HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 5 Water Quantity5.1
NC
D
W
Q
N
E
W
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
W
AtER
Q
uAN
tIty
2
0
1
1
Understanding stream Flow
Stream flow is monitored by U.S. Geological Survey gaging stations at selected stations across
the state. Flow, often abbreviated as “Q”, is measured in terms of volume of water per unit of time,
usually cubic feet per second (cfs). Minimum flows are intended to be only occasional short-term
events that maintain stream conditions at a survivable level for aquatic life. One example of such
a minimum flow requirement is the “7Q10 flow” - the lowest flow occurring for seven consecutive
days, with a probability of occurring once every 10 years. This is a drought flow statistic that is used
to determine wastewater discharge effluent limits such that the pollutant load can still be assimilated
and chemical water quality standards can still be maintained during the driest week occurring once
every 10 years. This type of minimum flow will not protect ecological integrity if it is frequently the
only flow in the stream, and/or occurs for long periods of time. The potential for global climate
change to change the patterns of water availability adds to the importance of protecting ecological
flows, not just maintaining minimum flows of increasing duration.
A minimum flow approach does not incorporate critical characteristics of a flow regime (magnitude,
timing, frequency, duration, variability and rate of change) needed to protect ecological integrity.
Minimum flows lack the variability between different times of year (monthly and seasonal), as well
as the inter-annual variability between different types of years (wet, dry, average).
For additional information about stream flow see DWR’s Environmental Flows web page.
managing Flow From impoUndments
minimUm release reqUirements
One of the purposes of the Dam Safety Law is to ensure maintenance of minimum streamflows
below dams. Conditions may be placed on dam operations specifying mandatory minimum releases
in order to maintain adequate quantity and quality of water downstream of the impoundment. The
Division of Water Resources (DWR), in conjunction with the Wildlife Resources Commission
(WRC), recommends conditions related to release of flows to satisfy minimum instream flow
requirements. The Division of Land Resources (DLR) issues the permits and is responsible for
enforcement. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licenses most dams associated
with hydropower under the Federal Power Act. Flow requirements may also be established for
CHAPTER 5
water qUantity
IN thE NEW RIVER BASIN
Chapter topiCs
£Understanding Stream
Flow
£Managing Flow from
Impoundments
£Water Supply, Demand,
Availability & Planning
£SWAP
5.2
NC
D
W
Q
N
E
W
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
W
AtER
Q
uAN
tIty
2
0
1
1
non-dam projects that require a Finding of No Significant Impact to satisfy a state or federal
environmental review or as a condition of a permit required by the Clean Water Act. Calculated
minimum stream flows for impoundments in the New River Basin are listed in Table 5-1. If the
inflow is less than the minimum release, the minimum release becomes that inflow rate.
tABLE 5-1: MINIMuM RELEASE fRoM IMPouNDMENtS IN thE NEW RIVER BASIN
NAME of DAM PuRPoSE WAtERBoDy DRAINAgE AREA MINIMuM RELEASE
Hydroelectric Dams
Sharpes Falls
(FERC #: 6322)
Hydroelectricity
Production
North Fork New
River
112 mi2 None a
Impoundment Dams/Weirs
Roaring Gap (Lake Louise)Amenity & Irrigation Laurel Branch 1.06 mi2 1.4 cfs
Old Beau Upper Amenity & Irrigation Laurel Branch 1.33 mi2 None b
Old Beau Lower Amenity & Irrigation Laurel Branch 1.54 mi2 1.6 cfs
South Fork New River Weir Town of Boone Water
Supply
South Fork 19.5 mi2 4.0 c cfs
Winkler Creek Dam Town of Boone Water Supply Winkler Creek 5.7 mi2 2.4 c cfs
a Even though there is no minimum flow, the project must operate in a run-of-river mode; i.e., instantaneous inflow equals
instantaneous outflow. Note: A noncompliant project can noticeably alter the stream flow.
b The upper and lower ponds were built in series so that the system will provide 1.6 cubic feet/second (cfs) downstream.
c The Section 404 permit, issued by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, also states “the Town of Boone will in all cases be
permitted to withdraw a maximum of 4.6 cfs from the combined sources.”
water sUpply, demand, availability & planning
Division of Water Resources summarized water quantity in the New River Basin in 2001 in a
four page document on their web site. Information included in this document includes:
£Water demand and use,
£Local Water Supply Plans,
£Self-Supplied use and registered water withdrawals,
£Water availability, and
£Interbasin transfers of surface water.
water withdrawals
North Carolina General Statute G.S. 143-215.22H, originally passed in 1991, requires surface
water and ground water withdrawals that meet conditions established by the General Assembly
to register the water withdrawals and surface water transfers with the State and update those
registrations at least every five years. Agricultural water users that withdraw one million gallons
of water a day or more and non-agricultural water users that withdraw one hundred thousand
gallons of water a day are required to register. Administrative rules that became effective in
March 2007 (15A NCAC 02E.0600) stipulate that registrants must also report their water usage
annually to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. In its 2008 session, the
General Assembly established civil penalties for failure to comply with these requirements.
In the New River Basin, there are five registered users that withdraw surface water (Table 5-2).
5.3
NC
D
W
Q
N
E
W
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
W
AtER
Q
uAN
tIty
2
0
1
1
tABLE 5-2: CuRRENt SuRfACE WAtER WIthDRAWALS By LoCAL WAtER SuPPLy SyStEMS*
CouNty SyStEM NAME SouRCE PuBLIC WAtER
SuPPLy ID LINk 1 oWNERShIP
Ashe Jefferson New River 01-05-015 Municipality
Watauga Blowing Rock Flat Top Branch 01-95-020 Municipality
Watauga Boone South Fork NR 01-95-010 Municipality
Watauga Boone Winklers Creek 01-95-010 Municipality
Watauga Appalachian State University Norris Branch 01-95-101 State
1 Additional information on average water use by day and month along with a wide variety of other information about the water
supply (the facilities LWSP) can be found at the Public Water Supply ID Link supplied in this table.* Note: This is not necessarily a complete list. Omission from this list does not excuse any party from meeting their permit conditions.
loCal water sUpply plan (lwsp)
Units of local government that supply or plan to supply water to the public are required to prepare
a Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP). Like the withdrawal registrations, a LWSP must be updated
at least every five years and systems required to prepare a LWSP must also report water usage
annually to the Division of Water Resources. Preparing a LWSP and keeping it updated meets
a local government’s obligation to register their water withdrawals under General Statute 143-
215.22H. The LWSPs for the five registered users are linked in Table 5-2. Other LWSP reports
can be searched on DWRs Water Supply Planning website.
The Town of Sparta
The Town of Sparta updated their LWSP in 2007. At that time the plan stated that “Sparta
and the Town of Independence, Va. are currently pursuing an interconnection with water being
drawn from the New River which will replace the existing well systems currently serving each
town.”
That status of that project is progressing and is projected to be completed in 2011.
The Town of Boone
A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Rural Development State Office for a new run-of-river withdrawal for the Town of Boone to
be located on the Watauga County side of the South Fork New River just upstream of the
community of Brownwood. The drainage area at the proposed intake is estimated by the
applicant to be 101.7 square miles. The intakes proposed permitted capacity is 4.0 million
gallons per day (MGD), or 6.18 cubic feet per second (cfs). The proposed project’s purpose
and need included an emergency source to the Town of Blowing Rock of 0.5 MGD, or 0.77
cfs, through an interconnection. The project is supposed to address Boone’s projected 2030
maximum daily demand of 6.8 MGD, or 10.5 cfs, in combination with its existing water sources.
The withdrawal mechanism will be a sub-channel infiltration gallery.
The applicant estimated the 7Q10 flow at the proposed intake to be 35.61 cfs, or 23.0 MGD.
Twenty percent of this value is 7.12 cfs, or 4.6 MGD. Excepting certain circumstances, DWR
has historically considered the withdrawal of a volume less than that representing 20 percent
of the 7Q10 as not triggering an intensive field study. The applicant did examine the impact of
withdrawals on water depth at the first riffle complex downstream of the intake in consideration
of the extensive use of the river for boating.
Boone’s water treatment plant’s treatment capacity will also be expanded from 3.0 MGD to 4.5
MGD, or 6.95 cfs as part of the proposed project.
5.4
NC
D
W
Q
N
E
W
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
W
AtER
Q
uAN
tIty
2
0
1
1
soUrCe water assessment & proteCtion (swap) oF
pUbliC water sUpplies in the new river basin
introdUCtion
The Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments of 1996 emphasize pollution
prevention as an important strategy for the protection of ground and surface water resources.
This new focus promotes the prevention of drinking water contamination as a cost-effective
means to provide reliable, long-term and safe drinking water sources for public water supply
(PWS) systems. In order to determine the susceptibility of public water supply sources to
contamination, the amendments also required that all states establish a Source Water
Assessment Program (SWAP). Specifically, Section 1453 of the SDWA Amendments require
that states develop and implement a SWAP to:
£Delineate source water assessment areas;
£Inventory potential contaminants in these areas; and
£Determine the susceptibility of each public water supply to contamination.
In North Carolina, the agency responsible for the SWAP is the Public Water Supply (PWS)
Section of the DENR Division of Environmental Health (DEH). The PWS Section received
approval from the EPA for their SWAP Plan in November 1999. The SWAP Plan, entitled North
Carolina’s Source Water Assessment Program Plan, fully describes the methods and procedures
used to delineate and assess the susceptibility of more than 9,000 wells and approximately 207
surface water intakes. To review the SWAP Plan, visit the PWS website.
delineation oF soUrCe water assessment areas
The SWAP Plan builds upon existing protection programs for ground and surface water
resources. These include the state’s Wellhead Protection Program and the Water Supply
Watershed Protection Program.
Wellhead Protection (WHP) Program
North Carolinians withdraw more than 88 million gallons of groundwater per day from more
than 9,000 water supply wells across the state. In 1986, Congress passed Amendments to the
SDWA requiring states to develop wellhead protection programs that reduce the threat to the
quality of groundwater used for drinking water by identifying and managing recharge areas to
specific wells or wellfields.
Defining a wellhead protection area (WHPA) is one of the most critical components of wellhead
protection. A WHPA is defined as “the surface and subsurface area surrounding a water well or
wellfield, supplying a public water system, through which contaminants are reasonably likely to
move toward and reach such water well or wellfield.” The SWAP uses the methods described
in the state’s approved WHP Program to delineate source water assessment areas for all public
water supply wells. More information related to North Carolina’s WHP Program can be found
on the SWAP website.
Water Supply Watershed Protection (WSWP) Program
DWQ is responsible for managing the standards and classifications of all water supply watersheds.
In 1992, the WSWP Rules were adopted by the EMC and require all local governments that
have land use jurisdiction within water supply watersheds adopt and implement water supply
watershed protection ordinances, maps and management plans. SWAP uses the established
5.5
NC
D
W
Q
N
E
W
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
W
AtER
Q
uAN
tIty
2
0
1
1
water supply watershed boundaries and methods established by the WSWP program as a
basis to delineate source water assessment areas for all public water surface water intakes.
Additional information regarding the WSWP Program can be found at their website.
sUsCeptibility determination – nC’s overall approaCh
The SWAP Plan contains a detailed description of the methods used to assess the susceptibility
of each PWS intake in North Carolina. The following is a brief summary of the susceptibility
determination approach.
Overall Susceptibility Rating
The overall susceptibility determination rates the potential for a drinking water source to
become contaminated. The overall susceptibility rating for each PWS intake is based on two
key components: a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability rating. For a PWS to be
determined “susceptible”, a potential contaminant source must be present and the existing
conditions of the PWS intake location must be such that a water supply could become
contaminated. The determination of susceptibility for each PWS intake is based on combining
the results of the inherent vulnerability rating and the contaminant rating for each intake. Once
combined, a PWS is given a susceptibility rating of higher, moderate or lower (H, M or L).
Inherent Vulnerability Rating
Inherent vulnerability refers to the physical characteristics and existing conditions of the
watershed or aquifer. The inherent vulnerability rating of groundwater intakes is determined
based on an evaluation of aquifer characteristics, unsaturated zone characteristics and
well integrity and construction characteristics. The inherent vulnerability rating of surface
water intakes is determined based on an evaluation of the watershed classification (WSWP
Rules), intake location, raw water quality data (i.e., turbidity and total coliform) and watershed
characteristics (i.e., average annual precipitation, land slope, land use, land cover, groundwater
contribution).
Contaminant Rating
The contaminant rating is based on an evaluation of the density of potential contaminant
sources (PCSs), their relative risk potential to cause contamination, and their proximity to the
water supply intake within the delineated assessment area.
Inventory of Potential Contaminant Sources (PCSs)
In order to inventory PCSs, the SWAP conducted a review of relevant, available sources of
existing data at federal, state and local levels. The SWAP selected sixteen statewide databases
that were attainable and contained usable geographic information related to PCSs.
soUrCe water proteCtion
The PWS Section believes that the information from the source water assessments is the
basis for future initiatives and priorities for public drinking water source water protection (SWP)
activities. The PWS Section encourages all PWS system owners to implement efforts to manage
identified sources of contamination and to reduce or eliminate the potential threat to drinking
water supplies through locally implemented protection planning.
To encourage and support local SWP, the state offers PWS system owners assistance with local
SWP planning as well as materials such as:
£Fact sheets outlining sources of funding and other resources for local SWP efforts.
£Success stories describing local SWP efforts in North Carolina.
5.6
NC
D
W
Q
N
E
W
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
W
AtER
Q
uAN
tIty
2
0
1
1
£Guidance about how to incorporate SWAP and SWP information in Consumer Confidence
Reports (CCRs).
Information related to SWP can be found online.
pUbliC water sUpply sUsCeptibility determinations in the new
river basin
In April 2004, the PWS Section completed source water assessments for all drinking water
sources and generated reports for the PWS systems using these sources. The assessments
are updated regularly; the most recent updates were published in May 2010. The results of
the assessments can be viewed in two different ways, either through the interactive ArcIMS
mapping tool or compiled in a written report for each PWS system. To access the ArcIMS
mapping tool, simply click on the “NC SWAP Info” icon on the web page. To view a report,
select the PWS System of interest by clicking on the “Source Water Assessment Results-2010”
link found on the SWAP web page.
In the New River Basin, 201 public water supply sources were identified. Six are surface water
sources, one is groundwater under the influence of surface water (i.e. a spring) and 194 are
groundwater sources. Of the 194 groundwater sources, 2 of them have a Higher, 176 have a
Moderate and 16 have a Lower susceptibility rating. The one groundwater under the influence
of surface water has a Moderate susceptibility rating. Table 10-1 identifies the surface water
sources and their overall susceptibility ratings. It is important to note that a susceptibility rating
of Higher does not imply poor water quality. Susceptibility is an indication of a water supply’s
potential to become contaminated.
tABLE 5-3: SWAP RESuLtS foR SuRfACE WAtER SouRCES IN thE NEW RIVER BASIN
PWS ID
NuMBER
INhERENt
VuLNERABILIty
RAtINg
CoNtAMINANt
RAtINg
oVERALL
SuSCEPtIBILIty
RAtINg
NAME of SuRfACE
WAtER SouRCE PWS SyStEM NAME
0105015 H L M South Fork of NR Town of Jefferson
0195010 H L M South Fork of NR Town of Boone
0195010 H L M Winklers Creek Town of Boone
0195020 M L M Town Lake Town of Blowing Rock
0195101 H L M Howard’s Creek Appalachian State Univ.
0195101 M L M Norris Branch Appalachian State Univ.
reFerenCes
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). Division of
Water Resource (DWR). March 2007. Water Use During Droughts and Water Supply
Emergencies. North Carolina Administrative Code: 15A NCAC 2E .0600. Raleigh, NC.
(http://www.ncwater.org/Rules_Policies_and_Regulations/Planning/drought_rules.
pdf)
____. DWR. 1991. § 143-215.22H. Registration of Water Withdrawals and Transfers Required.
Raleigh, NC.
Note: URL addresses for hyperlinks found in this plan are listed in the Acronyms & Definitions
Chapter.