20051117 Ver 2_More Info Received_20080430

/FEY, &
t i
RAIA/
l
'S C)S- I%%-1 Y2

April 29, 2008
Ms. Cyndy Karoly, Supervisor
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 ?
Re: Lissara Development r_`1
DWQ Project 05-1117, Ver. 2 (Forsyth County) APR 2JG&
DENR - VVAfER ?tUiaiJiY
Dear Ms. Karoly: MTLMDSAND STORdMWATM BRANCH
. Enclosed you will find a packet of reports and materials that are intended to satisfy
the requirements of your March 12, 2008 "Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling
Reference Impoundments" as that process is applied to our proposed Lissara Lake in
Forsyth County, North Carolina. While we were certainly inquisitive in our April 15, 2008
meeting on many aspects of the newly created protocol, including the science surrounding
the requirements in it and its approval process given the very short working time within
which it was apparently developed, your statement that it had been approved and signed
by all of the appropriate folks (our copy was neither signed nor dated as approved) left 4&-
no choice but to try and satisfy the spirit and intent of the protocol. After our meeting
wherein you encouraged us to continue to be creative in the necessary process to provide
your office with the requested information (this was after we mentioned using previous
public lake monitoring), we and our consultant spent time combing through the various
studies that have been prepared by DWQ staffers over the last 10-12 years on "public"
lakes in North Carolina with particular emphasis on the lakes in the necessary HUC area
and Level IV ecoregion in which our Lissara Lake is included.
Once we determined the physical area of the HUC for Lissara Lake and
superimposed it over the same Level IV ecoregion for Lissara Lake, we determined an area
that was the most comparable for comparison on the two factors that you indicated
mattered most to your office-HUC and ecoregion. We next had to identify those public
lakes that were in or contiguous to that crossroads of HUC and ecoregion. There were a
number of lakes that had been monitored extensively by DWQ and we were fortunate
P.O. Box 10 • Bethania, NC 27010-0010 • 336-922-4000 • Fax [phone]
enough to have lots of data on the two lakes we chose that met the first two criteria in your
protocol.
The selection of Salem Lake in Winston-Salem and Lake Thom-A-Lex in Davidson
County was made all the easier by the fact that they are both water supply lakes. What
that means to us is that their expected safety and welfare from a water quality standpoint is
bound to be greater since drinking water is taken from there for the public at large. Since
neither of those lakes has been, to our knowledge, on the impaired list of lakes over the last
10-12 years, there is every expectation on our part that the quality of these lakes is as great
as can be attained in our part of the state.
Another significant reason for choosing Salem Lake and Lake Thom-A-Lex is the
fact that they are public water bodies with significant monitoring by both the state and
local water authorities, and the results of the testing is known to all, including the public.
The issues we raised about private lakes--how would the testing results that we might
obtain be used by other DWQ staffers if the private lakes failed the tests and how hard
would it be to obtain permission from the lake owners to even go on their property--were
eliminated completely with public lakes such as the ones we chose.
Additionally, since DWQ did the testing of the comparable lakes, there can be no
questioning of how the sampling was done and the results obtained. If the DWQ testers
don't have the knowledge, experience and ability to do the monitoring correctly, then we
would suggest that no one would be able to satisfy that requirement. We feel particularly
grateful that DWQ has done the extensive research and monitoring that your office can
now use in its process of determining if the information on these lakes, as extrapolated, can
predict the results of our lake. I must note that even after 6-8 years of monitoring, DWQ's
staff thought the results were inconclusive on our two comparable lakes as to whether they
met the appropriate water quality standards. If this is true on existing lakes, I continue to
wonder how a theoretical assessment can ever be made on a proposed lake based on other
lake's measurements?
Inasmuch as our "second" application filed on February 19, 2008 is apparently one
of the first applications to have to address the March 12, 2008 protocol (and our immediate
request for a meeting on same took us three weeks further into the year as we accepted
your first available date), we would expect some latitude in the interpretation of the
monitoring expectations of a protocol penned after our application was filed. And the
DWQ monitoring of our two comparable lakes should easily fit into acceptable practices
and results.
Along with our report, we have provided an analysis/recommendation on the data
and factors involved in determining the efficacy of Lissara Lake by a former regional
employee of NC DENR, DWQ division, Daryl Lamb. We have worked with Daryl on
numerous occasions when he was here in Winston-Salem and we always found him to be
knowledgeable, experienced, practical, and above all, professional in his approach to issues
that affected the projects on which we were working. His concern for detail, while
appreciated in the abstract, was sometimes difficult to satisfy in the field but he always
explained the reason for his requirements and we trusted his judgment and complied. Our
conversation reminded us that he was now living in another state and doing consulting
work, and we quickly brought him aboard to guide us in this process. We heard you loud
and clear on the importance of having the best professional help we could get for this
process. And I take comfort in the knowledge that your office relies heavily on the fact
finding, investigation, and processing of any 401 permit by the local staff of NC DENR
(DWQ). Our previous working relationship with Steve Tedder has always been very
professional, I believe. And Sue Homewood has been involved with this project already,
which is a real plus. Both of those folks have always been mindful of time constraints on
both sides of the equation in our experience. Your comment about using and relying upon
those folks for the process makes sense. Their knowledge about our part of North Carolina
and their judgments about what works or doesn't work in Piedmont, North Carolina
obviously should, and apparently does, carry a great deal of weight in this process.
Both you and Ian McMillan made it abundantly clear that you understood that finding
lakes exactly like our Lissara Lake was not expected but that the information on the lakes
we did choose could be vetted by your scientists in some type of analysis that could bring
about scientifically significant adjustments to the provided information that would bring
some degree of confidence that the information would be a good predictor of how our
Lississa Lake will turn out. We seriously questioned that approach but you both assured
us that this was how your process would work. Given that assurance, we have provided
you with lakes that obviously need those scientific adjustments but we have accepted that
your folks can make the necessary adjustments.
We have included a discussion of the various site selection parameters for each of
the two chosen lakes and then our proposed Lissara Lake. The first two items are
significant and virtually match your requirements. The other parameters need adjustment
per our discussion. Daryl has interjected some thoughts about the whole process both as it
pertains to the parameters and how the results in the 2 lakes can give us guidance in our
Lissara Lake project to meet the expectations of DWQ. Some would call this lake
management and I would agree with that term. Each lake is different, t am quickly
learning, and needs its own set of corrective actions. That's not unlike each child in a
multi-child family. He or she may have the same Mom and Dad, live in the same house,
sleep in the same room, dress the same way, eat the same food, play in the same yard, but
need entirely different amounts of various things, including attention, to satisfy his or her
needs. That's how our Lissara Lake will be treated-we'll figure out what she needs and
give her those things to make her the best she can be.
We note that monitoring data is not available to us from 2007. Since that was such an
unusual year because of the drought (which may have left lingering issues in the lakes that
will take several years to correct), it is probably good that the years that were monitored
were pre-2007. Other natural factors could probably be suggested that cause fluctuation in
the results (hurricanes, upstream spills, large development projects, etc.) but the drought
was an all encompassing one that will unquestionably have long term effects.
Should you need anything else or explanations as to any provided data or information,
please feel free to contact us. We believe we have satisfied the needs of your office with the
enclosed information and look forward to wrapping up our permitting process in the very
near future. With this submittal and the additional inclusion of information requested by
Mr. McMillan about the bottomless culverts, we believe we have submitted a fully
compliant application for an individual 401 permit for our Lissara Lake project. Time
continues to be of the essence for us and the need for moving onto the next phase of our
project stares us in the face every day. We respectfully request a response from your office
within the next 30 days as to our satisfaction of your requirements or any deficiencies that
you believe we have. Your previous review of our application with listed deficiencies
obviously indicates a thorough review of what you already had in hand. This additional
information should be easily reviewed and assessed. I look forward to your response in the
very near future.
Very truly yours,
es W. Armentrout
or the Lissara Group, LLC
JWA/Ig
W.enclosures
cc Daryl Lamb
Steve Tedder
Lang Wilcox
Beau Dancy
Pete Ramey
Brant H. Godfrey
Lissara Lake and Subdivision
Reference Impoundment Sampling Process
April 2008
INTRODUCTION:
As requested by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality (DWQ), Lissara Partners, L.L.C. has selected two reference impoundments,
each of which is a public water supply reservoir, for analysis of sampling data as it may relate to
the proposed Lissara Lake and to postulates and hypotheses within the DWQ's "Predictability
Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments" guidelines. DWQ has agreed that data
already gathered and available through the public domain could be considered for analyses of
data as requested within the guideline document.
PROCEDURE:
Our review of the site selection criteria is with the understanding that it is unlikely that completely
comparable impoundments exist, and that the proposed Lissara subdivision and impoundment
design, surrounding vegetation, watershed area, buffers, site geology, soil types and overall lake
management philosophy, to name a few, may differ from that of any sites within the public
domain for which meaningful data exist. With these factors in mind, it was determined that water
supply reservoirs which exist within or very near the intersection of the USGS Hydrologic Unit
and the Level IV Ecoregion where the Lissara impoundment is to be located would be selected for
submittal of sampled data. Lake Thom-A-Lex and Salem Lake meet these criteria.
DWQ presented a comprehensive report regarding the status of water quality in North Carolina
water supply reservoirs to the Environmental Review Commission in April of 2006. The data
reviewed was confined to the period from January 1995 through May 2005. In a separate report
dated April, 2007, the DWQ Intensive Survey Unit, Environmental Sciences Section, summarized
and discussed lake and reservoir assessments within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin. Data for
this report were reviewed for the period of January 1, 2002 through September 30, 2006. Both of
these reports form the basis for the underlying data submitted with this Report.
ANALYSIS:
Beginning with DWQ's April 2006 report, it should be noted, as stated in the report, that the
DWQ ambient monitoring program is designed to provide snapshots of water quality during the
period of the year when the effects of eutrophication are most noticeable, just as suggested by the
current DWQ guideline. It should be further noted that, after nearly 9 V2 years of sampling and
data analyses, the DWQ concluded that there was not sufficient data from the DWQ sampling
program to determine with confidence if many of the reservoirs sampled were meeting or not
meeting surface water quality standards. A summary of sampling results taken from that report
for Lake Thom-A-Lex and Salem Lake is attached. Lake Thom-A-Lex did not meet the Turbidity
standard during the sampling period of 1999 and 2000 through 2002, although less than two of the
twenty -one samples obtained during this period failed to meet the standard. Salem Lake did not
meet the dissolved oxygen standard for the period of 1999 through 2002, even though only one
sample of the thirty-three samples obtained did not meet the standard. No other above-normal
eutrophication-related water quality standards were noted for either of these two reservoirs. It is
important to note that within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin, the report listed several other
reservoirs showing no above-normal water quality standards noted during the sampling period.
This gives us great comfort in knowing that the data from our two comparative impoundments
was developed over a long period of time and from responsibly managed lakes.
Continuing with a review of the April, 2007 report, sampling data for Salem Lake and Lake
Thom-A-Lex indicates that both reservoirs exceeded the 40 ug/L standard for chloryphyll-a,
although the amount above-normal is not indicated in the report. All other water quality
standards were within target and acceptable limits. Reports for the sampling summaries for these
two lakes are attached for additional review. Again, as noted within the April, 2006 DWQ report,
sufficient data has not been gathered or analyzed to determine if these reservoirs were meeting or
not meeting state water quality standards.
CONCLUSIONS
Most of the State of North Carolina lakes have been artificially created or enhanced for the
creation of one or more specific uses. Lakes are traditionally seen as a valuable resource,
providing wildlife and fisheries habitat, flood control, water supply, water-generated power and
recreational activities such as fishing, boating and swimming. Their societal impact can be very
significantly positive and their adverse environmental impacts, if any, can be mitigated through
responsible lake management protocols and sound environmental stewardship of the surrounding
watershed area.
From a geologic perspective, lakes are short-lived phenomena that undergo a natural enrichment
(aging) process called eutrophication. Generally, the life span of most lakes is measured in tens of
thousands of years. Over that time period, a lake will gradually fill with sediments and organic
materials with the length of its life depending on its individual characteristics and those of the
watershed. Many North Carolina lakes may be prematurely aging due to stresses caused by
primarily human activities; however, the role of Mother Nature through the introduction of
droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes and other adverse weather phenomena cannot be ignored.
Watershed activities that disturb soils, increase erosion, or increase stormwater runoff from paved
surfaces, can lead to increased sediment discharges and accelerate the filling of a lake basin.
Nutrient runoff from fertilizers, septic systems and other non-point sources in the watershed can
cause undesirable algal blooms and increased growth of aquatic plants. The flow of nutrients and
other substances into a lake can degrade overall water quality, altering the eco-system. The
understanding of these matters and other factors which can affect a lake's water quality have been
recognized by the Lissara Partners management group and every effort has been, and will be,
made to incorporate means to mitigate these factors through the site planning, design process,
proposed construction methods as well as through future lake management protocols.
Unlike the minimal municipality control of the watersheds which serve Lake Thom-A-Lex and
Salem Lake, a unique feature of the proposed Lissara impoundment is that upwards of 80% of the
watershed area will be controlled by the applicant. The proposed project includes over 38% of
common area open space and only 11% impervious area, (as compared to an impervious area
stormwater management criteria limit of 24%). Through designs that require clearing and
grading by following existing topography contours, the impacts of roadways and utilities will be at
a minimum. At-grade stormwater drainage will maximize the process of natural ground

absorption of stormwater. Limited clearing for home-sites will be required to reduce impact to
natural vegetation. Homeowners will be encouraged to have little or no permanent lawn areas
which will reduce fertilizer applications and subsequent nutrient runoff. An offsite wastewater
treatment plant, constructed down-gradient of the subdivision and lake dam, will treat wastewater
generated within the subdivision. On-site streams will be protected by a 50-foot preservation
buffer, as will be the proposed lake shoreline itself, which will help maintain the perimeter of
natural mature forest.
The Lissara Partners management group intends to utilize the services of a professional lake
management-consulting firm to assist in ensuring that the Lissara Lake meet any and all
applicable DWQ standards Class C waters. We have met with one group already to get a sense of
the issues they commonly see in North Carolina lakes so we can incorporate those issues into our
early planning process.
If, and as needed, techniques to be implemented to enhance or improve lake water quality may
include, among others, water level drawdown, targeted sediment removal, aeration, vegetation
harvesting, biological treatment and chemical treatment. These techniques may be used to manage
eutrophication, restore lake depth, enhance sport fisheries habitat, or to increase the amount of
lake area available for recreation. In-lake management may also be used, if needed to control the
spread of non-native and/or invasive plant or animal species. These in-lake management
techniques are often very effective in addressing certain specific water quality issues, algal blooms,
oxygen depletion, or excessive plant growth. Watershed management is an integral component of
a lake management plan and, as noted above, the developer has already attempted, through
design, to incorporate careful land-use planning and practices as a means to control erosion,
agricultural and residential stormwater runoff as well as any wastewaters generated within the
subdivision.
The Lissara Development (DWQ #05-1117, Version 2):
Utilizing Existing DWQ Lake Water Quality Data to Meet the
Requirements of the Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling
Reference Impoundments
Background
In June of 2005, Lissara Partners, LLC filed applications with the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the N. C. Division of Water Quality requesting authorization under
Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act to place fill in waters of the U. S. for the
purpose of constructing a 32-acre lake in western Forsyth County. This lake was
planned as an integral component of a 132-acre residential subdivision to be called
Lissara. Since the original submittal, there have been numerous changes made to the
proposed plan in response to requirements of both the Corps and DWQ. The lake is
currently planned to have a surface area of 21.06 acres and impact, by placement of fill
and flooding, 5,107 linear feet of jurisdiction stream and .042 acre of jurisdictional
wetlands.
On March 14, 2008, the 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit of the N. C
Division of Water Quality sent Lissara Partners, LLC a "Request for More Information"
pursuant to processing Lissara Partners' application. Among the additional items
requested was a requirement to sample similar reference impoundments according to
DWQ's "Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments (March 12,
2008)". In an effort to meet this requirement in a timely and efficient manner, Lissara
Partners, LLC is proposing to utilize existing water quality data gathered by DWQ over
the last ten years in impoundments which meet the criteria of being similar in location
and physical characteristics to the impoundment being proposed.
Discussion
In response to concerns that lakes such as the one proposed for Lissara have a high
potential to degrade water quality and to violate the State's water quality standards,
DWQ has adopted a policy which requires permit applicants to show that a proposed
impoundment is unlikely to cause a degradation of water quality within the affected
reach by collecting appropriate water quality data from a minimum of two existing
impoundments that are similar to the impoundment being proposed. The procedures for
collecting this data are detailed in the "Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling
Reference Impoundments" released by DWQ on March 12, 2008. This document lists
requirements for site selection, sampling schedule, sampling stations, water quality
indicators, sampling methods, analytical methods, and reporting of results. This
protocol is designed around the essential features of DWQ's Ambient Lakes Monitoring
Program which is conducted by the Intensive Survey Unit of DWQ's Environmental
Sciences Section. These activities are supported by public funds including federal
monies made available under the Clean Water Act. All data collected and all reports
generated are in the public domain and are available for review and use by the general
public.
Two reports generated by this program are of particular interest in regards to meeting
the requirements of the Predictability Study Protocol for the proposed lake at Lissara.
The first report was released in April 2006 and details the findings of a 10-year effort to
assess the water quality of 95 water supply reservoirs throughout North Carolina.
Included among these impoundments are two lakes that meet the selection criteria of
the Predictability Protocol: Salem Lake in Forsyth County and Lake Thom-A-Lex in
Davidson County. The second report was released in April 2007 and deals specifically
with an assessment of water quality in lakes and reservoirs in the Yadkin - Pee Dee
River Basin. Included in this study are extensive water quality data for three
impoundments which meet the selection criteria: Salem Lake, Winston Lake, and Lake
Thom-A-Lex. All three lakes are located in the same ecoregion (45b - Southern Outer
Piedmont) and hydrologic unit (03040101). In addition, they are located in areas with
the same or very similar geology ( Gneiss, Schist and granitic rocks of the Charlotte
Belt) and soils (fine sandy and clayey loams). In addition, the same water quality
parameters specified in the Predictability Study Protocol are included in both studies,
with the exception of fecal coliform. The depths, volumes, and watershed areas of the
three lakes are listed below. All three lakes have a trophic status of 2trophic.
1. Salem Lake: Mean depth = 5.5 meters Volume = 800,000 m3 Watershed area =
25.5 mil
2. Winston Lake: Mean depth = 2.5 meters Volume = 30,000 m3 Watershed area
= 6.6 mil
3. Lake Thom-A-Lex: Mean depth = 8.0 meters Volume = 7,800,000 m3
Watershed area = 39.4 mil
The information contained in these two reports makes it clear that the most significant
threats to water quality in an impoundment in the Upper Yadkin - Pee Dee Basin are
eutrophication and sediment impacts. The following summaries are quoted directly from
the Yadkin - Pee Dee River Basin assessment report of April 2007:
Salem Lake
DWQ monitored Salem Lake five times in 2006 from May through September. Secchi
depths were generally less than a meter. Surface dissolved oxygen, while not less than
the state's instantaneous reading of 4.0 mg/L, was low at site YAD077C in July (4.5
mg/L) and August (4.3 mg/L). Total phosphorus and total organic nitrogen generally
ranged from moderate to elevated throughout the reservoir. Chlorophyll a values
ranged from moderate to elevated in 2006 with values in the Lowery Creek Arm
(YAD077B) and Kerners Mill Creek Arm (YAD077A) greater than the state water quality
standard of 40 Ng/L in July and August. Algal blooms were observed from June through
September in the arms of Salem Lake. In May and August, the pinnate diatom,
Nitzschia, was common. The prymnesiophyte Chrysochromulina was the most
common genus throughout the summer and the filamentous blue green alga
Cylindrospermopsis was common in September (Figure 1). Based on the calculated
NCTSI scores, Salem Lake was determined to be eutrophic in 2006. Trophic scores
were similar to those previously calculated by DWQ for this reservoir since 1981. The
elevated chlorophyll a values and depressed dissolved oxygen concentrations indicate
that there may be problems at this lake.
Winston Lake
One station was sampled in Winston Lake by DWQ five times from May through
September of 2006. Dissolved oxygen and pH measurements were within state water
quality standards during the sampling period. One of five (20%) of the dissolved oxygen
saturation values was above 120% saturation. The dissolved oxygen saturation found
was 125% saturation on August 10, 2006. This indicates that significant algal activity
(production of dissolved oxygen by algae) was occurring in the lake. Nutrient
concentrations were generally moderate to elevated in Winston Lake in 2006. The
highest nutrient values were generally found for total organic nitrogen, nitrite + nitrate,
and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. No chlorophyll a values were above the state water quality
standard of 40 Ng/L. Trophic state analyses indicated that Winston Lake is a
biologically productive lake with a 2006 average NCTSI score placing the lake in the
eutrophic category.
Lake Thom-A-Lex
Lake Thom-A-Lex was sampled by DWQ from May through September in 2006 for a
total of five sampling trips. Physical lake parameters in 2006 were similar to those
observed in previous sampling years. Dissolved oxygen and pH measurements were
within state water quality standards during the sampling period. The average lake-wide
Secchi readings for the summer of 2006 ranged from 0.5 to 0.7 meters. These readings
were fairly low, indicating limited water clarity. Nutrient concentrations generally ranged
from moderate to elevated with the exceptions of ammonia and nitrite + nitrate, which
were generally below DWQ laboratory detection levels. The greatest lake wide average
concentrations of total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen and total organic nitrogen
were observed in July and August. The lake-wide average chlorophyll a values for the
summer of 2006 ranged from 21 //g/L to 50 /jg/L. The state chlorophyll a standard (40
ug/L) was exceeded during August and September and chlorophyll levels were elevated
(> 20 ug/L) during May and July. Forty percent of lake-wide average chlorophyll a
values were greater than the state water quality standard of 40 Pg/L, indicating elevated
biological productivity by algae. Severe blooms were observed from May through July.
Extreme blooms occurred during August and September (50 /jg/L). Surface mats,
scums or flecks were not observed in the lake at the time of the algal blooms.
Recommendations
It is recommended that Lissara Partners, LLC submit both the water quality data and a
summary of the relevant findings from both reports for Salem Lake, Winston Lake, and
Lake Thom-A-Lex in order to provide a timely response to DWQ's "Request for More
Information", dated March 14, 2008. This report should include a discussion of the
implications for the water quality of the proposed Lissara impoundment and the steps
that will be taken in the design, construction, and post-construction management stages
of the project to ensure that the threats to water quality demonstrated by the present
condition of the three reference lakes are thoroughly addressed. It is important to stress
that the information presented to DWQ is being used to establish a baseline, and that if
further sampling is required, it should be focused on the stream system on the project
site. In addition, this report should demonstrate why the data previously collected and
analyzed by DWQ's Intensive Survey Unit is appropriate to address the request for
sampling of similar impoundments listed in the March 14, 2008 "Request for More
Information".
The Predictability Study Protocol for Sampling Reference Impoundments does not
specify how the water quality data collected is to be used by DWQ staff in reviewing
proposed impoundments. It also does not specify how applicants should use the
information to aid in the design, construction, and management of impoundments to
ensure that water quality is not degraded and water quality standards are not violated.
However, it is expected that Lissara Partners, LLC will be proactive in utilizing this data
to adjust the overall project design and execution as well as to demonstrate how this
previously collected data meets all the requirements listed in DWQ's "Request for More
Information" of March 14, 2008.
Daryl Lamb, P.G.
N 1
r
Report to the Environmental Review
Commission on the Status of Water
Quality in Water Supply Reservoirs
Sampled by the Division of Water Quality
April 2006
North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission
t
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Under Section 2(a) of the 2005 Drinking Water Reservoir Protection Act (SB981), the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) is charged with analyzing existing water quality
data for water supply reservoirs sampled by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and reporting its
findings and recommendations to the Environmental Review Commission by May 1, 2006.
Data review was confined to January 1995 through May 2005 to provide the most recent
assessment. Of the 160 lakes that DWQ monitors, data from the 95 reservoirs classified as water
supplies and sampled during this time period were reviewed. These lakes are from 10 river
basins and are located in the piedmont and mountain regions of North Carolina.
As the Act focused on elevated nutrients in water supplies, this analysis includes those standards
regularly sampled by DWQ related to nutrient enrichment (also referred to as eutrophication):
chlorophyll a, dissolved oxygen, pH and turbidity. In some cases, the discussions of individual
lakes include discussions of water quality problems associated with parameters that have no
standards such as aquatic weeds.
Findings:
¦ Fourteen percent of the water supply reservoirs (13 out of 95) sampled by DWQ during
January 1995 through May 2005 did not meet all eutrophication related standards based
on available data.
¦ Those lakes that did not meet all of the eutrophication-related standards are: Graham-
Mebane Reservoir, High Point Lake, Jordan Lake, Stoney Creek Reservoir, Lake
Mackintosh, Pittsboro Lake, Lake Rhodhiss, Cedar Cliff Lake, Lake Sequoyah, Falls of
the Neuse Reservoir, High Rock Lake, Lake Lee, and Lake Twitty.
• Graham-Mebane, High Point, Jordan, Mackintosh, Pittsboro, Stoney Creek, Rhodhiss,
Falls of the Neuse, and High Rock have strategies in place or under development to
address their water quality concerns.
¦ Additional sampling is planned for Lakes Lee and Twitty.
• Six lakes had water quality problems (taste, odor, color) sufficient to require additional
treatment either in-lake or at the treatment facility: High Point, Oak Hollow, Lucas, Twitty,
Hickory and Rhodhiss.
• In addition to nutrients, aquatic weeds and sediment are problems in water supplies.
Fourteen lakes, mainly in the Cape Fear and Catawba River basins, are currently
infested with aquatic weeds at levels that require some treatment.
Recommendations
There was not sufficient data from DWQ's sampling program to determine with confidence if
many of these reservoirs were meeting or not meeting surface water quality standards. The
current ambient monitoring program is designed to provide snapshots of water quality during the
period of the year when the effects of eutrophication are most noticeable. DWQ prioritizes
additional monitoring based on the ambient lakes monitoring. The current monitoring program
resources are insufficient to perform large-scale assessments of eutrophication in multiple
reservoirs where additional monitoring has not been prioritized. Such evaluations are possible;
however, a significant input of staff, equipment and laboratory support would be required to
perform these evaluations on all water supply reservoirs.
Page ii
Y f
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ii
Table of Contents iii
List of Tables
Section 1. Introduction and Program Overview
1.1. Introduction
iv
5
5
1.2. Division of Water Quality Ambient Lakes Monitoring Program 5
1.3. Water Supply Classifications & Standards 11
1.4. Impaired Waters Designation 13
1.5. Water Supply Protection Program 16
1.6. Division of Environmental Health Surface Water Assessment
Program 16
Section 2. Methodology 17
Section 3. Findings and Recommendations 19
3.1. Findings
3.1.1. Eutrophication Related Standards
3.1.2. Other Water Quality Concerns _
19
19
20
3.2. Recommendations 21
Appendix 1. Percentage of Samples Not Meeting Eutrophication-
Related Water Quality Standards in Water Supply
Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ 1
Appendix 2. Water Supply Reservoir Water Quality For Selected
Water Supplies By Basin 5
Page iii
! r
List of Tables
Table 1.1. Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ (Jan. 2000 -
May 2005) 7
Table 1.2. Parameters Routinely Sampled by DWQ at Water Supply
Reservoirs 10
Table 1.3. Parameters with Water Supply Standards 11
Table 1.4. Land Use and Discharge Requirements Associated with
WS Classifications. 12
Table 1.5. Water Supply Lakes Currently Classified as NSW by River
Basin 13
Table 1.6. NSW Requirements Related to Discharges and Land Use
in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico and Cape Fear River Basins. 14
Table 1.7. Water Supply Lakes Listed as Impaired on the 2004
Impaired Waters List. 15
Table 2.1. Surface Water Quality Standards Related to .
Eutrophication 17
Table 3.1. Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ Not Meeting
All Eutrophication-Related Standards (Jan 2000-May 2005)
with Current Management Strategies 19
Table 3.2. Potential Causes of Water Quality Concerns in Water
Supply Reservoirs Based on DWQ Ambient Lakes
Monitoring Results. 21
Page iv
Y
Section 1. Introduction and Program Overview
9.1. Introduction
Lakes and reservoirs are integral features of the North Carolina landscape,
supplying water for personal, industrial and municipal users. Lakes provide
recreational opportunities and aesthetic enjoyment for the public, and support rich
communities of aquatic plants and animals. Public use of the state's lakes is high,
and lake-related recreation provides significant revenues. The North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission and Division of Water Quality are
committed to protecting these valuable resources for public use.
Recognizing the importance of North Carolina's waters, the Legislature adopted
the 2005 Drinking Water Reservoir Protection Act (SB981). Under Section 2(a) of
this Act, the Environmental Management Commission is charged with studying the
state's drinking water reservoirs, determining which reservoirs are not meeting
surface water quality standards using available data, and reporting their findings
and recommendations to the Environmental Review Commission.
This report was prepared to meet that requirement and to provide some additional
information on the Division of Water Quality's (DWQ) Ambient Lakes Monitoring
Program. An overview of the Ambient Lakes Monitoring Program (ALMP) is
presented as well as an explanation of water supply classifications, standards and
rules. Other programs that assist with protection of water supplies are discussed
briefly. Following those sections there is a review of the data collected over the
past 24 years, basin by basin discussion of lakes with exceedances of the
standards and recommendations.
1.2. Division of Water Quality Ambient Lakes Monitoring
Program
Assessment of water quality is necessary to determine the health of a reservoir
and its suitability for public use. Reservoirs in North Carolina have been monitored
for several decades; however, current electronic data only goes back to 1981 when
the DWQ received federal Clean Water Act funding to classify the trophic (or
nutrient enrichment) status of North Carolina's publicly owned freshwater
lakes/reservoirs', and to prioritize them for restoration. This report looks at the
most recent ten years of data as it provides a better picture of current conditions in
the reservoirs.
EPA has continued to provide limited funding for monitoring lakes under Section
314 and recently 319 of the Federal Clean Water Act. The emphasis continues to
be on eutrophication, where eutrophication is defined as human-induced increases
in nutrient loading above natural levels in a lake. This has driven DWQ's program
1 The ternis lake and reservoir are used interchangeably throughout this report. Technically, lake
refers to a natural waterbody. North Carolina has only a few natural lakes in the sandhills and
coastal plain. All other "lakes" are reservoirs created by man.
Page 5
to focus its monitoring toward the summer months when eutrophication impacts are
most prevalent.
A total of 160 publicly owned lakes have been sampled as part of the ALMP.
Those lakes are sampled once every five years per the DWQ's Basinwide
Assessment Program's schedule. Data are used to prioritize lakes for restoration
efforts and, starting in 2004, resources are being reorganized to provide sufficient
data to determine if water quality standards are being met and to support special
studies and development of lake total maximum daily loads (TMDL). A TMDL is a
calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive
and still meet water quality standards and it includes the allocation of that loading
between the various sources that contribute the pollutant to the water body. These
calculations are required under Section 303 of the Federal Clean Water Act for any
water body determined not to be attaining its uses (water supply, recreation,
aquatic life).
Recent special studies include Falls of the Neuse Reservoir, Jordan Lake (B.
Everett Jordan Reservoir) and High Rock Lake. The data collected will be used for
analysis of water quality trends and model development/calibration (TMDLs). Other
lakes have been monitored intensively to evaluate lake restoration attempts.
Merchants Millpond, Big Lake, and Lake Wheeler have been monitored to assess
the effects of aquatic weed control measures. Belews, Hyco and Mayo continue to
be monitored because of selenium contamination. Lake Wylie was intensively
monitored in 1989 and 1990 in response to problems associated with
eutrophication and the results were used to implement a nutrient management
strategy in the watershed.
Of the 160 reservoirs routinely sampled, 95 lakes classified Water Supply (WS) are
reviewed in this report (Figure 1.1 and Table 1.1). While this report discusses only
95 water supply reservoirs, there are 101 reservoirs classified as WS that have
been sampled by DWQ over the years. Some lakes classified as WS were not
sampled during the 1995-2005 review period due to resource constraints.
Figure 9.1. Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ as Part of the
Ambient Lakes Monitoring Program.
Page 6
Figure 1.1 presents the distribution of the 95 lakes, while Table 1.1 provides data
on characteristics, classification, and sampling history for each lake. Eighty-five of
these water supplies are located in the piedmont with ten located in mountain
basins. None of these surface water supplies are located in the coastal area.
Sampling for the ALMP has normally occurred in June through August targeting the
critical time of year for algal activity in most lakes. Typically, 30 to 35 lakes are
sampled monthly in the summer.
The number of stations per lake varies based on the morphology of the lake.
Sampling may be more frequent if a special study for permitting or TMDL
development is occurring.
Table 1.2 lists the parameters routinely sampled as part of the ALMP. There are
59 parameters that have numeric standards in freshwater, 29 of those parameters
have standards specific to water supplies and only five WS specific parameters are
regularly monitored due to resource constraints (Table 1.3).
Table 1.1. Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ (Jan. 1995 - May 2005)
Mean Number of
Depth Volume Watershed Sampling Dates* Times
Basin/Water body Classification feet 108m3 Area mil month! ear Sampled
BROAD
Kings Mountain Reservoir WS-III CA 46 7.4 65.3 8/1989 - 5/2005 16
CAPE FEAR
Bonnie Doone Lake WSW 3 0.1 3 811993 - 812003 7
Cane Creek Reservoir WS-II HQW NSW CA 7 11.0 32 811990 - 8/2003 11
Carthage City Lake WS-III CA 3 0.1 27 8/1991 - 8/2003 8
Glenville Lake WS-IV CA 8 0.2 10 811991 - 8/2003 7
Graham-Mebane Reservoir WS-II HOW NSW CA 10 8.7 66 8/1993-8/2003 7
Harris Lake WS-V 20 10.1 70 8/1987 - 8/2003 13
High Point Lake WS-IV CA 16 4,8 60 7/1981 - 8/2003 29
Jordan Lake WS-IV B NSW CA 16 929.6 1689 7/1982-5/2005 128
Kornbow Lake WS-IV 7 0.3 5 8/1993 - 8/2003 7
Lake Brandt WS-III NSW CA 7 84.0 40 711981 - 8/2003 10
Lake Cammack (Burlington
Reservoir
WS-11 HOW NSW CA
13
12.2
28
811981 - 8/2003
10
Lake HI ins WS-III NSW CA 12 3.0 11 811990 - 812003 8
Lake Hunt WS-III B NSW CA 33 2.8 5 7/1981 - 8/2003 17
Lake Mackintosh WS-IV NSW CA 59 29.0 129 8/1993-812003 14
Lake Ramseur (Sandy
Creek Reservoir
WS-111 CA
21
1.5
55
8/1992 - 8/2003
8
Lake Townsend WS-111 NSW CA 10 25.0 105 8/1990 - 812003 8
Mintz Pond WS-IV 5 0.3 6 8/1993 - 8/2003 7
Page 7
Table 1. 1. Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ (Jan. 1995 - May 2005)
Mean Number of
Depth Volume Watershed Sampling Dates* Times
Basin/ Water body Classification feet 10sm' Area miZ month/year Sampled
Lake Lucas (Back Creek
Lake
WS-11 HQW CA
13
5.0
16
7/1989 - 8/2002
9
Lake Monroe WS-IV CA 18 1.8 9 811989 - 8/2000 5
Lake Reese WS-III CA 16 0.9 100 7/1989 - 812002 13
Lake Thom-A-Lex WS-III CA 26 7.8 39 711981 - 8/2002 17
Lake Tiller WS-IV B CA 33 207 4834 711981 - 8/1999 10
Lake Twits Lake Stewart WS-III CA 18 7.6 36 8/1989 - 8/2000 5
Lake Wright WS-II HOW CA 10 0.3 2 8/1989 - 811999 5
McCrary Lake WS-II HQW CA 10 0.9 1 7/1989 - B/2001 10
Roberdel Lake WS-III CA 10 10.0 140 8/1989 - 8/2000 4
Rockingham City Lake WS-III CA 2 0.02 20 8/1992 - 812000 4
Salem Lake WS-111 CA 18 0.8 26 7/1981 - 812002 17
Tuckertown Reservoir WS-IV B CA 33 289 4210 7/1981 - 811999 9
Wadesboro City Pond (City
Pond
WS-II HQW CA
8
0.1
9
8/ 1989 - 8/200
5
Water Lake WS-II HOW CA 10 0.06 20 811989 - 8/2000 10
* Sampling was normally conducted during June, July, and August.
Table 1.2. Parameters Routinely Sampled by DWQ at Water Supply
Reservoirs
Physical Measurements (at 1 meter increments from the surface to the bottom of the lake)
Dissolved Oxygen Secchi depth pH
Water Temperature Conductivity
Metals (collected at the surface)
Cadmium Copper Calcium '
Iron Manganese Zinc
Chromium, Total Lead Magnesium
Nickel
Water Chemistry (collected from Photic Zone (from surface to 2 times the Secchi depth)
Turbidity Total Residue Total Suspended Solids
Total Dissolved Solids
Nutrients (Photic Zone composite samples and Bottom grab samples)
Ammonia Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Total Phosphorus
Nitrate/Nitrite
Biological
Chlorophyll a (Photic Zone) Phytoplankton (Photic Zone)
Fecal Coliform Bacteria (Surface Grab) (colonies/100 ml) only in lakes classified B
* Calcium and Magnesium are used to calculate Total Hardness (mg/L)
Page 10
The ALMP is conducted by the Intensive Survey Unit with a staff of seven people
(including supervisor); only two are dedicated to sampling lakes. The Intensive
Survey Unit also conducts a variety of physical and chemical sampling to support
permitting, compliance, modeling, TMDL development, emergency response,
reclassifications and regional investigations in lakes, rivers, streams and estuaries.
At times, the Winston-Salem Regional Office assists with lakes monitoring.
Table 1.3. Parameters with Water Supply Standards
(Bold indicates parameters routinely sampled as part of Ambient Lakes monitoring)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachlorethane Chlorinated Benzenes PAH
2,4-D DDT PCB
Aldrin Dieldrin Phenolic Compounds
Arsenic Dioxin Siivex
Barium Hardness Sulfates
Benzene Hexachlorobutadiene Tetrachloroethylene
Beryllium Manganese Total dissolved solids
Carbon Tetrachloride Methylene Blue Active Substances Trichloroethylene
Chlordane Nickel Vinyl chloride
Chloride Nitrate (nitrate/nitrite)
1.3. Water Supply Classifications & Standards
Surface water classifications are designations applied to streams, rivers and lakes,
and are intended to define the best uses to be protected within these waters (for
example swimming, recreation, drinking water supply, etc.). The surface water
standards are designed to protect the water quality based on the classifications for
a variety of ecological and human health reasons.
For surface waters used as water supplies, there are five classifications: WS-I,
WS-II, WS-III, WS-IV, and WS-V. All water supply classifications except WS-V
carry additional restrictions on treated wastewater discharges and land use
activities based on development in the watershed (Table 1.4). Note that some
portions of the WS watersheds carry additional restrictions due to their proximity to
the water intakes. Those areas are designated by CA, which stands for "critical
area".
Twenty-eight of the WS lakes are also classified B, which recognizes that they
have organized swimming occurring on a regular basis in areas of those lakes.
Management strategies associated with these waters include discouraging
wastewater discharges and storm drains.
Some WS lakes are supplementally classified as nutrient sensitive waters (NSW).
These lakes are in watersheds that the EMC has determined to be experiencing
nutrient over-enrichment and that need additional management to protect and
restore water quality.
Page 11
INn N
I-°
O N N U

> m
m
U
E

m O O

a U

m U N

o
o 3
co " w N d m
m a> a aNi w Q U)
'm ' o 0 0 LU z a
o z z Z a
a
Q

L
rn .,

m
> L C
of N
m ? ?
v ?a
a
-2
co m °

c 2Q
(D c
43
ma) o m a0

_0 (D
" co
12
O=
O
O Q
Cr p
a O
o N

rn .

L Z m

:3
cn
0)
N
> °.,
.
(ED U -6

U °

0 m

C m

2 5

d
v
C
m N O

l9 CV O

r N

U1 P
m
U
¢
'6
J
y
3 C
N
c
0. C
a
O
a O
p •ty r O
p B C p C
.? z
2 Cn N
• O
p 7
m z
O N
>`
N -O
w N
N C
N O ?- O)
C
(0
a 7
° 2'
m
- ?
a 0- m
'- a r-
f/1 ° °
E Cp C C N w
>
m °
p 0
3 N N J
o ) = z
o
z
a) CD
21 m
w N N
?v Q Q` ° w
-
n
-0
U
c m
to ° °
E >
a o Q m

a)
N c
O m
C
3 ? r- °
m = om Z
J Y
o
m 3
°
J 0
z
U

N
L
.,N.
d C
U m
C
O C
N T
CL Q1
_

fn

>
O

co
m
a.

O
d

M ° m N
L
IF

$ -
O
T CV
? U
m
? N
o N .°
'o c
L ° c N
D r C J
(0
75

'

U

z

?

CL ? ?
=
`
C
co
0 ?

m La}
Q
U) N
O
u1 Z

m
- N a)
CL a
O w C :3 N
C
CN (? (? fV m
Q a) C
m O J
> d r N 3
N
m U O N p cc
J N N

a

Cp Cn
C

Z
r m J
N N
0
a
2
O
o a? ,a
o ?' m o
o a a
° O
° a >_
p v
-
?_L m
_

-
I N !
a) 3
a) 0
0) co ca Q a c.3 c? °a. Z Q
Z C f0
3 m c
o Q z 2
Z Q)
0 Q N m

c
° c Z Z c c o
Z c o
W z
y
'N°
m o
c
0
o aNi
a
U) V
0
d 7
O
Y
d
m
U)
tJ % N
l6 t '6 O
U) O m .
O 0 7 C g N C

'O •
V- C M U)
`
L r
'D U
of w
A
J •N
C
C N
l!
O
'?' al m
'fl
9 Q
N 0
Q
an d
_
a) a
0 I
c 0 to
O r
y;
p
N
%= I`o C
.
E m a 0 E r n ?' L m 'ro ° E y c'? ro U) m
0) m a
m L
v °
zm m o= m rn « Q
E m 0
2 1 0 m R m c
E m .
11
y
U

.Q

N
0
Oll
Fourteen of the WS reservoirs sampled in the Cape Fear River Basin are regulated under the
NSW rules for the Haw River and Jordan Reservoir drainage areas (Table 1.5). All of the
Neuse (17) and Tar-Pamlico (2) Water Supply reservoirs sampled by DWQ are NSW. An
outline of the management strategies and rules governing these waters is presented in Table
1.6. They include permit limits and stream buffer requirements.
Other supplemental classifications that impact management and regulations related to water
supplies and their watersheds include High Quality Waters (HQW) and Trout jr). All WS-1 and
WS-II are classified as HQW (n=29) and that classification is reflected in the management
strategies presented in Table 1.4. The Trout classification is reserved for waters that are home
to naturally propagating trout and stocked trout. Trout flourish in colder waters and are more
sensitive to some pollutants than most other fish species. Therefore, water quality standards for
dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity, chlorophyll-a, cadmium, and toluene are more
stringent.
Table 1.5. Water Supply Lakes Currently Classified as NSW by River Basin
Cape Fear River Basin
Burlington Reservoir Cane Creek Reservoir
Graham-Mebane Reservoir B.E. Jordan Reservoir
Lake Brandt Lake Burlington
Lake Higgins Lake Hunt
Lake Mackintosh Lake Townsend
Pittsboro Lake Reidsville Lake
Richland Lake University Lake
Neuse River Basin
Apex Reservoir Beaverdam Reservoir
Buckhorn Reservoir Corporation Lake
Falls of the Neuse Reservoir Lake Ben Johnson
Lake Benson Lake Butner
Lake Michie Lake Orange
Lake Rogers Lake Wheeler
Lake Wilson Little River Reservoir
Toisnot Reservoir West Fork Eno River Reservoir
Wig ins Mill Reservoir
Tar-Pamlico River Basin
Lake Devin Tar River Reservoir
1.4. Impaired Waters Designation
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop a list of waters not
meeting water quality standards or which have impaired uses. Listed waters must be prioritized,
and a management strategy or total maximum daily load (TMDL) must subsequently be
developed for all listed waters. Uses that are evaluated for development of this list include
water supply, aquatic life, and recreation. This list must be submitted to EPA every 2 years for
their approval. More information on this program is available at http:%/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmd1/.
Page 13
Table 1.6. NSW Requirements Related to Discharges and Land Use in the Neuse,
Tar-Pamlico and Cape Fear River Basins.
Neuse River Basin Tar-Pamlico River Basin Cape Fear River Basi
Area Affected Entire watershed Entire watershed Haw River & Jordan Reservoir
Drainage

Wastewater Discharge Allowed Per WS Classification
Permit t Limits Yes' Yes z Yes'
Low Density Option Per WS Classification
High Density Option (includes

additional stormwater controls Per WS Classification
Stream Setbacks for Impervious Riparian Buffer Protection Rules
'
Surfaces 50
wide riparian buffer adjacent directly adjacent to surface Per WS Classification
waters
Erosion & Sedimentation
Controls Standard Rules
Agriculture Best Management Required either as standard Required to collectively limit
Practices Mandated BMPs or as part of Collective nutrient loading to the estuary Standard Rules
Local Strategy to achieve target reductions
Forestry Best Management

Practices Mandated Per Forest Practices Guidelines
Transportation Best Management
Practices Mandated Per WS Classification
Landfills Allowed Per WS Classification
1. NEUSE RIVER BASIN:
NiMQgen Limits Originally effective August 1, 1998, the nitrogen discharge limit reduces the nitrogen from point sources by 30 percent compared to
1995 levels. The overall nitrogen discharge limit is 2.8 million pounds per year. Limits in terms of pounds per year are called "mass-based limits." The
overall nitrogen discharge limit is divided among three different groups of dischargers as follows:
• Dischargers with permitted flows greater than or equal to 500,000 gallons per day or 0.5 million gallons per day (MGD) downstream of
Falls Lake dam have a combined limit of 2.45 million pounds per year.
• Dischargers with permitted flows greater than or equal to 0.5 MGD upstream of the dam have a combined limit of 444,000 pounds per
year.
• Dischargers with permitted flows less than 0.5 MGD have a combined limit of 280,000 pounds per year.
Phosphor imit ? 2.0 mg/L concentration limit on phosphorus throughout basin
2. TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN
Tar-Pamllco Basin Association Members - As a coalition, the goal is to decrease total nitrogen load to the estuary by 30 percent from 1991 levels along
with no increases in phosphorus loads. Nutrient exceedances follow the offset payment approach with offset rates adjusted based on basin-specific
agricultural BMP cost-effectiveness data. Non-Tar-Pamlico Basin Association Members are placed on restrictions; all discharges >0.5 MGD must meet
6 mg/L TN and 1 mg/L TP limits within 5 years. Any new loading from new or expanding facilities are mitigated using the offset payment method
established for the Tar-Pamlico Association Members.
3. CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN
Limits of 5.5 mg/L TN and 2.0 mg/L TP for qualifying facilities discharging >O.5MGD into the Jordan Reservoir/Haw River watershed (Clean Water
Responsibility Act of 1997). Most of the facilities were granted an extension by the EMC (Senate Bill 1366) and were required to develop a calibrated
nutrient response model. That model has been developed and rules are being developed to implement the limits indicated by the model.
Page 14
There are ten water supply lakes listed for impaired aquatic life use support (Table 1.7). Six of
the lakes are listed for impaired biological integrity due to impairments in the streams feeding
them. Several have been recently delisted due to improvements in water quality. Hyco Lake
has been removed due to the rescinding of the fish consumption advisory for selenium.
Pittsboro and Roanoke Rapids Lakes are listed for aquatic weeds and as aquatic weeds are not
considered a pollutant, no TMDL is required.
Table 1.7. Water Supply Lakes Listed as Impaired on the 2004 Impaired Waters
List.
Basin[Water Supplies Year Listed Reason Listed TMDL Status
Cape Fear
Bonnie Doone Lake 1998 Impaired biological Included in impaired stream segment (Little
inte ri Cross Creek). Not scheduled.
B.E. Jordan Reservoir - New

Hope & Morgan Cr Arms 2002 Chlorophyll a Draft TMDL completed
Glenville Lake 2000 Impaired biological Included in impaired stream segment (Little
integrity Cross Creek). Not scheduled.
Kornbow Lake 1998 Impaired biological Included in impaired stream segment (Little
integrity Cross Creek). Not scheduled.
Mintz Pond 1998 Impaired biological Included in impaired stream segment (Little
integrity Cross Creek). Not scheduled.
To be shifted to Category 4c (Impairment
Pittsboro Lake 1998 Aquatic Weeds not caused by a pollutant) -does not require
a TMDL
Neuse
Buckhorn Reservoir 1998 Impaired biological Included in impaired stream segment
_ inte rit Contentnea Creek). Not scheduled.

Roanoke
Hyco Lake 1998 Fish Advisory - Delisted 2004 - Fish Advisory rescinded in
Selenium 2001.
To be shifted to Category 4c (Impairment
Roanoke Rapids Lake 1998 Aquatic Weeds not caused by a pollutant) -does not require
a TMDL
Yadkin-Pee Dee
I
High Rock Lake
2004
Turbidity &
In Scoping Phase prior to TMDL
Chloro h ll a develo ment
B.E. Jordan Reservoir was listed for chlorophyll-a violations in 2002 and a draft TMDL was
completed in 2005. Development of an implementation strategy is currently underway. High
Rock Lake is also listed for chlorophyll a, as well as, turbidity. DWQ is currently doing additional
monitoring and working with the High Rock Lake Technical Advisory Committee composed of
Page 15
agency staff and other stakeholders to develop the monitoring and modeling strategy for TMDL
development. It is expected that TMDL modeling will begin in 2009 or 2010.
There are no lakes currently listed as not supporting water supply uses. Water supply use
support is assessed using information from the seven Division of Environmental Health regional
water treatment plant (WTP) consultants. Each January, the WTP consultants are asked to
submit a spreadsheet listing closures and water intake switch-overs for all water treatment
plants in their region. This spreadsheet describes the length and time of the event, contact
information for the WTP, and the reason for the switch-overs and closures. When the
closures/switches are due to water quality, then they are considered in determining if the uses
of the lake (recreation, water supply, aquatic life) are being protected.
1.5. Water Supply Protection Program
The EMC and DWQ have administered a Water Supply Protection Program since 1986. Under
the Water Supply Protection Rules, all water supply watersheds are to have ordinances, maps
and a management plan in place to protect the water supplies. DWQ is conducting a review of
the program and preparing for another audit of all water supplies covered under the rules.
1.6. Division of Environmental Health Surface Water Assessment
Program
The 1996 Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments required that all states
establish Source Water Assessment Programs in order to determine the susceptibility of public
water supply sources to contamination. This new focus in the SDWA 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 systems. Specifically, Section 1453 of the SDWA
Amendments required that states develop and implement a Source Water Assessment Program
(SWAP) to delineate source water assessment areas, inventory potential contaminants in these
areas, and determine the susceptibility of each public water supply to contamination.
The Public Water Supply (PWS) Section of the Division of Environmental Health in DENR is
responsible for SWAP in North Carolina. The PWS Section received EPA approval 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.
The SWAP Plan is available at: http://www.deh.enr.state.nc.us/pws/swaD-
In April 2004, the PWS Section completed source water assessments for all drinking water
sources and generated reports for the public water supply systems using these sources. In
April 2005, a second round of assessments were completed. The ratings are available at the
above-mentioned web site, either through the interactive mapping tool or compiled in a written
report for each public water supply system.
Page 16
Section 2. Methodology
For the purposes of this report, DWQ ambient lakes data from January 1995 through May 2005
were reviewed. Over that time period, DWQ sampled 97 lakes with the water supply
classifications (WS-I, WS-II, WS-III, WS-IV, and WS-V). West Fork Eno Reservoir was only
recently filled and was only sampled once in May 2005. Beaverdam Lake has been included in
the analysis of Falls of the Neuse Reservoir. Therefore, only 95 lakes are discussed in this
report.
As noted earlier, lakes are sampled once every five years unless a special study is conducted.
As the 2005 Drinking Water Reservoir Protection Act is focused on eutrophication in water
supplies, this analysis is of those standards related to eutrophication: chlorophyll a, dissolved
oxygen, pH, and turbidity. The discussions for individual lakes found in Appendix 2 may include
discussion of water quality problems associated with parameters that have no standards such
as aquatic weeds.
Eutrophication-related standards for WS waters are presented in Table 2.1.
Table 2.9. Surface Water Quality Standards Related to Eutrophication
Parameter Standard for Non-Trout Waters Standard for Trout Waters
Chlorophyll a Not greater than 40 ug/L Not greater than 15 ug/L
Dissolved oxygen Not less than 4 m /L Not less than 6 m /L
pH Between 6 and 9 except in Swamp Waters then
4.3 Standard Units SU Between 6 and 9 SU
Turbidity 25 Ne helometric Units NTU 10 NTU
North Carolina does not have standards for nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen) that result in
eutrophication as there are a variety of factors that control a water body's response to nutrients
including, but not limited to: size, depth, flow, shape of the lake, and light penetration. When the
chlorophyll-a standard was adopted it was based on the determination that an indicator of
eutrophication would provide more certainty in determining impacts than nitrogen and
phosphorus standards.
Dissolved oxygen (DO), pH and turbidity are also indicators of the potential for eutrophication.
During photosynthesis and respiration, DO and pH can increase and decrease due to the
chemical reactions taking place. During the normal sampling times for the Ambient Lakes
Monitoring Program (usually between 10 AM and 3 PM), peak photosynthesis is occurring
resulting in increased oxygen releases by the alga and an increase in pH due to carbon dioxide
uptake related to photosynthesis. When DO reaches levels above 10-12 mg/L at summer
temperatures, the water becomes supersaturated and fish may experience gas bubble disease
if they are unable to escape the supersaturated waters. Gas bubble disease may be fatal or the
fish may eventually recover.
Turbidity refers to water clarity. The greater the amount of suspended solids in the water,
including algae, the murkier it appears and the higher the turbidity measured. Turbidity
measures the scatter of light by the suspended solids as opposed to measuring solids.
Page 17
Therefore, anything that results in light scattering will increased the turbidity reading. That is
why turbidity is considered to be related to eutrophication, the more phytoplankton in the water
column, the higher the turbidity reading. Therefore, the major source of turbidity in the open
water zone of most lakes is typically phytoplankton. Closer to the shore, clays and silts from
shoreline erosion, resuspended bottom sediments and organic detritus from stream and/or
discharges not only are usually the major source of turbidity but they actually act to shade the
phytoplankton, reducing phytoplankton growth. Dredging operations, channelization, increased
flow rates, floods, or even too many bottom-feeding fish (such as carp) may stir up bottom
sediments and increase,the cloudiness of the water.
In addition to carrying nutrients, high concentrations of particulate matter can modify light
penetration, cause shallow lakes and bays to fill in faster, and smother bottom habitats
impacting both organisms and eggs. As particles of silt, clay, and other organic materials settle
to the bottom, they can suffocate newly hatched larvae and fill in spaces between rocks which
could have been used by aquatic organisms as habitat. Fine particulate material also can clog
or damage sensitive gill structures, decrease their resistance to disease, prevent proper egg
and larval development, and potentially interfere with particle feeding activities. If light
penetration is reduced significantly, macrophyte growth may be decreased which would in turn
impact the organisms dependent upon them for food and cover. Reduced photosynthesis can
also result in a lower daytime release of oxygen into the water. Effects on phytoplankton growth
are complex depending on too many factors to generalize.
For the purposes of this review, standards were deemed to be exceeded (not met) when the
sample size was 10 or more and more than 10 percent of the samples failed to meet the
standard.
Page 18
Section 3. Findings and Recommendations
3.1. Findings
3.1.1. Eutrophication Related Standards
Using DWQ's Ambient Lakes Monitoring data and some information from the water supply users
(Appendix 1), 13 lakes (14 percent) are currently not meeting eutrophication-related water
quality standards: Graham-Mebane Reservoir, High Point Lake, Jordan Lake, Stoney Creek
Reservoir, Lake Mackintosh, Pittsboro Lake, Lake Rhodhiss, Cedar Cliff Lake, Lake Sequoyah,
Falls of the Neuse Reservoir, High Rock Lake, Lake Lee, and Lake Twitty (Table 3.1).
Table 3.1. Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ Not Meeting All
Eutrophication-Related Standards (Jan 1995-May 2005) with Current
Management Strategies
Lake
F- 1 Standard Not Met in X10% of
Samples
- Current Actions
Cape Fear River Basin
Graham-Mebane Reservoir Chloro h II-a NSW
High Point Lake Chloro h II-a _ Adding to Impaired Waters List
Jordan Lake Chloro h II-a NSW TMDL
Lake Mackintosh Chloro h II-a NSW
Pittsboro Lake Turbidity NSW, TMDL (aquatic plants)
Stone Creek Reservoir Turbidity NSW
Catawba River Basin
Lake Rhodhiss H Adding to Impaired Waters List
Little Tennessee' River Basin
Cedar Cliff Lake pH Additional sampling was conducted that
did not find similar pH problems. No
further action has been planned.
Lake Se uo ah H Local Efforts Underway
Neuse River Basin
Falls of the Neuse Reservoir Turbidity NSW, Special study underway
Yadkin River Basin
High Rock Lake Chlorophyll-a, pH, turbidity TMDL
Lake Lee pH Additional sampling is planned during
2006
Lake Twitty (Lake Stewart) pH Additional sampling is planned during
2006
Page 19

Table 3.1 indicates activities currently underway, which are intended to reduce nutrient inputs.
Most of the Cape Fear River basin lakes and Falls of the Neuse Reservoir in the Neuse River
basin are classified as NSW. The NSW classification carries with it management strategies
designed to reduce nutrient inputs based on site-specific requirements. These management
strategies are revisited periodically through the basinwide process to determine if the strategy is
working and allow for adjustments.
Those lakes that are listed on the Impaired Waters List may require the development of TMDLs
that identify the allowable nutrient concentrations as well as how much reduction is required of
each source. TMDLs are used to develop permit limits and to target nonpoint source control
activities. They may also result in the development of rules to provide additional controls of
point and nonpoint sources.
Additional sampling was conducted on Cedar Cliff Lake during 1999 to determine if the low pH
values were indicative of on-going impairment. Subsequent sampling indicates pH within the
standards and no additional management is recommended at this time. Lakes Lee and Twitty
are targeted during the 2006 sampling period for additional sampling to provide additional data
for determining causes and sources of impairment.
In the case of some water supply lakes (High Point Lake, Oak Hollow Lake, Lakes Lucas,
Twitty, Hickory and Rhodhiss), algal bloom related problems have been significant enough to
require additional treatment either at the treatment facility (addition of carbon filters for example)
or in the lake (destratification systems). The destratification systems used in Oak Hollow, Lucas
and Twitty prevent algae from remaining within the photic zone and multiplying while
maintaining dissolved oxygen and pH at normal levels, therefore chlorophyll-a, dissolved
oxygen and pH values met the standards even though nutrient concentrations are sufficient to
cause blooms.
The sources of the nutrients fueling the algal blooms include point and nonpoint sources. Due
to the protected nature of most water supply watersheds, nonpoint sources of rural origin
appear to be the largest source of threat. The Basinwide process continues to work with local
stakeholders to address these issues.
Additional information on the lakes with exceedances is provided in Appendix 2
3.1.2. Other Water Quality Concerns
In the process of preparing this document, information on all the water supply lakes was
reviewed and it appears that, in addition to nutrient over-enrichment (algal blooms), aquatic
weeds and sediment are also major problems for water supply reservoirs (Table 3.2 and
Appendix 2). Sedimentation is a major problem in some of the watersheds, although it is not
always indicated by in-lake turbidity. While turbidity gives some idea of sediment, it does not
provide a good measure of the amount of sediment coming into a system and being deposited.
Therefore, DWQ's results include field observations and are probably an underestimation of the
true impact of sedimentation within North Carolina's lakes. This is especially true in the Yadkin-
Pee Dee River Basin where highly erodable soils and heavy development pressures result in
the Yadkin River flowing muddy most of the time.
A few lakes had other documented problems, such as Bonnie Doone Lake in the Cape Fear
Basin where the City of Fayetteville is addressing pesticides in stormwater runoff after finding
them in the lake. Some lakes need to be reclassified to recognize the swamp water influences
that result in pH below the standard.
Page 20

Table 3.2. Potential Causes of Water Quality Concerns in Water Supply
Reservoirs Based on DWQ Ambient Lakes Monitoring Results.
(Shading indicates that those causes have been identified as problems in each basin.)
Cause
Basin
Aquatic Sediment Algal Blooms-
Weeds Nutrients
Broad
Cape Fear i,
Catawba
French Broad
Little Tennessee
Neuse
New
Roanoke ?-
Tar-Pamlico
Yadkin-Pee Dee - -' -
Aquatic weeds, such as Hydrilla and Parrotfeather, are hardy, fast growing and have caused
problems for water supply intakes, boating, swimming and aquatic life throughout the state.
These aquatic weeds can take over a water supply within a couple of years, increasing
maintenance costs for facilities and ruining the public's experience of their waters. Fourteen WS
lakes sampled by DWQ are currently infested with aquatic weeds at levels that require some
treatment.
3.2. Recommendations
As is evident from the data review, DWQ's current program does not have sufficient data in
most cases to determine with confidence that a water supply is or is not meeting standards.
The Ambient Lakes Monitoring program was designed to allow targeting of water bodies for
additional sampling based on the limited resources available to support the program. It is
possible to conduct large-scale assessments of eutrophication in multiple reservoirs; however, it
will require significant additional resources including staff, equipment and laboratory support.
Page 21
I , A
Appendix 1. Percentage of Samples Not Meeting
Eutrophication-Related Water Quality Standards
in Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ

Basin & Lake Name
Years Included in
Analyses
# of Chl-a
Samples
# of DO, ph
& Turbidity
Samples Percentage of Samples Not Meeting
Each Standard During January 1995
through May 2005

Chl-a DO H Turbidity
BROAD RIVER
Kings Mountain Reservoir 1995, 2000, 2005 12 24
CAPE FEAR RIVER
Bonnie Doone Lake 1998, 2003 6 6
Cane Creek Reservoir 1996, 1998, 2003 9 27
Carthage City Lake 1998, 2003 3 6
Glenville Lake 1998, 2003 2 5
Graham-Mebane Reservoir 1998, 2003 15 30 27%
Harris Lake 1996, 2003 8 22
High Point Lake 1996-1998, 2000-2003 12 48 25%
Jordan Lake 1995-2001, 2005 607 732 27% 5 % 8 % 8 %
Kornbow Lake 1998 2003 3 6
Lake Brandt 1998, 2003 9 18 6%
Lake Cammack (Burlington
Reservoir 1998, 2003 6 12
Lake Higgins 1998, 2003 6 12
Lake Hunt 1998, 2003 9 15 * 7%
Lake Mackintosh 1996-1998, 2003 18 72 17% 7%
Lake Townsend 1998,2003 9 18
Mintz Pond 1998 2003 3 6
Oak Hollow Lake 1996-1998 2000-2003 18 63
Old Town Reservoir 1998 2003 6 12
Pittsboro Lake 1998 2003 6 11 * 27%
Reidsville Lake 1998, 2003 6 12 * 8%
Rock River Reservoir 199B,2003 6 12
Sand Creek Reservoir 1998, 2003 9 18
I
Stoney Creek Reservoir (Lake
Burlington)
1998, 2003
6
12
°
17 /o
University Lake 1998 2003 6 .12
CATAWBA RIVER
Bessemer City Lake 2002 3 3
Lake Hickory 1997 2002 11 24 4%
Lake James 1997, 2001, 2002 18 59
Lake Norman 1997 2002 24 48
Page A-I
0 ,

Basin & Lake Name
Years Included in
Analyses
# of Chl-a
Samples
# of DO, ph
& Turbidity
Samples Percentage of Samples Not Meeting
Each Standard During January 1995
through May 2005

Chl-a DO pH Turbidit
ROANOKE RIVER
Belews Lake 1999, 2000-2002,
2004 20 55
Farmer Lake 1999, 2000-2002,
2004
36
51
6%
H co Lake 1999,2004 12 24
Kernersville Lake 2000, 2004 3 11
Lake Gaston 1996, 1999, 2000,
2004 15 41
Lake Roxboro 1999,2000-2002,
2004
18
42
2%
Mayo Reservoir 1999, 2004 9 18
Roanoke Rapids Lake 1999, 2004 9 18
Roxboro City Lake 1999, 2004 18 30
TAR-PAMLICO RIVER
Lake Devin 1997,2002 6 12
Tar River Reservoir 1997, 2002 12 24 8% 8
YADKIN-PEE DEE RIVER
Back Creek Lake 1999, 2001, 2002 15 21 5 %
Badin Lake 1999, 2002 48 63 2% 2% 8%
Blewett Falls 1999 2 3
Bunch Lake 1999, 2000, 2001 2 8
High Rock Lake 1997,1999,2000-
2005
2
160
28%

12 /0
°
13 /°
I
F- Kanna olis Lake
1995, 2000
2
8
Kerr Scott Reservoir 1999, 2000-2002 9 33
Lake Concord 1995 2000 3 9
Lake Corriher 1999 0 6
Lake Fisher 1995 2000 3 12 8 %
Lake Lee 1995 2000 3 12 18 %
Lake Monroe 1995, 2000 2 8
Lake Reese 1995, 2000-2002 15 33
Lake Thom-A-Lex 1999_2000-2002 6 16 8%
Lake Tillery 1999 0 12
Lake Twitt Lake Stewart 1995 2000 3 12 58%
Lake Wright 1999 0 4
McCrary Lake 1999- 2001 2 8
Roberdel Lake 1995 2000 2 6
Rockin ham Cit Lake 1995, 2000 1 3
Salem Lake 1999-2002 9 33 3%
Page A-3

Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by DWQ in the Yadkin-
Pee Dee River Basin
le.
?t !19
1 Back Creek; Reservoir 10 0$ ??
2 Badin Lake ) 7 23
3 Blewitt Falls Lake l? 2
4 Bunch Lake ?m
5 Falls Lake d J?
6 High Rock Lake 6
7 Kannapolis Lake
8 Kerr Scott Reservoir
9 Lake Concord
10 Lake Con-iher 1 3 20
'11 Lake Fisher 24
12 Lake Lee 2 R ckfngham
13 Lake Monroe
14 Lake Reese
15 Lake Thom-A.-Lex
16 Lake Tillery
17 Lake Twitty (Lake Stewart)
18 Lake Wright
19 McCrary Lake
20 Roberdel Lake
21 Rockingham City Lake
22 Salem Lake
23 Tuckertown Reservoir
24 Wadesboro City Pond
25 Water Lake
Page A-33
I
Basin Overview
From its headwaters in northwestern North
Carolina and southern Virginia, the Yadkin
River flows southeast across North
Carolina's densely populated midsection.
Three of the state's five interstate highways
cross the upper half of the basin. The
Yadkin River basin is the second largest
basin in North Carolina, covering 7,213
square miles within twenty-one counties.
Ninety-three municipalities are located within
this river basin. From the eastern slopes of
the Blue Ridge Mountains in Caldwell and
Wilkes counties, the Yadkin River flows
northeasterly for about 100 miles, and then
flows to the southeast until it joins the
Uwharrie River to form the Pee Dee River.
The Pee Dee River continues flowing
southeasterly to the North Carolina-South
Carolina state line and then through South
Carolina to Winyah Bay.
The river is impounded several times as it
travels through North Carolina forming the
Yadkin Chain Lakes. These reservoirs
include W. Kerr Scott Reservoir, High Rock
Lake, Tuckertown Reservoir, Badin Lake,
Falls Lake, Lake Tillery and Blewett Falls
Lake. The Yadkin drainage encompasses
much of the Piedmont Triad area including
the cities of Winston-Salem, High Point,
Thomasville and Lexington. Land use is
mixed with forests, agriculture, and urban
development.
Twenty-five lakes classified as WS were
sampled within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River
basin. High Rock Lake exceeded
chlorophyll-a, pH, and turbidity standards in
more than 10 percent of the samples taken.
Lakes with Water Quality
Concerns
High Rock Lake
Located on the mainstem of the Yadkin
River in Rowan and Davidson counties, High
Rock Lake is the largest and most upstream
of the Yadkin-Pee Dee chain lakes.
Completed in 1929, the reservoir was
constructed to provide hydroelectric power
and is owned and operated by Yadkin
Division of APGI. With a 3,850 square mile
watershed, the lake has a volume of
approximately 83 billion gallons and a
surface area of approximately 15,750 acres.
No drinking water is drawn directly from the
lake, although Salisbury's water supply
intake is located just upstream of the
reservoir and the Town of Denton draws
water just below the dam. Due to numerous
discharges (155 individual NPDES permitted
dischargers) and potential sources of
contamination in the watershed, High Rock
Lake has a Higher Susceptibility Rating
under the SWAP. This rating indicates that
there are many potential sources of pollution
in the watershed that could adversely impact
High Rock Lake's water quality.
Eutrophic conditions in High Rock Lake
have been documented by DWQ since
19741. In the 1998 basinwide plan, several
recommendations were made to address
over-enrichment in portions of the lake,
Phosphorus limits,were recommended and
subsequently implemented in the Abbotts
Creek arm of the lake in the NPDES permits
for Lexington, Thomasville, and High Point
WWTPs. The Town of Spencer removed
their discharge from Grants Creek, a major
tributary of High Rock Lake, and connected
to the City of Salisbury's WWTP. The City
of Salisbury eliminated its discharges to
Grants Creek and Town Creek by
constructing a new WWTP that discharges
to the Yadkin River in the upper reaches of
High Rock Lake.
Water quality data over the past 24 years
indicates 44 exceedances (n=156) of the
chlorophyll-a standard, 19 of those recorded
since June 2002. Values for pH have
exceeded the standard 14 times, usually co-
occurring with the elevated chlorophyll-a
concentrations. Turbidity has been
exceeded 23 times with some
measurements over 10 times the standard.
Most of the turbidity exceedances occurred
at the upper stations reflecting the amount of
sediment that is coming into High Rock Lake
from its upper watershed.
Mild to severe blooms were recorded
throughout 2005. The mild blooms recorded
in May were dominated by green algae. The
1 DENR 2003, Basinwide Assessment Report
Yadkin-Pee Dee River.
http://vrvvw.esb.enr.,state.nc.us/Basinwide/
Page A-34
A.
assemblages then shifted to blue greens,
which formed moderate to severe blooms in
June, July and September. These blooms
consisted of multiple filamentous, blue-green
taxa, such as Planktolyngbya and
Anabaena. Excessive sediment and detrital
matter was frequently noted during the
analysis of samples from upper most station.
This was the only station that did not have
blooms recorded during 2005. It was also
noted that the samples at this location
contained many benthic diatoms indicating a
riparian more than lacustrine system.
In the 2003 basinwide plan, DWQ committed
to work more closely with other agencies to
assist in reducing nonpoint source pollution
to the lake. DWQ also continues to work on
relicensing of the hydropower projects in the
Yadkin-Pee Dee basin in order to provide
greater protection of water quality.
In 2004, High Rock Lake was added to the
Impaired Waters list due to turbidity and
chlorophyll-a problems. A scoping study
was begun in 2005 to support development
of a TMDL for High Rock Lake. This study
is continuing into 2006 and the final TMDL is
scheduled for completion in 2008 or 2009.
Badin Lake
Badin Lake (also called Narrows Reservoir)
is one of the chain lakes on the Yadkin
River, located downstream from Tuckertown
Reservoir, High Rock Lake and W. Kerr
Scott Reservoir. The lake was filled in 1917
and is owned by the Yadkin Division of APGI
Hydropower. It has a maximum depth of 53
meters and a surface area of 5,350 acres.
The City of Albemarle draws water from
Badin Lake. The watershed is forested with
some agriculture; however, population
growth in the area raises concerns regarding
protection and improvement of water quality.
DWQ has sampled Badin Lake 18 times
since 1981.
Over the past few years, summer fish kills
have become a concern. These fish kills are
currently under investigation by researchers
at NCSU and preliminary results indicate
that the stocked striped bass are at the edge
of their temperature tolerance zone causing
them to be easily stressed 2. As the lake
warms up, the fish look for adequate
dissolved oxygen and low water
temperatures. At times they get caught in
pockets of low dissolved oxygen and higher
temperature and die.
A few samples did not meet the standards
for chlorophyll a, dissolved oxygen, pH and
turbidity. These samples were from
throughout the sampling period and did not
seem to indicate any decrease in water
quality. Mild blooms were recorded in early
and mid summer 2002. These blooms were
dominated by Chrysochromulina sp. (a
golden flagellate] and Psuedoanabaena
(filamentous blue-green). During late
summer 2002, moderate algal blooms of
Psuedoanabaena and Cylindrospermopsis
(filamentous blue-green) were documented.
Similar assemblages were identified in 1987
and 1990.
Relicensing is underway for the hydropower
projects on the Yadkin and the Division is
working with the Yadkin Division of APGI to
provide/ensure water quality improvements
through that process'.
Lake Lee
Lake Lee was built in 1927 and serves as an
emergency water source for the City of
Monroe. The lake is fairly shallow with a
maximum depth of approximately 10 feet.
Water from Lake Monroe feeds into Lake
Lee and water from Lake Lee is pumped into
a tributary of Lake Twitty during periods of
low flow.
Sampling in 1989 found chlorophyll-a
concentrations above the standard and then
in 2000, two pH readings were above the
standard. These readings were
accompanied by elevated dissolved oxygen
indicating potential algal bloom activity.
Surface algal mats and green-colored water
were observed at Lake Lee in 2000. An
analysis of phytoplankton samples
Bryn Tracy, Fisheries Biologist DWQ
Environmental Sciences Section. Personal
communication January 12; 2006.
3 DENR 2003. Basinwide Assessment Report
Yadkin-Pee Dee River.
http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/Basinwide
Page A=35
4 4 e ?
confirmed the presence of algal blooms
during each sampling event. Samples
collected in June were dominated by green
algae while samples collected in July and
August were dominated by filamentous blue-
green algae (Anabaena sp. and
Anabaenopsis sp.) commonly associated
with taste and odor problems in drinking
water.
As with many other lakes in the basin,
manganese concentrations were above the
applicable surface water quality standard in
one sample. No reports of taste and odor
problems were received by DWQ.
Lake Monroe
Lake Monroe is a secondary (backup) water
supply for the City of Monroe in Union
County and is also used for recreation. The
reservoir was built in 1955 and has a volume
of 480 million gallons. The drainage area is
mostly forested.
This lake was most recently sampled in
2000. While Lake Monroe was rated
eutrophic in 1995, surface dissolved oxygen
and pH values were even higher in 2000.
Total phosphorus and total organic nitrogen
were elevated in both years and the 2000
phytoplankton sample analysis confirmed
the presence of algal blooms in June, July
and August. Phytoplankton samples from
July and August were dominated by
filamentous blue-green algae (Anabaena sp.
and Anabaenopsis sp.) commonly
implicated in taste and odor problems in
drinking water.
Lake Thom-A-Lex
Lake Thom-A-Lex is a water supply
reservoir for the cities of Thomasville and
Lexington. Its major tributary is Abbotts
Creek.
This lake was monitored in 1999, 2000 and
2001. Sampling was previously conducted
in 1994 at which time the lake was
determined to be eutrophic. This lake has
been consistently eutrophic since it was first
monitored in 1981.
Secchi depths in 1999 through 2001 were
typical of a piedmont reservoir with readings
usually less than one meter. In general,
nutrient concentrations were elevated in
1999 through 2001. The availability of
nutrients supported increased algae
productivity in all years. In 2001,
chlorophyll-a values ranged from 24 to 31
pg/L. The exceedances of the chlorophyll-a
standard occurred in 1982 and 1989.
As has been seen in other piedmont lakes,
the state water quality standard for
manganese was exceeded once in the 1999
- 2001 period.
Salem Lake
Salem Lake is a water supply reservoir
providing drinking water for the City of
Winston-Salem and Forsyth County. This
lake has a maximum depth of 36 feet (11
meters), well-defined north and south arms
and 14 miles of shoreline. The watershed
includes portions of the Towns of
Kernersville and Walkertown. Land use is
mainly urban with some agriculture.
Sedimentation and agricultural runoff have
presented problems in the lake.
Salem Lake has been monitored since 1994,
with the most recent samples taken in 2000
and 2001. Overall, the lake is showing
some signs of nutrient over-enrichment,
based on nutrient concentrations.
Surface dissolved oxygen at Station
YAD077B on June 12, 2000 was 3.4 mg/L,
which was less than the state water quality
standard of 4.0 mg/L for an instantaneous
reading. A review of the data indicated that
the sample was taken at 9:15 AM and that
previous samples taken at the station that
early also exhibited low dissolved oxygen
compared to the other stations.
In keeping with the moderate to elevated
nutrient concentrations found over the years,
chlorophyll-a values for 2001 were in the
moderate range (12 - 20 pg/L).
Phytoplankton samples collected in 1999
indicated that the lake contained a diverse
assemblage of algae ranging from blue-
green and green algae in the Kerners Mill
Creek arm to diatoms near the dam.
Exceedances of the chlorophyll-a standard
occurred in 1989 due to the presence of a
small golden alga, Chrysochromulina
breviturrita. This alga contains a large
amount of chlorophyll-a relative to its size.
Chlorophyll-a standards were also exceeded
Page A-36
4 ? I 1
in 1982. No phytoplankton information is
available for that time period.
In September 2000, the US Environmental
Protection Agency investigated lead
contaminated soil at a battery manufacturing
plant in Walkertown and at an unnamed
tributary to Lowery Creek, which is one of
the major tributaries to Salem Lake. Lead
levels of 320 pg/L were found in the creek.
The NC DWQ's sampling during 2000 and
2001 found lead levels less than the water
quality laboratory detection level of 10 pg/L
in the lake.
All other parameters were below state
standards with the exception of manganese
in 2000 at one station in July 2000.
Manganese concentrations above the state
water quality standard of 200 pg/L for water
supply sources are common in the state due
to background manganese concentrations.
Lake Twitty
Lake Twitty (also called Lake Stewart) is
owned by the City of Monroe and operated
as a water supply reservoir and for
recreation. The lake's volume is
approximately 2 billion gallons with a
maximum depth of 15 meters. Stewart
Creek and Chinkapin Creek are the main
tributaries to Lake Twitty. Land in the mainly
flat drainage area is forested and
agriculture.
Lake Twitty was most recently monitored in
2000. The lake was strongly stratified near
the dam with hypoxic conditions present at a
depth of three meters from the surface
(depth to bottom in June was 12 meters).
Secchi depths were less than one meter at
each of the sampling sites, indicating poor
light availability within the water column.
Surface dissolved oxygen and pH values
were elevated. Elevated dissolved oxygen
and pH values are symptoms of increased
algal photosynthetic activity in the lake.
Field notes indicated that the water was
green in color in 2000.
Nutrient concentrations were elevated.
Analysis of phytoplankton samples
confirmed the presence of algal blooms in
June, July and August. Samples collected
in June were dominated by green algae
while samples collected in July and August
were dominated by filamentous blue-green
algae. The blue-green algae observed in
the July and August samples (Anabaena
sp., Oscillatoria sp., and Anabaenopsis sp.)
are commonly associated with taste and
odor problems in drinking water.
Surface metals were within applicable state
water quality standards with the exception of
copper. Values in June, July and August
(15.0, 9.8, and 76.0 pg/L, respectively) were
greater than the state water quality action
level of 7.0 pg/L. A conversation with Mr.
Allan Kilogh, Water Treatment Plant
Supervisor for the Town of Monroe revealed
that Lake Stewart was treated with a copper
based algaecide twice during the summer.
One of these treatment occurred the first
week of August. The product used remains
in suspension, which explains the elevated
copper values. Treatment was done using
appropriate application and an algaecide
approved for use in water supplies. All
precautions were taken to protect the
treated drinking water.
In May of 2001, the City of Monroe installed
a diffused air hypolimnic system to decrease
stratification and increase dissolved oxygen
levels throughout the lakes profile to
improve the drinking water quality4.
Rockingham City Lake
Rockingham City Lake is a secondary water
supply reservoir for the City of Rockingham.
It is located on Falling Creek.
Rockingham City Lake was most recently
monitored in 2000. This lake is dystrophic
(tannic water, acidic) with numerous aquatic
macrophytes present. Plant samples
collected from the lake consisted of
spikerush (E/eocharis sp.), bog moss
(Mayaca f/uviatilis), variable-leaf watermilfoil
(Myriophyllum heterophyllum), and fragrant
or white water lily (Nymphaea odorata).
Due to the naturally dark colored water,
Secchi depths were less than a meter.
Surface dissolved oxygen concentrations
(3.9 mg/L in June and 3.2 mg/L in August)
were less than the state water quality
standard of 4.0 mg/L for an instantaneous
4 Russell Colbath, Water Resources Director for
the City of Monroe. Personal communication
January 18, 2006.
Page A-37
4" (,I , •
reading. This low dissolved oxygen reading
is not considered unusual in the presence of
such thick stands of macrophytes. Nutrient
concentrations ranged from low to
moderate.
This lake has been listed as impaired due to
the excessive growth . of aquatic
macrophytes.
Pave A-38
t ?
LAKE & RESERVOIR ASSESSMENTS -
YADKIN-PEE DEE RIVER BASIN
MODeraw LaKe
Intensive Survey Unit
Environmental Sciences Section
Division of Water Quality
April 2007
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 6/29/2007
a .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... 2
FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. 4
TABLES ............................................................................................................................... 5
GLOSSARY ......................................................................................................................... 6
OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................... 8
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................... 8
ASSESSMENTS BY SUBBASIN ....................................................................................... 10
Subbasin 030701 .............................................................................................................. 10
W. Kerr Scott Reservoir .................................................................................................. 10
Subbasin 030704 .............................................................................................................. 11
Salem Lake ..................................................................................................................... 11
Winston Lake .................................................................................................................. 12
High Rock Lake .............................................................................................................. 13
Subbasin 030707 .............................................................................................................. 19
Lake Thom-A-Lex ........................................................................................................... 19
Subbasin 030708 .............................................................................................................. 21
Tuckertown Reservoir ..................................................................................................... 21
Badin Lake ...................................................................................................................... 22
Lake Tillery ..................................................................................................................... 23
Subbasin 030709 .............................................................................................................. 25
Lake Reese .................................................................................................................... 25
Back Creek Lake (Lake Lucas) ....................................................................................... 26
Lake Bunch ..................................................................................................................... 27
McCrary Lake ........................................................................................................ ... 29
Subbasin 030710 .............................................................................................................. 31
Blewett Falls Lake ........................................................................................................... 31
Subbasin 030711 .............................................................................................................. 32
Lake Howell .............................................................................. ... 32
...................................
Subbasin 030712 .............................................................................................................. 33
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 2 6/29/2007
J Y
Kannapolis Lake ............................................................................................................. 33
Lake Fisher ................................... :................................................................................. 34
Lake Concord ................................................................................................................. 35
Subbasin 030714 ............................................................................. ............................... 37
Lake Lee ......................................................................................................................... 37
Lake Monroe ................................................................................................................... 41
Lake Twitty ..................................................................................................................... 42
Subbasin 030716 .............................................................................................................. 46
Roberdel Lake ................................................................................................................ 46
Water Lake ..................................................................................................................... 46
Subbasin 030717 .............................................................................................................. 48
Wadesboro City Pond ..................................................................................................... 48
Appendix A. Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Lakes Use Assessment Matrix
Appendix B. Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Lakes Use Assessment Data
Appendix C. High Rock Lake Algae Densities and Biovolumes 2004-2006
DVVQ Intensive Survey Unit 3 6/29/2007

Figures
Figure 1. Phytoplankton Groups of Salem Lake, Summer 2006 ................................. 11
Figure 2. Mean chlorophyll a values by sampling station for May through September,
2006 ............................................................................................................... 14
Figure 3a. Results of the Algal Growth Potential Test, June 15, 2005 ........................ 15
Figure 3b. Results of the Algal Growth Potential Test, July 19, 2006 ......................... 15
Figure 4. Average Densities of Algae in High Rock Lake from May to September 2006
....................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 5. Digital images of samples collected on 9/21/05 (200X magnification)........ 18
Figure 6. Magnified Image of Euglena sp. (a) and Euglena sp. forming a cyst (b).... 18
Figure 7. Lake Thom-A-Lex Algae Groups at YAD1611A in 2006. Densities are
labeled for blue green algae ........................................................................ 20
Figure 8. Chinese Mystery Snail Collected From Tuckertown Reservoir ................... 22
Figure 9. Image of the algae in Lake Bunch that shows the, size variation (200X
magnification): .............................................................................................. 29
Figure 10. Algal Densities (units/ml) in Lake Lee, May - September, 2006 ................ 37
Figure 11. A Comparison of Algal Densities at the Dam (YAD233) on Lake Lee for
2000 and 2006 ............................................................................................... 39
Figure 12. Anabaena, the dominant alga in Lake Lee on June 8, 2006 (magnification
200X ) .............................................................................................................. 39
Figure 13. Algal Densities in Lake Twitty, May - September, 2006 ............................. 43
Figure 14. Algal Densities (units/ml) in Lake Twitty, 2000 .............
Figure 15. Phytoplankton Groups at the Two Sampling Sites in Wadesboro City
Pond, Summer 2006 ..................................................................................... 49
DVVQ Intensive Survey Unit 4 6/29/2007
Tables
Table 1. Locations of Algal Samples Including Station Description and Years
Characterized ................................................................................................... 16
Table 2. Chlorophyll a, Phytoplankton Densities and Common Algae at the Lake
Thom-a-Lex DWQ Sampling Site Near the Dam, 2006 .................................. 20
Table 3. Phytoplankton densities and % dominance in Lake Bunch during 2006..... 28
Table 4. Phytoplankton Biovolumes (BV) and Percent Dominance (%) in Lake Bunch
during 2006 ....................................................................................................... 28
Table 5. Chlorophyll a and dominant phytoplankton at Station YAD216G on Lake
Concord ............................................................................................................ 35
Table 6. Algal Densities (units/ml) in Lake Lee, May - September 2006 .................... 38
Table 7. Algal Biovolume (mm3/m3) in Lake Lee, May - September 2006 ................. 38
Table 8. Number of Genera by Major Algal Groups ...................................................... 40
Table 9. Algal Densities (units/ml) and Dominance in Lake Twitty, May- September
2006 ................................................................................................................... 43
Table 10. Algal Biovolumes (mm3/m3) and Dominance in Lake Twitty, May -
September, 2006 ............................................................................................... 44
Table 11. Number of Genera by Major Algal Groups .................................................... 44
Table 12. Chlorophyll a, Phytoplankton Densities and Common Genera in
Wadesboro City Pond ...................................................................................... 48
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 5 6/29/2007
GLOSSARY
Algae Small aquatic plants that occur as single cells, colonies, or filaments. May also be
referred to as phytoplankton, although phytoplankton are a subset of algae.
Algal biovolume The volume of all living algae in a unit area at a given point in time. To determine
biovolume, individual cells in a known amount of sample are counted. Cells are
measured to obtain their cell volume, which is used in calculating biovolume
Algal density The density of algae based on the number of units (single cells, filaments and/or
colonies) present in a milliliter of water. The severity of an algae bloom many be
determined by the algal density as follows:
Mild bloom = 20,000 to 30,000 units/ml
Severe bloom = 30,000 to 100,000 units/ml
Extreme bloom = Greater than 100,000 units/ml
Algal Growth A test to determine the nutrient that is the most limiting to the growth of algae in a body
Potential Test of water. The sample water is split such that one sub-sample is given additional
(AGPT) nitrogen, another is given phosphorus, a third may be given a combination of nitrogen
and phosphorus, and one sub-sample is not treated and acts as the control. A specific
species of algae is added to each sub-sample and is allowed to grow for a given period
of time. The dry weights of algae in each sub-sample and the control are then
measured to determine the rate of productivity in each treatment. The treatment
(nitrogen or phosphorus) with the greatest algal productivity is said to be the limiting
nutrient of the sample source. If the control sample has an algal dry weight greater
than 5 mg/L, the source water is considered to be unlimited for either nitrogen or
phosphorus.
Centric diatom Diatoms photosynthetic algae that have a siliceous skeleton (frustule) and are found in
almost every aquatic environment including fresh and marine waters, soils, in fact
almost anywhere moist. Centric diatoms are circular in shape and are often found in
the water column.
Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll a is an algal pigment that is used as an approximate measure of algal
biomass. The concentration of chlorophyll-a is used in the calculation of the NCTSI
,
and the value listed is a lake-wide average from all sampling locations.
Clinograde In productive lakes where oxygen levels drop to zero in the lower waters near the
bottom, the graphed changes in oxygen from the surface to the lake bottom produces
a curve known as clinograde curve.
Coccoid Round or spherical shaped cell
Conductivity This is a measure of the ability of water to conduct an electrical current. This measure
increases as water becomes more mineralized. The concentrations listed are the
range of values observed in surface readings from the sampling locations.
Dissolved oxygen The range of surface concentrations found at the sampling locations.
Dissolved oxygen The capacity of water to absorb oxygen gas. Often expressed as a percentage

saturation ,
the amount of oxygen that can dissolved into water will change depending on a
number of parameters, the most important being temperature. Dissolved oxygen
saturation is inversely proportion to temperature, that is, as temperature increases
,
water's capacity for oxygen will decrease, and vice versa.
Eutrophic Describes a lake with high plant productivity and low water transparency.
DvuQ Intensive Survey Unit 6 6129/2007
Eutrophication The process of physical, chemical, and biological changes associated with nutrient,
organic matter, and silt enrichment and sedimentation of a lake.
Limiting nutrient The plant nutrient present in lowest concentration relative to need limits growth such
that addition of the limiting nutrient will stimulate additional growth. In north temperate
lakes, phosphorus (P) is commonly the limiting nutrient for algal growth
Manganese A naturally occurring metal commonly found in soils and organic matter. As a trace
nutrient, manganese is essential to all forms of biological life. Manganese in lakes is
released from bottom sediments and enters the water column when the oxygen
concentration in the water near the lake bottom is extremely low or absent.
Manganese in lake water may cause taste and odor problems in drinking water and
require additional treatment of the raw water at water treatment facilities to alleviate
this problem.
Mesotrophic Describes a lake with moderate plant productivity and water transparency
NCTSI North Carolina Trophic State Index was specifically developed for North Carolina lakes
as part of the state's original Clean Lakes Classification Survey (NRCD 1982). It takes
the nutrients present along with chlorophyll a and Secchi depth to calculate a lake's
biological productivity.
Oligotrophic Describes a lake with low plant productivity and high water transparency.
pH The range of surface pH readings found at the sampling locations. This value is used
to express the relative acidity or alkalinity of water
Photic zone The portion of the water column in which there is sufficient light for algal growth. DWQ
considers 2 times the Secchi depth as depicting the photic zone.
Secchi depth This is a measure of water transparency expressed in meters. This parameter is used
in the calculation of the NCTSI value for the lake. The depth listed is an average value
from all sampling locations in the lake.
Temperature The range of surface temperatures found at the sampling locations.
Total Kjeldahl
nitrogen (TKN) The sum of organic nitrogen and ammonia in a water body. High measurements of
TKN typically results from sewage and manure discharges in water bodies

Total organic .
Total Organic Nitrogen (TON) can represent a major reservoir of nitrogen in
Nitrogen (TON) aquatic systems during summer months. Similar to phosphorus, this concentration can
be related to lake productivity and is used in the calculation of the NCTSI. The
concentration listed is a lake-wide average from all sampling stations and is calculated
by subtracting Ammonia concentrations from TKN concentrations.
Total phosphorus
(TP) Total phosphorus (TP) includes all forms of phosphorus that occur in water. This
t
i
nu
r
ent is essential for the growth of aquatic plants and is often the nutrient that limits
the growth of phytoplankton. It is used to calculate the NCTSI. The concentration
listed is a lake-wide average from all sampling stations.
Trophic state This is a relative description of the biological productivity of a lake based on the
calculated NCTSI value. Trophic states may range from extremely productive
(Hypereutrophic) to very low productivity (Oligotrophic)
Turbidity A measure of the ability of light to pass through a volume of water. Turbidity may be
influenced by suspended sediment and/or algae in the water.
Watershed A drainage area in which all land and water areas drain or flow toward a central
collector such as a stream, river, or lake at a lower elevation.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 7 6/29/2007
Overview
The Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin covers 7,213 square miles within 21 counties in North Carolina in the
mountain and piedmont regions. It is the second largest basin in the state. The river basin originates om the
eastern slope of the Blue Ridge Mountains in Caldwell and Wilkes counties. The Yadkin River lows
northeast for approximately 100 miles before turning southeast and joining with the Uwharrie River to form the
Pee Dee River. The Pee Dee River continues flowing southeast across the North Carolina-South Carolina
state line into South Carolina and to Winyah Bay.
Prior sampling in the Yadkin basin resulted in High Rock Lake, the upper portion of Tuckertown Lake and
Rockingham City Lake being listed as impaired. The upper portion of High Rock Lake below normal
operating level was impaired in 2004 for violations of the state water quality standards for turbidity, chlorophyll
a, and dissolved oxygen. The lower portion of High Rock Lake to the dam) is also listed as impaired for
turbidity. Data collected in 2005 and 2006 supported impairment of High Rock Lake based on elevated
turbidity and chlorophyll a values. The upper portion of Tuckertown Lake to the mouth of Cabin Creek was
placed on the 303(d) List in 2004 as impaired for low dissolved oxygen. The upper most DWQ ambient
sampling site is downstream of Cabin Creek, and dissolved oxygen values in this portion of the reservoir in
2006 were adequate. Rockingham City Lake was impaired in 1998 for aquatic weeds. A survey of the lake in
the early summer of 2006 determined that the lake is still impaired for aquatic plants.
Twenty-three reservoirs were sampled in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin between 1 January 2002 and 30
September 2006. In 2006, DWQ staff discovered Chinese Mystery Snails (Cipangopa/udina chinensis) in
Tuckertown Reservoir. These snails are a nonnative species commonly found in aquarium and pet stores.
Where they have become established in other parts of the United States, they have out competed native
snails for food and habitat. Also found in Tuckertown Reservoir and Badin Lake were mats of the fibrous blue
green alga, Lyngbya wollei. Lyngbya can form huge mats that impede swimming and boating and can greatly
reduce the aesthetic values of a lake where it has become established. The mats generally form on the lake
bottom but often come to the surface of the water where they may decay and produce a strong, offensive
odor. One lake, Lake Howell (Coddle Creek Reservoir), a water supply for Concord, was sampled for the first
time by DWQ in 2006.
Lakes Lee, Monroe and Twitty were identified in the 2006 Report to the Environmental Review Commission
on the Status of Water Quality in Water Supply Reservoirs Sampled by the Division of Water Quality as
needing additional sampling to better determine if these lakes should be listed as impaired. The 2006
sampling resulted in all three lakes are being listed as impaired based on exceedances of the chlorophyll a
standard.
The remaining 18 lakes sampled during 2006 were not rated due to insufficient sampling. However, six lakes
were identified as having potential problems and additional sampling on those lakes will be conducted as
resources become available. Those lakes are Salem, Fisher, Concord, Back Creek, Bunch and Badin.
Following the description of the assessment methodology used for the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin, there are
individual summaries for each of the lakes and Appendix A, a matrix that distills the information used to make
the lakes use support assessments. For further background information on a particular lake (including
sampling data), please go to http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/.
Assessment Methodology
For this report, data from January 1, 2002 through September 30, 2006 were reviewed. All lakes except High
Rock Lake were sampled only during the summer of 2006 from May through September. High Rock Lake
was sampled April 2005 through August of 2006. The extended sampling period was due to a special study
being conducted to better document current conditions in the reservoir and support development of a nutrient
model for the watershed. Data were assessed for excursions of the state's class C water quality standards
for chlorophyll-a, pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and surface metals. The water supply standards sampled
and evaluated were total suspended solids (TSS), nickel, manganese, chlorides and total hardness.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 8 6/29/2007
Other parameters discussed in this report include Secchi depth and percent dissolved oxygen saturation.
Secchi depth provides a measure of water clarity and is used in calculating the trophic or nutrient enriched
status of a lake. Percent dissolved oxygen saturation gives information on the amount of dissolved oxygen in
the water column and may be increased by photosynthesis.
On lakes without obvious segmentation or differences in hydrology and morphology between stations, all
samples taken on a particular sampling date regardless of station are treated as replicates and the average
concentration is used to determine if the standards are being met. Readings of pH are the only exception as it
is inappropriate to average pH values. For a lake such as High Rock Lake, which has very definite differences
between portions of the lake and has been given different assessment units based on hydrology and
morphology, results are averaged within the assessment unit. See the matrix in Appendix A for how the
stations are grouped.
A water quality standard is exceeded (denoted by CE in matrix) if data values are do not meet the state's
water quality standard for more than 10% of the samples where the sample size consists of ten or more
observations for the basinwide assessment period. Ideally, ten observations are needed to provide enough
data to reasonably interpret water quality conditions within the lake or reservoir. Fewer observations increase
the possibility of misinterpreting random unusual conditions as representative of ongoing water quality trends.
If the water quality standard is exceeded, either in less than 10% of the data collected during the assessment
period or if the sample observation size is less than ten for the basinwide assessment period, then the water
quality standard for that parameter is designated exceeded (E in the matrix).
Additional data considered as part of the use support assessment includes historic DWQ water quality data,
documented algal blooms and/or fish kills, problematic aquatic macrophytes, or listing on the EPA's 303(d)
List of Impaired Waters.
Lakes receive an overall rating of Supporting or Impaired when ten or more samples per water quality criteria
are collected for evaluation within the basinwide assessment period. Otherwise, the lake is considered as Not
Rated. The exception is for a lake listed on the 303(d) List of Impaired Waters or where additional data
indicates water quality problems not captured during sampling. These lakes are listed as Impaired along with
the reason for the impairment.
A more complete discussion of lake ecology and assessment can be found at http://Www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/.
The 1990 North Carolina Lake Assessment Report (downloadable from this website) contains a detailed
chapter on ecological concepts that clarifies how the parameters discussed in this review related to water
quality and reservoir health.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 9 6/29/2007
Assessments by Subbasin
Subbasin 030701
W. Kerr Scott Reservoir
Construction of W. Kerr Scott Reservoir took
place between 1960 and 1962. The project was
open for public use in 1963. Located in the
foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, this
reservoir is within the Mountain ecoregion of the
state.
Nutrient concentrations in 2006 were similar to those observed since 1981. Total phosphorus values were
low and within range of concentrations to be expected in lakes located in the Mountain ecoregion. Total
organic nitrogen and total Kjeldahl nitrogen ranged from low to moderate while ammonia and nitrite + nitrate
values were generally low, with the exception of values measured in May, 2006. Nitrite + nitrate
concentrations at all three lake sampling sites on May 23, 2006 were very elevated. This was more likely due
to the availability of nitrogen in the system in the spring prior to an increase in the phytoplankton community
as suggested by the low chlorophyll a concentrations in May as compared with increasing concentrations in
July through September. In response to the available nutrients, lake-wide chlorophyll a values were greater
than the state water quality standard of 15 pg/L for Trout Waters at YAD007A in August and at all three lake
sampling sites in September (Appendix B).
W. Kerr Scott Reservoir was consistently mesotrophic (moderate biological productivity) in 2006 based on the
calculated NCTSI scores. Historically, this reservoir has ranged between mesotrophic and oligotrophic (very
low biological productivity) since 1981. Because this lake was sampled eight times during this evaluation
period (less than 10 trips for evaluation of rating status), W. Kerr Scott Reservoir was designated as Not
Rated.
Repair work on the swimming beach began in mid-December 2006 with the lowering of the lake water level to
near elevation 1026 ft mean sea level (msl). Repair work was completed in January 2007 and the return to
normal pool level (1030 ft msl) was expected to occur within four to six weeks. There were no complaints
received by the Army Corps of Engineers regarding the drawdown of the reservoir, and some permit holders
used the opportunity to repair their docks.
Additional sampling may be performed in this reservoir during the High Rock Lake TMDL special sampling
beginning in 2007.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 10
6/29/2007
Subbasin 030704
Salem Lake
Salem Lake is located in the municipality of Winston-
Salem. Created in 1919, this small reservoir serves
as the water supply source for the city. Salem Lake
provides water to eastern and southeastern Winston-
Salem as well as serving as a reserve water basin for
the Yadkin River
(hftp://www.citvofws.org/Assets/City0f\NS//Document
s/departments/utilities/pdf files/Water%20Division%2
00perations2.pdf). DWQ monitored Salem Lake five
times in 2006 (May through September).
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25.000
¦ 20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
Figure 1. Phytoplankton Groups of Salem Lake, Summer 2006
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 11 6/29/2007
YADU17A YAD077A YAD077A YAD077B YAD077B YAD077B YAD077B YAD077B
May 3 June6 July 10 Aug 14 Sept 12 May 3 June6 July 10 Aug 14 Sept 12
Total phosphorus and total organic nitrogen generally ranged from moderate to elevated throughout the
reservoir. Chlorophyll a values in Salem Lake ranged from moderate to elevated in 2006 with values in the
Lowery Creek Arm (YAD077B) and Kerners Mill Creek Arm (YAD077A) greater than the state water quality
standard of 40 pg/L in July and August. Algal blooms were observed from June through September in the
arms of Salem Lake. In May and August, the pinnate diatom, Nitzschia, was common. The prymnesiophyte
Chrysochromulina was the most common genus throughout the summer and the filamentous blue green alga
Cylindrospermopsis was common in September (Figure 1)
Based on the calculated NCTSI scores, Salem Lake was determined to be eutrophic in 2006. Trophic scores
were similar to those previously calculated by DWQ for this small reservoir since 1981. The elevated
chlorophyll a values and depressed dissolved oxygen concentrations indicate that there may be problems at
this lake. Additional sampling is warranted as resources become available.
Winston Lake
Winston Lake is a small reservoir located in the
City of Winston-Salem. The lake was built in 1919
as a water supply source but is no longer used for
that purpose. The lake is currently used for non-
contact recreation such as fishing.
One station was sampled in Winston Lake by
DWQ five times from May through September of
2006. Dissolved oxygen and pH measurements
were within state water quality standards during
the sampling period. One of five (20%) of the
dissolved oxygen saturation values was above
120% saturation. The dissolved oxygen saturation
found was 125% saturation on August 10, 2006.
This indicates that significant algal activity
(production of dissolved oxygen by algae) was occurring in the lake.
Nutrient concentrations were generally moderate to elevated in Winston Lake in 2006. The highest nutrient
values were generally found for total organic nitrogen, nitrite + nitrate, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (Appendix
B). Total phosphorus was generally found in more moderate amounts. No chlorophyll a values were above
the state water quality standard of 40 pg/L. Trophic state analyses indicated that Winston Lake is a
biologically productive lake with a 2006 average NCTSI score placing the lake in the eutrophic category.
Surface metals in Winston Lake were within applicable state water quality standards with the exception of
iron. Iron was found to be greater than the state water quality action level of 1000 pg/L in 60% of the samples
collected. Iron values ranged from 660 pg/L to 1600 pg/L in 2006. Iron is present in naturally occurring high
amounts in local soils. Field notes indicated that Winston Lake was very shallow and frequently had high
turbidity levels, especially after a rain. These high iron values may be due to re-suspension of bottom
sediments due to wind mixing along with nonpoint source runoff from iron rich soils upstream in the
watershed.
Winston Lake appears to be supporting its aquatic life designated uses at this time.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 12
6/29/2007
High Rock Lake
High Rock Lake, built in 1927, is in the Yadkin River
High Rock Lake is separated into four assessment units. Sampling stations are established in each of these
units (Appendix A). The lake was sampled from August 2004 through September 2006. Three of the four
assessment units were sampled 22 times and the remaining assessment unit was sampled 19 times during
the sampling period (Appendix A).
At two locations (one the middle of the main stem of the lake and the other near the dam), thermisters
(programmed temperature recorders) documented temperature profiles. These devices were deployed at
three lake sampling sites (YAD169F, YAD152A, and in the Abbots Creek Arm from March through November
2005. These thermisters were programmed to record water temperatures every two hours. At YAD152A
where water depth is shallow, data showed little stratification. However, at the dam location (YAD169F)
where water depths are much deeper, stratification layers are particularly evident in the warmer months and
less so during cooler months.
Surface water temperature was greater than the state water quality standard of 32 °C (89.6 °F) in the main
body of High Rock Lake and the Second Creek arm on July 19, August 16, 2005 and August 1, 2006 (August
2, 2006 for the Second Creek arm sampling site). Air temperatures on the days preceding sampling and on
these sampling dates were in the low to mid 90's (32 to 35 °C). These high ambient air temperatures may
have assisted in the warming of the lake water and producing the surface water temperature excursions
observed. Sampling was conducted between 11 AM and 2 PM, times of day when temperatures are the
highest and the air is usually the calmest. Water temperatures dropped below the standard of 32 °C at a
depth of one meter from the surface. As there remained sufficient cooler water (temperatures measured at 1
meter and deeper were all below the temperature maximum) to support fish populations, these elevated
temperatures are not considered sufficient to result in impairment of aquatic life.
Surface dissolved oxygen levels did not exceed state water quality standards during the sampling period;
however, surface dissolved oxygen values were elevated during the warm months. These high values were
consistent with previous data. Surface pH values in three of the four assessment units did exceed the state
water quality standard of 9.0 s.u. (Appendix A & B). Again, pH was consistent with previous sampling events
data. A predictable warm weather relationship between elevated dissolved oxygen, pH values, and algal
growth was observed. Warmer temperatures during summer speed up the rates of photosynthesis. During
photosynthesis carbon dioxide is taken up, increasing the pH values. Oxygen is produced and released into
the water, increasing dissolved oxygen levels.
Turbidity in three of the four assessment units exceeded the state water quality standard of 25 NTU for lakes.
The elevated turbidity values corresponded with low Secchi depths (which ranged from 0.1 to 1.4 meters),
DVVQ Intensive Survey Unit 13 6/29/2007
and observations of extremely orange to brown water color. Secchi depths were similar to those observed in
the past.
Nutrient levels in High Rock Lake varied greatly and tended to be elevated. Chlorophyll a values ranged from
low to elevated. Chlorophyll a values did exceed the state water quality standard of 40 Ng/L during more than
10% of sampling events, in all four assessment units (Appendix A). Mean chlorophyll a values from May
through September 2006 were greater than 40 pg/L at eight of the 11 lake sampling sites (Figure 2)
60
50
J
Of
3
40
s
0 30
0
t
U 20
c
m
10
0
Figure 2. Mean chlorophyll a values by sampling station for May through September, 2006
With the assistance of EPA's Athens Laboratory, Algal Growth Potential Tests (AGPT) were conducted at six
stations on the lake. Algal growth potential tests are used to determine the potential of the water body to
grow algae and the nutrient that is controlling algal growth. Tests indicated nitrogen was the predominate
limiting nutrient controlling algal growth in High Rock Lake for samples taken June 15, 2005 and July 19,
2006. (Figures 3a and 3b).
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 14
6/29/2007
N? o?
X
A QOM yQ0 41P Alp -k N
Dam
Sampling Site
40 , --
32.8 32 2
30
J
01
E
20
.?
L
0
10
0
OCOntr01
C+N
OC+P
56
i 2 6 2.7 ,- 2.1 2.3 3.3
?? - &-
YAD169F YAD169A
Station
30 3
Figure 3a. Results of the Algal Growth Potential Test, June 15, 2005
40
30
J
Of
E
= 20
A
0
10
0
36.4
In 2004, algae samples were collected for the basinwide assessment program. In 2005 and 2006, algae
samples were collected as part of a scoping study for the Modeling Unit in DWQ's Planning Section.
Phytoplankton assemblages were characterized at four stations for three consecutive months in 2004 and at
five stations every other month for a total of six times in 2005 and 2006 (Table 1).
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 15
6/29/2007
YAD152A
YAD1391A YAD152C
YAD156A
YAD169B
Table 1. Locations of Algal Samples Including Station Description and Years Characterized.
Station Code Station Description Year Characterized
YAD1391A HIGH ROCK LAKE UPSTREAM S POTTS CK NR LINWOOD, NC 2005
YAD152A HIGH ROCK LAKE AT MOUTH OF TOWN CK 2006
YAD152C HIGH ROCK LAKE NEAR ROCKWELL, NC 2004, 2005 & 2006
HRL052 ABBOTTS CREEK ABOVE HOLLYWAY CHURCH RD BRIDGE 2005, 2006
YAD169A ABBOTTS CREEK AT NC HWY 8 NEAR COTTON GROVE, NC 2004
YAD1561A SECOND CREEK AT SR 1002 NEAR LIBERTY, NC 2006
YAD156A SECOND CREEK AT MOUTH NEAR GRANITE QUARRY, NC 2004
YAD169B HIGH ROCK LAKE UPSTREAM OF PANTHER CREEK 2004
YAD169E HIGH ROCK LAKE AT MOUTH OF FLAT SWAMP CREEK 2004, 2006
YAD169F HIGH ROCK LAKE NEAR HIGH ROCK, NC 2004, 2005 & 2006
Algal densities and assemblage structure in High Rock Lake fluctuated over time with highest densities
occurring during the summer growing season of May through September. Densities in most sections of the
lake were comparable with severe to extreme blooms occurring at all stations during this time (Figure 4).
Severe algae blooms range between 30,000 to 1000,000 units/ml. Extreme blooms are those that are greater
than 100,000 units/ml. The most upper station, YAD1391A, where samples contained a lot of sediment and
reflected a riparian environment was the only location that did not experience blooms (Figure 5). Blue greens
overwhelmingly dominated the algal assemblages in 88% of the samples collected during the May through
September period (Appendix C). The majority (31%) of the blooms were dominated by the blue green alga,
Pseudanabaena sp., which comprised up to 63% of the assemblage.
Blue green blooms may discolor water, cause taste and odor problems in processed drinking water, and are
common indicators of eutrophication. Pseudanabaena is arguably the most common alga found in large
North Carolina reservoirs. It is relatively small (cells < 2x5µm), often forms extreme blooms that, unlike other
blue greens, inhabit the complete photic zone as opposed to collecting at the surface. Pseudanabaena can
fix atmospheric nitrogen (N2) into a biologically usable form (nitrate/nitrite or NOJ Other filamentous blue
greens found in the lake, such as Cylindrospermopsis, are documented in other locations as producing toxins.
There have been no reported health problems associated with blue greens in North Carolina.
On August 23, 2006, a surface bloom of Euglena sp. was observed in the main channel of High Rock Lake
between Crane Creek and Swearing Creek. Analysis of samples collected at this site confirmed the presence
of the bloom. Euglena sp. can vary in color and, in this particular case, a dark red euglenoid was dominant.
Euglena sp. commonly ball up and form cysts when under stress making them difficult to identify (Figures 6a
and 6b). Euglena blooms are often found on the surface of still waters that have a high organic nutrient
content. These blooms may give the water a characteristic red or green surface sheen and a fishy odor.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 16 6/29/2007

YAD1391A
Year 2005
N 4
Avg. 5,000
r?

Max.
7,000 x

Min.
1,000 k,

K,

? YAD152A
HRL051 .
No algal data Year 2006

J N 2
i Avg. 56,000
Max. 90,000
_' - YAD152 22,000
- No algal data
12-11 8.6
H R L052
I
I ,
i
Year 2005 2006
N 3 2
Avg. 60,000 78,000
Max. 76,000 123,000
Min. 42,000 32,000
•

YAD152C
Year 2004 2005 2006
N 2 4 2
Avg. 49,000 33,000 44,000
Max. 52,000 77,000 52,000
Min. 46,000 14,000 37,000
I YAD156A I
Year 2004
N 3
Avg. 59,000
Max. 98,000
Min. 23,000
• • • •'`gssessment Units Boundaries
YAD169A
Year 2004
N 3
Avg. 71,000
Max. 139,000
Min. 25,000

?'. 12-(114)
IT
7-(3)?
/ -z
YAD169E
Year 2004 2006
N 1 2
Avg. N/A 90,000
Max. 18,000 142,000
Min. N/A 39,000

J YAD1561A YAD169B
Year 2006 Year 2004
N 2 N 3
Avg. 85,000 Avg. 79 000
Max. 120,000 Max. 116,000
Min. 51,000 Min. 20,000
YAD169F
Year 2004 2005 2006
N 3 5 2
Avg. 69,000 48,000 77,000
Max. 102,000 95,000 115,000
Min. 19,000 11,000, 37,000
Figure 4. Average Densities of Algae in High Rock Lake from May to September 2006
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 17
6/29/2007

Figure o. Digital images of samples collected on 9/21/05 (200X magnification).
On the left is the sample collected from station YAD1391A. Note that it is full of sediment in comparison to the
relatively clear sample collected from station YAD169F on the right.
Figure 6. Magnified Image of Euglena sp. (a) and Euglena sp. forming a cyst (b).
High Rock Lake was consistently eutrophic (very high biological productivity) during the sampling period,
based on the NCTSI calculations. This is consistent with monitoring that has taken place since 1981. The
uses of High Rock Lake were determined to be impaired due to elevated chlorophyll a, turbidity and pH
(Appendix A).
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 18
6!29!2007
Subbasin 030707
Lake Thom-A-Lex
Lake Thom-A-Lex is located near the Cities of
Lexington and Thomasville. The lake was built in
1957 as a drinking water supply for these two
cities. The watershed draining to the lake is
primarily composed of commercial and urban
areas.
The lake-wide average chlorophyll a values for the summer of 2006 ranged from 21 pg/L to 50 pg/L. The
state chlorophyll a standard (40 ug/L) was exceeded during August and September and chlorophyll levels
were elevated (> 20 ug/L) during May and July. Forty percent of lake-wide average chlorophyll a values were
greater than the state water quality standard of 40 jig/L, indicating elevated biological productivity by algae
(Appendix A). Severe blooms were observed from May through July. Extreme blooms occurred during
August and September (50 pg/L). Staff field notes indicated that the lake water had a brown coloration in
2006 that impacted the aesthetics of the lake. Surface mats, scums or flecks were not observed in the lake at
the time of the algal blooms.
Algal densities at the sampling site near the dam (YAD1611A) ranged from 40,000 to 214,000 units/ ml (Table
2). Blooms were comprised of the prymnesiophyte Chrysochromulina and the filamentous blue green
Cylindrospermopsis during early summer (Figure 7). Blooms during July-September were comprised of
Cylindrospermopsis. Chrysochromulina is sometimes associated with elevated chlorophyll concentrations
and taste and odor problems in processed drinking water. Filamentous blue greens frequently bloom in local
freshwaters during mid to late summer and are often associated with eutrophication. They are also
associated with taste and odor problems in processed drinking water. Cylindrospermopsis is known to be
toxic elsewhere in the world, but there have been no reported health problems associated with this alga in
North Carolina
Surface metals in Lake Thom-A-Lex were within applicable state water quality standards.
Trophic state analyses confirmed that Lake Thom-A-Lex is a biologically productive lake with a 2006 average
NCTSI score placing the lake in the eutrophic category. Lake Thom-A-Lex appears to be supporting its
designated use as a secondary water supply at this time although insufficient data is available to rate it. The
eutrophic conditions found in the lake also warrant cause for future concern and monitoring.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 19
6/29/2007

Table 2. Chlorophyll a, Phytoplankton Densities and Common Algae at the Lake Thom-a-Lex
DWQ Sampling Site Near the Dam, 2006
Chia - It ]nit nanRitl/)
4-May-06 25 51,000 Blue green, Pr mnesio h to C lindros e
20-Jun-06 18 40,000 Blue green, Pr mnesio h to C lindros e
12-Jul-06 32 68,000 Blue green c
10-Au -06 52 179,000 Blue green C
12-Sep-06 45 214,000 Blue preen r.
35,000
30,000
E 25,000
cm
iA 20,000
c
d
c
0
15,000
m
CL
0
M
M
a 10,000
5,000
0
--Y zu-jun Date 12-Jul 10-Aug 12-Sep
Figure 7. Lake Thom-A-Lex Algae Groups at YAD1611A in 2006. Densities are labeled for blue green
algae.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit 20
6/29/2007

APPENDIX A. YADKIN-PEE DEE RIVER BASIN LAKES USE ASSESSMENT MATRIX
: 030701 030704 030704

s e
&
W. Kerr Scott Reservoir
Salem Lake
Winston Lake
!%
) Eutrophic Eutrophic
) 12.0 5,5 2
5
volume (10°m') 189.0 08 .

W
t
h
l 0.03
a
ers
ed Area (mi
) 347.5 25.5 6
6

Assessment Unit Name Yadkin River Kerr
Scott Reservoir ir below
Elevation 1030) Salem Creek(Middle Fork

Muddy Creek, Salem Lake) .
Frazier Creek
(Winston
Lake)

Classification WS-IVB Tr WS-III C
A
ssessment Unit 12-(27.5) 12-94-12-(1) 12-94-12-6-1
Stations in Assessment Unit YAD007A, YAD008,
YAD008A YAD077A, YAD077B,
YAD077C
YAD077D
N
b
f
um
er o
Sampling Trips 8 5 5
water quality Standards
Chloro
h
ll a
p
y >40 ug/L E (20%) E (40%) NCE
Dissolved Ox
e
yg
n <4.0 mg/L NCE
NCE
NCE
pH
<6 s.u. or > 9 s u. NCE NCE
NCE
Turbidit
y >25 NTU
NCE
NCE
NCE
Tem
er
t >29°C Mountains and Upper Piedmont
p
a
ure >32°C Piedmont E (13%) NCE NCE

Metals 15A NCAC 2B.0211
ND
E (Mn - 100%)•
NCE

Other Data
% Saturation DO
>120°% N
N
Y (20%)
Algae

Fish Documented blooms during 2 or more sampling
events in 1 year with historic blooms
N
N
N

Chemically/Biologically Kills related to eutrophication

algal or macro
h
te
t N
N
N
p
y
con
rol - either
icals or biolo icall
g y by fish, etc.
nted sheens
discolorati
t
N
N
N

TSI ,
on, e
c. - written
mplaint and follow-up by a state
Increase of 2 tro
hic l
l
f
N
N
N

Historic D4%'O Data

30 tdl

aGPT

Aacrophytes

aste and Odor

ediments n p
eve
s
romone 5-yr period to next
Conclusions trom other reports
(link to other reports)
Listed on susidl (year listed]
Algal Growth Potential Test 5-9 mg/L = concern
10 mg/L or more = problematic
Limiting access to public ramps, docks,
swimming areas; reducing access by fish and
other aquatic life to habitat
Public complaints or taste and odor causing
algal species are dominant
Clogging intakes -dredging program
ecessary Fre uent bl" / N

N
N

NR

N

N N

N

N

NR

N

N N
"--- ----
N

N

NR

N

N
I H. is agency complaints - N
visual observation N N
Rating: NR NR NR
E =Criteria exceeded but N<10 (full key on last page of this appendix)
NR = Not rated. Not Rated is used where there are <10 samples & Other Data indicate potential problems.
'W Kerr Scott Reservoir is located in the Mountains Region of the state therefore the >29°C is applicable. All other Yadkin lakes are in Piedmont.
' Mn (Manganese) concentrations are probably related to the high organic carbon present due to the algal blooms and is not considered to be distinct from the
chlorophyll-a violation. Addressing algal blooms should result in decreased Mn concentrations. There are no point sources of Mn in the watershed
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit
A - 1 6/29/2007
6 a ? %
APPENDIX A. YADKIN-PEE DEE RIVER BASIN LAKES USE ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Subbasin: 030707 030708
Lakes Ambient Program Name Lake Thom-A-Lex Tuckertown
Badin Lake Lake Tillery
Trophic Status (NC TSI) Eutrophic Eutro hic
P Eutrophic Eutrophic
Mean Depth (meters)
Volume (10°
') 8.0 10.0 14.0 7.2
m 7.8 297.5 3440 166
0
Watershed Area (mil) 39.4 4120.0 4116.0 .
4834
0
.
Abbots Creek
(including

Assessment Unit Name Lexington-
Thomasville Water
Supply Reservoir at
normal reservoir
elevation, Lake Yadkin River
(including lower
portion of
Tuckertown Lake)
Yadkin River
(including Badin
Lake)
Pee Dee River (including Lake
Tillery below normal operating
levels)
Thom-A-Lex)
Classification WS

Assessment Unit -II CA
12
11 WS-IV B CA WS-IV B CA WS-IV B CA
-
9-(4.5)
YAD 12-(124.5)c 12-(1245)d 13-(1)
Stations in Assessment Unit 16013,
YAD1611A YAD172C, YAD1780A YAD178B, YAD178E,
YAD178F,YAD178F1 YAD185A, YAD189, YAD189B,
YAD189C
Number of Sam lin TrI s 8 5 6
4
Water Quality Standards
Chlorophyll a >40 ug/L
Dissolved Oxygen <4
0 mg/L E (40%) E (40%) NCE
NCE
.
H
<6 s.u. or > 9 s.u. NCE
NCE NCE
NCE NCE NCE

Turbidity >25 NTU
NCE
NCE NCE
NCE
NCE

emperature >32°C Piedmont
NCE
NCE
NCE NCE
Metals
15A NCAC 2B .0211
NCE
NCE

NCE NCE
NCE
Other Data
% Saturation DO >120% N Y (40%) N
Documented blooms during 2 or N
Algae more sampling events in 1 year with N Y (Lyngbia woolei Y (Lyngbia woo/el mats
historic blooms mats reported by staff) reported by staff) N
Fish Kills related to eutrophication N N
For algal or macroPhYto control -
hemically/Biologically N N
reated either chemicals or biologically by N N

fish, etc. N
N
Documented sheens, discoloration,
Aesthetics complaints etc. -written complaint and f
ll
p
Y
L
o
ow-u
by a state N mats reported by (
yngbia wcdei mats
N
public) reported by public)
SI Increase of 2 trophic levels from one
5-yr period to next N N N N
HIStOrlr CWt? C3tz COnC?_i5i0n5 from Other reports
(link to other remits) N N

303(d) Listed on 303(d) [year listea]
N PJ

Algal Growth Potential Test 5-9 N N

N
AGPT mg/L = concern NR
NR
10 mg/L or more = problematic NR NR
Limiting access to public ramps,
Macrophytes docks, swimming areas; reducing
access by fish and other aquatic life N Y N

to habitat N
Taste and Odor Public complaints or taste and odor
causing algal species are dominant N N N

Clogging intakes - dredging N
Sediments program necessary ; Frequent
public/agency complaints - visual N N N

observation N
Rating: NR NR NR
NR
E =Criteria exceeded but N<10 (full key on last page of this appendix)
NR = Not rated. Not Rated is used where there are <10 sa
l
mp
es & Cther Data in dicate potential problems.
DWQ Intensive Survey Unit A-3
6/29/2007
6 s I s
C
N
N Y
a E y
A
F- E v
QQ E 00 O
L z
z
,W
vI
(n c
w C F
N U m
N >
a vyi tq
W U
N
w
g
z
a
m a
y N
W 1
W
W
0
W
W
0C
Z W
Y w
J O
W y
K a C
W 'o
Z Y Ul
w
a
a
a
C A
O
d ?
? e
¦
N I
? I
E'
U'
t
'e
c
O
m
U -
4: S
N ?
N
N
U
? r
a4
N
d ?
J
W
J
a
c
O
v

v m
l0 - C?
m
'V
N
m
N o N co
N N Z
OU
9 J
? O
o ?
v 0
v n
0 LO
n 0 U
t
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
- M Z

y tj
O
O --
O - - -- - --
LL N co ti co
N
L
U
A Z
u
1 J u0'? o
00

?
q O
O
M co N N N O
1
- - - - - - - - - - -

1 J
• - - - - - - - - - - -
Q
1

1
- - - - - - - - - - - - 2

9 J
O
O
O - - - -
O - - - -
O - -
i U v v v IN v l1 U

U7
U v IN N V 04 In U
v 2
M J O O 0

U
V
v O
v O
n
C
1
2
V
o ° °
2
y
V
V o
L
O
U
Z
a o O

IL
m
v
-
V o
-
V
v 0 o
V W
- - - - - - - - - - Z

c J
0
° - - - - - - - - -

N
v
V 0 0
v O
v W
n U
2

co n co M o 0 o r
N
W
Z O) co n c o r? r V ( C In M w
m m
ro M i c 0
ri ro (O n W
` ?' U
? - - - ? v v ( d u i 2

N
N -
w a -
W -
N -
0 -
N -
0 -
0 -
° - -
W N -
co - -
0 - - - - -
W
f. Q) w q n 0 m q ( 0 6 O V - w (d co
V Y 1 N
I (0 N
R O
c ((
0 ( 1
d 0 U

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Z
J-

V

V

N

ryry
N
M

V

c

M

N

N

N
(
N O in
W

e e
(p co co
co LO rn m In
0) ro m
m

C,
CN 'q In (n In n
2
a

U In I

N n

N O

N n

N o (

N o

N
r
N
N
?
?-
'
O)
n
r-
O p (
A (M
a-
(D
W
ac
O)
V
N
N N
N N
N
N
N d'

N 01

.- 6 6 0 Lo U

Z
3
0 (0 N O 01 O O m r

D

m

u

(d

s

d

(d r (

ao p I

p n

v 'Q

ro Q) (

N N l0 O
r
(O 0A
W
U
i I - r o 0) ad cd
2

c
e Q m U
a

B

m

U
QQ

m

U Q
m
U
Q
m

U
u
W

E

o

S o

o n

b j p g ? m

0 ° °

0
1
W
U
42 > d Q
rr d
i
>
<
w
r r
(p O
O o
O
N N O
N pM O
0 0 (
0 0
N N 0 4 O o

(NV 0
'
D '
D

00
O

O
?6 'O V z v N N N N N ON N
O L?

E E n

E _ 0 0 o m

c
c
c

o
(
c 6 c? (o co
' ' ? » ? l
? X1 1
i c¢ ¢
c o
n t o
R
O
Ill
U
Q
U
Z
c_
a
U
0
v
`m
OO
N
X
w
N
10
v
U
a
E
0
C
0 ,2
v
C C
7 N
N
N x
f? N
20
U j
O M
co
o.
m a
5 m
M L
10
Ul
aE -?
y E
0.0
a
o?
c
L ?
v.
v c0 ?
O X
N w
x
aw W 0a)
N
10U
O
?-Z
U if
C) w
11
wUz
w
Y
t-
o
N
01
N
ib
N
m
C
D
7
CID
.O
c
O
6 < .. ,
C
•
O
3 c7. ?, ? n

N
-?
o
E

O
v

?

?in? V
I (o
W

2
U i

`J o
c
0 o
O
Q cr,
Li o
'Ki
AIL. iii U 1

c rn U
f" ? 2
z _ 4
W N O
(,f c', `-
N r O

V

IU W

U
C
G c v N
.+j v? cJ
v C
v Z
U) v
E
U) E J Cc, , u: " D w

U) U
IA 3-j O
O
O
O
W
Q U ,
v
C `?
'
v ? Z

uj o

Z of cl

V 'J V o

';
V 10
U
M
J i z

LU
Y O
C -J
O
O O
O
O
W
i
?
?
c ?
?o
oco W
Z U J'?
Al v Z
i

?
U ? iin'?IO
v «, U
z

W
7
Q O
F
0
Q
o

O
i to o

ro M O O
\

O
Qom,
W N a >
W

Z a N n rnr l
z

D E

?- U N J u: r7 C (n U

m w N CJ N z
x J C

Y Z O

D ,- N
n U
Z m0
z
?
W ?
-
IL

a 3 m
c c
o
L{
W
Cl) W
y r y

n
1
00 f°o
01
N
-? CV
J
I,
O:w JL'M
E
>-
UL j Li
a,
w
C
E
E
O
U
C
O
co
U
N U
N?
(o _
U
d
n
I
w
Q
N
Y O
J H
w
Y
g
Z
00
52
M w
a
-
C
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O
_ co co Ln
co

O M N N T V V V O Z
J p
O

L E
v n
oll
v
v co
v
c
o

t °

LL cr.

?

N

v O

m

U
? N Z
C J ° co O
° o
U
o
2
'O - ? O O O O O

U
v
v
v
v

V
N

V O

N O
N O
N
N W

U
v V V
Z
J
o N

v y

v )

v Lc

v )

v
I
N
v
n N Ln

v

a0 w

U
V z
3 J O O O O
U V 0 4 v v O o OD
N co
W
v N z
J

v
o
v v v v v v O

o
0
0
0 Z
d

V

v

v

V 0

V
O
v
p o

O W

J
O

°

°

o

o V

V

z
N _ _ _ 0 0
°
w
v z
oo m °w o 0o m °
o `° o °•
O ° ry v m (o om WR w
N ( I- m In n I- to m m m ?- m

J
(n

E
O

N

o
M
N

m
N

i,
n
0

o
0
0
0

o
M
p

o

c

n

o

m

n

°

o

W
a u
i m (
o co 2

U
?o
u
Lo
7 V P
N
(n O

?

m
N
c, N
v
N
m
??
m
m
In
u? o

O
M ? N N M ? ?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - w
- - - - - - - - - - - -
F
Q
n
n
?D o
U
I
(7 o
O
N
N
gl a
N o
co 0
o 0
V 0
m a?
N 0
(O 0 0 0 0 0
(0`, (n n

o p
p
Ol ° n

m m

o m

m O

° (O

rn

off, O

o

o o r r (O

o M M

o 00 co
U
a 2
_ =
a rri rn
r-
co v
co i?
m v
f? u;
I' N o
o N m n co (o (o v ° W

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

- ?

-

- c
m
--

- c0

- co

-

- co

- a) oo c6 OD c0 U
Z

O_ - - - - - - --

F-
U (C,

ui cD

ui n

ui lfJ

rn i?

o
(D
ai
I
r
u?
n
:
v'J N
M
N
V
o
0
V
M
o
M
tO

w

N
N
N
N
N
N _
N r_
N r
N m o
N N pppp
(V
N
N
N
N 6
N
N
N m
N
N
N
N cc)
U
. Z
Q J
E
O O
m
co ?-

ro O m

i? tt

t` i?

i?

r? R

(
ic0-"I(,
1--,
n
t;
In
m
o
o
M
(f')

o
O
(D
O,
c
7
W
N
N
W
m c m ro m au o m od co
U
z
o) c mo a O Q o Q co Q
CD m
o a m Q m Q m Q O
(E
a O 0 p 0 p p p p
n
2 V
(n y y > } > <
y y a } a Q ¢ a k
W
y y y y y y y }
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
a
N ON o 0OO O 0 0 N O O O ( (] o o p
` O N 0
ON
N N N
N
04
O
O
°
o
m
0 f 2 8 ° N r pp
c V V p o
E . o N
c m >
a w
? m > m
in (°n a s A ¢ a3
O
m
U
U
Z
c
N
'O
U
C
0
c
v
5
W
X
w
m
ru
N
O
N
m
N
6
m
E
m
0
0
O M
A
c m
C) -2
v 10
c ?c
0
-00
O -a
al
N
X
N 0
v o
0.j
O ?
w0
c Q
E °-
N
? m
-C
m
w m
on
o 2
°
w
C ?
Y
v E
12
C 0
(D
m v c
-0
(UNw D
v Q{ m T
0w 2
N m 3
? ) UO
m )
V1w c
w
wUZ c
}
Y p
BOTTOMLESS CULVERT & GEOLOGIC INFORMATION
Because of our intent to use bottomless culverts as our stream crossing structures,
additional information has been requested regarding the geology of the Lissara property,
specifically, in the areas of the two proposed bottomless culverts which shall be utilized as
stream crossings. In August of 2007, Soil and Environmental Consultants, PA, conducted a
site soil investigation and determined that particular soil types encountered within the
project area are consistent with soils typically found in layers above bedrock formations of
gneiss. The Federal Highway Administration, Hydraulics Engineering Division, assigns
their highest Rock Quality Designation number (RQD) to gneiss as well as certain other
igneous and metamorphic rocks which exhibit high strength characteristics and a
resistance to scour as related to continuos exposure to stream flows. Ms. Sue Homewood's
internal DWQ correspondence of March 6, 2008 noted that "The upper portion of the
stream, (where the stream crossings occur), is a step-pool stream with bedrock and boulder
substrate". Outcroppings of gneiss and associated float material along the stream banks
and within the stream itself are easily observed by the trained professional.
Prior to design and construction of footings as may be required for the installation of
bottomless culverts in these stream crossing areas, subsurface investigations will be
performed and data will be analyzed by a professional engineering consulting firm with
expertise in these types of footing designs and our proposed stream crossing structure.
Footing designs and crossing construction details will be in accordance with any and all
applicable Federal, State and Municipal ordinances or design criteria as necessary.