B6_Broad_03

Section B: Chapter 6 - Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06 119
Chapter 6 -
Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06
Includes North Carolina portion of North Pacolet River
6.1 Water Quality Overview
This subbasin contains approximately ten miles of the
North Carolina section of the North Pacolet River, which
flows into the Broad River in South Carolina. The word
"Pacolet" means swiftly flowing, thus representing the
swiftly flowing waters of the Pacolet River. Smaller
streams include Joels, Horse and Skyuka Creeks. Saluda,
Columbus and Tryon are the only municipal areas in this
subbasin.
A map including the locations of NPDES discharges and
water quality monitoring stations is presented in Figure B-
6. Table B-11 contains a summary of monitoring data
types, locations and results. Use support ratings for
waters in this subbasin are summarized in Table B-12.
Appendix I provides a key to discharge identification
numbers. Refer to Appendix III for a complete listing of
monitored waters and more information about use support
ratings.
The land in this subbasin is located on the edge of the mountain and piedmont ecoregions.
Seventy-nine percent of the land is forested. Row crops and pasture are the most prevalent
agricultural land uses (19 percent). However, portions of the subbasin are being rapidly
developed for second homes and vacation lodges. The population of Polk County is expected to
increase 37 percent and 37 percent in Henderson County between 2000 and 2020.
There are eight NPDES permitted dischargers in this subbasin. The largest facilities are the
Town of Tryon WWTP (1.5 MGD to an unnamed tributary to the North Pacolet River); Grover
Industries (0.45 MDG to the North Pacolet River); and the Carolina Yarn Processors, Inc. (0.26
MGD to an unnamed tributary to the North Pacolet River). Only one facility, the Saluda WWTP,
experienced significant problems meeting permitted limits during this review cycle. In 1998, the
City of Saluda’s WWTP conducted a routine cleaning, and for a couple of months following the
cleaning, the facility experienced problems with its aeration basin. However, the facility quickly
resolved the problems and is operating in full compliance. Two facilities, Grover Industries and
the Tryon WWTP, in this subbasin are required to monitor their effluent’s toxicity. In the two-
year review period, only the Tryon WWTP failed its toxicity testing (in December 2000).
Subbasin 03-08-06 at a Glance
Land and Water
Total area: 72.8 mi
2
Stream miles: 64.5
Population Statistics
1990 Est. Pop.: 7,606 people
Pop. Density: 105 persons/mi
2
Land Cover (%)
Forest/Wetland: 78.6
Surface Water: 1.0
Urban: 1.2
Cultivated Crop: 0.3
Pasture/
Managed Herbaceous: 18.8
Section B: Chapter 6 - Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06 121
Table B-11 DWQ Monitoring Locations and Benthic Macroinvertebrate Bioclassifications
(2000) for Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06
Site Stream County Location Bioclassification
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring
B-1 North Pacolet River
1 Polk SR 1179 Good
B-2 North Pacolet River Polk SR 1501 Good-fair
1 Historical data of this type are available for this waterbody; refer to Appendix II. Sites may vary.
Table B-12 Use Support Ratings Summary (2000) for Monitored and Evaluated Freshwater
Streams (miles) and Lakes (acres) in Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06
Use Support Category Units Supporting Impaired Not Rated No Data Total
Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation miles
acres
29.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.0
33.0
0.0
64.5
0.0
Fish Consumption miles
acres
64.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
64.5
0.0
Primary Recreation miles
acres
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
Water Supply miles
acres
6.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.7
0.0
Benthic macroinvertebrates in this subbasin were sampled during a three-year drought of a
magnitude that local meteorologists compared to the Dust Bowl. Flows in all streams were well
below normal, and the effects of nonpoint sources of pollution (nutrient runoff and in stream
scour) were minimal.
Water quality seems to be stable in this subbasin. Based on macroinvertebrate collections in
both 1995 and 2000, water quality in North Pacolet River is Good above the Town of Tryon and
declines to Good-Fair below the town and the town’s WWTP.
For more detailed information on sampling and assessment of streams in this subbasin, refer to
the Basinwide Assessment Report - Broad River Basin (NCDENR-DWQ, December 2001),
available from DWQ Environmental Sciences Branch at http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html or by
calling [phone].
6.2 Status and Recommendations for Previously Impaired Waters
The 1998 Broad River basin plan identified no impaired streams in this subbasin.
Section B: Chapter 6 – Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06 122
6.3 Status and Recommendations for Newly Impaired Waters
Although no new stream segments in this subbasin were rated as impaired based on recent DWQ
monitoring (2000), impacts to the North Pacolet River from habitat degradation were observed.
Part 6.5 below discusses these impacts.
6.4 Section 303(d) Listed Waters
There are no stream segments in this subbasin that are impaired and on the state’s draft 2002
303(d) list. Refer to Appendix IV for more information on the state’s 303(d) list and listing
requirements.
6.5 Other Water Quality Concerns and Recommendations
The surface waters discussed in this section are supporting designated uses based on DWQ’s use
support assessment and are not considered to be impaired. However, notable water quality
problems and concerns have been documented for some waters based on this assessment. While
these waters are not considered impaired, attention and resources should be focused on these
waters over the next basinwide planning cycle to prevent additional degradation or facilitate
water quality improvement. A discussion of how impairment is determined can be found on
page 47 and Appendix III.
Water quality problems in the Broad River basin are varied and complex. Inevitably, many of
the water quality impacts noted are associated with human activities within the watershed.
Solving these problems and protecting the surface water quality of the basin in the face of
continued growth and development will be a major challenge. Voluntary implementation of
BMPs is encouraged and continued monitoring is recommended. DWQ will notify local
agencies and others of water quality concerns for the waters discussed below and work with them
to conduct further monitoring and to locate sources of water quality protection funding.
Additionally, education on local water quality issues is always a useful tool to prevent water
quality problems and to promote restoration efforts. Nonpoint source program agency contacts
are listed in Appendix VI.
6.5.1 North Pacolet River
The benthic macroinvertebrate community of the North Pacolet River just above the North
Carolina/South Carolina state line was sampled in 2000. The site received a Good-Fair
bioclassification, indicating some impacts to water quality were present, but the biological
community was not considered impaired. However, habitat degradation, including sedimentation
and lack of pools and riffles, was noted at the sampling site. Refer to Section A, Chapter 4 for
more information regarding these problems.
The Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN) also monitors three sites on the North
Pacolet River. The site located at SR 1516 has been monitored since 1993, while the sites at
Route 108 and at Melrose have only been monitored since 1998. VWIN sampling data indicate
good water quality in the upper North Pacolet watershed and water quality impacts in the lower
Section B: Chapter 6 – Broad River Subbasin 03-08-06 123
portion of the watershed (Maas et al., June 2000). Sedimentation, especially during rain events,
was noted at all three monitoring sites and was the most severe at the downstream site (SR
1516). BMPs should be put in place during construction and on agricultural operations to reduce
sediment inputs in order to protect these streams and to prevent further water quality degradation.
For more information of the VWIN program, refer to page 46 and page 137.
6.6 Additional Issues within this Subbasin
The previous section discussed water quality concerns for specific stream segments. This section
discusses water quality issues that relate to multiple watersheds in subbasin 03-08-01. Increased
growth was identified by participants at the public workshop as significant issues in this
subbasin.
6.6.1 Population Growth
From 2000 to 2020, the estimated population growth for both Polk County and Henderson
County is 37 percent. Growth management within the next five years will be imperative,
especially in and around developing areas, in order to maintain good water quality in this
subbasin. Growth management can be defined as the application of strategies and practices that
help achieve sustainable development in harmony with the conservation of environmental
qualities and features of an area. On a local level, growth management often involves planning
and development review requirements that are designed to maintain or improve water quality.
Refer to Section A, Chapter 4 for more information about urbanization and development and
recommendations to minimize impacts to water quality.