June 25, 2013: The N.C. water quality program has been innovative, award-winning and a frequent target of complaints — complaints about excessive regulation and complaints about poor customer service. The complaints probably result in part from the reach of water quality rules. Over the last 15-20 years, water quality programs have expanded to address pollution that gets to rivers and streams indirectly — in runoff from parking lots, roads, lawns and agricultural activities, for example. The expanded scope of the water quality program responded to specific state water quality problems and a new (beginning in the 1990s) federal focus on “nonpoint sources”. (The term “nonpoint source” distinguishes these indirect sources of water pollution from “point sources”, such as pipes and ditches, that directly discharge waste to rivers, lakes and streams.) In the 1970s and 1980s, the Division of Water Quality mostly regulated municipal wastewater systems and industrial discharges to rivers and streams. A simple subdivision development only needed a water quality permit if the construction involved filling a wetland or stream. Since the 1990s, water quality rules have had a much greater effect on real estate development, agriculture, and even the activities of individual property owners. Any regulatory program that touches so many citizens and activities will generate controversy and complaints — some legitimate and others not.
The McCrory administration has begun moving toward a major reorganization of the water quality programs in DENR’s Division of Water Quality (DWQ). It is not yet clear what the state’s water quality program will look like in the end or even what the McCrory administration wants to achieve, but Secretary John Skvarla has been publicly and harshly critical of the Division of Water Quality’s customer service. Word has started to get out about first steps in reorganization of the division. Both the division director and deputy director have recently taken new assignments; former director Chuck Wakild will retire in August. Reports are that the first reorganization move will be to transfer all stormwater programs from the Division of Water Quality to the Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources effective August 1 2013. The transfer will have a big impact — the Division of Water Quality now manages a number of different state and federal stormwater programs. State stormwater programs include coastal stormwater rules designed to protect the quality of shellfish waters and stormwater requirements associated with the Neuse River, Tar-Pamlico River, Falls Lake and Jordan Lake nutrient rules. Federal stormwater programs (Clean Water Act programs delegated to the state by EPA) issue permits for municipal and industrial stormwater discharges and construction stormwater permits for active construction sites.
The Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (DEMLR) has no stormwater experience (other than a supporting role in DWQ’s issuance of construction stormwater permits) and no experience managing federal Clean Water Act programs. Taking on the stormwater programs will greatly increase the portfolio of a division already struggling to meet the enormous workload associated with shale gas rule making. The move will also separate federal stormwater programs from other federal Clean Water Act permitting programs delegated to DWQ, requiring a bit more effort to coordinate water quality strategies that require control of both point and nonpoint pollution sources. It appears that the remaining DWQ programs will become part of an expanded Division of Water Resources.
As the McCrory administration moves forward with reorganization plans, a few things to watch for and think about:
— Will the reorganized programs have enough staff to review permits, inspect projects, enforce environmental laws and meet federal grant requirements? Even in the construction stormwater program where there has long been a cooperative agreement between DWQ and DEMLR’s sediment program, merging staff from the two divisions does not yield a single program with enough staff to meet its responsibilities under state and federal law. Budget cuts in the sedimentation program over the last five years have take too great a toll. The temptation to use reorganization as a way to cut positions will be great; it should only be done if the new organization can continue to meet all of its state and federal responsibilities. The same holds true for transfer of DWQ programs to the Division of Water Resources; some programs in the two divisions appear to do similar things, but in reality have very different purposes. Reorganization decisions will need to keep those different program functions in mind. Staffing levels also affect the federal grants that support much of the water quality program; state-funded staff positions provide much of the required state match for federal grant dollars and at a certain point eliminating state-funded positions jeopardizes the federal funding.
— Will reorganization decisions maintain all of the functions needed to meet Clean Water Act requirements? Permits are only a small part of the state’s federal Clean Water Act responsibilities. The state must also have an ongoing water quality planning program that regularly reviews water quality standards; identifies rivers, lakes and streams that are not meeting water quality standards; develops plans to improve water quality; and develops best management practices to reduce nonpoint source pollution.
The Division of Water Quality’s water quality planning program provides much of the information and analysis needed to meet the planning requirements of the Clean Water Act. Planning programs may appear less critical than permitting, but the planning program provides the monitoring data needed to evaluate the effectiveness of water quality rules, pinpoint pollution problems, and develop the right solution. A planning program that meets federal requirements is also necessary for the state to have a delegated Clean Water Act permitting program.
— Will the reorganization maintain the expertise needed to evaluate water quality trends, find solutions to impaired water quality, provide good advice to permit applicants, and advocate the state’s position on water quality policy to EPA? Many water quality programs (especially the delegated federal programs) are very complex. Water quality staff need to understand both the science and the law to help permit applicants through the process. There are also times that EPA and the state will disagree on an issue that affects a Clean Water Act permitting program; DENR will need the knowledge and experience to make a case for the state’s position.
— Will changes that affect federal Clean Water Act programs require EPA approval? The answer will depend on what kind of changes are made (to organization structure, staffing and program functions) and how the existing program description approved by EPA was written. Generally, program changes have to be submitted to EPA for approval along with a certification by the Attorney General that the water quality program continues to meet requirements of the Clean Water Act.
N.C. has made tremendous gains in water quality over the last 20 years. Some of the more visible signs of progress have been better management of swine waste, innovative approaches to stormwater control, creation of GIS tools to better predict stream and wetland impacts, and development of river-basin water quality plans that provide a big picture of water quality conditions, threats and trends. One of the real challenges of environmental protection programs is that success often means avoiding a problem — success is the swine waste lagoon that doesn’t fail, the fish kill that doesn’t happen, drinking water supplies unaffected by algae. The challenge for the McCrory administration will be to improve what needs to be improved in the state’s water quality programs without undermining their effectiveness. Water supply will be key to the state’s economic future — and the quality of the water is as important as the quantity.
Note: A new version of House Bill 94 (Amend Environmental Laws) came up in the Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee this morning. The bill included a new section that directs DENR to combine the Division of Water Quality with the Division of Water Resources. The senator presenting the bill indicated that DENR had asked for the reorganization authority, but the details of the bill language do not match up with reported plans for moving the stormwater programs to the Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources. The version of House Bill 94 approved by the committee shifts the stormwater programs to the Division of Water Resources with other water quality programs. Either the DENR plan has changed or the bill needs a little more work.