Jordan Nutrient Rules

Here’s the 117 page pdf that Mike Barber doesn’t seem to have read:

Pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1(c5), 143-215.8B, and 143B-282(c) and (d) of the Clean Water Responsibility Act of 1997, G.S. 143-215.1(c5), the Environmental Management Commission hereby establishes the initial goal of reducing the average annual loads of nitrogen and phosphorus delivered to Jordan Reservoir from all point and nonpoint sources of these nutrients located within its watershed, as further specified in Item (3) Item (5) of this Rule, and providing provides for an adaptive management of the initial strategy and goal, as further specified in Item (7)Item of this Rule.

What’s TREBIC got against clean water?

The unprecedented rule requirement for all previously developed areas to retrofit existing infrastructure for pollutant removal is exceedingly costly and places an undue burden on local governments. All local governments (cities and counties) in the watershed will be required to install retrofit storm water controls on existing developed lands. Further, the DWQ estimate of $403 million cost to retrofit existing development only includes one year of actually buying land and installing systems.

I don’t care if it harelips the Queen. If this legislation hinders development then I’m for it. Further, we’re at the top of the Cape Fear Basin and responsible for the quantity and quality of potable water downstream.

Here’s a handout from UNC’s Environmental Finance Center:

The issue of greatest concern to stakeholders with regarding this rule was the compliance date for nitrogen allocations, which had been proposed in an early draft as 2011. That date was pushed back to 2016 in the public comment version, while the phosphorus compliance date was moved up to the first year after effective date. The Division proposed these changes in consideration of the extent of infrastructure improvements and expense that will be required for each parameter. The Hearing Officers evaluated this issue closely and concluded that the 2016 date would not be consistent with Session Law 1998-212, which amended the Clean Water Responsibility Act. Their recommendation reflects the direct application of requirements of the Act to the Jordan Reservoir case. After weighing the various interests, they concluded that the maximum time allowed for compliance under the legislation is the fifth calendar year following Commission?s adoption of these rules, which would equate to the year 2014.

Let’s see how things are going in Liberal Land:

Since 2002, Jordan Lake has been listed as “impaired” under the federal Clean Water act, which requires the state to produce cleanup plans. The the result is a “Jordan Lake Nutrient Strategy” — a set of 12 regulations now before the state General Assembly…

Durham’s primary objection is a rule requiring existing subdivisions, office parks, shopping centers and other developments to be “retrofitted” with stormwater-runoff controls that meet the new, stringent standards — at the expense of Durham taxpayers.

Such a rule has never been enacted in North Carolina, and the city puts the cost of engineering, constructing and maintaining such controls — as well as buying the land to install them — at $570 million, spread over a 20-year period…

Reduction standards for Durham are particularly high. Streams running through Durham County feed the most polluted section of Jordan Lake because of heavy development in southern Durham and a causeway that concentrates pollutants.

It’s gonna be a hard sell if Durham can’t fund it and the economy mitigates against.

Alamance seeks to block:

RALEIGH – Another Alamance County legislator has sponsored a bill that would block implementation of the Jordan Lake Rules…

The Jordan Lake Rules, approved by the Environmental Management Commission last year, will take effect later this year unless the General Assembly passes a bill blocking or modifying them…

The most recent bill is similar to two other bills introduced in the General Assembly this year.

This looks like a shovel-ready project to me. Would it really be the end of the world if, while we’re out of work, we put up some forms and spread concrete? Hell, Obama might even fund it.

From Mark Binker at the N&R:

“I expect it will be contentious because it has already been contentious,” said Rep. Lucy Allen , a Franklin County Democrat who chairs the House environment committee. “We hear all of the objections coming from the communities up that way.”

Although state law gives opponents of regulations a clear path to appeal to the General Assembly, it gives lawmakers little guidance on how to settle disputes. Allen has filed one of a handful of bills that would wipe the Jordan Lake rules from the books, although few expect that could pass as it is.

And right on cue:

“The problems with the rules are dire,” said Marlene Sanford , the president of the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition.

As she reads the rules, they could require city governments to go into existing neighborhoods and condemn land for water-cleaning projects such as detention ponds. They also would be costly to small towns that would have to start street-sweeping and other programs that are usually the preserve of larger cities. To boot, opponents raise questions about whether the retrofit work would even go that far toward cleaning up the lake.

Please read the entire Binker article excerpted in blue lest he hunt me down and beat my ass for misattribution, or worse, send his lawyers after me.

From John Hammer at the Rhino Times:

The City Council received a memo but did not discuss the fact that the staff is continuing to lobby for its own position on the Jordan Lake Rules, and ignoring the unanimous vote of the City Council to oppose the rules.

One might imagine that some city councilmember would be upset that the staff is ignoring the clear direction given by the City Council to oppose the Jordan Lake Rules and is continuing to support the implementation of most of the rules and only recommending changes in a couple of the rules.

Wade said she was not surprised that the staff was going off in its own direction. She said, “I feel that we were just ignored on the Jordan Lake Rules. There is not any control over the staff. A vote of the council, even a unanimous vote, doesn’t have any significance whatsoever with the staff.”

An unsigned memo that is attached to a memo from Turner states, “Most of the rules proposed in Jordan Lake are standards the city already meets or could adjust to meet. However, there are two proposed rules that would be extremely costly for the city. In addition, it is unclear if one of the rules would have any impact on Jordan Lake’s quality. Therefore, city staff [sic] primary opposition to the rules are:” and the memo lists the retrofit rule and the wasterwater treatment plants being required to meet new standards by 2014 instead of 2016.

This is exactly what Bob Morgan said to Council last night. It seems, begging Hammer’s pardon and Kissinger’s:

Council doesn’t understand that it doesn’t understand.

If Hammer’s assertion that staff was taking direction from Mitch Johnson is true, this could get interesting. However, I believe the recently departed City Mgr understood that Council did not understand. And that is one of the many reasons he smiled when the decision was announced.

Don’t miss Hammer jumping up and down, stating the same thing thrice.

I think Perkins, Dr. Wells and maybe Anderson Groat probably understand the complexity of the issue – that a set of laws is about to be enacted, negotiations are on going and no is not an answer. A position is required of Council on the separate points. But Council is incapable of anything save a wet fart.

You know, if I’m gonna go around accusing the N&R of yellow journalism, what Hammer produces must be brown.

Did the Jordan Lake Rules contribute to Mitch Johnson’s dismissal? If so, then I’ve given Anderson Groat too much credit. What’s staff to do in Johnson’s absence? They can’t take no for an answer.