Chapter 3 - 03010102

Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.1
SubbaSin Water Quality OvervieW
The Middle Roanoke River Subbasin located around the middle of the
basin along the North Carolina/Virginia state line, contains one Impaired
stream; Nutbush Creek is Impaired for biological integrity. During this
assessment cycle (2004-2009), the subbasin experienced prolonged
drought between 2007 and 2008.
The John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir Section 216 Feasibility Study project
is partially located in this subbasin. The project area also includes HUCs
03010106 and 03010107. The study has focused on examining the
feasibility of addressing downstream environmental resource concerns in
the Lower Roanoke River drainage area through changes in operations
or structures at the John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir. Along with USACE,
the non-federal cost sharing partners for this study are Virginia, and North
Carolina. The process includes forming diverse workgroups, conducting
a wide range of studies and developing a plan of recommendations. The
project is currently completing phase 2 and beginning phase 3, the final
phase. A more detailed description of the project is found in the Additional
Study section.
SubbaSin at a Glance
cOuntieS:
Granville, Vance, & Warren
MunicipalitieS:
Stovall, Henderson, & Middleburg
ecOreGiOnS:
Southern Outer Piedmont, & Northern Outer Piedmont
perMitted FacilitieS:
NPDES Dischargers: ................5 Major ...........................................1 Minor ...........................................2
General .......................................2
NPDES Non-Dischargers: .........4
Stormwater: ............................13
General .....................................13
Individual .....................................0
Animal Operations: ...................2
pOpulatiOn:
2010 Census ....................22,444
2006 land cOver:
Open Water .........................5.4%
Developed ...........................6.0%
Forest ...............................60.5%
Agriculture .........................15.2%
Wetlands .............................1.9%
Barren Land ........................0.2%
Shrub/Grassland ...............10.8%
CHAPTER 3
Middle rOanOke
river SubbaSin
HUC 03010102
Includes: Grassy Creek, Island Creek, Little Island Creek, Nut-
bush Creek & John H. Kerr Reservoir
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.2
FiguRe 3-1: Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin (03010102)
VANCE
GRANVILLE
Ratt
l
esn
a
k
e
Cr
Kerr
Reservoir
Island
C
ree
k
L it tle I s l an d Creek
NutbushCreek
Newmans
Creek
Kerr
Reservoir
Henderson
Stovall
MiddleburgVANCE
GRANVILLE
WARREN
PERSON
Roxboro
Norlina
WARREN
PERSON
N6400000
N4590000
N6400000
N5000000
N4590000
N6400000
N4590000
N6400000
N4590000
NF38
NF37
NF36
NF22
NF33
NF31
NB89 NB90
NB64
NB49
NB48
NB88
NB87
NB45
NB86
NB112
AaronsCreek
Flat
C
r
e
e
k
BlueCre
e
k
MountainCreek
Smith Creek
G
r
a
s
s
y
C
r
e
e
k
C
rooked
R
u
n
Johnson
Creek
Littl
e Johnson
Cr
e
e
k
Michael Creek
Crook
e
dFork
BearskinCreek
W
olfpit
R
u
n
GilliamsBranch
LickBranch
MillCreek
CedarBranch
LittleNutbushCreek
ROA037I
ROA037E
ROA037A
ROA037IJ
I-85
NC-39
US-15
U
S
-
1
5
8
US-1
NC-96
U
S
-
1
,1
5
8
U
S-1-B
U
S
N
C-49
US-401
US-158-BUS
U
S
-
1
5
8
I-85
NC-96
US-158-BUS
US-158-BUS
Middle
Roanoke
River
Subbasin
(03010102)
Legend
Permits
Animal
Operation
Permits
Monitoring
Sites
2010
Use
Support
Minor
NPDES
Dischargers
Major
NPDES
Dischargers
NPDES
Non-Dischargers
NPDES
Stormwater
Individual
State
Cattle
Swine
Wet
Poultry
NPDES
Aquaculture
Supporting
Not
Rated
No
Data
Impaired
Primary
Roads
Municipalities
County
Boundaries
8-Digit
HUC
#*XY#0Ek"Y
USGS
Gage
Stations
!<
RAMS
(`09-`10)
¢¡
RAMS
(`07-`08)
¢¡
Lake
Stations
^
Benthos
"à)
Fish
Community
[¡
Ambient
¢¡
NC
Division
of
Water
Quality
Basinwide
Planning
Unit
August
2011 ¯
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
1.25
Miles
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.3
Water Quality data SuMMary FOr thiS SubbaSin
Monitoring stream flow, aquatic biology and chemical/physical parameters is a large part of the basinwide
planning process. More detailed information about DWQ monitoring and the effects each parameter has on
water quality is discussed in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Supplemental Guide to North Carolina’s Basinwide
Planning document.
StreaM FlOW
The basin experienced prolonged droughts from 1998-2002 and again from 2007-2008, with moderate
droughts in 2005 and 2006 (Figure 3-2). More detail about flows in the Roanoke River Basin can be found in
the 2010 Roanoke River Basinwide Assessment Report produced by DWQ-Environmental Science Section.
FiguRe 3-2: YeaRlY Flow Rates (CFs) oF tHe usgs gage stations in tHe Roanoke
RiveR Basin Between 1997 & 2009
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Di
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
,

c
u
b
i
c

f
e
e
t
/
s
e
c
o
n
d
2068500 2070500 2071000 2074000 2077200 02077303 02077670 2080500 208111310
Indicates periods of drought in the Roanoke River Basin
From Left to Right:
• 2068500: Dan River
(Francisco)
• 2070500: Mayo River
• 2071000: Dan River
(Wentworth)
• 2074000: Smith River
• 2077200: Hyco
Creek (Leasburg)
• 2077303: Hyco
Creek (McGehees)
• 2077670: Mayo
Creek
• 2080500: Roanoke
River
• 208111310: Cashie
River
biOlOGical data
Biological samples were collected during the spring and summer months of 2009 by the DWQ-Environmental
Sciences Section as part of the five year basinwide sampling cycle, in addition to special studies. Overall,
seven biological sampling sites were monitored within the Middle Roanoke River Subbasin. The ratings for
each station can be seen in Appendix 3-B.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling
Each benthic station monitored during the current cycle is shown in
Figure 3-3 and color coded based on the current rating. Each of the
sites are discussed in more detail in the watershed section below. Figure
3-5 is a comparison of benthic site ratings sampled during the last two
basinwide cycles to indicate if there are any overall shifts in ratings.
Benthic ratings from this cycle are similar to those received during the
previous cycle indicating a relatively stable community.
benthic SaMplinG SuMMary
£Total Stations Monitored 4
£Total Samples Taken 4
£Number of New Stations 1
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.4
FiguRe 3-3: BentHiC stations ColoR Coded BY CuRRent
Rating in tHe Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin
Benthos 2004-2009
Excellent
Good
Good-Fair
Fair
Not Impaired
Not Rated
FiguRe 3-4: CuRRent BentHiC site Ratings
Excellent
Good
Good-Fair
Fair
Poor
Not Rated
Not Impaired
FiguRe 3-5: CHange in BentHiC site Ratings
Improved
Declined
No Change
New Station
Fish Community Sampling
Each fish community station monitored during the current cycle is shown
in Figure 3-6 and color coded based on the current rating. Each of the
sites are discussed in more detail in the watershed section below. Figure
3-7 shows the percentages of each rating given during this sampling cycle
within this subbasin. Figure 3-8 is a comparison of fish community site
ratings sampled during the last two cycles to determine if there are any
overall watershed shifts in ratings. Even though there was a 33% decline
in ratings, overall the community is relatively stable.
FiSh cOM. SaMplinG SuMMary
£Total Stations Monitored 3
£Total Samples Taken 4
£Number of New Stations 0
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.5
FiguRe 3-6: FisH CoMMunitY stations ColoR Coded BY
CuRRent Rating in tHe Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin
Fish 2004-2009
Excellent
Good
Good-Fair
Fair
FiguRe 3-7: CuRRent FisH CoMMunitY site Ratings
Excellent
Good
Good-Fair
Fair
Poor
Not Rated
Not Impaired

FiguRe 3-8: CHange in FisH CoMMunitY site Ratings
Improved
Declined
No Change
New Station
For more information about biological data in this subbasin, see the 2010 Roanoke River Basinwide
Assessment Report. Detailed data sheets for each sampling site can be found in Appendix 3-B.
Fish Kills/Spill Events During This Cycle
UT to Crooked Creek:
A pond located on a spring fed tributary to Nutbush creek experienced a fish kill event with a mortality count
of about 500. A failing septic system from upstream had been piped into a tributary by a property owner for
undetermined length of time. Low DO and Nitrates were noted in water samples taken by a private pond
management company prior to calling DWQ. Aerators had been put in the pond by the time DWQ was
contacted so DO levels were acceptable upon investigation. DWQ followed the progression of the pond for
several weeks. Correcting the upstream problem appeared to solve the problems in the pond.
aMbient data
The ambient data are used to develop use support ratings every two years, which are then reported to the
EPA via the Integrated Report (IR). The IR is a collection of all monitored waterbodies in North Carolina and
their water quality ratings. The most current IR is the 2010 version and is based on data collected between
2004 and 2008. The ambient data reported in this basin plan were collected between 2005 and 2009 and will
be used for the 2012 IR. If a waterbody receives an Impaired rating, it is then placed on the 303(d) Impaired
Waters List. The Roanoke River Basin portion of the 2010 IR can be found in Appendix 3-A and the full 2010
IR can be found on the Modeling & TMDL Unit’s website.
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.6
One Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) station is located in the Middle Roanoke River subbasin (see Figure
3-1 for the station location). During the current sampling cycle (January 2005 and December 2009), samples
were collected for all parameters on a monthly basis except metals which were sampled quarterly until May
2007 when metals sampling was suspended. For more information about the ambient monitoring, parameters,
how data are used for use support assessment and other information, see Chapter 2 of the Supplemental
Guide to North Carolina’s Basinwide Planning.
Long Term Ambient Monitoring
The following discussion of ambient monitoring parameters of concern include graphs showing the median
and mean concentration values for ambient station N5000000 in this subbasin by specific parameter over a
13 year period (1997-2009). The geometric mean is a type of mean or average, which indicates the central
tendency or typical value of a set of numbers. The graphs are not intended to provide statistically significant
trend information, but rather an idea of how changes in land use or climate conditions can affect parameter
readings over the long term. The difference between median and mean results indicate the presence of
outliers in the data set. Box and whisker plots of individual ambient stations were completed by parameter
for data between 2005 and 2009 by DWQ’s Environmental Sciences Section (ESS) and can be found in the
Roanoke River Basin Ambient Monitoring System Report.
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) occurs in water as a result of nonpoint sources such as animal waste from
wildlife, farm animals and/or pets, as well as from sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). The FCB standard
for freshwater streams is not to exceed the geometric mean of 200 colonies/100 ml, or 400 colonies/100
ml in 20% of the samples where five samples have been taken in a span of 30 days (5-in-30). Only results
from a 5-in-30 study are used to indicate whether the stream is Impaired or Supporting. Waters with a use
classification of B (primary recreational waters) receive priority for 5-in-30 studies. Other waters are studied
as resources permit.
As seen in Figure 3-9, 10% of samples taken at station N5000000 during this cycle, resulted in levels over 400
colonies/100 ml. The geometric mean (calculated average) for this basinwide cycle was 115.9 colonies/100 ml
at this station. When the geometric mean breaches 200 colonies/100 ml at a station, it is very likely a 5-in-30
study would result in an impairment. Possible sources of the elevated FCB levels at this station are discussed
in the watershed section. Figure 3-10 shows the yearly geometric mean for all samples taken over the course
of 13 years in the Middle Roanoke River subbasin. The highest yearly geometric mean was recorded in 2003
(222 colonies/100 ml). For additional data from this site, see Appendix 3-C.
FiguRe 3-9: PeRCentage oF saMPles
witH elevated FCB levels (2004-
2008)
<6.9%
6.9%-10%
10.1%-20.0%
>20.0%
FiguRe 3-10: suMMaRized FeCal ColiFoRM BaCteRia values FoR data
ColleCted at tHe aMBient saMPling station in HuC 03010102
0
50
100
150
200
250
FC
B

(
c
o
l
o
n
i
e
s
/
1
0
0
m
l
)
Geometricmean
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.7
Additional information about possible causes of parameters discussed above for particular stations, see the
stream write ups below. For more information regarding any of the parameters listed above, see Section
3.3 of the Supplemental Guide to North Carolina’s Basinwide Planning. For additional information about
ambient monitoring data collected in this river basin, see the Roanoke River Basin Ambient Monitoring
System Report.
underStandinG the data
Biological & Ambient Ratings Converted to Use Support Categories
Biological (benthic and fish community) samples are given a
bioclassification/rating based on the data collected at the site
by DWQs Environmental Sciences Section (ESS). These
bioclassifications include Excellent, Good, Good-Fair, Not
Impaired, Not Rated, Fair and Poor. For specific methodology
defining how these rating are given see Benthic Standard
Operating Procedures (SOP) or the Fish Community SOP.
Once a rating is given, it is then translated into a Use Support
Category (see Figure 3-11).
Ambient monitoring data are analyzed based on the percent of
samples exceeding the state standard for individual parameters
for each site within a five year period. In general, if a standard is
exceeded in greater than 10.0% of samples taken for a particular
parameter, that stream segment is Impaired for that parameter.
The fecal coliform bacteria parameter is exception to the rule. See the Fecal Coliform Bacteria
section in the Ambient Data portion below.
Each biological parameter (benthic and fish community)
and each ambient parameter is assigned a Use Support
Category based on its rating or percent exceedance. A
detailed description of each category can be found on the first
page of Appendix 3-A. Each monitored stream segment is
given an overall category number which reflects the highest
individual parameter category. Figure 3-12 shows how the
category number is translated into the use support rating.
Example
Stream A had a benthic sample that rated Good-Fair and
12% of turbidity samples taken at the ambient station were exceeding the standard. The benthic
sample would be given an individual category number of 1 (Figure 3-11) and the turbidity parameter
would be given a category number of 5 since >10% of samples exceeded the standard. Therefore,
stream A’s overall category number would be a 5, indicating the stream has a use support rating of
Impaired.
FiguRe 3-11: use suPPoRt
CategoRies FoR BiologiCal Ratings
Biological
Ratings
Aquatic Life
Use Support
Excellent
Supporting
(Categories 1-2)
Good
Good-Fair
Not Impaired
Not Rated Not Rated(Category 3)
Fair Impaired
(Categories 4-5)Poor
FiguRe 3-12: CategoRY nuMBeR to
use suPPoRt Rating
CategoRY #use suPPoRt Rating
1 Supporting2
3 Not Rated
4 Impaired5
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.8
additiOnal StudieS
John H. Kerr Dam & Reservoir Virginia & North Carolina (Section 216)
Feasibility Study
Summary
The purpose of the feasibility study is to review the operation of the John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir and
provide recommendations to Congress on the advisability of modifying the structure or the structure’s operation
for improving the quality of the environment in the overall public interest, as authorized under Section 216
of Public Law 91-611, the River and Harbor and Flood Control Act of 1970. Based on the interests of
the Sponsors and opportunities for improvement identified to date, the study has focused on examining the
feasibility of addressing downstream environmental resource concerns in the Lower Roanoke River through
changes in operations or structures at the John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir. Along with USACE, the non-
federal cost sharing partners for this study are the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of North Carolina.
The study area encompasses the John H. Kerr Reservoir (Kerr Reservoir) and approximately 1,917 square
miles of watershed downstream of the John H. Kerr Dam (Kerr Dam), and is shown in Figure 3-14. The
Kerr Dam is located on the Roanoke River, about 178.7 river-miles above the mouth (Figure 3-13). It is in
Mecklenburg County, Virginia, 20.3 miles downstream from Clarksville, Virginia, 18 miles upstream from the
Virginia-North Carolina border, and 80 miles southwest of Richmond, Virginia. Kerr Reservoir covers nearly
50,000 acres at its normal summer pool and extends about 39 miles up the Roanoke River. The study area
includes the Kerr Dam and Reservoir project and the Roanoke River Basin from the Dam downstream to the
Albemarle Sound. For this study, the area will be referred to as the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The study
area is located in Charlotte, Halifax, Mecklenburg, and Brunswick Counties of Virginia, and in Granville, Vance,
Warren, Halifax, Northampton, Bertie, Martin and Washington Counties of North Carolina, and it is located in
the 4th and 5th Congressional District of Virginia and the 1st and 13th Congressional Districts of North Carolina.
FiguRe 3-13: loCation oF JoHn H. keRR ReseRvoiR and daM and
downstReaM daMs
This feasibility study has
proceeded in a 3 phase process.
In the first phase, 11 subject area
work groups were formed,
consisting of members from state
and federal agencies and non-
profit and business organizations.
These groups identified problems
and opportunities in the
watershed, provided input
regarding planning objectives
and identified constraints for the
study, collected existing data,
and identified needs for additional
data and study. In Phase 2, which
is ongoing but nearing completion,
technical studies, data collection,
and modeling were undertaken to
address the needs identified in
Phase 1. Phase 3, also currently
ongoing, includes the formulation
and evaluation of alternative
plans, leading to the selection of
a tentatively recommended plan
and approval of an integrated
feasibility report and NEPA
Document.
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.9
The major problems of interest in the study area that have been identified are:
£Degradation of the lower Roanoke River bottomland hardwood ecosystem due to long-term inundation
during flood operations, potentially leading to a 60% decline in habitat quality over the next 50 years in the
without project condition.
£Impaired dissolved oxygen (DO) levels below Kerr Dam and in the lower Roanoke River, which has
degraded in-stream habitat to a condition which is expected to persist in the future without project condition.
£Bank erosion in the lower Roanoke River, which is estimated at between 27 – 60 mm a year depending on
location, and which will continue in the without project condition.
£Loss of connectivity in the Roanoke River due to the presence of the dams, which in particular have
prevented and continue to prevent the American shad and American eel from populating upstream areas
where they have historically occurred.
Based on the identified problems,
opportunities, constraints, and
established study planning
objectives, a series of management
measures, consisting of both
structural and operational changes
and activities, have been proposed.
These measures have undergone
a preliminary screening process
based on the study planning
constraints as well as a simplified
cost-effectiveness analysis. The
measures that remain from the
screening process and that will
require more detailed evaluation
are:
£Measure 6B with potentially a
duration of release trigger. This
operational measure would allow
for more frequent 35,000 cfs
releases at the reservoir from
January 1st to June 30th, thus
reducing the duration of 20,000
cfs releases during the growing
season, with adjustments to the
reservoir guide curve meant to
minimize impacts to hydropower
revenue.
£Quasi run of the river measure. Under this operational measure, releases from the reservoir would equal
the inflows into the reservoir, up to 35,000 cfs, and would be implemented year round.
£Short bursts of higher (>20,000 cfs) releases from Roanoke Rapids Dam. This operational measure would
involve having pulses of shorter duration releases at higher flows during the growing season.
£Plug man-made canals that breach the river levee. This structural change would involve identifying and
plugging man-made canals that breach the natural river levee and currently allow high flows to enter the
floodplain.
£Use Roanoke River Basin Reservoir Operations Model (RRBROM) probabilistic model forecasting. Use
of the forecasting component of this model could be used to supplement to assist in water management
decisions that could affect the duration of flooding in downstream areas.
FiguRe 3-14: loCation oF oveRall PRoJeCt aRea
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.10
£Place a fabric weir upstream of Kerr Dam. This is a structural measure for improving DO between Kerr
and Gaston Dams.
£Oxygen or air injection upstream of Kerr Dam. This is a structural measure for improving DO between Kerr
and Gaston Dams.
£Implement actions indicated by USGS water quality modeling. Ongoing USGS modeling efforts may
suggest additional measures that could improve DO conditions in lower Roanoke River.
Adaptive management, which would include monitoring of project performance, would be a fundamental
aspect of any of the remaining measures if they were to be implemented.
The benefits of measures identified to date are non-monetary, National Ecosystem Restoration (NER) benefits
and will be quantified in terms of increases over the no-action alternative in average annual ecosystem habitat
outputs. The models used for measuring benefits are Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Habitat Suitability
Index (HSI) models, and a Roanoke River riparian wetland assessment model, based on Hydogeomorphic
(HGM) principles, that was developed and calibrated specifically for use on this study. Additionally, some
measures may result in a loss of National Economic Development (NED) hydropower or flood risk management
benefits. Measures will be compared against each other using a trade-off analysis, as gains in one benefit
category (NER/ecosystem restoration) will, in some cases, need to be compared to losses in other benefit
categories (NED/hydropower and flood damage reduction, for example). The trade-off analysis will be
displayed in a system of accounts format.
An appropriate NEPA (EA or EIS) document will be prepared, and will be integrated into the feasibility report.
Additional information can be found on the US Army Corps of Engineers website or the Kerr 216 Water Wiki
site.
Schedule
A schedule of completed and anticipated major study milestones over the next 2 years is below:
task date
Feasibility Scoping Meeting June 22, 2011
Alternative Formulation Briefing Meeting April 2012
Submittal of Draft Feasibility Report to SAD/ HQ, USACE December 2012
Distribute Draft Feasibility Report for NEPA/Public review February 2013
Submit Final Feasibility Report to SAD July 2013
SAD Submits Final Report to HQ, USACE August 2013
recOMMendatiOnS & actiOn planS at the SubbaSin Scale
dWQ priOrity SuMMary
Table 3-1 is a list of waters in the Middle Roanoke River Subbasin that DWQ has prioritized for restoration/
protection. The order of priority is not based solely on the severity of the steam’s impairment or impacts but
rather by the need for particular actions to be taken. A stream that is currently supporting its designated uses
may be prioritized higher within this table than a stream that is currently impaired. This is based on a more
holistic evaluation of the drainage area which includes monitoring results, current and needed restoration/
protection efforts, land use and other activities that could potentially impact water quality in the area. Some
supporting streams may have a more urgent need for protections than an impaired stream with restoration
needs already being implemented.
The table also lists potential stressors and sources that may be impacting a stream including in-field
observations, monitoring data, historical evidence and permit or other violations. Additional study may be
needed to determine exact source(s) of the impact. The last column includes a list of recommended actions.
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.11
taBle 3-1: notaBle wateRs in tHe Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin (not Ranked)
stReaM naMe au#Class.Potential
stRessoR(s)
Potential
souRCe(s)
Qualitative
status
aCtions
needed
Grassy Creek 23-2-(1) & (6)C Low DO, Turbidity --Not Rated --
Johnson Creek 23-2-7-(1)C Low DO, Low Flows --Supporting SS
Little Island
Creek
23-4-3 C --Inactive Hazardous
Site
Not Rated M
Nutbush Creek 23-8-(1)a & b C Specific Conductivity,
Nutrients
Urban Runoff Impaired SS
Kerr Reservoir (Nutbush Creek
Arm)
23-8-(2)B ----Improving --
Class.: Classification (e.g., C, B, WS-I, WS-II, WS-III, WS-IV, WS-V, Tr, HQW, ORW, SW, UWL)
Stressor: Chemical parameters or physical conditions that at certain levels prevent waterbodies from meeting the standards for their designated
use (e.g., low/high DO, nutrients, toxicity, habitat degradation, etc.). Fecal Coliform Bacteria (FCB),
Source: The cause of the stressor. (Volume & Velocity: when a stream receives stormwater runoff at a much higher volume and velocity than it
would naturally receive due to ditching, impervious surfaces, etc.)
Status: Impaired, Impacted, Supporting, Improving (For current Use Support Assessment see the Integrated Report.)
Actions Needed: Agriculture BMPs (Ag), Best Management Practices (BMPs), Daylight Stream (DS), Education (E), Forestry BMPs (F), Local Ordinance (LO), Monitoring (M), Nutrient Mgnt Controls (NMC), Protection (P), Restoration (R), Riparian Buffer Restoration (RBR), Stormwater
Controls (SC), Sediment and Erosion Control BMPs (SEC BMPs), Species Protection Plan (SPP), Stressor Study (SS), .
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.12
StatuS & recOMMendatiOnS FOr MOnitOred WaterS
underStandinG thiS SectiOn
In this Section, more detailed information about stream health, special studies, aquatic life stressors
and sources and other additional information is provided by each 10-digit Hydrological Unit Code
(HUC). Waterbodies discussed in this Chapter include all monitored streams, whether monitored
by DWQ or local agencies with approved methods. Use Support information on all monitored
streams within this watershed can be seen on the map in Figure 3-1, and a Use Support list of all
monitored waters in this basin can be found in the Use Support Chapter.
Use Support & Monitoring Box:
Each waterbody discussed in the Status & Recommendations for
Monitored Waters within this Watershed section has a corresponding
Use Support and Monitoring Box (Table 3-2). The top row indicates
the 2010 Use Support and the length of that stream or stream
segment. The next two rows indicate the overall Integrated Report
category which further defines the Use Support for both the 2008
and the 2010 reports. These first three rows are consistent for all
boxes in this Plan. The rows following are based on what type of
monitoring stations are found on that stream or stream segment
and may include benthic, fish community and/or ambient monitoring
data. If one of these three types of monitoring sites is not shown,
then that stream is not sampled for that type of data. The first column
indicates the type of sampling in bold (e.g., Benthos) with the site
ID below in parenthesis (e.g., CB79). The latest monitoring result/rating of that site is listed in the
next column followed by the year that sample was taken. If there is more than one benthic site, for
example, on that stream, the second site ID and site rating will be listed below the first. The last
row in the sample box in Table 3-2 is the AMS data. The data window for all AMS sites listed in the
boxes in this Plan is between 2004-2008. Only parameters exceeding the given standard are listed
in the second column with the percent of exceedance listed beside each parameter.
Please note any fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) listing in the last row (as seen in Table 3-2) only
indicates elevated levels and a study of five samples in 30 days (5-in-30) must be conducted
before a stream becomes Impaired for FCB.
taBle 3-2: exaMPle oF a use
suPPoRt and MonitoRing Box
use suPPoRt: iMpaired (14 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.4a
2010 IR Cat.4
Benthos (CB79)
(CB80)
Fair (2002)
Fair (2002)
Fish Com
(CF33)Good-Fair (2002)
AMS
(C1750000)
Turbidity - 12%
FCB - 48%
GraSSy creek-JOhn h kerr reServOir (0301010208)
Includes: Grassy Creek [AU#: 23-2-(1) & (6)], Johnson Creek [AU#:
23-2-7-(1) & (2)], & Rattlesnake Creek [AU#: 23-2-5]
Watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, forested and some residential
areas. There is one permitted swine animal operation located in the watershed and
no point source discharger permits. There are also no waters on the 2010 Impaired
Waters List within this watershed.
Grassy Creek [AU#: 23-2-(1) & (6)]
The first segment of Grassy Creek [AU#: 23-2-(1)] is approximately 18.3 miles
from source to the second segment, which is the Grassy Creek arm of John H
Kerr Reservoir [AU#: 23-2-(6)]. The majority of the drainage area is forestry
use suPPoRt: nOt rated(18.3 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.3
2010 IR Cat.3
Benthos (NB86)Not Rated (2004)
Fish Com
(NF33)Good (2009)
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.13
and agriculture with spots of residential areas. There is one two-house swine farm operation in the Grassy
Creek drainage area. Both segments of the creek were given a Not Rated use support category for the 2010
Integrated Report (IR) based on the 2004 benthic sample.
Water Quality Status
Grassy Creek was monitored once during this sampling cycle. The fish site (located at Cornwall Rd; SR
1300) was somewhat effected by low flow conditions when sampled in 2009. This site had the lowest DO
concentration (4.3 mg/l) and the fewest fish collected of any other site in the basin. During a sampling event
at this site in 1999, 650 fish were collected where as the 2009 sample only collected a total of 81. Specific
conductivity and turbidity levels were elevated. The habitat score was low (64 out of 100) mostly due to no
riffle habitat and poor bottom substrate. However, it is estimated that the 2009 rating will move the segments
from the Not Rated (3) use support category into the Supporting (2) category on the 2012 Integrated Report
(IR).
Recommendations
The fish community site is a regional reference site and is suggested to be re-evaluated in 2014 or during a
more normal flow year to determine if reference site status is still warranted.
Johnson Creek [AU#: 23-2-7-(1)]
Johnson Creek is approximately 8.3 miles from source to John H Kerr Reservoir
[AU#: 23-2-(6)]. The majority of the drainage area is forestry and agriculture
with spots of residential areas. The creek is in the Supporting use support
category for the 2010 Integrated Report based on the 2004 fish community
sample.
Water Quality Status
The fish community site located on Johnson Creek was monitored in 2004 as well as 2009. Results from
these two samples were very similar in ratings; however, the 2009 sample had one-third fewer fish than the
2004 sample and the lowest number of fish species collected in the basin. The site had the highest specific
conductivity (127 µS/cm) of any other fish community site in the basin and recorded low DO levels (5.6 mg/l).
Overall habitat was good but lacked adequate riffle habitat and had poor bottom substrate. Low flows during
drought conditions and limited downstream re-colonization sources are suggested to be partial causes of the
this lower rating. Johnson Creek will likely continue to be placed in the Supporting (2) category for the 2012
Integrated Report based on the 2009 fish community sample.
Rattlesnake Creek [AU#: 23-2-5]
Rattlesnake Creek is approximately 2.3 miles from source to Grassy Creek
[AU#: 23-2-(1)]. The majority of the drainage area is agriculture and forestry
with spots of residential areas. This creek was placed in the Supporting use
support category of the 2010 IR due to the Not Impaired rating received in
2005.
Water Quality Status
A benthic sample was taken in 2005 as part of a special study to develop biocriteria for small streams in
North Carolina. The sample was given a Not Impaired rating since the studies proposed criteria has yet to
be approved. Habitat was rated high (79 out of 100) and the benthic community showed no signs of being
impacted.
Mountain Creek [AU#: 23-2-3]
Mountain Creek is approximately 8.1 miles from source to Grassy Creek [AU#:
23-2-(1)]. The land use in this drainage area is largely agriculture with some
forestry and residential areas. This creek was placed under the Not Rated use
support category of the 2010 IR due to the benthic rating in 2004.
use suPPoRt: SuppOrtinG (8.3 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.2
2010 IR Cat.2
Fish Com
(NF36)Good-Fair (2009)
use suPPoRt: SuppOrtinG (2.3 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.2
2010 IR Cat.2
Benthos
(NB64)
Not Impaired
(2005)
use suPPoRt: nOt rated
(8.1 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.3
2010 IR Cat.3
Benthos
(NB87)Not Rated (2004)
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.14
Water Quality Status
This site was sampled as a one time event in 2004 as part of a special study. However, the stream had very
low flow even after a fair amount of rain four days prior to the sample being taken. Deeply incised and eroding
banks suggested flashiness and unstable hydrology. For these reasons, the site was given a Not Rated and
will remain in this use support category on the 2012 Integrated Report.
butcher creek JOhn h kerr reServOir (0301010209)
Includes: Island Creek [AU#: 23-4] & Little Island Creek [AU#: 23-
4-3]
This watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, forested and some residential
areas. There are no permitted facilities within this watershed. There are also no
waters which appear on the 2010 Impaired Waters List.
Island Creek [AU#: 23-4]
Island Creek is approximately 6.4 miles from the confluence of Gill Creek [AU#:
23-4-1] and Michael Creek [AU#: 23-4-2] the North Carolina-Virginia state line.
The land use in this drainage area is predominantly agriculture with some
forestry and residential areas. This segment was placed under the Supporting
use support category of the 2010 IR as a result of the Good-Fair benthic rating
it received in 2004.
Water Quality Status
Island Creek was sampled twice during this sampling cycle. The benthic sample showed overall improved
in the benthic community from the last time it was sampled in 2004 when it received a Good-Fair rating. The
2009 Good rating reflects an increase in the number of pollution intolerant species collected.
The fish community sample; however, did not show the same improvement. The rating actually fell from an
Excellent in 1999 to a Good-Fair in 2009. The total number of fish collected for the sample dropped by three-
fourths. There was still diversity among those captured but there were no pollution intolerant species. The site
was re-evaluated in 2010 following a wetter winter and spring and received a Good rating.
This stream is expected to remain under the Supporting use support category on the 2012 IR.
Little Island Creek [AU#: 23-4-3]
Little Island Creek is approximately 11.8 miles from source to Island Creek
[AU#: 23-4]. The majority of the drainage area is agriculture and forestry with
residential areas mixed in. This segment was placed in the Not Rated use
support category of the 2010 IR based on the 2004 fish community sample.
Water Quality Status
This site and the lower part of the adjacent Island Creek watershed encompass
the defunct Tungsten Queen Mine, an inactive hazardous site. The mine ceased
operations in 1971 but at one time was one of the largest tungsten mines in the country. The tailings (sands)
in Little Island Creek appear to be similar to those at the tungsten mine and may have similar contaminant
metals of concern including lead, arsenic, antimony, cadmium, and zinc. The surface water, ground water,
sediments, and fish in Little Island Creek have not been monitored but have the potential to be contaminated
with these metals. Currently, the area including the tailings (sands) is under a remedial action by the Inactive
Hazardous Site Branch of Superfund.
Recommendations
If resources allow, benthic site NB38 should be sampled to ensure the water quality has not degraded since
the previous sample was taken.
use suPPoRt: SuppOrtinG (6.4 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.2
2010 IR Cat.2
Benthos (NB45)Good (2009)
Fish Com
(NF22)
Good-Fair (2009)
Good (2010)
use suPPoRt: nOt rated
(11.8 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.3
2010 IR Cat.3
Benthos
(NB38)Good-Fair (1988)
Fish Com
(NF37)Not Rated (2004)
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.15
nutbuSh creek-JOhn h kerr reServOir (0301010210)
Includes: Nutbush Creek Arm of John H Kerr Reservoir
[AU#: 23-8-(2)], Nutbush Creek [AU#: 23-8-(1)a, b & c], & Anderson
Swamp Creek [AU#: 23-8-6-(1)]
The majority of this watershed contains the John H Kerr Reservoir and is a mix land
use of agriculture, residential and some forested areas. There are two minor NPDES
permitted facilities and one permitted swine animal operation within the watershed.
Nutbush Creek is the only waterbody on the 2010 Impaired Waters List.
Nutbush Creek Arm of John H Kerr Reservoir [AU#: 23-8-(2)]
The Nutbush Creek arm of John Kerr Reservoir is approximately 9,690 acres
from Crooked Run [AU#: 23-8-3] to North Carolina-Virginia state line. The
majority of the land use draining to the lake consist of agriculture and forestry
with some residential area. The John H. Kerr Reservoir (also called Kerr
Lake) is a multipurpose impoundment constructed and operated by the US
Army Corps of Engineers to provide flood control, recreation and hydroelectric
power. The reservoir crosses the North Carolina-Virginia state line with the
majority of the lake located in Virginia. Kerr Reservoir is the first of three chain
lake impoundments on the Roanoke River in North Carolina.
Water Quality Status
The Nutbush Creek arm of Kerr Reservoir was monitored at four lake monitoring stations during this sampling
cycle. Parameters monitored all resulted in normal levels. Historically, the lake has either had high (eutrophic)
or medium (mesotrophic) biological productivity. It was again found to be mesotrophic during the majority of
the sampling season with exception of June. June 2009 was the first time the lake has ever recorded low
(oligotrophic) productivity levels.
Section 216 Feasibility Study
This study has focused on examining the feasibility of addressing downstream environmental resource
concerns in the Lower Roanoke River drainage area through changes in operations or structures at the John
H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir. Along with USACE, the non-federal cost sharing partners for this study are the
Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of North Carolina. It is a three phase process that includes forming
diverse workgroups, conducting a wide range of studies and developing a plan of recommendations. The
project is currently completing phases 2 and beginning phase 3. A more detailed description of the project is
found in the Additional Study section.
Nutbush Creek [AU#: 23-8-(1)a & b]
Nutbush Creek is approximately 3.3 miles from source within the Town of
Henderson to SR 1317. The land use in this drainage area is urban in the
headwaters and transitions to farm land outside of the Town of Henderson’s
city limits. This creek has been on the Impaired Waters list since 1998 based
on benthic monitoring data.
Water Quality Status
The first segment of Nutbush Creek ([AU#: 23-8-(1)a], 1.7 stream miles) was
monitored once during this sampling cycle in 2006. This segment is almost
entirely within the Town of Henderson’s city limits. A benthic sample was taken
in 2006 as part of a special study to develop biocriteria for small streams in North Carolina. The sample was
given a Not Rated rating since the studies proposed criteria has yet to be approved. Habitat was poorly rated
(58 out of 100) and the benthic community showed definite signs of being impacted.
use suPPoRt: SuppOrtinG
(9,690 aCRes)
2008 IR Cat.2
2010 IR Cat.2
Lake (ROA037A)
(ROA037E)
(ROA037I)
(ROA037IJ)
No Exceedances
use suPPoRt: iMpaired (3.3 Mi)
2008 IR Cat.5
2010 IR Cat.5
Benthos
(NB48) (NB49)Not Rated (2006)Fair (2009)
Fish Com
(NF38)Fair (2004)
AMS
(N5000000)No Exceedances
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)
3.16
The second segment of Nutbush Creek’s ([AU#: 23-8-(1)b], 1.6 stream miles) benthic community was
also monitored once during this sampling cycle in 2009. This segment begins just outside of the Town of
Henderson’s city limits and receives discharge from the towns Water Reclamation Facility. This benthic site
has been monitored six times since 1988 and has received a Fair rating each time, with exception to the 1988
Poor rating. The 2009 sample continued to show a pollution tolerant macroinvertebrate community. This
includes a species rarely collected here in the past but common within this sample that is generally collected
only in degraded streams, as well an increase in the abundance of organic pollution tolerant species.
Habitat at the site ranked fairly high, scoring 86 out of 100; indicating the community is more likely being
impacted by instream water quality pollution rather than poor habitat. This is reflected in the specific conductivity
measured at the site which was the highest of any biological site within the basin (416 µS/cm). However, that
level has been dropping since 1999 when it was measured at 633 µS/cm. A slight increase in benthic quality
and an increase in dissolved oxygen may be a result of this decrease in specific conductivity.
An Ambient Monitoring Systems station is sampled monthly at this same location, about a mile downstream
of the WRF. No parameters exceed the state standards at this station. Between 2005 and the end of 2009,
fecal coliform bacteria levels, along with some nutrients (ammonia and TKN) levels had decrease. The fiftieth
percentile for specific conductivity results reflects what was measured at the benthic site (458 µS/cm) with the
highest result of 693 µS/cm. Other nutrient parameters (total phosphorus and NO2 + NO3) averages increased
during this cycle. More detailed information about this AMS site as well as the biological site can be found on
the site data sheets in Appendix 3-B.
Nutbush Creek is expected to remain on the Impaired Waters list in 2012.
reFerenceS
References marked with (*) indicates a DWQ special study report. These reports are not currently available
online. Contact the DWQ Environmental Science Section at [phone] to receive a hardcopy.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). Division of Water Quality
(DWQ). August 2004a. Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Waters and
Wetlands of North Carolina. North Carolina Administrative Code: 15A NCA 2B. Raleigh, NC. (http://
h2o.enr.state.nc.us/csu/)
____. DWQ. Planning Section. Basinwide Planning Unit (BPU). November 2008. Supplemental Guide to
Basinwide Planning: A support document for basinwide water quality plans. Raleigh, NC. (http://por-
tal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu/about/supplementalguide)
____. DWQ. Environmental Sciences Section (ESS). Ecosystems Unit. September 2010. Roanoke River
Basin Ambient Monitoring Systems Report (January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2009). Raleigh,
NC. (http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=c9a59811-634c-490b-b566-
6a8ebc00554d&groupId=38364)
____. DWQ. ESS. BAU. April 2005. Basinwide Assessment Report: Roanoke River Basin. Raleigh, NC.
____. DWQ. ESS. BAU. March 2010. Lake & Reservoir Assessments Roanoke River Basin. Raleigh, NC.
____. DWQ. Environmental Sciences Section (ESS). Biological Assessment Unit (BAU). December 2010.
Basinwide Assessment Report: Roanoke River Basin. Raleigh, NC. (http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/doc-
ument_library/get_file?uuid=e3dd1d8b-bbc5-42c9-9999-1d99dd4c7455&groupId=38364)
Pate, Travis. 2009. Watershed Assessment in North Carolina: Building a Watershed Database with Popula-
tion, Land Cover, and Impervious Cover Information. Master Theses, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill.
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-A.1
dRaFt 2010
iR CategoRY
integRated RePoRting CategoRies FoR individual assessMent unit/use suPPoRt CategoRY/
PaRaMeteR assessMents. a single au Can Have MultiPle assessMents dePending on data
availaBle and ClassiFied uses.
1 All designated uses are monitored and supporting
1b Designated use was impaired, other management strategy in place and no standards violations for the
parameter of interest (POI)
1nc DWQ have made field determination that parameter in exceedance is due to natural conditions
1r Assessed as supporting watershed is in restoration effort status
1t No criteria exceeded but approved TMDL for parameter of interest
2 Some designated uses are monitored and supporting none are impaired Overall only
2b Designated use was impaired other management strategy in place and no standards violations Overall only
2r Assessed as supporting watershed is in restoration effort status overall only
2t No criteria exceeded but approved TMDL for POI Overall only
3a Instream/monitoring data are inconclusive (DI)
3b No Data available for assessment
3c No data or information to make assessment
3n1 Chlorophyll a exceeds TL value and SAC is met-draft
3n2 Chlorophyll a exceeds EL value and SAC is not met first priority for further monitoring-draft
3n3 Chlorophyll a exceeds threshold value and SAC is not met first second priority for further monitoring-draft
3n4 Chlorophyll a not available determine need to collect-draft
3t No Data available for assessment –AU is in a watershed with an approved TMDL
4b Designated use impaired other management strategy expected to address impairment
4c Designated use impaired by something other than pollutant
4cr Recreation use impaired no instream monitoring data or screening criteria exceeded
4cs Shellfish harvesting impaired no instream monitoring data- no longer used
4ct Designated use impaired but water is subject to approved TMDL or under TMDL development
4s Impaired Aquatic Life with approved TMDL for Aquatic Life POI or category 5 listing
4t Designated use impaired approved TMDL
5 Designated use impaired because of biological or ambient water quality standards violations and needing
a TMDL
5r Assessed as impaired watershed is in restoration effort status
appendix 3-a
use suPPoRt Ratings FoR all
MonitoRed wateRs in tHe
Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-A.2

AU_NameAU_Number AU_Description LengthArea AU_Units Classification
All 13,123 Waters in NC are in Category 5-303(d) List for Mercury due to statewide fish consumption advice for several fish species

NC 2010 Integrated Report

Grassy Creek-John H Kerr Reservoir 0301010208Roanoke River Basin Watershed
John H Kerr Reservoir-Roanoke River 03010102Roanoke River Basin Subbasin
Grassy Creek-John H Kerr Reservoir 0301010208Roanoke River Basin Watershed
Grassy Creek (Grass
Creek)
23-2-(1)From source to John H. Kerr Reservoir at
Granville County SR 1431
18.3 FW Miles C
 3a
Johnson Creek23-2-7-(1)From source to Little Johnson Creek 5.3 FW Miles C
 1
Mountain Creek23-2-3 From source to Grassy Creek 8.1 FW Miles C
 3a
Rattlesnake Creek23-2-5 From source to Grassy Creek 2.3 FW Miles C
 1
Butcher Creek-John H Kerr Reservoir 0301010209Roanoke River Basin Watershed
Island Creek (Island
Creek Reservoir)
23-4 From source to North Carolina-Virginia
State Line, including that portion of Island
Creek Reservoir in North Carolina below
normal operating elevation
6.4 FW Miles C
 1
Little Island Creek
(Vance County)
23-4-3 From source to Island Creek Reservoir,
Island Creek
11.8 FW Miles C
 3a
Nutbush Creek-John H Kerr Reservoir 0301010210Roanoke River Basin Watershed
Nutbush Creek
(Including Nutbush
Creek Arm of John H.
Kerr Reservoir below
normal pool
elevation)
23-8-(1)a From source to NC 39 1.7 FW Miles C
  5
10/20/2010 Page 220 of 372NC 2010 Integrated Report 5-303(d) List EPA Approved Aug 31, 2010
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-A.3

AU_NameAU_Number AU_Description LengthArea AU_Units Classification
All 13,123 Waters in NC are in Category 5-303(d) List for Mercury due to statewide fish consumption advice for several fish species

NC 2010 Integrated Report

Nutbush Creek-John H Kerr Reservoir 0301010210Roanoke River Basin Watershed
Nutbush Creek
(Including Nutbush
Creek Arm of John H.
Kerr Reservoir below
normal pool
elevation)
23-8-(1)b From NC 39 to SR 1317 1.6 FW Miles C
  5
  5
 1
 1
Nutbush Creek Arm
of John H. Kerr
Reservoir (below
normal pool
elevation 300 feet
MSL or as this
elevation may be
adjusted by the Corps
of Engineers)
23-8-(2)From Crooked Run to North Carolina-
Virginia State Line
9,690.1 FW Acres B
 1
10/20/2010 Page 221 of 372NC 2010 Integrated Report 5-303(d) List EPA Approved Aug 31, 2010
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-A.4
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.1
appendix 3-b
BiologiCal saMPling site data sHeets
(BentHiC MaCRoinveRteBRate & FisH CoMMunitY)
FoR tHe Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.2
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.3
Biological Samples Taken During this Assessment Cycle
station id wateRBodY CountY site loCation saMPle Results
Benthic Sample Sites
NB45 ISLAND CR GRANVILLE SR 1445 09 - Good
NB48 NUTBUSH CR VANCE NC 39 06 - Not Rated
NB49 NUTBUSH CR VANCE SR 1317 09 - Fair
NB64 RATTLESNAKE CR GRANVILLE SR 1437 05 - Not Impaired
Fish Community Sample Sites
NF22 Island Cr Granville SR 1445 09 Good-Fair
NF33 Grassy Cr Granville SR 1300 09 - Good
NF36 Johnson Cr Granville SR 1440 09 - Good-Fair
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.4
Water Quality Parameters
Temperature (°C)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Specific Conductance (µS/cm)
pH (s.u.)
Water Clarity
Channel Modification (5)
Instream Habitat (20)
Bottom Substrate (15)
Pool Variety (10)
Riffle Habitat (16)
Erosion (7)
Bank Vegetation (7)
Light Penetration (10)
Left Riparian Score (5)
Right Riparian Score (5)
Total Habitat Score (100)
County
GRANVILLE
Good
Bioclassification
Level IV EcoregionLongitude
-78.66444444
05/26/09
Date Station ID
Species Change Since Last Cycle
Waterbody
GRASSY CR
AU Number
23-2-(1)
Yes
Reference Site
Subbasin
6
Latitude
36.47222222
Elevation (ft)
8 digit HUC
03010102 Carolina Slate Belt
05/26/09
NPDES Number
---
Stream Width (m)
8
06/09/99
NF33
Site Photograph
Forested/Wetland
00
0.5
Agriculture Other (describe)
None
Watershed -- drains central Granville County, no municipalities in the watershed; tributary to Kerr Reservoir. Habitats -- primarily a run and slow moving
pool upstream from the bridge, riffles absent, not much habitat in mid-channel, no coarse woody debris snags, some Justicia at the bridge, good riparian
zones. Water Quality -- due to the low flow and pool conditions, the dissolved oxygen concentration was low, only at 48% of saturation. 2009 -- fewest
fish collected at any site in 2009 (n=81), more than 650 fish were collected in 1999; metric scores and ratings for 2009 may be biased by this small sample
size; Carolina Darter [Special Concern] collected for the first time. 1999 & 2009 -- only 19 species known from the site, including 3 species of darters, but
no intolerant species; because it is a regional reference site, this site should be re-evaluated in 2014 or during a more normal flow year to determine if
reference site status is still warranted.
Rural Residential
0
Volume (MGD)
Data Analysis
Visible Landuse (%)
Sample Date
Gains -- Golden Shiner (n=11), Green Sunfish (n=6), Pumpkinseed (n=7), Warmouth (n=3), Carolina Darter
(n=1). Losses -- Crescent Shiner (n=31), Margined Madtom (n=3), Fantail Darter (n=54).
46
46
Average Depth (m)
---
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)
100
20.4
4
Habitat Assessment Scores (max)
340
Drainage Area (mi2)
20.9
5
5
10
Green Sunfish, Bluegill
Bioclassification
Good
Good
NCIBI
0
Sample ID
10
4.3
104
6.4
Turbid
5
12
Cobble, gravelSubstrate
Exotic Species 2009
Species Total
16
1599-43
2009-47
FISH COMMUNITY SAMPLE
Stream Classification
C
SR 1300
Location
Highfin Shiner Most Abundant Species 2009
64
6
7
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.5
Water Quality Parameters
Temperature (°C)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Specific Conductance (µS/cm)
pH (s.u.)
Water Clarity
Channel Modification (5)
Instream Habitat (20)
Bottom Substrate (15)
Pool Variety (10)
Riffle Habitat (16)
Erosion (7)
Bank Vegetation (7)
Light Penetration (10)
Left Riparian Score (5)
Right Riparian Score (5)
Total Habitat Score (100)
FISH COMMUNITY SAMPLE
Stream Classification
C
SR 1440
Location
Fantail Darter (46%) Most Abundant Species 2009
78
5
7
Cobble, gravelSubstrate
Exotic Species 2009
Species Total
13
132004-26
2009-46
10
5.6
127
6.3
Clear, easily silted
5
18
5
5
10
Green Sunfish, Bluegill
Bioclassification
Good-Fair
Good-Fair
NCIBI
5
Sample ID
Average Depth (m)
---
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)
95
19.7
8
Habitat Assessment Scores (max)
325
Drainage Area (mi2)
7.6
Watershed -- drains the extreme north-central part of Granville County and a small portion of southeast Mecklenburg County, VA; no municipalities in the
watershed; tributary to Grassy Creek and Kerr Reservoir, site is ~ 3.8 miles above the creek's confluence with the reservoir. Habitats -- a regional
reference site, a typical Carolina Slate Belt-type stream with very shallow pools and many riffles out of water; very low flow. Water Quality -- specific
conductance has always been slightly elevated (129 µS/cm in 2004), the highest of any site in the basin in 2009. 2009 -- one-third fewer fish in 2009 than
in 2004 (232 vs. 339), noticeably absent were Margined Madtom, and the number of Fantail Darters decreased from 190 to 107; fewest species of any site
in 2009 (n=13); Carolina Darter [Special Concern] was collected for the first time; greater darter diversity and a higher percentage of omnivores+herbivores
were offset by lower percentages of piscivores and species with multiple ages classes; lingering effects from drought may still be evident. 2004 & 2009 --
18 species known from this site, including 3 species of darters; dominant species is the Fantail Darter; lower than expected metric scores for this small
drainage area reference site are attributable to the very low flows during droughts and limited downstream re-colonization sources.
Rural Residential
0
Volume (MGD)
Data Analysis
Visible Landuse (%)
Sample Date
Gains -- Golden Shiner, Chain Pickerel, Warmouth, Carolina Darter, Johnny Darter. Losses -- Satinfin Shiner,
Margined Madtom, Snail Bullhead, Redbreast Sunfish. All species gained or lost were represented by 1-3
fish/species, except for Golden Shiner and Margined Madtom (n=8 and 53, respectively).
44
4404/28/04
NF36
Site Photograph
Forested/Wetland
05
0.3
Agriculture Other (describe)
None
36.53222222
Elevation (ft)
8 digit HUC
03010102 Carolina Slate Belt
05/26/09
NPDES Number
---
Stream Width (m)
7
Species Change Since Last Cycle
Waterbody
JOHNSON CR
AU Number
23-2-7-(1)
Yes
Reference Site
Subbasin
6
LatitudeCounty
GRANVILLE
Good-Fair
Bioclassification
Level IV EcoregionLongitude
-78.65861111
05/26/09
Date Station ID
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.6
Water Quality Parameters
Temperature (°C)22.7
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)6.3
Specific Conductance (µS/cm)103
pH (s.u.)6.7
Channel Modification (5)5
Instream Habitat (20)18
Bottom Substrate (15)12
Pool Variety (10)8
Riffle Habitat (16)7
Bank Erosion (7)2
Bank Vegetation (7)5
Light Penetration (10)9
Left Riparian Score (5)2
Right Riparian Score (5)4
Total Habitat Score (100)72
BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE SAMPLE
Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification
ISLAND CR SR 1445 NB45 08/13/09 Good
County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude AU Number Level IV Ecoregion
GRANVILLE 6 03010102 36.495240 -78.504200 23-4 Carolina Slate Belt
Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m)
C 32.5 330 9 0.1
Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe)
Visible Landuse (%)80 0 0 20 (Fallow Fields)
Site Photograph
Water Clarity slightly turbid
Habitat Assessment Scores (max)
Substrate Mostly sand and silt with one long cobble riffle.
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD)
None ------
Bioclassification
08/13/09 10811 ---21 ---5.05 Good
Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI
Good-Fair
08/24/94 6693 ---17 ---5.12 Good-Fair
06/29/04 9421 ---17 ---5.48
Taxonomic Analysis
Four additional EPT taxa were collected since sampling began in 1994. The pollution sensitive edge-dwelling caddisfly Mystacides sepulchralis was
common at this site in 2009. Additionally, the intolerant mayfly taxa Acerpenna macdunnoughi and Leucrocuta spp. were collected at this location.
Other taxa not previously collected from this site include the Slate Belt Ecoregion endemic Stenonema femoratum ; the stonefly Leuctra spp.; and the
caddisflies Pycnopsyche spp. and Hydroptila spp .
Data Analysis
An improvement in water quality from Good-Fair in both 1994 and 2004 to Good in 2009 was observed at this sampling location. The EPTBI was the
lowest and EPT taxa richness was the highest on BAU record at this sampling location suggesting a more intolerant benthic community and overall
improved water quality. Upstream portions of this catchment are mostly rural with some agricultural land use. The site was not sampled in 1999 due to
low flow conditions.
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.7
Water Quality Parameters
Temperature (°C)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Specific Conductance (µS/cm)
pH (s.u.)
Water Clarity
Channel Modification (5)
Instream Habitat (20)
Bottom Substrate (15)
Pool Variety (10)
Riffle Habitat (16)
Erosion (7)
Bank Vegetation (7)
Light Penetration (10)
Left Riparian Score (5)
Right Riparian Score (5)
Total Habitat Score (100)
05/27/09 2009-49 21 44 Good-Fair
05/27/09
Date Station ID
Species Change Since Last Cycle (2009
vs. 2004)
Waterbody
ISLAND CR
AU Number
23-4
County
GRANVILLE
Subbasin
6
Latitude
36.495
Good-Fair
Bioclassification
Level IV Ecoregion
Carolina Slate Belt
Longitude
-78.50444444
NF22
94-25 24
Site Photograph
Forested/Wetland
015
0.5
Agriculture Other (describe)
No
Watershed -- drains northeastern Granville and and northwestern Vance counties; no municipalities in the watershed; tributary to Kerr Reservoir. Habitats
-- root mats, snags, pools, short, shallow riffles. Water Quality -- specific conductance has ranged from 90 to 106 µS/cm. 2009 -- the number of fish
collected in 2009 was one-fourth the number in 1999 (208 vs. 895); the Crescent Shiner, the dominant species in 1999, was essentially absent in 2009
(435 vs . 1); greatest diversity of sunfish than at any other site (n=6); very skewed trophic structure along with decreases in the total number of fish and
diversity of suckers were responsible for the decline in the NCIBI score and rating; lingering drought impacts. 1994 - 2009 -- diverse community with 30
species known from the site, including 6 species of sunfish, 3 species of suckers, and 3 species of darters including the Carolina Darter [Special Concern];
but no intolerant species; in 1994 and 1999 the dominant species was the Crescent Shiner. Note: the site was re-sampled in 2010 following a wetter
winter and spring flow period and the community was rated Good.
Rural Residential
10
Volume (MGD)
Data Analysis
Visible Landuse (%)
Sample Date
Gains -- Comely Shiner, Pirate Perch, Eastern Mosquitofish, Pumpkinseed, Redear Sunfish. Losses --
Rosyside Dace, Rosefin Shiner, Mountain Redbelly Dace, Golden Redhorse, Creek Chubsucker, Margined
Madtom, Brown Bullhead, Flat Bullhead, Chain Pickerel. All species gained or lost were represented by 1-6
fish/species, except for Pirate Perch, Rosefin Shiner, and Golden Redhorse (n=13, 59, and 91, respectively).
06/16/10
06/09/99
Reference Site
NPDES Number
---
Stream Width (m)
10
Average Depth (m)
---
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)
75
Elevation (ft)
Green Sunfish, Bluegill, Redear Sunfish
Bioclassification
Good
Excellent
NCIBI
46
54
50 Good
18
3
5
10
5.5
102
6.4
6
7
8
06/02/94
99-44
3
Sample ID
None
Habitat Assessment Scores (max)
20.6
10
Slightly turbid, easily
silted
5
Cobble, gravel, sand, clay, boulderSubstrate
Exotic Species 2009
Species Total
19
24
2010-49
Johnny Darter (20%) Most Abundant Species 2009
75
290
Drainage Area (mi2)
33.1
FISH COMMUNITY SAMPLE
Stream Classification
C
SR 1445
Location
8 digit HUC
03010102
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-B.8
Water Quality Parameters
Temperature (°C)25.9
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)9.0
Specific Conductance (µS/cm)416
pH (s.u.)7.4
Channel Modification (5)5
Instream Habitat (20)20
Bottom Substrate (15)13
Pool Variety (10)8
Riffle Habitat (16)12
Bank Erosion (7)3
Bank Vegetation (7)5
Light Penetration (10)10
Left Riparian Score (5)5
Right Riparian Score (5)5
Total Habitat Score (100)86
Taxonomic Analysis
A tolerant macroinvertebrate community was observed at this Basinwide sampling location in 2009. No stoneflies were collected at the site.
Maccaffertium modestum and Baetis flavistriga were the abundant tolerant mayflies collected at the site. These mayfly species commonly occur in NC
peidmont streams. The tolerant filter-feeding caddisfly taxa Cheumatopsyche spp . and Hydropsyche betteni were also abundant. A rarely collected
mayfly Paracloeodes fleeki was common at this location. This taxa is generally collected in degraded streams. The organic pollution tolerant
Dicrotendipes neomodestus was abundant along with other tolerant chironomids such as Phaenopsectra punctipes gr.,Polypedilum illinoense gr., and
P. scalaenum gr. Only two intolerant taxa were collected including the caddisfly Chimarra spp. and the beetle Psephenus herricki .
Data Analysis
This stream received a bioclassification of Fair in 2009 despite the highest EPT taxa richness and lowest EPTBI and NCBI on record at this station. A
generally tolerant benthic community was found at this location. A more diverse macroinvertebrate community would be expected due to adequate
habitat found at the site. Conductivity was the highest compared to all other Roanoke Basinwide sites at 416 µS/cm. This is most likely due to the
WWTP located approximately 1 mile upstream. In 2009, the elevated conductivity was lower than in 1999 (633 µS/cm) and in 2004 (501µS/cm) and
dissolved oxygen was higher in 2009 potentially parallelling decreases in biotic indices. This site has been issued permit violations in the past and
continues to suffer degraded conditions most likely from point source inputs.
Fair
08/24/94 6694 44 8 6.84 6.89 Fair
10/28/94 6738 50 8 6.74 6.31
Fair
08/25/99 7989 41 8 6.73 6.75 Fair
06/29/04 9420 64 9 7.00 6.70
Bioclassification
08/12/09 10810 57 12 6.54 6.03 Fair
Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI
Site Photograph
Water Clarity slightly turbid
Habitat Assessment Scores (max)
Substrate Good mix of bedrock, boulder, rubble, and sand.
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD)
Henderson Water Reclamation Facility NC0020559 6.0
Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe)
Visible Landuse (%)80 20 0
Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m)
C 7.0 330 8 0.2
County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude AU Number Level IV Ecoregion
VANCE 6 03010102 36.368770 -78.408520 23-8-(1)b Northern Outer Piedmont
BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE SAMPLE
Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification
NUTBUSH CR SR 1317 NB49 08/12/09 Fair
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-C.1
appendix 3-c
aMBient MonitoRing sYsteMs
station data sHeets
FoR tHe Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-C.2
Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report
Station #:N5000000
Location:NUTBUSH CRK AT SR 1317 NR HENDERSON
Stream class:C
NC stream index:23-8-(1)
Hydrologic Unit Code:03010102
Latitude:36.36914 Longitude:-78.40834
Agency:NCAMBNT
PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max
# ND EL # %%Conf
Field
D.O. (mg/L)<4 6.6 7 7.5 9.7 12.5 13.5 14.947000
<5 6.6 7 7.5 9.7 12.5 13.5 14.947000
pH (SU)<6 6.2 6.6 6.9 7.4 7.7 7.8 8.647000
>9 6.2 6.6 6.9 7.4 7.7 7.8 8.647000
Salinity (ppt)N/A 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.390
Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 221 300 360 458 572 630 693480
Water Temperature (°C)>32 5.9 7.5 10 14.9 22.5 24.3 26.148000
Other
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)>40 4 4 4 7 10 10 102000
TSS (mg/L)N/A 2.5 2.5 2.5 6.2 12 13 151910
Turbidity (NTU)>50 1 1.4 1.8 2.2 4.8 8.7 3148010
Nutrients (mg/L)
NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.084736
NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 4.1 5.99 7.5 11 15 18 23460
TKN as N N/A 0.2 0.2 0.35 0.55 0.6 0.69 0.89457
Total Phosphorus N/A 0.06 0.17 0.21 0.36 0.54 0.75 1450
Metals (ug/L)
Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 84 84 98 140 185 320 32090
Arsenic, total (As)>10 5 5 5 5 5 5 59090
Cadmium, total (Cd)>2 1 1 2 2 2 2 29090
Chromium, total (Cr)>50 10 10 25 25 25 25 259090
Copper, total (Cu)>7 2 2 2 3 4 5 59020
Iron, total (Fe)>1000 130 130 190 270 330 640 6409000
Lead, total (Pb)>25 10 10 10 10 10 10 109090
Mercury, total (Hg)>0.012 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.28080
Nickel, total (Ni)>88 10 10 10 10 10 10 109090
Zinc, total (Zn)>50 15 15 16 18 23 34 349000
Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL)
# results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf:
48 115.9 4 8.3
01/03/2005Time period:11/18/2009to
Key:
# result: number of observations
# ND: number of observations reported to be below detection level (non-detect)
EL: Evaluation Level; applicable numeric or narrative water quality standard or action level
Results not meeting EL: number and percentages of observations not meeting evaluation level
Stations with less than 10 results for a given parameter were not evaluated for statistical confidence
%Conf : States the percent statistical confidence that the actual percentage of exceedances is at least 10% (20% for Fecal Coliform)
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-D.1
appendix 3-d
10-digit wateRsHed MaPs
FoR tHe Middle Roanoke RiveR suBBasin
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-D.2
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-D.3
"à)
"à)
"à)"à)
"à)
"à)"à)
"à)"à)"à)
"à)
[¡[¡
[¡
[¡
[¡[¡
[¡
[¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡¢¡
VANCE
GRANVILLE
Rattles
n
a
ke
C
r
Kerr
Reservoir
IslandCre
e
k
LittleIslandCreek
NutbushCreek
LittleJohnson
Cre
e
k
N C -9 6
US-15
Henderson
Stovall
Middleburg
GRANVILLE
PERSON
N4590000
N5000000
N4590000N4590000
N4590000
NF38
NF37
NF36
NF22
NF33
NF31
NB64
NB49
NB48
NB87
NB45
NB86
NB112
AaronsCreek
F
lat
C
r
e
e
k
BlueCre
e
k
MountainCreek
G
r
a
s
s
y
C
r
e
e
k
C
rooked
R
u
n
Johnso
n
Creek
MichaelCreek
Crook
e
d
Fork
BearskinCreek
W
olfpit
R
u
n
G illia m s B r a n c h
LickBranch
MillCreek
CedarBranch
LittleNutbushCreekROA037IROA037E ROA037AROA037IJ
Grassy
Creek-John
H
Kerr
Reservoir
(0301010208)
Legend
Permits
Animal
Operation
Permits
Monitoring
Sites
2010
Use
Support
Minor
NPDES
Dischargers
Major
NPDES
Dischargers
NPDES
Non-Dischargers
NPDES
Stormwater
Individual
State
Cattle
Swine
Wet
Poultry
NPDES
Aquaculture
Supporting
Not
Rated
No
Data
Impaired
Primary
Roads
Municipalities
County
Boundaries
8-Digit
HUC
#*XY #0 E k "Y
USGS
Gage
Stations
!<
RAMS
(`09-`10)
¢¡
RAMS
(`07-`08)
¢¡
Lake
Stations
^
Benthos
"à)
Fish
Community
[¡
Ambient
¢¡
NC
Division
of
Water
Quality
Basinwide
Planning
Unit
March
2011
¯
0
1
2
3
4
0.5
Miles
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-D.4
Rattlesnak
e
Cr
Kerr
Reservoir
IslandCr
e
e
k
L it tl e I s l a n d C r e e k
NutbushCreek
NewmansCreek
US-15
GRANVILLE
VANCE
Kerr
Reservoir
Henderson
Stovall
MiddleburgVANCEWARREN
N5000000
NF38
NF37
NF36
NF22
NF33
NB64
NB49
NB48
NB88
NB87
NB45
NB86
F
lat
Cre
e
k
BlueCre
e
k
MountainCreek
Smith Creek
GrassyCreek
C
ro
o
ked
R
un
JohnsonCreekLittleJohnsonCreek
MichaelCreek
GilliamsBranch
LickBranch
MillCreek
CedarBranch
LittleNutbushCreek
ROA037A
Butcher
Creek-John
H
Kerr
Reservoir
(0301010209)
Legend
Permits
Animal
Operation
Permits
Monitoring
Sites
2010
Use
Support
Minor
NPDES
Dischargers
Major
NPDES
Dischargers
NPDES
Non-Dischargers
NPDES
Stormwater
Individual
State
Cattle
Swine
Wet
Poultry
NPDES
Aquaculture
Supporting
Not
Rated
No
Data
Impaired
Primary
Roads
Municipalities
County
Boundaries
8-Digit
HUC
#*XY#0Ek"Y
USGS
Gage
Stations
!<
RAMS
(`09-`10)
¢¡
RAMS
(`07-`08)
¢¡
Lake
Stations
^
Benthos
"à)
Fish
Community
[¡
Ambient
¢¡
NC
Division
of
Water
Quality
Basinwide
Planning
Unit
October
2011
¯
0
1
2
3
4
0.5
Miles
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-D.5
VANCE
Rattl
e
s
nak
e
C
r
Kerr
Reservoir
Island
C
re
e
k
LittleIslandCreek
NutbushCreek
Newmans
Creek
John
H.
Kerr
Reservoir
U
S
-
1
5
8
I-85 US-158
US-1
NC-39
Henderson
Stovall
Middleburg VA N C E
GRANVILLE
WA R R E N
N5000000
N6400000
NF38
NF37
NF36
NF22
NF33
NB89NB90
NB51
NB51
NB64
NB49
NB48
NB88
NB87
NB37NB37
NB45
NB86
NB113
Flat
C
r
e
e
k
BlueCre
ek
MountainCreek
SmithCreek
C
rooked
R
u
n
MichaelCreek
G illia m s B r a n c h
LickBranch
MillCreek
CedarBranch
ROA037I
ROA037E
ROA037A
ROA037IJ
Nutbush
Creek-John
H
Kerr
Reservoir
(0301010210)
Legend
Permits
Animal
Operation
Permits
Monitoring
Sites
2010
Use
Support
Minor
NPDES
Dischargers
Major
NPDES
Dischargers
NPDES
Non-Dischargers
NPDES
Stormwater
Individual
State
Cattle
Swine
Wet
Poultry
NPDES
Aquaculture
Supporting
Not
Rated
No
Data
Impaired
Primary
Roads
Municipalities
County
Boundaries
8-Digit
HUC
#*XY #0 E k "Y
USGS
Gage
Stations
!<
RAMS
(`09-`10)
¢¡
RAMS
(`07-`08)
¢¡
Lake
Stations
^
Benthos
"à)
Fish
Community
[¡
Ambient
¢¡
NC
Division
of
Water
Quality
Basinwide
Planning
Unit
October
2011
¯
0
1
2
3
4
0.5
Miles
Roa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R B
as
i
n
:
M
id
d
l
e
R
oa
n
o
k
e
R
iv
e
R suBB
as
i
n

(
H
uC
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
2
)

a
PP
en
d
i
Ces
3-D.6