Orange County NC Website
Neuse Basin rules came into effect, we were already able to meet those. I think with the Jordan Lake <br />nitrogen requirements coming dawn the pipe, we're going to be able to meet those as well with our South <br />Durham facility. The County is working on upgrading their plan and it doesn't have that capability yet. But <br />they're working on a planned expansion for that to meet those nitrogen requirements. As far as the city is <br />concerned, we've tried to look ahead and provide that level of protection for Jordan Lake particularly and <br />Falls Lake as well. In the case of Jordan, hoping that we would someday be drinking that same water we <br />discharge to. We have a particular interest in protecting that water I think that no one else probably will have. <br />Because I don't believe anybody else will be in the unique situation of discharging into and drinking out of the <br />same reservoir. <br />Dr. Moreau: Would you send me a copy of that protection program for Jordan? I have not seen it <br />recently. I'd be interested in that. One point I do want to make is that Ed Holland, you were Triangle J when <br />that started. Ed was sort of a key staff person in that. I think there's some really goad things that came out of <br />that process for the region as well as for North Carolina. A lot of people have put a lot of effort into that. And <br />I don't think sometimes some of the newer folks coming in know that history and don't realize where we've <br />come from. We've come a long way. That's not to say we don't still need to do more. But we've done a lot. <br />We just need to recognize that we've done that. It would be a lot worse if we hadn't done that too. <br />Dan Okun: We need to prepare and learn what to do by looking at what they are doing in the <br />western part of the United States. Growth is making the demands increase which we will have to pay far. <br />We need to consider what is happening around the country. We could manage or reclaim our water for other <br />uses. Water reclamation requires early planning. Make reclamation very economical. It can be done for <br />small and large communities alike. We have state regulations for non-portable uses. <br />Dr. Moreau: One of the questions is haw da we initiate that process of water reuse. We've had a <br />couple of aborted efforts, Motorola, I guess, was negotiating with Durham. Wasn't there a study on <br />Meadowmont? <br />Dan Okun: The best example is what Cary has done with a golf course using reclaimed water. It can <br />be done if there is some initiative on the part of the communities and the engineers. We need to examine our <br />options and get it in the early planning stages. <br />Don Cox: One of the big problems is that there is no demand for reclaimed water. One way to <br />create the demand is through the local subdivision ordinances. It would require local communities to say this <br />is what you have to do to develop this subdivision. <br />Dan Okun: Whenever there is a water shortage, people will use reclaimed water to water their <br />shrubs and lawns. This is beginning to be done just because people must conserve water. <br />Bill Strom: I wasn't on the Council in Chapel Hill when it was discussed at Meadowmont, but it's not <br />going to happen by the private sector necessarily. There's a legislative approach that's going to have to be <br />taken in the communities by elected officials that think this is important. For example, Dr Moreau you <br />mentioned Meadowmont, and a dual system was proposed and it was negotiated away because the <br />developer took it away as other requests were made and the approval was negotiated out. It really does <br />require some legislative will to change the paradigm. <br />Chair Jacobs: As I recall, even the University was approached about it's golf course and decided to <br />just suck water out of Morgan Creek rather than be part of doing something a little mare creative. My <br />question had to do with inter basin transfer. Could you just outline why we don't like inter basin transfer? My <br />understanding is the State sets a threshold of two million gallons per day where you raise the flag of concern. <br />If it's something that we discourage, why talk about such a large amount? If it's less we shouldn't worry <br />about it, or it's not worth regulating? How do we get to that? <br />Dr. Moreau: Well, you have to agree on some sort of diminimus level. You're not going to regulate <br />every little garden hose that crosses a ridgeline. And frankly, I don't know why two million gallons a day. It <br />may have been just looking at what already existed in making that judgement. The real argument against <br />inter basin transfer is one of water rights. There may have been others, but I remember Senator Roby Nash. <br />When you start talking about running that water from Siler City to Zebulon, there was this proposal in 1957 to <br />run water from the Yadkin River to Burlington -the so-called seven cities proposal. Senator Nash spent his <br />lifetime in the legislature making darn sure that was not going to happen. The legislation that was written in <br />same of the very cumbersome stuff that OWASA had to deal with in getting the permit for Cane Creek came <br />out of that legislation that was very restricted on who could do that. The case an Jordan Lake was very <br />political dealing with Senator Rand and the perception that the Cape Fear River in Fayetteville was going to <br />be dried up by this transfer. Eight million gallons a day was transferred against a minimum low flow in <br />Fayetteville of 575 million gallons a day. The whole issue on Virginia Beach was a water rights, not only a <br />