Nora DeamerDWQ

919-807-6431nora.deamer@ncdenr.gov

http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu

What is Degrading our Urban Piedmont Streams?

DWQ Water Quality Assessment

17 Major River Basins in NC

DWQ Water Quality AssessmentEvery two years – determine how well our

water bodies supports their designated uses.

Designated uses are bases on stream classificationsClass C – Protection and propagation of aquatic

life; Fish consumption; Secondary Recreation

Class B – Recreation (Swimming)Class WS – Water SupplyOthers (Tr, ORW, HQW, SA)

DWQ Water Quality AssessmentUse Support Ratings

Supporting – No criteria exceededImpaired – Criteria exceededNot Rated – Inconclusive

information/data No Data – No assessment made

Produce an Integrated Report (303(d)/305(b)) (The NC 2012 303(d) impaired waters list is

currently out for public comment. NC is required to submit the 2012 list to the US EPA by April 1st)

Impacts of UrbanizationDecreased Vegetative cover Riparian buffer zones Soil infiltration Water Quality Aquatic Habitat Groundwater base flow

rates Drought stream flow

rates

Increased Impervious surface Runoff volume Runoff velocity Stream bank erosion Stream

channelization Soil disturbance Soil compaction

http://www.connectedwater.gov.au/processes/controlling.html

Water Quality Impacts of Urbanization

Increased Stream bank erosion Sedimentation\Turbidity Water temperatures Conductivity Pollutant Concentrations

(nutrients, pesticides, oils, metals)

Bacterial loading (animal and human waste)

Algal/Periphytic growth Water supply treatment

cost

Decreased Aquatic habitat Aquatic

biodiversity Aquatic health &

reproduction Dissolved Oxygen pH

What Can You Do To Reduce Stormwater Pollution?

Divert roof drains to vegetated areas

Use rain barrels/cisterns

Convert lawns to natural area

Vegetate bare areasUse environmentally

friendly lawn careKeep storm drains cleanInspect/maintain septic

systems

Pick-up pet wasteRestore stream

buffersSupport land use &

stormwater planningMinimize paved

areas or use pervious pavement materials

Maintain vehicleWash vehicle on

grassy areas

Chapel Hill

Chapel Hill

Benth

ic M

acro

inve

rt

Fish C

omm

unity

High W

ater

Tem

perat

ure

Low D

isso

lved

Oxy

gen

Low p

H

Turbid

ity

Fecal

Colif

orm (

recr

eatio

n)

Chloro

phyll a

NO2+NO3-

N

Amm

onia

Wat

er c

olum

n Mer

cury

Zinc

Lead

CopperPCB

Nu

mb

er o

f Im

pai

red

Ass

essm

ent

Un

its

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2010 Urban

PiedmontStream

Impairments

Benth

ic M

acro

inve

rt

Fish C

omm

unity

High W

ater

Tem

perat

ure

Low D

isso

lved

Oxy

gen

Low p

H

Turbid

ity

Fecal

Colif

orm (

recr

eatio

n)

Chloro

phyll a

NO2+NO3-

N

Amm

onia

Wat

er c

olum

n Mer

cury

Zinc

Lead

CopperPCB

Nu

mb

er o

f Im

pa

ire

d A

sse

ssm

ent

Un

its

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

100

120

2010 Urban

PiedmontStream

Impairments

Cape

Fear

Cataw

ba

Neuse

Roanoke

Yadki

n-Pee

Dee

0

20

40

60

80

100

120200

400

600

800

1000

Number of Impaired Assessment UnitsNumber of Impaired Stream Miles

2010 Urban

PiedmontStream

Impairments~

By Basin

Standard assessed - 400 CFU/100 mL

2010Fecal

ColiformBacterial

Assessment

0303002

0303003

03030070303004

0303005

0303006

Little Creek Watershed 2010/2012 Assessment

Booker Creek Upper 3.5 mile segment – Impaired

Benthic MacroinvertebrateLow Dissolved Oxygen (30%)

Lower 2.1 mile segment – ImpairedBenthic Macroinvertebrate

Bolin Creek Middle 3.1 mile segment – Impaired

Benthic Macroinvertebrate

Little CreekUpper 4.9 mile segment – Impaired

Benthic Macroinvertebrate

Tools & Strategies DWQ Utilizes to Restore Urban Streams

Work with stakeholders/watershed groups to develop watershed restoration plans

Phase I and Phase II Stormwater regulationsDevelopment of Total Daily Maximum Loads

(TMDL) for a specific stream reach and pollutant of interest. (A percent load reduction is determined)

Development of specific management strategies and rules (Jordan Lake, Falls Lake, Randleman Lake)

Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy & Rules

Jordan Lake Strategy is divided into three management segment requiring different amount of reductions in order to meet standards.

Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy & Rules

15A NCAC 02B .0262-.0273 & .0311 (q)AgriculturalStormwater Management for New DevelopmentStormwater Management for Existing DevelopmentProtection of Existing Riparian BuffersMitigation for Riparian BuffersRiparian Buffer Mitigation Fees for NC EEPWastewater Discharge RequirementsStormwater Requirements for State and Federal EntitiesFertilizer ManagementOptions for Offsetting Nutrient LoadsCape Fear Basin – Jordan Lake Watershed WS-V reclassification

For more information see DWQ website - http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/jordanlake

Questions

Nora DeamerDivision of Water Quality919-807-6431nora.deamer@ncdenr.gov

Basinwide Planning Websitehttp://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu

AU# Stream Name Location Classification Miles Impairment Status Use Support Rating/Information

Booker Creek Watershed            

16-41-1-15-2-(1)Booker Creek (East-wood

Lake) From source to dam at    Eastwood Lake WS-V,B;NSW 3.5 m Impaired Fair Bug (BB198 - Piney Mtn Rd.); 

Low DO @ B3050000 = 30.4%

16-41-1-15-2-(4) Booker Creek  From dam at eastwood  Lake to US Hwy 15 WS-V;NSW 1.2 m Impaired Fair Bug 

16-41-1-15-2-(5) Booker Creek  From US Hwy 15 to Little   Creek WS-IV;NSW 0.9 m Impaired Fair Bug

Bolin Creek Watershed          

16-41-1-15-1-(0.5)a

Bolin Creek (Hogen Lake)

 From source to Pathway   Drive WS-V;NSW 5.3 m Supporting Good-Fair Bug (BB330 - SR1777)

16-41-1-15-1-(0.5)b

Bolin Creek (Hogen Lake)

 From Pathway Drive to US  Hwy 501 Business WS-V;NSW 3.1 m Impaired Fair Bug (BB506 - Estes Dr. 

Upstream 400M)

16-41-1-15-1-(4) Bolin Creek  From US Hwy 501  Business to Little Creek WS-IV;NSW 0.9 m No Data No Data or information to make 

assessment

Little Creek Wateshed          

16-41-1-15-(0.5) Little Creek  From source to a point   0.7 mile downstream of   Durham County SR 1110

WS-IV;NSW 4.9 m Impaired Poor Bug (BB197 - Pinehurst Dr.)

16-41-1-15-(3) Little Creek From a point 0.7 mile  downstream of Durham  County SR 1110 to New  Hope Creek

WS-IV;NSW,CA 0.8 m No Data No Data or information to make 

assessment

2010 & Draft NC 2012 Assessment (Integrated Report)

2000 Population

Density

Nonpoint Sources of Pollution Pollution reaching waterways from rainfall runoff,

atmospheric deposition and groundwater flow. Impacts result from cumulative effects of many small activities.

Changing Hydrology Effects

Forces more water

(energy) more quicklyPhysically

damages stream channel

Before Development

After Development

Zone 1: 30’undisturbed

forest vegetation

Zone 2: 20’ managed vegetation

Stream

Buffer Zones on Streams

Top of bank

Planning Considerations Avoid Areas Near

Sensitive Waters Maintain Buffer Areas

Around Streams Consider Land

Constraints - slope/soil…

Maintain Areas of Open Space

Minimize Impervious Cover

Planning Options Low Impact

Development (LID)

Maintain Stream Buffers

Consider Slope & Soil Maintain Open Space Minimize Impervious

Cover

What can local governments do to reduce stormwater pollution?Limit impervious surfaces by concentrating

development in high density clusters.Encourage mass transit to reduce need for

roads/parking lots.Set zoning standards for development to reduce

runoff and protect stream corridors.Discourage development in floodplains.Protect farmland and open spaces.

Benefits of Riparian BuffersTrap/Remove

sediment from runoffProtect stream bank

from erosionTrap/Remove

nutrients, metals and other contaminants

Effective flood controlProvides food and

habitat for wildlife

How Buffers WorkSedimentNitrogenPhosphorusOther

ContaminantsFlood ControlChannel StabilityWildlife Habitat

Impacts of Increased Turbidity

4-32 NTU– Reduced food intake– Slight reduction in growth– Reduced survival percentages – Avoidance, escape

80-90 NTU– Marked reduction in growth & survival

Sensitive Species 10-25 NTU = Mortality

Urbanization Impacts

Bolin Creek from Randy Dodd

Overview of 2010 303(d) list

Categories:

Freshwater streams

Lakes

Salt Waters

Turbidity High pH Chlorophyll a

Fre

sh

Wa

ter

Acr

es

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Lake Impairment Parameters

2010 Impaired Freshwater Acres

Ars

enic

Co

pp

er

Zin

c

Am

mo

nia

Ch

lori

de

NO

2+N

O3-

N

Tu

rbid

ity

Lo

w D

isso

lved

Oxy

gen

Lo

w p

H

Ch

loro

ph

yll a

Rec

. Fec

al C

olif

orm

Bac

teri

a

Bio

log

y-B

ug

Bio

log

y-F

ish

Fre

sh

Wa

ter

Mil

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

200225250275300

StreamImpairmentParameters

2010 Impaired Freshwater Miles

DO pHSpec. Cond. Turb.

Fecal C.(Geomean) TN NH3

NO2/NO3-N TP

mg/L μmhos/

cm NTU cfu/100 ml mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

CFR Basin Average 7.6 6.9 13.1 75 2.01 0.10 1.24 0.19

Haw – 3030002 8.4 7.3 277 16.7 108 2.90 0.09 2.15 0.24

Deep – 3030003 8.5 7.2 217 15.6 107 2.68 0.07 2.02 0.25

Middle CFR – 3030004 8.5 6.6 119 10.8 91 1.27 0.22 0.49 0.10

Lower CFR – 3030005 7.1 6.9   11.9 28 1.22 0.07 0.51 0.12

Black R – 3030006 6.4 6.1 110 4.5 70 1.07 0.04 0.25 0.11

Northeast CFR - 3030007 6.6 6.6   7.1 98 2.17 0.07 1.23 0.30

Healthy Piedmont Strm*      12-90     0.80 0.05 0.30 0.05EPA Nutrient Criteria -

Piedmont**           0.70     0.038EPA Nutrient Criteria -

Coastal**           0.72     0.032

* Information from ESS document.** USGS Circular 1350 – The Quality of Our Nation’s Water – Nutrients in the Nation’s Streams and Groundwater, 1992-2004 Neil Dubrovskt et al., 2010.

Standard assessed - 400 CFU/100 mL

FecalColiformBacteria

0303002

0303003

03030070303004

0303005

0303006