NC 2022 303d Decision Document

Prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Water Division
April 28, 2022

DECISION DOCUMENT
FOR THE
APPROVAL OF THE NORTH CAROLINA 2022 SECTION 303(d) LIST

SUBMITTED ON APRIL 1, 2022

Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................1
II. Statutory and Regulatory Background .......................................................................................1
III. Analysis of State’s Submission ..................................................................................................1
A. Identification of Water Quality Limited Segments for Inclusion on the 303(d) List ..........2
B. Assessment and Listing Methodology .................................................................................2
C. Existing and Readily Available Water Quality-Related Data and Information ...................3
D. Demonstration of Good Cause for Delisting .......................................................................4
E. Priority Ranking and Two Year TMDL Development Schedule ........................................5
F. Public Participation ..............................................................................................................5
IV. The Integrated Report and ATTAINS .......................................................................................6
V. State’s Additions to and Delistings from the Section 303(d) List .............................................6
VI. Government to Government Consultation .................................................................................7
VII. Final Decision on State’s 2022 Section 303(d) List Submission ...............................................7
Appendix A: Waterbody Impairments Added to the Section 303(d) List .............................................. A-1
Appendix B: Waterbody Impairments Delisted Since the Previous Cycle ..............................................B-1

NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

1

I. Executive Summary

The purpose of this document is to describe the rationale for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s approval of the state of North Carolina’s 2022 section 303(d) List submitted on April 1, 2022, by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). The EPA has conducted a complete review of the State’s List and supporting documentation and information, including changes to the previous List. Specific additions and delistings are identified in Appendices A and B of this
document. Based on this review, the EPA has determined that the State’s List of water quality limited
segments (WQLS) still requiring total daily maximum loads (TMDLs) meets the requirements of section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and the EPA’s implementing regulations. This document summarizes the EPA’s review and the basis for the approval.
II. Statutory and Regulatory Background

Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA, or the Act) and the EPA's implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 C.F.R. section 130.7 require states to identify WQLS still requiring TMDLs within their jurisdictions. The section 303(d) List submission must include a description of the methodology used to develop the List and must show that the state has considered all
appropriate information, including a rationale for any decision to not use any existing and readily
available data and information. States are also required to provide any other reasonable information requested by the EPA to demonstrate good cause for not including a WQLS on the List. The List submission must include a priority ranking to put plans in place for establishing a total pollutant load and must involve the public and other stakeholders in the development of the section 303(d) List. State
section 303(d) Lists are submitted to the EPA for approval or disapproval. Further statutory and
regulatory information is given in italics at the beginning of each section below.
III. Analysis of State’s Submission
Section 303(d) of the CWA and the EPA's implementing regulations at 40 C.F.R. section 130.7 require states to identify WQLS still requiring TMDLs within their jurisdictions. State Lists are submitted to the EPA for approval or disapproval.
The EPA received the State’s final 2022 section 303(d) List submission on April 1, 2022. The
submission consisted of a Listing and Delisting Methodology, the section 303(d) List, the list of waters removed from the section 303(d) List (delistings), and a draft Integrated Report (IR) providing IR categories on all State-assessed waters. The package also included the State’s priority ranking of TMDLs, the Notice for Public Comment, and the State’s response to public comments. Contents of the
List package can be found on the State’s website.1

1 https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/modeling-assessment/water-quality-data-assessment/integrated-report-files
NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

2

To determine that the State’s submission reasonably identified impaired waters, the EPA examined the assessment and listing methodology used to develop the List in light of the State’s approved WQS
(sections A and B, below). The EPA's review was further based on its analysis of whether the State
reasonably considered existing and readily available water quality related data and information (section C), demonstrated good cause for not including WQLSs on the List (section D), assigned a priority ranking and provided a list of TMDLs to be developed in the next two years (section E), provided adequate public participation and responded to comments (section F). The following sections describe
all the factors involved in the EPA’s review.
A. Identification of Water Quality Limited Segments for Inclusion on the 303(d) List

The list of WQLSs still requiring TMDLs is the State’s section 303(d) List. A WQLS is defined in 40 C.F.R. section 130.2(j) as “[a]ny segment where it is known that water quality does not meet applicable water quality standards, and/or is not expected
to meet applicable water quality standards, even after the application of the technology-based effluent limitations required by sections 301(b) and 306 of the Act.” The WQLS listing requirement applies to waters impaired by point and/or nonpoint
sources, under the EPA’s long-standing interpretation of section 303(d). Note: The term WQLS may also be referred to as “waterbody-pollutant combinations,” “listed waters,” “impaired waters” or “impairments” throughout this decision
document.
For purposes of listing waters under 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(b), the terms ‘water quality standard applicable to such waters’ and ‘applicable water quality standards’ refer to those water quality standards (WQS) established under section 303 of the
Act, including designated uses, water quality criteria (WQC) and antidegradation requirements. The NCDEQ developed its section 303(d) List in light of the State’s EPA-approved WQS. Since the previous cycle List review, there were no modifications to North Carolina’s WQS that impact this listing cycle. The EPA reviewed the various assessments, focusing on changes to the previous List, and concludes the State’s assessments are consistent with federal listing requirements and applicable WQS.
B. Assessment and Listing Methodology

The EPA regulations at 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(b)(6) require states to document decisions to list or not list waters, including a description of the methodology used to develop the List. The methodology, often referred to as an assessment methodology
or a listing methodology, should describe how a state collects or obtains data and information relevant to applicable WQS, how it evaluates the suitability of the data or information for decision making, and how it analyzes and interprets data to
make attainment or impairment decisions. The methodology is not an item for approval under 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(d)(1). The methodology is documentation that supports the assessment decisions. Although the EPA reviews a state’s methodology
as part of the List submission review, the EPA’s approval of a state’s section 303(d) List should not be construed as agreement with or approval of the listing methodology.
The State’s List submittal provides a methodology used to identify impaired waters and specifies
explicit factors for making listing and delisting decisions for different pollutant types based on different
kinds of data. The State prepared the List in accordance with this methodology. In general, the State includes a waterbody on the List based on adequate documentation showing that WQS were not being met during the assessment period.

NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

3

The methodology includes quantitative assessment factors including statistical methods for evaluating potential WQS exceedances, minimum data set requirements, and data quality requirements. The
methodology also includes statistical methods for removing waters from the List. These decision factors
are applied to various types of data, including water chemistry, bacteria, nutrients, and biological integrity. The EPA reviewed the methodology and concludes that North Carolina’s assessments are consistent with federal listing requirements, except for the assessment of toxic metals.
Assessment of Toxic Metals
The State’s water quality criteria (WQC) for toxic metals do not define a frequency of exceedance. The State continues to assess for toxics by assigning impairment to waters with a greater than ten percent exceedance frequency, with at least 90 percent statistical confidence level. As North Carolina has yet to
provide supporting evidence that this exceedance rate is reflective of their WQC, the EPA cannot
determine that it is a reasonable method for the NCDEQ to assess toxic pollutants consistent with the State’s EPA-approved WQC. An explanation of the EPA’s position on this is found in the Decision Document on the North Carolina 2018 section 303(d) List.2
In the 2022 listing cycle, there was limited metals data to assess. There was one proposed delisting of a metals impairment and no new listings to the section 303(d) List. The EPA’s review of North Carolina’s 2022 section 303(d) List included an assessment of the limited amount of new dissolved metals data
using the EPA recommended 1-in-3 method. Based on this review, the EPA concludes that waters
impaired by metals have been appropriately included on the State’s List. The EPA will continue to work with the State to reach an agreement on a defensible assessment methodology for metals. Also, to properly identify the condition of all waterbodies impaired due to
metals, the EPA strongly recommends these waters be given high priority for follow up monitoring.
C. Existing and Readily Available Water Quality-Related Data and Information

In developing section 303(d) Lists, states are required to assemble, evaluate and consider all existing and readily available water quality-related data and information about, at a minimum, the following categories of waters: (1) waters identified as
partially meeting or not meeting designated uses, or as threatened, in the state’s most recent section 305(b) report; (2) waters for which dilution calculations or predictive modeling indicate nonattainment of applicable standards; (3) waters for
which water quality problems have been reported by governmental agencies, members of the public, or academic institutions; and (4) waters identified as impaired or threatened in any CWA section 319 nonpoint assessment submitted to
the EPA. See 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(b)(5).
In addition to these minimum categories, states are required to consider any other water quality-related data and information that is existing and readily available. The EPA’s 1991 Guidance for Water Quality-Based Decisions:
The TMDL Process3 includes a list of water quality-related data and information that may be considered existing and readily available. States have certain flexibility in deciding which data or information they will use to list waters. The EPA’s 20064

2 The EPA Decision Document for the North Carolina 2018 section 303(d) List can be found in the EPA How’s My Waterway website (https://attains.epa.gov/attains-public/api/documents/cycles/6026/197780) or the NCDEQ website
(https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2018/20190522-NC-208-303d-Approval-Package.pdf) 3 Guidance for Water Quality-Based Decisions: The TMDL Process, EPA Office of Water, EPA 440/4-91-001, April 1991.
4 Guidance for 2006 Assessment, Listing, and Reporting Requirements Pursuant to Sections 303(d), 305(b), and 314 of the Clean Water Act, July 29, 2005, at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/2006irg-report.pdf.
NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

4

and 20105 Integrated Report Guidance encourages states to describe data and information expectations in the assessment and listing methodology. This includes consideration of data representativeness and data quantity and quality and suggests
having in place procedures for identifying overwhelming evidence of water quality impairment. For example, older data should not be automatically determined as non-representative, particularly when its inclusion could be used to augment
small sets of more current data. Also, minimum sample sizes should not be set as absolute exclusionary rules. The NCDEQ collects a variety of biological, chemical, and physical data, including benthic macroinvertebrates, fish community, fish tissue, lake assessment, ambient monitoring, and aquatic toxicity monitoring. Other sources of data and information include water quality problems reported from local, state, or federal agencies, tribal governments, members of the public and academic institutions,
including waterbodies where specific fishing or shellfish bans and/or advisories are currently in effect. The NCDEQ maintains a standing solicitation for data on their website.6 For data to be used for impairment determinations, data must meet specific submission criteria, including quality assurance and quality control of the collection and analysis of the data.
Use support is assessed for all basins statewide. The 2022 List is based on data collected in calendar years 2016 through 2020. According to the State’s 2022 Methodology, “assessments based on older data are carried forward if newer data or information were not available to change the previous assessment decision…Older data will not be automatically excluded particularly when its inclusion could be used to
augment small sets of more current data. For the 2022 303(d) assessment, the state will augment small sets of current data (i.e. when n<10) with the previous five years of data (2011-2015) where available.” Supporting information for specific waterbody assessment decisions can generally be found in the NCDEQ Basin Assessment Reports7 and Basin Water Quality Plan Reports8 available online. The EPA
recommends that North Carolina ensure that these Reports continue to be updated and relevant to support the State’s assessment decisions. Summaries of the State’s Basin Reports can be found in the Annual Reports to the General Assembly Environmental Review Commission, found on the NCDEQ Basin Planning Branch website.9
The State considered all readily available information and reported using this information to determine compliance with the WQS in the manner described in the 2022 Methodology. The EPA reviewed the information submitted and concluded that the State properly assembled and evaluated all existing and readily available data and information, consistent with federal listing requirements.
D. Demonstration of Good Cause for Delisting

The EPA may request that the state demonstrates good cause for not including individual segments, including previously listed segments, on the section 303(d) List. The EPA may request this demonstration if the state does not develop an adequate
record supporting the basis for the decision or does not specifically explain its decision to delist WQLSs previously on the

5 Guidance for 2010 Assessment, Listing, and Reporting Requirements Pursuant to Sections 303(d), 305(b), and 314 of the
Clean Water Act, May 5, 2009, at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/2009_05_06_tmdl_
guidance_final52009.pdf 6 https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/modeling-assessment/water-quality-data-assessment
7 https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-data/water-sciences-home-page/reports-publications-data
8 https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/basin-planning 9 https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/basin-planning
NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

5

List. Consistent with 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(b)(6)(iv)), good cause includes, but is not limited to, more recent or accurate data; more sophisticated water quality modeling; flaws in the original analysis that led to the water being listed; changes in
conditions; approval of a TMDL; demonstration that the impairment is being addressed through other pollution control requirements; or documentation that the impairment is not caused by a pollutant. The EPA reviewed the State’s assessment process, focusing on changes to the previous approved List.
For each proposed delisting, the NCDEQ provided a rationale to support removal of each impairment.
The EPA reviewed these delistings as well as the State’s Responsiveness Summary regarding delistings. The EPA considered the documentation as part of its review and has determined that the State has demonstrated good cause justification for the delistings.
E. Priority Ranking and Two Year TMDL Development Schedule

The EPA regulations codify and interpret the requirement in section 303(d)(1)(A) of the CWA that states establish a priority
ranking for listed waters. See 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(b)(4). States are required to prioritize waters on their section 303(d) Lists for TMDL development, and to identify those WQLSs targeted for TMDL development in the next two years. In
prioritizing and targeting waters, states must, at a minimum, consider the severity of the pollution and the uses to be made of such waters.
On December 5, 2013, the EPA announced a new collaborative framework for implementing the CWA section 303(d)
program with states — A Long-Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration, and Protection under the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Program ("Vision").10 Under the Vision, states are expected to develop tailored strategies to implement their CWA 303(d) program responsibilities in the context of their overall water quality goals and individual state priorities. Although a state’s long-term priorities should be included, or referenced, in the 2020 Integrated Report, the EPA’s formal decision on
the state’s CWA section 303(d) List will not include action on their long-term priorities identified under the Vision. Consistent with federal regulations, the North Carolina’s TMDL priority ranking is fully described in its section 303(d) List submission, and the State has included a two-year schedule of TMDL development for the waters identified on its section 303(d) List.
F. Public Participation

The EPA regulations require states to describe in their Continuing Planning Processes the process for involving the public and other stakeholders in the development of the section 303(d) List. See 40 C.F.R. Part 25 and 40 C.F.R. section 130.7(a). The EPA encourages the states to provide ample opportunities for public participation in the development of the IR and demonstrate how it considered public comments in its final decisions. The State published its draft section 303(d) List for public review on January 11, 2022, accepted written comments through February 28, 2022, and prepared a formal response to the comments received during
the public comment period. This responsiveness summary was included in the State’s submission to the EPA. Many comments were outside the scope of the section 303(d) process, and the NCDEQ indicated they would coordinate with the affected programs. The EPA will continue to coordinate with NCDEQ regarding any potential changes to the state WQS and any corresponding impacts on assessment and listing.
Based on information provided by the State, the EPA has concluded that public participation was conducted adequately to ensure compliance with federal listing requirements.

10 A Long‐Term Vision for Assessment, Restoration, and Protection under the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Program https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/vision_303d_program_dec_2013.pdf (December 2013)
NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

6

The EPA reviewed the Responses and concluded that the State appropriately considered and responded to all comments, data, and information received. The EPA is also satisfied that the State made
appropriate decisions based on the data and information gathered.
IV. The Integrated Report and ATTAINS
Section 305(b) of the CWA directs states to report on the overall condition of aquatic resources in their jurisdictions at the same time as the section 303(d) List submission (by April 1 of all even numbered
years). States are encouraged to merge these reports into a single IR. While the section 305(b)
submission is required, the CWA does not specify Agency approval of the 305(b) report. See 40 C.F.R. section 130.8. The EPA's 2006 IR Guidance11 recommends the use of five categories to classify the WQS attainment status for individual waterbody segments. Placement of a waterbody in IR category 5 indicates that available data and/or information show that at least one designated use is not being
supported or is threatened, and a TMDL is needed. Waterbodies listed in this category are those
considered to be on the section 303(d) List. This categorization scheme is the basis for the national electronic system, the Assessment and TMDL Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS). The electronic IR submission via ATTAINS will
allow the EPA and states to process information in a timely manner for use in the National Water
Quality Inventory Report to Congress; the formula used for state grant allocations; water quality listing decisions; and analyses supporting actions to protect and restore waters and track progress toward that goal.12
V. State’s Additions to and Delistings from the Section 303(d) List
The State identified 58 additional waterbody-pollutant combinations in its List submission, as listed in Appendix A of this document. The EPA is approving the addition of those WQLSs to the State’s section 303(d) List.
The State proposed to delist 26 waterbody-pollutant combinations in its List submission. The EPA fully considered the State’s delisting rationale for each delisting and has determined that the State has demonstrated good cause justification for the delistings. As such, the EPA is approving the delisting of the 26 waterbody-pollutant combinations from the State’s section 303(d) List. All WQLSs removed
from the State’s section 303(d) List and the rationales for each delisting are provided in Appendix B of this decision document.

11 2006 IR Guidance. Cited in Footnote 2.
12 Information Concerning 2018 Clean Water Act Sections 303(d), 305(b), and 314 Integrated Reporting and Listing Decisions, December 22, 2017, at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-01/documents/final_2018_ir_memo.pdf
NORTH CAROLINA 2022 Section 303(d) Decision Document

7

VI. Government to Government Consultation
Under its tribal consultation process, the EPA consults with federally recognized tribes on a government-to-government basis where the EPA decisions may impact tribal interests. By letters dated February 9, 2022, the EPA formally offered consultation to the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians and the Catawba Indian Nation on the available draft North Carolina 303(d) List. The consultation and
coordination process were conducted in accordance with the EPA’s Policy.13. The process began on February 9, 2022 and ended on March 10, 2022. Neither Tribe requested consultation with the EPA on this action. Upon receipt of the final State section 303(d) List submission on April 1, 2022, the EPA contacted the Tribes to request if there were any questions prior to the EPA taking action on the List.
Neither Tribe requested further information.
VII. Final Decision on State’s 2022 Section 303(d) List Submission
After careful review of the final submission, the EPA has determined that the state of North Carolina’s 2022 section 303(d) List meets the requirements of section 303(d) of the CWA and the EPA’s
implementing regulations. Therefore, the EPA is approving the State’s 2022 section 303(d) List.

13 https://www.epa.gov/tribal/epa-policy-consultation-and-coordination-indian-tribes
North Carolina 2022 Section 303(d) List Decision Document APPENDIX A: Additions to the List

A-1

Appendix A: Waterbody Impairments Added to the Section 303(d) List
Information in this table is from North Carolina’s submittal.

NEW
ASSESSMENT UNIT ID
ASSESSMENT
UNIT ID (to be retired)
NORTH CAROLINA
RIVER BASIN

ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME
PARAMETER
NAME
1561 12-118.5a Yadkin-Pee Dee Abbotts Creek Arm of High Rock Lake Fecal Coliform
10121 30b Pasquotank ALBEMARLE SOUND pH
2525 13-2-3-3-(0.7) Yadkin-Pee Dee Back Creek (Back Creek Lake) Chlorophyll a
14108 This is a new AU so AU ID is 14108 French Broad Bacoate Branch Fecal Coliform
13867 27-12-(0.7)b Neuse Beaverdam Creek (Beaverdam Creek Reservoir below normal pool elevation) Chlorophyll a
8337 27-57-16-(3)a Neuse Buffalo Creek (Wendell Lake) pH
3496 15-25-13 Lumber Calabash River Dissolved Oxygen
13527 21-32a White Oak Calico Creek pH
13727 21-32b White Oak Calico Creek Dissolved Oxygen
11540 6-57-(9)b French Broad Cane Creek Fecal Coliform
13596 6-57-(9)a2 French Broad Cane Creek Fecal Coliform
13570 6-57-(9)a1 French Broad Cane Creek Fecal Coliform
11540 6-57-(9)b French Broad Cane Creek Benthos
5745 20-9-1 White Oak Catfish Lake Turbidity
2405 13-17-6-(5.5) Yadkin-Pee Dee Coddle Creek Turbidity
North Carolina 2022 Section 303(d) List Decision Document APPENDIX A: Additions to the List

A-2

NEW ASSESSMENT UNIT ID
ASSESSMENT UNIT ID (to be retired)
NORTH CAROLINA RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME PARAMETER NAME
13881 27-33-(3.5)b1 Neuse Crabtree Creek (Crabtree Lake) Benthos
13765 27-2-3b Neuse East Fork Eno River (Lake Orange) Chlorophyll a
13676 27-54-(3.5)b Neuse Falling Creek pH
12758 9-50-(1) Broad First Broad River Turbidity
13562 6-(54.75)c French Broad FRENCH BROAD RIVER Fecal Coliform
1150 11-54-1 Catawba Frye Creek Benthos
13864 27-52-6a2 Neuse Hannah Creek pH
13865 27-52-6a1 Neuse Hannah Creek Dissolved Oxygen
11633 6-76d French Broad Hominy Creek Fecal Coliform
6945 23-4 Roanoke Island Creek (Island Creek Reservoir) Benthos
4417 18-16-1-(2) Cape Fear Kenneth Creek Turbidity
2351 13-17-40-(1) Yadkin-Pee Dee Lanes Creek Dissolved Oxygen
4704 18-4-(2) Cape Fear Lick Creek Turbidity
2904 1-42-11 Hiwassee Little Brasstown Creek Fish Community
8536 27-86-2-5 Neuse Little Creek (East Side) Benthos
8032 27-2-21-(3.5) Neuse Little River (Little River Reservoir) Chlorophyll a
8327 27-57-(8.5)b Neuse Little River (Tarpleys Pond) pH
North Carolina 2022 Section 303(d) List Decision Document APPENDIX A: Additions to the List

A-3

NEW ASSESSMENT UNIT ID
ASSESSMENT UNIT ID (to be retired)
NORTH CAROLINA RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME PARAMETER NAME
8163 27-38 Neuse Marks Creek (Lake Myra) Benthos
3206 1-49 Hiwassee Martin Creek Fish Community
13674 27-52-(1)b Neuse Mill Creek (Moorewood Pond) pH
3441 15-25v Lumber Montgomery Slough Dissolved Oxygen
4415 18-16-(0.7)c2 Cape Fear Neills Creek (Neals Creek) Turbidity
13773 27-(5.5)b4a Neuse NEUSE RIVER (Falls Lake below normal pool elevation) Turbidity
9534 29-(27) Tar-Pamlico PAMLICO RIVER Chlorophyll a
6739 22-52 Roanoke Rattlesnake Creek Fish Community
13699 12-94-12-(4)c Yadkin-Pee Dee Salem Creek (Middle Fork Muddy Creek) Turbidity
13857 27-23-(2)b Neuse Smith Creek Turbidity
11676 6-78d French Broad Swannanoa River Fecal Coliform
11674 6-78a French Broad Swannanoa River Fecal Coliform
11675 6-78b French Broad Swannanoa River Fecal Coliform
11673 6-78c French Broad Swannanoa River Fecal Coliform
3397 1-52-39 Hiwassee Taylor Creek Fish Community
14109 This is a new AU
so AU ID is 14109 French Broad Town Branch Fecal Coliform
14109 This is a new AU so AU ID is 14109 French Broad Town Branch Benthos
North Carolina 2022 Section 303(d) List Decision Document APPENDIX A: Additions to the List

A-4

NEW ASSESSMENT UNIT ID
ASSESSMENT UNIT ID (to be retired)
NORTH CAROLINA RIVER BASIN ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME PARAMETER NAME
13688 28-83b Tar-Pamlico Town Creek Dissolved Oxygen
13375 28-79-32-(0.5)ut18 Tar-Pamlico UT to Deep Creek Turbidity
14113 16-18-2-(0.5)ut1 Cape Fear UT to Stagg Creek Benthos
2449 13-2-(1.3) Yadkin-Pee Dee Uwharrie River Chlorophyll a
8391 27-68 Neuse Walnut Creek (Lake Wackena, Spring Lake) pH
13189 12-(38)b Yadkin-Pee Dee YADKIN RIVER pH
1322 12-(124.5)b Yadkin-Pee Dee YADKIN RIVER (including upper portion of Tucktertown Lake) Turbidity
14028 12-(27.5)b2 Yadkin-Pee Dee YADKIN RIVER (W. Kerr Scott Reservoir below Elevation 1030) Chlorophyll a
13904 12-(27.5)a Yadkin-Pee Dee YADKIN RIVER (W. Kerr Scott Reservoir below Elevation 1030) Chlorophyll a

North Carolina 2022 Section 303(d) List Decision Document APPENDIX B: Delistings from the List
B-1

Appendix B: Waterbody Impairments Delisted Since the Previous Cycle
Information in this table is from North Carolina’s submittal.

ASSESSMENT
UNIT ID
ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME NORTH
CAROLINA
RIVER BASIN
PARAMETER
NAME
PARAMETER DELISTING
REASON
11-138 Twelvemile Creek Catawba Turbidity More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
12-113 Swearing Creek Yadkin-Pee Dee Turbidity More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
12-115-3 Town Creek Yadkin-Pee Dee Turbidity More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
13-17-9-(2) Irish Buffalo Creek Yadkin-Pee Dee Turbidity More recent or newer data indicate
parameter is meeting criteria.
13-2-(17.5) Uwharrie River Yadkin-Pee Dee pH More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
16-41-1-(11.5)b New Hope Creek Cape Fear Turbidity More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
17-43-(8)a Rocky River Cape Fear Dissolved Oxygen More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
18-27-4-(1)a Little Cross Creek (Bonnie Doone Lake, Kornbow Lake, Mintz) Cape Fear Benthos
Flaws in the original analysis of data
and information led to assessment being incorrectly listed in Category 5
19-(15.5) New River White Oak pH More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
2-(1)a LITTLE TENNESSEE RIVER Little Tennessee Benthos More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
21-(17)e2 Newport River White Oak Enterococcus More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
21-34 Taylor Creek White Oak Enterococcus More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
21-35-1b7 North River White Oak Enterococcus More recent or newer data indicate
parameter is meeting criteria.
North Carolina 2022 Section 303(d) List Decision Document APPENDIX B: Delistings from the List
B-2

ASSESSMENT
UNIT ID
ASSESSMENT UNIT NAME NORTH
CAROLINA
RIVER BASIN
PARAMETER
NAME
PARAMETER DELISTING
REASON
23-8-(1)b
Nutbush Creek (Including Nutbush Creek
Arm of John H. Kerr Reservoir below normal pool elevation) Roanoke Benthos More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
2-46 Brush Creek Little Tennessee
River Basin Fish Community More recent or newer data indicate
parameter is meeting criteria.
27-33-18 Pigeon House Branch Neuse Dissolved Oxygen More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
27-43-12 Little Creek Neuse Benthos More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
29-(1) PAMLICO RIVER (Upper Pamilco Segment) Tar-Pamlico Dissolved Oxygen More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
30d ALBEMARLE SOUND Pasquotank Enterococcus More recent or newer data indicate
parameter is meeting criteria.
5-32 Fines Creek French Broad Fish Community More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
13-(15.5)b PEE DEE RIVER Yadkin-Pee Dee pH More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
29-(5)b2 PAMLICO RIVER (Pamlico Bath Segment) Tar-Pamlico Enterococcus More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
18-27-(3)cut2 UT at Cross Creek POTW Cape Fear Dissolved Oxygen More recent or newer data indicate
parameter is meeting criteria.
22-56-(3.5)a Country Line Creek (Farmers Lake) Roanoke Chlorophyll a More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
12-(124.5)c2 YADKIN RIVER (including Tuckertown Lake, Badin Lake) Yadkin-Pee Dee Chlorophyll a More recent or newer data indicate parameter is meeting criteria.
11-137-8 Little Sugar Creek Catawba Copper Flaws in the original analysis of data and information led to assessment being incorrectly listed in Category 5