A3_Broad_WaterQualityInfoSummary

Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 34
Chapter 3 -
Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad
River Basin
3.1 General Sources of Pollution
Human activities can negatively impact
surface water quality, even when the
activity is far removed from the
waterbody. With proper management of
wastes and land use activities, these
impacts can be minimized. Pollutants
that enter waters can be grouped into two
general categories: point sources and
nonpoint sources.
Point sources are typically piped discharges and are controlled through regulatory programs
administered by the state. All regulated point source discharges in North Carolina must apply for
and obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the state.
Nonpoint sources are from a broad range of land
use activities. Nonpoint source pollutants are
typically carried to waters by rainfall, runoff or
snowmelt. Sediment and nutrients are most often
associated with nonpoint source pollution. Other
pollutants associated with nonpoint source
pollution include fecal coliform bacteria, heavy
metals, oil and grease, and any other substance
that may be washed off the ground or deposited
from the atmosphere into surface waters.
Unlike point source pollution, nonpoint pollution sources are diffuse in nature and occur
intermittently, depending on rainfall events and land disturbance. Given the diffuse nature of
nonpoint source pollution, it is difficult and resource intensive to quantify nonpoint contributions
to water quality degradation in a given watershed. While nonpoint source pollution control often
relies on voluntary actions, the state has many
programs designed to reduce nonpoint source
pollution.
Every person living in or visiting a watershed
contributes to impacts on water quality. Therefore,
each individual should be aware of these contributions
and take actions to reduce them.
Point Sources
Piped discharges from:
• Municipal wastewater treatment plants
• Industrial facilities
• Small package treatment plants
• Large urban and industrial stormwater systems
Nonpoint Sources
• Construction activities
• Roads, parking lots and rooftops
• Agriculture
• Failing septic systems and straight pipes
• Timber harvesting
• Hydrologic modifications
Cumulative Effects
While any one activity may not have a
dramatic effect on water quality, the
cumulative effect of land use activities
in a watershed can have a severe and
long-lasting impact.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 35
3.2 Description of Surface Water Classifications and Standards
North Carolina’s Water Quality Standards program adopted classifications and water quality
standards for all the state’s river basins by 1963. The program remains consistent with the
Federal Clean Water Act and its amendments. Water quality classifications and standards have
also been modified to promote protection of surface water supply watersheds, high quality
waters, and the protection of unique and special pristine waters with outstanding resource values.
Statewide Classifications
All surface waters in the state are assigned a primary classification that is appropriate to the best
uses of that water. In addition to primary classifications, surface waters may be assigned a
supplemental classification. Most supplemental classifications have been developed to provide
special protection to sensitive or highly valued resource waters. Table A-19 briefly describes the
best uses of each classification. A full description is available in the document titled:
Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters of North Carolina.
Information, including a database of North Carolina’s stream classifications, is also available on
DWQ’s website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/csu/.
Table A-19 Primary and Supplemental Surface Water Classifications
PRIMARY FRESHWATER AND SALTWATER CLASSIFICATIONS
Class Best Uses
C and SC Aquatic life propagation/protection and secondary recreation.
B and SB Primary recreation and Class C uses.
SA Waters classified for commercial shellfish harvesting.
WS Water Supply watershed. There are five WS classes ranging from WS-I through WS-V. WS
classifications are assigned to watersheds based on land use characteristics of the area. Each water
supply classification has a set of management strategies to protect the surface water supply. WS-I
provides the highest level of protection and WS-IV provides the least protection. A Critical Area
(CA) designation is also listed for watershed areas within a half-mile and draining to the water
supply intake or reservoir where an intake is located.
SUPPLEMENTAL CLASSIFICATIONS
Class Best Uses
Sw Swamp Waters: Recognizes waters that will naturally be more acidic (have lower pH values) and
have lower levels of dissolved oxygen.
Tr Trout Waters: Provides protection to freshwaters for natural trout propagation and survival of
stocked trout.
HQW High Quality Waters: Waters possessing special qualities including excellent water quality, Native
or Special Native Trout Waters, Critical Habitat areas, or WS-I and WS-II water supplies.
ORW Outstanding Resource Waters: Unique and special surface waters which are unimpacted by
pollution and have some outstanding resource values.
NSW Nutrient Sensitive Waters: Areas with water quality problems associated with excessive plant
growth resulting from nutrient enrichment.
* Primary classifications beginning with "S" are assigned to saltwaters.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 36
Statewide Water Quality Standards
Each primary and supplemental classification is assigned a set of water quality standards that
establish the level of water quality that must be maintained in the waterbody to support the uses
associated with each classification. Some of the standards, particularly for HQW and ORW
waters, outline protective management strategies aimed at controlling point and nonpoint source
pollution. These strategies are discussed briefly below. The standards for C waters establish the
basic protection level for all state surface waters. All of the other primary and supplemental
classifications have more stringent standards than for C, and therefore, require higher levels of
protection.
Some of North Carolina’s surface waters are relatively unaffected by pollution sources and have
water quality higher than the standards that are applied to the majority of the waters of the state.
In addition, some waters provide habitat for sensitive biota such as trout, juvenile fish, or rare
and endangered aquatic species.
Trout Waters
Different water quality standards for some parameters, such as dissolved oxygen, temperature
and turbidity, have been developed to protect freshwaters for natural trout propagation and
survival of stocked trout. These water quality standards result in more restrictive limits for
wastewater discharges to trout waters (Tr). There are no watershed development restrictions
associated with the Tr classification. However, the NC Division of Land Resources does require
a 25-foot vegetated buffer between Tr waters and graded construction sites.
A state fishery management classification, Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters, is
administered by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. It provides for public access to
streams for fishing and regulates fishing activities (seasons, size limits, creel limits, and bait and
lure restrictions). Although many of these waters are also classified Tr by DWQ, this is not the
same classification.
High Quality Waters
Special HQW protection management strategies are
intended to prevent degradation of water quality
below present levels from both point and nonpoint
sources. HQW requirements for new wastewater
discharge facilities and facilities which expand
beyond their currently permitted loadings address
oxygen-consuming wastes, total suspended solids,
disinfection, emergency requirements, volume,
nutrients (in nutrient sensitive waters) and toxic
substances.
For nonpoint source pollution, development
activities which require a Sedimentation and Erosion
Control Plan in accordance with rules established by
Criteria for HQW Classification
• Waters rated as Excellent based on
DWQ’s chemical and biological
sampling.
• Streams designated as native or special
native trout waters by the Wildlife
Resources Commission.
• Waters designated as primary nursery
areas or other functional nursery areas
by the Division of Marine Fisheries.
• Waters classified by DWQ as WS-I,
WS-II or SA.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 37
the NC Sedimentation Control Commission or an approved local erosion and sedimentation
control program, and which drain to and are within one mile of HQWs, are required to control
runoff from the development using either a low density or high density option. The low density
option requires a 30-foot vegetated buffer between development activities and the stream;
whereas, the high density option requires structural stormwater controls. In addition, the
Division of Land Resources requires more stringent erosion controls for land-disturbing projects
within one mile of and draining to HQWs.
Water Supply Watersheds
The purpose of the Water Supply Watershed Protection Program is to provide an opportunity for
communities to work with the state to strengthen protection of their water supplies. There are
five water supply classifications (WS-I to WS-V) that are defined according to the amount and
types of permitted point source discharges, as well as requirements to control nonpoint sources of
pollution (Table A-19). Watersheds draining to waters classified WS carry some restrictions on
point source discharges and on many land use activities including urban development,
agriculture, forestry and highway sediment control. Minimum requirements for WS-I to WS-IV
include a 30-foot undisturbed vegetated buffer. The WS-I and WS-II classifications are HQW by
definition because requirements for these levels of water supply protection are at least as
stringent as for HQWs.
Classifications and Standards in the Broad River Basin
The waters of the Broad River basin have a variety of surface water quality classifications
applied to them. Water supply watersheds range from WS-II to WS-IV. Three waters have the
supplemental classification of High Quality Waters: the upper headwaters of the Green River
and two unnamed tributaries to the Green River at Tuxedo. Portions of the Broad River basin
that contain these special classifications are shown on Figure A-10. Approximately 30 percent of
the waters in the Broad River basin are classified Trout Waters.
Class B Waters and the Reclassification Process
Class B waters are those used for primary recreation and other uses suitable for Class C. Primary
recreational activities include swimming, skin diving, water skiing, and similar uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an organized manner or on a
frequent basis. During the public meetings and comment period for this basin plan, several
citizens voiced concern about waters that are currently not Class B but which are currently being
utilized in a manner consistent with the description of primary recreation.
A waterbody’s classification may change at the request of a local government or citizen. DWQ
reviews each request for a reclassification and conducts an assessment of the waterbody to
determine the appropriateness of the reclassification. DWQ also conducts periodic waterbody
assessments which may result in a recommendation to reclassify the waterbody. In order for a
waterbody to be reclassified it must proceed through the rule-making process. To initiate a
reclassification, complete the "Application to Request Reclassification of NC Surface Waters",
which is available from the Planning Branch by calling [phone], ext. 558 or by email at
[e-mail].
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 39
Pending and Recent Reclassifications in the Broad River Basin
In April 2001, a portion of the upper headwaters of the Green River was reclassified High
Quality Waters. DWQ has also received a request from the Town of Forest City to reclassify a
section of the northernmost portion of Second Broad River from WS-IV to WS-II HQW. Forest
City has submitted this request in order to expand their water treatment plant. This
reclassification is currently in the planning process.
3.3 DWQ Water Quality Monitoring Programs in the Broad River Basin
Staff in the Environmental Sciences Branch and
Regional Offices of DWQ collect a variety of
biological, chemical and physical data. The
following discussion contains a brief introduction
to each program, followed by a summary of water
quality data in the Broad River basin for that
program. For more detailed information on
sampling and assessment of streams in this basin,
refer to the Basinwide Assessment Report for the
Broad River basin, available from the
Environmental Sciences Branch website at
http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html or by calling
[phone].
3.3.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring
Benthic macroinvertebrates are organisms that live in and on the bottom substrates of rivers and
streams. These organisms are primarily aquatic insect larvae. The use of benthic data has
proven to be a reliable monitoring tool, as benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle
changes in water quality. Since macroinvertebrates have life cycles of six months to over one
year, the effects of short-term pollution (such as a spill) will generally not be overcome until the
following generation appears. The benthic community also integrates the effects of a wide array
of potential pollutant mixtures.
Criteria have been developed to assign a bioclassification to each benthic sample based on the
number of different species present in the pollution intolerant groups of Ephemeroptera
(Mayflies), Plecoptera (Stoneflies) and Trichoptera (Caddisflies), commonly referred to as EPTs,
and a Biotic Index value, which gives an indication of overall community pollution tolerance.
Different benthic macroinvertebrate criteria have been developed for different ecoregions
(mountains, piedmont and coastal plain) within North Carolina. Bioclassifications fall into five
categories ranging from Poor to Excellent.
DWQ monitoring programs for the
Broad River Basin include:
• benthic macroinvertebrates
(Section 3.3.1)
• fish assessments
(Section 3.3.2)
• aquatic toxicity monitoring
(Section 3.3.3)
• lakes assessment
(Section 3.3.4)
• ambient monitoring system
(Section 3.3.5)
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 40
Overview of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data
Appendix II lists all the benthic macroinvertebrate collections in the Broad River basin between
1983 and 2000, giving site location, collection date, taxa richness, biotic index values and
bioclassifications. Benthic macroinvertebrates have been collected at 66 sites in the Broad River
basin since 1983 with 38 of these sites sampled during the 2000 basinwide survey or special
studies. Table A-20 lists the most recent bioclassifications since 1983, by subbasin, for all 66
benthic sites.
Table A-20 Summary of Bioclassifications for All Freshwater Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Sites (using the most recent bioclassification for each site) in the Broad River
Basin
Subbasin Excellent Good Good-Fair Fair Poor Not Rated Total
03-08-012200015
03-08-02 1 6 15 2 0 0 24
03-08-034320009
03-08-04112210016
03-08-052321019
03-08-060120003
Total (#) 10 27 23 4 0 2 66
Total (%) 15% 41% 35% 8% 0% 1%100%
Basinwide sampling in 2000 generally occurred during a period of extreme low flows. In 2000,
38 sites were sampled during basinwide surveys or special studies. For the 2000 collections,
Figure A-11 presents the following bioclassifications: Excellent – 6 (16%), Good – 17 (44%),
Good-Fair – 11 (29%), Fair – 2 (5%), Poor – 0, Not Rated –1 (3%) and Not Impaired – 1 (3%).
The distribution of water quality bioclassifications is similar for both the 2000 collection and all
collections since 1983, although drought conditions and the corresponding reduction of nonpoint
source pollution impacts produced a slightly higher percentage of Good sites in 2000 than in
previous years.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 41
2000 Benthic Sampling Results
Not Rated
3%
Good-Fair
29%
Good
44%
Not Impaired
3%
Fair
5%
Excellent
16%
Figure A-11 Bioclassifications for 35 Broad River Basin Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sites
Sampled by DWQ in 2000
Trends in water quality over the past five years were evaluated at 33 sites in the Broad River
basin, with a majority of the sites (88 percent) showing no change in water quality, other than
flow related changes in bioclassification. None of the sites showed a decline in water quality.
However, four sites showed improvements related to improvements in wastewater treatment.
A designation of Not Impaired may be used for flowing waters that are too small to be assigned a
bioclassification (less than 4 meters in width), but meet the criteria for a Good-Fair or higher
bioclassification using the standard qualitative and EPT criteria. Subbasin chapters in Section B
contain more specific information regarding these streams.
3.3.2 Fish Assessments
Historical studies of fish communities in the Broad River basin were conducted primarily by the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) in the 1960s and late 1970s.
Approximately 59 species have been collected from the Broad River basin in North Carolina.
Several streams were sampled by DWQ during the last basinwide planning cycle (1995), and 15
samples were collected in 2000. Scores are assigned to these samples using the North Carolina
Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI). The NCIBI uses a cumulative assessment of 12 parameters or
metrics. Each metric is designed to contribute unique information to the overall assessment. The
scores for all metrics are then summed to obtain the overall NCIBI score. Appendix II contains
more information regarding the NCIBI.
Overview of Fish Community Data
Appendix II lists all of the fish community collections in the Broad River basin between 1995
and 2000, giving site location, collection date and NCIBI bioclassification. Fish community
samples have been collected at 23 sites in the Broad River basin since 1990. Table A-21 lists the
most recent bioclassifications since 1990, by subbasin, for all fish community sites.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 42
Table A-21 Summary of NCIBI Categories for All Freshwater Fish Community Sites (using
the most recent bioclassification for each site) in the Broad River Basin
Subbasin Excellent Good Good-Fair Fair Poor Not Rated Total
03-08-01 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
03-08-02 3 3 3 0 1 0 10
03-08-03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03-08-04 3 3 2 0 0 0 8
03-08-05 0 1 1 0 0 0 2
03-08-06 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Total (#) 6 8 7 0 1 1 23
Total (%) 26% 35% 31% 0% 4% 4%100%
In 2000, 15 sites were sampled for fish community surveys. Only one of these sites, Beaverdam
Creek, had been previously sampled during the initial basinwide monitoring in 1995, while the
remaining 14 sites represented new monitoring sites. For the 2000 collections, Figure A-12
presents the following NCIBI bioclassification: Excellent – 3 (20%), Good – 5 (33%), Good-
Fair – 6 (40%), Fair – 0 and Poor – 1 (7%). The NCIBI bioclassification at the survey site on
Beaverdam Creek did not change between the 1995 and 2000 sampling periods.
Figure A-12 NCIBI bioclassifications for 15 Broad River Basin Fish Community Survey Sites
Sampled by DWQ in 2000
3.3.3 Aquatic Toxicity Monitoring
Acute and/or chronic toxicity tests are used to determine toxicity of discharges to sensitive
aquatic species (usually fathead minnows or the water flea, Ceriodaphnia dubia). Results of
2000 Fish Community Survey Results
Good
33%
Excellent
20%
Poor
7%
Good-Fair
40%
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 43
these tests have been shown by several researchers to be predictive of discharge effects on
receiving stream populations. Many facilities are required to monitor whole effluent toxicity by
their NPDES permit or by administrative letter. Other facilities may be tested by DWQ’s
Aquatic Toxicology laboratory.
The Aquatic Toxicology Unit maintains a compliance summary (Figure A-13) for all facilities
required to perform tests and provides a monthly update of this information to regional offices
and DWQ administration. Ambient toxicity tests can be used to evaluate stream water quality
relative to other stream sites and/or a point source discharge.
Eighteen NPDES permits in the Broad River basin currently require whole effluent toxicity
(WET) testing. Seventeen permits have a WET limit; the other facility permit specifies
monitoring but with no limit.
The number of facilities required to monitor whole effluent toxicity has increased steadily since
1987, the first year that whole effluent toxicity limits were written into permits in North
Carolina. The compliance rate has risen as well. Since 1993, the compliance rate has stabilized
at approximately 90-95 percent. Facilities with toxicity problems during the most recent two-
year review period are discussed in the subbasin chapters in Section B.
0
5
10
15
20
19
8
5
19
8
7
19
8
9
19
9
1
19
9
3
19
9
5
19
9
7
19
9
9
Year
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
0
20
40
60
80
100
Co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e

(
%
)
No. Facilities % Meeting Permit Limit
Figure A-13 Summary of Compliance with Aquatic Toxicity Tests in the Broad River Basin
3.3.4 Lakes Assessment Program
Four lakes in the Broad River basin were sampled as part of the Lakes Assessment Program
during the summer of 2000: Lake Lure (03-08-01), Lake Summit and Lake Adger (03-08-03),
and Kings Mountain Reservoir (03-04-05). Each lake is individually discussed in the appropriate
subbasin chapter in Section B.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 44
In January 2001, the NC DWQ discovered quality assurance issues with chlorophyll a laboratory
analyses for samples from 1996 through February 2001. NC DWQ tracking efforts have
identified several different quality assurance issues. In some circumstances, laboratory data for
chlorophyll a will require recalculation efforts. In other cases, chlorophyll a data cannot be
recovered from the laboratory methods that were utilized. For lakes that were monitored as part
of this time period, all previously reported chlorophyll a laboratory analyses have been withheld
pending a sufficient quality assurance evaluation and/or recalculation of chlorophyll a values.
As a result of this dilemma, there are no North Carolina Trophic State Index (NCTSI) values
available for this time period.
3.3.5 Ambient Monitoring System
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake and estuarine sample
stations strategically located for the collection of physical and chemical water quality data.
North Carolina has nine stations in the Broad River basin listed in Table A-22 and shown on
individual subbasin maps in Section B. These stations are sampled monthly for 27 parameters.
Table A-22 Ambient Monitoring System Stations within the Broad River Basin
Subbasin/
Station Code Station County Classification*
03-08-01
A1510000 Cove Creek at US 64/74, near Lake Lure Rutherford C
03-08-02
A1520000 Broad River at SR 1181, near Rock Spring Rutherford WS-IV
A2700000 Second Broad River at 1538, near Logan Rutherford WS-IV
A4400000 Second Broad River at 1538, near Cliffside Rutherford C
03-08-04
A4700000 Broad River at NC 150, near Boiling Springs Cleveland C
A4800000 First Broad River at SR 1530, near Casar Cleveland WS-IV
A6400000 First Broad River at SR 1140, near Earl Cleveland C
A6450000 Sugar Branch at NC 150, near Boiling Springs Cleveland C
03-08-05
A8600000 Buffalo Creek at NC 198, near Grover Cleveland C
* An index for DWQ freshwater classifications can be found in Part 3.2 of this section (Table A-19).
Generally, water quality at all locations is good. However, land-disturbing activities such as the
construction of roads and buildings, crop production, livestock grazing and logging can all lead
to accelerated erosion rates by causing more soil than usual to be detached and moved by water,
especially after periods of rain. In the Broad River basin, individual samples at all monitoring
stations documented turbidity in excess of the state standard (50 NTU). The ambient monitoring
station in the Second Broad at Cliffside had eight (14 percent) observations in excess of 50 NTU
and the highest turbidity value (380 NTU) of all the stations.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 45
Iron exceeded its action level at three locations: the Second Broad River at Cliffside, the Broad
River at Boiling Springs, and the First Broad River at SR 1140. Iron is a common element in
clay soils; therefore, elevated concentrations may reflect the natural geochemistry of the
watershed.
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Fecal coliform bacteria are widely used as an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens
typically associated with the intestinal tract of warm-blooded animals and are therefore found in
their wastes. Coliform bacteria are relatively easy to identify and are usually present in larger
numbers than more dangerous pathogens, even though they respond to the environment and to
treatment in much the same way. Sources of fecal coliform bacteria, as well as other more
dangerous pathogens, include runoff from pastures, feedlots, poultry operations and lagoons that
do not employ appropriate best management practices. Other sources include straight pipes,
leaking and failing septic systems, and noncompliant WWTPs. Wildlife and pet waste also
contribute to elevated concentrations of pathogens.
Table A-23 presents Broad River basin ambient monitoring stations with geometric means
greater than 200 colonies/100ml. Stations where 20 percent or more of samples contained
concentrations greater than 400 colonies/100ml are also presented. All three stations are located
in subbasin 03-08-04. Further discussion of these waters is found in Section B, Chapter (page
102). The majority of stations in the basin (67 percent) had geometric means of less than 150
colonies/100ml.
Table A-23 Ambient Monitoring Stations with Fecal Coliform Geometric Means Greater than
200 Colonies/100ml or with 20 Percent of Samples Greater than 400
Colonies/100ml in the Broad River Basin
Station Location Classification
No. of Samples
Used in Mean
Geometric
Mean
% >400
col/100ml
A4700000 Broad River near Boiling Springs C 55 118 25.5
A6400000 First Broad River near Earl C 51 239 31.4
A6450000 Sugar Branch near Boiling Springs C 53 189 32.1
3.4 Other Water Quality Research
North Carolina actively solicits "existing and readily available" data and information for each
basin as part of the basinwide planning process. Data meeting DWQ quality assurance
objectives are used in making use support determinations. Data and information indicating
possible water quality problems are investigated further. Both quantitative and qualitative
information are accepted during the solicitation period.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 46
High levels of confidence must be present in order
for outside quantitative information to carry the
same weight as information collected from within
DWQ. This is particularly the case when
considering waters for the 303(d) list.
Methodology for soliciting and evaluating outside
data is presented in North Carolina’s 2000 § 303(d)
List (NCDENR-DWQ, October 2000). The next
data solicitation period for the Broad River is
planned for fall 2004.
Any data submitted to DWQ from other water
sampling programs conducted in the Broad River
basin have been reviewed. Data that meet quality
and accessibility requirements were considered for
use support assessments and the 303(d) list. These
data are also used by DWQ to adjust the location of
biological and chemical monitoring sites.
In particular, DWQ has reviewed and considered
information developed through the Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN) as managed
by the UNC-Asheville Environmental Quality Institute (see page 137) and the State of South
Carolina. Other programs or research that developed data or information are presented in Section
C or discussed in individual subbasin chapters in Section B.
In the Broad River Basin VWIN monitors 27 sites (Table A-24). VWIN has collected at least
three years of monthly data for most sites and over six years of monthly data for many sites.
Parameters monitored include major nutrients, turbidity, suspended solids, pH, alkalinity,
conductivity and heavy metals such as zinc, copper and lead.
Each county having monitoring stations has a coordinator to organize and train volunteers and to
ensure that all stations are monitored monthly. The Upper Broad River Watershed Protection
Program (UBRWPP) is the lead organization for VWIN in Henderson and Rutherford counties.
For more information on the UBRWPP, please refer to Section C, page 138. The Pacolet Area
Conservancy (PAC) is the lead organization for VWIN in Polk County. For more information on
PAC, please refer to page 135 of Section C. The subbasin chapters in Section B discuss streams
where VWIN monitoring revealed water quality impacts.
DWQ data solicitation includes
the following:
• Information, letters and photographs
regarding the uses of surface waters for
boating, drinking water, swimming,
aesthetics and fishing.
• Raw data submitted electronically and
accompanied by documentation of
quality assurance methods used to collect
and analyze the samples. Maps showing
sampling locations must also be included.
• Summary reports and memos, including
distribution statistics and accompanied
by documentation of quality assurance
methods used to collect and analyze the
data.
Contact information must accompany all
data and information submitted.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 47
Table A-24 Location of VWIN Monitoring Sites in the Broad River Basin
County Stream
Name
Sampling
Location
Rutherford Reddypatch Creek HWY 64
Hickory Creek HWY 74
Broad River HWY 9
Broad River at Hickory Nut Falls Camp Ground
Broad River at Lake Lure
Pool Creek HWY 64/74/9
Public Golf Course Creek HWY 64/74
Cane Creek ¼ mile above Tryon Bay
Buffalo Creek above Lake Lure
Fairfield Mountains Creek at Fairfield Mountain
Lake Lure Main Channel at Center of the Lake
Lake Lure at the Dam
Polk White Oak Creek SR 1137
White Oak Creek SR 1531
White Oak Creek SR 1322
Horse Creek SR 1153
Horse Creek SR 1516
North Pacolet River SR 1516
Demannu Creek SR 1140 and Route 9N
Joel’s Creek above Saluda WWTP
Joel’s Creek below Saluda WWTP
Green River HWY 9
White Oak Creek at Briar Hill Farm
North Pacolet River at Melrose
North Pacolet River Route 108
White Oak Creek at Weidman’s
Camp Creek
3.5 Use Support Summary
3.5.1 Introduction to Use Support
Surface waters are classified according to their best intended uses. Determining how well a
waterbody supports its uses (use support status) is an important method of interpreting water
quality data and assessing water quality.
Surface waters are rated Supporting or Impaired. These ratings refer to whether the classified
uses of the water (such as water supply, aquatic life protection and recreation) are being met. For
example, waters classified for fish consumption, aquatic life protection and secondary recreation
(Class C for freshwater or SC for saltwater) are rated Supporting if data used to determine use
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 48
support meet certain criteria. However, if these criteria were not met, then the waters would be
rated as Impaired. Waters with inconclusive data are listed as Not Rated. Waters lacking data
are listed as No Data. More specific methods are presented in Appendix III.
In previous use support assessments, surface waters were rated fully supporting (FS), fully
supporting but threatened (ST), partially supporting (PS), not supporting (NS) and not rated
(NR). FS was used to identify waters that were meeting their designated uses. ST was used to
identify waters that were fully supporting but had some notable water quality concerns and could
represent constant, degrading or improving water quality conditions. Impaired waters were rated
PS and NS, depending on their degree of degradation. NR was used to identify waters lacking
data, or having inconclusive data. The 2002 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and
Assessment Report Guidance issued by the EPA requested that states no longer subdivide the
supporting or impaired categories. In agreement with this guidance, North Carolina no longer
subdivides the use support categories and rates waters as Supporting, Impaired, Not Rated or No
Data.
Use support methods have been developed to assess ecosystem health and human health risk
through the development of use support ratings for six categories: aquatic life and secondary
recreation, fish consumption, shellfish harvesting, primary recreation, water supply and "other"
uses. These categories are tied to the uses associated with the primary classifications applied to
NC rivers, streams and lakes. A single water could have more than one use support rating
corresponding to one or more of the six use support categories. For many waters, a use support
category will not be applicable (N/A) to the use classification of that water (e.g., shellfish
harvesting is only applied to Class SA waters). A full description of the classifications is
available in the DWQ document titled: Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable
to Surface Waters of North Carolina. For more detailed information regarding use support
methodology refer, to Appendix III.
3.5.2 Comparison of Use Support Ratings to Streams on the Section 303(d) List
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify waters not meeting standards.
EPA must then provide review and approval of the listed waters. A list of waters not meeting
standards is submitted to EPA biennially. Waters placed on this list, termed the 303(d) list,
require the establishment of total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) intended to guide the
restoration of water quality. See Appendix IV for a description of 303(d) listing methodology.
Waters are placed on North Carolina’s 303(d) list primarily due to an impaired use support
rating. These use support ratings are based on biological and chemical data and, for some
categories, human health advisories. When the state water quality standard is exceeded, then this
constituent is listed as the problem parameter. TMDLs must be developed for problem
parameters on the 303(d) list. Other strategies may be implemented to restore water quality;
however, the waterbody must remain on the 303(d) list until improvement has been realized
based on either biological bioclassifications or water quality standards.
The 303(d) list and accompanying data are updated as the basinwide plans are revised. In some
cases, the new data will demonstrate water quality improvement and waters may receive a better
use support rating. These waters may be removed from the 303(d) list since water quality
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 49
improvement has been attained. In other cases, the new data will show a stable or decreasing
trend in overall water quality resulting in the same, or lower, use support rating. Attention
remains focused on these waters until water quality standards are being met.
3.5.3 Use Support Ratings for the Broad River Basin
Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation
The aquatic life/secondary recreation use support category is applied to all waters in North
Carolina. Therefore, this category is applied to the total number of stream miles (1,494.8) in the
North Carolina portion of the Broad River basin. Table A-25 presents use support ratings by
subbasin for both monitored and evaluated streams in the aquatic life/secondary recreation
category. A basinwide summary of current aquatic life/secondary recreation use support ratings
is presented in Table A-26.
Approximately 37 percent of stream miles (546.2 miles) were monitored for the protection of
aquatic life and secondary recreation by DWQ during this basinwide planning cycle. All waters
rated Impaired in the aquatic life/secondary recreation use support category were monitored
within the past five years. Impaired waters accounted for 0.3 percent of the total stream miles
and 0.9 percent of monitored stream miles.
Table A-25 Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation Use Support Ratings for Monitored and
Evaluated Waters Listed by Subbasin (1995-2000)
Subbasin Units Supporting Impaired Not Rated No Data Total
03-08-01 miles 151.1 0.0 10.0 42.3 203.4
acres 732.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 732
03-08-02 miles 229.2 4.7 5.1 232.3 471.3
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
03-08-03 miles 143.9 0.0 0.0 48.6 192.5
acres 692.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 692
03-08-04 miles 226.5 0.0 0.0 199.9 426.4
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
03-08-05 miles 64.1 0.0 0.0 72.6 136.7
acres 530.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 530
03-08-06 miles 29.9 0.0 1.6 33.0 64.5
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total miles 844.7 4.7 16.7 628.7 1,494.8
acres 1,954.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,954.0
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 50
Table A-26 Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation Use Support Summary Information for Waters
in the Broad River Basin (2000)
Monitored and
Evaluated Waters*
Monitored
Waters Only**Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation
Use Support Ratings Miles or
Acres %Miles or
Acres %
Supporting 844.7 Miles
1,954.0 Acres
56.5%
100.0%
531.5 Miles
1,954.0 Acres
97.3%
100%
Impaired 4.7 Miles
0.0 Acres
0.3%
0.0%
4.7 Miles
0.0 Acres
0.9%
0.0%
Not Rated 16.7 Miles
0.0 Acres
1.1%
0.0%
10.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
1.8%
0.0%
No Data 628.7 Miles
0.0 Acres
42.1%
0.0%
TOTAL 1,494.8 Miles
1,954.0 Acres
546.2 Miles
1,954.0 Acres
* = Percent based on total of all streams, both monitored and evaluated. ** = Percent based on total of all monitored streams.
Fish Consumption
Like the aquatic life/secondary recreation use support category, the fish consumption use support
category is also applied to all waters in the state. No streams were monitored for the fish
consumption category during this basinwide cycle because of the lack of any significant
contaminant issues in the basin. Fish consumption use support ratings are based on fish
consumption advisories issued by the NC Department of Health and Human Services
(NCDHHS). Currently, there are no fish consumption advisories specific to the NC portion of
the Broad River basin; and therefore, all waters are fully supporting the fish consumption use.
Primary Recreation
There are 11.8 stream miles and 964 lake acres currently classified for primary recreation (Class
B) in the Broad River basin. Table A-27 presents use support ratings by subbasin for all waters
in the primary recreation use support category.
No stream miles were monitored by DWQ over the past five years for the primary recreation use.
However, Lake Lure and Lake Summit were monitored by DWQ over the past five years and are
fully supporting the primary recreation use. A basinwide summary of current primary recreation
use support ratings is presented in Table A-28.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 51
Table A-27 Primary Recreation Use Support Ratings for Monitored and Evaluated Waters
Listed by Subbasin (1995-2000)
Subbasin Units Supporting Impaired No Data Total
03-08-01 miles 0.0 0.0 2.5 2.5
acres 732.0 0.0 0.0 732.0
03-08-02 miles 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
03-08-03 miles 0.0 0.0 7.5 7.5
acres 232.0 0.0 0.0 232.0
03-08-04 miles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
03-08-05 miles 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
03-08-06 miles 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
acres 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total miles 0.0 0.0 11.8 11.8
acres 964.0 0.0 0.0 964.0
Table A-28 Primary Recreation Use Support Summary for Waters in the Broad River Basin
(2000)
Monitored and
Evaluated Waters*
Monitored
Waters Only**Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation
Use Support Ratings Miles or
Acres %Miles or
Acres %
Supporting 0.0 Miles
964.0 Acres
0.0%
100.0%
0.0 Miles
964.0 Acres
0.0%
100%
Impaired 0.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
0.0%
0.0%
0.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
0.0%
0.0%
Not Rated 0.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
0.0%
0.0%
0.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
0.0%
0.0%
No Data 11.8 Miles
0.0 Acres
100.0%
0.0%
TOTAL 11.8 Miles
964.0 Acres
0.0 Miles
964.0 Acres
* = Percent based on total of all streams, both monitored and evaluated. ** = Percent based on total of all monitored streams.
Water Supply
There are 402.8 stream miles and 530.0 lake acres currently classified for drinking water supply
in the Broad River basin. All were evaluated within the past five years; all are fully supporting
the water supply use. A basinwide summary of current water supply use support ratings is
presented in Table A-29.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 52
Table A-29 Water Supply Use Support Ratings for All Waters Listed by Subbasin
Evaluated WatersWater Supply
Use Support Ratings
Miles %
Supporting 402.8 Miles
530.0 Acres
100%
100%
Impaired 0.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
0%
0%
Not Rated 0.0 Miles
0.0 Acres
0%
0%
TOTAL 402.8 Miles
530.0 Acres
Impaired Waters
Table A-30 presents impaired waters (in all categories), listed by subbasin, in the Broad River
basin that were monitored by DWQ within the last five years. Ratings for each applicable use
support category are shown, even though only one use may be Impaired. Descriptions of
impaired segments, as well as problem parameters, are outlined in Appendix III. These waters
are presented on maps in the appropriate subbasin chapter along with management strategies for
improving water quality.
Section A: Chapter 3 – Summary of Water Quality Information for the Broad River Basin 53
Table A-30 Monitored Impaired Waters within the Broad River Basin (as of 2000)
1
Use Support Categories/Rating – Impaired Miles
Impaired
Water Subbasin Chapter in
Section B Classification2 Aquatic Life/
Secondary Recreation
Fish
Consumption
Primary
Recreation
Water
Supply
Potential
Sources
Cathey’s Creek 03-08-02 2 C Impaired – 1.9 mi.Supporting N/A N/A P, NP
Hollands Creek 03-08-02 2 C Impaired – 2.8 mi.Supporting N/A N/A P, NP
Notes
1 These waters are currently, or will be placed, on the 303(d) list, and a TMDL and/or management strategy will be developed to address causes and sources of impairment. Refer
to Appendix IV for further information regarding 303(d) listing methodology.
2 An index for DWQ freshwater classifications can be found in Part 3.2 of this section (Table A-19 on page 35).
P Point Sources NP Nonpoint Sources N/A Not Applicable