[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
r STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR RALEIGH 27611 JAMES 13- HUNT, JR. GOVERNOR Dear Concerned Citizens: The State of North Carolina is committed to restoring the health and beauty of the Chowan River, and we need the thoughts and commitment of citizens like you to do it. On March 9 of this year, I directed the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development to develop an Action Plan for controlling nutrient inputs to the river. The only way we can stop the algal blooms that hurt the recreational and commercial value of the rivers is to.control the nutrient inputs to the river system. The Action Plan describes the steps that North Carolina and Virginia must take to control nutrients. We won't see improvdments overnight, so it's all the more important that we begin at once. Of course state and local governmentsstill do all they can within their authority to control nutrient discharges. But we need the support of every citizen who lives in the Chowan River Basin to make the Chowan Restoration Project successful. The nutrients we must control don't come from one or two specific sources, and all sources must do their share in the clean up. Restoration may mean changes in some of our farming practices, a change in some municipal sewage treatment plants, and changes in industrial waste disposal practices. In the short run, it may seem inconvenient to take these actions. In the long run, it will benefit every citizen in the Chowan River Basin. Please read the Action Plan and share with us your thoughtful criticism of the steps we propose to take. I hope very much that you will support this project. Sin ely, c State of North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development Raleigh 27611 HOWARD N. LEE JAMES B. HUNT, JR. SECRETARY GOVERNOR September 27, 1979 TELEPHONE AREA CODE 919-733-4984 The Honorable James B. Hunt, Jr. Governor State of North Carolina Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Dear Governor Hunt: The Department of Natural Resources and Community Development is pleased to transmit to you our Plan of Action to restore the Chowan. Although the restoration of the river must be viewed as a long-term process,a lot has already been done, and we are continuing to take every step we can to clean it up as soon as possible. We have left no stone unturned in our search for solutions to this problem and the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development is committed to sticking with the problem until restoration occurs. We believe you will be pleased with the progress already made in working with some of the industries and municipalities along the river. These measures, when completed, should drastically reduce the nutrient flow to the river from point sources for a restored Chowan River. With kindest regards and best wishes, I am Respectfully yours, Howard N. Lee TABLE OF CONTENTS Chowan River Action Plan APPENDICES A. Problem Assessment A-1 B. North Carolina Activities and Commitments B-1 C. Virginia Activities and Commitments C-1 D. Bi-state Water Quality Management Plan D-1 E. WRRI Statement of Work E-1 F. Progress in.working with Municipalities F-1 and Industries G. History of CF Industries Abatement Efforts G-1 H. Union Camp Discharge Permit Actions H-1 I. Point Source Discharger Nitrogen I-1 Contributions 'J. Description of Slide-Tape Show J-1 K. Work Plans for Action Elements (to be added) K-1 CHOWAN RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT Summary The Chowan River Restoration Project (CHORE) is a large- scale bi-state effort to halt algal blooms and restore the valuable and scenic lower Chowan River. The lower Chowan lies in North Carolina, but about two-thirds of the tributary area is in Virginia. North Carolina has committed to a Plan of Action to take all feasible steps to clean up sources within-its borders. Both states have committed to develop a "Joint Water Quality Management Plan." Implementation of such a plan is intended to en- sure acceptable water quality over the long-term. The North Carolina agency responsible for the project is the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. In Virginia, it is the Virginia State Water Control Board. 2. PurRose The Chowan River estuary has recently experienced nuisance algal blooms which are symptomatic of advanced eutrophi- cation and clear evidence that excessive concentrations of nutrients are present in the river, The purpose of this Action Plan is to describe the steps that will be taken by the states of North Carolina and Virginia to reduce the levels of nutrients entering the river to the lowest prac- tical levels. The Plan has two parts: 1) an immediate commitment by North Carolina to use the authority granted to the State Government to halt all unnecessary and exces- sive nutrient inputs (see 4.A. below) and, 2) a joint effort by the North Carolina-Virginia Water Management Com- mittee-to develop a long-term Water Quality Management Plan that will ensure acceptable levels of water quality perma- nently (see 4.B. below). The commitment set forth in this document is by the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. Virginia's present commitment is described in the Appendix. The name of the total project is the "Chowan River Restoration Project" (CHORE). 3. Authority and Means The states will use all meansand resources available to regulate both point and non-point discharges and to en- courage good land use practices to reduce the total inflow of nutrients into the river system. Governor Hunt is on record as stating that the Chowan River is a "Top Prior- ity" for North Carolina attention and Governor Dalton of Virginia has assured Governor Hunt of his cooperation. As a result of Governor Hunt's March 9, 1979 meeting concerning the Chowan River, a number of other corpo- rate, agricultural and state and local government officials are on record with their support of CHORE. 4. Elements of the Project The basic structure of the project includes the follow- ing: A. Immediate Action Plan This is the immediate action component of the pro- ject. The full authority of State Government will be used to find solutions to those pollution prob- lems which have degraded the river water quality. The specific elements of the Plan are g iven below. In each case, the North Carolina lead agency has been identified. It will be the responsibility of that lead agency to develop the appropriate coopera- tion with Virginia and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Each lead agency is required.to.sub- mit to the Secretary of NRCD a schedule and work plan for their individual. work element by _OctOhe@r 15. Where applicable, outcomes of the bi-state con- tinuing Chow*an planning process may modify or super- sede these immediate action activities. (1) To work with each of the municipal or public point dischargers in the basin to reduce their nutrient inputs to the river to the minimum possible levels. Appropriate techniques such as land application of wastewater will be used wherever possible. The Appendix describes pro- gress to date on this task. Responsibility: Director, Division of Environ- mental Management (2) To work with each industrial or private dis- charger in the.river basin to reduce nutrient discharges to a.minimum consistent with good environmental and economic practices. Responsibility: Director, Division of Environ- mental Management (3) In particular, work with the CP Industries' fertilizer plant at Tunis to completely elimi- nate the flow of nutrients from the site. CF -2- has retained an engineer to develop a proposal for a study on how to remedy the problem and their engineer has already met with NRCD offi- cials. Responsibility: Director, Division of Environ- mental Management (4) In particular, work with the Union Camp Corpo- ration to ensure that their wastewater does not contribute to the algal blooms. North Carolina has already protested the continuation of their discharge permit as it is presently issued and intends to work toward the goal of requiring Union Camp waste disposal practices that do not adversely affect either the Chowan River or Albemarle Sound. Additional provisions to moni- tor nutrients were put into the reissued permit for the first time. Responsibility: Director, Division of Environ- mental Management (5) To work with North Carolina and Virginia farmers @and ensure, through voluntary programs of co- operation, that only the amount of agricultural nutrients that can readily be assimilated will be allowed to enter the river system. This pro- gtam. will be carried out through the Soil and Water Districts. Responsibility: Director, Division of Soil and Water Conservation (6) To carefully study all other non-point runoff sources in the basin to see if any further re- ductions in. nutrient inputs can be achieved. ..Responsibility: Director, Division of Environ- mental Management (7) To assess the extent to which dry weather raw water withdrawals can be reduced, especially those that increase the probability of algal blooms and to recommend actions to mitigate these efforts. Responsibility: Director, Division of Environ- mental Management (8) To study and implement new projects and inno- vative concepts that might reduce algal blooms. -3- Examples of such measures might be: low flow augmentation, selective dredging or experi- mental fishery initiatives. Only those ideas which are judged feasible and acceptable eco- nomically and environmentally would be pur- sued. Responsibility: Director, Office of Water Resources B. Long-Term Water Quality Management Plan Development (1) Development of the management structure for the bi-state planning process. (2) Development of a schedule for Management Plan Implementation. (3) Development of a continuing planning process to ensure follow through on the Restoration Pro- ject. (4) Development of monitoring and reporting systems for both the quality of the water and the pro- gress of CHORE. 5. Management of CHORE The responsibilities for developing the Water Quality Management Plan are as shown in Figures 1 and 2. As this is a bi-state effort, responsibilities reside with both states. Regulatory and operational authorities must re- side with the appropriate boards: the Environmental Manage- ment Commission in North Carolina and the Virginia Water Control Board. For the basin Water Quality Management Plan, the states are working closely together. All bi- state activities are carried out through the North Carolina-Virginia Water Management Committee and through staff coordination by the two agencies. The management structure for the immediate Action Plan is of particular interest. This Plan will be carried out by the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development (NRCD). The primary responsi- bility is with the Secretary of NRCD working through the Deputy Secretary to the Assistant Secretary for Natural Resources who is responsible for all aspects of project operations. Six divisions of NRCD have substantial re-. sponsibilities in the project. The largest responsibility is with the Division of Environmental Management which operates regulatory and planning programs concerned with water quality. Another very important division is the -4- Figure 1. Resp*ilities for CHORE Immediate Action Plan. Department of Natural Resources NC-Va CO-'-21-,IISSIONS and Community Development Water Management Environmental Management Secretary Committee Soil and Water Conservation Coastal Resources Marine Fisheries Sedimentation Control Deputy NIC-Va Secretary Chowan Technical Panel Board of Assistant Chowan Scientific Secretary for Basin Advisors for Natural Resources Task Force vlater Quality Office of Coastal Office olf Management IWater Resourcesi Division of Division oflj County Division Division Land Quality Environmenta Task of Soil of Marine Force and 'Nater Fisheries F Water Planning perations Environmental and FSection I Planning D evelopment Section Section Withdrawals Permitting TATater Quality Enforcement Management Planning Governor Governor North Carolina Virginia North Carolina-Virginia Water Management Committee Chowan Project CHORE Technical Panel 'steering Committee Basin Task Force E: Dir-ec tor:@ Research Director NRCD-DEM', Programs, VWCB. North Carolina Management Plan Virginia Programs Control Group Programs -Note: This management structure applied to the bi-state project. For the N. C. Action Plan itself, the basic authority for execution is with the Governor and the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. Figure 2. Management Structure for Development of Water Quality Management Plan. -6- t @or' tor B@ Soil and Water Conservation Division which is re- sponsible for working with the Soil and Water Con- servation Districts which will be instrumental in the agricultural portion of the project. Other NRCD units with substantial responsibilities in- clude: Division of Land Resources Division of Marine Fisheries office of Water Resources Office of Coastal Management In addition to the Commissions shown on Figure 1, there are two advisory groups with substantial roles in the Chowan Action Plan. The Board of Scientific Advisors for Water Quality advises on scientific measures and considerations in the Chowan project. This Board is comprised of scientists and re- searchers with substantial expertise in water quality. The CHORE Basin Task Force is comprised of local officials with substantial expertise and interests in local matters important in.execution of the project. The administrative support for the CHORE Basin Task Force-will be with the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. Administrative support for the Board of Scientific Advisors is from the Division of Environmental Management. 6. Schedule for Implementation The basic schedule for project implementation is as shown in Figure 3. This schedule will be supplemented by time schedules developed by the immediate action lead agencies (see 4.A. above), as well as those developed in the Water Quality Management Plan. 7. Specific Management Plan Responsibilities The two states will develop a coordinated Continuing Planning Process as an extension of outline contained -7- FIGURE 3. TARGET ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR CHORE ObJective 1979 1980 1981 1. Establish action plan Start Finish 2. Achieve cleanup of CF Industries site 3. Implement control of Permit nutrient relea ses from Union Camp Corporation Expires 4. Achieve control of Intermedi@te Results nutrient releases from municipalities T 5. Achieve control of OL nutrient releases from industries t 6. Reduce nutrient releases Continuous Program frot., agriculture 7. Develop and implement long term water quality ContinuinE management Produce Planning Plan, includingi Process all other required studiesi Document in the Appendices. This process will outline the plan- ning concept, complete with the allocation of resources, necessary agreements and milestone dates. 8. Reports The CHORE Steering Committee will prepare brief quarterly and substantive annual progress reports, including in the latter all pertinent data with analysis. The Appendices of this report serve as the annual report due June 10, 1979, and summarize all the work done prior to that date. The Steering Committee will recommend to the bi-state Water Management Committee when CHORE should be considered complete. 9. Distribution of Nitrogen Inputs to Chowan To understand the magnitude of the nutrient problem, it will be helpful to see a distribution of nitrogen input by source. Table 1 presents a very approximate listing of nutrient inputs to the Chowan from North Carolina and .Virginia. These are placed in categories including non- point sources broken down into major and minor contribu- tors. Table 1. Annual Average Total Nitrogen Inputs to Chowan (Percent) North Carolina Virginia Total Non-point Sources Agriculture 11 36 47 Forest and Wetlands 7 28 35 All other 1 1 2 Total 84% Point Sburces Municipalities 2 4 6 Industries 4 6 10 Union Camp (5) CF Industries Total (3) 16% Grand Total 100% Source: Virginia and North Carolina 303 River Basin Plans -9- NORTH CAROLINA-VIRGINIA WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE NORTH CAROLINA VIRGINIA Mr. Howard N. Lee (Co-Chairman) Mr. Maurice Rowe (Co-Chairman) Secretary Secretary Department of Natural Resources Department of Commerce and and Community Development Resources P. 0. Box 27687 P. 0. Box 1475 Raleigh, NC 27611 Richmond, VA 23212 Honorable Melvin R. Daniels Honorable Paul Councill, Jr. Member, North Carolina Senate Member, Virginia House of 1613 Rochelle Drive Delegates Elizabeth City, NC 27909 P. 0. Box 119 Franklin, VA 23851 Honorable John T. Church Member, North Carolina House Honorable Lewis Parker, Jr. of Representatives Member, Virginia House of 420 Woodland Road Delegates Henderson/ NC 27536 P. 0. Box 120 South*Hill, VA 23970 Mr. H. W. Whitley, Chairman Environmental Management Honorable.J. Lewis Rawls, Jr. Commission Member, Virginia Senate 507 Lakeview Drive P. 0. Box 1458-Bank Street Murfreesboro, NC 27855 Suffolk, VA 23434 Dr. Neil S. Grigg- Mr. George M. Cornell Assistant Secretary for Natural Member, State Water Control Board Resources 5301 Bennett's Pasture Road Department of Natural Resources Suffolk, VA 23435 and Community Development Raleigh, NC 27611 Mr. Robert V. Davis Executive Director Mrs. Anne Taylor State Water Control Board Special Assistant for Natural 2111 N. Hamilton Street Resources Richmond, VA 23230 DeDartment of Natural Resources and Community Development Mr. Harry S. Montgomery Chairman Mr. Donald Baker Southside Virginia Planning Inland Fisheries Division District Commission wildlife Resources Commission P. 0. Box 553 Department of Natural Resources South Hill, VA 23970 and Community Development Raleigh, NC 27611 Honorable Patrick Standing Mayor, City of Virginia Beach Mr. J. S. Everett 16 Koger Executive Center Executive Director Norfolk, VA 23502 Kerr-Tar Council of Governments P. 0. Box 709 Henderson, NC 27536 _10- PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE North Carolina Virginia Howard N. Lee, Secretary Maurice Rowe, Secretary Department of Natural Resources Department of Commerce and & Community Development Resources Raleigh, NC 27611 Richmond, VA 23219 Dr. Neil S. Grigg Mr. R. V. Davis Assistant Secretary for Executive Secretary Natural Resources Virginia Water Control Board Department of Natural Resources Richmond, VA "23220 & Community Development Raleigh, NC 27611 CHOWAN TECHNICAL PANEL Mr. Bill Raney Mr. R. V. Davis Attorney General's Office Executive Secretary P. 0. Box 629 Virginia Water Control Board Raleigh, NC 27611 Richmond, VA 23220 Mr. Robert Van Tilburg Mr. S. Mason Carbaugh Division of Environmental Commissioner Management Department of Agriculture and Department of NRCD Consumer Services Raleigh, NC 27611 Richmond, VA 23219 Mr. Ralph Heath Dr. Clifford W. Randall U. S. Geological Survey VPI and State University P. 0. Box 2857 Blacksburg, VA Raleigh, NC 27602 Dr. William J. Hargis, Jr. Dr. James Lamb Director Environmental Science and Virginia Institute of Marine Engineering Science UNC - Chapel Hill Gloucester, VA Chapel HIll, NC 27514 Dr. Frank Humenik Mr. Joseph B. Willson, Jr. Extension Biological and Agri- Soil and Water Conservation cultural Engineering Commission N. C. State University Richmond, VA 23219 Raleigh, NC 27650 Dr. Joe Phillips, Director Mr. Larry S. McBride Division of Soil and Water State Water Control Board Conservation Tidewater Regional Office Department of NRCD 287 Pembrook Office Park Raleigh, NC 27611 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 -il- NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORS FOR WATER QUALITY Dr. Neil S. Grigg, Chairman Assistant Secretary for Natural Resources Department of Natural Resources and Community & Development (NRCD) Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Mr. David Howells Dr. Frank Humenik Water Resources Research Institute Extension Biological and Agri- N. C. State University cultural Engineering Raleigh, NC 27650 N. C. State University Raleigh, NC 27650 Dr. Jay Langfelder Dr. Jim Lamb Department of Marine Science Environmental Science and and Engineering Engineering N. C. State University UNC - Chapel HIll Raleigh, NC 27650 Chapel HIll, NC 27514 Dr. Don Francisco Mr. Don Kennedy Environmental Science and Bass, Nixon & Kennedy Engineers Engineering 7416 Chapel Hill Road UNC - Chapel Hill Raleigh, NC 27608 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Mr. Ralph Heath Dr. Gus Witherspoon U. S. Geological Survey Department of Botany P. 0. Box 2857 N. C. State Universi.ty Raleigh, NC 27602 Raleigh, NC 27650 Mr. Bill Raney Dr* Ron Raschke Attorney General's Office EPA P. 0. Box 629 S. E. Environmental Research Lab Raleigh, NC 27611 Bailey Road Annex Athens, GA 30605 Dr. Carl Shy Environmental Studies Institute Dr. Jim Gregory UNC - Chapel Hill School of Forest Resources Chapel Hill, NC 27514 N. C. State University Raleigh, NC 27650 Mr. Alan Klimek Division of. Environmental Mr. Harrell Johnson Management Division of Marine Fisheries Department of NRCD Department of NRCD Raleigh, NC 27611 Elizabeth City, NC 27909 Dr. R. L. Harris, Jr. Mr. Barry Adams Environmental Science and Division of Environmental Engineering Management UNC - Chapel Hill Department of NRCD Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Washington, NC 27889 -12- MANAGEMENT PLAN CONTROL GROUP This group would manage and coordinate the joint North Caro- lina-Virginia Special 208 Study should funds become available to implement the Study. Representatives would consist of staff from both states and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. CHOWAN RIVER TASK FORCES Governor Hunt envisioned the form'ation of a local group in each county of the Chowan River Basin to develop a Chowan Action Plan for their county. These local task forces, work- ing with the local Soil and Water Conservation Districts, will be composed of county leaders from diverse backgrounds. They will be responsible for planning and implementing the Action Plan at the local level. The Soil and water Conservation Com- mission will support the CHORE Plan by implementing the 208 Agricultural Plan in the Chowan River Basin. To coordinate the programs between counties, a regional task force will be formed from the membership of the local task forces and some regional workers. This regional task force will coordinate between the local groups and the Department of Natural Re- sources and Community Development to engure consistency on the work of the local task forces. The Department of Natural Re- sources and Community Development will provide technical sup- port related to Best Management Practices. The Chowan Basin Task Forces (both county and regional) will be formulated by the end of the year if possible. -13- APPENDIX A PROBLEM ASSESSMENT 0 PROBLEM ASSESSMENT Summary While large growths of algae have been occurring on the Chowan River for years, heavy growths were noted in 1970 and bloom conditions developed in the summer of 1972. These con- ditions have continued and thesummer of 1978 brought exten- sive algal growth once more. This condition has generated heavy local protect and much media attention. Major complaints center around the loss in recreational value caused by the algae and the reduced fishing success experienced in recent years. While the reduced commercial fishing catches have not been scientifically proven to be caused by the algae, there is no doubt that the algae has reduced the river's recreational potential and has affected recreational property values near the river. Scattered fish kills have occurred following ex- tensive blooms of algae. Swimming or boating in algal choked water is not attrac- tive, and dead algae can cause odor problems. But there is more than just aesthetics associated with excessive growths of algae, particularly the blue-green species which proliferate in the Chowan. Large growths of algae can deplete the water's oxygen supply and cause fish kills. Blue-green algae are also toxic and can cause further biological problems. An outbreak of red sore disease, a bacterial infection of fish, is reaching epidemic proportions this year in the Chowan River-Albemarle Sound drainage system. The disease has been linked to deteriorating water quality in the sound and river and some commercial fish catches have up to 100 percent con- tamination. While the direct link has not yet been made be- tween the algal blooms and the disease, which can be fatal to fish and cause disease and death in man, it is probably that steps taken to eliminate the blooms will also help protect the commercial fishing industry from red sore disease outbreak. Previous Studies Nitrogen is the nutrient most often mentioned when dis- cussing the restoration of the Chowan River, but it is impor- tant to note that phosphorus also plays a critical role in the nutrient balance. Increases of nitrogen in the river have pro- moted the growth of algae to the point that in some portions-of the river, phosphorus can be the limiting nutrient. This is important because four of the five species of algal blooms can "fix" nitrogen from the air, therefore, phosphorus may prove to be an important link in the restoration project. Much of the work described below, however, focuses on nitrogen. Water quality monitoring in the 1960's showed that the Chowan had levels of inorganic nitrogen approaching the amount necessary for blooms to occur. During 1972 and succeeding A-1 years, detailed studies have found that more than enough nu- trients exist in the river to support severe-algal blooms. A 1972 study by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management recommended that several detailed studies be funded to provide more information on the problems in the Chowan River. As a result of the 1972 report, several research studies were funded to investigate different aspects of the water quality problem in the river. This study effort, which te- ceived financial support from the U. S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency, the U. S. Department of the Interior and the states of North Carolina and Virginia took place over a one- year period, 1974-1975. This was called the Chowan River Project. The study of the Chowan River involved six coordinated project components as follows: 1. The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) developed a hydrologic model using tide, wind and tempera- ture information along with upstream gaged flows. This model will be essential for use in making nutrient transport estimates and to facilitate development of water quality models. 2. An intensive sampling program of the river was made by the North Carolina office of Water and Air Resources, under the direction of Mr. Grover Cook. This sampling.effort turned out to be too limited to provide sufficient data for modeling efforts and, in particular, was insufficient be- cause the sampling was not done during a bloom. year. This data will be extremely useful for later model verification work. 3. The role of aquatic macrophytes in controlling water quality was studied under the direction of Drs. Brinson and Davis at East Carolina Univer- sity. They found that aquatic macrophytes were unlikely to affect the water quality of the Chowan River because of the restricted area of the shallow littoral in the river and, thus, low growth of rooted aquatics. 4. The recycling of nitrogen in the river was studied by Drs. Stanley and Hobbie, N. C. State University. They found that nitrogen was recycled rapidly in the Chowan and that much of the nitrogen to sustain summer algal blooms comes from nitrogen.that is A-2 recycled from the river and its bottom sediments. This means that if point source discharges of organic matter and nutrients settle out on the river bottom, even if discharged only in the win- ter, they may provide nutrients to sustain summer blooms of algae. 5. The phytoplankton response to wat *er quality was studied under the direction of Dr. Witherspoon, N. C. State University. This study characterized the patterns of algal growth in the Chowan and identified the major bloom-causing species in the river. Dr. Witherspoon-and others monitored algal growth from 1974 to 1977 and noted that algal bio- mass increased each year. They noted that the sluggish lower river was where most of the growth took place because of the long residence time of nutrients and algae. The investigation also docu- mented that algal blooms would occur following rain- fall after the river stage decreased. In addition, it was found that algae, washed down from upstream areas with runoff, could proliferate to bloom pro- portions in the lower river. This indicated that nutrients in surface runoff as well as algae from upstream areas may be contributing to the problem. 6. Mathematical modeling of the upper and Lower Chowan was performed under the direction of Dr. Contractor, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Drs. Galler and Amein, N. C. State University, respectively. These models were to use the information developed in the first five components of the study. Dr. Contractor's report has not yet been received by DEM and, in any .case, does not address the bloom portion of the Chowan. The model as developed by Drs. Galler and Amein has provided a basic modeling tool to be worked with; however, it has several severe limitations due to lack of a sufficient data base and gaps of knowl- edge in the processes of the Chowan which need fur- ther study. These gaps of knowledge include inter- action with the sediments and nitrogen fixation. The model also does not predict algal nuisance or bloom conditions, but rather average conditions in the river. Other researchers investigating water quality in the Coastal Plain have found that greater amounts of nutrients were transported in channelized streams than in natural streams (Kuenzler, et al., 1977). They concluded that natural streams and swamps 1-n _iE_astern North Carolina cleanse the wa- ter of nutrients and, therefore, would deliver less nutrients to estuaries than would channelized streams. A-3 Very high amounts of nitrogen have been monitored in ditches below agricultural land in eastern North Carolina (Gambrell, et al., 1974) and sampling undertaken by the Statewide 26-8 @@_tudy has found very high levels of nutrients in streams draining agricultural areas in the Coastal Plain. Gilliam, et al., (1978) have reported results of recent re- search near R-Inston and Plymouth that used the control of water table height in ditches to stop some of the nutrients from reaching streams. They state "There is no question that a significant reduction in nitrate-nitrogen entering the surface water could be achieved using the methods de- scribed herein." However, the researchers are not sure whether this would mean that less nitrogen would reach estu- aries. It appears clear from the existing data that less nitrogen would reach s-@reams in the Coastal Plain if less tile drainage, less intensive ditching and less ditch mainten- ance or channel improvements were undertaken. Preliminary Summary of Division of Environmental Management Data The emphasis of the current and proposed monitoring on the Chowan is on determining the sources and fate of nutrients entering the Chowan and the biological response of the river to nutrient loadings. Major emphasis of data evaluation has centered on nitrogen since this nutrient has been implicated as the limiting nutrient for algal growth in the Chowan and thus the nutrient to be most tightly controlled. More em- phasis will probably be directed towards phosphorus in future data analysis as its role in the eutrophication process in the Chowan may not have been sufficiently emphasized in the past. A. Estimated Nutrient Loadings An inventory of nitrogen loadings to the Chowan watershed from both point and non-point sources has been developed and is summarized in Table 1. Further refinements on loadings of nitrogen from specific land uses and refinements in land use characterization of the basin will be developed as the monitoring and study efforts continue. The nitrogen loadings for the Virginia portion of the Chowan Basin were developed from information in the Virginia 303 Plan (June 1976) for this so basin. In this Plan, the magnitude of hon-point source pollution was estimated in terms of pol- lutant area-yield rates for specific land use types which were judged to be reasonable values for the Chowan River Basin. Further loadings A-4. were attributed to farm animal populations in the basin. The area-yield rates were compared (by Virginia) to vdlues reported in recent technical literature and found to be reasonable and were also found to be compatible when evaluated against the results of a combined point source/non-point source computer model being developed at the Virginia Polytechn-ic Institute for the Chowan Basin. The non- point source pollution area yield rates.used wer.e as follows: Land Use Type Total Nitrogen as N (lbs/acre/yr) Urban 6 Agricultural 6 Forest/Marsh 2 The point source industrial and municipal loadings of nitrogen from Virginia were also developed from information in the 303 Plan. For the purpose of approximating contributing non- point sources of nitrogen in the North Carolina por- tion of the basin, the Virginia methodology was adopted. This-was done after review of the available technical literature which supported the kinds of yields which were used and for purposes of being con- sistent for comparison of North Carolina and Virginia contributions. Land uses and animal populations were abstracted from the North Carolina 303 Plan for this basin. Point source loadings for North Carolina were calculated from recent data on average flows and nu- trient concentrations for North Carolina dischargers. Direct precipitation figures were estimated after re- view of several data sources op rainfall nutrient concentrations in this area. Actual nutrient loading delivered to the estuary from the headwaters and major tributaries of the Chowan will be developed on a seasonal and annual basis as the monitoring program continues and flow data becomes available through USGS. These input data will be in- valuable for future modeling work on the river. B. Water Quality Data Water quality data has been gathered along the river on a weekly basis since September 1978. Data has been collected on nutrients and various physical and chemi- cal parameters in the river. This data has been com- piled in the Quarterly Reports on the investigation. A-5 The tidal nature of the river and the complexity of the biological-nutrient processes in the river make's interpretation of this data difficult outside of the confines of a water quality modeling effort. The concentrations of available nutrients necessary to trigger algal blooms in the estuary has not been de- termined. This is because flushing times, temperature, light penetration and other factors also impact algal growth. Also, some nutrient sources and sinks have not been adequately investigated for the Chowan system such as interaction with the sediments and nitrogen fixation by blue-green algae. It is hoped that the data being gathered in this study, along with further research, will allow for development of a usable pre- dictive model for algal growth in the Chowan which can be used for management purposes. Preliminary analysis of the data has revealed some findings. During the summer 1978 bloom period, a pat- tern of high total nitrogen and, in particular, total organic nitrogen was found in the bloom area from Holiday Island south to Edenton Bay. This is due to the relatively large amounts of nutrients tied up in- the algal cells. Nitrate nitrogen (NO _N) and ammonia nitrogen (NH -N) values were consistenhy lower in this reach than I'A the reaches above Holiday Island. Much of the sampling effort has centered on possible nitrogen input from the CF Industries (CFI) properties. A pattern of higher levels of total organic nitrogen and total inorganic nitrogen downstream from CFI were noted'on mostf but not all, sampling runs. The increase in nitrogen concentration was most noticeable during low stream flow periods and.was not noticeable during high flow periods. Preliminary estimates indicated that between 500 to 2000 lbs./day of nitrogen enter the Chowan River in the vicinity of CFI. The winter sampling on the river and its tributaries showed a typical pattern of much higher loads 'of nitro- gen to the river during the winter high flow period than during the summer low flow period. This was due not only to higher flows, but also higher nitrogen con- qentrations, particularly inorganic nitrogen. The effect of the winter Union Camp discharge on the river nitrogen loadings was quite noticeable. This win'ter influx of nutrients may be particularly important if settling of some of these nutrients occurs in the winter period and recycling of nutrients back into -the water column occurs during the critical spring and summer growth period. A-6 Water quality data is also being collected on the major tributaries of the river on a bi-weekly basis to provide data on inputs to the river system. C. Biological Quality Data The 1978 bloom on the Chowan lasted from late June to early November. The typical pattern of growth of algae during these months showed goodspecies di- versity and lower biomass above the bloom area (above Hiliday Island) and a dominance of 1 to 3 taxa and high growth of algae in the bloom area. The predominant species found in the bloom growth area were of the blue-green type. Five major species of cyanophyceae were found to be the cause of the visual blooms in the Chowan: three species of Anabaena, one of Mycrocystis and one of Aphanizomenon. The particular phytoplankton species present in the river are important since algae have different nu- trient and physiological needs and some species can fix their own nitrogen from atmospheric sources. Growth was definitely in nuisance proportions during the 1978 bloom. The DEM is proposing a chlorophyll a water quality standard of 40 ug/l for estuaries, 9nd chlorophyll concentrations far exceeded this value during the 1978 bloom. References Gambrell, et al., 1977. N. C. W. R. R. I. ReporE-N-o. 93. .Gilliam, et al., 1978. N. C. W. R. R. I. RepoHt ffo-. 128. Kuenzler, et al., 1977. N. C. W. R. R. I. ReporT-N-o. 127. A-7 Table Estimate of Annual Nitrogen Inputs to the Chowan River Basin Land Area % of Total Lbs. N 105lbs N % of Total (104 acres) Area per ac. per yr. N North Carolina per yr. Agriculture 20.2 6.8 - 11.4 Runoff 6 12.1 V Animal Waste - - - 3.6 Forest & Wetlands 47.1 15.7 2 9.4 6.9 Urban Runoff 1.4 0.5 6 0.8 0.6 Point - - 5.5 Industrial 5.1 (3.7) Mun. & other Domestic - - - .2.5 (1.8) Direct Precipitation 2.8 0.9 7.8 2.2 .1.6 Total 71.5 23.9 35.7 26.1 Virginia Agriculture 36.8 12.3 - 36.2 Runoff 6 22.1 (16.2) Animal Waste - - - 27.4 (20.0) Forest & Wetlands 189.5 63.3 2 37.9 27.3 Urban Runoff 1.4 0.5 6 0.8 0.6 Point - 9.5 Industrial 7.6 (5.6) Mun. & other Domestic - - 5.3 (3.9) Total 227.7 76.1 101.1 73.9 Total Agriculture 57.0 19.1 47.6 Runoff 6 34.2 (25.0) Animal Waste - - - 31.0 (22-6) Forest & Wetlands 236.6 79.0 2 47.3 34.6 Urban Runoff 2.8 1.0 6 1.6 1.2 Point - - - 15 Industrial 12.7 Mun. & other Domestic - 7.8 Direct Precipitation 2.8 0.9 7.8 2.2 1.6 Total for Chowan Basin 299.2 100 136.8 100 Including CF's 4.4 (1200 lbs/day) A-8 Table 2. General Characteristics of the Chowan River Basin Basin drainage area: Piedmont Plateau of Virginia (rolling hills) 2,000 square miles Coastal Plain 3,000 square miles Main River length 50 miles Rainfall (annual) 45 inches Runoff from Chowan River Basin (annual) 12 inches or .9 cfs/mi2 of drainage 1970 population (approximate) Virginia 171,600 North Carolina 88,400 Total 260,000 1970 rural population (80% of total) 206,000 1% decline in population since 1960 A-9 TABLE 3 - WASTEWATER DISCHARGERS OF THE CHOWAN RIVER BASIN A. VIRGINIA DISCHARGERS MEHERRIN RIVER BASIN Domestic Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 1 Town of Alberta Brunswick Roses Creek 2 Town of Lawrenceville Brunswick Roses Creek 3 City of Emporia Greenville Falling Run 4 Town of Victoria (West) Luenburg Couches Creek 5 Town of Chase City (#2) Mecklenburg unt. Finneywood Creek 6 Town of South Hill (#2) Mecklenburg Mountain Creek 7 Town of South Hill (#3) Mecklenburg Taylor Creek 8 Town of LaCrosse (#1) Mecklenburg Little Genito Creek 9 Town of Boykins Southampton Tarrara Creek 10 Brunswick Jr. High School and Totaro Elem. School Brunswick unt. Roses Creek 11 Brunswick Academy Brunswick Sandy Branch 12 Sturgeon Elem. School Brunswick unt. Flatrock Branch 13 Meherrin-Powellton Elem. School Brunswick unt. Greentown Branch 14 Edmunds Trailer Court Brunswick unt. Allen Creek 15 Scuthside Community College Charlotte unt. Gills Creek 16 Hicksford Elem. School Greensville Falling Run A-10 Map Key No. Facility Nam Receiving Water 17 Zion Elem. School Greensville unt. Falling Run 18 Belco Motel and Restaurant Greensville unt. Falling Run 19 Ramada Inn Greensville Fountaine Creek 20 Artie Pickford Residence Greensville Mill Swamp 21 Robert Hicks Residence Greensville unt. Mill Swamp 2@ Virginia Rest Stop (1-95) Greensville unt. Beaverpond Creek -23 Gizzards Sunoco Greensville unt. Falling Ran 24 Wilson Trailer Court Greensville Caney Branch 25 B. A. Moore's Trailer Park Greensville unt. Falling Run 26 Boykins Elem. School Southampton unt. Tarrara Creek MEHERRIN R= BASIN Industrial Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 1 Vulcan Materials (001) Brunswick Robinson Creek 2 Vulcan Materials (002) Brunswick Robinson Creek 3 Iawrenceville Water Treatment Plant Brunswick Great Creek 4 Jenny System Mayfield Carwash Brunswick Great Creek 5 Virginia Dye Corp. Greensville Meherrin River 6 Trego Stone Corp. Greensville Fontaine Creek 7 Weldon Mills Greensville Meherrin River 8 Georgia Pacific Greensville Metcalf Creek 9 Rnporia Water Treatment Plant Greensville meherrin River 10 Victoria industrial Development Aut1-iority (Salt Holding Pond) lunenburg Couches Creek A-11 MEHERRIN RIVER BASIN (continued) Industrial Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 11 Victoria Industrial Development Authority (Aerated lagoon) Lunenburg Couches Creek 12 Kenbridge Water Treatment Plant Lunenburg Flat Rock Creek 13 South Hill Water Treatment Plant Mecklenburg Crooked Creek NOTTOWAY RIVER BASIN Domestic Dishcarger: Hap Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 1 Town of McKenny Dinwiddie unt. Buckskin Creek 2 Town of Jarratt Greensville Hickory Swamp 3 Town of Victoria (East) Lunenburg unt. Big Hounds 4 Town Of Kenbridge Lunenburg Seays Creek 5 Red Oak E.S. Brunswick unt. Waqua Creek 6 Eastside E.S. Dinwiddie Rocky Branch 7 Nottoway Motel and Restaurant Brunswick Nottoway River 8 Humble Oil Co. 712 Brunswick Nottoway River 9 Dinwiddie Co. Jr. Dinwiddie unt. Little Cattail Righ School Creek 10 Dinwiddie Co. Dinwiddie unt. Chamberlains High School Bed Creek 11 Silmurts Motel Dinwiddie Smith Creek 12 Georgian Rathskeller Dinwiddie unt. Hatcher Ran 13 Green Acres Trailer Dinwiddie Hatcher Run Court and Motel A-12 NOITa%7AY RIVER BASIN (Continued) Damestic Dischargers: 14ap Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 14 1-85 Rest Stop Dinwiddie unt. Gravelly Rin 15 Harrison's Trailer Park Dinwiddie Picture Branch 16 Holiday Inn Trav-L- Campo ,rounds Dinwiddie Hatcher Ran 17 Stuckey's Dinuliddie Little Cattail Creek 18 Belfield E. s. Greensville unt. Maclins Creek 19 Reste' Motel Greensville Otterdam, aTamp 20 Emporia Motel and Restaurant (Quality Inn) Greensville Otterdam. Swan-p 21 Ehiporia Truck Stop Greensville unt. Three Creek 22 Deering Exxon Greensville unt. Three Creek 23 Burkeville T-nter- Mediate School Nottagay nt. Mallorys Creek 24 Fort Pickett Nottoway unt. Hurricane Branch 25 Piedmont State Hosp. Nottoway unt. Lazaretto Creek 26 Holiday Inn South Prince George Un-IL-.-. Jones Hole Swarnp 27 Clairmont Motel Prince George Jones Hole Swamp 28 Bollingbrook Inn Motel and Allstate MEP Prince George unt. Jones Hole Swamp 29 Busby Sunoco Station Prince George Jones Hole Swamp 30 Hill's Trailer Park Prince George unt. Jones Hole Swamp 31 Southampton High School Southampton unt. Mill Swamp 32 Southampton Jr. High School Southampton unt. Nottoway River 33 Courtland E.S. Southampton unt. Flag Run A-1 3 NOTTOWAY RIVER BASIN (Continued) Domestic Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 34 Capron E.S. Southampton Buckhorn Swamp 35 Hunterdale E.S. Southampton unt. Nottoway Swamp 36 Southampton State Correctional Farm Southampton Three Creek 37 Convict Camp No. 20 Southampton Hornet Swamp 38 Central H.S. and E.S. Sussex Anderson Branch 39 Colonial Motel and Jarratt Motel Sussex Spring Creek 40 Davis Restaurant Sussex Stony Creek 41 Sussex Courthouse Sussex unt. Thweatt Branch NOTTOWAY RIVER BASIN Industrial Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 1 Lone Star Industries Brunswick unt. Nottoway River 2 Dinwiddie Laundromat Dinwiddie Stony Creek 3 Victoria Water Treatment Plant Lunenburg Little Hounds Creek 4 Burkeville Veneer Nottoway unt. Mallorys Creek 5 Crewe Water Treatment Plant Nottoway Lazaretto Creek 6 Fort Pickett Water Treatment Plant Nottoway Hurricane Creek 7 Hercules, Inc. Southampton Wills Gut 8 Hercules, Inc. Soluhampton Nottoway River A-14 NOTTOWAY RIVER BASIN (Continued) Industrial Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 9 H. P. Beale and Sons Southampton unt. Mill Run 10 Southampton State Correctional Farm Southampton Three Creek 11 Johns-Manville Corp. (002) Greensville Hickory Swamp 12 Johns-Manville Corp. (001) Greensville Chetocric Swamp BLACKWATER RIVER BASIN Domestic Dishcargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 1 South Plains Sub-Division (City of Petersburg) Petersburg City unt. Second Swamp 2 Berkeley Manor (City of Petersburg) Petersburg City Blackwater Swamp 3 City Of Franklin Southampton Blackwater River 4 Edgehill Subdivision Southampton unt. Blackwater River 5 Town of Waverly Sussex Spring Branch 6 Town of Wakefield Sussex Wildcat Swamp 7 Zuni Presb. School Isle of Wight unt. Blackwater River 8 Field Correctional Unit 3 Isle of Wight unt. Corrowaugh Swamp 9 South E.S. Prince George unt. Second Swamp 10 Walton E.S. Prince George unt. Blackwater Swamp 11 Richard Bland College Prince George unt. Second Swamp 12 Harrison E.S. Prince George unt. Blackwater Swamp A-15 BLACKWATER RIVER BASIN (Continued) Domestic Dischargers: Map Key No. Facility Name County Receiving Water 13 Beazley E.S. Prince George unt. Blackwater Swamp 14 Prince George H.S. and Country Aire MHP Prince George Blackwater Swamp 15 Prince George Jr. H.S. Prince George Second Swamp 16 Quality Inn/Steven Kent Motel Prince George unt. Second Swamp 17 LaSalle Motel Prince George unt. Second Swamp 18 Ellwyn Motel Prince George unt. Second Swamp 19 Phillips 66 Prince George Groundwater 20 Prince George Texaco Prince George unt. Warwick Swamp 21 Petersburg Jail Farm Prince George unt. Second Swamp 22 Bennies M.H.P., Inc. Prince George unt. North Fork Blackwater Swamp 23 Mannings M.H.P. Prince George Blackwater Swamp 24 Whispering Pines Trailer Court Prince George unt. Blackwater Swamp 25 Battlefield Park Exxon No. 2 Prince George Groundwater 26 Berlin-Ivor E.S. Southampton unt. Seacock Swamp 27 Brookside Trailer Park Southampton unt. Blackwater River 28 Jones Primary School Suffolk Spiney Swamp 29 Surry County H.S. Surry Hazel Swamp 30 L. P. Jackson Combined School Surry unt. Blackwater River A-16 BT-ACI'\VRT-CR RIVER BASIN Industrial DiscHargers': Map Key No. Facility Nam County Receiving Water 1 Union Camp Bleac'ned Paper and Board Division Isle of Wight Blackwater River 2 Union Canp Building Products Division Isle of Wight Blackwater River 3 Master Tank and Welding Co. Prince George mt. Second Swamp 4 R. M. Felts Packing Co. Southampton unt. of Seacock Swamp 5 St. Regis Paper Co. Southampton unt. of Black-water River 6 Union Camp Bleached Paper and Board Division Suffolk City Blackwater River 7 Masonite Corp. Sussex Spring Branch 8 Masonite Corp. Sussex, Spring Branch 9 Spurlock Corp. Sussex Spring Branch 10 Spurlock Corp. Sussex Spring Branch unt. unnamed tributary A-17 B. NORTH CAROLINA DISCILNRGERS Map Key Receiving Type NO. Facility County Water Waste 1 Roanoke Housing Project Northampton Beaverpond Creek Domest'- 2 Seaboard Northampton Ivy Creek Domes 3 Eastside Elementary School Northampton Ramsey Creek Domesto, 4 Northampton High School Northampton Wildcat Swamp Domestic 5 Severn Northampton Meherrin River Domestic 6 Conway Northampton unt. Kirby Creek Domestic 7 Georgia-Pacific, Inc. Northampton Paddy's Delight Creek Industrial 8 Woodland Northampton unt. Urahaw Swarrp Domestic 9 Murfreesboro Hertford Meherrin River Domestic 10 Riverview Elementary School Hertford unt. Meherrin River Domestic 11 Oulander Hertford Fort Branch Domestic 12 S. Oulander Elementary School Bertie Fort Branch Domestic 13 Ahoskie Hertford Ahoskie Creek Swamp Domestic 14 Alamanc Knitting Mills Hextford unt. Ahoskie Creek Industrial Swamp, 15 Winton Hertford Chowan River Domestic 16 C. F. Industries Hertford unt. Chowan River Industrial 17 C. G. White Ele. School Bertie unt. Barbecue Swamp Domestic 18 Harrellsville Hertford unt. Wiccacon River Domestic 19 W. Colerain Ele. School Bertie unt. chinkapin Swamp Domestic 20 Coleraih Bertie unt. Cho@zn River Domestic 21 Perry-Wynns Fish Co. Bertie Chowan River Industrial 22 John P. Law Ele. School Bertie unt. Black Walnut Domestic Swamp 23 Gates County High School Gates unt. Bennett Creek Domestic 24 Gates County Cormunity Center Gates Bennett Creek Domestic 25 N.C. Dept. of Correction and Central Jr. Hi. School Gates unt. Bennett Creek Domestic 26 Gatesville Ele. School Gates Bennett Creek Domestic 27 Sunbury Primary School Gates unt. Raynor Swaiqo Domestic 28 T.S. Cooper Ele. School Gates unt. Raynor Swaffp Domestic 29 Chowan County Hi. School Chowan Indian Creek Domestic 30 White Oak School Chowan unt. Chowan River Domestic 31 United Piece Dyevlorks Chowan Chowan River Industrial 32 Chowan County Water System Chowan unt. Rockyhock Creek Industrial 33 Edenton Water TreatTent Plant Chowan unt. Chowan River Indu 34 Edenton Cotton Mills Chowan Queen Annie Creek Indu 35 Edenton Chowan Chowan River Dome unt. - unnamed tributary A-18 CHOWAN RIVER BASIN FIGURE 1 Va. -------- ------ N.C. LOCATION MAP 00 0 D I W I u B R River -Vo tto.a S W K C) e Cree 03 %p S 0 u Amf p NO-R TH N A E S E R T T E WAS G T -/k. GENERALIZED LAND USAGE F ALA IL 4Q- NFOREST AND SWAMP LAND DAGRICULTURE DorRIBUTION OF POINT SOURCE 40 PETERSBURG 250 6 T6 T7 021 16 @rI5 1110 13 9 0 10" 6 N, 29 io 0 FORT 11 ... 11 0 17 024 03o 15 oil 3 A 4 0 0 0 KEN-RIDGE (D 4D *TAKEFAD 05 e 0 140TTOWAY RIVFR 41 38 SLACKWATFR 39 012 OQjARRAT 10 6 CEMIE 031 01 am 4 SOUTH HILL 2 11 .220 19 0 0 4p 9 5 0 3j 34 IS 330 16 31 8 3 IS 140 23 25 17 -1 7 27 19 0 20 21 260 0 0 22 9 0 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 2 5 496EABOARD 40.W- 7 3 RI.TO. WO--LA.. INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE :210: DOMESTIC DISCHARGE '*10. U t A N D E R14 17 12 0 APPENDIX B I NORTH CAROLINA ACTIVITIES AND COMMITMENTS is NORTH CAROLINA ACTIVITIES AND COMMITMENTS Monitoring Strategy The water quality monitoring program currently underway in the Chowan River is the single most critical activity being performed. It is essential to an understanding of how the river responds to various conditions and to the dqvelopment of a sound management strategy. Three full-time scientists are assigned to this restoration project and are stationed in Edenton. Dr. Robert Holman is the head of this team, and may be reached at (919)'482-7556. The current and proposed moni- toring plan calls for the following actions: A. Approximately 25 stations on the Chowan River are sampled weekly by boat. Figure 1 shows the loca- tions of the sampling stations, and Table 1 gives station descriptions and parametric coverage. These samples will provide a data base for river conditions during the sampling period and can be combined with flow data for development of water quality models of algal growth and nutrient dynam- ics in the Chowan. Continuous automatic samples of the river are being taken in the vicinity of C. F. Industries (CFI). B. Approximately 20 stations on tributaries.to the Chowan R'iver are sampled bi-weekly from bridges. Figure 2 shows the locations of these stations and Table 2 gives station descriptions and parametric coverage. These stations will give nutrient loading data for tributaries which will be useful for model inputs. These loading data can also be used along with land use data and point source data to deter- mine important nutrient source areas. C. Weekly samples of the Union Camp effluent are taken when the industry is discharging and bi-weekly samples are taken of United Piece and Dye effluent. Further monitoring of point sources will be needed on a regular basis to obtain accurate estimates of individual point source contributions. D. Sediment samples are taken on a monthly basis at five stations for nutrient analysis in an effort to show geographical and seasonal variations in nutrient concentrations in the sediment. This samp- ling scheme may not be sufficient to determine nu- trient inputs from the sediment. It is anticipated that a sediment interaction research study in the Chowan, to be managed through the WRRI, could answer the sediment question (assuming it is funded). B-1 E. Some air sampling has taken place in the vicinity of CFI to preliminarily study air inputs of nu- trients to the Chowan from CFI's emissions. Some loading of nitrogen was seen in this area and further air sampling and modeling work has been planned to study this possibly significant source. F. Groundwater studies have been ongoing at the CFI site. Wells have been installed in the swamp be- low their property and surface and subsurface con- centrations of nitrogen in the swamp have been determined. Hydraulic profiles have been deter- mined by shooting elevations of water levels in the wells. A report is pending on an estimate of ground- water inputs of nutrients from CFI property. G. Agricultural BMP's recommended in the 208 Plan are 2 being implemented on four small watersheds (1-5 mi area) within the Chowan River Basin as part of a study being carried out by NCSU researchers. Nutrient production from these watersheds will be compared with that from a forested watershed as well as with previous estimates of nutrient production. These previous estimates, made before BMP implementation, were develoiDed from monitorina done for a two-vear period in two of the watersheds by researchers from NCSU. This study will provide much needed informa- tion relative to the ef f ectiveness of recommended BMP 1 s in reducing nutrients from agriculture. H. Tides and temperature are being continuously monitored at five stations along the river by USGS to use in determining accurate flow patterns in the river. This information will be useful in future water quality modeling. I. Algal kinetics and nutrient requirements are being studied through a contract with Dr. Witherspoon at NCSU. He is focusing his work on the five major bloom species in the Chowan. The NCSU laboratory is also performing much of the nutrient analysis and - all phytoplankton analysis for the Chowan study. The Division of Environmental Management is currently establishing a laboratory in Edenton to ensure the. availability of sample analysis and ainalytical capa- bilities for both biological and chemical samples. The same analytical methods developed and utilized by Dr. Witherspoon are being used. B-2 Nutrient Sensitive Water Classification Until the adoption of the Nutrient Sensitive Water Clas- sification, the Division of Environmental Management (DEM) did not have the authority to limit nutrient inputs into the surface waters of the State. At the January 11, 1979,meeting of the Environmental Management Commission (EMC), the DEM staff presented a proposed action plan to limit nutrient re- ieases to the Chowan River Basin. In response to this pro- posal, along with various other input, the EMC adopted a res-@- .olution authorizing the Director of DEM to initiate rule- making procedures for developing "a regulation to limit nu- trient discharges into the streams and tributaries to streams experiencing or which are likely to experience excessive growth(s) of microscopic and macroscopic vegetation." Following the direction provided in the January 11 EMC Resolution, DEM staff, Enforcement staff and the Attorney General's Office staff began to formulate specific regulatory authority to address nutrients in the aquatic environment. The result of this effort is the concept nutrient sensitive waters. The rule was formulated to utilize the statutory authority in G. S. 143-214.1 for developing surface water classifications aimed at protecting the water for its best usage. The Nutrient Sensitive Water (NSW) regulation was con- s'idered at public hearings in Winton, North Carolina on March 13, 1979 and in Raleigh, North Carolina on March 15, 1979. The staff brought the regulation before the EMC at their May 10, 1979 meeting. At that time, the EMC adopted the NSW regulation. Briefly, 15 NCAC 2B. 0214, Nutrient Sensitive Waters, allows the EMC to classify, in addition to existing classifications, any waters which "are experiencing or are subject to excessive growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation" as nutrient sensitive. Excessive growths are de- fined as "... growths which the Commission in its discretion finds to substantially impair the use of the water for its best,usage as determined by the classification applied to such waters." Excessive growths, then, are more than scien- tific measurements alone. The total impact of excessive aquatic vegetation must be considered. The NSW regulation prohibits the increase of nutrient concentrations in waters so classified. A copy of the adopted regulation is shown in Addendum 1. B-3 At the May 10, 1979 EMC meeting, the Commission utilized their emergency powers to classify the Chowan River as nu- trient sensitive for 120 days. On June 21, 1979, a public hearing was held in Winton, North Carolina to consider whether the NSW classification of the Chowan should be made permanent. Point Source Nutrient Control Options A. Municipalities: Since the EMC has adopted the NSW classification of the Chowan as permanent, at least two nutrient control options exist: 1. Under the NPDES permitting system, all point source dischargers into NSW may be required to control nutrient inputs. Thus, a munici- pality's NPDES permit could contain nutrient limitations. However, two conditions will pre- vent the immediate realization of any benefits this control option might have. First, nu- trient limitations will be placed in a dis- charger's permit upon reissuance. Because per- mit reissuance is normally on a five year basis, nutrient effluent limitations may not become effective for up to five years. -Second, even if a permit with nutrient limitations is issued in a short amount of time, a particular munici- pality will likely lack the facilities neces- sary to achieve the nutrient requirements. A compliance schedule involving several years will have to be developed. 2. Through the 201 planning process, treatment facil- ities for nutrient removal or land application procedures can be planned for and constructed. This option, however, also has with it a delay period for realizing the actual reduction of nu- trients going into the Chowan River. B. Industries: Besides.voluntary cutbacks, industries would be subject to the same processes as that de- scribed for municipalities in A.l. above. Point Source Legislation Attached in Addendum 2 is a copy of the recently ratified Senate Bill-641. This bill established G. S. 143-214.3, Re- vision to Water Quality.Standard. The provisions of this statute provide an'affected discharger.the opportunity to B-4 request revisions to established water quality standards for a particular stream.segment on the basis of economic con- siderations which would, in effect,.require a lesser degree of treatment than what would otherwise be required. Nutrient limitations, which are rarely required under EPA guidelines, could be directly affected by this statute. Therefore, it is important to note that any nutrient point source control pro- gram implement-ed in the Chowan through nutrient permit limita- tions is jeopardized by the availability of the statutory re- vision process in G. S. 143-214.3. Non-Point Source Nutrient Control Options The Chowan River Basin has been designated as a priority area in the North Carolina 208 Water Quality Management Plan for Agriculture and as such will receive intensified imple- mentation and study efforts. This will involve intensive educational efforts and, to the extent possible, shifting available technical assistance capabilities and cost-sharing funds to the region to promote a maximum voluntary control effort from local farmers. The intensive educational effort will be a highly coop- erative venture, employing the excellent local support de- veloped by each of the agencies represented on the,208 Agri- cultural Task Forc'e. Local participation and involvement is crucial to the success of this program aspect and toward this end the formation of ad hoc committees is-envisioned. These will consist of representatives of all concerned local groups, including Soil and Water Conservation District supervisors, SCS personnel, NCDA representatives, local Farm Bureau and Grange officials and county extension staff, as well as re- presentatives of task force organizations. This will stimu- late the highest possible level of community awareness and benefit from being founded at the grassroots level. on-farm demonstrations, carried out with the cooperation of these same agencies, will be employed as part of the educational program to encourage the use of recommended practices. Besides the voluntary approach currently anticipated, the EMC could utilize its "Special Order" authority for non-point source pollution. A third mode of action limiting additional tile drainage, drainage ditch construction and channel im- provements would be unpopular in the area and is not currently being considered. It would, however, very likely assist in controlling nutrient delivery to streams in the basin. Addi- tional monitoring is needed to determine the levels of nu- trient loading coming from intensively-drained agricultural land. B-5 A.. Voluntary Use of Best Management Practices" This would consist of good faith effort by farmers to reduce nutrient input through applying less fertilizer, different fertilizer, or different timing of fertilizer. Soil tests could be used to assist in proper fertilizer application. Soil con- servation practices could be used in appropriate areas and would be eligible for funding from the U. S. Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service if funding was available. Better practices would also be needed in locating animal operations and in managing animal waste disposal. The North Carolina 208 Agricultural Task Force could be used to assist in urging voluntary compliance. B. Special Order A Special Order is the most likely regulatory tool that could be used to control non-point source pol- lution. A Special Order may be issued by the EMC to any person causing or contributing to any pollu- tion of the waters for which standards have been set. The order may direct the person, within a specified period of time, to take action deemed by the EMC as necessary and feasible in order to eliminate such pollut-Lon. During the 1979 Session of the General Assembly, a bill was passed to exempt agriculture from any Special Order of the EMC. Very few agri- cultural operations have ever been fined by the EMC, and these have been animal operations which are classified as point source pollution. Perhaps the EMC still has the authority to fine a non-point source agricultural operation, but noW it cannot specify a time period for the operation to come in- to compliance in order to avoid that fine (see adden- dum 3). This now also applies to point source ani- mal operations. Therefore, the EMC at this time has no practical regulatory tool to deal with agricultural non-point source pollution, the major contributor of non-point source nutrients. C. Drainage and Channel Improvement Controls By memorandum of agreement, the U. S. Army Corps o*f Engineers, the U. S. Soil Conservatibn Service and various North Carolina and Virginia counties could institute a moratorium on the public support of drainage improvements below agricultural areas. The U. S. Soil Conservation Service could agree not to supervise the installation of tile drainage in the B-6 river basin. Since "normal farming" and "minor drainage" are exempt from the 404 Dredge-and-Fill Permit process, voluntary compliance by individ- ual landowners would be needed to limit the in- stallation of tile drainage and to minimize the amount of maintenance of existing ditch systems. In addition, agriculture is exempt from the pro- visiojis of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) with one exception -- that all new ditch andcanal outlets through estuarine shorelines or coastal wetlands require CAMA permits. Consequently, im- provements to existing channels will not require CAMA permits. Research currently being conducted by N. C. State University and U. S. Geolouical Survey is finding that if ditches are not cl@ared of vegetation, the plants will cleanse the waters of nutrients and less may be delivered to watercourses. Thus, landowners should be encouraged to conduct a mini- mum amount of ditch clearing. Preliminary research also conducted by N. C. State University has found that winter water table controls can help reduce the delivery of nitrogen to surface waters. This technique may provide a useful means of controlling nutrient delivery from cropland in the future. Water Quality Management Plan for the Chowan River Little authority exists to immediately limit nutrient de- livery to the river. Consequently, the states of North Carolina and Virginia must prepare a Water Quality Management Plan for the entire Chowan Basin that will identify all the hard technical and political decisions concerning pollution abatement actions that will be needed to control nutrient de- livery to the river. North Carolina has prepared a Statewide 208 Water Quality Management Plan that delineates actions that need to be taken across the State to improve water quality. Due to its wide coverage from the mountains to the coast, this first Plan does not include detailed actions that should be specifically under- taken to solve the problem in the Chowan River. However, this first Plan did identify a process by which the 208 Water Qual- ity Management Planning program can be used to develop a specific water quality management plan for river basins such as the Chowan River. Both Virginia and North Carolina must participate in this planning proce *ss to restore acceptable water quality to the river. A more detailed description of this process may be found in Appendix D B-7 Cal ClA j- I//'// 'Y VIRGINIA GATES CO CAROLINA I T 00 c c *019 258 C2 113 V C2 Lille Alla/p ond 'R R V L'R it el c Murfreesboro 4 _2 E 1581, C 2 F -- 158 Millpond P 0 --lGa esville c i ton B I cl. C5 c C 6 -Jill G7 c Y River 01-jk -I I ic-cac n c 8 01. 41 R/ ,P c, j 11 c 9 C 11hilcoak B 0 S,.@! I>@ -Ahoskie 0 c I I , e C c sIt'll c 2diotyl TFORD ier CA C 13 0, 1,00siII4! 13 S 11-P z @ub-basin bounda line P C 15 ell 416 `E ent n Figure Chowan Sampling Stations 1978 Z!; S", B-8 il@BLAI IR1.1. -Se TABLE 1 CH0WAN STATIONS Spores - Sediment P&N - Sediment Phytoplankton Chlorophyll P&N - Water D.O. - Temp. - pH River Mile from alk.-light Va. Line C-1 Nottoway River above mouth at US 258. UC-1 Union Camp discharge C-1A* Discharge canal from Union Camp. C-1B Blackwater River at horseshoe bend above Union Camp C-2 Blackwater River 300 yds. above mouth. C-2A* Buckhorn Creek at Riddick Landing. C-2B Somerton Creek 100 yds. above mouth. C-2B1 Chowan At Gatlington Landing. C-2C Chowan at 90' bend above Meherrin. C-2D Meherrin River at horseshoe. C-2E* Meherrin River at Parker Ferry. C-2F Potecasi Creek at mouth. C-3 Chowan 100 yds. above bridge at Winton. 13.3 C-3A (Old C-RR) Chowan at Searboard Railroad near Tunis. 16.2 C-3B Catharine Creek at Tunis boat ramp. C-4 Chowan mid-river at CF Industries pier. 17.8 C-4Z Swamp drainage at downstream flag (sample on land) C-4C* Chowan 10' off bank at C-4Z C-4A Chowan on CF side at swamp at automatic sampler. 17.9 W W C-5 Chowan below bend below CF Industries at Marker 27. 18.8 W W W W C-5A* Barnes Creek at mouth. C-6 Chowan just below Island Creek. 22.7 W W W W C-6A Wiccacon River at lst bend above mouth. W W W W C-6B* Wiccacon at Tar River Landing W W W W C-7* Chowan 200 yds. below Wiccacon. 25.5 C-7A Chowan River below Wiccacon at Marker 18 25.9 W W W W C-8 Bennett Creek at lst bend above mouth. W W W W C-9 Catherine Creek 100 yds. above mouth. W W W W C-11 Chowan 200 yds. below Holiday Island at Marker 12. 31.4 W W W W M W C-12 Chowan mid-channel at Dillard Creek (Indian Creek) 33.7 W W W W C-13 Chowan mid-channel at Colerain. 37.1 W W W W M W C-14 Rockyhock Creek up into mouth. W W W W C-15 Chowan mid-channel at Rockyhock Creek. 44.2 W W W W C-16 Chowan 50 yds. above NC 17 bridge. 48.2 W W W W M W C-17* Chowan 400 yds. below NC 17 bridge. 48.5 C-21* Edenton Bay 300 yards S of Edenton. *Stations which have been discontinued. M=Monthly W=Weekly VIR@INIA G A f-ES 60 CAROLIN HE T rclt A *DIP 258 00 vd, eo r P. R L ille rs d W_ M u r f re e s b o r o D-J PoIc M illly (I nel Occ CF Ga esville C8A K> B inton J. CB B J I CQ1 C 17 R r C> @,,O jjc C I Br z .1, --Ah oskie i TFORD Cc Jer C 1821, CIO,/ 13 sivp 1@v Z! 14A 7- .Ub-basin bounda line C14 4- title 'Edent FIGURE 2 Chowan Bridg(-, Pun Stations B-11 Table.2. Bridge Run Station Parameter* C-14 Rockyhock Creek at SR-1207 P&N C-14A Rockyhock Creek at ST-1222 P&N C-12A Dillard Creek at ST-1226 P&NI Phyto C-A UT on ST-1232 just north of P&N Cannon Ferry C-9A Catherine Creek At ST-1232 P&N C-9B Trotman Creek at ST-1100 P&N C-B Swamp area around Trotman Creek P&N C-8A Bennetts Creek at Highway 37 P&N C-6E Cole Creek at SR-1112 P&N C-C 2nd Bridge at Cole Creek at SR-1112 P&N C-6D Taylor Mill Pond at SR-1118 P&N, Phyto C-6F Sarem Creek at ST-1120 P&N C-D Run Swamp Creek at Highway 13/158 P&N C-2A1 Buckhorn Creek at ST-1319 P&N C-F Potecasi Creek at Highway 158 P&N C-G Catherine Creek at ST-1400 P&N, Phyto C-6C Wiccacon River at Highway 45 P&N C-7B Taylor Pond at ST-1441 P&N, Phyto C-H Deep Creek at ST-1112 P&N UPD United Piece & Dye Effluent P&N Also temperature, pH, D.O. and conductivity taken at all tributary stations. B-12 ADDENDUM I Regulation 15 NCAC 2B .0214; NUTRIENT SENSITIVE WATERS; has been adopted and reads as follows: .0214 NUTRIENT SENSITIVE WATERS W In addition to existing classifications, the commission may classify any purface waters of the State as nutrient sensitive waters (NSW) upon a finding that such waters are experiencing or are subject to excessive growt@s of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. Excessive growths are growths which the commission in its descretion finds to substantially impair the use of the water for its best usage as determined,by the classification applied to such waters. (b) NSW may include any or all waters within a particular river basin as the commission deems necessary to effectively control excessive growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. (c) For the purpose of this rule, the term "nutrients" shall mean phosphorous and/or nitrogen. When considering the assignment of this classification the commission may specify as a "nutrient" any other chemical parameter or combination of parameters which it determines to be essential for the growth of microscopic and macroscopic vegetation. *(d) Those waters additionally classified as nutrient sensitive shall be identified in the appropriate schedule of classifications as referenced in Section .0300 of this Subchapter. (e) For the purpose of this rule the term "background levels" shall mean the concentration(s), taking into account seasonal variations, of the specific nutrient or nutrients upstream of a nutrient source. (f) Quality St5ndards applicable to NSW: No increase in nutrients over background levels unless it is shown to the satisfaction of the director that the increase (1) is the result of natural variations, or (2) will not endanger human health, safety or welfare and that. preventing the increase would cause a serious economic hardship without equal or greater benefit to the public. History Note: Statutory Authority C. S. 143-214.1; Eff. May 10, 1979. B-13 Addendum 2 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1979 RATIFIED BILL CHAPTER 929 SENATE BILL 641 AN ACT TO AMEND G.S. 143-214.3 SO AS TO REVISE THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: Section 1. A new section is added to Chapter 143 of the General Statutes to read as follows: " 143-214.3. Revision to water quality standard.--(a) Any person subject to the provisions of G.S. 143-215.1 may petition the Environmental Management Commission for a hearing pursuant to G.S. 143-215.4 for a revision to water quality standards adopted pursuant to G.S. 143-214.1 as such water quality standards may apply to a specific stream segment into which the petitioner discharges or proposes to discharge. (b) Upon a finding by the Environmental Management commission that: (1) natural background conditions in the stream segment proclude the attainment of the applicable water quality standards; or (2) irretrievable and uncontrollable man-induced conditions preclude the attainment of the applicable water quality standards; or (3) application of effluent limitations for existing sources established or proposed pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1 more restrictive than those effluent B-14 standards and limitations determined or promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Section 301 of the Federal Uater Pollution Control Act in order to achieve and maintain applicable eater quality standards would result in adverse social and economic impact, disproportionate to the benefits to the public health, safety or uelfare as a result of maintaining the standards; and (4) there exists no reasonable relationship betveen the cost to the petitioner of achieving the effluent limitations necessary to comply vith applicable water quality standards to the benefits, iDcluding the incremental benefits to the receiving waters, to be obtained from the application of the said effluent limitations; Then the Environmental Hanagement Comaission shall revise the standard or standards, as such standard may apply to the petitioner, provided that such revised standards shall be no le'ss stringent than that which can be achieved by the application of the highest level of treatment which uill -result in benefits, including the incremental benefits to the receiving waters, having a reasonable relationship to the cost to the petitioner to apply such treatment, as determined by the evidence; provided, however, in no event shall these standards be less stringent than the level attainable with the application by the petitioner of those efiluent standards and limitations determined or Senate Bill 641 promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency pursuant, to Section 301 of the Federal Hater Pollution Control Act; provided, further, that no revision shall be granted uhich vould-endanger human health or safety.21 Sec. 2. There is approFriated from the General Fund to the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) for the 1979-80 fiscal yeare and forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) for the 1980-81 fiscal year, in addition to all other appropriations, for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this act. Sec. 3. This act shall become effective July 1,, 1979. In the General Assembly read three ti mes and ratified, this the 8th day of June, 1979. JAMES C. GREEN James C. Green President of the Senate CARL J STEWART, JR. Carl J. Stewart, Jr. Spe aker of the House of Representatives 'Senate Bill 641 B-16 ADDENDUM 3 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1979 RATIFIED BILL CHAPTER 889 HOUSE BILL 1456 AN ACT TO AMEND G.S. 143-215.2 CONCERNING THE USE CF SPECIAL ORDERS AGAINST FARM OPERATIONS. The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: Section 1. G.S. 143-215.2(a) is amended by adding the following sentence at the end thereof: t'Provided, however, that the provisions of this section shall not apply to any agricultural operation, such as the use or preparation of any land for the purposes of planting, growing, or harvesting plants, crops, trees or cther agricultural products, or raising livestock cr pcultry.11 Sec. 2. This act is effective upen ratification. In the General Assembly read three times and ratified, this the 'Z'+"Nday of June, 1979. JAP11ES C. GREEN James C. Green President of the Senate CARL J. STEI.,VART, JR. Carl J. Stewart, Jr. Speaker of the House of Representatives B-17 APPENDIX C 0 VIRGINIA ACTIVITIES AND COMMITMENTS 41 VIRGINIA ACTIVITIES AND COMMITMENTS At a meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina on March 9, 1979, Mr. R. V. Davis, Executive Secretary, Virginia State Water Con- trol Board, spoke on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia and pledged Virginia's cooperation "to the fullest extent possible in assessing the water quality situation of the Chowan River Basin in Virginia." Since that meeting, Virginia has met with officials from North Carolina on several occasions and coordi- nated various proposals to study and develop a Special 208 Study outline for the Chowan. It is in this light that the following list of activities by Virginia in the Chowan River Basin is pre- sented. 1. A Section 303(e) (Public Law 92-500) River Basin Water Quality Management Plan for the Chowan River Basin in Virginia has been developed. This Plan essentially covers the management of all the point source dis- charges in the Chowan River Basin and further makes an assessment of non-point sources, environmental impact, and wasteload allocations into the river. It is felt that the implementation of this Plan will result in the removal of the maximum amount of nutrients from the point sources located in the Chowan River Basin in Virginia. Implementation is being carried out through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System at this time. 2. A Section 208 (Public Law 92-500) Water Quality Manage- ment Plan for the Southeastern portion of Virginia, included in the Chowan River Basin,the counties of Isle of Wight, Southampton and Nansemond, and the Town of Franklin, has been developed by the Hampton Roads Water Quality Agency. The purpose of this Plan is to set forth the measures to be taken.by agencies, com- panies and localities throughout'the Hampton Roads area (including the Chowan River Basin area) to obtain and maintain the water quality goals as specified in the Federal and state laws and regulations. These goals include those pertaining to nutrients and nutrient re- moval controls as it may apply to the Chowan River Basin. Specifically, the Plan recommends that stanr dards for nutrients (including nitrogen and phosphorus) will be defined and applied*to area receiving waters. Additionally, stream classifications will be refined and impact evaluation tools will be developed to evalu- ate significant discharges into the Chowan system. Also necessary monitoring to include additional parameter coverage such as missing nutrients, heavy metals and C-1 toxicants is being recommended. Further basin analysis, including receiving water modeling for non-point and nu- trients will be carried out for the Albemarle Sound/ Chowan River Basin and the waters in the basin will be classified as effluent-limited until additional studies are performed. The Plan recommends that localities im- plement additional. best management practice measures as outlined in the engineering report to control non-point sources of pollution. Additional control recommendations for non-point sources will bebased on test site results as well as on proposed water quality modeling to be con- ducted. It is felti,then that elements of this Plan, as implemented, will complement the State's plan listed in the next item for best management practices application to those known sources or areas where non-point sources- of pollution are affecting the water quality. 3. The Statewide 208 Program for 1977-78 included the de- velopment of best management practices as the top prior- ity item for implementation of a management program to control non-point sources of pollution in six categories. They are: a. Agricultural b. Forestry C. Urban d. Sources affecting groundwater e. Hydrologic modifications f. Surface mining Currently, there is being developed a management hand- book for implementing best management practices through- out the State, including the Chowan River Basin, where problems from non-point sources of pollution have been evaluated and assessed to be of a nature which demands their control. 4. The Tidewater Regional Office of the State Water Control Board has initiated a one-year monitoring study intended to determine the nutrient loading of the Blackwater, Nottoway and Chowan Rivers in Virginia as they cross the border from Virginia to North Carolina. Variables such as dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, micronutrients, and direction of flow will also be observed. It is thought that the following information will be generated from the data gathered in the study. a. -Nutrient contribution from Virginia to the Chowan Basin b. The comparative nutrient loading of the three .Virginia rivers that flow into the Chowan Basin C-2 C. Comparisons between ambient quality monitoring stations from grab samples and the detailed transect sampling d. Yearly exchanges in the flora, to be observed e. M.icronutrient observation f. Further statistics with respect to various means of monitoring and correlation matrices for nutrients and algae data. 5. Development of a proposal to do a Special 208 Study in the Chowan Basin in conjunction with North Carolina has been developed by Virginia. This proposal will de- tail: a. The coordination and management b. Water quality/pollutant loading analysis c. Evaluation of alternative control strategies d. Evaluation of implementation program/institutional arrangements e. Environmental assessment f. Public participation g. A reporting mechanism The details of this program are being coordinated with North Carolina officials at the present time. 6. Virginia 'has developed a first-cut study to determine the total pounds of nitrogen in the three major trib- utaries to the Chowan near the Virginia-North Carolina line. The tributaries are the Blackwater, Nottoway, and Meherrin Rivers. 7. Virginia is an active participant in the ongoing USDA study of the Chowan-Pasquotank River Basin, which in- cludes the relationship between agricultural runoff of nutrients and other pollutants versus the water quan- tity and water quality goals for the Chowan-Pasquotank River Basins. 8. Virginia is also participating in several other water resource related studies, such as that done by the Corps of Engineers for water supply in Southeastern Virginia and being expanded to that water supply in Southeastern Virginia and Northeastern North Carolina, a Level B Water Resource Council Albemarle Sound River Basin Study, activities of the Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission water supply studies, and numerous groundwater studies in the area of Southeast Virginia, the use of groundwater possibly having some effect on water quality in the Chowan River Basin. c-3 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Office of the Governor Maurice B. Rowe Richmond 23219 RECEIVED Secretary of Commerce and Resources OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY June 15, 1979 OCT 2 1979 Honorable Howard N. Lee, Secretary Department of Natural Resources and Community Development State of North Carolina Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Dear Secretary Lee: This is with reference to Governor Dalton's letter to Governor Hunt dated March 9, 1979, and to Governor Hunt's response of April 18, 1979 relative to the appointment of Virginia members to the Technical Panel, which would be involved in the project for the Lower Chowan River. We are pleased to report to you that six persons have been. appointed from Virginia to serve as Virginia members of the Technical Panel to be engaged in activities concerning the Lower Chowan River Project. Those individuals who have been appointed to serve from Virginia are as follows: R. V. Davis, Executive Secretary, Virginia State Water Control Board S. Mason Carbaugh, Commissioner, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Clifford W. Randall, Department of Civil Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University William J. Hargis, Jr., Director, Virginia Institute of Marine Science Joseph B. Willson, Jr., Director, Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Commission Larry S. McBride, Regional Director, State Water Control Board, Tidewater Regional Office C-4 Honorable Howard N. Lee Page Two June 15, 1979 As indicated during the May 22,-. 1979 meeting of the North Carolina-Virginia Water Resources 'Management Committee, we have made those modifications referred to during that meeting, and have incorporatcd them in a revised version of the paper describing the Lower Chowan Riv-er Project, a copy of which is provided hereviith for execution and return to us for our Committee files. Your earliest convenient consideration in executing the referenced document will be appreciated. We look forward to joining you in positive efforts toward amelioration of the water quality and associated problems in the Lower Chowan River in North Carolina. With kindest regards and all good wishes, I am ncerely yours, Maurice B. Rowe Enclosure C-5 628-21 North Carolina Department of Natural Resources & Community Development James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Howard N. Lee, Secretary July 2, 1979 The Honorable Maurice B. Rowe Secretary Commerce and Resources Office of the Governor Commonwealth of Virginia Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Maurice: Thank you for your letter of June 15 responding to our request for members to be appointed to the Chowan River Technical Panel. We also appreciate your sending along the revised document concerning the lower Chowan River. I am happy to enclose the signed agreement. In our view, this agreement to work together needs to be further developed as we determine specific measures to be taken to clean up the river. In North Carolina we are, of course, moving ahead with a number of very specific actions which go beyond the study phase. We will look forward to sharing these with you at our next meeting. We will designate members of the Steering Committee and Technical Panel to work with you as soon as we can discuss the matter further within the Department. As we already have a Technical Panel in operation, it will simply be a matter of deciding which six members will represent us on the joint Virginia-North Carolina Technical Panel. We trust this will meet the spirit of the July 15 project initiation date. Thank you again for all of your cooperation and Virginia's commitment to help us clean up the Chowan River. With kindest regards and best wishes, I am Respectfully yours, Howard N. Lee Enclosure cc: Dr. Neil S. Gringg Mr. A. F. McRorie C-6 Post Office Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina Telephone 919 733-1984 An Equal Opportunity Employer NORTH CAROL INA-V I RGI N IA WATER Pt':"SOURCES MANAGEMENT COMMI rT11 PROJECT F 0 R@ LOWER C11014AN RIVER NORTH nROLINA 1. INTRODUCTION: On April 27, 1978, the Govern-ors'of Virginia and North Carolina entered into a formal written aqreoment which recognizes that programs and activities for water resources management in water courses common to both states generate issues of mutual concern, which should be resolved through their designated representatives. As a result of the agreement, a committee was appointed by the Governors of Virginia and North Carolina to study and to develop joint policy, to devise institutional agreements, arid to develop and implement procedures for the resolution of water resources matters of mutual interest to the two states. Since its establishment, the committee, known as the North Carolina- Virginia Water Resources Manage:iient Committee, has considered several subjects of mutual interest and concern to both states.. On May 22, 1979 the Committee deliberated the sul.)ject of Lower Chowan River in North Carolina and a suggestion by North Carolini representatives to address water quality issues in that reach of the river. This project proposal is formulated based on decisions reached by the Committee on May 22, 1979. 2. BACKGROUND: The Cho@,.an River in North Carolina is formed at the juncture of the Blackwater River and Nottoway River, in North Carolina several miles upstream from Winton, North Carolina. The headwaters of Blackwater River arid 1,,1ottowiy River are in Virginia with both rivers crossing the Virginia-North Carolina boundary upstream froi@,i their juncture which forilis the Chowan River which empties into Albemarle Sound near Edenton, North Carolina. The basin drains about 5,000 square miles in Southeastern Virginia arid in Northeastern North Carolina and @qith notable exceptions, the basin is comprised of a rural economy for the most part. Urban areas in Virginia lying within the basin include the Cities of Franklin and Emporia with Edenton, Ahoskie, and Murfreesboro in North Carolina providing urban concentrations. The largest single employers in manufacturing in the basin include pulp, paper, wood products, textiles, arid a fertilizer manufacturing operation located in Tunis in North Carolina. Historically, the Chowan estuary has been plagued naturally with algal blooms and other related water- quality problems. The slow moving nature of waters in the Chowan River in North Carolina, particularly in the lower ret-Iches, provides conditions favorable for the growth of aquatic plant life, and seasonal algal blooms have been reported to be a natural phenomenon in the Chowan River with algal blooms of short duration expected to occur in late c-7 spring and again during late summer. It has been suspected that factors necessary to produce nuisance blooms of algae have been present since 1956 while in 1972 the seasonal algal bloom arrived in May and persisted until fall of that year providing a "pea soup" appearance from bank to bank in the lower half of the Chowan and in some sponts massive tufts which in the decaying process provided unsightly and malodorous material which was reported to have restricted various used of the river and beaches. Conditions similar to and perhaps more pronounced than the 1972 condition occurred in 1974 and in 1978. Governor Hunt on March 9, 1979 held an informational meeting on Chowan River problems in Raleigh, N.C. which was attended by representatives from point source dischargers in the Chowan River Basin and by representatives from regulatory and agricultural agencies in both Virginia and North Carolina. The purpose of the meeting, as expressed by Governor Hunt, was to provide an opportunity to discuss the seriousness of the situation concerning the Chowan River Basin and to discuss that which might be done to stem the nuisance algal blooms which appear periodically. During that meeting, the following points were made by Governor Hunt: a. Virginia was asked to join with North Carolina in efforts to abate the algal blooms. b. North Carolina's industries and municipalities were requested to monitor the nutrient levels from their discharges and submit that data to the North Carolina Secretary of Resources and Community Development. c. Agricultural interests in North Carolina were requested to follow soil and water conservation practices to reduce nonpoint source contributions. d. There was an expression of need that forests in the Basin be closely managed to eliminate or reduce considerably non- point source pollutants. e. North Carolina legislators present were reminded that there was then pending a supplementary request to accelerate pollution abatement in the Chowan River Basin. f. Governor Hunt expressed the thought that all should join together to implement a Chowan River Restoration Project. g. Governor Hunt emphatically stated that "save the Chowan" was his tip priority in the State insofar as pollution abatement efforts are concerned. h. The Governor of North Carolina requested that Virginia designate the Chowan as its top priority, along with North Carolina. In a communication to Governor Hunt, on March 22, 1979, Governor Dalton pledged to assess the effectiveness of agricultural conservation practices which have been employed throughout the Basin C-8 over the past several years, wi th consideration -to be given also to the following: a. The use of those practices designed to prevent or to reduce nonpoint sources of pollutants to a level compatible with water quality goals. b. *Review of ambient monitot'ing data (chemical and biological) to ascertain the nutrient" contribfitions to the "f,asi*n over the past several years. c. Emphasis of continued L-Ind more intense monitoring of nutrient sources within the Basin. d. Bring up to date, if necessary. data on pollutant levels from point sources in the 13asin. Governor Dalton also expressed continu-d interest in the subject and continued full cooperation in reviewing the problems associated with the Lower Chowan River. Assurance was given of the forthcoming appointment of Virginia members to be added to the membership of a Technical Panel of scientists in North Carolina who are already engaged in Chowan River water quality investigatory work. 3. SCOPE: The scope of the project is to examine the Lower Chowan water quality issues with special attention to be given to the relationships to algal production Of point and non-point discharges within the Basin and to provide information derived from sound scientific data, analyses, and conclusions, upon which to base and design a plan of positive action, the purpose of ahich is to ameliorate the nuisance condition of algal blooms in the Lower Chowan River in North Carolina. 4. PROJECT ORGANIZATION: The projlect is to be carriedi Out during a twenty-four month period commencing July 15, 1979, by a Technical Panel comprised of riot more than 12 eminent. scientists and engineers, six each from North Carolina and Virginia, appointed by a Steering Comwittee Linder the overall direction of the North Carolina-Virginia Water Resources Management Commi ttee. The Steering Comiliittee shall be comprised of the Virginia Secretary of Co!m,,ivrce and Resources, the Niorth Carolina Secretary of Natural Resources and COPMUnity Development, along with two other members, one each to be selected by the two respective secretaries. Members of the Steering Committee and of the Technical Panel shall be appointed no later than July 15, 1979. 5. PROJECT ACTIVITIES: Project activities will include the development jointly by the Technical Panel, a study plan designed to yield a plan of action to ameliorate the condition of nUisance algal blooms in the lower Chowan C-9 River, which plan is to be based on sound scientific data analyses, and conclusions, to include minimal adverse environmental and economic impact to those entities located throughout the Basin in North Carolina and Virginia. Project activities will include execution of those elements of the plan of action deemed appropriate, desirable, and necessary to be executed in the Virginia and North Carolina portions of the Basin as determined by each respective state. 6. LEVEL OF EFFORT: The level of effort to be applied to the project will be determined for each respective state by each state's member of the project Steering Committee. 7. FUNDING: The project funding by each respective state will be determined for each respective state by each state's member of the project Steering Committee. 8. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING: This document, executed by the Virginia Secretary of Commerce and Resources, and the North Carolina Secretary of Natural Resources and Community Development, co-chairmen of the North Carolina-Virginia Water Resources Management Committee, consists of the sole and only Memorandum of Understanding between the parties hereto for the conduct of this project. In witness whereof, the parties hereto affix their hands and seals: Maurice B. Rowe, Secretary Date June 25, 1979 Commerce and Resources Commonwealth of Virginia Howard N. Lee, Secretary Date 7-2-79 Natural Resources and Community Development State of North Carolina JMA/hkw C-10 APPENDIX D 9 BI-STATE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN I ol BI-STATE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN In March 1979, Governor Hunt called for a unified effort between localities, citizens and state agencies of both North Carolina and Virginia in solving this pressing problem. It was at this same meeting that the Executive Secretary of the State Water Control Board, in speaking for the Commonwealth of Virginia, pledged full cooperation in assessing the water quality situation in the Virginia portion of the Chowan River Basin. This pledge of cooperation has led to the development of an outline of a Plan of Action by Virginia to be conducted in coordination with North Carolina as a Special 208 Study of the Chowan Basin. The purpose of this summary is to lay forth the general proposal that Virginia has developed with respect to the Virginia portion of the special Chowan Water Quality Management Plan. It should be noted that a detailed work task outline of the Chowan Basin Special 208 Study is being d.--veloped concurrently as the North Carolina efforts progress and in co- ordination with the staff of the Environmental Management Com- mission of North Carolina. The finalized joint proposal would then be submitted to the EPA to.see if funds could be made available to support the project. North Carolina-has already committed a significant portion of its existing resources to the Chowan, which would be supplemented by this request, but Virginia will need additional funds to develop this Water Qual- ity Management Plan for the Virginia section of the Basin.. The proposed study will be delineated into seven general sections or subjects which require detailed task outlines. Those subjects.are: 1. The procedures for coordination and management 2. An analysis of water quality/pollutant loadings (assuming that point source control programs are adequate for continuous and special point sources) 3. The development of alternative control strategies and evaluations of these strategies singularly and in combination with other strategies and other programs 4. The development of recommendations for implementation, to include institutional arrangements 5. The description of environmental assessment responsi- bilities or subjects which should be addressed 6. A program of full public participation to assist in the development and direction and approval of this study D-1 7. A methodology of reporting on this study, to in- clude status reports, evaluation reports and final plan recommendations and summaries., backed up by technical reports. Project Coordination and Management The purpose of this section of the report would be to assure the establishment of a Management Plan Control Group which would manage and coordinate the study from beginning to finish and direct the appropriate subcontrol groups in their work toward a joint effort in solving the overall problems in the Chowan River Basin as it relates to the algal growth. It is felt that this group would include representatives of both states and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and would include an appropriate staff to carry out the management responsibilities. Staffing might consist of existing resource personnel or management consultant person- nel or combinations thereof. The major responsibilities of this group would be to carry throughi after certification, the management and review procedures to be employed in conduct- ing the study and-the monitoring results throughout this planning process. Coordination with all other efforts and all other levels of studies such as water resources and water quality studies and participation of efforts by various levels of interest groups, such as citizens, public and municipal-i- ties in Federal and state agencies is also an essential re- sponsibility of this management team or control group. A co- ordinated approach involving a detailed review and evalua- tion of previous studies conducted in the basin and re- lationship to other water programs, including a sound en- vironmental approach is necessary. It is felt that coordi- nation by this management group with the policies and desires of the states and -the Project Steering Committee and the work already done by Water Resource Research Centers in the Chowan are potentially significant responsibilities. Integration of the control strategies and outputs from all sections of the- study is also necessary for making final recommendations. Coordination of the public participation, administrative re- view and reporting elements is essential as a task that falls under the responsibility of such a management team and is an essential element of this section of the report. Analyses of Water Quality/Pollutant Loadings The purpose of this section is to obtain and correlate all water quality data in existence from both North Carolina and Virginia sources, and to utilize the analyses of this data in developing a program for water quality monitoring including both the hydrologic and water quality response elements (models) to obtain tools by which to test alter- native.strategies. Then, the monitoring and modeling D-2 program must be carried out to obtain the necessary inputs for making particular recommendations regarding effective- ness of controls and wasteload allocations. It is anti- cipated that this section of the overall plan will be the most costly and time consuming, but one without which the study cannot achieve meaningful results. Major elements of this section would include: A. The collection and correlation of all water quality data from both states B. The examination of the variations in water quality in the varying flow situaftions C. The development therefrom of a detailed monitoring program for the Blackwater, Nottoway and Meherrin River Sub-basins in Virginia D. The appropriate selection of a water quality model sufficient to meet parameter response needs E. The evaluation of rate effectiveness of present point and non-point source controls F. The establishment and updating of total maximum daily wasteload allocations, when compared to various alter- native strategies, and monitoring results It is important to note in this section of the report that it is essential to establish "critical periods" of response for loading, and the growth of plankton. The establishment of a monitoring program to detect the "critical period" might include such things as a point source loading docu- mentation, the hydrologic conditions and anomalies, non- point source sampling by land use types, the ambient river conditions under a variant of hydrologic conditions, ben- thic sampling, both chemical and biological, especially in North Carolina's tidal portion, including an emphasis on the uptake/release rates. Other special monitoring needs for decision-making would be biological studies of plankton species, in diversity and patterns. Additionally, it is necessary to establish the mass balance of the limiting nutrients and perform an evaluation of problem segments. The Establishment and Evaluation of Alternative Control Strategies The purpose of this section is to inventory existing control strategies, develop new ones where needed, and assess the applicability and effectiveness of various strategies under different scenarios for all sources of pollution. D-3 The selection process and recommended control strategy for all sources is to be accomplished. These efforts will re- quire close interface with all the efforts of both states. and under the confines of the regulations laid down by EPA. Major tasks would include inventory and tabulation by cate- gory of all potentially applicable best management prac- tices for the basin, including a correlation of their effectiveness ratings with each land use category in the basin. A modification of point source control programs for use as potential control strategies is also a necessary ele- ment. Various control scenarios are to be developed and tested for cost-effectiveness, and use of the various source controls available. The control technique scenarios are to be evaluated for regulatory and nonregulatory programs, and the establishment of a display criterion practicality and effective use is.necessary before a recommended plan or a plan of action for control strategies can be accomplished. The final key element would be to select and recommend the proposed control strategy for all sources of pollutants. IV. Development of Implementation Program Including Institutional Arrangements It is anticipated that this section will be developed under I 7_1 the auspiccs of the North Carolina-V@rgiini_.- T07 "- t _- r @ , C S 0 u --ce Management Committee as a Special 208 Study which will not preclude recommendations found in ongoing Virginia or North Carolina 208 planning efforts, including any designated 208 agency' work. The major thrust of this section would be to develop a plan which would lead to an implemental0le procedure acceptable to the state and local government entities. The major elements of such a plan will include an inventory of existing institutional arrangements and their roles in the basin development which-"along with an analysis of the rec- ommended control strategies with respect to management de- cisions, would lead to appropriate implementation recommen- dations regarding agencies, designations and management schemes. Further, this section,will attempt to identify an implementation schedule -and the necessary financial commit- ments to carry through with the process. A continuing plan- ning process and public participation commitments and con- currences is necessary to round out this section. V. Environmental Assessment Tasks Once a recommended program approach is developed by the local governments, it must be assessed with respect to its environmental impact on all of the local and state govern- ments involved. This environmental assessment will consist D-4 basically of the inventory of the effects on the environ- ment of the-recommended program, including the relative magnitude and priority of each particular action. The major effects would include both the environmental impacts and environmental enhancement effects. An evaluation cri- teria or scale for the importance of each of these effects would also be developed and utilized to determine the rel- ative priority. The end result of the environmental assessment section of this report should be a listing or summary table with specific evaluation criteria of the varying impacts, both urban and rural, of the recommended action plan for implementation, displayed in such a manner that decision-makers in the institutional management group can make appropriate decisions with respect to the rec- ommended alternatives. Vi. Public Participation In any water quality study funded by 208 or other Federal funds, there is a need for appropriate public participation to assure the proper decision-making role of the affected publics. This section will address the necessary activities consistent with Public Participation Regulations as promul- gated by EPA in 1979. This section will develop a program which will serve to enhance the awareness of water quality problems as well as foster the open processes of govern- mental decision-making. There are certain elements which must be addressed and are touched on below. However, there are often activities which are unplanned or executed in the course of the study which would be appropriate to public participation needs as they arise during the study. The major element to be covered is the design and establishment of appropriate public advisory groups representative of all sections of the population in substantially equal propor- tions. The two other major elements would be the actual conduct of a number of public meetings, forums and/or. hearings, and the development of media relationships and .vehicles to be used as educational material for the public through radio, TV, newspapers, audio visuals and special forums. VII. Report and Evaluation This section will deal mainly with the format for reporting to the public and the management committees both during the process, the formal certification at the end of the process, and the format for the reporting documents to be used. It will consist essentially of four elements, the first being the status report format to include timing and materials presentation. The second, third and fourth major elements D-5 of.reporting would be the format for the technical re- ports, the plan recommendations, and the public summary. The latter element - public summary - would be designed for public distribution to be used for educating.and ex- plaining to the public what the final recommended plan was in hopes it can be appropriately certified and im- plemented. It should be noted that the progress reports or status reports of the first element would evaluate the study as it is progressing and keep everyone informed of its progress. D-6 APPENDIX E (a WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH INSTITUTE . STATEMENT OF WORK 4-9 WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH INSTITUTE STATEMENT OF WORK Following the algal bloom of 1972, the Water Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina (WRRI) participated in the multi-agency Chowan River Project. Re- presentatives of the WRRI served on steering committees which formed overall policy and coordinated the individual studies. Institute sponsored research developed estimates of stream- flow, investigated the role of aquatic plants in nutrient re- cycling processes, described algal growth response to changing nutrient levels, studied seasonal limiting factors and their effect on algal growth, and developed water quality models applicable to the system. Researchers from North Carolina State University, East Carolina University, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill were supported in this re- search by the WRRI and the Office of Water Research and Tech- nology, USDI. Continuing and proposed work will investigate nutrient contributions from rural land runoff, refine and expand exist- ing water quality models, determine the function of bottom fauna in nitrogen recycling, explore the nutrient kinetics of the algal bloom, quantify nitrogen fixation by blue-green algae, and develop a multi-species phytoplankton nutrient criterion standard for the estuary. Research conducted by WRRI-sponsored investigators is closely coordinated with,.and provides essential information to, State Governmentactivities, and individual researchers are frequently called upon for advice and counsel. The fol- lowing lists summarize the completed publications and also the proposed research efforts for the Chowan. E-1 PUBLICATIONS Amein, M. and Galler, W. S. Management model for the Chowan River. UNC-WRRI Report No. 130. 1979. Bond, S., Cook, G. and Howells, D. H. Summary Report - The Chowan River Project. UNC-WRRI. n.d. Brinson, M. M. and David, D.,J. Primary productivity and mineral cycling in aquatic macrophyte communities of the Chowan River. UNC-WRRI Report No. 120. 1977. Daniel, C. C. III. Digital flow model of the Chowan River estuary, North Carolina. USGS, Water Resources Investi- gations, 77-63. 1977. Stanley, D. E. and Hobbie, J. E. Nitrogen recycling in the Chowan River. UNC-WRRI Report No. 121. 1977. Witherspoon, A. M. Phytoplankton response to water quality in the Chowan River. UNC-WRRI Report No. 129. 1979. ONGOING RESEARCH Humerrik, F. J. , Koehle_r, F. and Peroutka, A. A. Inves-tigat ion of strategies for-reducing agricultural non-point sources in the Chowan River Basin. May 1979 to December 1980. PROPOSED RESEARCH Kuenzler, E. J. Nutrient kinetics in relation to algal blooms in the Chowan River. October 1979 to September 1982. Lauria, D. T. and O'Melia, C. R. Chowan River quality models. October 1979 to September 1982. Mosley, S. C. Bottom fauna of the Chowan River. October 1979 to September 1981. Paerl, H. W. Nitrogen fixation as a eutrophication factor in the Chowan Riverl North Carolina. October 1979 to September 1981. Witherspoon, A. M. A phytoplankton multi-species nutrient criterion standard for the management of the Chowan River estuary. October 1979 to September 1981. E-2 Table 1. Summary of Research Proposals Inputs/Ex eriments Investigator Objectives Type Station Depth EreQuency-- Output/Results Paerl 1. Determine the quantitative 1. Water samples 1. Colerain 1. 0.5 m incr. 1. 14 day 1 Rate of N2 Fixation importance of N2 fixation & acetylene to 2.0 m, (May-Oct) by blue-green algae in the lm incr. Monthly lower Chowan River. beyond (Nov.-Apr) 2. To identify the environmen- 2. Water samples 2.. Colerain 2. Same as 1 2. Same as 1 2 Confirm actual stochiometry of 1, tal factors enhancing and + 15NI2 above limiting N2 fixation by blue green algae. 3. Water samples 3. Colerain 3. Same as 1 3. Same as 1 3. Rate of photosynthetic C02 fixation 3. Work with modelers in terms + 14C of N2 fixation as N input. 4. Probe Sensor 4. Colerain 4. Same as 1 4. Same as 1 4. DO, OC 5. Quantun photo- 5. Colerain 5. Same as 1 5. Same as 1 5. Photosynthetically active radiation meter sensor readings 6. Water samples, 6. Colerain 6. Same as 1 6. Same as 1 6. Algal species composition, biomass, millipore and- chlorophyll a, carotenoids. glass fiber fil tered, preserve 7. Water samples, 7. Colerain 7. Surface to 7. Diurnals- 7. Effect Of 02 and C02 concentration on N2 diurnal stud- 1 m monthly: fixation ies and lab- laboratory- oratory 2-3 days/wk. LJ studies Mozley 1. Determine distribution and 1. Sediment, grab, 1. 28, same 1. O.lm to 12"t 1. Once, Nov. 1. Distribution of benthos-preliminary sur- composition of larger bot- dredge, arti- as DEM bottom only 1979 vey tom fauna. ficial sub- locations strate samples Determine population dynam- 2. Seasonal 2. Same as 1 2. 1 to 12m, 2. 3 mos. 2. Seasonal distribution of benthos ics and production of common benthic grab bottom only over I yr. bottom fauna species. samples 3. Estimate bottom fauna's 3. Benthic samples 3. ColeraiN 3. 5m, bottom 3. 14 day.over 3. Environmental factors, sediments contribution to bloom via Winton only yr. nitrogen, phosphorus, and silica cycling 4. Population 4. Change in benthic populations dynamics 5., Estimates of bottom fauna, contribution to sediment water cycling for use in model Table 1. (Continued) Tnnijt,/Fyn rimpntt Investigator Objectives Type Station Depth Frequency Output/Results Kuenzler I Measure uptake rates of 1. Water samples, 1. Harrels- 1. 0.5, 1.5, 1. 4 wks 1. Turbidity, color, *C, conductance, DO, inorganic C, NH4, N03, P04 by -in situ mea- Ville, and 4m filterable reactive P, filterable un- phytoplankton under am- surements-- Colerain, reactive P, particulate P, NH4, N03, bient conditions. physical & Edenhouse N02, DON, particulate ON, dissolved OM, chemical particulate organic C. characteris- tics 2. Determine limiting nutrient 2. Water samples, 2. Above + 2. Same as 1 2. 2 wks, dur- 2. Same as 1. during bloom in situ mea-, 2 addi- ing summer surements-- tional bloom physical & chemical characteris- tics 3. Determine sediment metab- 3. Water samples, 3. Transects 3. 0.0 to 0.5m 3. Same as 2 3. Horizontal algal distribution and con@ olic rates and rates of phytoplankton centration inorganic N & P movement distribution into water column. by fluorescense t7j 1. Integrate data into nutrient 4. Water samples, 4. Same as 1 4. Same as 1 4- Same as 1 4. Photosynthetic rates and PO NO and 41 process models. growth & up- NH4 uptake 4' 3' take kinetics 5. Water samples, 5. Same as 1 5. Same as 1 5. Same as 1 5. Rel,ative N, P, or 3ther nutrient limita- algal enrich- tions ment studies 6. Sediment sam- 6. Same as 6. 0 to 2m, 6- Once 6. Sediment characteristics-4 sand, silt, ples--frozen Mozley 2 to 5m, clay; OM; Total N, Total P, interstitial :@5 m. H20, PO 49 NH 4' 7. Sedime 'nt-- 7. Between 7. Same as 6 7- Quarterly 7. Exchange of DO;NH4- PO 4. between water water exchange Harrels- and sediments in situ experi- Ville & ments with R/V Edenhouse Muchapunga Witherspoon 1. Develop data base upon 1. Water and 1. Winton, 11. Top & bottom 1. Bi-weekly 1. Isolation of 5 species which Chowan River WQ sediment Harrellsville, for 14 mos. model can predict response samples Colerain, of algal bloom species. Edenhouse Establish nutrient standard 2. Water samples 2. 25 station@2.' Top, center, 2. Weekly for 2. Ambient nutrient concentrations based on response of 5 bloom bottom 12 mos. species. 3. Isolates 3. Lab and 3. Sediment 3. Monthly for 3. Growth rate and standing crop along nuT (5 spp) above 12 mos. trient gradie,nt (biomass & chlorophyll a) stations 4. Isolates 4. L@b and 4. Sediment 4. Monthly for 4. N concenton required to trigger a ffe 12 mos. bloom (5 spp) s a ions Inputs/Experiments Investigator Objectives Type Station Depth Frequency Output/Results Lauria & 1. Refine parameters in 1. Analyze salinity data to deter-mine dispersion; evaluate 1. Mathematical models of transport O'Melia existing Chowan model reaction rate constants from nutrient data; calculate phenomena, reactions, and loadings. pollution discharges to estuary. 2. Investigate new and revised 2. Analyze N and P data for water column and sediments. 2. Mathematical models of nutrient reactions for inclusion in cycling within the estuary. the model 3. Expand model to predict new 3. Analyze Chowan data to determine interrelationships among 3. Mathematical models to predict reaction constituents chemical/biological species. and particulate N and P, chlorophyll- a and biomass 4. Examine model suitability 4. Comparison of field data with model predictions 4. Calibrated and verified predictive model 5. Simulate Chowan quality 5. Prepare computer program, and select alternative waste 5. Water quality simulation research loadings for Chowan. 6. Communicate research find- 6. Meetings, conferences, worksh ips, short course 6. Tool for water quality management ings Ln APPENDIX F * . I PROGRESS IN WORKING WITH MUNICIPALITIES AND INDUSTRIES 46 PROGRESS IN WORKING WITH MUNICIPALITIES AND INDUSTRIES A. Municipal Point Sources In May 1979, thirteen towns in the Chowan River Basin d.emonstrated a commitment to voluntary action to re- duce discharges into the Chowan. Upon the invitation of these' towns, the State's Ad Hoc Alternative Sewage Disposal Task Force met with the town officials and their consulting engineers in T inton, N North Carolina. The Task Force was requested to assist local governments in pursuing the possibilities of land application of municipal waste to eliminate nutrient discharges into the river while increasing the produc- tivity of farm and forestry lands. The Ad Hoc Alternative Sewage Disposal Task Force agreed to work with the towns in the Chowan Basin to develop a comprehensive plan for effective and efficient sewage .disposal, and the communities agreed to work toward a co- operative regional approach which would serve as a dem- onstration model for land application, septic tank manage- ment and other alternatives to conventional sewage dis- posal. The Environmental Management Commission (EMC) imposed a moratorium on 201 planning in the Chowan Basin until such time as the EMC completed its rule-making on classifida- tion of the Chowan as nutrient sensitive. On August 9, the EMC declared the Chowan as nutrient sensitive by unanimous vote. The Task Force has proceeded to meet its commitment to the local governments through the following activities: 1. A concept paper was prepared and presented to the Rural Development Coordinating Committee which approved the concept of a regional plan for alter- native and innovative sewage disposal at its meeting on May 17, 1979. 2. The concept was next presented to the principal funding agencies of the-Rural Water and Sewage Com- mittee formed under the President's Rural Develop- ment Initiatives. On May 23, this Committee deter- mined "that the thirteen towns in the Chowan Basin have a sewage disposal problem and that the concept paper approved by the North Carolina Rural Develop- ment Coordinating Committee constitutes a valid goal for all agencies to work towards." F-1 Significantly, the Rural Water and Sewage Com- mittee stated that it would concentrate on the towns in this river basin and provide assistance to the local units of government in applying for Federal and State funding available to assist in the construction of such facilities. 3. In spite of the planning moratorium, Task Force members proceeded to evaluate the cost effec- tiveness of alternatives to conventional sewage disposal for each of the towns involved working closely,with each town and its consulting engi- neers. 4. Having established the cost of land application. and other alternatives for most of the thirteen towns, the Task Force is in the process of working with each town to determine the "package" of financial assistance which will be required from the State and Federal agencies represented on the Rural Water and Sewage Committee for their con- sideration and commitment. 5. A follow-up meeting in late August is scheduled to assist towns and their consulting.engiheers in ade- .quately assessing alternative and innovate sewage disposal and in preparing proposals for analysis by the Rural Water and Sewage Committee (HUD, EPA, FmHA, EDA, State Government) for funding opportuni- ties under the President's Rural Initiative Program. Secondary benefits beyond the primary goals of this arrange- ment have emerged and are under way. Primary Goals: 1. Eliminate municipal discharge into the Chowan 2. Productive use of land application'on farm and forest lands 3. State/local/Federal cooperation in effective and efficient sewage disposal Secondary Benefits: Training Program: 1. Assist with revisions to design manuals and develop curriculum for wastewater treatment plant operators 2. Prepare land treatment operators school feasibility study, F-2 3. Grant application for land treatment opera- tors school 4. Conference on land treatment systems Industrial Point Sources: 1. Technical assistance with treatment alter- natives 2. Technical assistance with industrial loans and grants Agricultural and Other Non-point Sources: 1. Technical assistance - evaluate current erosion control practices - nutrient application rates 2. Education Financial Aid: 1. Use this experience to evaluate State/Federal cost-sharing practices General education on management arrangements for innovative and alternative sewage disposal As other rivers in North Carolina and the United States experience algal blooms and eutrophication, the Chowan model and demonstration project will provide a "packaged" comprehensive approach to help significantly reduce nu- trient runoff and discharge into waterways. The key has been and will continue to be a firm partnership between local, State and Federal Governments to utilize the com- plex range of resources available to assist rural communi- ties in meeting their sewage disposal needs. F-3 Thirteen North Carolina towns border the Chowan demon- strating a commitment to voluntary action to reduce .discharges into the Chowan River. Winton Harrellsville Murfreesboro Edenton Ahoskie Colerain Aulander Rich Square Seaboard Woodland -Conway Jackson Severn F-4 North Carolina Department of Natural Resources &Community Development James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Howard N. Lee, Secretary DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT September 18, 1979, Sent to Municipal dischargers in the Chowan River Basin As part of the program to restore the water quality of the Chowan River to acceptable levels, the Division of Environmental Management (Division) through the Environmental Management Commission (Commission) has established the Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) classification. At the Commission's May 1979 meeting the Nutrient Sensitive Waters Classification regulation was adopted and the waters of the Chowan River Basin were temporarily classified as nutrient sensitive under the Commission's emergency powers. Following the required public hearing, the Commission at their August, 1979 meeting permanently classified the waters of the Chowan Nutrient Sensitive. As a result, all point source wastewater dischargers in the basin are subject to effluent controls for nutrients. Pursuant to this mechanism, the Division has developed,a methodology for the assignment of nutrient effluent limitations for POTW (Publicly owned Treatment Works). This area was considered first in order to keep the 201 planning process in the Chowan basin moving. The nutrient sensitive waters regulation provides the authority to limit nutrient inputs to "no increase in nutrients over bac'kground levels". However, it also provides that the increase can exceed background levels if "it is shown to the satisfaction of the Director that the increase (1) is the result of natural variations, or (2) will not endanger human health, safety or welfare and that preventing the increase would cause a serious economic hardship without., equal or greater benefit to the public". In establishing the permanent NSW classification for the Chowan, the-staff designated both phosphorus and nitrogen as "nutrients". Thus, effluent limitations for both these nutrientslias been established. The Division staff has reviewed existing technologies for the removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from POT14 wastewater. It has been determined that effluent limitations of 3 mg/l of total nitrogen and I mg/1 of total phosphorus as a 30 day average are well within the reach of existing technologies. In fact, existing removal processes have shown that lower effluent values can consistently be achieved. F-5 P. 0. Box 27687 Ralcigh. Notth CatolinA 27611 An Equal Opportunity A ffirmorive A (tion fmploye"r It is very important to point out that while these limitations Will allow surface water discharge of effluents it is the Division's position that non- surface water discharge treatment facilities (land application) are the more desirable treatment methodology for thd'-removal of nutrients from the thowan River system. It is,, however, the Division's aim to provide a wastewater treatment alternative that will avoid any,"serious economic hardship" consequences that could occur from a no discharge policy, and at the time effectively reduce nutrients going into the river system. The development of'these technology level limitations for POTW are controlled by existing treatment procedures. With the development of more advanced technologies, new discharge requirements are a possibility in the future. Therefore, surface water discharge systems could be required to meet more restrictive nutrient limitations ar a later date. Such requirements, however, will be evaluated in reference to expected water quality benefits. Attached is a tabulation of the effluent limits required. The limits are maxi-mum monthly mean values unless otherwise noted.. The limits reflect current policies and methodologies in the State Continuing PIanning Process and -are part of the Chowan River Basin Plan. We have also attached a discussion and explanation of the effluent limits and a copy of the nutrient sensitive waters regulation. Please contact Mr. Forrest Westall of my staff if you have any questions concerning the limits. We hope you find our information complete for your development of the Edenton 201 Facilities Plan. Sincerely, oftkni- Signed BY: P, w. van Tilburg R. W. Van Tilburg, Chief Envl-ronmental Planning Section Attachment cc: Forrest Westall Louis Eckley Vernon Harris Paul Wilms Jim Mulligan F-6 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL, MANAGEMENT July 18, 1979 MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. A. F. McRorie, Director FROM: Vernon 0. Harris, Jr., Supervisor Local Planning Management Unit SUBJECT: Status Report - 201 Facility Plans Chowan River Basin As directed by Mr. Bob Van Tilburg and in answer to Ms. Eva Clayton's July 9, 1979 inquiry letter to Deputy Secretary Walton Jones, we are presenting a summary of the status of the 201 areas for the subject basin. These areas and their status are as follows: 1. Ahoskie-Aulander Ahoskie is currently proposing a 0.8 mgd discharging treatment plant that has effluent limits assigned to it of BOD 5 = 5 mg/1 and NH3-N of 2 mg/l. The mode of treatment is to upgrade the existing trickling filter plant by following it with activated sludge and tertiary filters. Aulander currently proposes a 0.125 mgd discharging treatment plant with assigned effluent limits of BOD 5 = 10 mg/l, NH3-N = 4 mg/l. The 201 proposes a new extended aerated treatment plant followed by tertiary filters. This 201 has been held up due to an I/I problem in the Town of Aulander that requires the completion of the Phase I SSES in order to get a handle on the flows. We are now told that land application for the Town of Aulander will probably be cost effective according to EPA's 201 criteria. 2. Colerain The Town of Colerain presently has a new oxidation ditch that discharges effluent that is assigned limits of BOD 5 = 30 mg/1 and suspended solids 30 mg/1 . The design capacity of this treatment plant is .075 mgd. We are not aware of a 201 being prepared for this project. 3. Conway/Severn The Town of Conway has an existing 0.12 discharging treatment plant. The Town of Severn has a 0.03 mgd discharging treatment plant. Since the 201 is in the preparation stage by the consultant and no I/I has been turned in, we have no other information that can be added at this time. F-7 Mr. A. F. McRorie, Director July 18, 1979 Page Two 4. Edenton Edenton currently proposes to upgrade their existing trickling filter plant by the addition of activated sludge to meet efflu- ent limits of BOD 5 = 30 mg/1 and total suspended solids = 30 mg/l. The Edenton 201 Facility Plan was certified by this Division to EPA on September 20, 1977. Since that time, EPA has written a letter of approval for the 201, Plan in a letter dated March 31, 1978. Step 2 grant applications are currently being held in this Division's Grants Administration Unit. 5. Harrellsville Harrellsville currently has no existing sewerage system in the town. The 201 Facility Plan proposes to build a 0.02 mgd three- cell stabilization lagoon that would have discharge limits of 30 BOD 5and NH3-N of 10 mg/l and 90mg/1 suspended solids. A negative declaration for this project was prepared and signed by Secretary Howard N. Lee on September 26, 1978. By the time the negative declaration was signed and the certification letter was forwarded for your signature, the Commission ruled on the moratorium for the Chowan River Basins; therefore, the certifi- cation letter to EPA was never signed. 6. Jackson Jackson currently has no sewerage system, but a 201 Facility Plan is under preparation by to consultant. We have no other information on this particular project. 7. Murfreesboro The Town of Murfreesboro proposes to build a 0.476 mdg discharging treatment plant that will have effluent limits of BOD 5 = 30 mg/1 and total suspended solids of 90 mg/1. The existing lagoons would be upgraded through the addition or aerated tubes. The Murfreesboro 201 Plan was also ready for certification at the time the Environmental Management Commission declared the Chowan River moratorium. This project is, therefore, on hold as is Harrelsville. 8. Seaboard The Town of Searboard currently is constructing a 0.072 mgd land application system. Seaboard was certified by this Division to EPA on March 15, 1977 and, of course, plans and specifications have been reviewed and approved by this Division prior to the project going to construction. F-8 Mr. A. F. McRoric, oirecLor July 18, 1979 Page Three 9. Winton The Town of Winton proposes to build a 0.235 mgd discharging wastewater 'tre.atment plant that will meet effluent limits of 30 mg/l BOD, and total suspended solids of 30 mg/l. The new treatment p ant will replace thn existing trickling filter plant and is proposed to-be an oxidation ditch type facility. Winton was certified to EPA on May 26, 1977. Plans and speci- fications for this project have been prepared by the consultant and are currently being held in the Engineeting-Unit of this Division awaiting final action by the Commission. 10. Woodland Rich_Square The Town of Woodland currently has under construction a 0.185 mgd land application system. Woodland was.certified to EPA as a breakout project on May 14, 1976. The Town of Rich Square is also proposing to build a land appli- cation sys.tem that will have a capacity of 0.24 mgd. This project i.s approvabl.e, except for the fact.that archaeological surveys have not been completed that would allow us to prepare a negatLve declaration and to certify the Rich Square portion-, thus completely certifying the 201 Facility Plan. All of the above information is present(-.-d as is currently contained in the facility plans per EPA and Federal regulations. Once the questions of nutrient limits and the finalized assigning of effluent limits are completed, re-analysis of the 201's proposed for discharging can begin. In an effort to aid the Technical Services Branch of this Divisiorf, I have previously forwarded a map of all wastewater dischargers in the Chowan River Basin with a description of their size and treatment plant process. ji cc: Mr. R. W. Van Tilburg Mr. Forrest Westall P-9 DIVISION OF ENVTRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT June 20, IM MEMORANDUM TO: Forrest Westall, Head Technical s6r'vices Branch PROM: Vernon 0. Harris, Jr., Supervisor46@ Local Planning Management Unit SUBJECT: Certified & Proposed Project 201 Facility-Plan's Cust of Conventional vs. Cost of Land Application Alternative Chowan River Basin Per our telephone conversation of June 19, 1979, 1 am furnishing you information regarding 201's in-house that are proposing discharges in the Chowan River Basin. I present two tables - one with total present worth analysis and one that is purely capital construction cost. Any discharge (i.e., Colerain, etc.) not mentioned is because we have no 201 in- house for that town. Additionally, I have left off the towns going with land application per the existing 201 rules and regulations that have proven to be cost effective -with no change in ef fluent limits (i.e., Woodland, Rich Square, Seaboard, Aulander). TABLE I Project Selected Alternative Cost (TPW) Land App. Cost Edenton Trickling Filter-Act. Sludge Discharge $2.117 Million Not Costed Out Harrellsville 3-Cell Lagoon Discharge $0.401 Million @0.549 Million Murfreesboro Aerated Lagoon Discharge $0.937 Million $1.564 Million Winton oxidation Ditch Discharge $1.104 Million $1.537 Million Ahoskie Trickling Filter-Act. Sludge Discharge $2.408 Million $2.932 Million TABLE II Project Capital Cost Selected Alt. Ca ital Cost Land App. Edenton $1,300,000 Not Costed Out Harrellsville $ 364,124 $ 355,313* Murfreesboro $ 596,000 $1,258,800- Winton $ 820,000 $1 276,000 Ahoskie $1,682,000 $2:364,000 -:@-Alternative included leasing land from Union Camp Taper Company TPW - Total Present Worth (20 years) Capital + O&M F-10 TOWN OF HARRELLSVILLE HARRELLSVILLE, N. C. 27942 April 11, 1979 [ion. Roy Harrell Town of Edenton Edenton, N. C. 27932 Dear Mayor Harrell: At the joint Hertford County Municipal Governm 'ent and County Commissioners Meeting last week, several concerns about a cost effective method of sewage treatment were expressed by Harrellsville and Winton. Other Town representatives also expressed the same concerns because of the need for upgrading systems, especially in view of the point discharge problem relating to the Chowan River algae bloom. I shared with the group that an Alternative Sewage Disposal Task Force, made up of University people, private interests and represen- tatives of several departments of State government, had been organized for t 'he purpose of determining alternative and innovative sewage treatment systems which are more cost efficient than the traditional expensive sewage treatment plant. This group will also help identify necessary financing of such systems. The group at last week's meeting unanimously agreed that representatives of this Task Force be invited to come and share their findings with representatives nf our Towns as soon as possible. I would like to confirm Thursday, May 3, for this meeting at 12 o'clock noon at the Elks Shrine in Winton. Anne Taylor, Special Assistant for Natural Resources, is coordinating the Task Force. This will include Dr. Neil S. Grigg, Chairman of the Chowan Technical Panel of the Chowan River Reclamation Project; Dr. Bobby Carlile, NCSU Ag Extensio'n Service, the State's best sewage treatment expert; Bob Rubin, NCSU Ag Extension and assistant to Dr. Carlile; A. F. McRorie, Director of Environmental Management; Coy Batten, also of the N. C. Division of Environmental Management; Steve Steinbeck, N. C. Depart- ment of Human Resources, a soil scientist; and Eva Clayton, Assistant Secretary of Community ')evelopment. We would like to invite two people representing your Town, and if you like, one member of your engineering firm, making a total of three persons from each of the f ollowing Towns: Edenton, Colerain, Harrellsville, Ahoskie, Cofield, Winton, Murfreesboro and Como. A special invitation is being sent to the Mayor of Franklin, Virginia. Please, send us a card stating who your three representatives will be. (by name and position) or you may call 332-3819 and leave the message. Please come with questions and suggestions as t o how we might design more cost effective systems maintaining reasonable per user rates. Sincer Y.. P-11 RWB/j f Ricl(ard W. Baker, Jr. eel Hill G4rdnar, Town Ifigr. Mayor. RURAL DEVELOPMENT COORDINATING COMMITTEE Federal Representatives Mr. Harold Perry, Director Mr. Al Baldwin, Executive Farmers Home Administration Director 310 New Bern Avenue Southeastern Federal Regional Raleigh, NC 27611 Council 755-4640 101 Marietta, Suite 2121 Atlanta, GA 30323 Mr. Art Campbell (404) 221-4162 Area Coordinator Farmers Home Administration Ms. Betsy Stafford Room 5313 Area Director South Agricultural Building Department of Housing and Washington, D. C. Urban Development (4102) 447-8806 415 N. Edgeworth Street Greensboro, NC 27401 Mr. Dale Jones, State Director 378-5361 Economic Development Adminis- tration Room 314 Federal Building 310 New Bern Avenue Raleigh, NC 27611 755-4570 State Representatives Chairperson Governor James B. Hunt, Jr. Mr. D. M. Faircloth, Secretary State of North Carolina Department of Commerce Capitol Building 430 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Raleigh, NC 27611 733-5811 733-4962 Vice-Chairperson Mr. T. W. Bradshaw, Jr., Secretary Mr. Howard N. Lee, Secretary Department of Transportation Department of Natural Resources P. 0. Box 25201 and Community Development Raleigh, NC 27611 P. 0. Box 27687 733-2520 Raleigh, NC 27611 733-4984 Dr. Sarah Morrow, Secretary DeDartment of Human Resources Mr. Arnold Zogry, Assistant 325 N. Salisbury Street Secretary for Policy Raleigh, NC 27611 Development.& Management 733-4534 Department of Administration 1,16 W. Jones Street Mr. J. A. Graham, Conimissioner Raleigh, NC 27603 Department of Agriculture 733-4131 P. 0. Box 27647 Raleigh, NC 27611 733-7125 F-12 City Representatives Honorable Ferd Harrison Honorable John C. McKenzie Mayor Mayor Town of Scotland Neck Town of Pilot Mountain P. 0. Box 176 P. 0. Drawer AA Scotland Neck, NC 27874 Pilot mountain, NC 27041 826-3111 368-5511 County Representatives Mr.*J. Richard Condor Mr. Grover C. Lancaster, Jr. Chairman Chairman Richmond County Board of Craven County Board of Commissioners Commissioners P. 0. Box 1217 Route 1, Box 142 Rockingham, NC 28379 Vanceboro, NC 28586 997-5551 638-1424 North Carolina Home Builders Association Mr. Nick De Mai Executive Vice-President North Carolina Home Builders Association P. 0. Box 18625 Raleigh, NC 27609 782-3300 North Carolina Agriculture Extension Service Mr. Carlton Blalock Director North Carolina Agriculture Extension Service P. 0. Box 5157 N. C. State University Raleigh, NC 27650 737-2811@ F-13 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION Room 525, 310 New Bern Avenue Raleigh, North Carolina 37601 Mr. Dale L. Jones, EDR U. S. Department of Commerce April 25,1979 Economic Development Administration Room 314, 310 New Bern Avenue RECEIVED Raleigh, NC 27611 Mr. L. Page Benton, Jr., Chief APR 26 1979 Environmental Planning Section DIV. OF Division of Environmental Management ENVIRONMENTAL MGT. North Carolina Department of Natural RALEIGH, N.C. Resources & Community Development P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611 Mr. Coy M. Batten, Branch Head Local Programs P1anning Section Division of Environmental Management North Carolina Department of Natural Resources & Community Development P.0. Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611. Mr. Ed Coble, Director HUD Area Office Community Planning and Development Division 415 N. Edgeworth Street Greensboro, NC 27402 Mr. John Booth, Director Office of Intergovernmental Relation Department of Natural Resources & Community Development P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611 F-14 B. Industrial Point Sources Both Governor Hunt and Secretary Lee have requested dischargers in the North Carolina portion of the basin voluntarily cut back on the nutrients being input to the Chowan. Governor Hunt at the Plarch 9, 1979 meeting in Raleigh concerning the Chowan River also asked for a report from each discharged by July 15, 1979, outlining what steps they could take to reduce their nutrient inputs. Special interest has been generated in two industrial dischargers: C. F. Industries and Unioil Camp. See Appendices G and H, respectively, for recent actions undertaken with regard to these dischargers. However, it is the intention of the,State to work with all of the North Carolina industrial dischargers in the Chowan River Basin to reduce their contribution of nutrient input. F-15 NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. EDENTON, N.C. - HIGHTSTOWN, N J. MIDDLETOWN, PA. - NEW YORK, N.Y. --4V THE UNITED PIECE DYE WORKS 0 D P.O. BOX 569 - EDENTON. NORTH CAROLINA 27932 919 .221-4121 June 29, 1979 Mr. Bob Holman Rt. 2, Box 277 Edenton, N. C. 27932 Re: Nutrient Adjustment Dear Mr. Holman: As per our telephone discuss-ion on June 29, 1979, 1 am submitting this letter, as requested, as to United Piece Dye Works Nutrient Ad- justment to help the algae problem in the Chowan River. Up through the month of April and part of May, we were using three 55-gallon drums of Ammonium Hydroxide to feed our system. The last week in May, we adjusted this amount to two drums. Seeing no adverse effect to this adjustment, we cut back to one drum the last week of June. During shut-down June 30 - July 7, we will be moving the aerators around in the basin to give better coverage. After this is achieved, we will begin cutting down and eventually cutting out the defoamer which we are now using. If there is anything else United Piece Dye Works can do to help the algae situation in the Chowan River, please notify us. We will cooperate in any way we can. Sincerely, THE UNITED PIECE DYE WORKS Debor-@h Anderson Technical Superintendent DA:gt cc: Ernest Knighton Harold Summerford New York Office F-16 APPENDIX G HISTORY OF CF INDUSTRIES ABATEMENT EFFORTS 49 History of CF Industries Abatement Efforts Farmers Chemical Association, Inc. (FCAI) decided in 1967 to construct the Tunis, North Carolina facility. The plant.began operating in late fall of 1969. The operation initially included the production of ammonia, nitric acid, urea, ammonium nitrate, nitrogen solutions and nitrogen- phosphorus-potassium (N-P-K) fertilizer. The Tunis site was selected, according to one source, "because of its out- standing transportation potential, and because of its location in the center of a rich fertilizer market" (1). FCAI apparently initiated contact with the Department of Water and Air Resources (DWAR), forerunner of the Divi- sion of Environmental Management, in 1968. After a number of conferences and exchanges of correspondence, FCAI agreed that only non-contaminated waters introduced.to their site (rain, etc.) would be discharged to the waters of the State (2). The DWAR issued Permit No. 1707 on December 10, 1969 to FCAI for the Tunis Plant. This permit allowed for the con- strtiction and operation of a wastewater treatment facility that was "... for monitoring, storage and, if necessary, re- turn of wastewater to the plant process water system to pre- vent the discharge of any contaminated waters to the Chowan River ..." (3). Among other things, the permit contained a condition which required FCAI to effectively maintain and operate the proposed facility in such a manner that at no time should there occur a "... discharge of nutrients in quantities which result in the production of undesirable aquatic organisms and if a discharge was made, it should be of such a quality so as to protect the receiving waters. .In January 1970, it was determined that most of the wastewater being supplied to the waste holding ponds was heavily contaminated, and since the system had not been de- signed to utilize such large quantities,' FCAI began to dis- charge the contaminated wastewater (2). FCAI was informed that they were in violation of permit requirements. As a result, FCAI and the DWAR entered into an Assurance of Vol- untary Compliance, dated July 29, 1971. This agreement re- quired FCAI to develop and construct wastewater handling facilities capable of adequately containing their waste- water M. It further required that FCAI place the approved facilities in operation on or before May 31, 1972. The Assurance of Voluntary Compliance was amended July 25, 1972, changing the date for having the facilities operational to August 15, 1972 (5). G-1 After the original Assurance of Voluntary Compliance was Issued', and in response to that document, FCAI applied for and was granted Permit No. 2262 allowing them to oper- ate their existing wastewater collection system. Along with this allowance, FCAI was to construct and operate several other wastewater control systems (6). The trans- mittal letter, dated February 1972, informed FCAI that Per- mit No. 1707 was voided. In an effort to provide the wastewater reclamation- recycling facilities that would eliminate the discharge of all process waters and prevent the discharge of contami- nated runoff from the site, as provided for in Permit No. 2262, FCAI was to construct four pressure filters and two ion exchange units as well as other related facilities. - However, FCAI's system was not in operation by August 15, 1972 as required by the amended Assurance of Voluntary Com- pliance, but an inspection of the Tunis Plant on August 16, 1972 and frequent intervals thereafter prior to October 5, revealed no discharge (2). on October 6, 1972, FCAI was found to be discharging waters from their site. Chemical analysis of that water revealed that it was heavily contami- nated with nutrients. This constituted an additional vio- lation of the Assurance of Voluntary Compliance and also violated Permit No. 2262. Mr. George E. Pickett, Director of DWAR sent a letter dated October 6, 1972, to Mr. H. T. Rosser, Assistant Attor- ney General,. requesting that Mr. Rosser "... proceed imme- diately with any and all appropriate legal action against the FCAI" (7). In response to this request, a complaint against FCAI was prepared and filed in Wake County Superior Court (8). The court ordered that the case be heard and set a date of hearing for October 24, 1972 (9). The complaint requested that the court restrain FCAI from further discharge of waters containing nutrients, and from operating their facility until all wastewaters were treated to the satisfaction of the DWAR. To further re- strain FCAI from operation until it had demonstrated the capability to adequately treat its wastewaters and to re- quire FCAI to undertake a monitoring and analysis program that would allow the DTRAR to ensure FCAI's compliance with these terms. The complaint stipulated that FCAI had, in its operation, contributed substantial nutrients to the Chowan River since it began operation and was a triggering factor in the increasing algal blooms of.the river (8). The September 1972 "Interim Report of the Chowan River Water Quality Study" was cited in the complaint. The reportrec- ommended, among other things, that the discharge of nutrients G-2 from FCAI not be allowed to recur, but while concluding that FCAI was a triggering agent in the 1972 bloom, it did not state that FCAI was the only cause of eutrophica- tion in the Chowan River (10). Following the hearing, Judge Pilston Godwin ordered the phased shutdown of the Tunis facility.to be completed by November 23, 1973. FCAI agreed to employ a professional engineer to evaluate existing waste storage and treatment facilities for adequacy. On December 4, 1972, the FCAI matter came before the court again. The court issued an order which allowed FCAI to resume normal operation of its production facilities and contained numerous agreements between FCAI and the State. The total thrust of the order centered around a re- newed program of providing adequate waste storage capacity and treatment. The order provided for specific new holding pond construction, other control construction, proposal pre- paration for treatment facilities, operational procedures aimed at preventing discharge, and a reporting process that would keep the DWAR informed of FCAI's progress in these activities. The DWAR issued a temporary permit (No. T-558) which allowed FCAI to continue the operation of existing waste- water containment facilities, provided there was no dis- charge to surface waters (14). This permit incorporated the required,court order conditions. The court hearings brought to light the inadequate na- ture of FCAI's wastewater containment and treatinent facili- ties. FCAI reported to DWAR that the discharge which had occurred on October 5-6 was unavoidable due to heavy rain- fall (8). The existing facilities were not designed to re- tain this volume of water. Their concern with the huge amount of nitrogen contaminated water generated by the Tunis site is indicated in the fact that they applied for and received a permit on September 29, 1972, for a spray irrigation system consisting of 200 acres of irrigation area with a 400 gpm loading capacity (15). Under the court orders, FCAI began to develop a larger, more viable wastewater retention system. They applied for and received permits for storage ponds and related facili- ties (16, 17, 18). The additional storage facilities per- mit consisted basically of four ponds with a combined capa- city of 163 million gallons. FCAI's effort to comply with the court orders is outlined in the "Engineering Report on Wastewater Treatment" for FCAI at Tunis, North Carolina by G-3 Rose and Purcell, Inc. (19). FCAI's program included closing down the N-P-K operation at Tunis and reducing the plant to the production of direct application nitrogen solutions and ammonium nitrate prills. FCAI, after a careful evaluation of the N-P-K process with input from their consultants and in response to a State requirement, concluded that the process was the major sou 'rce of runoff contamination. In addition, the N-P-K stack was the worst source of air pollution. While the removal of the N-P-K process was beneficial from the standpoint of environmental considerations, it resulted in an adverse'economic impact to FCAI. It reduced total daily pro- duction by 900 tons and lowered the total end product dollar value by approximately 50% (19).' FCAI's efforts toward hand- ling the existing wastewater storage situation at the site involved the movement of huge volumes of water and the con- struction and installation of large holding and pumping fa--@ cilities. During the startup period for FCAI's discharge control program, management changes there were well underway. In a letter to Mr. E. C. Hubbard, dated January 11, 1973, Mr. John A. Lawrence, General Manager Nitrogen Operations, CF Industries, stated that he was Acting Manager of FCAI's Tunis plant and that all management functions of the plant would be assumed by CF Industries on February 1, 1973,(20). The plant site.water balance problems were examined in detail in the Rose and Purcell Report, February 1973 (19). The Summary and Conclusions of that report recommended that the plant be required to use only Chowan River water for the. demineralizer and that this wastewater, which contains only the minerals present in the clarified raw water plus certain conditioners, be discharged back to the Chowan. This disposal method is typical of power plants and large boiler operations throughout the State. This matter was heard before Judge Hamilton Hobgood on March 12, 1973 (22). The order resulting from this hearing permitted FCAI to return its demineralizer regenerate and boiler blowdown streams to the Chowan River. Under the provisions o f the Clean Water Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-500), the Federal permitting program, National Pol- lution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) came into effect. FCAI applied for and received a NPDES permit for the dis- charge of demineralizer regenerate and boiler blowdown to the Chowan River -(23). This permit allowed for a total nitrogen discharge of 42 lbs/day. This loading was basically the same amount of nitrogen that FCAI would draw from the Chowan River. During the time that the Tunis plant had been in opera- tion, the DWAR had maintained close contact with the facil- ity and its management through the Washington Regional Office. G-4 In fact, much of the work leading up to the court hearings in late 1.972 and early 1973 was provided by the Washington Regional Office. Following the issuance of the NPDES permit, this contact was maintained. Close inspection of the waste- water treatment and retention system was provided. Records show that numerous, detailed inspections of the Tunis site took place over this period. The inspections following the construction of new holding ponds and the court orders in- dicated that FCAI was having difficulty keeping the required 3 ft. of freeboard in the ponds. On January 29, 1974, CF Industries (CFI) informed the DWAR that they were experi- encing an overflow from two of their freshwater ponds (24). Sample analyses indicated that the discharge contained signi- ficant amounts of nitrogen. The overflow appeared to be due to rainfall. CFI (FCAI's management authority) continued to look for alternatives for addressing their water balance problems at the site. They approached DWAR with a proposal for barging less contaminated @qaters to an ocean dui'tiping site located off Oregon Inlet. The DWAR informed CFI that the General Statutes prohibited ocean dumping within the three-mile limit (25). The tremendous amount of water introduced to the site over the Tunis'plant's life, along with the numerous con- taminated water holding ponds, represented a potential prob- lem over and above that of a surface discharge, that is the storage of nitrogen in the sediments and groundwater and the movement of these contaminated waters in the groundwater flow. The DWAR and CFI received a report on this potential problem in mid-1974 (26). A major groundwater formation in this area is the dense clay-loam Yorktown which is 35 to 40 feet below the ground surface at the Tunis site. The report concluded that this formation acts as an aquiclude and that significant quantities of nitrogen do not move into the Yorktown. The study found that heavy concentrations of nitrogen were con- tained in the groundwater and that this material represented a potential of nitrogen input to the waters around the site; namely, the freshwater ponds. and the Chowan River. The report recommended that some minor-site alterations be made,in order to lower the amount of rainwater getting into the sediments and to improve surface drainage patterns. Following a con- ference with CFI, the investigators and the DWAR requested that the study recommendations be implemented by CFI (27). In addition to these technical developments, one final court order in this matter was issued in 1974. In that order, dated March 7, 1974, Judge Donald L. Smith stated that since the State no longer wished the court to retain jurisdiction G-5 for further orders, the court relinquished this jurisdiction and the judgement and orders which had been previously entered became the final judgement (28). Thus, while the jurisdiction was relinquished, the previous orders continue to remain in effect. The site inspection procedure by the State continued to be utilized and CFI continued their operation without any apparent discharge to the Chowan River system until early 1976.,* .The algal bloom conditions in the Chowan in 1976 probably con- tributed to intensified site inspections at the Tunis plant. The algal bloom condition increased the pressure on-the DWAR (now the Division of Environmental Management) to determine the cause of these conditions. 'Because the State report had concluded the CFI was a triggering factor in the algal bloom occurring that year, the Division of Environmental Management* (DEM).maintained-close surveillance of CFI (10). Beginning on June 14, 1976 and continuing for several days thereafter, DEM staff in the Washington Regional Office observed several seepage areas around diked ponds of CFI's site (30). Through chemical analysis of samples taken from these seeps, it was found that this water was very heavily contaminated with nitrogen. The seepage area examined was located at the bluff between the plant site and the Chowan River. There is@actually a swamp between the bluff and the --rkv-er. Following the discovery of these seeps, CFI contacted their engineering consultant, Rose and Purcell, Inc. A rep- resentative of Rose and Purcell, Mr. C. A. Purcell, Jr., was present at the site on June 17, 1976, and CFI began to initi- ate a program to prevent further seepage from entering the swamp adjacent to the Chowan River (32). As a temporary solu- tion, the seeps were collected in sumps and pumped to storage ponds. To examine a permanent solution to the seepage prob- lem, CPI, through Rose and Purcell, initiated a groundwater study of their site. During the time that the temporary solu- tion was being put into action and the study effort begun, CFI and their representatives maintained contact with the DEM. The DEM staff recommended that civil penalties be assessed against CFI (31). This recommendation was made based on the conclusion that CFI's discharge was in viola- tion of G.S,. 143.'215.1(1),and also that the seepage consti- tuted a violation of the terms of their EPA issued NPDES permit. In response to this recommendation, Mr. W. Everette Knight, Director of DEM, assessed civil penalties of $1250 per day for a total of $15,000 over twelve days (33). CFI G-6 forwarded the payment of the civil penalties in a letter dated August 5, 1976 (34). CFI knew that without long-term corrective action, the seepage problem would still remain. While 62 sumps were installed along the bluff in order to collect the seeps, this system was both temporary and not very reli- able (32). In a meeting on August 25, 1976 with DEM staff, C. A. Purcell, Jr. reported the results of their*ground- water study and offered a proposed solution to the problem. The study reinforced the conclusion reached in the 1974 NCSU study; nitrogen bearing groundwaters had not entered the Yorktown formation. Groundwater nitrogen concentration contours showed that the groundwater was very contaminated; concentrations reaching 30,000 mg/1 of total nitrogen were measured near the bluff. The solution proposed for groundwater contain- ment called for the installation of a 10,000 linear feet slurry trench wall around the main plant site, an area of approximately 100 acres. Also included in the proposed solution was the continued use of a collection system out- side'the wall to collect the seeps until they were no longer significant. It is important to note that the proposed solu- tion, as outlined in the Rose and Purcell Report, calls for reclaiming the high concentration nitrogen contaminated groundwater behind the wall, but calls for the discharge to surface waters of the low concentration nitrogen contaminated groundwater collected within the wall, and states that ground- waters outside the containment wall would be allowed to con- tinue their natural flow patterns (32). The provision for discharge of the low concentration nitrogen contaminated groundwater was included in the proposed solution because it was known that without the removal of some water from the site's holding facilities, they would be exhausted, including the volume behind the proposed slurry wall container. Water buildup behind the slurry wall is due to surface infiltration behind the wall. At the September 9, 1976 meeting of the Environmental Management Commission (EMC), the governing body for DEM, Mr. Purcell, in his presentation of the proposed solution, re- quested that CFI be allowed to discharge low nitrogen con- tent groundwaters in amounts necessary to offset infiltra- tion. This low concentration Mr. Purcell referred to was stated at the meeting to be 100 mg/l or less of total nitro- gen (35). This concentration, by comparison, is approximately five times that found in secondary treated domestic sewage. In the staff report at the EMC meeting, Mr. Knight stated that it might not be feasible to reclaim all nitrogen con- tained in the waters on the property, but indicated concern G-7 over the fate of the nitrogen outside the slurry wall. The staff, however, recommended that the EMC approve the slurry wall concept so that an effort could be made to contain as much material as would be reasonable and practicable. The EMC moved that DEM issue the necessary permit. The DEM issued CFI permit No. 4082 on October 1, 1976 for construction of the slurry wall as previously described (36). The permit did not contain discharge provisions. The permit set January 1, 1977 as the date of completion. Also included was a provision requiring seepage collection and re- tention until seepage nitrogen concentrations became less than 100 mg/l total nitrogen. Prior to, during and after the construction of the slurry wall, Washington Regional Office staff continued to conduct inspections of the site and seep containment activi- ties. The seepage pumping operation was observed over this period and was found to be in both good and bad condition. CFI appears to have responded well to correcting poor oper- ating conditions. In a letter dated October 27, 1976, W. E. Knight amended the slurry wall completion date from January 1 to February 1, 1977 (37). The completion date was amended further to be no later than. March 15., 1-977,. unless documented evidence sup- porting a further delay was presented (38). However, this date was again amended after CFI submitted a request for an extension to May 1, 1977 (39). The wall was functionally completed on April 29, 1977, requiring only backfilling and surface grading (40). During the slurry wall construction process, the site water balance problems which have been discussed previously were again brought to the attention of the EMC. At the February 10, 1977 EMC meeting, Archie Purcell discussed the impact of the fuel shortage on water balance at the Tunis plant (41). CFI utilizes fuel-produced heat to evaporate the waste liquid as a means of concentrating the nitrogen in the water and -lowering the wastewater volume at the site. He also pointed out that heavy rains could overload available storage capacity. It was requested that the EMC allow CFI* to discharge 70 tons of nitrogen into the Chowan. Mr. Purcell stressed that a discharge during the winter could be advantageous because the nitrogen would be flushed out of the system before warm weather brought algal bloom conditions. A discharge of 43 million gallons of wastewater over a 28-day period was requested. L. P., Benton, Jr. presented the staff recommendation in regard to the proposed discharge. Mr. Benton stated that the staff could not recommend such a dicharge, but if one were to be granted,' it should occur in G-8 late fall prior to December 1 of any year. It was also stressed that since CFI was using fuel oil that the water balance concerns had not reached a critical stage yet. Based on the staff's own calculations, it was projected that water storage at the plant would not be critical in the near future. The staff position was that no dis- charge be allowed at that time, but that a discharge might be considered in late 1977. The EMC adopted the staff rec- ommendation. An update of the CFI fuel problems was pro- vided at the March 1977 EMC meeting (42). The staff told the EMC that natural gas was again available and in use at the Tunis Plant. CFI was issued an NPDES permit for a 10,000 gpd treated domestic wastewater discharge to Catherine Creek on February 25, 1977 (43). The seepage collection system utilized by CFI outside the slurry wall continued to be inspected by DEM staff. In addition, the Tunis site inspections showed that nitrogen contaminated waters were being lost to the swamp area through a drainage ditch east of the plant (44).. An area of interest not previously discussed is the swamp area between the river and the plant. Nitrogen con- taminated waters have moved, from the site to this swamp.area. Trees 'in this swamp have died, apparently due to the high nitrogen concentrations in the air and water. This poten- tial area of concern has been studied as part of the recent DEM efforts on the Chowan River. CFI's concern over the water balance at their site prompted a request for a permit for a one time, 60 million gallon discharge (45). At the public hearing held to con- sider this proposal, CFI withdrew its request for such a permit for the stated reason that EPA opposed the proposal. However, in the recommendations of the Hearing officer fol- lowing the January 17, 1978 hearing, it was stated that should CFI again make such a request, more consideration would need to be given to the effects of such a discharge on the Albemarle Sound, its effects on aquatic life with parti- cular reference to fish, and that any request for a discharge without adequate consideration of these things be returned to CFI without action (46). In anl.effort to relieve water accumulation behind the slurry wall, CFI proposed the installation of a well point system and spray header for withdrawing slurry wall water with nitrogen concentrations up to 100 mg/l and then spraying this water into the swamp bordering the Chowan River (47). The DEM regarded this system as a discharging, rather than a non-discharging system and, as such, would require a.n G-9 NPDES permit. It was further stated that DEM's intention would be to deny such a permit. Algae conditions in the Chowan achieved bloom propor- tions in 1978 and DEM intensified monitoring on the river. This study program is continuing, broading in scope and in- volves consideration of the CFI site as a nitrogen source. The impact of the CFI site on the Chowan River is being evaluated through the results of the river sampling, a groundwater evaluation of the "dead-tree swamp,"' and con- sideration of nitrogen air emissions from the plant. The sampling results-from the river stations near the CFI site have indicated increases in total organic and inorganic nitrogen (NH3-N+NO2-+NO3-N) downstream of the Tunis plant. The November 30, 1978 Chowan Quarterly Report stated that for a selected period from September 6, 1978 through Octo- ber 12, 1978, the river data showed an approximate increase in total nitrogen downstream of CFI of 1200 lbs/day (48). The report did state that this figure was an approximation. It also noted that nitrogen loading increased according to many, but not all, sampling results above and below CFI. An evaluation of all the data through March 1979 shows that consistent and significant increases in-total nitrogen down- stream of Tunis were observed. This increase is greater than what could be attributed to forested and agricultural runoff expected between the stations. Much of the study at the CFI site, completed to date, has been around the swamp. Nitrogen values in the swamp are normally-well above the 100 mg/1 level and values have exceeded 2000 mg/1 (49). Subsurface swamp water samples have indicated even higher values. In late 1978, sampies of swamp runoff, following a one inch rain, contained total inorganic nitrogen values between 300 and 1500 mg/1 (48). Swamp runoff data from the winter of 1978-79 showed even higher total inorganic nitrogen concentrations, exceeding 2000 mg/l (49). These surface runoff samples were taken at two sites in the swamp where there is normally a movement of this water toward the river. Automatic sampling data from a site on the Chowan at the downstream side of the swamp indicate that nitrogen- is moving from the swamp to the river; this movement is normally more pronounced following a rainfall event (49). Grab samples of the swamp a reas along the Chowan have in- dicated total nitrogen values less than 10 mg/l. It is im- portant to note that virtually all of this nitrogen is' organic in nature, indicating the dead-tree swamp nitrogen contamination, which is largely in the inorganic form, most likely originated from the CFI site. However, based on groundwater studies performed by DEM, this contamination G-10 occurred prior to the slurry wall installation. Therefore, during rainfall-events or high river stage, large quantities of nitrogen are being flushed from the swamp. DEM installed 30 wells at various sites in the dead-tree swamp (49). Nitrogen data from these wells indicate high, but vairiable, concentrations of the material throughout the swamp's surfade and subsurface waters. Analysis of the swamp's groundwater hydrology has indicated that a slight groundwater gradient toward the river exists, but that subsurface flows are small and very slow. DEM is presently preparing a comprehen- sive report on the groundwater situation at CFI. A tentative conclusion of that study is that movement of nitrogen from the swamp by the groundwater route is very small and, as stated before, nitrogen from the swamp is flushed out by the intro- duction of flow into the swamp area. In addition, the data gathered indicates that the slurry wall is effective in con- taining most of the nitrogen contaminated water within that enclosure. The basic conclusions of the recent intensified studies of , CFI is that there is a large amount of nitrogen-bearing water within the groundwater outside the slurrywall, that the dead-tree swamp contains a significant amount of nitrogen, and that this nitrogen is flushed from the swamp into the Chowan River. An additional area of concern at the CFI site is that of nitrogen air emissions. Based on CPI emission inventories, large quantities of 'nitrogen are discharged to the atmosphere at the site (49). To date, only limited data exist , based on very crude sampling procedures, and further investigation of this potentially significant source seems warranted. DEM is presently developing a monitoring program to evaluate this concern. As the history of the Tunis plant indicates, the contain- ment facilities have not been, and are not presently designed, to operate as a non-discharge system indefinitely. CFI's con- stant concern over water balance is illustrated throughout this report. It is highlighted again by CrIls application for a permit for an experimental land application system (50). DEM issued CFI this permit on May 25, 1979 and it is effective un- til rescinded. The record shows that a number of wastewater disposal options have been considered by CFI, such as land application, marketing nitrogen water as fertilizer, a more extensive nitrogen reclamation program, denitrification treatment, and perhaps others. It is not clear from available records, however, whether detailed examination.of disposal alternatives have been considered. Through the Chowan River G-11 Technical Panel, Dr. Frank Humenik, N. C. Agricultural Ex- tension Service, has worked with CFI in obtaining some of the nitrogen contaminated water in order to test it as a possible direct application fertilizer material. Prelimi- nary results show that it is an acceptable fertilizer. CFI has shown a willingness to address this problem, as shown by the two permits obtained for land application systems, and has discussed,the problem with State representatives on several occasions. The water balance difficulties at the Tunis plant are iMPOT-t-ADt, but are removed somewhat from the problem re- lated to nitrogen outside the slurry wall. It is important to remember that as part of the proposed slurry wall solu- tion, CFI's consulting engineers stated that nitrogen water outside the wall area would be allowed to continue its natural flow patterns (32). In addition, at the EMC meeting that considered the slurry wall, DEM staff reported.that al- though there was concern over the fate of nitrogen in the groundwater outside the proposed wall area, the slurry wall approach appeated to be the most workable and feasible solu- tion to the problem (35). The most recent data indicate that significant amounts of nitrogen enter the Chowan River from the swamp area. It is very likely that this input is a contributing factor.to algae conditions in the river. CFI, in a letter dated June 27, 1979, has committed to examining the swamp area. -This will be a step toward addressing this concern. -It has been recommended to CFI that their permitted discharge be relocated such that all discharges will.be made directly into the river instead of to the swamp. Th is move, as indicated by.the June 27, 1979 letter, is acceptable to. CFI and efforts are underway to accomplish this. CFI's NPDES permit is for,treatment plant wastewater and boiler blowdown.: This permit was issued February 2, 1979, with an expiration date of November 30, 1979 (51). The short duration of the permit was set in order to enable DEM and CFI to incorporate and implement recommendations made as a result of the studies now underway on the Chowan River. In examining the pollut 'ion control efforts made by CFI over the years of their existence at Tunis, it is clear that significant money has been spent toward this concern. It is estimated that pollution control has cost CFI in excess of $7 million in capital costs alone (52). This is a sizable expense. The evaluation of the conditions at the CFI site indicates clearly that many problems remain. A cooperative working relationship between CFI and the State must continue to successfully address these problems. G-12 REFERENCES 1. Report to the Staff, Committee and Board of the State of North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources,Office of Water and Air Resources, by Farmers Chemical Association, Inc. (prepared by AWARE, Associatea Water and Air R-esources Engineers, Inc.),, December 5, 1972. .2. Affidavit of Mr. A. C. Turnage, Jr., employed with the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources, dated October 16, 1972. 3. North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources, Raleigh. Permit for the discharge of sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes, No. 1707, issued DecetRber 10, 1969, effective until December 31, 1974. 4. Assurance of Voluntary Compliance for Farmers Chemical Association, Inc. (Tunis, North Carolina), July 29, 1971. 5. Supplemental Assurance of Voluntary Compliance for Farm- mers Chemical Association (Tunis Plant), July 25, 1972. 6. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re- sources, office of Water and Air Resources, Raleigh. Permit No. 2262, for the discharge of sewage, industrial wastes and other wastes, issued February 14, 1972, effec- tive until December 31, 1972. 7. Letter from E. C. Hubbard to H. T. Rosser, dated October 6, 1972. 8. Complaint signed by G. E. Pickett and H. T. Rosser, dated October 16, 1972. 9. Court order signed by Judge Walter J. Bone, dated October 17, 1972. 10. "Iftterim Report of Chowan River Water Quality Study," Office of Water and Air Resources, Department of Natural and Economic Resources, September 1972. 11. Court order signed by Judge A. Pilston Godwin, Jr., dated October 24, 1972. 12. "The Development of an Integrated Wastes Management Pro- gram for the Farmers Chemical Association's fertilizer plant at Tunis, North Carolina," Associated Water and Air Resources Engineers, Inc., November, 1972. G-13 13. Court order signed by Judge Harry Cannaday, dated December 12, 1972. 14. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources, Office of Water and Air Resources temporary Permit No. T-558, issued December 22, 1972, effective until December 31, 1973. 15. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re- sources, Office of Water and Air Resources, Permit No. 2448, issued September 29, 1972, effective until July 31, 1973. 16. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re- sources, Office of Water and Air Resources, Permit No. 2500, issued November 27, 1972, effective until Decem.- ber 31, 1973. 17. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re- sources, Office of Water and Air Resources, Permit No. 2536, issued December 18, 1972, effective until Decem- ber 31, 1973. 18. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re- sources, office of Water and Air Resources, Permit No. 2547, issued January 3, 1973, effect-ive untlil Deccmber 31, 1973. 19. "Engineering Report on Waste Water Treatment," Farmers Chemical Association,Inc., Tunis, North Carolina, by Rose and Purcell, Inc., Surveyors-Engineers-Planners, Fayetteville. February 1973. 20. Letter from Mr. John A. Lawrence of C. F. Industries to Mr. E. C. Hubbard, North Carolina Office of Water and Air Resources. 21. Letter from Mr. V. A. Minch of AWARE to Mr. E. C. Hubbard, dated January 26, 1973. 22. Court order signed by Judge Hamilton H. Hobgood, dated March 23, 1973. 23. NPDES Permit No. NCO003409, issued December 31, 1973, expires December 31, 1979 (issued by the U. S. EPA). 24. Memorandum from Mr. Robert P. Norris to Mr. A. C. Turnage, Jr., dated February 22, 1974. 25. Letter from Mr. A. C. Turnage, Jr., Office of Water and Air Resources to Mr. John H. Heckert, C. F. Industries, dated July 1, 1974. G-1-4 26. "Nitrogen in Sediments and'Movement to Chowan River at C. F. Industries, Inc. Fertilizer Plant in Hertford County, North Carolina," by J. W. Gilliam, R, W. Skaggs, R. B. Daniels and E. E. Gamble. 27. Letter from Mr. E. C. Hubbard, office of Water and Air Resources to Mr. J. H. Heckert of C. F. Industries, dated July 5, 1974. 28. Memorandum from Mr. John R. B. Matthis, Deputy Attorney General to Mr. M. W. Puette, Enforcement Director, Division of Environmental Management, dated July 2, 1976. 29. "Summary Report, The Chowan River Project," by Sharon Bond, Grover Cook and David H. Howells, Water Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina. 30. "Report of Dike Seepages at C. F. Industries, Tunis," by A. C. Turnage, Jr. and other staff members, dated June 14, 15, 16, 1976. 31. Memorandum from Mr. L. P. Benton, Jr. to Mr. W. E. Knight, dated June 23, 1976. 32.- "Engineering Report, Seepage Investigation - C. F. In- dustries, Inc., North Carolina Nitrogen Complex," Rose and Purcell, Inc., dated September 27, 1976. 33. Certified letter from Mr. W. E. Knight to Mr. W. C. Pickett, Farmers Chemical Association, dated July 7, 1976. 34. Letter from Mr. J. Allen Adams, Attorney for FCA, Inc. to Mr. W. E. Knight, dated April 5, 1976. 35. Minutes, Environmental Management Commission Meeting, September 9, 1976. 36. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Re- sources, Division of Environmental Management, Permit No. 4082, issued October 1, 1976, effective until rescinded. 37. Letter from Mr. W. E. Knight to Mr. Wallace Hoelscher,. C. F. Industries, dated October 27, 1976. 38. Letter from Mr. W. E. Knight to Mr. Wallace L. Hoelscher, dated January 27, 1977. 39. Letter from Mr. W. E. Knight to Mr. Wallace Hoelscher, dated March 16, 1977. G-15 40. Memorandum from Mr. A. C. Turnage, Jr. to Mr. Robert Carter, dated May 10, 1977. 41. Minutes, February 10, 1977 meeting of the Environ mental Management Commission. 42. Minutes, March 10, 1977 meeting of the Environmental Management Commission. 43. NPDES Permit No. NCO031721, signed February 25, 1977, effective from February 28, 1977 to December 31, 1981. 44. Several site reports by Mr.-Harry Kaufman, Northeastern Regional Office. 45. Letter from.Mr. B. R. Phillips, C. F. Industries to Mr. A. F. McRorie, dated January 17, 1979. 46. "Report of Proceedings at a public hearing concerning the proposed issuance of a State NPDES Permit to C. F. Industries for a one-time discharge to the Chowan River at Tunis, Hertford County," January 17, 1978. 47. Letter from Mr. A. C. Turnage to Mr. B. R. Phillips, dated July 10, 1978. 48. "Quarterly RepQrt: Investigation of the Chowan River Estuary Algal Bloom," dated November 30, 1978. 49. "Quarterly Report: Investigation of the Chowan River Estuary Algal Bloom," dated April 17, 1979. 50. Cover letter from Mr. A. F. McRorie to Mr. B. R. Phillips, transmitting Permit No. 5318, dated May 30, 1979. 51. NPDES Permit No. NCO003409, issued February 2, 1979, expires November 30, 1979. 52. Memorandum to files from Mr. Roger K. Thorpe, dated October 19, 1977. G-16 Cj - I BOX 2500 AHOSKIE. NOR7H CAROLINA 27910 TELEPHONE: 919/3513-5011 Twx 510-929-0951 11C. Nortly Carolina Nitrogen Coaiplex June 27, 1979 RECEIVED - JUN 2 9 1979 Mr. Howard N. Lee, Secretary North Carolina Department of Natural NRCD AD OkFICE OF Resources and Community Development MINISTRATIotj P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Dear Mr. Secretary: One of the ever present challenges of members of Governor Hunt's .cabinet is finding the time to respond to the many requests for attention to challenges and problems. CF Industries would like to express their thanks and appreciation for the generous amount of tfiliewhich you and your staff alloted to examining and discussing our mutual challenges. Our company firmly believes that through such direct and honest communica- tion, challenges can be discussed in a positive manner, and approaches to solutions can be created. Confirming our discussions on June 27th, CF personnel will promptly proceed to take the following actions--- Travel to Raleigh for the purpose of visiting Dr. Grigg to review and discuss the data which has been collected during recent work by the State in examining the movement of nitrogen from the "swamp" area by the plant into the Chowan River. Develop a draft proposal for an engineering study to quantitatively examine the nutrient movement around the 11swamp" area referred to in the previous section. This draft proposal would define the scope of the sampling and modeling work to be done, as well as the costs associated with such a Study. With this draft proposal completed--- hopefully by tile end of September, CF personnel then would be in a position to meet with Dr. Griggs, or other people whom you might designate, and define how and when such a study could be implemented and completed. Prepare an engineering proposal for the relocation of the discharge piping identified in our present NPDES permit, so that such effluent would be discharged directly into the Chowan'River. When this proposal is complete- probably no laterthan the end of July, CF personnel would meet with the appropriate State agencies to discuss its G-17 implementation. Mr. Howard N. Lee -2- June 27, 1979 Again, CF, its management, and employees wish to thank you for the opportunity to meet with you and your staff. Sincerely, CF INDUSTRIES, INC. T. H. Traylor Vice President, Operations J. A. Lawrence Vice President, Manufacturing Northern Region B. R. Phillips Plant Manager THT/ksv G-18 -7 SALEM LAKE DRIVE LONG GROVE, ILL. 60047 PHONE (312) 438-9500 JOHN A. LAWRENCE 0Fr r CI VE 0 Vice President 0" 3- rRr, 1,7Y Moni.foctufing * Northern Region April 30, 1979 North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Attention: Mr. Howard N. Lee, Secretary Dear Sir: Thank@,you for your letter to our Executive Vice Pres- ident, Mr. Donald Borst, regarding his attendance at the March 9, 1979 meeting on the Chowan River. As I am directly responsible for our nitrogen plant 0 on the Chowan River,*I am taking the liberty of answering your letter and commenting on Governor Hunt's request which pertains to our company. Governor Hunt's Item 2: That plant's should monitor their discharge. As you know, under the permit from your office, we monitor our discharges for flow and pH and constit- uents and report these items to your office. Our nitrogen' discharge, by your office's permit, cannot exceed the nitrogen in the water the plant takes from the river. In previous discussions with your people, it has been explained that there is no avail- able technology to handle this material which normally runs about 411 pounds per day. As you may also recall, our company has worked dili- gently with your people. We were pioneers in using ion exchange for nitrogen removal. G-19 We built the first nitrogen plant slurry wall con- taining ground water and have done many minor items inside the plan't, including the stacks, to reduce the discharge of nitrogen. These items have a capital cost of several million dollars and an annual operat- in- cost of over a million dollars per year. They serve only one function; to minimize nitrogen from our plant. We will continue to work with you as much as possible to continue to solve the complex problems of low velocity waterway eutrification. Yours very truly, G-20 State of North Carolina Department of Natural Resources And Community Development Raleigh 27611 James B. Hunt, JR. HOWARD N LEE Secretary Telephone Area Code 910-733-4984 May 5 1979 Mr. Donald V. Borst Executive Vice President C. F. Industries, Incorporated Salem Lake Drive Long Grove, Illinois 60047 Dear Mr. Borst: Since you were with us at Governor Hunt's meeting on March 9th, the "Chowan River Restoration Project" has made sub- stantial progress. You learned at that meeting about our serious commitment Lo clean up the Chowan River and we were pleased to hear your statement about the willingness of C.F. Industries to cooperate. I am writing to you today to make a specific request about your cooperation. As you know, we have been studying the river very carefully for several years. We have considerable data about river nutrient levels, as well as specific information about run- off from the C. F. site. We have recent results from close surveillance of Jirect nitrogen inputs to the river from the vicinity of the fertilizer plant. We have a report in pre- paration about specific quantities of nitrogen in the runoff and we are convinced that it will disclose that average daily discharges of nitrogen from the plant site are substantial. By this I refer to discharges caused by overland flow during rainfall events and seepage which reaches the river through underground flow. These discharges are not considered in the C. F. discharge permit and are often misunderstood. We are aware of the very substantial work completed by C. F. Industries in past years to eliminate these discharges. It appears to us at the present time that this past work has not been adequate and that significant amounts of nitrogen are still reaching the river. We believe that it can be con- sidered a significant source of nutrients and a possible major contribution to the algae blooms. G-21 Page 2 Mr. Donald V. Borst May 5, 1979 We know that the best future operation of your plant will depend on acceptance by the local population. It seems best for C. F., the State of North Carolina, and Chowan re- sidents that we work as hard as we can on this difficult problem. We therefore would-like to meet with you as soon as possible on the site to discuss with you specifically what measures C. F. Industries might take to halt this source of nutrient inputs. At a public meeting in Edenton, North Carolina on Thursday, April 19, 1 stated that I would be visiting the C. F. plant site soon to inspect firsthand the waste management system. I hope you can meet with us on the site so that we can dis- cuss between your engineers and ours the possibilities for correcting this problem. We would hope to receive a commitment from you at that time to receive a commit- ment from you at that time tO understand a substantial effort to remedy these problems. We will be in touch with you to determine whether you can meet us on the site. With kindest regards and best wishes, I am Respectfully yours, Original Signed BY SECRETARY HOWARD N. LEE Howard N. Lee HNL/ch G-22 APPENDIX H 0, . UNION CA14P DISCHARGE PERMIT ACTIONS is UNION CAMP DISCHARGE PERMIT ACTIONS Union Camp Corporation and its predecessor companies have operated on the Blackwater River at Franklin, Virginia since-1850. Beginning as a sawmill, it has grown into the present bleached pulp and paper and building products com- plex, employing at the site about 2,600 people.' The plant has had secondary treatment since 1964. The treatment system was upgraded in 1972 and further refined in 1977. The pre- sent system consists of a clarifier, wet sludge lagoons, 10-day aerated stabilization basin, and a storage pond, capac- ity about 12 billion gallons. A final pond is used only during the four month release period for controlling rate of discharge of treated effluent to the Blackwater River. The discharge is limited to the months of December, January, February and March. These are the months when stream flows are at a maximum and therefore during the period of minimum impact. The company contends that the nutrients dis- charged during this period are well downstream of the algal bloom areas by the time algal activity begins and, hence ', cannot be utilized by the algae. Union Camp is the largest single point source contributor of nitrogen in the basin, and the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management sus- pects that the nutrients are stored in the Chowah and remain there for considerable periods. If this is the case, the nutrients are available for recycling during the summer months. A hearing was held on May 21, 1979, concerning the re- issuance of the Union Camp discharge permits. At that hearing the State of North Carolina vigorously objected to the issuance of the permit unless it was modified to require that: 1. Union Camp Corporation characterize its nutrient contributions to the Chowan River Basin, and 2. Union Camp Corporation establish an adequate pro- gram for nutrient removal or control. By March 1980 the State of North Carolina will establish the levels of nutrient which can be tolerated in the Chowan River. The State of North Carolina, therefore, requested that the permit be terminated on March 1, 1980, or that the permit be amended to assure that the company will begin implementing a program of nutrient control designed to bring its discharge into compliance with North Carolina's nutrient limits when they are established. H-1 Such a control program should be initiated no later than March 1, 1980, and should be completed no later than March 31, 1982. While the position of the State of North Carolina in this matter was unusual in that the State had not yet estab- lished the levels of nutrients which would be allowed in the Chowan River, this method follows the precedent of the EPA which requires that major permits be reopened so that re- quirements for control of certain toxic constituents can be inserted in the permits. If the permit terminated on March 1, 1980, the new permit would then contain all the requirements for implementing an adequate nutrient control program. An alter- native action that would be acceptable to North Carolina was to include a reopener clause in the permit. The reissued permit does not contain a reopener clause and will expire March 31, 1981. Union Camp will be required to monitor 'nutrients as a condition of the reissued permit. H-2 STATEMENT CONCERNING NPDES PERMITS NO. VA0004162 and VA0004154 to be presented to the Virginia Water Control Board at a Public.Hearing in Franklin, VA May 21, 1979 By: A. F. McRorie I appreciate this opportunity to comment on the draft NPDES permits for wastewater discharges from Union Camp Cor- poration, Franklin, Virginia, into the Blackwater River in the Chowan River Basin. As you are aware, the major dis- charge from Union Camp Corporation is into the Blackwater River immediately above the Virginia-North Carolina border. The major impact of this discharge is on North Carolina waters. Union Camp Corporation has provided a high level of treat- ment for the biodegradable materials and solids in their waste- water. The firm has also provided for wastewater storage so that the full year's accumulation of waste can be discharged ,during the high flow winter months - December through March. These activities have resulted in an improvement in river water quality as far as solids and biodegradable materials are con- cerned. However, further steps are now necessary to protect water quality and to avoid algal blooms. The Chowan River, formed by the Blackwater and Nottoway Rivers, has been experiencing increasingly severe algal blooms in recent years. The river and the people of the area suffered from a devastating bloom during the summer of 1978. Early in- dicators suggest that there will be a similar problem in the summer of 1979. In the past, the Chowan River has been an extremely pro- ductive fishery and a significant recreational asset. In North Carolina, many people depend on this fishery and recreational asset for their livelihood. The resources of the Chowan River are a very significant part of the economy of the entire lower basin. The algal blooms have interfered with fish life and re- creation on the river. This has had a serious effect on the. well-being of the entire lower basin. Take, for example, the herring fishery. In the 1960's, it averaged a catch of twelve million pounds annually. This year, following the severe algal bloom of 1978, the herring fishery yielded the lowest catch on record - 0,- million pounds, roughly 37% of the earlier figure. In addition, during the summer and fall of 1978, the algal bloom brought recreational activities on the lower Chowan River to a halt. H-3 The recent algal blooms have been studied by the State of North Carolina, and other agencies, in an attempt to find a solution. Preliminary indications are that the most likely method for preventing over-productivity of algae in the Chowan River Basin is to reduce the nitrogen contributions to the river. The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, after public hearings on the issue, acted on May 10 to estab- lish a new classification for waters of the State of North Carolina. This classification allows for additional control measures in waters which are exhibiting a sensitivity to nu- trients. In addition to adopting the "Nutrient Sensitive Classification," the Commission, through emergency rulemaking procedures, acted to apply this classification to all the waters of the Chowan River Basin which are under its control. During the next few months, the State of North Carolina will identify control measures necessary to reduce nutrient levels. As a re- sult, dischargers in North Carolina will be called on to expend additional time and money to reduce their nutrient input to the river. our goal is to control eutrophication or over- abundance of algae in the Chowan River so as to preserve that resource for the people of the State. Let me note, at this point, that we are also very seriously concerned about the future of the Albemarle Sound. The draft permibs under consideration today for Union Camp Corporation do not address the control of nutrients. The com- pany's application does indicate that there are significant quantities of nitrogen in its discharge. However, the appli_@ cation does not specify the levels of various nitrogen compounds to be discharged. our preliminary staff work suggests that Union Camp is the leading point source of nitrogen in the Chowan Basin. Although this discharge occurs under high flow winter conditions, we believe that the nutrients are stored in the Chowan and remain there for considerable periods. We are very concerned about the effects of hutrient recycling. The State of North Carolina must vigorously object to the issuance of the Union Camp Corporation permits unless they are modified to require that:, 1. Union Camp Corporation characterize its nutrient r contributions to the Chowan River Basin and 2. Union Camp Corporation establish an adequate pro- gram for nutrient removal or control. Furthermore, it is noted that this permit will expire on March 31, 1982.* This date is likely two years beyond the time *This statement was made in error. The expiration date has always been March 31, 1981. H-4 when the State of North Carolina will establish the levels of nutrient which can be tolerated in the Chowan River. The State of North Carolina requests that this permit be terminated on March 1, 1980, or that the permit be amended to assure that the company will begin implementing a program of nutrient con- trol designed to bring its discharge into compliance with North Carolina's nutrient limits, when they are established. Such a control program should be initiated no later than March 1, 1980, and should be completed no later than March 31, 1982. I realize that the position of the State of North Carolina in this matter is unusual in that the State has not yet estab- lished the levels of nutrients which will be allowed in the Chowan River. However, this method follows the precedent of the Environmental Protection Agency which requires that major per- mits be reopened so that requirements for control of certain toxic constituents can be inserted in the permits. We would pre- fer that these permits terminate on March 1, 1980, so that the new permit would then contain all the requirements for imple- menting an adequate nutrient control program. However, since we are certain that we will establish nutrient control levels for the Chowan River, a reopener clause for this purpose is accept- .able. I thank you again for allowing us to make this presenta- tion. 11-5 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT August 29, 1979 Mr. R. V. Davis Executive Secretary Com nwealth of Virginia State Water Control Board Post Office Box 1143 Richmond, Virginia 23230 Subject: Union Camp Corporation NPDES Permit Franklin, Virginia Dear Mr. Davist Your letter of July 26, 1979, was received'. and your concern for.the Chowan Basin is appreciated. We still feel that a *reopener clause for nutrients -is-needed in NPDES Permit No. VA0004162 for Union Camp Corporation. EPA, Region IV, has notified us that they feel the reopener clause request is reasonable. It is unlikely that the EPA standards for the pulp and paper industry which you referred to in your letter will adequately addrese nutrients. Alsog we understand your prudence in re-rrd to tonics. Therefore, we feel that, at least, the same consideration should be giveu to the existing nutrient problem in the Chowan River. The sooner attempts can be made to restore the Chowan River, the sooner results can occur. Please reconaider our request for the reopener clause. Yours very truly, Grigg Nail S. Grigg Acting Director cc: Mr. Bob Holman Mr. Ian MacBryda Washington Regional Office Tidewater Regional Office Mr. A. C. Turnage, Jr. 16910 H-6 WA,@@ H 14 Li AUG .3 19/9 Af COMMONWEALTH of V1RQJNJA, ST/I TE JVA TER CONTROL BOA R 1) R. V. Davis 2111 linindlon Street Executive Secretary Post-Office Box 11143 July 26, 1979 Ri J, Virginia 23230 * @4) 257-0056 Mr. A. F. McRorie, Director AUG 191S North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development FAVIRONMENTAL OP-ERATWN3 P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 RE: Union Camp Corporation NPDES Permit Dear Mr;--M-_RoxJe: #4 Thank you for your letter of July 13, 1979 concerning the NPDES Permit for Union Camp Corporation, Franklin, Virginia. I appreciate the comments that you and other members of your staff had at the public hearing concerning this permit and I understand your current concern. We feel, however, that the permit as reissued, does in fact,adequately address your concern. The permit was set to expire on March 31, 1981 in accordance with EPA regulations. A "reopener clause" for toxics was also included, which would allow for permit modification or reissuance to comply with the requirements of the Clean Water Act. As you know, the EPA is working towards promulgation of the applicable standards for the subject industry by early 1980. If the permit is reopened in 1980 and North Carolina is ready then to present evidence of the Company's effluents effect on the Chowan River, we will certainly reevaluate .the permit's requirements on nutrients. If, however, the permit is not reopened in 1980, North Carolina will still have a chance to provide input on additional nutrient control, when the permit comes up for reissuance prior to March 31, 1981. It is also felt that due to the Company's winter release schedule (the reissued permit covers only two discharge seasons) and the weekly nutrient monitoring requirement during each discharge season, there is some nutrient control program during the life of the short-term permit. In addition, after the first year of issuance, the State of Virginia may reevaluate the nutrient monitoring.requirement and make modifications as deemed appropriate. I hope that this adequately addresses your concerns on this issue, and I look forward to the day when we have solved the water quality problem in the Chowan Basin. If I may be of any further assistance, please let me know. Sincerely R. V. Is Execut W SQ eti -_J sf cc: EPA Region III; BAT, BE, TRO H-7 COMMONWEALTH of Virginia State Water Control Board 2111 Hamilton Street R. V. Davis BOARD MEMBERS Executive Secretary Millard B. Rice, Jr. Box Office Box 11143 Chairmen Richmond, Virginia 23230 Please reply to: Tidewater Regional Office George M. Coirnell (804) 257- 0056 287 Pembroke Office Park Vice-Chairman Suite 310 Pembroke No. 2 Col. J. Leo Bourassa Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Warren L. Braun (804) 499-8742 Kenneoth B. Rollins William L. Tate June 18, 1979 R. Alton Wright Mr. Jim Mulligan North Carolina Division of Environmental Management 1502 North Market Street Washington, North Carolina 27889 RE: Union Camp Corporation NPDES Permit No. VA0004162 - Reissuance Dear Mr. Mulligan: At its June 2-5, 1979 meeting, the Virginia State Water Control Board authorized the staff to reissue NPDES Permit No. VA0004162 to the Union Camp Corporation's Bleach Paper and Board Division. As a result of the concern voiced by the State of North Carolina during the May 21, 1979 Public Hearing in Franklin, Virginia, we have incorporated a nutrient monitoring requirement into the permit. This special condition, which is attached, will involve sampling once per week for nutrients throughout each discharge season. We appreciate North Carolina's concerns in this matter. It we may be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, L. S. McBride Tidewater Regional Director bts Attachment cc: BAT, BE TRO File Mr. A. F. McRorie H-8 APPENDIX I 6 POINT SOURCE DISCHARGER NITROGEN CONTRIBUTIONS It POINT SOURCE DISCHARGER NITROGEN CONTRIBUTIONS Estimated average discharge rate and nitrogen discharge for point sources in the Chowan Basin-ranked by nitrogen discharge. (X denotes a Virginia discharger) Discharger Flow (MGD) N Discharge (lbs./day) x Union Camp Bleached Paper 145 5565 Edenton 1.0 234 Ahoskie 0.8 211 x Fort Pickett 1.,04 191 X Hercules 3.1 130 X Virginia Dyeing Corporation 0.12 115 United Piece Dye Works 0.93 78 x Franklin 0.46 65 x Lawrenceville 0.28 44 x Emporia 0.5 42 CP Industries 0.25 42 x Petersburg 0.2 42 Aulander 0.14 36 Murfreesboro 0.2 32 X Waverly 0.15 29 x Kenbridge 0.15 25 Winton 0.14 .23 Woodland 0.08 20 x Southampton State Correctional Farm 0.07 18 x Jarrett 0.07 15 Conway 0.06 15 X McKenney 0.05 14 x Spurlock Corporation 0.002 14 x South Hill #2 0.168 14 x South Hill #3 0.16 13 x Wakefield 0.15 13 Colerain 0.04 10 x Ramada Inn 0.036 8 Seaboard 0.0305 8 Severn 0.03 8 x Bollingbrook Inn & Allstate MHP 0.029 8 x Piedmont State Hospital 0.05 8 x Victoria (west) 0.086 7 x Victoria (east) 0, ',086 7 x Boykins 0.085 7- Fiberform, Division of USI 0.01 7 N. Hampton High School 0.025 6 x Green Acres Trailer Court & Motel 0.025 6 x Southside Community College 0.021 6 x Beazly Elementary School 0.02 6 x Steven Kent Motel 0.02 6 x Surry County High School 0.02 6 I-1 Discharger Flow (MGD) N. Discharge (qlbs. /day) x Alberta 0.077 5 x LaCrosse 0.06 5 x Prince George High School and Country Aire Mobile Home Park 0.06 5 x Bennie's Mobile Home Park 0.06 5 Roanoke Housing Authority 0.02 5 x Virginia Rest Stop (I-95) 0.02 5 x Central High School and E.S. 0.017 5 x Vulcan Materials 0.06 3 x Holiday Inn South 0.04 3 x South Plains Subdivision 0.04 3 x Edgehill Subdivision 0.04 3 x Richard Bland College 0.04 3 x Vulcan Materials 0.02 3 N. C. Department of Corrections #4130 0.013 3 Riverview Elementary School 0.012 3 x Southampton High School 0.011 3 Perry-Wynn Fish Company 0.01 3 Eastside Elementary School 0.01 3 CF Industries (domestic) 0.01 3 x Southampton High School 0.01 3 x Colonial Motel & Jarrett Motel 0.008 3 x Field Correctional Unit #3 0.008 3 x Dinwiddie County High School 0.022 2 x South Elementary School 0.02 2 x 1-85 Rest Stop 0.02 2 x Walton Elementary School 0.01 2 x Prince George Jr. High School 0.008 2 Chowan County High School 0.008 2 West Colerain 0.008 2 x Weldon Mills 0.007 2 x Belco Motel & Restaurant 0.007 2 Central Jr. High School 0.006 2 x Belfield Elementary School 0.006 2 x Georgian Rathskeller 0.006 2 x Brookside Trailer Park 0.006 2 x Hunterdale Elementary School 0.005 2 x Red Oak Elementary School 0.005 2 X Hicksford Elementary School 0.005 2 x Stuckey's 0.005 x Hill's Trailer Park 0.005 2 x Johns-Manville Corporation 0.11 1 x Wilmurts Motel 0.015 1 x Holiday Inn Trav-L-Campgrounds 0.015 1 x Mannings Mobile Home Park 0.015 1 x Whispering Pines Trailer Court 0.013 1 x Brunswick Jr. High School & Totaro E.S. 0.01 1 x Petersburg Jail Farm 0.01 1 x Nottoway Motel and Restaurant 0.01 1 x Dinwiddie County Jr. High School 0.01 1 I-2 Discharger Flow (MGD) N Discharge (lbs./day) X Convict Camp #20 0.01 1 X Harrison Elementary School 0.009 1 X Town of Chase City (#2) 0.008 1 X Brunswick Academy 0.008 1 X Emporia Truck Stop 0.007 1 X Emporia Motel & Restaurant 0.007 1 Buckland Elementary School 0.005 1 Sunbury Primary School 0.005 1 Gatesville Elementary School 0.005 1 .1-95 Rest Stop 0.005 1 C. G. White Elementary School 0.005 1 Aulander Elementary School 0.005 1 X L. P. Jackson Combined School 0.005 1 X Boykins Elementary School 0.004 1 X Meherrin-Powellton Elementary School 0.004 1 X Sturgeon Elementary School 0.004 1 X Reste Motel 0.004 1 X. Courtland Elementary School 0.004 1 T. S. Cooper Elementary School 0.0035 1 John P. Lae Elementary School 0.003 1 White Oak School 0.003 1 X Berlin-Ivor Elementary School 0.003 1 X Zion Elementary School 0.003 1 X Burkeville Intermediate School 0.003 1 X Capron Elementary School 0.003 1 X Davis Restaurant 0.003 1 X Prince George Texaco 0.003 1 X Clairmont Motel 0.002 1 X Edmunds Trailer Court 0.002 1 X Wilson Trailer Court 0.002 1 X Humble Oil Company #712 0.002 1 X Sussex Courthouse 0.002 1 X LaSalle Motel 0.002 1 Edenton Cotton Mills 0.001 1 X Spurlock Corporation 0.16 1 X Eastside Elementary School 0.003 1 X Ellwynn Motel 0.002 1 X Busby Sunoco 0.001 1 X Gizzards Sunoco 0.001 1 X Deering Exxon 0.001 1 M. J. Tynch Intermittent l X Trego Stone Corporation 2.0 stone wash water X Hercules, Inc. 2.o cooling water X Union Camp Bleached Paper 0.72 cooling water X Southern Johns-Manville Products 0.511 cooling water Carolina Aluminim Company 0.4 cooling Water Georgia-Pacific, Inc. 0.15 cooling water I-3 Discharger Flow (MGD) N Discharge. (lbs./day) x Boykins Narrow Fabrics 0.1 no data x Masonite Corporation 0.1 cooling water West Point Pepperell 0.03 cooling water x St. Regis Paper Company 0.019 cooling water x Victoria Industrial Dev. Authority 0.018 no data x Masonite Corporation 0.012 cooling wat*, x Union Camp Building Products Div. 0.0115 cooling water- Edenton Water 0.008 no data Chowan County Water 0.006 no data x Master Tank and Welding Company 0.002 no data x R. M. Felts Packing Company 0.001 no data x Lawrenceville WTP no data x Emporia WTP no data x Kenbridge WTP no data x South Hill WTP no data x Victoria WTP no data x Crews WTP no data x Fort Pickett WTP no data x Burkeville Veneer no data x Dinwiddie Laundramat no data x Jenny System. Mayfield Carwash no data Discharges for a 4-month period (December March) 1-4 APPENDIX J DESCRIPTION OF SLIDE/TAPE SHOW I I NOAA COA.TAL SVIVICES CTR LIBRARY i i, 3 6668 14111645 1 W-zl