Transylvania Co. - Jocassee Watershed Coalition

Q0
Regional
Groups
Blue Ridge
Boone
B►oad River .
Shelby
Cape Fear
Wilmington
capital
Raleigh
Central
Piedmont
Charlotte .
Cypress
Greenville
Foothills
Winston-Salem
HawRiver
Burlington
Headwaters
Durham
Horace Kepart
Fayetteville
Medoc
Rocky Mount _
Pledmont
Plateau
Greensboro
Pisgah
Brevard
Research
Triangle
Chapel Hill
Sandhllls
Southern Pines
South
Mountains
Morganton
WENOCA
Asheville
of
0
Mr. Robert Johnson
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville, N.C.,
Dear Mr. Johnson:
North Car
P.O. Box 272
Cedar Mount
August 30,1
i
We spoke by phone last week about the question of a dam on the Thompson
River just above the fish hatchery on Gum Bottom Creek. You may recall that I first
brought this up to you in July of 1989. I enclose a picture. of the dam I took at that
time, with the fishery buildings on the left. The outfall from the hatchery.is also
on the, left. As near as I_ can tell all of the flow from the creek is through the
hatchery. I assume that the purpose of the dam is to provide additional flow for the
hatchery, but I did not go farther upstream to investigate.
There have been, recent reports, unsubstantiated by me, that the owner of
the hatchery, is also using the Thompson to dredge up rocks for use in a landscaping
business. This may be the reason Duke Power folks commented to me several years
ago that sedimentation in the river appeared to be quite heavy, though it could also
have arisen from the lumbering that was done four years or more ago.
My concern is that the Thompson is a potential North Carolina Natural and
Scenic River, as well as a potential High Quality Waters River, Secretary Cobey has
promised a thorough study of the river when funding is available from the
Legislature, and the river has already appeared as a candidate for the HOW
designation. The U.S Forest Service has also reported (at the request of Senator
Sanford) that the river (along with the Whitewater and Toaaway) appears to meet
qualifications for a National Wild and Scenic River. Obviously sedimentation and
fish offal/manure are barriers to such designations, and should not be permitted to
occur in any event. As I am sure you are aware, the Thompson is probably the
wildest of the four rivers that drop over the Blue Ridge Escarpment and discharge
into Lake Jocassee. One of these, the Horsepasture River is already a National Wild
and Scenic River. The others also deserve this designation, that is if we do not allow
them to be polluted and destroyed by activities that may be illegal.
I would very much appreciate your attention and comments on this
situation.
Sincerely,
Bill Thomas WMF-r QL131ity Sectio,9
Chair
cc: Forrest Westall, DEHNR, Asheville S r l — Igg0
David Howells, NC Sierra Water Issues Chair
Asheville Regional- Office
Asheville, North Carolina
To &Vlore, enjoy, andprotect the wild places of the earth;
to practice and promote the responsible use of the earth's ecosystem and resources...

c�
f

ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGIONAL OFFICE
730 PEACHTREE STREET, N.E.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30308
June 6, 1990
Project No. 2503 - NC and SC
Mr. E. O. Ferrell, III
Vice President, Operation
Duke Power Company
Post Office Box 1006
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006
Dear Mr. Ferrell:
ADMINISTlA111IVE SERVICES SECTfflN
Messrs. Jason J. Chen, P. E., and Randal G. Pool of this
office will conduct operation inspections of the Keowee and
Jocassee developments of the Keowee-Toxaway Project No. 2503 on
June 25-27, 1990. Our engineers will meet with your
representatives at the World of. Energy at the Keowee-Toxaway
complex at 12:30 p.m. on Monday, June 25, to begin the inspections.
Specific time schedules for inspection of the developments can be
arranged at that time.
During the inspections, our engineers will inspect all project
structures and examine operation records including the minimum flow
data. You should furnish an explanation for each instance where
minimum flow requirements were not met. Please refer to our letter
dated December 5, 1984, for documentation requirements. They may
request that a spillway gate be operated using standby emergency
power. To facilitate the examination of dam slopes and abutments,
any heavy vegetation growing in these areas must be cleared.
Enclosed is a Project Compliance Summary printout from the
Hydropower License Compliance Tracking System (HLCTS) showing due
dates for various Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
requirements. Changes in status and other questions should be
discussed with Messrs. Chen and Pool during the inspections.
A licensee is expected to timely comply with the terms and
conditions of its licenses by required dates, unless a request for
extension of time is filed and approved by the Commission. Failure
to comply with a license requirement may result in the Commission's
taking enforcement action.
RECEIVED
Water Quality Section
J►?N 1990
,Asheville Regional Off;ce
Asheville, North Carolina

,ell, III
-2-
_ssion's Order on P-233-008, -013, and -014, dated
(copy mailed to you on August 14, 1987), requires the
:rve copies of any Commission filing required by the
� entity specified in the license to be consulted on
:d to that filing. This procedure applies to all
suture licenses/exemptions issued by the Commission
where consultation with other entities is required. When sending
a copy of your filing to these entities, please state in the cover
letter that you are providing this copy in accordance with
procedures outlined in the order referenced above. Proof of
service on these entities must be provided to the Commission along
with the filing.
Furthermore, should you have already submitted filings since
July 17, 1987, as required by the license, you must serve at once
copies of those filings with any entity required to have been
consulted on it. Proof of service of any such copies must be
provided to the Commission at the same time.
Copies of this letter are being furnished to appropriate
Federal and State agencies. If agency representatives are
interested in accompanying our engineers during the inspections,
they are requested to contact this office_at 404-347-4134 so they
can be kept informed of last minute schedule changes.
�q
Very truly yours, s
Robert W. Crisp, P. E.
Director
Atlanta Regional Office'
Enclosure

O. Ferrell, III -3-
rth Carolina Federal and State Agencies
cc:
Mr. Jim Kirkwood
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Richard B. Russell Federal Building
75 Spring Street, S. W., Suite 1276
Atlanta, GA 30303
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Mr. Andreas Mager, Jr.
Acting Assistant Regional Director
Habitat Conservation Division
National Marine Fisheries Service
9450 Koger Boulevard
St. Petersburg, FL 33702
Director
Mr. John D. Wray, Deputy Director
Southeast Office
Division of Water Resources
National Park Service
NC Department of Natural Resources
75 Spring Street, S. W.
and Community Development
Atlanta, GA 30303
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Mr. Dick Jones
State of North Carolina
Forest Service, Division
Wildlife Resources Commission
of Engineering
Archdale Building
1720 Peachtree Road, N.
W. 512 North Salisbury Street
Suite 800
Raleigh, NC 27611
Atlanta, GA 30309
Regional Director
Region IV
Environmental Protection
Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.
E.
Atlanta, GA 30308
Attn: Mr. Heinz Mueller
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
Environmental Management
and Recreation
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611

'' O. Ferrell, III -4-
F6uth Carolina Federal and State Agencies
Mr. Jim Kirkwood State of South Carolina
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Natural Resources
75 Spring Street, S. W. Office of the Governor
Atlanta, GA 30303 Post Office Box 1145
Columbia, SC 29211
Ms. Diane Duncan
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Post Office Box 12559
Charleston, SC 29412
Mr. Andreas Mager, Jr.
Acting Assistant Regional Director
Habitat Conservation Division
National Marine Fisheries Service
9450 Koger Boulevard
St. Petersburg, FL 33702
Director
Southeast Office
National Park Service
75 Spring Street, S. W.
Atlanta, GA 30303
Mr. Dick Jones
Forest Service, Division
of Engineering
1720 Peachtree Rd., N.W.
Suite 800
Atlanta, GA 97208
Regional Administrator
Region IV
Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta., GA 30.3.08
Attn: Mr. Heinz Mueller
State of South Carolina
Water Resources Commission
1201 Main Street, Suite 1100
Columbia, SC 29201
State of South Carolina
Wildlife and Marine Resources Department
1921 Vanboklen Road
Eastover, SC 29044
Ms. Nancy Ferguson
State of South Carolina
Department of Health and Environment Control
Environmental Analysis Division
J. Marion Sims Building
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(w/o Enclosure)

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
December 6, 1989
Mr. Bill Thomas, Chairman
Sierra Club
North Carolina Chapter
Post Office Box 272
Cedar Mountain, North Carolina 28718
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Ann B. Orr
Regional Manager
Subject: Thompson River Evaluation
Sweetwater Trout Farm
Transylvania County; N.C.
This Division has conducted an evaluation of the Thompson
River and the effects of the operation of the Sweetwater Trout
Farm. A report has been prepared (copy enclosed) summarizing
sampling results which have taken place during February, 1988 and
September 1989. In addition to transmitting a copy of this
report to you this letter is to advise to the current status in
issuance of NPDES Permits to trout growing operations.
The evaluation of the Thompson River revealed impacts from
both siltation and the discharge from the Sweetwater Farm. There
is no evidence of any sewage contamination. Fungus growths that
have been observed are directly a result from a discharge of
nutrients from the trout operation. This fungus is known as
sphaerotilus, is abundant in most hatchery operations and can be
found in raceways and receiving streams as well. The amount of
growth is dependent upon nutrient levels, temperature, low stream
flows, and amount of sunlight exposure and will be more abundant
in dry summer months. The sphaerotilus is a white stringy type
growth and even though it may be aesthetically unpleasant its
presents does not pose significant adverse affects on water
quality in the Thompson River. This fungus and the discharge of
waste from raceways does have adverse effects similar to
siltation in that the bottom rubble habitat areas are covered
prohibiting a good benthic community. It is evident that the
Sweetwater Trout Farm is having some impact primarily to loss of
waste solids from the raceways. From the standpoint of fisheries
trout operations have generally shown little impact. During the
Interchange Building, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, N.C. 28801 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Bill Thomas
December 6,
Page Two
September sampling on the Thompson, no fish were observed
upstream of the hatchery while several trout were observed
downstream.
This Division will work with the Sweetwater farm to improve
waste management during the upcoming NPDES permitting program.
As you are aware, this Division has been developing a method by
which to issue NPDES Permits to trout hatchery and other
concentrated aquatic animal feeding operations. Federal
regulations require NPDES Permits for trout operations exceeding
20,000 pounds per year production. The Division is just now
finalizing permit application procedures and plans to undertake
in early 1990 securing applications from all trout operations
exceeding the 20,000 pounds per year production level. We have
been working with local trout operations, N.C. State University
Agricultural Extension Service, and the Western Carolina
University Center for Improvement of Mountain Living in
developing solids management systems. This office has been
participating in agriculture workshops held at Haywood Community
College in efforts to make the regulations better known and
highlight the need for proper waste management at these
facilities. The final treatment requirements have not been
finalized but in general trout operations will have to manage
manure and raceway cleaning such to minimize effects on receiving
streams. Several trout operations currently utilize solids
management programs resulting in collection of solids for use as
fertilizers on farm lands. It is our objective that the
permitting process will result in all trout operations developing
adequate solids handling systems.
It is expected that a permit will be issued to the
Sweetwater Trout Farm and other similar operations in 1990. It
will probably be necessary for the farm to change solids
management practices to meet the conditions of the permit. With
better solids management at the farm it is expected that
improvements can be made to the Thompson River. There will
always be some impact even with excellent solids handling and
disposal as long as the facility is in operation.
Siltation'in the river is very noticeable even though the
watershed is very rural and undeveloped. The steep topography of
the area results is severe erosion whenever construction occurs.
This siltation is having a significant impact on the Thompson
River. Local efforts in land use planning are needed to help
minimize siltation problems.

Bill Thomas
December 6,
Paae Three
It is hoped that this information is helpful to your
organization and should you have any questions or need
assistance, please contact this office at 704-251-6208.
Sincerely yours,
Y
-A
Gary T. Tweed, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Division of Environmental Management
Enclosure
xc: Larry Eaton
Forrest R. Westall
Sweetwater Trout Farm

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
14 November 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ken Eagleson
THROUGH: Jimmie Overton
Trish MacPherson `P,
FROM: Lay.-rence Eaton -' S
SUBJECT: Sweetwater Trout Farm/ Thompson River Evaluation
BACKGROUND
The Thompson River is located in southern Transylvania County.
It is one of the headwater rivers of Lake Jocassee, a pump storage
reservoir in South Carolina operated by Duke Power Company. The
river falls approximately 1700 feet in the 5.8 miles from its
headwaters to the South Carolina state line.
The Natershed is almost entirely forested, although nearly all of
the area was logged between 25 and 45 years ago. Crescent Land
and Timber Company, a subsidiary of' Duke Power, owns much of the
land in the watershed. The remainder of the land in the area is in
the Nantahala National Forest or is in private ownership.
This area has been previously sampled, in February, 1988, to
determine the suitability of the Thompson River to be classified as
Outstanding Resource Waters. Three sites were collected along the
length of the Thompson River and one site was collected on an
unnamed tributary. Based upon that survey, the river was not
recommended for the ORW classification
There are no large industrial or municipal dischargers in the
watershed, however the Sweetwater Trout Farm discharges into the
Thompson River just below NC 281. The trout farm consists of 20
sets of paired raceways with a maximum production capacity of
200,000 lbs/yr. Estimated trout production for 1989 is expected to
be around 100,000 lbs.
This investigation was prompted by an inquiry about the trout
farm by Bill Thomas, Chairman of the Sierra Club -North Carolina
Chapter on August 2, 1989. In his inquiry, he cited frequent reports
from local residents of sewage fungus, a foul smell and occasional
dead fish in the Thompson River below the trout farm.
i

J SITES
Collections have been made at 4 sites along the length of the
Thompson River (Figure 1). :Three of these sites (1', 3 and 4) were
collected in February, 1988 as part of an Outstanding Resource Water
Evaluation of the river, while 2 sites (1 and 2) were sampled in
September, 1989 to specifically address the possible impacts of the
trout farm. Physical characteristics for these sites are listed in Table
1. Chemistry samples were collected at stations 1 and 2 (Table 3) in
1989.
Station 1 was the Thompson River at NC 281. This site was
sampled both in 2/88 and 9/89. The substrate was primarily
bedrock in February 1988, but by September 1989 a large amount of
sand was also found and Podostemum was abundant.
Station 2 was the Thompson River 1/4 mile downstream of the
trout farm. The substrate was primarily bedrock. Sphaerotilus could
still be found in sandy backwaters. During a rainfall event while on
site, the river rose noticably within a few minutes.
Station 3 was the Thompson River approximately 1/2 mile
downstream of the trout farm. Boulder and rubble were the
dominant substrate types. Sphaerotilus was abundant. I
Station 4 was the Thompson River at the NC/SC state line. The
substrate was primarily boulder and bedrock and the water was
i
very clear.
METHODS
All stations were sampled using DEM's standardized qualitative
sampling method. This method uses a wide variety of collection
techniques (10 samples) to inventory the aquatic fauna. The primary
output is a species list with some indication of relative abundance
(Rare, Common, Abundant) for each taxon (Table 2 and Appendix 1).
The number of species within the pollution intolerant insect orders of
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT taxa richness) is
used with DEM criteria to assign water quality ratings. Unstressed
streams and rivers have many species, while polluted areas have
fewer species.
Comparing data from different times of the year, and to a lesser
degree between years, must be done with caution since different
species and different numbers of species can be expected from the
same stream depending upon the season and prior flows. DEM's
bioclassification criteria is based on summer values, therefore the
most recent collections (in September) are more applicable to the

E1
Study: Sweetwater Trout Farm
Basin: Little Tennessee
County: Transylvania
Thompson River
NC 281
NI
Sweetwater
Trout
Farm /
r��4 i►111 t�a�������ti
r>■r:�s�ar����,t,
NC 281
Reid Br
Thompson i River
North LCarolina
South I Carolina

Station description of Thompson River, Transylvania Co.
J 1 ti 11 V1V
LOCATION
WIDTH(M)
DEPTH(M)
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
CANOPY (%)
AUFWUCHS
SUBSTRATE (%)
BOULDER
RUBBLE
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT
COMMENTS
1
NC 281
10
0.2
0.4
80
Abun.
35
10
10
35
10
Much Sand
2
1/4mi down
10
0.8
1.3
40
Abun.
50
15
5
30
0
Sphaerotilus
in pools
Table 2. Taxa Richness by group, Thompson River, Transylvania Co.
STATION
1
2
LOCATION
NC 281
1/4mi down
DATE
9/12/89
9/12/89
EPHEMEROPTERA
17
9
PLECOPTERA
9
5
TRICHOPTERA
17
15
COLEOPTERA
5
2
ODONATA
4
4
MEGALOPTERA
1
2
DIPTERA: Misc
8
7
DIPTERA: Chiron
22
23
OLIGOCHAETA
1
4
CRUSTACEA
0
0
MOLLUSCA
1
2
OTHER
0
1
EPT TAXA
43
29
EPT ABUNDANCE
176
110
TOTAL TAXA
85
74
RATING
EK
G/F

which we assess the Thompson River than
amples. For this reason, the discussion will
more toward these September samples.
are th e
be weighted
RESULTS AND DISCL:SSION
Sampling in 19� 9 indicated an increase in sand at static-)n 1
between 1988 and 1959. The winter of 1988 was very dry: The
nearest USGS floe.- gage (French Broad River at Rosman) recorded 30
day flows before the February sampling to be 35% below historic
average flows of the same period. By September 1989 the same area
had received over 1-'" more rain than average. This increased
rainfall has probable increased erosion in unstable areas (e.g. areas
being developed or recently deforested). upstream.
Table 2 shows s definite impact in 1989 due to enrichment
between station 1, rated Excellent, and station 2, rated Good/Fair. All
orders of intolerant insects show declines in taxa richness (Appendix
1). Intolerant taxa sL:.h as Epeorus sp., Drunella conestee, Diploperla
sp., Allonarc s sp.. Dolophilodes sp. and Parapsyche cardis, all
common or abundant upstream of the trout farm, were eliminated
downstream. More tolerant taxa such as CheumatopsLhe sp. and
Hydropsyche betteni appeared at station 2. This shift toward
tolerant taxa caused the Biotic Index, a measure of the average
pollution tolerance of all taxa at a site (scale from 0-most intolerant
to 5- most tolerant), to rise from 1.8 upstream to 2.8 downstream.
Two other statistics v-: ere also calculated. The Dominants in Common
statistic assesses a moderate impact between the two sites, while the
common taxa index rinds the trout farm creating only a slight impact.
The Thompson River ORW study in February 1988 found that 1/2
mile downstream of the trout farm water quality of the Thompson
River was affected either by the trout farm or by silvicultural and
construction activities. The Dominants in Common and Common Tara
Index statistics also bear this out, predicting a moderate impact and
slight impact, respectively, between the upstream and downstream
sites. The Thompson River apparently has recovered by the time it
reaches the North Carolina/South Carolina State Line.
Table 3 sho«,s the results of water chemistry analyses at different
sites along the Thompson River.
i

Water Chemistry of the Thompson River, Transylvania Co.
9/12/89
STATION
1
outfall
2
pH (units)
5.8
6.2
6.4
BOD (mg/1)
3.5
4.7
3.8
NH3-N (mg/1)
0.01
0.25
0.19
TKN (mg/1)
0.1
0.4
0.4
NO2-\03-N (mg/1)
0.02
0.03,
0.04
TOTAL P (mg/1)
0.01
0.08
0.09
BOD, a measure of organic input, indicates a slight increase at the
outfall which drops back almost to background levels by 1/4 mile
downstream. The lower ponds of the farm contained several feet of
settled solids in them and appear to be doing an adequate job of day
to day solid removal. Large slugs of solids created by cleaning
raceways could represent the heaviest impacts to the river, though
these were not noted during this survey.
While still not grossly elevated, the 25 fold increase in NH3
(ammonia), the most harmful form of nitrogenous waste, should be
noted. Even after 1/4 mile downstream, less than 1/3 of the NH3
has been broken down into the less harmful forms of nitrogen NO2
and NO3.
CONCLUSION
The effluent from the Sweetwater Trout Farm significantly
degrades the Thompson River for at least 1/4 mile downstream.
Considering this degradation has occurred while the farm is
operating at approximately half -capacity (100,000 lbs/yr), and that
producers of 20,000 lbs/yr or more of trout require an NPDES
permit, it is recommended that the Sweetwater Trout Farm be
brought into the NPDES permitting process.
CC Forrest Westall
Gary Tweed
David Harding
All work in this study was done in subbasin 04-04-01.
Asti n.,',

SAS
DPENOIX 1. SPECIES LIST AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCEt
SWEET'WATER TROUT FARM STUDYt THOMPSON RIVER.
SEPTMESER 19891 SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN.
01 JZ
E PHE—MEROPTERA
3ACETIS FLAVISTRIGA
3AETIS PLUTO
CLO_3N SPP
DRUN�-LLA CJNESTEE
E-,EORUS SPP
PHEMERELLA CATAWBA (GROUP)
EIriEyER=LLA SPF
EURYLJPHELLA TEMPO;ALIS
HEPTAGENIA APHRODITE
G-NIa %+aRvIWALIS
HEXAGENIA SPP
PARALEPTOPHLEB_IA SPP
PSEUJOCLOEDN SPP
S_RRATELLA DEFICIEiNS
ST=".ACiRON P ALLIDUM
ST=tiONE`^A MOJESTUM
STENDNEMA PUDICUh
PLECuPTERA
ACRONEURIA ABNJRMIS-
ALLOCAPNIA SPP
ALL^NARCYS SPP
D1PLOPERLA
CCOPTURA XANTHENES
ISJPERL.A HOLOCH LORa
PAKA3NETiNA !MMARGINATA
PELT-IPERLA SPP
SWELTSA SPP
TRICHCPTERA
APAT ANIA
CHEUMATOPSYCHE SPP
DIPLECTRONA MODESTA
DOL+OPHILODES SPP
GLOSSOSOMA SPP
HETEROPLECTRON AMERICANU,M
HYDATOPHYLAX SPP
HYDROPSYCHE BETTENI
HYDROPSYCHE DECALDA
HYDR-OPSYCHE ROSSI
HYDROPSYCHE SPARNA.
.'YCTIOPHYLAX SPP
PAR.APSYChE CARDIS
PHYLOCENTROPUS SPP
POLYCENTROPUS SPP
PSILOTRETA SPP
PSYCHOMYIA FLAVIDA
RHYACOPHILA ACUTILABA
RHYACOPHILA CAROLINA
RHYACOPHILA FUSCULA
RHYACOPHILA NIGRITA
RHYACOPHILA TORVA
R C
A A
R
A
R
A A
C C
R
R R
R
:R
Vr
r
lr
C
A A
R
A C
A
C
A
C
R 1
R ;R
A C
R
R
C
A R
C
R
R
R 2.
C A
C
C C
A A
L
R
C R
A R
R
R
C
C A
C R
C C

SAS
:'PE.`4DiX I SP=LIES LIST AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE•
SWEETWATER TROUT FARM STUDY• THOMPSON RIVER.
SEPTMEBEr 19899 SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN.
01 02
COLEOPTERA
DERONECTES GRIS=JSTRIATUS R
ECTOPRIA NERVOSA C R
MACRONYCHUS GLA3RATUS R
OPTIOSERVUS SPP R
PRJJ�!ORESIA TARJELLA R R
Dr ONATA
BOYERIA VINOSA
R
C
CALOPTERYX, S?P
R
CORDULEGASTER SPP
C
(,
LANTHUS VERNALIS
A.
C
STYLOGOMPHUS ALBISTYLUS
K
MEGALOPTERA
NIGRONIA S:-:RRICCRNIS
C
R
SIALIS SPP
R
DI?TERA:CHIRON
3RILLIA SPP
R
A
CARDIOCLADIUS SPP
R
A
CHIRONOMUS SPP
A
CONCHAPELOPIA GROUP
C
A
CRICOTOPUS/0THOCLAOIUS
SPIO
R
C
CRICOTOPUS/ORTHOCLADIUS
SP54
C
;,
CRICOTOPUS/ORT;OCLADIUS
SP5
A
CROCOTJPUS/OR-lH0CLAC'IUS
SP4F
:R
CRYPTOCHI?.ONGMUS FJLVUS
R
DEMICRYPTOCHIRO`:7MUS SPP
R
EPOICOCLADIUS SPP
R
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP1
R
A
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP11
R
A
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP12
R
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP2
R
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP3
C
LOPESCLADIUS SPP
R
MICROTENDIPES S?P
R
NATARSIA SPP
R.
ODONTOMESA FULVA
A
PAGASTIA SPP
C
PARAPHA_NOCLAOIUS SPP
C
A
PARAPHAE"lCCLACIUS SPP
R
A
POLYPEDILUM AVICEPS
C
A
POLYPEDILUM FALLAX
A
POLYPEDILUM HALTERALE
R
C
POLYPEDILU.M ILLINOENSE
R
A
PRODIAMESA OLIVACEA
C
RHEOCRICOTOPUS SP2
A
C
SAETHERIA TYLUS
R
TANYTARSUS SP2
C
C
THIENEMANIELLA SPP
C
DIPTERA:MISC

SAS
PPEVDIX 1. SPECIES LIST .AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE?
SW=cTWATER TROUT FARM STUDY, THOMPSON RIVER.
SEPTHEBER 19B9, SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN.
U1 u2
C R
DILRANJIA 5)PP
R
DIXA SPP
EMPIDIDAE:
R -
HEXATOMA SPP
C
R
PALPU`"YIA (CDMPLEX)
R
PULYM=DA/0RMD S I A SPP
R
1
PROTGPLASA FITCHi_
t
S I,MUL I U', Vi TT ATUY
C
A
TIPUL.A SPP
A
i
0LI,�GCF,AtTA
i
L1iimN0DRIL JS ri C F E::ISTERI
A i
L LJ M 3R I Z. U L I D A E
R
A
`VATS SPP
A
OPISTHOPO+RA S,PP
R
MOLLUSCA
EFRRISSIA RIVUL.ARIS
R
SPHAERIU;, SPP
A
OTHER
PROSTIDMA GRAECENS C

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
14 November 1989
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ken Eagleson
THROUGH: Jimmie Overton
Trish MacPherson 7.,
FROM: Lawrence Eaton a' c
SUBJECT: Sweetwater Trout Farm/ Thompson River Evaluation
BACKGROUND
The Thompson River is located in southern Transylvania County.
It is one of the headwater rivers of Lake Jocassee, a pump storage
reservoir in South Carolina operated by Duke Power Company. The
river falls approximately 1700 feet in the 5.8 miles from its
headwaters to the South Carolina state line.
The watershed is almost entirely forested, although nearly all of
the area was logged between 25 and 45 years ago. Crescent Land
,and Timber Company, a subsidiary of Duke Power, owns much of the
land in the watershed. The remainder of the land in the area is in
the Nantahala National Forest or is in private ownership.
This area has been previously sampled, in February, 1988, to
determine the suitability of the Thompson River to be classified as
Outstanding Resource Waters. Three sites were collected along the
length of the Thompson River and one site was collected on an
unnamed tributary. Based upon that survey, the river was not
recommended for the ORW classification
There are no large industrial or municipal dischargers in the
watershed, however the Sweetwater Trout Farm discharges into the
Thompson River just below NC 281. The trout farm consists of 20
sets of paired raceways with a maximum production capacity of
200,000 lbs/yr. Estimated trout production for 1989 is expected to
be around 100,000 lbs.
This investigation was prompted by an inquiry about the trout
farm by Bill Thomas, Chairman of the Sierra Club -North Carolina
Chapter on August 2, 1989. In his inquiry, he cited frequent reports
from local residents of sewage fungus, a foul smell and occasional
dead fish in the Thompson River below the trout farm.
i

SAMPLING SITES
Collections have been made at 4 sites along the length of the
Thompson River (Figure 1). Three of these sites (1, 3 and 4) were
collected in February, 1988 as part of an Outstanding Resource Water
Evaluation of the river, while 2 sites. (1 and 2) were sampled in
September, 1989 to specifically address the possible impacts of 'the
trout farm. Physical characteristics for these sites are listed in Table
1. Chemistry samples were collected at stations 1 and 2 (Table 3) in
1989.
Station 1 was the Thompson River at NC 281. This site was
sampled both in 2/88 and 9/89. The substrate was primarily
bedrock in February 1988, but by September 1989 a large amount of
sand was also found and Podostemum was abundant.
Station 2 was the Thompson River 1/4 mile downstream of the
trout farm. The substrate was primarily bedrock. Sphaerotilus could
still be found in sandy backwaters. During a rainfall event while on
site, the river rose noticably within a few minutes.
Station 3 was the Thompson River approximately 1/2 mile
downstream of the trout farm. Boulder and rubble were the
dominant substrate types. Sphaerotilus was abundant.
Station 4 was the Thompson River at the NC/SC state line. The
substrate was primarily boulder and bedrock and the water was
very clear.
METHODS
All stations were sampled using DEM's standardized qualitative
sampling method. This method uses a wide variety of collection
techniques (10 samples) to inventory the aquatic fauna. The primary
output is a species list with some indication of relative abundance
(Rare, Common, Abundant) for each taxon (Table 2 and Appendix 1).
The number of species within the pollution intolerant insect orders of
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT taxa richness) is
used with DEM criteria to assign water quality ratings. Unstressed
streams and rivers have many species, while polluted areas have
fewer species.
Comparing data from different times of the year, and to a lesser
degree between years, must be done with caution since different
species and different numbers of species can be expected from the
same stream depending upon the season and prior flows. DEM's
bioclassification criteria is based on summer values, therefore the
most recent collections (in September) are more applicable to the

Study:
Basin:
Sweetwater Trout Farm
Little Tennessee
County: Transylvania
Thompson River
NC 281
NI
Sweetwater
Trout
Farm
is
r��4 �1f1�,�l�t*�J�►�jrt� ��►
NC 281
Reid Br
Thompson J River
North Varolina
South I Carolina {'

able 1. Station description of Thompson River, Transylvania Co.
STATION
1
2
LOCATION
NC 281
1/4mi down
WIDTH(M)
10
10
DEPTH(M)
AVERAGE
0.2
0.8
MAXIMUM
0.4
1.3
CANOPY (%o)
80
40
AUFWUCHS
Abun.
Abun.
SUBSTRATE (%)
BOULDER
35
50
RUBBLE
10
15
GRAVEL
10
5
SAND
35
30
SILT
10
0
COMMENTS
Much Sand
Snhaerotilus
in pools
Table 2. Taxa Richness by group, Thompson River, Transylvania Co.
STATION
1
2
LOCATION
NC 281
1/4mi down
DATE
9/12/89
9/12/89
EPHEMEROPTERA
17 .
9
PLECOPTERA
9
5
TRICHOPTERA
17
15
COLEOPTERA
5
2
ODONATA
4
4
MEGALOPTERA
1
2
DIPTERA: Misc
8
7
DIPTERA: Chiron
22
23
OLIGOCHAETA
1
4
CRUSTACEA
0
0
MOLLUSCA
1
2
OTBER
0
1
EPT TAXA
43
29
EPT ABUNDANCE
176
110
TOTAL TAXA
85
74
RATING
EX
G/F
i

criteria by which we assess the Thompson River
February samples. For this reason. the discussion
more toward these September samples.
than are the
will be weighted
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Sampling in 1989 indicated an increase in sand at station 1
between 1988 and 1989. The ;sinter of 1988 was very dry: The
nearest USGS flow gage (French Broad River at Rosman) recorded 30
day flows before the February sampling to be 35% below historic
average flows of the same period. By September 1989 the same area
had received over 12" more rain than average. This increased
rainfall has probably increased erosion in unstable areas (e.g. areas
being developed or recently deforested) upstream.
Table 2 shows a definite impact in 1989 due to enrichment
between station 1, rated Excellent, and station 2, rated Good/Fair. All
orders of intolerant insects show declines in taxa richness (Appendix
1). Intolerant taxa such as Epeorus sp., Drunella conestee, Diploperla
sp., Allonarcys sp., Dolophilodes sp. and Parapsyche cardis, all
common or abundant upstream of the trout farm, were eliminated
downstream. More tolerant taxa such as Cheumatopsyche sp. and
Hydropsyche betteni appeared at station 2. This shift toward
tolerant taxa caused the Biotic Index, a measure of the average
pollution tolerance of all taxa at a site (scale from 0-most intolerant
to 5- most tolerant), to rise from 1.8 upstream to 2.8 downstream.
Two other statistics were also calculated. The Dominants in Common
statistic assesses a moderate impact between the two sites, while the
common taxa index finds the trout farm creating only a slight impact.
The Thompson River ORW study in February 1988 found that 1/2
mile downstream of the trout farm water quality of the Thompson
River was affected either by the trout farm or by silvicultural and
construction activities. The Dominants in Common and Common Taxa
Index statistics also bear this out, predicting a moderate impact and
slight impact, respectively, between the upstream and downstream
sites. The Thompson River apparently has recovered by the time it
reaches the North Carolina/South Carolina State Line.
Table 3 shows the results of water chemistry analyses at different
sites along the Thompson River.

Table 3. Water Chemistry of the Thompson River, Transylvania Co.
9/12/89
STATION
1
outfall
2
pH (units)
5.8
6.2
6.4
BOD (mg/1)
3.5
4.7
3.8
N113-N (mg/1)
0.01
0.25 .
0.19
TKN (mg/1)
0.1
0.4
0.4
NO2-NO3-N (mg/1)
0.02
0.03
0.04
TOTAL P (mg/1)
0.01
0.08
0.09
BOD, a measure of organic input, indicates a slight increase at the
outfall which drops, back almost to background levels by 1/4 mile
downstream. The lower ponds of the farm contained several feet of
settled solids in them and appear to be doing an adequate job of day
to day solid removal. Large slugs of solids created by cleaning
raceways could represent the heaviest impacts to the river, though
these were not noted during this survey.
While still not grossly elevated, the 25 fold increase in NH3
(ammonia), the most harmful form of nitrogenous waste, should be
noted. Even after 1/4 mile downstream, less than 1/3 of the NH3
has been broken down into the less harmful forms of nitrogen NO2
and NO3.
CONCLUSION
The effluent from the Sweetwater Trout Farm significantly
degrades the Thompson River for at least 1/4 mile downstream.
Considering this degradation has occurred while the farm is
operating at approximately half -capacity (100,000 lbs/yr), and that
producers of 20,000 lbs/yr or more of trout require an NPDES
permit, it is recommended that the Sweetwater Trout Farm be
brought into the NPDES permitting process.
CC Forrest Westall
Ga T d':)
David Harding
All work in this study was done in subbasin 04-04-01.
rRA„"f3 V
Ou:�lity Se4ii fl
Cr
,Asheville "egio;;ai Office
,Asheville, North Carolina

Or
SAS
APPE-NDIX 1. SPECIES LIST AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCEI
SWEETWATER TROUT FARM STUDY, THOMPSON RIVER.
SEPTMEBER 19891 SAVANNAH :RIVER BASIN.
01 JZ
EPHEMEROPTERA'
BAETIS FLAVISTRIGA
R C
3AETIS PLUTO
A A
CLOEON SPP
R
DRUNELLA CDNESTE-
A
c?EORUS SPP
C
PHEMERELLA C "TA'»3A I SRCUPI
EPHEMPRELLA SP=
A A
EURYLOPHELL.A T=VrO ALIS
C C
HEPTAGENIA APHRODITE
R
1cPTAG:-NIA MAR3INALIS
Ft
HEXAGc-NIA SPP
R
PAR.ALEPTDPHLEEZIIA SPP
PScUDOCLOtJN SPP
R' C
SERRATELLA DE ICIE-NS
C
STE-NACRON PALLIDUM
C
STENONEMA MODESTU''
A A
STc"40NE'!A PUDICU.'�
R
PLcCGPTERA
ACROtiEURIA ABNJR.`1IS
A C
ALLOCAPNIA SPP
A C
ALLO:NARCYS SPP
C
�IPLOPERLA
A
ECCOPTURA XA.NTHE DES
ISOPERL.A HOLOCHLORA
R R
PARAGNETTNA "M'A 1RGINAT.A
R c
PCLTOPERLA SPP
.A C
SWELTSA SPP
R
TRICHOPTERA
APATANIA
R
CHEUMATOPSYCHE SPP
C
DIPLECTRONA MODESTA
A R
DOLOPHILODES SPP
C
GLOSSOSOMA SPP
R
HETEROPLECTRON AMERICANUM
Z
HYDATOPHYLAX SPP
R P.
HYUROPSYCNEr- 3ETTENI
HYDROPSYCHE JECALDA
C A
HYDROPSYCHE ROSSI
C
HYDROPSYCHE SPARK A
C C
N YCTIOPHYLAX SPP
A A
PARAPSYCHE CARJIS
C
PHYLOCENTROPUS SPP
R
PO LYCENTROPUS SPP
C R
PSILOTRETA SPP
A R
PSYCHDMYIA FLAVIDA
R
RHYACOPHILA ACUTILABA
R
RHYACOPHILA CAROLINA
C
RHYACOPHILA FUSCULA
C A
rRHYACOPHILA NIGRITA
C R
RHYACOPHILA TORVA
C C

SAS
APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST AND RELATIVE ASUNDANCEv
S'WEETWATER TROUT FARM STUOYY THOM-PSON RIVER.
SEPTMEBER 19891 SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN.
01 02
COLEOPTERA
D=RONECTES �RISEJSTRIATUS R
cCTO?. IA N-R'VOSA C S
14ACR:� %YCHUS CLABRATUS R
OaTIuStRVUS SPP R
PKO-'.ORESIA TARDELLA R R
DOG'.YATA
ECYERIA VI\'OSA
R
C.ALCPTERYX SPP
R
CCRDULEGASTER SPP
C
LANTHUS VERN.ALIS
a.
STYLOGIOMPHUS AL 3ISTYLUS
R
MEG2.AL0PTERA
►vIGRONIA SERRICCR;NI S
C
t
SIALIS SPP
R
DIPTERA:CHIRON
BRILLIA SPP
R
A
CARDiOCLADTUS SPP
R
y
CHIROIVOMUS SPP
A
CONCHAPELOPIA GR3UP
C
.A
CRIC-3TOPUS/ :RTHOCLADIUS
SPIO
R
C
I-RICDTOPUVORTHOCLADIUS
SP54
C
CRIL COTOPUS/ORT OCLADIUS
SPb
A.
CRDC OT.'?US /Di�THOCLADIUS
SP48
�
CRYPTDCHIRDN3MUS FULVUS
t
DEMICRYPTCCHIRON-CMUS SPP
R
EPOICC4LADIUS SPP
R.
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP1
R
A
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP11
R
A
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP12
R
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP2
-R
EUKIEFFERIELLA SP3
C
LOPESCLADIUS SPP
R
MICP,�T�"JDIPES SPP
NATARSIA SPP
R
ODONTOME-SA FULVA
A
PAGASTIA SPP
C
PARAPHAENDCLADIUS SPP
C
A
PARAPHAENOCLACIUS SPP
R
A
POLYPEDILUM AVICEPS
C
A
POLYPEDILUM FALLAX
POLYPEDILUM HALTERALE
R
C
POLYPEDILUM ILLINOENSE
R
A
PRODIAMESA OLIVACEA
C
RHEOCRICOTOPUS SP2
A
;.
SAETHERIA TYLUS
R
TANYTARSUS SP2
C
C
THIENEMANIELLA SPP
C
i
DIPTERA:MISC

SAS
APPENDIX 1® SPECIES LI ST AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE,
SW=-TWATER TROUT EARN! STUDY, THOMPSON RIVER.
SEPTMEB'ER
19894P SAVAN'6'AH . RIVER BASIN.
Cl
02
ATHERIX SPP
C
R
DICRANOTA S?;'
R
DIXA SPP
R
EMPIDIDAE
`iEXATD,',IA SP:
C
PALPOMYiA (,DMPLEX)
;R
POLYMEDA/OR!!DSIA SPP
R
PROTOPLASA =TTCH:I
SIMULI-0". 'VI TT A T U
C
TIPULA SPP
A
OL.LGOCHAETA
L IiMN0DRIL US -10FF:'-lEIST=RI
:
LUM3RICULIDA=
R
H
NAIS SPP
�.
OPISTHOPORA SPP
R
MOLLUSCA
EERRIISSIA R?VULARIS
t
S P H A E R I U M SPP
R
4
OTHER
rROSiCMA GRA_CENS

aQ 101131
RR •t l
North Carolina Chapter
,
Regional Groups
in North Carolina
i=:elan l'iounta?r!, r`.a.r:;. • _� ^ ., i`;
BLUE RIDGE GROUP
Boone
I
BROAD RIVER GROUP
r Cr_,rresi_ Westai i
Shelbv
WI. of Jatdrai F eSCUrCe.' aric '__ommunity Devel0r iletli
CAPE FEAR GROUP I
O. ^uX `. ' U
-
Wilmington
,
Asheville; N.!' , 28Sf
CAPITAL GROUP
Raleigh
pear Mtr. west all -
CENTRAL
I appreciateo talking, w,th you about the Thompson River East v,eev.. aria the
PIEDMONT GROUP
apparent difficulties V`eiti iI `",e f iSh-atchery Uweetwat` r ri7tr,,'!ery be eve. _
Charlotte i
the rnrne, Owned by hill Burrow) on Cum Bottom Creek where it meets, the
I hor;lpson. Tr is hatchery is completely astride 6,jrn Bottom rlee and 3plears tc�
COASTAL GROUP
New sets
c tc nt4� flow. There - inn crude n. �. a„ sc t' �r^n n�•-n ; �+
use i,� e, re f o�v. Th�� �� �" ,� �, ode cc Crete uar, �."�o ,
above the 1 unction w ith i ur! F,0tiom AS I re!ated to you lass. `?deed: nave. `'fa4C
CYPRESS GROUP I
_
,numerous reports frorr, :`rsrermen and: local re,•iderlts ti-at thr Tiz�rnpscir; often
Greenville
i
tales on a very iCCi! ``mle'l I belo.v' the: hatchery and thy` !leir ,sr ar esometime:.
i
FOOTHILLS GROUP
seer,. You are aware of Duke ''_>yver' S report t ieter t0 DL3 ir1 `',;?Ill dated L)ec;.
Winston-Salem
' 9 o 7t that, Ofor an,� fungus wen seer; al.+. :.
iQ k4'3y dil Yev
HEADWATERS GROUP
r'O7! aril that le r`r,!li,� fir no ut i eft r! trie !^ivp—
tr y i; 1 P, i items r n;, t t!!rpc
Durham
iristarlCBS of sewage :• lei I, irl , !r i I i8t�, and NciG'CillilCr 967. arils , bBi 10`,'C
!
1
Duke also, hadalso r,oti`;ed Te��" lance in B:revar: ra+ th? ruble^ as i �ieyS?
HORACE KEPHART
GROUP I
Sewage dumping might have beenTa factor , ano not the hatchery. 1 C,eIieve tiary
Fayetteville
Tweed n-,ade so!m!e n-,easureInerits of water cluviity ar-id round inigh cJ3i `rI'^';, but riut
much fecal. He concluded that the hatchery was not a problem, but I think this
PIEDMONT PLATEAU i
conclusion is un)ustif leo based on Duke's.report and the reports of resilentS anti
GROUP
Greensboro I
l ao.,� Lip ih y U Y `� 19 _ !,rr�t f
fishermen. w ad r t Ye r We.- 1(j 'the hat' - erg J V I � 8 ,�, aril_; !i_) a.YJ rIc
smell or fish or fungus, but water, flow was high as, it has been for sNver,- week.Y,
RESEARCH TRIANGLE j
r cr t i^^=i c t t c r
! ly question to you and to DEN, is what water aualit/ reQu,ation_, apUiy to
GROUP
Chapel Hill
hatcherles', l am concerned ill this parUCL:lar case becau,e +ht JocaSsee
Watershed Coalition, of wr),,1Cl, i art! the Co -Chair !; seei lno StaiP rJaiu-al ant+
sANDIIILI.s GROUP
Scenic River Status for the Thomusor!, Whitewater, and Toxaway-IRIver s in ti-!e
Southern Pines
,ocassee watershed. There ^as been some legislative interest, first from former
SMOKY MOUNTAINS
Senator Hipps and now from Rep. ;Marie Colton. NRC-D's preliminary mudie', show
GROUP
the rivers to be eligible and 1ecretary Coby has prom ised a desionatior!-level
Bryson City
study. h 5 ie ra Club a Wed with tale Joca re a on ar,d suppo the
The �, r'. is ffi _ 'a `S". , CO lift its
SOUTH MOUNTAINS
designation of these rivers also. Pollution Such as that attributed to the hatchery,
GROUP
or to illegal dumping, cannot the eligibilit,/ of these rivers, ,h
Morganton
upgrade to Class r, water aliAlity.
WENOCA GROUP
Asheville
To explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth,, io practice and promote the responsible use of the earth's ecosystems and resources .. .

gathered from your anwers to my question that the issue is rather complex and
tec
hnical,; req
uiring of the actual situation for each hatchery in the state, obviously very
,arge job. From my untutored point -of -view it would seem. logical that, there would be a 'I I rn
on the weight of fish a hatchery could handle based on amount of water available,e,
Something lill
pounds offish per cubic feet per second at the 0i 0 flow, with some correction perhaps, for
water temperature. I.woulud also think limits could be established on the 3-1,iaximjrii-i nutrient
nitrogen and ROD irl }he effluent, also corrected for temperature and flow of the receiving
streams.
The Sierra Club certainly does riot wish to put Nr. Burrow out of business, but
certainly does support the establishment of limits that will protect downstream water quality
and prevent overuse of a valuable resource. I am sure the Thompson Rive,- situation is lust one
of many such situations, and that as demand for water grows in our- state the issue will need to be
addressed. Certainly trout farmers have a right to know what rules need to be ooeyed before
they invest Considerable sums in trout farms, The State is fal"ling its c4l 1,"Izens bYhen it 5' 'low,:-,
overproduction ,In a river like the Champion Paper- till) and then finds itself in trouble with
water quality.
would be interested in what sort of studies/efforts would need to be Started, to arrive at
some rational way to manage hatchery discharges, and how the Sierra Club might help the
p r oces,, if it can 'held at all.
Sincerely,
E i 'I I T ho n-%, as
(`halm
cc: David Howells
Randy Schenck
Bill Holman
Dennis Chastain

Water dual:( ;eciion
JUL 12 1983
Ashe%fille Regional 0,11 �e
State of North Carolina Asheville, north Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor R. Paul Wilms
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary July 9, 198B Director
Mr. Robert A. Cloninger
Transmission Department
Technical Services
Duke, Power Company
P.O. Box 33189
Charlotte, N.C. 28242
Dear Mr. Cloninger:
Paul Wilms asked me to respond to your 27 May, 1988 letter
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed transmission
line near Brevard (Rich Mountain Retail). These comments are
from the water quality viewpoint.
The French Broad River in that vicinity is rated as
"supporting" as are most of the nearby streams except Carson
Creek which is "partially supporting" due to sediment from
construction. The supporting rating means that these streams
have water quality sufficient to support all their designated
uses (such as aquatic life support). The Division of
Environmental Management has a macrobenthos monitoring station
upstream at Rosman. In 19B6, we rated this station as having
excellent biota - a rating which is rather unusual for a stream
this size. This indicates exceptional water quality in the river
at this location. The attached publication (Brimlevana 8:27-50)
provides more details on water quality in this area: Therefore,
appropriate measures to control sedimentation and erosion would
be advisable especially near the French Broad River and smaller
streams.
Also, the shorter routes (Alternative 1 and 2) may be
preferable from the water quality viewpoint since less soil and
vegetation would be disturbed during construction. This may
result in less off -site erosion. Similarly, Alternative 2
crosses the least amount of floodplain along the River- and
thereby may disturb less soil adjacent to the River.
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page 2
Mr. Robert Cloninger
July 8, 1988
We also suggest that after a route is chosen that Duke Power
conduct macrobenthos sampling downstream before and after
construction. This would be prudent given the very high upstream
water quality of the river. Sampling would also provide valuable
information on the impact of power line construction (with best
management practices) on aquatic ecosystems. If you plan to
conduct this sampling, please contact Jimmie Overton of my staff
at. 919-733-6946 to coordinate your sampling with our past and
ongoing efforts.
I hope this information is useful. If you have any
questions, please contact John Dorney at [phone].
>arleeslyWa/kild,
,
C ief
Water Quality Section
RPW:JD/jho
cc: R. Paul Wilms
�'rs=tsW.esta 1 1

P. 0. BOX 33189
April 1, 1988
DUKE POWER COMPANY
GENERAL OFFICES
422 SOUTH CHURCH STREET
CHAIILOTTE, N. C. 28242
TELEPHONE: AREA 704
373-4011
PS-... ice,.. s i7 i.,.. 19.'
Ulater Quality Section
APR G - i10,88
Mr. Gary T. Tweed Asheville fet:i _! ON CE
,
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources Asheville, l.orth
and Community Development
P. O. Box 370
Asheville, North Carolina 28802-0370
Re: Thompson River, Whitewater River, and Lake Jocassee
Untreated Sewage Discharges
File Nos: J15-1100.00, GAH-0207
Dear Mr. Tweed:
As a follow-up to our report of untreated sewage discharge into
the Thompson and Whitewater Rivers, we have examined the records
of the septic contractors servicing the Bad Creek and Coley Creek
sites. Two vendors, Jiffie Johnnie and Triangle Trucking and
Leasing, service these projects. Jiffie Johnnie discharges
wastes into the Pendleton -Clemson Waste Treatment Facility.
Triangle Trucking and Leasing hauls wastes to the City of Union,
S. C. Utility Department.
Invoices and disposal records for both vendors have been
examined. From this examination, we have concluded that both
vendors are properly disposing of septic wastes.
We appreciate the attention you have given to this matter. If
you have any questions, please call Bob Waldrop at
[phone].
Yours truly,
S. B. Hager, Chief Engineer
Civil/Environmental Division
&94-6-�
By: R. J. Waldrop
Design Engineer I
RJW/kmp:RJW94
cc: D. H. Meacham, P. H. Clawson, J. S. Garton, H. G. McKay,
Central Records

&Qj'RCE5
South Carolina
l �Tildlifejllalne
Resour<rs Department
t V"d ik)mrluwy ApPnCy
September 22, 1988
James A. 'Timmerman, Jr., Ph.D.
Executive Director
Larry D Cartee
Asst. Executive Director
RECEIVED
Colonel Paul W. Woodbury S E P 2 6 1986
District Engineer
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers �SAhDMINi ADMINISTRATION
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Dear Colonel Woodbury:
I am writing in reference to a letter addressed to you from
L. K. Mike Gantt,' Supervisor, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
(F&WS) Raleigh, N.C.' dated September 1, 1988. The South Carolina
Wildlife and Marine Resources Department also supports your
request for approval from Division to exert discretionary
authority over proposed fill activities in state -designated
trout waters and their headwaters. Additional protection for.
sensitive trout streams and trleir associated riparian wetland
l.,hitats are badly needed.
As indicated in the F&WS letter., recent development activities in
the headwaters of the Chattooga River in North Carolina are
adversely, impacting trout waters in South Carolina, as well as
the Walhalla Natiohal Fish Hatchery. In addition, development
activities in North Carolina are adversely impacting the
Whitewater River in South Carolina, one of this state's best
trout streams. We have also been advised by Duke Power Company
that a potentially, very serious problem has been observed on the
Thompson River. On,three separate occasions. during 1987 a very
str of y sewage odd - 116.+ • uce1i 1`i.SL�d, 'GIBS Well' L8 'irluL.ky''vruic i ally
the presence of sewage fungi in the Thompson River. This problem
also originates in North Carolina and .is impacting South Carolina
waters. I might add that the Thompson River is also considered
one of South Carolina's better trout streams.
In summary, Colonel Woodbury, the State of South Carolina is
experiencing significant problems with silt, sediment and sewage
discharges on three of its best trout streams, the Chattooga
River, the Whitewater River and the Thomps,-,n River, as a result of
development or other activities originatiog in North Carolina.
t
Rembert C. Dennis Building ❑ P. O. Box 167 O Columbia, South Carolina 29202 [] Telephone: [phone]

el Woodbury
mber 22, 1988
Page 2
These problems have been going on much too long and no solution
appears in sight. I would appreciate -your immediate assistance
in helping to resolve these problems.
incere ,
James A. Timmetman, Jr
Executive Director
JATjr/sa
cc: Lt. Col. Stewart Bornhoft, COE, Charleston
Greer C. Tidwell, EPA, Atlanta
Lewis Shaw, DHEC, Columbia
Brock Conrad, SCWMRD, Columbia
Buford Mabry, SCWMRD, Columbia
L. K. Gantt, USF&WS-Raleigh Office
James Anderson, Walhalla NFH
Don Baker, NCWRC
Glen McBay, FWS-Fisheries (RO)
Roger Banks, Charleston FWE Office
v d; Spain,-, NCDNRCD, .;Asevil-le Oi`€ire.:=
John Garton, Duke Power Co., Charlotte Office

S. 1 cs"
State of ,North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Asheville Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
January 27, 1988
Mr, S. B. Hager, Chief Engineer.
Civil/Environmental Division
Duke Power Company
General Offices
422 South Church Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
j Subject: Thompson and Whitewater Rivers
I Transylvania County
Dear Mr. Hager:
In follow-up to inquires by Duke Power Company and your December
23, 1987 letter, this Division has.conducted an investigation of this
Thompson and Whitewater Rivers.. Both Mr. Bob Waldrop and Ms. Phylis
Clawson with Duke Power, have been contacted and are familiar with this
Division's investigation.
On January 21, 1988, samples were collected from the Thompson ,and
Whitewater Rivers -and results are as follows:
Station
1. Thompson River -
Trout Hatchery Discharge
2. Thompson River
Below Hatchery
3. Thompson River Above
Hatchery at NC 281
4. Thompson River Trib.
NCSR 1152
5. Thompson River NCSR 1152
6. Whitewater River NC 281
Fecal Total
Coliform Coliform
< 1 940
Fecal Sere
< 20
29
320
<
20
- 9
140
<
20
4
220
<
20
< 1
120
<
20
2
210
<
20
All results
in colonies/100
ml
Interchange Building, 59 Woodfin Place, P.O. Box 370, Asheville, N.C. 28802-0370 O Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmar.ve .Action Employer

er
71.
In order to interpret bacterial analyses one must first understand
the relationship between focal coliform, total coliform and fecal
steep. The total coliform group.includes all of the aerobic and
facilitative anaerobic, grampiiegative, nonsproe-foroming, rod -shaped
bacteria that ferment -lactose in 24-48 hours at 35 C. The definition
includes the generic: excherichia (major species of the fecal coliform
group), citrobacter, enterobacter and klebsiella. The fecal coliforms
are part of the total coliform group. They are define as gram -negative
nonsproe-.forming rods that ferment lactose in 24 + 0.2 C. The major
species in the fecal coliform group is escherichia coli, a species
indicative -of fecal pollution and the possible presence of enteric
pathogens. Fecal streptococci data verify fecal pollution and may
provide additional information concerning the recency and probable
origin of pollution. The occurrence of fecal streptococci in water
indicates fecal contamination by warm-blooded animals. They are not
known to multiply in the environment. Fecal coliform bacteria also has
its or in warm-blooded animals and is used primarily as an
indicator of sewage contamination. The relationship between fecal
coliform and fecal streptococci may allow distinction between animal.
and human waste.
Certain coliform bacteria occur naturally in the environment in
soils and water. During wet weather when streams receive run-off the
coliform levels will increase in waterways. Based on the levels
measured above and other data collected by Dicke Power there is very
little evidence of human sewage contamination. As you may be aware
those levels reported as fecal coliform in your December 23, 1987,
letter are actually total coliform measurements and are likely normal
for that time depending on rainfall run-off. Total coliforms could
easily measure in the thousands due to natural run-off. The lack of
fecal streptocci in the above samples and the low fecal coliform levels
indicate no contamination from human or animal waste. The levels of
total coliform appear normal and were expected to be even higher since
the streams at the time of sampling were experiencing significant
run-off. There is some logging activity in the drainage area of the
Thompson River which may affect total coliform due to increased run-off.
All of the testing conducted thus far does not eliminated the
possibility that illegal dumping has occurred. It will be very
difficult to verify infrequent dumping by sampling. Should dumping
occur then coliform levels would only increase for short period of
time (duration dependent of flow conditions) then return to normal. If
dumping was occurring daily or on a relatively constant basis then this
activity could possible be identified by sampling. .
The trout hatchery on the Thompson River appears to be having
little affect on the river. There is some fungus growing in the
hatchery and at its discharge point which past hatchery investigations
has shown is due to increase nutrient levels. This is common with all
hatcheries and is not considered to be a problem. In fact past studies

Pr. B. Hager
January 27, 1988.
Page Three
indicate downstream fisheries are enhanced due to increase nutrients.
from hatcheries. Most mountain streams are very sterile and the
increase nutrients will promote better food chains necessary for good
fish -propagation.' The hatchery may cause some odor during warm weather
which may have been the source of -"sewage odor" previously reported.
In summary., this.Division does not feel coliform sampling data
thus far is indicative of sewage contamination. The total coliform .
levels measured appear to be within those normally expected. Illegal
dumping will be best determined by visual inspection of streams and
road access areas to streams. Questioning haulers as to disposal
practices may reveal problems. To date there is only one hauler
registered with the Transylvania County Health Department operating out
of Pisgah Forest, N. C. It is very unlikely for this hauler to be
improperly dumping. There may be haulers operating out of other local
districts or haulers serving the contractor port-a-john company which
may be dumping improperly. We -have never received a report identifying
a dumping incident in this area.
This Division appreciates Duke Power Company's interest in protect-
ing the Jocassee Lake watershed. Should furhter data be collected or
problems detected, please keep this office informed. I will be glad to,
discuss this matter,shoul.d you wish:to contact this office at
704/251-6208.
Sincere yours,
Gary Tweed, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
GTT:ls
Enclosure
xc: Terry Pierce
Bill Thomas
David R. SpaiV
Roy M. Davis
Forrest R. Westall
Russ Shearer

C�
s
by l :J-- `r _._,.. - _ T�•n. ,.:. l' ....-.�„6m,, _ '- �.�'= ::-
pre
L pg{�
d f '°'�'
•,_:'p _ �'• -- ads ,,: rt''��`� j`Ad �
2.l �.• a 'i `v'�\ ELEv. 3
Mil:.
SFN:'l}pj
- _. _ __ _ ''-'�`'!. .:L.: dim "! mot` ��^. • , • �
_ r
- ____ Cib6�RY!r.^,rC:L�::Y��i_�`!-:5+'2'8�.•iYi:.diS�Y�"N.U.iZr�'-••.e�iS:La3•��.src. b..L•�. - J �-��� -

d �a STA]p o
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Asheville Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor Ann B. Orr
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Regional Manager
DIVISION:OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
August 2, 1989
Mr. Bill Thomas, Chair
Sierra Club -North Carolina Chapter
Post Office Box 272
Cedar Mountain, North Carolina 28718
Subject: Fish Hatchery Activities
Thompson River Area
Transylvania County
i
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Thank you for your letter of July 19, 1989, concerning a fish
hatchery on Gum Bottom Creek, a tributary of the Thompson River. In
addition, I appreciate your general comments on .the issue of fish
hatcheries.
As I discussed with you in.a recent telephone conversation, the
Division is examining its approach to trout farms. Regent biological
monitoring results from streams receiving discharges from these type
operations have indicated water quality impacts not measured.in
previous samplings. This office has proposed to the MELnagement of the
Water Quality Section, a procedure to place those trout farms requiring
a permit under a general NPDES Permit. I anticipate a. response from
the Central Office on this proposal within the next few days. It is
very likely that the Division staff involved with trout farm operations
will meet shortly to finalize a permitting procedure. I want to
emphasize, as we recently discussed, that permitting trout operations
by itself will not address all issues concerning "specific" trout
operations. Many of the indicated water quality concerns caused by
trout farm discharges fall into the category of "enrichment" or
eutrophication problems. Other cited objections could be characterized
as aesthetic/odor.related. Specific, on -site evaluations of a trout
operation are required to develop an accurate understanding of the
extent of impact. Making a direct connection between impact and the
water quality standards can also be a very complex and difficult task
as well.
Interchange Building, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, N.C. 28801 0 Telephone [phone]

till Thomas
August 2, 1989
Page Two
With regard to your comments on the Gum Bottom ,Creek trout
operation, I am referring a copy of your letter to our Environmental.
Sciences Branch` -for the scheduling of a biological monitoring
evaluation. This office has_. examined the complaints received
concerning this area of the 'Thompson River, as you noted. The
conclusion stated in your letter of "no impact" from the trout
operation was related to the fecal-coliform "issue" which was initially
brought to our attention by Duke Power representatives. Our general
examination of the hatchery did note some characteristic signs of
increased nutrient addition below the hatchery, however, without a
biological evaluation, a complete determination of "enrichment" impact
cannot be made.
Again, thank you for
quality management issues.
information -or would like
me know.
xc: Steve Tedder
Ken Eagleson
Trevor Clements
Dennis Ramsey
David Howells
Randy Schenck
Bill Holman
Dennis Chastain
your letter and your interest in water
If you have any questions concerning this
to discuss these issues further, please let
Sincerely,
orrest R. We;DUdlL
Water Quality Regional
Supervisor

Regional Groups
in North Carolina
BLUE RIDGE GROUP
Boone
BROAD RIVER GROUP
Shelby
CAPE FEAR GROUP
Wilmington
CAPITAL GROUP
Raleigh
CENTRAL
PIEDMONT GROUP
Charlotte
COASTAL GROUP
New Bern
CYPRESS GROUP
Greenville
FOOTHILLS GROUP
Winston-Salem
HEADWATERS GROUP
Durham
HORACE KEPHART
GROUP
Fayetteville
PIEDMONT PLATEAU
GROUP
Greensboro
RESEARCH TRIANGLE
GROUP
Chapel Hill
SANDHILLS GROUP
Southern Pines
SMOKY MOUNTAINS
GROUP
Bryson City
SOUTH MOUNTAINS
GROUP
Morganton
WENOCA GROUP
Asheville
FRECrEIV
Cedar riou1ntain, N.G. , 28 7 18
,Ashzvi9le 4;e�io�t:'a Dfl,ca ,
(Asheville, 1`l0liil �3f011na
Mr. Forrest Westal i
NC Dept. of Natural Resources and Community Development
P.O. Box 3 7 U
Asheville, N.G., 28802
Dear Mr. Westall:
1 appreciated talking with you about the Thompson River last week, and the
apparent difficulties with the fish hatcher/ (Sweetwater Hatchery, I believe is
the name, owned by Sill Burrow) on Gum Bottom Creel: where it meets the
Thompson. This hatchery is completely astride uum Bottom Creek and appears to
use its entire flow. There is also a crude concrete dam across the Thompson just
above the junction with Gum Bottom. As I related to you last week, 1 have had
numerous reports from fishermen and local residents that. the Thompsoin often
tales on a very foul smell below the hatchery, and that dead fish are sometimes
seen. You are aware of Duke Power's report ( leter to David Spain dated Dec, 23,
1 987) that odor and white fungus were seen all the way downriver to the Duffle
road, and that they could find no trout left in the river at all. They report three
instances of sewage smell, in April, Nay, and November 1987. 1, and i believe
Dudke also, had also notified Terry Pierce in Brevard of this problem, as illegal
sewage d_lmping might have been a factor, and not the hatchery. I believe Gary
Tweed made some measurements of water quality and found high coliform, but not
much fecal. He concluded that the hatchery was not a problem, but 1 thini; this
conclusion is unjustified based on Duke's report and the reports of residents and
fishermen. I waded up the river to the hatchery on July 9, 1989, and found no
smell or fish or fungus, but water flow was high as it has been for several weeks.
My question to you and to DEM is what water quality regulations apply to
hatcheries? i am concerned in this particular case because the Jocassee
Watershed Coalition, of which I am the Co -Chair, is seeking State Natural and
Scenic River Status for the Thompson, Whitewater, and Toxaway Rivers in the
Jocassee watershed. There has been .some legislative interest, first from former
Senator Hipps and now from Rep. Marie Colton. NRCD's preliminary studies show
the rivers to be eligible and Secretary Coby has promised a designation -level
study. The Sierra Club is affiliated with tlse Jocassee Coalitior, and supports the
designation of these rivers also. Pollution such as that attributed to the hatchery,
or to illegal dumping, cannot enhance the eligibility of these rivers, or their
upgrade to Class B water quality.
To explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; to practice and promote the responsible use of the earth's ecosystems and resources .. .

gathered from your anwers to my question that the issue is rather complex and
technical, requiring study of the actual situation for each hatchery in the state, obviously a very
large job. From my untutored point -of -view it would seem logical that there would be a limit
on the weight of fish a hatchery could handle based on amount of water available, something like
pounds of fish per cubic feet per second at the 7010 flow, with some correction perhaps for
water temperature. i would also think limits could be established on the maximum nutrient
nitrogen and SOD in the effluent, also corrected for temperature and flow of the receiving
streams.
The Sierra Club certainly does not wish to put Mr. Burrow out of business, but
certainly does support the establishment of limits that will protect downstream water quality
and prevent overuse of a valuable resource. I am sure the Thompson River situation is j ust one
of many such situations, and that as demand for water grows in our state the issue will need to be
addressed. Certainly trout farmers have a right to know what rules need to be obeyed before
they invest considerable sums in trout farms. The State is failing its citizens when it allows
overproduction on a river ( like the Champion Paper Mill) and then finds itself in trouble with
water quality.
I would be interested in what sort of studies/efforts would need to be started to arrive at
some rational way to manage hatchery discharges, and how the Sierra Club might help the
process, if it can help at all.
Sincerely,
Sill Thomas
Chair
cc: David Howells
Randy Schenck.
Bill Holman
Dennis Chastain

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
February 3, 1989
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Steve W. Tedder
THROUGH: Ken Eagleson
Jimmie Overtont�
FROM: David Penrose
SUBJECT: ORW Evaluation of the Thompson River
Ureter Quality s-cit
-on
Asheville Re;ier,a! 0;i;ce
,Asheville, North Ccr ilRa
Attached is our data and summaries regarding the ORW request for Thompson
River in southern Transylvania and Jackson Counties. These data suggest that
the Thompson River does not qualify as ORW. This recommendation is based
primarily on current water quality conditions which indicate impacts due to
both point (trout farm) and non -point (silviculture and construction) sources
of pollution. However, the Thompson River is valuable as a trout stream and
as an area of high biological diversity. Vigorous efforts should be made to
protect the river from any further degradation.
DP:ps
cc: Steve Zoufally
Beth McGee
asrtest We.sta1.1

OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATER STUDY
OF THE
THOMPSON RIVER
February 1988
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ,
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
,November 1988
This report has been approved for release C'
Char es Wakild, Section hief
Date C� 1--Z
El

THOMPSON RIVER STUDY
BACKGROUND
The Thompson River is located in southern Transylvania and Jackson
Counties and forms one of the headwater rivers of Lake Jocassee. Lake Jocas-
see is a pump storage reservoir in South Carolina operated by Duke Power Com-
pany. The Thompson River has recently been nominated as an Outstanding
Resource Water by the North Carolina Natural Areas Protection Planning Commit-
tee. In addition, the river was also found to be a suitable candidate for
designation as a State Natural and Scenic River (NRCD,1987). The Thompson
River is typical of several "escarpment gorge" rivers in this area of Transyl-
vania and Jackson Counties. Others include the Toxaway, White Water, Horse
Pasture and Chattooga Rivers. These rivers are typified by outstanding scen-
ery, waterfalls, cascades and rugged undeveloped terrain. The Thompson river
falls approximately 1700 feet from its headwaters to the South Carolina line,
a distance of approximately 5.8 miles. The lower Thompson River, a one mile
section above Lake Jocassee at the state line, has more gorge -like character-
istics than the upper section. The microclimate in this segment is moderated
to such an extent that winter temperatures are never freezing And summer con-
ditions remain cool and moist. The habitat is suitable for some unusual plant
and animal species (NRCD 1987, Table 1). Most of these species are not asso-
ciated with the river; however, the gorge moss (Bryocrumia andersoni) is
closely tied to the spray of the river.

Table 1. Unusual Plant and Animal Species Recorded from the Thompson
River Gorge. Transylvania County, N.C.
(Source, N.C. Department of Parks and Recreation 1988)
Common Name
Green Salamander
Ground Beetle
Gorge Moss*
Sullivant's Maned -Moss
Alabama Grape Fern
Porter's Reedgrass
Blue Ridge Bindweed
Rough Gayfeather
Fraser's Loosestrife
Sweet Pinesap
Ginseng
Large -Leaved Grass -of -Parnassus
Pink -Shell Azalea
Oconee Bells*
Mottled Trillium
* State Endangered
Geology/Soils
Scientific Name
Aneides aeneus
Scaphinotus violaceus
Bryocrumia andersonii
Macrocoma sullivantii
Botrychium jenmanii
Calamagrostis portexi
Calysteria sericata
Liatris aspera
Lysimachia fraseri
Monotropsis odorata
Panax Ruinauefolius
Paranassus grandifolia
Rhododendron vase i
Shortia galacifolia
Trillium discolor
Much of the watershed above 3000 feet is composed of alternating layers
of biotite gneiss and granitic rock (Eaker and Stokes 1987). The soils
(Chandler -Fannin -Watauga Association) in the upper watershed have severe to
moderate limitations for construction of structures, roads and septic systems
(USDA 1974). The geology of the lower Thompson River watershed is primarily
composed of granite rock and gneiss and overlaid by soils of the Ashe-
Edneyville association. Because of restrictive slopes, many of the limita-
tions to construction and septic systems noted for the upper watershed also
' apply here.
Land Use/Dischargers
The watershed is almost entirely forested. However, nearly all of the
watershed was logged between 25 and 45 years ago. Crescent Land and Timber
Company, a subsidiary of Duke Power, owns much of the land from the headwaters
of Jocassee to NC-281 (Bohaynee Road). The balance of the remaining land
�I

area is in the Nantahala National Forest or in private ownership. Crescent
Land and Timer Company recently harvested trees from a large section of the -
watershed (clear cut) above the confluence with Reid Branch and the Thompson
River (Figure 1.).
There are no large industrial or municipal dischargers in the watershed.
However, a trout hatchery discharges its waste to the Thompson River below
NC-281.
ORW Criteria
North Carolina's administrative code (1986) states that the Environmental
Management Commission may classify certain unique and special surface waters
of the State an Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) upon finding that such
waters are of exceptional state or national recreational or ecological sig-
nificance and that the waters have exceptional water quality while meeting the
following conditions:
• there are no significant impacts from pollution with the water
quality rated as excellent based on physical, chemical and/or bio-
logical information;
• the characteristics which make these waters unique and special may
not be protected by the assigned narrative and numerical water
quality standards.
In order to be classified as ORW, a water body also must exhibit one or
more of the following values or uses:
■ there are outstanding fish (or commercially important aquatic
species) habitat and fisheries;
■ there is an unusually high level of water -based recreation or the
potential for such recreation;
• the waters have already received some special designation such as a
North Carolina 6r National Wild and Scenic River, Native or Special
G

Native Trout Waters, National Wildlife Refuge, etc. which do not
provide any water quality protection;
• the waters represent an important component of a state or national
park or forest; or
• the waters are of special ecological or scientific significance such
as habitat for rare or endangered species or as areas for research
and education.
STATION LOCATIONS
Three stations were established on the Thompson River to assess ORW
potential (Table 2, Figure 1) including 1) Thompson River at NC-281 above the
trout hatchery, 2) Thompson River below the trout hatchery and near the Cres-
cent timber operation and 3) Thompson River at the state line near Lake jocas-
see (Duke Power Co. Station V583.2), In addition, a fourth site was estab-
lished on a UT to the Thompson River at NC-281. This site was added to assess
conditions in a.tributary stream typical of the upper Thompson River wat-
ershed. Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected at all four locations using
DEM's standardized qualitative collection technique (NRCD 1986). However,
only EPT taxa were collected at the UT location. A review of water quality
data and fisheries information is also summarized in this report.

FIGURE 1. STATION LOCATIONS FOR THOMPSON RIVER ORW SURVEY.
TRANSYLVANIA C0.' FEBRUARY 1988.
�---- NC
7-HOIYP56W 201
R/VIR
TROUT DUKE POWER CO.
HATCHERY 1 BOUNDARY
UT MOMPSON R 4 Rf/U
BRANCH
cUl,
2
NC
281
NC
281
3
DUKE POWER CO.
BOUNDARY
THo/'IPSIfY
RIVER
TRANSYLVANIA COUNTY, N.C.
OCONEE COUNTY, S.C.
LAA'E
JOCASSEE

Table 2. Station Descriptions. Thompson River Basin, Jackson and
Transylvania Counties, N.C. February 1988.
Location
Width (m)
Depth (m)
Average
Maximum
Canopy M
Aufwuchs
Substrate M
Boulder
Rubble
Gravel
Sand
Silt
Comments
Water Quality
1
NC-281
5.0
0.2
0.8
80
Moderate
45
30
10
10
5
High Gradient
with bedrock
2 3
Below Hatchery State Line
10.0 8.0
0.3
0.6
1.5
2.0
60
65
Abundant
Moderate
25
30
10
20
15
Sohaerotilus
on substrate
RESULTS
50
30
10
10
Very Clear
UT Thompson R.
NC-281
4.0
0.3
0.7
100
Moderate
20
30
35
25
Small, sandy
NRCD does not maintain a water quality station in the Thompson River
watershed. However, data have been collected by Duke Power Company as part of
their Keowee-Toxaway Project. Data from Duke Power Company were recorded as
mean and range values for several water quality parameters from the lower
Thompson River (Site #552.0) for 1976-1987. Interpretation of these data are
limited in this report because of potential effects of seasonality or flow
conditions. However, there did not appear to be any major water pollution
problems in the watershed. Values for these parameters (temperature, dis-
solved oxygen, specific conductance, turbidity and solids, nutrients and met-
als) from the Thompson River compared favorably to other rivers in their study
area (i.e. lower Whitewater and lower Horsepasture). Data were also summa-
rized from Reid Branch (Site #583.6) for 1987. Data from Reid Branch were
similar to Bearcamp, lower Mill and lower Wright Creeks. Supplemental data
from Reid Branch, the upper Thompson River (Site #583.9 at NC-281) and the

lower Thompson River (Site #552.0) locations in January 1988, were also
included in this review and did not indicate any water pollution problems.
Special studies were conducted by both Duke Power Company and NRCD in
response to a sewage odor detected from the Thompson River near Reid Branch in
November 1987. An elevated total coliform value was collected from the lower
Thompson River site (>2400/100 ml). These studies could not pin -point any
potential problems with bacterial pollution and noted that values recorded
were "typical of that type of minimally disturbed area" (memo from Gary Tweed,
NRCD January 27, 1988). Memos regarding these surveys from Phyllis Clawson
(Duke Power Company) and Gary Tweed (NRCD) are attached.
Fisheries
Several Fisheries surveys have been conducted on the Thompson River.
Survey and Classification investigations of State managed trout streams have
been conducted by the Division of Inland Fisheries (Messer 1964 and Bonner
1983). The most recent investigations have been conducted by Duke Power Com-
pany as part of their Keowee-Toxaway Project.
The Thompson River was noted as a high quality trout stream based on
Fisheries data collected in June 1963 (Messer 1964). Furthermore, this report
indicated that successful brook trout reproduction was taking place in the
river.
Bonner (1983) noted that the Thompson River was severely damaged between
1976 and 1977 by siltation from highway construction. This report indicated
that the river may be recovering and that standing stocks of trout vary con-
siderably. Standing stocks range from zero trout (Bonner collected 0.54
lbs/ac of wild trout below highway 281 in August 1981) to 20 lbs/ac following
stocking with fall brown trout fingerlings. Also, Bonner (1983) noted that
headwater streams (within game lands) do contain populations of brook trout.

Due to widely fluctuating standing crops and poor access, the Thompson
River is currently classified as a B Class -State managed trout stream. Class
B streams may have occasional reproductive failures and are usually stocked
with fingerling trout. Half -wild brown trout fingerlings were last stocked in
the Thompson River in December 1985. General trout fishing regulations apply
to the Thompson River. Native trout fishing regulations were never enacted by
the Wildlife Resources Commission primarily because of limited access (com-
munication Fred Harris; Chief, Division of Inland Fisheries).
The most recent Fisheries investigations were conducted by Duke Power
Company. These data (listed below) generally agree with the Wildlife
Resources Commission information in that standing stock ranges are less than
20 lbs/ac.
Trout Standing Stock. Thompson River, Transylvania County, North Caro-
lina, September/October 1987. Duke Power Company (memos to Bennett
Wynne, Fisheries Biologist, District 9.)
Station Location
1. Reid Branch
2. Upper Thompson River
3. Lower Thompson River
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Trout
Results
Date
Species
Kg/ha
Lbs/ac
Oct. 1987
Brook
10.1
11.3
Sep. 1987
Brown
0.5
0.56
Rainbow
8.7
9.75
Total
9.2
10.31
Sep. 1987
Brown
0.2
0.22
Rainbow
1.2
1.34
Total
1.4
1.57
Benthic macroinvertebrates have been collected from the Thompson River by
several groups. Objectives and collection methods were different for each
group making direct comparisons between surveys impractical.
Duke Power Company. Duke Power Company biologists have collected benthos from
the Thompson River at the NC/SC state line (site #583.2) every other month
since November 1986. These data were collected to assess faunal composition
and note any variations in population structure. These samples were collected
with Hess samplers in rocky riffle areas and with core samples from sandy
L. A

areas, supplemented by qualitative techniques. A diverse population of ben-
thic insects was recorded at this site. A peak in density was noted in May
(primarily because of chironomidae collected from riffle areas) and total taxa
richness values were highest in May 1987 (ST/SEPT1 = 70/27) and November 1986
(ST/SEpT = 76/32). Average ST/SEpT values (average of 6 collection dates)
were 65/25. These data will be summarized by Duke Power Company as part of
their license application procedure.
Duke Power, Company also hired a private consultant "to determine the
species of the adult aquatic insect fauna and the presence of species which
could be rare, endemic, or of limited distribution in the (Lake Jocassee)
area". Principal collection methods were the use of all-night light traps,
Malaise traps and aerial net sweeping of vegetation. These techniques were
supplemented by qualitative examination of benthic materials. Results of
these investigations (Morse 1987) identified 17 species which they considered
"rare, endemic, or of limited distribution" from the Lake Jocassee collection
area. Eleven of these species were found in the Thompson River (site # 583.2)
and three species were unique to this site. These eleven species are listed
in Table 3. The author concluded that the distribution of the 17 "rare"
species found in this investigation (including the 11 species from the Thomp-
son River) are not well known and that they may also be present in other, less
studied streams.
1 ST/SEPT = Total taxa richness/Ephemeroptera + Plecoptera + Trichoptera

Table 3. Benthic Macroinvertebrates that are "Rare, Endemic or of Limited
Distribution". Thompson River NC/SC. (Morse 1987)
Taxa
Baetis flavistriga
Leucrocuta juno
Stenacron pallidum
Optioservus immunis
Agarodes tetron'^
Helicopsuche n. sp..nr
Hydropsyche carolina
Hydroptila n. sp. nr.
Hydroptila spinata
Stactobiella martynovi
Wormaldia nr. sp. ?
limnella*
lonchera'^
* Found only in the Thompson River
Months of Collection
May -July
June -July, September
May -August
July -October
May
June -July
June -July
August
May
June
August
NRCD. Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected from three locations on
the Thompson River to assess ORW potential (Table 1). In addition, EPT
samples were collected from a UT to the Thompson River. Results of these
surveys are listed in Table 4 and Appendix I. All data were collected using
NRCD's standardized qualitative sampling method (NRCD 1986). This method uses
a wide variety of collection techniques to inventory the aquatic fauna. The
primary output is a species list, with some indication of relative abundance
(Rare, Common or Abundant) for each taxon. Both total taxa richness and the
taxa richness of the most intolerant (EPT) invertebrate groups can be used to
assign water quality ratings. Unstressed streams and rivers have many
species, while polluted areas have fewer species. Water quality assessments
also use the abundance of both intolerant species and "pollution indicator"
groups. EPT abundance values have also been calculated. These values esti-
mate relative abundance for EPT taxa based on subjective values of 10, 3 and 1
for the Abundant, Common and Rare taxa.

Table 4
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Taxa Richness Totals. Thompson River ORW
Survey. Transylvania County, North Carolina. February 1988.
Group
Ephemeroptera
Plecoptera
Trichoptera
Coleoptera
Odonata
Megaloptera
Diptera: Misc.
Diptera: Chiron
Oligochaeta
Crustacea
Mollusca
Other
Thompson River
1
2
3
13
15
17
22
8
7
17
15
17
2
4
2
2
4
2
1
2
1
6
7
11
13
20
24
2
2
4
-
1
-
1
1
1
Subtotal (EPT)
41
38
48
EPT Abundance
210
120
229
Total Taxa
68
79
87
Bioclassificationl
Good
Good
Good
UT Thompson
13
7
11
31
1 Rating is based on taxa richness criteria for mountain streams
(NRCD 1986).
These taxa richness values indicate a Good bioclassification at all
Thompson River locations. The somewhat lower EPT taxa richness and abundance
values at Site 2 may reflect the effects of the trout hatchery. This was the
site that had the prolific Sphaerotilus growths on substrate. Darschnik and
Schuhmacher (1987), noted changes in functional feeding groups, i.e., a shift
to dominance of filter feeders below trout farms. This report also states
that disturbances below trout farms in mountain stream systems create condi-
tions in their downstream course that are very similar to those found much
further downstream in the natural stream continuum. Field notes indicate a
disproportionate abundance of hydropsychid caddisfly (filter -feeders) at both
lower Thompson River locations (sites 2 and 3), although these taxa were dom-
inant only at site #2 below the trout hatchery.
All of the mayfly species collected by Morse and listed as rare, were
also collected in this survey. All other rare taxa (including the 3 endemic

caddisfly taxa) listed in Table 2 were not collected. Differences in collec-
tion records may be due to seasonality (this survey was conducted in February)
and collection methods.
EVALUATION OF ORW CRITERIA
The Thompson River was found to have Good water quality according to
biological data collected from three locations. However, there is some evi-
dence that suggests that water quality may be affected by the effluent from a
trout farm. Potential effects of construction and/or silvicultural activities
in the watershed may also affect water quality. The characteristics which
contribute to this Good water quality may not be protected by the "assigned
narrative and numerical water quality standards", as chemical data for this
river appear to exceed the minimum standards for C-trout streams.
There are five "Outstanding Resource Values" defined by the North Caro-
lina Administrative Code (1986). ORW streams must meet one or more of these
criteria.
• Outstanding fish habitat or fisheries. The 1983 Survey of State
managed trout streams in Transylvania County assigned the Thompson
River a B classification, indicating that occasional reproductive
failures are expected. With stocking of fingerling trout, the
Thompson River is expected to support 5-10 lb/acre of trout.
Potential sedimentation from silvicultural and construction acti-
vities may affect trout viability.
■ Unusually high level of water -based recreation or the potential for
such recreation. The Thompson River is expected to have a low
potential for recreation because of limited access and also the
majority of the watershed is privately owned.

■ Special designations. There are no special designations currently
assigned to the River. However, the Thompson River has been pro-
posed for Natural and Scenic designation.
■ Important component of state or national park or forest. A small
upper portion of the Thompson River watershed (200-300 acres) is in
the Nantahala National Forest. Personnel from the National Forest
Service were not able to identify any unusual characteristics of
Forest Service lands in the watershed. Current land use plans
indicate that no logging is to occur for the next ten years (Class
4C).
■ Special ecological or scientific significance. No unique or endemic
benthic insect species were collected during this investigation.
Other researchers (Morse 1987) have noted the occurrence of rare
species in the Thompson River. However, similar communities can
probably be collected from most Class A or B trout streams in this
area.
SUMMARY
The Thompson River was found to have Good water quality and a fairly
diverse population of benthic macroinvertebrates. There is some evidence that
suggests that water quality may be affected by the effluent from a trout farm.
Potential effects of silvicultural and construction activities may also affect
water quality and should be carefully monitored.
The Thompson River does not qualify as an Outstanding Resource Water.
However, this river is valuable both as a trout stream and as an area of high
biological diversity. Vigorous efforts should be made to protect the Thompson
River from any degradation.

REFERENCES
Bonner, W.R. 1983. Survey and Classification of State -Managed Trout Streams,
District Nine. N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission,.Division of Inland
Fisheries. 326 pp.
Darschnik, V.S. and H. Schumacher. 1987. Str6nung des naturlichen
Langsgradienten eines Bergbaches durch Forellenteichanlagen. Arch.
Hydrobiol. 110(3)409-439.
Eaker, W.M. and J.L. Stokes. 1987. Transylvania County Water Quality Study.
Land -of -Sky Region Council. 36 pp.
Messer, J.B. 1964. Survey and Classification of the Savannah River and Trib-
utaries, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Division of Inland
Fisheries.
Morse, J. 1987. Final Report: Aquatic Insects of the Lake Jocassee Watershed.
Prepared for Duke Power Company. 13 pp.
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development.
1986. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) Data Review 1985.
Division of Environmental Management Report No. 86-04. 123 pp.
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development.
1987. A Preliminary Report on the Qualifications of the Thompson River
for Designation into the North Carolina Natural and Scenic River System
Division of Parks and Recreation. 5 pp
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1974. Soil Survey of Transylvania County,
North Carolina. Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service.
a&

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY.
FEBRUARY 1988.. R=RAREi C=COMMONS A=ABUNDANT
!ORDER
I-------------
IE_PHEMEROPTERA
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
i
1
i
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(CONTINUED)
I
I 01
I STREAM
ITHOMPSON
I R AT NC
t` .....281
i
i
STATION;
-------------------------------I
1 02 1 03 1 0-rt I
+---------
t STREAM 1 STREAK? I STREAM 1
-+-------------------+---------I
ITHOMPSON 1THOMPSON 1 UT 1
1'R BELOW IR a STATEITHOMPSON t
1HATCHERY I LINE 1 R 1
—+---------+--------+---------I
I 1 1 I
-+---------+---------+---------i
I I I 1
-------+------- +-------------------+---------1
1SPECIES i
--+--------------I
I I 1 t
IAMELETUS I I I I 1
ILI'NEATUS 1 A I C 1 C ! C t
I---------------+----=----+-=-------+---------+-------- I
IBAETIS AMPLUS 1 R I A 1 A I R I
---------------+---------+---------+--------+----_----I
1B.AETIS 1 I I 1 1
IFLAVISTRIGA 7 1 C I I 1
1---------------+---------+---------+---------+--------I
IBAETIS PYGMAEU:S1 I 1 1 R i
------+---------+---------+---------I
18AETIS 1 1. 1 1 1
ITRICAUDATUS I R 1 G 1 A I C 1
I ---------------+---------+----. --+---------+---------I
ICLOEON SPP 1 I R I I I
I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------t
1EPEORUS DISPAR 1. C 1 C I A 1 t
--+---------+---------+---------I
1EP`ORUS 1 I I I I
IPLEURALIS I A 1 1 A 1 A 1
I---------------+---------+---------+---------+--------�1
IEPHEMERA SPP I C I C I R I C I
I ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
IEPHEMERELLA i I 1 I 1
ICAT AWBA (GROUP)I 1 1 A I C 1
1---------------+---------+---------+---------+=-------=1
I EPHEMERELLA I I 1 I I
1H.ISPIDA I ! I C I 1
I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
1EPHEMERELLA 1 I I I I
IINVARIA (GR) ! I I C I t
-+---------+---------+---------+---------1
I EPHEMERELLA I I I I I
1ROSSI (GR) i A I C 1 A I R I
--------------------------------------------
b

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. v MARC
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE9 C=COMMONS A=ABUNDANT
-----------------------------------
I I STATION I
1 1------------------------ ----------------1
01 1 02 1 03 1 04 {
JJ---------+---------+---------+---------J
I 1 STREAM I STREAM i STREAM I STREAM 1
1{---------+---------+---------+---------i
i ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT 1
i I R AT NC i R BELOW IR a@ STATEiTHOMPSON i
I 1 .281 ]HATCHERY i LINE I R 1
1{---------+---------+---------+---------I
J J 1 i i 1
Ii---------+---------+---------+---------J
I 1 1 I i I
-----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
]ORDER ISPECIES
I---------------+---------------( I I I I
IEPHEMEROPTERA 1EURYLOPHELLA I I I I I
J ISPP----+----RC I
— I ----+---------I
{ IEURYLOPHELLA I 1 I 1 1
{ JBiCOLOR I i —----+----R-
--------------------- ----+---------J
I JEURYLOPHELLA I l 1 ) I
I IT------- R
I -----+----- I —__—_+____
— ---_I
I IHABROPHLEBIODESi I i ] I
J I--- ------+---------+--- J c 1 — ---I
I IHEPTAGENIA SPP I R I I I I
JI----------=----+---------+---------+----------------J
i ILEPTOPHLEBIA
J I-- {------+— 1 ----- I
I ILITOBRANCHA I i I I 1
J iRECURVATA I -----I R I I R t
---+---- --------+---------+---------I
IPARALEPTOPHLEB—] I I I
I IIA SPP I A I R I C I R 1
iI--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------i
t 1RHITHROGENA SPPI J I C I I
--------+--------+---------+---------J
1 I STEN.ACRON i I I J I
J iPALL.IDUM I C i R I R I R 1
iI ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
J ISTENONEMA I
{ ICARLSONI I c i I I A I
II---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------i
i ISTENONEMA 1 I I i 1
I IMODESTUM I I C J A ] I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
iCONTINUED)
f

APPENDIX 1- SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY: , MAR(
, FEBRUARY 1088. R=RARE, C=COMMON~ A=ABUNDANT
----------------------------- -----------------------
I
I STATION {
I---------------------{
I O1 I OZ 1 03 1 04 f
I
i---------+---------+---------+---------I
{
i STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1 STREAM I
{
(---------+---------+---------+---------{
1
ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT I
{
{ R AT NC I R BELOW IR @ STATEITHOMPSON i
I
{ 281 1HATC'HERY I LINE I R
1
jI---------+---------+---------+---------{
{
I I { 1 !
+--------=-+---------+---------{
------------------+---------+-------------------+---------
{-------------{
IORDER {SPECIES
I I I 1 I
i---------------+---------------{
I ! 1
IEPHEMEROPTERA ISTENONEMA
A f
1 IPUDICUM
I A j A {
-----j
-------------------------------------+---------+----
IPLECOPTERA IACRONEURIA
I 1 {
I R I
f 1ABNORMIS
I A I C I A
1 ------+---------+---------+---------+--'-------
{---------f
{ 1.ALLOCAPNIA SPP
I C ! { R ! I
j--------------
+---------+---------+---------+---------{
C I
{ IALLONARCYS SPP
I C I R I C I
I---+---------+---------+---------+---------{
{ IAMPHINEMURA SPPI 1-----}------ -{---C----I
-- +-
------+---------+----
ECISUS
CULTUS
{ 1------ D------
1-----+---------+- C 1------j
j IISOPERLA
I I I I {
I fHOLOCHLORA
I R I I I I
-------+---------+---------+---------+---------.I
{ IISOPERLA NR
I I I I
J ISLOSSONAE
I C . R I A I R 1
--------+---------+---------{
--------+---------+-
{ {ISOPERLA SPP
I R I R 1 I
1I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------{
{ IMALIREKUS
{ I I I I
{ jHASTATUS
I C I R 1 I C
{ I ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
{ jPARAGNETINA
i I I I i
{ IIMMARGINATA
I C I I A I
j{---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------�
IPELTOPERLA SPP
I A 1 C 1-----+----A I
----I
------+---------+---------+----
{ 1PROSTOIA
i I I I I
I ISIMILIS
I I R-I---------'---------±
(CONTINUEO)

APPENDIX I. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. MAR(
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE, C=COMMON, A=ABUNDANT
I I STATION I
i1------------- ---------------------1
I I 01 1 02 1 03 I 04 1
Ii--------+--------+---------+---------I
I 1 STREAM I STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1
! (---------+---------+---------+---------I
! ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT I
1 I R AT NC I R BELOW IR @ STATEITHOMPSON I
I 281 (HATCHERY I LINE I R 1
II---------+---------+---------+---------i
I I I 1 I I
I ---------+---------+---------+---------I
I I i I 1 I
(-------------------------------+---------+---------+--------+---------I.
(ORDER ISPECIES I I 1 I I
I---------------+---------------! I 1 I I
1PLECOPTERA ISTROPHOPTERYX I 1 I ! 1
1 ISPP I A I R i C I A I
II ---------------+---------+------- +---------+--------1
I I SWEL.TSA SPP
I---------------+---
ITRICHOPTERA {
I I
I I
1 #
1 I
1 {
I 1
{ I
I I
1 I
I I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
(CONTINUED)
! R 1 I I I
---------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
APATANIA- I I I A I 1
---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------}
ARCTOPSYCHE I I I I
I RRORATA I R I I C I C 1
-+---------+--------=I
CERACLEA
A.NCYL.US
+--- -----+---------I
CHEUMATOPSYCHE i I 1 I I
S P.P 1 ( I C I I
----------------+---------+---------+---------+---------(
IDIPLECTRONA I I I I I
{MODESTA 1 A I. R I R I R
--------+---------+---------{
IDOLOPHILODES I I I I i
I SPP I C I I A I R I
------+---------+---------+--=------+---------I
IfLOSSOSOMA SPP I C I I A I 1
-------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
1HETEROPLECTRON I I I i I
IAMERICANUM I A I I I A
----+---------+---------(
1HYDATOPHYLAX I I I I I
IS PP 1 C I R I I R I
--+--------+---------+---------I
IHYDROPSYCHE 1 I I I !
IBETTENI---------------------------------------

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. , MAR
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE, C=COMMON, A=ABUNDANT
---------------- --------------------------------
1 1 STATION 1
II ---------------------------------------I
1 i O1 1 02 1 03 1 04
II ---------+---------+---------+---------I
{ I STREAM I STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1
iI ---------+---------+---------+---------I
1 ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT {
1 { R AT NC I R BELOW! IR @ STATEITHOMPSON 1
I' 281 1HATCHERY I LINE I R-- i
1 I---------+---------+---------+----- --I
I I I I 1 1
1-+---------+---------+=-------- I
I I I I I I
- --------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
]ORDER ]SPECIES I { I I I
I---------------+---------------I 1 1 I 1
ITRICHOPTERA 1HYDROPSYCHE I 1 1 I j I MAC --AA
-------t----
--- I ---- f--- I
j IHYDROPSYCHE I I I I 1
j I-LO------------fi----A- I A A 1
1 i
j 1 HYDROPSYCHE I 1 1 { I
I ISPARNA -I A I A 1 A 1 1
- +------=--+---------+---------+---------I
j IHYDROPTILA SPP I C I R 1 I 1
---+---------+---------+--------+---------1
I ILEPIDOSTOMA SPPI ' C I R I R I 1
jI ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
j IMOLANNA BLENDA 1 1 1 I R {
+---------+---------+---------+---------j
I I--------- NEOPHYLAX SPP I A IA
------+--------+— 1
j 1NYCTIOPHYLAX 1 I 1 1 1
{ IMOESTUS I C 1 A I R I 1
II---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------i
i IPARAPSYCHE I I I I 1
1 I CARDIS I I I I C
I---------------+---------+---------+--------+---------1
IPOLYCENTROPUS I I 1 1 1
{ ISPP I C I I C I
—+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I IPSILOTRETA SPP 1 I_ I R I 1
-------+=--------+---------+--------+---------I
I IPTILOSTOMIS SPPI I R 1 i 1
-----+---------+---------+---------+---------I
i IPYCNOPSYCHE I i I I II
1 IGUTTIFER 1 I I C I R 1
(CONTIUUEO)

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. 9 MARC
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RAREs C=COMMON, A=ABUNDANT
---------------------------------------------------
1 { STATION 1
{1----------------------------------{
] I 01 1 02 1 03 1 04 1
{---------+---------+--------+--------1
I ] STREAM 1 STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1
I1-------------------+------------------{
I ITHOMPSON ]THOMPSON ]THOMPSON I UT i
] I R AT NC I R BELOW IR 0 STATEITHOMPSON I
I 1 281 ]HATCHERY I LINE I R !
---------+---------+---------+---------I
] 1 I 1 I I
II---------+--------+---------+---------{
I f ! I I I
---t--------+---------+---------+---------I
]ORDER ]SPECIES
1-------------------------------1 ( ] 1 1
]TRICHOPTERA IPYCNOPSYCHE 1 1 1 f {
{ 1SCABRIPENNIS 1 ! i R l i
] I---------------+-----------------------------+---------]
{ IPYCNOPSYCHE SPPI R I C I I I
iI---------------+---------+---------+---------t---------I
1 1RHYACOPHILA ] 1 1 1 I
] IACUTILABA I I R ] 1 1
{ I ----------- ---+--------+------------------+---------f
{ IRHYACOPHILA 1 I I I I
] 1 C'AROLTNA 1 C I C I C I R I
-----+---------+-----------------------------I
1 ] RHYACOPHILA I I I I I
] IEUSCULA I A I A I A I R f
{ I---------------+---------+---------+----------------- I
I IRHYACOPHILA I 1 .1 1 I
{ ITORVA I 1 R 1 I 1
]---------------+---------------+---------+-------------------+---------I
1COLEOPTERA I-CTOPRIA I I I I I
] I NERVOSA I C I C 1 R 1 I
1 I---------------f---------+-----------------+--------I
I IGYRINUS SPP 1 I R i I I
I--------------+---------+----------+---------+--------1
j IHYDROPORUS SPP I I R I I I
{ I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------)
I IPROMORESIA 1 I 1 I 1
] IELEGANS I R I I I I
]I---------------+---------+-------------------+---------1
1 IPSEPHENUS I 1 1 I 1
1 IHERRICKI I I R I A I I
.1---------------+---------------t---------+---------+---------+---------1
IODONATA IBOYERIA I I I I I
1 1GRAFIANA I R I R I I I
II ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I ICALOPTERYX SPP 1 I C I 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTINUED)

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. MAR
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE-P C=COMMONy A=ABUNDANT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I } STATION i
1 1------------=--------------------------i
I O1 1 02 I 0.3 1 04 }
I} ---------+----------}---------+---------I
I 1 STREAM I STREAM 1-STREAM I STREAM i
1 1---------+---------+---------+----=----I
1 ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON'I UT 1
1 I R AT NC I R BELOW IR a STATEITHOMPSON 1
I I 281 IHATCHERY I LINE I R I
1 1---------+---------+---------+---------1
} 1 I 1 I 1
Ii---------+---------+---------+---------1
I 1 1 I I 1
---+---------+---------+---------1
}ORDER (SPECIES
1---------------+---------------1 I I I 1
1ODONATA ICORDULEGASTER l 1 1 I I
I I SPP 1 1 R I R 1 1
II---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------1
1 ILANTHUS I I I 1 I
1 IVERNALIS i A I R 1 C I 1'
------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
IMEGALOPTERA INIGRONIA I 1 I I I
1 ISERRICORNIS I I A I C I I
1---------------+---------+=-------+---------+---------I
I ISIALIS SPP I R I C I I i
I---------------- ---------------+---------+----------+---------+---.------
i
IDIPTERA.CHIRON IBRILLIA SPP 1 C I R i R 1 I
—+---------+---------+---------+---------1
1 ICHIRONOMUS SPP I I C i I i
1 I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------i
1 ICONCHAPELOPIA 1 I i i 1
1 GROUP I C 1 A I A I I
1 I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------1
I ICORYNONEURA SPP1 R I A I I I
1 I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------1
1 ICRICOTOPUS/ORT-1 } 1 1 I
IHOCLADIUS SP10 I A 1 1 A ) I
I1---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
ICRICOTOPUS/CRT-1 1 } I 1
I IHOCLADIUS SP13 I C I ( A i }
i----------------+---------+---------+=--------+---------1
1 ICRICOTOPUS/ORT-1
1 IHOCLADIUS SP46 I 1 A I !41 I
-------+---------+-----------1
j ICRICOTOPUS/ORT-1- 1 i 1 1
i IHOCLADIUS SP51 1 I I R I i
---+---------+---------+---------1
I ICRICOTOPUS/ORT-1 I i I I
1 IHOCLADIUS SP54 I A I A I I 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTINUED)

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. s MARCi
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE, C=COMMONi A=ABUNDANT
--------------------------------------------
f STATION !
II--------------------------- ---------I
I 1 01 1 02 1 03 { 04 !
1 I---------+---------+--------+--------1
f STREAM I STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1
II---------+--------+-------+--------i
I ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT {
j I R AT NC I R BELOW IR a STATEITHOMPSON I
I I 281 (HATCHERY I LINE 1 R i
1 I ---------+---------+---------+---------I
1 I 1 1 1 !
II---------+---------+--------+----- =I
1 { 1 I I 1
i-------------------------------+---------+--------+--------+-------- j
(ORDER (SPECIES 1 I 1 I I
I ---------------+---------------I I { 1 1
IDIPTERA:CHIRON ICRICOTOPUS/ORT—i 1 I { I
I IHOCLADIUS SP8 I 1 1 R { {
II ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I IDIAMESA SPP I 1 I A I 1
1 I---------------+---------+---------+---------+------- —I
j IEUKIEFFERIELLA .1 1 1 1 1
1 IsPl I C I C I C I {
II---------------+---------+---------+---------+--------!
i IEUKIEFFERIELLA I I { I 1
! I SP1I i A I A I I I
{ I ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
IEUKIEFFERIELLA I 1 1 I I
I ISP12 I 1 A 1 A I I
------+---------+---------+--------I
I IEUKIEFFERIELLA I { I I {
j 1SP3 I I C j I 1
{ I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------j
IEUKIEFFERIELLA I I 1 I 1
j ISP6 I I C { I I
jI ---------------+---------+------- +---------+---------I
I IMICROPSECTRA I I I I {
ISPP I C I )c I C 1 i
jI ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I I MIC ROTENDI PES 1 I I I I
I 1sP1 - I R I C I R I I
iI ---------------+---------+---------+---------+--------I
I INANOCLADIUS SPP.I I I R {
---+---------+-------+------,---1
j INATARSIA SPP { I C I i 1
--+---------+---------{--------I
I IPAGASTIA SPP I I I A I I
fI ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
j IPARACHIRONOMUS I I I I I
f ISPP I R 1 I C I !
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTINUED)

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. , MAR(
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE, C=COMMON, A=ABUNDANT
--------------------------------------------------------
1 I STATION i
II--------------- -----------------------I
I 1 01 1 02 1 03 1 Opt I
II ---------+---------+---------+---------I
I 1 STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1 STREAM 1
II ------- --+---------+---------+---------I
1 ITHOMPSON 1THOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT 1
I I R AT NC'I R BELOW IR a STATEITHOMPSON 1
1 281 1HATCHERY 1 LINE I R 1
1 I ---------+---------+-------------------I
1 i 1 1 1 1
1 I---------+---------+---------+---------i
1 I 1 i i 1
--------------+---------+--------+---------+---------I
IORDER ISPECIES
I---------------+---------------I
1DIPTERA:CHIRON IPARAPHAENOCLAD-1 I 1 I I
I IIUS SPECIES 1 1 A I A 1 A 1 1
II ---------------+---------+--------+--------+--------I
I IPHAENOPSECTRA I 1 1 I 1
I I SPP I I A
----+-------:--+---------+---------+---------I
I IPOLYPEDILUM I i I I I
I I ANGULUM I 1 R i C I I
II---------------+---------+---------+-------+---------1
IPOLYPEDILUM I I 1 I I
I lAVICEPS I R I I R I 1
II ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I IPOTTHASTIA I 1 1 I !
I IGAEDI I 1 I R I I
II---------------+---------+------- -+---------+---------1
I IPRODIAMESA I I I 1 I
I IOLIVACEA I I C I 1 !
11---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I 1RHEOCRICOTOPUS I I I I I
I ISP2 1 1 A i I 1
II---------------+---------+---------+--------+--- ------ I
I IRHEOTANYTARSUS I I I I I
I 1 S P P l .l 1 R I I
II --- —----------+---------+---------+---------+---------i
I ISYNORTHOCLADIUSI I 1 I 1
ISPP 1 I C i R I 1
II ---------------+---------+---------+---------+--------i
ITHIENEMANIELLA 1 I i I I
I IsPP ) I I A 1 I
1 I ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
{ ITRIBELOS SPP I I I R I I
-------+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
IDIPTERA:MISC IANTOCHA SPP I I C I R I I
----------------------------------------------------------------- --
(CONTINUED)

APPENDIX 1- SPECIES LIST FOR-THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. MAR(
FEBRUARY 1988. R=RARE, C=COMMONj A=ABUNDANT
------------------------------------------------------------------
I 1 STATION! I
Ii---------------------------------------1
! f 01 I" 02 1 03 1 Oft 1
1---------+---------+---------+---------1
1 1 STREAM I STREAM I STREAM I STREAM f
i1----=----+--------+---------+---------1
1 ITHOMPSON ]THOMPSON 1THOMPSON I UT I
1 I R AT NC I R BELOW IR a STATEITHOMPSON 1
1 1 281 IH�ATCHERY i LINE 1 R 1
1 J---------+---------+---------+--------J
I I I i I i
I1---------+---------+---------+---------I
J I ! 1 I 1
1-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------J
IORDER (SPECIES
I---------- -----+---------------I 1 1 I I
IDIPTERA=MISC IATHERIX LANTHA I C 1 I I 1
1 I ---------------+---------+---------+--- -----+---------I
J IBLEPHARICERA I I 1 i !
J ISPP I C I R I A I I
J1---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
I ICNEPHIA
J IPECUARUM
! I ---------------- ----------+---------+--------+--------- J
I IDICRANOTA SPP I 1 i R I I
1 i---------------+---------+---------+---------+---=-----I
i IDIXA SPP I I I R 1 I
iI ---------------+---------+=--------+---------+---------I
1 1HEXATOMA SPP i C I C I A I 1
1 I --- ------------+---------+---------+---------+---------I
J IPALPOMYIA I 1 i -I I
J 14COMPLEX) I C I C I C I 1
1 I ----------- ----+---------+---------+---------+---------1
J IPOLYMEDA/ORMOS-1 I I i 1
J iIA SPP I I I I R i ]
iJ---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------i
I 1PROSIMULIUM I I I I i
f IMIXTUM I C I A 1 .1 1
! I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------f
1PRO.SIMULIUM SPP1 I I A 1 1
JI ---------------+---------+---------+---------+--------I
I ISIMULIUM I I I I 1
J I(PHOSTERODOROS)I I I I 1
I ISPP I i i C I I
---+-------- +---------+------------------I
J ISIMULIUM I I I i I
1 IVITTATUM I I C I I I
-----+---------+---------+---------1
ITIPULA SPP 1 A I A I R I i
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTINUED)

APPENDIX 1. SPECIES LIST FOR THOMPSON RIVER STUDY. s MAR(
FE'BRUARY 1988. R=RARET C=COMMON, A=ABUNDANT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I STATION _ i
1 1---------------------------------------I
1 O1 1 OZ 1 03 1 04 1
--------------- -----+---------+---------]
i I STREAM I STREAM I STREAM 1 STREAM !
I1---------+---------+--------+---------1
I ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON ITHOMPSON I UT I
I R AT NC I R BELOW IR @ STATEITHOMPSON I
i 1 281 ]HATCHERY 1 LINE I R I
--+---------+---------+---------I
I I 1 I I I
1 1---------+---------+---------+---------1
--+---------+---------+---------1
IOROER ISPECIES I 1 I I 1
---------------+-----------
IOLIGOCHAETA ILUMBRICULIDAE I C i A I A 1 I
]---------------+---------+---------t---------+---------1
INAIS SPP I I R I A `1 R I ]
1 I---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------]
I 1PELOSCOLEX SPP I I .1 R C. I
--+---------+---------]
] ISPIROSPERMA i I I 1 I
I INIKOLSKYI 1 I 1 R I i
-------------------------------+----=----+---------+---------+--------]
IM OLLUSCA ISPHAERIUM SPP I I C I I I
I-------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------1
(OTHER IDUGESIA TIGRINAI I C I R I 1
iI---------------+---------+=--------+--------+---------i
I 1HYDRACARINA I R I I 1 I

JanUar`. 1':?88
To: Bob Waldrop
From: Phyllis Clawson
sampling at Lake Jocassee
Re: January coliform
cc: A. Gnilka B. McCahe
J. Garton T. Whisenant
D. Meachum R. Siler
We collected tot<11 rand fec31 col iform samp'_es on January !S
in the Joca=_see feeder streams:
Just above confluence
with Jocassee__- _-.- L_ocati_Dn_
Howard Creek
550
Whitewater River
551
Thompson River
552
Coley Creek
584
Wr=pht Creel:
567
Mill Creek
586
Bearcamp Creek
1585
Horsepastur e Ri-✓e,-
553
Toxa�,.ay River
554
Laurel Fork Creek.
55
Fecal coliform
Total coliform
!co lonies/100m1)
-(co.onies .-._._—
- ---
,
`?
130
8
170
13
350
a
5
13
49
5
1 '7
2
2 7
it
420
;2
26
540
tewater R.i-r 5
583 94
Th :moron Ri •'F L 10
ror- sepas lure P i ver 5-
A b ov e Aohaynee Y;u -n _5F' ._..-�_.__.----------
Thompson River, 2
Drainage [:pool at Bart Creep --
(below septic field)
N
13
1600
_ - 1 led e,ter =av _aard r:a i
Gary Tweed(tiCCi l- ;chewi_a - 1 tan 1!21 S`^
data, and to vela'•. col if0r.T• numbers t e lecc o
3t siml 1 ar i]r t; i017
Tributary to Thcmpson River
= ?C.
;above Bohavnee,
on SR 1152-
u
-
Thompson River
( above Bohav,,ee
Thomp»n Rives
In t r o u t t ._'
be l ow Doha-, -:eLl ;
Wh:tewate,- er (at 5or.,3ynee)
Treed ccnveY�d :3
::•; -
- _
high we 1 i;,rc :e
ti.I-D,1s� �d- dUi-
�.
!
r,e :•a�:a ;
_ .._, _._ .
_
h ierosion area-�
,-._
-J-��
ri•ep� Pno1) because
o.ai col iforr:
1 I' Iota ar,d
_
ec:Ji _o ! _ nrrn
a• -: _ _,
i.intraated =_ewage is
,d:ca`ed. T::ee� -'
-
directly into
t ti -
'he L .e, y
ter =o :rc_,
f,d -
aid a' �_
drains
theti=yh• total
.� 1 f ,-m nun::�er
n = h=
partly the cause of

hatchery. He said the numbers he and we are getting .n the
Jocassee watershed are very typical of that type of
minimally disturbed area, are nothing alarming, and
continual monitoring. is probably not ;�,arranted. Spot dumping
b✓ a sewage truck (esp. on SR 1152) rr,.3y be occurrinq, and m3,,
lev
be what DPC environmental personnel saw inside the Coe
project area, but or.l,: sampling during '.he noticeable
effluent would catch high fecals-si,,cP they die O'f ::,uicr•:ly
in cool water. He mentioned that the low numbers we observed
on the Horseoastt.ir-e (and Laurel Fork?) rmav be due to residual
chlorine from licens=d treatment' facilities •spstream.
1 again clarified to Tweed that the high cpl.for-.�
seen on November l 7 at t�je Th mpso^ arm Wh i tewa ter
a vr(.) esD2C t : ve 1 v) were T1)TAl._ , nr, t fec a 1
confluences.:(>2400,
coliform.
We recommend di.scor,! ir.ui-.^ l:h1S ^p2=:a1 colifor^, sacnpl.na
1 12C t: r.q =Damp les onlw ,;F:-gin sight and smel L
In 11e11 of CO
indicate untreated sev-3:]e . ,c pa=� e ont3C t re i l' ,/n-U have an•J
ob ject ions or que:,t io;-;s `97J-5255''

x�= �'D ,c
S
p n I
reA,it
State of North Carolina ,�- �� ,r \,.x I c ;�. `�
velopment � ^ �
Department of Natural Resources and Community De�? ��v
Asheville Regional Office Sv U.r
James G. ivtartin, Governor
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION'
R£C£11/ ED
January 27, 1988 CIVIL, ENVIROHMENTAL DIVISION
O{IU EiyGiPIEER'S OFFICE
` ``.ti''.' JAN 2 S 1988
;=
Mr. S. B. Hager, Chief Engineer '"
Civil/Environmental Division
�'FNTRAL RECORDS'DMS�N DSi
Duke Power Company y0 ATTACHMENT TO ��
General offices
422 South Church Street NO' _
Charlotte, North Carolina 28242
Subject: Thompson and Whitewater Rivers
Transylvania County
Dear Mr. Hager:
In follow-up to inquires by Duke Power. Company and your December
23, 1987 letter, this Division has conducted an investigation of the
th Mr.
Thompson and Whitukeewater Power,RhavesbeenocontactedbandWaldrop and Ms. Phylis
are
Dfamiliar with this
Clawson with
Division's investigation.
On January 21, 1988, samples were collected from the Thompson and
Whitewater Rivers and results are as follows:_
Station
1. Thompson River
Trout Hatchery Discharge
2. Thompson River
Below Hatchery
3. Thompson River Above
Hatchery at NC 281
4. Thompson River Trib.
NCSR 1152
5. Thompson River NCSR 1152
6. Whitewater River NC 281
Fecal
Total
Coliform
Coliform
Fecal Stre
< 1
940
< 20
29
320
< 20
9
140
< 20
4
220
< 20
< 1 120
2 210
All results in colonies/100 m'
Interchange Building. 39 Woocl6n Place. P.O. Box 370. Asheville. ;'.C. 28802-0370 • Telephone 704-253
An Equal Opporrunity Affirmative Action Employzr
< 20
< 20

S. B. Hager
January 27, 1988
Page Two
In order to interpret bacterial analyses one must first understand
the relationship between fecal coliform, total coliform and fecal
strep. The total coliform group includes all of the aerobic and ed
facil-itative anaerobic, gr negative, nonspore-forming, P
bacteria that ferment lac tos'� in 24-48 hospeci3CTdefinitionhe
(mayor p
esofthefecalcoliform
includes the generic: e�cherichia
group), citrobacter, enterobacter and klebsiella. The fecalcolorms
They are define as gram -negative
are p rt of the total coliform group. The major
non rods that ferment lact�se in 24 ± 0.2 C• }
species in the fecal coliform group is scherichia coli, a species
indicative of fecal pollution and the possible preollution andenteric
may
pathogens. Fecal streptococci data verify fecal P and probable
provide additional information concerning the recency
coc
er
origin of pollution. The occurrence-ofblooded sireanimsThey nare `not
indicates fecal contamination by
known to multiply in the environment. Fecal coliform bacteria also. has
its origin in warm-blooded animals and is used primarily as an
e
ecl
indicator of sewage contamination. oi
may allowdastibetweentinship f
nctionbetweenanimal
coliform and fecal str�pt
and human waste.
Certain coliform bacteria occur naturally in the environment in
soils and water. During wet weather when streams receive run-off the
increase in waterways.- Based on the levels
coliform levels will incvery
measured above and other data collaby e Aswyou tmay ebesaware
littl�yidence of _human_ sewage contamination. 23,
those levels reported �alfeca c m1orm in
rements and eaerlikely 98ormal
letter are actually to
for that time depending on rainfall run-off. Total coliforms could
ot
easily„me.as.ure_in the thousandsamp anddue to tthel ow u al coliformKlevels
fecal streptocci.in the
indicate no contamination from human or animal waste. The levels of
total coliform appear normal and were expected to be even higher since
the streams at the time of sampling were experiencing significant
run-off. There is some logging activity in the drainage area of the
affect total coliform due to increased run -or -
Thompson River which may
•
All of the testing conducted thus far does not eliminated the
possibility that illegal dumping has occurred. It will be very
difficult to verify infrequent dumping by sampling. Should dump-ing
occur then coliform levels would only increase for short period ofIf
time (duration dependent of flow conditions) then return
stantbasis to notmhenal this
dumping was occurring daily or on
activity could possible be identified by sampling.
The trout hatchery on the Thompson River appears__o be having
little affect on the river. There
1whi�hepastfungus
hatgrowing
nvestiin gaticns
ha ery and at its discha_ge point
has shown is due to increase nutrient levels. This is common with a1
hatcheries and is not considered to be a problem. In fact past st

S. B. Hager
January 27, 1988
Page Three
indicate downstream fisheries are enhanced due to increase nutrients
from hatcheries. Most mountain streams are very sterile and the
increase nutrients will promote better food chains necessary for good
fish propagation. The hatchery may cause some odor during warm weather
which may have been the source of "sewage odor" previously reported.
In summary, this Division does not feel coliform sampling data
thus far is indicative of sewage contamination. The total coliform
hin those normally expected. Illegal
levels measured appear to be wit
dumping will be best determined by visual inspection of streams and
road access.areas to streams. Questioning haulers as to disposal
practices may reveal problems. To date there is only one hauler
registered with the Transylvania County Health Department operat-in
out
of Pisgah Forest, N. C. It is very unlikely for this hauler to be
improperly dumping. There may be haulers operating out of other local
districts or haulers serving the contractor port-a-john company which
may be dumping improperly. We have never received a report identiiving
a dumping incident in this area.
This Division appreciates Duke Power Company's interest in protect-
ing the Jocassee Lake watershed. Should furnformter data bewilllectedl, be glor
problems detected, please keep this office
discuss this matter should you wish to.contact this office at
704/251-6208.
Sincere yours,
r
Gary Tweed, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
GTT:ls
Enclosure
xc: Terry Pierce
Bill Thomas
David R. Spain
Roy M. Davis
Forre"st R. Westall
L.,--Russ Shearer

,mo o RECEIVIED
s Water Quality Section
,�1 ��• �.°� NOV 15 1988
State of North Carolina Asheville Regional Office
As eville, North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor R. Paul Wilms
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary Director
November 3, 1988
Mr. James A. Timmerman, Executive Director
South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department
Post Office Box 167
Columbia, South Carolina 29202
Subject: Development of North Carolina Watersheds
Dear Mr. Timmerman:
Your September 22, 1988, letter to Colonel Paul W. Woodbury of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicated that certain streams in South
Carolina were being impacted as a result of development activities occurring
in this State. The Division of Environmental Management is responsible for
the management of wastewater discharged to North Carolina surface waters.
Our investigations have not been able to confirm that: discharges to the
Thompson River are occurring. The Thompson River watershed in North
Carolina is a sparsely settled, relatively small area with limited
opportunity for the discharge of sewage,
I would welcome the opportunity for members of my
staff to
discuss
this problem with officials of the State of
South Carolina.
We view
this as
a serious matter deserving immediate attention. I would
suggest that
you
use Mr. Roy Davis, Regional. Supervisor
in our Asheville
Regional
Office,
as a contact person in setting up such
a meeting. Mr. Davis
may be
reached at telephone number 704/251-6208,
extension 242.
We look forward to hearing from you.
cc: Colonel Paul W. Voodbury
David R. Spain /
Roy M. Davis
i
D'
Sincgrely,
R. Paul. Wilms
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

C E I V E D
�fJateb Quality Section
4� 1�
NOV 15 1988
Ash�:fiile Re g.lonal Office
State of North Carolina f5,s>>e�iiie, �c,tz ,,roliea
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor R. Paul Wilms
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary Director
November 3, 1988
Mr. James A. Timmerman, Executive Director
South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department
Post Office Box 167
Columbia, South Carolina 29202
Subject: Development of North Carolina Watersheds
Dear Mr. Timmerman:
Your September 22, 1988, letter to Colonel Paul W. Woodbury of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicated that certain streams in South
Carolina were being impacted as a result of development activities occurring
in this State. The Division of Environmental Management is responsible for
the management of wastewater discharged to North Carolina surface waters.
Our investigations have not been able to confirm that discharges to the
Thompson River are occurring. The Thompson River watershed in North
Carolina is a sparsely settled, relatively small area with limited
opportunity for the discharge of sewage.
I would welcome the opportunity for members of my
staff to
discuss
this problem with officials of the State of
South Carolina.
We view
this as
a serious matter deserving immediate attention. I would
suggest that
you
use Mr. Roy Davis, Regional Supervisor
in our Asheville
Regional
Office,
as a contact person in setting up such
a meeting. Mr. Davis
may be
reached at telephone number 704/251-6208,
extension 242.
We look forward to hearing from you.
SiHZc rely,
R . Paul Wilms
cc: Colonel Paul W. Woodbury
David R . Spain
Roy M. Davis /
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

49
ss=
IF
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources -and Community .Dev'elopment
Asheville Regional Office . .
James G. Martin, Govemor David R. Spain
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary Regional ;ti1anager
-DIVISION 'OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER -QUALITY .SECTION.
October 19, .1988 ,
MEMORANDUM
TO. R. Paul Wilms, Director
Division--of-:Environmental Management
'FROM: Roy M. Davis, Regional-Superv-sor
Division of Environmental -Management
SUBJECT: Transmittal Letter .for James A.1Timmerman
Development of North Carolina Watersheds
-Please find enclosed a let..ter.for your. -consideration to
Mr. .James A.' Timmerman ,concerning -t—he .:Development -of .Nor-th
Carolina . Watersheds, -If you have ---any -question✓, 4o not
--hesitate to call. -me. t
RMD.:1s
Enclosure
S p ! +k.,S w1�1 't v,{ t k
t��l:-- i� ,�ryhr,(, .� r' + f..' 6 �!•f S+Y a s e a rf i a'hw 3 ye t x ✓
anwrclan�e-Building, 59 Woodfin'Piace,' P.O. Box 370, Asheville, N.C. 28802-0370 • Telephone 7(?-25)3 3341

State of .North Carolina
Department of Natural resources and Community Development
Division of Environmental Aianagement
512 North Salisbury Sm-et • Raleigh, North Carolina "27611
James G. Martin, Governor
S. Thomas Rhodes, "Secretary
Mr. -James A. Timmerman, .Executive Director
South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department
Post Office :Box 167
Columbia, South Carolina -29202
R. Paul Wilms
Director
subject: .Development -of -North Carolina
Watersheds
:Dear Mr." Timmerman:
I have before -me a copy -of "your. September 22,--1988, letter to
colonel -Paul W..-Woodbury of the u. S.-Army Corps, of Engineers in which
in
you make statements regardindevelocmentts nactivitiestoccurringaindthis
South Carolina as".a result of p
State. By way of introduction, I .should tell you that the Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the managementof
wate to _
water discharged to "surface •wate:: s , .so I will _restrict my comments
that specific -area. We -have received reports of possible sewage
discharges to the.Thompson River. -Cube investonav
R er.wans ave mot
in
confirmed -that this .is occurring. T
North Carolina is =sparsely:set tl;:d -:and relative small _in an"area making
the opportunity for the discharg:: -of sewage -limited.
I would welcome the opp
ortuiiity for members of my staff to sit
down with officials of the Statine of uthisth aState. rolina hwelviewnthisdas oge f
the discharge -of -sewage to streamssuggest that you
serious matter deserving immediate attention. I would
use Mr. Roy Davis,. Regional-Superviscr in our AshevilleD eavgional fffice
as a contact person in setting -up such a meeting.
reached at telephone number 704/251-6208, extension 242.
we look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
R. Paul Wilms
RPW:Is
-� xc Colonel _..Paul W.-Woodbu _ .. r
::David R Spax.n _
f
P,O:�wc:27687, -R.AiWi,

0,
South Carolina
tVildldfe &,1k lfile
Depamnent
Septe-:Ier .22, i988
Colonel Paul-W. Woodbury -
District Engineer. - _
U. S. Army Corps of Engi:rieer:s
P. 0. B o`x 1890
.Wilmington, NC 28402-1,890
-James A. Timmerman. Jr.. Ph.D.
Executive Director
Larry 0. Cartee
Asst. Executive Director
RECEI�EU
NA61ZHl Gu4�St'vr`t
Dtar Colonel Woodbury:
r t,,
Iyam writing in -reference to a .letter addressed to"`you from
L. K. Mike Gantt, Supervisor, .U. S. Fish rand Wildlife .:Service,
(F&WS) Raleigh,-N.-C. dated 'September 1, 1988. The South Carolina
Wildlife and Marine.Resources Department also -supports your
reauest far. -approval from Division to :exert discretionary
authority over proposed fill activities in state -designated
trout waters and their headwiaTers. Additional protection for
sensitive trout -streams and their -associated riparian wet'and
.habitats are -badly needed.
As indicated in the 'F&WS 1ett.,q;; r.ecent"-oevel-opment activities ;n
the .headwaters of the ChattocgS' -River ir. North Carol.:.&Ma are
adversely impacting trout -waters in South Carolina, -as well as
-the -Walhalla Na.t-iona.l -Fish Hatchery. In .addition, -development
activities in - North Carolina are adversely. impacting the
Whitewater River in South Carolina,_one'.of this state's best
trout streams. We -have also been advised by Duke Power Company
-that -a :potentially, ve.ry-s.erious problem has-been observed on the
'Thompson River. On three=s.epar-ate occasions during 1987 a very
strong sewage odor has been noted, as weli as "murky" water and
the presence of sewage fungi in the Thompson River. 'This problem
also originates in North Carolina and is :,impacting South. Carolina
waters. I might add that the Thompson River is also considered
one of South Carolina's :better trout streams.
In surnma.ry, Colonel. Woodbury, the State of South Carolina is
experiencing significant problems with silt, sediment and sewage
discharges
on three of its best
trout streams, the Chattooga
River, the.Whitewater
River and
the 'Thompson River as a result of
•.
development
or other activities
originating in jAQrth Carolina..
1
.. ., _.v. ... ...-, - ..won..... .., �..,. a...,w........ +�+.., �. ,...-�....<-... ...
.. ,, _ �e.. r_. .,, .. - . .y. .. .. ... ... r.,.

Colonel Woodbury
September -22, 1988
Page 2
These problems have been going on much too long and no solution
appears in sight. 1 wou.ld appreciate your immediate,assisLance
in helping to resolve.these problems.
incere ,
James A. Timmerman, Jr
LJtiCLii�1 JC ..il:e-,Liuf
-JATj r; sa
cc: Lt. Col. .Stewart Bornhoft, COE, Charleston
Greer C. -Tidwell, -EPA,--A.tI_anta
-.Lewis Shaw, DHEC, Columbia
Brock Conrad, SCWMRD, Columbia
Buford Mabry, SCWMRD, Columbia
L. K. Gantt, USF&WS-Raleigh Office
James Anderson, Walhalla NFH
Glen McBay, F'WS-Fisheries (RO)
Roger Banks, Charleston FWE Office.
David.Spa-in, NCDNRCD, Aseville Office
John Garton, Duke -Power Co., Charl-otte Office
f*� """""`" (.. 3 J � Fc �, � P � `' K ., ��'f cN�t -� Az �,. r .� � .'^i^"' r.�'rb •'e��,,,i�i4

NORTH CA.F CLIN . MILIDLIFE R-E-SMIRCES Co,,vfs:ISS:Ct:
-�77 AO 001
J --HANDLE
ClREVIEW AND
G-,PRAFT-A REPLY' FOR MY S1GNAC
.TUREARVIEW)
�zEiURr' Q Y,00r- RECOMME.MDO.TICti REQUESTED -13--",'F--
CR YOUR INFORMATION AND FILES
v INVESTIGATE AND P.KEPARE A-REPGr:' -1 FOR YOUR APPROVAL
REVIEW -AND LET'S DISCUSS
5Epe ;
t
I � r
h
M1� i'*4<���i��T:�1'mT'�«F��� Yaa� rCx,pa ,�'m�`liy'�'�LV�n*�.+(,ra.. 1ki p4� ro4� wi ua,+�+4�b)✓"� (rya "�aae� ,dry

9
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Asheville Regional Office
James G. Mardn, Governor
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary
September 28, 1988
Dr. Ernie Carl, Deputy Secretary
N. C. Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North.'Carolina 27611
Dear Dr. Carl:
David R. Spain
Regional Manager
Attached is a letter from James Timmerman of the South Carolina Wild-
life & Marine Resources Department to Col. Woodbury, U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, requesting assistance concerning activities near the NC/SC border.
His letter is inaccurate and misleading.
Last April, our Regional Office staff met with officials from the South
Carolina State Fish Hatchery, Duke Power and other interested persons to dis-
cuss sedimentation and water quality incidents in the Whitewater, Thompson
and Chattooga headwaters. After the meeting, it was felt by our staff that
there was a good general understanding of the situation and that things were
not as bad as it was portrayed. I was unable to attend this meeting.
Since that time, our Land Quality section has worked diligently in the
Cashier-Toxaway-Highlands areas to bring about compliance in that development
rich area and Division of Environmental Management has intensified their ef-
forts in general water quality monitoring.
Several incidents of "murky" water in the Thompson were investigated by
this office in 1987, but we could not determine the source. It is speculated
that a local "honey wagon" may have been dumping its contents from a bridge
crossing the Thompson River. I contacted Duke Power (Bad Creek Project),
local officials, and waste handlers to inform them that this is not an ac-
ceptable situation. Since then, no similar incidents have occurred.
Between the lines, Mr. Timmerman and several South Carolina Wildlife
Commissioners have problems with the Duke Power Coley Creek project which
is located on the NC/SC border. The incidents under our regulatory control
(i.e., sedimentation, water quality) are minor. The Duke project is located
Interchange Building, 59 Woodfin Place, P.O. Box 370, Asheville, N.C. 28802-0370 • Telephone [phone]
An Fnnal Cinmrhinity Affirmative Arrinn Fmnlny r

Ernie Carl
Sept. 28, 1988
Page 2
primarily in South Carolina and North Carolina will have the pump storage
lake.
In reference to Mr. Timmerman's last paragraph, this is the first time
since the April meeting that this office has received any communication from
South Carolina. I will request Col. Woodbury to set up a meeting in the area
in the near future.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
DRS:dk
Attachment
A I ti- -OOOJ
Regards,
David R. Spain
Regional Manager
Asheville Regional Office

DUKE POWER COMPANY
GENERAL . OFFICES
422 SOUTH CHURCH STREET
CHARLOTTE, N. C. 28242
December 23, 1987
Mrlr David. Spai-n-
North Carolina Department
and Community Development
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, North Carolina
of Natural Resources
28801
TELEPHONEe AREA 704
373.4011
Mr. Douglas Johns
South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control
P. O. Box 1906
Anderson, South Carolina 29621
Re:. Thompson River, Whitewater River, and Lake Jocassee
Untreated Sewage Discharges
File Nos: J15-1100.00, GAH-0207, GAH-0301
Dear Sirs:
DEC 3
A►1NJSTRAI'I0N
Our water quality sampling crews have discovered evidence of
untreated sewage discharges into the Thompson and Whitewater
Rivers. On November 17, 1987, a crew noted a strong sewage odor
in the Thompson River near Reid Branch (Station 583.6 on the. -
attached map). Samples were taken at Station 552.0 on the
Thompson River and Station 551.0 on the Whitewater River. The
results of fecal coliform analyses are as follows:
Whitewater River Thompson River
920 col/ml? > 2400 col/ml
This is the third occasion which Duke Power personnel have noted
the presence of untreated sewage in the Thompson River. We
previously reported a strong sewage odor noted once in April and
once in May of 1987. Analysis of a water sample taken in the
Thompson River near Reid Branch confirmed the presence of fecal
coliform.
Duke Power's concern is not only with the water quality in the
Thompson and Whitewater Rivers, but also with the danger to human
health. The Foothills Trail comes into contact with both of
these rivers near the points where untreated sewage was detected.
If there is any way in which Duke Power can assist in this
matter, please advise.

If there are any questions, please call Bill McCabe at
704/373-8764 or Bob Waldrop at 704/373-2771.
Yours truly,
S. B. Hager, Chief Engineer
Civil/Environmental Division
By: R. J. Waldrop
Design Engineer I
RJW/kmp/RJW66
Attachment
cc w/atta: W.--J. McCabe
P. A. Clawson
J. S. Garton
Central Records

FIGURE C-1
MIIl1TTf QAMDI TMr, I nrATTnm4z
• - AQUATIC SAMPLING STATIONS

VVA
V C

DIVISION 0 F •ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
COUNTY j_ PRIORITY SAMPLE TYPE
RIVER BASINy°�
REPORT TO M10 FRO MRO RRO WaRO WiRO WSRO TS ❑AMBIENT ❑ QA ❑ STREAM ❑ EFFLUENT
Otherr
Otheer
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Staff, Other
❑ COMPLIANCE ❑ CHAIN
OF CUSTODY
❑ EMERGENCY
❑ LAKE
I ❑ ESTUARY
❑ INFLUENT
1For Lah IT— nNr_V
Lab Number: I ?
5 !�
J
tJt
Date Received: r �� �- �`
Time:
Rec'd by: � &JF
I From: Bus -Courier -Hand Del
DATA ENTRY BY:
',
CK:
DATE REPORTED:
T - 2 - cf,y
COLLECTOR(.S):`- Ta ! r .�
Estimated BOD Range: 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus STATION LOCATION: d` +� , �Tt✓ �',r� �s .- s
Seed: Yes ❑ No ❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
Station ✓' Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin Date End Time End' Depth DM DB DBM Vaiue Type
�1 dd A H L
1
BOD5 310 mg/I
2
'COD High 340 mg/1
3
COD Low 335 mg/I
4
z.
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 /100ml
5
Coliform: MF Total 31'5O4 � /100ml
6
Coliform: Tube Fecal 31615 /100ml
7
Imo'`
_ to iform: Fecal Strep 31673 G, /100ml
8
Residue: Total 500 mg/I
9
Volatile 505 mg/I
10
Fixed 510 mg/1
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/1
13
Fixed 540 mg/1
14
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/1
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/1
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mg/I
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/I
19
TOC 680 mg/l
20
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/1
Chi a: Tri 32217 ug/I
Chi a: Corr 32209 ug/I
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/1
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/I
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/I
Grease and Oils 556 mg/1
Hardness Total900 mg/I
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/I
Phenols 32730 ug/1
Sulfate 945 m9/1
Sulfide 745 mg/I
NH3 as N 610 mg/I
TKN as N 625 mg/I
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mgA
P: Total as P 665 mg/1
PO4 as P 70507 mg/1
P: Dissolved as P 666 mg/I
Cd-Cadmium 1097 ug/I
CrChromium:Total1034 u9/1
ICU -Copper 1042 ug/I
Ni-Nickel 1067 ug/I
Pb-Lead 1051 ugA
Zrr-Zinc 1092 ugA
Ag-Silver 1077 ug/I
Al -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
Be -Beryllium 1012 ug/1
Ca -Calcium 916 mgA
Co -Cobalt 1037 ug/I
Fe -Iron 1045 ug/I
Composite
T S B
Sample T ;pe
C G GNXX
Li -Lithium 1132 ug/I
Mg -Magnesium 927 mg/1
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/1
Na-Sodium 929 mg/1
Arsenic -.Total 1002 ug/I
Se -Selenium 1147 ug/1
Hg-Mercury 71900 ug/I
Organochlorine Pesticides
Organophosnhorus Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bottle reg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point %
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature (C)
D.O. mgA
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature (C)
pH 8.3 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 •
400 is
82244 431
82243 182242
20
Salinity %
Precipition (Nday)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction (Deg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity M/H
can Stream Depth it
Stream Width it
480
45
32
36
1351
1350
35
64
4
DMI/Revised 10/86

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANA EMENT
For Lab Use ONLY
G WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
COUNTY r s� f-� �� PRIORITY SSAAMPLEE TYPE
RIVER BASIN RO lMRO R❑AMBIENT ❑ (QA L�J S REAM ❑ EFFLUENT
UZ—
AT REPORT TO AFRO MRO RO WaRO WIRO W$RO TS
Otheerr ❑ COMPLIANCE ElCHAIN ❑ LAKE ❑ INFLUENT
OF CUSTODY
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Staff, Other ❑EMERGENCY ❑ESTUARY
COLLECTOR(S): "D
Lab Number: ttJ Q 910n -2
[�
Date Received: --� - Time:
Rec'd by:From: Bus -Courier -Hand Del
DATA ENTRY BY: wt CK:
DATE REPORTED: Z -
Estimated SOD Range: 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus
STATION LOCATION:
Seed: Yes No ❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
Station Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin Date End Time End Depth DM DB DBM Value Type Composite Sample Ty e
A H L T S B C GNXX
1
BOD5 310 mg/l
2
COD High 340 mg/1
3
COD ,Low 335 mg/1
4
Goliform: MF Fecal 31616 � /100ml
5
i _
..ebliform: MF Total 31504 3;zo = /loom]
6
Coliform: Tube Fecal 31615 /loom]
liform: Fecal Strep 31673 —",;2 /loom]
8
Residue: Total 500 mg/l
9
Volatile 505 mg/1
10
Fixed 510 mg/1
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/I
14
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/I
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/I
17
Alkalinity to pH' 8.3 415 mg/1
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/1
1'9
TOC 680 mg/1
20
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/l
Chl a: Tri 32217 ug/I
ChL-a: Coir 32209 j ' u4/1
L
Phe6phytin ,a, 322131 ug/l
Color -' True 80 Pt -Co
Coloi:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADMI
,Cyanide 720 mg/l
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/I
Grease and Oils 556 mg/1
Hardness Total900 mg/I
Specific Cond. 95 Mhos/cm2
MBA& 38260 mg/I
Phenols 32730 ug/I
Sulfate 945 mg/1
Sulfide 745 mg/I
NI-13 as N 610 mgA
TKN as N 625 mg/I
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mgA
P: Total as P 665 mgA
PO4 as P 70507 mg/I
P: Dissolved as P 666 mgA
Cd-Cadmium 1027 ugA
Cr-Chromium:Total1034 ug/1
Cu-Copper 1042 ug/I
NI -Nickel 1067 ug/I
Pb-Lead 1051 ugA
Zn-Zinc 1092 ugA
Ag-Silver 1077 ugA
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
Be -Beryllium 1012 ug/1
Ca -Calcium 916 mgA
Co -Cobalt 1037 ug/1
Fe -Iron 1045 ugA
Li -Lithium 1132 ug/I
Mg -Magnesium 927 mg/1
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/I
Na-Sodium 929 mg/I
Arsenic:Total 1002 ug/1
Se -Selenium 1147 ug/I
Hg-Mercury 71900 ug/l
Organochlorine Pesticides
Organophosphorus Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics.
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bottle reg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point %
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature (C)
D.O. mgA
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature (C)
pH 8.3 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH '8.3
2
94
10
300 •
400 •
82244 431
82243 182242
20
Salinity %
Precipition (In/day)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction (Deg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity'M/H
can Stream Depth ft.
Stream Width ft.
480
45_
32
36
1351
1350
35
64
4
10/86

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL M N
For Lab Use ONLY
A AGSMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
COUNTY/�' ^ -�
PRIORITY
❑AMBIENT
❑
SAMPLE TYPE
QA ❑ S RT EAM
❑
EFFLUENT
RIVER BASIN`
REPORT TO NARQ RO MRO RRO WaRO W➢RO WSRO TS
AT BM
Other
❑ COMPLIANCE
��'}j
DEMERGENCY
❑
CHAIN ❑ LAKE
OF CUSTODY
I ❑ESTUARY
❑
INFLUENT
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Staff, Other
COLLECTOR(S): ,li �'
Lab Number:
/ O 7 7
p
Date Received:
em Time:
Rec'd by: ! fs}
From: Bus -Courier -Hand Del
DATA ENTRY BY:wt'�`
CK:
DATE REPORTED:
j
Estimated BOD Range: 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus STATION LOCATION: r�.� ,>�$�,. ' s �, �� 'j %UL2 rJ� rJ %� ✓�� C r x �j
l
Seed: Yes ❑ No ❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
Station Date�B gin (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin Date End Time End Depth DM DB DBM Value Type Composite Sample Tye
t) 1-?/ A H L T S B C GNXX
—j
1
BOD5 310 ' mg/I
2
COD High 340 mgA
3
COD Low 335 mg/1
4
JCbliform: MF Fecal 31616 0 /100ml
oliform: MF Total 31504 /100ml
6
Coliform: Tube Fecal 31615 /100m1
7
G
Goliform: Fecal Strep 31673 G+ /100m1
A
8
Residue: Total 500 mg/I
o
Volatile 505 mg/I
10
Fixed 510 mg/I
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/1
14
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/I
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/1
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mgA
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5410 mg/1
19
TOC 680 mgA
20
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/I
Chi a: Tri 32217 ug/1
Col a: Corr 32209 USA
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/1
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/1
Grease and Oils 556 mg/1
Hardness Total900 mg/I
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/1
Phenols '32730 ug/I
Sulfate 945 1119/1
Sulfide 745 mg/I
NH3 as N 610 mg/I
TKN as N 625 mg/1
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mgA
P: Total as P 665 mg/I
PO4 as P 70507 mg/l
P: Dissolved as P 666 mg/i
Cd-Cadmium 1027 ug/l
CrChromium:Total1034 ugA
Cu-Copper 1042 ug/I
Ni-Nickel 1067 ug/I
Pb-Lead 1051 ug/I
Zn-Zinc 1092 ugA
Ag-Silver 1077 ug/I
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
Be -Beryllium 1012 ug/I
Ca -Calcium 916 mg/I
Co -Cobalt 1037 ug/I
Fe -Iron 1045 ug/I
Li -Lithium 1132 ug/I
Mg -Magnesium 927 mg/1
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/I
Na-Sodium 929 mg/I
Arsenic -.Total 1002 ug/I
Se -Selenium 1147 ug/I
Hg-Mercury 71900 ug/I
Organochlorine Pesticides
Organophosphorus Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bottlereg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point %
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature (C)
D.O. mg/I
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature (C)
PH 8.3 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 .
400 1•
82244 431
82243 82242-
20
Salinity %
Precipition (In/day)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction (Deg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity M/H
Mean Stream Depth ft.
'Stream Width ft.
480
45
32
36
1351
1350
y
35
64
4
DM1/Revised 10/86

Fnr Lwh TY.. nett V
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
r
COUNTY �.
PRIORITY
RIVER BASIN _ —.� �fy ��
❑
❑
REPORT TO- ARO F90 MRO RRO WaRO W1RO WSRO TS
AMBIENT
Qp
AT BM �.--
❑
Other
COMPLIANCE
El CHAIN
OF CUSTODY
hl b
❑ EMERGENCY
S pped y: Bus Courier, Staff, Other
COLLECTOR(S):
SAMPLE TYPE
❑lam R AM
❑ LAKE
❑ ESTUARY
❑
EFFLUENT
❑
INFLUENT
Lab Number: / C� ✓ f
Date Received: Time:
Rec'd by: � LO From: Bus -Courier -Hand Del
DATA ENTRY BY: v r CK:
DATE REPORTED: G ��
Estimated BOD Range: 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus STATION LOCATION: �' i�� �(�/���yJ%+✓ / f��; ��,� �'� �� �/`
Seed: Yes ❑ No ❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
Station #7 Date Begln (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin Date End Tlme End Depth DM DB DBM Value Type Composite Sample Type
A H L T S B C Eft GNXX
1
BOD5 310 mg/l
2
COD High 340 mg/I
3
COD Low 335 mg/l
4
1
oliform: MF Fecal 31616 T1 /100ml
5
C>oliform. MF Total 315042�/100ml
6
Conform: Tube Fecal 31615 /100ml
7
oliform: Fecal Strep 31673 Ga /100ml
8
Residue: Total 500 mg/I
9
Volatile 505 mg/1
10
Fixed 510 mgA
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/1
14
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/I
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/I
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mgA
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/1
19
TOC 680 mgA
20
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/1
Chi a: TO 32217 ug/I
Chi a: Corr 32209 ug/I
Pheophytln a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color. pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/I
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/1
Grease and Oils 556 mgA
Hardness Tota1900 mg/I
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/1
Phenols 32730 ugA
Sulfate 945 mgA
Sulfide 745 mg/l
NH3 as N 610 mg/I
TKN as N 625 mgA
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mgA
P: Total as P 665 mg/1
PO4 as P 70507 mg/l
P: Dissolved as P 666 mgA
CdCadmlum 1027 ug/I
CrChromium:Total1034 ugA
Cu-Copper 1042 ug/I
NI -Nickel 1067 ugA
Pb-Lead 1051 ug/I
Zn-Zinc 1092 ug/I
A Ilver 1077 ugA
Al -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
Be-Berynlum 1012 ug/I
Ca -Calcium 916 1119/1
Co -Cobalt 1037 ug/1
Fe -Iron 1045 ug/I
LI-Lithium 1132 ugA
Mg -Magnesium 927 mg/1
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/I
Na-Sodlum 929 mg/I
Arsenic:Total 1002 ug/I
Se -Selenium 1147 ug/I
Hg-Mercury 71900 ug/1
Organochlorine Pesticides
Organophosphorus Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bottle reg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point Z
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature
D.O. mgA
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature (C)
pH 83 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 1.
400 1.
82244 431
82243 182242
20
Salinity %
Preclpltion (In/day)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction (Deg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity M/H
4ean Stream Depth ft.
Stream Width ft.
480
45
32
36
1351
1350
35
64
4
DM1/Reviaed 10/86

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
COUNTY
PRIORITY
SAMPLE TYPE
0
RIVER BASIN-, ? ✓�
❑AMBIENT
❑
❑
REPORT TOtiARO FRO MRO RRO WaRO W1R0 WSRO TS
Qp
REAM
STREAM
EFFLUENT
AT BM
❑COMPLIANCE
❑ CHAIN
❑ LAKE
❑ INFLUENT
Other
❑ EMERGENCY
OF CUSTODY
❑ ESTUARY
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Staff, Other
COLLECTOR(S):
Estimated BOD Range: 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus STATION LOCATION:
Seed: Yes ❑ No ❑ Chlorinated- Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
Station # Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin Date End Tlme End Depth DM DB DBM Value Type Composite �Sa.ple Type
_l
A H L T S B GS GNXX
Fnr 1 wh I I.. nNr V
1
BOD5 310 mg/1
2
COD High 340 mg/1
3
COD Low 335 mg/1
4
C,61ifGTM- MF Fecal 31616 rl /100ml
5
Collform: MF Total 31504 -, , -� /100ml
6
Collform: Tube Fecal 31615 /100ml
7
Collform: Fecal Strep 31673 ! /100m1
8
Residue: Total 500 mg/1
9
Volatile 505 mg/I
10
Fixed 510 mg/1
11
Residue: Suspended 530 mg/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/1
14
PH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4S 436 mgA
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/1
17
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mg/1
18
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/1
19
TOC 680 mgA
on
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/I
Chi a: Trl 32217 ug/I
Chi a: Corr 32209 ug/I
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADMI
Cyanide 720 mg/1
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/I
Grease and Oils 556 mg/1
Hardness Total900 mg/1
Specific Cond. 95 uMhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/1
Phenols 32730 ug/I
Sulfate 945 mg/1
Sulfide 745 mg/I
Lab Number -
Date Received:'`
_ Time:
r v
Rec'd by: /; 'ayb
From: Bus -Courier -Hand Del
DATA ENTRY BY:
CK:
DATE REPORTED:
NH3 as N 610 mgA
TKN as N 625 mgA
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mgA
P: Total as P 665 mg/1
PO4 as P 70507 mgA
P: Dissolved as P 666 mgA
Cd-Cadmium 1027 ugA
Cr-Chromium:Tota11034 ugA
Cu-copper 1042 ug/I
Ni-Nickel 1067 ug/I
Pb-Lead 1051 ugA
Zn-Zinc 1092 ugA
Ag-Silver 1077 ug/I
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
Be -Beryllium 1012 ug/I
Ca -Calcium 916 mg/I
Co -Cobalt 1037 ugA
Fe -Iron 1045 ugA
LI-Lithium 1132 ug/I
Mg -Magnesium 927 mgA
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/I
Na-Sodium 929 mg/I
Arsenic:Total 1002 ug/I
Se-Selenlum 1147 ug/I
Hg-Mercury 71900 ugA
Organochlorine Pesticides
Organophosphorus Pesticides
Acid Herbicides
Base/ Neutral Extractable Organics
Acid Extractable Organics
Purgeable Organics (VOA bottle reg'd)
Phytoplankton
Sampling Point %
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature
D.O. mgA
pH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Air Temperature (C)
PH 83 pH 4.5
pH 4.5 pH 8.3
2
94
10
300 1.
400 •
82244 431
82243 182242
20
Salinity %
Precipltlon On/day)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction (Deg)
Stream Flow Severity
Turbidity Severity
Wind Velocity M/H
can Stream Depth ft.
Stream Width ft-
480
45
32
36
1351
1350
35
64
4
DM1/Revlsed 10/86

IVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY FIELD -LAB FORM (DM1)
OUNTY
PRIORITY
SAMPLE TYPE
RIVER BASIN
❑AMBIENT [IQA
0--STREAM❑
PBMT TOi4R0 FRO MRO RRO WaRO WIRO WSRO TS
EFFLUENT
AT
❑ COMPLIANCE ❑ CHAIN
❑ LAKE
❑ INFLUENT
Other
OF CUSTODY
❑
❑
Shipped by: Bus Courier, Staff, Other
EMERGENCY
ESTUARY
D
C
Lab Number:
1A ii C! 1
9
DateReceive�d: Time:
Rec'd by- /I /,fJ)C
From: Bus -Courier -Nand Del
DATA ENTRY BY:
t; t A ;ir CK:
DATE REPORTED:
Estimated BOD Range- 0-5/5-25/25-65/40-130 or 100 plus STATION LOCATION: "� J j , i rz- a t �r j -2
Seed: Yes ❑ No ❑ Chlorinated: Yes ❑ No ❑ REMARKS:
Station # Date Begin (yy/mm/dd) Time Begin Date End Time End Depth DM DB DBM . Value Type Composite Sample Type
7�r s /' �% A [i L T S B CG GNXX
_e c
1
BOD5 310
mg/I
2
COD High 340
mgA
3
COD Low 335
mg/I
4 y,
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 -
/100ml
5 /
,Co`liform: MF Total 31504 t
/100ml
6
Coliform: Tube Fecal 31615
/100ml
7 �+ �
Coliform: Fecal Strep 31673
/100ml
8
Residue: Total 500
mg/I
o
Volatile 505
mg/I
10
r.- ..0 mg/1
11
Residue: Suspended 530 rng/I
12
Volatile 535 mg/I
13
Fixed 540 mg/I
14
pH 403 units
15
Acidity to pH 4.5 436 mg/1
16
Acidity to pH 8.3 435 mg/1
i7
Alkalinity to pH 8.3 415 mg/1
i8
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 mg/1
19
TOC 680 mg/I
nn
Turbidity 76 NTU
Chloride 940 mg/1
Chi a: TO 32217 ug/I
Chi a: Corr 32209 ug/I
Pheophytin a 32213 ug/I
Color: True 80 Pt -Co
Color:(pH ) 83 ADMI
Color: pH 7.6 82 ADM[
Cyanide 720 mg/I
Fluoride 951 mg/I
Formaldehyde 71880 mg/1
Grease and Oils 556 mg/I
Hardness Total900 mg/1
Specific Cond. 95 umhos/cm2
MBAS 38260 mg/I
Phenols 32730 ug/I
Sulfate 945 mg/I
Sulfide 745 mg/I
NH3 as N 610 mg/I
TKN as N 625 mgA
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 mgA
P: Total as P 665 mg/1
PO4 as P 70507 mgA
P: Dissolved as P 666 mg/I
CdCadmium 1027 ug/I
CrChromium:Total1034 ug/I
Cu-Copper 1042 ug/I
Ni-Nickel 1067 ug/I
Pb-Lead 1051 ugA
Zn-Zinc 1092 ugA
AgSilver 1077 ug/I
AI -Aluminum 1105 ug/I
Be -Beryllium 1012 ugA
Ca -Calcium 916 m
Co -Cobalt 1037
Fe -Iron 1045
Acidi
Sampling Point %
Conductance at 25 C
Water Temperature (C
D.O. mg/I
pH
Alkalinity 82
--
pH 8.3 PH 4� Wi
2
94
10
800 .
400
822" 4V
Stream Flow Severity 35
i
Salinity %
Precipition On/day)
Cloud Cover %
Wind Direction (Deg)
480
45
32
36
1351
Li -Lithium 1132 ug/I
Mg -Magnesium 927 mg/I
Mn-Manganese 1055 ug/I
Na-Sodium 929 mg/I
Arsenic:Total 1002 ug/I
Se -Selenium 1147 ug/I
Hg-Mercury 71900 ug/I
Organochlorine Pesticides
Pesticides
Herbicides
joophosphorus
/ Neutral Extrac. ' 2�aaniosnitsExtractab�ganfcs (VOA bottle reg'd)
��
Phytoplankton
ty
Z PH 8.3 Air Temperature (C)
243
82242
nd V¢IocityM/H¢anStream Depth ft.Stream Width ft.
4
DM1/Revised 10/86

�t`l �33-3c�To
ryt�
\-ci Lh(;
rJCS �� a-j)A_
`
LI
y

it
II
`
_ - __-_-_. . __- -
_. i._
. __ _ _...__- _ __ _ -_ _• _- _.4 -_.--CSC/.-=
- /�-,_.`�//._(� _ _-��-
f
'
A,
I,
�1
- ivC'SZ_1/S-Z - -
iI
'I
i
t
�j
a
f.i
Z Z40 2 -
-
' Z
,i
�I
Z 1O

-- - - -- _ .
is
- -
-�-- -���y - - -
- -- - - - -- - - -,—
�� ---- — —--—
/ ,�
,���
— --- — — _ .
— -— — —... — — — �—----
— -- —
�, — — —--
-- -- - - G/�_, T,� __ 2�-
- —�
/3d - -
1
l:
--
--
- _ __ - -- -
I;
I
---. - _ ---
�: -- --
- - --
-
i
- --- .- -- - -z�� - - - --
_.
� - - - - --_ .
_ _.
—,
���25.���,i�� L Z
Z.� _.. _
- -- - - -
-- - - --- -
_ --- - -�
�..
. --- - - - - --- - �_i.�.
- -- - -- --
�'�
- -- .. --- � _ ._ �i.
--
_ _
---- --
�,
-- �-�--_ -- - - -
Z�
-_ .._ .,
.�,-_
- - -- - - --- �:
i _ - - --
- -- -- -- -
�;
— —- —
..
�r
I`
�;

R03-65Y-630&

IMP_ akR TA Nr&!fTA7i Er
3
W 7E YOU W O T
Zvi
OF
Area Code
& Exchange
EL-RHONED
v
PLEASE CALL
CAL D O SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WA O SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
,,I„lei �� 's
4
r,
IQ

. - n I
�'° 1

s SiATt q '
Y M ra _North CarolingDepartment of Nat rah,
Resourcesr r alit to meat
3[ �Y�OyiV

TO:
(o
vo,
DATE:.-----_.-----_.__ -
SUBJECT:
Nor th C'airollilla F)OP1011"frTIEW-t cl Natural
Fle.s.1-ourcOs &COcrinn �ty [F)"'umvelo, me'ri
,P

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
730 PEACHTREE STREET, N.E.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30308
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
A A.
PM
7 JUN
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources`
and Community Development
Environmental Management
and Recreation
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
FEDERAL ENERGY
REGULATORY COMMISSION
FERC-351