NC0080071_Engineering Alternatives Analysis_20191002

DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
Vanceboro WTP
NPDES PERMIT NCO080071
TOWN OF VANCEBORO
NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 2019

0 Potable Water Solutions
DO
C
Wren Thedford
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Permitting Section — NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
RE: Town of Vanceboro, Craven County
Permit NCO080071
September 30, 2019
Dear Ms. Thedford,
RECEIVED
OCT 0 2 2019
KDEUDWRODES
Please see attached Discharge Alternatives Evaluation for the Town of Vanceboro, located in Craven
County. The renewal application form for this permit was previously submitted under separate cover.
Please contact myself or Mr. Vernon Edwards with the Town of Vanceboro if you have any questions
concerning this renewal request or if additional information is required.
Harry Bailey
A^%
1402 Harrington Street
Washington, NC 27889
252.945.8948
potablewatersolutionsC yahoo. com

DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
Vanceboro WTP
NPDES PERMIT NCO080071
TOWN OF VANCEBORO
NORTH CAROLINA
SEPTEMBER 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 BACKGROUND
1.2 PURPOSE
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 SOURCE WELLS AND WTP RECEIVED
2.2 DISCHARGE WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
2.3 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT OCT 02 1019
3.0 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION NCDEQ/DWR/NPDES
3.1 CONNECT DISCHARGE TO A WWTP
3.2 OBTAIN A NON -DISCHARGE PERMIT
3.3 INSTALL WASTEWATER TREATMENT
3.4 USE ALTERNATIVE WATER TREATMENT SOURCE
3.5 USE ALTERNATIVE WATER TREATMENT METHOD
3.6 DISCHARGE TO A LARGER WATERBODY/PERFORM A DILUTION MODEL
3.7 COMBINATION OF ALTERNATIVES
3.8 DISCHARGE VARIANCE
4.0 ALTERNATIVES PRESENT WORTH COSTS
5.0 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
5.1 ALTERNATIVE IMPLEMENTATION
5.2 PROIECTSCHEDULE

INDEX OF FIGURES
FIGURE 2.1
FIGURE 2.2
INDEX OF TABLES
TABLE 2.1
NPDES LOCATION MAP
TREATMENT & DISCHARGE SCHEMATIC
RECEIVED
EXISTING WELL DATA OCT 0 2 2019
NCDEQIDWRINPDES
INDEX OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
NPDES PERMIT INFORMATION
APEPNDIX B
TOWN OF VANCEBORO 2018 LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
APPENDIX C
MAULS SWAMP STREAM CLASSIFICATION
APPENDIX D
CRAVEN COUNTY 2018 LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
APPENDIX E
CCPCUA DATA FOR CRAVEN COUNTY
APPENDIX F
NEUSE RIVER STREAM CLASSIFICATION
APPENDIX G
ROUTE FOR ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE

r'"01\ 1.0
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 BACKGROUND
The Vanceboro Water Treatment Plant (WTP) is operated by the Town of Vanceboro to
provide potable water for Town customers. The WTP treats groundwater from two
wells screened in the Castle Hayne aquifer and pumps the finished water into the Town
distribution system. The current treatment techniques consist of aeration, filtration,
softening, and disinfection.
As part of the filtration and softening process, the filter vessels must undergo a
backwash process and the softening vessels must undergo a regeneration cycle. The
filtration backwash process only utilizes raw water. The softener regeneration cycle also
utilizes raw water and a salt (brine) is injected during a small portion of the cycle to
restore the softener resin.
The wastewater generated by the filtration backwash and softener regeneration is
discharged to an unnamed tributary to Mauls Swamp in the Neuse River Basin, under
NPDES Permit NC0080071. Due to failed Whole Effluent Toxicity tests (WET), the Town
is required by Part A. (3) of the permit to submit a Discharge Alternatives Evaluation
with the next permit renewal application.
Appendix A contains a copy of the existing discharge permit and the fact sheet for the
permit. According to permit requirements, the following options must be evaluated:
1. Connect Discharge to a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
2. Obtain a Non -discharge Permit
3. Install Wastewater Treatment
4. Use Alternative Water Treatment Source
5. Use Alternative Water Treatment Method
6. Discharge to a Large Waterbody/Perform a Dilution Model
7. Combination of Alternatives
This evaluation is to include a present worth cost analysis for all technically feasible
options in accordance with Division of Water Resources guideline "Engineering
Alternatives Analysis Guidance Document".

M
2.0
1.2 PURPOSE
This evaluation is being requested to determine whether there are any economical and
technologically feasible alternatives available to the Town to address aquatic toxicity in
the plant effluent. Based upon the evaluation, please identify viable alternatives and
present an implementation schedule and project timeline for the preferred alternative.
The Town shall submit the Discharge Alternatives Evaluation to the Division along with
the submission of their next permit renewal application (due 6 months prior to permit
expiration).
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Town of Vanceboro WTP was designed to receive and treat groundwater pumped from two
wells (Well #1 and Well #2). The location of the wells, the WTP, and the NPDES discharge
location are shown in Figure 2.1. Information of the two wells supplying the WTP is shown in
Table 2.1.
Chloride (mg/1)
Current Average Daily Pumped
Table 2.1
Vanceboro WTP
Well #1
7 mg/I (9/11/18)
0.094 MGD
Well #2
7 mg/I (9/11/18)
0.094 M G D
The average daily demand for the Town varies from 0.176 MGD to 0.218 MGD. This
information obtained from monthly operational reports and the 2018 Local Water Supply Plans
submitted to NC DEQ Water Supply Section. Appendix B contains a copy of the 2018 Local
Water Supply Plan for the Town of Vanceboro.
The current treatment train for the Town of Vanceboro WTP is shown in Figure 2.2. The existing
treatment techniques utilized at the WTP are as follows (raw to finished):
• Aerator
• Raw Water Reservoir
• High Service Pumps
• Filtration
• Cation Exchange Softener
• Chlorine Gas addition
• Discharge of Filter Backwash and Softener Regeneration water to Mauls Swamp

There are two existing filter vessels and two existing softeners at the WTP. The filter backwash
and softener regeneration cycles occur for every 300,000 gallons of water treated. The cleaning
of the filter starts with a filter backwash with a flow rate of 560 gpm for approximately 18
minutes. It is then followed by a filter rinse with a flow rate of 160 gpm for approximately 5
minutes. The regeneration cycle of the softener includes a 10-minute ion exchange backwash
with a flow rate of approximately 170 gpm, a 25-minute brine injection with a flow rate of 10
gpm, and a 30-minute ion exchange rinse with a flow rate of approximately 115 gpm. Raw
water is used for the filter backwash and softener regeneration cycle. The volume generated
during the filter backwash and regeneration cycle are reported on discharge monitoring reports
as estimated values because the cleaning processes are completed manually.
2.1 SOURCE WELLS AND WTP
DISCHARGE OF REGENERATION WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO MAULS
SWAMP
As stated earlier, water generated during the filter backwash and regeneration cycles is
currently discharged to Mauls Swamp in accordance with the NPDES permit issued. The
discharge location is show in Figure 2.1. Based on discussions with the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) and USGS, Mauls Swamp has no stream
gauging station. According to NC DEC, Mauls Swamp has a Class C freshwater
classification. Appendix C contains a copy of page 24 of the Neuse River Basin hydro
order that documents this classification. Thus, the existing permit does not allow any
dilution factor for toxicity testing on the effluent at present.
2.2 DISCHARGE WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
The discharge from the filter backwash and softening regeneration process produces a
wastewater that is discharged to Mauls Swamp. Data from permit Discharge Monitoring
Reports (DMR) from January 2017 to April 2017 were reviewed for flowrate and water
quality parameters to determine the character of the discharges. It is important to note
that discharge samples are representative samples and thus reflect the filter backwash
and regeneration cycle. The routine compliance sampling data indicates that the
discharge has TDS, chlorides and conductivity values characteristic of a strong brine.
In June 2012, representatives of NC DEQ Washington Regional Office met with the Town
to review the WET testing procedures. It was determined that the current procedure for
collection of samples were not adequately representing the filter backwash and
softener regeneration cycle. A new sampling procedure was created and provided to
the Town. Once the plan was implemented, the WET sample tests have since been
failures.

As part of the Evaluation project, the plan given to the Town was reviewed and
determined to be flow volume skewed with regard to the softener regeneration brine
cycle. A new plan was developed to address the flow volume discrepancies in the
current plan. This updated plan was reviewed by the WaRO staff before
implementation. The WET tests after implementation were determined to be failures.
Since the WET tests results did not improve, the updated procedures were reviewed and
sampling of the regeneration cycle was completed. The sampling determined that the
chloride levels associated with the brine cycle injection was detected at the beginning of
the rinse cycle and not during the brine cycle. This is due to the low flow volume
associated with the brine injection and increased flow rate during the rinse cycle.
The sampling was revised to address this new information and data. The plan appears
to better address the chloride levels based on when they appear during the softener
regeneration cycle. To date however, the Town has not received approval from the
WaRO staff for implementation.
Based upon existing data from the DMRs, the following data represents current
discharges from the WTP:
Filter Backwash and Regeneration Volume/Cycle 16,280 gpd
Total Chlorides —5,000 mg/L
Total Dissolved Solids —20-30 mg/L
Salinity —7 ppt
Conductivity—5,000-13,000 umhos/cm
2.3 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Toxicity testing is currently conducted on a composite sample of filter backwash and
softener regeneration discharge water. Due to the rating of Mauls Swamp as a zero -
flow stream, 90% effluent strength is used in the toxicity testing procedure. Toxicity
tests are conducted using Ceriodaphinia dubia (water fleas). The Town has had failures
since the representative sampling plan was modified by the WaRO staff. In general,
failure of the test occurs due to the chloride levels associated with the regeneration of
the softener.

3.o ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
3.1 Connect discharge to a WWTP: Determine whether the wastewater can be
discharged to a wastewater treatment plant. Approval or disapproval from the plant
operator should be acquired.
This alternative would eliminate the surface water discharge by connection to a
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). If a discharge line to the sanitary sewer system
were constructed, this line would accept the discharge effluent flows from both the
filter backwash and the softener regeneration. The Town of Vanceboro owns and
operates a Wastewater Treatment Plant WWTP under Permit Number NC0031828. The
WWTP has a permitted capacity of 0.30 MGD and discharges into Swift Creek.
Based on discussions with WaRO staff, addition of the discharge from the WTP to the
sanitary sewer system may create issues with the WWTP effluent. It is therefore not
recommended as a viable alternative.
A possible viable option would be the blending of raw water with the WTP discharge
prior to entering the sanitary sewer system. This would reduce the chloride
concentration in the flow along with other contaminants of concern and not create any
issues with regard to permitted capacity at the WWTP. Conversations with WaRO staff
have indicated that this would not be a permitted alternative.
3.2 Obtain a Non -discharge permit: Eliminate the surface water discharge by
obtaining a non -discharge permit for spray irrigation, infiltration, or subsurface disposal
(on -site drain field, infiltration gallery, injection wells).
This option eliminates the surface water discharge by obtaining a non -discharge permit
for spray irrigation, infiltration, or subsurface disposal. In accordance with the
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance Document provided by NCDEO' waste
streams from ion exchange treatment units do not have to be evaluated for land
application. Discharge high in salt concentration is typically not suitable for land
application, as excess salts can adversely affect plants via osmotic effect; specific ion
toxicity; and soil particle dispersion, which reduces soil permeability and the water
infiltration rate. Chloride levels above 350 mg/I and conductivity levels above 3,000
umhos/cm are considered severe potential irrigation problems for land application.

Wastewater reuse disposal alternatives include agricultural and landscape irrigation,
industrial activities, groundwater recharge, non -potable urban uses (i.e.: toilet flushing,
construction water). As explained previously, the waste brine is not suitable for
irrigation or landscape irrigation. State of North Carolina code 15A NCAC 02U.1101
prohibits discharge to saltwater wetlands, so this discharge alternative is not available.
Additionally, the quality of the discharge would prohibit the use of the discharge for
non -potable uses. The brine content does not allow the beneficial use of this waste
stream for reuse application. Wastewater reuse is not a feasible alternative for disposal
of this discharge.
3.3 Install wastewater treatment: Install improved wastewater treatment to enable
the facility effluent to consistently pass the WET test. If this is not technically feasible or
cost prohibitive, please explain and provide estimated costs.
This alternative requires installation of a wastewater treatment method to enable the
facility effluent to consistently pass the WET test. A candidate treatment technology for
removal of chlorides is reverse osmosis (RO) technology. However, with such a high
chloride content in the feed water, the RO system would need very high pressure and
the percent recovery through the process would be 75% or less. Thus, RO process
/001� would produce a discharge with a concentrate still requiring discharge to a large water
body. There are evaporative type systems that could evaporate the water off the brine
wastewater to produce a solid (salt), but they are energy intensive and expensive. Thus,
the RO treatment and/or brine evaporation option does not solve the original discharge
problem and is not economically feasible.
3.4 Use Alternative Water Treatment Source: Obtain drinking water from another
source (nearest County, City, or Town or other wells) so the discharge or toxicity
problem is eliminated.
This alternative explores the possibility of obtaining drinking water from another source
(nearest County, City, or Town or other wells) so the discharge or toxicity problem is
eliminated. Based upon the 2018 Local Water Supply Plan, the Town of Vanceboro
average daily use ranged from 0.176 to 0.218 MGD and had a maximum day use of
0.3830 MGD (September 2018). The 2018 Local Water Supply Plan also estimated the
Town will have a 2060 average daily demand (ADD) of 0.2537 million gallons per day
(MGD). Appendix D contains a copy of the Craven County water system Local Water
Supply Plan for 2018.
The Town of Vanceboro currently has an emergency interconnection with the Craven
County water system (NC0425055). Craven County is located within the Central Coastal

Plain Capacity Use Area (CCPCUA) and the Craven County water system is a registered
permit holder (CU3108). Appendix E contains a copy of the CCPCUA Permit Data for
Craven County. Due to the CCPCUA Rules, the Craven County water system has been
subject to withdrawal reductions since 2008. The 2018 Local Water Supply Plan
indicates that demand as percent of supply is approximately 60% and will approach 80%
between 2040 and 2050. At this time, it does not appear that this would be viable
alternative source.
The Town of Vanceboro utilizes groundwater sources that are in the Castle Hayne
aquifer and are currently not subject to withdrawal reductions based on the Central
Coastal Capacity Use Area (CCPCUA) Rules. The Division of Water Resources may not
permit new groundwater sources located in deeper aquifers that are subject to the
CCPCUA Rules. Since there are no public water supply wells located in the deeper
aquifers in this area of Craven County, it is not known what raw water quality may exist
or what treatment may be required. This alternative would require two new
groundwater wells being installed along with the possible construction of a new water
treatment plant that would have a discharge. Due to the amount of required
infrastructure, this alternative is not financially feasible.
3.5 Use Alternative Water Treatment Method: Install alternative and/or innovative
/Ok*� water treatment methods or operational improvements that do not produce toxic
wastewaters. For example, install a recycle iron/manganese filtration system with no
discharge or combine discharge with WWTP or cooling water effluents.
This category includes evaluating alternative and/or innovative water treatment
methods or operational improvements that do not produce toxic wastewaters. In
effect, this would mean eliminating the softener (and ion exchange) and using a
different technology that does not produce the brine/salt discharge in the form of
reverse osmosis (110). However, these technologies produce a brine/saline discharge in
the form of concentrate stream that must be disposed of. Thus, use of nanofiltration or
RO would need to be combined with a large water body discharge to be applicable. This
alternative does not solve the original discharge problem and is not economically
feasible.
3.6 Discharge to a Larger waterbody/Perform a dilution model: Relocate the
facility's discharge to a larger receiving waterbody to eliminate or reduce toxic impacts
to the receiving waterbody given the increased dilution. If applicable, perform a dilution
model to receive allowance for steam dilution in WET test.

In this alternative, the WTP's discharge line would be lengthened and rerouted to a
larger receiving waterbody to eliminate or reduce toxic impacts to the receiving
waterbody given the increased dilution. For any receiving body, a dilution mixing model
effort would be needed to receive allowance for dilution in WET test. A wastewater
pump station would be installed at the WTP and the pump station would discharge via a
discharge line leading to a single diffuser outlet.
The backwash and regeneration cycle volume are produced in approximately 88
minutes. The highest discharge rate during the filter backwash and softener
regeneration cycle is 560 gpm. This occurs during the initial segment of the filter
backwash.
Due to the salty nature of the discharges, the best choice for a new discharge location
would be to a tidally influenced area where the salinity of the discharge will not have as
great an impact. A larger water body around the Town of Vanceboro is the Neuse River.
The Neuse River is located south of the Town of Vanceboro. The advantage to a new
discharge into Neuse River segment 27-(96) is that it is classified SC; Sw; NSW.
Appendix F contains a copy of page 23 of the Neuse River Basin hydro order that
documents this classification. A discharge to SC waters would change the WET test
requirements and also chloride limits. A discharge force main from the WTP would be
/421'�N approximately 8 miles along Mill Avenue to Hwy 17 Business and then Streets Ferry
Road to NC Hwy 55. Appendix G contains a map showing the route required. Due to
the amount of required infrastructure, this alternative is not financially feasible.
3.7 Combination of Alternatives: Employ any combination of the alternatives listed
above that would result in eliminating or decreasing toxicity until a more feasible
solution becomes available.
Each of the alternatives stated above either do not solve the original discharge problem
and/or are not financially feasible for the Town of Vanceboro. Therefore, a combination
of these alternatives would also not solve the original discharge problem and/or would
not be financially feasible.
3.8 Discharge Variance
The Town of Vanceboro may apply to the Environmental Management Commission
(EMC) for a variance to the NPDES permit discharge requirements under State Statute
143-215.3 (e). This statute reads as follows:

eoll� "Variances. —Any person subject to the provisions of G.S. 143-215.1 or 143-214.1, 143-
215, or 143-215.107. The Commission may grant such variance, for fixed or indefinite
periods after public hearing on due notice, or where it is found that circumstances so
require, for a period not to exceed 90 days without prior hearing and notice. Prior to
granting a variance here under, the Commission shall find that: (1) The discharge of
waste or the emission of air contaminants occurring or proposed to occur do not
endanger human health or safety; and (2) Compliance with the rules, standards, or
limitations from which variance is sought cannot be achieved by application of best
available technology found to be economically reasonable at the time of application for
such variances, and would produce hardship without equal or greater benefits to the
public, provided that such variances shall be consistent with the provision of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act as amended or the Clean air Act as amended; and provided
further, that any person who would otherwise be entitled to a variance or modification
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended or the Clean Air Act as
amended shall also be entitled to the same variance from or modification in rules,
standards, or limitations established pursuant to G>S> 143-214.1, 143-215, and 143-
215.107, respectively."
If NPDES variances were to be granted for the WTPs by the DWR, the variance must be applied
for, re-evaluated by DWR, and granted every five years for each NPDES permit renewal. It is
/906) not clear at this point what cost would be incurred for the variance requests for the WTP in the
future as the requirements are determined on a case by case basis.
4.0 ALTERNATIVES PRESENT WORTH COSTS
A present worth costs analysis was not completed because the alternatives would either not
solve the original discharge problem and/or would not be financially feasible for the Town of
Vanceboro.
5.0 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
This study has been conducted to meet NPDES permit requirements to assess methods for
treatment/discharge of wastewater from the WTP to avoid the toxicity impact on Mauls
Swamp. The feasibility of alternative methods was presented in Section 3. The cost of the
alternatives is significant and most do not solve the original discharge problem.
The Town would prefer to work with NC DEQ Water Resources staff on an updated sampling
plan that would assist in securing pass results for the WET tests. This is an alternative that

would not add a financial burden to the Town and should meet the goal of regulatory
compliance.
If this plan of action does not meet the goal of compliance, the next preferred method would
be the installation of a holding tank. The tank would have a volume of approximately 20,000
gallons with a mixer to properly combine the filter backwash and softener regeneration prior to
discharge. Based on calculations of the chloride loading during the brine cycle compared to the
total discharge volume.. WET testing conducted using Ceriodaphinia dubia (water fleas) should
provide a pass for chronic test results.
5.1 ALTERNATIVE IMPLEMENTATION
It is important to note that the preferred alternative is not part of the seven (7) alternative
choices that are listed on page 5 of 7 of the permit. The recommended implementation steps
are as follows:
1. Contact NC DEQ Water Resources staff in the Washington Regional Office for a
meeting to discuss the representative sampling plan for collection of WET samples
from the WTP discharge.
tA� 2. Based on the results of the meeting(s), an updated sampling plan may be created for
approval of use by the Town of Vanceboro.
3. Conduct WET sampling based on the updated representative sampling plan to
determine compliance.
4. If compliance is achieved, no further actions must be taken.
5. If compliance is not achieved, or an updated representative sampling plan cannot be
secured, then a meeting with the WaRO staff will be scheduled to discuss the
possibility of utilizing a holding tank. After determining what would be required by
the State for implementation (i.e. permitting, compliance monitoring, etc.), the
Town of Vanceboro would have to review and discuss the financial viability of this
alternative.
5.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE
The project schedule for implementation steps 1 & 2 are dependent on the availability of the
NC DEQ WaRO staff, Town of Vanceboro staff, and consultant. If steps 1 & 2 can be
implemented, scheduling of step 3 is strictly based on the WET test compliance monitoring
schedule.

Figure 2.1
NPDES LOCATION MAP

USGS Quad: F30SW Vancebbro, NC
Outfall Facili
atitude: 35018' 13.6" N 35018' 15.1" N
ingitude: 770 8' S 1.1 f' W 770 8' S0.3" W
Stream Class: C. Sw, NSW .
Subbasin:03-04-09 HUC:03020202
Vanceboro WTP NCO080071
Craven County
Receiving Stream: UT to Mauls

Figure 2.2
TREATMENT & DISCHARGE SCHEMATIC

raL1110TO.I1113i73IkF-lureP!
WELL #1
AERATOR-- o FILTER- ® ION EXCHANGE SOFTENER— `V
Well #2�
10,880 GALLONS 5,400 GALLONS
® DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
0.016 MGD
- ® UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO MAULS SWAMP
0 UTFALL 001
Town of Vanceboro WTP Discharge
MeH16918

Appendix A
NPDES PERMIT, INFORMATION

� NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory.
Govemor
February 5, 2015
E. Renee Ipok
Town of Vanceboro
P. O. Box 306
Vanceboro,. NC 28586
Donald R. van der Vaart
ecretary
REC�CDENRftnM '
FEB 19 2015
Water Quality Regt mal
opwdorns Section
WOMOD111 RagbW 01ft
• Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit
Permit NCO080071
Vanceboro WTP
Craven County
Class I
Dear Ms. Ipok :
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject
-permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding -the attached NPDES permit. This permit'is issued pursuant to
the requirements of North Carolina. General Statute 143-215.1and the Memorandum of Agreement
'1 between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.dated October 15, 2007 (or as
subsequently amended).
SMMM= of Changes in Final Permit from Exigling Permit
1) Removed monthly average flow limit. Weeldy monitoring to continue. Applied the 2009 - WateT
Treatment Plant Strategy which removes the flow limit. [See A.(1.)] .
2) Reduced monitoring for total chloride, total copper, total iron, and total` zinc to quarterly to
coincide with chronic toxicity sampling. Edited chronic toxicity footnote. As action level
toxicity parameters of concern, these .parameters are to be evaluated in conjunction with the
Whole -Effluent Toxicity (WET) test. Note, this permit may be reopened and limits added for
these parameters if WET tests continue to demonstrate aquatic toxicity. [See A.(1.)]
3) Reduced monitoring for total manganese to quarterly to coincide with chronic toxicity
sampling. Edited chronic toxicity footnote. As a toxicity parameter of concern, monitoring'in
conjunction with the quarterly toxicity test was implemented. [See A.(1.)]
4) Reduced monitoring for Total Nitrogen (M and Total Phosphorus (TP) to • semi-annual.
Removed reporting of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (continue to measure to determine TM,
Nitrite/Nitrate Nitrogen (continue to measure to determine. Tom, and Total Nitrogen Loam
Removed Calculation of Total Nitrogen Loads special condition. Removed Total Monthly Flow
footnote. The 2012 Neuse River Basin Strategy reduced nutrient .requirements from monthly to
semi-annual monitoring and reporting for TN and TP. [See A.(1.)]
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleth, North Carolina 27699.1617
_ -Location: 512 N. Salisbury St Raleth, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] t Fax: [phone]
lntemet: Wvkmcdenrgov
An Equal QpportuniVAfiirmdva Action Employer

ti
E. Rene Ipok
February 5, 2015
Page 3 of 3
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Ron Berry at -telephone
number [phone] or at email [e-mail].
Sincerely,
e%*ct!g
Z
Director Division of Water Resources
Attachments
Cc: Washington Regional Office/Water Quality Programs
WSS/Aquatic Toxicology Branch/Susan Meadows (email)
Central Fili`es
NPDES Ale
. ti.
f

s
Permit NCO080071
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE.
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, the
Town of Vanceboro
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility .located at the
Vanceboro WTP
923 Farm Life Avenue northeast of Vanceboro.
Craven County.
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary to Mauls Swamp in the Neuse River Basin in
accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, -and other conditions set forth in Paris I,
II, and III hereof. '
The permit shall become effective .................................. March 1, 2015.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on February 29, 2020.
Signed this day .:.................... February 5, 2015.
'K.j&yZimmerm6/7'-"
Ai%ng Director, Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 7

/'01
Permit NCO080071
Part I
A: (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
a. During the period beginning on the effective date of this -permit and lasting until expiration,'the
Permittee is authorized to discharge backwash/rinse wastewater from Dutfa11001. Such discharges
shall be limited and monitored 1 by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFI;UENT ....
CHARACTERISTICS
tzw
MO TOWNG RE UIREME
y'Z'S . i .
IV�ontlily
: ,
e
Daily.
Maximum
1Vleasuremerit
:..,.
tiew..eiacY
Sample
Tbe
Sample.'
s ..
Location -
Flow, MOD.
Weekly
Estimated
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0' mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month -.
Grab
Effluent'
PH
. -
Not les than 6.0 S.U. nor
eater than 9.0 S.U.-
2/Month.
.Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
17 µ
-2/Month
Grab
Effluent
Salinity, p2t <<_ .
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Conductivi os/cm
Monthly
. Grab
Effluent
Total Dissolved"Solids mg/L
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Ammonia as Nitrogen, m
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Turbidity, NT J
Monthl
Grab
Effluent
Total Chloride, m
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Copper, µg/L4
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent -
Tow Iron, mg/L
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Manganese, mW
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Zinc, g/L -
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity a
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen, mg/L5
Monitor &
R ort
Semi-annual
Grab
Effluent
Total Phosphorus, m
Monitor & Re ort
Semi-annual
=Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. No later than 270 days from the effective date of this permit; begin submitting discharge monitoring
reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR application system. See Special Condition A.(4.).
2. Flow is estimated based on influent meter flow rates and duration of discharges events that occur
daily. Records shall be maintained and available for inspection indicating the flow rates and duration
of daily events used to calculate the reported flow.
3. Limit and monitor only if the facility adds chlorine or a chlorine derivative to water that is eventually
discharged The. Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 pg/L to be
compliant with the permit. However, the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values
reported by a North Carolina laboratory (including field certified), even if these values fall below 50
14L -
4. Chronic toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubla) c@ 90% conducted in March, June, September, and December.
Sampling for total chloride, total copper, total iron, total manganese, and total zinc shall be conducted
in conjunction with toxicity testing. See Special Condition A. (2.).
5. For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + (NO2 N + NO3-N), where TN is Total Nitrogen, (NOZ,
N + NO3-N) is Nitrite/Nitrate Nitrogen, and TKN is Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen.
b. All samples collected shall be from a representative discharge event.
/-au� c. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 3 of 7

I/4"%�
rO�
Permit NCO080071
A. (3) DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
(G.S. 143-215.3.(a)(2)] .-
The Permttiee shall assess potential. alternatives to eliminate Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) test
failures. This evaluation shall assess the feasibility of all the following alternatives:
1. Connect discharge to a WWTP: Determine whether the wastewater can be discharged to a
wastewater treatment plant. Approval or disapproval from the plant operator
should be acquired.
2. Obtain a lion -discharge ,permit: Eliminate the surface water discharge by obtaining a non-
discharge permit for spray irrigation, infiltration, or subsurface disposal (on -site
drainfield; infiltration gallery, injection wells).
3. Install Wastewater Treatment: Install improved wastewater treatment to enable the facility
effluent to consistently pass the WET test. If this is not technically feasible or
_ . cost prohibitive, please explain and provide estimated costs.
4. Use Alternative Water Treatment Source: Obtain drinking water from another source (nearest
County, City, or Town or other wells) so the discharge or toxicity problem is
• i � eliminated.
5. Use Alternative Water Treatment Method: Install alternative and/or innovative water treatment
methods or operational improvements that do not produce toxic wastewaters.
For example, install a recycle iron/rnanganese filtration system with no
discharge or combine discharge with WWTP or cooling water effluents.
6. Discharge to a Larger waterbodv/Perform a dilution model: Relocate the facility's discharge to
a larger -receiving waterbody to eliminate or reduce toxic impacts to the
receiving waterbody given the increased dilution. If applicable, perform a
dilution model to receive allowance for stream dilution in. WET test
7. Combination of Alternatives: Employ any combination of the alternatives listed above that would
result in eliminating or -decreasing toxicity until a more feasible solution
becomes available.
The evaluation shall include a present value of costs analysis for all technologically feasible options as
outlined in the Division's "Engineering Alternatives Analysis Guidance Document." This Document can
be found at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/sW/ps/npdes/permits.
This evaluation is being requested to determine whether there are any economical and -technologically
feasible alternatives available -to the Permit -tee. to address aquatic toxicity in the plant effluent. Based
upon the evaluation, please identify viable alternatives and present an implementation schedule and
project timeline for the preferred alternative. The- Permtttee shall submit the Discharge Alternatives
Evaluation to the Division along with the submission of their next permit renewal application (due 6
months prior to permit expiration on March 1, 2015) to:
NC DENR / Division of Water Resources / Water Quality Permitting
NPDES, Wastewater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Page 5 of 7 .

.e0*41N
Permit NCO080071
(Continued A. (4)ELECTRONIC REPORTING OF DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS)
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/boglipu/edmr
Regardless of the submission method, the first DMR is due on the last day of the month following
the issuance of the permit or in the case of a new facility, on the last day of the month following -the
commencement of discharge.
2. Signatory Reatuirements (Suuulements Section B. (11.) (b) and suuersedes Section B. (11.1(d)l
All eDMRs submitted to the permit issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in Part II,
Section B. (I1.)(a) or by a duly authorized representative of that person as described in. Part II,
Section B. (I I )(b). A person, and not a position, must be delegated signatory authority for eDMR
reporting purposes.
For eDMR submissions, the person signing and submitting the DMR must obtain an eDMR- user
account and -login credentials to access the eDMR system. For more information *on North
Carolina's eDMR system, registering for. eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account,. please visit
the following web page:
a�
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/boglipu/edmr
Certification. Any person submitting an electronic DMR using the state's eDMR system shall make
the following certification [40 CFR 122.22]. NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION
WILL BE ACCEPTED:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments wereprepared under my
direction or supervision in -accordance with a system designed to assure that qual fled personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted Based on my inquiry of the person or
persons who -manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,
the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are signicant penalties for submitting false information including the
possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations "
3. Records Retention [Supplements Section D. (6.)l
The permittee shall . retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports; including eDMR
submissions. - These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the
date *of the report. This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time [40 CFR
122.41].
Page 7 of 7

10
Vanceboro WI?
tic
i
I w � •
• •� Discharge - r i
s
- :w. • ceM �.� ; �� NCO080071 ­.j/../���
•• w. 1 A f
..b • , •�...• } 1 ')%-:.'.' ��.'' w•�• y .fib+. • . t .i
ra- WIN
rn
41
� ,,,,,.,, d►0 .. + � .�y � .•� ..ram
mow,.,,,,, 1( •�,�.rr �'" ID
tl
' ��.. .«..ram ..- ..... ..r..+.+.. �.w�. ...4... ..rww.w+... ..w...rr.+ '•- � .,� .. 4
,r--•- .Y
s PJX: 1 in=24000 ft
USGS Quad: F30SW Vancebbro, NC
Outffall Facili ,
-J,atitude: 35018' 13.6" N 35018' 15.1" N
r .x •a ✓
ongitude: 77* 8' 51.1" W 770 8' S0.3" W
North Facility Location's
Stream Class: C, Sw, NSWtY
Subbasin: 03-04-09 HUC: 03020202 Vanceboro WIT? NC0080071
Receiving 8tream: UT to -Mauls Swamp Craven Countv

Appendix B
TOWN OF VANCEBORO 2018 LOCAL
WATER SUPPLY PLAN

Adi
Vanceboro 2§i
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the date contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers
DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely free of emors
and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LW SPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result
In significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
1. System Information
Contact Information
Water System Name: Vanceboro
Mailing Address: PO Box 306
Vanceboro, NC 28586
Contact Person:
Phone:
Secondary Contact:
Mailing Address:
Beverly W. Drake
252-244-0919
Mike Hill
100 Stroud Ave.
Pink Hill, NC 28572
Distribution System
Line Type
Asbestos Cement
Polyvinyl Chloride
PWSID: 04-25-020
Ownership: Municipality
Titre: Town Clerk
Cell/Mobile: —
Phone: [phone]
Cell/Mobile: —
Size Range (Inches)
8
2-6
Complete
Estimated % of Imes
5.00 %
95.00 %
What are the estimated total miles of distribution system lines? 16 Miles
How many feet of distribution lines were replaced during 20181 0 Feet
How many feet of new water mains were added during 2018? 0 Feet
How many meters were replaced in 2018? 8
How old are the oldest meters in this system? 50 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use, such as irrigation, are not billed for sewer services? 0
What is this system's finished water storage capacity? 0,5500 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any part of the system since last update? Line breaks that were repaired quickly should not be included No
Programs
Does this system have a program to work or flush hydrants? Yes, As Needed
Does this system have a valve exercise program? No
Does this system have a crosswnnection program? No
Does this system have a program to replace meters? Yes
Does this system have a plumbing retrofit program? No
Does this system have an active water conservation public education program? Yes
Does this system have a leak detection program? Yes
As employees ride through out town they are looking leaks
Water Conservation
What type of rate structure is used? Increasing Block
How much reclaimed water does this system use? 0.0000 MGD For how many connections? 0
Does this system have an interconnection with another system capable of providing water in an emergency? Yes
2. Water Use Information
Service Area
Sub -Basins)
^r Neuse River(10-1)
%of Service Population County($) %of Service Population
100 % Craven 100 %
What was the year-round population served in 2018? 1,864
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No

Water Use by Type
Type of Use Metered
Metered
Non
-Metered
Non -Metered
,IWx Connections
Average Use (MOD)
Connections
Estimated Use
(MGD)
Residential 428
0,0670
0
0.0000
Commercial 41
0,0080
0
0.0000
Industrial 1
0,0020
0
0,0000
Institutional 20
0.0710
0
0.0000
Haw much water was used for system processes (backwash, line cleaning, flushing, etc.)?
0,0150 MGD
Water Sales
Average
Days Contract
Required to
pipe Sizes)
Use
Purchaser PWSID Daily Sold
Used
comply with water
(Inches)
Type
(MGD)
MGD Expiration
Recurring
use restrictions?
Craven County 04-25-055 0.0000
0
Yes
Emergency
3. Water Supply Sources
Monthly Withdrawals & Purchases
Average Daily Max Day
Average Daily
Max Day
Average Daily
Max Day
Use MGD) Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use MGD)
Jan 0.2180 0.3150
May 0.1870
0.3420
Sep
0,1950
0.3830
Feb 0.1820 0.2840
Jun 0.1810
0.2950
Oct
0.1870
0.3050
Mar 0,1790 0.2720
Jul 0.1900
0.2870
Nov
0.1900
0.2810
Apr 0.1820 0.2700
Aug 0.1760
0.2750
Dec
0.1780
0.2920
The meters at the wells had not be calibrated in
20 years. This could be the the 11,000 gpd they is being
used for backwash.
The system is using raw water to
backwash.The ORC is going to have the well meters
calibrated.
/1
,I►,
Vanceboro's 2018 Monthly Withdrawals & Purchases
0 1
c
f
T
A
d
6
A
l]
C
0 0
F Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Ground Water Sources
Average Daily Withdrawal (MGD)
Name or Number
MGD Days Used
1 0.0940 363
2 0.0940 364
Ground Water Sources (continued)
Name or Number Well Depth (Feet) Casing Depth
(Feet)
1 165 160
2 165 160
Are ground water levels monitored? Yes, Monthly
Does this system have a wellhead protection program? Yes
Water Purchases From Other Systems
■ Avg Daily
. Max Day
Max Day Withdrawal (MGD)
12-Hour Supply
CUA Reduction Year Ofiline
Use Type
(MGD)
0.268
0.2160
CUAO
Regular
0.249
0.2160
CUA0
Regular
Screen Depth (Feet)
Well Diameter (Inches)
Pump Intake Depth (Feet)
Metered?
Top Bottom
128 160
8
105
Yes
128 160
8
105
Yes

Ail
Average Days Contract Required to pipe Size(s)
Seller PWSID Daily Purchased comply with water
(MGD) Used MOD Expiration Recurring use restrictions? (Inches)
Craven County 04-25-055 0.0000 0 Yes No 8
Water Treatment Plants
Plant Name Permitted
Capacity Is Raw Water Metered? Is Finished Water Ouput Metered?
Vanceboro Water Plant 0.4320 Yes Yes
Did average daily water production exceed 80 % of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2018? No
If yes. was any water conservation implemented? No
Did average daily water production exceed 90%of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2018? No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Am rcat day demands excected to exceed the water treatment plant capacity in the next 10 years? No
4. Wastewater Information
Monthly Discharges
Use
Type
Emergency
Source
Groundwater Castle Haynes
Average Daily
Average Daily
Average Daily
Discharge (MGD)
Discharge (MGD)
Discharge (MGD)
Jan
0.2190
May
0.2030
Sep
0.2070
Feb
0.2630
Jun
0.1950
Oct
0.1680
Mar
0.2530
Jul
0.1630
Nov
0.2160
Apr
0.2370
Aug
0.2370
Dec
0.2380
Vanceboro', 2018 Monthly Discharges
� 1
t7
I
T
W
6
N
C
O
A
la
C
O 0
f Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
■ Avg Daily
How many sewer connections does this system have? 481
How many water service connections with septic systems does this system have? 2
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years? No
Wastewater Permits
Permit Number Permitted Capacity Design Capacity Average AnnualDaily Discharge Maximum Day Discharge
Receiving Stream Receiving Basin
(MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD)
NCO031828 0.3000 0.3000 0.2170
Swift Creek
Neuse River (10-1)
NCO080071 0.0000 0.0000 0.0110
Maul.SWame
Neuse River (10-1)
Total discharge from both plants 0,228 MGD. Maul Swamp is the discharge from water plant the 2 wells pump to one water plant.
5. Planning
Projections
2018 2020 2030
2040
2050 2060
^s year -Round Population 1,864 1,876 1,914
1,949
2,017 2,111
Seasonal Population 0 0 0
0
0 0
Residential 0.0670 0.0680 0.0700
0.0730
0.0763 0.0801

Commercial 0.0080
0.0071
0.0079
0.0086
0.0095
0.0105
Industrial 0.0020
0.0021
0.0024
0.0027
0.0030
0.0033
Institutional 0.0710
0.0724
0.0797
0.0876
0.0964
0.1060
System Process 0,0150
0.0170
0.0180
0,0190
0.0200
0.0210
Unaccounted-for 0.0242
0.0247
0.0264
0.0283
0.0305
0.0328
The meters at the wells had not be calibrated in 20 years. This could be
the the 11.000 god
they is being used for backwash. The system is using raw water to
backwash.The ORC is going to have the well meters calibrated.
Demand v/s Percent of Supply
2018
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
Surface Water Supply
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Ground Water Supply
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
Purchases
0,0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Future Supplies
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0,0000
Total Available Supply (MGD)
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
0.4320
Service Area Demand
0.1872
0.1913
0.2044
0,2192
0.2357
0.2537
Sales
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Future Sales
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total Demand (MGD)
0.1872
0.1913
0.2044
0.2192
0.2357
0.2537
Demand as Percent of Supply
43 %
44%
47 %
51%
55 %
59%
JpGraph Error: 25121
Empty input data array specified for plot.
Must have at
I least one data point.
r1 The purpose of the above chart is to show a general indication of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over time. The per capita water demand may
actually be different than indicated due to seasonal populations and the accuracy of data submitted- Water systems that have calculated longterm per capita water
demand based on a methodology that produces different results may submit their information in the notes field.
Your long-term water demand is 36 gallons per capita per day. What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce the per capita water demand
Ileconduct regular water audits, implement a plumbing retrofit program, employ practices such as rainwater harvesting or reclaimed water)? If these practices are
covered elsewhere in your plan, indicate where the practices are discussed here.
Are there other demand management practices you will implement to reduce your future supply needs?
What supplies other than the ones listed in future supplies are being considered to meet yourfuture supply needs?
How does the water system intend to implement the demand management and supply planning components above?
Additional Information
Has this system participated in regional water supply or water use planning? Yes, CCPCUA
What major water supply reports or studies were used for planning? CCPCUA
Please describe any other needs or issues regarding your water supply sources, any water system deficiencies or needed improvements (storage, treatment, etc.) or your
ability to meet present and future water needs. Include both quantity and quality considerations. as well as financial, technical, managerial, permitting, and compliance
issues: Radio read meters.
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers.
DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely free of errors
and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result
in significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.

Appendix C
� MAULS SWAMP STREAM CLASSIFICATION

NC DENR - DIVISON OF WATER RESOURCES
2B.0300
0315 NEUSE RIVER BASIN
Name of Stream
p%
Description
Class
Class Date
Index No.
orham Swamp
From source to Creeping Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5-3-0.5
Pollard Swamp
From source to Creeping Swamp
C,Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5-3-1
Palmetto Swamp
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5.3
Fork Swamp
From source to Palmetto Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5.3-1
Mauls Swamp
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5.7
Swift Creek
From mouth of Bear Branch to Neuse
SC;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-(6)
River
Bear Branch
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-7
Little Swift Creek
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-8
Bushy Fork
From source to Little Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-8-1
Pine Tree Swamp
From source to Little Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-8-2
Kit Swamp
From source to Little Swift Creek
C,Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-8-2.5
Fisher Swamp
From source to Little Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-8-3
Beaverdam Swamp
From source to Fisher Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-8-3-1
Bachelor Creek
From source to mouth in Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98
located 3.2 miles more or less
downstream from The Gut
Hollis Branch
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-1
(Batchelder) Creek
,R[Iover Creek
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2
(Batchelder) Creek
Ueep Branch
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2.1
(Batchelder) Creek
Beaverdam Branch
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2.2
(Batchelder) Creek
Jumping Run
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2.3
(Batchelder) Creek
Beech Tree Branch
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2.4
(Batchelder) Creek
Round Tree Branch
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2.5
(Batchelder) Creek
Caswell Branch
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-2.6
(Batchelder) Creek
The Gut
From source to Bachelor
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-98-3
(Batchelder) Creek
Renny Creek
From source to Neuse River
SC;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-99
Mills Branch
From source to Neuse River
SC;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-99.5
Jack Smith Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-100
Trent River
From source to mouth of Deep Gully
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-(1)
Running Branch
From source to Trent River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-1.5
Horse Branch
From source to Trent River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-2
Beaverdam Swamp
From source to Trent River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-3
^shua Creek
From source to Trent River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-4
—ickyard Branch
From source to Joshua Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-4-1
Bearwell Branch
From source to Joshua Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-101-4-2
24

Appendix D
CRAVEN COUNTY 2018 LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN

Craven County
2018
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a courtesy and service to our customers.
DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is completely has of errors
and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result
in significant revision, Questions regarding the accuracy, or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
1. System Information
Contact Information
Water System Name: Craven County
Mailing Address: 406 Craven Street
New Bern, NC 28560
Contact Person:
Phone:
Secondary Contact:
Mailing Address-
Elliot Thomas
252-636-6181
Nadyne Bentley
2830 Nauss Blvd
New Bern, NC 28562
PWSID: 04-25-055
Ownership: County
Title: Water Treatment Plant Supervisor
Cell/Mobile: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Cell/Mobile: [phone]
Complete
Distribution System
Line Type Size flange (Inches) Estimated %of lines
Ductile Iron 4-16 1.00 %
Other 6-14 1.00 %
Polyvinyl Chloride 2-18 98,00 %
What are the estimated total miles of distribution system lines? 650 Miles
How many feet of distribution lines were replaced during 2018? 0 Feet
` How many feet of new water mains were added during 2018? 0 Feet
/ \ How many meters were replaced in 20189 170
How old are the oldest meters in this system? 35 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use, such as imgation, are not billed for sewer services? 43
What is this system's finished water storage capacity? 3.4000 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any part of the system since last update? Line breaks that were repaired quickly should not be included. No
Programs
Does this system have a program to work or flush hydrants? Yes, Annually
Does this system have a valve exercise program? Yes, As Needed
Does this system have a cross -connection program? Yes
Does this system have a program to replace meters? Yes
Does this system have a plumbing retrofit program? No
Does this system have an active water conservation public education program? Yes
Does this system have a leak detection program? No
Water Conservation
Wnat type of rate structure is used? Increasing Block
How much reclaimed water does this system use? 0.0000 MGD For how many connections? 0
Does this system have an interconnection with another system capable of providing water in an emergency? Yes
2. Water Use Information
Service Area
Sub-Basin(s)
Neuse River(10-1)
%of Service Population County(s) %of Service Population
100 % Craven 100 %
What was the year-round population served in 2018? 36,250
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No

Water Use by Type
Type of Use Metered
Metered
Non -Metered
Non -Metered
Polk,
Connections Average Use (MGD)
Connectors
Estimated Use (MGD)
Residential 14.470
1.9832
0
0.0000
Commercial 1,073
0.2031
0
0.0000
Industrial 0
0.0000
0
0.0000
Institutional 0
0.0000
0
0.0000
How much water was used for system processes (backwash, line cleaning, flushing, etc.)? 0.6592 MGD
Water Sales
Average Days
Contract
Required to Pipe S¢e(s) Use
Purchaser PWSID Daily Sold
comply with water
(MGD) Used
MGD Expiration
Recurring use restrictions?
(Inches) Type
Cove City 04-25-045 0.0310 365
0.2500 2025
Yes Yes
6 Regular
First Craven SO 04-25-040 0.0000 0
0.0000 2050
No No
6 Emergency
Havelock 04-25-015 0.4500 14
0.0000 2050
Yes Yes
8 Emergency
Jones County 04-52-020 0.5000 5
No
8 Emergency
New Bem 04-25-010 0.0000 0
0.0000 2050
Yes No
12 Emergency
North River 04-16-197 0.1600 63
0.0000 2050
Yes Yes
6 Emergency
Town of Dover 04-25-025 0.0000 0
0.2500 2050
Yes Yes
6 Emergency
Vancebom 04-25-020 0.0000 0
0.0000 2050
Yes No
6 Emergency
3. Water Supply Sources
Monthly Withdrawals a Purchases
Average Daily Max Day
Average Daily
Max Day
Average Daily Max Day
Use (MGD) Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use (MGD)
Use (MGD) Use (MGD)
Jan 3.6020 5.6040 May
3.0200
5.5430 Sep
3.5760 6.2490
i0\
Feb 2.7160 3.8730 Jun
2.9030
4.0430 Oct
3.2080 4.8700
Mar 2.9240 3.9080 Jul
3.0520
4.3650 Nov
2.6720 3.5890
Apr 2.9710 5.3470 Aug
2.9640
4.5550 Dec
2.6380 5.0300
Craven County's 2018 Monthly Withdrawals
& Purchases
� 8
7
f
■ Avg Daily
♦
Max Day
0 6
0 4 ♦ • ♦__-
q
l7
C
2 2
f Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Jul Aug
Sep Oct Nov
Dec
Ground Water Sources
Average Daily Withdrawal
12-Hour
Name or Number (MGD)
Max Day withdrawal
Supply
CUA Year Use
(MGD)
(MGD)
Reduction Online Type
MGD Days Used
Bryan 0.3270 212
1.004
0.7200
CUA25 Regular
Bryan PO 0.0690 210
0.175
0.1120
CUAO Regular
Davis 0.2840 B2
1.273
0.5760
CUA25 Regular
Davis PD 0.0660 41
0.237
0.1150
CUAO Regular
f1
Flanners Beach #2 - 0.2550 342
0.805
0.5760
CUAO Regular
W13
Flanners Beach #3 - 0.3470 332
0,849
0.5760
CUAO Regular
WO8

Flanners Beach #4 -
0.3450
333
0.774
0.5760
CUAO
Regular
W06
Flanners Beach #5 -
/► W09
0.2380
68
0.659
0.5760
CUAO
Regular
Ft Barnwell
0.3110
250
1.281
0.5400
CUA25
Regular
Ft Barnwell PO
0.0560
64
0.176
0.0860
CUAO
Regular
Lewis Farm Rd 91 - W11
0.3340
340
0.762
0.5760
CUAO
Regular
Stately Pines #2-W12
0.2640
339
0.736
0.5760
CUAO
Regular
Stately Pines #3-W10
0.3000
341
0.881
0.5780
CUAO
Regular
Water Plant Well -W07
0.3380
338
0.818
0.5760
CUAO
Regular
Wells
0.3640
244
1.513
0.5400
CUA25
Regular
Well 5 PD
0.0590
237
0,230
0A940
CUAO
Regular
Wintergreen
0.3270
272
1.272
0.5760
CUA25
Regular
Wintergreen PD
0.0690
45
0.169
0.1800
CUAO
Regular
,AM1
Ground Water Sources (continued)
Casing Depth
Screen Depth (Feet)
Name or Number Well Depth (Feet)
(FeeO
Well Diameter (Inches)
Pump Intake Depth (Feet)
Metered?
Top
Bottom
Bryan 804
535
535
788
10
320
Yes
Bryan PD 312
262
262
302
10
252
Yes
Davis 828
714
714
818
10
240
Yes
Davis PD 338
303
303
338
10
296
Yes
Flanners Beach #2 - W13 250
250
205
245
12
100
Yes
Flanners Beach #3 - Wb8 247
247
202
242
12
100
Yes
Flanners Beach #4- WO6 250
250
205
245
12
115
Yes
Flanners Beach #5-W09 255
255
210
250
12
100
Yes
Ft Barnwell 800
495
495
698
10
270
Yes
Ft Barnwell PD 242
197
197
237
10
191
Yes
Lewis Farm Rd #1 - W11 280
280
235
275
12
115
Yes
Stately Pines #2- W12 271
271
226
266
12
110
Yes
Stately Pines #3 - W10 261
261
216
256
12
100
Yes
Water Plant Well -W07 280
280
235
275
12
115
Yes
well 708
606
606
698
10
287
Yes
Well 5 PO 283
253
253
273
10
242
Yes
Wintergreen 800
535
535
780
10
270
Yes
Wintergreen PD 330
280
280
320
10
276
Yes
Are ground water levels monitored? Yes, Monthly
Does this system have a wellhead protection program?
No
The Division of Water Resources Local Water Supply
Plan database does
not currently accurately track allowable groundwater withdrawals regulated by
Central Coastal Plain Capacity Use Area Permits. These allowable withdrawals are regulated by that Permit rather than the design capacity of the system's
wells. Therefore, the allowable withdrawal from
the system's "Its
in 2018
was only 6.2283 MGD rather than the 12-hr
well capacity of 8.1470 MGD.
This
reduction effectively increases the Demand as Percent of Supply shown in
Section 5 of the
Plan from 38%to 50%,
Water Purchases From Other Systems
Required to
Average
Contract
comply with
Pipe
Seller
PWSID
Purrcchased aily
Days
water
Size(s)Type
Used
MGD
Expiration
Recumng
use
(Inches)
(MGD)
restrictions?
First Craven
040r'
0.0000
0
0.0000
2050
No
No
6
Emergency
Havelock
0155
0.0000
0
0.0000
2050
Yes
Yes
B
Emergency
Jones County Regional Water
04-52-
0.0000
0
0.0000
2050
Yes
Yes
8
Emergency
System
020
New Bem
0 '20
0.0000
0
0.0000
2050
Yes
Yes
8
Emergency
North River
0.0000
0
0.0000
2050
No
Yes
3
Emergency
196
Vancebom
04-25-
0.0000
0
0.0000
2050
Yes
Yes
8
Emergency
020

Water Treatment Plants
'^` Plant Name Permitted Capacity
Is Raw Water Metered? Is Finished Water Ouput Metered?
Source
(MGD)
Bryan/PeeDee Well 0.8320
Yes
Yes
Black Creek/PeeDee
Craven County Water Treatment 3.0000
Yes
Yes
Castle Hayne Aquifer
Davis/PeeDee Well 0.6910
Yes
Yes
BlackCresk/PeeDee
Dover/ Pee Dee Well 0.6260
Yes
Yes
Black Creek/ PeeDee
Well# 5/ PeeDee 0.6340
Yes
Yes
Black Creek/PeeDee
Writergreen/PeeDee Well 0.7560
Yes
Yes
BlackCreek(PeeDee
Did average daily water production exceed 80% of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2018?
No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Did average daily water production exceed 90% of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2018?
No
If yes, was any water conservation implemented? No
Are peak day demands expected to exceed the water treatment plant
capacity in the next 10 years? No
4. Wastewater Information
Monthly Discharges
Average Daily
Average Daily
Average Daily
Discharge (MGD)
Discharge (MGD)
Discharge (MGD)
Jan 0.7106 May
0.6451
Sep
0.7814
Feb 0.5732 Jun
0.6308
Oct
0.6593
Mar 0.6347 Jul
0.6587
Nov
0.5818
Apr 0.6455 Aug
0.6038
Dec
0.5646
Z Jan
Craven County's 2018 Monthly Discharges
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
■ Avg Daily
How many sewerconnections does this system have? 0
How many water service connections with septic systems does this system have? 9.910
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years? No
Wastewater Permits
Permit Number Permitted Capacity Design Capacity Average AnnualDaily Discharge Maximum Day Discharge Receiving Stream Receiving Basin
(MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD)
NCO089460 1.2000 1.2000 0.6396 1.1920 Nauss River Nauss River (10-1)
Although we stale that we have a 1.2 MGD flow limit we do not actually have a maximum flow limit At our current production of 3 MGD, 1.2 MGD would be the
most we could discharge.
5. Planning
Prajeclions
2018 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060
Year -Round Population 36,250 35,564 41,593 48,645 56,892 62,500
Seasonal Population 0 0 0 0 0 0

Residential
1.9832
1.9560
2.2876
2.6755
3.1291
3.4375
Commercial
0.2031
0.2800
0.3300
0.3900
OA500
0.5000
Industrial
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Institutional
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
System Process
0,6692
0.6600
0.6700
0.6800
0.6900
0.7000
Unaccounted-for
0.1925
0.3210
0.3210
0.3210
0.3210
0.3210
Future Water Sales
Contract
Purchaser PWSID Pipe Size(s)(inches) Use Type
MGD Year Begin Year End
CCPCUA 00-00-000 0,0800 2019 2061 Regular
The sale identified as to the CCPCUA is not actually a sale but a reduction in the available supply due to the conditions of the CCPCUA Permit issued to the
County.
1
-J Demand v/s Percent of Supply
2018 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060
Surface Water Supply 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Ground Water Supply 8.1470 5.9330 5.9330 5,9330 5.9330 5.9330
Purchases 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Future Supplies 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total Available Supply (MGD) 8.1470 5.9330 5.9330 5,9330 5.9330 5.9330
Service Area Demand 3.0380 3.2170 3.6086 4.0665 4.5901 4.9585
Sales 0.0827 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500
Future Sales 0.0800 0.0800 0.0800 0.0800 0.0800
Total Demand (111 3.1207 3.5470 3.9386 4,3965 4,9201 5.2885
Demand as Percent of Supply 38% 60% 66% 74% 83 % 89%
JpGraph Error: 25121 -
Empty input data array specified for plot. Must have at
I least one data point.
The purpose of the above chart is to show a general indication of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over 6me. The per capita water demand may
actually be different than indicated due to seasonal populations and the accuracy of data submitted. Water systems that have calculated long-term per capita water
demand based on a methodology that produces different results may submit their information in the notes field.
Your long-term water demand is 55 gallons per capita per day. What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce the per capita water demand
(i.e. conduct regular water audits, implement a plumbing retrofit program, employ practices such as rainwater harvesting or reclaimed water)? If these practices are
covered elsewhere in your plan, indicate where the practices are discussed here.
Are there other demand management practices you will implement to reduce your future supply needs? Continue to promote Water Conservation Education.
What supplies other than the ones listed in future supplies are being considered to meet your future supply needs? Our Water Treatment Plant is easily expandable by
an additional 2MGD for a total supply of 7-933MGD
How does the water system intend to implement the demand management and supply planning components above? Continue to promote Water Conservation by the
customer. Carefully monitor the growth of our customer base and plan according to large growth suddenly.
Additional Information
Has this system participated in regional water supply or water use planning? No
What major water supply reports or studies were used for planning?
Please describe any other needs or issues regarding your water supply sources, any water system deficiencies or needed Improvements (storage, treatment, etc.) or your
ability to meet present and future water needs. Include both quantity and quality considerations, as well as financial, technical, managerial, permitting. and compliance
issues:
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) provides the data Contained within this Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) as a Courtesy and service to our customers.
DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR, nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is Completely free of errors

and omissions. Furthermore, data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff. Subsequent review may result
in significant revision. Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.

Appendix E
CCPCUA DATA FOR CRAVEN COUNTY

1�2
About DM • Contact Us - Jobs- News • Calendar• seas
Goegle Search
Central Coastal Plain Capacity Use Area Permit Data for Craven County Water
Permit holder
Craven County Water
Application Received
06/112019
Permit number
CU3108
Application Complete
06/102019
Permit status
Active
Application Public Notice
D811912019
County
Craven
Draft Perrrft Public Notice 07/092019
Type of Use
Public Supply
Issue Date
D9/022019
Cretaceous Water Bank
Yes
Fapimbon Date
07/312024
Bank Start Date
08/01/2D07
Date First Issued
11/082004
Withdrawals Not Subiect
to .0503 Reductions
5,767,200 Aquifer: Tdi,
No. of 14
Permitted Maximum Daily Ground Water
Kpd
Wells:
Withdrawal (In GPD):
bterwilationj
Aquifer
S
urfidal
u
riper Tertiary
orktown
ch
sere He ne
eaufort
eases,
Kbc
Black Creek
Kud
pper Cape Fear
Kid
ower Ca a Fear
Br
asement Rock
Wihdrawals$ub)ggt to .0503 Reductions 952,790,700 Aquifer. Kbc, No. of 5 North Carolina Aquifer Information
Approved Base Rate (In GPY): Kud Wells:
Temporary Permit Withdrawal Rate (in Ground Water Management Branch web site
Future Pertnllle0 Annual Withdrawal Rates (in GPY) SPY)
August 1, 2D08 through July 31, 2013 714,593,025 Beginning on 2019-08-02 476,395,350
August 1, 2013 through July 31, 2018 476,395,350
Augusi1,2018 238,197,675
This pemniree has filed a Local Water Supply Plan. Click here to review their plan. Access this permit holders withdrawal data formatted for Local Water Supply Planning
for all wells and individual wells.
Access any Local Water Supply Plan here.
Water Withdrawal Statistics for Craven County Water (CU3108)
Wells Not Subiect to 0503 Reductions
Calendar YearfTypellYear
Total (gallonsvery a Da allons/da
Mazimum Da allonsltla
of Da
2009 ell
140,578,20 443,269
846,9
317
2010 ell
148,611,30 431,210
811,7
340
2011 dl
161,448,90 445,991
927,7
362
M12 Well
150,922, 412,357
868,2
366
2013 Well
142,838, 391,338
698,5
385
2014 Well
147,345, 403,687
812,50
365
2015 WNI
129,595,20 372,400
751,50
348
2016 Well
725,772,40 345,529
582,00
364
W17 Well
256,876,59 703,777
2 830 50'qj
365
2018 Well
795,045,00 2,178,205
3,fi77,2
365
2019 Well
534,495,20 2,199,589
4,048,20
243
Wells Subiect to.0503 Reductions
Aunust 1 threueh Jul. 31 Yeam
Year
Year Total (gallons
Average Day gallonsiday)
Maximum Day (gallonslday
Of of Days
8-1.1996 mm 731-199
345,922,551
2.203,328
8.511.10
157
1-1%7Hire 731-199
292,234,501
2,301.059
9,178,30
127
&14999 uses 7-31-
742,550,701
2,911.964
12,416.
255
8-1-20011hm 7-31-200
450,194,201
2.981.419
11,970,90
151
1-2002lhru 731-200
578.502,201
3,060.858
10.807,20
189
1-Mi31hm 7-31-200
780,371,601
2,645,327
11.584.7
295
8-1-2004 mru 7-31-200
834J365.501
2,293,587
4.105,
364
8-1-2005 true 7-31-20a
M,481,M
2,331,905
7,761,40
363
9-1 4006 mru 731-200
880,057,60
2,411,117
4,171,60
365
1-2007 this 7-31200
898,660,60
2,455,357
4,109,40
366
8-1-2008 Wu 7-31-200
785,592,70
2,152,309
3,9988
365
8-1-2009 M. 731-201
729,695,00
1,999,164
4.01170
365
-1-2010 mm 731-2011
679,178,40
1,860,763
3,549,10
365
8-1-2011 Wu 731-2012
733,212,20
2,014,319
5,298,
364
6-1-2012 ism 731-201
627,253,50
1.718,503
3.343,10
365
8-1-20131hm 731-201
633,646,60
1,872,730
3,273,20
365
8-140141hm 731-201
692,014,10
1895929
3.,449,90
5
33666
8-1-2015 ism 731-201
684,839,80
1,871,147
455,
61-2016 thm 731-201
717,277,70
1
33303,4
365
8-1-2017 thm 7-31-201
391,475,
1072,535
3,158,1
385
8-1-20181hru 7-3i-201
352,930,10
966,932
2,831,90
365
8-1-20191hm 731-2n2
27,551,0
888,742
1,856,00
31
r4�\ ABR Calculation

/ti
Craven County Water ICD3108) Well
Lantl
PYf°p
Pum P
To P
Bottom
AquiferProtluction
Well
Y
Source
Surtace
levation
iamete
(inches)
Ca aci
P tY
(gall°ns
nfake
Depm
Green
Depth
Screen
Depth
Wellducts
Depth
Top
Depth
9uifer(s
ype
etluc0on
Slaws
.0503
Zone
or
Monitoring
Geo
Logs
Cons
Form
Pump
Diagram
(feeQ
mile
(feat)
(feet)
(feet)
(feet)
(feet)
Well?
Well or
(GW1)
1
t fiamwell
49.00
20
80
300
495
696
800F
3-64
Kbc, Kucf
Well
es
Existin
25
P
e5
w-1
es
ryan
40.00
20
1,00
300
535
788
798
424
Kbc, Kucf
Well
es
Existin
25
P
no
w-1
es
[�
ntergreen
45.00
19
80
3 00
535
780
800
43
bc, Kuct
Well
I
as
avis
41.
20
79
24
714
818
828
464
be Kuct
Well
es
Existin
25
P
no[E-11
no
F 28
808
898
708
42
G Kuct
Well
es
Existin
25
P
es
-1
es
.:
D ter9reeo
10
25
276
280
320
33
27
Well
no
Existing
0
P
?
skelrh
nc
inns 2
12
80
11]
228
288
271
61
Well
no
Existing
0
P
no
gw.1
yes
Lewis Farm
28.
12
80
118
235
275
28
�
ch
Well
no
Existing
0
P
no
gw-1
yes
ardison
pq
68
220
234
274
300
8
ch
0AP
0:
tDBamwell
49
10
120
191
197
237
242
172
ptl
gZ�
no
Existing
0sketch
no
t
IztNy30.00
ran 3tansrs
12
80
107
216
256
261
0gw-7
yes
2800
12
80
f07
210
250
25
5
ch
no
Existing
0gw-1
yes
tans rs
28 00
12
80
122
205
245
24
��
Well
no
Existing
0
P
no
gw-1
yes
I_,
lanrers
26.00
12
80
10]
202
242
247
E21Fh
J
Well
no
Existing
0
P
no
gw-1
yes
fanners
26 00
12
80
107
205
245
25
51
Well
no
Existing
0
P
no
gw-1
yes
ui
vis PD
43.00
10
20
296
303
338
348
306
ptl
Well
no
Existln
0
©
ketch
no
t ]
an PD
40.00
10
25
252
282
302
312
255
ptl
Well
no
Existin
0
©sketU
no
is
PSite
22.00
12
80
122
235
275
280
69
0
P
no
w-1
es
ci
PD
41.00
10
13
242
253
273
283
246
tl
Well
no
Existin
0
P
?
sketch
no
pump Intake below top of screen; pump intake below top of screen and top of aquifer, pump intake below top of aquifer
Rehm to the Central Coastal Plain Capacity Use Area Web Page
r NC Division of Water Resources, DED -1611 Mail Service Canter- Raleigh, NC 27699-1611 Last Modified 04.15.2019
Phone: [phone]- Fax: [phone]
Comments, questions, or problems? Please contact the DWIR mbmester.

Appendix F
NEUSE RIVER STREAM CLASSIFICATION
m

NC DENR - DIVISON OF WATER RESOURCES
.0315 NEUSE RIVER BASIN
2B .0300
Name of Stream Description Class Class Date Index No.
.lack Swamp
From source to Little Contentnea
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-26-2
Creek
Langs Mill Run
From source to Black Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-26-2-1
Jacob Branch
From source to Black Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-26-2-2
Oldwoman Branch
From source to Little Contentnea
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-26-3
Creek
Pinelog Branch
From source to Little Contentnea
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-264
Creek
Middle Swamp
From source to Little Contentnea
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-26-5
Creek
Sandy Run
From source to Middle Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-26-5-1
Eagle Swamp
From source to Contentnea Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86-27
Alum Springs Branch
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-86.5
Grinnel Slough
From soruce to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-87
Grinnel Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-87.5
Halfmoon Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-88
Village Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
O5101/88
27-89
Core Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-90
Grape Creek
From source to Core Creek
C,Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-90-1
Mill Branch
From source to Core Creek
C;Sw,NSW
06/01/88
27-90-2
r at Swamp
From source to Core Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-90-3
Turkey Quarter Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-91
Mill Run
From source to Turkey Quarter Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-91-1
McCoy Branch
From source to Mill Run
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-91-1-1
Taylor Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-92
Greens Thoroughfare
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-93
Stony Branch
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-94
Pinetree Creek
From source to Neuse River
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-95
NEUSE RIVER
From Streets Ferry to a line across
SC;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-(96)
Neuse River from Johnson Point to
McCotter Point
Swift Creek
From source to mouth of Bear
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-(0S)
Branch
Gum Swamp
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-1
Nobel Canal
From source to Swift Creek
C;NSW
05/O1/88
27-97-2
Horsepen Swamp
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-3
Simmon Branch
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-3.5
Fork Swamp
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-974
Clayroot Swamp
From source to Swift Creek
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5
^borofare Swamp
From souce to Clayroot Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
O5101/88
27-97-5-1
Indian Well Swamp
From source to Clayroot Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5-2
Creeping Swamp
From source to Clayroot Swamp
C;Sw,NSW
05/01/88
27-97-5-3
23

A
Appendix G
ROUTE FOR ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE

Craven County GIS Vanceboro WTP lk
1 inch = 5000 feet
Craven County does NOT warn M the Information shown on this May end should esused ONLY for tea ass. semen I purposae. PIIM.d on Seplemha 9, 2019 at 5'. 19'.29 PM

k
NC Surface Water Clas.,fication
Ernul
wMa