NCS000515_China Grove 2012 Permit Application_20120423

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental dual

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
M54 PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
� r�S �i51�
� v
DOC TYPE
❑FINAL PERMIT
JVNUAL REPORT
VAPPLICATION
❑ COMPLIANCE
❑ OTHER
DOC DATE
❑ DL-4�'3
YYYYMMDD

Engineering
Architecture
Environmental
Planning
AWPease
A La Bella Affiliate
Pease Engineering and Architecture, P.C.
1520 South Blvd., Suite 210, Charlotte, NC 28203
April 20, 2012
Mr. Mike Randall
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality Stormwater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Reference: Town of China Grove
NPDES Phase II Permit NCS000515
Subject: Stormwater Management Program Report
Permit Renewal Application
Please find attached the following for the above referenced project:
Phone 704,376,6423
Fax [phone]
www.pease-ae.com
DO
APR 23Z012
NR - WA R QUALITY
1) Three (3) copies of the Town of China Grove Stormwater Management Program Report.
2) One (1) copy of the NPDES Stormwater Permit Application Form for renewal of the existing
permit.
Thank you for your time and please do not hesitate to call me with any questions or comments
regarding the attached (Direct: 704-941-2174, Email: hcrockford(cpease-ae.com).
Sincerely,
4a&t'4_ 0 .
Heather A. Crockford, PE, FEED® AP, BD+C
Civil Engineer
cc: Ken Deal —Town of China Grove Town Manager
V;\212129\CFile\Ph1-5\010-Rev-Approvals\Stormwa ter Report Application Cover Letter.doc
Relationships. Resources. Results.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
OFl"IC USE ONLY=
Date Rec'd
Fee Paid
Permit Number
NPDES_STORMWATER PERMIT APPLICATION_ FORM
This application form is for use by public bodies seeking NPDES stormwater permit coverage for Regulated
Public Entities (RPE) pursuant to Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2H .0126, A complete
application package includes this form and three copies of the narrative documentation required in Section X
of this form, This application form, completed in accordance with Instructions for completing NPDES Small
M54 Stormwater Permit Application (SWU-270) and the accompanying narrative documentation, completed
in accordance with Instructions for Preparing the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report
(SWU-268) are both required for the application package to be considered a complete application submittal.
Incomplete application submittals may be returned to the applicant.
I. APPLICANT STATUS INFORMATION
a.
Name of Public Enti Seeking Permit Coverage
Town of China Grove
b,
Ownership Status federal state or local
Local
c.
Type of Public Entity (city, town, county, prison,
school etc.
Town
d.
Federal Standard Industrial Classification Code
SIC 91- 97
e.
County(s)
Rowan
f.
Jurisdictional Area(square miles
5,96 s uare miles
g.
Population
Permanent 3,569
Seasonal (if available) N/A
h,
Ten-year Growth Rate
32.4% from 1990 to 2000
Fiat from 2000 to 2010
i.
Located on Indian Lands?
I ❑ Yes Z No
II. RPE / MS4 SYSTEM INFORMATION
a.
Storm Sewer Service Area(square miles
2.14 s uare miles
b.
River Basins
Yadkin Pee -Dee
c.
Number of Prima Receiving Streams
Three
d.
Estimated percentage of jurisdictional area containing the following four land use activities:
•
Residential
73%
•
Commercial
4%
•
Industrial
21%
•
Open Space
20/0
Total =
100%
e.
Are there significant water quality Issues
listed in the attached application report?
Yes ®No
III. EXISTING LOCAL {HATER QUALITY PROGRAMS
a, local Nutrient Sensitive Waters Strategy
❑ Yes ® No
b. Local Water Supply Watershed Program
❑ Yes ® No
c. Delegated Erosion and Sediment Control Program
❑ Yes ® No
d. CAMA Land Use Plan
❑ Yes ® No
Page 1
SWU-264-103102

NPDES RPE Stormwater Permit Application
IV. CO -PERMIT APPLICATION STATUS INFORMATION — N/A
(Complete this section only if co -permitting)
a.
Do you Intend to co -permit with a permitted Phase I enti ?
ED Yes No
b.
If so, provide the name and permit number of that entity:
•
Name of Phase I MS4
•
NPDES Permit Number
c.
Do you intend to co -permit with another Phase II entity?
❑ Yes No
d.
If so, provide the name(s) of the entity:
e.
Have legal agreements been finalized between the co- TO
ermittees?
Yes ❑ No
V. RELIANCE ON ANOTHER ENTITY TO SATISFY ONE OR MORE OF YOUR PERMIT OBLIGATIONS
(If more than one, attach additional sheets)
a. Do you intend that another entity
perform one or more of your
permit obligations?
® Yes ❑ No
b. If yes, identify each entity and the element they will be implementing
• fume of Entity
Rowan County Environmental Services
• Element they will implement
Erosion and Sediment Control Minimum Measure
• Contact Person
Greg Green, Environmental Specialist
• Contact Address
2727-D Old Concord Road Salisbury, NC 28146
• Contact Telephone Number
704-216-8591
c. Are legal agreements in place to
establish res onsibilities?
❑ Yes ® No
VI. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY (OPTIONAL)
The signing official may delegate permit implementation authority to an appropriate staff
member. This delegation must name a specific person and position and include documentation of
the delegation action through board action.
a. Name of person to which permit authority
has been delegated
b. Title/position of person above
c. Documentation of board action delegating permit authority to this person/position must be
provided in the attached application report.
VII. SIGNING OFFICIAL'S STATEMENT
Please see the application instructions to determine who has signatory authority for this permit
application. If authority for the NPDES stormwater permit has been appropriately delegated
through board action and documented in this permit application, the person/position listed in
Section VI above may sign the official statement below.
Page 2
SW U-264-103102

NPDES RPC Stormwater Permit Application
I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or
persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate,
and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
induding the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Signature
QJ1?Q[i �V
Name
Ken Deal
Title
Town Manager
Street Address
308 East Centerview Street
PO Box
City
China Grove
State
North Carolina
Zip
28023
Telephone
704-857-2466 ext. 101
Fax
704-855-1855
E-Mail
[e-mail]
VIII. MS4 CONTACT INFORMATION
Provide the following information for the person/position that will be responsible for day to day
implementation and oversight of the stormwater program.
a.
Name of Contact Person
Pamela Mills
b.
Title
Stormwater Administrator
c.
Street Address
308 East Centerview Street
d.
PO Box
e.
City
China Grove
f,
State
North Carolina
g.
Zip
28023
h.
Telephone Number
704-857-2466 ext. 104
i.
Fax Number
704-855-1855
j.
E-Mail Address
pmills@chinaarovgnc,ggv
Page 3
SWU-264-103102

NPDES RPE Stormwater Permit Application
IX. PERMITS AND CONSTRUCTION APPROVALS
List permits or construction approvals received or applied for under the following programs. Include
contact name if different than the person listed in item VH1. If further space needed, attach additional
sheets.
a.
RCRA Hazardous Waste
N/A
Management Program
b,
UIC program under SDWA
N/A
c.
NPDES Wastewater Discharge
N/A
Permit Number
d.
Prevention of Significant
N/A
Deterioration (PSD) Program
e.
Non Attainment Program
N/A
f.
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Pollutants (NESHAPS)
N/A
preconstruction-a2provaf
g.
Ocean dumping permits under the
Marine Protection Research and
N/A
Sanctuaries Act
h.
Dredge or fill permits under
N/A
section 404 of CWA
X. NARRATIVE APPLICATION SUPPLEMENT: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REPORT
Attach three copies of a comprehensive report detailing the proposed stormwater management
program for the five-year permit term. The report shall be formatted in accordance with the Table of
Contents shown below. The required narrative information for each section is provided in the
Instructions for Preparing the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program deport (SWU-268).
The report must be assembled in the following order, bound with tabs identifying each section by
name, and include a Table of Contents with page numbers for each entry.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. STORM SEWER SYSTEM INFORMATION
1.1. Population Served
1.2. Growth Rate
1.3. Jurisdictional and MS4 Service Areas
1.4. MS4 Conveyance System
1.5. Land Use Composition Estimates
1.6. Estimate Methodology
1.7. TMDL Identification
2. RECEIVING STREAMS
Page 4
SWU-264-103102

NPDES RPE Stormwater Permit Application
3. EXISTING WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS
3.1. Local Programs
3.2. State programs
4. PERMITTING INFORMATION
4.1. Responsible Party Contact List
4.2. Organizational Chart
4.3. Signing Official
4.4. Duly Authorized Representative
5. Co -Permitting Information (if applicable)
5.1. Co-Permittees
5.2. Legal Agreements
5.3. Responsible Parties
6. Reliance on Other Government Entity
6.1. Name of Entity
6.2. Measure Implemented
6.3. Contact information
6.4. Legal Agreements
7, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
7.1. Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts
7.2. Public Involvement and Participation
7.3, Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
7.4. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
7.5. Post -Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment
7.6, Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Page S
SWU-264-103102

Engineering
4/1'*Pease
Architecture
Environmental
• A LaBella Affiliate Planning
--St®rmwater
Management
Program
Submitted to:
Town of China Grove
North Carolina
Pease Project Number 212129
March 2012
r
Pease Engineering & Architecture, PC
J520-South Boulevard, Suite 210
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
P. 704.376.6423
a
F.704.332.6177
www.pease-ae.com

• TABLE OF CONTENTS
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report
Town of China Grove, North Carolina
0.0 Executive Summary
0.1 Introduction
0.2 Program Components
0.3 Applicable State Water Quality Programs 0
0.4 Receiving Streams --
1.
0.5 Conclusions Al R 64
1.0 Storm Sewer System Information DENR - WATER
1.1 Population Served &
1.2 Growth Rate
1.3 Jurisdictional and MS4 Services Areas
1..4 MS4 Conveyance System
1.5 Land Use Composition Estimates
1.6 Estimate Methodology
1.7 TMDI Identification
• 2.0 Hydrology
2.1 Watersheds
2.2 Receiving Streams
3.0 Existing Water Quality Programs
3.1 Local Programs
3.2 State Programs
4.0 Permitting Information
4.1 Responsible Party Contact List
4.2 Organizational Chart
4.3 Signing Official
4.4 Duly Authorized Representative
5.0 Co -Permitting Information (if applicable)
5.1 Co-Permittees
5.2 Legal Agreements
5.3 Responsible Parties
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

6.0 Reliance on Other Government Entity
6.1 Name of Entity
6.2 Measure Implemented
6.3 Contact Information
6.4 Legal Agreements
7.0 Stormwater Management Program
7.1 Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts
7.2 Public Involvement and Participation
7.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
7A Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
7.5 Post -Construction Storm Water Management in New
Development and Redevelopment
7.6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Appendices
A
Figure 1 Watershed Overview (1"=3000')
Figure 2 Receiving Streams (1"=2000')
Figure 3 Outfall Location Map (1"=2000')
B
• C
Town Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Ordinance
Yadkin -Pee Dee Basin wide Water Quality Management Plan
D
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
E
Employee Training Guidelines and Forms
F
Record Keeping Guidelines and Forms
G
Materials Inventory Guidelines and Forms
H
Spill Prevention Planning Guidelines and Forms
I
Outfali Reconnaissance Inventory/Sample Collection Field Sheet
J Town NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit
K NCDENR Annual Stormwater Program Reporting Form
L NCDENR Stormwater Program Compliance Checklist
M Detailed System Maps (1"=150')
N Watershed Overview Map (1"=1500')
•
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 0.0 Executive Summary
0.1 Introduction
This report updates the Town's existing Stormwater Management Program and
includes modifications to the original report submitted in 2005. Specifically, revisions
have been made to the six (6) program implementation measures outlined in Section 7
of the report. This updated report also includes detailed mapping of the Town's
existing stormwater infrastructure and a copy of the Town's stormwater quality
management and discharge control ordinance.
This Stormwater Management Program was developed for the Town of China Grove
for compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Phase H Storm Water Rule (The Rule).
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) includes the Town of China
Grove on the list of small municipal separate storm water systems (MS4s) that must
comply with the Phase II Storm Water -final Rule. MS4 stormwater management
programs must be fully developed and implemented within 5 years of the permit
issuance.
• Municipalities across the state and county are faced with increasing requirements to
monitor and control stormwater runoff. These efforts stem from awareness that
improving water quality requires controls of non -point source pollutants. The Federal
government published a Final Rule for NPDES Phase 11 Storm Water permits, which
addresses MS4 stormwater discharges and construction sites that disturb greater than 11
acre.
•
0.2 Program Components
The Rule requires MS4s to develop and implement a stormwater management
program (Program) designed to protect water quality by reducing the discharge of
pollutants from their MS4. The Program must include the following six (6) minimum
measures:
0.2.1 Public Education and Outreach on Stormwater Impacts
One of the major components of the Phase H NPDES Storm Water rules is
public education and outreach. The success of the Program and compliance
with the MS4s' NPDES stormwater permit will be more likely if the public is
aware of their existence and purpose.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
The EPA encourages the MS4s to enter into partnership with their State in
fulfilling the public education requirement. MS4s must implement a public
education program to:
■ Distribute educational materials to the community, or
■ Conduct equivalent outreach activities about the;
o Impacts of stormwater discharges on water bodies, and
o Steps to reduce stormwater pollution
The public education and outreach program should be target to specific
potential polluters including:
■ Individuals.
■ Households.
■ Senior Citizens, adults, adolescents, and children.
■ Minority groups.
■ Developers.
■ Disadvantaged communities.
■ Commercial, industrial, and institutional entities likely to have significant
stormwater impacts.
0 Examples of strategies include:
Distributing brochures or fact sheets.
■ Sponsoring speaking engagements before community groups.
■ Providing public service announcements_
■ Implementing educational programs targeted at school age children.
■ Informing individuals and groups on how to get involved with
community -based projects such as:
o Storm drain stenciling.
o Watershed and stream cleanups.
o Local stream and restoration activities.
The public education program should inform individuals and households
about steps that can be taken to reduce stormwater pollution such as:
■ Septic tank system maintenance.
■ Limiting use and runoff of garden chemicals.
■ Protecting and restoring riparian vegetation.
■ Proper disposal of household hazardous wastes.
■ Proper disposal of restaurant grease.
■ Proper disposal and spill control of service station chemicals.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
Resources for obtaining public education pamphlets currently exist From a
variety of organizations and governmental agencies including:
■ American Public Works Association.
■ North Carolina State Cooperative Extension.
■ US Environmental Protection Agency.
■ North Carolina Department of Natural Resources.
■ Other State nonpoint source pollution control programs under Section 31.9
of the Clean Water Act.
0.2.2 Public involvement/Participation
The Rule requires that MS4s comply with applicable State and Local public
notice requirements. The EPA recommends a public participation process with
efforts to reach out and engage all economic and ethnic groups for the
following:
1. Early and frequent public involvement can shorten
implementation schedules and broaden public support for the
program.
2. Public participation is likely to ensure a more successful
program by providing valuable expertise and a conduit to other
programs and governments.
Possible ways that members of the public may participate in the program
development and implementation include:
■ Serving on a stakeholder group.
■ Attending public hearings.
■ Working as citizen volunteers to educate others about the program.
■ Assisting in Program coordination with existing programs.
■ Participating in volunteer monitoring efforts.
Stakeholder groups provide an excellent forum for discussion and consensus
building around challenging initiatives such as establishing a stormwater
utility.
Possible Stakeholders include, but are not limited to:
■ Individual property owners.
■ Developers.
■ Realtors.
■ Home Builders Associations.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• State and City governmental agencies.
■ Political interest groups.
■ Planners.
■ Environmentalists.
• Designers.
■ Research institutions.
0.2.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
The illicit discharge detection and elimination requirements of the Rule are
fairly extensive. MS4 must, at a minimum, develop, implement, and enforce an
illicit discharge detection and elimination program. The requirements include:
■ Develop a storm sewer system map showing:
o All outfalls.
o Names and locations of all waters that receive discharges from
those outfalls.
■ Legally prohibit (through an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism):
o Illicit discharge into the storm sewer systems.
o Implement enforcement procedures and actions as needed.
■ Develop and implement a plan to detect and address illicit discharges and
illegal dumping to the system.
■ Inform the public employees, business, and the general public of hazards
associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of wastes.
The Rule requires a set of maps that shows the locations of all outfalls and
names and locations or receiving waters. In addition to the maps, the EPA
recommends gathering additional information from existing Town records and
walking (or boating) streambanks to verify the outfall locations. Once an illicit
discharge is detected at an outfall, it may be necessary to map that portion of
the storm sewer system leading to the outfall in order to locate the source of the
discharge.
The EPA recommends that Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Plans
include procedures for the following:
■ Locating priority areas for more detailed screening.
■ Tracing the source of an illicit discharge by:
o Identifying the source chemical characteristics.
o Determining the actual location of the source by following flow
up the system via:
- Chemical testing in manholes or channels.
- Television storm sewers.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
. s• Using infrared and thermal photography.
Conducting smoke or dye tests.
■ Removing the source of an illicit discharge by:
o Notifying the property owner.
o Specifying a length of time for eliminating the discharge.
a Describing procedures for additional notifications and escalation
of legal actions if the discharge is not eliminated.
■ Program evaluation and assessment by:
o Documenting actions taken to locate and eliminate illicit
discharges such as:
Number of outfalls screened.
Complaints received and corrected.
Feet of storm sewers televised.
Number of discharges and quantities of flow
eliminated.
Number of dye or smoke tests conducted.
This documentation should be submitted as part of the annual reports for the
first permit term.
0.2.4 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
The Rule requires MS4s to develop, implement, and enforce a pollutant control
program to reduce pollutants in any stormwater runoff from construction
activities that result in land disturbance of 1 or more acres. Currently, the State
and County are administering the Sediment Erosion Control on behalf of the
Town. The construction runoff control program must include:
■ An ordinance (or other regulatory mechanism) to require erosion and
sediment controls to the extent allowable under the law.
■ Sanctions to ensure compliance:
o Non -monetary penalties.
o Fines.
o Bonding requirements.
a Permit denials for non-compliance.
■ Requirements for owner/developers to implement best management
practices (BMPs).
• Procedure for pre -construction site plan review that includes
consideration of potential water quality impacts. This procedure should
also include a review of site erosion and sediment control plans.
■ Requirements to control construction wastes and chemicals that adversely
affect water quality.
■ Procedures for receipt of public comments/complaints. For example:
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
o Log public complaints on existing stormwater runoff problems
from construction sites and pass that information on to local
inspectors for investigation.
Procedures for regular inspections.
o Steps to identify priority sites for inspection.
• Enforcement based on:
o The nature and extent of the construction activity.
o Topography.
o Characteristics of soils.
o Receiving water quality.
■ Procedures for enforcement and penalties.
0.2.5 Post — Construction Stormwater Manogernent
The Rule requires the MS4s to develop, implement, and enforce a program to
address stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment projects
that result in land disturbance of greater than or equal to I acre that discharge
into the MS4.
As part of the Program, the MS4s must:
. ■ Develop and implement strategies that include a combination of structural
and/or non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate for
the community that:
o Minimize water quality impacts.
o Attempts to maintain pre -development runoff conditions.
o If possible, utilize locally based watershed planning efforts.
■ Use an ordinance (or other regulatory mechanism) to address post -
construction runoff from new development to the extent possible by law.
Policies and ordinance should:
o Provide requirements and standards to direct growth to
identified areas.
o Protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas.
o Maintain and/or increase space.
o Provide buffers along sensitive water bodies.
o Minimize impervious surfaces and directly connected
impervious surfaces.
o Minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation.
o Encourage infill development in higher density urban areas and
areas with existing storm water infrastructure.
o Encourage cluster developments that provide for greater open
space, recreation, stream protection, and stormwater control.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
- Ensure adequate long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs. The EPA
recommends that small MS4 operators ensure the appropriate
implementation of the structural BMPs by considering:
o Pre -construction review of BMP designs.
o Inspections during construction to verify BMPs are built as
designed.
o Post -construction inspection and maintenance of BMPs.
o Sanctions to ensure compliance with design, construction or
operations and maintenance requirements of the program.
o Evaluating various operation and maintenance (O&M)
agreement options.
■ Ensure that controls are in place that should minimize water quality
impacts. A suite of suitable structural and non-structural BMPs is
available.
0.2.6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for MS4 Operations
The MS4 is required to develop and implement an O&M program that has the
ultimate goals of preventing or reducing stormwater from municipal
operations. The O&M program must include a training component that
addresses prevention measures pertaining to municipal operations. The EPA
. also encourages consideration of the following in developing an O&M
program:
■ Implement maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term
inspection procedures for structural and non-structural stormwater
controls to reduce floatable and other pollutants discharged from the
storm sewers.
■ Implement controls for reducing or eliminating the discharge of pollutants
from streets, municipal parking lots, maintenance and storage yards,
waste transfer stations, fleet or maintenance shops with outdoor storage
areas and salt/sand storage areas.
■ Adopt procedures for the proper disposal of waste removed from the
separate storm sewer systems and areas listed above.
■ Adopt procedures to ensure that new flood management projects are
assessed for impacts on water duality and existing projects are assessed
for incorporation of additional water quality protection devices or
practices.
Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for MS4 operations could result in
cost savings by minimizing possible damage to the system and BMPs from
floatable and other debris and, consequently, reducing the need for repairs.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
Additionally, to comply with the NPDES Phase II regulations, the MS4`s
Stormwater Program must identify BMPs to be implemented in the above
program, measurable goals for water quality improvement, the start and
completion dates for each activity, and the person or persons responsible for
implementing the M54's Program.
0.3 6pplicable State Water Quality Programs
The State has multiple programs and potential funding sources which address water
quality. The following is a list of some of the programs and funding sources:
■ Regulations[Programs:
o
Basinwide Management.
o
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL).
o
Water Quality Standards and Classifications.
o
Stormwater Management.
o
Clean Water Act.
o
Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan of Action.
o
Water Supply Watershed Protection Program.
o
Solid Waste Management Act.
o
Clean Water Responsibility and Environmentally Sound Policy Act.
. ■ Potential
Funding Sources:
o
Clean Water Management Trust Fund.
0
1999 Clean Water Budget.
o
Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program.
o
Wetlands Restoration Program.
•
0.4 Receiving Streams
The Town of China Grove contributes stormwater runoff to three receiving streams
and their tributary streams, the streams are:
■ Grants Creek
■ Cold Water Creek
■ Town Creek
The streams are shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A.
Cold Water Creek is adjacent to Interstate 85 (I85) and flows in a south direction into
Buffalo Creek in Cabarrus County. Buffalo Creek flows into the Rocky River. Cold
Water Creek is in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• Grants Creek is located on the west side of China Grove and delineates a portion of the
Town limits. Grants Creek flows north through Salisbury and discharges into the
Yadkin River; Grants Creek is in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04. The
Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan prepared by NC Division
of Water Quality identified the lower section of Grants Creek upstream of the
confluence with the Yadkin River as impaired waters.
The headwaters of Town Creek are located northeast of the Town Limits of China
Grove. The Creek begins just east of SR 2553 and flows west parallel to NC 152 up to
I85. At I85 the creek turns northeast and flow through Salisbury and into the Yadkin
River. Although the Creek is outside of the current ET), areas within the ETJ drain into
the Creek.
The Yadkin — Pee Dee River Basin Wide Water Quality Management Plan prepared by
NC Division of Water Quality identified Town Creek as being an impaired water from
the headwaters to the Yadkin River.
Impaired waters are those waters, which only partially support or do not support their
designated uses based on DWQ monitoring data. The streams are impaired, in part,
because of nonpoint sources of pollution, which likely, includes stormwater
discharges.
The basis for the impaired status of the streams included habitat degradation and a few
occurrences of low dissolved oxygen (DO) and elevated turbidity. Sections of the
watersheds are highly developed and stormwater runoff was identified as a likely
major contributor to the impairment. Among the 2002 recommendations in the
Basinwide Plan were the requirement for municipalities to obtain NPDES permits for
stormwater systems under Phase II Stormwater Rules along with restoration of
riparian vegetation and wetlands.
Copies of The Forward, Executive Summary, Yadkin -Pee River Basin Overview,
Chapter 4 and Chapter 1.2 of the Yadkin Pee -Dee Basinwide Water Quality
Management Plan, which include the subbasin water quality overview and the
2001/2002 status and recommendations for these streams, are included in Appendix C.
0.5 Conclusions
The following Stormwater Management Program for the Town of China Grove was
prepared in accordance with the NC DWQ Phase II Stormwater Management Program
requirements and instructions. Implementation of the program will result in
protecting and significantly improving the water quality of the receiving streams,
which will contribute to achieving the goal of the Basinwide Water Quality
• Management Plan of improving water quality in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 1.0 Storm Sewer System Information
1.1 Population Served
The Town's present population is 3,569 according to 2010 US Census Data (from NC
Office of State Budget and Management). This is approximately a 1.2% decrease from the
2000 estimate of 3,616. No seasonal population was identified. Estimated population
within the ETJ is 1,520.
1.2 Growth Rate
Although the annualized 10-year growth rate from 1990 to 2000 was approximately
32.4% based on 2000 US Census data, the population within the Town has remained
flat from 2000 to 2010.
1.3 Jurisdictional and MS4 Services Areas:
City Limits Plus ETJ: 5.96 Square Miles.
MS4 Services area: 2.14 Square Miles.
. 1.4 MS4 Conveyance System:
Storm drainage within the Town of China Grove consists of a broken network of pipes,
ditches and open channels, which were installed at different times by many different
entities. The flow of storm water travels through both public and privately maintained
areas, and the level of improvements installed are the option of the property owner.
The overall drainage area is relatively small and is served by three major creeks and
numerous tributary steams. Therefore, the typical drainage path from overland flow to
the outfall is short.
:7
The Town recently inventoried the conveyance system and prepared detailed maps of
the entire system within the Town's municipal boundary limits.
Existing stormwater piping: +24,000 feet of 8" to 48" diameter piping
Stormwater inlets: +276 inlets
Outfalls or discharge points: +60 (size from 12" to 60" diameter)
Figure 3 of Appendix A is a location map of all inventoried outfalls within the Town's
municipal boundaries. Appendix M includes detailed system maps showing the
location of all inlets, piping and outfalls.
Pease Commission No. 21.2129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 1.5 land Use Composition Estimates
•
ETJ Summar
Zoning
Classification
Total
Existing
Area within
ETJ
Acres
Minimum
Residential
Lot Size
(Sq Ft)
Approximate
Existing
Units per
Acre
Allowable
Units Under
Current
Zoning
Persons per
Unit
Total
Projected
Allowable
Population
B-1
2.393
B-2
29.331
B-3
190.046
M-1
949.18
M-2
152.326
O-1
95.947
R-1
829.056
8,5001
5.1
4,249
2.5829
10,97
R-2
209.745
7,000
6.2
1,305
2.5829
3,371
R-3
353.276
7,000
6.2
2,198
2.5829
5,678
R-R
1823.559
10,000
4.4
7,943
2.5829
20,517
R-S
551.872
12,000
3.6
2,003
2.5829
5,174
Unclassified
43,560
1.0
0
2.5829
0
otals
5186.731
1
1 17,699
1 45,715
Current Land Use
Residential 73%,
Business and Commercial 4` ,
Manufacturing and Industrial 21`%o
Open Space 2%
1.6 Estimate Methodolog
Percentages were estimated from zoning map classifications.
1.7 TMDL Identification
The USEPA developed an approach called total maximum daily loads (TMDL)
for determining the total waste (pollutant) loading from point and nonpoint
sources that a stream or other water body can assimilate and maintain its
designated uses. With the TMDL approach streams, which do not meet water
quality standards, are identified and the State establishes priorities for actions
•
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
0
needed to meet water quality goals. There are no defined TMDLs within the
Town's watershed.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwwater Management Program
•
E
2.0 H dY rology
2.1 Watersheds
The Town contributes stormwater runoff to three receiving streams and their
associated watersheds. Runoff from the Town primarily enters either the Grants Creek
or Cold Water Creek watersheds. A very small portion enters the Town Creek
watershed. Between Grants Creek and Cold Water Creek, approximately two thirds of
the Town's runoff enters the Grants Creek watershed and the other one third enters the
Cold Water Creek watershed. Figure 1 in Appendix A illustrates the boundaries of the
Grants Creek and Cold Water Creek watersheds and their major sub -catchments,
relative to the Town's municipal and ETJ boundaries. Another watershed overview
map, at a scale of 1"W1500' and including contours, is included in Appendix N.
2.2 Receiving reams — Detailed Listing
The tributary streams are listed in the order in which they occur beginning at the most
downstream point of the named Creek within the program area and proceeding
upstream. The direction of flow of Grants Creek and Town Creek is from south to
north. Cold Water Creek Flows from the north to the south. The "E" and "W"
designations indicate that the tributary is located to either the east or the west side of
the main creek. The numerical designation indicates the order of occurrence from the
most far point in the program area downstream to most upstream point in the program
area. Figure 2 in Appendix A illustrates the receiving streams in the program area.
Major Receiving
Stream
Water Quality
Use
Water Quality
Stream Name
Segment
Classification
Support
Issues
Rating
Grants Creeks
12-110
C
O
Fecal Coliform,
Turbidity,
Sediment
Town Creek
12-115-3
C
O
DO, Turbidity
Cold Water Creek
13-17-9-
WS-IV
O
Fecal Coliform
4(0.5)
Cold Water Creek -- Beginning north of intersection SR 1.243 and I-85 and ending
north of NC 152 and south of intersection of I-85 and 29/601.
• Unnamed Tributary W-1 Cold Water Creek
• Unnamed Tributary W-2 Cold Water Creek
• Unnamed Tributary W-3 Cold Water Creek at SR 1232
• Unnamed Tributary E-1 Cold Water Creek at SR 1339
• Unnamed Tributary W-4 Cold Water Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-5 Cold Water Creek at SR 1337
■ Unnamed Tributary E-2 Cold Water Creek at SR 1337
Pease Commission No. 2121.29
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
•
LJ
• Unnamed Tributary E-3 Cold Water Creek at NC 152
Grants Creek — Beginning southwest of SR 1505 and ending at SR 1211
■ Unnamed Tributary E-1 to Grants Creek
o Unnamed Tributary E-IA
• Unnamed Tributary E-2 to Grants Creek
o Unnamed Tributary E-2A
■ Unnamed Tributary E-3 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-1 to Grants Creek
o Unnamed Tributary W-1A
■ Unnamed Tributary W-2 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-3 to Grants Creek
• Unnamed Tributary E-4 to Grants Creek at SR 1225
■ Unnamed Tributary W-4 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary E-5 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-5 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary E-6 to Grants Creek
Town Creek — Beginning at headwaters east of SR 2553 and ending at intersection SR
1505 and I-85. No tributary streams are included in the program area.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
0 3.0 Existing Water Quality Programs
•
3.1 Local Programs
ams
There are currently no local water quality programs for the Town of China Grove.
3.2 State Programs
Town of China Grove is in compliance with the requirements of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosion Control Program. The program is administered for the Town by
Rowan County Environmental Services.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 201.2

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
0 4.0 Permitting Information
0
•
4.1 Responsible Party Contact List
Position
Name
Phone #No.
Fax #No.
Email Address
Town
Ken Deal
704-857-2466
704-855-1855
[e-mail]
Manager
Ext: 101
Public Works
David Ketner
704-857-2466
704-855-1855
[e-mail]
Director
Ext: 401
StormAdministrator
Pamela Mills
7-2466
704-855-1855
pmills®chinagrovenc.gov
Administrator
Ext* 1
Ext: 104
Town Clerk
Amanda Eller
704-857-2466
704-855-1855
[e-mail]
Ext: 102
Town
Tom Brooke
704-857-6121
704-857-6540
tmb®brookelaw.com
Attorney
Pease Commission No. 2121.29
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
0 4.2 Oraanizational Chart
•
Town of China Grove
Organizational Chart
4.3 Signing Official
Pamela Mills, Stormwater Administrator
4.4 Duly Authorized Representative
• Not Applicable
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 5.0 Co -Permitting Information
Not Applicable to the Town of China Grove SWMP.
E
•
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 201.2

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
. 6.0 Reliance on Otter Government Entity
6.1 Name of Entity
Rowan County Environmental Services
6.2 Measure Implemented
Erosion and Sediment Control Minimum Measure
6.3 Contract Information
Greg Greene, Environmental Specialist
2727-D Old Concord Road
Salisbury, NC 28146
704-216-8591.
6.4 Legal Agreements
•
•
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 7.0 Stormwater Management Program Plan (SWMP)
•
•
The SWMP must be designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the Town of China
Grove and the ETJ to the maximum extent practicable (MEP), The SWMP must be
implemented and enforced to satisfy the appropriate water quality requirements of the Clean
Water Act.
The period of time for fully developing and implementing the SWMP is five (5) years from the
effective date of the NPDES stormwater permit. The Town's permit became effective in 2007
The Town has completed portions of their SWMP. Specific BMPs or tasks which have been
completed are indicated as such. BMPs remaining to be completed are identified for years six
through ten, or 2013 through 2017.
7.1 Public Education and Outreach on Stormwater Impacts
A public education program and other outreach activities that will inform the
community about the impacts of stormwater discharges on receiving streams and the
steps that the public can take to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff will be
developed and implemented. The Best Management Practices (BMP) that will be
developed and implemented are summarized in Table 7.1.1
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

0 • Comprehensive Stormwater Management0gram
Table 7.1.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Public Education and Outreach
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
6
YR
7
YR
8
YR
9
YR
10
Responsible
Position/Party
1
Distribute semi-annual
Distribute semi-annual stormwater related news and
X
X
X
X
X
Town Stormwater
newsletter
updates with the Town's existing newsletter. Include
Administrator
one article in each newsletter that targets a specific
stormwater problem and how citizens and businesses
can reduce their impacts.
2
Add information about Town's
Develop and maintain a stormwater information page
X
X
X
X
X
Town Stormwater
Stormwater Program to
for the existing Town website. Post newsletters and
Administrator
existing Town website
brochures and provide information on water quality,
stormwater pollutants and ways to minimize them,
municipal stormwater projects and activities. Also
provide contacts For reporting and questions.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
40. 7.1.1 Target Audiences
School children, households, businesses and industries will be the target
audiences. They can be reached in a cost effective manner and could make
significant contributions to the prevention of stormwater pollution.
7.1.2 Target Pollutant Sources
Lawn and gardening activities can result in contamination of stormwater.
Stormwater runoff may be contaminated with pesticides, fertilizers and
sediment. Environmentally friendly landscape management can effectively
reduce water use and runoff of contaminants_ It is important for municipalities
to set good examples, which may include avoiding or phasing out use of weed
killers or harmful pesticides and implementing environmentally friendly lawn
and garden activities on municipal property. Practices to be implemented by
the municipality and to be promoted to property owners, may include
landscape planning and design, planting indigenous species, soil testing, the
reduction or elimination of the use of fertilizers and pesticides, use of mulches,
efficient irrigation, and reduction of turf (lawn) areas in favor of non -turf areas
where practical. Benefits of environmentally friendly design include:
• Reduced maintenance requirements
■ Prevention of over application of fertilizers
■ Minimization of watering requirements
■ Reduced mowing requirements, which reduces air, water and noise
pollution
■ Stabilization of exposed soils
■ Reduced probability of stormwater contamination
Proper disposal of trash and elimination of litter.
Disposal of household chemicals, used oil, and anti freeze.
7.1.3 Outreach Program
The Town will implement a public education program to distribute educational
materials to the community and conduct equivalent outreach activities about
the impact of stormwater discharge on water bodies and the steps that the
public can take to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff. The town's efforts
may include but are not limited to:
• ■ Using stormwater educational material provided by the State, EPA,
environmental, public interest or trade organizations.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
■ Informing individuals and households about the steps they can take to
reduce stormwater pollution, such as ensuring proper septic tank
maintenance, modifying landscaping, disconnected impervious area (such
as roof downspouts), ensuring the proper use and disposal of landscape
and garden chemicals including fertilizer and pesticides, protecting and
restoring riparian vegetation, and properly disposing of motor oil,
household hazardous waste, or pet waste.
• Inform individuals and groups how to become involved in local stream,
lake, and river restoration activities as well as activities that are coordinated
by youth service and conversation corps and citizen groups.
• Tailoring the program, using a mix of locally appropriate strategies, to
target the specific audience. For example, providing information to garages
on the impact of oil discharges or the explanation to school children that
storm water flows into a nearby creek and eventually ends up in the water
they drink.
7.1.4 Decision Process
Each BMP was judged to be an effective and economical tool for educating the
general public and specific groups in the community.
• 7.1.5 Evaluation
•
The Town will form a staff committee to review all stormwater program BMPs
for effectiveness. The recommendations of the committee will be included in
the annual report.
Cease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 7.2 Public Involvement and Participation
•
Public involvement and participation can broaden support for the program,
make implementation easier and increase the likelihood for the success of the
program. The Town of China Grove will as a minimum comply with State and
local public notice requirements when implementing a public
involvement/participation program. EPA recommends public participation in
the development, review and implementation of SWMP. The process should
make efforts to reach out and engage all economic and ethnic groups. The
public notification process will endeavor to reach out and obtain participation
and support from all economic and ethnic groups. The Town will endeavor to
provide opportunities for public participation in program development and
implementation, The BMPs that will be developed and implemented by the
Town are summarized in Table 7,21.
Opportunities for the public to participate in program development and
implementation may include:
■ Serving as a citizen representative an stormwater management panel
■ Attending public hearings
■ Working as citizen volunteer to educate other individuals about program
■ Assisting with program coordination with other pre-existing programs
■ Participating in volunteer monitoring efforts
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

•
0 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Owarn
Table 7.2.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Public Involvement and Participation
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
b
YR
7
YR
S
YR
9
YR
10
Responsible Position/Party
1
Storm drain marking
Increased awareness about connection between storm
X
Town 5tormwater
drains and receiving streams and decreased dumping.
Administrator
Stream Cleanup
Removal of trash from streams, public participation and
X
X
Town Stormwater
T
education establishment of Adopt -A -Stream programs.
Administrator
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
7.2.1 Target Audience
The public hearing for the development of the Stormwater Management
Program and the NPDES Phase II application will target all interested and
affected members of the China Grove community.
7.2.2 Participation Program
Public Hearings are set by Town Council during their regularly scheduled
meetings. The date is announced and the time and place of the Public Hearing
is advertised for a minimum of 10 days prior to the hearing. The legal notices
for hearings are administered by the Town Clerk and may be reviewed for
compliance by the City Attorney.
7.2.3 Decision Process
The Town will use the public hearings as the most direct and efficient means of
involving all interested citizens in the process of developing and implementing
the Stormwater Management Program.
7.2.4 Evaluation
•
E
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
40 7.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
40CRF 122.26(6)(2) defines an illicit discharge as any discharge to an MS4 that is not
composed entirely of stormwater, except discharges as may be allowed pursuant to an
NPDES permit, including those resulting from fire fighting activities.
Nan-stormwater discharges can include discharge of process water air condition
condensate, non -contact cooling water, vehicle wash water or sanitary waste. These
discharges typically result from unauthorized connector to the storm sewers. Other
non-stormwater discharge of flows may include the following:
• Water line flushing
■ Landscaping irrigation
• Diverted stream flows
■ Foundation drains
■ Pumped ground water
• Potable water discharges
■ Crawl space pumps
■ Law watering
■ Residential car washing
• ■ Swimming pool discharges
• Street wash water
The program should include the following:
■ Procedures for locating priority areas likely to have illicit discharges
■ Procedures for training the sources of an illicit discharge
■ Procedures for removing the sources of the discharge
■ Procedures for program evaluation and assessment
A program must be developed, implemented and enforced to detect and eliminate
illicit discharge into the storm sewer system.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

i• Comprehensive Stormwater Managementogram
Table 7.3.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible
5
7
8
9
10
Position/Party
1
Eliminate discharge from septic
Develop and implement ordinance
TASK COMPLETE
systems to the MS4 sanitary sewer
Ordinance to be
Administered by Town
Stormwater Administrator
2
Detect and eliminate illegal or
Field testing of day weather discharges, visual
X
X
Ordinance to be
inappropriate connections of
inspections, smoke testing, dye testing
developed by Town.
industrial and business wastewater
Administered by Town
sources to the storm drain system
Stormwater Administrator
3
Detect and correct sanitary sewer
Physical inspection of sewer system, flow
SRU owns and operates
overflows
monitoring, smoke testing, dye water flooding,
the Town's sewer system
CCTV inspection, review of sewer maintenance
and will be responsible for
records
routine inspections and
testing
4
Prohibit through ordinance or other
New ordinance will be developed or existing
TASK COMPLETE
regulatory mechanism non-
ordinance amended
Ordinance to be
stormwater discharges into storm
Administered by Town
water system and implement
Stormwater Administrator
appropriate enforcement
procedures and actions
5
Inform public employees,
Program will be developed and implemented to
X
X
Town Stormwater
businesses and public of hazards
inform and educate
Administrator
associated with illegal dumping into
storm sewer system
Pease Commission No. 2121.29
March 2012

0 • Comprehensive Stormwater Managementogram
Table 7.3.1 - continued
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible
6
7
8
9
10
Position/Party
6
Institute mandatory inspections for new
X
Town Stormwater
developments or remodeling to identify
Administrator
illicit connection to storm sewer system
7
Detect and eliminate cross-
X
X
Town Stormwater
connections of wastewater drains to
Administrator
storm sewer
8
Eliminate illegal dumping/disposal of
X
X
Town Stormwater
waste in an unpermitted area
Administrator
9
Prepare storm sewer system map
A system map will be developed
TASK COMPLETE
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 7.3.1 Storm Sewer System Map
A storm sewer map showing the location of all outfaIls and the names and
location of all receiving streams will be prepared. Aerial photographs of the
area encompassed by the boundary of the area of extraterritorial jurisdiction
(ETJ) will be utilized as the base map. Topographic data (contours) and
streams centerlines data will be obtained from the North Carolina Department
of Transportation database. Information will be obtained from the Rowan
County GIS USGS. In addition to these sources of information including river
basin, stream and tributary names and subbasin designations will be obtained
from the Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
Mapping of the Town's stormwater system has been prepared and is included
with this report. Maps were prepared using ESRI's ArcView mapping software
and are GIS compatible. Appendix A includes maps showing receiving
watersheds, receiving streams, and outfall locations. Detailed system maps
have been prepared at a scale of 1"=150' and include aerial imagery, contours,
streams, parcels and roads. The detailed system maps are included in
Appendix M. An index map is provided which shows, in green shading, the
maps included with this report.
0 7.3.2 Regulatory Mechanism
•
This part of the program will establish the legal and administrative authority to
regulate, respond to and enforce regulations prohibiting illicit discharge in the
community. The program will be comprehensive and may include
development and adoption, new regulations or amendment of existing
regulations. It may also include the review of current building codes
(plumbing) and enforcement practices to ensure appropriate connections are
prohibited and integration of this part of the program with other programs
including public outreach and employee training.
The illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) program will be
established under the same jurisdiction that will oversee the other MS4 NPDES
requirements. This may be an existing authority such as the Town Manager or
department head or it could be a new committee or authority formed to
administer the program. It may also be appropriate to consider collaborating
with other communities, which share the same receiving streams and to
consider implementation based on the watershed basin.
The Town of China Grove will demonstrate that it has adequate legal authority
to successfully implement and enforce its own IDDE program and will work
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
with Rowan County in areas such as plumbing and enforcement and public
health where jurisdiction and enforcement responsibilities overlap.
If deemed appropriate after appropriate investigation and consideration a new,
stand alone illicit discharge ordinance can be developed that supersedes all
other related local regulations. The IDDE program whether accomplished
through existing mechanisms or through a new ordinance would include the
following key components:
• Prohibit illicit discharge
■ Investigation of suspected discharges
• Require and enforce elimination of illicit discharge
• Address unique conditions or special requirements
■ Clearly define illicit discharge
• Clearly define illicit connections
• Identify non-streamwater discharges or other flows that are not illicit
■ Clarify right-of-way
■ Define enforcement tools and provide escalating enforcement
measures
■ Establish tracking and reporting system
The Town has adopted a stormwater quality management and discharge
control ordinance which provides the legal and administrative authority to
implement the IDDE program. A copy of the ordinance is included with this
report.
7.3.3 Enforcement
The new IDDE ordinance or other regulations, which became part of the IDDE
program, will define enforcement tools. The choice of tools will be appropriate
for the volume and type of illicit discharge, the impact of the discharge or water
quality and will consider whether the discharge was intentional or accidental.
The enforcement measures will be escalating beginning with notification and
requests for voluntary criminal prosecution for serious violations or on -going
non-compliance. Methods of approval will also be provided.
Enforcement tools may include the following:
■ Written notification with voluntary compliance
■ Administrative fines/penalties imposed by responsible local
jurisdiction
■ Civil penalties imposed by judicial authority
- ■ Compensatory action
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
■ Criminal prosecution
• Cost of abatement of violation or property lien
■ Cease and desist order(s)
■ Suspension of related public services (water and sewer)
■ Stop work order
■ Revocation of permits (building)
7.3.4 Detection and Elimination
The approach for the detection and elimination of illicit discharge will include
an assessment of the potential for illicit discharges. Mapping and other
available data will be used to determine the potential severity of illicit
discharges within the program area. A priority system for identifying
discharge will be developed, which ranks businesses based on their potential
for illicit discharge. A typical ranking for business types would be as follows:
High Potential
Automobile -related business/Facilities and heavy manufacturing
Moderate Potential
Printing companies, cleaners and laundries, photo processors,
utilities, paint stores, water conditioners, laboratories,
construction companies and medium and light manufacturing
Low Potential
Institutional facilities, private service agencies, retail
establishments and schools
7.3.4.1 Procedures locating priority areas
This part of the program will use mapping and other available data to
determine the potential for illicit discharges. The procedures will
include:
Delineate watersheds and drainage basins within MS4 area
Compile available mapping and data including land use
Screen and rank potential illicit discharges
7.3.4.2 Procedures for tracking sources of illicit discharge
Field work, consisting of rapid field screening of outfalls in priority
watersheds and drainage basins, will be key to tracking the sources of
illicit discharges. Monitoring of suspect outfalls to determine the type
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
. and characteristics of the flow may also be required. The procedures
will include reconnaissance of streams (walk) to inventory and measure
storm drain outfalls. The reconnaissance can reveal obvious potential
illicit discharges, which may have high turbidity, strong odors or color.
Simple tests using test strips to indicate excessively high or low ph can
also be utilized. Discharge such as a fuel or oil spill can also be detected
during the reconnaissance. A typical outfall Reconnaissance
Inventory/Sample Collection Field Sheet is included in Appendix I.
The next step would be to select the type of indicators needed to
determine if the discharge is illicit and implement a plan to monitor the
discharge. The work along with the analytical services may be
performed in house or may be out sourced.
7.3.4.3 Procedures for removing source of the illicit discharges
Steps will be taken to eliminate an illicit discharge once it has been
identified. Elimination of the illicit discharge will require a
determination of the following:
Who is responsible for the discharge?
. What methods can be used to eliminate the discharge?
How long will it take to eliminate the discharge?
How can the elimination of the discharge be confirmed?
Initial action will include the identification of the responsible party and
issuance of a notice of violation (NOV). Methods of removal will
involve education of the responsible party and enforcement. Some
discharges can be eliminated simply by making the property owners
aware of the problem while the elimination of other discharges may
require an aggressive enforcement approach.
7.3.4.4 Procedures for evaluation of plan to detect and eliminate
illicit discharges
As a minimum the IDDE program should be evaluated annually to
determine if progress is being made towards measurable goals. A
tracking system will be developed and will include the following:
■ Up-to-date mapping showing outfall locations
OF Data on surveyed streams with Iocations of obvious, suspect and
potential illicit discharge
Results of sampling for specific streams, outfalls and storm drains
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
■ Frequency of hotline use and related number of confirmed illicit
discharges
■ Cost of the program
■ Number of discharges eliminated
■ Number and status of enforcement actions
The evaluation of the program can be utilized to assess the effectiveness
of the various elements of the program and resources can be shifted to
areas that are most effective at eliminating the discharges
7.3.5 Non-Stormwater Discharge
Non-Stormwater discharges can include process water, air conditioner
condensate, non -contacting cooling water, vehicle wash water or sanitary waste
and typically are the result of an unauthorized connection to storm drains.
These discharges can be significant sources of pollutants and are illegal.
Elimination of non-stormwater discharges is an effective BMP and it will be
implemented if it is determined that non-stormwater discharges are significant
contributor of pollutants in the MS4.
Most non-stormwater discharges can be detected by observing discharge points
in the stormwater collection system during periods of dry weather. Indication
of these discharges may include strains, smudge, odors and other abnormal
conditions. The identification of non-stormwater discharges should be a part of
every facilities operation and maintenance program. Annual inspection should
be conducted to determine, if new processes, procedures, additions or plant
changes have resulted in unintentional or unauthorized connection to the
stormwater system.
7.3.6 Occasional incidental non-stormwater discharges
Occasional incidental discharges are difficult to detect. The most effective way
to manage these discharges is to promote pollution prevention practices in the
community that prevent them from occurring. Many common practices and
behaviors can cause occasional discharges. Individually the practices cause
relatively small discharges and pollution. However, collectively these
discharges can produce significant pollutant loads. These practices may
include:
■ Individual and group car washes
• Swimming pool draining
• Household/waste storage and disposal
. Changing fluids in vehicle(s)
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
■ Septic system maintenance
■ Pressure washing of driveways and houses
Car washes are often used as fund raising events by Churches and charity
organizations. Septic systems are often taken for granted until they backup or
break out on the surface of the lawn. Subsurface failures, which are most
common, go undetected. Shade tree mechanics change their own automobile
fluids. The typical home garage storage building or tool shed contains a lot of
products that are hazardous including paints, stains, solvents, lubricants,
pesticides, herbicides and cleaning products. Spills and leaking containers can
result in the discharges of these products. Routine maintenance of swimming
pools can result in the discharge of chlorinated water or filter backwash water.
The Town will initially exclude these discharges from the category of illicit
discharges and will promote the elimination of these discharges through public
education, media and outreach programs.
7.3.7 Outreach
Employee training programs will be established to teach employees about
stormwater management, potential sources of illicit discharges and BMPs. The
objective of the training programs will be to instill all personnel with a
thorough understanding of the SWMP purpose, practices for detecting
discharge and procedures for eliminating illicit discharges. The program may
be standardized and repeated as necessary to train new employees and to keep
objectives in front of other employees. The program will be flexible and will be
adapted, as the Town's needs change over time. Frequent communication with
employees will be key to insuring that the outreach to employee is effective.
This part of the SWMP will be coordinated with the pollution prevention/good
housekeeping for municipal operations part of the SWMP.
Educational materials will be distributed to targeted businesses. The outreach
materials will be designed to educate business owners and employees about
pollution prevention practices and regulations.
The public will participate in the development and implementation of the
outreach portion of the program.
7.3.8 Decision Process
The IDDE program will result in the development, implementation and
enforcement of a comprehensive program with the goal of eliminating all illicit
discharges in the MS4.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
iThe individual BMP's have been identified and presented in Section 7.3.1 along
with measurable goals and responsible parties.
C7
The IDDE program includes measures to identify, locate and eliminate illicit
discharges by providing the following:
■ Procedures for locating likely priority areas for illicit discharges
■ Procedures for tracking the source of an illicit discharge
■ Procedures for removing the source of the discharge
■ Procedures for program evaluation and assessment
7.3.9 Evaluation
The detection and elimination of illicit discharges are frequently a new idea for
many communities 1DDE programs should be flexible to respond to the
changing needs and attitude of the community. The program should be
evaluated annually and modified as needed. Tracking systems should be in
place to measure progress towards the measurable goals. The tracking system
should include:
■ Updated mapping of the program area
• Stream survey with location of known or potential discharges
■ Program -to -date costs
■ Results of sampling and analysis of streams, outfalls and storm drains
■ Number of hotline calls
■ Number of discharges detected and eliminated
• Number and status of enforcement actions
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
is 7.4 Construction Site Stormwaier Runoff Control
The Town of China Grove will rely on the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act
of 1973 (SPCA) (Amended through 1.999) NCGS Chapter 113A Article 4 to
provide the measures to control construction site stormwater runoff for all
land -disturbing activities on tracts of 1 acre or more. The requirements of the
SPCA are enforced by the NC Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section.
The act is administered and enforced locally by the Rowan County Department
of Environmental Services Erosion and Sediment Control. A copy of the SPCA
is in Appendix D. The Town will monitor the Rowan County Department of
Environmental Services program for effectiveness in meeting the stated goals
within theTown's jurisdiction.
DWQ Stormwater general permits will also be relied upon. The general permit
authorizes the discharge of stormwater, which has been adequately treated and
managed in accordance with an approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Plan to the surface waters of North Carolina or to a separate storm sewer
system. Any other point source discharge to surface waters is prohibited unless
• covered by another permit, authorization or approval. The general permit is
applicable to point source discharges of stormwater from construction activities
disturbing one (1) or more acres of land. Coverage under the general permit is
not effective until issuance of an approval for the Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan by the Land Quality Section of the Division of Land Resources.
No construction and land disturbing activities shall commence prior to
approval of the flan.
•
Any owner or operator not desiring to be covered or limited by the general
permit must submit an application for an individual NPDES permit in
accordance with 15ANCAC 2H.0100.
The implementation of the approved plan is a requirement or condition of the
general permit. Failure to implement or deviation from the approved plan will
be a violation of the terms and conditions of the permit. Once construction has
started all erosion and sedimentation control facilities and stormwater runoff
discharges shall be inspected. Corrective action must be taken immediately to
control the discharge of sediments outside the disturbed limits of the
construction. Records of inspections, corrections and cleanup activities shall be
maintained by the operator and made available to DWQ upon request.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• The Town will develop procedures and protocol for tracking construction
projects within the Town's jurisdiction with erosion and sedimentation control
permits issued either at the State level (NCDENR-DLR) or locally (Rowan
County). Procedures for conducting site inspections and document tracking of
violations and follow-up will be established.
•
•
Pease Commission No, 212129
March 2012

0
• Comprehensive Stormwater Management Prom
Table 7.4.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
6
YR
7
YR
a
YR
9
YR
10
Responsible
Position/Party
1
Monitor Rowan County
X
X
X
X
X
Town Stormwater
Environmental Service program for
Administrator
effectiveness within Town's
jurisdiction
2
Provide means for public
A hotline for citizens will be established or
X
X
X
X
X
Town Stormwater
notification of observed erosion and
alternatively, information regarding NGDENR,
Administrator
sedimentation problems
DLR's "Stop Mud" hotline will be posted on the
Town's website
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
. 7.5 Post -Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and
Redevelopment
The program must insure that controls are in place to prevent or minimize
adverse water quality impacts. Strategies must be developed and
implemented, which include a combination of structural and/or non-structural
best management practices appropriate for the Town of China Grove.
The program must address projects that disturb greater than or equal to one (1)
acre including projects less than one (1) acre that are part of a larger common
plan of development or sale.
Ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms must be used to the extent
allowable under local law to address post construction runoff.
7.5.1 Stormwater Management Options
Low density development must, at a minimum, employ the following non-
structural stormwater management practices:
• Built -upon area of 24% or less. Where different built -upon area
thresholds are established through existing regulatory programs,
the more restrictive threshold shall be maintained.
■ Stormwater runoff is primarily transported through vegetated
conveyances.
■ A 30 foot vegetated buffer shall be maintained on all waters of the
state. Where different buffers are established through other
regulatory programs, the more restrictive buffer shall be
maintained.
High density development must, at a minimum, employ the following
stormwater management practices:
■ Stormwater treatment of the volume of post -construction
stormwater runoff resulting from the first 1-inch of precipitation.
Where different storm event thresholds are established through
existing regulatory programs, the more restrictive threshold (larger
storm event) shall apply.
■ Stormwater treatment shall be designed to achieve 85% Total
4D Suspended Solids removal.
Pease Commission No. 2121.29
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
iPost -development runoff conditions shall be such that either:
■ The runoff volume draw down to the pre -storm design stage
within 5 days, but not less than 2 days, or
■ The post -development discharge rate shall be no larger than the
predevelopment discharge rate for the 1-year, 24-hour storm event.
7.5.2 Operation and Maintenance
The operation and maintenance requirements for BMP's will vary, but every
BMP will most likely require maintenance at some point. The maintenance
needs will vary with the type, size, age, location, etc. of the BMP. The
owner/operator of all structural BMP's will be required in the plans submitted
for approval to include the requirements for long term operation and
maintenance of the BMP and will be required to stipulate the party that will be
responsible these actions. The owner/operator will be required to perform at a
minimum annual inspection and to submit a report of the inspection to the
Town.
• 7.5.3 Control of Sources of Fecal Coliform
The Town of China Grove will rely on the Rowan County Code Enforcement,
Environmental Services and Health Department to ensure proper design,
permitting, operation and maintenance of on -site wastewater treatment
systems for domestic wastewater in order to control to the maximum extent
practicable this source of fecal coliform.
7.5.4 Development/Redevelopment draining into SA Waters
This program does not include develop ment/redevelopment draining to SA
waters.
7.5.5 Development/Redevelopment draining into Trout jr) Waters
This program does not include development/redevelopment draining to Trout
(Tr) waters.
7.5.6 Development/Redevelopment into Nutrient Sensitive Waters
This program does not include development/redevelopment draining to
Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW).
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
•
7.5.7 Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan
The Town of China Grove will endeavor to develop a program that will take
into consideration and be consistent with the management strategies and
initiatives of the Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

0 0 Comprehensive Stormwater Managementogram
Table 7.5.8
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Post -Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
5
YR
7
YR
8
YR
9
YR
10
Responsible
Position/Party
1
Develop local ordinance to address
Adoption of ordinance with policies and
TASK COMPLETE
post -construction runoff
standards
Ordinance to be
Administered by Town
Stormwater Administrator
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• 7.5.8 Non -Structural BMP's
•
Several non-structural BMP's are proposed for inclusion in the program. The
BMP's include the development and implementation of ordinances, policies
and education programs.
7.5.9 Structural BMP's
A comprehensive list of structural BMP's have been included in the BMP
summary table. It is anticipated that the development of policies, ordinances
and/or standards will result in the utilization of some of the BMP's. The
structural BMP's include storage practices, filtration practices and infiltration
practices. Appropriate implementation is imperative and will be ensured by
the following:
■ Preconstruction review of BMP designs
■ Inspection during construction to verify that BMP's are built as designed
■ Post construction inspection and maintenance of BMP's
■ Enforcement of penalties for noncompliance with design, construction or
operation and maintenance.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
0 7.6 Pollution Prevenf on{Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
•
�J
The following will be considered in the development of this aspect of the program:
maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term inspection procedures
for structural and nonstructural storm water controls to reduce floatables and other
pollutants discharged from the storm sewers; controls for reducing or eliminating the
discharge of pollutants from streets, road, highways, municipal parking lots,
maintenance and storage yards, maintenance shops with outdoor storage areas,
salt/sand storage locations and procedures for properly disposing of waste removed
from the storm sewers and areas listed above (such as accumulated sediments,
floatables, and other debris). Operation and maintenance will be an integral
component of the programs and BMP's.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

• • Comprehensive Stormwater Managementogram
Table 7.6.1
BMP's and Measurable Goal for Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible Position/Party
6
7
a
9
10
1
Targeted outreach and training for
Reduction in stormwater toxicity and pollutant
X
Town Stormwater
business and municipal fleets
loads. Elimination of direct discharge to storm
Administrator
involved in auto maintenance about
drains. Reduction of elimination of
practices to control pollutants and
outreach/uncontained removal of vehicle fluids.
reduce stormwater impacts.
2
Landscaping lawn care and grounds
Outreach and training programs media
X
Town Stormwater
maintenance pollution prevention
campaigns.
Administrator
program.
3
Proper storage of hazardous
Reduced contamination of stormwater runoff
X
Town Stormwater
materials.
and streams.
Administrator
4
Spill response and prevention plan.
Reduced risk of surface and ground water
X
Town Stormwater
contamination.
Administrator
5
Used oil recycling.
Decrease in water pollution, protection of public
X
Town Stormwater
health and recycle of valuable economic
Administrator
resources.
6
Materials Management.
Develop materials inventory system to identify
X
Town Stormwater
all sources and quantities of materials that may
Administrator
by exposed to direct precipitation or stormwater
runoff.
7
Inventory and track existing Town
Inventory of Town facilities will be created in
X
X
X
Town Stormwater
facilities with potential for generating
conjunction with stormwater system mapping to
Administrator
stormwater runoff
be created as part of Section 7,3, IDDE
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
7.6.1 Affected Operations
Municipal operations that will be impacted by the operation and maintenance
program for pollution prevention/good house keeping for municipal operation
include the following:
■ Parks and Recreation vehicle
■ Equipment Maintenance
• Sanitation
The following facilities operated by the Town are subject to NPDES General
Permits or individual NPDES permits for discharges of Stormwater:
Permit No. Certificate of Coverage
7.6.2 Training
Employee training programs will be developed. The training programs will
teach the Town's employees about stormwater management, potential sources
of contaminants and BMP's. In addition the training program will endeavor to
instill all the Town's personnel with a thorough understanding of the plan for
pollution prevention/good housekeeping for their municipal operations.
Training will include posters, employee meetings, courses and bulletin boards
about stormwater management, potential pollution sources, and prevention of
pollution in surface runoff. Field training programs will also be used to show
employee's actual potential sources of stormwater pollution and to
demonstrate the implementation of site specific SMP's.
The program will be standardized and repeated as necessary to train new
employees and to refresh employees with prior training. The employee -
training program will be an on -going process.
The Stormwater Management Fact Sheet Employee Training EPA 832-F-99-01.0
will be utilized as a reference for developing and implementing the training
program. A copy is included in Appendix E.
7.6.3 Maintenance and Inspections
A preventive maintenance (PM) program and for operations will be developed.
The PM program and record keeping will include vehicle, equipment, and
material storage areas. Periodic inspections will ensure all equipment and
materials storage containers are in good condition. Any problems or issues that
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
may have an impact on stormwater quality will be recorded and corrective
action taken. Vehicle washing and fueling operations will be inspected
annually to ensure that they are in good working order and that they minimize
exposure of stormwater to chemicals, fuels and other pollutants. Schedules and
procedures will be established for the inspections and the record -keeping
system will document inspections. Records will include the following:
■ The date, exact place, and time of material inventories, site inspections,
sampling observation, etc.
■ Names of inspector(s) and sample(s).
■ Analytical information, including the date(s) and time(s) analyses were
performed or initiated, the analysts' names, analytical techniques or
methods used, analytical results, and quality assurance/quality control
results of such analyses.
■ The date, time, exact location, and a complete characterization of
significant observation, including spills or leaks.
■ Notes indicating the reasons for any exceptions to standard record
keeping procedures.
■ All calibration and maintenance records of instruments used in storm
water monitoring.
■ All original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring equipment.
■ Records of any non -storm water discharges.
The Stormwater Management Fact Sheet Record Keeping EPA-F-99-005 will be
utilized as a guide for developing the Town's Record Keeping System. A copy
of the document is in Appendix F.
7.6.4 Vehicular Operations
A program for inspection of vehicles and equipment and stored materials
storage will be developed to reduce or eliminate to discharge of pollutants to
stormwater. This will include vehicle maintenance and fueling stations and
salt/sand storage areas.
A material inventory system involves the identification of all sources and
quantities of stored materials that may be exposed to direct precipitation or
storm water runoff at a particular site. Stored materials are substances such as
salt, sand, crushed stone, mulch, chemicals, raw materials, fuels, pesticides, and
fertilizers. When these materials are exposed to direct precipitation or storm
water runoff they may be carried to a receiving water 'body. Therefore,
identification of these materials helps to determine sources of potential
contamination and is the first step in pollution control.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• Maintaining an up-to-date inventory of all materials (hazardous and non-
hazardous) will help to track how materials are stored and handled on and
identify which materials and activities pose the greatest risk to the
environment. The following are the basic steps in completing a materials
inventory:
•
■ Identify all chemical substances present in the work place. Review the
purchase orders for the previous year. List all chemical substances used in
the work place and then obtain the material safety data sheet (MSDS) for
each.
• Label all containers to show the name and type of substance, stock
number, expiration date, health hazards, suggestions for handling, and
first aid information. Unlabeled chemicals and chemicals with
deteriorated labels are often disposed of improperly or unnecessarily.
■ Clearly mark on the inventory those hazardous materials that require
specific handling, storage, use, and disposal considerations.
The key to a proper materials inventory system is continual updating of
records. Maintaining an up-to-date materials inventory is an efficient way to
identify the materials that are handled and whether they contribute to storm
water contamination problems.
The stormwater Management Fact Sheet Materials Inventory EPA 832-F-99-
021 will be used as a guidance document for preparation of the Materials
Inventory_ A copy of the document is in Appendix G.
A Spill Prevention Plan specifies materials handling procedures and storage
requirements and identifies spill cleanup procedures for areas in which spills
may potentially occur. The plan standardizes operating procedures and
employee training in an effort to minimize accidental pollutant releases that
could contaminate storm water runoff.
Spill prevention will be part of a comprehensive Best Management Practice
Program to prevent runoff contamination. This program will also include
stormwater contamination assessment, flow diversion, record keeping,
internal reporting, employee training, and preventive maintenance.
Public agencies that transport or store petroleum products are required by
State and federal law to prepare spill control and cleanup plans. The existing
plans will be re-evaluated and revised to address storm water management
issues.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
The Stormwater Management Fact Sheet Spill Prevention Planning EPA 832-F-
is 99-071 will be utilized as a guideline document for the integration of spill
prevention planning into the BMP's for preventing stormwater runoff
contamination. A copy of the document is in Appendix H.
7.6.5 Waste Disposal
Current programs for drainage system maintenance involves removal of large
pieces of debris by hand or with mechanical equipment on an as needed basis.
Smaller debris and sediment are removed from the drainage system by use of a
sewer jet vacuum truck. All debris and sediment removed during the process
is collected and disposed of. The current procedures will be reviewed and new
procedures will be developed.
7.6.6 Flood Management Project
7.6.7 Existing Ordinance
The first step in the decision process for reviewing existing ordinances for
possible modification to address stormwater issues will be to have the Town
staff become thoroughly familiar with the purpose, goals and objectives of the
SWMP. Existing ordinances can then be reviewed and evaluated to determine
if modification of the ordinances would address the stormwater management
issues identified in the SWMP. Recommendations for change can be
considered, the change drafted, presented to the Town Council for
consideration, and if deemed appropriate by the Council, issued for public
review and comment prior to adoption and implementation.
7.6.8 Other Evaluations
No other aspects of the Town's operation were evaluated.
7.6.9 Decision process
The following were considered in developing the Town's program:
maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term inspection
procedures for structural and nonstructural stormwater controls to reduce
floatables and other pollutants discharged from the storm sewer; controls for
reducing or eliminating the discharge of pollutants from streets, roads,
highways, parking lots, maintenance and storage yards, fleet or maintenance
shops, salt/sand storage locations, procedures for properly disposing of waste
removed from the storm sewers (such as accumulated sediments, floatables,
. and other debris); and ways to ensure that new flood management projects
assess the impacts on water quality and examine existing projects for
Pease Commission No, 2121.29
March 2012

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program
• incorporating additional water quality protection devices or practices.
Operation and maintenance will be an integral component of the Stormwater
management program. This measure is intended to improve the efficiency of
these programs and require new programs where necessary. Properly
developed and implemented operation and maintenance programs will reduce
the risk of water quality problems.
•
7.6.10 Evaluation
The effectiveness of many of the best management practices at removing
pollutants from stormwater runoff will be difficult to quantify. However, the
Town's emphasis will be on implementing the BMP's that eliminate the
potential for pollution. The success of this minimum measure will be
determined by the quantity of potential pollution sources that are identified,
inventoried and eliminated.
Pease Commission No. 212129
March 201.2

��iPease
Architects- Engineers
October 28, 2005
Pease Associctes
Post Office Box 18725
2925 East Independence Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28218
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
NCDENR — Division of Water Quality ryn z �g
NPDES Stormwater Permitting Unit L�
1617 Mail Service Center "' cc Yi
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
O 2 >
Reference: NPDES Stormwater Permit Application j os
Town of China Grove Q✓
Rowan County, North Carolina
Pease Commission Number: 2005004.00
Subject: NPDES Stormwater Permit Application and
Stormwater. Management Program Report
.Please find attached the Town of China Grove's NPDES stormwater permit application and three
copies of the program narrative.
['lease do not hesitate to call with any questions or comments regarding the attached application or
report. (Direct line: 704-941-2113, Email: [e-mail])
Sincerely,
Robert L. Bernard, P.E.
Associate Vice President
RLB:rlb
Enclosures
Cc: Eric Davis, Town Manager
Town of China Grove
NA2005004-00\CFile\ I'hl-4\ Rev iew-Approve\2005004002010U WQSWMYPermit102805r1b.doc
Over 60 years of architectural and engineering design excellence

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
G OFF;IC.USE'ONLY
Date Rec'd
to O
Fee Paid
Permit Number
NKS
Poo
NPDES STORMWATER PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
This application form is for use by public bodies seeking NPDES stormwater permit coverage for Regulated Public
Entities (RPE) pursuant to Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2H .0126. A complete application
package includes this form and three copies of the narrative documentation required in Section X of this form.
This application form, completed in accordance with Instructions for completing NPDES Small MS4 Stormwater
Permit Application (SWU-270) and the accompanying narrative documentation, completed in accordance with
Instructions for Preparing the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report (SWU-268) are both
required for the application package to be considered a complete application submittal. Incomplete application
submittals may be returned to the applicant.
I. APPLICANT STATUS INFORMATION
a.
Name of Public Entity
Seeking Permit Coverage
Town of China Grove
b.
Ownership Status (federal,
state or local)
Local
c.
Type of Public Entity (city,
town, county, prison, school,
etc,)
Town
d.
Federal Standard Industrial
SIC 91 - 97
Classification Code
e.
County(s)
Rowan
f.
Jurisdictional Area (square
miles)
5.96
g.
Population
Permanent
3616
Seasonal (if available)
h.
Ten-year Growth Rate
32.4%
i.
Located on Indian Lands?
❑ Yes M No
II. RPE / MS4 SYSTEM INFORM9ATION
a.
Storm Sewer Service Area
(square miles
b.
River Basin(s)
Yadkin - Pee
-Dee
c.
Number of Primary Receiving
Streams
3 - Grants Creek
I C6I:d Water Creek
(12-110) , Town Creek (12-115-3)
(13-17-9--4) .
d.
Estimated percentaqe of jurisdictional
area containing
the following four land use activities:
•
Residential
73
•
Commercial
4
•
Industrial
21
•
Open Space
Total =
100%
e.
Are there significant water
quality issues listed in the
attached application report?
❑ Yes E No
o �
V
CDx �1
Page 2
SWU-264-103102

::a9' c7��t.a:.;f�
j � i . �.__ . .. ___ ---

0
NPDES RPE Stormwater Permit Application
III. EXISTING LOCAL WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS
a. Local Nutrient Sensitive Waters Strategy
❑ Yes [N No
b. Local Water Supply Watershed Program
❑ Yes ® No
c. Delegated Erosion and Sediment Control Program
® Yes ❑ No
d. CAMA Land Use Plan
❑ Yes ® No
IV. CO -PERMIT APPLICATION STATUS INFORMATION
(Complete this section only if co -permitting)
a. Do you intend to co -permit with
❑ Yes Nv
a permitted Phase I entity?
b. If so, provide the name and permit number of that entity:
• Name of Phase I MS4
• NPDES Permit Number
c. Do you intend to co -permit
❑ Yes © No
with another Phase II enti ?
d. If so, provide the name(s) of
the entity;
e. Have legal agreements been
finalized between the co-
❑ Yes ❑ No
ermittees?
V. RELIANCE ON ANOTHER ENTITY TO SATISFY ONE OR MORE OF YOUR PERMIT OBLIGATIONS
(If more than one, attach additional sheets)
a. Do you intend that another
entity perform one or more of
our permit obligations?
® Yes ❑ No
b. If yes, identify each entity and the element they will be implementing
+ Name of Entity
Rowan County Environmental Services
Element they will implement
Sediment and Erosion Control Minimum Measure
Contact Person
Greg Greene
• Contact Address
402 N. Main Street Salisbury, NC 28147
Contact Telephone Number
704-638--3078
c. Are legal agreements in -place
to establish responsibilities?
❑ Yes ❑ No
VI. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY (OPTIONAL)
The signing official may delegate permit implementation authority to an appropriate staff member. This
delegation must name a specific person and position and include documentation of the delegation action
through board action.
a, Name of person to which permit authority FoAq (,( g Al T- M 51N A P�
has been delegated
b. iitle/position of person above U 7- I L t T l r 0) i91 C %o)Q
c. Documentation of board action delegating permit authority to this person/position must be
provided in the attached apE lication report.
SWU-264-103102
Page 2

NPDES RPE Stormwater Permit Application
VII. SIGNING OFFICIAL'S STATEMENT
Please see the application instructions to determine who has signatory authority for this permit
application. If authority for the NPDES stormwater permit has been appropriately delegated through
board action and documented in this permit application, the person/position listed in Section VI above
may sign the official statement below.
I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or
persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate,
and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Signature
q��
Name
Pqq k'MT �lll yJ,IA
Title
UT 11,/ ta" 5 PI RX4 iOIP
Street Address
205 5 W /NK 5 TRtr,rT
PO Box
city
G M AA G A OV K
State
C
Zip
2 S d Z 3
Telephone
704 -07 7720
Fax
70 4- 91 7- 1 6.5 2
E-Mail
He f"!Ph19!< 4 -China 404,V0 NC
VIII. MS4 CONTACT INFORMATION
Provide the following information for the person/position that will be responsible for day to day
implementation and oversight of the stormwater program.
a.
Name of Contact
Person
RGfZ y I� � V r
M l S d.a n
b.
Title
Li' r) i�l n e S
PtAf c 1' w r
c.
Street Address
7-,4 ee 7-
d.
PO Box
e.
City
e f INA 6R ovl=
f.
State
l( C
g.
Zip
. 8'412 3
h.
Telephone Number
70q-6y7- 772 0
i.
Fax Number
7o y - 9 57 - 6
5 D
j.
E-Mail Address
k rm 6rh a ch
+'no,v
Page 3
SWU-264-103102

NPDES RPE Stormwater Permit Application
IX. PERMITS AND CONSTRUCTION APPROVALS
List permits or construction approvals received or applied for under the following programs. Include contact
name if different than the person listed in Item VIII. If further space needed, attach additional sheets.
a. RCRA Hazardous Waste
Management Program
b. UIC program under SDWA
c. NPDES Wastewater Discharge
Permit Number
d. Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) Program
e. Non Attainment Program
f. National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Pollutants (NESHAPS)
reconstruction approval
g. Ocean dumping permits under the
N/A
Marine Protection Research and
Sanctuaries Act
h. Dredge or fill permits under
- section 404 of CWA
X. NARRATIVE APPLICATION SUPPLEMENT: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REPORT
Attach three copies of a comprehensive report detailing the proposed stormwater management program for
the five-year permit term. The report shall be formatted in accordance with the Table of Contents shown
below. The required narrative information for each section is provided in the Instructions for Preparing the
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Report (SWU-268). The report must be assembled in the
following order, bound with tabs identifying each section by name, and include a Table of Contents with
page numbers for each entry.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STORM SEWER SYSTEM INFORMATION
1.1. Population Served
1.2. Growth Rate
1.3. Jurisdictional and MS4 Service Areas
1.4. MS4 Conveyance System
1.5. Land Use Composition Estimates
1.6. Estimate Methodology
J.J. TMDL Identification
2. RECEIVING STREAMS
3. EXISTING WATER QUALITY PROGRAMS
3.1. Local Programs
3.2. State programs
Page 4
SWU-264-103102

NPDES RPE Storrnwater Permit Application
4. PERMITTING INFORMATION
4.1. Responsible Party Contact List
4.2, Organizational Chart
4.3. Signing Official
4.4. Duly Authorized Representative
5. Co -Permitting Information (if applicable)
5,1. Co-Permittees
5.2. Legal Agreements
5.3. Responsible Parties
6. Reliance on Other Government Entity
6.1. Name of Entity
_4-> 6.2. Measure Implemented
6.3. Contact Information
6.4. Legal Agreements
7, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
7,1. Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts
7.2. Public Involvement and Participation
7.3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
7.4. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
7.5. Post -Construction Storm Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment
7.6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Page 5
5WU-264-103102

�QiPease
Architects- Engineers
February 15, 2006
Mike Randall
Environmental Engineer
NCDENR — Division of Water Quality
NPDES Stormwater Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Reference: NPDES Permit Number NCS000515
Stormwater Permit Application
Town of China Grove
Rowan County, North Carolina
Pease Commission Number: 2005004.00
Subject: Revised Stormwater Management Program Report
Mr. Randall:
Pease Associotes
Post Office Box 18725
2925 East Independence Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28218
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c
c1J
�l
all
c11J
W
�
U
z
[--i
O
Please find attached revised Section 7 of the Town of China Grove's NPDES stormwater management
program report with revisions requested in your January 3, 2006 correspondence to the Town of
China Grove. This information supplements and should be considered part of, the existing report. A
copy of the January 3, 2006 correspondence is attached to this letter for reference. In response to your
comments, the following changes have been incorporated into the Town's draft report.
1. Public reporting mechanism. The Town will implement an illicit discharge/illegal
dumping hotline. (See Item No. 10, Table 7.3.1, page 31)
2. Monitoring of Rowan County Environmental Services program. The Town will monitor
the Rowan County Environmental Service program for effectiveness within the Town's
jurisdiction. (See Item No, 1, Table 7.4.1, page 40)
3. Public notification of erosion control problems. The Town will provide means for public
notification of observed erosion and sedimentation problems. (See Item No. 2, Table 7.4.1,
page 40)
4. Establish procedures/protocols for site inspections. The Town will establish procedures
for conducting site inspections. (See Item No. 3, Table 7.4.1, page 40)
5. Conduct site inspections. The Town will establish means of conducting random site
inspections. (See Item No. 4, Table 7.4.1, page 40)
Over 60 years of architectural and engineering design excellence

NCDENR — DWQ
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
February 15, 2006
Page 2
6. Low density built -upon area. Low density development area requirement modified from
30% or less to 24% or less. (see Section 75.1, page 41)
7. Inventory of all existing Town facilities and operations with potential for contributing
stormwa ter runoff. (See Item No. 7, Table 7.6.1, page 46)
8. Annual Review of permitted industrial activities of Town. Town will conduct annual
review of industrial activities owned and operated by the Town with Phase I NPDES
storrriwater permits. (See Item No. 5, Table 7.4.1, page 40)
Please do not hesitate to call with any questions or comments regarding the attached report and
revisions. (Direct line: 704-941-2113, Email: rob ert.bernard @5n12ease.com)
Sincerely,
g/"C-
Robert L. Bernard, P.E.
Associate Vice President
RLB:rib
Enclosures
Cc: Eric Davis, Town Manager
Town of China Grove
Kent Mishak, Utilities Director
Town of China Grove
NA2005004-00\CFile\ PhIA\ Review-Approve\2005004002010DWQ5W MPPerirtit021306r]b.doe
Pease Associates Architects — Engineers

,loll A ] E
Michael F. Easley, Governor
RQG
William G- Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
�0�0
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleco. 11. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division or Water Quality
January 3, 2006
Mr Rory Kent Mishak, Utilities Director
Town of China Grove
205 Swink Street
China Grove, North Carolina 28023
Subject: NPDES Permit Number NCS000515
Additional Information Request
Dear Mr. Mishak:
After a review of your permit application materials, I found that with changes to Stormwater
Management Plan identified herein, there is sufficient content to continue with the review and drafting of
your permit.
The Stormwater Management Report detailing the proposed stormwatcr management program for
the five-year permit did not address the following:
To meet the objectives of the Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program,
the Town of China Grove must establish and publicize a reporting mechanism for
the public to report illicit discharges.
aTo meet the objectives of the Construction Site Runoff Controls Program the
Town of China Grove will need to monitor the Rowan County Environmental
Services program for effectiveness in the permittee jurisdiction.
To meet the objectives of the Construction Site Runoff Controls Program the
Town of China Grove must provide and promote a means for the public to notify
the appropriate authorities of observed erosion and sedimentation problems. The
permittee may implement a plan promoting the existence of the NCDENR,
Division of Land Resources "Stop Mud" hotline to meet the requirements of this
paragraph.
a �4 To meet the objectives of the Construction Site Runoff Controls Program the
t
Town of China Grove must establish procedures for site inspection.
To meet the objectives of the Construction Site Runoff Controls Program the
Town of China Grove must conduct random inspections of local land disturbing
activities that have a sediment and erosion control permit, issued by Rowan
County Environmental Services. Potential problems at construction sites with
sediment and erosion control permits must be reported to the Rowan County
Environmental Services. The Town of China Grove must maintain a record of
findings and followup actions taken.
`. Under the Post -Construction Stormwater Management Program the Town of
China Grove low density development built -upon area of 30% or less is not
consistent with Session Law.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 [phone]
,Jq LONR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6749

I. To meet the objectives of the Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping
f Program the Town of China Grove must develop an inventory of all facilities and
operations owned and operated by the permittec with the potential for generating
polluted stormwater runoff, including the MS4 system and associated structural
BMPs, inspect potential sources of polluted runoff, the stormwater controls, and
conveyance systems, and evaluate the sources, document deficiencies, plan
corrective actions, and document the accomplishment of corrective actions.
a To meet the objectives of the Construction Site Runoff Controls Program the
Town of China Grove must conduct an annual review of the industrial activities
with a Phase I NPDES stormwater permit owned and operated by the the Town of
China Grove.
Enclosed for your review and comment is a preliminary draft Phase II NPDES Stormwater Permit
for the Town of China Grove. We believe that this draft permit will provide your community with the
flexibility vital for your community, while at the same time safeguarding and protecting our natural
environment for future generations of North Carolinians.
Please provide the additional information requested and your comments on the preliminary draft
permit by Friday, February 17, 2006. We would like to incorporate as many revisions as possible before
the public notice. You will also have an opportunity to submit comments during the public comment
period. If you have any questions, concerns, or suggested revisions about the preliminary draft permit
don't hesitate to contact me at [phone], ext. 545.
Sincerely,
�v
Mike Randall
Environmental Engineer
cc: DWQ Central File
Stormwater Permits Unit
DWQ Mooresville Regional Office

I
i
1
1
1
I
I
Stormwater Management Program
Town of China Grove
North Carolina
•r Of CH"V,,4
t)
J
CARp�`Z►P.:
2005
Ise a s e
Architects- Engineers
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Town of China Grove, North Carolina
0.0
Executive Summary
0.1
Introduction
0.2
Program Components
0.3
Applicable State Water Quality Programs
0.4
Receiving Streams
0.5
Conclusions
1.0
Storm Sewer System Information
1.1
Population Served
1.2
Growth Rate
1.3
Jurisdictional and M54 Services Areas
1.4
MS4 Conveyance System
L5
Land Use Composition Estimates
1.6
Estimate Methodology
1.7
TMDIIdentification
2.0
Receiving Streams
3.0
Existing
Water Quality Programs
3.1
Local Programs
3.2
State Programs
4.0 Permittina Information
4.1 Responsible Party Contact List
4.2 Organizational Chart
4.3 Signing Official
4.4 Duly Authorized Representative
5.0 Co-Permilting Information (if applicable]
5.1
Co-Permittees
5.2
Legal Agreements
5.3
Responsible Parties
6.0 Reliance on Other Goverment Entity
6.1
Name of Entity
6.2
Measure Implemented
6.3
Contact Information
6.4
Legal Agreements
Peose Commisslon No. 2005004,00
Octcber 2005

7.0 Stormwater Management program
7.1 Public Education and Outreach on Storm Water Impacts
7.2 Public Involvement and Participation
7.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
7.4 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
7.5 Post -Construction Storm Water Management in New
7.6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
Appendices:
A. Figure I Receiving Streams
13. Yadkin -Pee Dee Qasinwide Water Quality Management Plan
C. Public Hearing Notice
D. Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
r' E. Employee Training
F. Record Keeping
G. Materials Inventory
I.1. Spill Prevention Planning
I. Outfall Reconnaissance Inventory/Sample Collection Field Sheet
1
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
0.0 Executive Summary
0.1 Introduction
This Stormwater Management Program was developed for the Town of China Grove
for compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase
II Storm Water Rule (The Rule),
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) includes the Town of China
Grove on the list of small municipal separate storm water systems (MS4s) that must
comply with the Phase II Storm Water -final Rule. MS4 stormwater management
programs must be fully developed and implemented within 5 years of the permit
issuance.
r
Municipalities across the state and county are faced with increasing requirements to
-� monitor and control stormwater runoff. These efforts stem from awareness that
improving water quality requires controls of non -point source pollutants. The Federal
government published a Final Rule for NPDES Phase II Storm Water permits, which
addresses MS4 stormwater discharges and construction sites that disturb greater than 1
acre.
0.2 Program Components
The Rule requires MS4s to develop and implement a stormwater management
program (Program) designed to protect water quality by reducing the discharge of
pollutants from their MS4. The Program must include the following six (b) minimum
measures:
0.2.1 Public Education and Outreach on Stormwater Impacts
One of the major components of the Phase II NPDES Storm Water rules is
public education and outreach. The success of the Program and compliance
with the MS4s' NPDES stormwater permit will be more likely if the public is
aware of their existence and purpose.
` The EPA encourages the MS4s to enter into partnership with their State in
fulfilling the public education requirement. MS4s must implement a public
education program to:
■ Distribute educational materials to the community, or
■ Conduct equivalent outreach activities about the;
o Impacts of stormwater discharges on water bodies, and
o Steps to reduce stormwater pollution
Page 1 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive stormwater Management Report
The public education and outreach program should be target to specific
potential polluters including:
• Individuals.
■ Households.
• Senior Citizens, adults, adolescents, and children.
■ Minority groups.
■ Developers.
■ Disadvantaged communities.
• Commercial, industrial, and institutional entities likely to have significant
stormwater impacts.
Examples of strategies include:
■ Distributing brochures of facts sheets.
A Sponsoring speaking engagements before community groups.
■ Providing public service announcements.
■ Implementing educational programs targeted at school age children.
Informing individuals and groups on how to get involved with
community -based projects such as:
o Storm drain stenciling.
o Watershed and stream cleanups.
o Local stream and restoration activities.
The public education program should inform individuals and households
about steps that can be taken to reduce stormwater pollution such as:
■ Septic tank system maintenance.
■ Limiting use and runoff of garden chemicals.
■ Protecting and restoring riparian vegetation.
■ Proper disposal of household hazardous wastes.
Proper disposal of restaurant grease.
• Proper disposal and spill control of service station chemicals.
Resources for obtaining public education pamphlets currently exist from a
variety of organizations and governmental agencies including:
■ American Public Works Association.
■ North Carolina State Cooperative Extension.
■ US Environmental Protection Agency.
■ North Carolina Department of Natural Resources.
Page 2 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Other State nonpomt source pollution control programs under Section 319
of the Clean Water Act.
0.2.2 Public involvement/Participation
The Rule requires that MS4s comply with applicable State and Local public
notice requirements. The EPA recommends a public participation process with
efforts to reach out and engage all economic and ethics groups for the
following:
1. Early and frequent public involvement can shorten
implementation schedules and broaden public support for the
P P PP
program.
2. Public participation is likely to ensure a more successful
program by providing valuable expertise and a conduit to other
programs and governments.
Possible ways that members of the public may participate in the program
development and implementation include:
• Serving on a stakeholder group.
■ Attending public hearings.
■ Working as citizen volunteers to educate others about the program.
■ Assisting in Program coordination with existing programs.
■ Participating in volunteer monitoring efforts.
Stakeholder groups provide an excellent forum for discussion and consensus
building around challenging initiatives such as establishing a stormwater
utility.
Possible Stakeholders include, but are not limited to:
■ Individual property owners.
■ Developers.
■ Realtors.
• Home Builders Associations.
■ State and City governmental agencies.
Political interest groups.
■ Planners
■ Environmentalists.
■ Designers.
Page 3 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
■ Research institutions.
0.2.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
The illicit discharge detection and elimination requirements of the Rule are
fairly extensive. MS4 must, at a minimum, develop, implement, and enforce an
illicit discharge detection and elimination program. The requirements include:
■ Develop a storm sewer system map showing:
o All outfalls
o Names and locations of all waters that receive discharges from
those outfalls.
■ Legally prohibit (through an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism):
o Illicit discharge into the storm sewer systems.
o Implement enforcement procedures and actions as needed.
■ Develop and implement a plan to detect and address illicit discharges and
illegal dumping to the system.
■ Inform the public employees, business, and the general public of hazards
associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of wastes.
The Rule requires a set of maps that shows the locations of all outfalls and
names and locations or receiving waters. In addition to the maps, the EPA
recommends gathering additional information from existing Town records and
walking (or boating) streambanks to verify the outfall locations. Once an illicit
u discharge is detected at an outfall, it may be necessary to map that portion of
the storm sewer system leading to the outfall in order to locate the source of the
discharge.
The EPA recommends that Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Plans
include procedures for the following:
■ Locating priority areas for more detailed screening.
• Tracing the source of an illicit discharge by:
o Identifying the source chemical characteristics.
o Determining the actual location of the source by following flow
up the system via:
•:• Chemical testing in manholes or channels.
�' •:• Televisions storm sewers
Using infrared and thermal photography.
Conducting smoke or dye tests.
■ Removing the source of an illicit discharge by:
Page 4 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
o Notifying the property owner.
o Specifying a length of time for eliminating the discharge.
o Describing procedures for additional notifications and escalation
of legal actions if the discharge is not eliminated.
• Program evaluation and assessment by:
o Documenting actions taken to locate and eliminate illicit
discharges such as:
•3 Number of outfalls screened.
Complaints received and corrected.
•3 Feet of storm sewers televised.
•:• Number of discharges and quantities of flow
eliminated.
Number of dye or smoke tests conducted.
This documentation should be submitted as part of the annual reports for the
'�. first permit term.
0.2.4 Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
s The Rule requires MS4s to develop, implement, and enforce a pollutant control
program to reduce pollutants in any stormwater runoff from construction
activities that result in land disturbance of 1 or more acres. Currently, the State
and County are administering the Sediment Erosion Control on behalf of the
Ali Town. The construction runoff control program must include:
■ An ordinance (or other regulatory mechanism) to require erosion and
sediment controls to the extent allowable under the law.
■ Sanctions to ensure compliance:
o Non -monetary penalties.
o Fines.
o Bonding requirements.
o Permit denials for non-compliance.
■ Requirements for owner/developers to implement best management
practices (BMPs).
■ Procedure for pre -construction site plans review that includes
consideration of potential water quality impacts. This procedure should
also include a review of site erosion and sediment control plans.
■ Requirements to control construction wastes and chemicals that adversely
affect water quality.
■ Procedures for receipt of public comments/complaints. For example:
Page 5 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004,00
eOctober 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
o Logpublic complaints on existing stormwater runoff problems
P p g
from construction sites and pass that information on to local
inspectors for investigation.
■ Procedures for regular inspections.
o Steps to identify priority sites for inspection.
■ Enforcement based on:
o The nature and extent of the construction activity.
o Topography.
o Characteristics of soils.
o Receiving water quality.
■ Procedures for enforcement and penalties.
0.2.5 Post — Construction Stormwater Management
The Rule requires the MS4s to develop, implement, and enforce a program to
address stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment projects
that result in land disturbance of greater than or equal to 1. acre that discharge
into the MS4.
As part of the Program, the MS4s must:
�. Develop and implement strategies that include a combination of structural
and/or non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate for
the community that:
o Minimize water quality impacts.
o Attempts to maintain pre -development runoff conditions.
o If possible, utilize locally based watershed planning efforts.
• Use an ordinance (or other regulatory mechanism) to address post -
construction runoff from new development to the extent possible by law.
Policies and ordinance should:
o Provide requirements and standards to direct growth to
identified areas.
o Protect sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas.
o Maintain and/or increase space.
o Provide buffers along sensitive water bodies.
o Minimize impervious surfaces and directly connected
impervious surfaces.
c Minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation.
o Encourage infill development in higher density urban areas and
areas with existing storm water infrastructure.
o Encourage cluster developments that provide for greater open
space, recreation, stream protection, and stormwater control.
Page 6 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
■ Ensure P
adequateg long-term operation and maintenance of BMPs. The EPA
recommends that small MS4 operators ensure the appropriate
implementation of the structural BMPs by considering:
o Pre -construction review of BMP designs.
o Inspections during construction to verify BMPs are built as
designed.
o Post -construction inspection and maintenance of BMPs.
o Sanctions to ensure compliance with design, construction or
operations and maintenance requirements of the program.
o EvaIuating various operation and maintenance (O&M)
agreement options.
■ Ensure that controls are in place that should minimize water quality
impacts. A suite of suitable structural and non-structural BMPs is
• available.
0.2.6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for MS4 Operations
The MS4 is required to develop and implement an O&M program that has the
ultimate goals of preventing or reducing stormwater from municipal
operations. The O&M program must include a training component that
addresses prevention measures pertaining to municipal operations. The EPA
also encourages consideration of the following in developing an O&M
program:
■ Implement maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term
inspection procedures for structural and non-structural stormwater
controls to reduce floatable and other pollutants discharged from the
storm sewers.
■ Implement controls for reducing or eliminating the discharge of pollutants
from streets, municipal parking lots, maintenance and storage yards,
waste transfer stations, fleet or maintenance shops with outdoor storage
areas and salt/sand storage areas.
■ Adopt procedures for the proper disposal of waste removed from the
separate storm sewer systems and areas listed above.
■ Adopt procedures to ensure that new flood management projects are
assessed for impacts on water quality and existing projects are assessed
for incorporation of additional water quality protection devices or
practices.
Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for MS4 operations could result in
cost savings by minimizing possible damage to the system and BMPs from
floatable and other debris and, consequently, reducing the need for repairs.
Page 7 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Additionally, to comply with the NPDES Phase LI regulations, the MS4's
Stormwater Program must identify BMPs to be implemented in the above
program, measurable goals for water quality improvement, the start and
completion dates for each activity, and the person or persons responsible for
implementing the MS4's Program.
Page 8 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
0.3 Applicable State Water Quality Pro rams
The State has multiple programs and potential funding sources which address water
quality. The following is a list of some of the programs and funding sources:
■ Regulations/Programs:
o Basinwide Management.
o Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL).
o Water Quality Standards and Classifications.
o Stormwater Management.
o Clean Water Act.
o Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan of Action.
o Water Supply Watershed Protection Program.
�. o Solid Waste Management Act.
o Clean Water Responsibility and Environmentally Sound Policy Act.
■ Potential Funding Sources:
o Clean Water Management Trust Fund.
0 1.999 Clean Water Budget.
o Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program.
o Wetlands Restoration Program,
0.4 Receiving Streams
The Town of China Grove contributes stormwater runoff to three receiving streams
and their tributary streams, the streams are:
■ Grants Creek
■ Cold Water Creek
■ Town Creek
The streams are shown on Figure 1. in Appendix A.
Cold Water Creek is adjacent to Interstate 85 (I85) and flows in a south direction into
Buffalo Creek in Cabarrus County. Buffalo Creek flows into the Rocky River. Cold
Water Creek is in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12.
Grants Creek is located on the west side of China Grove and delineates a portion of the
Town limits. Grants Creek flows north through Salisbury and discharges into the
Yadkin River; Grants Creek is in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04. The
Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan prepared by NC Division
of Water Quality identified the lower section of Grants Creek upstream of the
confluence with the Yadkin River as impaired waters.
Page 9 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
The headwaters of Town Creek are located northeast of the Town Limits of China
Grove. The Creek begins just east of SR 2553 and flows west parallel to NC 1.52 up to
185. At I85 the creek turns northeast and flow through Salisbury and into the Yadkin
River. Although the Creek is out side of the current ETJ areas within the ETJ drain into
the Creek.
The Yadkin - Pee Dee River Basin Wide Water Quality Management Plan prepared by
NC Division of Water Quality identified Town Creek as being impaired water from the
headwaters to the Yadkin River.
Impaired waters are those waters which only partially support or do not support their
P � Y P Y PP PP
designated uses based on DWQ monitoring data. The streams are impaired, in part,
because of nonpoint sources of pollution, which likely, includes stormwater
discharges.
eThe basis for the impaired status of the streams included habitat degradation and a few
occurrences of low dissolved oxygen (DO) and elevated turbidity. Sections of the
watersheds are highly developed and stormwater runoff was identified as a Likely
major contributor to the impairment. Among the 2002 recommendations in the
Basinwide Plan were the requirement for municipalities to obtain NPDES permits for
stormwater systems under Phase II Stormwater Rules along with restoration of
riparian vegetation and wetlands.
Copies of The Forward, Executive Summary, Yadkin -Pee River Basin Overview,
Chapter 4 and Chapter 12 of the Yadkin Pee -Dee Basinwide Water Quality
Management Plan, which include the subbasin water quality overview and the
2001/2002 status and recommendations for these streams is included in Appendix B.
0.5 Conclusions
The following Stormwater Management Program for the Town of China Grove was
prepared in accordance with the NC DWQ Phase II Stormwater Management Program
requirements and instructions. Implementation of the program will result in
1 protecting and significantly improving the water quality of the receiving streams,
which will contribute to achieving the goal of the Basinwide Water Quality
Management Plan of improving water quality in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin.
Page 10 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Section 1.0
Storm Sewer System
Information

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
1.0 Storm Sewer System Information
1.1 Population Served
3,61.6 permanent Town residents based on 2000 US Census Data. No seasonal
population was identified. The estimated residents within the ETJ is 1,520.
1.2 Growth Rate
The annualized 10-year growth rate based on the 1990 and 2000 US Census data is
32.4%.
1.3 Jurisdictional and MS4 Services Areas:
City Limits Plus ETJ: 5.96 Square Miles.
MS4 Services area: 2.14 Square Miles.
1.4 MS4 Conveyance System:
Storm drainage within the Town of China Grove consists of a broken network of pipes,
ditches and open channels, which were installed at different times by many different
entities. The flow of storm water travels through both public and privately maintained
areas, and the level of improvements installed are the option of the property owner.
The overall drainage area is relatively small and is served by three major creeks; and
numerous tributary steams therefore, the typical drainage path from overland flow to
the outfall is short.
Page 1 1 of 5 i
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
1.5 Land Use Composition Estimates
ETJ Summa
Zoning
Classification
Total
Existing
Area within
ETJ
Acres
Minimum
Residential
Lot Size
(Sq Ft)
Approximate
Existing
Units per
Acre
Allowable
Units Under
Current
Zoning
Persons per
Unit
Total
Projected
Allowable
Population
B-1
2.393
B-2
29.331
B-3
190.046
M-1
949.18
M-2
152.326
O-1
95.947
R-1
829.056
8,5001
5.1
4,249
2.5829
10,974
R-2
209.745
7,000
6.2
1,305
2.5829
3,371
R-3
353.276
7,000
6.2
2,198
2.5829
5,678
R-R
1823.559
10,000
4.4
7,943
2.5829
20,517
R-S
551.872
12,000
3.6
2,003
2.5829
5,174
Unclassified
43,560
1.0
0
2.5829
0
Totals
5186.731
17,699
45,715
Current Land Use
Residential 73%
Business and Commercial 4%
Manufacturing and Industrial 21%
Open Space 2%
1.6 Estimate Methodology
Percentages were estimated from zoning map classifications.
1.7 TMDL Identification
The USEPA developed an approach called total maximum daily loads (TMDL)
for determining the total waste (pollutant) loading from point and nonpoint
sources that a stream or other water body can assimilate and maintain its
designated uses. With the TMDL approach streams, which do not meet water
duality standards, are identified and the State establishes priorities for actions
Page 12 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
needed to meet water quality goals. There are no defined TMDLs within the
Town's watershed.
Page 13 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
2.0 Receivinp Steams
Major Receiving
Stream
Water Quality
Use
Water Quality
Stream Name
Segment
Classification
Support
Issues
Rating_
Grants Creeks
12-110
C
O
Fecal Coliform,
Turbidity,
Sediment
Town Creek
12-115-3
C
O
DO, Turbidity
Cold Water Creek
13-17-9-
WS-IV
O
Fecal Coliform
4 0.5
Receiving Streams — Detailed Listing
The tributary streams are listed in the order in which that occur beginning at the most
downstream point of the named Creek within the program area and proceeding upstream.
The direction of flow of Grants Creek and Town Creek is from south to north. Cold Water
Creek flows from the north to the south. The "E" and "W" designations indicate that the
tributary is located to either the east or the west side of the main creek. The numerical
designation indicates the order of occurrence from the most far point in the program area
downstream to most upstream point in the program area.
Cold Water Creek — Beginning north of intersection SR 1243 and I-85 and ending north of NC
152 and south of intersection of I-85 and 29/601.
■ Unnamed Tributary W-1 Cold Water Creek
• Unnamed Tributary W-2 Cold Water Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-3 Cold Water Creek at SR 1232
■ Unnamed Tributary E-1 Cold Water Creek at SR 1339
• Unnamed Tributary W-4 Cold Water Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-5 Cold Water Creek at SR 1.337
■ Unnamed Tributary E-2 Cold Water Creek at SR 1337
• Unnamed Tributary E-3 Cold Water Creek at NC 1.52
IGrants Creek — Beginning southwest of SRI 505 and ending at SR 1211
• Unnamed Tributary E-1 to Grants Creek
o Unnamed Tributary E-1A
• Unnamed Tributary E-2 to Grants Creek
o Unnamed Tributary E-2A
■ Unnamed Tributary E-3 to Grants Creek
• Unnamed Tributary W-1. to Grants Creek
o Unnamed Tributary W-1.A
■ Unnamed Tributary W-2 to Grants Creek
Page 14 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
• Unnamed Tributary W-3 to Grants Creek
• Unnamed Tributary E-4 to Grants Creek at SR 1225
• Unnamed Tributary W-4 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary E-5 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary W-5 to Grants Creek
■ Unnamed Tributary E-b to Grants Creek
Town Creek — Beginning at headwaters east of SR 2553 and ending at intersection SR 1.505 and
I-85. No tributary streams are included in the program area.
Page 15 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Section 3.0
Existing Water Quality Programs

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
3.0 Existing Water Quality Programs
3.1 Local Programs
There are currently no local water quality programs for the Town of China Grove.
3.2 State Programs
Town of China Grove is in compliance with the requirements of the North Carolina
Sediment and Erosion Control Program. The program is administered for the Town by
Rowan County Environmental Services.
Page 16 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive 5tormwater Management Report
4.0 Permittina Information
4.1 Responsible Party Contact list
Position
Name
Phone #No.
Fax #No.
Email Address
Town
Eric Davis
704-857-2466
704-855-1855
[e-mail]
Manager
Director of .
Kent
704-857-7720
704-857-6552
[e-mail]
Public
Mishak
Utilities
Town Clerk
Gail Carter
704-57-2466
704-855-1855
[e-mail]
Town
Tom
704-857-6121
704-857-6540
Attorney
Brooke
Page 17 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
4.2 Organizational Chart
11
Town of China Grove
Organizational Chart
Page 18 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
4.3 Signing Official
Mr. Rory "Kent" Mishak, Town Utilities Director
4.4 Duly Authorized Representative
Not Applicable
Page 19 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Section 5.0
Co -Permitting Information (if applicable)
I
I
11

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
`1 5.0 Co-Permittina Information
1 Not Applicable to the Town of China Grove SWMP.
1
1
Page 20 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
' October 2005

1
I
I
I
t
1
i
1
Section 6.0
Reliance on Other Government Entity
1

11
r
e
I
t

Comprehensive 5tormwater Management Report
6.0 Reliance on Other Government Entity
6.1 Name of Entity
Rowan County Environmental Services
6.2 Measure Implemented
Erosion and Sediment Controi Minimum Measure
. 6.3 Contract Information
Greg Greene, Environmental Specialist
402 N. Main Street, Salisbury, NC 281.44
704-638-3078
6.4 Legal Agreements
Page 21 of51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Section 7.0
Stormwater Management Plan
t
i
i
1
ri

Im m

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Ir 7.0 Stormwater Management Program Plan (SWMP)
`. The SWMP must be designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the Town of China
Grove and the ETJ to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). The SWMP must be
implemented and enforced to satisfy the appropriate water quality requirements of the Clean
Water Act. The period of time for fully developing and implementing the SWMP is five (5)
years from the effective date of the NPDES stormwater permit.
7.1 Public Education and Outreach on Stormwater Impacts
A public education program and other outreach activities that will inform the
community about the impacts of stormwater discharges on receiving streams and the
steps that the public can take to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff will be
developed and implemented. The Best Management Practices (BMP) that will be
developed and implemented are summarized in Table 7.1.1
r.
I
Page 22 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Table 7.1.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Public Education and Outreach
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible
1
2
3
4
5
Position/Part
i
Distribute quarterly newsletter
Distribute quarterly stormwater newsletter through local
X
X
X
X
X
Town Utilities Director
newspaper and event displays. Include one article in
each newsletter that targets a specific stormwater
problem and how citizens and businesses can reduce
their impacts.
2
Distribute pollution prevention
Distribute brochures through event displays and utility
X
X
X
Town Utilities Director
brochures
bill inserts. Include information on steps to reduce
pollution sources including proper disposal of used oil
and toxic materials, public reporting of illicit discharges
and awareness of nutrient and fecal coliform issues.
3
Informational Website
Develop and maintain a stormwater information page
X
X
X
X
Town Utilities Director
for the existing Rowan County internet website. Post
newsletters and brochures and provide information on
water quality, stormwater pollutants and ways to
minimize them, municipal stormwater projects and
activities. Also provide contacts for reporting and
questions.
Page 23 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004,00
October 2005

t,
7A
1-1
� I
�l
71

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.1.1 Target Audiences
School children, households, businesses and industries will be the target
audiences. They can be reached in a cost effective manner and could make
significant contributions to the prevention of stormwater pollution. The target
audience should be easy to reach via flyers with water/sewer bills and
presentations to local schools.
7.1.2 Target Pollutant Sources
Lawn and gardening activities can result in contamination of stormwater.
Stormwater runoff may be contaminated with pesticides, fertilizers and
sediment. Environmentally friendly landscape management can effectively
reduce water use and runoff of contaminants. It is important for municipalities
to set good examples, which may include avoiding or phasing out use of weed
killers or harmful pesticides and implementing environmentally friendly lawn
and garden activities on municipal property. Practices to be implemented by
the municipality and to be promoted to property owners, may include
r landscape planning, and design planting indigenous species, soil testing the
reduction or elimination of the use of fertilizers and pesticides, use to mulches,
efficient irrigation and reduction of turf (lawn) areas in favor of non -turf areas
- where practical. Benefits of environmentally friendly design include:
Reduced maintenance requirements
Prevention of over application of fertilizers
'
Minimization of watering requirements
Reduced mowing requirements, which reduces air, water and noise pollution
Stabilization of exposed soils
Reduced probability of stormwater contamination
r.
Proper disposal of trash and elimination of litter.
Disposal of household chemicals, used oil, and anti freeze.
7.1.3 Outreach Program
The Town will implement a public education program to distribute educational
'
materials to the community and conduct equivalent outreach activities about
the impact of stormwater discharge on water bodies and the steps that the
public can take to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff. The town's efforts
may include but are not limited to:
r,
Page 24 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
rOctober 2005

Comprehensive stormwater Management Report
• Using stormwater educational material provided by the State, EPA,
environmental, public interest or trade organizations.
• Informing individuals and households about the steps they can take to
reduce stormwater pollution, such as ensuring proper septic tank
maintenance, modifying landscaping, disconnected impervious area (such
as roof downspouts), ensuring the proper use and disposal of landscape
and garden chemicals including fertilizer and pesticides, protecting and
restoring riparian vegetation, and properly disposing of motor oil,
household hazardous waste, or pet waste.
Inform individuals and groups how to become involved in local stream,
lake, and river restoration activities as well as activities that are coordinated
by youth service and conversation corps and citizen groups.
■ Tailoring the program, using a mix of locally appropriate strategies, to
target the specific audience. For example, providing information to garages
on the impact of oil discharges or the explanation to school children that
storm water flows into a nearby creek and eventually ends up in the water
they drink.
7.1.4 Decision Process
Each BMP was judged to be an effective and economical tool for educating the
general public and specific groups in the community.
7.1.5 Evaluation
The Town will form a staff committee to review all stormwater program BMPs
for effectiveness. The recommendations of the committee will be included in
the annual report.
Page 25 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.2 Public Involvement and Particioation
Public involvement and participation can broaden support for the program,
make implementation easier and increase the likelihood for the success of the
program. The Town of China'Grove will as a minimum comply with State and
local public notice requirements when implementing a public
involvement/participation program. EPA recommends public participation in
the development, review and implementation of SWMP. The process should
make efforts to reach out and engage all economic and ethnic groups. The
public notification process will endeavor to reach out and obtain participation
and support from all economic and ethnic groups. The Town will endeavor to
provide opportunities for public participation in program development and
implementation. The BMPs that will be developed and implemented by the
Town are summarized in Table 7.2.1.
Opportunities for the public to participate in program development and
implementation may include:
�( Serving as a citizen representative an stormwater management panel
�] Attending public hearings
Working as citizen volunteer to educate other individuals about program
nAssisting with program coordination with other pre-existing programs
Participating in volunteer monitoring efforts
fl
1
1
Page 26 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Table 7.2.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Public Involvement and Participation
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible Position/Party
1
2
3
4
5
1
Storm drain marking
Increased awareness about connection between storm
X
Town Utilities Director
drains and receiving streams and decreased dumping.
2
Stream Cleanup
Removal of trash from streams, public participation and
X
X
Town Utilities Director
education establishment of Adopt -A -Stream programs.
3
Adopt -A -Stream Programs
Group or organization becomes the primary caretaker
X
X
X
Town Utilities Director
of stretch of stream, improved aesthetics, and wildlife
habitat.
�
°
I
Page 27 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004,00
October 2005

A
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.2.1 Target Audience
. The public hearing for the development of the Stormwater Management
Program and the NPDES Phase II application will target all interested and
affected members of the China Grove community.
7.2.2 Participation Program
Public Hearings are set by Town Council during their regularly scheduled
meetings. The date is announced and the time and place of the Public Hearing
is advertised for a minimum of 10 days prior to the hearing. The legal notices
for hearings are administered by the Town Clerk and may be reviewed for
compliance by the City Attorney. A sample copy of a Public Notice of Hearing
are included in Appendix C.
. 7.2.3 Decision Process
The Town will use the public hearings as the most direct and efficient means of
involving all interested citizens in the process of developing and implementing
the Stormwater Management Program.
7.2.4 Evaluation
7.3 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
40CRF 122.26(6)(2)defines an illicit discharge as an discharge to an MS4 that is not
g Y g
composed entirely of stormwater, except discharges as may be allowed pursuant to an
NPDES permit, including those resulting from fire fighting activities.
Non-stormwater discharges can include discharge of process water air condition
condensate, non -contact cooling water, vehicle wash water or sanitary waste. These
discharges typically result from unauthorized connector to the storm sewers. Other
non-stormwater discharge of flows may include the following:
■ Water line flushing
■ Landscaping irrigation
■ Diverted stream flows
■ Foundation drains
Pumped ground water
■ Potable water discharges
■ Crawl space pumps
■ Law watering
• Residential car washing
Page 28 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
■ Swimmingpool discharges
es g
■ Street wash water
The program should include the following:
■ Procedures for locating priority areas likely to have illicit discharges
■ Procedures for training the sources of an illicit discharge
■ Procedures for removing the sources of the discharge
■ Procedures for program evaluation and assessment
A program must be developed, implemented and enforced to detect and eliminate
illicit discharge into the storm sewer system.
1 Page 29 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

cog
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Table 7.3.1
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible
1
2
3
4
5
Position/Part
1
Eliminate discharge from septic
Develop and implementation of ordinance
X
X
Ordinance to be
systems to the MS4 sanitary sewer
developed by Town.
Administered by Town
Utilities Director
2
Detect and eliminate illegal or
field testing of day weather discharges, visual
X
X
Ordinance to be
inappropriate connections of
inspections, smoke testing, dye testing
developed by Town.
industrial and business wastewater
Administered by Town
sources to the storm drain system
Utilities Director
3
Detect and correct sanitary sewer
Physical inspection of sewer system, flow
X
X
Ordinance to be
overflows
monitoring, smoke testing, dye water flooding,
developed by Town.
CCTV inspection, review of sewer maintenance
Administered by Town
records
Utilities Director
4
Prohibit through ordinance or other
New ordinance will be developed or existing
X
X
Ordinance to be
regulatory mechanism non-
ordinance amended
developed by Town.
stormwater discharges into storm
Administered by Town
water system and implement
Utilities Director
appropriate enforcement
rocedures and actions
5
inform public employees, business
Program will be developed and implemented to
X
X
Town Utilities Director
and public of hazards associates
inform and educate
with illegal dumping into storm
sewer system
Page 30 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Mon ra-M MM on
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Table 7.3.1 - continued
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible
1
2
3
4
5
Position/Party
6
Institute mandatory inspections for new
X
X
Ordinance to be
developments or remodeling to identify
developed by Town.
illicit connection to storm sewer system
Administered by Town
Utilities Director
7
Detect and eliminate cross -connect of
X
X
Ordinance to be
wastewater drains to storm sewer
developed by Town.
Administered by Town
Utilities Director
8
Eliminate illegal dumping/disposal of
X
X
Ordinance to be
waste in an unpermitted area
developed by Town.
Administered by Town
Utilities Director
9
Prepare storm sewer system map
A system map will be developed
X
X
Town Utilities Director
Page 31 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.3.1 Storm Sewer System Map
. A storm sewer map showing the location of all outfalls and the names and
location of all receiving streams will be prepared. Aerial photographs of the
area encompassed by the boundary of the area of extraterritorial jurisdiction
(ETJ) will be utilized as the base map. Topographic data (contours) and
streams centerlines data will be obtained from the North Carolina Department
of Transportation database. Information will be obtained from the Rowan
Count GIS USGS. In addition to these sources of information including river
basin, stream and tributary names and subbasin designations will be obtained
from the Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
The mapping will be prepared, updated and maintained in electronic format.
Storm sewer system features can be located in the field utilizing CPS
teclv,ologies, which will provide data that can be easily input into the mapping
system. The area of the Ell will be divided into a grid system. Each grid unit
will be 500' x 500'. Maps of the system will be printed at a scale of 1" = 60'.
Each sheet will contain an area 1.500' x 2000'. Street and stream names will be
n shown along with contours at an interval of 5'. The mapping will be at a scale
u and level of detail to all individual drainage features such as drop inlets and
catch basin to be shown. The mapping will also be compatible with other
utility mapping.
7.3.2 Regulatory Mechanism
This part of the program will establish the legal and administrative authority to
regulate, respond to and enforce regulations prohibiting illicit discharge in the
community. The program will be comprehensive and may include
development and adoption, new regulations or amendment of existing
regulation. It may also include the review of current building codes (plumbing)
and enforcement practices to ensure appropriate connections are prohibited
and integration of this part of the program with other programs including
public outreach and employee training.
The illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) program will be
established under the same jurisdiction that will oversee the other MS4 NPDES
requirements. This may be an existing authority such as the Town Manager or
department head or it could be a new committee or authority formed to
administer the program. It may also be appropriate to consider collaborating
with other communities, which share the same receiving streams and to
consider implementation on a watershed management basin.
Page 32 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
1 October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
1
I
The Town of China Grove will demonstrate that it has adequate legal authority
to successfully implement and enforce its own IDDE program and will work
with Rowan County in areas such as plumbing and enforcement and public
health were jurisdiction and enforcement responsibilities overlap.
If deemed appropriate after appropriate investigation and consideration a new,
stand alone illicit discharge ordinance can be developed that supersedes all
other related local regulations. The IDDE program whether accomplished
through existing mechanisms or through a new ordinance would include the
following key components:
■ Prohibit illicit discharge
■ Investigate of suspected discharges
■ Require and enforce elimination of illicit discharge
■ Address unique conditions or special requirements
■ Clearly define illicit discharge
• Clearly define illicit connections
■ Identify non-streamwater discharges or other flows that are not illicit
• CIarify right-of-way
• Define enforcement tools and provide escalating enforcement
measures
■ Establish tracking and reporting system
7.3.3 Enforcement
The new IDDE ordinance or other regulations, which became part of the IDDE
program, will define enforcement tools. The choice of tools will be appropriate
for the volume and type of illicit discharge, the impact of the discharge or water
quality and will consider whether the discharge was intentional or accidental.
The enforcement measures will be escalating beginning with notification and
request for voluntary criminal prosecution for serious violations or on -going
non-compliance. Methods of approval will also be provided.
Enforcement tools may include the following:
■ Written notification with voluntary compliance
■ Administrative fines/penalties imposed by responsible local
jurisdiction
■ Civil penalties imposed by judicial authority
■ Compensatory action
• Criminal prosecution
■ Cost of abatement of violation or property lien
Page 33 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive 5tormwater Management Report
■ Cease and desist order(s)
■ Suspension of related public services (water and sewer)
■ Stop work order
■ Revocation of permits (building)
7.3.4 Detection and Elimination
The approach for the detection and elimination of illicit discharge will include
an assessment of the potential for illicit discharges. Mapping and other
available data will be used to determine the potential severity of illicit
discharges within the program area. A priority system for identifying
discharge will be developed, which rank businesses based on their potential for
illicit discharge. A typical ranking for business types would be as follows:
High Potential
Automobile -related business/Faci.lities and heavy manufacturing
Moderate Potential
Printing companies, cleaners and laundries, photo processors,
utilities, paint stores, water conditioners, laboratories,
construction companies and medium and light manufacturing
Low Potential
Institutional facilities, private service agencies, retail
establishments and schools
7.3.4.1 Procedures locating priority areas
This part of the program will use mapping and other available data to
determine the potential for illicit discharges. The procedures will
include:
Delineate watersheds and drainage basins within MS4 area
Compile available mapping and data including land use
Screen and rank potential illicit discharges
7.3.4.2 Procedures for tracking sources of illicit discharge
Field work, consisting of rapid field screening of outfalls in priority
watersheds and drainage basins, will be key to tracking the sources of
illicit discharges. Monitoring of suspect outfalls to determine the type
and characteristics of the flow may also be required. The procedures
Page 34 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
will include reconnaissance of streams (walk) to inventory and measure
storm drain outfalls. The reconnaissance can reveal obvious potential
illicit discharges, which may have high turbidity, strong odors or color.
Simple tests using test strips to indicate excessively high or low ph can
also be utilized. Discharge such as a fuel or oil spill can also be detected
during the reconnaissance. A typical outfall Reconnaissance
Inventory/Sample Collection Field Sheet is included in Appendix J.
The next stepwould be to select the type of indicators needed to
YP
determine if the discharge is illicit and implement a plan to monitor the
discharge. The work along with the analytical services may be
performed in house or may be out sourced.
7.3.4.3 Procedures for removing source of the illicit discharges
Steps will be taken to eliminate an illicit discharge once it has been
identified. Elimination of the illicit discharge will require a
determination of the following:
Who is responsible for the discharge?
What methods can be used to eliminate the discharge?
How long will it take to eliminate the discharge?
How can the elimination of the discharge be confirmed?
Initial action will include the identification of the responsible party and
issuance of a notice of violation (NOV). Methods of removal will
involve education of the responsible party and enforcement. Some
discharges can be eliminated simply by making the property owners
aware of the problem while the elimination of other discharges may
require an aggressive enforcement approach.
7.3.4.4 Procedures for evaluation of plan to detect and eliminate
illicit discharges
As a minimum the IDDE program should be evaluated annually to
determine if progress is being made towards measurable goals. A
tracking system will be developed and will include the following:
■ Up-to-date mapping showing outfall locations
■ Data on surveyed streams with locations of obvious, suspect and
potential illicit discharge
• Results of sampling for specific streams, outfalls and storm drains
Page 35 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
■ Y
uenc Frea of hotline use and related number of confirmed illicit
discharges
■ Cost of the program
■ Number of discharges eliminated
■ Number and status of enforcement actions
The evaluation of the program can be utilized to assess the effectiveness
of the various elements of the program and resources can be shifted to
areas that are most effective at eliminating the discharges
7.3.5 Non-Stormwater Discharge
Non-Stormwater discharges can include process water, air conditioner
condensate, non -contacting cooling water, vehicle wash water or sanitary waste
and typically are the result of an unauthorized connection to storm drains.
These discharges can be significant sources of pollutants and are illegal.
Elimination of non-stormwater discharges is an effective BMP and it will be
implemented if it is determined that non-stormwater discharges are significant
contributor of pollutants in the MS4.
Most non-stormwater discharges can be detected by observing discharge points
in the stormwater collection system during periods of dry weather. Indication
of these discharges may include strains, smudge, odors and other abnormal
conditions. The identification of non-stormwater discharges should be a part of
every facilities operation and maintenance program. Annual inspection should
be conducted to determine, if new processes, procedures, additions or plant
changes have resulted in unintentional or unauthorized connection to the
stormwater system.
7.3.6 Occasional incidental non-stormwater discharges
Occasional incidental discharges are difficult to detect. The most effective way
to manage these discharges is to promote pollution prevention practices in the
community that prevent them from occurring. Many common practices and
behaviors can cause occasional discharges. Individually the practices cause
relatively small discharges and pollution. However, collectively these
discharges can produce significant pollutant loads. -These practices may
include:
■ Individual and group car washes
■ Swimming pool draining
■ Household/waste storage and disposal
Page 36 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
' Changing fluids in vehicle s
g g c)
■ Septic system maintenance
■ Pressure washing of driveways and houses
1 Car washes are often used as fund raising events by Churches and charity
organizations. Septic systems are often taken for granted until they backup or
break out on the surface of the lawn. Subsurface failures, which are most
common, go undetected. Shade tree mechanics change their own automobile
fluids. The typical home garage storage building or tool shed contains a lot of
products that are hazardous including paints, stains, solvents, lubricants,
pesticides, herbicides and cleaning products. Spills and leaking containers can
result in the discharges of these products. Routine maintenance of swimming
pools can result in the discharge of chlorinated water or filter backwash water.
The Town will initially exclude these discharges from the category of illicit
discharges and will promote the elimination of these discharges through public
education, media and outreach programs.
7.3.7 Outreach
Employee training programs will be established to teach employees about
stormwater management, potential sources of illicit discharges and BMPs. The
objective of the training programs will be to instill all personnel with a
thorough understanding of the SWMP purpose, practices for detecting
discharge and procedures for eliminating illicit discharges. The program may
be standardized and repeated as necessary to train new employees and to keep
objectives in front of other employees. The program will be flexible and will be
adapted, as the Town's needs change over time. Frequent communication with
employees will be key to insuring that the outreach to employee is effective.
' This part of the SWMP will be coordinated with the pollution prevention/good
housekeeping for municipal operations part of the SWMP.
Educational materials will be distributed to targeted businesses. The outreach
materials will be designed to educate business owners and employees about
pollution prevention practices and regulations.
The public will participate in the development and implementation of the
t� outreach portion of the program.
Page 37 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.4
7.3.8 Decision Process
The IDDE program will result in the development, implementation and
enforcement of a comprehensive program with the goal of eliminating all illicit
discharges in the MS4.
The individual BMP's have been identified and presented in Section 7.3.1 along
with measurable goals and responsible parties.
The IDDE program includes measures to identify, locate and eliminate illicit
discharges by providing the following:
■ Procedures for locating likely priority areas for illicit discharges
■ Procedures for tracking the source of an illicit discharge
■ Procedures for removing the source of the discharge
■ Procedures for program evaluation and assessment
7.3.9 Evaluation
The detection and elimination of illicit discharges are frequently a new idea for
many communities IDDE programs should be flexible to respond to the
changing needs and attitude of the community. The program should be
evaluated annually and modified as needed. Tracking systems should be in
place to measure progress towards the measurable goals. The tracking system
should include:
■ Updated mapping of the program area
■ Stream survey with location of known or potential discharges
• Program -to -date costs
■ Results of sampling and analysis of streams, outfalls and storm drains
■ Number of hotline calls
■ Number of discharges detected and eliminated
■ Number and status of enforcement actions
Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control
The Town of China Grove will rely on the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act
of 1973 (SPCA) (Amended through 1999) NCGS Chapter 1.1.3A Article 4 to
provide the measures to control construction site stormwater runoff for all
land -disturbing activities on tracts of 1 acre or more. The requirements of the
SPCA are enforced by the NC Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Division of Land Resources Land Quality Section.
Page 38 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
The act is administered and enforced locallyb the Rowan Count Department
Y Y p
of Environmental Services Erosion and Sediment Control. A copy of the SPCA
is in Appendix D.
DWQ Stormwater general permits will also be relied upon. The general permit
authorizes the discharge of stormwater, which has been adequately treated and
managed in accordance with an approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Plan to the surface waters of North Carolina or to a separate storm sewer
system. Any other point source discharge to surface waters is prohibited unless
covered by another permit, authorization or approval. The general permit is
applicable to point source discharges of stormwater from construction activities
disturbing one (1) or more acres of land. Coverage under the general permit is
not effective until issuance of an approval for the Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan by the Land Quality Section of the Division of Land Resources.
No construction and land disturbing activities shall commence prior to
' approval of the Plan.
Any owner or operator not desiring to be covered or limited by the general
permit must submit an application for an individual NPDES permit in
accordance with 15ANCAC 2H,0100.
The implementation of the approved plan is a requirement or condition of the
general permit. Failure to implement or deviation from the approved plan will
be a violation of the terms and conditions of the permit. Once construction has
started all erosion and sedimentation control facilities and stormwater runoff
discharges shall be inspected. Corrective action must be taken immediately to
control the discharge of sediments outside the disturbed limits of the
construction. Records of inspections, corrections and cleanup activities shall be
maintained by the operator and made available to DWQ upon request.
' 7.5 Post -Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and
Redevelopment
The program must insure that controls are in lace to prevent or minimize
P g P
' adverse water quality impacts. Strategies must be developed and
implemented, which include a combination of structural and/or non-structural
best management practices appropriate for the Town of China Grove.
The program must address projects that disturb greater than or equal to one (1)
acre including projects less than one (1) acre that are part of a larger common
plan of development or sale.
Page 39 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
Octo e( 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms must be used to the extent
allowable under local Iaw to address post construction runoff.
7.5.1 Stormwater Management Options
1 Low density development must, at a minimum, employ the following non-
structural stormwater management practices:
■ Built -upon area of 30% or less. Where different built -upon area
thresholds are established through existing regulatory programs,
the more restrictive threshold shall be maintained.
■ Stormwater runoff is primarily transported through vegetated
conveyances.
■ A 30 foot vegetated buffer shall be maintained on all waters of the
state. Where different buffers are established through other
regulatory programs, the more restrictive buffer shall be
maintained.
High density development must, at a minimum, employ the following
stormwater management practices:
■ Stormwater treatment of the volume of post -construction
stormwater runoff resulting from the first 1-inch of precipitation.
Where different storm event thresholds are established through
e existing regulatory programs, the more restrictive threshold (larger
storm event) shall apply.
• Stormwater treatment shall be designed to achieve 859% Total
Suspended Solids removal.
Post -development runoff conditions shall be such that either:
■ The runoff volume draw down to the pre -storm design stage
within 5 days, but not less than 2 days, or.
■ The post -development discharge rate shall be no larger than the
predevelopment discharge rate for the 1-year, 24-hour storm event.
Page 40 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004,00
1 October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
P
7.5.2 Operation and Maintenance
The operation and maintenance requirements for BMP's will vary, but every
BMP will most likely require maintenance at some point. The maintenance
needs will vary with the type, size, age, location, etc. of the BMP. The
owner/operator of all structural BMP's will be required in the plans submitted
for approval to include the requirements for long term operation and
maintenance of the BMP and will be required to stipulate the party that will be
responsible these actions. The owner/operator will be required to perform at a
minimum annual inspection and to submit a report of the inspection to the
Town.
7.5.3 Control of Sources of Fecal Coliform
The Town of China Grove will rely on the Rowan County Code Enforcement,
Environmental Services and Health Department to ensure proper design,
permitting, operation and maintenance of on -site wastewater treatment
systems for domestic wastewater in order to control to the maximum extent
practicable this source of fecal coliform.
7.5.4 Development/Redevelopment draining into SA Waters.
This program does not include development/redevelopment draining to SA
waters.
7.5.5 Development/Redevelopment draining into Trout (Tr) Waters.
This program does not include development/redevelopment draining to Trout
(Tr) waters.
7.5.6 Development/Redevelopment into Nutrient Sensitive Waters.
This program does not include development/redevelopment draining to
Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW).
7.5.7
The Town of China Grove will endeavor to develop a program that will take
into consideration and be consistent with the management strategies and
initiatives of the Yadkin -Pee Dee Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
Page 41 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
October 2005

= MIMI mmm 0 m m � = M M M M M M M IM
Comprehensive 5tormwater Management Report
Table 7.5.8
BMP's and Measurable Goals for Post -Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
1
YR
2
YR
3
YR
4
YR
5
Responsible
PositionlPart
1
Develop local ordinance to address
Adoption of ordinance with policies and
X
X
Ordinance to be developed
post -construction runoff
standards
f
by Town Council
Page 42 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004,00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.5.8 Non -Structural BMP's
Several non-structural BMP's are proposed for inclusion in the program. The
t BMP's include the development and implementation of ordinances, policies
and education programs.
7.5.9 Structural BMP's
A comprehensive list of structural BMP's have been included in the BMP
' summary table. It is anticipated that the development of policies, ordinances
and/or standards will result in the utilization of some of the BMP's. The
structural BMP's include storage practices, filtration practices and infiltration
practices. Appropriate implementation is imperative and will be ensured by
the following:
■ Preconstruction review of BMP designs
■ Inspection during construction to verify that BMP's are built as designed
■ Post construction inspection and maintenance of BMP's
• Enforcement of penalties for noncompliance design, with construction or
P ]?
operation and maintenance.
7.6 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeepinq for Municipal Operations
The following will be considered in the development of this aspect of the program:
maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term inspection procedures
' for structural and nonstructural storm water controls to reduce floatables and other
pollutants discharged from the storm sewers; controls for reducing or eliminating the
discharge of pollutants from streets, road, highways, municipal parking lots,
maintenance and storage yards, maintenance shops with outdoor storage areas,
salt/sand storage locations and procedures for properly disposing of waste removed
' from the storm sewers and areas listed above (such as accumulated sediments,
floatables, and other debris). Operation and maintenance will be an integral
component of the programs and BMP's.
Page 43 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

■e yr Ir M Ml M M M M M W � = r are W= s M
Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
Table 7.6.1
BMP's and Measurable Goal for Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
--F—
BMP
Measurable Goals
YR
YR
YR
YR
YR
Responsible Position/Party
1
2
3
4
5
I
1
Targeted outreach and training for
Reduction in stormwater toxicity and pollutant
X
Town Utilities Director
business and municipal fleets
loads. Elimination of direct discharge to storm
involved in auto maintenance about
drains. Reduction of elimination of
practices to control pollutants and
outreachluncontained removal of vehicle fluids.
reduce stormwater impacts.
2
Landscaping lawn care and grounds
Outreach and training programs media
X
Town Utilities Director
maintenance pollution prevention
campaigns.
program.
3
Proper storage of hazardous
Reduced contamination of stormwater runoff
X
Town Utilities Director
materials.
and streams.
4
Spill response and prevention plan.
Reduced risk of surface and ground water
X
Town Utilities Director
contamination.
5
Used oil recycling.
Decrease in water pollution, protection of public
X
Town Utilities Director
health and recycle of valuable economic
resources.
6
Materials Management.
Develop materials inventory system to identify
X
Town Utilities Director
all sources and quantities of materials that may
by exposed to direct precipitation or stormwater
runoff.
Page 44 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
7.6.1 Affected Operations
Municipal operations that will be impacted by the operation and maintenance
program for pollution prevention/good house keeping for municipal operation
include the following:
■ Parks and Recreation vehicle
■ Equipment Maintenance
■ Sanitation
The following facilities operated by the Town are subject to NPDES General
Permits or individual NPDES permits for discharges of stormwater:
Permit No. Certificate of Coverage
1 7.6.2 Training
' Employee training programs will be developed. The training programs will
teach the Town's employees about stormwater management, potential sources
of contaminants and BMP's. to addition the training program will endeavor to
instill all the Town's personnel with a thorough understanding of the plan for
pollution prevention/good housekeeping for their municipal operations.
' Training will include posters, employee meetings, courses and bulletin boards
about stormwater management, potential pollution sources, and prevention of
' pollution in surface runoff. Field training programs will also be used to show
employee's actual potential sources of stormwater pollution and to
demonstrate the implementation of site specific BMP's.
' The program will be standardized and repeated as necessary to train new
employees and to refresh employees with prior training. The employee -
training program will be an on -going process.
The Stormwater Management Fact Sheet Employee Training EPA 832-F-99-010
will be utilized as a reference for developing and implementing the training
program. A copy is included in Appendix E.
' 7.6.3 Maintenance and Inspections
A preventive maintenance (PM) program and for operations will be developed.
The PM program and record keeping will include vehicle, equipment, and
material storage areas. Periodic inspections will ensure all equipment and
Page 45 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004,00
' October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
' materials storage containers are in good condition. An problems or issues that
g g Y
may have an impact on stormwater quality will be recorded and corrective
action taken. Vehicle washing and fueling operations will be inspected
annually to ensure that they are in good working order and that they minimize
exposure of stormwater to chemicals, fuels and other pollutants. Schedules and
procedures will be established for the inspections and the record -keeping
system will document inspections. Records will include the following:
■ The date, exact place, and time of material inventories, site inspections,
sampling observation, etc.
■ Names of inspector(s) and sample(s).
• Analytical information, including the date(s) and time(s) analyses were
performed or initiated, the analysts' names, analytical techniques or
methods used, analytical results, and quality assurance/quality control
results of such analyses.
' ■ The date, time, exact location, and a complete characterization of
significant observation, including spills or leaks.
■ Notes indicating the reasons for any exceptions to standard record
keeping procedures.
■ All calibration and maintenance records of instruments used in storm
water monitoring.
■ All original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring equipment.
■ Records of any non -storm water discharges.
' The Stormwater Management Fact Sheet Record Keeping )PA-F-99-005 will be
utilized as a guide for developing the Town's Record Keeping System. A copy
of the document is in Appendix F.
7.6.4 Vehicular Operations
A program for inspection of vehicles and equipment and stored materials
' storage will be developed to reduce or eliminate to discharge of pollutants to
stormwater. This will include vehicle maintenance and fueling stations and
salt/sand storage areas.
A material inventory system involves the identification of all sources and
quantities of stored materials that may be exposed to direct precipitation or
' storm water runoff at a particular site. Stored materials are substances such as
salt, sand, crushed stone, mulch, chemicals, raw materials, fuels, pesticides, and
fertilizers. When these materials are exposed to direct precipitation or storm
water runoff they may be carried to a receiving water body. Therefore,
' Page 46 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
' October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
identification of these materials helps to determine sources of potential
contamination and is the first step in pollution control.
Maintaining an up-to-date inventory of all materials (hazardous and non-
hazardous) will help to track how materials are stored and handled on and
identify which materials and activities pose the greatest risk to the
environment. The following are the basic steps in completing a materials
inventory:
■ Identify all chemical substances present in the work place. Review the
purchase orders for the previous year. List all chemical substances used in
the work place and then obtain the material safety data sheet (MSDS) for
each.
■ Label all containers to show the name and type of substance, stock
number, expiration date, health hazards, suggestions for handling, and
first aid information. Unlabeled chemicals and chemicals with
deteriorated labels are often disposed of improperly or unnecessarily.
• Clearly mark on the inventory those hazardous materials that require
specific handling, storage, use, and disposal considerations.
The key to a proper materials inventory system is continual updating of
records. Maintaining an up-to-date materials inventory is an efficient way to
identify the materials that are handled and whether they contribute to storm
water contamination problems.
The stormwater Management Fact Sheet Materials Inventory EPA 832-F-99-
021 will be used as a guidance document for preparation of the Materials
Inventory. A copy of the document is in Appendix G.
' A Spill Prevention Plan specifies materials handling procedures and storage
requirements and identifies spill cleanup procedures for areas in which spills
' may potentially occur. The plan standardizes operating procedures and
employee training in an effort to minimize accidental pollutant releases that
could contaminate storm water runoff.
Spill prevention will be part of a comprehensive Best Management Practice
Program to prevent runoff contamination. This program will also include
a stormwater contamination assessment, flow diversion, record keeping,
internal reporting, employee training, and preventive maintenance.
Public agencies that transport or store petroleum products are required by
State and federal Iaw to prepare spill control and cleanup plans. The existing
' Page 47 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004.00
eOctober 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
1
u
plans will be re-evaluated and revised to address storm water management
issues.
The Stormwater Management Fact Sheet Spill Prevention Planning EPA 832-F-
99-071 will be utilized as a guideline document for the integration of spill
prevention planning into the BMP's for preventing stormwater runoff
contamination. A copy of the document is in Appendix H.
7.6.5 Waste Disposal
Current programs for drainage system maintenance involves removal of large
pieces of debris by hand or with mechanical equipment on an as needed basis.
Smaller debris and sediment are removed from the drainage system by use of a
sewer jet vacuum truck. All debris and sediment removed during the process
is collected and disposed of. The current procedures will be reviewed and new
procedures will be developed.
7.6.6 Flood Management Project
7.6.7 Existing Ordinance
The first step in the decision process for reviewing existing ordinances for
possible modification to address stormwater issues will be to have the City staff
become thoroughly familiar with the purpose, goals and objectives of the
SWMP. Existing ordinances can then be reviewed and evaluated to determine
if modification of the ordinances would address the stormwater management
issues identified in the SWMP. Recommendations for change can be
considered, the change drafted, presented to the Town Council for
consideration, and if deemed appropriate by the Council issued for public
review and comment prior to adoption and implementation.
7.6.8 Other Evaluations
No other aspects of the Town's operation were evaluated.
7.6.9 Decision Process
The following were considered in developing the Town's program:
maintenance activities, maintenance schedules, and long-term inspection
procedures for structural and nonstructural Stormwater controls to reduce
1 floatables and other pollutants discharged from the storm sewer; controls for
reducing or eliminating the discharge of pollutants from streets, roads,
highways, parking lots, maintenance and storage yards, fleet or maintenance
Page 48 of 51
Pease Commission No, 2005004.00
1 October 2005

Comprehensive Stormwater Management Report
shops, salt/sand storage locations, procedures for properly disposing of waste
removed from the storm sewers (such as accumulated sediments, floatables,
and other debris); and ways to ensure that new flood management projects
assess the impacts on water quality and examine existing projects for
incorporating additional water quality protection devices or practices.
Operation and maintenance will be an integral component of the stormwater
management program. This measure is intended to improve the efficiency of
these programs and require new programs where necessary. Properly
developed and implemented operation and maintenance programs will reduce
the risk of water quality problems.
7.6.10 Evaluation
The effectiveness of many of the best management practices at removing
pollutants from stormwater runoff will be difficult to quantify. However, the
Town's emphasis will be on implementing the BMP's that eliminate the
potential for pollution. The success of this minimum measure will be
determined by the quantity of potential pollution sources that are identified,
inventoried and eliminated.
N:12005004-00\CFile\Phl-4\Report-Study\Stormwater Management Program.doc
Page 49 of 51
Pease Commission No. 2005004,00
October 2005

I
'ease
Architeds — Engineers
I� 4wtialn
111 116 6123
P�.Ba1 181'6
2925 Eul Indcpendcnce Blyd,
Charlotte
North Carolina 2821E
SCALE : 1" - 2000'
Town of China Grove
China Grove, North Carolina
Stormwater Management Program
Receiving Streams

Ll
I
1

r
1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee RiverBasinwide Water Quality Managemcnt Plan Executive Sutra.
Page I of 19
III
[l
Yadkin®Pee .Dee
assnwide Water �ualfty
Management Plan
Foreword and Executive Suninnary
May 1998
Prepared by the:
NC Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
[phone]
Lake Tillery
Stanly County, NC
lliis document was approved and endorsed by the NC Environmental Management Colnniission on May 14, t998 to be used
as a guide by the NC Division of Water Quality in carrying out its Water Quality Program duties and responsibilities on the
Yadkin -Pee Dec River Basin.
Foreword
Executive Summary
Yadkin-Pec :Dee River Basin Overview
0 Assessruent Of water Qualit3LInflic. Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
G Major Water Quality Concerns and Priority Issues
6 Recommended Mann enteg_ ni Strategicsestoring Impaired Waters And Protecting Threatened Waters
o Potential Reclassification "ro High Quality Waters Or outstandinF4 Resource Waters
0 Future Iniliativcs In `I'hc Yadkin -Pee Dee Rivcr Basin
FOREWORD
�. Most water users in the basin, including industry, agriculture, tourists, and residents, rely on water for
basic needs. These needs include; water supply and/or disposal of treated wastewater. In addition, many
businesses and residents of the basin rely directly or indirectly on the waters of the basin to meet their
recreational neccls and supply an economic base: through tourism. The lakes of the Yadkin-Pce Dee
River basin are well known for recreation activities including fishing, boating and swlnuning. To these
groups and the public they serve, it is important that the basin's waters support viable fisheries, that the
waters be relatively safe (low risk of contracting water -borne disease) and that they be aesthctically
I htt r//h2o.eiir.state.nc.us/basiiiwicle/ adkin I)asinwide water ualit .htm
l Y �, _ _9 Y_
l 1 /3/2004

1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River 13asinwide Water Quality Management.Plan. ExeWtiVC Slue... Page 2 or 19
desirable (free of objectionable colors, odors and smells). Yet maintaining clean water becomes
increasingly difficult and more expensive as the population grows, as land is developed and as
{ competition for resources heighten.
The. Majority ofthe waters in the basin are supporting their designated uses, based on Division of Water
Quality monitoring data. The Use -Support assessment methodology used by DWQ found about 9
percent of stream miles to be impaired. However, there are reasons to be concerned about the quality of
the lar'gc number of support threatened waters in the basin. In addition, many streams have not been
monitored by DWQ, so there are potentially other streams with water quality problems.
.�, Some areas of the basin have experienced significant population growth between 1970 and 1990. This
growth rate is expected to continue. The construction of roads, driveways, commercial and recreational
areas and homes must be undertaken with proper care to prevent sediments front reaching surface
waters. In addition, timber harvesting and agricultural activities should use best management practices to
avoid erosion and the resulting sedimentation to streams.
['reserving and enhancing the duality of water in the basin is beyond the capabilities of any one agency
or group. State and federal government regulatory programs will play an important part, but much of the
responsibility will be at the local level. Those who live, work and recreate in the basin have the most at
stake.
This document provides a summary of the causes and sources of water pollution in the basin, the status
of the basin's water quality, a summary of water quality rules and statutes that apply to water quality
protection in the basin, and recommended strategies to protect and enhance the quality of the surface
waters in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin. The Yadkin -Pee Dee River Rasinwicle Water Quality
Management Plan will be used a guide by the NC .Division of Water Quality (formerly Division of
I�nvironmental Management) in carrying out its water quality program responsibilities in the basin,
l3eyond that, it is hoped that the plan will provide a framework for cooperative efforts between the
various stakeholders in the basin toward a common goal of improving and protecting the basin's water
resources while accommodating reasonable economic growth.
;�_Tup;iaf;:P�ge
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NO1ZTI1 CAROLINA'S BASINWIDE APPROACH To WATER QUALITY MANAGEIVIENT -
PURPOSL OF YADKIN-PIKE DEl+. RIVER BASIN PLAN
13asinwidc management is a watershed -based water quality management initiative being implemented by
the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (previously Division of Environmental Management). The
Yadkin -Nee DeeRiver 13asinwide Water Quality Management Plant is the sixteenth basinwide water
quality management plan prepared by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) in a series of plans being
prepared for all seventeen of the sta.te's major river basins. DWQ uses the plans as guides in carrying out
its water quality programs in each river basin.
The basinwide water quality management plans are not new regulatory documents. '1'hcy are planning
I
littl)://li2o.etir.statc.tlC. us/basnlwicle/ya(lkin_basinwicle_water_qual ity_.Iitm 1 1 /3/2004

1998 Yadkin --Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Execuiivc Surn... rage 3 of 19
documents used to communicate the State's rationale, approaches and long-term water duality
management strategies to policyrnakers, the regulated cornrnunity and the general public. Each plan is
completed and approved prior to the scheduled date for basinwide discharge permit renewals. The plans
are then evaluated, based on follow-up water quality monitoring, and updated at five year intervals.
DWQ uses this approach as a means to report to the public on the current status of water quality in tine
basin, major water quality Concerns and issues, projected trends in development and water duality, the
long-range water quality goals for the basin, and reconunendeci point and nonpoint source management
Options.
�. The .Yadkin-Pee.Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan will be updated in 2002.
Basinwide NPDES permitting in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin is scheduled to begin in July, 1998.
GOALS CIF+' ` 1IE BASINW[DE APPROACH
"rhe primary goals of DWQ's basinwide program are:
I , to identify and restore full use to impaired waters,
2. to identify and protect highly valued resource waters and biological communities of special
importance, and
3. to manage the causes and sources of pollution so as to ensure the protection of those waters
currently supporting their uses while allowing for reasonable economic growth.
In addition, DWQ uses this approach as a means to better identify water quality problems, develop
appropriate management strategies, maintain and protect water duality and aquatic habitat, assure
equitable distribution of waste assimilative capacity for dischargers, and improve public awareness and
involvement in the management of the State's surface waters.
PUBLIC WORKSHOPS
Upper Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Workshops
The Northwest Piedmont Council ol'Governments, in conjunction with Centralina Council of
Governments was awarded a 205j grant to assist DWQ with the preparation and coordination of public
input for the Yaclkin-11'ce Dec workshops for the upper portion of the basin. A series of four meetings
were held in Jonesville (March 15, 1996), Salisbury (March 22, 1996), Winston-Salem (May 17, 1996)
and Salisbury (August 22, 1997). Details on these meetings can be found in Chapter 6 and Appendix W.
The initial meeting allowed people to select a breakout group from a choice of areas of concern for the
basin. 'These were eventually conbsolidated into four groups which included: Water Quality (Point
Source:), Economic Development, Future Growth and Development and Water Quality (Nonpoint
Source). Planning sessions were held in which the information from the workshops was summarized For
presentation at the May meetings. Follow-up meetings, held in May, were intended to dissen7inate the
summaries compiled at the planning sessions and to give attendees the opportunity to provide comments
and suggestions. A summary of the subcommittees goals and recommended action plans is presented in
Appendix 1V.
Each subcominittee developed: 1) a goal, 2) a series of recommenda€ions, 3) a list of agcncics that could
implement the recommendation, 4) suggested potential funding sources for implementation oFthe
recommendation, and 5) a timetable for complction of the recommendation,
hltp://l12o.cnr.state.ne.us/I)asiiiwicic/yadlciii_basitiwicle_water_clual1ty_.Iitm 1. 1/3/2004

1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan ExeC UdVe Sunk., Page 4 of 19
Lower ,Yatlkin-Pee Dee River Baavin Workshops
1 Two workshops were held for the lower Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin in Albemarle on August 22, 1996.
' The workshops were conducted to provide an overview of the basin schedule and information specific to
the lower portion of the basin. After presentations, the group broke out into small discussion groups.
Each group was asked to respond to three questions: 1) What are the priority water quality related issues
in the basin?; 2) Are there any specific waterbodies in the basin that are experiencing water quality
problems?; 3) What efforts have been undertalcen to improve water quality?
a Lower Yadkin-Pec Dec River basin workshop participants identified the following categories as the
primary areas of concern to the basin (Table 1), An effort has been rnade to address these issues in the
development of the plan. Several issues identified by workshop participants that were not addressed in
the plan were listed in Chapter 7 for future activities, A full summary of the workshops can be found in
Chapter 6 and Appendix IV.
Table I Primary Areas of Concern for- Participants of the Lower
l Yadldn-Pee Dee River Basin Workshops
0 Equity between Point Source and
Nonpoint Source Issues
0 Research and Monitoring Needs
(Sec Clip 7, Section 7.3.7))
0 Agriculture 13MPs and Waste
0 Urban Development
Mgt.
+ Policy Issues
0 Recreation tnnpacts
0 NPS Pollution/Sedinientation
o Point Source Pollution
0 Forestry Practices and 13MPs
0 Loss of Riparian Zones
• Water Supplies
0 Lake Management
''YADKIN-PEE SEE RIVER BASIN OVERVIEW
The Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin is the second largest river basin in the state, covering 7,213 square
miles, It includes eighty-three municipalities and all or part of twenty-four counties. The basin is
primarily located within the piedmont physiographic region of the state Fi xu�, re l ), but also drains the
mountain and coastal plain regions. Streams within each region are affected by the soils, geology and
topography characteristie oI'that region.
Tale basin originates on the eastern slopes of the Blue Ridge Mountains in Caldwell, Wilkes and Surry
Counties (Figure 1). A small portion of the Yadkin River headwaters originates in Virginia. It flows
northeasterly for about 100 miles, then flows to the southeast.until it joins the Uwharrie River to form
the'l'ec Dee River. The Pee Dee River continues flowing southeasterly through South Carolina to the
Atlantic Ocean. The North Carolina portion of the basin contains approximately 5,991 miles of
freshwater streams and rivers.
i To aid in locating the streams and lakes within the basin, this plan presents the basin as the upl3er
Yadkin 17iver basin (Figure 2.3) and the lower Yadkin River basin (Figure 2.4). The upper Yadkin River
littp:Hli2o.enr.stttte.ne.us/basirtwide/yaclkiit_basinwicle-water_quality_.litm l 1/3/2004

1998 Yadkin-Pec Dec River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive SUM... Page 5 of 19
basin contains subbasins 03-07-01 through 03-0.7-07, which (train to High Rock Lakc. The lower Yadkin
�. River basin contains subbasins 03-07-08 through 03-07-17 which drain to the remaining chain lakes and
the Pcc Dee River.
[� Forest land, covers approximately 49 percent of the basin. Agriculture (including cultivated and
uncultivated cropland and pastureland) covers approximately 30 percent ofthe land area. The urban and
built-up category comprises roughly 1 I percent and exhibited the most dramatic change between 1982
and 1992 (38 percent increase). Other categories that showed substantial changes during this period
were pasturelands (19 percent increase) and the "Other" category, which includes rural transportation
(26 percent increase). Both cultivated an([ uncultivated cropland decreased by a total of 4G percent in the
basin between 1982 and 1992. 1t is likely that some of this cropland was converted to pasturcland and to
urban and built-up areas. Major land use activities in the basin include agriculture (crops and swine,
poultry and cattle operations) and construction activities related to growth. Iredell County has the largest
dairy cattle population in the state..
There are a number of. I-Iigh Quality and Outstanding Resource Waters in the basin and many state and
federally listed threatened and endangered species. The Yadkin-Pce Dee River basin contains a high
number of lakes, including a series of "chain" lakes on the mainstem of the river, which attract many
:�. tourists to the area.
i i
Based on 1990 census data, the population of the basin was 1.2 million people. Tile most populated
areas are in and near Winston-Salem and Charlotte. The overall population density is 163 persons per
square mile versus a statewide average of 123 persons per square mile. While much oFthe basin contains
rural areas surrounding small towns, many of the small to large cities have high density areas. The
percent population growth over the ten year period between 1980 to 1990 was 10 percent.
_T4p�;-n�;Pita
ASS:ESSME.NT OF WATER QUALITY IN THE VADKIN-PEE DEE RIVER BASIN
An assessment of water quality information collected by DWQ and other agencies indicate that 82% of
the waters within the basin are supporting their designated uses. However, the uses of half of these
waters (41 %) are threatened. In addition, 9% of the waters are considered impaired. Of the 29 lakes
monitored by DWQ, the majority are supporting their designated uses but are nutrient -enriched
(eutrophic oi- mesotrophic). Below is a summary of monitoring data reflective of water quality in the
basin. More details on this information can be found in Chapter 4.
Sunimary of DWQ Monitoring Data
Benthiic Macroinvertebrates - These are primarily bottom -dwelling aquatic insect larvae such as
species of mayflies, stoneilies, and caddisflics that are used as biological indicators of water quality.
IVfeasurements of the number and diversity of these organisms at strategic sampling sites is an important
means of assessing water quality.
http://li2o.enr.state.n(;.us/basinwicic/yaclkin—I)asinwide_watei-_qual'Lty_ htni 1 1/3/2004

1998 Yadkin-11ce Dec River Basinwidc Water Quality Management Plan Executive Sum... Page 6 of 19
nervit lfup of I lie Y2411:in River Basin
....... ...... .. vs
L• rSyl+! •1
='yI
s
lw — r -
ia:r;r 6 ii
,,11,yy f-•'
:arrnj
I_ESigs e6 p
cr-a-Casty 8rr ti'Ki �� • ��
Satv:ulPBsrt3x�
h1a�a Wj� apaplty �:s• '-�'��
vuttu,�'•, ,� ' •
4
.............
W.Jr C
J E,r
r4U0
c
s 3�1
�.........
.
aim- +R. � .+ •1
t a � r- � • �r � �E
t;.Li � r'J 415Yt try 1 M1CN:Ski
SausH c+sxoiee:n 4;,rrva�•:,
Yai•f rfi•rer B=ln
`rwiw; w tv: •.r•- v ».'- MtJ� 0 . r 37 4f nu
1+igurc 1. General Map of the Yadkin -Yee Dec River Basiat
During the 1996 Yadkin basin sampling, macroinvertebrates were collected at 105 sites. The 1996 basin
sampling targeted mainstem sites and major tributaries in ail the subbasins and gave a good
representation of present water quality in the basin. Of the 105 basin samples, I 1 were Excellent (10°/a),
30 were Good (29%), 46 were Good -Fair (44%), 14 were lair (13%), and 4 sites were rated as Poor
(4%).
Rsh_Community .S'atyl inn - During the spring of 1996, 55 lish community sites, representing at least
one site per subbasin, were sampled and evaluated using the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity
(NCI B1). 'These 55 sites were rated as: Good-Excellent-6 (11 %), Good-23 (42%), Fair-Good-6 (I I %),
Fair-13 (24%), Poor-Fair-2 (4%), Poor-1 (2%), and Not Rated-4 (7%).
K.vh 'TissueAnalysi,5 - Sample collections were performed at nine sites within the drainage in 1996.
DWQ confirmed extensive mercury contamination of the Abbotts Creek ernbayrnent of 1•ligh Rock Lake
in 1981, but tollowup remedial actions have brought n—IMM.-y concentrations back clown to background
levels.
http://li2o.cnr,state.lie.us/basinwi(Ie/yaclkin^basiliwi(ie_watci_qual1tyPubnl L 1/3/2004

1998 Yadkin-11ce Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Managernent Plan Executive ,Surn... Page 7 of 19
Lakes Asses item - "Twenty-nine lakes were sampled in the Yadkin River Basin. The majority of these
,. lak.es were sampled in 1994 or 1995. Twenty six lakes were fully supporting their designated uses. Two
lakes were rated partially supporting their uses (Rockingham City Lake and Hamlet City Lake). Long
Lake was listed as not supporting because it was drained in 1995 to facilitate sediment removal from the
lake's basin.
jmbient Mon toring - Water quality data collected at 45 sites in the Yadkin River basin were evaluated
for the period 1992-1996. Yadkin River mainstem water quality indicates highest total phosphorus and
nitrogen concentrations at the Yadkin College site. Water quality at tributaryambient sites showed
patterns of low dissolved oxygen levels and pH. at some sites. Elevated focal coliform bacteria levels are
commonly found throughout the basin.
a Use -Support Ratings
Use -support ratings are a method to analyze water quality information and to determine whether the
quality is sufficient to support the uses for which the waterbody has been classified by the State. The
word uses refers to activities such as swimming, fishing and water supply. All surface waters in the state
have been assigned a classification.
DWQ has collected chen-iical and biological water quality monitoring data throughout the basin, some of
which are summarized above. Available data for a particular stream segment has been assessed to
determine the overall use support rating; that is, whether the waters are fully supporting, support -
threatened, partially supporting, or not supporting their uses. Fully supporting and support -threatened
streams are not considered impaired. Streams referred to as impaired are those rated as either partially
n supporting or not supporting their uses.
Although the majority of the streams have good to excellent bioclassifications and few standards were
violated at the ambient stations, nonpolnt source effects such as increased sedimentation, were evident at
many of the sampling sites. There are also some point source discharges that pose water quality
concerns in the portion of the basin draining into High [lock Lake. Those waters considered Impaired,
and some select support threatened waters based on monitoring data, are discussed below by subbasin.
Use support ratings in the Yadkin River basin, described more fully in Chapter 4, are summarized
below. Of the 5,991 miles of freshwater streams and rivers in the Yadkin -Pee Dee basin, use support
ratings were determined for 91% or 5,408 miles with the following breakdown: 5
Miles Percent of Total
SUPPORTING
4930
82%
A Fully supporting:
(2436)
(41%)
n Suppoa-threatened:
(2494)
(4l`%)
I[5'1 PAIRET)
478
9%
a Partially supporling:
(383)
(7%)
�� Not supporting;
(95)
((2%)
�y
l O1 E/ALUAT D:
5584
9%
http://l'i2o.etir.state.]lc.Lls/bash]wlde/yaclk111_basiiiwlde_wator—qual1ty_.litin 11 /3/2004

1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwidc Water Quality Management Plan l"x(:CutiVe Sung— Page 8 of 19
' MAJOR WATER QUALITY CONCERNS AND PRIORITY NSUES
t The primary water duality issues discussed in this basin plan relate to concerns presented to DWQ as
priority issues, or those that have been identifies} as causing water quality impacts or impairment.
Discussion on these categories follows.
Crowth Management - Proactive planning efforts at the local level are needed to assure that
development is done ina. manner that maintains the good water quality that is presently attracting; people
to the area. These planning efforts will need to find a balance between water quality protection, natural
resource management and economic growth. Growth ranagement requires planning for the ricecls of
future population increases as well as developing a strong tourism base, 'These actions are critical to
water quality management and the duality of life for the residents of the basin. Urban and residential
impacts on water quality and trends in the basin are discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2. Some local
initiatives are presented in Chapter 5, Section 5.6.3. Refer to Section 6.5 for recommended management
strategies relating to planning for growth and development.
Urban Stormwater - Surface waters can be sign ihcant] y impacted by urban stormwater i'unof�f. The
impacts of urban and residential runoff on water quality in the basin are discussed in Chapter 3, Section
3.4.2. Some local initiatives are presented in Chapter 5, Section 5.6.3. Refer to Section 6.5 for
recommended management strategies relating to controlling potential water quality problems related to
urban stonnwater runoff.
■ Sedimentation - Erosion, and the resulting sedimentation, are prevalent throughout the basin. Workshop
participants (Section 6.2.2) and Nonpoint Source 1'eam members (Section 6.2.3) have expressed the
' view that the priority issue for the basin is sedimentation. Many waters in the basin are thought to be
impacted or impaired, at least in part, by sedimentation (Chapter 4, Section 4.5). The sources of
sedimentation are discussed in detail in Chapter 3, programs to address erosion and sedimentation are
discussed in Chapter 5, same of the actions being taken at the local level are discussed in Chapter 5,
Section 5.6. General i-nanaget718nt strategies for controlling sedimentation are presented in Section 6.5.
Nutrients - Eutrophication of High [lock Hake is the primary focus of nutrient strategies in this basin
plan. Nutrients are discussed in Chapter 3. Water duality on each monitored lake is presented in Chapter
4. Management strategies pertaining to High Rock lake are presented in Section 6.3. General
management strategies for controlling nutrients from urban and industrial stormwater are presented in
Section 6.5.
I fecal Coliform Bacteria - An-ibicnt monitoring stations t}-ii-oughout the basin have identified
waterbodies with elevated fecal coliform bacteria (Chapter 4). Fecal Coliform bacteria sources are
discussed in Chapter 3. General management strategies to address nonpolnt sources of fecal conform
bacteria are presented in Section 6.5.
Oxygen Consuming, Wastes - Many streams within the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin are low or zero
flow streams. Regulations currently exist for streams with 7QI0 and/or 30Q2 equal to zero cubic feet
per second (cfs). 'These regulations were developed to prohibit new or expanded discharges of oxygcn-
consuming wastes to zero flow streams. Existing facilities were evaluated for alternatives to discharge.
Many facilities found alternatives and some chose to build new tertiary treatment facilities (which are
allowed to discharge under the regulations). General management strategies for oxygen -consuming
wastes and management strategies for specific streams within the basin are presented in Section 6.5.7.
Agricultural Nonpoint Source l'crlhrtiorr - Agi'1CLlltllre e!!l1 Contribute to degraded Watel' quality
I
http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/l)asinwidc/yadkin_basinwide water�quality_.ISfm i I/3/2004

1 1998 Yadkin -Pee Dec River 13asinwide Water Quality Management Plan Exccutive Sutn... Page 9 of l9
M through contributions of excess nutrients, fecal conform bacteria, toxic chemicals and erosion problems
from runoff. Chapter 3, Section 3.2 discusses these causes oCttnpairmemt and Section 3.4 provides a
l discussion on agricultural contributions to water quality impacts. Chapter 6, Section 6.5.2 presents some
suggested management strategies to reduce the negative impacts agricultural activites can have on water
qual ity.
RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR RESTORING AND
PROTECTING IMPAIRED WATERS AND SE-LECT "THREATENED" WATERS
Those waters in the basin that are considered impaired based on DWQ monitoring data are presented in
Table 2. A summary of the management strategy developed for this waterbody is also presented. Some
additional streams with known water quality problems which have not led to impairment but for which a
management strategy has been developed are presented in summary in Table 3. for more details on
water quality problems or management strategies for these waters, refer to Chapter 6, Section 6.3.
These watcrbodies are impaired, at least in part, due to tonpoint sources of pollution. The tasks of
identifying nonpoint sources of pollution and developing management strategies for these impaired
watcrbodies, is very resource -intensive. Accoinplishing these tasks is overwhelming, given the current
limited resources of DWQ, other agencies (o.g.-Division of Land Resources, Division ol'Soil and Water
Conservation, Cooperative Extension Set -vice, etc.) and local governments. 'Therefore, only limited
progress towards restoring those NI'S impaired watcrbodies can be expected during this five-year cycle
unless substantial resources are put towards solving NPS problems. Due to these restraints, this plan has
no NPS management strategies for most of the strean}s with NPS problems.
DWQ plans to further evaluate the impaired watcrbodies in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin in
conjunction with other NPS agencies and develop management strategies for a portion of these impaired
watcrbodies for the second Yadkin River I3asinwide Water Quality Management Plan, in accordance the
requirements of Section 303(d).
Table 2 Partially Supporting or Not Supportung Monitored Waters
in the Yadkin -Yee
.Dee
River Basin*
Subbasin
Wa(erbody
t'y`
Support
1,0tenti,al
5okik't�S
Reconimencled Wi. Strategy*Rn
in'T
030703
Ararat It.
PS
NP,P
Actions by local governments and
below lvl t Fairy
agencies are needed to reduce I'S
pollution. The Division will
continue to evaloato instreani data
submitted by the City of Mount
Airy.*
030703
1_ovills Cr. at
PS
Nil
Fuktlaer investigation is necessary
Sit 1371
to determine actions needed.*
030703
Heatherly Cr.
I's R.
NP,P
Continued monitoring will quantify
NS
improvements with [lie removal of
(lie Pilot Mountain ww'rt'
discharge.*
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.uslbasinwidcly,tdkin_basitiwidc_water_clultlity_.htiit 1 1/3/2004

1999 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Managetnent Plan Executive Su... Page 10 of 19
1
1
030704
Reynolds Cr.
PS
NP,P
Sequoia WWTP should submit an
engineering alternatives analysis,*
030704
Salem Cr. -
i'S
NP
Action by Forsyth County and the
Middle Fork
City of Winston Salem are needed
to improve water quality. DWQ
will reevaluate the model to
determinc ifwasteload allocation
should be revised.*
030704
Grants Cr.
]'S
P,NI'
DWQ will tnonitor for
improvement after the City of
Salisbury's discharges are
eliminated. If the creek is still
impaired after the Salisbury
discharge is removed, DWQ will
identify other point sources of
pollution and the options for these
sources. *
030706
Fourth Cr_
I'S
NI`
Pollutant sources must be
below
identified, along with methods to
Statesville
reduce nutrient loading,*
030707
Brushy Fork at
i'S
Nl'
Additional activity by local
SR1810
governments and agencies and the
Nonpoint Source Team are
needed.*
030707
Hamby Cr. at 1-
NS
NP,1'
No new dischargers of oxygen-
85, SR2031
consuming; wastes should be
(Abbotts Cr.
permitted. '11omasville and
watershed)
Lexington should serve as regional
WWTPs for future wastewater
needs.*
030708
Lick Cr. at
PS
P,� t'
New dischargers, including the
SR2351, NC8
Town of Denton's proposed
outt`all, should receive advanced
tertiary limits for oxygen -
consuming wastes.*
030708
Little Mtn Cr.
PS
NP,P
New or expanding discharges
should receive advanced tertiary
limits for oxygen-consurning
wastes under the cutTent zero flow
regulations. Low dissolved oxygen
levels will be evaluated and
appropriate actions pursued during
F ERC reliccnsing.*
030710
Pee Dee R.
PS
NP
New or expanding discharges to
below Lake
the Pcc Due River below Lake
Tillery
'finery should meet limits no less
stringent than 15 mg/I 130D5, 4
mg/1 NI.13N and 5 mg/1 DO,
Appropriate mitigative actions will
be pLll'sUC(t dUring FERC
rcl icensi ng. *
030710
Brown Cr. at
PS
NP
No new discharges should be
SR 1627
1
permitted in this watershed.*
030711
upper pocky
NS -a
NP
New or expanding dischargers above
River
portion is
Mallard Creek should receive limits
rated
littl):/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwidelyadkin_basinwide watel._gttality_.htm 11/3/2004

1 1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Su... Page I 1 of 19
1
1
1
Support
of'S nigh BOD and 2 mg/l NI.13N.
t�reacd
New or expanding discharges below
Mallard Creek will receive total
BODu limits 32 tng/l. Model results
will be used to evaluate specific
scenarios for future allocations in the
river.
The City of Charlotte and Cabarrus
and Mecklenburg Counties should
investigate pollution sources and
develop mitigation plans to protect
the river from further degrada(ion.*
030711
Coddle Cr. at
PS
NP
The NC Division of Water
NC49
Resources has requested a
minimum streamflow, intended to
maintain downstream Habitat, from
the Coddle Creek impoundment
(Chp 2, Sect 2.9). This minimum
flow inay or may not improve water
quality at the DWQ downstream
sampling site, DWQ will continue
to monitor for improved effects.
'I'lie'fown of Concord is
encouraged to take steps to reduce
nonponri source runoff to Coddle
Creek.*
030712
Goose Cr.
NS
Ni',P
A field -calibrated QUAL2E model
will be developed to evaluate
assimilative capacity of the creek.*
030712
N. & S. pork
PS
P,NP
DWQ recommends that no
Crooked Cr.
additional oxygen -consuming
wastes be permitted in N- Fork
Crooked Creek until data are
available to evaluate the impact of
existing loading. No additional
loading of oxygen -consuming
wastes will be permitted in S. Fork
Crooked Creek.*
030713
Long Lake
NS
NP
Long Lakc is drained and under a
local restoration project.
030714
Richardson Cr.
PS
NP,P
No new discharges of oxygen -
below Monroe
consuming wastes should be
permitted above Monroe's WWTP.*
030714
I_.ancs Cr-
NS &
NP
Every alternative to discharge
is
should be thoroughly examined
before a new outfall is eonsidcred.*
t) )071 G
Cartledge Cr.
PS
NP
Additional activity by local
al SR 1142
governments and agencies are
needed to develop a plan to reduce
nonpoint source pollu(ion.*
030716
Hitchcock Cr.
NS
NP
No additional loads of oxygen -
at SR 1 109
consuming wastes within 4 miles of
nnouth of creek should be
permitted.*
fitti)://Ii2o.eiir.state.nc.us/basiiiwide/ya(lkin_basinwide Wate _quality .ltti-n 1 l/3/2004

1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River .Basinwicle Water Quality Management Plan Executive Su... Page 12 of 19
030716
Rockingham
City Hake
I's
NP
Local restoration actions will need
to be taken.*
030716
Hamlet City
I I S
Nil
Local restoration actions are
Lake
plaruied.*
030717
N. Fork Jones
PS
NY
Before any new outfalls are
Cr_ at SR 1 121
permitted, it is recommended that
and S. Fork
additional data be collected to aid in
Jones Cr_,
assessing assimilative capacity.
Anson Cnty
Additional investigation is
accessary to identify specific
nottpoint sources of
contamination.*
Notes:
NS — Not Supporting PS = Partially Supporting
NP = Nonpoint Sources 1' = Point Sources
* - Only limited progress towards developing and implementing NPS
strategies for these impaired waters can be expected without additional
resources.
Table 3 Recommended'I'MDLs and Management Strategies for
A[Idressing Oxygen -Consuming Wastes with Reference to
Subbasin Summaries.
Map
Sub-
ReeCivinI3
Clip.
Ref.
basin
StrcatW'
Manaf cment Strategy
6
#
Sect.
1
030704
Grants Creek
1 f DO violations continue after
6.3.4-
Salisbury has relocated, other
F
sources Of pollution will need to be
identified.
2
030704
Salem Creek
Reevaluate QUA.L211' model to
6.3,4-
& Muddy
determine if the wasteload
11
Creek.
allocation for the Archie EIledge
Plant should be revised.
3
030705
Cedar Creek
To aid in assessing the assimilative
6.3.4-
capacily, additional water quality
h
data should be collected before
permitting new dischargers.
4
030706
Second
Field calibrated model should be
6.3.4-
Creek
considered for assessing the
G
(North)
potential impact of new or
expanding dischargers.
5
030707
Rich Fork
No additional loadings of oxygen-
6.3.4-
consuming wastes should be
ld
permitted.
6
03070'1
Abbotts
No new dischargers of oxygen-
6.3.4-
Creek
consuming wastes should be
FI
watershed
permitted. Thomasville and
Lexington should serve as regional
WW'I'Ps for future wastewater
needs.
littp:Hh2o.ear.state.nc.us/i)asiiiwicle/yacikiiibzisiiiwide watcr`ctuality_.11tnl
11/3/2004

1998 Yadkin-poe Dee River 13as111wide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Sit... Page 13 of 19
r�
I
e
7
D30708
Mountain Cr.
Low dissolved oxygen levels in the
6.3.4-
arm of Lake
Mountain Cr. arm of L ake "Tillery
I
Tillery
will be Evaluated. Appropriate
actions will be pursued during
FERC relicensing,
8
030708
Upper Lake
Low dissolved oxygen levels in the
6.3.4-
Tillery
upper reaches of Lake Tillery will
I
be evaluated. Appropriate actions
will be pursued during FERC
relicensing,
9
030708
Clarks Creek
Further evaluation and updated
6.3.4-
Oow information should be
1
obtained if the Mt. Gilead discharge
remains, or new discharges locate
to this creek,
10
030708
Yadkin River
Low dissolved oxygen levels below
6.3.4-
I-figh Rocic Lake dam will be
I
evaluated and appropriate actions
pursued during F1IZC relicensing.
11
030710
Pee Dee
New or expanding discharges to the
6.3.4-
River
Pee Dee River below Lake Tillery
K
should meet limits no less stringent
than 15 mg/l BOD5, 4 nag/I NI•13N
and 5 nig/l DO. Appropriate
mitigative actions will be pursued
during FERC relicensing.
12
030710
Brown Creek
No new discharges should be
6.3.4-
permitted in this watershed.
K
13
030711
Mallard Cr &
New or expanding discharges, if
6.3.4-
Rocky R.
permitted, should receive limits of
L
watershed
5 mg/l BOIL and 2 nig/I NI-13N.
upstnn of
Mallard Cr
14
030711
Rocky River
New or expanding discharges are to
6.3.4-
below
receive BODu limits equal to 32
1_,
Mallard
mg/l.
Creek
15
030712
Goose Creek
Field calibrated model will be
6.3.4-
developed to evaluate assimilative
M
capacity of the creek.
16
030712
Crooked
Before any new outfalls are
6.3.4-
Creek
permitted, it is recommended that
M
additional chemical/physical data
be collected to aid in assessing the
assimilative capacity Of the
proposed receiving stream.
17
030712
South Fork
No additional loads of oxygen-
6.3.4-
Crooked
consuming wastes will be
NI
Creek
permitted.
18
030712
North Fork
No additional loads of oxygen-
6.3.4-
Crooked
consuming wastes until data has been
M
Creek
collected on the creek to determine
impacts fi-om existing facility.
19
030712
pocky River
New or expanding; dischargers to the
6.3.4-
11ttp:I/112o.enr.stale.nc.ltslbl,isinwiclelya(lkln—basiii4vide water_quality .Itttn 11/3/2004

1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River 13asinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Su... Page 14 of l9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
river between the Rocky River Regional
M.
WWTP and the confluence with Muddy
Creels will receive total BODu limits of
approx. 32 tng/l. In addition, DWQ is
planning to request USGS to develop a
low flow profile for the river so that the
QUA1,2F model can be extended to the
mouth of the river.
20
030713
Long Creek
The City of Albemarle should optimize:
6.3.4-
treatment processes. More stringent
N
BOD5 limits will be considered.
21
030714
Richardson
No new discharges of oxygen-
6.3.4-
Creek
consuming wastes should be permitted
O
above Monroe's WWTI:1.
22
03071.6
Hitchcock
No additional loads of oxygen-
6.3.4-
Creek
consuming wastes within 4 miles of
Q
mouth of Greek should be permitted,
030716
Marks Creek
Additional loadings of oxygen-
6.3.4-
consuming wastes are not recommended.
Q
If future expansions are to be
reconsidered, it is recommended that
DWQ analyze the feasibility of
developing a field calibrated model in
order to assess the assimilative capacity
of the stream.
030716
Pee Dee
Low dissolved oxygen levels below
6.3.4-
River
Blewett Falls Lake dam will be
Q
evaluated and appropriate actions
pursued during F I;RC relicensing.
030717
Jones Creek
Before any new outfalls are permitted, it
6.3.4-
and Deadfall
is recommended that additional
R
Creek
chemical/physical data be collected to
catchments
aid in assessing the assimilative capacity
of the proposed receiving stream.
POTENTIAL RECLASSIFICATION TO HIGH QUALITY WATERS OR OUTSTANDING
RESOURCE WATERS
Based on DWQ monitoring, there are several waterbodies that may be considered eligible [or
reclassification to HQW or ORW (Table 4).
Table 4 Potential HQW/0RW Waters hi the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River Basin
Subbasin 1wafterbodies
030701 Buffalo Creek, Stoney fork, Mulberry Creek, Roaring River and
Middle Prong Roaring River
030706 upper South Yadkin River, Hutting Creek, North Little Hunting
Iittp:l/h2o.enr.state.nagslb�tsinwiclelyadktn—basinwide watei_quality_.lttm
1 1 /3 /2004

1 1998 Yadkin-Pce Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Su... Rage 15 of 19
Crcek and Rocky Creek
030710 Mountain Creek
030714 West Fork Little River
63671 C Bcaverdain Creek, Boties Fork Creek rmd Rocky Fork Creek
0'::�I�aLL^aJV:3¢�Cwernv�vr:�.v'uT:xfti:i[RmrY �^s'rrr..sr�u�.'��:]v,WAv'aL+'a69�'J:m[¢'tl.^��::IF'JSL�:'+311[xs:i'rsL'4-i::k'.A9lP�Ix:uu.TR±��*LTti'�r'PT'.':c,a��:r,:r ��et'R.Iwu[I'uat61S.PL:•:xlu�'n�:[rrusYl:tr�lYYC1:l'1LLti'srRlrRx_'[v
FUTURE INITIATIVES IN THE YADKIN-PEE DEE RIVER BASIN
Nonpoint Source Control Strategies and Priorities/Nutrient Reduction Efforts
0 Improving knowledge of and controlling nonpoint source pollution will be a high priority over the next
five years. Nonpoint source pollution is primarily responsible for the impaired and threatened waters in
the Yadkin-Pec Dee River basin, The following two initiatives are underway to address the protection of
surface waters From nonpoint sources of pollution.
• Establishment of nonpoint source basin teams in each basin. DWQ has begun to establish a
nonpoint source team in each of the state's 17 major river basins. Two nonpoint source teams have
been established for the upper and the lower Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin. Refer to Chapter 7,
Section 7.2.2 for further description.
o Interagency Water Quality Monitoring. DWQ has begun the process of coordinating with other
natural resource agencies on the idea of interagency water duality monitoring across the state.
Refer to Chapter 7, Section 7.2.3 for more information.
Efforts to Improve NC's Sedimentation and Erosions Control Program
Recently, there has been an initiative in the Division of Land Resources to address sediment and
turbidity water quality problems across the state. The Sedimentation and Erosion Control Commission
recognized the need to evaluate: the implementation of the existing programs. A "Technical Advisory
Committee was established to develop recommendations for the Commission. The Commission
supported the recommendations and instructed staff to implement the ones which can be implemented
' without rule or statute changes and establish a schedule to implement the others. The changes are
expected to result in program implementation improvements and reduction in sediment losses to our
streams.
The North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program
The North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRI') was established by the General Assembly
in 1996. The purpose of the NCWR_V is to protect and improve water quality, flood prevention, fisheries,
wildlife and plant habitats, and recreational opportunities through the protection and restoration of
wetlands and riparian areas. The NCWRP will accomplish this purpose by itnpleniertting projects that
will restore wetland and riparian area functions and values throughout North Carolina.
Beginning July 1, 1997, comprehensive Basinwide Restoration Plans will be developed for each river
basin in conjunction with the Basinwide Water Quality Management Plans. G1S-based mapping
http://h2o.enr.statc.nc. ttslbitsinwidelyadkin_I)asinwide_water_gLlality_.littn 1 1 /3/2004

1 1998 Yadkin-Pec Dee giver Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Lxecutivc SLI... Page 16 of] 9
5 methodologies will be used to assess the status of existing wetlands and riparian area resources within
each basin and to identify degraded wetlands and riparian areas. Potential restoration sites will be
prioritized based on the ability of the restored sites to address problems that have been identified in the
Basinwide Water Quality Management Plans. The Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Restoration Plan
will be one of the First plans developed. See Chapter 7, Section 7.3.2 for more details
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program
In the next five years, efforts will be continued to:
improve compliance with permitted limits;
o improve pretreatment of industrial wastes to municipal wastewater treatment plants so as to
rnaintain reduced toxicity in effluent wastes;
o encourage pollution prevention at industrial facilities in order to reduce the need for pollution
control;
e require dechlorination of chlorinated effluents or the use of alternative disinl,'eetants for new or
expanding facilities;
C require multiple treatment trains at wastewater facilities; and
o require plants to begin plans for expansion well before they reach capacity.
Longer -term objectives will include refinement of overall mana Bement strategies. Long-term oint
b J 15 b g p
source control efforts will stress reduction of wastes entering wastewater treatment plants, seeking more
efficient and creative ways of recycling byproducts of the treatment process (including reuse of
nonpotable treated wastewater), and keeping abreast of and recommending the most advanced
' wastewater treatment technologies.
Use of (Discharger Self -Monitoring Data
iDWQ will continue to make greater use of discharger self -monitoring data to augment the data it
collects through the programs described in Chapter 4. Quality assurance, timing and consistency of data
from plant to plant will be issues of importance. Also, a system will need to be developed to enter the
data r11tO a computerized database for later analysis.
In an effort to improve the qualtiy and consistency of self -monitoring data, DWQ is working with a
coalition of dischargers in the Yadkin -Pee Dee river basin to develop a strategic monitoring plan that is
similar, and in compliment to, DWQ's ambient monitoring system. Similar programs are effectively
used in the lower Neuse and Cape pear River basins. See Chapter 7, Section 7.3.4.
Promotion of Non -Discharge Alternatives/Regionalization
DWQ requires all new and expanding dischargers to submit an alternatives analysis as part of.' its
NPDE•rS permit application. Non -discharge alternatives, including connection to an existing WW"1" P or
1 ; land -applying wastes are preferred from an environmental standpoint. It the Division determines that
there is an economically reasonable alternative to a discharge, DWQ may recommend denial oI'the
N P D 1,"-5 permit.
1
littp:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwide/yadkin_basirrwide_wctte _quality_.Irtm 11/3/2004

1998 Yadlcin-Pec Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Su... Page 17 of 19
Coordinating I3asinwide Management with Other Programs
i The basinwide planning process helps to identify and prioritize waterbodies in need of protection or
restoration efforts and provides a means of disseminating this information to other water quality
protection programs. The potential exists to identify wastewater treatment plants in need of funding for
improvements through DWQ's Construction Grants and Loan Program. The plans can also assist in
identifying projects and waterbodies applicable to the goals of the Clean Water Management Trust
Fund, Wetlands Restoration Program, or Section 319 grants program. F inalized basin plans are provided
to these program offices for their use and to other state and federal agencies.
Improved Data Management and Expanded Use of Geographic Information System (GIS)
Computer Capabilities
DWQ is in the process of centralizing; and improving; its computer data management systems. Most of its
water quality program data including permitted dischargers, effluent limits, compliance information,
water quality data and stream classifications, will be put- in a central data center which will be made
accessible to most staff at desktop computer stations. Much of this information is also being entered into
the state's GIS computer system. As all this information is made available to the GIS system, including
land use data from satellite or air photo interpretation, and as the system becomes more user friendly, the
potential to graphically display the results of water quality data analysis will be tremendous.
Improved Monitoring and Assessment of Erosion Impacts
Sedimentation is perceived by the workshop participants and the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin NPS
'1'eains as one of the highest priorities in the basin. Many streams are impacted or impaired, at least in
part, clue to sedimentation. Erosion is evident throughout the basin. The fact that sedimentation is visible
and aesthetically unpleasant helps make it a higher profile issue. The extent of sedimentation problems
can be difficult to diagnose with the monitoring methods historically used by DWQ and many other
state water quality agencies. Suspended solids sampling conducted on a scheduled monthly basis is
likely to miss most of the high -flow periods during which the majority of sediment is transported.
' Benthic monitoring techniques may not always identify the effects of sedimentation, which can impact
aquatic organisms by reducing and altering available habitat.
Some of the actions that DWQ and others will take towards improving monitoring and assessment of
erosion impacts arc:
o DWQ currently does not have adequate means of quantifying the effects of sedimentation on
water quality. DWQ recognizes the need to improve its targeting and monitoring capabilities in
order to further identity sediment problems as well as to facilitate and support efforts to restore
degraded areas, 'Phis points to the need for targeted management efforts coupled with a
monitoring strategy Which effectively measures sediment transport under both average and
extreme conditions. DWQ will work -toward developing interagency resources for enhancing the
ability to measure and model erosion and sediment levels, to identify sediment source areas, and
to recommend appropriate management practices. DWQ will initiate discussions among staff and
other agencies to determine how these issues can best be addressed given current resource
constraints. DWQ will also try to determine what, if any, programmatic changers can be made to
gain better knowledge on sedimentation.
e Locally -based watershed improvement efforts represent an important mechanism for restoring
streams and watersheds degraded by sedimentation. The Division is working with several such
llttl>:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwiclelyadkin_basinwide Watcr_quality_.htrrl 1113l2004

I1998 Yadkin -Yee Dee River Sasinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Su... Page l8 of 19
projects in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin and will continue to do so. Funding for such efforts
can come from a number of sources (See Appendix VI), including the Agricultural Cost Share
Program, Section 319 grants and the Clean Water Management Trust Fund. Tile Division's role in
such projects can include assistance with problem identification and targeting, monitoring and
other technical assistance.
o DWQ is currently working with the Division of Land Resources, Division of Forest Resources
and Division of Soil and Water Conservation to develop a Memorandum of Agreement for
Turbidity. Turbidity is an indicator of sedimentation in a waterbody. The intent of the agreement
is to establish a relationship between the agencies that better defines each agency's responsibility
f.'or activities related to turbidity. The turbidity standard is not being changed under this
agreement.
Additional Research and Monitoring Needs
DWQ staff has identified some additional research and monitoring needs that would be useful for
assessing and, ultimately, protecting and restoring the water quality of the Yadlcin-Pee Dee River basin.
The following list is not inclusive, Rather, it is meant to stimulate ideas for obtaining more information
to better address Water quality problems in the basin. With the newly available funding programs (Cleary
Water Management Trust Fund and Wetlands Restoration Program) and the existing Section 319 grant
program, it may be desirable for grant applicants to focus proposals on the following issues:
a More resources are needed to address nonpoint sources of pollution. Identifying nonpoint sources
of pollution and developing management strategies for impaired waterbodies, given the current
limited resources available, is an overwhelming task. Therefore, only limited progress towards
restoring NPS impaired waterbodies can be expected unless substantial resources are put towards
solving NPS problems.
a Long-range water supply planning for the upper portion of the basin is needed. The proposed
water withdrawal by the City of Winston-Salem has the potential to reduce low flow conditions ill
' the mainstern of the Yadkin Riiver enough to affect the River's waste assimilative capacity.
o Growth rnanageinent/urban stormwater planning (specifically for the Rocky River drainage out of
Charlotte and in the Winston-Salem area) are needed. Increased population ill these areas will
demand more water and generate more wastewater. In addition, conversion of land from forests
and Farms will increase impervious surfaces and produce higher than natural stream flows and
' cause erosion. Streams in these areas will likely become impaired unless this growth is planned
for and managed properly.
o Need to update the sediment studies of the 1970's to the 1990's. This information would be used
to predict future trends and to assess the effectiveness of major sediment control efforts (e.g.- the
Farin I3i11).
e There is a lack of data on impacts of summer low -flow conditions on aquatic life. The lack of
flowing water during summer months can severely reduce the diversity of aquatic fauna. This
problem has not been investigated in North Carolina and further research will be required to
determine the effect of water withdrawals (e.g.- for irrigation) oil Stream life.
I' s Determining sedimentation rates and volumes in the Chain Lakes Would be Very UsetUl.
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.Lis/basinwicle/yacakin_basinwide_water_cluatity_.litill 11 /3/2004

1 1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Man Executive Su.... Page 19 of 19
a Document the impact of animal wastes in areas of high cattle (e.g.-lredell County) and poultry
(e.g.-Union County) production, There is a need for separating out the impact from organic
( loading, nutrient loading and other nonpoint sources.
o Need improved monitoring of small streams. These streams are currently ignored because of their
p g Y g
size, but they are a source of pollution and this source will increase as growth occurs.
' The followingcomments and questions, as resented b the participants of the Lower Yadkin -Pee Dee
q s p Y p �
River basin workshop, require attention:
. More data are needed t 13l r o d c o determine what percentage of water quality problems are clue to
agriculture.
2. There needs to be a better understanding of, and more education on, color impacts from
wastewater discharges.
3. Need to identiFy both NPS and point source pollution contributions/contributors. What data do we
have? Is it based on good science?
4. Need better identification of the causes and sources of pollution in impaired streams. More
resources should be put into determining why stream miles are impaired- "what is the source of
poor water quality?" This is needed to develop appropriate management strategies.
5. Identify problems before establishing regulations.
6. Need more research on urban l3MPs.
7. We need education for farmers and better access to research.
af;P`P
(1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan ]
[ 1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan Executive Summary ]
[ Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Map ] [ Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Statistics ]
[Nome ] [ Basinwide Water Quality Plans ] [ Water Quality Plan Expqutive Summaries ] [Basin Maps ]
[ River Basin Quiz ] [ Basinwide Statistics ] [ Meetings and Events ] [ What is Basinwide planning? ]
[ Which Basin Are You In? ] [ Basinwide Contact Information ]
htti)://h2o.stir.st,ite.ne.tis/basinwicle/yadkin basinwide_water_quality_.11tnl 11 /3/2004

Section Ba Chapter 4
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04
Includes Muddy Creek, Grants Creek and High Rock Lake
i?.1la.J,
4.1 Water Quality Overview
=---'=.,:_ =�: «;,r This subbasin is located entirely within the piedmont
Subbasht 03-07-04 at a Glance 11, of the state. Muddy Creek is the largest tributary
of the Yadkin River within this subbasin and its watershed
Land and Water
Total area: 730 mil
Stream miles: 438.0
Lake acres: 11,137.3
Population Statistics
1990 Est, Pop.:. 325,945 people
Pop. Dcnsity: 461 persons/rni'
Land Co_v_er_(%
Forest/ Wetland:
55.9
Surface Water:
3.6
Urban:
6.0
Cultivated Crop:
2.8
drains the Winston-Salem area. Grants Creel<, in the
southwestern part ofthe subbasin, flows through Salisbury,
Spencer and East Spencer. Dutchman Creel. (subbasin 03-
07-05) and the South Yadkin River (subbasin 03-07-06)
enter the Yadkin River above High Rock Lalce in this
subbasin. Abbotts Creek (discussed in subbasin 03-07-07)
is a tributary to High Rock Lake. The subbasin contains
all or part of more than 15 different municipalities and five
counties. The Yadkin River and High Rock Lake serve as
the county boundary between Davie and Davidson rind
Rowan and Davidson counties.
Pasture/ f A map including the locations of NPDES discharges and
Managed Herbaceous: 31.7 water duality monitoring stations is presented in Figure 13-
r•,,,iwr,yrrv.:^:rmi..;r«.-a-ter•.,....s,,,rrrt...,:n^.•arTrrc^r,. 14_Leq'.tl
4. Table 13-7 contains a summary ot`monitoring data
types, locations and results. Use support ratings for waters in this subbasin are summarized in
Table B-8. Appendix 1 provides a key to dischargeidentification numbers. Refer to Appendix
Ill for a complete listing of monitored waters and more information about use support ratings.
This subbasin is one of only a few in which more than 5 percent of land is described as urban.
The northern portion of the subbasin includes Winston-Salem, Rural Hall, Tobaccoville and parts
of Icing, Lewisville, Clernmons and Kcrnersville and is almost completely developed.
.Approximately 56 percent of the land is forested and nearly 35 percent is in agriculture. More
than 3 percent is surface water reflecting a large portion of the 15,750-acre High Rock. Lake.
This subbasin contains more than one quarter (27 percent) of the total basin population, and the
' population density in 1990 was the highest ofany other subbasin. Population is expected to
increase 32 percent in Rowan, 26 percent in l'orsyth and 25 percent in Davidson counties
between 2000 and 2020. ']'he subbasin contains 40 NPDES permitted discharges and eight
registered animal operations. Facilities with compliance or toxicity problems are discussed in
following sections.
The majority of -waters within this subbasin exhibit some level of impacts to water quality. Many
streams are impaired by a combination of nonpoint and point source pollution. There are no
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters within the subbasin.
i
Section B: Chaplet- 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee Ri vcr• Subbasin 03-07-04 146

Figure B-4 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04
star
King aY STOXES
I baccovi le
'
72, RuraE Hall
2
Y,
r-oRsy-rH
0
h, it
Bet nia'
-7
Walkertown
WinJstonp
251 A _S�eM
'
J� 241 Ker64s ville
A
sop
236
S513_1 V
225- 31­7"'�
223 230A,r;2•-2
'
Lewisville S
'
214 Q2510000
215
r
Q2600 00 U 7
2 —b' '19 F 4 -A-
DA
.2
2
-A 199"
N
187
47 1844
DAVIDSON M
or"
k. P281000
168
159
R 0 RIA tit 157
151
70 000
4
4660 ;14
146
� 600000 143
Q4 12d�"
117
0I
B-8. V
112A -A, �Y.
110aeK
R, A- -3.
S fil' 5- 599 1 et Subbasin HowdDry
5,36000 "0.111 Awhimit Mo0wring SI�ition
Benthl; StatIon
106
05-!' High Rock F-ah Comaninrry Station
SB_ Lake
rish Tissun Station
Q6120000
101
99 Faith
ti ei I MAW
I.
China Roc
f Us. Support Rating
Landis Grove
/V Supporting
Impaired
SS
Not Rated
A 1.
No Dole GA
MCDENR
CADARRUS STALY ydyC�nt
1*i�NV P'h­'y Ruads
Basinwide Planning Program Unit 5 0 5 10 Miles MunWorility
March 21, 2003

1
1
11
Table B-7 DWQ Monitoring Locations, 13ioclassifications and Notable Chemical Parameters
(1998-2002) ror Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04
Site
Stream
_
County
Road
13ioc1assilication or
Nnted Parameter '
lfenthic Macroin vertebrate Community Monitoring
B-1
Muddy Creek'
Forsyth
SR 1998
Good -Pair
1:3-2
Muddy Creek
Forsyth —
Sit 2995
Good4air-----
SS13-1
Reynolds Creek'
Forsyth
Above Sequioa
W WTP
Not Rated
SS13-2
Reynolds Creek
Forsyth
Below Sequioa
W WTP
Not Rated
13-3
Salem Creek'
Forsyth
SR 2657
Not Rated
13-4
Salem Creek - �T
Forsyth
Sit 2902
Fair
13-5
Salem Creek
Forsyth
SR 2991
fair
13-6
South Fork Muddy Cr'
Forsyth
Sit 2902
Good -Fair
13-7
Yadkin River'
Davidson
SR 1447
Good
13-8
Grants Creek'
Rowan
SR 1914
Fair
SS13-4
UT Grants Creek'
Rowan
SR 1500
Not Impaired
SS13-3
"Town Creek'
Rowan
1-85
Fair
F'4h CanunrrrrityAlonitoring
1.1-1
Muddy Creek
Forsyth
SR 1891
hair
1.-2
Silas Creek
Forsyth
Sit 1137
Fair
1'-2
Silas Creek (2002)
Forsyth
SR 1137
Good -hair
F-3
Salem Creek
Forsyth
SR 1 120
Poor
F-4�
South Fork Muddy Cr
Forsyth
SR 2902
Good -Fair
h-5
Grants Creek
Rowan
SR 2202
Good -Fair
Ambient Alartitaring
Q2510000
Salem Creek
Forsyth
At Elledbe WWT1'
Fecal coliform
Q2600000
Muddy Creek
Forsyth
SR 2995
Nutrients,
Decal coliform
Q2810000
Yadkin River
Davie/
Davidson
US 64
`turbidity
Q4600000
_
Grants Creek
Rowan
Near mouth
_
Turbidity, Nutrients,
fecal soli€ol-ns
Q4660000
Yadkin River
Rowan/
Davidson
NC 150
Turbidity
Fecal coliform
Q5970000
Abbotts C:rcek Arm of
High Rock Lake
Davidson
NC 47
`turbidity, Iron,
Dissolved oxYgen
Q5990000
Abbotts Creek Arm of
High Rock Lake
Davidson
SR 2295
"turbidity,
Dissolved oxygen
Section 8 Chaplet- 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04
148

I
I
Q5360000
Town Creek Ann of
High Rock Lake
Rowan
SR 2168
Turbidity, Iron,
Dissolved oxygen
Yadkin -Pee Dee fiver Basin Association Monitoring
Q2291000
Muddy Creek
Forsyth
I-40
Fecal coliform
Q2479455
Salcm Creek
Forsyth
SR 2740
Norty
Q2540000
Salem Creek
Forsyth
SR 1120
None
Q2570000
Salem Creek
Forsyth
SR 2991
Fecal ecliform
Q2720000�
Muddy Creek
Forsyth
SR 1495
`1-urbidily
Q2810000
Yadkin River'
Davie/
Davidson
US 64
Turbidity
Q4540000
Grants Crock
Rowan
31' St. Extension
Fecal coliform,
Turbidity
Q4600000
Grants Creek'
Rowan
Near mouth
_
None
Q4660000
Yadkin River'
Rowan/
Davidson
NC 150
Turbidity
Q5240000
'Town Creek
Rowan
1-85
None
Q5980000
Abbotts Creek Arm of
High Rock Lake'
Davidson
NC 47
None
Lakes Assessment
--
Winston Lake
Forsyth
1 station
None
--
Salem Lake
Forsyth
3 stations
None
--
I -sigh Rock Lake
Rowan/
Davidson
8 stations
% DO saturation,
Turbidity, Nutrients,
Chlorophyll a, pl-1
Lake Wright
Rowan
1 station
None
--
Lake Corriher
Rowan
1 station
None
' I listorical data of this type are available for this waterbody; refer to Appendix 11. Sitcs may vary,
3 Parameters arc noted if in excess of state slandards in more than 10 percent of samples collected within the
assessment period (9/ 1996-8/2001).
' This site duplicates a DWQ ambient monitoring station.
For more detailed infon-nation on sampling and assessment of streams in this subbasin, refer to
the Bcrsinwide Assessment Report - Yncllcin-Pee .Dee River Basin (NCDENR-DWQ, ,tune 2002),
available froln DWQ Environmental Sciences Branch at hap:/hr,-«.esb,enr.state.nc.uslbar.himl or by
calling [phone].
I
1
5ecriorr 13: Cha/seer 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River 5•arbGasin 03-07-04 149

I
I
1
1
1,
Table 13-8 Use Support Ratings Summary (2002) for Monitored and Lvaluated' freshwater
Streams (miles) and Lakes (acres) in Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04
Use Support Category
_J
Units Supporting
Impaired
Not Rated
Nu 13ata
Iotali
Aquatic Life/Secondary Recreation
mites
acres
69.3
275.3
49.2
10,449.7
3.3
71.0
317.2
341.3
438.0
11,137.3
Fish Consumption'
miles
acres
352.7
301.8
85.3
10,835.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
438.0
11,137.3
Primary Recreation
miles
acres
0.0
4,880.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
359.5
3.0
5,240.4
Water Supply
mites
acres
7G.9
11,084.5
0.0
0.0
OA
Q.Q
0.0
0.(?
76_9
11,084.5
Total stream miles/acres assigned to each use support category in this subbasin. Column is not ndditivc because sotuc stream
miles are assigned to more than one category.
These waters are impaired based on fish consumption advice issued for three species of freshwater fish dnc to mercury
contamination. Refer to page 104 of Section A for details.
4.2 Status and Recommendations for Previously Impaired Waters
'this section reviews use support and recommendations detailed in the 1998 basinwide plats,
reports status of progress, gives recommendations for the next five-year cycle, and outlines
current projects aimed at improving water quality for each water. The 1998 Yadkin -Pee Dee
River basin plan identified portions of Reynolds Creek, Salem Creek and Grants Creek as
impaired. These waters arc discussed in further detail below.
4.2.1 Reynolds Creels (3.3 miles from source to Muddy Creek)
1998 Recommendations
Biological surveys conducted in 1994 revealed that Reynolds Creek was Impaired downstream of
the Sequoia wvri,. `['his facility was a package WWTP serving a residential community.
DWQ recommended that an engineering alternatives analysis be conducted to determine the
feasibility ofchminating this discharge and connecting to the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County
collection system. Recommendations were also made for reducing nonpoint source pallution.
Current S'tolus
Benthic macro invertebra te communities in Reynolds Creek were sampled again at two locations
in 2000. Due to reduced flow, the stream was too small for bioelassifications to be assigned.
' Upstream of the discharge, DWQ biologists found that there had been a slight decline over the
six -year period, which is likely clue to increased development in Lewisville. Downstream,
significant problems still existed that were attributed primarily to the wwrp. ,Areas of sludge
deposition were observed that were contributing to water quality problems, 'l'he Sequoia WWTP
discharge was removed in July 2001.
2002 Reconsnaendcttion,4
Although Reynolds Creek is currently Not Rated due to its small size, significant water duality
problems still exist. DWQ will continue to monitor this stream to evaluate any improvement
Section B: Chapter 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04 150

e
t
Following the removal of the Sequioa WWTP discharge. However, local actions are Deeded to
reduce the effects of nonpoint source pollution, particularly frown stormwater ninoff, and to
restore habitat in the lower portion of the watershed. It is likely that Forsyth County and
Lewisville will be required by DWQ to obtain an NPDE1S permit for municipal stormwater
systems under the federal Phase I I stormwater rules.
4.2.2 Salem Creek (12.0 miles from dam at Salem Lake to Muddy Creek)
1998 Recommendations
Recommendations for the Salem Creek watershed include support for the City of Winston-
Salem's stormwater program and tali for further action by the city and Forsyth County to help
maintain and improve water quality in the mace of continuing development. DWQ planned to
reevaluate the computer model used to determine the wasteload allocation for the Archie Elledge
W WTI' and adjust the NI1DI?S permit accordingly, based on the outcome.
Current Status
The Salem Creek watershed continues to develop, particularly in the headwaters near
1
Kernersville, but also on the lower end. Some habitat degradation was observed above Salem
Lake, but the majority of water quality problems exist below the confluence with Brushy Fork.
Biological surveys were conducted by DWQ at three sites below Salem Lake, and water
chemistry samples were also collected at three sites. Although a small percentage of samples
downstream of the Archie Flledge WWTP contained dissolved oxygen concentrations less than
5.0 mg/l, the WWTP does not seem to be adversely impacting the stream. Benthic
macroinvertebrate communities were very similar above and below the WWTP. Significant
habitat degradation was observed throughout the lower watershed, including; severe bank erosion,
a lack of riparian vegetation, and sedimentation leading to a very uniform sand/silt substate (i.e.,
1
lack of pool and riffle habitat). Additionally, the fish community site, which received a Poor
bioclassification, is located upstream of the WWTP discharge. Salem Creck, from the dam at
'
Salem Lake to the confluence with Muddy Creek, remains Impaired.
The geometric means of fecal coliform samples collected from three stations between 1998 and
2001 and one station between 1996 and 2001 from Salem Creek (307, 327, 368 and 773
co tonics/ I 00in 1) indicate that the stream may not be Suitable for primary recreation. In addition,
fecal coliform concentrations were greater than 400 colonies/ I00ml in more than 20 percent of
samples from each site. Salem Creek is not currently classified for primary recreation (Class 13).
However, the stream was historically placed on the 303(d) list for fecal coliform and a TMDL is
being developed by DWQ.
2002 Recomnaenctations
Further investigation into the causes and sources of biological impacts to Salem Creek is needed
before specific recommendations to improve water quality can be made. Local actions tire
needed to reCIUCC sedimentation, turbidity and Fecal coliform contamination and to promote the
production of instreamn habitat by restoring riparian vegetation throughout the watershed. DWQ
wilt develop a TMDL for fecal coliform and work with local agencies to implement it over the
next five-year basinwide planning cycle. Many of the 13MPs employed to reduce fecal coliform
contamination will likely help reduce habitat degradation in the watershed also. In addition,
Forsyth County and Kernersville are rccluired to obtain NI'DI�S permits For Municipal
Section B: Chefprer 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04 151

stormwater systems under the Phase 11 stormwater nrles. Refer to page 37 of Section A, Chapter
' 2 for details.
Water Quality Improvement Projects
The Salem Creek watershed, including Peters Creek and Brushy Fork (03040101 170060), is one
of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee Dee Riverbasin that has been identilscd by the NC Wetlands
Restoration program (NCWRP) as an area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and
' wetland restoration efforts. This watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted
watershed for the implementation oFNCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section
C for- details.
4.2.3 Grants Creek (1.2 miles from SR 1910 to Yadkin River)
.1998 Recommendations
The 1998 basin plan discussed water quality impacts from the Salisbury Grants Creek WWTP
and Spencer Sowers Furry Road WWTP discharges and Salisbury's plans to relocate the Grants
Creek WWTP discharge to the Yadkin River. Recommendations were for 13WQ to monitor the
stream following the removal of this discharge and for local action to reduce nonpoint source
pollution.
Current Status
Biological data were collected from two sites, and water chemistry datawere collected from
' three sites along Grants Creek over (lie previous basinwide planning cycle: Although the
uppermost site (above the WWTP discharges) received a Good -Fair bioclassification, biological
surveys indicated severe habitat degradation as well as nutrient enrichment. Further downstream,
Grants Creek is impaired by a combination of historical point source problems and current
nonpoint source problems.
At two water chemistry sites (above and below the WWTPs), turbidity concentrations were in
excess of state standards in more than 10 percent of samples. The geometric means of fecal
coliform samples collected from two stations between 1998 and 2001 and one station between
1.996 and 2001 from Grants Creek. (282, 231 and 291 colonies/ 100m1) indicate that the stream
may not be suitable for primary recreation. In addition, fecal coliform concentrations were
greater than 400 colonies/100m1 in more than 20 percent of samples born each site. Grants
Creek is not currently classified for primary recreation (Class B). However, the stream was
1 historically placed on the 303(d) list for fecal coli form and a TM.DL has already bceri developed
by DWQ.
' The City of Salisbury relocated the Grants Creek WWTP discharge to the Yadkin River in 1998.
The City of Spencer's Sowers Ferry Road WWTP continued to have significant and chronic
problems with BOD as well as chronic problems with dissolved oxygen and total suspended
' solids over the most recent assessment period (1998-2001). However, in November 2000, the
City of Salisbury purchased the Sowers Ferry Road WWTP. Salisbury worked throughout 2001
and 2002 to divert all flows into the Grants Creek. WWTP and the Sowcrs Ferry Road W W'fP
discharge was eliminated by the end of 2002.
Section B: Chapter 4 - Ycrtfkin-Pee Uee River Subbasin 03-07-04 152

2002 Recommendations
i
Although Grants Creek above the City of Salisbury is not Impaired, impacts are evident. Further
investigation into the causes and sources of biological impacts in the lower portion of. Grants
Creek is needed before specific recommendations to improve water quality can be made. DWQ
expects to see some improvement below the old Sowers Deny Road WWTP during the next
basinwide planning cycle due to Salisbury's elimination of this discharge. However, local
actions will continue to be needed throughout the watershed to reduce sedimentation and
'
turbidity and to promote the production of instream habitat by restoring riparian vegetation.
DWQ's fecal coliform TMDL for Grants Creek was approved by the EPA in 2002. The study
revealed that the sources of fecal coliform in the Grants Crcelc watershed arc urban sources in the
Landis, China Grove and Salisbury areas, livestock grazing and manure application on
agricultural lands and pasturclands, and wildlife in the forested areas of the watershed. The
Coliform Routing and Allocation Program was utilized to simulate instream fecal concentrations
and to allocate the fecal coliform loads to the various sources. In order for water quality
standards for fecal coliform to be met in Grants Creels, a nonpoint source load reduction of 33-60
percent under dry weather conditions and 85-97 under wet weather conditions must be met. The
model estimates that WWTP discharges contribute an insignificant percentage of the fecal
coliform loading in the watershed. In addition, both major discharges have now been removed
from Grants Creek. Therefore, the reduction allocation focuses on the fecal coliform loading
from urban sources in the Landis, China Grove and Salisbury areas and livestock grazing and
manure application on agricultural lands.
'
These calculations are the first step in reducing fecal coliform concentrations in the watershed.
Many of the 13MPs employed to implement the TMDI_, will likely help reduce habitat
Arequired
degradation in the watershed as well. In addition, Landis, China Grove and Salisbury are
to obtain an NPDES permit for municipal stormwater systems under the federal Phase I I
stormwater rules. Refer to Section A, page 37 foi- details.
'
Water Quality Improvement Projects
The Grants Creek watershed (03040103 010010) is one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin-13ee Dee
River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) as an
area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration efforts. This
watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted watershed for the implementation of
NCWR.I' restoration projects. Refer to page 279 in Section C for details.
4.3 Status and Recommendations for Newt im aired Waters
Y �
"Down Creek, a portion of Muddy Creek. and High Dock Lake are rated Impaired based on recent
DWQ monitoring (1.996-2001). This section outlines the potential causes and sources of
eimpairment
and provides recommendations for improving; water quality.
Section 8: Chopter 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee Ki ver ,%bbasirr 03-07-04 153

n
{
4.3.1 Muddy Creek (15.2 miles from Mill Crec€c #3 to SR 2995)
Current Status
The headwaters of Muddy Creek flow from Stokes County, and the stream is currently the
western boundary of the City of Winston-Salem. The watershed continues to develop,
particularly in the headwaters near King, Tobaccoville and Rural Hal I, but also on the iowcr end
where Clemnions and Winston-Salem meet. Some habitat degradation was observed above the
confluence with Mill Creek, but the majority of water quality problems exist below this point.
On the: low end, the stream exhibits some recovery below the confluence with South Fork Muddy
Creek; however, impacts are evident in this portion of stream as well. The middle portion of
Muddy Creck is Impaired based primarily on fish community data collected in 1996 and 2001.
'
Benthic macroinvertebrate communities in this middle reach of stream have also received
bioclassifications that indicate impairment, although these communities were not sampled at this
location over the most recent assessment period.
Water chemistry is collected at three locations along Muddy Creek. Elevated nutrients, turbidity
and fecal coliform were observed over the five-year period (1996-2001). The geometric means
'
of fecal coliform samples collected from two stations between 1998 and 2001 and one station
between 1996 and 2001 from Muddy Creek (265, 255 and 488 colonies/100m1) indicate that the
stream may not be suitable for primary recreation. Fecal coliforin concentrations were greater
than 400 colonies!100m] in more than 20 percent of samples from each site as well. Current
methodology requires additional bacteriological sampling .for streams with a geometric mean
greater than 200 colonies/ l 00mi or when concentrations exceed 400 col/ 100ml in more than 20
e
percent of samples. However, these additional assessments are prioritized such that, as
l
monitoring resources become available, the highest priority is given to those streams where the
likelihood of full -body contact recreation is greatest. Muddy Creek is not currently classified for
primary recreation (Class B).
The impairment of Muddy Creek. is primarily attributed to nonpoint source pollution from
stormwater runoff from construction sites and developed areas. The input of heavily developed
and/or Impaired tributaries also contributes: Mill, Silas, Reynolds and Salcm Creeks.
2002 Recommendations
Further investigation into the actual causes and sources of biological impacts to Muddy Creek is
needed before specific recommendations to improve water quality can be made; however, the
'
potential for water quality improvement for this stream is still strong;. Local actions are ncedcd
to reduce sedimentation, turbidity and fecal coliforni contamination and to promote the
production of instream habitat by restoring riparian vegetation throughout the watershed. In
addition, Forsyth County as well as King, Tobbacoville, Rural Hall, Lewisville and Clernmons
are required by DWQ to obtain an NPDES permit for municipal stormwater systems under the
Phase Il stormwater rules. Refer to Section A, page 37 for details. Section A, Chapter 4 contains
more recommendations for reducing habitat degradation from stonnwater runoff.
Water Qyalilylinproven7ent Projects
Although Muddy Creek is not one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin that has
been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) as an area with the greatest
need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration efforts, several of its tributary
Seclictrt 13: Chapter 4 - Yadlcitt-Pee Dee River Subbcrsin 03-07-04 154

1
watersheds have been selected. The Mill Creek, Silas Creek and South 1701-k Muddy Creek
1 watersheds have been targeted. These watersheds will be given higher priority than nontargeted
watersheds for the implementation of NCWRI' restoration projects. Rcfer to page 278 in Section
C for details.
4.3.2 Town Creek (15.4 miles fronti source to Crane Creek)
Current Status
Town Creek begins just cast of Kaivaapolis and flows through Salisbury and East Spencer before
reaching Fligh Rock Lake. The City of Salisbury historically had a discharge from a W W"1'P on
Town Creek. Significant improvement has been observed since the discharge was removed in
1990. However, both fish and benthic communities are Impaired inTown Creek.. Habitat
degradation was noted along with a few occurrences of low dissolved oxygen and elevated
turbidity. The lower half of the watershed is heavily developed, and stormwater runoff is likely a
major contributor to the impairment. 'There is one minor discharge in the headwaters which
continues to be compliant with its NPDE-S permit.
2002 Recommendations
DWQ plans to conduct further investigation into the causes and sources of the biological
impairment of'rawn Creek during this basinwide planning cycle, DWQ will notify local
agencies of water quality concerns regarding these waters and work with them to conduct further,
monitoring and to locate sources of water quality protection funding. In addition, Rowan County
' and Salisbury are required to obtain an NPDES permit for municipal storrnwater systerns under
the Phase lI stormwater rules. Refer to Section A, page 37 for details.
f
Water Quality Improvement Projects
The Town Creels watershed (03040103 010020) is one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) as an
area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration efforts. This
watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted watershed for the implementation of
NCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for details.
4.3.3 ftigh Rock Lake (15,750 acres)
.1998 Recommendations
Fligh Rock Lake was not rated .Impaired during the assessment period leading up to the, 1998
Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin plan. I-lowcver, the lake was rated support threatened and is
extensively discussed in the plan, indicating impacts to water quality that could lead to
impairment. The plan focuses on problems with excessive algal growths related to high nutrient
levels in the arms of the lake. Although nutrients were also high in the main body of the lake,
designated uses seemed to be supported. Recommendations are for DWQ to investigate the
feasibility of developing a nutrient strategy for the watQrshed and consider reclassifying the lake
as Nutrient Sensitive Waters. DWQ also planned to require phosphorus Iiinits for major
discharges into the arms and urged all major dischargers in the watershed to identify ways to
optimize phosphorus removal using existing capabilities.
1
Section 13: Chapter 4 - Yudlrir:-Yer 1Jec River• b'ulzliasirr 03-07-04 155

I
Current Status
Bight stations on High Rock Lake were monitored by DWQ in 1999, 2000 and 200). This
e increased monitoring of I-ligh Rock Lake over the most recent assessment period has allowed
DWQ to determine that the lake is Impaired. The decision is based on high levels of nutrients,
combined with chlorophyll a, turbidity and percent dissolved oxygen saturation in excess of state
standards. Low dissolved oxygen and high turbidity in the Abbotts Creek and Town Creek Arms
are also contributing to aquatic life impairment. An extensive discussion of water quality data
collected from High Rock Lake is found in Section A, Chapter 4 beginning on page 107,
2002 Recommendations
The High Rock Lake watershed (map on page 279) comprises slightly more than half of the
Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin. Recommendations for improving water quality in the lake are
detailed in Section 4, Chapter 4; Recom mendations for Water Quality lssuav Related to Multiple
Subbasins in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. The I-1il h Rock Lake part of' tile discussion begins
on page 107.
' 4.4 Section 303(d) Listed Waters
Currently, portions of six waters in this subbasin are listed on the state's draft 2002 303(d) list
' for biological impairment: Reynolds Creek, Salem Creek, Grants Creels, 'Town Creek and two
small unnamed tributaries. Grants Creek and a portion of Salem Creek are also listed for fecal
coliform and turbidity. A fecal colifortn TMD11 l.'or Grants Creels has been developed by DWQ,
and one for Salem Creek will likely be developed during this basinwide planning cycle. Refer to
Appendix IV for more information on the state's 303(d) list and listing requirements.
4.5 Status and Recommendations for Waters with Notable Impacts
Based on DWQ's most recent use support assessment, the surface waters discussed below are not
Impaired. However, notable water quality impacts were documented. While these waters are not
considered Impaired, attention and resources should be focused on them over the next basinwide
planning cycle to prevent additional degradation or facilitate water quality improvement. A
' discussion of how impairment is determined can be found in Appendix I11.
Although no action is required for these streams, voluntary implementation of BMPs is
encouraged and continued monitoring is recommended. DWQ will notify local agencies and
others of water duality concerns discussed below and work with them to conduct further
monitoring and to locate sources of water quality protection funding. Additionally, education on
' local water quality issues is always a useful too] to prevent water quality probUns and to
proinote restoration efforts. Nonpoint source agency contacts are listed in Appendix VI.
4.5.1 Mill Creek
Silas Creek
' Mill and Silas Creeks parallel Salem Creek in the Muddy Creek watershed. These streams are
likely being impacted by stormwater runoff froth the City of Winston-Salem. Mill Creek has not
been sampled by DWQ, but the lower two-thirds of the watershed contain moderate road
t
Section t3; Chapter 4 - Yrrclkrar-Pee Dee River Sutihasirr 03-07-04 156

coverage indicating large amounts of developed area, similar to the watershed of Silas Creels.
f
'ihe fish community of Silas Creek was sampled by DWQ for the first time in 2001. Severe
'
habitat degradation was observed and the data indicated impairment. However, the stream was
resampled in 2002 and received a Good -Fair biociassification. This score is likely due to the
reduction in nonpoint source pollution that accompanies an extended drought. Rcfcr to Section
A, Chapter 4 for recommendations and management strategies for reducing impacts of runoff
From developed areas.
The Mill Creek and Silas Creek watersheds (03040101 170020 and 170040) are two of 55
watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin that have been identified by the Wetlands
Restoration Program as areas with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland
restoration efforts. These watersheds will be given higher priority than nontargetcd watersheds
for the implementation ofNCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for
details.
4.5.2 Salem Lake
Kerners Mill Creels
Although the most severe water quality problems in the Salern Creels watershed occur
downstream of Salem hake, habitat degradation has been observed in Kerners Mill Creek above
the lake. In addition, this water supply lake exhibits signs of nutrient enrichment and a diverse
assemblage of algae. The Lowery Creek arm exhibits slightly lower dissolved oxygen compared
with the other two stations on Salem Lake. Local actions are needed to reduce the effects of
nonpoint source pollution in the Salem Lake watershed, particularly from stormwater runoff
from construction sites and developed areas. Kernersville is required to obtain an Ni11)LS permit
for municipal stonnwater systems under the Phase 11 stormwater rules. Defer to page 37 of
Section A, Chapter 2 for details.
The Salem Creek watershed (03040101 170060) is one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) as an
area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration efforts. This
watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargetcd watershed for the implementation of
NCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for details.
4.5.3 South Fork Muddy Creek
South Fork Muddy Creek borders the City of Winston-Salem on the southeastern side. The
watershed contains a mix. of residential and agricultural land uses. Most of the new development
'
is occurring In the Fiddlers Creek watershed. Substantial habitat degradation Was observed
during biological surveys of South Fork Muddy Creek below the confluence of Fiddlers Creek -
The Good -Fair bioclassifieation could be due to the reduction in nonpoint source pollution that
accompanies an extended drought. Local actions are needed to reduce the effects of nonpoint
source pollution, particularly from stormwater runoff from construction sites and developed areas
In Fiddlers Creek, but also from agricultural activities in other parts of the watershed.
The South fork Muddy Creek watershed (03040I01 170070) is one of 55 watersheds in the
Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program
Serlion B: Chapter 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04 157

I
(NCWRI') as an area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration
' efforts. This watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted watershed for the
implementation ofNCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for details.
4.5.4 North Potts Creek
South Potts Creek
North and South Potts Creeks flow south in Davidson County near Lexington into the upper
� reaches of High Rock Lake. The South Potts Creek watershed (larger of the two) is mostly in
agriculture, with the exception of the 1-85 corridor and a large rail yard on the lower end. Some
historic chaniielization is evident, and residential development is increasing along US 29/70
between .Lexington and Spencer. One NPDB'S permitted discharge (Davidson County
Churchland Elementary) is in significant noncompliance for ammonia in the headwaters.
There is already more developed area in the North Potts Creek watershed and major
channelization has occurred. Two NPDGS permitted discharges (Davidson County Tyro Junior
High and West Davidson High) are in significant noncompliance for 130D, ammonia and
chlorine. DWQ sampled North Potts Creek in 1988, but there is no recent data for either stream.
DWQ will attempt to conduct a special study of these streams during the next basinwidc
planning cycle to determine: 1) the level of impacts associated with these land uses and
discharges; and 2) the contribution of this watershed to the impairment of'I-ligh Rock Lake. In
' addition, local actions are needed to reduce the effects of nonpoint source pollution, particularly
r
from stonnwater runoff.
4.6 Additional Water Quality Issues with Subbasin 03-07-04
The previous parts discussed water quality concerns for specific stream segments. This section
discusses water quality issues related to multiple watersheds within the subbasin. Information
found in this section may be related to concerns about things that threaten water duality or about
plans and actions to improve water quality.
4.6..1. NPDES Discharges
Twenty-two of the 40 NPDI:,S discharges had a few permit violations over the two-year review
period (September 1999 - August 2001). Nine facilities are in significant noncompliance; six are
Davidson County schools. Almost every school in Davidson County is in significant
noncompliance For at least one parameter. Because the facilities are scattered throughout several
subbasins, these problems and the plans to correct them are discussed oli page 113 of Section A,
Chapter 4. Color/Tex Finishing had significant problems meeting COD, pl-I and total suspended
solids limits in 2000. The Sowers Perry Road WWTP (originally owned by Spencer, then
bought by Salisbury) was in significant noncompliance over the entire period of review for
problems meeting 130D, dissolved oxygen and total suspended solids limits. This discharge was
eliminated in 2002. The 1-1111top Living Center had problerns meeting 130D limits over the two-
year review period.
Section li: Chapter 4 - iudkirt-1'ee {Jce ltivcrSuUhasrrr 03-07-04 158

{ Fifteen facilities are required to monitor effluent toxicity; three have had significant compliance
problems over the previous basinwide planning cycle. The Lucent Technologies groundwater
remediation facility failed four consecutive chronic toxicity tests during the period from March
to June of 1999. Facility staff replaced the system's carbon Inter media and optimized
application of treatment chemicals to address the problem. No failures have occurred since June
1999. Noncompliances in 1999 and 2000 at the City of Salisbury's Sowers Road WWTP seemed
to be associated with operational problems at the WWTP. There were no WET test failures
between September 2000 and 2002 when the discharge was eliminated. The Scarlett Acres
Mobile Home Park WWTP has produced sporadic failures since it began operation in 1990. Its
most recent noncornpl latices in 2001 have been attributed to poor operation and numerous power
outages.
4.6.2 Projected Population Growth
The population of Rowan County is projected to increase 32 percent, Davidson County — 25
percent, and Forsyth County — 26 percent between 2000 and 2020. Much of this development .is
likely to occur along highway corridors (1-40, I45, US 64 and US 29170) and in smaller
Suburban municipalities like King, Kernersville, Lewisville and Clemnions. Figure B-5 presents
population increases between 1990 and 2000 for selected municipalities this subbasin.
8000
7000
6000 -
5000 --
0
a 4000 i.
0
3000 --
2000 , —
1000 — —
0.
040
0 y�o
figure B-5 Population Increases for Selected Subbasin 03-07-04 Municipalities (1990-2000)
Growth management within the next five years will be imperative in order to improve or
maintain water quality in this subbasin. Growth management can be defined as the application of
strategies and practices that help achieve sustainable development in harmony with the
conservation of environmental qualities and features of an area. On a local level, growth
management often involves planning and development review requirements that arc designed to
maintain or improve water {luahty. Refer to Section A, Chapter 4 for more H lbrina iosi about
minimizing impacts to water duality from development.
Seclion B: Chapier 4 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-04 159

w
1
4.6.3 The South Yadkin/Yadkin River Corridor Conservation Plan
The LandTrust for Central NC (LTCNC) received $7,500 from the Conservation Trust for North
Carolina and the Clean Water Management Trust fund to develop a report evaluating the
'
conservation needs and opportunities along 24 miles of the lower South Yadkin River and a 26-
mile section of the Yadkin River above High Rock Lake, This corridor incidentally included a
portion of lower Grants Creek as well.
The South Yadkin/Yadkin River Corridor Conservation Plan was completed in December 2001.
The highest priorities for conservation identified by the plan are land between fourth Creek and
the South Yadkin River, above and including the confluence of the two streams; and land
between the South Yadkin River and the Yadkin River, above and including the confluence; of
the two rivers. There are large tracts of land (owned by Duke Power -Progress Energy) along the
Yadkin River which are in close proximity to lands that are already by LTCNC. 'There are also
large amounts of riparian land (owned by ALCOA) along both the South Yadkin and Yadkin
Rivers. These Duke Power and ALCOA Lands also received high priority for protection (Merrill,
'
December 2001).
The conservation plan has been integrated into the daily efforts of LTCNC while pursuing
conservation opportunities in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin. Page 294 of Section C contains
more information about The LandTrust for Central NC. You may also visit the website for
details about the many lands which LTCNC helped place in conservation ownership at
i
huplAywny.landirustcnc.orglabouilandtiust-lit nil .
I
Section B: Cherpter 4 - Yoclkin-PeeDee River Subbasin 03-07-04 160

1
r
F
I I
Section Bo Chapter 12
Yadkin -:fee Dee Rider Subbasin 03-07-12
Includes a portion of the Rocky River, Dutch Buffalo, Irish Buffalo,
Goose and Crooked Creeks
12.1 Water Quality Overview
i»4 a sZ�: ^' 1 S! 1 ^ i.•.f :' t' :: -." _'.�'vz:'.
Subbasin 03-07-12 at a Glance
Land and Water
Total area: 435 mi'
Stream miles: 317.1
Lake acres: 722.1
Population Statistics
1990 Est. Pop.: 125,021 people
Pop. Density: 288 persons/mil
Land Cover Mo
Forest/Wetland:
53.6
Surface Water:
0.6
Urban:
5.0
Cultivated Crop:
8.8
Pasture/
Managed Herbaceous: 32.0
Tile middle section of the Rocky River flows east, then
south, then cast again dividing this subbasin almost in half.
Tributaries in the upper half include Irish Buffalo and
Dutch Buffalo Creeks flowing generally south. Smaller
tributaries in the lower half include Clear, Goose and
Crooked Creeks flowing generally northeast. The majority
oFthe subbasin lies within CabarrUS County, but portions
of Mecklenburg, Union and Stanly counties are also
encompassed. Municipalities include Kannapolis,
Concord, Locust, Mint I- AI, Indian Trail, Lance Park and
Unionville.
A rnap including the locations of NPDES discharges and
water duality Monitoring stations is presented in Figure 13-
13. Table 13-24 contains a summary of monitoring data
types, locations and results. Use support ratings for waters
in this subbasin are summarized in Table B-25. Appendix
I provides a key to discharge identification numbers. Refer
to Appendix III for a complete listing of monitored waters and more information about use
support ratings.
This subbasin is rapidly urbaniving, and land cover and population information become outdated
quickly. Land cover information compiled between 1993 and 1995 describes approximately 50
percent of the land as forested, more than 40 percent in agricultural uses, and approximately 5
percent as urban. 'File population in 1990 was estimated to be just over 125,000 people.
Estimates of subbasin population have not yet been made for the 2000 census data; however, it is
likely that population increased substantially over the ten-year period. Population is projected to
increase 57 percent in Mecklenburg County, 53 percent in Cabarrus County, and 70 percent in
Union County between 2000 and 2020. There are 17 NPDES permitted discharges and seven
registered animal operations within this subbasin. Facilities with compliance or toxicity
problems are discussed in Following sections.
Water quality varies substantially across this subbasin, although most waters contain soiree water
quality impacts. The headwaters of Dutch Buffalo Creck are classified WS-11 and High Quality
Waters.
Section 6: Chapter 12 - Yadlcin-Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12 224

Figure B- t3 Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-47-12
N
S China
Grove r.
Landis
N R 0 VVA
IR ED 7 L I
A-i
fi
V
Kannapolis i, Z,
J Hill
0
-.1", 41 F-2 V
N Concord e�? / 84 ,A
73 AA 83
C,
Mount
Pleasanf"
B 3
F-1 i F-3 K,
-A, -�. Q 090000
"VQ8211 0000
SKA AIL Y
B-1 Bar
CABAR, Rk US
J/48 Locust
-A
MECKLENBURG
42 Stanfield t.
30 38
3
Mint 32 3
Legend
Hill 29
27 tic
Subbasin Boundury
(J) Ambient Monitoring Slation
SSB-1 S I
%-� . .........
SSB-9 IVL
Senthic Stalon
SSB 3
2 SSAB-2
Matthews SSB 4— -25 Fish Ccmrrunily statlon
ssb,
��B-7 S d
t"h Tissue SUition
858 6— A
Q8360 00 23 NPDES Discharges
A moiw
SSB i Minor
SSB-13 A`- UNION
_e 16 Use Supped Rating
Stallings/
/V Supporting
15
-7Unbriville
Impaired
Indian Trail
Net Rated
No Data
A MIA
A—s—_
NCDENR Monroe County Boundary
Planning Branch Primary Reads
Basinwide Planning Program Unit
0 5 Miles Municipality
March 21, 2003

I (
i
i I I
t
1
Ii
1
1.
1
1
'fable 13-24 DWQ Monitoring Locations, Bioclassifications and Notable Chemical Parameters
(1998-2002) For Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12
Site
Stream County
Road
Bioel,ssilieztion of
Noted Parameter
Bemthic Macroittvertehrate Cottmtrmttity iWonitorbig
13-1
Rocky River'
Cabarrus
US 601
fair
B-2
Irish Buffalo Creek'
Cabarrus
SR 1132 —
Good -Fair
B-3
Coldwater Creek'
Cabarrus
NC 49
Good -Fair
13-4
Dutch Buffalo Creek'
Cabarrus
NC 200
Good -Fair
SSB-I I
Clear Crock
Mecklenburg
SR 3181
Good -Fair
SSB-3
Goose Creek
Mecklenburg
SR 1004
Good -Fair
SSB-4
Goose Creek
Union
Glamorgan Rd.
Good
SSB-5
Goose Creek
Union
SR 1524
Good -Fair
SSB-6
Goose Creek
Union
Below Fairfield
Fair
SS13-7
Goose Creek
Union
SR 1525
Poor
SSB-8
Goose Creek
Union
SR 1533
Fair
B-5
Goose Creek'
Union
US 601
Poor
SSB-9
Goose Creek
Union
SR 1547—
Fair
SSB-I
Stevens Creek
Mecklenburg
Maple Hollow Rd.
Good
SSB-2
UT Stevens Crock
Mecklenburg
Thompson Rd_
Not Impaired
SSB-10
Duck Creek
Union
US 601
Fair
B-6
Crooked Creek'
Union
SR 1547
Good -Fair
SSB-12
N. Fork Crooked Cr'
Union
SR 1520
Fair
SSB-13
N. Fork Crooked Cr
Union
SR 1514
Pair
Fish CoamttttrtityjVIordtorhkq
F-1
Irish Buffalo Crock'
Cabarrus
Sit 1 132
Good
F-2
Coldwater Creek'
Cabarrus
NC 73
Good -Fair
F-3
Dutch Buffalo Creek'
Cabarrus
SR 2622
Good
Ambient Monitoring
Q9090000
Irish Buffalo Creek
Cabarrus
SR 1132
Turbidity,
Fecal coliform
Q8210000
Rocky River
Cabarrus
US 601
Fccal coliform
Q8360000
Goose Creek
Union
Sit 1524
Fecal colilorm
Yadkin -Pee Vcc River Bashi Association rlfonhorhtg
Q8200000
Coldwater Creek
Cabarrus
SR t 132
Fecal coliform
Q82I0000
Rocky River'
Cabarrus
US 601
None
Q8340000
UT Clear Crock
Mecklenburg
Sit 3104
Dissolved oxygen,
Fecal colil'orm
Seerion 1J: Choliter 12 - Yadlcin-Pee Dee River =Subbasin 03-07-12
226

r
I
I
1
Q8342000
Clear Creek
Union
US 601
Dissolved oxygen,
Fecal coliform
Q8355000
Rocky River
Cabarrus
SR 1114
None
Q8359000
Coose Creek
Union
SR 4228
Fecal coliform
Q8360000
Goose Creek'
Union
SR 1524
Dissolved oxygen,
Fecal coii form
Q8385000
Rocky River
Union
SR 1606
Turbidity
Q8386000
N. Fork Crooked Cr
Union
SR 1520
Dissolved oxygen,
Turbidity,
Fatal coliform
Q8386200
N. Fork Crooked Cr
Union
SR 1514
Dissolved oxygen,
Turbidity,
Fecal coliform
Q8388000
Crooked Creek
Union
NC 218
Turbidity
Q8388900
Crooked Creek
Union
SR 1601
Turbidity,
Fecal coliform
J akes Assessittent
--
Kannapolis Lake
Rowan
2 sites
None
--
Lake Fisher
Rowan/Cabarrus
3 sites
None
--
Lake Concord
Cabarnts
3 sites
Turbidity
Historical data of this type are available for this waterbody; refer to Appendix 11. Sites may vary.
' Parameters are noted if in excess of state standards in more than 10 percent of samples collected within the
assessment period (9/1996-8/2001),
' This site duplicates a DWQ ambient monitoring station.
For snore detailed information on sampling; and assessment of streams in this Subbasin, refer to
the Basinwide Assessment Rel7art - Yadlcin-Pee Dee River Basin (NCDLNR-DWQ, June 2002),
available frorn DWQ l;nvironrnental Sciences Branch at 1,�tp:Ihv�vw.csl7.en,.statc.ne.usJbar.hsntt or by
calling [phone].
Table 13-25 Use Support Ratings Summary (2002) for Monitored and Ewaluated Freshwater
Streams (miles) and Lakes (acres) in Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12
Use Support Category
Units
Supporting
Impaired
Not Rated
No Dat:t
Total'
Aquatic Lifc/Secondary Recreation
miles
acres
94.8
0.0
33.6
0.0
1.3
697.0
187.4
25.1
317.1
722.1
Nish Constimptiott'miles
acres
0.0
0.0
317.1
722.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
317.1
722.1
Primary Recreadun
miles
acres
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Water Supply
miles
acres
G
723;8
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
F-38.6
234.8
Total stream miles/acres assigned to encli use suppurt category in this Subbasin. Co[umn is not additive because some stream
miles arc assigned to more than one category.
' These waters are impaired based on fish consumption advice issued for three species of freslnvater fish duo to mercury
contamination. Refer to page 104 of Section A for details.
Section B' Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12
227

r
.12.2 Status and Recommendations for Previously Impaired Waters
This section reviews use support and recommendations detailed in the 1998 basinwide plan,
Pp p a
reports status of progress, gives recommendations for the next five-year cycle, and outlines
current projects aimed at improving water quality for each water. The 1998 Yadkin-Pec Dee
River basin plan identified four Impaired streams in this subbasin. Goose Creek, Crooked Creek,
and the North and South Forks of Crooked Creek are discussed below.
12.2.1 Goose Creek 17.0 miles from source t ver ( o RockyRiver)
y )
1998 Recommendation
Growth pressures, problems with wastewater discharges and infrastructure, and impacts From
agricultural activities are discussed in the 1998 basin for the Goose Creek watershed.
Recommendations are for DWQ tO conducting modeling to evaluate the assimilative capacity of
Goose Creek. DWQ planned to pursue enforcement action with some NPDLS permit holders for
past violations ol'discharge permits, and chlorine limits are recommended ror existing
discharges. In addition, the plan recommends Iocal actions to reduce the effects of nonpoint
source pollution, particularly from stormwater runoff, and to restore riparian habitat throughout
the watershed.
Status of Progress
In 1998, the benthic macro]nvertebrate community was sampled by DWQ at 11 sites in the
watershed: I site on Duck Creek; 2 sites on Stevens Creek; and 8 sites on Goose Creek
including the regular basinwide monitoring site at US I-fighway 601. Five sites (63 percent)
received lair or Poor bioclassifications, indicating impairment. Three sites (37 percent) received
'
Good -Fair or Good bioclassifications, indicating the community is not Impaired. Stevens Creek
received one Good bioclassification near the mouth and the other site was too small to assign a
bioclassification to, but it was found to be not Impaired. Duck Creek received a Fair
bioclassification near US I-[ighway 601 in the lower portion ol'the watershed, Indicating
itnpainnent.
In 2001, only the US Highway 601 site was sampled by DWQ. This site is at the lower end 01"
the watershed, but above the confluence with Duck Creek. The site contained fairly good
instream habitat and riparian vegetation overall, but the strearnbanks were extremely unstable in
places and there were few deep pools. The benthic macroinvertebrate community received a
Poor bioclassification, as it had to 1998 and 1996. The specific COndUctance was high and there
were many Indicators of organic enrichment. No fish community samples were conducted.
The Goose Creek watershed contains one ambient monitoring station at SR 1524 near Mint Hill
(fairly high up in the watershed). A SUmtnaty of water chemistty monitoring over a five-year
period ending in 2001 revealed that all nutrient levels are elevated. Phosphorus, in particular,
exceeded the evaluation level (0.05 rngfl) 93 percent of the time, reaching a maxirnurn of 3.70
mill. Dissolved oxygen data commonly showed supersaturated conditions, indicating algae
bloorns.
There are six permitted wastewater discharges in the watershed: Oxford Glen WWTP on
Stevens Creek; Ashe I?lantation W w,rp on Duck Creels; and Fairview Elcmentary W WTP,
Section 13; Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River- Srrbbasin 03-07-12 223

I
Fairfield Plantation W WTP, Country Woods W WTP and 1lunley Creek W WTP on Goose Creek.
i
Ewach of these facilities received chlorine limits (which became effective by October of 2002)
during the last cycle of NPDES permit renewals, as is recommended by the 1998 basin plan.
However, owner/operators of the Oxford Glen and Ashe Plantation WWTPs decided to install
ultraviolet disinfection systems. Compliance reports from the most recent review period (2000-
2001) show problems with excess flow at the Fairfield Plantation and Country Woods WWTPs.
No other NPDES permit violations were observed in (lie Goose Creek watershed.
The l-lunley Creek WWTP is the Yadkin Dee River Basin Association,
a member of -Pee and
water chemistry samples are collected through the monitoring program at two locations on Goose
Creek (upstream and downstream of the facility). Dissolved oxygen was less than 5.0 ingll in 8.6
percent of downstream samples compared with only 1.1 percent of upstream samples. Fecal
coliform concentrations were reduced by half Crom 988 co]oniesllDOM] upstream to 412
colonies/100iil downstream. (The evaluation level is 200 coloniesi100m1.)
The geometric means of fecal coliform samples collected from one station between 1996 and
2001 and two stations between 1998 and 2001 from Goose Creek (241, 988 and 412
colonicsl100ml) indicate that the stream may not be Suitable for primary recreation. Ili addition,
fecal coliform concentrations were greater than 400 colonies/ I001n1 in more than 20 percent of
samples from each site. Goose Creek is not currently classified for primary recreation (Class 13).
However, the stream was historically placed on the 303(d) list for fecal coliform and a TMDL
has already been developed by DWQ. Goose Creek was historically placed on the 303(d) list for
fecal coliform and DWQ is currently working with Mecklenburg County to develop a TMDL.
Stevens Creek and Goose Creek from its source to SR 1524 just inside Union County are
currently Supporting aquatic life and secondary recreation, although impacts were evident in
1998, particularly in the headwaters of Goose Creek. Duck Creek and Goose Creek from SR
1524 to the confluence with the Rocky River are Impaired. Currently, problems with point
sources are limited to inflow and infiltration problems at the Fairfield Plantation and County
Woods WWTPs. Nonpoint source pollution problems are associated with stormwater runoff
from constriction sites and developed areas, as well as agricultural activities.
2002 Recornmendations
DWQ, in coordination with other natural resource agencies, will develop a site -specific
management strategy for the Goose Creels watershed which provides for the maintenance and
recovery of water quality conditions necessary to sustain the Carolina heelsplitter. 'The strategy
will likely contain recommendations for point and nonpoint sources of pollution (refer to page 32
for details).
Mecklenburg and Union counties, as well as Mint 1-1 ill Indian Trail and Lake Park are required
to obtain a NPDES permit for municipal stormwater systems under the Phase 11 stormwater rules
(refer to page 37 of Section A, Chapter 2 for details). The City of Charlotte received a NP017S
permit under the federal Phase I stormwater rules. DWQ applauds Charlotte-Mecklenburg's
Surface Water lmprovcment and Management Program (page 299 contains details) and
recommends that all local governments in the Goose Creek watershed implement programs to
reduce the impacts of stormwater runoff, including local riparian buffer ordinances.
Section 13' Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Yee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12 229

L
Although much work is currently being conducted in the Goose Creek watershed by DWQ, other
l
natural resource agencies and local governments, local actions by citizens arc still needed to
reduce nonpoint source pollution. Many parts of the Goose Creek watershed could benefit
greatly from riparian area restoration and protection. Section A, Chapter 4 outlines general best
management practices for protecting and improving water quality. In addition, an organized
group of dedicated citizens can be one of the most effective tools for affecting watershed
protection and preservation of quality of life in communities.
Water Quality Improvement Initiatives
In 1999, the NC Wildlife Resources Commission initiated a project in the Stevens Creek
watershed (tributary to Goose Creels in the headwaters of Mecklenburg County) to reduce the
peak flows and pollutant load carried by storrnwater from residential areas, improve streambanks
through stabilization and buffering, conduct community education abOUt use Or110USehOld and
lawn chemicals, increase community involvement in the protection and restoration of Stevens
Creels, and implement livestock exclusion to prevent direct access to the creek or its tributaries.
'['his project was funded in part through the Clean Water Act — Section 319 Prograrl3 (page 273).
The Goose Creek Watershed Advisory Committee was convened in December 2000 to make
recommendations to local governments, state agencies and other appropriate organizations that
would protect and improve water quality and wildlife habitat in the Goose Creek watershed. The
committee is comprised of stakeholders representing diverse interests in the watershed. Refer to
page 290 in Section C for details about the committee and its sources of funding. Appendix V
contains a summary of the recommendations.
The Goose Creek. watershed (03040105 030020) is one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin-Pcc Dec
River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWR.P) as an
area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration efforts. This
watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted watershed for the implementation of
NCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for details.
11.2..2.2 Crooked Creek (13.1 miles from source to Rocky River)
1998 Recarmnendolions
The 1998 basin plan suggests that Crooked Creek is impaired primarily by low dissolved oxygen
problems and nonpoint source pollution in the upstream watersheds of the North and South
Forks. The plan recommends that DWQ collect additional data and assess assimilative capacity
for oxygen -consuming wastes before any additional discharges are permitted into the watershed.
Status of Promess
In 2001, sampling of the benthic macro invertebrate community resulted in a Good -lair
bioclassification below the Union County Grassy Branch W WTP in the lower third of the
watershed. Water chemistry data revealed elevated turbidity concentrations at two locations.
DWQ biologists noted good habitat in Crooked Creek; however, indicators of organic
enrichment were numerous. Crooked Creek is currently rated Supporting; however, the increase
in bioclassification (from hair in 1996) could be partly due to reduced nonpoint source pollution
impacts as a result of the extended drought.
Section 11: Chaptar 12 - Yerdkin-Pec flee River- Stttilrasin 03-07-12 230

L
The geometric means of fecal coliform samples collected from two stations between 1998 and
2001 from Crooked Creels (290 and 210 colonies/100m1) indicate that the stream may not be
suitable for primary recreation. fecal coliform concentrations were; greater than 400
colonies/[ 00ml in more than 20 percent of samples from each site as well. Current methodology
requires additional bacteriological sampling for streams with a geometric mean greater than 200
colonies/100m1 or when concentrations exceed 400 cot/ I00ml in more thatt 20 percent of
samples. However, these additional assessments are prioritized such that, as monitoring
resources become available, the highest priority is given to those streams where the likelihood of
�. full -body contact recreation is greatest. Crooked Creek is not currently classified for primary
recreation (Class 13).
2002 Recornrnendations
Local actions are needed to reduce the effects of nonpoint source pollution, particularly from
stormwater runoff, as further development occurs in the Crooked Creek watershed.
Water Qualitv Improvement Initiatives
The Crooked Creek watershed (03040105 040010) is one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee
Dec River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) as
an area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration efforts. This
watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted watershed for the implementation of
NCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for details.
12.2.3 North Fork Crooked Creek (9.2 miles from source to Crooked Creek)
1998 Recommendations
Streainflow in the upper Crooked Creels watershed is naturally very low in the summer months
and smaller tributaries often stop flowing completely. Problems with low dissolved oxygen were
thought to be contributing to impairment in 1998. The 1998 basin plan recommends that DWQ
collect additional data and assess assimilative capacity for oxygen -consuming wastes before any
�. additional discharges are permitted into North fork Crooked Creek.
Status of Progress
Benthic macroinvertebrates and water chemistry were sampled at two locations on North Fork
Crooked Creek over the most recent basinwide planning cycle, Bioclassilications were Fair, and
elevated turbidity and fecal coliform concentrations were recorded at both sites. In addition, low
dissolved oxygen concentrations were observed. Aquatic life and secondary recreation continuc;s
to be Impaired in North Fork Crooked Creek.
The geometric means of fecal coliform samples collected from two stations between 1998 and
2001. from North Fork Crooked Creek (349 and 3 l8 colonies/ 100m1) 'indicate that the stream
may not be suitable for primary recreation. fecal colifonn concentrations were greater than 400
colonies/100m1 in more than 20 percent orsamples from each site as well, Current methodology
requires additional bacteriological sampling for streams with a geometric mean greater than 200
cot onies/100in1 or when concentrations exceed 400 cot/ 100m1 in more than 20 percent of
samples, However, these additional assessments are prioritized such that, as monitoring
resources become available, the highest priority is given to those streams where the likelihood of
Section P: Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12 231

full -body contact recreation is greatest. North Fork Crooked Creek is not currently classified for
primary recreation (Class B).
2002 Recommendations
Further investigation into the causes and sources of these water quality impacts is needed before
recommendations to improve water quality can be made. However, local actions to reduce the
effects of nonpoint source pollution, particularly from stormwater runoff as further development
occurs in the Crooked Creek watershed, will be an imperative part of improving water duality.
1.2.2.4 South Fork Crooked Creek (13.7 miles from source to Crooked Creek)
1993 Recommendations
Streamflow in the upper Crooked Creek watershed is naturally very low ill the Sumner months
and smaller tributaries often stop flowing completely. Problems with low dissolved oxygen
associated with the Union County WWTP discharge were thought to be contributing to
impairment at the time of the 1998 basin plan. In 1996, Union County relocated its WWTP
discharge to Crooked Creek downstream and some improvement in the stream was expected in
the future as a result. DWQ recommended that no discharge containing an additional loading of
oxygen -consuming waste be permitted into South Fork Crooked Creek.
Stal us o Frog!, Lis
Due to reduced Vows during an extended drought, DWQ did riot resample South Fork Crooked
Creek during the most recent basinwide planning cycle and the stream is currently not rated.
2002 Recommendations
As resources and stream condition allow, DWQ will sample South fork Crooked Creek to
evaluate any improvement following the relocation of the Union County WWTP discharge
during the next basinwide planning cycle.
12.3 Status and Recoiiiiiiendations for Newly Impaired Waters
A portion of the Rocky River within this subbasin was rated Impaired based on recent IDWQ
monitoring (1998-2001). This section outlines the potential causes and sources of impairment
and provides recommendations for improving water quality.
12.3.1 pocky River (8.5 miles from Reedy Creek to Dutch Buffalo Creels)
Currenl >Status
Berithic macroinvertebrates received a lair bioetassification at a location one mile below the
Water and Sewer Authority of Cabarrus County (formerly Rocky River Regional) W WTI' in
2001 and 2002, Previously, this seginent of river received Good -Fair bioclassi Iications. This
decline during an extended drought indicates point source problems. 1-lowever, this portion of
the Rocky River was included in a field -calibrated QUALM modeling analysis which was
conducted by DWQ in the mid- 1990s, and the WWTP has maintained compliance with its
NPDEiS permit.
i
Section B_ Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Del River Subbasin 03-07-12 232

Q
Low flows in the Rocky River watershed are difficult to assess. USGS 7Q 10 estimates for
various reaches of the river were made at different times using varying methodologies and, at the
time of modeling for the Rocky River Regional WWTP permit, did not provide a clear picture of
low flow conditions.
The geometric mean of fecal eoliform samples collected between 1996 and 2001 from this
portion of the Rocky River (234 colonies/ 100m1) indicates that the stream may not be suitable for
primary recreation. Fecal eoliform concentrations were greater than 400 colonies/100nl1 in
nearly 22 percent of samples from this site as well. Current methodology requires additional
bacteriological sampling for streams with a geometric mean greater than 200 colonies/100ml or
when concentrations exceed 400 eoi/100m1 in more than 20 percent of samples. However, these
additional assessments are prioritized such that, as monitoring resources becorne available, the
highest priority is given to those streams where the likelihood of full -body contact recreation is
greatest. The Rocky River is not currently classified for primary recreation (Class l3).
2002 Recommendations
Further investigation into the causes and sources of these water quality impacts is needed before
recommendations to improve water quality can be made.
Water Oucility .Itnprovement .Initiatives
The Rocky River watershed is one of three priority areas in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin
under the USDA Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), l:QIP provides technical,
educational and financial assistance to Farmers and ranchers to address soil, water and related
natural resource concerns on their lands. Refer to page 274 in Section C for details.
i
12.4 Section 303(d) Misted Waters
Currently, portions of four waters in this subbasin are listed on the stat'e's draft 2002 303(d) list.
Goose Creek is listed for fecal eoliform and biological impairment. Crooked Creek and North
and South Forks Crooked Creek are listed for biological impairment. In the future, another
segment oFthe Rocky River will likely be added to the list for biological impairment. Appendix
1V contains more information on the state's 303(d) list and listing requirements.
12.5 Status and Recommendations for Waters with Notable Impacts
Based on DWQ's most recent use support assessment, the surface waters discussed below are not
Impaired, I-[owever, notable water quality impacts were documented. While these waters are not
considered Impaired, attention and resources should be focused on them over the next basinwide
planning cycle to prevent additional degradation or facilitate water quality improvement. A
discussion of how impairment is determined can be found in Appendix 111.
Although no action is required for these streams, voluntary implementation of BMPs is
encouraged and caltinued monitoring is recommended. DWQ will notify local agencies and
others of water duality concerns discussed below and work with them to conduct further
monitoring and to locate sources oFwater quality protection funding. Additionally, education on
Section B: Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River SubGusin 03-07-12 233

8
B
local water quality issues is always a useful tool to prevent water duality problems and to
promote restoration efforts. Nonpoint source agency contacts are listed in Appendix VI.
12.5.1 Irish Buffalo Creek
Coldwater Creek
Irish Buffalo Creek drains Kannapolis and Concord in northeastern Cabarrus County, and much
of the watershed is developed. Water chemistry samples revealed elevated phosphorus and
turbidity levels. Benthic macroinvertebrates received a Good -hair bioclassification in 200 L
However, the fish community remains diverse despite these water quality impacts.
Coldwater Creek makes up a large portion of the Irish Buffalo Creek watershed. With the
exception of the Lake Concord watershed which is rapidly developing, there is very little urban
area in the Coldwater Creek watershed. however, a decline in bioclassification was observed at
NC 73 between 1996 (Good) and 2001 (Good -Fair), At the most downstream station, instrcam
habitat was lacking and the site also received a Good -Fair bioclassification.
The geometric means of fecal coliform samples collected from Irish Buffalo Creek between 1996
and 2001 (234 colonies/ 100m1) and Coldwater Creek between 1998 and 2001 (290
colonies/ 100m1) indicate that these streams may not be suitable for primary recreation. Fecal
coliform concentrations were greater than 400 eolon.ics/100ml in more than 20 percent of
samples from each site as well. Current methodology requires additional bacteriological
sampling for streams with a geometric mean greater than 200 colonies/100m1 or when
concentrations exceed 400 col/1 OOmI in more than 20 percent of samples. However, these
additional assessments are prioritized such that, as monitoring resources become available, the
highest priority is given to those strearns where the likelihood of full -body contact recreation is
greatest. Neither Irish Buffalo nor Coldwater Creeks are currently classified for primary
recreation (Class B).
Local actions to reduce the effects of nonpolnt source pollution, particularly from stormwater
runoff as further development occurs in the Irish Buffalo Creels watershed, will be an imperative
part of protecting water quality. The Irish Buffalo Creek watershed (03040105 020040) is one of
55 watersheds in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands
Itestoration Program (NCWIZP) as an area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and
wetland restoration efforts. This watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargcted
watershed for the implementation of NCWIZP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section
C for details.
12.5.2 Dutch Buffalo Creek
The Dutch Buffalo Creek watershed in northeastern Cabarrus County is primarily agricultural,
and many small headwater tributaries are dammed for farm ponds. Although the stream
continual to receive a Goad -Fair bioclassification, severe bank erosion and a lack of riparian
vegetation was observed. Local actions are needed to reduce the effects of nonpoiat source
pollution, particularly from agricultural activities, and to restore habitat throughout the
watershed. Refer to Section A, Chapter 4 for details about reducing habitat degradation.
Section B: Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-12 234

6
I
Fhe Dutch Buffalo Creek watershed (03040105 020060) is one of 55 watersheds in the Yadkin-
Pee Dee River basin that has been identified by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program
(NCWRI') as an area with the greatest need and opportunity for stream and wetland restoration
efforts. This watershed will be given higher priority than a nontargeted watershed for the
implementation ofNCWRP restoration projects. Refer to page 278 in Section C for details.
1.2.6 Additional Water Quality Issues within Subbashi 03-07-12
The previous parts discussed water quality concerns (:or specific -stream segments. This section
discusses water quality issues related to multiple watersheds within the subbasin. Information
found in this section may be related to concerns about things that threaten water quality or about
plans and actions to improve water quality.
12.6.1 Projected Population Growth
From 2000 to 2020, the estimated population increase for Mecklenburg County is 57 percent and
for Cabarrus County is 53 percent. Growth management within the next five years will be
imperative, especially in and around urbanizing areas and along highway corridors, in order to
protect or improve water duality in this subbasin. Growth management can be defined as the
application of strategies and practices that help achieve sustainable development in harmony with
the conservation of environmental qualities and features of an area. On a local level, growth
management often involves planning and development review requirements that are designed to
maintain or improve water quality. Refer to Section A, Chapter 4 for more infonnation about
urbanization and development and recommendations to minimize impacts to water quality.
12.6.2 High Fecal Coliform Concentrations
Fecal coliform bacteria arc widely used as an indicator of the potential presence of pathogens
typically associated with the intestinal tract of warm-blooded animals and are therefore found in
their wastes. Coliform bacteria are relatively easy to identify and are usually present in largur
numbers than more dangerouspathogens, even though they respond to the environment and to
treatment in much the same way. Sources of fecal coliform bacteria, as well as other more
dangerous pathogens, include runoff froth pastures, feedlots, poultry operations and lagoons that
do not employ appropriate best management practices. Other sources include straight pipes,
leaking and failing septic systems, and noncompliant W WTPs. Wildlife and pet waste also
�. contribute to elevated concentrations of' pathogens.
The water quality standard for fecal coliform bacteria is based on a geometric mean of 200
colonies/ 100m1 of .f Eve samples collected within 30 days, or 20 percent of samples having a
concentration greater than 400 colonies/100m1. High levels of fecal coliform bacteria are
widespread through this subbasin. Samples were collected from 13 locations on seven streams,
and the geometric means for 10 locations (77 percent) were greater than 200 colonies/i00rnl over
the five-year assessment period. These data indicate that many streams in this subbasin may not
be suitable for primary recreation, Current methodology requires additional bacteriological
sampling for streams with a geometric mean greater than 200 colonies/100an[. However, these
additional assessments are prioritized such that, as monitoring resources become available, the
Section B: Chapter 12 Yadkin -Pee Dec River Subbasin 03-07-12 235

A
1
I
a
A
A
highest priority is given to those strearns where the likelihood of fall -body contact recreation is
greatest. Currently, no waters in this subbasin are classified for primary recreation (Class B).
Section B Chapter 12 - Yadkin -Pee Dee RNer- Subbasin 03-07-12 236

Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA) Page I of 1 1
North Carolina
Ctic-laartrntmt of Env�rcmi«erl� orld h•ladiar"�s!' Resources i,�" , ,� '+
N4 i i
�i�et!
Home Contact Us Mission NCGov.com
Sedirrl en: .at:ion Pollution Control Act: of 1973 (SPCA)
(As amended through 1999) North Carolina General Statutes Chapter
113A Article 4
' § 113A-50. Short title.
This Article shall be known as and may be cited as the "Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act of 1973." (1973, c. 392, s. 1.)
§ 113A-51. Preamble.
The sedimentation of streams, lakes and other waters of this State constitutes a major pollution problem.
Sedimentation occurs from the erosion or depositing of soil and other materials into the waters, principally frc
' construction sites and road maintenance. The continued development of this State will result in an intensifica
of pollution through sedimentation unless timely and appropriate action is taken. Control of erosion and
sedimentation is deemed vital to the public interest and necessary to the public health and welfare, and
expenditures of funds for erosion and sedimentation control programs shall be deemed for a public purpose.
the purpose of this Article to provide for the creation, administration, and enforcement of a program and for tl
{ adoption of minimal mandatory standards which will permit development of this State to continue with the lea
detrimental effects from pollution by
sedimentation. In recognition of the desirability of early coordination of sedimentation control planning, it is th
intention of the General Assembly that preconstruction conferences be held among the affected parties, subj
to the availability of staff .(1973, c. 392, s. 2; 1975, c. 647, s. 3.)
§ 113A-52. Definitions.
As used in this Article, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) Repealed by Session Laws 1973, c. 1417, s. 1.
(1a) "Affiliate" has the same meaning as in 17 Code of Federal Regulations § 240.12(b)-2 (1 June 1993 Editi+
which defines "affiliate" as a person that directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries,
controls, is controlled by, or is under common control of another person.
(2) "Commission" means the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
(3) "Department" means the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
(4) "District" means any Soil and Water Conservation District created pursuant to Chapter 139, North Carotin
General Statutes.
(5) "Erosion" means the wearing away of land surface by the action of wind, water, gravity, or any combinatic
thereof.
(6) "Land -disturbing activity" means any use of the land by any person in residential, industrial, educational,
institutional or commercial development, highway and road construction and maintenance that results in a
change
in the natural cover or topography and that may cause or contribute to sedimentation.
(7) "Local government" means any county, incorporated village, town, or city, or any combination of counties;
incorporated villages, towns, and cities, acting through a joint program pursuant to the provisions of this
Article.
' (7a) "Parent" has the same meaning as in 17 Code of Federal Regulations § 240.12(b)-2 (1 June 1993 Editic
which defines "parent" as an affiliate that directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls
another person.
littp://www.dIr.enr.state.nc.us/pages/sediineiitl)oI Iutionconti-o1.litm1 l / l 1 /2005

ISedimentation POilution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 2 of l 1
(8) "Person" means any individual, partnership, firm, association, joint venture, public or private corporation, t
estate, commission, board, public or private institution, utility, cooperative, interstate body, or other
legal entity.
(9) "Secretary" means the Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources.
(10) "Sediment" means solid particulate matter, both mineral and organic, that has been or is being transport
by water, air, gravity, or ice from its site of origin.
(10a) Subsidiary" has the same meaning as in 17 Code of Federal Regulations § 240.12(b)-2 (i June 1993
Edition), which defines "subsidiary" as an affiliate that is directly, or indirectly through one or more
intermediaries, controlled by another person.
(10b) "Tract" means all contiguous land and bodies of water being disturbed or to be disturbed as a unit,
regardless of ownership.
(11) "Working days" means days exclusive of Saturday and Sunday during which weather conditions or soil
conditions permit land -disturbing activity to be undertaken.(1973, c. 392, s. 3; c. 1417, s. 1; 1975, c. 647,
s. 1; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1989, c. 179, s. 1; c. 727, s. 218(60); 1989 (Reg. Sess., 1990), c. 1004, s. 19(b); 199
' 275, s. 1; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 1; 1997, c. 443, s. 11A.119(a).)
§ 113A-52.01. Applicability of this Article.
This Article shall not apply to the following land -disturbing activities:
(1) Activities, including the breeding and grazing of livestock, undertaken on agricultural land for the productsi
plants and animals useful to man, including, but not limited to:
(a) Forages and sod crops, grains and feed crops, tobacco, cotton, and peanuts.
(b) Dairy animals and dairy products.
(c) Poultry and poultry products.
(d) Livestock, including beef cattle, llamas, sheep, swine, horses, ponies, mules, and goats.
(e) Bees and apiary products.
(f) Fur producing animals.
(2) Activities undertaken on forestland for the production and harvesting of timber and timber products and
conducted in accordance with best management practices set out in Forest Practice Guidelines Related to
Water Quality, as adopted by the Department.
(3) Activities for which a permit is required under the Mining Act of 1971, Article 7 of Chapter 74 of the Gener
Statutes.
(4) For the duration of an emergency, activities essential to protect human iife.(1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 7
s. 2; 1997, c. 84, s. 1.)
§ 113A-52.1. Forest Practice Guidelines.
(a) The Department shall adopt Forest Practice Guidelines Related to Water Quality (best management
practices). The adoption of Forest Practices Guidelines Related to Water Quality under this section is subject
to the provisions of Chapter 150E of the General Statutes.
(b) If land -disturbing activity undertaken on forestland for the production and harvesting of timber and timber
products is not conducted in accordance with Forest Practice Guidelines Related to Water Quality, the
provisions of this Article shall apply to such activity and any related land -disturbing activity on the tract.
(c) The Secretary shall establish a Technical Advisory Committee to assist in the development and periodic
review of Forest Practice Guidelines Related to Water Quality. The Technical Advisory Committee shall cons
one member from the forest products industry, one member who is a consulting forester, one member who is
private landowner knowledgeable in forestry, one member from the United States Forest Service, one memb
from the academic community who is knowledgeable in forestry, one member who is knowledgeable in erosii
and
sedimentation control, one member who is knowledgeable in wildlife management, one member who is
knowledgeable in marine fisheries management, one member who is knowledgeable in water quality, and on
member from the conservation community.(1989, c. 179, s. 2.)
§ 113A-53. Repealed by Session Laws 1973, c. 1262, s. 41.
§ 113A-54. Powers and duties of the Commission.
l (a) The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Secretary of Transportation and other appropriate State ar
federal agencies, develop, promulgate, publicize, and administer a comprehensive State erosion and
sedimentation control program.
1
http://www.dIr.cnr.state.tic.us/pages/sedirnentpollutioncontrol.html 1/1 1/2005

ISedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 3 of I I
(b) The Commission shall develop and adopt and shall revise as necessary from time to time, rules and
regulations for the control of erosion and sedimentation resulting from land- disturbing activities. The Commi:
shall adopt or revise its rules and regulations in accordance with Chapter 150B of the General Statutes.
(c) The rules and regulations adopted pursuant to G.S. 113A-54(b) for carrying out the erosion and sediment
control program shall-
(1 ) Be based upon relevant physical and developmental information concerning the watershed and drainage
basins of the State, including, but not limited to, data relating to land use, soils, hydrology, geology, grading,
'
ground cover, size of land area being disturbed, proximate water bodies and their characteristics, transportat
and public facilities and services;
(2) Include such survey of lands and waters as may be deemed appropriate by the Commission or required t
any applicable laws to identify those areas, including multijurisdictional and watershed areas, with critical ero
'
and sedimentation problems;, and
(3) Contain conservation standards for various types of soils and land uses, which standards shall include cri
and alternative techniques and methods for the control of erosion and sediment resulting from land -
disturbing activities.
(d) In implementing the erosion and sedimentation control program, the Commission shall:
(1) Assist and encourage local governments in developing erosion and sediment control programs and, as a
of this assistance, the Commission shall develop a model local erosion control ordinance. The
Commission shall approve, approve as modified, or disapprove local programs submitted to it pursuant to G.
113A-60.
(2) Assist and encourage other State agencies in developing erosion and sedimentation control programs to
administered in their jurisdictions. The Commission shall approve, approve as modified, or disapprove
programs submitted pursuant to G.S. 113A-56 and from time to time shall review these programs for complia.
with rules adopted by the Commission and for adequate enforcement.
(3) Develop recommended methods of control of sedimentation and prepare and make available for distributi
publications and other materials dealing with sedimentation control techniques appropriate for use by
persons engaged in land -disturbing activities, general educational materials on erosion and sedimentation
control, and instructional materials for persons involved in the enforcement of this Article and erosion control
rules, ordinances, regulations, and plans.
(4) Require submission of erosion control plans by those responsible for initiating land -disturbing activities for
i
approval prior to commencement of the activities.
(e) To assist it in developing the erosion and sedimentation control program required by this Article, the
'
Commission is authorized to appoint an advisory committee consisting of technical experts in the fields of wa
resources, soil science, engineering, and landscape architecture.
(f) Repealed by Session taws 1987, c. 827, s. 10, effective August 13, 1987. (1973, c. 392, s. 6; c. 1331, s. <
1417, s. 6; 1975, 2nd Sess., c. 983, s. 74; 1977, c. 464, s. 35; 1979, c. 922, s. 2; 1983 (Reg. Sess.,
1984), c. 1014, ss. 1, 2; 1987, c. 827, s. 10; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988), c. 1000, s. 3; 1989, c. 676, s. 1; 1993
Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 3.)
§ 113A-54.1. Approval of erosion control plans,
T (a) A draft erosion control plan must contain the applicant's address and, if the applicant is not a resident of P
Carolina, designate a North Carolina agent for the purpose of receiving notice from the Commission or the
Secretary of compliance or noncompliance with the plan, this Article, or any rules adopted pursuant to this Ai
The Commission shall approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove a draft erosion control plan for tho
land- disturbing activities for which prior plan approval is required within 30 days of receipt. The Commission
shall condition approval of a draft erosion control plan upon the applicant's compliance with federal and State
water quality laws, regulations, and rules. Failure to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove a
completed draft
erosion control plan within 30 days of receipt shall be deemed approval of the plan. If the Commission
disapproves a draft erosion: control plan or a revised erosion control plan, it must state in writing the specific
reasons that
the plan was disapproved. Failure to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove a revised erosion cc
plan within 15 days of receipt shall be deemed approval of the plan. The Commission may establish an expir-
date for erosion control plans approved under this Article.
(b) If, following commencement of a land -disturbing activity pursuant to an approved erosion control plan, the
Commission determines that the plan is inadequate to meet the requirements of this Article, the Commission
i require any revision of the plan that is necessary to comply with this Article. Failure to approve, approve with
modifications, or disapprove a revised erosion control plan within 15 days of receipt shall be deemed
approval of the plan.
littp://www.dlr.enz•.stitte.iic.us/pages/sc(limenti)oliutioncontroi.litmI 1/1 1 /2005

ASedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 4 of l I
(c) The Commission shall disapprove an erosion control plan if implementation of the plan would result in a
violation of rules adopted by the Environmental Management Commission to protect riparian buffers
along surface waters. The Director of the Division of Land Resources may disapprove an erosion control plat
upon finding that an applicant or a parent, subsidiary, or other affiliate of the applicant:
(1) Is conducting or has conducted land -disturbing activity without an approved plan, or has received notice c
violation of a plan previously approved by the Commission or a local government pursuant to this Article
and has not complied with the notice within the time specified in the notice;
(2) Has failed to pay a civil penalty assessed pursuant to this Article or a local ordinance adopted pursuant tc
Article by the time the payment is due;
(3) Has been convicted of a misdemeanor pursuant to G.S. 113A-64(b) or any criminal provision of a local
ordinance adopted pursuant to this Article; or
(4) Was failed to substantially comply with State rules or local ordinances and regulations adopted pursuant t,
this Article.
(d) In the event that an erosion control plan is disapproved by the Director pursuant to subsection (c) of this
section, the Director shall state in writing the specific reasons that the plan was disapproved. The applicant n
appeal the Director's disapproval of the plan to the Commission. For purposes of this subsection and subsec
(c) of this section, an applicant's record may be considered for only the two years prior to the
application date. (1989, c. 676, s. 2; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s, 4; 1998, c. 221, s. 1.11(a); 1999, c,
S. 1.)
§ 113A-54.2. Approval Fees.
(a) The Commission may establish a fee schedule for the review and approval of erosion control plans under
Article. In establishing the fee schedule, the Commission shall consider the administrative and personnel
costs incurred by the Department for reviewing the plans and for related compliance activities. An application
may not exceed fifty dollars ($50.00) per acre of disturbed land shown on an erosion control plan or of
land actually disturbed during the life of the project.
(b) The Sedimentation Account is established as a nonreverting account within the Department. Fees collect,
under this section shall be credited to the Account and shall be applied to the costs of administering this
Article.
(c) Repealed by Session Laws 1991 (Reg. Sess, 1992), c. 1039, s. 3, effective July 24, 1992.
(d) This section may not limit the existing authority of local programs approved pursuant to this Article to ass(
fees for the approval of erosion control plans. (1989 (Reg. Sess., 1990), c. 906, s. 1; 1991 (Reg. Sess.,
1992), c. 1039, s. 3; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c, 776, s. 5; 1999, c. 379,
S. 1.)
§ 113A-55. Authority of the Secretary.
■ The sedimentation control program developed by the Commission shall be administered by the Secretary un.
the direction of the Commission. To this end the Secretary shall employ the necessary clerical, technical, anc
administrative personnel, and assign tasks to the various divisions of the Department for the purpose of
implementing this Article. The Secretary may bring enforcement actions pursuant to G.S. 113A-64 and G.S.
1 113A-65. The Secretary shelf make final agency decisions in contested cases that arise from civil penalty
assessments pursuant to G.S. 113A-64. (1973, c. 392, s. 6; c. 1417, s, 3; 1993 (Reg. Sess„ 1994), c. 776, s.
§ 113A-56. Jurisdiction of the Commission.
■ (a) The Commission shall have jurisdiction, to the exclusion of local governments, to adopt rules concerning
disturbing activities that are:
' (1) Conducted by the State;
(2) Conducted by the United States;
(3) Conducted by persons having the power of eminent domain;
(4) Conducted by local governments; or
(5) Funded in whole or in part by the State or the United States.
(b) The Commission may delegate the jurisdiction conferred by G.S. 113A- 56(a), in whole or in part, to any c
State agency that has submitted an erosion control program to be administered by it, if such
program has been approved by the Commission as being in conformity with the general State program.
(c) The Commission shall have concurrent jurisdiction with local governments over all other land -disturbing
activities. (1973, c. 392, s. 7; c. 1417, s. 4; 1987, c. 827, s. 130; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988). c. 1000, s. 4.)
httn:l/www.dlr.enr.state.ne. uslpageslscdiillciltpolltitioticonti-ol.11tillt 1 / 11 /2005

Sedimentation l'oilution Controi Act of 1973 (SPCA) Page 5 of i I
§ 113A-57. Mandatory standards for land -disturbing activity.
1 No land4sturbing activity subject to this Article shall be undertaken except in accordance with the following
mandatory requirements:
(1) No land -disturbing activity during periods of construction or improvement to land shall be permitted in
proximity to a lake or natural watercourse unless a buffer zone is provided along the margin of the
watercourse of sufficient width to confine visible siltation within the twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer zoi
nearest the land -disturbing activity. Waters that have been classified as trout waters by the Environmental
Management Commission shall have an undisturbed buffer zone 25 feet wide or of sufficient width to confine
visible siltation within the twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer zone nearest the land -disturbing activity,
whichever is greater. Provided, however, that the Sedimentation Control Commission may approve plans wh
include land -disturbing activity along trout waters when the duration of said disturbance would be temporary
the extent of said disturbance would be minimal. This subdivision shall not apply to a land -disturbing activity i
e connection with
the construction of facilities to be located on, over, or under a lake or natural watercourse.
(2) The angle for graded slopes and fills shall be no greater than the angle which can be retained by vegetati
cover or other adequate erosion -control devices or structures. In any event, slopes left exposed will, within 1!
working days or 30 calendar days of completion of any phase of grading, whichever period is shorter, be piar
or otherwise
provided with ground cover, devices, or structures sufficient to restrain erosion.
(3) Whenever land -disturbing activity is undertaken on a tract comprising more than one acre, if more than or
acre is uncovered, the person conducting the land- disturbing activity shall install such sedimentation and erc
control devices and practices as are sufficient to retain the sediment generated by the land -disturbing activity
within the boundaries of the tract during construction upon and development of said tract, and shall
plant or otherwise provide a permanent ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion after completion of
construction or development within a time period to be specified by rule of the Commission.
(4) No person shall initiate any land -disturbing activity on a tract if more _than one acre is to be uncovered unl
30 or more days prior to initiating the activity, an erosion and sedimentation can ro pan for such activity is frl
with the agency having jurisdiction. The agency having jurisdiction shall forward to the Director of the Division
t Water Quality a copy of each erosion and sedimentation control plan for a land -disturbing activity that involVE
the utilization of ditches for the purpose of de -watering or lowering the water table of the tract. (1973, c. 392,
c. 1417, s. 5; 1975, c. 647, s. 2; 1979, c. 564; 1983 (Reg. Sess., 1984), C. 1014, s. 3;
1987, c. 827, s. 131; 1989, c. 676, s. 3; 1991, c. 275, s. 2; 1998, c. 99,
s. 1., 1999, c. 379, s. 1.)
§ 113A-58. Enforcement authority of the Commission.
In implementing the provisions of this Article the Commission is authorized and directed to:
(1) Inspect or cause to be inspected the sites of land -disturbing activities to determine whether applicable lav
regulations or erosion control plans are being complied with;
(2) Make requests, or delegate to the Secretary authority to make requests, of the.Attorney General or solicit.
for prosecutions of violations of this Article. (1973, c. 392, s. 9.)
§ 113A-59. Educational activities.
The Commission in conjunction with the soil and water conservation districts, the North Carolina Agricultural
Extension Service, and other appropriate State and federal agencies shall conduct educational programs
in erosion and sedimentation control, such programs to be directed towards State and local governmental
officials, persons engaged in land -disturbing activities, and interested citizen groups. (1973, c. 392, s.
10.)
§ 113A-60. Local erosion control programs.
(a) Any local government may submit to the Commission for its approval an erosion and sediment control
program for its jurisdiction, and to this end local governments are authorized to adopt ordinances and regulat
necessary to establish and enforce erosion and sediment control programs. Local governments are authoriz(
create or designate agencies or subdivisions of local government to administer and enforce the programs. Ai
i ordinance adopted by a local government shall at least meet and may exceed the minimum requirements of I
Article and the rules adopted pursuant to this Article. Two or more units of local government are authorized tc
establish a joint program and to enter into any agreements that are necessary for the proper administration a
littu://www.dIr.enr.state.nc,us/pad;cs/sedinientpoIlLitioncontroi.html 1/11/2005

ISedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 6 of 1 l
enforcement of the
program. The resolutions establishing any joint program must be duty recorded in the minutes of the governir
body of each unit of local government participating in the program, and a certified copy of each resolution mL
be filed with the Commission.
(b) The Commission shall review each program submitted and within 90 days of receipt thereof shall notify th
local government submitting the program that it has been approved, approved with modifications, or disapprc
The Commission shall only approve a program upon determining that its standards equal or exceed those of
Article and rules adopted pursuant to this Article.
(c) if the Commission determines that any local government is failing to administer or enforce an approved
erosion and sediment control program, it shall notify the local government in writing and shall specify the
deficiencies of administration and enforcement. If the local government has not taken corrective action within
days of receipt of notification from the Commission, the Commission shall assume enforcement of the progra
until such time as the local government indicates its willingness and ability to resume administration and
enforcement of the program. (1973, c. 392, s. 11; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 7.)
§ 113A-61. Local approval of erosion control plans.
(a) For those land -disturbing activities for which prior approval of an erosion control plan is required, the
Commission may require that a local government that administers an erosion and sediment control program
approved under G.S. 113A-60 require the applicant to submit a copy of the erosion control plan to the
appropriate soil and water conservation district or districts at the same time the applicant submits the erosion
control plan to the local government for approval. The soil and water conservation district or districts shall re%
the plan and submit any
comments and recommendations to the local government within 20 days after the soil and water conservatio
district received the erosion control plan or within any shorter period of time as may be agreed upon by the &
and water conservation district and the local government. Failure of a soil and water conservation district to
submit comments and recommendations within 20 days or within agreed upon shorter period of time shall no
delay final action on the proposed plan by the local government.
(b) Local governments shall review each erosion control plan submitted to them and within 30 days of receipt
thereof shall notify the person submitting the plan that it has been approved, approved with modifications, or
disapproved. A local government shall only approve a plan upon determining that it complies with all applicat
State and local regulations for erosion and sediment control.
(bl) A local government shall condition approval of a draft erosion control plan upon the applicart's complian
with federal and State water duality laws, regulations, and rules. A local government shall disapprove an ero:
control plan if implementation of the plan would result in a violation of rules adopted by the Environmental
Management Commission to protect riparian buffers along surface waters. A local government may disappro
an erosion control plan upon finding that an applicant or a parent, subsidiary, or other affiliate of the applican
(1) Is conducting or has conducted land -disturbing activity without an approved plan, or has received notice c
violation of a plan previously approved by the Commission or a local government pursuant to this Article
and has not complied with the notice within the time specified in the notice;
(2) Has failed to pay a civil penalty assessed pursuant to this Article or a local ordinance adopted pursuant tc
Article by the time the payment is due;
(3) Has been convicted of a misdemeanor pursuant to G.S. 113A-64(b) or any criminal provision of a local
ordinance adopted pursuant to this Article; or
(4) Has failed to substantially comply with State rules or local ordinances and regulations adopted pursuant b
this Article.
(b2) In the event that an erosion control plan is disapproved by a local government pursuant to subsection (b
this section, the local government shall so notify the Director of the Division of Land Resources within 10 day
such disapproval. The local government shall advise the applicant and the Director in writing as to the specif
reasons that the plan was disapproved. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (c) of this section, the
applicant may appeal the local government's disapproval of the plan directly to the Commission. For purpose
this subsection and subsection (bl) of this section, an applicant"s record may be considered for only the two
years prior to the application date.
(c) The disapproval or modification of any proposed erosion control plan by a local government shall entitle tt
person submitting the plan to a public hearing if such person submits written demand for a hearing within 15
after receipt of written notice of the disapproval or modification. The hearings shall be conducted pursuant to
procedures adopted by the local government. If the local government upholds the disapproval or moditicatior
proposed erosion control plan following the public hearing, the person submitting the erosion control plan shy
entitled to appeal the local government's action disapproving or modifying the plan to the Commission. The
Commission, by regulation, shall direct the Secretary to appoint such employees of the Department as may t
ht.tr)://www.dlr.cnr.StatC.nc.us/pages/seciimcntpoilutioncontrol.litml I/11/2005

Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Pane 7 of I l
necessary to hear appeals from the disapproval or modification of erosion control plans by local government:
addition to providing for the appeal of local government decisions disapproving or modifying erosion control f
to
designated employees of the Department, the Commission shall designate an erosion control plan review
committee consisting of three members of the Commission. The person submitting the erosion control plan n
appeal the decision of an employee of the Department who has heard an appeal of a local government actioi
disapproving or modifying an erosion control plan to the erosion plan review committee of the Commission.
Judicial review of the final action of the erosion plan review committee of the Commission may be had in the
superior court of the county in which the local government is situated. (d) Repeated by Session Laws 1989, c
676, s. 4, effective October 1,
1989. (1973, c. 392, s. 12; 1979, c. 922, s. 1; 1989, c. 676, s. 4; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, ss. 8, 9; 19
c. 221. s. 1.11(b); 1999, c. 379, s. 1.)
§ 113A-61.1. Inspection of land -disturbing activity; notice of violation.
(a) The Commission, a local government that administers an erosion and sediment control program approves
under G.S. 113A-60, or other approving authority shall provide for inspection of land -disturbing activities to
ensure compliance with this Article and to determine whether the measures required in an erosion control plr
are effective in controlling erosion and sediment resulting from the land -disturbing activity. Notice of this right
inspection shall be included in the certificate of approval of each erosion control plan.
(b) No person shall willfully resist, delay, or obstruct an authorized representative of the Commission, an
authorized representative of a local government, or an employee or an agent of the Department while the
representative, employee, or agent is inspecting or attempting to inspect a land -disturbing activity under this
section.(c) If the Secretary, a local government that administers an erosion and sediment control program
approved under G.S. 113A-60, or other approving authority determines that the person engaged in the land -
disturbing activity has failed to comply with this Article, the Secretary, local government, or other approving
authority shall immediately serve a
notice of violation upon that person. The notice may be served by any means authorized under G.S. 1A- 1, F
4. A notice of violation shall specify a date by which the person must comply with this Article and inform the
person of the actions that need to be taken to comply with this Article. Any person who fails to comply within
time specified is subject to additional civil and criminal penalties for a continuing violation as provided in G.S.
113A-64. (1989, c. 676, s. 5; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 10; 1999, c. 379, s. 1.)
§ 113A-62. Cooperation with the United States.
The Commission is authorized to cooperate and enter into agreements with any agency of the United States
government in connection with plans for erosion control with respect to land- disturbing activities on lands thz
are under the jurisdiction of such agency. (1973, c. 392, s. 13.)
§ 113A-63. Financial and other assistance.
The Commission and local governments are authorized to receive from federal, State, and other public and
private sources financial, technical, and other assistance for use in accomplishing the purposes of this Article
(1973, c. 392, s. 14.)
§ 113A•64. Penalties.
(a) Civil Penalties. --
(1) Any person who violates any of the provisions of this Article or any ordinance, rule, or order adopted or is
pursuant to this Article by the Commission or by a local government, or who initiates or continues a land -
disturbing activity for which an erosion control plan is required except in accordance with the terms, conditior
and provisions of an approved plan, is subject to a civil penalty. The maximum civil penalty for a violation is fi
thousand dollars ($5,000). A civil penalty may be assessed from the date of the violation. Each day of a
continuing violation shall constitute a separate violation.
(2) The Secretary or a local government that administers an erosion and sediment control program approved
under G.S. 113A-60 shall determine the amount of the civil penalty and shall notify the person who is assess
the civil penalty of the amount of the penalty and the reason for assessing the penalty. The notice of assessr
shall be served by any means authorized under G.S. 1 A-1, Rule 4, and shall direct the violator to either pay t
assessment or contest the assessment within 30 days by filing a petition for a contested case under Article 3
Chapter 1508 of the General Statutes. if a violator does not pay a civil penalty assessed by the Secretary wit
httn:llwww.dlr.cni-.state.nc.uslpageslsediiiicntpoIlutioncontrc)l.html 1/11/2005

Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Pale 8 of 11
30 days after it is due, the Department shall request the Attorney General to institute a civil action to recover
amount of the assessment. If a violator does not pay a civil penalty assessed by a local government within 3(
days after it is due, the local government may institute a civil action to recover the amount of the assessment
The civil action may be brought in the superior court of any county where the violation occurred or the violato
residence or principal place of business is located. A civil action must be filed within three years of the date tI
assessment was due. An assessment that is not contested is due when the violator is served with a notice of
assessment. An assessment that is contested is due at the conclusion of the administrative and judicial revie
of the assessment.
(3) In determining the amount of the penalty, the Secretary shall consider the degree and extent of harm eau
by the violation, the cost of rectifying the damage, the amount of money the violator saved by noncompliance
whether the violation was committed willfully and the prior record of the violator in complying or failing to cam
with this Article.
(4) Repealed by Session Laws 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 11, effective October 1, 1994.
(5) The clear proceeds of civil penalties collected by the Department or other State agency under this subset
shall be remitted to the Civil Penalty and Forfeiture Fund in accordance with G.S. 115C-457.2. Civil penalties
collected by a local government under this subsection shall be credited to the general fund of the local
government as nontax revenue.
(b) Criminal Penalties. -- Any person who knowingly or willfully violates any provision of this Article or any
ordinance, rule, regulation, or order duly adopted or issued by the Commission or a local government, or whc
Knowingly or willfully initiates or continues a land- disturbing activity for which an erosion control plan is requi
except in accordance with the terns, conditions, and provisions of an approved plan, shall be guilty of a Clas
misdemeanor which may include a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000). (1973, c. 392, s. 15; 19-
c. 852; 1987, c. 246, s. 3; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988), c. 1000, s. 5; 1989, c. 676, s. 6; 1991, c. 412, s. 2; c. 72�
5; 1993, c. 539, s. 873; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 11; 1998-215, s.
1999, c. 379,
S. 1.)
§ 113A-64.1. Restoration of areas affected by failure to comply.
The Secretary or a local government that administers a local erosion and sediment control program approve(
under G.S. 113A-60 may require a person who engaged in a land -disturbing activity and failed to retain sedir
generated by the activity, as required by G.S. 113A-57(3), to restore the waters and land affected by the failu
so as to minimize the detrimental effects of the resulting pollution by sedimentation. This authority is in addib
any other civil or criminal penalty or injunctive relief authorized under this Article. (1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c
776, s. 12.)
■ § 113A-65. injunctive relief.
(a) Violation of State Program. -- Whenever the Secretary has reasonable cause to believe that any person is
violating or is threatening to violate the requirements of this Article he may, either before or after the institutio
any other action or proceeding authorized by this Article, institute a civil action for injunctive relief to restrain 1
violation or threatened violation. The action shall be brought in the superior court of the county in which the
violation or threatened violation is occurring or about to occur, and shall be in the name of the State upon the
relation of the
Secretary.
' (b) Violation of Local Program. -- Whenever the governing body of a local government having jurisdiction has
reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or is threatening to violate any ordinance, rule,
regulation, or order adopted or issued by the local government pursuant to this Article, or any term, condition
provision of an erosion control plan over which it has jurisdiction, may, either before or after the institution of.
' other action or proceeding authorized by this Article, institute a civil action in the name of the local governme for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation. The action shall be brought in the superior
court of the county in which the violation is occurring or is threatened.
(c) Abatement, etc., of Violation, -- Upon determination by a court that an alleged violation is occurring or is
threatened, the court shall enter any order or judgment that is necessary to abate the violation, to ensure tha
restoration is performed, or to prevent the threatened violation. The institution of an action for injunctive relief
under subsections (a) or (b) of this section shall not relieve any party to the proceeding from any civil or crimi
penalty prescribed for violations of this Article. (1973, c. 392, s. 16; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 776, s. 13.)
§ 113A-65.1. Stop -work orders.
dtr r,,m et,►tc. nr..us/naccs/sedIi»entl)ollutioncontrol.html 1/ 1 1 /2005

Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 9 of 1 l
(a) The Secretary may issue a stop -work order if he finds that a land -disturbing activity is being conducted in
violation of this Article or of any rule adopted or order issued pursuant to this Article, that the violation is
knowing and willful, and that either:
(1) Off -site sedimentation has eliminated or severely degraded a use in a lake or natural watercourse or that
degradation is imminent.
(2) Off -site sedimentation has caused severe damage to adjacent land or that such damage is imminent.
(3) The land -disturbing activity is being conducted without an approved plan.
(b) The stop -work order shall be in writing and shall state what work is to be stopped and what measures are
required to abate the violation. The order shall include a statement of the findings made by the Secretary
pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, and shall list the conditions under which work that has been stoppE
the order may be resumed. The delivery of equipment and materials which does not contribute to the
violation may continue while the stop- work order is in effect. A copy of this section shall be attached to the o
(c) The stop -work order shall be served by the sheriff of the county in which the land- disturbing activity is bei
conducted or by some other person duly authorized by law to serve process as provided by G.S. 1A-1,
Rule 4, and shall be served on the person at the site of the land -disturbing activity who is in operational contr
the land -disturbing activity. The sheriff or other person duly authorized by law to serve process shall post a c,
of the stop- work order in a conspicuous place at the site of the land -disturbing activity. The Department shal
also deliver a copy of the stop -work order to any person that the Department has reason to believe may be
responsible for the violation.
(d) The directives of a stop -work order become effective upon service of the order, Thereafter, any person
notified of the stop -work order who violates any of the directives set out in the order may be assessed a civil
penalty as provided in G.S. 113A-64(a). A stop -work order issued pursuant to this section may be issued for
period not to exceed five days.
(e) The Secretary shall designate an employee of the Department to monitor compliance with the stop -work
order. The name of the employee so designated shall be included in the stop- work order. The employee so
designated, or the Secretary, shall rescind the stop -work order if all the violations for which the stop -work ord
are issued are corrected, no other violations have occurred, and all measures necessary to abate the violatio
have been taken. The Secretary shall rescind a stop -work order that is issued in error.
(f) The issuance of a stop -work order shall be a final agency decisionsubject to judicial review in the same
manner as an order in a contested case pursuant to Article 4 of Chapter 1506 of the General Statutes. The
petition for judicial review shall be filed in the superior court of the county in which the land -disturbing activity
being conducted.
(g) As used in this section, days are computed as provided in G.S. 1A-1, Rule 6. Except as otherwise providE
the Secretary may delegate any power or duty under this section to the Director of the Division of Land
Resources of the Department or to any person who has supervisory authority over the Director. The Director
delegate any power or duty so delegated only to a person who is designated as acting Director.
(h) The Attorney General shall file a cause of action to abate the violations which resulted in the issuance of
stop -work order within two days of the service of the stop -work order. The cause of action shall include a moi
for an ex parte temporary restraining order to abate the violation and to effect necessary remedial measures.
resident superior court judge, or any judge assigned to hear the motion for the temporary restraining order, s
hear and determine the motion within two days of the filing of the complaint. The clerk of superior court shall
accept complaints filed pursuant to this section without the payment of filing fees, Filing fees shall be paid to
clerk of superior court within 30 days of the filing of the complaint. (1991, c. 412, s. 1; 1998, c. 99, s. 2)
§ 113A-66. Civil relief.
(a) Any person injured by a violation of this Article or any ordinance, rule, or order duly adopted by the Secre
or a local government, or by the initiation or continuation of a land- disturbing activity for which an erosion col
plan is required other than in accordance with the terms, conditions, and provisions of an approved plan, ma,
bring a civil action against the person alleged to be in violation (including the State and any local government
The action may seek:
(1) Injunctive relief;
(2) An order enforcing the law, rule, ordinance, order, or erosion control plan violated; or
(3) Damages caused by the violation; or
(4) Both damages and an enforcement order. if the amount of actual damages as found by the court or jury it
suits
brought under this subsection is five thousand dollars ($5,000) or less, the plaintiff shall be awarded costs of
litigation including reasonable attorneys fees and expert witness fees.
(b) Civil actions under this section shall be brought in the superior court of the county in which the alleged
violations occurred.
1-44.-. ri,,,, "- A I r � tlr 0sitf, nr. IlOnqurs/qed I mentno l lut l oil Coll tro 1. [It nl 1 1/11/2005

1 Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 10 of-' 1 l
(c) The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought pursuant to this section may award costs of litig;
(including reasonable attorney and expert -witness fees) to any party, whenever it determines that such an av
is appropriate. The court may, if a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction is sought, require, the
filing of a bond or equivalent security, the amount of such bond or security to be determined by the court.
(d) Nothing in this section shall restrict any right which any person (or class of persons) may have under any
statute or common law to seek injunctive or other relief. (1973, c. 392, s. 17; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988), c. 100
6.)
SEDIMENTATION CONTROL COMMISSION
§ 143B-298. Sedimentation Control Commission - creation; powers and duties.
There is hereby created the Sedimentation Control Commission of the Department of Environment, Health, a
Natural Resources with the power and duty to develop and administer a sedimentation control program as hE
provided. The Sedimentation Control Commission has the following powers and duties;
(1) In cooperation with the Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Highway Safety and other
appropriate State and federal agencies, develop, promulgate, publicize, and administer a comprehensive Ste
erosion and sedimentation control program.
(2) Develop and adopt on or before July 1, 1974, rules and regulations for the control of erosion and
sedimentation pursuant to G.S. 113A-54.
(3) Conduct public hearings pursuant to G.S. 113A-54. (4) Assist local governments in developing erosion ar
sedimentation control programs pursuant to G.S. 113A-60.
(5) Assist and encourage other State agencies in developing erosion and sedimentation control programs
pursuant to G.S. 113A-56.
(6) Develop recommended methods of control of sedimentation and prepare and make available for distributi
publications and other materials dealing with sedimentation control techniques
pursuant to G.S. 113A-54. (1973, c. 1262, s. 39; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1989, c. 727, s. 218(137).)
§ 143113-299. Sedimentation Control Commission - members;selection; compensation; meetings.
(a) Creation; Membership. -- There is hereby created in the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission, which is charged with the duty of
developing and administering the sedimentation control program provided for in this Article. The Commission
shall consist of the following members:
(1) A person to be nominated jointly by the boards of the North Carolina League of Municipalities and the Noi
Carolina Association of County Commissioners;
(2) A person to be nominated by the Board of the North Carolina Home Builders Association;
(3) A person to be nominated by the Carolinas Branch, Associated General Contractors of America;
(4) The president, vice-president, or general counsel of a North Carolina public utility company;
(5) The Director of the North Carolina Water Resources Research Institute;
(6) A member of the State Mining Commission who shall be a representative of nongovernmental conservati(
interests, as required by G.S. 74-38(b);
(7) A member of the State Soil and Water Conservation Commission;
(8) A member of the Environmental Management Commission;
(9) A soil scientist from the faculty of North Carolina Stale University;
(10) Two persons who shall be representatives of nongovernmental conservation interests; and
(11) A professional engineer registered under the provisions of Chapter 89C of the General Statutes nominal
by the Professional Engineers of North Carolina, Inc.
(b) Appointment. -- The Commission members shall be appointed by the Governor. Alt Commission member:
except the person filling position number five, as specified above, shall serve staggered terms of office of thn
years and until their successors are appointed and duly qualified. The person filling position number five shal
serve as a member of the Commission, subject to removal by the Governor as hereinafter specified in this
section, so long as he continues as Director of the Water Resources Research Institute. The terms of office c
members filling positions two, four, seven, and eight shall expire on 30 June of years evenly divisible by threw
The terms of office of members filling positions one, three, and ten shall expire on 30 June of years that follo+
one year those years that are evenly divisible by three. The terms of office of members filling positions six, ni
and eleven shall expire on 30 June of years that precede by one year those years that are evenly divisible by
+'-- -- --- -]I ---....#.,# - -- ,,oA-,,.,,c/cart; m f- ni no l l i i ti on co n tro 1. h 1. m 1 1/1 1/2005

ISect inicntation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (SPCA)
Page 11 of 1 l
three. Except for the person filling position number five, no member of the Commission shall serve more thar
complete consecutive three-year terms. Any member appointed by the Governor to fill a vacancy occurring it
of the appointments shall be appointed for the remainder of the term of the member causing the vacancy. Th
Governor may at any time remove any member of the Commission for inefficiency, neglect of duty, malfeasa
misfeasance, nonfeasance or, in the case of members filling positions five, six, seven, eight, nine, and elevel
specified above, because they no
longer possess the required qualifications for membership. In each instance appointments to fill vacancies in
membership of the Commission shall be a person or persons with similar experience and qualifications in the
same field required of the member being replaced. The office of the North Carolina Sedimentation Control
Commission is
declared to be an office that may be held concurrently with any other elective or appointive office, under the
authority of Article VI, Sec. 9, of the North Carolina Constitution.
(b1) Chairman. -- The Governor shall designate a member of the Commission to serve as chairman.
(c) Compensation. -- The members of the Commission shall receive the usual and customary per them allow,
for the other members of boards and commissions of the State and as fixed in the Biennial Appropriation Act
and, in addition, the members of the Commission shall receive subsistence and travel expenses according tc
prevailing State practice and as allowed and fixed by statute for such purposes, which said travel expenses z
also be allowed while going to or from any place of meeting or when on official business for the Commission.
per diem payments made to each member of the Commission shall include necessary time spent in traveling
and from their places of residence within the State to any place of meeting or while traveling on official busini
for the
Commission.
(d) Meetings of Commission. -- The Commission shall meet at the call of the chairman and shall hold special
meetings at the call of a majority of the members. (1973. G. 1262. s. 40; 1977, c. 771, s. 4; 1981, c. 248, ss.
1, 2; 1989, c. 727, s. 218(138); 1989 (Reg. Sess., 1990), c. 1004, s. 19(b); 1991, c. 551, s. 1.)
BUILDING PERMITS
In 1988, the General Assembly amended G.S. 153A-357 and 160A-417 regarding building permits. The
amendments were as follows:
I G.S. 153-357(b): "No permit shall be issued pursuant to subsection (a) for any land -disturbing activity, as def
e in G.S. 113A-52(6), for any activity covered by G.S. 113A-57, unless an erosion control plan has been appro
by the Sedimentation Pollution Control Commission pursuant to G.S. 113A-54(d)(4) or by a local government
pursuant to G.S. 113A-61 for the site of the activity or a tract of land including the site of the activity."
G.S. 160A-417(b): "No permit shall be issued pursuant to subsection (a) for any land -disturbing activity, as
defined in G.S. 113A-52(6), for any activity covered by G.S. 113A-57, unless an erosion control plan has bee
approved by the Sedimentation Pollution Control Commission pursuant to G.S. 113A-61 for the site of the ac
or a tract of land including the site of the activity."
1
i
North Carolina nlvislon of Land Resources - 1012 Mail Service Conte,, Raleigh, 14C 27699-1612 919-733-3833 Disclaim
,...._.ir-_.__.,.. Al- rJ,fn nr„cir,�nrc/carlirnetlfnnllt.tttOrtC011€I'Ol.l]tmI 1/11f2005

United States Office of Water EPA 832-F-99-010
Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. September 1999
Agency
E PA 30torm Watter
Manarvement Fact Sheet
Employee Training
DESCIUPTCON
In-house employee training programs are
established to teach employees about storm water
management, potential sources of contaminants,
and Best Management Practices (13M.Ps).
Emploype training programs should instill all
personnel with a thorough understanding of their
Storm Water Pollution Prevention flan (SWPPP),
including BMPs, processes and materials they Eire
working with, safety hazards, practices for
preventing discharges, and procedures for
responding quickly and properly to toxic and
hazardous material incidents.
APPLICABILITY
Typically, most industrial facilities have employee
training programs. Usually these address such
areas as health and safety training and fire
protection. Training on storm water management
and BMI's canbc incorporated into these programs.
Employees can be taught through 1) posters,
employee meetings, courses, and bulletin boards
about storm water managertnent, potential
contalnlnant sources, and prevention of
ContaminatiOn In surface water runoff, and 2) field
tl'itiiiiiig programs that show areas oI potential storm
water contamination and associated pollutants,
followed by a discussion of site -specific BMPs by
trained personnel.
ADVANTACES AND DISADVANTAGES
Advantages of an employee trailing program are
that the program can be a low-cost and easily
implcrnentable storm water management 13MP.
The program can be standardized and repeated as
necessary, both to train new c nployccs and to keep
its objectives Fresh in the minds of more senior
employees. A training program is also Flexible and
can be adapted as a facility's storm water
management needs change over time.
Obstacles to an employee training program include:
• Lack of commitment from senior
managernelnt.
• Lack of employce motivation,
• Lack of incentive to become involved ill
BMP implennenta(ion.
KEY PROGRAM COMPONENTS
Specific design criteria for implementing an
employee training program include:
• Ensuring strong commitment and periodic
input from senior management.
• CommuLlicating frCCILlcrltly to cnsurc
adequate understanding of SWITP goals
and objectives.
• Utilizing experience from past spills to
prevent future spills.
• Making employees aware of BMP
]monitoring and spill reporting procedures.
• Developing operating manuals and standard
procedures.

1
1
1
1
1
i
Implementing spill drills.
i-Al PLEM ENT AT CON
An employee training program should be an
on -going, yearly process. Meetings about SWIII'Ps
should be held at least annually, possibly in
conjunction with other training programs. Figure 1
illustrates a sample employee training worksheet.
Worksheets such as these can be used to plats and
track employee training programs. Program
performance depends on employces' participation
and on senior management's commitment to
reducing point and nor►polnt sources of pollution;
therefore, performance will vary among facilities.
To be effective these programs need senior
management's support
COSTS
Costs for implementing an employee training
program are highly variable. Most storm water
training program costs will be directly related to
labor and associated overhead costs. Trainers can
reduce costs by using free educational materials
available on the subject of storm water quality.
Figure 2 can be used to estimate the annual costs
for an in-house training program. Table 1 provides
an example of haw this worksheet can be used to
estimate annual costs.
RE CI RENCES
U.S. EPA, 1979. NPDI:S BMI' Guidance
Document.
2. U.S. EPA, Pre-print, 1992. Stormwater
Management for Industrial flctivities:
Developing Pollution Prevention Plans ancJ
Best Management Practices. 1:PA 832-R-92-
006.
ADDITIONAL IN1{ORMAnON
Center for Watershed Protection
Tom Schucler
8391 Main Street
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Tim Clark
285 Aragon Avenue
Coral Gables, F1133134
HillsbomLigh County, l"-lorida
.lose Rodriguez
Hillsborough County Public Works
601 Bast Kennedy Boulevard
Tampa, FL 33601
King County, Washington
Dave Hancock
Department of Natural Resources, Water and (Land
Resources Division, Drainage Services Section
700 5`h Avenue, Suite 2200
Seattle, WA 98104
Mitchell Training, Inc.
Barbara Mitchell
5414 SW 1776 Street
Archer, FL 32618
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission
Bob Biebel
916 N. East Avenue, P.O. Box 1607
Waukesha, W153187
The mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for the use by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
City of Coral Gables, Florida

1
1
1
d
1
EMPLOYEE TRAINING
Worksheet Completed by:
Title:
Date:
Instructions: Describe the employee training program for your facility below. The program should, at a minimum, address spilt prevention and
response, good housekeeping, and material management practices. Provide a schedule for the training program and list the employees who
attend the training sessions.
Training Topics
Brief Description of
Training
Program/Materials (e.g.,
film, newsletter, course)
Schedule for
Training (list dates)
Participants
Spill Prevention and Response
Good Housekeeping
Material Management
Prartices
Other Tapirs
bource: U. S. EPR, 1992,
FIGURE 1 SAMPLE WORKSHEET FOR TRACKING EMPLOYEE TRAINING
TABLE 1 EXAMPLE OF ANNUAL EMPLOYEE TRAINING COSTS
Title Number
Average Overhead'
Estimated
Estimated Annual
Hourly Multiplier
Yearly Hours
Cost ($)
Rate ($j
on SW
Training
Stormwater 1
x '15 x 2.0
x 20
= 600
Engineer
Plant Management 5
x 20 x 2.0
x 10
= 2,000
Plant Employees 100
x 10 x 2.0
x 5
= 10,000
Total Estimated Annual Cost $12,600
Note: defined as a multiplier (typically
ranging between 1 and 3) that takes into account those costs associated with
costs other than salary of employing a person, expenses, etc

Title Number Average Overhead Estimated Estimated
Hourly Multiplier Yearly Hours on Annual Cost
Rate ($) SW Training ($)
x x x = (A)
x x x = (B)
x x x = (C)
x x x - (D)
Total Estimated Annual Cost
(Sum of A+B+C+p)
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992.
FIGURE 2 SAMPLE ANNUAL TRAINING COST WORKSHEET
For more information contact:
Municipal Technology Bnuich
U.S. EPA
Mail Code 4204
401 M St., S.W.
Washington, D.C., 20460
O B
€xccOtrrcc Fi cmgrarre dram oplfmal Ecrtnfc� mkrtlon�
MUNICIPAL TECHNOLOGY BRAN H

t
0
United States Office of Water 832-F-99-005
Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. September 1999
Agency
Storm VVa$er
Management Fact Sheet
Record Keeping
DESCtzir '1ON
Keeping records of spills, leaks, and other
discharges can help a facility run more efficiently
and cleanly. Records of past spills contain useful
information for improving Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to prevent future spills. Typical
items that should be recorded include the results of
routine inspections, and rt,ported shills, leaks, or
other discharges.
Records shoLIId inClllde:
The date, exact place, and time of material
inventories, site inspections, sampling
observations, etc.
Names of inspector(s) and sampler(s)
Analytical information, including the date(s)
and time(s) analyses were performed or
initiated, the analysts' names, analytical
techniques or methods used, analytical
results, and duality assurance/duality control
results of such analyses.
The date, time, exact location, and a
complete characterization of significant
observations, including spills or leaks.
Notes indicating the reasons for any
exceptions to standard record keeping
procedures.
All calibration and maintenance records of
instruments used in storin water monitoring.
All original strip chart recordings for
continuous monitoring; equipment.
Records of any non storm water discharges.
Figure 1 shows a sample workshcet for tracking
spills and leaks.
Record keeping is usually coordinated with internal
reporting and other 13MPs, and is often integrated
into the development of it facility's Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPI'P) as part ol'thc
facility's NPDES storm water discharge permit.
APPLICABILITY
Records keeping is a basic business practice and is
applicable to all facilities. If a separate record
keeping system for tracking BM1's, monitoring;
results, etc., is not currently in place at a facility,
existing record keeping structures can be easily
adapted to incorporate this data. An ideal too] for
implementation is (lie record keeping procedures
laid out in an SWPI'P.
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Record keeping is a simple, easily Implemented,and
cost effective management tool. Complete, well -
organized records can help ensure proper
maintenance of facilities and equipment and can aid
in determining the causes of spills and leaks; thus,
record keeping can protect water quality by helping
to prevent future leaks and spills.
Limitations of a record keeping system may
including the following:

t
• Records must be updated regularly.
• Personnel completing and maintaining
records must be trained to update records
correctly,
• The records need to be readily accessible.
• Records containing any confidential
inlormation must be secured.
IMPLEMENTATION
The key to maintaining records is continual
updating. Ensure that new information, such as
analytical results, is added to existing inspection
records or spill reports as it becomes available. In
addition, update records if there are changes to the
number and location of discharge points, principal
products, or raw material storage procedures_
Maintain records for least five years from the (late
of sample observation, measurement, or spill report.
Some simple techniques used to accurately
document and report results include:
• ]held notebooks.
• Timed and dated photographs.
• Videotapes.
• Drawings and maps.
Computer spreadsheets and database
programs.
COSTS
Costs are those associated with staff hours used to
develop and implement a record keeping system,
costs for analyzing samples, and company overhead
costs. figure 2 is a sample worksheet that can be
used to determine annual record keeping costs.
Table 1 is an example of a completed record
keeping costs sheet.
.RE F ERENCES
1. California Environmental Protection
Agency, August 17, 1992. Staff Proposal
for ModiFiication to Water Quality Order
No. 91-13 DWQ Waste Discharge
Requirements for Dischargers of Storm
Water Associated with Industrial Activities,
Draft Wording, Monitoring Program and
Reporting Requirements.
2. U.S. EPA, 1981. NPD1sS BA11P Guidance
Document,
3. U.S. CPA, Pre-print, 1992. Storm Waier
Management for Industrial Activities:
Develol)ingPollution.Prevention Plans and
Best Management Practices. EPA 832-R-
92-006.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Center for Watershed Protection
Tom Schueler
8391 Main Street
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission
David Bulova
7535 Little River Turnpike, Suite 100
Annandale, VA 22003
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
lion Mooney
Water Quality Division, Storm Water Unit
P.O. Box 1677
Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission
Bob Biebel
916 N. East Avenue, P.O. Box 1607
Waukesha, W 1 53 187
United States Postal Service
Charles Vidich
6 Griffin Road North
Windsor, CT 06006-7030
The mention of trade names or conuziercial products
does not Constitute endorsement or recommendation
for the use by the U.S. I7'nvironmcntal Protection
Agency.

LIST OF SIGNIFICANT SPILLS AND LEAKS
Worksheet
Completed by:
Title:
Date:
Directions: Record below ail significant spills and significant leaks of toxic or hazardous pollutant that have occurred at the faciiity in the three years prior to the
effective date of the permit.
Definitions: Significant spills include, but are not limited to. releases of oil or hazardous substances in excess of reportable quantities.
1 st Year
Prior
Date
(mo/day/yr)
Spill
L
a
a
k
Location
(as indicated
on site map)
Description
Response Procedure
Preventive Measure Taken
Type of
Material
Quantity
Source, if
Known
Reason
Amount of
Material
Recovered
Material No
I anger
Exposed to
Storm Water
(True / False)
2nd Year
Prior
Date
(moldaylyr)
Spill
L
a
a
k
Location
(as indicated
on site map)
Description
Response Procedure
Preventive Measure Taken
Type of
Material
Quantity
Source, if
Known
Reason
Amount of
Material
Recovered
Material No
Longer
Exposed to
Storm Water
(True / False)
3rd Year
Prior
Date
(molday/yr)
Spill
L
a
a
k
Location
(as indicated
on site map)
Description
Response Procedure
Preventive Measure Taken
Type of
Material
Quantity
Source, If
Known
Reason
Amount of
Material
Recovered
Material No
Longer
Exposed to
Storm Water
(True 1 False)
Source: U-S. EPA, 1992.
FIGURE 1 SAMPLE WORKSHEET FOR TRACKING SPILLS AND LEAKS

Title Quantity Average Overhead Estimated Estimated Annual Cost($)
Hourly Multiplier Yearly Hours on
Rate ($) SW Training
x x x - (A)
x x x = (B)
x x x = (C)
x x x = (D)
Total Estimated Annual Reporting Cost
(Sum of A+B+C+D)
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992.
FIGURE 2 SAMPLE ANNUAL RECORD KEEPING COST WORKSHEET
TABLE 1 EXAMPLE OF ANNUAL. RECORD KEEPING COSTS
Title Quantity Average Overhead* Estimated Yearly Estimated Annual
Hourly Multiplier Hours on SW Cost ($)
Rate {$) Training
Storm Water 1 x 15 x 2.0 x 20 = 600
Engineer
Plant 5 x 20 x 2.0 x 10 - 2,000
Management
Plant 100 x 10 x 2.0 x 5 = 10,000
Employees
Total Estimated Annual Cost: $12,600
`Note: Defined as a multiplier (typically ranging between 1 and 3) that takes into account those casts associated
with payroll expenses, etc
Source: U.S. EPA, 1992. For more information contact:
Municipal Technology Brtulch
U.S. E�PA
Mail Code 4204
401 M St., S.W.
Washington, D.C., 20460
9OMTB
Excernce h wrt"E3xe thwgh C>Pft i te&4A JOIA10M
MUNICIPAL TECHNOLOGY BRAN H

1
1
11
1
11
I
United States Office of Water EPA 832-F-99-021
Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. September 1999
Agency
oEPAZo 'ae r
anao"ement Fact Sheet
Materials Inventory
DESCRIP'1 ION
A materials inventory system involves the
identification of all sources and cluantitics of
"significant" materials tliat maybe exposed to direct
precipitation or storm water runoff at a particular
site. "Significant" materials are substances related
to industrial activities such as process chernicals,
raw materials, Fuels, pesticides, and fertilizers.
When these substances are exposed to direct
precipitation or storm water runoff, they may be
carried to a receiving water body. Therefore,
identification of these materials helps to determine
sources of potential contamination and is the first
step in pollution control.
APPLICABILITY
A materials inventory system is appropriate at most
industrial facilities. Inventory of exposed materials
should be part of it baseline administrative program
and is directly related to both record keeping and
visual inspection Best Management Practices.
AIIVANTAGES AND DISADVAN'rAGES
Since the program is intended to prevent pollution
before.it occurs, it is not possible to quantify water
quality benefits to receiving waters of a materials
inventory program. However, it is anticipated that
an effective materials inventory program will
improve the quality of storm water discharges.
Limitations ofa materials inventory systorn include:
• It is an on -going process that continually
needs updating.
Qualified personnel are required to perform
the materials inventory from a storm water
perspective.
.KEY PROGRAM COMPONENTS
Most facilities already have in place a materials
inventory system, but this system is not generally
followed from a storm water contamination
viewpoint. Adding storm water considerations into
an existing inventory should require only minimal
effort. When discussiIlg a material inventory It is
very important to be aware of Material Safety Data
Sheets (MSDS). Currently the United States
Government has created a Hazard Communication
standard, which requires all firms manufacturing
and/or distributing chernicals within the United
States to prepare MSDSs for those chernicals and
distribute them to their customers.
Keeping an up-to-date inventory of all materials
(hazardous and nori-hazardous) on the site will help
to track how materials are stored and handled on
site, and identi fy which materials and activities pose
the greatest risk to the environment. The following
instructions explain the basic steps in completing a
materials inventory:
• Identify all chemical substances present in
the work place. Walk through the facility
and review the purchase orders for the
previous year. List all chemical substances
used in the work place and then obtain the
material safety Bala sheet (MSDS) for each_
• Label all containers to show the name and
type of substance, stock number, expiration
date, health hazards, suggestions for

I"
1
handling, and first aid information. This
information is found on the MSDS.
Unlabeled chemicals and chemicals with
deteriorated labels are often disposed of
improperly or unnecessarily.
Clearly tnark on the inventory those
hazardous materials ' that require specific
handling, storage, use, and disposal
considerations.
Au example Materials Inventory Worksheet is
provided in Figure 1. Based on your materials
inventory, describe the significant materials that
were exposed to storm water during the past three
years or are currently exposed.
Other 13MI's should then be evaluated and
implemented to prevent exposure of these materials
to storm water or them before discharge. Figure 2
illustrates a sample worksheet for evaluating
exposed materials.
IMPLEMENTATION
The key to a proper materials inventory system is
continual updating of records. Maintaining an
up-to-date materials inventory is an efficient way to
identify what materials are handled on -site and
whether they contribute to storm water
contamination problems.
COSTS
Typically, the major cost of implementing a
materials inventory system is the time required to
adapt an existing program to emphasize storm water
duality. The incremental cost is usually small.
Costs of the program are often offset by cost
savings in other areas. Improved material tracking
and inventory practices, such as instituting a shelf
life program, can reduce the waste resulting ffom
the overstocking and disposal of outdated materials.
Careful tracking of all materials ordered may also
result in more efficient materials use.
Worksheet Completed by:
MATERIAL INVENTORY
Title:
Date:
Instructions: List all materials used, stored, or produced on site. Assess and evaluate these materials for their
potential to contribute pollutants to storm water runoff. Also complete Worksheet 3A if the
material has been exposed during the last three years.
Quantity (units)
Past Significant Spill or
Leak
Quantity
Likelihood
exposed
of contact
"I
Purpose 1
Location
Used
Produced
Stored
during
last 3
years
with storm
water. If
yes,
Yes
No
describe
reason
Source: U. S. EPA. 1992,
FIGURE 1 SAMPLE MATERIAL INVENTORY

Q
t
1
1
1,
1
1
1
1
1
1
DESCRIPTION OF EXPOSED SIGNIFICANT MATERIAL
Worksheet Completed by:
Title:
Bate;
Instructions. Based on your material inventory, describe the significant materials that were exposed to storm
water during the past three years or are currently exposed. For the definition of "significant
materials" see Appendix 8 of the manual.
tescription of
Exposed
Significant
Material
Period of
Exposure
Quantity
Exposed (units)
Location (as
indicated on
the site map)
Method of
Storage or
Disposal (e.g_.
pile, drum, tank)
Description of
Material
Management
Practice (e.g.,
pile covered,
drum sealed)
Source: U S, EPA, 1992.
FIGURE 2 EXPOSED MATERIAL WORKSMEET
RE1+LRE:NCES
1. U.S. II;PA, 1992. NPDES Best
Management Practices Guidance
Document.
2. U.S. HIA, 1992. StortnwaterManagement
for Industrial Activities: Developing
Pollution Prevention Plans and Best
Management Practices. EPA 832-R-92-
006.
ADDITIONAL 1NT011ZMA"PION
Center for Watershed Protection
Toni Schuelcr
8391 Main Street
E3111cott City, MD 21043
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission
David 13ulova
7535 Little River Turnpike, Snite 100
Annandale, VA 22003
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
Don Mooney
Water Quality Division, Storm Witter Unit
P.O. Box 1677
Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677
Southeastern Wits. Regional Planning Commission
Bob Biebel
916 N. East Avenue, P.O. Box 1607
Waukesha, W 153187
United States Postal Service
Charles Vidich
6 Griffin Road North
Windsor, CT 06006-7030

LI
1
1.1
'rhe mention oftrade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation
for the use by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
For more iul'ormalion contact:
Municipal Teclutiology Branch
U-S. l;PA
Mail Code 4204
401 M St., S.W.
Washington, D.C., 20460
0
Ex[Nerte h tp,plxxe H'.^agh ApIM71 IlC+'kal soY,tloru
MUNICIPAL. IECWNOLOGY BkAN H

I k
I
United States Office of Water 832-F-99-004
Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. September 1999
Agency
A St
coo
orm Water
OEM Fact Sheet
Preventive Maintenance
DESCRIPTION
Preventive maintenance involves the regular
inspection, testing, and replacement or repair of
equipment and operational systerns. As a storm
water best management practice (BMI'), preventive
maintenance should be used to monitor systems
built to control storm water. These systems should
be inspected to uncover cracks, leaks, and other
conditions that could cause breakdowns or failures
of storm water mitigation structures and equipment,
which, in turn, could result in discharges of
chemicals to surface waters either by direct
overland flow or through storm drainage systems.
A preventive maintenance program can prevent
breakdowns and failures through adjustment, repair,
or replacement of equipment before a major
breakdown or failure occurs.
Typically, a preventive maintenance program
should include inspections of catch basins, storm
water detention areas, and water quality treatment
systcrns. Without adequate nnaititena.nee, sedinient
and debris can quickly clog storm drainage facilities
and render them useless.
APPLICABILITY
Preventive maintenance procedures and activities
are applicable to almost all industrial facilities.
This concept should be a part of a general good
housekeepingprogram designed to maintain a clean
and orderly work, environment. Often the most
effective first step towards preventing storm water
pollution from industrial sites is to improve the
facility's preventive maintenance and general good
housekeeping methods.
For many facilities, preventive maintenance to
protect water quality is simply an extension of
current plant preventive maintenance programs.
Most plants already have preventive maintenance
programs that provide some degree of
environmental protection. Such programs could be
expanded to include storm water considerations.
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTACES
Preventive maintenance takes a proactive approach
to storm water management and seeks to prevent
problerns before they occur. A preventive
maintenance prograrn can improve water duality by
controlling pollutant discharges to surface water
that would result from spills and leaks. Preventive
rnaintenanec programs can also save a Facility
money by reducing the likelihood of having a
system breakdown and also by reducing the
likelihood of funding; costly cleanup projects. In
addition, a preventive maintenance program can be
an effective community relations tool.
The primary limitations of implementing a
preventive rnaintcrrance program include:
• Cost.
• Availability of trained preventive
maintenance staff technicians.
Management direction and staff motivation
in expanding the preventive maintenance
program to include storni water
considerations.

0
1
I
11
1
KEY PROGRAM COMPONENTS
lwlements of a good preventive maintenance
program should include the following:
• Identification of equipment or systems that
may malfunction and cause spills or leaks,
or may otherwise contaminate, storm water
runoff'. Typical equipment to be inspected
inspected includes pipes, pumps, storage
tanks and bins, pressure vessels, pressure
release valves, process and material
handling equipment, and storm water
management devices.
• Establishment of schedules and procedures
for routine inspections.
• Periodic testing of plant equipment for
structural soundness.
Prompt repair or replacement of def.'ective
equipment found during inspection and
testing.
• Maintenance of a supply of, spare parts for
cquipmcnt that needs frequent repairs.
• Use of an organized record -keeping system
to schedule tests and document inspections.
• Commitment to ensure that records are
complete and detailed, and that they record
test results and follow-up actions.
Preventive maintenance inspection records
should be kept with other visual inspection
records.
UM PLMM ENTATION
The key to properly implementing and tracking a
preventive maintenance program is through the
continual updating of maintenance records. Update
records immediately after performing preventive
maintenance or repairing an item and review them
annually to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the
program, 'Then reline the preventive maintenance
procedures as necessary.
No quantitative data on the effectiveness of
preventive maintenance as a BM1' is available.
However, it is intuitively clear that an effective
preventive maintenance program will result in
improved storm water discharge duality.
COSTS
The major cost of Implementing a preventive
maintenance program on storm water quality is the
staff time required to administer the program.
Typically, this is a small incremental increase if a
preventive maintenance program already exists at
the facility.
REFERENCES
U.S. EPA, June, 1981. NPOES Hest
Nlanagement Practice Guidance Document.
2. U.S. EPA, Pre-print, July 1992. Storm
Water Management for Industrial
Activities: Developing.Pollution Prevention
Plans and Best Management Practices,
EPA 832-R-92-006.
3. Washington State Department of Ecology,
February 1992. Storm Water Management
Manual for Puget Sound.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Center for Watershed Protection
Tom Schueler
8391 Main Street
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Northern Virginia Planning District Commission
David Bulova
7535 Little River Turnpike, Suite 100
Annandale, VA 22003
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
Don Mooney
Water Quality Division, Storm Water Unit
P.O. Box 1677
Oklahoma City, OK 73 t 01-1077

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
Commission
+
Bob Biebel
916 N. bast Avenue, P.O. Box 1607
Waukesha, Wl 53187
United States Postal Service
Charles Vidich
6 Griffin Road North
Windsor, CT 06006-7030
The mention of trade names or commercial
products does not canstitute endorsemont or
recommendation for the use by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
0
L
n
I
For more information contact:
Municipal Technology Branch
U.S. EPA
Mail Codc 4204
401 M St., S.W.
Washington, D.C., 20460
20MM"
F.hcencnrr. rn cnm'Juxe Ihrow1h OPOM V&rjem salmons
MUNICIPAL TECHNOLOGY BRAN H

1
11
United States Office of Water EPA 832-F-99-071
Environmental Protection Washington, D.C. September 1999
Agency
o
r"'torm Water
Spill Prevention Planning
DESCRIPTION
Spill prevention is prudent both economically and
environmentally, because spills increase operating
costs and lower productivity. An important tool in
preventing spills is a Spill Prevention Plan. A Spill
Prevention Plan specifies materials handling
procedures and storage requirements and identifies
spill cleanup procedures for areas and processes in
which spills may potentially occur. The plan
standardizes process operating procedures and
employee training in an effort to minimize accidental
Pollutant releases that could contaminate storm
water runo ff.
Spill prevention should be part of a comprehensive
Best Management Practice program to prevent
runoff contamination. This program should also
include storm water contamination aSSessrnetlt, flow
diversion, record keeping, internal reporting,
employee training, and preventive maintenance.
Typically, most businesses and public agencies that
generate hazardous waste and/or produce,
transport, or store petroleum products are required
by State and federal law to prepare spill control and
cleanup plans. Therefore, a Spill Prevention and
Response Plaza may have already bean developed as
a result of other environmental regulatory
requirements. Ex isti ng plans should be re-evaluated
and revised to address storm water management
issues.
A 1' I'LICA BI Ury
A Spill Prevention Plan is applicable to facilities that
transport, transl:er, and/or store hazardous materials,
petroleum products, or fiertilizers that can
contaminate storm water runoff:. An important part
of an effective Spill Prevention Plan is establishing
a method for quick notification of: the appropriate
emergency response teams in the event of a spill. hi
some plants, each area or process may have a
separate team leader and/or response team. Figure
I illustrates a sample spill prevention team roster
that can help in quick identification of Spill
Prevention team leaders and their responsibilities.
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Theadvantages ofan effective Spill Prevention Plan
include reducing storm water contamination and
maintaining the water quality of the rcceiving water.
Spill Prevention Plans are often good ways of
standardizing procedures and employee training to
decrease the likelihood of spills.
Spill Prevention Planning can be limited by the
following:
Lack of employee motivation to implement
the plan.
Lack of commitmcrit from senior
management.
• Key individuals identified in the Spill
Prevention Plan may not be properly trained
in the areas of spill prevention, response,
and cleanup.
KEY PROGRAM COMPONLNTS
Before preparing a Spill Prevention Plan, a facility
Should do the following:

Worksheet
POLLUTION PREVENTION TEAM
Completed by:
MEMBER ROSTER
Title:
Date:
Leader:
'title:
Office Phone:
Responsibilities:
Members:
(�)
Title:
Office Phone:
Responsibilities:
(2)
Title:
Office Phone:
Responsibilities:
(3)
Title:
Office Phone:
Responsibilities:
Source: EPA, 1992,
FIGURE 1 SAMPLE SPILL PREVENTION TEAM ROSTER
Conduct a materials inventory throllghout - [dertify non -storm water discharges and
the facility, non -approved connections to storm water,
evaluate past spills and leaks. Collect and evaluate storm water.
• smninariae tine Endings of this assessment.

Once these tasks have been accomplished, the
in fueling areas, absorbent should be
facility should prepare its Spill Prevention Plan. The
packaged in small bags for convenient use
+
plan should include:
and sinall drums should be available for
storage. Absorbent materials should not be
• A description of the faculty, including the
washed down the floor drain or into tale
owner's name and address, the nature of the
storm sewer.
facility activity, and the general types of
1
chemicals used in the facility.
Emergency spill containment and cleanup
kits should be located at the liteility site.
• A site plan showing the locations of
The contents of the kit should be
cheImical storage areas, storm drains,
approprlatc to the type and quantities of
tribulaty drainage areas with dralllage
chemical or goods stored at the facility.
arrows, all surface water bodies on or next
to the site, and any devices to stop spills
Some structural methods to consider when
from leaving the site (i.e., collection basins).
developing a Spill Prevention Plan include:
Spill prevention devices should also have a
description written on the map. Table 1
Containment diking --Containment dikes
contains a list of features that should be
are temporary or permanent earth or
indicated on the site map.
concrete berms or retaining walls that are
designed to hold spills. Diking can be used
• Notification procedures to be used in the
at any industrial facility, but is most
event of a spill. These should include phone
common lbr controlling large spills or
numbers of key personnel and appropriate
releases from liquid storage illld transfer
regulatory agencies, such as local Pollution
areas. Diking can provide one of the best
Control Agencies and the local Sewer
protective measures against the
Authority.
contamination of storm water because it
surrounds the area of concern and keeps
' Specific instructions regarding cleanup
spilled [materials separated From the, storm
procedures.
water outside of the diked area,
'
• A single designated person who has overall
• Curbing --Similar to containment diking, a
responsibility for spill response, 1Cey
curb is a barrier that surrounds all area of
personnel should be trained in the use of this
concern. Unlike diking, curbing is unable to
'
plan, and all employees should have basic
contain large spills and is usually
knowledge of spill control procedures.
implemented on a small-scale basis_
However, curbing is common at many
A summary of the plan should be written and posted
facilities and in smallareas where liquids are
at appropriate points in the building (i.e., meeting
handled and transferred.
rooms, cafeteria, and areas with a high spill
'
potential). The summary should identify the spill
Collection basins --Collection basins are peri-naricnt
cleanup coordinators, location of cleanup kits, and
structures in which large spills or contanunated
phone numbers of regulatory agencies to be
storm water is contained and stored before cleanup
B
contacted in the cverit of a spill.
or treatment. Collection basins are designed to
receive spills, leaks, etc., and to prevent pollutants
Irnplclmelltnlg the Spill Prevention Plan should
from being released into the environment. Unlike
'
include the following:
containment dikes, collection basins can receive and
contain materials From many locations across a
• Spilt cleanups should begin immediately.
facility.
' 1
No emulsifier or dispersant should be used.

1
I
TABLE 9 CRITERIA FOR DESIGNING A SITE MAP
Worksheet
Completed by:
DEVELOPING A SITE MAP I Title:
Date:
Instructions: Draw a map of your site including a footprint of all buildings, structures, paved areas, and
parking lots. The information below describes additional elements.
All outfalls and storm water discharges
Drainage areas of each storm water outfall
Structural storm water pollutlon controi measures, such as:
-Flow diversion structures
-Retention/detention ponds
-Vegetative swales
Name of receiving waters (or if through a Municipal Separate Sewer System)
Locations of past spills and leaks
Locations of high -risk, waste -generating areas and activities common sites such as:
-Fueling stations
-Vehicle/equipment washing and maintenance areas
-Area for unloading/loading materials
-Above-ground tanks for liquid storage
-Industrial waste management areas (landfills, waste piles, treatment plants, disposal areas)
--Outside storage areas for raw materials, by-products, and finished products
-Outside manufacturing areas
-Other areas of concern (specify: }
Source: EPA, 1992.
In addition to preventing the release of the
substance to surface waters, any spilled substances
must be cleaned up and disposed to protect plant
personnel from potential health and fire hazards.
Methods of cleanup, recovery, treatment, or
disposal include;
• Physical. Physicat methods for the cleanup
of dry chemicals include the use of brooms,
shovels, sweepers, or blows.
• Mechanical. Mechanical methods include
the use of vacuum cleaning systems alld
pumps.
• Chcmical. Chemical cleanups of material
can be achieved with the use ot' sorbents,
gets, and foams. Sorbents are compounds
that immobilize nlatenals by surface
absorption oradsorption in the sorbentbulk,
Gelling agents interact with the spilled

n
a
0
1
11
chemicals) by concentrating and congealing
to form a rigid or viscous material more
conducive to a mechanical cleanup, Foams
are mixtures of air and aqueous solutions of
proteins and surfactant -based foaining
agents. The primary purpose of foams is to
reduce the vapor concentration above the
spill surface, thereby controlling the rate of
evaporation.
IMPLEMENTATION
Past experience has shown that the biggest obstacle
to an effective Spill Prevention Plan is its
implementation. Qualitatively, implementation of a
well prepared Spill Prevention Plan should
significantly decrease contamination of storm water
runoff.
A facility Spill Prevention Plan should be reviewed
at least annually and following any spills to evaluate
the Spill Prevention Plan's level of success and how
it can be improved. The plan should also be
reviewed when a new rnatcrial is introduced to any
of the facility's processes.
Cos'rs
If a facility already has a Spill Control and Cleanup
Plan in place, modification to address storm water
contamination concerns will require minimal cost.
If a facility will be developing a Spill Prevention
Plan for the first time, the initial cost will depend on
the type of material at the facility, the facility size,
and other related parameters. Costs for structural
containment devices will also need to be identified
for each facility.
REF LRENCES
U.S. EPA, 1992. Storm YVoler
Management for Industrial Activilies:
Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and
Best Management Practices. EI'A 832-k-
92-006.
2. Washington State Department of 17"cology,
1992. Storm Water Management iWanual
for Puget SoLind.
ADDI'rIONAL INFORMAT[ON
Blymeyer Engineers, l.nc,
Danielle ormsty
1829 Clement Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
EMPE, Inc.
Bill Basham
220 Athens Way
Plaza 1, Suite 410
Nashville, TN 37228
Environmental Management and training, LLC.
Normand Wei
7284 Vista Bonita Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89129
City of Fort Lauderdale
Jeff: Halsey
218 SW I" Avenue
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
State of Illinois
Jorge Patino, Storm Water Engineer
1021 North Grand Avenue East
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62702
United States Postal Service
Charles Vidich
6 Griffin Road North
Windsor, CT 06006-7030
The mention o 1 trade names or commercial products
sloes not consti Lute endorsemen t or recommendation
for the use by the U.S. Environmentai Protection
Agency.
For more information contact-,
Munici pal 'rechno logy Branch
U.S. EPA
Mail Code 4204
401 M. St., S.W.
o T tum'st*
•fc�Cfuc Y+ (om�1'.i�ce lb-1h tpfk iE t *� fdullnnf
MUNICIPAL TUCHNOLOGY BRAN W

OUT%ALL W.7CONNAISSANCE INVENTORY/ SAMPLE. COLLECTION FtE.LI) SIIN:G;1'
B
1
I
1
1
1
1
Section 1: 13ackgi•ound Data
Subwatershed:
Outfall ID:
Today's dale:
Time (Military):
Investigators;
Form completed by:
Temperature ff):
Rainfall (in.): Last 24 hours:
Last 48 hours:
Latitutde:
Longitude:
CPS Unit: CPS LMK #:
Camera;
Photo #s;
Land Use in Draivage Area (Check al that apply):
❑ Industrial
❑ Ultra -Urban Residential
❑ Suburban Residential
[� Commercial
❑ Open Space
❑ Institutional
Other;
Known Industries:
Notes (e.g.., origin of outfall, if ktiowu):
Sectioil 2: Outf'all Description
LOCATION
MATERIAL
SHAPE
DIMENSIONS (IN.)
SUBMERGED
❑ RCP ❑ CMP
❑ Circular
❑ Singlc
Diameter/Dimensions:
In Water:
❑ No
❑ PVC ❑ HDPE
❑ El'sptical
❑ Double
❑ Partial!;
❑ Fully
❑ Closed Pipe
❑ Steel
❑ Box
❑ Triple
With Sediment:
❑ Other:
❑ Other: _._
❑ Other:
❑ No
❑ Partially
❑ Fully
❑ Concrete
❑ Trapezoid
Depth;
❑ Eat then
❑ Open drainage
❑ Parabolic
Top Width:
❑ rip�rap
Other:
Bottom Width:
❑ Other:
❑ In -Stream
(appties ble when collecting samples)
Flow ]'resent?
❑ Yes ❑ No If No, .Skip to Section 5
Flow Description
(IfPresent)
El Trickle ❑Moderstc ❑SL'i15t:lntlal
Section 3: Quantitative Characterization
FIELD DATA FOR FLOWING OUTFALLS
PARAMETER
RESULT
UNIT
EQUIPMENT
❑Flaw # I
Volume
Liter
—
Bottle
Time to fill
--
Sec
-•—
Flow depth
In
Tape measure
Flow #2
Plow width
Ft, In
Tape measure
Measured length
Ft, In
Titpe measure
Time of travel
�
Stop wutch
Temperature
-F
'l hermOmcter
PH
ptl knits
'test strip/Probe
Ammonia
mall,
'test strip

Outfall Reconnaissance Inventory Field Sheet
Section 4: Physical Indicators for Flowing Outfalls Only
Are Anv Phvsical Indicators Present in the flow? 11 Yes F1 No (IfNo. Skiv to Section Sl
INDICATOR
! CHECK if
Present
DESCRIPTION
I RELATIVE SEVERITY !NOEX (2-3)
Odor
❑
❑ Sewage [IRancid/sour [J Petroleum/gas
❑ 1 —Faint
El2 — Easily detected
El 3 — Noticeable from a
❑ Sulfide ❑ Other.
distance
Clear
❑
�
[3 Clear ❑ Brown ❑ Gray Cl Yellow
❑ 1— Faint colors in
❑ 2 — Clearly visible in
❑ 3 — Clearly visible in
❑ Green ❑ Orange ❑ Red ❑Other.
sample bottle
sample bottle
outfall flow
Turbidity
❑
See severity
❑ 1 — Slight cloudiness
❑ 2 — Cloudy
❑ 3 — Opaque
Floatables
❑ Sewage (Toilet Paper, etc.) ❑ Suds
El1 —Few/slight; origin
❑ 2 — Some; indications
of origin (e.g_,
❑ 3 - Some; origin clear
(e.g_, obvious oil
-Does Not Include
Trash!!
❑
❑ Petroleum (oil sheen) ❑ Other
not obvious
possible suds or oil
sheen, suds, or floating
sheen)
sanitary materials)
Section 5: Physical Indicators for Both 1~lowiztg and Non -Flowing OutfaUs
Are nhvsical indicators that are not related to flow present? n Yes n No UIfNo. Skin to Section 6)
INDICATOR
CHECK if Present
DESCRIPTION
COMMENTS
Outfall Damage
❑
f4
❑ Spalling, Cracking or Chipping ❑ Peeling Paint
0 Corrosion
Deposits/Stains
❑ Oily ❑ Flow Line ❑ Paint ❑ Other:
Abnormal Vegetation
❑
I ❑ Excessive ❑ Inhibited
Poor pool quality
❑
❑ Odors ❑ Colors ❑ Floatables ❑ Oil Sheen
❑ Suds ❑ Excessive Algae ❑ Other:
Pipe benthic growth
❑
❑ Brown ❑ Orange ❑ Green ❑ Other:
Section 6: Overall Outfall Characterization
EE:unlikely ❑ Potential (presence of two or more indicators) ❑ Suspect (one or more indicators with a severity of 3) ❑ Obvious
Section 7: Data Collection
1. Sample for the lab? ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. If yes, collected frorn., ❑ Flow ❑ Pool
3, Intermittent flow trap set? [] Yes ❑ No If Yes, 'type: ❑ OBM ❑ Caulk dam
Section 8: Any `won-I111cit Discharge Concerns (e.g., trash or needed infrastructure repairs)?