North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality And Environmental Management Commission Division of Water Resources

Transcription

1 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality And Environmental Management Commission Division of Water Resources Annual report to the General Assembly Environmental Review Commission Basinwide Water Quality Management Planning July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016

2 This report is submitted to meet the requirements of G.S B(d), which requires annual reporting on the development of basinwide water quality management plans B. Basinwide water quality management plans (d) The Commission and the Department shall each report on or before 1 October of each year on an annual basis to the Environmental Review Commission on the progress in developing and implementing basinwide water quality management plans and on increasing public involvement and public education in connection with basinwide water quality management planning. The report to the Environmental Review Commission by the Department shall include a written statement as to all concentrations of heavy metals and other pollutants in the surface waters of the State that are identified in the course of preparing or revising the basinwide water quality management plans. As directed by Session Law , staff are developing data management schemes and planning templates that support the creation of integrated river basin plans which address water quality and quantity issues. DWR is expanding the capacity to present integrated basin plans electronically, increasing the availability to the public, and enhancing the public s ability to explore data on which basin plans are based. River basin water resources plans provide detailed assessments of water quality conditions for watersheds within each river basin. Where possible, sources of pollutants are identified and recommendations are made on how to improve water quality within that watershed. This information supports a variety of state and local programs aimed at protecting and improving water quality in North Carolina s streams, rivers, and water bodies. Water quality issues documented in river basin water resource plans provide support for local governments, natural resource groups, researchers, soil and water agencies, and others when applying for grant or loan funding to address issues. For implementation, the basinwide planning program relies heavily on other branches and sections within DWR, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and other state agencies to implement water quality improvement practices. This can be through regulatory directives and/or voluntary measures. If a management strategy is in place, the plans provide detailed updates on the implementation of that strategy including successes, additional needs or changes that may require rule making or legislative action. Basinwide water quality management plans are available at: The division s basin planning programs also take advantage of stakeholder input, which enhances public participation by maintaining electronic communications. Stakeholders provide information essential to protecting and enhancing watershed water quality and issues associated with reliability of water supplies. Partnering stakeholders typically include watershed associations, land trusts, water quality monitoring coalitions, soil and water conservation districts, public water systems, and other federal, state, and local agencies. DWR staff members regularly assist municipal water systems with developing and updating their local water supply plans. Basin Plan Development Currently, the Cape Fear, Chowan, Pasquotank, White Oak and Watauga River Basin Water Resource Plans are under development. Along with in-depth water quality assessments and recommendations for improving water quality, these integrated water resource plans will include detailed evaluations of surface water availability as well as future demands and groundwater use where possible, Table 1 lists the 17 River 2 P a g e

3 Basins within NC and the schedule in which DWR monitoring, planning and implementation activities are slated to occur. Table 1: Basin Plan Schedule River Basin Last EMC Approved Plan Next Plan Update NPDES Permits Renewal Year Biological Basinwide Monitoring Quantity Model Quality Model/ Strategy Web Links to Executive Summary Chowan n/a NSW CHO Pasquotank n/a NCDP PAS Watauga OASIS WAT White Oak n/a New R.- NSW WOK Broad OASIS BRD Neuse / 2019* OASIS NSW NEU Cape Fear OASIS Haw R.- NSW; Mid CF - NCDP Yadkin NCDP YAD Lumber LBR Catawba CHEOPS CAT French Broad OASIS FBR New River OASIS NEW Hiwassee TVA HIW Little Tennessee TVA LTN Roanoke OASIS 216 Study ROA Savannah n/a SAV Tar-Pamlico OASIS NSW TAR NSW = Nutrient Sensitive Waters, NCDP = Nutrient Criteria Development Plan, * NSW Strategy and regulatory update prior to NPDES permits renewal; Full plan completion n/a currently hydrologic models are not being developed for coastal areas. CPF Broad River Basin The last Broad River Basinwide Water Quality Plan was written and approved by the EMC in It is currently in the process of being updated and is planned to be presented to the EMC in Main water quality stressors identified in the 2008 plan were habitat degradation, impervious surfaces, sedimentation and erosion, as well as high fecal coliform bacteria levels and low ph. Recommendations on the minimum releases from the Lake Lure dam were also discussed. Catawba River Basin The last Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan was written and approved by the EMC in It will be updated and presented to the EMC in Main water quality stressors identified in the 2010 plan were habitat degradation, high volume and velocity of stormwater runoff, sediment and erosion, elevated nutrients, and a basinwide downward ph shift. There is an active Bi-State Commission in the Catawba basin that focuses on water quantity issues while taking quality issues into consideration. The Catawba- Wateree Water Management Group, which formed during the development of the water quantity model 3 P a g e

4 efforts, and other groups are actively working on identifying and implementing restoration projects throughout the basin. The Duke Energy FERC License was approved by FERC in the summer of 2016 for a 40-year period. South Carolina is in the early process of developing a nutrient TMDL and DWR staff have been involved with the stakeholder meetings. Cape Fear River Basin The last Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan was written and approved by the EMC in The Cape Fear River Basin Water Resource Plan is currently under development and is proposed to come before the EMC for approval in Over the last several years a lot of efforts have occurred that will be included in the final plan write up. These include: - A legislative special study required as part of SL , requires the department to assist the ERC with a study and report to the 2017 General Assembly on the aggregate uses of groundwater and surface waters in or affecting the Cape Fear River Basin by all users. Basin Planning Branch staff are working closely with other division staff members to fulfill the requirements of this session law. - Basin planning staff is working closely with the other division staff members and the Science Advisory Council on the development of instream nutrient criteria (as part of the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan (NCDP) process) for the middle portion of the Cape Fear River basin (which encompasses the area from Randleman Reservoir dam and Jordan Lake dam down to Lock and Dam #1 near Wilmington, NC.). This process involves extensive data analysis, additional ambient monitoring and model development in this segment of the basin. Some of the analysis and a detail description of the process will be included in the 2018 plan. - Basin Planning Branch and the Modeling and Assessment Branch are working together to evaluate the long term (through 2060) Cape Fear River water supply needs of the public water systems that depend on surface water from the Deep River, Haw River and Cape Fear River subbasins. This information is critical for the water quantity assessment that is now part of the integrated Water Resource Plan. A Cape Fear-Neuse River basin hydrologic model and analysis is scheduled to be completed in early 2017 and will be included as part of the final Integrated Cape Fear River Basin Water Resource Plan. - Round four of the Jordan Lake surface water allocation process is underway. The proposed draft allocations of Jordan Lake water supply were approved by the WAC in January 2016 to go out for public comment. An update in response to public comment and information is currently underway. A request to approve the Jordan Lake allocations is expected to go to the EMC for approval in early Pender County has requested an IBT certificate to transfer 15 mgd from the Cape Fear River to the South River, Northeast Cape Fear and New River IBT basins. This IBT request was initiated in A proposed swamp (Sw) reclassification of a section of the Cape Fear River in Brunswick and New Hannover Counties from Class SC to SC, Sw with a water quality management plan was completed in This reclassification will be addressed by the 2017 General Assembly since it received more than 10 letters of objection. - Division staff has worked closely with NC State University Professor Dr. Detlef Knappe to locate elevated levels of 1,4-dioxane throughout in the basin. The basin plan will include information on this new potential emergent contaminate. - A Cape Fear River Partnership was formed in 2011 with a vision of a healthy Cape Fear River for fish and people. DWR staff participated along with many other State and Federal resource agencies and stakeholders to develop the Cape Fear River Basin Action Plan for Migratory Fish, in P a g e

5 Staff members continue to participate in the water quality/water quantity, habitat and socioeconomic subcommittees which are working towards implementation of this action plan. - DWR staff is conducting a 2016 water quality special study on the Rocky River, in the Deep River subbasin, to help identify the extent of a dissolved oxygen impairment. This study will be presented to the Rocky River Management Team later this year. - Jordan Lake Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) management strategy implementation has been delayed due to legislative mandates. Session Law Section indefinitely prohibits local implementation of new development and existing development stormwater rules. It also prevents initiation of re-adoption steps for the Jordan nutrient rules prior to October It further funds the development of a NC Policy Collaboratory at UNC. The Collaboratory will evaluate the effectiveness of the Jordan and Falls nutrient strategies as well as the costs and benefits of nutrient strategies in other states. The final results of its study and recommendations for further actions regarding the Jordan strategy, including any statutory or regulatory changes necessary to implement the recommendations, are due no later than December 31, 2018 (interim updates no later than Dec. 31, 2016 and 2017). - In recent years, portions of the Cape Fear River basin have begun to experience algal blooms, some of which are potentially toxic and have resulted in human contact advisories. Research is occurring in order to determine the causes and potential solutions. - The Cape Fear River Water Resource Plan is behind schedule for reasons many of which are listed above. This plan was underway when the Division of Water Quality and Division of Water Resources merged in August 2013, and plan development slowed while development of an integrated water quality/water quantity methodology was developed. A need for a centralized database management system for the division was identified to improve the data quality, accessibility and automated data analysis capabilities to improve the accuracy and speed in developing the new integrated water resource plans. Current staffing resources have not allowed completion of this task within the timeline, and efforts will extend beyond the deadlines for other Basinwide Water Resource Plans. The Cape Fear River Basin has over 150 ambient monitoring stations from 4 different monitoring programs. The data processing has proven to be challenging and staff is learning how to use SAS software to assist in this process for the Cape Fear plan and across the entire state. The goal is to complete the comprehensive water quality and water quantity analysis for the Cape Fear River Basin in 2018, which will be done with the aid of several basin planning staff. Chowan River Basin The last approved plan approval by the EMC was The Chowan River basin plan will be brought to the EMC for their final approval in NPDES Permits will start being issued in November The Albemarle Sound is an area of concentration in the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan process. Neuse River The last Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan was approved by the EMC in The Neuse River Basinwide Water Resource Plan is proposed to be completed in The goal is to have an update on critical portions of the plan prior to the NPDES permit renewal process scheduled for some time in This would include an assessment of the Neuse River Basin NSW strategy and trend analysis, Falls Lake Management implementation progress and any concerns with known water quality and quantity issues in the basin. A Cape Fear-Neuse River basin hydrologic model and analysis is scheduled to be completed in early 2017 and will be included as part of the final Integrated Neuse River Basin Water Resource Plan. DWR resources and implementation activities in the Neuse basin have focused primarily on the implementation of the Falls Water Supply Nutrient Strategy (15A NCAC 02B.0275 to.0282 and 15A 5 P a g e

6 NCAC 02B.0235 and.0315) which became effective January 15, Neuse River estuarine NSW implementation efforts are ongoing and have been reported to the Water Quality Committee (WQC) and EMC as requested and through the annual agricultural report to the EMC. Basin Planning Branch staff will work with the Modeling and Assessment Branch to update estuarine trends over the next year for incorporation into the proposed 2018 update. Falls Lake nutrient management and rule review were affected by the SL , Section This legislation prevents initiation of re-adoption steps for the Falls Lake nutrient rules prior to October It also funds the development of a NC Policy Collaboratory at UNC. The Collaboratory will evaluate the effectiveness of the Jordan and Falls nutrient strategies as well as the costs and benefits of nutrient strategies in other states. The final results of the study and recommendations for further actions regarding the Falls Lake strategy, including any statutory or regulatory changes necessary to implement the recommendations, are due no later than December 31, 2021 (interim updates no later than Dec. 31, 2019 and 2020, which is after the Neuse River Basin Water Resources Plan is due). Pasquotank River Basin The last plan approval by the EMC was in The Pasquotank River Basin plan will be brought to the EMC for their final approval in NPDES Permits will start being issued in December The Albemarle Sound is an area of concentration in the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan process. Roanoke River Basin The last plan approval by the EMC was in After the Dan River coal ash spill, monthly sampling of the Dan River continues and analytical results from samples collected downstream of the spill area are similar to sample results collected upstream. There are elevated concentrations of aluminum and iron detected in surface water near the spill site, which may be attributed to background conditions. Coal ash excavation from the onsite pits started in November Roanoke River Basin Bi-State Commission meeting is scheduled to be held in November On June 1, 2016, US Army Corps of Engineers, signed into regulation a new Water Control Plan for John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir, as developed under a 216 Study. Under the new plan, the Corps will release up to the previous week s inflows to the reservoir, up to the maximum capacity of the dam s generators, to bring Kerr Lake back to the guide curve as quickly as possible. Kerr Lake Regional Water System Interbasin Transfer (IBT) Certificate was granted by the Environmental Management Commission in November The next basin plan is not scheduled to come to the EMC until Tar-Pamlico River Basin Water Resources Plan Water quality evaluations and recommendations in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin Water Resources Plan were approved by the EMC in July The integrated Tar-Pamlico River Basin Water Resources Plan is available for review on the division s website at: The EMC classified the Tar-Pamlico River Basin as Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) in The Tar- Pamlico NSW Strategy implementation includes nutrient reduction requirements from wastewater treatment plants, agriculture practices and new development stormwater runoff from six municipalities and five counties within the basin. The basin plan provides a summary of the nutrient strategy implementation progress, a strategy evaluation which identifies additional opportunities, and research needs to address and understand nutrient loading to the estuary. While the implementation efforts taken to date have not fully achieved compliance with the TMDL, the nutrient reductions achieved by point sources and agriculture have helped reduce the severity of fish kills in the Pamlico River and Estuary. DEQ is continuing to work with municipal wastewater facilities and the agricultural community to maintain their compliance with the strategy. Savannah River Basin The last EMC approval of the Savannah River Basin Plan was in A special biological study has been organized to evaluate sedimentation issues in the Chattooga River. The concern, from citizen complaints is 6 P a g e

7 trout habitat degradation in the Chattooga River which is currently classified as B; ORW; Tr and is a national wild and scenic river. Watauga River Basin The last Watauga River Basinwide Water Quality Plan was approved by the EMC in It is currently in the process of being updated, and is scheduled to be presented to the EMC in Main water quality concerns identified in the 2007 plan included habitat degradation, impervious surface areas, construction activities, temperature and agriculture (pasture and Christmas tree farms). A hydrologic model for the Watauga River Basin is being developed. White Oak River Basin The last EMC approval of the White Oak River Basin Plan was in The White Oak River Basin Plan will be brought to the EMC for their final approval in NPDES Permits will start being issued in September The New River NSW strategy will be evaluated to include possible nonpoint source nutrient contribution reductions. Yadkin-PeeDee River Basin The last Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Plan was written and approved by the EMC in It will be updated and presented to the EMC in Main water quality stressors identified in the 2008 plan were habitat degradation, stormwater runoff, sediment and erosion, elevated nutrients and ph levels. High Rock Lake is an area of concentration in the Nutrient Criteria Development Plan process. Union County has requested an IBT certificate to transfer 23 mgd from the Yadkin River IBT basin to the Rocky River IBT basin. The final IBT Certificate request is scheduled to go before the EMC in early 2017 and will be reported in the final Yadkin River Basin Water Resource Plan. Water Resource Plans for Other River Basins In the New, Hiwassee, Savannah, Little Tennessee, French Broad, and Lumber River basins, watershed groups are actively working to educate the public on water quality, identify water resource needs, and implement restoration projects. Water Quality Monitoring and Impairments All water quality parameters collected in a waterbody or assessment unit (a defined portion of a waterbody) are assessed independently. Assessment criteria are based on frequency of exceedance of numeric and narrative water quality standards. There are 13,393 assessment units that vary in size based on the specific characteristics of the water body being evaluated. Because the characteristics of assessment units vary, some units are only monitored for a subset of the parameters shown on Table 1 below. Water quality monitoring for total recoverable metals assessment was suspended in April 2007, to allow for evaluation and re-adoption of revised standards using the most current science. In November 2014, as part of the Triennial Review process, the EMC approved new dissolved metals standards which became effective for state purposes in January The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved these standards for Clean Water Act purposes in April The division is beginning to collect dissolved metal samples in 2016; therefore, an assessment for metals will be incorporated into the next integrated report in The metals information included below are for total recoverable metals impairments. Water quality impairments are compiled and submitted to the U.S. EPA for review and approval pursuant to Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. The results of the impairment evaluations are based on a fiveyear compilation of data that has been quality assured and quality controlled. The 2014 and draft 2016 impairment assessment is based on data collected from and respectively. Table 2 illustrates the number of assessment units impaired for each assessment period based on the water quality 7 P a g e

8 parameters shown on the bottom of the graph and denotes an increase (red) or decrease (blue) in the number of assessment unit between the two periods. Table 2.) Statewide Water Quality Impairments for Integrated Reporting Years 2014 and Statewide Water Quality Impairments Number of Impaired Assessment Units (AUs) IR - Years Data Based on 3,626 Assessment Units 2016 IR - Years Data Based on 3,737 Assessment Units Total AUs Assessed* Arsenic Cadmium Copper Lead Nickel Zinc Fish Tissue Mercury Dioxin PCB Chlorophyll a Turbidity Low Dissolved Oxygen High ph Low ph Saltwater Enterococcus Saltwater Fecal Coliform Freshwater Fecal Coliform Macroinvertebrate Fish Community Metals Chemical Physical Bacterial Biological North Carolina DENR Division of Water Resources Water Sciences Section Ecosystems Branch Total and Dissolved Metals in North Carolina Surface Waters: RAMS Data Exploration January 2007 June 2013 DWR Water Sciences Section 11/7/ Abstract The following was extracted from the above-referenced report 8 P a g e

9 Water quality standards are used to determine if the designated uses of a water body are being protected. Surface water standards are used to determine the status of a waterbody. Waters that are meeting all of the surface water standards and that have good biological communities are considered to be supporting monitored standards and uses2. Current surface water quality standards for metals are based on chronic instream concentrations of total recoverable metals. Concentrations of total metals represent both the portion of metal bound to sediments in the water and the portion of metal dissolved within the water column. Data used for water quality assessment through comparison with water quality standards are generated through ambient surface water monitoring programs, such as the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR) Ambient Monitoring System (AMS). In May 2014, NC DENR proposed to the Environmental Management Commission, modifications to current fresh and salt water quality standards which include acute and chronic instream concentrations of dissolved metals in most cases. The concentration of dissolved metals is a primary factor in evaluating potential toxicity to fish and other forms of aquatic life. Other factors such as water hardness and ph also influence toxicity. Total recoverable metals standards are proposed to remain in place for mercury and selenium in all surface waters, as well as for some other metals in waters with certain classifications. The Random Ambient Monitoring System (RAMS), started in January 2007, is a probabilistic component of the AMS. The RAMS sampling locations are randomly located on freshwater streams throughout the state. The objective of the RAMS program is to monitor approximately 30 stations monthly, with new sampling sites selected every two years. Randomized site selection and the limited number of RAMS monitoring stations provide several valuable features. For one, since most streams in North Carolina are small, the majority of RAMS sites are also on small streams. Secondly, the RAMS program allows DWR to collect data on water quality parameters that are rarely examined and to answer broad questions about the water quality of North Carolina streams with a statistical precision not previously available. The following parameters were collected once per month for a total of 24 events in two years: dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, temperature and ph; alkalinity, chloride, fluoride, sulfate, dissolved organic carbon, turbidity, total metals, dissolved metals, hardness, mercury and volatile organics. The following parameters are collected once every other month for a total of 12 times in two years: cyanide, sulfide, semi-volatile organics, pesticides and PCBs. Total and dissolved metals results from 120 Random Ambient Monitoring System (RAMS) stations were explored in regard to current and proposed freshwater metals standards. Three methods of evaluation were used: Were results higher than standards over ten percent of the time? Were results higher than standards over ten percent of the time AND was statistical confidence in the ten percent rate at least ninety percent? Were results higher than standards more than once in three years of monitoring? While some individual results were higher than standards, the overall results from the majority (98/120) of RAMS stations were not higher than standards for any total or dissolved metal through any of the three evaluation methods. Twenty-two stations returned results over standards for one or more metal(s) through the evaluation methods above. For each parameter with results over current or proposed standards, results were over the evaluation threshold(s) at two to twelve stations. No stations returned results over the evaluation thresholds for current Aquatic Life standards for total arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium or lead, nor over Water Supply standards for total nickel. No stations had results over proposed chronic or acute standards for dissolved arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium1, lead (acute) or nickel. 9 P a g e

10 Arsenic: Results from two stations were over current and proposed (unchanged) total arsenic Human Health standards. Copper: Results from seven stations were over the current total copper standard. Results from twelve stations were over proposed calculated hardness-dependent chronic dissolved copper standards. Results from six stations were over proposed calculated hardness-dependent acute dissolved copper standards. Lead: Results from two stations were over proposed calculated hardness-dependent chronic dissolved lead standards. Mercury, Selenium and Silver: There are no proposed changes to total mercury and total selenium standards. Results were not available for silver evaluation. Please see relevant sections within the report for details on these metals. Zinc: Results from seven stations were over the current total zinc standard. Results from five stations were over proposed calculated hardness-dependent chronic and acute dissolved zinc standards. The frequency and duration component of the proposed standards were not evaluated with this dataset, and assumptions were made to be able to evaluate the magnitude component of the proposed standards. Currently, no RAMS stations are located in waters classified as salt waters, so summaries of data related to salt water quality standards were not possible in this evaluation. Water Quality Monitoring and Pollutant Concentrations The Division of Water Resources ambient monitoring program along with seven monitoring coalitions collect nutrients and other pollutants at many stations across the state (Figure 1). This data was assessed to identify the mean and median concentrations of pollutants specifically for this report as required by statute. All statewide freshwater ambient monitoring data was assessed from January 2005 through August 2013 for all basins except for the Cape Fear River Basin which goes through December The ambient data for Total Nitrogen (TN), Total Phosphorus (TP), and turbidity were processed using quality assurance codes and SAS-JMP scripts developed specifically for processing the Cape Fear River Basin dataset currently being used to develop the basin plan. While these scripts should work for the rest of the statewide data, there could be some additional QA/QC issues that were not identified at the time of this batch process. These will be review and refined as each basin plan data assessment is completed. The data summaries where done for each 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) and at the whole basin level if possible (Figure 2). Fecal Coliform Bacteria assessment was done for each of the 17 river basins at the basin level only and for data collected from January 2010 through August Data is shown in a table and map format for comparison purposes below. NOTE: 10/14/16, DUE TO THE BRANCH GIS ANALYST BEING UTILIZED FOR HURRICANE MATTHEW TASKS, THESE TABLES AND MAPS WILL BE FORTHCOMING NEXT WEEK. 10 P a g e