Jordan Lake Water Supply Allocation - Rulemaking

State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Edythe McKinney
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary Director
Planning and Assessment

MEMORANDUM

TO: Kim Brewer

FROM: Bill Flournoy

SUBJECT: Jordan Lake Water Supply Allocation - Rulemaking

DATE: October 30, 1986

Dan Oakley forwarded a draft copy of the Jordan Lake
allocation rules to me on 10/6. I have reviewed them for
their relationship to the N.C. Environmental Policy Act
(G.S. 113A).

G.S. 113A and the supporting rules at 1 NCAC 25 are explicit
in that environmental reviews conducted under NEPA satisfy
the requirements of the State Act. Therefore, because and
EIS under NEPA was prepared for the construction of Jordan
Lake and its water supply capacity, this issue does not have
to be revisited.

The actual decision on allocation and the subsequent
contracts are state "actions involving the expenditure of
public moneys", and the result of such actions may
"significantly effect the quality of the environment", as
described in G.S. 113A. The environmental effects would
include not only the primary impacts of constructing water
intakes, pipelines, and treatment plants, but also the
secondary and cumulative impacts resulting from this
additional water capacity. Since these are beyond the scope
of the NEPA document and clearly fall under G.S. 113A, then
it appears that environmental documentation will be
required.

P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

The major question seems to be: At what point should the
environmental documentation be required. In this case the
allocation decision will be reviewed periodically and
modified as necessary to accommodate volume reversions, non
use, greater needs, etc. This process tends to justify the
preparation of environmental documents at the time a
decision is made to use the water, rather than when it is
allocated.

Further, it is likely that the allocation will go to a
number of communities. This further supports a later
review. Such reviews would occur, of course, only when the
action is above the Minimum Criteria thresholds established
under 1 NCAC 25.

My recommendation is that environmental documentation under
G.S. 113A be conducted by each local or special purpose unit
of government (under the guidance of a State Project Agency)
before it utilizes its allocation from Jordan Lake. It is
imperative that this requirement is understood by all
involved parties. The applicability of G.S. 113A might be
included in the rulemaking but surely should be an explicit
condition of the allocation contract.

If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further
then please contact me. I will be happy to meet with you
and others if this needs further discussion.

BF:so
cc: Dan Oakley
Joe Slate
John Morris