[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]



          COAST,4.L ZONE M-ANAGE.,MfENT PROGR,.,.LV
                                           FY "91
                       PROGRESS REPORT UPDATE






                                                           or,













     K'N

      Ui

      LA

                     STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMIEN7
                                                and
                             PROTECTION PROGRAM


                                IMPLEMENTATION



           Presewed to.-                                         Prepared by.

                     ,eanic and                                  Charles County Department
             GB       Adminimation;                              of Planning and Growth
             565                                                 Management,     Planning
             M3
             S77       t. of Natural Resourres,                  Depariment
            FY 1991  ourtes DiviTion,
             t991    W Management P@ogram.                       Date: September 30, 1991
             c. I



















































               Funding for this Program is provided by the Coastal Resources Division, Maryland Department
               of Natural Resources, through a grant provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972,
               administered by the office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and
               Atmospheric Administration.





          CHARLES COUNTY GOVERNMENT
          .Planning and Growth Management
          ROY E. RANCOCK, Deputy County Administrator                                                                            Z


                                                                                                                          16,5b

                                                                             October 8, 1991

                  Ms. Gwynne Schultz
                  Coastal Resources Division
                  Department of Natural Resources
                  Tidewater Administration
                  Tawes State Office Building
                  Annapolis, MD 21401                                          US Department of Commerve
                  RE-     CONTRACT # C 209-90-002                        NOAA Coastal Services Center Library
                          PROGRESS REPORT UPDATE                                 2234 South Hobson Avenue
                                                                                                  SC 29405-2413



                  Dear Gwynne,


                          In response to the terms of this contract period (Oct. '90 - Sept. '91) for the implementation of the
                  Stream Valley Management and Protection Program, five copies of this final report documenting the results
                  of this ear', work effort are being submitted to CRD for review and approval at this time. Final work
                  products for this year's grant period may be broken down into 5 sections: Resource Protection; Watershed
                  Management; Water Quality Monitoring; Land Trust Formation and; Education (see attached Time Frames
                  and Work Products). Program updates will be addressed for each of the final work products in the context
                  of this report. In addition, you will find enclosed copies of the Mattawoman Watershed Soil Survey Report,
                  prepared and submitted by the Soil Conservation Service.

                          This report will also document: 1) An inventory of properties lying within delineated stream valleys,
                  including lists of property owners; 2) A brochure explaining the management plan objectives, protection
                  methods, implementation techniques and a description of land trusts and conservation easements; 3) A
                  description of the activities undertaken to expand the local land trust, cooperative conservation easement
                  program and other formalized measures.to acquire and protect sensitive stream valley habitat areas, 4)
                  Guidelines established for possible inclusion of other stream valleys not included in this program.

                          It was a meaningful endeavor this year, being given the opportunity (through CZM funding) to
                  implement the goals and objectives of the Stream Valley Management and Protection Program - a Program
                  which I feel very positive about for protecting Charles County's sensitive riparian environs. I am certainly
                  looking forward to your comments and feedback with respect to our work products this grant period. Our
                  requested reimbursement for expenditures accrued during this last quarter will be forthcoming. If you
                  should have any questions or require any further clarification regarding this submittal, please don't hesitate
                  to give me a call at 645-0599.


                                                                             Respectfully submitted,
                                                                             @
                                                                             Kevin J.    rby
                                                                             Environmental Planner


                  KJK/ Attachments
                                                                             :-evin      r@@


                                                             SAY NO TO DRUGS

                                     Post Office Box B   La Plata, Maryland 20646   (301) 645-06 10 or 670-3935

                                                             EOUAL OPPORTUNITY COUNTY







                     STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION PROGR4M
                                           IMPLEMENTATION REPORT UPDATE



                            In response to the terms of this contract period (Oct. '90 - Sept. '91) for the implementation of the
                   Stream Valley Management and Protection Program, five copies of this final report documenting the results
                   of this year's work effort are being submitted to CRD for review and approval at this time. Final work
                   products for this year's grant period may be broken down into 5 sections: Resource Protection; Watershed
                   Management; Water Quality Monitoring; Land Trust Formation and; Education (see attached Time Frames
                   and Work Products). Program updates will be addressed for each of the final work products in the context
                   of this report.

                            This report will also document: 1) An inventory of properties lying within delineated stream valleys,
                   including lists of property owners; 2) A brochure explaining the management plan objectives, protection
                   methods, implementation techniques and a description of land trusts and conservation easements; 3) A
                   description of the activities undertaken to expand the local land trust, cooperative conservation easement
                   program and other formalized measures to acquire and protect sensitive stream valley habitat areas, and; 4)
                   Guidelines established for possible inclusion of other stream valleys not included in this program.


                   I        PROGRAMVP       DATES


                    A.      Resource Protection District Overlay Zone

                              Ordinance for the Resource Protection District


                                    To protect Charles County's riparian and aquatic ecosystems, an Overlay Zone, termed the
                            Resource Protection District (RPD), has been identified within the adopted 1990 Charles County
                            Comprehensive Plan. The Overlay Zone is normally established to protect a single resource through
                            the creation of a zoning classification that overlays the base zoning district, whether it is residential,
                            commercial, industrial or agricultural. The delineation of the RPD includes all wetlands contiguous
                            to stream valleys, floodplains, and their corresponding buffers.

                                      The purpose of this ordinance is to protect stream valley habitat and stream water quality.
                            Ile scope of these regulations shall apply to all proposed development, including: projects for which
                            subdivision, site plan, building and grading permits or approvals are necessary; timber harvesting;
                            and agriculture activities.

                                    Given the realities of existing State and Federal regulations, it was realized that Charles
                            County could only require agricultural producers and timber harvesters to abide by 'the most
                            -restrictive regulations -curreatly.in place... This:strategy includes requiring the same compliances for
                            agricultural and timber activities adjacent to stream valleys as are required adjacent to the
                            Chesapeake Bay Critical Area"(CBCA). We would be amiss to not mention that the. RPD regulation
                            affects far more properties than are currently within the jurisdictional boundaries of the CBCA_
                            To question the effectiveness of the Soil Conservation and Water Quality plans which we are
                            requiring of affected properties (i.e. the 25 ft.,xegetative buffer), is -to question State and Federal
                            guidelines. The political realities of at-tempting to implement a more stringent regulation then State
                            and Federal guidelines would be folly in a county as agricultirally strong as Charles - to propose
                            this would be to compromise the passage of any regulation at all.






                   STREAM VALLEY MAAAGEMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM                                                REPORT UPDATE
                   IMPLEMENTATION                                           3







                 I        PROGRAM UPDATES (cont.)


                   A.     Resource Protection District Overlay Zone (cont.)

                                  Maximum effort was taken in the drafting of this ordinance to establish    guidelines for the
                          inclusion of stream valley tributaries not included in the original inventory. The guidelines include
                          establishing recognition of all tributaries and stream valleys with identified floodplains and/or
                          wetlands. It is our opinion that the guidelines specified in this ordinance for delineation of the
                          RPD is comprehensive in this respect. At this time, the language for the Resource Protection
                          Overlay Zone Ordinance has been included within the recent draft Comprehensive Rezoning
                          Ordinance. A copy of this language is included for your perusal (see Appendix A).

                                  The schedule for approval of this ordinance, at this point in the Zoning Ordinance adoption,
                          is: approval by the Planning Commission; conducting a public hearing on whatever changes may have
                          occurred; final recommendations presented to the Charles County Commissioners and lastly; final
                          action by the Commisioners. We are optimistic that we will have an adopted Zoning Ordinance,
                          complete with a Resource Protection District, by the end of this fall, 1991.


                            County-wide Mapping Status

                                  At this time, all of Charles County's major stream valleys, including but not be limited to
                          the Zekiah Swamp, Gilbert Swamp, Mattawoman Creek, Nanjemoy Creek, Swanson Creek, Indian
                          Creek, and Port Tobacco River, have had their floodplains, contiguous wetlands and corresponding
                          buffers digitized onto the County's tax-map database. Fine tuning of the map products are currently
                          underway with reviews being conducted by planning staff, Planning Commission members, and
                          County Commissioners. It is worth noting that the criteria for inclusion and delineation of this
                          overlay zone is subject to change at the pleasure of both the Planning Commission and the County
                          Commissioners. To date, we have had very strong support from the majority of Commission
                          members to adopt the Overlay Zone as drafted.


                             Inventory of Properties Within Resource Protection District

                                  One of the work products included in implementing the SVMPP is compiling an inventory
                          of properties lying within delineated stream valleys. This includes lists of property owners whose
                          property may lie wholly or partially within the major stream valleys of the County. In compiling
                          this inventory, two factors.have "been considered in order to prioritize the phasing of such a major
                          inventory: Identifying those properties whose stream valley's lie within areas of high natural value
                          such Natural Heritage Areas and Areas of Critical State Concern. This includes the entire
                          Mattawoman, Zekiah, Upper Nanjemoy, and'Port Tobacco stream valleys. At, this time, we-are.
                          submitting to CRD an inventory of those. properties lying wholly.or partially within the, Resource
                          Protection Zone of the Zekiah Swamp and the Mattawoman Creek - both identified as Areas of
                          Critidal State Concern (see Appendix C). These areas are our highest priorities for land acquisition.
                          The Mattawoman Creek watershed corresponds with the County's Development District. The Zekiah
                          Swamp is -well known as one of the most significant natural areas in the Chesapeake Bay region.
                          Because of the sizeable acreage of these areas and the large number of private holdings within
                          them, it is reasonable to focus land acquisition activities exclusively on these areas at this time.








                  STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM                                           REPORT UPDATE
                  IMPLEMENTATION                                        4








                 I        PROGRAM UPDATES (cont.)

                   B.     Mattawoman Watershed Management Plan

                                  This document represents an integral part of the adopted Stream Valley Management and
                          Protection Program (SVMPP) as a strategy to protect riparian habitats, protect the quality of stream
                          waters, and conserve the environmental features and functions of Charles County's watersheds. The
                          Mattawoman watershed was selected as a pilot study area in order to respond to the tremendous
                          development pressure anticipated for this development district.

                                  The Mattawoman Creek wat     ershed offers unique management considerations compared to
                          other watersheds in the County in that this region has been targeted as an area of "directed growth"
                          in the adopted Charles County Comprehensive Plan. The implications of such intense development
                          requires the development of this Watershed Management Plan thereby focusing on controlling
                          further degradation of water quality by assessing current conditions, anticipating what impacts will
                          be associated with urbanization, and adopting urban Best Management Practices (BMPs) for this
                          development district as a means of controlling and regulating stormwater runoff.

                                  This plan is further designed to meet the Watershed Management Plan (WMP)
                          considerations as established by the Maryland Water Resources Administration, pursuant to the
                          State's Nontidal Wetlands Protection Act. As such, it is anticipated that this WMP will take several
                          years to develop and implement. Pursuant to the submitted schedule for the development of the
                          Mattawoman WMP, Charles County has begun development of Phases I & 11; Outline of the
                          Concept Document & Issue Identification (see Appendix B).

                                  Originally, an outgrowth of this plan was to draft a Watershed Management District
                          Ordinance which would require such components as urban BMPs and the pre-treatment of SW
                          facility discharge before entering wetlands. It has become obvious, with the review of existing
                          ordinances that a much more practical approach is to make these requirements County-wide (rather
                          than watershed specific) and that a more logical vehicle to utilize in implementing such a regulation
                          is in the existing Stormwater Management. Ordinance. The rational behind this is that with the
                          changes slated for this current ordinance (as a result of review and assessment as a part of the WMP
                          process) justifies a comprehensive overhaul of this ordinance in order to maximize inter-ordinance
                          coordination between various goals and objectives. Therefore, Charles County withdraws its
                          commitment to produce a Watershed Management District Ordinance this grant period and will
                          not document expenditures accrued by county staff to produce it.


                   C.     Water Quality Monitoring Program Strategy

                                  Water quality monitoring in the County's streams has been identified as another major
                          component of Charles County's SVMPP. As such, Charles County planning staff has developed a
                          three-tiered Water Quality Monitoring Program Strategy which was adopted by the Charles County
                          Commissioners on July 30, 1991 (see Appendix E). This program strategy covers the approach,
                          organization, staffing, data interpretation, and costs of the program.












                 STPXAM VAUEYM4AWGEMENTA%T) PROTECTIONPROWUM                                                REPORT UPDATE
                 IMPLEMENTATION                                         5








                  I        PROGRAM UPDATES (cont.)

                    C.     Water Quality Monitoring Program Strategy (cont.)

                                    Stream monitoring will establish baseline data for existing water quality, which can be
                           compared with future water quality data to establish trends and aid in tracking water quality problem
                           areas. This three-tiered approach to water quality monitoring includes:

                           1)       A volunteer oriented stream water quality monitoring program documenting the physical,
                                    chemical and benthic testing of palustrine stream waters;

                           2)       Laboratory analysis of water quality which includes a more detailed technical and site
                                    specific analysis of water quality to be conducted in cases where the results of first tier
                                    sampling indicate that the quality of waters tested fall below accepted standards, and;

                           3)       An in-stream computer monitoring station which would allow for water quality testing
                                    before, during and after crucial storm events when the true telling of a watershed's
                                    environmental health is most evident.



                    D.     Charles County Conservancy

                                    The formation of a County-wide land trust has been envisioned as a means of acquiring
                           important and sensitive natural areas and of encouraging stream stewardship on the part of those
                           property owners adjacent to stream valleys and, as such, identified as another component of
                           implementing the SVMPP. "Me strategy for land trust formation has been to have the County
                           Commissioners act as the formal land trust incorporators, thereby forming the Charles County
                           Conservancy.

                                    At this time, the County Commissioners have selected members for the steering committee
                           (copies of steering committee meetings, solicitations and charge letter are enclosed for your review
                           in Appendix D). The steering committee is charged with nominating the Board of Directors and
                           providing recommendations on land trust bylaws, articles of incorporation, funding and role in the
                           County.


                    E.     Education


                                    As with any new program whose objective and focus may be admirable if not         controversial,
                           its effectiveness is inherently limited by the manner in which the-information is communicated to
                           the people it might effect. "Me SVMPP has striven from its inception to present the programs goals
                           and objectives to the residents of Charles County in a manner which would promote a stewardship
                           on the part of those residents that might be fortunate enough to have a stream valley coursing
                           through their "back 40". At this time, two brochures are being presented to CRD: One on
                           Agricultural BMP's and a second on the Stream Valley Management. and Protection Program.

                                    The purpose of the Agricultural BMP's brochure is to describe various state and federal
                           programs which exist that can help defray the costs associated with the design and installation of
                           agricultural BMPs. although their currently exists a host of literature which describe different
                           programs, there is no one source that describes them all. This brochure is intended to do just that,
                           and is based upon the literature available on each grant program.

                                    The purpose of the Stream Valley Management and Protection Program brochure is to
                           explain the management plan objectives, protection methods, implementation techniques, and a
                           description of land trusts and conservation easements.


                  STRE4H VAU_17YM4MGEKFA7 AND PROTECTIONPROGXAM                                                 REPORT UPDATE
                  IMPLEMENTATION                                          6







                            SIRE" VALLEY AIANAGEMENT and PROTECTION PROGRAM
                                                        Time Frames and Work Products for 1990 - 1991

             TASK                                                              WORK PRODUCT                                      TIMELINE                    TIMELINE
                                                                                                                                 FY1991                      FY1992


             RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTRICT
             (RPD)      Delineation @ 1"=600'                                  Delineated Taxmaps,                               03/31/91                    ----------

                        RPD Ordinance                                          Draft Ordinance                                   12/31/90                    ----------



             WATERSHED MANAGEMENT


                        Phase I - Concept Document                             Concept                                           09/31/91                    ----------

                        Phase   2 - Issue Identification                       Issues                                            09/31/91                    ----------


                        Phase 3 - Alternatives                                 Alternatives                                      ----------                  12/31/91


                        Phase 4 - Scheduling                                   Scheduling                                        ----------                  03/30/92

                        Phase 5 - Implementation                               Implementation                                    ----------                  09/30/92


             WATER QUALITY

                        Program Strategy                                       Program Strategy                                  06130/91                    ----------

                        Grant Funding                                          Grant Application                                 08/15/91                    ----------

                        Citizen Monitoring                                     WQ Data                                           ----------                  10/01/92


             LAND TRUST


                        Steering Committee                                     Charge Letter                                     03/30/91                    ----------

                        Board of Directors                                     Appointment Letter                                09/30/91                    ----------

                        Goals and Criteria                                     Goals and Criteria                                ----------



             EDUCATION


                        SVMPP Brochure                                         Educational Brochure                              08/30/91                    ----------


                        Agric. BMP Brochure                                    Educational Brochure                              08/30/91                    ----------

                        Agric. BMP Promoter                                    Grant Applications                                08/15/91                    ----------



                        STPXAM VAUEYMAMCEMENT AND PROTECTIONPROMUM                                                                                TIME FRAMES
                        IMPLEMENTATION                                                         7



















                                          RESOURCE PROTECTION


                                                        OVERLAY ZONE


                                                             ORDINANCE




                                                            APPENDIX A













                   STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM                  RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE ORDINANCE
                   IMPLEMENTATION                                             8                                            APPENDIX A







                                                                   DRAFT
                                                Resource Protection Overlay Zone (RPZ)



                  A. Statement of Purpose

                  1)      The general purpose of this zone is to protect stream valley habitat    and stream water quality. in
                          particular, the purposes of this zone are to:

                          a)       preserve floodplains in a natural state;
                          b)       preserve wetlands associated with floodplains;
                          C)       preserve significant habitat areas associated with stream valleys or in other locations;
                          d)       prevent soil erosion and sedimentation by protecting steep slopes associated with stream
                                   valleys;
                          e)       protect persons and property from environmental hazards such as unstable or highly erodible
                                   soils and flooding;
                                   filter nutrients, toNics, and sediment from stormwater;
                          g)       protect scenic values;
                          h)       provide recreational opportunities; and
                          i)       minimize public investment in floodplain stormwater management.


                  B. Scope


                  1)      These regulations shall apply to all proposed development, including: projects for which subdivision,
                          site plan, building and grading permits or approvals are necessary; timber harvesting; and agricultural
                          activities.



                  C. Application

                  1)      The Resource Protection Zone (RPZ) shall apply to those County streams or those portions of
                          County streams outside of the Critical Area Overlay Zone, including but not limited to: Zekiah
                          Swamp, Gilbert Run, Nanjemoy Creek, Swanson Creek, Indian Creek, Port Tobacco River,
                          Mattawoman Creek, Chicamuxen Creek, Popes Creek, Wards Run, Kerrick Swamp, Null Run,
                          Beaverdam Creek, Hancock Run, Old Woman's Creek, Piney Branch, and tributaries thereof or of
                          the Potomac River.



                  D. Resource Protection Zone Delineation


                          'Me Resource Protection Zone shall encompass an area based on the -outermost combined limits'
                          of the existing 100-year floodplain if present, non-tidal wetlands contiguous with or within 25' of
                          the stream channel or 100 year floodplain if present, and a buffer. Except as permitted in this
                          ordinance, the land within this zone is to remain in an @undisturbed natural state, and the outer edge
                          of this zone shall constitute the limit of clearing and grading.










                  SrREAm VALLEY M,4mGE&w,%T AmD PRomcrioN PRoGmu               RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE ORDINANCE
                  IMPLEMENTATION                                         9                                          APPEADIXA







                 Resource Protection Overlay Zone (cont.)

                 E. Minimum Buffer Widths


                 1)      The minimum buffer standards shall be as follows:

                         a) 100' - for perennial streams
                         b) 50' - for intermittent streams

                 2)      The minimum buffer shall extend outward from the outermost limit of the 100-year floodplain or
                         non-tidal wetlands adjoining the stream channel or floodplain, whichever is greater, or outward from
                         fboth sides of the centerline of the stream channel in the absence of a 100-year floodplain and non-
                         tidal wetlands. The buffer shall be measured horizontally from a floodplain, wetland, or stream
                         channel without regard for the lay of the land.



                 F. Buffer Adiustment for Steep Slopes


                 1)      The minimum buffer shall be increased to account for steep slopes contiguous with or within 25'
                         of the minimum buffer. The buffer width shall be doubled or extend to the top of the slope,
                         whichever is less, where average slopes greater than 15% adjoin the minimum buffer or are within
                         25' of the minimum buffer.


                 2)      Percentage of average slope shall be determined by plotting a transect from the outer edge of the
                         minimum buffer to the top of the adjoining slope, defined as the point at the top of slope where
                         the percent slope falls below 15%, and calculating an average slope from the slope percentages
                         crossed by the transect. 'Fhe number of transects will vary depending on the uniformity of slopes
                         adjoining a particular reach of a stream. Transects may be spaced up to 100' apart regardless of
                         slope uniformity. However, transect spacing exceeding 100' shall be based on slope uniformity.



                 G. Use Restrictions


                 'Me following uses shall be prohibited in the RPZ:

                 1)      Mining or excavation, except for existing operations;

                 2)      Dredging except as may be pe   rinitted under state law.

                         Deposit or landfilling of fill, refuse, and solid or liquid waste, except manure applied as a crop
                         fertilizer and acceptable fill permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for streambank erosion
                         control.


                 4)      Alteration of the stream bed and bank of a waterway, except for best management practices to
                         reduce stream erosion, and construction and maintenance of stream crossings for permitted uses.

                 5)      Clearing of vegetation and grading, except as may be permitted under this ordinance.










                 S'rRFAm VALLff MAmGEmEw AND PRomcrm PRorRAm                 RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE ORDINANCE
                 IMPLEMENTATION                                       10                                        APPENDIX A








                 Resource Protection Overlay Zone (cont.)


                 H. Permitted Uses


                 'Me following land uses shall be permitted, provided that the conditions herein are met:

                 1) -     Agriculture

                          Agricultural uses shall be permitted, provided that a soil conservation and water quality plan be
                          approved by the Charles Soil Conservation District. 'Me soil conservation and water quality plan
                          shall include 25' vegetative filter strips adjoining streams.

                 2)       Timber Harvesting

                          Landowner timber harvesting for personal use shall be permitted. Commercial timber harvesting
                          shall be permitted, provided that the timber harvesting is conducted in conformance with Subtitle
                          16 - Forest Conservation, Annotated Code of Maryland, or a local program pursuant to said subtitle.

                 3)       Utility transmission lines, railroads, roads, stormwater management facilities, recreational non-
                          motorized trails, public environmental education facilities, facilities for recreational access to a
                          stream, and associated clearing shall be permitted, provided that:

                          a)       Project location in the RPZ is essential for access or        continuity and no reasonable
                                   alternatives exist.


                          b)       Crossings of the RPZ are as close to 90 degrees as reasonably possible.

                          C)       The project complies with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Maryland
                                   Department of Natural Resources, and the Floodplain Management Ordinance for Charles
                                   County, Maryland.

                          d)       'Me project is designed to minimize disturbance, clearing, and grading.

                          e)       Approved sedimentation and erosion control, best management practices, and revegetation
                                   plans in accordance With Subtitle 16 - Forest Conservation, Annotated Code of Maryland
                                   or local program pursuant to Subtitle 16          Forest Conservation, as applicable, are
                                   implemented for the project.

                          f)       The habitats of federally or-state listed threatened and endangered species or other critical
                                   habitats are fully protected.


                 1.       Open Space Credit

                 1)       Land within the RPZ may be used to meet open space requirements.


                          Extension of RPZ


                 1)       The Planning Commission may extend the RPZ to include adjoining hydric soils, severely erodible
                          soils, entire steep slopes, State designated natural heritage areas and wetlands of special concern,and
                          the habitats of federally or state listed threatened and endangered species or other critical and
                          significant wildlife and plant habitats deserving of protection.



                 SrREAm VALLEY MAuGFmENT AND PRorEcrioNPRoGium                 RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE ORDINANCE
                 IMPLEMENTATION                                         11                                          APPENDMA








                 Resource Protection Overlay Zone (cont.)


                 K        Adiustm nt of District


                 1)       Tle application of this zone to the County zoning maps shall be construed as general in nature and
                          may be adjusted by the Planning Director upon the presentation of engineering data
                          which delineates more precisely the boundaries of this zone.



                 L        Plans and Plats Information


                 1)       All plans submitted to Charles County for review shall indicate the boundary of the RPZ and buffer
                          width, as applicable.

                 2)       All plats prepared for recording shall clearly show:

                          a)      The extent of the RPZ by metes and bounds;

                          b)      A label stating, "Resource Protection Zone" for the area within the RPZ; and

                          C)      A note stating: "T'here shall be no clearing, grading, construction or disturbance of
                                  vegetation in the Resource Protection Zone as further documented in a recorded
                                  conservation easement, except as may be permitted by the Charles County Planning
                                  Commission."


                          d)      A conservation easement requiring that the RPZ land be perpetually maintained in natural
                                  vegetation shall be dedicated to the County or to a County land trust, should one exist.
                                  Said easement shall be recorded by deed or plat in the County land records for that portion
                                  of the property within the RPZ.



                 M.       Construction Stakin


                 1)       The outer edge of the RPZ buffer shall be field staked and clearly delineated as the limit of clearing
                          and grading prior to the commencement of clearing and grading activities within 50' of the RPZ,
                          permitted clearing and grading in the RPZ excepted. The limits of permitted clearing and grading
                          within the RPZ shall likewise be field staked and clearly delineated.



                 N,       Enforcement


                 1)       Ile enforcement provisions of the Charles County Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance
                          shall also apply to this zone.

                 0.       Performance Bond


                 1)       A performance bond or other surety in a form and amount established as acceptable to the County
                          shall be executed by the owner or developer to cover possible damage to-RPZ lands during
                          construction. The bond or surety shall remain in full force until the work encompassed by the
                          applicable grading permit has been completed and approved by the County. Accidental or incidental
                          construction damage to the RPZ shall result in a full or partial forfeiture of the performance bond
                          or surety, depending on the severity of the violation and the costs of restoring damaged RPZ land.
                          It shall be the developer's responsibility to restore damaged RPZ land in accordance with County
                          revegetation requirements.


                 STRUM VAUEYMAMGEMENT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM                  RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE ORDINANCE
                 IMPLEMENTATION                                        12                                          APPENDIXA







                Resource Protection Overlay Zone (cont.)

                P.      RPZ Variance Provisions


                1)      The variance provisions of Article XVIII shall apply to this ordinance.


                Definitions to add to Zoning Ordinance:

                Intermittent Stream - means a stream in which surface water is absenet during a portion of the year, as
                shown on the most recent 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle or other topographic maps published by the
                United States Geological Survey, or as shown on an official map or aerial photograph as chosen by the
                Charles County Planning Commission.

                Perennial Stream - means a stream containing surface water throughout an average rainfall year, as shown
                on the most recent 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle or other topographic maps published by the United
                States Georlogical Survey, or as shown on an official map or aerial photograph as chosen by the Charles
                County Planning Commission.










































                STRFAM VAU-1YM4X4GEkMVT AND FROTECTIONPROGR4M             RESOURCE PROTECTION ZONE ORDINANCE
                IMPLEMENTATION                                     13                                      APPEIMIX A


















                           RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTMCT


                                 PROPEMY OWNER INVENTORY


                                                            APPENDIX B



















                   STREAM VAU.EY MAX4GEME%7 ANI) PROTECT-TON PROGR4M                                     RFD PROPERTY INVENTORY
                   IMPLEMENTATION                                             14                                            APPENDIX B




                                                    PROPERTY INVENTORY


                                                    MATTA WOMAN CREEK


                PROPERTY OWNER                           TAX MAP#             PARCEL         ACREAGE



                George Rhodes                                   2                   1
                Waldorf Restaurant                              3                   1
                                                                4                   1
                Herbert S. Kidwell                              6                   69           62.00
                Charlotte R. Rogers                             6                   68           21.0
                Rainbow Construction, Inc.                      6                   8              7.51
                N/A                                             6                   89
                Cleota Langdon                                  6                   6            43.28
                Eunice B. Anderegg                              6                   4            33.94
                C. M. Long Assoc. Inc.                          6                   206          16.00
                N/A                                             6                   23
                NIA                                             6                   170
                William R. Porter                               6                   175          16.31
                Thadeus J. Swenton                              6                   208          36.50
                N/A                                             6                   70
                N/A                                             6                   180
                J.E. Bracy                                      6                   2            66.94
                Mildred Melton Cover                            6                   7
                Leo Tompkins                                    6                   1            126.68
                Waldorf Meth. Episcopal Ch.                     7                   222          15.00
                Richard H. Estevez                              7                   157           3.45
                Carroll T. Grandstaff                           7                   214           3.88
                NIA                                             7                   188
                Ashford Joint Venture                           7                   152          119.06
                Rose Marie Borde                                7                   132          -35.39
                CMDC St.Char.Ltd. Part.                         7                   108          60.15
                George Estevez                                  7                   62           42.50
                Richard H. Dobson                               7                   27           221.50
                Berry Rd. Stream View Assoc.                    7                   16           83.41
                Larry B. Wilkerson                              7                   79           46.54
                David Edelen                                    7                   250          87.03
                Co. Comm. of Charles Co.                        7                   240          '32.19
                FEH Inc. c/o L.K.Farral 111                     7                   4            79.12
                Randy M. Shaban                                 7                   5     Lotl 8-Sec2
                Joseph A. Moran                                 7                   205   Lot3l -Sec2
                Hillman Cornell                                 7                   242          20.00
                Maryland Quality Homes,Inc.                     7                   170          12.46
                Joseph H. Gibson                                7                   104    Lot32-Sec2
                Co. Comm of Charles Co.                         7                   156          20.73
                Waldorf Shopping MaII,Inc.                      7                   302          36.94
                Monel Associates, Inc.                          7                   1            101.00



                STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT AND PROTEC77ON PROGRAM                            RPD PROPER 7Y INVENTORY
                IMPLEMENTATION                                     15                                       APPENDIX B








                 PROPERTY OWNER                          TAX MAP#             PARCEL         ACREAGE


                 Walte Wroblewski                               7                   185           7.50
                 Eugene C. Radcliff                             7                   305           2.00
                 NIA                                            7                   60
                 Leonard D. Sanford                             7                   2             2.00
                 William H. Clifton                             7                   61            98.71
                 Robert E. Noonan                               7                   40            27.31
                 John M. Edwards                                7                   340           1.76
                 Alice Pennington Bell                          7                   329           0.47
                 Laurence M. Ullman                             7                   220           0.47
                 Scotland Hts. Ltd. Part.                       7                   221           91.20
                 Brian N. Helland                               7                   312           1.00
                 Joseph A. Pickeral                             7                   171           2.01
                 Cleo A. Helland                                7                   273           1.01
                 Lewis R. Vest                                  7                   313           1.00
                 Shirley Ann Proctor                            7                   137           1.00
                 N/A                                            7                   327
                 Elizabeth M. Proctor                           7                   82            61.79
                 William Junior Swann                           7                   81            1.00
                 Rhoderick R. Dyson                             7                   28            67.93
                 Lewis R. Vest                                  7                   272           125.35
                 Richard Allen                                  7                   232           33.50
                 Russell E. Knieser                             7                   126     NIA
                 Karl L. Elders                                 7                   163           1.00
                                                                9                   80
                 Henry Travathan'                               13                  173           23-60
                 State of Md. D.N.R.                            13                  189           22.76
                 State of Md. D.N.R.                            13                  57            99.66
                 Hillen Morgan,Jr.                              13                  146           134.52
                 N/Al                                           13                  113
                 Sharon Bolton                                  13                  54            94.10
                 N/A                                            13                  181
                 Cafritz Foundation Et AL                       13              52-A              248.79
                 Jesse Meyers                                   13              -51               269.21
                 Louis Bell                                     13                  81            188.95
                 Louis Bell                                     13                  6             231.70
                 Philip Dwyer-.                                 13                  1
                 Isabella Cole                                  21                  5             7.50
                 Vintage Asso. % Cecil Boyle                    21                  10            .10.00
                 NIA                                            21                  51
                 Thomas Marbury                                 21                  59            0.45
                 Walter Washington                              21                  64
                 Earl Thomas                                    21                  65
                 Jane Datcher                                   21                  66
                 Harold Hancock                                 21                  60
                 Billy Dixon                                    21                  6             1.86
                 George Grieninger                              21                  7             2.11


               Snt,-Am VAu.EYMANAGFidEwAvDPRoTEcrioNPitoGitAm                              RPD PROPERYY INVENTORY
               IMPLEMENTATION                                      16                                       APPENDIX B










                 PROPERTY OWNER                          TAX MAP#              PARCEL         ACREAGE


                 N/A                                           21                   9
                 N/A                                           21                 52
                 N/A                                           21                 53
                 N/A                                           21                 13
                 Percontee, Inc.                               21                 14             234.56
                 Date Mueller                                  21                 26               14.00
                 Joseph T. Dixon                               21                 172              75.00
                 Leo B. Dixon                                  21                 173              75.40
                 Trimac, Inc.                                  21                 76             204.58
                 Dept. of Forest & Parks                       21                 28             754.00
                 DNR                                           21                 24               56.00
                 Robert Kravel, Jr.                            21                 29
                 Vernon Haas                                   21                 17               32.41
                 James Corridon                                21                 61               69.73
                 N/A                                           21                 113
                 Norman Irvine                                 21                 23             115.46
                 N/A                                           21                 116
                 DNR                                           21                 187              73.40
                 John Ray                                      21                 164              14.25
                 DNR                                           21                 114
                 Benard M. Short Et Al                         22                 34             134.00
                 Garland Smythers                              22                 101              50.07
                 Henry L. Trevathan                            22                 143              1S.63
                 Lanie Gesvero                                 22                 146              10.00
                 Gunga Lee Dean                                22                 144              10.00
                 N/A                                           22                 200
                 INIA                                          22                 201
                 Gary Stine                                    22                 174              2.32
                 Paul Thorne                                   22                 123              31.60
                 Charles Co. Co  mmission' ers                 22                 505              15.64
                 N/A                                           22                 304              -
                 Paul Middleton                                22                 308              23.73
                 William J. Purvis                             22                 371              44.30
                 -Benjamin Weiner                              22                 305              50.48
                 Earl Gates, Jr.
                                                               22                 183            128.00
                 Lester Hamilton                               22                 578            .25.00
                 Holly Station Partnership                     22                 706              27.64
                 Charles County Commissioners                  22                 372              4.26
                 Embassy Dairy, Inc.                           22                 588              24.36
                 Waldorf Restaurant                            22                 254              32.66
                 Lots-36,37,38,39,40,41,42                     22                 622      Under 2ac.
                 Charles County Commissioners                  22                 668              5.14
                 Lots lthruS-Block A                           22                 605      Under2ac
                 Verdie Jefferson                              22                 457              0.60
                 Elsie B. Yuters, Trustees                     22                 457.00           79.69

               STRFAM VAU" MAMGEMMweM PAOTEMON PROCUUM                                  - - RPD PROPERYY MYENTORY
               IMPLEMENTATION                                       17                                       APPENDIX B






                                              RESOURCE PROTECTION DISTRICT


                                                         PROPERTY INVENTORY


                                                               ZEKL4H SW"P


                   PROPERTY OWNER                             TAX MAP#              PARCEL          ACREAGE


                   State of Maryland, DNR                          74                      71          286.41
                   State of Maryland, DNR                          73                      70            14.10
                   Henry S. Bowling, Jr.                           73                      16            60.88
                   Levin Family Farms, Inc.                        73                      34          238.56
                   William E. Sill, Jr.                            73                      6           318.10
                   Charles Bowling 111                             65                      16              6.90
                   Bowling's Zekiah Farm Inc.                      65                      84          294.86
                   Marion D. Cook, Sr.                             65                      100         172.54
                   Frank A. Bowling, Jr.                           65                      25          103.95
                   Garth E. Bowling                                65                      93            99.35
                   James W. Boarman, I 11                          65                      71            67.68
                   Willard A. Boarman                              65                      22          4SO.00
                   Brinsfield Farm, Inc.                           64                      43          338-52
                   PEPCO                                           64                      36          276.38
                   Thomas J. Higdon                                64                      110         317.37
                   Harry L. Jones, 11                              64                      158           65.34
                   Robert E. Cooksey                               64                      14          330.36
                   Mary L. Morgan                                  56                      9           226.20
                   Elmer G. Marchi                                 56                      108         208-11
                   GEM Investments                                 56                      5           224.75
                   Norman F. Duehring                              56                      111111      120.09
                   Katherine C. Long                               56                      99          239.22
                   George N. Schultz                               56                      1           297.22
                   J.S. Blacklock,...                              55-                     9           138.50
                   J.S.Blacklock                                   55                      4           328.26
                   James W. Thompson                               55                      81          341.12
                   Donald F. Fey                                   55                      40          170.78
                   Ann C. Fey                                      55                      198-        -38.149
                   Leo L. Seligson                                 45              11,12,38            103.91
                   Richard M. Gummere                              45                      2           176.98
                _W.A. Cooksey-                                     44                      89-         352.24
                   Edwin R. Fischer                                45              3.14.16           1085.00
                   Mazell Corporation                              45                      13          288.30
                   Raymond L. Brown                                45                      9           234.18
                   Sheldon L. Contract                             45                      27          203.47
                   Allan P. Clagett, Jr.                           45                      15          356.79
                   Herman Welch                                    45                      5           148.64
                   Charles Foley                                   45                      4           400.00


               STREAM VAU"MAXAGEMENTAND PROTECTIONPROGRAM                                       RPD PROPERTY rNVENTORY
               IMPLEMENTATION                                          18                                         APPENDLr B








                  PROPERTY OWNER                         TAX MAP#                   PARCEL  ACREAGE


                  Sunnyside Farm, Inc.                          35                  171         353.74
                  Edward W. Wetherald                           35                  36          225.15
                  Benjamin M. Edelen                            35                  107         124.52
                  Jeffery W. Earnshaw                           35                  129         62.83
                  Elhi-M  Bowling                               35                  93          88.00
                  Edward B. Bowling                             35                  95          31.54-
                  Francis X. Cooksey                            34                  77          87.63
                  J. Frank Cooksey                              34                  20          146.37
                  Edward A. Mohler                              34                  74          30.10
                  Meredith E. Hendricks                         34                  19          S2.72
                  Nell Myers          1                         34                  42          200.00
                  J. Stewart Brinsfield                         34                  79,1_1 5    40+
                  Lawrence C. Abell                             34                  11          311.68
                  Francis L. Stonestreet                        34                  21          206.50
                  Dennis J. Anderson                            34                  96          110.24
                  Dietrick H. Steffens                          34                  7           152.77
                  Juanita A. Young                              34                  88          38.84
                  Theresa Y. Banks                              34                  9           111.90
                  G. Forbes Bowling                             25                  23          110.71
                  Louise Jameson                                25                  182         93.00
                  Charles 1. Scatter                            25                  103         147.00
                  Alice 1. Jameson                              25                  16          79.09
                  Irads Sadeghian                               25                  98          222.46
                  Bryantown Joint Venture                       25                  17          191.19
                  Dewey E. Dick                                 25                  113         11.86
                  Charles County Sand & Gravel                  25                  9,13        283.22
                  Richard Chaney                                25                  214         4.83
                  Thomas Mac Middleton                          25                  139         247.29
                  Bernard P. Hemming                            25                  79          205.22
                  John A. Boothe      -                         25                  110         22.40
                  Margaret G. Brown.                            25                  109         23.28
                  Nellie E. Chase                               25                  111-        13.29-
                  Annie C. Wade                                 25            24,135            142.22
                  Ronald A. Mandey                              16                  92          141.03
                  Hubert F. Robinson                            16                  241         97.01
                  Erika M. Blevins                              16            240,36            -96.86
                  Lewis W. Mandcet                              16                  33          -50.16
                  George Chapman-Heirs                          16                  119         186.00
                  Salah H. Hosny                                16                  60          142.72
                  Mudd Farms. Inc.                              16                  10          201.00
                  Sarah F. Gardiner-                            16                  9           121.00
                  John S. Bayley                                16                  123         37.92
                  Andrew E.A.B. Chapman                         16                  120         166.00
                  Clarence J. Lucas                             16                  3           153.72
                  Howard E. Wall, Jr.                           16                  83          20.60
                  Jimmie E. Conley                              16       4,40,209,226           73.60


                  TRFAU VAUZY MAMGEMWT AND PROTEMON PitorPAV                              RPD PROPERTY mvENToRy
               IMPLEMENTATION                                     19                                      APPENDIX B
               S






                  PROPERTY OWNER                           TA)eMAP#              PARCEL         ACREAGE

                                                                16                  98             144.00
                  James A. Doyle                                16                  15             160.23
                  Elinor W. Cam                                 16                 117             125.00
                  Charles Co. Sand & Gravel                     16                  13             148.18
                  Gardiner Road Joint Venture                   16                 216              90.66
                  Charles Co. Sand & Gravel                     16                  11              82.94
                  DNR                                           16                  6               23.27
                  DNR                                           9                   18              96.35





















































                 rRFAM VAUEYMANAGEMENT AND PROrECTIONPROGR4M                                  RPD PROPERTY INVENTORY
               IMPLEMEAFTATION                                       20                                        APPENDIX B
               S














                                                      AlATTAWOMAN


                            WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN


                                                          APPENDIX B
























                   STRFAM VALLEY M4MGEW.NT AND PROTECTION PROGRAM                            WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN
                   IMPLEMENTATION                                                                                     APPENDM B
















                              AL47TAWOMAN


                     WATERSHED MANAGEMEAT PLAN




                               Work Program

                                   and

                          Concept Document Outline








                                                    TABLE OF COATEMS


                INTRODUCTION


                        Summary Elements


                PHASE I - PRELIMINARIES


                        I      Outline of Concept Document (Task 100)

                               A.      Purpose of the Watershed Management Plan
                               B.      Scope of Planning Effort
                               C.      Planning Objectives
                               D.      Expected Results
                               E.      Description of the Watershed Planning Process
                               F.      Tentative Work Plan
                               G.      Coordination with Other Planning Efforts

                        11     Summary of Existing Conditions (Task 110)

                               A.      Watershed Characteristics/Background
                               B.      Interested Parties File


                        III    Assessment of Current Programs (Task 120)

                               A-      Local
                               B.      State
                               C.      Federal


                        IV     Re-examination of Concept Document (Task 130)

                PHASE II - ISSUE IDENTIFICATION


                        I      Comprehensive List of Issues (Task 200)

                               A-      Wetlands & Resource Protection
                               B.      Water Resources
                               C.      Storm Water Management

                        II     Screened Issues (Task 210)

                               A.      Wetlands & Resource Protection
                               B.      Water Resources
                               C.      Storm Water Management

                        III    Final Issues (Task 220)

                               A.      Wetlands & Resource Protection
                               B.      Water Resources
                               C.      Storm Water Management

                        IV     Management Goals (Task 230)

                        V      Re-examination of Concept Document (Task 240)


                Mattawoman Watershed Management Plan             2                            TABLE OF CONTENTS








                                 MA YTA WOMAN WA TERSHED MANA GEMENT PLAN
                                            Work Program and Document Outline



               IN7RODUCTION


                               This document represents an integral part of the adopted Stream Valley
                       Management and Protection Program (SVMPP) as a strateg to protect riparian
                       habitats, protect the quality of stream waters, and conserve the environmental features
                       and functions of Charles County's wetlands. It also represents a contractual work
                       product to Coastal Zone Management pursuant to implementing the SVMPP for
                       TY199.1.


                               It became apparent in defining the parameters of the Stream Valley Management
                       and Protection Program that a gestalt approach to viewing and dealing with the entire
                       watershed was necessary in order to maximize the effectiveness of protecting sensitive
                       riparian corridors.    One cannot expect to propose any kind of comprehensive
                       improvement to the quality of stream waters without considering the watershed as a
                       whole. The cumulative impact of land uses and misuses of the entire watershed are
                       most clearly apparent along Hparian corridors - a stream's water quality offering mute.
                       testimony to land use practices and stewardship. Micro-management of only the stream
                       waters would compromise the program's effectiveness without considering the
                       headwaters, tributaries and uplands whence the streams derive their existence. For these
                       reasons, the need for comprehensive watershed management plans were identified in
                       order to minimize the deleterfous impacts associated with continued urbanization. The
                       Mattawoman Creek watershed has been chosen as the pilot watershed management
                       plan because of the foreseeable development pressures anticipated in this identified
                       County growth area.

                Elements:


                               This Watershed Management Plan, is comprised of three major           components
                       which include:


                               Resource Protection - Including Nontidal Wetlands

                               Water Resources - Including Water Supply & Water Quality

                               Storm Water Management - Including Sedunent and Erosion Control


                               This plan is further designed to meet the watershed management plan
                       requirements as established by the Maryland Water Resources Administration, pursuant
                       to the State's Nontidal Wetlands Protection Act.




                MAMAWOMAN WATERSHFD MAMGEMENT PL4N              3                                 INTRODUCTION








                 I        OUTILJNE OF CONCEPT DOCUMENT (Task 100)

                   A      Purpose of the Watershed Management Plan

                          T'he purpose of the Mattawoman Watershed Management Plan is: to protect the quality of water
                          resources, including surface waters & water supplies; provide increased open-space, recreational
                          and educational opportunities throughout the watershed; and conserve the environmental features
                          and functions of the watershed's natural resources. This will be achieved through: a thorough
                          inventory and assessment of all existing natural resources, including non-tidal wetlands; inventory
                          and assessment of existing storm water management (SWM) facilities; review and assessment of
                          existing regulatory controls; monitoring of water quality, and; implementation of watershed-wide
                          strategies aimed at improving water quality.

                          'Me Mattawoman Creek watershed offers unique management considerations for it is this region that
                          has been targeted as an area of "directed growth" in the adopted Charles County Comprehensive
                          Plan. The implications of such intense development requires controlling further degradation of
                          water quality by assessing current conditions, anticipating what impacts will be associated with
                          urbanization, and adopting urban Best Management Practices (BMPs) for this development district
                          thereby controlling stormwater runoff. Comparable efforts are also needed to protect wetlands,
                          natural resources, and water supplies.



                   B      Scope of Planning effort

                          The scope of the watershed management plan responds to several criteria as r     ecommended by the
                          Maryland Water Resources Administration and certain considerations which are specified in the
                          recent Nontidal Wetlands Protection Act. The regulations specify that watershed management plans
                          include a functional assessment of nontidal wetlands in the watershed, a strategy for their protection
                          - including limiting cumulative impacts, and addressing water supply and flood management. These
                          elements constitute the minimum planning effort that will fulfil the legal mandate.

                   C      Planning Objectives

                          Tle primary planning objectives of the watershed management plan are to:

                                   1)      Improve and protect the quality of stream water resources -in the watershed for the
                                           benefit of public health and safety;

                                   2)      Improve the quality of storm-water runoff and minimize the potential of flooding
                                           in the watershed for the benefit of public health and safety;

                                   3)      Conserve and protect the watershed's environmental features and functions including
                                           nontidal wetlands and significant wildlife habitat areas;

                                   4)      Provide and develop increased open-space, recreational and educational opportunities
                                           along stream valleys and -throughout the watershed;

                                   5)      Define wellhead protection areas and develop wellhead protection strategies;

                                   6)      Develop map and data information bases on the watershed's physical and
                                           environmental features.








                 MArmwomAN WAmRsHED MAxAcEmF_NT PLAv                    4                         PHASE I - PRELIMINARIES








                 I        CONCEPT DOCUMENT (cont.)

                   D      Expected Results

                          T'he results expected from this watershed management plan (WMP) include having a detailed
                          inventory of existing conditions in the watershed, a comprehensive list of issues to be addressed, and
                          a course of action laid out to implement the objectives of this WMP. T'his will be utilized as a basis
                          by which certain areas may be targeted for protection and/or conservation. The primary result of
                          this effort will be to establish preventative as well as corrective regulations addressing conservation
                          of environmental features and protecting water quality. Examples of a preventative regulatory
                          approach include establishing a Watershed Management District whereby urban BMPs would be
                          mandatory.


                   E      Description of the Watershed Planning process

                          Ile planning process includes natural resource inventory mapping and formulation of technical
                          management plans that will address natural resource protection, cumulative environmental impacts,
                          wetlands mitigation, water supply protection, stormwater and flood management. The methodology
                          for developing the watershed management plan involves the following process:

                          1)       Inventory and analysis of the e)dsting stream system and watershed conditions. Elements
                                   to be studied include:


                                   a.       Environmental features including soils, geology, slopes, vegetation, significant plant
                                            & animal habitat areas, and the functional assessments of all wetlands;

                                   b.       Non-point source pollution sources along the Mattawoman Creek;

                                   C.       Recreation facilities and open space lands;

                                   d.       Existing land use and zoning.

                          2)       Research and evaluation of State and County plans & policies relevant to the study area:

                                   a.       Charles County Comprehensive Plan;

                                   b.       Charles County. Stream Valley Management and Protection Program;

                                   C.       Charles County Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances;

                                   d.       Comprehensive- Water and Sewerage Plan;

                                   e.       County Floodplain Management, Stormwater Management, Grading and Sediment
                                            Control Ordinances;

                                   f.       Maryland Nonti  dal Wetland Protection Act;_

                                   9.       Prince George's County Ordinances & Policies.

                          3)       Conduct a community meeting to allow local residents the opportunity to participate in
                                   establishing goals, identifying problems and needs, and developing plans for the watershed.

                          4)       Identify specific problem areas including water quality, flooding, erosion, sedimentation,
                                   degradation of the natural environment, etc.


                  MAmwomAN WATmHED MAmGEmENT PL4N                        5                         PHASE I - PRELIMINARIES








                 I        CONCEPT DOCUMENT (cont.)

                   E      Description of the Watershed Planning process (cont.)

                          5)       Develop a management plan for the watershed. This includes:

                                   a.      Establishing goals and objectives for alleviating problems in the watershed and plan
                                           for the future use of the watershed's future resources;

                                   b.      Recommend policies and actions that will address the goals and objections of the
                                           plan.

                                   C.      Develop a strategy for the implementation of the plan.


                   F      Tentative Work Plan (see next page)


                   G      Coordination with other Planning efforts

                                   As with any significant planning project, coordination with other planning efforts is essential
                          to ensure the effectiveness of a comprehensive watershed management plan. 7be watershed
                          management plan must be responsive to on-going and future efforts by the federal, state, and local
                          governments. The aforementioned research and evaluation of State and County plans & policies
                          relevant to the study area would be the minimum effort necessary to coordinate the management
                          objectives with other planning efforts. This includes:

                                   a.      Charles County Comprehensive Plan;

                                   b.      Charles County Stream Valley Management and Protection Program;

                                   C.      Charles County Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances;

                                   d.      Comprehensive Water and Sewerage Plan;

                                   e.      County Floodplain Management, Stormwater Management, Grading and Sediment
                                           Control Ordinances;

                                   f.      Maryland Nontidal-Wetland Protection Act;

                                   9.      Prince George's County -Ordinances & Policies.


















                 MAmwomAN WATERsHFD MAmGEmmvTPL4,v                       6                         PHASE I - PRELIMINARIES









                                                     TENTATIVE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT WORK PLAN


                      TASK                                                              WORK PRODUCT                                  TIMELINE             TIMELINE
                                                                                                                                      FY1"1                FY1992


                      Phase I - Concept Document                                        Concept                                       09/30/91             ----------

                      Phase 2 - Issue Identification                                    Issues                                        09/30/91             ----------

                      Phase 3 - Alternatives                                            Alternatives                                  ----------           12/31/91

                      Phase 4 - Scheduling                                              Scheduling                                    ----------           03/30/92

                      Phase 5 - Implementation                                          Implementation                                ----------           09/30/92

                         a)      Water Resources

                                 ï¿½ Monitoring Program
                                     - Program Strategy                                 Program Adoption                              09/30/91             ----------
                                     - Program Coordinator                              Grant Applications                            09/30/91             ----------

                                 ï¿½  Wellhead Protection Ordinance                       Draft Ordinance                               ----------           06130/92

                         b)      Natural Resources

                                 * RPD Ordinance                                        Adopted Ordinance                             ----------           12/30/91

                                 * Land Trust Formation                                 Committee Formed                              ----------           12/30/91

                                 * Resource Inventory                                   Inventory                                     ----------           03/30/92

                                 * Resource Assessment                                  Assessment                                    ----------           06/30/92


                         c)      Stormwater Management

                                     Revised SWM Ordinance                              Revised Ordinance                             ----------           10/30/91

                         d)      Education

                                     BMP Promoter                                       Grant Applications                            09/30/91             ----------





                      Long Range Strategy for Implementation

                      Integrating the results of this tentative work program into e)dsting and proposed County programs will
                      require nothing less then a focused and concerted effort on all parties involved. This suggests a need to
                      identify this program as a priority initiative in order to carry the goals and objectives through to
                      implementation. How Charles County achi&Ves this challenge will depend, in large, on the availability and
                      procurement of funding. At this time, this makes establishing even a tentative long range strategy for
                      implementation a bit premature. This section will be discussed in more detail in Phases 4 & 5 under
                      Scheduling Implementation.




                      MATTAWOMAN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN                                   7                                 PHASE I - PRELIMINARIES







                  11      INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (Task 110)

                  A       Watershed Characteristics/Background

                  The Mattawoman Creek watershed is located in south central Maryland and covers about 50,500 acres in
                  Charles and Prince George's Counties (see Figure 1, Location Map). It lies within commuting distance of
                  Washington, D.C. and satellite metropolitan, commercial and business centers. 'Me description of this
                  watershed covers the freshwater part of the watershed above the legal tide limit.

                  The Mattawoman Creek begins in Prince George's County, extends along the Prince George's and Charles
                  County boundary from U.S. Route 301 west to Billingsley Road, turns south between Maryland Airport and
                  Myrtle Grove Wildlife Refuge and empties into the Potomac River. 7le area of the creek, with associated
                  wetlands and floodplains, has been designated as an area of Critical State Concern by the Maryland
                  Department of Natural Resources: Mattawoman Creek is among the most important of the Potomac Basin
                  spawning waters as its tidal and non-tidal wetlands are essential nursery areas for many species of fish.
                  These wetland areas of the creek also support large numbers of wildlife and provide excellent habitat for
                  diverse types of bird, plant and animal life.

                  The watershed area has a humid continental climate with an average precipitation of 47 inches and a mean
                  temperature of 56 degrees F annually. Maximum rainfalls occur in the summertime, although rain is fairly
                  evenly distributed throughout the year. The growing season averages about 190 days between mid-April and
                  mid-October.    Mattawoman Creek lies in the partly dissected uplands of the Atlantic Coastal Plain
                  physiographic province. 'Me major soil types in the area are the Beltsville, Sassafras, and Bibb series.
                  'Mese unconsolidated sands, gravels, silts and clays are the source material for the soils of the Mattawoman
                  Drainage Basin and are quite erodible when exposed.

                  In 1970, approximately 60 percent of the watershed was wooded and about 30 percent was in agricultural
                  use with the remainder in suburban or urban land use. About 10 percent of the watershed area has been
                  identified as marsh and flood plain. There are 275 farms in the watershed, averaging 125 acres in size,
                  producing corn, tobacco, soybean, and specialty crops. An additional 1500 acres of potential farmland has
                  been identified in this watershed.


                  The Mattawoman 100 year floodplain area covers about 5,000 acres which is about 10% of the watershed.
                  50 percent of the floodplain is seasonally flooded, 45 percent is occasionally flooded bottomland hardwood
                  and wooded swamp, 5 percent is non-wooded. There are few areas of prime farmland in the floodplain, and
                  those present occur in isolated patches.

                  Wetlands, like floodplains perform numerous natural functions which make-thern ecologically important.
                  'Mey function as natural settling basins, and purify polluted waters., Wetlands are exceptionally productive
                  wildlife habitats and also induce heavy vegetative cover which moderates temperature extremes and wind
                  velocity. In addition, these areas can provide several recreational, scientific, and educational opportunities.
                  Development Which is incompatible with the functions of wetlands should be strictly limited or prohibited
                  in these areas. Swamps along the Mattawoman are included on the Smithsonian Institution's Significant
                  Natural Areas list.


                  The Maryland Department of State Planning identifies the Mattawoman Creek and it's tributaries as one
                  of the most important of the Potomac Basin's spawning waters (Md. DSP, 1981). Its tidal wetlands are
                  nursery areas for many species of fish. The Maitawoman Creek and its tributaries support moderately high
                  populations of bluegill, largemouth bass, pickerel, catfish, and white perch. The lower reaches of the main
                  stem also support moderate to high populations of striped bass and herring during the spawning runs and
                  provide an important nursery area fbY striped bass.

                  Public lands that protect portions of the Mattawoman watershed include the Myrtle Grove Wildlife
                  Management Area, the Mattawoman Natural Environment Area, and the Cedarville State Forest. The
                  Myrtle Grove Wildlife Management Area covers 834 acres in the southwestern part of the watershed.


                  MATTAWOMAN WATEJ?SHFD MANAGEMENT PL4N                  8                         PIUSE I - PRELIMINARIES







                 H        INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (cont.)

                 A        Watershed Characteristics/Background (cont.)

                 Wildlife diversity and habitat are moderate to excellent in numbers and quality. Tle riparian corridor is
                 used as resting and feeding grounds for diving and dabbling ducks, geese, whistling swans, and other
                 migratory game such as mourning dove and woodcock. The riparian zone is also established breeding
                 territory for wood ducks and herons.       'Me relatively wide bottomland contains extensive wetlands,
                 approximately 5,000 acres of seasonally flooded basins or flats which are dominated by hardwoods and
                 wooded swamps. Deer, gray squirrel, cottontail rabbit, and bobwhite quail inhabit the stream valley year
                 round, as do furbearers such as red and gray fox. raccoon, opossum, striped skunk, muskrat, otter mink, and
                 beaver, Shorebirds, waders, songbirds, and raptors (including the osprey) are also present.

                 The Charles County Comprehensive Plan has designated the Mattawoman watershed as a primary
                 Development District which coincides with the Mattawoman Sewer Service Area. Thh major development
                 district is the principle center of population, services and employment for the County, accommodating 70% -
                  75% of the County's population growth through the year 2010.

                 There is some concern among watershed residents that the proposed Resource Protection District may be
                 usurped by development or damaged by excessive siltation from construction sites. With appropriate zoning
                 and enforcement of a watershed-wide sediment control program it is possible to maintain the Mattawoman
                 Resource Protection District area in a relatively wild and undeveloped state.

                 Informational sources for this study include: The Mattawoman and Tributaries Floodplain Study; the
                 Charles County Comprehensive Plan; the Stream Valley Management and Protection Program of Charles
                 County, and; the National Wetland Inventory compiled by the USFWS.

                   B      Interested Parties File


                          1.)     Federal -

                                  a)       U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
                                  b)       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                          2.)     State -

                                  a)       Md. Department of Natural Resources
                                           F      Nontidal Wetlands Division
                                           ii     Coastal Resources Division


                                  b)       Water Resources Administration
                                           i      Watershed Management

                                  C)       Maryland Department of the Environment
                                           i      Sediment and Erosion Control



                          3.)     County -
                                  a)       Planning Department
                                  b)       Developmental Services
                                  C)       Environmental Resources
                                  d)       Data Processing

                 M        ASSESS LOCAL, STATE, and FEDERAL PROGRAMS (Task 130)
                          [THIS SECTION IS IN DEVELOPMENT]


                 M.4rrAwomw WArFitsHED MAmGEmEw PLAm                  9                        PHASE I - PRELIMINARIES









                                                    PHASE 2 - ISSUE IDENTIFIC,4 TION



                 I        COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ISSUES (Task 200)

                 The following section summarizes issues of concern in the watershed. Since this WMP is issue driven, it
                 follows that each of the issues identified here would have a host of recommendations and/or actions aimed
                 at resolving or addressing these issues. 'Me common denominator in the issues presented here focus on
                 solving present and future water quality problems and protecting the environmental features and functions
                 of the watershed's natural resources. For the purpose of organization, these issues may be broken down into
                 the following categories:    Natural Resources Issues; Wetlands Issues; Water Resources Issues, and
                 Stormwater Management Issues.


                 NATURAL RESOURCES ISSUES

                 'Me most paramount issue, in considering the interfacing of urban growth on a pre-existing natural
                 environment, is protecting the environmental features and functions of the watershed's natural resources
                 while accommodating the projected developmental pressures
                 brought on by increased growth.



                 WETLANDS ISSUES


                 With the heightened awareness and mandated considerations given to the protection of non-tidal wetlands
                 @y State and Federal levels, a comprehensive WMP would seem incomplete without addressing the wetlands
                 issue - especially in a watershed where identified wetlands account for fully 10 -15% of the watershed's area.

                 Wetland areas in the watershed occur in the floodplain of Mattawoman Creek, along her major tributaries
                 of Old Woman's Run and Piney Branch, and in low lying seepage areas throughout the headwaters of the
                 stream network. They are especially prevalent where the stream course is wide, shallow and slow moving.
                 Man-made blockages such as dams, train railroad beds, and roadways have also created wetland
                 environments, in some areas where none have existed previously. The continued loss and degradation of
                 wetlands due to the foreseeable development within the watershed's development district indicates a need
                 to inventory and assess all wetlands within the watershed. T'he following list summarizes the issues which
                 need to be addressed in the Mattawoman watershed:


                          1.)     Comprehensive Wetland'In@rentoty@,

                          2.)     Functional Assessment of all Wetlands;

                          3.)     Wetland Mitigation Sites to be Located.


                 Comprehensive Wetland Inventory

                 The existing sources of wetland information in the Mattawoman watershed include the National Wetland
                 Inventory and the State of Maryland Wetland Guidance Maps. It is worth noting that these e)dsting
                 references are limited - indicating, at best, only approximate extents of nontidal wetlands. It is the intent
                 of this comprehensive inventory that all non-tidal wetlands within the watershed be located and delineated
                 as per the most recently adopted State and Federal definitions.






                 AILTTAWOMW WATERSIMD MAMGEMEW PLW                     10               PHASE H - ISSUE IDENTIFIC14TION







                  WETLANDS ISSUES (cont.)


                  Functional Assessment of Non-tidal Wetlands


                  Although the majority of wetlands within the watershed have been identified by type, there currently exists
                  no documentation as to what the various functional assessments are of these protected resources. This is
                  an element which the State of Maryland requires under the recent Non-tidal Wetland Act legislation. For
                  thi@ reason, efforts will be focused on developing a systematic assessment technique utilizing the regional
                  manual which the DNR has produced for this purpose - Maryland WET.

                  This suggests a need to develop a methodology utilizing available
                  reference sources, including aerial imagery, soil maps and NWI maps, and a system of ground-truthing
                  developed assessment. 'Me key here is to develop a functional assessments technique whereby time in the
                  field would be minimized. The reality of staffing constraints significantly limit the ability to commit
                  extensive field time in developing functional assessments.


                  Identification of Wetland Mitigation Sites

                  Another requirement of the State of Maryland is the identification of potential wetland mitigation sites
                  within the watershed. In spite of the requirement that all developments "shall take all necessary steps to
                  first avoid adverse impacts and then minimize loses of wetlands", there will continue to be loses of wetlands
                  in the watershed which will require mitigation to be performed - usually at higher ratios - within the same
                  watershed (if feasible). For this reason, a comprehensive inventory of potential mitigation sites should be
                  performed.


                  WATER RESOURCES ISSUES


                  'Me surface water quality of all rivers is defined by the inter-relationship of chemical, physical, and biological
                  conditions of the water and the manner in which these conditions affect the various components and uses.
                  These water quality parameters indicate whether streams, marshes and bays are generally suitable for aquatic
                  life, human consumption, and recreational use. It comes as no surprise that one of the most viable
                  indicators of stream health is its ability to support aquatic life. Good water quality supports designated uses
                  and, meets water quality goals.

                  Water quality degradation,' on the other hand, has noticeable impacts on the aquatic environment. The
                  principal results of water degradation include bacterial contamination, oxygen depletion, algal blooms, and
                  sediment pollution. Bacterial contamination makes waters. unsafe for swimming and for shellfish harvesting.
                  Oxygen depletion causes fish mortality if too much dissolved oxygen is consumed in the oxidation of organic
                  materials. Algal 'blooms' occur due to   -excessive discharges of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus.
                  Excessive levels of sediment suffocate stream bottoms and     reduce sunlight to submerged aquatic vegetation.

                  Water quality enhancemen     t is an important priority in the State of Maryland. Water of good quality
                  supports food chains, is necessary for safe. recreational use, and is critical to the maintenance of human
                  health. Furthermore, the biological health of the Mattawoman Creek depends on the water quality of its
                  tributaries. As such, improving water quality has become a major focus in the formulation of this Watershed
                  Management Plan.










                  MArrwwomv WArF-RsHED MAmrmmew PzAN                                       PHASE H - ISSUE IDENTIFIC4TION







                 WATER RESOURCES ISSUES (cont.)

                 One of the most fundamental issues in considering the impacts of urban growth on water quality, is
                 identifying strategies for protecting water quality while accommodating the projected developmental pressures
                 brought on by increased growth. Water quality issues which have been identified and need to be addressed
                 in the Mattawoman Creek watershed include:


                         1.)      Existing and historical water quality information and interpretation inconclusive and
                                  inadequate;

                         2.)      Point and Non-Point source pollution remain unchecked;

                         3.)      Identifying and restoring degraded stream sections;

                         4.)      Ensuring that adequate Well-Head Protection exists;

                         5.)      Ensuring that the risk of Salt-Water Intrusion is addressed.


                 Existing and historical water quality information -

                 Existing water quality in Mattawoman Creek has been compiled from several sources. These include; The
                 Maryland Water Quality Inventory (prepared by the Dept of Health and Mental Hygiene in 1984), the
                 Maryland Synoptic Stream Survey (prepared by DNR in 1988), An Evaluation of Stream Liming Effects on
                 Water Quality and Spawning of Migratory Fishes (prepared for DNR in 1989), and General Fisheries data
                 (compiled by DNR's Monitoring and Data Management).

                 Although the scopes of these reports are clearly not limited to the Mattawoman, they do provide a
                 fragmented status report of stream water quality in sections of Mattawoman Creek. This information could
                 be useful in comparing future water quality data. However, it should be noted that the fragmented nature
                 of existing water quality data render the information inconclusive - providing the curious investigator with
                 not much more than a "snapshot picture of selected streams water quality on a given day yesteryear. In
                 order for this, and future water quality information to be useful, a comprehensive baseline of water quality
                 data must be compiled and interpreted. This gives strength to the proposal, adopted by the County
                 Commissioners'in August, 1991, for implementing a water quality monitoring program thereby giving the
                 County a scientific basis for interpreting water quality information and trends.

                 Existing and historical water quality information (coht.)

                 'Me purpose of establishing a baseline of existing water quality is to determine the status of water quality
                 within the watershed. This will be used in order to aid in identifying water quality problem areas, pollutant
                 sources and provide direction for corrective actions or policies. Other possible sources of water quality
                 information include:

                                  a.      State sources; DNR, WRA, USGS
                                  b.      Other sources (local, special interest groups)












                 MATTAWOMW WArEMHFD MAMGEMEW PLAN                     12               PHASE II - ISSUE IDENTIFICATION







                 WATER RESOURCES ISSUES (cont.)

                 Point and Nonpoint source pollution

                 With more and more emphasis being placed on controlling point and nonpoint source pollution state-wide,
                 it follows that a comprehensive strategy should be developed in order to inventory and address this issue.
                 Of the two, nonpoint source pollution remains the larger and more elusive culprit.

                 Nonpoint source pollution is the by-product of a variety of land use practices, including farming, timber
                 harvesting, mining, and construction runoff caused by urban development. It also results when rain washes
                 pollutants in urban areas into sewer systems and storm drains (urban runoff). Agriculture accounts for the
                 largest share of the nation's nonpoint source pollution, affecting about 50 - 70 percent of waters assessed
                 (evaluated for water quality) through soil erosion from croplands and overgrazing, and runoff of pesticides
                 and fertilizers.



                 Degraded Stream Sections

                 Degraded stream sections throughout the watershed's stream system offer mute testimony as to the impacts
                 that increased urbanization can have on a once healthy riparian environment.                Vagrant dumping,
                 unauthorized filling, fish migration barriers, in-stream construction activity and unshaded stream sections are
                 just a few of the more serious elements which contribute to degraded stream sections.

                 This situation could be remedied by involving citizens in the watershed to act as the eyes and ears of the
                 county by reporting violations and assisting with community efforts aimed at stream valley cleanups. In
                 order to address this issue in a comprehensive manner, dump sites and other forms of degradation should
                 be located, inventoried, characterized, prioritized and strategiezed for involving the community and possible
                 grant funding to repair these areas.



                 Well Hea  d Protection


                 Well heads require protection from the direct introduction of contaminants and from microbial pollution.
                 Maryland currently has regulations directed toward protection of wells which provide minimum wellhead
                 protection to all public water supply wells. In order to provide this protection to all private wells also,
                 research.should be conducted utilizing the following minimum references:

                                  a.       State of Maryland Wellhead Protection Program
                                  b.       Existing Model Ordinances



                 Salt Water Intrusion


                 Long-term ground-water withdrawals have the potential of lowering ground-water levels which may lead to
                 the directional reversing of ground-water flow in the confined aquifer sediments under the adjacent Potomac
                 River. There is existing documentation of these flow conditions having caused river.water to intrude into
                 parts of this confined aquifer system. In order to assess existing problems and protect the aquifer from any
                 future salt water intrusion, existing studies should be included in the WMP.









                 MArrAwom4m WAmKsirED MAmrEmEw PL4N                    13                PHASE H - ISSUE IDENTIFIC4TION









                 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES


                 The purpose of Stormwater Management is to minimize the adverse effects increased land development has
                 on water quality and riparian resources. Land development has the potential to significantly degrade water
                 quality in downstream receiving waters. These impacts also include stream channel erosion, local flooding,
                 sedimentation and pollutant transportation, all of which adversely effect water quality. Adequate stormwater
                 management is achieved through responsible planning, engineering, engineering review, construction
                 inspection, and post-construction maintenance inspection including functional assessments of all existing
                 stormwater management facilities and structures. The cumulative impacts caused by an omission of any of
                 these checks may render an entire stormwater management facility inadequate. In reviewing the status of
                 existing stormwater management planning review,
                 construction, and inspections in Charles County, the following issues have come to light:

                         1)       Existing subdivisions with no SWM controls

                         2)       Existing subdivisions with inadequate SWM controls

                         3)       Shortcomings in current Stormwater Management and Grading & Sediment Control
                                  Ordinances


                         4)       Shortcomings in current Inspection programs

                         5)       Inadequate stormwater hydrologic reference studies available

                         6)       Inadequate enforcement of SWM and Sediment & Erosion Control compliance


                 Each of these issues justify the need for a comprehensive assessment and inventory of not only existing
                 stormwater management systems, but, perhaps more importantly, inventorying and assessing those
                 developments which occurred prior to the adoption of the County's Stormwater Management Ordinance.

                 The implications of such an increased work load on current staffing is staggering. Already, current divisions
                 in Planning, Development Services (Engineering), and Inspections are operating beyond staffing capacity.
                 'Mis points to a definitive need to increase staffing, allocating an engineer/stormwater inspector to do storm
                 water management exclusively.


                 Existing subdivisions with no SWM controls

                 The majority of developments that had proceeded the Charles County Stormwater Management (SWM)
                 Ordinance were constructed with no SWM controls due to no regulatory requirement being in place. For
                 this reason, these developments need to be identified, inventoried, and inspected to assess a potential need
                 to retrofit those developments with stormwater management facilities. 'Mis would include the inventory
                 and establishment of a database for all significant subdivision developments constructed prior to the adoption
                 of the Ordinance.















                 MATMWOMN WATEJtSHFD MAMOEMEW PLW                     14                PHASE H - ISSUE IDENTIFIC4TION







                 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES (cont.)

                 Fidsting subdivisions with inadequate SWM controls

                 Even with the adoption of the SWM ordinance, it has become apparent that relatively few developments
                 have constructed the SWM facilities which were initially designed. Recently, Charles County conducted a
                 preliminary survey of existing SWM facilities and has found that approximately 70% of those SWM facilities
                 inspected differ from those which were originally reviewed and approved by county engineers. As a result,
                 a high number of SWM facilities or controls have proved to be inadequately suited for the development
                 they serve. As a consequence, these facilities suffer problems with the design, construction, and are often
                 plagued with chronic maintenance problems, and in some cases, no longer function as designed.

                 The problem can be summarized as the tendency of development designers to fit the SWM facility to the
                 development - often locating the facility in the residual or unusable portions of the site - rather then fit the
                 development to the site by responding to the most logical and effective placement of the SWM facility. .

                 This issue points to the necessity of establishing a program to inspect all developments and assess the need
                 for creation and/or modification of stormwater management systems (retrofit candidate sites). This includes:

                          a.       Preliminary survey of existing SWM facilities through the use of checklists;

                          b.       Preliminary functional assessments of problematic SWM facilities by County engineering
                                   personnel;

                          C@       Institute a stormwater retrofit program to provide stormwater management in existing
                                   developed areas that have inadequate stormwater controls.

                 Evaluate County Ordinances -

                 Stormwater Management Ordinance -

                 Charles County recently underwent a review by the State Sediment and Stormwater Administration (SSA).
                 The purpose of these triennial reviews is to determine whether the County is operating an acceptable
                 stormwater management program. An acceptable program has an SSA approved Stormwater Management
                 (SWM) Ordinance, a plan approval process that provides SWM for every land development subject            .to the
                 ordinance, the ability and. information necessary to review SWM plans adequately, and the necessary
                 inspection and enforcement procedures that ensure the proper construction and maintenance of approved
                 SWM measures.


                 County staff is currently revising and updating its SWM ordinance in response to State feedback. Staff is
                 also taking this opportunity to include several of the Watershed Management Plan strategies such as
                 requiring urban BMPs and requiring the pretreatment of SWM facility discharge before entering wetlands,
                 including these in the revised ordinance. A copy of this effort will be forwarded to CRD and WRA as soon
                 as staff completes the revisions.














                 MAruwom@o WArFRsHED MAmcEmEsT PL4N                     15                PHASE II - ISSUE IDENTIFICATION







                 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ISSUES (cont.)

                 Evaluate County Ordinances -

                 Grading and Sediment Control Ordinance -

                 Charles County's Grading and Sediment Control Ordinance offers some very well intentioned language in
                 order to control the mounting sedimentation pollution resulting from developmental grading and
                 construction. The ordinance requires an approved Soil and Erosion Control Plan, approved by the Charles
                 Soil Conservation District, for most clearing and/or grading activity within the County. However, current
                 County policy is to not take jurisdictional authority to enforce the approved Sediment & Erosion Control
                 Plan. 77his, in effect, compromises the goals and objectives of the ordinance.

                 To date, the County's policy of passing the burden of enforcement to the State - which is as understaffed
                 as the County - has resulted in numerous violations remaining unchecked. Until the County takes action
                 on this issue, continued disregard for ordinance compliance will occur resulting in further degradation to
                 surface waters.



                 Construction and Maintenance Inspections for SWM facilities -

                 The shortcomings of the County's Stormwater inspection program, as documented by a recent triennial
                 County review by the State of Maryland, is an issue which demands action. An. inventory and maintenance
                 inspection of all private and public SWM facilities is a requirement of the State of Maryland. The Charles
                 County SWM Ordinance which was adopted in July, 1984 requires construction and maintenance inspections
                 of all facilities. Currently, there is no data available related to the functioning condition of existing SWM
                 facilities. This is due to no maintenance inspection program having been implemented in the past. This
                 points to a need for the improvement and/or revision of the County's inspection and enforcement programs
                 which are responsible for regulating and inspecting SWM facilities. The number and/or frequency of
                 unscheduled site inspections should be increased. This would require that manpower needs be met.

                 In conducting and maintaining systematic SWM construction and maintenance inspections, the most limiting
                 problem seems to be the decentralized, fragmented approach to inspecting and assessing SWM facilities.
                 The County could do much to improve its SWM construction and maintenance inspection system by
                 combining the SWM plan review and inspection _process to form a more focused priority program. Other
                 jurisdictions'have combined watershed planning, engineering, inspections, and water quality monitoring in
                 order to better-administer'the goals and objectives of their SW`M ordinance.


                 S
                  tormwater Hydrologic Reference Studies -

                 The ever-increasing development pressures besetting the Mattawoman watershed demands that more
                 attention be placed on accurately delineating the 100-year floodplain. The cur-rent resources available (such
                 as the FEMA and SCS floodplain study) lack the detail necessary to accurately assess the extents of the
                 floodplain on feeder streams and tributaries in this watershed.
                 For this reason, a stormwater hydrologic study of the watershed must be conducted in order to identify
                 potential floodplains, flood-sources and problems, predict impacts of future development, and target areas
                 for future action.











                 MAmwom4x WATEUUFD MAMWEMEW PL4N                       16               PHASE II - ISSUE IDENTIFIC4TION







                II      SCREEN ISSUES (Task 210)

                        'Me following list summarizes issues aimed at solving water quality problems in the watershed.



                Wetlands -


                        1.)     Comprehensive Wetland Inventory

                        2.)     Functional Assessment of all Wetlands

                        3.)     Wetland Mitigation Sites to be Lzeated



                Water Resource -


                        1.)     Existing and historical water quality information and interpretation inconclusive and
                                inadequate.

                        2.)     Point and Non-Point source pollution remain unchecked

                        3.)     Degraded stream sections

                        4.)     Well Head Protection

                        5.)     Salt Water Intrusion


                Stormwater Management -

                        1)      Existing subdivisions with no SWM controls

                        2)      Existing subdivisions with inadequate SWM controls

                        3)      Shortcomings in current Stormwater Management and       Grading & Sediment. Control
                                Ordinances-


                        4)      Shortcomings in: current Inspection programs

                        5)      Inadequate stormwater hydrologic reference studies available
                        6)      Inadequate enforcement of SWM and S   Iediment & Erosion 6ntrol compliance



                III     SELECT FINAL ISSUES (Task 220)

                IV      SET MANAGEMENT GOALS (Task 230)

                V       RE-EXAMINE CONCEPT DOCUMENT (I7ask 240)








                MAruwomAN WATEj?sffED MAmGEmEw PL4,v              17              PHASE H - ISSUE IDENTIFIC4TION











                                           LAND TRUST STARTwUP

                                                                                          D


















               STJWAM VAU-ZY MAX4GEAlE,%7 AND PROTECTION PROGAW                                          L,4ND TRUST START-UP
               IMPLEMENTATION                                                                                         APPENDLr D

















                                   INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM








            TO:             Mel Bridgett, County Administrator

            THRU:           Roy E. Hancock, Deputy County Administrator, PGM

            FROM:           George J. Maurer, Senior Environmental Planner
                            Department of Planning (PGM)

            SUBJECT:        Land Trust Steering Committee

            DATE:           May 23, 1991


                 As per the Commissioners' work session on May 21st, I have
            revised the letter requesting nominees for the steering committee,
            (attached) and added several groups to the organizations list. I
            have also* changed the completion date on the steering committee
            charge  letter to November  30, 1991.   Please contact me at ext. 688
            if you  have any  questions.about the.a.ttached.materials.






                                                                             7
            GM/ssa.                                    Z.
            A:Steer.Comm


            Attachment




















                                   COMMISSIONERS' LETTERHEAD



            Land Trust Steering Committee                       1991
            Charles County, MD

            RE: Committee Charge of Responsibilities

            Dear Steering Committee Members:

            In fulfillment of the adopted County Comprehensive Plan and               in
            compliance with County legal agreements with the U.S. EPA and the
           @State pursuant to a Coastal Zone Management grant, the County is
            to establish a land trust and. land acquisition program.               . The
            purpose of the steering committee is to assist the County
            Commissioners in deciding how and in what form a land trust should
            be established. -We.intend that the work of the committee provide
            the Commissioners with.an informed basis for decision making, and
            that the@outcome be the result of discussions among a group of
            individuals representing.a.broad cross section of Charles County..
            The "steps - the  committee   is to   follow and the issues      it, is -..-to
            address are   listed below:

                  Steps

                  1.    Review general information"on land.trusts, and         specific
                        material issue by issue-.-

                  2.    Develop alternatives    fo r each issue..

                  3.    Provide recommendations with accompanying        ration'ale,for
                        each issue.

                  4.    Produce a report containing sections based      on the issues,
                        as well as a set of land trust articles of incorporation
                        and bylaws.

                  5.    Make a presentation and submit the committee report to
                        the Commissioners by--or before November 30, 1991.









          Steering Committee                                       Page 2



               Issues


                    Public vs. private form

                    Voluntary vs. staffed

                    Accountability to County Commissioners

                    Land trust mission, goals, and objectives

                    Role and vis a vis County government

                    Funding needs and sources for start up, for continuing
                    operations and for land acquisition

                    Land trust name


               E    Recommended nominees for land trust board

          The Charles County Commissioners wish the committee success in
          carrying out its charge, and thank each of its members for the
          voluntary service they have agreed to provide to their community   *
          The members of the steering committee can take pride for their role
          in the formation of a Charles County land trust and the lasting
          benefits it will provide to the citizens of Charles   County.

                               Very truly'

                               COUNTY COMMISSIONERS'OF.
                               CHARLES COUNTY,-MARYLAND



                               _Thomas Mac.Middleton,, President--'----



                    Robert J.  Fuller                   Nancy J. Sefton



                    Murray D. Levy                       Dale E. Speake






                                                                   


      THOMAS MAC MIDDLETON.PRESIDENT                                         MELVIN  S. BRIDGETT
      ROBERT J. FULLER                                                      C0UNTY  ADMINSTRATOR
      MURRAY D. LEVY
      NANCY J. SEFTON
      DALE E. SPEAKE
						COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
						 OF CHARLES COUNTY                                   
                                           P. 0. BOX B                     
                                      LA PLATA. MARYLAND 20646
						  (301-645-0550 OR D.C. 870-3000

											JULY 1, 1991
                
                                    

                                                


           Charles County Garden Club
           P.O. Box 1496
           La Plata, Maryland 20646
           Attention: Ann Jameson


           Dear Ms. Jameson:

                The Commissioners of Charles County are establishing a
           steering committee to develop recommendations on the creation of
           a Charles County land trust.       A land trust is an organization
           devoted to the preservation of important natural historical,
           agricultural, and open space lands. It is capable of preserving
           such lands by purchase, easement, or donation.         We invite your
           organization to .'submit   up- -to three nominees for the steering
           committee.

                The attachedcharge letter outlines the tasks and       steps  that--
           the steering committee is  to complete.- The Commissioners view this
           as an important undertaking.      The steering committee is to    be a
           working group, and its members must-be committed to completing the
           committee's work.

               -Please provide   us with  two nominees within two weeks of the
           receipt of this letter if-possible, or within four weeks the
           latest.    If this is not possible, contact the Charles County
           Commissioners at 645-0550. Please include a brief biography for
           each nominee (form attached).

                The Commissioners are requesting nominations from a wide
           variety of groups which' represent 'business,,. farm, recreation,
           historical, and environmental interests.         It -is our intent to
           establish  a broadly based committee. While we would like to select
           a representative to--the steering committee from each of the many
           groups, it will not be possible to do so for the reason  of keeping
           the committee to a manageable size. We ask for your understanding







                                         SAY NO TO DRUGS

                                         EQUAL OPPERTUNITY COUNTY








           Charles County Garden Club
           July 1,1991
           Page - 2 -



           if a nominee is not selected from your organization.

                If you have questions about the land trust or steering
           committee please contact George Maurer with the Charles County
           Planning Office at 645-0610.    We look forward to receiving your
           nominations.

                                               Very truly,

                                               COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
                                               CHARLES COUNTY, MARYLAND
                                               Thomas Mac Middleton, President



                                               Murray D. Levy




                                                Nancy J. Sefton



                                               Dale E., Speake. 



           Attachment(s)

           ck
                                                          











                                   ORGANIZATIONS WITH CHARLES COUNTY CHAPTERS


                 Joan Bowling, Chair                               Southern Maryland. Audubon Society
                 Wicomico/Zekiah Advisory Board                    George Wilmot, President
                 % Neal Welch                                      P.O. Box 181
                 DNR Capital Programs Administration               Bryans Road, MD 20616
                 2012 Industrial Drive
                 Annapolis, MD 21401

                 Quail Unlimited                                   Forestry Board
                 Jimmy Farmer, Chairman                            Bob Eaton, Chairman
                 % Gallery Jamel                                   P.O. Box 2746
                 630 Old Line Center                               La Plata, MD 20646
                 Waldorf, MD 20602

                 Accokeek Foundation                               Charles County Board of Education
                 Wilton C. Corkern                                 John Bloom, Superintendent
                 3400 Bryan Point Road                             P.O. Box D
                 Accokeek, MD      20607                           La Plata, MD 20646

                 Charles County Farm Bureau                        lzaak Walton League
                 John Jarrett, President                           Charles County Chapter
                 Rt. 1, Box 255   -                                Dudley Gardiner
                 Nanjemoy, MD 20662                                Box 248
                                                                   Hughesville, MD 20637

                 Economic Development     Commission               Southern Maryland Bar Association
                 Donald Reinke,   Director                         Charles Bongar, President
                 P.O. Box V                                        P.O.Box 696
                 La Plata, MD. 20646                               Waldorf, MD 20601

                 Park Board                                        Charles County. Chamber of Commerce.
                 Lynn Lyons                                        Judy E. Rye
                 6404 Loy Dr.                                      516 North Highway.301
                 Waldorf, MD 20601-                                La Plata, MD '20646-11:

                 Southern Maryland Builders    Industry Assoc.     Charles County-Historical Society
                 Robert Hoier, Vice President                      % Charles County Community College
                 % F.S.I. Design Group                             Mitchell Road, P.O. Box 910
                 P.O. box 1935                                     La Plata, MD 20646-0910
                 La Plata, MD 20646

                 Southern Maryland Trailriders                     Potomac Valley Dressage Association
                 Donald Hancock, President                         (P.V.D.A-)
                 7 Maryland Trailriders-Club, Inc.                 170 Oliver Shop Road
                 P.O. Box 1318                                     La Plata, MD 20646
                 White Plains, MD     2069S








                Southern Maryland Quarterhorse                  Western Charles County
                P.O. Box 87                                     Business Association
                Hughesville, MD 20657                           Joseph Morton, President
                Attention: Debbie Bussie                        Rt. 2, Box 197A
                                                                Bryans Road, Maryland 20616

                Charles County Garden Club                      Farm Bureau
                P,O. Box 1496                                   John W. Jarrett, President
                La Plata, MD 20646                              Rt. 1, Box 255
                Attention: Ann Jameson                          Nanjemoy, Maryland 20662

                Port Tobacco Historical Society                 Waterman's Association
                P.O. Box 302                                    RR 1, Box 46
                Port Tobacco, Maryland 20677                    Newburg, Maryland 20664
                Attention: Kathleen Blanche                     Attention: William Rice


                Southern Maryland Board of Realtors             Ducks Unlimited
                Lyle Sackie                                     %Pat Bowling
                P.O. Box 400                                    Bryantown, Maryland 20617
                Hughesville, Maryland 20637


                                  ORGANIZATIONS LACKING CHARLES COUNTY CHAPTERS



                Chesapeake Bay Foundation                       Potomac Fisheries Commission
                162 Prince George Street                        P.O. Box 9
                Annapolis, Maryland 21401                       Colonial Beach, VA 22443

                Sierra Club                                     Dwight Johnsen
                Potomac Chapter                                 P.O. Box 177
                Bryantown, Maryland 20617                       St. Mary's City.- MD 20686





                                                                          CHARLES CO. COMMISSIONERS                                                       
     Z 7   Appointments - Land Trust Steering Committee

                Motion was made by Mr. Fuller to appoint the following persons
           to the Charles County Land Trust Steering Committee:

                Wayne St. Clair             James F. Farmer
                Stephen F. Colton           David Cooksey
                Peggy  Schaumburg           Dennis Woodruff
                Steve  Cardano              Andres R. Sine
                Joyce  Hancock              Charles Ellison
                Gemma  Theresa Nelson       Rick -Hamilton.
                Enoch  C. Bryant            Eli Flam

                  The motion was    seconded  by Mr. Speake and passed with all
           commissioners voting   in favor.

                The Commissioners also requested that the NAACP, be contacted
           regarding  a nominee f or the, Land Trust Steering Committee.   

                Thomas C. Hayden, Jr. ,  County Attorney, and Susan P. Hathaway,
           Personnel Director, joined   the meeting.












                            WATER Q UALI7Y MONITORING


                                         PROGRAM STRATEGY


                                                    "PENDM E

























                 SnzF-4m VAu"MANAGEmF,%TAvD PRomcnoNPRornum                         WATERSBED MANAGEMENT PLAN
                 IMPLEMENTATION                                                                            APPENDJX B





                            WATER Q UALI7Y MONITORING

                                        PROGRAM STRATEGY

                                                               for

                             CHARLES COUNTI; MARYLAND



                                                              Z@





















                Presented for ReAew to:                                Prepared by.

                COMWISSIONERS OF CHARLES COUNTY                                Kevin J. Kirby
                                                                               Environmental Planner
                        Thomas "Mac" Middleton                                 Charles County Department of
                Nancy J. Sefton        Robert J. Fuller                        Planning and Growth Management,
                Murray D. Levy          Dale E. Speake-                        Department of Planning

                                                                       Editted By:
                Date:
                                                                               George J. Maurer
                        July 30, 1991                                          Senior Environmental Planner





                                                                  TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                                                                                                                 Page

                     I         SUMMARY                                                  ---- - - -- - -------------- - -- - - ---- ---------- - - -      3



                     J1 INTRODUCTION                                                - ---------- - ------   - ---------- - ----                          3



                     Iff A 711REE-77ERED APPROACH To COMPREHENSIVE MONITORING                                                                            5



                     IV PROGRAM MANAGEMENT                                  - - - - - ------------ - - - - ------------ - - -- ----                 _-5



                     V         FIRST-TIER PARAMETERS, PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT                                                   ------ - ---- - -----    7



                     VI        SECOND-77ER PARAMETERS AND PERSONNEL                                           --- -----                                  9



                     V11       7HIRD-77ER PARAMETERS AND FUNCTIONS                                                                                       9




                                                                                                                         -----------  ------- - - -
                     VIII      COSTANALYSIS FOR WATER QUALITY MONITOR/NG



                     M         LJABILITY ISSUES AND VOLUNTEERS                                ------------ - ---- - ------ -- - ----------   ----13



                     APPENDIX A                    Sample Liability Waivers             --- - ------------ - ---------- - - -------- - ----              14


                     APPENDIX B,                   Job -Description for Monitoring Coordinator                                      ------  ___15


                     APPENDIX C                    Documentation & Resulls-of Initial Stream-Walk                       ---- - ------- - ---





                     Fundirig for this Program is provided by the Coastal Resources Division, Maryland Department
                     of Natural Resources, through a grant provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 197Z
                     administered by the office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and
                     Atmospheric Administration.


                                                                                      2





                                    A PROPOSED WATER QUAL17Y MONITORING PROGR,4M


                    -SUMMARY


                             Water quality monitoring in the County's streams has been identified as a major component of
                    Charles County's Stream Valley Management and Protection Program (SVMPP), adopted by the County
                    Commissioners in September, 1990. Stream monitoring will establish baseline data for existing water quality,
                    which can be compared with future water quality data to establish trends and aid in tracking water quality
                    problem areas.

                             In keeping with the established goals of Charles County, a three tiered approach to comprehensive
                    stream water quality monitoring is proposed. This includes:

                             1)       A volunteer oriented stream water quality monitoring program documenting the physical,
                                      chemical and benthic testing of palustrine stream waters;

                             2)       Laboratory analysis of water quality which includes a more detailed technical and site
                                      specific analysis of water quality to be conducted in cases where the results of first          tier
                                      sampling indicate that the quality of waters tested fall below accepted standards, and;

                             3)       An in-stream computer monitoring station which would allow for water quality testing
                                      before, during and after crucial storm events when the true telling of a watershed's
                                      environmental health is most evident.



                    INTRODUCTION


                             This report represents a submittal to Coastal Resources Division (CRD) as a portion of the FY1991
                    grant requirements for implementing the SVMPP. 'ne purpose of the adopted SVMPP is to protect and
                    conserve the environmental features and functions of Charles County's streams, wetlands and floodplains.
                    "Me goal was t6- develop a comprehensive, pyogram for the environmental protection of riparian habitat and
                    stream w*ater quality in Charles County while providing recreational and educational opportunities for its
                    citizens. Under@the terms of the contract, this report addresses the program          strategy and 'implementation
                    techniques of the Water'Quality'Monitoring Program.


                    Water Quality and the Aquatic Environment

                             Water  quality is an important    priority in the State of Maryland.- Water      of good quality supports
                    food chains- is necessary for safe. recreational use,- and is critical to the maintenance.of human health.
                    Furthermor;, the biological health of the Chesapeake Bay depends on the water quality of its, tributaries -
                     100,000 miles of them!    As such, improving water quality has become      'a major focus. in the-Chesapeake Bay -
                    initiatives, resulting in the Maryland General Assembly's Critical Area Law, enacted in 1994.

                             The surface water quality of all rivers is defined by the inter-relationship of chemical, physical, and
                    biological conditions of the water and the manner in -which these conditions affect the various components
                    and uses. These water quality parameters indicate whether streams, marshes and bays are generally suitable
                    for aquatic life, human consumption, and recreational use. Other uses defined within the State's stream
                    '. classification system include shellfish harvesting waters, natural trout waters and recreational trout waters.
                    It comes as no surprise that one of the most viable indicators of stream health is its ability to support
                    aquatic life. Good water quality supports designated uses and meets water quality goals.






                    STREAM VALLEY MANAGEmEAT PRoGRAm                          3                             IVA TER QVALrTY MONTOR/NG PROGR4M





                   Water Quality and the Aquatic Environment        cont.)

                            Water quality degradation, on the other hand, has noticeable impacts on the aquatic environment.
                   The principal results of water degradation include bacterial contamination, oxygen depletion, algal blooms,
                   and sediment pollution.     Bacterial contamination makes waters unsafe for swimming and for shellfish
                   harvesting.   Oxygen depletion causes fish mortality if too much dissolved oxygen is consumed in the
                   oxidation of organic materials. Algal 'blooms' and other excessive growths of aquatic plants occur due to
                   excessive discharges of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. Excessive levels of sediment suffocate
                   stream bottoms and red   -, uce sunlight to submerged aquatic vegetation.
                            During the late 1970's and early 1980's, the National Urban -Run-off Program documented
                   differences in stormwater quality based upon predominant watershed land uses. The stu(ly showed that there
                   were increases in particulate matter, coliform. bacteria, and oxygen demanding materials in nonpoint source
                   runoff from construction sites, lawns, and largely impermeable surfaces such as parking lots, roof tops, and
                   roadways associated with urbanization (MWCOG, 1983). Subsequently, there developed an increased public
                   awareness of the importance of nonpoint source pollution in contributing to the overall decline of the
                   Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries (USEPA, 1983). Much of this pollution was being carried out in runoff
                   from agriculture and urban lands to the non-tidal portions of the Bay's tributaries, then to tidal reaches and,
                   eventually, to the Bay itself (USEPA, 1988).


                   Existing Water Quality Information in Charles County

                            Existing water quality in Charles County has been compiled from several sources. These include;
                   'ne Maryland Water Quality Inventory (prepared by the Dept of Health and Mental Hygiene in 1984), the
                   -Survey of Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas (prepared by DNR in 1975), the Maryland Synoptic Stream
                   Survey (prepared by DNR in 1988), An Evaluation of Stream Liming Effects on Water Quality and
                   Spawning of Migratory Fishes (prepared for DNR in 1989), and General Fisheries data (compiled by DNR's
                   Monitoring and Data Management).

                            Although the scopes of these reports are clearly not limited to Charles County, they do provide a
                   fragmented status report of stream water quality in sections of the County. This information could be useful
                   in comparing future water quality data. However, it should be noted that the fragmented nature of existina
                   water qua'lity data of County streams render the information inconclusive - providing the curious investigator
                 ...-with not much more than. a 'snapshot picture' of selected streams water quality on a given clay yesteryear.
                   In- order. for this and future information
                   to  be    useful   to    the _' County, @ a
                                    aseline of water quality
                   comprehensive b                                                                                              T
                   data must be-compiled and interpretedi
                                                                                                                 A"
                   'Th'       ovides    justification      for
                     !S-.,- pr
                   implementing --a comprehensive - water
                   quality monitoring. program. This will
                   give the county a scientific basis for
                   identifying water quality problems and
                   trends.

                                                                                 Robot*
                                                                                                          012.
                            With environmental awareness
                   growing, in our community, the timing is
                   perfect for proposing an avenue for public     ban;
                   participation in water quality monitoring.
                   Monitoring by citizens in our County
                   could be a tremendous asset not jtist in
                   terms of assistance in compiling water
                   quality data, but in acting as the eyes and
                   ears of an environmentally conscience
                   community.


                   STRE,01 I-ALLEY MAAAGEMEAT PROG"AW                     4                           IIA TER QLAUTY AJONrTORING PROGRAW






                   A TIIREE-TIERED APPROACH TO COMPREHENSIVE MONITORING


                            Water quality monitoring in the County's streams has been identified as a major component of
                   Charles County's Stream Valley Management and Protection Program, adopted by the County Commissioners
                   in September, 1990. Stream monitoring will establish baseline data for existing water quality, which can be
                   compared with future water quality data to establish trends and aid in tracking water quality problem areas.
                   In keeping with the established goals of Charles County, a three tiered approach to comprehensive stream
                   water quality monitoring is proposed. This includes:

                   1st Tier - Citizen (and Public School) Monitoring Program

                            A two-part volunteer oriented stream water quality monitoring program documenting: Physical,
                            chemical and benthic testing of palustrine stream waters and; Physical & chemical testing of esturine
                            waters. 'Me sampling for benthic organisms will occur on a tri-annual basis; once in early spring,
                            late summer, and again in late fall. The testing of physical and chemical parameters will be done
                            concurrently with the benthic sampling in addition to ongoing monthly testing. This testing will
                            quantify water quality trends and identify stream segments with water quality problems. Key playprs
                            in establishing a viable citizen monitoring program include: 1) a Monitoring Coordinator; 2) core,
                            volunteer Team Leaders (see discussion under Personnel, Parameters and Equipment for First-Tier
                            water quality testing); and 3)    public schools including educators in environmental education
                            programs.

                   2nd Tier - Uboratory Analysis

                            As needs dictate from the results of the First-Tier monitoring, a more detailed technical and site
                            specific analysis of water quality would be in order.       In addition to testing all the first-tier
                            parameters, the contractor and/or County may choose to test additional parameters such as heavy
                            metals (see discussion. under Second Tier Parameters).

                   3rd Tier - In-Stream Computer Monitoring

                            In-stream computer monitoring is one of the most comprehensive methods of testing water quality
                            in order to track probable sources at a specific site over a long period. This allows for water quality
                            testing before, during and after crucial storm events when the true telling of a watershed's
                            environmental. health is most evident. It is during these storm events that the majority of nutrients
                            and sediment enter the watersheds stream system. In addition to testing water quality with the full
                            range of laboratory analysis including heavy metals, information pertaining to peak-discharge flows
                            and corresponding precipitation data would be available. It is worth noting that Anne Arundel
                            County's Instrearn Water Quality Monitoring Program has enjoyed tremendous success and has
                            provided- invaluable -information with regard to non-point source pollution tracking.



                   PROGRAM MANAGEMENT


                   Data Management
                            The data gathered through this program would be computerized and stored according to geographic'
                   location ( i.e. specific locationAvatershed ) on an appropriate soft-ware package such as d-Base. Raw data
                   would be compiled and interpreted by producing descriptive statistics which compare water quality data with
                   adopted standards. Water quality trends and problems would be identified and summarized in an annual
                   statistical report containing tables, charts, and graphs. By adopting acceptable water quality ranges for each
                   of the parameters noted, a red flag would go up when water quality data falls outside these ranges.
                   Monitoring will allow for the identification of water quality trends and- problems as they occur from year
                   to year.





                   STRFLW VAU" AUMGEM&Vr PROGPAM                          5                            111A TER QUALRY MONIrORING AROG"V





                   PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ( cont.)


                   Base Line Data


                           In order to establish a comprehensive baseline of existing water quality data each sampling station
                   would be tested once monthly during the first year. In addition, parameters should be tested at each station
                   after significant storm events. The data that is collected during this initial year ( and following years ) will
                   be entered into a data management software package, assessed and interpreted to ascertain what the status
                   is of our County's strea  ms. The baseline results, after interpretation, will dictate where to place later
                   research emphasis. This will be based on those sampling sites which exhibit on unusual spectrum of water
                   quality data - sites where the tested water quality falls outside of the accepted norms.


                   Usage of Water Quality Monitoring Information

                           This water quality data is to be used to track water quality trends in Charles County.    By systematic
                   investigation of water quality, existing conditions can be documented and interpreted, areas requiring more
                   intensive analysis can be identified, and areas requiring restoration can be identified. Local users of the
                   data may include County agencies such as the Department of Health and the Department of Planning. State
                   agencies such as DNR's Fisheries and Habitat Assessment Divisions and MDE's Water Resources
                   Administration have also expressed an interest in utilizing local data on water quality. Citizen monitoring
                   data would also be valuable to the citizens of the County, especially those residents on whose creeks
                   monitoring is taking place in that it would frequently be the only documented water quality information
                   available for those creeks.


                           By analyzing the data and determining the probable causes and sources of water quality degradation,
                   measures can be taken to correct the problem - be it a construction site with inadequate sediment fencing
                   or an existing development that may be a prime candidate site for BMP retro-fitting. Monitoring would
                   provide a means for -the County to assess and address the impacts associated with improper complianct, of
                   State and County developmentregulations- (such as sediment and 'erosion control, stormwater management).
                   This data could be utilized as. a tool to detect problems that,may require the attention of various inspection
                   and enforcement agencies. Monitoring can give regulatory agencies a statistical basis by which to assess.
                   environmental impacts with respect to water quality and further the County's goal of maintaining good water
                   quality.


                   Sampling Stations-

                           The locations of key,   benthic, water quality sampling stations should be placed    at strategic. points.
                   within the watershed's stream   system. Criteria for sampling site selection would be based on accessibility
                   to the site (both parking and stream access), on-site @onditions (i.e., adequate gravel beds for benthic
                   sampling), and geographic positioning within the watershed. The program's initial sampling sites will focus
                   in the county's development district watersheds. For instance, in the Mattawoman Creek watershed, where
                   intense urban development can be expected to occur, sampling stations would most effectively be placed at
                   periodic intervals all along the main stem and at strategic locations along the major tributaries ( Old
                   Woman's Run and Piney Branch ). In a more rural setting, such as the Nanjernoy watershed, perhaps as
                   few as two or three sampling stations along the mainstem would be sufficient. Sampling stations should,
                   wherever possible, be selected with consideration given to such elements as point discharge points, and
                   intense residential development.

                           The locations of ongoing monthly chemical and physical       sampling stations may be selected based
                   on the ease and accessibility to the site with respect to the individual stream sampler. Citizens participating
                   may wish to run monthly water quality tests in their backyard streams and docks therSby providing the
                   program with a broader spectrum of existing water quality conditions County-wide. This continuous, monthly
                   sampling by citizen monitors would provide a documented basis for detecting changes in stream water quality
                   after the initial baseline of data is established.




                   STR&W MALI" MMGEMENT PROGRAM                           6                           IVA TER QVAU" MONMRING PROG"V





                   FIRST-TIER PARAMETERS, PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT

                   First-Tier Sampling Parameters

                           These physical parameters are derived from Standard Methods for the Eranlination of Water and
                   Wastewater, by the American Public Health Association. These parameters have been selected based on
                   volunteer ability, existing Quality Control Assurance literature, and equipment budgeting. Minimum data
                   to be collected in the first-tier monitoring includes:

                           Alkalinity-       Alkalinity is a measure of a stream's capacity to neutralize acids. The alkalinity
                                             of natural waters is due primarily to the salts of acids, although bases may also
                                             contribute. Such substances act as buffers to resist a drop in pli resulting in acid
                                             addition (such as acidic soils or "acid rain"). Alkalinity is thus a measure of the
                                             streams buffering capacity and in this sense is used to a great extent in the testing
                                             of stream waters.


                           Biological        There are four groups of insects which should be present in all streams: stone flies,
                           Indicators        may flies, caddies flies and true flies. Generally, the stone flies are the most
                                             sensitive to pollution, followed by the may flies, then the caddis flies, with the true
                                             flies tolerating highly contaminated waters. Seasonal stream surveys of aquatic
                                             insects will be conducted on a tri-annual basis in coordination with the public
                                             schools, Maryland Save Our Streams, and the citizens monitoring program.

                           Dissolved         Dissolved Oxygen (DO) levels in natural waters depend on the physical,
                           Oxygen            chemical, and biochemical activities in the water body. The analysis for DO is a
                                             key test in water pollution and waste treatment process control. In streams, low
                                             DO levels usually signify a heavy loading of decomposing organic matter -which in
                                             turn results in high Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD). High BOD in a stream
                                             system sets into motion biological and chemical processes which lead to severe
                                             oxygen loss, or hypoxia.       Depending'_on temperature,, waterflow and other
                                             environmental conditions, hypoxia or even anoxia (total absence of oxygen) can
                                             result, leaving bottom waters all but uninhabitable by normal fauna.

                           Nutrients         Nutrient levels of total Phosphorus and.t.otal Nitrogen will be tested. Nitrogen and
                                             Phosphorus are found naturally- in the environment and are also used extensively
                                             in chemical fertilizers. When found in excess of natural conditions in    streams and
                                             estuaries, these nutrients cause the rapid growth of algae - algal blooms - to occur.
                                             This reduces light to SAV, and leads to oxygen depletion in the stream system.

                           pH Value          pH (hydrogen ion concentration) is one of the most important and frequently used
                                             tests in water chemistry. pH is used in alkalinity and carbon dioxide and many other
                                             acid-base equilibria. At a given temperature the intensity of the- acidic or basic
                                             character of a solution is indicated by hydrogen ion activity. Natural waters usually-
                                             have pH values in the range of 4 - 9, and most are slightly basic because of the
                                             presence of bicarbonates and alkaline earth metals. The neutral pointis pH.7.5.

                           Temperature -     Temperature readings are used in the calculation of various forms of alkalinity, in
                                             studies of saturation  and stability with respect to calcium carbonate, and in the
                                             calculation of salinity.- In stream water studies, water. temperatures as a function
                                             of depth are often required.

                           Turbidity -       Turbidity is an expression of the optical property that causes light to be scattered
                                             and absorbed rather than transmitted in straight lines througlL a water sample.
                                             Turbidity in water is caused by suspended matter, such as clay, silt, plankton and
                                             other microscopic organisms. The clarity of water is a major determinant of the
                                             condition and productivity of the system. Reduced light affects aquatic plants,
                                             reducing the plants ability to photosynthesize. Excessive levels of sediment suffocate
                                             stream bottoms and spawning areas.

                   STREW VALLEY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM                         7                            IVA TER QUAL17Y MONTTOR11VG PROGRAM





                       FI RST-TIER PARAMETERS, PERSONNEL ANI) EQUIPNIE-NT


                       Personnel


                                 Monitoring Coordinator

                                           The Monitoring Coordinator is proposed to be a half-time position, working for the Charles
                                 County Department of Environmental Resources. Among the Monitoring Coordinator's duties
                                 would be to: coordinate the overall program; coordinate team leaders, volunteer recruitment and
                                 training; determine sampling locations; maintain and disburse test equipment; receive, compile, and
                                 interpret data; check for accuracy of data and conduct quality control checks; and publish an annual
                                 report. See appendix A for a proposed Stream Water Quality Monitoring qordinator position
                                 description. This half-time position could be combined with a half-time sludge coordinator position
                                 that has been under discussion. Both responsibilities involve water testing and data recordation.

                                 Volunteer Team Leaders


                                           The Volunteer Team Leaders would act as watershed coordinators, organizing volunteer
                                 efforts within their respective watersheds.               These Team Leaders may originate from County
                                 Government, including schools and/or local environmental organizations such as the Izzak Walton
                                 League, or anyone that may have the willingness to take on the responsibility and work in
                                 conjunction with the County and State in establishing an on-going water quality monitoring program.

                       Non-Tidal Streams Monitoring Parameters & Equipment

                                 Physical/Chemical Analysis

                                           The testing of water would be done by volunteers on a weekly, or even monthly basis. A
                                 procedural manual and data sheets would accompany the test equipment. These parameters have
                                 been selected based         on volunteer ability, existing Quality Control Assurance literature, and
                                 equipment budgeting.

                                           Para  .meter-    -             Equipment                           Unit of Measurement                 Cost

                                 1.)       Alkalinity.                    LaMotte Alkalinity kit                   ppm                            1-7.15
                                 2.)       Dissolved Oxygen;              LaMotte. titration kit                   PPM                            26.75
                                 3.)       Temperature;                   LaMotte armored thermometer              degrees Celsius                15.00
                                 4.)      "Turbidity;.                    LaMotte turbidity test kit               NTU                            23.45
                                 5.)       Nitrate;                       LaMoue -nutrient test       kit          ppm                            37.90
                                 .6-)     -_pH;                          -UM.otte test kit .(wide range).-,-.      p@i units                      21.60
                                                                                                                                                 141.85


                                 Aquatic Insect Sampling

                                           Among the best        indi cators ofwater quality are the b       iological organisms (or lack there-of)
                                 which inhahit a stream.           Seasonal or tri-annual assessment of water quality through biological
                                 sampling or insect counts, will give-accurate determinations of stream health and begin to pin-point
                                 possible causes of poor water quality. For instance, because chemical spills are of a transitory
                                 nature, all evidence of an incident may wash away before a scheduled chemical testing of water
                                 quality. With biological testing, although the contaminant may be gone, its effects will be evident
                                 in the absence or change in insect populations.                     Save Our Streams, which is a non-profit
                                 organization that provides environmental information to individuals and groups, has an excellent
                                 program developed for volunteers which provides accurate assessment of water quality by aquatic
                                 insect inventories (referred to as bio-indicators).

                                                       Parameter                    Equipment            Unit of Measurement                      Cost

                                           1.)        Bio/indicators                Kick Seine           Insect Diversity/Sq. Meter               25.00

                       STRFAU VALLff AMNAGEMENr PROGRAM                                 8                                 HA TER QUALM MONTORING PROGRAM





                     FIRST-TIER PERSONNEL, PARAMETERS AND EQUIPMENT (Cont.)

                     Tidal Waters Monitoring Parameters & Equipment

                              Physical/Chemical Analysis

                                       In order to assess water quality in tidal waters, a different set of chemical and physical
                              parameters is necessary then those utilized in the testing of non-tidal waters. These parameters have
                              been selected b    'ased on volunteer ability, existing Quality Control Assurance literature, and
                              equipment budgeting.

                                       Parameter                   Equipment                       Unit of MeasurenWnt              Cost

                              1.)      Alkalinity                  LaMotte Alkalinity kit               PPM                         17.15
                              2.)      Dissolved Oxygen;           LaMotte titration kit                PPM                         26.75
                              3.)      pH;                         LaMotte test kit (wide range)        pH units                    21.60
                              4.)      Salinity                    Fisher Hydrometer                    ppt                         22.35.
                              5.)      Temperature;                LaMotte armored thermometer          degrees Celsius             15.00
                              6.)      Water Clarity               Secchi Disk                          inches                      23.35
                                                                                                                                 $  126.20



                     SECOND-TIER PERSONNEL AND PARAMETERS


                                       In cases where the results of first tier sampling indicate that the quality of waters tested
                              fall below accepted standards, a more detailed technical and site specific analysis of water quality
                              may be in order.. A number of options exist in determining who will conduct these more rigorous
                              water quality testing parameters. The County could choose to contract the work out to a qualified
                              consultant or expand the existing facilities in-house at the Maitawoman Treatmen                It Plant ( see
                              attached cost estimate    )..' In-addition to testing all the first-tier parameters, the contractor and/or
                              County may choose      to test additional parameters such as:

                              1.)     -Nutrients
                                           P-total, P-ortho, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate
                              2.)--  --Total -Colifbrm@ Bacteria
                              3.)      Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
                              4.)-.   jotal Suspended Solids (TSS)
                              5.)      Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
                              6.)'     Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)


                     THIRD-TIER FUNCTIONS AND PARAMETERS


                              In certain watersheds of the county, continual environmental impacts resulting in water quality
                     degradation may warrant the establishment of a more comprehensive water quality monitoring station. An
                     in-stream computer monitoring program may be established in order to follow water quality as far
                     downstream as possible in the non-tidal portion of County streams. This computerized, remote monitor will
                     conduct both monthly baseflow samples and automated flow and water sampling during individual storm
                     events. Both stream flows and water column concentrations will be measured during* crucial. storm events
                     as well as monthly sampling.

                              When the streams exceed a pre-determined cfs discharge, an automated water sampler would begin
                     pumping pre-programed volumes from the stream into a refrigerated composite sample pontainer. Water
                     sampling would then continue at equal volumes of accumulated flow during a storm, providing flow-weighted
                     results. Sampling would be terminated when the stream stage decreased below a criterion height.




                     STRFAM VALLff AW"GEMENT PROGA4M                             9                             WA TER QUALM HONTMUNG PROG)UM





                  THIRD-TIER FUNCTIONS AND PARAMETERS (cont.)

                          The station set-up, as illustrated in Figure 1, shows the equipment housed inside a weather-proof
                  fiberglass shelter with a rain gauge mounted on an adjacent pole. The rain gauge and the stream stage
                  measuring device (the pressure transducer) would provide input to a portable microcomputer.  The
                  microcomputer would control water sampling during storm events, as well as storing rainfall, stage, flow, and
                  sampling data.

                          Possible funding sources for an in-stream computer monitoring station's purchase, operation and
                  maintenance may be through funds generated in stormwater utility districts. Other funding possibilities
                  include applying for specific grants through MDE, WRA and DNR where water quality monitoring has been
                  identified as a State priority.












                                                       AUTOMATED MONITORING STATION



                                                                             BA


                                               CTLR




                                             







                                        AC
                                                                                                         







                                                                                             AC-AUTOMATING CURRENT

                                                               CTLR-CONTROLLER               SALEVENT ACCUMULATION




                  PTS
                                                                                                                            6qL0qJ




                                                                             Stream





                              FIGURE 1            The Automated Stream Monitoring Station

                                                                      10
 





                          COST ANALYSIS FOR WATER QUALITY MONITORING

                          A cost analysis has been performed on the three tiers of the proposed water quality monitoring program.

                          Ist Tier - Citizen (and Public School) Monitoring Program

                                      'Me costs associated with initiating the Citizen Monitoring Program may be broken down to
                                      personnel, test equipment, and misc. support (printing) expenditures.

                                                   Monitoring Coordinator (1/2 time position)                         ----------------   ------     S12,000
                                                   Test Equipment (20 complete sets)                                  -----------------------       S5,600
                                                   Misc. support (base-line soft ware, printing)                    -----------------------         S 30D
                                                                                                                                                    $17,900


                          2no Tier - Laboratory Analysis

                                      These are two possible scenarios to consider in compiling a quantitative and qualitative laboratory
                                      analysis of water quality.

                                      1)           Establish an in-house stream water quality division to perform water quality testing at the
                                                   Charles County central water quality lab;

                                      II)          Use a consultant to do the water quality testing on a contractual basis;

                                      A comparison has been done between scenario 1,establishing an in-house capability, and scenario
                                      II, consultant services. The full cost estimate reports submitted by the Mattawoman facility and
                                      Chesapeake Analytical Laboratory, Inc. are documented in the following pages., For comparative
                                      analysis of thelwo submittals, figures have been computed reflecting relative annual costs. for water
                                      quality. analysis, of 50 sites tested on- a monthly- ba                    sis.

                          Scenario I - In-house
                                                                                                               YEAR 1                               FUTURE YEARS
                                      Mattawoman Facility -

                                                   Capital Outlay (once only)              ------        ------- $19,700.
                                                   Field Servir&s        -------------------------------       $24,000.                             $24,000.
                                                   Lab    Services     ----------------------------------      $23,200.                             S 232W.
                                                                                                               $66,900.                             $47,200.
                          Scenario II -       Consultant -


                                      Chesapeake AnalyticalLaboratory -

                                                   Field Services        --------------------------------      S30,000.                             S   30,000.
                                                   Lab Services      - ----------------------------------      S32,400.                             S   32,400.
                                                                                                               $62,400.                                 62,400.


                          3rd Tier - In-Stream Computer Monitoring

                          'Me in-stream computer monitor,is notably the most costly. But                                    then, you get what you pay for - the most
                          comprehensive analysis of stream water quality available.                                     It should be noted that the most costly
                          component of this tier is that of professional consultant services,                               instrumental in setting-up the monitoring
                          station and interpreting the generated data. The relative cost for these monitoring stations and consultant
                          services per station are as follows:

                                      Consultant Services              ---------------------------------       S 30,000
                                      Equipment & Structure                 --------------------------------   S 17,000
                                                                                                               $ 47,000



                          STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM                                                                                      WA TER QLULJTY MONrrORING PROGAAM





                    COST ANALYSIS FOR NvATi.-IR QUALITY MONITORING (cont.)


                    Conclusions


                    The First Tier, while exhibiting the most attractive cost to the county by using volunteers, would require
                    coordination of efforts between the County, the Community College's environmental training center, the
                    public school's environmental education center, and established volunteer organizations such as Save Our
                    Streams. There are a number of useful roles that may be played by adult volunteers and motivated
                    students in our community. These include doing analysis in the field with portable test equipment,
                    collecting and managing data for subsequent input into the County's water quality data bank, and collecting
                    field samples for delivery to a lab as a possible assistance to Tier II monitoring. These are all potentially
                    attractive roles for public spirited, and environmentally conscious citizens. The disadvantages and/or
                    challenges of utilizing volunteer groups for sample collection is that of assuring quality control. If -the
                    sampling collection is done improperly, the data integrity would be compromised.

                    In comparing the Second Tier Scenarios I & II in laboratory water quality testing, it is worth noting that
                    the capital outlay for needed equipment ( vehicle, test equipment, etc. ) reflected in the Mattawoman
                    Facility figures will only occur at the onset of the program. An annual cost of approximately $47,200. can
                    be expected in subsequent years after the initial start-up costs.

                    Tier III, while exhibiting the most cost to the County also offers the most comprehensive analysis of water,
                    quality.. Possible funding sources for an in-stream computer monitoring station's purchase, operation and
                    maintenance may be through revinue generated by a stormwater utility district tax.              Other funding
                    possibilities include applying for specific grants   through  MDE, WRA        and DNR where water quality
                    monitoring  has been identified as  a State priority.





























                    SrRF-4U VALLEY M4MGEMF.Vr PROG)UM                     12                           11A TER Q UALITY A10Nn-oju,%,G PRoG"v






                    LIABILI'IY ISSUES AND VOLUNTEERS

                              As with any program involving volunteers, the issues regarding liability and compensation must be
                    examined.     While participating in an event, a volunteer could become injured and require medical
                    treatment. A volunteer also could be sued for damages by a property owncr as a result of carrying out
                    their duties on behalf of a government entity. Finally, a volunteer could sue the County for damages in
                    connection with volunteer activities.

                              In Maryland, broad based protection for volunteers was embodied in the Local Government Tort
                    Claims Act (LGTC) for actions arising from events on or after July 1, 1987. The LGTC applies to local
                    government employees which are defined to include "a volunteer who, at the request of the local
                    government, and under its control and direction, was providing services or performing dpties". The statute
                    requires that, as a local government volunteer, they will be provided with legal defense in any actions that
                    alleges damages resulting from tortious acts or omissions committed within the scope of volunteer work
                    with the local government. Unless a valid claim can be made under the Maryland Tort Claims Act,
                    volunteers will not be allowed to file a suit against the State (County) because of the doctrine of sovereign
                    immunity. There exist, however, other possible means for volunteers to be compensated for injuries
                    received during the course of their services for the County. One possibility may be an "umbrella" coverage
                    extended to volunteers under the County's liability insurance. Another strategy may be to obtain coverage
                    specifically for volunteers participating in this program. A third possibility is to draft a waiver of liability,
                    absolving the County from any risks and liability (see Appendix A, sample liability waiver). This last
                    strategy is the least desireable due to the general legal transparency of a liability waiver.

                              A recommended strategy in lessening the potential for an injury is to insure that adequate training
                    is provided to volunteers prior to "getting,their feet wet".        Most of these proposed sampling parameters
                    will require. technical training, particularly where test instrumentation, sample preservation, and data
                    analysis are concerned. A generous. offer. has been extended -to the County by the Director of the
                    Maryland Center for.Environmental Training (MCET) whereby the water quality monitoring program may
                    co tint oh utilizing the  MCET,facilities as a training s    ite for v61  unte ers, and as a stagin g area for use on
                    days of benthic water     testing/sampling. Possibilities to include in the training program include a mini-
                              series focusing on all aspects of the volunteer water quality monitoring effort.


                    Liabilit
                              y Insurance- Coverage for Volunteers.

                              Through   the Volunteer Insurance Service (VIS) Association,        it is possible to obtain   insurance for
                    -injuries or d6a-t -h resulting from accidents occurring as a result of       volunteer services.     Details may be
                    obtained from. VIS, a national nonprofit organization (Source: Volunteers and the Law in Maryland).


                    Maryland's- Workers'    Compensation Act

                              As a general   matter, volunteers are not     covered  under the Workers'      Compensation Act. To be
                    covered by the Act, one must be an "employee" which is defined generally as someone receiving
                    remuneration or payment for his or her services (Source: Volunteers and the Law in Maryland).













                    SrRFAH;1ALLEYht4MGEMENTPR0G&4M                            13                             WATER QUtLM MOSM0JUNG PROGJUM







                                                                  APPENDIX A

                                                IMPORTANT LIABILITY NOTE -

                           The Charles County Department of Planning and Growth Management (PGM) intends that citizen
                  volunteers participating in this program are not acting on behalf of PGM in any official capacity. As such,
                  it is the Department's intent that citizen volunteers are not authorized to be considered agents, employees,
                  or representatives of the Department for any purpose, and that citizen volunteers are not entitled to the
                  same benefits enjoyed by Department employees.

                           Citizen volunteers must recognize the potential for injury to themselves and their real and personal
                  property, and to other persons and their real and personal property, which may 'Tesult from citizen
                  volunteer activities conducted under the Citizens Stream Water Quality Monitoring Program.                The
                  Department intends that citizen volunteers expressly assume all risks and liability for any injuries to, or
                  caused by, citizen volunteers under this program.

                           Citizen volunteers will be instructed in proper sampling techniques and handling of sampling
                  chemicals. They will also be cautioned that if there is ever any doubt, they should give safety priority over
                  sampling. Every participant will also receive a copy of the water quality monitoring strategy and sampling
                  procedures.




                                               SAMPLE LANGUAGE FOR LIABILITY WAIVE, R


                           In consideration of the foregoing, 1, myself, my heirs and executors do hereby release and discharge
                  all Charles County Citizen Water Quality      Monitoring Program supporting organizations for all claims,
                  damages demands, actions, and whatsoever      in any.manner arising or   growing out of my'participation in
                  said monitoring program





                                SAMPLE LANGUAGE TO ACKNOWLEDGE TRAINING AND ORIENTATION


                           1, the undersigned, having received an orientational training in the  proper use and  procedures of
                 ''water quality -dat a. collection techniques, do hereby acknowledge the potential hazards      involved with
                  reckless or unsafe handling of chemical reagents involved.with the testing of water quality.


                  Signaturd:7                                                Date:


                  Parent or Guardian:
                  (If a volunteer is under 18 years of age, a parent or guardian must sign the waiver)













                  SrRFAM VALLEY MAWGEMEJVr PROGJUM                     14                           WA TER QUALITY MOSTrONNG PROGMU






                                                                APPENDIX 11


                                                   CHARLES COUNTY GOVERNMENT
                                                             JOB DESCRIPTION
                                                                  (Proposed)

                  JOB TITLE:               Stream Water Quality Monitoring Coordinator

                  DEPARTMENT:              Planning and Growth Management

                  DIVISION:                Environmental Resources


                  SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIP:


                           Reports To:     Environmental Resources Director

                  PRIMARY PURPOSE OF JOB:


                                   Performs a variety of administrative and technical duties relative to a county-wide stream
                                   water quality monitoring program.

                  REQUIRED KNOWLEDGE, EDUCATION, SKILL:

                           1.      Bachelors degree in Biology, Ecology, Marine Science or     related field or an equivalent
                                   combination o f experience and training which provides the  required knowledge, skills and
                                   abilities.


                           2.               -Class "D" drivers license
                                   Maryland..,

                           3.      Knowledge of various State and Federal   water quality regulations.

                           4.      Knowledge ofthe use of standard   office equipment/machines.

                           5.      Interpersonal skills.and public relations.

                  DUTIES:


                  30%      1.      Coordinates team leaders, volunteer recruitment and  training.

                  20%      2.      Receives, compiles, and interprets water quality-data.

                  15%      3.      Disseminates information to the public, other County, State and Federal agencies.

                  15%      4.      Conducts quality control checks.'

                  5%       5.      Checks for accuracy of water.quality data.

                  5%       6.      Determines. sampling locations.

                  5%       7.      Maintains and dispenses test equipment.

                  5%       1*      Performs other related duties as assigned.


                  ACCOUNTABILITY:


                           Is accountable for the complete, prompt and effective performance of all assigned duties and the
                           compliance with County policies and procedures.

                  STREAM VALLEY H&UGEHENr PROGRAM                     15                          IMM QUALM MOV1TORXG PROGRAM





               CHARLES COUNTY AND MARYLAND SAVE OUR STREAMS NEED YOUR HELP IN

               MONITORING MATTAWOMAN CREEK
                           Sunday, May 12, 10:00 am to 3:30 pm












             Charles County citizens will begin ongoing stream valley monitoring of
             Mattawoman Creek.  This monitoring project will commence a  
             citizen/government watch of the Mattawoman to establish a data baseline of
             existing water quality. Once established, the data can be compared with
             future water trends in order to keep track of the Mattawoman's stream
             health.


                   **Training will be held at Charles County Community College in the
                     Environmental Training Center

                   **Learn how to determine water quality by collecting aquatic
                     insects using kick-seining techniques.

                   **Learn how you can Adopt-A-Stream in your neighborhood!

                   "Join Charles County citizens along with Maryland Save Our Streams
                    in helping to restore and preserve our waterways.

                This event is free and open to the public. To pre-register
                           please contact Kevin Kirby at 645-0610                         ADOPT-A-STREAM




           1658



             STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM            16                  WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM






                                                         APPENDIX C

                                               WATER QUALITY MONITORING
                                                   FIELD DATA SHEET
                  Please complete a separate data form for each assessment and at each site.

                  Assessment Date:                                     Sampling Station Number:

                  Name(s) of Assessor(s):

                  Stream Name:


                  Stream Location (use map coordinates if possible):

                  Organizational Affiliation:


                  Number of: Stoneflies                Mayflies             Caddisflies

                                Other organisms              Total Number of Organisms

                  Describe other organisms:


                  How would you rate the quality of the stream at this point?  Please circle one:

                                a. Excellent,         b. Good.       c. Fair       d. Poor

                  If you rated the stream fair or poor, what do you think is the cause of the  pollution?





                                               Water Color: Please Circle One:.

                        a. medium brown       b. dark brown        c. reddish brown    d. green brown
                        e. yellow brown       f. green             g. other (describe)

                                               Water Odor: Please Circle One:

                       a. sewage      b. oily             c. musky        d. fishy     e. rotten eggs
                       f. none        g. chlorine         h. other(describe)

                                         Black color on deeply imbedded stones? YES  NO

                         Major land use visible from your sampling station: Please Circle One:

                       a. forest      b. residential     c. commercial         d. institutional      e. industrial
                       f. pasture     g. other

     STREAM VALLEY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM                  17                      WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM







                                                   APPENDIX C


                                      WATER QUALITY A10NITORING
                                                FIELD DATA SHEET


               Data compiled by:   V-J

               Date collected: I   t-7 K,@-                         Air Temp:

               Watershed. f-7/i,-T @k e,l er,- /I                    Win d Direction:


               Station:



               PARAM1ETERS                UNJT         MEASUREMENTS



               Alkalinity                 PPM

               Dissolved Oxygen            PPM

               Temperature.,              -C-

               Turbidity---.,             NTU

               Nitrate'                   PPM.
                                                              d b,.
               pH                         pH




               Conclusions


                      Overall water quality at this location appears good based on the
               preliminary inventory of aquatic insects present. Although we were unable
                                                                                Z>
               to test the entire host of first tier parameters (due to unavailable equipment)
               the chemical parameters tested indicate acceptable levels.






               STRFAM VALLEY MMGEMENT PROGJUM             18                    11A TER QUAU77 MONUMUNG PROGRAM





          CH            ES COUNTY GOVERNMENT
           Plan 'g and Growth Management

          ROY E. HANCOCK, Deputy County Administrator



                                                                                                                                     1656
                                                                                                      September 30, 1991
                  Mr. Gary 11odge
                  Tri-County Council
                  P.O. Box 1634
                  Charlotte Hall, Md. 20622

                  Dear Mr. Hodge,

                           'Mis letter is a follow-up to a letter you have received from the Charles County Commissioners
                  seeking your endorsement for grant funding for use in association with water quality programs as authorized.
                  under section 2050) and 604(B) of the Clean Water Act (copy of letter attached). 'Me County wishes to
                  obtain grant funds for the creation of a position to staff the County's water quality monitoring program.
                  To help the County obtain grant funds we would like an endorsement letter from Tri-County Council to
                  submit with our application.

                           The Federal Clean Water Act stipulates that at least 40% of 2050) funds allotted to each State be
                  used by "substate" agencies for water quality planning and assessment. The Act further clarifies that activities
                  such as.water quality investigations, water quality planning and water quality monitoring would qualify for
                  these planning grant funds. The Maryland Department of the Environment, having taken a lead role in
                  administering these.funds state-wide, has indicated a priority in.terest-in "...assessments of point and non-
                  point source p9llutaIntj including nutrient loads.to -the ChesapeakeBay or its tributaries". Discussions with
                  contacts'at th6.federal funding level (EPA) have indicated that in order for "substate" (county)             agencies to
                  apply for.these gTapts,    they must be. sponsored by a State      or  Re ional agency. This       includes   Tri-County
                                                                                           .9
                  Council.


                           Tlis  program    isIn  keeping with other established     priorities in MDE's    specific Areas  of interest in
                  utilizing these  ftinds:._'.._These include:. assessment of small creek and estuary reclarnation ne@ds; and        efforts
                  to improve the targeting and tracking of non-point source "best management techniques".

                           'Me requested funding of S32,500 covers the salary and fringe costs of a new full-time position for
                  managing the Water     -Quality Monitoring Program. A proposal sheet and a copy of the program strategy
                  is attached for your information. We intend to formally. sub imt a pre-proposal to Mr. J. L. Hearn, Director,
                  Water -ManagementAdmin.istration at- 2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, Md 21224, with your letter of
                  endorsement, for consideration of 2050) funding during the FY1992 cycle.

                           'Mank you for your assistance in this matter. Please feel free to contact Kevin Kirby of my staff
                  at 645-0610 if you have any questions regarding the program strategy or this request.



                                                                                                      Sincerely,
                                                                                                         0
                                                                                                           ly
                                                                                                          -0
                                                                                                         q u ri@S@Zh a I
                                                                                                      Director of Planning



                  Attachments
                    Water Quality Program Strategy

                  KJKI

                                                                   SAY NO TO DRUGS

                                       Post Office Box B      ba Plata, Maryland 20646     (301) 645-06 10 or 870-3935

                                                                  EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COUNTY











                                                      PROPOSAL STATEMENT SHEET



                Purpose in Seeking Grant Funding -

                         Charles County wishes to establish a water quality monitoring program in order to establish a data
                         base of existing stream water quality and to track trends in water quality, especially in those areas
                         identified within the County's development district.



                Grant Source -


                         As authorized under section 2050) and 604(B) of the Clean Water Act; administered federally by
                         the Environmental Protection Agency;         administered state-wide by the Water Management
                         Administration, Maryland Department of the Environment.


                Grant Request -

                         Charles County's purpose in obtaining grant funding is for the creation of a full-time position in
                         Charles County Government which would manage the adopted Water Quality Monitoring Program
                         (see Monitoring Coordinator position description on page'15 of the attached program strategy)..'
                         Total cost for funding this position (including salary and fringe) is S32,500. Among the Monitoring
                         Coordinator's. Zuties th fi'            would be to: coordinate. the     .overall program including-,
                                                   e   rst. year
                         coordinating team leaders, volunteer recruitment and training; determine         sampling locations;
                         maintain and..disburse test equipment; receive, compile, and interpret data; check for    accuracy of,
                         data as well is conduct quality control checks; and'p@blish an annual    report.



                                                                                                 ill I       I
                                                                         -I - 3 6668 14103
                                                                         L                                   I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             i
                                                                                                             -1
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                       i
                                                                                                             I
                                                                                                             I