GooseCk.FCTMDLApprovedbyEPAJuly0805

Total Maximum Daily Loads for
Fecal Coliform for
Goose Creek,
North Carolina
[Waterbody ID NC_13-17-18a and 13-17-18b]

Final Report Submitted to EPA
April 2005
(Approved July 08, 2005)

Prepared by:
Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program (MCWQP)
Mecklenburg County Water Quality
700 North Tryon St
Charlotte, NC 28202
[phone]

NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone]

Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005

- i -
Table of Contents________________

List of Tables ii
List of Figures ii
Summary Sheet iii
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Watershed Description 2
1.3 Water Quality Monitoring Programs 3
1.4 Water Quality Target 4
1.5 Water Quality Assessment 4
2.0 Source Assessment 8
2.1 Point Source Assessment 8
2.1.1 NPDES Permitted Dischargers 9
2.2 Non-Point Source Assessment 10
2.2.1 Failing Septic Systems 11
2.2.2 Ground Water 14
2.3 Water Quality Monitoring 14
2.3.1 Bacterial Source Tracking 16
3.0 Modeling Approach 18
3.1 Modeling Freamework 18
3.2 Model Setup 19
3.3 Fecal Coliform Source Representation 21
3.3.1 NPDES Discharges 21
3.3.2 Land Uses 22
3.3.3 Failing Septic Systems 22
3.4 Model Calibration 22
3.5 Model Output 26
3.5.1Current Conditions 26
3.5.2 Critical Conditions 28
4.0 Allocation 28
4.1 Total Maximum Daily Load 28
4.2 Waste Load Allocations 30
4.3 Load Allocations (Non-Point Source) 31
5.0 Implementation Plan 32
6.0 Stream Monitoring 32
7.0 Future Efforts 32
8.0 Public Participation 33
9.0 References 34
10 Appendices 35
Appendix A-1. NCDENR fecal coliform monitoring results 35
Appendix A-2. Fecal Coliform data from WWTP effluent samples 37
Appendix A-3. Fecal coliform concentrations and 30-day geometric mean 38
Appendix A-4. Phase II Source Assessment Monitoring Results 41
Appendix B. HSPF *.uci File 42
Appendix C-1. Public Notice 91
Appendix C-2: Affidavit of Publication from The Charlotte Observer Public
Notification 92
Appendix C-3: Goose Creek TMDL Stakeholder Meeting Minutes 93
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005

- ii -
List of Tables
Table 1. USGS Water Discharge Stations for the Goose Creek Watershed 3
Table 2. NPDES Permitted Dischargers in Goose Creek Watershed 9
Table 3. Rate of Accumulation and Maximum Storage of
Fecal Coliform by Land-Use 10
Table 4. Known Livestock Operations in the Goose Creek Watershed 10
Table 5. Septic Loading System 13
Table 6. Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Source Assessment Monitoring Sites 15
Table 7. Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Phase II Source Assessment
Monitoring Sites 16
Table 8. BST Analysis Results 17
Table 9. Percent Impervious by Land-Use for TMDL Water Quality Model 20
Table 10. Basic Hydrologic Calibration Data for Goose Creek 23
Table 11. Basic Temperature Calibration Data for Goose Creek 23
Table 12. Basic Fecal Coliform Calibration Data for Goose Creek 24
Table 13. Critical Model Parameters and Ranges 26
Table 14. Simulated Total Fecal Coliform Load for entire
Simulation Period (01/01/2000 – 06/01/2004) 27
Table 15. Critical Condition for the Goose Creek Watershed 28
Table 16. Critical Condition Loading by Source Category
(Total Loading 4/12/02 – 5/11/2002) 28
Table 17. Data Used in Flow Correlation Analysis 30
Table 18. TMDL for Goose Creek at SR 1524 30
Table 19. Percent Reduction for MS4 Areas to Achieve TMDL 30
Table 20. Percent Load Reductions necessary to meet TMDL
requirements for Goose Creek Watershed 31
Table 21. TMDL components to meet the water quality target 31

List of Figures
Figure 1. Location of Goose Creek Watershed in Mecklenburg
and Union Counties 2
Figure 2. Goose-Stevens Creeks Sampling Sites in Mecklenburg
and Union Counties 3
Figure 3. Duck Creek Fecal Coliform Data 5
Figure 4. Goose Creek Fecal Coliform Data 6
Figure 5. Goose/Duck NPDES Discharger Fecal Coliform Data 7
Figure 6. Land Use Sampling Results 8
Figure 7. Analysis of Number of Isolates From Monitoring Sites 18
Figure 8. Goose Creek Watershed Delineations 20
Figure 9. Goose Creek Watershed Land Use Distribution 21
Figure 10. Simulated vs. Observed Flow Goose Creek at 601 (Union County) 24
Figure 11. Frequency Distribution Plot of Simulated and Observed Flow 25
Figure 12. Simulated vs. Observed Fecal Coliform Concentration at SR 1524 25
Figure 13. Simulated Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform
Concentration at SR 1524 27
Figure 14. Correlation of USGS Gage Data 29
Figure 15. Current and TMDL Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform
Concentration at SR 1524 32
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005

- iii -
Summary Sheet

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)

1. 303(d) Listed Watershed Body Information

State: North Carolina

Counties: Mecklenburg, Union

Major River Basin: Yadkin-Peedee River Basin

Watershed: Goose Creek Watershed, HUC 03040105, Waterbody ID 13-17-18a,
13-17-18b

Impaired Waterbody (2003 303(d) List):

Waterbody Name –
(Segment ID)

Water Quality
Classification
Impairment Length (mi)
13-17-18a

Class C (aquatic
life secondary
contact recreation)
NSW
Fecal Coliform

3.2
13-17-18b

Class C (aquatic
life secondary
contact recreation)
NSW
Fecal Coliform
Impaired Biological
Integrity
13.1

Constituents of Concern: Fecal Coliform Bacteria

Designated Uses: Biological integrity, propagation of aquatic life, and secondary contact
recreation.

Applicable Water Quality Standards for Class C Waters:

Fecal coliforms shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100mL (membrane filter count) based
upon at least five consecutive samples examined during any 30-day period, nor exceed 400/100
ml in more than 20 percent of the samples examined during such period.

2. TMDL Development

Analysis/Modeling:
WinHSPF Version 2.2 in conjunction with WISe (Watershed Information System) Version 2.0.3
(used for topographic data processing) were used to develop the TMDL.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005

- iv -
Critical Conditions:
Highest predicted instream fecal coliform concentrations occur during wet weather periods
preceded by a period of dry weather. The period of highest risk to public health is during dry
weather periods in the summer when recreational use of the waters is greatest and human sources
of bacterial contamination dominate watershed loads.

Seasonal Variation:
WinHSPF Version 2.2 is a continuous simulation model, which contains seasonal fluctuation for
the period modeled (01/01/2000 – 06/01/2004).

3. Allocation Watershed/Stream Reach

Segment 13-17-18a

Wasteload Allocation (WLA): 7.81x1012 counts
Load Allocation (LA): 1.14x1014 counts
Margin of Safety (MOS): More stringent geometric mean target of 180 counts/100 mL, as
opposed to the 200 counts/100 mL standard; conservative modeling assumptions.
TMDL (WLA+LA+MOS): 1.22 x 1014 counts

TMDL Component TMDL Allocation
Category
Fecal Coliform Load
Reductions
Wasteload Allocation MS4 92.5%
Load Allocation Nonpoint Sources 92.5%
Wasteload Allocation Permited WWTP’s N/A

Segment 13-17-18b

Wasteload Allocation (WLA): 2.34x1013 counts
Load Allocation (LA): 2.06x1015 counts
Margin of Safety (MOS): More stringent geometric mean target of 180 counts/100 mL, as
opposed to the 200 counts/100 mL standard; conservative modeling
assumptions.
TMDL (WLA+LA+MOS): 2.08x1015 counts

TMDL Component TMDL Allocation
Category
Fecal Coliform Load
Reductions
Wasteload Allocation MS4 92.5%
Load Allocation Nonpoint Sources 92.5%
Wasteload Allocation Permited WWTP’s N/A

4. Public Notice Date: Febraury 15, 2005
5. Submittal Date: April 20, 2005
6. Establishment Date:
7. Endangered Species (yes or blank): yes
8. EPA Lead on TMDL (EPA or blank):
9. TMDL Considers Point Source, Nonpoint Source, or both: Both
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 1 -
1.0 INTRODUCTION

North Carolina’s 2002 Integrated Report, which includes 305(b) reports and 303(d) lists of
impaired waters, was approved by EPA Region IV on March 18th, 2003. The 2002 list identified
the 17.0 mile segment of Goose Creek from its source to the Rocky River as impaired due to
elevated fecal coliform concentrations. The objective of this study is to develop a fecal coliform
TMDL using a watershed approach for Goose Creek. This TMDL encompasses all the stream
segments listed in the 2002 303(d) list for this watershed.

In response to the high level of interest in this TMDL from local government officials and
concerned citizens, a stakeholder group was formed in 2003. The stakeholder group, lead by the
Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program (MCWQP) and the NC Division of Water Quality
(DWQ), took an active role in the TMDL development process. MCWQP has a well developed
and respected water quality management program and was able to take the lead role in both the
source assessment and model development.

1.1 Background

Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop a list of waters not
meeting water quality standards or which have impaired uses. This list, referred to as the 303(d)
list, is submitted biennially to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for review. The
303(d) process requires that a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) be developed for each of the
waters appearing on Part I of the 303(d) list. The objective of a TMDL is to allocate allowable
pollutant loads to known sources so that actions may be taken to restore the water to its intended
uses (EPA 1991). Generally, the primary components of a TMDL, as identified by EPA (1991,
2000) and the Federal Advisory Committee (FACA 1998), are as follows:

Target identification or selection of pollutant(s) and end-point(s) for consideration. The pollutant
and end-point are generally associated with measurable water quality related characteristics that
indicate compliance with water quality standards. North Carolina indicates known pollutants on
the 303(d) list.
Source assessment. All sources that contribute to the impairment should be identified and loads
quantified, where sufficient data exist.
Assimilative capacity estimation or level of pollutant reduction needed to achieve the water
quality goal. The level of pollution should be characterized for the waterbody, highlighting how
current conditions deviate from the target end-point. Generally, this component is identified
through water quality modeling.
Allocation of pollutant loads. Allocating pollutant control responsibility to the sources of
impairment. The wasteload allocation portion of the TMDL accounts for the loads associated with
existing and future point sources. Similarly, the load allocation portion of the TMDL accounts
for the loads associated with existing and future non-point sources, storm water, and natural
background.
Margin of safety. The margin of safety addresses uncertainties associated with pollutant loads,
modeling techniques, and data collection. Per EPA (2000), the margin of safety may be
expressed explicitly as unallocated assimilative capacity or implicitly due to conservative
assumptions.
Seasonal variation. The TMDL should consider seasonal variation in the pollutant loads and
endpoint. Variability can arise due to stream flows, temperatures, and exceptional events (e.g.,
droughts, hurricanes).

Section 303(d) of the CWA and the Water Quality Planning and Management regulation (USEPA
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 2 -
2000a) require EPA to review all TMDLs for approval or disapproval. Once EPA approves a
TMDL, the waterbody may be moved to Part III of the 303(d) list. Waterbodies remain on
Category 4a of the list until compliance with water quality standards is achieved. Where
conditions are not appropriate for the development of a TMDL, management strategies may still
result in the restoration of water quality.

The goal of the TMDL program is to restore uses to water bodies. Thus the implementation of
bacterial controls will be necessary to restore uses in these creeks. Although an implementation
plan is not included in this TMDL, reduction strategies are needed. The involvement of local
governments and agencies will be needed in order to develop implementation plans.

1.2 Watershed Description

The Goose Creek watershed is located in Mecklenburg County and Union County, North
Carolina. The headwaters of the watershed originate in Mecklenburg County and flow into Union
County, North Carolina and into the Rocky River. Stevens and Duck Creeks, which originate in
Mecklenburg County, are both tributaries to Goose Creek. Stevens Creek flows into Goose Creek
at the Mecklenburg-Union County line west of Stevens Mill Rd. while Duck Creek joins Goose
Creek just upstream of Brief Rd. Figure 1 shows the location of the Goose Creek watershed
within Mecklenburg and Union Counties.

Figure 1:
Mecklenburg County
Union County
Goose Creek Watershed
Location of Goose Creek Watershed in Mecklenburg and Union Counties
5 0 5 10 Miles
N

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 3 -
Each compliance point utilized for this TMDL is associated with ambient monitoring that occurs
in the watershed. Water quality and quantity data is collected at multiple locations by different
agencies. For the purposes of assessing TMDL compliance, the DWQ ambient monitoring station
on Goose Creek was used (Q8360000). The location of this monitoring station is illustrated in
Figure 2. Other monitoring is discussed below.

Figure 2: Goose-Stevens Creek Sampling Sites in Mecklenburg and Union Counties

1.3 Water Quality Monitoring Programs

The MCWQP, DWQ, Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities (CMU) and USGS collect ambient data in
the Goose Creek watershed at regular intervals. However, CMU analyses do not include fecal
coliform bacteria. DWQ maintains one ambient monitoring location in the Goose Creek
watershed located in Union County on SR 1524. MCWQP maintains a monitoring location on
both Goose and Stevens Creeks. The USGS maintains a flow gauge located in Goose Creek and a
data summary are presented in Table 1. The USGS gauge location is shown in Figure 2.

Table 1: USGS Water Discharge Stations for the Goose Creek Watershed.

Station number

Description

Period of Record Mean Flow for
Period of Record, cfs
02124692 GOOSE CR AT
FAIRVIEW, NC
November 1999 to
current year
7.03

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 4 -

1.4 Water Quality Target

The North Carolina fresh water quality standard for fecal coliform in Class C waters
(T15A:02B.0211) states: Organisms of the coliform group: fecal coliforms shall not exceed a
geometric mean of 200/100 mL (membrane filter count) based upon at least five consecutive
samples examined during any 30-day period, nor exceed 400/100 mL in more than 20 percent of
the samples examined during such period; violations of the fecal coliform standard are expected
during rainfall events and, in some cases, this violation is expected to be caused by uncontrollable
nonpoint source pollution; all coliform concentrations are to be analyzed using the membrane
filter technique unless high turbidity or other adverse conditions necessitate the tube dilution
method; in case of controversy over results, the MPN 5-tube dilution technique will be used as
the reference method.

Note that there are two quantitative criteria in the standard: Geometric mean of 200 and an
instantaneous value of 400.

All TMDLs include the establishment of in-stream numeric endpoints, or targets, used to evaluate
the attainment of water quality goals and designated use criteria. The target represents the
restoration objective to be achieved by implementation of the load reductions specified by the
TMDL. For the TMDLs presented in this document, the fecal coliform 30-day geometric mean of
200 c.f.u./100 ml. with no more than 20 percent of samples exceeding 400 c.f.u./100 ml. is
applicable, as referenced in NC’s water quality standard for fecal coliform in Class C waters
(15ANCAC 2B .0211 (3)(e)).

Secondary recreation is the designated use being addressed in this TMDL. Secondary recreation
is defined in NC’s standards (15A NCAC 2B .0202 (57)) as including “wading, boating, other
uses not involving human body contact with water, and activities involving human body contact
with water where such activities take place on an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental basis.”

One compliance point has been established for this TMDL, representing the DWQ ambient
monitoring station located in the watershed. Compliance points are physical locations within a
watershed that are used to monitor water quality conditions and assess progress in achieving the
TMDL goal.

1.5 Water Quality Assessment

Phase I water quality monitoring was collected at a total of twenty sites, including five
wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) (See Figure 2). Phase I monitoring was conducted
between June 2003 and December 2003. Table 6 provides the location and a site description for
the Phase I monitoring sites located on Duck and Goose Creeks. Seventy-five samples were
collected from three sites in the Duck Creek watershed and 172 samples, from seven locations,
were collected in the Goose Creek watershed. Fifty-seven samples were collected from five
WWTPs.

The median and average fecal coliform concentrations for the Duck Creek samples were 530 and
1923 colonies/100 ml, respectively (Figure 3). The median concentration for the Goose Creek
samples was 510 colonies/100 ml and the average concentration was 1954 colonies/100 ml
(Figure 4).

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 5 -

Figure 3. Duck Creek Fecal Coliform Data

Duck Creek Fecal Coliform Data
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
6/1/2003 7/21/2003 9/9/2003 10/29/2003 12/18/2003
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Ra
i
n
f
a
l
l

(
i
n
c
h
e
s
)
D3 - Headwaters
D5 - Headwaters
D8 - Downstream
WQ Standard
Rainfall
Median Concentration = 520 c.f.u./100 ml (all
Average Concentration = 1945 c.f.u./100 ml
Median Concentration = 530 c.f.u./100 ml
(Duck)Average Concentration = 1923 c.f.u./100 ml
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 6 -

Figure 4. Goose Creek Fecal Coliform Data

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform Data
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
6/1/2003 7/21/2003 9/9/2003 10/29/2003 12/18/2003
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
.
f
.
u
.
/
1
0
0

m
l
)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Ra
i
n
f
a
l
l

(
i
n
c
h
e
s
)
G1 - Headwaters G3-Headwaters
G7 - Midstream G9 - Headwaters
G11 - Mid/Downstream G12 - Downstream
G13 - Goose/Duck Confluence 200 Standard
400 Standard Rainfall
Median Concentration = 520 c.f.u./100 ml (all
Average Concentration = 1945 c.f.u./100 ml (all
Median Concentration = 510 c.f.u./100 ml (Goose)
Average Concentration = 1954 c.f.u./100 ml (Goose)

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 7 -

There are 5 WWTPs in the watershed that were monitored during the Phase I monitoring (Table
2). Results are graphed in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Goose/Duck NPDES Discharger Fecal Coliform Data

Goose/Duck NPDES Discharger Fecal Coliform Data
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
5/9/2003 6/28/2003 8/17/2003 10/6/2003 11/25/2003 1/14/2004
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
f
u
/
1
0
0

m
l
)
APWWTP
CWWWTP
FPWWTP
OGWWTP
SMWWTP
200 Standard
400 Standard

Phase II monitoring included monitoring of streams downstream of specific land use sites. A
total of five (5) sites were identified that are representative of the targeted land uses present in the
Goose Creek watershed as listed in Table 7 and shown in Figure 2. Fecal coliform monitoring
results are shown in Figure 6.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 8 -
Figure 6: Land Use Sampling Results

2.0 Source Assessment

Potential sources of fecal coliform in a water body are numerous and often times transient. For
the purpose of this report, the sources of fecal coliform have been divided into two broad
categories; point sources and non-point sources. Point sources can be defined as sources, either
constant or time transient, which occur at a fixed location in a watershed. Non-point sources are
generally accepted to be diffuse sources not entering a water body at a specific location. An
example of a point source is wastewater treatment plants (WWTP). Examples of non-point
sources are storm water runoff, dry weather flow from storm drains and ground water.

The source assessment presented in this document represents the best estimation of the sources of
fecal coliform in the TMDL watershed at this time. Additional investigation into the sources and
distribution of sources of fecal coliform is critical to achieving the water quality target.
Therefore, it is expected that, in the future, the source assessment will be modified to reflect
additional data. Specifically, there needs to be a better understanding of seasonal changes and
variation in the watershed.

2.1 Point Source Assessment

All documented point source dischargers were included in the source assessment except the
Fairfield Elementary School WWTP, which was not sampled. Actual discharge values for fecal
Land-Use Sampling
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
02/08/04 02/13/04 02/18/04 02/23/04 02/28/04 03/04/04 03/09/04 03/14/04
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m

C
o
u
n
t

(
c
.
f
.
u
.
/
1
0
0

m
l
)
West Br - Low Density Residential
Horse Farm
Upstream Cattle Operations??
Downstream Cattle Operations
Downstream Land Application of Poultry Waste
Value = 37,000 c.f.u./100
ml
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 9 -
coliform concentration and effluent flow rates were used throughout the TMDL. In the absence of
direct measurements, permit limit values were used. Furthermore, it was assumed that discharges
recorded during 2003 are typical and effectively estimate future conditions.

2.1.1 NPDES Permitted Dischargers

Table 2 identifies the permitted NPDES point source dischargers in the Goose Creek Watershed.
Figure 2 is a map of the watershed showing the locations of the permitted point source
dischargers.

Discharge Monitoring Reports were obtained for each NPDES permitted discharger from January
2003 to May 2004. From these reports an average flow rate and hourly fecal coliform loading
rate was determined. Table 2 presents this data for each of the NPDES permitted dischargers.

Table 2: NPDES Permitted Dischargers in Goose Creek Watershed.
Facility ID Address Sub-
watershed
ID
NPDES ID Flow
Rate
(cfs)
FC Loading
(cfu/hr)
Oxford Glen 15349 Bexley Pl. 76 NC0063584 0.024
(0.075)
2.49E+04
(2.37E+07)
Ashe Plantation Quarters Ln. 88 NC0065749 0.056
(0.154)
5.7E+04
(3.15E+07)
Fairview Elementary 110 Clontz Rd. 125 NC0030538 No flow
(0.006)
No load
(1.26E+06)
Country Woods Country Woods
Dr.
108 NC0065684 0.213
(1.036)
2.43E+05
(2.11E+08)
Hunley Creek Stevens Mill Rd. 105 NC0072508 0.305
(0.294)
2.36E+07
(5.99E+07)
Fairfield Plantation Stoney Ridge
Rd
106 NC0034762 0.148
(0.108)
1.59E+06
(2.21E+07)
Note : permit limits are shown in parentheses.

The NPDES Phase I rule requires large and medium municipal separate storm sewer systems
(MS4s) greater than 100,000 people to obtain an NPDES storm water permit. The NPDES Phase
II addressed small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) serving a population of less
than 100,000 people in urbanized areas. This rule applies to a unit of government such as a city or
county, which owns or operates an MS4. Each permitted entity is required to develop a Storm
Management Program (SWMP). Within the Goose Creek Watershed four municipalities have
been designated into the Phase II program. These municipalities are Stallings, Indian Trail and
Hemby Bridge within Union County and Mint Hill within Mecklenburg County. In addition to
the aforementioned municipalities Mecklenburg County has also been designated into the Phase
II program. The land areas of Stallings, Indian Trail and Hemby Bridge within the Goose Creek
Watershed are 2.2 mi2, 1.3 mi2 and 0.47 mi2 respectively. The land area of Mint Hill within the
Goose Creek Watershed is 11.2 mi2. The land area of the Goose Creek Watershed within
Mecklenburg County is completely contained within Mint Hill’s jurisdiction.

A recent EPA mandate (Wayland, 2002) requires NPDES permitted stormwater to be placed in
the wastload allocation (WLA), which had previously been reserved for continuous point source
wastewater loads. Since portions of the Goose Creek Watershed are subject to MS4 permits, the
WLA in the Goose Creek TMDL will include loads from both continuous discharge facilities and
wet weather discharges.
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 10 -
2.2 Non-Point Source Assessment

Typically, assessment of the contribution of storm water runoff is based upon estimations of
wildlife, agricultural operations and typical accumulation rates on built up (urban) areas.
However, for this report, build-up and wash off rates for each land-use in the TMDL watersheds
were adopted from a highly calibrated water quality model for the McDowell Creek Watershed
(located approximately 15 miles to the northwest of the Goose Creek Watershed) (Tetra Tech,
2003). Originally, these values were calculated from local in-stream storm water samples
collected by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) from December 1993 to September
1997 (Bales et. Al, 1999). The calculated values were adjusted to obtain necessary calibration
tolerances for the McDowell Creek Model. These values were directly integrated into the Goose
Creek Watershed model. Table 3 presents the build-up and maximum accumulation levels used
in this study.

Table 3: Rate of Accumulation and Maximum Storage of Fecal Coliform by Land-Use.

Rate of
Accumulation of
Fecal Coliform
(count/acre/day)
Maximum Storage
of Fecal Coliform
(count per acre)
Rate of
Accumulation of
Fecal Coliform
(count/acre/day)
Maximum
Storage of Fecal
Coliform
(count/acre)
TMDL Land-Use
Pervious Lands Impervious Lands
>2 Acre Residential 1.20E+10 1.20E+10 6.20E+07 1.90E+08
0.25 – 0.5 ac res 1.30E+09 1.70E+10 1.90E+08 5.80E+08
0.25 ac res 2.50E+09 1.70E+10 1.90E+08 5.80E+08
0.5 – 2 ac res 2.50E+09 1.70E+10 6.20E+07 1.90E+08
Agricultural 2.50E+09 2.60E+10 3.20E+08 9.70E+08
Forest 2.50E+09 3.50E+10 3.20E+08 9.70E+08
Golf Course 2.50E+09 6.84E+11 6.20E+07 1.90E+08
Institutional 5.50E+09 7.50E+09 6.20E+07 1.90E+08
Road/Transportation 5.50E+09 7.50E+09 6.20E+07 1.90E+08
Industrial 7.60E+09 7.50E+09 6.20E+07 1.90E+08
Commercial 8.60E+10 7.50E+09 6.20E+07 1.90E+08

While the total number of livestock operations is unknown, several in the Goose Creek watershed
have been identified and are shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Known Livestock Operations in the Goose Creek Watershed

Animal Type Estimated # Location
Equestrian 8 Lawyers Rd. at Goose Ck. (Union Co.)
Equestrian 7-10 7300 West Duncan Rd.
Equestrian 10 8500Fairview Rd.
Equestrian 4 12300 Bain School Rd.
Bovine 150-200 13500 Lawyers Rd.
Bovine 40 12000 Bain School Rd.
Poultry 100,000 Bret Haigler Rd.
Poultry 75,000 Unionville-Brief @ Brief Rd.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 11 -
2.2.1 Failing Septic Systems

Failing septic systems have been cited in many TMDLs as a significant contributor of fecal
coliform to water bodies (Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of
Water Pollution Control, Watershed Management Section, 2000). Previous studies have used
failure rate values ranging from 4% to 50% of all septic systems. The Mecklenburg County
Health Department has estimated the local septic system failure rate to be 1%, (Daniel, 2000).
The Health Department cited the following reasons for this estimate (Daniel, 2000):

▪ In general, Mecklenburg County soils are highly conducive to septic system operation;

▪ Areas where soil types are not conducive to septic system operation have been excluded from
septic system use and existing systems in these areas have been targeted for integration into
the CMU sanitary sewer system; and

▪ Mecklenburg County has been a leader in enacting septic system regulation in North
Carolina, which has prevented the installation of sub-standard systems.

Many stakeholders, including Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities, have questioned the validity of a
1% failure rate for septic systems. Personal observations and anecdotal evidence appear to
indicate a much higher value. However, no documentation of a local investigation to establish a
more accurate or reproducible value exists. Because of the lack of direct evidence to refute the
1% value cited by the Health Department, that value was initially adopted for the TMDLs
presented in this document. However, during water quality model calibration the simulated fecal
coliform concentrations during baseflow conditions were consistently lower than observed data.
Because of the discrepancy in observed versus simulated, the septic system failure rate was
increased to 2.4%. It is possible that the discrepancy could be due to wildlife sources that were
unaccounted for in the model. However, direct inputs of fecal coliform bacteria by wildlife
during baseflow conditions could not be directly accounted for in the model.

No direct accounting of the number of septic systems in use in the Goose Creek Watershed was
available. An estimate of the possible number of septic systems was completed through analysis
of Mecklenburg County and Union County parcel data. Essentially, a listing of all parcels was
amassed, each meeting the following criteria:

1. The parcel must be at least 2 acres. The basic requirement of space for the septic system and
repair field was used to eliminate parcels less than 2 acres.

2. The parcel must be built upon. Database fields in the parcel coverage indicated the presence
of buildings. Any indication of a building was assumed to indicate the necessity of a septic
system.

3. The parcel must not be located in an area known to be served by a wastewater treatment
plant.

The resultant parcel coverage meeting the aforementioned criteria was then intersected with the
watershed coverage used to construct the water quality model. Those parcels bisected by a
watershed boundary were assumed to be located in the watershed containing the bulk of the
parcel. An estimated 2.8 individuals were served by each septic system (Daniel, 2000), an
estimated flow rate per person of 70 gallons per individual per day (Horsely and Witten, 1996)
and an estimated fecal coliform concentration of 10,000 c.f.u./100 ml (Horsely and Whitten,
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 12 -
1996) were used to calculate the loading and flow rates. Table 5 presents the loading rates by
watershed.
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 13 -
Table 5: Septic System Loading.

Basin Estimated
Number of
systems
Individuals
per System
Individuals
Served
Failure
Rate
Individuals
per Failing
System
Fecal Coliform
Concentration
Flow
gal/day
FC Load
(cfu/day)
67 71 2.8 198.8 2.4% 4.77 10000 334 1.26E+08
68 4 2.8 11.2 2.4% 0.27 10000 19 7.12E+06
69 11 2.8 30.8 2.4% 0.74 10000 52 1.96E+07
70 42 2.8 117.6 2.4% 2.82 10000 198 7.48E+07
72 26 2.8 72.8 2.4% 1.75 10000 122 4.63E+07
73 24 2.8 67.2 2.4% 1.61 10000 113 4.27E+07
75 74 2.8 207.2 2.4% 4.97 10000 348 1.32E+08
76 100 2.8 280 2.4% 6.72 10000 470 1.78E+08
77 70 2.8 196 2.4% 4.70 10000 329 1.25E+08
79 50 2.8 140 2.4% 3.36 10000 235 8.90E+07
80 3 2.8 8.4 2.4% 0.20 10000 14 5.34E+06
81 31 2.8 86.8 2.4% 2.08 10000 146 5.52E+07
82 2 2.8 5.6 2.4% 0.13 10000 9 3.56E+06
83 43 2.8 120.4 2.4% 2.89 10000 202 7.66E+07
84 5 2.8 14 2.4% 0.34 10000 24 8.90E+06
85 15 2.8 42 2.4% 1.01 10000 71 2.67E+07
86 8 2.8 22.4 2.4% 0.54 10000 38 1.42E+07
87 3 2.8 8.4 2.4% 0.20 10000 14 5.34E+06
88 83 2.8 232.4 2.4% 5.58 10000 390 1.48E+08
89 23 2.8 64.4 2.4% 1.55 10000 108 4.10E+07
90 13 2.8 36.4 2.4% 0.87 10000 61 2.31E+07
91 8 2.8 22.4 2.4% 0.54 10000 38 1.42E+07
93 55 2.8 154 2.4% 3.70 10000 259 9.79E+07
95 15 2.8 42 2.4% 1.01 10000 71 2.67E+07
96 8 2.8 22.4 2.4% 0.54 10000 38 1.42E+07
97 4 2.8 11.2 2.4% 0.27 10000 19 7.12E+06
98 6 2.8 16.8 2.4% 0.40 10000 28 1.07E+07
99 32 2.8 89.6 2.4% 2.15 10000 151 5.70E+07
100 17 2.8 47.6 2.4% 1.14 10000 80 3.03E+07
101 9 2.8 25.2 2.4% 0.60 10000 42 1.60E+07
102 37 2.8 103.6 2.4% 2.49 10000 174 6.59E+07
104 1 2.8 2.8 2.4% 0.07 10000 5 1.78E+06
105 12 2.8 33.6 2.4% 0.81 10000 56 2.14E+07
106 7 2.8 19.6 2.4% 0.47 10000 33 1.25E+07
107 17 2.8 47.6 2.4% 1.14 10000 80 3.03E+07
108 5 2.8 14 2.4% 0.34 10000 24 8.90E+06
109 5 2.8 14 2.4% 0.34 10000 24 8.90E+06
110 9 2.8 25.2 2.4% 0.60 10000 42 1.60E+07
111 33 2.8 92.4 2.4% 2.22 10000 155 5.88E+07
112 21 2.8 58.8 2.4% 1.41 10000 99 3.74E+07
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 14 -
Basin Estimated
Number of
systems
Individuals
per System
Individuals
Served
Failure
Rate
Individuals
per Failing
System
Fecal Coliform
Concentration
Flow
gal/day
FC Load
(cfu/day)
113 13 2.8 36.4 2.4% 0.87 10000 61 2.31E+07
114 42 2.8 117.6 2.4% 2.82 10000 198 7.48E+07
115 1 2.8 2.8 2.4% 0.07 10000 5 1.78E+06
116 13 2.8 36.4 2.4% 0.87 10000 61 2.31E+07
117 19 2.8 53.2 2.4% 1.28 10000 89 3.38E+07
118 49 2.8 137.2 2.4% 3.29 10000 230 8.72E+07
119 5 2.8 14 2.4% 0.34 10000 24 8.90E+06
120 34 2.8 95.2 2.4% 2.28 10000 160 6.05E+07
121 7 2.8 19.6 2.4% 0.47 10000 33 1.25E+07
122 31 2.8 86.8 2.4% 2.08 10000 146 5.52E+07
123 34 2.8 95.2 2.4% 2.28 10000 160 6.05E+07
124 15 2.8 42 2.4% 1.01 10000 71 2.67E+07
125 14 2.8 39.2 2.4% 0.94 10000 66 2.49E+07
126 13 2.8 36.4 2.4% 0.87 10000 61 2.31E+07
127 9 2.8 25.2 2.4% 0.60 10000 42 1.60E+07
129 15 2.8 42 2.4% 1.01 10000 71 2.67E+07

2.2.2 Ground Water

No direct monitoring of ground water was conducted for this TMDL. Literature values for fecal
coliform concentration in ground water range from <10 to over 1000 c.f.u./100 ml. Initially a
ground water concentration of 35 c.f.u./100 ml was adopted (HSPF default value). However,
during the calibration process simulated fecal coliform concentrations during base flow were
consistently lower than observed values. Because of the discrepancy, the value was raised to 50
c.f.u./100 ml for the model. It is possible that the discrepancy could be due to wildlife sources
that were unaccounted for in the model. However, direct inputs of fecal coliform bacteria by
wildlife during baseflow conditions could not be directly accounted for in the model.

2.3 Water Quality Monitoring

Phase I of the Goose Creek Source Assessment Strategy was initiated in June 2003 and was
concluded on December 2003. A total of 304 samples were collected from 15 sites (including
five (5) waste water treatment plants) during the sampling period. Table 6 presents a total of ten
(10) sites that were identified as being representative of the varying land uses present in the
Duck/Stevens/Goose Creek watersheds. The sites are mapped on Figure 2. All baseline
monitoring sites listed in Table 5 were sampled weekly for fecal coliform and E. coli.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 15 -
Table 6: Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Source Assessment Monitoring Sites.

In January 2004, Phase II of the source assessment monitoring was initiated. The Goose Creek
Phase II source assessment monitored specific land uses to determine baseline conditions. The
Phase II monitoring was used to help determine to what extent livestock and septic tanks are
contributing to fecal coliform loads in Goose Creek. A total of five (5) sites were identified that
are representative of the targeted land uses present in the Goose Creek watershed as listed in
Table 7 and shown in Figure 2. The monitoring sites are located upstream and downstream of a
cattle operation, downstream of a horse farm, downstream of an area where chicken waste has
been land applied and downstream of a residential area that utilizes septic systems. The sites are
mapped on Figure 2. Phase II monitoring sites were sampled weekly for fecal coliform and E.
coli for a period of six (6) weeks between February and March 2004.

Site Stream Segment ID Location Descritpion
G1 Stevens Creek 13-17-18a I-485 Bridge: Upstream
(NW side of I-485); 0.5
miles SW of Lawyers
Road
To define water quality in
Stevens Creek
G3 Goose Creek 13-17-18a I-485 Bridge: Upstream
(NW side of I-485); 0.7
miles SW of Lawyers
Road
To define water quality in
upper Goose Creek
G7 Goose Creek 13-17-18b Mill Grove Road @
USGS station
To define water quality in
Goose Creek between G1,
G3 and Mill Grove Rd.
G9 Paddle Branch Mill Grove Road: 0.5
miles E of Lawyers
Road
To define water quality in
Paddle Branch
G11 Goose Creek 13-17-18b Concord Hwy (Hwy
601) @ USGS station

To define water quality in
Goose Creek between G7,
G9 and Hwy 601
G12 Goose Creek 13-17-18b Unionville Brief Rd. To define water quality in
Goose Creek between G11
and convergence with Duck
G13 Goose Creek 13-17-18b Brief Road between
Unionville Brief Road
and Hopewell Church
To define water quality at
mouth of Goose Creek
D3 Duck Branch NC 218: Between Mill
Grove Road and
Russell Road
To define water quality in
Duck Creek
D5 Duck Creek Private Road @ 9902
Mill Grove Road:
Bridge at bottom of hill
To define water quality in
upper Duck Creek
D8 Duck Creek Hopewell Church
Road: 0.2 miles S of
Brief Road

To define water quality in
Duck Creek between D5
and convergence with
Goose Creek
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 16 -
Table 7: Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Phase II Source Assessment Monitoring Sites.

Site Stream Location Description
GT1 Goose Creek
Tributary
12051 Bain School
Rd.
To define water quality in a tributary of
Goose Creek downstream of a
residential community
GT2 Goose Creek
Tributary
12325 Bain School
Rd.

To define water quality in a tributary of
Goose Creek downstream of a horse
farm
GC1 Goose Creek

12309 Bain School
Rd
To define water quality in Goose Creek
upstream of a cattle farm
GC2 Goose Creek

13816 Lawyers Rd. To define water quality in Goose Creek
downstream of a cattle farm
GC3 Goose Creek

Goose Creek at Hwy.
218
To define water quality in Goose Creek
downstream of a chicken farm

2.3.1 Bacterial Source Tracking

Bacterial Source Tracking (BST) using Antibiotic Resistance Analysis (ARA) was also used in
the development of the TMDL to assess the contribution of specific bacteria sources to fecal
coliform loads in the watershed. BST analysis was conducted by MapTech Inc. in their
Blacksburg, VA laboratory. One hundred thirty six known source isolates from 17 livestock fecal
samples collected in the Goose Creek watershed were combined with 168 known source isolates
from 21 human and wildlife fecal samples previously collected in the Little Sugar Creek
watershed. The isolates were analyzed to develop a library for discriminating between human,
livestock and wildlife resources of E. coli bacteria. The livestock sample included 6 each from
cattle and horses, and 5 from poultry. Eighty-eight human isolates were extracted from 11
samples. The 80 wildlife isolates were collected from 1 sample each of rabbit, deer, goose,
raccoon and fox, 2 samples from squirrel and 3 from ducks. Statistical analysis of the resulting
data showed a 76% correct classification rate. This is slightly below the Division of Water
Quality’s preferred level of correct classification (> 80%).

One thousand three hundred forty unknown isolates from five sampling locations were analyzed
using the database developed with the known sources. The BST monitoring sites are shown on
Figure 2. Results of the analysis are given in Table 8 and graphed in Figure 7. The results
indicate that a significant number of the isolates are from livestock and wildlife.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 17 -
Table 8: BST Analysis Results.

Lab No.
Location
No.
Date of
Sample
No. of
Isolates
Analyzed % Wildlife % Human
%
Livestock
No. of
Isolates
Wildlife
No. of
Isolates
Human
No. of
Isolates
Livestock
3NC4 D8 2/24/2004 48 0.54 0.08 0.38 25.92 3.84 18.24
3NC9 D8 3/2/2004 48 0.04 0.04 0.92 1.92 1.92 44.16
3NC14 D8 3/10/2004 48 0.65 0.06 0.29 31.20 2.88 13.92
3NC19 D8 3/16/2004 48 0.35 0.17 0.48 16.80 8.16 23.04
3NC24 D8 3/23/2004 48 0.29 0.31 0.40 13.92 14.88 19.20
3NC29 D8 3/30/2004 48 0.06 0.67 0.27 2.88 32.16 12.96
TOTALS:288.00 92.64 63.84 131.52
3NC5 DCBST5 2/24/2004 48 0.21 0.10 0.69 10.08 4.80 33.12
3NC10 DCBST5 3/2/2004 48 0.63 0.04 0.33 30.24 1.92 15.84
3NC15 DCBST5 3/10/2004 9 0.89 0.00 0.11 8.01 0.00 0.99
3NC20 DCBST5 3/16/2004 48 0.00 0.81 0.19 0.00 38.88 9.12
3NC25 DCBST5 3/23/2004 12 0.08 0.25 0.67 0.96 3.00 8.04
3NC30 DCBST5 3/30/2004 48 0.04 0.40 0.56 1.92 19.20 26.88
TOTALS:213 51.21 67.80 93.99
3NC3 G12 2/24/2004 48 0.50 0.15 0.35 24.00 7.20 16.80
3NC8 G12 3/2/2004 48 0.42 0.04 0.54 20.16 1.92 25.92
3NC13 G12 3/10/2004 48 0.31 0.17 0.52 14.88 8.16 24.96
3NC18 G12 3/16/2004 48 0.23 0.27 0.50 11.04 12.96 24.00
3NC23 G12 3/23/2004 48 0.12 0.67 0.21 5.76 32.16 10.08
3NC28 G12 3/30/2004 48 0.40 0.19 0.41 19.20 9.12 19.68
TOTALS:288 95.04 71.52 121.44
3NC1 GCBST1 2/24/2004 48 0.17 0.10 0.73 8.16 4.80 35.04
3NC6 GCBST1 3/2/2004 48 0.06 0.44 0.50 2.88 21.12 24.00
3NC11 GCBST1 3/10/2004 48 0.02 0.04 0.94 0.96 1.92 45.12
3NC16 GCBST1 3/16/2004 48 0.56 0.25 0.19 26.88 12.00 9.12
3NC21 GCBST1 3/23/2004 31 0.13 0.29 0.58 4.03 8.99 17.98
3NC26 GCBST1 3/30/2004 48 0.10 0.17 0.73 4.80 8.16 35.04
TOTALS:271 47.71 56.99 166.30
3NC2 GCBST2 2/24/2004 48 0.63 0.10 0.27 30.24 4.80 12.96
3NC7 GCBST2 3/2/2004 48 0.56 0.19 0.25 26.88 9.12 12.00
3NC12 GCBST2 3/10/2004 48 0.17 0.33 0.50 8.16 15.84 24.00
3NC17 GCBST2 3/16/2004 48 0.10 0.31 0.59 4.80 14.88 28.32
3NC22 GCBST2 3/23/2004 40 0.08 0.28 0.64 3.20 11.20 25.60
3NC27 GCBST2 3/30/2004 48 0.17 0.35 0.48 3.84 13.44 30.72
TOTALS:280 77.12 69.28 133.60
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 18 -
Figure 7: Analysis of Number of Isolates From Monitoring Sites

3.0 MODELING APPROACH

3.1 Modeling Framework

Win HSPF was selected for use in preparation of the fecal coliform TMDLs for the Goose Creek
watershed. HSPF was selected for the following reasons:

1. Mecklenburg County has constructed several tools within its WISe system to mine
data for direct input to HSPF. These tools allow for the relatively rapid
parameterization of basic HSPF input decks with up to date local information.
Namely, the datasets include topography, land-use, land-cover and impervious area.

2. Mecklenburg County staff has significant experience preparing HSPF models as well
as supervising consultant preparation of HSPF models. This experience provides and
ability to cross check model parameters to other calibrated models. To date, HSPF
models have been prepared for the following watersheds in Mecklenburg County:

McDowell Creek: A HSPF model was prepared for McDowell Creek to determine
the effects of runoff on downstream water quality (Tetra Tech, 2003). Modeled
parameters included fecal coliform bacteria, temperature and sediment

Sugar, Little Sugar and McAlpine Creeks: HSPF models were prepared for fecal
coliform TMDL calculations in the Sugar, Little Sugar and McAlpine Creek
watersheds (MCDEP, 2002). Modeled parameters included fecal coliform bacteria
and temperature.

3. HSPF is a spatially distributed, lumped parameter, continuous simulation model used
to model water quality conditions in watersheds and river basins. HSPF calculates
non-point source loadings of selected pollutants for specified land use categories in a
Goose Creek and Duck Creek
2/24/2004-3/30/2004
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
D8 DCBST5 G12 GCBST1 GCBST2
Sample Sites
Nu
m
b
e
r

o
f

I
s
o
l
a
t
e
s
Wildlife
Human
Livestock
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 19 -
watershed; represents subsequent pollutant runoff response to hydrologic influences,
such as precipitation; simulates point sources as constant or variable flow and load;
and simulates flow and pollutant routing through a stream network. These
capabilities make it well suited to modeling a largely rural watershed where non-
point sources of pollution are likely to outweigh point sources.

For the Goose Creek watershed model the following elements of the model were used:

Pervious Land:
ATEMP – Air Temperature Elevation Difference
SNOW – Accumulation and Melting of Snow and Ice
PWATER – Water Budget Pervious
SEDMNT – Production and Removal of Sediment
PQUAL – Quality Constituents Using Simple Relationships

Impervious Land:
ATEMP – Air Temperature Elevation Difference
SNOW – Accumulation and Melting of Snow and Ice
IWATER – Water Budget Impervious
SOLIDS – Accumulation and Removal of Solids
IQUAL – Quality Constituents Using Simple Relationships

Reaches/Reservoirs:
HYDR – Hydraulic Behavior
ADCALC – Advection of Fully Entrained Constituents
HTRCH – Heat Exchange and Water Temperature
SEDTRN – Behavior of Inorganic Sediment
GQUAL – Generalized Quality Constituents

3.2 Model Setup

Figure 8 shows the sub-watershed delineations for the Goose Creek Watershed. Sub-watershed
delineation was based upon factors such as the presence of a USGS gauging station, presence of a
water quality monitoring site, presence of a NCDENR compliance point and confluence of major
stream segments. Sub-watershed delineation, stream cross section geometry, slope and length
were determined using Mecklenburg County’s version of the Watershed Information System,
which is a GIS based application that allows the manipulation of digital elevation data for
modeling applications. Locally developed land use data (based upon individual land parcels) was
simplified and used for model preparation. For the portion of the watershed in Mecklenburg
County, 2004 land-used data generated from individual parcels was used. For the parts of the
watershed in Union County, 2003 parcel data in combination with 2001 aerial photography was
used. Table 9 shows the land uses applied in the TMDL model along with percent imperviousness
and total area of each land use represented. Figure 9 shows the distribution of the land uses
throughout the watershed. Meteorological data was adopted from Charlotte/Douglas
International Airport.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 20 -
Figure 8:
##
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
88
83 81
79
77 76
75
73
72
70
69
68
67
93
90
89
96
9995
113
105
102
114
120
108
111
122
129
118
106
127
117
125
123
86
112
91
121
87
126
107
109
85
124
110
101
116
103
119
98
100
104
97
115
82
84
94
80
71
74
92
78
128
Goose Creek Watershed Delineations

Table 9. Percent Impervious by Land-Use for TMDL Water Quality Model.

Land Use in TMDL Model Percent Impervious Area Percent of Total
>2 Acre Residential 5 3945.7 14.23%
0.25 – 0.5 Acre Residential 18 957.161 3.45%
0.25 Acre Residential 30 58.431 0.21%
0.5 – 2 Acre Residential 12 1591.688 5.74%
Agricultural 2 6460.73 23.31%
Commercial 55 77.662 0.28%
Forest 2 12827.792 46.28%
Golf Course 5 289.26 1.04%
Industrial 28 113.363 0.41%
Institutional 28 67.359 0.24%
Road/Transportation 55 1330.389 4.80%

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 21 -

Figure 9:
Final-ws-lu.shp
0.25 - 0.5 ac res
0.25 ac res
0.5 - 2 ac res
>2 ac res
Ag
Commercial
Forest
Golf
Industrial
Institutional
Transportation
Goose-hspf-bsn.shp
Goose-hspf-reach.shp
Goose Creek Watershed Land Use Distribution

3.3 Fecal Coliform Source Representation

Both point and non-point sources of fecal coliform are represented in the water quality model.
Certain non-point source categories are not associated with land loading processes and are
represented as direct, in-stream source contributions in the model. These include failing septic
systems. Land loading non-point sources are represented as indirect contributions to the stream
through build-up and wash-off processes (see Section 2.2 above). The following sections
describe the assumptions used for the various sources described in Section 2.0.

3.3.1 NPDES Discharges

There are 5 NPDES point source dischargers in the Goose Creek Watershed. All NPDES
dischargers were represented in the model as constant (do not vary with time) sources of both
flow and fecal coliform. The fecal coliform loading and discharge rate were determined from
Discharge Monitoring Reports filed for each of the facilities. Long term average flow and fecal
coliform concentrations were used to determine the continuous inputs for the model.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 22 -

3.3.2 Land Use

Fecal coliform loading from urban areas was represented in the model as both pervious and
impervious surfaces. Typically, urban loading rates are adjusted as a primary calibration
parameter in the water quality model. However, for the water quality model developed for the
TMDL watershed discussed in this report, loading rates were determined from a highly calibrated
HSPF model prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. for the McDowell Creek Watershed (approximately 15
miles to the Northwest). The loading values used for the Goose Creek watershed model are
presented in the calibrated HSPF *.uci file included as Appendix B.

3.3.3 Failing Septic Systems

Fecal coliform loading values from failing septic systems were input to the water quality model
as continuous point sources by sub-watershed. The fecal coliform loading rates are presented in
Section 2.2.1 above.

3.4 Model Calibration

Calibration of a dynamic loading model involves both hydrologic and water quality components.
The model must be calibrated to accurately represent hydrologic response in the watershed before
reasonable water quality simulations can be performed. The hydrologic calibration involves
comparison of simulated stream-flows to observed stream-flow data from stream gauging stations
in the watershed. Simulated stream-flows are generated by the model using both meteorological
data and the physical characteristics of the watershed. Typically, certain model parameters are
altered until a reasonable match is developed between simulated and observed stream flow.
Similar techniques are used to calibrate the water quality portion of the model.

Hydrologic and water quality calibration for the Goose Creek watershed model was limited from
January 1, 2000 – June 1, 2004. Significant recent land-use changes occurred which would
substantially impact flow and water quality; therefore, the calibration was limited to this time
period.

The calibrated water quality model (*.uci file) is included as Appendix B. A condensed
presentation of the hydrologic calibration data is included as Table 10 for the Goose Creek
watershed. Much of the difference presented in Table 10 may be attributable to the use of a
single rain gage. Table 11 presents the temperature calibration statistics for Goose Creek at SR
1524. Table 12 presents the fecal coliform calibration statistics for Goose Creek at SR 1524.
Figures 10 and 11 are Cartesian and Frequency Distribution plots of the hydrologic calibration for
the Goose Creek watershed model, respectively. Figure 12 is a plot of the water quality (fecal
coliform) calibration for the Goose Creek Watershed (at SR 1524). Figure 13 is a plot of the
simulated fecal coliform concentration presented as a 30-day geometric mean.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 23 -

Table 10: Basic Hydrologic Calibration Data for Goose Creek at Hwy 601.

Flows Goal Simulated Observed Difference
Total of Highest 10% of Flows 15% 1.70E+09 1.97E+09 13.6%
Total of Lowest 50% of Flows 10% 1.10E+08 1.02E+08 7.4%
Observed Summer Flow Volume 30% 3.73E+08 3.57E+08 4.5%
Observed Fall Flow Volume 30% 2.78E+08 2.72E+08 2.3%
Observed Winter Flow Volume 30% 5.73E+08 6.69E+08 14.4%
Observed Spring Flow Volume 30% 8.45E+08 9.95E+08 7.7%
Observed Total Volume 10% 2.33E+09 2.65E+09 11.9%
Simulated Mean (cfs) 17.37
Observed Mean (cfs) 17.95
Simulated Range (cfs) 0.1 – 1170
Observed Range (cfs) 0 - 1510
Relative Error (cfs) 1.13
Absolute Error (cfs) 11.15
RMS Error (cfs) 39.2
R2 (unitless) 0.85
Note: Goal was adopted from HSPEXP.
Note: Units in cubic feet unless noted

Table 11: Basic Temperature Calibration Data for Goose Creek at SR 1524

Simulated Mean (F) 17.37
Observed Mean (F) 17.95
Simulated Range (F) 33.4 - 83.3
Observed Range (F) 36.1 – 83.3
Relative Error (F) 0.3
Absolute Error (F) 1.69
RMS Error (F) 3.3
R2 (unitless) 0.97
Number of values 46

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 24 -

Table 12: Basic Fecal Coliform Calibration Data for Goose Creek at SR 1524

Simulated Mean (cfu/100 ml) 1042
Observed Mean (cfu/100 ml) 378
Simulated Range (cfu/100 ml) 53 – 19,000
Observed Range (cfu/100 ml) 69 – 3,220
Relative Error (cfu/100 ml) 664
Absolute Error (cfu/100 ml) 880
Number of values 46
RMS Error (cfu/100 ml) 2963

Figure 10:
Simulated vs Observed Flow
Goose Creek at 601 (Union County)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1/1/2000 7/19/2000 2/4/2001 8/23/2001 3/11/2002 9/27/2002 4/15/2003 11/1/2003 5/19/2004
Time
Fl
o
w

(
c
f
s
)
Observed
simulated

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 25 -

Figure 11:

Figure 12:
Simulated vs. Observed Fecal Coliform Concentration
at SR 1524
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1/1/2000 7/19/2000 2/4/2001 8/23/2001 3/11/2002 9/27/2002 4/15/2003 11/1/2003 5/19/2004
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
n
c
NC-DENR Samples
simulated

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 26 -
In order to assess the status of the hydrologic calibration of the model the goals presented in
Table 10 were adopted from HSPEXP (Lumb et. Al., 1994). Similarly, for water quality
calibration, model parameters (primarily the first order decay coefficient) were adjusted until the
closest match of simulated and observed concentrations were made. The closeness of the match
was evaluated using the sum of the squares of the differences between simulated and observed
values.

The model was evaluated by sources outside Mecklenburg County for reasonableness,
completeness and basis in reality. As a result of the outside evaluation, improvements to the
model were suggested and adopted.

Table 13 presents typical values for critical model parameters and values used for the Goose
Creek HSPF model.

Table 13: Critical Model Parameters and Ranges

Parameter Name Description Typical
Range
Modeled
Value
Hydrology Calibration Parameters
DEEPFR Fraction of groundwater inflow lost to deep
percolation
0 – 0.2 0.1
LZSN Lower zone nominal storage 3.0 – 8.0 4
LZETP Lower zone evapotranspiration parameter 0.2 – 0.7 0.4 – 0.6
SLSUR Slope for overland flow 0.01 – 0.15 0.035
NSUR Manning’s roughness coefficient 0.15 – 0.35 0.32
LSUR Overland flow length 200 - 500 375
INFILT Infiltration 0.01 – 0.25 0.09
INTFW Interflow 1.0 – 3.0 0.4
IRC Baseflow recession parameter 0.5 - 0.7 0.3
AGWRC Groundwater recession rate 0.92 – 0.99 0.999
Water Quality Calibration
FSTDEC First order decay rate for Fecal Coliform 0.00001 - 1.152
THFST Temperature correction coefficient for first
order decay of Fecal Coliform
1.0 – 2.0 1.07
Note: Typical range values for Hydrology Calibration Parameters taken from Basins Technical
Note 6: Estimating Hydrology and Hydraulic Parameters for HSPF. Unites States Environmental
Protection Agency – Washington D.C., EPA-823-R00-012. Water Quality Calibration typical
range values are the absolute maximum and minimum allowed by Win HSPF.

3.5 Model Output

3.5.1 Current Conditions

Figure 13 presents a rolling 30-day geometric mean of predicted fecal coliform concentrations at
SR 1524. Table 14 presents the relative fecal coliform loading of each of the sources accounted
for in the model from 01/01/2000 thru 06/01/2004.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 27 -

Figure 13:
Simulated Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform Concentratin
at SR 1524
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1/1/2000 7/19/2000 2/4/2001 8/23/2001 3/11/2002 9/27/2002 4/15/2003 11/1/2003 5/19/2004 12/5/2004
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m

(
c
f
u
/
1
0
0

m
l
)

Table 14: Simulated Total Fecal Coliform Load for entire Simulation Period (01/01/2000 –
06/01/2004)

Source Category Total Simulated Load
(1 x 109 c.f.u.)
Percent of Total Load
A. Non-Point Sources (LA): 1,520,500 99.86%
B. Point Sources (WLA) 2,100 <0.14%
C. Grand Total 1,522,600 100.00%

An interpretation of the results presented in Table 14 indicates that non-point source runoff is by
far the largest contributor of fecal coliform in the Goose Creek Watershed. It is critical to note,
however, that as flows in Goose Creek approach 0, fecal loading from ground water, septic
systems and point sources greatly impacts in-stream fecal coliform concentrations. Typically, the
highest fecal coliform concentrations predicted by the WinHSPF model occurred during runoff
events. However, several high concentrations of simulated fecal coliform were noted during low
flow conditions. This may partially be the result of very dry conditions, particularly during the
summer/fall of 2002, which caused the model to nearly “dry up.” Although similar conditions are
witnessed in the USGS gage history, the model tended to under-predict stream flow during
extended periods without rain.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 28 -
3.5.2 Critical Conditions

Results of the three and a half year long water quality simulation of the 30-day geometric mean
concentration for existing conditions at SR 1524 and Goose Creek are presented in Figure 13.
Critical conditions (period of maximum exceedance) for the watershed occurred on 03/06/2003,
which was the result of several runoff events, which occurred in rapid succession. The date of
maximum exceedance and predicted in-stream fecal concentration are presented in Table 15.

Table 15: Critical Condition for the Goose Creek Watershed

Watershed Date of Predicted
Maximum
Exceedance
Value of Predicted Maximum
Exceedance (30 day geomean FC
Concentration [c.f.u./100 ml])
Goose Creek at SR
1524
03/06/2003 592

Table 16 presents the contribution of each of the source categories to the date of maximum
exceedance listed in Table 15.

Table 16: Critical Condition Loading by Source Category (Total Loading 4/12/02 – 5/11/2002).

Source Category Total Simulated Load
(1 x 109 c.f.u.)
Percent of Total Load
A. Non-Point Sources (LA): 129,318.0 99.97%
B. Point Sources (WLA) 26.4 0.03%
C. Grand Total 129,344.4 100.00%

4.0 Allocation

4.1 Total Maximum Daily Load

The TMDL process quantifies the amount of a pollutant that can be assimilated by a water body,
identifies the sources of the pollutant, and recommends regulatory or other actions to be taken to
achieve compliance with applicable water quality standards based on the relationship between
pollution sources and in-stream water quality conditions. A TMDL can be expressed as the sum
of all point source loads (Waste Load Allocations [WLAs]), non-point source loads (Load
Allocations [LA]), and an appropriate margin of safety (MOS), which takes into account any lack
of knowledge concerning the relationship between the effluent limitations and water quality:

∑∑++=MOSLAsWLAsTMDL

The objective of a TMDL is to allocate loads among all of the known pollutant sources
throughout a watershed so that appropriate control measures can be implemented and water
quality standards achieved. 40 CFR § 130.2 (I) states that TMDLs can be expressed in terms of
mass per time, toxicity, or other appropriate measure. For fecal coliform, TMDLs are expressed
as counts per 30 days to be consistent with the water quality standard. Therefore, the TMDL
represents the maximum fecal coliform load that can be assimilated by the stream during the
critical 30 day period while maintaining the fecal coliform water quality standard of the
geometric mean of 200 c.f.u./100 ml over 30 days.
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 29 -
In November 2002 EPA headquarters published guidance which clarifies the regulatory
requirements for establishing wasteload allocations for stormwater discharges (USEPA, 2002). In
summary, this guidance states that sources which are transported to a stream via a NPDES
regulated stormwater system must be considered point sources, and thus be addressed in the
wasteload allocation component of a TMDL. Since Goose Creek watershed (or part of the
watershed) is located in an NPDES Phase II community, pollutant loads, which are discharged to
a stream reach via the stormwater conveyance system, must be considered as point sources.

The total maximum daily load of fecal coliform was determined by adding the WLA and LA. A
10% MOS was explicitly included in the TMDL analysis, functionally this made the standard 180
c.f.u./100 ml. To determine the TMDL, all permitted NPDES dischargers were modeled at
permitted levels of flow and fecal coliform. These values are presented in Table 2. Model runs
to determine the TMDL with NPDES dischargers at permitted levels resulted in an inability to
meet the water quality standard at SR1524 during the summer of 2002. This is largely because of
extreme drought conditions that existed across the North Carolina Piedmont during this time.
Essentially this caused the NPDES dischargers to comprise nearly all of the flow in Goose Creek
at 1524, which rendered the 180 c.f.u./100 ml (includes 10% MOS) standard to be unachievable.
In order to determine the TMDL an analysis suggested by NC DENR DWQ staff to exclude the
lowest flows from the TMDL analysis was performed. Unfortunately, the USGS gage in the
Goose Creek Watershed (02124692) had not been in existence for the minimum 10 years to
accomplish the analysis. For this reason, a nearby stream gage with a long flow history (USGS
Gage #0214657975) was analyzed to determine the lowest 5% of flows at that gage. A
correlation of the observed flows at USGS Gage 02124692 with the observed flows at USGS
Gage 0214657975 is presented as Figure 14. The drainage area upstream of USGS Gage
#0214657975 (39.6 mi2) was compared to the drainage area upstream of SR1524 (8.69 mi2) to
determine the drainage area ratio. The drainage area ratio was then used to calculate the flow in
Goose Creek that would be exceeded 95% of the time. The results of this analysis are presented
in Table 17. Using the value determined from the analysis, all modeled flows at or below 0.6
c.f.s. were excluded from the TMDL analysis. The TMDL, excluding modeled flows at or below
0.6 c.f.s, is listed in Table 18.

Figure 14:
Correlation of USGS Gage Data
y = 1.2504x + 15.388
R2 = 0.5851
0.0
500.0
1000.0
1500.0
2000.0
2500.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Goose Creek Gage 02124692
Mc
A
l
p
i
n
e

C
r
e
e
k

G
a
g
e

0
2
1
4
6
5
7
9
7
5

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 30 -

Table 17: Data used in Flow Correlation Analysis

Watershed Drainage Area Flow Exceeded 95% of the
time
USGS Gage 0214657975
(McAlpine Creek)
39.6 mi2 2.6 c.f.s. (observed)
Goose Creek Upstream at SR
1524
8.69 mi2 0.6 c.f.s. (calculated)

Table 18: TMDL for Goose Creek at SR 1524

Watershed Predicted
Critical
Condition
30 Day Geometric
Mean during
critical condition
Predicted TMDL
(c.f.u./30 days)
Number of exceedances
of 400/100 ml during
Simulation Period (% in
parentheses)
Goose Creek
at SR1524
06/17/2002 177 1.58E+11 56 (3.4%)
Note: after source reduction scenario applied, critical condition shifted to 06/17/2002. All values in Table
14 reflect the shift.

In addition to the 30-day geometric mean standard, the daily model output was also evaluated for
compliance with the 400/100 ml in more than 20 percent of the samples portion of the standard.
For this evaluation model output (with flows excluded) was evaluated for the number of predicted
in-stream concentrations in excess of 360 c.f.u./100 ml (400 c.f.u./100 ml plus a 10% MOS
equates to an effective standard of 360 c.f.u./100 ml) during any 30-day period. The standard was
interpreted to mean that only 6 exceedances of 400 c.f.u./100 ml during any 30 day period would
be considered compliant with the standard and that 7 exceedances would be considered non
compliant. The maximum number of exceedances of the 400 c.f.u./100 ml standard in model
output (flows excluded) was 6. Therefore, the TMDL as presented was considered to be
compliant with both parts of the standard.

4.2 Waste Load Allocations (Point Sources)

The WLA for the Goose Creek Watershed is identical to the existing Waste Load Allocation. In
other words, for the TMDL current conditions should be maintained. Several of the point source
dischargers discharge fecal coliform at levels much less than their permit allows. If these
dischargers increase the level of fecal coliform in their effluent to permitted levels, it is likely the
TMDL presented here would not be met. In addition to permitted point source dischargers, MS4
communities required to obtain a Phase II Storm Water Permit are included in the WLA. Table
19 presents the percent reductions for the MS4 areas in the Goose Creek Watershed.

Table 19: Percent Reduction for MS4 Areas to Achieve TMDL.

MS4 Designated Area Area in Goose Creek
Watershed
Percent of
Watershed Area
Percent Reduction
Mint Hill 7195 ac 26% 92.5%
Hemby Bridge 298 ac 1% 92.5%
Indian Trail 855 ac 3% 92.5%
Stallings 1400 ac 5% 92.5%
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 31 -
4.3 Load Allocations (Non-Point Sources)

The LA for the Goose Creek Watershed is presented in Table 19. Modeling results indicate the
vast majority of fecal coliform loading is from build-up and wash-off of pollutants from the land
surface. Because of this, the TMDL has focused on this source. Table 20 presents the percent
reductions needed from the major allocation categories to meet the TMDL requirements. Table
21 presents the TMDL components necessary to meet the water quality target. Figure 15
displays the 30 geometric mean fecal coliform concentration for the Goose Creek Watershed for
both current conditions and TMDL conditions. Note that the day exhibiting the highest 30
geometric mean concentration during current conditions (with permitted dischargers discharging
at permit limits) was 03/06/2003. This 30-day period was typified by higher than average flows
with several runoff events. After the load reductions necessary to achieve the water quality
standard were input to the model the period of maximum exceedance shifted to 07/07/2002 (30
day geometric mean value of 177), which was a period of very low flows dominated by WWTP
effluent and ground water flow to the stream. The cause of the shift was the drastic reduction of
NPS fecal coliform in the model to achieve the water quality standard. This drastic reduction
shifted the critical condition from a 30-day period of wet weather (NPS dominated sources of
fecal coliform) to a 30-day period of dry weather (WWTP dominated sources of fecal coliform).

Table 20: Percent load reductions necessary to meet TMDL requirements for Goose Creek
Watershed.

Source Category Percent
Reduction
MS4 92.5%
Permitted WWTPs N/A
Nonpoint Sources 92.5%

Table 21: TMDL components to meet the water quality target.

Segment WLA LA MOS TMDL
13-17-18a 7.81x1012 1.14x1014 Explicit &
Implicit
1.22x1014
13-17-18b 2.34x1013 2.06x1015 Explicit &
Implicit
2.08x1015

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 32 -
Figure 15:
Current and TMDL Geometric Mean of Fecal Coliform Concentration
at SR 1524
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
7/1/2000 1/17/2001 8/5/2001 2/21/2002 9/9/2002 3/28/2003 10/14/2003 5/1/2004
Date
Fe
c
a
l

C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m

(
c
f
u
/
1
0
0

m
l
)
90% Reduction in NPS - Flows Excluded
NPDES at Permit - No Reduction - Flows
Excluded

5.0 Implementation Plan

The TMDL analysis was performed using the best data available to specify the fecal coliform
reductions necessary to achieve water quality criteria. The intent of meeting the criteria is to
support the designated use classifications in the watershed. A detailed implementation plan is not
included in this TMDL. The involvement of local land owners and agencies will be needed in
order to develop an implementation plan. In general, reductions in fecal coliform loads should be
sought through identification and installation of additional agricultural and urban BMPs to reduce
loads during runoff events.

6.0 Stream Monitoring

NCDENR will continue monthly monitoring on Stevens Mill Rd. in Union County. MCWQP
will continue monthly fecal coliform monitoring on Stevens Creek at Thompson Rd. and on
Goose Creek at Country Woods Dr. The continued monitoring of fecal coliform will allow for the
evaluation of progress towards the goal of achieving water quality standards and intended best
uses. Moreover the Storm Water Management Program (SWMP) required in MS4 permits is a
good means of achieving the continued and enhanced monitoring.

7.0 Future Efforts

The most prevalent sources of fecal coliform loading appear to be storm water runoff from forest,
agriculture and urban land uses. Addressing the agricultural sources will require voluntary
adoption of BMPs, facilitated by existing cost-share programs and educational efforts. Urban
sources can be addressed by the implementation of structural BMPs. Possible increased fecal
coliform levels from new development can be addressed by the adoption of post construction
ordinances that require riparian buffers and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques.
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 33 -

8.0 Public Participation

Mecklenburg County involved an interactive stakeholder group involving individuals
representing diverse community interests from the Mecklenburg and Union Counties, Charlotte
Mecklenburg Utilities, Sierra Club, DENR-DWQ, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
local developers, and community members. A series of stakeholder group meetings were held to
communicate and discuss TMDL development.

A draft of the TMDL was publicly noticed through various means, including notification in the
Charlotte Observer on February 26th , 2005 (Appendix C-2). DWQ electronically distributed the
draft TMDL and public comment information to known interested parties. The TMDL was also
available from the Division of Water Quality’s website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/ during
the comment period. The public comment period lasted for a minimum of 30-days and ended on
March 15, 2005. An article entitled, “Study of creek finds bacterial problem, is silent on
solution.” was published in the Charlotte Observer on March 27th, 2005 (Appendix C-3).
The last stakeholder group meeting minutes are included in Appendix C-4.

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 34 -

9.0 References

Bales, Jerad D., J. Curtis Weaver and Jerald B. Robinson, 1999, Relation of Land Use to
Streamflowand Water Quality at Selected Sites in the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina, 1993-98. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-
4180, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Daniel, Sylvia, 2001, Personal Communication, Mecklenburg County Health Department,
January 31, 2001.

FACA. 1998. Federal Advisory Committee (FACA). Draft final TMDL Federal Advisory
Committee Report.

Horsley & Whitten. 1996. Identification and Evaluation of Nutrient and Bacteriological Loadings
to Maquoit Bay, Brunswick, and Freeport, Maine. Final Report. Casco Bay Estuary Project,
Portland, ME.

Lumb, A.M., McCammon, R.B., and Kittle, J.L., Jr., 1994, Users manual for an expert system
(HSPEXP) for calibration of the Hydrologic Simulation Program--Fortran: U.S. Geological
Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4168, 102 p.

Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protection, 2002, Fecal Coliform Total
Maximum Daily Load for the Irwin, McAlpine, Little Sugar and Sugar Creek Watersheds,
Mecklenburg County. Prepared for NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section – Planning Branch, Raleigh, NC.

Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control,
Watershed Management Section, 2000, Total Maximum Daily Load for Fecal Coliform in
Sinking Creek, Watauga River Watershed, Tennessee (HUC 06010103). Nashville,
Tennessee.

Tetra Tech, Inc., 2003, Calibration Report for the McDowell Creek HSPF Model. Prepared for
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.

USEPA. 1991. Guidance for Water Quality-Based Decisions: The TMDL Process. Environmental
Protection Agency, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, Washington D.C.

USEPA. 2000. Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation and
Revisions to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program in Support of
Revisions to the Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation; Final Rule. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C+. Fed. Reg. 65:43586-43670 (July 13, 2000).

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 35 -
10.0 Appendices

Appendix A-1. Fecal coliform results from the NCDENR monitoring site located on Goose
Creek at Stevens Mill Rd.

Date FC Observation (#/100ml)
1/28/1997 6300
2/18/1997 10
3/26/1997 120
4/16/1997 450
5/20/1997 81
6/23/1997 290
7/30/1997 1600
8/26/1997 300
9/24/1997 820
10/28/1997 160
11/20/1997 27
1/5/1998 200
1/20/1998 750
2/18/1998 340
3/12/1998 81
4/27/1998 300
5/20/1998 600
6/15/1998 180
7/21/1998 2600
8/6/1998 210
9/29/1998 340
10/13/1998 73
11/5/1998 80
12/8/1998 310
1/25/1999 380
2/4/1999 230
3/4/1999 27
4/28/1999 6300
5/11/1999 1400
6/15/1999 110
7/21/1999 54
8/19/1999 170
9/8/1999 60
10/18/1999 110
11/18/1999 600
12/29/1999 60
1/19/2000 210
2/3/2000 340
3/6/2000 210
4/4/2000 240
5/30/2000 440
6/22/2000 210
7/25/2000 720
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 36 -
Date FC Observation (#/100ml)
8/14/2000 120
9/11/2000 19000
10/17/2000 6000
11/20/2000 130
12/12/2000 73
1/4/2001 140
2/7/2001 200
4/5/2001 53
5/3/2001 100
6/12/2001 270
7/10/2001 280
8/6/2001 440
9/6/2001 190
10/2/2001 640
11/7/2001 200
12/10/2001 530
1/7/2002 2000
2/12/2002 250
3/6/2002 120
4/9/2002 320
5/9/2002 1400
6/4/2002 230
7/10/2002 170
8/5/2002 2000
9/3/2002 530
10/3/2002 1500
11/5/2002 1100
1/21/2003 660
2/6/2003 2000
3/10/2003 150
4/1/2003 350
5/21/2003 1200
6/23/2003 340
7/16/2003 390
8/6/2003 1200
9/24/2003 150
10/8/2003 730
11/6/2003 200
12/3/2003 240

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 37 -
Appendix A-2 Fecal Coliform data from WWTP effluent samples

Fecal Coliform Fecal Coliform
Fecal
Coliform
Fecal
Coliform
Fecal
Coliform
Site Date (Colonies/100 ml) (Colonies/100 ml) (Colonies/100 ml) (Colonies/100 ml) (Colonies/100 ml)
APWWTP CWWWTP FPWWTP OGWWTP HCWWTP
6/11/2003 230
6/18/2003 2000
6/25/2003 5
7/2/2003 5
7/9/2003 5
APWWTP 7/23/2003 25 6 5
APWWTP 7/30/2003 25 50 5
APWWTP 8/6/2003 10 5 31 7300
APWWTP 8/13/2003 6 5 44 1380
APWWTP 8/20/2003 40 10 5 60 5
APWWTP 8/27/2003 10 10 5 10 5
APWWTP 9/3/2003 19 13 5 13 5
APWWTP 9/10/2003 10 6 5 5 5
APWWTP 9/17/2003 0 5 5
APWWTP 9/24/2003 10 19 5 25 5
APWWTP 10/1/2003 10 10 5 10 5
APWWTP 10/8/2003 10 10 5 20 5
APWWTP 10/15/2003 10 10 5 10 5
APWWTP 10/22/2003 10 10 5 20 5
APWWTP 10/29/2003 10 20 5 10 5
APWWTP 11/5/2003 10 6 10
APWWTP 11/12/2003 5 10 5
APWWTP 11/19/2003 40 960 6
APWWTP 12/3/2003 10 1500 10
APWWTP 12/11/2003 10 180 10
APWWTP 12/17/2003 10 10 10

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 38 -
Appendix A-3 Fecal coliform concentrations and 30 day geometric mean

Date G1
G1 30 day
geomean G3
G3 30 day
geomean G7
G7 30 day
geomean G9
G9 30 day
geomean
6/11/2003 210 1400 500 400
6/18/2003 720 1130 860 1000
6/25/2003 300 920 540 6700
7/2/2003 4600 676 2600 1395 5100 1043 2800 1655
7/9/2003 590 875 580 1119 470 1027 760 1943
7/16/2003 934 1115 1090 2425
7/23/2003 640 1202 2500 1556 2900 1908 2600 1769
7/30/2003 2800 1019 10000 2438 6000 2015 11900 2865
8/6/2003 760 1108 2300 3860 2500 3517 4000 4983
8/13/2003 310 806 2700 3530 600 2260 10000 5931
8/20/2003 60 446 30 1168 60 857 90 2558
8/27/2003 140 211 420 529 190 362 150 857
9/3/2003 400 180 490 359 450 236 3700 841
9/10/2003 193 160 250 198 330 203 310 353
9/17/2003 221 372 304 556
9/24/2003 450 326 400 366 395 389 4300 1702
10/1/2003 350 312 480 363 960 500 112 530
10/8/2003 4100 864 6200 1060 380 524 38 264
10/15/2003 40 401 320 786 380 484 1000 368
10/22/2003 220 335 310 737 700 558 60 126
10/29/2003 980 434 2800 1146 4200 807 5800 339
11/5/2003 330 231 370 566 400 818 1370 831
11/12/2003 200 345 380 591 480 867 160 526
11/19/2003 2800 652 21000 1696 4600 1388 13000 2016
12/3/2003 370 511 720 1207 180 631 1200 1360
12/11/2003 2400 840 3900 2176 3200 1062 4800 1860
12/17/2003 370 979 1100 2838 220 874 560 2545

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 39 -
Appendix A-3 Fecal coliform concentrations and 30 day geometric mean

Date G11 G11 30 day geomean G12 G12 30 day geomean G13 G13 30 day geomean
6/11/2003 210 190 200
6/18/2003 620 460 540
6/25/2003 220 320 390
7/2/2003 4700 606 4600 599 8800 780
7/9/2003 310 668 410 726 370 910
7/16/2003 684 845 1083
7/23/2003 4600 1885 4100 1977 4700 2483
7/30/2003 6000 2045 6000 2161 6000 2185
8/6/2003 2250 3960 2500 3947 1700 3633
8/13/2003 5250 4249 6000 4383 6000 4118
8/20/2003 70 1492 60 1524 60 1384
8/27/2003 140 583 240 682 210 599
9/3/2003 450 390 240 379 280 381
9/10/2003 600 227 250 171 190 161
9/17/2003 336 243 224
9/24/2003 290 428 240 243 370 270
10/1/2003 88 248 250 247 210 245
10/8/2003 280 193 850 371 400 314
10/15/2003 200 194 210 322 140 257
10/22/2003 160 168 340 351 160 208
10/29/2003 5300 467 5800 770 4700 453
11/5/2003 280 467 1480 885 310 425
11/12/2003 410 559 360 1012 420 559
11/19/2003 7400 1457 14000 2565 849
12/3/2003 260 686 1200 1730 880 486
12/11/2003 3900 1324 3300 2114 3100 1046
12/17/2003 560 1432 520 2317 520 1124

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 40 -
Appendix A-3 Fecal coliform concentrations and 30 day geometric mean

Date D3 D3 30 day geomean D5 D5 30 day geomean D8 D8 30 day geomean
6/11/2003 70 131 160
6/18/2003 640 640 1550
6/25/2003 194 260 194
7/2/2003 4000 432 4000 543 3200 626
7/9/2003 120 494 380 709 730 915
7/16/2003 453 734 768
7/23/2003 2200 1018 3000 1658 6100 2424
7/30/2003 6000 1166 8600 2140 6000 2990
8/6/2003 4200 3813 3000 4262 3900 5226
8/13/2003 550 2350 2000 3527 6000 5410
8/20/2003 25 767 80 1425 110 1982
8/27/2003 250 347 600 733 150 788
9/3/2003 250 171 480 463 300 415
9/10/2003 590 174 1140 403 240 186
9/17/2003 333 690 221
9/24/2003 1040 535 450 627 390 304
10/1/2003 5 145 250 504 169 251
10/8/2003 360 123 19700 1304 260 258
10/15/2003 230 144 570 1060 130 217
10/22/2003 460 117 350 996 90 151
10/29/2003 4800 654 1700 1608 7200 385
11/5/2003 150 525 680 693 70 277
11/12/2003 100 427 240 558 2300 568
11/19/2003 1200 542 8500 1239 1500 1148
12/3/2003 640 328 130 652 210 475
12/11/2003 8200 891 3500 982 5500 1413
12/17/2003 400 1260 220 960 530 979

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 41 -
Appendix A-4 Goose/Stevens Creek TMDL Phase II Source Assessment Monitoring Results

Date Site FC Concentration (col/100 ml)
02/10/04 GT1 4600
02/17/04 GT1 2700
03/02/04 GT1 800
03/10/04 GT1 2200

02/10/04 GT2 480
02/17/04 GT2 760
03/02/04 GT2 570
03/10/04 GT2 1500

02/10/04 GC1 1100
02/17/04 GC1 1300
03/02/04GC1 1080
03/10/04GC1 37000

02/10/04GC2 900
02/17/04GC2 1300
03/02/04GC2 1100
03/10/04GC2 3800

02/18/04GC3 120
03/02/04GC3 940
03/10/04GC3 570

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 42 -
Appendix B: HSPF UCI File

RUN

GLOBAL
UCI Created by WinHSPF for Exist_hyd
START 2000/01/01 00:00 END 2004/06/15 23:00
RUN INTERP OUTPT LEVELS 1 0
RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNITS 1
END GLOBAL

FILES
<FILE> <UN#>***<----FILE NAME-----------------------------------------
-------->
MESSU 24 wq-cal2.Exist_hyd.ech
91 wq-cal2.Exist_hyd.out
WDM1 25 exist-hyd.wdm
WDM2 26 ..\..\..\BASINS\data\met_data\gooseall.wdm
BINO 92 Exist_hyd.hbn
END FILES

OPN SEQUENCE
INGRP INDELT 01:00
PERLND 101
PERLND 102
PERLND 103
PERLND 104
PERLND 105
PERLND 106
PERLND 107
PERLND 108
PERLND 109
PERLND 110
PERLND 111
PERLND 112
IMPLND 101
IMPLND 102
IMPLND 103
IMPLND 104
IMPLND 105
IMPLND 106
IMPLND 107
IMPLND 108
IMPLND 109
IMPLND 110
IMPLND 111
IMPLND 112
RCHRES 67
RCHRES 71
RCHRES 69
RCHRES 70
RCHRES 72
RCHRES 73
RCHRES 86
RCHRES 75
RCHRES 76
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 43 -
RCHRES 77
RCHRES 89
RCHRES 79
RCHRES 88
RCHRES 81
RCHRES 91
RCHRES 83
RCHRES 82
RCHRES 93
RCHRES 92
RCHRES 87
RCHRES 95
RCHRES 78
RCHRES 100
RCHRES 85
RCHRES 99
RCHRES 96
RCHRES 97
RCHRES 98
RCHRES 94
RCHRES 80
RCHRES 101
RCHRES 103
RCHRES 105
RCHRES 106
RCHRES 108
RCHRES 109
RCHRES 102
RCHRES 110
RCHRES 104
RCHRES 112
RCHRES 84
RCHRES 114
RCHRES 116
RCHRES 117
RCHRES 118
RCHRES 74
RCHRES 119
RCHRES 120
RCHRES 121
RCHRES 122
RCHRES 123
RCHRES 124
RCHRES 125
RCHRES 90
RCHRES 126
RCHRES 127
RCHRES 128
RCHRES 107
RCHRES 111
RCHRES 113
RCHRES 115
RCHRES 129
END INGRP
END OPN SEQUENCE

PERLND
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 44 -
ACTIVITY
*** <PLS > Active Sections
***
*** x - x ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC
***
101 112 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
END ACTIVITY

PRINT-INFO
*** < PLS> Print-flags
PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 9
END PRINT-INFO

BINARY-INFO
*** < PLS> Binary Output Flags
PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
1 9
END BINARY-INFO

GEN-INFO
*** Name Unit-systems Printer BinaryOut
*** <PLS > t-series Engl Metr Engl Metr
*** x - x in out
101 >2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
102 0.25 - 0.5 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
103 0.25 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
104 0.5 - 2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
105 Ag 1 1 0 0 92 0
106 Forest 1 1 0 0 92 0
107 Golf 1 1 0 0 92 0
108 Institutional 1 1 0 0 92 0
109 Road 1 1 0 0 92 0
110 Transportation 1 1 0 0 92 0
111 Industrial 1 1 0 0 92 0
112 Commercial 1 1 0 0 92 0
END GEN-INFO

SNOW-PARM1
*** < PLS> LAT MELEV SHADE SNOWCF COVIND KMELT
TBASE
*** x - x degrees (ft) (in) (in/d.F)
(F)
101 112 40. 800. 0.3 1.2 10. 0.
0.
END SNOW-PARM1

PWAT-PARM1
*** <PLS > Flags
*** x - x CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE IFFC HWT IRRG
101 112 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0
END PWAT-PARM1

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 45 -
PWAT-PARM2
*** < PLS> FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY
AGWRC
*** x - x (in) (in/hr) (ft) (1/in)
(1/day)
101 0.25 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
102 104 0. 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
105 107 0.25 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
108 112 0. 4. 0.09 375. 0.035 1.
0.999
END PWAT-PARM2

PWAT-PARM3
*** < PLS> PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP
AGWETP
*** x - x (deg F) (deg F)
101 112 40. 35. 2. 2. 0.1 0.15
0.01
END PWAT-PARM3

PWAT-PARM4
*** <PLS > CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP
*** x - x (in) (in) (1/day)
101 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.6
102 104 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.4
105 107 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.6
108 112 0.02 0.4 0.32 0.4 0.3 0.4
END PWAT-PARM4

PWAT-STATE1
*** < PLS> PWATER state variables (in)
*** x - x CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS
GWVS
101 112 0. 0. 0.35 0. 4.2 1.
0.
END PWAT-STATE1

MON-INTERCEP
*** <PLS > Interception storage capacity at start of each month (in)
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
102 104 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.15
105 107 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
108 112 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.15
END MON-INTERCEP

MON-UZSN
*** <PLS > Upper zone storage at start of each month (inches)
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.1 0.08
END MON-UZSN

MON-INTERFLW
*** <PLS > Interflow inflow parameter for start of each month
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 46 -
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.25 0.25 0.25
END MON-INTERFLW

MON-IRC
*** <PLS > Interflow recession constant at start of each month (/day)
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.35 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.35 0.35 0.3 0.1 0.1
END MON-IRC

MON-LZETPARM
*** <PLS > Lower zone evapotransp parm at start of each month
*** x - x JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
101 112 0.15 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.15
END MON-LZETPARM

SED-PARM2
*** <PLS > SMPF KRER JRER AFFIX COVER NVSI
*** x - x (/day) lb/ac-day
101 1. 0.552 1.81 0.06 0.25 0.45
102 104 1. 0.552 1.81 0.001 0.25 1.75
105 107 1. 0.552 1.81 0.06 0.25 0.45
108 112 1. 0.552 1.81 0.001 0.25 1.75
END SED-PARM2

SED-PARM3
*** <PLS > Sediment parameter 3
*** x - x KSER JSER KGER JGER
101 112 1. 1.25 0.1 1.5
END SED-PARM3

NQUALS
*** <PLS >
*** x - xNQUAL
101 112 1
END NQUALS

PQL-AD-FLAGS
*** Atmospheric Deposition Flags
*** < PLS> QUAL1 QUAL2 QUAL3 QUAL4 QUAL5 QUAL6 QUAL7 QUAL8
QUAL9 QUAL10
*** x - x <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C>
<F><C> <F><C>
101 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
END PQL-AD-FLAGS

QUAL-PROPS
*** <PLS > Identifiers and Flags
*** x - x QUALID QTID QSD VPFW VPFS QSO VQO QIFW VIQC QAGW
VAQC
101 112FECAL COLIFO LBS 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1
0
END QUAL-PROPS

QUAL-INPUT
*** Storage on surface and nonseasonal parameters
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 47 -
*** SQO POTFW POTFS ACQOP SQOLIM WSQOP IOQC
AOQC
*** <PLS > qty/ac qty/ton qty/ton qty/ qty/ac in/hr qty/ft3
qty/ft3
*** x - x ac.day
101 1.7E+07 0. 0. 8.6e9 2.6E+10 2.5 14160.
14160.
102 104 1.7E+07 0. 0. 5.5E+09 1.7E+10 2.5 14160.
14160.
105 1.7E+07 0. 0. 7.6E+106.84E+11 2.5 14160.
14160.
106 1.7E+07 0. 0. 1.2E+10 3.5E+10 2.5 14160.
14160.
107 1.7E+07 0. 0. 1.3E+09 1.2E+10 2.5 14160.
14160.
108 112 1.7E+07 0. 0. 2.5E+09 7.5E+09 2.5 14160.
14160.
END QUAL-INPUT

END PERLND

IMPLND
ACTIVITY
*** <ILS > Active Sections
*** x - x ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL
101 112 1 1 1 1 0 1
END ACTIVITY

PRINT-INFO
*** <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *********
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END PRINT-INFO

BINARY-INFO
*** <ILS > **** Binary-Output-flags **** PIVL PYR
*** x - x ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *********
101 112 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END BINARY-INFO

GEN-INFO
*** Name Unit-systems Printer BinaryOut
*** <ILS > t-series Engl Metr Engl Metr
*** x - x in out
101 >2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
102 0.25 - 0.5 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
103 0.25 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
104 0.5 - 2 ac res 1 1 0 0 92 0
105 Ag 1 1 0 0 92 0
106 Forest 1 1 0 0 92 0
107 Golf 1 1 0 0 92 0
108 Institutional 1 1 0 0 92 0
109 Road 1 1 0 0 92 0
110 Transportation 1 1 0 0 92 0
111 Industrial 1 1 0 0 92 0
112 Commercial 1 1 0 0 92 0
END GEN-INFO
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 48 -

SNOW-PARM1
*** < ILS> LAT MELEV SHADE SNOWCF COVIND KMELT
TBASE
*** x - x degrees (ft) (in) (in/d.F)
(F)
101 112 40. 800. 0.3 1.2 10. 0.
32.
END SNOW-PARM1

IWAT-PARM1
*** <ILS > Flags
*** x - x CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI
101 112 1 0 1 0 0
END IWAT-PARM1

IWAT-PARM2
*** <ILS > LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC
*** x - x (ft) (in)
101 110 500. 0.0027 0.05 0.05
111 500. 0.0012 0.05 0.05
112 500. 0.0025 0.05 0.05
END IWAT-PARM2

IWAT-PARM3
*** <ILS > PETMAX PETMIN
*** x - x (deg F) (deg F)
101 112 40. 35.
END IWAT-PARM3

IWAT-STATE1
*** <ILS > IWATER state variables (inches)
*** x - x RETS SURS
101 112 0.2 0.01
END IWAT-STATE1

SLD-PARM2
*** KEIM JEIM ACCSDP REMSDP
*** <ILS > tons/ /day
*** x - x ac.day
101 0.1 2. 0.014 0.085
102 0.09 2. 0.02 0.085
103 0.08 2. 0.028 0.085
104 0.08 2. 0.016 0.085
105 107 0.1 2. 0.014 0.085
108 110 0.08 2. 0.015 0.085
111 0.09 2. 0.028 0.085
112 0.08 2. 0.015 0.085
END SLD-PARM2

NQUALS
*** <ILS >
*** x - xNQUAL
101 112 1
END NQUALS

IQL-AD-FLAGS
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 49 -
*** Atmospheric Deposition Flags
*** < ILS> QUAL1 QUAL2 QUAL3 QUAL4 QUAL5 QUAL6 QUAL7 QUAL8
QUAL9 QUAL10
*** x - x <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C> <F><C>
<F><C> <F><C>
101 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
END IQL-AD-FLAGS

QUAL-PROPS
*** <ILS > Identifiers and Flags
*** x - x QUALID QTID QSD VPFW QSO VQO
101 112FECAL COLIFO 0 0 1 0
END QUAL-PROPS

QUAL-INPUT
*** Storage on surface and nonseasonal parameters
*** SQO POTFW ACQOP SQOLIM WSQOP
*** <ILS > qty/ac qty/ton qty/ qty/ac in/hr
*** x - x ac.day
101 5E+08 0. 6.2E+07 1.9E+08 0.8
102 103 5E+08 0. 1.9E+08 5.8E+08 0.8
104 5E+08 0. 6.2E+07 1.9E+08 0.8
105 106 5E+08 0. 3.2E+08 9.7E+08 0.8
107 112 5E+08 0. 6.2E+07 1.9E+08 0.8
END QUAL-INPUT

END IMPLND

RCHRES
ACTIVITY
*** RCHRES Active sections
*** x - x HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG
67 129 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
END ACTIVITY

PRINT-INFO
*** RCHRES Printout level flags
*** x - x HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR
67 129 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END PRINT-INFO

BINARY-INFO
*** RCHRES Binary Output level flags
*** x - x HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR
67 129 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 9
END BINARY-INFO

GEN-INFO
*** Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer
*** RCHRES t-series Engl Metr LKFG
*** x - x in out
67 67 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
69 69 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 50 -
70 70 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
71 71 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
72 72 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
73 73 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
74 74 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
75 75 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
76 76 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
77 77 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
78 78 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
79 79 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
80 80 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
81 81 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
82 82 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
83 83 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
84 84 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
85 85 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
86 86 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
87 87 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
88 88 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
89 89 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
90 90 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
91 91 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
92 92 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
93 93 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
94 94 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
95 95 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
96 96 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
97 97 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 51 -
98 98 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
99 99 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
100 100 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
101 101 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
102 102 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
103 103 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
104 104 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
105 105 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
106 106 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
107 107 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
108 108 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
109 109 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
110 110 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
111 111 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
112 112 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
113 113 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
114 114 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
115 115 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
116 116 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
117 117 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
118 118 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
119 119 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
120 120 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
121 121 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
122 122 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
123 123 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
124 124 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
125 125 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 52 -
126 126 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
127 127 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
128 128 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
129 129 1 1 1 91 0 0 92
0
END GEN-INFO

HYDR-PARM1
*** Flags for HYDR section
***RC HRES VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT
for each
*** x - x FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit
possible exit
67 129 0 1 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
1 1 1
END HYDR-PARM1

HYDR-PARM2
*** RCHRES FTBW FTBU LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50
*** x - x (miles) (ft) (ft) (in)
67 0. 67. 1.7 127. 3.2 0.3 0.01
69 0. 69. 2.55 157. 3.2 0.3 0.01
70 0. 70. 2.1 89. 3.2 0.3 0.01
71 0. 71. 0.29 0. 3.2 0.3 0.01
72 0. 72. 1.56 103. 3.2 0.3 0.01
73 0. 73. 2.34 168. 3.2 0.3 0.01
74 0. 74. 0.15 3. 3.2 0.3 0.01
75 0. 75. 1.53 115. 3.2 0.3 0.01
76 0. 76. 2.7 143. 3.2 0.3 0.01
77 0. 77. 1.69 124. 3.2 0.3 0.01
78 0. 78. 0.2 8. 3.2 0.3 0.01
79 0. 79. 2.03 155. 3.2 0.3 0.01
80 0. 80. 0.13 7. 3.2 0.3 0.01
81 0. 81. 1.82 132. 3.2 0.3 0.01
82 0. 82. 0.43 8. 3.2 0.3 0.01
83 0. 83. 2.45 88. 3.2 0.3 0.01
84 0. 84. 0.56 28. 3.2 0.3 0.01
85 0. 85. 0.71 23. 3.2 0.3 0.01
86 0. 86. 0.89 27. 3.2 0.3 0.01
87 0. 87. 1.01 34. 3.2 0.3 0.01
88 0. 88. 2.86 177. 3.2 0.3 0.01
89 0. 89. 1.07 31. 3.2 0.3 0.01
90 0. 90. 0.85 23. 3.2 0.3 0.01
91 0. 91. 1.05 32. 3.2 0.3 0.01
92 0. 92. 0.02 1. 3.2 0.3 0.01
93 0. 93. 0.88 23. 3.2 0.3 0.01
94 0. 94. 0.31 13. 3.2 0.3 0.01
95 0. 95. 1.05 30. 3.2 0.3 0.01
96 0. 96. 1.74 64. 3.2 0.3 0.01
97 0. 97. 0.35 13. 3.2 0.3 0.01
98 0. 98. 0.5 10. 3.2 0.3 0.01
99 0. 99. 0.97 43. 3.2 0.3 0.01
100 0. 100. 0.66 16. 3.2 0.3 0.01
101 0. 101. 0.84 19. 3.2 0.3 0.01
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 53 -
102 0. 102. 1.08 19. 3.2 0.3 0.01
103 0. 103. 0.71 17. 3.2 0.3 0.01
104 0. 104. 0.76 11. 3.2 0.3 0.01
105 0. 105. 0.54 6. 3.2 0.3 0.01
106 0. 106. 0.56 13. 3.2 0.3 0.01
107 0. 107. 1.37 17. 3.2 0.3 0.01
108 0. 108. 1.05 12. 3.2 0.3 0.01
109 0. 109. 0.72 19. 3.2 0.3 0.01
110 0. 110. 0.55 14. 3.2 0.3 0.01
111 0. 111. 1.08 16. 3.2 0.3 0.01
112 0. 112. 0.77 8. 3.2 0.3 0.01
113 0. 113. 1. 11. 3.2 0.3 0.01
114 0. 114. 0.4 5. 3.2 0.3 0.01
115 0. 115. 0.5 3. 3.2 0.3 0.01
116 0. 116. 0.81 7. 3.2 0.3 0.01
117 0. 117. 0.6 6. 3.2 0.3 0.01
118 0. 118. 0.15 2. 3.2 0.3 0.01
119 0. 119. 0.68 7. 3.2 0.3 0.01
120 0. 120. 0.49 7. 3.2 0.3 0.01
121 0. 121. 0.82 5. 3.2 0.3 0.01
122 0. 122. 0.9 8. 3.2 0.3 0.01
123 0. 123. 0.59 5. 3.2 0.3 0.01
124 0. 124. 0.1 1. 3.2 0.3 0.01
125 0. 125. 1.03 14. 3.2 0.3 0.01
126 0. 126. 0.6 6. 3.2 0.3 0.01
127 0. 127. 0.88 9. 3.2 0.3 0.01
128 0. 128. 0.04 0. 3.2 0.3 0.01
129 0. 129. 0.89 5. 3.2 0.3 0.01
END HYDR-PARM2

HYDR-INIT
*** Initial conditions for HYDR section
***RC HRES VOL CAT Initial value of COLIND initial value
of OUTDGT
*** x - x ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible
exit,ft3
67 129 5. 4. 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 2.1 1.2 0.5
1.2 1.8
END HYDR-INIT

SED-GENPARM
*** RCHRES BEDWID BEDWRN POR
*** x - x (ft) (ft)
67 129 25. 10. 0.4
END SED-GENPARM

SAND-PM
*** RCHRES D W RHO KSAND EXPSND
*** x - x (in) (in/sec) (gm/cm3)
67 129 0.014 1.5 2.65 0.005 4.
END SAND-PM

SILT-CLAY-PM
*** RCHRES D W RHO TAUCD TAUCS M
*** x - x (in) (in/sec) gm/cm3 lb/ft2 lb/ft2 lb/ft2.d
67 129 0.0011 0.001 2.2 0.15 0.195 1.25
END SILT-CLAY-PM
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 54 -

SILT-CLAY-PM
*** RCHRES D W RHO TAUCD TAUCS M
*** x - x (in) (in/sec) gm/cm3 lb/ft2 lb/ft2 lb/ft2.d
67 129 0.00001 0.0001 2.2 0.1 0.075 2.25
END SILT-CLAY-PM

SSED-INIT
*** RCHRES Suspended sed concs (mg/l)
*** x - x Sand Silt Clay
67 129 1. 10. 10.
END SSED-INIT

BED-INIT
*** RCHRES BEDDEP Initial bed composition
*** x - x (ft) Sand Silt Clay
67 127 8. 0.38 0.26 0.36
128 6. 0.38 0.26 0.36
129 8. 0.38 0.26 0.36
END BED-INIT

GQ-GENDATA
*** RCHRES NGQL TPFG PHFG ROFG CDFG SDFG PYFG LAT
*** x - x deg
67 129 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 0
END GQ-GENDATA

GQ-AD-FLAGS
*** Atmospheric Deposition Flags
*** RCHRES GQUAL1 GQUAL2 GQUAL3
*** x - x <F><C> <F><C> <F><C>
67 129 0 0 0 0 0 0
END GQ-AD-FLAGS

GQ-QALDATA
*** RCHRES GQID DQAL CONCID CONV QTYID
*** x - x concid
67 129FECAL COLIFO 10. # 0.0035 #
END GQ-QALDATA

GQ-QALFG
*** RCHRES HDRL OXID PHOT VOLT BIOD GEN SDAS
*** x - x
67 129 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
END GQ-QALFG

GQ-GENDECAY
*** RCHRES FSTDEC THFST
*** x - x (/day)
67 129 1.152 1.07
END GQ-GENDECAY

END RCHRES

FTABLES

FTABLE 67
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 55 -
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.1 5.1 0.6 3.4
2.3 6.1 4.4 36.2
3.4 6.9 11.6 135.1
4.6 7.7 20.9 322.4
5.7 14.7 36.6 619.7
6.8 23.5 62.7 1129.5
8. 31.3 98. 1924.7
9.1 36.2 139.8 3033.3
25. 40.4 4000. 50000.
END FTABLE 67

FTABLE 71
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.2 5.3 4.2 47.9
4.4 5.5 13. 215.3
6.7 5.7 23.6 522.6
8.9 5.9 35.1 947.8
11.1 6.1 47.4 1483.5
13.3 6.2 60.6 2124.8
15.5 6.4 74.5 2871.2
17.8 6.6 89. 3724.4
20. 6.8 104.1 4682.1
END FTABLE 71

FTABLE 69
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 20.2 2.5 9.2
1.6 22.9 16.9 118.3
2.3 28. 34.1 323.8
3.1 43.2 54.5 616.8
3.9 46.6 81.8 1006.8
4.7 52.6 117. 1524.2
5.4 58.3 157.1 2170.7
6.2 64.3 202.8 2956.6
7. 65.1 251.3 3893.5
END FTABLE 69

FTABLE 70
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 3.3 0.7 5.2
1.6 7.6 3.3 32.8
2.4 22.3 15.9 105.2
3.2 30.6 34.7 249.6
4. 48.5 65.6 506.5
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 56 -
4.8 52.8 105.2 932.
7.2 53.8 146.8 1504.2
7.6 53.8 189. 2205.6
20. 53.8 231.5 3023.7
END FTABLE 70

FTABLE 72
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.4 23.9 38.3 516.1
4.7 38.5 108.1 2291.4
7.1 57.5 227.5 5767.5
9.5 77.1 386.2 11548.6
11.9 84. 581.8 20054.9
14.2 90.7 794.2 31197.9
16.6 101.2 1024.9 44944.2
19. 110.8 1281.2 61492.3
21.3 131. 1564.3 80997.
END FTABLE 72

FTABLE 73
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1. 9.4 0.9 5.
2. 23.3 11.6 70.9
3. 31.8 36.2 290.2
4. 38. 68.5 713.6
5. 42.9 106.8 1340.9
6. 47.2 149.8 2173.8
7. 51.3 197.2 3216.2
8. 54.9 248.7 4483.2
9. 57.4 303.1 5975.7
END FTABLE 73

FTABLE 86
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 0.9 0.3 4.9
1.8 5.1 1.9 34.9
2.8 5.8 6.6 112.6
3.7 7.1 12.2 241.4
4.6 10.1 19.5 426.5
5.5 13.5 29.9 693.8
6.5 16.9 43.7 1068.1
7.4 19.5 60.6 1568.3
8.3 21.2 79.5 2220.2
END FTABLE 86

FTABLE 75
rows cols ***
10 4
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 57 -
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.8 4.2 2.6 48.7
3.7 7.2 9.6 210.
5.5 11. 26. 600.2
7.4 13.3 49.2 1383.9
9.2 16.3 78. 2571.9
11. 20.2 113.3 4229.9
12.9 24.1 155.8 6412.5
14.7 28.1 205.7 9176.7
16.6 32.2 264.4 12606.7
END FTABLE 75

FTABLE 76
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
3.4 24.4 26.3 202.2
6.8 59. 160.2 1699.8
10.1 80.5 403.5 5764.1
13.5 99.4 715.9 12813.5
16.9 129.3 1122.8 23223.7
20.3 150.4 1621.7 37416.
23.7 161.4 2175.7 55441.7
27. 175.1 2775.3 77272.8
30.4 199.9 3448.3 103110.8
END FTABLE 76

FTABLE 77
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2. 4.2 3.7 47.9
4. 19.6 35. 586.9
5.9 35. 101.8 2310.1
7.9 42.5 196.4 5675.9
9.9 47.6 302.9 10644.4
11.9 51.9 418.1 17140.5
13.9 57.3 542.8 25154.6
15.8 65.5 681.7 34784.7
17.8 71. 833.9 46165.
END FTABLE 77

FTABLE 89
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1. 2.1 0.1 1.4
1.9 2.5 0.9 10.5
2.9 2.8 2.3 34.2
3.9 3.5 4.3 73.7
4.8 8.5 7.1 132.8
5.8 18.6 16.7 252.1
6.8 22.6 34.5 528.1
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 58 -
7.7 24.2 56.4 967.5
20. 26.1 500. 8500.
END FTABLE 89

FTABLE 79
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.2 11. 2. 22.1
2.4 21.3 17.3 222.3
3.6 31.6 46.8 695.3
4.8 42.8 87.6 1485.7
6. 45.7 136.9 2616.8
7.2 49.2 191.3 4113.8
8.4 51.8 249.1 5960.
9.6 53.6 309.7 8139.5
10.7 55.4 372.7 10650.9
END FTABLE 79

FTABLE 88
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.8 12.5 6.9 84.7
3.7 23.2 44. 683.5
5.5 32.8 101.2 2071.8
7.4 54.9 185.1 4390.1
9.2 67.1 301.3 7890.8
11.1 72.2 432.6 12646.2
12.9 76.2 574.2 18636.9
14.8 79.9 725.2 25891.8
16.6 83.8 885.1 34431.1
END FTABLE 88

FTABLE 81
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.1 12.8 1. 7.3
2.2 16.3 11. 106.7
3.3 23.1 27.8 353.5
4.4 26.5 51.1 784.2
5.5 29.4 79. 1422.5
6.6 34. 110.9 2290.3
7.7 39. 148.5 3404.6
8.7 43.6 191.2 4782.3
9.8 46.5 237.4 6439.
END FTABLE 81

FTABLE 91
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 59 -
1.4 1.6 1. 22.4
2.9 3.9 4.5 97.7
4.3 9.2 13.8 282.2
5.7 12. 33. 731.7
7.2 19.5 56.7 1454.5
8.6 21.3 85.1 2458.6
10. 22.5 116. 3740.7
11.5 23.7 148.7 5294.
12.9 24.8 183.4 7123.7
END FTABLE 91

FTABLE 83
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 4.3 1.4 7.5
1.8 43.1 16. 70.1
2.8 61.5 60.9 316.7
3.7 70.2 122.2 804.7
4.6 76.4 190.8 1521.7
5.5 81.7 266.2 2463.3
6.5 87.4 348.8 3635.5
7.4 91.6 437.5 5054.4
8.3 115. 533.1 6717.2
END FTABLE 83

FTABLE 82
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 0.5 0.1 2.6
1.6 0.6 0.5 17.3
2.4 0.9 1. 42.3
3.2 1.4 1.6 77.
4. 2.2 2.6 124.
4.8 5.3 4.6 193.9
5.6 7.7 8.8 325.
6.4 10.2 15.4 540.8
7.2 10.7 23.7 863.1
END FTABLE 82

FTABLE 93
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.1 1.5 2. 40.8
4.2 7.8 11.9 239.7
6.3 17. 35.8 828.4
8.5 22. 82.5 2159.4
10.6 31.6 147.5 4440.3
12.7 37.2 227.5 7892.5
14.8 39.1 315.8 12507.5
16.9 41. 408.1 18204.6
19. 43.2 504.6 24949.8
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 60 -
END FTABLE 93

FTABLE 92
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 0. 0. 0.2
1.6 0. 0. 3.2
2.4 0.1 0. 14.3
3.2 0.1 0.1 53.6
4. 0.2 0.2 146.8
7.2 0.2 0.3 306.4
7.4 0.2 0.4 529.7
7.8 0.2 0.6 804.6
20. 0.2 20. 3500.
END FTABLE 92

FTABLE 87
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 2.4 0.5 7.
1.8 5. 2.7 41.2
2.8 8.2 8.3 122.3
3.7 15.2 18.8 281.
4.6 19.9 34.3 570.6
5.5 21.7 52.9 1007.8
6.4 22.9 73.2 1586.9
7.4 23.7 94.6 2311.
8.3 24.5 116.9 3167.6
END FTABLE 87

FTABLE 95
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.9 8.2 5.4 91.7
5.9 22.8 49.9 819.7
8.8 29.8 129.3 3009.5
11.8 38.1 233. 6832.8
14.7 45.8 362.3 12571.9
17.7 53. 518.6 20486.4
20.6 59. 693. 30702.9
23.6 66.4 888.4 43337.5
26.5 75.1 1103.5 58549.6
END FTABLE 95

FTABLE 78
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.2 0.6 0.1 2.7
2.4 0.8 0.6 38.2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 61 -
3.7 0.9 1.5 124.7
4.9 2.5 2.9 293.9
6.1 2.9 6.1 648.7
7.3 3.2 9.7 1190.8
8.5 3.6 13.8 1930.
9.7 4.1 18.5 2893.4
11. 4.5 23.6 4084.6
END FTABLE 78

FTABLE 100
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.1 3.2 3.2 50.1
4.2 11.3 24. 442.4
6.3 16.9 65.5 1670.4
8.5 24.8 125.3 3991.3
10.6 27.1 195. 7498.
12.7 30.1 272.3 12198.6
14.8 32.4 355.9 18087.1
16.9 34.9 446.5 25193.
19. 37.5 544.5 33578.5
END FTABLE100

FTABLE 85
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
3.2 4.8 3.2 83.9
6.5 17.1 35.6 983.4
9.7 22.6 100.3 3887.6
13. 26.5 182.6 9099.6
16.2 29.3 274.6 16531.1
19.4 32.5 376.3 26169.4
22.7 35.8 488. 38096.2
25.9 38.5 609.4 52404.4
29.2 42.6 741.6 69185.7
END FTABLE 85

FTABLE 99
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.7 3.4 1.9 45.2
3.5 8.4 10. 238.2
5.2 11.8 25.6 683.8
7. 23.8 60.3 1693.
8.7 32.7 110.5 3664.7
10.5 42. 177.2 6760.
12.2 46.6 255.3 11059.
14. 49.8 339.5 16516.
15.7 54.1 429.9 23129.
END FTABLE 99

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 62 -
FTABLE 96
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.3 5. 4.2 46.3
4.5 32.4 28. 341.8
6.8 45.4 115.9 1516.9
9.1 52.2 225.3 3812.5
11.3 59.1 350.1 7321.2
13.6 66.7 491.3 12114.8
15.9 80.7 656.8 18316.6
18.1 116.9 861.8 26140.4
20.4 124.9 1124.8 35935.9
END FTABLE 96

FTABLE 97
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 0.9 0.1 3.4
1.9 1. 0.8 31.4
2.8 1.6 1.9 98.7
3.8 2.4 3.6 208.2
4.7 3.7 6.1 376.2
5.7 4.9 10. 627.9
6.6 7. 15.4 1001.9
7.6 8.1 22.3 1534.
8.5 8.4 30.2 2248.6
END FTABLE 97

FTABLE 98
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.2 0.9 0.2 5.
2.4 1.2 1. 35.7
3.6 3.1 3.5 114.9
4.8 5.2 8.6 347.5
6. 5.5 15. 744.2
7.2 6.1 22.2 1285.9
8.4 7.4 30.3 1969.6
9.6 9.3 39.7 2806.9
10.8 12.6 51.6 3817.3
END FTABLE 98

FTABLE 94
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.2 1.1 0.2 5.1
2.5 1.3 1. 46.2
3.7 1.4 2.4 141.4
4.9 3. 5.4 331.6
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 63 -
6.1 3.4 9.8 705.7
7.4 4.3 15.1 1261.3
8.6 4.7 21.3 2005.3
9.8 6.5 28.2 2944.2
11.1 7.5 37. 4130.3
END FTABLE 94

FTABLE 80
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.3 1.5 0.2 10.4
2.5 1.8 1.7 191.3
3.8 2. 3.9 623.9
5.1 2.2 6.4 1284.4
6.4 2.4 9.2 2173.1
7.6 2.6 12.3 3298.1
8.9 2.9 15.8 4705.2
10.2 3.2 19.7 6408.2
11.4 3.3 23.8 8405.1
END FTABLE 80

FTABLE 101
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.5 1.2 1.6 47.7
4.9 1.5 4.4 157.9
7.4 1.9 8.1 347.6
9.9 4.1 15.8 659.7
12.4 16. 26.3 1173.
14.8 16.7 45.7 1950.7
17.3 17.2 71.1 3087.6
19.8 17.8 99.7 4592.7
22.2 18.5 131.9 6494.7
END FTABLE101

FTABLE 103
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.7 2.2 1.8 26.6
3.3 3.3 6.9 168.6
5. 4.3 15.4 468.1
6.7 6.6 27.8 999.2
8.3 8. 46.5 1876.1
10. 9.2 66.7 3099.2
11.6 10.6 88.8 4639.3
13.3 14.9 112.8 6495.7
15. 17.5 140.3 8693.5
END FTABLE103

FTABLE 105
rows cols ***
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 64 -
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.3 1. 0.4 8.4
2.7 1.5 1.7 40.8
4. 2.3 3.8 100.4
5.3 3.4 7. 192.1
6.6 6.2 12.3 335.2
8. 8.5 21.8 595.
9.3 9.8 34.1 1004.6
10.6 12.1 47.8 1564.9
11.9 13.1 64.1 2284.4
END FTABLE105

FTABLE 106
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.5 1.6 1.5 31.1
3.1 4.9 8.1 212.8
4.6 5.4 20.9 742.7
6.1 5.8 34.6 1601.6
7.7 6.4 49.1 2742.6
9.2 9.2 64.9 4153.1
10.7 10. 83.1 5853.1
12.3 12. 102.4 7835.1
13.8 13.7 124. 10118.4
END FTABLE106

FTABLE 108
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
3.5 2.8 4.8 82.1
6.9 8.2 19.7 307.7
10.4 28.7 77.3 1115.1
13.9 35. 188.8 3438.4
17.4 39.6 319.5 7314.6
20.8 47.4 469.1 12717.5
24.3 52.7 642.5 19805.6
27.8 58.1 832. 28626.9
31.2 67.2 1047.8 39327.2
END FTABLE108

FTABLE 109
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
4.2 3. 6.2 171.2
8.5 15.1 38.7 1467.
12.7 24.3 118.9 5711.7
17. 28.2 226.3 13322.6
21.2 30.4 344.6 24135.5
25.5 31.9 470.6 38057.1
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 65 -
29.7 34.9 607.7 55246.8
34. 36.7 755. 75980.8
38.2 53.3 915.1 100346.9
END FTABLE109

FTABLE 102
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1. 1.8 0.7 8.8
2.1 3.2 2.8 44.1
3.1 4.5 6.6 114.1
4.2 5.8 12.2 230.3
5.2 7.5 20.4 416.8
6.2 10.8 30.2 687.4
7.3 12.2 42. 1044.1
8.3 17.1 56.2 1488.9
9.4 23.2 74.8 2042.3
END FTABLE102

FTABLE 110
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.7 2.7 2.2 57.7
3.4 4.7 7.6 261.6
5.2 5.7 19. 737.5
6.9 6.1 31.5 1535.1
8.6 7.7 45.1 2600.1
10.3 8.3 60.5 3954.5
12. 8.8 76.8 5594.9
13.8 10.2 94. 7504.9
15.5 12.4 113.2 9713.3
END FTABLE110

FTABLE 104
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.1 5.5 0.5 3.2
2.2 5.8 3.1 29.9
3.3 6.7 7.8 100.
4.4 15.1 17.3 238.
5.5 19.2 34.5 520.6
6.6 19.6 55.7 996.7
7.7 19.7 78.1 1637.4
8.8 19.9 101. 2425.6
9.9 20.1 124.2 3351.2
END FTABLE104

FTABLE 112
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 66 -
0. 0. 0. 0.
1. 4.7 0.6 5.3
2. 5.5 3.7 37.4
3. 6.2 7.9 97.
4. 6.8 13.1 184.9
5. 7.4 19.2 302.6
6. 10. 27.5 456.9
7. 12. 38.7 676.1
8. 12.9 51.7 968.4
9. 17. 66.9 1332.4
END FTABLE112

FTABLE 84
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.8 3.3 2.6 75.5
3.6 10.9 13.3 520.2
5.3 11.8 30.8 1581.9
7.1 12.5 50.4 3239.9
8.9 12.9 71.1 5474.6
10.7 13.3 92.8 8246.6
12.4 13.6 115.4 11529.1
14.2 14. 138.8 15335.3
16. 14.4 163.2 19664.4
END FTABLE 84

FTABLE 114
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 0.9 0.3 8.8
1.8 1.6 1.3 36.3
2.8 1.8 2.7 82.7
3.7 2. 4.3 145.4
4.6 2.2 6.1 225.2
5.5 2.5 8.1 323.3
6.5 4.4 10.5 441.6
7.4 16.4 17.5 622.5
8.3 19.5 34.4 1057.
END FTABLE114

FTABLE 116
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 3. 0.2 2.
1.7 3.9 1.3 12.6
2.5 4.3 3.1 34.2
3.3 4.7 5.6 67.6
4.2 5.1 8.6 114.3
5. 5.4 12.1 173.5
5.8 6.1 16.2 246.9
6.6 10.3 21.4 337.3
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 67 -
20. 18.2 150. 2500.
END FTABLE116

FTABLE 117
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.9 1.9 2. 34.7
3.8 7.8 12.4 178.7
5.6 11.3 40.1 821.7
7.5 11.7 68.7 1888.8
9.4 11.9 98.1 3311.2
11.3 12.3 128.6 5063.5
13.1 16.5 161.3 7137.9
15. 18.2 198.8 9566.1
16.9 20.9 240.3 12377.8
END FTABLE117

FTABLE 118
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 0.6 0.1 6.3
1.9 0.8 0.7 43.2
2.8 0.8 1.3 105.9
3.8 0.9 2. 190.5
4.7 1. 2.8 297.5
5.7 1.1 3.8 428.8
6.6 4.5 4.9 585.3
7.6 5.6 7.3 805.1
8.5 6.5 12.6 1232.7
END FTABLE118

FTABLE 74
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 0.2 0.1 6.9
1.6 0.3 0.2 21.5
2.4 0.4 0.3 44.5
3.2 0.4 0.6 77.5
4. 0.6 1. 124.3
4.8 1.2 1.7 199.1
5.6 2.6 3.1 334.8
6.4 2.7 5.1 556.2
7.2 3. 7.4 856.7
END FTABLE 74

FTABLE 119
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.3 2.7 2.6 69.7
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 68 -
4.5 4.9 12.9 402.6
6.8 5.3 28.9 1280.6
9. 5.7 45.5 2582.2
11.3 6. 62.8 4256.5
13.6 6.4 81.1 6275.5
15.8 11.7 101. 8636.4
18.1 16.1 126.2 11368.7
20.3 21.1 157.8 14514.9
END FTABLE119

FTABLE 120
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.9 2.6 1.9 43.1
3.7 3.3 6.4 191.9
5.6 4.8 12.6 446.6
7.4 7.2 25.2 937.9
9.3 9.2 40.9 1778.8
11.1 9.6 57.6 2915.8
13. 10.1 75.6 4336.6
14.8 10.5 94.7 6040.3
16.7 11.9 115.6 8028.7
END FTABLE120

FTABLE 121
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2. 4. 3.4 36.7
4. 7.8 14.4 172.1
6. 8.4 37.5 588.2
8. 9. 61.8 1246.5
10. 9.7 87.5 2119.3
12. 10.5 114.7 3191.1
14. 13.5 143.6 4460.8
16.1 17.4 176.1 5938.6
18.1 19.8 214.3 7654.3
END FTABLE121

FTABLE 122
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.1 3.2 0.8 11.6
2.2 4. 3. 40.5
3.3 5. 6.2 85.8
4.4 11.9 10.9 153.3
5.5 15.3 23.6 292.9
6.6 16.9 42.5 572.3
7.7 24.3 65.8 996.5
8.8 26.5 93.9 1572.
10. 27.5 124. 2297.
END FTABLE122
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 69 -

FTABLE 123
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.3 3.9 1.3 29.6
4.5 4.5 8.1 156.2
6.8 6.7 23.7 587.9
9.1 8. 45.3 1373.6
11.4 8.5 68. 2490.2
13.6 11.1 91.7 3898.2
15.9 11.7 117.2 5587.4
18.2 12.3 144.4 7564.1
20.5 13.2 174.1 9841.4
END FTABLE123

FTABLE 124
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 0.1 0. 0.7
1.6 0.2 0.1 3.8
2.4 0.2 0.2 8.4
3.2 0.2 0.4 14.4
4. 0.6 0.6 21.8
4.8 0.7 1. 32.4
5.6 0.8 1.5 46.8
6.4 0.9 2.1 65.9
20. 1.1 20. 20000.
END FTABLE124

FTABLE 125
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.6 1.4 1.7 33.1
3.3 2.7 5. 105.6
4.9 4.6 11.2 232.4
6.6 7.6 23.5 496.9
8.2 9.9 39. 939.
9.8 10.8 55.8 1534.5
11.5 11.6 73.9 2273.1
13.1 15.6 93.4 3151.6
14.8 20.7 116.7 4176.4
END FTABLE125

FTABLE 90
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 1.1 0.3 4.4
1.6 3.6 1.3 26.7
2.4 12.3 4.8 74.8
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 70 -
3.2 17.5 15.1 211.7
4.1 21.3 30.2 480.5
4.9 21.8 47.1 878.3
5.7 22.1 64.4 1388.1
6.5 22.4 82.1 2000.
7.3 22.8 100.2 2709.1
END FTABLE 90

FTABLE 126
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.4 7.3 0.8 6.4
2.8 7.7 3.6 47.9
4.2 8. 7.6 137.9
5.6 23.5 22.5 343.5
7.1 24.1 63.3 1087.6
8.5 24.8 106. 2327.1
9.9 25.4 149.6 3979.8
11.3 29.2 194.7 6012.4
12.7 34.3 242.5 8421.1
END FTABLE126

FTABLE 127
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.6 2.5 3.4 53.5
5.2 6.9 15. 251.9
7.9 12.8 42.6 858.
10.5 14.4 79.2 1973.9
13.1 15.3 119.3 3534.6
15.7 16.1 162.1 5512.4
18.4 18.6 207.3 7898.4
21. 19.8 256. 10694.1
23.6 20.6 307.5 13904.
END FTABLE127

FTABLE 128
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.8 0.2 0. 1.2
1.7 0.2 0.1 7.7
2.5 0.2 0.2 19.2
3.3 0.3 0.3 35.1
4.2 0.3 0.5 55.7
5. 0.3 0.6 81.1
5.8 0.3 0.8 111.8
6.7 0.3 1.1 148.8
20. 0.5 20. 5000.
END FTABLE128

FTABLE 107
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 71 -
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.8 5.4 3.8 30.2
3.7 12.8 19.2 165.5
5.5 25.2 52.3 533.6
7.3 26.2 96.3 1194.5
9.2 27.1 144.3 2121.6
11. 28.3 194.7 3294.9
12.9 29.5 247.7 4712.4
14.7 30.9 303.4 6374.5
16.5 32.7 362.6 8285.9
END FTABLE107

FTABLE 111
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.4 7.3 5.4 44.1
2.9 17.9 21.2 304.2
4.3 20.6 45. 791.2
5.7 25. 72.7 1495.5
7.1 26.2 103.5 2426.5
8.6 27.4 135.7 3561.5
10. 27.9 169.1 4889.5
11.4 28.3 203.2 6407.
12.9 29.1 238.7 8115.2
END FTABLE111

FTABLE 113
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
1.4 1. 0.7 14.
2.8 2.2 2.2 48.4
4.2 5.6 6.5 118.
5.6 7. 19.2 354.1
7. 7.7 34.1 783.3
8.4 8.8 49.9 1375.7
9.8 16. 67.4 2123.
11.2 17.6 90.4 3037.8
12.6 21.5 116.5 4130.2
END FTABLE113

FTABLE 115
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
2.6 0.8 1. 33.7
5.1 4.3 4.7 137.7
7.7 6. 21.6 633.6
10.3 6.5 40.9 1628.2
12.8 7. 61.3 3025.6
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 72 -
15.4 9.8 83. 4797.2
18. 10.3 106.9 6935.3
20.5 12.4 133. 9443.8
23.1 12.8 161.1 12329.8
END FTABLE115

FTABLE 129
rows cols ***
10 4
depth area volume outflow1 ***
0. 0. 0. 0.
0.9 6.1 0.7 3.7
1.8 7.2 4. 26.1
2.7 7.9 8.4 67.1
3.6 8.8 13.9 127.3
4.6 10. 20.9 209.7
5.5 13.8 30.3 321.5
6.4 15.5 43.4 477.3
7.3 16.9 58.4 688.1
20. 21.1 75.2 5000.
END FTABLE129
END FTABLES

EXT SOURCES
<-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> x <Name> x tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> x x <Name>
x x ***
*** Met Seg GOOSE
WDM2 11 PREC ENGL SAME PERLND 101 112 EXTNL PREC
WDM2 13 ATEM ENGL SAME PERLND 101 112 EXTNL GATMP
WDM2 17 DEWP ENGL SAME PERLND 101 112 EXTNL DTMPG
WDM2 14 WIND ENGL SAME PERLND 101 112 EXTNL WINMOV
WDM2 15 SOLR ENGL SAME PERLND 101 112 EXTNL SOLRAD
WDM2 16 PEVT ENGL SAME PERLND 101 112 EXTNL PETINP
*** Met Seg GOOSE
WDM2 11 PREC ENGL SAME IMPLND 101 112 EXTNL PREC
WDM2 13 ATEM ENGL SAME IMPLND 101 112 EXTNL GATMP
WDM2 17 DEWP ENGL SAME IMPLND 101 112 EXTNL DTMPG
WDM2 14 WIND ENGL SAME IMPLND 101 112 EXTNL WINMOV
WDM2 15 SOLR ENGL SAME IMPLND 101 112 EXTNL SOLRAD
WDM2 16 PEVT ENGL SAME IMPLND 101 112 EXTNL PETINP
*** Met Seg GOOSE
WDM2 11 PREC ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL PREC
WDM2 13 ATEM ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL GATMP
WDM2 17 DEWP ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL DEWTMP
WDM2 14 WIND ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL WIND
WDM2 15 SOLR ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL SOLRAD
WDM2 18 CLOU ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL CLOUD
WDM2 12 EVAP ENGL SAME RCHRES 67 129 EXTNL POTEV

WDM1 7072 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 67 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7073 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 69 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7074 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 70 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7075 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 72 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7076 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 73 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7087 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 86 INFLOW IDQAL
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 73 -
WDM1 7077 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 75 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7078 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 76 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7001 FLOW ENGL 0.0826SAME RCHRES 76 INFLOW IVOL
WDM1 7002 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 76 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7079 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 77 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7090 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 89 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7080 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 79 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7089 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 88 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7007 FLOW ENGL 0.0826SAME RCHRES 88 INFLOW IVOL
WDM1 7008 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 88 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7082 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 81 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7092 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 91 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7084 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 83 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7083 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 82 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7093 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 93 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7088 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 87 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7094 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 95 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7099 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 100 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7086 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 85 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7098 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 99 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7095 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 96 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7096 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 97 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7097 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 98 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7081 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 80 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7100 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 101 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7103 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 105 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7011 FLOW ENGL 0.0826SAME RCHRES 105 INFLOW IVOL
WDM1 7012 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 105 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7104 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 106 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7003 FLOW ENGL 0.0826SAME RCHRES 106 INFLOW IVOL
WDM1 7004 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 106 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7106 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 108 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7005 FLOW ENGL 0.0826SAME RCHRES 108 INFLOW IVOL
WDM1 7006 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 108 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7107 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 109 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7101 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 102 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7108 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 110 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7102 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 104 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7110 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 112 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7085 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 84 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7112 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 114 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7114 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 116 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7115 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 117 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7116 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 118 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7117 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 119 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7118 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 120 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7119 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 121 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7120 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 122 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7121 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 123 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7122 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 124 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7123 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 125 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7009 FLOW ENGL 0.0826SAME RCHRES 125 INFLOW IVOL
WDM1 7010 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 125 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7091 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 90 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7124 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 126 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7125 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 127 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7105 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 107 INFLOW IDQAL
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 74 -
WDM1 7109 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 111 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7111 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 113 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7113 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 115 INFLOW IDQAL
WDM1 7126 FECA ENGL DIV RCHRES 129 INFLOW IDQAL
END EXT SOURCES

SCHEMATIC
<-Volume-> <--Area--> <-Volume-> <ML#> ***
<sb>
<Name> x <-factor-> <Name> x ***
x x
IMPLND 101 12.9 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 101 245.17 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 102 0.98 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 102 4.47 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 103 0.03 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 103 0.07 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 104 5.98 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 104 43.88 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 105 1.21 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 105 59.08 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 112 4.29 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 112 3.51 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 106 3.37 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 106 164.97 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 108 2.88 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 108 7.4 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 109 43.65 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 109 35.71 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 110 0 RCHRES 67 1
PERLND 110 0 RCHRES 67 2
IMPLND 105 0.07 RCHRES 71 1
PERLND 105 3.6 RCHRES 71 2
IMPLND 106 0.27 RCHRES 71 1
PERLND 106 13.06 RCHRES 71 2
IMPLND 101 1.4 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 101 26.66 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 102 24.72 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 102 112.61 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 103 0.91 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 103 2.12 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 104 6.73 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 104 49.38 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 105 0.76 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 105 37.45 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 106 6.8 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 106 333.14 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 107 0.13 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 107 2.53 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 110 0.01 RCHRES 69 1
PERLND 110 0.01 RCHRES 69 2
IMPLND 101 8.1 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 101 153.94 RCHRES 70 2
IMPLND 102 0.24 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 102 1.1 RCHRES 70 2
IMPLND 103 0.06 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 103 0.14 RCHRES 70 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 75 -
IMPLND 104 3.57 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 104 26.19 RCHRES 70 2
IMPLND 105 5.75 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 105 281.61 RCHRES 70 2
IMPLND 106 2.78 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 106 135.96 RCHRES 70 2
IMPLND 109 22.64 RCHRES 70 1
PERLND 109 18.52 RCHRES 70 2
IMPLND 101 4.62 RCHRES 72 1
PERLND 101 87.71 RCHRES 72 2
IMPLND 104 1.72 RCHRES 72 1
PERLND 104 12.61 RCHRES 72 2
IMPLND 105 6.74 RCHRES 72 1
PERLND 105 330.53 RCHRES 72 2
IMPLND 106 4.08 RCHRES 72 1
PERLND 106 199.96 RCHRES 72 2
IMPLND 109 10.65 RCHRES 72 1
PERLND 109 8.72 RCHRES 72 2
IMPLND 101 3.01 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 101 57.16 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 102 3.34 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 102 15.21 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 103 0.2 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 103 0.46 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 104 9.01 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 104 66.05 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 105 0.12 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 105 5.99 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 106 8.05 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 106 394.38 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 107 4.07 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 107 77.4 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 109 14.94 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 109 12.22 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 110 0 RCHRES 73 1
PERLND 110 0 RCHRES 73 2
IMPLND 101 3.14 RCHRES 86 1
PERLND 101 59.71 RCHRES 86 2
IMPLND 102 0.19 RCHRES 86 1
PERLND 102 0.87 RCHRES 86 2
IMPLND 104 1.03 RCHRES 86 1
PERLND 104 7.58 RCHRES 86 2
IMPLND 105 1.8 RCHRES 86 1
PERLND 105 88.22 RCHRES 86 2
IMPLND 106 3.29 RCHRES 86 1
PERLND 106 160.96 RCHRES 86 2
IMPLND 109 2.55 RCHRES 86 1
PERLND 109 2.09 RCHRES 86 2
RCHRES 69 RCHRES 86 3
IMPLND 101 17.19 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 101 326.62 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 102 6.86 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 102 31.25 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 103 5.9 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 103 13.76 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 104 5.94 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 104 43.59 RCHRES 75 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 76 -
IMPLND 112 8.13 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 112 6.65 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 106 3.49 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 106 170.81 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 108 2.31 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 108 5.93 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 109 28.23 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 109 23.1 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 110 0.24 RCHRES 75 1
PERLND 110 0.19 RCHRES 75 2
IMPLND 101 10.04 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 101 190.76 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 102 7.05 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 102 32.12 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 103 0.03 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 103 0.08 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 104 10.21 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 104 74.87 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 105 1.14 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 105 55.65 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 112 9.15 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 112 7.49 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 106 4.47 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 106 218.8 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 108 10.45 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 108 26.87 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 109 21.99 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 109 17.99 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 110 1.31 RCHRES 76 1
PERLND 110 1.07 RCHRES 76 2
IMPLND 101 11.65 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 101 221.45 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 102 5.56 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 102 25.34 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 103 0.13 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 103 0.31 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 104 10.98 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 104 80.56 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 105 1.46 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 105 71.54 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 112 2.88 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 112 2.36 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 106 4.32 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 106 211.65 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 108 2.73 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 108 7.01 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 109 23.59 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 109 19.3 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 110 0 RCHRES 77 1
PERLND 110 0 RCHRES 77 2
IMPLND 101 1.2 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 101 22.76 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 102 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 102 4.54 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 103 0.03 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 103 0.06 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 104 1.16 RCHRES 89 1
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 77 -
PERLND 104 8.55 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 105 1.33 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 105 65.22 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 106 6.91 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 106 338.33 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 107 1.65 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 107 31.35 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 108 0.01 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 108 0.04 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 109 43.04 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 109 35.22 RCHRES 89 2
IMPLND 110 0.01 RCHRES 89 1
PERLND 110 0.01 RCHRES 89 2
RCHRES 67 RCHRES 89 3
IMPLND 101 13.96 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 101 265.29 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 102 0.31 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 102 1.39 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 104 2.93 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 104 21.5 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 105 1.3 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 105 63.83 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 106 5.88 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 106 287.86 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 111 5.2 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 111 13.38 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 109 13.23 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 109 10.83 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 110 0.08 RCHRES 79 1
PERLND 110 0.07 RCHRES 79 2
IMPLND 101 5.76 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 101 109.36 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 102 8.06 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 102 36.7 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 103 2.51 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 103 5.85 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 104 9.64 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 104 70.68 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 105 3.35 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 105 164.31 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 112 12.62 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 112 10.33 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 106 11.86 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 106 581.13 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 107 3.75 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 107 71.32 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 109 40.09 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 109 32.8 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 110 0.6 RCHRES 88 1
PERLND 110 0.49 RCHRES 88 2
IMPLND 101 3 RCHRES 81 1
PERLND 101 56.92 RCHRES 81 2
IMPLND 104 1.94 RCHRES 81 1
PERLND 104 14.24 RCHRES 81 2
IMPLND 105 6.13 RCHRES 81 1
PERLND 105 300.26 RCHRES 81 2
IMPLND 106 7.31 RCHRES 81 1
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 78 -
PERLND 106 358.2 RCHRES 81 2
IMPLND 109 7.49 RCHRES 81 1
PERLND 109 6.13 RCHRES 81 2
IMPLND 101 0.63 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 101 11.97 RCHRES 91 2
IMPLND 104 0.83 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 104 6.11 RCHRES 91 2
IMPLND 105 2.96 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 105 145.05 RCHRES 91 2
IMPLND 112 0.75 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 112 0.61 RCHRES 91 2
IMPLND 106 2.61 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 106 127.84 RCHRES 91 2
IMPLND 111 0.77 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 111 1.98 RCHRES 91 2
IMPLND 109 3.04 RCHRES 91 1
PERLND 109 2.48 RCHRES 91 2
RCHRES 86 RCHRES 91 3
IMPLND 101 8.36 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 101 158.77 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 102 0.28 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 102 1.29 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 103 0.34 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 103 0.8 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 104 4.2 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 104 30.76 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 105 5.34 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 105 261.89 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 106 6.24 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 106 305.97 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 111 1.01 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 111 2.61 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 109 18.3 RCHRES 83 1
PERLND 109 14.97 RCHRES 83 2
IMPLND 104 0.14 RCHRES 82 1
PERLND 104 1.04 RCHRES 82 2
IMPLND 105 1.83 RCHRES 82 1
PERLND 105 89.76 RCHRES 82 2
IMPLND 106 0.42 RCHRES 82 1
PERLND 106 20.47 RCHRES 82 2
IMPLND 109 0.15 RCHRES 82 1
PERLND 109 0.12 RCHRES 82 2
RCHRES 72 RCHRES 82 3
IMPLND 101 7.4 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 101 140.55 RCHRES 93 2
IMPLND 102 8.01 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 102 36.48 RCHRES 93 2
IMPLND 104 9.28 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 104 68.03 RCHRES 93 2
IMPLND 112 0.49 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 112 0.4 RCHRES 93 2
IMPLND 106 6.26 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 106 306.58 RCHRES 93 2
IMPLND 109 22.01 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 109 18.01 RCHRES 93 2
IMPLND 110 0.02 RCHRES 93 1
PERLND 110 0.02 RCHRES 93 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 79 -
RCHRES 75 RCHRES 93 3
IMPLND 105 0.17 RCHRES 92 1
PERLND 105 8.09 RCHRES 92 2
IMPLND 106 0.01 RCHRES 92 1
PERLND 106 0.3 RCHRES 92 2
RCHRES 91 RCHRES 92 3
IMPLND 101 0.67 RCHRES 87 1
PERLND 101 12.74 RCHRES 87 2
IMPLND 104 0.24 RCHRES 87 1
PERLND 104 1.74 RCHRES 87 2
IMPLND 105 2.21 RCHRES 87 1
PERLND 105 108.49 RCHRES 87 2
IMPLND 106 3.58 RCHRES 87 1
PERLND 106 175.64 RCHRES 87 2
IMPLND 109 0.09 RCHRES 87 1
PERLND 109 0.07 RCHRES 87 2
RCHRES 83 RCHRES 87 3
IMPLND 101 1.88 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 101 35.7 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 102 0.83 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 102 3.79 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 104 7.63 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 104 55.96 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 105 1.01 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 105 49.63 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 112 3.46 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 112 2.83 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 106 4.91 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 106 240.53 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 107 0.25 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 107 4.83 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 109 12.86 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 109 10.52 RCHRES 95 2
IMPLND 110 0.85 RCHRES 95 1
PERLND 110 0.7 RCHRES 95 2
RCHRES 88 RCHRES 95 3
IMPLND 106 0.06 RCHRES 78 1
PERLND 106 2.84 RCHRES 78 2
IMPLND 108 0.49 RCHRES 78 1
PERLND 108 1.25 RCHRES 78 2
IMPLND 109 0.02 RCHRES 78 1
PERLND 109 0.01 RCHRES 78 2
IMPLND 110 0 RCHRES 78 1
PERLND 110 0 RCHRES 78 2
RCHRES 76 RCHRES 78 3
IMPLND 101 2.17 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 101 41.3 RCHRES 100 2
IMPLND 102 0.5 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 102 2.28 RCHRES 100 2
IMPLND 104 3.55 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 104 26.03 RCHRES 100 2
IMPLND 106 1.57 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 106 76.67 RCHRES 100 2
IMPLND 107 0.21 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 107 3.95 RCHRES 100 2
IMPLND 108 0 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 108 0 RCHRES 100 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 80 -
IMPLND 109 19.73 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 109 16.15 RCHRES 100 2
IMPLND 110 16.18 RCHRES 100 1
PERLND 110 13.24 RCHRES 100 2
RCHRES 89 RCHRES 100 3
RCHRES 78 RCHRES 100 3
IMPLND 101 2.35 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 101 44.7 RCHRES 85 2
IMPLND 102 0.79 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 102 3.58 RCHRES 85 2
IMPLND 104 1.94 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 104 14.2 RCHRES 85 2
IMPLND 105 0.79 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 105 38.84 RCHRES 85 2
IMPLND 106 1.85 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 106 90.42 RCHRES 85 2
IMPLND 109 5.06 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 109 4.14 RCHRES 85 2
IMPLND 110 0 RCHRES 85 1
PERLND 110 0 RCHRES 85 2
RCHRES 77 RCHRES 85 3
IMPLND 101 2.99 RCHRES 99 1
PERLND 101 56.9 RCHRES 99 2
IMPLND 104 0.74 RCHRES 99 1
PERLND 104 5.46 RCHRES 99 2
IMPLND 105 1.25 RCHRES 99 1
PERLND 105 61.15 RCHRES 99 2
IMPLND 106 6.32 RCHRES 99 1
PERLND 106 309.89 RCHRES 99 2
IMPLND 109 8.01 RCHRES 99 1
PERLND 109 6.55 RCHRES 99 2
IMPLND 110 0.07 RCHRES 99 1
PERLND 110 0.05 RCHRES 99 2
RCHRES 95 RCHRES 99 3
IMPLND 101 2.48 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 101 47.21 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 102 3.07 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 102 13.98 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 103 0.27 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 103 0.62 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 104 2.19 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 104 16.06 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 105 2.74 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 105 134.34 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 106 4.7 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 106 230.26 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 107 0.24 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 107 4.63 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 109 10.88 RCHRES 96 1
PERLND 109 8.9 RCHRES 96 2
IMPLND 101 0.69 RCHRES 97 1
PERLND 101 13.16 RCHRES 97 2
IMPLND 104 0.04 RCHRES 97 1
PERLND 104 0.29 RCHRES 97 2
IMPLND 105 0.36 RCHRES 97 1
PERLND 105 17.76 RCHRES 97 2
IMPLND 106 2.06 RCHRES 97 1
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 81 -
PERLND 106 100.73 RCHRES 97 2
IMPLND 109 1.32 RCHRES 97 1
PERLND 109 1.08 RCHRES 97 2
RCHRES 96 RCHRES 97 3
IMPLND 101 0.58 RCHRES 98 1
PERLND 101 11.04 RCHRES 98 2
IMPLND 104 0.44 RCHRES 98 1
PERLND 104 3.22 RCHRES 98 2
IMPLND 105 0.51 RCHRES 98 1
PERLND 105 25.19 RCHRES 98 2
IMPLND 106 2.28 RCHRES 98 1
PERLND 106 111.47 RCHRES 98 2
RCHRES 97 RCHRES 98 3
IMPLND 101 0 RCHRES 94 1
PERLND 101 0.04 RCHRES 94 2
IMPLND 102 1.72 RCHRES 94 1
PERLND 102 7.83 RCHRES 94 2
IMPLND 104 2.08 RCHRES 94 1
PERLND 104 15.22 RCHRES 94 2
IMPLND 106 0.85 RCHRES 94 1
PERLND 106 41.61 RCHRES 94 2
IMPLND 109 4.32 RCHRES 94 1
PERLND 109 3.54 RCHRES 94 2
RCHRES 93 RCHRES 94 3
IMPLND 101 0.61 RCHRES 80 1
PERLND 101 11.51 RCHRES 80 2
IMPLND 106 0.37 RCHRES 80 1
PERLND 106 17.93 RCHRES 80 2
IMPLND 109 0.78 RCHRES 80 1
PERLND 109 0.64 RCHRES 80 2
RCHRES 79 RCHRES 80 3
IMPLND 101 1.17 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 101 22.27 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 102 1.85 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 102 8.44 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 103 0.18 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 103 0.42 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 104 0.88 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 104 6.46 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 105 0.17 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 105 8.55 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 106 3.06 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 106 149.97 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 107 1.33 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 107 25.27 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 109 17.91 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 109 14.65 RCHRES 101 2
IMPLND 110 0.12 RCHRES 101 1
PERLND 110 0.09 RCHRES 101 2
RCHRES 85 RCHRES 101 3
RCHRES 94 RCHRES 101 3
IMPLND 101 0.05 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 101 0.95 RCHRES 103 2
IMPLND 102 17.58 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 102 80.1 RCHRES 103 2
IMPLND 103 0.33 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 103 0.78 RCHRES 103 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 82 -
IMPLND 104 9.51 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 104 69.71 RCHRES 103 2
IMPLND 106 0.69 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 106 33.59 RCHRES 103 2
IMPLND 107 0.23 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 107 4.41 RCHRES 103 2
IMPLND 109 18.17 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 109 14.87 RCHRES 103 2
IMPLND 110 0.28 RCHRES 103 1
PERLND 110 0.23 RCHRES 103 2
RCHRES 100 RCHRES 103 3
RCHRES 101 RCHRES 103 3
IMPLND 101 0.05 RCHRES 105 1
PERLND 101 0.93 RCHRES 105 2
IMPLND 105 0.29 RCHRES 105 1
PERLND 105 14.42 RCHRES 105 2
IMPLND 106 5.14 RCHRES 105 1
PERLND 106 252.12 RCHRES 105 2
IMPLND 107 0.5 RCHRES 105 1
PERLND 107 9.52 RCHRES 105 2
IMPLND 109 46.94 RCHRES 105 1
PERLND 109 38.4 RCHRES 105 2
IMPLND 110 0.05 RCHRES 105 1
PERLND 110 0.04 RCHRES 105 2
RCHRES 103 RCHRES 105 3
IMPLND 101 0.5 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 101 9.59 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 102 18.45 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 102 84.04 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 103 1.13 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 103 2.64 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 104 7.39 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 104 54.17 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 106 7.1 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 106 348.08 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 107 0.23 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 107 4.45 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 109 19.09 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 109 15.62 RCHRES 106 2
IMPLND 110 0.26 RCHRES 106 1
PERLND 110 0.21 RCHRES 106 2
RCHRES 105 RCHRES 106 3
IMPLND 102 3.35 RCHRES 108 1
PERLND 102 15.27 RCHRES 108 2
IMPLND 103 3.92 RCHRES 108 1
PERLND 103 9.16 RCHRES 108 2
IMPLND 104 2.86 RCHRES 108 1
PERLND 104 21 RCHRES 108 2
IMPLND 106 10.67 RCHRES 108 1
PERLND 106 522.88 RCHRES 108 2
IMPLND 109 8.25 RCHRES 108 1
PERLND 109 6.75 RCHRES 108 2
RCHRES 106 RCHRES 108 3
IMPLND 102 7.26 RCHRES 109 1
PERLND 102 33.06 RCHRES 109 2
IMPLND 103 0.08 RCHRES 109 1
PERLND 103 0.2 RCHRES 109 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 83 -
IMPLND 104 5.55 RCHRES 109 1
PERLND 104 40.74 RCHRES 109 2
IMPLND 106 4.21 RCHRES 109 1
PERLND 106 206.38 RCHRES 109 2
IMPLND 109 13.12 RCHRES 109 1
PERLND 109 10.74 RCHRES 109 2
RCHRES 108 RCHRES 109 3
IMPLND 101 3.07 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 101 58.29 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 103 0.03 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 103 0.07 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 104 3.12 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 104 22.86 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 105 1.86 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 105 91.2 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 106 8.48 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 106 415.46 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 111 4.08 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 111 10.48 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 109 10.35 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 109 8.47 RCHRES 102 2
IMPLND 110 0.07 RCHRES 102 1
PERLND 110 0.06 RCHRES 102 2
RCHRES 99 RCHRES 102 3
RCHRES 98 RCHRES 102 3
IMPLND 101 0.02 RCHRES 110 1
PERLND 101 0.36 RCHRES 110 2
IMPLND 102 6.65 RCHRES 110 1
PERLND 102 30.28 RCHRES 110 2
IMPLND 104 3 RCHRES 110 1
PERLND 104 22.02 RCHRES 110 2
IMPLND 105 0.59 RCHRES 110 1
PERLND 105 28.84 RCHRES 110 2
IMPLND 106 3.73 RCHRES 110 1
PERLND 106 182.78 RCHRES 110 2
IMPLND 109 8.71 RCHRES 110 1
PERLND 109 7.13 RCHRES 110 2
RCHRES 109 RCHRES 110 3
IMPLND 101 0.05 RCHRES 104 1
PERLND 101 0.94 RCHRES 104 2
IMPLND 105 1.66 RCHRES 104 1
PERLND 105 81.41 RCHRES 104 2
IMPLND 106 2.47 RCHRES 104 1
PERLND 106 121.22 RCHRES 104 2
RCHRES 102 RCHRES 104 3
IMPLND 101 4.08 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 101 77.47 RCHRES 112 2
IMPLND 102 0.03 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 102 0.11 RCHRES 112 2
IMPLND 103 0.02 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 103 0.04 RCHRES 112 2
IMPLND 104 1.46 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 104 10.7 RCHRES 112 2
IMPLND 105 1.9 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 105 93.05 RCHRES 112 2
IMPLND 106 5.41 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 106 265.08 RCHRES 112 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 84 -
IMPLND 109 5.26 RCHRES 112 1
PERLND 109 4.3 RCHRES 112 2
RCHRES 110 RCHRES 112 3
IMPLND 101 0.27 RCHRES 84 1
PERLND 101 5.2 RCHRES 84 2
IMPLND 105 0.48 RCHRES 84 1
PERLND 105 23.34 RCHRES 84 2
IMPLND 106 1.26 RCHRES 84 1
PERLND 106 61.54 RCHRES 84 2
IMPLND 109 1.92 RCHRES 84 1
PERLND 109 1.57 RCHRES 84 2
RCHRES 81 RCHRES 84 3
IMPLND 101 2.98 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 101 56.69 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 102 0.3 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 102 1.37 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 103 0.02 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 103 0.04 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 104 5.37 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 104 39.37 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 105 1.18 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 105 58.09 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 106 8.94 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 106 438.1 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 111 0 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 111 0 RCHRES 114 2
IMPLND 109 10.12 RCHRES 114 1
PERLND 109 8.28 RCHRES 114 2
RCHRES 112 RCHRES 114 3
IMPLND 101 0.81 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 101 15.39 RCHRES 116 2
IMPLND 103 0.01 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 103 0.03 RCHRES 116 2
IMPLND 104 1.78 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 104 13.03 RCHRES 116 2
IMPLND 105 0.69 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 105 34.06 RCHRES 116 2
IMPLND 106 2.79 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 106 136.85 RCHRES 116 2
IMPLND 111 12.39 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 111 31.85 RCHRES 116 2
IMPLND 109 2.21 RCHRES 116 1
PERLND 109 1.81 RCHRES 116 2
RCHRES 114 RCHRES 116 3
IMPLND 101 3.11 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 101 59.16 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 102 0.06 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 102 0.29 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 103 0.13 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 103 0.3 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 104 3.38 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 104 24.81 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 105 4.24 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 105 207.8 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 112 0.94 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 112 0.77 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 106 4.39 RCHRES 117 1
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 85 -
PERLND 106 214.95 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 111 0 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 111 0.01 RCHRES 117 2
IMPLND 109 14.15 RCHRES 117 1
PERLND 109 11.58 RCHRES 117 2
RCHRES 92 RCHRES 117 3
RCHRES 116 RCHRES 117 3
IMPLND 101 5.34 RCHRES 118 1
PERLND 101 101.44 RCHRES 118 2
IMPLND 103 0 RCHRES 118 1
PERLND 103 0.01 RCHRES 118 2
IMPLND 104 4.75 RCHRES 118 1
PERLND 104 34.85 RCHRES 118 2
IMPLND 105 3.57 RCHRES 118 1
PERLND 105 174.92 RCHRES 118 2
IMPLND 106 4.65 RCHRES 118 1
PERLND 106 227.97 RCHRES 118 2
IMPLND 109 13.78 RCHRES 118 1
PERLND 109 11.27 RCHRES 118 2
RCHRES 117 RCHRES 118 3
IMPLND 101 0.5 RCHRES 74 1
PERLND 101 9.53 RCHRES 74 2
IMPLND 104 0 RCHRES 74 1
PERLND 104 0.03 RCHRES 74 2
IMPLND 106 0.1 RCHRES 74 1
PERLND 106 5.03 RCHRES 74 2
IMPLND 109 0.75 RCHRES 74 1
PERLND 109 0.61 RCHRES 74 2
RCHRES 70 RCHRES 74 3
IMPLND 101 1.52 RCHRES 119 1
PERLND 101 28.93 RCHRES 119 2
IMPLND 104 0.48 RCHRES 119 1
PERLND 104 3.52 RCHRES 119 2
IMPLND 105 0.28 RCHRES 119 1
PERLND 105 13.65 RCHRES 119 2
IMPLND 106 3.74 RCHRES 119 1
PERLND 106 183.16 RCHRES 119 2
IMPLND 109 2.75 RCHRES 119 1
PERLND 109 2.25 RCHRES 119 2
RCHRES 118 RCHRES 119 3
IMPLND 101 4.41 RCHRES 120 1
PERLND 101 83.8 RCHRES 120 2
IMPLND 103 0.03 RCHRES 120 1
PERLND 103 0.08 RCHRES 120 2
IMPLND 104 2.46 RCHRES 120 1
PERLND 104 18.02 RCHRES 120 2
IMPLND 105 5.72 RCHRES 120 1
PERLND 105 280.11 RCHRES 120 2
IMPLND 106 4.26 RCHRES 120 1
PERLND 106 208.58 RCHRES 120 2
IMPLND 109 8.16 RCHRES 120 1
PERLND 109 6.68 RCHRES 120 2
RCHRES 119 RCHRES 120 3
IMPLND 101 1.49 RCHRES 121 1
PERLND 101 28.3 RCHRES 121 2
IMPLND 104 0.11 RCHRES 121 1
PERLND 104 0.82 RCHRES 121 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 86 -
IMPLND 105 7.16 RCHRES 121 1
PERLND 105 351.09 RCHRES 121 2
IMPLND 106 1.17 RCHRES 121 1
PERLND 106 57.58 RCHRES 121 2
IMPLND 109 6.07 RCHRES 121 1
PERLND 109 4.96 RCHRES 121 2
RCHRES 82 RCHRES 121 3
RCHRES 120 RCHRES 121 3
IMPLND 101 6.45 RCHRES 122 1
PERLND 101 122.52 RCHRES 122 2
IMPLND 102 0.14 RCHRES 122 1
PERLND 102 0.66 RCHRES 122 2
IMPLND 104 9.01 RCHRES 122 1
PERLND 104 66.07 RCHRES 122 2
IMPLND 105 5.89 RCHRES 122 1
PERLND 105 288.46 RCHRES 122 2
IMPLND 106 1.54 RCHRES 122 1
PERLND 106 75.39 RCHRES 122 2
IMPLND 109 13.57 RCHRES 122 1
PERLND 109 11.1 RCHRES 122 2
RCHRES 121 RCHRES 122 3
IMPLND 101 4.04 RCHRES 123 1
PERLND 101 76.71 RCHRES 123 2
IMPLND 104 3.15 RCHRES 123 1
PERLND 104 23.09 RCHRES 123 2
IMPLND 105 3.99 RCHRES 123 1
PERLND 105 195.41 RCHRES 123 2
IMPLND 106 3.97 RCHRES 123 1
PERLND 106 194.38 RCHRES 123 2
IMPLND 111 3.54 RCHRES 123 1
PERLND 111 9.1 RCHRES 123 2
IMPLND 109 7.41 RCHRES 123 1
PERLND 109 6.06 RCHRES 123 2
RCHRES 122 RCHRES 123 3
IMPLND 101 1.09 RCHRES 124 1
PERLND 101 20.76 RCHRES 124 2
IMPLND 104 0.51 RCHRES 124 1
PERLND 104 3.78 RCHRES 124 2
IMPLND 105 3.16 RCHRES 124 1
PERLND 105 154.94 RCHRES 124 2
IMPLND 106 1.99 RCHRES 124 1
PERLND 106 97.64 RCHRES 124 2
IMPLND 111 2.63 RCHRES 124 1
PERLND 111 6.77 RCHRES 124 2
IMPLND 109 4.87 RCHRES 124 1
PERLND 109 3.98 RCHRES 124 2
RCHRES 123 RCHRES 124 3
IMPLND 101 6.15 RCHRES 125 1
PERLND 101 116.89 RCHRES 125 2
IMPLND 104 0.28 RCHRES 125 1
PERLND 104 2.03 RCHRES 125 2
IMPLND 105 3 RCHRES 125 1
PERLND 105 147.21 RCHRES 125 2
IMPLND 106 4.85 RCHRES 125 1
PERLND 106 237.68 RCHRES 125 2
IMPLND 111 1.95 RCHRES 125 1
PERLND 111 5.01 RCHRES 125 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 87 -
IMPLND 109 8.01 RCHRES 125 1
PERLND 109 6.55 RCHRES 125 2
RCHRES 74 RCHRES 125 3
RCHRES 124 RCHRES 125 3
IMPLND 101 1.11 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 101 21.03 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 102 10.58 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 102 48.19 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 103 0.37 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 103 0.86 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 104 5.36 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 104 39.28 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 105 0.84 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 105 41.29 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 106 7.69 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 106 376.93 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 107 1.52 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 107 28.87 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 109 16.71 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 109 13.67 RCHRES 90 2
IMPLND 110 0.01 RCHRES 90 1
PERLND 110 0.01 RCHRES 90 2
RCHRES 73 RCHRES 90 3
IMPLND 101 2.17 RCHRES 126 1
PERLND 101 41.25 RCHRES 126 2
IMPLND 104 0.7 RCHRES 126 1
PERLND 104 5.12 RCHRES 126 2
IMPLND 105 5.17 RCHRES 126 1
PERLND 105 253.28 RCHRES 126 2
IMPLND 106 2.52 RCHRES 126 1
PERLND 106 123.43 RCHRES 126 2
IMPLND 111 0.17 RCHRES 126 1
PERLND 111 0.43 RCHRES 126 2
IMPLND 109 12.49 RCHRES 126 1
PERLND 109 10.22 RCHRES 126 2
RCHRES 125 RCHRES 126 3
IMPLND 101 1.73 RCHRES 127 1
PERLND 101 32.82 RCHRES 127 2
IMPLND 104 0.67 RCHRES 127 1
PERLND 104 4.89 RCHRES 127 2
IMPLND 105 4.75 RCHRES 127 1
PERLND 105 232.85 RCHRES 127 2
IMPLND 106 5.77 RCHRES 127 1
PERLND 106 282.61 RCHRES 127 2
IMPLND 109 2.61 RCHRES 127 1
PERLND 109 2.13 RCHRES 127 2
RCHRES 126 RCHRES 127 3
IMPLND 106 0.01 RCHRES 128 1
PERLND 106 0.47 RCHRES 128 2
RCHRES 84 RCHRES 128 3
RCHRES 127 RCHRES 128 3
IMPLND 101 5.64 RCHRES 107 1
PERLND 101 107.18 RCHRES 107 2
IMPLND 102 0.12 RCHRES 107 1
PERLND 102 0.54 RCHRES 107 2
IMPLND 104 0.12 RCHRES 107 1
PERLND 104 0.88 RCHRES 107 2
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 88 -
IMPLND 105 0.33 RCHRES 107 1
PERLND 105 16.24 RCHRES 107 2
IMPLND 106 4.24 RCHRES 107 1
PERLND 106 207.91 RCHRES 107 2
IMPLND 109 2.66 RCHRES 107 1
PERLND 109 2.17 RCHRES 107 2
RCHRES 87 RCHRES 107 3
RCHRES 104 RCHRES 107 3
IMPLND 101 5.75 RCHRES 111 1
PERLND 101 109.19 RCHRES 111 2
IMPLND 102 0.06 RCHRES 111 1
PERLND 102 0.26 RCHRES 111 2
IMPLND 104 2.89 RCHRES 111 1
PERLND 104 21.22 RCHRES 111 2
IMPLND 105 1.09 RCHRES 111 1
PERLND 105 53.5 RCHRES 111 2
IMPLND 106 7.62 RCHRES 111 1
PERLND 106 373.18 RCHRES 111 2
IMPLND 109 14.49 RCHRES 111 1
PERLND 109 11.85 RCHRES 111 2
RCHRES 80 RCHRES 111 3
RCHRES 107 RCHRES 111 3
IMPLND 101 3.82 RCHRES 113 1
PERLND 101 72.49 RCHRES 113 2
IMPLND 104 0.2 RCHRES 113 1
PERLND 104 1.45 RCHRES 113 2
IMPLND 105 6.62 RCHRES 113 1
PERLND 105 324.44 RCHRES 113 2
IMPLND 106 4.45 RCHRES 113 1
PERLND 106 217.93 RCHRES 113 2
IMPLND 109 4.73 RCHRES 113 1
PERLND 109 3.87 RCHRES 113 2
RCHRES 111 RCHRES 113 3
IMPLND 101 0.08 RCHRES 115 1
PERLND 101 1.44 RCHRES 115 2
IMPLND 104 0.44 RCHRES 115 1
PERLND 104 3.21 RCHRES 115 2
IMPLND 105 2.58 RCHRES 115 1
PERLND 105 126.45 RCHRES 115 2
IMPLND 106 1.14 RCHRES 115 1
PERLND 106 55.7 RCHRES 115 2
IMPLND 109 3.49 RCHRES 115 1
PERLND 109 2.85 RCHRES 115 2
RCHRES 113 RCHRES 115 3
IMPLND 101 1.07 RCHRES 129 1
PERLND 101 20.28 RCHRES 129 2
IMPLND 102 0.05 RCHRES 129 1
PERLND 102 0.22 RCHRES 129 2
IMPLND 104 0.84 RCHRES 129 1
PERLND 104 6.16 RCHRES 129 2
IMPLND 105 4.06 RCHRES 129 1
PERLND 105 198.78 RCHRES 129 2
IMPLND 106 6.96 RCHRES 129 1
PERLND 106 340.98 RCHRES 129 2
IMPLND 109 11.28 RCHRES 129 1
PERLND 109 9.23 RCHRES 129 2
RCHRES 128 RCHRES 129 3
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 89 -
RCHRES 115 RCHRES 129 3
END SCHEMATIC

EXT TARGETS
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys
Aggr Amd ***
<Name> x <Name> x x<-factor->strg <Name> x <Name>qf tem
strg strg***
RCHRES 105 HYDR RO 1 1 AVER WDM1 1002 FLOW 1 ENGL
AGGR REPL
RCHRES 105 GQUAL DQAL 1 1 AVER WDM1 1152 DQAL 1 ENGL
AGGR REPL
END EXT TARGETS

MASS-LINK

MASS-LINK 2
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor-> <Name> <Name>
x x ***
*** Factor converts acre-in to acre-ft _1/12_
PERLND PWATER PERO 0.0833333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL
PERLND PQUAL POQUAL 1 RCHRES INFLOW IDQAL
1
END MASS-LINK 2

MASS-LINK 1
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor-> <Name> <Name>
x x ***
IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.08333333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL
IMPLND IQUAL SOQUAL 1 RCHRES INFLOW IDQAL
1
END MASS-LINK 1

MASS-LINK 3
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor-> <Name> <Name>
x x ***
RCHRES ROFLOW RCHRES INFLOW
END MASS-LINK 3

MASS-LINK 4
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor-> <Name> <Name>
x x ***
BMPRAC ROFLOW RCHRES INFLOW
END MASS-LINK 4

MASS-LINK 5
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 90 -
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor-> <Name> <Name>
x x ***
IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.08333333 BMPRAC INFLOW IVOL
IMPLND IQUAL SOQUAL 1 BMPRAC INFLOW IDQAL
1
END MASS-LINK 5

MASS-LINK 6
<-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-
Member-> ***
<Name> <Name> x x<-factor-> <Name> <Name>
x x ***
PERLND PWATER PERO 0.0833333 BMPRAC INFLOW IVOL
PERLND PQUAL POQUAL 1 BMPRAC INFLOW IDQAL
1
END MASS-LINK 6
END MASS-LINK

END RUN

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 91 -
Appendix C-1: Public Notice

Now Available Upon Request

Fecal Coliform
Total Maximum Daily Load
Goose Creek
Public Review Draft – February 2005

Is now available upon request from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. This
TMDL study was prepared as a requirement of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
Section 303(d). The study identifies the sources of the pollutants, determines allowable
loads to surface waters, and suggests pollutant allocations.

TO OBTAIN A FREE COPY OF THE TMDL REPORTS:

Please contact Ms. Robin Markham [phone], extension 558 or write to:
Adugna Kebede
Water Quality Planning Branch
NC Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

The draft TMDL is also located on the following website: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl.
Interested parties are invited to comment on the draft TMDL study by March 15, 2005.
Comments concerning the report should be directed to the Division of Water Quality at
the above address.

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

North Carolina Division of Water Quality/Planning Branch 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone]
512 North Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]

Customer Service 1-877-623-6748 Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 92 -
Appendix C-2: Affidavit of Publication from The Charlotte Observer Public Notification

Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 93 -
Appendix C-3: Goose Creek TMDL Stakeholder Meeting Minutes

Goose Creek TMDL Public Meeting Minutes

Meeting Date: Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Meeting Time: 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m.
Meeting Location: Mint Hill Town Hall Meeting Chamber located at 7151 Matthews-Mint
Hill Road

Purpose of Public Meeting:
To discuss the findings of the Goose Creek TMDL and receive comments and input from
attendees.

Attendees:
Barry Gullet – Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities
Rick Roti – Sierra Club
Tom Augspurger – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
Mark Fowlkes – N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Jenny Harrison – N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Richard Farmer – Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program
David Kroening – Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program
Dr. Craig Allan – UNC-Charlotte
Jerry Simpson – Union County Cooperative Extension Director
Amy Helms - Union County Storm Water Engineer
Adugna Kebede – North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ)

Agenda:

Time Topic Speaker
10:00 to 10:30 Source Assessment and Monitoring Richard Farmer

10:30 to 11:00 Modeling Approach David Kroening

11:00 to 11:30 Allocations and Source Reductions David Kroening

11:30 to 12:00 Group Discussion

Richard Farmer of the Mecklenburg County Water Quality Program (MCWQP) started off with
a PowerPoint presentation describing the point and non-point sources of fecal coliform bacteria
in the Goose Creek watershed. Phase I monitoring sites and associated data were then presented
to the group. Phase II monitoring data, which included specific land use monitoring sites, was
also presented. The Phase II land use monitoring locations include:
• a tributary to Goose Creek that is downstream of a residential community that utilizes
individual waste water systems;
• a separate tributary to Goose Creek which is located downstream of a horse farm;
Goose Creek Fecal Coliform TMDL - Final Version Submitted to EPA April 2005
- 94 -
• Goose Creek at Bain School Road upstream of a cattle farm;
• Goose Creek at Lawyers Rd. located downstream of the cattle farm; and
• Goose Creek at Highway 218 located downstream of a chicken farm.

The Bacterial Source Tracking (BST) component of the monitoring effort was also discussed.
BST is a monitoring technique used to distinguish animal form human sources. The BST
monitoring sites include:
• Goose Creek at Flour Mill Rd.;
• Goose Creek at Howey Bottoms Rd.;
• Goose Creek at the Tucker Farm;
• Duck Creek at Hopewell Church Rd.; and
• Duck Creek at Mill Grove Rd.
BST monitoring showed that of the isolates sampled 48% were from livestock, 25% were from
human sources and that 27% were from wildlife.

David Kroening of MCWQP followed Richard with a presentation covering Sections 3 and 4
from the Draft TMDL document. David explained that Win HSPF was used to simulate fecal
coliform, flow and temperature in the Goose Creek Watershed. When available, local data was
used to populate model parameters. Calibration graphs, land-use maps and model output were
presented to the stakeholders. A source reduction strategy consisting of a 92.5% reduction in
fecal coliform from MS4 areas, septic systems, ground water and non-point source runoff was
described.

Comments from the attendees at the meeting were as follows:
Rick Roti – Mr. Roti expressed a concern that the model incorporated current land uses and
impervious areas but did not address build out in the watershed. He was concerned that there
was no projection for future development as part of the TMDL and how this could affect the
Carolina heelsplitter. Mr. Roti was concerned that there is no State water quality standard for
suspended solids and felt that one should be implemented. He stated that the TMDL should be
met as a condition of the Phase II Storm Water Permit. Mr. Roti commented that there should be
more development controls within the watershed and that he is concerned about changes to the
watershed due to increased development. Mr. Roti stated that he does not like the fact that there
is not a requirement for an implementation strategy and that DWQ should mandate that
jurisdictions work together to address water quality issues.
Tom Auspurger – Mr. Auspurger stated fecal coliform bacteria is only part of the problem and
that reducing fecal coliform levels alone would not address the biological integrity of the stream.
He stated that there are greater stressors to biological integrity such as sediment and nutrients
and that if these pollutants were addressed, a reduction in fecal coliform may also be realized.
Mr. Auspurger was concerned that the lowest 5% of flows were not included in the model due to
drought conditions. He feels that these conditions need to be addressed so that real conditions
are not ignored.
Adugna Kebede – Mr. Kebede stated that all comments that wish to be considered for input into
the TMDL be provided to him at [phone] ext. 515.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 12:00 p.m.