Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 5 - 03010107Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.1 CHAPTER 5 Lower roanoke river SubbaSin HUC 03010107 Includes: Roanoke River, Quankey Creek, Cashie River & Welch Creek SubbaSin at a GLance countieS: Bertie, Halifax, Martin, Northampton & Washington MunicipaLitieS: Askewville, Aulander, Garysburg, Gaston, Halifax, Hamilton, Hassell, Hodgood, Jackson, Kelford, Lewiston Woodville, Oak City, Plymouth, Rich Square, Roanoke Rapids, Roxobel, Scotland Neck, Weldon, Williamston & Windsor, ecoreGionS: Northern Outer Piedmont, Rolling Coastal Plain, Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces, Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods, Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces & Chesapeake- Pamlico Lowlands and Tidal Marshes perMitted FaciLitieS: NPDES Dischargers: ..............................24 Major .............................................................7 Minor ...........................................................11 General .........................................................6 NPDES Non-Dischargers: ........................11 Stormwater: ............................................58 General .......................................................50 Individual .......................................................8 Animal Operations: .................................46 Aquaculture .................................................45 popuLation: 2010 Census .....................................78,568 2006 Land cover: Open Water .................................................1.7% Developed ...................................................6.1% Forest .......................................................25.9%Agriculture .................................................26.0%Wetlands ...................................................29.6% Barren Land ................................................0.1% Shrub/Grassland .......................................10.5% SubbaSin water QuaLity overview The Lower Roanoke River Subbasin is the eastern most subbasin and empties into Albemarle Sound. The subbasin contains three Impaired stream: one segment of Quankey Creek is Impaired for biological integrity; Welch Creek is Impaired for dioxin and low pH. One of the two most downstream segments of the Roanoke River is Impaired for low DO and the other is Impaired for dioxin. During this basinwide cycle (2004-2009), the subbasin experienced a moderate drought in 2005 and 2006 as well as a prolonged drought between 2007 and 2008. Monitoring the biological community showed only a small percent declined and some improved. There were no major ambient monitoring violations. The John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir Section 216 Feasibility Study project is partially located in this subbasin. The project area also includes HUCs 03010102 and 03010106. 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 in Chapter 3. Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.2 FiguRe 5-1: LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin (03010107) HALIFAXWARREN NorlinaMacon SmithCrSixpoundCrJordanCr Hub q u a rte r C r ROA038A NB113 NB37 NB51 NB52N6400000NB90 NORTHAMPTON HERTFORD BERTIE HERTFORD PITT MARTIN WAS HING TO N C H OW A N Roanoke Rapids Aulander Roxobel Windsor Oak City JacksonRich Square Williamston Jamiesville Scottland Neck Plymouth ROANOKERIV ER Conoconna r a S w ROANOKERIVER R O A N O KE RIVER QuankeyCr KehukeeSw C a shieRi ConohoCr RoquistCr Hogg a r d Mill C r HardisonMillCr CashieRiver WelchCr N9250000 N9600000 N9685000 NB69 N8550000 NB67 NB80 NB78 NB76 NB93 N8950000 NB75 N8300000 NB55ROA0491A ROA0492A N8200000 NB53 N7300000NF46 NB91 NB59NB60 NB59 BEAUFORT Lower Roanoke River Subbasin (03010107) 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 BasinwidePlanning Unit August 2011 ¯ 0 4 8 12 16 2 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.3 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 5-2). 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 5-2: YeaRLY FLow Rates (CFs) oF tHe usgs gage stations in tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Between 1997 & 2009 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Di s c h a r g e , c u b i c f e e t / s e c o n d 2080500 208111310 Indicates periods of drought in the Roanoke River Basin From Left to Right: • 2080500: Roanoke River at Roanoke Rapids • 208111310: Cashie River (Windsor) bioLoGicaL data Biological samples were collected mostly 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, 10 biological sampling sites were monitored within the Roanoke Rapids Subbasin. The ratings for each of the sampling stations can be seen in Appendix 5-B. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Each benthic station monitored during the current cycle is shown in Figure 5-3 and color coded based on the current rating. Each of the sites are discussed in more detail in the watershed section below. Figure 5-5 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 stable community. benthic SaMpLinG SuMMary £Total Stations Monitored 9 £Total Samples Taken 9 £Number of New Stations 0 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.4 FiguRe 5-3: BentHiC stations CoLoR Coded BY CuRRent Rating in tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Benthos 2004-2009 Excellent/Natural Good Good-Fair/Moderate Fair Not Impaired Not Rated FiguRe 5-4: CuRRent BentHiC site Ratings Excellent/Natural Good Good-Fair/Moderate Fair Poor/Severe Not Rated Not Impaired FiguRe 5-5: 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 5-6 and color coded based on the current rating. The site is discussed in more detail in the watershed section below. Figure 5-7 shows the percentages of each rating given during this sampling cycle within this subbasin. Figure 5-8 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. Overall, the community at this site is stable. FiSh coM. SaMpLinG SuMMary £Total Stations Monitored 1 £Total Samples Taken 1 £Number of New Stations 0 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.5 FiguRe 5-6: FisH CommunitY stations CoLoR Coded BY CuRRent Rating in tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Fish 2004-2009 Excellent Good Good-Fair Fair FiguRe 5-7: CuRRent FisH Comm site Ratings Excellent Good Good-Fair Fair Poor Not Rated Not Impaired FiguRe 5-8: CHange in FisH Comm 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 5-B. 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 5-A and the full 2010 IR can be found on the Modeling & TMDL Unit’s website. Seven Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) station is located in the Roanoke Rapids subbasin (see Figure 5-1 for the station locations). 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 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.6 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 each ambient station 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. pH Three out of the seven stations measured samples below the standard range in 1% to 4% of samples taken during this cycle. This is represented in Figure 5-9 by the yellow dots. No samples measured above the standard range which are represented by the green dots (0%). Figure 5-10 shows the mean and median pH levels for all samples taken over the course of 13 years in the Lower Roanoke River Subbasin. The pH pattern seen in this subbasin during this time period appears to be closely linked with flow levels. As flow levels go up pH levels appear to fall. This could be caused by the saltwater wedge traveling more upstream during these times. FiguRe 5-9: PeRCentage oF samPLes exCeeding tHe PH standaRds (2005-2009) 0% <7% 7%-10% >10% FiguRe 5-10: summaRized PH vaLues FoR aLL data CoLLeCted at amBient samPLing stations in HuC 03010107 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 pH Median Mean * NC pH Standard: Between 6.0 and 9.0 su for Class C; 4.3 and 9.0 for SW Turbidity One of the seven stations in the Roanoke Rapids subbasin exceeded the state’s turbidity standard in 6 percent of samples, as seen in Figure 5-11 indicated by the yellow dot. Possible sources of the elevated turbidity levels are discussed in the 10-digit watershed section. Figure 5-12 shows the mean and median turbidity levels for all samples taken over the course of 13 years in the Lower Roanoke River subbasin. The yearly averages are well below the state standard of 50 NTUs but have slightly increased over the years. While some erosion is a natural phenomenon, human land use practices may accelerate the process to unhealthy levels for aquatic life. Construction sites, mining operations, agricultural operations, logging operations and excessive stormwater flow off impervious surfaces are all potential sources. Turbidity exceedances demonstrate the importance of protecting and conserving stream buffers and natural areas. Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.7 FiguRe 5-11: PeRCentage oF samPLes exCeeding tHe tuRBiditY standaRd (2005-2009) 0% <7% 7%-10% >10% FiguRe 5-12: summaRized tuRBiditY vaLues FoR aLL data CoLLeCted at amBient samPLing stations in HuC 03010107 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Tu r b i d i t y ( N T U ) Median Mean * NC Turbidity Standard: 50 NUT Dissolved Oxygen As seen in Figure 5-13, one of the seven sites exceeded the DO standard in 2% of samples during this moni- toring cycle. Figure 5-14 shows the mean and median of DO levels for all samples taken over the course of 13 years in the Lower Roanoke River subbasin. These averages are well within the normal DO range; however, a slight decline is seen in the last four years. FiguRe 5-13: PeRCentage oF samPLes exCeeding tHe do standaRd (2005-2009) 0% <7% 7%-10% >10% FiguRe 5-14: summaRized do vaLues FoR aLL data CoLLeCted at amBient samPLing stations in HuC 03010107 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DO ( m g / l ) Median Mean * NC DO Standard: Not < 5 mg/l daily avg. or not < 4 mg/l instantaneous Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.8 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 5-15, all seven sites had less than 6% of samples over 400 colonies/100 ml. Possible sources of elevated levels of FCB are discussed in the subwatershed sections. Figure 5-16 shows the yearly geometric mean (calculated average) for all samples taken over the course of 13 years in the Lower Roanoke River subbasin. The highest yearly geometric mean was recorded in 2001 (56 colonies/100 ml). The figure also includes the yearly average stream flow, as seen in Figure 5-2, to show how flow can be closely linked to FCB levels. FiguRe 5-16: summaRized FeCaL CoLiFoRm BaCteRia vaLues FoR aLL data CoLLeCted at amBient samPLing stations in HuC 03010107 witH oveRLaYing FLow 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 FC B ( c o l o n i e s / 1 0 0 m l ) Geometricmean 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Di s h c h a r g e , c u b i c f e e t / s e c o n d 2080500 208111310 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Di s h c h a r g e , c u b i c f e e t / s e c o n d 2080500 208111310USGS Flow Gage Stations: 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Di s h c h a r g e , c u b i c f e e t / s e c o n d 2080500 208111310 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Di s c h a r g e , c u b i c f e e t / s e c o n d 2068500207050020710002074000 * NC FCB Standard (5-in-30 data only): Geomean not > 200/100 ml or 400/100 ml in 20% of samples 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. FiguRe 5-15: PeRCentage oF samPLes witH eLevated FCB LeveLs (2005- 2009) <6.9% 6.9%-10% 10.1%-20.0% >20.0% Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.9 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 5-17). 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 5-A. Each monitored stream segment is given an overall category number which reflects the highest individual parameter category. Figure 5-18 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 5-17) 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 5-17: use suPPoRt CategoRies FoR BioLogiCaL Ratings Biological Ratings Aquatic Life Use Support Excellent/Natural Supporting (Categories 1-2) Good Good-Fair/Moderate Not Impaired Not Rated Not Rated (Category 3) Fair Impaired(Categories 4-5)Poor/Severe FiguRe 5-18: 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.10 recoMMendationS & action pLanS at the SubbaSin ScaLe dwQ priority SuMMary Table 5-1 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. taBLe 5-1: notaBLe wateRs in tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin (not Ranked) stReam name au#CLass.PotentiaL stRessoR(s) PotentiaL souRCe(s) QuaLitative status aCtions needed Roanoke R 23-(26)b3 C Low DO --Impaired SS Quankey Cr 23-30b C ----Impaired M Hardison Mill Cr 23-50-3 C ----Supporting SS Cashie R 24-2-(1)a, b, (9), (11) & (15)C;SW Low pH --Supporting -- 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.11 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 5-1, 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 5-2). 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 5-2 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 5-2) 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 5-2: 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% roanoke river within 03010107 AU#’s: 23-(26)a, 23-(26)b1 & 23-(26)b2 These three segments are approximately 103.8 miles combined. They begin 50 feet downstream of the Roanoke Rapids dam and run to the Highway 17 bridge in Williamston. The drainage area is mostly agricultural with some forest and urban areas. There are four major and eight minor NPDES permitted facilities as well as several permitted aquaculture and animal operations. The three segments were on the Impaired Waters List from 2000 to 2008 for fish consumption due to mercury as well as dioxin fish consumption advisor for the lower segment 23-(53). Aquatic life and recreation assessments for the segments were Supporting during that time. Water Quality Status During this sampling cycle, three AMS stations were monitored along these three segments. There were no exceedances during this time and results showed similar water quality as found during the previous cycle. The segments are therefore Supporting of aquatic life and recreational parameters. use suPPoRt: SupportinG (103.8 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.2 AMS (N8200000) (N8300000) (N8550000)No Exceedances Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.12 The Town of Weldon’s WWTP discharges effluent about 30 miles upstream of AMS station N8200000. Between 2004 and 2010, this facility has had several permit violations. Majority of these violations were for exceeding the BOD weekly average limits and resulted in enforcement cases. The facility had eight FCB violations several times greater than permit limits which also resulted in enforcement cases. By July 2009, the facility had solved the issue and no longer received violations for elevated BOD or FCB. These segments were delisted in 2010 from the Impaired Waters List due to the development of a Statewide Mercury TMDL. The fish consumption advisory for this area is no longer in place, and the river will no longer be listed due to this advisory. AU#: 23-(26)b3 This segment is approximately 18 miles long from the Town of Halifax to the southeast corner of the Town of Jamesville. The drainage area has a mixture of forest and agricultural lands. As seen in Figure 5-19, majority of the forested land is located in the flood plain of the river. This segment of the river has been on the Impaired Waters List for low DO since 2008. Water Quality Status During the previous planning cycle, US Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a study entitled “Relations Among Floodplain Water Levels, Instream Dissolved-Oxygen (DO) Conditions, and Streamflow in the Lower Roanoke River, NC, 1997-2001”. Data from this study indicated that from September 1999 through August 2004, 16.3% of the samples taken were below the continuous monitoring DO standard for the daily average of 5 mg/l. Therefore, this segment of the Roanoke River was placed on the Impaired Waters List in 2008 for low DO. Data from the same station located on the eastern edge of the Town of Jamesville, showed an increase in DO levels between 2006 and 2010. During that time only 3.78% of samples were below the daily average of 5 mg/l. This slight increase can be seen in Figure 5-20 which displays the daily DO averages between 1998 to 2011. It was reported in the last plan that the McMurray Fabrics Inc. facility had significant noncompliance for their Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) testing. In 2005, the facility passed two tests and failed two test. By the end of 2005, the facility ceased discharging to the Roanoke River. The Town of Williamston WWTP (NC0020044) was also reported on in the previous plan. The facility had chronic problems exceeding their discharge limits for fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) and total suspended solids (TSS). A Special Order of Consent (SOC) was issued in February 2006 allowing the facility to monitor FCB levels without being penalized for exceeding the FCB limit assigned in their permit until December 2007. This provided time for the facility to make the necessary upgrades to reduce risk of further violations. All upgrades were completed within the period of the SOC and previous FCB permit limits once again applied. The facility has had no FCB or TSS violations since that time. use suPPoRt: iMpaired (17.8 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.5 FiguRe 5-19: 2010 sateLLite image oF HuC 0301010706 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.13 FiguRe 5-20: daiLY aveRage do data taken at usgs gage station 02081094 (1998-2011) AU#: 23-(53) This is the last segment (18.3 miles) of the Roanoke River before it empties into Swan Bay of the Albemarle Sound. This drainage area is mostly agriculture with some forested area in the floodplain and urban areas in and around the Town of Plymouth. There is one major and two minor NPDES permitted facilities along this segment of the Roanoke River. This segment has been on the Impaired Waters List since 2000 for fish consumption-dioxins. Water Quality Status During this sampling cycle, this segment was monitored at two AMS stations. There were no exceedances during this time and results showed similar water quality as found during the previous cycle. The segments are there for Supporting of aquatic life and recreational parameters. This segment was also listed in 2002 for fish consumption-mercury. The mercury portion of the Impairment was removed in 2010 due to development of a Statewide Mercury TMDL. However, it remains on the Impaired Waters List for the fish consumption-dioxin Impairment. Dioxins are a by-product in some manufacturing processes, herbicide productions and used for bleaching paper. There is no current indication of the specific source of dioxins in this segment. The fish consumption advisory for catfish and carp along this segment was issued by the NC Department of Health and Human Resources. Quankey creek-roanoke river (0301010701) Includes: Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(26)a], Quankey Creek [AU#: 23-30b] & Chockoyotte Creek [AU#: 23-29] This watershed contains a mix land use of urban, agriculture, residential and some forested areas. There are three major and two minor NPDES permitted facilities along with one permitted swine animal operations located within the watershed. There is only one stream segment (Quankey Creek) within this watershed on the 2010 Impaired Waters List. use suPPoRt: iMpaired (18.3 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.4t AMS (N9250000) (N9600000)No Exceedances Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.14 Quankey Creek [AU#: 23-30b] This segment of Quankey Creek is approximately 3.4 miles from the confluence of Little Quankey Creek [AU#: 23-30-1] to the Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(26)a]. The majority of the drainage area is agricultural lands with some residential and commercial land cover. The Town of Halifax runs along a portion of this segment. The Halifax WWTP holds a Minor NPDES permit to discharge to the creek. The creek was placed on the Impaired Water List in 1998 for Biological Integrity/Benthos. Water Quality Status A fish community sample was taken at this site for the first time and resulted in a Good rating. The habitat scored high due to high quality instream and riparian buffer habitat. pH levels were below the state standard of 6.0; however, the upstream watershed is swamp-like where low pH values are to be expected. The types of fish collected show some signs of nutrient enrichment. Recommendations It is recommended that the benthic station NB60 be sampled during the next monitoring cycle to determine if benthic conditions have improved. conoconnara SwaMp-roanoke river (0301010702) Includes: Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(26)a], Conoconnara Swamp [AU#: 23-33], & Wheeler Creek [AU#: 23-32] This watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, residential, wetlands, forested and some urban areas. There is one minor NPDES permitted facility along with five swine and one cattle permitted animal operations located within the watershed. There are no waters on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. kehukee SwaMp-roanoke river (0301010703) Includes: Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(26)a & b1], Kehukee Swamp [AU#: 23-42], & Sandy Run [AU#: 23-37] This watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, residential, wetlands and forested areas. There are four minor NPDES permitted facilities along with seven swine, one poultry and one cattle permitted animal operations located within the watershed. There are no waters on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. Sweetwater creek (0301010704) Includes: Sweetwater Creek [AU#: 23-50], Hardison Mill Creek [AU#: 23-50-3], & Peter Swamp [AU#: 23-50-4] This watershed contains agriculture with some residential and forested areas. There is one minor NPDES permitted facility along with eight aquaculture permits located within the watershed. There are no waters on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. use suPPoRt: iMpaired (3.4 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.5 Benthos (NB60)Fair (1999) Fish Com (NF46)Good (2009) Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.15 Hardison Mill Creek [AU#: 23-50-3] Hardison Mill Creek is approximately 20 miles from source to Sweetwater Creek [AU#: 23-50]. Land cover for the majority of this drainage area is agriculture. This creek is currently supporting all designated uses. Water Quality Status This creek was monitored at Yarrell Creek Road (SR 1528) for the third time since 1999 and has been rated Moderate for all three samples. However, during the 2009 sample there was a noticeable decline in benthic health and population. There was a total absence of the flow-dependent blackflies that have been abundant or common in all previous collections. There was also a drastic decrease in the diversity of chironomid larvae. These declines may be due to the drastically higher specific conductivity in 2009 (179 µS/cm) versus levels measured in 2004 (58 µS/cm) as well as the decline in pH (4.3). The absence of the blackflies also suggests the stream is experiencing low flow conditions. conoho creek-roanoke river (0301010705) Includes: Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(26)b2], Conoho Creek [AU#: 23-49a & b], & Coniott Creek [AU#: 23-48] This watershed contains agriculture and wetlands with some residential, urban and forested areas. There two major and one minor NPDES permitted facilities along with seven swine permitted animal operations and nine aquaculture permits located within the watershed. There are no waters on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. Gardener creek-roanoke river (0301010706) Includes: Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(26)b3 & (53)], Devils Gut [AU#: 23-52], & Gardners Creek [AU#: 23-52-1] This watershed contains agriculture and wetlands with some residential, urban and forested areas. There two minor NPDES permitted facilities along with 21 aquaculture permits located within the watershed. The two segments of the Roanoke River in this watershed are on the 2010 Impaired Waters List and are discussed at the beginning of this section. headwaterS caShie river (0301010707) Includes: Cashie River [AU#: 24-2-(1)a & (1)b], Connaritsa Swamp [AU#: 24-2-3], & Wahtom Swamp [AU#: 24-2-2] This watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, residential, wetlands and forested areas. There are two minor NPDES permitted facilities along with three permitted swine animal operations located within the watershed. There are no waters on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. use suPPoRt: SupportinG (19.9 mi) 2008 IR Cat.2 2010 IR Cat.2 Benthos (NB69)Moderate (2009) Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.16 Cashie River [AU#: 24-2-(1)a & (1)b] These two segments of Cashie River are approximately 45 miles from source to just upstream of the Bertie County line. However about 15 miles of the second segment is located in the Outlet Cashie River Watershed (0301010708). The majority of the drainage area is agriculture with some residential areas and a small amount of urban area downstream. There is one minor NPDES permitted facility and three permitted swine operations discharging to the river. The Cashie River was placed on the 2002 Impaired Waters List due to a NC DHHS fish advisory-mercury; however, the advisory was lifted and the river was removed from the list in 2010. The river is currently supporting all uses. Water Quality Status Cashie River was monitored at two benthic stations within this watershed. Location of these stations can be seen in Figure 5-1. Both sites had decent habitat ratings, long term decreasing pH levels, increasing specific conductivity and signs of possible upstream point or nonpoint source pollution inputs. The downstream site (NB76) dropped a rating from Natural to Moderate due to the lower number and pollution tolerance level of the taxa collected. An AMS station was also monitored during this sampling cycle and is located at the upstream benthic station (NB75). Parameters monitored at the station were consistent with those results from the previous cycle with the exception of pH levels. Long term monitoring results (1998-2009) showed a slight decrease from the mid 6’s to roughly 5.7. Since 2002, the Cashie River has been on the Impaired Waters List due to a fish consumption advisory. This advisory was put in place by NC DHHS as a result of a 2003 study of mercury in fish tissue. This advisory has been lifted causing the river to be removed from the list. A Statewide Mercury TMDL is also in development stages to address this issue. Need to make this more consistent with text above in Roanoke River write up. Recommendations A source study is recommended to determine the source of increasing conductivity levels and decreasing pH levels. outLet caShie river (0301010708) Includes: Cashie River [AU#: 24-2-(1)b, (9), (11) & (15)], Roquist Creek [AU#: 24-2-7], & Hoggard Mill Creek [AU#: 24-2-6] This watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, residential, wetlands and forested areas. There are one minor and one major NPDES permitted facilities along with five permitted aquaculture operations located within the watershed. There are no waters on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. Cashie River [AU#: 24-2-(9), (11) & (15)] These three segments of the Cashie River are approximately nine miles from just downstream of the Bertie County line to the Albemarle Sound (Batchelor Bay) [AU#: 24]. The majority of the drainage area is agriculture and forested area. Water Quality Status Since 2002, the Cashie River has been on the Impaired Waters List due to a fish consumption advisory. This advisory was put in place by NC DHHS as a result of a 2003 study of mercury in fish tissue. This advisory has been lifted causing the River to be removed from the list. A Statewide Mercury TMDL is also in development stages to address this issue. use suPPoRt: SupportinG (45.3 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.2 Benthos (NB75) (NB76) Moderate (2009) Moderate (2009) AMS (N8950000)No Exceedances use suPPoRt: no data (9.3 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.3c Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.17 These three segments have moved from the Impaired category to No Data because there are not current monitoring stations along this stretch of river. pLyMouth-roanoke river (0301010709) Includes: Welch Creek [AU#: 23-55], Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(53)], & Conaby Creek [AU#: 23-56] This watershed contains a mix land use of agriculture, urban, residential, and wetland areas. There are two minor and one major NPDES permitted facilities along with two permitted aquaculture operations located within the watershed. Two streams (Welch Creek and the downstream most segment of the Roanoke River) are on the 2010 Impaired Waters List within this watershed. Welch Creek [AU#: 23-55] Welch Creek is approximately 13 miles from source to the Roanoke River [AU#: 23-(53)]. The majority of the drainage area is agriculture with some industrial and a small percentage of urban area. Welch Creek is currently Impaired for dioxin due to a fish consumption advisory. Water Quality Status Welch Creek was not monitored during this cycle. reFerenceS References marked with (*) indicates a DWQ special study report. These reports are not currently available online. Contact the DWQ Environmental Science Section at (919) 743-8400 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. 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) ____. *DWQ. ESS. BAU. Month Year. (B-#) Report Name & Sample Date. Raleigh, NC. 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. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4295: “Relations Among Floodplain Water Levels, In- stream DO Conditions, and Streamflow in the Lower Roanoke River, NC, 1997-2001” use suPPoRt: iMpaired (13.3 mi) 2008 IR Cat.5 2010 IR Cat.5 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 7 ) 5.18 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-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 5-a use suPPoRt Ratings FoR aLL monitoRed wateRs in tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-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  Quankey Creek-Roanoke River 0301010701Roanoke River Basin Watershed Roanoke River 03010107Roanoke River Basin Subbasin Quankey Creek-Roanoke River 0301010701Roanoke River Basin Watershed Chockoyotte Creek23-29 From source to Roanoke River 10.6 FW Miles C  1  3a Little Quankey Creek23-30-1 From source to Quankey Creek 9.5 FW Miles C  1 Quankey Creek23-30a From source to Little Quankey Creek 16.0 FW Miles C  1 Quankey Creek23-30b From Little Quankey Creek to Roanoke River 3.4 FW Miles C   5 ROANOKE RIVER23-(25.5)From a point 0.6 mile upstream of N.C. Hwy. 48 bridge to a line across river 50 feet downstream of N.C. Hwy. 48 (City of Roanoke Rapids, Town of Weldon water supply intakes) 1.7 FW Miles WS-IV;CA  1  1  1 ROANOKE RIVER23-(26)a From a line across the river 50 ft downstream of NC Hwy 48 bridge to the confluence of Sandy Run Cr at the Bertie Northampton Halifax Co. line 50.1 FW Miles C  1  1 Conoconnara Swamp-Roanoke River 0301010702Roanoke River Basin Watershed Conoconnara Swamp23-33 From source to Roanoke River 17.7 FW Miles C  1 Kehukee Swamp-Roanoke River 0301010703Roanoke River Basin Watershed Kehukee Swamp (White Millpond) 23-42 From source to Roanoke River 10.6 FW Miles C  1 10/20/2010 Page 233 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-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  Kehukee Swamp-Roanoke River 0301010703Roanoke River Basin Watershed ROANOKE RIVER23-(26)b1 From the confluence of Sandy Run Cr at the Bertie/Northampton/Halifax Co. line to subbasin 8/9 boundary 24.8 FW Miles C  1  1 Sweetwater Creek 0301010704Roanoke River Basin Watershed Hardison Mill Creek23-50-3 From source to Sweetwater Creek 19.9 FW Miles C  1 Conoho Creek-Roanoke River 0301010705Roanoke River Basin Watershed Conoho Creek23-49a From source to Martin Co 1417 below Beaverdam Cr 24.5 FW Miles C  1 Conoho Creek23-49b From Martin Co 1417 to Roanoke River 7.0 FW Miles C  1 ROANOKE RIVER23-(26)b2 From subbasin 8/9 boundary to Hwy 17 Bridge in Williamston 28.9 FW Miles C  1  1 ROANOKE RIVER23-(26)b3 From Hwy 17 bridge at Williamston to the 18 mile marker at Jamesville 17.8 FW Miles C  5 Headwaters Cashie River 0301010707Roanoke River Basin Watershed Cashie River24-2-(1)a From source to Bertie County SR 1225 15.2 FW Miles C;Sw  1  1  1 Outlet Cashie River 0301010708Roanoke River Basin Watershed Cashie River24-2-(1)b From Bertie County SR 1225 to a point 1 mile upstream from Bertie Co. SR 1500 30.1 FW Miles C;Sw  1 Hoggard Mill Creek24-2-6 From source to Cashie River 7.4 FW Miles C;Sw  1 Roquist Creek24-2-7 From source to Cashie River 26.3 FW Miles C;Sw  1 Plymouth-Roanoke River 0301010709Roanoke River Basin Watershed 10/20/2010 Page 234 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-A.4 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  Plymouth-Roanoke River 0301010709Roanoke River Basin Watershed ROANOKE RIVER23-(53)From 18 mile marker at Jamesville to Albemarle Sound (Batchelor Bay) 18.3 FW Miles C;Sw   4t  1  1 Welch Creek23-55 From source to Roanoke River 13.3 FW Miles C;Sw   4t  1  5 10/20/2010 Page 235 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.1 appendix 5-b BioLogiCaL samPLing site data sHeets (BentHiC maCRoinveRteBRate & FisH CommunitY) FoR tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.2 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.3 Biological Samples Taken During this Assessment Cycle station id wateRBodY CountY site LoCation samPLe ResuLts Benthic Sample Sites NB55 KEHUKEE SWP HALIFAX SR 1804 09 - Natural NB59 QUANKEY CR HALIFAX NC 903 09 - Natural NB67 CONOHO CR MARTIN SR 1417 09 - Natural NB69 HARDISON MILL CR MARTIN SR 1528 09 - Moderate NB75 CASHIE R BERTIE SR 1219 09 - Moderate NB76 CASHIE R BERTIE SR 1257 09 - Moderate NB78 HOGGARD MILL CR BERTIE SR 1301 09 - Moderate NB80 ROQUIST SWP BERTIE US 17 09 - Natural NB93 CONOHO CR MARTIN NC 11-42 09 - Moderate Fish Community Sample Sites NF46 Quankey Cr Halifax US 301/NC 903/NC 125 09 - Good Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.4 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)6.6 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)10.6 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)74 pH (s.u.)5.4 Channel Modification (5)15 Instream Habitat (20)18 Site Photograph Water Clarity Tannic Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) None --- --- Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)90 0 0 10 (NC 903) Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) C 33.6 113 5 0.5 AU Number Level IV Ecoregion HALIFAX 8 03010107 36.353333 -77.643889 23-30a Rolling Coastal Plain County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude  Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification QUANKEY CR NC 903 NB59 02/03/09 Natural Instream Habitat (20)18 Bottom Substrate (15)15 Pool Variety (10)10 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)6 Bank Vegetation (7)7 Light Penetration (10)9 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)90 Taxonomic Analysis Pollution tolerant taxa present in 1999 but absent from 2004 and 2009 include the oligochaete Limnodrilus spp., the gastropod Physa spp ., the beetle Tropisternus spp ., and the chironomids Dicrotendipes neomodestus, and D. nervosus . Conversely, many pollution intolerant taxa were present in 2004 and 2009 but absent in 1999 and included the mayfly Ephemerella doris, the caddisfly Ceraclea transversa and Polycentropus spp . Most notably, the 1999 sample lacked nine stonefly taxa collected from the subsequent samples that included Allocapnia spp ., Suwallia basalis, Leuctra spp., Shipsa rotunda , Perlesta spp ., Perlinella drymo, Clioperla clio, Isoperla namata , and I. transmarina . Data Analysis The 2009 sample continues the trend of improving benthic macroinvertebrate community metrics from the first sample here in 1999. The S, EPTS, BI and EPTBI have all improved in 2004 and 2009 from the initial assessment. Although specific conductance has been fairly stable here with the 1999 sample resulting in a measurement of 70 µS/cm, 61 µS/cm in 2004, and 74 µS/cm in 2009, the benthic macroinvertebrate data suggest improving physical conditions at this site since 1999. Natural02/16/99 7823 40 9 6.66 5.93 Natural02/23/04 9351 52 17 5.81 4.05 Bioclassification 02/03/09 10528 51 15 5.80 4.77 Natural Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Substrate Gravel, sand, silt, and detritus. Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.5 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)6.6 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)8.8 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)93 pH (s.u.)5.4 Channel Modification (5)15 Bioclassification KEHUKEE SWP SR 1804 NB55 02/03/09 Natural  Waterbody Location Station ID Date AU Number Level IV Ecoregion HALIFAX 8 03010107 36.129167 -77.363333 23-42 Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude C 19.2 44 6 0.6 Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)100 0 0 0 Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) None --- --- Site Photograph Water Clarity Clear Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Channel Modification (5)15 Instream Habitat (20)18 Bottom Substrate (15)6 Pool Variety (10)10 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)7 Bank Vegetation (7)7 Light Penetration (10)9 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)82 Substrate Sand, silt, and detritus, Bioclassification 02/03/09 10598 66 12 6.79 6.06 Natural Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Moderate02/24/04 9343 46 7 7.08 5.89 Taxonomic Analysis The 2009 sampled produced the highest EPT taxa richness and the lowest BI since sampling commenced here in 1999. EPT taxa present in 2009 but absent previously included the intolerant caddisflies Triaenodes ignitus , Ptilostomis spp., and Chimarra spp. Additionally, several tolerant taxa that were either abundant or common in previous collections were absent or rare in 2009 including the molluscs Physa spp ., Micromenetus dilatatus , and Sphaerium spp . Data Analysis The 2009 collection established the highest EPT, ST and the lowest BI since sampling first started here in 1999 and resulted in a subsequent improvement in the bioclassification to Natural. Although the specific conductance was somewhat higher in 2009 (92 µS/cm) relative to 2004 (78 µS/cm) and 1999 (74 µS/cm), the evidence based on the shift from a facultative benthic macroinvertebrate community to a slightly more pollution intolerant community suggest an overall improvement in conditions at this site from previous samples. This improvement may be related to a decrease in non-point pollution as a result of the drought. Moderate02/11/99 7811 59 8 7.11 6.64 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.6 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)3.9 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)11.6 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)143 pH (s.u.)5.2 Channel Modification (5)15  Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification CONOHO CR NC 11-42 NB93 02/03/09 Moderate County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude AU Number Level IV Ecoregion Martin 9 03010107 35.971667 -77.295278 23-49a Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) C 38.5 42 6 0.6 --- Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)100 --------- Water Clarity clear/tannic Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) none --- Site Photograph Channel Modification (5)15 Instream Habitat (20)15 Bottom Substrate (15)5 Pool Variety (10)9 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)10 Bank Vegetation (7)10 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)84 Substrate Mostly silt with detrital pools, some sand. Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI 7.10 Bioclassification 02/03/09 10599 29 3 7.20 6.78 Moderate Sample Date Taxonomic Analysis Only the second time sampled, there was a 25% reduction in EPT taxa richness from 4 species obtained in 2004 to 3 species in 2009. The winter stonefly Taeniopteryx and the silt-loving mayfly Caenis were absent in 2009 while the caddisfly Polycentropus was collected for the first time. Additionally, fewer tolerant crustaceans, oligochaetes, and midges were also collected in 2009 leading to a decrease in the overall benthic biotic index. Data Analysis Located just northeast of Oak City, this headwater segment of Conoho Creek is mostly forested in the immediate vicinity of the sampling site although the catchment is overwhelmingly dominated by agricultural farms. A total absence of NPDES permitted dischargers indicates the high specific conductance measured is a result of nonpoint source runoff. Despite the presence of good macroinvertebrate habitat and decent flows, Conoho Creek received a Moderate bioclassification, driven in part by the paucity of EPT taxa. However, this Moderate rating is on the cusp of a Natural rating, as it was in 2004, leading to the conclusion that the water quality in this stream has not changed since that time. Moderate02/25/04 9345 31 4 7.70 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.7 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)4.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)10.7 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)177 pH (s.u.)5.3 Channel Modification (5)15 Instream Habitat (20)16  Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification CONOHO CR SR 1417 NB67 02/04/09 Natural County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude AU Number Level IV Ecoregion Martin 9 03010107 35.885556 -77.124444 23-49b Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) C 98.2 12 8 0.6 Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)100 --------- Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) none ------ Site Photograph Water Clarity clear/tannic Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Instream Habitat (20)16 Bottom Substrate (15)5 Pool Variety (10)9 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)10 Bank Vegetation (7)10 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)85 ST EPT BI EPT BI Substrate Detritus with silt, some sand Bioclassification 02/04/09 10600 32 6 6.43 5.23 Natural Sample Date Sample ID 4.80 Natural 02/24/04 9344 38 6 6.80 5.40 Taxonomic Analysis This sampling site maintained it's EPT richness of 6 taxa from the previous sampling event. Two species of mayflies collected in 2004, Caenis and Eurylophella doris were absent in 2009 as was the caddisfly Platycentropus. Ironoquia punctatissima , a caddisfly often found in swamp-like conditions, was collected for the first time in 10 years. Additionally, total taxa richness decreased from 2004 levels reflected in fewer tolerant midges, oligohaetes and crustacea collected. Although still higher than that measured in 1999, the biotic index was lower than in 2004 due in part to the more intolerant EPT community observed. Data Analysis This sampling site is low in the watershed of Conoho Creek and is very large. Much like the upstream site, agriculture dominates the landuse of Conoho Creek's watershed. Non-point source pollutants are likely diluted by the time they reach this segment and thereby have less impact on the macroinvertebrate community. Although this site did receive a Natural rating compared to the upstream rating (Moderate), the upstream site very nearly obtained a Natural rating suggesting water quality differences between these two sites are not so great. The macroinvertebrate community here appears to be relatively stable. Natural 02/24/99 7834 39 5 6.27 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.8 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)5.8 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)8.0 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)179 pH (s.u.)4.3 Channel Modification (5)11 Instream Habitat (20)15 Bottom Substrate (15)5 Pool Variety (10)6 Bioclassification HARDISON MILL CR SR 1528 NB69 02/04/09 Moderate  Waterbody Location Station ID Date AU Number Level IV Ecoregion MARTIN 9 03010107 35.764722 -77.006111 23-50-3 Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude C 49.7 18 11 0.7 Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)100 0 0 0 Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) None --- --- Site Photograph Water Clarity Clear Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Pool Variety (10)6 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)7 Bank Vegetation (7)7 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)71 Substrate Detritus and silt. 7.54 5.20 Bioclassification 02/04/09 10601 15 1 7.61 6.40 Moderate Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Taxonomic Analysis The 2009 sample produced a drastic decline in chironomid taxa relative to previous collections. Given the increase in specific conductance, it would have been expected that the diversity of the generally pollution tolerant chironomids would have increased or at least maintained levels previously recorded from this station. It is unclear as to why this reduction was observed in 2009 but it might be related to the very low pH (4.3) which was lower than previous collections (4.6 in 2004, 5.5 in 1999). However, the most significant change in this community was the total absence of the flow-dependent blackflies Simulium spp. and Stegopterna spp . which were both abundant or common from all previous collections. Their absence in 2009 strongly suggests that poor flows have been persistent at this location and may have had a role in the lowered ST and higher BI although the extremely low pH likely exacerbated this condition. Data Analysis Although the ST and EPT metrics reached all time lows for 2009, the BI, although higher, was generally comparable to previous collections. Moreover, the EPTBI in 2009 was intermediate between the two previous records. The primary difference in the benthic macroinvertebrate community observed at this location in 2009 relative to previous assessments was the drastic decrease in the diversity of chironomid larvae. Indeed, only two chironomid taxa were collected in 2009 versus 20 in 2004 and seven in 1999. The absence of the flow-dependent blackflies suggest that there have been persistent low flow conditions at this site. Indeed, flow conditions were marginal at the time of sampling. This likely explains, at least in part, the increased BI and lowered ST. However, specific conductance at this site was drastically higher in 2009 (179.1 µS/cm) versus levels measured in 2004 (58 µS/cm) and 1999 (65µS/cm). Consequently, deleterious anthropogenic influence at this station cannot be ruled out. In addition to the low flows and elevated conductivity, the very low pH likely played a role in the decline in the invertebrate community. Indeed, benthic macroinvertebrate communities are known to degrade with very low pH . Moderate 02/12/99 7817 27 3 7.32 7.67 Moderate 02/24/04 9331 36 2 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.9 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)2.2 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)9.1 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)190 pH (s.u.)4.7 Channel Modification (15)15 Instream Habitat (20)16 Bottom Substrate (15)4 Site Photograph Water Clarity clear Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) Lewiston-Woodville WWTP (~2.5 miles upstream)NC0023116 0.15 Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)100 0 0 Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) C;Sw 35.4 45 6 0.6 County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude AU Number Level IV Ecoregion BERTIE 10 03010107 36.123611 -77.121667 24-2-(1)a Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods  Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification CASHIE R SR 1219 NB75 02/05/09 Moderate Bottom Substrate (15)4 Pool Variety (10)9 Left Bank Stability (10)10 Right Bank Stability (10)10 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)84 Taxonomic Analysis A mostly tolerant benthic community was observed at this sampling location in 2009. No stoneflies or mayflies were collected at this monitoring station. Caddisflies present in the sample included Ironoquia punctatissima and Ptilostomis spp. These are common somewhat tolerant caddisflies found in North Carolina swamp benthic communities. Chironomid taxa richness was also low (8) with only two taxa that were common and abundant including Orthocladius obumbratus and the recently described Tvetenia sp. NC (Epler 2001) respectively. Data Analysis A Moderate bioclassication was retained at this site in 2009. Total taxa richness (26) and EPT taxa richness (2) dropped slightly compared to 2004. The NCBI was elevated from the 2004 sample. Despite the Moderate bioclassification, water quality parameters suggests some degradation. Conductivity was twice as high (190 µS/cm) and acidic conditions (pH=4.7) were observed in 2009 compared to 1999 (82 µS/cm, pH=6.2). Physico-chemical data was not collected at this site in 2004. The elevated conductivity suggest the possibility of upstream point source pollution inputs from the Lewiston-Woodeville WWTP. Additionally, naturally acidic waters occur in North Carolina swamp ecosystems and can lead to reductions in benthic taxa richness. A small beaverdam was observed within the sampling area in 2004 and 2009 and low flow conditions with nearly homogenous detrital substrate were noted in 2009 compared to other Roanoke Basinwide swamp sites. This lack of flow and lack of mixed substrate could lead to the absence of some mayflies and stoneflies adapted to those conditions. Not Rated 07/14/83 3057 34 2 8.55 7.00 Not Rated 06/26/84 3242 41 2 8.20 7.00 Moderate 02/11/99 7812 41 6 7.51 7.24 Natural 02/23/04 9328 29 3 7.49 7.03 Bioclassification 02/05/09 10602 26 2 8.15 7.10 Moderate Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Substrate Detritus and fine particulate organic matter was dominant. Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.10 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)4.4 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)9.5 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)133 pH (s.u.)5.1 Channel Modification (15)15 Instream Habitat (20)17 Site Photograph Water Clarity clear Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) Lewiston-Woodville WWTP (>4 miles upstream)NC0023116 0.15 Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)100 0 0 Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) C;Sw 108.6 10 8 0.7 County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude AU Number Level IV Ecoregion BERTIE 10 03010107 36.047778 -76.985556 24-2-(1)b Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces  Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification CASHIE R SR 1257 NB76 02/09/09 Moderate Instream Habitat (20)17 Bottom Substrate (15)5 Pool Variety (10)9 Left Bank Stability (10)10 Right Bank Stability (10)10 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)86 Taxonomic Analysis EPT taxa collected at this station were similar to that upstream including the caddisflies Ironoquia punctatissima and Ptilostomis spp . Additionally, the winter stonefly Taeniopteryx spp. was collected in abundance at this monitoring station. A low chironomid taxa richness (11) was present at this location similar to upstream, however, intolerant chironomid taxa were present in the sample including Eukiefferiella devonica gr. and Lopescladius spp . Rarely collected chironomid taxa in the sample included Parakiefferiella sp. D and Tvetenia sp. NC . The swamp endemic megalopteran Chauliodes rasticornis was found rare at the site. Data Analysis Total taxa richness remained similar to samples in the past, however, EPT taxa richness dropped from seven taxa in 1999 and 2004 to only three in 2009. This drop in EPT richness in addition to the highest NCBI and EPTBI recorded from this site lowered the bioclassification from Natural in 2004 to Moderate in 2009. Habitat parameters in 2009 (86) were higher than that observed in 2004 (70), yet similar to that observed in 1999 (85) suggesting no reduction in the bioclassification due to physical parameters. More acidic conditions were found in 2009 (pH=5.1) compared to 2004 (pH=5.6) and 1999 (pH=6.4) which could lead to the recent depletion of EPT taxa. Additionally, conductivity was elevated in 2009 (133 µS/cm) compared to in 2004 (64 µS/cm) and 1999 (72 µS/cm) similar to the upstream site at SR 1219 suggesting inputs from an upstream discharger or another unknown source. Natural 02/15/99 7827 34 7 6.80 6.09 Natural 02/24/04 9330 35 7 6.59 4.90 Bioclassification 02/09/09 10603 34 3 7.40 6.59 Moderate Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Substrate Fine particulate organic matter and detritus was dominant. Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.11 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)3.4 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)10.2 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)89 pH (s.u.)5.1 Channel Modification (5)12 Instream Habitat (20)16 Bottom Substrate (15)6 Site Photograph Water Clarity Tannic Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) None --- --- Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)90 0 10 0 Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) C; Sw 48.2 5 4 0.5 AU Number Level IV Ecoregion BERTIE 10 03010107 36.025000 -76.951389 24-2-6 Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude  Waterbody Location Station ID Date Bioclassification HOGGARD MILL CR SR 1301 NB78 02/05/09 Moderate Bottom Substrate (15)6 Pool Variety (10)9 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)7 Bank Vegetation (7)7 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)77 Taxonomic Analysis The 2009 sample continues the trend observed here since the 1999 collection in that there has been a decline in intolerant taxa and an increase in tolerant taxa. For 2009, this trend in reduced presence (or total absence) of intolerant taxa is exemplified by the lack of the stonefly Amphinemura spp., a substantial decrease in the abundance of the stonefly Taeniopteryx spp. (abundant in 1999 and 2004, rare in 2009), the absence of the caddisfly Platycentropus spp, and the first time appearance of the the tolerant beetle Coptotomus spp ., the hemipteran Pelocoris spp., as well as the tolerant chironomids Cricotopus annulator and Cricotopus bicinctus. Data Analysis As can be seen from the BI (and to a lesser extent the EPTBI data), as well as the ST and (to a lesser extent) the EPTS, the benthic macroinvertebrate community metrics continue to decline at this site since its first assessment in 1999. The data show a continuing shift from pollution intolerant taxa to more pollution tolerant taxa. It is possible that the prolonged drought may have resulted in very low flow conditions at this site for much of the year before the February sample and that may have caused natural stress due to lowered dissolved oxygen levels. Although dissolved oxygen data is extremely variable, it does not support this conclusion as the dissolved oxygen levels in 2009 (10.2 mg/l) was higher than in either 2004 (8.9 mg/l) or 1999 (8.6 mg/l). Conversely, the much higher specific conductance at this location (89.4 µS/cm) in 2009 relative to levels measured from previous observations in 2004 (60 µS/cm) and 1999 (70 µS/cm) may suggest a possible anthropogenic component to the increasing biotic indicies observed at this location since 1999. Moderate 02/15/99 7826 46 7 6.81 6.38 Natural 02/23/04 9327 30 3 7.18 5.65 Bioclassification 02/05/09 10604 24 3 7.40 7.57 Moderate Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Substrate Sand, silt, and detritus. Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.12 Water Quality Parameters Temperature (°C)0.8 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)8.8 Specific Conductance (µS/cm)83 pH (s.u.)5.0 Channel Modification (5)13 Bioclassification ROQUIST SWP US 17 NB80 02/06/09 Natural  Waterbody Location Station ID Date AU Number Level IV Ecoregion BERTIE 10 03010107 35.941667 -76.962222 24-2-7 Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces County Subbasin 8 digit HUC Latitude Longitude C; Sw 45.7 10 6 0.6 Stream Classification Drainage Area (mi2)Elevation (ft)Stream Width (m)Stream Depth (m) Forested/Wetland Urban Agriculture Other (describe) Visible Landuse (%)90 0 0 10 (US 13/17) Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile)NPDES Number Volume (MGD) None --- --- Site Photograph Water Clarity Clear Habitat Assessment Scores (max) Channel Modification (5)13 Instream Habitat (20)16 Bottom Substrate (15)6 Pool Variety (10)9 Riffle Habitat (16)0 Bank Erosion (7)7 Bank Vegetation (7)7 Light Penetration (10)10 Left Riparian Score (5)5 Right Riparian Score (5)5 Total Habitat Score (100)78 Substrate Sand, silt, and detritus. 7.14 6.46 Bioclassification 02/06/09 10605 30 3 6.73 2.28 Natural Sample Date Sample ID ST EPT BI EPT BI Taxonomic Analysis The 2009 collection produced the first record at this location for the facultative caddisfly Ptilostomis spp . and the intolerant caddisfly Lepidostoma spp . In addition, the previous two collections included the collection of the pollution tolerant mayfly Caenis spp. but was absent in 2009. Other pollution tolerant taxa collected from 1999 and 2004 but absent from 2009 sample included the chironomids Kiefferulus spp , Procladius spp, as well as the gastropods Micromenetus dilatatus and Ferrissia spp. Data Analysis Although the ST and EPT have been relatively stable at this site since sampling commenced in 1999 the EPTBI and BI both dropped in 2009 with the EPTBI dropping substantially. The decline in both the EPTBI and BI were due to the presence of several intolerant taxa collected for the first time in 2009 and the lack of several pollutant tolerant taxa absent from the 2009 collection but present in the previous samples. The shift in the benthic macroinvertebrate community represented by these taxa from 2009 relative to the 2004 and 1999 collections may reflect the drought and the reduced presence of non-point runoff at this site. Natural 02/11/99 7813 31 4 6.99 5.50 Natural 02/24/04 9329 38 4 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.13 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) HALIFAX Bioclassification Level IV Ecoregion Rolling Coastal Plain Longitude 06/18/09 Date Station ID NF46 Subbasin Site Photograph Good --- 6 Average Depth (m) AU Number 0 Agriculture --- Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1MGD or <1MGD and within 1 mile) 8 Latitude 36.318589 No Reference SiteStream Width (m) -77.594832 23-30b 0.4 This is the first fish community sample collected at this site. Watershed -- drains east-central Halifax County including the southern portion of the Town of Halifax; tributary to the Roanoke River; site is ~ 2 miles upstream of the creek's confluence with the river. Habitat -- upstream from the bridge Coastal Plain-like, downstream from the bridge Piedmont-like gorge with very high quality instream and riparian habitats -- riffles, runs, pools, Podostemum, and bluffs along both banks. Water Quality -- dissolved oxygen saturation only 62%; pH less than 6 s.u., but upstream watershed is swamp-like where low pH values are to be expected. 2009 -- a very diverse fish community with Coastal Plain and Piedmont species present, but only one species of sucker, one intolerant species, and only two species of darters; some evidence of nutrient enrichment based upon the high percentage of omnivores+herbivores collected such as Eastern Silvery Minnow, Bluehead Chub, and Spottail Shiner. Residential 5 Volume (MGD) Data Analysis Visible Landuse (%) Species Change Since Last Cycle N/A 06/18/09 NPDES Number 95 Elevation (ft) 65 Drainage Area (mi2) 33.6 Forested/Wetland Bioclassification Good NCIBISample Date Other (describe) None Habitat Assessment Scores (max) 22.0 12 0 5 5 10 15 Sample ID 2009-66 7 7 7 5.4 120 5.6 Clear, tannin stained 5 19 Eastern Silvery Minnow (16%), Redbreast Sunfish (15%), Bluehead Chub (14%) Most Abundant Species 2009 92 Gravel, cobble, boulder, clay, siltSubstrate Exotic Species 2009 Species Total 24 50 Bluegill FISH COMMUNITY SAMPLE Stream Classification C US 301/NC 903/NC 125 Location 8 digit HUC 03010107 Waterbody QUANKEY CR County Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-B.14 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.1 appendix 5-c amBient monitoRing sYstems station data sHeets FoR tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.2 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N7300000 Location:ROANOKE RIV AT NC 48 AT ROANOKE RAPIDS Stream class:WS-IV CA NC stream index:23-(25.5) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:36.48151 Longitude:-77.64526 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)<4 4.8 5.2 6.6 9.1 11.3 12.6 15.643000 <5 4.8 5.2 6.6 9.1 11.3 12.6 15.643204.7 pH (SU)<6 6 6.3 6.6 6.9 7.2 7.7 847000 >9 6 6.3 6.6 6.9 7.2 7.7 847000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 0.190 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 90 97 102 109 113 119 139480 Water Temperature (°C)>32 4.2 6.8 9.4 17.1 24.8 27.3 29.848000 Other TSS (mg/L)N/A 2.5 2.5 5 6.2 7 12 121911 Turbidity (NTU)>50 1.3 1.6 2.2 3.5 5.5 11.2 2248000 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.044839 NO2 + NO3 as N >10 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.18 0.23 0.2948040 TKN as N N/A 0.2 0.23 0.25 0.28 0.32 0.36 0.44472 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.19488 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 50 50 78 120 230 1000 100091 Arsenic, total (As)>10 5 5 5 5 5 5 59080 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 2 2 3 39070 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 57 57 105 200 355 1200 120091011.1 Lead, total (Pb)>25 10 10 10 10 10 10 109090 Manganese, total (Mn)>200 38 38 40 57 76 190 1909000 Mercury, total (Hg)>0.012 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.28080 Nickel, total (Ni)>25 10 10 10 10 10 10 109090 Zinc, total (Zn)>50 10 10 10 10 10 18 189080 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 48 7.4 0 0 01/27/2005Time period:11/23/2009to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.3 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N8200000 Location:ROANOKE RIV AT US 258 NR SCOTLAND NECK Stream class:C NC stream index:23-(26) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:36.20925 Longitude:-77.38387 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)<4 5.9 6 6.6 8.5 10.6 12.2 14.843000 <5 5.9 6 6.6 8.5 10.6 12.2 14.843000 pH (SU)<6 5.9 6.4 6.6 7 7.3 7.5 7.647102.1 >9 5.9 6.4 6.6 7 7.3 7.5 7.647000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 0.190 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 95 100 110 118 128 133 143480 Water Temperature (°C)>32 4.8 7.2 9.7 17.7 25.2 27.8 29.748000 Other TSS (mg/L)N/A 6 7.8 11 12 15 21 47191 Turbidity (NTU)>50 3.6 6.3 7.6 9.9 13.8 22.1 3348000 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.034833 NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 0.02 0.08 0.1 0.14 0.21 0.28 0.36471 TKN as N N/A 0.2 0.23 0.27 0.3 0.34 0.36 0.5461 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08470 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 150 150 380 430 540 1200 120090 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 2 3 4 49040 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 390 390 515 610 750 1500 150091011.1 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 10 10 10 10 10 10 109090 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 48 35.6 0 0 01/27/2005Time period:11/23/2009to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.4 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N8300000 Location:ROANOKE RIV AT NC 11 NR LEWISTON Stream class:C NC stream index:23-(26) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:36.01400 Longitude:-77.21487 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)<4 6.1 6.6 6.8 8.4 10.4 12.6 15.229000 <5 6.1 6.6 6.8 8.4 10.4 12.6 15.229000 pH (SU)<6 6.4 6.8 7 7.4 7.6 7.9 8.229000 >9 6.4 6.8 7 7.4 7.6 7.9 8.229000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.07290 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 93 100 102 112 122 130 146290 Water Temperature (°C)>32 4.4 7.6 10.1 17.8 25.7 28.7 30.129000 Other TSS (mg/L)N/A 12 12 13 17 29 60.4 68110 Turbidity (NTU)>50 7.1 9.4 11.5 15 19 24 4829000 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.042921 NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 0.02 0.11 0.17 0.22 0.29 0.31 0.44281 TKN as N N/A 0.2 0.23 0.28 0.31 0.36 0.4 0.44281 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.1 0.27290 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 190 190 400 550 775 1700 170090 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 2 3 3 39040 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 610 610 715 850 1150 2600 260093033.3 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 10 10 10 10 14 22 229060 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 29 38.9 0 0 01/19/2005Time period:10/17/2007to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.5 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N8550000 Location:ROANOKE RIV AT US 13 AND US 17 AT WILLIAMSTON Stream class:C NC stream index:23-(26) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:35.85986 Longitude:-77.04009 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)<4 5.4 6.2 6.7 7.8 10 11.1 13.159000 <5 5.4 6.2 6.7 7.8 10 11.1 13.159000 pH (SU)<6 5.8 6.7 6.8 7.1 7.4 7.6 859101.7 >9 5.8 6.7 6.8 7.1 7.4 7.6 859000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06590 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 92 100 104 117 126 132 138590 Water Temperature (°C)>32 4.2 7.7 10.5 17.7 26 28.3 30.259000 Other TSS (mg/L)N/A 6.2 6.4 10.1 14.5 21.8 38 39202 Turbidity (NTU)>50 6.2 9.4 12 15 19 26.8 4161000 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.055836 NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 0.08 0.15 0.17 0.21 0.26 0.29 0.34580 TKN as N N/A 0.2 0.25 0.29 0.33 0.38 0.46 0.63572 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.1590 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 200 200 395 650 850 1700 170090 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 2 2 3 39050 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 540 540 670 1000 1300 2000 200093033.3 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 10 10 10 10 11 14 149070 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 60 30.7 1 1.7 01/19/2005Time period:12/03/2009to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.6 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N8950000 Location:CASHIE RIV AT SR 1219 NR LEWISTON Stream class:C Sw NC stream index:24-2-(1) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:36.12376 Longitude:-77.12140 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)N/A 0.2 0.7 1.3 3.7 6.8 9.9 12.6520 pH (SU)<4.3 3.9 4.8 5.5 5.9 6.2 6.5 7.852203.8 >9 3.9 4.8 5.5 5.9 6.2 6.5 7.852000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.25520 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 54 68 78 100 116 177 493520 Water Temperature (°C)>32 0.1 4.6 8.3 14.8 21.8 24.8 27.352000 Other TSS (mg/L)N/A 2.5 2.9 5.6 9.2 18 35.4 39187 Turbidity (NTU)>50 1.8 2.9 5.3 10.1 31.5 50 9552407.7 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.12 0.245133 NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.1 0.435242 TKN as N N/A 0.35 0.51 0.62 0.91 1.4 1.82 2.4470 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.2 0.43 0.59 1.5520 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 93 93 180 220 270 310 31070 Arsenic, total (As)>10 5 5 5 5 5 5 57070 Cadmium, total (Cd)>2 1 1 2 2 2 2 27070 Chromium, total (Cr)>50 10 10 25 25 25 25 257070 Copper, total (Cu)>7 2 2 2 2 2 2 27060 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 560 560 760 1700 3400 8600 860074057.1 Lead, total (Pb)>25 10 10 10 10 10 10 107070 Mercury, total (Hg)>0.012 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.26060 Nickel, total (Ni)>88 10 10 10 10 10 10 107070 Zinc, total (Zn)>50 10 10 10 10 12 20 207050 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 52 64.8 4 7.7 01/19/2005Time period:12/03/2009to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.7 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N9250000 Location:ROANOKE RIV 1.3 MI UPS WELCH CRK NR PLYMOUTH Stream class:C Sw NC stream index:23-(53) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:35.86767 Longitude:-76.78541 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)N/A 4.4 5.9 6.8 7.6 9.8 11.3 11.9590 pH (SU)<4.3 4.5 6.6 6.9 7.1 7.3 7.4 7.659000 >9 4.5 6.6 6.9 7.1 7.3 7.4 7.659000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06590 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 80 94 106 116 125 134 140590 Water Temperature (°C)>32 5.1 6.9 10.2 18.6 25.8 29.1 31.559000 Other Chlorophyll a (ug/L)>40 1 1 2 4 8 9 1955000 TSS (mg/L)N/A 3.5 5.8 6.2 8.4 10.8 12.9 14206 Turbidity (NTU)>50 2.8 5.8 7.1 9.3 12 18 3059000 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.085935 NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 0.02 0.09 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.29 0.39590 TKN as N N/A 0.2 0.29 0.31 0.34 0.38 0.44 0.54581 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.12591 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 170 181 332 425 512 673 680100 Arsenic, total (As)>10 5 5 5 5 5 5 5100100 Cadmium, total (Cd)>2 1 1.1 2 2 2 6.5 710191073.6 Chromium, total (Cr)>50 10 10 21 25 25 25 25100100 Copper, total (Cu)>7 2 2 2 2 2 3 310080 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 460 467 575 720 1025 1280 130010202093 Lead, total (Pb)>25 10 10 10 10 10 10 10100100 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 10100100 Zinc, total (Zn)>50 10 10 10 10 11 16 1610070 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 59 8.7 0 0 01/11/2005Time period:12/07/2009to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-C.8 Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries NCDENR, Division of Water Quality Basinwide Assessment Report Station #:N9600000 Location:ROANOKE RIV AT NC 45 AT SANS SOUCI Stream class:C Sw NC stream index:23-(53) Hydrologic Unit Code:03010107 Latitude:35.91469 Longitude:-76.72252 Agency:NCAMBNT PercentilesResults not meeting EL# results Min 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th Max # ND EL # %%Conf Field D.O. (mg/L)N/A 4 5.6 6.1 7.4 9.6 11 12590 pH (SU)<4.3 6.3 6.6 6.9 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.659000 >9 6.3 6.6 6.9 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.659000 Salinity (ppt)N/A 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.4590 Spec. conductance (umhos/cm at 25°C)N/A 104 108 126 149 185 222 763590 Water Temperature (°C)>32 5.4 7.6 10.2 19 25.5 29.6 31.659000 Other Chlorophyll a (ug/L)>40 1 1 2 3 6 10 1754020 TSS (mg/L)N/A 2.5 3.5 6 6.2 8 16 20199 Turbidity (NTU)>50 2 4.6 5.8 7.6 11 14 2559000 Nutrients (mg/L) NH3 as N N/A 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.1 0.14 0.2597 NO2 + NO3 as N N/A 0.02 0.1 0.15 0.19 0.24 0.28 0.32590 TKN as N N/A 0.29 0.32 0.36 0.42 0.48 0.52 0.61570 Total Phosphorus N/A 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.12590 Metals (ug/L) Aluminum, total (Al)N/A 61 61 210 270 415 850 85090 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 2 2 3 39070 Iron, total (Fe)>1000 120 120 505 810 955 1100 110091011.1 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 10 10 10 10 10 10 109090 Fecal Coliform Screening(#/100mL) # results:Geomean:# > 400:% > 400:%Conf: 59 7 0 0 01/11/2005Time period:12/07/2009to 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.1 appendix 5-d 10-digit wateRsHed maPs FoR tHe LoweR Roanoke RiveR suBBasin Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.2 Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.3WARREN HubquarterCr ROA038A Roanoke Rapids Jackson RichSquare ROAN O K E RIVER ConoconnaraSw ROANOKERIVER QuankeyCr. KehukeeSw N8200000 NB53 N7300000 NF46 NB91 NB59 NB60 NB59 Lake Gaston Roanoke Rapids Gaston Garysburg Halifax Weldon NORTHAMPTON HALIFAX LittleQuan k e y C r. C h o c k oyotte Cr. I-95 N C-4 8 NC-46 NC-4 NC-903 US-3 01 US-158N C -1 86 NC-125 NC-305 NC-561 NC-4,561 U S - 1 5 8 ,3 0 1 US-301-BUS I-95 NC-561 US-158 NC-9 0 3 US-301 N C-5 6 1 N C-5 6 1 Quankey Creek-Roanoke River Watershed (0301010701) 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 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.4 NORTHAMPTON HERTFORD Roanoke Rapids Aulander Roxobel Jackson Rich Square Scottland Neck ROANOKERIVER ConoconnaraSw ROANOKERIVER QuankeyCr. KehukeeSw C a s h i e Ri N8950000 NB75 NB55 ROA0491A N8200000 NB53 N7300000NF46 NB91NB59NB60 NB59 Gaston Garysburg Halifax Weldon NORTHAMPTON HALIFAX LittleQuankeyCr.ChockoyotteCr. OcconeecheeCr. GumberrySwampLookingGlass R u n Bridge r s C r. NORTHAMPTON HERTFORD BERTIE US-158 US-258 US-301 NC-561 N C-481 NC-1 86 I-95 NC-305 NC-308 NC-46 NC-125,903 NC-35N C-305,561 NC-125 NC-11-BUS NC-903 NC-11,42 U S-1 5 8,3 0 1 US-158,258 US-301-BUS US-158 I-95 NC-561 NC-305 NC-305 US-301 NC-35 Conoconnara Swamp-Roanoke River Watershed (0301010702) 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 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.5 NORTHAMPTON HERTFORD Aulander Roxobel Oak City Rich Square Scottland Neck ConoconnaraSw R O A N O K E R I V E R KehukeeSw C a s hieRi ConohoCr R o quistCrNB76 NB93 N8950000 NB75 N8300000 NB55 ROA0491A ROA0492A N8200000 NB53 NF46NB59NB60 NB59 Halifax HALIFAX OcconeecheeCr. Looking Glass R u n Bridge r s C r . NORTHAMPTON HERTFORD BERTIE R O A N O K E R I V E R Kelford Roxobel Lewiston Woodville Hobgood C y p r e s s S wamp BullN e c k S w. S a n dy Run Canal G u t US-258 NC-30 8 NC-11,42 NC-903 N C-9 7 NC-561 NC-125 N C-1 2 5,9 0 3 N C-481 NC-305 US-301 N C-305,561 NC-122 NC-33 NC-11-BUS NC-561 NC-305 Kehukee Swamp-Roanoke River Watershed (0301010703) 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 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.6 PITT MARTIN OakCity Williamston Jamiesville R O A N O K E R I V E R Conoho Cr HardisonMillCr CashieRiver WelchCr N9250000 N9600000 N9685000 NB69 N8550000 NB67 NB80 NB93 S w e e t w ater Cr. L o n g Creek Smithwick Cr. ReadyBr. DogBr. M A R T I N B E A U F O R T R O AN O KE RIVER US-17 US-64 N C-1 7 1 NC-903 US-13,64 NC-125 NC-30 US-64-ALT US-13,17 US-64-BUS US-13,17,64 US-17-BUS NC-125 US-13,17 US-13,64 Sweetwater Creek Watershed (0301010704) 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 : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.7 PITTMARTIN Roxobel Windsor Oak City Williamston Jamiesville Scottland Neck R O A N O K E R I V E R KehukeeSw C a s h i e River Conoho Creek R o quistCr Hoggard Mill C r Hardison MillCr CashieRiver WelchCr NB69 N8550000 NB67 NB80 NB78 NB76 NB93 N8950000 NB75 N8300000 NB55 ROA0491A ROA0492A RO A N O K E R I V E R Kelford Lewiston Woodville Hobgood Cy p r e s s S w amp SandyRun Canal G u t Sweetwater Cr. Smithwick C r. R e a dy Br. Do g B r. ROANOKERIVER Hassell Hamilton Askewville Etheridge S w . IndianCr. Coniott C r. Beaverd a m Cr. M ARTIN BERTIE H A LIF A X NC-903 N C-308 US-13,64 NC-11,42 US-64-ALT U S-1 3 US-64 US-13,17 N C-42 NC-125 N C-11 NC-111 NC-142 NC-305 US-17 N C-125,903 NC-122 U S-1 3-B U S US-13,17,64 NC-42,142 US-17-BUS US-64 NC-142 US-13,17 US-1 7 NC-903 N C-125 US-64 U S -1 3 NC-125 NC-308 US-13,64 Conoho Creek-Roanoke River Watershed (0301010705) 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 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.8 Windsor Williamston Jamiesville Plymouth ROANOKERIVER ConohoCreek RoquistCr Hardison MillCr CashieRiver WelchCr N9250000 N9600000N9685000 NB69 N8550000 NB67 NB80 NB78 N8300000 S w e e t water Cr. L o n g Creek Smithwick C r. ReadyBr. DogBr. M A R T I N B E A U F O R T R O A N O KE RIVE R Hamilton ConiottCr. BeaverdamCr. ConineCr. DevilsGut LanierSw. DeepRunSwamp Cooper Sw. GardnersCr. US-17 US-64 N C-1 7 1 NC-32 US-13,17 NC -308 NC-125 US-13,64 US-64-ALT NC -45 NC-32,45 NC-45,308 NC-149 US-64-BUS US-13,17,64 NC-45,99 US-17-BUS US-13,64 US-13,17 NC-32 N C-125 NC-45 Gardener Creek-Roanoke River Watershed (0301010706) 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 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.9 Roxobel Windsor Oak City Rich Square R O A N O K E R I V E R C a s h i e R iver R o quistCr Hoggard Mill C r CashieRiver NB80 NB78 NB76 NB93 N8950000 NB75 N8300000 NB55 ROA0491A ROA0492A N8200000Bridge r s C r. NORTHAMPTON HERTFORD BERTIE R O A N O K E R I V E R Kelford Aulander Lewiston Woodville Hobgood C y p r e s s S w am p BullNe c k S w. S a n d y Run Canal G u t Hamilton Askewville Etheridge S w . IndianCr. Coniott C r. M ARTIN BERTIE H A LIF A X Wahto m S w. Connaritsa S w . NC-308 U S -1 3 NC-305 NC-11,42 NC-42 NC-903 NC-561 N C-1 1-B U S US-17 US-258 N C -30 5, 5 61 U S -1 3 -B U S NC-305 Headwaters Cashie River Watershed (0301010707) 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 October2011¯ 0 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.10 WA SH IN GT ON Roxobel Windsor Williamston Plymouth ROANOKERIVER C a s h i e River ConohoCreek RoquistCreek CashieRiver N9250000 N9600000N9685000 N8550000 NB67 NB80 NB78 NB76 N8950000 NB75 N8300000 NORTHAMPTONHERTFORD BERTIE Kelford Aulander LewistonWoodvilleCanalGut Sweetwater Cr. ReadyBr. DogBr. R O AN O KE RIVE R Hamilton Askewville IndianCr. ConiottCr. BeaverdamCr. Conine Cr. DevilsGut GardnersCr. WahtomSw. ConnaritsaSw. H oggard MillCr.ChucklemakerSw. FlatSwampCr. Wadin g P l a c e C r. S u tton Cr. C h o o w atic Cr. US-17 NC-45 US-13 NC-3 08 NC-305 NC-32 US-13,17 NC-45,308 NC-11,42 US-13-BUS US-17-BUS N C-3 0 8 NC-308 NC-45 US-13,17 Outlet Cashie River Watershed (0301010708) 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 October2011 ¯ 0 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.11 WA S HI N G T O N C H OWA N Windsor Williamston Jamiesville Plymouth R O A N O K E R I V E R C a s h i e River R o quistCreek H ardisonMillCr CashieRiver WelchCreek N9250000 N9600000 N9685000 NB69 N8550000 NB67 NB80 NB78 NB76 Sweetwater Cr. L o n gCreek Smithwick C r. R e a dy Br. D o g B r. M A R T I N B E A U F O R T R O A N O KE RIVER ConineCr. D e vilsGut L a nierSw. Deep R u n S w a m p Cooper Sw. Gardn e r s C r. H oggard Mill Cr. Wadin g P l a c e Cr. S u tton Cr. C h o o w atic Cr. B E R T I E Albe m arle Sound Middle Riv e r ConabyCr. U S-64 NC-308 N C - 1 7 1 NC-32 N C-4 5,99 N C -45 US-17 U S-1 3,1 7 N C-45,308 NC-32,45 N C-3 2,9 4 U S-1 3 N C -1 4 9 U S-13-B U S US-64-BUS NC-45 NC-32 NC-32 NC-45 NC-308 N C-3 0 8 US-13,17 Plymouth-Roanoke River Watershed (0301010709) 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 October2011 ¯ 0 2 4 6 8 1 Miles Roa n o k e R iv e R B as i n : L ow e R R oa n o k e R iv e R suBB as i n ( H uC 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 3 ) a PP en d i Ces 5-D.12