NC0024406_Temporary Cooling Water Intake Structure_20080115

Michael F. Easley, Governor
State of North Carolina
GWilliam G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
y Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Ronald E. Lewis
Duke Energy Company
Fossil/ Hydro Generation Dept.
P.O. Box.1006
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006
January 15, 2008
Subject: Authorization to Operate
Temporary Cooling Water Intake Structure
NPDES Permit NCO024406
Duke Power/ Belews Creek Steam Station
Stokes County
Dear Mr. Lewis:
This 1,04 r a4hori es the, operation of. a. tempamry Coaling ti� te_i° Intaho_:,-structure at the existing steam electric
plant.'C#e Intake structure wall,:pump water frtxttt the Dan J'uwer to Belews Lake, which provides condenser
c o'altitg,w ter for the sublet facility. itt a,typ CA year, B %eves l ttio fills zn the spring to 724.5 feet msl, then loses
4 tc et:pver the~stirrminet and fall' Due to e�cee tional itrtlugltc=ndiuons; projections for 2008 indicate Belews
Lakp�may tall 6Elow tti; Ettmtrrium String lake level necessary for continued intake pump operation through the
Summer period (1 e 720`f�dt tit$t). The plan proposes to pump lake levels to a minimum of 720 feet msl, up to a
makiiituixi.af 7 4.5 f40tJhsl, by ek4gfMarch 2008.
This pumping plan has been proposed to ensure uninterrupted power production at this base load facility, while
mitigating effects on the aquatic community and downstream users. This plan was reviewed in 2002 (when it was
first requested) by staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), NC Division of Water Resources (DWR),
NC W►ldlif di06r esetsmmcs on (Q!IRC), NC Division of Land Resources (DLR), and the US Army Corp of
Engineer: Tfte current,pr9posal_tia1fi~en reviewed by staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), and NC
Dv�ior' of"'itti J:esoiiraes .{D.), It is our understanding that Duke Energy has discussed the proposed
temporary pumping plan with downstream municipalities with water intakes.
The temporary pumping plan is authorized to be implemented with the following operational and design measures
to minimize biological impacts and downstream water supply concerns:
➢ Pumping is scheduled to begin in January 2008 and end in March 2008, which coincides with the
historical period of maximum flow in the Dan River, and avoids the April -May fish spawning period. If
water levels in Belews Lake are still below 720 feet msl after this period, Duke Power must request
authorization to continue temporary pumping beyond this date.
➢ Pumping will 'not lower the flow in Dan River below 110 cfs, which is the Division of Water Resources
target flow recommendation for this site. River flow at the pumping location will be estimated prior to
each daily pumping event.
➢ The minimum pumping rate will be 10 cfs (6 MGD), and the maximum pumping rate will be 100 cfs (65
MGD).
➢ The Dan River intake pumps will be positioned above the river bottom and have an approach velocity less
than or equal to 0.5 feet/ second across screening with mesh openings of less than 1 cm2 to minimize fish
entrainment and impingement.
➢ The withdrawal location will be near the confluence of the spillway channel below Belews Lake Dam and
the Dan River. This is a scoured bottom area that does not provide suitable aquatic habitat.
➢ The facility will perform routine monthly lake monitoring during the period of pumping to assess
limnological conditions in Belews Lake.
--
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1617 -TELEPHONE [phone]/FAX [phone]
VISIT US ON THE WEB AT http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES

NCO024406
Page 2 of 2
January 14, 2008
The additional fishery issue&ot(►td wtfh; ttus femporaCyptimpzhg, the potential for transmittal of a fish virus
(i.e. Spring Viremia of Carp Lake has been reviewed by the lead fisheries
biologist and declared notto De an .issue There wiis fib evidence that the pathogen survived in the system and no
evidence was found in their,m
ring,�ri ?OO4:-,that tl►e. y mts `h'jid ,affected any fish in the upper Roanoke! Dan
River system.
Please note that this tAb"riaattonY d0_ S not, affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be,
required by the biv t;yoiia l::'Wtlter Qil iiry 'the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or
any other federal`ar lcicslgiivernmeOwl. pe�tn ts.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact Jim McKay of my staff
at [phone], extension 595.
`awls
Surface Water Protection Section Chief
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office — Surface Water Protection
NCDWR/ Fred Tarver

Proposed Pumping Rates
Withdrawals will be variable based upon available river flow, and a flow measuring device will
be installed at .the intake location. The Division of Water Resources target flow
recommendation for the Dan River at this site is 110 cfs.. Pumping will not lower the in -stream
flow rates to less than 110 cfs. Thus, the in -stream flow rate should be sufficient for NPDES
discharges and water withdrawals. The minimum pumping rate will be 10 — 20cfs, and the
maximum pumping rate will be 100 cfs. The following is an outline of proposed pumping
rates.
Table 1— Proposed Pumping Rates
River Flow
cfs
1 Pumping Rate
cfs
>2101W7
90
190
_ - .80
70
170::. - .
66 �.
160;
50
15.0
40
140
30
....130'
_120
10
110
Proposed Pumping Schedule
Pumping is scheduled to begin in January 200,8 andG, Withdrawals wtl1 vary based on available
river flow as outlined in Table 1. At the 'rmaxti um. pt9p(?W4 pumping rate, 61 days of
continuous pumping would be requiredfio xatse "the fake level from 716 to 720 feet msl. If the
lake level drops to 715 feet msl, then ,141 days of :continuous pumpjng.
`ould be required to
raise the lake level from 715 to 720 fe6t:ms1 aritl2-02`d4ys-would be necessary to raise the lake
levelto full pond (724.5 feet msl). However, pumv, pin .is, unlikely to extestd into late spring due
to flow and aquatic constraints.

January 16, 2008
Ronald E. Lewis
Duke Energy Company
Fossil/ Hydro Generation Dept.
P.O. Box 1006
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006
Subject: Authorization to Operate - Correction
Temporary Cooling Water Intake
Structure
NPDES Permit NCO024406
Duke Power/ Belews Creek Steam
Station
Stokes County
Dear Mr. Lewis:
The Authorization to Operate a Temporary Cooling Water Intake Structure recently issued
contains an error that was inadvertently carried over from the 2002 Authorization document.
On the third page above Table 1— Proposed Pumping Rates, wording referring to installation of
a flow measurement device was carried over in error. Our agreement with the Division of
Water Resources does not require a flow measurement device for this short term pumping
operation.
A revised page 3 is attached. Please remove the old page 3 and replace it with the attached.
Please contact me if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
Jim McKay
Eastern NPDES Program
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office — Surface Water Protection
NCDWR/ Fred Tarver
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1617 - TELEPHONE [phone] EXT. 595/FAX [phone]
VISIT US ON THE WEB AT http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES
i
Michael F. Easley, Governor
State of North Carolina '
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
January 16, 2008
Ronald E. Lewis
Duke Energy Company
Fossil/ Hydro Generation Dept.
P.O. Box 1006
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006
Subject: Authorization to Operate - Correction
Temporary Cooling Water Intake
Structure
NPDES Permit NCO024406
Duke Power/ Belews Creek Steam
Station
Stokes County
Dear Mr. Lewis:
The Authorization to Operate a Temporary Cooling Water Intake Structure recently issued
contains an error that was inadvertently carried over from the 2002 Authorization document.
On the third page above Table 1— Proposed Pumping Rates, wording referring to installation of
a flow measurement device was carried over in error. Our agreement with the Division of
Water Resources does not require a flow measurement device for this short term pumping
operation.
A revised page 3 is attached. Please remove the old page 3 and replace it with the attached.
Please contact me if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
Jim McKay
Eastern NPDES Program
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office — Surface Water Protection
NCDWR/ Fred Tarver
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1617 - TELEPHONE [phone] EXT. 595/FAX [phone]
VISIT US ON THE WEB AT http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES

NCO024406
Page 2 of 2
January 16, 2008
Proposed Pumping Rates
Withdrawals will be variable based upon available river flow. The Division of Water
Resources target flow recommendation for the Dan River at this site is 110 cfs. Pumping will
not lower the in -stream flow rates to less than 110 cfs. Thus, the in -stream flow rate should be
sufficient for NPDES discharges and water withdrawals. The minimum pumping rate will be
10 - 20cfs, and the maximum pumping rate will be 100 cfs. The following is an outline of
proposed pumping rates.
Table 1- Proposed Pumping Rates
River Flow
; �` Pumping Rate i
cfs
cfs
>210
100_
_____._.............. .-
200
90
190-
180..:
170:
60
160____
- 50
- -
150
� 40-
0,140
140
130 . -
. : 20 -_.
120
10
_'t
------iro
Proposed Pumping Schedule
Pumping is scheduled to begin in January 2008, and withdrawals will vary based on available
river flow as outlined in Table 1. At the maximum proposed pumping rate, 61 days of
continuous pumping would be required to raise the lake level from 716 to 720 feet msl. If the
lake level drops to 715 feet msl, then 101 days of continuous pumping would be required to
raise the lake level from 715 to 720 feet msl and 202 days would be necessary to raise the lake
level to full pond (724.5 feet msl). However, pumping is unlikely to extend into late spring due
to flow and aquatic constraints.

Dati River gage installation
Subject: Dan River gage installation
From: Fred Tarver <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:44:10 -0500
To: [e-mail], James Mckdy <[e-mail]>
CC: John Sutherland <[e-mail]>, "Mead, Jim" <[e-mail]>
James/Ron,
After discussing with Ron Lewis, it has come to my attention that a Corps Nationwide
Permit 5 would be required to install even a temporary gage to monitor flows in the
Dan River. Given the time constraints, the Division of Water Resources is not
requesting the installation of any new gaging material for this temporary pumping
scenario as was requested in our memorandum of 1.11.08.
Ron also informed me that staff from the Belews Lake Station inspected the site of
the old USGS gage station at Pine Hall and did not find any existing structures.
Staff from DWR will be in the area this Wednesday and will check the site to verify.
If there is a gage plate remaining at the Pine Hall site that is suitable for
monitoring flows, DWR would still request that Duke Power maintain records of daily
readings from this site during pumping.
Fred Tarver
Fred R. Tarver III <[e-mail]>
Environmental Specialist I
Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources -- Instream flow Unit
1 of 1 1/14/2008 12:54 PM

wa NCDENR'
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Division of Water Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
January 11, 2008
MEMORANDUM
To: James McKay
DWQ NPDES Unit
From: John Sutherland
Water Projects gtion
Subject: Temporary Dan River Pumping to Belews Lake
Resources
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
John Morris, Director
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) has reviewed Duke Power's proposal to withdrawal water
from the Dan River at Pine Hall for discharge into Belews Lake. Pumping rates will be based on
available river flow. The pumping will occur in 8 cfs increments, using a series of 12 pumps, to a
maximum pumping rate of 98 cfs. As proposed, the pumping will not operate when the river flow is
less than 100 cfs at the point of withdrawal, as measured at the U.S. Geological Survey's upstream
Francisco gage. Duke Power has reported a 7Q10 value for the river at Pine Hall to be 80 cfs. Itis
unclear how this value was determined. The proposal also includes a cushion of 20 cfs for immediate
.downstream withdrawals. Pumping is scheduled to begin as soon as possible and cease in March,
2008.
DWR requests the following modifications to the proposal:
Duke Power should increase the base flow during pumping from 100 to 110 efs withdrawals.
DWR has a wetted perimeter (WP) study site below SR 1138 near Madison with a target flow
recommendation of 110 cfs. DWR can find no evidence of withdrawals between the point of
withdrawal and the WP site; therefore, the flow buffer would contribute to the target flow. This
flow of 110 cfs should meet both the in -stream and off -stream needs in the downstream reach of
the ban River during this brief period of withdrawal to refill Belews Lake.
2. Duke Power should install and rate a temporary gage plate between Pine Hall and the SR 1138
WP site or re -rate any suitable gage plate at the retired USGS gaging site at Pine Hall within 30
days of the commencement of pumping in order to more accurately monitor flow -by in the
Dan River.
Please call or email if you have questions or wish to discuss further.
1611 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611 NOPtl1Clina
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: 919=733-3558 \ Internet: www.ncwater.org
o a
An Equal opportunity I Affirmative Action Employer - 50 /a Recycled 110 /o Post Consumer Paper

RE:- [Fwd Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River]
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River]
From: "Lewis, Ronald E" <relewisl@duke=dnergy.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:53:47 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: "James Mckay" <[e-mail]>
Fred and Jim,
After discussion with our staff concerning the two issues listed in your note below, our
preference would be to use the USGS gage upstream at Francisco like what was done in
2002. The lead time to reactivate the gage at Pine Hall would most likely be on the order of
weeks, if not months, missing our window for pumping during the winter period. We will
evaluate further if a permanent pumping system needs to be installed going forward. Our
current plan calls for reviewing the flow rate twice a day, adjusting pumps as needed, and will
keep a log of how many pumps are running to estimate withdrawal volume.
Changing from 100 to 125 cfs raises the threshold equal to the capacity of about 3 pumps and
would prefer to use the 100 cfs criteria. In November/December 2007 our plan was
communicated to downstream municipalities and met with the City of Eden at their request to
review our plan. We will notify them when we begin pumping, as well as Dan River Steam
Station. We have asked for feedback from both, if there are issues with our withdrawal. Since
no issues with downstream users were noted when the 100 cfs criteria was used in 2003, our
preference would be to monitor the actual downstream effects based on flow at the Wentworth
gage (i.e. > 300 cfs when pumping).
Let me know if you need more information. Your prompt responses are appreciated.
Thanks.
Ron
Duke Energy
Mail Code: EC13K
526 S. Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Office 980-373-5710
Mobile [phone]
From: Fred Tarver [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 4:25 PM
To: Lewis, Ronald E
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River]
Ron, Here's the email. Fred
Original Message--------
Subject:Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River
Date:Mon, 07 Jan 2008 16:20:56 -0500
1 of 4' 1/9/2008 11:49 AN

M [Fwd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River]
From:Fred Tarver <fred.tarver@,ncmail.net>
Reply -To: [e-mail]
Organization:NC Dept. of Env.&Nat.Res.--Div. of Water Resources
To:James Mckay <James.McKayoncmail.net>
CC:Linwood Peele <linwood.peele [e-mail]>, Tom Fransen
<Tom.Fransenna,ncmail.net>, "Mead, Jim" <jim.mead a,ncmail.net>, Shari Bryant
<[e-mail]>7 John Sutherland <[e-mail]>
References:<475EC91E.60009(a ncmail.net> <475ED616.2050106pncmail.net>
<47600ABB.3000908oncmail.net>
Jim,
This is in response to your phone call and email last week. The instream flow unit has review the
attached document that was included with your email last week and offers the following requests. My
comments of 12/12/07 are included below as reference.
1). Duke Power should install and/or re -rate the gage plate at the retired USGS gaging site at Pine Hall
prior to the commencement of pumping in order to more accurately monitor flow -by in the Dan River.
2). Duke Power should increase the base flow during pumping from 100 to 125 cfs. DWR has a wetted
perimeter study site at a drainage area of 600 square miles with a target flow of 110 cfs. The Pine Hall
gage site, located slightly upstream of the pumping site, has a drainage area of 501 square miles, yielding
an intervening drainage area of 99 square miles. Subtracting the Belews Creek watershed at the dam of
69.6 square miles leaves an intervening drainage area of 29.4 square miles. Using an estimated 7Q10
per square mile flow value of 0.18 yields an estimated intervening flow of 5 cfs between the point of
withdrawal and the wetted perimeter study site. Therefore, 105 cfs + 20 cfs buffer for near -field
downstream withdrawals equals 125 cfs. This flow should provide a conservative margin of error to
meet both the in -stream and off -stream needs in the downstream reach of the Dan River during this brief
period of withdrawal to refill Belews Lake.
Please call or email if you have questions or wish to discuss further.
Fred
Fred Tarver wrote:
Jim,
1). Questions that immediately come to mind are based on the following statement:
"River flow at the pumping location will be estimated prior to each daily pumping event."
How will flows be estimated?
Does Duke have an established and rated gaging device, based on USGS specifications?
[See link: <http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/wsp2l75/html/WSP2175 voll pdf.html>]
Is the gage located downstream or upstream of the point of withdrawal?
Will flows be read during the day to assure that flow does not drop below the threshold?
2 of 4 1/9/2008 11:49 AM

RE:'[Fwcd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River]
It would be informative to have the stage -discharge relationship on which these river -flow estimates are
based. Also, it would be beneficial to maintain records of the gage reading, the corresponding flow, the
date and time read, the volume pumped, the period of pumping, and the surface elevation of Belews.
2). Another question concerns the 7Q10 estimate.
Do you know the source of the 80 cfs 7Q10 estimate?
DWR did wetted perimeter studies in the 1980's on the Dan River and determined a minimum flow
requirement of 110 cfs just downstream of SR 1138 (Lindsey Bridge Rd.) near Madison. This site has a
drainage area of 600 sq. mi. and 110 cfs was reported to be the 7Q10 value at this site [NC Division of
Water Resources. Dan River Basin Study, North Carolina: Phase I. November, 1986. 116p.]. Our report
lists a 7Q10 value at Madison --with a drainage area of 645 sq. mi. --of 80 million gallons per day
(mgd), which equals 123 cfs. Using a USGS-estimated drainage area of 581 sq. mi. for the Dan River
below Belews Creek at Pine Hall and rationing the 7Q10 values to this site gives a rough 7Q10 estimate
between 106 to 110 cfs. I think this 80 cfs 7Q10 estimate requires verification.
3). One last question concerns water usage in the reach.
Since 2002 has the 20 cfs water usage in the reach been inventoried? A 2002 email from Tracy Beer to
Tom Fransen stated the 100 cfs flow -by "allows a cushion of 20 cfs for immediate downstream
withdrawals. The cushion value may change as we get a better handle on the amounts of immediate
downstream withdrawals. Do you have information on the near field downstream withdrawal rates?" I
don't know if this 20 cfs value was verified, but it seems that it was based more on speculation.
4). Editorial Note: Page 2: "unrersolved"
Hope this helps.
Fred Tarver
James Mckay wrote:
Attached are the two documents. The first is the original authorization to pump. Duke installed the
equipment in 2002, then it rained so much they did not operate. The second authorization draft is
slightly modified to reflect a new application. Please review and email any comments or questions back
to me.
Thanks for your help.
Jim McKay
Environmental Engineer
NCDWQ
Eastern NPDES Program
[phone], ext. 595
Linwood Peele wrote:
Hello Jim,
3 of 4 1/9/2008 11:49 AN

RE: [Fwd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River]
As per our telephone conversation, please send.a copy of the draft memo and also send the 2002 memo.
regarding Duke Power temporarily pumping from the Dan River. Fred Tarver is the contact, but send it
to Tom Fransen and me.
Thanks,
Linwood Peele
Water Supply Planning Section
NCDWR
4 of 4 1/9/2008 11:49 AN,

Flow Multipliers for the Temporary Dan River Pumping Project
Introduction,
Withdrawals will be variable based upon river flow. Pumping will not lower the river flow
rate downstream of the pumping site to less than 100 cfs, which is the- sum of the 7Q10
flow rate and near -field municipal water withdrawals. The maximum pumping rate will be
98 cfs. Therefore, if flow is less than 100 cfs at the pumping site, there will be no
pumping, and if flow is greater, than 198 cfs, maximum pumping will occur. If flow is
between 100 and 198 cfs, the pumping rate will vary. A method of determining flow at
the pumping site is necessary to determine the correct number of pumps to operate.
There are currently two USGS flow gages on the Dan River in the vicinity of the
proposed pumping project. USGS Gage 02068500 near Francisco is located upstream
from the pumping site, and USGS Gage 02071000 near Wentworth is located
downstream of the pumping site. Retired USGS Gage 02069000 was located slightly
upstream of the pumping site. The upstream gage near Francisco will be used to
determine river flow rate at the pumping site. Data from all three gages was analyzed to
determine the appropriate multiplier between the Francisco gage and the pumping site.
A summary of the data used in the assessment is shown in Table 1.
Flow Rate Proiection
Flow rates along a river can be projected by a function of the ratio of the drainage areas.
x
_ * DrainageArea2
QZ — Q, DrainageArea,
The exponent typically varies between %Z and 1, depending upon river characteristics
and flow rates. Working downstream, the lower the exponent, the lower the predicted
flow will be. The exponent may vary with baseflow rates and increase when flows
increase. Additionally, during storm events, the exponent usually increases because the
intensity and duration of the storm hydrograph increases as flow moves downstream and
drainage area increases. However, for consistency and convenience, a single method is
desired to project flows at Pine Hall based on real-time flows at Francisco. Therefore,
the projection was developed in a way that would yield conservative results. The
analysis focused on low flow periods, which have lower exponents. Because only one
exponent will be used, the projected storm hydrograph at Pine Hall will be the same
intensity and duration as Francisco, which will be less than the actual hydrograph
duration and intensity.
More than six months of recent data, in 15 -minute time increments, for the Francisco
and Wentworth gages was analyzed to determine the travel time between the two
gages. Analysis of peak flows indicates that the travel time between the Francisco gage
and the Wentworth gage is about 14 hours, and interpolation indicates the travel time
between Francisco and the pumping site is about 7 hours. The flows at Francisco were
lagged 14 hours for the exponent analysis so that the hydrograph peaks would match.
Duke Energy/TLB 11

The duration of the ascension limbs were generally similar for hydrographs at both,
locations, but the recession limbs were longer downstream, as expected.
The projection should be most accurate during periods when the available flow is less
than the level needed for maximum pumping. Therefore, the previously mentioned data
set was sorted to include only those flows.' including higher flows would raise the
median exponent for the data set because the exponent typically increases with flow.
The minimum flow rate required at Pine Hall for maximum pumping is 198 cfs. If the
projection exponent were 1, the corresponding flow at Wentworth would be 413 cfs.
Therefore, the maximum flow at Wentworth for the analysis was 413 cfs. The data set
included 13,301 flow ratios, and the corresponding median exponent was 0.51. This
exponent results in a flow multiplier of 2 between Francisco and Pine Hall and 0.69
between Pine Hall and Wentworth. Similar analysis was performed using the daily data
available for all three gages, and results were consistent. These multipliers will under
predict higher flows because the exponent typically increases with flow, and this
exponent was developed using only low flow data. However, this error will not affect
pumping rates because maximum pumping capacity will have already been realized. _
Table 2 shows the protocol for pump operation when the available river flow is less than
the level required for maximum pumping. Pumping, should not lower the downstream
river flow to less than 100 cfs, which is the sum of the 7010 level and the near -field
downstream municipal water withdrawals.
Duke Energy/TLB

Table 1
Francisco ---.-Pine Hall"
Wentworth
Gage # 02069500' 02069000
02071000
DrainageArea (mid) _ -._ .. 129 501
_ 1.035 -
The Pine Hall gage is retired, It was located slightly upstream of the pumping site.
The pumping site is interchangeably referred to as Pine Hall.
Flow rates can be projected at Pine Hall
x
DrainageArea2 ;
using this equation and flow rates at theQ __ Q *
z '
,Francisco gage. X typically varies
DrainageArea,
between 0.5 and 1. X was determined -
using flow data from Francisco and Wentworth.
Minimum River Flow After Pumping (cfs)
100
Maximum Pumping Rate (cfs)
98
# Pumps
12
Pumping Rate Per Pump (cfs)
8
Minimum Flow at Pine Hall for Max Pumping (cfs)
198
Flow Required at Francisco. and Wentworth for Maximum Pumping__
X = 0.5 = 0.51
X = 1.0
Francisco 101 99
51
Wentworth 283 287
413
X typically increases with flow; therefore, only flows less than 413 cfs at Wentworth
were used in determining the correct exponent for this portion of the Dan River.
The median value of X for those low flows was 0.51.
Multipliers.to_Determine Flow at Pine Hall
x = 0.5 x = 0.51
x = 1.0
Francisco 1.97 2.00
3.88
Wentworth 0.70 0.69
0.48
Duke Energy/TLB 3

Table 2
hump Operation Based on Flow at Francisco (x = 0.51)*
Flow at Francisco Flow at Pine Hall
Pump Flow
Number
(cfs) (cfs)
(cfs)
of Pumps
50.0 100.0
0.0
0
54.1 108.2
8.2
1
58.2 116.3
16.3
2
62.3 124.5
24.5
3
66.3 132.7
32.7
4
70.4 140.8
40.8
5
74.5 149.0
49.0
6
78.6 157.2
57.2
7
82.7 165.3
65.3
8
86.8 173.5
73.5
9
90.8 181.7
81.7
10
94.9 189.8
89.8
11
99.0 198.0
98.0
12
Use of x=0.51 at flows greater than those shown will produce conservative results.
Also, this method assumes the -shape of the storm hydrograph at Pine Hall is the
stri"ieas at Francisco. This is conservative because the intensity and
duration of
the hydrograph increases downstream.
Duke Energy/TLB

RE:,FW: Reactivatib� of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan...
Subject: RE: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake.
From: "Lewis, Ronald E" <relewis I @duke-energy.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:37:1.7 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: "Susan.a.Wilson" <[e-mail]>
Jim,
In response to our phone call yesterday, I've attached a copy of the 2003 report that was previously submitted-€
following the 2003 pumping event. I've also attached the protocol analysis showing that the flow recorded at the
Francisco USGS gage the previous 7 seven hours could be used to determine when flow rates met the criteriafor
starting and stopping the pumping system. The same protocol will be used in 2008. The target date for
Installation and start-up of the temporary pumping system is January 15, 2008, pending NCDENR approval and
river flow at the Francisco USGS gage. If we need to meet next week to discuss, please advise.
Thanks,
Ron
Duke Energy
Mail Code: EC13K
526 S. Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Office 980-373-5710
'Mobile [phone]
From: Susan -Wilson [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:20 PM
To: Lewis, Ronald E
Subject: Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews'Lake
Hi Ron hope you had a good one as well. I.was up in Brevard - and that received a good bit of rain
(along with a little snow!).
I'll forward your note to Jim McKay. He was going to have Div. of.Water Resources take a look at it
(and likely due to the holidays it has gotten slowed down). I'll check in with him to make sure things
keep moving even so (although Gil Vinzani is his supervisor - fyi).
Susan
Lewis, Ronald E wrote:
Susan,
Hope you had great holidays. I know I was thankful for the rain we received. However, the forecast still
calls for a drier than normal winter and we will still need to pump water from the Dan River to Belews
Lake when adequate river flow is available this winter. What is the status of our request to reactivate the
2003 winter withdrawal plan? You can reach me at my mobile [phone], if we need to discuss.
Happy New Year.
over,
1 of 3 1/4/2008 1:02 PIS,

RE: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan...
From: Sergei Chernikov Finailto:sergei.chernikovnancmail.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:18 AM
To: -Lewis, Ronald E
Subject:: Re: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake
Ron,
I'will- check with Susan and. find out who received this assignment and get back with you.
Sergei
Lewis, Ronald E wrote:
Any update on the status of this request? The management of Belews Creek will begin to communicate-
plans- with downstream stakeholders today.
Also, since this is the -second occurrence of hot dry weather within the last five years, our internal
drought team is discussing options needed at other stations to address generation going forward.
From: Lewis, Ronald E
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 1:52' PM
To: Sergei Chernikov
Subject: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake
Sergei,
As we discussed about a month ago, we have continued to track the impact of the drought and the
extended forecast for next year with respect to the lake level of Belews Lake in the 2008 summer. Based
on our lake level data and the " 2007 -2008 -Winter Drought Outlook November 2007 Assessment from
NOAA's National Weather Service Office in Raleigh and the North Carolina State Climate Office issued
November 7, 2007" received today, we will be requesting to reactivate the 2003 pumping plan. I have
attached a copy of -the previous NCDENR approval letter and the proposed 2003 pumping plan that was,
approved. The same intake design that addressed the 0.5 ft/sec through, screen velocity 316(b) issue and
withdrawal plan that addressed downstream user concerns will remain the same. After approval, all we,
will need, is the rain. If all goes like before,.it started raining when we began to install the system and
only operated -the system in January of 2003.
Please let me know ASAP what my next step for approval of the request should be.
Thanks,
2 of 3 1/4/2008 1:02 PN

WATER QUALITY IMPACTS OF
PUMPING DAN RIVER WATER TO
AUGMENT BELEWS LAKE LEVEL,
WINTER 2002-2003
May 2003
Keith A. Finley
Duke Power
Fossil -Hydro Environmental Health & Safety
Huntersville, NC 28078

Table of Contents Page
ExecutiveSummary............................................................................................................3
Introduction.........................................................................................................................5
Methodsand Materials........................................................................................................6
Resultsand Discussion......................................................................................................6
Pumping Operation and Lake Elevation.....................................................................
6
Spatial Analysis of Water Quality Profiles..................................................................
7
Historical Analysis of Water Quality Profiles........................................................................
8
Water Clarity and Suspended Solids......................................................................................
9
Comparison of Water Quality to Historical Trends
...................................................10
Conclusions.......................................................................................................................11
LiteratureCited.................................................................................................................11
Tables................................................................................................................................12
Figures...............................................................................................................................14
2

Executive Summary
Due to persistent drought conditions in the Southeast during mid-1998 through 2002, by
early 2002, groundwater levels, stream flows and reservoir levels were substantially.
reduced. Duke Power engineers had projected that if the surface elevation of Belews
Lake dropped below 717 feet above mean sea level (msl), Belews Creek Steam Station
(BCSS) would become unavailable for generation due to condenser cooling water (CCW)
pump cavitation. Subsequently, in early 2002 structures were added to the CCW inlets to
suppress potential vortices, permitting the plant to operate down to a surface elevation of
715 ft msl. Yet, the drought remained in effect and future operability was by no means
ensured for this important base -loaded facility.
In the summer of 2002, Duke Power consulted with regulatory agencies and stakeholders -
seeking permission to install a temporary pumping operation providing Dan River water
to Belews Lake. Permission was subsequently granted for a winter 2002-2003 seasonal
withdrawal and pumping of Dan River water to provide aid for Belews Lake water
management. The agreement included a request by the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) to monitor Belews Lake water quality
during the pumping operation to ascertain whether water quality impacts had occurred.
Pumping from the Dan River commenced December 23, 2002 and was terminated on
February 28, 2003. Belews Lake was restored to near full pond by early March, 2003.
Pumping from the Dan River had supplied an estimated 45 percent of the restored Belews
Lake water volume, with the remaining 55 percent supplied by increased winter seasonal
precipitation and inflows.
The December 2002 though March 2003 monitoring effort showed only localized effects
due to the Dan River pumping operation. In the immediate vicinity of the pump inflow
(near the spillway), slightly lower water temperatures, coupled with higher dissolved
oxygen saturation, and slightly lower specific conductance were noted in vertical profiles
collected during pumping. Lake -wide, lower than normal water temperatures during the
winter 2003 season were primarily attributable to reduced generation at BCSS during
much of the period. Winter 2002-2003 climatology provided near normal temperatures,
but approximately 21 percent higher than normal precipitation.
3

Indicators of water clarity (i.e., Secchi depth, suspended solids and turbidity) also showed
only temporary, highly localized effects attributable to the pumping operation. Most
notable increases observed in particulate loading appeared to have resulted from
upstream watershed. inflows, particularly during the February -March 2003 timeframe.
These watershed -related effects were most notable at the slightly uplake BCSS CCW
discharge zone.
Examination of sequential seasonal observations for solids, major nutrients, and minerals
tended to show that the winter 2002-2003 pumping operations had less overall impact on
the lake -wide water quality than did the preceding mid -1998-2002 regional drought. The
winter 2002-2003 Dan River pumping, combined with the coincident watershed inputs,
actually served to partially counteract drought -related increases that had been observed in
the concentrations of certain constituents, particularly calcium (and alkalinity), chloride,
and sodium.
In summary, water quality impacts from the Dan River pumping operation. were: 1)
limited primarily to the immediate vicinity of the pump outlets in the lake; 2) of transient
duration (i.e., days as opposed to weeks); and 3) insignificant when compared to effects
of the 1998-2002 drought or seasonal storm runoff -related events.
4

Introduction
Drought conditions during mid-1998 through 2002 led to substantial` decreases in
groundwater levels, stream. flows, and reservoir levels in the Piedmont region. After
winter 2001 and spring 2002 precipitation failed to appreciably raise the Belews Lake
surface elevation, it became highly likely that with the "absence of very substantial and,
seemingly .improbable amounts of rainfall, the lake would fall to critically low levels
during the normally drier, summer and fall of the year. Previous data had demonstrated
that in a dry year, lake levels could .easily drop by 3' to 4 feet between the -end of the
relatively wet spring season and the end of the calendar year. This eventuality did indeed -
materialize in 2002, as the -prolonged drought continued and losses of surface water to
groundwater and evaporation accelerated throughout the -summer and continued beyond.
Duke Power engineers had projected that lake levels falling below 717 feet above mean -
sea level (msl) would lead to Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS) condensing cooling,
water (CCW) pump cavitation and subsequent inoperability of the generating station. In
anticipation of this problem, Duke Power installed modifications ' at the CCW pump
intake bays early in 2002. Structures were added to the CCW inlets to suppress potential
vortices and to hypothetically allow'the plant to operate down to a surface elevation of
715 feet without significant pump cavitation occurring. As the drought continued,
however, resulting in unprecedented low lake levels, it became clear that additional
measures would be needed to ensure station operability in 2003, should substantially
above-average rainfall not occur during that year.
In the summer of 2002, Duke Power Fossil -Hydro Environmental Health and Safety staff
consulted with regulatory agencies, including the North I Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, US Fish and Wildlife Services, US Army Corps of Engineers, and other
stakeholders seeking permission to install a temporary pumping operation providing Dan
River water to Belews Lake. Permission was subsequently granted for a winter 2002-
2003 seasonal withdrawal of Dan River water to provide a source for Belews Lake water
management. This report provides a summary of Belews Lake water quality monitoring
conducted prior to, during and following .the termination of the Dan River pump
operation.
E

Methods and 'Materials
On, December 12, 2002, prior to Dan River pump operation, near -shore in situ
measurements (temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance) were
obtained with a Hydrolab Mini Sonde , and surface samples for laboratory analyses. This
initial sampling included the Belews Lake pump inflow area near the spillway, and the
Dan River where the temporary pumps were being installed. Also on December 12,
continuous monitoring (i.e., set to record ata five minute interval) near -surface
temperature loggers were installed at each of the .two locations.
In January -March, 2003, Belews Lake water quality was monitored once per month at the
pump inflow, as well- as at three previously established Belews Lake water quality
monitoring locations (Figure 1-1), representing the forebay (Location 416), BCSS CCW
intake zone (Location 418), and.the BCSS CCW discharge confluence (Location 410).
Additional samples were collected at the Dan River pump inlet location, situated
immediately above the confluence of Belews Creek and the Dan River. At each lake
location, vertical, one -meter incremental profiles of in situ parameters, (temperature,
dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance) were obtained with a Hydrolab
DataSonde°. analyzer. Water samples were collected with a Kemmerer bottle for
laboratory analyses from surface (0.3 m), and from one meter above bottom, as the
location depth allowed. Surface -only measurements and samples for laboratory
parameters were collected from the Dan River from the .river bank. Samples for soluble
'nutrients were filtered (0.45-µm glass fiber filter) in the field.
All samples were preserved (acidified or iced, depending on analytical requirements)'
immediately following collection. Samples were preserved and analyzed according to the
methods listed in Table °1.
'Results and Discussion
Pumping Operations and Lake Elevation
Pumping from the Dan River was initiated on December 23, 2002, with Belews Lake at
720 ft msl elevation. Pumping was terminated on February 28, 2003, with the lake
elevation rapidly approaching full pond (725 ft msl). Except for the first week of

pumping, water from the Dan River was pumped primarily over a period when only a
single generating unit of BCSS was operational (Figure 2). Without accounting for
evaporative loss, by the end of February 2003 approximately 8509 acre-feet of Dan River
water was added to Belews Lake (Figure 3) from the Dan River. After the reservoir
achieved full pond in early March, 2003 it was estimated that .the Dan River pumping
operation had been responsible for contributing about 45 percent of the restored water
volume differential, with the remaining 55 percent added by appreciable winter season
stream inflows due to above average precipitation. Precipitation over the months of
December 2002 through February 2003, as measured at the Greensboro Regional Airport,
was 20.6 percent above historical norms for the period (NOAA 2003). In the week of
February 20-27 alone, the lake elevation increased (due to heavy rainfall in that week and
continued pumping) from 722.5.to 723.7 ft msl, recovering approximately 24 percent of
the original below -full pond deficit, based on the beginning 720 ft msl elevation.
Spatial Analysis of Water Quality Profiles
Throughout the pumping operation, Dan River water temperatures were consistently
cooler than Belews Lake surface temperatures (Figure 4). Upon entering Belews Lake
in the eight -meter deep area at the pump outlets near the spillway, cooler Dan River water
appeared to mix completely, in effect, moderating temperatures from top to bottom in this
immediate area. Vertical temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles measured at the
inflow point, the forebay (near -maximal depth), and the BCSS CCW intake and discharge
areas confirmed the relatively localized thermal effect of inflowing waters. Observed
temperature reductions near the spillway (pump inflow) relative to the forebay or CCW
intake zones of -the lake ranged from about 1.5 °C to slightly less than 3 °C during pump
operations (Figure 5). Likewise; due to the commensurate increased solubility of oxygen
at cooler temperatures, observed dissolved oxygen concentrations were increased at the
near -field spillway area by approximately 0.5 to 1.5 mg/L relative to the lake forebay or
CCW intake locations.
Dan River pH was slightly more acidic than that of Belews Lake during the two
samplings conducted during the pumping operation (January 31 and February 20), but the
influence of Dan River pumping inflow on Belews Lake pH remained negligible, even in
the inflow zone near the spillway (Figure 6). Slightly lower (more acidic) pH values
observed in the lower water column of Belews Lake at the more remote CCW discharge
zone on March 31, one month after the completion of pumping, are thought to be
7

attributable to significant watershed inputs following above-average precipitation patterns
in the two weeks prior to sampling (NOAA 2003). The relative stability of pH in Belews
Lake during pumping can be attributed to the rapid mixing of inflow with the Belews
Lake water column, and subsequent buffering due to the established dissolved carbon
dioxide, bicarbonate and carbonate equilibrium system within Belews Lake.
During pumping, a distinct near -field effect was observed in the lake specific
conductance profiles (Figure 6) measured during pumping (Figure 6). January and
February samplings indicated that Dan River specific conductance was 81.0 and 62.9
µOcm, respectively, compared to forebay surface conductance values of 108.0 and 102.1
µS/cm, respectively, for those two events. A resulting specific conductance of the mixed
area immediately adjacent to the pump outlets yielded conductance values intermediate
between those of the river and Belews Lake forebay. However, no appreciable further
distant or lake -wide reductions in specific conductance were observed in Belews Lake
based on January through March observations. As was observed for pH, CCW discharge
zone specific conductance measured below the thermal plume was slightly lower than
that of the main lake, presumably due the influence of lower conductivity watershed -
derived inflows from uplake areas.
Historical Analysis of Water Quality Profiles
As evidenced by thermal, dissolved oxygen and dissolved oxygen saturation water
column profiles collected during the winter of 2003 compared to recent historical minima
and maxima, Belews Lake matched or slightly surpassed the coldest conditions
experienced in recent years (Figures 7 and 8). Thermal and dissolved oxygen saturation
profiles, along with pH profiles (Figure 9) suggest the lake was also more thoroughly
mixed vertically than at any time over the preceding decade.
The winter 2002-2003 season was not unusually cold compared to normal patterns.
Heating degree-day (base 65°F) totals for December -February from Greensboro Regional
Airport were only 0.6 percent above normal (NOAA 2003). The observed cooler
temperatures, higher dissolved oxygen and enhanced vertical mixing in Belews Lake can
primarily be attributed to lower heat loading to the reservoir due to outage -related
generation reductions at BCSS, and to a lesser extent, Dan River pumping and possibly
watershed inputs of comparatively cooler water.
8

Water column profiles for specific conductance (Figure 9) approached and exceeded
recent historical maxima during.=January-March 2003 samplings, but as will be discussed
'further in the following sections, this was primarily due to the drought over the previous
four years. A lake -wide, net increase in specific conductance during the January - March
2003 period was not observed, indicating that watershed and Dan River pumping inflows
were on average not adding dissolved solids to the lake at above -ambient levels.
Water Clarity and Suspended Solids
Mean Secchi depth, an indication of visible light transmittance (and indirectly,.. of
suspended material concentrations) in the upper water column, was decreased in the
immediate Dan River pump inflow area relative to the lake forebay, the CCW - intake
zone, and to a lesser degree, compared to the uplake CCW discharge zone (Figure 10).
For the March 2003 sampling, completed a month after termination of the Dan River
pumping operation, Secchi depth readings in the former pump inflow area were
comparable to the forebay, indicating the relative short term nature of the observed effect.
January -February 2003 Secchi depths measured in the main body of Belews Lake were-
all
ereall slightly less than winter means for the 1997-2001 period. March 2003 Secchi depths
lake -wide were further reduced, undoubtedly indicative of solids loading following heavy
rainfall during March 13-20.
As anticipated, Dan River total suspended solids concentrations fluctuated widely
between isample dates, but were consistently greater than concentrations in Belews Lake
on any ."given'.sampling date. (Figures 11 and 12). Belews Lake near -surface total
suspended` solids concentrations were generally similar to, or slightly less than historical
averages. For February 2003 lake bottom samples, total suspended solids concentrations
were approximately twice historical main lake concentrations at the immediate pump
outlet area and at the BCSS CCW discharge zone (attributable to uplake, watershed -
derived inflows), but not at the forebay or at the BCSS CCW intake zone. Bottom
samples were comparable for other sample dates, indicating that suspended solids
impacts were generally limited to the immediate. vicinity of the pump inflow.
Similar patterns in turbidity measurements were observed as for total suspended solids
during the course of this investigation. As for solids, highest Dan River turbidity
occurred in December 2002, prior to the start of pumping (Figures 13 and 14). Belews
0
J

Lake turbidity values were similar to, or in the case of March 2003 surface samples, only
slightly above the recent historical averages. Turbidity tended to be highest near the
bottom at both, the immediate pump inflow area and the CCW discharge zone; the latter
finding being consistent with recent, historical trends.-'
Comparison of Water Quality to Historical Trends
Belews Lake monitoring locations for which recent winter season water quality trends
have been documented were used to examine the relative effect of the Dan River
pumping operation. Examination of lake -wide water quality indicator. distributions (box -
and -whisker plots indicating minima, maxima, 1St and 3rd quartiles and means), combined
withsequential seasonal observations at the Belews forebay of solids (Figures 15 and
16); total phosphorus (Figures 17 and 18); total nitrogen (Figures 19 and 20); total organic
carbon (Figures 21 and 22); silica (Figures 23 and 24); specific conductance (Figures 25
and 26); total 'alkalinity (Figures 27 and 28); and major soluble anions and cations
(Figures 29-40) tended to show that the winter 2002-2003 pumping operations had less
overall impact on the lake -wide water quality than did the preceding mid -1998-2002
regional drought. The winter 2002-2003 Dan River pumping, combined with the
coincident seasonal watershed inputs, actually served to partially counteract the drought -
related increases that had been observed for certain constituents, particularly for calcium -
(and alkalinity), chloride, and sodium.
.The relative equilibrium of major cations and anions in samples collected from the
Belews Lake forebay during the winter 2003 pumping operation was virtually identical to
the established ionic equilibrium as averaged over the period 1992-2002 (Figure 41). By
2002, effects .of the continuing drought, in particular increasing influence of evaporation
relative to inflow, had resulted in relative gain of sulfates, compensated by a relative loss
of bicarbonate anions. Winter'2003 analyses showed that inflows from the watershed,
and to a somewhat lesser extent from the pumping operation, had apparently led to
restoration of an ionic equilibrium more similar to what had existed prior to the drought.
Lake -wide nutrient concentrations during and following the Dan River pumping
operation remained comparable to previous levels, indicating that the oligothrophic
classification of Belews Lake (Weiss and' Kuenzler 1976) had been maintained. Water
quality impairment due to nutrient addition was not expected from the pumping
10

operations due to the relatively .low nutrient concentrations commonly observed in the
Dan River (Duke Power 2002).
Conclusions -
Analysis of water quality constituent spatial and temporal tends graphically suggests that
measurable water quality impacts from the Dan River pumping operation were: 1) limited
primarily to the immediate vicinity of the pump outlets in the lake;. 2) of transient .
duration (i.e., days as opposed to weeks); and 3) insignificant when compared to effects
of the 1.998-2002 drought or seasonal storm runoff -related events.
Literature Cited
American Public Health Association (APHA); American Water Works Association
(AWWA); Water Environment Federation. 1995. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater. 19t' Edition. APHA, Washington, DC.
Duke Power. 2002. Belews Creek Steam Station: 2001 Dan River Summary.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2003. National Climatic Data
Center, Data for Greensboro -Winston-Salem, NC. December 2002 = March
2003.
U. S. EPA.. 1983. Methods for the Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes.
Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab, Office of Research and
Development. Cincinnati, OH.'
Weiss, C.M.; Kuenzler, E.J. 1976. -The Trophic State of North. Carolina Lakes.
Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, School" of Public Health,
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Report No. 119.
11

Table 1. Analytical methods used to determine chemical and physical water quality
parameters for the winter 2002-2003 Belews Lake monitoring program.
Reporting
Parameter Method (EPA/APHA)* Preservation Limit
Alkalinity, Total Total inflection point titration 4 °C 0.01 meq/L
EPA 310.1.
Aluminum Atomic emission/ICP 0.5% HNO3 0.05 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Arsenic, Total ICP mass spectrometry 0.5% HNO3 2.0 µg/L
-Recoverable
EPA 200.8
Biochemical Oxygen
EPA 405.1
4 °C
2.0 mg/L
Demand
Cadmium, Total
ICP mass spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
0.5 µg/L
Recoverable
EPA 200.8
Calcium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.03 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Carbon, Total Organic
EPA 415.1
0.5% H2SO4
0.1 mg/L
Chloride
Colorimetric
4 °C
1.0 mg/L
EPA 325.2.
Chlorophyll a
4 °C
1.0 mg/L
Conductivity,'
Temperature -compensated
in-situ
0.1 µS/cmt
Specific
graphite electrode
Copper, Total
ICP mass spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 µg/L
Recoverable
EPA 200.8
Iron
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.01 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Lead, Total
ICP mass spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 pg/L
Recoverable
EPA 200.8
Magnesium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.03 mg/L
EPA 200:7
Manganese, Total
ICP mass. spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
1.0 µg/L
Recoverable .
EPA,200.8
Nitrogen, Ammonia
Colorimetric.
4 °C
0.02 mg/L
EPA 350.1.
Nitrogen, Nitrite+Nitrate Colorimetric
4 °C
0.02 mg/L
EPA 353.2
Nitrogen, Total
Colorimetric
4 °C
0.1 mg/L
Kjeldahl
EPA 351.2
+ References: USEPA' 1983 and APHA et al. 1995
t instrument sensitivity listed in lieu of laboratory reporting limit
12

Table 1. (Continued). Analytical methods used to determine chemical and physical
water quality parameters for the winter 2002-2003 Belews Lake monitoring
program.
Parameter
Method (EPA/APHA)
Preservation
Reporting
Limit
Oxygen, Dissolved
Temperature -compensated
in-situ
0.01 mg/Lt
polarographic cell
pH
Temperature -compensated
in-situ
0.01 SUt
glass electrode
Phosphorus.
Colorimetric
4 °C
0.005 mg/L
Orthophosphate
EPA 365.1
Phosphorus, Total
Colorimetric
4 °C
0.01 mg/L
EPA 365.1
Potassium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.25 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Selenium, Total
ICP mass spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 µg/l_
Recoverable
EPA 200.8
Silica
APHA 4500SW
4 °C
0.5 mg/L
Sodium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
1.5 mg/L
EPA 200.7 ,
Solids, Total
Gravimetric
4 °C
0.1 mg/L
Suspended
EPA 160.2
Sulfate
Ion chromatography
40C
0.1 mg/L
EPA 300.0
Temperature
NTC thermistor
in-situ
0.01 Oct
Turbidity
Turbidimetric
40C
0.05 NTU
EPA 180.1
Zinc, Total
ICP mass spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
1.0 µg/L
Recoverable
EPA 200.8
13

Figure 1. Belews Lake water quality sampling locations during winter 2002-2003
pump operation.
14

2500
2000
r_
0
1600
0 1000
0
0
200 ;U
—S.
0
12/1/02 1/1/03 2/1/03 314/03 414103
Figure 2. BCSS generation, Dan River pumping rates and water,quality sampling
activity during the winter 20.02-2003.
10,000
9,000 Belews Full Pond Volume = Approx. 179,000 acre -ft
8,000
7,000 -
6,000— .. ....... . ......
Q
5,000 ------
4,000-
3,000--
2,000
1,000
0
10 -Dec 17 -Dec 24 -Dec 31 -Dec 7 -Jan 14 -Jan 21 -Jan 28 -Jan 4 -Feb 11 -Feb 18 -Feb 25 -Feb 4 -Mar
Figure 3. Cumulative volume of Dan River water pumped to Belews Lake.
15

LU
18
16
14
12
V 10
8
6
4
2
0
12/12 12/19 12/26 1/2 1/9 1/16 1/23 1/30 2/6 2/13 2/20 2/27
Figure 4. Continuous monitoring thermal trends for the Belews Lake spillway area (0.3 to 1.5 m depth) and at the Dan River
pump inlet. Missing river data was due to sensor displacement caused by flood events and low flows, or due to icing of
the probe.

0
0
5
10
1s
E
r 20
O.
d
C' 25
30
35
Thermal Profiles, January 31, 2003
Degrees C
5 10 15 20
i
/
• 1
/
I
1
I
• Dan River at Pumps
-Pump Discharge Near Spillway
-Forebay
...... BCSS Intake,
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ BCSS Thermal Discharge
Thermal Profiles, February 20, 2003
Degrees C
0 5 10 15 20
0
5
10
15
E
t 20
d
25
30
35
40
0
0
5
10
15
E
L 20
a
v
25
30
35
40
t
:I
:i
:I
;i
:i
r
• Dan River at Pumps
._ _. ...... ......... . _. __ _ -Pump Discharge Near Splllway
- Forebay
BCSS Intake
-- - --- -- - - - -- - - --- BCSS Thermal Discharge
Thermal Profiles, March 31, 2003
Degrees C
5 10 15 20
-Pump Discharge Near Spillway
- Forebay is _
------ BCSS Intake ---.. --f%
- BCSS Thermal Dischar e
.j/
Dissolved Oxygen Profiles, January 31, 2003
mg/L
0 5 10 15
0
5
10
1$
E
= 20
a
at
2$
30
35
0
0
5
10
15
E
t 20
n
v
C' 25
30
35
40
1
• Dan Rivera'Pumps t
-Pump Discharge Near Spillway 1
-Forebay
••-•BCSS Intake /
- BCSS Thermal Disc
e
__ I
I
I
I
I
1
i
I
r
1
Dissolved Oxygen Profiles, February 20, 2003
mg/L
5 10 15
Dissolved Oxygen Profiles, March 31, 2003
mg/L
0 5 10 1;
-Pump Discharge Near Spillway I:
- Forebay
5 ----•BCSS Intake /
--- BCSS Thermal Discharge
}
I:
15
1;
E
r20.. _ ... .. .. ... ... I ._ - .. ... ....
a I
v I
X25__ ___ _________..__.1_ _._.________ _ _
30
35
40
Figure 5. Belews Lake temperature (left) and dissolved oxygen (right) profiles
during (January 2002 -February 2003) and after (March 2003) pumping
operations.

pH Profiles, January 31, 2003
SU
6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
0
:I
5 J
i
10
I:
15 I
1:
1:
E I:
Leo - --- - __ --I--- --- ---
1
d I
30
Dan River at Pumps
—
35 - - - -- - Pump Discharge Near Spillway
—Forebay
E
:E
0
pH Profiles, February 20, 2003
SU
l 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
i
r :
t
15
t0
I
SD _
Dan River at Pumps
—Pump Discharge Near SpiM+ay
— Forebay
---- BCSS Intake
10 - -
-- BCSS Thermal Discharge
pH Profiles, March 31, 2003
SU
6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
0
1
5
10 '
I
15
E �
� I
d 1
C' 25-
30-
35-
5 3035 - ffPump Discharge Near Spilhvay
Forebay
BCSS Intake
40 - — — — — — — — — - — - — — BCSS Thermal Dischar e
Specific Conductance Profiles, January 31, 2003
µS/cm
0 25 50 75 100 125
0
• Dan River at Pumps
5 —Pump Discharge Near Spilhvay _ _ — _ _ _ _ _:
— Forebay
---• BCSS Intake
10 --- BCSS Thermal Dischar e
15
E
o.
v
30
35
Specific Conductance Profiles, February 20, 2003
Wcm
0 25 50 75 100 125
0 I
m Dan River at Pumps 'r
—Pump Discharge Near SpilNray
5 —Forebay
...... BCSS Intake 1
10 --- BCSS Thermal Dischar e _ — — — — — — — I — — — —
15
E I
L 20 i
c I
tl I
X45
30
35
Specific Conductance Profiles, March 31, 2003
pS/cm
0 25 50 75 100 125
0
5
10
15
E
L 20
a
a
25
30
35
40
—Pump Discharge NearSpillray r
— ForebaY
------ BCSS Intake
— BCSS Thermal Discharge /
\
r
1
11
Figure 6. Belews Lake pH (left) and specific conductance (right) profiles during
(January 2002 -February 2003) and after (March 2003) pumping
operations.
18

0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0
5
10
E
15
20
25
0
5
10
t 15
O
20
25
30
Forebay
.0
5 10 15 20 25 0
0
0
0
5
10
15
20
J4
25
30
35
40
45
BCSS Intake Cove
.c
5 ID 15 20 25 0
I.
1192-20111,Min & M.-
-1.. 200
—Feb 20111
5
10
15
20
Forebay
mgfL
10 is
1992-2002 Min & Maz
_Jan 2003
—Feb 2003
MinlmaI2002profile—
to only 28 meters
deep..
BCSS Intake Cove
mg/L
5 10 15
BCSS Discharge Confluence
.0
5 10 15 20 25 0
0
5
10
15
O
20
25
BCSS Discharge Confluence
mg/L
5 10 15
Figure 7. Belews Lake thermal (left) and dissolved oxygen (right) profiles during
(January -February 2003) compared to 1992-2002 winter minima and
maxima.
19

BCSS Intake Cove
Percent Oz Saturation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120%
0 T _
5
20
25
Forebay
Percent Or Saturation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120%
BCSS Discharge Confluence
Percent Oi Saturation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120%
Figure 8. Belews Lake dissolved oxygen saturation profiles during (January -
February 2003) compared to 1992-2002 winter minima and maxima.
20
I
I
i
Forebay
Percent Or Saturation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120%
BCSS Discharge Confluence
Percent Oi Saturation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120%
Figure 8. Belews Lake dissolved oxygen saturation profiles during (January -
February 2003) compared to 1992-2002 winter minima and maxima.
20

Forebay
PH SU
6 7 8 9
0
5
10
15
E 20
s
25
30
35
40
45
BCSS Intake Cove
PH SU
6 7 8 9
0
5
10
tE
° 15
20
25
6
OF5
10
E
15
0
20
25
30
1992-2002 Min & Max
-Jan 2003
-Feb 2003
I
i
I �
f �
BCSS Discharge Confluence
PH SU
0
0
5
10
15
E 20
t
0 25
30
35
40
45
Forebay
Aslcm
25 50 75 100 125
BCSS Intake Cove
µ5/cm
0 25 50 75 100 125
0
-1992-2002 Min & Max
Jan 2003
-Feb 200310
I
.... ... ............. ..__�. :_.__I.. ......._...-_.. ..I ._._... _ ..__...._.. _.
I I
15-
20-
BCSS
520
BCSS Discharge Confluence
µS/cm
7 8 9 0 25 50 75 100 125
0
5
10
25
30
Figure 9. Belews Lake pH (left) and specific conductance (right) profiles during
(January -February 2003) compared to 1992-2002 winter minima and
maxima.
21
1992-2002 Min & Max
______
._ __
-Jan 2003
1
I
-Feb 2003
'
1
f
/
BCSS Intake Cove
PH SU
6 7 8 9
0
5
10
tE
° 15
20
25
6
OF5
10
E
15
0
20
25
30
1992-2002 Min & Max
-Jan 2003
-Feb 2003
I
i
I �
f �
BCSS Discharge Confluence
PH SU
0
0
5
10
15
E 20
t
0 25
30
35
40
45
Forebay
Aslcm
25 50 75 100 125
BCSS Intake Cove
µ5/cm
0 25 50 75 100 125
0
-1992-2002 Min & Max
Jan 2003
-Feb 200310
I
.... ... ............. ..__�. :_.__I.. ......._...-_.. ..I ._._... _ ..__...._.. _.
I I
15-
20-
BCSS
520
BCSS Discharge Confluence
µS/cm
7 8 9 0 25 50 75 100 125
0
5
10
25
30
Figure 9. Belews Lake pH (left) and specific conductance (right) profiles during
(January -February 2003) compared to 1992-2002 winter minima and
maxima.
21

0
1
2
d
C
d
co
5
6
BCSS Intake Cove - Belews Cr at CCW Canal
At Pump Outlet - Surface Forebay - Surface Surface Confluence - Top
Figure 10. Belews Lake Secchi depth prior to, during (January -February 2003) and following (March 2003) pumping.
:..:
...
ki
•::.
s
i
•};titititi•
::..
.....
::::::.
d
:::•
a
a
3
::•
}
It
{
Increasing Water Clarity
01997-2001 Mean
El Jan 03
Feb 03
❑ Mar 03
Figure 10. Belews Lake Secchi depth prior to, during (January -February 2003) and following (March 2003) pumping.

30
25
20
J
� 15
W
m
f-
10
5
0
December sampling
occurred priorto pumping
■ 1992-2002 Mean
B Dec 02
❑ Jan 03
El Feb 03
❑ Mar 03
Dan R At Pump Outlet - Forebay - Surface BCSS Intake Cove - Belews Cr at CCW
Surface Surface Canal Confluence -
Top
Figure 11. Belews Lake surface total suspended solids prior to (December 2002),
during (January -February 2003) and following (March 2003) pumping.
30
25
20
10
5
0
■ 1992-2002 Mean
B Dec 02
❑Jan 03
0 Feb 03
❑ Mar 03
December sampling
occurred prior to pumping
Dan R At Pump Outlet - Forebay - Bottom BCSS Intake Cove- Belews Cr at CCW
Bottom Bottom Canal Confluence -
Bottom
Figure 12. Belews Lake bottom total suspended solids prior to (December 2002),
during (January -February 2003) and following (March 2003) pumping.

60
50
40
30
s;
-
F
20
10
0
December sampling
El
■ 1992-2002 Mean
occurred prior to pumping Dec 02
El Jan 03
O Feb 03
❑ Mar 03
Dan R At Pump Outlet - Forebay - Surface BCSS Intake Cove - Belews Cr at CCW
Surface Surface Canal Confluence -
Top
Figure 13. Belews Lake surface turbidity prior to (December 2002), during (January -
February 2003) and following (March 2003) pumping.
60
50
40
Z
� 30
v
F-
20
10
0
December sampling occurred
prior to pumping
■ 1992-2002 Mean
19 Dec 02
❑Jan 03
-
E1 Feb 03
❑ Mar 03
Dan R At Pump Outlet - Forebay - Bottom BCSS Intake Cove- Belews Cr at CCW
Bottom Bottom Canal Confluence -
Bottom
Figure 14. Belews Lake bottom turbidity prior to (December 2002), during (January -
February 2003) and following (March 2003) pumping.
24

25
20
5
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 41.8 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 15. - Box -and -whisker plot of 1995-2002 winter season total suspended solids
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles' represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
5
4
3
J
E
2
1
0 i - -
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 16. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season total
suspended solids over the period 1995-2003.
25

0.100
0.075
J
Co 0.050
E
0.025
0.000
Figure 17
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
J
0.05
E
0:04
6.03
0.02
0.01
tv.Av 1)
416 TOP,..' 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter, season . total phosphorus for
Belews Lake '(416 —-forebay; 418 CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
0.00
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 18. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season total
phosphorus over the .period 1992-2003. "
26

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
J
o� 0.5
E
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 1.9. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season total nitrogen for
Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter- 2003 (January -February)
mean.
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
J
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0 ' i
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 20. Trend of Mews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) -winter season total
nitrogen over the period' 1992-2003.
27

5
4
3
J
E
2
1
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 21. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season total organic carbon for
Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
5
4
3
J
2
1
0 '
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 22. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season total
organic carbon over the period 1992-2003.
28

8-
7
6
5
4
E
3
2
1
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 23. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season. silica for. Belews Lake
(416 —forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW confluence area).
Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February) mean.
8-
7 ------
6
5 _-----
4- - . . .. ...... . .
E
3 . . .. . ..... . . ...... .
..... . ....
2
0
.1992• 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 24. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season silica
over the period 1992-2003.
I\
29

120
100
80
E
60
40
20
0 '
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 25. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season specific conductance
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
,confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
120
I
100 _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _._ ......
I
80
60
40
i
I
20
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 26. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
specific conductance over the period 1992-2003.
30

35
30
25
M
O
W 20
U
N
t6
J 15
10
5
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 27. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season total alkalinity for
Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
30
25
20
O
U
W
U
y 15
R
J
10
5
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 28. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season total
alkalinity over the period 1992-2003.
31

8
7
6
5
04
E
3
2
1
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 29. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season chloride concentration
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles -represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
'Ju
9 . ... . . ..... . ..... . . . . . . ....... ... .
8
6
0 5
E
4-
3- . . ........
0
1992 1993 1994 4995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 30. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
chloride concentration over the period 1992-2003.
32
�
�
A
. . . ........
o
a
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 29. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season chloride concentration
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles -represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
'Ju
9 . ... . . ..... . ..... . . . . . . ....... ... .
8
6
0 5
E
4-
3- . . ........
0
1992 1993 1994 4995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 30. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
chloride concentration over the period 1992-2003.
32

ski
20
15
J
tM
E
10
5
0 '
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 31. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season sulfate concentration
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
20
J
10
E
5
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 32. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
sulfate concentration over the period 1992-2003.
33

8
7
6
5
0 4
E
3
2
1
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 33. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season calcium concentration
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -February)
mean.
IU
9 . . . . . . ......... ... . - . . ....... . . .... . .... - ...... . . ......... . ..... . ... ........ . ..... ...... . . . .. . . ....... T-
8
6 - --- --- . ..... .......:. _ .. .__ ._- .as .... .
6 ------- I
3--
2
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 34. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
calcium concentration over the period 1992-2003.
34

4
3
1
0 ' I I
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 35. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season potassium
concentration for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area;
410 — CCW confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -
February) mean.
5
4
3
J
C)
E
2
1
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 36. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
potassium concentration over the period 1992-2003.
35

4
3
J
CD 2
E
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM,
Figure 37. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season magnesium
concentration for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area;
410 — CCW confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (January -
February) mean.
5
4
3
E
2
1
0 '�
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 38. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
magnesium concentration over the period 1992-2003.
Wi

8
7
6
4
3
2
0
416 TOP 416 BOTTOM 418 TOP 418 BOTTOM 410 TOP 410 BOTTOM
Figure 39. Box -and -whisker plot of 1992-2002 winter season sodium concentration
for Belews Lake (416 — forebay; 418 — CCW intake area; 410 — CCW
confluence area). Triangles represent winter 2003 (Jan — Feb) mean.
8 -
7 . . . .......... .
6 . .. ..... ....... .
.. .. ......
4--
3--
2--
0
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Figure 40. Trend of Belews Lake forebay (Location 416, surface) winter season
sodium concentration over the period 1992-2003.
37

W HCO3'
00
SO4-
SO4-
Na+
CI' +
K
1992-2002 Winter
Means
Winter 2002
CI' K+
Winter 2003
Figure 41. Belews Lake forebay relative proportions of cations and anions prior to and during (winter 2003) pumping.
Mg++

Flow Multipliers for the Temporary Dan River Pumping Project
Introduction
Withdrawals will be variable based upon river flow. Pumping will not lower the river flow
rate downstream of the pumping site to less than 100 cfs, which is the sum of the 7Q10
flow rate and near -field municipal water withdrawals. The maximum pumping rate will be
98 cfs. Therefore, if flow is less than 100 cfs at the pumping site, there will be no
pumping, and if flow is greater, than 198 cfs, maximum pumping will occur. If flow is
between 100 and 198 cfs, the pumping rate will vary. A method of determining flow at
the pumping site is necessary to determine the correct number of pumps to operate.
There are currently two USGS flow gages on the Dan River in the vicinity of the
proposed pumping project. USGS Gage 02068500 near Francisco is located upstream
from the pumping site, and USGS Gage 02071000 near Wentworth is located
downstream of the pumping site. Retired USGS Gage 02069000 was located slightly
upstream of the pumping site. The upstream gage near Francisco will be used to
determine river flow rate at the pumping site. Data from all three gages was analyzed to
determine the appropriate multiplier between the Francisco gage and the pumping site.
A summary of the data used in the assessment is shown in Table 1.
Flow Rate Proiection
Flow rates along a river can be projected by a function of the ratio of the drainage areas.
x
_ *(DrainageArea,
DrainageArea,
Qz — Q'
The exponent typically varies between %2 and 1, depending upon river characteristics
and flow rates. Working downstream, the lower the exponent, the lower the predicted
flow will be. The exponent may vary with baseflow rates and increase when flows
increase. Additionally, during storm events, the exponent usually increases because the
intensity and duration of the storm hydrograph increases as flow moves downstream and
drainage area increases. However, for consistency and convenience, a single method is
desired to project flows at Pine Hall based on real-time flows at Francisco. Therefore,
the projection was developed in a way that would yield conservative results. The
analysis focused on low flow periods, which have lower exponents. Because only one
exponent will be used, the projected storm hydrograph at Pine Hall will be the same
intensity and duration as Francisco, which will be less than the actual hydrograph
duration and intensity.
More than six months of recent data, in 15 -minute time increments, for the Francisco
and Wentworth gages was analyzed to determine the travel time between the two
gages. Analysis of peak flows indicates that the travel time between the Francisco gage
and the Wentworth gage is about 14 hours, and interpolation indicates the travel time
between Francisco and the pumping site is about 7 hours. The flows at Francisco were
lagged 14 hours for the exponent analysis so that the hydrograph peaks would match.
Duke Energy/TLB 1':

The duration of the ascension limbs were generally similar for hydrographs at both
locations, but the recession limbs were longer downstream, as expected.
The projection should be most accurate during periods when the available flow is less
than the level needed for, maximum pumping.' Therefore, the previously mentioned data
set was sorted to include only those flows. Including higher flows would raise the
median exponent for the data set because the exponent typically increases with flow.
The minimum flow rate required at Pine Hall for maximum pumping is 198 cfs. If the
projection exponent were 1, the corresponding flow at. Wentworth would be 413 cfs.
Therefore, the maximum flow at Wentworth for the analysis was 413 cfs. The data set
included 13,301 flow ratios, and the corresponding median exponent was, 0.51. This
exponent results in a flow multiplier of 2 between Francisco and' Pine Hall and 0.69
between -Pine Hall and Wentworth. Similar analysis was performed using the daily data
available for all three gages, and results were consistent. These multipliers will under
predict higher flows because the exponent typically increases with flow, and this
exponent was developed using only low flow data. However, this error will not affect
pumping rates because maximum pumping capacity will have already been realized.
Table 2 shows the protocol for pump operation when the available river flow is less than
the level required for maximum pumping. Pumping should not lower the downstream
river flow to less than 100 cfs, which is the sum of the 7Q10 level and the near -field
downstream municipal water withdrawals.
Duke Energy/TLB -'

Table 1
Francisco .. --_Pine Hall*--,—
Wentworth__,-, ,
Gage # 02069500 02069000
02071000
prainage,Area,(mi), 129 501
_ 1.035
The Pine Hall gage is retired. It was located slightly upstream of the pumping site.
The pumping site is interchangeably referred to as Pine Hall.
Flow rates can be projected at Pine Hall
x
using this equation and flow rates at theQ _ Q *
2 ^ '
DrainageArea2
Francisco gage. X typically varies
DrainageAreal
between 0.5 and 1. X was determined
--
using flow data from Francisco and Wentworth.
Minimum River Flow After Pumping (cfs)
100
Maximum Pumping Rate (cfs)
98
# Pumps
12
Pumping Rate Per Pump (cfs)
8
Minimum Flow at Pine Hall for Max. Pumping (cfs)
198
Flow Required at Francisco and Wentworth for Maximum Pumping_
X = 0.5 ;"k = 0.51
X'= 1.0
Francisco 101 99
51
Wentworth 283 287
413
* X typically increases with flow; therefore, only flows less than
413 cfs at Wentworth
were used in determining the correct exponent for this portion of the Dan River.
The median value of X for those low flows was 0.51.
Multigliers.to-Determine Flow at Pine Hall.
x = 0.5 x = 0.51
x = 1.0
1'ranci'sco 1.97 2.00
3.88
Wentworth 0.70 0.69
0.48
Duke En ergy/TLB

Table 2
Operation Based on Flow at Francisco (x = 0.51)*
Flow at Francisco
(cfs)
50.0
54.1
58.2
62.3
66.3
70.4
74.5
78.6
82.7
86.8
90.8
94.9
99.0
Flow at Pine Hall
(cfs)
100.0
108.2
116.3
124.5
132.7
140.8
149.0
157.2
165.3
173.5
181.7
189.8
198.0
Pump Flow
(cfs)
0.0
8.2
16.3
24.5
32.7
40.8
49.0
57.2
65.3
73.5
81.7
89.8
98.0
Number
of Pumps
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
* Use of x=0.51 at flows greater than those shown will produce conservative results.
Also, this method assumes the shape of the storm hydrograph at Pine Hall is the
sare�as at Francisco. This is conservative because the intensity and duration of
the hydrograph increases downstream.
Duke Energy/TLB 4;

Re,:. [F'wd%Re: [Fwd: Meetings with Duke Energy Carolinas on drought...
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Meetings with Duke Energy Carolinas on drought related projects]]
From: James Mckay <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 09:26:52 -0500
To: Susan Wilson <[e-mail]>
Right. Basically the people at DWR now do not know anything about the previous
review and approval, and were looking at it as a new situation. I called Ron
yesterday and re -emailed the comments to him, but have not heard back yet.
Jim McKay
Susan Wilson wrote:
Jim - fyi. I thought they may want to move this one along pretty fast. I'll
Chuck decide if he wants to include DWR ('cause that's what the sticking point
right now anyway, right?)
Belews is in the Roanoke - so that's yours Gil. (I think they keep calling me
because Agyeman worked on the Belews permit - as part of the assignments).
*Susan A. Wilson, P.E.*
Supervisor, Western NPDES Program
(919) 733 - 5083, ext. 510
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Subject:
Re: [Fwd: Meetings with Duke Energy Carolinas on drought related projects]
From:
Chuck Wakild <[e-mail]>
Date:
Fri, 04 Jan 2008 08:58:04 -0500
To:
Linda Jones <[e-mail]>
To:
Linda Jones <[e-mail]>
CC:
Coleen Sullins <[e-mail]>,
Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>
Linda,
Ive' suggested
afternoon will
let you know.
let
is
Paul Rawls <[e-mail]>,
Jimmie Overton
to George that Jan 28, 29, or 30 in the late morning or early
work for me. I expect to hear back from him later today and I'll
Coleen Sullins wrote:
ILinda - how about working on scheduling this for us. If
for Chuck and me create problems, both of us don't need
Coleen
scheduling conflicts
to be there. Thanks
Subject:
Meetings with Duke Energy Carolinas on drought related projects
From:
"Everett, George T" <[e-mail]>
Date:
Thu, 3 Jan 2008 10:52:01 -0500
To:
1 of 2 1/9/2008 1:40 PTV,

Wd Ob:i SOOZ/6/T CJU c
asS
zgquow ST-gq
aGgPT JTPq p pup znou un aOJ gaaw pTnoo am sagpp GTgTssod awos aw GATS norl UPD
•squpdToTgzpd qupgzodwT aq ggBTw (mous{ I awos zoJ uoSTTM
upsng) pazp aoTAzas zno saTpuprl gpuq uoszad SHQdN aTgq pup dnozS TpoTSoToTq auq
wozg auoawos goodxa pTnom I •sagTs TpzaAas qp spuod abpzogs zagpm wpazgs JJo 90
uoTgpazo auq aq pTnom SuTgpnTPAG Gap am supTd zaugo •aXpq smaTag oq aGATU UPC
a-qq wozg SuTdwnd TpuoTqTppp pup szamoq SuTT000 aOJ squawAoTdap azow SuTgpnTpna
Gap aM -SGXPT zno uo SGxpquT oq pGgPTaz aq TTTm sgoaCozd owoS •elpm quaToTJ3a
gsow aqq UT pzpmzoJ GAow upo supTd asogg azns axpw upo am os Aapnupr agpT
uT szappaT liar{ moll jo awos pup noel ugTM gGaw oq aggoTaPqD wozg sNI09 Tpzanas
Surzq oq GXTT PTnom GM gnogp OMQ ugTm XTpq oq ONTT PTnom am gPgq qubnozp
au -4 oq pGgPTaz sgoaCozd TPaGAas spu spuTTozpo ASzaug GNnQ - xonuD pup uaaToo
<gau•TTpwou@pTTNPm•xonuo> '<gau•TTpwoupsuTTTns•uaaToo>
:o1
<gau•TTpwou@pTTXpm•NonuD> '<gau•TTpwou@suTTTns•uaaToo>
•••iu2?no.ip uo smiioze� �i�zaug axnQ jinn s�uuaay� :pm3] :ag :pnn3] :ag

[Fwd: Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan fr...
Subject: [Fwd: Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake]
From: James Mckay <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:11:47 -0500
To: Fred Tarver <[e-mail]>
CC: Gil Vinzani <[e-mail]>
Fred:
Attached is information 2 recently received from Duke Power regarding the proposal to pump from the Dan River to
Belews Lake.
Please let me know if there are any unanswered questions. This information is from the last time that Duke applied
for, and DWQ approved of this pumping. After receiving approval, rains came and pumping was not required.
Jim McKay
Subject: RE: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake
From: "Lewis, Ronald E" <relewis I @duke-energy.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:37:17 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: "Susan.a.Wilson" <[e-mail]>
Jim,
In response to our phone call yesterday, I've attached a copy of the 2003 report that was previously submitted
following the 2003 pumping event. I've also attached the protocol analysis showing that the flow recorded at the
Francisco USGS gage the previous 7 seven hours could be used to determine when flow rates met the criteria for
starting and stopping the pumping system. The same protocol will be used in 2008. The target date for Installation
and start-up of the temporary pumping system is January 15, 2008, pending NCDENR approval and river flow at
the Francisco USGS gage. If we need to meet next week to discuss, please advise.
Thanks,
Ron
Duke Energy
Mail Code: EC13K
526 S. Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Office 980-373-5710
Mobile [phone]
From: Susan Wilson [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:20 PM
To: Lewis, Ronald E
Subject: Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake
Hi Ron - hope you had a good one as well. I was up in Brevard - and that received a good bit of rain
(along with a little snow!).
I'll forward your note to Jim McKay. He was going to have Div. of Water Resources take a look at it
(and likely due to the holidays it has gotten slowed down). I'll check in with him to make sure things
keep moving even so (although Gil Vinzani is his supervisor - fyi).
Susan
Lewis, Ronald E wrote:
Susan,
1 of 3 1/9/2008 1:41 PN

[Fwd: Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan fr...
Hope you had great holidays. I know I was thankful for the rain we received. However, the forecast still
calls for a drier than normal winter and we will still need to pump water from the Dan River to Belews
Lake when adequate river flow is available this winter. What is the status of our request to reactivate the
2003 winter withdrawal plan? You can reach me at my mobile [phone], if we need to discuss.
Happy New Year.
Mel
From: Sergei Chernikov[mailto:sergei.chernikov(@,,ncmail.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 11:18 AM
To: Lewis, Ronald E
Subject: Re: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake
Ron,
I will check with Susan and find out who received this assignment and get back with you.
Sergei
Lewis, Ronald E wrote:
Any update on the status of this request? The management of Belews Creek will begin to communicate
plans with downstream stakeholders today.
Also, since this is the second occurrence of hot dry weather within the last five years, our internal drought
team is discussing options needed at other stations to address generation going forward.
From: Lewis, Ronald E
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 1:52 PM
To: Sergei Chernikov
Subject: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake
Sergei,
As we discussed about a month ago, we have continued to track the impact of the drought and the
extended forecast for next year with respect to the lake level of Belews Lake in the 2008 summer. Based
on our lake level data and the " 2007-2008 Winter Drought Outlook November 2007 Assessment from
NOAA's National Weather Service Office in Raleigh and the North Carolina State Climate Office issued
November 7, 2007" received today, we will be requesting to reactivate the 2003 pumping plan. I have
attached a copy of the previous NCDENR approval letter and the proposed 2003 pumping plan that was
2 of 3 1/9/2008 1:41 PM

[Fwd:, Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan fr...
approved. The same intake design that addressed the 0.5 ft/sec through screen velocity 316(b) issue and
withdrawal plan that addressed downstream user concerns will remain the same. After approval, all we
will need is the rain. If all goes like before, it started raining when we began to install the system and
only operated the system in January of 2003.
Please let me know ASAP what my next step for approval of the request should be.
Thanks,
Ron
Sergei Chernikov , Ph.D.
Environmental Engineer
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1617
phone: [phone] ext. 594
fax: [phone]
Susan A. Wilson, P.E.
Supervisor, Western NPDES Program
(919) 733 - 5083, ext. 510
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Content -Type: message/rfc822
Re: FW: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews Lake.eml
Content-Encoding:7bit j
Content -Description: Belews Winter Pumping Water Quality Summary.pdf
Belews Winter Pumping Water Quality Summary.pdf� Content -Type: application/octet-stream
Content -Encoding: base64
- ._— .....-.-..... _._- _ ...-_....— :_..._ -._.— —__
------- - — _ .......
Content -Description. Flow Protocol Calc.pdf
:Flow Protocol Calc.pdf Content -Type: application/octet-stream j
Content -Encoding: base64
3 of 3 1/9/2008 1:41 P� �T

[Fwd,: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River, part II]
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River, part II]
From: James Mckay <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:09:35 -0500
To: [e-mail]
I:zUre 9
I have drafted the document to allow,pumping from the Dan River to Belews Lake based
on the old one. I have received the attached questions and comments from Division of
Water Resources folks. Can you help me reply to them? If you like, you can reply
directly with a cc. to me.
Thanks for your help.
Jim McKay
Environmental Engineer
NCDWQ
Eastern NPDES Program
[phone], ext. 595
Subject: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River, part II
From: Fred Tarver <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:33:35 -0500
To: James Mckay <[e-mail]>
CC: Linwood Peele <[e-mail]>, Tom Fransen <[e-mail]>, John
Sutherland <[e-mail]>
Jim,
My comments elicited this additional comment from my co-worker.
Fred
-------- Original Message--------
Subject:Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River
Date:Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:35:13 -0500
From:Jim Mead <jim.mead a,ncmail.net>
To : fred.tarver(d,)ncmail.net
References:<[e-mail]> <475ED616.2050106pncmail.net>
<47600ABB .3 00090 8 p,,ncmail.net>
Fred,
As we discussed, I think that at a minimum we need to review monthly
flow duration curves with existing and with -project conditions overlaid
to get a better feel for the extent of potential impact of this
proposal. Is it an occasional thing or fairly frequent? This will
influence what we think is an acceptable instream flow pumping threshold.
I agree with the other points you raise.
Jim
1 of 3 12/17/2007 2:11 PM

[Fwd: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River, part II]
Fred Tarver wrote:
> Jim,
> 1). Questions that immediately come to mind are based on the following
> statement:
> "River flow at the pumping location will be estimated prior to each
> daily pumping event."
> How will flows be estimated?
> Does -Duke have an established and rated gaging device, based on USGS
> specifications?
> [See link: <http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/wsp2l75/html/WSP2175 voll pdf.html>]
'> Is the gage located downstream or upstream of the point of withdrawal?
> Will flows be read during the day to assure that flow does not drop
> below the threshold?
> It would be informative to have the stage -discharge relationship on
> which these river -flow estimates are based. Also, it would be
> beneficial to maintain records of the gage reading, the corresponding
> flow, the date and time read, the volume pumped, the period of
> pumping, and the surface elevation of Belews.
> 2). Another question concerns the 7Q10 estimate.
> Do you know the source of the 80 cfs 7Q10 estimate?
> DWR did wetted perimeter studies in the 1980's on the Dan River and
> determined a minimum flow requirement of 110 cfs just downstream of SR
> 1138 (Lindsey Bridge Rd.) near Madison. This site has a drainage area
> of 600 sq. mi. and 110 cfs was reported to be the 7Q10 value at this
> site [NC Division of Water Resources. Dan River Basin Study, North
> Carolina: Phase I. November, 1986. 116p.]. Our report lists a 7Q10
> value at Madison --with a drainage area of 645 sq. mi. --of *80 million
> gallons per day (mgd)*, which equals 123 cfs. Using a USGS-estimated
> drainage area of 581 sq. mi. for the Dan River below Belews Creek at
> Pine Hall and rationing the 7Q10 values to this site gives a rough
> 7Q10 estimate between 106 to 110 cfs. I think this 80 cfs 7Q10
> estimate requires verification.
> 3). One last question concerns water usage in the reach.
> Since 2002 has the 20 cfs water usage in the reach been inventoried? A
> 2002 email from Tracy Beer to Tom Fransen stated the 100 cfs flow -by
> "allows a cushion of 20 cfs for immediate downstream withdrawals. The
> cushion value may change as we get a better handle on the amounts of
> immediate downstream withdrawals. Do you have information on the near
> field downstream withdrawal rates?" I don't know if this 20 cfs value
> was verified, but it seems that it was based more on speculation.
> 4). Editorial Note: Page 2: "unrersolved"
> Hope this helps.
> Fred Tarver
> James Mckay wrote:
>> Attached are the two documents. The first is the original
>> authorization to pump. Duke installed the equipment in 2002, then it
>> rained so much they did not operate. The second authorization draft
>> is slightly modified to reflect a new application. Please review and
>> email any comments or questions back to me.
>> Thanks for your help.
2 of 3 12/17/2007 2:11 PM

[Fwd.: Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River, part II]
>> Jim McKay
>> Environmental Engineer
>> NCDWQ
>> Eastern NPDES Program
>> [phone], ext. 595
>> Linwood Peele wrote:
>>> Hello Jim,
>>> As per our telephone conversation, please send a copy of the draft
>>> memo and also send the 2002 memo regarding Duke Power temporarily
>>> pumping from the Dan River. Fred Tarver is the contact, but send it
>>> to Tom Fransen and me.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Linwood Peele
>>> Water Supply Planning Section
>.>> NCDWR
Fred R. Tarver III <fred.tarver a,ncmail.net>
Environmental Specialist I
Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources -- Instream flow Unit
ii Content -Type: message/r&822'
(Re: Duke Power - Pumping from Dan River, part II.eml
!; Content -Encoding: 7bit
3 of 3 12/17/2007 2:11 PM

[Fwd: [F'd: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from... .
..ter
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal planfrom Dan River to Belews
Lake]]
From: Sergei Chernikov <[e-mail]> 0,475 5;& J
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:00:37 -0500
To: Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>teI Lr
Susan,
Can you tell me who received this assignment? --
51c�N uiu�7 wl
Thank you! k5 ,�ouy
.SergeiIJ ®'0 �N
X
CO 0 �
Original Messa -------- Pc i3I M�
e,q4 M tom'
-------- g g. f
Subject: [Fwd: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan River to Belews
Lake]
Date:Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:07:10 -0400
From:Sergei Chernikov <sergei.chernikovnancmail.net>
Organization:NC DENR DWQ
To:Susan A Wilson <Susan.A.Wilsoncrncmail.net>
Susan,
Please assign to someone as a_ misc. ;assignment. We already done it in the past, attached is an
example of our approval letter. I
Thank you!
Sergei ,
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from Dan -River to Belews Lake
Date:Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:51:57 -0500
From:"Lewis, Ronald E" <relewis lna,duke-energy.'com>
To:"Sergei Chernikov" <sergei.chernikovAncmail.net>
Sergei,
As we discussed about a month ago, we have continued to track the impact of the drought and the extended
forecast for next year with respect to the lake level of Belews Lake in the 2008summer. Based on our lake level
data and the " 2007-2008 Winter Drought Outlook November 2007 Assessment from NOAA's National Weather
Service Office in Raleigh and the North Carolina State Climate Office issued November 7, 2007" received today,
we will be requesting to reactivate the 2003 pumping plan. I have attached a copy of the previous NCDENR
approval letter and the proposed 2003 pumping plan that was approved. The same intake design that addressed
the 0.5 ft/sec through screen velocity 316(b) issue'and withdrawal plan that -addressed downstream user concerns
will remain the same. After approval, all we will need is the rain. If all goes like before, it started raining when we
began to install the system and only operated. the system in January of 2003.
Please let me know ASAP what my next step for approval of the request should be.
Thanks,
Ron
1 of 2 11/20/2007 9:40 AN

[Fwd: [Fwd: Reactivation of 2003 winter water withdrawal plan from...
Sergei Chernikov; Ph.D.
Environmental Engineer
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-16.17
phone: [phone] ext. 594
fax: [phone]
Sergei Chernikov, Ph.D.
Environmental Engineer
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
phone: [phone] ext. 594
fax: [phone]
j Content -Type: application/octet-stream
NCDENR Pumping Plan Approval.pdf (Content -Encoding• base64
i
Content -Type: application/octet-stream
Proposed Pumping Rates.pdf
Content -Encoding: base64
2 of 2 11/20/2007 9:40 AM

Michael F. Easley, Govemor
'A
ry
K wimiam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of EnViMnMerit and Natural Resources
AlEin W. Yjlmak, P.G., Director
Division of Water Quality
7
December 13, 2002
Ronald E. Lewis
Dit Power COMPanY
F6ssfl/Hydr? Generation Dept,
P.O. Box 1006
Charlotte, North Carolina 26201-1006
Subject,
'Intake Structure
Duke Power/Belews
Stokes County
Dear W_ Lewis.
This letter authorizes the operation of a temporary cooling- water W,
e,dsting steam electric plant, The intake structure will l? 1p .1Mdt&t1
Belews Lake, which provides condenser CoOhng water for ��01'6,,'��Obftbt'at
Belews Lake fins in the spring to 7 k
24.5 feet incl, then loses 2-4 et-JOV'r-e'
Due to exceptional drought conditions, projections for 2003 A
idicate
below the I-ainimuni spring lake level necessary for continued JA%It0�pl
the summer period (i.e., 720 feet ms1), The plan proposes to puMp'
1 4. of 724 5 feet xmil, by end of March 2003.
Steam Station -,
at the
W P
/ZV feet me C& Up QAAA
This
puxnping plan has been proposed to ensure uninterruptedj#bi
powerdixot
load facility, while mitigatingmitigating effects on the aquatic conimunity and dov.,A-i - �Ifi-eani� U This
plan has Lwen reviewed by staff of the NC Division of Water Quality W, of
- - �.'. ; I
Water Resources (DWR), NC Wildlife 'Resources commission Land
4
ResGurces pLM', and the US Army Corp of Engineers. It.t, also my that Duke
power has discussed the proposed temporary pumping -plan with downstream municipalities
witi-i,water intakes. A
'11
The temporary pumping plan Is authorized to be implemented with the following operational -
and design measures to Minim%e biological impacts and downstream water.. Supply Concerns,
-b &,UlMarch 200:3, Which:
it t'80 -W- . b� I � .
2002- t
urn;
f; - low d avoids
period -1 41 D''an Pjvcr, an
f-:n'_a ii. � �. ft., Lake are still below
''0 A
tb Pffl-
t VM e-'
rization to cOnt
IS
beyond
lower _.fixe f 16N nn
Dan ) V. r beltrw
howplusM' 4W 'd6*n#tfe�'" tM XM*MtOp
A
d
Uthe pumping location will be �tittld�ed prior io each daily pumping euent g:
■ 'i'he Dan River intake pumps will be pg5�tlaneci,above the river bt)ttc�.rn ancj `bav
approach veltsety less` than or equal to E3.5 feet/9econc across; sCa�eeiaxn' mer
it
f�n I
-1 e , ssth'Ao: I c to M!
_'peasings ­ o 6f' "tviuway' A"APP4
y-16,tAiion will be near wi
it, p - P*
Belews lake Dam and the Dan River. This is a scoured bott6ritht does not
provide
area a
pr-ovide suital)le aquatic habitat.
The facility Will perform routine Montlily lake monitoring d'uTing the period of
pumping to assess hrrinological conditions in BeleW-8 Lake.
N. C, Division of Watar Quality 1617 mail srvice Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone]
Qustomeer.Sorvice 1 Boo 623-7748
80: TT ZO, 9T 32G 6TZ0_M__6T6:XPJ 0MG-NNION

Page 2 of 2
NCO024406 .
December 13, 2002 ;4
a
The Mg recognizes an additional fishery issue associated with this temporaty pumping is still
under evaluation, that being the potential for transmittal of a Rsh virus (I.e.. Spring Virernia of
Carp Virus) from the Dan River to Bele'ws Lake. Duke Energy has reported that evidence to
date indicates pumping during winter conditions should miniirilze potexitial negative impacts
from this fish virus In Belews Lake. Duke Energy wilt continue to confer --�wlth the WRC on this
is,Gue_
Please be aware that DWQ will continue to evaluate requirements for : coohng water Intake
structurc9 at this facility on a case-by-case basis, until frrial rules for existing industrial
facilities are promulgated under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Final federal actions
are ealeduied for F�bxubizy 16; 20.04, for Phase U iaGihtres and junot i , 2006 for Phase III
faelil es° k'nna
y,'this i�uthoFizafiron does not affect theale al ecltziitenients to obtain'ottker
pmay be, required by the Division of Water Qualify. the Division of Lan, d
l esource t tire, .boastall Area ,Man44ftgnt Act, or airy otex leder az local governorntal
permit.
If you.have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Tom B rdek at 919-733-50$3,
CYief, Watefguality Section
X
3�
Fred HarrLq, WRC
Bryn Tracy, Mg
Winston-Salem Regional Office, Water Quality
NPD3ES Fite
Central File
9-0/20'd 60: TT Z0, 9T 39Q 6TZO-22Z-616: XEd OMQ-zINMDN

Proposed Pumping Rates
Withdrawals will be variable based upon available river flow, and a flow measuring
device will be installed at the intake location. The 7610 flow rate at this location is 80
cfs. The near field downstream water withdrawals total X cfs (for now, assume x=20
cfs). Pumping will not lower the in -stream flow rates to less than the sum of those two
values, 80 + X cfs. Thus, the in -stream flow rate should be sufficient for NPDES
discharges and water withdrawals. The minimum pumping rate will be 10-20 cfs, and
the maximum pumping rate will be 100 cfs. The following is an outline of proposed
pumping rates.
Table 1 — Proposed Pumping Rates
River Flow
(cfs)
Pumping Rate
(cfs)
> 200
100
190
90
180
_ _
80
170
70
_
160
60
150
50
140
40__�
_
130
�30
120
20
110
10
100
0
Proposed Pumping Schedule
Pumping is scheduled to begin in December 2002, and withdrawals will vary based on
available river flow as outlined in Table 1. At the maximum proposed pumping rate, 61
days of continuous pumping would be required to raise the lake level from 716 to 720 ft-
msl from December through mid-February. If the lake level drops to 715 ft-msl, then 101
days of continuous pumping would be required to raise the lake level from 715 to 720 ft-
msl from December through mid-March and 202 days would be necessary to raise the
lake level to full pond (724.5 ft-msl) from December through June. However, pumping is
unlikely to extend into late spring due to flow and aquatic constraints.