DOCSLIB.ORG

The Condition of South Carolina's Estuarine And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Condition of South Carolina's Estuarine And The Condition of South Carolina’s Estuarine and Coastal Habitats During 1999-2000 Technical Report An Interagency Assessment of South Carolina’s Coastal Zone DHEC PROMOTE PROTECT PROSPER South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control ED STA IT TE N S U E Y N C V N I R E O G N A M E N N I O T T A L C P R O T E The Condition of South Carolina’s Estuarine and Coastal Habitats During 1999 - 2000 Technical Report Prepared by: R.F. Van Dolah, P.C. Jutte, G.H.M. Riekerk, M.V. Levisen, L.E. Zimmerman, J.D. Jones, A.J. Lewitus Marine Resources Division South Carolina Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 12559 Charleston, SC 29412 D.E. Chestnut, W. McDermott Bureau of Water South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29201 D. Bearden, G.I. Scott, M.H. Fulton Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research NOAA NOS CCEHBR Laboratory 219 Ft. Johnson Rd Charleston, SC Technical Report No. 90 2002 This document should be cited as follows: Van Dolah, R.F., P.C. Jutte, G.H.M. Riekerk, M.V. Levisen, L.E. Zimmerman, J.D. Jones, A.J. Lewitus, D.E. Chestnut, W. McDermott, D. Bearden, G.I. Scott, M.H. Fulton. 2002. The Condition of South Carolina’s Estuarine and Coastal Habitats During 1999- 2000: Technical Report. Charleston, SC: South Carolina Marine Resources Division. Technical Report No. 90. 132p. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. v 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 2. METHODS ..................................................................................................................... 3 2.1. Sampling Design...................................................................................................... 3 2.2. Water Quality Measurements .................................................................................. 4 2.3. Biological and Sediment Sampling.......................................................................... 5 2.4. Habitat Evaluation ................................................................................................... 7 2.5. Quality Assurance.................................................................................................... 7 2.6. Data Analyses .......................................................................................................... 8 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..................................................................................... 9 3.1. Station Array............................................................................................................ 9 3.2. Water Quality........................................................................................................... 9 Temperature .............................................................................................................. 14 Salinity ...................................................................................................................... 14 Dissolved Oxygen..................................................................................................... 15 pH.............................................................................................................................. 17 Nutrients.................................................................................................................... 19 Biochemical Oxygen Demand .................................................................................. 22 Total Organic Carbon ............................................................................................... 22 Fecal Coliform Bacteria............................................................................................ 23 Turbidity ................................................................................................................... 24 Alkalinity .................................................................................................................. 25 Integrated Water Quality Measure............................................................................ 25 3.3 Sediment Quality ................................................................................................... 28 Sediment Composition.............................................................................................. 28 TOC........................................................................................................................... 28 TAN .......................................................................................................................... 29 Contaminants ............................................................................................................ 30 Toxicity..................................................................................................................... 32 Integrated Assessment of Sediment Quality............................................................. 33 3.4 Biological Condition.............................................................................................. 35 Phytoplankton ........................................................................................................... 35 Benthic Communities................................................................................................ 36 Finfish and Crustacean Communities ....................................................................... 41 Contaminant Levels in Fish Tissue........................................................................... 47 3.5 Incidence of Litter.................................................................................................. 48 3.6 Integrated Measure of South Carolina’s Estuarine Habitat Quality ...................... 48 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................................. 55 LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................................... 57 DATA APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 63 i LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1. Depiction of tidal creek and open water habitats in the Charleston Harbor area. The pie chart shows the percentage of each habitat for the whole coastal zone, excluding the un-sampled shoals (primarily mud flats) and vegetated salt marsh. .... 4 During each station visit, sampling crews noted whether there were any urban/suburban development or industrial sites visible within 1 km or greater than 1 km from the station. The presence of litter was also recorded. ...................................................... 4 Figure 2.2. Example of a CDF analysis using dissolved oxygen data from tidal creeks. The dotted line shows upper and lower 95% confidence limits. Based on these data, 46% of the state’s tidal creek habitat has a daily average bottom dissolved oxygen concentration < 4 mg / L during the summer index sampling period......................... 8 Figure 3.1.1. Distribution of open water and tidal creek stations sampled throughout South Carolina’s coastal zone during 1999 – 2000. ................................................. 10 Figure 3.1.2. Distribution of open water and tidal creek stations sampled in the northern portion of the state during 1999 – 2000.................................................................... 11 Figure 3.1.3. Distribution of open water and tidal creek stations sampled in the central portion of the state during 1999 – 2000.................................................................... 12 Figure 3.1.4. Distribution of open water and tidal creek stations sampled in the southern portion of the state during 1999 – 2000.................................................................... 13 Figure 3.2.1. Comparison of the average salinity concentrations observed in tidal creek and open water habitats during 1999-2000, and estimates of the percent of the state’s coastal habitat that represented various salinity ranges based the average of measurements obtained over 25-hrs at each station.................................................. 15 Figure 3.2.2. Comparison of the average dissolved oxygen concentrations observed in tidal creek and open water habitats during 1999-2000, and estimates of the percent of the state’s coastal habitat representing various DO ranges based on the average of measurements obtained over 25-hrs at each station.................................................. 16 Figure 3.2.3. Typical dissolved oxygen concentrations observed during various tidal and diurnal periods in tidal creek versus open water habitats during 1999-2000. Shaded areas represent night-time periods. Dotted lines show tidal stage........................... 17 Figure 3.2.4. Comparison of the average pH concentrations observed in tidal creek and open water habitats during 1999-2000, and estimates of the percent of the state’s coastal habitat representing various pH ranges based on the average of measurements obtained over 25-hrs at each station.................................................. 18 Figure 3.2.5. Comparison of the average total nitrogen (TN) concentrations
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Class G Tables of Geographic Cutter Numbers: Maps -- by Region Or
    G3862 SOUTHERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3862 FEATURES, ETC. .C55 Clayton Aquifer .C6 Coasts .E8 Eutaw Aquifer .G8 Gulf Intracoastal Waterway .L6 Louisville and Nashville Railroad 525 G3867 SOUTHEASTERN STATES. REGIONS, NATURAL G3867 FEATURES, ETC. .C5 Chattahoochee River .C8 Cumberland Gap National Historical Park .C85 Cumberland Mountains .F55 Floridan Aquifer .G8 Gulf Islands National Seashore .H5 Hiwassee River .J4 Jefferson National Forest .L5 Little Tennessee River .O8 Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail 526 G3872 SOUTHEAST ATLANTIC STATES. REGIONS, G3872 NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. .B6 Blue Ridge Mountains .C5 Chattooga River .C52 Chattooga River [wild & scenic river] .C6 Coasts .E4 Ellicott Rock Wilderness Area .N4 New River .S3 Sandhills 527 G3882 VIRGINIA. REGIONS, NATURAL FEATURES, ETC. G3882 .A3 Accotink, Lake .A43 Alexanders Island .A44 Alexandria Canal .A46 Amelia Wildlife Management Area .A5 Anna, Lake .A62 Appomattox River .A64 Arlington Boulevard .A66 Arlington Estate .A68 Arlington House, the Robert E. Lee Memorial .A7 Arlington National Cemetery .A8 Ash-Lawn Highland .A85 Assawoman Island .A89 Asylum Creek .B3 Back Bay [VA & NC] .B33 Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge .B35 Baker Island .B37 Barbours Creek Wilderness .B38 Barboursville Basin [geologic basin] .B39 Barcroft, Lake .B395 Battery Cove .B4 Beach Creek .B43 Bear Creek Lake State Park .B44 Beech Forest .B454 Belle Isle [Lancaster County] .B455 Belle Isle [Richmond] .B458 Berkeley Island .B46 Berkeley Plantation .B53 Big Bethel Reservoir .B542 Big Island [Amherst County] .B543 Big Island [Bedford County] .B544 Big Island [Fluvanna County] .B545 Big Island [Gloucester County] .B547 Big Island [New Kent County] .B548 Big Island [Virginia Beach] .B55 Blackwater River .B56 Bluestone River [VA & WV] .B57 Bolling Island .B6 Booker T.
    [Show full text]
  • Board Meeting Agenda and Materials and Monthly Division Reports
    South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Board Meeting Agenda and Materials and Monthly Division Reports Board Meeting Scheduled for Videoconference https://scdnr2.webex.com/scdnr2/j.php?MTID=mb786d66feafef8aa7e4e0a0438488318 Meeting number (access code): 132 319 2411 Telephone: 1-844-992-4726 Access Code: 132 319 2411## March 18, 2021 10:00 AM Quick Tips and Logistics WebEx Video Conferencing Quick Tips Once you are logged into the WebEx meeting room this is the first screen you will see. Select “Start Meeting” Select “Mute” to eliminate all background noise. To see all the members in attendance you can select “Participants”. Select “chat” so that the host is always able to communicate with you. In the event of technical issues, the host will call you directly to assist you further. Agenda AGENDA SC DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BOARD Virtual Meeting March 18, 2021 10:00 AM https://scdnr2.webex.com/scdnr2/j.php?MTID=mb786d66feafef8aa7e4e0a0438488318 Meeting number (access code): 132 319 2411 Telephone: 1-844-992-4726 Access Code: 132 319 2411## I. Call to Order ............................................................. Norman Pulliam, Chairman, SC DNR Board II. Videoconference Guidelines .............................................................. Valerie Shannon, Facilitator III. Invocation IV. Pledge of Allegiance............................................ Mike Hutchins, Vice Chairman, SC DNR Board V. Chairman’s Comments VI. Introduction of Guests ............ Emily Cope, Deputy Director for Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries VII. Constituent Comments (Comments are limited to 5 minutes) ..................................... Emily Cope VIII. Approval of Minutes from February 18, 2021 meeting IX. Presentations/Commendations X. Advisory Committee Reports A. Governor’s Cup Billfishing Series ........................ Carlisle Oxner, DNR Board Representative B. Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries .................................................... Mike Hutchins, Chairman XI.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F Biological Assessment of Threatened and Endangered Species
    EDISTO BEACH COASTAL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION GENERAL INVESTIGATION STUDY APPENDIX F BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT COASTAL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION GENERAL INVESTIGATION STUDY EDISTO BEACH, COLLETON COUNTY SOUTH CAROLINA January 2014 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Edisto Beach is a barrier island located at the mouth of the Edisto River in Colleton and Charleston Counties, South Carolina, approximately 45 miles southwest of Charleston, South Carolina and approximately 20 miles east-northeast of Beaufort, South Carolina (see Figure 1). The incorporated Town of Edisto Beach is located on the island, as is Edisto Beach State Park. The specific study area (See Figure 2) includes Edisto Beach, two Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) zones (the Edisto Complex (Unit M09) to the northeast and Otter Island (Unit M10) to the southwest), and the coastal Atlantic Ocean waters where offshore borrow investigations will be conducted and potential borrow areas will be identified and located. The Town of Edisto Beach and Edisto Beach State Park are part of Edisto Island. They are separated from the main body of Edisto Island by Big Bay Creek, Scott Creek, and the associated salt marsh to the northwest and Jeremy Inlet to the northeast. The Town of Edisto Beach and Edisto Beach State Park are also bounded by the South Edisto River and St. Helena Sound to the southwest and the Atlantic Ocean to the southeast. The maximum width at the southern end of this portion of Edisto Island is approximately 1.5 miles, while the northern end is much narrower. The Town of Edisto Beach occupies the central and southern portions of the island and is generally separated from Edisto Beach State Park by State Highway 174, which provides the only access to the island.
    [Show full text]
  • From Rice Fields to Duck Marshes: Sport Hunters and Environmental Change on the South Carolina Coast, 1890–1950 Matthew Allen Lockhart University of South Carolina
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2017 From Rice Fields to Duck Marshes: Sport Hunters and Environmental Change on the South Carolina Coast, 1890–1950 Matthew Allen Lockhart University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Lockhart, M. A.(2017). From Rice Fields to Duck Marshes: Sport Hunters and Environmental Change on the South Carolina Coast, 1890–1950. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/4161 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FROM RICE FIELDS TO DUCK MARSHES: SPORT HUNTERS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ON THE SOUTH CAROLINA COAST, 1890–1950 by Matthew Allen Lockhart Bachelor of Arts Wofford College, 1998 Master of Arts University of South Carolina, 2001 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2017 Accepted by: Robert R. Weyeneth, Major Professor Janet G. Hudson, Committee Member Kendrick A. Clements, Committee Member Daniel J. Vivian, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Matthew Allen Lockhart, 2017 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION In memory of my brother Marc D. Lockhart, who began this journey with me iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I want acknowledge with gratitude my splendid dissertation committee. Getting to this point would not have been possible without my director, Robert R.
    [Show full text]
  • US Environmental Protection Agency Region 4
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 4 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 61 FORSYTH STREET ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 David Wilson Chief South Carolina Department of Environmental Control Bureau of Water 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29201 SUBJ: Approval of the State of South Carolina's 2008 303( d) List Submittal Dear Mr. Wilson: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 4, has completed its review of the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control's Final 2008 Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303(d) list of water quality limited segments. EPA has determined that each of the water quality limited segments still requiring Total Maximum Daily Loads identified on the State's 2008 list meets the requirements of the CWA Section 303( d) and its implementing regulations, 40 CFR 130.7. EPA hereby approves the State of South Carolina's decision to include each of the waters designated by the State in its 2008 303( d) list. Enclosed for your information is the accompanying decision document for this approval action. Appendix C of the enclosed decision document contains 23 waters of concern for which EPA is not acting on at this time. These waters were submitted based on a preliminary assessment method that has recently been modified in the State's monitoring program so that more representative data can be obtained. Listing determinations for these waters should be included in the 2010 303(d) list submittal. If you have questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me at (404) 562-9345 or Annie Godfrey, Chief, East Standards, Monitoring, and TMDL Section at (404) 562-9967.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Habitat Plan for American Shad
    SOUTH CAROLINA HABITAT PLAN FOR AMERICAN SHAD South Carolina Department of Natural Resources April 2021 Approved May 5, 2021 Introduction: The purpose of this Habitat Plan is to briefly document existing conditions in rivers with American shad runs, identify potential threats, and propose action to mitigate such threats. American shad (Alosa sapidissima) are found in at least 19 rivers of South Carolina (Waccamaw, Great Pee Dee, Little Pee Dee, Lynches, Black, Sampit, Bull Creek, Santee, Cooper, Wateree, Congaree, Broad, Wando, Ashley, Ashepoo, Combahee, Edisto, Coosawhatchie, and Savannah Rivers). Many have historically supported a commercial fishery, a recreational fishery, or both. Currently, commercial fisheries exist in Winyah Bay, Waccamaw, Pee Dee, Black, Santee, Edisto, Combahee, and Savannah Rivers, while the Sampit, Ashepoo, Ashley, and Cooper rivers no longer support commercial fisheries. With the closure of the ocean-intercept fishery beginning in 2005, the Santee River and Winyah Bay complex comprise the largest commercial shad fisheries in South Carolina. Recreational fisheries still exist in the Cooper, Savannah, Edisto, and Combahee Rivers, as well as the Santee River Rediversion Canal. For the purposes of this plan, systems have been identified which, in some cases, include several rivers. Only river systems with active shad runs were included in this plan, these include the Pee Dee River run in the Winyah Bay System (primarily the Waccamaw and Great Pee Dee Rivers), the Santee-Cooper system (Santee and Cooper Rivers with the inclusion of Lakes Moultrie and Marion), and the ACE Basin (Edisto and Combahee Rivers) (Figure 1). A joint plan with Georgia was submitted and approved for the Savannah River.
    [Show full text]
  • The Condition of South Carolina's
    The Condition of South Carolina’s Estuarine and Coastal Habitats During 1999-2000 Technical Report An Interagency Assessment of South Carolina’s Coastal Zone DHEC PROMOTE PROTECT PROSPER South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control ED STA IT TE N S U E Y N C V N I R E O G N A M E N N I O T T A L C P R O T E The Condition of South Carolina’s Estuarine and Coastal Habitats During 1999 - 2000 Technical Report Prepared by: R.F. Van Dolah, P.C. Jutte, G.H.M. Riekerk, M.V. Levisen, L.E. Zimmerman, J.D. Jones, A.J. Lewitus Marine Resources Division South Carolina Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 12559 Charleston, SC 29412 D.E. Chestnut, W. McDermott Bureau of Water South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29201 D. Bearden, G.I. Scott, M.H. Fulton Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research NOAA NOS CCEHBR Laboratory 219 Ft. Johnson Rd Charleston, SC Technical Report No. 90 2002 This document should be cited as follows: Van Dolah, R.F., P.C. Jutte, G.H.M. Riekerk, M.V. Levisen, L.E. Zimmerman, J.D. Jones, A.J. Lewitus, D.E. Chestnut, W. McDermott, D. Bearden, G.I. Scott, M.H. Fulton. 2002. The Condition of South Carolina’s Estuarine and Coastal Habitats During 1999- 2000: Technical Report. Charleston, SC: South Carolina Marine Resources Division. Technical Report No. 90. 132p. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ACTS and JOINT RESOLUTIONS SOUTH CAROLINA 2018 REGULAR SESSION Pages 1298-1966 Acts 127-264
    ACTS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS SOUTH CAROLINA 2018 Volume I REGULAR SESSION Pages 1298-1966 Acts 127-264 ACTS and JOINT RESOLUTIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE of SOUTH CAROLINA ________ 2018 REGULAR SESSION VOLUME I ________ Second Part of Eighty-first Volume of Statutes at Large (The Acts and Joint Resolutions of 2017 Constitute the First Part) ______ Passed at the regular session which was begun and held at the City of Columbia on the 9th day of January, A.D., 2018, and was adjourned on the 3rd day of October, A.D., 2018 ______ PRINTED UNDER DIRECTION OF ASHLEY HARWELL-BEACH CODE COMMISSIONER Notice The second regular session of the 122nd South Carolina General Assembly has adjourned under the provisions of H. 5383, the Sine Die Resolution. In the parenthesis to the left of the permanent numbers are two numbers of which this is an example: (R276, S424). The first number is preceded by R in every instance, and the second number is either H or S. The R indicates the ratification number of the act or joint resolution; the H is the House number as a bill or joint resolution; and the S is the Senate number as a bill or joint resolution. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Notice ..................................................................................................... ii Ratification number to act number ....................................................... iv General and permanent laws ............................................................ 1298 Local and temporary laws ...............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Species Status Assessment Report for the Macgillivray's Seaside Sparrow
    Species Status Assessment Report for the MacGillivray’s Seaside Sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus macgillivraii) Version 1.3 Credit: A. Schwarzer May 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4 Atlanta, GA ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s MacGillivray’s Seaside Sparrow Species Status Assessment Team: Whitney Wiest (USFWS – South Carolina Ecological Services Field Office), Nicole Rankin (USFWS – Region 4), Angela Romito (USFWS – Region 4), Melanie Olds (USFWS – South Carolina Ecological Services Field Office),Gail Martinez (USFWS – Georgia Ecological Services Field Office), Amy Schwarzer (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission), and Elizabeth Hunter (University of Nevada – Reno, formerly University of Georgia). We also received assistance from Brian Paddock (USFWS – Region 4), Jason Ayers (USFWS – South Carolina Ecological Services Field Office), Jennifer Koches (USFWS – South Carolina Ecological Services Field Office), Rebecca Longenecker (USFWS – Region 5 – Division of Natural Resources and Conservation Planning), Chris Hill (Coastal Carolina University), and Stefan Woltmann (Austin Peay State University). We would also like to recognize and thank the following individuals who provided substantive information and/or insights for our SSA. Thank you to Aaron Given (Town of Kiawah Island), Adam Smith (USFWS – Region 4 Inventory & Monitoring), Amy Tegeler (South Carolina Department of Natural Resources), Andrew Cox (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission), Billy Brooks
    [Show full text]
  • Journal Senate State of South Carolina
    NO. 58 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA REGULAR SESSION BEGINNING TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2018 _________ TUESDAY, APRIL 17, 2018 Tuesday, April 17, 2018 (Statewide Session) Indicates Matter Stricken Indicates New Matter The Senate assembled at 2:00 P.M., the hour to which it stood adjourned, and was called to order by the PRESIDENT. A quorum being present, the proceedings were opened with a devotion by the Chaplain as follows: Deuteronomy 32:7 “Remember the days of old, consider the years long past; ask your father, he will inform you; your elders, and they will tell you.” Let us pray. Gracious and loving God, Sunday night six candles were lit in a synagogue in remembrance of 11 million people. These people were systematically exterminated in Nazi concentration camps during WW2: men, women, children and infants. Six million of them were Jews. These innocent people were killed for no other reason than their race or their beliefs. This was evil on a scale beyond comprehension. It is, therefore, our moral imperative, O God, to never forget, to never cease telling this tragedy to our children and to their children. Can this tragedy against humankind happen again? Most assuredly, but not if we, Your people, always treasure and protect the freedoms we have in this country. May each generation, O God, stand up for this freedom and may each generation remember those who fought and those who fell, protecting our precious right to be free -- free to raise our children without fear in a country where we believe that “all people are created equal”.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 303(D) List of Impaired Waters
    State of South Carolina Integrated Report for 2016 Part I: Section 303(d) List of Impaired Waters May 25, 2016 (Amended August 24, 2016, March 1, 2017 and January 24, 2018) The State of South Carolina’s 2016 Integrated Report Part I: Listing of Impaired Waters INTRODUCTION The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (Department) developed this priority list of waters pursuant to Section §303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Federal Regulation 40 CFR 130.7 last revised in 1992. The listing identifies South Carolina waters that do not currently meet State water quality standards after application of required controls for point and nonpoint source pollutants. Updated use attainment determinations were made using water quality data collected from 2010-2014. The classified uses of waters and a number of other factors were considered in establishing priorities and targets. The list will be used to consider waters for further investigation, additional monitoring, and water quality improvement measures, including Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). Over the past three decades, impacts from point sources to waters have been substantially reduced through point source controls achieved via National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Since 1990, steady progress in controlling nonpoint source impacts has also been made through implementation of South Carolina’s Nonpoint Source Management Program. In conjunction with TMDL development and implementation, the continued expansion and promotion of these and other state and local water quality improvement programs are expected to be effective in reducing the number of impaired waters. In compliance with 40 CFR 25.4(c), the Department, beginning April 1, 2016, commenced a minimum 30-day public notice in statewide newspapers, to ensure broad notice of the Department's intent to update its list of impaired waters.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of South Carolina's 2002 §303(D) List
    The State of South Carolina’s 2018 Integrated Report (IR) Part I: Listing of Impaired Waters INTRODUCTION The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC or the Department) developed this priority list of waters pursuant to Section §303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Federal Regulation 40 CFR 130.7 last revised in 1992. The listing identifies South Carolina waters that do not currently meet State water quality standards after application of required controls for point and nonpoint source pollutants. Updated use attainment determinations were made using water quality data collected from 2012-2016. The classified uses of waters and a number of other factors were considered in establishing priorities and targets. The list will be used to consider waters for further investigation, additional monitoring, and water quality improvement measures, including Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). Over the past three decades, impacts from point sources to waters have been substantially reduced through point source controls achieved via National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Since 1990, steady progress in controlling nonpoint source impacts has also been made through implementation of South Carolina’s Nonpoint Source Management Program. In conjunction with TMDL development and implementation, the continued expansion and promotion of these and other state and local water quality improvement programs are expected to be effective in reducing the number of impaired waters. In compliance with 40 CFR 25.4(c), the Department, beginning November 5, 2018, commenced a minimum 30-day public notice to ensure broad notice of the Department's intent to update its list of impaired waters.
    [Show full text]