HomeMy WebLinkAboutchapter 3 subbasin -03
Chapter 3
Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-03
Including: Little Alamance Creek, Big Alamance Creek and Stinking Quarter Creek
3.1 Subbasin Overview
Subbasin 03-06-03 is a piedmont watershed characterized
by highly erodible soils. Most of the watershed is
forested with extensive agriculture present. Development
is occurring along the I-85/40 corridor in and around
Burlington. Population is expected to grow by 120,000
people in counties with portions or all of their areas in this
subbasin by 2020.
Subbasin 03-06-03 at a Glance
Land and Water Area
Total area: 263 mi2
Land area: 262 mi2
Water area: 1 mi2
Population Statistics
2000 Est. Pop.: 132,837 people
Pop. Density: 508 persons/mi2
Land Cover (percent)
Forest/Wetland: 59.4%
Surface Water: 0.2%
Urban: 5.8%
Cultivated Crop: 2.2%
Pasture/ Managed
Herbaceous: 32.4%
Counties
Alamance, Guilford and Randolph
Municipalities
Alamance, Burlington, Elon and
Graham
There are six individual NPDES wastewater discharge
permits in this subbasin with a permitted flow of 12.1
MGD (Figure 6). The largest is South Burlington WWTP
(12 MGD). Refer to Appendix VI and Chapter 30 for
more information on NPDES permit holders. Issues
related to compliance with NPDES permit conditions are
discussed below in Section 3.3 for Impaired waters and in
Section 3.4 for other waters.
Burlington and Graham are the only municipal areas in
this subbasin required to develop stormwater programs
(Chapter 31).
There are three registered swine operations and two
registered dairy operations in this subbasin. Issues related
to agricultural activities are discussed below in Section
3.3 for Impaired waters.
There were six benthic macroinvertebrate community samples and five fish community samples
(Figure 6 and Table 6) collected during this assessment period. Data were also collected from
three ambient monitoring stations including one DWQ station, one UCFRBA (Appendix V)
station, and one shared ambient station. One reservoir was also monitored. Refer to the 2003
Cape Fear River Basinwide Assessment Report at http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html and
Appendix IV for more information on monitoring.
Waters in the following sections are identified by assessment unit number (AU#). This number
is used to track defined segments in the water quality assessment database, 303(d) Impaired
waters list and the various tables in this basin plan. The assessment unit number is a subset of
the DWQ index number (classification identification number). A letter attached to the end of the
AU# indicates that the assessment is smaller than the DWQ index segment. No letter indicates
that the assessment unit and the DWQ index segment are the same.
Chapter 3 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-03 32
AU Number
Description
Length/AreaClassification
CAPE FEAR 03-06-03
AL Rating REC RatingStationYear/ParameterResult % Exc
Aquatic Life Assessment
ResultStation
Recreation Assessment
Stressors Sources
SubbasinTable 6
Big Alamance Creek (Alamance Cr)(Lk Macintoch)
16-19-(2.5)
From a point 2.4 miles downstream of Guilford County
SR 3045 to dam at Lake Macintosh
67.7 FW AcresWS-IV NS S NDBL8 NCE
BL9 NCE
16-19-(4.5)a
From Dam at Lake Macintosh to confluence with
Stinking Quarter Creek
5.6 FW MilesC NSW I ND
BB130 /2003F
Habitat Degradation Agriculture
Habitat Degradation MS4 NPDES
16-19-(4.5)b
From confluence with Stinking Quarter Creek to Haw
River
4.6 FW MilesC NSW NR NR*BA112 NCE Turbidity 7.3
BA114 NCE
BA112 NCE
Big Alamance Creek (Alamance Creek)
16-19-(1)
From source to a point 2.4 miles downstream of Guilford
County SR 3045
18.0 FW MilesWS-IV NS S ND
BF68 /1999G
BF68 /1999F
BF68 /2003GF
Little Alamance Creek (Gant Lake, Mays Lake)(Alamance County
16-19-11
From source to Big Alamance Creek
12.6 FW MilesC NSW I ND
BB131 /2003P
BB193 /2003P
BB388 /2003F
BB78 /2003P
BF60 /2003G
Habitat Degradation MS4 NPDES
Little Alamance Creek (Guilford County)
16-19-3-(0.5)
From source to a point 0.3 mile downstream of Guilford
County SR 3073
15.0 FW MilesWS-IV NS S ND
BF67 /2003GF
Little Alamance Creek(Guilford County)
16-19-3-(4.5)
From a point 0.3 mile downstream of Guilford County
SR 3073 to Lake Macintosh, Big Alamance Creek
3.6 FW MilesWS-IV NS S SBA98 NCE BA98 NCE
CAPE FEAR Subbasin 03-06-03
AU Number
Description
Length/AreaClassification
CAPE FEAR 03-06-03
AL Rating REC RatingStationYear/ParameterResult % Exc
Aquatic Life Assessment
ResultStation
Recreation Assessment
Stressors Sources
SubbasinTable 6
North Prong Stinking Quarter Creek
16-19-8-1
From source to Stinking Quarter Creek
18.3 FW MilesC NSW S ND
BF27 /2003G
South Prong Stinking Quarter Creek
16-19-8-2-(2)
From dam at Kimesville Lake to Stinking Quarter Creek
8.3 FW MilesC NSW S ND
BF28 /2003E
Stinking Quarter Creek
16-19-8
from source to Big Alamance Creek
4.6 FW MilesC NSW S ND
BB249 /2003GF
BB249 /2003F
Habitat Degradation
AL - Aquatic Life BF - Fish Community Survey E - Excellent S - Supporting, I - Impaired
REC - Recreation BB - Benthic Community Survey G - Good NR - Not Rated
BA - Ambient Monitoring Site GF - Good-Fair NR*- Not Rated for Recreation (screening criteria exceeded)
BL- Lake Monitoring F - Fair ND-No Data Collected to make assessment
S- DEH RECMON P - Poor
NI - Not Impaired CE-Criteria Exceeded > 10% and more than 10 samples
Miles/Acres S- Severe Stress NCE-No Criteria Exceeded
FW- Fresh Water M-Moderate Stress
S- Salt Water N- Natural
Results
Aquatic Life Rating Summary
S 67.8 FW Milesm
NR 4.6 FW Milesm
I 18.2 FW Milesm
S 67.7 FW Acresm
ND 110.4 FW Miles
ND 3.0 FW Acres
Recreation Rating Summary
3.6 FW MilesSm
4.6 FW MilesNR* m
192.9 FW MilesND
70.7 FW AcresND
Fish Consumption Rating Summary
201.1 FW MilesIe
70.7 FW AcresIe
CAPE FEAR Subbasin 03-06-03
3.2 Use Support Assessment Summary
Use support ratings were assigned for waters in subbasin 03-06-03 in the aquatic life, recreation,
fish consumption and water supply categories. All waters are Impaired on an evaluated basis in
the fish consumption category because of fish consumption advice that applies to the entire
basin. In the water supply category, all WS classified waters (70.7 acres and 77 miles) are
Supporting on an evaluated basis based on reports from DEH regional water treatment plant
consultants. Refer to Appendix X for a complete list of monitored waters and more information
on Supporting monitored waters.
There were 90.6 stream miles (45.1 percent) and 67.6 freshwater acres (95.7 percent) monitored
during this assessment period in the aquatic life category. There were 18.2 miles (9.1 percent) of
Impaired waters in this category.
3.3 Status and Recommendations of Previously and Newly Impaired
Waters
The following waters were either identified as Impaired in the previous basin plan (2000) or are
newly Impaired based on recent data. If previously identified as Impaired, the water will either
remain on the state’s 303(d) list or will be delisted based on recent data showing water quality
improvements. If the water is newly Impaired, it will likely be placed on the 2006 303(d) list.
The current status and recommendations for addressing these waters are presented below, and
each is identified by an assessment unit number (AU#). Refer to the overview for more
information on AUs. Information regarding 303(d) listing and reporting methodology is
presented in Appendix VII.
3.3.1 Little Alamance Creek [AU# 16-19-11]
2000 Recommendations
The 2000 basinwide plan recommended that Little Alamance Creek be resampled and the City of
Burlington address stormwater issues in the creek as part of the Phase II stormwater program.
Current Status
Little Alamance Creek from source to Big Alamance Creek (12.6 miles) is Impaired because of
Fair and Poor benthic community ratings at sites BB388, BB193, BB131 and BB78. A DWQ
TMDL stressor study found that urban runoff from large impervious surface areas in the
watershed have caused stream channelization with associated habitat degradation. Pollutants
associated with urban runoff as well as riparian area removals are also noted stressors to the
benthic community. Streambank erosion was noted and many storm sewers discharge into the
stream. In the lower watershed, land clearing was noted associated with many residential
developments.
2005 Recommendations
DWQ will continue to monitor water quality in the Little Alamance Creek watershed and work
with the Burlington and Graham stormwater programs to reduce further impacts due to new
development and to implement BMPs and restore instream habitat in Little Alamance Creek.
Chapter 3 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-03 36
Further recommendations to protect streams in urbanizing areas and to restore streams in existing
urban areas are discussed in Chapter 31.
Little Alamance Creek will remain on the 303(d) list of Impaired waters. TMDLs (Chapter 35)
will be developed for identified stressors within 8-13 years of listing.
3.3.2 Big Alamance Creek [AU# 16-19-(4.5)a and b]
Current Status
Big Alamance Creek was Fully Supporting in the 2000 basin plan; however, Big Alamance
Creek [16-19-(4.5)a] from dam at Lake Macintosh to Stinking Quarter Creek (5.6 miles) is
currently Impaired because of a Fair benthic community rating at site BB130. Runoff from
agriculture and urbanizing areas in the watershed are impacting water quality in Big Alamance
Creek. The channel is entrenched and severe streambank erosion was noted. Effects of drought
and high flows late in the assessment period may have impacted the benthic community as well.
Big Alamance Creek [16-19-(4.5)b] from Stinking Quarter Creek to the Haw River (4.6 miles) is
Not Rated for recreation because fecal coliform bacteria screening criteria were exceeded at site
BA112. This segment is Supporting aquatic life, although turbidity exceeded the standard in 7
percent of samples collected at site BA112. Burlington Southside WWTP (NC0023876) had
significant violations of biological oxygen demand permit limits during the last two years of the
assessment period. The violation occurred during a period of extremely wet weather and likely
did not impact water quality at that time. There has been only one violation since the installation
of new equipment.
2005 Recommendations
DWQ will continue to monitor water quality in the Big Alamance Creek watershed and work
with the Burlington stormwater programs to reduce further impacts due to new development and
to implement BMPs and restore instream habitat in Big Alamance Creek. The NPDES
compliance process will be used to address the significant permit violations noted above. DWQ
will determine if intensive sampling is needed to assess the fecal coliform bacteria standard in
this creek (Appendix X). DWQ will continue to work with DSWC staff to assure that
agricultural impacts are minimized in this watershed.
Big Alamance Creek will be added to the 303(d) list of Impaired waters. TMDLs (Chapter 35)
will be developed for identified stressors within 8-13 years of listing.
3.4 Status and Recommendations for Waters with Noted Impacts
The surface waters discussed in this section are not Impaired. However, notable water quality
problems and concerns have been documented for some waters based on this assessment. While
these waters are not Impaired, attention and resources should be focused on these waters to
prevent additional degradation or facilitate water quality improvement. Waters in the following
section are identified by assessment unit number (AU#). See overview for more information on
AU#s.
Chapter 3 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-03 37
3.4.1 North Prong Stinking Quarter Creek [AU# 16-19-8-1]
Current Status and 2005 Recommendations
North Prong Stinking Quarter Creek from source to Stinking Quarter Creek (18.3 miles) is
Supporting aquatic life because of a Good fish community rating at site BF27. Nathaniel Greene
Elementary School (NC0038164) had significant violations of pH limits during the last two years
of the assessment period that may have adversely impacted water quality in this creek. The
NPDES compliance process will be used to address the permit violations. The school is planning
to move the discharge point further downstream. DWQ will work with the school to evaluate the
effectiveness of the treatment plant and make any changes needed to maintain compliance with
permit limits. DWQ will continue to monitor water quality in this watershed.
3.5 Additional Water Quality Issues within Subbasin 03-06-03
The following section discusses issues that may threaten water quality in the subbasin that are
not specific to particular streams, lakes or reservoirs. The issues discussed may be related to
waters near certain land use activities or within proximity to different pollution sources. This
section also identifies those surface waters given an Excellent bioclassification, and therefore,
may be eligible for reclassification to a High Quality Water (HQW) or an Outstanding Resource
Water (ORW). For more information regarding water quality standards and classifications,
please refer to Chapter 25.
3.5.1 Jordan Haw River Watershed Nutrient Sensitive Waters Strategy
All land uses and discharges of wastewater and stormwater in subbasin 03-06-03 potentially
contribute nutrients to Jordan Reservoir in subbasins 03-06-04 and 03-06-05. The reservoir is
Impaired for aquatic life because chlorophyll a violated the standard in all segments of the
reservoir. Refer to Chapter 36 for more information on this strategy.
3.5.2 Surface Waters Identified for Potential Reclassification
South Prong Stinking Quarter Creek [AU# 16-19-8-2-(2)]
South Prong Stinking Quarter Creek from dam at Kimesville Lake to Stinking Quarter Creek
(8.3 miles) is Supporting because of an Excellent fish community rating at site BF28. DWQ will
consider pursuing reclassification of this creek to include a supplemental classification of ORW
(Chapter 25).
Chapter 3 – Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-03 38