Coastal Georgia
REGIONAL WATER PLAN
June 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................. ES-1
1. Introduction .................................................................................................1-1 1.1. The Significance of Water Resources in Georgia ............................1-1 1.2. State and Regional Water Planning Process ...................................1-2 1.3. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region Visions and Goals.....1-3
2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region..............................................2-1 2.1. History and Geography....................................................................2-1 2.2. Characteristics of Region ................................................................2-4 2.3. Local Policy Context ........................................................................2-5
3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region........................................3-1 3.1. Current Major Water Use in Region.................................................3-1 3.2. Current Conditions Resource Assessments ....................................3-2 3.2.1. Current Surface Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) ........3-3 3.2.2. Surface Water Availability ....................................................3-6 3.2.3. Current Groundwater Availability..........................................3-8 3.3. Current Ecosystem Conditions and Instream Uses..........................3-9
4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs ................................................4-1 4.1. Municipal Forecasts ........................................................................4-2 4.2. Industrial Forecasts .........................................................................4-5 4.3. Agricultural Forecasts......................................................................4-8 4.4. Water for Thermoelectric Power Forecasts....................................4-10 4.5. Total Water Demand Forecasts.....................................................4-10
5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs .................5-1 5.1. Groundwater Availability Comparisons ............................................5-1 5.2. Surface Water Availability Comparisons..........................................5-4 5.3. Surface Water Quality Comparisons (Assimilative Capacity) ...........5-8 5-4 Summary of Potential Water Resource Issues...............................5-14
6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals ............................................6-1 6.1. Identifying Water Management Practices ........................................6-1 6.2. Selected Water Management Practices for the Coastal Georgia Region ...............................................................................6-2
7. Implementing Water Management Practices...............................................7-1 7.1. Implementation Schedule and Roles of Responsible Parties...........7-1 7.2. Fiscal Implications of Selected Water Management Practices .......7-21 7.3. Alignment with Other Plans ........................................................... 7-35 7.4. Recommendations to the State ..................................................... 7-35
8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress.............................................................8-1 8.1. Benchmarks ....................................................................................8-1

June 2017

i

COASTAL GEORGIA

Table of Contents

8.2. Plan Updates...................................................................................8-7 8.3. Plan Amendments ...........................................................................8-8

Bibliography ............................................................................................... B-1

Tables

ES-1 ES-2 ES-3 3-1
3-2 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-6
5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4
5-5
5-6 5-7 6-1 7-1 7-2 8-1

Summary of 2050 Projected Surface Water Gaps.................................... ES-7 Short-Term Water Quantity Management Practices (0-10 Years) .......... ES-10 Short-Term Water Quality Management Practices (0-10 Years)............. ES-10 Assimilative Capacity for DO in Coastal Georgia Planning Council (under current permit conditions) ................................................................3-4 Summary of Modeled Current Conditions Surface Water Gaps...................3-8 Population Projections by County ...............................................................4-2 Baseline and Alternate Industrial Water Demands (in AAD-MGD) ..............4-6 Agricultural Water Forecast by County (in AAD-MGD) ................................4-9 Thermoelectric Water Demand Forecasts (in AAD-MGD) .........................4-10 Regional Thermoelectric Water Forecasts by Regional Population Growth (in AAD-MGD) .............................................................................. 4-11 2050 Forecasted Groundwater Demands vs. Permitted Capacity ...............5-4 Summary of 2050 Projected Surface Water Gaps.......................................5-5 Characteristics of Modeled 2050 Potential Surface Water Gaps .................5-7 2050 Increased Annual Average Surface Water Demand within Potential Gap Areas...................................................................................................5-8 2050 Municipal Wastewater Forecast versus Existing Permitted Capacity (MGD) ......................................................................................................... 5-9 Permitted Assimilative Capacity for DO in Coastal Georgia Region ..........5-10 Summary of Potential Water Resource Issues by County .........................5-14 Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region ...............6-7 Implementation Schedule............................................................................7-2 Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities ............................7-25 Benchmarks for Water Management Plans .................................................8-2

Figures

ES-1 ES-2 ES-3 ES-4 ES-5 ES-6 ES-7 1-1 1-2 1-3 2-1 2-2 2-3

Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council .................................. ES-2 2010 Water Supply by Source Type......................................................... ES-3 2010 Water Use by Category................................................................... ES-4 Trends in Wastewater and Return Flows ................................................. ES-5 Coastal Georgia Region Population Projections (2010-2050) .................. ES-5 Coastal Georgia Sub-regions ................................................................... ES-6 Implementation of Management Practices ............................................. ES-12 Regional Water Planning Councils..............................................................1-2 State Water Planning Process ....................................................................1-3 Location of Coastal Georgia Council Members ...........................................1-3 Surface Water Resources, Counties, and Major Cities................................2-2 Major Georgia Aquifers ...............................................................................2-3 Land Cover Distribution...............................................................................2-4

ii

June 2017

COASTAL GEORGIA

Table of Contents
3-1 2010 Water Supply by Source Type............................................................3-2 3-2 2010 Surface Water Withdrawal by Category..............................................3-2 3-3 2010 Groundwater Use Withdrawal Category .............................................3-2 3-4 2010 Surface Water Return Flow by Category ............................................3-2 3-5 Assimilative Capacity Models......................................................................3-3 3-6 Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO under Current Permit
Conditions ................................................................................................... 3-5 3-7 Surface Water Planning Nodes ...................................................................3-7 3-8 Sub-regions Associated with the Coastal Permitting Plan ...........................3-8 3-9 Coastal Georgia Region Impaired Waters.................................................3-13 4-1 Total Municipal Water Use Forecast (in AAD-MGD)....................................4-4 4-2 Total Municipal Wastewater Generation Forecast (in AAD-MGD) ...............4-5 4-3 Total Industrial Water and Wastewater Forecast (in AAD-MGD) .................4-7 4-4 Total Agricultural Water Forecast (in AAD-MGD) ........................................4-9 4-5 Water Demand per Sector ........................................................................4-11 4-6 Wastewater/Return Flow in 2015, 2020, 2030, 2040 and 2050 .................4-11 5-1 Red Zone Floridan Aquifer Permits vs. Projected Demand .........................5-2 5-2 Yellow Zone Floridan Aquifer Permits vs. Projected Demand .....................5-3 5-3 2050 Potential Surface Water Gap Summary..............................................5-6 5-4 Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO at Currently Permitted
Conditions ................................................................................................. 5-11 5-5 Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO at Future 2050
Conditions ................................................................................................. 5-12 6-1 Recommended Surface Water and Groundwater Availability Management
Practices in a Phased Approach .................................................................6-5 6-2 Recommended Surface Water Quality Management Practices in a
Phased Approach .......................................................................................6-6

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

iii

Table of Contents
Supplemental Documents The following supplemental materials have been developed in support of the Coastal Georgia Regional Water Plan and are available electronically as attachments to the Regional Water Plan on the Council's website at www.coastalgeorgiacouncil.org/ Public Outreach Technical Memorandum Vision and Goals Technical Memorandum Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum Gap Analysis Technical Memorandum Management Practices Selection Process Technical Memorandum Plans Reviewed in Selecting Management Practices Technical Memorandum Water Conservation Technical Memorandum

COASTAL GEORGIA

iv

June 2017

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments
The Coastal Georgia Council should be acknowledged for contributing significant amounts of time and talent toward the development of the Regional Water Plan. They participated in council meetings, subcommittee meetings, conference calls, and report development and review. The members of the Coastal Georgia Council include:

Name Fred G. Blitch Chris Blocker Michael F. Browning Jason Buelterman E. James Burnsed Robert H. Byrd, Jr. Kay W. Cantrell Van H. Collins Tom Edenfield (Alternate) Forrest Floyd John F. Godbee, Jr. William H. Gross William K. Guthrie (Alternate) Hugh "Bubba" Hodge Jay Kaufman Michelle L. Liotta (Vice Chair) Reginald S. Loper Randal E. Morris Johnny Murphy Phil Odom Pete Peterson John L. Sawyer Mark V. Smith James Thomas, Jr. Benjamin Thompson (Chair) James Vaughn, Jr. Roger A. Weaver Representative Ron Stephens (Ex-Officio) Senator William T. Ligon, Jr. (Ex-Officio)

City Statesboro Port Wentworth Brunswick Tybee Island Richmond Hill
Pooler St. Simons Statesboro Savannah
Guyton Brooklet Kingsland Savannah Darien Brunswick Rincon Springfield White Oak Richmond Hill Hinesville Guyton Rincon Savannah Hinesville Statesboro Savannah Kingsland

County Bulloch Chatham Glynn Chatham Bryan Chatham Glynn Bulloch Chatham Effingham Bulloch Camden Chatham McIntosh Glynn Effingham Effingham Camden Bryan Liberty Effingham Effingham Chatham Liberty Bulloch Chatham Camden

The Coastal Georgia Council would like to thank Rick Brown and Shayne Wood with CDM Smith and Jeff Larson of Georgia EPD for providing the planning and technical guidance toward the development of this Plan.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

v

Conversion of Units
Conversion of Units (Water Flow and Volume) Used in Plan (values
rounded) 1 cubic foot = 7.48 gallons 1 cubic foot per second = 0.646 million gallons per day or 646,272 gallons per day 1 million gallons per day = 1.55 cubic feet per second 1 million gallons = 3.069 acre-feet (1 acre-foot is enough water to cover a football field with about 9 inches of water) 1 cubic foot per second = 1.98 acre-feet per day 1 acre-foot = 325,851 gallons 1 acre-foot = 0.326 million gallons

COASTAL GEORGIA

vi

June 2017

- Draft

List of Acronyms

List of Acronyms

AAD-MGD

Annual Average Day in million gallons per day

ASR

Aquifer Storage and Recovery

ASWS

Additional/Alternate Surface Water Supply

BMP

best management practice

cfs

cubic feet per second

CRD

Coastal Resources Division

CWA

Clean Water Act

CWCS

Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy

CWSRF

Clean Water State Revolving Fund

DCA

Department of Community Affairs

DCAR

Data Collection/Additional Research

DNR

Department of Natural Resources

DO

dissolved oxygen

DWSRF

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

EDU

Educational Needs

EPA

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPD

Environmental Protection Division

FERC

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

GEFA

Georgia Environmental Finance Authority

Georgia DOA

Georgia Department of Agriculture

GFC

Georgia Forestry Commission

gpcd

gallons per capita per day

GSWCC

Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission

GW

groundwater

June 2017

vii

COASTAL GEORGIA

List of Acronyms

List of Acronyms (Continued)

I/I

inflow and infiltration

IGWPC

Industrial Groundwater Permit Capacity

IWWPC

Industrial Wastewater Permit Capacity

LAS

land application system

LDA

local drainage area

M

million

MG

million gallons

MGD

million gallons per day

MGWPC

Municipal Groundwater Permit Capacity

MNGWPD

Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District

MOA

Memorandum of Agreement

MWWPC

Municipal Wastewater Permit Capacity

N/A

not applicable

NPDES

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NPS

non-point source

NPSA

Agricultural Best Management Practices

NPSF

Forestry Best Management Practices

NPSR

Rural Best Management Practices

NPSU

Urban Best Management Practices

NRCS

Natural Resources Conservation Service

NUT

nutrients

O.C.G.A.

Official Code of Georgia Annotated

OCP

Ordinance and Code Policy

OPB

Office of State Planning and Budget

COASTAL GEORGIA

viii

June 2017 Final

List of Acronyms

List of Acronyms (Continued)

OSSMS

on-site sewage management systems

PIP

Public Involvement Plan

PS

point source

PSDO

Point Sources Dissolved Oxygen

mi2

square miles

SW

surface water

TMDL

total maximum daily load

UGA

University of Georgia

USDA

U.S. Department of Agriculture

USFS

U.S. Forest Service

USGS

U.S. Geological Survey

WC

water conservation

WCIP

Water Conservation Implementation Plan

WRD

Wildlife Resources Division

WWTP

wastewater treatment plant

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

ix

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Introduction and Overview of the Coastal Georgia Region
Of all of Georgia's natural resources, none is more important to the future of our State than water. Over the last several decades, Georgia continues to be one of the fastest growing states in the nation. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, between 2010 and 2016, Georgia ranked 4th in total population gain (620,000 new residents) and 12th in percentage increase in population (6.4%). During a portion of this same period, our State also experienced critical areas of severe drought. Georgia's growth and economic prosperity are vitally linked to our water resources.
As our State has grown, the management and value of water resources has also changed. Ensuring a bright future for our State requires thoughtful planning and wise use of our water resources. The water planning process began in 2008, when the State of Georgia's leadership authorized a comprehensive state-wide water planning process to help address these challenges and take a forward look at how our State is expected to grow and use water through 2050. The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council (Coastal Council) was established in February 2009 as

Water Resource Trends and Key Findings for the Coastal Georgia Region
The Coastal Georgia Region includes nine counties in southeast Georgia. Over the next 35 years, the population of the region is projected to grow by approximately 330,000 residents from approximately 680,000 in 2015 to 1.0 million residents by 2050.
Key economic drivers in the region include port, industry, business, tourism, trade, government facilities, and transportation, especially associated with the Brunswick and Savannah Harbors and Interstate 95. Energy production, manufacturing and silviculture are also significant to the region. Agriculture production occurs across the region, especially in the northern portion. Water supplies, wastewater treatment, and related infrastructure will need to be developed and maintained to support these economic drivers. Management of water resources to sustain the unique coastal environment is an important goal of the region.
Groundwater, mainly from the Floridan aquifer, is needed to meet about 62% of the municipal, industrial, and agricultural needs, with the municipal and industrial uses being the dominant demand sectors. Surface water is needed to meet about 38% of these needs, with industry as the dominant demand sector. Thermoelectric energy is a major user of surface water, but most of the water withdrawn is returned to the surface water source.
Water resource challenges in the region include: salt water intrusion concerns in the Savannah-Hilton Head area and in the Brunswick area in Glynn County; surface water shortfalls during some periods on the Canoochee, Ogeechee, and Satilla Rivers; and water quality challenges associated with low dissolved oxygen in some portions of the region, most notably the Savannah River Harbor.
Management practices are needed to address these challenges including: water conservation; refining planning information; alternate sources of supply in areas where groundwater or surface water availability may be limited; maximizing use of existing aquifer; consideration of aquifer storage and recovery; improving/ upgrading wastewater treatment; and addressing non-point sources of pollution.

June 2017

ES-1

COASTAL GEORGIA

Executive Summary

Figure ES-1: Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council

part of this state-wide process. The Coastal Council completed the initial Regional Water Plan in 2011, and in 20162017 the Coastal Council updated the Regional Water Plan. The Coastal Council is one of 11 planning regions charged with developing Regional Water Plans, and encompasses nine counties in the southeast portion of Georgia (shown in Figure ES-1). An overview of the updated findings and recommendations for the Coastal Georgia Region are provided in this Executive Summary. The Coastal Council's Regional Water Plan is available on the Council's website, at: www.coastalgeorgiacouncil.org.

Georgia has ample water resources, with 14 major river systems and multiple groundwater aquifer systems. These waters are shared natural resources; streams and rivers run through many political jurisdictions. The rain that falls in one region of Georgia may replenish the aquifers used by communities many miles away. And, while ample water in Georgia is available, it is not an unlimited resource. It must be carefully managed to meet long-term water needs. Since water resources vary greatly across the State, water supply planning on a regional and local level is the most effective way to ensure that current and future water resource needs are met.

The Coastal Georgia Region encompasses several major population centers, including Savannah, Statesboro, Hinesville, St. Marys, and Brunswick. When compared to other planning regions, the Coastal Georgia Region is projected to have the 2nd largest total growth in the State (over the next 35 years). In the metropolitan Savannah area, in the northeast portion of the region, Chatham, Effingham and Bryan Counties are forecasted to grow by approximately 220,000 residents, or 58%, from 2015 through 2050 (Georgia's Office of Planning and Budget, 2015). Based on the revised population projections developed in 2015, the population of the region is expected to grow by almost 330,000 residents from approximately 680,000 in 2015 to 1.0 million residents by 2050. These population centers, along with smaller cities and towns in the region, require reliable water supplies and sufficient wastewater treatment to meet their growing needs. In addition, the region has thriving industrial and commercial sectors as well as a vibrant agricultural base, especially in the northern portion of the region.

COASTAL GEORGIA

ES-2

June 2017

Executive Summary

Key economic drivers in the Coastal Georgia Region include industry; U.S. Government facilities including Fort Stewart and Hunter Army Airfields, Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center; and the Coastal Region's key transportation corridor, which includes the ports of Savannah and Brunswick and Interstate 95. Additionally, the important economic sectors in the region include paper, food and chemical industries, manufacturing, silviculture, tourism, trade, transportation, utilities, commercial and recreational fishing, education and health services, and leisure and hospitality among others.
Wetlands and forested lands are major land covers in the region along with urban/suburban development and agricultural lands. This is the only region in Georgia that contains seashore, barrier islands, and nine major estuaries. Estuaries within the coastal marshlands are an important ecosystem. A significant portion of the Atlantic seaboard's salt marshes and thousands of acres of rare tidal freshwater wetlands are located within the Coastal Georgia Region. Shrimp, oysters, clams, and various species of freshwater and salt water fish provide a vibrant and significant recreational and commercial resource, both ecologically and economically.
Establishing a Water Resource Vision for the Coastal Georgia Region
A foundational part of the water planning process was the development of a vision for the region that describes the economic, population, environmental, and water use conditions that are desired for the region. On September 24, 2009, the Coastal Council adopted the following Vision for the region.
"The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council seeks to conserve and manage our water resources in order to sustain and enhance our unique coastal environment and economy of Coastal Georgia."
On November 17, 2009, the Coastal Council identified six goals to complement the Vision. These goals can be found in Section 1 of the Regional Water Plan.
Overview of Water Resources and Use in the Coastal Georgia Region
Surface Water
The Coastal Georgia Region covers the lower portion of five major river basins, listed from north to south: Savannah, Ogeechee, Altamaha, Satilla, and St. Marys Rivers. Water is supplied in the Coastal Georgia Region by a combination of surface water and groundwater. As shown in Figure ES-2, surface water is expected to provide 70% of the water supply within the region. However, as described below, the majority of surface water

June 2017

ES-3

COASTAL GEORGIA

Executive Summary
withdrawals is for the energy sector and is non-consumptive. Based on water use trends and forecast information through 2050, the majority of the industrial, municipal, energy (consumptive use only), and agricultural surface water use in the region is projected to come from the Savannah River (72-76%), Satilla River (2024%), and Ogeechee Rivers (3-4%). This information is based on the assumption that future use will follow current practices and trends. However, as described in more detail below, additional surface water use is one option for addressing concerns associated with salt water intrusion into the Upper Floridan Aquifer, so this usage may increase.
Groundwater
As shown in Figure ES-2, groundwater is estimated to meet about 30% of the region's water supply needs. Based on 2015 forecasted groundwater withdrawal data, approximately 97% of groundwater in the region is supplied from the Floridan aquifer, which is one of the most productive groundwater aquifers in the United States.
Water and Wastewater Needs in the Coastal Georgia Region A Closer Look
Figure ES-3 presents surface water and groundwater use by sector in the Coastal Georgia Region. About 80% of surface water withdrawals in the region are for the energy sector. However, the majority of this water (276 MGD) is returned to the surface water, with only 7 MGD consumed. The plan update accounts for the fact that the Coastal Georgia Region is currently is a state of transition as it relates to energy production and associated water use. This includes accounting for the retirement of two older generating units with high-water using once-through cooling (in Glynn and Chatham Counties Plant McManus and Plant Kraft, respectively) and the construction of a new water-efficient generating unit (in Effingham County

COASTAL GEORGIA

ES-4

June 2017

Executive Summary

Effingham County Power Project). Industry is also a major user (34 MGD) of surface water in the region. About 151 MGD of groundwater are expected to be used to supply the industrial (46%), municipal, (44%), self-supply (homes with groundwater wells), agricultural, and energy water use sectors.

Figure ES-4: Trends in Wastewater and Return Flows

Wastewater treatment types/values representing past trends and forecasted use in the region are shown in Figure ES-4. According to the Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecast developed for the Regional Water Plan (CDM Smith, 2017) and USGS energy withdrawal data for 2010, 95% of treated wastewater in the region is disposed of as a municipal/industrial point source discharge (41.2%), energy discharge (53.2%), or to a land application system (0.6%). The remaining wastewater is treated by onsite sewage treatment (septic) systems (5%).

Data Sources: a) Energy only: "Water Use in Georgia by County for 2010; and Water-Use Trends, 1985-2010" (USGS, 2016); b) Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum (CDM Smith, 2017).

Coastal Georgia Forecasted Water Resource Needs from the Year 2015 to 2050

Energy totals shown represent thermoelectric water return flows; 7.7 MGD of the total 284 MGD withdrawn (2.7%) is consumptive, the remainder (276 MGD) is discharged back to surface waters as return flow.

Municipal water and wastewater forecasts are closely tied to population projections for the counties within the

Coastal Georgia Region. The population projections were developed by the Georgia

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

ES-5

Executive Summary

Governor's Office of Planning and Budget and are shown in Figure ES-5. Overall, the region's water supply needs are expected to grow by 26% (70.4 MGD) in demand from 2015 through 2050. Wastewater flows are expected to grow by 17% (40 MGD) from 2015 through 2050.

Comparison of Available Resource Capacity to Future Water Resource Needs

Figure ES-6: Coastal Georgia Subregions

Groundwater Availability

Groundwater from the Floridan aquifer is a

vital resource for the Coastal Georgia

Region. Several groundwater modeling

tools were developed as part of the water

planning process to estimate the amount of

water that can be sustainably pumped from

select regional aquifers, including the

Floridan; also referred to as sustainable

yield. Overall, the results from the

Groundwater Availability Assessment

(EPD, May 2017) indicate that the

sustainable yield for the modeled portions

of the regional aquifer(s) is greater than

the forecasted demands. However,

groundwater pumping or withdrawals in

coastal regions can lead to salt water

intrusion or the movement of saline waters

into freshwater aquifers. As shown in

Figure ES-6, 24 counties in southeast

Georgia are subject to the Coastal Georgia

Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion (Coastal Permitting Plan) (www.gadnr.org/cws). As

Source: Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion

a result of concerns over salt water intrusion, the Coastal Permitting Plan placed

restrictions on groundwater withdrawals from the Floridan aquifer in this region,

which included significant permit reductions for permit holders in Chatham, Bryan,

Liberty and parts of Effingham County. A second Red Zone was designated for a

small portion of Glynn County in Brunswick, commonly referred to as the "T-shaped

Plume." The results of a variety of studies on salt water intrusion for this region, and

discussions regarding potential solutions, resulted in bi-state agreements between

Georgia and South Carolina to better manage the use of groundwater in the region to

limit the impacts of salt water intrusion.

To accommodate both the regional planning process and bi-state agreements, the Coastal Council developed a flexible and adaptive approach for meeting regional groundwater needs. As described below, a variety of water supply strategies, also called management practices, were developed for the region. Additional detail will be

COASTAL GEORGIA

ES-6

June 2017

Executive Summary

needed for some management practices before final recommendations can be determined or implemented, for example on-going research associated with aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and the potential use of the Cretaceous Aquifer as an alternative groundwater supply for areas such as Tybee Island.
Surface Water Availability
Surface water is also an important resource used to meet current and future needs of the Coastal Georgia Region. In order to analyze whether there is sufficient surface water to meet both off-stream uses of water and instream flow needs, a Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment model was developed by EPD and used in the state water planning process.
The results of the future conditions modeling from the Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment (EPD, March 2017) show that in many portions of the region, there are sufficient surface water supplies to meet forecasted water supply needs. However, in dry years, during some portions of the year, the modeled demand for off-stream uses of water results in projected impacts to instream flow needs (referred to as a potential "gap").
Table ES-1 summarizes the forecasted gaps between available surface water resources and forecasted needs. There are current and 2050 forecasted surface water gaps at the following locations in and near the region: Claxton (Canoochee River just west of the Coastal Council boundary), Eden (Ogeechee River), and Kings Ferry (Ogeechee River).

Table ES-1: Summary of 2050 Projected Surface Water Gaps

Node Claxton Eden Kings Ferry
Source: EPD 2017.

Duration of Gap (% of total days)
15
3.3
3

Average Flow Deficit
5 cfs (3 MGD)
24 cfs (16 MGD)
37 cfs (24 MGD)

Long-term Average Flow
452 cfs (292 MGD)
2,213 cfs (1,430 MGD)
3,658 cfs (2,364 MGD)

At each of these locations, the dominant water use type is agricultural. The projected increase of agricultural surface water use for the counties within the Coastal Georgia Region that contribute to current and/or future gaps is 0.1 MGD. Since there are current gaps at the referenced locations, it will be difficult to develop additional surface water to meet projected needs without increasing current gaps. As described

June 2017

ES-7

COASTAL GEORGIA

Executive Summary

in Table ES-1, management practices are recommended by the Coastal Council to address surface water gaps.

Assessment of Water Quality Conditions

One measure of the capacity of surface water to maintain its health and the health of the aquatic species living therein is the amount of residual

Summary of Resource Assessment Results

dissolved oxygen in the water. As part of the Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Management Practices should be

Assessment (EPD, May 2017), modeling of developed and implemented to

dissolved oxygen concentrations was performed address water resource shortfalls as

for each surface water reach in the region that has determined by the three Resource

upstream wastewater discharges to the reach. Assessments.

The modeling estimates the ability of the surface water to assimilate the amount of pollutants being discharged (also referred to as assimilative capacity). Each modeled river segment was classified as exceeding dissolved oxygen capacity, meeting dissolved oxygen capacity, or having available dissolved oxygen capacity. The assimilative capacity assessment for dissolved oxygen at baseline and/or permitted conditions is presented in Section 3 and Section 5, and Section

Groundwater: Overall, results indicate that the sustainable yield for the modeled portions of the regional aquifer(s) is greater than the forecasted demands. However, groundwater pumping in certain areas of the Coastal Region can lead to salt water intrusion. Groundwater supplies in these areas are limited due to

6 (Management Practices) outlines the quality characteristics.

recommendations that have been made to address these impairments in the future. Assimilative capacity assessments indicate the potential need for improved wastewater treatment in some facilities within the Ogeechee and Altamaha River Basins.

Surface Water Quantity: There are sufficient surface water supplies at many locations throughout the Coastal Region, but there are also projected surface water shortfalls at the Claxton, Eden, and Kings Ferry

Under Section 303d of the federal Clean Water nodes.

Act, a total maximum daily load (TMDL) must be developed for waters that do not meet their designated uses. A TMDL represents the maximum pollutant loading that a water body can assimilate and continue meeting its designated use (i.e., not exceeding State water quality

Surface Water Quality: There are three river reaches within the Ogeechee River Basin, four river reaches within the Altamaha River Basin, and the main stem of the St.

standards). A water body is deemed to be Marys River and the St. Marys Sound

impaired if it does not meet the applicable criteria that exceed DO assimilative capacity.

for a particular pollutant; consequently, TMDLs

are required to be established for these waters to

reduce the concentrations of the exceeding parameters in order to comply with State

water quality standards.

COASTAL GEORGIA

ES-8

June 2017

Executive Summary
For the Coastal Region, there are 51 impaired stream reaches (total impaired length of 413 miles) and 2 impaired sounds. TMDLs have been completed for 35 of the impaired stream reaches and both impaired sounds. The majority of impairments are due to low dissolved oxygen and fecal coliform.
With concurrence from EPA, stakeholders including Georgia EPD, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), EPA, and the Savannah River/Harbor Discharger Group initiated a 5R process and through that process collaboratively developed, in lieu of a TMDL, an alternative watershed restoration plan to meet applicable water quality standards for the Savannah River and Harbor. Following development of this 5R plan, and reclassification of the Savannah Harbor to Category 5R on the 2014 305(b)/303(d) list, the EPA withdrew the original dissolved oxygen TMDL for the Savannah River and Harbor in favor of the alternative restoration approach outlined in the 5R plan. The intent is to remove the Savannah Harbor from subcategory 5R once the alternative restoration plan has been implemented to meet applicable water quality standards.
Identifying Water Management Practices to Address Water Resource Shortfalls and Future Needs
The comparison of EPD's May 2017 Resource Assessments and forecasted demands identified the region's likely resource shortfalls or gaps and demonstrated the necessity for region and resource specific water management practices. In selecting the actions needed (i.e., water management practices), the Coastal Council considered practices identified in existing plans, the Region's Vision and Goals, and coordinated with local governments and water providers as well as neighboring Councils that share these water resources.
The Coastal Council has developed a management practice strategy based on the best data and modeling results available. The Council recognizes that as data are refined and modeling results improve--including water and wastewater projections and Resource Assessments--the resulting future needs and gaps may change. Therefore, the Council has prioritized short-term management practices to address gaps with the understanding that more complex management practices may be required in the future. These short-term management practices are presented in Tables ES-2 and ES-3.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

ES-9

Executive Summary

Table ES-2: Short-Term Water Quantity Management Practices (0 10 Years)
Utilize surface water and groundwater sources within the available resource capacities
For Red and Yellow Zones in Chatham, Liberty, Bryan and parts of Effingham County, management practices include a range of options including: Replacing groundwater with surface water Replacing Red Zone groundwater withdrawals
with groundwater withdrawals outside the Red and Yellow zones Continue study of potential for Aquifer storage and recovery Optimization of all aquifers and continued monitoring and modeling to assess ongoing aquifer management practices Water reuse For the Red Zone "T-shaped plume" near Brunswick, avoid additional pumping in the area of the "T-shaped plume"
Water conservation
Data collection and research to confirm the frequency, duration, severity, and drivers of surface water gaps (forecast methodology assumptions and Resource Assessment modeling)
Evaluate and ensure that future surface water permit conditions do not contribute to low flow concerns
Encourage sustainable groundwater use as a preferred supply in regions with surface water low flow concerns and adequate groundwater supply
Identify incentives and a process to sustainably replace a portion of existing surface water use with groundwater use to address low flow concerns
Evaluate the potential to use existing storage to address low flow concerns
Education to reduce surficial aquifer groundwater use impacts to 7Q10 low flow concerns

Table ES-3: Short-Term Water Quality Management Practices (0 10 Years)
Point Sources: Support and fund current permitting and waste
load allocation process to improve treatment of wastewater and increase treatment capacity Data collection and research to confirm discharge volumes and waste concentrations as well as receiving stream flows and chemistry
Non-point Sources: Data collection to confirm source of pollutants and
causes; encourage stormwater ordinances, septic system maintenance, and coordinated planning Ensure funding and support for Best Management Practices programs by local and state programs, including urban/suburban, rural, forestry, and agricultural Best Management Practices
Non-point Source Existing Impairments: Total maximum daily load listed streams: Improve
data on source of pollutant and length of impairment; Identify opportunities to leverage funds and implement non-point source Best Management Practices

COASTAL GEORGIA

ES-10

June 2017

Executive Summary

The Coastal Council's efforts in developing management practices were significantly informed and guided by the scale and complexity of the bi-state discussions regarding saltwater intrusion in the Hilton Head Island region of South Carolina, and by the 2015 Georgia stakeholder process for implementing additional groundwater withdrawal reductions in the Red and Yellow Zones. An additional significant bi-state issue informing the council discussions was the 5R process involving NPDES permitted wastewater treatment facilities from both Georgia and South Carolina. This long-term process resulted in EPA approval of the 5R plan, EPA withdrawal of the original dissolved oxygen TMDL, and has allowed both states to move forward with receiving NPDES permit applications and issuing permits for municipal and industrial facilities on the main stem of the river and harbor, and those tributary to the main stem. The Coastal Council has provided a "tool box" of management practices, that augment and align with these on-going strategies and implementation plans. In addition, results and recommendations from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's Savannah River Basin Comprehensive Study (a cost-share study with Georgia, South Carolina, and The Nature Conservancy), as well as other planning needs that may be identified through South Carolina's water planning process, will need to be evaluated and considered in future iterations of the Coastal Council Regional Water Plan. The Coastal Council intends to revisit this Plan to evaluate any substantial new information that may emerge to determine if modification of the Plan is warranted. Council expects that a formal decision to continue the Council will be made in the near future to facilitate accomplishing this objective. Members of the Coastal Council have invested significant time and expertise into the planning process and wish to capitalize on the expertise gained by the Council to continue providing leadership towards the advancement of the Council's stated vision and goals.
The Coastal Council believes the Regional Water Plan should be reviewed in defined increments in the future, such as every 5 years to evaluate how the implemented management practices are performing toward addressing gaps and meeting forecasted needs and what additional measures might be required. If the selected management practices have not sufficiently closed the gaps identified by the Resource Assessments, then additional management practices should be selected and implemented. The selected management practices will over time address identified gaps and meet future uses when combined with practices for all shared resource regions. The Council further believes that triggering events might cause the need for the plan to be revisited at a smaller time increment. These triggering events could include items such as a large water using industry moving into the region, significant changes in regulatory policy, and results of the bi-state negotiations that alter the findings of the Regional Water Plan.
Implementing Water Management Practices
The Coastal Council supports the concept of regional water resource planning with a focus on planning Councils composed of local governments, water users, water providers, industry, business and affected stakeholders. Local representatives are typically most familiar with local water resource issues and needs. The State has a vital role providing technical support, guidance, and funding to support locally focused water resource planning.

June 2017

ES-11

COASTAL GEORGIA

Executive Summary
Implementation of the Coastal Georgia Regional Water Plan will be primarily by various water users and wastewater utilities in the region. The most cost-effective and more readily implemented management practices will be prioritized for shortterm implementation via an incremental and adaptive approach as shown in Figure ES-7. If resource needs are not met and/or gaps are not addressed, then more complex management practices will be pursued. Future planning efforts should confirm current assumptions and make necessary revisions and/or improvements to the conclusions reached during this round of planning.
Figure ES-7: Implementation of Management Practices

Cost Considerations
Planning level cost estimates were prepared for the various categories of management practices. A detailed summary of costs can be found in Section 7 of the Regional Water Plan. In general, addressing surface water needs in the region from both a water supply and a water quality perspective are expected to present the largest challenges and have the most fiscal impact. For the Regional Water Plan to be most effective wastewater utilities and agricultural water users will need planning and implementation support to help them meet current and future needs. It is anticipated that several different sources and options will be used to secure funding for the various management practices outlined in the Regional Water Plan, and adequate funding will be a critical component of the successful implementation of the state-wide water planning effort.
Water conservation remains a cost-effective means to address future water supply needs, and could be applied region-wide and especially in areas of development affected by groundwater withdrawal restrictions in the Red and Yellow Zones. It appears more costly solutions such as surface water supply or more regionally collaborated shared-solutions may also be required in these areas. Wastewater treatment will likely also require funding sources, both to upgrade treatment facilities and to address aging sewer infrastructure.

COASTAL GEORGIA

ES-12

June 2017

Executive Summary
Implementation Considerations and Benchmarks Helping Ensure Progress toward Meeting Future Needs
Effective implementation of the Regional Water Plan will require the availability of sufficient funding in the form of loans, and in some cases, possibly grants. In addition, many of the proposed management practices require ongoing coordination with affected stakeholders/water users and collaboration to help ensure successful solutions are identified and implemented. Finally, in many cases, monitoring progress toward addressing future needs will require improved data and information on the current actions and management practices that are already in place.
To assess progress toward meeting regional needs, the Coastal Council identified several benchmarks that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Regional Water Plan. The benchmarks are shown in Section 8 of the Regional Water Plan and include both the activities that should be accomplished and the measurement tools that can be used to assess progress. In the Coastal Georgia Region, there are several issues that may require the development of regional solutions and the benchmarks were developed with this information in mind.
The Coastal Council supports the concept of regional water planning led by local representatives. The Council members wish to express their gratitude to Governor Nathan Deal, Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle, and Speaker of the House David Ralston for their nomination to the Coastal Council. The Regional Water Plan provides a recommended path forward to help achieve social, economic, and environmental prosperity for the region. The Council members are grateful for the opportunity to serve the region and State and wish to remain involved in facilitating attainment of the Regional Water Plan benchmarks and making necessary revision to the Plan either through the Coastal Georgia Regional Commission or other avenues.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

ES-13

1.1.ININTRTROODDUUCCTITOIONN

1. Introduction

Section 1. Introduction

Georgia is one of the fastest growing states in the nation. Couple that with recent critical areas of severe

Summary

drought, increased competition for water supplies, and changing perspectives on how we use and value water, and we begin to see the challenges of managing our valuable water resources. In response to these challenges, a State Water Council was formed to develop a state-wide water planning process.

The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council, established in February 2009 under the State Water Plan, has adopted a Vision and Goals for prioritizing water resource

The water planning process began in 2008 when the use and management within State Water Council submitted the Georgia the region.

Comprehensive State-wide Water Plan (State Water Plan) to the Georgia General Assembly and the water planning process was approved. The purpose of the State Water Plan is to guide Georgia in managing water resources in a sustainable manner to support the State's economy, protect public health and natural systems, and to enhance the quality of life for all our citizens. The State Water Plan identifies state-wide

These guiding principles were used to identify and select water management practices that best address the needs and resource conditions of the Coastal Georgia Region.

policies, provides planning guidance, and establishes

a planning process for completion of Regional Water Development and Conservation

Plans (Regional Water Plans). The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council

(Coastal Council) was formed to help guide the completion of the 2011 Regional Water

Plan and they have now produced this update. The Coastal Council is composed of

membership based on a nomination and appointment process by the Governor,

Lieutenant Governor, and Speaker of the House.

The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Plan was first completed and adopted in 2011. During the 20162017 plan update process, this document was updated from the original 2011 Regional Water Plan for the Coastal Georgia Region based on updated regional water demand forecasts, updated resource assessment modeling, and the evaluation of future gaps in water availability and water quality. This updated plan also includes the revised management practices recommended by the Coastal Council to either address future water resource management needs or to refine or clarify management practices. A table is provided in Appendix A that identifies the portions of the plan that have been updated and provides a short explanation for why the update was made (for instance, a change in circumstance in the region, or an update to the technical work such as updated projections or forecast).

1.1. The Significance of Water Resources in Georgia
Of all Georgia's natural resources, none is more important to the future of our State than water. Georgia has ample water resources, with 14 major river systems and

June 2017

1-1

COASTAL GEORGIA

1. Introduction

multiple groundwater aquifer systems. These waters are shared natural resources. Streams and rivers run through many political jurisdictions. The rain that falls in one region of Georgia may replenish the aquifers used by communities many miles away. And, while water in Georgia is abundant, it is not an unlimited resource. It must be carefully managed to meet long-term water needs.

Since water resources, their conditions, and their uses vary greatly across the State, selection and implementation of management practices on a regional and local level are the most effective ways to ensure that current and future needs for water supply and assimilative capacity are met. Therefore, the State Water Plan calls for the preparation of 10 Regional Water Plans. The eleventh regional water planning district, the Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District (MNGWPD, also known as "the District"), was created by State law in 2001 and had existing plans in place. Figure 1-1 illustrates the 11 council boundaries and major surface watersheds, which are shown by the different background colors.

Figure 1-1: Regional Water Planning Councils

This Regional Water Plan prepared and updated by the Coastal Council describes the current and projected water resource needs of the region and summarizes regionally appropriate management strategies (also referred to as water management practices) to be employed in Georgia's Coastal Water Planning Region over the next 35 years to help meet these needs.

1.2. State and Regional Water
Planning Process
The State Water Plan calls for the preparation of Regional Water Plans designed to manage water resources in a sustainable manner through 2050. The original (2011) Regional Water Plan was prepared following a consensus-based planning process illustrated in Figure 1-2. As detailed in the Coastal Council's Memorandum of Agreement with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) and Department of Community Affairs (DCA) as well as the Council's Public Involvement Plan (PIP), the process required and benefited from input of other regional water planning councils, local governments, and the public. For this plan update, a similar approach was followed including a review of the original vision and goals, updates to the water and wastewater demands, updates to the resource assessments, and a re-evaluation of future gaps. Public/local government input and coordination with other regional water planning councils also informed the plan update.

COASTAL GEORGIA

1-2

June 2017

1. Introduction Figure 1-2: State Water Planning Process

1.3. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region Visions and Goals
Following the process established in the State Water Plan, the Coastal Council was established in February 2009. The Coastal Council has 30 members, which includes 3 alternates and 2 Ex-Officio members. Figure 1-3 provides an overview of the Coastal Region and the residential locations of the Coastal Council members.
To develop the 2011 Regional Water Plan, the Coastal Council met collectively for the first time on March 13, 2009 at a kickoff meeting for the 10 regional water planning councils. The meeting focused on: providing an orientation to the water planning process; a preliminary overview of Georgia's water

June 2017

1-3

COASTAL GEORGIA

1. Introduction

resources; and establishing an understanding of the schedule for completing the Regional Water Plan, the Council's meeting schedule, and requirements. As part of this update, the Coastal Council met over a series of meetings in 2016 and 2017 to revise and update each of the sections of the plan, as appropriate.
Developing the Region's Council Procedures Initially, the planning process focused on establishing the Coastal Council leadership along with operating procedures and rules for conducting meetings. The operating procedures and rules were appended to the Memorandum of Agreement that was executed between the Coastal Council, EPD, and DCA. The Memorandum of Agreement was unanimously approved by the Coastal Council and executed on June 25, 2009. A copy of the Memorandum of Agreement is available on the Council's website, at: www.coastalgeorgiacouncil.org.
In support of the Memorandum of Agreement, the Coastal Council formed six subcommittees to provide planning guidance during various development stages of the development of the 2011 Regional Water Plan. The subcommittees consisted of the following: Vision and Goals, Municipal Water and Wastewater Forecasting, Public Involvement Plan, Plan Drafting (Table of Contents), Plan Drafting (Report), and Management Practices.
Developing Regional Vision and Goals A major element of Georgia's state and regional water planning process is the identification of the Vision and Goals that describe the economic, population, environmental, and water use conditions desired for each region. The Vision and Goals described below summarize the Coastal Council's priorities for water resource use and management. This information is used to help guide the identification and selection of water management practices for the Coastal Georgia Region and to communicate these priorities and values to other regions of the State.
Vision Statement (As established September 24, 2009)
"The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council seeks to conserve and manage our water resources in order to sustain and enhance our unique coastal environment and economy of Coastal Georgia."
Goals (as established November 17, 2009) The Coastal Council has identified six goals for the region. It is important to note that the goals summarized below are not presented in order of priority, but rather were assigned a number to identify specific goals addressed as part of the water management practice selection process (Section 6).
1. Manage and develop high quality water resources to sustainably and reliably meet domestic, commercial, industrial and agricultural water needs.

COASTAL GEORGIA

1-4

June 2017

1. Introduction
2. Identify fiscally responsible and implementable opportunities to maximize existing and future supplies including promoting water conservation and reuse.
3. Optimize existing water and wastewater infrastructure, including identifying opportunities to implement regional water and wastewater facilities.
4. Protect and maintain regional recreation, ecosystems, and cultural and historic resources that are water dependent to enhance the quality of life of our current and future citizens, and help support tourism and commercial activities.
5. Identify and utilize best available science and data and apply principles of various scientific disciplines when making water resource management decisions.
6. Identify opportunities to manage stormwater to improve water quantity and quality, while providing for wise land management, wetland protection, and wildlife sustainability.
More information regarding the region's Vision and Goals is available on the Council's website, at: www.coastalgeorgiacouncil.org.
The Coastal Council's Public Involvement Plan A foundational principle of the Georgia water planning process is an emphasis on public and stakeholder participation and coordination among multiple interests. The Coastal Council developed a Public Involvement Plan to help guide and implement an inclusive planning process. The Public Involvement Plan was adopted by the Coastal Council on November 17, 2009 and is available at the Council's website, at www.coastalgeorgiacouncil.org.
Outreach to the public, local governments, water providers, and users was accomplished by e-mail correspondence, direct communication, and updates provided by Council members at local government and other interest group meetings. Opportunity for public and local government comment was provided at each Council meeting. More information regarding public outreach can be found in the Coastal Council Public Outreach Technical Memorandum available on the Council's website, at: www.coastalgeorgiacouncil.org.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

1-5

2. THE 2C.OTAHSETAAPLLPLTALGAANEMNNOANIRNHINGGAGIARWREWAEGATGIOETIONERNR

2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region

Section 2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region

2.1. History and Geography
Georgia's Lower Coastal Plain, an environmental region of the Coastal Plain Province, contains some of the State's most well-known geographic features. The State's lowest elevations have the highest percent of wetlands, bottom lands, and hardwood swamps. In addition, there are several subregions, or physiographic districts, based on topography, geology, soil, flora, fauna, and other factors. The most notable of these districts are the Barrier Island Sequence, which includes historic seashore and present day coastline.
Surface Water Resources
The Coastal Georgia Region covers the lower portion of five major river basins, listed from north to south: Savannah, Ogeechee, Altamaha, Satilla, and St. Marys. All rivers contained in these basins discharge to the Atlantic Ocean after flowing through coastal marshlands.

Summary
The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region encompasses nine counties in the southeast coastal portion of Georgia and is bordered by South Carolina and Florida. Predominant land cover in the region includes forest, wetland, and urban areas.
Major surface water resources in the region include the Savannah, Ogeechee, Altamaha, Satilla, and St. Marys Rivers, which provide significant recreational and economic benefits to the area.

Figure 2-1 provides an overview of the surface water resources in the Coastal Region. Carp, shrimp, oysters, clams, and various species of fish provide a vibrant and significant recreational and commercial resource, both ecologically and economically. It is estimated that the sales effect from the commercial fishing industry from Georgia's coast provides over $27 million to the economy each year (NOAA, 2016). Estuaries within the coastal marshlands are also important ecosystems. A significant portion of the Atlantic seaboard's salt marshes and thousands of acres of rare tidal freshwater wetlands are located within the Coastal Georgia Region.

The Floridan Aquifer, one of the most productive aquifers in the United States, is the primary source of groundwater in the region.
The regional domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural, thermoelectric power, and recreational water uses are vital to the region's economy and quality of life.

The Savannah River is 350 miles long and has a drainage area of approximately 10,577 square miles (mi2), 55% of which lies in Georgia (EPD, 2007) and the remainder in North and South Carolina. The headwaters begin in the Blue Ridge Mountains in northeast Georgia and across the state borders in North and South Carolina. The largest off-stream water use is power generation, including two power facilities located within the Coastal Georgia Region. The Savannah River Basin is

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

2-1

2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region

Figure 2-1: Surface Water Resources, Counties, and Major Cities

home to 108 species of fish and supports significant wetlands areas in the southern part of the basin. The Savannah River discharges to the Atlantic Ocean near the Port of Savannah, which is a major shipping port for the eastern United States.

The Ogeechee River is 245 miles long and has a drainage area of approximately 5,540 mi2 between the Altamaha and Savannah River Basins (EPD, 2007). The main tributary in this basin is the Canoochee River, which flows through extensive river swamps in the Coastal Plain before joining the Ogeechee River. Fishing and swimming are popular along both rivers. The Ogeechee basin is home to 59 species of fish, including large numbers of catfish and sunfish. The Ogeechee River supports Georgia's largest commercial American shad harvest. In addition, the Wildlife Resources Division raises bass at the Richmond Hill Hatchery in Bryan County for stocking streams across Georgia.

The Altamaha River, located between the Ogeechee and Satilla River Basins, is 137 miles long and has a drainage area of approximately 14,000 mi2, including the upstream drainage area of the Ocmulgee River and Oconee River (EPD, 2003). There is some commercial navigation in the lower Altamaha River near the Intracoastal Waterway. The Altamaha River is a popular fishing resource to the region and is home to 74 species of fish, including sunfish, largemouth bass, bluegill, black crappie, and catfish.

The Satilla River is 200 miles long and has a drainage area of approximately 3,940 mi2 between the Altamaha and Suwannee River Basins (EPD, 2007). The Satilla River is a blackwater stream consisting of tannins and other natural leachates, which cause the river to have a darkly stained appearance. Power generation has been a significant off-stream water use in the basin, including a power plant in Turtle Creek, near Brunswick (Plant McManus) that was recently fully decommissioned. During dry periods, many smaller streams within the basin have virtually no flow. Diversity of fish

COASTAL GEORGIA

2-2

June 2017

2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region
species within the Satilla River is limited by extreme variations in flows and the relatively homogenous habitat present through most of the river. However, the river does support major fisheries for redbreast sunfish and catfish.
The St. Marys River is 90 miles long and has a drainage area of approximately 1,300 mi2, 59% of which lies in Georgia (EPD, 2007) and the remainder in Florida. The St. Marys River is also a blackwater stream and flows north and east, forming the border between southeast Georgia and northeast Florida. This river is well-known for its nearnatural conditions. Large families of sunfish, minnows and catfish can be found in the St. Marys River in addition to various coastal and riparian species that inhabit the marshlands.
Groundwater Resources Figure 2-2: Major Georgia Aquifers Groundwater is a very important resource for the Coastal Georgia Region. Figure 2-2 depicts the major aquifers of Georgia. Three aquifers beneath the Coastal Georgia region are the surficial aquifer, Brunswick aquifer, and the Floridan aquifer. The thickness of the surficial aquifer is typically less than 50 feet and consists mostly of beds of unconsolidated sand and shell. The Brunswick aquifer occurs between the surficial and Floridan aquifers. The thickness of the aquifer ranges from less than 100 to 200 feet. The Brunswick aquifer is commonly utilized as an alternate water source to the Floridan aquifer within the Coastal Georgia Region. Groundwater levels in the lower unit of the Brunswick aquifer typically respond to pumping from the Floridan aquifer.
Based on 2015 forecasted groundwater withdrawal data, approximately 97% of groundwater supplied in the region is from the Floridan aquifer system, which is one of the most productive aquifers in the United States. The Floridan aquifer is primarily comprised of limestone, dolostone, and calcareous sand. The aquifer is generally confined, but at its northern extent there are unconfined and semi-confined zones. The Floridan aquifer increases in thickness eastward across the state and is approximately 400 feet thick in Glynn County. The aquifer is very productive, with typical well yields of 1,000-5,000 gallons per minute. However, high volumes of pumping of groundwater aquifers in coastal regions can lead to salt water intrusion or the movement of saline waters into freshwater aquifers. Due to concerns over salt water intrusion, there are localized restrictions on groundwater withdrawals in the Coastal Region as discussed in Section 3.2.3.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

2-3

2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region

Climate
A review of available data for the region from the Southeast Regional Climate Center indicates that the climate is temperate with mild winters and hot summers. Average maximum temperatures are about 92F in July and average minimum temperatures are near 40F in January. The area receives abundant rainfall, approximately 46-51 inches per year, with the greatest rainfall occurring during July and August inland and in September along the coast. The driest month in the region is November. Snowfall is rare and historical averages for the region are 0.1 inch near the coast to 0.3 inch further inland.

2.2. Characteristics of Region
The Coastal Council's planning boundaries encompass nine counties in the southeast portion of Georgia with a projected 2015 population of approximately 683,803 (Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2015). The counties and major towns and cities are shown in Figure 2-1. Effingham and Chatham Counties are bordered to the north by the Savannah River and South Carolina, and Camden County is bordered to the south by Florida. The major population centers in the region include Savannah, Statesboro, Hinesville, St. Marys, and Brunswick.

A summary of 2008 land cover

distribution is shown in Figure 2-3,

based on data obtained from the

University of Georgia Natural

Resources Spatial Analysis. The

top two land covers in the Coastal

Georgia Region are wetlands and

forests, which cover 35% and 31%

of the planning region, respectively.

The term wetland refers to land

cover and does not infer a

regulatory

determination.

Agriculture accounts for 8% of the

land cover and urban development

accounts for only 7% of the land

cover within the Coastal Georgia

Region. The remaining land cover

(19%) consists of water and open

spaces. Based on the inventory of

Georgia's irrigated cropland

developed as part of the agricultural

demand assessment in 2016,

peanut, corn and cotton account for the majority of crops irrigated in the Coastal

Region. Soybeans are also planted widely within this area.

COASTAL GEORGIA

2-4

June 2017

2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region
The dominant economic drivers in the region are the Georgia Ports Authority (Ports of Savannah and Brunswick) and the U.S. Government, including Fort Stewart and Hunter Army Airfields, Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base, and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Additionally, the dominant economic sectors in the region include tourism, manufacturing, silviculture, trade, transportation, utilities, education and health services, and leisure and hospitality.
The region includes four colleges and universities within the University System of Georgia: Georgia Southern University in Statesboro, Armstrong State University and Savannah State University in Savannah, and the College of Coastal Georgia in Brunswick. The Georgia Institute of Technology's Savannah campus offers graduate programs and professional development/continuing education. The Savannah College of Art and Design offers four-year programs and the Technical College System of Georgia offers programs at the Ogeechee Technical College in Statesboro and Savannah Technical College. The Coastal Pines Technical College also serves citizens from the Coastal Region. It should be noted that on January 11, 2017, the University System of Georgia Board of Regents voted to consolidate Armstrong State University and Georgia Southern University. The consolidated university will be named Georgia Southern University and the first entering class of this new university is anticipated to be in the fall of 2018. In addition to county jails, there are four correctional facilities that are important employers and water users in the Coastal Region, including: Bulloch County Correctional Institution, Coastal State Prison and Coastal State Transitional Center in Chatham County, and Effingham County Correctional Institution.
2.3. Local Policy Context
Regional Commissions Regional Commissions are agencies of local governments and representatives from the private sector that facilitate coordinated and comprehensive planning at the local and regional levels. Regional Commissions often assist their membership with conformity to minimum standards and procedures and serve as liaisons with state and federal agencies. There are 12 Regional Commissions in Georgia. The Coastal Regional Commission covers the same counties as the Coastal Council with the exception of Screven County.
In July 2009, the Georgia Department of Community Affairs required the Regional Commissions to adopt, maintain, and implement a Regional Plan (DCA Rule 110-126). The Coastal Regional Commission's Regional Plan provides guidance to regional and local business leaders, local governments, state and federal agencies, and citizens to promote quality growth in region. It is a vision of the future for the region and includes quality community based objectives related to water resources such as water supply, wastewater, and stormwater management. A key component is the establishment of "performance standards," which are actions, activities, or programs a local government can implement or participate in that will advance their efforts to meet the vision of the Regional Plan. The Coastal Regional Commission's Regional

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

2-5

2. The Coastal Georgia Water Planning Region
Plan defines two achievement thresholds (Minimum and Excellence), which are attained by implementing the performance standards. Local governments are required to achieve the Minimum Standard to maintain their Qualified Local Government status, which qualifies them for certain state funding. By achieving the Excellence Standard, a local government may be eligible for special incentives.

COASTAL GEORGIA

2-6

June 2017

33. .WWAATTEERRRREESSOOUURRCCEESSOOFFTTHHEE ACLOTAASMTAAHLAGWEOARTEGRIARREEGGIOIONN

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

Section 3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

3.1. Current Major Water Use in Region
As a general overview and providing background, major water use and water returns are summarized for the Coastal Georgia Region based on data compiled by USGS in the report `Water Use in Georgia by County for 2010 and WaterUse Trends, 1985-2010'. In 2010, water supply in the Coastal Georgia Region totaled approximately 505 million gallons per day (MGD) and was comprised of 30% groundwater and 70% surface water, as shown in Figure 3-1. A total of 353 MGD was withdrawn from surface waters in the region to supply the energy, industrial, municipal, and agricultural sectors as shown in Figure 3-2. The majority of this withdrawal is returned to the surface water. Figure 3-3 shows that about 152 MGD of groundwater withdrawn were predominantly used to supply industrial (46%) and municipal uses (44%), while self-supply, agricultural, and energy made up the remaining uses. Wastewater flows in the region are shown in Figure 3-4. 405 MGD of surface water is returned; 53% from the energy sector, 34% from industries, and 13% from municipal sources. No surface water was returned from agricultural sources.

Summary
In 2010, surface water and groundwater withdrawal in the region totaled approximately 505 MGD to accommodate municipal, industrial, agricultural, and energy demands.
The majority of wastewater in the region is disposed of as a point source discharge from municipal, industrial, and energy uses.
The availability of surface water to meet current uses varies significantly across the region. Most of the region has sufficient surface water supplies. However, on smaller rivers (i.e., Ogeechee and Canoochee Rivers) with higher water use, river flows are at times (during drier years) insufficient to meet both off-stream uses and instream needs.
Regionally, for the modeled portions of the aquifer(s), there is sufficient groundwater to meet current needs; however, pumping restrictions have been locally implemented in some areas in response to effects from salt water intrusion.
Under current conditions, there are several locations in the region where dissolved oxygen levels may be insufficient to assimilate wastewater discharges.
Water quality in several river reaches and water bodies does not meet the designated use for the resource. The majority of these occurrences are associated with low dissolved oxygen and fecal coliform.

The estuaries, tidal rivers, salt water and brackish marshes, and inshore marine waters are unique resources to the eastern seaboard and are not found in any other regions of Georgia.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-1

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

3.2. Current Conditions Resource Assessments
EPD developed three Resource Assessments to evaluate surface water quality, surface water availability, and groundwater availability throughout the State. These assessments analyzed the capacity of water resources to meet demands for water

3-2

June 2017

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

supply and wastewater discharge without causing unacceptable local or regional impacts according to metrics established by EPD. The assessments were completed on a resource basis (river basins and aquifers). The results of the Baseline Resource Assessments are summarized herein as they relate to the Coastal Georgia Region. As described in more detail below, the term "gap" is used to indicate when the current or future use of water has been identified as potentially causing unacceptable impacts.

3.2.1. Current Surface Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity)

The Surface Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment (EPD, 2017)

estimates the capacity of Georgia's surface waters to assimilate pollutants without

unacceptable degradation of water quality. The term assimilative capacity refers to the

ability of a water body to naturally assimilate pollutants via chemical and biological

processes without harming aquatic life or humans who come in contact with the water.

A water body can be overloaded and violations of water quality standards may result.

Water quality standards define the uses of a water body and set pollutant limits to

protect those uses. The Assimilative Capacity Resource Assessment evaluated the

capacity of surface waters to process pollutants without violating water quality

standards. The current (also referred to as baseline) assimilative capacity results focus

on dissolved oxygen (DO), nutrients in some areas of the State (specifically nitrogen

and phosphorus), and chlorophyll-a

Figure 3-5: Assimilative Capacity

(a parameter that is closely tied to

Models

lake water quality). The assessments evaluate the impact of current

wastewater and stormwater

discharges with current withdrawals,

land use, and meteorological

conditions.

Assimilative Capacity Modeling (Dissolved Oxygen) One measure of the capacity of a stream to maintain its health and the health of the aquatic species living therein is the amount of residual DO in the waters of the stream. As shown in Figure 3-5, DO modeling was performed by EPD for each reach that has upstream wastewater dischargers (light blue segments). Each segment was classified as exceeding DO capacity, meeting DO capacity, or having available DO capacity. The results of the current DO modeling are presented in Table 3-1 and in Figure 3-6.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-3

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

The current assimilative capacity results represent municipal and industrial wastewater facilities operating at their full permitted discharge levels (flow and effluent discharge limits as of 2014). It should be noted that most permit holders do not operate at their full permitted capacity. When reviewing the figures, the following points should be kept in mind: segments shown that exceed assimilative capacity may result from a number of factors including: point and/or non-point sources of pollutants; modeling assumptions regarding wastewater discharge, stream flow and temperature; and naturally low DO conditions in the receiving stream. When model results show DO assimilative capacity as exceeded, a potential "gap" exists between the amount of pollutants discharged and the ability of the receiving stream to assimilate the pollutants. These points were considered when developing recommended strategies to address water quality needs in the region.

Table 3-1: Assimilative Capacity for DO in Coastal Georgia Planning Council (under current permit conditions)

Basin

Available Assimilative Capacity (Total Mileage)

Very Good (>1.0 mg/L)

Good (0.5 to <1.0 mg/L)

Moderate (0.2 to <0.5 mg/L)

Limited (>0.0 to
<0.2 mg/L)

None or Exceeded
(<0.0 mg/L)

Unmodeled

Total River Miles in the Council Area

Altamaha 23

1

13

5

38

0

80

Ogeechee 84

133

133

4

10

0

364

Satilla

30

4

0

0

0

0

34

Savannah

0

0

0

0

0

21

21

St Marys

0

0

0

0

21

0

21

Source: GIS Files from the Updated Water Quality Resource Assessment; EPD, January 2017

Nutrient Modeling
In addition to Assimilative Capacity modeling for DO, EPD completed nutrient (total nitrogen and total phosphorus) modeling. The location of the watershed model boundaries, and lakes, harbors and estuaries model locations are shown in Figure 36. There are currently no nutrient standards for total nitrogen and total phosphorus, but these standards may be developed within this region following a public stakeholder process(es). The nutrient modeling evaluates contribution of nutrients from upstream watersheds to downstream watersheds that discharge in the rivers and streams during the wet years. The Coastal Council proactively identified several non-point source best management practices (BMPs) that can be used to help reduce nutrient loading and this information can be found in Section 6.

COASTAL GEORGIA

3-4

June 2017

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region
Figure 3-6: Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO under Current Permit Conditions

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-5

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region
Figure 3-6: Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO under Current Permit Conditions
HARBORS AND SOUNDS

3.2.2. Surface Water Availability
The Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment (EPD) estimated the availability of surface water to meet current and future municipal, industrial, agricultural, and thermoelectric power water needs as well as the needs of instream and downstream users. The assessment evaluated the impact of water consumption (withdrawals from a water body that are not returned to that water body) on stream flows at certain locations in each river basin. Modeled stream flows were compared with a flow regime based on low flow thresholds (from state policy) selected as indicators of the potential for water consumption to impact instream uses such as fishing, boating, and aquatic life habitat.
The modeled flow was compared with the flow regime; where the modeled stream flow was less than the flow regime, a potential "gap" was identified. The potential gaps were analyzed in terms of both magnitude (i.e., the amount by which the modeled stream

COASTAL GEORGIA

3-6

June 2017

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

flow fell below the flow regime) and duration (i.e., the number of days the stream flow fell below the flow regime).

As shown in Figure 3-7, there are several surface water planning nodes located in the Coastal Georgia Region. Planning nodes are locations along a river where there is a long-term record of river flow measurements. At each node, the surface water availability models applied the current cumulative upstream consumptive uses of water (i.e., withdrawal minus discharge returns) and authorized reservoir operations to stream flows from 1939 to 2013. In the Coastal Georgia Region and surrounding area, potential surface water gaps exist under current conditions at the following planning nodes: Claxton (Canoochee River just west of the Coastal Council Boundary), Eden (Ogeechee River), and Kings Ferry (Ogeechee River). At these nodes, during certain low flow periods, there is not sufficient surface water to meet current off-stream demands and also meet the targets for support of instream uses. The results of the current conditions potential gaps are shown in Table 3-2. More detailed information about potential gaps at these nodes under future conditions is included in Section 5.

In the Coastal Georgia Region and surrounding area, critical low flow conditions occur on river systems that do not have any upstream storage reservoirs. In these situations, the Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment uses the unimpaired (meaning estimated flows without off-stream uses) monthly 7-day low flow that occurred over a 10-year period or the daily unimpaired flow (whichever is the lowest value) as the low flow thresholds to determine the flow regime. It is important to note that when a potential surface water gap exists, management practices are needed to address times when offstream uses increase the severity and/or frequency of low flow conditions. Low flow conditions have been and will continue to occur; and the Coastal Council's management practices are not utilized to address naturally occurring low flow conditions.

Figure 3-7: Surface Water Planning Nodes

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-7

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

Table 3-2: Summary of Modeled Current Conditions Surface Water Gaps

Node

Duration of Gap
(% of total days)

Average Flow Deficit

Long-term Average Flow

Maximum Corresponding 1-Day Gap Flow Regime

Claxton

21

6 cfs (4 MGD)

448 cfs (290 MGD)

16 cfs (10 MGD)

16 cfs (10 MGD)

Eden

16 cfs

2,207 cfs

35 cfs

139 cfs

6

(10 MGD) (1,426 MGD) (23 MGD)

(90 MGD)

Kings Ferry

6

35 cfs (23 MGD)

3,634 cfs (2,349 MGD)

81 cfs (52 MGD)

Source: Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment, May 2017, EPD Note: Surface Water Availability modeling simulation period is from 1939 to 2013

422 cfs (273 MGD)

3.2.3. Current Groundwater Availability

The Groundwater Availability Resource Assessment (EPD, March 2010) evaluates the

Figure 3-8: Sub-regions Associated with the Coastal Permitting Plan

amount of water that can be withdrawn from specific areas of an aquifer without reaching specific thresholds of

local or regional impacts. Indictors of

impacts included declines in

groundwater levels that may affect

neighboring wells (drawdown) and

reductions in the amount of

groundwater that seeps into streams

and thereby contributes to

streamflows. The assessment

estimates a range of yield that can be

withdrawn from an aquifer before

specific impacts become evident. The

results reflect modeled aquifer

responses to specific baseline

conditions and specific pumping

scenarios.

EPD prioritized the aquifers based on the characteristics of the aquifer, evidence of negative effects, anticipated negative impacts, and other considerations. If negative impacts occur or are expected to occur, then a groundwater "gap" exists.

Source: Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion

COASTAL GEORGIA

3-8

June 2017

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region
Groundwater from the Floridan aquifer is a vital resource for the Coastal Georgia Region. In 2010, groundwater was relied upon to meet about 30% of the water use in the region (USGS, 2016). Overall, the results from the Groundwater Availability Resource Assessment indicate that on a regional basis, for the modeled portions of the prioritized aquifers, there is sufficient groundwater supply to meet forecasted demands in some portions of the region. However, significant localized issues exist as described below.
High levels of groundwater pumping or withdrawals in coastal regions can lead to salt water intrusion or the movement of saline waters into freshwater aquifers. As shown in Figure 3-8, 24 counties in southeast Georgia are subject to the Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion, June 2006 (Coastal Permitting Plan). The Coastal Permitting Plan specifies that no additional withdrawals beyond current allowable levels be permitted from the Floridan aquifer in all of Chatham County, the southern portion of Effingham County, and a small portion of Glynn County near Brunswick due to concerns regarding salt water intrusion. Both Bryan and Liberty Counties are also subject to the Coastal Permitting Plan, and there are limitations on how much additional Floridan aquifer withdrawals may be allowed in these counties. The remaining counties that are subject to the Coastal Permitting Plan do not have pumping restrictions, but do have water conservation requirements related to groundwater withdrawals.
In the Coastal Region, the groundwater model developed for the Coastal Sound Science Initiative was used to evaluate Floridan aquifer conditions in Chatham, Effingham, Bryan, and Liberty Counties. The Coastal Plain Groundwater Model developed for the state-wide Resource Assessment was used in other portions of the Coastal Region to evaluate sustainable yields of the Floridan aquifer. Sustainable yield estimates were not completed in Glynn, Camden, and the majority of McIntosh Counties and the above four counties since these areas are east of the boundary of the Coastal Plain Groundwater Model.
3.3. Current Ecosystem Conditions and Instream Uses
The rivers and estuaries of coastal Georgia support a diversity of fish and wildlife, and many of the amphibians, fish, mammals, mollusks, and reptiles living here depend on coastal rivers and estuaries for part or all of their lifecycle. Coastal riverine systems and processes provide the wide variety of habitats--alluvial rivers and swamps, bottomland hardwood forests, brackish and salt water marshes, canebreaks, estuarine and inshore marine waters, open-water ponds and lakes, tidal rivers, and freshwater tidal marshes--that allow the area to support a rich complex of plants and animals.
The coastal area contains a unique combination of fresh, brackish, and salt water environments. The area is defined by barrier islands, sand beaches, open Atlantic Ocean, and there are 9 major estuaries including 350,000 acres of salt marsh and 150,000 acres of open water. Shipping channels are maintained in three estuaries the lower Savannah River, St. Simons, and Cumberland. Otherwise, the remainder

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-9

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region
are very similar in depth, size and other physical characteristics as they were at the time of European settlements of Georgia.
An estuary is a semi-enclosed body of water, which has a free connection with the sea and within which sea water is measurably diluted with fresh water. Without the fresh water input, such areas in Georgia would be salt water lagoons or bays. A key characteristic of an estuary is salinity, which can be highly variable depending on the location within the estuary and the estuary itself. Sources of freshwater in estuaries include: freshwater river discharges, industrial and municipal discharges of groundwater after use and treatment, and upwelling of groundwater through geologic features. Estuarine environments support a diversity of life, both aquatic and terrestrial, unparalleled in other portions of the State. Hundreds of species of animals and plants exist because of the unique mixing of salt water and fresh water. If the fresh water were removed, the diversity would change immensely from what is found today. Maintaining fresh water inputs to Georgia's estuaries is vital for maintaining a unique coastal environment, which provides a myriad of social and economic benefits, as well as invaluable ecological services to the citizens of Georgia. (Personal Communication Spud Woodward, Coastal Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources).
The coastal area also provides numerous recreational and commercial opportunities for Georgians; with over 1.29 million resident anglers, fishing is the most popular wildlife-related activity in Georgia (DNR-WRD 2006). Some of the most sought-after freshwater sport fish in the region include largemouth bass, striped bass, bluegill, redear sunfish, black crappie, channel catfish, and chain pickerel. In support of these and other fisheries, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) operates Richmond Hill Fish Hatchery, located in the Coastal Region. This facility produces many freshwater species but is most noted for producing the majority of the striped bass and all of the hybrid striped bass that are stocked throughout the state. The stocking of these two species supports fisheries in reservoirs and rivers that would not otherwise be able to maintain those fisheries. DNR also manages 10 Wildlife Management Areas in the region and maintains several public boat ramps that provide public access to coastal rivers for fishing, hunting, boating, and other recreational activities.
In addition to the freshwater resources associated with coastal rivers, many of the ocean species in the area utilize the river systems either directly, by inhabiting the brackish estuarine areas during some life stage, or indirectly, by feeding on organisms that are directly dependent on these areas. Important salt water sport fish in the coastal area include red drum, spotted sea trout, flounder, black drum, tripletail, and sheepshead. Salt water commercial fisheries are also important in the Coastal Region and include shrimp, crab, and eel. Georgia's coastal rivers also provide important riverine habitat for several anadromous fish, including American shad, hickory shad, Atlantic sturgeon, shortnose sturgeon, and striped bass. Anadromous fish migrate from the ocean or estuaries into rivers to spawn.

COASTAL GEORGIA

3-10

June 2017

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region

The 2005 Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy identified 71 high-priority animals that inhabit the southern Coastal Plain ecoregion (more information is available at www.georgiawildlife.com/node/1370). In addition, there were 25 highpriority habitats identified in the southern Coastal Plain ecoregion (for more information on high-priority waters and protected species in the region please go to www.georgiawildlife.com/node/1377 and www.georgiawildlife.com/node/1366).
Several rivers and river corridors in the Coastal Plain have been identified as ecologically important including the Altamaha, Savannah, and Ogeechee Rivers. In the southern Coastal Plain ecoregion, conservation lands make up 14% of the land area (CWCS, 2005). A map of potential conservation opportunity areas identified in Georgia (WRD Nongame Wildlife and Natural Heritage Section 2005) is available at: www.georgiawildlife.com/sites/default/files/uploads/legacy_assets/Documents/gnhp/ provisional_conservation_opportunity_map.jpg.
Impaired Water Bodies Under Section 303 (d) of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), a total maximum daily load (TMDL) must be developed for waters that do not meet their designated uses. A TMDL represents the maximum pollutant load that a water body can assimilate and still continue to meet its designated use (i.e., not exceed state water quality standards). A water body is deemed to be impaired if it does not meet the applicable criteria for a particular pollutant; consequently, TMDLs are required to be established for these waters to reduce the concentrations of the exceeding parameters in order to comply with state water quality standards. For the Coastal Region, there are 51 impaired stream reaches (total impaired length of 413 miles) and 2 impaired sounds (total impaired area of 8,960 acres).
Of the impaired reaches in the region (note that a reach may be impaired for more than one parameter):
33% are impaired for low dissolved oxygen
33% are impaired for Fecal Coliform
13% are impaired for trophic-weighted residual mercury in fish tissue
7% are impaired for Fish Consumption Guidance
6% are impaired for Shell Fishing Ban
3% are impaired for pH
2% are impaired for Selenium
1% are impaired for Mercury
<1% are impaired for Cadmium

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-11

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region
<1% are impaired for Biological (Fish Community)
One impaired sound in the region is impaired for low dissolved oxygen, the other for Fish Consumption Guidance. TMDLs have been completed for 33 impaired stream reaches and 2 impaired sounds as shown in Figure 3-9. This list is updated every 2 years by EPD and a full list of impaired waters can be found on the EPD website.
With concurrence from EPA, stakeholders including Georgia EPD, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), EPA, and the Savannah River/Harbor Discharger Group initiated a 5R process and through that process collaboratively developed, in lieu of a TMDL, an alternative watershed restoration plan to meet applicable water quality standards for the Savannah River and Harbor. Following development of this 5R plan, and reclassification of the Savannah Harbor to Category 5R on the 2014 305(b)/303(d) list, the EPA withdrew the original dissolved oxygen TMDL for the Savannah River and Harbor in favor of the alternative restoration approach outlined in the 5R plan. The intent is to remove the Savannah Harbor from subcategory 5R once the alternative restoration plan has been implemented to meet applicable water quality standards.

COASTAL GEORGIA

3-12

June 2017

3. Water Resources of the Coastal Georgia Region
Figure 3-9: Coastal Georgia Region Impaired Waters

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

3-13

4. FORECASTING FUTURE WATER RRESEOSOURUCRE NEEDS

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

Section 4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

Water and wastewater demand forecasts, along with the Resource Assessments (Section 3), form the foundation for water planning in the Coastal Georgia Region and serve as the basis for the selection of water management practices (Sections 6 and 7). The tables and graphics in this section present the regional water and wastewater forecasts from 2015 through 2050 for four water use sectors: municipal, industrial, agriculture, and thermoelectric generation.
During the regional planning process, the majority of Council members identified the following objectives for the forecast process:
Ensure accurate data and Ensure that data are not used to establish
regional or local mandates.

Summary
Over the next 35 years, the population of the region is projected to increase by 48%, increasing the demands for surface water and groundwater and increasing the quantity of wastewater generated.
Total water withdrawals by municipal, industrial, agricultural, and energy sectors are forecasted to increase by 26 percent (70 MGD) from 2015 to 2050.

Central to these objectives is the overarching goal to develop consistent and comparable sets of data. This means that select data sets (common year for data inputs and comprehensive coverage of the State) in many cases have broader coverage of the State, but

Total wastewater flows are projected to increase by 23 percent (58 MGD) over the same period.

may not be as precise as local provider data. During

development of the Regional Water Plan, there was a

concerted effort to strike a balance between broad coverage and local data. This was

accomplished by using consistent data collection on a regional basis modified as

appropriate with local provider input. These data and resulting forecasts are not always

applicable between regions or between providers within the region due to local/region

specific differences.

The methodology to forecast water and wastewater demands is based primarily on the assumption that there will be a continuation of existing trends and practices. It does not make a determination regarding the efficiency or inefficiency of forecasted demands, only that they are expected to occur given current trends. Initial forecasting does not take into account management practices, including water conservation (other than passive conservation as described in more detail below) that may be adopted by Regional Water Planning Councils to reduce the expected magnitude of demand (see Sections 6-8 for additional details on water conservation and other management practices). Additionally, this forecasting effort does not change EPD requirements related to individual permitting decisions, but represents a forecast for regional water planning that will help guide permitting and funding decisions.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

4-1

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

4.1. Municipal Forecasts
Municipal water includes water supplied to residences, commercial businesses, and small industries (water use by higher water using industries are forecasted separately and those major industrial sectors are identified in Section 4.2). Residential water uses include water for normal household purposes: cooking, bathing, and clothes washing, among others. Commercial water uses include water used by hotels, restaurants, retail stores, and office buildings, among others. Municipal water demands may be served by public water systems, private water systems, or self-supplied by the user (such as individual wells.)
Population Projections
Municipal water and wastewater forecasts are closely tied to the population projections for the counties within the Coastal Region. The population projections were developed by the Georgia Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, which is charged in State law (O.C.G.A. 45-12-171) with the responsibility for preparing, maintaining, and furnishing official demographic data for the State. The population projection results by county are shown in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1: Population Projections by County

County

2015

2020

2030

2040

2050

Difference % Increase (2015-2050) (2015-2050)

Bryan

35,107

40,165 51,924

66,309

84,449

49,342

141%

Bulloch

73,278

78,642 89,828 101,289 113,950

40,672

56%

Camden

52,580

55,230 59,679

63,260

66,339

13,759

26%

Chatham 285,958 304,482 339,092 371,973 405,573

119,615

42%

Effingham 56,847

62,989 76,320

90,918

108,029

51,182

90%

Glynn

83,355

87,921 96,667 105,455 115,502

32,147

39%

Liberty

65,294

67,806 70,890

72,489

72,064

6,770

10%

Long

17,447

19,600 24,618

30,372

36,757

19,310

111%

McIntosh

13,937

13,706 12,778 11,362

9,958

-3,979

-29%

Total

683,803 730,540 821,796 913,427 1,012,621 328,818

48%

Source: Georgia 2030 Population Projections, Georgia Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2010.Governor's Office of Planning and Budget (2015)

COASTAL GEORGIA

4-2

June 2017

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs
Municipal Water Forecasts The municipal water forecasts were calculated by multiplying a per capita water use rate by the population served. Per capita water use rates are different for public water systems in comparison to self-supplied water use; therefore, demands are calculated separately and then summed together. In 2010, the Coastal Council decided to utilize a uniform publicly-supplied water use of 138 gpcd for all counties in the region. The self-supply per capita demand is estimated at 100 gpcd. The publicly-supplied per capita water demand is generally higher than self-supplied due to several factors including commercial and transient/tourism water use that is provided by public water suppliers.
To support this Plan update, EPD reviewed withdrawal data and the estimated population served reported by permitted municipal water systems from the years 2010 through 2014. Based on the trends observed from that data, an adjustment factor for each County was developed and applied to the gallons per capita per day values used in 2010 for public-supplied municipal demand. The self-supplied per capita values remained unchanged.
The forecasted water use rates for the Coastal Georgia Region were further adjusted based on two plumbing code changes that mandate new water saving lavatory fixtures. The National Energy Policy Act of 1992 reduced the maximum toilet flush volume from 3.5 to 1.6 gallons per flush for all toilets available in the U.S. starting in 1994. The Georgia Water Stewardship Act of 2010 reduces the maximum flush volume to 1.28 gallons per flush for all new toilets installed in Georgia after July 1, 2012. As new homes are constructed and less efficient toilets are replaced within existing housing stock, the water use rate is reduced over time. Additional information on plumbing code efficiency adjustments and rationale for per capita water use is available in the Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum (CDM Smith, 2017).
Total regional municipal water demands are shown in Figure 4-1 for the Coastal Georgia Region. In addition, this figure shows the distribution in demands resulting from public water systems (by source) and self-supply systems. In the Coastal Georgia Region, public water demands and self-supply demands are satisfied by utilizing groundwater as the main source for withdrawals. To a lesser extent, surface water is also utilized to meet public water demands.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

4-3

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

Municipal Wastewater Forecasts
Municipal wastewater forecasts are based on estimates of indoor municipal (public and self-supplied) water use. Indoor water use may be treated by centralized treatment plants or onsite sanitary sewage (septic) systems. Centralized treatment plants may discharge to a water body or to a land application system (LAS).
Estimates of wastewater generated from publicly-supplied and self-supplied water use (from the passive conservation scenario above) were calculated and then assigned to septic and centralized wastewater flows. U.S. Census data on the percent of households with septic systems were obtained by county. For planning purposes, it was estimated that all the wastewater generated from self-supplied water use was disposed of via septic system. Dividing the number of municipally-supplied households on septic by the U.S. Census estimate of the number of households by county provided an estimate of the percent of municipally-supplied households that discharged to septic systems.
Wastewater effluent flow from centralized treatment facilities is either discharged as a point source to a receiving water body or to a land application system. Information obtained from existing EPD permit data as well as feedback from municipal suppliers was used to determine the ratio of point discharge to land application systems for each county. Municipal wastewater forecasts are shown in Figure 4-2.

COASTAL GEORGIA

4-4

June 2017

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

4.2. Industrial Forecasts
Industrial forecasts show the future need from the major water using industries including: food, paper, chemical, petroleum, stone and clay, and primary metals. Industries require water for processes, sanitation, cooling, and other purposes, in addition to domestic (employee) water use. Some industries, such as poultry processors, operate under strict U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines that require water use to maintain sanitary conditions within the facilities. Water need (i.e., the total water requirements of an industry, or the water withdrawals) is based on either production or employment, depending on the available information.
Employment Projections
The employment projections provided information on the anticipated employment growth rate for each industrial sector. The University of Georgia produced the industryspecific rates of growth for employment for EPD, which were then used to calculate the future water needs for specific industries within the Coastal Georgia Region. General employment in industries such as textile, petroleum, rubber, stone and clay, fabricated metal products, and auto manufacturing sectors shows an upward trend throughout the planning period, while employment projections in the food, chemicals, primary metals, and electrical equipment sectors decreased. In situations where there was a decrease in employment for major water using industries, the water use forecast was held constant over the planning horizon.

June 2017

4-5

COASTAL GEORGIA

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

Industrial Water Forecasts
Industrial water use was calculated based on available information including water need per unit of production, units of production per employee, and water need by employee. For industries where information was available on water use per unit of production, water forecasts were based on production. For industries where product based forecasting was not possible, industry-specific workforce projections were used to project the rate of future growth in water use within the industry. Industry employment data are readily available, and employment is linked to production, and thus indirectly linked to water requirements. By assuming that water use per production unit and production per employee remain the same over the forecast period, future water needs can be estimated by future employment. Table 4-2 shows the baseline and alternate industrial water demands over the planning period.

Table 4-2: Baseline and Alternate Industrial Water Demands (in AAD-MGD)

Category

2015

2020 2030 2040 2050

Baseline Industrial

161.1

161.2 161.3 161.4 161.6

Alternate Industrial

166.0

170.0 182.9 190. 6 196.6

Source: Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum; (2017).

The existing major water using industries historically operating in the Coastal Georgia Region are projected to have limited employment growth with current operations over the 2015-2050 planning horizon. The Coastal Council believes that these past trends may not accurately reflect future trends in industrial growth and requested the development of an alternate industrial forecast that would reflect potentially higher industrial growth. The key reasons for potentially higher industrial growth are: proximity to major surface transportation network(s); the current access to, use of, and potential expansion of the Brunswick and Savannah Harbors; innovation and technological advancements in process manufacturing, and the projected relatively high rate of population growth associated with the region. In addition, it was noted that employment may not be the best metric for determining water use needs; this is especially true for industries that may have increased automation and expanding water use.
The Coastal Council gathered information about potential new industries from their local county's economic development authorities and also asked for the Coastal Regional Commission to identify existing and potential industrial sites within the region as well as potential new industry types and future water needs.

COASTAL GEORGIA

4-6

June 2017

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs
Discussions with the Coastal Regional Commission revealed that the locations of existing and near-term industrial sites are well established, but predicting the type of industry that may locate there as well as that future industry's water demand are more elusive. However, the Coastal Regional Commission foresees future industry growth in the region occurring in four main categories: energy, aerospace, general manufacturing, and warehouse distribution. Energy water use was forecast separately from industry, but was included in the overall water demand for the region. The Coastal Council recommended (alternate) industrial water and wastewater forecast is shown in Figure 4-3. Additional information on industrial water and wastewater forecasts is provided in the Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum (CDM Smith, 2017).

COASTAL GEORGIA

Industrial Wastewater Forecasts
Industrial wastewater forecasts were calculated for each sector by multiplying the industrial water use by the ratio of wastewater to water for that industrial sector. For example, in the apparel category, for every gallon of water used, there will be 0.6 gallon of wastewater produced. For the paper category, for every gallon of water used, there will be 1.0 gallon of wastewater produced. In some categories, this approach estimates that more wastewater will be produced than the gallons of water used. This occurs when wastewater treatment tanks and ponds are located outside the industrial facility and collect precipitation. This rainwater adds to the total wastewater effluent discharged or land-applied. Stone and gravel quarries also must discharge rainwater

June 2017

4-7

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs
that accumulates in the operational pits, and this flow adds to the permitted discharge. Thus, some industries have a wastewater to water use ratio greater than 1.0.
Once the industrial wastewater flows were estimated, the flows were separated between point discharges and land application. No LAS is part of the projected industrial wastewater forecasts in Coastal Georgia. The industrial wastewater forecasts are presented in Figure 4-3 by the anticipated disposal system type: industrial wastewater treatment (point discharge), or discharge to the municipal wastewater treatment. These are based upon the alternate industrial water forecasts presented in Table 4-2.
4.3. Agricultural Forecasts
The agricultural water use forecasts include irrigation demands for both crop and noncrop (including livestock, nurseries, and golf courses) uses. The crop forecasts, developed by the Georgia Water Planning & Policy Center at Albany State University (GWPPC), with support from the University of Georgia's (UGA) College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences for 2015 through 2050, provide a range of irrigation water use from dry to wet climate conditions based on the acres irrigated for each crop. Table 4-3 lists a drier-than-normal year crop irrigation forecast for each county.
Non-crop (including non-permitted) agricultural water demands were identified with the assistance of industry associations. Similar to crop irrigation, forecasts for nursery and greenhouse water use were also developed for a range of climate conditions over the planning period. For planning purposes, the drier-than-normal nurseries/greenhouse forecasts are presented in Table 4-3. For golf courses and livestock production, current water forecasts were developed, but future forecasts were not developed for this first round of regional water planning due to lack of available data. Current water demands were held constant throughout the planning period for these water use sectors.
Figure 4-3 shows the regional agricultural demands by source of supply. The Coastal Georgia Region as a whole is expected to see a 6% increase in agricultural water demand by 2050. Bulloch County has the highest agricultural water forecast in the region with average daily demand above 11.1 MGD in 2015 with a 7% increase by 2050. All other counties have forecasted demand less than 1.8 MGD. As shown in Figure 4-4, about two-thirds of the agricultural withdrawals are supplied by groundwater and the remainder by surface water.

COASTAL GEORGIA

4-8

June 2017

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

Table 4-3: Agricultural Water Forecast by County (in AAD-MGD)1-3

County

2015

2020

2030

2040

2050

Bryan

0

0

0

0

0

Bulloch

11.1

11.3

11.6

11.7

11.9

Camden

0

0

0

0

0

Chatham

0.19

0.20

0.22

0.24

0.25

Effingham

1.8

1.8

1.8

1.7

1.7

Glynn

0.03

0.04

0.04

0.04

0.04

Liberty

0.01

0.01

0.02

0.02

0.02

Long

0.39

0.40

0.42

0.44

0.46

McIntosh

0.39

0.40

0.43

0.46

0.48

Total

13.9

14.2

14.5

14.7

14.8

1Source: Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum; (2017). 2The agricultural demands represent dry year conditions, in which 75% of years had more rainfall and 25% of years had less. 3Agricultural withdrawals are supplied by groundwater and surface water.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

4-9

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

4.4. Water for Thermoelectric Power Forecasts
Thermoelectric water withdrawal and consumption demands were developed for the State of Georgia based on forecasted power generation needs and assumptions regarding future energy generation processes. Full details of the state-wide energy sector water demand forecast can be found in the memorandum, "Update of GA Energy Needs & Generating Facilities" (2016).
Thermoelectric water demands for the Coastal Georgia Region are shown in Table 44. Energy facilities within the Coastal Georgia Region include: Effingham County Power Project, Plant McIntosh and Plant Wentworth (Kraft). Based on the results of the energy sector water demand forecast, Plant Wentworth was accounted for as being retired in the forecasts following 2015. The forecast analysis covers both water withdrawal requirements and water consumption associated with energy generation. Information related to water withdrawals is an important consideration in planning for the water needed for energy production. However, water consumption is the more important element when assessing future resources because a large volume of water is typically returned to the environment following the energy production process.

Table 4-4: Thermoelectric Water Demand Forecasts (in AAD-MGD)

Category

2015

2020

2030

Existing and Planned Facilities' Withdrawals

344

75

86

Existing and Planned Facilities' Consumption

7.7

9.3

10.7

Source: Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum; (2017).

2040 94 11.9

2050 97 12.7

4.5. Total Water Demand Forecasts
Total water demand forecasts for the Coastal Georgia Region are summarized in Figure 4-5. This figure presents the forecasts for municipal, industrial (alternate forecast), agricultural, and thermoelectric power. Overall, the region is expected to grow by 26% (70 MGD) in water demand from 2015 through 2050.
Total wastewater and return flow forecasts for the Coastal Georgia Region are summarized in Figure 4-6. This figure presents the forecasts for municipal and industrial discharges. Overall, the region is expected to grow by 23% (58 MGD) in wastewater flows from 2015 through 2050.

COASTAL GEORGIA

4-10

June 2017

4. Forecasting Future Water Resource Needs

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

4-11

5.5.CCOOMMPPAARRISISOONNOOFFAAVVAAILILAABBLLEE RREESSOOUURRCCEECCAAPPAACCITITYYAANNDDFFUUTTUURREENNEEEDDSS

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Section 5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

This Section compares the water and wastewater Summary demand forecasts (Section 4), along with the

Resource Assessments (Section 3), providing the basis for selecting water management practices (Sections 6 and 7). Areas where projected future demands exceed the estimated capacity of the resource have a gap that will be addressed through water management practices. This Section summarizes the gaps and water supply needs for the Coastal Georgia Region.

Regionally, for the modeled portions of the prioritized aquifers, there is sufficient groundwater to meet forecasted needs over the planning horizon; however, meeting the increase in demands in areas where groundwater supplies may be

5.1 Groundwater Availability

limited due to salt water intrusion is a significant challenge.

Comparisons
Groundwater from the Floridan aquifer is a vital resource for the Coastal Georgia Region. Overall, the results from the Groundwater Availability Resource Assessment (EPD, March 2010) indicate that the estimated range of sustainable yield for the modeled portions (Bulloch, Long, portions of Bryan and Liberty,

The outcomes from the Bi-state Stakeholder process regarding salt water intrusion will need to be considered in determining groundwater use in some portions of the region.

and the southwestern portion of McIntosh Counties) of the prioritized regional aquifer(s) is greater than the forecasted demands. However, significant localized issues exist as described below.

Forecasted surface water demands within and outside the region, at times, is predicted to exceed the available resource at

As shown in Figure 3-8, all of Chatham County, the southern portion of Effingham County, and a small portion of Glynn County near Brunswick ("T" shaped

some locations in the region (Canoochee and Ogeechee Rivers).

plume) are located in a Red Zone and are subject to Water quality conditions indicate

groundwater withdrawal restrictions per the Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion (Coastal Permitting Plan; EPD, 2006). Future water supply needs in these areas will need to come from sources other than new permits or increases to existing groundwater permits from the Floridan aquifer. As shown in Figure 5-1, projected Floridan aquifer demands within the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone are expected to exceed permitted withdrawal limits starting in 2020 by 1.9 MGD and increasing to 15.6 MGD by 2050. Current permitted withdrawal limits within the

the potential need for improved wastewater treatment within the Ogeechee, Altamaha, and St. Marys river basins. As a result of the TMDL/5R stakeholder process, the Savannah Harbor was reclassified to Category 5R. Non-point sources of pollution and existing water quality impairments will likely influence how future needs are met.

Chatham/Effingham Red Zone are planned to

decrease in 2020 and again in 2025 as shown by the solid black line in Figure 5-1.

June 2017

5-1

COASTAL GEORGIA

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs
Following 2025, the permitted withdrawal limits are assumed to stay consistent (as represented by the dashed black line) for the purpose of the gap analysis. Figure 5-1: Red Zone Floridan Aquifer Permits vs. Projected Demand

Notes: 1) This figure is specific to the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone and 50 percent of the Effingham County municipal and industrial demands are assumed to come from the Red Zone. 2) Demand assumed to be supplied from the Brunswick aquifer has not been included (0.44 MGD in 2015; 0.53 MGD in 2050)
Furthermore, Bryan and Liberty Counties are located in a Yellow Zone where there is also uncertainty regarding how much additional withdrawal of groundwater from the Floridan aquifer may occur in the future. This decision and potential solutions regarding salt water intrusion are also part of ongoing bi-state discussions between Georgia and South Carolina. Figure 5-2 shows the assigned permits and future projected demand within the Yellow Zone. Demand is not projected to exceed the permitted withdrawal limits until 2050. Within the Yellow Zone, the permitted withdrawal limits are expected to increase slightly in 2020 before dropping back down in 2025 as represented by the solid black line in Figure 5-2. Following 2025, the permitted withdrawal limits are assumed to stay consistent (as represented by the dashed black line) for the purpose of the gap analysis. For the industrial demands, the Council elected to develop an alternate forecast that included a higher industrial growth rate than the baseline forecast. None of this alternative industrial demand was assigned to groundwater within the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone; however,

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-2

June 2017

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs
additional groundwater demand was assigned to Bryan and Liberty counties within the Yellow Zone. Figure 5-2: Yellow Zone Floridan Aquifer Permits vs. Projected Demand

There are currently no anticipated regional groundwater resource gaps expected over the 40-year planning horizon in Bulloch, Camden, Long, and southwestern McIntosh Counties. However, localized gaps could occur if well densities and/or withdrawal rates result in exceedance of sustainable yield metrics. Sustainable yield data were not developed for Glynn, Camden, and the remaining portion of McIntosh Counties. In addition, all counties within the planning area except Camden and Glynn Counties may need additional permitted capacity (or additional sources) if future demand for groundwater exceeds permitted groundwater withdrawal limits. The comparison of existing groundwater permitted capacity to forecasted future demand in Coastal Georgia is shown in Table 5-1. This table includes groundwater permitted withdrawals and demands from both the Floridan and Brunswick aquifers. Please note that sufficient capacity at the county level does not preclude localized municipal permit capacity shortages. Local water providers in counties with large demand forecasts should review their permitting needs.

June 2017

5-3

COASTAL GEORGIA

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Table 5-1: 2050 Forecasted Groundwater Demands vs. Permitted Capacity

Municipal

Industrial

County Bryan1

2050 PubliclySupplied Demand Forecast (AAD MGD)
7.1

Municipal Groundwater
Permitted Yearly Average (MGD)
6.3 (2025)

Municipal Permitted Capacity
Need in 2050 (MGD)
0.8

2050 Industrial Demand Forecast (AAD MGD)
1.8

Existing Industrial Groundwater Permitted
Yearly Average (MGD)
0.4 (2025)

Industrial Permitted Capacity
Need in 2050 (MGD)
1.4

Bulloch

11.7

Camden

5.7

Chatham1

38.7

Effingham1

4.0

Glynn

12.7

Liberty1

7.8

Long

1.5

6.6 12.9 28.3 (2025) 4.0 (2025) 22.6 11.3 (2025) 0.6

5.1 None 10.4 None None None 0.9

2.2

0.8

1.4

1.7

1.7

None

21.4

16.7 (2025)

4.7

2.0

1.3 (2025)

0.7

46.8

60

None

13.5

12.1 (2025)

1.4

0.0

0.0

None

McIntosh

0.6

1.4

None

0.3

0.2

0.1

Source: Coastal Georgia Demand Forecast Technical Memorandum; CDM, 2017.
1. Counties in the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone or Yellow Zone have planned permitted withdrawal reductions through 2025 for Floridan aquifer permits, gaps are based on these more restrictive values.

5.2 Surface Water Availability Comparisons
The Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment (EPD, 2017) includes results from modeling projected surface water demands in 2050. This assessment shows potential surface water gaps (i.e., times when there is insufficient water to meet offstream demands and also meet low flow thresholds to support instream uses) at the following planning nodes: Claxton (Canoochee River), Eden (Ogeechee River), and Kings Ferry (Ogeechee River). The location of these planning nodes and the portion of the planning region that is within the local drainage area (LDA) is shown in Figure 5-3. The darker shading within the region shows the areas that drain to a planning node with potential surface water gaps. A summary of the modeled potential surface water gaps in 2050 is provided in Table 5-2.

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-4

June 2017

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Table 5-2: Summary of 2050 Projected Surface Water Gaps

Node

Duration of Gap
(% of total days)

Average Flow Deficit

Long-term Average Flow

Maximum 1-Day Gap

Claxton

15

5 cfs (3 MGD)

452 cfs (292 MGD)

15 cfs (10 MGD)

Eden

24 cfs

2,213 cfs

47 cfs

3.3

(16 MGD) (1,430 MGD) (30 MGD)

Kings Ferry

3

37 cfs (24 MGD)

3,658 cfs (2,364 MGD)

80 cfs (52 MGD)

Source: EPD, 2017 Note: Surface Water Availability modeling simulation period is from 1939 to 2013

Corresponding Flow Regime
15 cfs (10 MGD)
102 cfs (66 MGD)
247 cfs (160 MGD)

When assessing this issue, the Coastal Council recognized that modeled surface water gaps are driven by both net consumption (withdrawal minus returns) and year to year variations in river flows. In wet years, the region is likely to not experience any potential gaps to off-stream uses and instream needs. In dry years, the potential gaps are likely to be more severe. In order to better assess these potential gaps and to better understand the types of management practices that may be required, a more detailed quantification of the frequency and severity of modeled potential surface water gaps was completed.
The quantification and frequency of potential gaps is especially relevant when selecting water management practices. For example, if the preferred management practice is to replace surface water diversions with groundwater withdrawals, it is important to know how much flow should be generated and for what length of time. This process will in turn dictate the number and size of wells needed to generate the flow. If a reservoir is the preferred practice, then one needs to know the largest volume of storage that may be needed because stream flow needs can then be addressed by controlling the rate of flow released from the reservoir. In addition, since the largest potential gaps occur less frequently, there are important cost-benefit considerations associated with addressing the largest and more infrequent potential gaps. The quantification and frequency of the modeled potential gaps are provided in Table 5-3. It is important to note that the majority of the modeled potential gaps were shorter in duration (1 to 7 day and 8 to 14 day potential gaps events). The more infrequent and severe gaps are indicative of drought conditions and will most likely be addressed through drought management measures implemented by EPD and users in the region.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

5-5

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs
Figure 5-3: 2050 Potential Surface Water Gap Summary

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-6

June 2017

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Table 5-3:
Gap Event Duration
1-7 days 8-14 days 15-30 days >30 days Totals
1-7 days 8-14 days 15-30 days >30 days Totals
1-7 days 8-14 days 15-30 days >30 days Totals

Characteristics of Modeled 2050 Potential Surface Water Gaps

Number of Gap Events

Total Gap Days

Average Daily Flow Deficit per
Event

Average Cumulative Flow Deficit per Event

Claxton Node

139 (51.7%) 482 (1.8%) 3 cfs (2 MGD)

13 cfsd (8 MG)

55 (20.4%) 598 (2.2%) 5 cfs (3 MGD)

56 cfsd (36 MG)

39 (14.5%) 851 (3.1%) 6 cfs (4 MGD)

123 cfsd (80 MG)

36 (13.4%) 2181 (8.0%) 6 cfs (4 MGD)

335 cfsd (218 MG)

269 (100.0%) 4112 (15.0%)

Eden Node

44 (61.1%) 178 (0.6%) 11 cfs (7 MGD)

52 cfsd (34 MG)

12 (16.7%) 114 (0.4%) 15 cfs (10 MGD)

150 cfsd (98 MG)

10 (13.9%) 222 (0.8%) 29 cfs (19 MGD) 633 cfsd (411 MG)

6 (8.3%) 388 (1.4%) 28 cfs (18 MGD) 1,795 cfsd (1,167 MG)

72 (100.0%) 902 (3.3%)

Kings Ferry Node

40 (58.0%) 137 (0.5%) 20 cfs (13 MGD)

82 cfsd (530MG)

9 (13.0%) 98

(0.4%) 41 cfs (27 MGD) 468 cfsd (302 MG)

13 (18.8%) 291 (1.1%) 57 cfs (37 MGD) 1,264 cfsd (817 MG)

7 (10.1%) 413 (1.5%) 75 cfs (49 MGD) 4,363 cfsd (2,820 MG)

69 (100.0%) 939 (3.4%)

The projected surface water use increases for the counties within the Coastal Georgia Region that have current and future modeled potential gaps are shown in Table 5-4. Only agricultural demands are presented because there are no forecasted municipal and industrial surface water demands within the Coastal Georgia Region at the Claxton, Eden, and Kings Ferry planning nodes. Since there are current modeled gaps at the referenced planning nodes, development of additional surface water to meet projected needs will need to done in a manner that does not increase potential gaps.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

5-7

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Table 5-4: 2050 Increased Annual Average Surface Water Demand within Potential Gap Areas

County

Planning Node with Gap

Change in Agriculture Demand by 2050 (MGD)

Claxton

-0.003

Bulloch

Eden

-0.01

Kings Ferry

0.09

Effingham

Eden

-0.001

Liberty

Kings Ferry

0.002

Long

Kings Ferry

0.02

Source: Coastal Georgia Demand Forecast Technical Memorandum; CDM Smith, 2017.

5.3 Surface Water Quality Comparisons (Assimilative Capacity)
This section summarizes the results of the Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment modeling when all municipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities operate at permit conditions, and provides a comparison of existing wastewater permitted capacity to the projected 2050 wastewater forecast flows. A discussion on non-point source pollution is also included.
Future Treatment Capacity Needs
Existing municipal wastewater permitted capacities were compared to projected 2050 wastewater flows to estimate future treatment capacity needs by county. This analysis was done for both point sources and land application systems (LAS), that are permitted under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or state LAS permits. As shown in Table 5-5, Bryan is the only county projected to have infrastructure needs by 2050. It should be noted that the comparison in Table 5-5 was completed at the county level and localized shortages in treatment capacity may exist.

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-8

June 2017

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Table 5-5: 2050 Municipal Wastewater Forecast versus Existing Permitted

Capacity (MGD)

Point Source (PS)

Land Application Systems (LAS)

County

2050 Forecast1

Permitted Capacity

2050 Surplus or
Gap (-)

2050 Forecast1

Permitted Capacity

2050 Surplus or Gap (-)

Bryan

5.3

4.4

-1.0

0.4

0.4

0.1

Bulloch

7.5

10.0

2.5

0.2

7.6

7.4

Camden

4.9

9.3

4.4

1.0

1.7

0.7

Chatham

44.0

48.0

4.0

1.6

4.3

2.7

Effingham

2.0

3.3

1.3

0.9

2.8

1.9

Glynn

14.8

20.0

5.3

0.0

0.0

0.0

Liberty

2.2

7.7

5.5

0.4

0.7

0.3

Long

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.0

0.0

0.0

McIntosh

0.2

0.6

0.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

Total

81.0

103.5

22.5

4.5

17.6

13.0

Source: Coastal Georgia Gap Analysis Technical Memorandum; CDM, 2011. 1Includes industrial wastewater expected to be treated at municipal facilities.

Assimilative Capacity Assessments
The Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment drew upon water quality modeling tools to estimate the ability of streams and estuaries to assimilate pollutants under current and future conditions. Modeling was focused on instream dissolved oxygen (DO) and incorporated all industrial wastewater facilities operating at their full permitted discharge levels (flow and effluent discharge limits as of 2014). The results of the DO modeling at current permitted conditions are presented in Table 5-6 and in Figure 5-4 for the Coastal Region, which includes portions of the Savannah, Ogeechee, Altamaha, St. Marys and Satilla River basins. The results show the modeled effects of oxygen-demanding compounds in wastewater and other factors on instream DO levels. A stream segment with "none or exceeded" available assimilative capacity (denoted as red lines in Figure 5-3) have estimated instream DO levels that are at or below the DO water quality criteria and therefore indicate conditions of no available assimilative capacity or exceeded assimilative capacity. It is important to note that an exceedance of DO assimilative capacity on a stream segment could be the result of a point source discharge, non-point source loading, or a naturally low instream DO condition. Reaches within the Coastal Georgia Region that have exceeded their full assimilative capacity under the current conditions assessment include:
Taylors Creek, Canoochee Creek, and Little Ogeechee River in the Ogeechee Basin;

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

5-9

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

Beards Creek, Doctors Creek, Jones Creek and the lower portion of the Altamaha River main stem in the Altamaha Basin; and
The main stem of the Saint Marys River in the St. Marys Basin.

Table 5-6: Permitted Assimilative Capacity for DO in Coastal Georgia Region

Basin

Available Assimilative Capacity (Total Mileage)

Very Good (>1.0 mg/L)

Good (0.5 to <1.0 mg/L)

Moderate (0.2 to <0.5 mg/L)

Limited (>0.0 to
<0.2 mg/L)

None or Exceeded
(<0.0 mg/L)

Unmodeled

Modeled River
Miles in Region

Altamaha

23

1

13

5

38

0

80

Ogeechee

84

133

133

4

10

0

364

Satilla

30

4

0

0

0

0

34

Savannah

0

0

0

0

0

21

21

St Marys

0

0

0

0

21

0

21

Source: GIS Files from the Updated Permitted Water Quality Resource Assessment; EPD, January 2017

Based on the results shown in Figure 5-4, EPD also conducted modeling under future conditions. In order to address areas of limited or no assimilative capacity for DO, EPD incorporated some assumptions regarding future (2050) permitted flows and modifications to permit effluent limits. Since EPD cannot issue permits that will violate water quality standards, EPD will continue to evaluate and modify future permit requests and adjust permit limits to avoid potential DO violations. Figure 5-5 shows the assimilative capacity at assumed future (2050) permitted flows and effluent limits. More information regarding the type of assumptions made under future conditions modeling is provided in the Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment (EPD, 2017).
Finally, under current (baseline) and future conditions (2050) the Coastal Council recognizes the importance of managing both point source and non-point sources, which may impact water quality in the Brunswick Harbor estuary and all significant estuary resources of coastal Georgia.

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-10

June 2017

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs
Figure 5-4: Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO at Currently Permitted Conditions

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

5-11

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs
Figure 5-5: Results of Assimilative Capacity Assessment DO at Future 2050 Permitted Conditions

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-12

June 2017

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs
With concurrence from EPA, stakeholders including Georgia EPD, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), EPA, and the Savannah River/Harbor Discharger Group initiated a 5R process and through that process collaboratively developed, in lieu of a TMDL, an alternative watershed restoration plan to meet applicable water quality standards for the Savannah River and Harbor. Following development of this 5R plan, and reclassification of the Savannah Harbor to Category 5R on the 2014 305(b)/303(d) list, the EPA withdrew the original dissolved oxygen TMDL for the Savannah River and Harbor in favor of the alternative restoration approach outlined in the 5R plan. The intent is to remove the Savannah Harbor from subcategory 5R once the alternative restoration plan has been implemented to meet applicable water quality standards.
Non-Point Source Pollution Non-point source pollution accounts for the majority of surface water impairments in the region according to the 2014 303(d) list of Rivers, Streams, Lakes, and Reservoirs published by EPD (see discussion in Section 3). Non-point source pollution can occur as a result of human activities, including urban development, agriculture, and silviculture, and as a result of non-human influences such as wildlife and naturallyoccurring nutrients. An important component of any non-point source management program is identifying those pollutant sources that are resulting from human activities.
An analysis of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) that may occur due to point sources and nonpoint sources in watersheds was conducted. The goal was to identify nutrient loading rates from different portions of the watersheds under various hydrologic conditions and evaluate them in relation to corresponding land uses and potential nonpoint source contributions. Results of watershed nutrient modeling identify portions of the watersheds where there are higher concentrations of nutrients (total nitrogen and total phosphorus) in stormwater runoff than other parts of the watershed.
There are currently no nutrient standards in place for the Coastal Georgia Region, so there is no absolute threshold against which these nutrient loadings are compared. Rather, the nutrient model results are beneficial for relative comparisons to target areas where implementation of non-point source control management practices will have the greatest benefit. More detail regarding the nutrient model results is available in the Synopsis Report Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment (EPD, 2017). Nutrient and non-point source control management practices specific to land uses within the Coastal Georgia Region are discussed in Section 6.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

5-13

5. Comparison of Available Resource Capacity and Future Needs

5.4. Summary of Potential Water Resources Issues
This section summarizes the potential water resources issues in the Coastal Georgia Region. These potential water resources issues are the basis for the recommended management practices in Section 6. Table 5-7 summarizes the potential water resource issues and permitted capacity needs in the Coastal Georgia Region by County.

Over the planning horizon, forecasted surface water demands within and outside the region are projected to exceed the available resources at locations in the region.

Regionally, there is sufficient groundwater to meet forecasted needs over the planning horizon.

Water quality conditions indicate the potential need for improved wastewater treatment within the Altamaha and Ogeechee River basins.

Addressing non-point sources of pollution and existing water quality impairments will be a part of addressing the region's future needs.

Table 5-7: Summary of Potential Water Resource Issues by County

County

Municipal Water Permitted
Capacity Need

Part of Drainage Area with
Modeled Surface Water Gaps

Municipal Wastewater Permitted Capacity Need

Water Quality DO Assimilative Capacity Issues

Source

Table 5-1

Figure 5-3

Table 5-5

Figure 5-4

Bryan

Yes

Yes

Yes

Bulloch

Yes

Yes

Camden

Yes

Chatham

Yes

Yes

Effingham

Yes

Yes

Glynn

Liberty

Yes

Yes

Yes

Long

Yes

Yes

Yes

McIntosh

Yes

Yes

Notes: 1) "Yes" indicates a predicted gap in the indicated county (for surface water, "yes" indicates part or all of the indicated county lies in the area contributing to a gap)
2) Permitted capacity need is based on the comparison of permitted municipal capacity versus 2050 forecasted demand.

COASTAL GEORGIA

5-14

June 2017

66.. AADDDDRREESSSSIINNGG WWAATTEERR NNEEEEDDSS AANNDD RREEGGIIOONNAALL GGOOAALLSS

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Section 6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

This Section presents the Coastal Council's water management practices selected to address resource

Summary

shortfalls or gaps identified and described in Section 5, and/or to meet the Council's Vision and Goals described in Section 1.

The Coastal Council selected management practices to help address surface water low flow

6.1. Identifying Water Management

conditions at the Claxton, Eden, and Kings Ferry planning nodes.

Practices
The comparison of Resource Assessments and forecasted demands presented in Section 5 identifies the region's likely resource shortfalls or gaps and demonstrates the necessity for region and resource specific water management practices. In cases where shortfalls or gaps appear to be unlikely, the Council

A variety of management practices have been identified to address current and future groundwater use in areas that are affecting salt water intrusion into the Floridan aquifer.

identified needs (e.g., facility/infrastructure needs and practices, programmatic practices, etc.) and corresponding management practices that are aligned with the region's Vision and Goals. In selecting the actions needed (i.e., water management practices), the Council considered practices identified in existing plans, the region's Vision and Goals, and coordinated with local governments and water providers as well as neighboring Councils who share these water

Water quality management practices focus on addressing dissolved oxygen conditions at select locations and best management practices to address non-point sources of pollution and help reduce nutrient sources.

resources.

Additional water and wastewater

Review of Existing Plans and Practices

permit capacity, data collection, and new/upgraded infrastructure

The Council conducted a comprehensive review of will be needed to address

existing local and regional water management plans existing and/or future uses.

and relevant related documents to frame the selection

of management practices. The types of plans/studies that were reviewed to support

identification and selection of management practices for the Coastal Georgia Region

consisted of the following:

Best Management Practices (forestry, agriculture, and stormwater management)

Comprehensive Work Plans (local and regional scale)
EPD databases (permitted withdrawals, planned projects, and proposed reservoirs)

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-1

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Regional infrastructure and permitting plans
State-wide guidance documents (conservation, cost, and water planning)
TMDL evaluations
Water quality studies, including watershed protection plans (basin, watershed, and local scale)
When possible, successful management practices already planned for and/or in use in the Coastal Georgia Region formed the basis for the water management practices selected by the Council.
6.2. Selected Water Management Practices for the Coastal Georgia Region
Table 6-1 summarizes the Coastal Council's selected management practices by source of supply for the relevant demand sector(s), including permitted municipal and industrial water and wastewater capacity, water quality assimilative capacity (dissolved oxygen) challenges, current water quality impairments, and nutrient considerations for the Satilla and Savannah River watersheds. The table summarizes general information regarding management practices needed to meet forecasted needs, and more detailed information on management practices needed to address gaps between available resources and forecasted needs. Information on shared resources is provided at the end of the table to identify where management practices in other regional Councils are also needed to address identified gaps. The Coastal Council reviewed a number of existing local and regional water management plans and related documents during the development and selection of management practices. A detailed list of plans and documents that were considered can be found in the Coastal Georgia Plans Reviewed in Selecting Management Practices Technical Memorandum (CDM, 2011).
During the original water plan development that was completed in 2011, the Coastal Council's efforts in developing management practices were significantly informed and guided by the scale and complexity of the groundwater resource issues evaluated through the Bi-state Salt Water Intrusion Stakeholder Process in the Savannah/Hilton Head Region, and the Savannah River Harbor TMDL/5R Stakeholder Process. During the 20162017 plan update process, the Coastal Council reviewed the management practices to ensure they were in alignment with developments related to these activities, and others that have unfolded over the past 5 years, including:
The December 2015 revisions that were made by EPD to the Coastal Groundwater Withdrawal permits resulting in reductions to annual withdrawal limits from the Floridan aquifer for M&I users of the Red Zone (Chatham/Effingham Counties) and the Yellow Zone (Bryan and Liberty Counties) in 2020 and 2025

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-2

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Subcategory 5R Documentation for Point Source Dissolved Oxygen Impaired Waters in the Savannah River Basin, Georgia and South Carolina. Final Savannah Harbor Restoration Plan (dated November 10, 2015)
The Georgia Coastal Nonpoint Source Plan, which establishes a portfolio of non-regulatory best management practices for addressing nonpoint source pollution in Coastal Georgia.
The University of Georgia River Basin Center's comprehensive manual titled, Wastewater Management in Coastal Georgia (January 2017)
The Coastal Council considered a number of practices to address potential surface water availability gaps, ranging from agricultural conservation to one or more regional reservoirs. While reservoirs would provide multiple potential benefits, the flat topography of the region makes siting of regional reservoirs difficult, expensive, and may have associated impacts. The Coastal Council concluded that integrating practices, rather than using a single practice, would be more effective at addressing gaps and more economically feasible.
With this information in mind, Figure 6-1 illustrates the Coastal Council's recommended suite of groundwater and surface water availability management practices, which will be implemented via an incremental and adaptive approach. Those practices that are less costly and more readily implemented are prioritized for shortterm implementation. If resource needs are not met and/or gaps are not addressed, then more costly and complex management practices will be pursued.
Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2 summarize groundwater gaps in the Coastal Georgia Region (Chatham/Effingham Red Zone and Yellow Zones) associated with the limited permitted supply availability and increases in multi-sector water demands. These figures should be referenced to provide the geographic focus of the management practices in the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone and the Yellow Zone. Groundwater is primarily used by the municipal and industrial sectors in these designated zones.
The groundwater gap in Chatham, Southeastern Effingham, Liberty, and Bryan Counties, the "T" shaped salt water plume area of Glynn County, and future uses will be addressed through a portfolio of options that include management practices such as additional conservation, alternate sources and the expanded use of reclaimed water.
Table 5-2 and Figure 5-3 both summarize the location and magnitude of potential regional surface water gaps and should be referenced to provide the geographic focus of the management practices. Surface water consumption in the region is primarily associated with the municipal, industrial, agricultural, and thermoelectric demand sectors. The surface water availability potential gaps are primarily driven by upstream and regional agricultural irrigation usage. Therefore, the majority of the surface water supply management practices in Table 6-1 are intended to address groundwater and agricultural surface water use.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-3

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals
Potential surface water gaps in the region exist under current and future conditions at the Eden and Kings Ferry planning nodes and will be addressed by management practices including those that reduce net consumption, replace surface water use with groundwater use, improve data on frequency and magnitude of gaps, and assessing the impact of infrequent surface water gaps and the associated costs associated with these gaps, among others. A portion of the potential gaps at Eden and Kings Ferry results from net consumption associated with agricultural water use in the MayJuly timeframe; another portion of the potential gaps is associated with periods of drought. A significant portion of the surface water consumption occurs upstream of the region on the Ogeechee River at Eden and on the Canoochee River at Claxton and above Kings Ferry. The Coastal Council's management practices will address approximately 11% of the gap at Eden, 9% of the cumulative gap at Kings Ferry, and 8% of the gap at Claxton and when combined with management practices from the Altamaha, Upper Oconee, and Savannah-Upper Ogeechee water planning regions will over time address surface water gaps.
Figure 6-2 illustrates the Council's approach to water quality and Table 6-1 also includes the Coastal Council's recommended management practices to address water quality gaps, including watersheds with limited localized dissolved oxygen assimilative capacity and insufficient wastewater permit capacity. The Coastal Council addresses gaps by: identifying and recommending specific actions to add/improve infrastructure and improve flow and water quality conditions.
In addition to addressing gaps, the Coastal Council identified several management practice recommendations in Table 6-1 to address forecasted future uses. These recommendations include such practices as the additional sustainable development of groundwater and surface water in areas with sufficient water supply; management of other water quality issues such as non-point source runoff, nutrient loadings, and TMDLs in the region; and additional educational and ordinance practices. Maintaining suitable water quality in St. Marys Sound and all coastal estuaries can be achieved by local and regional implementation of both point source and non-point source management practices found in Table 6-1 including: PSDO-1 through PSDO-3; SW2; PSAN-1 through PSAN-3; NPS-1 and NPS-2; NUT-1; non-point source best management practices for urban/suburban, rural, forestry, and agriculture; ordinance/code considerations; and educational programs. The selected management practices will over time address identified gaps and meet future uses when combined with practices for all shared resource regions.

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-4

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals
Figure 6-1: Recommended Surface Water and Groundwater Availability Management Practices in a Phased Approach

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-5

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals
Figure 6-2: Recommended Surface Water Quality Management Practices in a Phased Approach

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-6

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

Action Needed - Water Conservation (WC) - Address current and future gaps and meet water needs by efficient water use. The Coastal Council supports the 25 water conservation goals contained in the March 2010 Water Conservation Implementation Plan (WCIP), and supports collecting water use data according to demand sector (residential, commercial, and industrial).

WC-1
Tier 1 and Tier 2 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users

Help meet current and forecasted municipal and industrial surface water and groundwater supply needs throughout the region

Municipal and Industrial water uses - 1-3 encourage implementation and adherence to Tier 1 and 2 water conservation measures established in existing and future rulemaking processes and plans (WCIP procedures, Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan to Control Salt Water Intrusion (Coastal Permitting Plan), June 2006, Water Stewardship Act of 2010 and 2015 rules for public water systems to improve water supply efficiency through water loss audit and water loss control programs (391-3-33)) by local governments/utilities. Council also recommends that local governments consider requiring rain/moisture sensor shut-off devices for irrigation systems in new construction.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-7

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

WC-2

Help meet current and

Municipal and Industrial groundwater

1-3

Tier 3 and Tier 4 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users in the Red and

forecasted municipal and industrial groundwater water supply needs/gaps in the Red and Yellow Zones

uses - The following Tier 3 and 4 municipal and industrial water conservation practices, established in the Coastal Permitting Plan, June 2006, and are supported by Council.

Yellow Zones

- Maximize use of recycled or

reclaimed water with an emphasis

placed on identifying industrial users

and implementing reclaimed water for

outdoor irrigation in municipal and

industrial settings

- Adopt water conservation education

programs that emphasize the value of

conserving water and educate the

public on salt water intrusion and how their actions and behavior towards

conservation can contribute to better management of the aquifer

- For Golf Courses: 1) conduct

reclaimed water feasibility study and

2) comply with Best Management

Practices MOA by Georgia Golf

Course Superintendents Assoc./EPD,

May 2004. Council also recommends

that local governments consider

requiring rain/ moisture sensor shut-

off devices for irrigation systems in new construction.

Action Needed - Water Conservation (WC) Continued - Address current and future gaps and needs by efficient water use Agricultural Tier 3 Conservation Practices2

WC-3 Audits
WC-4 Metering

- Help meet current and future agricultural ground and surface water supply gaps/needs throughout the region
- Help meet current and forecasted agricultural groundwater use in the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone and the Yellow Zone

Conduct irrigation audits Meter irrigation systems

1,2,4 1,2,4

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-8

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

WC-5 Inspections
WC-6 Minimize HighPressure Systems

- Help address surface water gap on Ogeechee River at Kings Ferry and Eden and Canoochee River at Claxton

Inspect pipes and plumbing to control water loss
Minimize or eliminate the use of highpressure spray guns on fixed and traveler systems where feasible

1,2,4 1,2,4

WC-7
Efficient Planting Methods

Utilize cropping and crop rotation methods that promote efficiency

1,2,4,5

Action Needed - Water Conservation (WC) Continued - Address current and future gaps and needs by efficient water use Agricultural Tier 4 Conservation Practices2

WC-8
Conservation Tillage

- Help meet current and future agricultural ground and surface water supply gaps/needs throughout the region

Practice conservation tillage

1,2,4

WC-9 Control Loss

- Help meet current and forecasted agricultural groundwater use in the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone and the Yellow zone

Control water loss

1,2,4

WC-10
End-Gun Shutoffs

- Help address surface water gap on Ogeechee River at Kings Ferry and Eden and Canoochee River at Claxton

Install end-gun shutoff with pivots

1,2,4

WC-11
Low Pressure Systems

Install low pressure irrigation systems where feasible (soil-specific)

1,2,4

WC-12
Application Efficiency Technologies

Encourage and improve use of soil moisture sensors, evapotranspiration sensors, or crop water use model(s) to time cycles

1,2,5

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-9

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

Action Needed - Additional/Alternate Sources to Present Groundwater Source(s) in Gap Areas (AAGS)1. Note future groundwater use in Glynn County near Brunswick can be met by drilling groundwater wells outside the hydrologic boundaries that induce upward movement of salt
water from a deeper geologic unit in the area of the "T" shaped salt water plume.

AAGS-1

Help meet current and

Multi-jurisdictional groundwater

1-3

CrossJurisdictional Collaboration

forecasted municipal and industrial groundwater use in the Red and Yellow Zones

development and/or management in multi-county areas outside Red and Yellow zones. This should also

include participation by the Coastal

Council to assist with developing a

Chatham/Effingham Red Zone Water

Supply Management Plan. This

initiative began in January 2017 and

is being led by the Chatham County

Savannah Metropolitan Planning

Commission (MPC).

AAGS-2
Increase Surface Water Supplies

Develop/utilize additional surface

1-5

water supplies to meet multi-sector

uses (i.e., City of Savannah Industrial

and Domestic Plant or other sources)

AAGS-3
Additional Reservoir Storage

Increase surface water storage

1-5

(reservoirs)

AAGS-4 Study Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Addressing Gaps
AAGS-5 Surface Water Storage in Aquifers

Conduct research to determine the
feasibility (technical, financial, legal,
political), role, and potential benefits and limitations of aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) in critical gap areas and/or recharge of surficial and other aquifers
Increase surface water storage (ASR); feasibility based on outcome of AAGS-4

1,5 1-3,5

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-10

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

AAGS-6

Help meet current and

Optimize the use of additional

1-3

Additional

forecasted municipal and

regional and local aquifers

Aquifer Use

industrial groundwater use in

the Red and Yellow Zones

AAGS-7 Reuse

Implement water reuse

1-5

AAGS-8

Help meet current and

Desalination - consider feasibility of

1,5

Determine

forecasted municipal and

removal of salt from ocean water and

Desalination

industrial groundwater use in distribution of water to help meet

Feasibility

the Red and Yellow Zones

water needs in gap areas

AAGS-9 Determine Reverse Osmosis Feasibility
AAGS-10 Inter-basin Transfers

(Note: This option is pending feasibility of other options) Help meet current and forecasted municipal and industrial groundwater use in the Red and Yellow Zones
(Note: These options are pending feasibility of other options)

AAGS-11
Monitor Aquifer and additional Modeled Simulations

Groundwater monitoring and modeling to verify gaps and aquifer conditions

Reverse Osmosis treatment of brackish water - consider feasibility of additional treatment at source of supply through treatment of brackish surface water and distribution of water to help meet water needs in gap areas
Inter-basin transfers from within the region or collaborating regions to meet regional water needs and benefit both the areas from which the transferred water is withdrawn and the area receiving the water
Monitoring actual aquifer levels and conducting additional modeling to optimize aquifer use/management to better delineate the timing and quantity of the projected gaps

1,5 1, 3, 4
1-3

Action Needed - Institutional (I) Practice(s)1 to Help Meet Water Needs in Groundwater Gap Areas

I-1
CrossJurisdictional Groundwater Coordination Group

Coordinate and optimize water development and distribution for both groundwater and surface water municipal and industrial uses

Formation of a multi-jurisdictional groundwater use and development "Group" to coordinate groundwater development, infrastructure development/use, and optimize yield and sustainability

1-3,5

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-11

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or
Issue to Vision and
Goals (Section 1.4)

Action Needed - Address Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas
Data Collection/Additional Research (DCAR) to confirm frequency, duration, and severity of agriculturally-driven shortages to 7Q10* low flow conditions
*Note: 7Q10 refers to the 1 in 10 year 7 day monthly low flow condition

DCAR-1

Improve understanding and

Acquire additional data/information on

5

Agricultural Consumption Data

quantification of agricultural water use and the projected surface water gaps on the Ogeechee River at Eden and

agricultural consumptive use to confirm or refine if agricultural consumption is less than 100% consumptive. Conduct "modeling

Kings Ferry

scenario analysis to bracket a

reasonable range of consumption"

with Resource Assessment models

with "new" information on

consumptive use to assess effect on

surface water gap.

DCAR-2

Improve understanding and

Refine surface water agricultural

5

Source of Supply Data to Refine Forecasts

quantification of agricultural water use and the projected surface water gaps on the Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry

forecasts and Resource Assessment models to improve data on source of supply and timing/operation of farm ponds

DCAR-3

Improve understanding and

Refine and improve surface water

5

Better Understand Demand and Impacts on Projected Gaps

quantification of agricultural water use and the projected surface water gaps on the Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry

Resource Assessment and agricultural forecasts to address spatial and temporal hydrologic variations in relationship to forecasts, climate conditions, and other nonwater use variables

DCAR-4

Obtain additional data and

Continue to fund, improve, and

5

Improve Data improved understanding of

incorporate agricultural water use

Quality and

actual versus forecasted water metering data and use this

Analysis

use

information in Regional Water Plan

updates

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-12

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

DCAR-5

Improvement of surface water Collaborate/support research

5

Irrigation Efficiency

flows (Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry) via

(University, State and Corporate) on improved irrigation efficiency

Education and reduced surface water use

measures and development of lower

Research

while maintaining/improving

water use crops

crop yields

DCAR-6

Improvement of surface water Improve education and research on

5

Understand

flows (Ogeechee River at

when and how much water is needed

Optimum

Eden and Kings Ferry) via

to maximize crop yield with efficient

Application

reduced surface water use

irrigation

Methods

while maintaining/improving

crop yields

DCAR-7

Improvement of surface water Promote management practices and

2,4

Minimize Groundwater Use Impacts to Surface Water

flows (Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry) in areas where ground and surface water are hydrologically connected and

educate stakeholders to minimize impacts to surface water associated with excessive pumping/use of aquifers that may impact surface water flows and estuary health

groundwater use impacts

surface water flows

DCAR-8

Cost effectively address

Conduct analysis of the

5

Analyze

surface water low flow

socioeconomic benefits and cost in

Addressing Extreme

conditions (Ogeechee River at comparison to ecological benefits of Eden and Kings Ferry) while addressing surface water gaps.

Conditions

avoiding undue adverse

Council discussion, and additional

impacts on water users and

detail provided by EPD during the

uses in the planning area

2016 updates to the resource

assessments, indicated the need to

focus this Management Practice on

the more frequent, smaller magnitude

gaps, rather than the larger, longer

duration gaps that would likely be

managed through drought

management measures. Additional

analysis is also needed (similar to the

examples shared during the surface

water shared resources

subcommittee meeting in January

2017) regarding the locations of

demands contributing to the gaps

within specific counties and portions

of the local drainage areas (LDAs).

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-13

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

DCAR-9

Examine potential role and

Conduct research to determine the

5

Study Potential feasibility of storage of surface feasibility and potential benefits and

Use of Aquifers water to help meet municipal limitations of aquifer storage and

to Address

and industrial needs;

recovery for confined aquifers; and

Gaps

especially in Red and Yellow determine the feasibility and potential

Zones (possible alternate

benefits to recharge surficial aquifers

supply) and/or for use in

to increase stream baseflow to

improving surface water flows address gaps

(in gap areas).

DCAR-10
Restoration Impact on Low Flow Conditions Analysis

Examine potential role of wetlands restoration and implementation considerations in addressing surface water low flow conditions

Conduct research and identify incentives to restore wetlands and other areas to determine if this practice can improve river flows during shortages to 7Q10 low flows

2,4,6

Action Needed - Address Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas Additional/Alternate to Existing Surface Water Supply Sources (ASWS)

ASWS-1
Consider Low Flow Conditions in Future Surface Water Permitting

Help ensure that future surface water use does not contribute to frequency and severity of low flow conditions within the Local Drainage Areas that contribute flow to the Eden and Kings Ferry gauges

Future surface water uses - If surface water (ponds and withdrawals) is sought for future water supply (new permits), the Applicant and EPD should work collaboratively to demonstrate that future surface water uses will not contribute to frequency or magnitude of gaps2

1,2,4

ASWS-2
Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

Help improve surface water flow on the Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry during low flow conditions

Future surface water uses - Utilizing incentives and collaborative partnerships, examine opportunities to optimize farm and other pond operations to obtain releases during gap periods2

1,2,4,5

ASWS-3
Substitute Future Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

Help improve surface water flow on the Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry during low flow conditions

Future surface water uses Encourage use of groundwater within the estimated sustainable yield of the groundwater aquifer (outside) as an alternate source to surface water use during 7Q10 low flow conditions2

1,2,4

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-14

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

ASWS-4
Substitute Existing Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

Help improve surface water flow on the Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry during low flow conditions

Existing surface water uses - Replace portion of existing surface water use with groundwater, within the estimated sustainable yield of the groundwater aquifer (outside Red and Yellow Zones) in times of shortage to 7Q10 low flow conditions, so long as use of groundwater sources does not impact surface water flow in other areas

1,2,4

ASWS-5
Opportunities and Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

Existing surface water uses - Utilizing

1-4

incentives and collaborative

partnerships, identify opportunities to

allow use of agricultural pond storage

to augment river flows in times of

shortage to 7Q10 low flow periods

ASWS-6 Ecological Restoration Incentive Program
ASWS-7 Land Management Incentives
ASWS-8 Incentives for Greater Wastewater Return Flows

Based on the outcome of research (DCAR-10 above), consider incentive based programs to restore wetlands and other areas if this practice can improve river flows during shortages to 7Q10 low flow periods
Incentive-based land use practices to help promote infiltration and aquifer recharge
Evaluate incentive-based programs to increase wastewater returns; modify land application systems, septic systems, and manage stormwater to improve return flows while maintaining water quality

2,4,6 2,6 1-3,6

ASWS-9
Multi-Region Reservoir

Possible joint non-main stem

1-5

reservoir to serve multiple

regions/regional council boundaries

with Savannah-Upper Ogeechee and

Oconee Councils

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-15

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number
ASWS-10 Inter-Basin Transfers

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)
Help improve surface water flow on the Ogeechee River at Eden and Kings Ferry during low flow conditions

Description/Definition of Action
Inter-basin transfers from within the region or collaborating regions that can address regional water needs and benefit both the areas from which the transferred water is withdrawn and the area receiving the water

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)
1-3

Action Needed - Address Water Quality (Dissolved Oxygen Levels)

Point Sources Dissolved Oxygen (PSDO)

PSDO-1

Verification of Water Quality Data collection to confirm loading

5

Collect Water Resource Assessment Data

and/or receiving stream chemistry

Quality Data

and Assumptions to determine

dissolved oxygen conditions

(see Figure 5-3 for more

information)

PSDO-2

Improve dissolved oxygen

Modification of wastewater discharge

3,4

Point Discharge Relocation

levels in receiving streams (see Figure 5-3 for more information)

location. In areas without shortages to 7Q10 low flow conditions, identify feasibility to move discharge location to higher flow streams with greater

assimilative capacity.

PSDO-3
Enhance Point Source Treatment

Upgrade/improve treatment to

3,4

address low dissolved oxygen

conditions in receiving streams

Action Needed - Address Wastewater Permit Capacity Needs/Gaps

Municipal Wastewater Permit Capacity (MWWPC)

MWWPC-1

Additional municipal

Expand or construct new facilities

3,4

Increase

wastewater treatment capacity and/or obtain additional wastewater

Wastewater Permit

may be needed in Bryan County

permit capacity to meet forecasted needs.3 Planned municipal projects in

Capacity

Bryan County.

Industrial Wastewater Permit Capacity (IWWPC)

IWWPC-1

Collect additional data where Obtain additional permit data

5

Collect

needed on industrial flow

regarding flow volumes and permit

Additional Industrial

volumes and permit conditions conditions for industrial wastewater

to verify permitted versus

facilities forecasted needs4

Permit Data

forecasted needs

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-16

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

Action Needed - Address Water Withdrawal Permit Capacity Needs/Gaps

Municipal Groundwater Withdrawal Permit Capacity (MGWPC)

MGWPC-1

2050 municipal groundwater For Green Zone, obtain groundwater

3,4

Increase

forecast exceeds existing

permit capacity and construct new or

Municipal

permit capacity in all counties expanded facilities to meet forecasted

Groundwater except Glynn

need. For Red and Yellow Zones,

Permit Capacity

consider alternate source of supply, if applicable5.

Industrial Groundwater Permit Capacity (IGWPC)

IGWPC-1

2050 industrial groundwater For Green Zone, obtain groundwater

3,4

Increase Industrial Groundwater Permit

forecast exceeds existing permit capacity in Bryan, Bulloch, Effingham, Liberty, and McIntosh Counties

permit capacity. For the Chatham/Effingham Red Zone and the Yellow Zone, consider alternate source of supply6. Construct new or

Capacity

expanded facilities to meet forecasted need.

The following Coastal Council management practices are programmatic in nature and are therefore described in general terms.

Action Needed Utilize Groundwater (GW) to meet Current and Future Needs

GW-1
Develop and Practice Sustainable Groundwater Use

For cities, counties, and utilities outside the Red and Yellow Zones, continue to sustainably provide and manage water from the Floridan aquifer and other significant aquifers in areas not impacting salt water intrusion, following EPD permitting protocol regarding leakage between aquifers
Construct new or expanded facilities to meet forecasted need

1-3,5

GW-2

Encourage land use practices that sustain and protect aquifer

2,6

Promote

recharge areas (both inside and outside the region) for the

Aquifer-

aquifers present in the region

Friendly Land

Counties and local governments should consider practices to

Use Practices

promote infiltration and aquifer recharge

GW-3

Continue to monitor and improve understanding of historic,

5

Research and

current, and future trends in groundwater levels; use best

Analyze

available science when evaluating potential value and/or

Sustainable

impact associated with aquifer storage and/or recovery of

Groundwater

surface water

Management

Utilize sound science and continue to improve data and

sustainably manage groundwater resources

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-17

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or
Issue to Vision and Goals (Section
1.4)

Management Practices to Address Current and Future Surface Water (SW) Needs

SW-1
Surface Water Use Within Available Capacity

Continue to apply for permits to use surface water within the available surface water resource capacity

1,3-5

SW-2

Monitor Atlantic slope river flow conditions to sustain estuary

5

Monitor and

conditions

Evaluate

Estuaries

Management Practices to Address Water Quality Point Source Needs - Ammonia and Nutrients (PSAN) The University of Georgia River Basin Center's Comprehensive Manual:
Wastewater Management in Coastal Georgia should also serve as a reference to further inform and guide implementation of these NPS Management Practices

PSAN-1
Ammonia Limits

Implementation of ammonia limits, where applicable (see Figure 5-4 for more information)

1,4,5

PSAN-2

Improve/upgrade treatment for nutrients (phosphorus and/or

1,4

Enhance

nitrogen) (see Figure 5-4 for more information)

Nutrient

Treatment

PSAN-3

Identify and eliminate illicit discharges to surface waters (as

1,4

Eliminate Illicit

found in Glynn County, City of Darien, City of Pooler, Bryan

Discharges

County, and City of Savannah Watershed Protection Plans)

Management Practices to Address Water Quality Non-Point Source (NPS) Needs

(Dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, nutrients, and other impairments)
The Coastal Non-point Source Pollution Management Program should also serve as a reference to further inform and guide implementation of these NPS Management Practices

NPS-1

Data collection/analysis to confirm if dissolved oxygen and/or

4,5

Study Human

fecal coliform is human induced

Impacts on

Water Quality

NPS-2
Monitor and Address NPS Nutrient Loading

Support efforts to monitor and determine sources of nutrient loading and other NPS impairments to waters of the State, and upon confirmation of source, develop specific management programs to address these needs

1,4-6

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-18

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or
Issue to Vision and Goals (Section
1.4)

The following practices are selected by the Costal Council to encourage implementation by the applicable local or State program(s).

Urban/Suburban Best Management Practices (NPSU)

NPSU-1

Use soil erosion and sediment control measures

4,6

Control Erosion

NPSU-2
Manage Stormwater Runoff

Stormwater retention ponds, wetlands, swales, filter strips, and bank stabilization to manage runoff and help support river flows (as found in City of Pooler, City of Richmond Hill, and City of Savannah Watershed Protection Plans)

2,4,6

NPSU-3
Increase Stormwater Infiltration

Consider measures to promote increased infiltration of stormwater to reduce nutrient and other pollutant runoff

2,4,6

NPSU-4

Protect and maintain riparian buffers along urban streams

4,6

Riparian

Buffers

Rural Best Management Practices (NPSR)

NPSR-1

Implement BMPs to control runoff from dirt roads by

4,6

Advocate

encouraging County implementation of BMPs identified in

Implementing

Georgia Resource Conservation and Development Council,

Road Runoff

"Georgia Better Back Roads Field Manual"

BMPs

Forestry Best Management Practices (NPSF)

NPSF-1

Support Georgia Forestry Commission's (GFC) water quality

4,6

Support

program consisting of BMP development, education/outreach,

Forestry

implementation/compliance monitoring, and complaint

Commission

resolution process

Water Quality

http://www.gfc.state.ga.us/resources/publications/BMPManual

Program

GA0609.pdf

NPSF-2

Improve BMP compliance through State-wide biennial BMP

4-6

Improve BMP

surveys and BMP assurance exams, Master Timber Harvester

Compliance

workshops, and continuing logger education

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-19

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or
Issue to Vision and Goals (Section
1.4)

NPSF-3

Incentives to restore wetlands and historically drained

4,6

Wetland and

hardwood and other areas. Where applicable, support United

Forest

States Department of Agriculture (USDA) incentive programs

Restoration

through the Farm Service Agency and NRCS to restore

Incentives and

converted wetlands back to forested conditions.

Support

Agricultural Best Management Practices for Crop and Pasture Lands (NPSA) - Support and encourage implementation of Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC) BMP
and Education Programs

NPSA-1

Conservation tillage and cover crop

4,6

Soil Erosion

Reduction

Measures

NPSA-2

Field buffers, riparian forested buffers, and strip cropping to

4,6

Utilize Buffers

control run-off and reduce erosion

NPSA-3

Livestock exclusions from direct contact with streams and

4,6

Livestock

rivers and vegetation buffers

Management

NPSA-4

Responsible manure storage and handling

4,6

Manure Control

NPSA-5

Incentives to restore wetlands and historically drained

4,6

Wetland and

hardwood and other areas

Forest

Restoration

Incentives

Existing Impairments and Total Maximum Daily Load Listed Streams (TMDL)

TMDL-1
Evaluate Impairment Sources

Data collection and confirmation of sources to remove streams

4,5

listed due to "natural sources"

TMDL-2

Data collection to refine river/stream reach length for impaired

4,5

Analyze

waters; focus on longest reaches to refine location and

Impaired

potential sources of impairments

Segments and

Sources

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-20

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or
Issue to Vision and Goals (Section
1.4)

TMDL-3

Stormwater Management:

4,6

Stormwater

- Agricultural, Forestry, Rural, and Urban/Suburban Best

Management

Management Practices (BMPs)

BMPs

See Above Non-Point Source for Details

Nutrients Satilla and Savannah River Nutrient (Phosphorus and Nitrogen) Watershed Models (NUT)

NUT-1

Align current land use with phosphorus and nitrogen loading

4,5

Link Nutrient

data to help optimize effectiveness of management practice

Loading With

based on consideration of land uses and actual nutrient loading

Current Land

contribution to surface water resources (i.e., predominant land

Use

use is not necessarily the predominant source of nutrients)

- Agricultural, Forestry, Rural, and Urban BMPs

See Above Non-Point Source for Details

Management Practices to Address Future Educational Needs (EDU)

EDU-1

Support Water Conservation Programs

2,5

Promote

Conservation

Programs

EDU-2

Support Stormwater Educational Programs

2,6

Stormwater

Education

EDU-3

Support Septic System Maintenance Programs

2,3

Septic System Maintenance Education

Additional educational and outreach material available through Georgia Department of Public Health at
http://dph.georgia.gov/wastewater-management

EDU-4

Support GFC Forestry BMP and UGA-SFI Logger Education

2,6

Forestry BMP

Programs

Education

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-21

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or
Issue to Vision and Goals (Section
1.4)

Management Practices to Address Future Ordinance and Code Policy Needs (OCP)

OCP-1

Encourage local government to develop ordinances and

4,6

Engage Local

standards to implement and/or update stormwater regulations

Governments

(as found in Glynn County, City of Darien, City of St. Marys,

in Stormwater

City of Port Wentworth, Town of Portal, City of Rincon, and City

Issues

of Hinesville Watershed Protection Plans). Possible resource

documents include: Georgia Stormwater Management Manual,

Coastal Stormwater Supplement, and Metro North Georgia

Water Planning District Model Ordinance.

OCP-2

Identify opportunities for green space on incentive and

2,4

Green Space

voluntary basis

Opportunities

and Incentives

OCP-3
Promote Integrated Planning

Encourage coordinated environmental planning (land use,

1-6

water supply, stormwater, wastewater and compliance with the

Environmental Planning Criteria developed pursuant to Part V

of the Georgia Planning Act and in the Mountain and River

Corridors Protection Act

OCP-4

Encourage local governments to implement, inspect, and

2,6

Local

enforce Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures (as

Government

found in City of Darien, City of Pooler, Bryan County, City of

Erosion Control

Rincon, and City of Hinesville Watershed Protection Plans)

Measures

Summary of Management Practices for Shared Resources The Coastal Georgia Region will combine its management practices with the following Councils to address shared resource gaps. The management practices that address gaps at Claxton and Eden will also help address the gap
at Kings Ferry.

Surface Water Quantity Ogeechee River (Eden and Kings Ferry) and Canoochee River (Claxton)
Coastal Georgia The Coastal Georgia Regional Council has identified management practices in the above table to address approximately 11% of the cumulative gap at Eden, 9% of the cumulative gap at Kings Ferry, and 8% of the cumulative gap at Claxton.
Altamaha The Altamaha Regional Council has identified water conservation, replacement of surface water use with groundwater use, refinement of forecasting and modeling data, and potential use of incentives, among others to address the majority of the cumulative gap at Claxton and a portion of the cumulative gap at Eden and Kings Ferry, a small portion of the cumulative gap at Statenville, and a portion of the cumulative gap at Atkinson.

COASTAL GEORGIA

6-22

June 2017

6. Addressing Water Needs and Regional Goals

Table 6-1: Management Practices Selected for the Coastal Georgia Region

Management Practice Number

Issue(s) to be Addressed by Action(s)

Description/Definition of Action

Relationship of Action or Issue to Vision and Goals (Section 1.4)

Savannah-Upper Ogeechee The Savannah-Upper Ogeechee Regional Council has identified water conservation, replacement of surface water use with groundwater, and agricultural water use monitoring program to address a portion of the cumulative gap at Kings Ferry and the majority of the cumulative gap at Eden.
Upper Oconee The Upper Oconee Regional Council has identified the use of variable rate irrigation, development of new groundwater wells, and encouraging centralized sewer in developing areas to address a small portion of the cumulative gap at Eden and a small portion of the cumulative gap at Kings Ferry.

Surface Water Quality:
Satilla River Watershed Model The Suwannee-Satilla Regional Council has identified the same Best Management Practices for reducing nutrient loading as are summarized in the above table for the Coastal Council.
Savannah River Watershed Model The Savannah-Upper Ogeechee Regional Council is awaiting more information on nutrient standards.
Suwannee-Satilla There is one reach with exceeded dissolved oxygen assimilative capacity in the St. Marys basin that is shared with the Suwannee-Satilla Region. Both Councils recommend monitoring and data collection.

Surface Water Quality: Support TMDL Stakeholder Group for the Savannah River Harbor.

Groundwater Quantity/Quality: Support Bi-State Salt Water Intrusion Stakeholder Process in the
Savannah/Hilton Head Regions.

Ongoing Planning: Research and incorporate South Carolina and Florida water planning data and issues
for future modeling and refine modeling, if warranted. Track potential issues/proposed uses that may affect Surface Water Quality and Quantity on the St. Marys River in South Georgia and Florida.

Notes: 1The role/selection of specified practice in addressing current gaps and future forecasted needs in the gap areas requires additional data from the Bi-State Salt Water Intrusion Stakeholder Process between Georgia and South Carolina. 2For agricultural water users in the Coastal Region, focus management practice on surface water permit holders and new surface water permit requests in Bulloch, Bryan, Effingham, Chatham, and Long Counties; Kings Ferry and Eden nodes (Ogeechee and Canoochee Rivers). 3Wastewater utilities should coordinate with EPD to obtain needed capacity. Regionally sufficient capacity exists; however, localized gaps may occur in Bryan, Camden, Effingham, and Liberty Counties. 4Additional industrial wastewater capacity may be needed. EPD to update and refine discharge limit databases.
5Additional municipal groundwater permit capacity may be needed in Bulloch, Camden, Long, and McIntosh Counties. Utilities in regions should evaluate long-term needs and, if needed, work with EPD to obtain additional permit capacity. Municipal groundwater forecast above existing permitted capacities in Bryan, Chatham, Effingham and Liberty Counties should be evaluated for alternate source of supply in light of possible outcomes from the Bi-State Salt Water Intrusion Stakeholder Process between Georgia and South Carolina. 6Additional industrial groundwater permit capacity may be needed in Bulloch and McIntosh Counties. Industrial groundwater forecast above existing permitted capacities in Bryan, Effingham and Liberty Counties should be evaluated for alternate source of supply in light of possible outcomes from the Bi-State Salt Water Intrusion Stakeholder Process between Georgia and South Carolina.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

6-23

77.. IIMMPPLLEEMMEENNTTIINNGG WWAATTEERR MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT PPRRAACCTTIICCEESS

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Section 7. Implementing Water Management Practices

This Section presents the Coastal Georgia Council's estimated timeframes for the implementation of the

Summary

water management practices identified in Section 6. Schedules for implementation, in addition to the early step(s) required to initiate implementation of a given practice, are presented for both short- and long-term actions. The Coastal Georgia Council has defined shortterm as years 2015 to 2025 and long-term as 2025 to 2050. As the State Water Plan provides, this Plan will be primarily implemented by the various water users in the region; therefore, the Coastal Georgia Council has described the roles and responsibilities of the implementing parties as well as the fiscal implications of the practices.

Implementation of the Coastal Georgia Regional Water Plan will be primarily by various water users and wastewater utilities in the region. The most costeffective and more readily implemented management practices will be prioritized for short-term implementation via an incremental and adaptive approach. If

The Coastal Council also emphasizes that the resource needs are not met implementation of recommended management and/or gaps are not

practices are predicated on a number of planning addressed, then more assumptions and/or may be impacted by unanticipated complex management

or currently unknown factors including: projected growth practices will be pursued.

of population, industry, agricultural and energy needs; shared resources with surrounding regions; future identification/proposal of a significant upstream water resource project; data sets and assumptions related to water use, water withdrawals and returns; data regarding water quality and watershed models; rules

As new information becomes available, it is important the Plan remain a living document and be updated to incorporate new findings.

and regulations regarding water resource use and

management; and Resource Assessment tools for surface water availability, surface

water quality, and groundwater availability. Consequently, significant changes or

departures from these planning assumptions, forecasts, and Resource Assessment

tools may require a modification of the recommended management practices, the

implementation schedule, and/or the implementing entities/affected stakeholders.

Future planning efforts should confirm current assumptions and make necessary

revisions and/or improvements to the conclusions reached during this round of

planning.

7.1. Implementation Schedule and Roles of Responsible Parties
Table 7-1 ties the resource shortfalls and the needs specified by the Council and the corresponding management practices detailed in Table 6-1 to the parties who will implement those practices. This table also describes the timeframe for implementation and the specific steps required for implementation.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-1

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

WC-1
Tier 1 and Tier 2 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users

Current and future groundwater and surface water supply needs

Surface water and groundwater withdrawal (Municipal and Industrial)

WC-2
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users in Red and Yellow Zones

Current and future groundwater supply needs/gaps in the Red and Yellow Zones

Groundwater withdrawal
(Municipal and Industrial)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Water Conservation (WC)1

Conduct outreach/
education/incentives to encourage implementation of conservation measures

Continue to implement water conservation practices through 01/2025

Verify conservation savings estimates

Responsible Parties
EPD, Georgia Municipal Association, Georgia Association of County Commissioners, and Water Providers in the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-2

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

WC-3 through
WC-12
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Measures for Agricultural Users

Current and future agricultural groundwater and surface water supply gaps/needs

Surface water and groundwater withdrawal (Agricultural)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Responsible Parties
EPD, GSWCC, Georgia Department of Agriculture, and Agricultural water users in the Coastal Region

AAGS-1
CrossJurisdictional Collaboration

Additional/Alternate to Present Groundwater Source(s) in Gap Areas (AAGS)2

Current and future groundwater use in the Red and Yellow Zones

Groundwater withdrawal (Municipal)

Continue discussions with multi-county, city, and key utilities

Continue to track and N/A incorporate major findings from the Bistate stakeholder group on salt water intrusion (by 01/2025)

AAGS-2
Increase Surface Water Supplies

Surface water withdrawal
Public Water System

Coordinate with City of Savannah Industrial and Domestic Water Plant to utilize excess finished water as needed

Construct distribution infrastructure from City of Savannah Industrial and Domestic Water Treatment Plant to demand locations (by 01/2020)

Water Providers outside Red and Yellow Zones in proximity to demand locations2
Water Providers within Red and Yellow Zones, City of Savannah

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-3

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

AAGS-3
Additional Reservoir Storage

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
N/A

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Conduct reservoir reconnaissance and feasibility evaluation (by 01/2020)

If feasible, construct reservoir, treatment plant, and distribution system to demand locations (by 01/2030)

Responsible Parties
Water Providers within and outside Red and Yellow Zones

AAGS-4

N/A

Study Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Addressing Gaps

Evaluate effectiveness N/A and feasibility of aquifer storage and recovery/aquifer recharge (by 01/2015)

EPD, Georgia Legislature if evaluation shows effectiveness, feasibility, and need.

AAGS-5
Surface Water Storage in Aquifers

Current and future groundwater use in the Red and Yellow Zones

Underground Injection
Public Water System

Pending favorable results from AAGS4, perform desktop evaluation to identify and screen potential ASR well sites (by 01/2020)

Drill exploratory ASR wells to confirm feasibility at each site (by 01/2025)

Construct ASR wellfields and complete cycle testing to verify aquifer conditions and yield volumes (by 1/2035)

EPD, Water
Providers within Red and Yellow Zones

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-4

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

AAGS-6
Additional Aquifer Use

Groundwater withdrawal (Municipal and Industrial)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Determine feasibility of utilizing alternative aquifers to the Floridan in supplying groundwater withdrawals (by 01/2020)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Install production wells in aquifers other than the Floridan aquifer and meet sustainable withdrawal rates (by 01/2025)

Continue to regularly update Groundwater Resource Assessment and sustainable yield criteria

Responsible Parties
EPD, Water Providers within and outside Red and Yellow Zones

AAGS-7 Reuse

General Wastewater

Continue to conduct reuse feasibility studies to determine potential customers and treatment needs
(by 01/2020)

Construct treatment upgrades/new facilities and establish contractual agreements with reuse customer base (by 01/2025)

Continue treatment upgrades and seek new customers as additional capacity is provided (by 01/2050)

AAGS-8 through AAGS-10
Desalination, Reverse Osmosis, and Inter-basin transfers

Options pending feasibility of other options

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-5

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

AAGS-11
Monitor Aquifer and additional Modeled Simulations

Current and future groundwater use in the Red and Yellow Zones

Groundwater withdrawal (Municipal and Industrial)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Develop scope of work (6/20171/2018) and identify key partnering agencies

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Implement monitoring plan, modeling (as applicable) and reporting on a yearly basis

Compile results in 5year increments for use in subsequent updates to the Resource Assessments and Review and Revision of the Coastal Water Plan

Responsible Parties
EPD and potentially U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District given their responsibilities in implementing a Floridan aquifer monitoring program as part of the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project

I-1
CrossJurisdictional Groundwater Coordination Group

Current and future groundwater use in the Red and Yellow Zones

Groundwater Withdrawal

Institutional (I)2

Continue discussions with multi-county, city, and key utilities in support of a regional groundwater coordination group

Continue the collaboration and implementation actions of the regional groundwater coordination group

Continue to participate in regional groundwater coordination group, as available (by 01/2050)

EPD, Water
Providers within and outside Red and Yellow Zones

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-6

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

DCAR-1

Current and N/A

through

future surface

DCAR-6

water use in

Agricultural

gap areas

Data

Collection and

Irrigation

Research

Develop scope of

Complete data

N/A

work 6/2012) and

collection, research,

key partnering

and evaluation by

agencies

01/2020

(06/2012-01/2015)

Incorporate

data/findings in next

Regional Water Plan

revision

DCAR-7
Minimize Groundwater Use Impacts to Surface Water

Responsible Parties
EPD, GSWCC, University of Georgia, Georgia Department of Agriculture (DOA)

DCAR-8 Analyze Addressing Extreme Conditions

Develop scope of work (06/2011-
12/2011)

EPD

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-7

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

DCAR-9

Current and N/A

Study Aquifer future surface

Potential to

water use in

Address Gaps gap areas

DCAR-10
Restoration Impact on Low Flow Conditions Analysis

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Develop scope of work 12/2011) and key partnering agencies (01/201201/2015)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Complete data

N/A

collection, research,

and evaluation by

01/2020

Incorporate data/findings in next Regional Water Plan revision

Responsible Parties
EPD, GSWCC, University of Georgia, Georgia DOA EPD and other research agencies/entities; USDA and other agencies for funding and incentives

ASWS-13
Consider Low Flow Conditions in Future Surface Water Permitting

Additional and Alternatives to Existing Surface Water Supply Sources (ASWS)1

Future surface Surface water

water use in withdrawal

gap areas

(Agricultural)

EPD to develop Data Needs and Guidance for Analysis Requirements
Applicants to submit analysis from 20152020

GSWCC to collaborate with EPD, Georgia DOA, and current/future surface water users to develop application process and data needs to streamline application and review process (by 01/2020)

Determine if expedited or revised permitting process is warranted to allow for use of the resource and protection of critical low flows

EPD, GSWCC, Georgia DOA, and Agricultural surface water users in the Coastal Region for implementation

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-8

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

ASWS-23
Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Responsible Parties

ASWS-33 Substitute Future Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years
ASWS-4 Substitute Existing Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

Future surface Surface water

water use in withdrawal

gap areas

(Agricultural)

Current surface water use in gap areas

Surface water/
Groundwater withdrawal (Agricultural)

EPD to develop Data Needs and Guidance for Analysis Requirements
Applicants to submit analysis from 20102015
Develop strategy and work with potential participants/ impacted users to increase support for and implementation of strategy

GSWCC to collaborate with EPD, Georgia DOA, and current/future surface water users to develop application process and data needs to streamline application and review process (by 01/2020)
Evaluate need and feasibility to conjunctively manage groundwater (outside Red and Yellow Zones) and surface water to address 7Q10 low flow conditions (by 01/2020)

Determine if expedited or revised permitting process is warranted to allow for use of the resource and protection of critical low flows
N/A

EPD, GSWCC, Georgia DOA, and Agricultural surface water users in the Coastal Region for implementation

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-9

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

ASWS-5 Opportunities and Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

Surface water withdrawal (Agricultural)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Examine opportunities to modify farm and other pond operations to obtain releases in to address gaps (by 01/2020)

Modify farm and other pond operations to obtain releases to address gaps (by 01/2035)

Responsible Parties

ASWS-6
Ecological Restoration Incentive Program
ASWS-7
Land Management Incentives

Current and future surface water use in gap areas

Wetland Restoration
Stormwater NPDES Discharge

ASWS-8
Incentives for Greater Wastewater Return Flows

Wastewater/
Stormwater NPDES Discharge,
Sanitary Sewer Extension

Encourage research to determine effectiveness and feasibility of restoring wetlands
Monitor land use changes and further delineate aquifer recharge areas
N/A

Determine effectiveness and feasibility of restoring wetlands (by 01/2020)
Determine effectiveness and feasibility of implementing practice (by 01/2020)

Restore wetland characteristics (by 01/2035)
If deemed effective and feasible, implement practice based on status of gap closure (by 01/2030)
Continue to monitor land use and hydrologic relationships

EPD and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
EPD, Municipalities and Water/Wastewater Utilities in the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-10

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

ASWS-9
Multi-Region Reservoir

Surface water withdrawal

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Monitor gap closure

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Based on rate of gap closure, consider reservoir reconnaissance/feasib ility study (by 01/2020)

Construct joint regional reservoir and/or multiple new smaller reservoirs (and/or utilize existing reservoirs) (by 01/2035)

Responsible Parties
EPD, Water providers in the Coastal Region, other collaborating regions

ASWS-10 Inter-Basin Transfers
PSDO-1 Collect Water Quality Data
PSDO-2 Point Discharge Relocation

Current and future surface water use in gap areas
Water quality gaps

Surface water withdrawal

Monitor gap closure

Based on rate of gap closure, consider interbasin transfer reconnaissance/feasib ility study (by 01/2025)

Construct infrastructure for inter-basin transfers, if feasible and needed (by 01/2050)

Point Sources Dissolved Oxygen (PSDO)

General

N/A

Wastewater

Collect data to confirm N/A loading and/or receiving stream chemistry (by 01/2020)

Identify feasibility to move discharge location to higher flow streams with greater assimilative capacity (by 01/2020)

If feasible, and cost effective, relocate discharge location (by 01/2025)

EPD, USACE, Water providers in the Coastal Region, other collaborating regions
EPD, Municipalities and/or wastewater utilities in the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-11

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

PSDO-3
Enhance Point Source Treatment

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Confirm wastewater facilities to upgrade/improve treatment to address low dissolved oxygen conditions in receiving streams (by 01/2015)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Upgrade/improve treatment of identified wastewater facilities (by 01/2020)

Continue to upgrade/improve treatment of identified wastewater facilities (by 01/2045)

Responsible Parties

MWWPC-1 Increase Wastewater Permit Capacity
IWWPC-1 Increase Wastewater Permit Capacity

Wastewater permit capacity gap (Bryan County)
Wastewater permit capacity gap

Available Municipal Wastewater Permit Capacity (MWWPC)

Municipal

N/A

Wastewater

Expand or construct N/A new facilities and/or obtain additional wastewater permit capacity to meet forecasted needs (by 01/2025)

Available Industrial Wastewater Permit Capacity (IWWPC)4

Industrial Wastewater

Obtain additional

Expand/construct new N/A

permit data on flow facilities and/or obtain

volumes and permit additional wastewater

conditions for

permit capacity to

industrial

meet forecasted

wastewater facilities needs (by 01/2025)

forecasted needs

EPD, Municipal wastewater utilities in the Coastal Region
EPD, Industrial wastewater facilities in the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-12

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Available Municipal Groundwater Permit Capacity (MGWPC)

MGWPC-1

Groundwater Groundwater N/A

Increase

permit

Withdrawal

Municipal

capacity gap (Municipal)

Groundwater (All Counties

Permit

except Glynn

Capacity

County)

Evaluate short-term needs and, if needed, work with EPD to obtain additional permit capacity and/or alternate source of supply (by 01/2025)

Evaluate long-term needs and, if needed, work with EPD to obtain additional permit capacity (by 01/2050)

Responsible Parties
EPD, Municipal water utilities in the Coastal Region

Available Industrial Groundwater Permit Capacity (IGWPC)

IGWPC-1

Groundwater Groundwater N/A

Increase

permit

Withdrawal

Industrial

capacity gap (Industrial)

Groundwater (Bryan,

Permit Capacity

Bulloch, Effingham, Liberty, and

McIntosh

Cos.)

Evaluate short-term needs and, if needed, work with EPD to obtain additional permit capacity and/or alternate source of supply (by 01/2025)

Evaluate long-term needs and, if needed, work with EPD to obtain additional permit capacity (by 01/2050)

EPD, Industrial water facilities in the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-13

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

GW-1
Develop and Practice Sustainable Groundwater Use
GW-2
Promote AquiferFriendly Land Use Practices
GW-3 Research and Analyze Sustainable Groundwater Management

Future groundwater needs in Green Zone

Groundwater Withdrawal (Municipal, Industrial, and Agricultural)
N/A

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Groundwater (GW)

Verify sustainable yield metrics and consider relevant localized impacts (by 01/2015)

Provide guidance and implement sustainable groundwater withdrawal rates through 01/2025

Modify Resource Assessments and sustainable yield criteria, if necessary (by 01/2050)

Monitor land use changes and further delineate aquifer recharge areas (by 01/2015)
N/A

Encourage land use practices that sustain and protect aquifer recharge areas (by 01/2025)

Continue to monitor land use and hydrologic relationships

Continue to monitor N/A and improve understanding of historic, current, and future trends in groundwater levels (by 01/2025)

Responsible Parties
EPD, Water Providers outside Red and Yellow Zones
EPD, Municipalities in aquifer recharge areas (within and outside the Coastal Region) EPD

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-14

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

SW-1
Surface Water Use Within Available Capacity

Current and future surface water use outside gap areas

Surface water Withdrawal

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Surface Water (SW)1

Confirm non-gap areas and available surface water resource capacity (by 01/2015)

Continue to apply for permits and use surface water in nongap areas within the available surface water resource capacity (by 01/2025)

Verify flow conditions and gaps

Responsible Parties
EPD, applicable federal agencies, and surface water users in Coastal Region

SW-2 Monitor and Evaluate Estuaries
PSAN-1 Ammonia Limits PSAN-2 Enhance Nutrient Treatment

Water quality outside gap areas

N/A

Monitor Atlantic

Determine flow

N/A

slope river flow

conditions that sustain

conditions

estuary conditions (by

01/2025)

Point Sources-Ammonia and Nutrients (PSAN)

General Wastewater

Identify wastewater treatment facilities that would need to be upgraded and determine processes to implement

Improve/upgrade

N/A

identified wastewater

treatment facilities to

comply with ammonia

and nutrient limits (by

01/2025)

EPD, Coastal Resources Division, Wildlife Resources Division
EPD, Wastewater facilities in the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-15

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

PSAN-3
Eliminate Illicit Discharges

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Identify options for treating illicit discharges to surface waters

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Eliminate illicit discharges to surface waters (by 01/2025)

Responsible Parties

NPS-1
Study Human Impacts on Water Quality
NPS-2
Monitor and Address NPS Nutrient Loading
NPSU-1 through NPSU-4
Various Stormwater Management Practices Related to Urban Uses

Non-Point Sources (NPS) Urban, Rural, Agricultural, and Forestry Uses

Water quality outside gap areas

Stormwater (NPDES Discharges)

Collect data to

Confirm sources of

N/A

determine dissolved loading and develop

oxygen, fecal

programs to address

coliform, and

(by 01/2025)

nutrient sources

Select best management practices needed for treating stormwater from urban uses

Implement a variety of stormwater best management practices related to urban uses (by 01/2020)

EPD, Municipalities and Utilities within the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-16

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

NPSR-1
Advocate Implementing Road Runoff BMPs

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Select best management practices needed for treating stormwater from rural uses

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Implement a variety of stormwater best management practices related to dirt road maintenance (by 01/2020)

Responsible Parties
EPD, Counties (Public Works/Roads and Bridges Departments) within the Coastal Region, GDOT and GFC

NPSF-1 through NPSF-3
Various Stormwater Management Practices Related to Forestry Uses

Water quality outside gap areas

Stormwater (NPDES Discharges)

Continue to support existing best management practices programs

Implement a variety of N/A BMPs related to forestry and agricultural uses and continue monitoring of Forestry BMPs (by 01/2020)

Georgia Forestry Commission, and possibly county commissions

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-17

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

NPSA-1 through NPSA-5
Various Stormwater Management Practices Related to Agricultural Uses
TMDL-1 through TMDL-3
Evaluate Impaired Segments and Sources

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Collect data to confirm impairment and determine sources

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Remove streams listed due to "natural sources" (by 01/2020)
Refine river/stream reach length for impaired waters (by 01/2025)

Continue collecting data to monitor impairment sources; Support reassessment of stream segment classifications (by 01/2050)

Responsible Parties
GSWCC, Agricultural users within the Coastal Region
EPD, Municipalities and Utilities within the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-18

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

NUT-1
Link Nutrient Loading With Current Land Use

Water quality outside gap areas

Stormwater (NPDES Discharges)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)
Align current land use with nutrient loading data to optimize management practice based on consideration of land uses and actual nutrient contribution to loading

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Support research and N/A development of tools such as the Southern Group of State Foresters and USFS Sediment Prediction modeling tool being developed by Auburn University (by 01/2025)

Responsible Parties
EPD, GSWCC, Georgia Forestry Commission, Municipalities and Utilities within the Coastal Region, and county commissions

EDU-1 through
EDU-4

Education/

N/A

outreach support

Various Educational and Outreach Programs on Conservation/ Water Quality

Educational Practices (EDU)

Develop educational programs on water conservation, septic system maintenance, and stormwater management

Complete educational programs on water conservation, septic system maintenance, and stormwater management

Continue educational programs on water conservation, septic system maintenance, and stormwater management

EPD, State Agencies with WCIP responsibilities, Municipalities and Utilities within the Coastal Region

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-19

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-1: Implementation Schedule

Management Practice No. (See Table 61)

Issues to be Addressed and Resource(s) Affected

Permittee Category of Responsible Parties
(if applicable)

For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)

For Short-term Actions (2010-2020)

For Long-term Actions
(2020-2050)

Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates

Ordinance and Code Policy Practices (OCP)

Responsible Parties

OCP-1 through
OCP-4

Ordinances N/A and code policies

Stormwater Management through Ordinance/

Code Updates and

Integrated Planning

Identify ordinances and standards to implement/update stormwater and land development (including green space and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures)
Encourage coordinated environmental planning

Pass ordinances and develop standards on stormwater management and land development (by 01/2025)
Conduct regional environmental planning (e.g., land use, water supply, stormwater, wastewater, etc.)

Continue to regulate stormwater management and land development actions consistent with ordinances and codes implemented

EPD, Regional Commissions, Municipalities and Utilities within the Coastal Region and county commissions

Notes: 1For agricultural water users in the Coastal Region, focus management practices on surface water permit holders and new surface water permit requests in Bulloch, Bryan, Effingham, Chatham, and Long Counties; Kings Ferry and Eden nodes (Ogeechee and Canoochee Rivers). 2The role/selection of specified practice in addressing current gaps and future forecasted needs in the gap areas requires additional data from the Bi-State Salt Water Intrusion Stakeholder Process between Georgia and South Carolina.

3Possible areas include: Effingham, Bulloch, Evans, Tattnall, Long, McIntosh, Glynn, and Camden Counties [(Effingham, Chatham Red Zone); [Bryan, Liberty Yellow Zones)]
4Additional industrial wastewater capacity may be needed. EPD to update and refine discharge limit databases to confirm flow and quality assumptions.

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-20

June 2017

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
7.2 Fiscal Implications of Selected Water Management Practices
The following subsections discuss planning level cost estimates for the water management practices selected by the Coastal Council and potential funding sources and options. Successful implementation of the Regional Water Plan is highly dependent on the ability of state and local governments, water providers, and utilities, to fund the needed implementation actions.
Planning Level Cost Estimates Planning level cost estimates were prepared for each management practice as shown in Table 7-2 using planning guidance documents, the knowledge base of previous state and utility planning efforts, and other sources of information, as listed below. The guidance documents and sources used to inform the planning level cost information in Table 7-2 have not been updated. Accordingly, the values shown below should only be used as a general guide. Specific costs should be further evaluated and updated before being relied upon.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division Supplemental Guidance for Planning Contractors: Water Management Practice Cost Comparison dated March 2010 (Revised March 2011).
Water Conservation Technical Memorandum to Supplement Council's Plan prepared by CDM for Georgia EPD draft dated July 2011.
CDM Water Supply Cost Estimation Study prepared for the South Florida Water Management District dated February 2007.
EPA Report titled Costs of Urban Stormwater Control Practices Preliminary Report dated February 5, 2006.
EPA Report titled Costs of Urban Stormwater Control dated January 2002.
St. Johns River Water Management District Report titled Water Supply Needs and Sources Assessment Alternative Water Supply Strategies Investigation, Water Supply and Wastewater Systems Component Cost Information dated 1997 (Publication Number SJ97-SP3).
Preliminary estimates of production well yields and costs from local licensed well drillers in Georgia (Bishop Well and Pump Service and Grosch Irrigation Company.)
Irrigation Conservation Practices Appropriate for the Southeastern United States. Project Report 32. Prepared in cooperation with the Georgia DNR, EPD under Proposal No. ES61135FC1.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-21

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
Groundwater Flow Modeling of the Coastal Plain Aquifer System of Georgia. Draft Report completed for EPD as part of State of Georgia Groundwater Resource Assessment (December 2009).
FY 2004 Sussex Conservation District Cover Crop Program Fact Sheet. Sussex Conservation District, Georgetown, Delaware. Dated 2003.
North Carolina State University Department of Forestry Costs of Forestry Best Management Practices in the South: A Review.
Recent bid tabulations (as of 2011) for wastewater treatment facilities.
The cost estimates are unit cost estimates where there is a lack of detail or specificity about the management practice. For example, for an inter-basin transfer of water, the cost is driven by the length and size of the pipeline and the quantity to be transferred. If the connection locations and/or the transfer quantity are not known, a unit cost per mile of pipeline is given. Where there is detail about the management practice, unit cost data were used to develop an approximate capital/programmatic cost. The capital costs were adjusted to 2010 dollars using the Engineering News Record Cost Index. In summary, some cost estimates are unit costs with different unit basis and some costs are approximate capital costs. Therefore, each management practice was assigned a cost (where applicable) rather than rolling up the costs into general categories since they may not be additive. The cost information provided in this document will be used to pursue loans, grants, and other funding options that can be prioritized throughout the region.
Funding Sources and Options Several different funding sources and options will be used to secure funding for the different management practices outlined in this Plan including:
The State Revolving Fund Program administrated by GEFA
Other State of Georgia Funding Programs
State and Federal Grants
Water/Wastewater System Revenues
State and local government incentive programs
More details on potential loan and grant programs are provided for the management practices in Table 7-2. Below is a list of some of the larger organizations and agencies that provide funding for the types of management practices recommended in this Plan. It is important to note that funding sources and opportunities change on a yearly basis.

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-22

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Programs
The EPA provides grants to States, non-profits, and educational institutions to support high-quality research that will improve the scientific basis for decisions on national environmental issues and help the EPA to achieve its goals. The EPA provides research grants and graduate fellowships; supports environmental education projects that enhance the public's awareness, knowledge, and skills to make informed decisions that affect environmental quality; offers information for State and local governments and small businesses on financing environmental services and projects; and provides other financial assistance through programs such as the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), and the Brownfield Program. More information on the EPA can be accessed at: www.epa.gov.
The EPA offers the following grant programs:
Continuing Program Grants
Project Grants
Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program
Water Pollution Control Program
Water Quality Cooperative Agreements Program
Water Quality Management Planning Program
Onsite Wastewater Management Planning Program
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program
Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD)
The mission of EPD is to protect and restore Georgia's environment. EPD takes the lead in ensuring clean air, water and land. With their partners, EPD pursues a sustainable environment that provides a foundation for a vibrant economy and healthy communities. As a result of the Clean Water Act, each year the State of Georgia receives funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to assist the State with addressing environmental issues. EPD offers the following grant programs:
Section 319 (h) Grants
Section 604 (b) Grants

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-23

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDANRCS) Conservation Programs
The USDA-NRCS offers a number of funding opportunities as a result of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. This Act is landmark legislation for conservation funding and for focusing on environmental issues. The conservation provisions will assist farmers and ranchers in meeting environmental challenges on their land. This legislation simplifies existing programs and creates new programs to address high priority environmental and production goals. The USDA-NRCS offers the following funding options:
Agricultural Conservation Easement Program
Conservation of Private Grazing Land Program
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
Resource Conservation and Development Program

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-24

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

Water Conservation (WC)

WC-1
Tier 1 and Tier 2 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users
WC-2
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users in the Red and Yellow Zones

Help meet current and forecasted surface water and groundwater supply needs throughout the region

$0.1 to $0.2 million (M)
$3.5M

Local

Supplemental Guidance

governments;

utilities

50 golf courses times $70,000 per Reuse Feasibility Study

WC-3 Audits

$1,300/system

State/federal loan or grant

Irrigation Conservation Practices Appropriate for the Southeastern United States

WC-4 Metering

$0.47M

(528 existing irrigation pumps) times 10% increase in pumps times $800/totalizer

WC-5 Inspections

$0 to $0.9M

$0 to $0.7 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

WC-6 Minimize HighPressure Systems
WC-7 Efficient Planting Methods
WC-8 Conservation Tillage
WC-9 Control Loss

$4,700/system $0.1 to $0.2M $0.1 to $0.2M $0.1 to $0.2M

Irrigation Conservation Practices Appropriate for the Southeastern United States
Educate farmers on benefits of cropping and crop rotation
Educate farmers on benefits of conservation tillage
Educate farmers on practices to prevent water loss through more efficient detention of rainfall

WC-10
End-Gun Shutoffs

$700/system

Irrigation Conservation Practices Appropriate for the Southeastern United States

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-25

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

WC-11 Low Pressure Systems
WC-12 Application Efficiency Technologies

Help meet current and forecasted surface water and groundwater supply needs throughout the region

$3,400/system $2,000/system

State/federal loan or grant

Irrigation Conservation Practices Appropriate for the Southeastern United States

Additional/Alternate to Present Groundwater Source(s) (AAGS) Gap: 21 to 99 MGD

AAGS-1
CrossJurisdictional Collaboration

Current and Future Groundwater Use in Gap Areas

$150M to $240M

GEFA Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program and Georgia Fund Loan

Includes new wells, cost of groundwater treatment, and pipeline for 29 to 50 MGD and 10 miles of pipeline. Unit costs for wells taken from local driller cost data. Unit costs for treatment and pipelines taken from Supplemental Guidance. Costs do not include storage.

AAGS-2
Increase Surface Water Supplies

$170M to $390M

Includes cost of surface water treatment and pipeline for 29 to 50 MGD and 10 miles of pipeline. Unit costs for treatment and pipelines taken from Supplemental Guidance. Costs do not include storage.

AAGS-3
Additional Reservoir Storage

$0.21M to $15M

GEFA Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund

$0.01M to $0.15M/MGD to increase storage at existing surface water reservoirs from Supplemental Guidance and CDM Water Supply Cost Estimation Study

AAGS-4
Study Aquifer Storage and Recovery in Addressing Gaps

$0.5M to $1M

GEFA Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund/Utilities

Various recent similar projects

AAGS-5
Surface Water Storage from Aquifers

$0.21M to $99M

$0.015M to $1M/MGD from Supplemental Guidance, CDM Water Supply Cost Estimation Study and various recent projects. Higher end of cost range includes pretreatment to prevent arsenic mobilization in ASR storage zone.

7-26

June 2017 011

COASTAL GEORGIA

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

AAGS-6 Additional Aquifer Use
AAGS-7 Reuse
AAGS-8 Determine Desalination Feasibility

Current and Future Groundwater Use in Gap Areas

$0.5M to $1M
$74M to $400M $290M to $400M

GEFA Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund Loan
Program (DWSRF)
Water/
Wastewater
system revenues
GEFA Georgia Reservoir and Water Supply Fund

Various recent similar projects
$0.50 to $1.50/1,000 gallons. Assumes secondary treatment and no additional WWTP upgrades. Desalination: 29 MGD. $8M to $12M per MGD from CDM Water Supply Cost Estimation Study and Supplemental Guidance. Also includes 10 miles of pipeline. Unit costs for pipeline taken from Supplemental Guidance. Costs do not include storage.

AAGS-9
Determine Reverse Osmosis Feasibility

$620M to $920M

Brackish Water RO: 99 MGD at $5M to $8M per MGD from CDM Water Supply Cost Estimation Study and supplemental Guidance. Also includes 10 miles of pipeline. Unit costs for pipeline taken from Supplemental Guidance. Costs do not include storage.

AAGS-10 Inter-basin Transfers
AAGS-11 Monitor Aquifer and additional Modeled Simulations

Current and Future Groundwater Use in Gap Areas

$25M to $250M $50K to $100K

GEFA Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund
EPD and possibly U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District

Inter-basin transfer function of piping cost. Assume 36 to 84-in pipe costs $4.8M to $12.7M per mile and 5 to 20 mile pipe runs.
Various recent similar projects

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-27

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

Institutional (I)

I-1
CrossJurisdictional Groundwater Coordination Group

Current and Future Groundwater Use in Gap Areas

$0.5M to $1M

State incentive programs

Various recent similar projects

DCAR-1 Agricultural Consumption Data
DCAR-2 Source of Supply Data to Refine Forecasts

Data Collection/Additional Research (DCAR)

Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas

$0.25M

State incentive programs

Various recent similar projects

$0.5M

Local governments; State incentive programs

DCAR-3 Better Understand Demand and Impacts on Projected Gaps
DCAR-4 Improve Data Quality and Analysis
DCAR-5 Irrigation Efficiency Education and Research
DCAR-6 Understand Optimum Application Methods

$0.5M

$0.2M $0.1M

USDA Rural
Development Water and Wastewater loan/grant

$0.05M

Clean Water Act Section
319(h) Grants

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-28

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

DCAR-7
Minimize Groundwater Use Impacts to Surface Water

$0.075M

Local governments; State incentive programs

DCAR-8
Analyze Addressing Extreme Conditions

Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas

$0.125M

State incentive programs

Various recent similar projects

DCAR-9
Study Aquifer Potential to Address Gaps

$0.15M

GEFA Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund

Additional/Alternate to Existing Surface Water Supply Sources (ASWS)

ASWS-1
Consider Low Flow Conditions in Future Surface Water Permitting

Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas

$0.15M per applicant

State incentive programs; utilities

Various recent similar projects. Includes modeling, permit application, and monitoring.

ASWS-2
Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

$1M to $2M

State incentive programs

ASWS-3
Substitute Future Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

$0.01M to $0.15M per MGD

Georgia Fund Loan; Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund

Local well driller data and Supplemental Guidance

ASWS-4
Substitute Existing Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

$0.01M to $0.15M per MGD

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-29

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

ASWS-5
Opportunities and Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

$1.1M to $1.4M per mile

State incentive programs

Pipeline cost to connect ponds to nearby rivers. Assume 1 to 2 mile pipe runs. Assume pipe diameters of 10 to 12 inches. Unit costs from Supplemental Guidance.

ASWS-6
Ecological Restoration Incentives

$0.1M/ac

Clean Water Supplemental Guidance Act Section
319(h) Grants

ASWS-7
Land Management Incentives
ASWS-8
Incentives for Greater Wastewater Return Flows

Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas

$0 to $1/capita
$0.1M to $1M per MGD

Clean Water State
Revolving Fund Loan
Program

Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000
Supplemental Guidance

ASWS-9 Multi-Region Reservoir
ASWS-10 Inter-Basin Transfers

$0.1M to $0.35M per MG
$2.2M per mile

GEFA Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund

Inter-basin transfer is a function of piping cost. Assume 18 inch pipe. Unit cost from Supplemental Guidance.

Point Sources Dissolved Oxygen (PSDO)

PSDO-1
Collect Water Quality Data

Water Quality Gaps

$0.25M to $0.5M

Local governments;
utilities

Various recent similar projects

PSDO-2
Point Discharge Relocation

$0.1M to $0.3M

GEFA Georgia Fund Loan; Utilities

PSDO-3
Enhance Point Source Treatment

$7M to $10M per MGD

GEFA Georgia Fund Loan; Utilities; CWSRF

Supplemental Guidance

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-30

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

Available Municipal Wastewater Permit Capacity (MWWPC)

MWWPC-1
Increase Wastewater Permit Capacity

Wastewater Permit Capacity Gap

$4M to $10M per MGD

GEFA

Supplemental Guidance

Georgia Fund

Loan

Available Industrial Wastewater Permit Capacity (IWWPC)

IWWPC-1
Increase Wastewater Permit Capacity

Wastewater Permit Capacity Gap

$0.1M to $0.2M

Various recent similar projects

Municipal Groundwater Permit Capacity (MGWPC)

MGWPC-1
Increase Municipal Groundwater Permit Capacity

Groundwater Permit Capacity Gap

$0.025M to $0.05M

Drinking Water State
Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Loan Program

Various recent similar projects

Industrial Groundwater Permit Capacity (IGWPC)

IGWPC-1
Increase Industrial Groundwater Permit Capacity

Groundwater Permit Capacity Gap

$0.025M to $0.05M

DWSRF Loan Various recent similar projects Program

Groundwater (GW)

GW-1
Develop and Practice Sustainable Groundwater Use

Groundwater Needs Outside Gap Areas

$0.01M to $0.15M per MGD

Georgia Reservoir and
Water Supply Fund

Local well driller data and Supplemental Guidance

GW-2
Promote AquiferFriendly Land Use Practices

$0.15M to $1.3M

State, local $0 to $1/capita. Total population governments/ in 2050: 1,266,000 utilities

GW-3
Research and Analyze Sustainable Groundwater Management

$0.2M to $0.4M

Various recent similar projects

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-31

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

Surface Water (SW)

SW-1
Surface Water Use Within Available Capacity

Surface Water
Needs Outside Gap Areas

$0.05M to $0.1M per applicant

Local

Includes cost of permitting and

governments/ impact evaluation

utilities

SW-2
Monitor and Evaluate Estuaries

$0.1M to $0.15M

Coastal Incentive Grant
Program

Various recent similar projects

Ammonia and Nutrients (PSAN)

PSAN-1 Ammonia Limits

Water Quality Point Source Needs

$4M to $10M per MGD

CWSRF;

Supplemental Guidance

Georgia Fund

Loan

PSAN-2 Enhance Nutrient Treatment

$7M to $11M per MGD

PSAN-3
Eliminate Illicit Discharges

$0.2M to $0.5M per MGD

Recent Bid Tabs

Dissolved Oxygen, Fecal Coliform, Nutrients, and Other Impairments

NPS-1 Study Human Impacts on Water Quality
NPS-2 Monitor and Address NPS Nutrient Loading

Water Quality

$0.2M to $0.4M

Non-Point Source

(NPS) Needs

$0.5M to $1.5M

Clean Water Act Section
319(h) Grants (NPS Implementation Grant)

EPA Manual of Costs of Urban Stormwater Control (2002)
Various recent similar projects

NPSU-1 Control Erosion

Urban Best Management Practices (NPSU)

Water Quality NPS Needs

$0 to $1.3M

Clean Water Act Section
319(h) Grants (NPS Implementation Grant)

$0 to $1 per capita. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-32

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

NPSU-2
Manage Stormwater Runoff

$6,000 to $65,000 per MG

EPA Manual of Costs of Urban Stormwater Control (2002)

NPSU-3
Increase Stormwater Infiltration

$0 to $0.9M

$0 to $0.7 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

NPSU-4 Riparian Buffers

$0 to $0.9M

GEFA Land Conservation Program

Rural Best Management Practices (NPSR)

NPSR-1
Advocate Implementing Road Runoff BMPs

Water Quality NPS Needs

$2,500 to $75,000 per mile of swale

CWSRF; Clean Water Act Section
319(h) Grants

EPA Manual of Costs of Urban Stormwater Control (2002)

Forestry Best Management Practices (NPSF)

NPSF-1
Support Forestry Commission Water Quality Program

Water Quality NPS Needs

Continue to fund existing programs

NPSF-2
Improve BMP Compliance

Continue to fund existing programs

Costs of Forestry Best Management Practices in the South: A Review

NPSF-3
Wetland and Forest Restoration Incentives and Support

$5,000 to $9,000 per credit

Federal grants

Supplemental Guidance. The costs are based on the cost to purchase credits from a restoration bank.

Agricultural Best Management Practices for Crop and Pasture Lands (NPSA)

NPSA-1
Soil Erosion Reduction Measures

Water Quality NPS Needs

$0.1M to $0.2M

Irrigation Conservation Practices Appropriate for the Southeastern United States

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-33

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost

Funding
Sources and Options1

Notes and Sources for Costs

NPSA-2 Utilize Buffers

$0 to $0.9M

GEFA Land Conservation

$0 to $0.7 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

NPSA-3
Livestock Management

NPSA-4 Manure Control

$0.5M to $1M

Sussex (Delaware) Conservation District Cover Crop Program Fact Sheet

NPSA-5
Wetland and Forest Restoration Incentives

$0.25M to $0.5M

$0 to $0.7 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

Existing Impairments and Total Maximum Daily Load Listed Streams (TMDL)

TMDL-1
Evaluate Impairment Sources

Water Quality NPS Needs

$0.5M to $1M

Clean Water Various recent similar projects Act Section
319(h) Grants

TMDL-2
Analyze Impaired Segments and Sources

$0.035M to $0.13M per impairment

TMDL-3
Stormwater Management BMPs

$63M to $100M

$50 to $80 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

Nutrients Satilla and Savannah River Nutrient (Phosphorus and Nitrogen) Watershed Models (NUT)

NUT-1
Link Nutrient Loading With Current Land Use

Water Quality NPS Needs

$10 to $150 per acre

Clean Water Align land use with phosphorus Act Section and nitrogen loading data
319(h) Grants

Educational (EDU)

EDU-1
Promote Conservation Programs

Future Educational Needs

$0 to $2.8M

State incentive programs; Utilities; Local

$0 to $2.25 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-34

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices

Table 7-2: Cost Estimates for the Implementation Responsibilities

Management Practice No. (See Table 6-1)
EDU-2 Stormwater Education

Issue to Be Addressed

Capital/ Programmatic
Cost
$0 to $2.8M

Funding Sources and
Options1
governments

Notes and Sources for Costs

EDU-3 Septic System Maintenance Education
EDU-4 Forestry BMP Education

$0 to $0.9M
$0.05M to $0.15M

State incentive programs; Utilities; Local governments

$0 to $2.25 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050: 1,266,000
Support Georgia Forestry BMPs

Ordinance and Code Policy (OCP)

OCP-1
Engage Local Governments in Stormwater Issues

Future Ordinance and Code Policy Needs

$0 to $0.9M

State incentive programs; Utilities; Local governments

$0 to $0.7 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050:1,266,000

OCP-2
Green Space Opportunities and Incentives

Future Ordinance and Code Policy Needs

$0 to $0.9M

State incentive programs; utilities, local governments; Georgia Land Conservation Program

Green space incentives $0 to $0.7 per capita. Total population in 2050:1,266,000

OCP-3
Promote Integrated Planning

$0 to $0.9M

State incentive programs; Utilities; Local governments

$0 to $0.7 per capita per Supplemental Guidance. Total population in 2050:1,266,000

OCP-4
Local Government Erosion Control

$0.05M to $0.1M

Enforce Erosion and Sedimentation control practices

1 Where referenced, GEFA-administered loan programs (e.g., CSWRF, DWSRF) are intended to finance eligible activities related to construction of water infrastructure projects, including site-specific engineering and planning efforts.

7.3. Alignment with Other Plans
The Coastal Council's Plan and management practices selection process was based on identifying and supporting existing policy, planning, and projects. Local comprehensive plans, planned and/or permitted projects were relied upon in developing the Regional Water Plan. This approach is tailored to maintain consistency with, and to maximize support for, locally driven water resource management

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-35

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
decisions. The Coastal Council did identify potential challenges associated with both the cost and technical issues that the region may face; especially regarding water and wastewater needs for both new and aging infrastructure. In addition, addressing existing surface and groundwater gaps must be accomplished in a manner that does not cause adverse impacts to local water users and local governments.
Water resource decisions in the Coastal Georgia Region are affected by regulatory process related to Savannah River water quality and bi-state discussions regarding the Savannah River and salt water intrusion in the Savannah/Hilton Head region. The outcome of these discussions and potential recommendations or other decisions will have important implications for the Regional Water Plan and will need to be incorporated and/or reconciled with the Regional Water Plan as this information becomes available.
The challenges of funding Plan recommendations and addressing future technical and regulatory issues is especially difficult for smaller towns and utilities, agricultural water uses, and small businesses that rely on natural resources. The successful implementation of the Regional Water Plan will be dependent on the principles of support and leadership by state agencies, in a collaborative setting, utilizing incentives and financial assistance to the extent possible.
7.4. Recommendations to the State
The Coastal Council supports the concept of regional water resource planning with a focus on planning Councils composed of local governments, water users, water providers, industry, business and affected stakeholders. Local representatives are typically most familiar with local water resource issues and needs. The State has a vital role providing technical support, guidance, and funding to support locally focused water resource planning.
The Coastal Council is sensitive to unintended consequences if Plan recommendations become mandates. The State must help balance Plan recommendations with assessing measurable progress toward Plan implementation. If additional rules or other administrative or regulatory actions are deemed necessary, the State should work with Councils to help ensure workable solutions.
The following specific recommendations to the State are provided to help aid in the successful implementation of the Plan.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD)
Consider "institutionalizing" planning. This would entail a long-term commitment of staff and funding to: monitor and support Plan recommendations; coordinate improved data collection, management and analysis; continue to develop and improve Resource Assessment tools; and help provide funding, permitting and technical support to address gaps and water resource needs.

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-36

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
Support and facilitate the continued implementation of the Savannah Harbor 5R plan that was approved by EPA in 2016. EPD's assistance in coordinating, facilitating, and providing technical support during implementation of the 5R Plan is essential. The Coastal Council supports this process and has indicated that continued implementation of pollutant loading strategies (management practices) will continue to improve dissolved oxygen conditions in the lower Savannah River.
Provide leadership, coordination, and technical support to continue stakeholder collaboration, coordination and implementation of management practices that will continue to improve the regional management of the Floridan aquifer, as outlined in this plan, and in conjunction with the Coastal Georgia Water & Wastewater Permitting Plan (CPP) that was recently updated in 2015. The Coastal Georgia Regional Water Plan provides recommended management practices that are in alignment with the CPP and that also continue to advance the adopted Vision and Goals of the Coastal Georgia Regional Water Planning Council. A continued stakeholder process is encouraged, including on-going monitoring and reporting which are foundational to implementing a plan based on the principles of adaptive management. Consequently, EPD will also need to continue to serve as a "bridge" between the State water planning process and this stakeholder process.
Work with EPD's Agricultural Water Metering Program, as well as other partners, including but not limited to, the University of Georgia and the Georgia Department of Agriculture to improve agricultural water use data collection and management. This effort would focus on refining source(s) of supply for multiple irrigation sources, continuing to assess data on crop water requirements, evaluating the effects of farm ponds on direct irrigation withdrawals and the hydrologic cycle, and further research on crop consumptive use. This data in turn should be coordinated with Resource Assessment tools to ensure accurate simulation of any gaps and assumptions.
Support completion, maintenance and improvement of the Agricultural Water Use Measurement Program, which is aimed at cost effectively collecting agricultural water use data across the State, and integrating cooperative arrangements with the private sector and partnerships with other State agencies. This program is a vital component to helping the State and regions effectively manage and utilize water resources.
Focus funding support and permitting assistance to projects and programs aimed at addressing gap areas. Where possible, leverage federal funds to help support and expedite project implementation.
Consider collaborative approaches to collecting more standardized water use data and improving data on water demands. This would include continued improvement and updating databases used in the planning process. It would

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-37

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
also involve working with the Georgia Municipal Association, Georgia Association of County Commissioners, and other relevant stakeholders to improve water use information.
Working with Georgia Environmental Finance Authority, examine opportunities to improve coordination among water providers and users and create incentives to maximize existing infrastructure and coordinated operations.
Track, support, and participate in South Carolina water planning efforts. Successful planning in the Coastal Region and Savannah-Upper Ogeechee Region will benefit from constructive and collaborative engagement of South Carolina on issues associated with the current and future use of the Savannah River for both water supply and wastewater assimilation. Sustainable use and management of the Savannah River is critical to the social and economic future of both Georgia and South Carolina.
Continue to engage in dialogue and data-sharing with the States of Florida and South Carolina regarding current and forecasted groundwater use. South Georgia, North Florida, and South Carolina rely on the Floridan aquifer to meet water supply needs and it is in EPD's best interest to include the most accurate available information on growth and groundwater use in both states in the Resource Assessment modeling.
Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA)
Meeting forecasted water supply needs will require stable and flexible funding sources to assist water users and water and wastewater utilities in meeting forecasted needs. A stable GEFA financing source(s) should be maintained for necessary water supply, water and wastewater plant construction, and plant upgrades to address current and future gaps.
Georgia Forestry Commission (GFC)
Continue to support and fund the GFC Forestry Best Management Practices Program. Providing education and incentives to control erosion and sedimentation will help the region prevent/address TMDL listed segments, reduce nutrient loadings, and support wetland areas. This will have the benefit of helping sustain baseflow conditions of streams and water quality.
Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC)
GSWCC should continue to provide leadership and locally focused efforts in the following programs:
Continue education and outreach associated with Urban Erosion and Sediment Control program including certification of individuals involved in land disturbing

COASTAL GEORGIA

7-38

June 2017 011

7. Implementing Water Management Practices
activities and on-site implementation of erosion, sedimentation, and pollution control plans. This will help address the water quality needs of the region.
Continue education and outreach efforts to agricultural interests to inform farmers of available technologies and funding sources to make more efficient use of water resources without incurring hardship. Support Georgia Agricultural Conservation Incentive program, which provides funding support to help implement conservation practices. Funding for this program is essential to help implement conservation measures, especially in the regional watersheds where there are surface water gaps.
Office of State Planning and Budget (OPB)
Obtain population census data and compare to population forecasts to track trends in the accuracy of population projections
Revise population forecasts and support ongoing state-wide planning
Department of Community Affairs (DCA)
Identify and encourage local governments to integrate Regional Plan management practices with land use and water quality/quantity nexuses into their comprehensive planning efforts.
Continue to promote coordinated environmental planning
Georgia Department of Agriculture (DOA)
Provide technical information and participate in needed studies to better characterize agricultural water uses and quantification of shortages to low flow conditions.
Assist with outreach and education of agricultural uses to obtain greater understanding of surface water resource limitations, both quality and quantity, and to help improve the implementation rate of management practices. Assist EPD and other state agencies in coordinating with the Georgia Farm Bureau to accomplish the above goals.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources [Coastal Resources Division (CRD) and Wildlife Resources Division (WRD)]
Continue to monitor resources and help sustain, enhance, protect and conserve Georgia's natural, historic and cultural resources.
Provide technical and ecosystem information to help support state water planning needs.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

7-39

888... MMMOOONNNIITTITOOORRRIINNINGGGAAANNNDDDRRREEEPPPOOORRRTTTIINNINGGG PPPRRROOOGGGRRREEESSSSSS

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Section 8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

The selected water management practices identified in Section 6 will be primarily implemented

Summary

(as described in Section 7) by the various water users in the region, including local governments and others with the capacity to develop water infrastructure and apply for the required permits, grants, and loans.

The Coastal Council has identified several benchmarks and means to measure progress toward meeting regional needs and goals. In most cases, efforts

8.1. Benchmarks

will require significant coordination between affected

The benchmarks prepared by the Coastal Council and listed in Table 8-1 will be used to assess the effectiveness of this Plan's implementation and identify any required revisions. As detailed below,

water resource managers, and local and state government. Successful implementation will be dependent on adequate

the Coastal Council selected both qualitative and financing, leadership and support quantitative benchmarks that will be used to assess by State agencies, and

whether the water management practices are collaboration by multiple

closing gaps over time and allowing the water stakeholders.

planning region to meet its Vision and Goals. Effective implementation of the Plan will require the availability of sufficient funding in the form of loans, and in some cases, possibly grants. In addition, many of the proposed management practices require ongoing coordination with affected stakeholders/water users and collaboration to help ensure successful solutions are identified and

New and/or changing information, particularly regarding salt water intrusion issues and Savannah River Harbor water quality, will likely influence how the recommended practices are ultimately implemented.

implemented. Finally, in many cases monitoring

progress toward addressing future needs will require improved data and information

on the current actions and management practices that are already in place. The

benchmarks will be used to evaluate the Regional Water Plan's effectiveness at the

next 5-year Plan review and will require collection of information in the intervening

years to better quantify and document resource conditions and progress to meeting

regional needs and goals. The successful implementation of the Regional Water Plan

will require both leadership and supporting roles by Georgia EPD, other state

agencies, local government and water and wastewater utilities, as well as individual

water users.

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

8-1

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Table 8-1: Benchmarks for Water Management Plans

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Benchmark

Measurement Tools Time Period

Groundwater quantity and all water use throughout the region Surface water quantity at Kings Ferry, Eden, and Claxton

WC-1 and WC-2
Tier 1 through Tier 4 Measures for Municipal and Industrial Users

- Maintain or reduce gallons per capita consistent with Tiers 1 and 2 conservation practices
- Applicable Tiers 3 and 4 municipal and industrial conservation practices implemented in groundwater gap areas

Assess regional municipal and industrial water use rate trends and practices via periodic survey

2-5 years

WC-3 through WC-12
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Measures for Agricultural Users

Reduction in agricultural surface water withdrawals while maintaining agricultural production and reduction in surface water gaps at Kings Ferry, Eden, and Claxton

- Survey of agricultural conservation practices implementation rates and trends in water use by GSWCC
- Assess flow conditions using water use data and Resource Assessment tools (EPD)

2-5 years

Additional/Alternate to Present Groundwater Source(s) in Gap Areas (AAGS)

The role/selection of these management practices for addressing current gaps and

future forecasted needs in the gap areas requires additional data associated with ongoing implementation of the Coastal Georgia Water & Wastewater Permitting Plan (CPP)

that was recently updated in 2015. This also highlights the continued need for

collaboration with Stakeholders from both Georgia and South Carolina

AAGS-1 through AAGS-10, I-1
Variety of alternative water supply sources evaluated as options to groundwater pumping

-Verify that implementable management practices have emerged from stakeholder process - Determine state, local government, and affected water provider support for management practice(s) - Quantity of water supply yielded by management practice determined - Implementation roles for cost sharing and infrastructure constructions identified - Infrastructure needs identified (Joint operating and/or funding agreement or equivalent and implementation plan developed)

- Summary report completed from Bistate discussion or equivalent
- Implementation recommendations report completed and necessary agreement completed

1-2 years 2-5 years

COASTAL GEORGIA

8-2

June 2017

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Table 8-1: Benchmarks for Water Management Plans

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Benchmark

Measurement Tools Time Period

Address Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas
Data Collection/Additional Research (DCAR) to confirm frequency, duration, and severity of agriculturally-driven shortages to 7Q10 low flow conditions

DCAR-1 through DCAR-10
Various Data Collection and Additional Irrigation and Restoration Research Practices

- Develop Plan of Study, obtain funding and stakeholder participation as needed
- Completion of work plans and study implementation and documentation of results Incorporate data and findings into forecasts, Resource Assessments, and Water Plan updates

-Survey or selfreporting of agencies/entities involved in studies
-Verify inputs and revisions to water planning tools

2-4 years 5 years

Address Current and Future Surface Water Use in Gap Areas Additional/Alternate to Existing Surface Water Supply Sources (ASWS)

ASWS-1
Consider Low Flow Conditions in Future Surface Water Permitting

- Formation of stakeholder group and consensus reached on new surface water application process in gap areas
- Application process and permit conditions developed

Status report from stakeholder group;
Report out on usage of process and the number of permits issued with conditions

1-2 years 2-4 years

ASWS-2

Incentives identified and

Incentives for Dry-Year operating conditions as part of

Releases from Ponds ASWS-1

Document and maintain volumetric accounting of participating storage facilities

2-5 years

ASWS-3
Substitute Future Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

-Information and educational materials developed in conjunction with GSWCC and Georgia DOA to communicate details and goals of improving surface water flows
-Methods and incentives identified to increase implementation/participation

- Verify information and educational outreach via survey or direct agency reporting
- Monitor and track surface water versus groundwater permit applications

1-3 years 1-5 years

ASWS-4
Substitute Existing Surface Water Use with Groundwater in Dry Years

- Develop information and educational materials in conjunction with GSWCC and Georgia DOA to communicate issue and goals of improving

Identify and monitor participation and conversion rates from surface water to groundwater

1-3 years

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

8-3

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Table 8-1: Benchmarks for Water Management Plans

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Benchmark

Measurement Tools Time Period

surface water flows
- Identify methods and incentives to increase implementation/participation

1-5 years

ASWS-5
Opportunities and Incentives for Dry-Year Releases from Ponds

-Completion of feasibility study
- Working with potential participants' opportunities and incentives identified

- Identification of largest storage facilities for potential participation in gap areas
- Report summarizing opportunities and implementation

1-3 years 1-5 years

ASWS-6 through ASWS-10 Various land management, disposal, and water storage/transfer measures

-Feasibility studies completed (for short-term studies)
-Feasibility studies initiated (for long-term studies/actions)

Assess need based on short-term actions and feasibility studies (see Tables 6-1 and 7-1)

5 years

Address Water Quality (Dissolved Oxygen Levels) Point Sources (PSDO)

PSDO-1 Collect Water Quality Data
PSDO-2 Point Discharge Relocation PSDO-3 Enhance Point Source Treatment

-Resource Assessment assumptions reviewed and, if necessary, new data collect efforts underway/completed
-New findings incorporated into updated Resource Assessment data sets
-Outreach activities to discharges completed and feasible options have been implemented by discharges
-EPD to conduct outreach and facilitate improved treatment in low dissolved oxygen reaches

-EPD/agency summary report complete verifying assumptions and documentation of new data
-Incorporation of new findings and update Resource Assessment data
Improved dissolved oxygen is verified in stream reaches by monitoring or discharger reporting

1-4 years 1-5 years

Obtain Additional Municipal and Industrial Water and Wastewater Permit Capacity

MWWPC-1, IWWPC-1, MGWPC-1, IGWPC-1

-Outreach activities completed to water providers in high growth areas

Monitor permit applications and verify that improved data collection for

5 years

8-4

June 2017

COASTAL GEORGIA

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Table 8-1: Benchmarks for Water Management Plans

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)
Expansion of Wastewater and Groundwater Permit Capacities to Address Gaps/Needs

Benchmark
-Need for additional permit capacity verified and improved data for discharges obtained

Measurement Tools dischargers

Time Period

Addressing Current and Future Groundwater Needs for Gap and Non-gap Areas

GW-1
Develop and Practice Sustainable Groundwater Use

Sufficient permitted capacity to meet forecasted needs; through timely submittal and processing of applications

Monitor permit applications and issuance

1-5 years

GW-2
Promote AquiferFriendly Land Use Practices

Counties and local governments consider practices to promote infiltration and aquifer recharge

Evaluate trends in impervious land cover in areas of aquifer recharge

5 years

GW-3
Research and Analyze Sustainable Groundwater Management

Sound science used to improve data and sustainably manage groundwater resources

Groundwater Resource Assessment updated

Addressing Current and Future Surface Water Needs for Gap and Non-gap Areas

SW-1
Surface Water Use Within Available Capacity

Sufficient permit capacity exists to meet forecasted needs through timely submittal and processing of applications

Monitor permit applications and issuance

1-5 years

SW-2
Monitor and Evaluate Estuaries

Major water resources diversion/storage projects identified; Upstream actions that would significantly impact flow conditions assessed

Monitoring data collected in estuaries and river flow trend data collected and reviewed

5 years

Programmatic Practices for Water Quality The following management practices are associated with the Vision and Goals of the Region and are described in general terms as they are either associated with existing state and local programs or are not yet at a
point where implementation frameworks have been established by the State

- Ammonia and Nutrients Point Sources
- Nutrient Non-point sources Satilla and Savannah Watershed Models

- Additional assessments to align sources of contaminants (point and non-point sources) to water quality impairments and land use types
- Continue implementation and assessment of the

- Review and assessment of program and information
- Complete summaries of watershed conditions using

1-5 years

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

8-5

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Table 8-1: Benchmarks for Water Management Plans

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)
- Urban/Suburban, Rural, Forestry, and Agricultural Non-point source BMPs
- TMDL Listed Streams BMPs

Benchmark
effectiveness of existing state programs including GFC, GSWCC, 319 Water Quality initiatives, and local efforts to improve watershed protection and water quality improvements - Background/natural levels of potential sources established

Measurement Tools Time Period
Resource Assessment tools, improved data collection, and synthesis of state program data

Management Practices to Support Educational Needs

Support education programs for: - Water Conservation - Stormwater Management - Septic System Maintenance -Logger Education -Forestry BMPs

-Data used to identify where future program efforts will be most effective
-Funding for programs maintained or improved

Survey and summarize program effectiveness and success stories

1-5 years

Management Practices to Address Ordinance and Code Policy Needs

- Encourage implementation and/or compliance with Stormwater ordinances and/or regulations
- Encourage improved conformance with Environmental Planning Criteria developed pursuant to Part V of the Georgia Planning Act
- Encourage local government to improved conformance with erosion and sediment control measures

-Select local governments surveyed to identify current knowledge base and recommended areas of improvement
-Improved education at state and local government conferences and workshops
-Enhanced awareness in Comprehensive Planning by local governments across region

Select follow-up survey of local governments to identify changes and success stories

1-5 years

COASTAL GEORGIA

8-6

June 2017

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress

Table 8-1: Benchmarks for Water Management Plans

Management Practice No.
(See Table 6-1)

Benchmark

Measurement Tools

Shared Resources

Groundwater quality/quantity Support Bi-state stakeholder process for salt water intrusion

- Implementable solutions identified
- Venue and implementation process/plan established and nexus to state planning completed

-Assess progress and summarize implementation recommendations from Bi-state stakeholders
- Develop implementation options

Time Period
1 year 2-5 years

Combined management practice for the Kings Ferry, Eden, and Claxton surface water gaps
Coastal Georgia, Altamaha, SavannahUpper Ogeechee, Upper Oconee Water Planning Regions
Support on-going stakeholder process associated with implementation of the Savannah Harbor 5R plan approved by EPA in 2016
Ongoing Planning coordination with South Carolina and Florida

Regional Council-specific management practices implemented
- Waste load allocation process developed for applicable dischargers - Pollution control strategies developed
- Outreach and coordination with states completed and water planning data collected - Review Resource Assessment tools and make modification if warranted

Evaluate project improvement of surface water flows using gauge data and Resource Assessment tools

1-5 years

Summary of implementation recommendations and timelines for water quality improvements

1-5 years

- Report summarizing planning data
- Information needs and issues documentation

1-5 years 5 years

8.2. Plan Updates
Meeting current and future water needs will require periodic review and revision of Regional Water Plans. The State Water Plan and associated rules provide that each Regional Water Plan will be subject to review by the appropriate Regional Water Planning Council every 5 years and in accordance with this guidance provided by the Director, unless otherwise required by the Director for earlier review. These reviews

June 2017

8-7

COASTAL GEORGIA

8. Monitoring and Reporting Progress
and updates will allow an opportunity to adapt the Regional Water Plan based on changed circumstances and new information arising in the 5 years after EPD's adoption of these Plans. These benchmarks will guide EPD in the review of the Regional Water Plan.
The Regional Water Planning Councils appointed to prepare future Plan updates will have the opportunity to review the recommendations of past Plans against current available data to make a determination as to which management practices are still appropriate and which ones need to be revised or augmented to meet changing conditions. Future Councils will also have the ability to review the effectiveness of practices recommended in previous Plans against available benchmark data. This analysis will reveal which practices are effective and what adjustments are necessary to compensate for less effective practices.
8.3. Plan Amendments
The Coastal Council emphasizes that the recommendations in this Regional Water Plan are based on the best information available at the time the Plan was written. New information and issues that may impact the recommendations should be considered and incorporated into relevant implementation decisions and future Water Plan updates. Future planning efforts should confirm current assumptions and make necessary revisions and/or improvements to the conclusions reached during this phase of planning.

COASTAL GEORGIA

8-8

June 2017

BBIBIBLILOIOGGRRAAPPHHYY

Bibliography

Bibliography
CDM. Water Supply Cost Estimation Study. Document prepared for the South Florida Water Management District. February 2007.
CDM, 2010. Groundwater Flow Modeling of the Coastal Plain Aquifer System of Georgia. Draft Report completed for EPD as part of State of Georgia Groundwater Resources Assessment.
Coastal Regional Commission of Georgia, June 9, 2010. The Regional Plan of Coastal Georgia. June 9, 2010. www.crc.ga.gov/planning/Pages/planning_regional.aspx
Coastal Georgia Regional Development Center, Coastal Georgia Comprehensive Plan Agenda. November 12, 2008. www.crc.ga.gov/planning/Pages/planning_regional.aspx
Coastal Regional Commission of Georgia website. Retrieved August 3, 2010. www.crc.ga.gov/
Coastal Regional Commission's Coastal Georgia Economic Development website. Retrieved on July 20, 2010, www.thegeorgiacoast.crc.ga.gov/index.html
Cowie, G. and Davis, D. Georgia's State Water Plan. Retrieved on March 2, 2009. www.robinson.gsu.edu/ethics_pub/2009/cowie.pdf
Fisheries Economics of the United States. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Fisheries, Silver Spring, Maryland. 2014
Georgia Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Plan. Georgia Water Council. January 8, 2008.
Georgia Department of Community Affairs Georgia County Snapshots website. Retrieved on July 21, 2010, www.dca.state.ga.us/CountySnapshotsNet/default.aspx
Georgia Department of Community Affairs, Regional Planning Rules "Standards and Procedures for Regional Planning." Chapter 110-12-6, et seq. www.dca.ga.gov/development/PlanningQualityGrowth/PAGES/Legal.asp#RegionalRules
Georgia Department of Corrections website Facility Search. Retrieved on July 21, 2010, www.dcor.state.ga.us/GDC/FacilityMap/jsp/FacQrybyCounty.jsp
Georgia Department of Economic Development. GeorgiaFacts website. Retrieved on July 21, 2010, www.georgiafacts.net

June 2017

B-1

COASTAL GEORGIA

Bibliography

Georgia Department of Labor. LaborMarket Explorer and Local Area Profiles. Retrieved on July 21, 2010, www.explorer.dol.state.ga.us/mis/profiles.htm
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Assimilative Capacity Resource Assessment Scenario Report. Draft Report completed in cooperation with Tetra Tech. March 2011.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Subcategory 5R Documentation for Point Source Dissolved Oxygen Impaired Water in the Savannah River Basin, Georgia and South Carolina. Final Savannah Harbor Restoration Plan (dated November 10, 2015), http://epd.georgia.gov/sites/epd.georgia.gov/files/related_files/site_page/SavannahH arbor5R_Restoration_Plan_11_10_2015.pdf
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Synopsis Report Groundwater Availability Assessment. Report completed in cooperation with CDM. March 2010.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Synopsis Report Groundwater Availability Assessment Updates. Report completed in cooperation with CDM Smith. May 2017.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Synopsis Report Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment. Report completed in cooperation with ARCADIS. May 2017.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Synopsis Report Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment. Report completed in cooperation with TetraTech. May 2017.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Supplemental Guidance for Regional Planning Contractors: Water Management Practice Cost Comparison. March 2010 (Revised March 2011).
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Groundwater Flow Modeling of the Coastal Plain Aquifer System of Georgia. Draft Report completed by CDM for EPD as part of State of Georgia Groundwater Resources Assessment. December 2009.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. The State of Georgia's Environment, 2009.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Georgia's State Water Plan. Regional Water Planning Guidance. July 2009.

COASTAL GEORGIA

B-2

June 2017

Bibliography
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Georgia's Water Resources. A Blueprint for the Future. Draft Submission to the Water Council. June 28, 2007.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion. Updated June 2015.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Environmental Protection Division. Draft August 2003. Altamaha River Basin Management Plan 2003.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Wildlife Resources Division. A Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy for Georgia. August 31, 2005.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Wildlife Resources Division. Fisheries Section Annual Report. 2006.
Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Wildlife Resources Division. State Wildlife Action Plan. Revised 2015. http://www.georgiawildlife.com/conservation/wildlifeaction-plan
Georgia Forestry Commission, Water Quality Program. Georgia's Best Management Practices for Forestry. May 2009. http://www.gfc.state.ga.us/resources/publications/BMPManualGA0609.pdf
North Carolina State University Department of Forestry. Costs of Forestry Best Management Practices in the South: A Review. Presentation from Forestry Best Management Practices Research Symposium, Atlanta, Georgia, April 2002.
Southeast Regional Climate Center. Climate summaries obtained for the following stations: Brooklet (ID 091266), Savannah Airport (ID 097847), Brunswick Airport (ID 091345), Fort Stewart (ID 093538), and Sapelo Island (ID 097808).
St. Johns River Water Management District. Water Supply Needs and Sources Assessment Alternative Water Supply Strategies Investigation, Water Supply and Wastewater Systems Component Cost Information.1997.
Sussex Conservation District. FY 2004 Sussex Conservation District Cover Crop Program Fact Sheet. Georgetown, Delaware. 2003.
The New Georgia Encyclopedia, Land Resources www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-2123
Thomas, D.L. (ed.), Evans, R.O., Harrison, K.A., Hook, J.E., Privette, C.V., Segars, W.I., Smith, W.B., Tyson, A.W. 1998. Irrigation Conservation Practices

COASTAL GEORGIA

June 2017

B-3

Bibliography
Appropriate for the Southeastern United States. Georgia Geologic Survey Project Report 32. Prepared in cooperation with Georgia DNR, EPD under Proposal No. ES61135FC1. Retrieved on November 20, 2010 from: www.nespal.org/SIRP/IWC/Report/conserv.rpt980728.pdf
University of Georgia, River Basin Center. Comprehensive Manual Wastewater Management in Coastal Georgia. January 2017, https://researchweb8.wpengine.com/rivercenter/wpcontent/uploads/sites/17/2015/08/WEB_wastewater_mgmt_in_coastal_ga_jan2017.p df
University System of Georgia, Map of USG Institutions. Retrieved on July 21, 2010, www.usg.edu/inst/map/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Costs of Urban Stormwater Control Practices Preliminary Report. February 5, 2006.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Costs of Urban Stormwater Control. January 2002.

COASTAL GEORGIA

B-4

June 2017

ATAPBPELENDOIFX CAONTENTS

Section ES
ES ES
ES ES ES
ES ES ES
ES
ES ES ES
ES

Location Trends and Key Findings
Introduction/ Overview Introduction/ Overview
Introduction/ Overview Water Resources and Use, Figure ES-2 Water and Wastewater Needs, Figure ES-3 Water and Wastewater Needs, Figure ES-4 Figure ES-5
Groundwater Availability
Surface Water Availability
Table ES-1
Summary of Resource Assessment Results Assessment of Water Quality Conditions
Former Table ES-2

Change Updated summary box text with the most recent information.
Updated state growth information Minor text revisions/updates
Updated population projections Updated water use information and figures Updated water use information and figure Updated return flow information and figure Updated figure Updated/modified text
Updated/modified text
Replaced Figure ES-7 with Table ES-1 Updated/modified text
Updated/modified text
Table removed

Description - Population information was updated based on the most recent readily available information (Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2015). - Revised/amended description of dominant economic sectors per Council recommendation. - Updated water use information from the Altamaha Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum (CDM Smith, 2017). - Removed reference to engineered solutions to address salt water intrusion as recommended by Council.
- Values for the state of Georgia were updated based on the most recent readily available information from the U.S. Census Bureau. - Text was revised/updated to reflect the purpose of this document as an update to an earlier version of the Plan completed in 2011. - Addition of description of key transportation corridors added per Council recommendation. - Revised/amended description of dominant economic sectors per Council recommendation. - Values were updated based on the most recent readily available information from (Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2015). - Updated water use information to the most recent readily available information in the 2016 USGS Publication.
- Updated water use information to the most recent readily available information in the 2016 USGS Publication.
- Updated return flow information from the Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Forecasting Technical Memorandum (CDM Smith, 2017).
- Population information was updated based on the most recent readily available information (Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2015). - Written descriptions of the Coastal Permitting Plan were updated to more accurately describe the implemented withdrawal restrictions. - Revised description of bi-state agreements between Georgia and South Carolina regarding salt water intrusion. - Added reference to specific recommendations for locations with local groundwater withdrawal restraints and example of on-going research of the use of aquifer storage and recovery as an alternative groundwater supply. - Removed references to Figure ES-7 and replaced with references to Table ES-1. - Removed reference to surface water gap at the Atkinson planning node. - Updated contribution of agricultural surface water use to current and/or future surface water gaps from 0.65 MGD to 0.1 MGD. - Replaced Figure ES-7 with Table ES-1 to describe the forecasted surface water gaps.
- Revised surface water quantity and surface water quality information based on results from Surface Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment (EPD, March 2017).
- Updated discussion of water quality impairments based on results from Surface Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity) Resource Assessment (EPD, March 2017). - Updated word choice and sentence structure. - Text was updated to describe the current status of the Savannah Harbor subcategory 5R Restoration Plan that replaced EPA's TMDL. - Table removed and reader directed to updated information in Sections 3, 5, and 6.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 1

Section ES ES ES ES
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2
2 2 2 2

Location Water Management Practices Table ES-2 Figure ES-7 Implementation Considerations and Benchmarks Section 1.0 Section 1.0 Section 1.1
Section 1.2
Section 1.3 Figure 1-3 Section 1.3 Section 1.3
Section 2.1 Section 2.1 Section 2.1
Section 2.2 Section 2.2 and Figure 2-3 Section 2.2 Section 2.2

Change Updated/modified text
Modified table number and updated information Modified figure number
Updated/modified text

Description
- Text was updated to describe the current status of the Savannah Harbor subcategory 5R Restoration Plan that replaced EPA's TMDL. - The Description/Definition of Action of various management practices was updated to align with 2017 updates and to capture the recommendations made by the council. - Because Figure ES-7 was removed (see above), subsequent figure numbers were revised accordingly. 2011 Figure ES-8 is Figure ES-7 in 2017 update. - Updated Governor and Speaker of the House to current administration.

Minor text revisions/updates
Added third paragraph to Introduction. Minor text revisions/updates
Minor text revisions/updates
Updated to current Coastal Council member numbers. Updated to current Coastal Council member cities. Minor text revisions/updates
Revised website references
Updated economic estimate of Coastal Georgia fishing industry. Updated operational status of Plant McManus Updated percentage of groundwater supplied from the Floridan aquifer system Updated population projection
Updated land cover distribution
Updated description of irrigated crops Minor text revisions/updates

- In first two paragraphs of Introduction, text was revised/updated to reflect the purpose of this document as an update to an earlier version of the Plan completed in 2011. - Added a brief description of the purpose of the Regional Water Plan update process and resulting changes to the revised management practices recommended by the Coastal Council. - Updated word choice in first paragraph (ample vs. abundant). This was a council request. - Text in third paragraph was revised/updated to reflect the purpose of this document as an update to an earlier version of the Plan completed in 2011. - Text in this section was revised/updated to reflect the purpose of this document as an update to an earlier version of the Plan completed in 2011 and to describe the similar approach to process utilized for the Plan update.
- Updated Coastal Council member numbers, including positions of alternates and Ex-Officio members in first paragraph. - Updated Coastal Council member location cities in the map showing each county in the council.
- Text in this section was revised/updated to reflect the purpose of this document as an update to an earlier version of the Plan completed in 2011. - Website links for the Memorandum of Agreement, Vision and Goals, Public Involvement Plan, and Public Outreach Technical Memorandum were removed because they were no longer valid. Please refer to the Council's website for these documents. - Updated estimated economic impact of fishing industry along Georgia's coast based on most recent readily available information (NOAA, 2018). - Revised statement regarding the status the Plant McManus power plant to indicate that the plant was recently fully decommissioned. - Updated percentage of groundwater supplied to the Coastal Planning Region from the Floridan aquifer system based on new 2015 forecasted groundwater withdrawal information.
- Updated population value to the 2015 population projection based on updated reference (Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2015). - Updated land cover distribution based on most recent available information from the University of Georgia Natural Resources Spatial Analysis Laboratory (2008) - Updated description based on the most recent readily available information in the 2016 agricultural demand assessment. - Revised/amended description of dominant economic sectors. - Updated college/university names and offerings.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 2

Section 3

Location Summary

3

Section 3.1

3

Figures 3-1 to 3-4

3

Section 3.2

3

Section 3.2.1

3

Figure 3-5

3

Table 3-1

3

Figure 3-6

3

Section 3.2.2

3

Table 3-2

3

Section 3.2.3

3

Figure 3-8

3

Section 3.3

3

Figure 3-9

4

Summary

4

Section 4

4

Table 4-1

4

Section 4.1 -

Municipal Water

Forecasts Section

4

Figure 4-1

4

Former Table 4-2

4

Section 4.1 -

Municipal

Wastewater

Forecasts Section

4

Figure 4-2

Change Minor text revisions/updates Updated water use information
Updated water use information and figures Minor text revisions/updates Text revisions/updates Updated Updated Updated Text revisions/updates
Updated Text revisions/updates
Updated Updated Impaired Water Bodies
Updated Minor text updates Minor text updates Updated

Description
- Updated year and data. - Revised word choice. - Added introductory text regarding the source of the data presented in Section 3.1 - Updated water use information to the most recent readily available information in the 2016 USGS Publication. - Removed text related to outdated references.
- Updated water use information to the most recent readily available information in the 2016 USGS Publication.
- Updated word choice and sentence structure in first paragraph. - Removed text related to outdated references. - Updated descriptions of the Surface Water Quality Resource Assessment to more accurately describe the nature of the analysis. - Figure updated with most recent assimilative capacity model. - Values updated with most recent results of the assimilative capacity assessment. - Values updated with most recent results of the assimilative capacity assessment. - Updated descriptions of the Surface Water Availability Resource Assessment to more accurately describe the nature of the analysis. - Moved the reference to Table 3-2 prior to the table instead of after. Text following Table 3-2 was deleted.
- Table was revised to align with the 2017 updates. Values presented are based on the Surface Water Availability Assessment, March 2017, EPD. - Updated descriptions of the Groundwater Availability Resource Assessment to more accurately describe the nature of the analysis. - Updated water use information to the most recent readily available information in the 2016 USGS Publication.
- This figure has been Updated to remove reference to the Upper Floridan Aquifer. See reason in "General updates completed throughout the plan". - Percentages of impaired reaches was updated. - Text was added regarding the Savannah Harbor subcategory 5R Restoration Plan that replaced EPA's TMDL. - Removed text related to outdated references.
- The figure has been updated to show the types of impairments, the surrounding text has also been updated based on the 2014 303(d) list. - The text was updated to reflect the revised forecasts. - The text was updated for 2015. - All values were updated based on the 2015 population numbers from the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget.

Text revisions/updates

- The text was added to describe updated methodology utilized during the Plan update. - The text related to former Figure 4-2 was removed.

Updated Removed
Text removal

- The figure was updated to reflect the revised municipal water forecasts.
- The table was removed as the revised methodology did not split out the specific contributions from each individual piece of legislation that reduced flush volumes of toilets for passive conservation. Because Table 4-2 was removed, subsequent table numbers were revised accordingly.
- A contribution for I/I was not explicitly added under the revised methodology but instead forecasts were based on the reported discharges. Thus the paragraph describing I/I flows was removed.

Updated

- This figure was updated to reflect the revised municipal wastewater forecasts.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 3

Section 4 4 4
4 4

Location
Section 4.2 Employment Projections Section
Section 4.2 Industrial Water Forecasts Section
Section 4.2 Industrial Wastewater Forecasts Section
Table 4-2 and Figure 4-3 Section 4.3

Change Minor text revisions/updates Minor text revisions/updates Minor text revisions/updates
Updated Text Updates

4

Table 4-3

4

Figure 4-4

4

Section 4.4

4

Table 4-4

Updated Updated Text Updates Updated

4

Former Table 4-6

Removed

4

Section 4.5

4

Figure 4-5

Minor text revisions/updates Updated

4

Figure 4-6

Updated

Description - The text related to the planning period was updated.
- The text related to the planning period was updated in the second paragraph. - Updated word choice and sentence structure in third paragraph. - The text was updated to reference the 2017 Technical Memorandums. - Updated word choice and sentence structure.
- The table and figure were updated to include 2015 data also other values remained the same.
- The text was updated to reflect the updated methodology for forecasting agricultural demands that was updated in 2016. - The text was updated based on the most recent data. - This table was updated with the revised agricultural forecasts. - Values quoted in surrounding text was also updated based on current information. - This figure was updated to reflect the revised agricultural water use forecasts. - The forecast is no longer being split between crop and non-crop values. - The text was updated to reflect the updated energy forecast that was completed in 2016 and included some updates to the methodology. - The table was updated with the revised thermoelectric water forecasts. - There is no longer a regional portion of unassigned withdrawals as the Statewide unassigned withdrawals were significantly reduced since the previous round and this was no longer a factor. - Two separate tables for the thermoelectric water forecasts are no longer needed as the regional portion of unassigned withdrawals is no longer a factor being considered following reduction of the Statewide unassigned total during the plan update. - The text was updated based on the most recent data. - This figure was updated with the revised water demand totals per sector. - The figure was converted from pie charts to a bar chart to better show the trend of increasing demands. - Values quoted in surrounding text was also updated based on current information. - This figure was updated with the revised total wastewater flows. - The figure was converted from pie charts to a bar chart to better show the trend of increasing flows. - Values quoted in surrounding text was also updated based on current information.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 4

Section 5

Location Summary

5

Section 5

Introduction

5

Section 5.1

Change Minor text revisions/updates Minor text revisions Text revisions/updates

5

Figure 5-1 and

Figure 5-2

Figures Added to replace former Figure 5-1

5

Table 5-1 and prior Updated

text

Description
- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - The text was updated to reflect the most recent data. - Updated word choice and sentence structure.
- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - First paragraph, list of counties in the modeled aquifer area was cross checked with the county demands being included as part of the groundwater availability comparison. - Second paragraph, text was added to describe and discuss Figure 5-1. - Third paragraph, text was added to describe and discuss Figure 5-2. - Removed outdated text.
- These figures were added to specifically show that projected demands are expected to exceed the permit limits in the Red Zone and Yellow Zone. -Former Figure 5-1 was removed as it was replaced with the other style of figures. - Values in the table were updated based on revised permit information and updated demand forecasts. - The text was updated as there are now less counties will a projected need to future permitted withdrawal capacity.

5

Section 5.2

5

Table 5-2, and

Figure 5-3

5

Table 5-3

5

Table 5-4

5

Section 5.3

5

Section 5.3 -

Assimilative

Capacity

Assessments

Section

5

Table 5-5

5

Table 5-6

5

Figure 5-4 and

Figure 5-5

5

Section 5.3 -

Assimilative

Capacity

Assessments

Section

Text revisions/updates
Elements added to replace former Figure 5-2 Added Updated Text revisions/updates Text revisions/updates

- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - The text was updated to reflect the most recent data. - Removed outdated text related to previous shortfall analysis. - Added text related to current analysis.
- Figure 5-3 was added to highlight the portions of the region which drain to a planning node identified as having a gap. - Table 5-2 contains a summary of the identified gaps that was previously included as part of Figure 5-2.
- This table was added to provide additional detail on the frequency of different gap durations. This information was utilized in determining the most relevant management practices for addressing the identified gaps.
- Values in the table were updated based on the updated demands and the updated potential gaps.
- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - The text was updated to reflect the most recent data.
- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - The text was updated to reflect the most recent data. - Text was added regarding the current modeling results.

Updated
Updated
Revised to replace former Figure 53 Text on Savannah Harbor WQ

- Values in the table were updated based on the updated wastewater forecasts and updated permit information. - The number of counties with projected infrastructure needs by 2050 has decreased.
- This table was updated based on the results of the current assimilative capacity resource assessment that was completed in 2016.
- These figures were reworked to provide a single view of the whole region rather than the individual snapshots provided previously.
- Text was updated to describe the current status of the Savannah Harbor subcategory 5R Restoration Plan that replaced EPA's TMDL.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 5

Section 5
5

Location
Section 5.3 - NonPoint Source Pollution Section Former Figure 5-4

5

Section 5.4 and

Table 5-7

6

Section 6.2

Change Minor text revisions/updates
Removed Added Minor text revisions/updates

6

Table 6-1

Updated

Description
- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - Text was added regarding the Resource Assessment.
- This figure was removed as revised information was not available. The core components of the figure are still included within the text and new figures. - A summary section was added to recap major findings in the section. - Table 5-7 was added to summarize the counties with specific identified issues. - Text was added regarding the impact to the management practices since 2011. - The text about the groundwater gaps were updated. - Updated word choice and sentence structure. - Text was deleted regarding management practices. - Deleted references to 7Q10.
- The Description/Definition of Action of various management practices was updated to align with 2017 updates and to capture the recommendations made by the council. - Additional updates:
- AAGS-11 was added. - ES-1 was removed. - MWWPC-1 currently only impacts Bryan County. - Added a note regarding 7Q10. - NPSF-1 - added website link. - EDU-3: Based on guidance provided by DCA and EPD, a link for Septic Public Education and Outreach on DPH's website was added. - Summary of Management Practices for Shared Resources - Text updated for Altamaha.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 6

Section 7 7

Location Introduction Table 7-1

7

Section 7.2

7

Section 7.2

7

Section 7.2

7

Table 7-2

7

Section 7.4

8

Table 8-1

Change Minor text revisions/updates Table updated with the most recent information.
Text revisions/updates
Text revisions/updates Revised various USDA NRCS funding options.

Description
- Years of the planning horizon were updated.
- Updated "For All Actions: Initial Implementation Step(s) and Associated Date(s)" and Further Action to Complete Implementation and Associated Dates" to align with the 2017 updates for multiple management practices. Removed ES-1. MWWPC-1 currently only impacts Bryan County.
- Added verbiage regarding planning level cost estimate. Neither the cost guidance prepared by EPD in April 2011 ("GAEPD Cost Guidance") nor the cost estimates have been updated therefore EPD recommended cautioning the public.
- The text regarding EPDs mission was revised.
- The Conservation Security Program (CSP) was not reauthorized in the 2008 Farm Bill and is no longer available. - The Agricultural Act of 2014 (Act) establishes the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP) and repeals the Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program (FRPP). F24ACEP combines the purposes of FRPP and the similarly repealed Grassland Reserve Program (GRP) into the new Agricultural Land Easements (ALE) that protect the agricultural use and conservation values of eligible farm and ranch land. - Wetland Reserve Program: The Agricultural Act of 2014 establishes the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP). It repeals FRPP, GRP, and WRP but does not affect the validity or terms of any FRPP, GRP, or WRP contract, agreement or easement entered into prior to the date of enactment on February 7, 2014 or any associated payments required to be made in connection with an existing FRPP, GRP, or WRP contract, agreement or easement. - Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program: The Agricultural Act of 2014 (enacted on February 7, 2014) repealed the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP). NRCS will continue to support existing active WHIP contracts entered into prior to passage of the Agricultural Act of 2014, using the rules and policy in effect at the time of contract obligations. Portions of the WHIP Statute were rolled into the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).

Management practice AAGS-11

- Table was modified to be consistent with Table 6-1.

was added and ES-1 was removed.

Text revisions/updates Text revisions/updates

- Updated word choice and sentence structure. - The text was updated to identify changes since 2011. - The Savannah Harbor was reclassified to Subcategory 5R on the 2014 305(b)/303(d) list. - In 2016, the Ag metering program was moved out of GS&WCC and into EPD.
- Added text regarding the Additional/Alternate to Present Groundwater Source(s) in Gap Areas (AAGS) , the Coastal Georgia Water & Wastewater Permitting Plan (CPP) and the Savannah Harbor subcategory 5R Restoration Plan that replaced EPA's TMDL.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 7

Section

Location

General updates completed throughout the plan

Change
Updated references to "Upper Floridan" aquifer to read "Floridan" aquifer.
Removed references to the current State Water Plan or Council webpages (instead referring to availability on the Council's website of the Water Planning website).

Description
- References to the "Upper Florida" aquifer were updated to read "Floridan," to ensure consistency with terminology used by EPD in the 2013 Announcement regarding Future Withdrawals from the Floridan Aquifer and in other documents.
- EPD is currently working to build a new Regional Water Planning website. Once the new site is up, the former site will be taken down. Web links in the Regional Water Plan document will be updated once the new website is completed.

March 2017 - DRAFT

Coastal Georgia A - 8

Printed on recycled paper