[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
                                              Task 62 FY 90
                                              Final Work Product


                                             MODEL
                                ENVIRONMENTAL

                          so         ASSESSMENT
              -' X    X                 PROCEDURE



                 '-" '""-,..
















                                          PREPARED BY
                                       HAMPTON ROADS
                            PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION
                                        DECEMBER 1991
 I~~~~~~~~~~ %
        ~.' 
I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~'






        HAMPTON ROADS PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION

CHESAPEAKE                             POQUOSON
  ROBERT G. BAGLEY                        L. CORNELL BURCHER
  DR. ALAN P. KRASNOFF                    ROBERT M. MURPHY
  JAMES W. REIN
                                       PORTSMOUTH
FRANKLIN                                  JOHNNY M. CLEMONS
  ROBERT E. HARRELL                    ' V. WAYNE ORTON
  JOHN J. JACKSON                         GLORIA 0. WEBB

HAMPTON                                SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY
  T. MELVIN BUTLER          *             ROWLAND L. TAYLOR
  JAMES L. EASON                          C. HARRELL TURNER
  ROBERT J. O'NEILL, JR.
                                       SUFFOLK
ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY                      S. CHRIS JONES
  0. A. SPADY                          * RICHARD L. HEDRICK
  MYLES E. STANDISH
                                       VIRGINIA BEACH
JAMES CITY COUNTY                         JOHN A. BAUM
  DAVID B., NORMAN                        ROBERT E. FENTRESS
  DAVID L. SISK                           HAROLD HEISCHOBER
                                          WALTER E. MATHER
NEWPORT NEWS                              REBA S. McCLANAN
  JOE S. FRANK                            MEYERA E. OBERNDORF
  DR. VINCENT T. JOSEPH                   JAMES K. SPORE
  EDGAR E. MARONEY
                                       WILLIAMSBURG
NORFOLK JOHN HODGES
  MASON C. ANDREWS, M.D.                  JACKSON C. TUTTLE, II
  PAUL D. FRAIM
  JOSEPH A. LEAFE                      YORK COUNTY
  JAMES B. OLIVER, JR.                    PAUL W. GARMAN
  G. CONOLY PHILLIPS         *            DANIEL M. STUCK

                          *EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

                            PROJECT STAFF

   ARTHUR L. COLLINS              EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY

   JOHN M. CARLOCK                DIRECTOR OF PHYSICAL AND
                                     ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
   JERYL G. ROSE                  PHYSICAL PLANNER
   WILLIAM P. WICKHAM             PHYSICAL PLANNER, 11990-199 1)
   TODD A. GRISSOM                PHYSICAL PLANNER

   JOYCE M. COOK                  DIRECTOR, SECRETARIAL SERVICES
   FRANCES D. HUGHEY              WORD PROCESSOR

   ROBERT C. JACOBS               DIRECTOR OF GRAPHIC & PRINTING
                                     SERVICES
   JEANNE L. MUNDEN               GRAPHICS TECHNICIAN
   JOSEPH L. MARHEFKA             GRAPHICS TECHNICIAN
   MICHAEL R. LONG                GRAPHICS TECHNICIAN
   RACHAEL V. PATCHETT            REPROGRAPHIC SUPERVISOR

             HAMPTON ROADS PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION
                        THE REGIONAL BUILDING
                         723 WOODLAKE DRIVE
                      CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA 23320
                            18041 420-8300

















                   MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE








              This report was produced, in part, through financial support from
                 the Virginia Council on the Environment pursuant to Coastal
                  Resources Program Grant No. NA9OAA-H-CZ796 from the
                 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and from
                  the Virginia Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department
                      pursuant to Contract No. 91-42.of August 1990.



                              Property of CSC Library


              Preparation of this report was included in the HRPDC Program for
              1990-91, approved by the Commission at its Executive Committee
                                Meeting of March 20, 1991.






                                Prepared by the Staff of the
                        Hampton Roads Planning District Commission



                                                         U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                      December 1991       COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                      December 1991
~,_L cJ    ~                                               2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
,-,:                                                      CHARLESTON  SC 29405-2413









                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface

Part I.

     Overview of the Initial Environmental Review
     Questionnaire and Recommendations for Use

     Model Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire

     Guidance Text

     Bibliography

Part II.

     Comprehensive Water Quality Impact Assessment
      Procedure Guidance

      Model Comprehensive Water Quality Impact
     Assessment Procedure

      Bibliography

Appendices

      Appendix A:
      Prediction and Assessment of Impacts on the
     Water Environment --
      Data Needs and Resources

      Appendix B:
      Sample Impact Assessment Thresholds

      Appendix C:
      State Water Quality Standards

      Appendix D:
      Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern List

      Appendix E:
      Summary of WQIA Provisions from CBPA Model Ordinances
      and Local CBPA Ordinances in Hampton Roads








                                          PREFACE


              In May 1989, the Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission
        completed development of the Reaional Stormwater Manaaement Strateav for
I     ~ ~Southeastern  Virainia.    That  report  recommended  that  local  governments
        undertake a variety of activities on a cooperative basis. Since completion of that
        study, several state and federal initiatives in the areas of Nonpoint Source and
I     ~ ~Stormwater Management have progressed closer to implementation.  All of these
        programs focus on local governmental implementation and place heavy emphasis
        on  implementation of Best Management  Practices.   Both the affected  local
        governments and the region's development community have indicated that the
        preferred approach for satisfying these requirements would be a regional one,
*       ~~where administrative procedures as well as facility and system design are similar
        throughout Hampton Roads.

              Previous studies have identified nonpoint source pollution and stormwater
        management as a key water quality problem in many of the estuaries, lakes and
        rivers of Hampton  Roads.   While recognizing that overall guidance is being
I     ~ ~developed at the state level, it is believed that a region-specific environmental
        assessment procedure and associated guidance would enhance efforts by the
*       ~~region's localities in this regard.

              The objective of this Model Environmental Assessment Procedure has been
        to develop a region-specific common approach to assessing the environmental
I     ~ ~impacts of development proposals to be used in plan of development review. This
        procedure focuses primarily on water quality issues and, specifically, the
        Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act requirements. Other environmental issues have
        also been considered for locally-designated environmentally- sensitive areas, based
        on evolving local programs and state and federal regulatory programs.



I
I
                  MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL
                ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
I
*             ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I









   I                  ~~~~OVERVIEW OF THE INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

   *                  ~~~~QUESTIONNAIRE AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR USE


*       ~INTRODUCTION

              The following model Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire is designed
        to alert both the developer and the City/County staff to any environmental
        problems associated with a project that may require mitigation. This Questionnaire
        is also designed to assist developers in understanding and complying with the
I      ~ ~many   local,  state  and  federal  environmental  regulations  affecting  land
        development. Accompanying the Questionnaire is a detailed Guidance Text which
        summarizes local, state and federal environmental programs which are applicable
        to land development activities.

              The Questionnaire is intended to be an initial screening only. More detailed
        assessments of potential environmental impacts may be required during the
        City/County development review process, or as part of the application processes
        required to obtain various environmental permits.

              Only impacts on the natural environment are addressed. The Questionnaire
        does not address impacts on the human environment, except for noise, and,
        therefore, does not include such issues as historic resources, traffic, aesthetics,
        energy consumption, and so forth.

              Prior to the Questionnaire is a discussion of issues that should be
        considered by local City/County staff when administering the Questionnaire; a
        user's  guide.   These  issues  include appropriate  local  review  responsibility,
        determining when to require completion of the Questionnaire, evaluating impacts,
3       ~~and integrating the Questionnaire with a geographic Information System.

              This model is intended to serve as a prototype only. It is expected that local
3 ~~government staffs will want to revise both the Questionnaire and Guidance Text to
        reflect local programs and policies.

3      ~USE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

              The initial Environmental review Questionnaire should be used as a
        preliminary assessment of the types of environmental impacts that may be
        associated  with  a  proposed  development  of  redevelopment  project.   This
        assessment permits proposals, which raise significant environmental impact
I    ~     ~questions, to be identified for a further and more detailed study; such study
        typically occurs during the local development review process or as part of the
3      ~~application processes  required to obtain various environmental  permits.   The








        questionnaire is intended to "flag" and significant environmental impacts that may
        occur. It is also intended to initiate a dialogue between the developer and local
I     ~ ~government staff on potential environmental issues before a project is begun or, at
        least, prior to land disturbance.  Its objective is to incorporate environmental
        concerns - -both constraints and opportunities - - into the development planning
I     ~ ~process, by evaluating the assets and liabilities of the project environs and how
        those factors operate to influence a development's design.

 *           ~~~The Questionnaire can also be used as a tool to educated developers about
        the environmental issues that are of concern to local governments, and state and
        federal regulators.  To accomplish this, the Guidance Text accompanying the
        Questionnaire summarizes local, state, and federal programs and regulations
        associated with each of the environmental issues addressed by the Questionnaire.
*      ~~This document should provide a fast and efficient means for screening a variety of
        development proposals and does not require the user to have detailed technical
        expertise in environmental impact assessment.

        Ad ministering the Questionnaire

 *           ~~~It is recommended that the Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire be
        administered by the local planning department and completed by the developer of
        a proposed project. Designated professional certification should also be completed
I    ~     ~on behalf of the developer or his representative.  Once completed, planning staff
        would  review  and  verify the  information  in the  Questionnaire.   With  the
        information provided by the Questionnaire, the planning staff can begin to work
        with the developer to ensure that all applicable environmental regulations are
        complied with, and that efforts are made to mitigate significant environmental
*      ~~impacts.

              In general, projects subject to an initial environmental review should be
*      ~~limited to those having the potential for causing significant environmental impact.
        However, specifying what types of projects met this broad criterion may be
        difficult however.   The need to treat all proposed projects equitably generally
I    ~     ~precludes the option of making subjective determinations on a case-by-case basis.
        Therefore, requiring the completion of an Initial Environmental Review
        Questionnaire should be considered for one or a combination of the following
        categories of development projects:
  *            o~~~~ All project requiring site plan reviews.

              o     All project requiring rezoning, subdivision or a conditional use permit.

  I            o~~~ All proposed land uses failing under a pre-determined "potential risk
                    to water quality" category.


          U                                    ~~~~~~~~~~iv









            o     All projects exceeding 2,500 sq. ft. area of land disturbance; this
                   threshold   generally  triggers   compliance   with   E&S   control
                   requirements. Higher thresholds may be chosen.

            o     All projects exceeding certain size or quantity thresholds.   For
                   example, all multi-family residential projects exceeding 20 units, all
                   commercial projects exceeding 12,000 square feet, all projects
                   requiring greater than 40 parking spaced, all proposals using in
                   excess of specified quantities of hazardous materials, and so forth.
                   Other examples are commercial/industrial development proposing
                   greater than 250,000 sq. ft. of gross building floor area, and other
                   development projects which contain greater than 100 acres and
                   propose more than 200 dwelling units.

            o     All projects occurring in or near designated environmentally sensitive
                   areas (e.g. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, Natural Area
                   Preserves, water supply drainage basins, etc.), or area containing
                   certain environmental features (e.g. wetlands, unstable slopes or hyric
                   soils, etc.).

            o     All projects clearly requiring one or more environmental permits (e.g.
                   E&S, wetlands, wastewater discharge, groundwater withdrawals, and
                   so forth).

            o     At the discretion of the planning director, any proposal which has the
                   potential to elicit a public controversy due to the potential for
                  environmental impacts.

            Regardless of what project are subject to the Initial Environmental Review
      Questionnaire, it is important that each applicant be given the Questionnaire early
      in the development review process. This could be done at a pre-submittal meeting
      or whenever the City/County staff distributes applications for rezoning,
      subdivision, or conditional or special use permits.

      Evaluating Impacts

~~I  ~The Questionnaire asks respondents to identify "significant" environmental
      impacts.  For the purposes of this environmental review process, a significant
      environmental impact can generally be defined as a potentially substantial adverse
      change to the land, water, air, flora and fauna in the area of a proposed activity.
      In most cases, what constitutes a significant environmental impact is determined
      by  local,  state  and/or  federal  regulatory  standards.    For  example,  some
      development proposals may be considered significant because, due to the nature
      of the proposed activity, they are subject to air or water effluent limitations under
      air or water regulatory programs. Other activities may be significant by virtue of


                                       I     V








        their location in or near environmentally sensitive areas delineated by regulatory
        criteria (e.g. wetlands, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, and so forth).

              The Questionnaire does not provide a mechanism for assessing "cumulative
        impact."   Although the individual environmental impacts of a project may  be
I     ~ ~individually limited, the effects of the project may be considerable when viewed in
        combination with the effects of other past, present and possible future projects.

 U            ~~~While there is concern  in the available literature about the cumulative
        environmental impacts of development, relatively little research has been
        conducted on how to measure such impacts. Many state environmental programs
        issue permits in isolation and allow exemptions for smaller projects. This can
        allow impacts to accumulate without regulatory agencies having a sense of the
        overall effects.  Fragmented authority for oversight of different aspects of an
        activity adds to this lack of control.

              To date, there are no methodologies applied in Virginia that are acceptable
        to both environmental regulators and the regulated communities. However, the
        Virginia Council on the Environment recently funded a study through the Coastal
I     ~ ~Resource Management Program to identify methodologies for explicitly considering
        cumulative and secondary impacts. A report was issued in November 1991 which
        defines a cumulative impact, identifies five specific types of impacts, determines
I     ~ ~obstacles and impediments to cumulative impact management in Virginia, and
        examines programs in other states. Even though an acceptable cumulative impact
        assessment methodology has not been developed, it is still imperative that,
        throughout the development review process, consideration be given to the
        potential for such impacts.

             .Therefore taking the appropriate above-mentioned environmental impacts
        into consideration along with all of the information submitted by the project
I     ~ ~application on the Questionnaire, the following three determinations could be
        made.

 *           ~~~1.    Negative Declaration:  a finding that the proposed project could not
                    have significant adverse impacts on the environment as categorized in
   *                ~~~~~the Questionnaire.

              2.    Mitigated Negative Declaration:  a finding that although the project
                    could have significant adverse impacts on the environment as
   I.              ~ ~~~categorized in the Questionnaire, the proposed mitigation measures
                    detailed and/or agreed upon by the project applicant will remedy
   *                ~~~~~those impacts.




          I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~vi








 U            ~~~~3.    Positive Declaration: a finding that the project, as proposed, will have
                     significant adverse impacts on the environment which cannot be
                     remedied through the proposed mitigation measures.
              If a "Positive Declaration" is determined, then a finding of environmental
U      ~ ~inconsistency for the proposed project is made.  A locality may wish to provide
        administrative relief from such a determination through an administrative appeals
        process. For example, in the event that the property owner or other aggrieved
I     ~ ~party with pre-determined standing alleges an error in any order, requirement,
        decision or determination made by local planning staff in the interpretation of any
        portion  of  the  Questionnaire  and/or  the  information  submitted  on  the
        Questionnaire, an appeal may be filed pursuant to the local administrative appeals
        process.   Inclusion of a severability clause may  also be warranted at local
*       ~~discretion.

        Integration with Geographic Information System (GIS)

              The usefulness of the Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire can be
        greatly enhanced  if used  in conjunction  with  a  computerized  Geographic
I     ~ ~Information System (GIS) containing applicable environmental data coverages.  A
        GIS can be used to quickly analyze a proposed project's location with respect to a
        variety of sensitive environmental features. Data coverages which may indicate
I     ~ ~the  environmental  constraints  associated  with  a  project  site include  soils,
        slopes,wetlands, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas, Natural Heritage Preserves,
        endangered species habitat, water supply watersheds, and so forth.  Most are or
        will be digitized on EcoMAPs. The primary goal of the Virginia EcoMAP System is
        to be comprehensive natural resource inventory within a GIS.

I       ~~Conclusion

               In summary, the overarching goal when using this Questionnaire, and
        subsequently evaluating potential environmental impacts, should be to minimize
        the negative impacts that could be associated with proposed development or
I     ~ ~redevelopment in environmentally-fragile areas. This can be achieved by managing
         land uses and their location and intensity through the encouragement, where most
        applicable, of innovative design, construction, operation, and maintenance

        techniques which are sensitive to the natural environment.








          I                                   ~~~~~~~~~~Vii









  I               ~~~~MODEL INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

               I                                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Project No.___

*       ~~PURPOSE OF QUESTIONNAIRE:

        The purpose of this Questionnaire is to provide information that will help both you
        and City/County staff identify any significant adverse environmental impacts
        resulting from your proposal. With this information, you and the City/County can
        begin working together to ensure that any such impacts can be avoided or
*       ~~reduced.

        This Questionnaire is also intended to inform you of the environmental issues that
*      ~~are of concern  to both the City/County  and  State and  federal  regulators.
        Contained in the Guidance Text accompanying the Questionnaire are summaries of
        local, State and federal programs and regulations that may affect your project.
*      ~~The Guidance Text is structured so as to correspond with the environmental issues
        addressed by the Questionnaire.

I      ~~Instructions for Applicant:

        1 .    Completion of this Questionnaire is required for the following development
 I          ~ ~~~proposals:

                     (Local staff should insert locally derived criteria for requiring
   I              ~ ~~~~completion of an Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire.   See
                     accompanying discussion entitled Use of the Initial Environmental
   *                ~~~~~Review Questionnaire.)

        2.    In completing this Questionnaire, it is assumed that you will only need
 *           ~~~currently available information concerning your proposal and its potential
               environmental impacts. Points of contact are provided for your convenience
              so that you may inquire about and obtain the most current and accurate
  I          ~ ~~data available.  Additional studies, research or other investigations are not
               required, unless requested by City/County staff.

1      ~~3.    This Questionnaire applies to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to
               construct them over a period of time, or on different parcels of land.

1      ~~4.   If you answer "yes" or "maybe" to a question, please read the appropriate
               section of the Guidance Text accompanying the Questionnaire. For each
               question, the Guidance Text addresses (1) how to determine if the project is
               subject to any relevant regulations, and (2) what a developer must do if it
               appears that a project is subject to the regulation~s). If you are absolutely
  *           ~~~certain that the proposed project will not have the environmental impacts in









      question or be subject to any applicable environmental regulations, you may
      answer "no" and skip to the next question.

5.   It is important that this questionnaire be fully and accurately completed to
      the best of your knowledge. In addition, a certified professional must testify
      to the accuracy and completeness of your answers by providing his/her
      signature and title in the signature space at the end of the questionnaire.

      (Local staff should  insert who/which  professional(s)  must  provide this
      certification.)

6.    City/County staff may ask you to explain your answers or to provide
      additional information, if available.








        BACKGROUND INFORMATION


        (Please attach additional sheets if space provided is inadequate to answer the
I       ~~question.)

        1.    Name of Proposed Project:

I       ~~2.    Name of Applicant:

*       ~~3.    Address and phone number of applicant or contact person:




        4.    Date Questionnaire completed:

        5.    Location of proposed project.  Give the precise location of the proposed
              project, including the street address, parcel number and lot number, if
 I          ~ ~~applicable.   If the  project is to occur over a large area,  identify the
              boundaries of the site.







        6.    Give a brief description of your proposed project including proposed use(s)

              and size.




        7.    List any environmental  information that you  know  about that has been
  I          ~ ~~~prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to your proposed project.




        8.    State previous uses of the property on which project is being proposed, if
              known. Consult aerial photos, property deeds, restrictive convenants, etc.
              available in local planning office, Circuit Court Clerk's office, or real
  *           ~~~estate/Commissioner of Revenue's office to obtain this information.


          I                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3








                                 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS


I     1.    WETLANDS

            A.    Will the project result in the dredging or filling of nontidal wetlands?

                   Yes ___Maybe                                 No___

 I                ~~~~~See pages 13-18 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

            B.    Will the project result in the dredging or filling of tidal wetlands?

                   Yes __Maybe                        _No

                   See pages 15-18 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

I           ~~~C.    Will the project impact State-owned subaqueous land?

 *               ~~~~Yes __Maybe                               No__

                   See pages 19-20 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

U           ~~~D.    Will the project result in the alteration of wetlands drainage patterns
                   by ditching, damming, road construction, or other means?

                   Yes ___Maybe                                 No___

3           ~~~E.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts on wetlands
                   or subaqueous land, if any. (include any anticipated government
  *               ~~~~~approvals or permits that will be needed.)







         I. CHESAPEAKE SAY PRESERVATION AREAS

3          ~~~A.    Is the project located within a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area?

                   Yes ___May be                                No

                   See pages 21-23 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.



         1                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4








K            ~~~B.   If located within a Chesapeake Preservation Area, will the project
                    encroach into the Resource Protection Area?

                    Yes ___Maybe                                No __

                    See pages 23-24 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

              C.    Will the project require compliance with a WQIA/CWQIA procedure?

                    Yes ___Maybe                                No___

  I                 ~~~~~See page 22 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

              D.    Describe measures proposed to comply with the Chesapeake Bay
                    Preservation Act, if necessary. (include any anticipated government
                    approvals that will be needed.)






        Ill.    PRIMARY SAND DUNES

              A.    Will the project in any way alter coastal primary sand dunes?

  I                ~~~~~Yes  _Maybe   _No _

                    See pages 25-27 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

              B.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to primary
                    sand dunes, if any. (Include any anticipated government approvals or
                    permits that will be needed.)






3      ~IV.   SURFACE WATER QUALITY

              A.    Will the project result in a point source discharge to surface waters?

   *                ~~~~~Yes            Maybe __                 No__

                    See pages 28-32 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.


          I                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5








            B.    Will the project result in a discharge of nonpoint source pollutants to
                  storm sewer systems or directly to surface waters?

                  Yes ___Maybe ___No___

 I                ~~~~~See pages 33-38 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

            C.    Will the project contribute to erosion and sedimentation impacts to
                  adjacent properties, or waterways, or sensitive environmental


 H                 ~~~~~Yes   _ __Maybe   __ _No ___

 3                ~~~~~See pages 38-39 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

            D.    Will the  project contribute  to the  need  for off-site stormwater
 I               ~ ~~~~management facilities?

 *                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                  See pages 39-40 of the guidance text to answer this question.

I           ~~~E.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to surface
                  water quality, if any. (Include any anticipated government approvals
 *                ~~~~~or permits that will be needed.)






      V.    SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND FLOW

I           ~~~A.    Will the project be an instream use, or an offstream use, or a non-
                  consumptive use?

 I                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

 *                ~~~~~See page 41 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

            B.    If the project will be one of the above uses, please describe.






        3                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6








U            ~~~~C.    Will the project affect the flow regime of alocal river or stream?

 *                 ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                  See pages 41-42 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

             D.    If the project will affect surface water flow regime, please describe
                  that effect. (Include any anticipated increase or decrease from pre-

                  development flows).



             E.    Will the project be located within a state-designated Surface Water
 I               ~ ~~~Management Area?

 *                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                   See pages 42-43 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

             F.    If located within a Surface Water Management Area, will the project
                   involve surface water withdrawals of greater than or equal to
                   300,000 gallons/month?
  3                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                   See pages 42-43 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

*           ~~~G.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to surface
                   water quantity, if any. (include any anticipated government approvals
  3                ~~~~~or permits that will be needed.)






       VI. GROUNDWATER QUALITY

 I           ~~~A.    Will the project have the potential to significantly impact groundwater
                   quality?

  I                ~~~~~Yes__          Maybe__                   No__

                   See pages 44-54 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.


         I                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7









 U           ~~~B.    Describe  measures  proposed  to  reduce  or  avoid  impacts  to
                    groundwater quality, if any.  (include any anticipated government
  I              ~ ~~~~approvals or permits that will be needed.)


I       ~ViI.   GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

              A.    Will the project have the potential to significantly impact groundwater
   I              ~ ~~~~quantity?

   *                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                    See page 55 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

 U           ~~~B.   Will  project  be  located  within  a  state-designated  Groundwater
                    Management Area?
                    Yes ___Maybe ___No___

                    See pages 55-56 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.


 3           ~~~C.    Describe  measures  proposed  to  reduce  or  avoid  impacts  to
                    groundwater quantity, if any.  (include any anticipated government
                    approvals or permits that will be needed.)






U      ~~Vill. AIR QUALITY

  3           ~~~A.    Will the project result in an increase in odor, dust, fumes, gases or
                    other air contaminants?

   I                Yes   _____YesMaybe    _     __No              _ _ _

   3               ~~~~~See pages 57-62 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

              B.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to air quality,
                    if any. (Include any anticipated government approvals or permits that

                    will be needed.)



          *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8









        IX. SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

 I            ~~~A.    Will the project result in an  increase  in municipal  solid waste,
                   hazardous waste, or construction debris requiring management?

  I                 ~~~~~Yes   _Maybe   _No _

                   See pages 63-69 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

             B.    Describe measures proposed to reduce impacts to regional waste
                   management, if any. (include any anticipated government approvals
                   or permits that will be needed.)




3       ~X.    TREE PRESERVATION

             A.    Will the project result in a change in the number or diversity of trees?

                   Yes ___Maybe ___No___

  I                 ~~~~~See pages 70-71 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

             B.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to trees, if
                   any. (include any anticipated government approvals or permits that
                   will be needed.)





       Xi.   ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES

 I            ~~~A.    Will the project affect any  federal or state-listed  endangered  or
                   threatened plant or animal species through a taking or loss of habitat?

   I                 ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                   See pages 72-73 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

             B.    If project will affect any  federal- or state-listed  endangered  or
                   threatened plant or animal species, please identify which one(s).

                   See pages 74-79 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.



         I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9









            C.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to federal or
                  state-listed endangered or threatened species, and/or loss of habitat,
 I                ~ ~~~~if any.  (include any anticipated government approvals or permits that
                  will be needed.)





       XII.   NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION

U            ~~~~A.    Will the project result in a loss of habitat for nongame species?
                  Yes ___Maybe ___No___

                  See page 80 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

*            ~~~~B.    Will the project impact any Natural Area Preserves designated through
                  the Virginia Natural Heritage Program?

 I                 ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                  See pages 8 1-82 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.

             B.    Describe measures proposed to reduce or avoid impacts to State
                   Natural Area Preserves, if any. (include any anticipated government
                  approvals or permits that will be needed.)




       XIII1. NOISE

             A.    Will the project result in a significant increase in noise levels to the
  I               ~ ~~~~surrounding land area, either during construction or operation?

  *                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

             B.    If located within the vicinity of an airport, either commercial  or
                   military, will the project site fall within an AICUZ Noise Zone or
                  Accident Potential Zone?

  *                ~~~~~Yes __Maybe __No__

                   See pages 82-85 of the Guidance Text to answer this question.



         *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~10









         SIGNATURE

I       I~~.  I, the undersigned, swear that the above responses are made truthfully and
               to the best of my knowledge.

 I           ~~~~Appl ica nt:


        I                               ~~~~~~~~~~Name (Print or Type)


          I                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Title


     U                     ~~~~~~Signature                               Date

 *           ~~~Person Completing Form:


        *                               ~~~~~~~~~~Name (Print or Type)


          I                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Title


     *                     ~~~~~~Signature                               Date


         II.   I, the undersigned, am knowledgeable about the proposed project and do
                hereby certify that the above questionnaire is accurate and complete
  *           ~~~~according to all available information.

  *           ~~~Certified Complete:


         *                              ~~~~~~~~~~Name (Print or Type)


          *                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Title


     *                     ~~~~~~Signature                               Date



I
I
I
I
I
I
I
     I ~~~~~~~GUIDANCE TEXT

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








    I                      I~~~~~. WETLANDS AND SUBAQUEOUS LAND

              Regulation  of  wetlands  (tidal and  nontidal) and  subaqueous  land  is
        accomplished through the federal permitting process established under the federal
        Clean Water  Act and the River and  Harbors  Act of  1 899.   Generally,  all
I      ~ ~development within bodies of water and wetlands which can be defined as
        "waters of the United States", requires a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers
        (COE). "U.S. waters" is defined to include all waterways and their adjacent
I     ~ ~wetlands channelward of the ordinary high water shoreline. Section 10 of the
        Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) regulates activities affecting navigation in the U.S.
        Waters. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) addresses dredge and fill
        operations in wetlands and expands the definition of U.S. waters to include all
        wetlands adjacent to tidal and non-tidal waterways as well as isolated wetlands.

 U           ~~~~All applications for permits from the COE require coordination with the U.S.
        Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
        and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Under Section 404, the EPA
        has the power to veto, under certain circumstances, a decision by the COE to
        approve a permit.   Under Section 401  of the Clean Water Act, all projects
        requiring a COE permit must receive a certification from the State Water Control
        Board (SWCB) that the project will not have a significant adverse water quality
        impact, and that the State's water quality concerns will be compled with.
U     ~ ~However, Virginia has proposed that the 401 Certification Program in Virginia be
        phased out and replaced with the Virginia Water Pollution Protection Permit
        Program. This permit will be issued to constitute the certification required by
I     ~ ~Section 401 of the CWA.  Also, the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of
        1972 requires that any applicant for a required federal license, permit, or federally
        funded activity affecting land or water uses in the coastal zone area of Virginia to
        provide, in the application to the licensing or permitting agency, a certification that
        the proposed activity complies with the Virginia Coastal Resources Management
*       ~~Program.

              Many projects involving wetlands or subaqueous land fall under COE
3       ~~General Permits.  The COE is authorized to issue General Permits on a state,
        regional or nationwide basis for certain categories of development activities which
        are similar in nature and cause only minimal adverse environmental impacts. Most
I     ~ ~wetland or subaqueous land disturbances authorized under a General Permit may
        proceed without applying for an individual permit.   In some  circumstances,
        conditions associated with a General Permit require that the Corps be notified
I     ~ ~before an activity takes place.  The COE District Office should be contacted to
        determine whether a project qualifies for a General Permit and, if so, whether any
*      ~~General Permit conditions apply to the project.




          3                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~13









A.    Nontidal Wetlands

      At present there is no State regulatory program governing development in
nontidal wetlands. The following describes procedures in the federal Section 404
permitting process that are specific to nontidal wetlands.

      To determine whether a site contains nontidal wetlands, the Norfolk District
of the COE recommends the following procedure.

      1.    Consult the U.S. Soil Conservation Service's local soil survey for your
            jurisdiction to check for the possible presence of hydric soils on your
            site.

      2.    If it is found that any portion of your site contains hydric soils, a
            formal wetlands delineation should be performed in accordance with
            the procedure outlined in the Federal Manual for ldentifvina and
            Delineatina  Jurisdictional  Wetlands.    More  information  on  the
            wetlands delineation process and guidance on the Manual edition to
             be used is available from the COE District Office.

      3.    Once a wetlands delineation has been performed, the results must be
            verified  by  the  Corps.    A  preapplication  procedure  has  been
             recommended  by the Corps.  It will be used to review wetlands
            delineations and make a final determination of federal jurisdiction.
             More information on the preapplication procedure is available from the
             COE District Office.

      The 404 permit process for development in nontidal wetlands involves the
steps outlined below. (This process applies to individual permits only.)

      1.    Complete and submit a COE permit application.

      2.    If the application is complete, the COE prepares and distributes a
             public notice within 15 days.

      3.    30 day public comment period.

      4.    COE conducts site inspection.

      5.    Application is reviewed EPA, FWS, NMFS, SWCB, VMRC, VIMS, and
             VCOE at monthly coordination meeting.






                                       14








1            ~~~~6.    COE ensures compliance with other regulations:

                     a.    Section 401  water quality certificate from the State Water
                           Control Board.

  *                 ~~~~~b.    Certification that the project complies with the Virginia Coastal
                           Resources Management Program.

  I                 ~~~ ~~C.    Adherence to National Environmental Policy Act procedures.

              7.    Depending  on the conclusions  reached  by the federal reviewing
                     agencies and the volume and nature of public comments, the Corps
                     may decide that a public hearing is warranted.

 I             8~~~~.    A decision is made by the COE to approve, approve with modification
                     or deny a permit application.

        For more information on development in nontidal wetlands contact:

 *            ~~~U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
              Norfolk District                             (804) 441-7656

 I            ~~~~State Water Control Board                 (804) 527-5000
              Tidewater Regional Office                    (804) 552-1840

*       ~~B.    Tidal Wetlands

              In addition to the federal regulatory process, State and local governments
I     ~    ~have enacted programs to regulate development in tidal wetlands.  The Virginia
        Wetlands Act of 1972, as amended, applies to all tidal wetlands, both vegetated
        and non-vegetated. The Act also applies to the wetlands of the Back Bay and
        North Landing River which are subject to wind tides only. The Act defines tidal
        wetlands as that land lying between mean low water and an elevation above mean
3       ~~low water equal to 1.5 times the mean tide range at the site of a proposed project.
        Title 62.1, Chapter 2.1 of the Code of Virainia gives the Virginia Marine Resources
        Commission (VMRC) primary responsibility for regulating tidal wetlands.   Local
I     ~ ~governments may establish and administer their own regulatory programs, with
        VMRC oversight, through local Wetlands Boards and ordinances which conform to
*      ~~model State legislation.

              A joint permitting process has been established which combines the local,
        State and federal tidal wetlands permitting requirements. Joint permit applications
I    ~     ~can be obtained from the VMRC, local wetlands boards or the COE District Office.
        VMRC and the Virginia Institute for Marine Science (VIMS) have developed
        Wetland Guidelines which describe tidal wetlands types, their values, and methods








        of coastal construction that minimize impacts. These Guidelines can be used to
        assist applicants when filling out the joint permit application.

              A general overview of the joint permit application process is provided below
        and a flow chart depicting the process can be found on page 17. The entire joint
I      ~ ~permitting process generally takes two to three months.  Complex projects may
        take longer.

 I~~~~ 1.    One permit application is completed and submitted to the VMRC.
                     Copies of the application are then forwarded to the COE and to the
                     local Wetlands Board.

               2.    A joint public notice is prepared by COE.  If a project does not require
   3                 ~~~~~a permit from COE or qualifies for a COE General Permit, individual
                     public notices are prepared by each of the other regulatory agencies.

               3.    A site inspection is conducted jointly, where possible, by the VMVRC,
                     VIMS, COE, and the local Wetlands Board.

 3            ~~~4.    The application is reviewed by EPA, FWS, NMFS, SWCB, VMVRC,
                     VIMS, and COE at monthly coordination meeting.

 *            ~~~5.    Depending on the conclusions reached by the reviewing agencies and
                     the volume and nature of public comments, a public hearing may be
   *                ~~~~~~held.

               6.    Separate decisions are made by the local Wetlands Board and the
                     COE to approve, approve with modification, or deny their respective
                     permit applications.

 3            ~~~7.    The  local Wetlands  Board decision is reviewed by the VMVRC to
                     ensure consistency with the State Wetlands Act.

 3           ~~~8.    Decisions may be appealed to the VMRC within ten days. The VMVRC
                     Board will review any appeals within forty-five days and make a
                     determination to uphold, reverse, modify, or remand the original
                     decision.
  3           ~~~~9.    After a thirty-day waiting period, the VMVRC decision can be appealed
                     to the Circuit Court. If no appeal is made, a final permit is issued.







          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~16






                                   FIGURE 1
               WETLANDS PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS

                      APPLICATION SUBMITTED 

            VMRC  logs application, assigns application number               It COE Permit
                                 $
                                                                         Required

                        I Wetlands Board  i
                                                                        COE Public
                                            ffi                              ~~~~~~~~~Notice
    Review by          '             Notice |
   VMRC, VIMS,  4 ~             Public Notice                                       4,
      VDOT,
     VSWCB,             '                                                   30 Day Comment
   C&HR, known   .  Wetlands Board Public Hearing                                 Period
   claimants and
     adjacent                      ,               J                                 r
     property 
      ownerts        Board Fails to Act            Board Acts                 Public Hearing
                                             Approval                        Potential 
                                             Approval with             Lï¿½................J
                                                 Modification                   4,
                                                     ,  "Denial       |Review by EPA, 
                                Decision Notice  i~enial                 I   FWS, NMFS
        Decision Notice sent to VMRC and Applicant  |

            l,            4l                                                   COE Decision
                                                                       . Approval
    |Permit Final  | |Appeal |                                              .Approval with
                                                                            Modification
                                      MI~~~~ 4~~~~, *Denial

                      Commission            Thirtyday 
                        Hearing  --    waiting period          No Appeal
                      ï¿½ Uphold 
                      a Reverse                 4                   _
                       Modify                Appeal            Final Permit   Final Permit I
                      , Remand IApa 

                                       I  Circuit Court  I



    Acronyms

     VMRC - Virginia Marine Resources Commission
     VDOT - Virginia Department of Transportation
     C&HR - Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources
     VIMS - Virginia Institute of Marine Science
     VSWCB - Virginia State Water Control Board
     COE - Corps of Engineers                                      Adapted from: Chesapeake Bay
     EPA - Environmental Protection Agency                         Foundation Conservina Our
     FWS - Fish and Wildlife Service                               Wetland Resources: Avenues for
     NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Services                     Citizen Particination, 1987.

Source: SVPDC, The Value of Wetlands: A Guide For Citizens, 1988

                                           17











       For more information on development in tidal wetlands contact:

I           ~~~U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
             Norfolk District                                 (804)441-7656

I           ~~~Virginia Marine Resources Commission           (804)247-2200

             State Water Control Board                        (804)527-5000
I          ~ ~~Tidewater Regional Office                      (804)552-1840

3           ~~~Local Wetlands Board

             (insert name and number of local wetlands board contact.)








        C.    Subaqueous Land

 I            ~~~All development  activities affecting  subaqueous,  or submerged,  lands
        associated with federally defined "waters of the United States" are subject to the
        federal COE permitting process described at the beginning of this section.   Types
I      ~ ~of projects which may affect subaqueous lands and require COE permits typically
        include structures such as piers, breakwaters, bulkheads, revetments, power
        transmission lines and aids to navigation, and such activities as channelization,
        excavation, dredging, filling and ocean dumping.
               As defined in the Code of Virainia, "Tidewater Virginia" encompasses
        approximately 5,000 miles of shoreline. There are about 2,300 square miles, or
        roughly 1,472,000 acres, of tidally influenced subaqueous lands. This vast area
        requires an ever- increasing custodial responsibility for the State. In Virginia, all
        tidally influenced submerged lands channelward of mean low water are owned by
        the Commonwealth. Additionally, State ownership extends as well to non-tidal
3       ~~subaqueous lands throughout the Commonwealth, which had not been granted to
        private owners before 1792. Title 62.1, Chapter 1 of the Code of Virainia states
        that it is unlawful to encroach upon or use any materials from State- owned
I      ~ ~submerged lands without a permit from the Virginia Marine Resources Commission
        (VMRC). Exemptions to this statute include the following:

 *            o~~~ Dams authorized by proper authority

 3            o~~~~ Fishing and shellfishing already regulated under State Code

               o     Federal navigation and flood control projects

 1            o~~~ Private, noncommercial piers adjacent to private land which do not
                     interfere with navigation

               All non-exempt activities affecting subaqueous lands are subject to the joint
        permit application process described in the preceding section on tidal wetlands.
I     ~ ~Applications can be obtained from the VMRC or from local wetlands boards.  In
        addition to a permit fee, rents or one time royalty payments are required for most
        activities affecting State-owned  subaqueous  lands.   The VMRC  has prepared
I     ~ ~Subaqueous Guidelines which informs applicants of the general conditions and
        terms under which subaqueous activities will be allowed in State waters.

I       ~~For more information on development activities affecting State- owned subaqueous
        lands contact:

  I           ~~~Virginia Marine Resources Commission              (804)247-2200



          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~19









     Local Wetlands Board

(Insert name and number of local wetlands board staff contact.)

Sources of additional information:

Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Conservina our Wetland Resources: Avenues for
     Citizen Particioation, 1987.

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 62.1, Chapter 1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.

           Title 62.1, Chapter 2.1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as amended.

Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for
     Identifvina and Delineatina Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of
     Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
     Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.
     Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus appendices.

Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission. The Value of Wetlands: A
     Guide for Citizens. Chesapeake, Virginia: SVPDC, 1988.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. CorDs of Enaineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
      Final Report (Technical Report Y-87-1) Washington, D.C.: Department of
     the Army, January, 1987.

U.S. Congress. River and Harbors Act of 1899. 33 U.S.C. 403.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   "Proposed  Revisions to the Federal
      Manual for Delineating Wetlands."   Office of Wetlands,  Oceans,  and
     Watersheds. Washington, D.C.: EPA, August, 1991.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  U.S. Army  Corps of Engineers, U.S.
      Department of Agriculture Soil and Conservation Service, and U.S.
      Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. "1989 'Federal Manual for
      Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands'; Proposed Revisions."
      56 Federal Reaister 40446, August 14, 1991.

Virginia Institute of Marine Science and Virginia Marine Resources Commission.
      Wetlands Guidelines. Newport News, Virginia: VMRC, undated.

Virginia Marine Resources Commission.  Subaaueous Guidelines: Guidelines for the
      Permittina of Activities which Encroach In. On or Over the Submeraed Lands
      of the Commonwealth of Virainia. Newport News, VA: VMRC, 1986.


                                     20










               II.    CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREAS

A.    General Requirements

      Under the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (Title 10.1, Chapter 21, Code
of Virainia), the forty-six cities and counties and forty- three towns in Tidewater
Virginia are required to develop programs to delineate and protect environmentally
sensitive areas known as Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas (CBPAs). CBPAs are
defined as those lands, which if improperly developed, may result in substantial
damage to the water quality of the Bay and its tributaries.

      Local Tidewater governments must delineate two categories of CBPAs:
Resource Protection Areas (RPAs) and Resource Management Areas (RMAs). The
RPA includes lands at or near the shoreline which have important value to water
quality. Under the Act, the RPA must include tidal wetlands, certain nontidal
wetlands, tidal shoreline and any other lands with important water quality values.
The RPA must also include a 100-foot buffer area measured from the landward
side of these natural features. The RMA is land which protects the values of the
RPA.  The delineation of the RMA is left to the discretion of local governments,
but is subject to State consistency review. State regulations require that localities
consider including floodplains, highly erodible and permeable soils, steep slopes,
nontidal wetlands not included in the RPA, and any other lands necessary to
protect water quality.

      Under the Act, local governments are allowed to designate portions of RPAs
and RMAs as Intensely Developed Areas (IDAs). IDAs are areas where
concentrated  development  already  exists.    This  designation  allows  for
redevelopment and infill development where little of the natural environment
remains. Not all localities have designated IDAs.

      The initial step in determining whether a site is located within a CBPA is to
contact the local planning staff. Most localities have prepared maps which show
the general location of CBPAs.   The CBPA  delineations on these maps are
extremely generalized, however. Detailed, site-specific surveys showing the exact
location of CBPA resource features on a lot may be required. These surveys are
generally the responsibility of the applicant.

      In all CBPAs, development must meet general criteria that require the
reduction of pollutants found in runoff and/or protect sensitive lands from land
disturbance. These general criteria are briefly described below. For guidance on
meeting these criteria, the local planning staff should be contacted.





                                      21









     o     Minimize disturbance of land.

     o     Preserve natural vegetation.

     o     Minimize impervious cover such as paving.

     o     Ensure regular maintenance of required stormwater best management
           practices.

     o     All development exceeding 2,500 square feet must undergo a formal
           development review process, and comply with the requirements of
           the local erosion and sediment control ordinance.

     o     All on-site sewage treatment systems must have a reserve drainfield
           which equals the waste treatment capacity of the primary drainfield,
           and be pumped out once every five years. The reserve drainfield
           requirement does not apply to any lot or parcel recorded prior to
           October 1, 1989.

     o     Control the quality of stormwater runoff from new development so
           that post-development pollutant loads do not exceed pre-development
           pollutant loads. For redevelopment areas and any development in
           IDAs, pollutant loads must be reduced by 10%.  If a redevelopment
           site is already served by stormwater best management practices,
           *post-development pollutant loads shall not exceed existing loads.

           A specific calculation procedure for use in demonstrating compliance
           with this criteria has been developed. It is discussed in greater detail
           in Part II of this document, the "Comprehensive Model Water Quality
           Impact Assessment Procedure."

      In RPAs, only water dependent uses, such as piers, and redevelopment are
allowed.   New  homes and related structures, such as swimming  pools, are
prohibited.  Any development within an RPA must meet the general criteria noted
above and be subject to a Water Quality Impact Assessment (WQIA) to be
performed by the applicant in accordance with local guidelines, or a
comprehensive WQIA (CWQIA) Procedure if one is adopted by the locality.  See
Part II of this document which discusses the Model CWIQA Procedure.
Subsequent discussions with the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department
have suggested that any land disturbing activity which constitutes redevelopment
as defined in Sec. 1.4 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Designation and
Management Final Regulations (VR 173-02-01) definitions section within an RPA
will also be subject to a WQIA. Part II provides guidance for use in performing the
WQIA.



                                     22









               In RMAs, any use allowed under the local zoning ordinance is still permitted.
        However,       alnew  development  must  meet the general  performance  criteria
        outlined above.
               If a locality designates IDAs, development in those areas must meet the
I     ~ ~above criteria pertaining to stormwater management and erosion and sediment
        control.
        For more information about the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act or development
        activities within CBPA boundaries, contact:
              Virginia Chesapeake Bay Local
              Assistance Department                        (800)243-7229

 *            ~~~(insert name and number of local Chesapeake Bay staff contact.)

        B.    Encroachment into the RPA Buffer Area

               Activities allowed in the buffer area are as follows:

 *            o~~~~ Paths cleared through the buffer to water access points such as piers
                     or boat ramps.

 1            o~~~~ Shoreline erosion control activities. Vegetative control techniques are
                     preferred over structural techniques. Structural techniques will still
                     require any applicable local, state or federal waterfront development
                     permits.
  *            o~~~~ Pruning or thinning of vegetation to create a vista.

               o     Mowing or other maintenance of lawns that existed when the local
                     CBPA program became effective.

  *            o~~~~ Construction of wells.

            Septic systems, swimming pools, sheds, decks or similar structures cannot be
        constructed by right in the buffer.  However, the local exception process may
I    ~     ~allow some of these uses in the landward fifty feet of the buffer. In such cases, it
        will be necessary to prepare a WQIA in accordance with local guidelines, and to
         provide best management practices landward of the buffer area which achieve
        water quality benefits that are equivalent to the full 100-foot buffer.
            When a buffer area results in the loss of buildable area on a lot or parcel
         recorded before October 1, 1989, a buffer may be reduced by no more than fifty
         feet in width as long as the reduction is the minimum necessary to achieve a
         reasonable building area, and, where possible, an area equal to the buffer


          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~23









encroachment is provided elsewhere on the site to provide water quality protection
benefits.


For more information regarding development activities within CBPA boundaries,
contact:

           Virginia Chesapeake Bay Local
           Assistance Department                       (800)243-7229

   (Insert name and number of local Chesapeake Bay staff
  contact.)

Sources of additional information:

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 21, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Hampton Roads Planning District Commission. "CBPA Administrative Procedures -
      Hampton Roads Localities." February, 1991.

            "Summary of Local Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Programs" in
      Environmental Reviews. January, February, March, 1991, No. 2.

Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission. "Virginia's Chesapeake Bay
      Preservation Act: A Guide" in Environmental Reviews.   Special Edition.
      March, 1990.

Virginia Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department.  "Factual Answers to Bay
      Act Misconceptions". Undated.

            Local Assistance Manual. Richmond, Virginia: CBLAD. 1990.

              VR  173-02-01.1.   "Emergency  Chesapeake  Bay  Preservation
      Designation and Management Regulations." Virainia Reaister, Volume 7,
      Issue 7, December 31, 1990, p. 1138.












                                     24








       N                                 III~~~~~~~~111.  PRIMARY SAND DUNES

5          ~~~In 1980, the Virginia General Assembly passed the Coastal Primary Sand Dune
         Protection Act (Title 62.1, Chapter 2.2, Code  of Virginia).  In passing this
         legislation, the Commonwealth recognized that coastal primary sand dunes provide
I      ~ ~a number of valuable functions including protection of life and property from
         flooding and erosion caused by coastal storms; replenishment of beach sand;
         provision of habitat for coastal fauna; and, preservation of the overall scenic and
I      ~ ~recreational attractiveness of Virginia's coastal environment.  Also inherent in this
         legislation is an understanding that development activities that impact coastal
         dunes must not only take these values into account, but must also recognize the
         dynamic nature of dune systems. Inappropriate development activity may
         contribute to increased erosion, coastal flooding damage to fixed structures, and
5       ~~increased public expenditures for disaster assistance and beach replenishment.

            Under the Coastal Primary Sand Dune Protection Act, localities having coastal
5 ~~primary dunes are authorized to adopt a State prescribed ordinance which
         establishes a local permitting program to control development in these dunes. This
         ordinances must be implemented by the local Wetlands Board.   As with the
I     ~ ~Virginia Wetlands Act, the Primary Sand Dune Protection Act requires the Virginia
         Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) to review, on appeal, local permit
         decisions. In addition, where a locality has opted not to adopt the specified
I     ~ ~ordinance, the Act requires the VMRC to administer the permit program itself. The
         three Hampton Roads localities subject to the Act (Hampton, Norfolk and Virginia
*       ~~Beach) administer their own dune permitting programs.

             As defined in the Coastal Primary Sand Dune Protection Act, the coastal
         primary dune system commences at the intertidal zone and extends landward to a
         point on the backside of the first row of dunes where the slope drops below ten
         percent. The Act establishes the following standards for construction on primary
5       ~~dunes:

             "No permanent alteration or construction upon any coastal primary sand dune
 5          ~~~shall take place which would:

             (a) impair the natural functions of the dune as described by the Act;

             (b) physically alter the contour of the dune; or

 I         ~~~(c)  destroy vegetation growing on the dune.

         Activities contrary to these standards will be permitted only if the wetlands board
         or Commission finds that there will be no significant adverse ecological impact
         from the proposal, or that granting a permit for the proposal is clearly necessary
 *      ~~and consistent with the public interest."

          5                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~25









               It is apparent from these standards that the Act encourages a permitting
I      ~ ~process which carefully balances the public and private benefits and detriments of
         each proposed activity. Guidelines prepared by the VMRC and the Virginia Institute
        of Marine Science to implement the Act indicate that, in general, alteration of
I      ~ ~primary dunes may be justified in order to provide beach access, as long as the
         natural functions of dunes are not significantly disturbed. These guidelines also
         indicate that dune alteration will ordinarily not be justified for the following:


               1.  Activities that can be accommodated without encroachment into the
  I              ~ ~~~~dune area;

 *            ~~~2.  Where construction is proposed on the dune crest or seaward of the
                   crest;

 3            ~~~3.  Where the dune location must be modified in order to accommodate
                   the proposed activity; and,

 3            ~~~4.    Where  alteration of the dune  would  likely result in damage  to
                     neighboring property owners.

  I            ~~~In 1987, the Coastal Primary Sand Dune Protection Act was amended to
         allow property owners along rapidly eroding Sandbridge Beach in Virginia Beach to
         build bulkheads and other shoreline stabilization structures as long as permission
I     ~ ~was obtained from adjacent property owners.  In 1988, in response to continuing
         beach erosion problems, the Act was amended again to remove the provision
3 ~~requiring permission from adjacent property owners.

               Permit applications for primary dune alterations can be, obtained from and
3 ~~filed with the local Wetlands Board. Within 60 days of receipt of the completed
         application, the Wetlands Board must hold a public hearing on the application.
         The Wetlands Board must notify all adjacent landowners and interested public
*       ~~agencies of the public hearing no less than 20 days before the scheduled hearing
         date.  In addition, notice of the public hearing must be published in a local
         newspaper once a week for the two weeks prior to the hearing. The Wetlands
I     ~ ~Board must make its determination within 30 days of the hearing and the applicant
         must be informed of the Board's decision within 48 hours of the determination.
         Violation of the provisions of the Coastal Primary Sand Dune Protection Act may

         result in a penalty of up to $25,000 per day.






          3                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~26









For more information contact:

      Virginia Marine Resources Commission             (804)247-2200

      Local Wetlands Board

(Insert name and number of local wetlands board staff contact.)

Sources of additional information:

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 2.2, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.

Virginia Marine Resources Commission.  Coastal Primary Sand Dunes/Reaches
      Guidelines: Guidelines for the Permittina of Activities which Encroach into
      Coastal Primary Sand Dunes/Reaches.   Newport News, Virginia: VMRC,
      revised 1986.

































                                     27








     N                          ~~~~~~IV.   SURFACE WATER QUALITY

 *            ~~~A project can  contribute to surface water  quality degradation through
        several different processes.   These include the discharge of pollutants from a
         discrete point source, the discharge of nonpoint source pollutants carried in
I      ~ ~stormwater  runoff,  or erosion  and  sedimentation  during  construction.   The
         following summarizes existing water pollution regulations associated with each
*       ~~process.

        A.    Point Source Discharges

 I            ~~~~Point source discharges enter a waterbody at a discrete'location, usually a
        discharge pipe. Such discharges, which are generally composed of municipal
        sewage treatment or industrial process wastewater, are regulated under Section
        402  of the federal Clean Water Act.   Section 402  establishes the National
         Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) which requires that a discharging
*       ~~facility obtain a permit limiting the amount of pollution that can be discharged into
        a given stream.

               Under Section 402, point source discharges must meet the more stringent
         of two separate requirements:

  1            ~~~1. The  requirements  needed  to  maintain  a  receiving  water's  quality
                   standards, ideally a quality suited for "the protection and propagation of
                   fish, shellfish and wildlife" and for recreation in and on the water."

               2. Minimum treatment requirements imposed uniformly nationwide based
   3               ~~~~~on the type, age and size of the discharging facility.

         Virginia Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System (VPDES)

             While some states have elected to have the EPA manage their NPDES permit
         programs, Virginia requested and in 1 975 was granted the authority to administer
         its own permitting program. The Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
         (VPDES) is administered by the State Water Control Board (SWCB) in conformance
         with the federal NPDES regulations.

             VPDES permits specify maximum levels of pollutants permitted in a discharge,
         procedures for discharge sampling and testing, and Best Management Practices
I     ~ ~needed to control and abate pollutants. The permits also require the reporting of
         sampling and testing results to the SWCB at least once per year, and the
         immediate notification (within 24 hours) of any spills or unpermitted discharges.
         Routine reporting frequency is dependent on the size and characteristics of the
         discharge. Once granted, permits are valid for five years.



          *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~28









            The water quality standards established by the SWCB require maintaining
        certain levels of dissolved oxygen and pH for designated stream segments (VR
~1       680-21-01.5).  Other standards have been established for mercury, chlorine and
        radiological substances. In shellfish areas, fecal coliform standards are also
        established. The State's Policy for Nutrient Enriched Waters (VR 680-14-02) and
        Toxics Management Program (VR 680-14-03) may be found in the State Water
        Control Board Regulations, as amended. In Hampton Roads, the nutrient standard
        applies to the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and the Chowan River.

            In meeting these standards, proposals to construct new or modify existing
        industrial facilities must demonstrate that "best available control technology" will
        be used before a permit can be granted.

            Applications for VPDES  permits are obtained from and, when  completed,
        submitted to the SWCB. The SWCB point of contact for Hampton Roads is the
         SWCB  Tidewater  Regional  Office in Virginia  Beach.   Applications  must  be
I  ~     submitted to the SWCB  180 days prior to the commencement of construction,
        expansion or employment of the discharging facility.

 ~~1  ~      Upon receiving a permit application, the SWCB will either tentatively issue the
         permit or deny the application. If a decision is made to tentatively issue a permit,
        then a draft permit is prepared for public review. A period of at least thirty days
         following the date of initial public notice is allowed for interested parties to provide
         comments on a draft permit and request a public hearing. If a public hearing is
         requested, a public notice must be published at least thirty days in advance of the
         hearing date.  No VPDES permit application will be considered complete until the
         SWCB receives notification from the locality in which the discharge is to take place
         that the discharging facility is consistent with all applicable local ordinances.

            If a permit application is found to be unacceptable, the SWCB advises the
         applicant of the requirements necessary to obtain approval.  Prior to a formal
         Board action, an applicant is given the opportunity to either withdraw an
         application or satisfy the conditions necessary for approval.

            Permits are generally not granted if a proposed discharge will cause or
         contribute to the violation of water quality standards. An applicant proposing to
         discharge to streams which do not meet applicable water quality standards may be
         granted a permit under certain circumstances.  It must be determined by the
         SWCB through a waste load allocation study that there is sufficient waste
         assimilative capacity in the receiving stream or waterway to allow discharge of the
         waste(s) in question. It must also be shown that existing dischargers are being
         governed by compliance schedules, which are designed to ensure that the stream
         or waterway meets applicable water quality standards.




          ~~I                                    ,~~~~~29









            The SWCB3 may also issue VPDES general permits for categories of dischargers
        that involve the same or similar types of operations, discharge the same or similar
        types of wastes, require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions, and
        require the same or similar types of monitoring. General permits preclude the need
        for individual permits; however, as with an individual permit, the effluent limits in
I      ~ ~the general permit will be set to protect the quality of receiving waters.  Also, no
        discharge would be covered by the general permit unless the local governing body
        has certified that the facility complies with all applicable local zoning and planning
        ordinances.
            For example, one increasingly popular alternative to traditional septic tank
I      ~ ~systems are on-site package sewage treatment plants (STP) which discharge to
        surface waters. These plants generally provide sewage treatment to one or more
        residences or businesses by providing biological processes and/or sand filtration.
         Because they discharge to surface waters, they are regulated by the VPDES
        program. The 1990 Virginia General Assembly passed legislation allowing the
        SWCB to require that individual STP plants with flows of less than or equal to
         1 ,Q00 gallons per day be covered by both a VPDES general permit and a VDH
         permit. In July 1991, the SWCB adopted emergency regulations establishing a
        general permit covering such domestic sewage discharges. Adoption of these as
         permanent regulations (VR 680-14-09) is currently undergoing public review.

            Before issuing its permit, the VDH must agree that all other on-site disposal
        options have been explored and found unsatisfactory, certain criteria regarding
        outfall location and development density have been met, and that monitoring and
I      ~ ~maintenance contracts are in place.  In addition, local governments must provide
         certification that the package treatment plants comply with local ordinances.
         Other proposed VPDES general permits applicable to Hampton Roads are
         discharges from molluscan shellfish and crustacea processing establishments (VR
         680-14-10), and corrective action plans (CAP) for remnediation of leaking
         underground storage tanks (VR 680-14-1 1).

            Certain discharges are exempt from the VPDES regulations. In most cases,
*       ~~these exemptions exist because the discharges are addressed by other state and
         federal regulations. Some of the more common exemptions under the VPDES
         regulations include:

            o    Any discharge associated with the normal operation of a vessel.  This
                  exemption does not include the overboard disposal of trash or garbage.
   I            ~ ~~~Nor does it include discharges when a vessel is operating in a capacity
                  other than as means of transportation (i.e. mining, storage or seafood
   3              ~~~~processing).

            o    Discharges of fill or dredge materials already covered by a permit issued
                 under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act.


                                               30









              o    Discharges to publicly owned  treatment works.  (See discussion of
                   VWCB Pretreatment Program below.)
              o    Discharges  of nonpoint sources  from  agricultural  activities.   This
  I               ~ ~~~exemption  does  not  include  discharges  from  concentrated  animal
                   feeding operations.

 U             o~~~~ Return flows from irrigated agricultural land.

              o    Land disposal activities when already covered by State Department of
  I              ~ ~~~Health and State Department of Waste Management permits.

              In Hampton Roads, provision of wastewater treatment facilities is critically
        tied to the accommodation of development in a manner which protects public
        health and the environment. Rational and efficient provision of these facilities has
        been examined in many studies prepared by state, regional, and local agencies.
        Most of the recent studies on this issue have also examined the water quality
*       ~~implications of such facilities.

              In response to increasing urban development in the region and especially in
        the rural portions of Southeastern Virginia, the Southeastern Virginia Planning
I      ~ ~District Commission in 1987 endorsed an advisory policy regarding the provision
        of wastewater collection and treatment facilities to serve development in
        Southeastern Virginia.  It is the stated policy that publicly-owned facilities are
I      ~ ~preferred and  privately-owned  and operated  facilities are discouraged, except
        where there are no other service options available. Where feasible, regional public
*       ~~facilities are encouraged.

        Pretreatment Program

 U            ~~~The VPDES program also regulates industries which discharge directly to
        public sewer  systems.   Publicly Owned  Treatment  Works  (POTWs) are not
        designed to treat toxic industrial wastes.   Such wastes may interfere with the
        plant's biological treatments processes, pass through them untreated into receiving
        waters,  or contaminate  sewage  sludge  precluding  proper  disposal.    POTW
I     ~ ~operators  have  the  primary  responsibility  for  ensuring,  that  before  being
        discharged to the sewer system, industrial effluents meet applicable pretreatment
        standards.  Oversight and regulation of the POTW  pretreatment programs was
I     ~delegated to the SWCB  by the EPA in 1989.  The VWCB's primary means of
        regulating local POTW pretreatment programs is by incorporating program
        requirements into POTW VPDES permits. The SWCB also audits pretreatment
        programs and conducts inspections of significant industrial dischargers.



          *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~31









      As authorized by Chapter 66, Acts of the Virainia General Assembly, 1960
and by the federal Clean Water Act, as amended, the Hampton Roads Sanitation
District (HRSD) adopted its own industrial wastewater discharge regulations in
November 1978, which were later revised in 1983. These regulations provide
requirements for control of the discharge of such wastewater into any part of the
sewerage system of the HRSD, directly or through its local collection systems, and
cover the quantity and rate of discharge, quality of industrial wastewaters
discharged in the system, and the issuance of Industrial Wastewater Discharge
Permits.  All industries which discharge industrial wastewater into the sewerage
system or whose discharge otherwise may have a significant impact on the
system, as determined by HRSD, shall obtain a permit prior to the commencement
of such discharge. For a complete listing of prohibited waste discharges, refer to
the HRSD IWD regulations.

Virginia Pollutant Abatement (VPA) Permits

      VPA permits may be required for wastewater handling facilities which do
not involve discharging to a sewage treatment facility or to State waters. Such
facilities may include pits, ponds or lagoons which rely on evaporation or store
waste for eventual land application. VPA permits may also be required for on-site
septic tank drainfields or land application of sludge from wastewater treatment
facilities. VPA permit conditions generally include requirements for liners and
other facility design and performance criteria.

      The basis for issuance of VPA permits is to ensure that wastewater will not
discharge directly to State surface waters, and to protect groundwater.
Applicants for VPA permits are required to provide conceptual plans for proposed
facilities. These plans are reviewed by VWCB staff and a site inspection is made.
If it is determined that there is a potential threat to groundwater quality, the
applicant must provide site evaluation data and possibly conduct groundwater
monitoring before a permit is approved.

      The VPA  permit program is administered by the VWCB.   The permit
application and public review procedures for VPA permits are essentially the same
as those for VPDES permits. VPA permits are valid for ten years.

For further information on VPDES, VPA, or HRSD IWD permits contact:

      State Water Control Board                   (804)527-5000
      Tidewater Regional Office                   (804)552-1840
      Hampton Roads Sanitation District           (804)460-2261






                                      32









B.    Nonpoint Source Discharges

      Nonpoint Source (NPS) pollution is generally defined as the transfer of
pollutants from land to water during rainstorms.   NPS  pollutants can enter
waterways directly via overland flow, or indirectly through a stormwater collection
system.  Although water quality control efforts have historically focused on point
sources, EPA studies have shown that over half of the nation's water pollution
problems can be attributed to nonpoint sources. Increasing concern for the water
quality impacts associated with urban runoff has led to the development of a
variety of state and federal programs which require the incorporation of NPS
pollution control into local stormwater management activities.   One of these
programs, the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, is discussed in Section II of this
Guide. Other NPS control programs that may affect development activities in
Hampton Roads are discussed below.

EPA NPDES Stormwater Permitting Regulations

      As discussed in Section IV.A. of this Guide, Section 402 of the federal
Clean Water Act establishes the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
permitting program for point source discharges.  A 1987 amendment to Section
402 required the EPA to develop regulations which extend the NPDES permitting
program to NPS pollutants contained in stormwater discharges. Regulations for
this program were published on November 16, 1990 (55 FR 47990 et seq.) and
amended on March 21, 1991 (56 FR 12098 et seq.).

      The  EPA  NPDES  permitting regulations  address stormwater  discharges
associated with both industrial activities and municipal storm sewer systems
serving populations greater than 100,000.  By October 1992, the EPA is required
to issue additional regulations for all other stormwater discharges.

      The EPA regulations for municipal storm sewer systems require localities to
establish stormwater management programs, that will eventually result in local
regulations affecting the way land is developed and managed. Localities subject to
the regulations are currently preparing permit applications which describe existing
stormwater management activities and problems, and outline community-specific
stormwater management programs which will be needed to implement permit
conditions over a five year term.  Six Hampton Roads localities have populations
greater than 100,000 and therefore must comply with the regulations. They are:
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth and Virginia Beach.
Localities having populations greater than 250,000 (only Norfolk and Virginia
Beach in Hampton Roads), have until November 16, 1992 to complete the permit
application process.  Localities with populations between 100,000 and 250,000
must complete their permit applications by May 17, 1993.




                                      33









               Of more immediate concern to the development community are the EPA
         regulations for industrial stormwater discharges.   New  and existing industrial
I      ~ ~facilities are subject to a permitting process that is separate from and has different
         application  requirements  than  the  municipal  permitting  process.    Under  the
         industrial regulations, facilities must obtain stormwater permits for discharges to
         receiving waters and discharges to municipal storm sewer systems.
               The EPA regulations describe the types of industrial facilities required to
         submit applications and specify the information necessary to complete the
         application. A number of industrial activities required to obtain NPIDES stormwater
*       ~~permits are specifically cited in the regulations by industrial category or Standard
         Industrial Classification (SIC) code. More generally, the regulations apply to any
         discharge from any conveyance used for collecting and transporting stormwater
I      ~ ~originating from  manufacturing,  processing, or raw  material storage areas at
         industrial plants.  Areas that are located on plant lands, but are separate from
         industrial activities, such as office buildings or parking lots, are generally excluded
I      ~ ~from this definition.     Other facilities and activities subject to the industrial
         regulations that do not fall neatly into the above definition include the following:

 *            ~~ ~~0 mining activities

               o     Hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities

               o     Landfills, land application sites and open dumps that receive industrial
   *                 ~~~~wastes

               0     Recycling facilities

               o     Power generating facilities

 *~~~ ~~ o           vehicle maintenance and equipment cleaning facilities

               o     Sewage  treatment plants or other wastewater treatment systems
   U               ~ ~~~~which have design flows of greater than 1 .0 mngd or are approved
                     under a pretreatment program

  1            ~~    ~~0 All construction sites greater than five acres which are not part of a
                     larger plan of development or sale

  I            ~~~~Industrial facilities that discharge stormwater directly to a municipal storm
         sewer system must obtain a NPIDES permit even if the municipal system has a
         permit. Moreover, a new industrial facility must formally notify the operator of the
         municipal storm sewer system to which it discharges no more than 180 days prior
         to commencing discharge.



          I                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~34









               The regulations do not indicate specific NPS controls to be included in the
I      ~ ~permit conditions.  They state only that controls must be developed from Best
         Available Technology, Best Control Technology or, in some cases, be water
         quality-based controls. Specific controls will be determined by the permitting
I      ~ ~authority. In Virginia, the permitting authority is currently the EPA regional office.
         However, the VWCB is currently studying the feasibility of assuming this
*       ~~~responsibility.

               The EPA regulations authorize three categories of industrial permits:
         individual, group and general. Individual permits are facility-specific. The current
I      ~ ~deadline for the submission of individual industrial permit applications is November
         18, 1991. However, the EPA has proposed extending that deadline to May 18,
         1992. In the future, individual permit applications for new industrial stormwater
         discharges must be submitted 180 days before commencing the activity that will
         result in the discharge. Although the VWCB has yet to assume permitting
         authority, applications for individual permits should be submitted to the VWCB
         where they will be forwarded to the regional EPA office.

               Group permits are standard permits, issued in lieu of individual permits,
         which apply broadly to entire subcategories of similar facilities. Issuance of group
         permits and the conditions that accompany the permits are dependent on detailed
I      ~ ~information provided during the application process  by several representative
         members of a group. The assumption in the group permitting approach is that,
         since similar industrial facilities will have similar stormwater discharges, it is
I      ~ ~reasonable to require the same permit conditions.  Groups are generally organized
         by industrial trade associations. They must contain at least four members and are
*       ~~subject to EPA approval.

               Prior to September 30, 1991, a group of facilities wishing to apply for a
*       ~~group permit was required to jointly submit an initial Partl1application to the EPA
         by that same date. This application was used to determine whether the group
         qualified as a properly constituted "group". The EPA had 60 days to make this
         determination. The Part 1 application was used to identify the members of the
         group who would be required to submit the detailed information required in the
         Part 2 application. If found to be ineligible for a group permit, individual facilities
I     ~ ~have one year from the date of the permit denial to apply for individual permits. If
         approved as a group, a Part 2 application must be submitted twelve months after
~~~teapoa ftePr  plcto o yMy1,19,wihvrcmsfrt

               The EPA only offered this one opportunity to apply for group permits. After
         September 30, 1991, no more group permit applications will be accepted and all
         new industrial facilities will have to either apply for individual permits or qualify for
         general permit coverage. Individual facilities not identified in an already submitted
         group permit application have until February 18, 1992 to "add on" to an already


          I                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~35









approved group permit. Approval for adding on to a group permit application must
be obtained from the EPA as well as the existing membership of the group.

      General permits can be issued by states or the EPA and provide blanket
coverage for groups of facilities which are not included in existing or proposed
group permits, but which are deemed similar enough to justify coverage under a
single, comprehensive permit. The EPA has proposed regulations for the issuance
of general stormwater permits in states which do not have general permitting
authority.  The EPA granted Virginia general permitting authority in May 1991.
However, the State has yet to assume authority for the NPDES stormwater
permitting program and therefore has not promulgated regulations for the issuance
of general NPDES stormwater permits. Until State regulations are promulgated,
stormwater dischargers will be subject to the EPA general permitting regulations.

      The evolving EPA general permitting regulations, as well as any future State
regulations, will undoubtedly be less cumbersome than those imposed on an
individual or group applicant.   EPA's primary intent for promulgating general
permitting regulations is to ensure coverage of most of the regulated discharges in
states without NPDES authority. Industrial facilities wishing to be covered under a
general permit will not need to prepare permit applications. They will need only to
submit a notice of intent to the permitting authority which will determine whether
the facility is eligible for general permit coverage. The upcoming EPA general
permitting regulations will specify the information that will be required in this
notice of intent.

For more information on the NPDES stormwater permitting program contact:

      U.S Environmental Protection Agency,
      Office of Enforcement and Permits                 (202)475-9518

      State Water Control Board                         (804)527-5000
      Tidewater Regional Office                         (804)552-1840

      (Insert name and number of City/County agency responsible for local NPDES
      stormwater permitting program.)

State Stormwater Management Regulations

      The 1989 Virginia General Assembly passed the Stormwater Management
Act (Title 10.1, Chapter 6, Code of Virainia) enabling local governments to
establish, by ordinance, stormwater management programs. Under this legislation,
such programs would require a developer to submit to a locality for approval a
stormwater management plan prior to any non-exempt activity. Land development
projects that disturb less than one acre of land area are exempt. State regulations
establishing minimum acceptable technical criteria and administrative procedures


                                      36









for these programs became effective on December 5, 1990. Pursuant to the Act,
the implementation of local stormwater management programs is voluntary. The
regulations only apply to localities which have existing programs, or which opt to
develop new  programs.       According to the regulations, existing stormwater
management ordinances must comply with the regulations by December 5, 1991.

      The State stormwater management regulations require that local stormwater
management programs do the following:

      o     Require   regulated   development   activities  to   maintain   post-
            development peak runoff rates at or below pre-development runoff
            rates

     o     Establish minimum technical criteria to control NPS  pollution and
            control flooding

     o     Require the provision of long-term responsibility for and maintenance
            of stormwater management facilities

     o     Require local programs to include certain minimum  administrative
            procedures

      In Hampton  Roads,  only  Virginia  Beach  currently  has, a  stormwater
management program that is similar in structure to the program outlined by the
Stormwater Management Act regulations. However, Virginia Beach must revise its
ordinance to comply with the regulations. Other localities are considering or have
begun development of stormwater management ordinances.


For more information on State Stormwater Management Regulations contact:

      Virginia Department of Conservation and
      Recreation, Division of Soil and Water
      Conservation                                       (804)786-2064

      (Insert name and number of City/County agency responsible for developing
      and/or implementing stormwater management ordinance)

Local Reservoir Protection Programs

      A number of Hampton Roads localities have adopted ordinances specifically
aimed at controlling NPS pollution in watersheds surrounding public water supply
reservoirs. These ordinances typically require developers to implement stormwater
Best Management Practices, shoreline buffers and stormwater diversion projects to
prevent NPS pollutants from reaching water supplies. Localities with reservoir


                                      37








        protection programs include Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth, James City
        County and York County.

         For more information on local reservoir protection programs contact:

 I            ~~~(insert name and number of City/County agency responsible for developing
               and/or implementing reservoir protection ordinance)

I       ~~C.    Erosion and Sediment Control

               The Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Title 1 0.1, Chapter 5, Code
        of Virginia) requires that local erosion and sediment (E&S) control programs be
        developed and implemented by either the locality or, where a locality chooses not
3 ~~to assume responsibility for an E&S program, the local soil and water conservation
        district. All Hampton Roads localities have adopted their own E&S programs.

 5            ~~~Under the Erosion and Sediment Control Law (ESCL), any party engaging in
        any "land disturbing activity" must submit an E&S control plan to the local "plan-
         approving authority" and receive approval for this plan before work can proceed.
I      ~ ~In most cases, the plan-approving authority is the local public works department.
        The ESCL defines a land disturbing activity as "any land change which may result
         in soil erosion from water or wind and the movement of sediments into state
I      ~ ~waters or onto lands in the Commonwealth .....". Although this definition may
         appear to be quite broad, there are a number of exemptions which significantly
         narrow the scope of the Law. The most far-reaching exemption is for disturbed
         land areas of less than 10,000 square feet. However, the ESCL gives localities the
         authority to reduce this exemption to a smaller area or to qualify the conditions
         under which it applies. Furthermore, the threshold for this exemption is reduced
         to 2,500 square feet in Chesapeake Say Preservation Areas. Some of the other,
         common land disturbing activities that are exempted are as follows:

               o     Home  gardens  and  individual  home  landscaping,  repairs  and
                     maintenance work

               o     Individual service connections

  I            o~~~ Installation,  maintenance  and  repair of underground  utility lines
                     located under existing hard surfaced roads or sidewalks

  U            o~~~~ Septic system lines or drainage fields

               o     Tilling, planting and harvesting crops, livestock feedlot operations,
   I              ~ ~~~~and agricultural engineering operations




          I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~38









     o     Preparation of single family residences separately built, unless in
            conjunction with multiple construction in a subdivision development

     o     Installation of posts or poles

     o     Shore erosion control projects on tidal waters

      Under regulations recently promulgated to implement the ESCL, any
property owner who is engaged in a land disturbing activity of more than 10,000
square feet and claims to be exempt from the ESCL has one year from the
commencement of the activity to prove that activity is exempt.

For more information on local E&S programs contact:

      Virginia Department of Conservation
      and Recreation, Division of Soil and
      Water Conservation                                (804)786-2064

      (Insert name and local number of City/County agency responsible for
      implementing local E&S program.)

D.    Land   Development  Fees  for  Construction  of  Off-Site  Stormwater
      Management Facilities

      Title 15.1, Chapter 11, Section 466(j) of the Code of Virainia enables local
governments to assess fees to developers based on the pro-rata share of runoff
contributed by new development. These fees can only be assessed if a locality
has a comprehensive drainage master plan in place which identifies watershed-
specific drainage facility needs. In addition, the fees can only be used for off-site
facilities serving a project on which a fee is assessed. Fees are generally assessed
on a per acre basis and are often  based  on  imperviousness,  land  use or
contribution to peak flow. Several Hampton Roads localities have implemented
stormwater management pro-rata share payment programs.

For more information on local stormwater management pro-rata share payment
programs contact:

      (Insert name and local number of City/County agency responsible for
      implementing pro-rata share payment program.)








                                      39









Sources of additional information:

Point Source Control

Hampton Roads Sanitation District. "Industrial Wastewater Discharge Regulations."
      Virginia Beach, Virginia: HRSD, November 1978, rev. June, 1983.


Southeastern  Virginia  Planning  District Commission.    "Policy  Statement  on
      Provision of Sewage Collection and Treatment Facilities."   Chesapeake,
      Virginia: SVPDC, 1987.

Virginia State Water Control Board. VR 680-14-01. "Virginia Pollutant Discharge
      Elimination System." Virainia Reaister, September 27, 1989.

Nonpoint Source Control

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 10.1, Chapter 6, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 15.1, Chapter 4, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
      System Permit Application Regulation for Stormwater Discharges; Final
      Rule." Federal Reaister, 47990, November 16, 1990.

             "Revision of the Virginia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
      System (NPDES) Program to Issue General Permits." Federal Reaister,
      30573, July 3, 1991.

Virginia  Department  of  Conservation  and  Recreation.          VR  215-02-  00.
      "Stormwater Management Regulations."   Virainia Reaister, November  5,
      1990.

Erosion and Sediment Control

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 5, Article 4, Code of Virainia,
      1950, as amended.

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water
      Conservation. VR 625.02.00. "Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations."
      Virainia Reaister, August 13, 1990.




                                      40








   1                     ~~~~~V.  SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND FLOW

              Activities affecting streamnflow or "instream flow" in Hampton Roads rivers
        and streams may have negative impacts on both man's beneficial uses and the
        natural aquatic habitat.   Generally, these activities are limited to large scale
        development projects that result in the following impacts:
              o     Decreased  water  levels  resulting  from  withdrawals  for  industrial
                     activities, irrigation or municipal water supply
              o     increased  water  levels  resulting  from  water  treatment,  power
                     generation or industrial facility discharges, or from land use changes
                     that increase imperviousness or require channelization of tributary
  3                 ~~~~~streams

              o     Changes in circulation and salinity levels due to channel modifications
   fl                ~~~~~(i.e. dredging, filling, erosion control, damming, etc.)

              According to Title 62.1, Chapter 24, Code of Virainia, a beneficial use
        means both instream and offstream uses. Instream beneficial uses include but are
        not limited to "protection of fish and wildlife habitat, maintenance of waste
        assimilation, recreation, navigation, and cultural and aesthetic values." Offstreamn
I      ~ ~beneficial uses include but are not limited to "domestic (including public water
        supply), agricultural, electric power generation, commercial, and industrial uses."
        Non-consumptive uses refer to "use of water withdrawn from a stream in such a
        manner that it is returned to the stream without substantial diminution in quantity
        at or near the point from which it was taken, and would not result in or exacerbate
3       ~~low flow conditions."

               At the federal level, in administering the permitting process established
        under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers
        and  Harbors  Act  of 1899, the U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers  (COE)  gives
        consideration to a number of potential environmental impacts including instream
U     ~ ~flow.  Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredge and fill materials into waters
        of the United States. By definition, "waters of the United States" includes all
        waterways and their adjacent welands channelward of the ordinary high water
I     ~ ~shoreline.  Section 10 regulates construction in or alteration of navigable U.S.
        waters. A more detailed discussion of these regulations can be found in Section I.

 I            ~~~Under Section 401 of the (CWA), all projects requiring a permit from the
        COE must also receive State certification that the project will not have significant
        adverse water quality impacts. In Virginia, this process is administered by the
        State Water Control Board (SWCB). The SWCB may require the incorporation of
        Minimum Instream Flow (MIF) requirements for such certification.


          *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~41










      In Virginia, there has been increasing support for instream flow protection.
This support is reflected in the passage of five bills by the 1989 Virginia General
Assembly which provide for greater involvement by the State in instream flow
management.    The  two  bills  having  the  greatest  potential  for  affecting
development projects were the establishment of the Virginia Water Protection
Permit program and the authority granted to the SWCB to establish "Surface
Water Management Areas" (see Title 62.1, Chapter 24, Code of Virainia).
Because  regulations to implement  these  two  programs  are currently  being
developed by the SWCB, the implications for development projects are uncertain.
However, the following provides a brief discussion of the intent of these programs.

     The Virginia Water Protection Permit (VWPP) program provides independent,
statutory authorization of the State's Section 401 certification process.  Issuance
of a VWPP constitutes not only the certification required under Section 401, but
also a finding by the VWCB that a proposed activity will "protect instream uses."
Domestic uses and existing beneficial uses would be given the highest priority in
permitting decisions. Virginia has proposed that the 401 Certification Program in
Virginia be phased-out and replaced with the VWPP  Program.   The  SWCB
published proposed VWPP regulations in October 1990; however, due to a large
number of concerns regarding the regulations, the SWCB withdrew its proposal
and is in the process of drafting revised regulations.

      The Surface Water Management Areas (SWMA) program is modelled after
the existing Groundwater  Management  Areas  program.    Under  the  SWMA
program, the SWCB or any other State agency, or any locality may initiate a study
to determine the merit of establishing a Surface Water  Management  Area.
Designation as a Surface Water Management Area requires that the stream in
question must show evidence of instream values, the potential for low flow
conditions that could threaten important instream uses, and the potential for the
aggravation of low flow conditions by offstream uses.

      Once a SWMA is established, all non-exempt surface water withdrawals
would require a permit from the SWCB.  Exemptions include non-consumptive uses
(i.e., most of the water is returned at or near the point of withdrawal);
withdrawals of less than 300,000 gallons per month; and withdrawals by a
wastewater treatment system.  All existing "beneficial consumer" withdrawals,
including withdrawals for public water supply systems, in effect by July 1, 1989
may continue without a permit provided that they have instituted approved water
conservation programs.

      SWMA permit conditions are to include instream flow requirements that
protect beneficial instream uses without "imposing unreasonable burdens" on
offstream uses.  Specifically, the conditions can include but are not limited to
maximum  withdrawal  amounts,  timing of withdrawals,  and  requirements  for


                                     42









voluntary or mandatory conservation measures.  Permit conditions would only be
applicable during low flow periods as determined by the SWCB.

      The SWCB has not yet drafted SWMA permitting regulations and does not
intend to do so until the VWPP regulations are finalized.
Also, no SWMA's have been designated.

For more information on regulations affecting surface water quantity and flow,
contact:

      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
      Norfolk District                                   (804)441-7656

      State Water Control Board                          (804)527-5000
      Tidewater Regional Office                          (804)552-1840

Additional source of information:

Commonweatlh of Virginia. Title 62.1, Chapter 24, Code of Virainia, as amended.































                                      43








     I                          ~~~~~~VI.   GROUNDWATER QUALITY

 *            ~~~~In response to a growing awareness of the vulnerability of groundwater to
        contamination by human land use activities, a number of federal laws were
        enacted in the mid to late 1970s that direct the EPA or other federal agencies to
I      ~ ~address specific land use threats that may contaminate groundwater.  The primary
         responsibility for implementing most of these laws lies with the states; however,
         local approaches to groundwater protection can also be coordinated through
I      ~ ~zoning and land use controls. Groundwater contamination that may occur as a
         result of new development and the federal and/or State regulatory programs that
3       ~~respond to groundwater quality are discussed below.

               Groundwater  is primarily  stored  in aquifers.    Aquifers  are  geologic
        formations which contain sufficient saturated permeable material, such as rock,
        sand or gravel, to yield significant quantities of water. Aquifers are recharged by
         precipitation seeping into the ground or by surface waters with which they are
3       ~~interconnected.  Grounwater becomes available for human use when it emerges
         into a stream, through a spring or when it is drawn up in wells.

 3            ~~~~That groundwater is naturally cleansed of pollution as it moves through the
         soil is a common misconception. Although soil has the capacity to filter and
         absorb some wastes, many contaminants pass through the soil layer to the
3      ~ ~saturated  zones  or aquifers.   Major sources  of groundwater  contamination
         commonly found throughout the U.S. include:   hazardous and non-hazardous
         waste sites; surface impoundments for storing liquid wastes; storage tanks for fuel
I      ~ ~and other regulated substances; septic tanks; pesticide and fertilizer application;
         animal waste lagoons; improperly sealed abandoned wells; highway de-icing
         compounds; accidental spills of fuel and chemicals during transport; active or
         abandoned metal or coal mines; and, underground injection of liquid wastes, which
         is illegal in Virginia. In Virginia and in Hampton Roads, in particular, groundwater
3       ~~contamination can also occur along the Atlantic Coast, Chesapeake Bay, and
         inland areas when groundwater is pumped out faster than it can be replenished
         and salt water advances into freshwater aquifers.

               Protection of the aquifer system is essential to ensure a continued supply of
         safe and  plentiful groundwater.   In Hampton  Roads,  the primary source of
I     ~ ~municipal drinking water supplies comes from surface water.  However, in the
         event of an emergency such as a drought or surface water contamination from a
         toxic spill, during which both the quantity and quality of the water source can be
I     ~ ~threatened, groundwater resources become an important alternative source of
         water supply. In the more rural areas where municipal water service does not
3      ~~exist, individual wells are relied upon for domestic water supply.





          I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~44









              Virginia's varied geology affects both the quality and quantity of our
I      ~ ~groundwater.  Most of the State's precipitation- - an average of 43 inches per
        year-- becomes surface runoff, but some of it seeps into the water table,
        recharging the aquifers which hold groundwater. How much runoff reaches the
I      ~ ~aquifers depends on things such as how much vegetation there is on the surface,
        how wet the soil is, and what kind of rock the water travels through. These
        things also affect how much water aquifers in the area will produce and how high
        the water's mineral content will be.
        A.    General Hydrogeology of Hampton Roads

              Hampton Roads lies within the Coastal Plain physiological province of
        Virginia, which extends from the Atlantic Ocean west to the Fall Line.  The
        underlying geology of the Coastal Plain is unconsolidated sands, silts, clays,
        gravels, limestone, marl and shell strata, and aquifers may be confined,
3       ~~unconfined, or surficial.  Groundwater is abundant in this province and, as the
        majority of the State's population lies within it, groundwater usage is high. This
        combination of geology and population density increases the risk of groundwater
        contamination in the region.
              According to a joint groundwater management study conducted by the
I     ~ ~Virginia and North Carolina Groundwater Subcommittees in 1975, the Coastal
        Plain region of southeastern Virginia is underlain by a "wedge" of sedimentary
        rocks that range in geologic age and can be several thousand feet in thickness
I     ~ ~along the coast. There are three aquifer systems underlying southeastern Virginia.
        The Cretaceous aquifer system is sometimes referred to as the principle aquifer. It
        contains relatively thick, but discontinuous, sands and some gravels of high
        porosity, transmissivity and storativity.  It is the most productive aquifer with
        yields of up to 2,000 gallons per minute (gpm).

              The Tertiary aquifer system overlies the Cretaceous system and consists of
        interbedded sands and clays with some beds of limestone and shell. The clays
        serve as aquitards and  confine the water  under  pressure.   Although  it is
        considered a "secondary" aquifer, it is moderately productive yielding up to 200
        gpm. As with the Cretaceous aquifer system, the aquitards greatly reduce natural
        vertical recharge to the aquifer system in much of the area.
              The water table aquifer consists of the sands and gravels that lie above the
I    ~     ~first significant clay layer.   Thickness of the aquifer is generally less than 100
        feet, with a maximum of about 120 feet. It is an important part of the hydrologic
        system as it serves as a recharge reservoir to the underlying confined systems.
        The aquifer is widely used as a source of individual domestic water supplies and
        will become increasingly important with increased water demands and improved
        groundwater  development  methods.   The  water table aquifer is also  more


          1                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~45









U        ~~susceptible to pollution from land surface sources than the confined or artesian
         aquifers below.

         Groundwater Recharge

 I            ~~~An  important first step in planning for the protection of groundwater
         resources is the delineation of land areas that contribute water to the aquifer
         through runoff and/or recharge. Contributions are derived from both natural and
I      ~ ~artificial sources. Natural sources include indirect recharge from overlying lands,
         infiltration from streams and lakes, and runoff from upgradient watershed areas.
*       ~~Artificial sources most often include man's activities upon the land surface.

               Recharge to the aquifer systems of the Coastal Plain is derived chiefly from
3       ~~precipitation in the region. The water table aquifer is the reservoir for recharge to
         the underlying artesian aquifers. Except in a very narrow zone near the Fall Line
         along the province's western boundary, the artesian aquifers are recharged
*       ~~principally by vertical leakage from the water table aquifer through the confining
         clays. The rate of recharge to any particular aquifer unit depends of the vertical
         permeability and thickness of the overlying beds. Recharge is also affected by the
I      ~ ~pumping of wells which increase the gradient between the water table and the
         pumped aquifers. Because of the thickness and low permeability of the many clay-
         layers in the Tertiary and Cretaceous aquifer systems, the rate of recharge over
I      ~ ~most of the area is relatively low and potential yield is limited.  Restrictions on the
         amounts of groundwater which may be withdrawn in the Southeastern Virginia
I ~~Groundwater Management Area are discussed in Section VII.

         Groundwater Quality

  I            ~~~~The chemical and physical quality of the water in the aquifer systems of the
         area varies greatly and is critical with respect to utilization.  The Tertiary and
         Cretaceous aquifer systems contain brackish to saline water in the extreme
         eastern parts of Virginia. West of the fresh-saline water interface, pockets of
         saline water are sometimes found in the Tertiary and Cretaceous aquifer systems.
3       ~~Saline waters may move upward into fresh water aquifers as a result of sustained
         pumping; however, in some cases the mineral content of water from wells has
 *       ~~gradually decreased after long term withdrawals.

         B.    Federal and State Laws and Policies

  I           ~~~The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted a Groundwater
         Protection Strategy in 1984 that provides a systemn for internal EPA coordination
         of groundwater protection programs and offers technical assistance for the
         development of state programs. This strategy provided $7 million in 1985 for a
         grant program to develop state groundwater protection strategies, tools for
 3      ~~groundwater  management,  and  information collection systems.   The  Virginia

           *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~46









U       ~~Groundwater Protection Steering Committee was formed with an EPA grant in late
         1985.  The Steering Committee is chaired by the State Water Control Board
         (SWCB) and consists of representatives from eight other state agencies, all of
         which have either direct or indirect responsibility for groundwater protection in
*       ~~~Virginia.

               In May 1987, the Steering Committee published the Groundwater Protection
         Strateav for Virainia, which was later supplemented in 1990. This document
I      ~ ~outlined recommendations for how the state agencies responsible for groundwater
         protection could work individually and collectively to better carry out Virginia's
3       ~~groundwater protection policies.

               Virginia has a strong constitutional mandate to protect its natural resources
         and environment from pollution in Art. Xi, Sect. 1 of the Virainia Constitution.
         The Commonwealth has declared a state-wide anti-degradation policy to protect all
         waters. The Virginia Water Control Law's anti-degradation policy mandates the
3       ~~protection of existing high quality and provides for restoring all other State waters
         to a condition of quality the will permit all reasonable public uses (State Water
         Control Law, Section 62.1- 44.2, Code of Virainia). The SWCB publishes water
         quality standards to carry out the statute's intent.
               The State's central mechanism for preventing groundwater contamination is
I     ~ ~a group of permit programs governing specific activities.  Such activities include
         operating a hazardous waste facility, a solid waste landfill, a septic tank, or an
         industrial waste lagoon.  Virginia is also exploring ways to minimize potential
         effects of the more diffuse threats that are not specifically being addressed by
         existing permit programs.

  I            ~~~The Steering Committee recommended that top priority be assigned to the
         following five potential sources of groundwater contamination:   underground
3       ~~storage tanks, landfills, surface waste impoundments, septic tanks, and pesticides
         and fertilizers.

         Underground Storage Tanks

               Leaking underground storage tanks (USTs) are the most commonly reported
         source of groundwater contamination in Hampton Roads. According to the VWCB,
         between 1986 and 1989, 89 of the 126 reported groundwater contamination
         incidents in southside Hampton Roads involved leaking USTs. The number of
I     ~ ~reported leaking USTs is thought to greatly understate the actual problem for two
         reasons.   First, most of the reported incidents were  identified because they
         impacted and often permanently degraded nearby well water supplies. In areas
         using surface water and public distribution systems, however, tank failures are
         presumed to go unnoticed and therefore unreported. Second, the EPA estimates
         that 35% of all USTs will eventually leak as a result of tank construction and


          I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~47









H       ~~subsequent corrosion.  This estimate combined with a VWCB estimate that there
        are 12,000 to 15,000 USTs in southside Hampton Roads alone, indicates a high
         probability that there are large numbers of leaking USTs across the entire region.
               In 1984, Congress passed the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to
I      ~ ~the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These amendments require
        states to regulate certain USTs. The RCRA defines an UST as any combination of
        tank and underground pipes where the volume of the system is ten percent or
         more beneath the surface.
               Virginia's federally approved UST Program is administered by the SWCB.
         Under this program, newly installed USTs are required to meet design,
         construction and monitoring standards that prevent leaks and overflows, as well
*       ~~as have corrective action plans detailing a mitigation strategy in the event of a
        spill. These requirements are implemented by permitting programs administered by
         local building inspectors. The SWCB conducts random inspections to uncover
        violations of the State program.
               In addition to the design, construction and operating requirements, an
I     ~ ~owner or operator of a LIST must demonstrate to the SWCB that they have ability
        to assume financial responsibility for any bodily injury or property damage resulting
3 ~~from an accidental release from an UST.

               The facilities listed below are exempt from the RCRA UST provisions. Many
*       ~~of the exempted facilities are subject to other federal and State regulations.

               o     Farm or residential tanks with a capacity of 1,100 gallons or less
   3                ~~~~~storing motor fuel for noncommercial use

               o     Any UST storing heating oil for consumptive use on the property
   *                ~~~~~where stored

               o     Pipeline facilities

               o     Surface impoundments, pits, ponds, or lagoons

  I            o~~~ Stormwater or wastewater collection systems

  *            o~~~ Flow-through process tanks

               o     Liquid traps or gathering lines related to oil or gas producing and
    3                ~~~~~gathering operations, not including oil and gas traps at gas stations

               o     Septic tanks


           3                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~48








 U            o~~~~ Any tank located in an underground area as long as the tank is sitting
                    on or above the floor surface

              Additional regulatory exemptions are listed below.

 I            o~~~ USTs which contain a hazardous waste regulated elsewhere by RCRA

              o     Wastewater treatment tanks regulated under the Clean Water Act

              o     "Self monitoring" machinery and equipment where operation depends
  *                ~~~~~on the presence of a regulated substance

              o     Any UST system with a volume of I110 gallons or less

              o     Any UST system containing a de minimis concentration of regulated
                    substance determined by the State on a case- by-case basis

              o     Any UST system used to contain spills or overflows in emergencies
  *                ~~~~~which is emptied as soon as possible after use.

              Whenever a release from an UST is identified, certain activities are required
        of the owners and operators of the system. These activities are governed the
I     ~ ~"Underground  Storage  Tanks:  Technical  Standards  and  Corrective  Action
        Requirements" (VR 680- 13-02). Among the required activities are immediate
        pollution abatement steps, a site assessment, and risk and remediation
        assessments. Based on this information, the SWCB may require the owner and
        operator to submit a corrective action plan (CAP) for responding to the situation.
        Owners and operators are then required to obtain a CAP permit in order to
        implement the remediation activities detailed in the CAP.

        For more information on UST regulations contact:

              State Water Control Board                   (804)527-5000
 I          ~ ~~Tidewater Regional Office                 (804)552-1840

*      ~~~Landf ills

              Most Virginia households and businesses dispose of trash in solid waste
        landfills. Landfills have also been used to dispose of household chemicals and
I    ~     ~fertilizers,  hazardous  waste  from  small  businesses,  and  other  construction
        materials.






          I                                  .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~49








              Unlined landfills and waste lagoons, illegal dumps, and hazardous waste
        sites all can contribute to groundwater contamination. Liquid wastes can infiltrate
I      ~ ~soil and rock layers, and precipitation percolating through solid wastes can leach
        out metals and other contaminants and carry them to groundwater. The disposal
        of wastes through underground injection also can endanger groundwater; in
        Virginia, the use of hazardous waste injection wells is currently banned.
              In the last decade, a series of changes in federal and state laws has had a
I     ~ ~significant impact on solid waste management.  In 1976, Congress passed the
        Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requiring "cradle-to-grave"
        management  and  tracking of hazardous  wastes,  as defined  in the statute.
        Virginia's 1986 Waste Management Act requires all solid waste facilities to have
        permits taking environmental protection into account.   This Act also requires
*       ~~regional waste management plans and allows for appropriations from state general
        funds to help localities manage solid waste.  In December 1988, the Virginia
        Department of Waste Management issued its "Solid Waste Management
I     ~ ~Regulations" (VR 672- 20-10) that address the siting, design, management,
        closure, and post-closure monitoring of solid waste landfills. These are discussed
        in greater detail in Secion IX.

        For more information on solid waste management, contact:

 I           ~~~~Virginia Department of Waste Management         (804)225-2667

*       ~~Surface Waste Impoundments

              Surface waste impoundments are pits, ponds or lagoons used by industries,
        agricultural operations and municipalities for the retention, treatment and/or
        disposal of hazardous and non- hazardous liquid wastes. Leaking surface waste
        impoundments can easily contaminate groundwater.

              The SWCB regulates the construction and operation of surface
        impoundments under either the VPDES or VPA permit programs. These programs
        are discussed in detail in Section IV of this Guidance Text. In accordance with the
         1984 RCRA amendments, the SWCB requires liners for all new surface
        impoundments containing wastes regulated under the RCRA. The SWCB may also
I     ~ ~require, as a VPDES or VPA permit condition, liners for impoundments containing
        RCRA- exempt wastes where groundwater is threatened.

I      ~~For more information on surface waste impoundment regulations, contact:

              State Water Control Board                         (804)527-5000
              Tidewater Regional Office                         (804)552-1840



          *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~50








N       ~~On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems

               Failing or inadequate on-site sewage disposal systems are generally
        considered to be a common source of groundwater contamination. Domestic and
        commercial on-site systems, which generally include septic systems and mass
I      ~ ~drain fields, are regulated by the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) under the
         1982 State Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations. Before on-site systems
        can be constructed, permits must be obtained from locally- based VDH sanitarians.
I      ~ ~Before permits are issued, the sanitarian will review site characteristics and the
         proposed system design to ensure that the system will function adequately. Site
        characteristics included in this review include topography; -percolation rates;
        standoff distance to water table; depth to restrictive layers; slope; and, setback
        distances to potentially sensitive site features such as streams, lakes, reservoirs,
         public and private wells, shellfish waters, and so forth.

               At present, the required separation distance between the bottom of the
*       ~~septic system trench and the seasonal high water table ranges from two to
        eighteen inches, depending on soil type. The Code of Virainia allows localities to
        adopt more stringent regulations than the State's and many have done so. In
I     ~ ~response to growing concerns for the protection of groundwater quality, the VDH
         convened a task force to study the feasibility of requiring an increased separation-
        distance. In July 1991, the task force issued its report recommending a twenty-
I     ~ ~four inch separation distance for soil Group I (affecting Poquoson, and portions of
         Hampton and Virginia Beach) and an eighteen inch separation distance for soil
         Group II (affecting Chesapeake, Norfolk, Suffolk, Isle of Wight, and portions of
        Virginia Beach, James City and York Counties.) Other recommendations were
         included to ensure the proper oversight of any on-site waste disposal system.

  I           ~~~Systems are inspected at time of installation to ensure compliance with VDH
         regulations.   Subsequent inspections occur only in response to complaints of
         failing systems.

               On-site package sewage treatment plants discharging to surface waters are
         regulated through the VPDES and VDH permitting programs. These programs are
         discussed in Section IV.

               Septic tank systems for the disposal of industrial wastewater are regulated
         by the SWCB under the VPA permit program. Before a VPA permit can be issued,
         it must be demonstrated that a proposed industrial septic system will protect the
 I     ~ ~beneficial uses of groundwater.   Groundwater  monitoring  is often a permit
         condition. The VPA permitting process is addressed in Section IV.

  I           ~~~Owners of small businesses, homes, or rental properties than rely on septic
         systems for sanitary waste diposal should ensure that they are not used for the
         diposal of non-domestic wastes. Allowing movement of fluids containing









3       ~~contaminants into underground sources of drinking water is prohibited by federal
         law (40 CFR Sec. 144.12).

               In addition to the VDH and VWCB regulations, development projects
         occurring within Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas are subject to septic system
I      ~ ~standards contained in local Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act regulations.  These
         standards state that all septic systems must be pumped out every five years and
         all new systems must be constructed with a 1 00 percent reserve drainf ield.
         For more information about on-site sewage disposal regulations, contact:
               State Water Control Board                   (804)527-5000
               Tidewater Regional Office                   (804)552-1840

 3            ~~~(insert name and number of local VDH  sanitarian responsible for onsite
               sewage disposal permitting program.)

3       ~~Pesticides and Fertilizers

               Virginians use pesticides and fertilizers in farming, forestry, and urban park
         management and private lawns and gardens. In 1 982 pesticides were applied to
         more than 900,000 acres in Virginia, and herbicides were used on over one million
         acres. Fertilizer sales for Virginia totaled 715,000 tons in 1984. These chemicals
         benefit farmers and others, but there use is difficult to monitor and regulate.
               Groundwater contamination from fertilizers and pesticides depends upon the
         rate at which they are applied, their decomposition rate and water solubility, and
         the nature of the soil and depth to groundwater. Contamination usually extends
3       ~~over a wide area at low concentrations but can build up over time.

               Several federal programs address potential groundwater contamination by
3 ~~fertilizers and pesticides. These programs include the Safe Drinking Water Act,
         under which EPA proposed maximum contaminant levels in 1987. The EPA is also
         examining the potential other laws such as the Toxic Substances Control Act have
3       ~~for groundwater protection.

               Several state agencies have responsibilities that relate directly or indirectly
         to pesticide and fertilizer use and groundwater protection, and a number of state
         and local agencies are involved in technical assistance programs for farmers at the
3      ~~local level.

         For more information regarding pesticide and fertilizer application, contact:

  *           ~~~Virginia Department of Agriculture
               and Consumer Services                       (800)552-9963



           *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~52








               Virginia Cooperative Extension Service

               (Insert locations and numbers of local CES contacts.)

U       ~~Hazardous Wastes

              The improper management of hazardous waste may result in severe
        groundwater contamination problems. Hazardous substances that are dumped,
         buried or accidentally spilled on the ground way quickly find their way into the
        water table. The RCRA provides for the strict regulation of hazardous wastes from
I       ~~"cradle to grave". This program is discussed in detail in Section IX.

        For more information on hazardous waste management, contact:

 U            ~~~Virginia Department of Waste Management  (804)225-2997

        Underground Injection

               Underground injection is the placement of fluids into the ground through a
        well. Examples of underground injection wells are cesspools, cooling water return
        flow wells, heat pump exchange wells, agricultural drainage wells, sand backfill
3       ~~wells, septic systems, "improved sinkholes," and solution mining wells.

               Allowing the movement of fluids containing contaminants into underground
        sources of drinking water is prohibited by federal law (40 CFR Sec. 144.12). The
I     ~ ~Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, part of the federal Safe Drinking
        Water Act, was created to ensure that disposal of fluids by injection does not
3 ~~threaten present and future drinking water sources.

               Under the EPA's UIC program for Virginia, owners or operators of injection
3 ~~wells must report wells to the EPA for its inventory of Virgina's underground
         injection wells. Immediate action will be taken by the EPA or the State on such
         wells that pose a risk to human health. In Virginia, the use of hazardous waste
3       ~~injection wells is illegal.

         If you plan to own or operate an underground injection well tha4 has not been
I     ~ ~reported to the EPA, contact:

               Underground Injection Control Section,
  I          ~ ~~U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
               Region III - Philadelphia, PA.               (21 5)597-9928






          I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~53









Sources of additional information:

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.

North Carolina-Virginia Groundwater Subcommittee.  "Groundwater
      Management in Southeastern Virginia and Northeastern North Carolina."
     August 1, 1975.

Southeastern Virginia Planning  District Commission.   Groundwater Protection
      Handbook for Southeastern Virainia. Chesapeake, Virginia: SVPDC, 1990.

Task Force on Septic Regulations. "Report of the Task Force on Septic
      Regulations."  Final Draft.  Charlottesville, VA: Institute for Environmental
      Negotiation, July 1991.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  "Underground Storage Tanks; Technical
      Requirements and State Program Approval; Final Rules." 53, Federal
      Register 37082, September 23, 1988.

            "Protecting Our Groundwater."   Office of Public Affairs (A-107).
      Washington, D.C.: EPA, September 1985.

          _  "Virginia's Groundwater:   You Can Help Protect It." Adapt. from
      "Threats to Virginia's Groundwater," a Virginia Water Resources Reasearch
      Center publication by Diana L. Weigmann and Carolyn J. Kroehler.
      Undated.

Virginia Groundwater Protection Steering Committee.   Groundwater Protection
      Strateav for Virainia.    Charlottesville, VA:  Institute for Environmental
      Negotiation. 1987, 1990 Supplement.

         __    Virainia  Groundwater  Manaaement  Handbook:       State  Aaencv
      Proarams for Groundwater Protection. Richmond, VA: VGPSC, 1988.














                                     54








     I                         ~~~~~~VII.  GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

              In response to increasing groundwater withdrawals from the aquifers of
        eastern Virginia, the Virginia Groundwater Act (Title 62.1, Chapter 3.4, Code of
        Virginia) was  passed in 1973.   As  originally enacted, the Act required the
I      ~ ~permitting of industrial and commercial  users withdrawing more than 50,000
        gallons per day within designated groundwater management areas. Agricultural
        withdrawals and withdrawals for human consumptive use, including municipal
        withdrawals, were specifically exempted from the provisions of the Groundwater


 I            ~~~The Groundwater Act also grants the State Water Control' Board (SWCB) the
        authority to declare a groundwater management area (GWMA) where there is
3       ~~reason to believe that-- in the area of question-- groundwater levels are declining,
        there is substantial well interference, the aquifer may be depleted or that the
        groundwater may be polluted.

              Once a groundwater management area is declared, all existing users within
        the area are eligible to file a registration statement documenting their right to
I      ~ ~continue  to  withdraw  groundwater  to  the  extent  of their  maximum  daily
        withdrawal  in two years preceding the declaration.   In addition, any person
        constructing a well on the date of declaration is eligible to file a registration
I     ~ ~statement documenting their right to withdraw groundwater to the extent of the
        design capacity of the groundwater withdrawal system under construction.

 I            ~~~~After withdrawal claims are verified, the SWCB is required to issue to these
        users a Certificate of Groundwater Right documenting their right to continue to
        withdraw groundwater.   Under the Groundwater  Act, the General Assembly
        retained the authority to limit such rights should the continued unrestricted uses of
        groundwater contribute to shortage or pollution of groundwater.

              Any person wishing to withdraw additional groundwater in a GWMA after
        the declaration must apply for a groundwater withdrawal permit from the SWCB.
U     ~ ~The SWCB may not issue a permit that will deprive those having prior lawful rights
        to the amount of groundwater to which they are entitled.

  I           ~~~On  February  26, 1975  the SWCB  declared  the Southeastern  Virginia
         GWMA. This area was composed of the Counties of Prince George, Sussex,
        Southampton, Surry, and Isle of Wight and the Cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth,
        Chesapeake, Virginia Beach, Suffolk, Hopewell, and Franklin. On November 1,
         1975 the SWCB declared the Eastern Shore GWMA.

  I           ~~~During the late 1970's and early 1980's the experience of the SWCB  in
        applying the Groundwater Act indicated that withdrawals for irrigation and human
         consumptive uses were of significant magnitude. The extent of these withdrawals









was such that they prevented adequate management of the groundwater resource
within  the  State's  two  declared  GWMA's.   Due  to these  concerns,  the
Groundwater Act was amended in 1986 to include municipal water withdrawals
and to reduce the threshold for permitting from 50,000 gallons per day to
300,000 gallons per month.   Withdrawals for agricultural purposes remained
exempt.

     On December 6, 1989 the Southeastern Virginia GWMA was expanded and
renamed the Eastern Virginia GWMA. The expanded area included the Counties of
Charles City, James City, King William, New Kent, and York; the areas of
Chesterfield, Hanover and Henrico Counties east of Interstate 95; and the Cities of
Hampton, Newport News, Poquoson, and Williamsburg.

For more information on obtaining Groundwater Withdrawal Permits, contact:

     State Water Control Board                   (804)527-5000
     Tidewater Regional Office                   (804)552-1840

Sources of additional information:

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 3.4, Code of Vircinia, 1950, as
     amended.

Geraghty & Miller, Inc. "Availability of Groundwater in the Southeastern Virginia
      Groundwater Management Area." Prep. for the Virginia State Water Study
      Commission. Annapolis, MD: G&M, Inc., March 1979. Reprinted July,
      1979 by VaSWCB.

State Water Control Board.  Groundwater Resources of the Four Cities Area,
      Virginia. (Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Portsmouth, Chesapeake), Planning
      Bulletin 331. Richmond, VA: SWCB, November 1981.

U.S. Geological Survey. "Evaluation of Municipal Withdrawals from the Confined
      Aquifers  of  Southeastern  Virginia."    Open-File  Report  88-723.    In
      cooperation with the Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission.
      Richmond, VA.: USGS, 1988.












                                     56









                                       Vill. AIR QUALITY

 I            ~~~Virginia's air quality program has been developed under the Virginia Clean
        Air Law and the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970, as amended. Air quality
        policy formulation and approval of associated regulations is the responsibility of
        the State Air Pollution Control Board (SAPCB). The Virginia Department of Air
        Pollution Control (VDAPC) is the administrative agency charged with carrying out
        the SAPCB's policies. The VDAPC is authorized to perform all functions necessary
        to implement Virginia's air quality program including development of regulations,
        air quality monitoring, site inspections and investigations, issuance of permits,
        enforcement,  and  technical  assistance.    The  VDAPC's  regional  offices  are
        responsible for implementing the State's air quality program in the field.  The
        Hampton Roads regional office (Region VI) has its headquarters in Chesapeake.
I      ~ ~The Region VI office receives guidance from the Hampton  Roads Air Pollution
        Control Committee which consists of representatives from local governments, area
*       ~~military facilities and special interest groups.

              The State air pollution control regulations require that the construction,
        reconstruction or modification of all "stationary sources" of air pollutants be
I      ~ ~subject to a preconstruction review and permitting process.  Stationary sources
        are defined as any building, structure, facility or installation which emits or may
        emnit air pollutants. Although the term "air pollutant" is not specifically defined, it
        is applied to mean all State or federally controlled substances that are subject to
        SAPCB regulation. In general, air quality permits dictate how facilities will be
3       ~~designed,  constructed,  equipped  and  operated  to  comply  with  air  quality
        standards.

               The permitting regulations adopted by the SAPCB and implemented by the
        VDAPC fall into two basic categories: those necessary to carry out the State
        Implementation Plan which is developed by the State to achieve compliance
I     ~ ~with'the federal CAA, and those designed to meet State standards that are not
        part of the federal program. The following briefly summarizes the regulations that
        fall into each category and pertain to the permitting of new stationary sources of
        air pollutants.
*       ~~A.    Federal Clean Air Act Program

               Under the CAA (Sec. 108 and 109), EPA was directed to publish a list of
        pollutant emissions which cause or contribute to air pollution and which may
        reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. EPA must issue air
        quality criteria for an air pollutant within twelve months after such pollutant has
3       ~~been listed. Another name for listed pollutants is "criteria pollutants."





          I                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~57









      Subsequently, national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) are proposed by EPA for each criteria pollutant. Primary NAAQS shall be
standards the attainment and maintenance of which in EPA's judgement, based on
such criteria and allowing for an adequate margin of safety, are requisite to protect
the public health. Any secondary NAAQS shall specify a level of air quality the
attainment and maintenance of which in EPA's judgement, based on such criteria,
is requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse
effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient air. The
NAAQS refer to the total amount of any criteria pollutant permitted in the air in a
particular place from all sources. Consequently, they are simply goals for dealing
with  nationwide  air pollutant  problems  and  are  not  emissions  limitations.
Limitations are set, however, to achieve those goals.

      To date, there are six criteria pollutants for which NAAQS  have been
established:  particulate matter, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, ozone, carbon
monoxide, and lead.

      The CAA also directed the EPA to identify "hazardous air pollutants," for
which it has published national emission standards (NESHAPs). At this time, EPA
has identified seven hazardous air pollutants:  beryllium, mercury, arsenic, vinyl
chloride, radionuclides, benzene, and asbestos.

      Under Sec. 108 of the CAA, each State has the primary responsibility for
assuring air quality within its entire geographic area, and must submit a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) specifying the manner in which the primary and
secondary NAAQS will be achieved and maintained within each air quality control
region (AQCR). AQCRs were established within each State by EPA in the q970's
for the purposes of efficient and effective air quality management.  As mentioned
above, Hampton Roads is in Virginia's AQCR VI.

      In addition to providing for the attainment of primary and  secondary
NAAQS, SIPs also include emission limitations, schedules and timetables for
compliance with such limitations, and other such measures as may be necessary
to ensure attainment and  maintenance of the NAAQS.   These can include
transportation controls, air quality maintenance plans, and preconstruction review
of direct sources of air pollution.

      The basic federal regulations for permitting construction and operation of
new or modified stationary sources of air pollutants are separated into two
categories:  "minor" sources and "major" sources.  Minor sources are those that
do not emit more 100 tons per year of any one criteria pollutant. Major sources
emit more than 100 tons or a single criteria pollutant.  Both types of sources
require that Best Available Control Technology (BACT), as defined by the EPA, be
incorporated into a project. In brief, BACT is defined as the maximum degree of
emission reduction which the SAPCB, on a case-by-case basis, determines is


                                      58








H       ~~achievable through the application of either production processes or other available
         methods such as fuel cleaning or treatment, or fuel combustion techniques. In
U      ~ ~making this determination, the SAPCB takes energy, economic and environmental
         impacts into consideration.

 I            ~~~New or modified "major" stationary sources proposed in an area that has
         not attained one or more of the NAAQS established by the EPA (Nonattainment
         Area) must meet stricter permitting regulations. These regulations require that an
I      ~ ~applicant demonstrate that emissions will be controlled to the lowest achievable
         emission rate (LAER). Hampton Roads was classified as a Marginal Nonattainment
         Area for ozone in 1991 and will, therefore, be subject to stricter ozone emissions
         limitations for both stationary and mobile sources in the future. Localities included
         in this designation are the Counties of James City and York, and the Cities of
         Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk,
         Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg.

 *            ~~~~Certain sources specified in the State regulations are subject to additional
         permitting requirements to ensure compliance with the EPA New Source
         Performance Standards and NESHAPs. Because of these additional requirements,
*       ~~the processing time for permits for these sources is usually longer.

*       ~~B.    State Standards

               In addition to the regulations required by the Clean Air Act, the SAPCB has
         developed regulations under its own regulatory authority. Virginia's "Regulations
I     ~ ~for the Control and Abatement of Air Pollution" were published by the SAPCB in
         1985 and have been since revised to reflect new changes in State policy. They
         include standards for open burning, odor and air toxics.

               The air toxics program is intended to address pollutants not currently
3       ~~controlled by the federal Clean Air Act.   Through this program, the SAPCB
         regulates ambient concentrations of several hundred pollutants through imposition
         of guidelines derived from occupational safety standards. All stationary sources
3       ~~are required to comply with these guidelines.

 *      ~~Permit Application Process

               Permit applications for projects located in Hampton Roads must be
         submitted to the VDAPC  regional office in Chesapeake.   A permit application
 I     ~ ~checklist has been provided on page 60.  It is recommended that the regional
         office be contacted well in advance so it can provide assistance in the preparation
         and submittal of applications. All necessary local land use approvals must be
         obtained from a locality prior to the submittal of an application,



           1                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~59









                         FIGURE 2

        DEPARTMENT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTORL

             PERMIT APPLICATION CHECK LIST


1.   Have you checked with DAPC Regional Office?

2.   Identify type of facility - boiler, incinerator, chemical plant, paper
     mill, acid plant, furniture plant, bathroom fixtures, etc.

3.   Size - design capacity

4.   Hours of operation

5.   Quantity of air emissions in pounds per hour and tons per year.

     a.   Particulate

     b.   Sulfur oxides (SOJ)

     c.   Nitrogen oxides (NO.)

     d.   Carbon monoxide (CO)

     e.   Volatile organic compounds (VOC)

     f.   Lead
     g.   Toxics
6.   Air pollution control devices - type, size, rated efficiency

     a.   Bag House

     b.   Cyclone

    c.   Scrubber

    d.   Precipitator
7.   Stack parameters

    a.   Height

     b.   Diameter

     c.   Exit gas velocity

     d.   Exit gas temperature

    e.   Exit gas volume

                            60









 H            ~~~Upon receipt of the application, the VDAPC  has 30 days to determine
        whether the application is complete.   Once an application has been deemed
I      ~ ~complete and a draft permit has been prepared by the VDAPC, the permit may be
        advertised for public comment and the SAPCB may decide to hold a public hearing
        on the permit. A public review and hearing process is mandatory for several
I      ~ ~categories of facilities including any source of hazardous air pollutants, any major
        stationary source, and any source that has generated opposition or adverse
*       ~~comment from the public or another government entity.

               Public hearings are usually held before a VDAPC staff member in the locality
        where a facility is to be constructed. Following the comment period and public
        hearing, the VDAPC staff makes its recommendation to the Executive Director.
        The Executive Director usually makes the decision to approve or deny the permit,
        although controversial permits may go to the SAPCB for a decision.

               In general, permits for most small facilities can be issued in less than 30
        days, while larger more complex facilities will take as long as 60 days. Permits
        which require SAPCB action, are subject to the EPA New Source Performance
        Standards and NESHAPs, or are for facilities located within Nonattainment Areas
*       ~~usually require additional time.

               The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Title V) will alter the
         State's air quality permitting process as it applies to the operation of existing
        facilities. Although the State has regulations in place which govern the operation
        of air pollutant sources, they are only applied in limited circumstances. The 1990
         CAA Amendments contain provisions requiring states to greatly expand their
         permitting programs to address the ongoing operation of sources that are presently
        subject only to the regulations governing construction or modification. In addition,
        authority has been granted to the State's to collect permit fees for processing
         procedures.   The  EPA is currently developing regulations to implement these
         provisions. It is not anticipated that the 1 990 Amendments will significantly affect
        the permitting process as it applies to the construction or modification of
        stationary sources.


*       ~~For more information on Virginia's air quality regulatory program contact:

               Division of Technical Evaluation,
               Department of Air Pollution Control          (804)786-4867

               Department of Air Pollution Control,
               Hampton Roads Regional Office                (804)424-6707





          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~61









Sources of additional information:

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 10.1, Chapter 13, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990:
      Summarv Materials. Washington, D.C.: USEPA, 1990.

Virginia Air Pollution Control Board.  Reaulations for the Control and Abatement of
      Air Pollution. Richmond, Virginia: VAPCB, revised 1990.

Virginia Department of Air Pollution Control.  Air Qualitv Reaulatorv Proaram for
      Permittina in Virainia. Richmond, Virginia: VDAPC, 1990.






































                                      62









    I                       ~~~~~IX.   SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE

              In 1986, the Virginia General Assembly passed the Virginia Waste
        Management Act (Title 10.1, Subtitle II, Chapter 14, Code of Virainia). This
        legislation consolidated all solid and hazardous waste management activities in the
I      ~ ~new Virginia Department of Waste Management (VDWM). In addition, the Virginia
        Board of Waste Management (VBWM) was appointed to oversee the policy
        formation and approval of associated regulations of the VDWM.

              After its appointment and initial strategic planning process, the VBWM
        adopted the following mission statement: "protect public health and the
        environment through formulating and implementing policies to assure the proper
        siting, management, and disposal of solid, hazardous, and low-level radioactive
*       ~~wastes generated in the Commonwealth and through the promotion of recycling
        and resource conservation." With this mission statement, the Board adopted the
        following goals:

              o     Promote sound  waste management  practices within the regulated
                    community, government and the public.

              o     Reduce the adverse effects of past waste management practices.

 I            o~~~ Increase  the  public's  awareness  and   participation  in  waste
                    management practices.

 *            o~~~ Promote  the  effective  storage  and  transportation  of  hazardous
                    materials.

 I            o~~~ Improve the management of departmental resources.

              The VBWM is responsible for promulgating State regulations and enforcing
        both state and federal regulations governing waste management activities in the
        Commonwealth. Included in this is the permitting of solid waste disposal facilities
        and hazardous waste generation, transport, and disposal facilities, and insuring
        that such facilities meet both state and federal minimum design, performance, and
*      ~~financial responsibility requirements.

              In order to minimize the amount of waste which will ultimately reach the
        landfill, thereby prolonging the life of existing facilities and reducing the demand
I     ~for new  ones  in the future, it is the policy of the VBWM  to promote the
        development   of  comprehensive   waste   management   programs   for  the
*      ~~Commonwealth according to the following hierarchy:

              o     Planning
  *            o~~~ Source reduction


          *                                  *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~63








              o     Reuse
              o     Recycling
 I             o~~~~ Resource recovery (waste-to-energy)
              o     incineration (volume reduction)
              0     Landfilling

        A.    Waste Management Planning

 I            ~~~~Planning for solid waste management facilities occurs at the federal, state,
        regional and local levels. At the federal level the EPA administers the regulatory
        and planning initiatives detailed in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
        (RCRA) of 1976 as amended. RCRA requires states to develop programs which
        provide for the regulation of waste disposal as well as the elimination of
*       ~~unpermitted or open dumps.

              At the state level, Virginia established a process for designating agencies,
        such as local governments or regional agencies, to prepare solid waste plans at
        the regional and local levels. In 1989, the Virginia General Assembly enacted
        legislation requiring that solid waste management plans be prepared, and
I      ~ ~authorized the Board to promulgate regulations specifying requirements for local
        and regional solid waste plans (Title 10.1, Subtitle II, Chapter 14). Regulations
        were adopted in 1990 and encompass all aspects of solid waste management.
I     ~ ~They  require  that  consideration  be  given  to the  handling  of all types  of
        nonhazardous solid waste generated in the region or locality.  In addition, the
        regulations require that local or regional plans identify how the following minimum
        recycling rates shall be achieved: 10% by 1991, 15% by 1993, and 20% by


 I            ~~~To  implement  regional  plans,  the  Governor  may  designate  regional
        boundaries. The governing bodies of the counties, cities, and towns within any
*       ~~region so designated shall be responsible for the development and implementation
        of a comprehensive regional solid waste plan in cooperation with any planning
        district commission (PDC), commissions ar public service authorities in the region.

              Hampton Roads lies within two solid waste planning regions- - the
        Southeastern Virginia planning area and the Virginia Peninsulas planning area. The
I     ~ ~designated planning agencies for these areas are the Hampton Roads Planning
        District Commission and the Virginia Peninsulas Public Service Authority (VPPSA).
        Plan implementation is the responsibility of the Southeastern Public Service
I     ~ ~Authority and the VPPSA. Both agencies have adopted the required regional plan
        for their respective regions.





          *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~64








        B.    Solid and Hazardous Waste Management

*       ~~Solid Waste

               According to the Virginia Waste Management Act of 1986, solid waste
        means "any garbage, refuse, sludge and other discarded material, including solid,
        liquid, semisolid or contained gaseous material, resulting from industrial,
        commercial, mining and agricultural operations, or community activities but does
I      ~ ~not include (i) solid or dissolved material in domestic sewage, (ii) solid or dissolved
        material in irrigation return flows or in industrial discharges which are sources
        subject to a permit from the State Water Control Board, or (iii) source, special
        nuclear, or byproduct material as defined by the Federal Atomic Energy Act of
         1954, as amended." The term "sludge" refers to "any solid, semisolid or liquid
        wastes with similar characteristics and effects generated from a public, municipal,
        commercial or industrial wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant,
        air pollution control facility or any other waste producing facility." Storage and
        disposal of agricultural animal waste, under the VPA permit program is discussed
        in detail in Section VI.

 *            ~~~Solid waste  facilities are designed  to collect and/or  process  domestic
         garbage, commercial refuse, and sludges from water, wastewater, and air after
        treatment. RCRA requires that permits be obtained for the construction of new
I     ~ ~facilities, expansion of permitted disposal areas, or substantial changes in design
        or processing at existing facilities.  Exemptions from this include land clearing
        debris from agricultural or forestal activities by non-developers, disposal of inert
         materials ie. bricks, and temporary storage prior to recycling if in recycling
         business with a requirement of 75% removal at year's end.

  I            ~~~In addition to a certification disclosure statement demonstrating financial
         responsibility, positive operational history, and other information required of the
        owner/operator when filing a permit application, no application will be deemed
         complete and ready for review by the VBWM until local governments have been
         notified of the proposed  project.   Verification from the local government  of
*       ~~compliance with local zoning and other ordinances or regulations must be received
         by VBWM. VDWM urges owner/operator notification of the proposed facility or
         modification, as well as contact with the VDWM, early on in the permitting
I     ~ ~process.   Permits are denied by the VBWM  if there is failure to complete the
         application, failure to conform to siting standards set by the State, design,
         construction or operation does not conform to the permit, adverse impact on
         health or environment, or failure to meet financial responsibility requirements.
               When permits are issued by the VBWM, permits convey no property rights,
         no right to injure, or violate state or local law, and permitted facilities are shielded
         against future changes in regulations, subject to periodic inspections, must close
         in accordance with a closure plan, and are subject to corrective action. Permits


          *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~65









        can be terminated for non-compliance with any permit condition, failure to disclose
        important information prior to permit issuance, or endangerment of human health
        or environment. Permits may also be amended for major or minor changes.
        Finally, permits can be revoked or revoked and reissued for the following reasons:
        violation of any regulation posing a threat of release or hazard to health or
I      ~ ~environment; operation in the manner of an open dump or as a threat to health or
        environment; failure to provide measures to control pollution, leachate or residues
        posing a threat to air, land, surface or groundwater; and/or abandonment, sale, or
        lease of the facility.
*       ~~Construction and Demolition Debris

               It is the responsibility of the generator of construction debris to insure its
        proper disposal. The generator must deliver the debris for disposal directly to a
        landfill or other disposal site, or hire a private hauler to dispose of the debris. In
        the Hampton Roads area there are many inert debris landfills in operation at
        present. (it can be expected that many, if not all, of the private debris landfills will
        close by 1992, being unable to comply with the new landfill design criteria.) In
        addition to the debris specific landfills, several localities and the SPSA operate
I     ~ ~landfills that accept construction and demolition debris. The City of Chesapeake
        operates a pilot rubble recycling facility and accepts concrete and asphalt debris at
U       ~~~this site.

        Hazardous Waste

 I            ~~~Federal and state hazardous waste management is addressed in RCRA. The
        intent of RCRA is to provide "cradle to grave" requirements for hazardous waste
3       ~~management  and  to specifically address  solid  and  liquid  wastes  posing  a
        substantial hazard to human health or the environment through federal listing. The
        core of RCRA establishes regulations and permit requirements for hazardous waste
        generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDs).
        TSDs are subject to design and performance standards, operating and
        closure/post-closure requirements, and owners and operators are subject to
*       ~~financial responsibility disclosures.

               States may administer their own hazardous waste programs, so long as they
        satisfy or exceed the minimum requirements set by EPA; otherwise, EPA will
        administer the federal requirements for the state. However, EPA has no discretion
        to choose to run a state program that meets federal requirements. Virginia has

        chosen to administer its own hazardous waste program under the VDWM.






          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~66









1.    Identification

      Under RCRA Subchapter IIIl, the EPA promulgated criteria for identifying the
     characteristics of hazardous waste and listed particular hazardous wastes
     which are subject to regulation under RCRA.  Toxicity, persistence, and
     degradability in nature, potential for accumulation in tissue, and other
      related factors such as flammability, corrosiveness, and reactiveness are the
     criteria used by EPA when substances are considered for listing.

      Hazardous waste is defined by the EPA as a solid waste that is not excluded
      under 40 CFR Part 261.4(b) and meets any of the following criteria:

     o     Exhibits any of the characteristics of hazardous waste identified in 40
            CFR Part 261.4(c);

     o     Is listed in 40 CFR Part 261.4(d) and has not been excluded by 40
            CFR Parts 260.20 and 260.22;

      o     Is a mixture of a solid waste and one or more hazardous wastes, not
            excluded under 40 CFR Parts 260.20 and 260.22.

      Wastes excluded from this definition include the following: household
      wastes, agricultural wastes returned to the soil as fertilizers, mining
      overburden returned to the site, fly and bottom ash from the burning of coal
      and other fossil fuels, drilling fluids from energy exploration and production,
      and certain other special wastes.

      Under the Virginia Waste Mangement Act, hazardous waste is defined as "a
      solid waste or combination of solid wastes which because of its quantity,
      concentration, or physical, chemical,or infectious characteristics, may cause
      or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in
      serious irreversible or incapacitating illness; or pose a substantial present or
      potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly
      treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed."

2.    Generator, Transporter, and Disposal Facility Requirements and Permitting
      Process

      Generator type and actual waste characteristics determine to what extent
      the generator must follow reporting and disposal requirements.   First,
      generators must determine that they are indeed handling a regulated
      hazardous waste. If they are, then they must notify both the EPA and the
      VDWM. Upon notification, the generator will be issued an EPA identification
      number.



                                      67









              All hazardous waste generators, regardless of amount generated, are
 I           ~ ~~subject to standards established by EPA which are necessary to protect
              human health and the environment. Such standards establish requirements
              respecting recordkeeping, labeling, use of appropriate containers, furnishing
 I          ~ ~~~of information on chemical composition of waste, use of a manifest system,
              and rendering of other related reports to EPA.

 I            ~~~Standards applicable to transporters of listed hazardous wastes include
        recordkeeping of wastes being transported, transportation of such waste only if
        properly labeled, compliance with the manifest system, and transportation of such
        waste only to hazardous waste treatment storage and disposal facilities which the
        shipper designates on the manifest form and which hold a permit.

              Design and performance standards have also been established for owners
        and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage,and disposal facilities. New
I     ~ ~facilities may not operate without a permit.  The design standards relate to the
        physical condition of the site material used to make the site leakproof, and the
        performance standards provide a check on the quality of design to assure non-
I      ~~leakage.    Records  maintenance  of hazardous  waste,  reporting,  monitoring,
        inspections, contingency plans for spill containment and site remnediation, and
*       ~~financial responsibility are also required under these standards.

               Operating permits shall contain schedules of compliance for such corrective
        action and assurances of financial responsibility. Closure and post-closure permits
        and respective conditions must be integrated with the administration of the
        Comprehensive Emergency Response and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as
        Superfund.  The most important post-closure notice requirement is the deed
        restriction notification of RORA status.

 *           ~~~Exemptions to these requirements include: generators storing hazardous
        waste in tanks and containers for less than ninety days; farmers disposing own
        waste on-site, small quantity generators (less than 220 lbs/mo.); totally enclosed
        hazardous waste treatment facilities; hazardous waste treatment in wastewater
        treatment units; hazardous waste treatment by elementary neutralization;
        transporters storing hazardous waste for less than ten days; addition of adsorbent
I     ~ ~to hazardous waste; and non-hazardous waste facilities accepting wastes from
        exempt small quantity generators.

  I           ~~~Generators of more than 1000 kilograms per month of hazardous waste are
        the most tightly regulated group and are required to comply with all hazardous
*      ~~waste disposal regulations.




          *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~68








 H            ~~~Small quantity generators are those that produce between 100 and 1000
        kilograms of hazardous wastes per month. These generators must follow
I      ~ ~notification procedures and are expected to follow a more relaxed system of
        disposal.

 I            ~~~Those generators which produce less than  100 kilograms must follow
        notification procedures but are exempt from the regulatory disposal scheme. They
        are still expected to properly dispose of hazardous wastes. Household generators
        are exempt from the entire regulatory scheme.
              Owners and operators of solid waste facilities and. hazardous waste
I     ~ ~generators, transporters, and treatment, storage and disposal facilities located
        within the Southeastern Virginia Regional Planning Area should refer to the
*       ~~Regional Solid Waste Plan for Southeastern Virginia regarding waste management
        practices and requirements in the area.

3       ~~For further information about soild or hazardous waste management, contact:

              Virginia Department of Waste Management           (804)225-2997

              Southeastern Public Service Authority
 3           ~~~of Virginia (SPSA)                               (804)420-4700

              Virginia Peninsula Public Service Authority       (804)728-2062

 I           ~~~(insert Local Clean Community Coordinator)

*      ~~Sources of additional information:

        Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 14, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
  3           ~~~amended.

           ________   VR 672-20-10.  "Solid Waste Management Regulations." Richmond,
  3           ~~~VA:  DWM, December, 1988.

        Hampton  Roads  Planning  District  Commission.          "Regional  Solid  Waste
              Management  Plan for Southeastern Virginia."  In cooperation with the
              Southeastern Public Service Authority of Virginia. Vol. I and Vol. IL.
              Chesapeake, VA: HRPDC, May 1991.

        Southeastern  Virginia  Planning  District Commission.    "Hazardous  Waste  in
  3           ~~~Southeastern Virginia." Chesapeake, VA:  SVPDC, April, 1986.





          3                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~69









                                   X.    TREE PRESERVATION

 I            ~~~Shading and aesthetic enhancement have been traditionally recognized as
        the primary benefits provided by trees. Research conducted over the last several
        decades has found that trees provide a number of additional environmental
I      ~ ~benefits.   These  include filtering of both  water  and  air pollutants,  energy
        conservation, noise reduction, improved groundwater recharge, erosion control
        and enhanced wildlife habitat.  In recognition of these benefits, a number of
        Hampton Roads localities have either adopted tree preservation ordinances or have
        incorporated tree preservation provisions into other land development ordinances.
        Localities with tree preservation programs include the Cities of Chesapeake,
        Newport News, Suffolk and Virginia Beach, and York County.

              In 1989, the Virginia General Assembly passed legislation (Title 15.1,
        Chapter 1, Code of Virainia) allowing localities with population densities of at least
        75 persons per square mile to adopt ordinances which require tree preservation on
I     ~ ~private property.  This legislation, as amended in 1990, requires that minimum
        performance criteria and administrative procedures be adhered to, should a locality
        elect to implement a tree preservation ordinance.

               Local ordinances must require that site plans indicate how, through the
        preservation and/or planting of trees, minimum tree canopies will be achieved over
I     ~ ~a twenty year period.  Tree canopy shall include "all areas of coverage by plant
        material exceeding five feet in height, and the extent of the canopy at maturity
        shall be based on published reference texts." Minimum tree canopies for different
        land uses and densities are as follows:

              o     Ten  percent tree canopy  for site zoned  business, commercial  or
                     industrial

               o     Ten percent tree canopy for residential site zoned twenty or more
                     units per acre

  *            o~~~ Fifteen percent tree canopy for residential site zoned more than ten
                     but less than twenty units per acre

  I            o~~~~ Twenty percent tree canopy for residential site zoned ten units or less
                     per acre

  I           ~~~The City of Chesapeake recently adopted a tree preservation ordinance
        which is stricter than the state law, requiring that minimum tree canopies be
        achieved over a ten year period, as opposed to a twenty year period.





          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~70








 U            ~~~Ordinances must exempt dedicated school sites; playing fields and other
        non-wooded recreation areas; wetland preservation activities; and, any situation
I      ~ ~where the requirements would result in unnecessary or unreasonable hardship to a
        developer.  Reasonable exceptions to or deviations from these requirements to
        allow for reasonable development of farm land or other areas devoid of woody
        materials must also be provided for in these ordinances.
              In addition to the 1989 tree preservation legislation, the landscaping
I      ~ ~provisions of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (CBPA) regulations promote
        the preservation of trees and other vegetation located in Chesapeake Bay
        Preservation Areas. The CBPA regulations contain general performance criteria for
        all Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas as well as performance criteria that are
        specific to Resource Protection Areas (RPAs).  Under the general performance
        criteria, indigenous vegetation must be preserved to the maximumn extent possible
        given the land use and development intensity allowed under existing zoning.
        Under the RPA performance criteria, indigenous vegetation in the 100 foot Buffer
        Area may only be removed to provide for reasonable sight lines, access paths,
        general woodlot management and best management practices. The specific
        regulations developed to implement these criteria are contained in local CBPA
I     ~ ~ordinances and/or in other land development ordinances used to implement the
        CBPA. More information on the requirements of the CBPA can be found in Section
*       ~~~~~II.

        For more information on local tree preservation regulations, contact:

  I           ~~~~Virginia Department of Forestry,
               Region 8                                     (804)465-6840

  H           ~~~(insert name and number of local agency responsible for implementing tree
               preservation program)

               (Insert name and number of local Chesapeake Say staff contact.)

*      ~~Source of additional information:

        Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 15.1, Chapter 1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
  I          ~~~amended.









          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~71








   I                    Xl~~~~X. ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES

 3            ~~~During the twentieth century, many plant and animal species have either
        become extinct, or are in imminent danger of extinction. This phenomenon is seen
        as a threat to the natural diversity required for balanced ecosystems, and to the
I      ~ ~maintenance of adequate gene pools for future generations.   Although natural
        processes may be partially responsible, human activity, primarily habitat
        destruction, is considered to be the primary cause of species extinction.  The
I      ~ ~federal listing of endangered and threatened species includes approximately 575
        domestic and 510 foreign species.  Candidates for the list include 600 known and
        3,000 probable threatened and endangered species.  Federal-listed threatened and
        endangered animal and plant species that are found in Virginia are shown in Tables
         1 and 2.

 U            ~~~The federal and State governments have responded to this problem in a
        variety of ways.   The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended,
1       ~~establishes a program for the protection of species considered to be endangered or
        threatened with extinction. The ESA requires a federal listing of endangered and
        threatened species. An endangered species is defined as one that is on the verge
I     ~ ~of extinction in all or a portion of its range, while a threatened species is one that
        could become endangered in the foreseeable future.

 I            ~~~~Most of the responsibility for implementing the ESA lies with the U.S. Fish
        and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) which is charged with the protection of all
        terrestrial and inland species. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is
         responsible for all marine species while the Department of Agriculture oversees
         import/export inspections. For each federally listed species, a recovery plan must
         be prepared by the USF&WS.

               Once a species is placed on the federal listing, any project or activity
         undertaken by the federal government, occurring on federal land or in federal
         waters, or involving federal money or a federal permit cannot jeopardize that
         species through direct harm or habitat destruction. A "no jeopardy" opinion must
         be granted by the USF&WS and the NMFS in order for the project to proceed.

               Under Sec. 9 of the ESA, the taking of any listed species by anyone is
        strictly prohibited. The ESA defines as "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
         wound, kill, trap, capture, transport, collect, or to attempt to engage in other such
        conduct which would result in any sort of negative impact to a listed species."
I     ~ ~Development activities that directly harm an endangered or threatened species
         may be considered a taking. Violation of the Act can result in a fine of $50,000
3      ~~and a year in jail.





          1                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~72









      An incidental take permit process is provided for in Sec. 10 of the ESA. If a
proposed land development project will most likely result in the taking of a listed
species, then the developer must go to either the USFWS or the NMFS, depending
on the jurisdiction, and state this anticipated taking. A Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP) must then be developed so that the remainder of the that species on site
will not be significantly undermined. Lands may be offered, in mitigation, as part
of the HCP in order for the proposed project to receive a "no jeopardy" opinion.

      In addition to the federal listing, the State has established a list of species
that are not on the federal list, but are considered to be threatened or endangered
in Virginia. Any person found possessing, hurting or harassing any of the species
that are state-listed may face a fine of up to $20,000. State-listed animal and
plant species can also be found in Tables 1 and 2.

For more information on protection of endangered and threatened species contact:

      Virginia Department of Game
      and Inland Fisheries                        (804)367-1000
      Local Office - Williamsburg                 (804)253-7072

      Virginia Department of Conservation
      and Recreation, Division of Natural
      Heritage                                    (804)786-7951

      The Nature Conservancy - Charlottesville    (804)295-6106

      U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

      National Marine Fisheries Service

Sources of additional information:

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 29, Chapter 11, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Pague, Christopher A. "Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia: Rare Animals."
      Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural
      Heritage. Richmond, VA: VDCR, August 1, 1991.

U.S. Congress.  Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.  16 U.S.C. 1531-
      1543.

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage.
      "Virginia Rare Plant List." Richmond, VA: VDCR, March 1, 1991.



                                       73









                                   TABLE 1

                      THREATENED AND ENDANGERED
                    ANIMAL SPECIES FOUND IN VIRGINIA

Legend:     (FE) Federal Endangered, (FT) Federal Threatened,
            (SE) State Endangered, (ST) State Threatened
            * denotes effective 1/1/92

                                                       STATUS
            SPECIES                  (FE)        (FT)         (SE)        (ST)

Amphibians:
* Salamander, Mabee's                                                       X
 Salamander, Shenendoah               X                        X
 Salamander, eastern tiger                                     X
* Treefrog, barking                                                         X

Birds:
 Eagle, bald                          X                        X
 Falcon, peregrine                    X                        X
 Pelican, brown                       X
 Plover, Wilson's                                              X
 Plover, piping                                    X                        X
* Sandpiper, upland                                                         X
 Shrike, loggerhead                                            X
 Shrike, migrant loggerhead                                    X
 Sparrow, Bachman's                                                         X
 Sparrow, Henslow's                                                         X
* Tern, gull-billed                                                         X
 Tern, roseate                        X                        X
 Warbler, Bachman's                   X                        X
 Warbler, Kirtland's                  X
 Woodpecker, red-cockaded             X                        X
 Wren, Appalachian Bewick's                                    X

Crustaceans:
 Isopod, Madison Cave                              X                        X

Fishes:
 Chub, slender                                     X                        X
 Chub, spotfin                                     X                        X
* Dance, Tennessee                                             X
 Darter, Carolina                                              X
 Darter, Tippecanoe                                            X


                                      74









                             TABLE 1 (Continued)

                      THREATENED AND  ENDANGERED
                    ANIMAL SPECIES FOUND IN VIRGINIA

Legend:     (FE) Federal Endangered, (FT) Federal Threatened,
            (SE) State Endangered, (ST) State Threatened
            *  denotes effective 1/1/92

                                                       STATUS
            SPECIES                  (FE)        (FT)         (SE)         (ST)


Fishes (cont'd):
 Darter, blueside                                               X
* Darter, duskytail                                             X
* Darter, greenfin                                                           X
* Darter, longhead                                                           X
 Darter, sharphead                                                          X
* Darter, western sand                                                       X
* Darter, variegate                                             X
 Logperch, Roanoke                     X
* Madtom, orange                                                             X
 Madtom, yellowfin                                 X                         X
* Paddlefish                                                                 X
* Shiner, emerald                                                            X
* Shiner, steelcolor                                                         X
* Shiner, whitemouth                                                         X
 Sturgeon, shortnose                   X                        X
 Sunfish, blackbanded                                           X

Freshwater Mussels:
 Mussel, Appalachian monkeyface        X                        X
* Mussel, Atlantic pigtoe                                                    X
 Mussel, Cumberland bean              X                         X
 Mussel, Cumberland combshell                                   X
 Mussel, Cumberland monkeyface         X                        X
 Mussel, James spiny                  X                         X
* Mussel, Ohio pigtoe                                           X
* Mussel, Tennessee heelsplitter                                             X
 Mussel, birdwing pearly               X                        X
* Mussel, black sandshell                                                    X
* Mussel, brook floater                                         X
 Mussel, cracking pearly               X
* Mussel, deertoe                                               X


                                       75









                              TABLE 1 (Continued)

                       THREATENED AND ENDANGERED
                    ANIMAL SPECIES FOUND IN VIRGINIA

Legend:     (FE) Federal Endangered, (FT) Federal Threatened,
            (SE) State Endangered, (ST) State Threatened
            ' denotes effective 1/1/92

                                                        STATUS
            SPECIES                  (FE)         (FT)         (SE)         (ST)


 Mussel, dromedary pearly              X                         X
 Mussel, dwarf wedge                   X                         X
* Mussel, elephant-ear                                           X
 Mussel, fanshell                      X
 Mussel, fine-rayed pigtoe             X                         X
* Mussel, fragile papershell                                                  X
 Mussel, green blossom pearly          X                         X
 Mussel, little-wing pearly            X                         X
 Mussel, oyster                                                  X
* Mussel, pimpleback                                                          X
 Mussel, pink mucket                   X
* Mussel, pink pigtoe                                            X
* Mussel, purple bean                                            X
* Mussel, purple lilliput                                        X
 Mussel, rough pigtoe                  X                         X
* Mussel, rough rabbitsfoot                                                   X
* Mussel, sheepnose                                                           X
 Mussel, shiny pigtoe                  X                         X
* Mussel, slabside pearly                                                     X
* Mussel, slippershell                                           X
 Mussel, snuffbox                                                X
* Mussel, spectaclecase                                          X
 Mussel, tan riffleshell               X                         X

Gastropods:
 Coil, Virginia                        X                         X
* Coil, brown super                                                           X
* Coil, rubble                                                    X
* Coil, shaggy                                                   X
* Coil, spirit super                                             X
 Snail, Virginia fringed mountain      X



                                       76









                              TABLE 1 (Continued)

                       THREATENED  AND  ENDANGERED
                    ANIMAL SPECIES FOUND IN VIRGINIA


Legend:      (FE) Federal Endangered, (FT) Federal Threatened,
            (SE) State Endangered, (ST) State Threatened
            * denotes effective 1/1/92

                                                        STATUS
            SPECIES                   (FE)         (FT)         (SE)         (ST)


* Snail, spiny river                                                           X
* Snail, unthanks cave                                            X

Insects:
 Beetle, American burying               X
 Dragonfly, spring blue darner                                                 X

Mammals:
 Bat, Indiana                           X                         X
 Bat, Virginia big-eared                X                         X
 Bat, eastern big-eared                                           X
 Bat, gray                              X                         X
 Cougar, eastern                        X
 Fisher                                                           X
* Hare, snowshoe                                                  X
 Shrew, Dismal Swamp southeastern                    X                         X
 Squirrel, Delmarva Peninsula fox       X                         X
 Squirrel, northern flying              X                         X
* Vole, rock                                                      X

Marine Mammals:
 Manatee, Florida                       X
 Whale, blue                            X
 Whale, fin                             X
 Whale, humpback                        X
 Whale, northern right                  X
 Whale, sei                             X
 Whale, sperm                           X





                                        77









                              TABLE 1 (Continued)

                      THREATENED AND ENDANGERED
                    ANIMAL SPECIES FOUND IN VIRGINIA


Legend:      (FE) Federal Endangered, (FT) Federal Threatened,
            (SE) State Endangered, (ST) State Threatened
            * denotes effective 1/1/92

                                                        STATUS
            SPECIES                    (FE)         (FT)          (SE)         (ST)


Reptiles:
* Lizard, eastern glass                                                           X
* Rattlesnake, canebrake                                            X
 Turtle, Atlantic green sea                            X
 Turtle, Kemp's Ridley sea               X                          X
 Turtle, bog                                                        X
 Turtle, eastern chicken                                            X
 Turtle, hawksbill sea                   X
 Turtle, leatherback sea                 X
 Turtle, loggerhead sea                                X                          X
* Turtle, wood                                                                    X

Source:   Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural
          Heritage. "Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia: Rare Animals and
          Rare Plants." Comp. by Christopher A. Pague. VDCR: Richmond, VA,
          8/1/91, 3/1/91.

          Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. "Federal and State
          Listed Threatened and Endangered Species in Virginia as of 9/15/90,
          1/1/92." VDGIF: Richmond, VA, 1990,1991.














                                       78










                                   TABLE 2

                      THREATENED AND ENDANGERED
                        PLANT SPECIES IN VIRGINIA


Legend:     (FE) Federal Endangered, (FT) Federal Threatened
            (SE) State Engdangered, (ST) State Threatened


                                                       STATUS
            SPECIES                  (FE)         (FT)         (SE)         (ST)


Shale-Barren Rockress                  X                         X
Small Anthered-Bittercress             X
Peter's Mountain Mallow                X                         X
Northeastern Bulrush                   X                         X
Virginia Round-Leaf Birch               X                        X
Swamp-Pink                                          X            X
Small Whorled Pogonia                  X                         X
Variable Sedge                                                   X
Virginia Sneezeweed                                              X
Long-Stalked Holly                                               X
Tropical Water-Hyssop                                            X
Piratebush                                                       X
Harper's Fimbristylis                                            X
Nestronia                                                        X
Virginia Spiraea                                    X            X


Source:     Virginia Department  of Conservation and  Recreation,  Division of
            Natural Heritage.   "Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia:   Rare
            Animals and Rare Plants." Comp. by Christopher A. Pague. VDCR:
            Richmond, VA, 8/1/91, 3/1/91.

            Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. "Federal and State
            Listed Threatened and Endangered Species in Virginia as of 9/15/90,
            1/1/92." VDGIF: Richmond, VA, 1990, 1991.







                                      79








     I                        ~~~~~~X11I.   NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION

               Most people are aware that numerous species of wild animals and plants are
        on the verge of extinction because of human actions; but, many people are not
        aware that most of our nation's native animal species and many plants are in a
I      ~ ~state of decline due to habitat degradation or loss.  More than 500 species in the
        U.S. alone are now officially listed under the Endangered Species Act as either
*       ~~endangered or threatened by extinction.

               While it is the federal government that has responsibility for federally listed
        threatened and endangered species and migratory species, it is the states that
        bear responsibility for most of their resident wildlife.   State fish and wildlife
        agencies have generally emphasized management programs for game animals
        desired by hunters and fishermen. Traditionally, the agencies have had neither the
        funds nor, in many cases, the motivation, to safeguard the health and abundance
        of all wildlife in their states.

               In 1980, Congress passed the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act to aid
        efforts aimed at halting the decline of species, primarily through destruction of
I      ~ ~natural habitat.  Popularly referred to as the "Nongame Act," the legislation deals
        with wild animals that are not hunted, fished, or trapped. Those fauna comprise
         about 90% of our indigenous vertebrate wildlife, including 350 species of
I      ~ ~mammals, 654 species of birds, 470 species of amphibians and reptiles, and 630
        species of fish. The many thousands of invertebrate species are not now covered
*       ~~by the Act.

               The Fish and Wildlife Act is meant to provide funds for more comprehensive
         programs to help protect nongame wildlife through matching grants to the states.
        When reauthorized by Congress in 1986 and 1988, the Act set an annual
         appropriations ceiling and envisioned the development of additional sources of
         funds. The money is to be used for a matching grant program to reimburse states
         for development and implementation of nongame conservation plans. Under these
         plans, state fish and wildlife agencies are to evaluate the status of nongame
I      ~ ~species, identify critical habitats, and ultimately find the most cost-effective means
         for protecting the habitat and preventing the decline of nongame wildlife.

  I            ~~~In Hampton Roads, there are many publicly owned areas that have been
         established to protect sensitive environmental features and manage wildlife
         habitat. These areas include National Wildlife Refuges, State Wildlife Management
I     ~ ~Areas, State Parks, and regional parks with natural area components.  It is likely,
         however, that there are numerous other areas throughout the region that contain
         significant natural features worthy of protection. The State, in cooperation with
         The Nature' Conservancy (TNC), has established the Virginia Natural Heritage
         Program (VNHP) to identify and protect such areas. The goal of this program is to
*       ~~inventory the state's significant natural areas and establish a statewide system of


          *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~80









        natural area  preserves.   A  number  of sites in Hampton  Roads  are  being
        investigated for possible inclusion in this system.   Although State regulations
I      ~ ~which specifically control the impacts of development on such areas do not exist,
        local governments may consider such impacts during their development review
*       ~~processes.

               The VNHP was established in 1986 as a joint contract venture between the
        State and TNC. In 1988, the VNHP became an organizational component of the
        Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VDCR) in the Division of
        Natural Heritage. The main objectives of the VNHP are to expose information
        gaps, guide future research and identify significant natural features for establishing
        conservation priorities. The VNHP is the first comprehensive attempt to identify
        Virginia's most significant natural areas through an intensive statewide inventory.
        Resources being inventoried include rare plants, rare animals, geologic landmarks,
        natural communities and other unique natural features. It is anticipated that this
        inventory will provide information to the private sector and public agencies for
I     ~ ~making informed decisions with respect to development projects.  The Division of
         Natural Heritage is currently conducting inventories in the Cities of Virginia Beach
        and Williamsburg, and in the Counties of James City and York. Inventory work in
I     ~ ~the City of Suffolk and the Counties of Isle of Wight and Southampton will begin in
         late 1991.

  I           ~~~In 1989, the Virginia General Assembly passed the Virginia Natural Area
         Preserves Act (Title 10.1, Chapter 2, Code of Virainia) which expanded the VNHP
         by charging the VDCR with establishing and managing a State Natural Area
         Preserve system. The Act also established the Natural Area Preservation Fund to
        finance this effort. Establishment of the Preserve System will be accomplished by
        fee simple acquisition by the State and/or TNC; the use of conservation easements
        on private land; a voluntary, non- regulatory preservation program for public and
         private land; and, the use of legal or administrative means to establish special
         research or management areas on federal lands. Dedication as a State Natural
         Area Preserve affords a natural area formal recognition and provides it with legal
*      ~~protection in that it cannot be condemned by local or State government.

         For more information on the Virginia Natural Heritage Program contact:

  I           ~~~Virginia Department of Conservation and
               Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage    (804)796-7951

  I           ~~~The Nature Conservancy - Charlottesville    (804)295-6106

         Source of additional information:

         Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 2, Article 3, Code of Virainia,
               1950, as amended.

          I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~81








                                         XIII. NOISE

 I            ~~~Noise  is receiving  widespread  recognition  as  one  of the  significant
        environmental problems of our age, as it effects both the human and the natural
        environments.   Plainly stated, noise is unwanted  sound.   It is usually rated
        according to peak noise as measured in decibels on the A scale of a sound meter
        and referred to as "so many dbA." Noise abatement focuses on reducing to an
        acceptable level, or preferably lower, the amount of sound emitted from a source
        and transmitted along a path to a recipient.
              Projected levels of "sound pressure" can be measured with precision, but
        the "effects" of noise upon the recipient are dependent upon many other factors,
        such as duration.  Recent studies have shown that noise at intervals or long
I     ~ ~duration, besides bringing on gradual deafness, damages the heart and vision,
        produces indigestion and stomach ulcers, builds up hypertension, and causes
        mental disorder that sometimes leads to suicide. Generally, however, it is the
I     ~ ~amount of noise that is of utmost concern.  Tests in which animals are assailed
        with noise at levels not far above those many people are routinely subjected to
        produce such results as cannibalism, homosexuality, loss of fertility, and heart
        failure within a short time.
              A decibel rating of 70 dbA outside dwellings or public buildings is about the
        maximum acceptable for humans under most conditions. Every reduction of 10
        decibels corresponds to halving the apparent loudness of sound.

              Federal recognition of the problems associated with environmental noise
        came with the passage of the Noise Control Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-574) and the
        Occupational Health and Safety Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-596). These legislative
        mandates prompted federal agencies along with state and local governments to
        develop measures to control the harmful effects of noise on man. In addition, the
I     ~ ~Noise Control Act gave the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) broad
        authority to set maximum allowable sound pressure levels for all major noise
        sources   manufactured   after   1972,   including   construction   equipment,
I    ~     ~transportation equipment, electrical equipment, and motors (except aircraft).  The
        EPA was also charged with proposing noise standards for aircraft for
I ~~implementation by the Federal Aviation Administration. By 1983, the EPA had
        issued noise level regulations for air conditioners, buses, motorcycles, power
        mowers, some trucks and trains, and some construction equipment.

  I           ~~~The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) currently sets
        the standards for overexposure to noise in any workplace at 90 dbA for eight
        hours a day. This amount is still significantly higher than the standard of 85 dbA
        considered to be a minimum safe level.



          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~82









              Congress later passed the Quiet Communities Act in 1978, which authorizes
        the EPA to develop programs to help state and local governments combat
        excessive noise.  Since then, the EPA has assisted a number of cities, including
        the City of Newport News, and more than half of the states in launching noise
I    ~   control programs.

              On the other hand, the problem of incompatible development- - primarily
        residential-- in areas surrounding airports has become a matter of public concern,
        especially in Hampton Roads, due to a large number of military installations within
        the region. The cause of the problem stems primarily from the following factors:
        (i) introduction of jet aircraft in the early 1950s and the subsequent development
        and use of higher performance aircraft; (ii) dramatic increase in the use of aircraft
        as a mode of transportation and as a primary defense weapon; (iii) immense
        population growth with the accompanying  needs for additional housing;  (iv)
        availability of unimproved land near airports with access roads and utilities in
        place; and (v) construction of housing or incompatible facilities within the
*I  ~   immediate airport environs.

              The importance of unobstructed and controlled airspace in proximity to
        airports was one of the primary factors that influenced the siting of military air
        installation and the retention and expansion of these facilities. Over the past few
        years, however, rapid urbanization has adversely affected both military and civilian
        airports alike.  For example, communities are becoming more critical of aircraft
        noise and increasing pressure has been applied by local government and citizens
        groups to restrict flight operations. Of all the military services, the Navy has faced
        the most intense pressure because the majority of its air stations are located in
        coastal areas. Population growth in the Hampton Roads area has been particularly
        vigorous and has expanded to the point that development has occurred within the
        undeveloped areas surrounding NAS Oceana in Virginia Beach, ALF Fentress in
        Chesapeake, and Langley AFB in Hampton.

              In order to consider and deal with the problem of land development around
        military air facilities, the Noise Control Act also gave the U.S. Department of
~I      Defense (DOD) the authority to institute a study known as the Air Installation
        Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) Program. This program requires that a plan be
        developed and implemented whereby all military air installations will be studied in
        depth to determine those land areas for which development should be significantly
        influenced by the function and operation of the installations. The composite of
        those land areas at each installation is thus designated as the AICUZ for that
        installation.

              The AICUZ study addresses two major concerns:   aircraft noise and
        accident potential for surrounding areas. The noise impact studies are based on a
        technique known as the day-night average &sound level (LDN) system. The LDN
        system takes into account the type aircraft, the distance to the aircraft, the type


          ~~~~~~~I                              ,~83









        of aircraft operations, number of operations both day and night, and it has as its
        base the A scale measurement of sound level.

               Three general noise zones around the airports are defined which can be
*       ~~associated with human response as follows:

                     Noise Zone         Associated Characteristics

   I                   ~~~~~~3 Zone of highest intensity; frequency
                                       and intensity of noise is such as
       *                               ~~~~~~~~~~to be loud and annoying.

                        2               Second most intensive zone; noise
       *                               ~~~~~~~~~~is more moderate in character.

                        1               Lowest noise level zone; the noise
       *                               ~~~~~~~~~~may interfere occasionally with
                                        certain residential activities.

 I            ~~~In a similar manner the accident potential studies served to define three
        groupings of Accident Potential Zones (APZ). The three groupings are divided by
        degree of accident potential as follows:   APZ "A"-- zone of highest accident
I     ~ ~potential; APZ "B"- - zone of significant accident potential but less critical than
        Zone "A;" and APZ "C"-- zone with some potential for accidents but less critical
*       ~~than Zone "B."

               Both of these types of zones are then placed on a map, showing the airport
        and surrounding land areas; such maps should be consulting during the plan of
        development process.   With these two general types of zones defined, noise
        impact and accident potential, development of the land around the airport needs to
        occur in a manner that is compatible with the zone character. The AICUZ is not
        intended as a zoning document, but as a decision making tool to be used by those
        involved in the planning process, whether they be planning authorities, a land
        owner determining the best use of his property, or a potential home owner
        selecting a site for a new  home.   The  AICUZ provides definite zones with
        supporting documentation as to the impact the airport operation has on each zone.
I     ~ ~In addition, a wide range of compatible land uses are recommended for each zone
        to be used as a development guide.

  I           ~~~Noise will never be completely eliminated from our living and working
        places, and will continue to impact natural areas surrounding them. The problems,
        however, can be greatly alleviated by the grouping of land uses in relation to their
        relative noise production and their limits of tolerance.  Most controls on noise
        pollution from new development or land uses are primarily found within local
        zoning ordinances.   On the other hand, many  local government bodies have


          *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~84








         chosen not to use their zoning powers to prohibit construction for new residential
         and institutional uses beneath or adjacent to airport approach zones, departure
I      ~ ~zones, and other areas where aircraft noise may affect the quality of life. As a
         result, a person considering the purchase of property within the vicinity of an
*       ~~airport may not be aware of a noise problem.

               Therefore, the Virginia General Assembly has urged all local governing
         bodies to prohibit in their zoning ordinances construction for residential and
         institutional use beneath or adjacent to airport approach or departure zones.  If
         such construction is allowed, the seller must state in writing to the "potential"
         buyer the fact that the property is affected by aircraft noise. .Any property that
         has been purchased by the military and resold to private land users for a lesser
         price is restricted in terms of land use by the DOD, primarily for safety reasons.

               In addition, lending agencies such as the Federal Housing Administration
         (FHA) and the Veteran's Administration (VA) have adopted construction standards
I      ~ ~which  are prerequisites for obtaining financing for home  construction within
         AICUZ. Financing for construction within Noise Zone 3 will only be approved if
         certain criteria are met, such as insulation and air conditioners are installed, in
I     ~ ~order to reduce outside noise levels. Local zoning codes for noise control may be
         an acceptable substitute for financing criteria if code conditions are at or higher
         than FHA or VA construction standards.

         For more information regading potential constraints on development within AICUZ,
*       ~~contact local planning office and/or:

               Federal Housing Administration Loans Division
  3            ~~~~Veteran's Administration Loans Division


         Sources of additional information:

         "AICUZ for Naval Air Station Norfolk - Norfolk, VA.; Naval Air Station Oceana -
  U          ~ ~~Virginia  Beach,  VA.,  and;  Naval  Auxiliary  Landing  Field  Fentress  -
               Chesapeake, VA."

I       ~~U.S. Congress.  Noise Control Act of 1 972. (P.L. 92-574), C.F.R. 32 (1-1 1).

         U.S. Department of Defense. Air Installations Compatible Use Zones - AICUZ. (49
  I          ~ ~~U.S.C. 4901)






           *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~85









                               BIBLIOGRAPHY

I.    WETLANDS AND SUBAQUEOUS LANDS

Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Conservina Our Wetland Resources: Avenues for
      Citizen Particioation. Annapolis, Maryland: CBF, 1987.

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

          . Title 62.1, Chapter 2.1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as amended.

The  Conservation  Foundation.   Protectina America's  Wetlands:   An  Action
      Agenda.  Final Report of the National Wetlands Policy Forum.  Washington,
      D.C.: TCF, 1988.

Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manaual for
      Identifvina and Delineatina Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of
      Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
      Service,  and  U.S.D.A.  Soil  Conservation  Service,  Washington,  D.C.
      Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus appendices.

Kaufman & Canoles.  The Drv Facts About Wetlands: A Positive ADDroach to
      Dealina with Wetlands Reaulations and the Chesaoeake Bav Preservation
      Act. Norfolk, Virginia: Kaufman & Canoles, 1990.

Mitsch, William J. and James G. Gosselink. Wetlands. New York, New York:
      Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1986.

Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission. The Value of Wetlands: A
      Guide for Citizens. Chesapeake, Virginia: SVPDC, 1988.

U.S. Congress. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. 33 U.S.C. 403.

U.S. Department of the Army. Coros of Enaineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
      Technical Report Y-87-1; Final Report. Vicksburg, Mississippi:  USACOE,
      1987.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.D.A.
      Soil Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.   "1989
      Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands;
      Proposed Revisions." Federal Reaister, 40446, August 14, 1991.

Virginia Institute of Marine Science and Virginia Marine resources Commission.
      Wetlands Guidelines. Newport News, Virginia: VMRC, undated.


                                     86










Virginia Marine Resources Commission. Subaaueous Guidelines: Guidelines for the
     Permittina of Activities which Encroach In. On or Over the Submeraed Lands
     of the Commonwealth of Virainia. Newport News, VA: VMRC, 1986.

I I.    CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION ACT

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 10.1, Chapter 21, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.

Metropolitan Washington  Council of Governments.   A  Practical Manual  for
     Plannina and Desianina Urban BMPs. Washington, D.C.: MWCOG, 1987.

City of Norfolk, Virginia.   "Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Development
     Handbook." Norfolk, VA: The City, 1991.

Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission.  "Virginia's Chesapeake Bay
     Preservation Act: A Guide" in Environmental Reviews.   Special Edition.
     Chesapeake, VA: SVPDC, March, 1990.

Virginia Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department. "Factual Answers to Bay
     Act Misconceptions". Undated.

             VR  173-02-01.1.   "Emergency  Chesapeake  Bay  Preservation
      Designation and Management Regulations." Virainia Reaister, Volume 7,
     Issue 7, December 31, 1990, p. 1138.

          . Local Assistance Manual. Richmond, VA: CBLAD, November 1991.

Virginia Council on the Environment.  Case Studies in the ADDolication of Best
      Manaaement Practices to Meet the Reauirements of the ChesaDeake Bav
      Preservation Act. Prepared for the City of Richmond. Richmond, Virginia:
      VCOE, 1990.

III.   COASTAL PRIMARY SAND DUNES

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 2.2, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.

Virginia Marine Resources Commission.   Coastal Primarv Sand Dunes/Reaches
      Guidelines: Guidelines for the Permittina of Activities which Encroach into
      Coastal Primary Sand Dunes/Reaches.   Newport News, Virginia: VMRC,
      revised 1986.




                                     87









IV. SURFACE WATER QUALITY

Point Source Control

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.

Virginia State Water Control Board. VR 680-14-01. "Virginia Pollutant Discharge
     Elimination System." Virainia Reaister, September 27, 1989.

            Virainia Water Qualitv Assessment. 1990: 305(b) Report to EPA
     Administrator and Conaress for the Period Julv 1, 1987 to June 30. 1989.
     Information Bulletin 579. Three Volumes. Richmond, Virginia: VWCB, 1990.

Nonpoint Source Control

Bergeson, Lynn. "Legal Lookout: Summary of Final Storm Water Rule" in Pollution
      Engineering. January, 1991.

Cohen,  Gary B.   "Storm Water Permitting Deadlines  Set: EPA's Ambitious
      Regulatory  Approach  Will  be  Costly  to  Communities"  in  Pollution
      Engineering. Volume 3, Number 1, February 1991, pp. 15-17.

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 6, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

           Title 15.1, Chapter 4, Code of Virainia, 1950, as amended.

Southeastern  Virginia  Planning  District  Commission.    Reaional  Stormwater
      Manaaement Strateav. Chesapeake, Virginia: SVPDC, 1989.

Tarbert, Richard E.  "The Downpour of Stormwater Regs: A Summary of the
      Requirements for Individual and Group Applications for Stormwater
      Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity" in Environmental Protection.
      June 1991, pp. 27-29.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  "National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
      System Permit Application Regulation for Stormwater Discharges; Final
      Rule." Federal Reaister, 47990, November 16, 1990.

            National Pollutant Discharae Elimination Svstem Permit ArDlication
     Reauirements for Storm Water Discharaes. Final Reaulation: A Summarv.
     Washington, D.C.: USEPA, 1990.




                                     88









             "Revision of the Virginia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
     System (NPDES) Program to Issue General Permits." Federal Reaister,
     30573, July 3, 1991.

Virginia  Department  of  Conservation  and  Recreation.         VR  215-02-  00.
      "Stormwater Management Regulations."   Virainia Reaister, November  5,
      1990.

Weaver, Robert C.  "The EPA Storm Water Permit Application Process: Time is
     Short for Assessing Options and Gathering Data" in Pollution Enaineerina.
     Volume 3, Number 1, February 1991 pp. 18-20.

Erosion and Sediment Control

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 10.1, Chapter 5, Article 4, Code of Virainia,
      1950, as amended.

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water
      Conservation. VR 625.02.00. "Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations."
      Virainia Reaister, August 13, 1990.

V.    SURFACE WATER QUANTITY

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 62.1, Chapter 24, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

VI. GROUNDWATER QUALITY

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

North Carolina-Virginia Groundwater Subcommittee. "Groundwater Management in
      Southeastern Virginia and Northeastern North Carolina." August, 1975.

Southeastern  Virginia Planning  District Commission.   Groundwater  Protection
      Handbook for Southeastern Virainia. Chesapeake, VA: SVPDC, 1990.

Task  Force on  Septic Regulations.   "Report of the Task  Force on  Septic
      Regulations." Final Draft. Charlottesville, VA: Institute for Environmental
      Negotiation, July, 1991.

Virginia Groundwater Protection Steering Committee.   Groundwater Protection
      Strateav for Virainia.   Charlottesville,  VA:  Institute for Environmental
      Negotiation, 1987, 1990 Supplement.



                                      89









             Virainia  Groundwater  Manaaement  Handbook:    State  Aaencv
     Proarams for Groundwater Protection. Richmond, VA: VGPSC, 1988.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Groundwater Taskforce.  "Protecting the
      Nation's Groundwater: EPA's Strategy for the 1990s." Final Report, 21Z-
      1020.  Washington, D.C.:  Office of the Administrator (WH-550G), July
      1991.

VII.   GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 62.1, Chapter 3.4, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
     amended.


Southeastern  Virginia  Planning  District  Commission.    Review  of  Permits:
      Southeastern Virainia Groundwater Manaement Area. Chesapeake, Virginia:
      SVPDC, 1987.

U.S. Geological Survey.  "Groundwater Use and Levels in the Southern Coastal
      Plain of Virginia." Open-File Report 91- 187. Richmond, VA:  USGS, 1991.

VIII. AIR QUALITY

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 13, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Norfolk Department  of City Planning and  Codes  Enforcement.   Air Quality
      ImDlications for Norfolk: Draft Environmental Qualitv Issue Paoer for Norfolk
      General Plan UDdate. Norfolk, Virginia: The City, 1990.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990:
      Summary Materials. Washington, D.C.: USEPA, 1990.

Virginia Air Pollution Control Board. Reaulations for the Control and Abatement of
      Air Pollution. Richmond, Virginia: VAPCB, revised 1990.

Virginia Department of Air Pollution Control.  Air Qualitv Reaulatorv Proaram for
      Permittina in Virainia. Richmond, Virginia: VDAPC, 1990.

IX.  SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 10.1, Chapter 14, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.




                                     90









Hampton   Roads  Planning  District  Commission.          "Regional  Solid  Waste
      Management Plan for Southeastern Virginia." Vol. I & II. Chesapeake, VA:
      HRPDC, 1991.

Southeastern Virginia Planning District Commission. "An Analysis of Hazardous
      Waste Generation and Disposal in Southeastern Virginia."  Norfolk, VA:
      SVPDC, April, 1986.

X.    TREE PRESERVATION

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 15.1, Chapter 1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Xl.   ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES

Bass, Garnet. "Weapons Against Extinction" in Wildlife in North Carolina. Volume
      55, Number 3, March, 1991, pp. 8-13.

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 29, Chapter 11, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Pague, Christopher A. "Natural Heritage Resources of Virginia: Rare Animals and
      Rare Plants." Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division
      of Natural Heritage. Richmond, VA: VDCR, March/August, 1991.

U.S. Congress.  Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.  16  U.S.C. 1531-
      1543.

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Virainia's Endanaered Species.
      Richmond, Virginia: VGIF, 1985.

            "Federal and State Listed threatened and Endangered Species in
      Virginia as of 9/15/90, 1/1/92." Richmond, VA: VDGIF, 1990, 1991.

XII.   NATURAL AREAS PRESERVATION

Commonwealth of Virginia.  Title 10.1, Chapter 2, Article 3,  Code of Virainia,
      1950, as amended.

Defenders of Wildlife.  In Defense of Wildlife:   Preservina Communities and
      Corridors. Washington, D.C.: DOW, 1989.






                                     91









XIII. NOISE

Miller, G. Tyler, Jr. Livina in the Environment:  An Introduction to Environmental
     Science. 4th Ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co, 1985.

Simonds, John 0.  EarthscaDe:  A Manual of Environmental Plannina. New York,
      NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1978.

U.S. Congress.  Noise Control Act of 1972. 49 U.S.C. 4901, 49  U.S.C. 1201 et
     seq., 32 C.F.R. 1-11.

U.S. Navy.   "Naval Air Station - Oceana, Virginia Beach, Virginia and Naval
      Auxiliary Landing Field - Fentress, Chesapeake, Virginia Air Installations
      Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ)." Undated.

GENERAL

Bradshaw, Julie G. Coastal Resources and the Permit Process: Definitions and
      Jurisdictions. Technical Report No. 91-2. Gloucester Point, Virginia: Virginia
      Institute of Marine Science, 1991.

Canter, Larry W.   Environmental Impact Assessment.   New York, New York:
      McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1977.

Chesapeake Bay Public Access Subcommittee.   ChesaDeake Bav Area Public
      Access Technical Assistance ReDort. 1990.

Commonwealth of Virginia. Title 62.1, Chapter 3.1, Code of Virainia, 1950, as
      amended.

Copeland, B.J. and Jeri Gray, editors.   Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Svstem:
      Preliminarv Technical Analvsis of Status and Trends. Raleigh, North
      Carolina: North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
      Resources, 1989.

Fairfax  County  Office  of  Comprehensive  Planning.    Environmental  Impact
      Evaluation:  Environmental  Site Analvsis.  Desian  with  Natural  Svtems.
      Undated.

Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency.  California Environmental Qualitv
      Act Initial Studv and Checklist. Undated

Randolph, John.   Water Resources Manaaement in Vircinia and the Role of
      Localities. Blacksburg, Virginia: Virginia Polytechnic and State University,
      1991.


                                     92









Richmond Department of Planning and Community Development and University of
     Virginia Department of Engineering Science and Systems.  Environmental
     Advisory Service Prototvoe Model: User's Manual.  Richmond, Virginia: The
     City, 1983.

Spokane County, Washington. The Sookane Environmental Ordinance. 1984.

Thurow, Charles, William Toner  &  Duncan  Erley.   Performance Criteria for
     Sensitive Lands:  A Practical Guide for Local Administrators.   Planning
     Advisory Service, Report Nos. 307,308. Chicago, IL: ASPO, 1975.

URS  Consultants,  Inc.   Environmental  Comoliance  Audit  Checklists:  Naval
     Amphibious Base. Little Creek. Norfolk. Virainia. Virginia Beach, Virginia:
      URS, 1990.

U.S. Congress. Clean Water Act of 1972. P.L. 95-100.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV. Coastal Marinas Assessment
      Handbook. Atlanta, Georgia: EPA, 1985.

York County Department of Community Development. Environment Element: York
      Countv Comorehensive Plan. York County, Virginia: The County, 1991.



























                                     93



I
I
               MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL
             ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
I COMPREHENSIVE
*                 WATER QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








          COMPREHENSIVE WATER QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

                           PROCEDURE GUIDANCE


INTRODUCTION AND USE

Methodology

      For land disturbing activities associated with development, to date, the only
requirement for water quality impact assessment (WQIA) in the Commonwealth of
Virginia  is found  in Sec.  5.6E  of the  Chesapeake  Bay  Preservation  Area
Designation and Management Final Regulations (VR 173-02-01); hereinafter
referred to as the "Final Regulations."   Subsequently, a WQIA  procedure was
developed by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department (CBLAD) in Sec.
111 of the CBLAD Model Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area (CBPA) Ordinance;
hereinafter referred to as the "CBLAD MO." All localities within Tidewater Virginia
were required to develop and adopt local CBPA ordinances which complied with
the Final Regulations by November 15, 1991. Therefore, provisions for a WQIA
procedure are also found within each locally adopted CBPA ordinance.

      As the titles suggest, these WQIA requirements and procedures specifically
address water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. They have been
found by state and local officials to be administratively and politically acceptable.
While recognizing the importance of such a procedure in the efforts to restore the
vitality of Chesapeake Bay, it is equally important to consider land uses outside of
locally-designated CBPAs that may influence the quality of other waters within the
region. In other words, the need exists for more comprehensive water resource
planning and management.

      Therefore, in addition to meeting the requirements of the Final Regulations,
a model Comprehensive WQIA (CWQIA) procedure has been developed which
could be applied to other locally-designated environmentally-sensitive areas. It is
not the intent of the CWQIA to expand the scope and jurisdiction of the WQIA
requirements of the Final Regulations or the CBLAD MO WQIA procedure; rather, it
is intended to be an umbrella procedure, applicable to all development and
redevelopment.  It is also not the intent to create two separate water quality
impact assessment procedures. The CBPA WQIA requirements, which must be
met at a minimum for all land disturbing activities occurring within CBPAs, can be
found within this comprehensive framework.   Where  the CWQIA  it is to be
applicable outside of CBPAs is largely left to local discretion.

      The CWQIA procedure guidance which follows provides examples of when a
CWQIA should be required, as well as a detailed discussion of when CBPA WQIA
requirements must be met in accordance with the Final Regulations.   By also


                                     94









        providing a Model CWQIA Procedure, localities will have a tool for developing a
        more comprehensive WQIA procedure in addition to that currently provided for in
        local CBPA ordinances.  For the purposes of developing this guidance and model,
        and as a basis for comparison, a review of all WQIA procedures within model
        CBPA ordinances in Tidewater Virginia and locally-adopted CBPA ordinances
        within Hampton Roads was undertaken.  However, the guidance and model reflect
        the physical characteristics and administrative implementation needs of Hampton
*)    ~ Roads localities.

              The model includes provisions from existing CBPA WOIA procedures
        presently used in the region that are considered to be optimal. In addition to those
        provisions, others have also been included in order to ensure meaningful water
        quality protection in a more comprehensive manner. These provisions address
        local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to the following: surface water and
        groundwater quality and quantity, erosion and sediment control, point and
        nonpoint source pollution, wetlands, and coastal resources. For a more detailed
        discussion of such regulations, refer to the Guidance Text which accompanies the
        Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire (IERQ) in Part I of this document. The
        model provided herein should also be used to complement local ordinances and
        procedures regarding site plan review and plan of development considerations.

        Use of the CWQIA Procedure

              It is anticipated that the preparation of a CWQIA by a land development
        project applicant would be subsequent to completion, by the same, of the IERQ.

              With the exception of #3 as stated below, the following is a review of the
        evaluation procedure used for the IERO.

              i.    Negative Declaration:  a finding that the proposed project could not
                    have significant adverse impacts on the environment as categorized in
                    the Questionnaire.

              2.    Mitigated Negative Declaration:  a finding that, although the project
                    could have significant adverse impacts on the environment as
                    categorized in the Questionnaire, the proposed mitigation measures
                    detailed and/or agreed upon by the project applicant will remedy
                    those impacts.

 I~ ~        ~3.    CWQIA Required: a finding that the project, as proposed, will have a
                    significant adverse impact on either surface water or groundwater
                    quality and/or quantity; and/or the project will be located within or
                    encroach upon a Resource Protection Area as designated under the
                    local CBPA Ordinance. Therefore, a comprehensive water quality
                    impact assessment of the proposed project is necessary.


                                              95









              If a determination is made by the local planning staff that a CWQIA is
I     ~ ~required for the proposed project, such an assessment can be prepared according
        the Model CWQIA Procedure. This should be done prior to any clearing or grading
        of the site. Such assessment should also include, in detail, all proposed mitigation
I     ~ ~measures to be incorporated within the site plan and plan of development.  All
        expenses incurred during the preparation of the CWQIA should be borne by the
        applicant.   Examples of data needs and recommended  sources of assessment
        information, which can be used in the preparation of information to be submitted
        in the CWQIA, are provided in Appendix A.

 U           ~~~Once the CWQIA has been completed and submitted for review to the local
        designated authority, one decision regarding building permit issuance should be
        made by weighing specified evaluation criteria against the assessment findings. If
        it is determined that the project as proposed will cause a significant adverse
        impact (or whatever threshold is selected by the locality) to water quality, then the
*       ~~project applicant should be requested to submit additional mitigation plans where
        potential impacts have not been adequately addressed. Thresholds could include
        specific land uses, land use changes, area of land disturbance or change in water
I     ~ ~quality conditions.   A finding of environmental inconsistency regarding water
        quality should be made when impacts created by the project cannot be mitigated.

I       ~~Definitions

              The following words and terms are used in this discussion and model.
I     ~ ~Those which have been defined in the CBPA Final Regulations (VR 173-02-01)
        under See. 4.1 and Sec. 10.1-2101 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act are in
        bold print. Those definitions which are not in bold print have been cited from
        publications by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
        "Best Management Practice" means a practice, or combination of practices, that is
        determined by a state or designated area wide planning agency to be the most
        effective, practicable means of preventing or reducing the amount of pollution
        generated by nonpoint sources to a level compatible with water quality goals.
        "Best Management System" is a combination of conservation practices or
I     ~ ~management  measures,  which  when  applied,  will achieve  nonpoint  source
        pollution control through reduced transport of sediment, nutrients and chemicals
        into the surface and groundwater. This term applies to agricultural, forestry, and
I      ~ ~urban nonpoint source control measures.  The concept is based on the need to
        promote combinations of practices that most effectively protect or improve water
*       ~~quality and they can include structural and management practices.

        "Buffer Area" means an area of natural or established vegetation managed to
        protect other components of a Resource Protection Area and state waters from

         *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~96









significant degradation due to land disturbances.

"Chesapeake  Bay Preservation Area"  means any land designated by a local
government pursuant to Part III of the CBPA Final Regulations and Sec. 10.1-2107
of the Act. A Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall consist of a Resource
Protection Area and a Resource Management Area.

"Development" means the construction or substantial alteration of residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation, or utility facilities or
structures.

"Floodplain" means all lands that would be inundated by flood water as a result of
a storm event of a 100-year return interval.

"Highly erodible soils" means soils (excluding vegetation) with an erodibility index
(El) from sheet and rill erosion equal to or greater than eight. The erodibility index
for any soil is defined as the product of the formula RKLS/T, as defined by the
"Food Security Act (F.S.A.) Manual" of August, 1988 in the "Field Office
Technical Guide" of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service,
where K is the soil susceptibility to water erosion in the surface layer; R is the
rainfall and runoff; LS is the combined effects of slope length and steepness; and
T is the soil loss tolerance.

"Highly permeable soils" means soils with a given potential to transmit water
through the soil profile. Highly permeable soils are identified as any soil having a
permeability equal to or greater than six inches of water movement per hour in any
part of the soil profile to a depth of 72 inches (permeability groups "rapid" and
"very rapid") as found in the "National Soils Handbook" of July 1983 in the "Field
Office Technical Guide" of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation
Service.

"Impervious cover" means a surface composed of any material that significantly
impedes or prevents natural infiltration of water into the soil. Impervious surfaces
include, but are not limited to , roofs, buildings, streets, parking areas, and any
concrete, asphalt, or compacted gravel surface.

"lnfill" means utilization of vacant land in previously developed areas.

"Intensely Developed Areas" means those areas designated by the local
government pursuant to Sec. 3.4 of the CBPA Final Regulations.

"Nonpoint source  pollution"  is the  pollution that reaches  surface  water  or
groundwater that cannot be traced to an identifiable source such as a point
source. In coastal areas, this can include but is not limited to: agricultural runoff,
urban runoff (including developing and developed areas), silvicultural (forestry)


                                       97









runoff, marinas and recreational boating, hydromodification, dams and levees,
shoreline erosion, oil and gas operations, mining activities, land disposal of
wastes, and on- site sewage disposal.

"Nontidal wetlands" means those wetlands other than tidal wetlands that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, as
defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Sec. 404 of the
federal Clean Water Act, in 33 C.F.R. 328.3b, dated November 13, 1986. (This
definition is subject to change  pending revisions to the Federal Manual for
Identifvina and Delineatina Jurisdictional Wetlands, which are currently being
considered.)

"Plan of development" means any process for site plan review in local zoning and
land development regulations designed to ensure compliance with Sec. 10.1-2109
of the Act and these regulations, prior to issuance of a building permit.

"Redevelopment" means the process of developing land that is or has been
previously developed.

"Resource Management Area" means that component of the Chesapeake Bay
Preservation Area that is not classified as the Resource Protection Area.

(The Final Regulations establish the Resource Management Area or RMA as the
landward component of Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas. Land to be
considered for designation as RMAs include the following: non-tidal wetlands,
floodplains, highly erodible soils, highly permeable soils, other lands at local
discretion. Unlike the delineation of Resource Protection Areas, the designation of
RMAs has been left in large part to local discretion. See Figures 3A and 3B.)

Resource  Protection  Area"  means  that component  of the  Chesapeake  Bay
Preservation Area comprised of lands at or near the shoreline that have an intrinsic
water quality value due to the ecological and biological processes they perform or
are sensitive to impacts which may result in significant degradation to the quality
of state waters.

(The Final Regulations establish the Resource Protection Area or RPA as the
shoreward component of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area. Lands to be
included in the RPA designation include the following: tidal wetlands, nontidal
wetlands connected by surface flow and contiguous to tidal wetlands or tributary
streams, tidal shores, other lands at local discretion, and a buffer area not less
than 100 feet in width landward of all other components of RPAs and along both
sides of any tributary stream. See Figures 3A, 3B and 4.)



                                     98






                                 FIGURE 3A AND 3B





          CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREAS    3

























CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREAS


















                  Reprinted with permission: City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
             I~~~~~~~~~~~~~ï¿½






                              FIGURE 4


HYPOTHETICAL RMA CoMPONENTS

      HIGHLY ERODIBLE SOILS
                                      HIGHLY PERMEABLE SOILS
       100-foot buffer
                                                             RESOURCE
                                                             MANAGEMENT
                 \I~~~ \\ ~~~~~AREA (RMA)
                                                             BOUNDARY
                                                             (location at the
                               I'<~~~~~~~~~~~ ~discretion of the local
                                (.NOT.  CONECED governnent)



                                                             tidal shore





                                                        tidal wetland







                                                100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN
               Iiï¿½








 NOTE: items in lower case letters indicate the feature that the symbol depicts.
         ITEMS IN UPPER CASE LElTIERS INDICATE THE FEATURE
        SHOULD BE MAPPED AS AN RMA FEATURE


 Source:                                                      tiLAD Local Assistance Manual, 111-43 11-89.









"Riparian area" is the vegetated area along a waterbody that is typically part of a
riparian system or complex assemblage or organisms and their environment
existing adjacent to and  near waterbodies,  generally associated with bays,
estuaries, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, springs, seeps, and ephemeral, intermittent, or
perennial streams. These areas are strongly influenced by the adjacent aquatic
environment, have linear characteristics, and experience hydrological fluxes, ie.
flooding or inundation, at least once within the growing season.

"Substantial  alteration"  means  expansion  or modification  of a  building  or
development which would result in a disturbance of land exceeding an area of
2,500 sf. in the Resource Management Area only.

"Tidal shore" or "shore" means lands contiguous to a tidal body of water between
the mean low water level and the mean high water level.

"Tidal wetlands" means vegetated and nonvegetated wetlands as defined in Sec.
62.1-13.2 of the Code of Virainia.

"Tributary stream" means any perennial stream that is so depicted on the most
recent U.S. Geological Survey 7-1/2 minute topographic quadrangle map (scale
1:24,000)

"Vegetative filter strips" are permanent, maintained strips of planted or indigenous
vegetation located between nonpoint sources of pollution and receiving water
bodies for the purpose of removing or mitigating the effects of nonpoint source
pollutants such as nutrients, pesticides, sediment and suspended solids.

"Water-dependent facility" means a development of land that cannot exist outside
of the Resource Protection Area and must be located on the shoreline by reason of
the intrinsic nature of its operation. These facilities include, but are not limited to
(i) ports; (ii) the intake and outfall structures of power plants, water treatment
plants, sewage treatment plants, and storm sewers; (iii) marinas and other boat
docking structures; (iv) beaches and other public water-oriented recreation areas;
and (v) fisheries or other marine resources facilities.

"Wetlands" are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater and a frequency and duration to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas.   Wetlands include both tidal and nontidal wetlands as defined
previously; they are generally waters of the U.S. and, as such, afforded protection
under the Clean Water Act. (This definition is subject to change pending revisions
to the Federal Manual for ldentifvina and Delineatina Jurisdictional Wetlands,
which are currently being considered.)



                                       101









        Overview of the RelationshiD between Land Use and Water Quality

              High water quality and the sound environmental health of Chesapeake Bay
        are integrally related. Moreover, according to a recent book by the Chesapeake
        Bay Foundation entitled, Turnina the Tide,


                          "It's health is equally inseparable from the
                          quality of the air above it and the great,
                          invisible seepages of groundwater from
    I                   ~ ~~~~~beneath  it.   What  the  growing  human
                          population does to transform the land and
                          puts in the air is as important as what it
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~discharges directly into the water." (Horton
                          & Eichbaum, 1991)


        Should the optimal balance of nature which makes Chesapeake Bay the most
        productive estuary in the United States be upset, then life within and the quality of
        life derived from it is in jeopardy.
              Unfortunately, this is the reality facing Tidewater Virginia and the other Bay
        regions., today. Essential steps are being taken to restore the natural productivity
        of the Bay and to preserve its waters for present and future generations to enjoy.
        However, to focus all of our efforts on this unique resource and all that
        contributes to its continued decline or potential improvement can be short-
        sighted, however, if it is done to the mutual exclusion of all other important water
        resources and environmentally-sensitive areas within the region.
              Water is continuously recycled. The sun is the energy source that keeps
I     ~ ~water moving through an endless process called the water cycle, or hydrologic
        cycle. Water is exchanged among clouds, land, and the oceans, which makes it
        our most recycled resource. While this process transports water, some of it is
        purified through decomposition, settling, and filtering as water travels down a river
        and through wetlands, the soil, and other natural filters. The effectiveness of the
        purification process is reduced by such factors as vegetation removal, atmospheric
        pollution, and the introduction of such pollutants as heavy metals and some
        chemicals that do not break down into harmless substances.

              We use our lakes and rivers as sources of clean, safe water for water
        supply, recreational, industrial and agricultural uses, and for fisheries and wildlife
I     ~ ~habitat.  The amount of water that is available for use, by man and by nature,
        depends on its quantity and its quality.  In addition to the effects of natural
        processes, water quality is vulnerable to change from human activities which add

        substances such as bacteria, oxygen-demanding substances, nutrients, toxic

                                               102









        chemicals, sediment, oil-based compounds, debris, and waste heat to the water,
        as well as what is diffused into the air. The result of our day-to-day lifestyles can
        change the chemical, biological, and physical characteristics of our water, and the
        cumulative effect of this on Chesapeake Bay, and its tributaries, is of particular
        concern in Virginia.

              Because we use the same water over and over again as it is recycled by
        nature or people, its quality is important. Polluted water can spread disease, kill
1  ~     aquatic life, destroy plants and animals, and make rivers and other water bodies
        unfit for recreation. Since our water supply is limited, cleaning our used water and
        safeguarding our clean water is an important part of using this resource and our
        land wisely.

 *I~ ~There are two types of pollution from land use activities which can have an
        impact on water quality-- nonpoint and point. Nonpoint source pollution is pollution
        of water from diffuse sources, caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and
        through the ground and carrying natural and manmade pollutants into lakes, rivers,
        streams, wetlands, embayments, estuaries, and other surface waters and
        groundwater.   Nonpoint source runoff volume and pollutant loadings tend to
        increase as the amount of paved or impervious surface increases.

              During the first fifteen years of the national program to abate and control
        water  pollution, the Environmental  Protection Agency  (EPA)  and  the States
        focused most of their water pollution control activities upon traditional point
        sources, such as discharges through pipes from sewage treatment plants and
        industrial facilities. These point sources have been regulated by EPA and the
        States through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
        program, established by Sec. 402 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA). In
        Virginia, point source discharges are permitted through the State's own VPDES
        permit program. For a more detailed discussion of point source controls, refer to
        the Guidance Text which accompanies the IERQ in Part I of this document.
        Discharges of dredged and fill materials into wetlands have also been regulated by
        the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and EPA under Sec. 404 of the CWA, and
        under Sec. 401 of the CWA by the State Water Control Board.  These programs
        not only manage impacts to the water themselves, but also to both tidal and
        nontidal wetlands. This is discussed in greater detail in Part I.

              As a result of these efforts, pollutant loads from point source discharges
        have been greatly reduced and considerable progress has been made in restoring
        and maintaining water quality. However, by focusing primarily on point sources,
        comprehensive water quality improvements cannot be achieved. Recent studies
        and surveys by EPA and by State water quality agencies indicate that the majority
        of remaining water quality impairments in water resources results from nonpoint
        source pollution and other non-traditional sources such as urban stormwater runoff
        and combined sewer overflows.


                                               103









              While much progress has been made over the years in regulating and
I     ~ ~controlling point source pollution, it is generally felt that much work remains
        before nonpoint pollution prevention efforts can catch up to the level of protection
        achieved for point sources. This observation holds particularly true in Virginia. A
I     ~ ~recent comprehensive assessment of the condition of the Chesapeake Bay by the
        Chesapeake Bay Foundation, for instance, concludes that agricultural runoff,
        runoff from construction sites, and urban stormwater runoff are major causes of
        water quality degradation in the Bay (lEN, 1991).
              In addition, even though a number of programs have been developed to
        address nonpoint source pollution, studies indicate that other nonpoint sources of
        major concern are still not being addressed in water protection planning. A report
        issued in December 1990 by the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program's Nonpoint Source
        Evaluation Panel states that:

                           We are not persuaded that the present array
                           of programs, if implemented as presently
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~designed at the current resource levels, is
                           sufficient to guarantee achievement of the
                           40% nutrient reduction goal established by
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~~the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement.   In
                           general, nutrient management to achieve a
                           net reduction of nitrogen and phosphorous
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~~migrating  into  the  atmosphere,  surface
                           water and groundwater needs to be the
                           principle which drives program and funding
                           decisions. (EPA Chesapeake Bay Program,
                           1990)

              Another  report  from  the  Program's  Toxics  and  Living  Resources
        Subcommittee in May 1991 entitled "Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy
I      ~ ~Commitment Report" provides a "Toxics of Concern List," which identifies those
        toxic substances representing an immediate or potential threat to the Chesapeake
        Bay system. This list can be found in Appendix D. Future revisions of this list will
        incorporate the latest information available to the Program on point and nonpoint
        source loadings, ambient concentrations, aquatic toxicity, and federal and state
*       ~~regulations and/or restrictions.

              Virginia has adopted an "anti-degradation policy" which is intended to
        ensure that waters that are cleaner than the established water quality standards
        for those waters be maintained in this condition.  This policy and established
        standards represent an effort to identify desired uses for surface water bodies and
*       ~~to restrict the overall level of pollutant loading to ensure the protection of these


                                               104









        uses. Water quality management plans also exist for each of the State's river
        basins (with the exception of the Rappahannock River). These are used by the
        State Water Control Board in establishing discharge limits for point source
        pollution. In this way, the existing water quality framework does incorporate the
        concept of cumulative impacts even if that term is not used per se (IEN, 1991).
        The State's anti-degradation policy and water quality standards for the river and
        coastal basins within Hampton Roads are included in Appendix B.

              In Virginia, substantial progress in managing nonpoint source pollution is
        occurring through the implementation of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act,
I  ~     hereinafter referred to as the "Bay Act," and locally adopted programs throughout
        the Tidewater region. The State nonpoint source control plan, prepared under
        Sec. 319 of the federal CWA, also contributes to this effort. Control of nonpoint
        pollutants is provided through Virginia's Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations,
        which mandate that localities adopt minimum local erosion and sediment control
        ordinances. Other new mechanisms to promote more effective local and regional
        control  of stormwater  runoff were  established  by  the  Virginia  Stormwater
        Management Act. Local governments were given the authority to enact local
        stormwater management ordinances and state agency projects now require the
        preparation of stormwater management plans.  Coordination of these separate
        permitting programs may be facilitated under a comprehensive water quality.
        impact assessment (CWQIA) procedure umbrella and related performance
        standards.  In addition, a CWQIA can be used as a means of reinforcing the goals
        and objectives set forth in the local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances,
        where special management areas are addressed.

              Protection of groundwater from potentially harmful land use activities is also
        a priority in Virginia.  A detailed discussion of Virginia's Groundwater Protection
        Strategy is provided in the Guidance Text which follows the IERQ in Part I of this
        document. Groundwater quantity management is also a priority, especially in the
        State's two  designated "Groundwater Management Areas."   All localities in
        Hampton Roads are included in the Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management
        Area, and groundwater withdrawal permits are required for any new uses.
        Changes to the State's Groundwater Act are currently being considered to address
        the potential problems which have been brought about by overallocation of the
        groundwater resource in the past; or, in other words, to address and better
        manage the cumulative impact of the current and potential withdrawals by the
        many groundwater users in the area.

              Land use planning provides a means for managing growth to permit
        maximum use of a limited resource base and retain for future decisions a maximum
        number of available alternatives.  However, it is not enough to think only of
        protecting what we already have; it is also important to see protection as part of a
        larger effort to create what we want in the future.  In these efforts, a conflict
        often arises between conservation and creation.  In environmentally sensitive


                                              105








        areas,  natural  preservation  should  be  an  important  planning  objective.
        Development  needs to respect nature and  natural values.   In other areas,
I       "~Icreation" must focus less on prohibition than on sensitive accommodation and
        balance. Natural hazards and resources must be recognized and evaluated, and
        the information derived from these evaluations must be used in the planning
        process to make intelligent decisions about land use.
              A new type of land use management that is beginning to emerge is the use
I     ~ ~of performance standards to evaluate and  manage  development in sensitive
        environmental areas.  Traditional zoning ordinances establish a detailed list of
        permitted uses, prohibited uses, conditional uses that may occur if specific
        requirements are met, and site requirements. This approach is limited because of
        its inability to recognize the complex interrelationships of dynamic ecological and
        physical systems.   In most zoning ordinances,  there  is no  mechanism  for
        considering environmental capabilities beyond a simple exclusion of all uses that
        might have some impact on a sensitive resource.

              The alternative to this method is to establish environmental performance
        standards by which a community sets specific measurable levels at which key
I     ~ ~functions of the sensitive environmental system must operate, consonant with
        proposed changes in land use.  The developer, through a licensed engineer,
        geologist, hydrologist, planner or other professional, must then indicate how the
I     ~ ~proposed development will meet these standards.   This approach encourages
        innovation and experimentation, which will result in development that is more
*       ~~compatible with the environment.

              Water is a resource that can be protected through utilization of performance
        standards.   This can be achieved by maintaining natural runoff patterns and
        groundwater percolation, by minimizing erosion and siltation, and by minimizing
        other pollutants at the source including nitrogen, phosphorous, and toxics.
*       ~~Performance control regulations can also be created for protection of groundwater
        aquifers and aquifer recharge areas.

              In conclusion, land use planning concepts apply to both urban and nonurban
        areas. In recent times land use planning at all levels has become more responsive
        to environmental considerations. Effective planning calls for environmental
I     ~ ~awareness and concern in the determination of the location, nature, and extent of
        development. Land use decisions must take into account the capacity of the land
        itself, as well as other natural resources such as water, to withstand
U      ~ ~developmental impacts.  Planning efforts to enhance the water quality of the
        Chesapeake Bay, its tributaries, and other natural resource areas of concern at the
        regional and local level, must be made to avoid adverse environmental and
        socioeconomic consequences. One approach to such efforts can be achieved
        through preliminary evaluation of the environmental factors associated with
        proposed development and redevelopment projects. This can be accomplished by

         *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~106









        conducting a CWQIA of the project's potential impacts prior to land disturbance.

        Purpose and Intent of the CWQIA Procedure

              The Bay Act recognizes that healthy state and local economies are integrally
        related to each other and to the environmental health of the Chesapeake Bay. The
        Bay Act also recognizes that balanced economic development and water quality
        protection are not mutually exclusive. Both of these statements hold particularly
        true in Hampton Roads. Setting a goal of minimizing point and nonpoint source
        pollution in local comprehensive plans, and zoning and subdivision ordinances,
        would be within the spirit of this law. However, the Bay Act encourages locally
        adopted Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area (CBPA) programs to provide for the
        prevention of an increase in pollution, by requiring that new development or
*1  ~    redevelopment activities at least maintain present water quality levels in the Bay
        watershed and the Bay itself. In addition, local programs should strive to achieve
        a reduction in existing water pollution where possible.

              In order to achieve these goals of prevention, maintenance, and reduction,
        performance criteria are the vehicle used in the Final Regulations to establish
        standards for use when  evaluating development and  redevelopment  projects
        proposed within locally- designated CBPAs. Part IV of the Final Regulations, "Land
        Use and Development Performance Criteria," sets out the following objectives:
        "prevent a net increase in nonpoint source pollution from new development and
        achieve a 10% reduction in nonpoint source pollution from redevelopment."

              To meet these objectives, the Final Regulations further set out general
        performance criteria which include: preserving natural vegetation, minimizing land
        disturbance, minimizing impervious cover, strictly controlling soil erosion during
        land clearing and construction, controlling stormwater runoff and its quality, and
        subjecting all development to site plan review. These same performance criteria
        can be extended to areas outside of local CBPAs as well, in order to ensure
        comprehensive water quality protection.

 I~ ~~Land use changes, such as when a field used for agricultural production is
        subdivided for residential lots, can often result in a decrease of nonpoint source
        pollutant loadings in nearby surface and groundwater streams. On the other hand,
        new development also has the potential to aggravate poor water quality conditions
        if left unmanaged. This impact is further exacerbated in environmentally-sensitive
        areas.   Such an impact can be lessened or eliminated through mitigation by
        incorporating proper land management into the plan of development phase of the
        project.

              New development and redevelopment projects can be fitted and retrofitted,
        respectively, with best management practices (BMPs) to achieve the Bay Act goals
        of preventing an increase in or reducing pre-development nonpoint source pollution


                                               107








        as a result of construction, operation, and use maintenance activities. The same
        should hold true for such activities in other locally-designated, environmentally-
I    ~     ~sensitive areas.  Perhaps the optimal BMP might be proactive land use planning,
        which utilizes knowledge of the sensitivity of the site at the pre- plan of
        development stage. This may eliminate the need to install structural or non-
        structural BMPs in order to react to and mitigate the impacts of construction and
        the resultant new land use.

 I           ~~~Consideration of cumulative impacts by local planning staff when evaluating
        potential projects can also be used to help achieve the goals set forth above.
        Cumulative impacts, in this instance, are the combined effect on the watershed of
        the proposed project's potential water quality impacts along with those of already
        existing and proposed land uses. This consideration can also be incorporated
        within the CWQIA evaluation procedure. It is in this exercise at local discretion
        that improvements in the quality of state waters within the region can also be
        achieved over the long term.

              Sec. 101 of the CBLAD MO states that:

  3                 ~~~~~"...Certain lands that are proximate to shorelines have
                    intrinsic water quality value due to the ecological and
                    biological processes they perform.   Other lands have
  I               ~ ~~~~severe development constraints from flooding, erosion,
                    and soil limitations. With proper management, they offer
                    significant ecological benefits by providing water quality
  I               ~ ~~~~maintenance and pollution control, as well as flood and
                    shoreline erosion control. These lands together-- the
                    designated Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas (CBPAs)-
                    - need to be protected from destruction and damage in
                    order to protect the quality of water in the Bay and
  *                 ~~~~~consequently the quality of life [in the Bay region] and
                    the Commonwealth of Virginia."

        To use the water quality impact assessment as a means of ensuring this, the Final
        Regulations, which became effective on 10/1/91, state in Part V, Sec. 5.6E that:

                           "1.   The  purpose  of the  water  quality
                           impact assessment is to identify the impacts
    I                    ~ ~~~~~of proposed development on water quality
                          and land in Resource Protection Areas
                           (RPAs) consistent with the goals and
                          objectives of the Act, these regulations, and
                          local programs, and to determine specific
    *                      ~~~~~~measure  for mitigation of those  impacts.


                                               108








    I                     ~~~~~~The specific content and procedures for the
                           water quality impact assessment shall be
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~established    by    local    governments."
                           (Emphasis ours.)

 I           ~~~Thus, the purpose and intent of both the Final Regulations and the WQIA
        procedure requirements are inextricable. Based on this initiative, it should be the
        intent of the CWQIA to provide a major tool for ensuring that water quality
I     ~becomes  an  integral  element  of  all  development  considerations  in  all
        environmentally-sensitive areas; such areas including those that may either have a
        direct or indirect influence on nearby surface water or groundwater. The following
        list provides some examples of provisions that can be used to define the purpose
        and intent of the CWQIA. This list incorporates not only the encouragement given
        to local CBPA programn development to meet the spirit of the Bay Act, as stated in
        Part 11, See. 2.1 of the Final Regulations, but it also emphasizes comprehensive
        water quality impact assessment in other natural areas of concern.

              A.    To promote the protection of existing high quality state waters and
                     restoration of all other state waters to a condition or quality that will
   I               ~ ~~~~permit all reasonable public uses and will support the propagation and
                     growth of all aquatic life which might reasonably be expected to.
                     inhabit them.

              B.    To safeguard the clean waters of the Commonwealth from pollution.

 I            ~~~~C.    To prevent any increase in pollution.

 *            ~~~~D.    To reduce existing pollution.

               E.    To identify the impacts of proposed development on water quality and
                     lands within CBPAs, as well as other environmentally-sensitive areas
                     identified by local government.

 1            ~~~~F.    Where   development   does   occur   within   CBPAs   and   other
                     environmentally-sensitive areas, to ensure that it is located and
                     constructed in a manner that will minimize disruption to the natural
                     functions of these areas.
               G.    To  ensure that these environmentally-sensitive  areas  are clearly
                     delineated on local zoning maps and site plans.
               H.    To conduct site visits by designated authorities to help determine
                     lands which are unsuitable for development because of water-related
                     constraints. For example, such constraints can include non-seasonal
                     high groundwater, erosion potential, vulnerability to flood damage, or


                                                109









           incapability of soils to attenuate contaminants borne in domestic
           sewage.   (Note-- Although this approach may be instrumental in
            protecting  individuals  from  investing  funds  in lands  which  are
            unsuitable for development, it is ultimately the property owner's
            responsibility  to  investigate  potential  constraints,  conflicts,  and
            liabilities.)

      1.    To specify mitigation measures which will address water quality
            protection, and which will ensure protection of existing high quality
           state waters, where applicable, to the maximum extent feasible.

     J.    To promote water resource conservation in order to provide for the
            health, safety and welfare of the present and future citizens of the
            Commonwealth.

Context for the CWQIA Procedure

     The placement of a CWQIA procedure within the existing context of local
administrative procedures will necessarily vary. It should be understood that the
recommendations made herein provide maximum flexibility for local implementation
of a CWQIA and that each locality is ultimately left with final discretion on
placement.

      As a basis for comparison, a review of local CBPA WQIA procedures, found
in CBPA ordinances or other relevant ordinances, demonstrates several WQIA
placement options within existing administrative procedures. One option in a local
CBPA ordinance shows the WQIA procedure as a stand-alone element within the
CBPA  ordinance, and/or stormwater  management  and  erosion and  sediment
control ordinances. This option is also shown in the CBLAD MO. A second option
shows the WQIA procedure to be one of several required elements in a Plan of
Development (POD) process, within the CBPA ordinance.  In one local CBPA
ordinance, for example, the WQIA procedure is included within the Natural
Resources Inventory of the site.

      In general, the Final Regulations require a POD for all proposed development
exceeding 2,500 square feet (sf.) in CBPAs. All development encroaching into a
RPA is then required to conduct a WQIA.   Guidance within the CBLAD Local
Assistance Manual which accompanies the CBLAD MO states:

                  "This process for development review, as a
                  key in the effective administration of land
                  use regulations to protect water quality, will
                  provide significant benefits to the developer
                  and   the  community...lncluded  in  this
                  process is information needed to address


                                      110








                           water quality issues which may, however,
                           be over and above what is typically shown
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~~on  such  a  plan  (ie.    information  for
                           environmental site assessment, landscaping
                           plan, and stormwater management plan). In
                           all but the  most  complex   development
                           projects,   these   requirements   can   be
                           incorporated onto one or two sheets of the
    U                     ~~~~~~~~site plan."

        This guidance document goes on to describe the site plan process as required
        under the CBPA as follows:

    *                      ~~~~~~~"A site plan must indicate the nature of the
                           proposed use and include a depiction of all
                           site features, including building location,
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~~topography,  drainage,  utility  placement,
                           driveway   location  and   design,  on-site
                           circulation facilities, and landscaping.  The
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~~~site  plan   ordinance   establishes   basic
                           requirements  for  plan  content,  submittal
                           proced ures, and administration."

        Finally, the guidance document states that, "the approval of all components of the
        POD process should be required as a precondition for any development or
        redevelopment activity within CBPAs, including any grading and/or clearing of a
        site."

 U            ~~~As a more detailed example of how one locality within Hampton Roads has
        built the CBPA WQIA procedure into its existing POD and site plan review process,
        in accordance with the Final Regulations, the following is an excerpted scenario
        for a request for building permit or site plan review: 1) a request for a building
        permit or a site plan review is submitted; 2) if the project can be built under
I      ~ ~existing zoning, then it must be determined if the project is in a CBPA Overlay
        Zone; 3) if it is not, then the project is subject to the existing administrative
        process; if it is, then the location within the CBPA Overlay Zone is verified; 4) if
I      ~ ~the project does not require an exemption, exception or waiver to the CBPA
        requirements, then it must be determined if the project requires a RPA buffer area
        modification and/or WQIA; 5) if it does, then requirements for the RPA buffer area
        modification and/or WQ1A are added to the site plan requirements; if not, then the
        project proceeds in the normal site plan review process; and finally, 6) if the
        project is approved in the site plan review process, then a building permit is
        issued.

               As previously stated, the WQIA procedure as it exists within the Final








        Regulations, pertains only to lands within locally- designated CBPAs. In order to
        address water quality protection in other environmentally-sensitive areas outside of
I     ~ ~CBPAs, which may also have an impact on other water bodies of concern within
        the region, a CWQIA procedure would need to be adopted by the locality. The
        minimum CBPA WQIA requirements for all development proposed in CBPAs could
I     ~ ~be incorporated within this comprehensive assessment procedure.  Adopting of a
        CWQIA procedure may first require voluntary amendments to local zoning,
        subdivision and site plan ordinances, if a CWQIA is to be required for all
I     ~ ~development and redevelopment.  Alternatively, another approach could be local
        implementation of an overlay zone and creation of a supplemental overlay zone
        ordinance similar to that used for CBPAs; such implementation would also be done
        at local discretion.  In addition, if a locality does decide to adopt a CWQIA
        procedure, this procedure should be referenced in all relevant local ordinances and
*       ~~regulations where applicable.

        Elements to be Included in a CWQIA Procedure

              Based on the comparison of models and local ordinances, the following
        elements are commonly found and should be included in a CWQIA procedure at a
        minimum:
        1 .    Applicability/General Qualifying Criteria
I     ~ ~2.    Information to be Submitted for Review
        3.    Submission and Review Requirements
*       ~~4.    Evaluation Procedure

        Applicability/General Qualifying Criteria

 I            ~~~~It is essential that an "Applicability/General Qualifying Criteria" section,
        which details when a CWQIA is required for a proposed project, be included in the
        CWQIA  procedure.    This  section  should  clearly  specify  what  types  of
        development, what threshold of land area disturbance, and in what areas in the
        locality compliance with a CWQIA procedure is necessary. The reviewed WQIA
I     ~ ~procedures within CBPA models and locally adopted CBPA ordinances provide a
        wide range of development types and land area disturbance thresholds, which are
        considered to have the potential to cause a "significant adverse environmental
I      ~ ~impact" on water quality and, therefore, initiate the need for a project applicant to
        complete a WQIA. Where in the localities such a procedure is applicable also
        varies. However, at a minimum, those projects proposed in areas designated by
I      ~ ~the locality as Resource Protection Areas must complete a WQIA  in order to
        comply with the CBPA Regulations. These CBPA WQIA requirements could be
        incorporated within the umbrella CWQIA procedure.



         I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1









              A comparison of WQIA procedures in the CBPA models and locally adopted
        CBPA ordinances also reveals differences in applicability in terms of the level of
I     ~ ~assessment to be required.  The extent of impact associated with a proposed
        project can be classified as minor or major, for example, depending on the project
        intensity or area of land disturbance. This proposed intensity often serves as the
        basis for requiring that either a minor WQIA or a major WQIA be conducted in the
        CBPA models and ordinances. Some more simplified approaches use only one
        level of assessment for all qualifying proposals, regardless of the area of land
        disturbance. A determination of which level of assessment is more applicable for
        the type of land use proposed is largely left to the discretion of the locality;
        however, a general analysis of which path a locality should choose when making
        such a determination for a CWQIA procedure will be discussed. Consideration
        should be given to past, as well as proposed uses of the project site. Provisions
U       ~~for -inclusion of information on past uses in the CWQIA are not currently found in
        available WOIA guidance documents from the CBLAD.

              Part V, See. 5.6E. of the Final Regulations states:

                           "A water quality impact assessment shall be
                          required for any proposed development
                          within the RPA consistent with Part IV [of
                          these  regulations]  and  for  any  other
                          development      in    Chesapeake        Bay
                           Preservation Areas [CBPAs] that may
                          warrant such assessment because of the
                          unique characteristics of the site or intensity
                          of the proposed use or development."

U       ~~Finally, the guidance document which accompanies the CBLAD (MO) goes on to
        state that:

                           "The WQIA will be an important tool for
                           local   governments   in  identifying   and
    I                    ~ ~~~~~assessing  the  water  quality  impacts  of
                          proposed development projects within the
                           [CBPAJ Overlay District. A WQIA will be
    I                    ~ ~~~~~required  for  any  development  proposed
                          within RPAs, for development within RMAs
                          when deemed necessary by the [Designated
                          Authority], or in granting any exception
                          from the requirements of the Overlay
    *                     ~~~~~~~~~District. "

        However, only in the performance criteria for RPAs listed in See. 4.3 of the CBPA
        Final Regulations, where "allowable development is defined," does it state that

                                               113









redevelopment is also subject to a WQIA procedure:

               "A WQIA  shall be required for any proposed
               development   in  accordance   with   Part  V
               (Implementation, Assistance, and Determination
               of Consistency).   Land  development  may  be
               allowed it it is (i) water-dependent or (ii)
               constitutes redevelopment."

      New development has the potential to aggravate an already adverse water
quality condition, or could be a contributing factor in the decline of former high
water quality levels; primarily, because of nonpoint source pollution associated
with the site.  Likewise, redevelopment and improvements made to existing
structures have the potential to adversely affect water quality if mitigative
measures are not incorporated into the plan of development. Some examples
include structural stormwater BMPs or nonstructural vegetative filter strips, the
flexibility to contribute  runoff from  impervious  areas  on-site to a regional
stormwater BMP network if more appropriate (the Final Regulations, as currently
written, encourage use of on-site stormwater BMPs), and the coordination of
separate  BMPs  employed  to  address  specific  site/pollutant  source  loading
characteristics into a Best Management System or BMS.

      Through a dialogue between the project applicant and the designated review
authority prompted by the CWQIA procedure, such measures incorporated into the
plan of development could prevent an increase in pollutant loads being transported
off-site and discharged into any receiving waters.  In addition, such measures
should target urban nonpoint source nutrient loadings which have been identified
in various EPA studies as lacking significant consideration; yet, which remain a
serious threat to the ecosystem of Chesapeake Bay, and its tributaries, in
particular.

      Therefore, in order to ensure both beneficial and comprehensive water
quality management, all proposals for new development, redevelopment, amd
improvements to existing structures should require compliance with a WQIA
procedure. Appendix B provides examples of thresholds that could be used when
determining CWQIA applicability.

      Besides consideration of the types of land disturbing activities which would
initiate a CWQIA procedure, it is also necessary to make a determination as to
where in the locality compliance with this procedure is applicable. The Bay Act
understandably seeks to protect areas where such activities may cause either a
direct or an indirect influence on the water quality of the Bay and its tributaries.
Thus, the WQIA provisions set forth in model and local CBPA ordinances target
delineated CBPAs; this is only required for RPAs, and can include RMAs only when
it is deemed necessary.


                                      114








 U            ~~~However, the same types of provisions for water quality protection can also
        be applied to other natural areas of concern to the locality, which have been
I     ~ ~determined by the locality to be integrally related to both surface water and
        groundwater quality and quantity. For example, one locality chose to include all
        areas with elevations less than 4' above mean sea level, areas with slopes greater
I     ~ ~than 20%, and coastal and inland marshes, as well as areas designated as CBPAs
        in its WQIA  procedure.   Other localities have designated primary sand dunes,
        stream corridors and ponds within their CBPAs and subjected development in
        those  areas  to  the  CBPA  WOIA  requirement.    Thus,  all  development,
        redevelopment and improvements to existing structures which meet pre-
        determined thresholds should be subject to a CWQIA procedure if proposed in
        these same or similar environmentally-sensitive areas. All such areas are to be
        designated at local discretion. To enhance comprehensive water quality planning,
        in addition to those just listed, areas with highly erodible or permeable soils,
        upland or forested wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, and delineated wellhead
        protection zones should also be considered for inclusion in the CWQIA.

              Another factor to be considered in this element of the CWQIA procedure is
        whether one level of assessment should be used for all qualifying project
I      ~ ~proposals, or if such a procedure should set out two levels of assessment or a
        two-tiered approach. As a basis for comparison, the CBLAD MO states that "there.
        shall be two levels of water quality impact assessment: a minor assessment and a
I      ~ ~major assessment."  The guidance document accompanying the CBLAD MO goes
        on to further explain the justification behind this distinction:

   I                   ~~~~~~"The two levels of WQIA reflect the nature of the
                       proposed development, the degree of land
                       disturbance, and the sensitivity of areas to be
                       impacted.    A  minor  WQIA  is   required  for
                       development proposals which  would only disturb
   I                   ~~~~~the  landward  50  feet of the  buffer  area,  as
                       provided for (in the buffer area requirements). The
                       [designated authority will review the minor WQIA
   I                  ~ ~~~~~in determining whether or not the proposed buffer
                       area modification or reduction is appropriate and
                       the minimum necessary. In most cases, the minor
   I                 ~ ~~~~~WQIA will be satisfied by the submittal of a site
                       plan. A major WQIA is required for development
                       projects which due to their size or their location
   I                 ~ ~~~~~have the potential for significant impacts on water
                       quality. The primary purpose of the major WGIA is
                       to identify and evaluate the potential impacts that
                       a development may have on water quality and the
                       most sensitive lands in RPAs and to evaluate
   *                   ~~~~~~measures to mitigate these potential impacts."

         *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~115








              These considerations are important and recommended for the CWQIA
        procedure as well.  However, the level of scrutiny desired by the locality and
I     ~ ~reflected in the information requested, depending on the technical understanding
        of the designated authority or review body, is just as important. Some of the
        smaller localities in the region with less technical staff assistance have opted to
I     ~ ~use a simpler level of assessment; others with larger communities and a greater
        means of obtaining technical review have selected a more complex approach. At
        a minimum, however, the CBPA WQIA requirements must be met for projects
        occurring in CBPAs. Local planning staff are encouraged to seek the assistance of
        PDCs, the CBLAD, and other appropriate state environmental agencies when
        reviewing information submitted in the CWQIA.

              Whichever approach is selected, it is essential that the information required
        to be submitted in the assessment be comprehensive enough to provide
        designated authorities with a clear picture and strong evidence for making a
        decision on permit issuance. On the other hand, it is equally important that the
*       ~~kind of information to be submitted for a more detailed or major assessment not
        exceed the level of technical understanding on the part of the designated review
        authority; nor, should the resultant costs involved for this additional level of
I     ~ ~assessment be so financially unreasonable for the applicant as to render the
        preliminary aspects of the project infeasible.

 I            ~~~If two levels of assessment are the preferred approach, exactly which
        proposals should be subject to which level of assessment-- minor or major-- is
        something that is largely left to local discretion. However, the responses provided
        by the applicant on the IERQ could serve as a basis for determining the level of
        scrutiny desired by a locality. In addition, the comprehensive plan and special area
*       ~~management plans should be consulted for projects which are proposed in areas of
        particular concern; conformity with such plans could be a determining factor in the
        level of desired scrutiny. Other examples of thresholds which could serve as a
        guide in making this determination can be found in Appendix B, based on a study
        conducted by the Pamlico-Tar River Foundation in North Carolina. Some of the
        land use activities cited in Appendix B include privately-owned wastewater
I     ~ ~systems  (package plants), septic tanks (on-site wastewater disposal),  urban,
        industrial, and commercial development, residential and recreational development,
        and marinas. In general, it is important to remember the following when making
        such a determination:
                       "Virtually all human activity, and many natural
                       phenomena, can adversely affect the qualities [of
                       the resource for which protection is being sought].
                       It is not possible, or even practical to identify them
                       all. However, there are certain types of activities
                       which are prevalent [in the region now or which
   *                  ~~~~~can be expected to come about in the future],

                                               116








                       which may have severe potential impacts, for
                       which alternatives or mitigation measures exist, or
   I                 ~ ~~~~about which there is special concern."  (PTRF,
                       1991)

 I            ~~~~In addition to those general types of activities set forth in 'that framework
        for assessment, which might require compliance with a CWQIA procedure, Part
        IV., Sec. 4.2. of the Final Regulations (General Performance Criteria) states that,
        'it must be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the local governments that any
        use, development, or redevelopment of land in CBPAs meets [certain] performance
        criteria." In particular, Sec. 4.2(4) of the Final Regulations states that, "all
        development exceeding 2,500 sf. of land disturbance shall be accomplished
        through a plan of development review process consistent with Sec. 15.1-491 (h) of
        the Code of Virainia. Sec. 4.2(6)of the Final Regulations states:

                     "any land disturbing activity that exceeds an area
   I               ~ ~~~~of 2,500 sf. (including construction of all single-
                    family houses, septic tanks and drainfields, but
                    otherwise defined in Sec. 10.1-560 of the Code of
                    Virginia) shall comply with the requirements of the
                     local erosion and sediment contol ordinance."

I       ~~Under normal circumstances, the State and local erosion and sediment control
        regulations apply only to areas of land disturbance which exceed 10,000 sf. The
        CWQIA can be used as a means for integrating some of these separate
        administrative review and permitting procedures related to water quality planning
        and protection.

 U            ~~~~Finally, in addition to the above considerations, it is important for the project
        applicant to provide the designated review authority with the proposed use of the
        site. Equally important, the applicant should provide available information on past
        uses of the site; current models and reviewed ordinances do not address this.
        This is also requested of the project applicant in the preliminary IERO in the
        background information section provided therein.
              This information would be helpful in determining if such uses will present a
I     ~ ~threat to water quality, or if past uses may have already created a previously
        unknown risk. Even if the project proposal does not otherwise warrant the need
        to complete a CWQIA, the actual or potential risk created by certain past and
        proposed land uses might automatically be used to initiate this assessment
        procedure. Examples of land uses which could be included in this category that
        have been suggested by local planning officials include solid waste landfills,
        hazardous waste disposal sites, underground fuel storage areas or aboveground
        fuel storage facilities, certain commercial and industrial processes, and so forth.
*       ~~Performance criteria or specific prohibitions regarding these particular land uses

         *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~117








        should be determined by the locality and should be clearly set forth in the CWQIA
        procedure under the applicability section.

              Specific provisions used in the CBPA ordinances by Hampton Roads
        localities   and    others   within   Tidewater   Virginia,   regarding    WOIA
I     ~ ~applicability/general qualifying criteria, can be found under that same heading in
        Appendix E. Recommendations for incorporation of provisions that are considered
        to be optimal are listed in the Model CWQIA Procedure.

        Information to be Submitted for Review

I       ~~A.    General Information

 *            ~~~~Once a local government has decided on which criteria to use in determining
        when a proposed project must comply with a CWQIA procedure, the next step is
        deciding upon what information regarding impacts to water quality that a project
        applicant should submit for review. Requests for such information by the locality
        should be based primarily on the intensity and nature of the proposed project.
        Information required for the CWQIA would be in addition to that normally required
I     ~ ~by the locality for the particular development proposal, according to the site plan
        review ordinance or POD  procedure.   However,  reasonableness  should  be a-
        guiding factor here.

              A review of the CBPA models and local CBPA ordinances suggests that this
        section may be relatively simple or complex, depending not only on project
        intensity and proposed usage, but also on the level of local government scrutiny
        desired.  To reiterate what has been previously stated, it is important for the
        applicant to submit accurate information about the project's potential impacts on
        water quality. The information provided to the designated review authority should
        be comprehensive enough to allow for an educated evaluation and reasonable
        decision regarding the project's environmental consistency. However, it is also
        important that steps be taken to ensure that the information requested does not
        pose an unreasonable time constraint or financial burden on the project applicant;
I     ~ ~and, that it is not too technical in nature so as to render the review authority
        incapable of understanding the data and calculations provided and, in turn, slow
*       ~~the evaluation process.

              If a locality chooses to use only one level of assessment, two things should
        be incorporated into the assessment to ensure completeness: 1) a site drawing of
I     ~ ~the proposed project which shows existing environmental features such as CBPAs,
        beaches, water courses, lakes, ponds, wetlands, marshes, riparian areas, flood
        hazard areas, areas with steep slopes, and woodlands; and 2) a narrative
        description (including the CBPA Guidance Calculation Procedure and other locally-
        adopted relevant calculation procedures) and additional site plans, if necessary,
*       ~~which describe the potential or unavoidable impacts to the inventoried natural

                                               118









        features which may or will occur as a result of the construction, operation, and
        maintenance of the proposed land use; any proposed mitigation measures to
        minimize such impacts, and; any other pertinent information relative to water
        quality and vegetation loss. Included in this description, if possible, should also be
        identification of the natural processes and ecological relationships inherent to the
        site, and an assessment of the impact of the proposed use and development of
        land on these processes and relationships.

              Other pertinent information might include topography, soil information
        (including depth to groundwater and infiltration rate, where appropriate), surface
I     ~ ~and groundwater hydrology, and, if necessary, drainage patterns from adjacent
        lands. As well, impacts of the proposed development on the water courses within
        and adjoining the site, including impacts to aquatic flora and fauna, should also be
I      ~ ~considered.  Inclusion of such items into the CWQIA would be beneficial to know
        if such information is available and would ensure that comprehensive water
        resource protection is the goal, in addition to addressing concerns regarding
I      ~ ~nonpoint source impacts on Chesapeake Bay.  Detailed examples showing the use
        of one level of assessment in the CBPA models and local ordinances can be found
*       ~~in Appendix E.

              If using a two-tiered approach to CWQIA, elements which should be
        included in the preparation and submission of a minor CWQIA are generally not as
        detailed as those required for a major CWQIA.   For example, a minor CWQIA
        might simply require a scaled site drawing with the information requested;
        whereas, a major CWQIA may require a narrative description of much more
        detailed information, with specific data and calculations included in an appendix.
        Guidance from the CBLAD states:

                          "The primary purpose of the minor WQIA is
                          to allow small projects (especially single-
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~family residential) to proceed in a timely and
                          cost-effective manner while providing the
                          (designated authority] adequate information
                          to determine whether encroachment of the
                          RPA is appropriate. The comprehensiveness
                          and detail of information required in the
                          major WQIA is a reflection of the complexity
                          of the hydrological system. The [designated
                          authority], however, may determine that
                          some of the information is not necessary or
                          applicable to the proposed development and
                          indicate this to the preparer."
              Regardless of which approach is used-- one or two levels of assessment--

        existing hydrogeologic and vegetative characteristics of the site, proposed

                                              119









        changes to these characteristics, and resultant impacts should be inventoried and
        described. In addition, a wastewater element should be included as part of the
        assessment when a septic and/or sewage treatment system is part of the site plan,
        due to the potential impacts which these land uses can have on both surface and
        groundwater quality.  It should be noted, however, that any land disturbing
        activity which proposes to encroach into the seaward 50' portion of the 100'
        buffer area must comply with the CBPA major WOIA requirements at a minimum,
*I    ~ regardless of the area of land disturbance.

        B.    Mitigation Plans

 ~~I  ~It is equally important that proposed mitigation measures addressing how
        such impacts can be minimized or prevented are described. Examples of what the
I  ~    designated review authority would like to see in terms of mitigation measures can
        be provided in a guidance document given to the applicant before submittal of a
        CWQIA. Examples of what has been included as guidance in the CBPA models
        and local CBPA ordinances for WQIA procedures can be found in Appendix E;
        recommendations for specific provisions to be included in this section can be
        found in the Model CWQIA Procedure. Even prior to final review and evaluation of
~I      the project, this information can provide an opportunity for both the project
        applicant and local government staff to conduct a preliminary review of the plan of
        development.  As the CBLAD suggests, "the preparation and evaluation of the
        WQIA allows the [designated authority] to work with the applicant to reduce
        impacts through more effective mitigation."  Therefore, discussion of potential
        impacts and mitigation measures, as well as suggestions for project modifications
        which could be incorporated into the project can occur at this stage, and allow for
        a more expedient final evaluation in the end.

 UI~ ~The following goal was established for Virginia by Sec. 4.1 of the Final
        Regulations, as reflected in the following performance standards objective: "to
        prevent a net increase in nonpoint source pollution from new development,
        achieve a 10% reduction in nonpoint source pollution from redevelopment, and
        achieve a 40% reduction in nonpoint source pollution from agriculture." Mitigation
        measures in the form of BMPs are the general recommendation and guidance given
        by the CBLAD and reflected in the local CBPA ordinances to achieve these goals.
        However, reliance on BMPs can often be overemphasized as a potential or actual
        solution to impacts resulting from land development.  BMPs should be designed to
        address the particular source of the problem.

              For  example,  pollutant  loadings  in  surface  and  groundwater  from
        urban/suburban development and redevelopment typically result from soil erosion
        associated with land or vegetation disturbance, which causes sedimentation of
        adjacent or nearby streams; from nutrients carried with the sediment and other
        materials; from chemicals used in lawn care maintenance once construction has
        been completed, and; from conversion of natural ground cover to impervious


                                              120









        surfaces. These contaminants are generally washed into the storm sewer system
        and then into the Bay, its tributaries, or other surface waters.  They can be
        minimized at the source by constructing stormwater BMPs on-site, nonstructural
        vegetative filter strips, off-site or regional BMPs, or through educated and
I  ~    appropriate use of chemical treatment on lawns.

              Both structural and non-structural BMPs, which are encouraged by the
        CBPA, are used primarily to address overland flow and are to be incorporated into
        a project plan of development when necessary. Their purpose is to provide for the
        detention, retention, or infiltration of stormwater runoff and its associated
        contaminants from impervious surfaces before they reach receiving waters. It has
        been suggested by some Hampton Roads localities that the Final Regulations limit
        them and project applicants to using only on-site stormwater BMPs in the plan of
        development, when incorporation of runoff from one or more sites into a regional
        BMP network might be more appropriate. The argument is that if use of such
        regional BMP options were permitted, more of the site could be used for
        development purposes and more emphasis could then be placed on vegetative
        buffers in the landscaping plan to control remaining sheet flow. Therefore, based
        on the individual physical characteristics and needs of the localities, some see
        greater flexibility from the State as an accommodating solution.

              It does well to address these particular nonpoint pollution sources that can
        occur in both urban and suburban environments; but, there are other nonpoint
        sources, such as nutrients, which have received less attention and, nonetheless,
        continue to be a major contributing factor in the degradation of the Chesapeake
        Bay and its tributaries, as well as other surface and groundwater.  For example,
        pollutant loadings from agricultural uses in rural areas are typically a result of
        nutrients associated with animal wastes, pesticide, herbicide, and fertilizer
        application. These either run off the land into nearby surface streams, or are
        infiltrated into the ground where than can eventually find their way into the
        groundwater if not attenuated by the soil.  In many cases, crops or pastures
        encroach into the RPA and can often be within a designated RMA. As such,
        nutrient runoff from these lands has significant potential to impact surface or
        groundwater or fringe wetland areas, and can be subsequently transported in
        altered states into Bay waters. While this report focuses on the conversion of land
        and does not suggest that agricultural lands be subject to the same CWQIA
        procedure, the potential effects of agricultural practices on water quality should
        nonetheless be recognized.

              It should be understood, however, that the major nutrients of concern in the
        Bay ecosystem-- nitrogen and phosphorous-- naturally occur in the soil and serve
        as catalysts for much of the Chesapeake Bay's phytoplakton production.  They
        also nourish the Bay's submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) beds which, in turn,
        support higher life forms in the ecosystem. Therefore, these nutrients are good for
        the Bay; but, only up to a certain extent.  In the last several decades, principally


         *I~~~~~~~~ L~~~~~~121








        through large increases in the discharge of human sewage, farm fertilizers and
        animal wastes, and through deforestation and land development, the watershed's
I     ~ ~contributions of these essential ingredients has been increased to the point where
        they have become major pollutants. (Horton & Eichbaum, 1991)

              Likewise, these nonpoint source pollutants are intensifying -and changing in
        character across the region as a result of continuing rapid urbanization; and, are
        thereby effecting other surface water and groundwater systems outside of the
        Chesapeake Bay watershed.   Urban and suburban land uses contribute much
        higher nutrient loads, on a per acre basis, than other land uses.   Moreover,
*       ~~development can involve the conversion of forest land and wetlands which,
        unaltered, can provide positive water quality benefits.  In order to address this
        growing problem, localities should encourage private land owners to protect
*       ~~environmentally-beneficial land uses and cover types.

              The 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement between the Bay States set a goal
        for achieving a 40% reduction in nutrient enrichment by the year 2000. Study
        findings of EPA's Nonpoint Source Evaluation Panel indicate that current nonpoint
        source programs will not be able to achieve this goal, and that moving beyond the
I     ~ ~traditional BMVP approach toward utilizing a combination of conservation practices
        or management measures in a Best Management System (BMS) may be the better.
        approach, instead. When applied, a BMS would achieve multiobjective nonpoint
I     ~ ~source pollution control through reduced transport of sediment, nutrients and
        chemicals into surface and groundwater and can be incorporated into agricultural,
        forestry, and urban and nonpoint source control measures.

              This concept is based on the need to promote combinations of practices
        that most effectively protect or improve water quality. The Panel recognizes that:

                       "In some instances, traditional soil erosion control
                       BMPs   cannot   themselves   reduce   nutrient
                       loadings,  and  may  actually  increase  nutrient
                       loadings. Nutrient management techniques, such
   I                 ~ ~~~~as storage of animal waste  and  application of
                       fertilizer according to a nutrient management plan,
                       may also be insufficient if soil erosion is not
   I                 ~ ~~~~controlled.  Best Management Systems take into
                       account  the  effect  of  soil  erosion  control,
                       management of animal wastes, synthetic fertilizers
                       and municipal sludges, application of chemicals,
                       biological uptake of nutrients, establishment of
                       vegetative   buffers   and   other   management
                       measures. They can include structural and non-
                       structural management practices." (EPA, Nonpoint
                       Panel, 1990)

                                               122









              Therefore, in stressing the importance of submitting information regarding
        how potential impacts to water quality will be mitigated, as described and/or
        shown in the CWQIA and plan of development, local review authorities should
        selectively encourage the adoption of traditional BMPs that are proven to be
I    ~    ~effective both in reducing erosion and in controlling nutrient loadings. Where
        erosion control practices are likely to be ineffective in controlling nutrient loadings,
        adoption of nutrient management plans should be encouraged in the plan of
        development for the same acreage; adoption of such plans would promote the
        accomplishment or multiple environmental quality objectives. However, adoption
*      ~~of such plans should not be a prerequisite for determining project environmental
        consistency in the CWQIA evaluation procedure, unless deemed necessary at local
        discretion.

              Figure 5 is a comparison of known BMP effects on the quantity and quality
        of surface and groundwater, which highlights sedimentation, nutrient, pesticide,
I     ~ ~and water controls.  This guidance list could be given to the project applicant by
        the local review authority prior to submission of the plan of development and
        assessment information. In addition, the HRPDC has recently prepared a BMP
I     ~ ~Design Manual which can be used to determine the appropriate BMP(s) for a
        particular site.

 I           ~~~As  an addendum  to the information which  should  be included  in the
        assessment, the WQIA procedures set forth in the CBPA models and some local
        CBPA ordinances have also included provisions for a listing of all requisite permits
        from all applicable agencies necessary to develop the project. Such a requirement
        would ensure consistency with other local, state and federal programs with water
        quality jurisdiction. Use of the preliminary IERQ should also facilitate this
        requirement, as it contains questions regarding necessary permits to be obtained
        at the end of each section.

              In addition to the recommendations just discussed and the examples in
        Appendix E , regarding information which should be submitted for review, the
I     ~ ~following recommendations for provisions to be included within a CWQIA were
        suggested by local WQIA Administrators during the development of this report:

 *            o~~~ Impacts of the proposed project on adjacent or nearby public drinking
                    water supply reservoirs, wellhead protection areas, or aquifer storage
  *                ~~~~~and recharge areas.

              o     Impacts of the proposed project on the "beneficial uses," defined in
                    Title 62.1, Chapter 24, Code of Virainia, of receiving waters, on
                    minimum instreamn flow requirements, and on drinking water supply
                    reservoirs or tributaries of those.


                                              123






                                            FIGURE 5

 COMPARISON OF BMP EFFECTS ON THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY
                        OF GROUND AND SURFACE WATER


                                                              IMPACT OF BMPs ON:
General BMPs                                          Ground Water                         Surface Water
SEDIMENTATION COCntmi o...... ... .........  .' .  .ham!                           Ration

reduction of runoff velocity                   increase           variable          decrease          decrease
surface stabilization                          variable           variable          variable          decrease
filtration of sediments                        increase           variable          decrease          decrease
settling impoundments                          variable           variable          variable          decrease
infiltration impoundments                      increase          increase           decrease          decrease
watercourse stabilization                      variable           variable          variable          decrease

timing of activities                           no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
localized use restriction                      variable          decrease           decrease          decrease


reducing excess in soil                        no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
application timing                             no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
surface applications                           no effect         decrease          no effect          increase
shelter of manure sources                      decrease          decrease           increase          decrease

containment of manure sources                  decrease          decrease           decrease          decrease


biological pest control                        no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
mechanical pest control                        increase          decrease           decrease          decrease
crop selection/rotation                        no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
on demand pesticide use                        no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
pesticide application timing                   no effect         decrease           no effect         decrease
TER '     CON^^'OLS       .. ...................

irrigation scheduling                          decrease          decrease           decrease          decrease
selective irrigation                           decrease           variable          decrease          decrease
irrigation uniformity                          decrease           decrease          decrease          decrease
soil moisture control                          decrease           decrease          decrease          decrease

Source:  EPA Proposed Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Source of
Nonpoint Pollution in Costal Waters- May 1991, pp. B-18, B-19









              o     Where   appropriate  and  feasible,  a  site  plan  demonstrating
   I               ~ ~~~~management of off-site stormwater pollutants loadings with multi-site
                    or regional BMPs.

 I            o~~~ Impacts of proposed mitigative BMPs on existing wetlands.

              o     The relationship of vegetative BMPs to the landscape plan.

              In conclusion, a number of other outlines for environmental assessment
        procedures have been developed besides the WQlA procedures found within the
        CBPA models and local CBPA ordinances. These include both state and federal
        environmental assessment procedures. One such approach, which may be helpful
        in determining the information to be submitted in a CWQlA, is the content format
        used for a federal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It is not suggested that
        the federal format for a complete EIS be followed. However, certain elements of
*      ~~that format could be used as a general guide and can be tailored to specifically
        address water quality impacts.

 *           ~~~An analysis of environmental impact statements of U.S. Army Corps of
        Engineers water projects (Ortolano and Hill, 1978) provides some useful
        information on the overal quality and usefulness of the statements in evaluating
I     ~ ~environmental impacts. In the survey, statements prepared by the Corps were
        examined in detail and, in general, the majority of the statements were found to be
        decidedly less than adequate. They did not appear to be written with the view of
        providing non-technically oriented readers with the kind of insight and information
        necessary for effective participation and decision-making in the evaluation process.

 I           ~~~The  following  recommendations  were  suggested  for improvements  in
        information submitted for an impact assessment; some reiterate points previously
        discussed. These recommendations can be useful to localities as guidance which
        can be given to the project applicant who is required to conduct a CWQIA:

 *            o~~~~ Reduce the level of generality
              o     Identify all significant impacts
              o     Suggest alternatives to the proposed project
 I            o~~~~ Objective evaluation of environmental impacts
              o     Qualifications of individuals preparing reports
              o     Lengthiness
                 0  Integration  with  local comprehensive  planning  and  land  control


 I            ~~~Appendix A provides one recognized method for prediction and assessment
        of impacts on the water environment (Canter, 1977) and examples of
        recommended data needs and resources, that will be helpful in providing the

                                              125








H       ~~information required to be submitted in the CWQIA. This appendix is prefaced by
*       ~~a general primer on water pollution.

        Submission and Review Requirements

 I            ~~~Administrative submission and  review procedures will necessarily vary,
        depending on individual local government structure and procedures. The following
        items should be determined by each locality and addressed in this section: (i)
I     ~ ~number of copies to be submitted for review; (ii) the professionals and/or other
        qualified persons who must certify the CWQIA in order to ensure its accuracy and
        completeness; (iii) in conjunction with what other procedures as required by the
        CBPA ordinance or other local ordinances should the CWQIA be prepared and
        submitted, and; (iv) the designated review authority to whom such assessment
*       ~~shall be submitted.

              Section 5.61E of the Final Regulations does not specifically set out the
3 ~~professional qualifications which a person must have to certify the information
        submitted in the WQIA. The CBLAD MO, however, requires that "all information
        required [for the WQIAI shall be certified as complete and accurate by a
I      ~ ~professional engineer or a certified land surveyor.  Local CBPA ordinances reflect
        this requirement, as well, but broaden the range of qualified persons who could
        prepare the WQIA and/or sign a certification ensuring its completeness and
I     ~ ~accuracy on behalf of a developer or applicant.  Examples of such persons are:
        Professional Engineer, Certified Land Surveyor, Wetlands Scientist, Licensed
        Engineer, Licensed Land Surveyor, Licensed Landscape Architect, and other
U      ~ ~qualified persons acting within the limits of their professional expertise and license.
        It is recommended that the OWIQA require similar professional certification in order
3 ~~to ensure completeness and accuracy.

              Professional state certification, licensing, and registration from Virginia
        should be a prerequisite for CWQIA certification and/or preparation; these
        individuals are generally knowledgeable about environmental regulation and
        practices in the Commonwealth. If consultants or other professionals from outside
        of Virginia are used, home-state certification, licensing, and registration should be
        required.   One locality, whose CBPA Program was found to be "consistent" with
        the Final Regulations, eliminated the professional certification requirement in the
I      ~ ~case of construction of single-family homes.   In that procedure,  professional
        preparation or certification will not be required unless deemed necessary by the
        designated review authority, due to the magnitude of land disturbance or
I      ~ ~particularly sensitive location.   In addition, if state certification for wetlands
        delineators is approved in Virginia, it is recommended that all wetlands information
3       ~~should be prepared and/or verified by a certified wetlands delineator.

              The Final Regulations do not specify in conjunction with what other
        administrative procedures, as set forth in the CBPA ordinance, the WQIA must be

                                               126









prepared and submitted to the designated authority for review. However, if two
levels of assessment, or a two-tiered approach, is used, the CBLAD MO states
that:

            "A minor WQIA shall be prepared and submitted to
            and reviewed by the (Administrative Authority) in
            conjunction with the Plan of Development process
            [as set forth in the CBPA ordinance].  A  major
            WQIA  shall be prepared and submitted to and
            reviewed by the (Administrative Authority) in
            conjunction with a request for rezoning, special
            use permit, or in conjunction with the Plan of
            Development process [as set forth in the CBPA
            ordinance],   as   deemed   necessary   by   the
            (Administrative Authority)."


Almost all of the local CBPA ordinances which use two levels of assessment in the
WQIA Procedure follow this same language.  It is recommended that any request
by the project applicant for encroachment into locally-designated environmentally-
sensitive areas, requiring the submittal of a CWQIA, be accompanied by the same.
administrative requirements as set forth above.

      Designation of a review authority, who will be responsible for evaluating the
information provided in the CWQIA, will also be left to local discretion To a great
extent, this will depend on the administrative structure and procedures of the
locality. However, examples of such designated review authorities listed in local
CBPA ordinances include:  Department of Planning and Community Development,
Department  of  Environmental  Affairs,  Department  of  Public  Works,  the
city/county/town Engineer, the city/county/town Zoning Administrator, the
city/county/town Manager, and the Planning Commission.

      Finally, under Sec. 5.6,E.1. of the Final Regulations, "upon request, the
CBLA Board will provide review and comment on any water quality impact
assessment within 90 days, in accordance with advisory state review requirements
of Sec. 10.1-2112 of the [Bay Act]."   In its model, the CBLAD  has taken
responsibility for accommodating such requests for review rather than having the
CBLA Board carry out this exercise. The local CBPA ordinances have followed suit
in their language; however, the time limit for incorporation of solicited CBLAD
comments for a major WQIA varies from thirty (30) to ninety (90) days.  The
model CWQIA sets forth similar language but also suggests that local review
assistance be sought from PDC's and other relevant state environmental agencies.

      Examples of submission and review requirements for the WQIA procedure,
as set forth in the CBPA models and local CBPA ordinances, can be found in


                                     127









        Appendix E. An outline of those options that are considered to be optimal for
        submission and review requirements is provided in the Model CWQIA Procedure.
I     ~ ~This outline should be used as a guide, however, with actual requirements to be
        determined by the individual localities.

I       ~~Evaluation Procedure

              The last step in the CWQIA process is the final evaluation of all information
I     ~ ~submitted to the designated review authority. The information should be weighed
        against specified criteria, and should reflect the level of assessment used.
        Regardless of the level of assessment being used, it is essential that the evaluation
        criteria be comprehensive enough to ensure that the proposed project is consistent
        with the following: (i) the purpose and intent of the CWQIA; (ii) the Final
3       ~~Regulations; (iii) the local CBPA ordinance, and; (iv) other previously discussed
        environmental regulations and local ordinances.

 3            ~~~There are actually two types of evaluations which are involved in the
        CWQlA procedure. The first is the judgements made, on the part of the project
        applicant and his certifying professional, when estimating or describing the
I      ~ ~potential impacts which the proposed project may or may not have on water
        quality. This particular type of information should be included in what is submitted
        to the designated authority for review in the final evaluation of the project. The
        second evaluation is on the part of the review authority, who is called upon to
         make a professional determination regarding the actual impacts which the project
         will have on water quality, after the required information is submitted by the
         project applicant. Here, specific evaluation criteria is used which should reflect
         exactly what the locality will look for in order to make a determination regarding
        the project's environmental       "     cnistny or'inconsistency."

               There are several factors that should be considered when defining this final
3       ~~evaluation criteria. As a starting point, the designated review authority should be
         concerned with impacts to existing hydrology, vegetation, and the affects of
         wastewater treatment on existing water quality conditions.

               At the simplest level, one can intuitively determine prior to land disturbance
         what the extent of potential impact will be by knowing what the existing physical
I      ~ ~characteristics  of the  site are,  as  well  as  the  characteristics  of adjacent
         watercourses or other natural areas.  To take a more academic and scientific
         approach, however, published state or federal standards related to water quality
         and quantity, and applicable regulations addressing the specific proposed use of
         the site should be referred to. On the other hand, if the proposed use of the site
         does not conform to what the locality has stated is a permitted or preferred use
         for that site, according to the local comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, or
         special management area plan, then the CWQlA procedure can be dispensed with
3       ~~altogether; the proposed use is not allowed.


          3                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~128








              To be more specific, where water quality is concerned, future pollutant
        loadings and future water quality conditions which are anticipated to result from
I     ~ ~the proposed land disturbing activity can be gauged by comparing them to current
        water quality standards for that stream segment or water body.  These standards
        are established by the State Water Control Board (SWCB) and can be found in
I     ~ ~Appendix  C.   In addition, the Final Regulations  land use and  development
        performance criteria can be used as a measure against which to weigh the
        proposed project, if it is to occur in a designated CBPA. When assessing impacts
        to water quantity, comparing existing flow conditions and stream characteristics to
        how those will be changed as a result of the proposed project is another factor to
        be considered. As well, determining whether or not the project, has complied with
        existing stormwater management ordinances and related performance standards is
        necessary for making a determination of the project's environmental consistency
*       ~~or inconsistency.

              Determining to what extent the existing vegetation on or adjacent to the site
        should be allowed to be disturbed is left to the discretion of the locality. There is
        a point at which the line must be drawn, but that is primarily a subjective
        judgment. With the aid of a landscape architect, arborist, or wetlands scientist,
I     ~ ~the review authority should be able to have a clear idea of what an acceptable
        threshold number of disturbed trees, or what the permitted extent of other
        vegetation disturbance will be. Where potential impacts to wetlands or submerged
I     ~ ~aquatic vegetation are of particular concern, assistance from the Virginia Marine
        Resources Commission or the Virginia Institute for Marine Science, as well as
*       ~~members of the local Wetlands Board can be extremely helpful.

              Where wastewater treatment is applicable, both point source discharges and
        nonpoint source discharges need to be considered. As previously stated, for point
        source discharges, the SWCB has established water quality standards for the
        contaminants most often associated with municipal wastewater treatment. From a
        policy standpoint, a locality may have determined that is does not want a
        particular stream segment used for specific purposes and, therefore, can eliminate
        project proposals based on that policy.  For nonpoint source discharges, the
I      ~ ~adequacy of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment or septic system can be
        weighed against the Virginia Department of Health Regulations for the
        construction, operation, and maintenance standards of such systems; the SWCB
I      ~ ~Regulations can  also be referred to in this matter.   In addition, the  Final
        Regulations require a 100% reserve capacity drainfield to be incorporated into the
        plan of development for projects proposed within CBPAS.

              One tool which the locality has to help it develop evaluation criteria is the
        comprehensive plan, which guides the locality in future land use planning decisions
        over the long-term. By comparing the proposed use of the site to what has been
        established as the preferred use of that site or area, project consistency in terms
*       ~~of what the locality would like to see in the future can be built into the evaluation


                                               129








        procedure. Most comprehensive plans have an environmental element which can
        serve as a standard or guide when reviewing projects, and the Final Regulations
I     ~ ~require that the comprehensive plan contain an element that addresses future land
        use in designated CBPAs.

           whnIt is generally the case in the CBPA models and local CBPA 'ordinances that,
           whntwo levels of WOIA were used, major WOIA submittals required a more
        stringent evaluation than minor WQIA  submittals.   For the CWQIA Procedure
        included in the evaluation procedure element should be a determination of whether
        the potential impacts of the proposed project have been adequately mitigated in all
*       ~~cases.

              The CBLAD guidance states that:

                    "The evaluation procedure sets forth the criteria
                    the [designated authority] will use in evaluating the
   I               ~ ~~~~~water   quality   impacts   of   the   proposed
                    development.    This  evaluation  will  allow  the
                    [designated    authority]   to   determine    the
   I               ~ ~~~~consistency of the proposed development project
                    with the provisions of the CBPA Overlay District.
                    Inconsistent proposals can be modified so that the
   I               ~ ~~~~impacts are minimized or the mitigation measures
                    are enhances.   Those  projects whose  impacts
   *                ~~~~~cannot be mitigated can be identified."


              Thus, it would be appropriate for the designated review authority to require
        additional mitigation as a condition for approval of the project's environmental
        consistency, where it has been determined that the potential impacts have not
        been adequately addressed. The plan of development should be reconfigured by
        the project applicant and resubmitted for review. If the plan of development is
        resubmitted and the proposed mitigation measures remain insufficient to prevent a
I     ~ ~significant degradation  to water  quality of the  Chesapeake  Bay  and/or  its
        tributaries, it is recommended that a finding of inconsistency with the purpose and
        intent of the local CBPA ordinance be made. Likewise, if the plan of development
I      ~ ~is resubmitted and the proposed mitigation measures remain insufficient to prevent
        a significant degradation to water quality in CBPAs and other natural areas of local
        concern, it is recommended that a finding of environmental inconsistency with the
        purpose and intent of the CWQIA be made.


              Another criterion which has been used in the WQIA evaluation procedure in
        CBPA ordinances, is an assessment of the impact of the proposed use and

                                               130








U       ~~development of land on the natural processes and ecological relationships inherent
        in the site. Inclusion of this criterion would take into consideration other natural
I       ~~areas and functions of concern, in addition to trying to preserve the Chesapeake
        Bay ecosystem. Several localities have suggested that this level of scrutiny would
        be very difficult to achieve, as there are many factors that are not yet understood
I      ~ ~about such  interrelationships.  However,  provisions for the submittal of such
        information has been set forth in the Model  CWQIA  Procedure.   Insofar as
        available information can be obtained and submitted in the CWQIA, this additional
        information could prove useful to the designated review authority during the final
        evaluation process.

 I            ~~~The  WQIA  procedures  within  the  CBLAD  MO  and  some  local CBPA
        ordinances have also inserted a criterion stating that the cumulative impact of the
        proposed project, will not result in a significant degradation of water quality, when
        considered in relation to other existing and proposed project development in the
        vicinity. This is an important consideration for the CWQIA, as well, although the
        individual environmental impacts of a project may be limited in a "local" sense, the
        effects of that project on the "region" may be considerable when viewed in
        combination with the effects of other past, present or proposed projects.

              Examples of evaluation procedure provisions used in the WQlA procedures
        within the CBPA models and local CBPA ordinances can be found in Appendix E.

        Conclusion

 I            ~~~To paraphrase guidance given by one locality in Hampton Roads, the effect
        of the WQIA/CWQIA procedure and its respective provisions is not necessarily to
        preclude development or use of CBPAs and other sensitive lands which are
        integrally related to beneficial water quality. Rather, this process seeks to ensure
        that the types of development permitted by the underlying zoning district will be
*       ~~undertaken with a deliberate and  professionally responsive  recognition of the
        particular environmental qualities and conditions of a proposed development site.

               Preserving natural features on site by incorporating them into a plan of
        development, and building according to specified performance criteria, should not
        automatically  be viewed  as a loss of potential  economic  gain.   From  one
I      ~ ~perspective,  biological  functions  can  be  used  in a  manner  that  minimizes
        construction  costs  and   post-development  controls,  such  as  stormwater
        management,  flood control, land erosion, and wind  and wave  action.   From
        another point of view, having such natural area features as part of a site can add
        aesthetic value, and loss of buildable area can be recaptured in increased density
        and  value  on  the  remaining  buildable  area.    Compatible  development  and
        redevelopment, that recognizes the integral relationship between land use and
        water quality, draws Hampton Roads localities and Tidewater Virginia one step
*       ~~closer to providing for that unique resource -Chesapeake Bay -which provides a


         *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~131



I

I
I

I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








               MODEL COMPREHENSIVE WATER QUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

        I                                 ~~~~~~~~PROCEDURE


I       ~PREFACE

              The model presented herein should serve as a basis for further development
I     ~    ~of the water quality impact assessment procedures employed in each community
        that is subject to the Chesapeake  Bay Preservation Act (CBPA).  All locally
        adopted CPBA ordinances currently provide for such a procedure. Whereas the
        assessment procedures set forth in these ordinances respond specifically to the
        State mandate for maintenance or restoration of the Bay and its tributaries,
*       ~~comprehensive water quality protection throughout the region-- in addition to
        Chesapeake Bay-- is the focus of the this model.

 3           ~~~As a basis for developing the model, many examples from WQIA procedures
        in current CBPA models and local CBPA ordinances have been selected. This
        approach was taken in order to remain consistent with the administrative aspects
I     ~of plan  of development  review  within  Chesapeake  Bay  Preservation  Areas
        (CBPAs), which are presently being used throughout the communities that.
        comprise Hampton Roads; as well as, to provide a better insight into different
I     ~ ~approaches to the same situation which affects all of Tidewater Virginia.  The
        scope of this model has been broadened beyond locally-designated Chesapeake
        Bay Preservation Areas, however, in order to provide for comprehensive water
        quality  protection.    To  do  this,  screening  of  the  cumulative  impacts  of
        development and redevelopment affecting all waters and other natural areas of
        concern, which are integrally related to water quality or that provide beneficial
        water quality functions in and of themselves, has been introduced into the
        assessment process.

              By providing the project applicant with an initial environmental review
        questionnaire, such as the Model IERQ found in Part I of this document, local
I     ~ ~governments have a tool to alert themselves and the applicant to the full range of
        any potential environmental risks inherent with the proposed plan of development.
        Further evaluation of any water quality impacts, in particular, through a
        comprehensive water quality impact assessment procedure can then be justified,
        should preliminary screening of the proposed project warrant such an exercise.

 I            ~~~Information submitted in the assessment should be reviewed by such local
        designated authorities as discussed in the Submission and Review Requirements
        section of the preceding guidance text. By using the evaluation criteria set forth in
        this model, an evaluation of the proposed project should then be made regarding
        its consistency with the purpose and intent of the CWQIA, the CBPA Regulations,
        and the local CBPA ordinance.

                                              133










              This assessment procedure should facilitate creation of a forum which
        fosters discussion between the project applicant and the locality, prior to the
        commencement  of any  applicable land disturbing activity.   Targeted  in this
        discussion should be innovative mitigation measures that are designed specifically
I     ~ ~for the project in question.  These are aimed at reducing or eliminating anticipated
        adverse impacts to local water resources and the cumulative effects the same may
        have on water quality in Chesapeake Bay, its tributaries, and other natural areas of
        concern. Incorporation of such measures into the final plan of development should
        be the anticipated result. Ultimately, the CWQIA porcedure could be a means of
        integrating into one process other existing local, state, and federal mandates,
        regulatory tools, and permitting procedures which have been implemented to
        address water quality.

        I.    PURPOSE AND INTENT

              Whereas, considerable state and local economies are dependent to a large
              extent upon the environmental health and quality of the Chesapeake Bay
 *           ~~~and its tributaries in the Hampton Roads region; and

              Whereas, land use and the quality and quantity of both surface and-
 *           ~~~groundwater resources are integrally related; and

              Whereas, certain land uses and land alterations may pose a considerable risk
              to the maintenance of existing high quality waters or to the integrity of
              natural ecosystems, or may cause or contribute to an increase in poor water
              quality levels if planned improperly; and

 U           ~~~Whereas, any proposed development, redevelopment, or improvement plans
              to existing structures within the designated areas of Jurisdiction Name, as
              set forth below, may have the potential to cause degradation to existing
              water quality in Jurisdiction Name, the Chesapeake Bay, or its tributaries
              which fall within the political boundaries of Jurisdiction Name, or may have
 I          ~ ~~a related impact on other natural ecosystems which are influenced by water
              quality within said jurisdiction;

 *            ~~~It is the intent of this Comprehensive Water Quality Impact Assessment
              (CWQIA) Procedure to minimize potential nonpoint source pollution from
              stormwater runoff, minimize potential erosion and sedimentation of local or
              regional waterways, reduce the introduction of nutrients and toxic's into
              state waters, and to promote water resource conservation while balancing
              important economic interests, in order to provide for the health, safety, and
              welfare of the present and future citizens of Hampton Roads.



         *                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~134









             Upon a finding by the Desicinated Authoritv that such an exercise is
             warranted, based on a completed review of the Initial Environmental Review
I          ~ ~~Questionnaire by such authority, it is the responsibility of the project
             applicant and the purpose of this procedure:

I           ~~~A.    To delineate the components of the Resource Protection Area (RPA)
                   and the Resource Management Area (RMA) on- site, as well as the
                   water courses found on or adjacent to the site.

             B.    To  inventory all other environmentally-sensitive areas  or natural
                   features of concern, on or adjacent to the site, which provide
                   beneficial water quality functions.

             C.    To delineate the extent of proposed development, redevelopment, and
                   improvements to existing structures on a site plan, and where they
                   will encroach into CBPAs and/or other natural features on-site.

             D.    To provide for site visits by designated authorities, so as to help
                   property owners identify lands which are unsuitable for development
 I               ~ ~~~~because of water-related constraints.  Such constraints can include
                   high groundwater, erosion potential, shrink-swell soils, or vulnerability-
 *                ~~~~~to flood damage.

             E.    To  identify  and  describe  the  anticipated  impacts  of  proposed
                   development,   redevelopment,   and   improvements   to  existing
                   structures on water quality and lands within CBPAs and other natural
                   areas of concern.

H            ~~~~F.    Where   development   will  occur   within   CBPAs   and   other
                   environmentally-sensitive  lands, to ensure that it is located  and
 *                ~~~~~constructed in a manner that will minimize disruption to the natural
                   functions of these areas.

*            ~~~G.    To specify mitigation measures which will address anticipated water
                   quality impacts and impacts to natural areas of concern, and which
                   will ensure protection of existing high quality state waters, where
                   applicable, to the maximum extent feasible.
             H.    To ensure that past and proposed uses of the site do not/will not
                   pose a substantial risk to water quality, to the natural resources
                   present or adjacent to the site, or to future human use of the site.





        *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~135








H            I~~~. To ensure compliance with the purpose and intent of the CBPA, the
                   CBPA Regulations, the local CBPA ordinance, and other local, state,
 I               ~ ~~~~and federal mandates, regulations, and permitting procedures related
                   to water quality protection.

I      Il.  ~APPLICABILITYIGENERAL QUALIFYING CRITERIA.

*            ~~~~A.    General Criteria

                   Compliance with the CWQlA procedure, as outlined below, applies to
                   any proposed project which meets the following criteria:

                    1.    Any development, redevelopment, or improvements to existing
                          structures which:

                          a.    will substantially alter the natural water quality functions
    *                          ~~~~~~~~performed by locally-designated environmentally-sensitive
                                areas on or adjacent to the site. Such areas can include:
                                areas below a designated elevation above mean sea
    I                         ~ ~~~~~~~~level, other highly erodible or permeable soils, nontidal or
                                upland wetlands, coastal and inland marshes, areas with.
                                slopes in excess of 20%, aquifer recharge areas,
    I                         ~ ~~~~~~~designated wellhead protection zones, and areas with
                                non-seasonal high groundwater;

   I                      ~~~~~~b.    encroaches into any component of a RPA,regardless of
                                the area of land disturbance; or

   I                     ~~~~~C.    occurs  in a RMA  and  is deemed  necessary  by the
                                Desianated   Authoritv   because   of   the   unique
                                characteristics of the site or intensity of the proposed
                                development; this may be waived when written findings
                                have been submitted to the Desianated Authority,
                                demonstrating that the unique characteristics of the site
                                (e.g.  soils,  topography,   groundcover,  location  of
                                wetlands and tidal shores) will prevent the proposed
    *                          ~~~~~~~development  from  causing  a  degradation  to  water
                                quality.

   I                     ~~~~~~(if using two levels of assessment, the following provisions
                          should be inserted after "General Criteria.")
I            ~~~B.    There shall be two levels of comprehensive water quality impact
                   assessment: a major assessment and a minor assessment.


        *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~136











1.    Minor Comprehensive Water Quality Impact Assessment.

      A minor comprehensive water quality impact assessment will
      be   required  for  any   development,   redevelopment   or
      improvements to existing structures which:

     a.    may have a minor impact on the natural water quality
            functions of locally-designated, environmentally-sensitive
            areas on or adjacent to the site.  (See A.2 above for
            lands which should be included for consideration in this
            assessment.);

      b.    encroaches into the landward 50' of the buffer area in a
            RPA and causes less than 5,000 sf. of land disturbance;
            or

      c.    occurs within a RMA and causes less than 5,000 sf. of
            land disturbance, and is deemed necessary by the
            Desianated Authority due to the unique characteristics of
            the site or proposed project intensity.

            (Alternative thresholds for land disturbing activity
            occurring within a CBPA, and requiring a minor
            WQIA/CWQIA, could be 2,500 sf. or 10,000 sf.)

2.    Major Comprehensive Water Quality Impact Assessment.

      A major comprehensive water quality impact assessment shall
      be  required  for  any  development,   redevelopment,   or
      improvements to existing structures which:

     a.    May have a major impact on the natural water quality
            functions of locally-designated, environmentally-sensitive
            areas, on or adjacent to the site. (See A.2. above for
            lands which should be included for consideration in this
            assessment.);

      b.    requires any modification or reduction of the landward
            50' of the 100' buffer area in a RPA and which exceeds
            5,000 sf. of land disturbance, or disturbs any portion of
            the seaward 50' of the 100' buffer area or any other
            component of a RPA, regardless of the area of land
            disturbance; or


                          137









                  c.    occurs within a RMA and causes more than 5,000 sf. of
                        land disturbance, and is deemed necessary by the
                        Desianated Authority due to the unique characteristic of
                        the site or proposed project intensity.

                  (Alternative thresholds for land disturbing activity occurring in a
                  CBPA, and requiring a major WQIA/CWQIA, could be 2,500 sf.
                  and 10,000 sf.)

Ill.   INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW

     A.    The comprehensive water quality impact assessment shall identity the
            impacts   of  the   proposed   development,   redevelopment,   or
            improvements to existing structures on water quality in CBPAs and
            other  locally-designated,  environmentally-sensitive  areas.     The
            assessment shall also address all point and nonpoint sources of
            pollution associated with the project and recommend measures for
            mitigation of these impacts.

     B.    The following required information to be submitted by the project
            applicant for review by the Desianated Authority shall be considered a
            minimum:

            (This list is a comprehensive guide. It may be used in its entirety if
            using only one level of assessment, but the degree of scrutiny desired
            is left to local government  discretion.    Should  two  levels of
            assessment be used, then it is recommended that the provisions set
            forth in Subsection B.1. and B.2. be required for a minor CWQIA; the
            provisions set forth in Subsection B.3. and B.4. should be required for
            a major CWQIA, in addition to those provisions required for a minor
            CWQIA.)

            1.    A scaled site plan which shows the following:

                  a.    Clear delineation of the CBPAs, including the 100' RPA
                        buffer where applicable, and the type and location of the
                        existing characteristics and conditions of the CBPAs.

                  b.    Area of proposed land disturbance on site.

                  c.    Location of any proposed encroachment into the RPA,
                        buffer area, RMA, or other designated area as applicable.

                  d.    Location of all significant vegetative material on site prior
                        to proposed land disturbance, including all trees six (6)


                                      138








 U                          ~~~~~~~~inches in diameter or greater at breast height and the
                             delineation of tree drip lines.

                       e.    All vegetation which will be disturbed or removed and
 *                          ~~~~~~~~~the limits of land disturbance.

                       f.    Inventory   and   location   of   all   other   natural
                             features/resources  on  site,  including  beaches,  water
                             courses, lakes, ponds, wetlands, marshes, flood hazard
                             areas, areas with steep slopes (greater than 20%) and
 *                          ~~~~~~~woodlands.

                       g.    Location of anticipated drainfield or wastewater irrigation
                             areas, if applicable.

                       h.    Location of proposed  mitigative BMPs.   This should
                             include facilities or BMPs for stormwater management,
                             either on-site or to be included as part of a regional
                             system,   which   would   comply   with   established
                             performance standards for stormwater management.
                2.    Demonstration  through  acceptable  calculations  that  the
I                    ~ ~~~~~~remaining buffer area and necessary mitigative BMPs will result
                       in meeting the "no net increase" in post-development pollutant
                       loadings goal for new development or improvements to existing
I                    ~ ~~~~~structures, or the 10% reduction in pre-development pollutant
                       loadings conditions for redevelopment goal, as set forth in the
                       CBPA Regulations.

                3.    A  narrative description of the following:  (inclusion of this
                       information is to be considered a minimum, unless the
                       Desiunated Authority determines that some of the information
                       is unnecessary due to the scope and nature of the proposed
*                     ~~~~~~~use and development of land.)

                       a.    Nature of the proposed encroachment into the 100' RPA
 I                         ~ ~~~~~~buffer where  applicable,  including  roadways,  paving
                             materials, utilities, and wetland mitigation sites.

I                     ~~~~~~~b.    Existing topography, soils, hydrology, and geology of the
                             site and adjacent lands.

I                     ~~~~~~~C.    Impacts of the proposed project on the topography, soils,
                             hydrology, and geology of the site, including but not
                             limited to source, location, and placement of fill material,

     *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~139









      disturbance or destruction of wetlands, and disruption
      and reduction of water flow and circulation patterns.

d.    Impacts of the proposed development on water courses
      within the adjoining site, including impacts to aquatic
      flora and fauna (e.g. shellfish beds, submerged aquatic
      vegetation, and fish spawning areas).

e.    Percent of proposed land disturbance on the site, or
      percentage of land to be cleared for construction.

f.    Pre- and  post-development  nonpoint source  pollution
      loads in runoff and   supporting documentation of all
      utilized coefficients and calculations.   For projects in
      CBPAs, the CBLAD Guidance Calculation Procedure, or
      other locally-developed calculation procedures, should be
      utilized.

g.    Percentage increase in impervious surface on site and the
      types of surfacing materials to be used.

h.    Channel, direction, flow rate, volume, and quality of
      stormwater that will be conveyed from the site, with a
      comparison to the pre- development conditions.

i.    Significant vegetative material on site, including plant
      species; measures for the preservation of vegetation.

j.    Calculations  of  anticipated  drainfield  or  wastewater
      irrigation areas, justification for sewer lines and a
      description of construction techniques and standards, if
      applicable.

k.    Any proposed on-site or off-site collection and treatment
      systems for sewage and stormwater, including the
      impacts on receiving water courses.

I.    Verification  of  structural  soundness  of  stormwater
      management       facilities,   including     professional
      certification.

m.    Plan to establish a long term schedule for inspection and
      maintenance of stormwater management facilities that
      include all maintenance requirements, and persons
      responsible for performing maintenance.


                    140








                       n.    Proposed   mitigation   measures   for  the   potential
                             hydrogeological impacts. Potential mitigation measures
                             include:
                             (i)   Proposed erosion and sediment control measures;
   I                             ~ ~~~~~~~~concepts may include minimizing the extent of the
                                    cleared area, perimeter controls, reduction of
                                    runoff velocities, measures to stabilize disturbed
                                    areas, schedule and personnel for site inspection.
                             (ii)   Proposed stormwater management system.

                             (iii)  Creation of wetlands to replace those lost;

                             (iv)   Minimizing cut and fill.

*                      o~~~~~~~. Proposed measures for mitigation of vegetative impacts.
                             Possible mitigation measures include:

                             (i)   Replanting schedule for trees and other significant
                                    vegetation removed for construction, including a
   *                               ~~~~~~~~~~~list of possible plants and trees to be used;

                             (ii)   Demonstration that the design of the plan will
                                    preserve to the greatest extent possible any
                                    significant trees and vegetation on the site and will
                                    provide maximum erosion control and overland
   *                               ~~~~~~~~~~flow benefits from such vegetation;

                             (iii)  Demonstration that indigenous plants are to be
   *                               ~~~~~~~~~~used to the greatest extent possible.

                       P.    Mitigative measures for impacts of proposed wastewater
                             treatment systems.

                3.    Anticipated duration and phasing schedule of construction of
I                    ~ ~~~~~~proposed project.

                4.    Listing and status of all requisite permits from all applicable
I                    ~ ~~~~~~local, state, and federal agencies, including wetlands permits.

                5.    Assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the
I                    ~ ~~~~~~natural processes and ecological relationships inherent in the
                       site shall be made and considered.


     *                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~141









                   6.    Available information about past uses of the site and detailed
                         information regarding the proposed use of the site.

                   7.    Any  other information  which  the  project applicant  or the
                         Desianated Authority believes is reasonably necessary for an
                         evaluation of the proposed project.

      IV.   SUBMISSION AND REVIEW REQUIREMENTS.

             A.    (X number  of) copies of all site drawings  and  other applicable
                   information as required must be submitted to the Designated
                   Authority for review, prior to the beginning of any land disturbance.

I            ~~~~B.    Such plan must be of sufficient scale and detail to depict the location
                   and area of all natural features and natural resources present on the
                   site.

             C.    Such plan must also depict the development, if any, and the methods
                   and procedures proposed to ensure the protection of such natural
 I               ~ ~~~~~features/resources   including   water   quality  during   and   after
                   construction. This plan may simply note that such areas are not to be
                   disturbed during or after site development.

             D.    The  Desianated  Authority  may  waive  some  of  the  CWQIA
 *                 ~~~~~requirements if they are unnecessary due to the scope and nature of
                   the proposal.

3            ~~~E.    The  CWQIA  should  be  certified  as  complete  and  accurate  by
                   (designated professional) or by such other professional as may be
                   specifically certified, licensed, or registered by the State of Virginia or
 I               ~ ~~~~other state to provide such certification, prior to submission to the
                   designated review authority. Evidence of professional qualifications
 *                 ~~~~~should be also be submitted.

                   (Optional-- If state certification for wetlands delineators is approved in
                   Virginia, all wetlands information should be prepared and/or verified
                   by a certified wetlands delineator.)
             F.    Any CWQIA must be submitted to and reviewed by the Designated
                   Authority in conjunction with the Plan of Development process, or
                   concurrent with the submission of application for review and approval
                   of site or subdivision plans, variances or application for land
                   disturbing, erosion and sediment control, or building permits.



                                              142








           G.    As  part of any CWQIA  submittal, the Desianated Authority may
                 require outside review of the CWQIA. The Designated Authority will
I               ~ ~~~~determine if such review is warranted. The Chesapeake Bay Local
                 Assistance Department (CBLAD), the Hampton Roads Planning District
                 Commission (HRPDC), and/or any other state or federal agency which
I               ~ ~~~~has a related interest and/or jurisdiction in the proposed project, may
                 be asked to review the assessment and respond with written
                 comments. Such agencies can provide comments to the designated
                 review authority which will be incorporated into the final review and
                 project evaluation, at the discretion of the latter. The deadline for
                 submittal of such comments by relevant agencies to the designated
                 review authority will be _ days following such request.

                 (Options for deadline of submittal of comments to be incorporated
                 into the final evaluation could be 30, 60, or 90 days.)

     V.    EVALUATION PROCEDURE.

           A.    General

                 1 .    Upon submission by the project applicant of all information.
                       required for a CWQIA and any other relevant information as
                       may be provided by the project applicant to the Designated
                       Authority, such authority will weigh the information submitted
                       against evaluation criteria specified in Subsection B. below in
 I                    ~ ~~~~~~order to determine if the proposed project is consistent with the
                       purpose and intent of this CWQlA procedure, the CBPA, the
                       Final Regulations, and the local CBPA ordinance.

                 2.    The  Designated  Authority may  seek the assistance of the
                       CBLAD, HRPDC, and/or other appropriate state or federal
                       agency for review and comment upon any water quality impact
                       assessment.

                 3.    The  Designated Authoritv will include in the determination
                       whether the potential impacts of the proposed development or
                       redevelopment have been adequately mitigated.
                 4.    Upon determining that the impacts have not been adequately
 I                    ~ ~~~~~mitigated, the Desionated  Authority shall require additional
                       mitigation as a condition for finding project consistency. The
                       project applicant shall resubmit all information regarding
                       improved mitigation measures.
*                 ~~~ ~~5.    When  the proposed or resubmitted mitigation measures are

                                            143









                 determined to be inadequate to minimize or eliminate the
                 anticipated impacts to water quality, the Desionated Authoritv
                 shall  disapprove  the  proposal  as  inconsistent  with  this
                 assessment procedure.

           6.    In making  a determination,  the  Desiunated  Authority shall
                 consider the cumulative impacts of the proposed development,
                 redevelopment,  or improvements  to existing structures on
                 water   quality  in  relation  to  other  development   and
                 redevelopment in the locality.

           7.    The Desionated Authority shall also consider the impacts of the
                 proposed project on the natural processes and ecological
                 relationships inherent in the site and adjacent lands.

B.          Evaluation Criteria.

           (If only one level of assessment is used, then Subsections B.1 and
           B.2. shall be used to evaluate the proposed project.)

           1.    In the case of development where a minor CWQIA is required,.
                 the reduced buffer area, in combination with the proposed
                 IVBMPs, will achieve water quality protection, pollutant removal,
                 and water resource conservation which is at least the
                 equivalent to the full 100' buffer area.

                 The following criteria will be used:

                 a.    The necessity of the proposed encroachment and the
                       ability to place improvements elsewhere on the site to
                       avoid disturbance of the buffer area.

                 b.    Impervious surface is minimized.

                 c.    The cumulative impact of the proposed development,
                       when considered in relation to other development in the
                       vicinity, will not result in a significant degradation of
                       water quality, or substantial alteration of any other
                       natural features/resources on or adjacent to the project
                       site.

           2.    In the case of developments where a major WQIA is required,
                 the following are established in addition to the criteria set out
                 for a minor WQIA:



                                      144








                       a.    Within any RPA, the proposed development is water-
                             dependent.

                       b.    The disturbance of wetlands will be minimized.

I                     ~~~~~~~C.    The development will not result in significant disruption
                             to the hydrology of the site.
I                     ~~~ ~~~~d.    The development will not result in severe degradation to
                             the aquatic vegetation or wildlife.
H                     ~~~~~~~e.    The  development  will  not  result' in  unnecessary
                             destruction of plant material on site.
U                     ~~~~~~f.    Proposed erosion and sediment control measures are
                             adequate to achieve the reduction in runoff and prevent
 *                          ~~~~~~~~~off-site sedimentation.

                       g.    Proposed   stormwater   management   measures   are
                             adequate to control the stormwater runoff to achieve "no
                             net increase" in pre-development pollutant loadings for-
                              new   development   and   improvements   to  existing
 I                        ~ ~~~~~~~structures, and will achieve a 10% reduction in previous
                              pollutant loadings for redevelopment.

I                     ~~~~~~~h.    Proposed re-vegetation of disturbed areas will provide
                             optimum erosion and sediment control benefits.

I                     ~~~~~~~i.    The design and location of any proposed drainfield will
                              be in accordance with any designated performance
 *                          ~~~~~~~~~standards set forth in relevant ordinances or regulations.

                       k.    The relationship and cumulative impact of the proposed
 I                        ~ ~~~~~~development on water quality, CBPAs, and other so
                              designated environmentally- sensitive areas, both on-site
 *                          ~~~~~~~~and on adjacent lands.










                                            145









                              BIBLIOGRAPHY


Canter, Larry W. Environmental ImDact Assessment. University of Oklahoma, OK:
     McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1977.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation. "Comparison of the Home Builders Association of
     Virginia's Chesapeake By Preservation Act Ordinance and the Chesapeake
     Bay Local Assistance Department's Model Ordinance." CBF, August 1990.

Chesapeake  Bay  Local Assistance  Department.   Local  Assistance  Manual.
     Richmond, VA: CBLAD, November 1989.

            Evaluation of the Homebuilders Association of Virginia's proposed
     model CBPA Ordinance. Information Bulletin #2. Richmond, VA: CBLAD,
     September 1990.

Chesapeake Bay Program. "Report and Recommendations of the Nonpoint Source
     Evaluation Panel."  (CBPITRS 56/91). Washington, D.C.:  EPA, December
     1990.

Chesapeake Bay Program - Toxic Subcommittee and Living Resources
     Subcommittee Joint Criteria and Standards Workgroup. "Chesapeake Bay
     Toxics of Concern List." Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy Commitment
     Report. Washington, D.C.: EPA, May 1991.

"Coastal  Nonpoint Pollution Control  Program:   Development  and  Approval
     Guidance." Washington, D.C.: NOAA/EPA, October 1991.

Griggs, Gary B. and John A. Gilchrist.   Geoloaic Hazards.  Resources and
     Environmental Plannina. 2nd. Ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing
     Co., 1983.

Hampton Roads Planning District Commission.  "CBPA Administrative Procedures
     in Hampton Roads Localities." Chesapeake, VA: HRPDC, February 1991.

             Best Manaaement Practices Desian Manual.   Chesapeake, VA:
     HRPDC, 1991.

Henning, Daniel H. and William R. Mangun.  Manaaina the Environmental Crisis.
     Durhan, NC: Duke University Press, 1989.

Horton, Tom and William M. Eichbaum. Turnina the Tide: Savina the Chesapeake
     Bay. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1991.



                                    146










Institute for Environmental Negotiation. "Management of Cumulative Impacts in
     Virginia:    Identifying  the  Issues  and  Assessing  the  Opportunities."
     Charlottesville, VA: IEN, December 1991.

Marsh, William M.  Landscaoe Plannina: Environmental Aoplications. University of
     Michigan - Flint, Ml: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1983.

Ortolano,  Lenoard.    Environmental  Plannina  and  Decision  Makina.  Stanford
     University, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1984.

Pamlico-Tar River Foundation, Inc. A River of Oooortunitv: A Pollution Abatement
     and Natural Resource Manaaement Plan for the Tar-Pamlico Basin.
     Washington, NC: P-TRF, April 1991.

State Water Control Board. "Water Quality Standards." Richmond, VA: SWCB,
      1988, revised 1990.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Nonpoint Source Watershed Workshop."
      Seminar Publication (EPA/625/4-91/027). Washington, DC: EPA, September
      1991.

           .  "Proposed Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of
      Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters." Washington, D.C.: EPA, May 1991.

























                                     147









   U               ~~~~~Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Models and Ordinances:

I      ~~Chesapeake Bay Foundation, August 1990.

        Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department, November 1989.

        City of Chesapeake, October 1991.

I      ~~Gloucester County, October 1991 revision.

        City of Hampton, November 1990.

        Home Builders Association of Virginia. Final Draft, July 1990.

H ~~Isle of Wight County, December 1990.

        James City County, August 1990.

        Lancaster County, September 1990.

        Middle Peninsula Planning District Commission, undated.

I      ~~City of Newport News, November 1991.

        City of Norfolk, September 1990.

        Northern Virginia Planning District Commission, October 1990.

I ~~City of Poquoson, November 1991.

        City of Portsmouth, September 1990.

        Town of Smithfield, September 1990.

        City of Suffolk, July 1990, revised 12/91.

I ~~City of Virginia Beach, January 1991.

        City of Williamsburg, September 1990.

        York County, September 1990.






                                              148






 MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE

              APPENDICES



I
I
II
i.
II


3                                APPENDIX A
    'I ~~~~PREDICTION AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON
                        THE WATER ENVIRONMENT
I DATA NEEDS AND RESOURCES
      I ~~~~~~~~Primary Source: Canter, 1977

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

 I








    I                   ~~~~PREDICTION AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON

      *                            ~~~~~~THE WATER ENVIRONMENT

        Basic Information on Water Pollution

              Water pollution can be defined in a number of ways; however, the basic
        elements of most definitions are the concentrations of particular pollutants in
I     ~ ~water for sufficient periods of time to cause certain effects.  If the effects are
        health related, such as those caused by pathogenic bacterial intrusion, the term
        "1contamination" is appropriate. Effects that have to do with limitations on water
        availability due to certain water quality requirements related to usage can serve as
        a basis for defining a condition  of water  pollution.   "Nuisance"  refers to
        aesthetically displeasing effects created by oils, grease, or other floating materials.

              Potential water quality impacts must be considered based on a clear
3       ~~delineation of various water quality characteristics. Water quality can be described
        in terms of physical, chemical, and bacteriological parameters.

 3            ~~~~Physical parameters include color, odor, temperature, solids (residues), oils,
        and grease. Color can be defined relative to type and density, the type being
        related to whether it is true color (dissolved) or apparent color (filterable). Odor is
I     ~ ~described by type and threshold odor number, which is related to odor-free water
        required for diluting an odorous water sample to a nonodorous level. Total solids
        are comprised of suspended and dissolved solids, and each of these fractions can
        be further divided into organic (volatile) and inorganic related to light transmittance
        through water. Settleable solids describe the materials present in solution that will
        settle by gravity in a one- hour period. Specific conductance (conductivity) is a
        measure of the inorganic dissolved solids present in ionic form.   In surface
        watercourses oil and grease is of interest relative to nuisance considerations.

              Chemical parameters can be subdivided into organic and inorganic
        constituents.    Several  tests  can  be  employed  to  describe  the  organic
I      ~ ~characteristics of water.  The most-used test is the BOD  (biochemical oxygen
        demand). BOD is the amount of dissolved oxygen that effluent takes from its
        receiving water.  It is a measurement of the quantity of organic waste in the
I      ~ ~water,  since this material takes oxygen  from  the water  as it decomposes.
        Technically, it is defined as the amount of oxygen required by bacteria in a sample
        under aerobic conditions at 20 degrees Celsius over a 5-day incubation period.
I      ~ ~The first-stage BOD represents the carbonaceous demand  plus the nitrogenous
        oxygen demand (NOD). Other test that describe the organic content of water
3 ~~include the chemical oxygen demand, total organic carbon, and total oxygen
        demand.


         I                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~A-i









      Inorganic parameters of potential interest in water quality characterization
include salinity, hardness, pH, acidity, alkalinity, and the content of iron,
manganese, chlorides, sulfates, sulfides, heavy metals (Hg, Pb, Cr, Cu, Zn),
nitrogen (organic, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and phosphorous. Salinity and chloride
content are a measure of the salt in the water.  Hardness is caused primarily by
divalent metallic cations that have soap=consuming potential, the major ones
being calcium and magnesium. Nitrogen and phosphorus contents are of interest
due to their nutrient characteristics, especially in Chesapeake Bay and Chowan
River where special standards have ben set for these substances.

      Bacteriological parameters include coliforms, fecal coliforms, specific
pathogens, and viruses.  Total coliform and fecal coliform organisms are used as
indicators of the presence of pathogens. specific pathogens such as salmonella
organisms may be relevant for certain environmental impact studies.

      There are two main sources of water pollutants in surface watercourses,
namely, point sources and nonpoint sources.  The total waste load in a stream is
represented by the sum of all point and nonpoint pollutant sources.  Refer to
Guidance Text which follows the Initial Environmental Review Questionnaire for a
more  detailed discussion of these in the Surface and  Groundwater  Quality
sections.

      Agricultural wastes include irrigation return flows as well as runoff from
feedlots. These waters exhibit salinities that are several-fold greater than unused
irrigation water; also, hardness, total dissolved solids (TDS), and turbidity are at
increased levels. Irrigation return flows may also exhibit increases in nitrogen,
phosphorus, and pesticide contents.   Runoff waters from feedlots have high
organic, nutrient, and solids concentrations and contain microorganisms that are
potentially pathogenic to animals and humans.

      Soil erosion is another major water pollutant in terms of quantity. The total
quantity of solids from soil erosion is approximately 700 times greater than the
total from municipal waste-water discharges.

      Accidental spillage of oil and other hazardous substances into watercourses
is also prevalent and can cause devastating and extensive damage to the aqueous
environment.  Watercraft that navigate waters discharge sanitary wastes, oils,
litter, ballast, and bilge waters. Although the total quantities of waste discharged
from watercraft are small relative to other pollutant sources, they are important
since most of the discharges are in high-use shoreline and harbor areas. This is of
particular consequence in Hampton Roads.

      The effects of water pollutants on receiving water quality are diverse and
dependent upon the type and concentrations of pollutants. Soluble organics, as
represented by high BOD wastes, cause depletion of oxygen.  Trace quantities of
                                      A-2








        certain organic cause undesirable tastes and odors, and some may be biomnagnified
        in the  food  web.    suspended  solids  decrease  water  clarity  and  hinder
3       ~~photosynthetic processes; if solids settle and form sludge deposits, changes in
        benthic (lacustrine) ecosystems result. Color, turbidity, oils, and floating materials
        are often of concern due to their aesthetic undesirability and possible influence on
I      ~ ~water clarity and photosynthetic processes.  Excessive nitrogen and phosphorus
        can lead to algal overgrowth with accompanying water treatment problems
        resulting from algae decay and interference with treatment processes. Chlorides
I     ~ ~cause a salty taste to be imparted to water, and in sufficient concentration
        limitations on water usage can occur. Acids, alkalis, and toxic substances have
        the potential for causing fish kills and creating other imbalances in stream
I      ~ ~ecosystems.  Thermal discharges can also cause imbalances as well as reductions
        in stream waste assimilative capacity. Stratified flows from thermal discharges
3       ~~minimize normal mixing patterns in receiving streams and reservoirs.

        Impact Assessment Steps

               One of the major results from land disturbance and land use activity is
        evidenced by changes in water quality both in the vicinity and downstream from
U       ~~project areas.    Construction  will cause  short-term  impacts  on  the  water
        environment at the local or site level, and operation of the samne will result in
U       ~~longer-term impacts on a regional scale.

               These following twelve steps are directed toward determining the water
        impacts of alternatives on the local and regional levels. Microscale (on-site or local)
I      ~ ~assessment involves comparisons of calculated concentrations of water pollutants
        applicable to water quality standards. Macroscale (regional) assessment considers
        the contribution of alternatives to area water pollutant sources, both point and
         nonpoint. Both levels of impact assessments are necessary in order to adequately
        address water quality impacts associated with proposed actions.

 U            ~~~Data needs and associated resources for predicting and assessing impacts
        of proposed actions on water quality are as follows:

         1.    Determine types and quantities of water pollutants emitted from all sources
               for meeting a given need during both construction and operational phases.

               The first step in prediction and assessment of water quality impacts involves
               identification of types and quantities of water pollutants emitted from
 I          ~ ~~~construction and operation of each alternative under consideration.  One
               approach for identifying water pollutants is to review EISs prepared for
               similar projects. Another approach is to utilize the unit waste generation
 I          ~ ~~factor, which is defined as the rate at which a pollutant is released to a
               drainage area or watercourse as a result of some activity, such as land
 3            ~~~~clearing or production by industry, divided by that activity.
                                               A-3









2.    Determine the existing water quantity and quality levels for the surface
     watercourses in the area.  Examine the frequency distributions and the
      median and mean data for both water quantity and quality.  If possible,
     consider historical trends of water quality. Note particularly the low flow or
      minimum instream flow ratio utilized by the state for maintenance of water
     quality standards.

     The second step involves assembling information on existing water quantity
     and quality levels in the area of the project, particularly focusing on quality
      parameters related to anticipated water pollutants to be emitted from
     construction and operational phases of the project.   Sources of water
      quality information include relevant city, county, regional, and state water
      resources agencies and private industries that have monitoring programs.
      Another source is the storage and retrieval of water quality data (STORET)
      system of the EPA.

      Since water quality standards vary with the beneficial uses assigned for
      particular stream or stream segments, it may be necessary to evaluate
      existing water quality relative to various standards. This step is important
      for project that may have an impact over large distances in a single stream
      and for other projects, such as pipelines, that may cross numerous streams
      and several states.

      Interpretation of water quality data involves comparison with water quality
      standards.  The State Water Control Board (SWCB) has established such
      water quality standards; refer to Appendix B. A rating system can be used
      for this purpose. The use of a rating system is of value in graphically
      portraying existing water quality. Stream flow information can be obtained
      from the U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) as well as from the SWCB -
      Tidewater Regional Office (TRO).

      One of the key concerns with regard to stream flow is the flow frequency,
      which is utilized for calculation of compliance with water quality standards.
      In some instances the 7-day, 2-year low flow is utilized; in other cases the
      7-day, 10- year low flow is required. A 7-day, 2-year low flow indicates
      that this is the minimum flow that occurs over a 7-day period on a
      frequency of once  every  2 years.   Flow  frequency  information  and
      "minimum instream flow" requirements for specific stream segments are
      available from the SWCB-TRO.







                                     A-4








I        ~~3.    Document unique pollution problems that have occurred or are existing in
               local surface watercourses.

               The primary purpose of this step is to identify any unique pollution problems
               that have occurred in the project area. This is necessary in order to
 I           ~ ~~~adequately describe the environmental setting, to indicate a familiarity with
               the area, and to focus on environmentally sensitive parameters. Examples of
               unique pollution problems that should be identified include fish kills,
               excessive algal growth, and thermal discharges causing stratified flow


 I            ~~~Many  sources can  be  used to obtain  information  on  unique  pollution
               problems, including the SWCB-TRO, as well as, conservation groups. Local
 *            ~~~newspapers  are  another  source  of  historical  pollution  incidents;  this
               information is generally stored on microfilm at local, regional, or university
               libraries. Use of aerial photographs can also reveal past uses of the site.

         4.    If relevant for the project alternatives, describe groundwater quantity and
               quality in the area, noting the depth to the water table and direction of
 U           ~ ~~water flow.   Identify major local uses of groundwater,  and  delineate
               historical trends for groundwater depletion and pollution.

 I            ~~~~This step may not be required for all project types, but for alternatives that
               have potential for groundwater impact, this is a necessary step. The basic
               purpose is to determine the depth to the groundwater table in the area and
  I           ~ ~~~to identify the direction of groundwater flow.  Major users of groundwater
               from the area should be enumerated, as well as historical trends in
  5            ~~~~groundwater depletion or quality deterioration.

               Sources of information include local, regional, and state agencies dealing
  I            ~~~with water resources.  Local public utilities, community development, and
               zoning offices often have maps showing existing and/or abandoned well
               sites. The Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, in conjunction
  I           ~ ~~with the U.S.G.S., maintains a regional groundwater monitoring system.  in
               addition, the SWGB-TRO administers permits for the Eastern Virginia
               Groundwater Management Area and must be contacted if a new or modified
  I           ~ ~~use of groundwater is proposed. Groundwater quality standards which are
               applicable statewide are found in Appendix C.







                                                A-5







        5.    Assemble summary of key meteorological parameters in the area, noting
              particularly the monthly averages of precipitation, evaporation, and
              temperature.

              Meteorological data are required in order to predict and assess air quality
              impacts associated with proposed actions. In addition, certain climatological
 I          ~ ~~~factors such as precipitation, evaporation, and air temperature are important
              in terms of predicting and assessing water quality impact. As well,
              precipitation and temperature information may need to be considered from
 I           ~ ~~proper construction scheduling.  The primary sources of information include
              the SWCB-TRO, as well as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
              Administration. The Hampton Roads Planning District Commission also has
              some of this data.
*       ~~6.    Procure  the  applicable  water  quality  standards  for  local  surface
              watercourses and groundwater supplies if relevant. Specify applicability of
              effluent standards and required treatment technology and state whether the
 3            ~~~~receiving stream is water-quality limited or effluent limited.- Consider time
              schedules required for attaining applicable water quality standards.

 3            ~~~The Clean Water Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500) established basic
              water quality goals and policies for the U.S. Some of these are:

   *                 ~~~ ~~1)    The discharge of pollutants into navigable waters should be
                           eliminated.

   I                 ~~~ ~~2)    Wherever attainable, an interim goal of water quality, which
                           provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish,
                           and wildlife and provides for recreation in and out of water,
                           should be achieved.

   *                 ~~~ ~~3)    The discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts should be
                           prohibited.

 3            ~~~These standards were later amended in the 1977, 1987, and 1990 OWA
              revisions.

              Strategies for point source control have been developed, with every point
              source being subject to an effluent standard and a water quality standards,
              with the most stringent treatment requirements being applied.   Control
 3            ~~~strategies for nonpoint source  pollution have  been  generally taken the
              approach of application of Best Management Practices or BMPs. Effluent
              standards for point sources represent requirements in terms of the quality
 I           ~ ~~characteristics of the effluent discharged  from  municipal  and  industrial
              wastewater treatment plants.  Water quality standards are applicable to

         I~~~~~~~~~~~-







 I            ~~~~surface watercourses and represent the quality characteristics requir ed to
              allow certain water uses.

 *            ~~~New  industrial point sources are to be planned in accordance with new
              source performance standards. Pretreatment standards are to be met by
 *            ~~~industrial sources prior to discharge into publicly-owned treatment works
              (POTWs).

              Water quality-limited segments cannot be expected to meet established
              water quality standards, even if all point sources achieve effluent limitations
              such as secondary treatment for POTW's and best practicable treatment for
              industrial discharges.   Effluent-limited segments  are those where water
              quality standards can be achieved after all point sources meet effluent
 *            ~~~~limitations.

              Water quality standards vary from state to state, river basin to river basin,
              and various segments within river basins. State standards also include
 I           ~ ~~consideration of present and potential beneficial uses of water. The SWCB
              has established water quality management plans for the watershed basins
              which encompass Hampton Roads. Refer to the water quality management
              plans in Appendix C for the following basins: Chowan and Dismal Swamp,
              James, York, and Small Coastal Basins and Chesapeake Bay.

3       ~~7.    Summarize the organic waste local allocation study for the area.  Also
              procure existing information on inorganic, thermal, and bacterial waste
 3            ~~~loads.  Identify known point sources of pollution, focusing specifically on
              unique discharges or wastewater constituents. Also enumerate the types of
              water uses in the area and summarize the quantities involved.

              The purpose of this step is to summarize the waste load allocation study for
              the particular surface watercourses in the vicinity of proposed alternatives.
 I           ~ ~~One  result of this step is the identification of known  point sources of
               pollution in the vicinity of the study area. Attention should also be directed
              toward unique discharges or effluent constituents in the area. 'State studies
               for compliance with CWA See. 305(b) can be a helpful source of this


 I            ~~~~It is also important to identify numbers and types of water users in the area,
               particularly those  downstream  from  the  project site.   Water  quantity
 3            ~~~~concerns are of major importance in water-deficit areas. The types of water
               uses are important since quality requirements vary for different uses.



         I~~~~~~~~~~~-







 I       8.   ~~Determine the regional impacts by calculating estimated daily quantities of
               water pollutants from the alternatives during both construction and
               operational phases and comparing these to existing waste loads in the drain
               area.   Determine the percentage increase in these waste loads.   Note
               existing water quality parameters that are good or poor relative to current or
 *            ~~~~potential standards.

               The purpose of this step is to examine the impact of alternatives in terms of
               their relative contributions to existing waste loads in streams. The approach
               consists of multiplying unit waste generation factors by their appropriate
               production quantities and then comparing these calculated waste loads with
               existing waste loads in the study area. One means of assessing the impact
               is to calculate percentage changes in pollutant loads resulting from the
               alternatives relative to existing pollutant loads in the study area. Waste
 I           ~ ~~~loads should be considered for organic, inorganic, solid, nutrient, bacterial,
               and thermal pollutants.

*       ~~9.    Consider construction phase impacts in terms of the following factors:

               a)    Time  period  of  construction  and  the  resultant 'time  period  of
                     decreased  water quality.   Specify stream discharges and  quality
                     variations that would be anticipated during the construction phase.

 U            ~~~~b)    Anticipated distance downstream of decreased water quality.

 *            ~~~~c)    Implications of decreased water quality relative to downstream water
                     users. If there are users that require certain water qualities, identify
                     the required raw water quality characteristics and discuss the effects
                     of decreased quality during the construction phase.
               d)    Specific  construction   specifications  directed  toward   pollutant
                     minimization.
               The primary water quality impact during construction results from sediment
 I           ~ ~~that is eroded from the construction site, transported to local surface
               watercourses, and then dispersed or deposited. Many predictive methods
               have been developed to describe erosion, transport, and deposition. See
               the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department's Local Assistance
               Manual, Appendix C, for a summary of the RPA buffer equivalency
 *            ~~~~calculations to be used in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas.




         I~~~~~~~~~~~~-








U       ~~10.   Determine  the  microscale  impacts  by  calculating  specific  downstream
               concentrations resulting from conservative pollutants, dissolved oxygen
               concentration resulting from organic pollutants, and temperatures resulting
               from thermal discharges. Consider these on-site or local impacts for both
               construction and operational phases.   Compare  calculated downstream
 I           ~ ~~~concentrations with applicable water quality standards.  Check if applicable
               effluent standards are met for existing facilities, or consider how they will
               be brought into compliance. In the case of new sources, identify necessary
 I           ~ ~~technology for compliance with new source performance standards.
               This step involves the calculation of downstream concentrations of various
               water pollutants from the project area for each alternative during both the
 I           ~ ~~~construction and operational phases.  Several mathematical models that can
               be used in microscale impact calculations are presented as examples in the
 *            ~~~~discussion below.

               Conservative Pollutants

               Conservative pollutants are not biologically degraded in a stream, nor will
               they be lot from the water phase due to precipitation, sedimentation, or
 I           ~ ~~~volatilization.    The  basic  approach  for  prediction  of  downstream
               concentrations of conservative pollutants is to consider the dilution capacity
 *            ~~~~of the stream.

               Thermal Pollution

 I            ~~~~Mathematical models of varying degrees of complexity have been developed
               to predict the persistence of heat in stagnant waters, flowing streams,
               estuaries, and the ocean. An example has been published on the use of a
               simplified temperature- predictive equation for calculating downstream
               temperatures following a waste heat discharge into a flowing stream. (See
               source) There are also other reference materials available on the subject of
               thermal pollution.
         11.  If water quality or effluent standards are exceeded, consider mitigation
               through Best Management Practices (BMPs) or other control measures.

 *            ~~~If it is determined that water quality standards  are exceeded  by the
               proposed action, than abatement strategies, control measures, or BMPs to
               mitigate these impacts should be presented.   Examples which describe
 I           ~ ~~~various control technologies that can be used  for minimizing  pollutant
               emissions are available from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
               BMPs can be designed with the advice of a consultant or local planning

               staff.


                                              A-9








U       ~~12.   Consider operational impacts of alternatives in terms of the following
               factors:

               a.    Frequency distribution of decreased quality and quantity

 I            ~~~~b.    Effects of sedimentation on the stream bottom ecosystem

               C.    Fate of nutrients by incorporation into biomass

               d.    Reconcentration of metals, pesticides, or radionuclides into the food
   *                 ~~~~web

               S.    Chemical precipitation or oxidation/reduction of inorganic chemicals

 I            ~~~~f.    Anticipated distance downstream of decreased water quality and the
                     implications for water users and related raw water quality
   *                 ~~~~~requirements

 *             g~~~~. General'effects of any water quality changes on the ecosystem

               h.    Unique  water  quality changes  that occur  as a  result of water
   *                 ~~~~~impoundment and thermal stratification

               The final step is included as a reminder to consider unique aspects of
               operational impacts relative to a variety of concerns.   These concerns
 I           ~ ~~~include the frequency distribution of decreased quality or quantity, fate of
               nutrients by incorporation into biomass, reconcentration of conservative
               pollutants into the food web, and chemical changes of certain inorganic
               chemical within aqueous systems.
*       ~~Data Needs and Resources

               Local zoning, tax, and special district maps, as well as aerial photos, are
         generally available in the local planning department, real estate, or Commissioner
         of the Revenue's offices. Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area overlay maps can be
         found in local planning and zoning offices.

         Wetlands Information:

*        o~~ Virginia Institute of Marine Science Marsh Inventory Maps

*        o~~ National Wetlands Inventory Maps

         o     Federal  Manual  for Identifvina and  Delineatina  Jurisdictional Wetlands;
               1987, 1989, and 1991 Proposed
                                              A-10








o     Infrared Aerial Photos

o     Virginia Institute of Marine Science - Wetlands Program

o     Virginia Marine Resources Commission

o     Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board

o     Local Wetlands Board

o     Designated local government planning staff

Vegetation Information:

o     Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation-
      Division of Natural Heritage (endangered species inventories)

o     Virginia Native Plant Society

o     U.S. Forest Service

o     The Nature Conservancy

o     Local Nurserymen and Arborists

o     Designated local government planning staff

Surfacewater Information:

o     FEMA National Flood Insurance Maps

o     State Water Control Board - Tidewater Regional Office
      --    Basin Water Quality Management Plans
      --    Water Quality Monitoring Data
      --    Minimum Instream Flow Requirements

o     U.S.G.S. Computer Modelling Data

      o    Public Water Supply Data - Newport News Waterworks, City/County
           Department of Public Works






                                     A-11








Groundwater Information:

o     U.S.G.S.
      --    Geologic Maps (aquifer boundaries and vulnerability)
      --    Hydrogeologic   Studies   (aquifer   characteristics,   vulnerability,
            groundwater    flow    direction,    potential    recharge    areas,
            surfacewater/groundwater interaction)

o     Public Water Supply Data (water quality, well construction, geology, aquifer
      characteristics, location of public wells,wellhead protection areas)

o     Domestic  Well  Data  - Virginia  Department  of  Health,  local  health
      departments (water quality, well construction standards, geology)

Stormwater Runoff and Discharge Information:

o     State Water Control Board - Tidewater Regional Office

o     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region III (Philadelphia)

o     City/County Engineer

Wastewater/Water Treatment Information:

o     Hampton Roads Sanitation District

o     Virginia Department of Health

o     City/County Department of Public Works


















                                      A-12



I
I
I
I
I.
I
                               APPENDIX B
     IN~~ ~SAMPLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT THRESHOLDS
    I|~~~ ~Source: Pamlico-Tar River Foundation, Inc., 1991

!
1
I
I
I



II
II
!
l



I
l
l
l
l










1. Publicly-Owned Wastewater Treatment Systems
       (sewer plants)


Determinants of Impact Severity
Design or permitted flow
       <50,000 gallons per day (GPD) ................. relatively minor impact
      50,000 to 100,000 GPD ...................... needs environmental assessment
       100,000 to 500,000 GPD ..................... needs full EIS
       > 500,000 GPD ........................... source of major concern
Treatment level
      Tertiary or advanced ........................ acceptable
      Secondary .............................. needs environmental assessment,
                                                          especially in estuarine waters
      Primary only ............................. unacceptable
Disposal of treated wastewater
      Non-discharge (land application) ................. preferable, if feasible
      Discharge to wetlands ....................... needs environmental assessment;
                                                          created wetlands preferred
      Discharge to surface waters ..................... least desirable
Types of wastewater accepted
      Domestic and sewage only .................... relatively less concern
      Industrial wastes ........................... undesirable
Sludge disposal
      Land application .preferable, if feasible
      Landfilling or incineration ..................... less desirable
DIscharge point
      Land application .......................... preferable
      Nursery areas, shellfish waters,
         outstanding resource waters, high
         quality waters, Class B or higher .............. unacceptable
      Other waters ......................... needs further scrutiny
Minimum acceptable removal percentages for domestic wastewater
      Biological and chemand ............ 90%
      Nitrogen ............................... 50% or 6 mg/liter effluent
                                                          concentration TN
      Phosphorus ............................... 30% or 2 mg/liter effluent
                                                          concentration TP
      Metals ................................. 70% for freshwater;
                                                       90% saltwater
      Synthetic organics ......................... 70%
Storm sewerage
      Separate wastewater/stormwater ................. preferable
      Combined wastewater/stormwater ................ unacceptable








                                           B-i








        Site characteristics for sludge disposal or effluent irrigation
               Seasonal high water table
                  > 10 feet below surface ...........acceptable
               > 300 feet from surface water ..........acceptable
               Seasonal high water table
                  6-10 feet below surface...........needs environmental assessment
               <300 feet from surface water ..........needs environmental assessment
               Seasonal high water table
                  < 6 feet below surface ...........undesirable
I        ~     ~~Disinfectant method
               Ozone..................option to chlorination
               Activated carbon...............option to chlorination
 I               ~~~~~Chlorination................unacceptable if trihalomethanes
                                                                likely to be formed


















          I~~~~~~~~~~~~~-










2. Privately-Owned Wastewater Systems
      (package plants)


Determinants of Impact Severity
Design or permitted flow
       <50,000 gallons per day (GPD) ................ relatively minor concern
      50,000 to 100,000 GPD ...................... needs environmental assessment
       > 100,000 GPD ........................... source of major concern
Treatment level
      Tertiary or advanced ....................... acceptable
      Secondary ............................... needs environmental assessment
      Primary only ............................. unacceptable
Disposal of treated wastewater
      Non-discharge (land application) ................. preferable, if feasible
      Discharge to wetlands ....................... needs environmental assessment;
                                                          created wetlands preferred
      Discharge to surface waters .................... least desirable
Types of wastewater accepted
      Domestic and sewage only .................... relatively less concern
      Industrial wastes .......................... unacceptable
Sludge disposal
      Land application ........................... preferable, if feasible
      Landfilling or incineration .................... less desirable
Discharge point
      Land application .......................... preferable, if feasible
      Nursery areas, shellfish waters, outstanding resource waters,
         high quality waters, Class B or higher ........... unacceptable
      Other waters .needs further scrutiny
Minimum acceptable removal efficiencies for domestic wastewater
      Biological and chemical oxygen demand ............ 90%
      Nitrogen ............................... 50 % or 6 mg/liter effluent concentration TN
      Phosphorus ............................... 30% or 2 mg/liter effluent conc. TP
      Metals.                                                       ...70%
          Mtl..... ...........................70
      Synthetic organics .......................... 70%
      Bacteria .............................. 90%
Ownership, funding, and operation
      Single owner .............................. desirable
      Local owner .desirable
      Owner/operator ........................... desirable
      Absentee owner ........................... undesirable
      Group ownership .......................... undesirable; needs performance bonds
      Contract operator .......................... undesirable; needs performance bonds
Local regulatory framework
      County package plant ordinance
         and inspections ......................... good
      No local ordinance and inspections ............... unacceptable





                                           B-3











3.  Industrial Dischargers


Determinants of Impact Severity
Waste disposal approach
       Process modification to reduce pollutants ........... desirable
       Recycling/Reuse of wastewater .................. desirable
       End-of-pipe control ......................... less desirable
Waste products
       Standard pollutants only ...................... relatively minor concern
       Biocides ................................ needs environmental assessment
       Synthetic organics ......................... needs environmental assessment
       Metals and other toxics ...................... needs environmental assessment;
                                                              unacceptable in salt water
       Reusable/recyclable pollutants .................. unacceptable
Design or permitted flow
       <50,000 gallons per day (GPD) ................. relatively minor concern
       50,000 to 100,000 GPD ...................... needs environmental assessment
       100,000 to 500,000 GPD ..................... needs full EIS
       >500,000 GPD ........................... source of major concern
Disposal of treated wastewater
       Non-discharge (land application) ................. preferable, if feasible
       Discharge to wetlands ....................... needs environmental assessment;
                                                              created wetlands preferred
       Discharge to surface waters .................... least desirable
Sludge disposal
       Land application .......................... preferable, if feasible
       Landfilling or incineration .................... less desirable
Discharge point
       Land application .......................... preferable, if feasible
       Nursery areas, shellfish waters,
          outstanding resource waters, high quality waters,
          Class B or higher ....................... unacceptable
       Other waters ............................. needs further scrutiny
UMinimum acceptable removal efficiencies for standard pollutants
       Biological and chemical oxygen demand ............ 90%
       Nitrogen ............................... 50 % or 6 mg/liter effluent concentration TN
       Phosphorus .............................. 30 % or 2 mg/liter effluent cone. TP
       Metals ................................. 70% freshwater; 90% saltwater
       Synthetic organics ......................... 70%
       Temperature ............................. no more than 10 F rise in mixing zone
Storm sewerage
       Separate wastewater/stormwater ................. acceptable
       Combined wastewater/stormwater ................ unacceptable
Site characteristics for sludge disposal or effluent irrigation
       Seasonal high water table > 10 feet below surface ...... acceptable
       > 300 feet from surface water .................. acceptable
       Seasonal high water table 6-10 feet below surface ...... needs environmental assessment
       < 300 feet from surface water .................. needs environmental assessment
       Seasonal high water table < 6 feet below surface ....... undesirable


                                              B-4











4.   Landfills


Determinants of Impact Severity
Type of waste .................................                       always needs environmental assessment
Distance from surface waters
       > 1 mile ............................... acceptable
       1000 feet to 1 mile ......................... needs environmental assessment
       < 1000 feet ............................. unacceptable
Distance from municipal water supplies
       >2 miles ...............................   acceptable
       1-2 miles ...............................                    needs environmental assessment
       < 1 mile ...............................                     unacceptable
Regulatory floodplain location
       Above 100-year floodplain ....................                acceptable
       Above 10-year floodplain .....................               needs scrutiny
       Below 10-year floodplain .....................               unacceptable
Depth of seasonal high water table below bottom of landfill
       > 10 feet ...............................                    needs scrutiny
       < 10 feet .................................unacceptable
Permeability of landfill bed/liner
       Impermeable material .......................  acceptable
       Very low permeability clay .....................  needs scrutiny
       Permeable ..............................                     unacceptable
Leachate collection and treatment onsite
       Yes ..................................   desirable
       No ..................................   undesirable


























                                                  B-5











6. Urban, Industrial, and Commercial Development


       For assessement of industrial wastewater treatment, see Guide 3.

Determinants of Impact Severity
Size or area
       < 1 acre ...............................relatively minor concern
       1-10 acres ..............................needs scrutiny
       10-100 acres .............................needs environmental assessment;
                                                              mitigation measures probably necessary
       > 100 acres .............................needs full EIS
Impervious surface (built-upon area)
       < 12% ................................acceptable
       12-30% ................................needs stormwater and erosion control plus
                                                              buffers; stormwater controls for I inch
                                                              runoff;minimum buffer of 100 feet for
                                                              nonsensitive and 300 feet for sensitive
                                                              waters
       >30% ................................needs stormwater and erosion control plus
                                                            "buffers; stormwater controls for 1.5
                                                              inches runoff; stormwater measures
                                                              with performance guarantees; minimum
                                                              300 feet buffer for all waters.
Wastewater treatment
       Connected to public wastewater system ............. acceptable if system can handle
                                                              additional flow
       Septic tanks .............................undesirable (see Guide 5)
       Private wastewater system (package plant) ........... less desirable (see Guide 2)
Zoning or land use plan classification
       In appropriately zoned area ....................preferable
       In zoned area requiring rezoning ................. needs scrutiny
       In unzoned area ...........................undesirable; points to need for zoning
Land use context
       In area of similar or compatible land uses,
          or area specifically designated as such ........... preferable
       In area of incompatible land use
          or lacks infrastructure ..................... probably unacceptable; needs scrutiny
       In environmentally sensitive area ................ unacceptable
       Within 300 feet of sensitive area ................. unacceptable














                                                 B-6











7. Residential and Recreational Development


Determinants of Impact Severity
Size or area
       <1 acre ...............................relatively minor concern
       1-10 acres ..............................needs scrutiny
       10-100 acres .............................needs scrutiny; mitigation likely
       > 100 acres .............................needs environmental assessment
Density (dwelling units per unit area)
       0.05 unit/acre ............................relatively minor concern
       <0.5 unit/acre ...........................minor concern if not in or near
                                                               environmentally sensitive areas
       <1 unit/acre .............................minor concern if subject to appropriate
                                                               subdivision controls and not in or near
                                                               environmentally sensitive areas
       1-4 units/acre ............................needs environmental assessment
       >4 units/acre ............................too high except in urban areas
Impervious surface (built-upon area)
       <6% ................................ preferable
       6-12% .................................needs erosion and sediment control plus
                                                               minimum 50-foot buffer for
                                                              non-sensitive and 100-foot buffer for
                                                               sensitive riparian areas
       12-30% ................................needs stormwater and erosion control plus
                                                              buffers; stormwater controls for 1 1/2'
                                                               runoff; minimum buffer of 100 feet for
                                                               nonsensitive and 300 feet for sensitive
                                                              waters
       >30% ................................unacceptable
Wastewater treatment
       Septic tanks .............................desirable if site characteristics meet criteria
                                                               in Guide 5 above and if overall density
                                                               <I /acre; less desirable or unacceptable
                                                               otherwise
       Connected to public wastewater system ............. acceptable if existing system can
                                                              handle additional flow. New sewer
                                                               lines need environmental assessment
                                                               since their costs typically lead to
                                                              pressure for more development.
       Private wastewater system (package plant) ........... undesirable (see Guide 2 above)
Zoning or land use plan classification
       In appropriately zoned area .................... preferable
       In zoned area requiring rezoning ................. needs scrutiny
       In unzoned area ........................... undesirable; points to need for zoning
Land use context
       In area of similar or compatible land uses,
          or area specifically designated as such ........... preferable
       In area of incompatible land use or
          lacks infrastructure ....................... probably unacceptable; needs scrutiny
       In environmentally sensitive area ................ unacceptable

                                              B-7










8. Marinas


Determinants of Impact Severity
Water characteristics
       Shellfish, outstanding resource or
          high quality waters, nursery areas,
          water supplies, class B or higher .............. unacceptable
       Urban or developed waterfronts ................. probably OK but needs scrutiny
       Other undeveloped waters .....................needs environmental assessment
Terrestrial, wetland, and aquatic habitats
       Mitigated wetland alteration ...................needs scrutiny
       Endangered or threatened species habitat ............ unacceptable
       Unmitigated wetland alteration ..................unacceptable
       Primary nursery area .........................unacceptable
Size (number of slips)
       <5 ..................................relatively minor concern
       5-10 ..................................relatively minor concern, but needs scrutiny
       10-100 ................................needs environmental assessment
       100-300 ................................needs full EIS
       > 300 .................u................Unacceptable
Construction
       Excavated upland basin ...................... preferable, if feasible
       Open water ..............................unacceptable if upland alterative exists
       Excavated wetlands .........................unacceptable
Flushing characteristics (maximum water turnover time)
       <2 days ...............................acceptable
       2-4 days ...............................probably acceptable but needs scrutiny
       4-10 days ...............................needs environmental assessment
       > 10 days ..............................unacceptable
Waste control
       No onshore restrooms/pumpout facilities ............ unacceptable
       No "locked head" policy with signage ............. unacceptable
Impervious surface and wastewater disposal
       Same as for residential/recreational development in Guide 7
Degree of shoreline alteration (other than upland basin entrance)
       None .................................acceptable
       Minor, but shoreline character unchanged
          and sensitive areas unharmed ................ acceptable
       Significant ..............................needs scrutiny
       Major .................................unacceptable
Public waterfront access provided
       None .................................unacceptable
       Walking access only ........................acceptable
       Free public boat launching .................... desirable








                                                B-8










9.  Agriculture


Determinants of Impact Severity
        There is such a wide variety of agricultural systems, even within eastern North Carolina, that even Iho
broad generalities used in other categories are not possible here. Instead, some basic questions to ask regarding
agricultural operations are listed.

        *Are wetlands or lands designated highly erodible being converted to production? If in production, can/will
it be retired and enrolled in the Conservation Reserve?

        *Has a soil and water conservation plan been drafted and implemented? Are Best Management Practice
(BMPs) in use? Can/will the operation qualify for BMP cost-sharing?

        *Are nutrient and integrated pest management strategies being utilized? Are other "low-input' or organic
approaches to reducing synthetic chemical use used?

        *Is livestock contact with streams minimized? Are livestock wastes handled properly?

        *Is the area artificially drained? If so, are water management practices to reduce runoff during the
non-growing season used?

        *Are vegetated buffers maintained between agricultural operations and surface waters?

        *Is there a potential for groundwater contamination by nitrates and pesticides?

        *Are fertilizer and pesticide wastes properly disposed of?


























                                                     B-9









10. Forestry


Determinants of Impact Severity
Harvesting method
       Intensive selection .........................best
       Partial clearcut ... ........................better
       Extensive selective cutting ....................better still
       Extensive clearcut ..........................worst
Silvicultural practice
      Mixed-age, mixed species .....................best
      Even-age monoculture .......................worst
Artificial drainage
      No ..................................desirable
      Yes, with water management ...................suboptimal
      Yes, without water management .................undesirable
Fire control
      Partial suppression or controlled bums ............. more desirable
       Complete suppression; no controlled burns .......... undesirable
Vegetated riparian buffer zones
       > 15 meter wide ..........................undesirable to acceptable
       < 15 meter wide ..........................undesirable
      None .................................unacceptable
During and post-harvest erosion control
      Mulching, reseeding, buffers, terracing,
          diversions, water control, slope adjustment ........ desirable
      Mulching and reseeding ......................probably inadequate
      None .................................unacceptable
Logging roads and skid trails
      Adjacent to streams .........................unacceptable
      No erosion control .........................unacceptable
      More than minimum neccesary for operation ......... unacceptable




















                                             B-10








U         ~11. Commercial Fishing


N          ~~Determinants of Impact Severity
        Fishing methods (inshore)
              Degree of benthic disturbance
                 Low.................preferable
                High.................needs scrutiny in environmentally

 I               ~     ~~~~Degree of selectivity of catchseitvars
                High.................desirable
                Low.................needs scrutiny
        Areas fished
              Non-nursery areas..............acceptable
              Secondary nursery areas ............needs scrutiny
              Primary nursery areas.............unacceptable for bottom-disturbing
              Submerged aquatic vegetation ..........unacceptable for bottom-disturbing
        Fisheries management and regulation
              Emphasis on habitat and water
                 quality maintenance ............desirable
              Emphasis on long-term stock maintenance              .        ....... acceptable
              Emphasis on short-term stocks ..........unacceptable
















         I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- 










12. Air Pollution Point Sources


Determinants of Impact Severity
Size of discharge (tons/yr of most abundant regulated pollutant)
      <10 ..................................relatively minor concern
      10 to 100 ................................needs   scrutiny
      too to 2.50 .............................. needs environmental assessment
      > 250 .................................needs full EIS
Substances discharged
      Regulated "criteria' pollutants only ............... needs scrutiny
      Toxics (regulated or unregulated) ................ needs environmental assessment
      Radionuclides ............................unacceptable
Effect on local/regional air quality standards
(all values in micrograms per cubic meter)
      Suspended particulates (24-hour mean)
         <75 ...............................tolerable
         75-260 ..............................suboptimal
         260-375 .............................undesirable
         > 375 ...............................unacceptable
      Sulfur dioxide (24-hour mean)
         < 80 ...............................tolerable
         80-365 ..............................suboptimal
         365-800 .............................undesirable
         > 800 ...............................unacceptable
      Carbon monoxide (8-hour mean)
         <5 ................................tolerable
         5-10 ................................suboptimal
         10-17 ...............................undesirable
         > 17 ...............................unacceptable
      Ozone (1-hour mean)
         < 120 ..............................tolerable
         120-240 .............................suboptimal
         240-400 .............................undesirable
         >400 ...............................unacceptable
      Nitrogen dioxide (1-hour mean)
         < 100 ...............................tolerable
         100-1130 .............................suboptimal
         > 1130 ..............................unacceptable
      Lead (3-month mean)
         none ...............................tolerable
         0-1.5 .......................undesirable
         > 1.5 ...............................unacceptable
      Hydrocarbons (3-hour mean)
         <80 ...............................tolerable
         80-160 ..............................suboptimal
         > 160 ...............................unacceptable
Modeled or predicted effect of emissions on ambient air quality during annual worst-case meteorological conditions





                                            B-1 2








         General pollution control approach
               Source reduction                                               .............. best
I                  ~~~~~~Recycling and reuse ............. good
               Process modification ............. good
               Emission controls ..............least desirable if other approaches feaible
I           Climatology~imited vertical air movement ..........undesirable
               Restricted horizontal air flow ..........undesirable
               Prone to inversions..............undesirable



















         I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- 











13. Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal


       For water quality impacts of landfills, see Guide 4.
       For air quality impacts of incinerators, see Guide 12.

Determinants of Impact Severity (major solid waste disposal plans or facilities will always require
       expert assistance for assessment)
General approach to solid waste management
       Reduce waste stream input via decreased
          consumption, increased efficiency and reuse ....... good
       Reduce waste stream via recycling ............... good
       Entirely disposal oriented ..................... unacceptable
Type of waste
       High-level radioactive ....................... needs full EIS; disposal at generation
                                                              site preferred
       Low-level radioactive .......................needs full EIS
       Hazardous/toxic ...........................needs full EIS
       Other .................................needs environmental assessment
Waste Disposal Method
       Landfilling ..............................increasingly less viable. Alternatives
                                                              must be explored.
       Incineration .............................beware of air quality impacts and ash disposal
                                                              problems. If incineration occurs,
                                                              energy generation should be
                                                              considered.
       Ocean dumping ..........................probably unacceptable; needs full EIS
       Ocean incineration .........................needs full EIS


























                                                 B-14








I ~14. Roads, Highways, and Parking Lots

 I                ~~~~~See also Guides 6, 7.

         Determinants of Impact Severity
         General approach to transportation planning
                Mass transit................the more the better
                Complete reliance on roads and highways.......unacceptable
I      ~       ~Type of land/water affected
                Mitigated wetland alteration ...........needs environmental assessment
                Environmentally sensitive areas..........needs full EIS
                Unmitigated wetland alteration ..........unacceptable
                Other areas................needs scrutiny
         Erosion/sedimnent control
                Mulching & revegetation of exposed
  I                 ~     ~~~~~surfaces; stabilization of all slopes > 15 %;
                   silt fencing; berms.............acceptable
                Anything less ...............unacceptable
         Vegetated buffer zones between paved surfaces and surface waters
                    >100 meters ...............acceptable
                15-100 meters................needs scrutiny
                < 15 meters................unacceptable
I      ~       ~Drainage interference by roadways and base
                Flow blockage mitigated by drainage structures,
                   roadway elevation, permeable roadbeds, and
  I                 ~     ~~~~~orientation parallel to hydraulic gradients......acceptable
                No significant flow blockage...........acceptable
                Blocks ground or surface flow ..........unacceptable
         Zoning/land use planning
                Development restricted except in designated nodes ....desirable
                Controlled access ..............desirable
                No zoning or land use control ..........undesirable; points to need for county zoning
  I              ~ ~~~~Development allowed along entire corridor ......undesirable
         Land use planning context
                Road/highway construction consistent
   I                 ~     ~~~~~with local land use planning goals
                   and policies...............desirable
                Inconsistent with local goals and policies .......undesirable
                Local goals/policies absent or unclear                         .............undesirable
         Environmental impact assessment
                Full EIS conducted for all major projects                      ...........acceptable
                Anything less                                                   ............................unacceptable










                                                    8-1 5



I
I
I
I
I
I
                              APPENDIX C
     IH~~~ ~STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
    I|~~~ ~Source: State Water Control Board, 1988, 1990.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
U
I







       INTRODUCTION


       The State Water Control Law mandates the protection of existing
       high quality State waters and provides for the restoration of
       all other State waters to such condition of quality that any
       such waters will permit all reasonable public uses and will
I ~support the propagation and growth of all aquatic life that
       migh reasonably be expected to inhabit them (Section
       62.1-44.2). The adoption of water quality standards under
       Section 62.1-44.15(3) of the Law is one of the Board's methods
       of accomplishing the Law's purpose.
       Water quality standards consist of narrative statements that
I     ~~escribe water quality requirements in general terms, and of
       numeric limits for specific physical, chemical, biological or
       radiological characteristics of water. These narrative
*     ~statements and numeric limits describe water quality necessary
*     ~to meet and maintain reasonable and beneficial uses such as
       swimming and other water based recreation, public water supply
       and the propagation and growth of aquatic life. Standards
       include general as well as specific descriptions, since not all
       requirements for water quality protection can be numerically
       defined. Standards are not static. They will change and be
       constantly adjusted to reflect changes in law, technology and
       information available to the Board and its sta'ff.
       The standards are intended to protect all State waters for
I    ~recreational use and for the propagation and growth of a
       balanced population of fish and wildlife. Through the
       protection of these two uses, which usually require the most
       stringent standards and the highest degree of protection, other
       usually less restrictive uses like industrial water supply,
       irrigation and navigation are usually also protected. Should
       additional standards be needed to protect other uses as dictated
U    ~by changing circumstances or improved knowledge, they can be
       formulated and adopted.









       I~~~~~~~~~~~~~-







      VR680-21-01 SURFACE WATER STANDARDS WITH GENERAL, STATEWIDE
                  APPLICATION

      VR680-21-Ol.1 Use Designations

           All State waters are designated for recreational use,
           except for reasonably-sized mixing zones in waters
I         ~~~immediately below municipal and industrial discharges, for
           example as provided in VR680-21-02.2 below, and for the
           propagation and growth of a balanced, indigenous population
           of fish, shellfish and wildlife.

      VR680-2l-Ol.2 General Standard

I          ~~~A.   All state waters shall be maintained at such quality
                as will permit all reasonable, beneficial uses and
                will support the propagation and growth of all aquatic
 I             ~~~~life, including game fish, which might reasonably be
                excpected to inhabit them. Reasonable beneficial uses
                include, but are not limited to, recreational uses,
                e.g. swimming and boating; and production of edible
                and marketable natural-resources, e.g., fish and


I          ~~~B.   All State waters shall he free from substances
                attributable to sewage, industrial waste, or other
                waste in concentrations, amounts, or combinations
                which contravene established standards or interfere
                directly or indirectly with reasonable, beneficial
                uses of such water or which are inimical or harmful to
                human, animal, plant, or aquatic life. Specific
 I             ~~~~substances to be controlled include, but are not
                limited to: floating debris, oil, scum, and other
                floating materials; toxic 'substances; substances that
 U            ~~~~produce color, tastes, turbidity, odors, or settle to
                form sludge de'osits, and substances which nourish
                undesirable or nuisance aquatic plant life. Effluents
                which tend to raise the temperature of the receiving
                water will also be controlled.
           C.   Zones for mixing wastes with receiving waters shall be
 I            ~~~~determined an a case-by-case basis; shall be kept as
                ,small as practical; shall not be used for, or
                considered as, a substitute for minimum treatment
                technology required by the Clean Water Act and other
                applicable State and Federal laws; shall be
                implemented, to the greatest extent practicable, in
                accordance with the provisions of subsections A and B

                hereof, and shall not contain toxic substances in





                                    C-2







               acutely toxic concentrations. An area of initial
               dilution may be allowed. This area of initial
               dilution will be determined an a case-by-case basis
               and shall not at any time exceed the lethal
               concentration for appropriate representative species
               for time periods of exposures likely to be encountered
               by that species and likely to cause acute effects.
I            ~~~~Mixing within these zones shall be as quick as
               practical and may require the installation and use of
               devices which ensure that waste is mixed with the
I            ~~~~allocated receiving waters in the smallest practical
               area. The need for such devices shall be determined
               on a case-by-case basis. The boundaries of these
               zones of admixture shall also be such as to provide a
I            ~~~~suitable passageway for fish and other aquatic
               organisms. in an area where more than one discharge
               occurs and several mixing zones are close together,
               these mixing zones shall be so situated that this
               passageway is continuous.

    VR68O-21-Ql.3 Anti-degradation Policy

         A.   High Quality Waters
I             ~~~~Waters whose existing quality is better than the
               established standards as of the date on which such
               standards become effective will be maintained at high
               quality; provided that the Board has the power to
               authorize any project or development, which would
               constitute a new or an increased discharge of effluent
               to high quality water, when it has been affirmatively
               demonstrated that a change is justifiable to provide
               necessary economic or social development; and
              provided, further, that the necessary degree of waste
I            ~~~~treatment to maintain high water quality will be
               required where physically and economically feasible.
               Present and anticipated use of such waters will be
3              ~~~~preserved and protected.   (Section 62.1-44.4 of the
              State Water Control Law.)
              Guidelines for Implementation

              Existing instream beneficial water uses will be
              maintained and protected, and actions that would
              should not be undertaken.

               In considering whether a possible change is
              justifiable to provide necessary economic or social
              development, the Board will provide notice and





                                  C-3







   I             ~~~~opportu nity for a public hearing so that interested
                 persons will have an opportunity to present
   u             ~~~~information.

                 Upon a finding that such change is justifiable, the
                 change nevertheless, must not result in violation of
                 those water quality characteristics necessary to
                 ,attain the national water quality goal of protection
                 and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and
                 -recreation in and on the water. Further, if a change
   U            ~~~~is considered justifiable, it must not result in any
                 significant loss of marketability of fish, shellfish
                 or other marine resources, and all practical measures
   I            ~~~~should be taken to eliminate or minimize the impact on
                 water quality.
                 When degradation or lower water quality is allowed,
   I            ~~~~the owner shall nevertheless employ all cost-effective
                 and reasonable best management practices for nonpoint
   *             ~~~~source control.

                 Any determinations concerning thermal discharge
                 limitations made under Section 316(a) of the Clean
                 Water Act will be considered to be in compliance with
                 the anti-degradation policy.
 3         ~~~B.  High Quality State Resource Waters

                 Where high quality waters constitute an outstanding
                 resource, such as waters of national and state parks
  U            ~~~~and wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional
                 recreational or ecological significance, that water
                 quality shall be maintained and protected to prevent
                 permanent or long-term degradation or impairment of
                 beneficial uses of the water. When proposing a
                 designation of any waters as outstanding resource
                 waters, under this section, the Board shall convene a
                 public hearing to receive data, views, and argument on
                 the proposal.


U     ~VR68O-21-01.4  Standards Application: Stream Flow
            Stream Standards shall apply whenever flows are equal to,
            or greater than, the lowest flow which, On a statistical
            basis, would occur for a 7-consecutive-day period once
 3          ~~~every 10 years.







                                     C-4







     Manmade alterations in stream flow shall not contravene
     reasonable, beneficial uses including protection of the
     propagation and growth of aquatic life.


VR680-21-01.5 Standards for Dissolved Oxygen, pH, and Maximum
               Temperature

       DESCRIPTION       DISS. OXYGEN(m/ll'   pH  Max.Temn.
CLASS   OF WATERS         Min.   Daily Avg.          ( C)


  I    Open Ocean           5.0     --       6.0-9.0

 II    Estuarine Waters    4.0      5.0      6.0-9.0   --
        (Tidal Water-
        Coastal Zone to
      Fall Line)

III    Non-tidal Waters    4.0      5.0      6.0-9.0   32
       (Coastal and
        Piedmont Zones)

IV     Mountainous Zones   4.0      5.0      6.0-9.0   31
        Waters

 V     Put and Take Trout  5.0       6.0     6.0-9.0   21
        Waters

VI     Natural Trout        6.0      7.0     6.0-9.0   20
        Waters

VII    Swamp Water           *        *          *      **


  *   This classification recognizes that the natural
      quality of swamp water may fall outside of the ranges
      for D.O. and pH set forth above as water quality
      standards; therefore, on a case-by-case basis,
      standards for specific swamp waters can be developed
      that reflect what natural quality is.

 **   Maximum temperature will be the same as that for
      Classes I through VI waters as appropriate.












                              C-5





























VR680-21-01.10 Mercury in Fresh Water

     A. Standard

          0.05 ug/1 (ppb) total recoverable mercury in
          fresh water..
          0.01 ug/I (ppb) methyl mercury in fresh water.

      B. Policy

         1. The Board, pursuant to Section
              62.1-44.15(3)(a) of the Code of Virginia
              (1950), as amended, hereby sets forth its
             policy that, with respect to any State waters
             in which the water quality standard for total
             recoverable mercury and/or methyl mercury is
             exceeded, the Board shall identify the point
             and nonpoint sources of mercury
             contamination and institute appropriate
             abatement action against such sources to
             reduce the level of mercury in such State
             waters to a concentration less than or equal
             to the Water Quality Standard. Such
             abatement action shall include the submittal,
             by the owner of the source, of a plan and
             schedule for the reduction of such mercury







                              C-6







    contamination and an evaluation of the
    potential for environmental cleanup with a
    plan and schedule for said cleanup as
    appropriate.

2. The Board, pursuant to Section
    62.1-44.15(3) (a) of the Code of Virginia
    (1950), as amended, hereby sets forth its
    policy that the level of methyl mercury in
    edible fish tissue in fresh water, as an
    arithmetic mean of a representative sampling
    of the fish population tested by or at the
    direction of the Board, shall not exceed a
    concentration of 750 ng/g (ppb). A
    representative sampling shall consist of
    individuals of at least two species
    representing two trophic levels, including a
    predator species, chosen at the direction of
    the Board. The edible tissue of the
    individual fish shall be analyzed and,
    wherever practicable, when more than one
    location is sampled the same species shall be
    collected at all locations.

    With respect to any State waters in which the
    foregoing concentration is exceeded, the
    Board shall identify the point and nonpoint
    sources of mercury contamination and
    institute abatement action against such
    sources, as appropriate, to reduce the level
    of methyl mercury in edible fish tissue in
    such State waters, as an arithmetic mean of a
    representative sampling of the fish
   population tested by or at the direction of
    the Board, to a concentration not exceeding
    750 ng/g (ppb). Such abatement action shall
    include the submittal, by the owner of the
    source, of a plan and schedule for the
   reduction of such mercury contamination and
   an evaluation of the potential for
   environmental cleanup with a plan and
   schedule for said cleanup, as appropriate.

3. Further, the Board, pursuant to Section
    62.1-44.15(3) (a) of the Code of Virginia
    (1950), as amended, hereby sets forth its
   policy that a concentration of total mercury
   in the freshwater river sediments in excess
   of 300 nanograms per gram (parts per






                   C-7










               billion-ppb) shall be an index of potential
               mercury contamination.  Wherever this level is
               exceeded, the staff shall determine mercury
               levels in edible fish tissue and the water column
               and take appropriate action pursuant to Sections
               A and B of this policy.

       4.  Compliance with any Order issued by the Board to any
           such owner for cause involving mercury shall
           constitute "appropriate abatement"action" 'under the
           terms of this policy for the duration of such Order.

       5.  Notwithstanding the above, pursuant to Section
           62.1-44.4 of the Code of Virginia, in waters in which
           the mercury concentrations are below this standard or
           any level enumerated in this policy, the Board may
           initiate action under this policy to ensure that
           State waters are maintained at, or returned to, the
           quality existing at the time of adoption of this
           standard.

VR680-21-01.11 Chlorine in Surface Waters

       A.  Standard

           1.  The average daily concentration of total residual
           chlorine (TRC) in freshwater shall not exceed 11
           parts per billion (ug/1) and the average daily
           concentration of chlorine produced oxidant (CPO) in
           saline waters (annual mean salinity of 5 parts per
           thousand or greater) shall not exceed 7.5 parts per
           billion (ug/1).

           2. The one-hour average concentration of total
           residual chlorine (TRC) in freshwater shall not
           exceed 19 pa-ts per billion (ug/l) and the one hour
           average concentration of chlorine produced oxidant
           (CPO) in saline waters shall -ot exceed 13 parts per
           billion (ug/1).

       B.  Policy

           The Board, pursuant to Section 62.1-44.15(3a) of the
       Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, hereby sets forth
       its policy for implementation of the chlorine standard in
       surface waters of the Commonwealth. These concentrations
       shall apply to all surface waters of the Commonwealth
       except where the permittee can demonstrate to the Board
       that exceptions may be allowed without resulting in
       damage to aquatic life.


                                C-8













1. Mixing zones may be established on a case-by-case
basis according to Section VR680-21-01.2C. Since
Section VR680-21-01.2C does not allow acutely toxic
concentrations within the mixing zone, chlorine
residuals within the mixing zone shall not exceed the
one hour average of 19 ug/1 TRC in freshwater or 13
ug/l CPO in saline waters.

2. Effluent limitations on chlorine shall be imposed
to assure compliance with paragraphs A.1. and A.2. at
the boundary of the mixing zone and paragraph A.2.
within the mixing zone. These effluent limitations
shall be calculated presuming complete mixing.

3. The permittee may present to the. Board site
specific analytical data showing that a modified
effluent limit will result in compliance with
Sections A.1. and A.2. of the Standard.

4. Exceptions to these concentrations may be allowed
by the Board only upon a case-by-case demonstration
by the permittee. These case-by-case demonstrations
shall contain both alternative instream
concentrations and appropriate permit limitations to
protect beneficial uses. Exceptions may be
considered for only the following situations:

    a.   The nature of the receiving waters or the
    nature and composition of the chlorine discharged
    are such that this TRC or CPO concentration is
    not necessary to protect aquatic life.

    b.   Receiving streams such as drainage dS tches
    whose nature is such that they cannot reasonably
    be expected to support the propagation and growth
    of aquatic life and do not provide reasonable
    beneficial uses with respect to aquatic life.
    Compliance shall nonetheless be required where
    these waters discharge into other State waters
    capable of sustaining reasonable beneficial
    uses. In such situations, the Board may place
    effluent limits at the confluence of these two
    waters.

    c.   Discharge of intermittently chlorinated
    water (not more than two hours in anyeight hour
    period).


                      C-9








          5.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, chlorine or other
          halogen compounds   shall not be used for
          disinfection purposes or other treatment purposes
          including biocide applications for any treatment
          facility with a permitted flow of 20,000 gallons per
          day or more discharging to waters containing
          endangered or threatened species as identified in
          Section VR6B0-21-07.2 or to waters classified as
          natural trout waters except for dischargers who
          intermittently chlorinate. Dischargers of less than
          20,000 gallons per day shall dechlorinate to the
          requirements of subsections A.1 and A.2 or to a
          non-detectable chlorine residual. Dischargers who
          intermittently chlorinate (not more than two hours in
          any eight hour period) shall be required to install
          equipment and/or employ procedures to assure
          dechlorination to a chlorine residual that meets the
          requirements of subsections A.1 and A.2, and to apply
          effective best management practices for chlorine.
          Dischargers who intermittently chlorinate shall, in
          order to address a possible malfunction of the
          dechlorination system, either have storage sufficient
          to contain the chlorinated water until it can be
          dechlorinated prior to discharge or have an online
          redundant and operational back-up dechlorination
          system.

               Variance to this requirement shall not be made
          unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated that
          the beneficial uses of the water will be maintained
          and that either a change is justifiable to provide
          necessary economic or social development or the
          degree of waste treatment necessary to preserve the
          existing quality can not be economically or socially
          justified.
1 Bromine, bromine chloride, hypocalorite and chlorine
dioxide.

VR680-21-01.12      Radiological Quality Standards

       Substance                                     Standard

       Total Radium (Ra-226 & Ra-228)               5   pCi/i
       Radium 226                                   3   pCi/i
       Gross Beta Activity*                        50   pCi/1
       Gross Alpha Activity                        15  pCi/1
           (excluding Radon & Uranium)
       Tritium                                 20,000   pCi/i




                                  C-10














     Strontium-90                                 8  pCi/i
     Manmade Radioactivity - Total Dose Equiv.** 4 mrem/yr

         pCi/l = picocurie per liter
         mrem/yr = millirems per year

         *The gross beta value shall be used as a screening
         value only.  If exceeded the water must be analyzed to
         determine the presence and quantity of radionuclides to
         determine compliance with the tritium, strontium, and
        manmade radioactivity standards.

         **Combination of all sources should not exceed total
        dose equivalent of 4 mrem/year.

VR680-21-01.13 Tributyltin in Surface Waters

    The concentration of tributyltin (TBT) in freshwater shall
not exceed 0.026 parts per billion (ug/1), and the concentration
of tributyltin in saltwater shall not exceed 0.001 parts per
billion (ug/1).

VR680-21-01.15 Surface Water Standards for the Protection of
Human Heath

    A. Dioxin

        For the protection of human health from the toxic
        properties of dioxing ingested through water and
        contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient
        concentration of all surface waters shall not exceed
         1.2 parts per quadrillion (ppq) bated upon a risk level
        of 10   and _  potency of 1.75 x 10
         (mg/kg-day) 

    B. The applicability of the standard in calculating an
        average effluent limit is based on the mean annual
        stream flow.

    C. Variances to Water Quality Standards in Section
        VR680-21-01.15.A

        The Board may consider site-specific modifications to
        the numerical standard in Section VR680-21-0l.15.A
        where the applicant demonstrates that the alternative
        numerical water quality standard is sufficient to
        protect human health. Any demonstration provided to
        the Board for review shall utilize the previously
        referenced risk level and potency as its basis.
                               C-1 1








VR680-21-02  STANDARDS WITH MORE SPECIFIC APPLICATION

VR680-21.02.1 Fecal Coliform Bacteria - Shellfish Waters

      In all open ocean or estuarine waters capable of
      propagating shellfish or in specific areas where
      public or leased private shellfish beds are present,
      and including those waters on which condemnation or
      restriction classifications are established by the
      State Department of Health, the following standard
      for fecal coliform bacteria shall apply:

      The median fecal coliform value for a sampling
      station shall not exceed an MPN (most probable
      number) of 14 per 100 milliliters. Not more than 10%
      of samples shall exceed an MPN of 43 for a 5-tube,
      3-dilution test or 49 for a 3-tube, 3-dilution test.

VR680-21-02.2 Fecal Coliform Bacteria - Other Waters

     A. General Requirements

          In all surface waters, except shellfish waters
          and certain waters addressed in B. below, the
          fecal coliform bacteria shall not exceed a
         geometric mean of 200 fecal coliform bacteria per
          100 ml of water for two or more samples over a
          30-day period, or a fecal coliform bacteria level
         of 1000 per 100 ml at any time.

     B.  Disinfection Policy

         In waters that receive sewage discharges, all the
         reasonable, beneficial, seasonal uses in these
         waters shall be protected. The Board's
         Disinfection Policy applies to these waters.

         1.  Sewage Discharges in Relation to Water Supply
             Intakes

















                             C-12







              Discharges located within fifteen miles
              upstream or one tidal cycle downstream of a
              water supply intake shall be disinfected in
              order to achieve a fecal coliform geometric
              mean value in the effluent equal to or less
              than 200 per 100 milliliters.

          2.  Sewage Discharges into Shellfish Waters

              When sewage discharges are permitted to or
              within five miles upstream of shellfish
              waters, they shall be disinfected in order to
              achieve a fecal coliform geometric mean value
              in the effluent equal to or less than 200 per
              100 milliliters.

          3. Sewage Discharges into Other Waters

              Sewage discharges into other waters shall be
              adequately treated and disinfected as
              necessary to protect all the reasonable
              beneficial seasonal uses in these waters.
              Generally, these discharges shall achieve a
              fecal coliform geometric mean value in the
              effluent equal to or less than 200 per 100
              milliliters.  However, the Board, with the
              advice of the State Department of Health, may
              determine that reduced disinfection of a
              discharge is appropriate on a seasonal or
              year-round basis. In making such a
              determination, the Board shall consider the
              actual and potential beneficial uses of these
              waters and the seasonal nature of those
              uses. Such determinations will be made
              during the process of approving, issuing, or
              reissuing the discharge permit and shall be
              in conformance with a Board approved site
              specific beneficial use-attainability
              analysis performed by the permittee. When
              making a case-by-case determination
              concerning the appropriate level of
              disinfection for sewage discharges into these
              waters, the Board shall provide a 45-day
              public notice period and opportunity for a
              public hearing.


VR680-21-02.3  Surface Water Standards for Surface Public
                Water Supplies







                             C-13








  In addition to other standards established for the
  protection of public or municipal water supplies, the
  following standards apply at the water intake; the
  standards also apply to any upstream or downstream
  reach specified in the appropriate river basin
  table. The standards apply to both the water supply
  main stream and its tributaries within the designated
  distance.

CONSTITUENT                       CONCENTRATION
                                     (MG/L)

Arsenic                               0.05
Barium                                1.0
Cadmium*                              0.01
Chloride                            250
Chromium (Total)                      0.05
Copper*                               1.0
Foaming agents (measured as
  methylene blue active substances)  0.5
Iron (soluble)                        0.3
Lead                                  0.05
Manganese (soluble)                   0.05
Mercury*                              0.002
Nitrate (as N)                       10
Phenols                               0.001
Selenium*                             0.01
Silver*                               0.05
Sulfate                             250
Total dissolved solids              500
Zinc*                                 5.0

Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Insecticides:

Endrin*                               0.0002
Lindane*                              0.004
Methoxychlor*                         0.1
Toxaphene*                            0.005

Chlorophenoxy Herbicides:

2,4-D                                 0.1
Silvex                                0.01

The numeric standards for the constituents above are
designed to protect public water supplies for human
consumption. The limits established for those
chemicals marked with an asterisk (*) may not protect
aquatic life. Therefore, when a request to classify a







                         C-14



I
             stream as a public water supply is received, an
I             evaluation shall be made to determine whether more
             stringent limits are needed for those chemicals in
             order to ensure protection of aquatic life.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                      0-15
I








VR680-21-03 WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR SURFACE WATER

VR680-21-03.1 General Requirements

      Section VR680-21-03.2 below establishes water quality
      criteria for certain substances in surface waters.
      Groundwater criteria are found in VR680-21-04.4. One
      basic distinction differentiates water quality
      criteria from water quality standards found in
      VR680-21-01 and VR680-21-04 of these regulations.
      The standards are always mandatory while the criteria
      are not. Criteria shall be utilized as mandatory
      requirements when in the judgement of the Board they
      are necessary to ensure the protection of the
      beneficial uses of the water body. The agency will
      employ the criteria values or any others it deems
      appropriate in establishing effluent limitations or
      other limitations necessary to protect the beneficial
      uses. The Board may consider modifications to these
      criteria, on a case-by-case basis, dependent upon a
      site-specific determination performed by the
      permittee which demonstrates that alternate criteria
      are sufficient to ensure protection of water quality.
































                             C-1 6







VR680-21-03.2 Water Quality Criteria for Surface Water

   Chronic Criteria for Protection of Aouatic Life ua/1

      Substance               Value               Apnlicabilitv

     Aldrin                       0.03               Freshwater
                                  0.003             Saltwater

     Ammonia              SEE TABLE ATTACHED         Freshwater

     Arsenic-trivalent,           190                Freshwater
             inorganic,          36                 Saltwater
             total recoverable

     Cadmium  e0.7852(ln(hardness))-3.490            Freshwater
     total recoverable            9.3                saltwater

     Chlordane                    0.0043             Freshwater
                                  0.004             Saltwater

     Chromium-hexavalent,         11                 Freshwater
      total recoverable           50                 Saltwater

     trivalent,     e0.819(ln(hardness))+1.561       Freshwater
     total recoverable   No saltwater Value

     Copper,        e0.8545(ln(hardness))-1.465    Freshwater
      total recoverable           2.9                Saltwater

     Cyanide, total               5.2                Freshwater
                                  1.0               Saltwater

     DDT                          0.001              All Waters

     Demeton                      0.1                All Waters

     Dieldrin                     0.0019             All Waters

     Endosulfan                   0.056              Freshwater
                                  0.0087            Saltwater

     Endrin                       0.0023             All Waters

     Guthion                      0.01               All Waters

     Heptachlor                   0.0038             Freshwater
                                  0.0036            Saltwater

     Hydrogen Sulfide             2.0                All Waters

     Iron                     1,000                  Freshwater
                          No Saltwater value
*Total unless otherwise indicated


                              C-17









   Chronic Criteria for Protection of Acuatic Life ua/l

     Substance*          Value               AnPlicabilitv


     Kepone                  Zero                All Waters

     Lead,       el.266(ln(hardness))-4.661    Freshwater
     total recoverable       5.6                 Saltwater

     Lindane                 0.080               Freshwater
                             0.0016             Saltwater

     Malathion               0.1                 All Waters

     Manganese             100                   Saltwater

     Mercury                 0.10                Saltwater

     Methoxychlor            0.03                All Waters

     Mirex                   Zero                All Waters

     Nickel       e0.76(ln(hardness))+1.06       Freshwater
     total                   7.1                 Saltwater
     recoverable

     Parathion               0.04               All Waters

     Phenol                  1.0                 All Waters

     Phthalate Esters        3.0                 All Waters


     Polychlorinated         0.014               Freshwater
      Biphenyls              0.03                Saltwater

     Selenium, total inorganic  35               Freshwater
                                 54             Saltwater

     Silver, el.72(ln(hardness))-6.52x0.01       Freshwater
      total                  0.023               Saltwater
      recoverable

     Toxaphene               0.013               Freshwater
                            0.0007             Saltwater

     Zinc, total                47               Freshwater
            recoverable        58               Saltwater

*Total unless otherwise indicated








                            Ammonia Criteria

 pH         O C       5 C       10 C     15 C      20 C       25C      30C

A.  Salmonids or Other Sensitive Coldwater Species Present

                    Un-ionized Ammonia (mg/liter NH3)

6.50      0.0007   0.0009    0.0013   0.0019   0.0019    0.0019  0.0019
6.75      0.0012   0.0017    0.0023   0.0033   0.0033    0.0033  0.0033
7.00      0.0021   0.0029    0.0042   0.0059   0.0059    0.0059  0.0059
7.25      0.0037   0.0052    0.0074   0.0105   0.0105    0.0105  0.0105
7.50      0.0066   0.0093    0.0132   0.0186   0.0186    0.0186  0.0186
7.75      0.0109   0.0153    0.022    0.031    0.031         0.031   0.031
8.00      0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.035         0.035   0.035
8.25      0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.035         0.035   0.035
8.50      0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.035         0.035   0.035
8.75      0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.035         0.035   0.035
9.00      0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.035         0.035   0.035

                      Total Ammonia (mg/liter NH3)

6.50     2.5       2.4        2.2       2.2       1.49       1.04    0.73
6.75     2.5       2.4        2.2       2.2       1.49       1.04    0.73
7.00      2.5       2.4       2.2       2.2       1.49       1.04    0.74
7.25      2.5      2.4        2.2       2.2       1.50       1.04    0.74
7.50      2.5      2.4        2.2       2.2       1.50       1.05    0.74
7.75      2.3      2.2        2.1       2.0       1.40       0.99    0.71
8.00      1.53     1.44       1.37      1.33      0.93       0.66    0.47
8.25     0.87      0.82       0.78      0.76      0.54       0.39    0.28
8.50     0.49      0.47       0.45      0.44      0.32       0.23    0.17
8.75     0.28      0.27       0.26      0.27      0.19       0.15    0.11
9.00     0.16      0.16       0.16      0.16      0.13       0.10    0.08

B.  Salmonids and Other Sensitive Coldwater Species Absent

                   Un-ionized Ammonia (mg/liter NH3)

6.50     0.0007   0.0009    0.0013   0.0019   0.0026    0.0026  0.0026
6.75     0.0012   0.0017    0.0023   0.0033   0.0047    0.0047  0.0047
7.00      0.0021   0.0029    0.0042   0.0059   0.0083    0.0083  0.0083
7.25      0.0037   0.0052    0.0074   0.0105   0.0148    0.0148  0.0148
7.50      0.0066   0.0093    0.0132   0.0186   0.026         0.026   0.026
7.75      0.0109   0.0153    0.022    0.031    0.043         0.043   0.043
8.00     0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.050          0.050   0.050
8.25     0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.050          0.050   0.050
8.50     0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.050          0.050   0.050
8.75      0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.050         0.050   0.050
9.00     0.0126   0.0177    0.025    0.035    0.050          0.050   0.050






                              C-19









B.  Salmonids and Other Sensitive Coldwater Species Absent (cont.)

                      Total Ammonia (mg/liter NH3)

 pH      OC        SC 5C               15C       20C        25C      30C

6.50     2.5       2.4        2.2      2.2       2.1        1.46     1.03
6.75     2.5       2.4        2.2      2.2       2.1        1.47     1.04
7.00     2.5       2.4        2.2      2.2       2.1        1.47     1.04
7.25     2.5       2.4        2.2      2.2       2.1        1.48     1.05
7.50     2.5       2.4        2.2      2.2       2.1        1.49     1.06
7.75     2.3       2.2        2.1      2.0       1.98       1.39     1.00
8.00     1.53      1.44       1.37     1.33      1.31       0.93     0.67
8.25     0.87      0.82       0.78     0.76      0.76       0.54     0.40
8.50     0.49      0.47       0.45     0.44      0.45       0.33     0.25
8.75     0.28      0.27       0.26     0.27      0.27       0.21     0.16
9.00     0.16      0.16       0.16     0.16      0.17       0.14     0.11

Site-specific criteria development is strongly suggested at
temperatures above 20 C because of the limited data
available to generate0the criteria recommendation, and at
temperatures below 20 C because of the limited data and
because small changes in the criteria may have significant
impact on the level of treatment required in meeting the
recommended criteria.































                             C-20








I     ~VR680-21-04  GROUNDWATER STANDARDS

       VR680-21-04.1 General Requirements

             Except where otherwise specified, groundwater quality
             standards shall apply statewide and shall apply to
             all groundwater occurring at and below the uppermost
             seasonal limits of the water table. In order- to
             prevent the entry of pollutants into groundwater
             occurring in any aquifer, a sail zone or alternate
 I         ~~~protective measure or device sufficient to preserve
             and protect present and anticipated uses of
             groundwater shall he maintained at all times. Zones
 I         ~~~for mixing wastes with groundwater may be allowed,
             upon request, but shall be determined on a
             case-by-case basis and shall be kept as small as
             possible. it is recognized that natural groundwater
             quality varies from area to area. Virginia is
             divided into four Physiographic Provinces, namely the
             Coastal Plain, Piedmont and Blue Ridge, 'Valley and
 I         ~~~Ridge, and Cumnberland Plateau.  See Figure 1.
             Accordingly, the Board has established certain
             groundwater standards specific--to each individual
             Physiographic Province.
       VR680-21-04.2 - Anti-degradation Policy for Groundwater

 I          ~~~If the concentration of any constituent in
            'groundwater is less than the limit set forth by
            groundwater standards, the natural quality for the
 U         ~~~constituent shall be maintained; natural quality
             shall also be maintained for all constituents,   .
             including temperature, not set forth in groundwater
            standards. If the concentration of any constituent
             in groundwater exceeds the limit in the standard for
            that constituent, no addition of that constituent to
            the naturally occurring concentration shall be made.
I         ~~~Variance to this policy shall not be made unless it
            has been affirmatively demonstrated that a change is
            justifiable to provide necessary economic or social
             development, that the degree of waste treatment
            necessary to preserve the existing quality cannot be
            economically or socially justified, and that the
            present and anticipated uses of such water will be

            preserved and protected.









                                   C-21



            I-  ---                                         ---                      --                 -








                    GROUNDWATER QUALITY STANDARDS

                    PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES


1 Coastal Plain                                                  1 

2 Piedmont and Blue Ridge                   ,                      i /

3 Valley and Ridge                                                      .

4  Cumberland Plateau                             3


                                             .' "'"'} V' 2/
                                                       ~,,~>9'. /'. q*

                                    * /          ï¿½       2    -3t" C' ï¿½  /'C

                                       *ï¿½ ï¿½.- \   /  -          .           /' ?
                                   r'        I    I-ï¿½..~f.' , , %.. 4.      -'
                     L~~~~~~~ï¿½..~ -,,...                                 :. ~..

                                           JAL~:)LL.,
                   L~~~~~~~~~~~."x








              GROUNDWATER STANDARDS APPLICABLE STATEWIDE


Constituent                                                Concentration

Sodium                                                   270         mg/1
Foaming Agents as methylene blue active substances       0.05        mg/l
Petroleum hydrocarbons                                   1.0         mg/1
Arsenic                                                  0.05        mg/1
Barium                                                    1.0        mg/1
Cadmium                                                  0.0004      mg/1
Chromium                                                 0.05        mg/1
Copper                                                    1.0        mg/1
Cyanide                                                  0.005       mg/1
Lead                                                     0.05        mg/1
Mercury                                                  0.00005    mg/1
Phenols                                                  0.001       mg/1
Selenium                                                 0.01        mg/1
Silver                                                   None
Zinc                                                     0.05        mg/1

Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Insecticides

Aldrin/Dieldrin                                          0.003       ug/1
Chlordane                                                0.01        ug/1
DDT                                                      0.001       ug/1
Endrin                                                   0.004       ug/1
Heptachlor                                               0.001       ug/1
Heptachlor Epoxide                                       0.001       ug/1
Kepone                                                   None
Lindane                                                  0.01        ug/1
Methoxychlor                                             0.03        ug/1
Mirex                                                    None
Toxaphene                                                 None





                                   C-23









             GROUNDWATER STANDARDS APPLICABLE STATEWIDE

Constituent                                                  Concentration


Chlorophenoxy Herbicides

2,4-D                                                      0.1         mg/1
Silvex                                                     0.01        mg/1

Radioactivity

Total Radium (Ra-226 & Ra-228)                             5           pCi/1
Radium 226                                                 3           pCill
Gross Beta Activity*                                       50          pCi/l
Gross Alpha Activity (excluding Radon & Uranium)           15          pCi/1
Tritium                                                    20,000      pCi/1
Strontium-90                                               8           pCi/ll
Manmade Radioactivity -Total Dose Equiv, **                4           mrem/yr

PCi/1 = picocurie per liter
Mrem/yr = millirems per year

*The gross beta value shall be used as a screening value only. If exceeded the water
must be analyzed to determine the presence and quanity of radionuclids to
determine compliance with the tritium, strontium, and manmade radioactivity
standards.

**Combination of all sources should not exceed total dose equivalent of 4
mrem/year.

Source: Virginia State Water Control Board, 1989.












                                     C-24









              GROUNDWATER STANDARDS APPLICABLE BY STATE

                         PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCE


CONSTITUENT                                            CONCENTRATION

                   Coastal       Piedmont and       Valley      Cumberland
                     Plain         Blue Ridge      and Ridge       Plateau

pH                  6.5-9         5.5-8.5           6-9           5-8.5

Ammonia
 Nitrogen          0.025 mg/1    0.025 mg/1         0.025 mg/1    0.025 mg/1

Nitrite
 Nitrogen          0.025 mg/1   0.025 mg/1          0.025 mg/1    0.025 mg/1

Nitrate
 Nitrogen           5.0  mg/1    5.0  mg/1          5.0  mg/1    0.5  mg/1


Source: Virginia State Water Control Board, 1989.




























                                  C-25








VR680-21-05  WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR GROUNDWATER

VR680-21-05.1 General Requirements

      These groundwater quality criteria apply primarily to
      groundwater constituents that occur naturally. Since
      natural groundwater quality can vary greatly from
      area to area for these constituents, enforceable
      standards were not adopted. These criteria are
      intended to provide guidance in preventing
      groundwater pollution. Groundwater criteria carry
      the same regulatory limitation as surface water
      criteria: they are not mandatory.

VR680-21-05.2  Groundwater Criteria

                          GROUNDWATER CRITERIA
CONSTITUENT            BY PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCE***
  (mg/')
               Coastal   Piedmont &   Valley &  Cumberland
                Plain    Blue Ridge    Ridge       Plateau

Alkalinity      30-500      10-200       30-500     30-200
Total Diss.
  Solids        1000        250          500        500
Chloride           50*       25           25         25
Sulfate            50        25          100        150
Total Organic
  Carbon          10         10           10         10
Color units        15        15           15         15
Iron               0.3        0.3          0.3        0.01-10
Manganese           0.05      0.05         0.05        0.01-0.5
Sodium            100*       25           25        100
Fluoride            1.4**     1.4          1.4        1.4
Hardness          120       120          300        180

     * It is recognized that naturally occurring
       concentrations will exceed this limit in the eastern
       part of the Coastal Plain, especially toward the
       shoreline and with increased depth.

    ** Except within the cretaceous aquifer: concentration
       up to 5 mg/1 and higher.

   *** See Figure 1, for delineation of physiographic
       provinces.










                            C-26








VR680-21-07 SPECIAL STANDARDS AND DESIGNATIONS

VR680-21-07.1 Special Standards and Requirements

     The special standards are shown in small letters to
      correspond to lettering in the basin tables. The
      special standards are as follows:

a.    Shellfish Waters

      In all open ocean or estuarine waters capable of
     propagating shellfish or in specific areas where
     public or leased private shellfish beds are present,
      including those waters on which condemnation or
      restriction classifications are established by the
     State Department of Health, the following standard
      for fecal coliform bacteria will apply:

     The median fecal coliform value for a sampling
     station shall not exceed an MPN of 14 per 100 ml of
     sample and not more than 10% of samples shall exceed
     43 for a 5-tube, 3-dilution test or 49 for a 3-tube,
      3-dilution test.

     The shellfish area is not to be so contaminated by
     radionuclides, pesticides, herbicides, or fecal
     material that the consumption of shellfish might be
     hazardous.



























                             C-27








m.    The following effluent standards apply to the entire
      Chickahominy Watershed above Walker's Dam:

      CONSTITUENT           CONCENTRATION

  1.  Bio-chemical         6.0 mg/1 monthly average, with not
      Oxygen demand       more than 5% of individual samples
      5-day at 200        to exceed 8.0 mg/1

  2.  Settleable Solids   Not to exceed 0.1 ml/1

  3.  Suspended Solids    5.0 mg/1 monthly average, with
                          not more than 5% of individual
                          samples to exceed 7.5 mg/1

  4.  Ammonia Nitrogen    Not to exceed 2.0 mg/1 as N

 5.  Total Phosphorus    Not to exceed 0.1 mg/1 monthly
                          average for all discharges with
                          the exception of Holly Farms
                          Poultry Industries, Inc. which
                          shall meet 0.3 mg/1 monthly
                          average and 0.5 mg/1 daily
                          maximum.

  6.  Other Physical       Other physical or chemical
      and Chemical        constituents not specifically
      Constituents        mentioned will be covered by
                          additional specifications as
                          conditions detrimental to the
                          stream arise.  The specific
                          mention of items 1 through 5 does
                          not necessarily mean that the
                          addition of other physical or
                          chemical constituents will be
                          condoned.

n.    No sewage discharges, regardless of degree of
      treatment, should be allowed into the James River
      between Bosher and Williams Island Dams.

o.    The concentration and total amount of impurities in
      Tuckahoe Creek and its tributaries of sewage origin
      shall be limited to those amounts from sewage,
      industrial wastes, and other wastes which are now
      present in the stream from natural sources and from
      existing discharges in the watershed.

p.    Cancelled.






                             C-28

































VR680I-21-07.2 Outstanding State Resource Waters.

     The following section recognizes waters which the
     General Assembly, Board and/or other State agencies
     have. determined to be of speci al ecological or
     recreational significance to the State. The
     designation of a Scenic River and the significance
     of this designation are the subject of the Scenic
     Rivers Act (Section 10-167 et seq. of the Code of
     Virginia). The listing of Outstanding State
     Resource Waters that follows constitutes those
     waters which the Board has designated as high
     quality state resource waters subject to the
     protections found in the anti-degradation policy in
     Section VR680-21-01.3.

     A. Scenic Rivers

     The purpos~e of the Scenic Rivers Act is to provide
     for identification, preservation, and protection of
     certain rivers which possess natural beauty of high
     quality to assure their use and enjoyment for their
     scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife,
     historic, cultural or other values. According to the
     Act "in all planning for the use and development of





                             C-29








water and related land resources including the
construction of impoundments, diversions, roadways,
crossings, channelization, locks, canals, or other
uses which change the character of a stream or
waterway or destroy its scenic values, full
consideration and evaluation of the river as a
scenic resource shall be given before alternative
plans for use and development are approved". -

The following have been included by the General
Assembly in the Scenic Rivers System:

POTOMAC RIVER BASIN

POTOMAC RIVER SUBBASIN

SR-1    Goose Creek from its confluence with the
        Potomac River upstream to the
        Fauquier-Loudoun County line (about 28
        miles).

SR-2    Catoctin Creek in Loudoun County from its
        confluence with the Potomac River upstream to
        the Town of Waterford.

SHENANDOAH RIVER SUBBASIN

SR-3    The Shenandoah River in Clarke County from
        the Warren-Clarke County line to Lockes
        Landing.

JAMES RIVER BASIN

SR-4    The Saint Marys River in Augusta County
        within the George Washington National Forest.

SR-5    Rivanna River from its confluence with the
        James River upstream to the
        Fluvanna-Albemarle County line.

SR-6    Appomattox River from the Route 36 bridge
        crossing in the City of Petersburg upstream
        to the abutment dam located about 1.3 miles
        below Lake Chesdin (about 5 miles).

SR-9    The James River from Orleans Street extended
        in the City of Richmond westward to the 1970
        corporate limits of the City.







                       C-30









SR-10   The Upper James River from a point two miles
        below Eagle Rock to the Route 630 bridge in
        Springwood, 14+/- miles.

RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER BASIN

SR-11   The Rappahannock River from its headwaters
        near Chester Gap to the confluence of Deep
        Run at the Fauquier/Stafford County line,
        64+/- miles.

ROANOKE RIVER BASIN

SR-7    Roanoke (Staunton) River from Brockneal
        upstream to Long Island.

CHOWAN AND DISMAL SWAMP BASIN

CHOWAN RIVER SUBBASIN

SR-8    The Nottoway River in Sussex County from the
        Route 40 bridge at Stony Creek to the
        Southampton County line.

B. Trout Streams

   Trout streams that are Class I and II according
   to the Commission of Game and Inland Fisheries
    Classification System are indicated by Trout
    Stream subclassifications i and ii in this
   booklet.

C. Waters Containing Endangered or Threatened
   Species.

   The following waters provide essential or
   critical habitat for endangered or threatened
   species which have been identified by the United
   States Fish and Wildlife Service under the
   Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. If
   the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service identifies new
   waters containing endangered or threatened
   species, the Board shall consider the need to
   protect these beneficial uses in reviewing
   discharge permits and other actions until such
   time as the waters are officially added to the
   list in this section.








                     C-31








VR680-21-07.3 Nutrient Enriched Waters

ï¿½ 1.   Purpose.

       The board recognizes that nutrients are contributing
to undesirable growths of aquatic plant life in surface
waters of the Commonwealth. This standard establishes a
designation of "nutrient enriched waters".  Designations of
surface waters of the Commonwealth as "nutrient enriched
waters" are determined by the board based upon an
evaluation of the historical water quality data for one or
more of the following indicators of nutrient enrichment:
chlorophyll "a" concentrations, dissolved oxygen
fluctuations, and concentrations of total phosphorus.

ï¿½ 2.   Authority.

      This standard is adopted under the authority of ï¿½ï¿½
62.1-44.15(3) and 62.1-44.15(10) of the Code of Virginia.

ï¿½ 3,   Designation of nutrient enriched waters.

      A.   The following State waters are hereby
      designated as "nutrient enriched waters":

            1.   Smith Mountain Lake and all tributaries*
            of the impoundment upstream to their
            headwaters.

            2.   Lake Chesdin from its dam upstream to
            where the Route 360 bridge (Goodes Bridge)
            crosses the Appomattox River, including all
            tributaries to their headwaters that enter
            between the dam and the Route 360 bridge.

            3.   South Fork Rivanna Reservoir and all
            tributaries of the impoundment upstream to
            their headwaters.

            4.   Peak Creek from its headwaters to its
           mouth (confluence with Claytor Lake), including
            all tributaries to their headwaters.

            5.   Aquia Creek from its headwaters to the
            state line.

            6.   Fourmile Run from its headwaters to the
            state line.

           7.   Hunting Creek from its headwaters to the
           state line.





                            C-32







8.   Little Hunting Creek from its headwaters
to the state line.

9.   Gunston Cove from its headwaters to the
state line.

10. Belmont and Occoquan Bays from their
headwaters to the state line.

11. Potomac Creek from its headwaters to the
state line.

12. Neabsco Creek from its headwaters to the
state line.

13. Williams Creek from its headwaters to its
confluence with Lower Machodoc Creek.

14. Tidal freshwater Rappahannock River from
the fall line to Buoy 44, near Leedstown,
Virginia, including all tributaries to their
headwaters that enter the tidal freshwater
Rappahannock River.

15.  Estuarine portion of the Rappahannock
River from Buoy 44, near Leedstown, Virginia,
to the mouth of the Rappahannock River (Buoy
6), including all tributaries to their
headwaters that enter the estuarine portion of
the Rappahannock River.

16.  Estuarine portion of the Mattaponi River
from Clifton, Virginia, and estuarine portion
of the Pamunkey River from Sweet Hall Landing,
Virginia to West Point, Virginia, and the York
River from West Point, Virginia, to the mouth
of the York River (Tue Marsh Light) including
all tributaries to their headwaters that enter
the estuarine portions of the Mattaponi River,
the Pamunkey River and the York River.

17.  Tidal freshwater James River from the fall
line to the confluence of the Chickahominy
River (Buoy 70) including all tributaries to a
distance five river miles above their fall
lines that enter the tidal freshwater James
River.

18.  Estuarine portion of the James River from
its confluence with the Chickahominy River
(Buoy 70) to the mouth of the James River (Buoy





                 C-33







            25), including all tributaries to their
            headwaters.

            19.  Chesapeake Bay and its small coastal
            basins from the Virginia State line to the
            mouth of the Bay (a line from Cape Henry drawn
            through Buoys 3 and 8 to Fishermans Island),
            and its tidal tributaries, excluding the
            Potomac tributaries, those tributaries listed
            above, and the Mattaponi River upstream of
            Clifton, Virginia, and the Pamunkey River
            upstream of Sweet Hall Landing, Virginia.

            20. Tidal freshwater Blackwater River from the
            Norfolk and Western railway bridge at Burdette,
            Virginia, and tidal freshwater Nottoway River
            from the Norfolk and Western railway bridge at
            Courtland, Virginia, to the State line,
            including all tributaries to their headwaters
            that enter the tidal freshwater portions of the
            Blackwater River and the Nottoway River.

       B.   Whenever any water body is designated as
       "nutrient enriched waters", the board shall modify
       the NPDES permits of point source dischargers into
       the "nutrient enriched waters" as provided in the
       board's Policy for Nutrient Enriched Waters
       (VR-680-14-02).


* When the word "tributaries" is used in this standard, it
does not refer to the mainstem of the water body that has
been named.























                             C-34









VR680-21-08  RIVER BASIN SECTION TABLES

VR680-21-08.1 Section Number and Description Columns

      A. Basin Descriptions

          The tables that follow divide the State's surface
          waters into nine river basins, some with
          subbasins: Potomac River Basin (Potomac and
          Shenandoah Subbasins), James River Basin,
          Rappahannock River Basin, Roanoke River Basin
          (Roanoke and Yadkin Subbasins), Chowan and Dismal
          Swamp Basin (Chowan and Albemarle Sound
          Subbasins), Tennessee and Big Sandy Basins (Big
          Sandy, Clinch and Holston Subbasins), Chesapeake
          Bay, Atlantic Ocean and Small Coastal Basin, York
          and New River Basin. (See Figure 2.)

          Each basin is further divided into sections.
          Each section is assigned a Class, represented by
          Roman Numerals I through VII, based on its
          geographic location or, in the case of trout
          waters, on its use. Descriptions of these
          Classes are found in Section VR680-21-01.5.

      B. Potomac Water Supplies (Raw Water Intakes)

          The Leesburg and County of Fairfax intakes in the
          Potomac are in Maryland waters and the Board
         cannot adopt the standards in Section
          VR680-21-02.3 to apply at the raw water intake
          points.  However, applications to discharge into,
          or otherwise alter the physical, chemical, or
          biological properties of Virginia waters within
          an area five miles upstream of the intake will be
          reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure that
          they will protect the water supply. Basin
          sections where this would be applicable are shown
          with an asterisk (*) in the Basin and Section
          description columns.

VR680-21-08.2  Classification Column

     A. DO, pH and Temperature Standards

         The classification column defines the Class of
         waters to which the basin section belongs in
          accordance with the Class descriptions given in
          Section VR680-21-01.5. Section VR680-21-01.5
          defines the State's seven classes (I-VII) and the






                            C-35







dissolved oxygen (Do), pH and maximum temperature
that apply to each class. By finding the class
of waters for a basin section in the
Classification Column and referring to Section
VR680-21-01.5,  the DO,  pH  and  maximum
temperature standards can be found for each basin
section.















































                  C-36




















           RIVER BASINS IN VIRGINIA


                               I  POTOjiAC-SHEHANDOAH3

                               2  JAME S                                                                                                  D
                                 3RAPPAHANNOCK

                                 14ROANOKE                                  fe, N                                     .I

                                5CHOWAN AND DISMAL SWAMP

                                6TENNESSEE AND BIG SANDY*(:                             *'     N*'
C)                         7 ~~~~~~SMALL COASTAL BASINS AND
                                  CHESAPEAKE BAY


                                9NEW                                                         )I                    :\~               .~


                                                                                                     ~~~~~~  A'  ./S-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d












                                                                                                        N. C.







3      ~VR680-21-08.3  Special Standards Column

             A.  Bacteria Standards
  I              ~~~~All surface waters have a standard for fecal
                 coliform, bacteria. The bacteria standard for
                 shellfish waters is set forth in Section
  I             ~~~~VR680-21-02.1, the standard applying to all other
                 surface waters is found in Section
                 VR6SO-21-02.2. The letter a in the Special
                 Standards column next to a river basin section
                 indicates that there are shellfish waters
                 somewhere within that section and the bacteria
                 standard for shellfish waters applies to those
  I             ~~~~shellfish waters.  (It should be noted that even
                 though the column contains the letter a the
                 entire section may not be shellfish waters.)

             B. Natural Variation

                 In some cases natural water quality does not fall
  I            ~~~~within the limits set by the standards.  (For
                 example streams in some areas of the State may
                 naturally exceed the usual pH range of 6 to 9.0.)
  I             ~~~~In these instances the Board may have set a more
                 appropriate standard that reflects natural
                 quality, and this special limit is shown in the
  I             ~~~~Special Standards column.
             C.  Additional Requirements

  I              ~~~~In other cases the basic water quality parameters
                 of Do, pH, temperature, and bacteria have not
                 been sufficient to protect water quality in
                 certain areas, and effluent limits or treatment
                 requirements have been established for these
                 areas. This fact is also indicated in the
  I             ~~~~Special Standards column.  if the applicable
                 standard was too long to print in its entirety in
                 that column, the column contains only a lower
                 case letter, and the standard itself will be
  I             ~~~~found in the Special Standards Section
                 VR680-21--07.1 under that letter.











                                    C-38








D.  Other Special Standards or Designations

    1. Public Water Supplies

       Sections that are public water supplies are
        indicated in the Special Standards column
       with a PWS. This designation indicates that
       additional standards are applicable. (See
       Section VR680-21-02.3 for applicable
       standards).

   2. Scenic Rivers

       If a section contains a stream that has been
       designated a scenic river by the General
       Assembly, the Special Standards column
       indicates this with an SR- followed by a
       number.  The appropriate waterway can be
       found listed in the Key to Special Standards
       Section under Scenic Rivers, Section
       VR680-21-07.2A. The entire section is not
       necessarily a scenic river, only that portion
       specifically listed in-VR680-21-07.2A.































                      C-39









SEC.    SECTION DESCRIPTION                          CLASS   SP. STDS.

        VR680-21-08.6 JAMES RIVER BASIN
                        (LOWER)
1       James River and its tidal tributaries        II      a
         from Old Point Comfort - Fort Wool to
         Barrets Point (Buoy 64), except
        prohibited or spoil areas, unless
        otherwise designated.

la      Free flowing or non-tidal portions of        III
         streams in Section 1, unless otherwise
        designated.

lb      Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River        II      a
        and tidal portions of its tributaries
         from its confluence with the Elizabeth
        River to the end of tidal waters.

lc      Free flowing portions of the Eastern         III
        Branch of the Elizabeth River-and its
        tributaries.

Id Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River    II              a
        from its confluence with the Elizabeth
        River to the lock at Great Bridge.

le      Free flowing portions of the Western         III
        Branch of the Elizabeth River and of
        the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth
        River from their confluence with the
        Elizabeth River to the lock at Great
        Bridge.

if      Nansemond River and its tributaries          II      a
        from its confluence with the James
        River to Suffolk (dam at Lake Meade),
        unless otherwise designated.

lg      Shingle Creek from its confluence with    III
        the Nansemond River to its headwaters
        in the Dismal Swamp.

lh      Lake Prince, Lake Burnt Mills and            III     PWS
        Western Branch impoundments for Norfolk
        raw water supply and Lake Kilby -
        Cahoon Pond, Lake Meade and Lake
        Speight impoundments for Portsmouth raw
        water supply.




                              C-40








ii      Free flowing portions of the Pagan           III
        River and its free flowing tributaries.

lj      Chisel Run and its tributaries, except    III
        that tributary into which Eastern State
        Hospital discharges, to their
        headwaters.

1k      Skiffes Creek Reservoir (Newport News        IiI     PWS
        water impoundment).

11      The Lone Star lakes and impoundments in   III        PWS
        the City of Suffolk, Chuckatuck Creek
        watershed which, will serve as a water
        source for the City of Suffolk.

Im      The Lee Hall reservoir system, near          I!I     PWS
        Skiffes Creek and the Warwick River, in
        the City of Newport News.

In      Chuckatuck Creek and its tributaries         III     PWS
        from Suffolk's raw water intake (at
        Godwin's Millpond) to a point 5 miles
        upstream.































                              C-41









SEC.    SECTION DESCRIPTION                          CLASS   SP. STDS.

        VR680-21-08.7 JAMES RIVER BASIN
                        (MIDDLE)

2       James River and its tidal tributaries        II
        from Buoy 64 near Barrets Point
        upstream to the fall line at Richmond,
        to include the Chickahominy River and
        its tidal tributaries from the mouth
        upstream to Walkers Dam and the
        Appomattox River and its tidal
        tributaries from the mouth upstream to
        the head of tidal waters (approximately
        at the Route 1/301 Bridge across the
        Appomattox), unless otherwise
        designated.

2a      James River from City Point to a point    II         PWS
        5 miles above American Tobacco
        Company's raw water intake and the
        Appomattox River and its tidal
        tributaries from its mouth to 5 miles
        upstream of Virginia-American Water
        Company's raw water intake.

2b      Free flowing tributaries to Section 2a.   III        PWS

3       Free flowing tributaries of the James        III
        River from Buoy 64 to Brandon and free
        flowing tributaries of the Chickahominy
        River to Walkers Dam, unless otherwise
        designated.

3a      Diascund Creek and its tributaries from   III        PWS
        Newport News' raw water intake dam to
        its headwaters.

3b      Little Creek Reservoir and its               III     PWS
        tributaries from the City of Newport
        News impoundment dam to 5 miles
        upstream of the raw water intake.

  4     Chickahominy River and its tributaries    III        m
        from Walkers Dam to Bottoms Bridge
        (Route 60 bridge).

4a      Chickahominy River from Walkers Dam to    III        PWS,m
        a point 5 miles upstream.






                              C-42








SEC.    SECTION DESCRIPTION                         CLASS

        VR680-21-08-12  CHOWAN AND DISMAL SWAMP
                        Chowan River Subbasin

1       Blackwater River and its tidal              II
        tributaries from the Virginia-North
        Carolina State line to the end of tidal
        waters at approximately State Route 611
        at river mile 20.90; Nottoway River and
        its tidal tributaries from the
        Virginia-North Carolina State line to
        the end of tidal waters at
        approximately Route 674.

2       Blackwater and Nottoway Rivers from the   III       SR-8
        end of tidal waters to their headwaters
        and their free-flowing tributaries in
        Virginia, unless otherwise designated.

2a      Blackwater River and its tributaries        III     PWS
        from Norfolk's auxiliary raw water
        intake near Burdette, Virginia, to a
        point 5 miles above the raw water
        intake, to include Corrowaugh Swamp to
        a point 5 miles above the raw water
        intake.

2b      (Deleted)

2c      Nottoway River and its tributaries from   III       PWS
        Norfolk's auxiliary raw water intake
        near Courtland, Virginia, to a point 5
        miles upstream.

2d      (Deleted)

2e      Nottoway River from the Georgia-Pacific   III       PWS
        and the Town of Jarratt's raw water
        intakes near Jarratt, Virginia, to a
        point 5 miles above the intakes.

2f      Nottoway River and its tributaries from   III       PWS
        Camp Pickett's raw water intake to a
       point 5 miles above the raw water
        intake.

2g      Lazaretto Creek and its tributaries         III     PWS
        from Crewe's raw water intake to a
       point 5 miles upstream.





                               C-43








2h      Modest Creek and its tributaries from        III     PWS
        Victoria's raw water intake to their
        headwaters.

2i      Nottoway River and its tributaries from   III        PWS
        the Town of Victoria's raw water intake
        at the Falls (about 200 feet upstream
        from State Route 49) to a point 5 miles
        upstream.

2j      Big Hounds Creek from the Town of            III     PWS
        Victoria's auxiliary raw water intake
        (on Lunenburg Lake) to its headwaters.

3       Meherrin River and its tributaries in        II
        Virginia from the Virginia-North
        Carolina State line to its headwaters.

3a      Meherrin River and its tributaries from   III        PWS
        Emporia's water supply dam to a point 5
        miles upstream.

3b      Great Creek from Lawrenceville's raw         III     PWS
        water intake to a point 5 miles
        upstream.

3c      Meherrin River from Lawrenceville's raw   III        PWS
        water intake to a point 5 miles
        upstream.

3d      Flat Rock Creek from Kenbridge's raw         III     PWS
        water intake upstream to its
        headwaters.

3e      Meherrin River and its tributaries from   III        PWS
        South Hill's raw water intake to a
        point 5 miles upstream.

3f      Couches Creek from a point 1.6 miles         III
        downstream from the Industrial
        Development Authority discharge to its
        headwaters.














                               C-44









SEC.    SECTION DESCRIPTION                         CLASS   SP.STDS.

        VR680-21-08.13 CHOWAN AND DISMAL SWAMP
                       Albemarle Sound Subbasin

I Back Bay and its tributaries in the               II
        City of Virginia Beach to the
        Virginia-North Carolina State line and
        the Northwest River and its tidal
        tributaries from the Virginia-North
        Carolina State line to the free flowing
        portion, and North Landing River and
        its tidal tributaries from the
        Virginia-North Carolina State line to
        the Great Bridge Lock.

la      The free flowing portions of streams in   III
        Section 1 and tributaries of Stumpy
        Lake.

lb Stumpy Lake (raw water supply for the            III     PWS
        City of Norfolk) and feeder streams to
        a point 5 miles upstream.

lc      Northwest River and its tributaries         III     PWS
        from the City of Chesapeake's raw water
        intake to a point 5 miles upstream and
        a point 5 miles downstream.

2       Intracoastal Waterway (portions not         III
        described in Section 1).

3       Lake Drummond, including feeder             III
        ditches, and all interstate tributaries
        of the Dismal Swamp between Virginia
        and North Carolina.



















                              C-45









SEC.    SECTION DESCRIPTION                          CLASS   SP.STDS.

        VR680-21-08.17 CHESAPEAKE BAY,
                        ATLANTIC OCEAN AND
                        SMALL COASTAL BASINS

1       The Atlantic Ocean from Cape Henry           I        a
        Light (Latitude 36o55'061 North;
        Longitude 76000'04" West) east to the
        three mile limit and south to the North
        Carolina State line.  The Atlantic
        Ocean from Cape Henry Light to Thimble
        Shoal Channel (Latitude 36 57'30"
        North; Longitude 76 02'30" West) from
        Thimble Shoal Channel to Smith Island
        (Latitude 37ï¿½07'04" North; Longitude
        75 54'04" West), and north to the
        Virginia-Maryland State line.

la      All free flowing portions of the             III
        streams, creeks and coves in Section 1
        east of the east-west divide boundary
        on the Eastern Shore of Virginia.

lb      Tidal portions of streams, creeks and        II       a
        coves in Section 1 east of the
        east-west divide boundary on the
        Eastern Shore of Virginia.

2       Chesapeake Bay and its tidal                 II       a
        tributaries from Old Point Comfort
        Tower (Latitude 37 o00'00" North;
        Longitude 76ï¿½18'08" West~ to Thimble
        Shoal Light (Latitude 37 00'09"
       North; Longitude 76ï¿½014'04" West) to
        and along the south side of Thimble
        Shoal Channel to its eastern end
        (Latitude 36ï¿½57'03" North; Longitude
        76 02'03"1 West) to Smith Island
        (Latitude 37007'04" North; Longitude
        75 54'04" West) north to the
       Virginia-Maryland border following the
        east-west divide boundary on the
       Eastern Shore of Virginia, west along
       the Virginia-Maryland border6 to the
       Virginia Coast, (Latitude 37 53'23"
       North; Longitude 76 14'25" West) and
       south following the Virginia Coast to
       Old Point Comfort Tower (previously
       described), unless otherwise
       designated.




                              C-46







2a      Free flowing portions of streams lying    III
        on the Eastern Shore of Virginia west
        of the east-west divide boundary unless
        otherwise designated.

2b      Drummonds Millpond including Coards          III
        Branch.

2c      The Virginia Department of Agriculture    III
        experimental station pond and its
        tributaries.

2d      The free flowing streams tributary to        III
        the western portion of the Chesapeake
        Bay lying between the Virginia-Maryland
        State line and Old Point Comfort.

2e      Harwood's Mill Reservoir (in Poquoson        III      PWS
        River's headwaters - a source of water
        for the City of Newport News) and its
        tributaries.

2f      Brick Kiln Creek and its tributaries         III      PWS
        from Fort Monroe's raw water intake (at
        the Big Bethel Reservoir) to a point 5
        miles upstream.

3       Chesapeake Bay from Old Point Comfort        II      a
        Tower (Latitude 37000'00" North;
        Longitude 76018'08" West~ to Thimble
        Shoal Light (Latitude 37 00'09"
        North; Longitude 76014'04"11 West)
        along the south side of Thimble Shoal
        Channel to Cape Henry Light (Latitude
        36055'06"11 North; Longitude
        76000'04"1 West).

3a      Little Creek from its confluence with        II       a
        Chesapeake Bay (Lynnhaven Roads) to end
        of navigable waters.

3b      Tidal portions of Lynnhaven watershed        II       a
        from its confluence with the Chesapeake
        Bay (Lynnhaven Roads) to and including
        Lynnhaven Bay, Western Branch Lynnhaven
        River, Eastern Branch Lynnhaven River,
        Long Creek, Broad Bay and Linkhorn Bay,
        Thalia Creek and its tributaries to the
        end of tidal waters. Great Neck Creek
        and Little Neck Creek from their
        confluence with Linkhorn Bay and their
        tidal tributaries. Rainey Gut and
        Crystal Lake from their confluence with
        Linkhorn Bay.


                              C-47








3c      Free flowing portions of streams in         III
        Section 3b, unless otherwise
        designated.

3d      Impoundments on Little Creek watershed.   III        PWS

3e      London Bridge Creek from its confluence   II
        with the Eastern Branch of Lynnhaven
        River to the end of tidal waters.
        Wolfsnare Creek from its confluence
        with the Eastern Branch Lynnhaven River
        to the fall line.

3f      Free flowing portions of London Bridge    III
        Creek and Wolfsnare Creek and their
        free flowing tributaries.

3g      Lake Joyce and Lake Bradford.               III





































                             C-48








SEC.    SECTION DESCRIPTION                         CLASS   SP.STDS.

        VR680-21-08.18 YORK RIVER BASIN

I1      York River and the tidal portions of        II      a
        its tributaries from Goodwin Neck and
        Sandy Point upstream to Thorofare Creek
        and Little Salem Creek near West Point;
        Mattaponi River and the tidal portions
        of its tributaries from Little Salem
        Creek to the end of tidal waters;
        Pamunkey River and the tidal portions
        of its tributaries from Thorofare Creek
        near West Point to the end of tidal
        waters.

2       Free flowing tributaries of the York        III
        River, free flowing tributaries of the
        Mattaponi River to Clifton and the
        Pamunkey River to Romancoke, unless
        otherwise designated.

2a      Queen Creek and Waller Mill Pond to the   III       PWS
        headwaters of the pond.

2b      Jones Pond (a tributary of Queen Creek    III       PWS
        near Williamsburg which serves as the
        raw water supply for Cheatham Annex
        Naval Station) and its tributaries to a
        point 5 miles upstream.

3       Free flowing portions of the Mattaponi    III
        and Pamunkey Rivers, free flowing
        tributaries of the Mattaponi above
        Clifton, and free flowing tributaries
        of the Pamunkey above Romancoke, unless
        otherwise designated.

3a      South Anna River from Ashland's raw         III     PWS
        water intake to a point 5 miles
        upstream.

3b      Northeast Creek from the Louisa County    III       PWS
       Water Authority's impoundment dam
        (approximately 1/8 mile upstream of
       Route 33) to its headwaters.

3c      South Anna River from Route 15 upstream   III
       to a point 1.5 miles below the effluent
        from the Gordonsville Sewage Treatment
        Plant.




                               C-49








3d      Ni River and its tributaries from           III     PWS
        Spotsylvania's raw water intake near
        208 to their headwaters.

3e      The North Anna River and its                III      PWS
        tributaries from Hanover County's raw
        water intake near Doswell
        (approximately 1/2 mile upstream from
        State Route 30) to a point 5 miles
        upstream.

3f      Stevens Mill Run from the Lake Caroline   III       PWS
       water impoundment, and other
        tributaries into the impoundment
       upstream to their headwaters.








































                              C-50



I
I
I
I
I
I
                           APPENDIX D
-- Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern List

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I









     The following is a list of Chesapeake Bay toxics of concern, as identified by
EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program in its May 1991 "Basinwide Toxics Reduction
Strategy Commitment Report."  This list was prepared by the Chesapeake Bay
program Toxics Subcommittee's and Living Resources Subcommittee's Joint
Criteria and Standards Workgroup.

     Atrazine
     Cadmium
     Chlordane
     Chromium
     Copper
     Lead
     Mercury
     Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
     Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

           Benzo [A]anthracene
           Benzo [A]pyrene
           Chrysene
           Fluoranthene
           Napthalene

     Tributylin (TBT)


























                                    D-1



I
I
I
I
I
I
                                      APPENDIX E
I
                             Summary of WQIA Provisions from
                                  CBPA Model Ordinances
                        and Local CBPA Ordinances in Hampton Roads
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I









      This appendix contains a summary of all provisions found within the WQIA
procedures of the CBPA models and locally-adopted CBPA ordinances reviewed for
this report. Additional notes regarding specific provisions, as indicated by bolded
parenthetical references, are at the end of each sub-section.  By providing this
documentation, it is not the intent of this report to recommend any or all such
provisions; rather, they are included solely as examples and should be used for
comparison purposes only. Those provisions which are considered optimal for use
in a WQIA procedure can be found in the Model WQIA Procedure.

ADolicabilitv/General Qualifvina Criteria

      The  following  provisions  include  criteria  which  have  been  used  in
determining when a WQIA should be required or be applicable. General qualifying
criteria are listed first; the provisions in this section would be placed in a WQIA
procedure prior to a minor or major WQIA criteria and information requirements
section. Any combination of these criteria can also stand alone if only one level of
assessment is used. Following this section are minor and major WQIA applicability
criteria which were used when a two- tiered approach to WQIA was taken.
Additional threshold criteria based on specific land use activities are listed in
Appendix B; these assessment guides list the determinants of impact severity,
such as specific properties or characteristics of the land use activity, which can be
used in making a preliminary determination regarding the magnitude of possible
adverse impacts to water quality.

General Criteria:

      CBLAD Model

      "A water quality impacts assessment is required for (i) any proposed
      development within a RPA, including any buffer area modification or
      reduction as provided for in the Performance Criteria Standards section of
      this ordinance; (ii) any development in a RMA as deemed necessary by the
      Administrative Authority due to the unique characteristics of the site or
      intensity of the proposed development."

Other examples by order of complexity:

      o     Any  proposed development or redevelopment which disturbs any
            portion of a RPA.

      o     Any proposed development within a RPA, including any buffer area
            modification or reduction as provided for herein.





                                      E-1









o     Any proposed development, redevelopment, and improvements to
      existing  structures  within  a  RPA,  including  any  buffer  area
      modification or reduction as provided for elsewhere in this ordinance.

o     Any  proposed  development,  redevelopment,  or improvements to
      existing structures which disturb lands within any portion of a RPA,
      regardless of square footage of land disturbance.

o     Any proposed development within a RPA, including any buffer area
      modification or reduction of the landward 50' of the 100' buffer area.

o     Any development in a RPA which requires modification or reduction
      of the landward 50' of the 100' buffer area, disturbs any portion of
      the buffer area within 50' of any other component of the RPA, or
      which disturbs any portion of any other component of the RPA.

o     (i) Any proposed development within a RPA, including any buffer area
      modification or reduction as provided for elsewhere in the CBPA
      ordinance; (ii) any development in a RMA as deemed necessary by
      the [designated authority].

o     (i) Any proposed development or redevelopment within a RPA; (ii) any
      proposed development or redevelopment in a RMA when required
      because of the unique characteristics of the site or project intensity.

o     (i) Any proposed development or redevelopment within a RPA; (ii) any
      proposed development or redevelopment in a RMA when required
      because of the unique characteristics of the site or intensity of the
      proposed development on water quality and land in the RPA.

o     (i) Any proposed development or redevelopment within a RPA, (ii) any
      proposed development or redevelopment within an RMA with a land
      area disturbance exceeding 5,000 sf. (Alternative thresholds could be
      2,500 sf. or 10,000 sf., to be selected at local discretion.)

o     (i) Any development which exceeds 5,000 sf. of land disturbance or
      land disturbing activity within a CBPA and requires modification or
      reduction of the landward 50' of the 100' buffer area, (ii) disturbs any
      portion of the buffer area within 50' of any other component, (iii)
      disturbs any portion of any other component of the RPA, or (iv) is
      located in a RMA and is deemed necessary.

o     (i) Any  proposed development or redevelopment within a RPA,
      including any buffer area modification or reduction as provided for
      elsewhere in the CBPA ordinance, or (ii) any proposed development or

                                E-2









           redevelopment within a RMA. The latter requirement may be waived
           when it is apparent that the unique characteristics of the site (e.g.
           soils, topography, groundcover, location of wetlands and tidal shores)
           will prevent the proposed development from causing a degradation to
           water quality. (1)

     o     (i) Any development or redevelopment within a RPA; (ii) any buffer
           area encroachment or reduction provided for in the CBPA ordinance;
           or (iii) where is deemed necessary by the designated authority to
           evaluate the potential impacts of the development or redevelopment
            upon water quality or a RPA by reason of the unique characteristics
           of the site or the intensity of the proposed use or development.

     o     Any proposed land use specifically set forth in the zoning ordinance
            or other applicable ordinance as automatically requiring compliance
            with a WQIA procedure.

     o     A natural resources inventory shall be required for all propoerties
            proposed for development within areas with an elevation of less than
            4' above mean sea level, areas with slopes in excess of 20%, coastal
            and inland marshes, and areas designated by the locality as CBPAs.

            As part of the natural resources inventory for development in CBPAs,
            prepared in accordance with methods and procedures prescribed by
            the designated authority and based on degree of land disturbance and
            water quality sensitivity of the lands impacted.

Notes: (1)    This example can be reworded  to state that the designated
               authority may waive the latter requirement after issuance in
               writing of findings indicating that the unique characteristics of the
               site [same as example] or the insignificance of the proposed
               development will not cause a degradation to water quality.

Minor WQIA Criteria:

      CBLAD Model

      "A minor water quality impact assessment pertains only to development
      within a CBPA which causes no more than 5,000 sf. of land disturbance
      and requires any modification or reduction of the landward 50' of the 100'
      buffer area."






                                     E-3









Other examples:

     o     Development within the RPA which causes no more than 5,000 sf. of
           land disturbance and requires any modification or reduction of the
           landward 50' of the 100' buffer area.

     o     Development which covers no more than one acre of land disturbance
           within the RPA and requires any modification or reduction of the
           landward 50' of the 100' buffer
           area. (2)

     o     Development within CBPAs which causes no more than 10,000 sf. of
            land disturbance and requires any modification or reduction of the
            landward 50' of the 100' buffer area.

     o     Development within RMAs which causes from 2,500 to 10,000 sf. of
            land disturbance, or for any single-family or duplex development
           within RPAs which causes up to 10,000 sf. of land disturbance, or
           for any other development within RPAs which causes up to 2,500 sf.
           of land disturbance.

     o     Development of individual single-family lots, or other development
            within CBPAs  which causes no more than  10,000 sf. of land
            disturbance and requires any modification or reduction of the
            landward 50' of the 100' buffer area.

     o     Development associated with a single-family residential dwelling unit
            which encroaches into any component of a RPA, as well as
            development within CBPAs which causes less than 5,000 sf. of land
            disturbance and requires buffer area modification or reduction in
            landward 50' of 100' buffer area. (3)

Notes:   (2)   One acre is equivalent to 43,560 sf.; such a high threshold for
               area of land disturbance is not recommended. The result of using
              this threshold has the potential to eliminate major development
               impacts   from   consideration   which   would   normally  be
               acknowledged or more appropriately addressed in a major WQIA.

         (3)   By limiting development within a RPA associated with a single-
               family dwelling unit solely to a minor WQIA, the potential exists
               for eliminating major development impacts from consideration
               which would normally be acknowledged or more appropriately
               addressed in a major WQIA.




                                    E-4









Major WQIA Criteria:

      CBLAD Model

      "A major water quality impact assessment shall be required for any
      development which (i) exceeds 5,000 sf. of land disturbance within CBPAs
      and requires any modification or reduction of the landward 50' of the 100'
      buffer area; (ii) disturbs any portion of the seaward 50' of the 100' buffer
      area or any other component of a RPA; or (iii) is located in a RMA when
      deemed necessary by the Administrative Authority."

Other examples:

     o     Any development which exceed 5,000 sf. of land disturbance within
            a RPA and requires any modification or reduction of the landward 50'
            of the 100' buffer area, or (ii) disturbs any portion of the seaward 50'
            of the 100' buffer area or any other component of a RPA.

      o     Any development which (i) exceeds 5,000 sf. of land disturbance
            within a RPA or (ii) is located in a RMA and is deemed necessary.

      o     Any development which exceeds 5,000 sf. of land disturbance within
            CBPAs and requires any modification or reduction of the landward 50'
            of the 100' buffer area; disturbs any portion of any other component
            of a RPA or disturbs any portion of the buffer area within 50' of any
            other component of a RPA, or is located in a RMA and is deemed
            necessary.

      o     Any development which (i) exceed 10,000 sf. of land disturbance
            within CBPAs and requires any modification or reduction of the
            landward 50' of the 100' buffer area; (ii) disturbs any portion of any
            other component of a RPA or disturbs any portion of the buffer area
            within 50' of any other component of an RPA; or (iii) is located in a
            RMA and is deemed necessary.

      o     Any development which (i) exceeds 5,000 sf. of land disturbance
            within CBPAs  and requires any modification or reduction of the
            landward 50' of the 100' buffer area; or (ii) disturbs any portion of
            the seaward 50' of the 100' buffer area or any other component of a
            RPA; (iii) except development associated with a single-family
            residential dwelling unit. (4)






                                     E-5









     o     Any development which exceeds  10,000 sf. of land disturbance
           within the RMA, or single-family duplex development which exceeds
           10,000 sf. of land disturbance in a RPA, or any other development
           which exceed 2,500 sf. of land disturbance in a RPA.

     o     Any non-individual single-family lot development which (i) exceeds
           10,000 sf. of land disturbance within CBPAs and requires any
           modification or reduction of the landward 50' of the 100' buffer area;
           (ii) disturbs any portion of the seaward 50' of the 100' buffer area or
           any other component of a RPA; or (iii) is located in a RMA and is
           deemed necessary. (5)

     o     Any development which exceeds 10,000 sf. of land disturbance
           within a RMA; or, any single-family or duplex development which
           exceeds 10,000 sf. of land disturbance in a RPA; or, any other
           development which exceeds 2,500 sf. of land disturbance within a
           RPA.

Notes       (4)   See note #3.
           (5)   See note #3

Information to be Submitted for Review

     The following provisions were used in reviewed CBPA models and locally
adopted CBPA ordinances to reflect the types and the extent of information that
should be submitted to the designated authority for review in the WQIA. Some
models and localities based their requests for information on the level of scrutiny
desired for an applicable project, such as "Minor WQIA Requirements" and "Major
WQIA Requirements." Others chose to use only one comprehensive assessment
procedure for all applicable projects.

     This section is separated into two subsections:   examples from WQIA
procedures which used one assessment for all applicable projects (one level of
assessment) and; examples from WQIA procedures which used a minor and a
major assessment, generally based on the intensity of the proposed project (two
levels of assessment).

One Level of Assessment:

     o     A water quality impact assessment shall identify impacts of proposed
            development on water quality and land in RPAs and recommended
            measures for mitigation of the impacts. Water quality impact
            assessments shall address Nonpoint Source components set forth in
           the CBPA ordinance and shall follow guidelines established by the
            [designated authority.]   Development or redevelopment within an


                                    E-6









                  RMA shall not require a water quality impact assessment when
                  impervious cover is less than 40% of the total site area.

            o     A water quality impact assessment shall identify impacts of proposed
                  development on water quality and land in RPAs and recommended
                  measures for mitigation of these impacts. Water quality impact
                  assessments shall address Nonpoint Source Pollution components set
                  forth in the CBPA ordinance and shall follow guidelines established by
                  the [designated authority]. At a minimum, the water quality impact
                  assessment must contain:

                  1.    A hydrogeological element that:

 I                     ~~~~~~~a.    Describes the existing topography, soils, hydrology and
                               geology of the site and adjacent lands;

 I                     ~~~~~~b.    Describes  the  source  location  and  description  of
                               proposed fill material;

 I                     ~~~~~~C.    Indicates an estimation of pre- and post- development
                               pollutant loads in runoff; and

 I                     ~~~ ~~~~d.    Indicates the percent of site to be cleared for the project.

*                ~~~ ~~2.    A landscape element that:

                         a.    Describes plant species to be disturbed or removed; and

                         b.    Demonstrates indigenous plants are to be used to the
   *                          ~~~~~~~~~greatest extent possible.

                  3.    A wastewater element that:

 I                     ~~~~~~~~a.    Includes  calculations   and   location  of  anticipated
                               drainfield or wastewater irrigation areas; and

 I                     ~~~~~~b.    Describes  the  potential  impacts  of  the  proposed
                               wastewater systems, including any proposed mitigative
   *                          ~~~~~~~~measures for these impacts.

            o     The water quality impact assessment shall be of sufficient specificity
                  to demonstrate compliance with the CBPA ordinance. The impact
                  statement shall be prepared by qualified persons acting within the
                  limits of their professional expertise and license, and shall include the

                  following:

      *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~E-7










                   1.    Location of the components of the RPA, including the 100'
  I                    ~ ~~~~~~RPA buffer.

                   2.    Location of the RMA boundaries.

                   3.    Location and nature of any proposed encroachments into the
                          RPA buffer area including type of paving material; areas of
                          clearing or grading; and the location of any structures,
                          driveways, and other impervious cover.

                   4.    Type  and  location  of  proposed  stormwater  management
                          facilities and BMPs necessary to comply with performance
  I                    ~ ~~~~~standards for stormwater  management  in the  Performance
                          Standards section of the CBPA ordinance.

 I                ~~~ ~~5.    Calculation of pre- and post-development pollutant loading in
                          accordance with the Performance Standards section of the
                          CBPA ordinance.

                   6.    Identification and status of any required wetlands permits from-
                          federal, state or local agencies.

                   7.    An erosion and sediment control plan in accordance with the
   *                     ~~~~~~~local erosion and sediment control ordinance.

                   8.    A narrative describing the site; the impacts of the proposed
                          development on topography, soils, hydrology and geology; and
                          the measures taken to mitigate nonpoint source pollution.

*            o~~~~ The water quality impact assessment shall describe the following:

                    1 .    The nature of the proposed encroachment into the buffer area,
   I                    ~ ~~~~~including roadways,  paving  material,  utilities, and  wetland
                          mitigation sites;

 I                ~~~ ~~2.    The impacts of the proposed development on topography, soils,
                          hydrology, and geology;

 I                ~~~ ~~3.    The impacts of the proposed development on the water courses
                          within and adjoining the site, including impacts to aquatic flora
   *                     ~~~~~~~and fauna.

                    4.    Identification and status of any prerequisite wetlands permits
   I                   ~ ~~~~~~from federal, state, or local agencies;

        *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~E-8










      5.    A discussion of any proposed on-site collection and treatment
            systems for sewage or stormwater, including the impacts on
            receiving water courses.

      6.    Mitigative measures to be employed to reduce' impacts of the
            proposed development.

o     A water quality impact assessment shall, at a minimum, include:

      1.    A site drawing to scale which shows the following:

            a.    Location of the components of the CBPAs, including the
                  full 100' wide buffer area; and

            b.    Location and nature of any proposed encroachment into
                  the buffer area, including but not limited to [same as
                  CBLAD Model - "Minor WQIA"].

            c.    Type and location of proposed BMPs to mitigate any
                  proposed encroachment of the RPA.

      2.    Identification of the existing characteristics and conditions of
            the CBPAs.

      3.    A hydrogeological element that describes and indicates:

            a.    Existing topography, soils, hydrology and geology of the
                  site and adjacent lands.

            b.    Impacts of the proposed development on topography,
                  soils, hydrology and geology on the site and adjacent
                  lands, including but not limited to source, location and
                  placement of fill material, disturbance or destruction of
                  wetlands,  and  disruptions  and  reductions  of water
                  supplies and circulation patterns;

            c.    Location of and impacts on shellfish beds, submerged
                  aquatic vegetation, and fish spawning areas;

            d.    Estimation of pre- and post-development nonpoint source
                  pollution loads in runoff;

            e.    Estimation of percent increase in impervious surface on-
                  site and type(s) of surfacing materials used;

                                E-9










                          f. Percent of proposed land disturbance on the site;

                       g.    Anticipated   duration   and   phasing   schedule   of
 *                          ~~~~~~~~~construction project;

                       h.    Listing of all requisite permits from all applicable local,
                             state and federal agencies.

                4.    A landscape element that identifies and describes:

U                     ~~~ ~~~~a.    Location of all significant plant material on site, including
                             all trees six (6) inches or greater in diameter at breast
                             height (DBH);

*                     ~~~~~~~b.    Limits of land disturbance;

                       C.    All vegetation which will be disturbed or removed, and
 *                          ~~~~~~~~~their species;

                       d.    Measures for preservation and replanting of vegetation,
                             mitigation of damage, and use of indigenous plants.

                 5.    A wastewater element, where applicable, that:

I                     ~~~~~~~a.    Includes  calculations  and   locations  of  anticipated
                             drainfield or wastewater irrigation areas;

                       b.    Provides  justification  for  sewer  line  locations  and
                             describes construction techniques and standards;

                       C.    Analyzes any proposed on-site collection and treatment
                             systems, their treatment levels, and impacts on receiving

                             watercouses; and
                       d.    Describes  the  potential  impacts  of  the  proposed
                             wastewater systems, including measures for mitigation.
          o     The information required in the water quality impact assessment shall
                 be considered a minimum, unless the [designated authority]
                 determines that some of the elemnents are unnecessary due to the
                 scope and nature of the proposed use and development of land or
                 when the elements of the assessment are duplicative of information
                 submitted in other required plans under the CBPA ordinance.



     *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~E- 10








U                ~~~~~The following elements shall be included in the preparation and
                 submission of a water quality impact assessment:

                  1.    All of the information required for site plan review as specified
                        in the general provisions of the CBPA ordinance.

                  2.    A hydrogeological element [same as CBLAD Model - "Major
                        WGIA"].

                  3.    The   landscape   element  that  includes  those  additional
                        requirements in CBPAs that must be shown in a landscape
                        plan, including:

                        a.    Within the buffer area, trees to be removed for site lines,
                              vistas, and access paths;

 *                     ~~~~~~~b.    Vegetation required by any city ordinance to replace any
                              existing trees within the buffer area;

 *                     ~~~~~~~C.    Trees to be removed for shoreline stabilization projects
                              and any replacement vegetation required by this section;

 I                     ~~~ ~~~d.    Grade changes or other work adjacent to trees which
                              would affect them adversely. Specifications shall be
                              provided as to how grade, drainage, and aeration would
                              be maintained around trees to be preserved;
                        e.    Specifications for the protection of existing trees during
                              clearing, grading, and all phases of construction;

                        f.    Where areas are to be preserved, as designated on an
                              approved landscape plan, are encroached, replacement
                              of existing trees and other vegetation will be achieved at
   *                          ~~~~~~~~~a ratio of one inch in caliper of trees planted to one inch
                              in diameter breast height (DBH) for trees removed. Trees
                              planted shall be a minimum of 2" to 2.5" caliper class
   I                         ~ ~~~~~~and of a species approved by the Dept. of Parks and
                              Recreation.

   I                          ~~~~~~~~~In addition, the landscape plan must include a description
                              of the  potential  measures  for  mitigation.    Possible
                              mitigation measures include: [same as CBLAD Model -

                              "Major WOIA"].



                                            E-1 1










                  4.    A wastewater element, where applicable that: [same as CBLAD
 3                     ~~~~~~Model - "Major WQIA"].

                  5.    Identification  of  the  natural  processes   and   ecological
                         relationships inherent in the site, and an assessment of the
                         impact of the proposed use and development of land on these
                         processes and relationships.

            o     The following elements should be included in a water quality impact
                  assessment unless one or more such elements shall, in the judgement
I               ~ ~~~~of the review authority, not be reasonably necessary in determining
                  the impact of the proposed development or redevelopment:

1~~~~ ~ 1.    Location of the components of the RPA, including the 100'
                         buffer area.

I                ~~~~2.    Type  and  location  of  proposed  BMPs  to  mitigate  any
                         encroachment into, or reduction of, the buffer area.

*                ~~~ ~~3.    A scaled plan and text that:

 3                      a~~~~~~. Describes  the  existing  topography,  soil  information,
                               including depth to groundwater and infiltration rate
                               where appropriate, surface and groundwater hydrology,
                               wetland on the site and, if necessary, drainage patterns
                               from adjacent lands;

  *                     ~~~~~~b.    Describes the impacts of the proposed development on
                               topography, soils, surface and groundwater hydrology on
   *                          ~~~~~~~~~the site and adjacent lands;

                         C.    Describes potential adverse impacts on wetlands;


                         d.    Indicates the source location and description of proposed
   *                         ~~~~~~~~~excavation and fill material;

                         e.    Indicates, for any water-dependent activity, the location
   3                         ~~~~~~~~of, and potential adverse impacts upon, shellfish beds,
                               submerged aquatic vegetation, and fish spawning and
    *                         ~~~~~~~~~nursery areas;

                         f.    Lists all federal, state and local permits required for the
                               development of the site; and



       I                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E-1 2









                           g. Describes the  proposed  mitigation  measures  for the
  3                          ~~~~~~~~~potential adverse hydrogeological impacts of the project.

                  4.    A landscape element that:

 I                     ~~~~~~~a.    Identifies and delineates the location of a three of six-
                              inch (6") or greater diameter at breast height (DBH).
   3                          ~~~~~~~~Where there are groups of trees, stands may be outlined;

                        b.    Describes the impacts the proposed  development  or
   3                          ~~~~~~~~redevelopment will have on existing vegetation.  Such
                               information shall include:

                               (1)   Limits  of  clearing,  based  on  all  anticipated
                                     improvements, including buildings, drives, and
    *                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~utilities;

                               (2)   Delineation of all trees which will be removed; and

   I                          ~~~~~~~~(3)   Description of plant species to be disturbed or
                                     removed.

 I                     ~~~~~~C.    Describes the proposed measures for mitigation, which
                               should include: [same as CBLAD Model -"Major WQlA"].

1           o    ~~~~A water quality impact assessment shall be required as part of the
                  Natural Resources Inventory for development in areas designated as
3                ~~~~CBPAs.  It shall be prepared in accordance with the methods and
                  procedures prescribed by the [designated authority] and based on the
                  degree of land disturbance and water quality sensitivity of the lands
*                ~~~~~impacted.

                  Inventory features/resources which shall be depicted include, but shall
                  not be limited to, CBPAs, beaches, water courses, lakes, ponds,
                  wetlands, marshes, flood hazard areas, areas with steep slopes
                  (greater than 20% and woodlands.
I               ~ ~~~~The natural processes and ecological relationships inherent in the site
                  shall be identified, and an assessment of the impact of the proposed
3                ~~~~~development  on  these  processes  and  relationships  shall  be
                  considered.







                                            E- 13










Two Levels of Assessment:

1)    Minor Water Quality Impact Assessment.

      CBLAD Model

      "A minor assessment must demonstrate through acceptable calculations
      that the remaining buffer area and necessary BMPs will result in removal of
      no less than 75% of sediments and 40% of nutrients from post-
      development stormwater runoff. A minor assessment shall include a site
      drawing to scale which shows the following:

      1.    Location of the components of the RPA, including the 100' buffer
            area.

     2.    Location and nature of the proposed encroachment into the buffer
            area, including: type of paving material, areas of clearing or grading;
            location of any structures, drives or other impervious cover; and
            sewage disposal systems or reserve drainfield sites.

      3.    Type and location of proposed best management practices (BMPs) to
            mitigate the proposed encroachment."

      Other examples:

            o     1.    Location of the components of the RPA on-site or within
                        100' of the site, including the 100' buffer area. [Rest
                        same as CBLAD Model.]

            o     A  minor assessment  must demonstrate  through acceptable
                  calculations that the BMPs will result in meeting a "no net
                  increase" in pollution loading goal for new development, or a
                  ten  percent  (10%)  reduction  in  pollution  loadings  for
                  redevelopment.

                  A minor assessment shall include a site drawing to scale, and
                  other documentation which shows the following:

                  1.    Location of the RMA  as well as the location of the
                        components of the RPA, including the 100' buffer area.

                  2.    Pre- and post-development pollutant loads in runoff.




                                    E-14









   U                     ~~~ ~~~3.    Type and location of proposed  BMPs  to mitigate the
                                pollutant loading impact, and attain the pollutant removal
                                requirements.
                    o     Submission  of a  plan  of  development  that  demonstrates
    I                    ~ ~~~~~through the use calculations,  provided  for in the  Plan of
                          Development section of the CBPA ordinance, that the remaining
                          buffer area and necessary BMPs will result in removal of no
                          less than 75% of sediments and 40% of nutrients from post-
                          development stormwater runoff shall be deemed to have
                          satisfied the requirement for a minor WQIA.

                    o     A minor assessment shall include a site drawing to scale which
    *                     ~~~~~~~shows the following:

                           1.    Location of the RPA boundary.

                          2.    Location and nature of the proposed encroachment into
                                 the buffer area, including: [same as CBLAD Model].

                          3.    Type and location of proposed BMPs .. . [same as CBLAD
     3                          ~~~~~~~~Model].

                          4.    Documentation and other pertinent information certified
                                 by a licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.) or certified land
                                 surveyor that the proposed BMPs will mitigate the
                                 proposed encroachment. In the event that the proposed
                                 development is an accessory structure or addition to an
                                 existing single-family residence having an area of
                                 impervious cover no greater than 50% of the building
     3                          ~~~~~~~~footprint  of the  principle  structure,  the  [designated
                                 authority] may waive the requirement that the minor
                                 WQIA be prepared by a licensed P.E. or certified land
      3                          ~~~~~~~~surveyor.

*       ~~2)    Major Water Quality Impact Assessment.

              CBLAD Model

 I            ~~~"The information required in this section shall be considered minimum,
              unless the designated authority determines that some of the elements are
              unnecessary due to the scope and nature of the proposed use and

              development of land.



         *                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~E- 15








The following elements shall be included in the preparation and submission
of a major water quality assessment:

1.    All of the information required in a minor water quality impact
      assessment.

2.    A hydrogeological element that:

      a.    Describes  the  existing  topography,  soils,  hydrology,  and
            geology of the site and adjacent lands.

      b.    Describes  the  impacts  of  the  proposed  development  on
            topography, soils, hydrology, and geology on the site and
            adjacent lands.

      c.    Indicates the following:

      (i)         Disturbance or destruction of wetlands and justification
                  for such action;

      (ii)        Disruptions  or reduction  in the  supply  of water  to
                  wetland, streams, lakes, rivers or other water bodies;

      (iii)       Disruptions to existing hydrology including wetland and
                  stream circulation patterns;

      (iv)        Source location and description of proposed fill material;

      (v)         Location of dredge material and location of dumping area
                  for such material;

      (vi)        Location of any impacts on shellfish beds, submerged
                   aquatic vegetation, and fish spawning areas;

      (vii)       Estimation of pre- and post-development pollutant loads
                   in runoff;

      (viii)      Estimation of percent increase in impervious surface on
                   site and type(s) of surfacing materials used;

      (ix)        Percent of site to be cleared for project;

      (x)         Anticipated   duration   and   phasing   schedule   of
                   construction project;



                                E-1 6








1                ~~~~    ~~(xi)  Listing of all requisite permits from all applicable agencies
                               necessary to develop project.

                  d.    Describes the proposed mitigation measures for the potential
                         hydrogeological impacts. Potential mitigation measures include:

                  (i)          Proposed  erosion  and  sediment  control  concepts;
                               concepts may include minimizing the extent of the
   I                         ~ ~~~~~~~cleared  area,  perimeter  controls,  reduction  of runoff
                               velocities,  measures   to  stabilize  disturbed   areas,
   3                          ~~~~~~~~schedule and personnel for site inspection;

                  (ii)         Proposed stormwater management system;

I                 (iii~ ~     ~O) Creation of wetlands to replace those lost;

                  (iv)         Minimizing cut and fill.

            3.    A vegetative element that:

                  a.    Identifies and delineates the location of all significant plant
                         material on site, including all trees on site six (6) inches or 
 U                    ~ ~~~~~~greater in diameter at breast height or, where there are groups
                         of trees, said stands may be outlined.

I                 ~~~~~b.    Describe the impacts the development or use will have on the
                         existing vegetation. Information should include:

I                 ~~~    ~~(i)  General  limits of clearing,  based  on  all anticipated
                               improvements, including building, drives, and utilities;

I                 ~~~~   ~~(ii)  Clear delineation of all trees which will be removed;

                  (iii)        Description of plant species to be disturbed or removed.

                  C.    Describes  the  potential  measures  for  mitigation.  Possible
 *                      ~~~~~~~mitigation measures include:

                  (i)          Replanting  schedule  for  trees  and  other  significant
   U                         ~ ~~~~~~~vegetation removed for construction, including a list of
                               possible plants and trees to be used;






                                             E-17









                     ODi         Demonstration that the design of the plan will preserve
                                 to the greatest extent possible any significant trees and
     I                        ~ ~~~~~~~vegetation on the site and will provide maximum erosion
                                 control and overland flow benefits from such vegetation;

  I                ~~~~~(iii)    Demonstration that indigenous plants are' to be used to
                                 the greatest extent possible.

 1           ~~~~4.    A wastewater element, where applicable that:

                     a.    Includes calculations and locations of anticipated drainfield or
                           wastewater irrigation areas;

                     b.    Provides   justification   for   sewer   line   locations   in
                           environmentally-sensitive   areas,   where   applicable,   and
    *                     ~~~~~~~describes construction techniques and standards;

                     C.    Discusses  any  proposed  on-site  collection  and  treatment
                           systems, their treatment levels, and impacts on receiving
                           watercourses;
                     d.    Describes the potential impacts of the proposed wastewater
                           systems, including proposed mitigative measures for these
                           impacts.

 I           ~~~~5.    Identification of the existing characteristics and conditions of sensitive
                     lands included as components of the CBPAs, as defined.

               6.    Identification of the natural processes and ecological relationships
                     inherent to the site and an assessment of the impact of the proposed
                     use and development of land on these processes and relationships."

*       ~~Other examples:

              o     The following elements shall be included in the preparation and
                     submission of a major water quality impact assessment which
                     accompanies a site plan or subdivision application:
                     1 .    All information required as part of a minor water quality impact
                           assessment.

   3                ~~~ ~~2.    An environmental site assessment.

   1                ~~~ ~~3.    A clearing plan and landscaping plan.


         3                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~E-18








     4.    A stormwater management plan.

     5.    An erosion and sediment control plan.

      6.    A wastewater plan.

      7.    A hydrogeological study which includes an estimation of pre-
            and post-development pollutant loads in runoff.

o     A major water quality impact assessment shall include a site drawing
      to scale and a narrative statement as follows:

      1.    Existing topography, soils, and hydrology of the site.

     2.    Location of the RPA and buffer.

      3.    Location and nature of proposed encroachments into the RPA
            buffer area along roadways, utilities, and wetland mitigation
            sites.

      4.    Type  and  location  of  proposed  stormwater  management
            facilities and BMPs to mitigate the proposed encroachments.

      5.    Size  and  location  of anticipated  drainfield  or  wastewater
            irrigation areas, where applicable.

      6.    Narrative description of the following:

            a.    Geology of the site.

            b.    Impacts of the proposed development on topography,
                  soils, hydrology, and geology.

            c.    Estimates of the pre- and  post-development pollutant
                  loads in runoff.

            d.    Identification and status of any prerequisite wetlands
                  permits from federal, state, or local agencies.

            e.    A  discussion of any  proposed  on-site collection and
                  treatment systems, their treatment level, and any
                  impacts on receiving water courses.

            f.    Any additional relevant information as provided by the
                  applicant to assist in the review of the proposed project.

                               E-19










o     The information required for a major water quality impact assessment
      shall include the following:

      1.    A hydrogeological element that:

            a.    Describes the existing topography, soils, hydrology and
                  geology of the site and adjacent lands.

            b.    Describes the impacts of the proposed development on
                  topography, soils, hydrology and geology on the site and
                  adjacent lands.

            *C.    Describes the proposed  mitigation  measures  for the
                  potential hydrogeological impacts which may include:
                  [same as CBLAD Model].

      2.    A landscape element that describes the potential measures for
            mitigation of the water quality and land impacts including:
            [same as CBLAD landscape mitigation measures].
      3.    [No wastewater element].

Io    The following elements shall be included in the preparation and
      submission of major water quality impact assessment:

      1.   All the information required in a minor water quality impact
            assessment.

      2.    A  hydrogeological element that:   [same as CBLAD  Model,
            excepts eliminates items 7-11].

      3.    Describes the proposed mitigation measures for the potential
            hydrogeological impacts which may include: [same as CBLAD
            Model].

      4.    A landscape element that describes the potential measures for
            mitigation of the water quality impacts within the CBPAs.
            Possible mitigation measures include: [same as CBLAD Model].

      5.    A  wastewater element, where  applicable, that:   [same as
            CBLAD Model].

      6.    Identification of the existing characteristics and conditions of
            sensitive lands included as components of the CBPAs as
            defined in the CBPA ordinance.

                               E-20









              o  The following elements shall be included in the preparation and
                 submission of a major water quality impact assessment:
                 1.    All of the information required in a minor water quality impact
                        assessment.
                 2.    A hydrogeological element that:

                        a.    Describes the existing topography, soils, hydrology and
                              geology of the site and how these characteristics relate
                              to and affect adjacent lands in regard to water
                              absorption and runoff.

                        b.    Describes the impacts of the proposed development on
                              topography, soils, hydrology and geology on the site and
   *                          ~~~~~~~~how these impacts will affect adjacent lands in regard to
                              water absorption and runoff.

                 3.    Indicates the following:  [in addition to what is provided in
                        CBLAD Model and omitting location of and impacts on shellfish.
                        beds, submerged aquatic vegetation, and fish spawning areas]
                        (6)
                        a.    Percent of site to be cleared for project; in the case of a
                              final site plan, delineation of the construction footprint
                              shall satisfy this requirement.

*                ~~~ ~~4.    Describes the proposed mitigation measures for the potential
                        hydrogeological impacts.   Potential mitigation measures may
                        include: [same as CBLAD Model]

                  5.    A landscape element that, for the area within the RPA:

                        a.    Identifies and delineates the location of all significant
                              plant material, including all trees.   Where  there are
                              groups of tress, stands may be outlined.
                        b.    Describes the impacts the development or use will have
                              on the existing vegetation. Information should include:
                              [same as CBLAD Model].

 *                     ~~~~~~~C.    Describes the potential measures for mitigation wherever
                              located. Possible mitigation measures include: [same as
                              CBLAD Model].

                                            E- 21










6.    A wastewater element, where applicable, that:

      a.    Includes  calculations  and  locations  of  anticipated
            drainfield or wastewater irrigation areas.

      b.    Provides justification for sewer facility locations in RPAs.

     c.    Discusses any proposed on-site collection and treatment
            systems, their treatment levels, and impacts on receiving
            watercourses.

For a major WQIA, the following information must be included, at a
minimum [excerpted with emphasis on stormwater]:

1.    Hydrogeological element to include:

      a.    Existing topography,  and  hydrology  of the site and
            adjacent lands;

      b.    All existing watercourses, water bodies, and wetlands on
            or adjacent to the site;

      c.    Direction, flow rate and volume of stormwater runoff
            under existing conditions adjacent lands;

      d.    Location of areas on site where stormwater collects or
            percolates into the ground;

      e.    Groundwater levels, including seasonal fluctuations;

      f.    Location of floodplain and floodplain vegetation;

      g.    Impacts of the proposed development on topography and
            hydrology on the site and adjacent lands;

      h.    Disturbances  or  destruction  of  wetlands  and  RPA
            features and justification for such action;

      I  i.    Disruption  or reductions  in the supply  of water  to
            wetlands, streams, lakes, rivers or other water bodies.
            This may include, but is not limited to changes in the
            incidence or duration of flooding on the site and
            upstream and downstream from it.


                         E-22









                    j.    Disruptions to existing hydrology including wetland and
*                         ~~~~~~~~~stream circulation patterns;

                    n.    Estimation of pre- and post-development pollutant loads
                           in runoff and supporting documentation of all utilized
                          coefficients and calculations;
                    o.    Estimation of percent increase in impervious surface on
                           site and type(s) of surfacing materials used;

                    q.    Percent of site to be cleared for project and areas where
                          vegetation will be cleared or otherwise killed;

                    r.    Channel, direction, flow rate, volume, and quality of
                           stormwater that will be conveyed from the site, with a
                           comparison to the pre- development conditions;

                    S.    Detention and retention areas, including plans for the
                           discharge of contained waters, maintenance plans and
                           prediction of water quality in those areas;
                    t.    Detailed anticipated duration and phasing schedule of
                           construction project;
                     U.    Plan for control of erosion and  sedimentation which
                           describes in detail the type and location of control
                           measures, the stage of development at which they will
                           be put into place or used, and  provisions for their
                           maintenance.  Such a plan shall be filed in accordance
                           with the provisions of the E&S Control Ordinance;

                     V.    Verification  of  structural  soundness  of  stormwater
                           management facilities, including professional engineer of
                           class III B surveyor certification;
                     W.    Plan to establish a long term schedule for inspection and
I                        ~ ~~~~~~~maintenance of stormwater management facilities that
                           include all maintenance requirements and persons
*                          ~~~~~~~~responsible for performing maintenance;

                     X.    Any  other  information  which  the  developer  or the
                           [designated review authority] believes is reasonably
                           necessary   for  an   evaluation   of  the   proposed
                           development.


                                        E-23









Notes: (6)  It is recommended that the location of and impacts on shellfish beds,
           submerged aquatic vegetation, and fish spawning areas be included in
           the information submitted for a major WQIA; unless, it has been
           determined that such features are not found on or are adjacent to the
           project site.

Submission and Review Reauirements

     The following provisions have been set forth in CBPA models and local
CBPA ordinances describing how a WOIA should be submitted by the project
applicant to the local designated authority for review:

      CBLAD Model

      1.    (Five) copies of all cite drawings and other applicable information as
            required by [that part of the WQIA procedure which species
           information to be submitted] to the (Administrative Authority) for
            review.

      2.    All information required in this section shall be certified as complete
           and accurate by a professional engineer or a certified land surveyor.

     3.    A  minor water quality impact assessment shall be  prepared  an
            submitted to an review by the (Administrative Authority) in
            conjunction with the Plan of Development requirements of the CBPA
            ordinance.

      4.    A  major water quality impact assessment shall be  prepared  an
           submitted to an reviewed by the (Administrative Authority) in
            conjunction with a request for rezoning, special use permit, or in
            conjunction with the Plan of Development requirements of the CBPA
            ordinance, as deemed necessary by the (Administrative Authority).

      5.    As part of any major water quality impact assessment submittal, the
            (Administrative Authority) may require review by the CBLAD. Upon
            receipt  of  a  major  water  quality  impact  assessment,  the
            (Administrative Authority) will determine if such review is warranted
            and may request CBLAD to review the assessment and respond with
            written comments. Any comments by CBLAD will be incorporated
            into the final review by the (Administrative Authority), provided that
            such comments are provided by CBLAD within 90 days of the
            request.





                                    E-24









       Other examples, by order of complexity:

             o     1.    The  applicant shall submit  ()copies of the water quality
                         impact assessment to the (Administrative Authority) for review
   I                    ~ ~~~~~~prior to beginning any land disturbance.   The water quality
                          impact assessment shall be certified as complete and accurate
                          by a qualified expert such as a professional engineer prior to
                          submission to the (Administrative Authority).
                   2.    The  (Administrative  Authority)  may  seek  the  review  and
                          comment of the CBLAD for review and comment upon any
                          water quality impact assessment.

U~~~~ 0 1.                 When a major subdivision approved prior to the effective date
                          of this ordinance contains a number of development sites or
                          lots which require a WOIA, the developer may submit a WQIA
                          to cover a group of lots and/or development sites which require
                          a WQIA. It each of the development sites or lots would require
   I                    ~ ~~~~~only a minor WQIA, then only a minor WQIA would be required
                          for the group.

 *                 ~~~ ~~2.    To the extent authorized by the Commonwealth of Virginia,
                          information required [to be submitted for review] shall be
                          certified as complete and accurate by a professional engineer or
   I                    ~ ~~~~~~a certified land surveyor or by such other professional as may
                          be specifically licensed or certified by the Commonwealth of
   3                      ~~~~~~~Virginia to provide such certification.

             o     1 .    Documentation and other pertinent information required for a
   3                      ~~~~~~minor  WQIA  shall  be  certified  by  a  licensed  Professional
                          Engineer or certified land surveyor that the proposed BMPs will
                          mitigate the proposed encroachment into the RPA buffer area.
   U                      ~~~~~~In the event that the proposed development is an accessory
                          structure or addition to an existing single-family residence
                          having an area of impervious cover no greater than fifty (50)
   I                    ~ ~~~~~~percent of the building footprint of the principle structure, the
                          (designated authority] may waive the requirement that the
                          minor WQIA be prepared by a licensed Professional Engineer or
                          certified land surveyor.
 3                 ~~~   ~~2.    [Rest same as CBLAD].

             o     1 .    A WQIA shall be submitted in conjunction with the plot plan,
   *                      ~~~~~~~site plan and/or subdivision review process.

                                             E-25









                 2.    The [designated authority] may request review of the WOIA by
                       the CIBLAD. Any comments by CBLAD will be considered by
                       the Planning Commission provided that such comments are
                       provided by CBLAD within thirty (30) days of the request.

           o     1.    There  shall be submitted  to the [designated  authority] for
                       review such number of copies of all site drawings and other
                       required information as the [designated authority] may required.
                 2.    All information required for a WQIA  shall be prepared by a
                       professional engineer, a certified landscape architect or a
                       certified land surveyor, provided, however, that the landscape
                       element may be prepared by a qualified professional as
                       otherwise defined in the [City Landscape Ordinance].

                 3.    A WQIA shall be prepared and submitted to the [designated
                       authority] and reviewed by the [designated review authority] in
                       conjunction with the Plan of Development process of the CBPA
                       ordinance.

           o     1 .    The WQIA, as part of the Natural Resources Inventory, shall be
                       prepared and/or certified by a professional qualified to perform
                       environmental   inventories  and   evidence   of  professional
                       qualification shall be submitted. In the case of construction of
 I                    ~ ~~~~~~individual single-family homes, such Inventory shall be required;
                       however, professional preparation or certification shall not be
                       required unless deemed necessary by the [designated authority]
                        because of the magnitude of land disturbance or particularly
                       sensitive location.

*                 ~~~ ~~2.    Such plan shall be of sufficient scale and detail to depict the
                        location and area of all natural features and natural resources
                        present on the site. Such plan shall also depict the
                       development, if any, and the methods and procedures proposed
                       to ensure the protection of such natural features/resources
 I                    ~ ~~~~~~including water quality during and after construction. This plan
                        may simply note that such areas are not to be disturbed during
                       or after site development.

           o     1 .    Copies of all site drawings and other applicable information as
                        required for a minor or major WQIA shall be submitted to the

                        [designated authority] for review.



                                           E-26








U                 ~~~~~2.    All information required for a minor or major WQIA shall be
                        certified as complete and accurate by a professional engineer or
                        a certified land surveyor.
                  3.    All wetlands information shall be prepared and certified by a
                        qualified wetlands scientist.
                  4.    A  water quality impact assessment shall be prepared  and
 I                    ~ ~~~~~submitted to, and reviewed by, the [designated authority] in
                        conjunction with the preliminary site plan, or in conjunction
                        with a request for building permit or zoning permit if not site
                        plan or subdivision plan is required.
                  5.    Any  request  for encroachment  within  the  RPA  shall  be
                        accompanied by a water quality impact assessment.

*                 ~~~~6.    As  part  of  any  major  water  quality  impact  assessment
                        submittal, the [designated authority] may require review by the
                        CBLAD.   Upon  receipt  of a major  water  quality  impact
 I                    ~ ~~~~~assessment, the [designated authority] may request CBLAD to
                        review the assessment and respond with written comments..
                        -Any comments by CBLAD may be incorporated into the final
 I                    ~ ~~~~~review  by  the  [designated  authority)  provided  that  such
                        comments are provide provided by CBLAD within sixty (60)
 *                     ~~~~~~~days of the request.

            o     1.    Five copies of all drawings and other applicable information as
                        required for a minor WQIA and fifteen copies of all drawings
                        and other applicable information as required for a major WOIA
                        shall be submitted to the [designated authority] for review.

U                 ~~~ ~~2.    All information required for a water quality impact assessment
                        shall be certified as complete and accurate by a licensed
 3                     ~~~~~~~engineer, land surveyor or landscape architect.
                  3.    A  minor WQIA  shall be  prepared  and  submitted  to  and
                        reviewed by the [designated authority] in conjunction with the
                        Plan of Development.
                  4.    A  major  WQIA  shall  be  prepared  and  submitted  to  the
  I                    ~ ~~~~~~[designated  authority]   and   reviewed   by   the   Planning
                        Commission in conjunction with a request for rezoning, special
                        use permit, or in conjunction with the Plan of Development, as
                        deemed necessary by the Planning Commission and,



                                            E-27









            5.    As  part  of any  major  WQIA  submittal,  the  [designated
                  authority] may require review by the CBLAD. Upon receipt of a
                  major WQIA, the [designated authority] will determine if such
                  review is warranted...[rest same as CBLAD Model].

Evaluation Procedure

     The following provisions have been set forth in CBPA models and local
CBPA ordinances regarding the evaluation procedure to be undertaken by the
locally-designated authority for review of a submitted WQIA, and the findings
which shall be made pertaining to the environmental consistency of the proposed
project.

One Level of Assessment:

      o     The  (designated authority) shall review the WQIA  and determine
            whether the proposed development or redevelopment conforms with
            and is consistent with the intent, purpose and provisions of the CBPA
            ordinance. The (designated authority) will include in the determination
            whether the potential impacts of the proposed  development  or
            redevelopment have been adequately mitigated.  Upon determining
            that the impacts have not been adequately mitigated, the (designated
            authority)  shall require  additional  mitigation  as  a condition  for
            approval of the development or redevelopment or, when mitigation
            cannot be adequate, shall disapprove the proposal as inconsistent
            with the CBPA ordinance. In making a determination, the (designated
            authority) shall consider the cumulative impacts of the proposed
            development or redevelopment on water quality in relation to other
            existing and proposed development in (jurisdiction name).

     o     The (designated authority) shall review the WQIA to determine if the
            proposed development is consistent with the purpose and intent of
            the CBPA ordinance. A finding shall be made within thirty (30) days
            of submission by (i) approving the WQIA as submitted, (ii) approving
            the WQIA with any appropriate conditions, or (iii) providing comments
            specifically indicating any and all inconsistencies. (7)

      o     1.    Upon the completed review of the WQIA,  the (designated
                  authority) will determine if the proposed development or
                  redevelopment is consistent with the purpose and intent of the
                  CBPA ordinance and the applicable provisions within the Zoning
                  Ordinance and make a finding based upon the following criteria:
                  [same as CBLAD Model - "Major WQIA" evaluation criteria].




                                     E-28








   1                ~~~ ~~2.    The  (designated authority) may  require additional mitigation
                           where potential impacts have not been adequately addressed.
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~Evaluation of mitigation measures will be made ... [rest same as
                           CBLAD Model evaluation criteria items (3) and (4).

I       ~~Two Levels of Assessment:

              CBLAD Model

               1.    Upon  the  completed  review  of  a  minor  water  quality  impact
                     assessment, the (Administrative Authority) will determine that any
                     proposed modification or reduction to the buffer area is consistent
                     with the provisions of [the CBPA ordinance] and make a finding based
   3                ~~~~~~upon the following criteria:

                     a.    The necessity of the proposed encroachment and the ability to
                           place improvements elsewhere on the site to avoid disturbance
                           of the buffer area.

   I                 ~~~ ~~b.    Impervious surface is minimized.

                     C.    Proposed best management practices, where required, achieve
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~the requisite reductions in pollutant loadings.

                     d.    The development, as proposed, meets the spirit and intent of
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~[the CBPA ordinance].

                     e.    The cumulative impact of the proposed development, when
    I                    ~ ~~~~~~considered in relation to other development in the vicinity, both
                           existing and proposed, will not result in a significant
    *                     ~~~~~~~degradation of water quality.

               2.    Upon  the  completed  review  of  a  major  water  quality  impact
   U               ~ ~~~~assessment, the (Administrative Authority) will determine whether or
                     not the proposed development is consistent with the spirit and intent
                     of [the CBPA ordinance] and make a finding based upon the following
                     criteria:
                     a.    Within  any  RPA,  the  proposed  development  is  water-
                           dependent.
                     b.    The  percentage  of  existing  wetlands  disturbed  by  the
                           development. The number of square feet to be disturbed.


                                               E-29








                   C.    The development will not result in significant disruption of the
   1                    ~~~~~~~hydrology of the site.

                   d.    The  development will not result in severe degradation to
   *                    ~~~~~~~aquatic vegetation or life.

                   e.    The development will not result in unnecessary destruction of
   *                    ~~~~~~~plant materials on site.

                   f.    Proposed erosion and sediment control concepts are adequate
                         to achieve the reductions in runoff and prevent off-site
                         sedimentation.
                   g.    Proposed stormwater management concepts are adequate to
                         control the stormwater runoff to achieve "no net increase" in
                         pollutant loadings.

                   h.    Proposed revegetation of disturbed areas will provide optimum
                         erosion and sediment control benefits.

                   i.    The design and location of any proposed drainfield will be in
                         accordance  with  the  requirements  of  the  performance
                         standards section [of the CBPA ordinance].
                      j. The development is consistent with the spirit and intent of the
                         CBPA Overlay District.
                   k.    The  relationship  and  cumulative  effect  of  the  proposed
                         development on water quality and CBPAs has been considered.
*           ~~~3.    The  (Administrative  Authority)  shall require  additional  mitigation
                   where potential impacts have not been adequately addressed.
                   Evaluation of mitigation measures will be made by the (Administrative
                   Authority) based on the criteria listed above in subsections (1) and
                   (2).

*           ~~~4.    The  (Administrative  Authority)  shall  find  the  proposal  to  be
                   inconsistent with the purpose and intent of [the CBPA ordinance]
                   when the impacts created by the proposal cannot be mitigated.
 I               ~ ~~~Evaluation of the impacts will be  made  by the  (Administrative
                   Authority) based on the criteria listed in subsections (1) and (2).






                                            E-30








U      ~~Other examples:

              a A preliminary or final subdivision, use permit or site plan or plat for a
                    property which is subject to the CBPA standards set forth [in the
                    CBPA ordinance), and which encroaches on any portion of the RPA,
   I              ~ ~~~~shall not be approved unless such plan or plat meets the following
                    criteria:

                    1.   In the case of development where a minor WOIA is required,
                          the reduce buffer area, in combination with the proposed
                          BMPs, will achieve water quality protection, pollutant removal,
                          and water resource conservation which is at least the
                          equivalent of the full 100-buffer area.

                    2.   In the case of developments where a major WQIA is required,
                          the following are established in addition to the elements set out
                          in subsection (1) above:

                          a.    Within any RPA, the proposed development is water-
      I                        ~ ~~~~~~~dependent or is re-development.

                          b.    The disturbance of any wetlands will be minimized.

                          C.    The  development  as  proposed  will  not  result  in
                                significant disruption of the hydrology of the site.

                          d.    Proposed erosion and sediment control concepts are
                                adequate to achieve the required reductions in runoff and
                                prevent off-site sedimentation.

                          e.    Proposed   stormwater   management   concepts   are
                                adequate to control the stormwater runoff to achieve the
                                required performance standard for pollution control.

                          f.    Proposed revegetation of disturbed areas will provide
                                optimum erosion and sediment control benefits.

                          g.    The design and location of any proposed drainfield will
                                be in accordance with the requirements of the
                                Performance Standards section [of the CBPA ordinance].
                    3.    The failure of an owner or developer to establish that the above
                          criteria have been met may be grounds for disapproving a
                          submitted preliminary or final subdivision or site plan or plat.


                                             E-3 1









              aThe evaluation procedure sets forth criteria the (designated authority)
I               ~ ~~~will  use  in evaluating  the  water  quality  impacts  of  proposed
                 development. This evaluation will allow the (designated authority) to
                 determine the consistency of the proposed development project with
I               ~ ~~~~the stormwater management provisions of the CBP`A. Inconsistent
                  proposals can be modified so that the impacts are minimized or the
*                ~~~~~mitigation measures are enhanced.

                  1 .    Upon the completed review of a minor WQlA, the (designated
                        review authority) will determine if any proposed modification or
                        reduction to the buffer area is consistent with the provisions of
                        all applicable (city) ordinances and make a finding based upon
                        the following criteria: [same as CBLAD Model - "Minor WQIA"
                        evaluation criteria].

                  2.    Upon the completed review of a major WQlA, the (designated
                        authority) will determine if the proposed development is
                        consistent with the purpose and intent of [the CBPA ordinance]
 I                    ~ ~~~~~and  make  a finding  based  upon  the  following  criteria in
                        conjunction with the preliminary site plan review, subdivision
                        improvement plan review or construction plan review: [same as
                        CBLAD Model - "Major WQIA" evaluation criteria].
                  3.    The (designated authority) shall required additional mitigation
                        where potential impacts have not been adequately addressed.
                        Evaluation of mitigation measures will be made... [lsame as
                        CBLAD Model].

                  4.    The  (designated  authority)  shall  find  the  proposal  to  be
                        inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the CBPA ordinance
                        when... [lsame as CBLAD Model].

*~~~~~~ 0         .      The Planning Commission shall recommend additional mitigation
                        where potential impacts have not been adequately addressed
                        subject to final approval or modification by the Board of
 I                    ~ ~~~~~~Supervisors. Evaluation of mitigation measures will be made by
                        the Planning Commission based on the criteria listed ... [same as
                        CBLAD Model -"Minor WQIA" and "Major WQIA" evaluation
                        criteria].
                  2.    The  Planning  Commission  shall  find  the  proposal  to  be
                        inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the CBPA ordinance
                        when the impacts created by the proposal cannot be mitigated
 *                     ~~~~~~subject  to  final  approval  by  the  Board  of  Supervisors.

                                           E-32









 H                     ~~~~~~Evaluation of the impacts  will be  made  by the  Planning
                        Commission based on the criteria listed... .[same as CBLAD
                        Model - "Minor WQIA" and "Major WQIA" evaluation criteria].

           o     1 .    Upon the completed review of a minor WQ1A, the (designated
                        authority) will determine if any proposed 'Modification or
                        reduction to the buffer area is consistent with the provisions of
                        (the CBPA ordinance] and that the following criteria have been
                        satisf ied:
                        a .    The proposed encroachment is necessary due to the
                              inability to place improvements elsewhere on the site to
                              avoid disturbance of the buffer area.

 H                     ~~~~~~~b.    Impervious surface is minimized.

                        C.    Proposed BMVPs, where required, achieve the requisite
                              reductions in pollutant loadings.

                        d.    The development, as proposed, meets the purpose and
                              intent of this ordinance.

I                ~~~ ~~2.    Upon completed review of a major WQIA, the (designated
                        authority) will determine if the proposed development satisfies
 *                     ~~~~~~~~the following criteria:

                        a.    Within any RPA, the proposed development is water-
   3                         ~~~~~~~~dependent.

                        b.    Proposed erosion and sediment control concepts are
   3                         ~~~~~~~~adequate to achieve the reductions in runoff and prevent
                              off-site sedimentation.

                        C.    Proposed   stormwater   management   concepts   are
                              adequate to control the stormwater runoff to achieve the
   *                         ~~~~~~~~~requisite performance standard for pollution control.

                        d.    Proposed re-vegetation of disturbed areas will provide
                               optimum erosion and sediment control benefits.

                        e.    The cumulative impact of the proposed development,
                               when considered in relation to other development in the
                               vicinity, both existing and proposed, will not result in a
                               significant degradation of water quality.


       3                                   ~~~~~~~~~~~E-33








     I  o  1.    [Same as CBLAD Model evaluation criteria item (1) for minor
                 WQIA evaluation].

           2.    Upon completed review of a major WQIA, the (designated
                  authority) will determine if the proposed development is
                  inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the CBPA ordinance
                  and that the following criteria have been satisfied: [same as
                  CBLAD Model - "Major WQIA" evaluation criteria items (a), (b),
                  (f-k)].

            3.    The (designated authority) shall require additional mitigation
                  where potential impacts have not been adequately addressed.
                  Evaluation of mitigation measures will be made by the
                  (designated authority) based on the criteria listed above in
                  subsections (1) and (2). (8)

Notes: (7) It is recommended that the evaluation procedure include the option of
            a finding that a project is either (i) inconsistent with the purpose and
            intent of the local CBPA ordinance, or (ii) is environmentally-
            inconsistent in general, because of the inadequacy or inability of the
            proposed mitigation measures to address potential impacts to water
            quality. This should be based on specified evaluation criteria.

      (8)  See note #7.
























                                     E-34