The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0069761_Wasteload Allocation_19871222NPDES DOCUMENT :MCANNIN`: COVER SHEET NC0069761 Beech Mountain / Pond Creek WWTP NPDES Permit: Document Type: Permit Issuance Wasteload Allocation Authorization to Construct (AtC) Permit Modification Complete File - Historical Engineering Alternatives (EAA) Owner Name Change Instream Assessment (67b) Speculative Limits Environmental Assessment (EA) Document Date: December 22, 1987 This document is printed on reuse paper - iggnore any content on tine re'rerse side MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 22 September 1987 Steve Tedder Jimmie Overton�v Ken Eaglesomic, David Lenatett us t. SUBJECT: Biomonitoring of Ponds Creek/Beech Creek below the discharge from the Beech Mountain WWTP, Watauga County. BACKGROUND The Beech Mountain WWTP (NPDES permit number NC0069761) discharges to Ponds Creek in Watauga County. The plant h ndles only domestic waste and has a permitted flow of 0.4MGD. The effluent may make up to 50% of stream flow during drought periods, but the volume o.f the flow varies seasonally. The greatest volume of effluent occurs during the winter, when the maximu number of tourists come to the Beech Mountain area. This effluent is disin ected using ultraviolet light. The discharge permit for this plant is scheduled for r-eissuance in 1987. Due to an administrative error, all of Pond Creek was classified as WS-III, although only a small headwater segment is used for water supply. It is likely tiat the middle and lower segments will be reclassified as C or C-Trout waters. Pond Creek flows into Beech Creek, a small C-Trout stream. There is some residential land use in the watersheds of both streams, but the Pond Creek watershed has a greater proportion of development. The Environmental Management Commission has received complaints from the Friends of the Watauga River streamwatch group concerning the Beech Mountain WWTP. A letter from Mr. George Dula listed a number of concerns about water quality in Pond Creek below the Beech Mountain discharge. The group used a Hach kit (supplied by TVA) to measure chemical parameters in Beech and Pond Creek at sites just above the confluence of these two streams. Measurements included temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, settleable matter, total chlorine, nitrogen and phosphorus (4 parameters) and total hardness. Of particular concern were, a mesurement of 0.07 mg/1 total chlorine and 5.0 mg/1 dissolved oxygen in Pond Creek. Phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations were elevated (relative to Beech Creek), but they were not at a harmful level. Note that the Beech Mountain WWTP is not designed to remove nutrients. The chlorine measurements (including a • reading of 0..04 mg/1 in Beech Creek) were. puzz.l ing, as the. Beech Mountain. effluent is not chlorinated. The determination of detectable chlorine in Don. streams suggested that the Hach kits may have produced inaccurate measurements of total chlorine. The Friends of the Watauga River also complained of turbid water and a "slightly musty odor" in Pond Creek and noted a "siltly coating" on the stream bed. Few fish or invertebrates Were observed by the streamwatch group in Pond Creek and they concluded .that "there definitely appears to be stress on the water life in Pond Creek". They list both nonpoint source runoff and the Beech Mountain effluent as possible sources of these problems and asked for a thorough study of the stream prior to reissuance of the p l ant's discharge permit. In response to these citizen complaints, the Asheville field office requested a biological survey of Pond Creek and Beech Creek. 0n 17-18 September 1987, the Biological Monitoring Group sampled two sites on Pond Creek_(above and_below the WWTP) and two. sites on Beech Creek (above and below the confluence with Pond Creek). This report will also utilize data previously collected at two other streams in the Watauga River basin: Buckeye Creek and the Upper Watauga River. STUDY SITES (Figure 1, Table 1) All study sites were small, high gradient streams, characterized by large boulder substrate and small waterfalls. It is expected that these turbulent streams would have a high aeration rate and high dissolved oxygen levels. There was some sand/silt deposited at all sites, but much of the sediment is probably washed out during high flow periods. The greatest amount of sediment was noted in Pond Creek above the wastewater treatment plant. In this area the substrate was usually "embedded", i.e., the interstial areas were filled with sand. Sand had been deposited along the bank and in lateral pools at this site and in Beech Creek below the confluence of Pond Creek. Some fish were observed at all sites, and a small trout was accidentally collected in the lower portion of Pond Creek. Three of the sites were accessed via SR 1126 in Watauga County. Station 4 Was established in Beech Creek above this road crossing. Two other sites were established about 0.2 miles upstream, above the confluence of Beech Creek and Pond Creek: Station 3 on Beech Creek and Station 2 on Pond Creek. Station 1 located just above the WWTP and was accessed via the Beech Mountain area in Avery County. METHODS Benthlc macrolnvertebrates were collected using DEM's standardized qua iative sa mpling Thes. a wide variety of collection. .ampling method - --is method us .. techniques to inventory the aquatic fauna. The primary output is a species list with some indication of relative abundance (Rare, Common, Abundant) for each taxon. Both total taxa richness and the taxa richness of the most intolerant (EPT) invertebrate groups can be used with DEM criteria to assign water quality ratings. Unstressed streams and rivers have many species, while polluted areas have fewer species. Water quality assessments also may use the abundance of "pollution indicator" groups . RESULTS MACROINVERTEBRATES EPT taxa richness indicated a Good -Fair rating for all sites on both Pond and Beech Creek (Table 2). Greater emphasis has been placed on EPT taxa richness than on total taxa richness, as these small streams would be expected to have a lower diversity of invertebrates relative to the streams and dvers normally sampled by DEM biologists. Comparison data (Buckeye Creek and the Upper Watauga River) indicate that Pond Creek and Beech Creek -have -a macroinvertebrate assemblage -that is normal for this region of the 1'atauga River basin. Comparison data has been used only from small streams that were similar in size to Pond and Beech Creeks. Both EPT taxa richness and total taxa richness were remarkably constant at st tions 1,3 and 4: Total=53-54, EPT=29-30. All summary parameters were reduced at station 2, below the Beech Mountain discharge, but these changes indicated only a slight decline in water quality. Relatively low totals taxa richness values are due, in part, to a low diversity in the family Chiranomidae (midges). Midges were particularly sparse in Pond Creek. The low number of chironomids reflects both the small size of the streams and the effects of sediment. Chironomidae are particularly susceptible to sediment scour (Lenat 1983). The dominant species were the same at all sites: Heptagen i a spp., Mal irekus nastatus, pipleetrona jnodestum, pol iphi lodes sp., and Hydropsyche jnacleodi, This pattern again suggested that only slight changes in water quality occurred between sites. Nol pollution indicator species were found to be abundant at any of the sites on Pond and Beech.Creeks. The lack of organic indicator species in lower Pond Creek suggests that low dissolved oxygen is not a chronic problem in this stream. Highly intolerant or unusual species occurred at all sites, but were most likely to be found at upstream sites (1 and 3): Drunella wayah: Rare at Station 1, Common at Station 4. Rnithrogenia sp.: Rare at Station 1, Common at Station 3 Epeorus sp.: Common at Stations 1 and 4, Abundant at Station 3. Pert inel la ephyre: Rare at Station 2 Hastaperla Drevis; Common at Stations 1, 3, and 4 Rhyacophi la_ torva:..Rare at_Station 1 _ Prlstinella jenkinae: Rare at Station 1 A characteristic dominant in unpolluted mountain stream is Epeorus spp. This species was not dominant at any of the sites on Pond and Beech Creeks, but it was most abundant at Station 3, above the effects on the Pond Creek waters ed. It was absent at Station 2 (below the Beech Mountain effluent) and only, common at the remaining sites. A reduction in abundance at lower Pond Creek was also observed for Stenonema carlsoni and Hastaperla Drevis. FISH Although we did not sample the fish community of Pond or Beech Creek, a limited amount of information is available from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (Bonner 1983). Beech Creek at SR 1 126 (DEM station 4) was sampedon 19 August 1980. About 300 feet of stream were e l ectrof i shed, yielding 17 brook trout, 1 brown trout and 1 blacknose dace. Trout density was estimated_to be 6 pounds/acre. The low diversity of fish species is typical of small, high -gradient trout streams. This investigation recommended a B classification for Beech Creek, indicating that natural reproduction is not expected during all years and the stream should be stocked, with fingerling trout. Moderate silt and heavy sand deposits were noted in this portion of Beech Creek, but the report also indicated good -boulder cover for trout species. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS All sites on Pond Creek and Beech Creek received a Good -Fair bioclassiflcation and the same macroinvertebrate species were dominant at all sites. Similar invertebrate communities have been observed in two other nearby streams: Buckeye Creek and the headwater of the Watauga River. However, the abundance of some intolerant species was reduced in lower Pond Creek (below the Beech Mountain effluent). Residential development has added sediment to both streams, with the greatest amount of habitat change noted in Pond Creek. Sediment scour during high flow conditions may reduce the abundance of macroinvertebrates in Pond Creek. The minor changes observed in Pond Creek below the Beech Mountain WWTP do not suggest any significant problems at this facility. The discharge permit should be reissued without change. REFERENCES. Bonner, W.R. 1983. Survey and claslflcation of state managed -trout streams in district seven. Federal aid in fish restoration project F24-S, Final report. NC Wildlife Resources Commission. Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1984. Use attainability surveys at Buckeye and Hyatt Creeks, North Carolina, September 1984. Biological Monitoring Group. Unpublished report. Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1985. Watauga River biological survey. Biological Monitoring Group, Memo.: 30 August 85. Lenat, D.R. 1983. Chironomid taxa richness: natural variation and use in pollution assessment. Freshwat. Invertebr. Biol. 2: 192-198. cc: Lee Gabele Randy Dodd Peter Nathanson, Asheville field office Jim Rogers, Beech Mountain Sanitary District, 510 Beech Mountain Parkway, Banner Elk NC 28604 George T. Everett Joe Mickey, Inland Fisheries FIGURE 1 STUDY: PpND CREEK AND BEECH CREEK RIVER BASIN: WATAUGA • COUNTY: V4ATAUGA/AYERY KELLERSV ILLE SR 1126 SR 1125 BEECH CREEK • • • • • • • • • • • • OOOOO • - - • • • • • CREEK ••••••••••••. OOOO • • • • • • rn • • • • • • • OOO ' " • • • "Z • ' • • • OO . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • - 07 - • • • • • • • • • • • • • *I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -0 • • • • • • I • • ' • • ' " • " . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ... . • m " • • • SR 1124 BEECH CREEK BEECH MNT. WTP . . . . . . . . . . . . • . " . ' . • . ' . *x . • . ' . ' . " • ' • rn ' ' • • • ' • - • - Z • - • - • • • • • • u) • • - ' - - • • • • . • - - • - - • • • • - • • • • • r r • • - - • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SR 1127 CREEK Table 1. Station descriptions, Pond Creek and 1987, Watauga County. ._...-__STATIONS _ Pond Creek LOCATION WIDTH (11) DEPTH (I1) AVERAGE MAXIMUM CANOPY (%) AUFWUCHS BANK EROSION SUBSTRATE (%) BOULDER RUBBLE GRAVEL SAND SILT 1 _ COMMENTS 1 Above WWTP 3 0.2 1.2 90 Moderate None 50 20 15- 15 Trace Substrate Embedded Beech Creek, 17-18 September • Beech Creek 2 4 Below WWTP, Above Pond Below Pond 3 2 5 0.2 0.8 90 Moderate None 50 20 Trace 30 Trace • 0.2 1.2 90 Moderate None 40 20 10 30 Trace 0.2 1.0 90 Moderate None 50 20 10 20 Trace Sand Deposition in pools Table 2. Taxa richness, by group, Pond Creek and Beech Creek. 17-18 September 1987, Watauga County. Station: Group EPHEMEROPTERA PLECOPTERA TR I CHOPIITERA COLE0PTERA ODONATA MEGALOPTERA DI PTER,MI SC. DI PTERa. CHIRON. OL I GOCHAETA CRUSTACEA MOLLUSCA OTHER TOTAL TAXA RICHNESS EPT TAX1A RICHNESS EPT ABUNDANCE2 RATING 1 Pond Cr Beech Cr Comparison Data3 1 2 A UWR 12 9 9 .12 13 7 6 7 8 7 6 9 11 8 12 14 14 2 0 2 io 2 1 2 1 2 :2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 7 5 5 5 6 5 10 7 11 14 14 12 2 3 2 1. 1 2 1 1 1 :1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 54 42 53 54 61 52 29 24 29 30 33 30 129 94 123 137 175 127 G-F G-F G-F G-F G G-F 1 G-F=Go d-Fa 1 r, G=Good 2Abunda' t=10, Common=3, Rare=1; summed for all EPT taxa 3UWR=Upper Watauga River (Station 5), 13 August 85 (DEM 1985) BC=BuckeYe Creek (Station 2), 17 April 84 (DAM 1984) A PD NC I X 1' SP F r:_ S LIFT —FOP rit•, r. i R c K eTUDY PCM:) 4'4D f : CCF' nEEKS. fC^TEr11'71 l.'?:• 7. R=RARF'•A=A?UN^A':T. n I I EPHEMCRRP'TCRA I��rCICS + I -�TATI �ti I - 1 r1 • 1 :'AETI`: TPICAUOATUS 1 + CLC73N SPP 1 + OFWIELLA WAYA4 1 + EP2fI• US So? + EPW=ITRA c7r C I AT �\ A (r.Re U! } 1 CU YLr7H7LLI TEm,P'T'SAL Ir 1 a H.FPTA IA SPP 1 IST4YCHIA SP? 1 + + + 17F7C; I 4':?\il 1 y ^Y:: 1 AT r.R I C '4 1 " •3 D CR 1 1126 + + + 1 1 I —♦ ♦ + 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 a I 1 C I A + + + 1 1 1 R + + + I I I C 1 1 • 1 + 1 1 C 1 A PA1ALrUT )PHL= '- I 1 1 it: S P' 1 :: 1 -. 1 + + + RHITri <O E'IA SPP I I 1 4 4 + ST'IN‘CRON 1 I 1 CAR1LINA 1 C 1 C t + + + STE1ONEv, I 1 1 L i 1 PLCC32TERA 1 rVnciRl a 1 A h V-1; 4 1 r, + + + 1 I I 1 1 1 t 1 + + r, 1 1 + • 1 V + 1 fs ►iPPr"f'!IX 1. SPFCIS LIST F-9R. Pr-, :^• CR-; u STUDY PO',A'r7 :'•E 'CH C?FKS. SEPT7.1ER, °=RARL, f �".'.7'y• a=A%�„� �A'��T, ORCFR ?LECGATERA TRICHG?TERA 13P _CICs ALL^CAPNIA SPA' ALL9NARCYS SP° rCCI2TIMA XA"r'TAENEj. STATION 01 _ 2 1 1� .� - 2'.:N7 2 1 'OND c 1 ;�r� C� C' A 7) vC 1 .A TX/C 1 V:JVE 1 'YT `_7A XWTF. 1 EEC :-4 C r 1' L:) CR 1 112 6-. + -+ ,SAL r1RTK'1S 1 HASTATt S 1 - PrLTORLA SPP 1 + P ERLIN=LLA. 1 ;W7LTS.y SPP 0IPL^C T 77?!A + +--- —+ 1 1 1 + + + 1 1 1 + + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 R a- C 1 C + + + 1 R 1 R 1 C + + + 1 1 1 1 R -1 Q. 1. + + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + 1 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + + t + Tilt_ OP HI L 07' E S 1 1 1 1 SPP 1 A 1 r. 1 A 1 + + + + GU_ISSflS-11.15 cpa 1 R 1 r', 1 R 1 HVDt CPSYCW: 1 1 1 1 .,A C L. ^0T 1 1 A 1 A. 1 A +---_-----;.---------r + LYPE HIV=R.SA 1 C 1 1 1 ►,;"nAYLAX SPP 1 1 C 1 C 1 A C7NTIm..1) �r ' .• t 1 . 4PP.E'•JDIX I. SPr =S LIST; F P 0'0 CR.Ec7k ¶TUM+ PCA�C+ AN ','EECH CREEKS. SEFT'M► SEE, L ?- 7. ^=PARF, C 74mCN, A=A`:UMOANI . 3TATI`)N 12 24 1 1 1 C I DTP-: C? + + + 3T C R TQICHC:PTEF�A C1LF_?Tr,.A CCNTlNU= I S ECI7S + + 'vYCTt 17PYL:,Y I N."P-lC?HILUS I S I i C I C + + + 4 PA?APSYCHc I I 1 I 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 + P"LYC T `' T 1 P U S I SPP 0HY4C -'ILA + ,PYaCUP!AILA 1 FUSCULA 1 + .HYAC?f'HILA + a.HYACOPHILA TfR'l4 + Cr1PPIA 4 7PTT =VUS SPP I + ;UL I MN I U a 1 LATIUSCULUS 1 + r 1 •, Yi RI.-', S^4FIa'1A + • 1 1 1 1 C 1 + + 1 I R- I R 1 I R 1 + + + 1 1 1 Afr-OIX 1. Sn'-FCIrS LIST -OR 0')Nn CREEV STUDY PON'' A` n ''-rCH C2r7:<S. L1:?7. /APF, Cf''' h, A=Al'AINDA`,JT. JR^ER G1G'1ATA ISPECI^S 1C��'Z^�JLE(A�T ISPP i SCM tfi.;S SPP ?1=GALf PT cA 1 S:ALi S DIPTE= A:CHI RJN + 3R1LL . S'P STATION 01 1 C' 1 + + n3 1 14 1 7,.,R: c 1 •. � -� C f v 1 1 ,17 1V.:, 1 ) _`rq-4 Cr" 1 "C! 0 r + + 1 1 AT S 1 1126 r + + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + 1 1 C 1 C ♦---------+ + + + + ;?'�`, lI N I —LL A 1 .1.. 1 1 1 ^jc-, cHil 1 1 1 1 + •• - + + + Cr} C'dtPr'Lf".P T ; GR UP. 1 + •,v�..:,,t��Jr�.F SD 1 TA"`_`A .31P 1 EUKIEFFERIl LLA 1 S^1 1 + =1IKIEC'F 7 I ELLA 1 Sal' 1 + EUKIEF CRIELLA 1 S'3 1 + MICP,J SECTRA 1 S21 1 4- ^r '' :': , L ►. ^ i ' J S Sr'Pl 1 1 1 + i + 1 ' 1 1 F. + + 1 [+ 1 ♦ + + 1 1 1 1 1•1 F + + + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 + + + 1 1 1 1 `? 1 r. 1 C ---+ + + 1 1 1 (CCNTI"JrD1 AP?OIY 1. SP'CI?:S LIST Fr. PT.:R- CRVHK STUDY PIN!) AND 'EFCH C;.F=KS. StPTF IR• 1937. ° AqE♦ C=C7Ns A=ASUNCANT. JTPTERA:Cft y I. °-17 J :� Lc. S + + 1 1 P&RAPHAC;v'JCLAC-1 IRS Sf"77.177, 1 1 ♦ ?rLYPCDTLUM 1 INC:ULU" 1 + PCLYPEDIUJRi cALLAY 1 STATI'7U 01 1 + 1 '-'3'42 C,r I ��: + + + + 1 1 1 RI.r:- CRIC QTC !JS I 1 SP3 i 1 + + Ar:VF 1 A "^VZ• 1 T Sid I1_6 1 1 1 1 1 1 I A 1 .A + + ♦ + STIL']CL&IUS 1 1 1 CLINJDECT-N 1 1 1 1 + + + + ;YV;R THOCLAIUS 1 1 I 1 Sp? 1 1 1 C + + + TANYTARSUS SP' 1 TMI'=N' IANITELLA 1 1 1 1 S °P 1 ? 1 1 F. I + + + + TK172i0S SPL' 1 1 1 C 1 + + + + DIPTFPA:MISC IDICR.MJTA SPP I 1 1 I Z 1 + + + + 1)txa SPP 1 1 2 1q 1 1 ifIFXAT^Y'A SPA + + +---------� 1 i . 1 1 (CONTINUED) APPE7T)IX 1. SPPCTES LIST F'J1 Pr''N= CREEK- STUOY PON^ AND 9E=CH CREEKS. SEPTEERN 19 37. P=°ARE• C=CO'4MON♦ A=A!'UNDANT. LR^ER OIPTERA:MISC OLIGoCHAE A CRUSTACEA', 1SeECICS + + + PALPC)MYTA (COf1P LEY ) STMULIUM SPP SYR'HIOAE TIPULA SPP CAAFARINCOLA SPP 1 1 1 LUMRRICULIDAE 1 R = 1 1 + STATION 1 n3 + 1 + + + 04 P J '' Cr'. 1 nrMC CR 1 _:EECi1 CR 1 aE1Ch CP 4r'V= 1 ArICVE 1 AEZVE 1 AT SR ALIT?, 1:=,EECrt CR 1 PJN3 CR 1 1126 + + + 1 1 + 1 1 + + s 1 1 + + 1 L 1 + C°IS{NOPORA SDP1 PRISTINA JE4KIMAc 1CAM9AQtS SPP 1 + C 1 C + 1 r 1 + 1 R + 1 1 1 R 1 1 i + + C 1 41 C 1 A DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT July 28, 1987 MEMORANDUM TO: Arthur Mouberry FROM: Randy Dodd P117, THRU: Steve Tedder SUBJECT: Pond Creek Draft Permit This memorandum is in response to Mr. George E. Dula's letter regarding Pond Creek and the Pond Creek WWTP in Watauga County. Pond Creek (WS-III) flows into Beech Creek (C-Trout). The WWTP discharges 0.64 miles above Beech Creek. The observations of the Friends of the Watauga River are appropriate as degraded conditions in Pond Creek are apparent. With regard to comments about elevated nitrogen and phosphorus levels in Pond Creek: since the WWTP is not designed to remove these constituents and a golf course is upstream, the results are not surprising. Biological observations are particularly troubling. Please note that Pond Creek is not currently classified as Trout Waters (either by the EMC or Inland Fisheries). Therefore, pertinent requirements are water quality standards for WS-III waters, and limits necessary to pro- tect downstream (i.e., Beech Creek) classifications and uses. Technical Support recommends a residual chlorine limit of 7 ug/l, which is the level necessary to protect the standard in Beech Creek, assuming no decay in Pond Creek. If staff interprets regulations as requiring maintenance of the DO standard for trout waters in Pond Creek, then an effluent limit of 4 mg/1 for DO would apply. Please advise if questions. RD:gh cc: Forrest Westall N.C. Environmental Management Commission P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 Dear Commission Members: Route 1, Box 233 Sugar Grove, N.C. 28679 D#d. of Environmental Mgt July 19, 1987 Raleigh, N. G. RE.CERIFID JUL 2 ,JUL 2 3 1 ,. rt7 TECHNICAL SERVICES BRANCH RECErvjD JUL 21 1987 This letter is in response to the proposed reissuance of the NPDES Permit Number NC0069761 for the Beech Mountain Sanitary District, Pond Creek wastewater treatment plant. Stream surveys were conducted on both Pond Creek and Beech Creek just up- stream of their juncture, with data and conclusions listed below. All chemical test data were obtained using Hach test kits provided to our StreamWatch group by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to monitor water quality in the Watauga River watershed. TROUT WATER STDS. BEECH CR. POND CR. FACTOR OF Pond Creek). TEST PERFORMED Temperature (°C) A 20 = 17 7 1 ,l pH 6-9 r •.6 7.2 6 xl Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 6.0 10 5 -2 ....k5 Settleable Matter (mL/L) �� 0 0 (.d`�'" Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/L) 10 0.1 0.8 Nitrate (mg/L) 0.5 3.5 8 Total Chlorine (mg/L) .002 0.04 0.07 1.8 Phosphate (mg/L) 0 1.7 1.7 Phosphorous (mg/L) 0 0.6 0.6 Ca/Mg Total Hardness (mg/L) 100 34.2 77.0 2.3 Beech Creek is r{ated as Class C-Trout from its source to the Watauga River and its tributary, Pond Creek, is rated as Class A -II from its source to Beech Creek. As indicated by my test results, Pond Creek is in the worse condition except for pH, temperature, and settleable matter. The dissolved oxygen is twice as to Creek, and is 1 mg/L below the minimum required for trout waters. Water hardness (calcium and magnesium) was about a times greater in Pond Creek, approaching the maximum allowable for water supplies. While the nitrate nitrogen and phosphate �� were well within' the standards, they were considerably higher in Pond Creek, and 44'0,. could indicate inadequately treated biological wastes. The higher readings for Ca/a Mg hardness, nitrate nitrogen, and phosphate could also indicate fertilizer runoff, 11)," especially in light of the golf course upstream of West Pond Creek (a tributary of kl�•..•,(`-� Pond Creek). B & C A -II Class C-Tr Class A -II DIFFERENCE [1.)/v v er-- 3 / � 7Spy /pig -A 1113 JI:, s d �� PERMITS & ENGINEERING et.6.44.44,-ft) The readings found for chlorine are of special concern. The trout water stan- dard is 2.0 ug/L (.002 mg/L) maximum. The concentration in Beech Creek was 20 times the standard and Pond Creek was 35 times higher than the standard. The high chlorine levels in Pond Creek could be explained by chlorinated discharges .from the wastewater treatment plant. ;,: a. The water quality of Pond Creek appears very poor. Its water is turbid, with a brown silty coating on virtually all of the stream bed, and has a slightly musky odor. Very few scattered individual fish (only near the juncture with Beech Creek), and only two types of macroinvertibrates were observed. No crayfish and few surface insects were found. Beech Creek appeared much healthier with clear, odor -free water, and very little siltation. Numerous fish, salamanders, and at least 5 types of macroinvertibrates were observed. There definaely appears to be stress on the water life in Pond Creek. Perhaps siltation has killed the filter feeders and the fish no longer have a food source. 0r maybe the higher levels of pH, nitrate nitrogen, total chlorine, phosphate, and Ca/Mg hardness (and lower dissolved oxygen) are causing the stress. My recommendation to you is that, before the Pond Creek NPDES permit is renewed, a thorough study of the stream should be conducted to determine what is impacting it to such an extent. Sincerely, George E. Dula, Chairman Friends of the Watauga River (StreamWatch) 1 c: Harvard 'Ayers, Sierra Club Jim Mead, DWR-NRCD Joe Mickey Frank Sagona, TVA