HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 12
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 179
CHAPTER 12 – PROTECTING WATER QUALITY
The future of our rivers, streams, wetlands and estuaries are closely linked to land use decisions
made on both a public and private scale. Most areas within a watershed are privately owned and
it is the private landowner who can best protect our waters through conservation and various land
use management options. This chapter explores various options for protecting water quality and
includes information related to local initiatives, planning and funding opportunities.
12.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF LOCAL INITIATIVES
Local initiatives to protect water quality are essential to any community because local people
make decisions that affect change in their own communities. There are a variety of limitations
local initiatives can overcome including limited state government budgets and staff resources,
minimal regulations for land use management, rulemaking processes and many others. Local
organizations and agencies are able to combine professional expertise in a watershed, thus
allowing groups to holistically understand the challenges and opportunities of different water
quality efforts. Involving a wide array of people in water quality projects also brings together a
wide range of knowledge and interests and encourages others to become involved and invested in
these projects.
By working in coordination across jurisdictions and agency lines, more funding opportunities
may be available. This will potentially allow local entities to do more work and be involved in
more activities because their funding sources are diversified. The most important aspect of these
local endeavors is that the more localized the project, the better the chances for success.
The collaboration of local efforts are key to water quality improvements. There are good
examples of local agencies and groups using these cooperative strategies throughout the state and
specific groups are discussed in each of the seventeen basinwide water quality plans. DWQ
applauds the foresight and proactive response of local watershed groups and local governments
to address any number of water quality problems.
12.2 GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE PLANNING
Growth management can be defined as the application of strategies and practices that help
achieve sustainable urban development and redevelopment in harmony with the conservation of
environmental qualities and features. In other words, growth management is the effective and
equitable management of growth and change in human habitats. Growth management tools
range from on-the-ground best management practices (BMPs) such as modifying parking areas
to reduce impervious surfaces, to establishing regional wastewater and/or stormwater authorities.
12.2.1 COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED PROTECTION STRATEGIES
In order for land use planning to effectively protect watersheds in the long-term, tools and
strategies must be applied at several scales. Effective implementation will require commitment
ranging from the individual citizen to the state government. A comprehensive watershed
protection plan should act on the following elements.
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 180
Basin Scale (Implemented by Town, County, and State Governments)
Characterize the watersheds within a basin as developed or undeveloped, identifying the
watersheds that are currently less than and more than10 percent impervious.
Focus new construction projects to the already developed watersheds first. Then assign
any construction that cannot be accommodated in developed watersheds to a limited
number of undeveloped watersheds. The watersheds to be developed should be
determined by their ecological importance and by other regional growth considerations,
such as the value of terrestrial ecosystems, the economic development potential as
determined by proximity to roads and rail lines, and the disposition of landowners in the
area toward land preservation and development.
Adopt policies that maintain impervious surfaces in undeveloped watersheds at less than
ten percent. These can include private conservation easements, purchase of development
rights, infrastructure planning, urban service boundaries, rural zoning (20-200 acres per
unit, depending on the area) and urban growth boundaries.
Ensure that local governments develop land use plans to provide adequate land for future
development within developed or developing watersheds.
Neighborhood Scale (Implemented by Town and County Governments)
Allow residential densities that support mass transit (i.e., buses, trains, etc.), reduce
vehicle trips per household and minimize land consumption. The minimum density for
new development should be seven to ten net units per acre.
Require block densities that support walking and reduce the length of vehicle trips.
Cities that support walking and transit often have more than 100 blocks per square mile.
Connect the street network by requiring subdivision road systems to link to adjacent
subdivisions.
Integrate houses with stores, civic buildings, neighborhood recreational facilities and
other daily or weekly destinations.
Incorporate pedestrian and bike facilities (greenways) into new development and ensure
these systems provide for inter-neighborhood travel.
Encourage and require other design features and public facilities that accommodate and
support walking by creating neighborhoods with a pleasing scale and appearance. (i.e.,
short front-yard setbacks, neighborhood parks, alleys and architectural and material
quality)
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 181
Site Scale (Implemented by Individual Property Owners, Developers Town and County
Governments)
Require application of the most effective structural stormwater practices, especially
focusing on hot spots such as high-volume streets, gas stations and parking lots.
Establish buffers and setbacks that are appropriate for the area to be developed – more
extensive in undeveloped watersheds than in developed watersheds. In developed
watersheds, buffers and setbacks should be reconciled to other urban design needs (such
as density) and a connected street network.
Educate homeowners about their responsibility in watershed management, such as buffer
and yard maintenance, proper disposal of oil and other toxic materials, and the impacts of
excessive automobile use (Beach, 2002).
12.2.2 REDUCING IMPACTS FROM EXISTING URBANIZATION
Below is a summary of management actions recommended for local authorities, followed by
discussions on large watershed management issues. These actions are necessary to address
current sources of impairment and to prevent future degradation in all streams. The intent of
these recommendations is to describe the types of actions necessary to improve stream
conditions, not to specify particular administrative or institutional mechanisms for implementing
remedial practices. Those types of decisions must be made at the local level.
Because of uncertainties regarding how individual remedial actions cumulatively impact stream
conditions and how aquatic organisms will respond to improvements, the intensity of
management effort necessary to bring about a particular degree of biological improvement
cannot be established in advance. The types of actions needed to improve biological conditions
can be identified, but the mix of activities that will be necessary – and the extent of improvement
that will be attainable – will only become apparent over time as an adaptive management
approach is implemented. Management actions are suggested below to address individual
problems, but many of these actions are interrelated.
Feasible and cost-effective stormwater retrofit projects should be implemented
throughout the watershed to mitigate the hydrologic effects of development (i.e.,
increased stormwater volumes and increased frequency and duration of erosive and
scouring flows). This should be viewed as a long-term process.
Over the short term, currently feasible retrofit projects should be identified
and implemented.
In the long term, additional retrofit opportunities should be implemented in
conjunction with infrastructure improvements and redevelopment of existing
developed areas.
Grant funds for these retrofit projects may be available from EPA initiatives,
such as EPA Section 319 funds, or the North Carolina Clean Water
Management Trust Fund (CWMTF).
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 182
A watershed scale strategy to address toxic inputs should be developed and
implemented, including a variety of source reduction and stormwater treatment
methods. As an initial framework for planning toxicity reduction efforts, the following
general approach is proposed:
Implementation of available BMP opportunities for control of stormwater
volume and velocities. As recommended above to improve aquatic habitat
potential, these BMPs will also remove toxics from stormwater.
Development of a stormwater and dry weather sampling strategy in order to
facilitate the targeting of pollutant removal and source reduction practices.
Implementation of stormwater treatment BMPs, aimed primarily at pollutant
removal, at appropriate locations.
Development and implementation of a broad set of source reduction
activities focused on: reducing non-storm inputs of toxics; reducing
pollutants available for runoff during storms; and managing water to reduce
storm runoff.
Stream channel restoration activities should be implemented in target areas, in
conjunction with stormwater retrofit BMPs, in order to improve aquatic habitat.
Before beginning stream channel restoration, a geomorphologic survey should be
conducted to determine the best areas for stream channel restoration. Additionally, it
would be advantageous to implement retrofit BMPs before embarking on stream channel
restoration, as restoration is best designed for flows driven by reduced stormwater runoff.
Costs of approximately $200 per foot of channel should be anticipated (Haupt, et al.,
2002 and Weinkam, 2001). Grant funds for these retrofit projects may be available from
federal sources, such as EPA Section 319 funds, or state sources including North
Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund.
Actions recommended above (i.e., stormwater quantity and quality retrofit BMPs) are
likely to reduce nutrient/organic loading, and to some extent, its impacts. Activities
recommended to address this loading include the identification and elimination of illicit
discharges; education of homeowners, commercial applicators, and others regarding
proper fertilizer use; street sweeping; catch basin clean-out practices; and the installation
of additional BMPs targeting biological oxygen demand (BOD) and nutrient removal at
appropriate sites.
Prevention of further channel erosion and habitat degradation will require effective post-
construction stormwater management for all new development in the study area.
Effective enforcement of sediment and erosion control regulations will be essential to the
prevention of additional sediment inputs from construction activities. Development of
improved erosion and sediment control practices may also be beneficial.
Watershed education programs should be implemented and continued by local
governments with the goal of reducing current stream damage and preventing future
degradation. At a minimum, the program should include elements to address the
following issues:
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 183
Redirecting downspouts to pervious areas rather than routing these flows to
driveways or gutters;
Protecting existing woody riparian areas on all streams;
Replanting native riparian vegetation on stream channels where such
vegetation is absent; and
Reducing and properly managing pesticide and fertilizer use.
12.2.3 REDUCING IMPACTS FROM FUTURE URBANIZATION
Proactive planning efforts at the local level are needed to ensure that development is done in a
manner that maintains water quality. These planning efforts can find a balance between water
quality protection, natural resource management and economic growth. Growth management
requires planning for the needs of future population increases, as well as developing and
enforcing environmental protection measures. These actions are critical to water quality
management and the quality of life for residents across the state.
Streams in areas adjacent to high growth areas are at a high risk of loosing healthy aquatic
communities. These biological communities are important to maintaining the ecological
integrity of the state. Unimpacted streams are important sources of benthic macroinvertebrates
and fish for reestablishment of biological communities in nearby streams that are recovering
from past impacts or are being restored.
Planning Recommendations for
New Developments
Minimize number and width of
residential streets.
Minimize size of parking areas
(angled parking & narrower slots).
To prevent future water quality degradation, local
governments should:
Identify waters that are threatened by
development.
Protect existing riparian habitat along streams. Place sidewalks on only one side of
residential streets. Implement stormwater BMPs during and after
development. Minimize culvert pipe and hardened
stormwater conveyances. Develop land use plans that minimize
disturbance in sensitive areas of watersheds. Vegetate road right-of-ways,
parking lot islands and highway
dividers to increase infiltration. Minimize impervious surfaces including roads
and parking lots. Plant and protect natural buffer
zones along streams and tributaries. Develop public outreach programs to educate
citizens about stormwater runoff.
Action needs be taken at the local level to plan for new development in urban and rural areas and
on inland, soundside and barrier islands. For more detailed information regarding
recommendations for new development found in the text box (above), refer to the US
Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Watershed Academy Web site
www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/acad2000/protection, the Center for Watershed
Protection Web site www.cwp.org, and the Low Impact Development Center Web site
www.lowimpactdevelopment.org. Additional information regarding environmental stewardship
for coastal homeowners is available at www.soil.ncsu.edu/assist/coastindex.html. Further public
education is also needed throughout the state in order for citizens to understand the value of
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 184
urban planning and stormwater management. For an example of local community planning
effort to reduce stormwater runoff, visit www.charmeck.org/Home.htm.
12.2.4 PREVENTING STREAMBANK EROSION
Streambank erosion can be caused by a number of factors, some of which may be difficult to
identify. For example, erosion may be caused by a lack of streambank vegetation that holds soil
in place. Erosion may also result from complex changes in urban runoff patterns, poor logging or
farming practices or other activities within the watershed.
Because the stabilization of a streambank can be an expensive and time-consuming process that
may require several attempts, the specific cause and nature of a problem should be investigated
and understood before any action is taken to restore a degraded stream channel or riparian area.
The following techniques can help control sediment loading and protect instream water quality:
Avoid the disturbance of streams and riparian zones.
Protect existing riparian forest buffers and restore vegetation that has been cleared from
the riparian zone.
Use BMPs for sediment control. A variety of agricultural BMPs effectively controls
sediment including conservation tillage/residue management, filter strips, field borders
and cover crops.
Maintain natural channels, or if modification is unavoidable, design channels based on
the stability and behavior of natural stream channels. Channel designs based on natural
stability principles will be less susceptible to erosion, remain more stable and provide
more habitat than traditional engineered channel designs.
Maintain predevelopment peak flows, flow velocities and flow timing to the extent
possible using stormwater management techniques and appropriate BMPs.
Use BMPs such as riser basins, diversion ditches, rock dams, check dams and buffers for
construction activities.
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 185
12.2.5 USING RIPARIAN BUFFERS TO PROTECT STREAM QUALITY AND INTEGRITY
A stream and its riparian area function as one. The condition of a riparian area plays a pivotal
role in the integrity of a stream channel and instream water quality. While any type of streamside
vegetation is desirable, forests provide the greatest amount of benefit and the highest potential
for meeting both water quality and habitat restoration objectives. Riparian forest buffers are
managed to protect water quality through the control of nonpoint source pollution and the
maintenance of the stream environment.
Riparian/Forested Buffers Riparian forest buffer systems are typically comprised of
an area of trees, usually accompanied by shrubs and other
vegetation, adjacent to a waterbody and managed as three
integrated streamside zones that are designed to intercept
surface runoff and subsurface flow.
Specifically Designed
and Managed To:
Maintain the integrity of stream
channels and shorelines by
protecting them from erosion. A sound scientific foundation exists to support the
sediment reduction, nutrient reduction and ecological
values and functions of riparian forest buffers. The use of
riparian buffers as a management tool should be
promoted.
Reduce the impact of upland sources
of pollution by trapping, filtering
and converting sediments, nutrient
and other chemicals.
Provide wildlife habitat for birds
and other species dependant on the
streams and woods for food, shelter
and raising young.
12.2.6 IMPLEMENTING EFFECTIVE EDUCATION
PROGRAMS Provide shade, which stabilizes
water temperatures, keeping water
livable for fish and other aquatic
species.
North Carolina's natural resources are under stress and
could be lost in the absence of a widespread awareness of
their existence, their significance and their value.
Government officials, business leaders and private
citizens must better understand the complexity of the
natural ecosystems that support our quality of life and
make this state an appealing place to live, work and visit.
Provide woody debris and organic
matter to the bacteria, fungi and
other species forming the basis of
the aquatic food chain.
These natural resources are not isolated from each other or from the people. Each element is part
of the ecosystem, interrelated and interconnected. When one part of the system is affected, other
parts feel the impact. Sound development decisions require an understanding of these
interconnections, as well as of the life-support roles played by natural resources.
The cause and effect relationship between human behavior and the environment and the
economics of that relationship must be well understood by decision makers - including
individuals, business, industry, government and elected officials - to instill a conservation ethic
and a sense of stewardship into the choices facing the state. Such stewardship of land, water, air
and biological resources is required to continue to enjoy the existing quality of life and to ensure
future improvements.
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 186
Environmental quality ultimately depends upon the understanding and support of individual and
corporate citizens who come to embrace standards and practices that discourage pollution while
they prize high quality air, water and soil. This relationship between knowledge of the
environment and support for its protection form a basis of public policy development. While the
need for education to improve our understanding of ecology and environment is accepted as
important, the practice of environmental education may take many forms. DWQ encourages
implementation of educational programs tailored to specific audiences that invoke the following
principles:
Respect and care for the community of life.
All things are connected. When something affects one part of the environment, other
parts feel the impact. The more we understand and respect our own community, the better
we will understand this interconnectedness and our responsibilities to the global
community of life.
Improve the quality of human life.
The aim of development is to improve the overall quality of human life. Development
must enable all people to realize their potential and lead lives of dignity and fulfillment.
This kind of development requires a healthy and robust supporting ecosystem.
Conserve North Carolina's vitality and diversity.
Renewable natural resources are the base of all economies. Soil, water, air, timber,
medicines, plants, fish, wildlife and domesticated species -- all come from natural
systems and can be maintained through conservation.
Life support systems are the ecological processes that shape climate, cleanse air and
water, regulate water flow, recycle essential elements, create and regenerate soil and keep
our environment fit for life. We must prevent pollution and degradation of these
ecosystems as well as the natural plant and wildlife habitats they provide.
Biological diversity includes the total array of species, genetic varieties, habitats and
ecosystems on Earth. It contributes to our quality of life, including a healthy economy. It
is a foundation of the Earth's biosphere, buffering us from the inevitable changes in the
environment.
Change personal understanding and practice.
Society must promote values that build and support its ability to continuously improve
the quality of living for its citizens. This requires maintaining the quality and integrity of
our natural environment. Knowledge, awareness and decision-making skills must be
taught through formal and non-formal education to promote problem solving and
constructive action to nurture the life-giving qualities of our ecosystem.
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 187
Enable communities to care for their own environment.
Living within the limits set by the environment depends on the beliefs and commitment
of individuals, but it is through communities that people share concerns and promote
practices that can nourish rather than cripple their natural life-support systems.
Provide a state and local knowledge base for integrating development and
conservation.
Economic policy can be an effective instrument for sustaining ecosystems and natural
resources. Every economy depends on the environment as a source of life support and
raw materials. The knowledge base for each city, county and the state must be
strengthened, and information on environmental matters made more accessible. The
state's adult and student populations must understand certain ecological and civics
concepts, and North Carolina's place within those concepts.
12.2.7 THE ROLE OF HOMEOWNERS AND LANDOWNERS
The following are ten simple steps individuals can do today to protect water quality.
To decrease polluted runoff from paved surfaces, households can develop alternatives to
areas traditionally covered by impervious surfaces. Porous pavement materials are
available for driveways and sidewalks, and native vegetation and mulch can replace high
maintenance grass lawns.
Homeowners can use fertilizers sparingly and sweep driveways, sidewalks, and roads
instead of using a hose.
Instead of disposing of yard waste, use the materials to start a compost pile.
Learn to use Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in the garden and on the lawn to reduce
dependence on harmful pesticides.
Pick up waste pet waste and dispose of it properly.
Use, store, and dispose of chemicals properly.
Drivers should check their cars for leaks and recycle their motor oil and antifreeze when
these fluids are changed.
Drivers can also avoid impacts from car wash runoff (e.g., detergents, grime, etc.) by
using car wash facilities that do not generate runoff.
Households served by septic systems should have them professionally inspected and
pumped every 3 to 5 years. They should also practice water conservation measures to
extend the life of their septic systems.
Support local government watershed planning efforts and ordinance development.
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 188
12.3 LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLANNING
The North Carolina General Assembly mandated a local and state water supply planning process
in 1989 to ensure that communities have an adequate supply of potable water for future needs.
Under this statute, all units of local government that provide, or plan to provide, public water
supply service are required to prepare a Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) and to update that
plan at least every five years. The information presented in a LWSP is an assessment of a water
system's present and future water needs and its ability
to meet those needs. By looking at current and future
needs, local governments will be better able to manage
water supplies and better prepared to plan for water
supply system improvements. Local governments must
have an adopted current LWSP on file with the NC
Division of Water Resources (DWR) to qualify for
certain grants and loans available for water supply
systems in North Carolina. More information about
local water supply planning can be found on the DWR
Web site (www.ncwater.org).
Benefits to Local Water
Supply Planning
Provides comprehensive look at water
supply needs, water usage, and water
availability.
Reduces the potential for water conflicts
and water shortages. Early identification
of these issues will allow more time for
resolution.
12.4 SOURCE WATER ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
The Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments of 1996 emphasize pollution
prevention as an important strategy for the protection of ground and surface water resources.
This new focus promotes the prevention of drinking water contamination as a cost-effective
means to provide reliable, long-term and safe drinking water sources for public water supply
(PWS) systems. In order to determine the susceptibility of public water supply sources to
contamination, the amendments also required that all states establish a Source Water Assessment
Program (SWAP). Specifically, Section 1453 of the SDWA Amendments require that states
develop and implement a SWAP to:
Delineate source water assessment areas;
Inventory potential contaminants in these areas; and
Determine the susceptibility of each public water supply to contamination.
In North Carolina, the agency responsible for SWAP is the Public Water Supply (PWS) Section
of the NCDENR Division of Environmental Health (DEH). The PWS Section received approval
from the EPA for their SWAP Plan in November 1999. The SWAP Plan, entitled North
Carolina’s Source Water Assessment Program Plan, fully describes the methods and procedures
used to delineate and assess the susceptibility of more than 9,000 wells and approximately 207
surface water intakes, and it builds upon existing protection programs for ground and surface
water resources. These include the state’s Wellhead Protection Program and the Water Supply
Watershed Protection Program.
Wellhead Protection (WHP) Program: North Carolinians withdraw more than 88 million gallons
of groundwater per day from more than 9,000 water supply wells across the state. In 1986,
Congress passed Amendments to the SDWA requiring states to develop wellhead protection
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 189
programs that reduce the threat to the quality of groundwater used for drinking water by
identifying and managing recharge areas to specific wells or wellfields.
Defining a wellhead protection area (WHPA) is one of the most critical components of wellhead
protection. A WHPA is defined as “the surface and subsurface area surrounding a water well or
wellfield, supplying a public water system, through which contaminants are reasonably likely to
move toward and reach such water well or wellfield.” The SWAP uses the methods described in
the state's approved WHP Program to delineate source water assessment areas for all public
water supply wells (http://www.deh.enr.state.nc.us/pws/swap).
Water Supply Watershed Protection (WSWP) Program: DWQ is responsible for managing the
standards and classifications of all water supply watersheds. In 1992, the WSWP Rules were
adopted by the NC Environmental Management Commission (EMC) and require all local
governments that have land use jurisdiction within water supply watersheds adopt and implement
water supply watershed protection ordinances, maps and management plans. SWAP uses the
established water supply watershed boundaries and methods established by the WSWP program
as a basis to delineate source water assessment areas for all public water surface water intakes
(www.ncwaterquality.org/wswp/index.html).
12.4.1 SUSCEPTIBILITY DETERMINATION – NORTH CAROLINA’S OVERALL APPROACH
The SWAP Plan contains a detailed description of the methods used to assess the susceptibility
of each PWS intake in North Carolina. The following is a brief summary of the susceptibility
determination approach.
Overall Susceptibility Rating: The overall susceptibility determination rates the potential for a
drinking water source to become contaminated. The overall susceptibility rating for each PWS
intake is based on two key components: a contaminant rating and an inherent vulnerability
rating. For a PWS to be determined “susceptible”, a potential contaminant source must be
present and the existing conditions of the PWS intake location must be such that a water supply
could become contaminated. The determination of susceptibility for each PWS intake is based
on combining the results of the inherent vulnerability rating and the contaminant rating for each
intake. Once combined, a PWS is given a susceptibility rating of higher, moderate or lower (H,
M or L).
Inherent Vulnerability Rating: Inherent vulnerability refers to the physical characteristics and
existing conditions of the watershed or aquifer. The inherent vulnerability rating of groundwater
intakes is determined based on an evaluation of aquifer characteristics, unsaturated zone
characteristics and well integrity and construction characteristics. The inherent vulnerability
rating of surface water intakes is determined based on an evaluation of the watershed
classification (WSWP Rules), intake location, raw water quality data (i.e., turbidity and total
coliform) and watershed characteristics (i.e., average annual precipitation, land slope, land use,
land cover, groundwater contribution).
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 190
Contaminant Rating: The contaminant rating is based on an evaluation of the density of
potential contaminant sources (PCSs), their relative risk potential to cause contamination, and
their proximity to the water supply intake within the delineated assessment area.
Inventory of Potential Contaminant Sources (PCSs): In order to inventory PCSs, the SWAP
conducted a review of relevant, available sources of existing data at federal, state and local
levels. The SWAP selected sixteen statewide databases that were attainable and contained
usable geographic information related to PCSs.
12.4.2 SOURCE WATER PROTECTION
The PWS Section believes that the information from the source water assessments will become
the basis for future initiatives and priorities for public drinking water source water protection
(SWP) activities. The PWS Section encourages all PWS system owners to implement efforts to
manage identified sources of contamination and to reduce or eliminate the potential threat to
drinking water supplies through locally implemented programs
To encourage and support local SWP, the state offers PWS system owners assistance with local
SWP as well as materials such as:
Fact sheets outlining sources of funding and other resources for local SWP efforts.
Success stories describing local SWP efforts in North Carolina.
Guidance about how to incorporate SWAP and SWP information in Consumer
Confidence Reports (CCRs).
Information related to SWP can be found at http://www.deh.enr.state.nc.us/pws/swap.
12.4.3 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SUSCEPTIBILITY DETERMINATIONS
In April 2004, the PWS Section completed source water assessments for all drinking water
sources and generated reports for the PWS systems using these sources. A second round of
assessments were completed in April 2005. The results of the assessments can be viewed in two
different ways, either through the interactive ArcIMS mapping tool or compiled in a written
report for each PWS system. To access the ArcIMS mapping tool, simply click on the “NC
SWAP Info” icon on the PWS Web site (http://www.deh.enr.state.nc.us/pws/swap). To view a
report, select the PWS System of interest by clicking on the “SWAP Reports” icon.
12.5 RECLASSIFICATION OF SURFACE WATERS
The classification of surface water may be changed after a request is submitted to the DWQ
Classifications and Standards Unit. DWQ reviews each request for reclassification and conducts
an assessment of the surface water to determine if the reclassification is appropriate. If it is
determined that a reclassification is justified, the request must proceed through the state rule-
making process. To initiate a reclassification, the Application to Request Reclassification of NC
Surface Waters must be completed and submitted to DWQ’s Classifications and Standards Unit.
For more information on requests for reclassification and contact information, visit
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 191
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/csu/swcfaq.html#ClassChanges. More information about DWQ’s
classifications and water quality standards can be found in Chapter 2.
12.6 FEDERAL AND STATE INITIATIVES
12.6.1 FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT – SECTION 319 PROGRAM
Section 319 of the Clean Water Act provides grant money for nonpoint source demonstration and
restoration projects. Through annual base funding, there is approximately $1 million available
for demonstration and education projects across the state. An additional $2 million is available
annually through incremental funds for restoration projects. All projects must provide
nonfederal matching funds of at least 40 percent of the project’s total costs. Information on the
North Carolina Section 319 Grant Program application process is available online
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/nps/application_process.htm. Descriptions of projects and general
Section 319 Program information are available on the DWQ Web site
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/nps/Section_319_Grant_Program.htm. For more information on
program initiatives refer to Chapter 6.
12.6.2 NORTH CAROLINA ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (NCEEP)
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is responsible for providing
ecologically effective compensatory mitigation in advance of permitted impacts associated with
road projects and other development activities. The fundamental mission of the program is to
restore, enhance and protect key watershed functions in the seventeen river basins across the
state. This is accomplished through the implementation of wetlands, stream and riparian buffer
projects within selected local watersheds. The vital watershed functions that NCEEP seeks to
restore and protect include water quality, floodwater conveyance and storage, fisheries and
wildlife habitat.
The NCEEP is not a grant program but can implement its restoration projects cooperatively with
other state or federal programs such as the Section 319 Program. Combining NCEEP-funded
restoration or preservation projects with 319 or other local watershed initiatives (i.e., those
funded through the Clean Water Management Trust Fund or local/regional Land Trusts)
increases the potential to improve the water quality, hydrologic and habitat functions within
selected watersheds.
The selection of optimal sites for NCEEP mitigation projects is founded on a basinwide and local
watershed planning approach, which results, respectively, in the development of River Basin
Restoration Priorities and Local Watershed Plans. In developing River Basin Restoration
Priorities (RBRP, the NCEEP identifies local watersheds (14-digit hydrologic units) with the
greatest need and opportunity for restoration, enhancement or preservation projects. These high-
priority watersheds are called “targeted local watersheds” (TLWs). Targeted local watersheds are
identified, in part, using information compiled by DWQ's programmatic activities (i.e.,
Basinwide Assessment Reports and Basinwide Water Quality Plans). Local factors considered in
the selection of TLWs include: water quality impairment, habitat degradation, the presence of
critical habitat or significant natural heritage areas, the presence of water supply watersheds or
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 192
other high-quality waters, the status of riparian buffers, estimates of impervious cover, existing
or planned transportation projects, and the opportunity for local government partnerships.
Recommendations from local resource agency professionals and the presence of existing or
planned watershed projects are given significant weight in the selection of TLWs. In essence,
targeted local watersheds represent those areas within a river basin where NCEEP resources can
be focused for maximum benefit to local watershed functions.
The Local Watershed Plans (LWPs) are usually located within targeted local watersheds
identified in the RBRPs. Through the local watershed planning process, NCEEP conducts
watershed characterization and field assessment tasks to identify critical stressors in local
watersheds. The NCEEP planners and their consultants coordinate with local resource
professionals and local governments to identify optimal watershed projects and management
strategies to address the major functional stressors identified in that watershed. The LWPs
prioritize restoration/enhancement projects, preservation sites and BMP projects that will provide
water quality improvement, habitat protection and other environmental benefits to the local
watershed. More information about watershed planning through NCEEP can be found on the
NCEEP Web site (www.nceep.net).
12.6.3 NORTH CAROLINA’S CLEAN WATER MANAGEMENT TRUST FUND (CWMTF)
The CWMTF offers approximately $40 million annually in grants for projects within the broadly
focused areas of restoring and protecting state surface waters and establishing a network of
riparian buffers and greenways. For more information on the CWMTF or these grants, call (252)
830-3222 or visit the website at www.cwmtf.net.
12.6.4 COMMUNITY CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (CCAP)
The landscape of North Carolina is changing and Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD)
have voiced concern about a void in program areas to address the growing threat of nonpoint
source pollution issues on non-agricultural lands. In the summer of 2005, a survey was
distributed to all districts to inventory their level of interest and BMP needs on urban, suburban
and rural lands. Many districts completed surveys about their needs for a community assistance
program and requested over $6.5 million for local projects. In July 2006, the legislature
unanimously passed House Bill 2129, creating the Community Conservation Assistance Program
(CCAP).
CCAP will focus its efforts on stormwater retrofits to existing land uses. It will not be used to
assist in new development sites to meet state and federal stormwater mandates. Districts have the
technical expertise to install stormwater BMPs and a successful history of promoting voluntary
conservation practices. The program will give the districts the structure and financial assistance
to carry out this mission. CCAP will encourage local governments, individual landowners and
businesses to incorporate stormwater BMPs within their landscape. The economic incentive, 75
percent of average installation costs, will encourage voluntary conservation to be installed.
A workgroup is developing recommendations for the standards and specifications of CCAP
BMPs. This group is also charged with defining the average cost of each practice. Practices that
have been approved by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) and the Soil and Water
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 193
Conservation Commission (SWCC) include: impervious surface conversion, permeable
pavement, grassed swale, critical area planting, bioretention areas, backyard rain gardens,
stormwater wetlands, backyard wetlands, diversion, riparian buffer, stream restoration, stream
stabilization, cisterns/rain barrels and pet waste receptacles.
The NCDENR Division of Soil and Water Conservation (DSWC) was awarded two grants that
will fund CCAP implementation in eighteen counties across the state. The DSWC received a
grant from the CWMTF in the sum of $557,000 and an award from Section 319 program for
$277,425. Since this is a grant-funded program, only districts that participated in the surveys
will receive an allocation. The maximum amount of assistance per practice is limited to $50,000.
It is the goal of the DSWC to seek additional funding sources, including recurring state
appropriations, to offer this program statewide in the future.
12.6.5 CLEAN WATER BONDS – NC RURAL CENTER
Outdated wastewater collection systems, some more than 70 years old, allow millions of gallons
of untreated or partially treated wastewater to spill into the state’s rivers and streams. The NC
Rural Economic Development Center, Inc. (Rural Center) has taken the lead role in designing
public policy initiatives to assist rural communities in developing and expanding local water and
sewer infrastructure. The Rural Center is a private, nonprofit organization. The Rural Center’s
mission is to develop sound, economic strategies that improve the quality of life in North
Carolina, while focusing on people with low to moderate incomes and communities with limited
resources.
To support local economic growth and ensure a reliable supply of clean water, the Rural Center
administers three Water and Sewer Grant Programs to help rural communities develop water and
sewer systems. The Supplemental Grants Program enables local governments and qualified
non-profit corporations to improve local water and sewer systems. Projects may address public
health, environmental and/or economic development critical needs. The maximum grant amount
for this program is $400,000. Rural Center funds must be used to match other project funds.
The Capacity Building Grants Program provides funding for local governments to undertake
planning efforts that support strategic investments in water and sewer facilities. Funds typically
are used to prepare preliminary engineering reports, master water/sewer plans, capital investment
plans, water/sewer feasibility studies, rate studies and grant applications. The maximum amount
for this program is generally $40,000. The Unsewered Communities Grants Program provides
funding for the planning and construction of new central, publicly-owned sewer systems.
Qualified communities must be unserved by wastewater collection or treatment systems.
Unsewered communities grants are designed to cover 90 percent of the total cost of a project but
will not exceed $3 million. For each grant program, priority is given to projects from
economically distressed counties of the state as determined by the NC Department of Commerce
(www.nccommerce.com).
The water and sewer grant programs are made possible through appropriations from the NC
General Assembly and through proceeds from the Clean Water Bonds. In 1998, North Carolina
voters approved an $800 million clean water bond referendum that provided $330 million to state
grants to help local governments repair and improve water supply systems and wastewater
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 194
collection and treatment. The grants also address water conservation and water reuse projects.
Another $300 million was made available as clean water loans.
Since the program’s beginning, the Rural Center has awarded nearly 500 communities and
counties more than $64 million to plan, install, expand, and improve their water and sewer
systems. As a result, these communities have served new residential and business customers,
created and preserved thousands of jobs, and leveraged millions of dollars in other water and
sewer funds. For more information on the Water and Sewer Grants administered by the Rural
Center visit www.ncruralcenter.org/grants/water.htm.
12.6.6 NC CONSTRUCTION GRANTS AND LOANS PROGRAMS
The NC Construction Grants and Loans Section provides grants and loans to local government
agencies for the construction, upgrades and expansion of wastewater collection and treatment
systems. As a financial resource, the section administers five major programs that assist local
governments. Of these, two are federally funded programs administered by the state, the Clean
Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) Program and the State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG).
The STAG is a direct congressional appropriations for a specific “special needs” project. The
High Unit Cost Grant (SRG) Program, the State Emergency Loan (SEL) Program and the State
Revolving Loan (SRL) Program are state funded programs, with the latter two being below
market revolving loan money.
As a technical resource, the Construction Grants and Loan (CG&L) Section, in conjunction with
EPA, has initiated the Municipal Compliance Initiative Program. It is a free technical assistance
program to identify wastewater treatment facilities that are declining but not yet out of
compliance. A team of engineers, operations experts and managers from the section work with
local officials to analyze the facility’s design and operation. For more information, visit the Web
site www.nccgl.net. You may also call (919)-715-6212.
12.6.7 STATE FUNDED OYSTER HATCHERIES
North Carolina Aquariums, in conjunction with the Department of Marine Fisheries (DMF), are
working together to establish additional oyster hatcheries in proximity to the three state
aquariums to support oyster gardening efforts and public education programs. An additional
commercial-sized hatchery would be constructed to support the goals of the DMF and will have
a production capacity of a billion larvae and include a nursery area for setting. The General
Assembly appropriated $600,000 to the state aquariums to facilitate the hatchery program. The
committee is also working to establish an education program that could potentially lead to a
certification in constructing and maintaining oyster hatcheries in North Carolina.
CHAPTER 12 - Protecting Water Quality 195
12.6.8 CLEAN MARINA PROGRAM
The Clean Marina is a voluntary program that began in the summer of 2000. The program is
designed to show that marina operators can help safeguard the environment by using
management and operations techniques that go above and beyond regulatory requirements. This
is a nationwide program developed by the National Marine Environmental Education
Foundation, a nonprofit organization that works to clean up waterways for better recreational
boating. The foundation encourages states to adapt Clean Marina principles to fit their own
needs. North Carolina joins South Carolina, Florida and Maryland as states with Clean Marina
programs in place.
Marina operators who choose to participate must complete an evaluation form about their use of
specific best management practices. If a marina meets criteria developed by NC Marine Trades
Services and the Division of Coastal Management (DCM), it will be designated as a Clean
Marina. Such marinas will be eligible to fly the Clean Marina flag and use the logo in their
advertising. The flags will signal to boaters that a marina cares about the cleanliness of area
waterways. Marinas that do not meet the standards will be able to learn about improvements
needed for Clean Marina designation. Marina owners can reapply after making the necessary
changes.
For more information about the program, visit http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us/Marinas/clean.htm,
http://www.nccoastalmanagement.net/Marinas/marinas.htm or contact NC Coastal Reserve
Education Office at 252-728-2170 or Coastal Management at 919-733-2293.
References
Beach, D. 2002. Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban Design on Aquatic Ecosystems in the
United States. Pew Oceans Commission, Arlington, Virginia.
Haupt, M., J. Jurek, L. Hobbs, J. Guidry, C. Smith and R. Ferrell. 2002. A Preliminary Analysis
of Stream Restoration Costs in the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program. Paper
presented at the conference Setting the Agenda for Water Resources Research. April 9, 2002.
Raleigh, NC.
Weinkam, C., R. Shea, C. Shea, C. Lein and D. Harper. October 2001. Urban Stream
Restoration Programs of Two Counties in the Baltimore-Washington DC Area. Paper presented
at the Fourth Annual North Carolina Stream Restoration Conference, Stream Repair and
Restoration: A Focus on the Urban Environment. Raleigh, NC.