McDowell Co. - Catawba River Park

e, \,NArF Michael F. Easley
�C �Q Governor
�Q G William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
rNorth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
"I Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regional Office
WATER QUALITY SECTION
January 11, 2002
Mr. Ken McFadyen
Assistant County Manager
McDowell County
10 East Court Street
Marion, North Carolina 28752
Subject: Catawba River Park
Clean Water Management
Trust Fund (CWMTF)
McDowell County
Dear Mr. McFadyen:
On Friday January 4, 2002 Mr. Mike Parker and I met with you, representatives of the
McDowell County. Commissioners and Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). The
purpose of the meeting was to ensure the stream restoration portions of the proposed Catawba
River Park project would meet Division of Water Quality approval.. We were assured that the
methods to be employed, should CWMTF fund this project and in lieu of plans, will be
appropriate. The methods described included Rosgen natural stream design and river restoration
concepts. In lieu of plans and with the understanding that appropriate restoration methods will be
employed, the Division has no issues with this project, at this time.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project in advance and look
forward to working with you in the future. Should you have any questions regarding this issue
you may contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
O
Larry Frost
Environmental Technician
cc: Mike Parker
Water Quality Section, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, NC 28801-2414 Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
KDENR
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. YJimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
•
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
WATER QUALITY SECTION
June 10, 2002
Mr. Ken McFayden, Assistant County Manager
McDowell County
60 East Court Street
Marion, North Carolina 28752
Subject: Property known as the BMX Park
NC Highway 226 South of Marion
McDowell County
Dear Mr. McFayden:
The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on our conversation of June 6, 2002, with regards
to the use of the property known as the BMX Park, south of Marion. Mr. Stuart Black of the
McDowell County Health Department, has requested the use of this property to conduct soils
training. The Health Department would dig several pits on the property to demonstrate the soil
profile in this area. I have spoken to the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Division's Wetland
contact and all agree that these activities are allowable, without permit or mitigation. We do
request that the pits be dug in areas where the vegetation has already been disturbed and that all
pits are filled upon completion of the training.
If you should have any questions regarding this or other water quality issues contact me at
[phone].
Sincerely,
La ry Frost
Environmental Technician
xc: Tim Smith — USACE
Stuart Black — McDowell County Health Department
Asheville Regional Office, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled\I 10% Post Consumer Paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Asheville Regional .Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Mr. Ronald Harmon
Planning Administrator
McDowell County
60 East Court Street
Marion, NC 28752
Dear.Mr. Harmon:
IWAL
•
A4 •
NCDEN R
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
WATER QUALITY SECTION
December 10, 2002
Subject: McDowell County Watershed
Mr. Van Boyd's Property
US Highway 70 at Buck Creek
McDowell County
The purpose of this letter is to document our meeting of Friday November 8, 2002. On that
date Mr. Roy Davis of this Office and I met with you, Mr. Ken McFadyen and Mr. Van Boyd on Mr.
Boyd's property bordering Buck Creek. Mr. McFadyen arranged the meeting for the purpose of
discussing Mr. Boyd's proposed accessing of his property along Buck Creek and the impact on
McDowell County's Watershed Ordinance.
Mr. Boyd proposed a road that would cross the adjacent property owned by a Mr. Burleson
and then would cross a berm located on his property. The purpose of the berm is to redirect
stormwater from the Boyd property to a point outside of the Buck Creek watershed. I made these
observations about the site and its access. It appears that there are other ,accesses available to
this property that should be explored as alternatives, which are outside of the watershed. The
adjacent mobile home park, for example, appears to have access outside of the watershed, and
might be utilized. However, should Mr. Boyd decide that there are no other ;alternatives, then; the
construction would have to be approved by the County in accordance with the provisions of the
watershed ordnance. Additionally, the construction should not disturb the stormwater pattern of
the Boyd property nor existing berm elevations that were previously established. Should this
criteria be met then this Division would have no issue with Mr. Boyd's proposal.
Asheville Regional Office, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled\110% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Harmon
December 10, 2002
Page 2
If you should have any questions regarding this or other water quality issues please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Larry Frost
Environmental Chemist
Asheville Regional Office, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled\110% Post Consumer Paper

Michael A. Thompson, Chairman
Bob Brackett, Vice Chairman
Dean Buff, Commissioner
Larry A. "Butch" Hogan, Commissioner
Andy Webb, Commissioner
McDOWELL COUNTY
Charles R. Abernathy
County Manager
Carrie Padgett
Clerk to the Board
Donald Fred Coats
County Attorney
60 East Court Street • Marion, North Carolina 28752 • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]
October 5, 2001
Via Certified Mail
Mr. Forrest Westall, Regional Water Quality Supervisor
NC DENR/ DWQ
Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Re: BMX Park violations
Dear Mr. Westall:
Thank you for your October 1, 2001 letter regarding water quality violations at BMX Park on
Highway 226 South in McDowell County. I have copied the McDowell BMX Park, Inc. on the
notice of violation and will assist them in any way to correct any problems relating to the site's
development.
McDowell County has leased approximately three acres to the McDowell BMX Park, Inc. adjacent
to the Saddle and Bridle Club on the same parcel to allow the organization to develop a BMX racing
track. In planning the park's development, the McDowell BMX Park submitted and received
approval for an erosion and sedimentation control plan from the Division .of Land Resources on
August 29, 2001 (attached). In submitting the erosion and sedimentation control plan application,
the BMX organization anticipated that the necessity of a 401 Water Quality Certification, or any
further permits, would be triggered upon the application's submission and review. Development of
the project site did not begin until receipt of the plan's approval. The erosion and sedimentation
control application identified the hauling -in of dirt fill (for the track's mounds);, at the project site.
Also, run-off from Highway 226 may account for the project area's saturation; however, we will
defer to your judgment on this possibility.
At your discretion, McDowell County will assist the BMX Park with the process of applying for 401
Water Quality Certification. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank
you for your time and consideration.
Page 1 of 2

Sincerely,
Ken McFadyen
Assistant County Manager
Attachment.
cc: Chuck Abernathy, County Manager
Tracy Fuller, McDowell BMX Park, Inc.
Page 2 of 2

ern
NCDENk
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross, Secretary
Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section
Charles H. Gardner, P.G., P.E. Director Richard A. Phillips, P.E., Regional Engineer
LETTER OF APPROVAL
August 29, 2001
Tracy Fuller
McDowell BMX Park, Inc.
9 North Main St.
Marion, NC 28752
This office has reviewed the erosion and sedimentation control plan submitted for the project listed below. We
find the plan to be acceptable and hereby issue this Letter of Approval with modifications and/or performance
reservations. A list of the modifications required and/or reservations is attached. This approval is conditioned
upon the incorporation or addition of these items to the plan. Please be advised that Title 15A, North Carolina
Administrative Code 4B.0017(a), requires that a copy of the approved soil erosion control plan be on file at the
job site. Also, you should consider this letter to give the Notice required by NCGS §113A-61(d) of our right of
periodic inspection to ensure compliance with the approved plan. This plan approval shall expire three (3) years
following the date of approval, if no land -disturbing activity has been undertaken, as is required by Title 15A
NCAC 46.0029.
The State's Sedimentation Pollution Control Program is a performance -oriented program requiring protection of
the natural resources and adjoining properties. If, following commencement of this project, it is determined that
the plan is inadequate to meet the requirements of NCGS §113A-51 to 66, this office may require revisions to
the plan and implementation of the revisions to ensure compliance with the Act. Acceptance and approval of
this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with federal and state water quality laws, regulations, and rules.
In addition, local city or county ordinances or rules may also apply to this land -disturbing activity. This approval
does not supersede any other permit or approval.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information provided in the Financial
Responsibility Form which you have provided. You are requested to file an amended form -if there is any change
in the information included on the form. Title 15A NCAC 413.0127(c) amended July 1, 2000, states: No person
shall initiate a land -disturbing activity before notifying the agency that issued the planapproval of the date
that the land -disturbing activity will begin. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
9X�h�mz pz-
Maxwell R. Fowler, P.E.
Asst. Regional Engineer
MR' ,a
Enclosu
copy: cDowell Co. Manager
Project name: McDowell BMX Park Site River Basin: Catawba
ID #: MCDOW-2002-001 Stream Classification: C
Date received: 8/8/01.
New submittal (✓) Revision ( )
59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone] & 828/251-6098 Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

A- Oeil 1312-;,Z
Location information
The project is located on Highway 226 south of I-40 and directly across the highway from the Marion
Correctional Institution Minimum Security Unit. The parcel is owned by McDowell County and is
leased by the McDowell BMX Park for the purpose of establishing a BMX racing track. A drainage
ditch constitutes the project area's southern perimeter.
General site features
The project area is a 3-acre part of a larger parcel owned by McDowell County. The western parcel
line bounds the City of Marion's Wastewater Treatment facility. The immediate area accommodates
the McDowell County Saddle and Bridle Club.
The project area is predominantly level in topography. Initial development of the project area will
account for roughly one acre with future development not to exceed 3 acres. Currently, the project
area is undeveloped. An existing access, gravel road forms the project area's southern perimeter.
Development of the project area will involve the mounding of dirt to form a BMX racing track. The
dirt fill may be provided from an off -site, separate DOT -contracted bridge construction project. The
dirt fill will be stock -piled immediately on the project area.
Site drainage features
With the exception of the adjoining Saddle and Bridle Club and the City of Marion's facility, the
project area proper is undeveloped and relatively flat. Drainage may occur from Highway 226 which
bounds the eastern perimeter and which rests higher than the project area. Iota -Braddock -Rosman -
Potomac are the soil types found in the project area's vicinity (McDowell Soil and Water Survey,
general soil map). No excavation of the project area is planned; the project involves the mounding
of dirt to form a BMX racing track.
Erosion control measures
A particular erosion control issue is preventing the dirt fill from entering the drainage ditch as noted
above and cited on the accompanying project map. However, a vegetative area lies between the
project area and the drainage ditch which favors erosion control. At the Division of Land Quality's
direction, silt fencing can be installed as a erosion control measure.
Vegetative stabilization
Following completion of the track course, the project plans for grass on the non -track surfaces to
take hold to prevent the mounds from eroding.

lox
NCDENR
North Carolina Deoartment of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley. Governor William G. Ross. Jr., Secretarn;
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality:
WATER. QUALITY SECTION
October 1, 2001
CERIFIED MAIL `
RETURN RECEIPT, REQUESTED
Mr. Ken McFayden, Assistant County Manager
McDowell County
60 East Court Street
Marion, North Carolina 28752
Subject: Notice of Violation
Wetlands Standards Violation
Proposed BMX Park
NC Highway 226 South of Marion
McDowell County
Dear Mr. McFayden:
On September 25, 2001 Mr. Mike Parker and on September 26, 2001 Mr. Larry.Frost, both
of this office, visited property owned by McDowell County, located west of NC Highway 226 South
of Marion. Also, I understand Mr. Frost visited your office on September 26, 2001 and informed
you of the Division's concern. The property is approximately three (3) acres in size. and is
adjacent to the property owned by the City of Marion's. Corpening Creek Wastewater Treatment
Plant on the north and the Saddle and Bridle Club to the south. The inspections of the property
revealed that a ditch has been constructed in the wetland area of this property and the spoil
material has been side cast onto the adjacent wetland. Also, fill dirt has been hauled onto the
property and is being placed in the southeast corner of the. property. It has been determined that
these activities were conducted without a 401 Water Quality Certification from the State of North
Carolina, required pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0500, a copy is enclosed for your. information.
Asheville Regional Office, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled\110% Post Consumer Paper

Ken McFayden
October 1, 2001
Page Two
In addition to the above violations, the fill of subject wetlands, represents a violation of
wetland standards as specified in 15A NCAC 2B .0231 (b), a copy is enclosed for your
information.
The Division requests that all land disturbing activities cease immediately on this property
and the ditch be filled in using the same material that was removed. Furthermore, the Division
requests that within ten (10) working days of receipt of this notice that the County submits to, this
office, a written. response which clearly explains why a 401 Water Quality Certification for the
wetland clearing, filling and ditching was not secured prior to disturbance of the subject wetland.
If you wish to provide any additional information, or if you believe that there are other factors that
should be considered, please include those with your response.
Finally, by copy of this notice the US Army Corps of Engineers has been notified of this
violation and may request further information. Should you have any questions regarding this
matter please contact Mr. Larry Frost at [phone].
Sincerely,
;6irrest . Westall
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
xc: COE — Asheville
Chuck Abernathy, County Manager
John Dorney
Mike Parker
Larry Frost
Asheville Regional Office, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled\1.10% Post Consumer Paper

Little & Associates Architects, Inc.
5815 Westpark Drive
Charlotte, NC 28217
NCDENR
Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville NC 28801
We are sending you:
❑ Shop drawings
0 Copy of letter
Letter Of Transmittal
Date: 09.10.01
T-JobNumber: 111.4675.00
ATTENTION: WQ Supervisor
RE: Cor enin YMCA — Sugar Hill Road
1XI Attached ❑ Under separate Cover via
❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples
❑ Change Order ❑
❑ Specifications
Copues
Date
° ' Number
Description '
1
WSCA 10/99
Watershed Classification Attachment
These are transmitted as checked below:
❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted
El For your use ❑ Approved as noted
❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections
❑ For review and comment ❑
❑ Fnr bids due.
Remarks:
❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ Return corrected prints
WQ Supervisor,
Please return the completed and properly executed Form WSCA 10/99 to my attention. Let me know if you
have any questions or comments. Thank you for your help.
cc:
Tom Balke - LAA
2001
it �kNAT Ei
FiCt!iLif:'�GlQidS�l
l
Signe Darek Oleksy, EIT
evelopment Group
704-561-5122

V%
Asheville, NC 28801 Fayetteville, NC 28301
Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Avery Macon
Anson
Moore
Buncombe Madison
Bladen
Robeson
Burke McDowell
Cumberland
Richmond
Caldwell Mitchell
Harnett
Sampson
Cherokee Polk
Hoke
Scotland
Clay Rutherford
Montgomery
Graham Swain
Haywood Transylvania
Henderson Yancey
Jackson
Raleigh Regional Office
Washington Regional Office
WQ Supervisor
WQ Supervisor
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101
943 Washington Square Mall
Raleigh, NC 27609
Washington, NC 27889
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Chatham Nash
Beaufort
Jones
Durham Northampton
Bertie
Lenoir
Edgecombe Orange
Camden
Martin
Franklin Person
Chowan
Pamlico
Granville Vance
Craven
Pasquotank
Halifax Wake
Currituck
Perquimans
Johnston Warren
Dare
Pitt
Lee Wilson
Gates
Tyrell
Greene
Washington
Hertford
Wayne
Hyde
Winston-Salem Regional Office
WQ Supervisor
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Alamance Rockingham
Alleghany Randolph
Ashe
Stokes
Caswell
Surry
Davidson
Watauga
Davie
Wilkes
Forsyth
Yadkin
Guilford
Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Alexander Lincoln
Cabarrus Mecklenburg
Catawba Rowan
Cleveland Stanly
Gaston Union
Iredell
Wilmington Regional Office
WQ Supervisor
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Brunswick New Hanover
Carteret Onslow
Columbus Pender
Duplin
FORM: WSCA 10/99 Page 2 of 2

AA

` State of North Carolina.
Department of Environment and' Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality SEP j
WATERSHED CLASSIFICATION ATTACHMENT
Any changes made to this form will result in the application being returned.
(THIS FORMMAYBE PHOTOCOPIED FOR USE AS AN ORIGINAL)
INSTRUCTIONS:
To determine the classification of the watershed(s) in which the subject project will be located, you are required to
submit this form, with Items 1 through 8 completed, to the appropriate Division of Water Quality Regional Office
Water Quality Supervisor (see Page 2 of 2) prior to submittal of the application for review. At a minimum, you must
include an 8.5" by 11" copy of the portion of a 7.5-minute USGS Topographic Map that shows the surface waters
immediately downslope of the project. You must identify the location of the project and the closest downslope
surface waters (waters for which you are requesting the classification) on the submitted map copy. If the facility is
located in the Neuse River Basin, also include a copy of the soil survey map for the project location.- The
corresponding non -discharge application may not be submitted until this form is completed by the appropriate
regional office and included with the submittal.
1. Applicant's name (name of the municipality, corporation, individual, etc.):
Maxwell M. Corpening Memorial Center Inc.
2. Name and complete address of applicant: 68 South Main St., Suite 204
City: Marion
Telephone number: ( 828 ) 652-2243
State: NC
Facsimile number: (_ )
3. Project name (name of the subdivision, facility or establishment, etc.):
Corpening YMCA
4. County where project is located:
McDowell
5. Name(s) of closest surface waters: Unnamed Tributary of Nix Creek
6. River basin(s) in which the project is located:
Catawba
7. Topographic map name and date: Marion West
Zip:
le - 7.5 Minute Series —1994
28752
8. North Carolina Professional Engineer's seal, signature, and date: P'a®mog
Tc
xa x,
1 41
m
TO: REGIONAL OFFICE WATER QUALITY SUPERVISOR �� F�j'®®mmar ^�Q��e���
Please provide me with the classification(s) of the surface waters, watershed(s), and apat�AOo®��fa sin(s) where
these activities will occur, as identified on the attached map segment:
Name(s) of surface waters and river basin(s): 7' 7'c /(I/A' CA FX& , C47,-440 34 �// — Z v)
Classification(s) (as established by the EMC): ['
Proposed classification(s), if applicable: /A
River basin buffer rules, if applicable: N ��
Signature of regional office personnel: Date:
1DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Regional Office Fayetteville Regional Office Mooresville Regional Office
WQ Supervisor WQ Supervisor WQ Supervisor
59 Woodfin Place Wachovia Building, Suite 714 919 North Main Street
FORM: WSCA 10/99 Page 1 of 2

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor .
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph D., Acting Director
McDowell Co -Water & Sewer Ext
Charles Abernathy
10 East CT St
Marion NC 28752
Dear Mr. Abernathy:
140AN%000% roo4ftia
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
September 18, 2001 Ja�y, C
_ _ _ I
iQQAA I'
B�/AsER ((��UAI.1eY SEC1I�Jill
(,____..�SHrtr(LiC_CEGIQ;JAL (lrhE��
Subject: Permit No. WQ0017285
-McDowell Co -Water & Sewer Ext
McDowell County
The Division's Non -Discharge Permitting Unit has received your signed and sealed certification with record
drawings. The Division hereby accepts this certification based upon its execution and submittal by a North
Carolina Professional Engineer. Please note that the record drawings will be forwarded to the Asheville
Regional Office and have not been reviewed. If a review is conducted, you will be notified of any non-
conformity with the Minimum Design Criteria.
If it would be helpful to discuss this matter further, I would suggest that you contact the Water Quality
Regional Supervisor at the Asheville Regional Office at [phone].
Si cerely,
r
Thelma Williams
cc: Asheville Reb onal Office, Water Quality Section
Central Files
Mattern & Craig
1 ww
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50 % recycled/10 % post -consumer paper

SINCE
1978
J. Wayne Craig
Stewart W. Hubbell
Gene R. Cress
Michael S. Agee
Steven A. Campbell
Randy W. Beckner
FNCDENR,
Kerr T. Stevens
DWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Stevens:
Mattern & Craig
CONSULTING ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS
July 16, 2001
Wm. Thomas Austin
Bradley C. Craig
David P. Wilson
Edwin K. Mattern, Jr. (1949-1982)
Sam H. McGhee, III (Retired)
Jul
op 20'?001
/REC �RSR gV'91/
Re: PRP Water & Sewer Extension
L 8
Comm. No. 1763
I, Randv W. Beckner as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, having been authorized to observe full time the construction of the project, PRP Water &
Sewer Extension, McDowell County. NC for the Permittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities,
due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was
observed to be built within substantial compliance of this permit.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call.
Q'
= I
20327
s p ,
.00
�� bGILI G�_10W,
Q
E
• C •..
Sincerely,
MATTERN & CRAIG
tj .
Randy W. Beckner, P.E.
Principal
Ken McFadyen, Assistant County Administrator
The Division of Water Quality hereby
acknowledges heap: and aceeptanw of this Engineers
Certification
12 Broad Street, Asheville, North Carolina 28801
[phone] Fax [phone]

of WATER
Michael F. Easley
Governor
rWilliam G. Ross Jr.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
0 Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
July 30, 2001
Mr. Charles R. Abernathy
McDowell County Manager
60 East Court Street
Marion, NC 28752
Re: Local Riparian Buffer Ordinance Approval
Dear Mr. Abernathy:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has reviewed and approved the
Lake James Protection Ordinance submitted by McDowell County pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0243 (3)(b) of the
state's Catawba Temporary Riparian Buffer Protection Rule. The Division believes that the buffer ordinance adopted
by McDowell County will provide equal to or greater water quality protection as required under the Catawba
Temporary Riparian Buffer Protection Rule provided that it is adequately implemented and enforced by the county.
Please note that a reevaluation of this approval will be required when the permanent Catawba Riparian Buffer Rule is
adopted.
If you have any questions regarding the DWQ's decision or any other questions regarding the Catawba Temporary
Riparian Buffer Protection Rule, please contact Lin Xu at 919-733-5083 ext. 357. Your interest and cooperation in
protecting Catawba buffers is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
4err T. Stty ns
Cc: Mike Thompson, McDowell County Commissioner
Coleen Sullins, DWQ
Alan Clark, DWQ
Lin Xu, DWQ
John Dorney, DWQ
Forrest Westall, DWQ ARO
Laurie Moorhead, DWQ ARO
Larry Frost, DWQ ARO
Pete Colwell, DWQ MRO
0
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone]
http://www.enr.state.nc.us

Michael F. Easley��-
GoveG'for
William; 3.'riossJr.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
July 30, 2001
Mr. Ron George
Burke County Manager
P. O. Box 219
200 Avery Avenue
Morganton, NC 28680-0219
Re: Local Riparian Buffer Ordinance Approval
Dear Mr. George:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has reviewed and approved the
buffer regulation submitted by Burke County pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0243 (3)(b) of the state's Catawba
Temporary Riparian Buffer Protection Rule. The Division is very pleased with the effort your community has
demonstrated throughout this process. The Division believes that the buffer regulation adopted by Burke County will
provide equal to or greater water quality protection as required under the Catawba Temporary Riparian Buffer
Protection Rule provided that it is adequately implemented and enforced by the county. Please note that a
reevaluation of this approval will be required when the permanent Catawba Riparian Buffer Rule is adopted.
If you have any questions regarding the DWQ's decision or any other questions regarding the Catawba Temporary
Riparian Buffer Protection Rule, please contact Lin Xu at 919-733-5083 ext. 357. Your interest and cooperation in
protecting Catawba buffers is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
`"Kerr T. StevIs
Cc: Judith Francis, Burke County Community Development
Coleen Sullins, DWQ
Alan Clark, DWQ
Lin Xu, DWQ
John Dorney, DWQ
1
Forrest Westall, DWQ ARO
Laurie Moorhead, DWQ ARO iA AUG
arr�yFrost;FDWQ:AROft
Pete Colwell, DWQ MROASH
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone]
httD://www.enr.state.nc.us

REVIEW L®CAL BUFFER ORDINANCE SUBMITTED By BURKE AND MCDOWELL
COUNTIES
Under the Catawba Temporary Riparian Buffer Rule, any local governments that have land use authority in the
Catawba River Basin may adopt a local buffer ordinance and submit it to the Division of Water Quality for
approval. The Division must review and approve the ordinance within 30 days after receiving the request from
local governments, if the Division determines that the local riparian buffer ordinance provides equal to or greater
water quality protection than the state Rule. The Catawba Temporary Buffer Rule would not apply in any areas
where a local government has obtained the Division's approval of the local riparian buffer ordinance, provided that
the local government is implementing and enforcing -the approved local riparian buffer ordinance.
Both Burke and McDowell Counties have submitted their riparian buffer ordinances for approval in June. Staffs
from the central and regional offices from the Division have reviewed the ordinances. In general, staff believes that
the ordinances submitted by Burke and McDowell Counties provide equal to or greater water quality protection
than the state temporary rule.
More Protective than the State Mule
Burke & McDowell Ordinances
Catawba Temporary Buffer Mule
Width
65 feet and 75 feet with 2:1 sloe
50 feet
Zone
One zone with all trees, shrubs and ground
Two Zones with undisturbed Zone 1 and
cover considered as protected vegetation.
vegetated Zone 2.
No grading is allowed in the buffer zone.
Grading and revegetating Zone 2 is allowed.
All permanent
Setback at least 65 feet
May be allowed in zone 2 if meet certain
structure (such
criteria
as buildings)
Road and
Not allowed in the buffer
Allowable or allowable with mitigation
driveway
depending on the impact
Less Protective than the State Rule
Burke & McDowell Ordinances
Catawba Temporary Buffer Rule
Forest
Existing trees with a diameter of 6" or greater
Existing trees with a stump diameter of 12" or
Harvesting
may be removed when replaced by a quantity
greater may be removed in Zone 1.
of trees totaling the diameter of the tree
Any trees in Zone 2 may be removed.
removed.
Recreational
Allowed
Allowed if a footprint of a structure is less than
and accessory
150 square feet.
structures (such
as decks,
gazebos, and
sheds)
Landuse
Do not specify
New buffers are required to be established.
change
Enforcement*
$100 per violation, however has the stop work
Fine up to $25,000
order
* State has oversight authority.

SUMMARY OF LOCAL RIPARIAN BUFFER ORDINANCES SUBMITTED' BY BURKE
AND iW DOWELL C®UNTIES
Fifty feet of natural woodland buffers (measured horizontally) is required to be protected from the reference line of
Lake James, Lake Rhodhiss, rind Lake Hickory within Burke and Mcdowell Counties, and the top of bank of
Catawba River within Burke County. The referece line is defined as the Duke Power Company Lake James Project
Boundary of 1,200 feet evelation above mean sea level.
Primary structures are required to be set back at least sixty-five (65) feet (measured horizontally) from the reference
line. On lots with a slope greater or equal to 2:1 (horizontal to vertical), the setback requirement is increased to
seventy-five (75) feet from the reference line. Primary structure is defined as a structure or building on a parcel
which contains the primary use of a parcel of land. A seventy-five (75) feet of setback from the reference line is
'required for roads and/or driveways.
General Provisions within Fifity Feet of the Natural Woodland Buffer
• All trees, shrubs and ground cover are considered protected vegetation.
• Clearing, thinning, pruning, and planting shall be accomplished with hand tool.
• All existing forest floor humus layers, leaf litter and soil shall remain undisturbed and intact.
Activities Permitted, within Fifty Feet of the Reference Line
• Dead, diseased, hazardous or unsafe trees, shrubs or ground cover may be removed.
• Fallen trees may be removed.
• Vines, shrubs, ground covers and small trees may be selectively cleared in order to faciliate a better view or a
more aesthetically pleasing landscapes.
• Understories of trees may be thinned, but no grubbing and griding of stumps is allowed.
• Existing trees with a diameter of six inches or greater may be removed when replaced by a quantity of trees
totaling the diameter of the tree removed. Replacement trees are not to be less than one and a half inch -
diameter. Diameter shall be measured at a height of three feet from the base of the tree. The replacement trees
may be placed anywhere within fifity feet of the reference line.
• Individual trees may be pruned to remove only lateral limbs from no more than the lower fifty percent of the
tree total height.
• Ground cover other than permanent turf grasses may be planted.
• Shoreline stabilization is permitted.
• Permanent grass other than turf grasses, may be permitted in conjuction with shoreline stabiliztaion projects
where the slopes will not support a natural mulch ground cover.
• Clearing is allowed to create corridors for equipment access, and to allow slope to be laid back to creat a stable
condition. Protected trees removed to accommodate the stabilization shall be replaced.
• Accessory structures such as storage sheds and gazebos but excluding automobile garages may be permitted.
• Structures that support water dependent uses(i.e., boat ramps, docks, piers, and boat houses, but not parking
areas) are permitted if they comply with all applicable Duke Power, local, state, and federal regulations.
Activities Not Permitted within Fifty Feet of the Reference Line
• Topping of trees
• Grubbing or grinding of stumps of any size.
• Chemcals shall not be used to kill stumps and other vegetation.
• Mechanical clearing shall not be used unless it is used in conjunction with a shoreline stabilization project.

PROPOSED RECLASSIFICATION OF ARMSTRONG CREEK:
PUBLIC HEARING SET FOR MAY
The N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources on behalf of the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) will conduct a public hearing in order to receive public comments on the proposed
reclassification of Armstrong Creek in McDowell County (Catawba River Basin) to High Quality Waters
(HQW)
� You
PUBLIC HEARING
McDowell County Courthouse Date:, May 28, .m1998 ', ;f '
4: 1998 �s /
1 South Main Street Time: 7:00 p. APR 3 0-
Marion, NC
Location:
The criteria for designation to High Quality Waters includes those waters which are rated as excellent based on
biological and physical/chemical characteristics through' Division of Water Quality (DWQ) monitoring or special
studies, native and special native trout waters designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission, primary
nursery areas designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission and other functional nursery areas designated by
the Wildlife Resources Commission, critical habitat areas designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission or
the -Department of Agriculture, all water supply watersheds which are .either classified as WS-I or WS-II or
those for which a formal petition for reclassification as WS-I or WS-II has been received from the appropriate
local government and accepted by DWQ, and all Class SA waters.
McDowell County officials have
requested that DWQ remove the
WS-II water supply classification
from the Armstrong Creek
watershed. Until October, 1997
the stream had been used by a
local industry as a source for
process water and drinking water
for its employees. In addition to
being considered HQW by
definition (as it is under Class
WS-II), Armstrong Creek was
evaluated by DWQ Environmental
Sciences Branch staff and
received an Excellent water
quality . bioclassification rating.
The EMC is proposing to
reclassify Armstrong Creek, and
all tributaries, from Classes WS-
II, WS-II CA, WS-II Tr, and C
Tr to Classes C HQW and C Tr
HQW.
Proposed Reclassification of Armstrong Creek
1�
Mitchell County_ — US 221
`
/ 'isGoUnM�
/thc 0°
Creek
1
0
Pisgah
/
_
Mnst^on9 Creek :-- '`
i
National
/
T
Esc
m
Forast/
x
/
Q
m
Lake
/
Ma
Tahoma
m
C°ems Creek
US 70
Mill Creek
Ga�Wba
1
Swannanoa Creek
Proposed High
1- 40
US 70
Quality Waters
\
vfiaP�ve%
Gam
The reclassification would result in generally less stringent requirements being placed on the regulated
community in the Armstrong Creek watershed. The following table highlights some requirements which apply
to the Armstrong Creek watershed under its current WS-II classification, in comparison to what would apply if
reclassified to HQW.
(Over)

Proposed Reclassification of Armstrong Creek to HQW
Current WS-II
Proposed High Quality Waters
requirements apply only to areas within
requirements apply to entire watershed
except additional sedimentation and
one mile and draining to High Quality
erosion control measures
Waters
Wastewater Dischargers
general permit discharges only
domestic & industrial discharges allowed,
new and expanding discharges have
additional treatment requirements, no new
discharges from single family residences
Development Density
low density option - 1 dwelling unit (du)
low density option- 1 du/acre or 12%
note: the high density option requires that
per acre or 6% built upon area in the
built upon area
the first inch of runoff from a rain event
Critical Area (CA) and 1 du/acre or 12%
high density option- no limit specified
be controlled through the use of
built upon area in the balance of the
engineered stormwater controls;
watershed
stormwater control systems must be
high density option- 6%-24% built upon
designed to remove 85% of total
area in the CA and 12%-30% built upon
suspended solids
area in the balance of the watershed
Additional Sedimentation &
Division of Land Resources sedimentation
Division of Land Resources sedimentation
Erosion Control Requirements
& erosion control requirements apply to
& erosion control requirements apply to
developments disturbing one acre or more
developments disturbing one acre or more
in areas which are within one mile and
in areas which are within one mile and
draining to WS-II streams
draining to H W streams
Stream Buffers
low density - 30 feet
low density - 30 feet
high density - 100 feet
high density - none required
How to Submit Comments:
The purpose of this announcement is to encourage those interested in this proposal to provide comments. You
may either attend the public hearing and make relevant verbal comments or submit written comments, data or
other relevant information by June 28, 1998. The Hearing Officer may limit the length of time that you may
speak at the public hearing, if necessary, so that all those who wish to speak may have an opportunity to do so.
We encourage you to submit written comments as well.
The Environmental Management Commission is very interested in all comments pertaining to the proposed
reclassification. All persons interested and potentially affected by the proposal are strongly encouraged to read
this entire announcement and make comments on the proposed reclassification. The EMC may not adopt a rule
that differs substantially from the text of the proposed rule published in the North Carolina Register unless the
EMC publishes the text of the proposed different rule and accepts comments on the new text (see General
Statute 150B 21.2 (g)). The proposed effective date for the final rules pursuant to this hearing process is April
1, 1999. Written comments may be submitted to Liz Kovasckitz of the Water Quality Planning Branch at the
address listed below.
For Additional Information:
Further explanations and details on the proposed reclassification of Armstrong Creek and other classifications
may be obtained by writing or calling:
Liz Kovasckitz
DENR/Division of Water Quality
Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
[phone], extension 572
In the case of inclement weather on the day of the public hearing is scheduled, please contact the above
telephone number for a recorded message on any changes to the location, day or time of the hearing.
1000 copies of this public document were printed at a cost of $29.00 or $.03 per copy

PROPOSED RECLASSIFICATION OF MILL CREEK, SWANNANOA CREEK, AND
TOMS CREEK: PUBLIC HEARING SET FOR JUNE
The N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources on behalf of the Environmental
Management Commission (EMC) will conduct a public hearing in order to receive public comments on the
proposed reclassification of Mill, Swannanoa and Toms Creeks in McDowell County (Catawba River Basin) to
High Quality waters (HQW).
PUBLIC HEARING
Location: McDowell County Courthouse Date: June 3, 1997
1 South Main Street Tune: 7:00 p.m.
Marion, NC
BACKGROUND
The criteria for designation to High Quality Waters includes those waters which are rated as excellent based on
biological and physical/chemical characteristics through Division of Water Quality (DWQ) monitoring or special
studies, native and special native trout waters designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission, primary
nursery areas designated by the Marine Fisheries Commission and other functional nursery areas designated by
the Wildlife Resources Commission, critical habitat areas designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission or
the Department of Agriculture, all water supply watersheds which are either classified as WS-I or WS-H or
those for which a formal petition for reclassification as WS-I or WS-II has been received from the appropriate
local government and accepted by DWQ, and all Class SA waters.
Several tributary sites of the Upper Catawba River were identified as potential HQW streams by the Division of
Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch. Mill Creek, Swannanoa Creek and Toms Creek, three of the
qualifying streams, received an excellent bioclassification and they, including their tributaries, are recommended
for reclassification to HQW. DWQ is requesting that the EMC reclassify these streams as follows: Mill Creek,
and all tributaries, from its source to Swannanoa Creek from Class C Tr to Class C Tr HQW; Swannanoa
Creek, and all tributaries, from its source to Mill Creek from Class C Tr to Class C Tr HQW; and Toms Creek
from its source to Harris Creek from Class C Tr to Class C Tr HQW, and from Harris Creek to McDowell
County SR 1434 from Class C to Class C HQW.
Mty— — US 221
`
GounH�
i ®a co,
Pisgah
/
rong Creek
Nationalon
/
r
Fonast/
on
``
He F
Creek
/
�
00
%*
Lake
/
Tahoma
�a�
m
Creek
US 70
Mill k
Gyta�+�P�Je
Swannanoa Creek
® Proposed High
I
1- 40
Quality Waters
US 70
��

If reclassified, new and expanding wastewater dischargers to the area affected by the proposed reclassification
in the Toms Creek and the Mill and Swannanoa Creeks watersheds will have additional treatment requirements.
Expanded discharges are those that increase their permitted pollutant loading. Single family residences would
not be permitted to discharge to surface waters. Land disturbing activities which require a Sedimentation and
Erosion Control Plan and which drain to and are within one mile of HQW streams will have more stringent land
use development criteria
SUMMARY
The N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources on behalf of the EMC will conduct a
public hearing in order to receive public comments on the proposed reclassifications of Mill, Swannanoa and
Toms Creeks to High Quality Waters. After the public comment period is closed, a recommendation on whether
to proceed with the proposed reclassifications will be made to the EMC.
McDowell County is the only local government having land use jurisdiction in the area affected by the proposed
rule change. If the streams are reclassified, new and expanded wastewater dischargers would have more
stringent treatment requirements, and new single family residences would not be permitted to discharge to
surface waters. There are currently no permitted dischargers i^, the Toms Creek, or Mill and Swannanoa ".-k.s
watershed areas proposed for reclassification, and DWQ has not received any requests for a new or expanded
discharge in these areas. The Division of Land Resources currently requires sedimentation and erosion control
measures on all land disturbances greater than one acre. If reclassified, more stringent sedimentation and
erosion control practices in areas within one mile and draining to the HQW designated waters would apply.
PUBLIC INPUT
The purpose of this announcement is to encourage those interested in this proposal to provide comments. You
may either attend the public hearing and make relevant verbal comments or submit written comments, data or
other relevant information by July 3.1997. The Hearing Officer may limit the length of time that you may
speak at the public hearing, if necessary, so that all those who wish to speak may have an opportunity to do so.
We encourage you to submit written comments as well.
Comment Procedure:
The Environmental Management Commission is very interested in all comments pertaining to the proposed
management strategy. All persons interested and potentially affected by the proposal are strongly encouraged to
read this entire announcement and make comments on the proposed reclassification. The EMC may not adopt a
rule that differs substantially from the text of the proposed rule published in the North Carolina Reg ster unless
the EMC publishes the text of the proposed different rule and accepts comments on the new text (see General
Statute 150B 21.2 (g)). The proposed effective date for the final rules pursuant to this hearing process is
August 1,1998. Written comments may be submitted to Liz Kovasckitz of the Water Quality Planning Branch
at the address listed below.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Further explanations and details on the proposed reclassification of Mill. Swannanoa and Toms Creeks and
other classifications may be obtained by writing or calling:
Liz Kovasckitz
DEHNR/Division of Water Quality
Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
[phone], extension 572
900 copies of this public document were printed at a cost of $26.40 or $ .03 per copy

McDowell County Planning Board Meeting
April 22, 1997
Division of Water Quality Presentation
I. Classifications and Standards Program Overview
• primary classifications
• supplemental classifications
II. High Quality Waters (HQW) Classification
• qualifying waters
• management strategies
• what HQW will not do
III. Mills, Swannanoa, and Toms Creeks Reclassification
• location
• summary
• schedule
IV. Armstrong Creek Reclassification
• location
• summary
• schedule
V. WS-IV Protected Area Reclassification
• location
• summary
• schedule
Contacts: Liz Kovasckitz, Environmental Specialist, DWQ, Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Phone: [phone], ext. 572 Fax: [phone]
Steve Zoufaly, Classifications & Standards Supervisor, DWQ, Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Phone: [phone], ext. 566 Fax: [phone]

HOW Qualifying Waters:
Surface waters in the following categories qualify for classification as High Quality Waters or HQW:
1) waters rated as Excellent based on chemical and biological sampling (Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
assigns water quality ratings to North Carolina's surface waters based on biological and chemical data);
2) streams designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission as native and special native trout waters or
primary nursery areas;
3) waters designated as primary nursery areas by the Division of Marine Fisheries; and
4) critical habitat areas designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission or the Department of Agriculture.
Waters classified by the Division of Water Quality as WS-I, WS-II and SA are HQW by definition, but these
waters are not specifically assigned the HQW classification because the standards for WS-I, WS-II and SA
waters are at least as stringent as those for waters classified as HQW.
HOW Management Strategies:
• In waters classified as HQW, new or expanded wastewater discharges are required to provide additional
treatment.
• New single family residences can not empty effluent from their septic tank system directly into waters
classified as HQW; if no other alternative exists, the effluent may be discharged, but it must be treated with
dual or recirculating sand filters, disinfection and step aeration.
• Any new development activities which disturb greater than one acre of land and are within one mile and
draining to HQWs must control stormwater runoff through low density development (1 dwelling unit per
acre or 12% built upon area) or structural stormwater controls for higher density development.
What HOW Will Not Do:
• The HQW classification has no effect on silvicultural activities.
• The HQW classification has = effect on any kind of agricultural activities. For example, animals are not
required to be fenced out of streams.
• The HQW classification does nZ prohibit use of private land; however, large developments may have to
control stormwater runoff.
• Any developments in the affected area that disturb less than one acre of land, such as single family owners
building a single family dwelling on their own lot, do not have to comply with either the low density or the
high density options contained in the HQW rule.

Proposed Reclassification of Armstrong Creek
o
Mitchell Countyi US 221
Ys�iy ®G°vn� �~�
�! Cox
/opcG°�eC
Pisgah /
_
Armstro�
ng Creek
Z
National /
T
Esc
-n
Forest/
reed
/
e4��
I
/
Creak
/
Lake
�
/
M Tahoma
ackey
m
f
Cr�k
Cues Creek US 70
1 Mill Creek
Caw,*
Swannanoa Creek
Proposed High
I - 40
Quality Waters
US 70 v+ba�wgt
� Data

Reclassification
1997
1998
1999
GA
GA
GA
GA
I
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
Armstrong Creek
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
DRAFT
McDowell County
Proposed
1998-1999
Schedule
for
Selected
HQW
In
-House
Proposed
Reclassifications
EMC EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
Out Out
Out
Out
Out
Out
Out
Out
Meet With Local Gov's/Other Parties if Needed
X
Submit Conceptual 101 (Send up Notice of
X
Rulemaking Form to Prevent 60 Day Auto -File)
Permission from WQC to go to EMC With
Concept
X
Permission from EMC to Proceed with
Rulemaking Proceedings
X
-DRAFT
Prepare Fiscal Note
X
X
Submit Final 101 and Notice of Text/ Fiscal Note
X
NRP Published in NC Register
X
Comment Period Ends for NRP
X
Notice to Governor
X
Final Notice of Text and Fiscal Note to
Rule -Making Coordinator
X
Notice of Text Published
X
Public Hearing
X
End Notice of Text Comment Period (will extend
comment period 1 mo after hearing when applies)
X
EMC Adopts Rules
X
RRC Files Rules with General Assembly (25 Days
Before 1st Day of Next GA Session)
X
Rules Become Effective (APRIL 1, 1999)
X
1997
1998
1999

.0214 FRESH SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR 'CLASS WS-II
WATERS
The following water quality standards apply to surface waters within water supply watersheds
that are classified WS-II. Water quality standards applicable to Class C waters as described in
Rule .0211 of this Section also apply to Class WS-II waters.
(1) Best Usage of Waters. Source of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food -processing
purposes for those users desiring maximum protection for their water supplies where a WS-I
classification is not feasible and any best usage specified for Class C waters.
(2) Conditions Related to Best Usage. Waters of this class are protected as water supplies
which are in predominantly undeveloped watersheds and meet average watershed development
density levels as specified in Sub -Items (3)(b)(i)(A), (3)(b)(i)(B), (3)(b)(ii)(A);!and (3)(b)(ii)(B)
of this Rule; discharges which qualify for a General Permit pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H ..0127,
trout farm discharges, recycle (closed loop) systems that only discharge in response to 10-year
storm events and other stormwater discharges are allowed in the entire .watershed; new domestic
and industrial discharges of treated wastewater are not allowed in the entire watershed; the
waters, following treatment required by the Division of Environmental Health, shall meet the
Maximum Contaminant Level concentrations considered safe for drinking, culinary, and
food -processing purposes which are specified. in the national drinking water regulations and in
the North Carolina Rules Governing Public Water Supplies, 15A NCAC 18C... 1500; sources of
water pollution which preclude any of these uses on either a short-term or long-term basis shall
be considered to be violating a water quality standard. The Class WS-II classification may be
used to protect portions of Class WS-III and WS-IV water supplies. , For reclassifications of
these portions of Class WS-III and WS-IV water supplies occurring after the July 1, 1992
statewide reclassification, the more protective classification requested by local governments shall
be considered by the Commission when all local governments having jurisdiction in the affected
area(s) have adopted a resolution and the appropriate ordinances to protect the; watershed or the
Commission acts to protect a watershed when one or more local governments has failed to adopt
necessary protection measures.
(3) Quality Standards Applicable to Class WS-II Waters:
(a) Sewage, industrial wastes, non -process industrial wastes, or other wastes: none
except for those specified in either Item (2) of this Rule and Rule .0104 of this Subchapter; and
none which shall have an adverse effect on human health or which are not effectively treated to
the satisfaction of the Commission and in accordance with the requirements of the Division of
Environmental Health, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources; any discharger may be required upon request by the Commission to disclose all
chemical constituents present or potentially present in their wastes and chemicals which could be
spilled or be present in runoff from their facility which may have an adverse impact on
downstream water quality; these facilities may be required to have spill and;, treatment failure
control plans as well as perform special monitoring for toxic substances;
(b) Nonpoint Source and Stormwater Pollution: none that would adversely impact the
waters for use as a water supply or any other designated use;
(i) Nonpoint Source and Stormwater Pollution Control Criteria For Entire
Watershed:
(A) Low Density Option: Development density must be limited to either no
more than one dwelling unit per acre of single family detached residential: development (or

40,000 square foot lot excluding roadway right-of-way) or 12 percent built -upon area for all
other residential and non-residential development in the watershed outside of the critical area;
Stormwater runoff from the development shall be transported by vegetated conveyances to the
maximum extent practicable;
(B) High Density Option: If new development exceeds the low density
option requirements as stated in Sub -Item (3)(b)(iXA) of this Rule, then engineered stormwater
controls must be used to control runoff from the first inch of rainfall; new residential and
non-residential development shall not exceed 30 percent built -upon area;
(C) Land within the watershed shall be deemed compliant with the density
requirements if the following condition is met: The density of all existing development at the
time of reclassification does not exceed the density requirement when densities are averaged
throughout the entire watershed area at the time of classification;
(D) Cluster development is allowed on a project -by -project basis as follows:
(I)overall density of the project meets associated density or stormwater
control requirements of this Section;
(II)buffers meet the minimum statewide water supply watershed
protection requirements;
(III)built-upon areas are designed and located to minimize stormwater
runoff impact to the receiving waters, minimize concentrated stormwater flow, maximize the use
of sheet flow through vegetated areas; and maximize the flow length through vegetated areas;
(IV)areas of concentrated development are located in upland areas and
away, to the maximum extent practicable, from surface waters and drainageways;
(V)remainder of tract to remain in vegetated or natural state;
(VI)area in the vegetated or natural state may be conveyed to a
property owners association; a local government for preservation as a park or greenway; a
conservation organization; or placed in a permanent conservation or farmland preservation
easement;
(VII)a maintenance agreement for the vegetated or natural area shall be
filed with the Register of Deeds; and
(VIII)cluster development that meets the applicable low density option
requirements shall transport stormwater runoff from the development by vegetated conveyances
to the maximum extent practicable;
(E) A maximum of 10 percent of each jurisdiction's portion of the
watershed outside of the critical area as delineated on July 1, 1993 maybe developed with new
development projects and expansions of existing development of up to 70 percent built -upon
surface area in addition to the new development approved in compliance with the appropriate
requirements of Sub -Item (3)(b)(i)(A) or Sub -Item (3)(b)(i)(B) of this Rule. For expansions to
existing development, the existing built -upon surface area is not counted toward the allowed 70
percent built -upon surface area. A local government having jurisdiction within the watershed
may transfer, in whole or in part, its right to the 10 percent/70 percent land area to another local
government within the watershed upon submittal of a joint resolution and review by the
Commission. When the water supply watershed is composed of public lands, such as National
Forest land, local governments may count the public land acreage within the watershed outside
of the critical area in calculating the acreage allowed under this provision. For local
governments that do not choose to use the high density option in that WS-II watershed, each
project must, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize built -upon surface area, direct

stormwater runoff away from surface waters and incorporate best management practices to
minimize water quality impacts; if the local government selects the high density development
option within that WS-H watershed, then engineered stormwater controls must be employed for
the new development;
(F) If local governments choose the high density development option which
requires stormwater controls, then they shall assume ultimate responsibility for operation and
maintenance of the required controls as outlined in Rule .0.104 of this Subchapter,
(G) Minimum 100 foot vegetative buffer is required for all new
development activities that exceed the low density option requirements as specified in Sub -Items
(3)(b)(i)(A) and Sub -Item (3)(b)(ii)(A) of this Rule; otherwise a minimum 30 foot vegetative
buffer for development activities is required along all perennial waters indicated on the most
recent versions of U.S.G.S. 1:24,000 (7.5 minute) scale topographic maps or ,as determined by
local government studies; nothing in this Section shall stand as a bar to desirable artificial
streambank or shoreline stabilization;
(I) No new development is allowed in the buffer; water dependent
structures, or other structures such as flag poles, signs and security .lights, which result in only
diminimus increases in impervious area and public projects such as road crossings and
greenways may be allowed where no practicable alternative exists; these activities shall minimize
built -upon surface area, direct runoff away from the surface waters and maximize the utilization
of BMPs;
(I) No NPDES permits shall be issued for landfills that discharge treated
leachate;
(ii) Critical Area Nonpoint Source and Stormwater Pollution Control Criteria:
(A) Low Density Option: New development is limited to either no more
than one dwelling unit of single family detached residential development per two acres (or
80,000 square foot lot excluding roadway right-of-way) or six percent built=upon area for all
other residential and non-residential development; Stormwater runoff from the development shall
be transported by vegetated conveyances to the maximum extent practicable;
(B) High Density Option: If new development density exceeds the low
density requirements specified in Sub -Item (3)(b)(ii)(A) of this Rule, then engineered stormwater
controls must be used to control runoff from the first inch of rainfall; new residential and
non-residential development density not to exceed 24 percent built -upon area;
(C) No new permitted sites for land application of residuals or petroleum
contaminated soils are allowed;
(D) No new landfills are allowed;
(c) Odor producing substances contained in sewage or other wastes: only such
amounts, whether alone or in combination with other substances or wastes, as will not cause:
taste and odor difficulties in water supplies which cannot be corrected by treatment, impair the
palatability of fish, or have a deleterious effect upon any best usage established for waters of this
class;
(d) Phenolic compounds: not greater than 1.0 ug/1 (phenols) to protect water supplies
from taste and odor problems from chlorinated phenols;
(e) Total hardness: not greater than 100 mg/1 as calcium carbonate;
(f) Total dissolved solids: not greater than 500 mg/1;
(g) Toxic and other deleterious substances:
(i) Water quality standards (maximum permissible concentrations) to protect

human health through water consumption and fish tissue consumption for non -carcinogens in
Class WS-II waters:
(A)
Barium: 1.0 mg/1;
(13)
Chloride: 250 mg/1;
(C)
Manganese: 200 ug/l;
(D)
Nickel: 25 ug/l;
(E)
Nitrate nitrogen: 10 mg/l;
(F)
2,4-D: 100 ug/l;
(G)
2,4,5-TP: 10 ug/l;
(H)
Sulfates: 250 mg/l;
(ii) Water quality standards (maximum permissible concentrations) to protect
human health through water consumption and fish tissue consumption for carcinogens in Class
WS-II waters:
(A)
Beryllium: 6.8 ng/l;
(B)
Benzene: 1.19 ug/l;
(C)
Carbon tetrachloride: 0.254 ug/l;
(D)
Chlorinated benzenes: 488 ug/l;
(E)
Dioxin: 0.000013 ng/l;
(F)
Hexachlorobutadiene: 0.445 ug/l;
(G)
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons: 2.8 ng/l;
(H)
Tetrachloroethane (1,1,2,2): 0.172 ug/1;
(n
Tetrachloroethylene: 0.8 ug/l;
(J)
Trichloroethylene: 3.08 ug/l;
(K)
Vinyl Chloride: 2 ug/l;
(L)
Aldrin: 0.127 ng/l;
(M)Chlordane:
0.575 ng/l;
(I)
DDT: 0.588 ng/l;
(0)
Dieldrin: 0.135 ng/l;
(P)
Heptachlor: ' 0.208 ng/l.
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-215.3(a)(1);
Eff. May 10, 1979;
Amended Eff. January 1, 1996; October 1, 1995.

ly`Jb 1 1Uzj/ I iovu
nct_.iaaauri,auUI i
GA
GA
GA
GA GA GA GA
GA
GA
Mills Creek
In
In
In
In In In In
In
In
Swannanoa Creek
Proposed
1997-1998 Rule -Making
Toms Creek
Schedule
for Selected In -House
Proposed
Reclassifications
McDowell County
C
EMC
EMC
EMC EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
HQW
Out
Out
Out
Out Out
Out
Out
Out
out
Meet With Local Gods/Other Parties if Needed
X
Submit Conceptual 101 (Send up Notice of
Rulemaking Form to Prevent 60 Day Auto -File)
X
Permission from WQC to go to EMC With
Concept
X
Permission from EMC to Proceed with
Rulemaking Proceedings
X
Prepare Fiscal Note
X
X
Submit Final 101 and Notice of Text/ Fiscal Note
X
NRP.Published in NC Register
X
Comment Period Ends for NRP
X
Notice to Governor
X
Final Notice of Text and Fiscal Note to
X
Rule -Making Coordinator
Notice of Text Published
X
Public Hearing
X
End Notice of Text Comment Period (will extend
comment period 1 mo after hearing when applies)
X
EMC Adopts Rules
X
RRC Files Rules with General Assembly (25 Days
X
Before 1st Day of Next GA Session)
Rules Become Effective
X
(AUGUST 1, 1998)
1996
11997
1998

INFORMATION PACKAGE
PROPOSED RECLASSIFICATION OF MILL CREEK,
SWANNANOA CREEK AND TOMS CREEK
TO HIGH QUALITY WATERS
Environmental Management Commission
Division of Water Quality
PUBLIC HEARING
Location: McDowell County Courthouse Date: June 3, 1997
1 South Main Street Time: 7:00 p.m.
Marion, NC
('OMMENT PROCEDURES
All persons interested in this matter are invited to participate. Comments, statements, data, and other
information may be submitted in writing prior to, during, or after the hearing until July 3,1997, or may be
presented verbally at the hearing. The length of verbal statements may be limited at the discretion of the hearing
officer. Submission of written copies of verbal statements is encouraged.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS RECLASSIFICATION CONTACT:
- Liz Kovascldtz
Division of Water Quality
Planning Branch
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
[phone], extension 572

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATIONS AND WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Program Overview 1
Statewide Classifications and Water Quality Standards. 1
Primary Classifications 1
Supplemental Classifications 1
Water Quality Standards 1
High Quality Waters and Outstanding Resource Waters 2
II. PROPOSED RECLASSIFICATION OF MILL, SWANNANOA, AND TOMS CREEKS
Background 3
Wastewater Requirements. 3
Map of Proposed Reclassifications 4
Sedimentation/Erosion Control Requirements 5
Stormwater Requirements 5
Summary 5
III. TABLES AND RULES
Table 1. Summary of North Carolina's Water Quality Classifications and Standards 6
Table 2. Water Quality Standards for Freshwater Classifications 10
Table 3. Water Quality Standards for Saltwater Classifications 11
Antidegradation Policy 15A NCAC 2B .0201 12
High Quality Waters 15A NCAC 2B .0224 13
Stormwater Requirements for High Quality Waters 15A NCAC 2H .1006 14

SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATIONS AND WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Program Overview
Waters were classified for their "best usage" in North Carolina beginning in the early 1950's, with classification
and water quality standards for all the state's river basins adopted by 1963. The effort to accomplish this
included identification of water bodies (which included all named water bodies on USGS 7.5 minute
topographic maps), studies of river basins to document sources of pollution and appropriate best uses, and
formal adoption of standards/classifications following public hearings.
The Water Quality Standards program in North Carolina has evolved over time and has been modified to be
consistent with the Federal Clean Water Act and its amendments. Water quality classifications and standards
have also been modified to promote protection of surface water supply watersheds, high quality waters and the
protection of unique and special pristine waters with outstanding resource values. Classifications and standards
have been broadly interpreted to provide protection of uses from both point and nonpoint source pollution.
Stormwater rules to protect uses and standards of coastal water are an example of North Carolina's water
quality authorities.
Statewide Classifications and Water Quality Standards
Table 1, which begins on page 6, summarizes the state's primary and supplemental classifications including, for
each classification, the best usage, key numeric standards, stormwater controls and other requirements as
appropriate. This information is derived from 15A NCAC 2B .0200 - Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Applicable to Surface Waters of North Carolina.
Primary Classifications
Under this system, all surface waters in the state are assigned a primary classification that is appropriate to the
best uses of that water body (e.g., aquatic life support and swimming). Primary freshwater classifications
include the following: C, B and WS (Water Supply) I through WS-V. The WS freshwater classifications may
also include a CA designation which stands for critical area. The critical area is an area in close proximity to a
water supply intake and/or the shoreline of the reservoir in which it is located. Primary saltwater classifications
include SC, SB and SA. SC and SB are saltwater counterparts to the freshwater C and B classifications. SA is
a classification assigned to waters used for shellfish harvesting. SA, WS-I and WS-II are also, by definition,
considered to be High Quality Waters, as discussed below.
Supplemental Classifications
In addition to primary classifications, surface waters may be assigned a supplemental classification. The
supplemental classifications include HQW (High Quality Waters), ORW (Outstanding Resource Waters), NSW
(Nutrient Sensitive Waters), Tr (Trout Waters) FWS (Future Water Supply) and Sw (Swamp Waters). Most of
these have been developed in order to afford special protection to sensitive or highly!valued resource waters.
Therefore, while all surface waters are assigned a primary classification, they may, also have one or more
supplemental classifications. For example, many surface waters in the Catawba River Basin are supplementally
classified as trout (Tr) waters. Therefore, a typical freshwater stream in the mountains might have a C Tr
classification where C is the primary classification followed by the Tr supplemental classification.
Water Quality Standards
Each primary and supplemental classification is assigned a set of water quality standards that establish the level
of water quality that must be maintained in the water body to support the uses associated with each
1

classification. Some of the standards, particularly for HQW and ORW waters, outline protective management
strategies aimed at controlling point and nonpoint source pollution. These strategies are discussed briefly
below. Tables 2 and 3 on pages 10 and 11 summarize the state's freshwater and saltwater numeric standards.
The standards for C and SC waters establish the basic protection level for all state surface waters. With the
exception of Sw, all of the other primary and supplemental classifications have more stringent standards than
for C and SC and therefore require higher levels of protection.
High Quality Waters and Outstanding Resource Waters
High Quality Waters
Some of North Carolina's surface waters are relatively unaffected by pollution sources and have water quality
higher than the standards that are applied to the majority of the waters of the state. In addition, some waters
provide habitat for sensitive biota such as trout, juvenile fish or rare and endangered aquatic species. In an
effort to protect waters that possess such characteristics, surface waters in the following categories qualify for
classification as High Quality Waters or HQW: 1)waters rated as Excellent based on chemical and biological
sampling (Division of Water Quality (DWQ) assigns water quality ratings to North Carolina's surface waters
based on biological and chemical data); 2) streams designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission as native
and special native trout waters or primary nursery areas; 3) waters designated as primary nursery areas by the
Division of Marine Fisheries; and 4) critical habitat areas designated by the Wildlife Resources Commission or
the Department of Agriculture. Waters classified by the Division of Water Quality as WS-I, WS-H and SA are
HQW by definition, but these waters are not specifically assigned the HQW classification because the standards
for WS-I, WS-II and SA waters are at least as stringent as those for waters classified as HQW.
Special HQW protection management strategies are presented in 15A NCAC 213.0201(d), and implemented
through 15A NCAC 2B .0224. Copies of these rules can be found on pages 12 and 13. These measures are
intended to prevent degradation of water quality below present levels from both point and nonpoint sources.
Point sources are those where pollutants travel through some conveyance system, such as a wastewater
discharge pipe or stormwater conveyance channel. Nonpoint source pollution means pollution.which enters
waters mainly as a result of precipitation and subsequent runoff from lands which have been disturbed by man's
activities. Examples of nonpoint source pollution include sediment from construction sites, nutrients from
agricultural fields, toxic chemicals from pesticide application, and oil, grease and metals in stormwater runoff
from urban areas. HQW requirements for new wastewater discharge facilities and facilities which expand
beyond their currently permitted loadings address oxygen -consuming wastes, total suspended solids,
disinfection, emergency requirements, volume, nutrients (in nutrient sensitive waters) and toxic substances.
For nonpoint source pollution, development activities which require an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
from the Division of Land Resources or delegated local program, and which drain to and are within one mile of
high quality waters will be required to control runoff from the one -inch design storm by using either a low
density or high density option described in 15A NCAC 2H .1006 (see page 14). Controlling stormwater runoff
will help prevent increased costs for water and wastewater treatment, the impairment/destruction of fish and
aquatic life, eroded streambanks and flooding, negative economic impacts to fisheries and tourism businesses,
and impaired recreational uses such as swimming, boating, and fishing.
Outstanding Resource Waters
A small percentage of North Carolina's surface waters have excellent water quality (rated based on biological
and chemical sampling as with HQWs) and an associated outstanding resource. The Outstanding Resource
Waters rule defines outstanding resource values as: 1) outstanding fishery resource; 2) a high level of water -
based recreation; 3) a special designation such as National Wild and Scenic River or a National Wildlife Refuge;
4) being within a state or national park or forest; or 5) having special ecological or scientific significance.
The requirements for ORW waters are more stringent than those for HQWs. Special protection measures that
apply to North Carolina ORWs are set forth in 15A NCAC 2B .0225. At a minimum, no new discharges or
expansions are permitted, and stormwater controls for most new development are required. In some
circumstances, the unique characteristics of the waters and resources that are to be protected require that a
specialized (or customized) ORW management strategy be developed.
2

PROPOSED RECLASIFICATION OF MILL, SWANNANOA, AND TOMS CREEKS
Background
Several tributary sites of the Upper Catawba River were identified as potential HQW streams by the Division of
Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch. Mill Creek, Swannanoa Creek and Toms Creek, three of the
qualifying streams, received an excellent bioclassification and they, including their tributaries, are recommended
for reclassification to HQW. DWQ is requesting that the EMC reclassify these streams as follows: Mill Creek,
and all tributaries, from its source to Swannanoa Creek from Class C Tr to Class C Tr HQW; Swannanoa
Creek, and all tributaries, from its source to Mill Creek from Class C Tr to Class C Tr HQW; and Toms Creek
from its source to Harris Creek from Class C Tr to Class C Tr HQW, and from Harris Creek to McDowell
County SR 1434 from Class C to Class C HQW (see map on page 4).
If reclassified, new and expanding wastewater dischargers to the area affected by the proposed reclassification
in the Toms Creek and the Mill and Swannanoa Creeks watersheds will have additional treatment requirements.
Expanded discharges are those that increase their permitted pollutant loading. Single family residences would
not be permitted to discharge to surface waters. Land disturbing activities which require a Sedimentation and
Erosion Control Plan and which drain to and are within one mile of HQW streams will have more stringent land
use development criteria.
Wastewater Discharge Requirements
For waters classified as HQW, new and expanded discharges must provide advanced treatment. Expanded
discharges are those that expand such that they increase their permitted pollutant loading. If the proposed
reclassifications become effective, the following waterwater discharge requirements will apply to NO,
Swannanoa and Toms Creeks and their tribuatries:
A. Discharges from new single family homes are prohibited.
B . The following treatment is required of new or expanded discharges:
1) Oxygen Consuming Wastes: BOD = 5 mg/l; NH3-N = 2 mg/l; and DO = 6 mg/l.
2) Total Suspended Solids: 10 mg/l in trout waters; 20 mg/l in all other waters (Thorpe Reservoir and
Laurel Branch do not have the supplemental trout designation, but Hurricane Creek does).
3) Disinfection: Alternative methods of chlorination will be required for discharges to trout streams,
except that single family residences may use chlorination if other options are not economically
feasible.
4) Emergency Requirements: Failsafe treatment designs will be employed, including stand-by power
capability for entire treatment works, dual train design for all treatment components, or equivalent
failsafe treatment designs.
5) Volume: The total volume of treated wastewater for all discharges combined will not exceed 50
percent of the total instream flow under 7Q10 conditions.
6) Nutrients: Where nutrient overenrichment is projected to be a concern, appropriate effluent
limitations will be set for phosphorus or nitrogen, or both.
7) Toxic Substances: In cases where complex wastes (those containing or potentially containing
toxicants) may be present in a discharge, a safety factor will be applied to any chemical or whole
effluent toxicity allocation. The limit for a specific chemical constituent will be allocated at one-half of
the normal standard at design conditions. Whole effluent toxicity will be allocated to protect for
chronic toxicity at an effluent concentration equal to twice that which is acceptable under design
conditions. In all instances there may be no acute toxicity in an effluent concentration of 90 percent as
measured by the North Carolina "Pass/Fail Methodology for Determining Acute Toxicity in a Single
Effluent Concentration." Ammonia toxicity will be evaluated according to EPA guidelines.

Proposed Reclassification of Toms Creek,
Mill Creek and Swannanoa Creek
Mitchell County_ _ — i US 221
Gn-i
o,
0 o
/
z
Pisgah /
Armstrong Creek
;i
National
„
Forest/
Qr
0
/
e4ckcre
ris
e6
Creek ,�
0
/
ek
Lake
I
/
Mackey
Tahoma
y
CD
'
C�®e
�Q�
k
Curtis Creek
US 70
MrU Cree k
�
G a�a�ba�`Jec
Swannanoa Creek
/
I - 40
Proposed High
US 70 �ve�
aP�
Quality Waters
a]

Sedimentation/Erosion Control Requirements
Development activities which require a Sedimentation/Erosion Control Plan in accordance with rules established
by the NC Sedimentation Control Commission or an approved local erosion and sedimentation control program,
and which drain to and are within one mile of HQWs shall be required to follow more stringent erosion and
sedimentation control measures. Examples include strict timelines for establishing cover after land -disturbing
activities and more stringent design specifications on sediment basins.
Stormwater Requirements
For High Quality Waters, low density and high density development options are available. The Low Density
Option allows development at 1 dwelling unit per acre, or 12 percent built upon area, and requires 30 foot
buffers along all perennial waters. Under the High Density Option, no development density limit is specified,
but engineered stormwater controls must control runoff from one inch of rainfall. Please see 15A NCAC 2H
.1006 on page 14 for more information on the stormwater requirements applicable to HQWs.
Summary
McDowell County is the only local government having land use jurisdiction in the area affected by the proposed
rule change. If the streams are reclassified, new and expanded wastewater dischargers would have more
stringent treatment requirements, and new single family residences would not be permitted to discharge to
surface waters. There are currently no permitted dischargers in the Toms Creek or Mill and Swannanoa Creeks
watershed areas proposed for reclassification, and DWQ has not received any requests for a new or expanded
discharge in these areas. The Division of Land Resources currently requires sedimentation and erosion control
measures on all land disturbances greater than one acre. If reclassified, more stringent sedimentation and
erosion control practices in areas within one mile and draining to'the HQW designated waters would apply.

H
SUMMARY OF NORTH CAROLINA'S WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS
PRIMARY
CLASSIFICATIONS
IMMMIN—M
C
(standards apply to all
freshwaters, unless pre-
empted by more stringent
standard for more
protective classification)
BEST USAGE
Secondary recreation
(including swimming on an
unorganized or infrequent
basis); wildlife; fish and other
aquatic life propagation
and survival; agriculture
and any other usage, except for
primary recreation, water
supply or other food -related
ruses
B Primary recreation
(swimming on an organized
or frequent basis) and all
uses specified for Class C
(and not water supply or
other food -related uses)
WS-I Water supplies in natural
Water Supply and undeveloped watersheds
W S-II
Water Supply
WS-III
Water Supply
Water supplies in
predominantly undeveloped
watersheds
Water supplies in low to
moderately developed
watersheds
DISCHARGE RESTRICTIONSI
Domestic and industrial wastewater
dischargers allowed
Same as for Class C; wastewater
treatment reliability requirements
(dual train design; backup power
capability) may apply to protect
swimming uses (15A NCAC 211
.0124)
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Stormwater Management Rules
apply in the 20 coastal
counties as described in
15A NCAC 2H .1000
Same as for Class C
OTHER REOUIREMENTSZ
No point source discharges Not applicable since No landfills; residual or
watershed is undeveloped petroleum contaminated soils
application not allowed in
the watershed
Only general permit wastewater
discharges allowed in watershed
General permits allowed throughout
watershed; domestic and non -process
industrial discharges allowed outside
of the Critical Area
Local land management program
required as per 15A NCAC 211 .0214;
6% built upon area in Critical Area;
12% built upon area in the Balance of
the Watershed; up to 24% built upon
area in the Critical Area and 30% in
the Balance of the Watershed allowed
with engineered stormwater controls
for the 1" storm3
Local land management program
required as per 15A NCAC 2B .0215;
12% built upon area in Critical Area;
24% built upon area outside of Critical
Area; up to 30% in Critical Area and
50% built upon area outside Critical
Area allowed with engineered
stormwater controls for the 1" storm3
Buffers required along perennial
waters; no new landfills allowed
in the Critical Area and no new
discharging landfills outside of
Critical Area; no new residual or
petroleum contaminated soils
application allowed in the
Critical Area
Buffers required along perennial
waters; no new landfills allowed
in the Critical Area and no new
discharging landfills outside of
the Critical Area; no new residual
or petroleum contaminated soils
application allowed in the Critical
Area

V
SUMMARY OF NORTH CAROLINA'S WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS (continual)
PRIMARY
CLASSIFICATIONS BEST USAGE DISCHARGE RESTRICTIONS I STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
W S -I V Water supplies in
Water Supply moderately to highly
developed watersheds
W S-V Former or industrial use
Water Supply water supplies
General permits, domestic and
industrial discharges allowed
throughout watershed4
No categorical restrictions on
development or wastewater dischargers
Local land management program
required as per 15A NCAC 2B .0216:
24% built upon area in Critical Area
and Protected Area 5,6; up to 50% in
Critical Area and 70% built upon area
outside Critical Area with engineered
stormwater controls for the 1" storm3
Stormwater Management Rules
apply in the 20 coastal counties
as described in 15A NCAC 2H .1000
OTHER REOUIREMENTS2
Buffers required along perennial
waters; no new landfills allowed
in the Critical Area; no new
residual or petroleum contaminated
soils application allowed in the
Critical Area
Instream water quality standards for
water supply waters are applicable
NOTES: Please refer to 15A NCAC 2B .0101, .0104..0202..0211 and .0301 for more specific requirements for surface water supply protection.
I Groundwater remediation discharges allowed when no altemative exists.
2 See attached tables: Water Quality Standards for Freshwater Classes and Water Quality Standards for Saltwater Classes for numeric standards associated with specific classes.
3 If the high density option is utilized engineered stormwater control systems must be designed for 85% TSS removal. Refer to Stormwater Management Rules (15 A NCAC 2H .1000) for
specific design information.
4 New industrial process wastewater discharges in the Critical Area are allowed but must meet additional treatment requirements.
5 Applies to projects requiring an Erosian/Sedimentation Control Plan.
6 36% built -upon area is allowed for projects without a curb and gutter street system in the Protected Area.
• Critical area is 112 mile and draining to water supplies from normal pool elevation of reservoirs, or 1/2 mile and draining to a river intake.
• Protected Area is 5 miles and draining to water supplies from normal pool elevation of reservoirs, or 10 miles upstream of and draining to a
river intake.
• Agricultural activities are subject to provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 and the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990.
In WS-I watersheds and Critical Areas of WS-II, WS-III and WS-IV areas, agricultural activities must maintain a 10 foot vegetated buffer or
equivalent control as determined by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission.
• Silviculture activities are subject to the provisions of the Forest Practices Guidelines Related to Water Quality (15A NCAC 1I.0101-.0209).
• The Department of Transportation must use BMPs as described in their document, "Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters".

HE
SUMMARY OF NORTH CAROLINA'S WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS (continued)
SUPPLEMENTAL
CLASSIFICATIONS
BEST USAGE I
DISCHARGE RESTRICTIONS
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
ORW
Unique and special waters having
Water quality must clearly maintain
Same as for High Quality Waters for
Outstanding Resource
exceptional water quality and being
and protect uses, including outstanding
Freshwater ORWs; for Saltwater
Waters
of an exceptional state or national
resource values; management
ORWs, development activities within
ecological or recreational
strategies mast include at a minimum:
a 575' buffer must comply with the
significance; must meet other
no new or expanded discharges to
low density option of die Stormwater
conditions and have 1 or more of
freshwater ORWs; some discharges
Management Rules (generally 25%
5 outstanding resource value
may be allowed in coastal areas
built upon area around SA waters and
criteria as described in Rule
30% around other waters)
15A NCAC 2B .0225
TR
Protected for natural trout
Domestic and industrial wastewater
Trout Waters
propagation and survival
discharges allowed with stricter
of stocked trout
treatment requirements
NSW
Waters needing additional
No increase of nutrients over
Nutrient management strategies
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
nutrient management due to
background levels permitted;
developed on a case -by -case basis
their being subject to
domestic and industrial
excessive growth of microscopic
wastewater discharges allowed
and macroscopic vegetation
S W
Waters with low velocities and
Swamp Waters
other characteristics different from
other waterbodies (generally, low
pH. DO, high organic content)
F W S
Waters designated for future water
Discharge restrictions will be reflective
Stormwater management options will
Future Water Supply
supply use
of those of primary water supply
be reflective of those of primary water
classification
supply classification; not required until
after FWS supplemental classification
is removed
6/96
Other management strategy
components as described in
15A NCAC 2B .0225
More protective standards for
cadmium, total residual
chlorine, chlorophyll -a,
dissolved oxygen, turbidity and
toluene to protect these sensitive
species
Nutrient management strategies
developed on a case -by -case
basis
pH as low as 4.3 and DO less
than 5 mg/1 allowed if due to
natural conditions
Requirements for landfill permits.
NPDES wastewater discharges,
land application of residuals and
road construction activities in
Critical Area and Balance of
Watershed or Protected Area as
appropriate (15A NCAC 2H .0101)

tF
SUMMARY OF NORTH CAROLINA'S WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS (continued)
PRIMARY
CLASSIFICATIONS BEST USAGE DISCHARGE RESTRICTIONS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Saltwater,•
SC Saltwaters protected for
secondary recreation,
aquatic life propagation
and survival and other
uses as described for
Class C
S B Saltwaters protected for
primary recreation and all
Class SC uses (similar to
Class B)
SA
Shellftshing and all Class
SC and SB uses
Domestic end industrial wastewater
discharges allowed
Same as Class SC; wastewater
treatment reliability requirements
(dual train design; backup power
capability) may apply to protect
swimming uses (15A NCAC 2H
.0124)
No domestic discharges and only
non -process industrial discharges
such as seafood packing houses or
cooling water discharges
Stormwater Management Rules
(15A NCAC 2H .1000) apply to all
waters in the 20 coastal counties;
low density option: 30% built upon
area or structural stormwater controls
with higher density, as specified
Same as for Class SC
Same as for Class SC except low
density option is 25% built upon area
Supplemental Classifications are added to the primary classifications as appropriate (Examples include Class C-NSW, Class SA-ORW, Class B-Trout, etc.)
and impose additional requirements.
SUPPLEMAVrAL
CLASSIFICATIONS BEST USAGE DISCHARGE REERVIC"YTIVS
HQW Waters rated as Excellent by DEM; For new or expanded discharges
High Quality Waters Primary Nursery Areas; Native or advanced treatment requirements are:
Special Native Trout Waters; WS-I, BOD5=5 mg/1; NH3-N= 2:mgQ;
WS-H and SA waters are HQW DO=6 Mg/l
by definition
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
For projects requiring Erosion/
Sedimentation Control Plan and that
are within_1-mile.and draining -to HQW
waters: 12% built upon area or higher
density with engineered structural
controls allowed; WS-I, WS-H and 20
coastal counties exempt since
stormwater control requirements already
apply
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Other treatment requirements
may apply, dependent upon type
of discharge and.: characteristics.
of receiving waters
(see Antidegradation Policy:
Rule 15A: NCAC 213 .0201)

Water Quality Standards For Freshwater Class'ffications
Dec. 21, 1996
Standards for All Freshwater '
Standards to Support Additional Uses
Swamp
Parameters (ucO unless noted)
Aquatic Life
Human Health,
WS Classed
Trout Waters HCW
Waters
Arsenic
50
Barium
1000
Benzene
71.4
1.19
Beryllium
6.5
0.117
0.0068
Cadmium
2.0
0.4
Carbon tetrachloride
4.42
0.254
Chloride
230000 (AL)
250000
Chlorinated benzenes
488 (N)
Chlorine, total residual
17 (AL)
17
Chlorophyll a, corrected
40 (N)
15 (N)
Chromium, total
50
Coliform, total (MFTCC/100ml)3
50 (N) 4
Coliform, fecal (MFFCC/100ml)3
200 (N)
Copper, total
7 (AL)
Cyanide
5.0
Dioxin
0.000000014
0.000000013
Dissolved gases
(N)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/I)
5.05
6.0
(N) 6
Fluoride
1800
Hardness, total (mg/1)
100
Hexachlorobutadiene
49.7
0.445
Iron (mgA)
1 (AL)
Lead
25(N) "
Manganese
200
MBAs
500
(Methylene-Blue-ActiveSubstances)
Mercury
0.012
Nickel
as
25
Nitrate nitrogen
10,000
Pesticides
Aldrin
0.002
0.000136
0.000127
Chlordane
0.004
0.000588
0.000575
DDT
0.001
0.000591
0.000588
Demeton
0.1
Dieldrin
0.002
0.000144
0.000135
Endosulfan
0.05
Endrin
0.002
Guthion
0.01
Heptachlor
0.004
0.000214
0.000208
Lindane
0.01
Methoxychlor
0.03
Mirex
0.001
Parathion
0.013
Toxaphene
0.0002
2,4-D
100
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)
10
pH (units)
6.0-9.0
(N) s
Phenolic coumpounds
(N)
1.0 (N)
Polychlorinated biphenylsr
0.001
0.000079
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons.
0.0311
0.0028
Radioactive substances
(N)
Selenium
5
Silver
0.06 (AL)
Solids, total dissolved (mg/l)
500
Solids, total suspended (mg/I)
10 Tr, 20 other
Solids, settleable
(N)
Sulfates -
250000
Temperature
(N)
Tetrachloroehane (1,1,2,2)
10.8
0.172
Tetrachlorethyiene
0.8
Toluene
11
0.36
Toxic substances
(N)
(N)
Trialkyltin
0.008
Trichloroethylene
92.4
3.08
Turbidity (NTU)
50; 25 (N)
10 (N)
Vinyl chloride
525
2.0
Zinc
50 (AL)
' These standards apply to all freshwater classifications. For the protection of WS and supplemental classifications, standards listed under Standards to Support
Additional Uses should be used unless standards for aquatic life or human health are listed and are more stringent.
(AL) Values represent action levels as specified in 2B .0211. WS Classes - Water Supply Classifications, same standards for all WS Classes.
(N) See 2B .0211 for narrative description of limits. Haw - High Quality Waters, standards for HQW areas only. Tr - Trout Waters.
r Human health standards are based on consumption of fish only unless dermal contact studies available. See 2B .0208 for equation.
2 Water Supply standards are based on consumption of fish and water. See 2B .0208 for equation.
3 MFTCC/100ml means membrane filter total coliforrn count per 100 ml of sample. MFFCC/100m1 means membrane filter fecal coliform count per 100 ml of sample.
Applies only to unfiltered water supplies.
5 An instantaneous reading may be as low as 4.0 mg/l, but the daily average must be 5.0 mg/I or more.
6 Designated swamp waters may have a dissolved oxygen less than 5.0 mg/I and a pH as low as 4.3, if due to natural condtions.
r Applies to total PCBs present and includes PCB 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, and 1016. See 2B .0208 & .0211.
r Applies to total PAHs present and includes benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthrecene, and
indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene. See 2B .0208, .0212, .0214, .0215, .0216, & .0218.
dmr/Macirdosh HD:Desktop Folderrules word:Old WO Standards Table
10

Water Quality Standards For Saltwater Classifications
April 1,1996
Standards for
All Saltwater _ _Standards to Su000rt'Additional
Uses
Swamp
Parameters (ug/I unless noted)
Aquatic Life
Human Health' Class SA
HC1W Waters
Arsenic
50
Benzene
71.4
Beryllium
0.117
Cadmium
5.0
Carbon tetrachloride
4.42
Chlorophyll a
40 (N)
Chromium, total
20
Coliform, fecal (MFFCC/100m1)2
200 (N) 14 (N)
Copper
3 (AL)
Cyanide
1.0
Dioxin
0.000000014
Dissolved gases
(N)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/1)
5.0
6.d (N)3
Hexachlorobutadiene
49.7
Lead
25(N)
Mercury
0.025
Nickel
8.3
Pesticides
Aldrin
0.003
0.000136
Chlordane
0.004
0.000588
DDT
0.001
0.000591
Demeton
0.1
Dieldrin
0.0002
0.000144
Endosulfan
0.009
Endrin
0.002
Guthion
0.01
Heptachlor
0.004
0.000214
Lindane
0.004
Methoxychlor
0.03
Mirex
0.001
Parathion
0.178
Toxaphene
0.0002
pH (units)
6.8-8.5
(N)3
Phenolic compounds
(N)
Polychlorinated biphenyls4
0.001
0.000079
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbonss
0.0311
Radioactive substances
(N)
Salinity
(N)
Selenium
71
Silver
0.1 (AL)
Solids, total suspended (mg/I)
10 PNA, 20 other
Solids, settleable (mg/1)
(N)
Temperature
(N)
Tetrachloroethane (1,1,2,2)
10.8
Toxic substances
(N)
(N)'
Trialkyltin
0.002
Trichloroethylene
92.4
Turbidity (NTU)
25 (N)
Vinyl chloride
525
Zinc
86 (AL)
(AL) Values represent action levels as specified in 2B .0220. Class SA - shellfishing waters see 2B .0101 for description..
(N) See 2B .0220 for narrative description of limits. PNA - Primary Nursery Areas
HQW - High Quality Waters, standards for HOW areas only.
1 Human health standards are based on consumption of fish only unless dermal contact studies are available. See 2B .0208 for equation.
2 MFFCC/100ml means membrane filter fecal coliform count per 100 ml of sample.
3 Designated swamp waters may have a dissolved oxygen less than 5.0 mg/I and a pH as low as 4.3, if due to natural conditions.
4 Applies to total PCBs present and includes PCB 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, and 1016. See 2B .0208 & .0220.
5 Applies to total PAHs present and includes benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene. See 2B .0208.
dmrMacintosh HD:Desktop Folder:rules word:old WQ Standards Table sw
11

.0201 ANTIDEGRADATION POLICY
(a) It is the policy of the Environmental Management Commission to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality
within the State of North Carolina. Pursuant to this policy, the requirements of 40 CFR 131.12 are hereby incorporated
by reference including any subsequent amendments and editions. This material is available for inspection at the
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, 512
North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies may be obtained from the U.S. Government Printing Office,
Superintendent of Documents, Washington, DC 20402-9325 at a cost of thirteen dollars ($13.00). These requirements
shall be implemented in North Carolina as set forth in Paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) of this Rule.
(b) Existing uses, as defined by Rule .0202 of this Section, and the water quality to protect such uses shall be
protected by -properly classifying surface waters and having standards sufficient to protect these uses. In cases where the
Commission or its designee determines that an existing use is not included in the classification of waters, a project which
shall affect these waters shall not be permitted unless the existing uses are protected.
(c) The Commission shall consider the present and anticipated usage of waters with quality higher than the standards,
including any uses not specified by the assigned classification (such as outstanding national resource waters or waters of
exceptional water quality) and shall not allow degradation of the quality of waters with quality higher than the standards
below the water quality necessary to maintain existing and anticipated uses of those waters. Waters with quality higher
than the standards are defined by Rule .0202 of this Section. The following procedures shall be implemented in order to
meet these requirements:
(1) Each applicant for an NPDES permit or NPDES permit expansion to discharge treated waste shall document
an effort to consider non -discharge alteratives pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0105(c)(2).
(2) Public Notices for NPDES permits shall list parameters that would be water quality limited and state whether
or not the discharge shall use the entire available load capacity of the receiving waters and may cause more
stringent water quality based effluent limitations to be established for dischargers downstream.
(3) The Division may require supplemental documentation from the affected local government that a proposed
project or parts of the project are necessary for important economic and social development.
(4) The Commission and Division shall work with local governments on a voluntary basis to identify and develop
appropriate management strategies or classifications for waters with unused pollutant loading capacity to
accommodate future economic growth.
Waters with quality higher than the standards shall be identified by the Division on a case -by -case basis through the
NPDES permitting and waste load allocation processes (pursuant to the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H .0100).
Dischargers affected by the requirements of Paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this Rule and the public at large shall be
notified according to the provisions described herein, and all other appropriate provisions pursuant to 15A NCAC 211
.0109. H an applicant objects to the requirements to protect waters with quality higher than the standards and believes
degradation is necessary to accommodate important social and economic development, the applicant may contest these
requirements according to the provisions of General Statute 143-215.1(e) and 15011-23.
(d) The Commission shall consider the present and anticipated usage of High Quality Waters (HQW), including any
uses not specified by the assigned classification (such as outstanding national resource waters or waters of exceptional
water quality) and shall not allow degradation of the quality of I-ligh Quality Waters below the water quality necessary to
maintain existing and anticipated uses of those waters. High Quality Waters are a subset of waters with quality higher
than the standards and are as described by 15A NCAC 2B .0101(e)(5). The procedures described in Rule .0224 of this
Section shall be implemented in order to meet the requirements of this part.
(e) Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) are a special subset of High Quality Waters with unique and special
characteristics as described in Rule .0225 of this Section. The water quality of waters classified as ORW shall be
maintained such that existing uses, including the outstanding resource values of said Outstanding Resource Waters, shall
be maintained and protected.
(f) Activities regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.1344) which require a water quality
certification as described in Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.1341) shall be evaluated according to the
procedures outlined in 15A NCAC 211 .0500. Activities which receive a water quality certification pursuant to these
procedures shall not be considered to remove existing uses. The evaluation of permits issued pursuant to G.S.143-
215.1 that involve the assimilation of wastewater or stormwater by wetlands shall incorporate the criteria found in 15A
NCAC 2H .0506(c) (1)-(5) in determining the potential impact of the proposed activity on the existing uses of the
wetland per 15A NCAC 2H .0231.
History Note: Authority G.S.143-214.1; 143-215.1; 143-2153(a)(1);
Eff. February 1,1976;
Amended Eff. October 1,1995; February 1,1993; April 1,1991; August 1,1990;
RRC Objection Eff. July 18,1996 due to lack of statutory authority and ambiguity;
Amended Eff. October 1,1996.
12

.0224 HIGH QUALITY WATERS
High Quality Waters (HQW) are a subset of waters with quality higher than the standards and are as described by 15A
NCAC 2B .0101(e)(5). The following procedures shall be implemented in order to implement the'requirements of Rule
.0201(d) of this Section.
(1) New or expanded wastewater discharges in High Quality Waters shall comply with the following:
(a) Discharges from new single family residences shall be prohibited. Those existing subsurface systems for
single family residences which fail and must discharge shall install a septic tank, dual or recirculating sand
filters, disinfection and step aeration.
(b) All new NPDES wastewater discharges (except single family residences) shall be required to provide the
treatment described below:
(i) Oxygen Consuming Wastes: Effluent limitations shall be as follows: BODS= 5 mg/1;NH; N = 2 mg/1 and
DO = 6 mg/1. More stringent limitations shall be set, if necessary, to ensure that the cumulative pollutant
discharge of oxygen -consuming wastes shall not cause the DO of the receiving water to drop more than
0.5 mg/1 below background levels, and in no case below the standard. Where background information is
not readily available, evaluations shall assume a percent saturation determined by staff to be generally
applicable to that hydroenvironment.
(ii) Total Suspended Solids: Discharges of total suspended solids (TSS) shall be limited to effluent
concentrations of 10 mg/l for trout waters and PNA's, and to 20 mg/1 for all other High Quality Waters.
(iii) Disinfection: Alternative methods to chlorination shall be required for discharges to trout streams, except
that single family residences may use chlorination if other options are not economically feasible. Domestic
discharges are prohibited to SA waters.
(iv) Emergency Requirements: Failsafe treatment designs shall be employed, including stand-by power
capability for entire treatment works, dual train design for all treatment components, or equivalent failsafe
treatment designs.
(v) Volume: The total volume of treated wastewater for all discharges combined shall not exceed 50 percent
of the total instream flow under 7Q10 conditions.
(vi) Nutrients: Where nutrient overenrichment is projected to be a concern, appropriate effluent limitations
shall be set for phosphorus or nitrogen, or both.
(vii) Toxic substances: In cases where complex wastes (those containing or potentially containing toxicants)
may be present in a discharge, a safety factor shall be applied to any chemical or whole effluent toxicity
allocation. The limit for a specific chemical constituent shall be allocated at one-half: of the normal
standard at design conditions. Whole effluent toxicity shall be allocated to protect for chronic toxicity at an
effluent concentration equal to twice that which is acceptable under design conditions. In all instances
there may be no acute toxicity in an effluent concentration of 90 percent. Ammonia toxicity shall be
evaluated according to EPA guidelines promulgated in "Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia -
1984'; EPA document number 440/5-85-001; NTIS number PB85-227114; July 29, 1985 (50 FR 30784)
or "Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia (Saltwater) -1989' ; EPA document number
440/5-88-004; NTIS number PB89-169825. This material related to ammonia toxicity is hereby
incorporated by reference including any subsequent amendments and editions and is available for
inspection at the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Library, 512 North Salisbury
Street, Raleigh, North Carolina. Copies may be obtained from the National Technical Information
Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161 at a cost of forty-seven dollars ($47.00).
(c) All expanded NPDES wastewater discharges in High Quality Waters shall be required,to provide the
treatment described in Sub -Item (1)(b) of this Rule, except for those existing discharges which expand with
no increase in permitted pollutant loading.
(2) Development activities which require an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in accordance with rules
established by the NC Sedimentation Control Commission or local erosion and sedimentation control program
approved in accordance with 15A NCAC 4B .0218, and which drain to and are within one mile of High
Quality Waters (HQW) shall be required to follow the stormwater management rules as specified in 15A
NCAC 2H .1000. Stormwater management requirements specific to HQW are described in 15A NCAC 2H
.1006.
If an applicant objects to the requirements to protect high quality waters and believes degradation is necessary to
accommodate important social and economic development, the applicant may contest these requirements according to
the provisions of G.S. 143-215.1(e) and 150B-23.
History Note: Authority G.S.143-214.1; 143-215.1; 143-215.3(a)(1);
Eff. October 1,1995;
13

..1006 STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS: HIGH QUALITY WATERS
All development activities which require a stormwater management permit under Rule .1003 of this Section
and are within one mile of and draining to waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQ«) shall manage
stormwater runoff in accordance with the provisions outlined in this Rule. More stringent stormwater
management measures may be required on a case -by -case basis where it is determined that additional measures
are required to protect water quality and maintain existing and anticipated uses of these waters.
(1) All waters classified as WS-I or WS-II (15A NCAC 2B .0212 and .0214) and all waters located in
the coastal counties (Rule .1005 of this Section) are excluded from the requirements of this Rule
since they alread
n y have requirements for stormwater management.
(2) Low Density Option: Development shall be permitted pursuant to Rule .1003(c)(1) of this Section
if the development has:
(a) built -upon area of 12 percent or less or proposes single family residential development on lots of
one acre or greater;
(b) stormwater runoff transported primarily by vegetated conveyances; conveyance system shall not
include a discrete stormwater collection system as defined in Rule .1002 of this Section;
(c) a 30 foot wide vegetative buffer.
(3) High Density Option: Higher density developments shall be permitted pursuant to Rule .1003(c)(2)
of this Section if stormwater control systems meet the following criteria:
(a) control systems must be wet detention ponds or alternative stormwater management systems
designed in accordance with Rule .1008 of this Section;
(b) control systems must be designed to control runoff from all surfaces generated by one inch of
rainfall.
History Note: Statutory Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-2141.7,• 143-215.1; 143-215.3(a);
E, f . September 1, 1995,
Amended Eff. December 1, 1995.
14

Catawba River ( M o r � a n t o n ) Catawba
Proposed Protecte Area Boundary
C
[n
i
Proposed Water Supply Watershed data compiled by
NCDAQ/NCCCIA, and automated by NCCCIA, August
1991. Most current revision: April 1997
!lnnicipalily Bala (collected for the Powell Bill)
%__I.""..
SCALE 1:2W,Oo0 ®Municipality y
Lake/Reservoir/Stream Proposed "Run —of River"
o s uiies ® Critical Area Outer Protected Area Boundary
Map Produred by Ihr N C._ Cenlr.r for
toor[�i

WATER SUPPLY WATERSHED FACT SHEET
Watershed: Catawba River (Morganton)
Major River Basin: Catawba
Current Classification: WS-IV
(Current Watershed Management Area)
Watershed Drainage Area
Watershed or Protected Area: 36,170 acres
Critical Area: 190 acres
Total Area: 36,360 acres
Approximate Jurisdictional Composition Of Watershed
Percent of Percent of
Counties Acres Watershed Jurisdiction
BURKE 27,721 76 8
MCDOWELL 8,086 22 3
Percent of Percent of
Municipalities Acres Watershed Jurisdiction
Glen Alpine 401 1 61
Morganton 152 0 1
(Proposed Watershed Management Area)
Watershed Drainage Area
Watershed or Protected Area: 8,676 acres
Critical Area: 190 acres
Total Area: 8,866 acres
Approximate Jurisdictional Composition Of Watershed
Percent of Percent of
Counties Acres Watershed Jurisdiction
BURKE 8,313 94 3
Percent of Percent of
Municipalities Acres Watershed Jurisdiction
Glen Alpine 401 5 61
Morganton 152 2 1

WS-IV PA Revisions (County)
1997
1995
1999
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
GA
Catawba River - Morganton (Burke, McDowell)
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
1w
DRAFT
Proposed
1998-1999
Schedule
for
Selected
In
-House
Proposed
Reclassifications
EMC EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
EMC
Out Out
Out
Out
out,
out
Out
Out
Meet With Local Gov's/Other Parties if Needed
1
L*
-
L* = Lastest date
can proceed to
Submit Conceptual 101 (Send up Notice of
1
L
meet a 1999 effective
date
Rulemaking Form to Prevent 60 Day Auto -File)
Permission from WQC to go to EMC With
1
L
Concept
Permission from EMC to Proceed with
1
L
Rulemaking Proceedings
T
—DRAFT
Prepare Fiscal Note
1
L
Submit Final 101 and Notice of Text/ Fiscal Note
1
L
NRP Published in NC Register
1
L
Comment Period Ends for NRP
l
L
Notice to Governor
l
L
Final Notice of Text and Fiscal Note to
1
L
Rule -Making Coordinator
Notice of Text Published
1
L
Public Hearing
1
L
End Notice of Text Comment Period (will extend
1
L
comment period 1 mo after hearing when applies)
EMC Adopts Rules
1
L
RRC Files Rules with General Assembly (25 Days
ALL
Before lst Day of Next GA Session)
Rules Become Effective (APRIL 1, 1999)**
ALL
1997 1 1998 1 1999 1

NORTH CAROLINA'S WATER SUPPLY WATERSHED
PROTECTION PROGRAM
Since 1986 the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) and the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) have administered a water supply protection program. Initially, the program was administered as a voluntary
program where counties and municipalities could pursue protective measures for their water supply watersheds. The
protective measures included limitations on the number and type of wastewater discharges which were allowed to
discharge into water supply watersheds. These were administered by the Division'of Water Quality and, in turn,
local governments would adopt and enforce land use ordinances to protect surface waters from nonpoint pollution
sources, namely stormwater runoff.
In time, it became apparent that a need for minimum statewide water supply protection measures was
necessary, especially where multiple local governments had land use jurisdiction within a single water supply
watershed. In 1989, the North Carolina General Assembly ratified the Water Supply Watershed Protection Act,
codified as General Statutes 143-214.5 and 143-214.6. The Act mandated the Environmental Management
Commission to adopt minimum statewide water supply protection standards by January 1, 1991 and to reclassify all
existing surface water supply watersheds to the appropriate classification by January 1, 1992. These dates were
modified by the General Assembly in 1991.
Over 40 informational meetings and workshops were conducted across the state to present the requirements
of the Act and the proposed water supply protection rules. Eight public hearings on the Rules were held across the
state in August of 1990 and were attended by over 800 people, with 160 providing verbal comments. In addition,
over 1600 pages of written comments were received. The Environmental Management Commission adopted the
Rules in December 1990 in compliance with the January 1, 1991 deadline, however, since the surface water supplies
had not been reclassified, the Commission postponed the effective date of implementation.
Division staff worked with local governments in determining the location of all surface water intakes and
the existing land use within the water supply watersheds. This information, in conjunction with information
reaardin- the tvpes and location of wastewater discharges, was used to determine the appropriate classification for the
208 surface water supplies in the state. Twelve public hearings were held on the reclassifications during August of
1991 in order to receive comments. The Commission also decided to bring the adopted Water Supply Watershed
Protection Rules with proposed modifications back to public hearing. Over 2400 people attended the public hearings
with more than 400 making verbal comments. Over 3000 written comments were received. The 1992 version of
the Water Supply Watershed Protection Rules was adopted by the EMC on February 13, 1992. The Environmental
Management Commission reclassified all of the surface water supplies on May 14, 1992 and the classifications and
Rules became effective in August of 1992.
The Water Supply Watershed Protection Rules adopted in 1992 required all local governments having land
use jurisdiction within water supply watersheds to adopt and implement water supply watershed protection
ordinances, maps and a management plan. The Rules required all municipalities with more than 5000 population to
submit their adopted ordinances to the Commission by July 1, 1993; all municipalities with less than 5000
population to submit their ordinances by October 1, 1993; and all affected counties to submit their ordinances by
January 1, 1994. In order to assist local governments, a model ordinance was approved by the Commission on July
9, 1992. This document suargests appropriate language for adopting an ordinance under the general ordinance
adoption powers, however, the language is useful for local governments adopting their ordinances as zoning overlay
districts and also for amending local subdivision regulations.
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Within WS-I watersheds, which are in areas where the land is undeveloped and in public ownership, no
development is allowed. In WS-V watersheds, which are portions of large river basins or which are used by
industries for consumption by their employees, but not for any other municipal use, there are no categorical land use
restrictions. The following summarizes the development regulations in the remaining three watershed classes:

WS-II Critical Area ldu/2ac, 6% built upon
Balance of WS ldu/ac, 12% built upon
HDt Critical Area < 24% built upon
Balance of WS < 30% built upon
WS-III Critical Area ldu/lac, 12% built upon
Balance of WS 2du/ac, 24% built upon
HD Critical Area < 30% built upon
Balance of WS < 50% built upon
WS-IV Critical Area 2du/lac, 24% built upon
Balance of WS 2du/ac, 24% built upon; or
or Protected Area 3du/ac, 36% built upon w/out curb
and gutter
HD Critical Area < 50% built upon
Balance of WS <.70% built upon
or Protected Area
In addition, within WS-II, WS-III and WS-IV watersheds, ten percent of each local government's land use
jurisdiction outside the critical area may be developed at up to 70 percent built upon surface area in addition to the
new development approved in compliance with the Rules. Local governments within the same watershed may
transfer this development potential to areas which will support higher density uses upon enactment of an interlocal
agreement. The 10%-70% provision is optional and does not have to be used by local governments.
EXEMPTIONS AND VARIANCES
Two general exemptions are made regarding the application of the Rules. First, single family lots created
prior to the effective date of the local ordinance and developed for single family use, regardless of whether a vested
right has been established are exempt from the Rules. Second, existing development defined as that which is
built or has an outstanding valid building permit or has established a vested right under North Carolina zoning law is
also exempt from the Rules. An addition to existing development (excluding additions to single family detached
development) would be subject to the development regulations in the Rules. Local governments are given the
authority to grant minor variances to the Rules in cases of extreme hardship. Major variances to the Rules are also
allowed; however, they require approval by both the local government and the Environmental Management
Commission.
1995 AMENDMENTS
The Water Supply Watershed Protection Program applies to approximately 20 percent of the land area in
North Carolina and affects approximately 250 local govemments (19 out of 100 counties). All local governments
subject to the regulations have submitted ordinances in compliance with the statutory deadlines; however, as of the
time of publication of this document, not all of the ordinances have been reviewed and approved by the
Environmental Management Commission. Over the past two years, the Division of Water Quality has worked very
closely with local governments to assist in the implementation of the required local programs. Division staff have
HD = High Density Option.
The High Density Option requires the use of engineered stormwater controls designed to meet a performance standard of 85%
removal of Total Suspended Solids.

met individually with local government officials and planners, and have conducted numerous public information
sessions and workshops across the state. During this information exchange, many local governments expressed the
need for more flexibility in the administration of the Water Supply Watershed Protection Program. The Division of
Water Quality responded to these concerns by proposing amendments to the Water Supply Watershed Protection
Rules to allow more flexibility in the local government watershed protection regulatory process. The amendments
were approved by the Environmental Management Commission on June 8, 1995.
The rule amendments, which became effective on August 1, 1995, provide flexibility and
clarify the requirements that local governments must follow. The amended rules do not add more
stringent requirements; rather, they are intended to give local governments more flexibility in
implementing the program. Local governments are not required to incorporate the 1995
amendments into their local ordinances. Any changes to the local government ordinances would be
optional and entirely voluntary on the part of the local government. A summary of the amendments
is as follows:
Class WS-I. Clarify requirement for public ownership. DWQ staff has maintained that a
criterion for Class WS-I waters is their location within watersheds held in public ownership. The
Rules only state that Class WS-I waters are essentially in natural and undeveloped watersheds.
The clarification includes an additional requirement for the land area in the watershed to be in
public ownership.
Class WS-V. Clarify that the WS-V classification may be applicable for watersheds used by
industries to supply their employees, but not applicable where an industry supplies raw drinking
water to a municipality or county. The Commission may consider a more protective water supply
classification at the request of the affected local governments. Language was also added to be
consistent with existing criteria in description of WS-V class that allows this water supply
classification to be applied to formerly used water supply watersheds.
Future Water Supplies (FWS). New supplemental classification to address watersheds
that will be used as a drinking water supply source in the future. The appropriate management
requirements associated with the primary water supply classification (e.g. WS-III) for activities
administered by the state, such as the issuance of permits for landfills, NPDES wastewater
discharges, land application of residuals and road construction activities, would be effective upon
reclassification to FWS. However, implementation of local government land 11se management
requirements would not be required until 270 days after the Commission has modified the FWS
supplemental classification (e.g. removed the FWS supplemental classification) through the rule -
making process and notified the affected local government(s).
Statewide minimum requirements. Clarify the existing authority of the Commission as
allowed by statute. The Commission may approve local water supply programs that it determines
provide protection equal to or greater than the state's minimum requirements.
Effective date and management plans. Clarify the effective date for implementation of
the Water Supply Watershed Protection Rules for state administered activities. Provision states
that the rules were applicable to state administrated activities on August 3, 1992, regardless of the
deadlines for municipal and county implementation. Further clarification also requires the Division
to revise the Model Ordinance and distribute it when the Rules are changed. The requirement that
local governments submit management plans was deleted.
Alternative stormwater controls. Expand section which references 15A NCAC 2H .1003
(stormwater rule) and include language regarding alternative stormwater control systems.
Maps. Expand requirements for the 1:24,000 map submission to include the specific
information (corporate and extraterritorial jurisdiction boundaries and the actual and interpreted
watershed boundaries) that must be included on each map.

Animal operations. Delete requirement for animal operations greater than 100 animal
units to employ BMPs. It is now a statewide requirement and thus not necessary in the Water
Supply Watershed Protection Rules. Added the provision that animal operations that are deemed
permitted and permitted under the animal waste rules are allowed in all water supply watersheds.
Nonconforming lots. Clarify that existing nonconforming lots not contiguous to another lot
are exempt from the Rules if they are developed for single family residential purposes. Also clarifies
that a lot created as part of a family subdivision is exempt from the land division regulations of the
Rules if it is created for single family development purposes and if it is exempt from local
subdivision regulations. A deeded single family lot would be exempt for subsequent owners of the
affected property.
Variances and more protective local programs. Divide the existing development
provisions such that exemptions are discussed in a separate paragraph. The proposed Rules refer
to all exemptions as variances. Previously, the terms exemption and variance within the context of
the watershed protection rules were interchangeable. Variance is a more commonly used term in
land use regulations, thus the language was changed accordingly. The amended Rules require that
a report of all variances granted by local governments be submitted to DWQ by January 1st of each
year and cover the previous calendar year's activities. The existing Rules require this submission on
an annual basis, but do not specify a submittal date. The specific procedures that local
governments must follow in granting minor variances and in submitting major variances to the EMC
for approval are delineated in this section, as well as the procedures for appeal from a local
government decision on a minor variance request and an EMC decision on a major variance request.
Language was added to state that variances from local ordinances that are more stringent than the
state's minimum requirements are not considered as major variances as long as the variance does
not exceed the state's minimum criteria.
Cluster development. Cluster development is an option under the existing Rules. This
provision also applies to planned unit development and mixed use development. Clarification was
added for siting of built -upon areas, minimizing impact to the receiving waters, use of vegetated
conveyances and requirements for projects using the low density option .
Tracking built -upon area. Adds flexibility for local governments using density
calculations (du/ac) to track high density residential development. Requires a safety factor to be
added in calculating the design volume of the engineered stormwater control structure to
accommodate stormwater flow from any additional impervious surface area that may be
constructed.
Watershed development. New provision would allow local governments to administer the
local water supply protection program on a watershed basis rather than on a project -by -project
basis, as long as the local government can demonstrate the ability to equitably distribute the
development potential.
Stormwater controls affecting wetlands. Reminder that other agencies, such as the US
Army Corps of Engineers, and regulations need to be consulted before engineered management
systems can be constructed that may impact existing waters or wetlands.
Delegation. The Commission may delegate such matters as assessment of civil penalties,
variance approval and extension of deadlines for submission of corrected ordinances to the Director.
5%/70% provision. Change the 5%-70% provision to 10%-70%. The amendment allows the
10%/70% provision to be used for new residential and non-residential development and expansions
to existing development. Local governments within a WS-II watershed are allowed to transfer land
area available for development under this provision to another local government within same
watershed upon approval from Commission. Allows public lands to be counted in calculating
acreage available under this provision. The 10%/70% provision is allowed in WS-IV watersheds for
new residential and non-residential development and expansions to existing development if the local
government does not use the high density development option.

J
Structures in buffer. Allow structures in buffer areas such as flag poles, signs and
security lights which do not significantly contribute to stormwater runoff.
Hazardous materials. Delete requirement for hazardous material and spill containment
plan due to duplication of effort by other state agencies.
A number of local governments have expressed the desire to incorporate the amended
provisions into their existing watershed protection ordinances. In order to assist local governments
in doing this, the EMC approved a revised model ordinance in December 1995. The new model
ordinance is available from DWQ staff as a hard copy, on disk in PC and Mac formats and as a
direct transfer file on the Water Supply Watershed Protection Program home page. For more
information on North Carolina's Water Supply Watershed Protection Program, please contact:
Lisa Martin, AICP
NCDWQ
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
phone: [phone], ext. 565
e-mail: [e-mail]
home page address: http://pluto.ehnr.state.nc.us/wswp/
LM
11/15/96

WATER SUPPLY WATERSHED PROTECTION RULES.
i
Allowable Development
Required
i. W/O Stormwater,
W/Stormwater,
Control with
10%/70Y. (5)
Residuals
Agriculture
Classification
Dischar¢ers
low Density Opt.
High Density Opt.
High Density Ont.
Provision
ARAL
Landfills
BMEA
WS-I
Watershed
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
(6) Required f
WS-II
Critical Area
General
; (2) 1du/2ac or
6.24%built
Control the V
Not allowed
No new
No new
(6) Required i
Permits
6%built upon
upon area
storm
sites
landfills
Watershed
General
ldu/ac or 12%
12-30% built
Control the 1"
Allowed
Allowed
No new
(6) Not t
Permits
built upon
upon area
storm
discharging
Required I j
landfills
i
WS-III
Critical Area
General
Idu/sc or 12%
12-30% built
Control the 1"
Not allowed
No new
No new
(6) Required
Permits
built upon
upon area
storm
sites
landfills
Watershed
Domestic &
2du/ac or 24%
24-50% built
Control the 1"
Allowed
Allowed
No new
(6) Not
non -process
built upon
upon area
storm
discharging
Required ! i
industrial
landfills
t
WS-IV
Critical Area
Domestic &
(3) 2du/ac or 24%
(3) 24-50% built
Control the 1"
Not allowed
No new
No new
(6) Required �
(l) industrial
built upon
upon area
storm
sites
landfills
i i
i
Protected Area
Domestic lk
4 , 3 ( ) 2du/ac or
(3,4) 24-70X built
Control the 1"
Allowed
Allowed
Allowed
(6) Not
industrial
24% built upon
upon area
storm
Required
WS-V
Watershed or
Domestic,
No categorical restrictions other than
instream water quality standards applicable to all surface water supply
waters.
River Segment
Industrial
I
I
NOTE: Critical area is one-half mile and draining to water supplies from the normal pool elevation of reservoirs, or one-half mile and draining to a river intake. i
Protected area is five miles and draining to water supplies from the normal pool elevation of reservoirs, or ten miles upstream of and draining to a river intake. i
Municipal with pretreatment program (211.0904) is considered industrial discharge.
Discharges qualifying for a General Permit pursuant to 2II .0127 will also be allowed in all areas of WS-III and WS-IV watersheds along with the allowed discharges noted in the table.
Buffers will be maintained around all perennial waters with a minimum width of thirty feet for low density development and a minimum one hundred foot buffer for high density developmei
Groundwater remediation. discharges may be allowed when no other practicable alternative exists.
Local governments will assume ultimate responsibility for operation and maintenance of stormwater controls.
(1) New industrial process wastewater discharges are allowed but will require additional treatment requirements. i
(2) Residential development may apply dwelling units per acre or use percent built -upon surface area. Non-residential development must use percent built -upon surface area.
(3) Applies only to projects requiring a Sedimentation/Erosion Control Permit.
(4) One third acre lot or 36% built -upon area is allowed for projects without curb and gutter street systems.
(5) Allowed; can use 10% of jurisdiction for new development and expansions to existing development up to 70%built-upon area, without stormwater controls, if using low density option ,
throughout remainder of water supply.
(6) In WS-I watersheds and critical areas of WS-II, WS-III and WS-IV watersheds, agricultural operations must maintain a 10 foot vegetated buffer, or equivalent control i
I
along all perennial streams. Animal operations deemed permitted and permitted are allowed in all water supply watersheds.
T
t

d��uc4
ENVIRGimnIIENTAL MANAGEMENT CdwnJIISSI®N
f
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Nayne McDevitt, Secretary
September 12, 1997
Mr. Charles R. Abernathy
County Manager
McDowell County
10 E. Court Street
Marion, NC- 28752
Re: Water Supply Watershed Protection Ordinance -- McDowell County
Dear Mr. Abernathy,
David H. Moreau
Chairman
Charles H. Peterson
Vice Chairman
Charles L. Baker
Daniel V. Besse
Douglas S. Boykin
Moses Carey, Jr.
Franklin S. Clark, III, M.D.
Carla E. DuPuy
Robert Epting
Will B. Fowler
Alice D. Garland
Dennis C. Loflin
Edwin S. Melvin
Jeffrey V. Morse
Ryan D. Turner
Richard V. Watkins
Lawrence R. Zucchino
NEP _
I v Jul
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Water Quality Committee (WQC) of the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC), in their September 10, 1997 meeting, reviewed and
approved McDowell County's water supply watershed protection ordinance submitted in accordance with
the Water Supply Watershed Protection Act (NCGS 143-214.5). Please be advised that any subsequent
amendments to the ordinance must meet or exceed the minimum statewide standards and must be
submitted to the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) for approval. The WQC and the Division are extremely
pleased with the effort which McDowell County and other local governments have demonstrated
throughout this process.
If you have any questions regarding the Environmental Management Commission's decision or
regarding the Water Supply Watershed Protection Program, please contact Brent McDonald at (919) 733-
5083, extension 508. Your interest and cooperation in protecting one of our state's most vital natural
resources, water supply watersheds, is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
(2, �/ A t-A -
Charles H. Peterson
cc: Brent C. McDonald
Forrest Westall, ARO DWQ
Alan Lang, ARO DCA
Kelly Pipes, McDowell County
DWQ Central Files
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Division of Water Quality `.
February 6, 1998
TO: Forrest Westall
Rick Shiver
Roger Thorpe
Rex Gleason
Steve Mauney
FROM: Boyd DeVanep ov
SUBJECT: Clean Water Trust Fund Projects
Steve Bevington brought me yesterday copies of 22 proposals
that the Clean Water Trust Fund board believes should be high on
their list of fundable projects. They would like for DWQ to look at
the projects and provide them with comments. I would like for you
to look at each of these, which are generally in your region, and let
me know what you think. I do not need them to be ranked, in fact,
they do not want that. I would just like your general opinion of the
project. You can summarize your opinion with a "excellent" "good"
"fair" it or "down right embarrassing" categorization. They are
especially interested in any that we think are real good or real bad.
Steve has asked that I get comments to him by Wednesday the 18th
of February. I would therefor like to hear from you by the aft re noon
of the 17th. I realize this is not much notice . and if you can't get to it,
we will just have. to do without your comment. Call if you . have
questions. I will accept your comment in any form; written, voice or
electronic. Call me at 733-5083 ext 559 if you have any questions.
cc. Coleen
Greg Thorpe

-74
- ---- -- - -- - .� _ � - �- �b� �-��-�_'•s-- ids �.�:�...� �� �:�.� --
1` f� cod`--
-
--------- ---' �' �--'1.�- �sT�,J+'1-__ ..S'l'_'�,b/�! �4 .�1-tlN -A�o'w -- - 4•� - `t- �~---- --Li1'�-�= - ---------
104
v as . �. �►�,'e,�, rvs
- -- - - - - - -.-- -- -- --- - - --- - - �s- a � --
! d _ A _
J_.`���./!9 � _� /%/n ?N�AJ N /�'�yJr_ ,60AA,
c Z t..--Yla py -Ce,e. 4 , �1'a

s
199 7B Applications
Project ID
1997B-408
Applicant Name
McDowell County
Applicant Type
Local Government - County
Purpose
Restore degraded lands
Request S
$323,675
Total S
$448, 925
Duration (months)
18
Watershed
Catawba
Region
Western
County
McDowell
Contact
Kelly Pipes
Title
Assistant to County Mgr.
Organization Name
McDowell County
Address
10 East Court Street
City
Marion
State
N C
Postal Code
28752-
Work Phone
[phone]
Mobile Phone
Fax Number [phone]
E Mail
Friday, December 05, 199 7

Dean Chapman, Chairman
Jerry Hunter, Vice Chairman
Butch Hogan, Commissioner
Larry Seagle, Commissioner
Terry L. Smith, Commissioner
_w�WtLL CO\
rr y
1111
111�
1842
y0
9TN 'V.
McDOWELL COUNTY
Charles R. Abernathy
County Manager
Carrie Padgett
Clerk to the Board
C. Randy Pool
County Attorney
10 East Court Street • Marion, North Carolina 28752 • [phone]
Clean Water Management Trust Fund Application Narrative Proposal
McDowell County would like to request $323,675 from the Clean Water Management
Trust Fund for the purpose of performing streambank stabilization and to help purchase riparian
buffers near the headwaters of the Catawba River. Thirty five thousand dollars of this request is
to develop a sustainable conservation plan for the river that ensures the quality of the waters
while laying the groundwork for a greenway along the length of the river.
The only stream in McDowell County listed as nonsupporting in the Catawba River
Basinwide Management Plan is Youngs Fork Creek, locally referred to as Corpening Creek. The
streambank stabilization component of this project would include $109,000 to stabilize various
streambanks along the creek. The McDowell County Catawba River Park has experienced
severe streambank erosion over the last five years causing 500 tons of sediment to enter the river
annually. McDowell County would like to spend $45,000 to stabilize this streambank.
The final portion of this grant would include $99,750 towards the purchase of the 21 acre
McElheny property. This property is located near the headwater of the Catawba River where it
emerges from the Pisgah National Forest. McDowell County recently signed an option to
purchase this property for $225,000. By combining the resources of the U.S. Forest Service, the
Clean Water Management Trust Fund and various private organizations McDowell County

intends to raise the money to purchase this property.
This project has been designed to specifically address a number of relevant issues with
regard to the river:
Water Quality: There are two major components of this project:
Assistance in the purchase of 21 acres of property near the headwaters of the Catawba
River. This property is currently being used as a tree farm and includes property on both
sides of the Catawba where it emerges from the Pisgah National Forest. This portion of
the project will improve water quality by ceasing the operation of the tree farm which
uses fertilizers, pesticides, insecticides and other chemicals in it's operations. This
purchase would also prevent the development of this property for commercial or
residential uses while establishing riparian buffers along this pristine and delicate stretch
of the Catawba. This property would become a possession of the U.S. Forest Service.
2. The second component is the performance of streambank stabilization, at an existing
county park on the Catawba River and along Youngs Fork Creek. The McDowell County
Catawba River Park has experienced flooding in recent years which has caused severed
erosion of the streambank near the park's entrance. This project would halt this erosion
and prevent 500 tons of silt from entering the Catawba River each year. Youngs Fork
Creek is the only stream in McDowell County listed as nonsupporting' in the Catawba
River Basinwide Management Plan. The volume of water in this creek has increased in
recent years due to increases in impervious surfaces around and in the,;City of Marion and
wastewater being discharged from the Marion wastewater treatment plant. This increase
in volume has caused serious erosion of streambanks along the creek. This project will
2

v
` � J
' address this problem by stabilizing these streambanks and establishing buffers along the
S
a. �5 stream. Private property owners who wish to have streambanks on their property
stabilized will be asked to preserve or establish a natural buffer along their property that
v S
fronts on the stream where feasible.
One additional portion of the grant would be used to prepare a comprehensive
riparian buffer and greenway plan for the Catawba River in McDowell. By planning for a
greenway along this stretch of river, McDowell County can begin the groundwork for a
system of riparian buffers that would protect the Catawba River, Lake James and the
drinking water supply for millions of North and South Carolinians.
Recreational Development: Providing a hiking trail to Catawba Falls and planning for
a greenway along the river are components of this project. McDowell County is listed as
well below the statewide average in the development of recreational areas. In addressing
the lack of recreational areas in the county this program will provide additional protection
to the waters by ensuring that only recreational use is made of the acquired lands.
Tourism Development: Tourism is a fast growing industry in the McDowell County
area. Without the threat of pollution tourism provides jobs, tax income and positive
growth to our economically distressed tier two county. The development of a Catawba
Falls hiking trail and planning for a Catawba River Greenway can provide a considerable
addition to the McDowell County tourism site inventory. From a tourism perspective,
this project not only provides additional recreational areas but also provides a very
positive impact on quality of life issues that impact tourism.
Measurable Outcomes - The success of this project can be measured in two ways. First,
3

streambanks along Youngs Fork Creek and the Catawba River will be stabilized and the amount
of land preserved around these stabilized areas will be easily visible. At the Catawba River Park
alone, 500 tons of sediment a year will be kept from the Catawba River. Upon the completion of
this project, 21 acres will be preserved from development and a permanent riparian buffer will be
established along one of the cleanest and most pristine streams in North Carolina.
Commitment - McDowell County has had a long history of protecting and restoring
water quality. Between 1960 and 1967 the Muddy Creek Watershed Commission constructed
nine dams in the County to help reduce sediment running into the Catawba River from Muddy
Creek. McDowell County has continually paid for the maintenance on these dams averaging
55,000 a year, recently increasing the allocation to $8,000. The McDowell County Soil and
Water Conservation District implements the Agricultural Cost Share Program to help protect
water quality from agricultural uses. Recently the County committed to work with the district to
perform debris removal from Youngs Fork Creek, the only nonsupporting stream in the County.
McDowell County has participated in the annual big sweep river and lake cleanup for the last ten
years and was the first county in North Carolina to use inmate labor to help with the cleanup.
Using prisoners and volunteers McDowell County removed 11 tons of trash from Lake James in
1996 and 9 tons in 1997. McDowell County has also participated in a water quality assessment
program with Western Piedmont Council of Governments for the last four years. Over this time
period McDowell County has contributed on average $4,977 per year towards this assessment.
Recently McDowell County has made great strides in attempting to protect water quality through
land use regulations. In 1995 McDowell County, Burke County and Duke Power developed the
Lake James Comprehensive Management Plan in order to address water quality issues on this
4

6,500 acre lake and its 150 miles of shoreline, 90% of which is undeveloped. Subsequently in
August 1996 the McDowell County Board of Commissioners adopted the Lake James Protection
Ordinance which is designed to protect the water quality of the lake by requiring new
construction to be setback 65 to 75 feet, restricting clearing of the shoreline within 100 feet of the
water and protecting the humus layer within 50 feet of the water. Developments are required to
have erosion control plans and are restricted to a built upon area of 24% within 250 feet of the
shoreline. This ordinance also contains several other water quality related provisions such as
requiring all new marinas to have pump -out stations and grey water disposal facilities. In
addition, in 1996 McDowell County adopted zoning for the first time for a community in the
Pleasant Gardens area. In November of 1997 the County adopted zoning in a second community
north of the Marion city limits. It is the policy of McDowell County to continue zoning on a
community basis as it is requested by the citizens.
Cooperation - This grant application has been developed by the McDowell County
Natural Resources and Heritage Conservation Committee. This committee was formed under the
auspices of the McDowell County Board of Commissioners to bring together the many diverse
agencies and organizations within McDowell County with an interest and/or responsibility in the
preservation and management of the county's natural resources. Included in the committee are
representatives from the McDowell County Board of Commissioners, McDowell County
Planning Board, McDowell County Tourism Development Authority, the office of the County
Manager, McDowell Technical and Community College, McDowell Clean County, the
McDowell County Soil and Water Conservation District, the Catawba River Watchers, the Lake
James State Park Advisory Board as well as several citizens and small business owners in
�1

McDowell County. The multi agency composition of the committee ensures a broad base of
support for the project throughout the private and public sectors and also guarantees a wide
spectrum of experience and expertise that ensures the long term sustainability of the project.
Committee members, all volunteers, have dedicated extensive man hours to the project. Even at
a modest rate of exchange, the participation of the committee would translate into hundreds of
obi
�yw man hours and thousands of dollars.
Innovation - Though the streambank stabilization at the Catawba River Park will entail
traditional bian baskets, the streambank stabilization on Youngs Fork Creek will include newer
9� c.� and more innovative techniques, particularly bioengineering where prudent.
� tf
The effort to purchase the 21 acre McElheny tract is a collaborative one. It is the
intention of McDowell County to work together with the U.S. Forest Service; the Clean Water
Management Trust Fund and various private foundations and individuals to purchase this
property. The Forest Service will pay approximately $90,000 towards this purchase. The
remaining $35,250 of the purchase price will be raised from private individuals and
organizations. To make this a successful venture a public -private partnership will be essential.
Matching Resources - The primary matching resources will be $90,000 from the U.S.
Forest Service and $35.250 from private organizations and individuals. Various other in kind
contributions will come in the form of staff time, volunteer time and ventures; such as the
removal of debris from the channel of Youngs Fork Creek. McDowell County will continue to
attempt to obtain additional matching resources and will notify representative's of the Clean
Water Management Trust Fund when they are secured.
Charles Abernathy, County Manager
s

Rft*W
(LIMIT RESPONSE TO SPACE PROVIDED FOR EACH ITEM) DEC 3 1997
Name of Organization: McDowell County G+,s_ &
Contact Person (name/title/phone/fax/address):
Kelly Pipes/ Assistant to County Manager/ Phone-[phone]/
Fax [phone] East Court Street, Marion, NC 28752
Chief Administrative Officer (If different from contact person) (name/title/p hone/fax)
Charles R. Abernathy/ County Manager/ Phone-[phone]/
Fax [phone]
Organization's fiscal year ends: June 30
What amount of funding is sought from CWMTF? $ 323,675
What are total costs of project? $ 448,925
Period for which CWMTF funds are sought: From: Jan 1, 1998 To: Jun 30, 1999
Describe any voluntary matching resources:
The project will be assisted by the McDowell County Natural Resources and Heritage Conservation
Committee(NRHCC), the Assistant County Manager, and the Planning Intern. The US Forest Service
will provide $90,000 and other private entities will provide $35,250 toward the purchase of the McElheny
tract.
Briefly describe organization's qualifications to accomplish the proposed project:
This project will be completed with the combined expertise of many organizations. The Soil and Water
Conservation District will employ their vast experience in their supervision of the stream bank
stabilizations. The Natural Resource Conservation Service will also help to oversee the restabilizations
and the establishment of riparian buffers.
Is this project coordinated with other regional water quality programs? If so, how?
This project will serve the water quality goals of the Lake James Comprehensive Management Plan and
the Catawba River Basinwide Management Plan. Agencies we anticipate working with include US
Forest Service, US Soil and Water Conservation District, Mountain Valleys Resource Conservation and
Development, and the Foothills Area Conservancy. McDowell County has been the recipient of many
grant awards in the past including CDBG, Rural Center and ARC and has never failed to meet it's
obligations.
What will be the measurable and enduring outcomes of the project?
This project will protect 21 acres near the headwaters of the Catawba River from pollution and
development, utilizing this land as riparian buffers. The amount of property protected by stream bank
stabilization will be clearly visible and measurable, particularly the 500 tons of silt which will be kept from
the Catawba River at the McDowell County Park.
If necessary, what assurances can you provide regarding long term management of proposed
project?
Newly acquired lands will be managed by the United States Forest Service. Stabilized stream banks will
be under the management of McDowell County, the City of Marion, and the State: Privately held stream
banks will be governed under conservation easements.

Location of project: Basin or watershed. Upper Catawba River Basin
Location of project: County McDowell
Location of project: (precise;map may be attached, recommend USGS 7.5 Topo-Quad). Please provide
name of Quad Sheet Map. See attached maps (Moffitt Hill, West Marion, and East Marion)
Please circle the primary purpose of those listed below for which CWMTF moneys are sought:
X Acquire land for riparian buffers
Acquire easements in order to protect surface waters or urban drinking water
supplies.
X Coordinate with other public programs to improve or protect water quality.
X Restore degraded lands for their ability to protect water quality.
Repair failing waste treatment systems
Repair/eliminate failing septic tank systems
Improve stormwater controls and management.
X Facilitate planning that targets reductions in surface water pollution.
If this project involves a permitted waste treatment system(s), include permit number(s):
It does not.
To what extent will the proposed project(1) restore degraded waters,(2)protect unpolluted waters,
and/or (3) establish riparian buffers?
1. The degraded waters of Youngs Fork Creek have been impaired by non -point source pollution.
The streambank stabilization and establishment of riparian buffers both help to restore the creek and
protect it from further contamination.
2. The Catawba River is in good health. The land acquisition and buffer protection will help to
sustain this health. The land that is to be purchased would cease to be used for agricultural purposes.
This will help prevent the run-off of pollutants into the river.
3. Riparian buffers will be developed at the Catawba River headwaters. Buffers will also be
developed at the County Park, after stream bank stabilization has been completed. Further buffers will
be established along Youngs Fork Creek after the banks are stabilized.

Explain how the project is consistent with the appropriate NC -Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Management Plan.
The Catawba River Basinwide Management Plan calls for the protection of water quality and the
improvement of degraded waters. Section 6.3.1 describes Youngs Fork Creek as a stream impaired by
non -point source pollution. Stream bank stabilization, and the establishment of riparian zones, would
work to remedy this problem. Additionally, acquisition of the Catawba River headwaters would enable
the further establishment of buffers, and the subsequent protection of water quality.
Describe any special significance of waters to be enhanced, restored, or protected by the project.
This project seeks to restore the quality of Young's Fork Creek, the only non -supporting stream in
McDowell County. The land acquisition will help protect the upper reaches of the Catawba River which
is classified as Class C Trout Waters and provides drinking water to millions of citizens in North and
South Carolina. This same drinking water source will also be improved by the stream bank stabilization
and riparian buffer establishment at the McDowell County Park.
Describe any special environmental, educational, or recreational values of the project (beyond
those offered above).
The stream bank stabilization will help to preserve the county park. The acquisition of the falls will lead
to their availability via public access. Both of these sites play great environmental and recreational roles.
Their use for educational purposes is an additional potential resource.
Does the project employ innovative procedures or technology? If so, what are the implications
for clean water?
Bio-engineering techniques will be used for stream bank stabilization on portions of Youngs Fork Creek.
This entails tree revetment which is a means of using downed trees and other natural materials to fortify
the bank and to collect sediment. These and other areas will then be transformed into riparian buffers.
The purchase of the McElheny tract will be a collaborative project, combining the efforts of the CWMTF,
the U.S. Forest Service, and other public and private entities.
Is this project eligible for funding under other state or federal grant programs? If so, elaborate.
The strict timetable dictated by the option to purchase the McElheny property restricts the ability to obtain
other grant moneys for this project. As the sites of the proposed stream bank stabilizations are not used
for agricultural purposes, they are not eligible for other grants unless the county is declared a disaster
area.
Additional comments:
One important aspect of the project is that it is located at the headwaters of the Catawba River. This
basin provides drinking water to over a million people in North Carolina alone. By protecting the
headwaters, this project will help maintain the integrity of the water for the people downstream.

Clean Water ManaL3,ement Trust Fund
McDowell County Grant Application
Budget Proposal
November 21 1997
Revenue
Expenditures
Cate o
Total CWMTF
Total Other
Total
Land Acquisition
$99 750.00
$90 000.00
USFS
$225 000.00
$35 250.00
Misc.
Legal and Survey Costs
$5 500.00
$0.00
$5 500.00
Stream Bank Stabilizations
-Catawba River Park
$45 000.00
$0.00
$45000.00
-Youngs Fork Cree
$109 000.00
$0.00
$109 000.00
Total Stabilization
$154 000.00
$0.00
$154 000.00
Planning
$35 000.00
$0.00
$35 000.00
Administrative Costs
$29 425.00
$0.00
$29 425.00
TOTALS
$323 675.00
$125 250.00
$448 925.00

Michael Thompson, Chariman
Dean Buff, Vice Chairman
Bob Brackett, Commissioner
Larry A. "Butch" Hogan, Commissioner
Andrew Webb, Commissioner
McDowell County
Charles R. Abernathy
County Manager
Carrie Padgett
Clerk to the Board
Donald Fred Coats
County Attorney
60 East Court Street - Marion, North Carolina 28752
Telephone: [phone] - Fax: [phone] - Website: mcdowell.main.nc.us/—mcdowell/
January 22, 2002
Mr. Tom Massie
Clean Water Management Trust Fund
Post Office Box 595
Sylva, North Carolina 28779
Re: Catawba River Park permit pre -application meetings
Dear Tom:
As part of McDowell County's Clean Water Management Trust Fund application for the Catawba
River Park, we have met both, with the North Carolina Division of Water Quality 401 and US Army
Corps of Engineers 404 staff on January 4, 2002 and January 22, 2002, respectively. Please find
attached the Division of Water Quality's comments; the US Army Corps of Engineers' comments are
forthcoming.
During our meeting, the Corps advised that a Nationwide 27 restoration permit would be necessary,
including the project design and monitoring plan. Also, the Corps advised the County to notify the
US Fish and Wildlife Service and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission of the project.
McDowell County will contact these agencies immediately.
Please call with any questions. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Ken McFadyen
Assistant County Manager
Attachment:
cc: Chuck Abernathy, County •Manager 002
Albert Moore, NRCS
JAN 2 5 2 b...a
Tim Smith, US Army Corps of Engineers
Larry Frost, NC Division of Water Quality _ _ _ `rT i t _ l F'.
"Great History, Exciting Future"

O�0fC 1NA7- �Q Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
r North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
WATER QUALITY SECTION
January 11, 2002
Mr. Ken McFadyen
Assistant County Manager
McDowell County
10 East Court Street
Marion, North Carolina 28752
Subject: Catawba River Park
Clean Water Management
Trust Fund (CWMTF)
McDowell County
Dear Mr. McFadyen:
Asheville Regional Office
On Friday January 4, 2002 Mr. Mike Parker and I met with you, representatives of the
McDowell County Commissioners and Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). The
purpose of the meeting was to ensure the stream restoration portions of the proposed Catawba
River Park project would meet Division of Water Quality approval. We were assured that the
methods to be employed, should CWMTF fund this project and in lieu of plans, will be
appropriate. The methods described included Rosgen natural stream design and river restoration
concepts. In lieu of plans and with the understanding that appropriate restoration methods will be
employed, the Division has no issues with this project, at this time.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project in advance and look
forward to working with you. in the future. Should you have 'any questions regarding this issue
you may contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Larry Frost
Environmental Technician
cc: Mike Parker
Water Quality Section, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, NC 28801-2414 Telephone: [phone] Customer Service
Fax: [phone] 623-7748

Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
Asheville Regional Office
WATER QUALITY SECTION
June 1, 2001
Mr. Ken McFayden, Assistant County Manager
McDowell County
60 East Court Street
Marion, North Carolina 28752
Subject: Catawba River Park - Greenlee Road
401 Certification
McDowell County
Dear Mr. McFayden:
I am very pleased to hear that this project is in the works, still. Attached is the
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Application Form. Please read the instructions
carefully and provide the information requested.
If you have any questions, you may contact me at [phone]:
Sincerely,
Larry Frost
Environmental Technician
Enclosure
xc: Wetlands Unit
NC
Water Quality Section, 59 Woodfin Place, Asheville, NC 28801-2414 Telephone: [phone] Customer Service
Fax: [phone] 623-7748

■ Complete! items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
Article Addressed to:
MR. KEN MCFAYDEN
by (Please Print Clearly) B. Date o elivery
C. Signature /
- / �j�/' / ❑ Agent
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
MCDO ELL COUNTY
60 LAST COURT STREET 13. Seroic Ape
�F���' NC ����� ertified Mail ❑ Ex r�ss Mail
❑ Registered eturn Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
2. rti le Number { py f o s ici label)
PS Form 9811, July 1994 t L , Domestic Returin7geceipt l `'' ' 102595-99-M-1789

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVI
_ _F_irsL-lass Mail
n. -- 'SPS�_�`Fe��l.
"� Per— mif"I�o-U-1"U-f
AINA North Carolina Department of
4CDENR Envirorunent and Natural Resources
59 Woodfin Place Asheville, NC 288(111 2 114
)IV OF DATER QUAIATY
AIR. LARRY FROST
NCDENR - DWQ - WQS
39 WOODF N PL ACE
ASHEVILLE, NC 28801
a`�.S'�..}^i•'.s:^y:'s.t�:--lta�l+17r�7'If Flf�i{r12fFi7FiTillilil-flip i7511S1T11�flIlTl �-�31i- - -- -"