Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
4 <br /> • Despite instances in Raleigh and Cary the state is characterized by rich supplies and low <br /> demand ; <br /> • As the state urbanizes the problems associated with surface water quality may in fact increase <br /> thereby necessitating policies such as water reclamation ; <br /> • Water reclamation refers to the process whereby wastewater is treated and used for non- <br /> potable purposes4lushing toilets , lawn care , etc . , <br /> • Water reclamation is both feasible and when done prior to development economical ; <br /> • OWASA has indicated interest in water reclamation and reclamation could be used in the <br /> development of Meadowmont and refurbishing of Finley Golf Course . <br /> To this , Jane Dunnick replied that given the issuance of special use permits in the Meadowmont <br /> development it will be difficult to force the developer of Meadowmont to install a water <br /> reclamation system . <br /> Okun mentioned that the phasing of Meadowmont provides a window of opportunity to require <br /> water reclamation . He added that irrespective of its applicability to Meadowmont water <br /> reclamation is sound policy that should be promoted by the Commission, so that future <br /> developers will conserve water and also recognize the added benefits of water reclamation . Okun <br /> reiterated such benefits to include : 1 ) constant supplies of water for residential and non- <br /> residential uses ; 2 ) economical before development . <br /> Following this , Richard Pratt asked if the charge of the water resources committee includes <br /> developing rules that determine off- set requirements for the purpose of wellhead protection . <br /> Additionally,: Pratt inquired that , if so then are the established rules based on scientifically sound <br /> data that is: relevant to Orange County . Mr . Cox responded that calculation of recharge areas can <br /> be done at the sub basin level with greater ease than at a site specific level . Mr . Pratt then stated <br /> that in his opinion establishing guidelines based on tangible , scientific evidence was a political as <br /> well as technical issue , and that his concern was whether or not any established rules were going <br /> to be based upon science . Mr . Cox replied stating that rules established by the committee will be <br /> based on tangible evidence , and that all of the physical attributes of the land will have an impact <br /> on determining recharge areas . <br /> William Glaze then inquired about the when the Water Resources Committee will conclude its <br /> task and when the Commission for the Environment will inherit their work . According to David <br /> Stancil , the Water Resources Committee will conclude their work by mid- 2000 . Dan Cox added <br /> that when the Commission for the Environment was formed it was assumed that the Water <br /> Resources Committee would eventually be imported into the Commission . The WRC asked that <br /> this not occur until after the work that WRC was doing with the United States Geologic Survey <br /> (USGS ) had concluded . Given this Glaze questioned the usefulness of a CFE liaison, at this <br /> juncture . Cox felt that a liaison would be useful because that person could gain significant insight <br /> into the process and knowledge presently employed by the Water Resources Committee . William <br /> Glaze suggested that possibly one of the prospective new members of the CFE may be an ideal <br /> candidate for the liaison position . Commissioner Gordon offered the suggestion that given the <br /> current three committee structure of the CFE and the addition of new members , a fourth <br />