NC0020231_Environmental Assessment_19961101

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0020231
Louisburg WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Staff Report
201 Facilities Plan
Instream Assessment (67B)_ . -_.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
November 1, 1996
This document is printed oa reuse paper - igpriore arty
coatertt oa the reverse side

ENGINEERS
SURVEYORS
ARCHITECTS
PLANNERS
SUITE 117
BUILDING I
5625 DILLARD ROAD
CARY. NC 27511
PHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]
•,MCKIM&CREED
November 1, 1996 M&CO245-0004.0R(10)
Ms. L. Faith Abbott, Environmental Engineer
State of North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29536
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0536
RE: Environmental Assessment Water Treatment Plant Expansion
Town of Louisburg
Dear Ms. Abbott:
The comments we received during the interdepartmental review period regarding
the Environmental Assessment for the Town of Louisburg Municipal Water
Treatment Plant, have been addressed. The comments and associated
responses are included as Appendix C in the revised document.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Very truly yours,
McKIM & CREED ENGINEERS, P.A.
Timothy J. Bald vkn,`P:E.
Project Manager
Isro
CC: John Sutherland
Owen Anderson
Jason Doll
Melba McGee
Wv�
11Mce_ra11vo111CLERICAL102451000411011116tjb.doc

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
June 21, 1996
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Alan Clark
Carla Sanderson
Ruth Swanek
Coleen S
Don S
Jason C. Doll
Environmen . Assessment
Proposed Water Treatment Plant Expansion
Town of Louisburg
The Technical Support Branch has reviewed the Environmental Assessment prepared by
McKim and Creed for the proposed increase in withdrawal from 2.0 to 3.0 MGD from the
upper Tar River by the Town of Louisburg Water Treatment Plant. The proposal was
reviewed for its impact on stream flow and any ramifications with regard to the NPDES
system and surface water quality in general.
Our chief concern with the proposed expansion was that the increased withdrawal would
pz tentially cause further reductions in downstream flow during drought periods. Stream
flow is of particular concern in this instance because the Louisburg wastewater treatment
plant discharges just below the water plant intake, and assimilative capacity is limited in this
area by severely low 7Q10 flows during drought conditions. By working with the
Division of Water Resources on this proposal we have established a minimum flow
agreement with the Town that will adequately protect the assimilative capacity of the
receiving stream during low flow events, and the agreement is described in satisfactory
detail in the EA.
Given that our chief water quality concern has been fuiiy addressed in die EA, it. is vui
opinion that the document is ready to proceed forward in the review process. Thank you
again for the opportunity to comment on the Environmental Assessment. Please let me
know if I can be of any further assistance in this matter.
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Central Files

December 8, 1994
FRANKLIN COUNTY
LONG RANGE UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT SUMMARY
P-A-L
■ Purpose
To briefly present the results of the long-range water study, and discuss option(s) under
consideration and clarify impact and requirements to proceeding with expansion of the
Louisburg WTP.
■ Agenda
► Predicted Conditions
► Alternatives Investigate
► Recommendations
► Future Actions
■ Limitation
To be agreed upon by the attendees
uu

•
v Q Q
as
YOUNGSVILLE TANK
YOUNGSVILLE PUMP STATION
YOUNGSVILLE METER STATION
US IA METER STATION
AMERICAL TANK
FRAN UNTON VVTP
FRANKLINTON TANK
FRANKLIN VENEER METER STATION
FRANKLIN VENEER BOOSTER STATION
NOVO TANK
I -ION -METER STATION
1-ION TANK
SUNBEAM BOOSTER STATION
SUNBEAM TANK
LOUISBURG VVTP
HOSPITAL TANK
Kill
; 6

•
Existing Production Level
❑ Total Treatment Capacity
El Reliable Source Yield
® Permitted Yield
Franklinton

• No Major Extensions
• Residential Growth
• Novo Growth
• Other Industrial Growth
Table 12
FUTURE WATER DEMANDS
Without Major Extensions
2.5% (Corridor Analysis)
2.5%
5.O%
:?.\,\, .t,.n:•:•:;_�:;h:
\. \v{.r±.:vi.i::w::::: n'? .t•{..C.{{{:{:.v: v'
:ttt'{{{-S}: �:C::: : •:.}}}}:J:i:-}i:j :jj env::. .: :
.-... ..?- ...r; .; •:^:
tv;�{--•-
l ..
ii;�{:;y<t .. - t t-?•
: {{ :�i::f-. :{' r
:.i:*:::; � -
.rnv::n..v:J<:tt:•:v±.:.Ct'.v...K{6v.M\hK::riR...........:�Z�ti{.�����.�........\\R\\\`\`.?v..±........t.
'} '+�{t:.¢�:`:,r.:-•;"
\
4:{: ���{�/J[J.� \\-
:?'� „.... S Y:} '�\
p
J`::ii't:i":=::::x:{:
, ±\, ..tt..
\\,\\i.\'.}:..
� . {::l-:
{..
-...:\♦. "jT:h'}A\.
>ftt\\� ... 1411,�.Y..•m-\-�~nQ}u
yt +�
.n\A
Louisburg
0.55
0.60
0.73
0.93
Novo
0.90
1.02
1.30
1.67
Franklin
0.42
0.44
0.47
0.52
Youngsville
0.14
0.21
0.29
0.39
Total
2.01
2.27
2.79
3.51
• No Major Extensions
• Residential Growth
• Novo Growth
• Other Industrial Growth
2.5% (Non -Corridor)
2.5%
10.0%
...........'aa.``.++``../i/.��''.........
Residential
0.73
0.83
0.94
1.20
1.54
Novo
0.22
0.90
1.02
1.30
1.67
Other Industrial
0.16
0.26
0.42
1.08
2.79
Total
1.99
2.38
3.58
6.00

• With Extensions
• Residential Growth
• Novo Growth
• Other Industrial Growth
Table 13
WATER DEMANDS
With Major Extensions
2.5% (Corridor)
2.5%
5.0%
Louisburg
Novo
Franklin
Youngsville
0.55
Harris
Dunn
Total •
0.90
0.42
0.14
0
0
2.01
(Add'l Residential Due to New Extensions =
5.17 - 3.51 = 1.66 MGD)
• 1.19
1.67
(Defends on Extension Timing)
• With Extensions
• Residential Growth 2.5%
• Novo Growth 2.5%
• Other Industrial Growth 10.0%
0.55
0.77
0.43
0.56
5.17
{ i•{}{�{ �h }4v"tir5{..S"y�r .
: '� > ..'• • cam}•>",, VJi `• `_ :. S
• ti ., { • f 4" •sue
i:{ • : �•..• •} $C f X,}r'••••{{,]: • `4
:SitiX 574 ^••54%.•A'4.4•}:•^C ^ •
iiir
y {.ti�S.i '.. rYr}:•:iV • •
S:vJ{�{ti { i •. 6 ti•.
..Y?fi;' • yjrFp ::: i
k.}kl4Q •:. }}. } 1
•. Xi{{'i :
.. :v,'v r x•'.:4i {art'
{ i • ti .`~
} l}-
{� :'+t� 'r.
::i ti ti ti : {:• r
ti+ti •{'.. v. {'. • '{
{. {¢ f •
Vf, Y^ 1 • • • �",{�•T
. r}.M1 ! •fih #
{� }, ?%l••••C A• 1
1
••• i).44::±{v� '.vr�'r•}:v
.
rrr}����,i••
W V -ti
..... ' iS.170~}} • h{
Residential
0.73
3.20
Novo
0.22
1.67
Other Industrial
0.16
2.79
Total
1.11
(Depends on Extension Timing)
7.66

8.0 --
7.0 —
• 6.0 -
0
Li- 5.0--
J 4.0 --
Ze
W 3.0 —
2.0 —
W
1.0
0
1990
PROJECTED WATER. DEMANDS
FIGURE 4
- - WITH EXTENSIONS
1995 2000
WITHOUT EXTENSIONS
YEAR
2010
1
1
2020

PROJECTED WATER DEMANDS
FIGURE 5
EXPAND CAPACITY TO TRIGGER DEMAND IS EARLIEST -LATEST
(ADF) (ADFANTICIPATED TRIGGER DATE
3.0 MGD 1.9 1993
4.0 MGD 2.4 1996-2002 -
5.0 MGD 3.2 ' 2000-2014
6.0 MGD 4.0 2004-2020+
7.0 MGD 4.8 2007-2020+
0
1990
- WITH EXTENSIONS
1995 2000
WITHOUT EXTENSIONS
YEAR
2010
MaKlME,CREED

Buffalo Creek Site
POTENTIAL WATER SUPPLY SITES IN FRANKLIN COUNTY
3.54
0.65
1.0
2.30
3.54
0.15 0.23
1.34
2.06
Cedar Creek Site 1
4.81
0.65
1.0
3.13
4.81
0.20
0.31
1.60
2.45
Cedar Creek Site 2
11.9
0.65
1.0
7.74
11.9
0.58
0.90
2.73
4.20
Tar River Site 1
328
0.58
0.9
192
295
4.26
Tar River Site 2
425
0.58
0.9
249
383
14.8
6.56
13.3
20.5
15.6
24.0
Taylor's Creek
Site 1
1.12
0.65
1.0
0.73
1.12
0
0
0.69
1.07
Taylor's Creek
Site 2
7.85
0.65
1.0
5.10
7.85
0.33
0.51
2.14
3.30

Figure 18 - Phase Flow Chart
i
SCADA
FV Meter
Sunbeam Pump
Expand
Louisburg
to 3.0 MGD
i
Supplement
Franklinton
Source
J
Kerr
i
Expand
Franklinton WTP
w/New Reservoir
Kerr
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3

Table 35
Phase Cost Summary
Phase .
#
Options
Description
Capital
Cost
$
Ann'L
Debt Svc.
$IYr.
Unit
Debt Svc.
$/1,000 Gal.
Anticipated
Unit Cost
S/1,000 Gal.
1
SCADA/Sunbeam
280,000
N/A
N/A
2
1. Kerr Lake
6,750,000
1,109,0001
$2.64 2
$4.27 3
2. Louisburg
1,000,000
164,000 1
$0.56 4
$2.10 5
3. Franklinton* •
1,000,000
164,0001
$1.28 6
• $2.49 ?
3
1. Kerr Lake
6,750,000
-1,109,0001
(588,500) 8
$1.69 9
(0.90) 9
$2.2610
($1.47) 10
2. Franklinton 2.0
MGD Reservoir &
WTP
4,200,000
690,0001
$2.36 4
$2.9711,12
1 Revenue Bonds 9 %-20 yrs., 150q coverage
3
Prorata at 1.15 MGD
Purchase Levels F 0.35 MGD, L 0.50 MGD,
K 0.30 MGD
4 Prorata at 0.80 MGD
Purchase Levels F 0.35 MGD, L 0.80 MGD
6 Prorata at 0.35 MGD
7
Purchase Levels
F 0.35 MGD
L 0.80 MGD
8 G.O. Bonds 6 %-20 yrs.
9 Prorata at 1.8 MGD
10
11
12
* Also requires #2 to be executed, cannot stand alone.
Purchase 100% Kerr Lake
Purchase Levels F 0.80 MGD, L 1.00 MGD
Assumes Franklinton non -debt costs reduced
to $1.60/ 1,000 gal.

TAR RIVER MEETING FOR ADDITIONAL WITHDRAWAL OF WATER AT LOUISBURG
December 8, 1994, Archdale Building
Name
O&;'/) ,A7/IG//"S0,n
Jss;(q /dff(e 5
ez e
lbw A„b(
b ) t
Jrs/11 /a4
6. Aare
.k
di otNts
cklit5 OVl aopk
Agency
CovtnANj
Phone
.,' 96';
76r- .t"144
�15- 5L52.
715 03?C
V'vr.
4---n&-s--70
963
Yrn q• 6A9/
ei7V-7/5-- PUS
733 - Sb .K3
fr:2 - 9 az.,
^496- 5qq,4
9l9 --TIG-Sc1oq

02081747 FLOW
Low mean value and ranking for the following number
for the months April to March
Discharge, in cubic feet per second
Year 1-day 3-day 7-day 14-day
30-day 60-day
1975 39.000 12 40.667 12 44.857 13 58.000 17 73.733
1976 40.000 13 41.000 14 47.571 15 52.000 14 74.133
1977 21.000 10 23.333 10 27.714 10 30.286 10 39.400
1978 8.100 1 8.633 1 9.557 2 14.707 4 18.363
1979 49.000 18 49.333 18 50.714 17 53.000 15 57.367
1980 44.000 17 46.667 17 52.000 18 54.500 16 86.100
1981 11.000 6 11.667 6 13.000 4 13.643 3 19.633
1982 9.600 4 10.200 3 10.800 3 11.614 2 14.320
1983 41.000 15 44.000 15 44.857 14 48.500 12 64.867
1984 17.000 7 17.667 7 20.571 8 28.143 8 35.567
1985 40.000 14 40.667 13 42.429 12 51.000 13 63.433
1986 8.200 2 8.700 2 9.214 1 11.607 1 23.750
1987 9.300 3 10.767 4 14.043 6 15.214 5 21.300
1988 19.000 9 19.667 9 24.000 9 26.143 9 30.700
1989 10.000 5 11.333 5 13.429 5 19.929 6 23.600
1990 83.000 19 87.000 19 94.429 19 105.500 19 155.600
1991 30.000 11 31.333 11 34.286 11 37.714 11 47.033
1992 17.000 8 17.667 8 18.286 7 21.857 7 40.500
1993 42.000 16 44.333 16 50.000 16 70.714 18 94.267
of consecutive days
90-day 120-day 183-day 365-day
15 95.917 15 133.100 14 173.925 16 247.842 15 564.148 15
16 111.133 17 193.611 18 219.050 17 258.519 16 422.019 9
9 48.733 9 64.856 9 78.325 8 100.552 7 239.890 2
2 40.265 6 42.599 3 58.924 4 85.513 6 432.964 10
12 69.550 10 86.422 12 115.383 13 173.432 12 614.685 16
17 102.683 16 155.900 16 248.367 18 373.459 18 544.189 14
3 29.867 1 35.711 1 43.892 1 59.929 2 166.967 1
1 75.010 11 69.218 10 105.672 11 106.610 8 346.489 6
14 79.200 12 151.189 15 172.442 15 300.486 17 644.005 17
8 42.533 7 47.256 4 65.117 5 121.459 9 645.447 18
13 80.183 13 82.656 11 114.833 12 200.284 14 492.636 12
6 35.642 5 55.928 8 74.063 7 82.363 5 285.785 5
4 34.133 2 54.022 7 87.594 9 127.155 10 444.891 11
7 34.483 3 48.122 6 68.617 6 71.803 3 283.370 4
5 34.950 4 40.033 2 44.258 2 75.213 4 361.518 7
19 330.033 19 399.422 19 412.533 19 446.847 19 699.890 19
11 87.583 14 95.200 13 103.767 10 129.530 11 405.047 8
10 47.017 8 47.633 5 53.900 3 59.240 1 263.027 3
18 134.500 18 162.122 17 166.100 14 195.361 13 538.047 13

Log -Pearson Type III Statistics (formerly USGS Program A193, Jan. 1986)
Note -- Use of Log -Pearson Type III or Pearson -Type III
distributions are for preliminary computations.
User is responsible for assessment and
interpretation.
02081747 L007
Analysis for -- 12 month period
starting April 1
ending March 31
1975-1993
Parameter is 7-day low value.
0 zero values in data
19 non -zero values in data
44.857 47.571
52.000 13.000
42.429 9.214
94.429 34.286
27.714
10.800
14.043
18.286
9.557
44.857
24.000
50.000
The following 7 statistics are based on non -zero values.
Mean (logs)
Variance (logs)
Standard Deviation (logs)
Skewness (logs)
Standard Error of Skewness (logs)
Serial Correlation Coefficient (logs)
Coefficient of Variation (logs)
1.421
0.090
0.301
- 0.065
0.524
- 0.132
0.212
50.714
20.571
13.429

02081747 L007
Non-exceedance Recurrence Parameter
Probability Interval Value
0.0100 100.00
0.0200 50.00
0.0500 20.00
0.1000
0.2000 5.00
0.5000 2.00
0.8000 1.25
0.9000 1.11
0.9600 1.04
0.9800 1.02
0.9900 1.01
5.101
6.216
8.344 _
10.815
14.768
26.580
47.337
63.739
87.261
106.709
127.732
V/yL DID �J
10 statistics added as attributes to users WDM file on data set 103
MEANND SDND SKWND NUMZRO NONZRO LDIST
L07020 L07010 L07005 L07002
pL c i )1 4„L-1 �r
/ r r
r7 Q"C' /C . c

w
a
w
w
w
0
0
Z a
U z
I-0
(/)w
w
0
0
0
J
LL
102
10
1 1.005
/q S 5 t 6 �.,� , r ��>, ,fie LP /T (441. 7,•4, 1-41.-x__,,
de,-) //ef ,�%`t n S e C/ve/� we /
i•-,S'1G-v,.c PS
71c. e 4 J C c c try, e 1 e7 6 r .04
"lc• cstLC'74
L p�I . % %Q / -�.'.r f 7`/i Cn� ,.� �s� �y eccwj J
LU��t Sn,c// �a +�y.A� j�i° /HfenI�t4,40,. IA a✓w� C/�cc
de /A 4.. L /'. i I / a,] T e.o ,.-L-t, S 1, r"
. 16,1 f `' e-')r - . IrC t 4.-1 c/ l /Q w :- . / G. ✓Crc r` 1 ✓ec._C
cri Vim1..44. "f%4- " //
Gir Ce 'C t C.� /'.,c./c e•F /ew�/��.,1 ci/-7,cic-.c�-e.
0
• Q.
2;. +415' -- '�
/�i!C 7 isr*1
P- (,,ece
7G
---1--
1.45 761/e ;s
rot- re '4/
�J
��.iq
i t
0 0 7-day low flow
t t i
Log -Pearson Type I II
e-
L P,y
1.02 1.05 1.1
1.25 1.5 2 3 5
10 20 50 100 200
RECURRANCE INTERVAL IN YEARS
Station - 0208174700
Specified length of record (see analyses), 12 month period ending March 31
Flow characteristic: Annual 7-day low value

Log -Pearson Type III Statistics (formerly USGS Program A193, Jan. 1986)
Note -- Use of Log -Pearson Type III or Pearson -Type III
distributions are for preliminary computations.
User is responsible for assessment and
interpretation.
02081747 L030
Analysis for -- 12 month period
starting April 1
ending March 31
1975-1993
Parameter is 30-day low value.
0 zero values in data
19 non -zero values in data
73.733 74.133
86.100 19.633
63.433 23.750
155.600 47.033
39.400
14.320
21.300
40.500
18.363
64.867
30.700
94.267
The following 7 statistics are based on non -zero values.
Mean (logs)
Variance (logs)
Standard Deviation (logs)
Skewness (logs)
Standard Error of Skewness (logs)
Serial Correlation Coefficient (logs)
Coefficient of Variation (logs)
1.627
0.080
0.283
0.113
0.524
-0.020
0.174
57.367
35.567
23.600

02081747 L030
Non-exceedance Recurrence Parameter
Probability interval Value
0.0100
0.0200
0.0500
0.1000
0.2000
0.5000
0.8000
0.9000
0.9600
0.9800
0.9900
100.00
50.00
20.00
10.00
5.00
1.25
1.11
1.04
1.02
1.01
9.812
11.551
14.806
18.521
24.392
41.858
73.093
98.511
136.152
168.306
204.074
9 statistics added as attributes to users WDM file on data set 105
MEANND SDND SKWND NUMZRO NONZRO LDIST
L30020 L30010 L30002

103
w
w
a
1-
w
w
LL
U
Ea
U
Z 0
Z
pc-50 102
�w
ccn
w
F-
U
S
0
0
J
LL
10
1.005
1.02 1.05 1.1
0 30-day low flow
Log -Pearson Type III
1.25 1.5 2 3 5
10 20 50 100 200
RECURRANCE INTERVAL IN YEARS
Station - 0208174700
Specified length of record (see analyses), 12 month period ending March 31
Flow characteristic: Annual 30-day low value

02081747 FLOW
Low mean value and ranking for the following number of consecutive days
for the months November to March
Discharge, in cubic eet per second
Year 1-day 3-day 7-day 14-day 30-day 60-day 90-day 120-day
1975 79.000 13 80.000 13 82.429 12 84.786 11 93.300 7 184.250 6 601.056 15 630.708 12
1976 84.000 14 84.333 14 85.000 13 147.429 14 211.933 13 241.367 11 382.711 7 415.142 7
1977 73.000 12 74.000 12 77.000 11 84.643 10 119.867 10 260.600 12 337.878 5 303.392 3
1978 119.000 15 121.333 15 130.429 15 148.500 15 213.700 14 366.100 14 883.100 19 751.200 15
1979 50.000 7 60.000 8 62.857 7 99.286 12 124.933 11 262.300 13 590.644 14 818.058 18
1980 126.000 16 175.667 17 188.857 17 215.571 17 244.233 16 436.550 15 509.967 12 561.683 9
1981 40.000 4 41.333 4 46.286 4 59.143 5 74.767 5 81.933 2 84.456 1 130.883 1
1982 47.000 6 48.000 5 51.143 5 54.143 4 57.400 2 204.267 8 483.722 10 599.617 11
1983 131.000 17 135.000 16 149.000 16 187.857 16 218.067 15 525.567 16 502.067 11 757.792 16
1984 54.000 8 54.667 6 56.143 6 61.500 6 276.167 17 697.867 19 842.811 18 911.175 19
1985 69.000 11 70.000 11 75.429 10 80.071 9 92.267 6 184.350 7 344.144 6 564.983 10
1986 35.000 2 63.000 9 93.714 14 122.643 13 135.533 12 221.017 9 249.367 3 378.325 4
1987 28.000 1 28.333 1 29.571 1 51.286 3 74.100 4 224.783 10 552.400 13 671.358 13
1988 40.000 5 40.667 3 42.286 3 50.857 2 68.500 3 138.067 3 263.444 4 296.400 2
1989 65.000 10 65.667 10 68.857 9 74.786 7 94.633 8 142.683 4 150.744 2 395.858 6
1990 215.000 19 246.333 19 275.286 19 386.643 19 442.000 19 654.983 18 708.267 16 803.458 17
1991 56.000 9 57.667 7 65.714 8 77.571 8 100.933 9 172.917 5 476.956 9 415.425 8
1992 39.000 3 40.000 2 40.714 2 45.214 1 47.200 1 65.500 1 388.978 8 378.475 5
1993 160.000 18 202.000 18 244.714 18 316.286 18 424.867 18 559.950 17 731.667 17 700.842 14

Log -Pearson Type III Statistics (formerly USGS Program A193, Jan. 1986)
Note -- Use of Log -Pearson Type III or Pearson -Type III
distributions are for preliminary computations.
User is responsible for assessment and
interpretation.
02081747 L007
Analysis for -- 5 month period
starting November 1
ending March 31
1975-1993
Parameter is 7-day low value.
0 zero values in data
19 non -zero values in data
82.429 85.000
188.857 46.286
75.429 93.714
275.286 65.714
77.000
51.143
29.571
40.714
-to- '616
130.429
149.000
42.286
244..714
The following 7 statistics are based on non -zero values_
Mean (logs)
Variance (logs)
Standard Deviation (logs)
Skewness (logs)
Standard Error of Skewness (logs)
Serial Correlation Coefficient (logs)
Coefficient of Variation (logs)
1.908
0.071
0.266
0.581
0.524
-0.250
0.140
62.857
56.143
68.857

02081747 L007
Non-exceedance Recurrence Parameter
Probability Interval Value
0.0100 100.00
0.0200 50.00
0.0500 20.00
0.1000
0.2000 5.00
0.5000 2.00
0.8000 1.25
0.9000 1.11
0.9600 1.04
0.9800 1.02
0.9900 1.01
25.337
28.006
32.993
38.713
47.872
76.332
132.357
182.776
265.045
342.193
435.140
10 statistics added as attributes to users WDM file on data set 113
MEANND SDND SKWND NUMZRO NONZRO LDIST
L07020 L07010 L07005 L07002
Computation of Basic statistics.
DATA- NUMBER NON -ZERO
SET STANDARD OF DATA VALUES RETURNS
NUMBER MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEAN DEVIATION USED UNUSED CODE NO.
1 8.100 13000.000 478.799 880.834 8169 2789

103
w
0
F-
w
w
U
E5
0
Z o
1-OU 102
cc
w
1-
0
2
0
O
J
u_
1.02 1.05 1.1
1.25 1.5 2 3 5
10 20 50 100 200
RECURRANCE INTERVAL IN YEARS
Station - 0208174700
Specified length of record (see analyses), 5 month period ending March 31
Flow characteristic: Winter 7-day low value

Flow duration curve
02081747 FLOW
Cases equal or
exceeding lower Cases equal or
limit and less exceeding lower
Lower than upper limit class limit
class
limit Cases Percent Cases Percent
0.00 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.10 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.14 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.20 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.28 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.40 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.57 0 0.00 6940 100.00
0.81 0 0.00 6940 100.00
1.10 0 0.00 6940 100.00
1.60 0 0.00 6940 100.00
2.30 0 0.00 6940 100.00
3.30 0 0.00 6940 100.00
4.60 0 0.00 6940 100.00
6.60 7 0.10 6940 100.00
9.30 43 0.62 6933 99.90
13.00 105 1.51 6890 99.28
19.00 205 2.95 6785 97.77
27.00 306 4.41 6580 94.81
38.00 480 6.92 6274 90.40
53.00 631 9.09 5794 83.49
76.00 767 11.05 5163 74.39
110.00 626 9.02 4396 63.34
150.00 840 12.10 3770 54.32
220.00 753 10.85 2930 42.22
310.00 599 8.63 2177 31.37
430.00 481 6.93 1578 22.74
610.00 355 5.12 1097 15.81
870.00 196 2.82 742 10.69
1200.00 149 2.15 546 7.87
1700.00 135 1.95 397 5.72
2500.00 112 1.61 262 3.78
3500.00 94 1.35 150 2.16
5000.00 38 0.55 56 0.81
7100.00 15 0.22 18 0.26
10000.00 3 0.04 3 0.04

02081747 FLOW
Percent time value was exceeded
FLOW
99. 14.11
98. 18.07
95. 26.49
90. 38.88
85. 49.72
80. 61.82
75. 74.47
70. 89.52
65. 104.90
60. 124.82
55. 147.00
50. 175.00
45. 203.92
40. 238.41
35. 279.88
30. 329.03
25. 398.55
20. 501.10
15. 651.01
10. 950.82
5. 1996.30
2. 3678.72
1. 4786.17

REQUEST NO: 9267
SOURCE: NRCD ACTION: EXISTING
SITE NO: 1 DATE: 10/ 5/94
STATION NUMBER: 0208174700 TYPE STATION: 01
STATION NAME: TAR R AT US 401 AT LOUISBURG, NC
LOCATION: AT US 401 AND 0.5 MI SE OF LOUISBURG, NC
LATITUDE: 360534 LONGITUDE: 781748
QUADRANGLE NUMBER: C25SE
COUNTY CODE: 069 STATE CODE: 37
HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE: 03020101
DRAINAGE AREA: 427.00 SO MI
AVERAGE FLOW: 442.0 [A]
7Q10 MIN FLOW: 10.29 (A]
(SUMMER)
30Q2 MIN FLOW: 37.64 [A]
7Q10 MIN FLOW: 40.21 [A]
(WINTER)
7Q2 MIN FLOW: 24.55 [A]
NOTES:
DISTRICT CODE: 37
NRCD BASIN CODE: 030301
[A] Estimate is based on records collected at or near the site.
[B] Estimate is based entirely on runoff observed at nearby streams.
[C] Estimate based on procedures given in Open -File Report 90-399
"Low -Flow Characteristics of Streams Irn.North Carolina"
[D] Estimate based on procedures given in Open -File Report 90-399 and
in conjuction with records collected at or near the site.
***** These data are provisional pending approval by the Director,USGS ******
REMARKS:
iEQUESTOR - JASON:607 .7p.E1g SECTION"
Entered by: JCW
Fee charged: 0
t,GCk CI(' r;c yekr
Kn-i ? o c -Floa ferr6)
Loa: a+ low s,» t VS :for >eAPS
Gr ` r
0 -c.ok re-c-orie,vic.
-cril ad'
Aoki s to) 04..sirdi.iti /6, 46
san e.
5444 164IcG1 o!cri a-vt

KALI
3 4 Mai
C,
0
rr
urn
.A!
Franklin County
Formed in 1779 from Bute, Franklin
County was named in honor of Benjamin
Franklin, noted American statesman,
auth-- nd nventor This north entr;,11

Table 25
OPTIONS
GOAL
1. Immediate or Short -Term
Achieve reliable supply of 3.0 MGD
a. Supplement FWTP w/Add'l 0.6 MGD new source.
b. Expand FWTP reservoirs for reliable 1.0 MGD draft.
c. Add 3rd 1.0 MGD train at LWTP.
Intermediate -Term
Achieve reliable supply of 5.0 MGD
a. Expand LWTP to 3.0 MGD
Supplement/new FWTP source to 2.0 MGD
High -rate FWTP.
b. Expand LWTP to 3.0 MGD
Provide new source/WTP for 2.0 MGD.
c. Connect and purchase from a regional source.
3. Long -Term
Achieve reliable supply of 7.0 MGD
a. Expand LWTP to 3.0 MGD
Supplement/new FWTP source to 4.0 MGD
High rate FWTP and new 2.0 MGD WTP
b. Expand LWTP to 3.0 MGD
Supplement/new FWTP source
New 4.0 MGD WTP
c. Connect and purchase from a regional source
PAeTi-4 ,67,4,1k „(
cafix ;67 lAyati?. hoilt0,6, 7

21.5
21.0
20.5
20.0
19.5
19.0
e 18.5
0
18.0
17.5
17.0
16.5
16.0
15.5
15.0
Louisburg WWTP
IWC vs. WTP Withdrawal
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Water Withdrawal (MGD

SUMMER
B0D5/NH3N = 5.0/2.0 MG/L
7010 = 8.6 CFS
Discharger
MODEL RESULTS
: LOUISBURG WWTP
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER
The End D.O. is 6.84 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 3.09 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 2.58 mg/1.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 4.96 4.80 3
Reach 1 7.50 9.00 5.00 1.37000
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000
Reach 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000
Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

SUMMER
B005/NH3N µ 5.0/2.0 MG/L
7Q10 = 8.6 CFS
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD ( Flow I
1 1 0.00 6.84 3.09 2.58 10.72
1 1 0.08 6.76 3.05 2.52 10.72
1 1 0.16 6.67 3.01 2.46 10.72
1 1 0.24 6.59 2.97 2.40 10.72
1 1 0.32 6.50 2.93 2.35 10.72
1 1 0.40 6.43 2.89 2.29 10.72
1 1 0.48 6.35 2.85 2.24 10.72
1 1 0.56 6.28 2.81 2.18 10.72
1 1 0.64 6.21 2.77 2.13 10.72
1 1 0.72 6.14 2.73 2.08 10.72
1 1 0.80 6.08 2.70 2.03 10.72
1 2 0.80 6.10 2.68 2.01 10.92
1 2 0.90 6.02 2.64 1.95 10.92
1 2 1.00 5.95 2.59 1.89 10.92
1 2 1.10 5.88 2.55 1.84 10.92
1 2 1.20 5.81 2.51 1.78 10.92
1 2 1.30 5.75 2.47 1.73 10.92
1 2 1.40 5.69 2.42 1.68 10.92
1 2 1.50 5.63 2.38 1.63 10.92
1 2 1.60 5.57 2.34 1.58 10.92
1 2 1.70 5.52 2.30 1.53 10.92
1 2 1.80 5.47 2.27 1.49 10.92
1 2 1.90 5.43 2.23 1.44 10.92
1 2 2.00 5.38 2.19 1.40 10.92
1 2 2.10 5.34 2.15 1.36 10.92
1 2 2.20 5.30 2.12 1.32 10.92
1 2 2.30 5.26 2.08 1.28 10.92
1 2 2.40 5.23 2.05 1.24 10.92
1 2 2.50 5.20 2.01 1.21 10.92
1 2 2.60 5.17 1.98 1.17 10.92
1 2 2.70 5.14 1.94 1.14 10.92
1 3 2.70 5.20 1.95 1.13 11.22
1 3 3.00 5.12 1.85 1.04 11.22
1 3 3.30 5.07 1.76 0.95 11.22
1 3 3.60 5.02 1.67 0.87 11.22
1 3 3.90 4.99 1.59 0.79 11.22
1 3 4.20 4.97 1.51 0.72 11.22
1 3 4.50 4.96 1.44 0.66 11.22
1 3 4.80 4.96 1.37 0.61 11.22
1 3 5.10 4.97 1.30 0.55 11.22
1 3 5.40 4.98 1.24 0.51 11.22
1 3 5.70 5.00 1.18 0.46 11.22
1 3 6.00 5.03 1.12 0.42 11.22
1 3 6.30 5.06 1.07 0.39 11.22
1 3 6.60 5.10 1.01 0.35 11.22
1 4 6.60 5.10 1.01 0.35 11.22
1 4 6.70 5.11 1.00 0.34 11.22
1 4 6.80 5.13 0.98 0.33 11.22
1 4 6.90 5.14 0.96 0.32 11.22
1 4 7.00 5.15 0.95 0.31 11.22
1 4 7.10 5.17 0.93 0.31 11.22
1 4 7.20 5.18 0.92 0.30 11.22
1 4 7.30 5.20 0.90 0.29 11.22
1 4 7.40 5.21 0.89 0.28 11.22
1 4 7.50 5.23 0.87 0.27 11.22
1 4 7.60 5.25 0.86 0.26 11.22
1 4 7.70 5.26 0.84 0.26 11.22
1 4 7.80 5.28 0.83 0.25 11.22
1 4 7.90 5.29 0.81 0.24 11.22
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I 0.0. I CBOD ( NBOD I Flow I

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : LOUISBURG WWTP
Receiving Stream : TAR RIVER
Summer 701O : 8.3
Design Temperature: 26.0
Subbasin : 030301
Stream Class: WS-III NS
Winter 701O : 48.0
!LENGTH' SLOPE' VELOCITY I DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd I Ka I Ka 1 KN ) KN I KNR I KNR 1 SOD 1 SOD
mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft )design' @20° 'design' @20° 'design l 020° 'design' @20° 'design' @20°
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Segment 1 I 0.801 1.481 0.096 1 2.13 1 0.21 i 0.20 1 0.21 1 0.191 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach t l I I I I I I I I I I I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Segment 1 1 1.901 1.481 0.091 1 2.14 1 0.21 1 0.20 1 0.21 1 0.191 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 10.00 1 0.00
Reach 2 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Segment 1 1 3.901 1.481 0.098 1 2.11 1 0.21 1 0.20 1 0.21 1 0.191 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 3 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Segment 1 I 1.301 1.481 0.091 1 2.11 1 0.27 1 0.20 1 0.21 1 0.191 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 10.00 10.00 1 0.00
Reach 4 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
I Flow 1 CBOD 1 NBOD 1 D. O. I
I cfs 1 mg/l 1 mg/1 1 mg/l I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 2.123 1 7.500 I 9.000 1 5.000
Headwaters) 8.600 I 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary 1 0.200 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 3
Waste 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary 1 0.300 1 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste I 0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary I 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.300
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.300
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mil e