High Rock Lake Hearing Officer's Report

Page 1 of 14
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION ON
THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A SITE-SPECIFIC SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARD FOR
CHLOROPHYLL-A FOR THE HIGH ROCK LAKE RESERVOIR
15A NCAC 02B .0211

Environmental Management Commission
July 14, 2022

Public Hearing
Date: October 28, 2021
Location: Virtual (via WebEx due to COVID-19)

NC Register: Publication of Notice of EMC Intention to Amend Rules in accordance with NCGS §150B-21.4 and
NCGS §150B
Proposed Text Volume 36, Issue 5, pp. 295-298
September 1, 2021

A - 1

Page 2 of 14
Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
Abbreviation Meaning
AMS NC DEQ Ambient Monitoring System
APA Administrative Procedures Act (NCGS §150B)
Chl-a Chlorophyll-a
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CIC Criteria Implementation Committee
CWA Clean Water Act (Title 40 CFR)
Department Department of Environmental Quality
DEQ Department of Environmental Quality
Division Division of Water Resources
DWR Division of Water Resources
EMC Environmental Management Commission
EPA US Environmental Protection Agency
HRL High Rock Lake
NC North Carolina
NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code
NCDEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
NCDP Nutrient Criteria Development Plan
NCGA North Carolina General Assembly
NCGS North Carolina General Statutes
NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
NRWQC US EPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria
RRC Rules Review Commission
SAC Scientific Advisory Council
SL Session Law
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
WQC Water Quality Committee

A - 2

Page 3 of 14
Introduction
This report is the official record of proceedings related to the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources’ proposal to revise the water quality classifications
and standards protections in Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Sub-Chapter 02B,
Section .0211 (15A NCAC 02B .0211). The proposed amendment introduces a site-specific standard for
chlorophyll-a for High Rock Lake and follows the requirements set forth for the Triennial Review of
Surface Water Quality Standards as mandated by the Clean Water Act.

This report includes background material, written comments received during the public comment period
related to this rulemaking, responses to the written comments, and relevant exhibits for the proposed
amendments to rules. Lastly, it includes the final recommendation of the Hearing Officer as to the
proposed revisions to the “Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards For Class C Waters” for consideration
by the Environmental Management Commission.

Background
The federal Water Pollution Control Act, as codified in 40 CFR 131.11(b)(1)(ii)1 provides that’s states may
adopt water quality standards that are modified to reflect site-specific conditions. The adoption of site-
specific standards must rely on sound scientific rationale, protect the designated uses, and are subject
to EPA review and approval or disapproval under Section 303(c) of the CWA2. To satisfy these
requirements, the proposed site-specific standard was developed under the NC NCDP and is proposed
for adoption as a separate component of the surface water standards triennial review. The triennial
review is conducted as a formal rulemaking process and satisfies the requirements of the CWA and the
NC Administrative Procedures Act (APA)3 to ensure transparency and public involvement.
The proposal for a site-specific surface water quality standard for chlorophyll-a in HRL, and the
associated Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) (see Appendix A), was presented to the EMC’s Water Quality
Committee (WQC) on May 12, 2021. The WQC granted approval to proceed to the full EMC to request
approval to proceed to public notice and hearing. The proposed site-specific standard and RIA were
presented to the EMC at their July 8, 2021 meeting where the EMC approved the site-specific standard
to procced to public notice and hearing.
Public notice for this rulemaking action was published in accordance with NC General Statutes, Chapter
143-214.1, 143-215.3(a) in Volume 36, Issue 5 of the NC Register4 on September 1, 2021 (also see
Appendix A), and in accordance with 40 CFR Chapter I Subchapter A Part 25.55. The public notice and
hearing announcement were emailed to all individuals on the NCDEQ Rulemaking Listserve. Additional

1 40 CFR 131.11 (b)(1)(ii) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-131
2 Clean Water Act Section 303(c) https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title33/pdf/USCODE-2011-
title33-chap26.pdf
3 North Carolina General Statue Chapter 150B Administrative Procedures Act.
https://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bychapter/chapter_150b.html
4 North Carolina Register. Volume-36-Issue-05-September-1-2021.pdf (nc.gov)
5 Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I, Subchapter A, Part 25.5.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-25
A - 3

Page 4 of 14
notice to the public was provided through the Department and Division’s websites and a press release
was issued by the NC Department of Environmental Quality on:
• NCDEQ’s Proposed Rules website,
• NCDEQ’s Upcoming Public Notices and Hearings website,
• EMC’s website,
• DENR’s Upcoming Public Events webpage
A public hearing was held in a virtual format under an abundance of caution and to address protective
measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 on October 28, 2021. EMC Commissioner Donna Davis was
assigned by EMC Chair Dr. A. Stanley Meiburg as the Hearing Officer for this rulemaking. Public
comments were accepted through the close of the public comment period which extended from the
publication of the Public Notice on September 1, 2021, through November 15, 2021.

A - 4

Page 5 of 14
Summary of Proposed Amendments
The proposed rule text published in Volume 36, Issue 5 of the NC Register are available in Appendix B.
The proposed changes to the rules were formatted in accordance with NC Office of Administrative
Hearings regulations6. The proposals would implement the following summarized changes to the surface
water quality standards for North Carolina:
Site-specific Chlorophyll-a for the High Rock Lake Reservoir
The NCDEQ proposed to adopt a site-specific standard for chlorophyll-a in the HRL reservoir. This site-
specific standard would appear in 15A NCAC 02B .2011 (4)(a) as follows:
(a)Site-specific High Rock Lake Reservoir [Index Numbers 12-(108.5), 12-(114), 12-117-(1), 12-117-
(3), 12-118.5, and the uppermost portion of 12-(124.5) to the dam of High Rock Lake] Chlorophyll
a (corrected): not greater than a growing season geometric mean of 35 ug/L in the photic zone
based on samples collected in a minimum of five different months during the growing season. For
the purpose of this Sub-Item, the growing season is April 1 through October 31 and the photic
zone is represented by a composite sample taken from the water surface down to twice the
measured Secchi depth. Chlorophyll a shall not occur in amounts that result in an adverse impact
as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1002.
A version of the 15A NCAC 02B .0211 rule with the proposed language is provided in Appendix A.
Technical Change
A non-substantive technical change is also included as part of this rulemaking. This technical change
appears in 15A NCAC 02B .0211(4) and adds the following underlined language to direct readers to the
proposed site-specific standard for HRL:

(4) Chlorophyll a (corrected): except as specified in Sub-Item (a) of this Item, not greater than
40 ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic
vegetation not designated as trout waters, and not greater than 15 ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and
other waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation designated as trout
waters (not applicable to lakes or reservoirs less than 10 acres in surface area). The Commission
or its designee may prohibit or limit any discharge of waste into surface waters if the surface
waters experience or the discharge would result in growths of microscopic or macroscopic
vegetation such that the standards established pursuant to this Rule would be violated or the
intended best usage of the waters would be impaired;

6 NC Office of Administrative Hearings Rules. Rules Division. “Information for Rulemaking Coordinators”.
https://www.oah.nc.gov/rules-division/information-rulemaking-coordinators
A - 5

Page 6 of 14
Regulatory Impact Analysis Summary
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) was prepared in conjunction with this rulemaking per NCGS §150B-
21.4. DWR staff conducted outreach activities to potentially affected parties, including members of the
regulated community, environmental groups and state agencies, and used that information in the RIA.
The RIA was approved by the NC Office of State Budget and Management (OSBM) on April 28, 2021. The
EMC approved publication of the RIA on July 8, 2021.
The agency anticipates that if the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard is adopted as proposed, the
changes would not result in any direct or near-term economic impacts as compared to the regulatory
baseline to state government, local government, or the regulated community. The main direct impact
from the adoption of the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard will be a more refined understanding of the
degree of impairment of High Rock Lake. This will enable the state to develop an appropriate TMDL
and/or Nutrient Management Strategy to address the impairment. Potentially significant long-term,
indirect economic impacts (costs and benefits) are possible as a result of the proposed standard as
compared to the baseline. However, we cannot predict the magnitude of costs or benefits (indirectly)
attributable to the proposed site-specific standard as compared to the baseline existing standard. These
impacts would not be realized until after a TMDL is developed and a nutrient management strategy is
adopted. Costs and benefits, including benefits to the environment, will be accounted for during the
future rulemaking to adopt a Nutrient Management Strategy.
Public Hearings
A virtual (i.e., online) public hearing was held in the abundance of caution, and to address protective
measures to help prevent the spread of COVID-19. This public hearing was held on October 28, 2021, at
6 pm via the video conferencing application WebEx. Donna Davis, the EMC-appointed Hearing Officer,
presided over this hearing. Additional information about this process and these hearings is available on
the DWR Surface Water Standards Website. This website also contains the audio recordings of this
public hearing.

A - 6

Page 7 of 14
Public Comments on Proposed Rules
The public comments received for this rulemaking can be viewed on the NCDEQ’s Surface Water Quality
Standards webpage at https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-
planning/classification-standards/surface-water-standards#CurrentRulemaking
Twelve comments were received regarding the proposed action to adopt a site-specific standard for
chlorophyll-a for the HRL reservoir from the following stakeholders:
• Bill Kreutzberger, Water Resources Consultant to the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Association
• Courtney Driver, Chair of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Association and Director, Winston-
Salem/Forsyth County Utilities
• David Saunders, Executive Director - Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Association
• High Rock Lake Clean Sweep
• Middle Cape Fear Basin Association
• North Carolina Farm Bureau Federation
• North Carolina Water Quality Association
• Sam Call, Vice-Chair of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Association and Utility Director for the
Town of Wilkesboro
• Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Association
• Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Water Management Group
• Yadkin River Keeper
• UNRBA
The comments received express support for a site-specific standard to address nutrient concerns in High
Rock Lake. Most comments, however, express concern with the lack of a proposed assessment
methodology for the site-specific standard and object to the components of the proposed standard that
vary from the SAC’s recommendations, including (1) the narrative criterion component, (2) the inclusion
of shallow backwater areas, and (3) the use of a not-greater-than frequency instead of a not-more-than-
once-in-three-years frequency. Summaries of the comments received are provided below along with
responses.
General Comments
Comment: The proposed criterion/standard should be aligned with the unanimous SAC
recommendation for nutrient criteria development for High Rock Lake.
Response: The role of the SAC is to advise NCDEQ on nutrient criteria development. NCDEQ staff
reviewed the SAC’s site-specific chlorophyll a criteria recommendation for HRL, considered all
components, and used this information to propose a scientifically based site-specific chlorophyll a
standard for HRL. The SAC’s report provides detailed justification for the necessary components of a
water quality standard and NCDEQ has carried forward those components that complement the
designated use protection goals for HRL.
A - 7

Page 8 of 14
Comment: The proposed magnitude, geometric mean, seasonal application, minimum data
requirements, and spatial extent are aligned with the SAC criteria recommendation and are
supportable.
Response: NCDEQ thanks the commentors for providing comments.
Comment: The technical documentation produced by DWR, “Overview of High Rock Lake (HRL)
Chlorophyll a Site-Specific Standard Proposal and Assessment Methodology Recommendation,” (DWR
Overview) should remove references to applying the criterion to individual stations.
Response: The DWR technical document provides supporting material describing the basis of the
proposed HRL site-specific standard. It is not part of the rule language. The use of individual stations for
making determinations of 303(d) listings and delistings is beyond the scope of this rulemaking and will be
addressed in the 303(d) listing and delisting methodology that is approved by the EMC following
adoption of the site-specific standard.
Comment: The proposed standard is significantly more stringent than the SAC recommendation
according to an analysis provided by NCWQA and may result in a reduction of chlorophyll-a that will
not support the freshwater sports fishery in HRL. It should be revised to be no more stringent than the
SAC’s recommendation.
Response: The NCWQA analysis concluding that the proposed standard would be significantly more
stringent than the criteria proposed by the NCDP SAC assumed that a “not-greater-than" frequency
would be used to assess the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard for 303(d) impairment listings. This
assumption was incorrect. . Nonetheless, the NCDEQ and the Hearing Officer recommend modifying the
proposed language for the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard for HRL to include the frequency
component more in line with the SAC recommendation. This modified language is discussed below in the
Hearing Officer’s Recommendations section.
Comment: The rule should stipulate that data collected from “backwaters, isolated coves, or where
water is typically shallow (e.g. < 10 feet)” should be excluded from geomean calculations as
recommended by the SAC.
Response: Shallow waters were included because: (1) shallow areas are often used for recreation and
fishing and may experience increased algal productivity that impacts these uses due to conditions that
are exacerbated by increased nutrient levels from anthropogenic sources and (2) HRL is a relatively
shallow lake that experiences lake level fluctuations of greater than 10 feet. To address concerns
expressed in the public comments regarding the inclusion of shallow waters in the geometric mean and
those samples not being consistent with the representative sampling occurring in deeper waters,
language in the proposed standard has been modified to indicate that only those composite samples that
can be completed down to twice the measured Secchi depth will be used in the calculation of the
geometric mean. This will ensure that all samples are taken in a consistent manner throughout HRL. This
modified language is provided below in the Hearing Officer’s Recommendations section.
A - 8

Page 9 of 14
Comment: The narrative standard should be reworded to read: “Chlorophyll a shall not occur in
amounts that indicate excessive growth of microscopic vegetation resulting in a preclusion of use
pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (2).”
Response: NCDEQ agrees that the narrative statement should be removed in favor of using the existing
narrative standard as written in 15A NCAC 02B .0211(2). This language has been removed; the modified
language is provided below in the Hearing Officer’s Recommendations section.
Comment: Efforts to protect HRL should be continuously occurring, and the adoption of this site-
specific standard should be completed expeditiously. Sampling of HRL should occur more frequently
using the latest available technology including real-time sampling.
Response: NCDEQ appreciates this comment. Various state surface water standards and surface water
protection programs are continuously engaged in protecting the uses of HRL. The adoption of this new
site-specific standard, however, must proceed through the legally required rulemaking process per the
NC APA and the federal CWA.

Implementation (Assessment, Frequency, & Nutrient Management)
Comment: The site-specific standard rule should include a one-in-three-year allowable exceedance
frequency as recommended by the SAC. The rules should not apply a “never to exceed concentration
standard”.
Response: The proposed language for the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard for HRL has been modified
to include a “not to exceed more than once in three years” (1-in-3) frequency component. The modified
language is provided below in the Hearing Officer’s Recommendations section.
Comment: The site-specific standard requires more specificity and should explicitly define a site-
specific assessment methodology inclusive of compliance assessment units and site-specific sampling
stations. The site-specific standard rule should include a stipulation that data from all years in the
current assessment period should be treated equally.
Response: Assessment methodologies and data requirements used for 303(d) listing or delisting purposes
are addressed in the 303(d) listing and delisting methodology that are approved by the EMC separately
from water quality standards.
Comment: Implementation concerns related to water body assessment should occur after the site-
specific standard is adopted.
Response: NCDEQ appreciates this feedback. The details regarding determinations of impairment will be
addressed in the 303(d) listing and delisting methodology when it is updated and approved by the EMC
following adoption of a site-specific HRL water quality standard.
A - 9

Page 10 of 14
Comment: The recommended spatial, station specific sampling and calculation of the geomean by
sampling station is appropriate, as long as any exceedance at one station for a given growing season is
considered adequate to determine impairment.
Response: NCDEQ appreciates this feedback. The details regarding determinations of impairment will be
addressed in the 303(d) listing and delisting methodology when it is updated and approved by the EMC
following adoption of a site-specific HRL water quality standard.
Comment: The SAC recommendation to determine impairment based on greater than one exceedance
of the geomean every three years is supportable, as long as there are plans to sample within that time
frame, not the current every five-year lake assessment sampling schedule used by DWR. Sampling
should be conducted every year at first until the impairment status of HRL can be determined.
Response: NCDEQ appreciates this feedback. HRL was fist listed as impaired for chlorophyll-a in 2004 and
continues to be listed as impaired on the 2022 EPA approved 303(d) list. Resource limitations for
conducting lake sampling generally results in NCDEQ sampling lakes on a five-year cycle. NCDEQ is
evaluating whether additional resources can be applied to sample HRL on a different frequency. .
NCDP Process
Comment: The CIC was not fully engaged and not provided ample opportunity to weigh in on
implementation of the proposed standard.
Response: The NCDEQ appreciates these comments and the concern expressed regarding the utilization
of the CIC. The NCDEQ feels that the CIC were adequately engaged as they were regularly updated on the
progress of the SAC over the five-years that the SAC met to deliberate the development of site-specific
chlorophyll-a criteria for HRL, were included in SAC meetings, and allowed to participate in SAC
discussions regarding the development of the recommendation, even though this was not their intended
role. The CIC was also asked to provide comments on the potential implementation concerns related to
the proposed rule language and was provided the language in advance of the December 3, 2020 meeting
that was held to discuss their comments. Few implementation concerns were addressed by the CIC at this
meeting and members stated that they would provide written comments to the NCDEQ, but comments
were never received.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Comment: Because DWR did not evaluate implementation costs in its Regulatory Impact Analysis, this
proposed standard is being considered without adequate projections of the potential costs and
benefits of its adoption.
Response: The agency anticipates that if the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard is adopted as proposed,
the changes would not result in any direct or near-term economic impacts as compared to the regulatory
baseline to state government, local government, or the regulated community. The main direct impact
from the adoption of the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard will be a more refined understanding of the
degree of impairment of High Rock Lake. This will enable the state to develop an appropriate TMDL
A - 10

Page 11 of 14
and/or Nutrient Management Strategy to address the impairment, which the state would need to
develop under the existing standard also. Potentially significant long-term, indirect economic impacts
(costs and benefits) are possible as a result of the proposed standard as compared to the baseline.
However, we cannot predict the magnitude of costs or benefits (indirectly) attributable to the proposed
site-specific standard as compared to the baseline existing standard. These impacts would not be
realized until after a TMDL is developed and a nutrient management strategy is adopted. Costs and
benefits, including benefits to the environment, will be accounted for during the future rulemaking to
adopt a Nutrient Management Strategy. In addition, the NCDP CIC on provided very little information on
potential implementation costs from the proposed standard.
A - 11

Page 12 of 14
Hearing Officer’s Recommendations
It is the recommendation of the Environmental Management Commission-appointed Hearing Officer,
Donna Davis, that the public-noticed revisions to rule 15A NCAC 02B .0211 be approved by the EMC with
modifications noted below and shown in the attached updated rule drafts. In making this
recommendation, the Hearing Officer has considered the requirements of applicable general statutes
and rules. All written and oral comments received by NC were considered. In taking this action, the
Hearing Officer’s recommendations are detailed below.
Hearing Officer’s recommendations:
Adopt the proposed site-specific chlorophyll-a standard for HRL with the following modifications
to address the public comments received as part of this rulemaking:
o Restructure the language for clarity.
o Remove the proposed narrative language from the proposed standard.
o Modify the water quality standard frequency from “not greater than” to “not to exceed
more than once-in-three years”.
o Clarify samples must be representative of the full photic zone when used to calculate
the geometric mean.
The proposed site-specific chlorophyll-a standard, with the above modifications added, will appear in
rule 15A NCAC 02B .0211 as:
(a)Site-specific High Rock Lake Reservoir [Index Numbers 12-(108.5), 12-(114), 12-117-(1), 12-
117-(3), 12-118.5, and the uppermost portion of 12-(124.5) to the dam of High Rock Lake]
Chlorophyll a (corrected): Not greater than one exceedance of a growing season geometric
mean of 35 ug/L in the photic zone within a three-year period. For purposes of this Sub-Item:
(i) The growing season is April 1 through October 31;
(ii) Samples shall be collected in a minimum of five different months within each
growing season with a minimum of two growing season geometric means collected in
a three-year period;
(iii) The photic zone shall be defined as the surface down to twice the Secchi depth;
(iv) Samples shall be collected as a composite sample of the photic zone; and
(v) Samples that do not satisfy the requirements in Sub-Item (iv) of this Item shall be
excluded from the calculation of the geometric mean.

A - 12
Page 13 of 14
Appendix A – Supporting Documents
The following supporting documents are included:
•NC Register Public Notice Volume 36, Issue 5
•High Rock Lake Site Specific Chlorophyll-a Standard Regulatory Impact Analysis
•NC DWR Overview of High Rock Lake (HRL) Chlorophyll a Site-Specific Standard Proposal
•North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Science Advisory Council – A Chlorophyll-a Criterion for High
Rock Lake
A - 13

NORTH CAROLINA
REGISTER

VOLUME 36 ● ISSUE 05 ● Pages 284 – 357

September 1, 2021

I. EXECUTIVE ORDERS
Executive Order No. 224 ................................................................................ 284 – 293

II. PROPOSED RULES
Environmental Quality, Department of
Environmental Management Commission ...................................................... 294 – 298
Wildlife Resources Commission ..................................................................... 298 – 299

III. APPROVED RULES........................................................................................ 300 – 338
Health and Human Services, Department of
Social Services Commission
Insurance, Department of
Department
Industrial Commission
Justice, Department of
Criminal Justice Education and Training Standards Commission
Sheriffs' Education and Training Standards Commission
Environmental Quality, Department of
Coastal Resources Commission
Occupational Licensing Boards and Commissions
Dental Examiners, Board of
Medical Board
Nursing, Board of
Pharmacy, Board of
Physical Therapy Examiners, Board of
Social Work Certification and Licensure Board
Administrative Hearings, Office of
Administrative Hearings, office of

IV. RULES REVIEW COMMISSION ................................................................. 339 – 354

V. CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS
Index to ALJ Decisions ................................................................................... 355 – 357

PUBLISHED BY
The Office of Administrative Hearings
Rules Division Donald R. van der Vaart, Director
6714 Mail Service Center Ashley B. Snyder, Codifier of Rules
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714 Dana McGhee, Publications Coordinator
Telephone [phone] Cathy Matthews-Thayer, Editorial Assistant
Fax [phone]

A - 14

Contact List for Rulemaking Questions or Concerns

For questions or concerns regarding the Administrative Procedure Act or any of its components, consult with the
agencies below. The bolded headings are typical issues which the given agency can address but are not inclusive.

Rule Notices, Filings, Register, Deadlines, Copies of Proposed Rules, etc.
Office of Administrative Hearings
Rules Division
1711 New Hope Church Road 984-236-1850
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 984-236-1947 FAX

contact: Ashley B. Snyder, Codifier of Rules [e-mail] 984-236-1941
Dana McGhee, Publications Coordinator [e-mail] 984-236-1937
Cathy Matthews-Thayer, Editorial Assistant [e-mail] 984-236-1901

Rule Review and Legal Issues
Rules Review Commission
1711 New Hope Church Road 984-236-1850
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 984-236-1947 FAX

contact: Amber Cronk May, Commission Counsel [e-mail] 984-236-1936
Amanda Reeder, Commission Counsel [e-mail] 984-236-1939
Alexander Burgos, Paralegal [e-mail] 984-236-1940
Julie Brincefield, Administrative Assistant [e-mail] 984-236-1935

Fiscal Notes & Economic Analysis
Office of State Budget and Management
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8005
Contact: Carrie Hollis, Economic Analyst [e-mail] 984-236-0689

NC Association of County Commissioners
215 North Dawson Street 919-715-2893
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
contact: Amy Bason [e-mail]

NC League of Municipalities 919-715-2925
424 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1900
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
contact: Monica Jackson [e-mail]

Legislative Process Concerning Rulemaking
545 Legislative Office Building
300 North Salisbury Street 919-733-2578
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 919-715-5460 FAX

Jason Moran-Bates, Staff Attorney
Jeremy Ray, Staff Attorney

A - 15

NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER
Publication Schedule for January 2021 – December 2021

FILING DEADLINES NOTICE OF TEXT PERMANENT RULE TEMPORARY
RULES
Volume &
issue
number
Issue date Last day
for filing
Earliest date
for public
hearing
End of required
comment
Period
Deadline to submit
to RRC
for review at
next meeting
RRC
Meeting
Date
Earliest Eff.
Date of
Permanent Rule
270th day from
publication in the
Register
35:13 01/04/21 12/08/20 01/19/21 03/05/21 03/22/21 04/15/21 05/01/21 10/01/21
35:14 01/15/21 12/21/20 01/30/21 03/16/21 03/22/21 04/15/21 05/01/21 10/12/21
35:15 02/01/21 01/08/21 02/16/21 04/05/21 04/20/21 05/20/21 06/01/21 10/29/21
35:16 02/15/21 01/25/21 03/02/21 04/16/21 04/20/21 05/20/21 06/01/21 11/12/21
35:17 03/01/21 02/08/21 03/16/21 04/30/21 05/20/21 06/17/21 07/01/21 11/26/21
35:18 03/15/21 02/22/21 03/30/21 05/14/21 05/20/21 06/17/21 07/01/21 12/10/21
35:19 04/01/21 03/11/21 04/16/21 06/01/21 06/21/21 07/15/21 08/01/21 12/27/21
35:20 04/15/21 03/24/21 04/30/21 06/14/21 06/21/21 07/15/21 08/01/21 01/10/22
35:21 05/03/21 04/12/21 05/18/21 07/02/21 07/20/21 08/19/21 09/01/21 01/28/22
35:22 05/17/21 04/26/21 06/01/21 07/16/21 07/20/21 08/19/21 09/01/21 02/11/22
35:23 06/01/21 05/10/21 06/16/21 08/02/21 08/20/21 09/16/21 10/01/21 02/26/22
35:24 06/15/21 05/24/21 06/30/21 08/16/21 08/20/21 09/16/21 10/01/21 03/12/22
36:01 07/01/21 06/10/21 07/16/21 08/30/21 09/20/21 10/21/21 11/01/21 03/28/22
36:02 07/15/21 06/23/21 07/30/21 09/13/21 09/20/21 10/21/21 11/01/21 04/11/22
36:03 08/02/21 07/12/21 08/17/21 10/01/21 10/20/21 11/18/21 12/01/21 04/29/22
36:04 08/16/21 07/26/21 08/31/21 10/15/21 10/20/21 11/18/21 12/01/21 05/13/22
36:05 09/01/21 08/11/21 09/16/21 11/01/21 11/22/21 12/16/21 01/01/22 05/29/22
36:06 09/15/21 08/24/21 09/30/21 11/15/21 11/22/21 12/16/21 01/01/22 06/12/22
36:07 10/01/21 09/10/21 10/16/21 11/30/21 12/20/21 01/20/22 02/01/22 06/28/22
36:08 10/15/21 09/24/21 10/30/21 12/14/21 12/20/21 01/20/22 02/01/22 07/12/22
36:09 11/01/21 10/11/21 11/16/21 01/03/22 01/20/22 02/17/22 03/01/22 07/29/22
36:10 11/15/21 10/22/21 11/30/21 01/14/22 01/20/22 02/17/22 03/01/22 08/12/22
36:11 12/01/21 11/05/21 12/16/21 01/31/22 02/21/22 03/17/22 04/01/22 08/28/22
36:12 12/15/21 11/22/21 12/30/21 02/14/22 02/21/22 03/17/22 04/01/22 09/11/22

This document is prepared by the Office of Administrative Hearings as a public service and is not to be deemed binding or controlling.

A - 16

EXPLANATION OF THE PUBLICATION SCHEDULE

This Publication Schedule is prepared by the Office of Administrative Hearings as a public service and the computation of time periods are not to be deemed binding or controlling.
Time is computed according to 26 NCAC 2C .0302 and the Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 6.

GENERAL

The North Carolina Register shall be published twice
a month and contains the following information
submitted for publication by a state agency:
(1) temporary rules;
(2) text of proposed rules;
(3) text of permanent rules approved by the Rules
Review Commission;
(4) emergency rules
(5) Executive Orders of the Governor;
(6) final decision letters from the U.S. Attorney
General concerning changes in laws affecting
voting in a jurisdiction subject of Section 5 of
the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as required by
G.S. 120-30.9H; and
(7) other information the Codifier of Rules
determines to be helpful to the public.

COMPUTING TIME: In computing time in the schedule,
the day of publication of the North Carolina Register
is not included. The last day of the period so computed
is included, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or State
holiday, in which event the period runs until the
preceding day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or
State holiday.

FILING DEADLINES

ISSUE DATE: The Register is published on the first and
fifteen of each month if the first or fifteenth of the
month is not a Saturday, Sunday, or State holiday for
employees mandated by the State Personnel
Commission. If the first or fifteenth of any month is a
Saturday, Sunday, or a holiday for State employees,
the North Carolina Register issue for that day will be
published on the day of that month after the first or
fifteenth that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday for
State employees.

LAST DAY FOR FILING: The last day for filing for any
issue is 15 days before the issue date excluding
Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays for State employees.

NOTICE OF TEXT

EARLIEST DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: The hearing
date shall be at least 15 days after the date a notice of
the hearing is published.

END OF REQUIRED COMMENT PERIOD
An agency shall accept comments on the text of a
proposed rule for at least 60 days after the text is
published or until the date of any public hearings held
on the proposed rule, whichever is longer.

DEADLINE TO SUBMIT TO THE RULES REVIEW
COMMISSION: The Commission shall review a rule
submitted to it on or before the twentieth of a month
by the last day of the next month.
A - 17
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
284
A - 18
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
285
A - 19
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
286
A - 20
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
287
A - 21
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
288
A - 22
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
289
A - 23
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
290
A - 24
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
291
A - 25
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
292
A - 26
EXECUTIVE ORDERS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
293

A - 27
PROPOSED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
294
Note from the Codifier: The notices published in this Section of the NC Register include the text of proposed rules. The agency
must accept comments on the proposed rule(s) for at least 60 days from the publication date, or until the public hearing, or a later
date if specified in the notice by the agency. If the agency adopts a rule that differs substantially from a prior published notice,
the agency must publish the text of the proposed different rule and accept comment on the proposed different rule for 60 days.
Statutory reference: G.S. 150B-21.2.

TITLE 15A – DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY

Notice is hereby given in accordance with G.S. 150B-21.2 that the
Environmental Management Commission intends to amend the
rule cited as 15A NCAC 02B .0211.

Link to agency website pursuant to G.S. 150B-19.1(c):
https://deq.nc.gov/news/events/public-notices-hearings

Proposed Effective Date: March 1, 2022

Public Hearing:
Date: October 28, 2021
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Location:
This public hearing can be joined starting at 5:45 pm via WebEx
link:
https://ncdenrits.webex.com/ncdenrits/onstage/g.php?MTID=eb
d820084710fd3ddd0e554a1b4476d4f
Event number: 161 161 1806
Event password: MPm6Jub8Y8k
Audio conference number: [phone]
Audio conference access code: 161 161 1806

To register for the hearing and provide your preference regarding
speaking at the hearing, please visit:
https://forms.office.com/g/6Tr81DQgwL
Or scan the following QR code with your phone:

Registration must be completed by 12:00 pm on October 28, 2021.
If you have any problems registering online, please call 919-707-
9011 by the registration deadline of 12:00 pm on October 28,
2021.
The Division of Water Resources highly recommends testing your
computer's WebEx capabilities prior to the hearing at
https://www.webex.com/test-meeting.html. For instructions about
digital ways to join the public hearing, please refer to the WebEx
Help Center online at https://help.webex.com/en-us/.

To comment during the hearing after your name is called as a
registered speaker and/or after the hearing officer asks if any
people wish to comment following the registered speakers:
- If you join the hearing by phone, press *3 to “raise your hand,”
speak once called upon to do so, and press *3 again to “lower
your hand.”
- If you join the hearing online, press the hand icon to “raise your
hand,” speak once called upon to do so, and press the hand icon
again to "lower your hand."
- The Hearing Officer may limit the length of time that you may
speak, so that all those who wish to speak may do so.

Reason for Proposed Action:
The Environmental Management Commission (EMC) will
conduct a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to
rule 15A NCAC 02B .0211 - Fresh Surface Water Quality
Standards for Class C Waters.

The purpose of these proposed amendments is to establish a site-
specific chlorophyll-a water quality standard for High Rock Lake
that has been developed in accordance with the North Carolina
Nutrient Criteria Development Plan (NCDP). The NCDP is a
formal agreement between North Carolina and the United States
Environmental Protection Agency with the goal of establishing
appropriate, scientifically defensible, surface water quality
standards for nutrient criteria. This site-specific chlorophyll-a
standard will replace the existing chlorophyll-a standard for High
Rock Lake. The existing chlorophyll-a standard will continue to
apply to all other fresh surface waters in North Carolina.

The rule being proposed for amendment is 15A NCAC 02B .0211-
Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for Class C Waters. The
Proposed changes include:
• The addition of Sub-Item (4)(a) to include
language for site-specific numeric and
narrative standards for chlorophyll-a in the
High Rock Lake Reservoir, and
• The addition of language in the introductory
sentence of Item (4), to direct attention to the
site-specific standards for the High Rock Lake
Reservoir that comprise Sub-Item (4)(a)

Comments may be submitted to: Christopher Ventaloro, NC
DEQ-DWR Planning Section, 1611 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
NC 27699-1611;
email [e-mail]

Comment period ends: November 15, 2021

Procedure for Subjecting a Proposed Rule to Legislative
Review: If an objection is not resolved prior to the adoption of the
rule, a person may also submit written objections to the Rules
Review Commission after the adoption of the Rule. If the Rules
Review Commission receives written and signed objections after
the adoption of the Rule in accordance with G.S. 150B-21.3(b2)
from 10 or more persons clearly requesting review by the
legislature and the Rules Review Commission approves the rule,
the rule will become effective as provided in G.S. 150B-21.3(b1).
A - 28
PROPOSED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
295
The Commission will receive written objections until 5:00 p.m.
on the day following the day the Commission approves the rule.
The Commission will receive those objections by mail, delivery
service, hand delivery, or facsimile transmission. If you have any
further questions concerning the submission of objections to the
Commission, please call a Commission staff attorney at 919-431-
3000.

Fiscal impact. Does any rule or combination of rules in this
notice create an economic impact? Check all that apply.
State funds affected
Local funds affected
Substantial economic impact (>= $1,000,000)
Approved by OSBM
No fiscal note required

CHAPTER 02 - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

SUBCHAPTER 02B - SURFACE WATER AND
WETLAND STANDARDS

SECTION .0200 - CLASSIFICATIONS AND WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO SURFACE
WATERS AND WETLANDS OF NORTH CAROLINA

15A NCAC 02B .0211 FRESH SURFACE WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CLASS C WATERS
In addition to the standards set forth in Rule .0208 of this Section,
the following water quality standards shall apply to all Class C
waters. Additional standards applicable to other freshwater
classifications are specified in Rules .0212, .0214, .0215, .0216,
.0218, .0219, .0223, .0224, .0225, and .0231 of this Section.
(1) The best usage of waters shall be aquatic life
propagation, survival, and maintenance of
biological integrity (including fishing and fish);
wildlife; secondary contact recreation as
defined in Rule .0202 of this Section;
agriculture; and any other usage except for
primary contact recreation or as a source of
water supply for drinking, culinary, and food
processing purposes. All freshwaters shall be
classified to protect these uses at a minimum.
(2) The conditions of waters shall be such that
waters are suitable for all best uses specified in
this Rule. Sources of water pollution that
preclude any of these uses on either a shortterm
or -longterm- basis shall be deemed to violate a
water quality standard;
(3) Chlorine, total residual: 17 ug/l;
(4) Chlorophyll a (corrected): except as specified in
Sub-Item (a) of this Item, not greater than 40
ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters
subject to growths of macroscopic or
microscopic vegetation not designated as trout
waters, and not greater than 15 ug/l for lakes,
reservoirs, and other waters subject to growths
of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation
designated as trout waters (not applicable to
lakes or reservoirs less than 10 acres in surface
area). The Commission or its designee may
prohibit or limit any discharge of waste into
surface waters if the surface waters experience
or the discharge would result in growths of
microscopic or macroscopic vegetation such
that the standards established pursuant to this
Rule would be violated or the intended best
usage of the waters would be impaired;
(a) Site-specific High Rock Lake
Reservoir [Index Numbers 12-(108.5),
12-(114), 12-117-(1), 12-117-(3), 12-
118.5, and the uppermost portion of
12-(124.5) to the dam of High Rock
Lake] Chlorophyll a (corrected): not
greater than a growing season
geometric mean of 35 ug/L in the
photic zone based on samples
collected in a minimum of five
different months during the growing
season. For the purpose of this Sub-
Item, the growing season is April 1
through October 31 and the photic
zone is represented by a composite
sample taken from the water surface
down to twice the measured Secchi
depth. Chlorophyll a shall not occur in
amounts that result in an adverse
impact as defined in 15A NCAC 02H
.1002.
(5) Cyanide, total: 5.0 ug/l;
(6) Dissolved oxygen: not less than 6.0 mg/l for
trout waters; for nontrout- waters, not less than
a daily average of 5.0 mg/l with an
instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/l;
swamp waters, lake coves, or backwaters, and
lake bottom waters may have lower values if
caused by natural conditions;
(7) Fecal coliform: shall not exceed a geometric
mean of 200/100ml (MF count) based upon at
least five samples taken over a 30-day period,
nor exceed 400/100ml in more than 20 percent
of the samples examined during such period.
Violations of this Item are expected during
rainfall events and may be caused by
uncontrollable nonpoint source pollution. All
coliform concentrations shall be analyzed using
the membrane filter technique. If high turbidity
or other conditions would cause the membrane
filter technique to produce inaccurate data, the
most probable number (MPN) 5-tube multiple
dilution method shall be used.
(8) Floating solids, settleable solids, or sludge
deposits: only such amounts attributable to
sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes as
shall not make the water unsafe or unsuitable
for aquatic life and wildlife or impair the waters
for any designated uses;
(9) Fluoride: 1.8 mg/l;
A - 29
PROPOSED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
296
(10) Gases, total dissolved: not greater than 110
percent of saturation;
(11) Metals:
(a) With the exception of mercury and
selenium, acute and chronic
freshwater aquatic life standards for
metals shall be based upon
measurement of the dissolved fraction
of the metal. Mercury and selenium
water quality standards shall be based
upon measurement of the total
recoverable metal;
(b) With the exception of mercury and
selenium, aquatic life standards for
metals listed in this Sub-Item shall
apply as a function of the pollutant's
water effect ratio (WER). The WER
shall be assigned a value equal to one
unless any person demonstrates to the
Division's satisfaction in a permit
proceeding that another value is
developed in accordance with the
"Water Quality Standards Handbook:
Second Edition" published by the US
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA-823-B-12-002), which is hereby
incorporated by reference, including
subsequent amendments and editions,
and can be obtained free of charge at
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidan
ce/standards/handbook/. Alternative
site-specific standards may also be
developed when any person submits
values that demonstrate to the
Commission that they were derived in
accordance with the "Water Quality
Standards Handbook: Second Edition,
Recalculation Procedure or the
Resident Species Procedure", which is
hereby incorporated by reference
including subsequent amendments and
can be obtained free of charge at
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidan
ce/standards/handbook/.
(c) Freshwater metals standards that are
not hardness-dependent shall be as
follows:
(i) Arsenic, dissolved, acute:
WER∙ 340 ug/l;
(ii) Arsenic, dissolved, chronic:
WER∙ 150 ug/l;
(iii) Beryllium, dissolved, acute:
WER∙ 65 ug/l;
(iv) Beryllium, dissolved,
chronic: WER∙ 6.5 ug/l;
(v) Chromium VI, dissolved,
acute: WER∙ 16 ug/l;
(vi) Chromium VI, dissolved,
chronic: WER∙ 11 ug/l;
(vii) Mercury, total recoverable,
chronic: 0.012 ug/l;
(viii) Selenium, total recoverable,
chronic: 5 ug/l;
(ix) Silver, dissolved, chronic:
WER∙ 0.06 ug/l;
(d) Hardness-dependent freshwater
metals standards shall be derived
using the equations specified in Table
A: Dissolved Freshwater Standards
for Hardness-Dependent Metals. If the
actual instream hardness (expressed as
CaCO3 or Ca+Mg) is less than 400
mg/l, standards shall be calculated
based upon the actual instream
hardness. If the instream hardness is
greater than 400 mg/l, the maximum
applicable hardness shall be 400 mg/l.

Table A: Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals
Numeric standards calculated at 25 mg/l hardness are listed below for illustrative purposes. The Water Effects
Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under Sub-Item (11)(b) of this Rule.

Metal Equations for Hardness-Dependent Freshwater Metals (ug/l) Standard
at 25 mg/l
hardness
(ug/l)
Cadmium,
Acute
WER∙ [{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.9151 [ln
hardness]-3.1485}]
0.82
Cadmium,
Acute,
Trout waters
WER∙ [{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.9151[ln
hardness]-3.6236}]
0.51
Cadmium,
Chronic
WER∙ [{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.7998[ln
hardness]-4.4451}]
0.15
Chromium
III, Acute
WER∙ [0.316 ∙ e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}] 180
Chromium
III, Chronic
WER∙ [0.860 ∙ e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}]

24

A - 30
PROPOSED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
297
Copper, Acute WER∙ [0.960 ∙ e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.700}]
Or,
Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria-Copper
2007 Revision
(EPA-822-R-07-001)

3.6

NA
Copper,
Chronic
WER∙ [0.960 ∙ e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702}]
Or,
Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria-Copper
2007 Revision
(EPA-822-R-07-001)
2.7

NA
Lead,
Acute
WER∙ [{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} ∙ e^{1.273[ln
hardness]-1.460}]
14
Lead, Chronic WER∙ [{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} ∙ e^{1.273[ln
hardness]-4.705}]
0.54
Nickel, Acute WER∙ [0.998 ∙ e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255}] 140
Nickel,
Chronic
WER∙ [0.997 ∙ e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584}] 16
Silver, Acute WER∙ [0.85 ∙ e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.59}] 0.30
Zinc, Acute WER∙ [0.978 ∙ e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}] 36
Zinc, Chronic WER∙ [0.986 ∙ e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}] 36

(e) Compliance with acute instream
metals standards shall only be
evaluated using an average of two or
more samples collected within one
hour. Compliance with chronic
instream metals standards shall only
be evaluated using an average of a
minimum of four samples taken on
consecutive days or as a 96-hour
average;
(12) Oils, deleterious substances, or colored or other
wastes: only such amounts as shall not render
the waters injurious to public health, secondary
recreation, or to aquatic life and wildlife, or
adversely affect the palatability of fish,
aesthetic quality, or impair the waters for any
designated uses. For the purpose of
implementing this Rule, oils, deleterious
substances, or colored or other wastes shall
include substances that cause a film or sheen
upon or discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines, as described in 40 CFR
110.3(a)-(b), incorporated by reference
including subsequent amendments and editions.
This material is available, free of charge, at:
http://www.ecfr.gov/;
(13) Pesticides:
(a) Aldrin: 0.002 ug/l;
(b) Chlordane: 0.004 ug/l;
(c) DDT: 0.001 ug/l;
(d) Demeton: 0.1 ug/l;
(e) Dieldrin: 0.002 ug/l;
(f) Endosulfan: 0.05 ug/l;
(g) Endrin: 0.002 ug/l;
(h) Guthion: 0.01 ug/l;
(i) Heptachlor: 0.004 ug/l;
(j) Lindane: 0.01 ug/l;
(k) Methoxychlor: 0.03 ug/l;
(l) Mirex: 0.001 ug/l;
(m) Parathion: 0.013 ug/l; and
(n) Toxaphene: 0.0002 ug/l;
(14) pH: shall be between 6.0 and 9.0 except that
swamp waters may have a pH as low as 4.3 if it
is the result of natural conditions;
(15) Phenolic compounds: only such levels as shall
not result in fish-flesh tainting or impairment of
other best usage;
(16) Polychlorinated biphenyls (total of all PCBs
and congeners identified): 0.001 ug/l;
(17) Radioactive substances, based on at least one
sample collected per quarter:
(a) Combined radium-226 and
radium-228: the average annual
activity level for combined
radium-226 and radium-228 shall not
exceed five picoCuries per liter;
(b) Alpha Emitters: the average annual
gross alpha particle activity (including
radium-226, but excluding radon and
uranium) shall not exceed 15
picoCuries per liter;
(c) Beta Emitters: the average annual
activity level for strontium-90 shall
not exceed eight picoCuries per liter,
nor shall the average annual gross beta
particle activity (excluding
potassium-40 and other naturally
occurring radionuclides) exceed 50
picoCuries per liter, nor shall the
average annual activity level for
tritium exceed 20,000 picoCuries per
liter;
A - 31
PROPOSED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
298
(18) Temperature: not to exceed 2.8 degrees C (5.04
degrees F) above the natural water temperature,
and in no case to exceed 29 degrees C (84.2
degrees F) for mountain and upper piedmont
waters and 32 degrees C (89.6 degrees F) for
lower piedmont and coastal plain Waters; the
temperature for trout waters shall not be
increased by more than 0.5 degrees C (0.9
degrees F) due to the discharge of heated
liquids, but in no case to exceed 20 degrees C
(68 degrees F);
(19) Toluene: 0.36 ug/l in trout classified waters or
11 ug/l in all other waters;
(20) Trialkyltin compounds: 0.07 ug/l expressed as
tributyltin;
(21) Turbidity: the turbidity in the receiving water
shall not exceed 50 Nephelometric Turbidity
Units (NTU) in streams not designated as trout
waters and 10 NTU in streams, lakes, or
reservoirs designated as trout waters; for lakes
and reservoirs not designated as trout waters,
the turbidity shall not exceed 25 NTU; if
turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural
background conditions, the existing turbidity
level shall not be increased. Compliance with
this turbidity standard shall be deemed met
when land management activities employ Best
Management Practices (BMPs), as defined by
Rule .0202 of this Section, recommended by the
Designated Nonpoint Source Agency, as
defined by Rule .0202 of this Section.
(22) Toxic Substance Level Applicable to NPDES
Permits: Chloride: 230 mg/l. If chloride is
determined by the waste load allocation to be
exceeded in a receiving water by a discharge
under the specified 7Q10 criterion for toxic
substances, the discharger shall monitor the
chemical or biological effects of the discharge.
Efforts shall be made by all dischargers to
reduce or eliminate chloride from their
effluents. Chloride shall be limited as
appropriate in the NPDES permit if sufficient
information exists to indicate that it may be a
causative factor resulting in toxicity of the
effluent.

Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-215.3(a)(1).

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Notice is hereby given in accordance with G.S. 150B-
21.3A(c)(2)g. that the Wildlife Resources Commission intends to
readopt without substantive changes the rules cited as 15A NCAC
10B .0102, .0115, .0121, .0122, .0124, .0125, .0202, .0208-.0211,
.0213-.0215, .0219-.0222, .0225, .0301; 10C .0201, .0212, .0213
and .0217.

Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.2(c)(1), the text of the rule(s) proposed
for readoption without substantive changes are not required to be
published. The text of the rules are available on the OAH website:
http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp.

Link to agency website pursuant to G.S. 150B-19.1(c):
https://www.ncwildlife.org/Proposed-Regulations

Proposed Effective Date: January 1, 2022

Public Hearing:
10B Rules
Date: September 21, 2021
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Location: Register online here:
https://ncwildlife-
org.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_m1sro69HSN-
nWKmpLkN0_A Join by phone toll free (669 254 5252 or 833
568 8864 ) using Webinar ID: 161 474 0305

Public Hearing:
10C Rules
Date: September 28, 2021
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Location: Register online here:
https://ncwildlife-
org.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_pnZIIZuWRVCxVWsoT
Adx_A Join by phone toll free (669 254 5252 or 833 568 8864 )
using Webinar ID: 160 982 2816

Reason for Proposed Action: Pursuant to 150B-21.3A, the
agency is required to readopt 10B and 10C rules as part of the
periodic review process.

Comments may be submitted to: Rulemaking Coordinator, 1701
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699; email
[e-mail]

Comment period ends: November 1, 2021

Procedure for Subjecting a Proposed Rule to Legislative
Review: If an objection is not resolved prior to the adoption of the
rule, a person may also submit written objections to the Rules
Review Commission after the adoption of the Rule. If the Rules
Review Commission receives written and signed objections after
the adoption of the Rule in accordance with G.S. 150B-21.3(b2)
from 10 or more persons clearly requesting review by the
legislature and the Rules Review Commission approves the rule,
the rule will become effective as provided in G.S. 150B-21.3(b1).
The Commission will receive written objections until 5:00 p.m.
on the day following the day the Commission approves the rule.
The Commission will receive those objections by mail, delivery
service, hand delivery, or facsimile transmission. If you have any
further questions concerning the submission of objections to the
Commission, please call a Commission staff attorney at 919-431-
3000.

Fiscal impact. Does any rule or combination of rules in this
notice create an economic impact? Check all that apply.
State funds affected
Local funds affected
A - 32
PROPOSED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
299
Substantial economic impact (>= $1,000,000)
Approved by OSBM
No fiscal note required

CHAPTER 10 - WILDLIFE RESOURCES AND WATER
SAFETY

SUBCHAPTER 10B - HUNTING AND TRAPPING

SECTION .0100 - GENERAL REGULATIONS

15A NCAC 10B .0102 IMPORTATION OF GRAY
FOXES (READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0115 SHINING LIGHTS IN DEER
AREAS (READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0121 WILD BIRDS DEFINED
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0122 PROHIBITED HUNTING ON
STATE FISH HATCHERIES (READOPTION WITHOUT
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0124 IMPORTATION OF ANIMAL
PARTS (READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0125 RELEASE OF MUTE SWANS
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

SECTION .0200 - HUNTING

15A NCAC 10B .0202 BEAR (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0208 QUAIL (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0209 WILD TURKEY (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0210 RUFFED GROUSE (NATIVE
PHEASANT) (READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0211 PHEASANT (NONNATIVE
VARIETIES) (READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE
CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0213 GROUNDHOG (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0214 WILDCAT (BOBCAT)
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0215 CROWS (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0219 COYOTE (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0220 NUTRIA (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0221 STRIPED SKUNK
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0222 ARMADILLO (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10B .0225 ELK (READOPTION WITHOUT
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

SECTION .0300 - TRAPPING

15A NCAC 10B .0301 DEFINITIONS (READOPTION
WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

SUBCHAPTER 10C - INLAND FISHING REGULATIONS

SECTION .0200 - GENERAL REGULATIONS

15A NCAC 10C .0201 IDENTIFICATION
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10C .0212 FISH HATCHERIES
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10C .0213 SNAGGING FISH
(READOPTION WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

15A NCAC 10C .0217 PUBLIC ACCESS FOR
ANGLERS ONLY (READOPTION WITHOUT
SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES)

A - 33
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
300
This Section includes a listing of rules approved by the Rules Review Commission followed by the full text of those rules. The rules
that have been approved by the RRC in a form different from that originally noticed in the Register or when no notice was required
to be published in the Register are identified by an * in the listing of approved rules. Statutory Reference: G.S. 150B-21.17.
Rules approved by the Rules Review Commission at its meeting on July 15, 2021 Meeting.

REGISTER CITATION TO THE
NOTICE OF TEXT
SOCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION
Definitions 10A NCAC 70M .0102* 35:20 NCR
Public Adoption Agencies 10A NCAC 70M .0201* 35:20 NCR
Functions of a Public Adoption Agency 10A NCAC 70M .0301* 35:20 NCR
Services to Adoptive Applicants 10A NCAC 70M .0302* 35:20 NCR
Multiethnic Placement Act Requirements for Adoptive Home ... 10A NCAC 70M .0304* 35:20 NCR
Regular Monthly Cash Adoption Assistance and Vendor 10A NCAC 70M .0401* 35:20 NCR
Eligibility Requirements for Regular Monthly Cash Assista... 10A NCAC 70M .0402* 35:20 NCR
Procedures/Reimbursement of Adoption Assistance Benefits 10A NCAC 70M .0403* 35:20 NCR
Eligibility Requirements for the Special Children Adoptio... 10A NCAC 70M .0404 35:20 NCR
Payments from the Special Children Adoption Incentive Fund 10A NCAC 70M .0405 35:20 NCR
Out of State Adoption Fees 10A NCAC 70M .0501* 35:20 NCR
General Eligibility Requirements 10A NCAC 70M .0502 35:20 NCR
Public Adoption Agency Requirements 10A NCAC 70M .0601* 35:20 NCR
Eligible Non-Recurring Adoption Expenses 10A NCAC 70M .0602* 35:20 NCR
Requirements 10A NCAC 70M .0603 35:20 NCR
Prohibition on Reimbursement Caps 10A NCAC 70M .0604* 35:20 NCR
Eligibility Requirements for the Special Need Adoption In... 10A NCAC 70M .0701* 35:20 NCR
Payments from the Special Need Adoption Incentive Fund 10A NCAC 70M .0702* 35:20 NCR
INSURANCE, DEPARTMENT OF
Licensing of Resident Agent, LTD Representative and Adjuster 11 NCAC 06A .0402* 35:18 NCR
Renewal of Agent Appts: Licenses/Limited Reps 11 NCAC 06A .0501* 35:18 NCR
Salesmen to be Licensed Insurance Agents 11 NCAC 13 .0410* 35:18 NCR
INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION
Emergency Orders and Directives of the Chief Justice of t... 11 NCAC 23E .0302 35:20 NCR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION AND TRAINING STANDARDS COMMISSION
Summary Suspensions 12 NCAC 09A .0206* 35:18 NCR
Certification Training for School Resource Officers 12 NCAC 09B .0313* 35:18 NCR
Trainee Attendance 12 NCAC 09B .0404* 35:18 NCR
Moral Character 12 NCAC 09G .0206* 35:18 NCR
Suspension: Revocation: or Denial of Certification 12 NCAC 09G .0504* 35:18 NCR
Summary Suspension 12 NCAC 09G .0506* 35:18 NCR
SHERIFFS' EDUCATION AND TRAINING STANDARDS COMMISSION
Certification and Training for School Resources Officers 12 NCAC 10B .0510* 35:20 NCR
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Development Period/Commencement/Continuation 15A NCAC 07J .0403* 34:09 NCR
A - 34
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
301
Development Period Extension 15A NCAC 07J .0404* 34:09 NCR
Permit Modification 15A NCAC 07J .0405* 34:09 NCR
Project Maintenance: Major Development/Dredge and Fill 15A NCAC 07J .0407* 34:09 NCR
Restoration/Mitigation 15A NCAC 07J .0410* 34:09 NCR
Structural Accessways Over Frontal Dunes Exempted 15A NCAC 07K .0207* 34:09 NCR
Single Family Residences Exempted 15A NCAC 07K .0208 34:09 NCR
DENTAL EXAMINERS, BOARD OF
Application for General Anesthesia or Sedation Permit, Pe... 21 NCAC 16Q .0102 35:18 NCR
Itinerant (Mobile) General Anesthesia Permit, Equipment a... 21 NCAC 16Q .0206 35:18 NCR
Annual Review of General Anesthesia and Itinerant (Mobile... 21 NCAC 16Q .0207* 35:18 NCR
Annual Renewal of Moderate Parenteral and Enteral Conscio... 21 NCAC 16Q .0305* 35:18 NCR
Annual Renewal of Moderate Pediatric Conscious Sedation P... 21 NCAC 16Q .0407* 35:18 NCR
Minimal Conscious Sedation Credentials and Permit 21 NCAC 16Q .0504 35:18 NCR
Minimal Conscious Sedation Clinical Requirements and Equi... 21 NCAC 16Q .0505* 35:18 NCR
Annual Renewal of Minimal Conscious Sedation Permit 21 NCAC 16Q .0506 35:18 NCR
Procedure for Minimal Conscious Sedation Evaluation or In... 21 NCAC 16Q .0507 35:18 NCR
MEDICAL BOARD
Prescribing Authority 21 NCAC 32M .0109* 35:18 NCR
Reporting Criteria 21 NCAC 32M .0117 34:21 NCR
NURSING, BOARD OF
Prescribing Authority 21 NCAC 36 .0809* 35:18 NCR
PHARMACY, BOARD OF
Compounding 21 NCAC 46 .2801* 35:20 NCR
PHYSICAL THERAPY EXAMINERS, BOARD OF
Persons Refused Examination Permission 21 NCAC 48D .0107 35:14 NCR
Retaking Examination 21 NCAC 48D .0109 35:14 NCR
Applicants with Special Needs 21 NCAC 48D .0111 35:14 NCR
Filing Application and Board Determination of Exam Eligib... 21 NCAC 48E .0101* 35:14 NCR
SOCIAL WORK CERTIFICATION AND LICENSURE BOARD
Work Experience 21 NCAC 63 .0211* 35:13 NCR
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS, OFFICE OF
Cost To Public 26 NCAC 01 .0103 35:20 NCR
Official Record 26 NCAC 03 .0123* 35:20 NCR

The following rules are subject to Legislative Review.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION AND TRAINING STANDARDS COMMISSION
Minimum Standards for Criminal Justice Officers 12 NCAC 09B .0101* 35:18 NCR
Physical and Mental Standards 12 NCAC 09G .0205* 35:18 NCR

A - 35
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
302
TITLE 10A - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES

10A NCAC 70M .0102 DEFINITIONS
(a) For the purpose of the rules in this Subchapter, 42 USC 673,
45 CFR 1356.41, and the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA) of
1994, P.L. 103-382, as amended by the Interethnic Adoption
Provisions of 1996, P.L. 104-188, are applicable to both the State
and public adoption agencies and are hereby incorporated by
reference including any subsequent amendments and editions.
These documents may be accessed at www.gpo.gov or
www.congress.gov at no charge.
(b) The following definitions shall apply to the rules in this
Subchapter:
(1) "Adoption assistance agreement" means a
signed written agreement that is developed by
the Department ("North Carolina Adoption
Assistance Agreement" Form DSS-5013,
which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) that is
binding upon the public adoption agency and
the prospective adoptive parents of a minor
child and, at a minimum, the agreement shall:
(A) specify payments that meet the
requirements in 42 USC 673(a)(3),
and specifies the nature and amount of
any payments, services, and assistance
to be provided under the agreement;
(B) stipulates that the agreement shall
remain in effect regardless of the state
where the adoptive parents are
residents of at any given time;
(C) require each adoptive parent to inform
the public adoption agency of any
circumstances that would make the
parent ineligible for the payments or
eligible for a different amount;
(D) if applicable, require the adoptive
parents to provide receipt of vendor
payments; and
(E) contain provisions for the protection
of the interests of the child in cases
where the adoptive parents and child
move to another state while the
agreement is in effect.
(2) "Applicable child" means a child who meets the
requirements in 42 USC 673(e).
(3) "Child with special needs" or "children with
special needs" means a child who meets the
requirements in 42 USC 673(c). The public
adoption agency, or the North Carolina
Department of Health and Human Services for
the Special Needs Adoptions Incentive Fund
assistance, shall make the specified
determinations for the State in 42 USC 673(c).
A child shall not be returned to the home of the
child's parent if there is a court order
terminating parental rights, a relinquishment to
a public or private child-placing agency, a
consent for adoption by the parent, a finding
from the court in an adoption proceeding that a
parent's consent is not required, or verification
of the death of a parent. For a child to meet the
requirement in 42 USC 673(c)(2)(B)(ii), the
child must have a letter from the Social Security
Administration that approves the child for
Social Security Insurance benefits. For
purposes of 42 USC 673(c)(1)(B) and 42 USC
673(c)(2)(B)(i), the child shall present one or
more of the following specific factors or
conditions:
(A) six years of age or older;
(B) two years of age or older and a
member of a minority race or ethnic
group;
(C) a member of a sibling group of three
or more children who will all be
placed in the same adoptive home;
(D) a member of a sibling group of two
children who will be placed in the
same adoptive home and the child's
sibling meets one of the factors or
conditions in Parts (A), (B), (E), (F),
(G), or (H) of this Paragraph;
(E) a medically diagnosed disability that
substantially limits one or more major
life activities, requires professional
treatment, requires assistance in self-
care, or requires the purchase of
special equipment;
(F) diagnosed by a medical professional,
who is qualified through licensing or
credentialing to make the diagnosis, as
having a psychiatric condition that
impairs the child's mental, intellectual,
or social functioning, and for which
the child requires professional
services;
(G) diagnosed by a medical professional,
who is qualified through licensing or
credentialing to make the diagnosis, as
having a behavioral or emotional
disorder characterized by
inappropriate behavior that deviates
substantially from behavior
appropriate to the child's age or
significantly interferes with child's
intellectual, social, and personal
functioning;
(H) diagnosed by a medical professional,
who is qualified through licensing or
credentialing to make the diagnosis, as
being intellectually or
developmentally disabled; or
(I) at risk, as opined by a medical
professional, who is qualified through
licensing or credentialing for one of
the factors or conditions in Parts (E)
A - 36
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
303
through (H) of the definition in this
Paragraph due to:
(i) prenatal exposure to toxins;
(ii) a history of abuse or serious
neglect; or
(iii) genetic history.
(4) "Department" means the North Carolina
Department of Health and Human Services.
(5) "Nonrecurring adoption expense" means the
same as "nonrecurring adoption expenses"
found in 42 USC 673(a)(6)(A).
(6) "Public adoption agency" means any county
department of social services, consolidated
human services, or regional department of
social services in North Carolina that is
authorized by law to place children for adoption
or that provides adoption services.
(7) "Supplemental Agreement" means a signed
written agreement that is developed by the
Department ("North Carolina Special Children
Adoption Incentive Fund Supplemental
Adoption Assistance Agreement" Form DSS-
5212, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) that is
binding upon the public adoption agency and
the prospective adoptive parents of a minor
child and at a minimum:
(A) specifies the nature and amount of any
Special Children's Adoption Incentive
Fund payment; and
(B) includes an acknowledgement by the
prospective adoptive parents that the
payments are not an entitlement and
are limited to available funds in the
Special Children's Adoption Incentive
Fund.

History Note: Authority G.S. 143B-153(2)(a); 108A-49; 42
U.S.C. 673;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0201 PUBLIC ADOPTION AGENCIES
(a) Except for the provisions relating to an executive director,
public adoption agencies shall comply with 10A NCAC 70H
.0401 in determining the qualifications and job responsibilities for
personnel.
(b) Public adoption agencies shall comply with 10A NCAC 70F
.0207 in the hiring of staff and use of volunteers.
(c) The caseload size of social workers providing adoption
services shall be in compliance with requirements set forth in 10A
NCAC 70H .0401.

History Note: Authority G.S. 143B-153;
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. October 31, 1977;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2008; September 1, 1986;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0301 GENERAL
Public adoption agencies shall perform the following functions:
(1) provision of casework and other supportive
services to biological parents considering
adoption;
(2) provision of casework and other supportive
services to the child considered for adoption;
(3) provision of casework and other supportive
services to adoptive applicants through
pre-placement studies;
(4) selection of home and placement process;
(5) supervision after placement;
(6) fulfillment of social and legal responsibilities;
(7) compilation and preservation of case records;
(8) provision of post-adoption consultation
services, including, coordination and referrals
for educational enrollment for children seven to
sixteen years of age, and for therapeutic and
physical health needs;
(9) when this Subchapter requires, determine
whether eligibility requirements have been met
for adoption assistance in this Subchapter that
is available for children with special needs who
are in custody of the public adoption agency or
who have been placed by a private child-
placing agency in an adoptive home within its
jurisdiction;
(10) administer adoption assistance agreements for
which it entered into pursuant to this
Subchapter;
(11) notify adoptive parents of tax credits that may
be available for adoptive parents;
(12) make information available for prospective
adoptive families that describes the kinds of
children needing placement, the availability of
adoption assistance, and procedures for
referring families they are unable to serve to
other child placing agencies; and
(13) recruit potential foster and adoptive families in
accordance with the Multiethnic Placement Act
(MEPA) of 1994, P.L. 103-382, as amended by
the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of 1996,
P.L. 104-188.

History Note: Authority G.S. 48-2-502; 48-3-203; 48-3-204;
48-3-303; 143B-153;
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. October 31, 1977;
Amended Eff. June 1, 1990; September 1, 1986;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0302 SERVICES TO ADOPTIVE
APPLICANTS
Public adoption agencies shall comply with 10A NCAC 70H
.0404, .0405, .0406, .0407, 0408 and .0409 in determining the
procedures for the application process, preplacement assessment,
notification to adoptive applicants of acceptance or denial of
application, services to adoptive applicants and families, legal
process, and record retention.
A - 37
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
304
History Note: Authority G.S. 143B-153;
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. October 31, 1977;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2008; July 17, 2000; September 1, 1986;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0304 MULTIETHNIC PLACEMENT
ACT REQUIREMENTS FOR ADOPTIVE HOME
RECRUITMENT
(a) Public adoption agencies shall recruit potential adoptive and
foster families that reflect the ethnic and racial diversity of
children in the State.
(b) Public adoption agencies shall not deny any person the
opportunity to become an adoptive or a foster parent on the basis
of the race, color, or national origin of the person or of the child
involved.
(c) Public adoption agencies shall not delay or deny the
placement of a child for adoption or foster care, on the basis of the
race, color, or national origin of the adoptive or foster parent or
the child involved.
(d) Public adoption agencies shall not violate provisions of the
Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994, P.L. 103-382, as amended by
the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of 1996, P.L. 104-188, that
apply to state or local agencies.

History Note: Authority G.S. 48-3-204; 131D-10.5; 143B-
153;
Eff. October 1, 2008;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0401 STANDARD MONTHLY CASH
ADOPTION ASSISTANCE AND VENDOR PAYMENTS
(a) Standard monthly cash assistance payments are monthly
payments made based on graduated rates set by the General
Assembly and reflected in the executed adoption assistance
agreement.
(b) Vendor payments are made directly to a child's provider,
which may include the adoptive parents, for medical, therapeutic,
psychological, and remedial services not covered by Medicaid or
another source if the requirements in this Subchapter are met.

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
Eff. July 1, 1982;
Amended Eff. July 18, 2002; July 1, 1991; September 1, 1986;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0402 ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR STANDARD MONTHLY CASH ASSISTANCE
PAYMENTS OR VENDOR PAYMENTS
(a) Adoption assistance in the form of standard monthly cash
assistance payments based on graduated rates set by the General
Assembly and vendor payments may be made when the child
meets the following eligibility criteria:
(1) The child was legally adopted;
(2) The child meets at least one of the following
criteria:
(A) is not an applicable child and meets
the requirements in 42 USC
673(a)(2)(A)(i). The public adoption
agency shall make the determination
in 42 USC 673(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) for the
State. 42 USC 673(a)(2)(B) shall be
applicable when appropriate;
(B) shall be an applicable child and meets
the requirements in 42 USC
673(a)(2)(A)(ii). The public adoption
agency shall make the determination
in 42 USC 673(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) for the
State. 42 USC 673(a)(2)(B) shall be
applicable when appropriate; or
(C) the requirements set forth in 42 USC
673(a)(2)(C); and
(3) An applicable child is not eligible if he or she
meets the conditions in 42 U.S.C.
673(a)(7)(A)(i) through (iii), unless 42 U.S.C.
673(a)(7)(B) is applicable and the public
adoption agency makes the requisite
determination for the State.
(b) For vendor payments, in addition to the criteria in Paragraph
(a) of this Rule, the child shall also meet the following criteria:
(1) at or prior to the issuance of the adoption
decree, have a diagnosed medical, mental, or
emotional condition that is documented by a
medical professional, who is qualified through
licensing or credentialing to make a diagnosis,
that will require ongoing treatment or therapy
of a medical or remedial nature; or
(2) after the issuance of the adoption decree but
while still under the age of 18, have been
determined by the public adoption agency
administering adoption assistance benefits to
have a medical, mental, or emotional condition,
congenital problem, birth injury, or other
documented problem that is determined by a
medical professional, who is qualified through
licensing or credentialing to have been
preexisting at the time of his or her placement
into an adoptive home.
(c) The prospective adoptive parents shall meet the following
criteria:
(1) Have a child placed with them in accordance
with applicable State and local laws for
purposes of an adoption who meets the
requirements in Paragraph (a) of this Rule;
(2) be legally responsible for the support of the
child and is providing support to the child, if the
child is under the age of 18;
(3) enter into an adoption assistance agreement
with the public adoption agency prior to
issuance of the decree of adoption. The
adoption assistance agreement shall identify the
specific services for the child that the parents
want to be covered by vendor payments;
(4) Shall have a completed criminal history
investigated pursuant to G.S. 48-3-303 and 48-
3-309 and shall not have a criminal history, as
defined by G.S. 48-1-101(5b), or any other
criminal conviction that would cause the
A - 38
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
305
prospective adoptive parent to be unfit to have
responsibility for the safety and well-being of
children as determined by the public adoption
agency pursuant to G.S. 43-3-309;
(5) Shall provide the public adoption agency with
the results of the criminal back history
investigation;
(6) Shall have a completed check of the North
Carolina's Responsible Individuals List
pursuant to G.S. 7B-311 and have a check of the
results of child abuse and neglect central
registry of states where the applicant has
resided the past five years and not be placed on
the North Carolina's Responsible Individuals
List or any other state's child abuse and neglect
central registry. The public adoption agency
shall maintain a copy of the results in their file;
and
(7) For vendor payments when the child meets the
criteria in Subparagraph (b)(2) of this Rule,
shall enter into an adoption assistance
agreement amendment on a form provided by
the Department ("North Carolina Division of
Social Services Adoption Assistance
Agreement Amendment" Form DSS-5307,
which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) that
identifies and includes supporting
documentation of the child's preexisting
condition and allows the parents to be
reimbursed for vendor services related to the
child's preexisting condition.
(d) All individuals 18 years of age or older who reside in the
prospective adoptive home shall have a completed a criminal
history investigated pursuant to G.S. 48-3-303 and 48-3-309 and
shall not have a criminal history, as defined by G.S. 48-1-101(5b),
or any other criminal conviction that would cause the prospective
adoptive parent is unfit to have responsibility for the safety and
well-being of children as determined by the public adoption
agency pursuant to G.S. 48-3-309.
(e) Prior to the adoption, all individuals 18 years of age or older
who reside in the prospective adoptive home shall have a
completed check of the North Carolina's Responsible Individuals
List and have a check of the results of child abuse and neglect
central registry of states where the applicant has resided the past
five years and not be placed on the North Carolina's Responsible
Individuals List or any other state's child abuse and neglect central
registry. The public adoption agency shall maintain a copy of the
results in their file.
(f) Upon adoption, the adoptive parents shall comply with all the
terms of the adoption agreement assistance and notify the public
adoption agency they are no longer legally or financially
responsible for the adopted child, address, or contact information.
(g) The public adoption agency shall:
(1) prior to the adoption, make a determination as
to whether the requirements of this Rule have
been met on a form created by the Department
("Adoption Assistance Eligibility Checklist"
Form DSS-5012, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) that
shall identify the reasons that the eligibility
requirements have been met and inform the
prospective adoptive parents of the right to
appeal the decision.
(2) maintain a copy of the results of the criminal
investigation of the foster parents and any
individual 18 years of age or older who resides
in the prospective adoptive home.
(3) after the adoption:
(A) annually send to the adoptive parents a
letter reminding them to report any
changes in their legal or financial
responsibility of the adopted child;
(B) issue to the adoptive parents a notice if
the adoption assistance payments are
to be suspended ("North Carolina
Division of Social Services Adoption
Assistance Suspension Notice" Form
DSS-5306, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss
) that shall identify the reason for the
suspension and how to appeal the
suspension; and
(C) issue to the adoptive parents a notice if
the adoption assistance payments are
to be terminated ("North Carolina
Division of Social Services Adoption
Assistance Termination Notice" Form
DSS-5308, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss
) that shall identify the reason for the
termination and how to appeal the
termination.
(4) in order for vendor services to be reimbursed,
the vendor must obtain prior approval by
submitting to the public adoption agency
completed and signed forms provided by the
Department ("Adoption Assistance Vendor
Payment Request Form" Form DSS-5112 and
"Adoption Assistance Vendor Payment
Instructions for Providers" Form DSS-5115,
which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) that
includes documentation of the child's diagnosis,
the child's special needs related to the
diagnosis, how the is service related to the
special needs, what goals the service is intended
to accomplish, how achievement of goals be
measured, the projected duration of treatment
or service, the projected total cost, and two
copies of the provider's bill after all health
insurance claims have been processed.

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
Eff. July 1, 1982;
Amended Eff. March 1, 2017; July 18, 2002; July 1, 1991; March
1, 1990;
Readopted Eff. August 1,2021.
A - 39
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
306
10A NCAC 70M .0403 PROCEDURES/
REIMBURSEMENT OF ADOPTION ASSISTANCE
BENEFITS
(a) Adoption assistance benefits for which a child is eligible shall
become effective the first month following the month in which the
Decree of Adoption is issued.
(b) Claims from service providers and standard monthly cash
assistance shall be reimbursed or provided from adoption
assistance funds subject to the following limitations:
(1) Vendor payments to adoptive parents, medical
providers, and to providers of psychological,
therapeutic, and remedial services shall be
made only for treatment or services given to
alleviate or correct those conditions for which
the child has been determined eligible to
receive benefits.
(2) The total amount for vendor payments for any
combination of medical services not covered by
Medicaid including psychological, therapeutic,
or remedial services for any child shall not
exceed two thousand four hundred dollars
($2,400.00) per State fiscal year.
(3) Vendor payments shall not be made to
reimburse providers for the following:
(A) routine medical examinations;
(B) illnesses or conditions not related to or
resulting from the conditions for
which the child was determined
eligible for vendor payments;
(C) services or treatment provided to the
child prior to issuance of the Decree of
Adoption; and
(D) services or treatment that may have
been provided on or after the first day
of the month following the month in
which the child's eligibility ceases.
(c) No local match, in terms of dollars, is required for funds for
those children certified to receive benefits under the State Fund
for Adoptive Children with Special Needs as set forth in G.S.
180A-50.1, who are the placement responsibility of licensed
private child-placing agencies with the exception of monthly cash
payments for those children who are eligible for benefits from
Title IV-E of the Social Security Act. No monthly cash assistance
payments from the State Fund for Adoptive Children with Special
Needs shall be made for any adoption in which the Decree of
Adoption is issued on or after October 1, 2011.

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
Eff. July 1, 1982;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2011; July 18, 2002; July 1, 1991;
March 1, 1990;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0404 ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE SPECIAL CHILDREN ADOPTION
INCENTIVE FUND AND EFFECTIVE DATE
10A NCAC 70M .0405 PAYMENTS FROM THE
SPECIAL CHILDREN ADOPTION INCENTIVE FUND

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
S.L. 2000-67, s. 11.16;
Temporary Adoption Eff. January 1, 2001;
Temporary Adoption Eff. August 31, 2001;
Eff. July 18, 2002;
Repealed Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0501 PURPOSE OF OUT-OF-STATE
ADOPTION SERVICE FEES
(a) When the requirements in this Rule have been met, with prior
approval, the Department may reimburse in part or in full a fee
incurred by a public adoption agency for adoption services
provided by an out-of-state adoption agency. Public adoption
agencies shall pay the out-of-state adoption provider directly and
provide proof of payment to the Department once payment is
made.
(b) The requirements of this Rule are met when the child:
(1) is a child with special needs;
(2) is registered on the North Carolina Adoption
Resource Exchange, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/social-
services/child-welfare-services/adoption-and-
foster-care;
(3) has parents who have each had one of the
following occur:
(A) a court order terminated parental
rights;
(B) executed a relinquishment of the child
to a public or private child-placing
agency;
(C) consented to the adoption;
(D) a finding by the court in the adoption
proceeding that the parent's consent to
the adoption is not required; or
(E) has died.
(c) Out-of-state adoption agencies shall be licensed by their
respective states and as approved by conditions of the Interstate
Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) pursuant to G.S.
7B, Article 38 to provide adoptive services for children with
special needs.
(d) The service fee charged by the specialized out-of-state
adoption agency shall be:
(1) any one of the following services provided by
the specialized adoption service agency:
(A) recruiting and securing an adoptive
home for the child;
(B) pre-placement services for the family
and child;
(C) post-placement services for the family
and child; and
(D) post-finalization services.
(2) only be available when an adoptive family has
not been identified in North Carolina.
(e) The public adoption agency:
(1) shall have custody and placement responsibility
of the child and have the legal authority to
consent to the child's adoption;
(2) shall make a written request to the Department
for reimbursement for the out-of-state adoption
A - 40
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
307
service fee at the time that a decision has been
made to place the child with a specific adoptive
parent or parents who have had an approved
home study that was conducted by the
specialized out-of-state adoption agency;
(3) shall include in its reimbursement request to the
Department written documentation that verifies
the following:
(A) the public adoption agency has legal
placement responsibility;
(B) the public adoption agency has the
authority to legally consent to the
adoption of the child;
(C) the child meets the requirements of
this Rule;
(D) the out-of-state adoption agency meets
the requirements of this Rule;
(E) the service fee to be charged meets the
requirements of this Rule; and
(F) a quote for the service fee that includes
the service to be provided and the
amount of the fee;
(4) shall obtain prior approval from the Department
prior to initiating contracted services where
reimbursement is expected;
(5) Upon the Department's prior approval for an
out-of-state adoption service fee, the public
adoption agency shall enter into an agreement
with the out-of-state adoption agency on a form
provided by the Department ("North Carolina
Division of Social Services Purchase of Out-of-
State Adoption Services Agreement" Form
DSS-5305, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) and
provide a copy of the agreement to the
Department. The agreement shall include the
type and nature of the service to be provided,
the fee amount to be charged, an agreement by
the out-of-state adoption agency to provide the
identified service, and an agreement by the
public adoption agency to pay for the identified
service; and
(6) shall pay any amount of the out-of-state
adoption agency service fee that is not approved
by the Department.
(f) To the extent funds are available and the fee for services is not
above the maximum allowable amount of one thousand eight
hundred dollars ($1,800) per child, the Department shall approve
the public adoption agency's request for prior approval for
reimbursement of the out-of-state adoption service fee if it meets
the requirements in this Rule and the Department notifies the
public adoption agency in writing of the approval.
(g) The Department shall not reimburse a public adoption agency
for any amount over one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800)
per child in out-of-state adoption service fees that are approved
pursuant to this Rule.
(h) In order for the public adoption agency to receive
reimbursement for a fee that has been approved pursuant to this
Rule, the public adoption agency shall notify the Department of
the date that payment of the fee is due and provide the Department
with a copy of the bill for the out-of-state adoption service fee.
(i) Upon the public adoption agency's payment of the out-of-state
adoption service fee, the public adoption agency shall provide the
Department with a copy of the receipt of payment for the out-of-
state adoption agency fee.

History Note: Authority G.S. 143B-153;
Eff. March 23, 1981;
Amended Eff. July 1, 1991;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0502 GENERAL ELIGIBILITY
REQUIREMENTS

History Note: Authority G.S. 143B-153;
Eff. March 23, 1981;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2008; July 1, 1991; June 1, 1990;
Repealed Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0601 PUBLIC ADOPTION AGENCY
REQUIREMENTS
(a) Public adoption agencies shall:
(1) at the time of or prior to the final decree of
adoption, enter into an agreement for the
reimbursement of nonrecurring adoption
expenses with parents who adopt a child with
special needs;
(2) prior to entering into an agreement for the
reimbursement of nonrecurring adoption
expenses, the public adoption agency shall:
(A) Make a determination that the child is
a child with special needs; and
(B) Make a determination that the child
has been placed for adoption in
accordance with applicable laws;
(3) make payments for reimbursement of
nonrecurring adoption expenses incurred by or
on behalf of parents in connection with the
adoption of a child with special needs if it enters
into an agreement for the reimbursement of
nonrecurring adoption expenses;
(4) retain copies of the complete application for
reimbursement of nonrecurring adoption
expenses, along with supporting document and
receipts, and the agreement for the
reimbursement of nonrecurring adoption
expenses for auditing purposes; and
(5) upon receipt of a completed nonrecurring
adoption expense reimbursement application,
the public adoption agency shall submit the
application to the Department.
(b) When there is an interstate placement of the child with
special needs, the public adoption agency that entered into an
adoption assistance agreement shall also reimburse the parent or
vendor for the nonrecurring adoption expenses. When there has
been an interstate placement of a child with special needs for the
purpose of adoption and there is no adoption assistance agreement
from the sending state, then the public adoption agency that is
A - 41
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
308
responsible for entering into an agreement for nonrecurring
adoption expenses shall be the public adoption agency where the
petitioner for adoption resides.

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
Eff. July 1, 1991;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0602 ELIGIBLE NONRECURRING
ADOPTION EXPENSES
An adoptive parent shall receive reimbursement for nonrecurring
adoption expenses not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000)
when:
(1) The child placed with the parent for the purpose
of adoption is a child with special needs;
(2) The adoptive parents have submitted a signed
application for nonrecurring adoption expenses
on a form provided by the Department ("State
of North Carolina Application For
Reimbursement of Nonrecurring Adoption
Costs" Form DSS-5145, which may be
accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss). The
application shall:
(a) provide evidence that the child is a
child with special needs;
(b) include acknowledgements by the
adoptive parents that:
(i) nonrecurring adoption
expenses are limited to a
reimbursement of two
thousand dollars ($2,000) per
child and are contingent on
the child being a child with
special needs;
(ii) the expenses that they are
seeking reimbursement for
were actually incurred by
them;
(iii) the expenses that they are
seeking reimbursement for
are reasonable and necessary
adoption expenses which
were directly related to the
legal adoption of the child
that meets the requirements
in 42 USC 673(A)(6); and
(iv) the expenses that they are
seeking reimbursement for
have not and will not be
reimbursed by another
source.
(c) if the placement was an interstate
placement, include an
acknowledgement by the adoptive
parents that the placement was made
in accordance with the Interstate
Compact on the Placement of Children
adopted by both the sending and
receiving state and any other
applicable federal, state, or local laws
or rules related to the interstate
adoptive placement of a child;
(d) the type and amount of the expense
that will be incurred by the adoptive
parents; and
(e) include documentation that verifies
the information in the application and
receipts for any nonrecurring service
for which the parent is seeking
reimbursement.
(3) The foster parents and all individuals 18 years
of age or older who reside in the prospective
adoptive home shall have a completed a
criminal history investigated pursuant to G.S.
48-3-303 and 48-3-309 and shall not have a
criminal history, as defined by G.S. 48-1-
101(5b), or any other criminal conviction that
would cause the prospective adoptive parent to
be unfit to have responsibility for the safety and
well-being of children as determined by the
public adoption agency pursuant to G.S. 48-3-
309.
(4) The foster parents shall provide the public
adoption agency with the results of the criminal
history investigation, and the public adoption
agency shall maintain a copy of the results.
(5) The adopting parents and all individuals 18
years of age or older who reside in the home
shall have a completed check of the North
Carolina's Responsible Individuals List
pursuant to G.S. 7B-311 and have a check of the
results of child abuse and neglect central
registry of states where the applicant has
resided the past five years and not be placed on
the North Carolina's Responsible Individuals
List or any other state's child abuse and neglect
central registry. The public adoption agency
shall maintain a copy of the results in their file.
(6) Upon approval of the application in Item (2) of
this Rule, the adoptive parents shall enter into a
binding written agreement with a public
adoption agency for the reimbursement of
nonrecurring expenses on a form provided by
the Department ("State of North Carolina
Agreement for Reimbursement of
Nonrecurring Adoption Costs" Form DSS-
5146, which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divisions/dss) that
meets the requirements in 42 USC 673(a)(3)
and is signed at the time of or prior to the final
decree of adoption.
(7) The application for reimbursement was filed in
accord with the quarter rule outlined in 45 CFR
1356.41(e)(2).

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
Eff. July 1, 1991;
A - 42
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
309
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0603 REQUIREMENTS

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
42 U.S.C. 673;
Eff. July 1, 1991;
Amended Eff. March 1, 2017;
Repealed Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0604 PROHIBITION ON
REIMBURSEMENT CAPS
The Department and any public adoption agencies shall not
establish a maximum allowable reimbursement amount for any
single eligible nonrecurring adoption expense, but the total
reimbursement for nonrecurring adoption expenses shall not
exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000).

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 143B-153;
Eff. July 1, 1991;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0701 ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE SPECIAL NEED ADOPTION INCENTIVE
FUND AND EFFECTIVE DATE
Within the limits of available funding, the Department may
approve and provide assistance in the form of standard monthly
cash payments from the Special Need Adoption Incentive Fund
when the following requirements have been met:
(1) The child:
(a) Shall be a child with special needs and
either has at least one of the factors or
conditions listed in Rule
.0102(b)(3)(E) through (H) of this
Chapter of a child with special needs
or meets the requirement in 42 USC
673(c)(2)(B)(ii);
(b) Shall meet the requirements for
standard monthly cash adoption
assistance in this Chapter;
(c) Shall be in the custody of the public
adoption agency and placement
responsibility of an adoption agency
for at least six consecutive months
prior to the finalization of the
adoption;
(d) The special needs condition from Sub-
Item (1)(a) of this Item is expected to
limit the child's ability, both currently
and throughout childhood, to function
in the home, school, or community
absent eight or more hours of in-
person daily supervision or care for
personal health care or prevention of
self-destructive or assaultive behavior;
(e) The child will have resided in the
foster parent's home for six
consecutive months prior to the
finalization of the adoption; and
(f) The child was legally adopted on or
after January 1, 2001.
(2) Each foster parent:
(a) be licensed as a foster parent;
(b) has been receiving standard monthly
cash assistance from any
governmental source, such as federal,
state, or local, above the State
adoption assistance rate established by
the General Assembly for the previous
six consecutive months prior to the
finalization of the adoption to provide
the direct care or supervision required
for the child's health condition that
meets the requirement in Item (4) of
this Rule;
(c) prior to the issuance of the adoption
decree, the foster parent made a
request for financial assistance in
addition to the State adoption
assistance rate established by the
General Assembly in order to provide
the care required for the child's health
condition that meets the requirements
in Item (4) of this Rule;
(d) prior to the issuance of the adoption
decree, the foster parent provided the
public adoption agency with a signed
letter that details the daily supervision
needs of the child;
(e) shall only be willing to adopt the child
if the monthly cash assistance from
any other governmental source, such
as federal, state, or local, above the
State adoption assistance rate received
for foster parents and is not terminated
upon the adoption of the child;
(f) shall enter into an adoption assistance
agreement with a public adoption
agency prior to the decree of adoption;
(g) entered into a supplemental agreement
with a public adoption agency prior to
the adoption decree;
(h) agree to provide the public adoption
agency with a copy of the adoption
decree once the adoption has been
finalized;
(i) shall have a completed criminal
history investigated pursuant to G.S.
48-3-303 and 48-3-309 and shall not
have a criminal history, as defined by
G.S. 48-1-101(5b), or any other
criminal conviction that would cause
the prospective adoptive parent to be
unfit to have responsibility for the
safety and well-being of children as
determined by the public adoption
agency pursuant to G.S. 48-3-309;
A - 43
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
310
(j) shall require all individuals 18 years of
age or older who reside in the
prospective adoptive home to undergo
a criminal history investigated
pursuant to G.S. 48-3-303 and 49-3-
309; and
(k) shall provide the public adoption
agency with the results of the criminal
back history investigation.
(3) All individuals 18 years of age or older who
reside in the prospective adoptive home shall
have a completed a criminal history
investigated pursuant to G.S. 48-3-303 and 48-
3-309 and shall not have a criminal history, as
defined by G.S. 48-1-101(5b), or any other
criminal conviction that would cause the
prospective adoptive parent to be unfit to have
responsibility for the safety and well-being of
children as determined by the public adoption
agency pursuant to G.S. 48-3-309.
(4) The public adoption agency having custody of
the child shall:
(a) voluntarily agree to participate in the
Special Need Adoption Incentive
Fund and agree to assume 50 percent
of the payment above the State
adoption assistance rate established by
the General Assembly.
(b) enter into an adoption assistance
agreement as provided in this Rule.
(c) enter into a supplement agreement as
provided in this Rule.
(d) maintain a record for the child that
contains written documentation that
the child and foster parent(s) have met
or will meet the requirements for the
foster child and the foster parents in
this Rule at the time of the adoption
decree and shall include the following:
(i) a written statement on a form
provided by the Department
("Special Children Adoption
Incentive Fund Agency
Verification of Legal
Custody and Child's Living
Arrangement For Past Six
Months" Form DSS-5214,
which may be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divi
sions/dss) signed by the
Director of the public
adoption agency that verifies:
(A) each foster parent is
licensed;
(B) the public adoption
agency has legal
custody and
placement authority
of the child;
(C) the child has lived
with the foster
family for six
consecutive months
prior to the
adoption;
(D) that the foster
parent(s) have
received monthly
cash assistance from
a governmental
source in excess of
the standard board
rate established by
the General
Assembly for the
previous six months
on a continuous
basis and the
amount of the
payments; and
(E) the foster parent(s)
have stated a
willingness to adopt
this child if the
monthly cash
assistance that they
have received as
foster parents is not
terminated;
(ii) a written statement on a form
provided by the Department
("Special Children Adoption
Incentive Fund Verification
of Child's Health Condition"
Form DSS-5213, which may
be accessed at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divi
sions/dss) signed by a
medical professional, who is
qualified through licensing
and credentialing to diagnose
the child's condition prior to
the adoption that
demonstrates that the child
meets all the requirements in
Item (1) of this Rule;
(iii) a written statement on a form
provided by the Department
("Special Children Adoption
Incentive Fund Verification
of Child's Need for Daily
Supervision" Form DSS-
5215, which may be accessed
at
https://www.ncdhhs.gov/divi
sions/dss) signed by the
foster parent(s) prior to the
adoption that demonstrates
A - 44
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
311
the child meets all the
requirements in this Item;
(iv) a letter from the foster
parent(s) explaining the daily
needs of the child;
(v) a signed adoption assistance
agreement;
(vi) a signed supplement
agreement;
(vii) a copy of the foster parent's
license;
(viii) a copy of the decree of
adoption once it has been
received pursuant to this
Rule;
(ix) a copy of the results of the
criminal investigation of the
foster parents and any
individual 18 years of age or
older who resides in the
prospective adoptive home;
and
(x) make a request, on behalf of
the foster parent(s), prior to
the adoption decree to the
Department for Special Need
Adoption Incentive Fund
assistance for the foster
parents.

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 108A-50.1;
143B-153;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

10A NCAC 70M .0702 PAYMENTS FROM THE
SPECIAL NEED ADOPTION INCENTIVE FUND
(a) Payments from the Special Need Adoption Incentive Fund
will be made by the State Division of Social Services to the
adoptive parent(s).
(b) Participating county departments of social services shall
submit claims for payments to the State Division of Social
Services.
(c) The initial payment claim must include the following items:
(1) verification of child's placement authority;
(2) verification that the child has lived with the
foster family six consecutive months submitted
on the "Living Arrangements for Past Six
Months" Form DSS-5214;
(3) a copy of written statement from a licensed
physician regarding the child's health condition;
(4) a copy of written statement from a licensed
health, mental health, or developmental
disability professional regarding the status of
the child's condition;
(5) a copy of signed adoption assistance agreement;
(6) a copy of signed supplemental assistance
agreement; and
(7) a copy of Decree of Adoption.
(d) Monthly payment claims shall be submitted on the "Request
for Special Children Adoption Incentive Fund Payment" Form
DSS-5211, which may be accessed at
https://www2.ncdhhs.gov/info/olm/forms/dss/dss-5211-ia.pdf.

History Note: Authority G.S. 108A-49; 108A-50; 108A-50.1;
143B-153;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

TITLE 11 - DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE

11 NCAC 06A .0402 LICENSING OF RESIDENT
AGENT, LTD REPRESENTATIVE AND ADJUSTER
(a) An applicant for a resident variable life and variable annuity
product shall hold a resident life license before making
application for a resident variable life and variable annuity
product license. An agent licensed to sell variable life and variable
annuity products shall be appointed by a company authorized to
sell variable annuities and variable life insurance products in
North Carolina. The company shall verify that the agent has met
the requirements of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(FINRA) or its successor organization.
(b) A limited representative shall be appointed with each
company for which he or she will solicit business for the
following kinds of insurance:
(1) Dental services;
(2) Limited line credit insurance;
(3) Prearrangement insurance, as defined in G.S.
58-60-35(a)(2), when offered or sold by a
preneed sales licensee licensed under Article
13D of Chapter 90 of the General Statutes; or
(4) Travel, accident, and baggage.
(c) Responsibility of insurance companies for forms:
(1) Companies shall have on file with the Division
the address and email address of one central
licensing office and the individual within that
office to whom all correspondence, licenses,
and invoices will be forwarded.
(2) Companies shall have on file with the Division
the name of the individual responsible for all
agent appointments and termination of agent
appointments submitted by the company to the
Division.
(3) A company shall verify the licensure of an
agent before the company appoints the agent.
(4) Companies shall notify the Division within 10
days after any change of address or email
address of the central licensing office and of
any change of the individual within that office
to whom all correspondence, licenses, and
invoices will be forwarded.
(d) Responsibility of the agent, limited representative, and
adjuster:
(1) A person, after surrender or termination of a
license for such period of time that he or she is
no longer eligible for waiver of the
examination, shall meet all legal requirements
for previously unlicensed persons.
A - 45
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
312
(2) Every licensee shall, upon demand from the
Division, furnish in writing any information
relating to the licensee's insurance business
within 10 business days after the demand in
accordance with G.S. 58-2-195(a).
(e) An applicant for a resident license shall, if an electronic record
is not available, obtain an original letter of clearance from his or
her former state of residency certifying the kinds of insurance for
which the applicant was licensed, that all licenses held in that state
have been canceled and that the applicant was in good standing in
that state at the time of the cancellation of licenses. A letter of
clearance is valid for 90 days from date of issuance.
(f) Only individuals may apply for limited representative and
adjuster licenses.

History Note: Authority G.S. 58-2-40; 58-2-195(a); 58-33-
26; 58-33-30; 58-33-66;
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. June 12, 1978;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2010; February 1, 2008; April 1, 2003;
February 1, 1996; October 1, 1990; February 1, 1989;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. June 25, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

11 NCAC 06A .0501 RENEWAL OF AGENT APPTS:
LICENSES/LIMITED REPS
(a) Annually the Division shall notify each insurance company of
dates and methods for renewing agent and limited representative
appointments. Companies shall be given at least 30 days' advance
notice of the last date the Division shall process terminations.
(b) On the last date to submit terminations, the Division shall
cease processing all terminations and bill companies for renewals.
All appointments and licenses shall automatically be billed for the
appointment renewal unless the Division has received a
termination request from the company within the specified time.
(c) The Division shall send each company an invoice stating the
total amount of money due and a list of all appointees or licensees
associated with the total due. The Division shall make this invoice
and a list of all appointees or licensees associated with the total
due available electronically to each company. Companies shall
remit the amount stated in the invoice by electronic payment to
the Commissioner or the Commissioner's designee and shall pay
all associated fees for electronic processing. Any discrepancies
claimed by companies shall be investigated only after full
payment is received.
(d) Upon receipt of the company payment, the Division shall
provide to the company an electronic list of all appointments and
licenses renewed.
(e) Appointments recorded and licenses issued prior to the
renewal date, but after the date specified by the Division as the
last date to process termination, shall be valid until the following
year.
(f) Failure of a company to pay any invoice by the due date shall
automatically result in the termination of all appointees or
licensees of that company. The Commissioner shall not issue any
new appointments until all outstanding invoices have been paid.
Any company that has had appointments or licensees cancelled by
the Commissioner pursuant to this Rule shall not process any new
electronic appointments until all outstanding invoices have been
paid. When the outstanding invoices are paid, the company may
re-appoint agents or limited representatives and shall pay the
appointment fees.

History Note: Authority G.S. 58-2-40; 58-2-250; 58-33-40(f);
58-33-56; 58-33-125(a); 58-33-125(h);
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. June 12, 1978;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2010; February 1, 1996; October 1,
1990; February 1, 1989; July 1, 1986;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. June 25, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

11 NCAC 13 .0410 SALESMEN TO BE LICENSED
INSURANCE AGENTS
Any person acting in the capacity of employee, agent, or salesman
who solicits or sells a motor club membership shall be a licensed
insurance agent if the membership contract includes a contract of
insurance to the member. The employee, agent, or salesman shall
be licensed with the same insurance company that issues the
contract of insurance.

History Note: Authority G.S. 58-2-40; 58-69-20(5);
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. January 1, 1978;
Amended Eff. April 8, 2002; July 1, 1986;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. June 25, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

11 NCAC 23E .0302 EMERGENCY ORDERS AND
DIRECTIVES OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA SUPREME COURT
(a) This Rule applies to all matters within the authority and
jurisdiction of the Commission and to all Subchapters of the
Commission's rules.
(b) In the interests of justice or to protect the public health or
safety, the Commission may waive or modify any portion of its
rules in order to bring them in conformity with an emergency
Order or directive of the Chief Justice of the North Carolina
Supreme Court that is in effect. The Commission shall consider
the following factors in determining whether to grant the waiver
or modification:
(1) the necessity of waiving or modifying the rule;
and
(2) the impact of waiving or modifying the rule on
the regulated parties and on the Commission.
If the Commission waives or modifies a rule to bring it into
conformity with any emergency Order or directive of the Chief
Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court, the Commission
shall post a notice of the waiver or modification of the rule on its
website unless the waiver or modification is case-specific and not
generally applicable to the regulated public. For a waiver or
A - 46
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
313
modification that is case-specific and not generally applicable to
the regulated public, the Commission shall notify the parties in
the case of the waiver or modification via an order of the
Commission.
(c) During any period that an emergency Order or directive of the
Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court authorizes the
taking of oaths and verifications outside the presence of a notary
public, the Commission shall accept any pleading, motion,
petition, supporting affidavit, or other document with an
affirmation or representation not attested to before a notary public
so long as the subscriber affirms the truth of the matter to be
verified by an affirmation or representation in substantially the
same language as that allowed by the emergency Order or
directive of the Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme
Court.
(d) Any waiver or modification made pursuant to this Rule shall
only remain in effect during the duration of any emergency Order
or directive of the Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme
Court upon which that waiver or modification is based.

History Note: Authority G.S. 97-80; 130A-425(d); 143-166.4;
143-296; 143-300;
Emergency Adoption Eff. November 6, 2020;
Temporary Adoption Eff. January 29, 2021;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

TITLE 12 - DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

12 NCAC 09A .0206 SUMMARY SUSPENSIONS
(a) The Commission, by and through the Probable Cause
Committee, may summarily suspend the certification of a criminal
justice officer or instructor before the commencement of
proceedings for suspension or revocation of the certification if the
public health, safety, or welfare requires action pursuant to G.S.
150B-3. The Commission has determined that the following
conditions specifically affect the public health, safety, or welfare
and therefore it, by and through the Probable Cause Committee,
may summarily suspend a certification of a criminal justice officer
if:
(1) the person has committed or been convicted of
a violation of the criminal code that would
require a permanent revocation or denial of
certification;
(2) the certified officer fails to complete the
in-service training requirements as prescribed
in 12 NCAC 09E; or
(3) the certified officer has produced a positive
result on a urinalysis test, conducted in
accordance with 12 NCAC 09B .0101(5).
(b) For the purpose of considering a summary suspension of
certification, the Probable Cause Committee shall meet only upon
notice given by mail, telephone, or other means not less than 48
hours in advance of the meeting.
(c) A summary suspension shall be effective on the date specified
in the order of summary suspension or upon service of the
certified copy of the order at the last known address of the person,
whichever is later. The summary suspension shall remain
effective during the proceedings.
(d) The Director, upon receipt of information showing the
existence of a basis for summary suspension provided for in
Subparagraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this Rule, shall coordinate the
meeting described in Paragraph (b) of this Rule. All affected
persons shall be notified that the person may submit any pertinent
matters to the Probable Cause Committee for its consideration
before the Committee acts on the summary suspension issue. No
person shall be allowed more than 48 hours to submit information
to the Probable Cause Committee.
(e) Upon oral notification by the Director that the certification of
an officer or instructor is being summarily suspended by written
order, the Department Head of the Criminal Justice Agency or the
executive officer of the institution shall ensure that the officer or
instructor does not perform duties requiring certification by the
Commission.
(f) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon
determining that a Commission-certified Concealed Carry
Handgun Instructor has conducted a concealed carry handgun
training course as mandated by G.S. 14-415.12(a)(4) that is not in
compliance with 12 NCAC 09F .0102 and negatively affects the
public safety and welfare shall do the following until such time as
the training course has been brought into compliance or reported
to the Probable Cause Committee for action:
(1) summarily suspend the Concealed Carry
Handgun Instructor certification, prohibiting
him or her from delivering concealed carry
handgun training until the Director determines
the training program is brought into compliance
with 12 NCAC 09F .0102 and 12 NCAC 09F
.0105 of this Chapter; and
(2) inform the instructor that he or she may appeal
the Director's suspension by requesting, in
writing, a formal hearing before the Probable
Cause Committee at the next scheduled
Commission meeting.
(g) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon
determining that a Commission-certified instructor has conducted
a Commission-approved training course in a way that was not in
accordance with the requirements of this Chapter or has
conducted a Commission-approved training course while being in
violation of the instructor's minimum standards as outlined in 12
NCAC 09B .0301 shall do the following until such time as the
training course or his or her instructor certification has been
brought into compliance:
(1) summarily suspend the individual's Instructor's
certification, prohibiting him or her from
delivering Commission approved training until
the noncompliance is remedied; and
(2) the Director shall send a report of all summary
suspensions for a formal hearing before the
Probable Cause Committee at the next
scheduled Commission meeting.
(h) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon
determining a Commission-certified instructor has been alleged to
have violated a certification rule as outlined in this Chapter shall
do the following:
(1) summarily suspend the individual's Instructor's
certification, prohibiting him or her from
A - 47
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
314
delivering Commission approved training until
the matter is resolved; and
(2) the Director shall send a report of all summary
suspensions for a formal hearing before the
Probable Cause Committee at the next
scheduled Commission meeting.
(i) A summary suspension shall be effective on the date specified
in the order of summary suspension or upon service of the
certified copy of the order at the last known address of the person,
whichever is later. The summary suspension shall remain
effective during the proceedings.
(j) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon
determining that a criminal justice officer who was issued a
waiver of the requirements of 12 NCAC 09C .0306 has not met
those requirements within 60 days of being awarded general
certification by the Commission, shall summarily suspend the
officer's certification until the officer meets the requirements of
12 NCAC 09C .0306.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10; 150B-3;
Eff. January 1, 1981;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2017; February 1, 2016; December 1,
2007; March 1, 2004; July 1, 1990; July 1, 1989; October 1,
1985; August 15, 1981;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

12 NCAC 09B .0101 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR
CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICERS
Every criminal justice officer who is employed in or has received
a conditional offer of employment for a certified position by an
agency in North Carolina shall:
(1) be a citizen of the United States;
(2) be at least 20 years of age;
(3) be of good moral character pursuant to G.S.
17C-10 as evidenced by the following:
(a) not having been convicted of a felony;
(b) not having been convicted of a
misdemeanor as defined in 12 NCAC
09B .0111(1) for five years or the
completion of any corrections
supervision imposed by the courts,
whichever is later;
(c) not having been convicted of an
offense that would prohibit the
possession of a firearm or
ammunition, under 18 U.S.C. 922,
which is hereby incorporated by
reference with subsequent
amendments and editions and can be
found at no cost at
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg
/USCODE-2011-
title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-
partI-chap44-sec922.pdf),
(d) having submitted to and produced a
negative result on a drug test within 60
days of employment or any in-service
drug screening required by the
appointing agency that meets the
certification standards of the
Department of Health and Human
Services for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs. A list of certified
drug testing labs that meet this
requirement may be obtained, at no
cost, at
https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/r
esources/drug-testing/certified-lab-
list;
(e) submitting to a background
investigation consisting of the
verification of age and education and a
criminal history check of local, state,
and national files;
(f) being truthful in providing
information to the appointing agency
and to the Standards Division for the
purpose of obtaining probationary or
general certification;
(g) not having pending or outstanding
felony charges that, if convicted of
such charges, would disqualify the
applicant from holding such
certification, pursuant to G.S. 17C-13;
and
(h) not having engaged in any conduct
that brings into question the
truthfulness or credibility of the
officer, or involves "moral turpitude."
"Moral turpitude" is conduct that is
contrary to justice, honesty, or
morality, including conduct as defined
in: In re Willis 288 N.C. 1, 215 S.E. 2d
771 appeal dismissed 423 U.S. 976
(1975); State v. Harris, 216 N.C. 746,
6 S.E. 2d 854 (1940); In re Legg, 325
N.C. 658, 386 S.E. 2d 174(1989); In re
Applicants for License, 143 N.C. 1, 55
S.E. 635 (1906); In re Dillingham, 188
N.C. 162, 124 S.E. 130 (1924); State
v. Benbow, 309 N.C. 538, 308 S.E. 2d
647 (1983); and later court decisions
that cite these cases as authority;
(4) have been fingerprinted and a search made of
local, state, and national files to disclose any
criminal record;
(5) have been examined and certified by a licensed
surgeon, physician, physician assistant, or
nurse practitioner to meet physical
requirements listed in the Medical Screening
Guide as found at https://ncdoj.gov/law-
enforcement-training/criminal-justice/forms-
and-publications/ necessary to fulfill the
officer's particular responsibilities and shall
have produced a negative result on a drug
A - 48
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
315
screen administered according to the following
specifications:
(a) the drug screen shall be a urine test
consisting of an initial screening test
using an immunoassay method and a
confirmatory test on an initial positive
result using a gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry
(GC/MS) or other initial and
confirmatory tests authorized or
mandated by the Department of Health
and Human Services for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs;
(b) a chain of custody shall be maintained
on the specimen from collection to the
eventual discarding of the specimen;
(c) the drug screen shall test for the
presence of at least cannabis, cocaine,
phencyclidine (PCP), opiates, and
amphetamines or their metabolites;
(d) the test threshold values meet the
requirements established by the
Department of Health and Human
Services for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs, as found in 82 FR
7920 (2017) incorporated by
reference, including later amendments
and editions found at no cost at
https://www.federalregister.gov/docu
ments/2017/01/23/2017-
00979/mandatory-guidelines-for-
federal-workplace-drug-testing-
programs;
(e) the test conducted shall be not more
than 60 days old, calculated from the
time when the laboratory reports the
results to the date of employment; and
(f) the laboratory conducting the test shall
be certified for federal workplace drug
testing programs, and shall adhere to
applicable federal regulations and
guidelines pertaining to the handling,
testing, storage, and preservation of
samples;
(6) have been administered a psychological
screening by a clinical psychologist or
psychiatrist licensed to practice in North
Carolina or by a clinical psychologist or
psychiatrist authorized to practice in
accordance with the rules and regulations of the
United States Armed Forces within one year
prior to employment by the employing agency
and upon the acceptance of a conditional offer
of employment to determine the officer's
mental and emotional suitability to properly
fulfill the responsibilities of the position as
listed in the Medical Screening Guide found at
https://ncdoj.gov/law-enforcement-
training/criminal-justice/forms-and-
publications/, as follows:
(a) Law Enforcement Officer applicant:
pre-employment psychological
screenings shall at a minimum
include:
(i) a pre-employment written
psychological test
recognized in the field, and
supervised by a licensed
psychologist or psychiatrist;
and
(ii) a clinical interview
conducted by a licensed
psychiatrist or psychologist.
(b) Juvenile Justice Officer applicant,
Juvenile Court Counselor applicant,
Chief Court Counselor applicant, or
Local Confinement Officer applicant:
pre-employment psychological
screenings shall at a minimum include
(i) a pre-employment written
psychological test
recognized in the field, and
supervised by a licensed
psychologist or psychiatrist;
and
(ii) a clinical interview
conducted by a licensed
psychiatrist or psychologist if
the psychologist or
psychiatrist reviewing the
results of the pre-
employment test identifies
any issue that he or she
believes needs further
examination or other
information is found in the
pre-employment process or
otherwise that raises
questions about the
psychological suitability of
the candidate;
(7) have been interviewed personally by the
department head or the department head
representative or representatives to determine
such things as the applicant's appearance,
demeanor, attitude, and ability to communicate;
and
(8) make the following notifications:
(a) within 30 days of the qualifying event
notify the Standards Division and the
appointing department head in writing
of all criminal offenses for which the
officer is charged or arrested. This
shall include traffic offenses identified
in the Class B Misdemeanor Manual
and offenses of driving under the
A - 49
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
316
influence (DUI) or driving while
impaired (DWI);
(b) within 30 days of the qualifying event
notify the Standards Division and the
appointing department head in writing
of all criminal offenses for which the
officer pleads no contest pleads guilty
or of which the officer is found guilty.
This shall include traffic offenses
identified in the Department of
Justice's Class B Misdemeanor
Manual and offenses of driving under
the influence (DUI) or driving while
impaired (DWI);
(c) within 30 days of service, officers
shall notify the Standards Division of
all Domestic Violence Protective
Order (G.S. 50B) and Civil No
Contact Orders (G.S. 50C) that are
issued by a judicial official against the
officer;
(d) within 30 days of the date the case was
disposed of in court, the department
head, provided he or she has
knowledge of the officer's arrests or
criminal charges and final
dispositions, shall also notify the
Standards Division of arrests or
criminal charges and final disposition;
(e) within 30 days of the issuance of all
Domestic Violence Protective Orders
(G.S. 50B) and Civil No Contact
Orders (G.S. 50C), the department
head, provided he or she has
knowledge of the order, shall also
notify the Standards Division of these
orders.
(9) The required notifications in this Rule shall be
in writing and shall specify the nature of the
offense or order, the court in which the case was
handled, the date of the arrest, criminal charge,
or service of the order, and the final disposition.
The notification shall include a certified copy of
the order or court documentation and final
disposition from the Clerk of Court in the
county of adjudication. The requirements of
this Item shall be applicable at all times during
which the officer is employed and certified by
the Commission and shall also apply to all
applicants for certification. Receipt by the
Standards Division of a single notification,
from the officer or the department head, shall
be sufficient notice for compliance with this
Item.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10;
Eff. January 1, 1981;
Amended Eff. April 1, 2018; October 1, 2017; September 1, 2001;
April 1, 1999; January 1, 1995; November 1, 1993; July 1, 1990;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. Pending Legislative Review; October 1, 2020.

12 NCAC 09B .0313 CERTIFICATION AND
TRAINING FOR SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS
(a) A "School Resource Officer (SRO)" is defined as any law
enforcement officer assigned to one or more public schools within
a local school administrative unit, as defined in G.S. 115C-5(6),
who works in a school at least 20 hours per week for more than
12 weeks per calendar year to assist with all of the following:
(1) School safety;
(2) School security;
(3) Emergency preparedness;
(4) Emergency response; and
(5) Any additional responsibilities related to school
safety or security assigned by the officer's
employer while the officer is acting as a School
Resource Officer.
Any written memorandum of understanding between the local
school administrative unit and the law enforcement agency
governing the School Resource Officer shall be consistent with
this Paragraph.
(b) Law enforcement officers assigned by their agency to perform
duties as a School Resource Officer shall:
(1) have been issued general certification by the
North Carolina Criminal Justice Education and
Training Standards Commission as a law
enforcement officer; and
(2) have until December 31, 2020, to complete the
basic School Resource Officer Training course,
if they are acting in the capacity of a School
Resource Officer between October 1, 2018 and
December 31, 2019. Any officer assigned as a
School Resource Officer effective January 1,
2020 or later shall complete the School
Resource Officer Training course pursuant to
Paragraph (g) of this Rule, within one year after
being assigned as a School Resource Officer.
Law enforcement officers who previously
completed the training pursuant to Paragraph
(g) of this Rule and who have been continually
assigned as an SRO pursuant to Paragraph (a)
of this Rule shall be credited with completion
of the basic School Resource Officer Training.
Law enforcement officers who completed the
training pursuant to Paragraph (g) of this Rule
between October 1, 2018 and December 31,
2020 shall be credited with completion of the
basic School Resource Officer Training course
even if they were not assigned as an SRO
pursuant to Paragraph (a) of this Rule as long as
they comply with the annual SRO refresher
training pursuant to Paragraph (g) of this Rule.
(c) A law enforcement officer assigned to one or more public
schools within a local school administrative unit, who works in a
school at least 20 hours per week for more than 12 weeks per
calendar year and who has not completed the initial training as
established by Paragraph (g) of this Rule shall not work in a
A - 50
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
317
school as a School Resource Officer until the officer has
completed the initial training as established by Paragraph (g) of
this Section.
(d) The agency head shall submit to the Criminal Justice
Standards Division a Form F-20 Commission School Resource
Officer Assignment Form for the person(s) selected to act as a
School Resource Officer for the agency. The Form F-20 is located
on the agency's website: https://ncdoj.gov/law-enforcement-
training/criminal-justice/forms-and-publications/#91-114-wpfd-
law-enforcement and must be completed in its entirety. The
Commission School Resource Officer Assignment Form consists
of the following:
(1) applicant's name;
(2) date of birth;
(3) social security number;
(4) name of agency and address;
(5) date awarded general certification;
(6) completion date of School Resource Officer
training; and
(7) date assigned as a School Resource Officer.
(e) The term of certification as a School Resource Officer shall
be indefinite, provided the School Resource Officer completes
during each calendar year a one hour basic School Resource
Officer refresher training authored by North Carolina Justice
Academy. For School Resource Officers who complete the basic
SRO training requirement in 2020 or earlier, this requirement
shall be effective January 1, 2021. For SROs, this requirement
shall be effective the year following the officer's successful
completion of the basic School Resource Officer Training course.
A certified School Resource Officer who has not completed the
refresher training during a calendar year as established by this
Rule shall not work in a school as a School Resource Officer until
the officer has completed the required refresher training as
established by this Rule. Any refresher training deficiency must
be made up on or before January 31st of the following calendar
year.
(f) Instructors who teach a basic SRO course in an in-person
traditional classroom format will receive credit toward the
completion of the basic SRO course requirement as required by
this Rule, provided that they pass all tests required by the SRO
Training Manual authored by the North Carolina Justice
Academy. Instructors shall have their instruction documented by
the Department Head or In-Service Training Coordinator once
completed.
(g) The basic School Resource Officer Training course for law
enforcement officers shall provide the trainee with the skills and
knowledge to perform in the capacity of a School Resource
Officer. The basic School Resource Officer Training Course
authored by the North Carolina Justice Academy shall be used as
the curriculum for this training course. Copies of this publication
may be inspected at the office of the agency:
Criminal Justice Standards Division
North Carolina Department of Justice
1700 Tryon Park Drive
Post Office Drawer 149
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
and may be obtained at the cost of printing and postage from the
North Carolina Justice Academy at the following address:
North Carolina Justice Academy
Post Office Drawer 99
Salemburg, North Carolina 28385

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10;
Eff. October 1, 2018;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; October 1, 2019.

12 NCAC 09B .0404 TRAINEE ATTENDANCE
(a) Each trainee enrolled in a certified Basic Law Enforcement
Training Course shall attend all class sessions. The school director
shall monitor the trainee's attendance at criminal justice training
courses in which the trainee is enrolled.
(b) The school director may excuse a trainee from attendance at
specific class sessions. However, in no case may excused
absences exceed five percent of the total class hours for the course
offering. A trainee shall not be eligible for administration of the
State comprehensive examination and shall be dismissed from the
course if the cumulative total of class absences exceeds five
percent regardless of the prior completion of make-up work.
(c) If the school director grants an excused absence from a class
session, he or she shall schedule make-up work and ensure the
completion of such work during the current course presentation.
The school director shall schedule instructors and reimburse those
instructors for the purpose of completion of the make-up work.
Absences that occur during the last 40 hours of the training course
may be made up in a subsequent delivery; however, the school
director shall notify the Standards Division prior to scheduling the
make-up work.
(d) A school director may terminate a trainee from course
participation or may deny certification of successful course
completion where the trainee is tardy to or departs early from class
meetings or field exercises.
(e) Where a trainee is enrolled in a program as required in 12
NCAC 09B .0212, .0213, .0214, .0215, .0218, .0219, .0220,
.0221, .0222, .0237, .0238, .0239, or .0240, and the scheduled
course hours exceed the requirements of the Commission, the
trainee, upon the authorization of the school director, may be
deemed to have satisfactorily completed the required number of
hours for attendance provided the trainee's attendance is not less
than 100 percent of the instructional hours as required by the
Commission.
(f) A trainee enrolled in a presentation of the "Criminal Justice
Instructor Training Course" under Rule .0209 of this Subchapter
shall not be absent from class attendance for more than 10 percent
of the total scheduled delivery period in order to receive
successful course completion.
(g) A trainee, enrolled in a presentation of the "Specialized
Firearms Instructor Training" course under Rule .0226 of this
Subchapter, the "Specialized Driver Instructor Training" course
under Rule .0227 of this Subchapter, the "Specialized Subject
Control Arrest Techniques Instructor Training" course under Rule
.0232 of this Subchapter, or the "Specialized Physical Fitness
Instructor Training" course under Rule .0233 of this Subchapter,
shall not be absent from class attendance for more than 10 percent
of the total scheduled delivery period in order to receive
successful course completion. Make-up work must be completed
during the current course presentation for all absenteeism. The
Director of the Criminal Justice Standards Division may grant a
waiver for completion of course requirements in a course delivery
A - 51
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
318
scheduled within 12 months, for just cause based upon the
circumstances that created the need for the absence. For the
purposes of this Rule, "just cause" includes an accident, illness,
emergency, or course cancellation that precluded the student from
completing the entire course in one continuous course delivery.
(h) A trainee, enrolled in a presentation of the "RADAR
Instructor Training Course" under Rule .0210 of this Subchapter,
the "Time-Distance Instructor Training Course" under Rule .0211
of this Subchapter, or the "LIDAR Instructor Training Course"
under Rule .0237 of this Subchapter shall not be absent from class
attendance for more than 10 percent of the total scheduled
delivery period in order to receive successful course completion.
Make-up work must be completed during the current course
presentation for all absenteeism.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10;
Eff. January 1, 1981;
Amended Eff. November 1, 1981;
Readopted Eff. July 1, 1982;
Amended Eff. February 1, 2006; May 1, 2004; August 1, 2000;
April 1, 1999; November 1, 1993; July 1, 1989; February 1, 1987;
June 1, 1986;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

12 NCAC 09G .0205 PHYSICAL AND MENTAL
STANDARDS
(a) Every person employed as a correctional officer or
probation/parole officer by the North Carolina Department of
Public Safety, Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice
shall have been examined and certified, within one year prior to
employment with the North Carolina Department of Public
Safety, Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice, by a
physician licensed in North Carolina, physician's assistant, or
nurse practitioner to meet the physical requirements as stated in
the essential job functions listed in the Medical Screening Guide
as found at https://ncdoj.gov/law-enforcement-training/criminal-
justice/forms-and-publications/ that are necessary to fulfill the
officer's particular responsibilities.
(b) Every person employed as a correctional officer or
probation/parole officer by the North Carolina Department of
Public Safety, Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice
shall have been administered, within one year prior to
employment with the North Carolina Department of Public
Safety, Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice and
upon the acceptance of a conditional offer of employment, a
psychological screening by a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist
licensed to practice in North Carolina or by a clinical psychologist
or psychiatrist authorized to practice in accordance with the rules
and regulations of the United States Armed Forces to determine
the officer's mental and emotional suitability to fulfill the
responsibilities of the position as listed in the Medical Screening
Guide as found at https://ncdoj.gov/law-enforcement-
training/criminal-justice/forms-and-publications/, as follows:
(1) Correctional Officer applicant: pre-
employment psychological screening shall at a
minimum include:
(A) a pre-employment written
psychological test recognized in the
field, and supervised by a licensed
psychologist or psychiatrist; and
(B) a clinical interview conducted by a
licensed psychiatrist or psychologist if
the psychologist or psychiatrist
reviewing the results of the pre-
employment test identifies any issue
that he or she believes needs further
examination or other information is
found in the pre-employment process
otherwise that raises questions about
the psychological suitability of the
candidate.
(2) Probation/Parole Officer applicant: pre-
employment psychological screening shall at a
minimum include:
(A) a pre-employment written
psychological test recognized in the
field, and supervised by a licensed
psychologist or psychiatrist; and
(B) a clinical interview conducted by a
licensed psychiatrist or psychologist.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10;
Temporary Adoption Eff. January 1, 2001;
Eff. August 1, 2002;
Amended Eff. January 1, 2015; April 1, 2009; August 1, 2004;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. Pending Legislative Review.

12 NCAC 09G .0206 MORAL CHARACTER
Every person employed as a correctional officer as defined in 12
NCAC 09G .0102(3) or probation/parole officer as defined in 12
NCAC 09G .0102(12) by the Department of Public Safety,
Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice shall
demonstrate good moral character as evidenced by the following:
(1) for correctional officers, not having been
convicted of a felony;
(2) for probation/parole officers, not having
committed or having been convicted of a
felony;
(3) for correctional officers, not having been
convicted of a misdemeanor as defined in 12
NCAC 09G .0102(10) for three years or the
completion of any corrections supervision
imposed by the courts, whichever is later;
(4) for probation/parole officers, not having
committed or having been convicted of a
misdemeanor as defined in 12 NCAC 09G
.0102 for a three years period prior to the date
of application for employment;
(5) not having been convicted of an offense that,
under 18 U.S.C. 922, which is hereby
incorporated by reference with subsequent
amendments and editions and can be accessed
at no cost at
A - 52
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
319
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOD
E-2011-title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-
partI-chap44-sec922.pdf, would prohibit the
possession of a firearm or ammunition;
(6) having submitted to and produced a negative
result on a drug test within 60 days of
employment or any in-service drug screening
required by the Department of Public Safety,
Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile
Justice that meets the certification standards of
the Department of Health and Human Services
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs.
A list of certified drug testing labs that meet this
requirement may be obtained, at no cost, at
https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/resources/
drug-testing/certified-lab-list;
(7) submitting to a background investigation
consisting of the following:
(a) verification of age;
(b) verification of education; and
(c) criminal history check of local, state,
and national files;
(8) being truthful in providing information to the
Department of Public Safety, Division of Adult
Correction and Juvenile Justice and to the
Standards Division for the purpose of obtaining
probationary or general certification;
(9) not having pending or outstanding felony
charges that, if convicted of such charges,
would disqualify the applicant from holding
such certification, pursuant to G.S. 17C-13; and
(10) not engage in any conduct that brings into
question the truthfulness or credibility of the
officer, or involves "moral turpitude." "Moral
Turpitude" is conduct that is contrary to justice,
honesty, or morality, including conduct as
defined In re Willis, 288 N.C. 1, 215 S.E. 2d
771 appeal dismissed 423 U.S. 976 (1975); In
State v. Harris, 216 N.C. 746, 6 S.E.2d 854
(1940); In re Legg, 325 N.C. 658, 386 S.E. 2d
174(1989); In re Applicants for License, 143
N.C. 1, 55 S.E. 635 (1906); In re Dillingham,
188 N.C. 162, 124 S.E. 130 (1924); State v.
Benbow, 309 N.C. 538, 308 S.E. 2d 647 (1983);
and later court decisions that cite these as
authority.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10;
Temporary Adoption Eff. January 1, 2001;
Eff. August 1, 2002;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2017; April 1, 2017; January 1, 2015;
June 1, 2012; April 1, 2009; August 1, 2004;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

12 NCAC 09G .0504 SUSPENSION: REVOCATION:
OR DENIAL OF CERTIFICATION
(a) The Commission shall revoke the certification of a
correctional officer or probation/parole officer when the
Commission finds that the officer has committed or been
convicted of a felony offense.
(b) The Commission shall deny the certification of a correctional
officer when the Commission finds the officer has been convicted
of a felony.
(c) The Commission shall deny the certification of a
probation/parole officer when the Commission finds the officer
has committed or been convicted of a felony offense.
(d) The Commission may, based on the evidence for each case,
suspend, revoke, or deny the certification of a corrections officer,
as defined in 12 NCAC 09G .0102(4) when the Commission finds
that the applicant for certification or the certified officer:
(1) has not enrolled in and completed with passing
scores the required basic training course in its
entirety in time periods prescribed in 12 NCAC
09G .0400 applicable to a specified position or
job title;
(2) fails to meet or maintain one or more of the
employment standards required by 12 NCAC
09G .0200 for the category of the officer's
certification or fails to meet or maintain one or
more of the training standards required by 12
NCAC 09G .0400 for the category of the
officer's certification;
(3) for correctional officers as defined in 12 NCAC
09G .0102(3), have committed or been
convicted of a misdemeanor as defined in 12
NCAC 09G .0102 after certification;
(4) for probation/parole officers as defined in 12
NCAC 09G .0102(12), have committed or been
convicted of a misdemeanor as defined in 12
NCAC 09G .0102 for a three year period prior
to the date of application for employment or
after certification;
(5) has been discharged by the North Carolina
Department of Public Safety, Division of Adult
Correction and Juvenile Justice for:
(A) commission or conviction of a motor
vehicle offense requiring the
revocation of the officer's drivers
license; or
(B) lack of good moral character as
defined in 12 NCAC 09G .0206;
(6) has been discharged by the North Carolina
Department of Public Safety, Division of Adult
Correction and Juvenile Justice because the
officer lacks the mental or physical capabilities
to fulfill the responsibilities of a corrections
officer;
(7) has knowingly made a material
misrepresentation of any information required
for certification or accreditation;
(8) has knowingly and willfully, by any means of
false pretense, deception, fraud,
misrepresentation, or cheating whatsoever,
A - 53
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
320
obtained or attempted to obtain credit, training,
or certification from the Commission;
(9) has knowingly and willfully, by any means of
false pretense, deception, fraud,
misrepresentation, or cheating whatsoever,
aided another person in obtaining or attempting
to obtain credit, training, or certification from
the Commission;
(10) has failed to notify the Standards Division of all
criminal charges or convictions as required by
12 NCAC 09G .0302;
(11) has been removed from office by decree of the
Superior Court in accord with the provisions of
G.S. 128-16 or has been removed from office
by sentence of the court in accord with the
provisions of G.S. 14-230;
(12) has refused to submit to an applicant drug
screen as required by 12 NCAC 09G .0206; or
has refused to submit to an in-service drug
screen pursuant to the guidelines set forth in the
Drug Screening Implementation Guide as
required by the Department of Public Safety,
Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile
Justice;
(13) has produced a positive result on a drug screen
reported to the Commission as specified in 12
NCAC 09G .0206, where the positive result
cannot be explained to the Commission's
satisfaction. For the purposes of this Rule, "to
the Commission's satisfaction" shall be
determined on a case-by-case basis, and the use
of a prescribed drug shall be satisfactory; or
(14) has been denied certification or had such
certification suspended or revoked by a
previous action of the North Carolina Criminal
Justice Education and Training Standards
Commission, the North Carolina Company
Police Program, the North Carolina Campus
Police Program, the North Carolina Sheriffs'
Education and Training Standards
Commission, or a similar North Carolina, out of
state, or federal approving, certifying, or
licensing agency whose function is the same or
similar to the agencies if the certification was
denied, suspended, or revoked based on
grounds that would constitute a violation of this
Subchapter.
(e) Following suspension, revocation, or denial of the person's
certification, the person shall not remain employed or appointed
as a corrections officer and the person shall not exercise any
authority of a corrections officer during a period for which the
person's certification is suspended, revoked, or denied.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10;
Temporary Adoption Eff. January 1, 2001;
Eff. August 1, 2002;
Amended Eff. December 1, 2018; January 1, 2015; April 1, 2009;
December 1, 2004; August 1, 2004;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

12 NCAC 09G .0506 SUMMARY SUSPENSIONS
(a) The Commission, by and through the Probable Cause
Committee, may summarily suspend the certification of a
corrections officer or instructor before the commencement of
proceedings for suspension or revocation of the certification
when, in the opinion of the Probable Cause Committee, the public
health, safety, or welfare requires this emergency action of
summary suspension. The Commission has determined that the
following condition specifically affects the public health, safety,
or welfare and therefore it, by and through the Probable Cause
Committee, may utilize summary suspension: when the
corrections officer has committed or been convicted of a violation
of the criminal code that would require a permanent revocation or
denial of certification.
(b) For the purpose of considering a summary suspension of
certification, the Probable Cause Committee may meet upon
notice given by mail, telephone, or other means not less than 48
hours in advance of the meeting.
(c) A summary suspension shall be effective on the date specified
in the order of summary suspension or on service of the certified
copy of the order at the last known address of the person,
whichever is later. The summary suspension shall remain
effective during the proceedings.
(d) Upon verbal notification by the Director that the certification
of an officer or instructor is being summarily suspended by
written order, the North Carolina Department of Correction shall
take such steps as are necessary to ensure that the officer or
instructor does not perform duties requiring certification by the
Commission.
(e) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon
determining that a Commission-certified instructor has conducted
Commission-approved training course in a way that was not in
accordance with the requirements of this Chapter or has
conducted a Commission-approved training course while being in
violation of the instructor's minimum standards as outlined in 12
NCAC 09G .0307 shall do the following until such time as the
training course or his or her instructor certification has been
brought into compliance:
(1) summarily suspend the individual's Instructor's
certification, prohibiting him or her from
delivering Commission approved training until
the noncompliance is remedied; and
(2) the Director shall send a report of all summary
suspensions for formal hearing before the
Probable Cause Committee at the next
scheduled Commission meeting.
(f) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon
determining a Commission-certified instructor has been alleged to
have violated a certification rule as outlined in this Chapter shall
do the following:
(1) summarily suspend the individual's Instructor's
certification, prohibiting him or her from
delivering Commission approved training until
the matter is resolved; and
A - 54
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
321
(2) the Director shall send a report of all summary
suspensions for formal hearing before the
Probable Cause Committee at the next
scheduled Commission meeting.
(g) The Commission, by and through the Director, upon a Finding
of Probable Cause by the Probable Cause Committee that an
instructor has violated a certification rule outlined in this Chapter
shall summarily suspend the individual's instructor certification.
A summary suspension shall be effective on the date specified in
the order of summary suspension or upon service of the certified
copy of the order at the last known address of the person,
whichever is later. The summary suspension shall remain
effective during the proceedings.

History Note: Authority G.S. 17C-6; 17C-10; 150B-3;
Temporary Adoption Eff. January 1, 2001;
Eff. August 1, 2002;
Amended Eff. January 1, 2004;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 25, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

12 NCAC 10B .0510 CERTIFICATION AND
TRAINING FOR SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS
(a) A "School Resource Officer (SRO)" is defined as any law
enforcement officer assigned to one or more public schools within
a local school administrative unit, as defined in G.S. 115C-5(6),
who works in a school at least 20 hours per week for more than
12 weeks per calendar year to assist with all of the following:
(1) School safety;
(2) School security;
(3) Emergency preparedness;
(4) Emergency response; and
(5) Any additional responsibilities related to school
safety or security assigned by the officer's
employer while the officer is acting as a School
Resource Officer.
Any written memorandum of understanding between the local
school administrative unit and the law enforcement agency
governing the School Resource Officer shall be consistent with
this Paragraph.
(b) Deputy Sheriffs assigned by their agency to perform duties as
a School Resource Officer shall:
(1) have been issued general certification by the
North Carolina Sheriffs' Education and
Training Standards Commission as a Deputy
Sheriff; and
(2) have until December 31, 2020 to complete the
basic School Resource Officer Training Course
if they are acting in the capacity of a School
Resource Officer between January 1, 2019 and
December 31, 2019. Any officer assigned as a
School Resource Officer effective January 1,
2020 or later shall complete the basic School
Resource Officer Training Course pursuant to
Paragraph (g) of this Rule, within one year after
being assigned as a School Resource Officer.
Deputy Sheriffs who previously completed the
training pursuant to Paragraph (f) of this Rule
at any time and who have been continually
assigned as an SRO pursuant to Paragraph (a)
of this Rule shall be credited with completion
of the basic School Resource Officer Training
Course. Deputy Sheriffs who completed the
training pursuant to Paragraph (g) of this Rule
between October 1, 2018 and December 31,
2020 shall be credited with completion of the
basic School Resource Officer Training Course
even if they were not assigned as an SRO
pursuant to Paragraph (a) of this Rule as long as
they comply with the annual SRO refresher
training pursuant to Paragraph (e) of this Rule.
(c) A Deputy Sheriff assigned to one or more public schools
within a local school administrative unit, who works in a school
at least 20 hours per week for more than 12 weeks per calendar
year and who has not completed the initial training as established
by Paragraph (g) of this Rule shall not work in a school as a
School Resource Officer until the officer has completed the initial
training as established by Paragraph (g) of this Rule.
(d) The agency head shall submit to the Sheriffs' Standards
Division a Form F-20 Commission School Resource Officer
Assignment Form for the person(s) selected to act as a School
Resource Officer for the agency. The Form F-20 is located on the
agency's website: https://ncdoj.gov and must be completed in its
entirety. The Form F-20 Commission School Resource Officer
Assignment Form consists of the following:
(1) applicant's name;
(2) date of birth;
(3) social security number;
(4) name of agency and address;
(5) date awarded general certification;
(6) completion date of School Resource Officer
training; and
(7) date assigned as a School Resource Officer.
(e) The term of certification as a School Resource Officer shall
be indefinite, provided the School Resource Officer completes
during each calendar year one credit of School Resource Officer
refresher training authored by North Carolina Justice Academy.
For School Resource Officers who complete the basic SRO
training requirement in 2020 or earlier, this requirement becomes
effective January 1, 2021. Otherwise, this requirement becomes
effective the year following the officer's successful completion of
the basic School Resource Officer Training Course. A certified
School Resource Officer who has not completed the refresher
training during a calendar year as established by this Rule shall
not work in a school as a School Resource Officer until the officer
has completed the required refresher training as established by
this Rule. Any refresher training that is not completed during a
single calendar year must be made up on or before January 31st of
the following calendar year. Any officer who fails to resolve a
deficiency in the refresher training shall no longer maintain
School Resource Officer certification.
(f) Instructors who teach a basic SRO course in an in-person,
traditional classroom format will receive credit toward the
completion of the basic SRO course requirement as required by
this Rule, provided they pass all tests required by the SRO
A - 55
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
322
Training Manual authored by the North Carolina Justice
Academy. Instructors shall have their instruction documented by
the Agency Head or In-Service Training Coordinator once
completed.
(g) The School Resource Officer training course for Deputy
Sheriffs shall provide the trainee with the skills and knowledge to
perform in the capacity of a School Resource Officer. The basic
School Resource Officer Training Course authored by the North
Carolina Justice Academy shall be used as the curriculum for this
training course. Copies of this publication may be inspected at the
agency:
Sheriffs' Standards Division
North Carolina Department of Justice
1700 Tryon Park Drive
Post Office Drawer 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
and may be obtained at the cost of printing and postage from the
North Carolina Justice Academy at the following address:
North Carolina Justice Academy
Post Office Drawer 99
Salemburg, North Carolina 28385

History Note: Authority G.S. 17E-4; 17E-7;
Eff. January 1, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; January 1, 2020.

TITLE 15A - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY

15A NCAC 07J .0403 DEVELOPMENT
PERIOD/COMMENCEMENT/CONTINUATION
(a) New dredge and fill permits and CAMA permits, excepting
beach bulldozing when authorized through issuance of a CAMA
minor permit, shall expire on December 31 of the third year
following the year of permit issuance.
(b) CAMA minor permit authorizing beach bulldozing shall
expire 30 days from the date of permit issuance. Following permit
expiration, the applicant may request an extension in accordance
with Rule .0404(a) of this Section.
(c) Development After Permit Expiration. Any development
undertaken after permit expiration shall be considered
unpermitted and shall constitute a violation of G.S. 113A-118 or
G.S. 113-229. Any development undertaken after permit
expiration shall require either a new permit, or extension of the
original permit according to 15A NCAC 07J .0404 with the
exception of Paragraph (e) of this Rule.
(d) Commencement of Development in Ocean Hazard AEC. No
development shall begin until the oceanfront setback requirement
can be met in accordance with 15A NCAC 07H .0306. When the
permit holder or an individual receiving an exception to the permit
requirement is ready to begin development, they shall arrange an
onsite meeting with the Division of Coastal Management or Local
Permitting Officer to determine the oceanfront setback. This
setback determination shall replace the one completed at the time
the permit was processed and approved and development shall
begin within of 60 days from the date of that meeting. In the case
of a shoreline change that alters the location of the permitted
development a new setback determination may be required. To
determine if a new setback is required, additional coordination
with the Division of Coastal Management or Local Permitting
Officer shall be required. Upon completion of the measurement,
the Division of Coastal Management or Local Permitting Officer
will issue a written statement to the permittee certifying the same.
(e) Continuation of Development in the Ocean Hazard AEC.
Once permitted development has begun, development in the
Ocean Hazard AEC may continue beyond the authorized
development period if, in the opinion of the Division of Coastal
Management or Local Permitting Officer, substantial progress has
been made and is continuing according to customary and usual
building standards and schedules. Substantial progress is defined
as beginning with the placement of foundation pilings, and proof
of the local building inspector's certification that the installed
pilings have passed a floor and foundation inspection.
(f) Any permit that has been stayed as a result of litigation shall
be extended at the permit holder's written request for a period
equivalent to the period of permit suspension, but not to exceed
the development period authorized under Paragraph (a) of this
Rule.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-118; 113A-124(c)(8);
Eff. March 15, 1978;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2002; April 1, 1995; July 1, 1989; March
1, 1985; November 1, 1984;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

15A NCAC 07J .0404 DEVELOPMENT PERIOD
EXTENSION
(a) For CAMA minor permits authorizing beach bulldozing, the
permit holder may request a one-time 30-day permit extension.
No additional extensions shall be granted after the 30-day
extension has expired. Notwithstanding this Paragraph, the permit
holder may apply for another minor permit authorizing beach
bulldozing following expiration of the 30-day permit extension.
(b) Where no development has been initiated during the
development period, the Division of Coastal Management or
Local Permit Officer shall extend the authorized development
period for no more than two years upon receipt of a signed and
dated request from the applicant containing the following:
(1) a statement of the intention of the applicant to
complete the work.
(2) a statement of the reasons why the project will
not be completed before the expiration of the
current permit;
(3) a statement that there has been no change of
plans since the issuance of the original permit
other than changes that would have the effect of
reducing the scope of the project or previously
approved permit modifications;
(4) notice of any change in ownership of the
property to be developed and a request for
transfer of the permit, if appropriate; and
(5) a statement that the project is in compliance
with all conditions of the current permit.
Where substantial development, either within or outside the AEC,
has begun and is continuing on a permitted project, the permitting
authority shall grant as many two year extensions as necessary to
complete the initial development. For the purpose of this Rule,
A - 56
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
323
"substantial development" shall be deemed to have occurred on a
project if the permittee can show that development has progressed
beyond basic site preparation, such as land clearing and grading,
and construction has begun and is continuing on the primary
structure or structures authorized under the permit. For purposes
of residential subdivision, installation of subdivision roads
consistent with an approved subdivision plat shall constitute
substantial development. Renewals for maintenance and repairs
of previously approved projects may be granted for periods not to
exceed 10 years.
(c) When an extension request has not met the criteria of
Paragraph (b) of this Rule, the Division of Coastal Management
may circulate the request to the commenting State resource
agencies along with a copy of the original permit application.
Commenting State resource agencies will be given three weeks in
which to comment on the extension request. Upon the expiration
of the commenting period the Division of Coastal Management
will notify the applicant of its actions on the extension request.
(d) Notwithstanding Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this Rule, an
extension request may be denied on making findings as required
in either G.S. 113A-120 or G.S. 113-229(e). Changes in
circumstances or in development standards shall be considered
and applied by the Division of Coastal Management in making a
decision on an extension request.
(e) The applicant for a major development extension request shall
submit, with the request, a check or money order payable to the
Department in the sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00).
(f) Modifications to extended permits may be considered
pursuant to 15A NCAC 07J .0405.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-119; 113A-119.1;
113A-124(c)(8);
Eff. March 15, 1978;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2002; August 1, 2000; April 1, 1995;
March 1, 1991; March 1, 1985; November 1, 1984;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

15A NCAC 07J .0405 PERMIT MODIFICATION
(a) A permit holder may modify their permitted major
development and/or dredge and fill project only after approval by
the Division of Coastal Management. In order to modify a
permitted project the permit holder shall make a written request
to the Division of Coastal Management showing the proposed
modifications. Minor modifications may be shown on the existing
approved application and plat. Modification requests which, in the
opinion of the Division of Coastal Management are major shall
require a new application. Modification requests are subject to the
same processing procedure applicable to original permit
applications. A permit need not be circulated to all agencies
commenting on the original application if the Commission
determines that the modification is so minor that circulation
would serve no purpose.
(b) Modifications to a permitted project that are imposed or made
at the request of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or other
federal agencies shall be approved by the Division of Coastal
Management under provisions of this Rule dealing with permit
modification procedures.
(c) Modifications of projects for the benefit of private waterfront
property owners that meet the following criteria shall be
considered minor modifications and shall not require a new permit
application, but shall be approved under the provisions of
Paragraph (a) of this Rule:
(1) for bulkheads:
(A) bulkhead shall be positioned so as not
to extend more than an average
distance of two feet waterward of the
mean high water and in no place shall
the bulkhead be more than five feet
waterward of the mean high water
contour;
(B) all backfill must come from an upland
source;
(C) no marsh area may be excavated or
filled;
(D) work must be undertaken because of
the necessity to prevent loss of private
residential property due to erosion;
(E) the bulkhead must be constructed prior
to any backfilling activities;
(F) the bulkhead must be constructed so as
to prevent seepages of backfill
materials through the bulkhead; and
(G) the bulkhead may not be constructed
in the Ocean Hazard AEC;
(2) for piers, docks and boathouses:
(A) the modification or addition shall not
be within 150 feet of the edge of a
federally-maintained channel;
(B) the structure, as modified, must be 200
feet or less in total length offshore;
(C) the structure, as modified, must not
extend past the four feet mean low
water contour line (four feet depth at
mean low water) of the waterbody;
(D) the project as modified, must not
exceed six feet in width;
(E) the modification or addition must not
include an enclosed structure; and
(F) the project shall continue to be used
for private, residential purposes;
(3) for boatramps:
(A) the project, as modified, shall not
exceed 10 feet in width and 20 feet
offshore; and
(B) the project shall continue to be used
for private, residential purposes.
(d) An applicant may modify his permitted minor development
project only after approval by the local permit-letting authority.
In order to modify a permitted project the applicant must make a
written request to the local minor permit-letting authority showing
in detail the proposed modifications. The request shall be
reviewed in consultation with the appropriate Division of Coastal
Management field consultant and granted if all of the following
provisions are met:
(1) the size of the project is expanded less than 20
percent of the size of the originally permitted
project;
A - 57
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
324
(2) a signed, written statement is obtained from all
adjacent riparian property owners indicating
they have no objections to the proposed
modifications;
(3) the proposed modifications are consistent with
all local, State, and federal standards and local
Land Use Plans in effect at the time of the
modification requests; and
(4) the type or nature of development is not
changed.
Failure to meet this Paragraph shall necessitate the submission of
a new permit application.
(e) The applicant for a major permit modification shall submit
with the request a check or money order payable to the
Department in the sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00) for a
minor modification and two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) for a
major modification.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-119; 113A-119.1;
113-229;
Eff. March 15, 1978;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2000; March 1, 1991; August 1, 1986;
November 1, 1984;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

15A NCAC 07J .0407 PROJECT MAINTENANCE:
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT/DREDGE AND FILL
(a) No project previously requiring a major development or
dredge and fill permit shall be maintained after the expiration of
the authorized development period without approval from the
Division of Coastal Management. Permits may contain provisions
that allow the applicant to maintain the project after its
completion. Persons wishing to maintain a project beyond the
development period and whose permit contains no maintenance
provision shall apply for a maintenance permit. This Rule does
not apply to maintenance required by rule or by permit condition.
(b) Maintenance Request. Persons desiring to initiate
maintenance work on a project pursuant to the maintenance
provisions of an existing permit shall file a request two weeks
prior to the initiation of maintenance work with:
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
(c) Such requests shall include:
(1) the name and address of the permittee;
(2) the number of the original permit;
(3) a description of proposed changes;
(4) in the case of a dredge and fill maintenance
request, a statement that no dimensional
changes are proposed;
(5) a copy of the original permit plat with cross-
hatching indicating the area to be maintained,
any area to be used as spoil, and the estimated
amount of material to be removed; and
(6) the date of map revision and the applicant's
signature shown anew on the original plat.
(d) Conditions for Maintenance. All work undertaken pursuant to
the maintenance provisions of a permit shall comply with the
following conditions:
(1) Maintenance work under a major development
permit shall be limited to activities which are
within the exemptions set forth by the
Commission.
(2) Maintenance under a dredge and fill permit
shall be limited to excavation and filling which
is necessary to maintain the project dimensions
as found in the original permit.
(3) Maintenance work is subject to all the
conditions included in the original permit.
(4) Spoil disposal shall be in the same locations as
authorized in the original permit, provided that
the person requesting the authority to maintain
a project may request a different spoil disposal
site if he or she first serves a copy of the
maintenance request on all adjoining
landowners.
(5) The maintenance work is subject to any
conditions determined by the Department to be
necessary to protect the public interest with
respect to the factors enumerated in G.S.
113A-120 or G.S. 113-229.
(e) The Division of Coastal Management may suspend or revoke
the right to maintain a project in whole or in part upon a finding:
(1) that the project area has been put to a different
use from that indicated in the original permit
application;
(2) that there has been a change in the impacts
associated with the permitted development
affecting coastal resources listed in G.S. 113A-
113 or G.S. 113A-120(a) that would justify
denial of a permit; or
(3) that there has been a violation of any of the
terms or conditions of the original permit.
(f) Grant or Denial of Maintenance Request
(1) Upon receipt of a complete maintenance
request the Division of Coastal Management
shall determine if there are grounds for
revocation or suspension of the applicant's right
to maintain based on the criteria in Paragraph
(e) of this Rule. If there are grounds for
revocation or suspension the applicant shall be
notified of the suspension or revocation by
certified mail, return receipt requested setting
forth the findings on which the revocation or
suspension is based.
(2) If the Division of Coastal Management
determines that the right to maintain should not
be revoked or based on the criteria in Paragraph
(e) of this Rule, a letter shall be issued which
shall authorize the applicant to perform
maintenance work. The letter shall set forth the
terms and conditions under which the
maintenance work is authorized.
(3) If the maintenance request discloses changes in
the dimensions of the original project, the
A - 58
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
325
Division of Coastal Management shall notify
the applicant that a permit modification or
renewal shall be required pursuant to the
procedure set out in 15A NCAC 07J .0404 and
.0405.
(4) Appeal of the Division of Coastal Management
action under this Section shall be in accordance
with 15A NCAC 07J .0302.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-103(5)c; 113A-120(b);
113A-124(c)(8);
Eff. March 15, 1978;
Amended Eff. June 1, 2005; December 1, 1991; May 1, 1990;
March 1, 1985; November 1, 1984;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

15A NCAC 07J .0410 RESTORATION/MITIGATION
Any violation involving development that is inconsistent with
rules for development within AECs, i.e. wetland fill, improper
location of a structure, shall result in a notice of restoration from
the Secretary or its delegate or a local government. The notice
shall describe the extent of restoration necessary to recover lost
resources, or to prevent further resource damage and a time for its
completion. Failure to complete the restoration described in the
notice may result in a court order as described in G.S. 113-126(a)
and (b). Failure to act to complete the required restoration may be
determined to constitute a separate violation, according to G.S.
113-126(d)(2), subject to the penalties in Rule .0409 of this
Section. Any resources that cannot be recovered by restoration of
the affected site shall be replaced in compliance with the goals of
the Commission's mitigation policy described in 15A NCAC 07M
.0701.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-126; 113A-124(c); 113A-
124(c)(8);
Eff. July 1, 1985;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

15A NCAC 07K .0207 STRUCTURAL ACCESSWAYS
OVER FRONTAL DUNES EXEMPTED
(a) The North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission exempts
from the CAMA permit requirement all structural pedestrian
accessways over frontal dunes which can be shown to meet the
following criteria:
(1) The accessway shall not exceed six feet in
width and shall be for private residential or for
public access to an ocean beach. This
exemption does not apply to accessways for
commercial use or for motor-powered vehicular
use.
(2) The accessway shall be constructed so as to
make no alterations to the frontal dunes that are
not necessary to construct the accessway. This
means that the accessway shall be constructed
over the frontal dune without any alteration of
the dunes. In no case shall the dune be altered
so as to diminish its capacity as a protective
barrier against flooding and by not reducing the
volume of the dune. Driving of pilings into the
dune shall not be considered alteration of a
frontal dune for the purposes of this Rule.
(3) The accessway shall conform with any
applicable local or State building code
standards.
(b) Before beginning any work under this exemption the CAMA
local permit officer or Division of Quality representative shall be
notified of the proposed activity to allow on-site review of the
proposed accessway. Notification can be by telephone, in person,
or in writing and must include:
(1) name, address, and telephone number of
landowner and location of work including
county and nearest community; and
(2) the dimensions of the proposed structural
accessway.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-103(5)c;
Eff. November 1, 1984;
Amended Eff. December 1, 1991; May 1, 1990;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

15A NCAC 07K .0208 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES
EXEMPTED
(a) All single family residences constructed within the Coastal
Shorelines Area of Environmental Concern that are more than 40
feet landward of normal high water or normal water level, and
involve no land disturbing activity within the 40 feet buffer area
are exempted from the CAMA permit requirement as long as this
exemption is consistent with all other applicable CAMA permit
standards and local land use plans and rules in effect at the time
the exemption is granted.
(b) This exemption allows for the construction of a generally
shore perpendicular access to the water, provided that the access
shall be no wider than six feet. The access may be constructed out
of materials such as wood, composite material, gravel, paver
stones, concrete, brick, or similar materials. Any access
constructed over wetlands shall be elevated at least three feet
above any wetland substrate as measured from the bottom of the
decking.
(c) Within the AEC for estuarine shorelines contiguous to waters
classified as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), no CAMA
permit shall be required if the proposed development is a
single-family residence that has a built upon area of 25 percent or
less and is at least 40 feet from waters classified as ORW.
(d) Before beginning any work under this exemption, the CAMA
local permit officer or the Department of Environmental Quality
representative shall be notified of the proposed activity to allow
on-site review. Notification may be by telephone at (252) 808-
2808, in person, or in writing to the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, 400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City, NC
28557. Notification shall include:
(1) the name, address, and telephone number of the
landowner and the location of the work,
including the county, nearest community, and
water body; and
(2) the dimensions of the proposed project,
including proposed landscaping and the
location of normal high water or normal water
level.
A - 59
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
326
(e) In eroding areas, this exemption shall apply only when the
local permit officer has determined that the house has been located
the maximum feasible distance back on the lot but not less than
forty feet.
(f) Construction of the structure authorized by this exemption
shall be completed by December 31 of the third year of the
issuance date of this exemption.

History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-103(5)c;
Eff. November 1, 1984;
Amended Eff. February 1, 2019; May 1, 2015; December 1, 2006;
December 1, 1991; May 1, 1990; October 1, 1989;
Readopted Eff. August 1, 2021.

TITLE 21 - OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS

CHAPTER 16 – BOARD OF DENTAL EXAMINERS

21 NCAC 16Q .0102 APPLICATION FOR GENERAL
ANESTHESIA OR SEDATION PERMIT, PERMIT
RENEWAL, AND PERMIT REINSTATEMENT
(a) An applicant for a general anesthesia or sedation permit shall
be licensed and in good standing with the Board.
(b) All permit applications shall be made on the forms furnished
by the Board at www.ncdentalboard.org and shall include:
(1) the full name;
(2) the mailing address;
(3) the North Carolina dental license number;
(4) a telephone number; and
(5) an email address.
(c) In addition to the information in Paragraph (b) of this Rule,
all applications for a general anesthesia, moderate conscious
sedation, moderate pediatric conscious sedation, or minimal
conscious sedation permit shall include:
(1) the addresses of all dental offices where the
applicant intends to use general anesthesia or
sedation;
(2) dental education, including dental school name,
dates attended, degree received, and any other
dental post-graduate education or specialty
degrees received;
(3) a resume or curriculum vitae;
(4) the names of and copies of unexpired BLS
certifications for any auxiliaries that will assist
the applicant with general anesthesia or
sedation;
(5) a statement disclosing and explaining any
instances of patient mortality or morbidity in
connection with applicant's prior use of general
anesthesia or sedation; and
(6) documentation of the required qualifications for
the permit for which the applicant is applying,
as set out in Rule .0201, .0301, .0404, or .0504
of this Subchapter.
(d) In addition to the information in Paragraph (b) of this Rule,
all applications for an itinerant permit shall include:
(1) North Carolina general anesthesia or sedation
permit number; and
(2) a statement of compliance with the
requirements for the itinerant permit for which
the applicant is applying, as set out in Rule
.0206, .0304, or .0406 of this Subchapter.
(e) All applications for renewal of a general anesthesia or
sedation permit shall be submitted electronically through the
Board's website, www.ncdentalboard.org, and shall include:
(1) the full name;
(2) the permit number and expiration date;
(3) the addresses of all dental offices where the
permit holder uses general anesthesia or
sedation; and
(4) a statement disclosing and explaining any
instances of patient mortality or morbidity in
connection with use of general anesthesia or
sedation that occurred during the calendar year
preceding the application and that were not
previously disclosed to the Board.
(f) All applications for reinstatement of a general anesthesia or
sedation permit shall be made on forms furnished by the Board at
www.ncdentalboard.org and shall include:
(1) the full name;
(2) the permit number and date of issuance;
(3) the mailing address;
(4) the North Carolina dental license number;
(5) the addresses of all dental offices where the
applicant intends to use general anesthesia or
sedation; and
(6) a statement disclosing and explaining any
instances of patient mortality or morbidity in
connection with use of general anesthesia or
sedation that occurred during the calendar year
preceding the application.
(g) Any permit obtained through fraud or by any false
representation shall be revoked.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

21 NCAC 16Q .0206 ITINERANT (MOBILE)
GENERAL ANESTHESIA PERMIT, EQUIPMENT AND
EVALUATION
(a) A dentist who holds a general anesthesia permit from the
Board and who wishes to provide general anesthesia or other
sedation services in the office of another practitioner shall obtain
a mobile general anesthesia permit from the Board by completing
the application requirements of this Rule and paying a one
hundred dollar ($100.00) application fee and a two-hundred
seventy-five dollar ($275.00) inspection fee. No mobile permit
shall be required to administer general anesthesia in a hospital or
credentialed surgery center.
(b) Before a mobile general anesthesia permit may be issued, a
general anesthesia permit holder appointed by the Board shall
inspect the applicant's equipment and medications to ensure that
they comply with Paragraphs (c) and (d) of this Rule.
(c) The permit holder shall maintain in good working order the
following equipment:
A - 60
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
327
(1) small, medium, and large supraglottic airways
devices;
(2) small, medium, and large anesthesia circuits;
(3) rebreathing device;
(4) scavenging system;
(5) intermittent compression devices;
(6) gastric suction device;
(7) endotracheal tube and pulmonary suction
device;
(8) equipment for performing emergency
cricothyrotomies and delivering positive
pressure ventilation; and
(9) the equipment required by Rule .0202(a)(1) of
this Section.
(d) A neuromuscular blocking agent, an anti-malignant
hyperthermia agent, and the medications required by Rule
.0202(a)(2) of this Section shall be on site, unexpired, and
available to the permit holder.
(e) The evaluation and on-site inspection shall be conducted as
set out in Rule .0204 of this Section.
(f) Prior to administering general anesthesia or sedation at another
provider's office, the mobile permit holder shall inspect the host
facility within 24 business hours before each procedure and shall
ensure that:
(1) the operatory's size and design permit
emergency management and access of
emergency equipment and personnel;
(2) there is a CPR board or dental chair without
enhancements suitable for providing
emergency treatment;
(3) there is lighting to permit performance of all
procedures planned for the facility;
(4) there is suction equipment, including non-
electrical back-up suction; and
(5) the facility shall be staffed with at least two
BLS certified auxiliaries, one of whom shall be
dedicated to patient monitoring and recording
general anesthesia or sedation data throughout
the sedation procedure. This Subparagraph
shall not apply if the dentist permit holder is
dedicated to patient care and monitoring
regarding general anesthesia or sedation
throughout the sedation procedure and is not
performing the surgery or other dental
procedure.
(g) Upon inspection, the permit holder shall document that the
facility where the general anesthesia or sedation procedure will be
performed was inspected and that it met the requirements of
Paragraph (f) of this Rule. The permit holder shall retain the
inspection and compliance record required by this Paragraph for
10 years following the procedure and provide these records to the
Board upon request.
(h) The mobile general anesthesia permit shall be displayed in the
host facility where it is visible to patients receiving treatment.
(i) All applicants for mobile general anesthesia permit shall be in
good standing with the Board.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1; 90-39; 90-48;
Eff. June 1, 2017;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; August 1, 2018.

21 NCAC 16Q .0207 ANNUAL RENEWAL OF
GENERAL ANESTHESIA AND ITINERANT (MOBILE)
GENERAL ANESTHESIA PERMIT REQUIRED
(a) General anesthesia permits and itinerant general anesthesia
permits shall be renewed by the Board annually at the same time
as dental licenses. For each permit to be renewed, the permit
holder shall pay a one-hundred dollar ($100.00) fee and complete
the renewal application requirements of this Rule. If the
completed permit renewal application and renewal fee are not
received before midnight on January 31 of each year, a fifty dollar
($50.00) late fee shall be charged. The renewal application shall
be submitted electronically through the Board's website,
www.ncdentalboard.org, and shall include the information
required by Rule .0102(e) of this Subchapter and a report of
compliance with the conditions for renewal in Paragraph (d) of
this Rule.
(b) Any permit holder who fails to renew a general anesthesia
permit or itinerant general anesthesia permit before March 31 of
each year shall complete a reinstatement application, pay the
renewal fee and late fee set out in Paragraph (a) of this Rule, and
comply with all conditions for renewal set out in this Rule.
Dentists whose general anesthesia permits or itinerant general
anesthesia permits have been lapsed for more than 12 calendar
months shall pass an inspection and an evaluation as part of the
reinstatement process in accordance with Rules .0202 and .0204
of this Section. All applicants for reinstatement of a permit shall
be in good standing. All applications for reinstatement of a permit
shall be submitted on forms furnished by the Board at
www.ncdentalboard.org and shall include the information
required by Rule .0102(f) of this Subchapter and a report of
compliance with the conditions for renewal set out in Paragraph
(d) of this Rule.
(c) A dentist who administers general anesthesia in violation of
this Rule shall be subject to the penalties prescribed by Rule .0701
of this Subchapter.
(d) As a condition for renewal of the general anesthesia permit
and itinerant general anesthesia permit, the permit holder shall
meet the clinical equipment and requirements set out in Rule
.0202 of this Section, the itinerant general anesthesia permit
holder shall also meet the clinical equipment and requirements set
out in Rule .0206 of this Section, and the permit holder shall
document the following:
(1) six hours of continuing education each year in
one or more of the following areas, which shall
be counted toward fulfillment of the continuing
education required each calendar year for
license renewal:
(A) sedation;
(B) medical emergencies;
(C) monitoring IV sedation and the use of
monitoring equipment;
(D) pharmacology of drugs and agents
used in general anesthesia and IV
sedation;
(E) physical evaluation, risk assessment,
or behavioral management; or
(F) airway management;
A - 61
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
328
(2) unexpired ACLS certification, which shall not
count towards the six hours of continuing
education required in Subparagraph (d)(1) of
this Rule;
(3) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in anesthesia or sedation procedures
have practiced responding to dental
emergencies as a team at least once every six
months in the preceding year;
(4) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in anesthesia or sedation procedures
have read the practice's emergency manual in
the preceding year; and
(5) that all auxiliaries involved in sedation
procedures have completed BLS certification
and three hours of continuing education
annually in any of the areas set forth in
Subparagraph (d)(1) of this Rule.
(e) Absent a Board order stating otherwise, all permit holders
applying for renewal of a general anesthesia permit or itinerant
general anesthesia permit shall be in good standing and their
office shall be subject to inspection by the Board.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1; 90-31; 90-39;
90-48;
Eff. June 1, 2017;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; August 1, 2018.

21 NCAC 16Q .0305 ANNUAL RENEWAL OF
MODERATE PARENTERAL AND ENTERAL
CONSCIOUS SEDATION PERMIT REQUIRED
(a) Moderate conscious sedation permits and itinerant moderate
conscious sedation permits shall be renewed by the Board
annually at the same time as dental licenses. For each permit to be
renewed, the permit holder shall pay a one-hundred dollar
($100.00) fee and complete the renewal application requirements
in this Rule. If the completed permit renewal application and
renewal fee are not received before midnight on January 31 of
each year, a fifty dollar ($50.00) late fee shall be charged. The
renewal application shall be submitted electronically through the
Board's website, www.ncdentalboard.org, and shall include the
information required by Rule .0102(e) of this Subchapter and a
report of compliance with the conditions for renewal in Paragraph
(d) of this Rule.
(b) Any permit holder who fails to renew a moderate conscious
sedation permit or itinerant moderate conscious sedation permit
before March 31 of each year shall complete a reinstatement
application, pay the renewal fee and late fee set out in Paragraph
(a) of this Rule, and comply with all conditions for renewal set out
in this Rule. Dentists whose moderate conscious sedation permits
or itinerant moderate conscious sedation permits have been lapsed
for more than 12 calendar months shall pass an inspection and an
evaluation as part of the reinstatement process in accordance with
Rules .0302 and .0306 of this Section. All applicants for
reinstatement of a permit shall be in good standing. All
applications for reinstatement of a permit shall be submitted on
forms furnished by the Board at www.ncdentalboard.org and shall
include the information required by Rule .0102(f) of this
Subchapter and a report of compliance with the conditions for
renewal set out in Paragraph (d) of this Rule.
(c) A dentist who administers moderate conscious sedation in
violation of this Rule shall be subject to the penalties prescribed
by Rule .0701 of this Subchapter.
(d) As a condition for renewal of the moderate conscious sedation
permit and itinerant moderate conscious sedation permit, the
permit holder shall meet the clinical and equipment requirements
set out in Rule .0302 of this Section, the itinerant moderate
conscious sedation permit holder shall also meet the clinical and
equipment requirements set out in Rule .0304 of this Section, and
the permit holder shall document the following:
(1) six hours of continuing education each year in
one or more of the following areas, which shall
be counted toward fulfillment of the continuing
education required each calendar year for
license renewal:
(A) sedation;
(B) medical emergencies;
(C) monitoring IV sedation and the use of
monitoring equipment;
(D) pharmacology of drugs and agents
used in IV sedation;
(E) physical evaluation, risk assessment,
or behavioral management; or
(F) airway management;
(2) unexpired ACLS certification, which shall not
count towards the six hours of continuing
education required in Subparagraph (d)(1) of
this Rule;
(3) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in sedation procedures have practiced
responding to dental emergencies as a team at
least once every six months in the preceding
year;
(4) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in sedation procedures have read the
practice's emergency manual in the preceding
year; and
(5) that all auxiliaries involved in sedation
procedures have completed BLS certification
and three hours of continuing education
annually in any of the areas set forth in
Subparagraph (d)(1) of this Rule.
(e) Absent a Board order stating otherwise, all permit holders
applying for renewal of a moderate conscious sedation permit or
itinerant moderate conscious sedation permit shall be in good
standing and their office shall be subject to inspection by the
Board.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1; 90-31; 90-39;
90-48;
Eff. June 1, 2017;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; August 1, 2018.

A - 62
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
329
21 NCAC 16Q .0407 ANNUAL RENEWAL OF
MODERATE PEDIATRIC CONSCIOUS SEDATION
PERMIT REQUIRED
(a) Moderate pediatric conscious sedation permits and itinerant
moderate pediatric conscious sedation permits shall be renewed
by the Board annually at the same time as dental licenses. For each
permit to be renewed, the permit holder shall pay a one-hundred
dollar ($100.00) fee and complete the renewal application
requirements in this Rule. If the completed renewal application
and renewal fee are not received before midnight on January 31
of each year, a fifty dollar ($50.00) late fee shall be charged. The
renewal application shall be submitted electronically through the
Board's website, www.ncdentalboard.org, and shall include the
information required by Rule .0102(e) of this Subchapter and a
report of compliance with the conditions for renewal in Paragraph
(d) of this Rule.
(b) Any permit holder who fails to renew a moderate pediatric
conscious sedation permit or itinerant moderate pediatric
conscious sedation permit before March 31 of each year shall
complete a reinstatement application, pay the renewal fee and late
fee set out in Paragraph (a) of this Rule, and comply with all
conditions for renewal set out in Paragraphs (d) and (e) of this
Rule. Dentists whose moderate pediatric conscious sedation
permits or itinerant moderate pediatric conscious sedation permits
have been lapsed for more than 12 calendar months shall pass an
inspection and an evaluation as part of the reinstatement process
in accordance with Rules .0405 and .0408 of this Section. All
applicants for reinstatement of a permit shall be in good standing.
All applications for reinstatement of a permit shall be submitted
on forms furnished by the Board at www.ncdentalboard.org and
shall include the information required by Rule .0102(f) of this
Subchapter and a report of compliance with the conditions for
renewal set out in Paragraph (d) of this Rule.
(c) A dentist who administers moderate pediatric conscious
sedation in violation of this Rule shall be subject to the penalties
prescribed by Rule .0701 of this Subchapter.
(d) As a condition for renewal of the moderate pediatric
conscious sedation permit and itinerant moderate pediatric
conscious sedation permit, the permit holder shall meet the
clinical and equipment requirements of Rule .0405 of this Section,
the itinerant moderate pediatric conscious sedation permit holder
shall also meet the clinical and equipment requirements of Rule
.0406 of this Section, and the permit holder shall document the
following:
(1) six hours of continuing education each year in
one or more of the following areas, which shall
be counted toward fulfillment of the continuing
education required each calendar year for
license renewal:
(A) sedation;
(B) medical emergencies;
(C) monitoring IV sedation and the use of
monitoring equipment;
(D) pharmacology of drugs and agents
used in IV sedation;
(E) physical evaluation, risk assessment,
or behavioral management; or
(F) airway management;
(2) unexpired PALS certification, which shall not
count towards the six hours of continuing
education required in Subparagraph (d)(1) of
this Rule;
(3) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in sedation procedures have practiced
responding to dental emergencies as a team at
least once every six months in the preceding
year;
(4) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in sedation procedures have read the
practice's emergency manual in the preceding
year; and
(5) that all auxiliaries involved in sedation
procedures have completed BLS certification
and three hours of continuing education
annually in any of the areas set forth in
Subparagraph (d)(1) of this Rule.
(e) Absent a Board order stating otherwise, all permit holders
applying for renewal of a moderate pediatric conscious sedation
permit or itinerant moderate pediatric conscious sedation permit
shall be in good standing and their office shall be subject to
inspection by the Board.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1; 90-31; 90-39;
90-48;
Eff. June 1, 2017;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; August 1, 2018.

21 NCAC 16Q .0504 MINIMAL CONSCIOUS
SEDATION CREDENTIALS AND PERMIT
(a) Before a dentist licensed to practice in North Carolina may
administer or supervise a CRNA employed to administer or an RN
employed to deliver minimal conscious sedation, the dentist shall
obtain a Board-issued permit for minimal conscious sedation,
moderate pediatric conscious sedation, moderate conscious
sedation, or general anesthesia. A dentist may obtain a minimal
conscious sedation permit from the Board by completing the
application requirements of this Rule and paying a fee of three-
hundred seventy-five dollars ($375.00) that includes the one-
hundred dollar ($100.00) application fee and the two-hundred
seventy-five dollar ($275.00) inspection fee. The permit shall be
renewed annually and shall be displayed with the current renewal
at all times in the facility of the permit holder where it is visible
to patients receiving treatment.
(b) The minimal conscious sedation permit holder shall ensure
the level of the sedation administered does not exceed minimal
conscious sedation as defined in Rule .0101(27) of this
Subchapter.
(c) An applicant for a minimal conscious sedation permit shall
submit to the Board:
(1) a completed application form provided by the
Board at www.ncdentalboard.org that includes
the information and materials required by Rule
.0102(b) and (c) of this Subchapter;
(2) a copy of an unexpired ACLS certification; and
(3) documentation showing completion of one of
the following:
A - 63
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
330
(A) an 18-hour minimal conscious
sedation course from the list, available
on the Board's website, of sedation
courses reviewed at any public Board
meeting and approved by a majority of
the Board based on its collective
experience; or
(B) a post-doctoral program accredited by
the Commission on Dental
Accreditation (CODA) that provides
training in administering and
managing minimal conscious
sedation. A list of CODA-accredited
programs is available at no cost at
www.ada.org/coda and is incorporated
by reference, including subsequent
amendments and editions.
(d) Prior to issuance of a minimal conscious sedation permit, the
applicant shall pass an evaluation and facility inspection in
accordance with Rules .0505 and .0507 of this Section.
(e) An applicant shall submit the fee set out in Paragraph (a) and
satisfy all requirements in Paragraphs (c) and (d) of this Rule for
the application to be complete. Applications that are not
completed within one year of being submitted to the Board shall
be disregarded without a refund of the fee.
(f) A dentist who administers minimal conscious sedation in
violation of this Rule shall be subject to the penalties prescribed
by Rule .0701 of this Subchapter.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1; 90-39;
Temporary Adoption Eff. March 13, 2003; December 11, 2002;
Eff. August 1, 2004;
Amended Eff. July 3, 2008;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. January 9, 2018;
Amended Eff. February 1, 2019;
Recodified from 21 NCAC 16Q .0401 Eff. November 9, 2020;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

21 NCAC 16Q .0505 MINIMAL CONSCIOUS
SEDATION CLINICAL REQUIREMENTS AND
EQUIPMENT
(a) A permit holder administering minimal conscious sedation or
supervising a CRNA employed to administer or RN employed to
deliver minimal conscious sedation shall ensure that the facility
where the sedation is administered meets the following
requirements:
(1) The facility shall be equipped with the
following:
(A) an operatory of size and design to
permit access of emergency
equipment and personnel and to
permit emergency management;
(B) a CPR board or a dental chair without
enhancements, suitable for providing
emergency treatment;
(C) lighting as necessary for specific
procedures and back-up lighting;
(D) suction equipment as necessary for
specific procedures, including non-
electrical back-up suction;
(E) positive pressure oxygen delivery
system, including full face masks for
small, medium, and large patients and
back-up E-cylinder portable oxygen
tank apart from the central system;
(F) small, medium, and large oral and
nasal airways;
(G) blood pressure monitoring device;
(H) pulse oximeter;
(I) automatic external defibrillator
(AED);
(J) thermometer;
(K) tonsillar suction with back-up suction;
and
(L) syringes as necessary for specific
procedures.
(2) The following unexpired drugs shall be
maintained in the facility and with access from
the operatory and recovery rooms:
(A) epinephrine;
(B) oral antihistamine;
(C) bronchodilator;
(D) antihypoglycemic agent;
(E) appropriate reversal agents; and
(F) nitroglycerine.
(3) The permit holder shall maintain written
emergency and patient discharge protocols. The
permit holder shall also provide training to
familiarize auxiliaries in the treatment of
clinical emergencies.
(4) The permit holder shall maintain the following
records for at least 10 years:
(A) patient's current written medical
history and pre-operative assessment;
(B) drugs administered during the
procedure, including route of
administration, dosage, strength, time,
and sequence of administration; and
(C) a sedation record.
(5) The sedation record shall include:
(A) base line vital signs, blood pressure
(unless patient behavior prevents
recording), oxygen saturation, pulse
and respiration rates of the patient
recorded in real time at 15-minute
intervals;
(B) procedure start and end times;
(C) status of patient upon discharge;
(D) documentation of complications or
morbidity; and
(E) a consent form, signed by the patient
or guardian, identifying the procedure,
risks and benefits, level of sedation,
and date signed.
(6) During a sedation procedure, the facility shall
be staffed with at least two BLS certified
A - 64
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
331
auxiliaries, one of whom shall be involved in
patient monitoring. This Subparagraph shall not
apply if the permit holder is dedicated to patient
care and monitoring regarding sedation
throughout the sedation procedure and is not
performing the surgery or other dental
procedure.
(b) During an inspection or evaluation, the applicant or permit
holder shall demonstrate the administration of minimal sedation
on a patient while the evaluator observes. During the
demonstration, the applicant or permit holder shall demonstrate
competency in the following areas:
(1) monitoring blood pressure, pulse, pulse
oximetry, and respiration;
(2) drug dosage and administration;
(3) treatment of untoward reactions, including
respiratory or cardiac depression if applicable;
(4) sterile technique;
(5) use of BLS certified auxiliaries;
(6) monitoring of patient during recovery; and
(7) sufficiency of patient recovery time.
(c) During an inspection or evaluation, the applicant or permit
holder shall demonstrate competency to the evaluator in the
treatment of the following clinical emergencies:
(1) laryngospasm;
(2) bronchospasm;
(3) emesis and aspiration;
(4) respiratory depression and arrest;
(5) angina pectoris;
(6) myocardial infarction;
(7) hypertension and hypotension;
(8) allergic reactions;
(9) convulsions;
(10) syncope;
(11) bradycardia;
(12) hypoglycemia;
(13) cardiac arrest; and
(14) airway obstruction.
(d) During the evaluation, the applicant shall take a written
examination on the topics set forth in Paragraphs (b) and (c) of
this Rule. The applicant must obtain a passing score on the written
examination by answering 80 percent of the examination
questions correctly. If the applicant fails to obtain a passing score
on the written examination that is administered during the
evaluation, he or she may be reexamined in accordance with Rule
.0507(h) of this Section.
(e) A minimal conscious sedation permit holder shall evaluate
each patient for health risks before starting any sedation procedure
as follows:
(1) The permit holder shall review the patient's
current medical history and medication use and,
if the permit holder considers it clinically
necessary, the permit holder shall consult with
the patient's treating medical provider.
(2) A patient who is not medically stable or who is
ASA III or higher shall be evaluated further by
the permit holder's consultation with the
patient's treating primary care physician or
medical specialist regarding the potential risks
posed by the procedure the permit holder plans
to perform.
(f) Post-operative monitoring and discharge:
(1) The permit holder or a BLS certified auxiliary
under his or her direct supervision shall monitor
the patient's vital signs throughout the sedation
procedure until the patient is recovered as
defined in Subparagraph (f)(2) of this Rule and
is ready for discharge from the office.
(2) Recovery from minimal conscious sedation
shall include documentation of the following:
(A) cardiovascular function stable;
(B) airway patency uncompromised;
(C) patient arousable and protective
reflexes intact;
(D) state of hydration within normal
limits;
(E) patient can talk, if applicable;
(F) patient can sit unaided, if applicable;
(G) patient can ambulate, if applicable,
with minimal assistance; and
(H) for the special needs patient or patient
incapable of the usually expected
responses, the pre-sedation level of
responsiveness or the level as close as
possible for that patient shall be
achieved.
(3) Prior to allowing the patient to leave the office,
the permit holder shall determine that the
patient has met the recovery criteria set out in
Subparagraph (f)(2) of this Rule and the
following discharge criteria:
(A) oxygenation, circulation, activity, skin
color, and level of consciousness are
stable and have been documented;
(B) explanation and documentation of
written postoperative instructions
have been provided to the patient or a
person responsible for the patient at
the time of discharge; and
(C) a person authorized by the patient is
available to transport the patient after
discharge.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-28; 90-30.1;
Temporary Adoption Eff. December 11, 2002;
Eff. August 1, 2004;
Amended Eff. July 3, 2008;
Readopted Eff. February 1, 2019;
Recodified from 21 NCAC 16Q .0402 Eff. November 9, 2020;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

21 NCAC 16Q .0506 ANNUAL RENEWAL OF
MINIMAL CONSCIOUS SEDATION PERMIT
REQUIRED
(a) Minimal conscious sedation permits shall be renewed by the
Board annually at the same time as dental licenses by the permit
holder paying a renewal fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00) and
completing the renewal application requirements of this Rule. If
A - 65
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
332
the completed permit renewal application and renewal fee are not
received in the Board's office before midnight on January 31 of
each year, a fifty dollar ($50.00) late fee shall be charged. The
renewal application shall be submitted electronically through the
Board's website, www.ncdentalboard.org, and shall include the
information required by Rule .0102(e) of this Subchapter and a
report of compliance with the conditions for renewal in Paragraph
(d) of this Rule.
(b) Any permit holder who fails to renew a minimal conscious
sedation permit before midnight on March 31 of each year shall
complete a reinstatement application, pay the renewal fee and late
fee set out in Paragraph (a), and comply with all conditions for
renewal set out this Rule. Dentists whose sedation permits have
been lapsed for more than 12 calendar months shall pass an
inspection and an evaluation as part of the reinstatement process
in accordance with Rules .0505 and .0507 of this Section. All
applicants for reinstatement of a permit shall be in good standing.
All applications for reinstatement of a permit shall be submitted
on forms furnished by the Board at www.ncdentalboard.org and
shall include the information required by Rule .0102(f) of this
Subchapter and a report of compliance with the conditions for
renewal set out in Paragraph (d) of this Rule.
(c) A dentist who administers minimal conscious sedation in
violation of this Rule shall be subject to the penalties prescribed
by Rule .0701 of this Subchapter.
(d) As a condition for renewal of the minimal conscious sedation
permit, the permit holder shall meet the clinical and equipment
requirements of Rule .0505 of this Section and shall document the
following:
(1) three hours of continuing education each year
in one or more of the following areas, which
shall be counted toward fulfillment of the
continuing education required each calendar
year for license renewal:
(A) sedation;
(B) medical emergencies;
(C) monitoring sedation and the use of
monitoring equipment;
(D) pharmacology of drugs and agents
used in sedation;
(E) physical evaluation, risk assessment,
or behavioral management; or
(F) airway management;
(2) unexpired ACLS certification, which shall not
count towards the three hours of continuing
education required in Subparagraph (d)(1) of
this Rule;
(3) that the permit holder and all auxiliaries
involved in sedation procedures have read the
practice's emergency manual in the preceding
year; and
(4) that all auxiliaries involved in sedation
procedures have completed BLS certification
and, within the past two years, completed three
hours of continuing education in any of the
areas set forth in Subparagraph (d)(1) of this
Rule.
(e) Absent a Board order stating otherwise, all permit holders
applying for renewal of a minimal conscious sedation permit shall
be in good standing and their office shall be subject to inspection
as set out in Rule .0507 of this Section.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-30.1; 90-31; 90-39;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

21 NCAC 16Q .0507 PROCEDURE FOR MINIMAL
CONSCIOUS SEDATION EVALUATION OR
INSPECTION AND RE-INSPECTION
(a) When an evaluation or on-site inspection is required, the
Board shall designate one or more persons to serve as evaluators,
each of whom has administered sedation or general anesthesia in
accordance with this Subchapter for at least three years preceding
the inspection. Training in minimal conscious sedation or other
levels of sedation shall not be counted in the three years.
(b) The inspection fee set out in Rule .0504(a) of this Section
shall be paid no later than 10 days after the applicant or permit
holder receives notice of the inspection for each additional
location at which the applicant or permit holder administers
minimal conscious sedation.
(c) Any dentist-member of the Board may observe or consult in
any evaluation or inspection.
(d) Each evaluator shall determine compliance with the
requirements of the rules in this Subchapter, as applicable, by
assigning a recommended grade of "pass" or "fail."
(e) Each evaluator shall report his or her recommendation to the
Board through the Board member serving as the Chair of the
Board's Anesthesia and Sedation Committee, setting forth the
details supporting his or her conclusion. The Committee Chair
shall not be bound by these recommendations. The Committee
Chair shall determine whether the applicant or permit holder has
passed the evaluation or inspection and shall notify the applicant
or permit holder in writing of its decision.
(f) An applicant who fails an inspection or evaluation shall not
receive a permit to administer minimal conscious sedation. If a
permit holder's facility fails an inspection, no further minimal
conscious sedation procedures shall be performed at the facility
until it passes a re-inspection by the Board.
(g) An applicant or permit holder who fails an inspection or
evaluation may request a re-evaluation or re-inspection within 15
days of receiving the notice of failure. The request shall be
directed to the Board in writing and shall include a statement of
the grounds supporting the re-evaluation or re-inspection. Except
as set forth in Paragraph (h) of this Rule, the Board shall require
the applicant or permit holder to receive additional training prior
to the re-evaluation to address the areas of deficiency determined
by the evaluation. The Board shall notify the applicant in writing
of the need for additional training.
(h) An applicant who failed the written examination portion of
the evaluation but passed all other aspects of the evaluation and
inspection may retake the written examination two additional
times at the Board office. The applicant must wait a minimum of
72 hours before attempting to retake a written examination. Any
applicant who failed the written portion of the examination three
times shall complete an additional Board-approved course of
study in the areas of deficiency and provide the Board evidence
of the additional study before written reexamination.
A - 66
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
333
(i) Re-evaluations and re-inspections shall be conducted by
Board-appointed evaluators not involved in the failed evaluation
or inspection.
(j) An applicant must satisfy all the requirements of Rule .0505
of this Section, including passing the written examination,
evaluation, and inspection, within 12 months of submitting the
application to the Board.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-30.1; 90-39;
Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CHAPTER 32 - MEDICAL BOARD

21 NCAC 32M .0109 PRESCRIBING AUTHORITY
(a) The prescribing stipulations contained in this Rule apply to
writing prescriptions and ordering the administration of
medications.
(b) Prescribing and dispensing stipulations are as follows:
(1) Drugs and devices that may be prescribed by
the nurse practitioner in each practice site shall
be included in the collaborative practice
agreement as outlined in Rule .0110(2) of this
Section.
(2) Controlled Substances (Schedules II, IIN, III,
IIIN, IV, V) defined by the State and Federal
Controlled Substances Acts may be procured,
prescribed, or ordered as established in the
collaborative practice agreement, providing all
of the following requirements are met:
(A) the nurse practitioner has an assigned
DEA number that is entered on each
prescription for a controlled
substance;
(B) refills may be issued consistent with
Controlled Substance laws and
regulations; and
(C) the primary supervising physician(s)
shall possess a schedule(s) of
controlled substances equal to or
greater than the nurse practitioner's
DEA registration.
(3) The nurse practitioner may prescribe a drug or
device not included in the collaborative practice
agreement only as follows:
(A) upon a specific written or verbal order
obtained from a primary or back-up
supervising physician before the
prescription or order is issued by the
nurse practitioner; and
(B) the written or verbal order as described
in Part (b)(3)(A) of this Rule shall be
entered into the patient record with a
notation that it is issued on the specific
order of a primary or back-up
supervising physician and signed by
the nurse practitioner and the
physician.
(4) Each prescription shall be noted on the patient's
chart and include the following information:
(A) medication and dosage;
(B) amount prescribed;
(C) directions for use;
(D) number of refills; and
(E) signature of nurse practitioner.
(5) Prescription Format:
(A) All prescriptions issued by the nurse
practitioner shall contain the name of
the patient and the nurse practitioner's
name and telephone number;
(B) The nurse practitioner's assigned DEA
number shall be written on the
prescription form when a controlled
substance is prescribed as defined in
Subparagraph (b)(2) of this Rule.
(6) A nurse practitioner shall not prescribe
controlled substances, as defined by the State
and Federal Controlled Substances Acts, for the
following:
(A) nurse practitioner's own use;
(B) nurse practitioner's supervising
physician;
(C) a member of the nurse practitioner's
immediate family, which shall mean a:
(i) spouse;
(ii) parent;
(iii) child;
(iv) sibling;
(v) parent-in-law;
(vi) son or daughter-in-law;
(vii) brother or sister-in-law;
(viii) step-parent;
(ix) step-child; or
(x) step-siblings;
(D) any other person living in the same
residence as the licensee; or
(E) anyone with whom the nurse
practitioner is having a physical,
sexual, or emotionally intimate
relationship.
(c) The nurse practitioner may obtain approval to dispense the
drugs and devices other than samples included in the collaborative
practice agreement for each practice site from the Board of
Pharmacy, and dispense in accordance with 21 NCAC 46 .1703
that is hereby incorporated by reference including subsequent
amendments.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-5.1(a)(3); 90-18(c)(14); 90-
18.2;
Eff. February 1, 1991;
Recodified from 21 NCAC 32M .0106 Eff. January 1, 1996;
Amended Eff. December 1, 2012; April 1, 2011; November 1,
2008; August 1, 2004; May 1, 1999; January 1, 1996; September
1, 1994; March 1, 1994;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. March 1, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; March 1, 2017.
A - 67
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
334
21 NCAC 32M .0117 REPORTING CRITERIA
(a) The Department of Health and Human Services
("Department") may report to the North Carolina Board of
Nursing ("Board") information regarding the prescribing practices
of those nurse practitioners ("prescribers") whose prescribing:
(1) falls within the top two percent of those
prescribing 100 morphine milligram
equivalents ("MME") per patient per day; or
(2) falls within the top two percent of those
prescribing 100 MMEs per patient per day in
combination with any benzodiazepine and who
are within the top one percent of all controlled
substance prescribers by volume.
(b) In addition, the Department may report to the Board
information regarding prescribers who have had two or more
patient deaths in the preceding 12 months due to opioid poisoning
where the prescribers authorized more than 30 tablets of an opioid
to the decedent and the prescriptions were written within 60 days
of the patient deaths.
(c) In addition, the Department may report to the Board
information regarding prescribers who meet three or more of the
following criteria, if there are a minimum of five patients for each
criterion:
(1) at least 25 percent of the prescriber's patients
receiving opioids reside 100 miles or greater
from the prescriber's practice location;
(2) the prescriber had more than 25 percent of
patients receiving the same opioids and
benzodiazepine combination;
(3) the prescriber had 75 percent of patients
receiving opioids self-pay for the prescriptions;
(4) the prescriber had 90 percent or more of
patients in a three-month period that received
an opioid prescription that overlapped with
another opioid prescription for at least one
week;
(5) more than 50 percent of the prescriber's patients
received opioid doses of 100 MME or greater
per day excluding office-based treatment
medications; and
(6) the prescriber had at least 25 percent of patients
who used three or more pharmacies within a
three-month period to obtain opioids regardless
of the prescriber.
(d) The Department may submit these reports to the Board upon
request and may include the information described in G.S. 90-
113.73(b).
(e) The reports and communications between the Department and
the Board shall remain confidential pursuant to G.S. 90-113.74.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-5.1(a)(3); 90-113.74;
Eff. April 1, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021; May 1, 2018.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CHAPTER 36 – BOARD OF NURSING

21 NCAC 36 .0809 PRESCRIBING AUTHORITY
(a) The prescribing stipulations contained in this Rule apply to
writing prescriptions and ordering the administration of
medications.
(b) Prescribing and dispensing stipulations are as follows:
(1) Drugs and devices that may be prescribed by
the nurse practitioner in each practice site shall
be included in the collaborative practice
agreement as outlined in Rule .0810(2) of this
Section.
(2) Controlled Substances (Schedules II, IIN, III,
IIIN, IV, V) defined by the State and Federal
Controlled Substances Acts may be procured,
prescribed, or ordered as established in the
collaborative practice agreement, providing all
of the following requirements are met:
(A) the nurse practitioner has an assigned
DEA number that is entered on each
prescription for a controlled
substance;
(B) refills may be issued consistent with
Controlled Substance laws and
regulations; and
(C) the primary supervising physician(s)
shall possess a schedule(s) of
controlled substances equal to or
greater than the nurse practitioner's
DEA registration.
(3) The nurse practitioner may prescribe a drug or
device not included in the collaborative practice
agreement only as follows:
(A) upon a specific written or verbal order
obtained from a primary or back-up
supervising physician before the
prescription or order is issued by the
nurse practitioner; and
(B) the written or verbal order as described
in Part (b)(3)(A) of this Rule shall be
entered into the patient record with a
notation that it is issued on the specific
order of a primary or back-up
supervising physician and signed by
the nurse practitioner and the
physician.
(4) Each prescription shall be noted on the patient's
chart and include the following information:
(A) medication and dosage;
(B) amount prescribed;
(C) directions for use;
(D) number of refills; and
(E) signature of nurse practitioner.
(5) Prescription Format:
(A) all prescriptions issued by the nurse
practitioner shall contain the name of
the patient and the nurse practitioner's
name and telephone number;
(B) the nurse practitioner's assigned DEA
number shall be written on the
prescription form when a controlled
A - 68
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
335
substance is prescribed as defined in
Subparagraph (b)(2) of this Rule.
(6) A nurse practitioner shall not prescribe
controlled substances, as defined by the State
and Federal Controlled Substances Acts, for the
following:
(A) nurse practitioner's own use;
(B) nurse practitioner's supervising
physician;
(C) member of the nurse practitioner's
immediate family, which shall mean a:
(i) spouse;
(ii) parent;
(iii) child;
(iv) sibling;
(v) parent-in-law;
(vi) son or daughter-in-law;
(vii) brother or sister-in-law;
(viii) step-parent;
(ix) step-child; or
(x) step-siblings;
(D) any other person living in the same
residence as the licensee; or
(E) anyone with whom the nurse
practitioner is having a physical,
sexual, or emotionally intimate
relationship.
(c) The nurse practitioner may obtain approval to dispense the
drugs and devices other than samples included in the collaborative
practice agreement for each practice site from the Board of
Pharmacy, and dispense in accordance with 21 NCAC 46 .1703
that is hereby incorporated by reference including subsequent
amendments.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-8.1; 90-8.2; 90-18.2; 90-
18(c)(14); 90-171.23(b)(14);
Recodified from 21 NCAC 36 .0227(h) Eff. August 1, 2004;
Amended Eff. March 1, 2017; December 1, 2012; April 1, 2011;
November 1, 2008; August 1, 2004;
Readopted Eff. January 1, 2019;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CHAPTER 46 – BOARD OF PHARMACY

21 NCAC 46 .2801 COMPOUNDING
(a) A pharmacy may dispense a compounded drug preparation to
a patient only pursuant to a prescription that is valid and complies
with all requirements of the law, including 21 NCAC 46 .1801. In
advance of dispensing the compounded drug preparation, a
pharmacy shall prepare the compounded drug preparation only:
(1) upon the pharmacy's receipt of a valid
prescription order for an individual patient; or
(2) in anticipation of a prescription order based on
an established history of receiving prescription
orders for the compounded drug preparation.
Any compounded drug preparation prepared in
anticipation of a prescription order shall not be
dispensed until the pharmacy receives a valid
prescription order for an individual patient.
(b) Compounded drug preparations shall not be offered to other
entities for resale.
(c) A pharmacy may supply compounded drug products to
practitioners authorized by law to prescribe drugs for those
practitioners to administer to those practitioners' patients. Such
compounding for office use shall comply with applicable federal
law.
(d) The preparation, labeling, and dispensing of non-sterile
compounded drug preparations shall comply with the standards
established by United States Pharmacopeia chapter <795>,
including all United States Pharmacopeia chapters and standards
incorporated into chapter <795> by reference and including all
subsequent amendments and editions of the same, governing both
the non-sterile compounded drug preparations and the physical
and environmental conditions under which non-sterile
compounded drug preparations are prepared, labeled, and
dispensed.
(e) The preparation, labeling, and dispensing of sterile
compounded preparations shall comply with standards
established by United States Pharmacopeia chapter <797>,
including all United States Pharmacopeia chapters and standards
incorporated into chapter <797> by reference and including all
subsequent amendments and editions of the same, governing both
the sterile compounded products and the physical and
environmental conditions under which sterile compounded
products are prepared, labeled, and dispensed.
(f) A pharmacy that prepares, labels, or dispenses sterile
compounded preparations shall maintain a reference library in the
pharmacy including the current United States Pharmacopeia
standards and references on the compatibility, stability, storage,
handling, and preparation of compounded drugs. These references
may be either hard copy or electronically accessible.
(g) In a pharmacy where compounded drug preparations are
prepared, labeled, or dispensed, the pharmacist-manager or the
pharmacist-manager's designated pharmacist shall be
knowledgeable in the specialized functions of preparing, labeling,
and dispensing compounded drug preparations. If the pharmacist-
manager chooses to designate another pharmacist for this purpose,
the pharmacist-manager shall notify the Board on the pharmacy's
permit application and within 15 days of any change in the
designation. Notwithstanding the pharmacist-manager's
designation of another pharmacist as knowledgeable in the
specialized functions of preparing, labeling, and dispensing
compounded drug preparations, the pharmacist-manager shall be
responsible for ensuring the pharmacy's compliance with all
statutes, rules, and standards that govern such activities.
(h) In addition to complying with all recordkeeping and labeling
requirements specified or referred to by United States
Pharmacopeia chapters <795> or <797>, a pharmacy that
prepares, labels, or dispenses compounded drug preparations shall
create and maintain a record-keeping system that enables the
pharmacy immediately upon request to identify every
compounded drug preparation prepared, labeled, or dispensed in
the past three years. This recordkeeping system may be created
and maintained electronically in compliance with 21 NCAC 46
.2508.
A - 69
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
336
(i) The pharmacist-manager of a pharmacy that prepares, labels,
or dispenses compounded drug preparations shall comply with all
quality assurance requirements and standards of United States
Pharmacopeia chapters <795> and <797>.
(j) Between January 1 and March 31 of each year, any pharmacy
permitted by the Board that has prepared, labeled, or dispensed
any compounded drug (for any patient or other person, either
within or outside North Carolina) during the immediately
preceding calendar year shall update all information regarding its
services in the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy's e-
Profile Connect system at https://dashboard.nabp.pharmacy.
(k) In addition to the requirements of this Section, the
compounding of radiopharmaceutical drug products shall comply
with Section .2700 of this Chapter.
(l) United States Pharmacopeia chapters <795> or <797> may be
inspected at the offices of the Board during its normal hours of
operation. Copies also may be obtained from the U.S.
Pharmacopeial Convention (www.usp.org), as a free download as
of the effective date of the last amendment to this Rule.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-85.6; 90-85.21A; 90-85.26;
90-85.32;
Eff. October 1, 1990;
Amended Eff. January 1, 2015; April 1, 2003;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. October 3, 2017;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CHAPTER 48 – BOARD OF PHYSICAL THERAPY
EXAMINERS

21 NCAC 48D .0107 PERSONS REFUSED
EXAMINATION PERMISSION
(a) The Board shall refuse permission to take the examination to
any person who:
(1) Does not meet the requirements as set forth in
the Physical Therapy Practice Act;
(2) Furnishes false information to the Board on the
application; or
(3) Fails to furnish personal background
information as required by these Rules.
(b) The Board and Federation have authority to approve an
applicant's exam eligibility. The Board shall approve exam
eligibility for foreign-trained applicants. The Federation shall
grant exam eligibility for all other applicants as set forth in
National Physical Therapy Examination policies, which are
available free of charge at the Board's office and at
www.fsbpt.org.
(c) Any applicant who is refused permission to take the
examination shall be entitled to petition the Board for a contested
case hearing pursuant to Subchapter 48G, Section .0500 of this
Chapter.
(d) Any applicant who is refused permission to take the
examination by the Federation has the option to appeal using the
policies set forth in Paragraph (b) of this Rule.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-270.92; 90-270.95; 90-
270.97; 90-270.100; 90-270.103;
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. September 30, 1977;
Amended Eff. December 1, 2006; August 1, 2002; December 30,
1985;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 1, 2018;
Temporary Amendment Eff. September 25, 2020;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

21 NCAC 48D .0109 RETAKING EXAMINATION
(a) Arrangements for Retake. To retake the examination, the
applicant shall notify the Board in writing, and pay the retake fee
as specified in 21 NCAC 48F .0102. The examination cost as set
forth by the Federation (www.fsbpt.org) is hereby incorporated by
reference and includes subsequent amendments and editions. If
the Federation approves exam eligibility, the Federation shall
administer the retake process according to NPTE policies, which
may be found at www.fsbpt.org.
(b) Limitations. An applicant shall be limited to taking the
examination the number of times allowed by the Federation as
indicated on the Federation's website (www.fsbpt.org).

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-270.92; 90-270.95; 90-
270.97; 90-270.100;
Emergency Regulation Eff. July 23, 1979, for a period of 120 days
to expire on November 20, 1979;
Made Permanent Eff. November 20, 1979;
Amended Eff. February 1, 2015; February 1, 1996; November 1,
1993; August 1, 1988; May 1, 1988;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 1, 2018;
Temporary Amendment Eff. September 25, 2020;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

21 NCAC 48D .0111 APPLICANTS WITH SPECIAL
NEEDS
Examination candidates who need special accommodations for
the examination as a result of a medical or physical disability shall
file an Accommodation Request Form and supporting
documentation with the Executive Director at least 60 days before
the examination date in order for the request to be considered by
the Board. If the Federation grants exam eligibility, the
accommodation request shall be made pursuant to Federation
testing accommodation policy, which may be found at
www.fsbpt.org.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-270.92; P.L. 101-336;
Eff. October 1, 1995;
Amended Eff. February 1, 1996;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 1, 2018;
Temporary Amendment Eff. September 25, 2020;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

A - 70
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
337
21 NCAC 48E .0101 FILING APPLICATION AND
BOARD DETERMINATION OF EXAM ELIGIBILITY
(a) An applicant for licensure shall ensure that his or her
credentials are filed with the Executive Director in accordance
with the rules of this Subchapter.
(b) Applicants pursuant to G.S. 90-270.97 shall submit all
application requirements to the Executive Director at least 30 days
prior to the examination.
(c) The Board shall not approve an application until the applicant
has graduated as defined by 21 NCAC 48A .0105(6).

History Note: Authority G.S. 90-270.92; 90-270.95; 90-
270.98(b);
Eff. February 1, 1976;
Readopted Eff. September 30, 1977;
Amended Eff. May 1, 1988; December 30, 1985; October 28,
1979;
Recodified Paragraph (c) to 21 NCAC 48C .0501 Eff. January 25,
1989;
Amended Eff. July 1, 2013; August 1, 1998; February 1, 1996;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. May 1,
2018;
Amended Eff. May 1, 2020;
Temporary Amendment Eff. September 25, 2020;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CHAPTER 63 - SOCIAL WORK CERTIFICATION
BOARD

21 NCAC 63 .0211 WORK EXPERIENCE
(a) Qualifications as required by G.S. 90B-7(d)(2) for the
Licensed Clinical Social Worker (LCSW) credential:
(1) Two years of post-MSW clinical social work
experience shall mean 3,000 clock hours of
work or employment for a fee or salary while
engaged in the practice of clinical social work
as defined in G.S. 90B-3(6). The 3,000 hours
shall be accumulated over a period of time not
less than two years nor more than six
consecutive years. Practicum or internship
experience gained as part of any educational
program shall not be included. Pursuant to G.S.
93B-15.1(a), military applicants may receive
credit for military occupational specialty
experience obtained post MSW degree and
deemed substantially equivalent to clinical
social work practice as defined in this Chapter.
(2) Appropriate supervision shall mean supervision
by a MSW who is also a Licensed Clinical
Social Worker and who is in good standing with
the Board. A supervisor disciplined by any
professional credentialing body or professional
organization by legal order, or who has been
found by legal order to have violated the
provisions of an occupational licensing Board
may not provide supervision to an associate
licensee without the written permission of the
Board. The Licensed Clinical Social Worker
Associate's (LCSWA) clinical social work
supervisor shall have an additional two years of
clinical social work experience post LCSW
licensure.
(3) Appropriate supervision shall be that which is
provided on a regular basis, conducted no less
than once every two weeks, with at least one
hour of supervision during every 30 hours of
experience. A minimum of 100 hours of
supervision is required. All work experience
must be clinical social work as defined by G.S.
90B-3(6) to qualify as work experience for
purposes of G.S. 90B-7(d)(2). Appropriate
supervision may be individual or group
supervision. Individual supervision shall mean
one on one, face-to-face supervision by a MSW
who is also a LCSW where the supervisor
reviews and discusses clinical social work
cases, reviews documentation, and provides
evaluative comments and direction to the
LCSWA. Group supervision shall mean face-
to-face supervision provided by a MSW who is
also a LCSW in a group setting, during which
the supervisor reviews and discusses clinical
social work cases, reviews documentation, and
provides feedback and direction to each
LCSWA in the group. A maximum of 25 hours
of group supervision may be applied toward
meeting the supervision requirements for the
LCSW.
(4) Unless otherwise preapproved by the Board, no
more than 50 hours of supervision may be
provided through the use of technology. The
clinical supervisor may seek approval by
providing a written request to the Board. The
request shall include the parties' information,
including name, license number, and business
address; and the circumstances for which the
additional hours are needed. Approval of the
request shall be determined on a case by case
basis, based upon the circumstances provided in
the request. All supervision provided through
the use of technology shall be synchronous,
involve visual and audio interactions
throughout the entire session, and shall take
place in such a manner as to maintain the
confidentiality of the communication.
(b) Qualifications as required by G.S. 90B-7(e)(2) for the
Certified Social Work Manager (CSWM) credential:
(1) Two years of post social work degree
experience shall mean 3,000 clock hours of
employment for a salary while engaged in
administrative social work duties including,
policy and budgetary development and
implementation, supervision and management,
program evaluation, planning, and staff
development. Such duties shall be carried out in
A - 71
APPROVED RULES

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
338
an administrative setting where social work or
other mental health services are delivered. The
3,000 hours shall be accumulated over a period
of time not less than two years nor more than
six consecutive years. Practicum or internship
experience gained as part of any educational
program shall not be included.
(2) Appropriate supervision shall mean face-to-
face supervision by a social work administrator
certified or licensed by the Board who has a
minimum of two years of administrative
experience in a social work or mental health
setting. Appropriate supervision shall be that
which is provided on a regular basis, conducted
no less than once every two weeks throughout
the applicant's two years of administrative
social work experience. A minimum of 100
hours of supervision is required. A maximum of
50 hours of group supervision may be applied
toward meeting the supervision requirements
for the CSWM. No more than 50 hours of
supervision may be provided through the use of
technology. All supervision provided through
the use of technology shall be synchronous,
involve visual and audio interaction throughout
the entire session, and shall take place in such a
manner as to maintain the confidentiality of the
communication.

History Note: Authority G.S. 90B-6; 90B-7;
Temporary Adoption Eff. October 1, 1999;
Eff. July 1, 2000;
Amended Eff. October 1, 2012; January 1, 2009; September 1,
2005;
Readopted Eff. February 1, 2017;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

TITLE 26 - OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

26 NCAC 01 .0103 COST TO PUBLIC
(a) Copies of any public records filed in the Office of
Administrative Hearings are available at the "actual cost" as
defined in G.S. 132-6.2(b). The Office of Administrative
Hearings shall provide its "actual cost" on the Office of
Administrative Hearings website.
(b) There is no charge to the requesting party unless the actual
cost is equal to or exceeds ten dollars ($10.00).

History Note: Authority G.S. 7A-751; 132-6.2; 150B-19;
150B-21.25; 150B-37;
Eff. August 1, 1986;
Amended Eff. April 1, 1990; January 1, 1989;
Recodified from 26 NCAC 1 .0001 Eff. January 1, 1991;
Amended Eff. April 1, 2009; May 1, 2001; August 1, 2000;
February 1, 1994; August 2, 1993;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. July 23, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

26 NCAC 03 .0123 OFFICIAL RECORD
(a) The official record of a contested case shall be available for
public inspection upon request. An administrative law judge may,
consistent with law, order all or part of an official record sealed.
(b) The official record shall be prepared in accordance with G.S.
150B-37(a).
(c) Contested case hearings shall be recorded either by a hearing
assistant provided by the Office of Administrative Hearings or a
court reporter listed by the North Carolina Administrative Office
of the Courts as authorized and approved to prepare transcripts of
proceedings held in the courts of all counties procured directly by
one or more parties to the contested case.
(d) If a contested case hearing is cancelled, the party responsible
for the cancellation shall provide a 24-hour cancellation notice to
the other parties in all cases in which a hearing assistant is
provided by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
(e) Transcripts of proceedings held in the Office of
Administrative Hearings shall be made only upon request of a
party. When proceedings are recorded by a court reporter,
transcript requests shall be made directly to the court reporter.
When proceedings are recorded by a hearing assistant, transcript
requests shall be made directly to a transcriptionist listed by the
North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts as authorized
and approved to prepare transcripts of proceedings held in the
courts of all counties.
(f) A party who orders a transcript shall use an Office of
Administrative Hearings Transcript Contract form to order the
transcript, which shall include the following information:
(1) case name and number;
(2) requestor information; and
(3) transcriptionist information.
That form is available on the Office of Administrative Hearings
website at https://www.oah.nc.gov and may be obtained from the
Chief Hearings Clerk upon request. The party ordering the
transcript shall file the transcript contract with the Office of
Administrative Hearings and shall serve the transcript contract on
all other parties and the transcriptionist. The transcriptionist shall
deliver the transcript to the parties and file the transcript with the
Office of Administrative Hearings by email to
[e-mail] in PDF format no later than 30 days after
having been served with the transcript contract.
(g) Copies of recordings made by a hearing assistant are available
upon written request at a cost set out in 26 NCAC 01 .0103.

History Note: Authority G.S. 7A-751; 150B-37;
Eff. August 1, 1986;
Amended Eff. August 1, 1998; April 1, 1990; February 1, 1989;
November 1, 1987;
September 1, 1986;
Recodified from Rule .0122 Eff. August 1, 2000;
Amended Eff. April 1, 2009;
Pursuant to G.S. 150B-21.3A, rule is necessary without
substantive public interest Eff. July 23, 2016;
Amended Eff. August 1, 2021.

A - 72
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
339
This Section contains information for the meeting of the Rules Review Commission September 16, 2021 at 1711 New Hope
Church Road, RRC Commission Room, Raleigh, NC. Anyone wishing to submit written comment on any rule before the
Commission should submit those comments to the RRC staff, the agency, and the individual Commissioners. Specific
instructions and addresses may be obtained from the Rules Review Commission at 984-236-1850. Anyone wishing to address
the Commission should notify the RRC staff and the agency no later than 5:00 p.m. of the 2nd business day before the meeting.
Please refer to RRC rules codified in 26 NCAC 05.

RULES REVIEW COMMISSION MEMBERS

Appointed by Senate Appointed by House
Jeanette Doran (Chair) Anna Baird Choi (1st Vice Chair)
Robert A. Bryan, Jr. Andrew P. Atkins (2nd Vice Chair)
Margaret Currin
Jeff Hyde
Paul Powell
Randy Overton
Robert A. Rucho Barbara A. Jackson

COMMISSION COUNSEL
Amber Cronk May 984-236-1936
Amanda Reeder 984-236-1939

RULES REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING DATES
September 16, 2021 October 21, 2021
November 18, 2021 December 16, 2021

AGENDA
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2021, 9:00 A.M.
1711 New Hope Church Rd., Raleigh, NC 27609
I. Ethics reminder by the chair as set out in G.S. 138A-15(e)
II. Approval of the minutes from the last meeting
III. Follow-up matters
A. Social Services Commission – 10A NCAC 71U .0101, .0201, .0203, .0204, .0205, .0206, .0207, .0209,
.0210, .0211, .0212, .0213, .0214, .0215, .0216, .0302, .0303, .0401, .0402; 71V .0102, .0103, .0104, .0105,
.0106, .0107, .0108, .0201, .0202, .0203, .0204, .0205; 71W .0101, .0302, .0303, .0304, .0403, .0404,
.0405, .0407, .0408, .0410, .0412, .0413, .0502, .0503, .0601, .0602, .0603, .0604, .0605, .0606, .0607,
.0704 (May)
B. Building Code Council - 2020 Electrical Code (Reeder)
IV. Review of Log of Filings (Permanent Rules) for rules filed between July 21, 2021 through August 20, 2021
• Board of Elections (Reeder)
• Child Care Commission (Reeder)
• Medical Care Commission (Reeder)
• DHHS - Division of Health Benefits (Reeder)
• Commission for Public Health 10A (Reeder)
• Department of Insurance (Reeder)
• Wildlife Resources Commission (Reeder)
• Commission for Public Health 15A (May)
• Department of Transportation - Division of Motor Vehicles (May)
• Board of Funeral Service (May)
• Social Work Certification and Licensure Board (Reeder)
V. Review of Log of Filings (Temporary Rules) for any rule filed within 15 business days prior to the RRC Meeting
VI. Existing Rules Review
VII. Commission Business
• Next meeting: October 21, 2021
A - 73
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
340

Commission Review
Log of Permanent Rule Filings
July 21, 2021 through August 20, 2021

BOARD OF ELECTIONS
The rules in chapter 06 concern partisan elections.

The rules in subchapter 06b concern ballots.
Arrangement of Official Ballots
Amend* 08 NCAC 06B .0103
CHILD CARE COMMISSION
The rules in Chapter 9 are child care rules and include definitions (.0100); general provisions related to licensing (.0200);
procedures for obtaining a license (.0300); issuance of provisional and temporary licenses (.0400); age and
developmentally appropriate environments for centers (.0500); safety requirements for child care centers (.0600); staff
qualifications (.0700); health standards for children (.0800); nutrition standards (.0900); transportation standards
(.1000); continuing education and professional development (.1100); building code requirements for child care centers
(.1300); space requirements (.1400); temporary care requirements (.1500); family child care home requirements (.1700);
discipline (.1800); special procedures concerning abuse/neglect in child care (.1900); rulemaking and contested case
procedures (.2000); religious-sponsored child care center requirements (.2100); administrative actions and civil
penalties (.2200); forms (.2300); child care for mildly ill children (.2400); care for school-age children (.2500); child care
for children who are medically fragile (.2600); criminal records checks (.2700); voluntary rated licenses (.2800);
developmental day services (.2900); NC pre-kindergarten services (.3000); and care for school-age children during
state of emergency(.3100).
NC Pre-K Teacher Assistant Education and Credentials
Amend* 10A NCAC 09 .3013
Scope
Adopt* 10A NCAC 09 .3101
Definitions
Adopt* 10A NCAC 09 .3102
Public Schools
Adopt* 10A NCAC 09 .3103
Adding Space at Licensed Centers for Care of School-Age C...
Adopt* 10A NCAC 09 .3104
MEDICAL CARE COMMISSION
The rules in Chapter 13 are from the NC Medical Care Commission.

The rules in Subchapter 13D are rules for the licensing of nursing homes including general information (.2000); licensure
(.2100); general standards of administration (.2200); patient and resident care and services (.2300); medical records
(.2400); physician's services (.2500); pharmaceutical services (.2600); dietary services (.2700); activities, recreation
and social services (.2800); special requirements (.2900); specially designated units (.3000); design and construction
(.3100); functional requirements (.3200); fire and safety requirements (.3300); and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing
requirements (.3400).
Definitions
Amend* 10A NCAC 13D .2001
A - 74
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
341
The rules in Subchapter 13K concern hospice licensing rules including general information (.0100); license (.0200);
administration (.0300); personnel (.0400); scope of services (.0500); patient/family care (.0600); patient/family care plan
(.0700); pharmaceutical and medical treatment orders and administration (.0800); medical records (.0900); evaluation
(.1000); hospice residential care (.1100); and hospice inpatient care (.1200).
Resident Care Areas
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1109
Design and Construction
Amend* 10A NCAC 13K .1112
Plans and Specifications
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1113
Plumbing
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1114
Waste Disposal
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1115
Application of Physical Plant Requirements
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1116
Requirements for Hospice Inpatient Units
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1201
Additional Patient Care Area Requirements for Hospice Inp...
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1204
Furnishings for Hospice Inpatient Care
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1205
Hospice Inpatient Fire and Safety Requirements
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1206
Hospice Inpatient Requirements for Heating/Air Conditioning
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1207
Hospice Inpatient Requirements for Emergency Electrical S...
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1208
Hospice Inpatient Requirements for General Electrical
Amend* 10A NCAC 13K .1209
Other Hospice Inpatient Requirements
Amend* 10A NCAC 13K .1210
Additional Plumbing Requirements for Hospice Inpatient Units
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1211
Application of Physical Plant Requirements
Readopt with Changes* 10A NCAC 13K .1212
HHS - HEALTH BENEFITS, DIVISION OF
The rules in Chapter 23 concern medical assistance administration.

The rules in Subchapter 23B concern benefits.
Issuance
Amend* 10A NCAC 23B .0102
PUBLIC HEALTH, COMMISSION FOR
The rules in Chapter 41 concern epidemiology health. The rules in Subchapter 41A deal with communicable disease
control and include reporting of communicable diseases (.0100); control measures for communicable diseases including
special control measures (.0200-.0300); immunization (.0400); purchase and distribution of vaccine (.0500); special
A - 75
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
342
program/project funding (.0600); licensed nursing home services (.0700); communicable disease grants and contracts
(.0800); and biological agent registry (.0900).
Reporting of COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Results
Adopt* 10A NCAC 41A .0107
Handling and Transportation of Bodies
Amend* 10A NCAC 41A .0212
INSURANCE, DEPARTMENT OF
The rules in Chapter 04 are from the Consumer Services Division including general provisions (.0100); market conduct
examination section (.0200); life: accident and health (.0300); property and liability (.0400); and life insurance
illustrations (.0500).
Division Procedures
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0115
Inquiries and Information
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0116
Statement of Action
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0117
Insurance Carriers as Lenders
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0118
Insurer Defined
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0119
Policy or Service Fees
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0120
Premium Payment Receipts
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0121
Power-of-Attorney
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0122
Use of Specific Company Name in Responses
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0123
Insurance Company Contact Persons
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0124
Information Used in Claim Settlements
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0312
Provisions of Contracts
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0313
Premium Notices: Payments and Refunds
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0314
Issuance of Contracts
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0315
Contestability Clause and Rescission
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0316
Sex Discrimination: Life: Accident and Health Insurance
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0317
Life Insurance Sales: Financing First Year Premium
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0318
Claims Practices: Life: Accident and Health Insurance
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0319
Student Loans
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0320
Safe Driver Incentive Plan 11 NCAC 04 .0415
A - 76
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
343
Readopt without Changes*
Billing Procedures for Automobile Insurance
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0416
Drive-In Claim Service Facilities
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0417
Written Confirmation of Oral Agreements
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0420
Cancellation of Insurance
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0422
Ethical Standards
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0423
Like Kind and Quality
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0426
Disclosure Requirements
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0427
Commingling
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0429
Proof of Mailing; Automobile Insurance
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0430
Definition of Claimant
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0431
Refund of Excess Premium on Scheduled Items
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0432
Refund of Auto Insurance Premium on New Business
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0433
Scope and Definitions
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0501
Assumed Expenses and Current Scale
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0502
Illustrated Policies
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0503
General Rules
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0504
Standards and Basic Illustrations
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0505
Standards for Supplemental Illustrations
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0506
Delivery of Illustration and Record Retention
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0507
Annual Reports and Notices to Policy Owners
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0508
Annual Certifications
Readopt without Changes* 11 NCAC 04 .0509
WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION
The rules in Subchapter 10C cover inland fishing including jurisdictional issues involving the Marine Fisheries
Commission (.0100); general rules (.0200); game fish (.0300); non-game fish (.0400); primary nursery areas (.0500);
and anadromous fish spawning areas (.0600).
Manner of Taking Inland Game Fishes
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0302
Flounder, Sea Trout, and Red Drum 15A NCAC 10C .0307
A - 77
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
344
Readopt without Changes*
Muskellunge
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0309
Pickerel
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0310
Roanoke and rock bass
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0311
Sauger
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0312
Sunfish
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0315
Walleye
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0317
White Perch
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0319
Yellow Perch
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0320
Scope and Purpose
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0501
Primary Nursery Areas Defined
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0502
Descriptive Boundaries
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0503
Scope and Purpose
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0601
Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas Defined
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0602
Descriptive Boundaries
Readopt without Changes* 15A NCAC 10C .0603
The rules in Subchapter 10F cover motorboats and water safety including boat registration (.0100); safety equipment
and accident reports (.0200); and local water safety regulations covering speed limits, no-wake restrictions, restrictions
on swimming and other activities, and placement of markers for designated counties or municipalities (.0300).
Stanly County
Amend* 15A NCAC 10F .0317
Montgomery County
Amend* 15A NCAC 10F .0327
Rowan County
Amend* 15A NCAC 10F .0329
The rules in Subchapter 10I concern endangered and threatened species.
Endangered Species Listed
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 10I .0103
Threatened Species Listed
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 10I .0104
Special Concern Species Listed
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 10I .0105
PUBLIC HEALTH, COMMISSION FOR
The rules in Chapter 18 cover environmental aspects of health such as sanitation (18A), mosquito control (18B), water
supplies (18C), and water treatment facility operators (18D). The rules in Subchapter 18A deal with sanitation and
A - 78
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
345
include handling, packing and shipping of crustacean meat (.0100) and shellfish (.0300 and .0400); operation of
shellstock plants and reshippers (.0500); shucking and packing plants (.0600); depuration mechanical purification
facilities (.0700); wet storage of shellstock (.0800); shellfish growing waters (.0900); summer camps (.1000); grade A
milk (.1200); hospitals, nursing homes, rest homes, etc. (.1300); mass gatherings (.1400); local confinement facilities
(.1500); residential care facilities (.1600); protection of water supplies (.1700); lodging places (.1800); sewage treatment
and disposal systems (.1900); migrant housing (.2100); bed and breakfast homes (.2200); delegation of authority to
enforce rules (.2300); public, private and religious schools (.2400); public swimming pools (.2500); restaurants, meat
markets, and other food handling establishments (.2600); child day care facilities (.2800); restaurant and lodging fee
collection program (.2900); bed and breakfast inns (.3000); lead poisoning prevention (.3100); tattooing (.3200); adult
day service facilities (.3300); primitive camps (.3500); rules governing the sanitation of resident camps (.3600); and
private drinking water well sampling (.3800).
Scope
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1934
Definitions
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1935
Permits
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1937
Responsibilities
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1938
Site Evaluation
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1939
Topography and Landscape Position
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1940
Soil Characteristics (Morphology)
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1941
Soil Wetness Conditions
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1942
Soil Depth
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1943
Restrictive Horizons
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1944
Available Space
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1945
Other Applicable Factors
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1946
Determination of Overall Site Suitability
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1947
Site Classification
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1948
Sewage Flow Rates for Design Units
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1949
Location of Sanitary Sewage Systems
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1950
Applicability of Rules
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1951
Septic Tank, Effluent Filter, Dosing Tank and Lift Station...
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1952
Prefabricated Septic Tanks and Pump Tanks
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1953
Minimum Standards for Precast Reinforced Concrete Tanks
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1954
Design Installation Criteria for Conventional Sewage Systems 15A NCAC 18A .1955
A - 79
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
346
Repeal*
Modifications to Septic Tank Systems
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1956
Criteria for Design of Alternative Sewage
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1957
Non-Ground Absorption Sewage Treatment Systems
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1958
Privy Construction
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1959
Maintenance of Privies
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1960
Maintenance of Sewage Systems
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1961
Applicability
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1962
Interpretation and Technical Assistance
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1964
Appeals Procedure
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1965
Severability
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1966
Injunctions
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1967
Penalties
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1968
Approval and Permitting of On-Site Subsurface Wastewater ...
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1969
Advanced Wastewater Pretreatment System
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1970
Engineered Option Permit
Repeal* 15A NCAC 18A .1971
General - Adoption by Reference
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 18A .2650
Definitions
Amend* 15A NCAC 18A .2651
Management and Personnel
Amend* 15A NCAC 18A .2652
Food
Amend* 15A NCAC 18A .2653
Equipment, Utensils, and Linens
Amend* 15A NCAC 18A .2654
Water, Plumbing, and Waste
Amend* 15A NCAC 18A .2655
Inspections and Reinspections
Amend* 15A NCAC 18A .2661
General Requirements for Pushcarts and Mobile Food Units
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 18A .2670
Limited Food Service Establishments
Readopt with Changes* 15A NCAC 18A .2674
The rules in Subchapter 18E concern wastewater treatment and dispersal systems including general provisions (.0100);
permits (.0200); responsibilities (.0300); design daily flow and effluent characteristics (.0400); soil and site evaluation
A - 80
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
347
(.0500); location of wastewater systems (.0600); collection sewers, raw sewage lift stations, and pipe materials (.0700);
tank capacity, leak testing, and installation requirements (.0800); subsurface dispersal (.0900); non-ground absorption
wastewater treatment systems (.1000); system dosing and controls (.1100); advanced pretreatment systems standards,
siting, and sizing criteria (.1200); operation and maintenance (.1300); approval of tanks, risers, effluent filters, and pipe
penetrations (.1400); approval and use of residential wastewater treatment systems (.1500); approval of pre-engineered
package drop dispersal systems (.1600); approval and permitting of wastewater systems, technologies, components,
devices (.1700);
Scope
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0101
Applicability
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0102
Incorporation by Reference
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0103
Abbreviations
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0104
Definitions
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0105
General
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0201
Application
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0202
Improvement Permit
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0203
Construction Authorization
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0204
Operation Permit
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0205
Existing System Approvals for Reconnections and Property ...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0206
Alternative Wastewater System Permitting Options
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0207
Owners
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0301
Local Health Department and Department
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0302
Licensed or Certified Professionals
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0303
Submittal Requirements for Plans, Specifications, and Rep...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0304
Submittal Requirements for Plans, Specifications, and Rep...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0305
Design Daily Flow
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0401
Septic Tank Effluent Characteristics
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0402
Adjustments to Design Daily Flow
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0403
Site Evaluation
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0501
Topography and Landscape Position
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0502
Soil Morphology 15A NCAC 18E .0503
A - 81
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
348
Adopt*
Soil Wetness Conditions
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0504
Soil Depth
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0505
Saprolite
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0506
Restrictive Horizons
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0507
Available Space
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0508
Site Suitability and Classification
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0509
Special Site Evaluations
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0510
Location of Wastewater Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0601
Applicability of Setbacks
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0602
Collection Sewers
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0701
Raw Sewage Lift Stations
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0702
Pipe Materials
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0703
Septic Tank Capacity Requirements
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0801
Pump Tank Capacity Requirements
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0802
Grease Tank Capacity Requirements
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0803
Siphon Tank Capacity Requirements
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0804
Tank Leak Testing and Installation Requirements
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0805
General Design and Installation Criteria for Subsurface D...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0901
Conventional Wastewater Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0902
Bed Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0903
Large Diameter Pipe Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0904
Prefabricated Permeable Block Panel Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0905
Sand Lined Trench Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0906
Low Pressure Pipe Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0907
Drip Dispersal Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0908
Fill Systems 15A NCAC 18E .0909
A - 82
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
349
Adopt*
Artificial Drainage Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0910
Privies
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .0911
Alternative Toilets
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1001
Reclaimed Water Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1002
General Dosing System Requirements
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1101
Pump Dosing
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1102
Control Panels
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1103
Siphon Dosing
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1104
Timed Dosing
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1105
Pressure Dosed Gravity Distribution Devices
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1106
Advanced Pretreatment System Standards
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1201
Siting and Sizing Criteria for Advanced Pretreatment Syst...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1202
Siting and Sizing Criteria for Advanced Pretreatment Syst...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1203
Advanced Pretreatment Drip Dispersal Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1204
Advanced Pretreatment Sand Lined Trench Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1205
Advanced Pretreatment Bed Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1206
Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1301
Operation and Maintenance of Advanced Pretreatment Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1302
Owner Responsibilities for Wastewater System Operation an...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1303
Management Entity Responsibilities for Wastewater System ...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1304
Local Health Department Responsibilities for Wastewater S...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1305
System Malfunction and Repair
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1306
Wastewater Systems Abandonment
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1307
Plans for Prefabricated Tanks
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1401
Tank Design and Construction
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1402
Tank Material Requirements 15A NCAC 18E .1403
A - 83
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
350
Adopt*
Plans and Specifications for Risers, Effluent Filters, an...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1404
Risers, Effluent Filters, Pipe Penetration Boots Approval...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1405
Modification, Suspension, and Revocation of Approvals
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1406
General
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1501
Application
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1502
Design and Construction Standards
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1503
Sampling Requirements for Residential Wastewater Treatment
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1504
Residential Wastewater Treatment System Approval Renewal
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1505
General
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1601
Design and Construction Standards
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1602
Drip Dispersal System Testing
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1603
General
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1701
Application
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1702
Department and Commission Application Review
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1703
Approval Criteria for Provisional Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1704
Approval Criteria for Innovative Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1705
Approval Criteria for Accepted Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1706
Design and Installation Criteria for Provisional, Innovation...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1707
Modification, Suspension, and Revocation of Approvals
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1708
Wastewater Sampling Requirements for Advanced Pretreatment...
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1709
Compliance Criteria for Advanced Pretreatment Systems
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1710
Provisional and Innovative Approval Renewal
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1711
Authorized Designers, Installers, and Management Entities
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1712
Local Health Department Responsibilities
Adopt* 15A NCAC 18E .1713

A - 84
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
351
TRANSPORTATION - MOTOR VEHICLES, DIVISION OF
The rules in Chapter 3 are from the Division of Motor Vehicles.

The rules in Subchapter 3D are from the enforcement section and include general information (.0100); motor vehicle
dealer, sales, distributor and factory representative licenses (.0200); motor vehicle thefts (.0300); notice of sale and
stored vehicles (.0400); general information regarding safety inspection of motor vehicles (.0500); weight of vehicles
and registration enforcement (.0600); approval of motor vehicles safety equipment (.0700); safety rules and regulations
(.0800); and approval of sun screening devices (.0900).
Operation of Safety or Emissions Inspection Stations
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0523
Pre-Inspection Requirements
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0525
Safety Equipment Grading Items
Amend* 19A NCAC 03D .0526
Emission Controls Tampering Check
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0527
Safety Equipment Emission Inspections
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0528
Certification
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0529
Disapproval
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0530
Reinspection
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0531
Brakes
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0532
Lights
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0533
Horn
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0534
Steering Mechanism
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0535
Windshield Wiper
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0536
Directional Signals
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0537
Tires
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0538
Tires - Definitions
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0539
Rear View Mirrors
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0540
Exhaust Emission Controls
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0541
Emissions Control Device
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0542
Inspection Procedure for Emissions Equipment
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0543
Safety Inspection of Motorcycles
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0544
A - 85
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
352
Investigation/Audits/Safety or Emissions Inspection Stations
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0545
Waivers from Emissions Test Requirements
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0550
Window Tinting
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0551
Photometer Design and Performance Requirements
Readopt without Changes* 19A NCAC 03D .0552
FUNERAL SERVICE, BOARD OF
The rules in Subchapter 34A concern board functions including general provisions (.0100); and fees and other payments
(.0200).
License Renewal Form
Adopt* 21 NCAC 34A .0119
The rules in Subchapter 34B are funeral service rules including rules relating to resident trainees (.0100); examinations
(.0200); licensing (.0300); continuing education (.0400); out-of-state licensees (.0500); funeral establishments (.0600);
and preparation of dead bodies (.0700).
Refrigeration
Adopt* 21 NCAC 34B .0707
The rules in Subchapter 34C concern crematories including general provisions (.0100); equipment and processing
(.0200); and authorizations, reports, records (.0300).
Refrigeration
Amend* 21 NCAC 34C .0202
The rules in Subchapter 34D are preneed funeral contract rules including general provisions (.0100); licensing (.0200);
operations (.0300); and preneed recovery fund (.0400).
Annual Report
Amend* 21 NCAC 34D .0302
SOCIAL WORK CERTIFICATION AND LICENSURE BOARD
The rules in Chapter 63 deal with Social Work Certification including general rules (.0100); certification (.0200);
examinations (.0300); renewal of certification (.0400); ethical guidelines (.0500); disciplinary procedures (.0600);
adoption of rules (.0700); and professional corporations and limited liability companies.
Application Process
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0202
Transcripts
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0203
References
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0204
Substantial Equivalency
Adopt* 21 NCAC 63 .0207
Application Fee
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0208
Exam Eligibility
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0209
Associate Licenses
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0210
A - 86
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
353
Temporary Licenses
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0213
Certification and Licensure for Military Personnel and Mi...
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0214
Qualifying Examinations
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0301
Cancellation
Repeal* 21 NCAC 63 .0304
Examination Fees
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0306
Continuing Education Requirements
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0401
Renewal Application and Fees
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0403
Reinstatement
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0404
Required Reporting by Licensee or Certificate Holder of C...
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0405
Military Waiver or Extension of Time for Renewal of Certi...
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0406
General Professional Responsibilities
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0503
Responsibilities in Professional Relationships
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0504
Relationships with Colleagues
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0505
Pursuit of Research and Scholarly Activities
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0508
Public Statements
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0509
Grounds for Disciplinary Procedures
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0601
Investigation
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0602
Notice of Charges and Hearing
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0603
Conduct of Hearing
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0607
Decision of Board
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0608
Reporting of Disciplinary Actions
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0609
Continuances
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0610
Petitions for Adoption of Rules
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0701
Temporary Rules
Repeal* 21 NCAC 63 .0703
Declaratory Rulings
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0704
Insufficient Fees
Adopt* 21 NCAC 63 .0705
A - 87
RULES REVIEW COMMISSION

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
354
Application for a Certificate of Registration
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0901
Renewal of Certificate of Registration
Amend* 21 NCAC 63 .0902

A - 88
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
355
This Section contains a listing of recently issued Administrative Law Judge decisions for contested cases that are non-confidential.
Published decisions are available for viewing on the OAH website at http://www.ncoah.com/hearings/decisions/
If you are having problems accessing the text of the decisions online or for other questions regarding contested cases or case
decisions, please contact the Clerk's office by email: [e-mail] or phone [phone].

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Chief Administrative Law Judge
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART

Senior Administrative Law Judge
FRED G. MORRISON JR.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES

Melissa Owens Lassiter J. Randolph Ward
J. Randall May Stacey Bawtinhimer
David Sutton Michael Byrne
Selina Malherbe Karlene Turrentine
Linda Nelson

Year Code Number Date
Decision
Filed
Petitioner Respondent ALJ
Published
20 DOJ 03447 6/14/2021 Christopher Lee
Maness
v. NC Sheriffs Education and Training
Standards Commission
May
20 DOJ 03914 6/15/2021 Robert Joseph
Brewington
v. NC Criminal Justice Education and
Training Standards Commission
Lassiter
20 DOJ 04027 6/25/2021 Heather Chatel
Blair
v. NC Sheriffs Education and Training
Standards Commission
Sutton
20 DOJ 05455 6/10/2021 Jose Daniel Palma v. NC Sheriffs Education and Training
Standards Commission
May
21 DOJ 00829 6/22/2021 Darren Tyree Taylor v. NC Sheriffs Education and Training
Standards Commission
Byrne

20 DSC 02922 6/4/2021 Timothy C Roper v. North Carolina Department of Public
Safety
Bawtinhimer

19 DST 05261 7/30/2020;
6/24/2021
Kirk Justin Barefoot v. NC Retirement Systems Division Bawtinhimer
21 DST 00090 6/15/2021 Evelyn P Hammond v. North Carolina Total Retirement Plans Bawtinhimer

20 INS 02078 6/2/2021 Dr James Anthony
McKernan
Professor
v. The North Carolina State Health Plan
for Teachers and State Employees
Ward
21 INS 01323 6/29/2021 Rhonda Russell-
Smith
v. North Carolina State Health Plan Byrne

Unpublished
21 ABC 01833 6/4/2021 NC Alcoholic
Beverage Control
Commission
v. Express Mini Mart 1 Inc T/A Express
Mini Mart 1
Lassiter
A - 89
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
356
21 ABC 01901 6/14/2021 NC Alcoholic
Beverage Control
Commission
v. Smokers Post LLC T/A Smokers Post Bawtinhimer

20 CPA 02840 5/12/2021;
6/30/2021
NC State Board of
Certified Public
Accountant
Examiners
v. Leon Little Rives II #29505 Bawtinhimer

20 CPS 04557 6/30/2021 Johnathan Adams v. Victims Compensation Commission Mann
21 CPS 01871 6/9/2021 Marion Lamont
Sherrod Jr agent for
Marion Lamont
Sherrod
v. North Carolina Department of Adult
Corrections/Public Safety
Byrne

20 CSE 04195 6/8/2021 William Glasson v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Turrentine
20 CSE 04292 6/16/2021 Kevin S Davenport v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Turrentine
20 CSE 04361 6/21/2021 Michael Smith v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Turrentine
20 CSE 04393 6/25/2021 Kenneth D White v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
May
20 CSE 04396 6/28/2021 Jaime Arturo Alejos
Mejia
v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
May
20 CSE 04518 6/28/2021 Isaiah Callands v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement Section
May
20 CSE 04693 6/30/2021 Carter Ryan Manley v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Bawtinhimer
20 CSE 04917 6/9/2021 Byron D Black v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Byrne
20 CSE 05178 6/9/2021 Justin Tyler Garrett v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Sutton
20 CSE 05320 6/14/2021 Rodrigo Alberto
Conde
v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Byrne
21 CSE 01299 6/2/2021 Travis L Davidson v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Social Services,
Child Support Enforcement
Sutton

21 DHR 01051 6/30/2021 Jennifer Jimenez v. DSS Mann
21 DHR 01676 6/2/2021 Sean Hawkins v. Health Care Personnel Registry May
21 DHR 01898 6/11/2021 Aaliyah Taylor v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services, Division of Health Service
Regulation
Bawtinhimer
21 DHR 02116 6/30/2021 Tom LaGarde Haw
River Ballroom
v. NC Department of Health and Human
Services Division of Public Health
Mann
A - 90
CONTESTED CASE DECISIONS

36:05 NORTH CAROLINA REGISTER SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
357
21 DOL 01831 6/30/2021 Pani Verma v. DOL Mann

21 DOT 01593 6/30/2021 Benjamin Riley
Pierce
v. NC Department of Transportation Mann

21 DSA 01505 6/10/2021 Kinetic Minds Inc v. NC Office of the State Auditor Lassiter

21 EDC 02118 6/14/2021 Essie Mae Kiser
Foxx Charter
School
v. North Carolina State Board of
Education et al
May

21 INS 01553 6/24/2021 Chelsea McLean v. North Carolina Department of State
Treasurer
Malherbe
21 INS 01794 6/14/2021 Cailisha L Petty v. North Carolina State Health Plan for
Teachers and State Employees
May

21 MIS 01325 6/11/2021 Nigel Rankin v. Guilford County Courthouse Angela
Fox Department of Social Services
Camelia K Smith & Paige Gilliard
Childrens Law Center of Central North
Carolina Jessica Stone Brian Hogan
Mann
21 MIS 01326 6/2/2021 Trisha White v. Sheriffs Office Harvey David Legrant
Jr Forsyth County Courthouse - Family
Court C District Logan T Burke Susan
Frye David Sipprell Lawrence J Fine
Lisa Menfee Shea Bree Ward Blalock
Mann
21 MIS 01442 6/15/2021 Jennifer and Eliseo
Contreras Jimenez
v. Department of Social Services Children
and Families of Forsyth County
Mann

21 OSP 01243 6/7/2021 Anastahia Johnson v. East Carolina University Turrentine
21 OSP 01471 6/22/2021 Jason Yoder v. NC Department of Public Safety Mann

21 SOS 01555 6/30/2021 Jordan P Archer
(The Archer
Foundation)
v. NC Dpt of the Secretary of State Mann

A - 91
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Rule Topic: High Rock Lake Chlorophyll-a Site Specific Standard
Rule Citation: 15A NCAC 02B .0211 – Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for Class
C Waters
DEQ Division: Division of Water Resources (DWR)
Staff Contacts: Chris Ventaloro, Water Quality Standards Co-coordinator, DWR
[e-mail]
[phone]
Julie Ventaloro, Economist, DWR
[e-mail]
[phone]
Impact Summary: State government: No direct impact
Local government: No direct impact
Federal government: No direct impact
Private entities: No direct impact
Substantial Impact: No
Authority: N.C.G.S. 143-214.1 and 143-215.3(a)
1.NECESSITY FOR RULE CHANGE
The proposed amendments are being made to satisfy, in part, the North Carolina Nutrient
Criteria Development Plan (NCDP) that was mutually agreed upon by North Carolina and
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) in 2014 and revised in 2019. The
proposed amendments are also being made to comply with Section 303(c)(1) of the Clean
Water Act which requires that states and tribes evaluate and update water quality standards,
as necessary. Lastly, the proposed amendments will establish site-specific criteria that will
be used for future waterbody impairment determinations and development of a Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) in compliance with Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.
2.BACKGROUND
2.1 High Rock Lake
The purpose of the proposed amendments to Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0211 is to establish a
site-specific chlorophyll-a water quality standard for High Rock Lake and its tributaries
(Figure 1). The site-specific chlorophyll-a standard will replace the existing chlorophyll-a
standard for the entire lake. The existing chlorophyll-a standard will continue to apply to all
other fresh surface waters in North Carolina.
A - 92

High Rock Lake is a 15,180-acre reservoir with a 3,974-square mile drainage area located on
the Yadkin River (Figure 2). The High Rock Lake drainage area is in the Piedmont
physiographic region, just south and east of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Historically the area
had extensive agriculture, but over recent decades there has been a decline in agricultural
land use and an increase in urban development. Multiple urban centers are located within
Figure 1: High Rock Lake mainstem and tributaries
Highlighted areas are subject to the proposed site-specific chlorophyll-a standard.
A - 93
the High Rock Lake drainage area and include the Cities of High Point, Lexington,
Salisbury, Thomasville, and Winston-Salem. The drainage area includes part or all of 14
North Carolina counties – Alexander, Alleghany, Ashe, Caldwell, Davidson, Davie,
Forsyth, Guilford, Iredell, Rowan, Stokes, Surry, Watauga, Wilkes, and Yadkin – plus a
small area in Carroll and Patrick Counties, Virginia. The lake is used as a source for public
drinking water as well as for recreational activities such as fishing, boating, and swimming.

High Rock Lake is currently on North Carolina’s Section 303(d) list of impaired or
threatened waters. The entire lake is impaired for chlorophyll-a and parts of the lake are
impaired for pH and turbidity (as per the 2018 303(d) list). The technical implication of
failing to meet the chlorophyll-a standard is that the lake is not fully supporting its
designated uses, including aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity,
wildlife, primary recreation, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Practical implications
include that the lake supports a less diverse, less healthy biota, recreation becomes less
attractive, and water treatment costs increase. The regulatory implication is that North
Carolina is required by the Clean Water Act to develop a TMDL (and/or TMDL alternative
such as a Nutrient Management Strategy) to fully restore designated uses.

If adopted, the proposed chlorophyll-a standard will be used for future impairment
determinations for High Rock Lake. The adoption of the proposed standard is just the first
step in a multi-step, multi-year process to refine our understanding of the degree of
impairment of High Rock Lake and develop a TMDL and/or Nutrient Management Strategy
for the drainage area to address the impairment.

2.2 Nutrient Criteria Development Plan (NCDP)

The North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Development Plan (NCDP) commits North Carolina to
evaluate site-specific nutrient-related criteria for three pilot water bodies, each representing
a distinct water body type. Those pilot water bodies are High Rock Lake (lake), Albemarle
Sound (estuary), and the Middle Cape Fear river system (river and streams). The NCDP
was mutually agreed upon by North Carolina and the U.S. EPA in 2014 and was renewed in
2019 with minor revisions. Based upon lessons learned from these site-specific evaluations,
North Carolina will be better positioned to reevaluate nutrient-related criteria statewide.

In the context of the NCDP, the term “nutrient” refers to nitrogen and phosphorus. Nitrogen
and phosphorus are natural parts of aquatic ecosystems that support the growth of algae and
aquatic plants. In turn, algae and aquatic plants provide food and habitat for fish, shellfish,
and smaller aquatic organisms. However, when nutrient levels are too high – usually the
result of a wide range of human activities – they can cause an overgrowth of algae that harm
water quality by decreasing the amount of oxygen available to fish and other aquatic life.
Algal blooms can also be harmful to humans if they come into contact with polluted water,
consume tainted fish or shellfish, or drink contaminated water. Common sources of excess
levels of nitrogen and phosphorus are fertilizers, septic systems, sewage treatment plants
and urban stormwater runoff. An aquatic system that has excess levels of nutrients is
referred to as “eutrophic.”

Chlorophyll-a is used as a measure of the amount of algae growing in a waterbody. High
levels of chlorophyll-a can be an indicator of water quality impairment in eutrophic systems.
A - 94
Chlorophyll allows plants, which include algae, to photosynthesize (i.e., use sunlight to
convert simple molecules into organic compounds). Chlorophyll-a is the predominant type
of chlorophyll found in green plants and algae.

The NCDP’s focus is on the development of nutrient criteria based primarily on the linkage
between nutrient-related parameters (e.g., dissolved oxygen, pH, water clarity, chlorophyll-
a) and the protection of designated uses (e.g., drinking water supply, fishing, swimming). Of
the three pilot water bodies outlined in the NCDP, High Rock Lake was chosen as the first
one for evaluation. The proposed chlorophyll-a standard for High Rock Lake is the result of
a multiyear evaluation process conducted in accordance with the NCDP. The site-specific
standard includes both narrative and numeric components and incorporates
recommendations on spatial extent, temporal period (growing season), and depth to which
the standard would apply within a waterbody and identifies the waterbodies to which the
standard would be applicable.

More detailed information about the NCDP and the associated nutrient criteria development
process are available on the DEQ website: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/water-resources-data/water-sciences-home-page/nutrient-criteria-development-
plan.

3. REGULATORY BASELINE

As part of the permanent rulemaking process, North Carolina General Statute 150B-19.1 requires
agencies to quantify to the “greatest extent possible” the costs and benefits to affected parties of
a proposed rule. To understand what the costs and benefits of the proposed rule changes would
be to regulated parties and the environment, it is necessary to establish a regulatory baseline for
comparison. For the purpose of this regulatory impact analysis, the baseline is comprised of the
current version of Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (effective Nov 1, 2019).

The current rule, which includes narrative and numeric components of the chlorophyll-a water
quality standard, comprises the baseline for comparing the relative costs and benefits of the
proposed site-specific standard; however, it should be noted that the standard itself does not have
a direct impact on regulated parties or the environment. It is through its application in permits
(e.g., wastewater effluent limits, stormwater benchmarks), waterbody impairment assessments,
and nutrient management strategies that its impact is realized. For this reason, this analysis takes
into account how the existing standard is currently being implemented in various regulatory
programs and considers implementation of the standard a part of the baseline.

4. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

The proposed site-specific chlorophyll-a standard of 35 µg/L (growing-season geometric mean)
will replace the existing chlorophyll-a standard of 40 µg/L (instantaneous, year-round) for High
Rock Lake. The proposed standard also includes temporal and spatial components. In the
existing standard, the temporal and spatial components are applied through the approved
assessment methodology rather than being described in the rule itself. Both the existing and
proposed standards have equivalent narrative components that provide broad protections beyond
the numeric components.

A - 95
A direct comparison between the existing chlorophyll-a standard of 40 µg/L and the proposed
site-specific standard of 35 µg/L cannot be made because they use different statistical measures -
- the proposed 35 µg/L is a measure of central tendency (geometric mean) calculated from data
within a defined growing season (April – October), while the existing 40 µg/L is an
instantaneous measure that applies year round. To provide some idea of the potential indirect
impacts of the proposed rule amendments, however, we conducted a preliminary analysis using
the High Rock Lake hydrodynamic and nutrient response model to estimate the relative percent
reductions in nutrient loading that would be required to meet the proposed standard relative to
the existing standard. Using the available model, our preliminary analysis suggested the
following load reductions will be needed when nitrogen only or phosphorus only will be reduced
(Table 1).

Table 1: Estimated Potential Maximum Percent Reduction in Total Nitrogen (TN) and
Total Phosphorus (TP) needed to meet Chlorophyll-a Standards

Chlorophyll-a Standard
Maximum
% TN
Reduction
Needed*
Maximum
% TP
Reduction
Needed†
Existing
40 µg/L
instantaneous
48.5% 42%
Proposed
35 µg/L
growing season geometric mean
50% 37%
Difference
percentage points -1.5 5
* assumes no increase in TP load from the baseline
† assumes no increase in TN load from the baseline

Based on the results of the preliminary analysis in Table 1, it seems likely that there will be
some difference in magnitude of nutrient reductions needed to meet the existing chlorophyll-a
standard as compared to the proposed site-specific chlorophyll-a standard. It is possible that
the percent TN reduction needed could be higher under the proposed standard, while the
percent TP reduction needed could be lower. These differences could have significant
impacts on the relative costs of reductions required to address the lake’s impairment. It is
highly unlikely that the lake’s impairment status itself will change as a result of the proposed
site-specific chlorophyll-a standard.

The estimated percent reductions in Table 1 are only preliminary, however, and are likely to
change based on the outcome of a likely Nutrient Management Strategy stakeholder development
process. It should also be noted that the estimated percent reductions in Table 1 do not
necessarily reflect the most appropriate strategy for meeting the chlorophyll-a standard. This
analysis was based on models that assumed that measures taken to reduce TN would have no
effect on TP and vice versa. For example, the model assumed that a reduction of 50% of TN
over the baseline loading would be required for High Rock Lake to meet the proposed
chlorophyll-a standard (at that particular sampling location) if the TP load remained at baseline
A - 96
loading. Similar assumptions were made for TP: a reduction of 37% of TP over the baseline
loading would be required for High Rock lake to meet the proposed chlorophyll-a standard if the
TN load remained at baseline loading. This is compared to estimated reductions of 48.5% TN
and 42% TP reductions needed to meet the existing chlorophyll-a standard at that particular
sampling location. A more likely strategy would involve a combination of TN and TP reductions
which may reduce slightly the percent reductions needed for a TN- or TP-only approach. It
should also be noted that this preliminary analysis was done for one sampling station which has
the highest chlorophyll-a levels relative to the other stations in High Rock Lake.

5. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
The purpose of this document is to examine the potential economic impacts (costs and benefits)
of the proposed site-specific chlorophyll-a standard. As with other surface water quality
standards, the chlorophyll-a standard is designed to define the condition of waters that protect
public and environmental health. Since water quality standards are developed to define an
appropriate condition, the water quality standards themselves do not produce costs for the
public. Costs and benefits are incurred, however, when the standards are implemented through
the states’ regulatory programs.
In the case of chlorophyll-a, there are additional steps that need to occur after adoption of the
standard and before implementation can occur, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Steps from Adoption of Standard to Implementation

In waters within North Carolina that have been listed as “impaired” using the approved
assessment methodology, water quality standards are used as water quality goals for the
development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). The TMDL Program is a federal
program authorized under the Clean Water Act to address waters that are not meeting water
quality standards. A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a
waterbody can receive and still meet water quality standards.
Adopt Water Quality
Standard
(defines water quality
goal)
Develop Assessment
Methodology Monitor Waters
Assess Waters List Impaired &
Threatened Waters Develop TMDL
Adopt Nutrient
Management
Strategy
IMPLEMENTATION
Control Point
Sources via NPDES
Permits
IMPLEMENTATION
Manage Nonpoint
Sources through
State/Local Programs
A - 97

In North Carolina, an integral part of the TMDL process for waters impaired for nutrients is the
creation of a comprehensive Nutrient Management Strategy. This strategy includes nitrogen and
phosphorous load allocations for both point and nonpoint sources in the affected watershed.
Once a Nutrient Management Strategy is adopted by the EMC through the rulemaking process
(and approved by U.S. EPA if it is being adopted as an alternative to a TMDL), the pollution
limits calculated for the load allocations can be enforced under the state NPDES program
through permitting. For example, in a waterbody with a TMDL for nutrients, a wastewater
treatment plant may be required to implement additional treatment technology to reduce nitrogen
and/or phosphorus loading.

The requirement for DWR to develop a TMDL and nutrient management strategy already exists
due to the existing impairment of High Rock Lake; as such, the adoption of the proposed site-
specific chlorophyll-a standard will not result in the imposition of any new burdens on DWR in
this regard.

In the future, High Rock Lake will continue to be assessed for chlorophyll-a impairment, but
those assessments will be based on the site-specific water quality standard. After the adoption of
the site-specific standard, DWR will develop and incorporate the site-specific assessment
methodology into the existing 303(d) Listing and Delisting Methodology which is the framework
used by the DWR to interpret data and information to determine whether a waterbody is meeting
water quality standards. A preliminary review of possible assessment recommendations was
performed by DWR to ensure that the recommended site-specific chlorophyll-a standard can be
practically and functionally assessed once adopted. Staff estimated the time to perform the task
of adding the site-specific component to the existing methodology will be negligible. This task
will not require additional expenditure, distribution, or reallocation of State funds.

While the adoption of the standard will establish a more specific water quality improvement
goal, any costs associated with meeting that goal will occur well into the future and will be
more directly associated with implementation. Benefits and costs associated with
implementation will be accounted for during future nutrient management strategy
rulemaking; as such, we have not attempted to quantify or monetize impacts in this analysis.
However, to provide some context with which to consider the indirect, long-term impacts of
the proposed site-specific standard, we have included an overview of typical nutrient
reduction strategies and their associated costs and benefits.

Given the large load reduction needed and recognizing the significant cost to implement the
necessary reductions, any future Nutrient Management Strategy will likely allow for a staged
management approach (i.e., “adaptive management”). A staged management approach relies on
first making nutrient reductions based on readily achievable controls that are possible with
currently available technology. This would be followed by more substantial reductions to the
extent that is technologically and economically feasible. The adaptive management aspect of the
strategy allows for ongoing evaluation during implementation to inform possible revisions to the
strategy and implementation. The lake’s response is monitored during every stage to maximize
the cost effectiveness of nutrient reduction efforts.

Based on DWR staff expertise and prior fiscal analyses for proposed Nutrient Management
Strategies, it is reasonable to expect that nutrient sources that will need to be addressed include
A - 98
agriculture, wastewater discharges, and stormwater runoff from both new development and
existing developed lands. It is also reasonable to expect that the total costs associated with
implementing a nutrient reduction strategy for High Rock lake would be on the order of tens of
millions of dollars to hundreds of millions of dollars. Costs would likely be incurred over the
course of ten or more years and would likely be incurred by a wide range of entities including
private- and government-owned wastewater dischargers, developers, state and local government
stormwater programs, and the agricultural community.

The likely benefits expected from successful implementation of nutrient reductions in High Rock
Lake include improvements in raw water quality which would help lower drinking water
treatment costs through reductions of chemical treatment needed and could also avoid potential
future costs of expensive treatment upgrades. There would also likely be improved conditions for
primary contact recreation which include swimming, fishing, boating, and skiing, as well as a
lower risk of the occurrence of harmful algal blooms which have the potential to release algal
toxins into the water. Improvement in the water quality would also likely have a positive impact
on local property values in general, increasing with greater proximity to the lake, and would
serve to enhance the greater local economy through increased desire to live near a healthy,
sustainable natural resource. Significant benefits to aquatic life would also be expected due to
reduced occurrences of algal blooms and sediment contributions due to lower nutrient loading in
the watershed. This would assist in meeting the water quality standards for turbidity, dissolved
oxygen, pH as well as chlorophyll-a.

These (indirect) costs and benefits would likely occur whether or not the proposed site-specific
chlorophyll-a standard is adopted since the lake is already impaired when assessed against the
existing chlorophyll-a standard; as such, we are already committed to developing a TMDL and
Nutrient Management Strategy for High Rock Lake. There are too many unknown variables to
determine if (indirect) costs and benefits associated with a future Nutrient Management Strategy
will be higher or lower based on the site-specific standard versus the existing standard.

5. SUMMARY

The agency anticipates that if the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard is adopted as proposed, the
changes would not result in any direct or near-term economic impacts as compared to the
regulatory baseline to state government, local government, or the regulated community. The
main direct impact from the adoption of the site-specific chlorophyll-a standard will be a more
refined understanding of the degree of impairment of High Rock Lake. This will enable the state
to develop an appropriate TMDL and/or Nutrient Management Strategy to address the
impairment.

Potentially significant long-term, indirect economic impacts (costs and benefits) are possible as a
result of the proposed standard as compared to the baseline. However, we cannot predict the
magnitude of costs or benefits (indirectly) attributable to the proposed site-specific standard as
compared to the baseline existing standard. These impacts would not be realized until after a
TMDL is developed and a nutrient management strategy is adopted. Costs and benefits,
including benefits to the environment, will be accounted for during the future rulemaking to
adopt a Nutrient Management Strategy.

A - 99
15A NCAC 02B .0202 is proposed for amendment as follows: 1
2
15A NCAC 02B .0211 FRESH SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CLASS C WATERS 3
In addition to the standards set forth in Rule .0208 of this Section, the following water quality standards shall apply 4
to all Class C waters. Additional standards applicable to other freshwater classifications are specified in Rules .0212, 5
.0214, .0215, .0216, .0218, .0219, .0223, .0224, .0225, and .0231 of this Section. 6
(1) The best usage of waters shall be aquatic life propagation, survival, and maintenance of biological 7
integrity (including fishing and fish); wildlife; secondary contact recreation as defined in Rule .0202 8
of this Section; agriculture; and any other usage except for primary contact recreation or as a source 9
of water supply for drinking, culinary, and food processing purposes. All freshwaters shall be 10
classified to protect these uses at a minimum. 11
(2) The conditions of waters shall be such that waters are suitable for all best uses specified in this Rule. 12
Sources of water pollution that preclude any of these uses on either a shortterm or -longterm- basis 13
shall be deemed to violate a water quality standard; 14
(3) Chlorine, total residual: 17 ug/l; 15
(4) Chlorophyll a (corrected): except as specified in Sub-Item (a) of this Item, not greater than 40 ug/l 16
for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation 17
not designated as trout waters, and not greater than 15 ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters 18
subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation designated as trout waters (not 19
applicable to lakes or reservoirs less than 10 acres in surface area). The Commission or its designee 20
may prohibit or limit any discharge of waste into surface waters if the surface waters experience or 21
the discharge would result in growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation such that the 22
standards established pursuant to this Rule would be violated or the intended best usage of the waters 23
would be impaired; 24
(a)Site-specific High Rock Lake Reservoir [Index Numbers 12-(108.5), 12-(114), 12-117-(1), 12-25
117-(3), and 12-118.5] Chlorophyll a (corrected): not greater than a growing season geometric mean 26
of 35 ug/L in the photic zone based on samples collected in a minimum of five different months 27
during the growing season. For the purpose of this Sub-Item, the growing season is April 1 through 28
October 31 and the photic zone is represented by a composite sample taken from the water surface 29
down to twice the measured Secchi depth. Chlorophyll a shall not occur in amounts that result in an 30
adverse impact as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1002. 31
(5) Cyanide, total: 5.0 ug/l; 32
(6) Dissolved oxygen: not less than 6.0 mg/l for trout waters; for nontrout- waters, not less than a daily 33
average of 5.0 mg/l with an instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/l; swamp waters, lake coves, 34
or backwaters, and lake bottom waters may have lower values if caused by natural conditions; 35
(7) Fecal coliform: shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100ml (MF count) based upon at least 36
five samples taken over a 30-day period, nor exceed 400/100ml in more than 20 percent of the 37
samples examined during such period. Violations of this Item are expected during rainfall events 38
and may be caused by uncontrollable nonpoint source pollution. All coliform concentrations shall 39
be analyzed using the membrane filter technique. If high turbidity or other conditions would cause 40
the membrane filter technique to produce inaccurate data, the most probable number (MPN) 5-tube 41
multiple dilution method shall be used. 42
(8) Floating solids, settleable solids, or sludge deposits: only such amounts attributable to sewage, 43
industrial wastes, or other wastes as shall not make the water unsafe or unsuitable for aquatic life 44
and wildlife or impair the waters for any designated uses; 45
(9) Fluoride: 1.8 mg/l; 46
(10) Gases, total dissolved: not greater than 110 percent of saturation; 47
(11) Metals: 48
(a) With the exception of mercury and selenium, acute and chronic freshwater aquatic life 49
standards for metals shall be based upon measurement of the dissolved fraction of the 50
metal. Mercury and selenium water quality standards shall be based upon measurement of 51
the total recoverable metal; 52
(b) With the exception of mercury and selenium, aquatic life standards for metals listed in this 53
Sub-Item shall apply as a function of the pollutant's water effect ratio (WER). The WER 54
shall be assigned a value equal to one unless any person demonstrates to the Division's 55
satisfaction in a permit proceeding that another value is developed in accordance with the 56
A - 100
"Water Quality Standards Handbook: Second Edition" published by the US Environmental 1
Protection Agency (EPA-823-B-12-002), which is hereby incorporated by reference, 2
including subsequent amendments and editions, and can be obtained free of charge at 3
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/handbook/. Alternative site-specific 4
standards may also be developed when any person submits values that demonstrate to the 5
Commission that they were derived in accordance with the "Water Quality Standards 6
Handbook: Second Edition, Recalculation Procedure or the Resident Species Procedure", 7
which is hereby incorporated by reference including subsequent amendments and can be 8
obtained free of charge at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/handbook/. 9
(c) Freshwater metals standards that are not hardness-dependent shall be as follows: 10
(i) Arsenic, dissolved, acute: WER∙ 340 ug/l; 11
(ii) Arsenic, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 150 ug/l; 12
(iii) Beryllium, dissolved, acute: WER∙ 65 ug/l; 13
(iv) Beryllium, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 6.5 ug/l; 14
(v) Chromium VI, dissolved, acute: WER∙ 16 ug/l; 15
(vi) Chromium VI, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 11 ug/l; 16
(vii) Mercury, total recoverable, chronic: 0.012 ug/l; 17
(viii) Selenium, total recoverable, chronic: 5 ug/l; 18
(ix) Silver, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 0.06 ug/l; 19
(d) Hardness-dependent freshwater metals standards shall be derived using the equations 20
specified in Table A: Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals. If 21
the actual instream hardness (expressed as CaCO3 or Ca+Mg) is less than 400 mg/l, 22
standards shall be calculated based upon the actual instream hardness. If the instream 23
hardness is greater than 400 mg/l, the maximum applicable hardness shall be 400 mg/l. 24
Table A: Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals 25
Numeric standards calculated at 25 mg/l hardness are listed below for illustrative purposes. 26
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under Sub-27
Item (11)(b) of this Rule. 28
29
Metal Equations for Hardness-Dependent Freshwater Metals
(ug/l)
Standard
at 25 mg/l
hardness
(ug/l)
Cadmium,
Acute
WER∙ [{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.9151 [ln
hardness]-3.1485}]
0.82
Cadmium,
Acute,
Trout
waters
WER∙ [{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.9151[ln
hardness]-3.6236}]
0.51
Cadmium,
Chronic
WER∙ [{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.7998[ln
hardness]-4.4451}]
0.15
Chromium
III, Acute
WER∙ [0.316 ∙ e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}] 180
Chromium
III, Chronic
WER∙ [0.860 ∙ e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}]

24

Copper,
Acute
WER∙ [0.960 ∙ e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.700}]
Or,
Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria-Copper
2007 Revision
(EPA-822-R-07-001)

3.6

NA
Copper,
Chronic
WER∙ [0.960 ∙ e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702}]
Or,
Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria-Copper
2007 Revision
2.7

NA
A - 101
(EPA-822-R-07-001)
Lead,
Acute
WER∙ [{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} ∙ e^{1.273[ln
hardness]-1.460}]
14
Lead,
Chronic
WER∙ [{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} ∙ e^{1.273[ln
hardness]-4.705}]
0.54
Nickel,
Acute
WER∙ [0.998 ∙ e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255}] 140
Nickel,
Chronic WER∙ 0.997 ∙ e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584}] 16
Silver,
Acute
WER∙ 0.85 ∙ e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.59}] 0.30
Zinc, Acute WER∙ [0.978 ∙ e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}] 36
Zinc,
Chronic WER∙ 0.986 ∙ e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}] 36
1
(e) Compliance with acute instream metals standards shall only be evaluated using an average 2
of two or more samples collected within one hour. Compliance with chronic instream 3
metals standards shall only be evaluated using an average of a minimum of four samples 4
taken on consecutive days or as a 96-hour average; 5
(12) Oils, deleterious substances, or colored or other wastes: only such amounts as shall not render the 6
waters injurious to public health, secondary recreation, or to aquatic life and wildlife, or adversely 7
affect the palatability of fish, aesthetic quality, or impair the waters for any designated uses. For the 8
purpose of implementing this Rule, oils, deleterious substances, or colored or other wastes shall 9
include substances that cause a film or sheen upon or discoloration of the surface of the water or 10
adjoining shorelines, as described in 40 CFR 110.3(a)-(b), incorporated by reference including 11
subsequent amendments and editions. This material is available, free of charge, at: 12
http://www.ecfr.gov/; 13
(13) Pesticides: 14
(a) Aldrin: 0.002 ug/l; 15
(b) Chlordane: 0.004 ug/l; 16
(c) DDT: 0.001 ug/l; 17
(d) Demeton: 0.1 ug/l; 18
(e) Dieldrin: 0.002 ug/l; 19
(f) Endosulfan: 0.05 ug/l; 20
(g) Endrin: 0.002 ug/l; 21
(h) Guthion: 0.01 ug/l; 22
(i) Heptachlor: 0.004 ug/l; 23
(j) Lindane: 0.01 ug/l; 24
(k) Methoxychlor: 0.03 ug/l; 25
(l) Mirex: 0.001 ug/l; 26
(m) Parathion: 0.013 ug/l; and 27
(n) Toxaphene: 0.0002 ug/l; 28
(14) pH: shall be between 6.0 and 9.0 except that swamp waters may have a pH as low as 4.3 if it is the 29
result of natural conditions; 30
(15) Phenolic compounds: only such levels as shall not result in fish-flesh tainting or impairment of other 31
best usage; 32
(16) Polychlorinated biphenyls (total of all PCBs and congeners identified): 0.001 ug/l; 33
(17) Radioactive substances, based on at least one sample collected per quarter: 34
(a) Combined radium-226 and radium-228: the average annual activity level for combined 35
radium-226 and radium-228 shall not exceed five picoCuries per liter; 36
(b) Alpha Emitters: the average annual gross alpha particle activity (including radium-226, but 37
excluding radon and uranium) shall not exceed 15 picoCuries per liter; 38
(c) Beta Emitters: the average annual activity level for strontium-90 shall not exceed eight 39
picoCuries per liter, nor shall the average annual gross beta particle activity (excluding 40
A - 102
potassium-40 and other naturally occurring radionuclides) exceed 50 picoCuries per liter, 1
nor shall the average annual activity level for tritium exceed 20,000 picoCuries per liter; 2
(18) Temperature: not to exceed 2.8 degrees C (5.04 degrees F) above the natural water temperature, and 3
in no case to exceed 29 degrees C (84.2 degrees F) for mountain and upper piedmont waters and 32 4
degrees C (89.6 degrees F) for lower piedmont and coastal plain Waters; the temperature for trout 5
waters shall not be increased by more than 0.5 degrees C (0.9 degrees F) due to the discharge of 6
heated liquids, but in no case to exceed 20 degrees C (68 degrees F); 7
(19) Toluene: 0.36 ug/l in trout classified waters or 11 ug/l in all other waters; 8
(20) Trialkyltin compounds: 0.07 ug/l expressed as tributyltin; 9
(21) Turbidity: the turbidity in the receiving water shall not exceed 50 Nephelometric Turbidity Units 10
(NTU) in streams not designated as trout waters and 10 NTU in streams, lakes, or reservoirs 11
designated as trout waters; for lakes and reservoirs not designated as trout waters, the turbidity shall 12
not exceed 25 NTU; if turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural background conditions, the 13
existing turbidity level shall not be increased. Compliance with this turbidity standard shall be 14
deemed met when land management activities employ Best Management Practices (BMPs), as 15
defined by Rule .0202 of this Section, recommended by the Designated Nonpoint Source Agency, 16
as defined by Rule .0202 of this Section. 17
(22) Toxic Substance Level Applicable to NPDES Permits: Chloride: 230 mg/l. If chloride is determined 18
by the waste load allocation to be exceeded in a receiving water by a discharge under the specified 19
7Q10 criterion for toxic substances, the discharger shall monitor the chemical or biological effects 20
of the discharge. Efforts shall be made by all dischargers to reduce or eliminate chloride from their 21
effluents. Chloride shall be limited as appropriate in the NPDES permit if sufficient information 22
exists to indicate that it may be a causative factor resulting in toxicity of the effluent. 23
24
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-215.3(a)(1); 25
Eff. February 1, 1976; 26
Amended Eff. January 1, 2015; May 1, 2007; April 1, 2003; August 1, 2000; October 1, 1995; 27
August 1, 1995; April 1, 1994; February 1, 1993; 28
Readopted Eff. November 1, 2019. November 1, 2019; 29
Amended Eff. Xxxxx 30
A - 103

1

Overview of High Rock Lake (HRL) Chlorophyll a Site-Specific Standard
Proposal
N.C. Division of Water Resources
Version 2
Updated 7/1/2022
Introduction
After a multiyear evaluation process conducted in accordance with North Carolina’s Nutrient Criteria
Development Plan (NCDP), the N.C. Division of Water Resources (DWR) is proposing a site-specific
chlorophyll a standard for High Rock Lake (HRL) for adoption by the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC). Site-specific standards may be established where a state identifies conditions in a
waterbody that that differ from national or statewide criteria.
The NCDP was mutually agreed upon by North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in 2014 and was renewed in 2019 with minor revisions. The plan commits North Carolina to
evaluate site-specific nutrient-related criteria for three pilot water bodies, each representing a distinct
water body type. Those pilot water bodies include High Rock Lake (lake), Albemarle Sound (estuary),
and the Middle Cape Fear river system (river and streams). Based upon lessons learned from these site-
specific evaluations, North Carolina will be better positioned to reevaluate nutrient-related criteria
statewide.
The NCDP also established two advisory bodies to assist with criteria development. The Scientific
Advisory Council (SAC) comprises experts in the fields of water quality, water quality engineering,
nutrient biogeochemistry, nutrient response variables, nutrient management and point and non-point
source nutrient abatement. The Criteria Implementation Committee (CIC) advises on the social and
economic implications of implementing proposed nutrient criteria to inform and assist DWR with fiscal
note preparation.
The SAC reviewed several nutrient-related parameters to determine if changes were warranted or if
criteria for new parameters should be adopted into site-specific standards. For High Rock Lake the
parameters reviewed included dissolved oxygen, clarity, algal assemblages, pH, cyanotoxins, chlorophyll
a, nitrogen, and phosphorus. No new criterion parameters were recommended, and the only standard
recommended for amendment was chlorophyll a.
The chlorophyll a site-specific standard proposal reflects a combination of the SAC’s recommendations
to DWR, CIC input, and the expertise of DWR staff.
High Rock Lake Chlorophyll a Criterion Proposal
Overview
The SAC began its work to evaluate site-specific criteria for High Rock Lake in 2015, ultimately
concluding its recommendations in a report published in May 2020 (Appendix I). DWR staff reviewed
the SAC’s recommendation, considered all components brought forward by the SAC, and has proposed a
A - 104

2

scientifically-based site-specific chlorophyll a standard for High Rock Lake. The SAC’s report provides
detailed justification for the necessary components of a water quality standard.
DWR has carried forward the SAC’s chlorophyll a standard proposal with a magnitude of 35 ug/L, a
frequency of not-to-exceed more than once in three years, and a seasonal duration, calculated as a
geometric mean (or geomean). The DWR recommendation includes the spatial extent and depth to
which the site-specific standard would apply within a waterbody and identifies the waterbodies to which
the proposed site-specific standard would be applicable, as is required. The proposed language, to
amend 15A NCAC 02B .0211(4), is as follows:
(4) Chlorophyll a (corrected): except as specified in Sub-Item (a) of this Item, not greater than 40
ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic
vegetation not designated as trout waters, and not greater than 15 ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and
other waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation designated as trout
waters (not applicable to lakes or reservoirs less than 10 acres in surface area). The Commission or
its designee may prohibit or limit any discharge of waste into surface waters if the surface waters
experience or the discharge would result in growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation such
that the standards established pursuant to this Rule would be violated or the intended best usage of
the waters would be impaired;
(a)Site-specific High Rock Lake Reservoir [Index Numbers 12-(108.5), 12-(114), 12-117-(1), 12-
117-(3), 12-118.5, and the uppermost portion of 12-(124.5) to the dam of High Rock Lake]
Chlorophyll a (corrected): not greater than one exceedance of a growing season geometric
mean of 35 ug/L in the photic zone within a three-year period. For purposes of this Sub-Item:
(i) The growing season is April 1 through October 31;
(ii) Samples shall be collected in a minimum of five different months within each
growing season with a minimum of two growing season geometric means collected in a
three-year period;
(iii) The photic zone shall be defined as the surface down to twice the Secchi depth.
(iv) Samples shall be collected as a composite sample of the photic zone; and
(v) Samples that do not satisfy the requirements in Sub-Item (iv) of this Item shall be
excluded from the calculation of the geometric mean.
Table 1 provides a comparison of SAC and DWR recommendations.

A - 105

3

Table 1: SAC and DWR chlorophyll a criterion and assessment recommendations.
Component

SAC
Recommendation
SAC Notes on Selection DWR
Recommendation
DWR Notes on Selection
Magnitude 35 ug/L Selected from a range
of chlorophyll a
concentrations deemed
to be protective of HRL
designated uses.
Same Selection of 35 ug/L derived
by SAC from a station by
station analysis deemed to be
protective of HRL designated
uses.
Period/
Duration
Seasonal
Geomean
Calculated geomean
based on all data from
growing season.
Same None
Growing
Season/
Duration
April-October Include samples
collected in at least five
different growing
season months for
each year of data
included in the
analysis.
Same None
Frequency Maximum
Exceedance
Frequency of one-
in-three years
Compute the geometric
mean for each year of
individual data and
apply a frequency
component of not
more than one
exceedance out of
three years of data.
Maximum
Exceedance
Frequency of one-
in-three years A
minimum dataset
of two seasonal
geometric means
within a three-
year period is
required.
Incorporated the SAC’s
recommended frequency
component with the
additional requirement to
have data from at least two
growing seasons. This
acknowledges year-to-year
variability in chlorophyll a
concentrations and the need
for more than one year of
data before making decisions.
Spatial
Considerations
Open Waters Photic zone composite
based on twice the
Secchi depth; shallow
waters and isolated
coves exempt from
numeric criteria; all
data within each
assessment unit would
be incorporated into
the calculated
geomean.
All waters within
the associated
index numbers
(12-(108.5), 12-
(114), 12-117-(1),
12-117-(3), and
12-118.5).
Same as SAC
recommendation except no
broad shallow water/isolated
coves exemption. Data from
shallow waters are only
excluded when samples
cannot be taken to twice the
Secchi depth to allow for
consistency in monitoring and
assessment. Station by
station assessment consistent
with methodology used to
develop the 35 ug/L
geometric mean.
A - 106

4

Narrative Criterion
The SAC recommended the use of a narrative criterion for shallow waters and isolated coves but did not
offer specific narrative language. DWR agrees that a narrative component is appropriate and proposes
to rely on the existing narrative language for best usage in 15A NCAC 02B .0211(2) which reads: “The
conditions of waters shall be such that waters are suitable for all best uses specified in this Rule. Sources
of water pollution that preclude any of these uses on either a short-term or long-term basis shall be
deemed to violate a water quality standard;”. This provides protection to any shallow waters and
isolated coves, seasons, or instances not covered by the site-specific, seasonal geomean and is
consistent with the SAC’s recommendation for shallow waters to be addressed by narrative criteria.
Shallow Water Areas
The SAC recommended the categorical exclusion of shallow waters and isolated coves from the
proposed numeric criterion, with a parenthetical suggestion of all waters less than ten feet deep. This
recommendation was included in the final SAC report but was not discussed as part of the 2018 meeting
during which the SAC voted upon its criteria recommendation. DWR does not recommend incorporating
this exclusion for several reasons.
First, reducing coverage of numeric nutrient-related standards in state waters is not the NCDP’s goal.
The NCDP’s purpose is to refine and expand the use of numeric standards to address nutrient issues, not
to reduce Clean Water Act (CWA) protections. If the recommended site-specific criterion including the
narrative component were not to apply to all waters under consideration, then the existing standard in
15A NCAC 02B .0211(4) would apply to any waters not subject to a site-specific standard. Shallow
waters are often the very places in need of numeric standards, particularly for recreational and fishing
uses.
Second, the definition of shallow waters as being less than 10 feet deep (3.0 m) raises substantial
pragmatic and operational issues and was never scientifically justified by the SAC. Water levels in High
Rock Lake fluctuate 10 feet or more, making the application of this limitation uncertain in relation to
many fixed sampling locations.
Third, the Monte Carlo analysis used to derive this site-specific magnitude recommendation did not
exclude data based on depth. Of four monitoring stations chosen for that analysis, station HRL051 was
included to represent riverine waters despite being well below the recommended ten-foot depth
threshold. The SAC noted that “waters at HRL051 reflect turbid river conditions, and the average
chlorophyll a is lower than in downstream waters.”1 Thus, the analysis, at least in part, supports applying
the derived site-specific criterion in shallower waters.
While not incorporating the exclusion of shallow waters from the application of this criterion, DWR
understands the underlying concern that samples be representative. To ensure decisions are made
based on representative samples throughout the lake, the proposed standard includes a requirement
that only data from samples that can be collected to twice the measured Secchi depth will be used when
calculating a geometric mean. In addition, current monitoring, quality assurance and transparency
protocols are also employed to ensure representative sampling in High Rock Lake.

1 N.C. Nutrient Criteria Scientific Advisory Council, page 65. A Chlorophyll a Criterion for High Rock Lake. May 26,
2020.
A - 107

5

DWR recommends that any new monitoring efforts in High Rock Lake, whether by DWR or by third
parties, comply with the following existing protocols:
• Photic zone composite and boat- or bridge-based sampling, which provide natural access and
depth limitations
• DWR or third-party compliance with the DWR Ambient Lakes Monitoring Program Quality
Assurance Project Plan, which provides:
“Actual sampling points are generally located within the center or main-stem of the lake, or
as determined by field staff as representative of the lake or specific areas of concern within
the lake.”
• Submission of third-party data for public review during biannual integrated reports and
associated Quality Assurance Protocol Procedures requirements
These safeguards ensure nonrepresentative shallow water samples are not used for assessment
purposes in High Rock Lake or statewide.
Frequency
The SAC recommended a “not greater than 1 in 3” frequency to implement the recommendation of a
seasonal geomean for chlorophyll a in High Rock Lake. This means that in order to be found to be
meeting criteria, there cannot be more than one excursion of the seasonal geomean in a three-year
period based on a minimum of two geomeans. DWR staff have concerns as to the justification and
feasibility of this approach. The SAC justification for the frequency component primarily relied on the
fact that other states have implemented this approach. DWR currently monitors HRL once every five
years; this approach may necessitate additional resources to monitor at an increased frequency.
However, as this is a site-specific standard applicable only to HRL, DWR is proposing to proceed with the
SAC recommendation.
DWR is not proposing a change to the 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report assessment methodology as part
of the site-specific standard adoption process as it is not part of the rule-making process. After the
adoption of a site-specific standard for High Rock Lake, DWR will incorporate the complementary site-
specific assessment methodology into the state’s comprehensive 303(d) listing and delisting assessment
methodology for EMC review and approval.
Reservoir Framework
As stated previously, the NCDP commits North Carolina to evaluate site-specific nutrient-related criteria
for three pilot water bodies, each representing a distinct water body type, and based upon lessons
learned from these site-specific evaluations, North Carolina will be better positioned to reevaluate
nutrient-related criteria statewide.
With regards to the process to evaluate the potential need and determine appropriate standards for
site-specific criteria for other reservoirs, the SAC proposal states:
“The SAC has not yet developed a detailed framework for deriving reservoir-specific chl a criteria.
However, many elements of the SAC’s approach for High Rock Lake would be transferable to
other water bodies. At various times, the SAC also discussed potential elements of a more formal
framework for site-specific criteria derivation. This section attempts to document some of those
A - 108

6

concepts in case they are useful during the future, statewide effort. Any of the framework
elements discussed herein are subject to additional discussion by the SAC and DWR.”
The SAC recommendation went on to document some of the concepts that were discussed, however no
framework was formally approved for use by the SAC and as stated above, require further discussion by
the SAC and DWR. Any criteria or site-specific standard proposed for other reservoirs will need the
scientific justification to support the proposed criteria or site-specific standard to demonstrate that it is
protective of designated uses and complies with North Carolina’s antidegradation policy.
A - 109
A Chlorophyll a Criterion for High Rock Lake
by the
North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Science Advisory Council
(Marcelo Ardon, Clifton Bell, James Bowen, Linda Ehrlich, Nathan Hall, William Hall,
Martin Lebo, Michael O’Driscoll, Deanna Osmond, Hans Paerl, Lauren Petter, Astrid Schnetzer)
May 26, 2020
A - 110
Table of Contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 1

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4

2. Literature Review of Chl a and Use Attainment ................................................................ 11

3. Current Conditions in High Rock Lake .............................................................................. 24

4. A Proposed Site-Specific Chlorophyll a Criterion for High Rock Lake .......................... 58

5. Potential Elements of a Framework for Deriving Site-Specific Criteria .......................... 76
A - 111
1

Executive Summary

This document provides a description and technical background for a site-specific chlorophyll a
(chl a) criterion for High Rock Lake, North Carolina, a freshwater reservoir in the Yadkin-Pee
Dee river basin of North and South Carolina. The work by the North Carolina Science Advisory
Council (SAC) to establish this criterion is part of larger effort in North Carolina to develop
nutrient criteria throughout North Carolina on a site-specific basis for three separate water body
types: 1) reservoirs/lakes, 2) rivers/streams and 3) estuaries. The existing numeric chl a criterion
of 40 µg/L is assessed on a “not-to-exceed” basis as part of a narrative standard for lakes,
sounds, estuaries, reservoirs, and other slow-moving waters not designated as trout waters. The
criterion is exceeded when there is greater than a 90% statistical confidence that more than 10%
of samples will exceed a 40 µg/L photic zone average concentration. The efficacy of applying a
single chl a criterion to protect the wide variety of surface water habitats in North Carolina has
been debated, and development of site-specific Chl a criteria have been promoted by the US EPA
and authorized for North Carolina by the Environmental Management Commission.

This newly-developed, site-specific Chl a criterion has been developed according to a process
that considered the designated uses (aesthetics, water supply, aquatic habitat, and recreation) of
High Rock Lake. The criterion was developed to protect these designated uses. Multiple lines of
evidence (e.g. literature review, water quality monitoring results, assessments of designated use
attainments) were used to determine the appropriate chl a concentration, its averaging period,
and the frequency of criterion exceedance that would be protective of the designated uses.

The literature review found that increases in chl a concentration decrease water clarity and
correlate strongly with increasing primary production in phytoplankton dominated
systems. Freshwater fisheries production generally responds positively to increases in chl a. An
upper threshold exists, however, to the positive relationship between chl a and overall fisheries
production. At chl a levels beyond the threshold, negative impacts of excessive algal production
on water quality (e.g. dissolved oxygen concentrations, water clarity) may reduce fish
production, or cause substantial shifts toward less desirable fish species. Higher chl a values
may also increase risks from phytotoxins. Several genera of bloom-forming cyanobacteria can
produce a potent suite of secondary metabolites that are hepatotoxic and neurotoxic and can
harm aquatic life. There is not a simple relationship between chl a and toxin concentration.
Despite a considerable literature on phytotoxins in lakes, given current information available, the
SAC does not advise establishing chl a standards based solely on cyanotoxin risk to aquatic life.

The SAC reviewed water quality monitoring studies conducted by a number of research groups
in High Rock Lake from 1973 – 2016. Designated use assessments were also reviewed. Based
on nutrient and chl a concentrations, previous studies have consistently characterized High Rock
Lake as a eutrophic reservoir. The lake has been considered to be like many “run-of-the-river”
reservoirs that have distinct riverine, transitional, and lacustrine zones. Chl a concentrations
were generally highest in the transitional zone of the lake and have frequently exceeded the
existing 40 µg/L chl a standard. There are no clear long-term trends in chl a concentration.
A - 112
2

Data on other indicators of water quality such as dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, water clarity, algal
abundance, and phytotoxin concentration were also reviewed. Chl a concentrations in High
Rock Lake are correlated with relatively high DO surface concentrations, mixed effects on
bottom DO concentrations, and relatively high DO percent saturation values. The reservoir
attains water quality criteria for DO under existing chl a conditions. The pH of surface waters in
High Rock Lake (<0.2 m) was found to be highest during the months of June through
September. Measured pH exceeded 9.0 in 24-38% of the measurements. Exceedances of a pH of
9.0 occurred over the entire range of chl a values, but were more common when chl a exceeded
30 μg/L. The water clarity in High Rock Lake, based upon the most recent assessment using
turbidity measurements, is considered impaired in the upper riverine portion of the lake. Algal
abundances and taxonomy were found to vary seasonally in a fashion typical for temperate
eutrophic reservoirs with summer maxima and winter minima. In-situ phytotoxin tracking
devices deployed as part of a special sampling study in 2016 indicated that microcystin,
anatoxin, and cylindrospermopsin were present throughout much of the summer in High Rock
Lake and were often detected simultaneously. Bulk water analysis indicated that toxin
concentrations were below action limits or health advisory concentrations.

Based on assessments made by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission, current water quality
conditions appear to be supportive of a sport fishery focused on largemouth bass, striped bass,
and crappie, sunfish, and catfish. The largemouth fishery has been consistently evaluated as a
“quality fishery” sustained by adequate recruitment and non-excessive mortality. Fish kills are
uncommon in HRL, and large fish kills have only been noted during the major drought of 2002
when low flows, low water levels, high summer temperatures, and low dissolved oxygen caused
major fish kills. The SAC is not aware of any aesthetic or swimming use impairment of the lake,
even though chl a concentrations routinely exceed 50 µg/L.

The SAC used a literature review and the reservoir-specific water quality and use assessment
observations to develop the recommended site-specific chl a criterion. The proposed chl a
criterion for High Rock Lake is a seasonal geomean of 35 µg/L, not to be exceeded more than
once in three years, for growing season months of April-October based on protection of all uses
while maintaining the productivity of the sport fishery. In terms of spatial considerations, all
monitoring data from open waters within assessment units collected during the months of April
through October would be used to compute a geomean to compare with the proposed
criterion. The criterion would apply to all months of the year, with attainment of the standard
assessed with data from the growing season months. The SAC recommended maximum
exceedance frequency is not to exceed more than one in three calculated seasonal geomean
values.

The SAC also considered how lessons learned from the reservoir pilot might inform a statewide
framework for deriving lake-specific chl a criteria. Such a framework should produce criteria
that minimize both type I (false finding of use impairment) and type II (false finding of use
attainment) errors. Several framework elements could streamline the criteria development
process while still making use of both the scientific literature and lake-specific information.
A - 113
3

These elements include: (1) using similar duration and frequency components as recommended
for the lake pilot; (2) a chlorophyll a screening range to inform lake use attainment status; (3) a
predetermined list of numeric and narrative indicators of use attainment; and (4) decision
guidelines for translating lake evaluation results into site-specific criteria. The SAC and DEQ
could revisit these concepts during the statewide criteria development phase of the NCDP.

A - 114
4

1. Introduction

As described in the North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Development Plan (NCDP), (NCDWR
2014) and its revised version (NCDWR 2019), North Carolina is working towards developing
scientifically defensible numeric nutrient criteria throughout the state on a site-specific basis.
According to the plan, numeric nutrient criteria will be developed initially for one example each
of three distinct water body types. The water bodies and the water body types are as follows:

1.0 High Rock Lake (reservoirs/lakes)
2.0 Central portion of the Cape Fear River (rivers/streams)
3.0 Chowan River/Albemarle Sound (estuaries)

An important component of the NCDP has been the creation of a twelve-member scientific
advisory council (SAC) to advise and assist the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) in the development of numeric nutrient criteria. This document represents the work
of the SAC done with the cooperation and assistance of the NCDWR. In this document the SAC
provides a description, a rationale, and technical background for site-specific chlorophyll a (chl
a) criterion for High Rock Lake, North Carolina, a freshwater reservoir in the Yadkin-Pee Dee
river basin of North and South Carolina.

High Rock Lake is a freshwater reservoir in the piedmont region of North Carolina. It is a
15,180-acre reservoir with a 3,974 mi2 drainage area located within the upper portion of the
Yadkin River basin (Figure 1.1). It is the first of a chain of four lakes (High Rock, Tuckertown
Badin, and Falls) that were created between 1917 and 1962 by Alcoa to provide hydroelectric
power for aluminum production (Cube Hydro Carolinas 2019).

According to a 2004 review of water quality data (Tetra Tech 2004), High Rock Lake has been
characterized as eutrophic since the 1970’s. EPA assessed water quality conditions in 1973 in
sixteen North Carolina lakes as part of a national eutrophication survey (USEPA 1975), finding
High Rock Lake to be the most eutrophic of the North Carolina lakes studied. At the time, EPA
noted that High Rock Lake’s variable but relatively short residence time (estimated at 27 days
for mean flow) produced a lake that operates more like a slow-moving river than a typical lake.

Tetra Tech summarized several additional water quality assessments in ensuing years that have
each shown High Rock Lake to have relatively high levels of turbidity, nutrients, and
phytoplankton abundance (i.e. high chl a concentration) (Tetra Tech 2004). High Rock Lake is
currently on North Carolina’s list of impaired or threatened waters as required under Section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Based upon the current numeric chl a criterion, the entire lake is
impaired for chl a and parts of the lake are impaired for pH and turbidity. Additional
information on the current numeric North Carolina chl a criterion, and policies for listing and
delisting waterbodies as impaired is provided in the following section of this chapter.

A - 115
5

The work of the SAC on a new numeric nutrient criterion for High Rock Lake has had multiple
objectives. While the immediate, primary objective of the work has been to develop a site-
specific criterion for High Rock Lake, a secondary objective has been to develop a methodology
for criteria development that can be applied to other North Carolina lakes and reservoirs, and
perhaps to other water body types within the state. The final section of this chapter describes the
general approach that the SAC has used to develop a site-specific chl a criterion for High Rock
Lake. One aspect of the approach is to utilize the scientific literature as a basis for the site-
specific criterion. A review of the relevant literature relating important eutrophication response
variables such as water clarity and chl a concentrations to relevant designated uses such as
aesthetics, water supply, aquatic habitat, and recreation is provided in chapter 2. Chapter 3 then

Figure 1.1. High Rock Lake and watershed. (figure taken from the North Carolina Nutrient Criteria
Development Plan (NCDWR 2019))
A - 116
6

looks specifically at the extent to which designated uses in High Rock Lake are supported given
the current water quality conditions. Chapter 4 then describes the proposed site-specific numeric
chl a criterion for High Rock Lake. The concluding chapter of this document (Chapter 5) then
returns to the larger task of developing numeric nutrient criteria for all the lakes and reservoirs in
North Carolina. The chapter proposes elements of a framework that the SAC believes could be
the basis for a general approach for developing site specific nutrient criteria across the range of
water body types in North Carolina.

1.1 Description of the Current North Carolina Chl a Criterion

As described in Division of Water Resources’ (DWR) May 2017 chl a description document (NC
Division of Water Resources 2017), the existing chl a criterion “arose through an advisory group
process and was informed by lake and reservoir research including the 1976 report by Charles
Weiss and Edward J. Kuenzler ‘The Trophic States of North Carolina Lakes (Weiss and
Kuenzler 1976) .’” The current approved regulatory text for the State’s chl a criterion, located at
15A NCAC 02B .0211(4), states:

Chlorophyll-a (corrected): not greater than 40 µg/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other
waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation not designated as
trout waters, and not greater than 15 µg/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters subject
to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation designated as trout waters (not
applicable to lakes or reservoirs less than 10 acres in surface area). The Commission or
its designee may prohibit or limit any discharge of waste into surface waters if the
surface waters experience or the discharge would result in growths of microscopic or
macroscopic vegetation such that the standards established pursuant to this Rule would
be violated or the intended best usage of the waters would be impaired; (Emphasis
added)

The 2017 Summary and 1976 report characterize 40 µg/L as the “upper range for alpha-
eutrophic waters (15µg/l to 40 µg/L).” Weiss and Kuenzler indicated that the scale of quality is
an interpretation that is not about whether the water should or should not be used; but rather the
interpretation that some attributes of more eutrophic waters are more acceptable – plenty of fish
– while others are less acceptable – swimming in algal blooms. The 2017 Summary also
references excerpts from another historical document, the records provided by Mike McGhee,
former EPA and NC DEM employee (McGhee 1983). The comments included in those notes
point to the importance of a chl a criterion to limit point and nonpoint discharges of nutrients,
including nitrogen and phosphorus.

For additional information, excerpts (shown in italics) from the NCDWR 2018 303(d)
listing/delisting procedures document are included. (NCDWR 2018). The excerpts summarize
how the state completes assessments of the existing chl a criterion based on collected ambient
data for determining whether a waterbody should be listed on the North Carolina Section 303(d)
A - 117
7

list. The flowcharts (Fig. 1.2) for listing and delisting waters when assessing numeric criteria are
also provided for reference.

ASSESSING CHLOROPHYLL-A NUMERIC CRITERIA
The following sets of evaluations will be used for the 2018 assessment for these parameters:
chlorophyll-a, dissolved oxygen, MBAS, mercury, nitrate/nitrite, pH, temperature, toxic
substances, and turbidity. For each parameter there is a brief discussion of the standard used for
assessment of the parameter including any parameter-specific good causes for not assessing in
Category 5. Note Category 5 is the 303(d) list.

The true frequency of criteria exceedances cannot be measured. It must be estimated from a set
of samples, which introduces statistical uncertainty. The degree of uncertainty depends on the
sample size. NC will use a nonparametric hypothesis testing approach based on the binomial
distribution. The binomial method allows a quantifiable level of statistical confidence (90%) for
listing decisions, which provides a 10% probability of listing an assessment unit when it should
not be listed. The null hypothesis is that the overall exceedance probability is less than or equal
to the 10% exceedance allowance. NC will also consider the number of excursions of criterion
for newer data that have not been assessed before. For 2018 assessment, newer data are defined
as data collected during calendar years 2015 and 2016.

Exceeding Criteria-Category 5
● Sample size is greater than nine.
● Greater than 10% exceedance with greater than or equal to 90% confidence,
or
● Greater than 10% exceedance, but less than 90% statistical confidence, and
at least 4 excursions in newer data that have previously not been assessed.

DELISTING WATERS

NC will review the final 2016 303(d) list as the starting point for the development of the 2018
303(d) list. All waters on the 2016 303(d) listing will be evaluated for appropriate inclusion on
the 2018 303(d) list as defined in 40 CFR 130.2(j). NC will apply a combination of
nonparametric hypotheses testing based on the binomial distribution as well as an analysis of the
dates of excursions to determine if there is good cause to delist a water. An analysis of newer
data that have not been previously assessed is included in the delisting procedure to allow the
state to determine if criterion excursions are more recent.

For delisting waters, if the 2018 assessment results in greater than 10% exceedance rate with
less than 90% statistical confidence and the water was on the 2016 303(d) list, the water will be
delisted if there are less than 2 excursions of the criterion in newer data that have not been
previously assessed. If the 2018 assessment results in less than 10% exceedance rate and the
water was on the 2016 303(d) list, the water will be delisted if there is greater than 40%
A - 118
8

statistical confidence that there is less than a 10% exceedance of the criterion or if there are less
than 3 excursions of the criterion in newer data that have not been previously assessed.

Flow chart for listing a waterbody

Flow chart for delisting a waterbody

Figure 1.2. Numeric Criteria Assessment Flowcharts

A - 119
9

1.2 Overview of Science Advisory Council Approach

The SAC was charged with recommending new numeric nutrient criteria so that High Rock Lake
meets its designated uses, which include public water supply, recreation, and aquatic life. An
important designated use in High Rock Lake is fisheries due to the quality of the bass fishing.
The focus of the SAC discussions were around designated uses, but also included lake use
protection into the future as the climate changes or if information on the lake’s health changes.

The SAC has proceeded in a step-wise fashion to recommend a new chl a criterion for High
Rock Lake. The first phase of the SAC’s work was information gathering so that the diverse
group could understand water quality standards, numeric nutrient criteria development, and learn
about High Rock Lake. Information was diverse and included uses and attainments, historical
water quality data, modeling, and other pertinent material collected from and about High Rock
Lake.

Additional information on multiple topics, such as the relationship between lake pH or chl a
values and fisheries, was developed by various SAC members from literature reviews. These
data were often tabulated in a “database” that was contextualized geographically for better
comparison to High Rock Lake conditions. Literature and data were shared among and discussed
between SAC members.

Numerous proposals for pH and chl a criteria were then developed by various SAC members
using multiple lines of evidence. Proposal discussions focused on averaging period and the
frequency of criterion exceedance that would be protective of the designated uses. Once fully
discussed, votes were taken on the different proposals until consensus was reached for a new
recommended chl a criterion. At a two-day SAC meeting in December 2018, the group’s
conclusions were substantively captured and that content was used to produce the current
document, including additional refinement on certain components as the document was finalized.
The newly developed proposed criterion has used the best science available and multiple lines of
evidence to determine the appropriate chl a criterion that is protective of the water quality
standards. As with most water quality decisions, numeric outcome-points consist of both data
and best scientific judgement.

Since the role of the SAC is to recommend standards protective of the water resource, the
committee tried not to discuss criteria relative to their feasibility and/or attainability. A
companion committee, the Criteria Implementation Committee or CIC, was formed to focus on
implementation of the recommended nutrient criteria as determined by the SAC. The CIC group
meets after the SAC committee proposes criteria. Their job is to refer clarifying questions back
to the SAC and also make determinations relative to the feasibility that the water resource can
meet these criteria. The process between the SAC and the CIC is iterative. Many of the CIC
members have attended the SAC meetings to better understand the deliberations that occur
around the new nutrient criteria recommendations for the High Rock Lake.

A - 120
10

1.2 References

Cube Hydro Carolinas. (2019). "The Yadkin Project." 2019, from http://cubecarolinas.com/the-
yadkin-project/. (retrieved May 25, 2020).
McGhee, R. (1983). "Experiences in developing a chlorophyll a. standard in the Southeast to
protect lakes, reservoirs, and estuaries." Lake Restoration Protection and Management: 163-
165.
NC Division of Water Resources (2017). Surface Water Quality Standards History Document:
Chlorophyll a. Raleigh, NC, NC Division of Water Resources: 2.
NCDWR, N. C. D. o. W. R. (2014). North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Development Plan, June
20, 2014. Raleigh, NC, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
NCDWR, N. C. D. o. W. R. (2018). 2018 303(d) LISTING AND DELISTING
METHODOLOGY, Approved by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission on March 8, 2018. N. C. D. o. E. Quality. Raleigh, NC.
NCDWR, N. C. D. o. W. R. (2019). North Carolina Nutrient Criteria Development Plan, v.2,
May 16, 2019. Raleigh, NC.
Tetra Tech (2004). Water Quality Data Review for High Rock Lake, North Carolina. Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709.
USEPA (1975). Report on High Rock Lake, Davidson and Rowan Counties, North Carolina,
EPA Region IV. National Eutrophication Survey Working Paper No. 381. Pacific Northwest
Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
Weiss, C. M. and E. J. Kuenzler (1976). The trophic state of North Carolina lakes, Water
Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina.

A - 121
11

2. Literature Review of Chl a and Use Attainment

This chapter reviews the existing literature relating chlorophyll a (chl a) concentrations and the
attainment of designated uses in surface water bodies. Surface water chl a concentration is a
proxy for phytoplankton biomass and correlates strongly with primary production in systems
where phytoplankton are the dominant primary producers (Cloern et al. 1995). Thus, chl a is a
strong indicator of trophic status. The principal function of chl a is to absorb visible sunlight
within the photosynthetically active radiation band (PAR, 400 - 700 nm), and convert PAR into
chemical energy needed to fuel carbon fixation. Through PAR absorption, chl a can directly
impact light levels necessary for other plants (e.g., submerged aquatic vegetation) to grow and
for animals including humans to see. Indirect impacts of elevated chl a on aquatic life include
excessive organic matter production and subsequent water quality degradation (e.g. high/low pH,
high/low dissolved oxygen), and toxicity from secondary metabolites that co-occur with chl a in
phytoplankton cells (e.g. cyanotoxins).

2.1. Chl a and Water Clarity

On average, chl a in phytoplankton cause about a 0.02/m attenuation of photosynthetically active
radiation (PAR) for every μg/L chl a (Koseff et al. 1993). A phytoplankton bloom of about 40
μg/L would result in a light attenuation value that approximately halves the light availability with
every meter depth. The relative importance of phytoplankton chl a in attenuating light depends
on the concentrations of other light attenuating substances including suspended mineral
sediment, suspended organic detritus (terrestrial or aquatic), and colored dissolved organic
matter (CDOM) (Biber et al. 2008).

For water bodies with submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), the amount of light that penetrates
to the bottom often determines the maximum depth that SAV can grow, and can limit SAV areal
coverage of shallow, nearshore areas in waters with elevated chl a concentration. Because of the
importance of SAVs for stabilizing sediments, trapping nutrients, and serving as a structured
habitat for fish and invertebrate communities, maintaining SAV coverage is often an important
component protecting aquatic life uses. Determining a chl a criterion that is protective of SAV
coverage requires knowledge of the light requirement for SAV growth, the maximum depth of
SAV beds to be protected, and the amount of background light attenuation from substances other
than chl a. Light requirements for SAV growth vary modestly among species and sediment
characteristics, but usually range from 10-20% of incident sunlight. Concentrations and relative
importance of light-attenuating substances vary greatly across aquatic systems and result in chl a
targets for SAV protection being highly site specific. For example, within different regions of
Chesapeake Bay, chl a targets to maintain SAV growth at depths from 0.5 to 2 m ranged by more
than an order of magnitude from 2.7 to 43 μg/L (EPA 2007). For some waters, concentrations of
sediments or CDOM are so high that SAV cannot grow, even though chl a in these waters is
often negligible, and otherwise suitable substrates exist (Bachmann et al. 2002). A standard of 20
μg/L was approved for Lake Winona, Minnesota to protect SAV coverage (MN PCA 2014).
Although protection of SAV is often a consideration in developing chl a criteria, SAV have
A - 122
12

apparently never been established in HRL, and with high suspended sediment concentrations and
widely fluctuating water levels, it is unclear whether even drastic chl a reductions would allow
for SAV establishment (see Chapter 3.4.1). Decreases in water clarity associated with high chl a
can also affect aquatic life uses by impacting predator/prey (Manning et al. 2013) and
competitive (Stasko et al. 2015) interactions, and altering heat budgets with resultant changes in
temperature and oxygen solubility (Rose et al. 2016; Heiskanen et al. 2015). These indirect
effects of water clarity are becoming better understood, but at present have not been used to
establish chl a thresholds for protecting aquatic life.

2.2. Fisheries Effects

In general, freshwater fisheries production responds positively to increases in chl a due to higher
rates of phytoplankton based primary production (Deines et al. 2015) ) that fuels production at
higher trophic levels. Bachmann et al. (1996) found a clear positive relation between standing
stock fish biomass and annual average chl a across 60 Florida Lakes with chl a levels ranging
from 1 to about 100 μg chl a (Fig. 2.1 A). For crappie, an optimal range 20-60 μg/L has been
reported (Schupp and Wilson 1993), which is slightly lower than optimal for bass and sunfish
production (40-60 μg/L, Maceina and Bayne 2001). Similar results were found in a comparison
of fish and chl a in Iowa reservoirs (Egerston and Downing 2004). In a meta analysis of over 700
freshwater systems worldwide, Deines et al. (2015) also found consistent positive relationships
between chl a and several metrics of fish production (production, yield, catch per unit effort, and
density), with coefficients of variation averaging 0.71 (95% confidence interval = 0.59-0.80).
Their study also included examination of climate impacts on fisheries but measures of
autotrophic production were consistently more important predictors of fish production metrics.

Across four Alabama and Georgia reservoirs, biomass and growth rates of black bass, the apex
predator, were positively related to average growing season chl a across the range 2 – 27 μg/L
(Bayne et al. 1994). Higher production of top predators in the eutrophic reservoirs was partly
related to increased efficiency of trophic transfer that was driven by a shortened food chain. In
the more eutrophic lakes, large phytoplankton were consumed directly by herbivorous shad
while in the mesotrophic reservoir, crustacean zooplankton served as a more important trophic
link between phytoplankton and planktivorous fish. Lower relative abundance of crustacean
zooplankton in the eutrophic reservoirs was linked to lower relative abundance of Lepomis
sunfish that prey largely on crustacean zooplankton in their early developmental stages. Thus,
higher productivity may favor planktivorous fish and their predators over other guilds of fish
(Bayne et al. 1994; Allen et al. 1999). There is also indication that very high productivity may
increase the predominance of benthic species such as catfish and roughfish that may or may not
be desirable (Egertson and Downing 2004; Michaletz et al. 2012. The types of fish communities
that are desired should be considered when designing nutrient management strategies to support
both fishery and water quality related uses.

In addition to causing shifts in composition of fish communities, an upper threshold to the
positive relationship between chl a and overall fisheries production is expected. At chl a levels
A - 123
13

beyond the threshold, negative impacts of excessive algal production on water quality (e.g.
dissolved oxygen concentrations, water clarity) may reduce fish production, or cause substantial
shifts toward less desirable fish species. Yurk and Ney (1989) found that across 22 southeastern
US reservoirs, chl a correlated positively with total fish abundance, but suitable habitats for
desirable walleye and striped bass occurred where reduced algal production allowed
hypolimnetic waters to remain oxygenated. In Westpoint Reservoir, Georgia, a 50% reduction in
chl a from approximately 40 to 20 led to shifts in the dominant species of black bass (Maceina
and Bayne 2001). The smaller spotted bass replaced largemouth bass with an overall increase in
number of fish, but a decrease in total black bass biomass.

Boucek et al. (2017) found some evidence for an upper threshold in the relationship between
largemouth bass condition (mass divided by length) and chl a such that condition improved up to
a chl a level of about 80-100, but subsequently decreased at higher chl a (Fig. 2.1 B). It is worth
noting that the decrease in body condition at higher chl a levels was driven only by two data
points with the highest chl a. In general, evidence for declines in fisheries production at the
highest chl a levels is weaker than evidence for a monotonic, positive relationship (Deines et al.
2015), and if a threshold exists it is most likely at a chl a level greater than 80 μg/L.

2.3. Chl a Relationships to Toxins

Several genera of bloom-forming cyanobacteria can produce a potent suite of secondary
metabolites that are hepatoxic and neurotoxic and can harm aquatic life (Chorus and Bartram
1999). Some freshwater eukaryotes (e.g. Prymnesium parvum, Roelke 2016) also produce toxins
and have caused massive fish kills in reservoirs of the southeast U.S. but these occurrences are
much less common than incidences of toxic cyanobacterial blooms. Microcystins (MCYs) are

Figure 2.1. Cross lake comparisons of chl a concentration versus total fish standing crop (A) redrawn
from Bachmann et al. (1996), and largemouth bass condition factor (B) redrawn from Boucek et al.
(2018).

A - 124
14

the most common cyanobacterial toxins measured in freshwaters, and far more is known about
MCYs than the other cyanotoxins. There are many congeners of MCYs that vary greatly in their
toxicity, but all primarily affect the liver and digestive function. Direct consumption of MCY
containing algal cells by feeding on toxic cyanobacteria cells, or by drinking bloom-
contaminated waters are the primary exposure pathways for animals (Ibelings and Havens 2008).
Acute microcystin exposure causes necrosis of the liver and death (Tencalla et al. 1994).
However, the sensitivity of aquatic organisms varies significantly, and organisms from eutrophic
freshwater systems where elevated microcystins are more common tend to be less affected by
microcystins than those from oligotrophic systems (Malbrouck and Kestemont 2006). Toxins
accumulated by zooplankton and bivalve filter feeders can be passed up the foodweb, but MCYs
are not known to biomagnify at higher trophic levels (Kozlowsky-Suzuki et al. 2012; Ibelings et
al. 2005). Rather, biodilution occurs, and animals at the top of freshwater aquatic food chains
(e.g. predatory fish) are least likely to accumulate MCYs to levels that cause liver damage to the
fish (Ibelings et al. 2005) or to humans that may eat their flesh (Hardy et al. 2015; Wilson et al.
2008). Emerging evidence indicates that MCYs may also have neurotoxic activity at
concentrations lower than those known to cause liver damage. Dissolved MCY concentrations of
0.5 μg/L or prepared in food at 10 ppb have been shown to alter behaviors of fish diurnal
swimming activity (Baganz et al. 1998; 2006) and refuge seeking and escape behaviors of
crayfish (Clearwater et al. 2014).

Two pieces of information are needed to determine a chl a level that is protective of aquatic life
from the threat imposed by MCYs. First, a toxin threshold below which negative impacts are
unlikely to occur must be established. Second, a sufficiently strong linkage between chl a and
MCY must be established to estimate the chl a level below which MCY concentrations remain
below harmful levels. The wide range of susceptibility of aquatic organisms to impacts from
MCYs, as well as uncertainties associated with impacts of low level, chronic exposures to MCYs
makes establishing a safe MCY level very difficult (Bukaveckas et al. 2017). In water bodies
where the dominant bloom forming phytoplankton are MCY producing cyanobacteria, strong
temporal and spatial relationships between chl a and MCYs have been documented (Otten et al.
2012; Gagala et al. 2014). For these water bodies, chl a may serve as a useful indicator for toxin
related risks to aquatic life (e.g. Otten et al. 2014). However, correlations of chl a with MCYs are
usually weak both for studies of individual water bodies (Vaitomaa et al. 2003; Ha et al. 2009)
and for intersystem comparisons (Yuan et al. 2014). The general lack of correlation between
cyanotoxins and chl a is primarily due to variability in chl a driven by eukaryotes and non MCY
producing cyanobacteria (Ha et al. 2009) but additional variation in MCYs relative to chl a is
produced by changes in environmental growth conditions (Orr and Jones 1998), and selection of
cyanobacterial strains genetically equipped for greater/lesser MCY production (Orr et al. 2004;
Otten et al. 2012). Given the difficulties in establishing the necessary threshold MCY
concentration for protecting aquatic life or a corresponding chl a value associated with any
particular MCY level, designing a chl a criterion to be protective of cyanotoxin exposure for
aquatic life would contain a very large amount of uncertainty. Therefore, given current
information available, establishing a chl a criterion based on cyanotoxin risk to aquatic life is not
advised.
A - 125
15

2.4. Chl a and Potable Water Supply Use

High Rock Lake is designated as Class WS-IV (waters protected as water supplies). (See, 15A
NCAC 02B .0301). In determining whether a water is suitable as a potable water supply, the
physical, chemical, and bacteriological maximum contaminant levels specified by Environmental
Protection Agency regulations are used as a guide. In other words, the requirements of EPA’s
Safe Drinking Water Act are used as a guide to determine the water quality necessary to ensure
this use is protected. The North Carolina Administrative Code also provides that the suitability of
water supplies are evaluated after treatment. In practice, potable water supplies are evaluated at
the point of a potable water intake and take into account the treatment provided in evaluating
whether uses are attained in the finished water. At a minimum, these treatment requirements
include filtration and disinfection for surface water supplies. (See, 40 CFR 141.70).

The Safe Drinking Water Act establishes primary and secondary standards for contaminants in
drinking water. (See, https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/national-primary-
drinking-water-regulations) The Primary Drinking Water Regulations (Primary Standards)
establish legally enforceable contaminant level concentrations and treatment techniques that
apply to public water systems to protect public health. Primary Standards include disease-
causing organisms, turbidity (an indicator of whether disease-causing organisms may be
present), and various chemical substances. The Secondary Drinking Water Regulations
(Secondary Standards) are non-enforceable guidelines for regulating contaminants that may
cause cosmetic effects or aesthetic effects (taste, odor, and color) in drinking water, but does not
prevent its use. The Secondary Standards include chemical contaminant concentrations, color,
odor, and other standards.

Under the SDWA, EPA may also publish health advisories for contaminants that are not subject
to any Primary Standards. In 2015, EPA developed such health advisories for two cyanotoxins,
microcystins and cylindrospermopsin. (See, https://www.epa.gov/cyanohabs/epa-drinking-water-
health-advisories-cyanotoxins) EPA also published guidance on managing cyanotoxins in public
drinking water systems. (See, https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/managing-
cyanotoxins-public-drinking-water-systems) This guidance generally discusses cyanobacteria,
hazardous algal blooms (HABs) of cyanobacteria, and the potential for cyanotoxins to be present
when HABs occur. The guidance notes that HABs can create taste and odor problems in drinking
water. Conventional water treatment (coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and chlorination) can
generally remove cyanobacterial cells and low levels of cyanotoxins. Risks associated with
HABs can also be reduced through active management of public water systems.

The chl a concentration of water does not directly affect its use as a potable water supply. Rather,
chl a or the presence of algal cells would be considered in a similar fashion to secondary
drinking water standards. Secondary drinking water standards apply to contaminants that are not
health threatening but may affect color, taste and odor, or have other undesirable effects.
Conventional potable water treatment facilities include processes to remove algal cells and their
A - 126
16

associated chl a prior to use. Consequently, even if chl a levels are elevated, adjustments in
treatment can generally be made without the need for additional facilities. However, operations
and maintenance (O&M) costs may be affected but this is not an impairment of the use.
Source water chl a concentration, at the point of intake to a potable water treatment system,
influences the potential cost of treatment to prepare the water for potable use, but does not affect
its use as a potable water supply. Treatment requirements for potable water supplies that
originate from surface waters, such as lakes and rivers, are highly regulated by USEPA. Under
the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the EPA Office of Water (EPA-OW) is charged with
setting water quality standards and regulations to protect the public drinking water supply. These
requirements impose treatment strategies at all potable water treatment facilities that are readily
able to control particulates (including algal cells). The regulatory basis for these treatment
strategies is presented in Attachment B of the pH criteria proposed by the SAC for HRL.
As discussed in Attachment B to the proposed pH criteria, potable water supplies, which use
surface water as a source, must provide treatment to settle and filter waterborne disease-causing
contaminants, and provide disinfection. The chemicals used in treatment to enhance particulate
removal will remove algal cells/chlorophyll before the treated water is provided for use.
Additional treatment, such as that required to minimize the formation of disinfection byproducts
under the Disinfection Byproducts Rule, would typically require the use of activated carbon to
reduce the amount of naturally occurring dissolved organic material. Activated carbon is also
very effective in removing taste and odor-causing compounds (2-methylisoborneol (MID) and
geosmin) and cyanotoxins. (EPA, 2015)

A review of the literature on chl a concentration necessary to protect drinking water uses yields a
mixture of reports that confound chl a with the actual cause of concern. Several of these studies
were identified during the meeting of the SAC in April, 2016. The meeting minutes and
presentation slides for this meeting identified several literature references related to development
of a chl a criterion to protect drinking water uses. These include the following specific references
(Table 2.1).

Table 2.1. A Review of Chl a Concentrations Necessary to Protect Drinking Water Uses
Chl a Target
(µg/L) Source/Notes
30 Values above 30 µg/L increase the risk of algal-related health problems. (Heath et
al., 1998)
9 – 10
15 – 20
20 – 80

Taste and Odor problems become noticeable
Water supply uses impaired
Consumptive uses severely impaired
(Carney, 1998)
10
50

Relatively low probability of adverse health effects
Moderate probability of adverse health effects (assumes cyanobacteria dominance)
(Chorus and Bartram, 1999)
15 To keep geosmin < 5 ng/L. (Smith et al, 2002)

A - 127
17

A review of these citations shows that the parameter associated with the impairment of the
drinking water use is not chl a but some other parameter. Heath et al (1998) and Chorus and
Bartram (1999) were primarily concerned with cyanobacteria and cyanotoxins. Carney (1998)
and Smith et al (2002) focused on taste and odor issues. These are separate issues that would
require a two-step process to generate a chl a criterion for the protection of drinking water (EPA,
2010). The first step involves identification of an impairment threshold for the agent causing the
impairment (e.g., cyanotoxin, geosmin). Then the causative agent must be related to chl a
concentration. This relationship typically results in low predictive capability.

For example, the State of Illinois prepared a literature review on taste and odor issues in potable
water supplies (Lin, 1977; https://www.isws.illinois.edu/pubdoc/C/ISWSC-127.pdf). Taste and
odor issues are attributed to chemical substances released by algae during the growth phase of
algal cell development, with about 60 species identified as producers of substances leading to
taste and odors in water. One such substance, geosmin, is produced by certain algae, including
cyanobacteria. In addition, taste and odor problems may also be caused by actinomycetes. This
literature review identifies other sources of taste and odor issues, various characteristics of taste
and odors, as well as methods for controlling taste and odor issues.

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) prepared a white paper on
Chlorophyll-a Criteria for Public Water Supply Lakes or Reservoirs (2011)
(http://www.kdheks.gov/water/download/tech/Chlorophylla_final_Jan27.pdf). They note that
excessive algal growth can have undesirable effects on drinking water supplies including taste
and odor problems, increased levels of cyanotoxins, higher levels of trihalomethane precursors,
and increased turbidity levels in source water. Treatment costs for dealing with issues caused by
excessive algal growth can be very high. KDHE noted, for example, that the City of Wichita
spent $8.5 million on an ozone facility to control taste and odor problems in the Cheney
Reservoir, and massive algal blooms have triggered the shutdown of drinking water intakes at
several other reservoirs. They conclude, prevention is one of the most cost-effective ways for
dealing with nutrient related problems for lakes and reservoirs. Problems associated with
excessive algal growth are specific to the types of algae present, but direct counting of algal
communities is time-consuming and labor-intensive, while chl a measurement is a good practical
alternative for assessing algal biomass. For Kansas reservoirs, taste and odor problems begin
occurring once chl a values reach 10 µg/L. KDHE subsequently adopted a chl a criterion of 10
µg/L to protect domestic water supply uses (See,
http://www.kdheks.gov/tmdl/download/Unofficial_Copy_SURFACE_WATER_QUALITY_ST
ANDARDS_04.11.18.pdf).

As discussed above, Kansas adopted chl a criterion of 10 µg/L to protect drinking water supplies
from taste and odor problems. Taste and odor problems are secondary drinking water standards
that do not preclude the use as a potable water supply under the SDWA. This is readily apparent
given that the use of High Rock Lake water as a potable water supply for a downstream
municipality has not been impaired by chl a concentrations that are significantly higher.
Moreover, based on modeling of High Rock Lake, it would be impossible to consistently achieve
A - 128
18

10 µg/L as a seasonal mean concentration. Consequently, the application of this criterion to High
Rock Lake is not recommended. As described by KDHE, dealing with taste and odor issues is a
cost-effectiveness problem. In this case, the cost to lower chl a concentrations in the lake should
be weighed against the cost of treatment to provide drinking water from this source.

KDHE also noted the relationship between chl a and the likelihood of cyanobacteria dominance,
the occurrence of cyanotoxins, precursors to disinfection byproducts, and turbidity. For these
parameters to serve as a basis for setting a chl a criterion, an impairment threshold for the
specific condition must be identified and then related back to chl a concentration, with
consideration for the removal that occurs during treatment at the water treatment plant. Since
these parameters are all subject to removal at the treatment works by the currently mandated
treatment processes, the analysis will become a cost-effectiveness evaluation to set an
appropriate criterion.

2.5. Chlorophyll a and Recreation Use

Clearer water is valued more highly for recreation than turbid waters (Andradi et al. 2018;
Smeltzer and Heiskary 1990), and therefore chl a-rich, turbid waters are generally perceived as
having poorer recreational value compared to waters with less chl a (Andradi et al. 2018; Smith
et al. 2015; Smeltzer and Heiskary 1990). It is important to recognize, however, that water clarity
is also controlled by suspended sediment and CDOM, and it is mainly water clarity rather than
chl a that relates to recreational value (Andradi et al. 2018). Waders and swimmers value water
clarity because the ability to see the bottom provides increased perception of safety pertaining to
physical hazards, a greater perception that the water is “clean”, and an increased aesthetic appeal
(Angradi et al. 2018). The aesthetic value of low chl a waters also extends to non-contact
recreational activities such as boating, fishing, or just lake viewing (Andradi et al. 2018).
However, other factors including surround land use (e.g. forested, cleared/ developed shorelines)
and abundance of litter play equal roles in a water body’s aesthetic appeal (House 1996; Andradi
et al. 2018). Aesthetic values are not explicitly protected as a designated use for NC waters but
implicitly are protected due to this strong relationship with recreational value. High algal
biomass can also generate unsightly scums that may also produce odors, and or toxins.
Increasing public recognition of toxin production by some bloom-forming phytoplankton may
further strengthen the perception of the safety of recreating in clearer waters. However, as
discussed in Section 2.3, the relationships between chl a and toxin production is too uncertain at
this time to derive a meaningful, quantitative chl a criterion for High Rock Lake.

Although water clarity is a strong determinant of perceived recreational value, the quantitative
water clarity judged by water users to be acceptable for recreation displays strong regional
variation that depends on the water clarity to which recreators are accustomed (Andradi et al.
2018; Smeltzer and Heiskary 1990). In regions that generally have high water clarity with Secchi
depths extending down 5-10 meters, a lake with a 2 m deep Secchi depth might be judged to
have impaired recreational value. At the same time, a lake with a 2 m deep Secchi depth might
be judged as having outstanding recreational value in the piedmont of NC where water clarity is
A - 129
19

generally poor due to a combination of high phytoplankton and suspended sediment. In regions
with very poor water clarity, water clarity also becomes a less useful predictor of recreational
value (Smeltzer and Heiskary 1990). These regional variations in user perceptions of acceptable
water clarity lessen the usefulness of recreational chl a criteria outside of the region where they
were developed. When translating survey results across regions, it is important that the average
water clarity in the survey region matches the average clarity of the region where the criterion is
being developed. Surveys of recreators on eight Texas reservoirs with water clarity similar to
North Carolina reservoirs indicated that lakes with annual average chl a values between 35-40
mg/L, about 30% of respondents judged the water quality to be impaired to some degree for
recreation (Glass 2006).

A - 130
20

2.6. References

Andradi, T.R., Ringold, P.L., Hall, K. 2018. Water clarity measures as indicators of recreational
benefits provided by U.S. Lakes: Swimming and aesthetics. Ecological Indicators 93: 1005-
1019.
Allen, M.S. Greene, J.C. Snow, F.J. Maceina, M.J. DeVries, D.R. 1999. Recruitment of
Largemouth Bass in Alabama Reservoirs: Relations to Trophic State and Larval Shad
Occurrence. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19(1):67-77.
Bachmann, R.W., Horsburgh, C.A., Hoyer, M.V., Mataraza, L.K., Canfield, D.E. Jr. 2002.
Relations between trophic state indicators and plant biomass in Florida lakes. Hydrobiologia
470: 219-234.
Bachmann, R.W., Jones, B.L., Fox, D.D., Hoyer, M., Bull, L.A., Canfield, D.E. Jr. 1996.
Relations between trophic state indicators and fish in Florida (U.S.A.) lakes. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 53: 842-855.
Baganz, D., Siegmund, R., Staaks, G., Pflugmacher, S., Steinberg, C.E.W. 2005. Temporal
pattern in swimming activity of two fish species ( Danio rerio and Leucaspius delineatus )
under chemical stress conditions, Biological Rhythm Research 36: 263-276, DOI:
10.1080/09291010500103112
Bayne, D.R., Maceina, M.J., Reeves, W.C. 1994. Zooplankton, fish, and sport fishing quality
among four Alabama and Georgia reservoirs of varying trophic status. Lake and Reservoir
Management 8: 153-163.
Beganz, D., Staaks, G., Steinberg, C. 1998. Impact of the cyanobacteria toxin, microcystin-LR
on behavior of zebrafish, Danio rerio. Water Research 32: 948-192.
Biber, P.D., Gallegost, C.L.., Kenworth, W.J. 2008. Calibration of a bio-optical model in the
North River, North Carolina (Albemarle-Pamlico Sound): A tool to evaluate water quality
impacts on seagrasses. Estuaries and Coasts 31: 177-191.
Boucek, R., Barrientos, C., Bush, M.R, Gandy, D.A., Wilson, K.L., Young, J.M. 2017. Trophic
state indicators are a better predictor of Florida bass condition compared to temperature in
Florida’s freshwater bodies. Environmental Biology of Fishes 100: 1181-1192.
Bukaveckas, P.A., Lesutiene, J., Gasiunaite, Z.R., Lozys, L., Olenina, I., Pilkaityte, R., Putys, Z.,
Tassone, S. Wood, J. 2017. Microcystin in aquatic food webs of the Baltic and Chesapeake
Bay regions. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 191: 50-59.
Carney, C.E. 1998. A primer on lake eutrophication and related pollution problems: Kansas
Department of Health and Envirnoment. Bureau of Environmental Field Services.
Chorus, I., Bartram, J. 1999. Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A Guide to Their Public Health
Consequences, Monitoring and Management. London, United Kingdom. E. and F.N.
Spon/Chapman and Hall.
Clearwater, S.J., Wood, S.A., Phillips, N.R., Parkyn, S.M., Van Ginkel, R., Thompson, K.J.
2014. Toxicity thresholds for juvenile freshwater mussels Echyridella menziesii and crayfish
Paranephrops planifrons, after acute or chronic exposure to Microcystis sp. Environmental
Toxicology 29: 487-502.
A - 131
21

Cloern, J.E., Grenz, C., Videgar-Lucas, L. 1995. An empirical model of the phytoplankton
chlorophyll: carbon ratio-the conversion factor between productivity and growth rate.
Limnology and Oceanography 40: 1313-1321.
Deines, A.M., Bunnell, D.B., Rogers, M.W., Beard, T.D. Jr., Taylor, W.W. 2015. A review of
the global relationship among freshwater fish, autotrophic activity, and regional climate.
Review in Fish Biology and Fisheries 25: 323-336.
Egerston, C.J. Downing, J.A. 2004. Relationship of fish catch and composition to water quality
in a suite of agriculturally eutrophic lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Science 61: 1784-1796.
EPA. 2007. Ambient water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen, water clarity, and chlorophyll a
for the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries: 2007 chlorophyll criteria addendum. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region III. Chesapeake Bay Program Office. Annapolis,
Maryland. November 2007.
EPA. 2010. Using Stressor-Response Relationships to Derive Numeric Nutrient Criteria.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-10/documents/using-stressor-response-
relationships-nnc.pdf
EPA. 2015. Recommendations for Public Water Systems to Manage Cyanotoxins in Drinking
Water. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-11/documents/cyanotoxin-
management-drinking-water.pdf
Gagala, I., K. Izydorczyk, T. Jurczak, J. Pawełczyk, J. Dziadek, A. Wojtal-Frankiewicz, A.
Jóźwik & A. Jaskulska,and J.Mankiewicz-Boczek. 2014. Role of environmental factors and
toxic genotypes in the regulation of microcystins-producing cyanobacterial blooms.
Microbial Ecology 67:465–479.
Glass, P. W. 2006. Development of use-based chlorophyll criteria for recreational uses of
reservoirs. Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation 2006 (8): 4038-4050.
Ha, J.H., Hidaka, T., Tsuno, H. 2009. Analysis of factors affecting the ratio of microcystin to
chlorophyll-a in cyanobacterial blooms using real-time polymerase chain reaction.
Environmental Toxicology 26: 21-228.
Hardy, F.J., Johnson, A., Hamel, K., Preece, E. 2015. Cyanotoxin bioaccumulation in freshwater
fish, Washington State, USA. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 187: 667. DOI
10.1007/s10661-015-4875-x
Heath, R.G., Steynberg, M.C., Guglielmi, R., Maritz, A.L. 1998. The implications of point
source phosphorus management to potable water treatment. Water Science and Technology
37(2): 343–350.
Heiskanen, J.J., Mammarella, I., Ojala, A., Stepanenko, V., Erkkila, K.M., Miettinen, H.,
Sandstrom, H., Eugster, W., Lepparanta, M., Jarvinen, J., Vesala, T., Nordbo, A. 2015.
Effects of water clarity on lake stratification and lake-atmosphere heat exchange. Journal of
Geophysical Research-Atmospheres 120: 7412-7428.
Hollister, J.W., Kreakie, B.J. 2016. Associations between chlorophyll a and various microcystin-
LR health advisory concentrations. F1000 Research 5:151. DOI:
10.12688/f1000research.7955.1
House, M.A. 1996. Public perception and water quality management. Water Science and
Technology 34: 25-32.
A - 132
22

Ibelings, B.W., Bruning, K., de Jonge, J., Wolfstein, K., Pires, L.M.D., Postma, J., Burger, T.,
2005. Distribution of microcystins in a lake foodweb: No evidence for biomagnification.
Microbial Ecology 49, 487-500.
Ibelings, B. W., Havens, K. E. 2008. Cyanobacterial toxins: a qualitative meta-analysis of
concentrations, dosage and effects in freshwater estuarine and marine biota. In Hudnell H. K.
(ed.), Cyanobacterial Harmful Algal Blooms: State of the Science and Research Needs, Vol.
619. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. Springer, New York: 675–732.
Koseff, J.R., Holen, J.K., Monismith, S.G., Cloern, J.E. 1993. Couple effects of vertical mixing
and benthic grazing on phytoplankton populations in shallow, turbid estuaries. Journal of
Marine Research 51: 843-868.
Kozlowsky-Suzuki, B., Wilson, A.E., Ferrao-Filho A.S. 2012. Biomagnification or biodilution of
microcystins in aquatic foodwebs? Meta-analyses of laboratory and field studies. Harmful
Algae 18: 47-55.
Maceina, M.J., Bayne, D.R. 2001. Changes in the black bass community and fishery with
oligotrophication in West Point Reservoir, Georgia. North American Journal of Fisheries
Management 21: 745-755.
Malbrouck, C., Kestemont, P. 2006. Effects of microcystins on fish. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 25: 72-86.
Manning, N.F., Mayer, C.M., Bossenbroek, J.M., Tyson, J.T. 2013. Effects of water clarity on
the length and abundance of age-0 yellow perch in the Western Basin of Lake Erie. Journal
of Great Lake Research 39: 295-302.
MN PCA. 2014. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Site Specific Water Quality Standards.
Winona Lake. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/site-specific-water-quality-standards
Orr, P.T. and G.J. Jones. 1998. Relationship between microcystin production and cell division
rates in nitrogen-limited Microcystis aeruginosa cultures. Limnology and Oceanography
43:1604−1614.
Orr, P.T., G.J. Jones, and G.B. Douglas. 2004. Response of cultured Microcystis aeruginosa
from the Swan River, Australia, to elevated salt concentration and consequences for bloom
and toxin management in estuaries. Marine and Freshwater Research 55: 277–283.
Otten, T.G., H. Xu, B. Qin., G. Zhu, and H.W. Paerl. 2012. Spatiotemporal patterns and
ecophysiology of toxigenic Microcystis blooms in Lake Taihu, China: Implications for water
quality management. Environmental Science & Technology 46: 3480−3488.
Roelke, D.L, Barkoh, A., Brooks, B.W., Grover, J.P, Hambright, K.D., LaClaire, J.W., Moeller,
P.D.R., Patino, R. 2016. A chronicle of a killer alga in the west: ecology, assessment, and
management of Prymnesium parvum blooms. Hydrobiologia 764: 29-50.
Rose, K.C., Winslow, L.A., Read, J.S., Hansen, G.J.A. 2016. Climate-induced warming of lakes
can be either amplified or suppressed by trends in water clarity. Limnology and
Oceanography Letters 1: 44-53.
Schupp, D., Wilson, D. 1993. Developing lake goals for water quality and fisheries. LakeLine
13(4): 18-21.
Smeltzer, E., Heiskary, S.A. 1990. Analysis and applications of lake user survey data. Lake and
Reservoir Management 6: 109-118.
A - 133
23

Smith, A. J., Duffy, B.T., Novak, M.A. 2015. Observer rating of recreational use in wadeable
streams of New York State, USA: implications for nutrient criteria development. Water
Research 69: 195-209.
Smith, V. H., Sieber-Denlinger, J., deNoyelles, Jr., F., Campbell, S., Pan, S., Randtke, S.J.,
Blain, G.T., Strasser, A.A. 2002. Managing taste and odor problems in a eutrophic drinking
water reservoir. Lake & Reservoir Management 18(4): 319-323.
Stasko, A.D., Johnston, T.A., Gunn, J.M., 2015. Effects of water clarity and other environmental
factors on trophic niches of two sympatric piscivores. Freshwater Biology 60: 1459-1472.
Tencalla, F., Dietrich, D., Schlatter, C. 1994. Toxicity of Microcystis aeruginosa peptide toxin to
yearling rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquatic Toxicology 30:215–224.
Vaitomaa J, Rantala A, Halinen K, Rouhiainen L, Tallberg P, Mokelke L, Sivonen K. 2003.
Quantitative real-time PCR for determination of microcystin synthetase E copy numbers for
Microcystis and Anabaena in Lakes. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:7289–7297.
Wilson, A.E., Gossiaux, D.C., Hook, T.O., Berry, J.P., Landrum, P.F., Dyble, J., Guildford, S.J.
2008. Evaluation of the human health threat associated with the hepatotoxin microcystin in
the muscle and liver tissues of yellow perch (Perca flavescens). Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 65: 1487-1497.
Yuan, L.L., Pollard, A.I., Pather, S., Oliver, J.L., D’Anglada, L. 2014. Managing microcystin:
identifying national-scale thresholds for total nitrogen and chlorophyll a. Freshwater Biology
59: 1970-1981.
Yurk, J.J., Ney, J.J. 1989. Phosphorus-fish community biomass relationships in Southern
Appalachian reservoirs: Can lakes be too clean for fish? Lake and Reservoir Management 5:
83-90.

A - 134
24

3. Current Conditions in High Rock Lake

The first two sections of this chapter present chlorophyll a (chl a) conditions in High Rock Lake
and relationships between chl a and other parameters of interest such as dissolved oxygen, pH,
water clarity. Later sections describe High Rock Lake conditions with respect to algal
abundance and species composition, and algal toxins. The final section of this chapter reviews
the current state of designated use attainment in High Rock. Separate evaluations of use
attainment are provided for fisheries and aquatic life, potable water supply, and
aesthetics/swimming. Included with each evaluation is a discussion of how the findings were
considered to indicate support or nonsupport of designated uses under High Rock Lake’s
prevailing chl a conditions.

High Rock Lake is one of the most studied reservoirs in North Carolina. Tetra Tech (2004)
summarized the results of six separate water quality monitoring programs conducted by the EPA,
NC DEM, a UNC research team, and contractors to Alcoa Power Generating Inc. that took place
between 1973 and 2001. These studies had various project objectives and sampling designs, and
consistently characterized High Rock Lake as a eutrophic reservoir based on nutrient and chl a
concentrations. More recently, the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) conducted two
rounds (2005-2006 and 2008-2010) of intensive water quality investigations that collected
“photic-zone” composites (defined as twice the Secchi depth) that were analyzed for chl a and
other water quality constituents. Twelve stations (Figure 3.1) across the lake and its tributaries
Figure 3.1. DWR Monitoring Stations in High Rock Lake during the 2005-2006, 2008-2010, and 2016
monitoring programs. Not all stations were sampled in all of the monitoring programs.
2

Figure 1. Monitoring Stations in High Rock Lake

Crane
Creek
Abbotts
Creek
Swearing
Creek
Yadkin River
Grants
Creek
South
Yadkin
River
Lake Characteristics:
Mean Depth: 17 feet
Max Depth: 62 feet
Surface Area: 15,180 acres
Drainage Area: 3,974 square miles
Volume: 239,672 acre-feet
Retention Time: 4 to 50 days
A - 135
25

were sampled as part of the High Rock Lake Scoping Study of 2005-2006 and the 2008-2010
intensive monitoring study. As part of the nutrient criteria development process, an
additional round of water quality sampling and analysis was performed the NC Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) in 2016. Results of these sampling efforts are described in detail
in the following sections.

3.1 Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Chl a Concentrations in High Rock Lake

An examination of the spatial and temporal patterns of chl a in High Rock Lake provides a
foundation for understanding the algal dynamics within the reservoir. Spatially, the reservoir
exhibits a consistent upstream-to-downstream pattern in relative chl a concentrations. A useful
conceptual model of the lake is that it operates like many “run-of-the-river” reservoirs that have
distinct riverine, transitional, and lacustrine zones. (Figure 3.2). The boundaries separating
these zones can shift upstream or downstream with river discharge, and the extent of the zone
can expand or contract in response to watershed runoff events, operation of the dam, and other
changes within the reservoir that influence the flow and water residence time (Cooke et al.
2005).

The riverine zone is located furthest upstream from the dam where the major river flows into the
lake. The riverine zone is characterized by the highest velocity and shortest hydraulic residence
time. This region tends to receive relatively high levels of nutrients and particulate matter. The
turbidity within this zone limits light penetration so primary production can be influenced by
light limitation. The transitional zone is marked by an increase in lake width, which can cause
decreased velocity and an increase in residence time. As the water slows, the suspended
sediment tends to settle out of the water and deposit on the lakebed. As turbidity decreases, light
penetration increases, and irradiance levels in the epilimnion increase. The transitional zone can
be a more productive region of the reservoir because light limitation plays less of a role there.
Bio-available nutrient concentrations decrease through the transitional zone while turbidity
decreases and irradiance levels increase. Controls on phytoplankton production transition from

Figure 3.2. Common lake zones (riverine, transitional, and lacustrine) observed for run-of-the
river reservoirs, such as High Rock Lake (modified from Cooke et al 2005).

Figure 3.2. Common lake zones (riverine, transitional, and lacustrine) observed for run-of-the river
reservoirs, such as High Rock Lake (modified from Cooke et al 2005).
A - 136
26

light-limited production in the riverine zone to nutrient limited production in the downstream
lacustrine zone (Rudd 2018). In addition, internal nutrient recycling can play a larger role in the
transition and lacustrine zones (Cooke et al. 2005).

DWR monitoring stations are located in each of three zones within High Rock Lake (Figure 3.3).
Consistent spatial differences have been seen between chl a concentrations located in different
zones, for samples collected between 2008 and 2012. Two stations in the transitional zone of the
lake frequently exceeded the existing 40 µg/L chl a criterion (Figure 3.4). YAD152C and
YAD152 are the sites that have most frequently exceeded the 40 µg/L chl a criterion (Figure
3.5).

Figure 3.3. High Rock Lake monitoring station locations and lake zones.
Seasonal patterns in chl a are difficult to determine, because the majority of the samples
collected over the long-term have been collected during the growing season only. Monthly
sampling during 2008-2011 at station YAD152C showed that chl a concentrations were highest
during July and August, but could remain relatively high even in December (Figure 3.6). The
samples with the highest chl a tended to be dominated by cyanobacteria (Figure 3.6) in terms of
number of cells, although other taxa still comprised significant proportions of the algal biomass
or biovolume. Samples from a site located in one of the arms of the reservoir (Abbotts Creek)
also tended to show higher chl a values during the summer, but in this location high values
during September and October were also observed (Figure 3.7).

A - 137
27

Figure 3.4. Map of percentage of water samples with chl a concentrations greater than 40 µg/L in the
time period 2008-2012 in High Rock Lake (from Behm presentation to SAC May 6, 2015).

Figure 3.5. Distribution (% of samples) of chl a concentrations across different stations in High Rock
Lake sampled between 2008-2011 (from Behm presentation to SAC May 6, 2015).

The variation in sampling frequency over the various High Rock Lake monitoring programs (e.g.
monthly, yearly, every five years) makes it challenging to draw conclusions on temporal trends
in the monitoring data. There are no clear long-term trends in chl a concentrations (Figures 3.8
and 3.9). Plots are shown for two of the sites with most data over the long-term sampling period
(1980-2011). There is no statistically significant trend, examined using linear regression.
A - 138
28

Figure 3.6. Seasonal patterns of chl a in station YAD152C High Rock Lake 2008-2010. (from Behm
presentation to SAC May 6, 2015).

Figure 3.7. Seasonal pattern of chl a in station HRL052 in High Rock Lake 2008-2010. (from Behm
presentation to SAC May 6, 2015).
A - 139
29

Figure 3.8. Long-term (1980-2011) chl a concentrations in YAD152C station in High Rock Lake. Years
in which more than 1 sample were collected were averaged and error bars represent standard error. There
has not been a clear increase or decrease in chl a concentration.

Figure 3.9. Long-term (1980-2011) chl a concentrations in YAD156A station in High Rock Lake. Years
in which more than 1 sample were collected were averaged and error bars represent standard error. There
has not been a clear increase or decrease in chl a concentration.
A - 140
30

3.2 Chl a Relationships with Other Indicators

The subsections below present evaluations of the relationships of chl a with other key parameters
such as dissolved oxygen, pH, and water clarity. These parameters are useful indicators of
attainment of aquatic life and recreational uses, so their relationship with chl a has direct bearing
on the selection of a chl a criterion for High Rock Lake. Specifically, if chl a has a strong
relationship with a key parameter, it would be desired to set chl a criteria at levels at which that
parameter is within use-supporting ranges, considering both magnitude and temporal aspects of
the parameter goals. If a parameter lacks strong relationships with chl a, or the parameter lacks
clear thresholds of attainment/non-attainment, it would have less bearing on the chl a criteria
selected.

3.2.1 Dissolved Oxygen

High Rock Lake generally experiences favorable dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in the
epilimnion and is not 303(d)-listed for this parameter. However, DO concentration is one of the
most direct indicators of aquatic life support, and so the relationship between chl a and DO
should be considered when setting site-specific criteria. The North Carolina Administrative Code
(15A NCAC 02B) identifies the DO water quality criteria applicable to High Rock Lake based
on the designated uses of the lake. The DO criteria for Class C waters (15A NCAC 02B.0211(6))
provides: for non-trout waters, not less than a daily average of 5.0 mg/l with a minimum
instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/l; swamp waters, lake coves, or backwaters, and lake
bottom waters may have lower values if caused by natural conditions.

Lin (2015) previously evaluated the relations between chl a and DO in High Rock Lake based on
the historical fixed station monitoring record. This evaluation determined that surface DO
concentration and DO percent saturation was positively correlated with chl a in spring and
summer, but negatively correlated with chlorophyll in the winter (Figure 3. 10). Bottom DO
was negatively correlated with chl a in the winter and spring.

The positive correlation between chl a and surface DO in growing season months is expected due
to algal photosynthesis, especially considering that most fixed station data were collected during
daytime hours. Weaker correlations were detected between chl a and deeper DO. While some of
the DO from surface algal photosynthesis can reach hypolimnetic waters by diffusion or
advective mixing, increases in organic matter may also increase the decay of algal biomass, thus
depleting DO in bottom waters. Some hypolimnetic oxygen depletion is considered a natural
process in lakes and reservoirs (such as High Rock Lake) especially during temperature-driven
stratification in warm months. For this reason, compliance with DO standards is normally
assessed using surface measurements, and the present evaluation did not consider hypolimnetic
DO depletion as an impairment of designated uses.

In 2016, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) also deployed monitoring sondes
in High Rock Lake to measure short-term variations in chl a, DO, and DO percent saturation,
A - 141
31

among other variables. The sondes were deployed from July 13 to October 5, 2016. Surface and
bottom sondes were deployed at station YAD152C for the entire period, whereas the other sonde

Figure 3.10. Relation between fractional DO saturation and chl a in High Rock Lake fixed station data.
Source: Lin (2015).
pair was moved between three stations (YAD169A, YAD169B, and HRL051). The chl a
concentrations from the sondes were not similar in magnitude to chl a concentrations measured
in grab samples (extraction method), and so are of questionable reliability. However, the sonde
data are still considered useful for exploring the DO conditions that High Rock Lake experiences
under the prevailing chl a conditions. For reference, chl a concentrations measured in grab
samples in July-October 2016 ranged from 11 to 47 µg/L station HRL051, 58 to 75 µg/L at
YAD152C, and 31 to 56 µg/L at YAD169B.

The sonde data reveal generally favorable DO concentrations at the surface, with >99 percent of
individual measurements above North Carolina’s minimum DO criterion of 4 mg/L for Class B
waters, and almost 100% percent of daily average DO measurements exceeding the daily average
criterion of 5 mg/L (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1. Proportion of High Rock Lake Surface Sonde DO Measurements at or Above DO Criteria
Station
Proportion of
Observations
≥ 4 mg/L
Proportion of Daily
Averages
≥ 5 mg/L
YAD152C 100% 100%
YAD169A ~98% 100%
YAD169B 100% ~100%
HRL051 ~100% 100%
All >99% ~100% A - 142
32

The sonde data also revealed relatively high diel variability in surface DO concentration (Figure
3.11) and surface DO saturation (Figure 3.12) associated with diurnal cycles in algal
photosynthesis and respiration. Table 3.2 presents a statistical summary of the sonde chl a and

Figure 3.11. Surface and bottom DO concentrations at YAD152C during a portion of the 2016 sonde
data collection period.

Figure 3.12. Surface and bottom DO percent saturation during a portion of the 2016 sonde data collection
period.
DO data by station. The surface DO percent saturation averaged 122% for all the sonde data
combined, but exceeded 175% about 10 percent of the time and was less than 71% about 10
percent of the time. The surface DO percent saturation occasionally exceeded 225%, although
A - 143
33

this occurred in only about one percent of the individual measurements. The single highest DO
percent saturation measurement (265%) was observed at station YAD152C.
Chl a was positively correlated with DO concentration and DO percent saturation in both surface
and bottom sonde measurements (Table 3.2). The positive correlation with bottom DO
demonstrates the possibility of downward diffusion/mixing of high DO at the surface, at
Table 3.2. Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficients of Daily Average Surface Chl a vs DO Metrics [Data
source: DWQ 2016 sonde data from High Rock Lake]
DO Metric Depth
Zone Statistic n
Spearman
Rank
Correlation
Coefficient
p-value
DO Concentration Surface Daily Minimum 164 +0.303 <0.001
Daily Average 164 +0.371 <0.001
Daily Maximum 164 +0.404 <0.001
Bottom Daily Minimum 145 +0.313 <0.001
Daily Average 145 +0.472 <0.001
Daily Maximum 145 +0.512 <0.001
DO percent
saturation
Surface Daily Minimum 164 +0.279 <0.001
Daily Average 164 +0.345 <0.001
Daily Maximum 164 +0.375 <0.001
Bottom Daily Minimum 145 +0.322 <0.001
Daily Average 145 +0.472 <0.001
Daily Maximum 145 +0.504 <0.001

least under certain conditions. North Carolina does not have a water quality criterion for DO
percent saturation and utilizes DO concentration criteria to protect against low DO conditions.
This approach for protection against low DO conditions is consistent with federal guidance
(USEPA, 1986) which states that concentration-based DO criteria are more direct and easier to
administer than percent saturation-based criteria and that percent saturation-based criteria could
be either over or under protective based on temperature and elevation. North Carolina does have
a criterion of not more than 110 percent saturation of total dissolved gas saturation, intended to
prevent over-aeration of water and subsequent gas bubble disease in aquatic life, as can occur in
hydroelectric dam tailwaters. However, percent saturation of total gases cannot be directly
translated to a goal for DO percent saturation, and gas bubble disease is usually caused by excess
nitrogen rather than excess oxygen (Weitkamp and Katz, 1980).

The effects of oxygen supersaturation on aquatic life is not as well understood as that of total
dissolved gases or nitrogen. Under most circumstances, fish can tolerate short periods of oxygen
supersaturation relatively well, partly because (unlike nitrogen) oxygen can be removed from
tissue via metabolic activity (Weitkamp and Katz, 1980). However, some studies have attributed
gas bubble disease to oxygen supersaturation (Renfro, 1963; McKee and Wolf, 1963; Woodbury,
1942; Lassleben, 1951; Faruqui, 1975), albeit at higher percent saturation values than would
apply to nitrogen or total dissolved gases. Mortality has been attributed with DO percent
A - 144
34

saturation values of 200 – 410%, depending on study. However, other authors point out that
despite the frequency occurrence of oxygen supersaturation in eutrophic lakes and aquaculture
facilities, fish mortality from oxygen supersaturation is very rare (Boyd and Tucker, 1998).

Chronic effects have been noted at lower DO percent saturations under laboratory conditions
when the supersaturated condition was maintained for extended periods. For example, Doulos
and Kindschi (1990) found signs of gas bubble disease in cutthroat trout when percent DO
saturation was maintained at levels as high as 172%. Espmark and others (2010) found signs of
gas bubble disease in Atlantic salmon with continuous, multi-day exposures to DO percent
saturation levels of 160 – 220%, and McKee and Wolf (1963) cite a greater incidence of disease
in carp exposed to 150% DO saturation, compared with carp exposed to 100-125% DO
saturation. Based on these studies, a DO percent saturation of 150% is sometimes cited in the
aquaculture literature as the maximum safe level for continuous, long-term exposures. It is
unclear if similar chronic effects occur in the field, where conditions of >150% DO saturation
tend to be more variable in space and time, and fish can migrate vertically within the epilimnion.
High Rock Lake has not been observed to experience fish kills associated with gas bubble
disease, and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission reports no signs of gas bubble
disease in fish from the reservoir (L. Dorsey, pers. comm., 18 Nov 2015).

In conclusion, the current chl a concentrations in High Rock Lake are correlated with favorable
surface DO concentrations, mixed effects on bottom DO concentrations, and relatively high DO
percent saturation values under some conditions. The reservoir attains water quality criteria for
DO under existing chl a conditions. However, based on the limited scientific literature available,
exceedances of 150% DO saturation for extended periods—or 200-250% for shorter periods—
might be cited as a reason for concern. Because this parameter correlates with chl a, chl a
reduction would probably also reduce the DO percent saturation values and daily variability in
this parameter.

3.2.2 pH

The acidity or alkalinity of water as measured by pH is considered a eutrophication-related
parameter because algal photosynthesis can elevate pH, especially during the day. North
Carolina’s existing pH criteria are expressed as range of 6.0 to 9.0 and lack an explicit averaging
period or return frequency. North Carolina DEQ’s current practice is to only use surface pH
measurements to assess reservoirs for pH impairment.

For the present evaluation, variation in the measured pH of surface waters in High Rock Lake
was assessed using data collected by NCDWR staff from 1981 to 2016. Monitoring typically
includes multiple measurements at different depths at established ambient monitoring stations.
On a seasonal basis, the pH of surface waters (<0.2 m) was highest during the months of June
through September (days 150-270), and pH exceeded 9.0 in 24-38% of the measurements,
depending on month (Figure 3.13, top panel). Exceedances of a pH of 9.0 occurred over the
entire range of chl a values, but were more common when chl a exceeded 30 µg/L. The line in
A - 145
35

the bottom panel of Figure 3.13 connects the median pH value for each interval of 10 µg/L chl a
(0-10, >10-20, etc). The median pH value was 8.6-8.9 for chl a concentration intervals greater
than 30 µg/L. However, the frequency of pH values greater than 9.0 increased from 21.6% for
the >30-40 µg/L chl a interval to 37.5% for the >50-60 µg/L chl a interval. The frequency of pH
value greater than 9.0 for chl a intervals below 30 µg/L ranged from 4.8% to 15.2%.

The pH of waters in High Rock Lake varied with depth, consistent with the expectation that
maximum rates of photosynthesis occur near the surface of the reservoir. Figure 3.14 displays
depth versus pH based on 2011-2016 monitoring, with the dataset filter to only include pH
observations at stations and dates on which the chl a concentration exceeded 40 µg/L. For the
profiles shown, the maximum pH value occurred near the surface of the reservoir to a depth of
about 3 m for some dates and locations. The majority of the water column at the open water
stations had a pH below the existing criterion of 9.0 for all profiles of pH reported from the
ambient monitoring. Thus, there is available habitat in the mid-depth portion of the reservoir
even when the surface reading is >9.0. As part of the evaluation of the pH criterion, the Science

Figure 3.13. Measured pH in the surface layer for 1981-2016 by day of year and by chl a. The line in the
lower panel connects the median pH by chl a intervals of 10 µg/L.

A - 146
36

Advisory Council evaluated the availability of habitat for aquatic life where pH was below the
existing criterion and DO was sufficient (>4 mg/L). Habitat meeting both the pH and DO
criteria was available for all dates and locations on which NCDWR conducted ambient
monitoring (SAC, 2019). This is relevant to the selection of a chl a criterion, because the oxic
zone-average pH could be maintained below 9.0 at moderate to high chl a concentrations,
whereas Figure 3.13 would indicate that maintaining the surface pH below 9.0 might not be
practicable even with very large chl a reductions.

Figure 3.14. Measured pH by depth in 2011 and 2016 for stations with reported chl a > 40 µg/L in High
Rock Lake.
3.2.3 Water Clarity
Water clarity is a measure of how deep into the water column light can penetrate. Suspended
mineral and organic particles and dissolved organic matter can affect light attenuation in surface
waters. Reduced water clarity associated with suspended sediments and algal blooms can affect
lake ecosystems by reducing the visual range in water and the light available for photosynthesis.
Impacts associated with poor water clarity include reduced visual range (fish feeding), reduced
light availability for increased water treatment costs, diminished aesthetics and recreation value,
and reduced property values (Dodds et al. 2009 and Borok, 2014). Indicators of water clarity
such as turbidity or Secchi depth can be early response variables that can indicate nutrient-related
changes to the system, particularly when algal growth affects light penetration. However,
because these indicators are also sensitive to suspended mineral sediment, increased turbidity
A - 147
37

and decreased Secchi depth can also indicate sediment transport from the watershed upstream,
particularly during wet weather conditions.

Turbidity is a metric of light scattering by suspended particles that can be used as a proxy for
suspended sediment and water clarity. Secchi depth is a direct metric of visual clarity attained by
quantifying the depth of transparency in the water column. A Secchi disk is lowered into the
water column, and the Secchi depth is recorded as the depth at which the disk is no longer
visible. Thus, Secchi depth provides an indication of the transparency of the water column.
Secchi depth can be directly relevant to aesthetics, recreational uses, and fish habitat (Davies-
Colley and Smith 2001). Turbidity and Secchi depth are typically inversely related, as shown for
High Rock Lake (Figure 3.15). Currently, there are no Secchi depth criteria for NC lakes but
there is a turbidity criterion (25 nephelometric turbidity units or NTU:
https://deq.nc.gov/documents/nc-stdstable-06102019). Based on the relationship between Secchi
depth (m) and turbidity in High Rock Lake (2.12 (Turbidity)-0.47), a Secchi depth value of
approximately 0.47 m or 1.54 ft. would be similar to a turbidity value of 25 NTU, the NC lake
turbidity standard (Figure 3.15).

Figure 3.15. Secchi depth (m) vs. turbidity (NTU) in High Rock Lake based on the 2008-2009 and 2016
water quality sampling campaign.

Based on the most recent 2018 NC Category 5 Assessments "303(d) List" (approved by EPA
May 22, 2019), the water clarity in High Rock Lake is considered impaired based on turbidity
measurements in portions of the lake and its tributaries (Figure 3.16). The Yadkin River and
secchi depth (m) = 2.12(turbidity (ntu))-0.47
R² = 0.65
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140Secchi depth (m)Turbidity (NTU)
A - 148
38

upper portion of the lake, the lower portion of the lake to Second Creek Arm, the Abbotts Creek
Arm, Second Creek, and the Yadkin River are listed as impaired for turbidity. The turbidity
impairment in High Rock Lake has been partially attributed to sediment loads, although algal
growth also contributes to the increased turbidity (Tetra Tech, 2012), particularly in the
transitional and lacustrine (downstream) segments of the lake (Rudd 2018).

The most recent assessment of High Rock Lake was based on 2016 data and included Secchi
depth and turbidity data for eight stations (HRL051, YAD152A, YAD152C, YAD156A,
YAD169A, YAD169B, YAD169E, and YAD169F) with monitoring data collected on 10 dates
from May 11, 2016- October 5, 2016 (NC DEQ, 2018) (Figure 3.15). The Secchi depth data for

Figure 3.16. Segments of High Rock Lake that are currently listed as impaired due to elevated (> 25
NTU) turbidity based on the 2018 NC 303(d) list:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2018/2018-NC-303-d--List-Final.pdf

High Rock Lake for this period ranged from 0.2-1.3 m, indicating that the clarity of the water
ranged from good to poor. The lowest Secchi depths (0.2-0.6 m) were observed at the most
upstream sampling site (HRL051), in the riverine segment of the lake. At this site, turbidity
averaged 44 NTU and was above the 25 NTU lake criterion for most (8 out of 9) of the sampling
dates, except for May 11, 2016, when turbidity levels were 23 NTU. The report stated that the
soils in the watershed are highly erodible and high sediment inputs to the lake have resulted in
deposition of sediments in the upper section of the lake that have reduced lake depth and affected
boat navigation (NC DEQ 2018).

In addition to the lake assessment, the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Ambient Monitoring System
Report (NC DEQ 2012) provided a synthesis of turbidity data collected in rivers in the
watershed. The NC turbidity criterion for rivers is 50 NTU. This study found that the turbidity
A - 149
39

criterion was exceeded more than ten percent of the time at 32 of the 103 monitoring stations in
the study area. Of the 103 stations monitored, only six stations had no samples that exceeded the
50 NTU threshold. They noted that episodic high turbidity values can often be associated with
rainfall events (NC DEQ, 2012). The monitoring data for stations on streams draining to High
Rock Lake showed that turbidity in the streams draining to the upper segments of the lake were
commonly elevated above the state standard. These data and the recent synthesis by Rudd (2018)
suggest that riverine sediment inputs have a large influence on lake water clarity, particularly
during storm events and in the upstream segments of the lake near the HRL 051 monitoring site.
The literature on run-of-the river reservoirs suggests that reservoirs often exhibit a longitudinal
gradient of water clarity from the riverine inflow to the outflow at the dam, as the system
transitions from riverine to lacustrine conditions. As discussed earlier, based on this gradient,
reservoirs can be divided into three zones: riverine, transitional, and lacustrine (Cooke et al.
2005) (Figure 3.2). This lake zone framework could be useful to categorize High Rock Lake
sampling stations (Figure 3.3) and assist with data interpretation of water clarity measurements
(see section 4.4.2 for additional discussion on spatial considerations regarding chl a
measurements). Longitudinal patterns in water clarity become evident when the turbidity data are
plotted versus the distance upstream from the dam (Figure 3.17). The turbidity and data suggest
that the uppermost stations: HRL051 and YAD1391A, are in the riverine zone. During high
flows YAD152A may also be in the riverine zone. The transition zone generally occurs from
YAD 152C until the YAD169A station, where the lacustrine zone begins. However, during
extreme streamflow events the riverine and transition zones may extend closer to the dam.

Figure 3.17. Lake turbidity vs. distance to the dam (2016 lake survey data).

60411653447521562707682875912669
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0Turbidity (NTU)Distance to the dam (m)
A - 150
40

In High Rock Lake, the relationship between chl a and water clarity is complex due to variations
in nutrient inputs, residence time and the influence of riverine sediment inputs on clarity and
light limitation in the riverine and transitional zones (Rudd 2018). The relationship between chl
a and water clarity can be more direct in the transitional and lacustrine sections of the reservoir,
during time periods when riverine inputs are low and the residence time is longer. For instance,
a comparison between chl a concentrations and Secchi depth in the transition and lacustrine zone
revealed a decline in Secchi depth with increased chl a concentrations in this zone (Figure 3.18).
However, in the riverine zone an inverse relationship between Secchi depth and chl a was present
presumably due to the influence of riverine sediment inputs on Secchi depth in that zone. In
general, in the transition and lacustrine zones, the Secchi depth was lowest during periods when
chl a was elevated, but data from some years show the opposite pattern, presumably due to
higher sediment concentration reaching these zones. These data suggest that decreased nutrient
concentrations and reduced chl a concentrations can result in an increased water clarity in the
lake, but that the improvement potential varies based on year and hydrologic conditions. For
example, reducing the chl a from the high of 73 μg/l to the current criterion of 40 μg/l would
increase the Secchi depth by approximately 0.3 m, based on the chl a-Secchi depth relation
observed in the 2016 303(d) assessment dataset (primarily 2011 data).

Figure 3.18. A comparison of the relationship between chl a and secchi depth for the upstream riverine
zone vs. the downstream transition and lacustrine zones. The data are from the 2016 HRL assessment,
which included growing season data from 2011.
Overall, these data suggest that streamflow variations have a strong influence on chl a and water
clarity in the reservoir. Riverine discharge and residence time are important variables to consider
when developing nutrient criteria for this and other NC reservoirs. In the future, modeling efforts
may help to elucidate more of the complex inter-relationships associated with discharge, nutrient
concentrations, chl a, and water clarity variability. Because of the influence of low flows on
secchi depth =
-0.0094(chlorophyll-a) + 1.24
R² = 0.46
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 20 40 60 80Secchi depth (m)Chlorophyll-a (µg/l)
Transition and
Lacustrine Zone
Riverine
A - 151
41

increased residences time and elevated chl a levels, it will be important to understand the role of
dam operations and climate change on streamflow to the lake, residence time, and potential
influences on chl a exceedances.

3.3 Algal Taxonomy

3.3.1 Background and Rationale

Algal species composition is a potential indirect indicator of use attainment in High Rock Lake.
North Carolina defines biological integrity as “the ability of an ecosystem to support and
maintain a balanced and indigenous community of organisms having species composition,
diversity, population densities and functional organization similar to that of reference conditions”
(15A NCAC 02B.02020). This definition lacks a specific meaning for an artificial reservoir for
which no reference conditions are available, and North Carolina has not adopted an index of
biotic integrity (IBI) for algal assemblages. However, the SAC identified biovolume and algal
assemblage as one of the intermediate components of the conceptual model relating nutrients to
use impairment, adopted at its February 17, 2016 meeting (Fig. 3.19) (Hall, 2018). Algal data are
integral in trend analysis and in the development of NC DWR nutrient response models.

Figure 3.19. Conceptual model relating nutrients to use impairment (NC DEQ, Feb. 17, 2016)
A - 152
42

Moreover, an understanding of the qualitative nature of algal blooms is essential for assessment
of their potential toxicity (Touchette et al, 2007; Vanderborgh, 2015; Hall, 2018). This section
summarizes available information on algal assemblages in High Rock Lake, and how they vary
with chl a concentration.

3.3.2 Methods and Sampling Sites

Unless otherwise noted, phytoplankton analyses were performed on whole water samples
collected from NC DEQ Ambient Lakes Monitoring Program designated sites on High Rock
Lake (Lin, 2015b) (Fig. 3.20). Algal studies were conducted by NC DEQ in the following years:
2004, 2004-2006, 2008-2010, and 2011, encompassing a total of 181 assessments. Additionally,
NC DWR staff requested a supplemental analysis of High Rock Lake samples by SAC member,
Dr. Linda C. Ehrlich, of Spirogyra Diversified Environmental Services. This analysis was
conducted by Dr. Linda C. Ehrlich on samples collected by NC DEQ on August 30, 2017. NC
DEQ staff collected whole water phytoplankton samples (fresh and Lugol’s iodine-preserved) at
the following lake sites: HRL151, YAD152C, and YAD169F. Additionally, a fresh sample was
collected in an un-named arm of the reservoir (N35.64.430 W80.28816). Phytoplankton samples
are collected according to the standard procedure for Lake Water Sample Collection described in
the NC DEQ Intensive Survey Branch SOP document (NC DEQ, 2013).

Figure 3.20. Designated NC DEQ algal sampling sites on High Rock Lake (Lin, 2015b).
A - 153
43

3.3.3 Results, NC DEQ

Over the totality of its studies, NC DEQ taxonomists documented 140 unique taxa, identified to
genus or to species when possible. Although all of the major algal phyla were represented at
various levels, the three most commonly observed phyla were the Bacillariophyta, the
Cryptophyta, and the overwhelmingly predominant Cyanobacteria (Fig. 3.21) (Vanderborgh,
2015; Lin, 2015b). There was seasonal variance, though summers were consistently dominated
by high densities of cyanobacteria (up to 177,000 units/mL), comprising 69% - 96% of the total
unit density in July-September. Through the other months, January - March, unit densities were
consistently much lower (as low as 100 units/mL), and were dominated by the Cryptophyta, the
Bacillariophyta, and Ochrophyta1 (Chrysophyta), comprising 40% - 50% of total unit density.
Figure 3.23 clearly reveals the positive relationship between chl a and cyanobacterial unit density
versus the negative relationships for diatoms and green algae (Lin, 2015b).
The most common genera within the Cryptophyta were Komma and Cryptomonas, whereas,
within the Bacillariophyta, the most common genera were centric diatoms and Synedra.
However, the distinctly most influential genus was the cyanobacterium, Pseudanabaena, found
in 83% of the assessments, often comprising > 60% of total unit density (Fig. 3.24).
Possible toxigenic cyanobacteria that were observed included Pseudanabaena (83% of samples),
Microcystis (7% of samples), Aphanizomenon (17% of samples), Anabaena (Dolichospermum)
(22% of samples), and Cylindrospermopsis (44% of samples).

1 See www.algaebase.org for current taxonomic hierarchies.
A - 154
44

Figure 3.21. Algal unit density of the major algal phyla in High Rock Lake, 2008-2010 (Lin, 2015b).

Figure 3.22. Correlation between algal unit density and chl a in High Rock Lake, 2005-2010 (Lin,
2015b).

Figure 3.23. Chl a and percent algal unit density in High Rock Lake, 2008-2010 (Lin, 2015b).
A - 155
45

Figure 3.24. The filamentous cyanobacterium, Pseudanabaena, 1000X (Spirogyra Diversified
Environmental Services, JP Optical).

Because cyanobacteria cells are smaller than those of most other algae taxa, cyanobacteria by
density will generally be lower than by biovolume. Analysis of the 2004-2011 NC DEQ algal
data by Rudd (2018) revealed that although cyanobacteria were often dominant by density in
High Rock Lake, the sum of non-cyanobacteria algal taxa usually comprised the majority of the
algal biovolume. Cyanobacteria were a relatively minor component of the biovolume in the
samples from the riverine stations (see Fig. 3.3), but on average were over a third of the
biovolume in the samples from transitional and lacustrine stations.

3.3.4 Results, Spirogyra Diversified Environmental Services

3.3.4.1 Qualitative Observations

The phytoplankton assemblages at all four sites were mixed, though there was an immediately
observable dominance of the filamentous cyanobacterium, Pseudanabaena limnetica
(Lemmerman) Komarek C, corroborating NC DEQ results (Fig. 3.25). Algal taxa representing all
of the major algal groups (phyla), except for the Haptophyta (haptophyte flagellates) were
observed at all four sites, including the Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae), Chlorophyta (green
algae), Bacillariophyta (diatoms), Ochrophyta (Chrysophyta) (golden algae), Cryptophyta
(cryptomonad flagellates), Euglenophyta (euglenoids), and Dinophyta/Pyyrhophyta
(dinoflagellates). There were only minor spatial differences in the total numbers of taxa
observed, even though there was considerable spatial difference in sediment content, with
notably high levels of sediment in the HRL051 sample. There also appeared to be some spatial
differences in physiological health of the phytoplankton. Many of the cells in the highly turbid
HRL051 sample appeared small, deformed, and chlorotic (reduced green coloration); whereas,
cells in the un-named arm sample appeared more robust. Other visibly important, though
considerably less abundant, cyanobacterial taxa included Komvophoron sp. K. Anagnostidis & J.
Komarek, 1988 and Cylindrospermopsis phillippinensis (W.R. Taylor).

A - 156
46

3.3.4.2 Quantitative Results

There were clear spatial differences in abundance of the three taxa (Fig. 3.25). Abundance was
clearly highest at YAD152C and lowest at the highly turbid HRL051. However, abundance was
only slightly higher at the low turbidity dam site than at HRL051. At the dam, nutrient limitation
may have become influential.

Figure 3.25. Phytoplankton community structure at three sites in High Rock Lake, August 30, 2017
(Spirogyra Diversified Env. Svcs.).
In conclusion, cyanobacteria dominated High Rock Lake’s algal assemblage by cell density
during the summer, but non-cyanobacteria usually comprised a majority of the biovolume.
Cyanobacteria densities and dominance were positively correlated with chl a. The algal
assemblage contained several potential toxin formers, and several of these were frequently
detected. High cyanobacteria counts are not a direct indication of impairment. Potentially
toxigenic cyanobacteria do not always produce high concentrations of toxins, and algal toxin
concentrations (addressed in the following section) are a more direct measure of potential toxic
effects. Similarly, there is no evidence that the prevailing algal assemblage is incapable of
supporting higher tropic levels, and measures of fishery health (addressed in a following section)
would be a more direct measure in that regard. Based on relationships such as that shown in
Figure 3.21), it can be stated that cyanobacteria are likely to remain a significant component of
High Rock Lake’s algal assemblage over a wide range of chl a concentrations (30 or 40 µg/L and
higher).

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
HR
Dam
HR
152C
HR
151Units/mLThousandsSpatial Distribution of Three
Cyanobacterial Taxa in High Rock Lake,
August 30, 2017
C. phiillipinensis
Komvophoron
Pseudanabaena
A - 157
47

3.4 Algal Toxins
At least a dozen cyanobacterial genera have been implicated with toxin production, and at least
eight toxin groups have been characterized, of which microcystin (MCY) has been studied most
extensively (Cheung et al. 2013). However, cyanobacterial abundances (or chl a
concentrations) are not reliable indicators for the presence of cyanotoxins since not all species
within a genus produce these substances and those that can, do not do so continuously (e.g.,
Kaebernick and Neilan 2001; Loftin et al. 2016). Toxin production can be associated with
specific environmental conditions but these conditions are likely species-dependent. For
instance, MCY concentrations may be linked to increased dissolved inorganic nutrients (mainly
N and P), or more strongly associated with temperature and light levels (Codd et al. 2005; Davis
et al. 2009). A recent US-wide survey of over 1,100 lakes showed that at least one of four
common cyanotoxins could be detected in 92% of the States; all of which can harm fish,
livestock, pets and humans in varying ways (Loftin et al. 2016). Understanding the conditions
that favor cyanobacterial growth and/or toxin production is of key importance to guarantee the
safe use of freshwater systems and lakes.

For High Rock Lake, the presence and distribution of cyanotoxins was examined in a subset of
the water quality sampling stations (Fig. 3.26) during the most recent water quality assessment in
summer of 2016 (NC DEQ, 2018). Here, the common toxins that were investigated included
MCY, cylindrospermopsin (CYL), anatoxin (ANA), N-methylamino-L-alanine (BMAA) and
Saxitoxin (STX). Exposure to MCY and
CYL can impair liver function and at high
doses be lethal (Carmichael and Boyer
2016; Chorus 2000; Råbergh et al. 1991).
ANA and STX are both neurotoxins
(Cheung et al. 2013; Falconer and Humpage
2006). ANA causes an overstimulation in
neuromuscular junctions, leading to
respiratory failure (Falconer 2008). STX is
responsible for paralytic shellfish poisoning
(PSP), a condition that can cause paralysis
and death in humans (Acres and Gray 1978;
Kaas and Henriksen 2000). More recently,
BMAA has been investigated for its
connection to neurological diseases,
including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
(ALS), Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s
disease (Banack et al. 2010; Murch et al.
2004).
For the assessment, a combination of in-situ
toxin tracking devices (Solid Phase

Figure 3.26: Toxins Assessment, Sampling
locations.

A - 158
48

Adsorption Toxin Tracking or SPATT; (Kudela 2011) and the collection of surface water grab
samples was used. In contrast to “grabbing” a sample and analyzing for toxins in a finite volume
of water at one specific time, the advantages of employing SPATTs comes from their higher
sensitivity in detecting low toxin levels via a time-integrative signal. Moreover, SPATTs can be
used in freshwater to marine environments, they facilitate testing for multiple toxins (depending
on the resin used), and they are easily deployed and recovered (Howard et al. 2018; Kudela
2011; Wiltsie et al., 2018). The disadvantage of using SPATTS is that the method is semi-
quantitative and average accumulation values cannot yet be linked to absolute concentrations and
therefore health risk guidelines. All cyanotoxin analyses for SPATT extracts and dissolved
samples were conducted using Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assays or ELISAs (Abraxis
Inc.,Warminster, PA, USA). Each toxin kit allows for the detection of a specific suite of
congeners and has its specific lower detection limit (LDL): 1) MCY-ADDA (#520011) sensitive
to MCY-LR, -YR, -LF, -RR, LW, and nodularin; LDL = 0.10 µg L-1, 2) CYL (#522011)
sensitive to CYL and deoxy-CYL; LDL = 0.04 µg L-1, ) ANA (#520060); sensitive to anatoxin-a
and homoanatoxin-a; LDL = 0.1 µg L-1, 4) STX (#52255B; sensitive to STX and other paralytic
shellfish poison [PSP] toxins; LDL = 0.015 µg L-1, and (5) BMAA (#520040) sensitive to
BMAA and other amino acids; limit of quantitation = 4 µg L-1.
SPATTs were deployed at stations 051 (n =1), 152C (n = 5), 169A (n = 8), 169B (n = 2), 169E
(n = 6), and at Q6120 (n = 7) and typically replaced on a biweekly to weekly schedule (Fig.
3.26). Q6120 was located close to the intake for the Denton Water Treatment Plant south of the
dam. SPATT sampling revealed that MCY, ANA and CYL were present throughout much of the
summer and often detected simultaneously (Fig. 3.27). MCY was found across the lake while
CYL and ANA were observed at 4 and 3 out of 6 SPATT locations, respectively (Fig. 3.27).

In addition to SPATT sampling, grab samples were analyzed for absolute dissolved and
intracellular toxin concentrations at each of the stations (shown for dissolved fraction in Fig.
3.28). Running several intracellular extracts for all five toxins did not result in detectable levels
for any of the substances (n = 10), despite SPATT data indicating at least the presence of MCY,
ANA and CYL for several of the dates and locations. For the dissolved fraction, MCY and ANA
could be confirmed at a subset of stations and sampling events (Fig 3.28) but considerable
discrepancies between toxin dynamics based on SPATT versus grab samples were indicated due
Figure 3.27. SPATT toxin values for
MCY, CYL and ANA in ng toxin (g
resin) −1 d−1. Averages are shown for
multiple deployments throughout the
summer. Standard deviations (SD) absent
if less than 2 observations were made.
Note: y-axes is log-transformed due to
differing concentration ranges.

0.0
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
051 152C 169A 169B 169E Q6120ng (g resin)-1d-1MCY
CYL
ANA
A - 159
49

to detection limits. Dissolved BMAA and STX were not present during our study period based
on a subset of grab samples (n = 30 across varying sites).

The discrepancies between SPATT and grab sampling are partially explained by continued flow
that transports algae and by the “boom and bust nature” of algal blooms since both make grab
sampling a “hit or miss affair” compared to in-situ tracking. While the dissolved MCY and CYL
concentrations (Fig. 3.28) never reached EPA recreational guidelines
(https://www.epa.gov/cyanohabs), an increasing number of studies do raise questions about the
risks that might be associated with recreational exposure to chronic low-level toxins (e.g.,
swimming, boating and wading) (Backer et al. 2010; Stewart et al. 2006). This issue together
with the potential poisoning of wildlife and humans that consume toxified fish and shellfish
(Ibelings and Chorus 2007; Lehman et al. 2010) has yet to be addressed in High Rock Lake.

3.5 Other Indicators of Use Attainment in High Rock Lake

Whereas section 3.2 explored relationships between chl a and specific quantitative indicators,
this section examines other useful information on use support in High Rock, including available
knowledge on fisheries and aquatic life, potable water supply, and recreation/aesthetics. The
types of information presented in this section do not necessarily lend themselves to direct
graphical or statistical comparison with chl a concentrations. However, the associated
conclusions regarding use support (or lack thereof) can be considered in light of the reservoir’s
existing trophic status and chl a concentrations, along with other lines of evidence presented in
this document. If a use currently appears to be met, it would support the conclusion that the
reservoir’s existing chl a concentrations are supportive of that use. Conversely, information that
a use is not supported could lead to the conclusion that lower chl a concentrations would be
beneficial, if a cause-effect linkage between algal biomass and the use can be reasonably
assumed. While not a part of the sampling and analysis of pelagic algae presented here, benthic
algae are also present in High Rock Lake. At the time of writing this document a bloom of
benthic cyanobacteria, Lyngbya wollei, has been reported in HRL, which may warrant further
assessment in the upcoming years.

0.00
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.16
0.20
0 5 10ng toxin L-1MCY
ANA
Figure 3.28. SPATT toxin values for MCY,
CYL and ANA in ng toxin (g resin) −1 d−1.
Averages are shown for multiple deployments
throughout the summer. Standard deviations
(SD) absent if less than 2 observations were
made. Note: y-axes is log-transformed due to
differences among concentrations for each of
the toxin types.

A - 160
50

3.5.1 Fisheries and Aquatic Life

In HRL, aquatic life is managed primarily to support a sport fishery focused on largemouth bass,
striped bass, and crappie, though fishing for sunfish and catfish also occur. Support for the
fishery includes ensuring healthy populations of fish that are also safe for human consumption.
Based on assessments made by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NC WRC), current
water quality conditions appear to be supportive of the sport fishery. Table 3.3 summarizes the
findings of sportfish population assessments in HRL over the last decade. The largemouth
fishery has been consistently evaluated as a “quality fishery” sustained by adequate recruitment
and non-excessive mortality. Body condition of young fish has been observed to be lower than
ideal but within the normal range for other Piedmont reservoirs. Crappie also showed high
abundances with slightly lower than average body condition. Lower average body condition of
both crappie and largemouth bass is believed due to intraspecific competition that results from
high fish densities (Table 3.3), and therefore, is likely more related to fisheries management than

Table 3.3. Summary of conclusions from fisheries assessments conducted by the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission for High Rock Lake over the past decade.
Species
(reference)
Survey
Year
Fishery status Growth/ Condition Recruitment/Mortality
Largemouth
bass
(NC WRC
2007)
2006 Quality fishery Relative weight of some year classes
not ideal but within normal range for
piedmont reservoirs
As expected, and no
apparent negative
impacts on population
Crappie
(NC WRC
2008)
2006 High densities of
black and white
crappie
Good body condition but somewhat
slow growth for black crappie,
potentially due to high density and
intraspecific competition
Weak recruitment
during 2002 during
drought
Striped bass
(NC WRC
2009)
2006 Fast growth with excellent body
condition
Recruitment due to
stocking. Few large (>
year 3) fish caught,
believed due to small
gill net size used
Largemouth
bass
(NC WRC
2011)
2009 Quality fishery Average growth for piedmont
reservoirs. Relative weight of younger
fish not ideal, but at or above levels in
other Piedmont reservoirs. Suspected
cause intraspecific competition from
higher than average density
As expected, and no
apparent negative
impacts on population
Crappie
(NC WRC
2012)
2009 Survey catch below
normal, suspected
cause was high
turbidity from high
river inputs
Slower than average growth,
suspected due to high density and
intraspecific competition

Largemouth
bass
(NC WRC
2013)
2012 Quality fishery Relative weights of younger fish
slightly less than expected. Suspected
due to high density and intraspecific
competition
Well balanced age
structure. Adequate
reproduction and
mortality is not
excessive
A - 161
51

to water quality conditions. As in most NC piedmont reservoirs, striped bass do not reproduce in
HRL due to high temperature and low hypolimnetic dissolved oxygen conditions (L. Dorsey, NC
WRC personal communication). Annual stocking of 89,000 fingerlings maintain the HRL
population of striped bass. The 2006 striped bass survey indicated that striped bass grow fast in
HRL and maintain a high body condition for longer than average as they age compared to other
piedmont reservoirs. Estimation of the number of older (> 3 year) striped bass abundance has
been hampered by sampling biases. Fish kills are uncommon in HRL, and large fish kills have
only been noted during the major drought of 2002 when low flows, low water levels, high
summer temperatures, and low dissolved oxygen caused major fish kills (L. Dorsey, NC WRC
personal communication).

As noted in chapter 2, the relationship between fishery production and chl a is generally positive
between 0 and about 100 μg/L (Bachmann et al. 1996; Deines et al. 2015). Currently, chl a
averages about 50 μg/L in the most production region of HRL near station YAD152C. Reducing
chl a to meet a new criterion may cause some decrease in fisheries production. However, there is
a huge degree of variation in the relationship between lake productivity and fisheries, and there
are many examples of lakes with highly productive fisheries with chl a concentrations much
lower than 40 μg/L. Studies of fisheries in Alabama and Georgia reservoirs have found that chl a
concentrations of 10-15 μg/L supported fisheries that were as productive as more eutrophic lakes
and also maintained high water clarity desirable for recreation (Maceina et al. 1996; Bayne et al.
1994). The SAC views the risk of a potential modest reduction in fisheries production an
acceptable tradeoff for the reduction in risks associated with the current high level of
phytoplankton biomass (e.g. potential for cyanobacterial blooms and toxin production).

Harmful effects on fish by cyanotoxins with subsequent consumption by fishermen is also a
potential concern, particularly due to the high levels of cyanobacteria biomass. In HRL, this risk
has not been fully assessed. Low resolution sampling (monthly) for total MCY (intracellular and
dissolved) in summer of 2002 (Touchette et al. 2007) and for accumulated dissolved toxins using
a field tracking approach in 2016 (see 3.2.5.) indicated concentrations < 1 μg MCY /L. Limited
data on toxin ranges, maxima and temporal dynamics are the presumed reason for a virtual
absence of a relationship between chl a and any of the cyanotoxins observed in the southeast US
(Chapter 2). Any refinement of chl a criterion, established to minimize the risks posed by
cyanotoxins including fish intoxication, will depend on more comprehensive measurements of
toxins in lake water as well as animals.

Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) is an aquatic life that is commonly protected by chl a
criteria. SAV, however, are not present in HRL probably due to a combination of poor water
clarity and highly variable water level. High phytoplankton biomass contributes significantly to
poor water clarity in HRL with Secchi disk depths rarely more than 1 m (see section 3.3.3).
However, high concentrations of suspended sediment also contribute significantly to low water
clarity and large fluctuations in water level would likely inhibit SAV colonization in the absence
of high phytoplankton biomass due to periodic desiccation of suitable benthic habitats. Lack of
A - 162
52

existing SAV and a hydrologic regime unfavorable for their development renders a chl a
criterion to protect SAV irrelevant for HRL.

3.5.2 Potable Water Supply

High Rock Lake is designated as Class WS-IV (waters protected as water supplies). (See, 15A
NCAC 02B .0301). In determining the suitability of waters for use as a source of water supply
for drinking, culinary or food processing purposes after approved treatment, the Commission will
be guided by the physical, chemical, and bacteriological maximum contaminant levels specified
by Environmental Protection Agency regulations. As noted, the suitability of water supplies are
evaluated after treatment. In practice, potable water supplies are evaluated at the point of a
potable water intake and take into account the treatment provided in evaluating whether uses are
attained.

There are no potable water intakes in HRL. Consequently, HRL is not being used as a potable
water supply. Consequently, a direct assessment of use attainment is not possible. However,
there is a potable water intake located downstream. The Town of Denton Water Treatment Plant
(WTP) is located downstream of the dam on HRL and takes its water supply from the
Tuckertown Reservoir, the next downstream lake on the Yadkin River. The intake is located only
about 0.5 mile downstream of the High Rock Lake dam, and much of the water at that location
was recently released from High Rock Lake. The WTP employs conventional water treatment
processes including coagulation, flocculation, settling, activated carbon filtration, and
disinfection. Although chl a levels in HRL are routinely elevated during the growing season,
staff at the Denton WTP do not report that the reservoir has been unavailable as a source for
potable water due to chl a level. Rather, the conventional treatment processes have been capable
producing a high quality potable water. The Town does report the need to carefully monitor the
quality of the raw water supply—especially with regard to turbidity from high flow and seasonal
turnover—and adjust treatment processes accordingly.

The chl a concentration of water does not directly affect its use as a potable water supply. Rather,
chl a or the presence of algal cells would be considered in a similar fashion to secondary
drinking water standards. Secondary drinking water standards apply to contaminants that are not
health threatening but may affect color, taste and odor, or have other undesirable effects.
Conventional potable water treatment facilities include processes to remove algal cells and their
associated chl a prior to use. Consequently, even if chl a levels are elevated, adjustments can be
made without the need for additional facilities. Operations and maintenance (O&M) costs may
be affected.

Source water chl a concentration, at the point of intake to a potable water treatment system,
influences the potential cost of treatment to prepare the water for potable use, but normally does
not prevent its use as a potable water supply. Treatment requirements for potable water supplies
that originate from surface waters, such as lakes and rivers, are highly regulated by USEPA.
Under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) the EPA Office of Water (EPA-OW) is charged
A - 163
53

with setting water quality standards and regulations to protect the public drinking water supply.
These requirements impose treatment strategies at all potable water treatment facilities that are
readily able to control particulates. The regulatory basis for these treatment strategies is
presented in Attachment B of the pH criteria document proposed by the SAC for HRL (NC SAC,
2018).

As discussed in Attachment B to the proposed pH criteria, potable water supplies, which use
surface water as a source, must provide treatment to settle and filter waterborne disease-causing
contaminants, and provide disinfection. The chemicals used in treatment to enhance particulate
removal will remove chl a before the treated water is provided for use.

3.5.3 Aesthetics, Swimming

Aesthetic and swimming uses may be adversely affected by chl a concentrations due to the
recreating public’s perception of color, turbidity, and/or water clarity (Secchi depth) associated
with specific concentrations of chl a. Information provided to the SAC suggests that public
perception is highly dependent upon the experience of the population using the lake. More
generally, the literature shows that public expectations of lake clarity and color have very large
regional variations, based on the conditions to which users are accustomed (e.g., Burden and
Malone, 1987; Smeltzer and Heiskary, 1988). It can also be reasonably expected that user
perceptions would be influenced by the form of algal growth in a reservoir; i.e., highly visible
scums or mats could elicit more user complaints than dispersed growths of the same biomass.

In the case of HRL, the SAC is not aware of any aesthetic or swimming use impairment of the
lake, even though chl a concentrations routinely exceed 50 µg/L. Most phytoplankton growth in
the reservoir is relatively dispersed rather than occurring as highly visible scums or mats, and
SAC was not provided with any information to indicate that user complaints are common. In
September 2019, the Davidson County Health Department investigated a complaint and
confirmed the presence of a benthic cyanobacteria (Lyngbya wollei) in the reservoir. Information
on the location and extent of the taxa was not available to the SAC, so it could not be determined
whether it was restricted to a single cove area versus more widely-occurring. Regardless,
because Lyngbya is a benthic alga, it would not be directly measured by water column chl a.

The contribution of chl a to water clarity was discussed in section 3.2.3. This section concluded
that although water clarity was dominated by suspended sediment in much of the reservoir, chl a
reduction from ~70 to ~40 ug/L could cause modest increases (0.1 – 0.3 m) in Secchi depth in
parts of the reservoirs in some years or hydrologic conditions.

A - 164
54

3.6 References

Acres, J., and J. Gray. 1978. Paralytic shellfish poisoning. Canadian Medical Association journal
119: 1195-1197.
AlgaeBase.org. 2019. Global algal web database.
https://www.algaebase.org/browse/taxonomy/detail/?taxonid=97243&-
session=abv4:AC1F036516a2f00ABCLR8F6B32A0 accessed 9/26/19.
American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association (AWWA),
and Water Environment Federation (WEF). 2017. Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater. E.W. Rice, R.B. Baird, and A.D. Eaton (eds.). 23rd Edition,
Washington, D.C.: APHA.
Bachmann, R.W., Jones, B.L., Fox, D.D., Hoyer, M.V., Bull, L.A., Canfield, D.E. Jr. 1996.
Relations between trophic state indicators and fish in Florida (U.S.A.) lakes. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 53: 842-855
Backer, L. C. and others 2010. Recreational exposure to microcystins during algal blooms in two
California lakes. Toxicon 55: 909-921.
Banack, S. A., T. A. Caller, and E. W. Stommel. 2010. The cyanobacteria derived toxin Beta-N-
methylamino-L-alanine and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Toxins (Basel) 2: 2837-2850.
Bayne, D.R., Maceina, M.J., Reeves, W.C. 1994. Zooplankton, fish, and sport fishing quality
among four Alabama and Georgia reservoirs of varying trophic status. Lake and Reservoir
Management 8: 153-163.
Borok, A. 2014. Turbidity Technical Review: Summary of Sources, Effects, and Issues Related
to Revising the Statewide Water Quality Standard for Turbidity. Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality. Portland, OR.
Boyd, C.E., and Tucker, C.S. 1998. Pond Aquaculture Water Quality Management. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Boston MA. 711 p.
Burden, D.G., and Malone, R.F. 1987. A classification of freshwater Louisiana lakes based on
water quality and user perception data. Environ Monit Assess. 1987 Sep;9(2):179-93.
Carmichael, W. W., and G. L. Boyer. 2016. Health impacts from cyanobacteria harmful algae
blooms: Implications for the North American Great Lakes. Harm. Algae 54: 194-212.
Cheung, M. Y., S. Liang, and J. Lee. 2013. Toxin-producing cyanobacteria in freshwater: A
review of the problems, impact on drinking water safety, and efforts for protecting public
health. Journal of Microbiology 51: 1-10.
Chorus, I. 2000. Health risks caused by freshwater cyanobacteria in recreational waters. Journal
of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B 3: 323-347.
Codd, G. A., L. F. Morrison, and J. S. Metcalf. 2005. Cyanobacterial toxins: risk management
for health protection. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 203: 264-272.
Cooke, D., E.B. Welch, S.A. Peterson, & Nichols, S.A. (2005). Restoration and Management of
Lakes and Reservoirs. Taylor and Francis Group. Boca Raton, FL.
Davis, T. W., D. L. Berry, G. L. Boyer, and C. J. Gobler. 2009. The effects of temperature and
nutrients on the growth and dynamics of toxic and non-toxic strains of Microcystis during
cyanobacteria blooms. 8: 715-725.
A - 165
55

Davies-Colley, R. and Smith, D. 2001. Turbidity, suspended sediment, and water clarity: A
review. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37(5):1085-1101.
Deines, A.M., Bunnell, D.B., Rogers, M.W., Beard, T.D. Jr., Taylor, W.H. 2015. A review of the
global relationship among freshwater fish, autotrophic activity, and regional climate. Rev
Fish Biol Fisheries 25:323-336.
Dodds, W., Bouska, W., Eitzmann, J., Pilger, T., Pitts, K., Riley, A., Schloesser, J., and
Thornbrugh, A. 2009.Eutrophication of U.S.freshwaters: Analysis of potential economic
damages. Environ. Sci. Technol. 43 (1): 12-19.
Doulos, S.K., and Kindschi, G.A. 1990. Effects of oxygen supersaturation on the culture of
cutthroat trout, Oncorhynchus clarki Richardson, and rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss
Richardson. Aquaculture Research 21 (1), p. 39-46.
Espmark, A.M., Hjelde, K., and Baeverfjord, G. 2010. Development of gas bubble disease in
juvenile Atlantic salmon exposed to water supersaturated with oxygen. Aquaculture 306(1):
198-204.
Falconer, I. R. 2008. Health effects associated with controlled exposures to cyanobacterial
toxins, p. 607-612. In H. K. Hudnell [ed.], Cyanobacterial Harmful Algal Blooms: State of
the Science and Research Needs. Springer New York.
Falconer, I. R., and A. R. Humpage. 2006. Cyanobacterial (blue-green algal) toxins in water
supplies: Cylindrospermopsins. Environmental Toxicology 21: 299-304.
Faruqui, A. M. 1975. Fluctuations in oxygen concentration and occurrence of mortality of carp
hatchlings in a hatchery pond at Parta Fish Farm, Bhopal. Broteria Series Trimester Ciencias
Naturale 44:67-79.
Hall, W. 2018. Evaluation of Recommendations for High Rock Lake Criteria – Chl a by Clifton
Bell (March 13, 2018). Technical document. Hall & Assoc., Washington, DC 9 pp.
Howard, D. A., K. Hayashi, J. Smith, R. M. Kudela, and D. Caron. 2018. Standard operating
procedure for Solid Phase Adsorption Toxin Testing (SPATT) assemblage and extraction of
HAB toxins.
Ibelings, B. W., and I. Chorus. 2007. Accumulation of cyanobacterial toxins in freshwater
“seafood” and its consequences for public health: A review. Environ. Pollut. 150: 177-192.
Kaas, H., and P. Henriksen. 2000. Saxitoxins (PSP toxins) in Danish lakes. Water Research 34:
2089-2097.
Kaebernick, M., and B. A. Neilan. 2001. Ecological and molecular investigations of cyanotoxin
production. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 35: 1-9.
Komarek, J. and K. Anagnostidis. 2005. ‘Cyanoprokaryota II. Oscillatoriales’, in Süβwasserflora
von Mitteleuropa, Band 19/2, Koeltz, Scientific Books, Koenigstein.
Kudela, R. M. 2011. Characterization and deployment of Solid Phase Adsorption Toxin Tracking
(SPATT) resin for monitoring of microcystins in fresh and saltwater. Harm. Algae 11: 117-
125.
Lassleben, P. 1951. Is supersaturation with oxygen dangerous? Fischbauer 2, 105; Water
Pollution Abstracts, 25:6.
Lehman, P. W., S. J. Teh, G. L. Boyer, M. L. Nobriga, E. Bass, and C. Hogle. 2010. Initial
impacts of Microcystisaeruginosa blooms on the aquatic food web in the San Francisco
Estuary. Hydrobiol. 637: 229-248.
A - 166
56

Lin, J. 2015. High Rock Lake Data Review. Presentation to North Carolina Nutrient Science
Advisory Council, August 18, 2015. 95 p.
Lin, J. 2015a. High Rock Lake Nutrient Response Model. PowerPoint presentation given at
NCDP, August 18, 2015. Division of Water Resources – Water Planning, NC Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, 6 pp.
Lin, J. 2015b. High Rock Lake Data Review. PowerPoint presentation given at NCDP, August
18, 2015. Division of Water Resources – Water Planning, NC Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Raleigh, 31 pp.
Loftin, K. A. and others 2016. Cyanotoxins in inland lakes of the United States: Occurrence and
potential recreational health risks in the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2007. Harm. Algae
56: 77-90.
Maceina, M.J., Bayne, D.R., Hendricks, A.S., Reeves, W.C., Black, W.P., DiCenzo, V.J. 1996.
Compatibility between water clarity and quality black bass and crappie fisheries in Alabama.
American Fisheries Society Symposium 16: 296-305.
McKee, J. E., and H. W. Wolf. 1963. Water quality criteria, second edition. Publication No. 3-A,
State Water Quality Control Board; Sacramento, CA.
Murch, S. J., P. A. Cox, S. A. Banack, J. C. Steele, and O. W. Sacks. 2004. Occurrence of β-
methylamino-l-alanine (BMAA) in ALS/PDC patients from Guam. Acta Neurologica
Scandinavica 110: 267-269.
NC DEQ, Division of Water Quality. 2012. Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin Ambient Monitoring
System Report. Raleigh, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources.
NC DEQ. 2018. Lake and Reservoir Assessments: Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin. North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, North Carolina.
NC DEQ. 2013. Intensive Survey Branch Standard Operating Procedures Manual: Physical and
Chemical Monitoring. Technical Document. NC Division of Environmental Quality, Intensive
Survey Branch, Raleigh, NC 132 pp.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Environmental%20Sciences/ISU/ISB%20SOP%
20Version2.1%20%20FINAL.pdf accessed 9/26/19.
NC DEQ 2019. Algal and Aquatic Plant Program. Webpage description of the Ambient Lakes
Monitoring Program, Water Sciences Section, NC DEQ, Raleigh.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-data/water-sciences-
home-page/intensive-survey-branch/ambient-lakes-monitoring accessed 9/26/19.
NC SAC. 2018. Recommendations for pH Criteria in High Rock Lake. 44 p.
NC WRC. 2009. High Rock Lake Striped Bass Survey, 2006. Thompson, T. North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission Division of Inland Fisheries. Raleigh, NC. 2009.
NC WRC. 2009. High Rock Lake Crappie Survey, 2006. Thompson, T. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission Division of Inland Fisheries. Raleigh, NC. 2009.
NC WRC. 2007. High Rock Lake Largemouth Bass Survey, 2006. Dorsey, L. North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission Division of Inland Fisheries. Raleigh, NC. 2007.
NC WRC. 2011. High Rock Lake Largemouth Bass Survey, 2009. Dorsey, L. North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission Division of Inland Fisheries. Raleigh, NC. 2011.
A - 167
57

NC WRC. 2012. High Rock Lake Crappie Survey, 2009. Thompson, T. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission Division of Inland Fisheries. Raleigh, NC. 2012.
NC WRC. 2013. High Rock Lake Largemouth Bass Survey, 2012. Dorsey, L. North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission Division of Inland Fisheries. Raleigh, NC. 2013.
Råbergh, C. M. I., G. Bylund, and J. E. Eriksson. 1991. Histopathological effects of microcystin-
LR, a cyclic peptide toxin from the cyanobacterium (blue-green alga) Microcystis aeruginosa
on common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Aquatic Toxicology 20: 131-145.
Renfro, W. C. 1963. Gas-bubble mortality of fishes in Galveston Bay, Texas. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc. 92:320–322.
Rudd, M. 2018. An Evaluation of Water Quality Parameters and Flow Dynamics in High Rock
Lake, North Carolina to Assist in the Development of Nutrient Criteria for Lakes and
Reservoirs in the State. Masters in Environmental Management Report. Duke University,
Durham, NC.
Smeltzer, E. and Heiskary, S. A. 1990. Analysis and applications of lake user survey data. Lake
and Reservoir Management 6(1), 109-118.
Stewart, I. and others 2006. Epidemiology of recreational exposure to freshwater cyanobacteria –
an international prospective cohort study. BMC Public Health 6: 93.
SWCS Environmental Consultants. 2010. East Canyon Reservoir and East Canyon Creek
TMDL. Report prepared for the Utah Division of Water Quality. 304 p
Tetra Tech 2012. High Rock Lake Watershed Model. Tetra Tech, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Tetra Tech 2015. Analysis Report For Classification and Exploratory Analysis of North Carolina
Lakes Data for the Nutrient Scientific Technical Exchange Partnership and Support (N-
STEPS). Tetra Tech, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Touchette, B.W., Burkholder, J.M., Allen, E.H., Alexander, J.L., Kinder, C.A., Brownie, C.,
James, J., Britton, C.H. 2007. Eutrophication and cyanobacteria blooms in run-of-river
impoundments in North Carolina, U.S.A. Lake and Reservoir Management, 23: 179-192.
USEPA. 1986. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen. EPA 440/5-86-003. 46 p.
Weitkamp, D.E. and Katz, M. 1980. A Review of Dissolved Gas Supersaturation Literature,
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 109:6, 659-702.
Wiltsie, D., A. Schnetzer, J. Green, M. Vander Borgh, and E. Fensin. 2018. Algal Blooms and
Cyanotoxins in Jordan Lake, North Carolina. Toxins (Basel) 10: 92.
Woodbury. L. A. 1942. A sudden mortality of fishes accompanying a supersaturation of oxygen
in Lake Waubesa, Wisconsin. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 71:112–117.

A - 168
58

4. A Proposed Site-Specific Chlorophyll a Criterion for High Rock Lake
This section presents the SAC’s recommendation for a site-specific chlorophyll a (chl a) criterion
to protect the designated uses of High Rock Lake from excessive nutrient-driven enhanced
primary productivity. The proposed criterion would minimize potential nutrient-driven adverse
effects over short- and long-time scales, equating to impacts that are acute and chronic in this
man-made reservoir (see Section 4.2.1.). Literature presented in chapter 2 and the reservoir-
specific observations in chapter 3 were used to develop the recommended site-specific chl a
criterion.

Water quality standards consist of designated uses, parameter-specific criteria to protect those
uses, and antidegradation policies. The SAC is not recommending changes to the designated
uses or antidegradation policies that currently apply to the waters of High Rock Lake; rather, the
focus of this proposal is on a site-specific chl a criterion. Subsections below describe the
designated uses of waters of High Rock Lake and recommendations on how the chl a criterion is
expressed in terms of the temporal (e.g. duration, frequency), spatial, and magnitude components
of the criterion.

4.1 Designated Uses for High Rock Lake

The waters of High Rock Lake are classified in the water quality standards regulations of North
Carolina as WS-V Class B waters in upstream reaches or WS-IV Class B waters in downstream
reaches (15A NCAC 02B .0309). The Class B designation requires protection of primary and
secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife (15A
NCAC 02B .0219). The water supply designations (WS-IV and WS-V) protect waters as water
supplies in moderately to highly developed watersheds. The water supply designations require
local programs to control nonpoint sources and stormwater discharges for WS-IV waters and
may apply appropriate management requirements in WS-V waters, as deemed necessary, for the
protection of downstream receiving waters per 15A NCAC 2B .0203.

The key components of the designated uses for classifications applied to High Rock Lake that
may be impacted by nutrient-driven enhanced primary production are primary recreation,
fishing/aquatic life, and water supply. For recreational activities, protection of primary
recreation activities, which includes swimming on a frequent or organized basis, also would be
protective of secondary recreation and fishing activities. Further, protection of primary
recreation and aquatic life would be protective of wildlife uses around the margins of High Rock
Lake. For the aquatic life use, propagation of species naturally occurring in the man-made
system and the overall productivity and diversity of the sport fishery, as an indication of healthy
transfer of primary production to apex predators, are the primary considerations. The use of
apex predator species as an indicator of overall aquatic life protection was used in the rationale
developed for protection of aquatic life in Missouri reservoirs (MDNR, 2017). For this
application for High Rock Lake, the productivity and diversity of multiple trophic levels were
considered in combination with available information on the site-specific fisheries described in
section 4.4.2.
A - 169
59

4.2 Temporal Components

The temporal components of how a water quality criterion is expressed include both duration
(averaging period, which for chl a focused on seasonal considerations) and allowable frequency
of exceedance. These components are discussed in subsections below.

4.2.1 Duration Components

Water quality studies to assess nutrient-driven enhanced productivity in natural and man-made
systems have shown that both short-term acute impacts (fish kills, algal toxins, etc.) and long-
term enhanced productivity, with potential shifts in the species assemblage present, can occur in
different systems (e.g. USEPA, 2000). The development of the temporal component for a site-
specific chl a criterion should consider how the key designated uses described above in Section
4.1 may be impacted on an acute and chronic basis. In general, acute effects can be associated
with algal toxins or with depletion of dissolved oxygen due to the decay of large algal blooms.
For High Rock Lake, the algal assemblage during the growing season often has a high proportion
of cells contributed by species of cyanobacteria (see Section 3.2.4). A limited number of
measurements to date indicate that algal toxins are present but at a relatively low concentration
(see Section 3.2.5). As discussed in Chapter 3, it is important to note that these observations are
mainly limited to biweekly measurements of dissolved toxins during the summer of 2016. The
sample resolution may not be representative of peak bloom conditions when toxin concentrations
(both dissolved and intracellular) tend to reach their maxima nor can any conclusions be drawn
in regard to year to year variability. The abundance of algae during the growing season is
typically high, and periods of depleted dissolved oxygen in deeper waters of the reservoir have
been reported when bottom waters become isolated from surface waters due to thermal
stratification (see Section 3.2.1). It is unclear, however, as to the extent that elevated levels of
nutrient-driven productivity contribute to dissolved oxygen depletion compared to the thermal
isolation of bottom waters during warm season conditions. Due to a lack of clear nutrient-driven
acute effects in High Rock Lake, the SAC chose to focus criterion development efforts on
longer-term measures of the reservoir’s trophic state.

The potential long-term or chronic effects of nutrient-driven enhancement of primary production
would be evaluated with a seasonal geometric mean (geomean). The objective of the criterion
would be to assess the central tendency of chl a concentrations over time for stations included in
each assessment unit. The use of a geomean for the proposed criterion is due to the geomean
being the best measure of central tendency for log-normally distributed parameters such as chl a
(USEPA, 2010). It is proposed that the geomean be calculated with data collected during the
growing season (April-October), as an indication of overall algal production and representative
of the time of maximum productivity in High Rock Lake, since chl a concentrations in High
Rock Lake are typically higher during the growing season than in other months of the year (see
Section 3.2.4). Utilizing data from the growing season is appropriate to assess reservoir trophic
A - 170
60

status and the general potential for algal-related effects. Overall, the reduction of the long-term
central tendency for chl a would also reduce the frequency of elevated chl a values over time.

Use of a geomean statistic to express the proposed chl a criterion is also consistent with approved
water quality criteria for chl a in other states. Examples of states that have adopted chl a criteria
expressed as a geomean include Arkansas, Florida, Texas, and Virginia. While the current
SAC’s analysis focused on the current science supporting the development of a geomean
criterion, the expression of the criterion as a geomean is also consistent with the historical
discussions related to the development of the existing instantaneous chl a criteria for North
Carolina.2

The proposed chl a criterion is intended to serve as an indicator of average algal growth during
the growing season. Therefore, the SAC recommends sufficient data be collected to provide a
representative average for the growing season, including samples collected in at least five
different growing season months for each year of data included in the analysis. Additional
discussion and SAC recommendations on the use of data from more than one year is included in
the following section.

4.2.2 Frequency of Exceedance

Water quality criteria have allowable frequencies of exceedance to acknowledge natural
variability and the fact that aquatic life can recover from periodic exceedances. Some states have
adopted specific allowable frequencies of exceedance for chl a criteria expressed as a geometric
mean (geomean). For example, Florida’s criteria for lakes, reservoirs, and estuaries may not be
exceeded more than once in three years. Florida adopted chl a criteria with an 20 percent
probability of exceedance in any given year, and used binomial statistics to demonstrate that a 1-
in-3 exceedance frequency would limit the probability of a Type I error (false finding of
impairment) to 10 percent (FDEP, 2012).

Similarly, Virginia and Missouri use a version of a once in three-year exceedance frequency
approach for chl a criteria in lakes and reservoirs (e.g. 9VAC25-260-187), which is based on a
magnitude tied to a single year’s computed mean. Minnesota has adopted multi-year average
criteria for total phosphorus, chl a, and Secchi depth in lakes and reservoirs (MAR 7050.0222).
Water bodies are considered impaired for phosphorus if the phosphorus criterion is exceeded and
either the chl a criterion or Secchi depth criterion (or both) are exceeded. Because the criteria are
expressed as long-term summer averages, values are computed by aggregating summer data
collected over multiple years. Minnesota uses a period as long as ten years for assessments
because it provides reasonable assurance that data will have been collected over a range of
weather and flow conditions and that all seasons will be adequately represented (MPCA, 2018).
All of the criteria components of these approaches have been approved by USEPA.

2 The chair of the advisory group that recommended North Carolina’s existing chl a criterion confirmed the intent of
the 40/15 standards were based on “growing season” averages and not any time / any place standards (Mike
McGhee, elec. comm., May 10, 2009).
A - 171
61

The SAC considered the existing data collection efforts by NCDWR in considering potential
frequency approaches for the proposed chl a criterion. For many lakes and reservoirs in North
Carolina, monitoring data are collected approximately monthly during the growing season as part
of the ongoing ambient monitoring program in a single year during each five-year assessment
period. Limited available data with which to assess compliance with a seasonal geomean
criterion for chl a presents an obvious challenge to considering a frequency component to the
criterion. The most common frequencies used by states are instantaneous or a frequency based
on some limited number of exceedances, which as described above, is typical for chl a criteria.

The SAC recommends data incorporated into the assessment be collected in two or more years to
incorporate year-to-year variability in chl a concentrations (see Table 4.1). The SAC considered
two options to evaluate compliance with the seasonal geomean criterion: (1) computing the
geometric mean for each year of individual data and applying a frequency component of not
more than one exceedance out of three years of data; or (2) computing a multi-year geometric
mean by aggregating data from at least two years within the assessment period. The multi-year
geometric mean would be considered a not-to-exceed value. The SAC’s criterion discussions did
not include an explicit maximum number of years to be included in a calculated multi-year
geometric mean. The SAC’s agreement from December 2018 cited the use of data from “the
assessment period,” which corresponds to an implicit maximum of five years. Some SAC
members expressed concerns that if multi-year averaging periods were too long, the assessment
would have a more difficult time detecting eutrophication-related problems in the reservoir.
Some SAC members also discussed the fact that a three-year averaging period would have the
closest statistical correspondence to a single-season, 1-in-3 year allowable exceedance approach.
The recommendation from the SAC is to utilize the exceedance frequency approach, and
recommended a maximum exceedance frequency of no more than one-in-three.

In cases when data are only available for a single year within an assessment period, data from
previous assessment periods could be used in order to complete the assessment. This is
consistent with North Carolina’s existing practice for some other parameters, and the SAC would
support this practice up to a total assessment period of 10 years. The SAC also recommends
additional sampling be undertaken to add a third year of sampling when the data are needed to
assess the maximum one-in-three exceedance frequency. The additional year of sampling would
provide nearer term information regarding the current health of the lake to help conclude whether
the criterion is met (i.e. only one of the three geometric mean year values exceed 35 µg/L) or not
(i.e. two of the three geometric mean year values are greater than 35 µg/L). No additional
sampling would be added if both existing seasonal geomean chl a values are below 35 µg/L or
both existing seasonal geomean values are above 35 µg/L. This approach is recommended by
the SAC in that it adds additional sampling only in instances when the data are needed to assess
the one-in-three maximum exceedance frequency.

A - 172
62

4.3 Criterion Magnitude

The magnitude component of the chl a criterion is more challenging to derive than for
constituents that display a simple dose-response relationship with designated uses. In some
settings, development of precise, quantitative relationships between chl a and indicators of
designated use impairment may be possible, and a magnitude could be selected to limit identified
response indicators from exceeding specific thresholds. However, the SAC’s comprehensive
examination of relationships between chl a and potential indicators in High Rock Lake (see
Section 3) did not identify dose-response relationships upon which a chl a criterion could be
based. In fact, High Rock Lake exhibits a combination of favorable indicators and indicators of
potential concern. With the understanding that scientific judgment would be required, the SAC
adopted the following general approach for deriving a site-specific chl a criterion magnitude for
High Rock Lake:

1. An extensive review of literature was conducted to define the ranges of chl a
concentration in natural and man-made systems that have been interpreted to be protective
of designated uses potentially impacted by a high abundance of algae (see Section 2). This
review culminated in the decisions made by the SAC at its December 2018 meeting. 3

2. The current conditions of High Rock Lake were evaluated, with an emphasis on current
chl a levels, on relationships between chl a and indicator parameters, and on evidence for
algal-related impacts to designated uses (see Section 3).

3. The results of steps 1 and 2 were synthesized to develop chl a concentration range that
was deemed to support designated uses in water bodies similar to High Rock Lake. At the
December 2018 SAC meeting, a chl a criterion magnitude was selected from this range. 4

4. A Monte Carlo analysis was performed to confirm that attainment of the recommended
criterion would protect the reservoir’s fishery and result in a low rate of exceedance of the
upper end of the acceptable chl a range.

The results of steps 3 (range derivation) and 4 (Monte Carlo analysis) are provided in the
following subsections along with the specification of the SAC recommended criterion
magnitude.

3 The summary of the group’s basis states that the “literature supports recreation, aquatic life and drinking waters
uses are achieved when chla is 20-40 µg/L.”
4 The magnitude summary states “35 µg/L to support average chl a levels throughout High Rock Lake of 20-25
µg/L, derived from 25-40 µg/L range for warmwater reservoirs.” The 35 µg/L was “near the upper end of the range
selected due to mostly favorable use indicators.”
A - 173
63

4.3.1 Derivation of a Chl a Protective Range

The literature review identified relatively wide ranges for chl a that have been supportive of
designated uses in different aquatic systems (Figure 4.1). The target range highlighted represents
a range for High Rock Lake that protects the water supply use, primary recreation (if algal toxins
can be presumed low; see Chapter 3), and apex predator productivity as an indication of aquatic
life protection (see below). In terms of site-specific observations, the existing condition of High
Rock Lake supports a thriving sport fishery for apex predators and with no surface, scum-
forming algal species (see Chapter 3 for details). These observations, in combination with the
literature review, were used to derive a chl a protective range of 25-40 µg/L for warmwater
reservoirs similar to High Rock Lake.

Figure 4.1. Proposed chl a concentration (µg/L) ranges by designated use. The green arrow for Water
Supply acknowledges treatment can remove chl a at higher concentrations.

An important indicator for protection of the aquatic life designated use in High Rock Lake is the
productivity of apex predators, including the forage trophic levels. Studies on the productivity of
apex predators in reservoirs have shown increased abundance of apex predators, prey species,
and zooplankton for chl a concentrations of 35-40 µg/L (Allen et al., 1998; Bayne et al, 1994)
typically reported as growing season mean values. In terms of changes with lower nutrient
levels, Maceina and Bayne (2006) showed a decrease in largemouth bass recruitment and growth
rate when chl a concentration was reduced from greater than 40 µg/L to 9-17 µg/L. The lower
end of the proposed range of chl a concentrations is set at 25 µg/L to provide sufficient algal
A - 174
64

production to support abundant apex predators in High Rock Lake and avoid the potential impact
to the fishery noted by Maceina and Bayne (2006). Based on the literature review (see Section 2;
Figure 4.1), a chl a value of 25 µg/L would be protective of the water supply and primary
recreation uses, assuming the associated presence of cyanobacteria is not linked to algal toxin
levels that can pose a risk to animal and human health (Chapter 3), and since observation of
surface algal scums have generally been absent at High Rock Lake (see Chapter 3 for details).

The upper end of the chl a range to support aquatic life is based on reservoir research
documenting abundant apex predators, prey species, and zooplankton at average chl a
concentrations of 35-40 µg/L (Allen et al., 1998; Bayne et al., 1994). Overall fish production has
been shown to increase even with chl a concentrations greater than 100 µg/L, although there is
indication of more benthic species (e.g. carp and flathead catfish) at very high chl a levels (e.g.
Egertson and Downing, 2004; Michaletz et al., 2012). The selection of 40 µg/L as the upper end
of the range is to maintain a balanced overall aquatic community considering the apex predators,
prey species, and zooplankton. The literature indicates overall apex predator abundance would
be higher at chl a concentrations >40 µg/L, but there likely would be a shift in species toward
bottom-dwelling species and the diversity of prey species and zooplankton may be affected.
Further, frequent high chl a concentrations in High Rock Lake could be associated with a higher
risk of toxin exposure potentially above proposed thresholds protective of human health, which
was also a factor in setting the upper end of the chl a range at 40 µg/L. Literature and
observations from High Rock Lake indicate primary recreation and public water supply would be
supported at a chl a concentration of 40 µg/L.

4.3.2 The SAC Recommended Criterion Magnitude

The SAC recommends a criterion magnitude of 35 ug/L, from the derived range of 25-40 µg/L,
expressed as a seasonal geomean. In developing the recommendation, the SAC considered
proposals as low as 25 µg/L and as high as 40 µg/L. Ultimately, the criterion magnitude was set
in the upper half of the potential range in acknowledgement of the favorable indicators of use
attainment in High Rock Lake, such as a thriving fishery and low algal toxin levels observed in
summer of 2016. The maximum value was not selected based on site-specific fisheries
information presented to the SAC indicating abundant benthic species, possible overall decreased
fish species diversity, and decreased catch rate of striped bass compared with other North
Carolina Piedmont reservoirs. Implementation of the proposed criterion of 35 µg/L in High
Rock Lake would require a reduction in the level of chl a in the reservoir from the existing
condition (see Figure 4.1). Total productivity of the fishery would be expected to decrease,
which may increase diversity and shift species abundance toward pelagic species.

4.4 Spatial Components

The spatial variation in biological and physical properties in man-made reservoirs follows a
regular spatial pattern (see Figure 3.2). The most upstream reach reflects primarily river
conditions as the river flows into the impoundment in which water level is controlled by the
A - 175
65

downstream dam structure. In the case of High Rock Lake, waters at HRL051 reflect turbid river
conditions, and the average chl a is lower than in downstream waters. In the middle reach or
transitional zone, water velocity slows down, mineral turbidity settles to the bottom, and a peak
in algal abundance typically occurs. In the case of High Rock Lake, waters at YAD152A and
YAD152C would be in the transitional zone. Waters downstream of the transitional zone in the
lacustrine zone above the dam (YAD169B and YAD169F) would typically have decreased algal
abundance compared with the transitional zone.

Available chl a data for monitoring stations listed above for the three reservoir zones are
summarized in Table 4.1. Monitoring during the growing season was conducted approximately
monthly in five individual years during the period of 2006 through 2016. Substantial variation,
expressed as the coefficient of variation (COV), is evident in the river reach (HRL051), but
variability is lower in the transitional and lacustrine zones. In terms of protection of uses, the chl
a criterion’s geometric mean calculated as the geomean of samples collected during the growing
season (April-October) will normally be protective of all designated uses even though winter
months are not part of the calculation, since chl a is typically lower in winter months (see Sec.
3.2.4).
Table 4.1. Growing Season (April-Oct) chl a geomean (µg/L) by sampling
location (COV = coefficient of variation)
Year HRL051 YAD152A YAD152C YAD169B YAD169F
2006 27.3 51.2 59.6 38.3 34.6
2008 34.1 49.2 53.4 40.3 32.5
2009 16.9 42.1 53.0 43.4 36.0
2011 30.7 50.1 55.6 42.5 36.5
2016 20.8 52.3 58.7 44.3 36.1
Overall 24.1 47.9 55.2 42.0 34.8
COV 29.2% 8.3% 5.5% 5.8% 4.7%

It is recommended that the spatial assessment scale for the site-specific chl a criterion be
consistent with the derivation of the criterion magnitude (see Section 4.4.2.) and expressed as a
seasonal geomean. It is recommended that all observations for the assessment period from open
waters within an assessment unit would be incorporated into the computation of the geomean of
available data from the growing season months (April-October). Monitoring locations in
backwaters, isolated coves, or where water depth is typically shallow (e.g. <10 feet) would be
evaluated based on narrative criteria but excluded from the calculation of the chl a geomean for
open waters based on the expectation that such data are not representative of the data used to
develop the criterion itself. The SAC also recommends that compliance with the chl a criterion
be evaluated with samples collected as photic zone composite samples (e.g. from the water
surface down to twice the Secchi depth).

A - 176
66

4.4.1 Monte Carlo Spatial Analysis

Evaluation of chl a data for High Rock Lake has shown a consistent spatial pattern with
maximum values in the transition zone for the reservoir and lower values in the lacustrine zone
and downstream tributaries (see Table 4.1). A Monte Carlo analysis was performed to evaluate
how spatial grouping of sampling locations could affect three specific implementation scenarios
relative to a seasonal geomean criterion of 35 µg/L. The Monte Carlo approach was used for the
analysis to extend conditions simulated to include the five primary years in which regular
monitoring was done and to include conditions that could have occurred in other years. Data
from monitoring efforts during 2006-2016 were used in the analysis. The objective of the
analysis was to evaluate how the seasonal geomean for chl a varies at target stations in the
transitional and in the lacustrine reservoir zones relative to the selected range for protection of
nutrient-sensitive uses (25-40 µg/L; see section 4.4.1) based on whether the seasonal geomean of
35 µg/L is achieved at all locations individually or for multiple locations aggregated together.

For the evaluation, the Monte Carlo approach was used to create 100 potential datasets for each
of four monitoring locations evaluated based on reported chl a concentrations for the growing
season for the five primary years in which regular monitoring was done (see Table 4.1).
Monitoring stations simulated were HRL051 (riverine), YAD152C (transitional), YAD169B
(lacustrine), and YAD169A (tributary embayment) (see Figure 3.2). Figure 4.2 plots the

Figure 4.2. Cumulative distributions of measured data by stations utilized in Monte Carlo analysis
A - 177
67

cumulative distribution of reported individual sampling chl a concentration values for the four
simulated stations for growing season samples from the five monitoring years listed in Table 4.1.

The datasets derived through a Monte Carlo analysis for the four locations simulated were
developed with a sampling design comparable to the current NCDWR ambient monitoring effort
of monthly sampling during the growing season. Five monthly samples were derived from the
cumulative distribution for a given location for two separate years, yielding a total of 10 data
points from which to calculate the seasonal geomean. Each point was derived by selecting
randomly a probability between 0 and 100%, and then converting the probability to a chl a value
by linear interpolation from the respective distribution in Figure 4.2 for the location. This
process of creating a dataset of 10 chl a values was performed 100 times for each location.
Figure 4.3 provides the distribution of geomean values for each location based on the 100 Monte
Carlo simulations for existing conditions.

Figure 4.3. Distributions of growing season geomean chl a concentration (µg/L) by location derived from Monte
Carlo analysis

The Monte Carlo simulation results were used in conjunction with a target seasonal geomean for
chl a of 35 µg/L selected to be above the midpoint of the range highlighted in Figure 4.1 but
below the maximum value of 40 µg/L (see Section 4.4.1). Three potential approaches to
applying the target chl a geomean criterion were simulated: (1) each individual station meets the
criterion as a long-term geomean; (2) each reservoir zone meets the criterion as a long-term
A - 178
68

geomean; and (3) the transitional and lacustrine zones collectively meet the criterion as a long-
term geomean. A long-term geomean was used in the analysis for reduction scenarios to reduce
the influence of year-to-year variation in the seasonal geomean on predicted results. The
analysis to support the evaluation is summarized in Table 4.2. The reduction percentage in long-
term geomean for chl a to achieve the criterion of 35 µg/L varied from 36.6% for Approach 1
based on YAD152C to 18.7% for the combined transitional and lacustrine zones approach.
Approach 2 is based on reducing chl a in the transitional zone to 35 µg/L. The potential impact
of each approach on the chl a levels to support the currently healthy fishery was evaluated by
reducing the chl a distributions derived for YAD152C, YAD169B, and YAD169A (Tributary) by
the required reduction for each approach to achieve the criterion. The analysis assumed
reductions in chl a would be the same percentage throughout the reservoir stations.

Table 4.2. Influence of assessment unit approach on results
Unit Existing Long-Term
chl a Geomean (µg/L)
Range for Individual
Years (see Table 4.1)
Reduction to
35 µg/L (%)
YAD152A 47.9 42.1 - 52.3 27.0%
YAD152C 55.2 53.0 - 59.6 36.6%
YAD169B 42.0 38.3 - 44.3 16.6%
YAD169F 34.8 32.5 - 36.5 N/A
Transitional 48.8 44.0 - 55.5 28.3%
Lacustrine 37.8 35.8 - 40.0 7.5%
Reservoir 43.0 41.1 - 47.3 18.7%
Notes: (1) Reduction percent is to reduce long-term geomean to 35.0 µg/L; (2) Transitional zone
assessed as YAD152A and YAD152C; (3) Lacustrine zone assessed as YAD169B and
YAD169F; (4) Reservoir assessed as YAD152A, YAD152C, YAD169B, and YAD169F.

Cumulative distributions for chl a at YAD152C, YAD169B, and YAD169A for the three
approaches evaluated are provided in separate panels of Figure 4.4. Evaluation of the three
approaches, in terms of protection of aquatic life, was determined by the frequency of overall
data points for each approach that were between 25 and 40 µg/L. The analysis also considered
whether data points outside the target range were below 25 µg/L or greater than 40 µg/L. In
terms of a frequency comparison with the target range, Approaches 2 and 3 were comparable at
72.7% and 73.7%, respectively, while Approach 1 had only 60.3% of data points in the target
range (see Table 4.3). Data points outside the target range were primarily <25 µg/L for
Approach 1 and primarily >40 µg/L for Approach 3, with data points <25 and >40 µg/L for
Approach 2. Approach 1 would likely cause the seasonal geomean of portions of the reservoir to
frequently fall below 25 µg/L, which could impact the valued fishery. Approach 2 provides a
balance between limiting chl a values <25 µg/L, which may impact the fishery, and limiting chl a
values >40 µg/L that could contribute to acute nutrient-dependent impacts in the future.
A - 179
69

Approach 3 would likely continue seasonal geomean chl a in the transitional zone >40 µg/L on a
frequent basis.

Figure 4.4. Distributions of growing season geomeans (µg/L) by location and assessment approach (top
panel: each individual station meets the criterion as a long-term geomean; middle panel: each reservoir
A - 180
70

zone meets the criterion as a long-term geomean; and bottom panel: the transitional and lacustrine zones
collectively meet the criterion as a long-term geomean). The box indicates target chl a concentration
range of 25-40 µg/L.

Table 4.3. Distribution of chl a geomean by spatial assessment
approach.
Assessment <25 µg/L (%) 25 – 40 µg/L (%) >40 µg/L (%)
Approach 1 39.0 60.3 0.7
Approach 2 15.7 72.7 11.7
Approach 3 0.3 73.7 26.0

Of note is the difference between the temporal averaging used in the Monte Carlo analysis (ten
randomly selected chl a values used to compute a geometric mean) and the temporal averaging in
the proposed chl a criterion (all growing season chl a values from a single year used to calculate
a seasonal geometric mean). The normal lake sampling plan of the NC DWR is to collect five
such chl a samples each growing season. Also not included in the Monte Carlo analysis is the
consideration of a maximum allowable exceedance frequency (the proposed criterion is that one-
in-three seasonal geomeans may exceed the chl a criterion). It is believed that these two
differences between the Monte Carlo analysis and the proposed chl a criterion offset one another,
so that the analysis presented is usable as-is for comparing the implications of the three
assessment unit approaches analyzed with the Monte Carlo analysis. Repeating the Monte Carlo
analysis with a different set of assumptions would likely not have significantly changed the
analysis outcome and would have led to an additional delay in completing the proposed High
Rock Lake chl a criterion development, and was therefore not pursued.

4.4.2 Considerations for Delineating Assessment Units

In the Clean Water Act framework, an assessment unit (AU) is the basic spatial component that
states use for evaluating attainment status of water bodies. States use various bases to delineate
AU boundaries, including hydrography datasets, hydrologic unit codes, maps of water body
names, major junctions, morphology, or limnological zones. Although assessment units can be
delineated in different manners, USEPA (2005) offers the following guidance on segmentation:

Segmentation may reflect an a priori knowledge of factors such as flow, channel
morphology, substrate, riparian condition, adjoining land uses, confluence with
other waterbodies, and potential sources of pollutant loadings…Segments should…
represent a relatively homogenous parcel of water (with regard to hydrology, land
use influences, point and nonpoint source loadings, etc.)

A - 181
71

States also vary widely with regard to how chl a is assessed spatially within reservoirs, and the
procedures often differ from those used for toxics. For example, Alabama uses an assessment
methodology that varied based upon the size of the waterbody. Some relatively small lakes that
are most easily monitored near the forebay use only this location for assessment. When a lake is
considered large enough to have more than one station, separate criteria are generally applied to
these separate stations (A.A.C. 335-6-10-.11). Georgia assigns specific chl a criteria to
individual stations within large reservoirs. Criteria can vary between stations to recognize
different expectations for different parts of the reservoir. Florida applies chl a criteria for most
lakes as a lake-wide or lake segment-wide average (F.A.C. 62-302). Virginia recognizes three
limnologically-defined zones within reservoirs (riverine, transitional, and lacustrine), but only
applies numeric nutrient criteria to the lacustrine zone (Virginia DEQ, 2009).

Despite considerable discussion, the SAC did not come to a consensus regarding how spatial
assessment units should be defined for High Rock Lake or other water bodies. However, the
manner in which assessment units are spatially defined for chl a has implications for the
stringency/conservativeness of the criterion, and also for how different uses or risks are balanced
within a reservoir. For that reason, this section provides a general discussion of the two basic
approaches discussed and considered by the SAC: (1) delineating AUs based on individual
monitoring stations, similar to NC’s existing or default approach; and (2) delineating AUs by
three major limnological zones.

4.4.2.1 Defining Chl a Assessment Units by Individual Stations

In large reservoirs, many DWR monitoring stations are more than 1 mile apart. For example, in
High Rock Lake, the distance between neighboring monitoring stations varies between 0.3 and
3.6 miles. Hence, most of the AUs delineated around individual stations in High Rock Lake are
still relatively large. Compared with other approaches, the use of individual stations increases the
homogeneity of water within an AU, which is an important characteristic of AUs as
recommended by USEPA (2005). The single station approach also avoids averaging that can
mask temporal and/or spatial changes in chl a concentration. Accordingly, an individual-station
approach will generally be more sensitive to detecting chl a related changes that occur at specific
locations within the reservoir. The individual station approach will also be better able to detect
chl a related problems that result from changes in the spatial distribution of nutrient loading to
the lake from loading hot spots or changing development patterns in the watershed.

Because the highest-chlorophyll station would tend to control a reservoir TMDL, an individual-
station approach for delineating AUs will generally require higher levels of nutrient reduction
than approaches that would average the chl a goal over larger segments. To this extent, the
individual station approach is more environmentally conservative with respect to potential
harmful effects of excess algae (e.g, toxins, bloom events, etc.). An estimate from the Monte
Carlo analysis is that applying the criterion using individual stations for AU specification rather
than the limnological AU specification will decrease the prevalence of chl a values above 40
µg/L from 11.7% to 0.7% (Table 4.3). Another practical advantage of the individual station
A - 182
72

approach is consistency with North Carolina’s existing approach and assessment data processing
procedures.

4.4.2.2 Defining Chl a Assessment Units by Limnological Zones

In contrast to delineating AUs around individual stations, this approach would define AUs using
a priori knowledge of major reservoir zones that are functionally different and represent logical
units for water quality management. The concept that reservoirs exhibit three major spatial zones
(riverine, transitional, lacustrine) is well established in the scientific literature and consistent with
observed water quality in High Rock lake (see section 3.1). In practice, the three-zone approach
would only involve aggregating data from DWR monitoring stations that are relatively close to
each other (e.g., YAD152A and YAD152C) and would not involve a dramatic change in overall
segmentation, but would avoid the delineation of small segments around individual stations such
as the AU currently associated with YAD152C.

A potential advantage of the limnological zone approach to AUs is the protection of current
levels of fish production in High Rock Lake, as demonstrated by the Monte Carlo analysis
(section 4.4.1). The limnological zone approach for AU specification raises the percentage of
chl a values within the fully protective range from 60.3% to 70.2%, when compared to the
individual station approach. The percentage of chl a values below the protective range also
decreases from 39.0% to 15.7% (Table 4.3). Attainment of the recommended criterion will
require significant chl a reductions in High Rock Lake, regardless of whether AUs are individual
station or three limnological zones. The three-zone approach reduces the risk of harmful effects
associated with high chl a, relative to existing levels, but provides a higher level of protection of
the fishery use compared to the individual station approach.

4.5 Consideration of Statistical Confidence

The SAC discussed the concept of incorporating a statistical test of confidence that the chl a
criterion had been exceeded in a given assessment period, as a potential means to reduce false
findings of non-attainment (for 303d listing of water bodies) or false findings of attainment (for
delisting water bodies). North Carolina currently uses a non-parametric statistical test (the
binomial method) for not-to-exceed criteria. Although the binomial method is not appropriate
for a seasonal geometric mean, other methods could be developed, such as the calculation of
confidence limits on the geometric mean. An argument against the use of a statistical test is the
primary purpose of these test is to prevent a very small number of data from controlling the
listing/delisting decision, but seasonal geometric mean chl a values (calculated for at least two
years) would be based on at least 10 data points. Also, if only 10 data points were available for a
given assessment period, confidence limits could be relatively wide, which could make it very
difficult to either list or delist water bodies. Although the SAC is not recommending a specific
statistic test at this time, this topic could be re-examined at the time of statewide criteria
development.

A - 183
73

4.6 Summary of Proposed Criterion

The proposed chl a criterion for High Rock Lake is a seasonal geomean of 35 µg/L, not to be
exceeded more than once in three years, for growing season months of April-October based on
protection of all uses while maintaining the productivity of the sport fishery (Table 4.4). In
terms of spatial considerations, all monitoring data from open waters within assessment units
collected during the months of April through October would be used to compute a geomean to
compare with the proposed criterion. The criterion would apply to all months of the year, with
attainment of the criterion assessed with data from the growing season months. The SAC
recommends the exceedance frequency assessment approach. The SAC recommended frequency
is not to exceed more than one in three calculated seasonal geomean values.

The SAC recognizes that several considerations remain in establishing the site specific chl a
criterion for High Rock Lake. These considerations include how much data to include and what
data might be excluded during assessment, spatial aggregation of data, and whether the criterion
should include a statistical confidence test (Table 4.5). Furthermore, the SAC encourages
continued monitoring of cyanobacterial toxin levels paired with chl a assessments to better
evaluate potential exposure risks and toxin dynamics in High Rock Lake. The SAC refers these
implementation questions to the CIC for further consideration.

Table 4.4. Proposed Chl a Criterion for High Rock Lake.
Component Selection Notes on Selection
Magnitude 35 µg/L None
Period/Duration Seasonal
Geomean Calculated Geomean based on all data from growing season
Season/Duration April-October Include samples collected in at least five different growing season
months for each year of data included in the analysis
Frequency
Maximum
Exceedance
Frequency of
One-in-three
Compute the geometric mean for each year of individual data and apply
a frequency component of not more than one exceedance out of three
years of data

Spatial
Considerations Open Waters
Photic zone composite based on twice the Secchi depth; shallow waters
and isolated coves to be addressed through narrative criteria; all data
within each assessment unit would be incorporated into the calculated
geomean

A - 184
74

Table 4.5 SAC’s Additional Topics for Specific Consideration by CIC
Component Alternatives or Additional Information included
in this document
Sample Size/Filtering of
Monitoring Data
SAC encourages CIC to offer implementation thoughts on whether data should
be collected from at least five different months within the growing season or if
there are other bounds or minimums on data density that may be acceptable.
Spatial Assessment Whether or not to include multiple stations in an assessment unit
Statistical Test of
Confidence
Whether or not to consider a statistical test of confidence that the chl a criterion
was exceeded in a given assessment period

A - 185
75

4.7 References

Allen, M.S. Greene, J.C. Snow, F.J. Maceina, M.J. DeVries, D.R. 1999. Recruitment of
Largemouth Bass in Alabama Reservoirs: Relations to Trophic State and Larval Shad
Occurrence. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19(1):67-77.
Bayne, D.R. Maceina, M.J. Reeves, W.C. 1994. Zooplankton, fish and sport fishing quality
among four Alabama and Georgia reservoirs of varying trophic status. Lake and Reservoir
Management 8(2):153-163.
Egertson, C.J. Downing, J.A. 2004. Relationship of fish catch and composition to water quality
in a suite of agriculturally eutrophic lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Science 61: 1784-1796.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2012. Overview of Approaches for Numeric
Nutrient Criteria Development in Marine Waters. 110 p.
Maceina, M.J. Bayne, D.R. 2001. Changes in the black bass community and fishery with
oligotrophication in West Point Reservoir, Georgia. North American Journal of Fisheries
Management 21(4):745-755.
Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). 2017. Rationale for Missouri Lake
Numeric Nutrient Criteria. December 2017.
Michaletz, P.H. Obrecht, D.V. Jones J.R. 2012. Influence of Environmental Variables and
Species Interactions on Sport Fish Communities in Small Missouri Impoundments. North
American Journal of Fisheries Management, 32:6, 1146-1159. First Published November 1,
2012.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources. 2019. 2020 303(d) Listing and Delisting
Methodology.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2020/2020-Listing-
Methodology-approved.pdf. 14 p.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2000. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance
Manual – Lakes and Reservoirs. EPA 822-B00-001. Washington, DC: USEPA, Office of
Water.
USEPA. 2010. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen, Water Clarity and
Chlorophyll a for the Chesapeake Bay and Its Tidal Tributaries: 2010 Technical Support for
Criteria Assessment Protocols Addendum. EPA 903-R-10-002. 63 p.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Guidance for 2006 Assessment, Listing and
Reporting Requirements Pursuant to Sections 303(d), 305(b) and 314 of the Clean Water
Act. Memorandum from Diane Regas to Water Division Directors. 89 p.
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. 2009. Monitoring and Assessment of Lakes and
Reservoirs. Water Guidance memo No. 09-2005. 31 p.

A - 186
76

5. Potential Elements of a Framework for Deriving Site-Specific Criteria

North Carolina’s Nutrient Criteria Development Plan (NCDP) states a commitment to develop
nutrient-related criteria (causal and/or response variables) throughout the state on a site-specific
basis. High Rock Lake has served as the pilot water body for reservoirs and lakes, and the
chlorophyll a (chl a) criterion recommendation of this technical support document apply to that
specific water body. However, the NCDP schedule calls for the adoption of nutrient-related
criteria on a statewide basis during the 2023-2028 timeframe. Part of this process will be to
“confirm the approach proposed during the adoption of the nutrient criteria in [High Rock Lake]
with SAC involvement”. The purpose of this section is to discuss how lessons learned during the
reservoir pilot might apply to the future effort to derive chl a criteria for other reservoirs and
lakes.

The SAC has not yet developed a detailed framework for deriving reservoir-specific chl a
criteria. However, many elements of the SAC’s approach for High Rock Lake would be
transferable to other water bodies. At various times, the SAC also discussed potential elements of
a more formal framework for site-specific criteria derivation. This section attempts to document
some of those concepts in case they are useful during the future, statewide effort. Any of the
framework elements discussed herein are subject to additional discussion by the SAC and DWR.

5.1. Desired Characteristics of a Framework

North Carolina’s intent to develop nutrient criteria throughout the state on a site-specific basis is
challenging from a scientific and regulatory perspective. Site-specific chl a criteria have the
advantage of reflecting water body-specific responses to nutrient inputs, and to avoid the
misallocation of resources that can result from one-size-fits-all criteria. However, the derivation
of site-specific criteria can be resource-intensive because it requires evaluation of water body-
specific conditions and nutrient-response relations. It is not practical for North Carolina DEQ to
develop complex nutrient-response models for every water body in the state, nor to devote the
level of time and resources that were devoted to the High Rock Lake pilot. Ideally, a framework
for deriving site-specific criteria would be streamlined enough for practical application with
datasets of moderate size, while also including enough water body-specific information to make
the correct criteria decisions.

With this background, the SAC cites the following characteristics as desirable for a framework
for developing site-specific chl a criteria:

1. The framework produces site-specific chl a criteria that are protective of
designated uses. This is a minimum requirement of any criteria derivation process. All
uses of the reservoir should be considered, including public water supply, recreation, and
aquatic life. The site-specific nature of the desired framework is explicit in the NCDP,
and is based in the understanding that different water bodies can respond to nutrient
inputs in different manners.
A - 187
77

2. The framework should minimize assessment and management errors. Both type I
(false findings of impairment) and type II (false finding of attainment) errors are of
concern and should be minimized to the extent possible. Overprotective criteria would
lead to type I errors, whereas underprotective criteria would lead to type II errors.
Although some degree of conservativeness is appropriate for water quality criteria, highly
overprotective criteria would misdirect TMDL and implementation resources.

3. The framework should consider both literature and reservoir-specific
information. The SAC’s chl a recommendations for High Rock Lake were derived using
both literature-based and reservoir-specific information. Research for the reservoir pilot
revealed that targets based on the literature and reservoir-specific data can be very
different. The scientific and lake management literature includes a wide range of
potential chl a targets associated with different regions, reservoir/lake types, and uses.
Many of the studies from the literature focus on water bodies that have experienced algal-
related problems that might or might not occur in other reservoirs being considered for
site-specific criteria. The literature also includes many chl a targets from higher latitudes
or altitudes, many of which could be unrealistically low for southeastern lakes and
reservoirs. Some literature-based chl a targets are based in concepts such as user
perception, which are difficult to transfer from one region to the next.

Reservoir-specific data or models can help determine whether uses are currently being met, and
also provide insights into the empirical relations between chl a and other use indicators. But like
the scientific literature, reservoir-specific information also has limitations for deriving site-
specific criteria. Some water bodies may have relatively few water quality data and little
narrative information on use attainment (e.g., fishery status, water treatability issues, algal toxins,
etc.). Even for a relatively data-rich water body such as High Rock Lake, the SAC did not find it
simple to identify chl a thresholds above which specific uses were met or not met. Rather, much
of the information pointed to a continuum of risk, where the concern over potential impacts
increased with chl a.

Ultimately, the SAC recommended a chl a criterion from within a range of candidate values (25
– 40 µg/L), as described in section 4. That range was determined from both literature and High
Rock Lake-specific information. The lower end of the range was more strongly influenced by the
literature and the desire to limit potential impacts to the fishery, whereas the upper end of the
range was from multiple lines of evidence that include the literature and High Rock Lake’s
existing chlorophyll-indicator relations. Similar consideration of both literature and reservoir-
specific information is likely to be useful for a statewide framework. The framework could
emphasize reservoir-specific information for water bodies with more definitive chlorophyll-use
indicator relations. The literature will remain informative of the chl a concentration at which
some lakes/reservoirs experience algal-related problems.

A - 188
78

5.2. Potential Common Elements

Some elements of the proposed chl a criterion for High Rock might be directly transferred to
other lakes and reservoirs without site-specific deliberations. This could be the case for criteria
elements whose technical justification for High Rock Lake would apply equally to other
reservoirs, or criteria elements for which it would be unnecessarily problematic to use different
approaches for different water bodies during the assessment process. The basis for the following
criteria elements is provided in section 4, and much of the reasoning for High Rock Lake would
also apply to other reservoirs:

● Geometric mean
● April – October growing season
● A 1-in-3 year allowable exceedance frequency
● Photic zone grab sample at 2X Secchi depth

The magnitude of the chl a criterion is the element most likely to change between
lakes/reservoirs. Factors to consider in the adjusting the magnitude of chl a criterion between
water bodies include warmwater vs. coldwater classification, historical and recent chl a
concentrations, designated uses, and various narrative and numeric indicators of use support.
Following are major steps of a potential framework to derive site-specific criteria:

1. Application of a chl a screening range as the initial evaluation of impairment status.
2. Consideration of other numeric and narrative indicators.
3. Application of decision rules on impairment status.
4. Application of decision rules on site-specific criteria.

These factors are discussed in subsections below.

5.3. Chl a Screening Range Concept

With any framework for deriving site-specific criteria, one of the first steps would be to
determine whether the reservoir is effectively meeting designated uses vs. experiencing tangible
nutrient-related impairments. Results of this determination would be a major factor in deciding
if the site-specific criteria should be lower than existing conditions. The use of readily-available
water quality data such as chl a concentrations could streamline this determination. As discussed
in previous sections, the SAC did not identify a one-size-fits-all chl a criteria that could be used
in a pass-fail manner to answer this question. However, the SAC did consider it more practical to
identify a range of chl a concentrations that was associated with increasing risk of impairment.

With this background, a potential first step of a framework could be to compare a reservoir’s
existing chl a concentration (seasonal geometric mean) to a screening range, with the goal of
determining whether the reservoir can be categorized as likely attaining vs. likely impaired based
on chl a alone. The upper end of the range would represent a value above which nutrient
A - 189
79

impairment is likely, and the lower end of the range would represent a value below which
nutrient impairment is unlikely. Reservoirs in the “gray area” (i.e, within the range) would
require additional narrative assessment (step 2) to determine if they experience nutrient-related
impairments. Figure 5.1 illustrates the chlorophyll-based screening range with a range developed
by the SAC (25-40 μg/L) during the High Rock Lake pilot.

Figure 5.1 – Illustration of the chl a screening range concept.

The use of a chl a screening range is conceptually similar to an approach published by Arizona
(Arizona DEQ, 2008), and is also similar to criteria recently adopted by Missouri [10 CSR 20-
7.031(5)(N)1.C.(I)] and approved by USEPA. However, the screening range concept described is
specifically discussed herein as a step to streamline the derivation of site-specific chl a criteria
rather than a long-term assessment method.

5.4. Consideration of Narrative and Numeric Indicators

In the second step of a potential framework for deriving site-specific criteria, various other types
of reservoir-specific information would be considered to support impairment categorization.
Although many types of information might be considered during this step, the framework could
be applied more consistently if it included a pre-defined list of useful indicators with associated
thresholds. Table 5.1 provides an example of such a checklist. The list includes both narrative
indicators (e.g., presence/absence of fish kills, nuisance conditions, fishery status) and numeric
indicators (pH, DO, cyanotoxin concentrations). It would not necessarily be required to have
information for every indicator to perform the categorization.

An important aspect of the indicator list is that indicators are categorized as either primary or
secondary. Primary indicators are those that are more direct indicators of nutrient impairments,
A - 190
80

whereas secondary indicators may indicate concerns but are not direct indicators of impairments.
For example, a high cyanobacteria density would be a secondary indicator, whereas persistent
exceedance of cyanotoxin thresholds would be a primary indicator. This distinction is important
because decision guidelines for impairment determinations would weight primary indicators
more than secondary indicators.

Table 5.1: Examples of Potential Indicators for Narrative Evaluation
Use
Category Indicator Primary or Secondary
Indicator
Narrative or
Numeric
Indicator
Aquatic
Life
DO concentration Primary Numeric
DO saturation Secondary Numeric
Ph Primary Numeric
Algal toxins Primary Numeric
%Cyanobacteria Secondary Numeric
Fishery status Primary Narrative
Fish kills Primary Narrative
Fish abnormalities Secondary Narrative
Public
water
supply
Algal toxins Primary Numeric
T&O-causing compounds Secondary Numeric
Treatability challenges Primary Narrative
Recreation Algal toxins Primary Numeric
Secchi depth Secondary Numeric
Nuisance blooms; mats or
extensive scums
Primary Narrative

Under a potential framework, each indicator could be categorized as green (full use support
indicated), yellow (potential concerns), or red (strong evidence of use impairment). Associated
guidance would provide numeric ranges or other guidelines for these determinations. The
guidance could also include decision rules for how multiple or mixed-result indicators would be
used to interpret existing use support.

If sufficient data were available, this step 2 could also involve direct examination of the relations
between chl a and other indicators such as water clarity, pH, cyanotoxins, etc. Such empirical
relations could lead to the selection of chlorophyll targets to achieve specific responses.
Examples of chlorophyll-indicator relations for High Rock Lake are provided in Section 3 of this
document.

A - 191
81

5.5. Decision Guidelines for Site-Specific Criteria
After application of the chlorophyll-based screening range and narrative numeric evaluation, the
final steps would be to make the appropriate site-specific chl a criterion. Although professional
judgment would be required, DWR’s decisions would be more transparent and defensible if clear
decision guidelines were developed. The associated decision guidelines could be organized as a
matrix based on the existing chl a concentration (below, within, or above screening range) and
outcome of the narrative evaluation (narrative evidence of use attainment, non-attainment, or
inconclusive). For example, if a reservoir’s chl a concentration was above the screening range
but the reservoir did not show clear signs of impairment from the narrative/numeric evaluation,
the criterion could likely be set at or near the top of the screening range. But a reservoir within
the screening range that failed the narrative/numeric evaluation might receive criteria in the
lower half of the screening range. The formulation of specific decision guidelines would require
additional discussion by the SAC and DEQ.

In some cases, criteria could be set to protect a reservoir’s existing condition. For example, a
lake with chl a in the 15-20 ug/L range (below the screening range) but with some exceedances
of secondary indicators might receive a criterion of 20 ug/L to prevent impairments. If robust
chlorophyll-response linkages were available, they could also be applied to set a specific chl a
target during this step, and these linkages might support criteria outside of the screening range.

5.6. References

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. 2008. Narrative Nutrient Standard
Implementation Procedures for Lakes and Reservoirs. Available at
https://legacy.azdeq.gov/environ/water/standards/download/draft_nutrient.pdf. 21 p.

A - 192

Page 14 of 14
Appendix B – Proposed Rule Amendments
Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0211 containing the proposed amendments is included here.

A - 193
1

15A NCAC 02B .0211 is proposed for amendment as follows: 1
2
15A NCAC 02B .0211 FRESH SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CLASS C WATERS 3
In addition to the standards set forth in Rule .0208 of this Section, the following water quality standards shall apply 4
to all Class C waters. Additional standards applicable to other freshwater classifications are specified in Rules .0212, 5
.0214, .0215, .0216, .0218, .0219, .0223, .0224, .0225, and .0231 of this Section. 6
(1) The best usage of waters shall be aquatic life propagation, survival, and maintenance of biological 7
integrity (including fishing and fish); wildlife; secondary contact recreation as defined in Rule .0202 8
of this Section; agriculture; and any other usage except for primary contact recreation or as a source 9
of water supply for drinking, culinary, and food processing purposes. All freshwaters shall be 10
classified to protect these uses at a minimum. 11
(2) The conditions of waters shall be such that waters are suitable for all best uses specified in this Rule. 12
Sources of water pollution that preclude any of these uses on either a shortterm or -longterm- basis 13
shall be deemed to violate a water quality standard; 14
(3) Chlorine, total residual: 17 ug/l; 15
(4) Chlorophyll a (corrected): except as specified in Sub-Item (a) of this Item, not greater than 40 ug/l 16
for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation 17
not designated as trout waters, and not greater than 15 ug/l for lakes, reservoirs, and other waters 18
subject to growths of macroscopic or microscopic vegetation designated as trout waters (not 19
applicable to lakes or reservoirs less than 10 acres in surface area). The Commission or its designee 20
may prohibit or limit any discharge of waste into surface waters if the surface waters experience or 21
the discharge would result in growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation such that the 22
standards established pursuant to this Rule would be violated or the intended best usage of the waters 23
would be impaired; 24
(a) Site-specific High Rock Lake Reservoir [Index Numbers 12-(108.5), 12-(114), 12-117-(1), 25
12-117-(3), 12-118.5, and the uppermost portion of 12-(124.5) to the dam of High Rock 26
Lake] Chlorophyll a (corrected): not greater than one exceedance of a growing season 27
geometric mean of 35 ug/L in the photic zone within a three-year period [based on samples 28
collected in a minimum of five different months during the growing season]. For the 29
purpose of this [Sub-Item,] Sub-Item: [the growing season is April 1 through October 31 30
and the photic zone is represented by a composite sample taken from the water surface 31
down to twice the measured Secchi depth.] [Chlorophyll a shall not occur in amounts that 32
result in an adverse impact as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1002.] 33
(i) The growing season is April 1 through October 31; 34
(ii) Samples shall be collected in a minimum of five different months within each 35
growing season with a minimum of two growing season geometric means 36
collected in a three-year period; 37
A - 194
2

(iii) The photic zone shall be defined as the surface down to twice the Secchi depth; 1
(iv) Samples shall be collected as a composite sample of the photic zone; and 2
(v) Samples that do not satisfy the requirements in Sub-Item (iv) of this Sub-Item 3
shall be excluded from the calculation of the geometric mean. 4
(5) Cyanide, total: 5.0 ug/l; 5
(6) Dissolved oxygen: not less than 6.0 mg/l for trout waters; for nontrout- waters, not less than a daily 6
average of 5.0 mg/l with an instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/l; swamp waters, lake coves, 7
or backwaters, and lake bottom waters may have lower values if caused by natural conditions; 8
(7) Fecal coliform: shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100ml (MF count) based upon at least 9
five samples taken over a 30-day period, nor exceed 400/100ml in more than 20 percent of the 10
samples examined during such period. Violations of this Item are expected during rainfall events 11
and may be caused by uncontrollable nonpoint source pollution. All coliform concentrations shall 12
be analyzed using the membrane filter technique. If high turbidity or other conditions would cause 13
the membrane filter technique to produce inaccurate data, the most probable number (MPN) 5-tube 14
multiple dilution method shall be used. 15
(8) Floating solids, settleable solids, or sludge deposits: only such amounts attributable to sewage, 16
industrial wastes, or other wastes as shall not make the water unsafe or unsuitable for aquatic life 17
and wildlife or impair the waters for any designated uses; 18
(9) Fluoride: 1.8 mg/l; 19
(10) Gases, total dissolved: not greater than 110 percent of saturation; 20
(11) Metals: 21
(a) With the exception of mercury and selenium, acute and chronic freshwater aquatic life 22
standards for metals shall be based upon measurement of the dissolved fraction of the 23
metal. Mercury and selenium water quality standards shall be based upon measurement of 24
the total recoverable metal; 25
(b) With the exception of mercury and selenium, aquatic life standards for metals listed in this 26
Sub-Item shall apply as a function of the pollutant's water effect ratio (WER). The WER 27
shall be assigned a value equal to one unless any person demonstrates to the Division's 28
satisfaction in a permit proceeding that another value is developed in accordance with the 29
"Water Quality Standards Handbook: Second Edition" published by the US Environmental 30
Protection Agency (EPA-823-B-12-002), which is hereby incorporated by reference, 31
including subsequent amendments and editions, and can be obtained free of charge at 32
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/handbook/. Alternative site-specific 33
standards may also be developed when any person submits values that demonstrate to the 34
Commission that they were derived in accordance with the "Water Quality Standards 35
Handbook: Second Edition, Recalculation Procedure or the Resident Species Procedure", 36
A - 195
3

which is hereby incorporated by reference including subsequent amendments and can be 1
obtained free of charge at http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/handbook/. 2
(c) Freshwater metals standards that are not hardness-dependent shall be as follows: 3
(i) Arsenic, dissolved, acute: WER∙ 340 ug/l; 4
(ii) Arsenic, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 150 ug/l; 5
(iii) Beryllium, dissolved, acute: WER∙ 65 ug/l; 6
(iv) Beryllium, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 6.5 ug/l; 7
(v) Chromium VI, dissolved, acute: WER∙ 16 ug/l; 8
(vi) Chromium VI, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 11 ug/l; 9
(vii) Mercury, total recoverable, chronic: 0.012 ug/l; 10
(viii) Selenium, total recoverable, chronic: 5 ug/l; 11
(ix) Silver, dissolved, chronic: WER∙ 0.06 ug/l; 12
(d) Hardness-dependent freshwater metals standards shall be derived using the equations 13
specified in Table A: Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals. If 14
the actual instream hardness (expressed as CaCO3 or Ca+Mg) is less than 400 mg/l, 15
standards shall be calculated based upon the actual instream hardness. If the instream 16
hardness is greater than 400 mg/l, the maximum applicable hardness shall be 400 mg/l. 17
Table A: Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals 18
Numeric standards calculated at 25 mg/l hardness are listed below for illustrative purposes. 19
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under Sub-20
Item (11)(b) of this Rule. 21
22
Metal Equations for Hardness-Dependent Freshwater Metals
(ug/l)
Standard
at 25 mg/l
hardness
(ug/l)
Cadmium,
Acute
WER∙ [{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.9151 [ln
hardness]-3.1485}]
0.82
Cadmium,
Acute,
Trout
waters
WER∙ [{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.9151[ln
hardness]-3.6236}]
0.51
Cadmium,
Chronic
WER∙ [{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} ∙ e^{0.7998[ln
hardness]-4.4451}]
0.15
Chromium
III, Acute
WER∙ [0.316 ∙ e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}] 180
A - 196
4

Chromium
III, Chronic
WER∙ [0.860 ∙ e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}]

24

Copper,
Acute
WER∙ [0.960 ∙ e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.700}]
Or,
Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria-Copper
2007 Revision
(EPA-822-R-07-001)

3.6

NA
Copper,
Chronic
WER∙ [0.960 ∙ e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702}]
Or,
Aquatic Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria-Copper
2007 Revision
(EPA-822-R-07-001)
2.7

NA
Lead,
Acute
WER∙ [{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} ∙ e^{1.273[ln
hardness]-1.460}]
14
Lead,
Chronic
WER∙ [{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} ∙ e^{1.273[ln
hardness]-4.705}]
0.54
Nickel,
Acute
WER∙ [0.998 ∙ e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255}] 140
Nickel,
Chronic
WER∙ 0.997 ∙ e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584}] 16
Silver,
Acute
WER∙ 0.85 ∙ e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.59}] 0.30
Zinc, Acute WER∙ [0.978 ∙ e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}] 36
Zinc,
Chronic
WER∙ 0.986 ∙ e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}] 36
1
(e) Compliance with acute instream metals standards shall only be evaluated using an average 2
of two or more samples collected within one hour. Compliance with chronic instream 3
metals standards shall only be evaluated using an average of a minimum of four samples 4
taken on consecutive days or as a 96-hour average; 5
(12) Oils, deleterious substances, or colored or other wastes: only such amounts as shall not render the 6
waters injurious to public health, secondary recreation, or to aquatic life and wildlife, or adversely 7
affect the palatability of fish, aesthetic quality, or impair the waters for any designated uses. For the 8
purpose of implementing this Rule, oils, deleterious substances, or colored or other wastes shall 9
include substances that cause a film or sheen upon or discoloration of the surface of the water or 10
adjoining shorelines, as described in 40 CFR 110.3(a)-(b), incorporated by reference including 11
A - 197
5

subsequent amendments and editions. This material is available, free of charge, at: 1
http://www.ecfr.gov/; 2
(13) Pesticides: 3
(a) Aldrin: 0.002 ug/l; 4
(b) Chlordane: 0.004 ug/l; 5
(c) DDT: 0.001 ug/l; 6
(d) Demeton: 0.1 ug/l; 7
(e) Dieldrin: 0.002 ug/l; 8
(f) Endosulfan: 0.05 ug/l; 9
(g) Endrin: 0.002 ug/l; 10
(h) Guthion: 0.01 ug/l; 11
(i) Heptachlor: 0.004 ug/l; 12
(j) Lindane: 0.01 ug/l; 13
(k) Methoxychlor: 0.03 ug/l; 14
(l) Mirex: 0.001 ug/l; 15
(m) Parathion: 0.013 ug/l; and 16
(n) Toxaphene: 0.0002 ug/l; 17
(14) pH: shall be between 6.0 and 9.0 except that swamp waters may have a pH as low as 4.3 if it is the 18
result of natural conditions; 19
(15) Phenolic compounds: only such levels as shall not result in fish-flesh tainting or impairment of other 20
best usage; 21
(16) Polychlorinated biphenyls (total of all PCBs and congeners identified): 0.001 ug/l; 22
(17) Radioactive substances, based on at least one sample collected per quarter: 23
(a) Combined radium-226 and radium-228: the average annual activity level for combined 24
radium-226 and radium-228 shall not exceed five picoCuries per liter; 25
(b) Alpha Emitters: the average annual gross alpha particle activity (including radium-226, but 26
excluding radon and uranium) shall not exceed 15 picoCuries per liter; 27
(c) Beta Emitters: the average annual activity level for strontium-90 shall not exceed eight 28
picoCuries per liter, nor shall the average annual gross beta particle activity (excluding 29
potassium-40 and other naturally occurring radionuclides) exceed 50 picoCuries per liter, 30
nor shall the average annual activity level for tritium exceed 20,000 picoCuries per liter; 31
(18) Temperature: not to exceed 2.8 degrees C (5.04 degrees F) above the natural water temperature, and 32
in no case to exceed 29 degrees C (84.2 degrees F) for mountain and upper piedmont waters and 32 33
degrees C (89.6 degrees F) for lower piedmont and coastal plain Waters; the temperature for trout 34
waters shall not be increased by more than 0.5 degrees C (0.9 degrees F) due to the discharge of 35
heated liquids, but in no case to exceed 20 degrees C (68 degrees F); 36
(19) Toluene: 0.36 ug/l in trout classified waters or 11 ug/l in all other waters; 37
A - 198
6

(20) Trialkyltin compounds: 0.07 ug/l expressed as tributyltin; 1
(21) Turbidity: the turbidity in the receiving water shall not exceed 50 Nephelometric Turbidity Units 2
(NTU) in streams not designated as trout waters and 10 NTU in streams, lakes, or reservoirs 3
designated as trout waters; for lakes and reservoirs not designated as trout waters, the turbidity shall 4
not exceed 25 NTU; if turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural background conditions, the 5
existing turbidity level shall not be increased. Compliance with this turbidity standard shall be 6
deemed met when land management activities employ Best Management Practices (BMPs), as 7
defined by Rule .0202 of this Section, recommended by the Designated Nonpoint Source Agency, 8
as defined by Rule .0202 of this Section. 9
(22) Toxic Substance Level Applicable to NPDES Permits: Chloride: 230 mg/l. If chloride is determined 10
by the waste load allocation to be exceeded in a receiving water by a discharge under the specified 11
7Q10 criterion for toxic substances, the discharger shall monitor the chemical or biological effects 12
of the discharge. Efforts shall be made by all dischargers to reduce or eliminate chloride from their 13
effluents. Chloride shall be limited as appropriate in the NPDES permit if sufficient information 14
exists to indicate that it may be a causative factor resulting in toxicity of the effluent. 15
16
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-215.3(a)(1); 17
Eff. February 1, 1976; 18
Amended Eff. January 1, 2015; May 1, 2007; April 1, 2003; August 1, 2000; October 1, 1995; 19
August 1, 1995; April 1, 1994; February 1, 1993; 20
Readopted Eff. November 1, 2019. November 1, 2019; 21
Amended Eff. Xxxxx 22
A - 199