This page covers information about Capacity Use Designation, the Ground Water Study, and other related information.
Well Water Testing
Drinking Water Information: http://www.scdhec.gov/HomeAndEnvironment/YourHomeEnvironmentalandSafetyConcerns/DrinkingWaterConcerns/
Capacity Use Designation
Process
A governmental entity must make the request (with supporting documentation) to DHEC
DHEC confers with, and seeks approval of, the Legislative Delegation before beginning work on the designation
DHEC’s Board makes the final decision and implements plan developed by water users in the the designated area.
SC Code of Laws Section 49-5-40, 50, 60 (Capacity Use Designations)
Title 49 – Waters, Water Resources and Drainage
CHAPTER 5 – GROUNDWATER USE AND REPORTING ACT
SECTION 49‑5‑40. Department to establish groundwater management program; withdrawers to register sources and report use.
SECTION 49‑5‑50. Department to monitor groundwater withdrawals; notice of construction of new well or increase in capacity of existing well; public notice. PFD: Non-capacity Use
SECTION 49‑5‑60. Capacity use area designation; notice and public hearing; development of groundwater management plan; groundwater withdrawal permits; appeals; grounds for reversal or modification.
(A) In the State where excessive groundwater withdrawal:
1. presents potential adverse effects to the natural resources or poses a threat to public health, safety, or economic welfare or where conditions pose a significant threat to the long‑term integrity of a groundwater source, including salt water intrusion,
2. the board, after notice and public hearing, in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act, shall designate a capacity use area
3. The department, local government authorities, other government agencies, or groundwater withdrawers may initiate the capacity use area designation process.
4. The notice and public hearing must be conducted such that local government authorities, groundwater withdrawers, or the general public may provide comments concerning the capacity use area designation process.
DHEC’s South Carolina Board of Health and Environmental Control, This Board governs DHEC and makes the final decision on the granting of Capacity Use Designation
Pee Dee region application (obtained via FOIA to DHEC): Link to be posted shortly – Original response was lengthy but in one large, unworkable file – a new copy had been requested but the Mt Pleasant file (see below) was returned in its place – an new, readable Pee Dee application will be requested
Mt. Pleasant (Charleston area) CUD correspondence 1987-88
May 1, 1989 – Mt. Pleasant Water works to SC State Water Resources Commission (SC WRC)
Mt Pleasant reiterates request for Capacity Use Designation (CUD)
Rationales are potential salt water intrusion, demands of increase growth
Offers to co-fund an update to SCWRC report #139 re coastal ground water resources
August 15, 1988 Mt Pleasant to WRC – Requesting SCWRC CUD for East Cooper Area of Charleston
Request is pursuant to Section 49-5-40 of SC Code of 1976 as amended;
attached to this letter were 2 Technical Memorandums and several maps of the area (but, this supporting documentation was not attached to FOI response)
re information update:
CUD Allows stricter, State-level permitting; likely will prohibit new wells interfering with existing wells; request must come from a governmental agency (Town or County) and might take 3 months to process;
an affirmative recommendation would be made to Legislature for formal action; request goes to Chair of WRC; pre-request meeting with WRC staff to discuss supporting data needs is recommended; Commissioners should be present when WRC considers the request.
Mt. Pleasant original letters are here: Mt Pleasant CUD 1987-88 correspondence – SC DHEC FOI 1605363
Aiken County funding for USGS Aiken County ground water study
USGS Study information (per Clay Killian – Aiken County Administrator eMail to P DeLorme July 8, 2016
a. The County has paid $90,375 toward this study. Our full commitment is for $110,000 toward the study. However, the full study is substantially more costly than that total, but the USGS has to contract with a governmental entity and cannot do so with private water companies. Therefore, we will be billing Breezy Hill Water Company ($75,000), Couchton-Montmorenci Water Company ($60,000) and Gilbert Summit Water Company($20,000) for their participation in the study. The USGS has a separate arrangement with the City of Aiken (also $110,000) for its participation in the study.
b. The amounts listed above in “a” detail the expenditures.
c. The funds for this work are included in the Aiken County Public Service Authority budget, which is a separate business fund and is not supported by general tax dollars.
PFD: Total cost of study 375k?
Montmorenci/Couchton Water district here in Aiken County is participating in, and providing part of the funding for, the ground water study. The information from the study will provide information which can support an application for a Capacity Use designation for the county. The districts home page is here: http://www.montmorencicouchtonwater.com/
2004 SC Water Plan (selected excerpts):
Maximizing Water Availability (p73)
South Carolina ordinarily receives ample water to meet its present and future needs, but because of its temporal and spatial distribution, water is sometimes unavailable in the right place at the right time and of the right quantity. … South Carolina needs to join [the] quest for a sustainable water supply.
The amount of time required for surface water to travel through the hydrologic cycle before being discharged to the ocean is significantly less that that needed for ground water. If water in a stream is not utilized before reaching the ocean, it is no longer available as a supply source.]
Recommendations (p80):
Water Resources Management (partial listing) (p80):
The effective management of South Carolina’s water resources is beyond the scope of any one agency or organization and will require cooperation and shared responsibility among Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as public and private parties. (p80)
Water availability can be enhanced by withdrawing water in the following order of source preference: (1) streams; (2) lakes; (3) aquifers.
Surface Water (partial listing) (p82)
Desired flows and minimum required flows for streams should be established to protect public health and safety . . .
Ground Water (partial listing) (p85-86):
To protect aquifer systems and to ensure the long-term sustainability of the ground water resources, the entire Coastal Plain province should be designated a Capacity Use Area.
In areas where water-level declines are or may become troublesome, withdrawals should be restricted in order to minimize further declines and allow ground-water levels to recover.
Withdrawals from water-table aquifers should be managed with consideration for the impact those aquifers have on wetlands, surface water, and confined aquifers.
Withdrawals should be managed to protect drinking-water supplies obtained from public-supply wells or private domestic wells.
Ongoing Ground Water Model Development Study for Aiken County – USGS and Aiken County: http://sc.water.usgs.gov/projects/aiken_gw/
The first page summary indicates that over the past 100 years rainfall in SC has been declining and over the past 20 years water levels in 2 Aiken wells have declined 6-7 feet (despite heavier than normal rainfall in the past 10 years).
SC Department of Natural resources/Water/Hydrology has links to the ground water study and its parent site (Water) has other links related to water monitoring
Joe Gellici presentation to Pastoral Advocated for Aiken
Joe Gellici (SCDNR) PowerPoint presentation to FRED in June, 2016 re Ground and Surface water: Joe_Gellici_BlackwaterFest_Presentation
Joe noted:
1. there has been a new registration for a large water withdrawal on a tributary of the Edisto River
2. One of the monitoring wells in Aiken has had a 17′ drop in water level so far this year, and summer water withdrawals have not yet started
2012 DNR Report: GROUND-WATER LEVELS IN SOUTH CAROLINA, 2006–2010
2010 paper: Groundwater availability in the Atlantic Coastal Plain of North and South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1773
This paper, as indicated in its title, covers groundwater availability in both North and South Carolina.
This paper is currently being updated for South Carolina’s 7 surface water basins in a study which may complete in 2018
[This study is] An in-depth assessment of groundwater availability of the Atlantic Coastal Plain aquifers of North and South Carolina has been completed by the U.S. Geological Survey Groundwater Resources Program. This assessment includes (1) a determination of the present status of the Atlantic Coastal Plain groundwater resources; (2) an explanation for how these resources have changed over time; and (3) development of tools to assess the system’s response to stresses from potential future climate variability. Results from numerous previous investigations of the Atlantic Coastal Plain by Federal and State agencies have been incorporated into this effort.
The primary products of this effort are (1) comprehensive hydrologic datasets such as groundwater levels, groundwater use, and aquifer properties; (2) a revised hydrogeologic framework; (3) simulated water budgets of the overall study area along with several subareas; and (4) construction and calibration of a numerical modeling tool that is used to forecast the potential effects of climate change on groundwater levels.
Friends of the Edisto (FRED) reports on activities related to Edisto