Goudreau, WRC
Joe Mickey, WRC
Monica Swihart, DEM
Susan Wilson, DEM
Carol Tingley, DPR
Kathy White, DPR - Winston Salem RO

DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
June 10, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Doug Lewis, Director
Planning and Assessment
FROM: Philip K. McKnelly, Director,
SUBJECT: Yadkin River Diversion Dam and Raw Water Intake
City of Winston-Salem, Forsyth County
Addendum to Environmental Assessment, Project No. 542.
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the addendum to
the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the City of Winston-Salem's
proposal to construct a weir diversion and raw water intake on the
Yadkin River. The proposed project would be located 5,000 feet
upstream of the SR 1525 bridge in Forsyth County and could result
in a significant loss of aquatic habitat as well as the conversion
of a considerable stretch of the river to completely flat water.
After reviewing the addendum and its analyses of the project's
potential backwater effects, the Division still harbors serious
concerns regarding recreational use and habitat degradation. These
concerns were previously identified and addressed in our comments
on the initial EA (DPR comments dated October 27, 1992). After
reviewing this addendum, the Division still disagrees that a FONSI
is appropriate for the following reasons:
1. The minimum backwater effect created by this project would be
approximately 6,000 feet; the maximum backwater effect would
be approximately. 9,400 feet. These inundations would
permanently alter the aquatic habitat upstream of the dam by
slowing flow rates and increasing water depths. Heavy
siltation is likely to occur throughout the impoundment,
resulting in a significant loss of macro -invertebrate habitat.
There is no indication that the flushing gates proposed in the
EA would prove effective in removing the silt. Neither the EA
nor the addendum provides any analyses of the river's aquatic
ecology. Aside from acknowledging that the darn will block the
river to fish migration, neither document addresses the
project's potential impacts on aquatic ecology, fish or macro -
invertebrate biology, reproduction, etc.

Doug Lewis
Page 2
June 10, 1993
2. This stretch of the Yadkin River is part of the state -
designated Yadkin River State Trail and is very popular with
recreational boaters. Regardless of what dam height is used,
this project will, at a minimum, significantly alter the
recreational character of the river by submerging at least six
riffle areas and converting over one mile of the river into
flat water.
Given the river's popularity and status as a state designated
trail, the Division considers these potential losses or alterations
of habitat and recreational characteristics to be significant
environmental impacts. The EA and the addendum do not adequately
address these issues; neither do they address mitigation measures
that would reduce the adverse effects of unavoidable impacts.
Therefore, we feel that the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement would more adequately address the Division's concerns.
An EIS would also allow increased public input in the review
process. The Division feels that such public involvement is
necessary to ensure that the proposed project is compatible with
the current public uses of the river.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project.
PKM/ME/me
CC:
Marshall Ellis
Kevin MacNaughton
Darrell McBane
Kathy White
Jim Mead

64) : n S �2'n - �cLGPI�I-►_
`3//(,7?
°D 4)a GAS 4r 2 !ac•-e.an et✓l-- `0uw
41)146± a � / (-5 c AZ c:c C LLe
W 1/ -e 1i, h be ) rt,2.- s
15- M6b
-6 c200
retie4zJ5 — „pavi e w e-4, U2 0-11— ; •- ; zv
e 3 ezde4:4-cy4-�
"ft;
if-Z3 /1/
i ((o - t2
471
C01""- •
, 0 9 w,kL
G urd__A�
,uct % u,,.g.e,Azle_
SD? e-v Jc- ti.e _.. 9 p t'a cc.c-L
— \oxos' r P?o-4 cf- ws S=-L • L c z oLc LQc 9 C; `?. oo
cL4 c -e - c .S L o-vn �( �J -�S Ot�� 1 l7
�C +Q- lit lQ�/ltnN- �liv- (4- R. i \ tA-A-CS \ 9
Cost S+n
")
(0 �"'
— Sou TU � -\, c� ,b ` P � clL c � la..,.�s ('$pj 1; �L 5
� t�
e _
v;. n 60-k sC6
ECG n \{CL-LC- \,,(317-4hAt

9jj93-
?t4 Scot
y�ti�se�
/?a6
6
ORLSTL Couck-1
cw+ Crailtede
L 5� NEE,
IiO1
Cotccn 14-.
pp
T _
terra -1 _
- ec i./
ya- a r ./�
C 1`4 7- tiF in)-1 - SRier^
1TOf Wta 3o13 -5K Yn
[-1-124. ems. a. -ck Sow er
r1 - 3 --j I s,eO
- - CsF3
t M -
P1one
-733-56 3
833— 7/Sz
9)9y - 91:;y-y7e0
8 33-i sz
733- 5063
133-SZ 3

.rli 3//3
fitud4 4)&J?-P
/-•a. /wcrp 023 f-h
�4 d�l,� a,,. ���� l Q�,• Baez - et-t �. a..�
-74 A (Zd/ eel--44,s4;
142 oc1 ,S 7;f Ce7 k �� s�� — o . (aS-
w as ; .7)wf - D. a 7 w sad l
4t.e,c_ ; s r(P7 y 7Ze/� ctStS�ec�,✓
tip
• I 1 447 c.('Gccg?4,; c/
714t; 73, �3 /1I6-r'
• 1.5-4y w
- 734,�7 = 6
-A/f/3-
SS 30 )4.457(
aoa/'. ►,c
-TA/-
- .N

t - �- - ��w ��� eAzzlc tc_r-to —P
1?
RAJ c, ?.8' 610
Up. s
(-t;wc - 35.z
ao M&P
Iwo - Sa 3 ,o
f3
a3 MCA
is
T 3o
Secavtaia
fo xr u "1'`j & fro
7 010,
cum Z(,sC= YP;
rs Maces
7 vety, 26 ci,oro2.1:5 Qf ,4oWeis- (1c/
. - 1e-et d - a ( �-
T-4-ss./a/�
A/ee-d - It
g`o
e . / 3 ., .
Ata4c . 3 S. 2- „2 `f- S
�nQUST•�(,
acar, f 6 - v STDGv�/�
rAl -PP
a.s
ai 3-7

30 ccZ @ �4 Qoc1c
V8o qs
Q ski cr►.
c lo.fL. . t
-..D ‘JN.. ?
30
6.ZS
cao
77. cif
OS
j --i. ; .87 -„az/
?.
/6)-E 7-Al
,kv&-
tots I 3
`1v 3
LQJk2 .
t
tee.

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
May 26,1.993
TO: Jay Sauber
FROM: Betsy Johnson�j9
THROUGH: Mike Scoville MOS
Ruth Swanek t5
SUBJECT: LT BOD Request for the Lower Muddy Creek WWTP
Forsyth County
NC0050342
The City of Winston-Salem is requesting speculative limits for an expansion of its
Lower Muddy Creek WWTP from 15 MGD to 30 MGD. There is a QUAL2E model for
Salem and Muddy Creek's which has been extended to the Yadkin River to include the
Lower Muddy Creek discharge. However, there is no longterm BOD data available for
the facility in order to accurately determine a wasteload allocation. As an application is
expected this summer, a longterm BOD sample should be taken as soon as possible.
cc: Dave Goodrich
Winston-Salem Regional Office

MEMO
TO: Fite -
We -Lob mow.. -. s-kn -
DATE • 3/3 1 13
SUBJECT: ►VLCfi evt 1 1�•''�'` t�`S
5 c.- , R u &A CL)t-Je
Crc tILQ a. . e Co4 _t s )re. Pa.i+ \ . v e c-_
Co" 5 -\ r- 0.. 0.4rii ul.Zrade. TL`e
c t.l. Y Q.t/�"t" P\, o_A\ `1, S l/`0� Lev. v ed S b Y1 t � c 4- 0 "7 i
Cl e, tn. , ` cc6, or o .b CC,.._ \n.a g \11‘.or'L& s
II tt
IC..?-41"-C.VC ' ,rxnu nY� vA.,,e e dA 4 ;),-- ✓tom a v+ti�� c` �,i ,•1- S
e c-c. cur \cN e.. o�
vv.... C tt/C-IcZ,ve r = \‘T\tt, e \ox:k.2.* vte e d-e
oath vs. tAbviOtv1`�c cG•'t k.-A---; ovts
v se ve o�
e `AM \A't c c�.� (3v, .
(ca-
From: 75 e_s io\A.vlse,"
Jcw. ruwter o2- ' ee calf' " 1 c �, , .
; -1 uK ek�a� sZo1-► - Its 0 c0.cceci 5� /�5
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources e6) Pr
inted nted on Recycled Paper
CkiDte ev✓t.rte
\ALA:eve:A:AS'

NCoo 5- 3 `Ez
793
J ►+ter o-f
�c)
.5ecovidci.ki.
jr Z3 '&6j :.k,
u..2 v,e ,. l \ti %_e.
S
30 f & r . f --c�'� 1� - i 4..'t L-41
c.-tre Ai:L✓va L aci
CG3 Cis- = r s�
Y)rt3_ U 9
u5 L 4. £line- GT
aV Act. z E %c Cttsicky_ 1ilvddni
, ,0cLILL8L . —0\L • du& we s QJyt.-ld,a.GlL
WAN CA . \ ko Mt4 ca
secs cky 1lA:L .
Ckeck vq.J.0c
Pies
"Z3 e.( ck
u S6 c d v K- -P u .
o cc u r
7

Winston-Salem Muddy Creek WWTP - Allowable Waste Concentrations
Residual Chlorine
7010 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (ug/I)
Residual Chlorine
7010 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (ug/I)
554
15
23.25
17.0
0
4.03
422.08
422.07527
554
30
46.5
17.0
0
7.74
219.54
219.53763
SUMMER
Ammonia as NH3
7010 (CFS) 554
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 15
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 23.25
STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL 0.22
IWC (%) 4.03
Allowable Concentration (nr 19.59
WINTER
Ammonia as NH3
7010 (CFS) 854
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 15
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 23.25
STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL 0.22
IWC (%) 2.65
Allowable Concentration (IT 59.84
SUMMER
Ammonia as NH3
7010 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (IT
WINTER
Ammonia as NH3
554
30
46.5
1.0
0.22
7.74
10.29
7010 (CFS) 854
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 30
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 46.5
STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL 0.22
IWC (%) 5.16
Allowable Concentration (r r 30.82
NC0050342 EAJ
Sd

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
April 13, 1992
Mr. Stanley B. Webb, Plant Manager
Muddy Creek WWTP
City of Winston-Salem
2799 Griffin Road
Winston-Salem, NC 27102
Subject Proposed Expansion of Muddy Creek WWTP
NPDES No. NC0050342
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Webb:
I am writing to provide you with speculative limits for an expansion of the Muddy Creek WWTP to
23 MGD. The following limits are suggested for a plant of your size:
Summer Winter
CBOD5 (mg/1) 15 30
NH3 (mg/1) 4 8
DO (mg/1) NL NL
Fecal Coliform (# /100 ml) 200 200
TSS (mg/1) 30 30
pH (S.U.) 6-9 6-9
Chlorine (ug/1) 28 28
The City will also receive a quarterly chronic toxicity limit at 5.7%. Limits and monitoring
requirements for chemical specific toxicants will be based upon the City's latest headworks analysis,
information included in the permit application, water quality standards, and federal criteria.
The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) is currently developing a nutrient model for
High Rock Lake. Although no management decisions have been made, nutrient limitations on point
sources are possible. Winston-Salem should anticipate possible nutrient limits, and a plant designed
with a high degree of flexibility to include nutrient removal should be considered.
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

You should note that these are speculative limits and are for planning purposes only. The limits are
not final until they are included in an NPDES permit.
If you have any questions or comments concerning any of the information contained in this letter,
please do not hesitate to contact Ruth Swanek or me at [phone].
J.evor Clements, sst. Chief
Quality Section
JTC/RCS
cc: Steve Mauney
Don Safrit
Boyd DeVane
Central Files
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

mi.lc t,` CL k)i 3,QyAL)
p. (c3 Io)
e-rC, C - s ,
1-4i CCU mod, sLpl e rn
•
-Er oot Car)
70 Q ._ 55I Cis
buj°N Cu (cF. ' (CC{ li(reo
J 3 C F Xp) (a)(o0) � J ee
(0,33)(5-5-q) (Cc(351-25) - (?)( 05) 0
111.�-
fr512 ( A T
(0, aQ)(51)(Cia35,&)5) _ (1'8)(Fw625
3
33.ce.5
(>3,(s5
IY)Ok fps Ifr-1 Jc I
Also pievt ►naGt'1e&.f Su, 0.-)0ds
V Yf oCcvr'1 i:lt' / LLYtr ytkd

State of North Carolina
i.rr Ric
Department of Natural Resources and Communitypevelopment
Division of Environmental Management L�
512 North Salisbury Street . Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor George T. Everett, Ph. D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
AN 3 0 1992
Mr. Stanley B. Webb
Plant Manager
Muddy Creek WWTP
City of Winston-Salem
2799 Griffith Road
Winston-Salem, NC 27102
Dear Mr. Webb:
January 29, 1992
Subject: NPDES Permit No. NC0050342
Muddy Creek WWTP
Forsyth County
Director
The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) has reviewed your letter of
January 15, 1992, concerning expansion of the Muddy Creek WWTP from 15.0 MGD to 23.0
MGD. An expansion of this size will subject your facility to the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA). This letter will briefly address the SEPA requirements and then will address the
comments in your letter.
On August 1, 1989, rules became effective that require the submittal of an
Environmental Asse.ssment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for new or
expanding facilities, being built with public monies, in excess of 0.500 MGD or when the
instream wastewater flow is in excess of 33% of the stream flow under 7010 conditions. Since
your request will be for a flow increase of 8.0 MGD, an EA or EIS must be submitted to meet the
requirements of the new regulations. The DEM will not accept an NPDES permit application
until the EA or EIS is at least at the State Clearinghouse in the SEPA review process. You should
contact Mr. Boyd DeVane at [phone] to discuss the requirements of the SEPA process.
The following information will be required to be submitted by Winston-Salem as part
of its permit application (All documents must be submitted in triplicate.):
1. An application processing fee of $400.00.
2. A completed and signed Standard Form A application.
3. An Engineering Proposal in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0105 (c) which
includes an Evaluation of Wastewater Disposal Alternatives. You may be required
to perform this, or an abbreviated version of this, as part of the requirements for
SEPA.
4. A preliminary sludge management plan.
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Webb
Page Two
At this time the DEM has no idea what the limits or monitoring will be for the
expansion. Limits and monitoring will be at least as stringent as in the present permit with the
possibility of more stringent limits, additional limits, and possibly additional monitoring. A
copy of this letter and a copy of your letter will be forwarded to Mr. Trevor Clements,
Supervisor of the Technical Support Branch. His staff will perform a preliminary modeling
review and will provide you with the results of their analyses.
The DEM has found that it is nearly impossible to estimate the time it will take to
process an NPDES permit application. We normally tell people to plan for six to twelve months
for DEM review. This can change dramatically if the DEM has to hold any public meetings on the
application. This time table also does not include the time to process the EA or EIS. Mr. DeVane
should be able to give you an approximate time schedule for the SEPA process.
I hope this provides you with the information that you need to begin your planning
process for any expansion of the Muddy Creek WWTP. If you have any questions, please contact
me at [phone].
Sincerel
M. Dale Overcash, PE
Supervisor, NPDES Permits
cc: Mr. Larry Coble
Mr. Boyd DeVane (with Winston-Salem letter)
Mr. Trevor Clements ( with Winston-Salem letter)

PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
City of Winston-cSalem
January 15, 1992
Mr. Don Safrit
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Safrit:
k.0
co
The City of Winston-Salem is interested in amending the Muddy
Creek WWTP's NPDES permit to allow the existing facility to raise
its discharge limit to -23 MGD from its current limit of 15 MGD.
To help us prepare the information you require to consider
this request, I would appreciate it if you could direct your staff
to provide us the following information:
. A detailed list of the information, process analyses,
etc., that you require to evaluate the amendment request.
. The amount of the application fee.
• An analysis indicating the proposed permit discharge
limits and monitoring requirements should the plant's
discharge flow be increased to 20 MGD and to 23 MGD.
. Copies of any application forms or other documents re-
quired to be submitted as part of the application packet.
• An estimate of the time DEHNR will require to act upon
the request for amendment once you receive a complete
application packet.
Box 2511, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27102

Mr. Don Sa f r i t
January 15, 1992
Page 2
Thank you for your help in this matter and feel free to call
rime at 919/784-4700 if you have any questions. Written correspon-- .
dence should sent to rriy attention at City of Winston-Salem 2799
Griffith Road, Winston-Salem, NC 27103-6499. Thanks again for
your help.
Sincerely,
_04) K
Stanley B.. 'Webb__ --
Plant Manager
pc: Barry Shearin, Utility Plants Engineer
Larry Coble - DEHNR Regional Office
It