NC0020231_Wasteload Allocation_19900917

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0020231
Louisburg WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Data Monitoring Report
Speculative Limits
Instream Assessment
(67b)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
September 17, 1990
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reYerse side

-£J '�'.t"S2f
DRAFT REQuENPDES WASTE LOAD
PERMIT NO.: NC0020231
PERMI'1-IEE NAME: Town of Louisburg / Louisburg Wastewater
Pia
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Modification
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 1.10 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 94 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 6** %
Comments:
* Flow increase
** 0.062/1.1*100=5.7%
STREAM INDEX: 28-(1)
RECEIVING STREAM: Tar River
Class: WS-III NSW
Sub -Basin: 03-03-01
Reference USGS Quad: C25SE, Louisburg
County: Franklin
(please attach)
Regional Office: Raleigh Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 6/30/91 Treatment Plant Class: III
Classification changes within three miles:
None within 3 mi.
Requested by: Jule Shanklin Date: 4/13/90
Prepared by: � _. �, Date:
Reviewed by:ett11.0,_ Date: 617//6 t Q G
&DU= U(J) 65) , �a(LAD) i7 �o
Ut;‘)
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
CM5
4 k o
5(oi6
Drainage Area (mi2 ) ¢31 Avg. Streamflow (cfs): 4(op
7Q10 (cfs) 14 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 4e 30Q2 (cfs)
Toxicity Limits: IWC (l % Acut
Instream Monitoring: -
Parameters 1).(2• `rcnnr, Fick1— Co / GoND.
Upstream i Location too vs";
(2) Downstream '%
Location Atu.4s pe, J,vst&& �tM
of DisU44.2
"Z• 9 kw -Es TbvrN5t s of Dcsui .
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (mg/1)
12-
Z9-
NH3-N (mg/1)
g
D.O. (mg/1)
S
S
TSS (mg/1)
3a
30
F. Col. (/100 ml)
Zoo
Zoo
pH (SU)
(a-9
6-9
Nosni of2D4 s i 11
Z.
Z-
' i/g(
/Z/ 1 7//
ii /i.7
E+14,121NE ;11.t,
0. ozg
p. 0Z8
Comments: fAu 7Y SHot.u-V r.KPt.6mr Cr41.D21A) TION B2 u( DIi /JF
W L T 1i I'titopi n cA•Tt oni • L D SN o1.41Z Be /kom frmE-D . F-IralD W o2KS
PjtJALAS 15 15 . geQ u. t ROD. (5r02.RTrA Cr+rAte n1T)

I
Request No.: 5676
WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Status:
Receiving Stream:
Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Quad:
Louisburg WWTP
NC00202031
94% Domestic/6%
Existing/Modif
Tar River
WS-III, NSW
030301
Franklin
RRO
Jule Shanklin
4/13/90
C25SE
RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT
EXISTING
Industrial
Drainage area: 437.0 sq mi
Summer 7Q10: 14.00 cfs
Winter 7Q10: 48.00 cfs
Average flow:.460.00 cfs
30Q2: cfs
LIMITS
Wasteflow (mgd): 0.80
BOD5 (mg/1) : 30
NH3N (mg/1) :
DO (mg/1) : 5
TSS (mg/1) : 30
Fecal coliform (#/100m1): 1000
pH (su) : 6-9
Phosphorous (mg/1):
Total Nitrogen (mg/1) :
Chlorine (mg/1) :
Oil & Grease (mg/1):
Toxicity Testing Req.: Chronic Q P/F: 11%
MONITORING
Parameters: D.O., temperature, Fecal coli, conductivity
Upstream (Y/N): Y Location: at least 100 ft upstream
(z)Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: approximately 5.7 miles downstream
of discharge./ /lpf%. '7. R ma -es "poKbus-r 4-nk of -Disc,NArey E
COMMENTS
Louisburg WWTP is expanding from 0.8 MGD to 1.1 MGD. Compliance data
indicates no problems at current limits. However, chlorine may be a
problem so facility should implement dechlorination with modification.
See the attached graph for the various BOD5 and corresponding NH3 limits
available to the facility. The Tar River is classified as NSW so a
phosphorous limit and total nitrogen limit will apply. %tD sko'u-U 8E MoA!loPD.
Headworks analysis may be required and the appropriate schedule is
attached should the region find a pretreatment program necessary.
PROPOSED
summer
winter
1.10
12 /24
4 /8
5
30
200
6-9 (PAIL,/ ,.n..f)
2
4 /8
0.028
30
Recommended by:
Reviewed by
Tech Support Supervisor:
egional
Supervisor:
Permits & Engineering: /gda`sv----/
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT Y:
Date: 6Oo
Date:
Date:
ci
2/0z0/ a)
Date: 7/Z7/Sa

f0
5-
0
Wasteflow NW) /7;7/
Facility L.A/
Winter (circle one)
.
i-
..
...
•
...
-
•
-
- •
• -
. -
.
-
-
. ...
.
..
- .
•-•
- -
.....
.
.
.
..
_
f •
.
.
.-
.-. .
.
..
.
•
.
I
-. •
.
i'
.
.
.
•
.
-
...-
-
.
-.
-
-
--
1
4-
1
--..-
-
-
i
.
0
....
-.,
.
-.4.,
i - i• - -
IIiUUUIIIIIUItIIUIU
J
I
.
! I
.
.
1
•
-
•
_
-•
;
•- 1 . .
I-
i.1.-
T
•
• • •
-
• • •
i
' ! .
:
:••
i
4
4
.
•
•
••.
i
•• •
. 1111111
. _
••
-
- :••••
hill.61161,
111111
•••
1
-iigin
I .
Mk,
....
...11
.•
••
.
'
is
1
11-
• 1
S.
_....
li
NEN
co
• •11
•
_
.
,..-.--..
h.
, .
3- )
NH3—N (mg/1)
Potential effluent limit combinations:
B0D5 (03'w) NH3-N
4 2:0 .(30) 1 ()
• /6 • ,.?_4 $ PC
-----t-- d /2.... (
( / g) -I- (i)
Comments :_frific Cieov :-- 1// /3-0)61.s-=- 62 ...3 ; /04/ Aid129:: 3 //• iwt-g
•
7
it2r PtEASE MO Te IPAVoliL,ue
eiF tuV.1 Ah43 is c4,105a4,
7t4AvNicimum exaR..6spo4Dmici_
a01)5 VAt_tAE- /5 2D r-,

8/89
Facility Name t oil, Bue4 1i) JTP Permit # A/C OO Zt) 2-3 /
CHRONIC TOXICITY TESTING REQUIREMENT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity in any two consecutive toxicity tests,
using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *June 1988) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality is 11 % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure
document). The permit holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish
compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from
issuance of this permit during the months of i tie . Effluent
sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below
all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 14 cfs
Permited Flow 1.1 MGD
IWC% to. sc.
Basin & Sub -basin 03o3o1 CIAO -of)
Receiving Stream -rAp /LtVra2
County I ZAN►u.{,v
**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at
Recommended by:
Date 5/it/cto
(I %, MktrAftdrrNIIIITFeet See Part 3 , Condition PI .
seP, Dec.., Mkt, Surf
tNA1J o iz/tORo

Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Divis on of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
per it may be reopene' and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
//'
NOTE: Failure to achie e test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
contVol organism surviv I and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid
test and will require immediate retesting (within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure
to submit suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
K. The permitee is hereby required to develop a DEM-approved pretreatment program. This
program must contain the following items:
1. An industrial user survey as required by 40 CFR 403.8 (f) (2) (i-iii) and 15 NCAC 2H
.0905 including identification of all industrial users and the character and amount of pollutants
contributed to the POTW by these industrial users.
2. An evaluation of legal authorities to be used by the permittee to apply and enforce the
requirements of Sections 307 (b) and (c) and 402 (b) (8) of the Clean Water Act including
those requirements outlined in 40 CFR 403.8 (f) (1) and 15 NCAC 2H .0905.
3. Technical information (including specific analytical data) necessary 10 develop a headworks
analysis.
4. Specific POTW pretreatment standards for prohibited pollutants (as defined in 40 CFR 403.5
(a) and (b) and 15 NCAC 2H .0909) contributed to the POTW by industrial users and a
headworks analysis which shows the technical basis for these standards.
5. The design of a monitoring program which will implement the requirements of 40 CFR 403.8
(f) and 403.12 and 15 NCAC 2H .0905 and .0908.
6. A list of monitoring equipment required by the POTW to implement the pretreatment
program and a description of municipal facilities to be constructed for monitoring and analysis
of industrial wastes.
7. An evaluation of the financial programs and revenue sources as required by 40 CFR 403.8
(f) (3) and 15 NCAC 2H .0905 which will be employed to implement the pretreatment
program.
8. Procedures for approving the construction of pre:J:rentrnenl facilities by industrial users and

Procedu,res.-for approving the construction of pretreatment facilities by industrial users and
for permitting industrial users for the operating and discharcinn wastCWaler from these
facilities as required by NCGS 143-215.1.
9. Draft pretreatment permits for all significant industrial users identified through the
industrial waste survey required in item one above.
10. An enforcement management strategy for identifying violations of and enforcing specific
local limits as required by and specified in 40 CFR 403 and 15 NCAC 2H .0900.
retreatment program approval as required by 40 CFR 403.9 and 15 NCAC
t 1. A request for p
2H .0906.
to the Division of Environmental
The permittee shall submit three copies of the above program �pPhase I shall consist of itmes 1-3
Management. The program shall be submitted in two phases
above and Ph
ase 11 shall consist of items 4-11. The program shall be submitted according to the
following schedule: N^_cr,
Phase I ........................
Phase.........................
d

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
August 23, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO : Susan Wilson
THROUGH Arthur Mouberry, P.E.
FROM -:,5j Timothy L. Donnelly, P.E.
SUBJECT
Town of Louisburg
NPDES Permit No. NC0020231
Franklin County
The Raleigh Regional Office has reviewed your
memorandum of August 8, 1990 and recommends the selection of
one appropriate downstream monitoring point. This will save
a small town a few dollars and be more consistent with the
efforts expected from other small towns. Also, it has been
our experience that data collected by small towns is only as
good as the person hired to collect it. Therefore,
confirmation of a model prediction may not be that reliable
by this method.
AM:TLD:bas

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 8, 1990
Memorandum
To: Tim Donnelly
From: Susan A. Wilsoi
kX
Through: Trevor Clements
Carla Sanderson
Subject: Town of Louisburg
NPDES No. NC0020231
Franklin County
Recently, a Wasteload Allocation Approval Form was routed to the Raleigh Regional Office
for the Town of Louisburg Wastewater Treatment Plant. At that time Technical Support
recommended only one downstream monitoring point 5.7 miles downstream of the
discharge. This point corresponded to the predicted dissolved oxygen (D.O.) sag in the
model for the expanded Mow of 1.1 MGD. However, upon further consideration,
Technical Support now tsnes to recommend two downstream discharge points: one at the
D.O. sag (5.7 miles downstream of the discharge) and another at approximately 7.9 miles
downstream.
Even though the model ror 1.1 MGD predicts background levels for CBOD and NBOD at
the 7.9 mile point, which is the end of the model, the predicted D.O. level is still fairly low
at 5.19 mg/l. The data gathered from the added monitoring point will help determine if the
D.Q. is actually increasing as the model predicts and will help insure that water quality is
protected. Technical Support feels that adding another monitoring point downstream will
provide a D.O. profile that will enable us to better evaluate impacts of the discharge to the
stream.
Currently, the facility is conducting downstream monitoring at SR 1001, which is
approximately 10 miles from the discharge point. This point is unsuitable for determining
the effect of the current design flow (0.8 MGD) into the Tar River. The facility may wish
to move their downstream monitoring point further upstream, possibly to the 5.7 mile
point, so that a fair assessment of the impact of the discharge can be made at the time of
permit renewal of the 0.8 MGD discharge.
�. �ubmi . cour ne addition :per downstrea:::
upon Louisburg's expansion to 1.1 MGD, to Technical Support. Feel free to call *me if you
have any questions regarding this matter.
cc: Central Files

NPDFS PRETREATMFNT INFORMATIct REQUEST FORM
Cd
Cr
Cu
Ni
Pb
Zn
CN
Phenol
Other
FACILITY NAME:1-.0 U- tS 19Gt I' NPDES No. NC 0 L O aJ
.l
REQUESTER:
1,(1 A:0/),1),
DATE:
6 / !s/ qo REGION: k 20
PERr4IT CONDITIONS COVERING PRFIRFA'IM Tf
This facility has no SIUs and should not have pretreatment language.
This faciliteV21740 developing a pretreatment program.
Please include the following conditions:
q,P'er
e -h,ue al.a.4-e
o per. rf
ater e
This facility is currently imp ementing a
Please include the following conditions:
r
Program Development dike/kept
hase I due /_/_ (i .
ase II due / /
Additional Conditions
(attached)
pretreatment program.
Program Implementation
Additional Conditions
(attached)
ICZUIFICANr INDUSTRIAL USFRRS' (SIUs) CONTRIBUTIONS
SIU FLOW - Zl7rAL:
- CO ITict :
TEXTILE:
METAL FINISHING:
OmER:
l
MGD
MD
r
MGD
MD
HEADMRKS REVIEW
PARAMETER
/�rti oaoa uH DAILY TOAD IN LRS/UAY
: ALDCWILE DCMESTIc P n T w t% REyno }/Al.
a
RECEIVED: 6/�3/9'o REVIEWED BY: Po-e-(263
REIURNED: 6 /I 3 / 9b

L& t5$weat
lF12 2�vri, WS-
f* l44I4 P
Wt4454qt4 CAtIATIPn.
1414% I4c4s
1QL44 ei
e1=F= / - I MAD
AgctLrT,/ t5 A.10 (1`yrtoG
5V 4A o UL'zesK
r20M O. S Mca r?
*SAVED : L6PATA iZ.
L Oltl s tTZ-
LouuSUf DTZ
TAR Ridr�
To 1. / rttaD
C.a,(+putkAK- 21T7- /I 2)C4 DES f/41 74E ' CI'-/fy t5 meow' /7-5 aeIa J
G(MLS
/u4Pr Anil f (. 5 /NVtC4 E iib iivr&-FE2.mick >Sc libe4EPs uPSr M41 02
12001N5T 41.
Lou15B1-4e4 ¢!/15 t,� 1/11.4TE2 5cPPt-y ars 7 gfrtf.
fc(Ey Qt-ott_ES'TE2 o119Te-EA,/4
WTI -I
455F s s.u�: Arr " (Zip. 9o) , Svc ro imc2EAsc FL.ovn1
T.; `tJONT !gt 4 L (1 / f & V
EXPA(4Stoni (•I M41) (5tNC. - 7i(15 /5 Lt55 71:L4N 4 b..5 b4I)
ING 5 ove2 blF c1,724twr !Co vi)

Lai( s O u 2 y NWT?
1,42 E dc,a, CIS- rj\150
tog 19577,
j 9 SycAacot2
Q£FF--1,1nwD °ul�
D.A. =�3•7 i�r'
A'AA � •� 0
701 OS : I4Ca5
r'ti35
7L7 t
1.H.'447h�
ADML
U SJ7AI3t763Z.7
D.A. =q•3z AT Z
14G
�t 05 ° D • � r.'�
LtS4� 2oP$1763c
P.A.: 4-. jc
ctJc+ _ 4,4 eI...
�.�'0.`1
:2„0"i"::t5g4.t76210
;,rt�Gr.. 2.
e
5/ 3/9
_0303DI
unA P,AICt k t)A)
14565 i'Ozy8t71O3Y�
2.6,4
?M47
74105 = o' o
oq2 = 0.3
1103
ce,eceEel-
e., 2081821;0
7A- : ,4- ry z
PO,4 - (a7 c.(s
7419,=4;7r')
(pJ
; I4
7010,E = 14- c4
,-)PZ= 2-0 e-(5
9*,
1.1
1caNattf 2
1-f,JG TA 0. S
I .n
31
1, 3
7 p 17 R p '1
O i
T
!
D
C cow gE(- Ge To ot..Z /407 c $. Ea
Ft ou..)_LA1i~o2AA.A 1a,U 7
7O!o„ RO I
J
StAFe 1 • kS f. 4
1. 40
I , 4B
its
�.s
C, o
4.4
Z.&
f t r.
1
4S'" 208t7(.7(50 QAJ4 — usgS 2o�Bt`7G32"lgAJ — u545 Zo817S7ao,
��-77 G5T1A.tF�ED � _ i,( ljr5(�{k2�6l
` u, [A i );ND of RI (e%LFGG r.• 59 cd µoR iJ QAJc� J
(47v�4> — 4 c7 L, We; of R• k r
d - = 1.Zs
O• S
Q&J4 1 u545"0817b290 7
_ 'ti,J G,-r u545 a ozog t7(v25o]
QkJC, (21(if4r 66forc 001.F?C1.I) — Q,44c5 f Pr' AT 94C031AAO 115—
= At Z .63

Laces..uw4 LtIGu TIC (c.,07-1z)
(i o I /' S Co/v4 c2(/,q_rLV1 . Q ✓G . f2uNoIF V4_1-1/ r.,72
R 4A/ ,i CZ43 c6,# ]
F (Q g_oPF tiltq-P-ozi !� 1 _ 66 -ZEl2a B y cort/ av477c/e c571/v4A7— 5
f2oti 1i o 1� L
20
hooig cANmior r3 ,u, E 1f4lJ -OA. 130.Dc, fog Suiir e2
r old . C60 ,
3
Faze
oP rl3-rf 9yrCr `(
/k4D — — — L 3 s
N4Asy792 AM 3 - (15(►J o 7 f f q c6s AIFL3 (limo) 7.4 rtr/g.
ri. (cei r; n1A,x VAtuahlii3 = 0.S��.�
Cs(/4 79 /O ^ 4e- c6 NI-13 = 46. 3' .!, MatirrgC t
(77-/g5C 114,4kovrA V4 GS 447. f !o m.Gt2` 5 r(ze / t/77r';iet) ?L.(o 'pr r��rur�IG
3r VItC - J!j,C K Lqr .S- 50 60D y�'L-(,cCS---ARC
z
wO r
ciioer _ gok-
/13 4= --- et = Cz 0.5) (' /
36,x
Rsrn4
7 = 7� u.s E QN y- com,-3, NA N or- I5 A/ui g
N9T 7-0L=,cc p w rNrEe- A11/3 cov Ei-
000,, 24(j.)— 5_(4. )
r
%Z
�ic�uLT)
A` _ 4UiJC— _ vjz . CLeTviAL P $rau,4c,) 7 iO3 = L¢ e•ES) CA. CrauEAJT Co/VC, = D. S
44r7 J57
4o_u2kl_ANCc- .724711 kvDlc4l
A K6- 7rf e y Atop, r y 1,06 /mac,9 / r 4CCeM Off ! E t ' ytq a, ? lF So Wed
v (472(AM ,1J 2 LIP r r r & &t 3 4. ,1L

An?
2,4,E . 130. -r co SSi v 5 fl 4 y row S
AAP4 )plug PAcJG, ?i 5 • /l�GSIGN rGDw Q ;rLS D'✓�' 2
13105,01o%20615 07-14 -
M1144ON
(7o7q L)
f 2>
1 P-
fr/e (MJ//J7-)
LcoketApt 5. E-e> Obi pk ALTO L Y 13'+/4 . .s44,. 4-05 7
', �lco�iTO2iNG DATA ._ LQ JL &Lf21b k1 GtIT' ,Nl/telTe
No D. 0. P7o8cefic_ . -CA-r'ot,Fv24'L WAS f &-y fi / AAA /Nc 7 Nce
IAJ 5_�Pi `4 Tu c y / c'o9 C (©na), Tars 045 .G 7-cri libts &WAJC g; ; i.
V6P-y SrRAN4 SfAICe
o�11 1i,J& C( l' cIzo 4 pixy A .51i2E1(4& D, as C44 7 Ls / ,2 vt br 5 C11x/24F)
P
ACC S. ,
� T 7LA (S /747,4 f,Qcy 8�` c5 5 Rip ®F___I �O_ca3 (7 4mP(A)4 /2 iA )
Ka- CALS '1/3o w rr.L AN) ANo �fI U. DOW I574EA 14 lvfaN i ro2vNC.r Pornl t' AF ✓' 7.�1 As
-vNE oG 1H r2 sc t 's r5 /I�f -�'f1� - w N F Vi_ru2t- IytAKae46410A) tot IL
cy c�
c�u
?N P 'c- 55 rr� �� P���
5Sr Pc p44
/a)' T65 is (f4Vg 63E- RAJ PoiAJQ f4c ur) INDLCATF. " 6IR Afil y i5f 4 Pk_eBLan
e G/� n� .gC Ju(o �7 Co N. i 5T&/UT �' N_o ACicTc s

INSTREAM SELF -MONITORING DATA
MONTHLY AVERAGES
Discharger: l.ouU sBUR4 1n1 LA 7 F
Receiving Stream: gi✓E12
Upstream Location: oN 5 MA04
DATE TEMP
DEC-90
NOV-90
OCT-90
SEP-90
AUG-90
JUL-90
JUN-90
MAY-90
NIAR- 90 �9►i5 (ro)
FEB-90
JAN-90 --1- (p,(,
DEC-89 5.5
NOV-89
OCT-89 1_
SEP-89 (5,9
AUG-89 9,2
JUL-89 2o,5
JUN-89 ar
MAY-89 (7.3
APR-89 r,¢
MAR- 8 9 (O. 5
FEB-89
JAN-89
DEC-88
NOV-88
OCT-88
SEP-88
AUG-88
JUL-88
JUN-88
MAY-88
APR-88
MAR-88
FEB-88
JAN-88
DEC-87
NOV-87
OCT-87
SEP-87
AUG-87
JUL-87
JUN-87
MAY-87
APR-87
MAR-87
FEB-87
JAN-87
Upstream
D.O. BOU5
Rat-
yA7A
Fr a ni. i i (o,
Permit No.: NC0 0 Zp2S 1
Sub -basin: 03v3c 1
Downstream Location Eacoc,6 52 1001
G.85 (bk))
(p,W.51) 4$)
6,i-1(54) 191 (245)
6.94(4,4) z2G(3z(0)_
9,8 ((c,7) 7A 4-(Q-J (,)
(0,S(51) 7bs(76,'')
66J(6;0 3Ib(('9.5)
(0.+(5,0 4'58(71 )
'4,3) / z (370)
6.0 z J 4a)
q 22S (3r0
(o,g(4,5� Z2 (330)
Downstream
TEMP D.O. � COND
9.aS(o) IS4(zz4)
�•S G.>4(5.7) 139,5(i z)
5.7c7- 5(5,$) ri3 (_'())
I¢•6 (0.9 (4,0 Zf 5 (3307)
l Z 7.9 (4.$) 415(304)
6,13S(6.0) �31(TGOoo�_
l�.3 (•23(5,6) 2/4C626)
20.7 G,.h (5.I) 27o (ZSraz,c9
21, 2 6, I'! (5:7) I Zr (46c7)
(g,q 71z 9) Z35(3E0
/3 • 5- (0.8 (6.7) 198 (Z6o)
26,z(1 )
r 1.5

SUMMER
MODEL AT BOD5=12, NH3=4, DO=5
Discharger
Receiving Stream
MODEL RESULTS
: LOUISBURG WWTP
: TAR RIVER
The End D.O. is
The End CBOD is
The End NBOD is
5.19 mg/l.
1.35 mg/l.
0.47 mg/1.
Segment 1
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
DO Min
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach #
5.05 5.70 3
WLA
CBOD
(mg/1)
18.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
WLA
NBOD
(mg/1)
18.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
WLA
DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) (mgd)
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.10000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000

• *** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
`Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP Subbasin : 030301
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER Stream Class: WS-III
Summer 7Q10 : 14.0 Winter 7Q10 : 48.0
Design Temperature: 26.0
ILENGTHI SLOPEI VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd 1 Ka 1 Ka I KN 1
I mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft Idesignl @204 Idesign l @204 designl
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 0.801 1.481 0.128 1 2.86 1 0.27 1 0.20 1 0.28 I 0.251 0.48
Reach 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 1.901 1.481 0.128 1 2.88 10.27 1 0.20 1 0.28 I 0.251 0.48
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
I I I 1 1 I 1 I I
Segment 1 I 3.901 1.481 0.129 12.90 1 0.27 10.20 1 0.28 1 0.251 0.48
Reach 3 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I
Segment 1 1 1.301 1.481 0.128 1 2.91 1 0.27 1 0.20 10.28 1 0.251 0.48
Reach 4 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I
I Flow I CBOD I NBOD I D.O. I
1 cfs I mg/1 I mg/1 I mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.705 118.000 1 18.000 I 5.000
Headwaters) 14.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste 1 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.200 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.300 I 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300

SUMMER
MODEL AT BOD5=12, NH3=4, DO=5
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow I
1 1 0.00 7.05 3.74 2.85 15.71
1 1 0.08 6.97 3.70 2.79 15.71
1 1 0.16 6.90 3.66 2.74 15.71
1 1 0.24 6.82 3.62 2.69 15.71
1 1 0.32 6.75 3.59 2.65 15.71
1 1 0.40 6.68 3.55 2.60 15.71
1 1 0.48 6.62 3.51 2.55 15.71
1 1 0.56 6.55 3.48 2.51 15.71
1 1 0.64 6.49 3.44 2.46 15.71
1 1 0.72 6.42 3.41 2.42 15.71
1 1 0.80 6.36 3.37 2.37 15.71
1 2 0.80 6.38 3.35 2.36 15.90
1 2 0.90 6.30 3.31 2.30 15.90
1 2 1.00 6.24 3.27 2.25 15.90
1 2 1.10 6.17 3.23 2.20 15.90
1 2 1.20 6.10 3.19 2.15 15.90
1 2 1.30 6.04 3.15 2.10 15.90
1 2 1.40 5.98 3.11 2.06 15.90
1 2 1.50 5.93 3.07 2.01 15.90
1 2 1.60 5.87 3.03 1.96 15.90
1 2 1.70 5.82 2.99 1.92 15.90
1 2 1.80 5.77 2.95 1.88 15.90
1 2 1.90 5.72 2.91 1.84 15.90
1 2 2.00 5.68 2.88 1.79 15.90
1 2 2.10 5.63 2.84 1.75 15.90
1 2 2.20 5.59 2.80 1.71 15.90
1 2 2.30 5.55 2.77 1.68 15.90
1 2 2.40 5.51 2.73 1.64 15.90
1 2 2.50 5.47 2.70 1.60 15.90
1 2 2.60 5.44 2.66 1.57 15.90
1 2 2.70 5.41 2.63 1.53 15.90
1 3 2.70 5.44 2.62 1.52 16.20
1 3 3.00 5.35 2.52 1.42 16.20
1 3 3.30 5.28 2.42 1.33 16.20
1 3 3.60 5.21 2.33 1.24 16.20
1 3 3.90 5.16 2.25 1.16 16.20
1 3 4.20 5.12 2.16 1.08 16.20
1 3 4.50 5.09 2.08 1.01 16.20
1 3 4.80 5.07 2.00 0.95 16.20
1 3 5.10 5.05 1.93 0.88 16.20
1 3 5.40 5.05 1.85 0.83 16.20
1 3 5.70 5.05 1.78 0.77 16.20
1 3 6.00 5.05 1.72 0.72 16.20
1 3 6.30 5.06 1.65 0.67 16.20
1 3 6.60 5.08 1.59 0.63 16.20
1 4 6.60 5.08 1.59 0.63 16.20
1 4 6.70 5.08 1.57 0.62 16.20
1 4 6.80 5.09 1.55 0.60 16.20
1 4 6.90 5.10 1.53 0.59 16.20
1 4 7.00 5.10 1.51 0.58 16.20
1 4 7.10 5.11 1.49 0.56 16.20
1 4 7.20 5.12 1.47 0.55 16.20
1 4 7.30 5.13 1.45 0.54 16.20
1 4 7.40 5.14 1.43 0.53 16.20
1 4 7.50 5.15 1.42 0.51 16.20
1 4 7.60 5.16 1.40 0.50 16.20

1 4 7.70 5.17 1.38 0.49 16.20
1 4 7.80 5.18 1.36 0.48 16.20
1 4 7.90 5.19 1.35 0.47 16.20
"I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow I

= WINTER
Discharger
Receiving Stream
MODEL RESULTS
: LOUISBURG WWTP
: TAR RIVER
The End D.O. is
The End CBOD is
The End NBOD is
8.69 mg/1.
2.43 mg/1.
1.60 mg/1.
Segment 1
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
DO Min
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach #
8.69 7.90 4
WLA
CBOD
(mg/ 1)
36.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
WLA
NBOD
(mg/1)
36.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
WLA
DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) (mgd)
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.10000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP Subbasin : 030301
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER Stream Class: WS-III
Summer 7Q10 : 14.0 Winter 7Q10 : 48.0
Design Temperature: 14.0
ILENGTHI SLOPE' VELOCITY I DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd 1 Ka I Ka I KN I
I mile I ft/mil fps 1 ft 'design l @20% Idesign l @20% Idesign'
Segment 1
Reach 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0.801 1.481 0.304 1 3.30 1 0.16 1 0.21 1 0.35 1 0.401 0.19
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 1.901 1.481 0.306 1 3.33 1 0.16 10.21 10.35 1 0.401 0.19
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1
Reach 3
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3.901 1.481 0.308 1 3.35 1 0.16 1 0.21 10.35 1 0.401 0.19
1
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 1.301 1.481 0.306 1 3.36 1 0.16 1 0.21 1 0.35 1 0.401 0.19
Reach 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
I Flow 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 D.O. I
I cfs 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.705 1 36.000 1 36.000 1 5.000
Headwaters) 48.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
Tributary I 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
* Runoff I 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary I 1.100 I 2.000 I 1.000 1 9.280
* Runoff I 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste I 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary I 0.920 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
* Runoff I 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste I 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary I 0.150 1 2.000 1 1.000 I 9.280
* Runoff I 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280

a
C
• .0
`dy 190
I
Lows W WTI
Stren.M : �
ai (1 St G rrt
stop� CLkt0sau
1
Led ev
Ago),
• 39 r-r/n,z = sLoPc
I eco - l 7o
5t..0PE B
(e • 3
(90— 110
r3.S
•
cum
ele,v disc
dirt S1
... 7,
c'o 7. 2 r b .3 —
190
170
0
15.
a
la 4
41 As
_
la—
l60
/
40.

SUMMER
NBOD=O
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER
The End D.O. is 5.16 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 2.23 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 0.15 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 5.09 6.30 3
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
41.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.10000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP Subbasin : 030301
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER Stream Class: WS-III
Summer 7Q10 : 14.0 Winter 7Q10 : 48.0
Design Temperature: 26.0
ILENGTHI SLOPE' VELOCITY I DEPTH' Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka 1 KN 1
I mile 1 ft/mil fps I ft Idesign ) @20' Idesign l @2034 Idesignl
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 0.801 1.481 0.128 1 2.86 10.27 10.20 10.28 I 0.251 0.48
Reach 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 1.90I 1.481 0.128 12.88 10.27 10.20 1 0.28 I 0.251 0.48
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 I 3.90I 1.481 0.129 12.90 10.27 1 0.20 1 0.28 I 0.251 0.48
Reach 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 I 1.301 1.481 0.128 12.91 10.27 1 0.20 10.28 I 0.251 0.48
Reach 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
I Flow I CBOD I NBOD 1 D.O. 1
I cfs I mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.705 1 41.000 I 0.000 I 5.000
Headwaters) 14.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300
Tributary 1 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.200 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste 1 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary 1 0.300 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300

= SUMMER
CBOD=0
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER
The End D.O. is 5.27 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 0.66 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 0.70 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 5.05 5.10 3
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
31.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.10000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000

•
*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP Subbasin : 030301
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER Stream Class: WS-III
Summer 7Q10 : 14.0 Winter 7Q10 : 48.0
Design Temperature: 26.0
'LENGTH' SLOPE' VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd I Kd 1 Ka 1 Ka 1 KN 1
I mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft Idesign l @204 Idesign l @204 Idesign'
Segment 1
Reach 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0.801 1.481 0.128 1 2.86 1 0.27 1 0.20 10.28 1 0.251 0.48
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Segment 1
Reach 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1.901 1.481 0.128 1 2.88 1 0.27 1 0.20 1 0.28 1 0.251 0.48
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I
Segment 1 1 3.901 1.481 0.129 2.90 0.27 0.20 0.28 0.25 0.48
Reach 3 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 1.301 1.481 0.128 1 2.91 10.27 1 0.20 1 0.28 1 0.251 0.48
Reach 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
I Flow 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 D.O. I
1 cfs I mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.705 1 0.000 131.000 1 5.000
Headwaters) 14.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.200 I 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 1 0.300 1 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.300