Water quality in Georgia, 2016/2017

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA 2016-2017
(2018 Integrated 305b/303d Report)
WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division
WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA 2016-2017
(2018 Integrated 305b/303d Report)
Preface
This report was prepared by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD), Department of Natural Resources, as required by Section 305(b) of Public Law 92-500 (the Clean Water Act) and as a public information document. It represents a synoptic extraction of the EPD files and, in certain cases, information has been presented in summary form from those files. The reader is therefore advised to use this condensed information with the knowledge that it is a summary document and more detailed information may be available in EPD files. This report covers a two-year period, January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2017. Comments or questions related to the content of this report are invited and should be addressed to:
Environmental Protection Division Georgia Department of Natural Resources Watershed Protection Branch 2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, SE Suite 1162 East Tower Atlanta, Georgia 30334
WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

This page is intentionally blank.
WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

CHAPTER 1
Executive Summary
Purpose This report, Water Quality in Georgia, 2016-20172016-2017, was prepared by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The DNR Coastal Resources Division (CRD) and Wildlife Resources Division (WRD), the Georgia Forestry Commission, the Georgia Environmental Finance Authority, and the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission also contributed portions of the report. In addition, water quality data was provided by a number of governmental agencies, environmental groups and universities.
This report is often referred to as the Georgia 305(b) Report as portions of the report are prepared to comply with this section of the Federal Clean Water Act. The report describes water quality conditions of navigable waters across the State. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) uses the individual State reports to develop a national water quality inventory report, which is transmitted to the Congress of the United States.
This report provides an assessment of the water quality conditions of surface and groundwater in Georgia and includes a description of the nature, extent, and causes of documented water quality problems. This assessment of water quality problem areas serves as the basis for lists required by Sections 303(d), 314, and 319 of the Clean Water Act. The report also includes a review and summary of ongoing statewide water planning efforts; wetland, estuary, and coastal public health/aquatic life issues; and water protection, groundwater, and drinking water program summaries.
In addition to complying with the Federal Clean Water Act, the major objective of this report is to provide Georgians a broad summary of information on water quality and the programs being implemented by the GAEPD and its partners to protect water resources across the State.

Watershed Protection in Georgia The GAEPD is a comprehensive environmental agency responsible for environmental protection, management, regulation, permitting, and enforcement in Georgia. The GAEPD has for many years aggressively sought most available program delegations from the USEPA in order to achieve and maintain a coordinated, integrated approach to environmental management. Today the GAEPD administers programs for planning, water pollution control, water supply and groundwater management, surface water allocation, hazardous waste management, air quality control, solid waste management, strip mining, soil erosion control, geologic survey activities, radiation control, underground storage tanks, and safe dams.
The Watershed Protection Branch of the GAEPD, in cooperation with many local, state, and federal agencies, coordinates programs to address most aspects of drinking water supply and water pollution control including: comprehensive statewide water planning; monitoring; water quality modeling to develop wasteload allocations and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs); TMDL implementation; the continuing planning process; water quality standards; local watershed assessment and watershed protection plans; nonpoint source management; erosion and sedimentation control; stormwater management; Clean Water State Revolving and Georgia Fund Loan programs; the NPDES permit and enforcement program for municipal and industrial point sources; water withdrawal and drinking water permits; water conservation; source water protection; industrial pretreatment; land application of treated wastewater; regulation of concentrated animal feedlot operations (CAFOs); and public outreach including Georgia Project Wet and Adopt-A-Stream programs.
The GAEPD has designated the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission as the lead agency for dealing with water quality problems caused by agriculture. The Georgia Forestry Commission has been designated by the GAEPD as the lead agency to deal with water quality problems due to commercial forestry operations.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

1-1

Watershed Protection Programs

Background Georgia is rich in water resources. The State has approximately 44,056 miles of perennial streams, 23,906 miles of intermittent streams, and 603 miles of ditches and canals for a total of 70,150 stream miles. The State also has 4.8 million acres of wetlands (9% tidally affected), 425,582 acres of public lakes and reservoirs, 854 square miles of estuaries, and 100 miles of coastline. This rich water heritage is often taken for granted. However, unusual events such as the flood in the summer of 1994 and drought conditions experienced throughout Georgia in 1986, 1988, 1999-2002, 2007-2008, and 2012 serve as reminders that water resources cannot be taken for granted and sound regulatory programs are necessary to protect these resources.

In 2016-2017, the GAEPD placed emphasis on comprehensive statewide water management planning, monitoring and assessment, water quality modeling and TMDLs, TMDL implementation, State revolving and Georgia Fund loan programs, NPDES permitting and enforcement, nonpoint source pollution abatement, stormwater management, erosion and sediment control and public participation projects.

Comprehensive

State-wide

Water

Management Planning In 2004 the Georgia

General Assembly passed new water planning

legislation to take the place of river basin

planning. The 2004 Comprehensive State-wide

Water Management Planning Act called for the

preparation of a comprehensive statewide water

plan and provided fundamental goals and

guiding principles for the development of the

plan. The Statewide Water Plan was completed

in 2008 and the Regional Water Councils

completed plans in 2011 and updated those

plans in 2017. This work is discussed in Chapter

2.

Watershed Projects The GAEPD is working with USEPA and South Carolina on several Savannah River projects; with the USEPA and the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on water quality issues in the Coosa River and Lake Weiss; with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) on nutrient issues in Lake Talquin; and with the FDEP and the Suwannee River Water

Management District to coordinate water protection efforts in the Suwannee River Basin. This work is discussed in Chapter 7.
Monitoring and Assessment Georgia's waters are currently designated as one of the following water use classifications: drinking water, recreation, fishing, coastal fishing, wild river, or scenic river. Specific water quality standards are assigned to support each water use classification. The quality of Georgia's waters is judged by the extent to which the waters support the uses (comply with standards set for the water use classification or designations) for which they have been designated. Water quality standards, monitoring programs, and information on assessments of Georgia's waters are discussed in Chapter 3. GAEPD's wetland monitoring program is discussed in Chapter 4 and estuary and coastal programs are discussed in Chapter 5.
Water Quality Modeling/ Wasteload Allocation/ TMDL Development The GAEPD conducted a significant amount of modeling in 2016-2017 in support of the development of wasteload allocations and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). Over the 2016-2017 period, 147 TMDLs were finalized and approved by EPA, 106 TMDLs were developed and public noticed, and 5 TMDLs were revised and public noticed. To date more than 1880 TMDLs have been developed for 303(d) listed waters in Georgia. This work is discussed in Chapter 7.
TMDL Implementation As TMDLs are developed, plans are needed to guide implementation of pollution reduction strategies. TMDLs are implemented through changes in NPDES permits to address needed point source improvements and/or implementation of best management practices to address nonpoint sources of pollution. TMDL implementation is discussed in Chapter 7.
Clean Water Revolving and Georgia Fund Loan Programs In 2016-2017 funds were obligated to communities for a variety of wastewater infrastructure and pollution prevention projects through the Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA) in the form of low-interest, SRF and Georgia Fund loans. The loan programs are discussed in Chapter 7.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

1-2

Metro District Planning The Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District (District) updated the comprehensive regional and watershed-specific plans to be implemented by local governments in the District in 2009. The EPD is charged with the enforcement of the District plans. State law prohibits the Director from approving any application by a local government in the District to issue, modify, or renew a permit, if such permit would allow an increase in the permitted water withdrawal, public water system capacity, or waste-water treatment system capacity of such local government, or any NPDES Phase I or Phase II General Stormwater permit; unless such local government is in compliance with the applicable provisions of the plan, or the Director certifies that such local government is making good faith efforts to come into compliance. This work is discussed in Chapter 7.
NPDES Permitting and Enforcement Significant resources were allocated to wastewater discharge permit reissuance activities in 2016-2017. NPDES permits were issued, modified or reissued for 98 municipal and private discharges and for 83 industrial discharges. Compliance and enforcement activities continued to receive significant attention in. The GAEPD utilizes all reasonable means to attain compliance, including technical assistance, noncompliance notification letters, conferences, consent orders, and civil penalities. Emphasis is placed on achieving compliance through cooperative action. However, compliance cannot always be achieved in a cooperative manner. The Director of the GAEPD has the authority to negotiate consent orders or issue administrative orders.
Permitting, compliance and enforcement work is discussed in Chapter 7.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations Georgia adopted rules for swine feeding operations in 1999. Rules were adopted for animal (non-swine) feeding operations in 2001. During 2002 and 2003, rules were developed and implemented for large chicken feeding operations. Revisions of those rules, designed to reflect changes in the federal regulations and recent court decisions, are planned. Work was continued in 2016-2017 to implement this program. This process is discussed in Chapter 7.

Zero Tolerance In response to a resolution adopted in 1998 by Georgia Department of Natural Resources that directed EPD to provide the "best quality of effort possible enforcing Georgia's environmental laws", a "zero tolerance" strategy was adopted for certain high growth areas of the state requiring enforcement action on any and all noncompliance issues. Significant work was conducted in 2016-2017 to implement this strategy. This process is discussed in Chapter 7.
Nonpoint Source Management Program. Nonpoint source management programs have allowed the GAEPD to place increasing emphasis on the prevention, control and abatement of nonpoint sources of pollution. The GAEPD is responsible for administering and enforcing laws to protect the waters of the State, defined to include surface and ground water and has been designated as the lead agency for implementing the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. This program combines regulatory and non-regulatory approaches, in cooperation with other State and Federal agencies, local and regional governments, State colleges and universities, businesses and industries, non-governmental organizations and individual citizens.
Georgia's nonpoint source goals and implementation strategies are delineated in the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. The Program is an inventory of the full breadth of current nonpoint source management activities (regulatory and non-regulatory) in Georgia.
The State's Nonpoint Source Management Program focuses on the comprehensive categories of nonpoint sources of pollution identified by the USEPA: Agriculture, Silviculture, Construction, Urban Runoff, Hydrologic/Habitat Modification, Land Disposal, Resource Extraction and Other Nonpoint Sources.
Under Section 319(h) of the Federal Clean Water Act, the USEPA awards a Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant to the GAEPD to fund eligible projects, which support the implementation of the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. Section 319(h) Grant funds for the prevention, control and/or

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

1-3

abatement of nonpoint sources of pollution of are made available annually to public agencies in Georgia. In FY15-FY17, Georgia's Section 319(h) grant project funded 30 new projects for over $6.5 million. The nonpoint source programs are described in Chapter 7.
Stormwater Management The GAEPD developed its Phase 1 Storm Water Permitting Strategy in February 1991. In 1994-1995 a total of 58 NPDES permits were issued to large and medium municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). The 45 NPDES permits covering the Atlanta metro area were reissued in 1999, 2004, and 2009, and 2014. The 12 NPDES permits for medium MS4s were reissued in 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2014. EPD expects to reissue the permits in 2019.
Georgia's Phase II Storm Water Permitting Strategy was approved by USEPA in May 2000, and Phase II designation criteria was developed by GAEPD in July 2002 and 2013, corresponding to the 2000 and 2010 US Census population figures and urban area mapping. In December 2017 GAEPD reissued the NPDES General Permit for Phase II MS4s. This permit currently regulates 107 municipalities. In 2009, a Phase II MS4 General NPDES Permit was issued to seven Department of Defense (DOD) facilities. Two of the bases closed in 2011, reducing the number of permitted DOD facilities to five. The NPDES Permit for these facilities was reissued in 2014. In 2016, Fort Gillem Enclave was designated and obtained coverage under the DOD permit. In 2012, GAEPD issued a Phase II MS4 General Stormwater Permit to the Georgia Department of Transportation, which is applicable to post-construction runoff in jurisdictions with MS4 permits EPD reissued this permit in 2017.
In 1993, a general NPDES permit for storm water associated with industrial activity was issued. This permit was most recently reissued in 2017, with approximately 2,362 facilities retaining coverage. Stormwater management is discussed in Chapter 7.
Erosion and Sediment Control The Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act was signed into law in 1975, and has been amended several times. The intent of the Act was to establish a comprehensive and statewide soil, erosion and sedimentation control to protect and conserve

air, land and water resources through the adoption and implementation of local ordinances and programs which regulate certain land disturbing activities. EPD implements the program where there is no local ordinance. Erosion and sediment control work is discussed in Chapter 7.
Major Issues and Challenges Georgia is one of the fastest growing states in the nation. Between 2000 and 2010, Georgia gained 1.5 million new residents, ranking 4th nationally. The increasing population places considerable demands on Georgia's ground and surface water resources in terms of water supply, water quality, and assimilative capacity.
In 2004 the Georgia General Assembly passed the "Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Planning Act", O.C.G.A. 12-5522, which called for the development of a statewide water management plan. Work was completed on the Statewide Water Plan and the plan was approved by the General Assembly and Governor Perdue in February 2008. Regional Water Councils and the Metro District were charged with the responsibility of developing water plans to provide a roadmap for sustainable use of Georgia's water resources. The Councils submitted initial recommended plans to the GAEPD in May 2011. The plans were publicly noticed and comments received were thoroughly reviewed. Appropriate revisions were made to the initial plans and final recommended regional water plans were submitted to the GAEPD in September 2011. On November 15, 2011, by action of Director Barnes, the GAEPD officially adopted all ten Regional Water Plans.
The regional water plans are not themselves an end. The plans present solutions identified by a cross-section of regional leaders, drawing on regional knowledge and priorities. The plans are based on consistent, statewide forecasts of needs and reflect the best available information on the capacities of Georgia's waters. The tools used to assess the capacities have been tested and refined, and will be further refined as the information for planning and management is improved. The process and results of regional planning, taken together, provide solid footing for plan implementation and the five-year review and revision required by the State Water Plan. Water users, water providers, local

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

1-4

governments, state agencies, and elected leaders all have an important role in actions to ensure that Georgia's waters are sustainably managed to support the state's economy, protect public health and natural systems, and enhance the quality of life for all citizens.
Nonpoint Source Pollution The pollution impact on Georgia streams has radically shifted over the last several decades. Streams are no longer dominated by untreated or partially treated sewage discharges which resulted in little or no oxygen and little or no aquatic life. The sewage is now treated, oxygen levels have returned and fish have followed. However, another source of pollution is now affecting Georgia streams. That source is referred to as nonpoint and consists of mud, litter, bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, metals, oils, detergents and a variety of other pollutants being washed into rivers and lakes by stormwater. Even stormwater runoff itself, if rate and volume is unmitigated, can be extremely detrimental to aquatic habitat and hydrologic systems. Nonpoint source pollution, although somewhat less dramatic than raw sewage, must be reduced and controlled to fully protect Georgia's streams. Structural and nonstructural techniques such as green infrastructure, pollution prevention and best management practices must be significantly expanded to minimize nonpoint source pollution. These include both watershed protection through planning, zoning, buffer zones, and appropriate building densities as well as increased use of stormwater structural practices, low impact development, street cleaning and perhaps eventual limitations on pesticide and fertilizer usage.
Toxic Substances Another issue of importance, the reduction of toxic substances in rivers, lakes, sediment and fish tissue. This is extremely important in protecting both human health and aquatic life. The sources are widespread. The most effective method to reduce releases of toxic substances into rivers is pollution prevention, which consists primarily of eliminating or reducing the use of toxic materials or at least reducing the exposure of toxic materials to drinking water, wastewater and stormwater. It is very expensive and difficult to reduce low concentrations of toxic substances in wastewaters by treatment technologies. It is virtually impossible to treat large quantities of stormwater and reduce toxic substances.

Therefore, toxic substances must be controlled at the source.
Nutrients Nutrients serve a very important role in our environment. They provide the essential building blocks necessary for growth and development of healthy aquatic ecosystems. However, if not properly managed, nutrients in excessive amounts can have detrimental effects on human health and the environment, creating such water quality problems as excessive growth of macrophytes and phytoplankton, harmful algal blooms, dissolved oxygen depletion, and an imbalance of flora and fauna. In Georgia, site specific nutrient criteria have been adopted for several major lakes and their tributaries. Some of these lakes are currently listed for chlorophyll a, which is the primary biological indicator in lakes for nutrient overenrichment. TMDLs, based on watershed modeling, have been completed or are in development to address the nutrient issues for these lakes. Currently, the GAEPD is in the process of collecting the necessary data and information for use in developing nutrient standards for rivers, streams and other waterbodies in Georgia. Determining the relationship of nutrient levels and biological response is necessary in order to develop appropriate nutrient criteria.
Public Involvement It is clear that local governments and industries, even with wellfunded efforts, cannot fully address the challenges of toxic substances and nonpoint source pollution control. Citizens must individually and collectively be part of the solution to these challenges. The main focus is to achieve full public acceptance of the fact that what we do on the land has a direct impact on water quality. Adding more pavement and other impervious surfaces, littering, driving cars which drip oils and antifreeze, applying fertilizers and other activities and behaviors all contribute to toxic and nonpoint source pollution. If streams and lakes are to be pollutant free, then some of the everyday human practices must be modified. The GAEPD will be emphasizing public involvement; not only in decision-making but also in direct programs of stream improvement. The first steps are education and adopt-a-stream programs.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

1-5

CHAPTER 2
Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Planning
Legislation
Georgia's future relies on the protection and sustainable management of the state's water resources. In 2004, the Georgia General Assembly passed the "Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Planning Act", O.C.G.A. 125-522, which called for the development of a statewide water management plan. The legislation assigned the responsibility for developing the draft plan to the Georgia Environmental Protection (GAEPD) and established a planning oversight committee, the Georgia Water Council, composed of legislators, legislative appointees, and state agency heads with water related responsibilities. The legislation called for the GAEPD to submit a final draft plan no later than the first day of the regular session of the 2008 General Assembly.
State Water Plan Development
The process used to develop the draft statewide water plan included meaningful stakeholder participation. A Statewide Advisory Committee (SAC) was convened to provide perspectives on water policy options. Technical Advisory Committees (TACs) provided early input when needed by answering specific technical questions needed to inform water policy options. Seven Basin Advisory Committees (BACs) were appointed to provide a regional perspective on proposed policy options and management practices.
The initial draft of the statewide water plan, "Georgia's Water Resources: A Blueprint for The Future" was submitted to the Water Council by the GAEPD on June 28, 2007. The Water Council approved the release of the initial draft and established a portal for

public input at its website. The Water Council discussed and approved a number of revisions to the initial draft plan and a second draft of the plan was prepared and noticed for public input on September 13, 2007.
The Water Council hosted thirteen public meetings across Georgia in November 2007 and received significant public comment on the second draft plan. The input was thoroughly reviewed and each change approved by the Water Council was made in the draft plan. A third draft of the plan was completed and noticed for public comment on December 5, 2007. The Water Council hosted six public meetings to discuss the revised water plan. Public input was reviewed and changes approved by the Water Council were made and a final draft of the plan was approved by the Water Council. This proposed plan, "Georgia Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Plan", was transmitted to the Georgia General Assembly for consideration on January 14, 2008, the first day of the 2008 regular session.
The Georgia General Assembly debated the provisions of the proposed water plan and both chambers approved the plan. Governor Perdue signed HR 1022, the Statewide Water Management Plan, on February 6, 2008. A copy of the plan is available at https://waterplanning.georgia.gov/.
State Water Plan Implementation
Introduction. The State Water Plan included several innovative concepts. One concept was the idea of appointing regional water planning councils whose responsibility would be to develop regional water plans. A second concept was the development of regional forecasts of water supply and wastewater demands based on forecasts of population and employment for a region. A third concept was the development of water resource assessments to provide information to each Council on available water supply and assimilative capacity. Each of these concepts is discussed below.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

2-1

Regional Water Planning Councils. The regional water planning councils (Councils) represent regions in Georgia as designated in the State Water Plan and adjusted by approved petition. Each Council includes individuals appointed by the Governor, Lt. Governor, and Speaker of the House. The Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District (Metro District), a separate water planning entity created by the legislature in 2001, participated fully in the statewide planning process. A map of the water planning regions is shown below.
The role of each Water Council is to prepare a plan to manage available water resources within its region. Each plan was based on resource assessments and estimates of current and future water needs. More detailed information on each regional water planning council can be found athttps://waterplanning.georgia.gov/. Forecasts of Water and Wastewater Demands. Understanding the capacities of water resources to meet the demands placed on them is critical to managing water for the future. In order for the Councils to produce regional water plans, forecasts of water and wastewater needs were needed. Long-range population and employment projections were prepared in order to forecast demand for municipal and industrial

water and wastewater. Population and employment projections were provided to each water council by the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget (OPB). Local governments and Councils were provided an opportunity to comment on the forecasts and the methodologies, assumptions, and data sources used to produce the projections. This input was considered prior to the use of the projections in the water demand planning process. Using the vetted population and employment forecasts, projections of water and wastewater demand were prepared to support regional water planning, providing this information on a consistent, statewide basis for the first time. Water and wastewater demand forecasts were developed for the following water use sectors: Municipal, Industrial, Agricultural, and Energy. Each Council received draft forecasts developed in10 year increments through 2050 for consideration and use in the planning process. More detailed information on the population and employment projections and the water and wastewater demand forecasts can be found athttps://waterplanning.georgia.gov/.
Water Resource Assessments. Water resource assessments were also one of the building blocks for regional water planning. The assessments included the compilation and analysis of data and modeling to evaluate the capacity of water resources to meet current and future demands for water supply and wastewater discharge within thresholds selected to indicate the potential for local or regional impacts.
The GAEPD, with the assistance of other state agencies, the University System of Georgia and other research institutions, the U.S. Geological Survey and contractors conducted water resource assessments to determine Surface Water Availability, Groundwater Availability, and Surface Water Quality (Assimilative Capacity). The resource assessment results for current and future conditions were provided to each regional water planning council for their consideration and use in the planning process.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

2-2

More detailed information on the water resource assessments can be found athttps://waterplanning.georgia.gov/.
Regional Water Plan Development
The Councils and the Metro District developed regional water plans that provide a roadmap for sustainable use of Georgia's water resources. The Councils' initials Regional Water Plans were publicly noticed and revised in 2011, and the final recommended regional water plans were adopted by GAEPD in November 2011. Beginning in late 2015, the Councils considered updates to water and wastewater demand forecasts for the Municipal, Agricultural and Energy sectors, as well as updated resource assessment information. Based on that review, the Councils updated their Regional Water Plans, which were adopted by GAEPD in July 2017.
The regional water plans represent solutions identified by a cross-section of regional leaders, drawing on regional knowledge and priorities. The plans are based on consistent, statewide forecasts of needs and reflected the best available information on the capacities of Georgia's water resources. The tools used to assess the capacities were tested and refined, and will be further refined as the information for planning and management continues to improve. The process and results of regional planning, taken together, provide a solid footing for plan implementation and future plan updates. The full plans can be reviewed athttps://waterplanning.georgia.gov/.
Regional Water Plan Implementation
Local governments, utilities, industries, and other water users in each region help implement the plans, and the plans are used to guide state agency decisions on water permits and loans for water-related projects. Contractors support the regional water planning councils in assessing implementation conducted in their regions, and reports were completed in June 2014

regarding the status of plan implementation. GAEPD has also established a regional water plan seed grant program to administer funds each year to support implementation projects in the regions.
During the ongoing planning process, the State continues to make investments in water quality data collection and the development of modeling tools to extend and improve the information and tools used in water planning and management.
This work will continue to pay off over time, advancing the ability to manage Georgia's water resources in a sustainable manner to support the state's economy, to protect public health and natural systems, and to enhance the quality of life for all citizens (O.C.G.A. 12-5-522(a)).
.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

2-3

CHAPTER 3
Water Quality Monitoring And Assessment
Background
Water Resources Atlas The river miles and lake acreage estimates are based on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1:100,000 Digital Line Graph (DLG), which provides a national database of hydrologic traces. The DLG in coordination with the USEPA River Reach File provides a consistent computerized methodology for summing river miles and lake acreage. The 1:100,000 scale map series is the most detailed scale available nationally in digital form and includes 75 to 90 percent of the hydrologic features on the USGS 1:24,000 scale topographic map series. Included in river mile estimates are perennial streams (streams that flow all year), intermittent streams (streams that stop flowing during dry weather), and ditches and canals (waterways constructed by man).
The estimates for Georgia are 44,056 miles of perennial streams, 23,906 miles of intermittent streams, and 603 miles of ditches and canals for a total of 70,150 geological stream miles. The estimates for the number of lakes in Georgia are 11,813 with a total acreage of 425,382. This information is summarized in Table 3-1.
Georgia has 14 major river basins. These are the Altamaha, Chattahoochee, Coosa, Flint, Ochlockonee, Ocmulgee, Oconee, Ogeechee, St. Marys, Satilla, Savannah, Suwannee, Tallapoosa, and the Tennessee. The rivers in Georgia provide the water needed by aquatic life, animals and humans to sustain life. Water also provides significant recreational opportunities, is used for industrial purposes, drives turbines to provide electricity, and assimilates our wastes.
Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards The Board of Natural Resources is authorized through the Georgia Water Quality Control Act to establish water use

classifications and water quality standards for the waters of the State.

For each water use classification, water quality standards or criteria have been developed, which establish the framework used by the Environmental Protection Division to make water use regulatory decisions. All of Georgia's waters are currently classified as fishing, recreation, drinking water, wild river, scenic river, or coastal fishing. Table 3-2 provides a summary of water use classifications and criteria for each use. Georgia's rules and regulations protect all waters for the use of primary contact recreation by having a fecal coliform bacteria standard of a geometric mean of 200 per 100 ml for all waters with the use designations of fishing or drinking water to apply during the months of May - October (the recreational season).

TABLE 3-1. WATER RESOURCES ATLAS

State Population (2016 Estimate)

10,097,340

State Surface Area

57,906 sq.mi.

Number of Major River Basins

14

Number of Perennial River Miles

44,056 miles

Number of Intermittent River Miles

23,906 miles

Number of Ditches and Canals

603 miles

Total River Miles

70,150 miles

Number of Lakes Over 500 Acres

48

Acres of Lakes Over 500 Acres

265,365 acres

Number of Lakes Under 500 Acres

11,765

Acres of Lakes Under 500 Acres

160,017 acres

Total Number of Lakes & Reservoirs, Ponds

11,813

Total Acreage of Lakes, Reservoirs, Ponds 425,382 acres

Square Miles of Estuaries

854 sq.mi.

Miles of Coastline

100

Acres of Freshwater Wetlands

4,500,000 acres

Acres of Tidal Wetlands

384,000 acres

Georgia has also adopted 31 numeric standards for protection of aquatic life and 92 numeric standards for the protection of human health. Table 3-3 provides a summary of toxic substance standards that apply to all waters in Georgia.
Georgia has six large publicly owned lakes that have specific water quality standards. These lakes are West Point, Jackson, Walter F. George, Lanier, Allatoona, and Carter's. Standards were adopted for chlorophyll-a,

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-1

TABLE 3-2. WATER USE CLASSIFICATIONS AND INSTREAM WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR EACH USE

Bacteria

Dissolved Oxygen1

pH

(other than trout

streams),2

Temperature (other than trout
streams)2

Use Classification Drinking Water requiring treatment Recreation
Coastal Fishing4
Fishing Wild River

30-Day Geometric Mean3 (no./100 mL) 1,000 fecal coliform (Nov-April) 200 fecal coliform (May-Oct) 126 E coli (Freshwater) 35 Enterococci (Coastal)
1,000 fecal coliform (Nov-Apr) 200 fecal coliform (May-Oct)
1,000 fecal coliform (Nov-April) 200 fecal coliform (May-Oct)

Maximum (no./100mL)
4,000 fecal coliform
(Nov-April) 410 E coli STV (Freshwater) 130 Entercocci STV (Coastal)
4,000 fecal coliform (Nov-Apr)
4,000 fecal coliform
(Nov-April)

Daily Average (mg/L)
5.0

Minimum (mg/L)
4.0

5.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

If it is determined that the "natural condition" in the waterbody is less than the values stated above, then the criteria will revert to the "natural condition" and the water quality standard will allow for a 0.1 mg/L deficit from the "natural" dissolved oxygen value. Up to a 10% deficit will be allowed if it is demonstrated that resident aquatic species shall not be adversely affected.

5.0

4.0

No alteration of natural water quality

Std. Units 6.0-8.5 6.0-8.5
6.0-8.5
6.0-8.5

Maximum Maximum Rise (F) (F)

5

90

5

90

5

90

5

90

Scenic River

No alteration of natural water quality

1The dissolved oxygen criteria as specified in individual water use classifications shall be applicable at a depth of one meter below the water surface; in those instances where depth is less than two meters, the dissolved oxygen criterion shall be applied at a mid-depth. On a case specific basis, alternative depths may be specified. 2Standards for Trout Streams for dissolved oxygen are a daily average of 6.0 mg/L and a minimum of 5.0 mg/L. No temperature alteration
is allowed in Primary Trout Streams and a temperature change of 2F is allowed in Secondary Trout Streams. 3Geometric means should be "based on at least four samples collected from a given sampling site over a 30-day period at Intervals not less than 24 hours." The geometric mean of a series of N terms is the Nth root of their product. Example: the geometric mean of 2 and 18 is the square root of 36. 4Standards are same as fishing with the exception of dissolved oxygen, which is site specific.

pH, total nitrogen, phosphorus, fecal coliform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, and temperature. Standards for major tributary phosphorus loading were also established. The standards for the six lakes are summarized in Table 3-4.
Water Quality Monitoring Goals The goal of the watershed protection program in Georgia is to effectively manage, regulate, and allocate the water resources of Georgia. In order to

achieve this goal, it is necessary to monitor the

water resources of the State to establish

baseline and trend data, document existing

conditions, study impacts of specific

discharges, determine improvements resulting

from upgraded water pollution control plants

and other restoration activities, support

enforcement actions, establish wasteload

allocations

for

new

and

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-2

TABLE 3-3. GEORGIA INSTREAM WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR ALL WATERS: TOXIC SUBSTANCES
(Excerpt from Georgia's Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control Chapter 391-3-6-.03 - Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards)

(i) Instream concentrations of the following chemical constituents which are considered to be other toxic pollutants of concern in the State of Georgia shall not exceed the criteria indicated below under 7-day, 10-year minimum flow (7Q10) or higher stream flow conditions except within established mixing zones:

1. 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) 2. Methoxychlor 3. 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy propionic acid (TP Silvex)

70 g/L 0.03 g/L* 50 g/L

(ii) Instream concentrations of the following chemical constituents listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

as toxic priority pollutants pursuant to Section 307(a)(1) of the Federal Clean Water Act (as amended) shall not

exceed the acute criteria indicated below under 1-day, 10-year minimum flow (1Q10) or higher stream flow

conditions and shall not exceed the chronic criteria indicated below under 7-day, 10-year minimum flow (7Q10) or

higher stream flow conditions except within established mixing zones or in accordance with site specific effluent

limitations developed in accordance with procedures presented in 391-3-6-.06. Unless otherwise specified, the

criteria below are listed in their total recoverable form. Because most of the numeric criteria for the metals below

are listed as the dissolved form, total recoverable concentrations of metals that are measured instream will need to

be translated to the dissolved form in order to compare the instream data with the numeric criteria. This translation

will be performed using guidance found in "Guidance Document of Dynamic Modeling and Translators August

1993" found in Appendix J of EPA's Water Quality Standards Handbook: Second Edition, EPA-823-B-94-005a or

by using other appropriate guidance from EPA.

Acute

Chronic

1. Arsenic (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

340 g/L 1 69 g/L 1

150 g/L 1 36 g/L 1

2. Cadmium (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

1.0 g/L 1, 3 40 g/L 1

0.15 g/L 1, 3 8.8 g/L 1

3. Chromium III (a) Freshwater

320 g/L 1,3

42 g/L 1,3

(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

--

--

4. Chromium VI (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

16 g/L 1 1,100 g/L 1

11 g/L 1 50 g/L 1

5. Copper (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

7.0 g/L 1,2*,3 4.8 g/L 1,2

5.0 g/L 1,2*,3 3.1 g/L 1,2

6. Lead (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

30 g/L 1,3 210 g/L 1

1.2 g/L 1,2*,3 8.1 g/L 1

7. Mercury (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

1.4 g/L 1.8 g/L

0.012 g/L 2 0.025 g/L 2

8. Nickel (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

260 g/L 1,3 74 g/L 1

29 g/L 1,3 8.2 g/L 1

9. Selenium

(a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 10. Silver

-290 g/L 1 -- 4

5.0 g/L 71 g/L 1 -- 4

11. Zinc (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

65 g/L 1,3 90 g/L 1

65 g/L 1,3 81 g/L 1

12. Lindane [Hexachlorocyclohexane (g-BHC-Gamma)]

(a) Freshwater

0.95 g/L

(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters

0.16 g/L

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-3

1 The in-stream criterion is expressed in terms of the dissolved fraction in the water column. Conversion factors used to calculate dissolved criteria are found in the EPA document National Recommended Water Quality Criteria EPA 2006. 2 The in-stream criterion is lower than the EPD laboratory detection limits (A "*" indicates that the criterion may be higher than or lower than EPD laboratory detection limits depending upon the hardness of the water). 3 The aquatic life criteria for these metals are expressed as a function of total hardness (mg/L) in a water body. Values in the table above assume a hardness of 50 mg/L CaCO3. For other hardness values, the following equations from the EPA document National Recommended Water Quality Criteria EPA 2006 should be used.
Cadmium acute criteria = (e ( 1.0166[ln(hardness)] -3.924) )(1.136672-[(ln hardness)(0.041838)] g/L chronic criteria = (e ( 0.7409[ln(hardness)] -4.719) )(1.101672-[(ln hardness)(0.041838)] g/L
Chromium III acute criteria = (e (0.8190[ln(hardness)] + 3.7256) (0.316) g/L chronic criteria = (e (0.8190[ln(hardness)] + 0.6848) )(0.860) g/L
Copper acute criteria = (e (0.9422[ln(hardness)] - 1.700) )(0.96) g/L chronic criteria = (e (0.8545[ln(hardness)] - 1.702) )(0.96) g/L
Site-specific Copper criteria developed using the biotic ligand model (BLM):
Buffalo Creek (Richards Lake Dam to confluence with Little Tallapoosa River):

Acute criteria

Chronic criteria

Lead acute criteria = (e (1.273[ln(hardness) - 1.460) )(1.46203 - [(ln hardness)(0.145712)]) g/L chronic criteria = (e (1.273[ln(hardness) - 4.705) )(1.46203 - [(ln hardness)(0.145712)]) g/L

Nickel acute criteria = (e (0.8460[ln(hardness)] + 2.255) )(.998) g/L chronic criteria = (e (0.8460[ln(hardness)] + 0.0584) )(.997) g/L

Zinc acute criteria = (e (0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.884) )(0.978) g/L chronic criteria = (e (0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.884) )(0.986) g/L
4 This pollutant is addressed in 391-3-6-.06.

(iii) Instream concentrations of the following chemical constituents listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as toxic priority pollutants pursuant to Section 307(a)(1) of the Federal Clean Water Act (as amended) shall not exceed criteria indicated below under 7-day, 10-year minimum flow (7Q10) or higher stream flow conditions except within established mixing zones or in accordance with site specific effluent limitations developed in accordance with procedures presented in 391-3-6-.06.

1. Chlordane (CAS RN1 57749) (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters
2. Cyanide (CAS RN1 57125) (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters
3. Dieldrin (CAS RN1 60571) (a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters
4. 4,4'-DDT (CAS RN1 50293) 5. a-Endosulfan (CAS RN1 959988)
(a) Freshwater (b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 6. b-Endosulfan (CAS RN1 33213659) (a) Freshwater

0.0043 g/L* 0.004 g/L*
5.2 g/L* 1.0 g/L*
0.056 g/L* 0.0019 g/L* 0.001 g/L*
0.056 g/L* 0.0087 g/L*
0.056 g/L*

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-4

(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 7. Endrin (CAS RN1 72208)
(a) Freshwater
(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 8. Heptachlor (CAS RN1 76448)
(a) Freshwater
(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 9. Heptachlor Epoxide (CAS RN1 1024573)
(a) Freshwater
(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 10 Pentachlorophenol (CAS RN1 87865)
(a) Freshwater2
(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 11. PCBs
(a) Freshwater
(b) Coastal and Marine Estuarine Waters 12. Phenol (CAS RN1 108952) 13. Toxaphene (CAS RN1 8001352)

0.0087 g/L*
0.036 g/L* 0.0023 g/L*
0.0038 g/L* 0.0036 g/L*
0.0038 g/L* 0.0036 g/L*
15 g/L*2 7.9 g/L*
0.014 g/L* 0.03 g/L* 300 g/L 0.0002 g/L*

1"CAS RN" or the Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) Registry Number is a unique numerical identifier assigned to each chemical and some chemical mixtures. 2The instream freshwater criterion for pentachlorophenol is a function of pH, determined by the formula (e ). (1.005(pH)-5.134) At
a pH equal to 7.8 standard units the criterion is 15 g/L. *The in-stream criterion is lower than the EPD laboratory detection limits.

(iv) Instream concentrations of the following chemical constituents listed by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency as toxic priority pollutants pursuant to Section 307(a)(1) of the Federal Clean Water Act (as amended) shall not exceed criteria indicated below under annual average or higher stream flow conditions:

1. Acenaphthene (CAS RN1 83329) 2. Acenaphthylene (CAS RN1 208968) 3. Acrolein (CAS RN1 107028) 4. Acrylonitrile (CAS RN1 107131) 5. Aldrin (CAS RN1 309002) 6. Anthracene (CAS RN1 120127)
7. Antimony
8. Arsenic (Total)
(a) Drinking Water Supplies
(b) All Other Classifications 9. Benzidine (CAS RN1 92875) 10. Benzo(a)Anthracene (CAS RN1 56553) 11. Benzo(a)Pyrene (CAS RN1 ) 12. 3,4-Benzofluoranthene (CAS RN1 205992) 13. Benzene (CAS RN1 71432) 14. Benzo(ghi)Perylene (CAS RN1 191242) 15. Benzo(k)Fluoranthene (CAS RN1 207089)
16. Beryllium 17. a-BHC-Alpha (CAS RN1 319846) 18. b-BHC-Beta (CAS RN1 319857) 19. Bis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether (CAS RN1 111444) 20. Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)Ether (CAS RN1 108601) 21. Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)Phthalate (CAS RN1 117817) 22. Bromoform (Tribromomethane) (CAS RN1 75252) 23. Butylbenzyl Phthalate (CAS RN1 85687) 24. Carbon Tetrachloride (CAS RN1 56235) 25. Chlorobenzene (CAS RN1 108907) 26. Chlorodibromomethane (CAS RN1 124481) 27. 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether (CAS RN1 110758) 28. Chlordane (CAS RN1 57749) 29. Chloroform (Trichloromethane) (CAS RN1 67663) 30. 2-Chloronaphthalene (CAS RN1 91587) 31. 2-Chlorophenol (CAS RN1 95578) 32. Chrysene (CAS RN1 218019) 33. Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene (CAS RN1 53703) 34. Dichlorobromomethane (CAS RN1 75274)

990 g/L ** 9.3 g/L 0.25 g/L 0.000050 g/L 40000 g/L 640 g/L
10 g/L 50 g/L 0.0002 g/L 0.018 g/L 0.018 g/L 0.018 g/L 51 g/L ** 0.018 g/L ** 0.0049 g/L 0.017 g/L 0.53 g/L 65000 g/L 2.2 g/L 140 g/L 1900 g/L 1.6 g/L 1600 g/L 13 g/L ** 0.00081 g/L 470 g/L 1600 g/L 150 g/L 0.018 g/L 0.018 g/L 17 g/L

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-5

35. 1,2-Dichloroethane (CAS RN1 107062)

36. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (CAS RN1 75354)

37 1,2 Dichloropropane (CAS RN1 78875)

38. 1,3-Dichloropropylene (CAS RN1 542756)

39. 2,4-Dichlorophenol (CAS RN1 120832)

40. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene (CAS RN1 95501)

41. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene (CAS RN1 541731)

42. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (CAS RN1 106467)

43. 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine (CAS RN1 )

44. 4,4'-DDT (CAS RN1 50293)

45. 4,4'-DDD (CAS RN1 72548)

46. 4,4'-DDE (CAS RN1 72559)

47. Dieldrin (CAS RN1 60571)

48. Diethyl Phthalate (CAS RN1 84662)

49. Dimethyl Phthalate(CAS RN1 131113)

50. 2,4-Dimethylphenol (CAS RN1 105679)

51. 2,4-Dinitrophenol (CAS RN1 51285)

52. Di-n-Butyl Phthalate (CAS RN1 84742)

53. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (CAS RN1 121142)

54. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (CAS RN1 122667)

55. Endrin (CAS RN1 72208)

56. Endrin Aldehyde (CAS RN1 7421934)

57. alpha Endosulfan (CAS RN1 959988)

58. beta Endosulfan (CAS RN1 33213659)

59. Endosulfan Sulfate (CAS RN1 1031078)

60. Ethylbenzene (CAS RN1 100414)

61. Fluoranthene (CAS RN1 206440)

62. Fluorene (CAS RN1 86737)

63. Heptachlor (CAS RN1 76448)

64. Heptachlor Epoxide (CAS RN1 1024573)

65. Hexachlorobenzene (CAS RN1 118741)

66. Hexachlorobutadiene (CAS RN1 87683)

67. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene (CAS RN1 77474)

68. Hexachloroethane (CAS RN1 67721)

69. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Pyrene (CAS RN1 193395)

70. Isophorone (CAS RN1 78591)

71.

Lindane [Hexachlorocyclohexane (g-BHC-Gamma)](CAS RN1 58899)

72. Methyl Bromide (Bromomethane) (CAS RN1 74839)

73. Methyl Chloride (Chloromethane) (CAS RN1 74873)

74. Methylene Chloride (CAS RN1 75092)

75. 2-Methyl-4,6-Dinitrophenol (CAS RN1 534521)

76. 3-Methyl-4-Chlorophenol (CAS RN1 59507)

77. Nitrobenzene (CAS RN1 98953)

78. N-Nitrosodimethylamine (CAS RN1 62759)

79. N-Nitrosodi-n-Propylamine (CAS RN1 621647)

80. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine (CAS RN1 86306)

81. PCBs 82. Pentachlorophenol (CAS RN1 87865) 83. Phenanthrene (CAS RN1 85018) 84. Phenol (CAS RN1 108952) 85. Pyrene (CAS RN1 129000) 86. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CAS RN1 79345) 87. Tetrachloroethylene (CAS RN1 127184)

88. Thallium 89. Toluene (CAS RN1 108883) 90. Toxaphene (CAS RN1 8001352) 91. 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene (CAS RN1 156605) 92. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (CAS RN1 79005) 93. Trichloroethylene (CAS RN1 79016) 94. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (CAS RN1 88062) 95. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (CAS RN1 120821) 96. Vinyl Chloride (CAS RN1 75014)

37 g/L 7100 g/L 15 g/L 21 g/L 290 g/L 1300 g/L 960 g/L 190 g/L 0.028 g/L 0.00022 g/L 0.00031 g/L 0.00022 g/L 0.000054 g/L 44000 g/L 1100000 g/L 850 g/L 5300 g/L 4500 g/L 3.4 g/L 0.20 g/L 0.060 g/L 0.30 g/L 89 g/L 89 g/L 89 g/L 2100 g/L 140 g/L 5300 g/L 0.000079 g/L 0.000039 g/L 0.00029 g/L 18 g/L 1100 g/L 3.3 g/L 0.018 g/L 960 g/L 1.8 g/L 1500 g/L ** 590 g/L 280 g/L ** 690 g/L 3.0 g/L 0.51 g/L 6.0 g/L 0.000064 g/L 3.0 g/L ** 857000 g/L 4000 g/L 4.0 g/L 3.3 g/L 0.47 g/L 5980 g/L 0.00028 g/L 10000 g/L 16 g/L 30 g/L 2.4 g/L 70 g/L 2.4 g/L

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-6

1"CAS RN" or the Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) Registry Number is a unique numerical identifier assigned to each chemical and some chemical mixtures. **These pollutants are addressed in 391-3-6-.06.

(v) Site specific criteria for the following chemical constituents will be developed on an as-needed basis through toxic pollutant monitoring efforts at new or existing discharges that are suspected to be a source of the pollutant at levels sufficient to interfere with designated uses:

1.

Asbestos

(vi)

instream concentrations of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) must not exceed 0.0000000051 g/L

under long-term average stream flow conditions.

(vii)

Mercury: For the protection of human health, total mercury concentrations bioaccumulating in a waterbody, in a

representative population of fish, shellfish and/or other seafood representing different trophic levels, shall not

exceed a total mercury concentration in edible tissues of 0.3 mg/kg wet weight. This standard is in accord with

the USEPA Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury, (January 2001, EPA-

823-R-01-001), and because nearly 100% of the mercury in fish tissue is methylmercury, adoption of the

standard as total mercury is an additional conservative measure. The representative fish tissue total mercury

concentration for a waterbody is determined by calculating a Trophic-Weighted Residue Value, as described by

the Georgia EPD Protocol (October 19, 2001).

(f) Applicable State and Federal requirements and regulations for the discharge of radioactive substances shall be met at all times.

TABLE 3-4. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR MAJOR LAKES

(17) Specific Criteria for Lakes and Major Lake Tributaries. In addition to the general criteria, the following lake specific criteria are deemed necessary and shall be required for the specific water usage as shown:

(a) West Point Lake: Those waters impounded by West Point Dam and downstream of U.S. 27 at Franklin. (i) Chlorophyll a: For the months of April through October, the average of monthly photic zone composite samples shall not
exceed the chlorophyll a concentrations at the locations listed below more than once in a five-year period.

1. Upstream from the Dam in the Forebay

22 g/L

2. LaGrange Water Intake

24 g/L

(ii) pH: Within the range of 6.0 - 9.5.

(iii) Total Nitrogen: Not to exceed 4.0 mg/L as Nitrogen in the photic zone.

(iv) Total Phosphorus: Total lake loading shall not exceed 2.4 pounds per acre-foot of lake volume per year.

(v) Bacteria:

1. U.S. 27 at Franklin to New River: Fecal coliform bacteria shall not exceed the Fishing criterion as presented in

391-3-6-.03(6)(c)(iii).

2. New River to West Point Dam: E. coli shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-

.03(6)(b)(i).

(vi) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of 5.0 mg/L and no less than 4.0 mg/L at all times at the depth specified in 391-3-6-

.03(5)(f).

(vii) Temperature: Not to exceed 90F. At no time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be increased more than 5F

above intake temperature.

(viii) Major Lake Tributaries: For the following tributaries, the annual total phosphorus loading to West Point Lake shall not

exceed the following:

1. Yellow Jacket Creek at Hammet Road:

11,000 pounds.

2. New River at Hwy 100:

14,000 pounds.

3. Chattahoochee River at U.S. 27:

1,400,000 pounds.

(b) Lake Walter F. George: Those waters impounded by Walter F. George Dam and upstream to Georgia Highway 39 near Omaha.
(i) Chlorophyll a: For the months of April through October, the average of monthly photic zone composite samples shall not
exceed 18 g/L at mid-river at U.S. Highway 82 or 15 g/L at mid-river in the dam forebay more than once in a fiveyear period. (ii) pH: Within the range of 6.0-9.5 standard units. (iii) Total Nitrogen: Not to exceed 3.0 mg/L as nitrogen in the photic zone. (iv) Total Phosphorous: Total lake loading shall not exceed 2.4 pounds per acre-foot of lake volume per year. (v) Bacteria: 1. Georgia Highway 39 to Cowikee Creek: Fecal coliform bacteria shall not exceed the Fishing criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(c)(iii). 2. Cowikee Creek to Walter F. George Dam: E. coli shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-36-.03(6)(b)(i).

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-7

(vi) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of no less than 5.0 mg/L and no less than 4.0 mg/L at all times at the depth specified in 391-3-6-.03(5)(f).
(vii) Temperature: Water temperature shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(iv). (viii) Major Lake Tributary: The annual total phosphorous loading to Lake Walter F. George, monitored at the Chattahoochee
River at Georgia Highway 39, shall not exceed 2,000,000 pounds.

(c) Lake Jackson: Those waters impounded by Lloyd Shoals Dam and upstream to Georgia Highway 36 on the South and

Yellow Rivers, upstream to Newton Factory Bridge Road on the Alcovy River and upstream to Georgia Highway 36

on Tussahaw Creek.

(i) Chlorophyll a: For the months of April through October, the average of monthly mid-channel photic zone composite samples

shall not exceed 20 g/L at a location approximately 2 miles downstream of the confluence of the South and Yellow

Rivers at the junction of Butts, Newton and Jasper Counties more than once in a five-year period.

(ii) pH: Within the range of 6.0-9.5 standard units.

(iii) Total Nitrogen: Not to exceed 4.0 mg/L as nitrogen in the photic zone.

(iv) Total Phosphorous: Total lake loading shall not exceed 5.5 pounds per acre-foot of lake volume per year.

(v) Bacteria: E. coli shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(i).

(vi) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of 5.0 mg/L and no less than 4.0 mg/L at all times at the depth specified in 391-3-6-

.03(5)(f).

(vii) Temperature: Water temperature shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(iv).

(viii) Major Lake Tributaries: For the following major tributaries, the annual total phosphorous loading to Lake Jackson shall not

exceed the following:

1. South River at Island Shoals:

179,000 pounds

2. Yellow River at Georgia Highway 212:

116,000 pounds

3. Alcovy River at Newton Factory Bridge Road:

55,000 pounds

4. Tussahaw Creek at Fincherville Road:

7,000 pounds

(d) Lake Allatoona: Those waters impounded by Allatoona Dam and upstream to State Highway 5 on the Etowah River, State

Highway 5 on Little River, the Lake Acworth dam, and the confluence of Little Allatoona Creek and Allatoona Creek.

Other impounded tributaries to an elevation of 840 feet mean sea level corresponding to the normal pool elevation of

Lake Allatoona.

(i) Chlorophyll a: For the months of April through October, the average of monthly mid-channel photic zone composite samples

shall not exceed the chlorophyll a concentrations at the locations listed below more than once in a five-year period:

1. Upstream from the Dam

10 g/L

2. Allatoona creek upstream from I-75

12 g/L

3. Mid-Lake downstream from Kellogg Creek

10 g/L

4. Little River upstream from Highway 205

15 g/L

5. Etowah River upstream from Sweetwater Creek

14 g/L

(ii) pH: within the range of 6.0-9.5 standard units

(iii) Total Nitrogen: Not to exceed a growing season average of 4 mg/L as nitrogen in the photic zone.

(iv) Total Phosphorous: Total lake loading shall not exceed 1.3 pounds per acre-foot of lake volume per year.

(v) Bacteria :

1. Etowah River, State Highway 5 to State Highway 20: Fecal coliform bacteria shall not exceed the Fishing Criterion

as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(c)(iii).

2. Etowah River, State Highway 20 to Allatoona Dam; E. coli shall not exceed the Recreation criteria as presented in

391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(i).

(vi) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of 5.0 mg/L and no less than 4.0 mg/L at all times at the depth specified in 391-3-6-

.03(5)(g).

(vii)Temperature:

1. Etowah River, State Highway 5 to State Highway 20: Water temperature shall not exceed the Fishing criterion as

presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(iv).

2. Etowah River State Highway 20 to Allatoona Dam: Water temperature shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as

presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(iv).

(viii) Major Lake Tributaries: For the following major tributaries, the annual total phosphorous loading to Lake Allatoona shall

not exceed the following:

1. Etowah River at State Highway 5 spur and 140, at the USGS gage

340,000 lbs/yr

2. Little River at State Highway 5 (Highway 754)

42,000 lbs/yr

3. Noonday Creek at North Rope Mill Road

38,000 lbs/yr

4. Shoal Creek at State Highway 108 (Fincher Road)

12,500 lbs/yr

(e) Lake Sidney Lanier: Those waters impounded by Buford Dam and upstream to Belton Bridge Road on the

Chattahoochee River, 0.6 miles downstream from State Road 400 on the Chestatee River, as well as other

impounded tributaries to an elevation of 1070 feet mean sea level corresponding to the normal pool elevation of Lake

Sidney Lanier.

(i) Chlorophyll a: For the months of April through October, the average of monthly mid-channel photic zone composite samples

shall not exceed the chlorophyll a concentrations at the locations listed below more than once in a five-year period:

1. Upstream from the Buford Dam forebay

5 g/L

2. Upstream from the Flowery Branch confluence

6 g/L

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-8

3. At Browns Bridge Road (State Road 369)

7 g/L

4. At Bolling Bridge (State Road 53) on Chestatee River

10 g/L

5. At Lanier Bridge (State Road 53) on Chattahoochee River

10 g/L

(ii) pH: Within the range of 6.0-9.5 standard units.

(iii) Total Nitrogen: Not to exceed 4 mg/L as nitrogen in the photic zone.

(iv) Total Phosphorous: Total lake loading shall not exceed 0.25 pounds per acre-foot of lake volume per year.

(v) Bacteria: E. coli shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(i).

(vi) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of 5.0 mg/L and no less than 4.0 mg/L at all times at the depth specified in 391-3--6-

.03(5)(g).

(vii) Temperature: Water temperature shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(iv).

(viii) Major Lake Tributaries: For the following major tributaries, the annual total phosphorous loading to Lake Sidney Lanier

shall not exceed the following:

1. Chattahoochee River at Belton Bridge Road

178,000 pounds

2. Chestatee River at Georgia Highway 400

118,000 pounds

3. Flat Creek at McEver Road

14,400 pounds

(f) Carters Lake: Those waters impounded by Carters Dam and upstream on the Coosawattee River as well as other

impounded tributaries to an elevation of 1072 feet mean sea level corresponding to the normal pool elevation of

Carters Lake.

(i) Chlorophyll a: For the months of April through October, the average of monthly mid-channel photic zone composite samples

shall not exceed the chlorophyll a concentrations at the locations listed below more than once in a five-year period:

1. Carters Lake upstream from Woodring Branch

10 g/L

2. Carters Lake at Coosawattee River embayment mouth

10 g/L

(ii) pH: within the range of 6.0 9.5 standard units.

(iii) Total Nitrogen: Not to exceed 4.0 mg/L as nitrogen in the photic zone.

(iv) Total Phosphorous: Total lake loading shall not exceed 172,500 pounds or 0.46 pounds per acre-foot of lake volume per

year.

(v) Bacteria : E. coli shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(i).

(vi) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of 5.0 mg/L and no less than 4.0 mg/L at all times at the depth specified in 391-3-6-

.03(5)(g).

(vii) Temperature: Water temperature shall not exceed the Recreation criterion as presented in 391-3-6-.03(6)(b)(iv).

(viii) Major Lake Tributaries: For the following major tributaries, the annual total phosphorous loading at the compliance

monitoring location shall not exceed the following:

1. Coosawattee River at Old Highway 5

151,500 pounds

2. Mountaintown Creek at U.S. Highway 76

16,000 pounds

existing facilities, develop TMDLs, verify water pollution control plant compliance, collect data for criteria development, and document water use impairment and reasons for problems causing less than full support of designated water uses. Trend monitoring, targeted monitoring, probabilistic monitoring, intensive surveys, lake, estuary, biological, toxic substance monitoring, , and facility compliance sampling are some of the monitoring tools used by the GAEPD.
Long-Term Trend Monitoring Long term monitoring of streams at strategic locations throughout Georgia, trend or ambient monitoring, was initiated by the GAEPD during the late 1960s. This work has been conducted by EPD associates and through cooperative agreements with federal, state, and local agencies that collect samples from groups of stations at specific, fixed locations throughout the year.

The cooperating agencies conduct certain tests in the field and ship stream samples to the GAEPD or UGA laboratories for additional laboratory analyses. Although there have been a number of changes over the years, much of the trend monitoring is still accomplished through similar cooperative agreements.
Today the GAEPD contracts with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) for the statewide trend sampling work, and with the Columbus Water Works for sample collection on the Chattahoochee River below Columbus. In 2010, GAEPD added 41 flow gages to its monitoring network as part of the State Water Plan. Table 3-5 provides a list of the USGS stream gages funded by GAEPD. GAEPD also funds three continuous water quality monitors operated by the USGS on the Coosa River at the Georgia/Alabama Stateline, Chattahoochee River at HWY 92, and the Savannah Harbor at the Corps Dock.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-9

TABLE 3-5. USGS STREAM GAGES FUNDED BY GAEPD

USGS Number
02177000 02191300 02192000 02193340 02193500 02197598 021964832 02197830 02198375 021989792 02198950 21989792 02198980 02197000
02201000 02202190 02203518
02215000 02215100 02215500 02216180 02214075 02214590 02215900 02208000
02212735 02211800 02204520 02223360 02223190 02223110 02225270
02314500 02318000 02315920 02317797
02226362 02227270 02228070
02231254
02327500 02327355
23432415 02343805 02338840

Station Name and Location Savannah River Basin
Chattooga River near Clayton, GA Broad River above Carlton, GA Broad River near Bell, GA Kettle Creek near Washington, GA Little River near Washington, GA Brushy Creek at Campground Road near Wrens, GA Savannah River above Augusta Canal, near Bonair, GA Brier Creek near Waynesboro, GA Savannah River near Estill, GA Savannah River at Port Wentworth, GA Middle River at GA 25, at Port Wentworth, GA Little Back River at GA 25, at Port Wentworth, GA Savannah River at Fort Pulaski Savannah River at Augusta, GA
Ogeechee River Basin Williamson Swamp Creek at Davisboro, GA Ogeechee River At GA 24, near Oliver, GA Canoochee River at Bridge 38, at Fort Stewart
Altamaha River Basin Ocmulgee River at US 341, near Hawkinsville, GA Tucsawhatchee Creek near Hawkinsville, GA Ocmulgee River at Lumber City, GA Turnpike Creek near McRae, GA Echecommee Creek at Houston Road, near Byron, GA Big Indian Creek at US 341, near Clinchfield, GA Little Ocmulgee River at GA 149, at Scotland, GA Yellow River at Rocky Plains Road, near Rocky Plains, GA
Ocmulgee River at GA 18, at Dames Ferry, GA Towaliga River at GA 83, near Juliette, GA South River at GA 81, at Snapping Shoal, GA Big Sandy Creek at US 441, near Irwinton, GA Commissioner Creek at US 441, at McIntyre, GA Buffalo Creek at GA 272, near Oconee, GA Ohoopee River at GA 297, near Swainsboro, GA
Suwannee River Basin Suwannee River at US 441, at Fargo, GA Little River near Adel, GA* Alapaha River at GA 125/32, near Irwinville, GA Little River Near Ty Ty Road near Tifton, GA
Satilla River Basin Satilla River at GA 158, near Waycross, GA Alabaha River at GA 203, nea Blackshear, GA Satilla River at US 17, at Woodbine, GA
St Mary's River Basin St. Mary's River at I-95, near Kingsland, GA
Ochlockonee River Basin Ochlockonee River near Thomasville, GA Ochlockonee River at GA 188 near Coolidge, GA
Chattahoochee River Basin Chattahoochee River 0.36 miles Downstream of WFG Dam, near Gaines, GA Chattahoochee River at Mile 46, near Columbia, AL Yellow Jacket Creek at Hammett Road, below Hogansville, GA

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-10

02342881 02331000 23312495
02344700 02349900 02351500 02353265 02353400 02353500 02355350 02355665 02357000 02350600 02354410 02354475 02354800 02354800 02356638
02381090 02381600 02384540 02385800 02395000
03568933 03550500 03567340
02413000 02413210

Chattahoochee River at Spur 39, near Omaha, GA Chattahoochee River near Leaf, GA Soque River at GA 197 near Clarkesville, GA
Flint River Basin Line Creek near Senoia, GA Turkey Creek at Byromville,GA Muckalee Creek near Americus, GA Ichawaynochaway Creek at GA 37, near Morgan, GA Pachitla Creek near Edison, GA Ichawaynochaway Creek at Milford, GA Ichawaynochaway Creek below Newton, GA Flint River at Riverview Plantation, near Hopeful, GA Spring Creek near Iron City, GA* Kinchafoonee Creek at Preston. GA Chickasawhatchee Creek near Leary, GA Spring Creek near Leary, GA Chickasawhatchee Creek at Elmodel, GA Ichawaynochaway Creek near Elmodel, GA Spring Creek Upstream of US27 near Colquitt, GA
Coosa River Basin Mountaintown Creek At Ga 76, Near Ellijay, Ga Fausett Creek near Talking Rock, GA Mill Creek near Crandall, GA Holly Creek near Chatsworth, GA Etowah River near Kingston, GA
Tennessee River Basin Lookout Creek near New England, GA Nottely River near Blairsville, GA West Chickamauga Creek at GA 146, near Lakeview, GA
Tallapoosa River Basin Little Tallapoosa at GA 27, at Carrolton, GA Little Tallapoosa at GA 100 near Bowdon, GA

* Partially funded by another cooperator
Targeted Monitoring In addition to trend monitoring done through cooperative agreements, GAEPD associates collect monthly samples from a number of locations across the state in a targeted monitoring effort. In targeted monitoring, sites are monitored at least once a month for a year. A different set of targeted sites are then selected for monitoring the next year.
Figure 1 shows the monitoring network stations for the sample collection period 2016-2017. This figure includes the Statewide trend monitoring network stations (that are sampled every year), the targeted monitoring stations, probabilistic stations, as well as stations sampled by Georgia's Coastal Resources Division for 2016 and .

2017. A list of all of these stations and a list of the parameters sampled is presented in Table 3-6, Tables 3-7, Table 3-8, Table 3-11 and Table 3-12.
Intensive Surveys Intensive surveys complement long term fixed station monitoring as these studies focus intensive monitoring on a particular issue or problem over a shorter period of time. Several basic types of intensive surveys are conducted including model calibration surveys and impact studies. The purpose of a model calibration survey is to collect data to calibrate a mathematical water quality model. Models are used for wasteload allocations and/or TMDLs and as tools for

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-11

FIGURE 1 GEORGIA MONITORING NETWORK
STATION LOCATIONS 2016-2017

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-12

TABLE 3-6. STATEWIDE TREND MONITORING NETWORK (CORE): RIVERS/STREAMS; LAKE/RESERVOIR STANDARD TRIBUTARY STATIONS

Rivers and streams stations are sampled monthly for field and chemical parameters every year. Four fecal coliform

bacterial samples are collected each calendar quarter to calculate four geometric means. Lakes and reservoir

stations are sampled monthly during the "growing season" from April through October.

Georgia

Waterbody

Station

Sampling

Type/

Number

Sampling Site

River Basin Organization Project Latitude Longitude

LK_01_7

Lake Burton - 1/4 mile South of Burton Island (aka Tallulah River)

Savannah

Cartersville WP

Lake Monitoring

34.835233 -83.553817

LK_01_8

Lake Burton - Dampool (aka Tallulah River u/s Lake Burton Dam)

Savannah

Cartersville WP

Lake Monitoring

34.795317

-83.5401

LK_01_9

Lake Rabun - Approx. 4.5 mi u/s Dam (Mid Lake)

Savannah

Cartersville WP

Lake Monitoring

34.763533 -83.455817

LK_01_10

Lake Rabun - Dampool (aka Tallulah River - Upstream From Mathis Dam)

Savannah

Cartersville WP

Lake Monitoring

34.764722 -83.417778

LK_01_11

Lake Hartwell @ Interstate 85

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

34.484167 -83.029833

LK_01_22

Lake Hartwell - Dam Forebay

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

34.358733 -82.824417

LK_01_67

Lake Tugalo - u/s Tugalo Lake Rd (aka Bull Sluice Rd.)

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

34.737805 -83.340555

LK_01_68

Lake Tugalo - Upstream From Tugaloo Dam

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

34.715

-83.351694

LK_01_27

Lake Russell Between Markers 42 and 44 (Mid Lake)

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

34.127778 -82.673611

LK_01_29

Lake Richard B. Russell - Dam Forebay Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

34.026333 -82.594167

LK_01_38

Clarks Hill Lake- Savannah River At U.S. Highway 378

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.857861 -82.399583

LK_01_39

Clarks Hill Lake- Savannah River At Dordon Crk.

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.765861 -82.271778

LK_01_40

Clarks Hill Lake - Dam Forebay

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.662694 -82.198528

LK_01_71

Clarks Hill Lake - Little River At Highway 47

Savannah

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.692722 -82.338805

LK_03_520

Lake Oconee At Highway 44, Oconee River Arm

Oconee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.431394 -83.265734

LK_03_525

Lake Sinclair - Little River & Murder Creek Arm, U/S U.S. Hwy 441

Oconee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.189

-83.2953

LK_03_526

Lake Sinclair - 300 Meters Upstream Dam (Dam Forebay)

Oconee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.142817 -83.202617

LK_03_530

Lake Sinclair - Midlake, Oconee River Arm

Oconee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.1968

-83.2742

LK_03_538

Lake Oconee 300 Meters Upstream Wallace Dam (Dam Forebay)

Oconee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.351667 -83.160833

LK_03_545 Lake Oconee - Richland Creek Arm

Oconee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.3947

-83.1767

LK_04_893

Lake Jackson at confluence of Alcovy River and Yellow/South River Branch

Ocmulgee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.368229 -83.863339

LK_04_897 Lake Jackson - Dam Forebay

Ocmulgee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.322

-83.8409

LK_05_2076 High Falls Lake - Midlake

Ocmulgee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.1973

-84.031

LK_05_2078 High Falls Lake - Dam Forebay

Ocmulgee

Atlanta WP

Lake Monitoring

33.1799

-84.0209

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-13

Georgia Station Number LK_05_2131 LK_05_2132 LK_05_2144 LK_05_2146 LK_09_3199 LK_11_3467 LK_11_3520 LK_11_3534 LK_11_3535 LK_11_3551 LK_11_3569 LK_12_3913 LK_12_3995 LK_12_3998 LK_12_4001 LK_12_4005 LK_12_4007 LK_12_4010 LK_12_4012 LK_12_4019 LK_12_4028
LK_12_4048
LK_12_4060 LK_12_4072 LK_12_4074 LK_12_4078 LK_12_4080 LK_12_4097

Sampling Site
Lake Juliette - Midlake
Lake Juliette - Dam Forebay
Lake Tobesofkee - Midlake
Lake Tobesofkee - Dam Forebay
Banks Lake - Near Lakeland, Ga.
Lake Blackshear @ Midlake
Lake Blackshear @ Dam Forebay
Flint River Reservoir @ Midlake, Flint River Arm Flint River Reservoir (Lake Worth) @ Dam Forebay Lake Worth (original) - Above Hwy 91 Bridge Lake Seminole - Flint River Arm @ Spring Creek Lake Sidney Lanier - Little River Embayment, b/w M1WC & 3LR Lake Sidney Lanier at Boling Bridge (State Road 53) on Chestatee River Lake Sidney Lanier at Lanier Bridge (State Road 53) on Chattahoochee River Lake Sidney Lanier at Browns Bridge Road (State Road 369) Lake Sidney Lanier - Flat Creek Embayment, 100' U/S M7FC Lake Sidney Lanier - Balus Creek Embayment, 0.34m SE M6FC Lake Sidney Lanier - Mud Crk Embayment, b/w Marina & Ramp Lake Lanier upstream from Flowery Branch Confluence (Midlake) Lake Sidney Lanier - Six Mile Creek Embayment, 300' E M9SM Lake Sidney Lanier upstream of Buford Dam Forebay West Point Lake at LaGrange Water Intake near LaGrange, GA (aka Chatt. River at Lagrange Intake)
West Point Lake - Dam Forebay
Lake Harding - Midlake, Main Body
Lake Harding - Dam Forebay (aka Chatt. River US Bartletts Ferry Dam)
Goat Rock Lake - Dam Forebay
Lake Oliver - Dam Forebay
Lake Walter F. George @ U.S. Highway 82

River Basin Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Suwanee Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint
Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee
Chattahoochee
Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee

Sampling Organization
Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP

Waterbody Type/ Project Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring Lake
Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring

Latitude 33.0464 33.0338 32.8346 32.8215 31.026667 31.9665 31.8479 31.6085 31.6033 31.6109 30.7627 34.355 34.31235 34.32195 34.261666 34.2587 34.2504 34.2333 34.200278 34.2335 34.162778
33.0783
32.9208 32.7379 32.6633 32.6112 32.516 31.891944

Longitude -83.8106 -83.7572 -83.8161 -83.7706 -83.105555 -83.9342 -83.9394 -84.119 -84.1365 -84.15 -84.8171 -83.8427 -83.950103 -83.880171 -83.950662 -83.9198 -83.9244 -83.9373 -83.982869 -84.0287 -84.067108
-85.110833
-85.1834 -85.1125 -85.090278 -85.0794 -85.0009 -85.120833

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-14

Georgia Station Number LK_12_4103 LK_12_4107 LK_12_4113 LK_12_4115 LK_14_4494 LK_14_4497
LK_14_4502
LK_14_4523 LK_14_4524 LK_14_4553 LK_14_4556 LK_14_4895 LK_14_4899
LK_14_4900
LK_14_4907 LK_14_4908 SH_01_56 SH_02_317 SH_02_364 SH_02_374 SH_06_2857 SH_07_3008 SH_07_3029 SH_07_3032 SH_07_3035 SH_07_3036 SH_07_3049 SH_01_56 SH_02_317 SH_02_364

Sampling Site

River Basin

Lake Walter F. George @ Dam Forebay Chattahoochee

Lake Andrews @ Dam Forebay
Lake Seminole @ Chattahoochee Arm, Lower
Lake Seminole @ Dam Forebay

Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee

Lake Allatoona Upstream from Dam
Lake Allatoona at Allatoona Creek Upstream from Interstate 75 Lake Allatoona at Etowah River upstream from Sweetwater Creek (Marker 44E/45E) Carters Lake (CR1) - Upper Lake, Coosawattee Arm Carters Lake - Midlake (upstream from Woodring Branch) Lake Allatoona at Little River upstream from Highway 205 Lake Allatoona downstream from Kellogg Creek ( Markers 18/19E) Lake Chatuge LMP 12 at State Line (aka Hiawassee River)
Lake Nottely (LMP15A) at Reece Creek
Lake Nottely - Dam Forebay (aka Nottely River - Upstream From Nottely Dam) Lake Blue Ridge (LMP18) - 300 Meter Upstream Of Dam Lake Blue Ridge (LMP18A) - 4 miles upsteam Dam Mouth of Wilmington River - Marker #19 Wassaw Sound

Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee Savannah

Waterbody

Sampling

Type/

Organization Project

Tifton WP

Lake Monitoring

Tifton WP

Lake Monitoring

Tifton WP

Lake Monitoring

Tifton WP

Lake Monitoring

Cartersville

Lake

WP

Monitoring

Cartersville

Lake

WP

Monitoring

Cartersville

Lake

WP

Monitoring

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP

Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring

Cartersville

Lake

WP

Monitoring

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP

Lake Monitoring
Lake Monitoring

Brunswick WP Estuary Site

Latitude 31.629167 31.2632 30.7662 30.7115 34.160833 34.085833
34.19
34.62087 34.6076 34.158611 34.138611 34.983333 34.91152
34.957778
34.881667 34.84017 31.93242

Longitude -85.0725 -85.113 -84.9201 -84.8647 -84.725845 -84.711389
-84.577778
-84.6212 -84.638 -84.577222 -84.639167 -83.788611 -84.0506
-84.092222
-84.28 -84.2731 -80.97711

Little Ogeechee River @ Green Island

Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.88823 -81.08798

St Catherines Sound at Medway River near Midway, GA
Sapelo River - Mouth of Broro River 1.4 miles South of Shellman's Bluff
Altamaha River - channel marker #201 off Wolf Island

Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.71547 -81.1568 Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.54486 -81.31603 Altamaha Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.31917 -81.325

St. Andrews Sound at Satilla Riv near

Satilla

Brunswick WP Estuary Site 30.98316 -81.45324

Turtle River off Hermitage Island

Satilla

Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.22028 -81.56417

Turtle River - Georgia Highway 303

Satilla

Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.186944 -81.531389

Brunswick Harbor

Satilla

Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.14361 -81.4975

Brunswick River - U.S. Highway 17

Satilla

Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.1164 -81.4858

Cumberland Sound at St. Marys Riv nr St Marys, GA
Mouth of Wilmington River - Marker #19 Wassaw Sound

Satilla

Brunswick WP Estuary Site 30.72807 -81.48979

Savannah Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.93242 -80.97711

Little Ogeechee River @ Green Island

Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.88823 -81.08798

St Catherines Sound at Medway River near Midway, GA

Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.71547 -81.1568

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-15

Georgia Station Number SH_02_374
SH_06_2857 SH_07_3008 SH_07_3029 SH_07_3032 SH_07_3035 SH_07_3036 SH_07_3049
SH_01_56 SH_02_317 SH_02_364
SH_02_374
SH_06_2857 SH_07_3008 SH_07_3029 SH_07_3032
RV_01_66
RV_01_87
RV_01_109
RV_01_120
RV_02_298
RV_03_502
RV_03_640
RV_04_853

Sampling Site Sapelo River - Mouth of Broro River 1.4 miles South of Shellman's Bluff Altamaha River - channel marker #201 off Wolf Island
St. Andrews Sound at Satilla Riv near
Turtle River off Hermitage Island
Turtle River - Georgia Highway 303
Brunswick Harbor
Brunswick River - U.S. Highway 17
Cumberland Sound at St. Marys Riv nr St Marys, GA Mouth of Wilmington River - Marker #19 Wassaw Sound
Little Ogeechee River @ Green Island
St Catherines Sound at Medway River near Midway, GA Sapelo River - Mouth of Broro River 1.4 miles South of Shellman's Bluff Altamaha River - channel marker #201 off Wolf Island
St. Andrews Sound at Satilla Riv near
Turtle River off Hermitage Island
Turtle River - Georgia Highway 303
Chattooga River at US Hwy. 76 near Clayton, GA Savannah River at 0.5 mile downstream from Spirit Creek Savannah River at Seaboard Coast Line Railway, north of Clyo, GA Savannah River at US Hwy. 17 (Houlihan Bridge) Ogeechee River at Georgia Hwy. 24 near Oliver, GA Oconee River at Barnett Shoals Road near Athens, GA Oconee River at Interstate Hwy. 16 near Dublin, GA
South River at Island Shoals Road near Snapping Shoals, Ga.

RV_04_876

Yellow River at Georgia Hwy. 212 near Stewart, Ga.

RV_04_888

Alcovy River at Newton Factory Bridge Road near Stewart, Ga.

RV_04_892

Tussahaw Creek at Fincherville Road near Jackson, Ga.

RV_05_2165

Ocmulgee River at New Macon Water Intake

RV_05_2203 Ocmulgee River at Hawkinsville, GA

Waterbody

Sampling

Type/

River Basin Organization Project Latitude Longitude

Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.54486 -81.31603

Altamaha
Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla
Satilla

Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.31917 -81.325
Brunswick WP Estuary Site 30.98316 -81.45324 Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.22028 -81.56417 Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.186944 -81.531389 Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.14361 -81.4975 Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.1164 -81.4858
Brunswick WP Estuary Site 30.72807 -81.48979

Savannah Ogeechee Ogeechee

Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.93242 -80.97711 Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.88823 -81.08798 Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.71547 -81.1568

Ogeechee Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.54486 -81.31603

Altamaha Brunswick WP Estuary Site 31.31917 -81.325

Satilla Satilla Satilla
Savannah
Savannah
Savannah
Savannah
Ogeechee
Oconee
Oconee Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Ocmulgee
Ocmulgee

Brunswick WP Estuary Site 30.98316 -81.45324

Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.22028 -81.56417

Brunswick WP Trend Site 31.186944 -81.531389

USGS USGS USGS USGS USGS USGS USGS USGS
USGS
USGS
USGS
USGS USGS

Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)
Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)
Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)
Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)
Trend Monitoring
Trend Monitoring

34.8140 33.3306 32.5250 32.1658 32.4948 33.8562 32.4804 33.4527
33.4543
33.4494
33.3789
32.8992 32.2818

-83.3064 -81.9153 -81.2640 -81.1539 -81.5558 -83.3265 -82.8582 -83.9271
-83.8813
-83.8283
-83.9634
-83.6641 -83.4628

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-16

Georgia Station Number RV_05_2223 RV_06_2846 RV_07_2986 RV_09_3181 RV_09_3236 RV_10_3386 RV_11_3485 RV_11_3511 RV_11_3553 RV_11_3558 RV_11_3563 RV_12_3902
RV_12_4292
RV_12_3925
RV_12_4003
RV_12_4049 RV_12_4039 RV_12_4041 LK_12_4074 LK_12_4079
RV_12_4084 RV_12_4091 RV_12_4093

Sampling Site

Waterbody

Sampling

Type/

River Basin Organization Project

Ocmulgee River at US Hwy. 341 at Lumber City, GA

Ocmulgee

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Altamaha River 6.0 miles downstream from Doctortown, GA

Altamaha

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Satilla River at Georgia Hwy.15 and Hwy.121

Satilla

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Suwannee River at US Hwy. 441 near Fargo, GA

St. Marys

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Withlacoochee River at ClyattsvilleNankin Road near Clyattsville, GA

Suwannee

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Ochlockonee River at Hadley Ferry Road near Calvary, Ga.

Ochlockonee

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Flint River at SR 92 near Griffin, GA

Flint

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Flint River at SR 26 near Montezuma

Flint

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Flint River at SR 234 near Albany,

GA

Flint

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Flint River at SR 37 at Newton, GA

Flint

USGS

Trend Monitoring

Flint River at US Hwy. 27-B near Bainbridge, GA

Trend

Flint

USGS Monitoring

Chattahoochee River at Belton Bridge Road near Lula, Ga.

Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

Dicks Creek at Forest Service Road

144-1 near Neels Gap, GA

Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

Chestatee River at SR 400 near Dahlonega, Ga.

Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

Flat Creek at McEver Road near Gainesville, Ga.

Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

Yellow Jacket Creek at Hammet Road near Hogansville, GA

Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

New River at SR 100 near Corinth,

Ga.

Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring

Chattahoochee River at US Hwy. 27 near Franklin, Ga.

Chattahoochee

USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

Lake Harding - Dam Forebay (aka Chatt. River US Bartletts Ferry Dam) Chattahoochee

CWW

Trend Monitoring

Lake Oliver - Chattahochee River at

Columbus Water Intake near

Columbus, GA

Chattahoochee

CWW

Trend Monitoring

Chattahoochee River downstream from Columbus Water Treatment Facility

Chattahoochee

CWW

Trend Monitoring

Chattahoochee River downstream

Oswichee Creek

Chattahoochee

CWW

Trend Monitoring

Chattahoochee River at Hichitee Creek (River Mile 127.6)

Chattahoochee CWW

Trend Monitoring

Latitude 31.9199 31.6233 31.2167 30.6806 30.6747 30.7317 33.3089 32.2929 31.5524 31.3094 30.9109 34.4451
34.6797 34.4667
34.2658
33.1392 33.2353 33.2792
32.6633
32.5214
32.4089 32.3000 32.2308

Longitude -82.6743 -81.7653 -82.1625 -82.5606 -83.3947 -84.2355 -84.3931 -84.0440 -84.1463 -84.3350 -84.5805 -83.6842
-83.9372 -83.9689
-83.8850
-84.9753 -84.9878 -85.1000
-85.09028
-84.9983
-84.9803 -84.9369 -84.9232

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-17

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

Waterbody

Sampling

Type/

River Basin Organization Project Latitude Longitude

RV_12_4094 Chattahoochee River at Spur 39 near Omaha, GA (Seaboard Railroad) Chattahoochee USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

32.1436

-85.0453

RV_12_4110

Chattahoochee River at SR 91 near Steam Mill, GA

Chattahoochee

USGS

Trend Monitoring 30.9775 -85.0053

RV_13_4353

Tallapoosa River at Georgia Hwy. 8 near Tallapoosa, Ga.

Tallapoosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

33.7408

-85.3364

RV_13_4349

Little Tallapoosa River at Georgia Hwy. 100 near Bowden, GA

Tallapoosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring 33.4928 -85.2792

RV_14_4438

Conasauga River at US Hwy. 76 near Dalton, GA

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring 34.7830 -84.8730

RV_14_4460

Conasauga River at Tilton Bridge near Tilton, GA

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring 34.6667 -84.9283

RV_14_4518

Mountaintown Creek at SR 282 (US Hwy. 76) near Ellijay, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

34.7034

-84.5398

RV_14_4520

Coosawattee River at Georgia Hwy. 5 near Ellijay, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

34.6717

-84.5002

RV_14_4534

Oostanaula River at Rome Water Intake near Rome, GA

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring 34.2703 -85.1733

RV_14_4549

Etowah River at SR 5 spur near Canton, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

34.2397

-84.4944

RV_14_4550

Shoal Creek at SR 108 (Fincher Road) near Waleska, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

34.2608

-84.5956

RV_14_4851

Noonday Creek at Georgia Hwy. 92 near Woodstock, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

34.0861

-84.5306

RV_14_4555

Little River at Georgia Hwy. 5 near Woodstock, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring (Lake Trib)

34.1222

-84.5043

RV_14_4586

Etowah River at Hardin Bridge (FAS 829) near Euharlee, GA

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

34.18886

-84.9251

RV_14_4622

Coosa River - GA/Alabama State Line Monitor near Cave Springs

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

34.1983

-85.4439

Chattooga River at HollandRV_14_4640 Chattoogaville Road (FAS1363) near
Lyerly, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

34.3356

-85.4453

RV_15_4918

West Chickamauga Creek - Georgia Highway 146 near Ringgold, Ga.

Coosa

USGS

Trend Monitoring

34.9572

-85.2056

Routine field parameters include: gage height, air temperature, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH,

conductivity, turbidity. Routine chemical parameters include: BOD5, alkalinity, hardness, ammonia, nitrite+nitrate nitrogen,
phosphorus, TOC and fecal coliform bacteria.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-18

TABLE 3-7. GEORGIA TARGETED MONITORING NETWORK 2016
Rivers and stream stations are sampled monthly for field and chemical parameters for one calendar year. For stations where fecal coliform bacteria is collected, four fecal coliform bacterial samples are collected each calendar quarter during the year. Basin lakes and reservoirs are sampled monthly during the growing season during the calendar year.

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates 3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_01_107 RV_01_16309

Buck Creek - Brannens Bridge Road (S1321) nr Sylvania, GA
Buck Creek at Friendship Rd near Sylvania, GA

RV_01_16310

Trib to Buck Creek at Rifle Rd near Sylvania, GA

RV_01_16311

Chandlers Branch at Charles Perry Ave near Sardis, GA

RV_01_16312 RV_01_16345 RV_01_16379 RV_01_16387
RV_01_244

Chandlers Branch near SR24 near Sardis, GA
Biger Creek at Diamond Hill Colbert Rd
Trib to Hanna Creek at Brown Hendrix Rd. near Franklin Springs, GA
Broad River at GA Hwy 172 near Comer, GA
Charlies Creek at Charlies Creek Rd East of Hiawassee, GA

Savannah Savannah
Savannah
Savannah Savannah Savannah Savannah Savannah Savannah

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP
Atlanta WP

WQMU Data Collection, D/S
GA0021385 WQMU Data Collection, U/S GA0021385 WQMU Data
Collection, Secondary Trib D/S GA0021385 WQMU Data Collection, U/S
GA0020893 WQMU Data Collection, D/S GA0020893
EPA BIO M

Atlanta WP

Probabilistic

Atlanta WP

Probabilistic

Atlanta WP

SEMN

32.768905

-81.586863 X

32.764622

-81.616844 X

32.777471

-81.597213 X

32.96904

-81.753246 X

32.970936 34.054 34.24 34.157
34.95895

-81.750429 X X

-83.241

1

-83.14

1

-83.083

1

-83.57158 1

X

X

X

X

X

X X X X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-19

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_01_248 RV_01_43 RV_01_45 RV_02_16300

Coleman River at Coleman River Rd nr Clayton, GA
North Fork Broad River at State Road 51 near Carnesville, GA
Hudson River at State Road 106 at Fort Lamar, GA
Little Ogeechee River Upstream of Larchmont near Georgetown, GA

RV_02_16301

Trib to Sterling Creek at Harris Trail Rd near Richmond Hill, GA

RV_02_16302

Williamson Swamp Creek at SR4 near Wadley, GA

RV_02_16303 RV_02_16304 RV_02_16305 RV_02_16306
RV_02_288

Trib to Taylor Creek at Coe Ave near Fort Stewart, GA
Trib to Richardson Creek near SR 23 near Butts, GA
Canoochee River at Unnamed Rd near Fort Stewart, GA
Long Branch at Unnamed Road (Fort Stewart) nr Hinesville, GA
Williamson Swamp Creek at U.S. Highway 1 East at Wadley, GA

RV_02_312

Sterling Creek at Harris Trail Road near Richmond Hill, GA

RV_02_359

Little Ogeechee River at U.S. Highway 17 near Burroughs, GA

Savannah Savannah Savannah Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP

SEMN
Probabilistic
Probabilistic
WQMU Data Collection, U/S
GA0034819 WQMU Data Collection, D/S GA0037648 WQMU Data Collection, U/S GA0021024 WQMU Data Collection, U/S GA0004308
Probabilistic
Probabilistic
CSU Reference Point Sampling
WQMU Data Collection, D/S
GA0021024 WQMU Data Collection, U/S GA0037648 WQMU Data Collection, D/S GA0034819

34.95203324 34.322891

83.51659881

1

-83.186876 1

34.24866

-83.271042 1

32.013421

-81.241469 X

31.912192

-81.302667 X

32.85208

-82.403893 X

31.878461 32.718 31.969
32.044106 32.850652

-81.604986 X

-82.04

X X

-81.459

X

-81.743825 X

-82.396993 X

31.918177

-81.307358 X

32.007468

-81.238481 X

X

X X X X X X

X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-20

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_02_431 RV_02_462 RV_02_468 RV_02_483 RV_02_488 RV_02_5056

Little Lotts Creek D/S WPCP Discharge at Langston Chapel Rd near
Statesboro, GA Mill Creek at Bulloch County Road 386
Old River Road near Brooklet, GA
Raccoon Branch nr Mount Olivet Church Rd nr Hinesville, GA
Tributary to Cannoochee nr SR 67 (Fort Stewart) nr Hinesville, GA
Tributary to Taylor's Creek nr Walthourville Rd nr Hinesville, GA South Fork Unnamed Tributary to Taylor's Creek at Hero Road near
Hinesville, GA

RV_03_16307

Bluewater Creek at Mark Wood Rd near Rentz, GA

RV_03_16329 RV_03_16341 RV_03_16342 RV_03_16344 RV_03_16351

Turkey Creek Upstream of Dudley WPCP Near Dudley, GA
Barber Creek at Laurel Pt. near Athens, GA
Barrow Creek at Hutchins Wolfskin Rd. near Crawford, GA
Beaverdam Creek at Beaver Dam Rd (CR 15)
Deaton Creek at Oliver Road

RV_03_16352 East Sandy Creek at Nowhere Road

RV_03_16356

Kimbro Creek at Lanier Road

Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee
Oconee
Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP
Tifton WP
Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

WQMU Data Collection, D/S
GA0023108
Trend
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
WQMU Data Collection, D/S
GA0004308 WQMU Data collection; D/S of GA0037630 (no
U/S) WQMU Data collection; U/S of GA0023957 NH3-OCONEE CO ; Stressor ID
303d; Bio F; Stessor ID
Stressor ID; LI

Atlanta WP

Stressor ID

Atlanta WP

Stressor ID

Atlanta WP

Stressor ID; LI

32.393824

-81.772604 X

32.440012 31.91321 31.98942 31.89725 31.886611

-81.579074 X X

-81.446836 X X

-81.38657 X

81.77377778

X X

-81.609091 X X

32.416758

-82.982739 X

32.552 33.90006
33.834 33.367236
34.143 34.021 33.43683

-83.05552 X

-83.47482 X

-83.231

X

-82.942669 X

-83.849

X

-83.369

X

-83.128019 X

X X X X

X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-21

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_03_16357 RV_03_16358

Little Mulberry River at Boss Hardy Road
Little Sandy Creek at Sailors Road

RV_03_16362 Mulberry River at Union Circle Road

RV_03_16363 RV_03_16364 RV_03_16367

Noketchee Creek at Nokethcee Drive
North Fork Wolf Creek at Smithboro Road
Rock Creek at Boss Hardy Road

RV_03_16368

Rocky Creek at Rocky Creek Road

RV_03_16372 RV_03_16373 RV_03_16381

South Fork Wolf Creek at Armour Road
Stewart Creek at Veazey Rd. near White Plain, GA
Trib to North Oconee River at Eberhart Cemetary Road

RV_03_16384

Whitten Creek Trib at CR 15

RV_03_16385 RV_03_16386 RV_03_5064

Wildcat Creek at Oliver Bridge Rd.
Wildcat Creek at Kirkland Rd near Watkinsville, GA
Turkey Creek at State Road 338 Near Dudley, GA

RV_03_5065

Stitchihatchie Creek at Taylor Rowland Rd near Dexter, GA

Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee
Oconee

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP
Tifton WP

Stressor ID
Stressor ID; LI
Stressor ID
Stressor ID; LI
Stressor ID
Stressor ID
Stressor ID; LI
Stressor ID LI; SST 1257 Stressor ID Stressor ID
Stressor ID; LI LI; SST 1299;
Stressor ID Stressor ID WQMU Data collection; D/S of GA0023957 WQMU Data collection; U/S of GA0048862

34.061133 34.116
34.147007 34.014139
33.292 34.056 33.197 33.283 33.495582 34.29 33.392044 33.811 33.829 32.551505

-83.804067 X

-83.357

X

-83.879011 X

-83.360988 X

-83.581

X

-83.798

X

-83.494

X

-83.568

X

-83.143711 X

-83.744

X

-82.951948 X

-83.316

X

-83.348

X

-83.054777 X

32.432279 -83.0488129 X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-22

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_03_5067 RV_03_557 RV_03_578 RV_03_790 RV_03_800 RV_04_15916 RV_04_2068

Stitchihatchie Creek at State Road 257 near Dexter, GA
Little River at State Road 16 near Eatonton, GA
Cedar Creek - Georgia Highway 53; North Winder
Copeland Creek nr Edwards Rd nr White Plains, GA
Trib to Murder Creek at Kinder Lane nr Eatonton, GA
Garner Creek at Five Forks Trickum Road nr Lawrenceville, GA
Stone Mountain Creek at Silver Hill Road near Stone Mountain, GA

RV_04_818 RV_04_845 RV_04_857 RV_04_862 RV_04_865 RV_04_908

Sweetwater Creek at U.S. Highway 29 near Luxomni, GA
Big Cotton Indian Creek at Stockbridge Road near Stockbridge, GA
Pew Creek at Patterson Road near Lawrenceville, GA
Pounds Creek at Pucketts Drive near Lilburn, GA
Little Stone Mountain Creek at Old Stone Mountain Road near Stone Mountain, GA
Big Haynes Creek at Lenora Rd

RV_04_974

Brush Creek at Pinehurst Dr

Oconee
Oconee
Oconee
Oconee
Oconee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee
Upper Ocmulgee

Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

WQMU Data collection; D/S of
GA0048862
PROBABILISTIC
NH3-WINDER WPCP; Stressor
ID
Stressor ID; LI
Stressor ID; LI
303d FC; Need data
Nutrients-LOWOCMULGEE; 303d FC
Nutrients-HIGHOCMULGEE; 303d FC
Nutrients-HIGHOCMULGEE
303d FC

32.4485069 -83.0267539 X

33.313983

-83.436817 X

34.029722

-83.712222 X

33.43474289 33.24370667 33.86194402

83.04195251
83.52437917
84.09718204

X X X X

33.826111

-84.165278 X X

33.913889 33.569444 33.925833

-84.098611 X X -84.233056 X -84.037778 X X

2010 Revisit
Nutrients-HIGHOCMULGEE; 303d FC
303d FC
NH3STOCKBRIDGE

33.837222

-84.108889 X X

33.830556

-84.139444 X X

33.81513619 33.55281591

83.99011974
84.20793329

X X X

X

X X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X

X X X

X

X X X X X X

X

X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-23

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_04_995 Panther Creek d/s of Northeast WRF

RV_05_2089 Towaliga River - Georgia Highway 83

RV_05_2107 RV_05_2125 RV_05_2217 RV_05_2222 RV_05_2240 RV_05_2827 RV_06_16313

Town Branch at Watkins Park and Pool Road near Jackson, GA
Gladesville Creek at New Pope Church Road near Monticello , GA
House Creek at Walker Road near Forest Glen, GA
Ocmulgee River at U.S. Highway 441 near Jacksonville, GA
Ocmulgee River at Hwy 83 near Juliette, GA
Red Bluff Creek at Dicksons Mill Pond Rd CR 190, Fitzgerald, GA
Trib to Beards Creek by Oaktown Rd near Glennville, GA

RV_06_16314

Yam Grandy Creek at Grande Creek Rd near Swainsboro, GA

RV_06_16315

Crooked Creek @ Old Nunez Rd near Swainsboro, GA

RV_06_2884 RV_06_2899

Yam Grandy Creek at Levilligar Pond Road (County Road 198) near Nunez,
GA
Ohoopee River at US 280/ SR 30 near Reidsville, GA

Upper Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Altamaha
Altamaha
Altamaha
Altamaha Altamaha

WPCP

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Tifton WP

NH3-CLAYTON CO
Nutrients-LOWOCMULGEE
Nutrients-HIGHOCMULGEE
303d; Bio F; need WQ data
Assessment ReEvaluation
Probabilistic

Atlanta WP

Probabilistic

Tifton WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP

CSU Reference Point Sampling
WQMU Data Collection, U/S
GA0037982 WQMU Data Collection, U/S GA0039225 WQMU Data
Collection, secondary trib U/S
GA0039225 WQMU Data Collection, D/S GA0039225

Brunswick WP

Probabilistic

33.574565 33.114722 33.26207
33.2 31.848783
31.7925 33.1591 31.754202 31.916152 32.53533
32.531404
32.499162 32.117844

-84.254609 X

-83.870556 X

-83.93777 X

-83.77

X

-83.2533 X X

-82.98

X

-83.8241 X

-83.008101 X

-81.921217 X

-82.353162 X

-82.344001 X

-82.363275 X -82.189758 X X

X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-24

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_06_2915

Spring Branch at CR 349 near Glennville, GA

RV_06_2942 Little Creek nr Gardi Rd nr Jesup, GA

RV_07_15791 RV_07_16298 RV_07_16299 RV_07_16331

Unnamed Tributary to 17 Mile River at Victor Beam Rd. near Douglas, GA
Trib to Trib to Raddcliffe Creek at Lake Erie Dr. near Brunswick, GA Bishop Creek at Ernest Kesler Road
near Baxley, GA
Unnamed Tributary to 17 Mile River at S. Pearson Ave near Douglas, GA

RV_07_16332

Unnamed Tributary to 17 Mile River at McDonald Rd near Douglas, GA

RV_07_16333 RV_07_16338 RV_07_16339 RV_07_16340 RV_07_3027
RV_07_3072

Unnamed Tributary to 17 Mile River at Lupo Ln near Douglas, GA
Little Satilla Creek nr County Line Rd nr Odum, GA
Waverly Creek at SR 110 nr Waverly, GA
Reedy Creek @ Gene Road near Odum, GA
Sixty-foot Branch at SR32 near Patterson, GA
Unnamed Tributary of Seventeen Mile River at Waldroup Rd near Douglas, GA

Altamaha Altamaha
Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP

WQMU Data Collection, D/S
GA0037982 CSU Reference Point Sampling Source Tracking,
D/S Douglas WPCP
Probabilistic
Watershed Characterization
Source Tracking, U/S Douglas WPCP
Source Tracking, U/S Douglas WPCP
Source Tracking, U/S Douglas WPCP
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
WQMU Data Collection, D/S
GA0037206 Source Tracking,
U/S Douglas WPCP

31.896219 31.491437 31.499095
31.148 31.672843 31.49139 31.489999 31.498288
31.761 31.081823 31.593652 31.361171 31.496603

-81.91091 X X

-81.846891 X X

-82.820840 X

-81.598

X

-82.435887 X X

-82.851078 X

-82.835779 X

-82.832316 X

-82.133

X

-81.726531 X X

-82.145155 X

-82.071783 X

-82.825408 X

X

X

X

X

X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-25

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_07_3096 RV_07_3099 RV_07_3107 RV_07_3108 RV_07_3112 RV_07_3113 RV_07_3115 RV_07_5091

Keene Bay Branch nr Tank Rd nr Odum, GA
Mill Creek nr High Bluff Rock Rd nr Waycross, GA
Trib Little Satilla River nr Ocean Hwy (US 17) nr Brunswick, GA
Trib Radcliffe Creek at US 82 nr Brunswick, GA
trib to Little Waverly Creek at Old Dixie Hwy nr White Oak, GA
Trib White Oak Creek at Horse Stamp Church Rd nr Waverly, GA
Trib. To Little Satilla Creek @ nr Brentwood Rd nr Odum, GA
Unnamed Tributary to Sixty-foot Branch at Main st neat Patterson, GA

RV_07_5092

Sixty Foot Branch at US84 near Patterson, GA

RV_07_5093

Unnamed Tributary to Sixty Foot Branch at US 84 near Patterson, GA

RV_09_16153

New River @ Highway 319 Near Tifton, GA

RV_09_16154

Unnamed Trib to New River East @ Highway 19 near Tifton, GA

Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla Satilla
Satilla
Satilla
Suwanee
Suwanee

Brunswick WP

CSU Reference Point Sampling

Brunswick WP

Trend

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP
Brunswick WP
Brunswick WP
Tifton WP
Tifton WP

CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
CSU Reference Point Sampling
WQMU Data Collection, U/S
GA0037206 WQMU Data
Collection, Secondary Stream
U/S GA0037206 WQMU Data Collection,
Tertiary trib U/S GA0037206
2015 follow-up; U/S of Tifton WPCP
2015 follow-up; Secondary trib U/S of Tifton
WPCP

31.717332 31.189994 31.134099 31.161349 31.07333417 31.065304 31.71471 31.382776
31.396863
31.403335
31.448512
31.450101

-82.080366 X

-82.202803 X

-81.599531 X

-81.596293 X

81.73597722

X

-81.657625 X

-82.10523 X

-82.134315 X

-82.127938 X

-82.119657 X -83.482639 X -83.480705 X

X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-26

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_09_16319

Trib to Mill Creek at Amaco Rd near Rochelle, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; U/S of GA0024224 trib

31.955212

-83.477802 X

RV_09_16320

Trib to Mill Creek at SR30 near Rochelle, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; D/S of GA0024224 trib

31.949891

-83.480221 X

WQMU Data

RV_09_16321 Mill Creek at SR233 near Rochelle, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

collection; D/S of GA0024236

31.932354

-83.455066 X

RV_09_16322

Grand Bay Creek at Old State Rd. near Naylor, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

Probabilistic

30.935

-83.109

X

WQMU Data

RV_09_16323

Tributary to Little Creek at Edmonson Road near Moultrie, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

collection; D/S of Moultrie WPCP
(no U/S)

31.127076

-83.70089 X X

WQMU Data

RV_09_16324

Unnamed trib to Franks Creek at Union Road near Hahira, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

collection; D/S of GA0037974 (no

30.983257

-83.381271 X

U/S)

RV_09_16325

Bear Creek at Kent Drive near Adel, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; D/S of
GA0021563

31.154876

-83.426943 X

RV_09_16326

Bear Creek at Patterson St near Adel, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; U/S of
GA0021563

31.165996

-83.433297 X

RV_09_16335

Withlacoochee River at SR 37 near Adel, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

Probabilistic

31.12

-83.321

X

X

WQMU Data

RV_09_16337

Reedy Creek at Serena Drive near Norman Park, GA

Suwanee

Tifton WP

collection; U/S of Norman Park WPCP

31.269788

-83.681287 X

RV_09_3209

New River - U.S. Highway 82 Near Tifton

Suwanee

Tifton WP

2015 follow-up; D/S of Tifton WPCP

31.4425

-83.475833 X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-27

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_09_3301

Little River at St Augustine Rd / SR 133 near Troupville, GA

RV_09_5070

Reedy Creek at East Broad Street near Norman Park, GA

Suwanee Suwanee

RV_10_16316

Pine Creek at SR3 near Ochlocknee, GA

Ochlockonee

RV_10_16317 RV_10_16318

Aucilla Creek D/S Boston WPCP near Boston, GA
Bay Pole Branch at Lower Meigs Rd near Moultrie GA

RV_10_16328

Ochlockonee River @ SR 37 near Moultrie, GA

Ochlockonee Ochlockonee Ochlockonee

RV_10_16336

Trib to Ochlockonee River at West Blvd near Moultrie, GA

RV_10_3365

Ochlockonee River - FAS 1205 near Moultrie, GA

Ochlockonee Ochlockonee

RV_10_3416

Oquina Creek at Old Albany Rd

Ochlockonee

RV_10_3424 RV_11_16293

Oquina Creek atNorth Pinetree Blvd near Thomasville, GA
Bay Branch at Bay Ave NW near Edison, GA

Ochlockonee Flint

Tifton WP Tifton WP
Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP

Probabilistic
WQMU Data collection; D/S of
Norman Park WPCP
WQMU Data collection; D/S of GA0046370 (no
U/S) WQMU Data collection; D/S of Boston WPCP
Watershed Characterization
WQMU Data collection;
Mainstem U/S of Moultrie WPCP
WQMU Data collection; U/S of Moultrie WPCP
WQMU Data collection; D/S of Moultrie WPCP NH3 evaluation; US potential NH3
Contribution NH3 evaluation; D/S potential NH3
Contribution WQMU Data collection; U/S of GA0037427

30.8530662 31.268065
30.963491 30.781203 31.099492 31.182903 31.160324 31.142333 30.855506 30.869167 31.56427

83.34655691

X

-83.680011 X X

-84.045693 X -83.785759 X -83.918695 X X -83.809738 X -83.802943 X -83.803611 X -83.995736 X -83.983611 X X -84.73124 X

X

X

X

X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-28

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_11_16294 RV_11_16296 RV_11_16330 RV_11_16334 RV_11_16343 RV_11_16365 RV_11_16369 RV_11_16371 RV_11_16375 RV_11_16380

Pachitla Creek at Robin Factory Rd. near Cuthbert, GA
Bear Creek at Nicholson St near Richland, GA
Mossy Creek at Pleasant Hill Road near Bronwood, GA
Baptist Branch at US Hwy 27 near Blakely, GA
Basin Creek at Old Alabama Rd near Thomaston, GA
Pigeon Creek at Shirley Rd near Manchester, GA
Russell Branch at Jeff Hendricks Rd. near Woodland, GA
Sheep Rock Hollow at Cove Rd near Woodbury, GA
Sullivan Creek at W. Lee's Mill Road near Atlanta, GA
Trib to Morning Creek at GA 314 near Fayetteville, GA

Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint

Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

Probabilistic WQMU Data collection; U/S of GA0021539 CSU Reference Point Sampling WQMU Data collection; U/S of Blakely WPCP
Reference
Need WQ data
Probabilistic
Reference
No data
Probabilistic

31.664 32.087872 31.878441 31.37057 32.926513
32.866 32.784 32.92202 33.61 33.499

-84.687

X X

-84.658598 X

-84.375904 X X

-84.92097 X

-84.38075 X X

-84.578

X X

-84.505

X X

-84.535264 X X

-84.411

X

-84.449

X

X

X X X

X

X X X

X

X X X

RV_11_3318

Spring Crk at SR 62 nr Blakely, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

319 Evaluation

31.414547

-84.775077 X X

X

RV_11_3447 RV_11_3448 RV_11_3449 RV_11_3480

Richland Creek
Barfield Creek Ulcohatchee Creek at Charlie Reeves
Road near Roberta, GA Flint River - Lee's Mill Road

Flint Flint Flint Flint

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

Reference
Reference
2010 Revisit Old sample location, update

32.72178647 32.7472334 32.708922

84.37952582

X

84.33926868

X

-84.187792 X

33.612222

-84.40667 X

X

X X X

X

X

X X X

X X X

X

X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-29

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

data

RV_11_3488

Flat Creek - Georgia Highway 74, South Of Peachtree City

Flint

Atlanta WP

Probabilistic; Nutrients-HIGH-
FLINT

33.341111

-84.538889 X

X X X

RV_11_3499

Elkins Creek at State Road 109 near Molena, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

2010 Revisit

33.0125

-84.483056 X X

RV_11_3584

Spring Creek at State Road 91 near Colquitt, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

319 Evaluation

31.170556

-84.742778 X X

X

RV_11_3586

Spring Creek At U.S. Highway 84 near Colquitt, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

319 Evaluation

30.975278

-84.745556 X X

X

RV_11_3592

Tributary to Potato Creek at Rocky Botton Rd nr Thomaston, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGHFLINT

32.93523

-84.28026 X X

X X X

RV_11_3632

Baptist Branch at SR 200 near Blakely, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; D/S of Blakely WPCP

31.37279423

84.91732226

X

RV_11_3634

Dry Creek at Georgia Highway 200

Flint

Tifton WP

Watershed Characterization

31.373023

-84.882969 X X

X

RV_11_3773

Auchumpkee Crk at Old Minor Rd nr Roberta, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

2010 Revisit

32.708359

-84.198271 X

X X X

RV_11_3780

Camp Creek 319(h) nr Walker Rd, Creekview Cir, Riverdale, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

319; NutrientsMED-FLINT

33.57508

-84.4337 X

X

X X X

X

RV_11_3789

Flint River @ Sprewell Bluff Sprewell Bluff State Park

Flint

Atlanta WP

Trend

32.855988

-84.476812 X X

X X X X X

RV_11_3799

Lanahassee Creek nr SR153 Wasington St nr Preston, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

CSU Reference Point Sampling

32.11212806

84.49885639

X X

X

RV_11_3804

Lime Creek at Springhill Church Road east of Americus, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

Trend

32.035

-83.9925 X X

X X X

X

X

RV_11_3807

Little Ichawaynochaway Crk at CR 3 nr Shellman, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

Trend

31.803532

-84.640013 X X

X X X

X

X

RV_11_3808

Little Patsiliga Creek at Montford Rd nr Butler, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

Reference

32.666907

-84.232452 X

X

X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-30

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_11_3835

trib to Flint River nr John Allen Carter Rd nr Talbotton, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

Reference

32.73479444

84.28516389

X

X

X X X

RV_11_3837

Turkey Creek at Pasley Shoals Rd. near Thomaston, GA

Flint

Atlanta WP

Reference; Nutrients-LOW-
FLINT

32.88144917

84.47736111

X X

X

X X X

X

RV_11_5101

Bay Branch at Hartford St near Edison, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; D/S of
GA0037427

31.562271

-84.718333 X X

RV_11_5106

Bear Creek at Sundown Road near Richland, GA

Flint

Tifton WP

WQMU Data collection; D/S of
GA0021539

32.069706

-84.642256 X

RV_12_16327

North Prong Kolomoki Creek at Kolomoki Rd near Bluffton, GA

Chattahoochee

Tifton WP

Watershed Characterization

31.501361

-84.942894 X X

X

RV_12_16354

House Creek at Monument Rd

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Need WQ data

32.825

-85.045

X X

X

RV_12_16370 RV_12_3841 RV_12_3849 RV_12_3859 RV_12_3870 RV_12_3891 RV_12_3934 RV_12_3940

Sandy Creek at Yates Rd near
Chattahoochee River at McGinnis Ferry Road
Chattahoochee River Mcclure Bridge
Chattahoochee River - DeKalb County Water Intake
Chattahoochee River at Cobb County Water Intake near Roswell, GA
Chattahoochee River - Atlanta Water Intake
Chattahoochee River at Bankhead Highway
Chattahoochee River @ Sr 6 (Camp Creek Pkwy / Thorton Rd.) near Lithia
Springs, GA

Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

Need WQ data AWW
Probabilistic Probabilistic;
AWW AWW AWW AWW
Probabilistic

32.829

-85.096

X X

X

34.050556

-84.097701 X X X

34.007778

-84.179444 X X X

X

33.9731

-84.2631 X X X

X

33.9443

-84.405

X X X

33.8278

-84.455

X X X

X

33.795278

-84.507778 X X

X

33.737335

-84.582591 X X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-31

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_12_3960

Chattahoochee River at Capps Ferry Road near Rico, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW

33.5778

-84.808611 X X

X

RV_12_4075

Mountain Oak Creek at State Road 103 near Hamilton, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

2010 Revisit

32.741111

-85.068889 X X

RV_12_4123

Hillabahatchee Creek at CR 210 near Frolona, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Trend

33.311218

-85.187675 X X

X X X X X

X

RV_12_4242 Whitewater Creek at North Glenn Rd Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Need WQ data

33.15225184

85.15408858

X X

X

RV_12_4280

Big Creek at Roswell Water Intake near Roswell, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

AWW

34.017851

-84.352492 X X X

X X

RV_12_4313

Odom Creek at Odom Creek Rd nr Blakely, GA

Chattahoochee

Tifton WP

CSU Reference Point Sampling

31.377779

-85.074508 X

RV_12_4316

Peachtree Creek at Northside Dr in Atlanta, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW

33.8194

-84.407778 X X X

X

X X

RV_12_4329

Sweetwater Creek at Interstate Highway 20

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

AWW

33.7728

-84.614722 X X

X X

RV_12_4333

Town Creek nr Town Creek Rd nr Woodland, AL

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

REFERENCE

33.29817222

85.26693722

X X

X

X X X

RV_12_4342

Wolf Creek At Wilson Road

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

2010 Revisit

33.539444

-84.833611 X X

RV_13_4393 RV_13_4397 RV_13_4407 RV_14_15873

Mud Branch at North Van Wert Rd near Villa Rica, GA
Indian Creek at State Line Road near Bowdon, GA
Tallapoosa River at Rockmart Road near Draketown, Ga.
Town Creek at Villanow Street

RV_14_15874

Dry Creek at Corinth Road

Tallapoosa Tallapoosa Tallapoosa
Coosa Coosa

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP

Villa Rica WPCP FC (Cat 3 for pH)

33.74128947 33.489176

84.96086342

X X

-85.30429 X X

2011 Repeat

33.885359

-85.094873 X X

Need data

34.704323

-85.275973 X

Need data

34.68537

-85.257968 X

X

X

X

X

X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-32

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_14_16346 RV_14_16353 RV_14_16355

Cedar Creek at SR 100
Euharlee Ck at Wayside Park Rockmart
Ketchum Branch at Underwood Road near Dalton, GA

RV_14_16359

Mill Creek @ SR 3

Coosa Coosa Coosa
Coosa

RV_14_16360

Mill Creek @ SR 3 BYPASS

Coosa

RV_14_16374 RV_14_4424 RV_14_4426 RV_14_4614 RV_14_4777

Stover Creek at Stover Creek Road near Dalton, GA
Camp Creek u/s SR136 near Resaca, GA
Oostanaula River at Georgia Highway 156 near Calhoun, GA
Coosa River at State Road 100 near Coosa, GA
Tanyard Branch at SR 100 / Canal St

RV_14_4788 Chattooga River South of Sucker Lake

RV_14_4789

Spring Branch off Ridgeway Rd

Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP

Rural runoff

34.00539

-85.26463 X X

Rural runoff
Need Data; WQMU
upstream water quality needed to compare with Mill
Creek @ SR 3 BYPASS
Stream possibly impacted by
construction of interchage, many industries in area
including a transfer tank wash out station. BIO F; need WQ
data
319 (FC)

33.99806 34.801
34.80338
34.7976
34.673 34.579167

-85.05308 X X

-84.917

X X

-85.02161 X

-84.99376 X X

-85.026

X X

-84.956111 X X

Probabilistic

34.4919

-85.0136 X

Probabilistic
WA-High FC
WA-City of Trion; need data
WA-City of Trion; need data

34.2486 34.00494021
34.55737

-85.3556 X

85.25937329

X X

-85.317355 X

34.568017

-85.296601 X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-33

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_14_4811 RV_14_4829 RV_14_4837 RV_14_4880

Allen Creek at Harrisburg Rd nr LaFayette, GA
Dykes Crk at Dykes Crk Xing nr Rome, GA
Jones Creek nr Jones Creek Rd, Dahlonega, GA
Thompson Creek at Bramlett Rd nr Rockmart, GA

RV_15_16347

Coke Oven Branch @ Lee Rd.

Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Tennessee

RV_15_16348

Crawfish Spring @ Euclid Ave.

Tennessee

RV_15_16349 RV_15_16350

Cutcane Creek @ Lowery Rd
Daley Creek @ Curtis switch Rd. near Mineral Bluff

RV_15_16361 Mineral Springs Creek @ Stites Rd.

Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee

RV_15_16366

Reservior Br @ Indian Forest

RV_15_16376 RV_15_16377

Toccoa River @ Harpertown Rd
Trib to Black Branch at Carline Rd. near Midway, GA

Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Atlanta WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP

Old BIO site; need data
Trend

34.601827 34.263568

-85.388774 X -85.08553 X X

SEMN
Reference
Never sampled possible impact by
urban growth Possible ref site. Never sampled. Water flows into
West Chickamauga
Creek. Never sampled Large Lake u/s
Never sampled
Headwater location possible impact by urban
growth Never sampled chicken houses u/s Never sampled possible impact by urban growth
Probabilistic

34.602401 33.97349613
34.87818
34.87039
34.92091 34.93322 34.85832 34.88336 34.98722 34.96957844

-84.150559 X

85.04021206

X

-85.2924 X X

-85.29264 X X
-84.2567 X -84.32011 X -84.31837 X -84.32487 X -84.37071 X -85.2656587 X

X X

X X X X X

X

X

X X X X X X

X X

X

X

X X

X

X

X X X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-34

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals Pesticides OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions
Total Dissolved Solids
Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_15_16378 RV_15_16382

Trib to Chattanooga Creek @ Lula Lake Rd.
Wauhatchie Branch @ Belk Rd.

RV_15_16383

Weaver Creek @ McKinney Rd

Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP

Never sampled possible impact by
urban growth Never sampled possible impact by urban growth Never sampled possible impact by urban growth

34.97701 34.97071 34.88172

-85.3579 X -85.40154 X -84.29545 X

X

X X

X

X

X X X

X

RV_15_4909

Toccoa River @ Hwy 76

Tennessee

Cartersville WP

Last sampled 1974

34.88914

-84.28677 X

X

RV_15_4911

Fighting Town Creek @ Mobile Rd

Tennessee

Cartersville WP

Last sampled 2001

34.98505

-84.38517 X

RV_15_4917

Lookout Creek @ Creek Rd

Tennessee

Cartersville WP

Last sampled 2011 large creek with impacts from lookout mountain. Floods easly.

34.8975

-85.46354 X

RV_15_4961

East Chickamauga Crk at Lower Gordon Springs Rd nr Dalton, GA

Tennessee

Cartersville WP

Trend

34.746923

-85.12355 X X

X X X X X

X

RV_15_4983

Wolf Creek @ River Rd.

Tennessee

Cartersville WP

Last sampled 2001

34.96554

-84.35383 X

1 Sampling Organization: Atlanta WP = GAEPD Atlanta office; Brunswick WP = GAEPD Brunswick Regional office, Cartersville WP = GAEPD Cartersville Regional Office Tifton WP = GAEPD Tifton Regional office. 2 Routine field and chemical parameters include: gage height / tape down or discharge measurement, air temperature, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductance, turbidity, 5-day BOD, , alkalinity, hardness, suspended solids, ammonia, nitrate-nitrite, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, total organic carbon Basin lakes field, chemical and biological parameters include: water depth, secchi disk transparency, photic zone depth, air temperature, depth profiles for dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and specific conductance, and chemical analyses for turbidity, specific conductance, 5-day BOD, pH, alkalinity, hardness, suspended solids, ammonia, nitrate-nitrite, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, total organic carbon, and chlorophyll a. 3 Biomonitoring: conducted for invertebrates and periphyton using Georgia EPD protocols.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-35

TABLE 3-8. GEORGIA TARGETED MONITORING NETWORK 2017
Rivers and streams stations are sampled monthly for field and chemical parameters for one calendar year. For stations where fecal coliform bacteria is collected, four fecal coliform bacterial samples are collected each calendar quarter during the year. Basin lakes and reservoirs are sampled monthly during the growing season for the calendar year.

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates 3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_01_115

Ebenezer Creek @ Long Bridge Rd nr. Stillwell, GA

RV_01_116

Ebenezer Creek @ Log Landing Rd

RV_01_16766

Trib to Buck Creek at SR 21 nr Sylvania

RV_01_16768

Little Ebenezer Creek @ Hwy 21

RV_01_244 RV_01_248 RV_02_16767 RV_02_292 RV_02_309 RV_02_462 RV_03_16072

Charlies Creek at Charlies Creek Rd East of Hiawassee, GA
Coleman River at Coleman River Rd near Clayton, GA
Lotts Creek at Jordan Rd near Register, GA
Ogeechee River at Scarboro Rd nr Rocky Ford
Ogeechee River at Morgans Bridge Rd nr Bloomingdale
Mill Creek at Bulloch County Road 386 Old River Road near Brooklet, Ga
North Oconee Rive at Greenway Road near Lula, GA

Savannah
Savannah Savannah Savannah Savannah Savannah Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee Ogeechee
Oconee

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP
Atlanta WP

WQMU Data Collection,
Springfield WPCP WQMU Data Collection,
Springfield WPCP
Probabilistic
WQMU Data Collection,
Springfield WPCP
SEMN

Atlanta WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP

SEMN
Stream Reach Characterization
Probabilistic

Brunswick WP

Probabilistic

Brunswick WP Atlanta WP

Trend Site
Stessor ID; potential LI

32.364583
32.350005 32.725738 32.345064 34.95895 34.952033
32.298 32.649294 32.079542 32.440012 34.364633

-81.23075 X

-81.267505 X

-81.608682 X X

-81.265565 X

-83.57158 X

-83.516598 X

-81.814

X

-81.840796 X X

-81.384688 X X

-81.579074 X X

-83.7317583 X

X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X

X

X X X

X

X

X X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-36

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_03_16273

Trib to Little Indian Creek at Pierce Dairy Rd.

RV_03_16761 Whitewater Creek at Lowery School Rd

RV_03_16780 RV_03_16781

Marshal Creek at CR 295 (Hillsboro Lake Rd) near Gray, GA
Cedar Creek at Union Hill Church Rd near Hillsboro, GA

RV_03_16782

White Oak Creek at GA Hwy 16 near Monticello, GA

RV_03_16783

Pearson Creek at College Street near Monitcello, GA

Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee
Oconee

RV_03_16784

Briar Creek at CR 167 (Briar Creek Rd)

RV_03_16785 RV_03_16786 RV_03_16787 RV_03_16788 RV_03_16789

Fishing Creek at CR 105 (Meadow St) near Maxeys, GA
Falling Creek at CR 87 (Wire Bridge Rd)
Indian Creek at CR 301 (Preston Rd) near Goodhope, GA
Turkey Creek at CR 311 (Mount Caramel Church Rd) near Monroe, GA
Hardeman Creek at CR 65 (Tal Phillips Rd)

Oconee
Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee

Atlanta WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

Stessor ID; D/S of Madison Lakes LAS;
Probabilistic
Stessor ID; potential LI
Stessor ID; List for FC
Stessor ID; NH3Monticello-White Oak Creek WPCP Stessor ID; NH3-
MonticelloPearson Creek
WPCP Stessor ID; Listed for BIO F; no WQ
data; D/S of Georgia Pacific
NPDES Stessor ID; potential LI Stessor ID; Listed for BIO F; no WQ
data Stessor ID; potential LI
Stessor ID; potential LI Stessor ID; Listed for BIO F; no WQ
data

33.508 32.334711 33.148626
33.162 33.296000
33.326000
33.621
33.717539 33.781
33.781617 33.843779
34.126

-83.472

X

-82.815942 X X

-83.584873 X

-83.543

X

-83.666000 X

-83.691000 X

-83.378

X

-83.156035 X

-83.256

X

-83.543094 X -83.576930 X

-83.395

X

X

X X X X

X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-37

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_03_16790 RV_03_16791

Cane Creek at CR 111 (Cane Creek Rd) near Arcade, GA
Cedar Creek at CR 814 (Cedar Creek Rd) near Gainesville, GA

RV_03_16801

Peterson Creek at US Hwy 280

RV_03_501 RV_03_508 RV_03_515

Cedar Creek at Barnett Shoals Drive near Athens, GA
Town Creek at CR 42 (Cold Springs Rd) near Greenboro, GA
Jacks Creek at Bearden Road near Monroe, GA

RV_03_554

Big Indian Creek at GA 83 near Madison, GA

RV_03_570 RV_03_603 RV_03_659

Pond Fork at Wayne Poultry Road near Pendergrass, GA
Oconee River at Milledgeville Water Intake
Peterson Creek at CR 58

RV_03_667

Trib to Mulberry River at Jackson Trail Road

RV_03_678

Lollis Creek at Spout Springs Rd

RV_03_706

Curry Creek at Jeffereson River Rd

Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee Oconee
Oconee Oconee

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

Stessor ID; potential LI
Stessor ID; potential LI
US GA0021377 Glenwood WPCP Stessor ID; D/S of large residential
neighborhoods Stessor ID; potential LI
Stessor ID; D/S of Monroe WPCP Stessor ID; List for FC, on 2015 list but not sampled for fish Stessor ID; List for FC
Probabilistic
DS GA0021377 Glenwood WPCP Stessor ID; most watershed drains
Braselton Golf Club
Stessor ID; D/S of Spout Springs
Reclamation LAS Stessor ID; D/S of Jefferson LAS and
NPDES

34.028907 34.295909 32.17367 33.895278 33.612982 33.79966 33.525556 34.18073 33.083861 32.162358
34.066
34.128823 34.076666

-83.463729 X -83.724132 X -82.68047 X
-83.3325 X -83.238978 X -83.61913 X

-83.524444 X

-83.66086 X -83.214393 X -82.645677 X

-83.686

X

-83.879728 X -83.499176 X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-38

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

X

X X X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_03_707 Redstone Creek at Lebanon Church Rd

RV_03_720

West Fork Trail Creek at Hull Rd

RV_03_736 RV_03_788 RV_04_2058 RV_05_16777 RV_05_16779 RV_05_2185

Peterson Creek at 3rd Ave
Candler Creek at Diamond Hill Rd near Gillsville, GA
Bear Creek at McDonald Road near Mansfield ,GA
Echeconnee Creek at Rock Quarry Rd near Yatesville
Trib to Walnut Creek at Chehaw Trail near Macon
Ocmulgee River at Hwy 96

RV_05_2229

Little Ocmulgee River at SR 134

RV_06_15207 RV_06_16760

Altamaha River at Jaycee Landing boat ramp
Big Cedar Creek at Bartow Dublin Hwy

RV_06_2850

Fountain Branch at Logging Road near Ludowici, GA

RV_06_2871

Ohoopee River at SR 56 nr Nunez

RV_06_2887

Ohoopee River at SR 292 nr Lyons

Oconee Oconee
Oconee Oconee Upper Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Ocmulgee Altamaha Altamaha
Altamaha Altamaha Altamaha

Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP

Stessor ID; D/S of Arcade LAS
Stessor ID; List for FC; Two MHP outfalls upstream
US GA0021377 Glenwood WPCP
Stessor ID; List for FC
Had metal data in 2010, but no TSS
or hardness.
Probabilistic

Atlanta WP

Probabilistic

Tifton WP Tifton WP

Need current fecal data
DS Scotland WPCP

Brunswick WP

Probabilistic

Tifton WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP

Probabilistic
WQMU Data Collection,NH3Ludowici WPCP
Probabilistic

Brunswick WP

Probabilistic

34.026189 33.989508 32.178996 34.280249 33.445923 32.922939 33.010562
32.5425 32.008583 31.666757 32.732922 31.646461 32.470859 32.194271

-83.533723 X -83.35101 X -82.691669 X -83.626928 X -83.812818 X -84.116989 X X -83.610971 X -83.536944 X X -82.752583 X -81.838751 X X -82.706965 X X -81.720465 X X -82.446815 X X -82.191849 X X

X

X X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X

X X

X

X

X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-39

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_07_16398

Unnamed Tributary to 17 Mile River at Gaskins Ave

RV_07_2661

Satilla River at SR 135

RV_07_2990 RV_07_2991 RV_07_2993

L. Hurricane Creek @ SR 32 near Alma, GA
L. Hurricane Creek @ CR 343 (SR 64) near Alma, GA
L. Hurricane Creek @ US Hwy 1 near Waycross, GA

RV_07_3099

Mill Creek @ High Bluff Rock Rd

RV_08_16769 RV_08_16770 RV_08_3131 RV_08_3144

Clay Branch @ Okefenokee Dr.
Long Branch @ Sardis/Spanish Creek Rd.
Spanish Creek @ SR 121 Okefenokee Parkway
Clay Branch @ Spanish Creek Rd.

RV_08_3146

Heather's Branch @ Post Rd

RV_09_16162 TyTy Creek at South Pickett Street

RV_09_16165

Trib of Ty Ty Creek West u/s of WPCP discharge

RV_09_16320

Trib to Mill Creek at SR 30

Satilla Satilla Satilla
Satilla
Satilla Satilla St Marys St Marys St Marys St Marys St Marys Suwannee Suwannee Suwannee

Brunswick WP

WQMU Data Collection,NH3-
RW Griffin

Brunswick WP

Probabilistic

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP

WQMU Data Collection, Miliken
WPCP WQMU Data Collection, Miliken
WPCP WQMU Data Collection, Miliken
WPCP

Brunswick WP

Trend Site

Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP Brunswick WP
Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP

Folkston Targeted FC Study
Folkston Targeted FC Study
Folkston Targeted FC Study
Folkston Targeted FC Study
Folkston Targeted FC Study
DS GA0025500 TyTy WPCP trib US
GA0025500 TyTy WPCP
DS GA0024244 Rochelle

31.502061 31.425888 31.54491
31.495556
31.423477 31.189994 30.840673 30.813087 30.804106 30.828992 30.827145
31.4619 31.46832 31.949891

-82.845295 X -82.889088 X -82.54472 X
-82.528056 X
-82.432838 X -82.202803 X X -82.014125 X X -82.069331 X X -82.027633 X X -82.019007 X X -82.035421 X X -83.65208 X -83.65423 X -83.480221 X

X X

X

X X X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-40

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_09_16752 RV_09_16757 RV_09_16758 RV_09_16759 RV_09_16763

Flat Branch at Kinard Bridge Rd Cat Creek at Hwy 122 Cat Creek at SR 37
Beaverdam Creek at Park Street Piscola Creek at SR 33

Suwannee Suwannee Suwannee Suwannee Suwannee

Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP

Northwest WPCP; 2016 sample site DS GA0031950
Lenox WPCP DS GA0033553 Ray City WPCP
US GA0033553
trib US GA0033553
GA NWQI

31.2587 31.02563 31.07393 31.07119 30.830549

-83.49347 X -83.22433 X -83.20504 X -83.20225 X -83.769923 X X

RV_09_16764

Piscola Creek at Hwy 122

Suwannee

Tifton WP

GA NWQI

30.939235

-83.768289 X X

RV_09_16765

Piscola Creek at Coffee Rd

Suwannee

Tifton WP

GA NWQI

30.881135

-83.771941 X X

RV_09_16800

Trib to Cherry Creek DS Oak St. Subdivision WPCP

Suwannee

Tifton WP

DS GA0030104

30.89499

-83.27701 X

RV_09_3166

Alapaha River at US Hwy 82

Suwannee

Tifton WP

DS GA0033596 Alapaha WPCP

31.384167

-83.1925 X X

X

RV_09_3192

Alapaha River at US Hwy 129

Suwannee

Tifton WP

Probabilistic

31.046241

-83.043412 X

RV_09_3230 RV_09_3246

Piscola Creek at US Hwy 84 Ty Ty Creek at US Hwy 82

RV_10_16396 Aucilla River at Whitney Camp Rd

RV_10_16754

Mill Creek DS Doerun WPCP

Suwannee Suwannee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee

Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP

GA NWQI
US GA0025500 TyTy WPCP
DS Boston WPCP GA0033715; 2016
sample site
DS GA0021717

30.793056 31.4736 30.744 31.30976

-83.706389 X X -83.66348 X -83.78597 X -83.9222 X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-41

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_10_16803

Slater Branch at Plantation Rd

Ocklockonee

Tifton WP

Probabilistic

30.733907

-84.013535 X X

X

X

RV_10_3365

Ochlockonee River at FAS 1205

Ocklockonee

Tifton WP

Ochlockonee Nutrient Study

31.142333

-83.803611 X

X

RV_10_3371

Ochlockonee River at SR 188

Ocklockonee

Tifton WP

Probabilistic

31.002463

-83.939229 X

RV_10_3384

Tired Creek at CR 151

RV_10_3386 Ochlockonee River at Hadley Ferry Rd

RV_10_3389

Attapulgus at US Hwy 27

RV_10_3390

Swamp Creek at US Hwy 27

RV_10_3415

Oquina Creek at Old Cassidy Rd

RV_10_3423

Little Attapulgus at SR 241

RV_10_3425

Parkers Mill Creek at CR 324

RV_10_5099 Unnamed Trib to Oaky Woods at SR 3

RV_11_16755

Pessell Creek at Thrasher Rd

RV_11_16756

Kell Creek at SR 62

RV_11_16778 Kennel Creek D/S of Greenville WPCP

Ocklockonee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee Ocklockonee
Flint Flint Flint

Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP

Evaluation for BioM delisting
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
Ochlockonee Nutrient Study
DS GA0020931 Plains WPCP
DS GA0026212 Leary WPCP
NH3-Greenville WPCP

30.763611 30.731717 30.732778 30.719444 30.884714 30.718056 30.838056 31.07699 32.014497 31.48577 33.025000

-84.229444 X

-84.235533 X

-84.453611 X

-84.411389 X

-83.98171 X

-84.49

X

-84.22611 X

-84.080289 X

-84.384629 X

-84.50654 X

-84.701000 X X

X X X X X X X
X

RV_11_16802

Cedar Creek at SR 90

Flint

Tifton WP

DS GA0048011

32.37803

-84.18865 X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-42

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_11_16804

Prison Branch

Flint

RV_11_3501 Flint River at SR 36 near Thomaston

Flint

RV_11_3513 RV_11_3571 RV_11_3691 RV_11_3789 RV_11_3804

Turkey Creek at SR 90
Ichawaynochaway at Herod Dover Rd/CR167
Town Branch at SR 18
Flint River at Sprewell Bluff Sprewell Bluff State Park
Lime Creek at Springhill Church Rd

Flint Flint Flint Flint Flint

RV_11_3807 Little Ichawaynochaway Creek at CR 3

Flint

RV_12_15965 Noses Creek at Mount Calvary Road Chattahoochee

RV_12_16762 Cemochechobee Creek at Coleman Rd Chattahoochee

RV_12_16771

Roaring Branch at GA Hwy 22 near Columbus, GA

Chattahoochee

RV_12_16772

Mulberry Creek at Winfree Rd

Chattahoochee

Tifton WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Atlanta WP Atlanta WP Tifton WP Tifton WP Cartersville
WP Tifton WP
Atlanta WP
Atlanta WP

DS Andersonville WPCP;
Probabilistic
DS GA0025623 Byromville WPCP
DS GA0032361 Shellman WPCP
NH3-Zebulon WPCP
Trend site
Trend site
Trend site
Urban runoff
Probabilistic
Industrial Permitting unit says that DMI Columbus has lots
of metals in stormwater that comingles with
noncontact cooling.
Probabilistic

32.19455 32.838463 32.195556 31.70208 33.101825 32.855988
32.035 31.803532 33.95317 31.635659
32.525827
32.722155

-84.13317 X

-84.424492 X X

-83.900833 X

-84.545693 X

-84.355752 X X

-84.476812 X X

-83.9925 X X

-84.640013 X X

-84.612

X

-85.00806 X X

-84.977956 X

-84.814867 X

X

X

X X X

X

X X X

X

X

X X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-43

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_12_16773

Trib to Mountain Creek at Callaway Gardens near Pine Mountain, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

NH3-Callaway Gardens WPCP

32.828000

-84.861000 X

X

RV_12_16774

Chattahoochee River at Hollingsworth Ferry Rd

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Probabilistic

33.394566

-85.032159 X X

RV_12_16792

Clear Creek at Piedmont Ave in Atlanta, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Listing based on info from Municipal
Engineering. No data in database, need new data.
Nutrients-???

33.796

-84.37

X X X

X

X

RV_12_3841

Chattahoochee River at McGinnis Ferry Road

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

AWW

34.050556

-84.097701 X X X

X

RV_12_3859

Chattahoochee River - DeKalb County Water Intake

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW

33.9731

-84.2631 X X X

RV_12_3870

Chattahoochee River at Cobb County Water Intake near Roswell, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW

33.9443

-84.405

X X X

RV_12_3891

Chattahoochee River - Atlanta Water Intake

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW

33.8278

-84.455

X X X

X

RV_12_3898

White Creek at New Bridge Road near Demorest, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGH

34.542636

-83.659694 X

X X

RV_12_3900

Little Mud Creek at Coon Creek Road near Alto, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-MED

34.467333

-83.632333 X

X X

RV_12_3917

Tesnatee Creek at County Road 200 near Cleveland, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-LOW

34.583333

-83.8225 X

X X

RV_12_3925

Chestatee River at State Road 400 near Dahlonega, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

USGS; NutrientsLOW

34.466667

-83.968889

X

RV_12_3934

Chattahoochee River at Bankhead Highway

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

AWW

33.795278

-84.507778 X X

X

RV_12_3942

Sweetwater Creek at Powder Springs Road near Austell, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-LOW

33.818788

-84.640703 X X

X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-44

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_12_3949

Anneewakee Creek at State Road 166 near Douglasville, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-MED

33.665278

-84.683611 X X

X X

X

RV_12_3960

Chattahoochee River at Capps Ferry Road near Rico, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW

33.5778

-84.808611 X X

X

RV_12_4003

Flat Creek at McEver Road near Gainesville, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

USGS; NutrientsHIGH

34.265833

-83.885

X

RV_12_4016

Four Mile Creek at Browns Bridge Road near Cumming, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGH

34.249394

-84.011959 X

X X

RV_12_4017

Sixmile Creek at Burrus Mill Road near Coal Mountain, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGH

34.259111

-84.057805 X

X X

X

RV_12_4039

New River at State Road 100 near Corinth, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

USGS; NutrientsLOW

X

RV_12_4049

Yellow Jacket Creek at Hammet Road near Hogansville, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

USGS; NutrientsLOW

X

RV_12_4069

Flat Shoals Creek at State Road 18 near West Point, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Nutrients-LOW

32.898056

-85.068889 X

X X

RV_12_4075

Mountain Oak Creek at State Road 103 near Hamilton, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-LOW

32.741111

-85.068889 X

X X

RV_12_4101

Pataula Creek at US Hwy 82

Chattahoochee

Tifton WP

Probabilistic

31.747461

-85.054612 X X

X

RV_12_4114

Chattahoochee River at SR 37

Chattahoochee

Tifton WP

DS GA0026191 Fort Gaines WPCP

31.604167

-85.055278 X

RV_12_4118

Mulberry Creek at US 27 near Hamilton, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGH

32.7085

-84.8698 X

X X

X

RV_12_4123

Hillabahatchee Creek at CR 210 near Frolona, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Trend site, Nutrients-LOW

33.311218

-85.187675 X X

X

X X

X

RV_12_4124

Milligan Creek at Star Point Rd near Roopville, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-MED

33.440331

-85.083574 X X

X X

RV_12_4256

Cracker Creek at Maroney Mill Rd near Douglasville, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

No data in listing folder. Nutrients-
???

33.78371361

-84.739272 X X

X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-45

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_12_4280

Big Creek at Roswell Water Intake near Roswell, GA

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

AWW, NutrientsHIGH

34.017851

-84.352492 X X X

X X

RV_12_4306

Mossy Creek at State Road 254 near Cleveland, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGH

34.535278

-83.699444 X

X X

RV_12_4309

Mud Creek at Crane Mill Road near Alto, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

Nutrients-HIGH

34.482833

-83.638667 X

X X

RV_12_4316

Peachtree Creek at Northside Dr in Atlanta, GA

Chattahoochee

Atlanta WP

AWW, NutrientsMED

33.8194

-84.407778 X X X

X

X X

RV_12_4329

Sweetwater Creek at Interstate Highway 20

Chattahoochee Atlanta WP

AWW, NutrientsLOW

33.7728

-84.614722 X X

X X

RV_13_16775

Indian Creek at Sandy Flat Rd near Bowdon, GA

Tallapoosa

Atlanta WP NH3-Bowdon LAS 33.518125

-85.292503 X X

X

RV_13_16776

Trib to Buck Creek at Hutches Rd near Bremen, GA

Tallapoosa

Atlanta WP

NH3-Bremen Buck Creek WPCP

33.692000

-85.102000 X X

X

RV_14_15853 Ninety nine Branch at Irwin Mill Rd

Coosa

Cartersville WP

EPA request

34.417529

-84.68994 X

RV_14_16687

Etowah River at South Broad Street Rome

Coosa

Cartersville WP

EPA request

34.251496

-85.176337 X

RV_14_16793 Marlow Branch at Covington Bridge

Coosa

Cartersville WP

EPA request

34.471

-84.716

X

RV_14_16794

Robins Creek at Miller's Ferry Road at Tressel

Coosa

Cartersville WP

EPA request

34.449186

-85.012284 X

RV_14_16795

Tributary to Noonday Creek Chastain Meadows Pky

Coosa

Cartersville WP

Probabalistic

34.02816

-84.55701 X

RV_14_16796

E. Branch Swamp Creek Below Big Canoe WPCP

Coosa

Cartersville WP

Ammonia

34.432

-84.291

X

X

RV_14_16797

Noonday Creek at Roberts Blvd

Coosa

Cartersville WP

DS of Vulcan minerals and McCollum Field in Kennesaw; Urban
runoff

34.00451

-84.59245 X

X

X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-46

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_14_16798 Badger Creek at S. Holly Springs Road

RV_14_16799 RV_14_4416 RV_14_4425 RV_14_4480

Town Creek at Newtown Creek Loop near Calhoun, GA
Dry Creek at Pleasant Hill Road
Snake Creek at Pocket Road in Sugar Valley
Bow Creek at Old Rome - Dalton Road

RV_14_4531 Woodland Creek at Bells Ferry Road

RV_14_4591

Spring Creek at SR 20

RV_14_4608 RV_14_4647 RV_14_4823 RV_14_4825

Beech Creek at Mays Bridge
Rubes Creek at Arnold Mill Rd Woodstock
Crane Eater Creek at Pine Chappel Road
Dozier Creek at Bells Ferry Road

RV_14_4829 RV_14_4831 RV_14_4837

Dykes Creek at Dykes Creek Crossing
Flat Creek at Hwy 382 D/S Bridge 100 yds.
Jones Creek near Jones Creek Rd, Dahlonega, GA

Coosa
Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa Coosa

Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Cartersville WP
Atlanta WP

Below old land fill, recycling center and new park; urban runoff NWQI Need data at normal flow EPA request
EPA request
EPA request
Need metals data Need data at normal flow Probabalistic
EPA request
EPA request
Trend site
Fecal needed
SEMN

34.14333
34.528 34.551944 34.557222 34.53859 34.343244 34.206056 34.233315 34.103855 34.531111 34.320833 34.293568 34.639854 34.602401

-84.47826 X

-84.899

X

-84.779167 X

-85.016389 X

-85.02672 X

-85.110348 X

-85.07485 X

-85.29329 X

-84.503804 X

-84.872222 X

-85.110278 X

-85.08553 X X

-84.574449 X X

-84.150559 X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X X

X

X X X X X

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-47

Routine 2 Fecal coliform E. coli Enterococci Metals OrthoPhosphorus Diatoms3 Macroinvertebrates3 Anions/TDS Gage Chlorophyll

Georgia Station Number

Sampling Site

River Basin

Sampling Organization1

Waterbody Type/Project

Latitude

Longitude

RV_14_4841

Lick Creek at Langford Road

Coosa

Cartersville WP

EPA request

34.534829

-84.796003 X

RV_15_4961

E. Chickamauga Creek at Lower Gordon Springs Rd

Tennessee

Cartersville WP

Trend site

34.74717

-85.12429 X X

X

X X X

SH_07_3049

Cumberland Sound at St. Marys Riv nr St Marys, GA

Satilla

Brunswick WP

Estuary Site

30.72807

-81.48979 X

1 Sampling Organization: Atlanta WP = GAEPD Atlanta office; Brunswick WP = GAEPD Brunswick Regional office, Cartersville WP = GAEPD Cartersville Regional Office Tifton WP = GAEPD Tifton Regional office. 2 Routine field and chemical parameters include: gage height / tape down or discharge measurement, air temperature, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductance, turbidity, 5-day BOD, , alkalinity, hardness, suspended solids, ammonia, nitrate-nitrite, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, and total organic carbon. Basin lakes field, chemical and biological parameters include: water depth, secchi disk transparency, photic zone depth, air temperature, depth profiles for dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and specific conductance, and chemical analyses for turbidity, specific conductance, 5-day BOD, pH, alkalinity, hardness, suspended solids, ammonia, nitrate-nitrite, Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, total organic carbon, and chlorophyll a. 3 Biomonitoring: conducted for invertebrates and periphyton using Georgia EPD protocols.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-48

use in making regulatory decisions. Impact studies are conducted where information on the cause and effect relationships between pollutant sources and receiving waters is needed. In many cases biological information is collected along with chemical data for use in assessing environmental impacts.
Biological Monitoring Biological monitoring is performed in order to assess the biological integrity of the States waters. The Department of Natural Resources' Wildlife Resource Division has been conducting bioassessments using fish as the indicator species since the early 1990's. The primary technique for determining the quality of fish communities is called the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). This index utilizes the numbers and types of fish species present in a stream to produce a stream score or rating for comparison across streams within a particular ecoregion or to the same stream over time. Biological monitoring is useful in detecting intermittent sources of pollution that may not be caught in trend or targeted monitoring of water quality parameters. The Tennessee Valley Authority has also collected fish IBI data in Georgia. In 2007, the GAEPD began utilizing macroinvertebrate biological data in addition to fish data for assessing the biotic integrity of wadeable streams in Georgia.
Lake Monitoring The GAEPD has maintained monitoring programs for Georgia's public lakes since the late 1960's. Currently, Georgia has six major lakes that have standard criteria approved by legislature, which include: Sydney Lanier, Allatoona, West Point, Walter F. George, Jackson and Carters. These lakes are sampled every year from April to October when primary productivity is highest. In addition to the six lakes with criteria, Georgia has 21 other major lakes (lakes over 500 acres). Prior to 2008, these lakes were monitored quarterly on a basin rotation cycle, so each lake was sampled once every 5 years. Beginning in 2008, EPD began to monitor these lakes monthly from April to October instead of quarterly. In addition, in 2008, EPD

began to transition from monitoring these lakes on a basin rotation cycle to monitoring them each year. This transition was done over a period of time by adding a set of lakes (by basin) to the annual monitoring program each year. By 2012, EPD was monitoring all major lakes annually (except for those in the Savannah River Basin). Major lakes in the Savannah River Basin were added to the annual monitoring program in 2014. The data collected in the annual monitoring of lakes includes depth profiles for dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and specific conductance; secchi disk transparency and photic zone depth; and chemical analyses for turbidity, specific conductance, 5-day BOD, pH, alkalinity, hardness, suspended solids, ammonia, nitrate-nitrite, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, total phosphorus, total organic carbon, bacteria (fecal coliform, E. coli, or enterococci depending on designated use), and chlorophyll a.
The monitoring of major lakes (> 500 acres) since 1984 has continued to use Carlson's Trophic State Index (TSI) as a tool to mark trophic state trends. Currently, all major lakes are monitored monthly April through October. Three measurements (secchi depth, chlorophyll-a and total phosphorus) are used to calculate TSIs each month using the equations below and are combined into a total trophic state index (TTSI). A growing-season average TTSI for the dampool location for each lake is then used to assess the trophic status. Other field data and observations are also used to assess the trophic condition of each lake and to establish categories of lakes relative to need for restoration and/or protection. The major lakes listed in Table 3-9 are ranked according to the average seasonal TSI.
TSIsecchi = 60 (14.41) (ln Secchi disk (meters))
TSIP = (14.42) (ln Total phosphorus (ug/L)) + 4.15
TSIchl = (9.81) (ln Chlorophyll a (ug/L)) + 30.6

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-49

TABLE 3-9. MAJOR LAKES RANKED BY SUM OF TOTAL TROPHIC STATE INDEX VALUES 2017

Major Lake

TTSI Ranking Major Lake TTSI Ranking Major Lake TTSI Ranking

High Falls

180

Goat Rock

150

Chatuge

125

Blackshear

171

Harding

150

Lanier

125

Worth

164

Andrews

149

Carters

124

Seminole

162

West Point

138

Nottely

124

Chehaw

162

Russell

137

Burton

124

Tobesofkee

160

Allatoona

137

Hartwell

119

Walter F. George

158

Julliette

133

Blue Ridge

119

Jackson

152

Tugalo

132

Oconee

No Data

Oliver

151

Clarks Hill

127

Sinclair

No Data

Banks

151

Rabun

125

*Carters Lake does not have a dam pool site due to the pump-back activity from the re-regulation reservoir. Data listed is from the mid-lake station. Sample for Lake Chatuge taken at State line.

Fish Tissue Monitoring This general contaminants assessment project is focused on fish tissue sampling and analyses, riskbased data assessment, and annual publication of consumption guidance in Georgia's Freshwater & Saltwater Sport Fishing Regulations and in Guidelines for Eating Fish from Georgia Waters. Fish tissue samples are typically collected in the fall from Georgia lakes and rivers, and analyzed in the winter and spring. Site-specific sampling in Georgia estuaries occurs between the spring and fall on a case specific basis. The sampling is conducted by either the GADNR Wildlife Resources Division (WRD), or the Coastal Resources Division (CRD), depending on whether the site is freshwater (WRD), or estuarine/marine waters (CRD). Samples are catalogued and transported to GAEPD or University of Georgia laboratories and results

are reported to the GAEPD the following late summer or early fall. The data from the annual collections are utilized in reassessments that are incorporated annually into the Guidelines for Eating Fish for Georgia Waters and Georgia's Freshwater and Saltwater Sport Fishing Regulations. The first risk-based consumption guidance was published in 1995. As part of the implementation of the Federal Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), it was recognized that a more rigorous monitoring program of mercury in fish tissue would be required to support trend analysis and the efficacy of future reductions in air mercury emissions. A subproject was designed and implemented in 2006 consisting of 22 fish mercury trend stations, which will be monitored annually. Nineteen stations are fresh water and 3 are estuarine. The mercury in fish trend monitoring sites are provided in Table 3-10.

TABLE 3-10. MERCURY IN FISH TREND MONITORING STATIONS

Antioch Lake at Rocky Mtn. PFA Oostanaula River at Georgia Hwy. 140 Lake Acworth Lake Tugalo Bear Creek Reservoir Randy Pointer Lake (Black Shoals Reservoir) Chattahoochee River below Morgan Falls Chattahoochee River Below Franklin Lake Tobesofkee Ocmulgee River below Macon at Ga. Hwy. 96 Lake Andrews

Flint River below Ichawaynochaway Creek Lake Kolomoki at Kolomoki State Park Satilla River below U.S. Hwy. 82 Okefenokee Swamp National Wildlife Refuge Banks Lake National Wildlife Refuge Savannah River at U.S. Hwy. 301 Savannah River at I-95 Ogeechee River at Ga. Hwy. 204 Wassaw Sound Altamaha Delta and Sound St. Andrews Sound

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-50

Toxic Substance Stream Monitoring The GAEPD has focused resources on the management and control of toxic substances in the State's waters for many years. Toxic substance analyses have been conducted on samples from selected trend monitoring stations since 1973. Wherever discharges were found to have toxic impacts or to include toxic pollutants, the GAEPD has incorporated specific limitations on toxic pollutants in NPDES discharge permits. In 1983 the GAEPD intensified toxic substance stream monitoring efforts. This expanded toxic substance stream monitoring project included facility effluent, stream, sediment, and fish sampling at specific sites downstream of selected industrial and municipal discharges. From 1983 through 1991, ten to twenty sites per year were sampled as part of this project. Continued work is performed on a site-specific basis and as part of the targeted monitoring program.
Aquatic Toxicity Testing Biomonitoring requirements are currently addressed in all municipal and industrial NPDES permits. In January 1995, the GAEPD issued approved NPDES Reasonable Potential Procedures that further delineate required conditions for conducting whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing for municipal and industrial discharges. The Reasonable Potential Procedures were updated in 2003 and the GAEPD additionally developed a WET Strategy that provided more detail as to how the State would determine which facilities needed a WET limit in their permit. This strategy outlined minimum data requirements for different types of facilities.
The GAEPD conducted aquatic toxicity tests on municipal and industrial water pollution control plant effluents from 1985 through 1997. Funding for GAEPD's aquatic toxicity testing laboratory was redirected to TMDL monitoring and the toxicity testing requirements were turned over to the individual permittees.
Coastal Monitoring The Coastal Resources Division (CRD) conducts the majority of coastal monitoring in the State. CRD conducts water quality monitoring in estuarine and near-shore coastal waters

through its Public Health Water Quality Monitoring Program. This Program has three distinct parts. The Shellfish Sanitation and Beach Water Quality Monitoring Programs are concerned with public health, while the Nutrient Sampling Program is designed to generate baseline-monitoring data for trends. A list of the beaches monitored in 2016 and 2017 can be found in Table 3-11. A list of the stations monitored under the Shellfish Sanitation program can be found in Table 3-12 (these stations are also included in Figure 1). The nutrient sampling that was performed was conducted at a subset of the Shellfish Sanitation monitoring stations. Table 3-12 indicates which stations were monitored for nutrients. More detail regarding the work conducted by CRD can be found in Chapter 5. GAEPD has, over the past few years, intensified its own coastal monitoring program. Currently, GAEPD monitors eight locations throughout Georgia's sounds. The data collected included depth profiles for dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and specific conductance, Secchi disk transparency, and chemical analyses for chlorophyll a, total phosphorus, nitrogen compounds, and turbidity.

Facility Compliance Sampling In addition

to surface water quality monitoring, the

GAEPD conducts evaluations and

compliance sampling inspections of

municipal and industrial water pollution

control plants and State-permitted industrial

pretreatment facilities.

Compliance

sampling inspections include collection of

24-hour composite samples, evaluation of

the permittee's sampling and flow monitoring

provisions and sampling documentation. In

excess of 170 sampling inspections were

conducted by the GAEPD in Fiscal Years

2016-2017. The results were used to

confirm validity of permittee self-monitoring

data and as supporting evidence in

enforcement actions.

Probabilistic Monitoring In order to determine the quality of all the waters in the State, the GAEPD would either have to sample and assess each individual waterbody (which is not possible due to the resources that would be needed) or would

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-51

Table 3-11 Beaches Monitored by CRD in 2016 & 2017

Station ID

Beach Name

BIRP BOSS CNBF DALL JICC JIM JIN JIS JISA JISD JIWY KING REIM SEN SES SIF

Blythe Island Sandbar Beach Ossabaw Island Bradley Beach Contentment Bluff Sandbar Beach Dallas Bluff Sandar Beach Jekyll Island - Clam Creek Beach Jekyll Island - Middle Beach at Convention Center Jekyll Island - North Beach at Dexter Lane Jekyll Island - South Beach at 4-H Camp Jekyll Island - St. Andrews Beach Jekyll Island - South Dunes Picnic Area Beach Jekyll Island - Captain Wylly Road Crossover Beach Kings Ferry County Park Beach Reimolds Pasture Beach Sea Island - North Beach Sea Island - South Beach Saint Simons Island - 5th Street Crossover Beach

SIM

Saint Simons Island - Middle Beach (aka East Beach Old Coast Guard Station)

SIMA SIN SIS
SKID

Saint Simons Island - Massengale Park Beach Saint Simons Island - North Beach at Goulds Inlet Saint Simons Island - South Beach at Lighthouse
Skidaway Narrows County Park Beach (aka Butterbean Beach)

SOSS

Ossabaw Island South Beach

TYM

Tybee Island - Middle Beach at Center Terrace

TYN

Tybee Island - North Beach at Gulick Street

TYP

Tybee Island - Polk Street Beach

TYS

Tybee Island - South Beach at Chatham Street

TYST

Tybee Island - Strand Beach at Pier

*Stations sampled monthly are monitored April October.

County Glynn Chatham McIntosh McIntosh Glynn Glynn Glynn Glynn Glynn Glynn Glynn Chatham Glynn Glynn Glynn Glynn
Glynn
Glynn Glynn Glynn
Chatham
Chatham Chatham Chatham Chatham Chatham Chatham

Frequency* Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Quarterly Monthly Monthly Monthly Weekly
Weekly
Weekly Weekly Weekly
Monthly
Monthly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly Weekly

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-52

Table 3-12 Stations Monitored by CRD under the Shellfish Sanitation and Nutrient Monitoring Programs in 2016 & 2017

Station ID

Latitude

Longitude Description

Nutrients Nutrients

2016

2017

1049 31.92866 -81.01839 southernmost tributary off Romerly Marsh Creek

1050 31.92503 -81.00860 northern mouth of Habersham Creek

1052 31.94317 -81.00914 northernmost tributary off Romerly Marsh Creek

1152 31.92557 -80.98520 Old Romerly Marsh Creek

1153 31.92993 -80.98919 Romerly Marsh Creek Chatham

1154 31.97741 -80.96789 Halfmoon River at Beard Creek

X

X

1155 31.95172 -80.98532 Tybee Cut South

X

X

1159 31.96792 -80.93600 Pa Cooper Creek

1200 31.94600 -80.93000 Mouth of House Creek Chatham

X

X

1201 31.95500 -80.93300 North of House Creek/Wassaw Sound Chatham

1222 32.01500 -80.92400 Cut Oyster Creek to Bull River Chatham

1223 32.01400 -80.91600 North Fork Oyster Creek Chatham

X

X

1224

31.99800

-80.91200

North Junction Lazaretto & Oyster Creeks Chatham

1225

31.99500

-80.91000

South Junction Lazaretto & Oyster Creeks Chatham

X

X

1337 32.02829 -80.94725 Bull River upstream of Betz Creek

X

X

1338 32.02005 -80.94529 Betz Creek

1352 31.96058 -81.01186 Priest Landing Chatham

3242 31.68500 -81.29600 Medway River Near Sunbury

X

X

3249 31.68600 -81.27700 Halfmoon East

3255 31.73400 -81.19400 Mouth of Jones Hammock Creek

3273 31.74100 -81.16100 Bear River across from Newell Creek

3275 31.77100 -81.16998 Bear River across from Kilkenny

X

X

3285 31.75680 -81.27240 Dickinson Creek Mouth

X

X

3286 31.74765 -81.25410 Jones Creek Mouth

3288 31.72800 -81.22028 Medway River East of Sunbury Creek

3291 31.68940 -81.19400 Van Dyke Creek Mouth

X

X

3319 31.68713 -81.15633 Walburg Northwest

X

X

4092 31.51000 -81.27800 Eagle Creek, McIntosh

4100 31.53000 -81.33000 Back River at July Cut

X

X

4120 31.52777 -81.25732 Mud River at Dog Hammock

4122 31.59343 -81.26117 Little Mud River at Barbour Island River

X

X

4123 31.53432 -81.22433 Sapelo Sound at Highpoint

X

X

4175 31.44200 -81.30600 Old Teakettle Creek, McIntosh

X

X

4177 31.47600 -81.33200 Shellbluff Creek, McIntosh

X

X

4178 31.48800 -81.32300 Creighton Narrows, McIntosh

4179 31.48500 -81.29500 New Teakettle Creek, McIntosh

4180 31.52300 -81.29100 Front River, McIntosh

4184 31.55400 -81.31400 Juliention River, McIntosh

X

X

4185 31.56360 -81.25778 Little Mud River, McIntosh

4186 31.55775 -81.23293 South Mouth Barbour Island River, McIntosh

X

X

4187 31.59300 -81.23600 Middle Barbour Island River, McIntosh

4188 31.61500 -81.21400 Middle Wahoo River, McIntosh

4190 31.63200 -81.22400 South Swain River, McIntosh

4191 31.63400 -81.23700 North Swain River, McIntosh

X

X

4195 31.56232 -81.21815 Todd River, McIntosh

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-53

Station ID

Latitude

Longitude Description

Nutrients Nutrients

2016

2017

4196 31.50300 -81.33500 Crescent River, McIntosh

X

X

4197 31.49100 -81.33200 Crescent River, South-end of Creighton, McIntosh

4304 31.55900 -81.27400 Julienton River mouth, McIntosh

4305 31.54800 -81.30800 Julienton River middle, McIntosh

4306 31.53900 -81.30200 Four Mile Island southwest, McIntosh

X

X

4330 31.55500 -81.29000 Jolly Creek

4333 31.38741 -81.28912 South end of Sapelo Island

X

X

4400 31.55700 -81.29400 Julienton River, middle, McIntosh

5069 31.05500 -81.46900 Jointer River Mouth, Glynn

X

X

5105 31.100

-81.516

Jointer River - Mac's Basin

5198 31.08900 -81.47900 Mouth Cedar Creek, Glynn

X

X

5199 31.08000 -81.50600 Jointer River, Glynn

5200 31.07100 -81.48300 Cobb Creek, Glynn

5322 31.09100 -81.51500 Jointer Island West, Glynn

5357 31.10200 -81.52700 Jointer Creek at Sage Dock, Glynn

5358 31.10600 -81.53300 Jointer Creek upstream of Sage Dock, Glynn

X

X

5359 31.06400 -81.52600 Little Satilla River at Honey Creek, Glynn

6201 31.03900 -81.49100 Little Satilla River, Camden

X

X

6210 30.89200 -81.51200 Cabin Bluff, Camden

X

X

6212 30.90400 -81.46100 North Brickhill River, Camden

6213 30.86300 -81.49700 Delaroche Creek Mouth, Camden

6214 30.85000 -81.47700 South Brickhill River, Camden

6215 30.85800 -81.54100 Mouth Black Point Creek, Camden

6216 30.84900 -81.54200 Crooked River, Camden

X

X

6217 30.84100 -81.52100 Crooked River South, Camden

X

X

6218 30.82300 -81.49800 South Crooked River Mouth, Camden

X

X

6300 30.92700 -81.45200 Cumberland River-Marker #39, Camden

X

X

6317 30.91100 -81.48500 Cumberland River East Shellbine, Camden

6318 30.86100 -81.50800 Delaroche Creek Headwaters, Camden

X

X

6323 30.85500 -81.46700 Brickhill River Upstream 6214, Camden

X

X

6343 30.86800 -81.48500 Brickhill River West Bend, Camden

6344 30.88300 -81.47900 Mumford Creek at Brickhill River, Camden

6360 31.06930 -81.54500 Maiden Creek

X

X

6361 31.05470 -81.53900 Honey Creek

X

X

6411

30.88100

-81.51100

Downstream from Cabin Bluff @ marker 51A, Camden

6412

30.87000

-81.49900

Upstream from DeLaroache ck @ marker 55, Camden

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-54

have to develop a scientific survey that would be representative of all the State's waters. Probabilistic monitoring provides a scientifically defensible way to sample a subset of all waters and then to use the results of this sampling to provide an estimate of the quality of all waters of the State. GAEPD has participated in all the USEPA probabilistic National Aquatic Resource Surveys including the National Lakes Assessment Surveys (2001, 2012 & 2017); the National Rivers and Streams Assessments (2009, 2013, & 2014); the National Wetlands Condition Assessments (2011 & 2016); and in cooperation with the DNR Coastal Resources Division, the National Coastal Condition Assessment (2015). The surveys consisted of 13 lake sites, 30 river/stream sites, 51 wetland sites, and 7 coastal sites.
In addition to participating in the National projects, beginning in 2010, GAEPD began to conduct probabilistic monitoring of the State's streams. Between 2013 and 2017 approximately 100 streams were sampled as part of the probabilistic monitoring project. The results of this work predict that approximately 66% of Georgia's streams are supporting their designated uses; that 3% of the streams are impaired due to low dissolved oxygen or pH; that approximately 0.1% are impaired for pH, and 78% are impaired for fecal coliform bacteria. None of the streams monitored as part of the probability survey were impaired for metals, so metals are not predicted to be source of impairment for many waters in the State. It is important to note that accuracy of predictions is highly dependent upon the sample size. The more sites that are sampled under the probabilistic study, the more likely it is that the results seen in the sampled sites will reflect the stream population as a whole. Typically, one would want a sample size of at least 30 to 50 sites. While approximately 100 sites were sampled as part of the probabilistic study, all the parameters reported above were not measured at each site. Dissolved oxygen, pH and temperature data were collected at each of the probablilistic sites, metals were collected at 45 sites and 36 of the sites had fecal coliform bacteria data collected. The lower sample size for fecal coliform bacteria causes there to be a

very wide confidence interval in predicting the number of streams that may be impaired for bacteria in the State (the predicted percentage of impairment ranges from 64% to 91%).
Georgia EPD is currently in the process of reevaluating the State's instream criteria for dissolved oxygen. There are places in the State (particularly in South Georgia) where dissolved oxygen concentrations are often naturally lower than the State's current criteria. The percentage of streams assessed as impaired for dissolved oxygen may change once the new criteria are adopted.
Surface Water Quality Summary
Data Assessment Water quality data are assessed to determine if standards are met and if the water body supports its designated or classified water use. If monitoring data show that standards are not achieved, the water body is said to be "not supporting" the designated use. The data reviewed included GAEPD monitoring data, and data from other State, Federal, local governments, and data from groups with GAEPD approved QA/QC programs. Table 3-13 provides a list of agencies that contributed data used to develop the 2018 report. The data may have been submitted specifically for the 2018 list or for previous listing cycles.
Appendix A includes an integrated list of waters for which data have been assessed. This list includes waters that have been assessed as "supporting" their designated uses and those assessed as "not supporting" their designated uses. In addition, some waters were placed in a third category called "assessment pending". Waters were placed in the "assessment pending" group when the data available for a water were insufficient to make an assessment as to whether the water was supporting its designated uses or not. Appendix A also includes Georgia's 2018 Listing Assessment Methodology which provides a description of how Georgia compares different types of water quality data with Georgia's water quality criteria in making assessment decisions.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-55

TABLE 3-13. CONTRIBUTORS OF WATER QUALITY DATA FOR ASSESSMENT OF GEORGIA WATERS

DNR-EPD, Watershed Planning & Monitoring Program DNR-EPD, Wastewater Reg. Program (Municipal) DNR-EPD, Wastewater Reg. Program (Industrial) DNR, Wildlife Resources Division DNR, Coastal Resources Division State University of West Georgia Gainesville College Georgia Institute of Technology U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Forest Service Tennessee Valley Authority Cobb County Dekalb County Douglas County Water & Sewer Authority Fulton County Gwinnett Couty City of Gainesville City of LaGrange Georgia Mountains R.D.C. City of Conyers Lake Allatoona (Kennesaw State University) Lake Blackshear (Lake Blackshear Watershed Association)
Lake Lanier (University of Georgia) West Point (LaGrange College/Auburn University) Georgia Power Company Oglethorpe Power Company Alabama DEM City of College Park Kennesaw State University University of Georgia Town of Trion Cherokee County Water & Sewerage Authority Clayton County Water Authority City of Atlanta Columbus Water Works Columbus Unified Government Jones Ecological Research Center City of Suwanee

City of Cartersville Georgia Ports Authority Chattahoochee/Flint RDC Upper Etowah Adopt-A-Stream Middle Flint RDC Central Savannah RDC Chatham County City of Savannah Heart of Georgia RDC City of Augusta Southwire Company DNR-EPD, Brunswick Coastal District DNR-EPD, Hazardous Waste Mgmt. Branch Ellijay High School DNR, Georgia Parks Recreation & Historic Sites Division DNR-EPD, Ambient Monitoring Unit (Macroinvertebrate Team) Forsyth County Tyson Foods, Inc. South Georgia RDC Northeast GA RDC Ogeechee Canoochee Riverkeeper Screven County Coastal GA RDC City of Roswell
City of Alpharetta Columbia County Southwest GA RDC Southeast GA RDC Coweta County Middle GA RDC Bartow County Atlanta Regional Commission Soquee River Watershed Partnership Upper Chattahoochee Riverkeeper Henry County City of Clayton South Carolina Electric and Gas Company South Carolina DHEC St. Johns River Water Mgmt. District City of Dacula City of Sandy Springs Athens Clarke County

Evaluation of Use Support Table 3-14 provides summary information from Appendix A on the total number of stream, coastal beach and freshwater beach miles; lake acres; or square miles of sounds/harbors that fall in each assessment category.
Assessment of Causes of Nonsupport of Designated Uses There are many potential pollutants that may interfere with the designated use of rivers, streams, lakes, beach, and coastal waters. These can be termed the causes of use

nonsupport. Based on information presented in Appendix A, Table 3-15 summarizes the parameters of concern or the causes which contributed to nonsupport of water quality standards or designated uses of a particular water body type. When comparing causes of impairment to previous Integrated Reports, it is important to note that EPD removed Commercial Fishing Ban (CFB) as a cause of impairment in the 2018 305b/303d list of waters. These impairments were replaced by the cause FCG(PCBs). This change was made becasue

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-56

In 2018, U.S. EPA consolidated the list of pollutants that States could report as causes of impairments on their lists of impaired waters when submitting data to the EPA National Database (ATTAINS). This database contains the assessment data for all the States and the participating Tribes. CFB (Commercial Fishing Ban) is not a cause on the new consolidated list of pollutants. Georgia's 2016 305(b)/303(d) list of waters had 26 waters listed as impaired for CFB. These listings were based on a list of waters that are not open to commercial fishing found in Chapter 391-4-3-.04 of Georgia's Fishing Regulations. The commercial fishing ban is in place due to historical PCB contamination in the area which has led to elevated levels of PCBs in fish tissue. The TMDLs completed for

waters impaired for CFB have been done for PCBs in fish tissue. The EPA National Database contains a pollutant cause of "PCBs in Fish Tissue". EPD is therefore changing the pollutant cause "CFB" to "FCG(PCBs)" in order to clarify the cause of impairment and to match allowable values in the EPA National Database (ATTAINS). EPD already had some waters listed as impaired for FCG(PCBs). Therefore if you compare table 3-15 in the 2016 and 2018 Integrated reports, it looks like there has been a large increase in the number of waters assessed as impaired for FCG(PCBs) when really the increase is a function of all CFB listings being changed to FCG(PCBs).

TABLE 3-14 EVALUATION OF USE SUPPORT BY WATER BODY TYPE AND ASSESSMENT CATEGORY
2016-2017

Degree of Use
Support
Support

Streams/Rivers (miles)
5,759.5

Lakes/Reservoirs (acres)
231,640

Sounds/Harbors (sq. miles)
68

Coastal Streams/Rivers
(miles)
305

Coastal Beaches
(miles)
30.81

Freshwater Beaches
2.12

11

Not Support

8,701.5

103,300

69

3.64

0.1

10

Assessment Pending

822.3

56,705

Total

15,283.3

391,645

89

95

0

0

469

34.45

2.22

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-57

TABLE 3-15 CAUSES OF NONSUPPORT OF DESIGNATED USES BY WATER BODY TYPE
2016-2017

Cause Category
Pathogens Fecal Coliform E. coli Biologic Integrity (Bioassessments) Maroinvertebrates (Bio M) Fish (Bio F)
Oxygen Depletion Dissolved Oxygen Thermal Impacts Temperature Toxic Inorganics Arsenic Cadmium Copper Lead Selenium Zinc Toxic Organics 1,1,2-Trichloroethane Tetrachloroethylene PCB in Fish Tissue Chrysene Trichloroethylene Vinyl Chloride Alpha-BHC Beta-BHC Benzo(a)Anthracene Metals Cadmium Copper Lead
Zinc Mercury in Fish Tissue (TWR) pH/Acidity/Caustic Conditions pH Nutrients (Macronutrients/Growth Factors) Objectionable Algae Pesticides Alpha-BHC Beta-BHC
Cause Category
Pathogens Fecal Coliform
Oxygen Depletion Oxygen Dissolved Toxic Organics PCB in Fish Tissue DDE/DDD in Fish Tissue Metals Mercury in Fish Tissue (TWR) Pesticides DDD/ DDE in Fish Tissue Observed Effects Chlorophyll a

Rivers/Streams (miles) Contributions to Impairment1
4,868 4,849
65 3,172 620 2,706
1,179.5 1,179.5
17 17 147 3 9 42 69 6 36 531 1 9 516 2 1 2 1 3 2 1,108 9 42 69
36 1,006 329 329
29 29 3 1 3
Lakes/Reservoirs (acres) Contributions to Impairment1
194 194
750 750 91,633 91,613 20 1,356 1,356
20 20 7,245 7,245

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-58

pH/Acidity/Caustic Conditions pH Cause Category
Pathogens Fecal Coliform Enterococci Oxygen Depletion Dissolved Oxygen Toxic Organics Dieldrin in Fish Tissue PCB in Fish Tissue Toxaphene like Chlorinated Camphenes in Fish Tissue Toxic Inorganics Selenium Pesticides Dieldrin in Fish Tissue Toxaphene in Fish Tissue Other
Shellfish Ban (SB) Cause Category
Pathogens Enterococcus Cause Category
Oxygen Depletion Dissolved Oxygen Toxic Inorganics Selenium Cause Category
Pathogens E. coli

2,720 2,720 Coastal Streams (miles) Contributions to Impairment1
23 22 1 33 33 38 3 30 5
9 9 8 3 5 28
28 Coastal Beaches (miles) Contributions to Impairment1
3.64 3.64 Sounds/Harbors (sq. miles) Contributions to Impairment1
5 5 6 6 Freshwater Beaches (miles) Contributions to Impairment1 0.1 0.1

1The total mileage/acreage provided for each impairment category (e.g. Pathogens, Toxic Organics, Metals, etc.) is a summation of the mileage/acreage of all the waters impaired by one or more of the pollutants in the category. Since a water may be negatively affected by more than one pollutant in a given impairment category, the total mileage/acreage for the impairment category may be less than the sum of the miles of each of the individual pollutants in that category.

Assessment of Sources of Nonsupport of Designated Uses Pollutants that impact water bodies in Georgia may come from point or nonpoint sources. Point sources are discharges into waterways through discrete conveyances, such as pipes or channels. Municipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities are the most

common point sources. Point sources also include overflows of combined storm and sanitary sewers. Nonpoint sources are diffuse sources of pollution primarily associated with run off from the land following a rainfall event. Table 3-16 summarizes information presented in Appendix A concerning the sources of pollutants that prevent achievement of water quality standards and use support in various water bodies in Georgia.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-59

TABLE 3-16 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF NONSUPPORT OF DESIGNATED USES BY WATER BODY TYPE
2016-2017

Source Category
Hydromodification Dams of Impoundments (Dam) Industrial Sources Industrial Point Source Discharge (I1) Industrial Stormwater Discharge (I2) Municipal Permitted Discharges Combined Sewer Overflows Municipal Point Source Discharges Nonpoint Sources Non-Point Source (NP) Urban Runoff (UR)
Source Category
Industrial Sources
Industrial Stormwater Discharge (I2) Nonpoint Sources Non-Point Source (NP) Urban Runoff (UR) Hydromodification Dams of Impoundments (Dam)

Rivers/Streams (miles) Contributions to Impairment1
4 4
285 45 281
286.5 93
193.5
8,627.5 6,944 2,229.5
Lakes/Reservoirs (acres) Contributions to Impairment1
55,950
55,950
46,600 46,406 34,211
750 750

Industrial Sources Industrial Point Source Discharge (I1) Industrial Stormwater Discharge (I2) Municipal Permitted Discharges Municipal Point Source Discharges Nonpoint Sources Non-Point Source (NP) Urban Runoff (UR)
Source Category
Nonpoint Sources Urban Runoff (UR) Non-Point Source (NP) Municipal Municipal Point Sources (M) Industrial Sources Industrial Point Source Discharge (I1)

35 27 35 19 19 41 14 33
Sounds/Harbors (Sq. Miles)
Contributions to Impairment1 11 5 6 5 5 5 5

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-60

Source Category

Nonpoint Sources

0.1

Non-Point Source (NP) 0.1

Source Category

Nonpoint Sources Non-Point Source (NP) Urban Runoff (UR)

Freshwater Beaches (Miles) Contribution to Impairment1
Coastal Beaches (Miles) Contributions to Impairment1
3.64 3.64 1.8

1The total mileage/acreage provided for each source category (e.g. Industrial, Municipal, Nonpoint, etc.) is a summation of the mileage/acreage of all the waters impaired by one or more of the sources in the category. Since a water may be negatively affected by more than one source in a given source category, the total mileage/acreage for the source category may be less than the sum of the miles of each of the individual sources in that category.

Priorities for Action The list of waters in Appendix A includes all waters for which available data was assessed against applicable water quality standards and designated uses were determined to be supporting, not fully supporting, or it was determined that more data was needed before an assessment was made "assessment pending". This list of waters has become a comprehensive list of waters for Georgia incorporating the information requested by Sections 305(b), 303(d), 314, and 319 of the Federal CWA. Waters listed in Appendix A are active 305(b) waters. Lakes or reservoirs within these categories provide information requested in Section 314 of the CWA. Waters with nonpoint sources identified as a potential cause of a standards violation are considered to provide the information requested in the CWA Section 319 nonpoint assessment. The 303(d) list is made up of all waters within category 5 in Appendix A. The proposed date for development of a TMDL for 303(d) waters is indicated within the priority column on the list of waters.
Georgia's Priority Waters Under U.S. EPA's Long-Term Vision In December 2013, U.S. EPA released a new Long-Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration, and Protection of waters under the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Program. This Vision focuses on six elements including 1) Prioritization, 2) Assessment, 3) Protection, 4) Alternatives, 5) Engagement and 6) Integration. The LongTerm Vision is a 10-year plan that goes through the year 2022. According to U.S. EPA, as part of the element (Prioritization), States are to review, systematically prioritize, and report priority watershed or waters for restoration and protection in their biennial integrated reports to facilitate State strategic planning for achieving water quality goals. The thought behind this

element is that there are many water quality issues facing States and the States need to prioritize what they plan to address by 2022 as States generally do not have the resources to focus on everything at once. Each State was to develop a Priority Framework that they would use to develop their list of priority waters. The list of priority waters are those waters that the States plan to have a TMDL, TMDL alternative, or protection plan written for by 2022. GAEPD developed our Priority Framework in February 2015 at which time it was placed on our website on both the TMDL and 305(b)/303(d) listing webpages.
GAEPD has historically done a good job in writing TMDLs for impaired waters in a timely manner. We have been writing TMDLs on a rotating river basin schedule. Since we cycle though all river basins in a 5-year period, a water is typically on the impaired list for 5 years or less before a TMDL is written for it. Since Georgia did not need to prioritize waters based on what TMDLs could be developed by 2022, we instead chose priority waters based on where we would be focusing a lot of our resources in the coming years. In selecting our priority waters, we used our 2012 305(b)/3039d) list as a baseline along with the Priority Framework we had developed. Factors we looked at in choosing priority waters included things such as impacts to public health, whether the impairment was on a water with a recreational use, whether the impairment was impacted by interstate issues, whether the impairments matched with national or regional EPA priorities (like reduction of nutrients) and whether there was stakeholder involvement present in the area. Based on these factors, Georgia chose the waters in Table 3-17 as our priority waters. The waters on the priority list can be organized into six groups.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-61

1) Lake Lanier Lake Lanier is composed of 5 segments. Only one of these segments (Lanier Lake Browns Bridge Road (SR 369)) is on the 2012 303(d) list for chloropyhyll a. However, the TMDL for chlorophyll a will be written for the entire lake, so the other four segments of the lake were also added to the priority list. The TMDL for chlorophyll a that was developed addresses nutrients, which are a National priority.
2) Carters Lake Carters Lake is composed of two segments. Both are on the 2012 303(d) list for chlorophyll a and total phosphorus. Georgia is putting both segment of the lake on the priority list for each parameter and plans to develop a TMDL to address them. This TMDL that was developed addresses nutrients, which are a National priority.
3) Savannah Harbor This segment is impaired for DO. Georgia EPD has been working with South Carolina DHEC and the Savannah River/Harbor Discharger Group to restore this water and has completed a TMDL alternative plan (5R).
4) Georgia has 4 coastal beaches on the 2012 303d list for enterococci. Georgia chose to put these beaches on the priority list to address human health concerns. TMDLs were developed to address these impairments.

5) Coosa River A segment of the Coosa River is on the 2012 303(d) list for Temperature. The cause of the temperature violation is known and will be addressed through direct implementation. A wasteload allocation for heat loads was developed and an NPDES permit was issued in 2017.
6) Ochlockonee River Basin - Georgia is placing the Upper and Lower Ochlockonee Watersheds on our priority list due to chlorophyll and DO impairments in a downstream lake located in Florida. A TMDL is being developed for this Lake. In accordance with the Clean Water Act, waters in Georgia may not cause and contribute to water quality violations in Florida. Georgia will develop a protection plan to help ensure that Georgia's waters meet the necessary nutrient reductions at the State line. The protection plan will address nutrients which are a National priority.
While the waters on the list are considered our priorities under the new Vision, EPD plans to continue to develop TMDLs using the rotating basin approach as we have been doing in the past. Therefore, Georgia will be developing more TMDLs by 2022 than what is accounted for in our "priority" list.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-62

Group Lake Lanier
Carters Lake Savannah Harbor
Coosa River
Beaches
Ochlockonee Watershed

Table 3-17 List of Priority Waters

Water ID

Name/Location

Parameter of Concern

GAR031300010819 GAR031300010705 GAR031300010818 GAR031300010820 GAR031300010821 GAR031501020406 GAR031501020408 GAR030601090318
GAR031501050209 GAR030602040306
GAR030701060506 GAR030702030230 GAR030702030415
HUC 03120002 HUC 03120002

Lanier Lake (Browns Bridge Road (SR 369)) Lanier Lake (Bolling Bridge)
Lanier Lake (Lanier Bridge Road (SR53))
Lanier Lake (Flowery Branch)
Lanier Lake (Dam Pool)
Carters Lake (US Woodring Branch/Midlake)
Carters Lake (Coosawattee River Embayment)
Savannah Harbor (SR 25 (old US Hwy 17) to Elba Island Cut) Coosa River (Beach Creek to Stateline) Kings Ferry County Park Beach (US Hwy 17
Kingsferry Bridge on Ogeechee River Entire Beach)
Reimolds Pasture Beach (Eastern Shore
of Buttermilk Sound)
Jekyll Island Clam Creek Beach (Clam
Creek to Old North Picnic Area)
Jekyll Island St. Andrews Beach (Macy Lane to St. Andrews Picnic Area) Upper Ochlockonee Watershed Lower Ochlockonee Watershed

Chlorophyll a
Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll a & Phosphorus Chlorophyll a & Phosphorus Dissolved Oxygen
Temperature
Enterococci
Enterococci
Enterococci
Enterococci
Phosphorus, Nitrogen Phosphorus, Nitrogen

Approach to Address Parameter of Concern TMDL
Protection via TMDL Protection via TMDL Protection via TMDL Protection via TMDL TMDL
TMDL
TMDL Alternative (5R) Direct to Implementation TMDL
TMDL
TMDL
TMDL
Protection Plan
Protection Plan

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

3-63

CHAPTER 4
Wetland Programs

swamp drains to the east by the St. Marys River into the Atlantic, and to the west by the Suwannee River into the Gulf.

Estimates of the total extent of Georgia's wetlands have varied from 4.9 to 7.7 million acres, including more than 600,000 acres of open water habitat found in estuarine, riverine, palustrine, and lacustrine environments. Estimates of wetland losses in the state from colonial times to the present range between 20-25% of the original wetland acreage.
Georgia has approximately 100 miles of shoreline along the south Atlantic coast, with extensive tidal marshes separating barrier islands composed of Pleistocene and Holocene sediments from the mainland. Georgia's barrier islands and tidal marshes are well preserved compared to other South Atlantic states. Georgia's coastline and tidal marshes are managed under the Coastal Marshlands Protection and Shore Protection Acts of 1970 and 1979 respectively, and are considered to be well preserved compared to other South Atlantic states.
Elevations within Georgia's boundaries range from sea level to 4,788 feet at Brasstown Bald in the Blue Ridge Mountain Province. At the higher elevations, significant, pristine cool water streams originate and flow down steep to moderate gradients until they encounter lower elevations of the Piedmont Province. Many of the major tributaries originating in the mountains and Piedmont have been impounded for hydropower and water supply reservoirs. These man-made lakes constitute significant recreational resources and valuable fishery habitat. At the Fall Line, streams flowing southeasterly to the Atlantic, or southsouthwesterly to the Gulf, have formed large floodplains as each encounters the soft sediments of the upper Coastal Plain.
Other significant wetlands found in the state are associated with blackwater streams originating in the Coastal Plain, lime sinkholes, spring heads, Carolina bays, and the Okefenokee Swamp, a vast bog-swamp measuring approximately one-half million acres in south Georgia and north Florida. The

The lower Coastal Plain has frequently been referred to as the Atlantic Coastal Flatwoods region, where seven tidal rivers headwater in the ancient shoreline terraces and sediments of Pleistocene age. Scattered throughout the flatwoods are isolated depressional wetlands and drainageways dominated by needleleaved and broad-leaved tree species adapted to long hydroperiods.
Due to considerable variation in the landscape in topography, hydrology, geology, soils, and climatic regime, the state has one of the highest levels of biodiversity in the eastern United States. The state provides a diversity of habitats for nearly 4,000 vascular plant species and slightly less that 1,000 vertebrate species. Numerous plant and animal species are endemic to the state. Many of the rarer species are dependent upon wetlands for survival.
Extent of Wetland Resources
Assessments of wetland resources in Georgia have been conducted by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. The extent and location of specific tidal marsh types have been reported in numerous scientific papers and reports. Estimates of other specific wetlands types, such as bottomland hardwood swamps, are also reported in studies on a regional scale.
Hydric soils as mapped in county soil surveys are useful indicators of the location and extent of wetlands for the majority of Georgia counties with complete surveys. The dates of photography from which the survey maps are derived vary widely across the state. There is an ongoing effort by NRCS to develop digital databases at the soil mapping unit level. Published soil surveys have proven useful in wetland delineation in the field and in the development of wetland inventories. County

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-1

acreage summaries provide useful information on the distribution of wetlands across the state.
The USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) utilizes soil survey information during photointerpretation in the development of the 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale products of this nationwide wetland inventory effort. Wetlands are classified according to a system developed by Cowardin et al. (1979), providing some level of detail as to the characterization of individual wetlands. Draft products are available for the 1,017 7.5-minute quadrangles in the state of Georgia, and many final map products have been produced. All of these quadrangles are available as a seamless dataset for Georgia through either a geodatabase or shapefile format (see www.fws.gov). Although not intended for use in jurisdictional determinations of wetlands, these products are invaluable for site surveys, trends analysis, and landuse planning.
A complementary database was completed by Georgia DNR in 1991 and was based on classification of Landsat TM satellite imagery. Due to the limitations of remote sensing technology, the classification scheme was simplified in comparison to the Cowardin system used with NWI. The targeted accuracy level for the overall landcover assessment using Landsat imagery was 85%. However, the classification error was not necessarily distributed equally throughout all classes.
Similar Landsat-based landcover databases have been produced with more recent satellite imagery. The Federal government completed mapping in Georgia using imagery from the mid-1990s as part of the National Landcover Database. The Georgia Gap Analysis Program, supported in part by funding from Georgia DNR, completed an 18-class database using imagery from 1997-1999. Both these databases include wetland landcover classes. More recently, the Natural Resources Spatial Analysis Laboratory at the University of Georgia completed an updated landcover dataset using 2008 imagery. This dataset is available from the Georgia GIS Clearinghouse.

Additional habitats have been mapped through the Georgia Coastal Land Conservation Initiative that may be helpful in identifying wetlands. Mapping was done by botanists with the Wildlife Resources Division (WRD) for the 11 coastal county area in 2010 to show the NatureServe classification of habitats within this area.
NWI for Georgia's six coastal counties was updated by the Coastal Resources Division (CRD) using 2006 base imagery. This dataset represents an approximately 25-year update considering the inventory was originally mapped in the early 1980s. A summary of wetland acreages derived from this database is as follows: Estuarine: Emergent=351,236, Unconsolidated Shore=10,700, ScrubShrub=4,495, and Forested=2,053; Lacustrine: Aquatic Bed=108, Unconsolidated Shore=32, Emergent=10; Marine: Unconsolidated Shore=3,084; Palustrine: Forested=339,743, Emergent=52,511, Scrub-Shrub=30,899, Unconsolidated Bottom=8,242, Aquatic Bed=832, Unconsolidated Shore=193; Riverine: Unconsolidated Shore=90. A full report can be found on CRD's website and the data from NWI can be found at www.fws.gov.
CRD also produced a NWI Plus database, which adds additional descriptors to the updated NWI dataset and provides a functional component to wetlands in the six-county area. Wetlands are rated as having either a High Potential, Moderate Potential, or Low to No Potential to function in a given capacity. Eleven functions are identified for the six coastal counties.
In addition, CRD completed an Impacted Wetland Inventory that was initiated to identify, assess, and inventory impacted wetlands in Chatham, Bryan, Liberty, McIntosh, Glynn, and Camden counties along the coast. The project area included all estuarine, marine and tidal fresh wetlands, as defined by Cowardin et. al (1979) and delineated by the NWI updates for the six coastal counties (completed in 2009, based on 2006 base imagery). For more information about the dataset, contact CRD.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-2

Wetland Trends In Georgia
The loss of wetlands has become an issue of increasing concern to the general public because of associated adverse impacts to flood control, water quality, aquatic wildlife habitat, rare and endangered species habitat, aesthetics, and recreation. Historically, wetlands were often treated as "wastelands" that needed "improvement". Today, "swamp reclamation" acts are no longer funded or approved by Congress and wetland losses are in part lessened. However, we still lack accurate assessments for current and historic wetland acreages. For this reason, we have varying accounts of wetland losses, which provide some confusion in the public's mind as to trends.
The most precise measure of Georgia's wetland acreage has been developed by the USFWS's National Wetland Inventory Status and Trends projects. The Status And Trends in the Conterminous United States, Mid-1970 's to Mid-1980' s report (1991), provides details of a statistically sound study based upon 206 sample plots of four (4) square miles each that were delineated and measured from 1975 and 1982 aerial photography. The total acreage of wetlands for Georgia was estimated at 7,714,285 acres in 1982 as compared to earlier estimates of 5.2 million acres. This estimate is considerably higher than the total shown in a 1984 trend study and is due in part to higher quality photography and an increase in the number of man-made ponds.
Georgia's total wetland area covers an estimated 20 percent of the State's landscape. This total includes approximately 367,000 acres of estuarine wetlands and 7.3 million acres of palustrine wetlands (forested wetlands, scrub-shrub, and emergents). A net wetland loss due to conversion of approximately 78,000 acres was estimated for the 7-year period (1975 1982), while 455,000 acres were altered by timber harvesting. These latter estimates are less reliable than the total acreage and are slightly higher than the 1984 study. Regardless of the method used to measure total acreage or wetland losses, Georgia still retains the highest percentage of

pre-colonial wetland acreage of any southeastern state. The state lacks the resources to conduct an independent monitoring program on the rate of freshwater wetland loss or degradation. The most recent NWI report, Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States, 2004 to 2009, provides information on a national scale.
All dredge and fill activities in freshwater wetlands are regulated in Georgia by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). Joint permit procedures between the COE and DNR, including public notices, are carried out in tidally influenced wetlands. Separate permits for alterations to salt marsh and the State's waterbottoms are issued by the Coastal Marshlands Protection Committee, a State permitting authority. Enforcement is carried out by the State, COE and EPA in tidal waters, and by the COE and EPA in freshwater systems. Normal agricultural and silvicultural operations are exempted under Section 404 regulations with certain conditions.
Integrity of Wetland Resources
Wetland Functions and Uses. In Georgia, wetland uses are tied to both the state water quality standards through the definition of "water" or "waters of the state," and to established criteria for wetlands protection (Chap. 391-3-16-.03) associated with the Comprehensive Planning Act of 1989 (O.C.G.A. 12-2-8).
The definition of "water" or "waters of the State" (Chap. 391-3-6) means "any and all rivers, streams, creeks, branches, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, drainage systems, springs, wells, wetlands, and all other bodies of surface or subsurface water, natural or artificial, lying within or forming a part of the boundaries of the state which are not entirely confined and retained completely upon the property of a single individual partnership, or corporation". The waters use classifications and general criteria for all waters are discussed elsewhere in this report.
The Comprehensive Planning Act requires all local governments and regional development

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-3

commissions to recognize or acknowledge the importance of wetlands for the public good in the landuse planning process. All local governments (municipalities and county governments) were required, beginning in 1990 and ending in 1995, to meet minimum criteria for wetland use and protection. Each government is required to map wetlands using DNR or NWI maps, and describe how wetlands will be protected from future development.
The wetlands protection criteria define freshwater "wetlands" as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. (33 CFR 32.93)." This definition is not intended to include "coastal marshlands" as defined by the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act. The minimum area of wetlands to be identified in landuse planning is not to exceed five acres.
The categories of freshwater wetlands and aquatic habitats to be identified, defined and mapped by the State and included in landuse planning are open water, non-forested emergent, scrub/shrub, forested and altered wetlands. Landuse plans must address at least the following considerations with regard to wetland classes identified in the database:
1) Whether impacts to an area would adversely affect the public health, safety, welfare, or the property of others.
2) Whether the area is unique or significant in the conservation of flora and fauna including threatened, rare or endangered species.
3) Whether alteration or impacts to wetlands will adversely affect the function, including the flow or quality of water, cause erosion or shoaling, or impact navigation.
4) Whether impacts or modification by a project would adversely affect

fishing or recreational use of wetlands. 5) Whether an alteration or impact would be temporary in nature. 6) Whether the project contains significant state historical and archaeological resources, defined as "Properties On or Eligible for the National Register of Historic Places". 7) Whether alteration of wetlands would have measurable adverse impacts on adjacent sensitive natural areas. 8) Where wetlands have been created for mitigation purposes under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, such wetlands shall be considered for protection.
The mapping of altered wetlands defined as "areas with hydric soils that have been denuded of natural vegetation and put to other uses, such as pasture, row crops, etc., but that otherwise retain certain wetland functions and values" has not been completed due to a lack of resources (with the exception of impacted tidal wetlands that were identified, mapped, and evaluated by CRD). It is unlikely that there will be any significant resources committed at the state or federal levels for monitoring wetland alterations and conversions in the near future.
Acceptable uses of wetlands were identified in wetland protection criteria as the following:
Timber production and harvesting. The socioeconomic value of wetlands for consumptive uses such as timber and wood products production is extremely high. High quality hardwoods are produced along the major river corridors throughout the state. There are established "best management practices" for harvesting in wetlands; the level of compliance with these voluntary standards is monitored by the Georgia Forestry Commission in cooperation with the DNR-EPD.
Wildlife and fisheries management. Wetlands are an invaluable resource, both ecologically and economically. They are among the state's

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-4

most biologically productive ecosystems and are crucial as habitats for wildlife. Wetlands function as essential breeding, spawning, nursery, nesting, migratory, and/or wintering habitat for much of the migratory and resident fauna. More than 40% of the state threatened and endangered plant and animal species depend heavily on wetlands. Coastal wetlands function as nursery and spawning grounds for 60-90% of commercial fin and shellfish catches. In addition, high levels of plant productivity in coastal wetlands contribute to corresponding levels of invertebrate organisms upon which fish and other animals feed. Plant decomposition in wetlands is also an important process in providing suitable habitat for waterfowl, which contributes to the economy through hunting-related expenditures.
Wastewater treatment. Wetlands help to maintain water quality and improve degraded water by removing, transforming, or retaining nutrients; processing chemical and organic wastes and pollutants; and reducing sediment loads. Wetlands function as sediment, toxic substance, and nutrient traps, performing functions similar to a waste treatment plant. Wetland vegetation filters and retains sediments which otherwise enter lakes, streams, and reservoirs, often necessitating costly maintenance dredging activities. Wetlands may also perform similar purification functions with respect to ground water. Wetlands that are hydrologically connected to ground water can also be a source of aquifer recharge, in which case the natural settling and filtering of pollutants can help protect groundwater quality. As with any filter, wetlands can be damaged, overloaded, or made nonfunctional. Wetlands conservation and careful management of point and nonpoint pollutants can provide good wetland filtration of materials.
Recreation. The non-consumptive uses of wetlands may contribute most significantly and positively to quality of life, yet these uses are often undervalued or unrecognized. Wetlands are habitats of great diversity and beauty and provide open space for recreational and visual enjoyment. They support a myriad of recreational activities including boating,

swimming, birdwatching, and photography. In addition, tidal, coastal, and inland wetlands provide educational opportunities for nature observation and scientific study.
Natural water quality treatment or purification. (See "Wastewater treatment" above). Maintaining the biological and ecological integrity of wetlands is essential to the capitalization of these natural systems for the improvement of water quality and quantity. The polluting, filling, silting, channelizing, draining, dredging, and converting to other uses of wetlands are destructive to the ecological functions of wetlands.
Other uses permitted under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Such uses must have an overwhelming public interest. Unacceptable uses of wetlands include: Receiving areas for toxic or hazardous
waste or other contaminants; Hazardous or sanitary waste landfills; and Other uses unapproved by local
governments.
The criteria established by the State for freshwater wetlands are designed to assist in the identification and protection of wetlands, and do not constitute a state or local permit program. The protection of coastal marshlands, seashores, and tidal waterbottoms is described under the Estuary and Coastal Assessment section of this report.
Wetlands within the 6 coastal counties (all tidal and non-tidal) were evaluated for function based on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' addition of hydrogeomorphic descriptors. These "LLWW" descriptors were added to the updated wetland inventory data (2006 base imagery) to create CRD's NWI Plus database for the six coastal counties. The NWI Plus data is used to better characterize wetlands in this region and to be able to predict wetland functions at the landscape level. The functions for coastal Georgia used are:
Surface Water Detention Coastal Storm Surge Detention Streamflow Maintenance Nutrient Transformation Carbon Sequestration

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-5

Retention of Sediment and Other Particulates
Bank and Shoreline Stabilization Provision of Fish and Aquatic
Invertebrate Habitat Provision of Waterfowl and Waterbird
Habitat Provision of Other Wildlife Habitat
Provision of Habitat for Unique,
Uncommon, or Highly Diverse Plant Communities
Wetland Monitoring. The state maintains monitoring and enforcement procedures for estuarine marshes under authority of the Coastal Marshlands Protection Act of 1970. Over-flights are made of the Georgia coastline to locate potential violations. Restoration and penalties are provided for in the Act. CRD continues to monitor marsh dieback sites annually along the coast along with other project partners. This protocol was initiated in 2003 with the first reports of marsh dieback. In addition, CRD monitors shorelines along Georgia tidal creeks to quantify habitat use and restoration of shorelines. A working group of project partners, including WRD, NGOs, and local academic institutions was formed in order to address policy issues, identify funding sources, and better manage and monitor shoreline restoration projects within the state of Georgia. In 2011, CRD and EPD conducted field monitoring for the National Wetlands Condition Assessment (NWCA) effort initiated by EPA. The overall goal of the NWCA was to monitor freshwater and estuarine wetlands nationally during 2011 to determine their current condition. Pre-existing point locations were used to randomly select wetlands to be evaluated during this project. CRD sampled 32 estuarine wetland sites, and EPD sampled 18 palustrine forested wetland sites. Multiple indicators were used to assess wetland health including vegetation characterization, soil profiles, hydrology and algal community. In addition, a Rapid Assessment Method (RAM) was evaluated across regions and wetland classes to determine the effectiveness of RAMs in wetland management disciplines. Specifically, the RAM identifies stressors to the wetland. Collectively, these parameters

provide an indication of overall wetland condition. Of the 1,179 wetlands sampled across the country in 2011, 48% were found to be in "good" condition. In Georgia, 50% of the Coastal Plain and 52% of the Eastern Mountain and Upper Midwest ecoregions were found to be in "good" condition. CRD successfully participated in the 2016 National Wetlands Condition Assessment and sampled 14 estuarine and freshwater wetlands within the 11 coastal counties. CRD continues to partner with EPA on wetland monitoring within the state of Georgia.
Also in 2011, EPD initiated a wetland monitoring and assessment program using an ecoregion-level approach. The goal of the program is to develop appropriate wetland assessment protocols. To date, seventy-five wetland sites within five ecoregions have been selected and monitored using various protocols, including NWCA protocols. This approach will again be applied in the Piedmont (Ecoregion 45) during 2016. Thereafter, an evolution of wetland monitoring approach will apply a more closely focused assessment of wetland soil and hydrology, particularly targeted at reference quality wetland habitats selected from statewide candidate sites. Wetland monitoring in Georgia, to the extent possible, is being coordinated with work being conducted by other Region 4 states within the same ecoregions.
Additional Wetland Protection Activities
Georgia is protecting its wetlands through land acquisition, public education, land use planning, regulatory programs, and wetland restoration. Additional protection to wetlands is provided either directly or indirectly by several statutes listed below, but described elsewhere in this report. These state laws are as follows: Coastal Marshlands Protection Act Shore Protection Act Water Quality Control Act Ground Water Use Act Safe Drinking Water Act Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act Metropolitan Rivers Protection Act

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-6

In 2011, a Wetlands Unit was formed within EPD to enhance the capabilities of EPD's regulatory functions (401 water quality certification review/issuance for Section 404 permits, and compensatory mitigation program oversight) and to coordinate and advance EPD's wetlands program.
Land Conservation. To date, the Department of Natural Resources has protected in fee over 460,000 acres of conservation land and another 11,259 acres through permanent conservation easements. Between 2014 and February 2016, the Department of Natural Resources acquired 19,858 acres of conservation land. Notable acquisitions protecting stream and wetland habitat included additions to the Paulding Forest WMA, Chattahoochee Fall Line WMA, and Sheffield WMA.
Since 2008 the Department has acquired 25,547 acres of conservation lands along the lower Altamaha River in partnership with the US Marine Corps, Fish and Wildlife Service, US Forest Service, Georgia Forestry Commission, Nature Conservancy, and numerous other private foundations and donors. These acquisitions, along with others by various partners, bring the protection of properties in the lower Altamaha Delta to over 130,000 acres.
Through its Private Lands Program, Georgia DNR provides technical assistance to private landowners to encourage protection and restoration of natural habitats. Working with other state and federal agencies as well as non-governmental organizations, DNR biologists assist private landowners in the development of management plans that will protect important wildlife habitats, including wetlands and streams. An online publication entitled "Landowner's Guide- Conservation Easements for Natural Resource Protection" can be found at the following web address: www.georgiawildlife.com/privatelandsprogram.
Education And Public Outreach. The Wildlife Resources Division is involved in aquatic education, providing training for educators in wetland values and developing

and coordinating teaching materials. The Aquatic Education Program consists of three key components: Youth Education, Adult Education, and Kids Fishing Events. Youth Education involves training educators to use Aquatic Project Wild (APW), which consists of instructional workshops and supplementary conservation curriculum materials for teachers of K-12 grade children. Adult Education consists primarily of producing educational materials such as the annual Freshwater and Saltwater Sport Fishing Regulations, Reservoir and Southeast Rivers Fishing Predictions, Small Georgia Lakes Open to Public Fishing, Introduction to Trout Fishing, news releases, brochures, radio Public Service Announcements, videos, and staff presentations to sportsmen and civic organizations, as well as large events. The purpose of Kids Fishing Events (KFEs) is to introduce youth and their families to the joys of recreational fishing. The Aquatic Education Program touches tens of thousands of youths and adults each year, bringing these people closer to the environment, and teaching them conservation principles that are important to sustaining wetlands and healthy fish populations.
The Coastal Resources Division has one position within the Division that assumes the role of coastal educator. The largest coastal education gathering, Coastfest, is hosted by CRD each October.
Additionally, CRD frequently presents relevant work at regional and national conferences, local academic institutions, municipality meetings, and with various civic organizations. CRD also relies on partners such as the Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve to carry out messages important to CRD.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-7

The Georgia EPD Adopt-a- Stream program facilitates volunteer-based monitoring of water quality in Georgia, and fosters a sense of personal and community responsibility. CRD routinely conducts chemical water quality training workshops with local riverkeepers, college students, and citizen scientists. To date, over 1700 volunteers have conducted chemical at 185 sites within the eleven coastal counties.

use environmental education facilities, local schools, and other facilities.

The Coastal Resources Division in collaboration with the Georgia Institute of Technology's Center for Geographic Information Systems has developed two interactive web portals: GCAMP (Georgia Coastal and Marine Planner) and G-WRAP (Georgia Wetlands Restoration Access Portal). These portals were designed to provide information on the Georgia coast to regulators, planners, and the public. Both of these portals are available through CRD's website at http://coastalgadnr.org/CMPWebMaps.
State Wildlife Action Plan
In 2005, the Wildlife Resources Division of Georgia DNR completed "A Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy for Georgia". This document, also known as the State Wildlife Action Plan, identified high priority species and habitats in Georgia, described problems affecting these species and habitats, and outlined specific research, conservation and monitoring needs to maintain the state's wildlife diversity. Protection of wetland and aquatic habitats was identified as a critical wildlife conservation need. The State Wildlife Action Plan was updated in 2015. The following goals represent important conservation themes in the plan:
-Maintain viable populations of all high-priority species and functional examples of all high priority habitats through voluntary land protection and incentive-based habitat management programs on private lands and habitat protection and management on public lands. -Increase public awareness of high priority species and habitats by developing educational messages and lesson plans for

-Facilitate restoration of important wildlife habitats through reintroduction of prescribed fire, hydrologic enhancements, and vegetation restoration. -Conduct statewide assessments of rare natural communities and habitats that support species of conservation concern and complete a statewide habitat mapping effort to inform future land conservation efforts. -Improve efforts to protect vulnerable and ecologically important habitats such as isolated wetlands, headwater streams, and caves. -Combat the spread of invasive/noxious species in high priority natural habitats by identifying problem areas, providing technical and financial assistance, and working cooperatively on early detection and rapid response protocols. -Minimize impacts from development and other activities on high-priority species and habitats by improving environmental review procedures and facilitating training for and compliance with best management practices. -Update the state protected species list and work with conservation partners to improve management of these species and their habitats. -Conduct targeted field inventories of neglected taxonomic groups, including invertebrates and nonvascular plants.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-8

-Continue efforts to recover federally listed species through implementation of recovery plans, and restore populations of other high priority species. -Work with other states and with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to assess species proposed for federal listing and engage in proactive programs to conserve these species so as to preclude the need for federal listing. -Establish additional funding mechanisms for land protection in order to support wildlife conservation, and increase availability and use of federal funds for land acquisition and management. -Continue efforts to monitor land use changes statewide and in each ecoregion, and use predictive models to assess impacts to high priority species and habitats. -Monitor high priority species and habitats as well as the results of conservation actions and share monitoring results to inform adaptive management programs.

-Enhance conservation efforts for high priority aquatic species and watersheds through protection of aquatic connectivity and streamflows, technical assistance to farmers and local governments, riparian forest restoration, targeted land protection strategies, outreach, and monitoring. The complete plan can be found at http://georgiawildlife.com/WildlifeActionPlan.
M.A.R.S.H. Projects
The Wildlife Resources Division has a cooperative agreement with Ducks Unlimited (DU) for the purpose of acquiring, developing, restoring, or enhancing waterfowl habitat. A major aspect of this agreement is the M.A.R.S.H. program (Matching Aid to Restore States Habitat). Under the M.A.R.S.H. program, 7.5% of the money raised by DU in Georgia is made available as matching funds for work to develop, improve, or restore waterfowl habitat.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

4-9

CHAPTER 5
Estuary and Coastal
Programs
Background The Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Coastal Resources Division (CRD) manages Georgia's coastal resources. The CRD's Coastal Management Section administers Georgia's Coastal Management Program and its enforceable authorities, manages Georgia's shellfish harvest program, and conducts water quality and wetlands monitoring based on specific grants and programmatic requirements. The CRD's Marine Fisheries Section manages Georgia's marine fisheries, balancing the long-term health of fish populations with the needs of those who fish for commercial and recreational purposes. The Section conducts scientific surveys of marine organisms and their habitats; collects harvest and fishing effort information; and assesses, restores and enhances fish habitats; along with other responsibilities. The DNR Wildlife Resources (WRD) and Environmental Protection Divisions (GAEPD) each play additional roles to manage resources in the Georgia coastal environment.
Georgia Coastal Management Program Recognizing the economic importance of environmentally sensitive coastal areas, the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 encourages states to balance sustainable development with resource protection in their coastal zone. As an incentive, the federal government awards states financial assistance to develop and implement coastal zone management programs that fulfill the guidelines established by the Act. Georgia entered this national framework in 1998 upon the approval of the Georgia Coastal Management Program (GCMP) by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Financial assistance under the federal grant to the GCMP has been used, in part, to support the Shellfish and Water Quality Monitoring Program described below.
The Coastal Management Program has provided guidance and technical assistance to improve coastal water quality in general, the development of a Coastal Non-Point Source

Control Program in particular. Under the Coastal Zone Management Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990, Congress added a section entitled "Protecting Coastal Waters." That section directs states with federally approved coastal management programs to develop a Coastal NonPoint Source Program. To that end, the GAEPD is assisting the GCMP in l) identifying land uses which may cause or contribute to the degradation of coastal waters, 2) identifying critical coastal areas adjacent to affected coastal waters, 3) identification of appropriate measures related to land use impacts to achieve and maintain water quality standards and designated uses, and 4) identifying management boundaries to more effectively manage land use impacts and water uses to protect coastal waters.
Shellfish and Water Quality Monitoring Program The CRD conducts water quality monitoring in estuarine and near-shore coastal waters through its Shellfish and Water Quality Monitoring Program. This Program has two distinct parts. The Shellfish Sanitation and Beach Water Quality Monitoring Programs are both based on public health.
Shellfish Sanitation Program CRD's Shellfish Sanitation Program monitors the quality of Georgia's shellfish harvest waters for harmful bacteria that might affect the safety of shellfish for human consumption. Seven (7) harvest areas are designated for recreational picking of oysters and clams by the general public. An additional seventeen (17) harvest areas are designated for the commercial harvest of oysters and clams.
The US Food and Drug Administration's National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) establishes national standards to show that shellfish harvest areas are "not subject to contamination from human and/or animal fecal matter in amounts that in the judgment of the State Shellfish Control Authority may present an actual or potential hazard to public health." Water samples from each approved harvest area are collected by CRD and analyzed regularly to ensure the area is below the established fecal coliform threshold. Waters approved for shellfish harvest must have a geometric mean that does not exceed the threshold set forth by the NSSP.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

5-1

County Chatham

Approved
15,351 acres

Leased
4,887 acres

Public
1,267 acres

Bryan/Liberty McIntosh

55,747 acres
50,170 acres

1,706 acres
13,756 acres

936 acres
1,974 acres

Glynn/Camden

37,018 acres

4,855 acres

4,355 acres

TABLE 5-1. LOCATION AND SIZE OF AREAS APPROVED FOR SHELLFISH HARVEST
Water quality sampling occurs monthly at eightyeight (88) stations in five (5) counties on the coast including Chatham, Liberty, McIntosh, Glynn, and Camden counties. These stations are located to provide representative coverage of all the approved harvest areas along the coast.
Beach Monitoring Program The Beach Monitoring Program was developed in response to the federal Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act of 2000. The BEACH Act is an amendment to the Federal Clean Water Act. The Act requires states to: 1) identify and prioritize their coastal recreational beaches; 2) monitor the beaches for the presence of the bacterial indicator Enterococcus; 3) notify the public when the EPA threshold for Enterococcus has been exceeded; and 4) report the location, monitoring, and notification data to EPA.
Georgia's recreational beaches have been identified and prioritized into three (3) tiers based on their use and proximity to potential pollution sources. Tier 1 beaches are high-use beaches. Tier 2 beaches are lower-use beaches. Tier 3 beaches are lowest-use or at low probability for potential pollution. Water quality sampling occurs regularly depending upon the tier: Tier 1 beaches are monitored weekly, March through November, and every other week for December through February; Tier 2 beaches are monitored monthly from April through October and Tier 3 beaches are not monitored. Beaches that exceed the threshold for Enterococcus are put under a swimming advisory that is not lifted until the levels of bacteria

are sufficiently reduced, based on resampling. Beaches under a permanent swimming advisory are monitored quarterly.
Nutrient Sampling Program (discontinued) Until 2017, CRD's Nutrient Sampling Program collected nutrient baseline data in coastal sounds and estuaries. High nutrient loads have been linked to outbreaks of harmful algal blooms in other states and can result in large kills of fish and other marine life as well as human sickness. CRD collected nutrients at eighty-four (84) stations along the coast since 2000 to establish baseline trends in nitrite nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, total dissolved phosphorus, ortho- phosphate, and silicate.
Due to budget reductions in 2010, changes were made to both the coastal river and estuarine sampling regimes. In response to drought conditions between 2011 and 2013, temperature, salinity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen and pH were collected monthly in the Ogeechee, Altamaha, Satilla, and St. Mary's Rivers at seven (7) sites in each river to provide data for the upper estuary/lower salinity environments. Due to continued budget reductions and higher rainfall totals in 2013, river sampling was terminated in 2014. Samples were also collected at thirty-five (35) of the eighty-eight (88) shellfish sample sites to provide nutrient, chlorophyll a and fecal coliform bacteria data from tidal rivers and sounds.
Coastal Streams, Harbors, and Sounds This report contains information on many coastal streams, harbors, and sounds. Several water bodies have been shown to have low dissolved oxygen (DO) readings over discrete periods of time during an annual cycle. EPD has categorized these streams as needing further assessment. A large percentage of the low dissolved oxygen readings occurred in the late summer and early fall of 2003, a period of prolonged, extreme drought. In addition to the dry conditions, water temperatures and salinities during this period were noted to be well above average for all of the water quality monitoring stations in coastal Georgia. To more accurately represent and report on natural dissolved oxygen levels in coastal water bodies, additional directed effort will be required at each location to increase the general state of knowledge for these estuarine systems.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

5-2

Coastal Beaches This report contains information on twenty-eight (28) coastal beaches. Of these, twenty-five (25) are considered to be supporting their designated use of coastal recreation. Three (3) beaches are considered as not supporting their designated use. The three (3) beaches are all under a permanent swimming advisory and are sampled quarterly. Two (2) of the beaches are located on Jekyll Island, at the St. Andrews picnic area and at Clam Creek. The other one (1) beach is the Kings Ferry beach located at a small municipal park on the Ogeechee River in Chatham County.
Data Not Included in Assessment Much of the data used to generate the 305(b)/303(d) list for coastal streams, harbors, and sounds were collected by CRD for the programs as described earlier in this chapter. Other data are used by CRD to address fisheries management or recreational use in specific areas along the coast, but much of these data do not meet the minimum spatial or temporal (frequency) criteria of the GAEPD 2010 listing methodology guidance document and cannot be used to assess the ability of a water body to support its designated use(s). Data from the Georgia National Coastal Assessment (NCA) Program (2000-2015) were not included for this listing period. NCA data are based on a probabilistic, random sampling design with only one sample per year at each location. For the purposes of 305(b)/303(d), these data may be used in the future to help select sites for further monitoring and to augment existing data sets.
The state's list of assessed waters for beaches does not contain all the coastal beaches that have been identified and prioritized by CRD. Tier 3 beaches are not monitored, so no data are available for assessment. Tier 3 beaches have few potential pollution sources.
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries CRD has several projects that produce information used to determine the status of commercially and recreationally important fish, crustaceans, and mollusks. The Ecological Monitoring Survey (EMS) conducts monthly assessment trawls (blue crabs, shrimp, and beginning in 2003, finfish) in the Wassaw, Ossabaw, Sapelo, St. Simons, St. Andrew and Cumberland estuaries. Data from this survey are used to describe the abundance, size composition, reproductive status of penaeid shrimp

and blue crab. In addition, information collected on finfish and other invertebrate species since 2003 provides a broad ecologically based evaluation of species' abundance, distribution, and diversity in these estuaries. The EMS also conducts a small trawl survey targeting juvenile specimens in the upper creeks monthly in two sound systems, Ossabaw and Altamaha, using similar techniques and protocols (albeit on a smaller scale) as the EMTS. The Marine Sportfish Population Health Survey uses gill and trammel nets to capture recreational finfish in the Wassaw and Altamaha River Delta estuaries from June to November. These data have been used in regional stock assessments for red drum, southern flounder, and black drum.
The Fisheries Statistics Work Unit collects catch and effort information from the recreational and commercial fisheries in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service. Total annual commercial landings in Georgia ranged from 6.74 to 12.69 million pounds of product during the period from 2007 to 2016, with an annual average of 9.09 million pounds. Penaeid shrimps are the most valuable catch in Georgia commercial landings, averaging nearly 9.13 million dollars (2.15 million pounds of tails) in unadjusted, exvessel value during recent years. Catches are composed primarily of white shrimp (Litopenaeus setiferus) during the fall, winter and spring, and brown shrimp (Farfantepenaeus aztecus) during the summer. These shrimp spawn in oceanic waters, but depend on the salt marsh wetlands to foster their juvenile and sub-adult stages. White shrimp landings have varied over the last 50 years with a recent downward trend due to declining fishing effort. Research has shown that densities of spawning stock respond strongly to cold air outbreaks during the early winter that can produce wide scale kills of white shrimp, and to a suite of environmental variables impacting the salt marsh ecosystem that produce a range of growing conditions. Cold weather kills have been associated with abnormally cold winters in 1984, 1989, and 2000.
Blue crabs live longer than penaeid shrimps (3-4 years versus 1-2 years), and also exhibit less extreme fluctuations in annual abundance from one year to the next. The 10-year average (2007 2016) of commercial blue crab harvest was 3.46

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

5-3

million pounds with an ex-vessel value of 3.66 million dollars. A severe drought from 1998 to 2002 reduced annual harvest to 80% of the longterm average. That drought resulted in a reduction in the quantity of oligohaline and mesohaline areas within Georgia's estuaries. This effect was more pronounced in estuaries that did not receive direct freshwater inflow from rivers. It is believed this altered salinity profile resulted in: (1) higher blue crab predation; (2) increased prevalence of the fatal disease caused by the organism, Hematodinium sp; (3) reduction in the quantity of oligohaline nursery habitat and (4) recruitment failure. Blue crab harvest and fishery independent estimates of abundance continue to be low most likely being driven by environmental variables.
Commercial finfish landings fluctuate annually depending on market conditions and the impacts of management. American shad populations in the Altamaha River have fluctuated over the past 30 years. Since 2001, effort estimates have been collected using a trip ticket system with effort being recorded as the number of trips for both the set and drift gill net fisheries. Previously, anecdotal evidence indicated participation in the American shad fishery was declining. However, in 2014 the Department implemented a program requiring shad harvesters to obtain a Letter of Authorization (LOA) thereby allowing it to positively identify participants. Landings data indicate participation has increased but this may be attributable to the LOA. The 10 year average (2007 2016) of shad trips is 661 with a high of 806 and a low of 540. Regulations enacted by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Fishery Management Plan on American Shad (Amendment 3), mandated additional monitoring efforts. Additionally, sustainability plans were required of any water system where commercial fishing is conducted. In Georgia, only the Altamaha, Ogeechee, and Savannah Rivers have commercial fisheries. The commercial fishery on the Ogeechee is very small, with effort averaging < 10 reported trips, landings averaging < 500 lbs, and participation averaging < 3 fishers. No effort has been reported since 2011 and as such, the fishery has remained closed in recent years. By contrast, the Altamaha accounts for the majority of the harvest and reported trips. Total landings of bivalve mollusks have fluctuated greatly over the last 30 years. During the 1970's landings were totally dominated by oysters (Crassostrea sp.), generally over 50,000 pounds of

raw meats per annum. During the early 1980's fishermen increasingly focused on hard clams (Mercenaria sp.) due to stock declines in other areas along the east coast and their market value. This combined with increasing acreages available for harvest activities due to water quality certifications, allowed the replacement of oysters by clams as the premier species from 1986-1988. From 1988-1992 clam landings again declined and oyster landings grew. Since 1990, the clam landings have shown a general increase in contrast to the oyster fishery that, after large catches from 1989-92, have shown a steady decline since. The 10 year average (2007-2016) for clams was 178 thousand pounds of meat and shell while oyster harvest was 24.9 thousand pounds.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

5-4

CHAPTER 6
Public Health &
Aquatic Life Issues
Risk-Based Assessment for Fish Consumption In 1995, Georgia began issuing tiered recommendations for fish consumption. Georgia's fish consumption guidelines are "riskbased" and are conservatively developed using currently available scientific information regarding likely intake rates of fish and toxicity values for contaminants detected. One of four, simple, species-specific recommendations is possible under the guidelines: No Restriction, Limit Consumption to One Meal Per Week, Limit Consumption to One Meal Per Month, or Do Not Eat. In 2017, 59.1% of recommendations for fish tested in Georgia waters were for No Restriction28% were to Limit Consumption to One Meal Per Week, 11.1% were to Limit Consumption to One Meal Per Month, and 1.8% was Do Not Eat Advisories. It should be noted that the dramatic increase of waters not fully meeting designated uses as related to fish consumption was a result of converting to a conservative riskbased approach for evaluating contaminants data in 1995, and not a result of increased contaminant concentrations in Georgia's fish.
Fish Consumption Guidelines Georgia has more than 44,000 miles of perennial streams and more than 421,000 acres of lakes. It is not possible for the DNR to sample every stream and lake in the state. However, high priority has been placed on the 26 major reservoirs, which make up more than 90% of the total lake acreage. These lakes will continue to be monitored to track any trends in fish contaminant levels. The DNR has also made sampling fish in rivers and streams downstream of urban and/or industrial areas a high priority. In addition, DNR focuses attention on public areas that are frequented by a large number of anglers.
The general contaminants program includes testing of edible fish and shellfish tissue samples for the substances listed in Table 6-1. Of the 43 constituents tested, only PCBs, dieldrin, DDT

and its metabolites, and mercury have been found in fish at concentrations above what may be safely consumed at an unlimited amount or frequency.

The use of PCBs, chlordane, DDT and dieldrin have been banned in the United States, and, over time, the levels are expected to continue to decline. Currently there are no restricted consumption recommendations due to chlordane. One water segment has a restriction in consumption recommended for one species due to dieldrin residues, and one pond has restrictions recommended due to DDT/DDD/DDE residues.

TABLE 6-1. PARAMETERS FOR FISH

TISSUE TESTING

Antimony

b-BHC

Toxaphene

Arsenic

d-BHC

PCB-1016

Beryllium

g-BHC (Lindane)

PCB-1221

Cadmium Chlordane

PCB-1232

Chromium, Total

4,4-DDD

PCB-1242

Copper

4,4-DDE

PCB-1248

Lead

4,4-DDT

PCB-1254

Mercury

Dieldrin

PCB-1260

Nickel

Endosulfan I

Methoxychlor

Selenium Endosulfan II

HCB

Silver

Endosulfan Sulfate

Mirex

Thallium

Endrin

Pentachloroanisole

Zinc

Endrin Aldehyde

Chlorpyrifos

Aldrin

Heptachlor

a-BHC

Heptachlor Epoxide

Mercury in Fish Trend Project In response to regulatory actions requiring reductions in air emissions of mercury, DNR recognized the need to establish a mercury in fish trend network that would provide a database for evaluating potential changes that may result in fish body burdens. Twenty-two stations were established in 2006 having spatial relevance to major air-emission sources in Georgia (coal-fired electric generating units and a chlor-alkali plant), waters with TMDLs for mercury in fish, and near State boundaries for out-of-state sources. Each station has a designated predator species that will be

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-1

monitored annually. Mercury trend samples of individual fish muscle tissue are analyzed for mercury and other metals.
Mercury is a naturally occurring metal that cycles between the land, water, and the air. As mercury cycles through the environment it is absorbed and ingested by plants and animals. It is not known where the mercury in Georgia's fish originates. Mercury may be present due to mercury content in natural environments such as in South Georgia swamps, from municipal or industrial sources, or from fossil fuel uses. It has been shown that mercury contamination is related to global atmospheric transport. The EPA has evaluated the sources of mercury loading to several river basins in Georgia as part of TMDL development, and has determined that 99% or greater of the total mercury loading to these waters occurs via atmospheric deposition.
States across the southeast and the nation have detected mercury in fish at levels that have resulted in limits on fish consumption. In 1995, the USEPA updated guidance on mercury, which documented increased risks of consuming fish with mercury. The DNR reassessed all mercury data and added consumption guidelines in 1996 for a number of lakes and streams, which had no restrictions in 1995. The Georgia guidance for 2014 reflects the continued use of the more stringent USEPA risk level for mercury.
Evaluation Of Fish Consumption Guidance for Assessment Of Use Support USEPA guidance for evaluating fish consumption advisory information for 305(b)/303(d) use support determinations has been to assess a water as fully supporting uses if fish can be consumed in unlimited amounts. If consumption needs to be limited, or no consumption is recommended, the water is not supporting this use. Georgia followed this guidance in evaluating the fish consumption guidelines for the 2000 and earlier 305(b)/303(d) lists. This assessment methodology was followed again in developing the 2016-2017305(b)/303(d) List for all fish tissue contaminants except mercury. Mercury in fish tissue was assessed and a segment or water body was listed if the trophicweighted fish community tissue mercury was in excess of the USEPA water quality criterion

(Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury, EPA-823-R-01001, January 2001). For mercury, waters were placed on the not support list if the calculated trophic-weighted residue value was greater than 0.3 g/g wet weight total mercury. For contaminants other than mercury (PCBs, dieldrin, DDT/DDD/DDE) waters were placed on the not support list if the assessment indicated any limited consumption of fish. The USEPA criterion represents a national approach to address what mercury concentration is protective for fishing waters. The existence of risk-based recommendations to reduce consumption was used with respect to other contaminants detected in fish tissue. EPD formally adopted the 2001 EPA national human health criterion for methylmercury as a human health standard for total mercury in fish tissue in the Georgia water quality rules in December 2002.
General Guidelines to Reduce Health Risks The following suggestions may help to reduce the risks of fish consumption:
Keep smaller fish for eating. Generally, larger older fish may be more contaminated than younger, smaller fish. You can minimize your health risk by eating smaller fish (within legal size limits) and releasing the larger fish.
Vary the kinds of fish you eat. Contaminants build up in large predators and bottom-feeding fish, like Bass and Catfish, more rapidly than in other species. By substituting a few meals of panfish, such as perch, sunfish and Crappie, you can reduce your risk.
Eat smaller meals when you eat big fish and eat them less often. If you catch a big fish, freeze part of the catch (mark container or wrapping with species and location), and space the meals from this fish over a period of time.
Clean and cook your fish properly. How you clean and cook your fish can reduce the level of contaminants by as much as half in some fish. Some chemicals have a tendency to concentrate in the fatty tissues of fish. By removing the fish's skin and trimming fillets

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-2

according to the diagram, you can reduce the level of chemicals substantially. Mercury is bound to the meat of the fish, so these precautions will not help reduce this contaminant.
Remove the skin from fillets or steaks. The internal organs (intestines, liver, roe, and so forth), and skin are often high in fat and contaminants.
Trim off the fatty areas shown in black on the drawing below. These include the belly fat, side or body fat, and the flesh along the top of the back. Careful trimming can reduce some contaminants by 25 to 50%.
Cook fish so fat drips away. Broil, bake or grill fish and do not use the drippings. Deep-fat frying removes some contaminants, but you should discard and not reuse the oil for cooking. Pan frying removes few, if any, contaminants.
Specific Water body Consumption Guidelines These guidelines are designed to protect you from experiencing health problems associated with eating contaminated fish. It should be noted that these guidelines are based on the best scientific information and procedures available. As more advanced procedures are developed these guidelines may change.
PCBs, chlordane, dieldrin, DDT and methylmercury build up in your body over time. It may take months or years of regularly eating contaminated fish to accumulate levels that would affect your health. It is important to keep in mind that these guidelines are based on eating fish with similar contamination over a period of 30 years or more. These guidelines are not intended to discourage people from eating fish. They are intended to help fishermen choose safe fish for the table.

Table 6-2 lists the lakes and streams where the fish have been tested and found to contain little or no contamination. There are no problems with eating fish from these water bodies. Tables 6-3 6-4, and 6-5 list the lakes, freshwater rivers and creeks, and estuaries, respectively, where consumption guidance has been issued by the DNR. This information is provided annually in Georgia's Freshwater and Saltwater Fishing Regulations, which is available from DNR and also supplied with each fishing license purchased. This information is also updated annually in the DNR publication Guidelines for Eating Fish From Georgia Waters.
Special Notice For Pregnant Women, Nursing Mothers, and Children If you plan to become pregnant in the next year or two, are pregnant now, or are a nursing mother, you and your children under 6 years of age are especially sensitive to the effects of some contaminants. For added protection, women in these categories and children may wish to limit consumption to a greater extent than recommended in Tables 6-3 and 6-4. Fish tissue consumption guidelines are discussed in detail in the DNR publication Guidelines for Eating Fish from Georgia Waters-2007 Update that is reproduced in Appendix C.
Development Of New Risk Communication Tools For Women of Child-bearing Age and Children In 2003, new approaches to spatial analyses were used to assess fish tissue contaminants by species and trophic level, and across distinct geographic areas including hydrologic unit codes, river basins, and hydrogeologic provinces of Georgia. The analyses were used to generate simple brochures with specific information targeting women of child-bearing age and children for distribution through health and nutrition related outlets. Brochures were generated for four distinct areas of Georgia, and English versions were released in November 2003, followed by publication of Spanish brochures in March of 2004. The College of Family and Consumer Sciences, Cooperative Extension Services, University of Georgia and the Chemical Hazards Program, Georgia Division of Public Health collaborated in the development of the brochures. The information will be updated as

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-3

needed, and all brochures are currently available on the DNR website.

Recreational Public Beach Monitoring The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducts fecal coliform monitoring at its reservoir bathing beaches in Georgia. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Georgia Power, the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park Service, Georgia State Parks, and counties and cities throughout the state have also conduct some sampling at the public beaches they operate. The Coastal Resources Division of DNR conducts enterococcus monitoring at public coastal beaches and other recreationally used estuarine locations such as boat ramps and sandbars, and works with the local County Health Department in issuance of swimming advisories.

Shellfish Area Closures Georgia's one hundred linear mile coastline contains approximately 500,000 acres of potential shellfish habitat. Most shellfish in Georgia grows in the narrow intertidal zone and are exposed between high water and low water tide periods. Only a limited amount of that area, however actually produces viable shellfish populations. Lack of suitable cultch, tidal amplitudes, disease, littoral slope, and other unique geomorphologic features contribute to the limited occurrence of natural shellfish resources along the Georgia Coast.

The Coastal Resources Division currently

monitors and maintains five shellfish growing

areas comprised of commercial leases and

public recreational harvest areas. Shellfish

waters on the Georgia coast are classified as

"Approved" or "Prohibited" in accordance with

the criteria of the National Shellfish Sanitation

Program. Specific zones within shellfish growing

areas may be closed to shell fishing because of

the proximity to a marina or a municipal or

industrial discharge.

Georgia maintains

approximately 33,000 acres approved for the

harvest of shellfish for commercial and/or

personal consumption. Only those areas

designated as Public Recreational Harvest or

those areas under commercial lease are

classified as "Approved for shellfish harvest".

Shellfish growing area waters are monitored

regularly to ensure that these areas remain in

compliance with the FDA fecal coliform

thresholds. All other waters of the state are classified as "Prohibited", and are closed to the taking of shellfish. It is important to note that, even though some of these areas could potentially meet the criteria to allow for harvesting, they have been classified as "Prohibited" due to the lack of available water quality data.
Cyanobacteria (Blue-Green Algae) Blooms Cyanobacteria blooms are an increasing concern for Georgia's citizens. Cyanobacteria occur naturally in low abundance in Georgia's lakes and reservoirs. However, eutrophication results in conditions that are favorable for cyanobacteriagrowth. Cyanobacteria blooms can cause a variety of water quality issues including, the potential to produce toxins and taste-and-odor compounds. These compounds are produced naturally by cyanobacteria, but their function or what causes their production is still currently unknown. EPD is in the process of developing a means to better detect blooms, assess whether toxins are present, and better inform the public on this issue.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-4

TABLE 6-2 NO CONSUMPTION RESTRICTIONS - 2017

LAKES
Allen Creek WMA (Ponds A & B) Bowles C. Ford Lake Brasstown Valley (Kid's Fish Pond) City of Adairsville Pond Clarks Hill Clayton County Water Auth. (Lakes Blalock, Smith and Shamrock) Dodge County PFA Fort Yargo State Park Lake Hard Labor Creek (Rutledge) High Falls Marben PFA (Bennett, Margery, and Shepherd) Mayer (Savannah) McDuffie PFA (East & West Watershed Ponds) Nancy Town Lake Oconee Olmstead Paradise PFA (Bobben, Patrick & Horseshoe 4) Payton Park Pond Rocky Mountain PFA (Lakes Antioch & Heath) Seed Silver Lake WMA Sinclair Shepherd CEWC Varner Walter F. George

RIVERS

Alcovy River Boen Creek (Rabun County) Brasstown Creek (Towns County) Broad River Buffalo Creek (Carroll County) Butternut Creek (Union County) Cane Creek (Lumpkin County) Chattahoochee River (Chattahoochee, Early, & Stewart Counties) Chattanooga Creek Chattooga River (Northwest Ga.) Chestatee River (Headwaters to Tesnatee River) Chickamauga Creek (East & South) Chickasawhatchee Creek Coleman River Conasauga River (in Cohutta Forest) Daniels Creek (Cloudland Canyon State Park) Dukes Creek Goldmine Branch Jacks River Jones Creek Little Dry Creek (Floyd County) Little Tallapoosa River Little Tennessee River Middle Oconee River

Mill Creek (Whitfield County) Moccasin Creek (Lake Burton Trout Hatchery) Mud Creek (Cobb County) Nickajack Creek Noonday Creek (Cobb County) North Oconee River Ocmulgee River (Butts & Monroe Counties.) Ocmulgee River (Pulaski County) Oconee River (Below Barnett Shoals to Lake Oconee) Oconee River (Baldwin/Wilkinson Counties) Oconee River (Laurens County) Ogeechee River (Ft. McAllister) Olley Creek Ponder Branch (Walker County) Proctor Creek Sewell Mill Creek Slab Camp Creek (Oconee County) South River (Butts County, Hwy. 36) Spirit Creek Stamp Creek (Cherokee County) Stekoa Creek Tallulah River Upatoi Creek Yahoola Creek Yellow River (Porterdale Dam)

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-5

TABLE 6-3. FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDANCE FOR LAKES 2017

Acworth

LAKES

Allatoona

Andrews Banks
Bartlett's Ferry (Harding)

NO RESTRICTIONS
Bluegill, Largemouth Bass <16" Carp, Crappie, Spotted Bass <16", Largemouth Bass 12-16", Channel Catfish, White Bass <12", G. Redhorse Channel Catfish, Spotted Sucker
Bluegill
Black Crappie <12", Largemouth Bass <16", Spotted Bass <12"

Bear Cr. Reservoir Bennett CEWC PFA Black Shoals (Randy Poynter) Blackshear Big Lazer PFA Blue Ridge Burton Paradise PFA (Patrick, Horseshoe 4, & Bobben) Pond N. Bush Field Carters Chatuge
Clarks Hill
Evans County PFA

Sunfish
Largemouth Bass Redear Sunfish
Channel Catfish <12", Redear
Channel Catfish <12"
Largemouth Bass 12-16", Channel Catfish Channel Catfish <16", Largemouth Bass <12", Bluegill Largemouth Bass <16", Channel Catfish, Bluegill, White Catfish Channel Catfish, LM, Bullhead, Bluegill Bluegill, Largemouth Bass <12" Largemouth Bass <16", Channel Catfish, Walleye Spotted Bass <16" Largemouth Bass 12"-16", Largemouth Bass >16", Channel Catfish Channel Catfish, Black Crappie, Redear, White perch, Striped Bass, Spotted sucker, Hybrid Bass, Largemouth Bass >16" Channel Catfish, Largemouth Bass 12-16"

1 MEAL/ WEEK Largemouth Bass >16"
Spotted Bass >16", Largemouth Bass >16", Hybrid Bass >16"
Largemouth Bass >12"
Hybrid Bass >16", Striped Bass >16", Largemouth Bass >16", Channel Catfish, Black Crappie >12", Spotted Bass >12" Largemouth Bass < 16", Channel Catfish >12"
Largemouth Bass 12-16", Channel Catfish >12", Black Crappie Channel Catfish >12", Largemouth Bass >12" Largemouth Bass >16" White Bass 12-16", Largemouth Bass 12-16", Channel Catfish >16" Largemouth Bass >16", Spotted Bass 12-16", Walleye >16"
Largemouth Bass 12-16"
Spotted Bass >16", Largemouth Bass >16"
Spotted Bass 12-16" Hybrid Bass >16"
Largemouth Bass >16"

1 MEAL/ MONTH
Largemouth Bass >12"

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-6

Goat Rock

LAKES

Hartwell (Tugaloo Arm)
Hartwell main body of lake Hugh M. Gillis PFA
Jackson

Juliette
Ken Gardens Kolomoki (DNR S.P.) Lanier L. Ocmulgee St. Pk. McDuffie PFA, West Nottely Oliver Rabun Reed Bingham S.P.
Richard B. Russell

Seminole
So. Slappy Blvd. Offramp (Albany) Stone Mountain Tobesofkee Tugalo

NO RESTRICTIONS
Black Crappie, Largemouth Bass 12-16", Spotted sucker, Bluegill Black Crappie, Hybrid Bass <12", Striped Bass < 12", Channel Catfish < 16"

1 MEAL/ WEEK
Hybrid Bass <12", Channel Catfish 12-16"
Largemouth Bass >12", Carp > 16"

DO NOT EAT Hybrid and Striped Bass > 16 inches in length

DO NOT EAT Hybrid and Striped Bass

(S C Dept. Health and Environmental Control 1-888-849-7241)

Channel Catfish, Bluegill

Largemouth Bass 12-16"

Black Crappie,

Redear sunfish,

Channel Catfish >16",

Channel Catfish < 16"

Largemouth Bass

White Catfish

Largemouth Bass <12";

Largemouth Bass 12"-16",

Redear Sunfish,

Largemouth Bass >16"

Bullhead,

Striped Bass

Channel Catfish,

Brown bullhead,

Largemouth Bass >12"

Bluegill

Redear Sunfish
Channel Catfish <16", Striped Bass <16", Bluegill, Black Crappie, White Catfish

Largemouth Bass >12"
Striped Bass, Carp>16", Walleye >16", Channel Catfish >16", Largemouth Bass, Spotted Bass
Brown bullhead 12-16"

Channel Catfish, Largemouth Bass
Channel Catfish, Black Crappie Hybrid Bass <12", Channel Catfish <16", Redear, Bluegill Largemouth Bass 12-16", Bluegill, White Catfish <16"

Largemouth Bass >12", Striped Bass >16"
Largemouth Bass > 12"
White Catfish >16" Largemouth Bass >16"

Black Crappie, Bluegill, White perch, Channel Catfish, Bullhead Channel Catfish, Spotted sucker, Black Crappie, Redear Sunfish
Bluegill
Catfish
Channel Catfish
White Catfish 12-16", Bluegill

Largemouth Bass >12"
Largemouth Bass >12" Largemouth Bass 12-16" Largemouth Bass >16" Largemouth Bass >12" Walleye>16"

1 MEAL/ MONTH Channel Catfish <16, Largemouth Bass >16", Hybrid Bass >12", White Bass Hybrid Bass 12-16", Striped Bass 12-16" Channel Catfish Largemouth Bass, Channel Catfish
Largemouth Bass >16"
Channel Catfish >16"
Largemouth Bass >12", White Catfish >16"
Largemouth Bass >16"
Largemouth Bass >12"

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-7

LAKES Tribble Mill Park
West Point
Worth (Chehaw) Worth (Flint Res.) Yohola (DNR S.P.)

NO RESTRICTIONS
Black Crappie, Bluegill, Largemouth Bass <12" , Carp, Spotted Bass, Black Crappie, Channel Catfish, Hybrid Bass <16" Spotted sucker, Redear
Channel Catfish
Bluegill

Yonah

Bluegill

Abbreviations used in table: < means "less than", > means "more than"

1 MEAL/ WEEK
Largemouth Bass 12-16"
Largemouth Bass >12"
Hybrid Bass >16"
Largemouth Bass 12-16", Channel Catfish >16" Largemouth Bass >12" Largemouth Bass >12" Largemouth Bass 12-16", Catfish 12-16"

1 MEAL/ MONTH

TABLE 6-4. FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDANCE FOR FRESHWATER RIVERS AND CREEKS 2017

RIVERS/CREEKS

NO RESTRICTIONS

1 MEAL PER WEEK

1 MEAL PER MONTH

Alapaha River Alapahoochee River

Redbreast sunfish

Spotted sucker Bullhead

Largemouth Bass, Bullhead

Allatoona Creek, Cobb County

Spotted Bass, Alabama Hog Sucker

Altamaha River (U.S Hwy 1)

Bluegill (US 1),

Flathead Catfish, Largemouth Bass, Channel Catfish

Altamaha River (U.S Hwy 25/84)

Channel Catfish, Strpied Mullet (Altamaha Park)

Flathead Catfish

Largemouth Bass

Apalachee River Beaver Creek (Taylor County) Brier Creek (Burke County) Canoochee River (Hwy 192 to Lotts Cr.)

Channel Catfish

Canoochee River (Lotts Cr. To Ogeechee River) Casey Canal Chattooga River (NE Ga., Rabun County)

Largemouth Bass, Bluegill
Brown Trout

Chattahoochee River (Helen to Lanier)

Channel Catfish

Largemouth Bass
Spotted sucker
Channel Catfish
Striped mullet Northern Hog Sucker, Silver Redhorse, Redbreast Sunfish Redeye Bass, Snail Bullhead Golden Redhorse Spotted bass Shoal bass

Yellow bullhead Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass, Redbreast, Snail Bullhead Largemouth Bass, Channel Catfish
Largemouth Bass

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-8

RIVERS/CREEKS
Chattahoochee River (Buford Dam to Morgan Falls Dam)

NO RESTRICTIONS
Brown trout, Carp, Rainbow trout, Yellow perch

1 MEAL PER WEEK Largemouth Bass

1 MEAL PER MONTH

Chattahoochee River (Morgan Falls Dam to Peachtree Creek)
Chattahoochee River (Peachtree Creek to Pea Creek) Chattahoochee River (Pea Creek to West Point Lake, below Franklin) Chattahoochee River Special Striped Bass (Morgan Falls Dam to West Point Lake) Chattahoochee River (Oliver Dam to Upatoi Creek) Chattahoochee River (West Point dam to I-85)
Chestatee River (below Tesnatee River)
Chickamauga Creek (West)

Brown trout, Rainbow trout, Largemouth Bass, Bluegill, Spotted Bass, Shoal Bass Channel Catfish, White sucker
Channel Catfish

Jumprock sucker
Bluegill, Black Bass Largemouth Bass, Spotted Bass

Carp Carp

This striped Bass population migrates annually between West Point Lake and Morgan Falls Dam. DNR recommends the general public restrict consumption to one meal per month.

Largemouth Bass, Bullheads Channel Catfish, Redbreast
Redbreast sunfish

Bullhead Catfish Spotted Bass Spotted Bass Spotted Bass

Largemouth Bass

Cohulla Creek (Praters Mill))

Blacktail Redhorse

Conasauga River (Stateline to Hwy 286) Conasauga River (Hwy 286 to Calhoun) Coosa River (Rome to Hwy 100, Floyd County)
Coosa River (Hwy 100 to Stateline, Floyd County) Coosa River Zero River Mile to Stateline

Spotted Bass

White Bass

Spotted Bass

DO NOT EAT SMALLMOUTH BUFFALO

Spotted Bass

Largemouth Bass, Black Crappie

Smallmouth Buffalo White Bass, Smallmouth Buffalo Largemouth Bass, Striped Bass
Striped Bass, Channel Catfish, Smallmouth Buffalo

Blue Catfish: <18" one meal per week; 18-32" one meal per month; and >32" do not eat.

Coosa River System Special (Coosa, Etowah below Thompson-Weinman Dam, Oostanaula)

Special Striped Bass: this population migrates annually between Weiss Lake and the Coosa River system. DNR recommends the general public restrict consumption of fish less than 20 inches to one meal per month, and to not eat any striped Bass 20 inches or greater in length.

Coosawattee River below Carters

Bluegill

Smallmouth buffalo

Etowah River (Dawson County)

Blacktail Redhorse

Etowah River (above Lake Allatoona) Etowah River (below Lake Allatoona Dam) Flint River (Spalding/Fayette Counties) Flint River (Meriwether/Upson/Pike Counties) Flint River (Taylor County)

Golden Redhorse
Channel Catfish, Bluegill, Striped Bass (above Thompson Weinman dam)
Spotted sucker
Channel Catfish, Flathead Catfish, Redbreast Sunfish, Black Bass Channel Catfish, Shoal Bass

Spotted Bass Spotted Bass, Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass Shoal Bass Largemouth Bass

Smallmouth buffalo

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-9

RIVERS/CREEKS

NO RESTRICTIONS

1 MEAL PER WEEK

Flint River (Macon/Dooly/Worth/Lee)
Flint River (Dougherty/Mitchell/Baker County) Gum Creek (Crisp County)

Channel Catfish Sucker, Flathead Catfish <16" Carp

Largemouth Bass
Largemouth Bass, Flathead Catfish 16-30"
Largemouth Bass

Holly Creek (Murray County)

Blacktail Redhorse

Ichawaynochaway Creek
Kinchafoonee Creek (Sumter/Lee Counties ) Little River (Above and Below Rocky Cr., Wilkes County ) Little River, (West of Valdosta, Lowndes County)

Spotted Sucker

Largemouth Bass

Largemouth Bass, Spotted sucker

Spotted sucker, Silver Redhorse Largemouth Bass

Spotted sucker

Largemouth Bass

Mill Creek (Murray County) Muckalee Creek (above Albany)
Ochlockonee River (Moultrie to Thomasville)
Ochlockonee River (Thomasville to Satate Line) Ocmulgee River (below Macon, Bibb County) Ocmulgee River (Houston/Twiggs Cos.)
Ocmulgee River (Telfair/ Wilcox Counties)
Oconee River (above Barnett Shoals) Ogeechee River (Washington County; near Davisboro) Ogeechee River (Jefferson County; Louisville) Ogeechee River (Burke County Midville) Ogeechee River (Jenkins County; Millen)

Redbreast Sunfish
Channel Catfish, Flathead Catfish Channel Catfish, Flathead Catfish
Channel Catfish
Spotted Bass, Bluegill Sunfish, Channel Catfish

Ogeechee River (Bulloch County; near Statesboro)

Ogeechee River (Hwy 119) Ogeechee River (Bryan County; near Ellabelle)

Spotted Sucker

Golden Redhorse
Largemouth Bass, Spotted sucker Spotted sucker, White Catfish, Redbreast Sunfish
Spotted Sucker
Largemouth Bass
Largemouth Bass
Flathead Catfish, Largemouth Bass
Silver Redhorse, Largemouth Bass
Spotted Sucker
Spotted Sucker, Redbreast Sunfsh
Redbreast Sunfish
Sanil Bullhead, Redbreast Sunfish Channel Catfish, Redbreast Sunfish, Snail Bullhead, Spotted Sucker Largemouth Bass, Redbreast Sunfish Redbreast sunfish, Channel Catfish,

Ohoopee River (Near Oak Park, Ga .) Ohoopee River (Near Reidsville, Ga., Tattnall County)
Okefenokee Swamp (Billy's Lake)
Oostanaula River, Hwy. 156, Calhoun

Bluegill Sunfish

Redbreast Sunfish
Redbreast Sunfish, Spotted Sucker, Channel Catfish
Flier, Bluegill Sunfish
Smallmouth buffalo

1 MEAL PER MONTH Flathead Catfish >30"
Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass
Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass
Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass Bowfin, Chain Pickerel, Largemouth Bass

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-10

RIVERS/CREEKS
Oostanaula River, Hwy 140, to Coosa River Patsiliga Creek (Upstream of Beaver Creek, Taylor County) Patsiliga Creek (Downstream of Beaver Creek) Pipemaker Canal Satilla River (Waycross, Ware/Pierce Counties)
Satilla River (near Folkston, Camden County) Savannah River (Below Clarks Hill Dam, Columbia County) Savannah River (Richmond/Burke Countiesbelow New Savannah Bluff Lock & Dam) Savannah River (Screven County)
Savannah River (Chatham County)

NO RESTRICTIONS
Bluegill Sunfish, Channel Catfish Largemouth Bass, Spotted Sucker

1 MEAL PER WEEK
Largemouth Bass, Spotted Bass, Smallmouth Buffalo
Chain Pickerel
Grayfin Redhorse, Spotted Sucker, Greater Jumprock Largemouth Bass Redbreast sunfish, Channel Catfish, Bullhead

DO NOT EAT FLATHEAD CATFISH>30"

Redear Sunfish, Redbreast Sunfish
Striped mullet Spotted Sucker

Largemouth Bass, Spotted Sucker
Largemouth Bass

Redear Runfish, Channel Catfish

Bluegill Sunfish, Largemouth Bass

Channel Catfish, Striped Mullet

Largemouth Bass,

1 MEAL PER MONTH
Largemouth Bass, Shoal Bass
Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass, Redbreast, Flathead Catfish <30"

Savannah River (Fort Howard)

Redbreast Sunfish

White Catfish

Bowfin, Largemouth Bass

Savannah River (Effingham County) Savannah River (Tidal Gate)

Channel Catfish, Redbreast Sunfish
Red drum,

Largemouth Bass White Catfish

Savannah River Special (New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam to Savannah Estuary, Chatham County)

DNR recommends the general public restrict consumption of legal size striped Bass 27 inches and larger to one meal per month. Women who are pregnant or nursing and young children may wish to further restrict their consumption due to the variable mercury levels in these striped Bass.

Short Creek (Warren County)

Sunfish

South River (DeKalb and , Rockdale Counties) South River (Henry County, Snapping Shoals)
Spring Creek (Seminole/Decatur/Miller Counties) St. Marys River (Camden County) St. Marys River (Charlton County)

Silver Redhorse, Channel Catfish
Redbreast, Striped mullet Redbreast sunfish

Snail bullhead, Bluegill Sunfish
Largemouth Bass
Largemouth Bass, Spotted sucker, Redear Sunfish

Largemouth Bass Largemouth Bass

Sugar Creek (Murray County)

Golden Redhorse

Sumac Creek (Murray County)

Suwannee River (Clinch, Ware and Echols Counties)

Swamp Creek (Redwine Cove Road, Whitefield County) Talking Rock Creek (Downtown Talking Rock, Pickens County)
Tallapoosa River (U.S Hwy 27)

Bluegill Sunfish, Blacktail Redhorse

Golden Redhorse Bullhead, Chain pickerel, Flier
Redeye Bass
Redeye Bass

Largemouth Bass

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-11

RIVERS/CREEKS Tallapoosa River (Ga. Hwy 100) Trib. To Hudson Rive( Alto, Banks County) Withlacoochee River (Hwy 122) Withlacoochee River (Cyattville/Hwy 84)

NO RESTRICTIONS Brown bullhead Redbreast sunfish

1 MEAL PER WEEK Blacktail Redhorse Redeye Bass Redbreast sunfish Spotted Sucker

1 MEAL PER MONTH Largemouth Bass

TABLE 6-4. FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDANCE ESTUARINE SYSTEMS 2017

ESTUARINE SYSTEMS

NO RESTRICTIONS

Turtle River System (Purvis Cr., Gibson Cr.)

Turtle & Buffalo Rivers (upriver Hwy 303)

White Shrimp, Flounder

Turtle River (Hwy 303 Channel Marker 9)

White Shrimp

Turtle River (C. Marker 9 & So. Brunswick River to Dubignons & Parsons creeks)
Terry Creek South of Torras Causeway to Lanier Basin
Terry and Dupree Creeks North of Torras Causeway to Confluence w/ Back River
Back River One mile above Terry Creek to Confluence with Torras Causeway
Back River South of Torras Causeway to St. Simons Sound

White Shrimp, Flounder, Red Drum, Sheepshead, Striped Mullet, Blue Crab Spot, Stripped Mullet, Shrimp, Atlantic Croaker, Spotted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting), Blue crab
Blue crab, Shrimp
Stripped Mullet, Shrimp, Atlantic Croaker, Spotted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting), Blue crab, Red drum Spot, Stripped Mullet, Shrimp, Spotted Seatrout,

1 MEAL PER WEEK Red drum, Flounder, Shrimp, Striped Mullet Red drum, Blue crab,
Sheepshead Black Drum, Striped Mullet Red drum, Flounder, Black Drum, Blue Crab , Black Drum, , Spotted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting)
Yellowtail (Silver perch)
Red drum
Atlantic croaker

1 MEAL PER MONTH Blue crab, Spotted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting), Sheepshead, Spot Black Drum
Spoted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting), Atlantic Croaker, Spot,
, Spotted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting), Sheepshead Striped Mullet
Atlantic Croaker, , , Spot

DO NOT EAT , Atlantic Croaker, Bivalves*
, Bivalves *
Spot, , Bivalves *
Bivalves *

Bivalves *

Stripped Mullet, Atlantic Croaker, Spotted Seatrout, Southern Kingfish (whiting)

Spot, Bivalves *

Spot

Bivalves *

Bivalves *

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-12

Southern Kingfish

(whiting),

Blue crab, Red drum

Floyd Creek

Blue crab, Southern Kingfish

Academy Creek

Blue crab

Altamaha Estuary

Striped mullet, Spotted Seatrout

Cumberland Sound

Brown Shrimp

Hayner's Creek (Savannah)

Blue crab

Mud River

White Shrimp

North Newport River

Striped Mullet

Blue Crab

Sapelo Sound

Brown Shrimp

Savannah Estuary

Striped mullet

Striped Bass >=27"

St. Simon's Sound

Tripletail

Sheepshead

Wassaw Sound

Brown Shrimp, Spotted Seatrout

* Bivalves are all clams, mussels and oysters; Shellfish ban under National Shellfish Sanitation Program

King Mackerel Special Joint State Guidance Issued by Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida For South Atlantic Ocean

Size Range (Fork Length, Inches)

Recommendations for Meal Consumption of King Mackerel Caught Offshore Georgia Coast

24 To Less Than 33 Inches

No Restrictions

33 To 39 Inches

1 meal per month for pregnant women, nursing mothers and children age 12 and younger. 1 meal per week for other adults

Over 39 Inches

Do Not Eat

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

6-13

CHAPTER 7
Watershed
Protection Programs
Program Perspective The first major legislation to deal with water pollution control in Georgia was passed in 1957. The Act was ineffective and was replaced by the Water Quality Control Act of 1964. This Act established the Georgia Water Quality Control Board, the predecessor of the Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, which was established in 1972. Early efforts by the Board in the late 1960's and early 1970's included documenting water quality conditions, cleanup of targeted pollution problems and the establishment of water use classifications and water quality standards. Trend monitoring efforts were initiated and a modest State construction grants program was implemented.
In 1972 the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 was enacted by Congress. Today, this law is known as the Clean Water Act (CWA). The CWA set the national agenda for water protection and launched the national objective to provide "for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provide for recreation in and on the water". The CWA established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit system for regulation of municipal and industrial water pollution control plants, a water use classifications and standards process, and a construction grants process to fund the construction of municipal water pollution control facilities.
Most industries in Georgia had installed modern, effective water pollution control facilities by the end of 1972. In the mid/late 1970's emphasis was placed on the design and construction of municipal facilities through the federal Construction Grants Program. First and second round NPDES permits were negotiated and operation and

maintenance, compliance monitoring, and enforcement programs initiated. Basin planning, trend monitoring, intensive surveys, modeling and wasteload allocation work was well underway.
In 1987 Congress made significant changes to the Clean Water Act. The Water Quality Act of 1987 placed increased emphasis on toxic substances, control of nonpoint source pollution, clean lakes, wetlands and estuaries. The Act required that all States evaluate water quality standards and adopt numeric criteria for toxic substances to protect aquatic life and public health. This work was initiated and completed by the GAEPD in the late 1980s. The Act also required each State to evaluate nonpoint source pollution impacts and develop a management plan to deal with documented problems.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Georgia General Assembly passed a number of laws that set much of the agenda for the GAEPD in the early 1990s. Laws such as the Growth Strategies Act which helps protect sensitive watersheds, wetlands, and groundwater recharge areas and the ban on high phosphate detergents to reduce nutrient loading to rivers and lakes were enacted. Legislation was passed in 1990 that required the GAEPD to conduct comprehensive studies of major publicly owned lakes and establish specific water quality standards for each lake. In addition in 1991 the General Assembly passed a law requiring a phosphorus limit of 0.75 mg/l for all major point sources discharging to the Chattahoochee River between Buford Dam and West Point Lake. Major river corridors were accorded additional protections with laws passed in 1991. Also in 1991, the General Assembly passed the Georgia Environmental Policy Act that requires an environmental effects report be developed for major State funded projects. In 1992, the General Assembly passed the River Basin Management Planning Act that required the GAEPD develop and implement plans for water protection for each major river basin in Georgia.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-1

In 2004, the General Assembly passed the Statewide Comprehensive Water Management Planning Act. This legislation replaced the river basin management planning legislation and charged the EPD with the responsibility of developing a comprehensive statewide water management plan for Georgia in accordance with the following policy statement: "Georgia manages 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 citizens."
In 2016-2017 high priority was placed on Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Planning, monitoring and assessment, water quality modeling and TMDL development, TMDL implementation, State revolving loan programs, NPDES permitting and enforcement, nonpoint source pollution abatement, stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, and public participation projects.
Comprehensive Statewide Water Planning Georgia's future relies on the protection and sustainable management of the state's limited water resources. In 2004 the Georgia General Assembly passed the "Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Planning Act" which called for the development of a statewide water management plan. The legislation created a framework for developing Georgia's first comprehensive statewide water management plan by providing a vision for water management in Georgia, guiding principles for plan development and the assignment of responsibility for developing the plan. A copy of the planning act can be found at www.georgiawatercouncil.org.
The Environmental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, with the help of numerous stakeholders, produced and submitted to the Georgia Water Council an initial draft of the statewide water plan on June 28, 2007. Following

several rounds of public input and changes in response to the input, the Georgia Water Council approved the "Georgia Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Plan" on January 8, 2008. The water plan was debated and approved in the 2008 session of the General Assembly and signed by Governor Perdue on February 6, 2008. The Regional Water Councils completed plans in 2011. This work is discussed in Chapter 2.
Watershed Projects The Savannah Harbor was first listed as impaired for dissolved oxygen (DO) on the 2002 303(d) list. The USEPA issued a DO TMDL in 2006. GAEPD subsequently revised its DO criteria for the Harbor and the revised criteria were approved by USEPA in 2010. Since 2012, GAEPD, SCDHEC, and USEPA Region IV, along with Savannah River/Harbor Discharge Group, have been working together to develop an alternative restoration plan to meet the new DO criteria. On October 9, 2015, GAEPD public noticed its revised 305(b)/303(d) 2014 Sounds/Harbors list changing the assessment category for Savannah Harbor from 4a to 5R along with the "Subcategory 5R Documentation For Point Source Dissolved Oxygen Impaired Water in the Savannah River Basin, Georgia and South Carolina." Changes were made to the Savannah Harbor 5R Restoration Plan document based on comments received and the revised 2014 Sounds/Harbors list and associated documents were submitted to EPA for approval on November 13, 2015. EPA approved the 2014 list on May 13, 2016 and withdrew the November 2006 EPA Savannah Harbor TMDL, which was based on the previous Georgia DO criteria. GAEPD intends to remove the Savannah Harbor from subcategory 5R once the alternative restoration plan has been implemented to meet applicable water quality standards.
U.S. EPA has requested each State develop a strategy for adopting nutrient water quality criteria to protect waters from the adverse effects of nutrient over-enrichment. The development of nutrient criteria is a very

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-2

complex matter since some level of nutrients is necessary for the health of the aquatic ecosystem, while too high of a concentration can cause an imbalance in the natural aquatic flora and fauna. Therefore, in order to protect our natural resources, it is important that the criteria not be set too low or too high. Georgia first developed a plan for adopting nutrient criteria in 2005. This plan was subsequently revised in October 2008 and August 2013. In 2015, EPA, Georgia EPD, and South Carolina DHEC collaborated on a report intended to provide technical support in developing and establishing numeric water quality criteria under the Clean Water Act to support the applicable designated uses in Georgia and South Carolina estuaries from the effects of excess nitrogen and phosphorus. Georgia and South Carolina's estuaries are characterized by their high turbidity, widely varying residence times associated with high tidal amplitudes, lack of seagrasses, high ratios of tidal wetland to estuary surface area, and relatively low coastal anthropogenic land use. The estuaries generally can be classified into Piedmont riverine systems (headwaters above the fall line, with large inflow), blackwater systems (headwaters in the coastal plain with significant terrestrial contributions of organic matter), and coastal embayments (oceandominated systems with only freshwater contributions from land stormwater runoff and subterranean (e.g., shallow water aquifer) sources). Conceptual estuarine eutrophication models established for other U.S. estuaries are often based upon hypoxia below the pycnocline, production dominated by phytoplankton, and seagrass endpoints none of which apply well to Georgia and South Carolina's estuaries, which tend to be well-mixed, mediated by heterotrophs, and have light-limited phytoplankton production. An alternative conceptual model was presented to derive nutrient targets (total nitrogen and total phosphorus), via measures (ecosystem primary production, chlorophyll a, dissolved oxygen, and indices of biological integrity) that are surrogates for designated use endpoints (aquatic community structure and function). The suite

of indicators provides a flexible framework where a lack of data, or insensitivity of an indicator in a given location, can be overcome by using the remaining indicators to develop defensible criteria for that estuary. Criteria can be derived based on reference conditions, stressor-response relationships, and water quality simulation modeling.
GAEPD listed a 17-mile segment of the Coosa River as impaired for DO and in 2004 developed a DO TMDL for this segment. Comments received suggested that this section of the Coosa River is a riverreservoir transition zone, representing an upstream backwater of Weiss Reservoir, where vertical DO gradients may be present during the algal growing season. The EPD RIV-1 model used for the Coosa River modeling was thought to be suitable for freeflowing and well-mixed riverine systems and was successfully used to model the approximately 200 miles of the Coosa River from the headwaters at Allatoona Lake, Carter's Lake, and Conasauga River near Eton to State Road 100. However, other modeling approaches are expected to provide additional, useful information on the section of the river from State Road 100 to the Georgia/Alabama State Line due to potential hydrodynamic impacts of Lake Weiss. Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), GAEPD and USEPA worked together to develop and calibrate the Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC) and the Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program (WASP) models for Lake Weiss, from Mayos Bar to the Dam. These models were used to develop the 2008 Nutrient TMDL for Lake Weiss. GAEPD continues to work on the Lake Weiss Model using both EFDC hydrodynamic and water quality models to simulate DO in the Lake transition zone. Model results will be used to revise the Coosa River DO TMDL and wasteload allocations for permitted discharges. GAEPD continues to implement Total Phosphorus reductions in the Coosa River Basin to meet downstream water quality standards in Alabama. This segment of the Coosa River

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-3

was also listed for temperature on the 2012 303(d) list. The cause of the temperature violation was addressed through direct implementation by issuing a thermal WLA to Plant Hammond.
Lake Talquin, which covers nearly 9,000 acres and is known as a bass-fishing hot spot, was deemed impaired by Florida DEP in 2009. About 75 percent of the lake's watershed is in Georgia. Agriculture is the largest non-point source of the pollution, and chemical company BASF Catalysts in Attapulgus, Georgia, is the single largest point-source contributor. GAEPD has been working with USEPA, Florida DEP, as well as industry, county, and area municipal officials to develop a nutrient TMDL for Lake Talquin for over two years.
In order to address the nutrient problems, USEPA has developed a series of complex models that cover the entire watershed using Loading Simulation Program in C++ (LSPC) to estimate the nutrient loads within and discharged from each watershed subbasin, and EFDC to simulate threedimensional movement of water mass in the rivers and lake. EFDC is calibrated to water surface elevation and temperature. The results of the LSPC models are passed WASP models and used to simulate the movement of pollutant mass in the rivers and lake. These models will provide a basis for setting nutrient limits that will affect those that discharge in the lake's watershed.
Several modeling stakeholders' meetings have been conducted to review the model calibration, discuss ways of streamlining the connection between models to facilitate scenario analyses, and better understand the post-processing of modeling results. GAEPD reviewed the models and provided comments to FL DEP to allow refinement of the models. FLDEP issued a draft TMDL on September 23, 2016, and a revised draft in May 2017. The revised draft TMDL was challenged by BASF, an industrial discharger located in Attapulgus, Georgia.

The GAEPD is also working with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Suwannee River Water Management District to coordinate water protection efforts in the Suwannee River Basin.
Water Quality Monitoring The goal of the water protection program in Georgia is to effectively manage, regulate, and allocate the water resources of Georgia. In order to achieve this goal, water quality monitoring is necessary to establish baseline and trend data, document existing conditions, support the development of protective and scientifically defensible water quality standards, study impacts of specific discharges, determine improvements resulting from upgraded water pollution control plants, support enforcement actions, establish wasteload allocations for new and existing facilities develop total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), verify water pollution control plant compliance, and document water use impairment and reasons for problems causing less than full support of designated water uses. Long-term trend monitoring, targeted and probabilistic monitoring, biological monitoring, intensive surveys, toxic substances monitoring, aquatic toxicity testing and facility compliance sampling are some of the monitoring tools used by the GAEPD. Monitoring programs are discussed in Chapter 3.
Water Quality Modeling/Wasteload Allocations/TMDL Development In December 2013, USEPA released "A Long-Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration, and Protection under the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Program" for managing the Clean Water Act 303(d) program responsibilities. The Vision was designed to coordinate and focus EPA and State TMDL efforts to advance the effectiveness of the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Program direction in the coming decade. To accomplish this, the Vision focuses on six elements including 1) Prioritization, 2) Assessment, 3) Protection, 4) Alternatives, 5) Engagement and 6) Integration. To address the prioritization

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-4

element, GAEPD developed a list of priority waters for protection, "direct to implementation", TMDL development, and/or TMDL alternative development. Georgia's priorities reflect where GAEPD plans to spend a great deal of its resources in the upcoming years. The waters were selected using the USEPA-approved 2012 305(b)/303(d) list of waters as the baseline and our priority framework. Waters on the priority list will be addressed using a variety of approaches and can basically be organized into the following six groups:
1) Lake Lanier Lake Lanier is composed of 5 segments, but only one of these segments, (Lanier Lake -Browns Bridge Road (SR 369)) is on the 2012 303d list for chlorophyll a. On December 21, 2017 the Final Lake Lanier Chlorophyll a TMDL was submitted to EPA Region IV for approval. The TMSL was ritten for the entire lane and addresses nutrients, a National priority.
2) Carters Lake Carters Lake is composed of two segments. Both segments are on the 2012 303d list for chlorophyll a and total phosphorusOn February 8, 2016, the Final Chlorophyll a TMDL for Carters Lake was submitted to EPA Region IV for approval that addressed nutrients.
3) Savannah Harbor This segment is impaired for DO. GAEPD has been working with SC DHEC and the Savannah River/Harbor Discharger Group to restore this water. On November 13, 2015 the GAEPD submitted Georgia"s Sounds/Harbors 305(b)/303(d) list to EPA Region IV listing the Savannah Harbor from Fort Pulaski to the Coastal Seaboard Railroad in Category 5R. EPA approved Georgia's 305(b)/303(d) list 2014 on May 13, 2016.
4) Coosa River A segment of the Coosa River is on the 2012 303d list for Temperature. The cause of the temperature violation was known and

GAEPD addressed this impairment through direct implementation. A wasteload allocation for heat loads was developed and issued through an NPDES permit in December 2017. In January 2018 the permit was appealed..
5) Georgia has 4 coastal beaches on the 2012 303d list for enterococci. GAEPD has prioritized these beaches to address human health concerns. GAEPD Developed TMDLs to address the impairments. The Final Ogeechee River Basin Enterococci TMDL was subkitted to EPA Region IV on February 8, 2016. The three other TMDLS on the Satilla and Altamaha River Basins were submitted for approval to EPA on April 21, 2017. All four Enterococci TMDLs have been finalized and The GAEPD will work with partners conducting bacteria source tracking indentification to help address causes.
6) Ochlockonee River Basin GAEPD placed the Upper and Lower Ochlockonee Watersheds on our priority list due to chlorophyll and DO impairments in Lake Talquin, a downstream lake located in Florida. FL DEP is developing a TMDL for this Lake. In accordance with the Clean Water Act, waters in Georgia may not cause and contribute to water quality violations in Florida; therefore, GAEPD will develop a protection plan to help ensure that Georgia's waters meet the necessary nutrient reductions at the State line. The protection plan will address nutrients.
While the waters on the list are considered our priorities under the new Vision, GAEPD plans to continue to develop TMDLs using the rotating basin approach. In 2016-2017, the GAEPD condcucted a significant amount of modeling in support of the development of wateload allocations and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). In 2015, TMDLs were developed for 118

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-5

impaired waterbodies on the Georgia 2014 303(d0 list for the Coosa, Tennessee, Tallapoosa, Savannah, and Ogeechee River Basins for the following parameters: chlorophyll a (2), enterococci (1), fecal coliform (16), and sediment (99). These TMDLs were public noticed on August 31, 2015. TMDLs were also developed for 8 segments in the Satilla and Suwannee River Basins for fecal coliform. These TMDLs were public noticed on November 20, 2015. Both sets of TMDLS were submitted to USEPA for approval on September 29,, 2016.
In 2016, impaired waterbody segments on the Georgia 2014 303(d) list in the Suwannee, Satilla, Oconee, Ocmulgee, and Altamaha River Basins for the following parameters: fecal coliform (13), enterococci (3), cadmium (1), zinc (2), copper (2), lead (3) and sediment (21). These TMDLs were public noticed on June 30, 2016, with the public notice period extended on August 22, 2016. The public comment period ended September 30, 2016 after receiving one comment letter referencing 7 segments in the Oconee River Basin. Revisions were made where appropriate and the Final TMDLs were submitted to USEPA for approval on April 21, 2017. USEPA approval letters for TMDLs covering 23 impaired waterbody segments were received on September 21, 2017.
In 2017, two TMDLs were revised for a Dissolved Oxygen segment in the St. Marys River Basin and three Copper segments in the Tallapoosa River Basin. These TMDLs were public notice on May 25, 2017. The public notice period ended July 28, 2017, and the Final TMDLs were submitted to USEPA for final approval on August 18, 2017. TMDLs were developed for 61 segments on the 2014 303(d) list in the Chattahoochee and Flint River Basins for the following parameters: Fecal coliform (15), sediment (43), chlorophyll a (2), and dissolved oxygen (1). These TMDLs were public noticed on September 29, 2017. The comment period ended November 24, 2017, after receiving 6 comments referring to 2 segments in the Chattahoochee River Basin.

After making appropriate revisions, the Final TMDLs were submitted to USEPA for approval on December 21, 2017. To date more than 1880 TMDLs have been developed for 303(d) listed waters in Georgia. To date more than 1880 TMDLs have been developed for 303(d) listed waters in Georgia.
TMDL Implementation As TMDLs are developed, plans are needed to guide implementation of pollution reduction strategies. TMDLs are implemented through changes in NPDES permits to address needed point source improvements and/or implementation of best management practices to address nonpoint sources of pollution. Changes in NPDES permits to address point source issues are made by GAEPD in coordination with local governments and industries. Implementation of management practices and activities to address the nonpoint sources of pollution is being conducted through the development of various types of TMDL implementation plans.
Plans include Watershed Improvement Plans (WIPs) and updates to existing plans prepared through contracts with Regional Commissions (RCs) and other public contractors.
Clean Water State Revolving and Georgia Fund Loan Programs The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) is a federal loan program administered by the Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA) that provides funding for a variety of wastewater infrastructure and pollution prevention projects. Eligible projects include water quality, water conservation and wastewater treatment projects, such as constructing new wastewater treatment plants, repairing and replacing sewers, stormwater control projects and implementing water conservation projects and programs. The Georgia Fund is a state-funded loan program administered by GEFA for wastewater, water, and solid waste infrastructure improvements. The Georgia

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-6

Fund program is available to local governments for projects such as sewer and water lines, treatment plants, pumping stations, wells, water storage tanks and water meters. GEFA contracts with GAEPD to provide environmental/engineering review for these projects.
Founded in 1985, GEFA offers low-interest loans and grants for projects that improve Georgia's environment, protect its natural resources, and promote economic development. The CWSRF program was initiated in 1988 to the full extent allowed by the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act. Since 1985, GEFA has approved more than $3.9 billion for infrastructure improvements and more than 1,500 projects have been funded to date. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund awarded approximately $240 million with 53 executions and the Georgia Fund awarded $55 million to 37 executions for water supply and water quality projects in FY2016-2017.
Metro District Planning The Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District (District) was created on April 5, 2001 as a planning entity dedicated to developing comprehensive regional and watershed-specific plans to be implemented by local governments in the District. The enabling legislation required the District to develop plans for watershed management, wastewater treatment, and water supply and conservation in its 15-county area that includes Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Paulding, and Rockdale Counties and all the municipalities within the District. These plans are designed to protect water quality and public water supplies, protect recreational values of the waters, and to minimize potential adverse impacts of development on waters in and downstream of the region. These plans were updated in May, 2009.
Limited water resources combined with the region's growth places the District in a unique position relative to other areas in

Georgia. With a finite water resource and a population of nearly 4 million, the need to carefully and cooperatively manage and protect Metropolitan Atlanta's rivers and streams has become a priority.
GAEPD is charged with the enforcement of the District plans. State law prohibits the Director from approving any application by a local government in the District to issue, modify, or renew a permit, if such permit would allow an increase in the permitted water withdrawal, public water system capacity, or waste-water treatment system capacity of such local government, or any NPDES Phase I or Phase II General Stormwater permit; unless such local government is in compliance with the applicable provisions of the plan, or the Director certifies that such local government is making good faith efforts to come into compliance.
GAEPD conducts audits to determine whether local governments are in compliance with the District Plans.
Georgia's Land Conservation Program On April 14, 2005, Governor Sonny Perdue signed House Bill 98, creating the Land Conservation Program. The act created a flexible framework within which cities and counties, the Department of Natural Resources, other state and federal agencies, and private partners can protect the state's valuable natural resources. The Land Conservation Program will protect Georgia's valued resources by developing a process that will strategically align the state's conservation needs with the ability to steward the land through public/private partnerships.
The land conservation goals set forth in the Act include: water quality protection for rivers, streams, and lakes; flood protection; wetlands protection; reduction of erosion through protection of steep slopes, erodible soils, and stream banks; protection of riparian buffers, natural habitats and corridors for native plant and animal species; protection of prime agricultural and

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-7

forestry lands; protection of cultural sites, heritage corridors, and archaeological and historic resources; scenic protection; provision of recreation and outdoor activities; and connection of existing or planned areas.
The Georgia Land Conservation Program (GLCP) and Georgia Conservation Tax Credit Program continue to facilitate permanent protection for important natural, agricultural, historic and recreational areas throughout the state. Since its inception in 2005 and as of 2015, the GLCP assisted with the permanent protection of 346,950 acres. GLCP provides assistance to local governments, state agencies, and conservation groups in the form of competitive grants, due diligence grants, low-interest loans, and conservation tax credits to incentivize the permanent protection of the state's natural resources. Together with other state and federal agencies, private sector conservation groups, and generous landowners, the GLCP has leveraged $258.9 million in state funds to conserve approximately $1.32 billion worth of conservation land (20052015). More information on the program can be found at https://glcp.georgia.gov.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Program The Federal Clean Water Act requires NPDES permits for point source wastewater dischargers, compliance monitoring for those permits and appropriate enforcement action for violations of the permits.
In 2016-2017, NPDES permits were issued, modified or reissued for 98 municipal and private discharges and for 83industrial discharges.
In addition to permits for point source wastewater discharges, the GAEPD has developed and implemented a permit system for land application systems. Land application systems are used as alternatives to surface water discharges when appropriate.

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations The Georgia rules require animal feeding operations with more than 300 animal units (AU) to apply for a wastewater permit under Georgia's Land Application System (LAS) permitting program id they are defined as a CAFO and discharge to waters of the state. GAEPD has been delegated the authority to administer the NPDES program in Georgia by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
There are currently 115 farms which require a LAS or NPDES permit. That includes approximately 40 large farms (greater than 1000 AU) with liquid manure handling systems. Of these 4 have federal NPDES concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) permits and 36 have state LAS permits. These farms, with their liquid waste lagoons and spray fields, are important managers of water resources. It has been deemed more efficient to redirect these regulatory activities to the Georgia Department of Agriculture Livestock/Poultry Section (GDA) where appropriate. Therefore, the GAEPD has contracted with the GDA for inspections, complaint investigations, nutrient management plan reviews, permit administrative support, and enforcement assistance.
An important goal of Georgia's Nonpoint Source Management Program is to encourage and support all animal feeding operations to develop and implement Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs). Cooperating organizations working toward this goal include the GSWCC, GSWCD, GA Milk Producers Association, Georgia Farm Bureau Federation, GA Pork Producers Association, CES, and NRCS.
Activities include statewide and watershedbased demonstrations and BMP implementation of Comprehensive Nutrient Planning, lagoon maintenance or decommissioning, irrigation systems, and waste and effluent management systems. Projects using Section 319(h) funds that install agricultural BMPS are required to

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-8

complete a CNMP. By the end of 2017 more than fifty CNMPS has been completed across Georgia.
Combined Sewer Systems (CSS) A CSS is a sewer system that is designed to collect rainwater runoff, domestic sewage and industrial wastewater in the same pipe. GAEPD has issued NPDES permits to two of the cities in Georgia that have Combined Sewer Systems (CSS). These are Albany and Atlanta. The permit for the third CSS in Columbus was issued in 2017. The permits require that the CSS must not cause violations of Georgia Water Quality Control Standards.
Compliance and Enforcement The Georgia Water Quality Control Act requires that every point source discharge obtain a NPDES permit, and that zero discharge systems obtain a Land Application System Permit from the GAEPD. The permits specify allowable discharge limits for the receiving streams or land application sites. Insuring compliance with permit limitations is an important part of the Georgia water pollution control program. Staff review discharge and groundwater monitoring reports, inspect water pollution control plants, sample effluents, investigate citizen complaints, provide on-site technical assistance and, if necessary, initiate enforcement action.
As of October 2017, of 165 major municipal dischargers, 162 facilities were in general compliance with limitations. The remaining facilities are under compliance schedules to resolve the noncompliance or implementing infiltration/ inflow strategies. Enforcement action has been taken by the GAEPD to insure problems are alleviated. Data evaluations (using annual reports, GAEPD sampling and biomonitoring results) were performed on NPDES permitted municipal facilities to determine the need to reopen specific permits for inclusion of numerical limits and monitoring for appropriate toxic pollutants.

Increased emphasis was placed on the industrial pretreatment programs for municipalities to ensure that the cities comply with applicable requirements for pretreatment.
Industries in Georgia achieved a high degree of compliance in 2016-2017. The thirty-six major industrial facilities were in compliance at the end of 2017.
The GAEPD utilizes all reasonable means to obtain compliance, including technical assistance, noncompliance notification letters, conferences, consent orders, administrative orders, and civil penalties. Emphasis is placed on achieving compliance through cooperative action. However, compliance cannot always be achieved in a cooperative manner. The Director of the GAEPD has the authority to negotiate consent orders or issue administrative orders. In fiscal year 2016 and2017, 209 Orders addressing wastewater issues were issued and approximately $708,072 in negotiated settlements was collected.
Stormwater compliance for municipalities and industries is most often reached through education and inspections. The vast majority of Enforcement Orders issued due to violations of stormwater permits are used in connection with construction activities. In 2016-2017 a total of 74 stormwater/erosion sedimentation orders were issued for a total of $729,496 in negotiated settlements.
Zero Tolerance In January 1998, the Georgia Board of Natural Resources adopted a resolution requiring that regulatory initiatives be developed to ensure polluters are identified, and that appropriate enforcement action is taken to correct problems. The resolution also directed EPD to provide the "best quality of effort possible in enforcing Georgia's environmental laws". High growth areas that have been identified as in need of enhanced protection include the Chattahoochee River Basin (from the headwaters through Troup County), Coosa

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-9

River Basin, Tallapoosa River Basin, and the greater metropolitan Atlanta area. EPD developed a "zero tolerance" strategy for these identified geographic areas. This strategy requires enforcement action on all violations of permitted effluent limitations, with the exception of flow, and all sanitary sewer system overflows into the waters of the State. The strategy includes simple orders (Expedited Enforcement Compliance Order and Settlement Agreement) with a directive to correct the cause of noncompliance with a monetary penalty for isolated, minor violations, and more complex orders (consent orders, administrative orders, emergency orders) with conditions and higher monetary penalties for chronic and/or major violations.
Stormwater Management The Federal Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987 require NPDES permits to be issued for specific stormwater discharges, with primary focus on stormwater runoff from industrial operations, including construction activities, and urban areas. The USEPA promulgated the Phase I Storm Water Regulations on November 16, 1990. GAEPD has developed and implemented a stormwater strategy which assures compliance with the Federal Regulations.
The Phase I Regulations set specific application submittal requirements for large (population 250,000 or more at the time of designation) and medium (population 100,000 to 250,000 at the time of designation) municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4). GAEPD determined that the metropolitan Atlanta area is a large municipal system as defined in the regulations. As a result, Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton and Gwinnett Counties and all the incorporated cities within these counties were designated Phase I Large MS4s and required to comply with the application submittal target dates for a large municipal area. Forty-five individual stormwater permits were issued to the Atlanta area municipalities on June 15, 1994 and reissued in 1999, 2004, 2009, and

2014. EPD expects to reissue the permits in 2019.
Augusta, Macon, Savannah, Columbus, the counties surrounding these cities and any other incorporated cities within these counties were identified as Phase I Medium MS4s as defined in the Phase I Stormwater Regulations. Thirteen individual stormwater permits were issued to the Phase I Medium MS4s in April and May, 1995. These permits were reissued in April 2000, 2005, 2010, 2012, and 2017. In 2014 the number of medium MS4s was reduced from 13 to 12 when the City of Macon and Bibb County became consolidated as Macon-Bibb County Consolidated Government.
On December 8, 1999 USEPA promulgated the Phase II Rules for Stormwater. Phase II required NPDES permitting and the development of Storm Water Management Programs for smaller cities and counties located within urbanized areas. Construction sites from 1 to 5 acres and municipallyowned industrial facilities also became regulated.
The Phase II regulations for MS4s required permit coverage for all municipalities with a population less than 100,000 at the time of the Phase I designations that were located within an urbanized area, as defined by the latest Decennial census. In addition, EPD was required to develop criteria to designate any additional MS4s which had the potential to contribute to adverse water quality impacts.
In December 2002, EPD issued NPDES General Permit No. GAG610000 which covered 86 Phase II MS4s, including 57 cities and 29 counties. This Permit was most recently reissued in December 2017 and currently covers 107 municipalities. The number of Phase II municipalities varies over time as cities, such as Payne City, are abolished and others, such as Peachtree Corners and Johns Creek, are created. The current number also includes 20 newly designated Phase II MS4s from the 2010 Census.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-10

In 2009, EPD issued a Phase II MS4 General NPDES Permit to seven Department of Defense facilities. Two of those bases closed in 2011, reducing the number of permitted DOD facilities to five. The NPDES Permit for the remaining five facilities was reissued in 2014. In 2016, Fort Gillem Enclave was designated and obtained coverage under the DOD permit.
In 2011, GAEPD issued a Phase II MS4 General Stormwater Permit to the Department of Transportation (DOT), which is applicable to post-construction runoff in jurisdictions with MS4 permits. EPD reissued this permit in 2017. These Phase II MS4 NPDES General Permits do not contain specific effluent limitations. Instead, each Phase II MS4 permittee is required to institute best management practices to control stormwater pollution. As part of the NOI, the MS4 is required to develop a Stormwater Management Plant (SWMP) that includes best management practices in six different areas, also known as minimum control measures. These six minimum control measures are Public Education, Public Involvement, Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination, Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control, PostConstruction Storm Water Management, and Pollution Prevention. In addition, all DOD facilities, DOT, and MS4 communities with populations over 10,000 that discharge to an impaired waterbody, are required to monitor for the pollutant of concern (POC) and evaluate their BMPs' effectiveness in reducing the POC in stormwater discharges from the MS4.
The Phase I and Phase II MS4 stormwater permits require the submittal of Annual Reports, which detail the municipality's implementation of its SWMP, to GAEPD. Each year, Georgia stormwater permitting program staff reviews each of these Annual Reports. GAEPD provides comments on the Annual Reports to the MS4 permittees, noting areas of noncompliance and recommending improvements to the SWMPs. GAEPD verifies the information in

the SWMPs and Annual Reports at on-site inspections. Each MS4 is inspected at least once every five years.
GAEPD has issued general permits for the 11 industrial subcategories defined in the Phase I Federal Stormwater Regulations. During 1993, GAEPD issued NPDES General Permit No. GAR000000 to regulate the discharge of stormwater from ten categories of industrial activity (the other category, construction activities as defined in 122.26(b)(14)(x), is covered under the construction general permits). This permit was reissued in 1998 and 2006 as GAR000000, and was then reissued as GAR050000 in 2012 and 2017. Currently, this permit covers the stormwater discharge from 2,362 industrial facilities.
EPD's support of permit GAR050000's requirements through technical assistance to permittees is an important component of stormwater management in Georgia. EPD staff handle multiple calls and emails per day from permittees seeking to discuss the requirements for compliance or compliance strategies. EPD staff, and inspectors under contract to EPD, conducted inspections at approximately 132 industrial facilities to assess compliance with the industrial general stormwater permit during 20162017.
GAEPD will continue to regulate stormwater runoff from industrial facilities and urban areas as a part of the point-source permitting process to protect water quality.
Erosion and Sedimentation Control The Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act (Act) was signed into law in April 1975. This legislation was the result of over five years of work, debate, and legislative compromise. Agencies and groups that coordinated their efforts to this end included the Georgia Association of Conservation Districts, the State Soil and Water Conservation Commission, and GAEPD.
The intent of the Act is to establish a statewide and comprehensive program for

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-11

erosion and sedimentation control to conserve and protect air, water and land resources of the State. The Act provides a mechanism for controlling erosion and sedimentation as related to certain land disturbing activities. Land disturbing activities are any activities that may result in soil erosion and the movement of sediments into State waters and onto lands within the State. Such activities may include, but are not limited to, clearing, dredging, grading, excavating, transporting, and filling of land. Activities not regulated under the Act include surface mining, construction of single family homes when such construction disturbs less than one acre and is not part of a larger common plan of development or sale with a planned disturbance of equal to or greater than one acre, and minor activities, such as home landscaping and gardening, and water supply reservoirs.
Implementation of the Act involves local units of governments and State agencies. The Act provides for municipalities and Counties to adopt local ordinances and to become delegated "Issuing Authorities". GAEPD delegates local "Issuing Authority", administers GAEPD rules where there is no local authority, and oversees local program implementation. Currently 321 cities and counties have adopted erosion and sediment control ordinances which have been reviewed by the GAEPD for compliance with the Act.
House Bill 285 was passed during the 2003 legislative session. The legislation amended the Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act to create an integrated permitting program for erosion and sedimentation control for land disturbing activities of one acre or greater, thereby standardizing the requirements for local Land Disturbing Activity Permits and the NPDES Construction Storm Water Permits. The legislation also created Georgia's first NPDES permit fee system, and established training and education requirements for individuals involved in land development design, review, permitting, construction, monitoring or inspection of any land

disturbing activity. During the 2016-2017 period, GAEPD decertified two Local Issuing Authorities. During this same period, EPD certified three new Local Issuing Authorities.
Senate Bill 460 was passed during the 2004 legislative session. The legislation amended the Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act to add three new criteria under which the EPD director can consider stream buffer variances. The legislation also required the Georgia Board of Natural Resources to adopt amendments to its Rules to implement the new criteria. In December 2004, the Georgia Board of Natural Resources adopted amendments to the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Rules which went into effect January 10, 2005.
The Act was amended by House Bill 463 in 2007 to give subcontrators an additional year to meet the training and education requirements established in HB 285. The Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission continues to administer the training and certification program. As of September 2017, 92,073 people have been certified and 62,580 re-certified. Senate Bill 155 amended the Act in 2009 to exempt 25foot buffers along ephemeral streams. This legislation clarified the definition of ephemeral in the Erosion and Sedimentation Rules. The E&S Rules were amended in 2011 to add a new stream buffer variance criteria for projects that pipe or re-route waterways that are not jurisdictional waters of the U. S., and for new infrastructure projects that impact only the buffer and not the stream.
A NPDES general permit to regulate storm water discharges from construction activities was issued by GAEPD and subsequently appealed in 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1999. The permit, which regulated stormwater discharges associated with land disturbances of five acres or greater, was eventually issued on June 12, 2000 and became effective on August 1, 2000. The NPDES general permit for construction activities was reissued by GAEPD on August 13, 2003 as three distinct general

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-12

permits: Stand Alone (GAR100001), Infrastructure (GAR100002) and Common Development (GAR100003). Coverage was required for projects disturbing one acre or more in accordance with the USEPA Phase II stormwater regulations. Changes to the permit included a reduction in monitoring requirements and the addition of a plan submittal requirement for projects located in areas that do not have a Local Issuing Authority or are exempt from Local Issuing Authority ordinances.
The permits were most recently reissued by EPD on September 24, 2013. The 2013 permits added additional stream buffer variance exemptions and amended tertiary permittee requirements. EPD modified the permits on July 1, 2016 and expects to reissue the permits in 2018.
In 2015, the Act was amended to provide for buffers on Coastal Marshes with SB 101. New Rules to implement the changes are expected in 2016.
During FY2016-FY2017, 21,233 primary, secondary and tertiary permittees submitted Notices of Intent for coverage under the NPDES General Permits. As of September 30,2017 there were 33,656 active construction sites in Georgia (i.e., primary, secondary and tertiary permittees with coverage under the NPDES General Permits that have not submitted Notices of Termination).
The GAEPD will continue to regulate stormwater runoff from construction sites as a part of the point-source permitting process to protect water quality.
Nonpoint Source Management Program Nonpoint sources of water pollution are both diffuse in nature and difficult to define.
The diffuse nature of nonpoint sources (e.g., agriculture, construction, mining, silviculture, urban runoff) and the variety of pollutants those sources generate makes effective control challenging. Although progress has been made in the protection and

enhancement of water quality, additional work is needed to identify nonpoint source management strategies that are both effective and economically achievable under a wide range of conditions.
GAEPD has been designated as the administering or lead agency for implementing the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. This program combines regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to address nonpoint source pollution, in cooperation with other State and Federal agencies, local and regional governments, State colleges and universities, businesses and industries, nongovernmental organizations and individual citizens.
GAEPD has designated the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC) as the lead agency for implementing the agricultural component of the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. Similarly, GAEPD has designated the Georgia Forestry Commission (GFC) as the lead agency for implementing the silvicultural component of the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program, and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) as the lead agency and point of contact for urban/rural nonpoint source pollution.
Georgia's initial Nonpoint Source Assessment Report was completed in compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act and approved by the USEPA in January 1990. This report, Water Quality in Georgia 2014-2015, as required by Section 305(b) of Public Law 92-500, serves as the current process to update the Nonpoint Source Assessment Report.
GAEPD revised the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program to update the goals, activities and implementation strategies of the Program. The revised plan focuses on the comprehensive categories of nonpoint sources of pollution identified by the USEPA: Agriculture, Silviculture, Construction, Urban Runoff,

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-13

Hydrologic/Habitat Modification, Land Disposal, Resource Extraction and Other Nonpoint Sources. The revised plan was developed through a consultation process, incorporating input from myriad stakeholders involved in nonpoint source management activities throughout the State, including local, regional, State and Federal agencies, as well as private, non-governmental organizations. The Nonpoint Source Management Program is set to be revised by the end of 2019.
Under Section 319(h) of the Federal Clean Water Act, the USEPA awards a Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant to GAEPD to fund eligible projects that support the implementation of the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. Section 319(h) Grant funds are made available annually to public agencies in Georgia for the prevention, control and/or abatement of nonpoint sources of pollution. The funds are distributed via competitive process to public agencies and governmental agencies. Receiving agencies are required to show substantial local commitment by providing at least 40% of the total project cost in local match or in-kind efforts. In FY15 FY17, Georgia's Section 319(h) grant project funded 30 new projects for over $6.5 million.
In 2017, Georgia's Nonpoint Source Program administered 50 Section 319(h) projects, totaling more than $10.8 million dollars in funds awarded to cooperating agencies. Priority projects include implementing the nonpoint source components of TMDL implementation plans and addressing the violated criteria of listed streams. Education, demonstration, and technical assistance projects are also eligible for funding, subject to restrictions. In addition, priority is given to projects that encompass or support a watershed management approach and result in measurable improvements in water quality. A watershed approach is a strategy for effectively protecting and restoring aquatic ecosystems and protecting human health. Major features of a watershed management approach are: targeting priority problems,

promoting a high level of stakeholder involvement, developing integrated solutions that utilize the expertise and authority of multiple agencies, and measuring success through monitoring and other data gathering. Focusing Section 319(h) Grant funds on solving nonpoint source pollution problems will enable the State to make great strides in achieving water quality goals.
GAEPD uses a competitive process to ensure that the most appropriate projects are selected for funding. In accordance with the Fair and Open Grant Act, GAEPD publishes a description of the Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant Program with the Secretary of State prior to disbursement of any grant funds. In accordance with the provisions of O.C.G.A. 28-5-122, the grant description filed with the Secretary of State includes information regarding the general scope and purpose of the grant program, general terms and conditions of the grant, eligible recipients of the grant, criteria for the award, and directions and deadlines for applications.
Eligible recipients of Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant funds include local, regional and State units of government, local authorities which operate local government service delivery programs, regional development centers, local school systems, State colleges and universities, and State agencies. Local governments must have Qualified Local Government status, in compliance with the requirements of the Georgia Planning Act of 1989 and Service Delivery Strategy Law of 1997.
Agriculture Georgia's Agriculture Nonpoint Source Management Program is implemented through a statewide non-regulatory approach. Water quality in Georgia has benefited from voluntarily installed best management practices and the implementation of conservation incentive programs. These voluntary programs are enhanced by financial programs, technical assistance, education outreach and

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-14

materials, demonstrations, and research activities delineated in the State's Nonpoint Source Management Program. Implementation of the Agriculture Nonpoint Source Management Program is a critical State initiative to identify priority waters and to target nonpoint source management activities.
The statewide non-regulatory approach uses cooperative partnerships with many agencies and a variety of activities and programs. Agencies that form the basis of the partnerships include the GSWCC (designated lead agency administrating the Agriculture Nonpoint Source Management Program), SWCD, NRCS, UGACAES, CES, FSA, GFC and the GDA. These agencies work closely with Georgia agricultural commodity commissions and organizations such as the GFBF, GAC, RC&D Councils, Cattleman's Association, Milk Producers, Pork Producers Association, Poultry Federation, Goldkist, The Georgia Conservancy, and GWF, as well as other producer groups and agriculture support industries, to prevent and solve water quality problems. In addition to the agriculture agencies and interest groups, a working partnership with individual land users is the cornerstone of soil and water conservation in Georgia.
The cooperating agencies have specific functions and directions, but all have an information, education, and public participation component to support their objective to improve and maintain water quality. Of the agriculture agencies, only the GDA has enforcement authority. The GSWCC works with GAEPD, the enforcement agency for the Georgia Water Quality Control Act, to resolve agricultural water quality complaints, where appropriate. The UGACAES and NRCS produce and distribute numerous brochures and fact sheets dealing with agriculture best management practices and water quality.
The GSWCC has continued to sponsor local demonstration projects, provide farmers with visual demonstrations and information on

the use and installation of best management practices, and collect data and generate computer databases on land use, animal units and agricultural BMP implementation. The GSWCC has published and continues to distribute the following guidebooks for implementing agricultural best management practices to protect the State's waters: Agricultural Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Georgia, Planning Considerations for Animal Waste Systems, A Georgia Guide to Controlling EROSION with Vegetation, and Guidelines for Streambank Restoration.
In 2017, approximately $2.2 million in new Section 319(h) Grant projects were implemented to target agricultural sources of nonpoint source pollution. In addition to the minimum 40% required non-federal in-kind match, the NRCS has contributed hundreds of hours of time worth many millions of dollars in technical assistance to support these projects. The UGACAES, GSWCC, FSA, GFC and other agencies have also contributed significant technical assistance to support these projects. These projects offer solutions, as well as financial and technical implementation assistance, in identified priority watersheds.
Farm Bill Programs under NRCS supervision include the Forestry Incentive Program (FIP), Wetland Reserve Program (WRP), the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Wildlife Habitats Incentives Program (WHIP), the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), the Farmland Protection Program and the Conservation Security Program (CSP). Collectively, these programs will continue to have a significant and positive impact on Georgia's natural resources.
These Federal cost-share programs bring millions of dollars to Georgia. By requiring priority areas to be identified and ranked, conservation assistance will maximize the environmental benefit per dollar expended. Therefore, capital funding and technical expertise can be leveraged to enhance

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-15

ongoing State and local efforts to more efficiently manage our natural resources.
The Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) is a voluntary conservation program that promotes environmental quality to producers and helps farmers and ranchers reduce soil erosion, improve water use efficiency and protect grazing land by installing conservation practices that protect natural resources. EQIP provides technical, financial and educational assistance.
NRCS is the lead agency for EQIP and works with many State and local partners to identify local priorities and recommend priority areas and program policy. In Federal Fiscal Year 2017, the EQIP program provided over $35 million in incentive payments and cost-sharing for conservation practices.
The Conservation Security Program (CSP) is a voluntary conservation program that supports ongoing stewardship of working agricultural lands by providing payments for maintaining and enhancing natural resources. CSP identifies and rewards those farmers who are meeting the highest standards of conservation and environmental management on their operations.
Watersheds that are selected to participate contain a variety of land uses and input intensities, have high-priority resource issues to be addressed, including issues that meet State priorities, have a history of good land stewardship on the part of landowners, and have the technical tools necessary to streamline program implementation.
Silviculture The Georgia Forestry Commission has been an integral partner to GAEPD since 1977 and is committed to protect and maintain the integrity and quality of the State's waters. The Silviculture Nonpoint Source Management Program is managed and implemented by the GFC, with the support of the forestry industry, for the voluntary

implementation of best management practices.
This program is managed by a Statewide Water Quality Coordinator and 7 foresters serving as District Water Quality Coordinators. The GFC Statewide and District Water Quality Coordinators have received specialized training in erosion and sediment control, forest road layout and construction, stream habitat assessment and wetland delineation. The Statewide and District Water Quality Coordinators provide local and statewide training to forest community through workshops, field demonstrations, presentations, management advice to landowners and distribution of Georgia's Best Management Practices for Forestry manual and brochures.
The GFC also investigates and mediates complaints involving forestry operations. After notifying the landowner, the GFC District Coordinators conduct field inspections to determine if best management practices (BMPs) were followed, if the potential for water quality problems exists, if a contract was used and who purchased the timber. If a written contract was executed, the GFC District Coordinators will verify if the contractual agreement contains a clause specifying the implementation of BMPs. If problems do exist, the GFC District Coordinator will work with the timber buyer and/or logger on behalf of the landowner to correct the problems. However, the GFC is not a regulatory authority. Therefore, in situations when the GFC cannot get satisfactory compliance, the case is turned over to GAEPD for enforcement action as provided under the Georgia Water Quality Control Act.
The State Board of Registration for Foresters has adopted procedures to sanction or revoke the licenses of registered foresters involved in unresolved complaints where actions or lack of supervision to implement BMPs have resulted in violations of the Board's land ethic criterion, Georgia

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-16

Water Quality Control Act, or Federal wetlands regulations.
A long-term goal of Georgia's Nonpoint Source Management Program is to achieve 100% compliance in implementation of recommended BMPs for silviculture. To determine the success of educational programs and the effectiveness of recommended BMPs, the GFC (with financial support from Section 319(h) funds) conducts a biennial Statewide BMP Compliance Survey. The survey assesses the application of BMPs by logging operations.
In 2017, the GFC completed a standardized survey of BMP compliance, including the rates of BMP implementation, units (areas, miles, crossings) in BMP compliance, effectiveness of BMPs, and areas to target for future BMP training. Overall, there were 232 sites evaluated totaling 33,578 acres. GFC has started tracking the percent of stream length and forest road length in compliance. In 2017, 96.12% of miles of stream length were in compliance, and 95.96% of miles of forest road length were in compliance. Out of the 6,044 applicable, individual BMPs evaluated, 93.17% were implemented correctly. This is an improvement of 2.04 percentage points from 2015. Out of the 63.73 miles of streams evaluated, 96.12% were found to have no impacts or impairments from forestry practices.
During the State FY17, the Georgia Forestry Commission provided 96 BMP talks to approximately 3,022 individuals. In addition, the GFC has addressed and resolved over 47 different harvest complaints, requiring 101 separate site visits, and has conducted more than 126 one-to-one conferences with silviculture workers and professionals onsite or in the field.
The Georgia Forestry Association (GFA) and the forestry industry have played a significant role in encouraging the voluntary implementation of BMPs in Georgia. The forest industry has initiated numerous

education workshops and training programs. The American Forest and Paper Association (AFPA) has adopted the Sustainable Forestry Initiative Program. The objective of the Sustainable Forestry Initiative Program is to induce and promote a proactive approach to forest management, including the protection of water resources. Two pertinent aspects of this program are: 1) a continuing series of 2 day Master Timber Harvester Workshops with a component devoted to the protection of water resources and the implementation of best management practices, and 2) a Land Owner Outreach Program which endeavors to deliver information about forestry management and the protection of water resources to forest land owners.
Urban Runoff The water quality in an urban and/or developing watershed is the result of both point source discharges and the impact of diverse land activities in the drainage basin (i.e., nonpoint sources). Activities which can alter the integrity of urban waterbodies include habitat alteration, hydrological modification, erosion and sedimentation associated with land disturbing activities, stormwater runoff, combined sewer overflows, illicit discharges, improper storage and/or disposal of deleterious materials, and intermittent failure of sewerage systems. During urbanization, pervious, vegetated ground is converted to impervious, unvegetated surfaces, such as rooftops, roads, parking lots and sidewalks. Increases in pollutant loading generated from human activities are associated with urbanization, and increases in imperviousness results in increased stormwater volumes and altered hydrology in urban areas.
Consistent with the multiple pollutant sources interacting with urban runoff, strategies to manage urban runoff have multiple focuses. Some programs focus on specific sources of urban runoff, targeting implementation of structural and/or management BMPs on individual sites or systemwide. Other programs treat corridors

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-17

along waterbodies as a management unit to prevent or control the impacts of urban runoff on urban streams. Additional programs focus on comprehensive watershed management, which considers the impacts of all the land draining into a waterbody and incorporates integrated management techniques. This approach is particularly critical to protecting and enhancing the quality of urban streams. Urban waterbodies cannot be effectively managed without controlling the adverse impacts of activities in their watersheds.
While the State continues to have an important regulatory role, cooperative intergovernmental partnerships have emerged and are being strengthened. GAEPD is implementing programs that go beyond traditional regulation, providing the regulated community with greater flexibility and responsibility for determining management practices. GAEPD is also expanding its role in facilitation and support of local watershed management efforts.
In this next decade, water resource management and the regulatory issues pertaining to water will be the most critical environmental issues faced by many local governments. Unlike many of the environmental issues local governments have faced in the past, water issues must be addressed on a regional or watershed basis to be effective. The major urban/industrial region of the State is highly dependent upon the limited surface water resources found in the northern portion of the State. With limited storage capacity and limited ground water resources in this region, it is imperative that these limited water resources be used wisely and their quality be maintained. In South Georgia, groundwater resources must be managed carefully to prevent contamination and salt water intrusion from excess water withdrawals. A stable, reliable framework and clearinghouse for regional cooperation, information sharing, and technical assistance is needed to prepare local governments and citizens to meet these challenges. The Georgia Department of

Community Affairs' Water Resources Technical Assistance Program will fulfill this need.
Georgia Department of Community Affairs (DCA) is a key partner and point of contact for urban nonpoint source pollution. Georgia DCA provides technical assistance on many different aspects of water quality management. As an information and networking center, the Program provides water resources tools, one-on-one technical assistance, and workshops to address regional water quality issues to local elected officials currently serving 159 counties and 532 cities. Funding from the 319 program supports these activities in the 24 counties within the coastal region, as well as all of the cities within. The Program will also provide tools to link land-use and water quality in land-use planning, promote smart growth principles, and provide public education materials and programs on protecting water resources.
Additionally, an array of programs to manage urban runoff are under development or being implemented in a variety of locales. The development and implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads for waterbodies not meeting water quality standards will continue to spur local and regional watershed management initiatives.
Other initiatives have been implemented to further statewide coordination and implementation of urban runoff best management practices. The Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and the GAEPD published the Georgia Stormwater Management Manual Volume 1, Stormwater Policy Guide and Volume 2, Technical Handbook in August 2001. This guidance manual for developers and local governments illustrates proper design of best management practices for controlling stormwater and nonpoint source pollution in urban areas in Georgia. The ARC published Volume 3: Pollution Prevention in 2012. The Georgia Stormwater Management Manual was updated in 2016. Also, in partnership

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-18

with GAEPD, ARC, numerous local governments and other stakeholders, the Savannah Metropolitan Planning Commission and the Center for Watershed Protection developed a Coastal Stormwater Supplement to the Georgia Stormwater Management Manual, to specifically address coastal stormwater, in 2009.
The University of Georgia's Marine Extension Service (MAREX) has partnered with local government officials to improve water quality through the Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) program, part of the national Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) network. The project is funded with a Coastal Incentive grant funds, and is also working closely with the Department of Community Affairs on their overall Statewide nonpoint source education efforts. MAREX provides educational programming, applied research, and technical assistance to communities along Georgia's coast.
In 2011, the GAEPD updated its Green Growth Guidelines. These are intended to provide information to local governments on how to grow in a more environmentally sustainable manner. Much of the information is focused on water quality and management measures to address potential impairments.
While the State has statutory responsibilities for water resources, local governments have the constitutional authority for the management of land activities. Therefore, forging cooperative partnerships between the State, local and regional governments, business and industry, and the public is necessary. Additionally, watershed planning and management initiatives are necessary to identify local problems, implement corrective actions and coordinate the efforts of cooperating agencies.
Outreach Unit The Outreach Unit consists of four primary programs that support the education and involvement of Georgia citizens in activities to protect waterways from nonpoint source

pollution. The four programs, highlighted below, include Georgia Project WET, River of Words, Georgia Adopt-A-Stream and Rivers Alive. A program manager, three state coordinators and part time staff provide the leadership necessary to implement the Outreach Unit programs.
Georgia Project WET (Water Education for Teachers) Program In October 1996, Georgia EPD selected Project WET (Water Education for Teachers) curriculum as the most appropriate water science and nonpoint source education curriculum for the State. The Project WET curriculum is an interdisciplinary water science and education curriculum that can be easily integrated into the existing curriculum of a school, museum, university pre-service class, or a community organization. The mission of Project WET is to reach children, parents, educators, and communities of the world with water education.
The success of the Georgia Project WET Program has been phenomenal. Since 1997, approximately 11,000 Georgia teachers have been certified as Project WET educators, and approximately 1,100 have volunteered to be facilitators and train other adults in their communities.
Certified Project WET instructors receive The Dragonfly Gazette twice a year, an electronic newsletter for educators with water education resources and news. Georgia Project WET Program provides educators with resources such as the Enviroscape Nonpoint Source, Wetlands, Stormwater and Groundwater Flow Models (demonstration tools used to emphasize the impacts of nonpoint source pollution to surface and ground waters) and promotional and instructional training videos. Information is also available on the Georgia Project WET website, www.GaProjectWET.org
Each year, the Georgia Project WET Program partners with the Environmental Education Alliance of Georgia to conduct a

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-19

statewide conference and awards ceremony. During the conference, Georgia Project WET recognizes a Facilitator, Educator and Organization of the Year. Awardees are selected based on their efforts to increase awareness about water issues and their commitment to water education. The Project WET Organization of the Year is invited to send one of its employees/members to attend the next scheduled Project WET Facilitator workshop at no charge.
Georgia Project WET has also partnered with the City of Atlanta's Department of Watershed Management to produce The Urban Watershed: A Supplement to the Project WET Curriculum and Activity Guide. This supplement includes twelve real-world, engaging activities that have been designed for 4-8th grade students. The activities address topics such as water quality, nonpoint source pollution, drinking water systems, wastewater systems and impervious surfaces. This supplement is the first curriculum of its kind, focusing on the Chattahoochee River watershed and the unique issues that face an urban watershed. Since its first printing in August of 2005, approximately 2,600 educators have been trained to implement the curriculum in their classrooms and in the field.
The Georgia Project WET Program offers educators in Georgia the opportunity to participate in the River of Words, an international poetry and art contest for students (K-12). This contest provides students with the opportunity to explore their own watersheds through poetry and art. The Georgia Project WET Program offers a free River of Words Teacher's Guide for educators with specific information about Georgia's watersheds. In addition, several nature centers throughout Georgia offer River of Words field trips for students and teachers.
The Georgia River of Words is part of a larger, international River of Words poetry and art contest, part of St. Mary's University Center for Environmental Literacy in

affiliation with The Library of Congress Center for the Book.
Over 20,000 entries are submitted to the River of Words contest each year, and every year since 1997 Georgia students have been selected as National Grand Prize Winners and/or Finalists. Georgia EPD receives an average of 1,685 River of Words entries each year. In addition to the students that are recognized nationally, Georgia Project WET conducts a State judging each year in which approximately 50 students are honored as State winners.
The State and National winners' work is on display in the Georgia River of Words Exhibition. Each year, Georgia Project WET partners with the Chattahoochee Nature Center to conduct the Georgia River of Words Awards Ceremony recognizing State and National winners from across the State. All River of Words state and national winners' poetry and art can be found on the project website, www.GaProjectWet.org.
In partnership with the Georgia Center for the Book, Georgia Project WET coordinates an additional River of Words traveling exhibit through the library system, which visits 2535 sites per year. In addition, over 70,000 students and teachers each year will view the River of Words exhibit when they visit the Education floor of the Georgia Aquarium.
Georgia Adopt-A-Stream Program The Georgia Adopt-A-Stream Program is a citizen monitoring and stream protection program that focuses on what individuals and communities can do to mitigate nonpoint sources of pollution. The Program consists of two staff positions in the Georgia EPD and over 70 local community and watershed Adopt-A-Stream coordinators. The community and watershed coordinators are a network of college, watershed, or local based training centers located throughout Georgia. The network of local programs provides training workshops and educational presentations that allow the Georgia AdoptA-Stream Program to be accessible to all areas of the State. In cooperation with the

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-20

Georgia State Coordinators, the programs ensure that volunteers are trained consistently and that the monitoring data is professionally assessed for quality assurance and quality control.
The Georgia Adopt-A-Stream Program's objectives are: (1) increase individual's awareness of how they contribute to nonpoint source pollution problems, (2) generate local support for nonpoint source management through public involvement and monitoring of waterbodies, (3) provide educational resources and technical assistance for addressing nonpoint source pollution problems statewide, and (4) collect and share baseline water quality data.
Providing technical assistance and supporting water quality data collection is a key Adopt-a-Stream goal. Since 1995, Adopt-a-Stream held 327 Trainer Workshops, resulting in 866 Trainers Certifications. In that same timeframe, Adopt-a-Stream help 3,409 QA/QC workshops, resulting in 33,170 QA/QC certifications.
Currently, more than 3,000 volunteers participate in 270 community sponsored Adopt-A-Stream Programs. Volunteers conduct clean ups, stabilize streambanks, monitor waterbodies using physical, chemical and biological methods, and evaluate habitats and watersheds at over 720 sites throughout the State. These activities lead to a greater awareness of water quality and nonpoint source pollution, active cooperation between the public and local governments in protecting water resources, and the collection of basic water quality data.
Volunteers are offered different options of involvement. Each option involves an education and action component on a local waterbody. In addition to water quality monitoring, volunteers are encouraged to engage in habitat improvement, riparian restoration and rain garden construction projects.

The Georgia Adopt-A-Stream Program provides volunteers with additional resources such as the Getting to Know Your Watershed, Visual Stream Survey, Macroinvertebrate and Chemical Stream Monitoring, Bacterial Monitoring, Adopt-AWetland, Adopt-A-Lake, Amphibian Monitoring and Adopt-A-Stream Educator's Guide manuals, PowerPoint presentations, and promotional and instructional training videos. Every quarter, a newsletter is published and distributed to volunteers statewide with program updates and information about available resources. Additional information about the Georgia Adopt-A-Stream Program, watershed investigation and water quality monitoring information is available on the website, www.GeorgiaAdoptAStream.org.
All Georgia Adopt-A-Stream Program activities have been correlated to the Georgia Performance Standards (GPS) for grades K 12 and certified teachers in Georgia participating in Georgia Adopt-AStream Program training workshops receive Professional Learning Unit (PLU) credits. Additional information about the GPS correlations and PLU credits can be found online.
Starting in 2010, Georgia Adopt-A-Stream brought back their annual conference, called Confluence. The Conference, held each year in the spring, has grown from an initial registration of 150 participants to average over 200 participants annually. The conference provides volunteers with an opportunity to further their knowledge of water related issues, choosing from multiple concurrent tracks including topics such as: visual monitoring, invasive species, program development and social media; advance macroinvertebrate monitoring; and green infrastructure and stream stabilization workshops. In addition to the education opportunities, the conference provides a venue for recognizing the outstanding achievements of our volunteers and local trainers through our awards ceremony.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-21

The Adopt-A-Stream website supports a database to house all volunteer monitoring water quality data and programmatic information. It is a database drive website, with real time stats and graphs automatically generated by the information volunteers submit. Several formats are used to display monitoring data, including charts, graphs and basic GIS using a maps page that displays terrain, topographical and photographic layers. Data sharing developments like this website improve volunteer monitors' capacity to learn about and protect local water bodies. Presently, there are over 270 groups actively monitoring over 720 sites.
Georgia Adopt-A-Stream partners with the Georgia River Network to present the Watershed Track at their annual conference. In another partnership activity with Georgia River Network, Adopt-A-Stream trained citizen monitors and led the scientific monitoring team for Paddle Georgia (a weeklong paddle down a major Georgia waterway). These events helped connect citizens with activities that help protect and improve Georgia waters.
Rivers Alive Program The Outreach Unit coordinates Georgia's annual volunteer waterway cleanup event, Rivers Alive, held in late summer through fall. Rivers Alive is a statewide event that includes streams, rivers, lakes wetlands and coastal waters. The mission of Rivers Alive is to create awareness of and involvement in the preservation of Georgia's water resources.
During the 2017 waterway cleanup, 26,000 volunteers cleaned over 1,600 miles of waterways and removed over 423,000 pounds of trash and garbage including vehicles, boats, refrigerators, tires, plastic bottles and thousands of lost balls. Rivers Alive receives key support in the form of corporate sponsorship for the purchase of tshirts and other materials to support local organizers. The cleanup events also share educational watershed posters and bookmarks, and public service

announcements to advertise in local newspapers and on the radio.
Rivers Alive also produces a how to organize a cleanup guide and a quarterly enewsletter to provide updated information and helpful cleanup tips for organizers. In addition to protecting and preserving the State's waterways, Rivers Alive cleanup events involve participants in diverse activities such as storm drain stenciling, water quality monitoring and riparian restoration workshops, riverboat tours, wastewater treatment facility tours and general environmental education workshops.
Rivers Alive maintains an online database for registering cleanups and submitting cleanup data. All cleanups are listed on an interactive maps page that shares individual organizer information. The cleanup results are displayed on maps and in graphs for each group to view and share. Additional information about Rivers Alive is available on the website: https://riversalive.georgia.gov/.
Emergency Response Network The GAEPD maintains a team of Environmental Emergency Specialists capable of responding to oil or hazardous materials spills. Each team member is cross-trained to address and enforce all environmental laws administered by the GAEPD. The team members interact at the command level with local, state and federal agency personnel to ensure the protection of human health and the environment during emergency and post emergency situations. These core team members are supplemented with additional trained Specialists who serve as part-time Emergency Responders.
A significant number of reported releases involve discharges to storm sewers. Many citizens and some industries do not understand the distinction between storm and sanitary sewers and intentional discharge to storm sewers occurs all too frequently. A problem which arises several

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-22

times a year involves the intentional discharge of gasoline to storm sewers, with a resulting buildup of vapors to explosive limits. A relatively small amount of gasoline can result in explosive limits being reached in a storm sewer. The resulting evacuations and industry closures cost the citizens of Georgia hundreds of thousands of dollars each year.
The GAEPD is designated in the Georgia Emergency Operations Plan as the lead state agency in responding to hazardous materials spills. Emergency Response Team members serve in both a technical support and regulatory mode during an incident. The first goal of the Emergency Response Team is to minimize and mitigate harm to human health and the environment. In addition, appropriate enforcement actions including civil penalties are taken with respect to spill incidents. Emergency Response Team members work directly with responsible parties to coordinate all necessary clean-up actions. Team members can provide technical assistance with clean-up techniques, as well as guidance to ensure regulatory compliance.
Environmental Radiation In 1976, the Georgia Radiation Control Act was amended to provide the GAEPD with responsibility for monitoring of radiation and radioactive materials in the environment. The Environmental Radiation Program was created to implement these responsibilities for environmental monitoring. Since that time, the Program has also been assigned responsibility for implementing the GAEPD lead agency role in radiological emergency planning, preparedness and response, and for analyzing drinking water samples collected pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act for the presence of naturally-occurring radioactive materials such as uranium, 226Ra, 228Ra and gross alpha activity.
The GAEPD monitors environmental media in the vicinity of nuclear facilities in or bordering Georgia to determine if radioactive materials are being released into the

environment in quantities sufficient to adversely affect the health and safety of the citizens of Georgia or the quality of Georgia's environment.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

7-23

CHAPTER 8
Ground and Surface Water Withdrawals, Availability and Drinking Water Supplies
Groundwater Georgia began the development of its Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Program (CSGWPP) in the 1970s with enactment of the Ground Water Use Act in 1972. By the mid-1980s, groundwater protection and management had been established by incorporation in a variety of environmental laws and rules. In 1984, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) published its first Groundwater Management Plan, in which the various regulatory programs dealing with groundwater were integrated.
Most laws providing for protection and management of groundwater are administered by the EPD. Laws regulating pesticides are administered by the Department of Agriculture, environmental planning by the Department of Community Affairs, and on-site sewage disposal by the Department of Human Resources. The EPD has established formal Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with these agencies. The Georgia Groundwater Protection Coordinating Committee was established in 1992 to coordinate groundwater management activities between the various departments of state government and the several branches of the EPD.
The first version of Georgia's Groundwater Management Plan (1984) has been revised several times to incorporate new laws, rules and technological advances. The current version, Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 11, was published in February 1998, after USEPA approval in September of 1997.This document was EPD's submission to the USEPA as a "core" CSGWPP.
Groundwater is extremely important to the life, health, and economy of Georgia. For example, in 2017, groundwater supplied some 2,200 of

Georgia's over 2,400 public water systems (which is about 60% of the municipal withdrawal permits totaling 419 million gallons per day annual average day (MGD-AAD). About twothirds of industrial and commercial permits are for groundwater use, comprising some 415 MGD-AAD. About 12,504 of the over 24,978 agricultural water withdrawal permits in Georgia are groundwater permits. In the rural parts of the state, virtually all individual homes not served by public water systems use wells as their source of drinking water. The economy of Georgia and the health of millions of persons could be compromised if Georgia's groundwater were to be significantly polluted.

Relatively few cases of ground water contamination adversely affecting public drinking water systems or privately owned drinking water wells have been documented in Georgia. Currently, the vast majority of Georgia's population is not at risk from ground water pollution of drinking water. Data on the sources of groundwater contamination are provided in Table 8-1.

The EPD's groundwater regulatory programs

follow an anti-degradation policy under which

regulated activities will not develop into significant

threats to the State's groundwater resources.

This anti-degradation policy is implemented

through three principal elements:

Pollution prevention,

Management of groundwater quantity,

Monitoring of groundwater quality and

quantity.

The prevention of pollution includes (1) the

proper siting, construction and operation of

environmental facilities and activities through a

permitting system, (2) implementation of

environmental planning criteria by incorporation

of land-use planning by local governments, (3)

implementation of a Wellhead Protection Program

for municipal drinking water wells, (4) detection

and mitigation of existing problems, (5)

development of other protective standards, as

appropriate, where permits are not required, and

(6) education of the public to the consequences of

groundwater contamination and the need for

groundwater protection.

Management of

groundwater quantity involves allocating the

State's groundwater, through a permitting system,

to ensure that the resource is

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-1

TABLE 8-1 MAJOR SOURCES OF GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION

Contaminant Source

Contaminant Source
Selection Factors

Agricultural Activities

Agricultural chemical facilities

Animal feedlots

Drainage wells

Contaminants

Fertilizer applications

Irrigation practices

Pesticide applications

Storage and Treatment Activities

Land application

Material stockpiles

Storage tanks (above ground)

Storage tanks (underground)*

C, D, F

D

Surface impoundments Waste piles Waste tailings Disposal Activities Deep injection wells Landfills* Septic systems* Shallow injection wells

C, D, F C

D, H E, K, L

Contaminant Source
Other
Hazardous waste generators
Hazardous waste sites*
Industrial facilities*
Material transfer operations
Mining and mine drainage
Pipelines and sewer lines*
Salt storage and road salting
Salt water intrusion*
Spills*
Transportation of materials

Contaminant Source
Selection Factors
F C, F
F
B, C, E, F F

Contaminants
C, H C, D, H
D G D

Urban runoff*
Natural iron and manganese* Natural radioactivity

D, E

Variable

F

H, I

*10 highest-priority sources

Factors used to select each of the contaminant sources.

A. Human health and/or environmental risk (toxicity) B. Size of the population at risk C. Location of the sources relative to drinking water
sources D. Number and/or size of contaminant sources E. Hydrogeologic sensitivity F. State findings, other findings

Contaminants/classes of contaminants considered to be associated with each of the sources that were checked.

A. Inorganic pesticides B. Organic pesticides C. Halogenated solvents D. Petroleum compounds E. Nitrate F. Fluoride

G. Salinity/brine H. Metals I. Radio nuclides J. Bacteria K. Protozoa L. Viruses

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-2

sustainably used and continues to be productively available to present and future generations. Monitoring of groundwater quality and quantity involves continually assessing the resource so that changes, either good or bad, can be identified and corrective action implemented when and where needed. Table 8-2 is a summary of Georgia groundwater protection programs.
The State of Georgia possesses a groundwater supply that is both abundant and of high quality. Except where aquifers in the Coastal Plain become salty at great depth, all of the State's aquifers are considered as potential sources of drinking water. For the most part, these aquifers are remarkably free of pollution. The aquifers are ultimately recharged by precipitation, and use of groundwater may help meet future water needs. While water from wells is safe to drink without treatment in most areas of Georgia, water to be used for public supply is required to be chlorinated (except for very small systems). Water for domestic use can also be treated if required.
Groundwater Monitoring Network Ambient groundwater quality, as well as the quantity available for development, is related to the geologic character of the aquifers. Georgia's aquifers can, in general, be characterized by the five main hydrologic provinces in the State (Figure 8-1). In addition to sampling of public drinking water wells as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act and sampling of monitoring wells at permitted facilities, the EPD monitors ambient groundwater quality through the Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network. From 1984 through January 2004, this network regularly sampled wells and springs, tapping important aquifers throughout the State. From February 2004 through 2010, the network focused on various specialized situations: the Coastal area (102 wells), the Piedmont/Blue Ridge area (120 wells and springs), small public water systems (180 wells and springs, statewide), uranium in ground water (310 wells and springs), and arsenic in ground water in South Georgia (67 wells). In 2011, the network returned to the regular sampling of wells and springs drawing from important aquifers. Figure 8-2 shows locations of stations for the groundwater monitoring network during calendar years 2016 through 2017. One of the purposes of the network is to allow the EPD to identify groundwater quality trends before they become problems. To date, most potential water quality issues that have been illuminated

through monitoring efforts are either natural in origin (e.g. arsenic and uranium), or limited to one well, such as the VOC contamination issues found within a well located in Atlanta. The 2016 ambient monitoring program found 23 wells with iron, manganese, or aluminum exceedances. In addition, the program uncovered one well with VOC contamination, potentially due to a neighboring underground petroleum storage tank. Another well, with nitrogen in excess of the primary MCL, is located in the surficial layer, and is used only for non-potable activities such as gardening. The 2017 ambient monitoring program continued to monitor the VOC contaminated well on a quarterly basis. Lead was found in excess of the Primary MCL at two locations; it is suspected that rarely utilized plumbing fixtures at the sample point are the source. 43 wells were found to contain iron, manganese, or aluminum in excess of secondary MCLs. Well owners with exceedances were notified, and, if the well was a public supply well or a private drinking water source, follow-up sampling was performed upon request. Results of aquifer monitoring data for calendar years 2016 and 2017 are provided in Tables 8-3 through 8-5.
Agricultural chemicals are commonly used in the agricultural regions of the State (Figure 8-3). In order to evaluate the occurrence of agricultural chemicals in groundwater, the EPD has sampled:
A network of monitoring wells located downgradient from fields where pesticides are routinely applied,
Domestic drinking water wells for pesticides and nitrates, and
Agricultural Drainage wells and sinkholes in the agricultural regions of Georgia's Coastal Plain for pesticides.
Only a few pesticides and herbicides have been detected in groundwater in these studies. There is no particular pattern to their occurrence, and most detections have been transient; that is, the chemical is most often no longer present when the well is resampled. Prudent agricultural use of pesticides does not appear to represent a significant threat to drinking water aquifers in Georgia at this time.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-3

TABLE 8-2

SUMMARY OF STATE GROUND WATER PROTECTION PROGRAMS

Programs or Activities

Check Implementation

Responsible

(X) Status

Georgia Agency

Active SARA Title III Program

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Ambient ground water monitoring system

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Aquifer vulnerability assessment

X

Ongoing

Environ. Protection

Aquifer mapping

X

Ongoing

Environ. Protection

Aquifer characterization

X

Ongoing

Environ. Protection

Comprehensive data management system

X

Ongoing

Environ. Protection

EPA-endorsed Core Comprehensive State Ground Water

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Protection Program (CSGWPP)

Ground water discharge

Prohibited

Ground water Best Management Practices

X

Pending

Environ. Protection

Ground water legislation

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Ground water classification

Not applicable

Ground water quality standards

X

Ongoing

Environ. Protection

Interagency coordination for ground water protection

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

initiatives

Nonpoint source controls

X

Ongoing

Environ. Protection

Pesticide State Management Plan

X

Fully Established Agriculture

Pollution Prevention Program

Discontinued

Natural Resources

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Primacy

State Superfund

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

State RCRA Program incorporating more stringent

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

requirements than RCRA Primacy

State septic system regulations

X

Fully Established Public Health

Underground storage tank installation requirements

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Underground Storage Tank Remediation Fund

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Underground Storage Tank Permit Program

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Underground Injection Control Program

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Vulnerability assessment for drinking water/wellhead

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

protection

Well abandonment regulations

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Wellhead Protection Program (EPA-approved)

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

Well installation regulations

X

Fully Established Environ. Protection

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-4

FIGURE 8-1
HYDROLOGIC PROVINCES OF GEORGIA

Valley and Ridge

Ground-water Reservoirs and Well Yields
Massive dolomite, limestone
50 - 500 gpm
Sandstone, mudstone, chert
1 - 100 gpm
Granite, gneiss, metasediments
1 - 250 gpm
Sand, gravel
50 - 1200 gpm
Limestone, sand
250 - 1000 gpm
Limestone, dolostone
1000 - 5000 gpm

Blue Ridge and Piedmont

Coastal Plain

0

35

70

140 Miles

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-5

FIGURE 8-2
GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORK, 2016-2017

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-6

TABLE 8-3A SUMMARY OF GROUND-WATER MONITORING RESULTS FOR CY 2016

125 Aquifer Monitoring Stations

Nitrate/ Nitrite

VOCs

Arsenic

Uranium

Copper or Fe, Mn,

Lead

or Al

Detections

111

15

5

5

28

120

Exceedances

1

2

0

0

0

56

TABLE 8-3B SUMMARY OF GROUND-WATER MONITORING RESULTS FOR CY 2017

126 Aquifer Monitoring Stations

Nitrate/ Nitrite

VOCs

Arsenic

Uranium

Copper or Fe, Mn,

Lead

or Al

Detections

109

13

4

8

31

131

Exceedances

1

1

0

1

0

61

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-7

TABLE 8-4 GROUND-WATER MONITORING DATA FOR CY 2016

Aquifer
Cretaceous/ Providence Clayton Claiborne Jacksonian Floridan Miocene Piedmont/ Blue Ridge Valley and Ridge

Number of
Stations

Number of
Samples

Nitrate/Nitrite Detection// Exceedance

22

22

3

3

3

3

8

8

35

65

7

7

40

74

13 // 0
3 // 0 1 // 0 4 // 0 22 // 0 3 // 1
55 // 0

7

10

10 // 0

Number of Samples Showing:

VOCs Detection// Exceedance

Arsenic Detection// Exceedance

Uranium Detection// Exceedance

Copper or Lead
Detection// Exceedance

0 // 0

0 // 0

0// 0

5 // 0

0 // 0 0 // 0 1 // 0 7 // 0 0 // 0

0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 5 // 0 0 // 0

0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0

3 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 4 // 0 2 // 0

6 // 2

0 // 0

5 // 0

14 // 0

Fe, Mn, or Al Detection// Exceedance
15// 7
3 // 2 2 // 2 5 // 1 29 // 9 6 // 4
55 // 30

1 // 0

0 // 0

0 // 0

0 // 0

5 // 1

TABLE 8-5 GROUND-WATER MONITORING DATA FOR CY 2017

Aquifer
Cretaceous/ Providence Clayton Claiborne Jacksonian Floridan Miocene Piedmont/ Blue Ridge Valley and Ridge

Number Number

of

of

Stations Samples

21

21

3

3

3

3

10

10

35

65

7

7

41

75

6

9

Nitrate/Nitrite Detection// Exceedance
11 // 0
3 // 0 1 // 0 7 // 0 21 // 0 2 // 1
55 // 0
9 // 0

Number of Samples Showing:

VOCs Detection// Exceedance

Arsenic Detection// Exceedance

Uranium Detection// Exceedance

Copper or Lead
Detection// Exceedance

0 // 0

0 // 0

0 // 0

6// 0

1 // 0 0 // 0 1 // 0 2 // 0 1 // 0

0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 4 // 0 0 // 0

0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0 0 // 0

3 // 0 0 // 0 1 // 0 5 // 0 3 // 0

7 // 1

0 // 0

8 // 1

12 // 0

Fe, Mn, or Al Detection// Exceedance
15 // 8
3 // 2 2 // 2 5 // 2 33 // 9 5 // 4
65 // 33

1 // 0

0 // 0

0 // 0

1 // 0

3 // 1

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-8

FIGURE 8-3
INSECTICIDE/HERBICIDE USE IN GEORGIA, 1980
Insecticide/Herbicide Use in Application-Acres Less than 50,000 50,000 - 100,000 Greater than 100,000

Note: An application-acre represents one application of insecticide-herbicide to one acre of land. Some crops may require multiple applications.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-9

Salt Water Intrusion The most extensive contamination of Georgia's aquifers is from naturally occurring mineral salts (i.e., high total dissolved solids, or TDS levels). Areas generally susceptible to high TDS levels are shown in Figure 8-4. Use of groundwater in the 24 counties of the Georgia coast has enabled some groundwater containing high levels of dissolved solids to enter freshwater aquifers either vertically or laterally. Salt-water intrusion into the Floridan Aquifer threatens groundwater supplies in Hilton Head, South Carolina and Savannah, Georgia and Brunswick, Georgia. Salt-water intrusion rates, however, are quite slow, with salt-contaminated water at the north end of Hilton Head, South Carolina projected to take more than a hundred years to reach Savannah. On April 23, 1997, the EPD implemented an Interim Strategy to protect the Upper Floridan Aquifer from salt-water intrusion in the 24 coastal counties. The strategy, developed in consultation with South Carolina and Florida, continued until June 2006, when the final coastal Plan was adopted for implementation.
The 2006 "Coastal Georgia Water & Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion" describes the goals, policies, and actions the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) will undertake to manage the water resources of the 24-county area of coastal Georgia. The Plan is designed to support the continued growth and development of coastal Georgia while implementing sustainable water resource management.
The 2006 Plan replaces the "Interim Strategy for Managing Salt Water Intrusion in the Upper Floridan Aquifer of Southeast Georgia", and sets forth how EPD will conduct ground and surface water withdrawal permitting, and management and permitting of wastewater discharges. It advances requirements for water conservation, water reclamation and reuse, and wastewater management. Based on the findings of the Coastal Sound Science Initiative (CSSI), the Plan will guide EPD water resource management decisions and actions.

The primary focus of the final Plan recognizes the intrusion of saltwater into the Upper Floridan aquifer at Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. The plan recognizes that actions taken to slow down the intrusion of additional salt water into the aquifer will not result in the halting of the migration of the salt water that has already entered the aquifer. As of 2017 work continues to be conducted to characterize the extent of salt water intrusion in the Florida aquifer, as well as study potential mechanisms for slowing its movement inland. Modeling work has indicated that the EPD requested reduction in withdrawals from the aquifer will effectively reduce the hydraulic gradient and rate of movement of the salt water plume.
This plan for managing coastal Georgia salt water intrusion, withdrawal permitting, and wastewater management reflects the State's goal of sustainable use of both groundwater and surface waters, it supports regional economic growth and development, and contributes to protecting the short-term and long-term health of both the public and natural systems. It is based on the best available scientific data and Information on the stresses on the water resources within the region.
Management strategies that abate the intrusion of salt water are primarily concerned with quantity and supply, but water supply strategies are incomplete without a corresponding array of actions that will address related wastewater issues. The additional water supply available through the water withdrawal permitting conducted under this Plan will increase the amount of wastewater to be discharged into the sensitive ecosystems of coastal Georgia. Therefore, the final Plan also incorporates policies and actions needed to begin solving the wastewater discharge limitations that have become evident as coastal Georgia continues to grow.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-10

FIGURE 8-4
AREAS SUSCEPTIBLE TO NATURAL HIGH DISSOLVED SOLIDS AND 24 COUNTY AREA COVERED BY THE INTERIM COASTAL MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY

DADE

CATOOSA

WHITFIELDMURRAY WALKER

FANNIN

TOWNS UNION

RABUN

GILMER

WHITEHABERSHAM

CHATTOOGA

GORDON

LUMPKIN PICKENS
DAWSON

STEPHENS

FLOYD

BARTOW CHEROKEE FORSYTH

HALL

BANKS FRANKLIN

HART

JACKSON

MADISON

ELBERT

Dissolved solids concentration
0 - 250 mg/L 251 - 500 mg/L 501 - 850 mg/L Coastal Management Area

POLK

PAULDING

HARALSON

COBB

BARROW

GWINNETT

CLARKE

DE KALB

WALTON

OGLETHORPE OCONEE
WILKES

LINCOLN

DOUGLAS FULTON

ROCKDALE

CARROLL HEARD

COWETA

CLAYTON

NEWTON

MORGAN

GREENE TALIAFERRO

COLUMBIA

FAYETTE

HENRY

MCDUFFIE WARREN

RICHMOND

SPALDING

BUTTS JASPER

PUTNAM

HANCOCK

GLASCOCK

PIKE TROUP MERIWETHER

LAMAR MONROE

BALDWIN JONES

JEFFERSON WASHINGTON

HARRIS

UPSON

BIBB

TALBOT

CRAWFORD

WILKINSON TWIGGS

JOHNSON

BURKE

JENKINS

SCREVEN

MUSCOGEE CHATTAHOOCHEEMARION

TAYLOR

PEACH

MACON

HOUSTON BLECKLEY

EMANUEL

LAURENS

TREUTLEN

CANDLER BULLOCH EFFINGHAM

SCHLEY

STEWART WEBSTER SUMTER

QUITMAN

RANDOLPH TERRELL

LEE

DOOLY CRISP

PULASKI WILCOX

DODGE

MONTGOMERY

WHEELER

TOOMBS

EVANS

TATTNALL

TELFAIR

BRYAN

TURNER

BEN HILL

JEFF DAVIS APPLING

LIBERTY LONG

CHATHAM

CLAY

CALHOUN DOUGHERTY

WORTH

IRWIN TIFT

COFFEE

BACON

WAYNE

MCINTOSH

EARLY MILLER

BAKER MITCHELL

COLQUITT

BERRIEN ATKINSON COOK

PIERCE BRANTLEY

GLYNN

LANIER

WARE

SEMINOLE DECATUR

GRADY

THOMAS

BROOKS

LOWNDES

CLINCH ECHOLS

CHARLTON

CAMDEN

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-11

In May 2013 EPD's Director issued a prohibition of new or increased permitted withdrawals from the Floridan aquifer in four coastal Georgia counties (shown on the map above as red and yellow zones). EPD determined the interconnectivity between the upper and lower Floridan permeable zones influence the saltwater intrusion into the upper Floridan permeable zone. Applicants for new water withdrawals may use alternate aquifers such as the Miocene or Cretaceous aquifers or may use surface water. In 2017 a large percentage of Floridan aquifer wells with existing withdrawal permits in the red and yellow zones have been issued new permits. The new permits have reduced limits that become effective in 2020 and 2025.
The Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Planning Act (the Water Planning Act), passed by the General Assembly and signed into law by Governor Perdue in 2004, defines general policy and guiding principles for water resource management that guide this Coastal Georgia Water & Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion. The incorporation of these policies and guiding principles into this Plan will facilitate its alignment with the Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Plan that was adopted by the General Assembly in January 2008.
The initial round of regional water planning under the State water plan has completed assessments of the quantity and quality of surface waters in major streams and rivers in Georgia, and the ranges of sustainable yields of prioritized aquifers in Georgia. Most of the aquifers prioritized for determination of ranges of sustainable yield were aquifers within the Coastal Plain physiographic province of Georgia where most groundwater use within the State occurs.
Ranges of sustainable yields of Coastal Plain aquifers were determined using finite difference and finite element numerical modeling methods.

The range of sustainable yield was determined for the Paleozoic carbonate aquifer in a study basin of the Valley and Ridge physiographic province of northwestern Georgia using finite difference modeling, and ranges of sustainable yield were determined for the crystalline rock aquifer in selected basins in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge physiographic provinces of northern Georgia using basin water budgets.
Some wells in Georgia produce water containing relatively high levels of naturally occurring iron and manganese. Another natural source of contamination is from radioactive minerals that are a minor rock constituent in some Georgia aquifers. While natural radioactivity may occur anywhere in Georgia (Figure 8-5), the most significant problems have occurred at some locations near the Gulf Trough, a geologic feature of the Floridan Aquifer in the Coastal Plain. Wells can generally be constructed to seal off the rocks producing the radioactive elements to provide safe drinking water.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-12

If the radioactive zones in a well cannot be sealed off, the public may have to connect to a neighboring permitted public water system(s). Treatment to remove radionuclides and uranium from water is a problem due to concerns for the disposal of the concentrated residue.
However, certain treatment firms (e.g. Water Remediation Technology, LLC) have arrangements to remove certain radionuclides from ground water and dispose of residues properly. In particular, uranium-rich residues are turned over to processors, which extract the metal. Radon, a radioactive gas produced by the radioactive minerals mentioned above, also has been noted in highly variable amounts in groundwater from some Georgia wells, especially in the Piedmont region. Treatment systems may be used to remove radon from groundwater.
Tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, was found in 1991 in excess of expected background levels by EPD sampling in Burke County aquifers. While the greatest amount of tritium thus far measured is only 15 percent of the US EPA MCL for tritium, the wells in which it has been found lie across the Savannah River from the Savannah River was produced for nuclear weapons (Figure 8 5).
The tritium does not exceed MCLs for drinking water; therefore it does not represent a health threat to Georgia citizens at the present time. Results of the EPD's studies to date indicate the most likely pathway for tritium to be transported from the Savannah River Plant is through the air due to evapotranspiration of triturated water. The water vapor is condensed to form triturated precipitation over Georgia and

reaches the shallow aquifers through normal infiltration and recharge.
Man-made pollution of groundwater can come from a number of sources, such as business and industry, agriculture, and homes (e.g., septic systems). Widespread annual testing of public water supply wells for volatile organic chemicals (VOCs, e.g. solvents and hydrocarbons) is performed by the EPD. Only a very few water systems have had a VOC level high enough to exceed the MCL and become a violation. The sources of the VOCs most commonly are ill-defined spills and leaks, improper disposal of solvents by nearby businesses, and leaking underground fuel storage tanks located close to the well. Where such pollution has been identified, alternate sites for wells are generally available or the water can be treated.
Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water Groundwater Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water (GWUDI) is defined as water beneath the surface of the ground with: significant occurrence of insects or other macro organisms, algae, or large diameter protozoa and pathogens such as Giardia lamblia or Cryptosporidium; and significant and relatively rapid shifts in water characteristics such as turbidity, temperature, conductivity or pH, which closely correlate to climatological or surface conditions. The EPD evaluates public groundwater sources (wells and springs) to determine if they are likely to have direct surface water influence.
Several factors are considered for risk of GWUDI, including location, historical sampling data, microbiological quality, chemical quality, physical parameters, well/spring construction, hydrogeology,

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-13

FIGURE 8-5
AREAS SUSCEPTIBLE TO NATURAL AND HUMAN INDUCED RADIATION

DADE

CATOOSA

WHITFIELDMURRAY WALKER

FANNIN

TOWNS UNION

RABUN

GILMER

WHITEHABERSHAM

CHATTOOGA

GORDON

LUMPKIN PICKENS
DAWSON

STEPHENS

FLOYD

BARTOW

CHEROKEE FORSYTH

HALL

BANKS FRANKLIN

HART

Areas of known natural radioactivity contamination Granite outcrops Tritium pollution

JACKSON

MADISON

ELBERT

POLK

PAULDING

HARALSON

COBB

BARROW

GWINNETT

CLARKE

DE KALB

WALTON

OGLETHORPE OCONEE
WILKES

LINCOLN

DOUGLAS FULTON

ROCKDALE

CARROLL HEARD

COWETA

CLAYTON

NEWTON

MORGAN

GREENE TALIAFERRO

COLUMBIA

FAYETTE

HENRY

MCDUFFIE WARREN

RICHMOND

SPALDING BUTTS JASPER

PUTNAM

HANCOCK

GLASCOCK

PIKE TROUP MERIWETHER

LAMAR MONROE

BALDWIN JONES

JEFFERSON WASHINGTON

BURKE

HARRIS

UPSON TALBOT

CRAWFORD

BIBB

WILKINSON TWIGGS

JOHNSON

JENKINS

SCREVEN

MUSCOGEE CHATTAHOOCHEEMARION

TAYLOR

PEACH

MACON

HOUSTON BLECKLEY

EMANUEL

LAURENS

TREUTLEN

CANDLER BULLOCH

EFFINGHAM

SCHLEY

STEWART WEBSTER SUMTER

QUITMAN

RANDOLPH TERRELL

LEE

DOOLY CRISP

PULASKI WILCOX

DODGE

MONTGOMERY

WHEELER

TOOMBS

EVANS

TATTNALL

TELFAIR

BRYAN

TURNER

BEN HILL

JEFF DAVIS APPLING

LIBERTY LONG

CHATHAM

CLAY

CALHOUN DOUGHERTY

WORTH

IRWIN TIFT

COFFEE

BACON

WAYNE

MCINTOSH

EARLY MILLER

BAKER MITCHELL

COLQUITT

BERRIEN ATKINSON COOK

PIERCE BRANTLEY

GLYNN

LANIER

WARE

SEMINOLE DECATUR

GRADY

THOMAS

BROOKS

LOWNDES

CLINCH ECHOLS

CHARLTON

CAMDEN

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-14

geology, and aquifer type. Sources with the greatest risk are those in karst areas (where water-soluble limestone is perforated by channels, caves, sinkholes, and underground caverns); springs without filtration; old wells with broken sanitary seals, cracked concrete pads, or faulty well casings; and wells not grouted into the unweathered rock formation. In Georgia, the northwest and portions of the southwest and south central parts of the state contain areas of karst topography.
The EPD requires water systems considered to be at risk of GWUDI to make arrangements with a private contractor to complete Microscopic Particulate Analysis (MPA). MPA is a method of sampling and testing for significant indicators of GWUDI. In cases where the water system has a contract with the EPD Laboratory for water analysis, the EPD performs the analysis of the MPA sample. If sample analysis indicates GWUDI, Division district office personnel work with the affected water systems and provide technical assistance in identifying and correcting the deficiencies contributing to the contamination.
Protecting Groundwater Groundwater protection from leaking underground storage tanks was enhanced with the enactment of the Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act in 1988. The program established a financial assurance trust fund and instituted corrective action requirements to cleanup leaking underground storage tanks. As of December 22, 2017, there are a total of 29,116 underground storage tanks (USTs) at a total of 9,705 UST facilities. Additional information on the UST management program can be found at the following site https://epd.gov/publications.
In 1992, the Georgia Legislature enacted the Hazardous Site Response Act to require the notification and control of releases of hazardous materials to soil and groundwater. As of July 1, 2017, there are 528 sites listed on the Georgia Hazardous Site Inventory (HSI). As with underground storage tanks, Georgia has established a trust fund raised from fees paid by hazardous waste generators for the purpose of cleaning abandoned hazardous waste sites.

Additional information on the HSI is available at

the

following

GAEPD

website

https://epd.georgia.gov/hazardous-siteinventory

Leachate leaking from solid waste landfills is also a potential groundwater pollutant. Georgia has a program, utilizing written protocols, to properly site, construct, operate, and monitor such landfills so that pollution of groundwater will not become a threat to drinking water supplies. In this regard, the EPD has completed a set of maps generated by a Geographic Information System that show areas geotechnically unsuitable for a municipal solid waste landfill. Maps at the scale of 1:100,000 have been distributed to all of the State's Regional Development Centers. In addition, all permitted solid waste landfills are required to have an approved groundwater monitoring plan and monitoring wells installed in accordance with the EPD standards for groundwater monitoring. Information on permitted solid waste facilities can be found at the following site https://epd.georgia.gov/permitted-solid-wastefacilities.

The EPD also actively monitors sites where treated wastewaters are further treated by land application methods. Agricultural drainage wells and other forms of illegal underground injection of wastes are closed under another EPD program. The EPD identifies non-domestic septic systems in use in the State, collects information on their use, and has implemented the permitting of systems serving more than 20 persons. Relatively few of the systems are used for the disposal of non-sanitary waste, and the owners of those systems are required to obtain a site specific permit or stop disposing of non-sanitary waste, carry out groundwater pollution studies, and clean up any pollution that was detected. None of these sources represents a significant threat to the quality of Georgia's groundwater at the present time.

The EPD has an active Underground Injection Control Program. As of September 30, 2017, the program has issued 703 UIC permits covering 15,347 Class V wells. Most of the permits are for remediation wells for UST sites,

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-15

petroleum product spills, hazardous waste sites, or for non-domestic septic systems.
Georgia law requires that water well drillers constructing domestic, irrigation and public water supply wells and all pump installers be licensed and bonded. As of December 31, 2017, Georgia had 222 active licensed water well contractors 38 bonded drillers and 63 certified pump installers and that are required to follow strict well construction and repair standards. The EPD continues to work with various drilling associations, licensed drillers, and certified pump installers to uphold and enforce the construction standards of the Water Well Standards Act. The EPD has taken an active role in informing all licensed drillers of the requirement that all irrigation wells must be permitted, and that such permits must be issued prior to the actual drilling of any irrigation well. All drillers constructing monitoring wells or engineering and geologic boreholes must be bonded, and such well construction or borings must be performed under the direction of a Professional Engineer or Professional Geologist registered in Georgia. The EPD maintains an active file of all bonded drilling and pump installing companies and makes every attempt to stop the operations of all drillers and pump installers who fail to maintain a proper bond. The EPD issues permits and regulates all oil and gas exploration in the state under the Oil & Gas and Deep Drilling Act.
Activities affecting groundwater quality that take place in areas where precipitation is actively recharging groundwater aquifers are more prone to cause pollution of drinking water supplies than those taking place in other areas. In this regard, Georgia was one of the first states to implement a state-wide recharge area protection program. The EPD has identified the most significant recharge areas for the main aquifer systems in the State (Figure 8-6). The EPD has completed detailed maps showing the relative susceptibility of shallow groundwater to pollution by man's activities at the land surface. These maps at the scale of 1:100,000 have been distributed to the State's Regional Development Centers, and a state-wide map at the scale of 1:500,000 has been published as Hydrologic Atlas 20. In addition, the EPD is geologically mapping the

recharge zones of important Georgia aquifers at a large scale of 1:24,000.
Recharge areas and areas with higher than average pollution susceptibility are given special consideration in all relevant permit programs. The EPD has developed environmental criteria to protect groundwater in significant recharge areas as required by the Georgia Comprehensive Planning Act of 1989. These criteria also reflect the relative pollution susceptibility of the land surface in recharge areas. Local governments are currently incorporating the pollution prevention measures contained in the criteria in developing local land use plans.
Some areas, where recharge to individual wells using the surficial or unconfined aquifers is taking place, are also significant recharge areas. To protect such wells, the EPD implemented a Wellhead Protection Program for municipal drinking water wells in 1993. Wells in confined aquifers have a small Wellhead Protection Area, generally 100 feet from the well. Wells using unconfined aquifers have Wellhead Protection Areas extending several hundred to several thousand feet from the well. Wells in karstic areas require even larger protection areas, which are defined using hydrogeologic mapping techniques.
Wellhead Protection Plans have been completed for all permitted municipal wells in Georgia. There are currently 1724 active municipal ground water wells with Wellhead Protection Plans. The ten-year update schedule for Wellhead Protection Plants continues to date. The WHP Plan update includes the addition of pertinent well information and an update of potential pollution sources. In addition, the EPD has carried out vulnerability studies for nonmunicipal public water systems.
Table 8-1 summarizes the sources and nature of groundwater contamination and pollution in Georgia. In Table 8-1, an asterisk indicates that the listed source is one of the 10 highest sources in the state. Of these, the most significant source is salt-water intrusion in the 24 coastal counties. The second most

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-16

FIGURE 8-6
GENERALIZED MAP OF SIGNIFICANT GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREAS OF GEORGIA
Aquifers
Ridge and Valley (Unconfined) Blue Ridge and Piedmont (Unconfined) Cretaceous System Clayton System Claiborne System Floridan-Jacksonian System Miocene/Pliocene (Recent Unconfined)

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-17

significant source is naturally occurring iron, manganese, and radioactivity. Agricultural applications of pesticides and fertilizers are not significant sources.
Table 8-2 is a summary of Georgia groundwater protection programs. Georgia, primarily the EPD, has delegated authority for all federal environmental groundwater protection statutes that are more stringent than federal statutes. Of the 28 programs, identified by USEPA, only three are not applicable to Georgia: discharges to groundwater are prohibited; the State's hydrogeology is not compatible to classification; and, while managed through construction standards, actual permits for underground storage tanks are not issued.
Tables 8-3, 8-4, and 8-5 summarize ambient groundwater quality monitoring results for calendar years 2016 and 2017. The data presented were developed from the Georgia Groundwater Monitoring Network reports.
As previously mentioned there are some wells and springs that EPD has determined to be under the influence of surface water. There are no documented cases in Georgia of groundwater polluting surface water sources.
Ground and Surface Water Withdrawals (including water availability analysis and conservation planning) The Water Supply Program of the Watershed Protection Branch currently has three (3) major water withdrawal permitting responsibilities: (a) permitting of municipal and industrial ground water withdrawal facilities; (b) permitting of municipal and industrial surface water withdrawal facilities; and (c) permitting of both surface and groundwater agricultural irrigation water use facilities. Any person who withdraws more than 100,000 gallons of surface water per day on a monthly average or more than 100,000 gallons of groundwater on any day or uses a 70 gpm pump or larger for agricultural irrigation, must obtain a permit from the EPD prior to any such withdrawal. Through the beginning of 2018 EPD had 288 active municipal and industrial surface water withdrawal permits (193 municipal, 80 industrial and 15 golf courses), and approximately 24,978 agricultural water use

permits (encompassing both groundwater and surface water sources). Future efforts will focus on improving long-term permitting, water conservation planning, drought contingency planning and monitoring and enforcement of existing permits.

The Georgia Ground Water Use Act of 1972 requires all non-agricultural groundwater users of more than 100,000 gpd for any purpose to obtain a Ground Water Use Permit from EPD. Applicants are required to submit details relating to withdrawal location, historic water use, water demand projections, water conservation, projected water demands, the source aquifer system, and well construction data. An EPDissued Ground Water Use Permit identifies both the allowable monthly average and annual average withdrawal rate, permit expiration date, withdrawal purpose, number of wells, and standard and special conditions for resource use. Standard conditions define legislative provisions, permit transfer restrictions and reporting requirements (i.e., semi-annual groundwater use reports); special conditions identify such things as the source aquifer and conditions of well replacement. The objective of groundwater permitting is the same as that defined for surface water permitting.

The 1977 Surface Water Amendments to the

Georgia Water Quality Control Act of 1964

require all non-agricultural surface water users

of more than 100,000 gallons per day (gpd) on a

monthly average (from any Georgia surface

water body) to obtain a Surface Water

Withdrawal Permit from the EPD. These users

include persons, municipalities, governmental

agencies, industries, military installations, and all

other non-agricultural users. The 1977 statute

"grandfathered" all pre-1977 users who could

establish the quantity of their use prior to 1977.

Under this provision these pre-1977 users were

permitted at antecedent withdrawal levels with

no minimum flow conditions. Applicants for

surface water withdrawal permits are required to

submit details relating to withdrawal source,

historic water use, water demand projections,

water conservation, low flow protection (for non-

grandfathered

withdrawals),

drought

contingency, raw water storage, watershed

protection, and reservoir management. An EPD-

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-18

issued Surface Water Withdrawal Permit identifies withdrawal source and purpose, monthly average and maximum 24-hour withdrawal limits, standard and special conditions for water withdrawal, and Permit expiration date. Standard conditions define legislative provisions, permit transfer restrictions and reporting requirements (i.e., usually annual water use reports); special conditions identify withdrawal specifics such as the requirement for protecting non-depletable flow (NDF). The NDF is that minimum flow required to protect instream uses, (e.g., waste assimilation, fish habitat, and downstream demand). The objective of surface water permitting is to provide a balance between resource protection and resource need.
The 1988 Amendments to both the Ground Water Use Act and the Water Quality Control Act require all agricultural groundwater and surface water users of more than 100,000 gpd on a monthly average to obtain an Agricultural Water Use Permit. "Agricultural Use" is specifically defined as the processing of perishable agricultural products and the irrigation of recreational turf (i.e., golf courses) except in certain areas of the state where recreational turf is considered as an industrial use. These areas are defined for surface water withdrawals as the Chattahoochee River watershed upstream from Peachtree Creek (North Georgia), and for groundwater withdrawals in the coastal counties of Chatham, Effingham, Bryan and Glynn. Applicants for Agricultural Water Use Permits who were able to establish that their use existed prior to July 1, 1988 and whose applications were received prior to July 1, 1991, are "grandfathered" for the operating capacity in place prior to July 1, 1988. Other applications are reviewed and granted with consideration for protecting the integrity of the resource and the water rights of permitted, grandfathered users. Currently, agricultural users are not required to submit any water use reports. An EPD-issued Agricultural Water Use Permit identifies among other things the source, the purpose of withdrawal, total design pumping capacity, installation date, acres irrigated, inches of water applied per year, and the location of the withdrawal. Special conditions may identify minimum surface water flow to be protected or the aquifer and depth to which a well is limited.

Agricultural Water Use Permits may be transferred and have no expiration date.
Under Georgia's comprehensive water management strategy, permit applicants for more than 100,000 gallons per day of surface water or groundwater for public drinking water have been required for a number of years to develop comprehensive water conservation plans in accordance with EPD guidelines. These plans primarily address categories such as system unaccounted-for water (leakage, unmetered use, flushing, etc.), metering, plumbing codes, water shortage planning, water reuse, public education, and so forth. Such plans must be submitted in conjunction with applications for new or increased non-agricultural ground and surface water withdrawals. Key provisions of the plans include the required submittal of water conservation progress reports 5 years after plan approval, the submittal of yearly "unaccountedfor" water reports, and greater emphasis on incorporating water conservation into long-term water demand projections.
Georgia law also requires the use of ultra-low flow plumbing fixtures (1.6 gpm toilets, 2.5 gpm shower heads and 2.0 gpm faucets) for all new construction. Local governments must adopt and enforce these requirements in order to remain eligible for State and Federal grants or loans for water supply and wastewater projects.
During times of emergency, the EPD Director is authorized to issue orders to protect the quantity and safety of water supplies. In general, municipal water shortage plans follow a phased reduction of water use based on the implementation of restrictions on non-essential water uses such as lawn watering, and so forth. These demand reduction measures typically include odd/even and/or time of day restrictions and progress from voluntary to mandatory with appropriate enforcement procedures. Severe shortages may result in total restriction on all nonessential water use, cut-backs to manufacturing and commercial facilities, and eventual rationing if the shortage becomes critical enough to threaten basic service for human health and sanitation. Water conservation efforts are extremely important to

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-19

Georgia's future particularly in the north and central regions of the State.
Ground and Surface Drinking Water Supplies Similar to groundwater, Georgia's surface water sources provide raw water of excellent quality for drinking water supplies. During 2016-2017, no surface water supply system reported an outbreak of waterborne disease. Since the Federal and State Surface Water Treatment Regulations (SWTR) went into effect on June 29, 1993, approximately 140 surface water plants around the state have taken steps to optimize their treatment processes not only to meet the current SWTRs tougher disinfection and turbidity treatment technique requirements, but also to meet more stringent future drinking water regulations. The most recent regulations mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency include the control of disinfection byproducts and the microbial contaminants in drinking water.
The purpose of the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and the Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule is to improve public health protection through the control of microbial contaminants, particularly Cryptosporidium (including Giardia and viruses) for those public water systems that use surface water or ground water under the direct influence of surface water. The purpose of the new Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 DBPR) is to improve public health protection by reducing exposure to disinfection by products in drinking water (total trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids). Stage 1 DBPR applies to all sizes of community and non-transient and non-community water systems that add a disinfectant to the drinking water during any part of the treatment process and transient non-community water systems that use chlorine dioxide. During 2016-2017, the majority (94%) of all drinking water violations involved failure to submit a sample, failure to report test results, or failure to provide an annual Consumer Confidence Report. These administrative violations do not mean there were any problems with the quality of the drinking water being served. Most violations were brief in duration and quickly resolved. Drinking water facilities' information can be reviewed on

drinking

water

watch

at:

http://gadrinkingwater.net.

LT2 and Stage 2 Surface Water Treatment Amendments to the SDWA in 1996 require EPA to develop rules to balance the risks between microbial pathogens and disinfection byproducts (DBPs). The Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, promulgated in December 1998, were the first phase in a rulemaking strategy required by Congress as part of the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act.

The Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule builds upon earlier rules to address higher risk public water systems for protection measures beyond those required for existing regulations.

The Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and the Stage 2 Disinfection Byproduct Rule are the second phase of rules required by Congress. These rules strengthen protection against microbial contaminants, especially Cryptosporidium, and at the same time, reduce potential health risks of DBPs. These two new regulations went into effect in December 2005. EPD is prepared to fully implement these regulations in Georgia, including the "early Implementation" provisions of the regulations.

The purpose of Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR) is to reduce illness linked with the contaminant Cryptosporidium and other pathogenic microorganisms in drinking water. The LT2ESWTR will supplement existing regulations by targeting additional Cryptosporidium treatment requirements to higher risk systems. This rule also contains provisions to reduce risks from uncovered finished water reservoirs and provisions to ensure that systems maintain microbial protection when they take steps to decrease the formation of disinfection byproducts that result from chemical water treatment.

Current regulations require filtered water systems to reduce source water

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-20

Cryptosporidium levels by 2-log (99 percent). Recent data on Cryptosporidium infectivity and occurrence indicate that this treatment requirement is sufficient for most systems, but additional treatment is necessary for certain higher risk systems. These higher risk systems include filtered water systems with high levels of Cryptosporidium in their water sources and all unfiltered water systems, which do not treat for Cryptosporidium. Based on the initial bin classifications for Cryptosporidium, there are no surface water sources in Georgia that require additional treatment to comply with the LT2ESWTR.
The LT2ESWTR is being promulgated simultaneously with the Stage 2 Disinfection Byproduct Rule to address concerns about risk tradeoffs between pathogens and DBPs.
The Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts Rule will reduce potential cancer and reproductive and developmental health risks from disinfection byproducts (DBPs) in drinking water, which form when disinfectants are used to control microbial pathogens. Over 260 million individuals are exposed to DBPs.
This Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts Rule strengthens public health protection for customers by tightening compliance monitoring requirements for two groups of DBPs, trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (HAA5). The rule targets systems with the greatest risk and builds incrementally on existing rules. This regulation will reduce DBP exposure and related potential health risks and provide more equitable public health protection.
Public Water System Supervision Program This program is designed to ensure that Georgia residents, served by public water systems, are provided high quality and safe drinking water. Its legal basis is the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Act and Rules. For the reporting period ending June 30, 2017, the State of Georgia had approximately 2,458 active public water systems serving a population over 10.6 million people. Based on the latest census figures, this means 87% of the citizens get their drinking water from one of the regulated public water systems in the

State. The rest obtain water from their privately owned water sources.

Approximately 75% provide water to residential customers. These systems are referred to as community water systems and serve at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serve at least 25 yearround residents daily. Approximately one-eighth of the community water systems are from surface water supplies (248 out of the total 1,793 community water systems); the remaining 86% (1545CWSs) are served by groundwater sources.

In addition, there are 183 non-transient noncommunity water systems that regularly serve at least 25 of the same persons over 6 months per year. Examples of these systems are hospitals, day care centers, major shopping centers, children's homes, institutions, factories, office and industrial parks, schools, and so forth.

Furthermore, there are 465 transient noncommunity water systems that do not regularly serve at least 25 of the same persons over six months per year, such as restaurants, highway rest areas, campgrounds, roadside stops, and hotels. With a few exceptions, practically all of the non-transient non-community water systems and the transient non-community water systems use groundwater sources for their drinking water needs. All public water systems are issued a Permit to Operate a Public Water System, in accordance with the Georgia Safe Drinking Water Act and Rules.

These permits set forth operational requirements

for wells, surface water treatment plants and

distribution systems for communities, industries,

trailer parks, hotels, restaurants and other public

water system owners. Georgia's community and

non-transient, non-community public water

systems are currently monitored for 92

contaminants. Georgia closely follows the

Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and

implements the National Primary and Secondary

Drinking Water Standards, involving about 92

contaminants (turbidity, 8 microbial or indicator

organisms, 20 inorganic, 60 organic, 4

radiological

contaminants).

Maximum

Contaminant Levels (MCLs) are set for 83

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-21

contaminants, treatment technique requirements are established for 9 contaminants to protect public health, and secondary standards for 15 contaminants are issued to ensure aesthetic quality.
The program is funded from State and Federal appropriations and grants respectively on a year-to-year basis and a Drinking Water Laboratory and Related Services Fee (DWLRSF), which has been in effect since July 1992. The DWLRSF was necessary to provide the resources to implement testing for (a) lead and copper and (b) Phase II and V Synthetic Organic and Inorganic Chemicals in public water systems. Water system owners who contract with the EPD for this testing are billed annually based on the system population. Participation in the DWLRSF is voluntary to the extent that a system may elect to use a public or certified commercial laboratory to analyze their required samples. The DWLRSF was expanded in July 2009 to incorporate bacteriological testing, for an additional fee, and updated in 2016 to a Terms and Conditions Agreement.
Testing for lead and copper in accordance with the Federal Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) began on January 1, 1992. On January 12, 2000 EPA published minor revisions to the existing 1991 Lead and Copper Rule. It was called Lead and Copper Minor Rule Revision (LCRMR). The purpose of this revision was to eliminate unnecessary requirements, streamline and reduce burden and also to promote consistent implementation. All systems that are required to monitor for lead and copper are initially required to perform two, six-month consecutive rounds of lead and copper monitoring starting from JanuaryDecember of the required year, all 19 large systems are still required to maintain a corrosion control plan and have continued to do so.
In 2017, no public water systems had a treatment technique violation for failure to take the required actions for exceeding the action level for lead (i.e., over 10% of samples exceeded 15 ppb lead) and/or copper (i.e., over 10% of samples exceed 1,300 ppb copper).

Monitoring for the 16 inorganic chemicals, 55 volatile organic chemicals and 43 synthetic organic chemicals, pesticides, herbicides and polychlorinated biphenyls is still required for systems that are considered a public water system. New systems are still required to initiate baseline monitoring (quarterly for all organic monitoring and surface water nitrate monitoring, annual for surface water inorganic monitoring and once every three years for groundwater inorganic monitoring). In 2017 there were no systems that had results over the MCL for individual volatile organic contaminants.
A majority of Georgia's water systems, which are currently contracted with the State (participating in DWLRSF) have been issued monitoring waivers for SOCs and therefore are not required to monitor for those contaminants. New sources however, for existing systems are still required to establish base line monitoring for SOCs. After establishing the four quarters baseline monitoring they will be eligible for a waiver.
In order to reduce the Federal chemical monitoring requirements, EPD conducts vulnerability studies for all public water sources. The studies are conducted to assist EPD with the issuance of chemical monitoring waivers to public water systems. Water sources at low risk to contamination are issued waivers from the chemical monitoring requirements as specified by the Federal Phase II/Phase V regulations. To date, the EPD has issued statewide monitoring waivers for asbestos, cyanide, dioxin and most synthetic organic compounds. EPD, however, does continue to monitor a representative number of water systems deemed to be of high vulnerability to contamination for asbestos, cyanide, dioxin and all waived synthetic organic compounds to obtain the chemical data needed to issue and maintain these state-wide waivers. The issuance of waivers from monitoring for the above chemical parameters has saved Georgia's public water systems millions of dollars in monitoring costs over the duration of the waiver terms.
In addition, EPD also prepared vulnerability studies for individual water sources. These studies included the preparation of countywide

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-22

and site specific maps of the area immediately surrounding the water source, and a report about the water source. The maps included water wells, potential pollution sources around the wells, cultural information such as roads, and bodies of water. As of December 31, 2017, the EPD had prepared site specific maps for approximately 723 privately owned ground water public water systems. Additional maps have not been completed since the information is included in the SWAP documents.
USEPA approved Georgia's Source Water Assessment and Protection Implementation Plan on May 1, 2000. The EPD completed initial

surface water source water assessments (SWAPs) in 2003. Initial groundwater SWAPs were completed for community and nontransient non-community systems in 2005 and for transient non-community systems in 2006. SWAPs for privately-owned groundwater systems are updated every 10 years. During the current reporting period, for the calendar years of 2016 and 2017, the following numbers of SWAPs were completed for each type of privately-owned groundwater system: 260 community, 38 non-transient non-community, and 120 transient non-community.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

8-23

CHAPTER 9
Major Issues and
Challenges
Comprehensive State and Regional Water Planning Georgia is one of the fastest growing states in the nation. Between 2000 and 2010, Georgia gained 1.5 million new residents, ranking 4th nationally. The increasing population places considerable demands on Georgia's ground and surface water resources in terms of water supply, water quality, and assimilative capacity.
In 2004 the Georgia General Assembly passed the "Comprehensive State-wide Water Management Planning Act", O.C.G.A. 12-5522, which called for the development of a statewide water management plan. Work was completed on the Statewide Water Plan and the plan was approved by the General Assembly and Governor Perdue in February 2008. Regional Water Councils and the Metro District were charged with the responsibility of developing water plans to provide a roadmap for sustainable use of Georgia's water resources. The Councils submitted initial recommended plans to the GAEPD in May 2011. The plans were publicly noticed and comments received were thoroughly reviewed. Appropriate revisions were made to the initial plans and final recommended regional water plans were submitted to the GAEPD in September 2011. On November 15, 2011, by action of Director Barnes, the GAEPD officially adopted all ten Regional Water Plans.
The regional water plans are not themselves an end. The plans present solutions identified by a cross-section of regional leaders, drawing on regional knowledge and priorities. The plans are based on consistent, statewide forecasts of needs and reflect the best available information on the capacities of Georgia's waters. The tools used to assess the capacities have been tested and refined, and will be further refined as the information for planning and management is improved. The process and results of regional planning, taken together, provide solid footing for plan implementation and the five-year review and revision required by the State Water

Plan. Water users, water providers, local governments, state agencies, and elected leaders all have an important role in actions to ensure that Georgia's waters are sustainably managed to support the state's economy, protect public health and natural systems, and enhance the quality of life for all citizens.
Nonpoint Source Pollution The pollution impact on Georgia streams has radically shifted over the last several decades. Streams are no longer dominated by untreated or partially treated sewage discharges that resulted in little or no oxygen and little or no aquatic life. The sewage is now treated, oxygen levels have returned and fish have followed.
However, another source of pollution affecting Georgia streams is nonpoint sources that include mud, litter, bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, metals, oils, detergents and a variety of other pollutants being washed into rivers and lakes by stormwater. Even stormwater runoff itself, if rate and volume is uncontrolled, can be extremely detrimental to aquatic habitat and hydrological systems.
Nonpoint source pollution must be reduced and controlled to fully protect Georgia's streams. In addition to structural pollution controls, the use of nonstructural techniques should be significantly expanded to minimize nonpoint source pollution. Some controls that should be considered include: green infrastructure, appropriate building densities, low impact development, buffer zones, erosion and sedimentation controls, street cleaning and limitations on pesticide and fertilizer usage. Some of these best management practices can be implemented through local government planning and zoning.
Toxic Substances The reduction of toxic substances in rivers, lakes, sediment, and fish tissue is extremely important in protecting both human health and aquatic life.
The sources of toxic substances are widespread. Stormwater runoff may contain metals or toxic organic chemicals, such as pesticides (chlordane, DDE) or PCBs. Even though the production and use of PCB and chlordane is outlawed, the chemicals still

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

9-1

persist in the environment as a result of previous use. One of the primary sources of mercury detected in fish tissue in Georgia and other states may be from atmospheric deposition. Some municipal and industrial treated wastewaters may contain concentrations of metals coming from plumbing (lead, copper, zinc) or industrial processes.
The concern over toxic substances is twofold. First, aquatic life is very sensitive to metals and small concentrations of metals can cause impairment. Fortunately, metals at low concentrations are not harmful to humans. Second, the contrary is true for carcinogenic organic chemicals. Concentrations of these chemicals may accumulate in fish flesh without damage to the fish but may increase a person's cancer risk if the fish are eaten regularly.
The most effective method to reduce the release of toxic substances into rivers is pollution prevention which consists primarily of eliminating or reducing the use of toxic substances, or at least reducing the exposure of toxic materials to drinking water, wastewater and stormwater. Although, it is very expensive and difficult to reduce low concentrations of toxic substances in wastewaters by treatment technologies, it is virtually impossible to treat large quantities of stormwater for toxic substance reductions. Therefore, toxic substances must be controlled at the source.
Nutrients Nutrients serve a very important role in our environment. They provide the essential building blocks necessary for growth and development of healthy aquatic ecosystems. However, if not properly managed, nutrients in excessive amounts can have detrimental effects on human health and the environment, creating such water quality problems as excessive growth of macrophytes and phytoplankton, harmful algal blooms, dissolved oxygen depletion, and an imbalance of flora and fauna. In Georgia, site specific nutrient criteria have been adopted for several major lakes and their tributaries. Some of these lakes are currently listed for chlorophyll a, which is the primary biological indicator in lakes for nutrient overenrichment. TMDLs, based on watershed modeling, have been completed or are in development to address the nutrient

issues for these lakes. Currently, the GAEPD is in the process of collecting the necessary data and information for use in developing nutrient standards for rivers, streams and other waterbodies in Georgia. Determining the relationship of nutrient levels and biological response is necessary in order to develop appropriate nutrient criteria.
Additionally, GAEPD, US EPA, and SC DHEC collaborated on a report intended to provide technical support in developing and establishing numeric water quality criteria under the Clean Water Act to support the applicable designated uses in Georgia and South Carolina estuaries from the effects of excess nitrogen and phosphorus. The report entitled "An Approach to Develop Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Georgia and South Carolina Estuaries" was finalized in 2015. Estuaries along Georgia and South Carolina's coasts exhibit unique combinations of characteristics and a great deal of diversity among systems so the development of a specifically-designed approach was necessary for these important areas.
The GAEPD has forged a partnership with EPA, UGA, and Tetra Tech to develop and calibrate two water quality models (EFDC and FVCOM) to will be used to help derive numeric nutrient criteria and possibly dissolved oxygen criteria for Georgia's estuaries. In 2017, several intensive surveys were conducted throughout the Altamaha, Sapelo and Doboy estuaries. Data collected including continuous dissolved oxygen, temperature, and conductivity measurements; monthly water sampling for nutrients and chlorophyll a; quarterly SOD measurements; and quarterly dissolved organic carbon measurements. This data will be utilized to characterize marsh loadings, an important contributor to Georgia's estuaries, and in the calibration of the models. After calibration and validation, FVCOM can be used to quantify the effects of changes in land use and various climate scenarios on water quality. UGA's validated FVCOM model can then be utilized in conjunction with Tetra Tech's EFDC model of the Altamaha Sound to help develop dissolved oxygen and numeric nutrient criteria for this estuary system.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

9-2

Public Involvement It is clear that local governments and industries, even with well funded efforts, cannot fully address the challenges of nonpoint source pollution control, nutrients, and toxic substances. Citizens must individually and collectively be part of the solution to these challenges.
The main focus is to achieve full public acceptance of the fact that what we do on the land has a direct impact on water quality. Human activities that contribute to nonpoint source pollution, nutrients, and toxics, include adding more pavement and other impervious surfaces, littering, driving cars that drip oil and antifreeze, applying fertilizers and pesticides. If streams and lakes are to be pollutant free, then some of the everyday human activities must be modified.
The GAEPD will be emphasizing public involvement; not only in decision-making, but also in direct programs of stream improvement. This work includes education through Georgia Project WET (Water Education for Teachers) and Adopt-A-Stream programs.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

9-3

APPENDIX A
WATERS ASSESSED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGNATED USES

The attached tables present Georgia's 2018 Integrated 305(b)/303(d) List of Waters. EPD issued a public notice on February 20, 2017 soliciting data from any outside sources to be included in the assessment of water quality data for the 2018 305(b)/303(d) List. All available data, including that which was collected by the Department of Natural Resources, were considered and determinations were made for compliance with designated uses. Information as to the specific data sources and an explanation for the various codes used with the 2018 listing assessment are included in the "Data Source Code/Key for Abbreviations" Table that follows this narrative.
Collected data and information were compared against applicable water quality standards to make listing assessment decisions. Assessed waters were placed into one or more of the five categories as described below:
Category 1 Data indicate that waters are meeting their designated use(s).
Category 2 A water body has more than one designated use and data indicate that at least one designated use is being met, but there is insufficient evidence to determine that all uses are being met.
Category 3 There were insufficient data or other information to make a determination as to whether or not the designated use(s) is being met.
Category 4a Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met, but TMDL(s) have been completed for the parameter(s) that are causing a water not to meet its use(s).
Category 4b - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met, but there are actions in place (other than a TMDL) that are predicted to lead to compliance with water quality standards.
Category 4c - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met, but a pollutant does not cause the impairment.
Category 5 - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met and TMDL(s) need to be completed for one or more pollutants.
Category 5R Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met; however, TMDL development is deferred while an alternative restoration plan is pursued. If the alternative restoration plan is not successful, then the water will be placed back in Category 5 and a TMDL will be developed.
In the 5-part categorization method, waters that are assessed as "not supporting" their uses were either placed in Category 4a, 4b, 4c, 5 or 5R. The federally mandated 303(d) list is made up of those waters in Category 5 (including Category 5R). Waters that are assessed as "supporting" their uses were placed in Category 1. Waters for which there were insufficient data to make a use assessment were placed in Category 2 or 3.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-1

Georgia's Integrated List of Waters is organized by water type (streams, lakes, coastal streams, sounds/harbors, and coastal beaches). Each water type is organized by river basin. Water bodies within a river basin are alphabetized. Information provided in the List of Waters includes a description of the water's location, data source, designated water use classification, use assessment, criterion violated, potential cause, estimates of extent affected and the assessment category (1-5). For waters within category 5, an entry in the priority column indicates the year by which a TMDL will be drafted for the pollutant of concern. A "Notes" column has been included to provide additional information for some water bodies such listing any TMDLs have been completed. Finally, each listed water has a unique Reach ID assigned to it. The Reach ID is a thirteen digit code made up of the letters "GAR" followed by the Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC 10) in which the waterbody falls followed by two sequential digits (i.e. 01, 02, 03).

In providing the information for the evaluated causes as listed in the tables on the following pages, many potential sources which may have caused the violation of the indicated criterion were considered. These sources are identified as the most likely candidates for affecting a particular stream segment. One potential source may be largely responsible for the criterion violated or the impact may be the result of a combination of sources.

Georgia contains a vast number of waterbodies. While EPD has assessed a large number of these waters, there are many waters (especially smaller creeks and lakes) that have not been assessed due to a lack of data. Waters that do not appear in the 305(b)/303(d) list of waters are to be considered to be in Category 3 (no data).

EPD developed a listing assessment methodology to use in the assessment of State waters. This methodology describes the different types of data that EPD evaluates and explains how the evaluation of the data results in water being placed in one or more of the 5 categories described above.

Georgia's 2018 305(b)/303(d) Listing Assessment Methodology

The outline below provides the listing assessment methodology used for the solicitation, review, consideration, and assessment of data for Georgia's 2018 305(b)/303(d) List of Waters. Each biennial listing cycle, the listing assessment methodology is updated to include needed changes and to reflect the most current Listing Guidance provided by the USEPA. Each listing cycle brings new challenges in the review and assessment of data. The information that follows is intended as a guide. The methodology does not cover all possible scenarios, so best professional judgment is used along with the listing assessment methodology, as needed. A best professional judgment approach is also used where insufficient information or data were available to making listing decisions.

I.

Data Solicitation

On February 20, 2017, a letter was sent by postal mail or electronic mail to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and individuals and/or organizations on the mailing list that is maintained by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) for notifying interested parties regarding proposed changes to EPD's Rules. This letter stated that the EPD was gathering water quality data and information to be used in the development of Georgia's draft 2018 305(b)/303(d) List of Waters. Any comments, data, or other information were requested to be submitted to EPD by June 30, 2017. The letter included a link to a document on EPD's website that provides information as to the requirements for the submission and acceptance of water quality data for EPD's use in 305(b)/303(d) listing

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-2

assessments. A copy of the notification letter was also included on EPD's 305(b)/303(d) webpage.

II.

Data Acceptability Requirements

In accordance with 40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(4), EPD is to evaluate all existing and readily available water quality data when assessing waters for the 305(b)/303(d) list of waters. However, water quality data can vary in both quality and quantity. Data used for assessing waters can be placed into 3 Tiers based upon its quantity and quality.

Tier 1 data is high in both quality and quantity and is used for assessing whether a waterbody is meeting its designated uses or not. In regards to data quality, this data will have been collected and analyzed in accordance with the Quality Control/Quality Assurance requirements in the Georgia Environmental Protection Division's Quality Assurance Manual and Quality Assurance Project Plan. In the case of data collected by our sister agencies (Wildlife Resources Division, Coastal Resources Division, and USGS), the data will have been collected in accordance with their quality assurance/quality control guidelines. In the case of data collected by third parties, the data would have been collected in accordance with an EPD approved Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan (SQAP) as described in Chapter 391-3-6-.03(13) of Georgia Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control. As for data quantity, Tier 1 data will meet or exceed the "preferred minimum data set" provided in Section VII below.
Tier 2 data is still of high quality (it meets the same quality standards as Tier 1 data), but does not meet the "preferred minimum data set." Tier 2 data are evaluated closely to determine whether the data quantity is sufficient to be used to assess the condition of the waterbody (i.e. determine if the designated use is being met or not) or if the waterbody needs to be placed in Category 3 (assessment pending) until additional data are collected. EPD needs to consider a number of factors when making this determination. These includes evaluating: how close the data set is to the preferred minimum set; the reason the data set did not meet the preferred minimum (i.e. did the stream dry up part of the year making sampling impossible some months); the seasonality of the data with regards to the parameter being assessed; the data values in relation to the water quality criteria for that parameter; and results of other data including historical data at the site.
Tier 3 data is data that does not meet data quality requirements described under Tier 1. This data is not used for 305(b)/303(d) listing purposes, but may be used for screening purposes to help EPD select sites for future sampling. Data that is collected by third parties that was not collected under an approved SQAP and who do not show that their data was collected and analyzed in such a manner that it would have received SQAP approval fall into Tier 3. In addition, when EPD, USGS or other agencies collect data and these data do not meet their respective quality guidelines, then these data are not used for listing purposes.
III. Data Assessment Period
All readily available data and information for the calendar years 2015-2017 were considered in development of Georgia's 2018 305(b)/303(d) List of Waters. For data collected in 2017, typically only data from January thru June are available for assessment. Currently, Georgia has around 2,500 waterbodies on its 305(b)/303(d) list of waters. It is not possible to obtain new data on all of these waters every two years. In cases where no new data has been collected between 2015 and 2017, EPD continues to use the older available data for the

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-3

waterbodies to make their assessments. In addition, data from 2012 through 2014 are considered along with the 2015 through 2017 data, when assessing a waterbody, if the data set is continuous. For instance, if data were collected every year from 2012-2017, then the data from all these years are used in the assessment. On the other hand, if data was collected in 2012, but not again until 2016, then only the 2016 data are used in the assessment, since conditions may have changed in the intervening years. There are instances where EPD may choose not to use all years of consecutive data in the assessment of a waterbody. For example, where a local government or group has conducted specific water quality improvement efforts in the watershed of a waterbody and the data collected before and after the improvement projects provide a clear indication that the project has succeeded in improving water quality, EPD may choose only to use data collected after implementation of the water quality improvements. It is the responsibility of the local government or group to submit specific documentation to EPD including a description of the improvement project, its location, the date of implementation, along with the water quality data supporting the assertion that the project has been successful.

IV. Data Collection and Areas of Focus

Section 305b of the Clean Water Act requires States to assess the quality of their waters. To meet this goal, Georgia collects water quality data for a number of physical/chemical parameters such as dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, bacteria, metals, pesticides, etc. Biological data is also collected at some sites (fish or macroinvertebrates) to assess the health of the aquatic community. Fish tissue data is collected at some sites to enable the State to detect concentrations of toxic chemicals in fish that may be harmful to consumers and guide appropriate future actions to protect public health and the environment. The goal of the State's monitoring program is to collect data that accurately represents the condition of the waterbody that can vary throughout the year. The State's monitoring program is designed to collect data in different seasons to capture the impact of seasonality on the data. In addition, water quality samples are collected in both wet and dry weather, with the exception that samples are not taken if conditions are dangerous to personnel or if there is no visible water flow in a stream to be sampled.

EPD used data collected from across the State to develop its 2018 305(b)/303(d) list of waters. EPD currently has monitoring staff located in four offices across the State (Atlanta, Cartersville, Brunswick and Tifton). By spreading its monitoring staff out in different regions of the State, EPD is better able to monitor waters throughout the State each year. In addition, EPD receives data from other GA DNR Divisions such as Georgia's Wildlife Resources Division and Georgia's Coastal Resources Division. EPD also accepts data from outside groups. This data may have been taken from anywhere in the State. Finally, EPD may conduct special projects and the data from these special projects can also be used for assessment purposes.

V.

Data Rounding

When assessing State waters, EPD compares water quality data with their respective water quality criteria. Water quality data for a given parameter will be rounded to the same number of significant digits as the criterion for that parameter before the two are compared for the purpose of making listing determinations. Should it be necessary to perform mathematical operations with the data before comparison with the appropriate criterion (such as the calculation of an average of a number of data points), EPD will keep extra decimal places throughout the calculations and then round to the appropriate number of decimal places at the end. This practice prevents the propagation of rounding errors throughout the calculation.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-4

VI. Assessment of Waters Using the 5-Part Categorization System
The USEPA has strongly encouraged States to move to a five-part categorization of their waters. EPD first adopted the five-part categorization system with the 2008 305(b)/303(d) report. Assessed waters are placed into one or more of five categories as described below:
Category 1 Data indicate that waters are meeting their designated use(s). Category 2 A waterbody has more than one designated use and data indicate that at least one designated use is being met, but there is insufficient evidence to determine whether all uses are being met. Category 3 There is insufficient data/information to make a determination as to whether or not the designated use(s) is being met. Category 4a Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met, but a TMDL(s) has been completed for the parameter(s) that is causing a waterbody not to meet its use(s). Category 4b - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met, but there are actions in place (other than a TMDL) that are predicted to lead to compliance with water quality standards. Category 4c - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met, but the impairment is not caused by a pollutant. Category 5 - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met and TMDL(s) need to be completed for one or more pollutants. Category 5R (Category 5 Alt) - Data indicate that at least one designated use is not being met; however, TMDL development is deferred while an alternative restoration plan is pursued. If the alternative restoration plan is not successful, then the water will be placed back in Category 5 and a TMDL will be developed.
A waterbody will be assessed as supporting its designated use (Category 1); not supporting its use (Category 4 or 5); or use assessment pending (Category 2 or 3). It is possible for a waterbody to be in category 4 and 5 at the same time if it is impaired by more than one pollutant. For instance, if a waterbody were impaired for fecal coliform bacteria and dissolved oxygen and a TMDL had been completed only for dissolved oxygen, then the waterbody will be placed in category 4a for dissolved oxygen and category 5 for fecal coliform bacteria.
VII. Assessment Methodology for Making Use Support Decisions (Listing/Delisting Strategies)
The following provides an outline of the assessment methodology employed during the 2018 Listing Cycle. The conditions under the header "listing" describe what data are needed to place a waterbody on the "not supporting" list for a specific parameter. The conditions under the header "delisting" describe what data are needed to remove a specific parameter from the "not supporting" list. Generally, the data required to "delist" a parameter are the same as would be required to assess a waterbody as "supporting" its use for the parameter in question. The methodology below also describes a number of situations that would result in a waterbody being placed in Category 3 "assessment pending."
A "preferred minimum data set" is provided for a number of the parameters below. If the quantity of data available is less than the "preferred minimum set," EPD uses best professional judgment to determine if there are sufficient data available to make an assessment of use support or if the waterbody should be placed in Category 3 until more data are collected. Best professional judgment is also used in cases where data are determined to be suspect.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-5

A. Fecal Coliform Bacteria: Preferred minimum data set 4 geometric means (2 collected in winter months and 2 in summer months). Each geometric mean consisted of at least 3 samples collected in a 30-day period.
1. Listing
a. One year of available data (Geometric Mean):
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting their use designation if more than 10% of the geometric means exceed the water quality criteria.
b. Multiple consecutive years of available data (Geometric Mean):
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if (a) more than 10% of the geometric means exceed the water quality criteria or (b) if 10% of the geometric means exceed the water quality criteria and one or more winter maximum violations occurred in the 30 day data set(s) where the geometric mean meet the water quality criteria.
c. Single Sample Data: In the absence of sufficient data in a data set to calculate a geometric mean, the USEPA's Listing Guidance is used to assess bacterial data as described below. EPD uses its best professional judgment when determining whether to use the single sample data to make a use assessment or to place the waterbody in Category 3 until sufficient data can be collected for use determination. Some factors in making this determination include the size of the data set, the time of year samples were collected, the consistency of the data (i.e. were most of the samples well over the single sample criteria), etc. If it is determined that the single sample data are sufficient for making a use determination:
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if more than 10% of the single samples exceed the USEPA's recommended review criteria for bacteria of 400/100 mL during the months of May-October, and 4,000/100 mL during the months of November-April with the exception of waters classified as "Recreation" where the review criteria are 400/100 mL JanuaryDecember.
d. Waters within "shellfish growing areas": Georgia's Coastal Resources Division (CRD) designates certain waters of the State as being shellfish growing areas. CRD designates shellfish harvesting areas within the growing areas. CRD monitors these waters for fecal coliform contamination in accordance with FDA requirements. A geometric mean using the most recent 30 data points is calculated and this mean is compared against FDA's criterion of 14 MPN/100 mL. In addition, the 90th percentile of the 30 samples is calculated and compared with FDA's criteria of 43 MPN/100 mL for a five-tube decimal dilution test; 49 MPN/100 mL for a three-tube decimal dilution test or 31 CFU/100 mL for a MF (mTEC) test.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-6

1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting their designated use if the geometric mean of the most recent 30 samples is greater than 14/100 mL MPN or if the 90th percentile exceeds the values provided above based upon the testing method used.
2. Delisting
a. One year of available data:
1. Waters are eligible for delisting for fecal coliform if 10% or less of the geometric means exceed the water quality criteria. If fewer than 4 geometric means are available for assessment, EPD may consider a waterbody eligible for delisting if there are at least two summer geometric means available for assessment and they comply with the water quality criteria.
b. Multiple consecutive years of available data:
1. Waters are eligible for delisting for fecal coliform bacteria if 10% or fewer of the geometric means exceed the water quality criteria.
c. Single Sample Data: Single sample data are typically not used for delisting purposes as the preferred data set would include the ability to calculate geometric means. However, EPD may consider using single sample data for delisting using best professional judgment. Some factors to be taken into consideration are the size of the data set, the time of year samples were taken and/or whether the original "not supporting" designation was based on single sample data or geometric means. If it is determined that the single sample data are sufficient for making a use determination:
1. Waterbodies are eligible for delisting for fecal coliform if 10% or fewer of the single samples exceed the USEPA's recommended review criteria for bacteria of 400/100 mL during the months of MayOctober, and 4,000/100 mL during the months of November-April with the exception of waters classified as "Recreation" where the review criteria are 400/100 mL January-December.
d. Waters within "shellfish growing areas"
1. Waters are eligible for delisting for fecal coliform bacteria if the geometric mean of the last 30 data points is less than or equal to 14 MPN/100 mL and the 90th percentile of the last 30 data points does not exceed the values provided above based upon the testing method used.
B. Enterococci Georgia has adopted new bacteria criteria for waters with a designated use of "Recreation". Enterococci is the bacterial indicator species used for coastal waters. The criteria consist of both a geometric mean and a statistical threshold value (STV). Depending upon how frequently bacteria data are collected, EPD uses the geometric mean, STV, or both to assess water quality. Coastal beaches are sampled at different frequencies depending upon how many people use them for recreation and their proximity to potential

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-7

pollution sources. Beaches are sampled either weekly (year-round); monthly (from April to October) or quarterly (if they are under a permanent advisory). Preferred minimum data set 10 geometric means for coastal waters sampled weekly under the BEACH Act and 10 months of data for those sampled monthly under the BEACH ACT.
1. Listing
a. Monthly Samples: Since only 1 sample is taken per month, there is not enough data available to calculate a meaningful geometric mean. Instead, the results of each monthly sample are compared with the STV.
1. If more than 10% of the monthly data exceed the STV of 130 CFU/100 mL, a beach is assessed as not supporting its use designation.
b. Weekly Samples: A geometric mean is calculated for each calendar month (if there were at least 3 samples taken during the calendar month). Each geometric mean is compared with the criteria. In addition, it is determined how many calendar months had data that exceeded the STV.
1. Beaches are determined not to be supporting their designated use if more than 10% of the geometric means exceed the criterion of 35 CFU/100 mL and/or if more than 10% of the monthly data sets have values that exceed the STV of 130 CFU/100 mL.
c. Mixture of Monthly and Weekly Samples
1. If during the last five years, data are collected monthly some years and weekly other years, then EPD assesses each data type separately as described above. If both the monthly and weekly data types indicate that a beach is not in compliance with the Enterococci criterion as described above, then the beach is assessed as not supporting its use. If the monthly and weekly data types support different listing decisions, then EPD uses its best professional judgment in making the listing determination. Generally, more weight is placed on the weekly data and on the most recent data set.
d. Quarterly Samples: Beaches under a permanent beach advisory are only sampled quarterly. Beaches under a permanent beach advisory are assessed not supporting their use designation.
2. Delisting
a. Monthly Samples: Since only 1 sample is taken per month, there is not enough data available to calculate a meaningful geometric mean. Instead, the results of each monthly sample are compared with the STV.
1. If 10% or less of the monthly data exceed the STV of 130 CFU/100 mL, a beach is assessed as supporting its use designation.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-8

b. Weekly Samples: A geometric mean is calculated for each calendar month (if there were at least 3 samples taken during the calendar month). Each geometric mean is compared with the criteria. In addition, it is determined how many calendar months had data that exceeded the STV.
1. If 10% or less of the geometric means exceed the criterion of 35 CFU/100 mL and if 10% or less of the monthly data sets have values that exceed the STV, the beach is eligible for delisting.
c. Mixture of Monthly and Weekly Samples
1. If during the last five years, data are collected monthly some years and weekly other years, then EPD assesses each data type separately as described above. If both the monthly and weekly data types indicate that a beach is in compliance with the Enterococci criteria as described above, then the beach is eligible for delisting.
d. Quarterly Samples: Beaches under a permanent beach advisory are not eligible for delisting.
3. Swimming Advisories -
a. Beach swimming advisories are issued when either the most recent Enterococci data exceeds the Beach Action Value (BAV) of 70 CFU/100 mL.
b. The swimming advisory is lifted when new data shows the Enterococci concentration is less than 70 CFU/100 mL.
C. E. Coli Georgia has adopted new bacteria criteria for waters with a designated use of "Recreation". E. coli is the bacterial indicator species used for freshwater. The criteria consist of both a geometric mean and a statistical threshold value (STV). Depending upon how frequently bacteria data are collected, EPD uses the geometric mean, STV, or both to assess water quality. EPD typically measures E. coli in lakes monthly (April October). These samples are taken offshore (not at a beach). E coli is typically sampled quarterly in streams (each quarter four samples are collected in a 30-day period). The Georgia Parks, Recreation and Historic Sites Division collects 5 samples of E. coli in April/May of each year at the public beaches in their Parks. Preferred minimum data set for data collected as geometric means: 4 geometric means. Each geometric mean is to consist of at least 3 samples collected in a 30-day period. Preferred minimum data set for data collected monthly: 10 monthly samples.
1. Listing
a. Monthly Samples: Since only 1 sample is taken per month, there is not enough data available to calculate a meaningful geometric mean. Instead, the results of each monthly sample are compared with the STV.
1. If more than 10% of the monthly data exceed the STV of 410 CFU/100 mL, a water is assessed as not supporting its use designation.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-9

b. Data collected for Geometric Means: A geometric mean is calculated for each 30 day sampling period (if there were at least 3 samples taken). Each geometric mean is compared with the criteria. In addition, it is determined how many 30-day sampling periods had data that exceeded the STV.
1. Waters are determined not to be supporting their designated use if more than 10% of the geometric means exceed the criterion of 126 CFU/100 mL and/or if more than 10% of the 30-day sampling periods have values that exceed the STV of 410 CFU/100 mL.
c. Mixture monthly and Geometric Mean Data
1. If during the last five years, some years have geometric means available and other years only have monthly data available, then EPD assesses each data type separately as described above. Waters are determined not to be supporting their designated use if more than 10% of the geometric means exceed the criterion of 126 CFU/100 mL and/or if more than 10% of the 30-day sampling periods have values that exceed the STV of 410 CFU/100 mL.
2. Delisting
a. Monthly Samples: Since only 1 sample is taken per month, there is not enough data available to calculate a meaningful geometric mean. Instead, the results of each monthly sample are compared with the STV.
1. If 10% or less of the monthly data exceed the STV of 410 CFU/100 mL, a water is assessed as supporting its use designation.
b. Data collected for Geometric Means: A geometric mean is calculated for each 30 day sampling period (if there were at least 3 samples taken). Each geometric mean is compared with the criteria. In addition, it is determined how many 30-day sampling periods had data that exceeded the STV.
1. If 10% or less of the geometric means exceed the criterion of 126 CFU/100 mL and if 10% or less of the 30-day sampling periods have values that exceed the STV of 410 CFU/100 mL, the water is eligible for delisting.
c. Mixture monthly and Geometric Mean Data
1. If during the last five years, some years have geometric means available and other years only have monthly data available, then EPD assesses each data type separately as described above. If 10% or less of the geometric means exceed the criterion of 126 CFU/100 mL and if 10% or less of the 30-day sampling periods have values that exceed the STV of 410 CFU/100 mL, the water is eligible for delisting.
D. Dissolved Oxygen (DO), pH, Water Temperature: preferred minimum data set 12 samples in a 12 month period with 1 or 2 samples collected per month. In the

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-10

case of continuous data (where a probe is left in the water for a long period of time and data is recorded multiple times per day), EPD may choose not to monitor the water for an entire year. Data need to be available for the critical period to be used for listing decisions (e.g. summer data needed for DO and temperature assessment).
1. Listing*
a. Dissolved Oxygen - One year of available data or multiple consecutive years of available data:
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if more than 10% of the data do not meet the water quality criteria. In the case of continuous data a waterbody would be determined not to be supporting its use if more than 10% of the data in the critical period exceeds the criteria.
2. In the case where the DO criteria are not met more than 10% of the time, but where a "natural" dissolved oxygen concentration has been established, then the dissolved oxygen data are compared against the established "natural" dissolved oxygen concentration. If any of the data points are less than the "natural" dissolved oxygen concentration, then the waterbody is determined not to be supporting its designated use. If none of the DO data are less than the "natural" DO, then the waterbody is determined to be "supporting" its use (as far as DO is concerned).
3. Chapter 391-3-6-.03(7) of the Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control recognizes that some waters of the State "naturally" will not meet the instream criteria in the Rules and that this situation does not constitute a violation of water quality standards. Many waters in Georgia, specifically areas in South Georgia and near the Coast, have "natural" dissolved oxygen concentrations below the State's standard dissolved oxygen criteria (daily average of 5.0 mg/l and an instantaneous minimum of 4.0 mg/l). If a waterbody does not meet the DO criteria more than 10% of the time and the waterbody is located in an area of the State where it is anticipated that the low dissolved oxygen condition is natural, then EPD will place the waterbody in Category 3 until work is completed that establishes the "natural" dissolved oxygen concentration for the waterbody. The measured dissolved oxygen data is then compared with the "natural" dissolved oxygen concentration and an assessment is made as to whether the waterbody is meeting its designated use.
b. Water Temperature, pH - One year or multiple consecutive years of available data:
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if more than 10% of the data do not meet water quality criteria. In the case of continuous data a waterbody would be determined not to be supporting its use if more than 10% of the data in the critical period exceeds the criteria.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-11

2. Chapter 391-3-6-.03(7) of the Rules and Regulations for Water Quality Control recognizes that some waters of the State "naturally" will not meet the instream criteria in the Rules and that this situation does not constitute a violation of water quality standards. Georgia has many blackwater streams. The pH of blackwater streams is naturally low. If a waterbody has been identified as a blackwater stream, then it is not listed as impaired if greater than 10% of the pH measurements are less than minimum pH criterion of 6.0, as long as there is no point source or land use issues that may be contributing to the low pH status of the stream.
2. Delisting
a. Dissolved Oxygen - One year or multiple consecutive years of available data:
1. Waters are eligible for delisting for DO if 10% or less of the data are lower than the water quality criteria. In the case of continuous data a waterbody would be eligible for delisting if 10% or less of the data in the critical period exceeds the criteria.
2. In the case where the DO criteria are not met more than 10% of the time, but where a "natural" dissolved oxygen concentration has been established, the instream DO data is compared against the "natural" DO. If no violations of the natural dissolved oxygen concentration occur, the segment is eligible for delisting.
b. Water Temperature, pH - One year or multiple consecutive years of available data:
1. Waters are eligible for delisting for temperature or pH if 10% or less of the data does not meet the water quality criteria. In the case of continuous data a waterbody would be eligible for delisting if 10% or less of the data in the critical period exceeds the criteria.
E. Metals: preferred minimum data set 2 samples in a 12 month period (1 winter, 1 summer) 1. Listing
a. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting their use designation if one sample exceeds the acute criteria in a three-year period or if more than one sample exceeds the chronic criteria in three years.
2. Delisting
a. Waters are eligible for delisting of metals if no exceedences of the acute criteria occur and no more than one exceedence of the chronic criteria occurs in three years.
F. Priority Pollutant/Organic Chemicals: preferred minimum data set 2 samples in a 12 month period (1 winter, 1 summer)
1. Listing

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-12

a. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting their use designation if more than one sample exceeds the criteria in a three-year period.
2. Delisting
a. Waters are eligible for delisting for priority pollutants/organic chemicals if no more than one exceedence of the criteria occurs in a three-year period.
G. Toxicity:
1. Listing
a. Acute or Chronic toxicity tests conducted on municipal or industrial effluent samples and receiving waters Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if:
1. Effluent toxicity test(s) consistently predict in-stream toxicity at critical 7Q10 low stream flow and/or if toxicity tests performed on receiving waters consistently indicate that the waterbody is toxic.
2. Delisting
a. New data with a facility consistently passing WET test(s) (if listing originated based on effluent toxicity test results) are eligible for delisting.
b. New data with receiving waters consistently passing toxicity test(s) (if listing originated based on stream toxicity test results) are eligible for delisting.
H. Fish/Shellfish Consumption Guidelines:
1. Listing
a. All Fish/Shellfish Tissue Contaminants Except Mercury:
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if the State's fish consumption guidelines document recommends that consumption needs to be limited or if no consumption is recommended.
b. Fish/Shellfish Tissue - Mercury:
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting their use designation if the Trophic-Weighted Residue Value (as described in the October 19, 2001 EPD "Protocol"), is in excess of Georgia's water quality criterion of 0.3 mg/kg wet weight mercury. Waters where the calculated Trophic-Weighted Residue Value for mercury is equal to 0.3 mg/kg wet weight total are put in Category 3.
2. Delisting
a. All Fish/Shellfish Tissue Contaminants Except Mercury:

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-13

1. Waters are eligible for delisting if there is no consumption restrictions and fish/shellfish can be consumed in unlimited amounts.
b. Fish/Shellfish Tissue - Mercury:
1. Waters are eligible for delisting if the calculated Trophic-Weighted Residue Values for mercury in fish tissue is less than or equal to 0.3 mg/kg wet weight total. Waters where the calculated TrophicWeighted Residue Value for mercury is equal to 0.3 mg/kg wet weight total are put in Category 3.
I. Biotic Data (Fish Bioassessments):
1. Listing Fish Bioassessments are based on Fish Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) data. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if:
a. The IBI ranking is "Poor" or "Very Poor";
2. Delisting
a. Waters are eligible for delisting if the waterbody has a Fish IBI rank of "Excellent", "Good", or "Fair"
J. Biotic Data (Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments):
1. Listing Benthic Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments based on a multi-metric index.
a. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if the narrative rankings are "Poor" or "Very Poor".
b. If the narrative ranking is "Fair", then the waterbody is placed in Category 3.
2. Delisting
a. Waterbodies are eligible for delisting if the waterbody scores a narrative ranking of "Very Good" or "Good". If a waterbody scores "Fair", it is placed in Category 3.
K. Data from Lakes with Site-Specific Criteria: Site-specific numeric criteria have been established for 6 major lakes in Georgia including 1) West Point Lake, 2) Lake Walter F. George, 3) Lake Jackson, 4) Lake Allatoona, 5) Lake Sidney Lanier and 6) Carters Lake. These lakes are monitored annually and assessed for these parameters as described below:
1. Listing
a. Chlorophyll a (lake stations): The last five calendar years of chlorophyll a data collected at each site-specific lake criteria station are assessed.
1. If during the five-year assessment period, the growing season average exceeds the site-specific growing season criteria 2 (or more)

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-14

out of the last 5 years, the lake area representative for that station is assessed as not supporting its designated uses. If the average exceeds the site-specific growing season criteria for 1 out of last 5 years, the waterbody is placed in Category 3.
b. Total Nitrogen (lake stations): The last five calendar years of total nitrogen concentrations collected at each site-specific lake criteria station are assessed.
1. For Lakes other than Lake Allatoona: If greater than 10% of the total nitrogen values exceed the site-specific criteria, the lake area representative for that station is assessed as not supporting its designated uses.
2. For Lake Allatoona: A growing season average for each of the last five years is calculated for each site-specific lake criteria station. If any of the five growing season averages exceed the criterion, then the lake area is represented by that station is assessed as not supporting designated uses.
c. Bacteria: Lakes with site-specific criteria have bacteria criteria of E. coli or a combination of E. coli and Fecal Coliform. The data from the last 5 years are evaluated using the procedures describes in Part VII.A. and VII.C. above.
d. Dissolved Oxygen, pH, Water Temperature: The last five calendar years of available data are assessed.
1. Waterbodies are determined not to be supporting use designation if more than 10% of the data do not meet water quality criteria
e. Major Lake Tributary Annual Total Phosphorous Loading Criteria: Annual total phosphorous loadings for each major lake tributary standard station are calculated for each of the last five calendar years.
1. If the average of the annual total phosphorous loadings exceeds the site-specific criteria, the site is assessed as not supporting designated uses.
f. Major Lake Annual Total Phosphorous Loading Criteria: The annual total phosphorus loading for each lake is calculated for each of the last five calendar years.
1. If the average of the annual total phosphorous loadings exceeds the site-specific criteria, the site is assessed as not supporting its designated uses.
2. Delisting
a. Chlorophyll a (lake stations): The last five calendar years of chlorophyll a data collected at each site-specific lake standard station are assessed.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-15

1. If during the five-year assessment period, there are no chlorophyll a growing season averages exceeding the site-specific growing season criteria, the lake area representative for that station is eligible for delisting. If the average exceeds the site-specific growing season criteria for 1 out of 5 years, the waterbody is placed in Category 3.
b. Total Nitrogen (lake stations): The last five calendar years of total nitrogen concentrations collected at each site-specific lake standard station are assessed.
1. For Lakes other than Lake Allatoona: If 10% or less of the total nitrogen values exceed the site-specific criteria, the lake area representative for that station is eligible for delisting.
2. For Lake Allatoona: A growing season average for each of the last five years is calculated for each site-specific lake criteria station. If none of the five growing season averages exceed the criterion, then the lake area that is represented by that station is eligible for delisting.
c. Bacteria: Lakes with site-specific criteria have bacteria criteria of E. coli or a combination of E. coli and Fecal Coliform. The data from the last 5 years are evaluated using the procedures describes in Part VII.A. and VII.C. above
d. Dissolved Oxygen, pH, Water Temperature: The last five calendar years of available data are assessed.
1. If 10% or less of the data do not meet water quality criteria, the water is eligible for delisting.
e. Major Lake Tributary Annual Total Phosphorous Loading Criteria: Annual total phosphorous loadings for each major lake tributary standard station were calculated for each of the last five calendar years.
1. If the average of the annual total phosphorous loadings does not exceed the site-specific criteria then the site was eligible for delisting.
f. Major Lake Annual Total Phosphorous Loading Criteria: The annual total phosphorus loading for each lake is calculated for each of the last five calendar years.
1. If the average of the annual total phosphorous loadings does not exceed the site-specific criteria then the site is eligible for delisting.
L. Objectionable Algae (Nutrients)
1. Listing
a. A waterbody is listed for objectionable algae based upon visual observation of excessive algae, duckweed, or other aquatic plant life by field staff along with other factors including high concentrations of nutrients in the waterbody compared with other waters in the same river

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-16

basin, and diurnal DO and pH swings indicative of high algae or plant activity (higher DO and pH later in the day and lower DO in the early morning).
2. Delisting
a. A waterbody is considered for delisting for objectionable algae if visual observation by field staff reveal that algae, duckweed, or other aquatic plant life is no longer excessive compared to other streams in the area, and the DO, pH, and nutrient data are at levels that no longer indicated a problem with excessive algae/plant life.
VIII. Priorities for Action
Section 303(d)(1) of the Clean Water Act requires each State to "establish a priority ranking" for the segments it identifies on the 303(d) list (i.e. those waters in Category 5). This ranking is to take into account the severity of the pollution and the uses to be made of such segments. The State is to establish TMDLs in accordance with the priority ranking. States are given considerable flexibility in establishing their ranking system. Georgia typically uses a basin rotation approach when it comes to drafting TMDLs. There are some cases where EPD may choose to draft a TMDL outside of the basin rotation schedule. Factors influencing this decision could include the severity of the pollution and whether development of the TMDL may require additional data collection and complex analysis. TMDLs are typically finalized sometime during the year after they are proposed. EPD has chosen to implement the priority ranking by indicating the year by which the TMDL for each segment on the 303(d) list will be drafted. TMDLs may be drafted before the year indicated in the report.
All dates provided are within the 13-year timeframe that is allowed for TMDL development as provided in the US EPA 1997 Interpretative Guidance for the TMDL Program. This guidance states that States should develop schedules for establishing TMDLs expeditiously, generally within 8-13 years of being listed.
In addition, US EPA has developed a new Long-Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration, and Protection of waters. This Vision focuses on six elements including 1) Prioritization, 2) Assessment, 3) Protection, 4) Alternatives, 5) Engagement, and 6) Integration. In accordance with this Vision, EPD has developed a Priority Framework that describes how GA EPD prioritizes waters on the 303(d) list for development of TMDLs or TMDL alternatives. The framework, along with the State's list of Priority Waters can be found on the EPD website at: http://epd.georgia.gov/georgia-305b303d-list-documents

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-17

Data Source Code/ Key for Abbreviations

Data Source 1 = DNR-EPD, Watershed Planning &
Monitoring Program 2 = DNR-EPD, Wastewater Regulatory
Program (Municipal) 3 = DNR-EPD, Wastewater Regulatory
Program (Industrial) 4 = DNR, Wildlife Resources Division 5 = DNR, Coastal Resources Division 6 = State University of West Georgia 7 = Gainesville College 8 = Georgia Institute of Technology 9 = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 10 = U.S. Geological Survey 11 = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 12 = U.S. Forest Service 13 = Tennessee Valley Authority 14 = Cobb County 15 = Dekalb County 16 = Douglas County Water & Sewer Authority 17 = Fulton County 18 = Gwinnett County
19 = City of Clayton 20 = City of Gainesville
21 = City of LaGrange
22 = Georgia Mountains R.D.C. 23 = City of Conyers 24 = Lake Allatoona (Kennesaw State
University) 25 = Lake Blackshear (Lake Blackshear
Watershed Association) 26 = Lake Lanier (University of Georgia) 27 = West Point (LaGrange College/ Auburn University) 28 = Georgia Power Company 29 = Oglethorpe Power Company 30 = South Carolina Electric & Gas Company 31 = South Carolina DHEC 32 = Jones Ecological Research Center 33 = Alabama DEM 34 = City of College Park 35 = Kennesaw State University 36 = University of Georgia 37 = Columbus Water Works 38 = Columbus Unified Government

39 = St. Johns River Water Mgmt. District
40 = Town of Trion
41 = Cherokee County Water & Sewerage Authority 42 = Clayton County Water Authority 43 = City of Atlanta 44 = City of Cartersville 45 = Georgia Ports Authority 46 = Chattahoochee/Flint RDC 47 = Upper Etowah Adopt-A-Stream 48 = Middle Flint RDC 49 = Central Savannah RDC 50 = Chatham County 51 = City of Savannah 52 = Heart of Georgia RDC 53 = City of Augusta 54 = Southwire Company 55 = DNR-EPD, Brunswick Coastal District 56 = DNR-EPD, Hazardous Waste Mgmt. Branch 57 = Ellijay High School 58 = DNR, Georgia Parks Recreation & Historic
Sites Division. 59 = DNR-EPD, Ambient Monitoring Unit
(Macroinvertebrate Team) 60 = Forsyth County 61 = Tyson Foods, Inc 62 = South Georgia RDC
63 = Northeast GA RDC
64 = Ogeechee Canoochee Riverkeeper 65 = Screven County
66 = Coastal GA RDC 67 = City of Roswell 68 = City of Alpharetta 69 = Columbia County 70 = Southwest GA RDC 71 = Southeast GA RDC 72 = Coweta County 73 = Middle GA RDC 74 = Bartow County keeper 75 = Atlanta Regional Commission 76 = Soquee River Watershed Partnership

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-18

77 = Upper Chattahoochee River 78 = Henry County 79 = City of Suwanee 83 = LandTec Southeast, Inc.

80 = City of Dacula 81 = City of Sandy Springs 82 = Athens Clarke County

Note: The above is a list of all historical data sources. All sources were not necessarily used in compilation of the 2018 list.

Criterion Violated Codes

As = Arsenic

Algae = Objectionable Algae

Bio F = Biota Impacted (Fish Community)

Bio M = Biota Impacted (Macroinvertebrate

Community)

Cd = Cadmium

Cu = Copper

1,1-DCE

= 1,1- Dichloroethylene

DO = Dissolved Oxygen

FC = Fecal Coliform Bacteria

FCG = Fish Consumption Guidance

Hg = Mercury

P

= Phosphorus

Pb = Lead

PCE = Tetrachloroethylene

SB = Shellfishing Ban*

Se = Selenium

Temp = Temperature

TCA = 1,1,2 - Trichloroethane

TCE = Trichloroethylene

Tox = Toxicity Indicated

TWR = Trophic-Weighted Residue Value of

mercury in fish tissue exceeding the EPD

human health standard of 0.3 mg/kg

Zn = Zinc

Potential Cause Codes

CSO = Combined Sewer Overflow

I1

= Industrial Point Source Discharge

I2

= Industrial Site Runoff

M

= Municipal Point Source Discharges

NP = Nonpoint Sources UR = Urban Runoff

* Shellfishing Ban (SB) is listed as an impairment for waters where shellfish should not be harvested/eaten due to concerns about pollutant contamination. It is important to note that public and commercial shellfishing in coastal waters is only permissible in designated "Approved Harvest Areas" throughout the coastal region. Shellfish growing area waters are monitored regularly to ensure that these areas remain in compliance with the FDA fecal coliform thresholds. All other waters of the state are classified as "Prohibited", and are closed to the taking of shellfish. Georgia's Coastal Resources Division maintains a maps of approved public shellfishing areas which can be found at the following website: https://coastalgadnr.org/approvedrecharvestareas.

WATER QUALITY IN GEORGIA

A-19