## North Carolina Department ofAgriculture and Consumer Services

Steven W. Troxler Commissioner
June 21,2012 

## N 

## C. Forest Service

Water DocketNumber EPA-HQ-OW-2012-0195 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Mail Code 2822T 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20460 Wib L. Owen Assistant Commissioner State Forester

Subject: Comments Regarding NOI to Address Forest and Logging Road Stormwater Discharges through the NPDES In addition to supportingthe enclosed comments ofthe Southern Group ofState Foresters, theNorth Carolina Forest Service provides the following comments specific to how stormwaterrunofffrom forest roads and associated forestry BMPs are managed in North Carolina. Logging Roads versus Forest Roads We support the USEP A's proposal to revise the federal Phase-! NPDES regulations to specifythat stormwater discharges from logging roads are not stormwater discharges "associated with industrial activity." We also support USEP A's effortto pursue flexible, non-regulatory options for managing stormwater discharges from forest roads. Over the 40 year history ofthe CleanWaterAct, silvicultural nonpoint sources ofpotential pollution have been appropriatelymanaged by delegation to states and subsequent enactment ofstate-based regulations and/or development offorestry best managementpractice (BMP) programs. However, it is concerning that USEPA appearsto be making a distinction between the status ofthe Phase 1-NPDES exemption for "loggingroads" versus "forestroads." A road that is constructed ormaintained upon forestland for the purposes offorest management and associated silvicultural activities may be used interchangeably for logging purposes or other forestry 

### I silvicultural purposes. The same processes are used to manage stormwaterrunoffand nonpoint source pollution from a road that exists within a forest, regardless ofwhether a specific road orroad segment is intended for logging or otherforestry use.

**~** We urge the USEPA to revise NPDES regulations to specifythat stormwater discharges from all "forest roads" are exempt from permitting requirements; notjustlogging roads. State Water Quality Rules and Regulatory Guidance North Carolina administrative code rules entitled the Forest Practices Guidelines Relatedto Water Quality (abbreviated as FPGs) were enacted in 1990 and require that all forestry sites which disturb soil to implement measures which prevent, restrain, control, and/or limit sedimentation into streams and bodies ofwater. On average, the N.C. Forest Service conducts upwards of3,000 to 4,000 water quality FPG compliance inspections annually. Overthe last 10 years, the overall statewide compliance rate with all ofthe FPGrules has averaged around 95%. It is our feeling thatthis high level ofcompliance, which includes measures to manage runofffrom forest roads, has contributed greatlyto the protection ofNorth Carolina's water resources.

1616 Mail Service Center. Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1616 Phone: (919) 857-4801 • FAX: (919) 857-4802 • www.ncforestservice.gov An Equal Opportunity Employer {continued on nextpage}Page 2. Date, 2012. North Carolina Forest Service. Docket# EPA-HO-OW-2012-0195

Additional state regulations limit certain forestry activities, including forest road placement, in an effortto protect water quality within geographically-specific regions ofthe state. Furthermore, in 2004 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers worked cooperatively with the N.C. Forest Service to develop guidance regarding forest roads in wetlands in an effortto minimize overall impacts to waters ofthe U.S. during forest road construction and maintenance, all ofwhich collectively addresses stormwaterrunofffrom such roads in wetlands. Forestry BMPProgram Management and Inter-Agency Cooperation The N.C. Forest Service is engaged in numerous aspects offorestry-related activities across the state, including monitoring forestry sites for compliance with water qualityrules. Technical BMP assistance and inspections are provided by our agency's field personnel in alllOO counties ofNorth Carolina. More in-depth technical assistance is provided bythe agency's Water Quality Foresters and a state-levelteam ofwater quality specialists. During the State Fiscal Year2010-2011, personnel in the N.C. Forest Service recorded in excess of27,700 hours devoted to water quality and BMP program delivery statewide. A wide range oftraining, education. and demonstration projects have been implemented in the last decade, in an effortto increase the awareness and functional knowledge offorestry BMPs with forest operators. These projects include videos, demonstrations, training workshops and a temporary bridgemat loan program for loggers to protect stream crossings when harvesting timber. TheN.C. Forest Service works closelywith the NC ProLogger Program to reach outto loggers across the state onthe importance ofusing BMPs. TheN.C. Forest Service works cooperativelywith the N.C. Department ofEnvironment andNatural Resources to manage compliance, education, funding and training on how to manage nonpoint source pollution from silvicultural activities. In 2012, the agency executed a revised Memorandum ofUnderstandingwith the N.C. Division ofLand Resources which describes in more detail how forestry-related land disturbing activities in North Carolinawill be monitored for compliance withthe state FPG rules, and how to streamline enforcement ofnoncompliant situations. Atthis time, our agency is working with the Division ofLand Resources to develop statewide workshops for interagencytrainingto reinforce how forestry sites are inspected and whatthe expectations are regarding compliance with staterules andthe use offorestry BMPs. ForestryBMPs and Roads In 2006 North Carolina's forestry BMP manual was extensivelyrevised with oversight from a multi-disciplinary technical committee. Among the many aspects offorest management that are covered inthis manual, we included detailed recommendations on managing, maintaining, constructing, and closing-out forest roads. In addition, North Carolinahas a supplemental publication for landowners for managing forest access roads in steep terrain, entitled "The Layman's Guide to Private Access Road Construction in the Southern Appalachian Mountains." ForestryBMPMonitoring, Research, and Acconntability TheN.C. Forest Service has undertaken recurring monitoring ofBMP use onforestry sites across North Carolina for nearly a decade. Monitoring ofBMP implementation across the state was conducted overtwo cycles ofsite evaluations occurring between 2000-2003, and again from 2006-2008. More than 770 loggingjobs were evaluated during these studies. Statewide, the implementation ofBMPs for forest roads were found to be 80% and 84%, respectively. Given the voluntary nature ofBMPs, this relatively high rate ofimplementation would illustratethat forest roads are largely being managed in a mannerwhich is sufficientto not contributeto widespread, pervasive,
or ongoing degradation ofwater resources. This summer, the N.C. Forest Service is undertaking a third cycle of statewide monitoring in an effort ofcontinuous improvement.

{continued on nextpage}Page 3. Date. 2012. North Carolina Forest Service. Docket#EPA-HO-OW-2012-0195 Beginning in 2007, the N.C. Forest Service partnered with the USDA-Forest Service Southern Research Station, N.C. State UniversityDepartment ofForestry, and N.C. Department ofAgriculture & Consumer Services Research Stations to conduct a paired-watershed research study to evaluate the effectiveness offorestry BMPs and to identifY any significant effects ofclearcuttimberharvesting on a wide range ofwater quality parameters in multiple perennial streams ofthe piedmont eco-region ofNorth Carolina. Thus farthe results indicate that when appropriate riparian buffers are established, and forestry BMPs are implemented, there are negligible impacts to water quality from clearcuttimber harvesting, which includes their associated forest orlogging access roads. Data collection and sampling will continue through 2013 at which time a full data analysis will occur and the results published in peerreviewed scientificjournals. This study is similar in nature to many other BMP effectiveness studies thathave been conducted across the country, nearly all ofwhich indicate that forestry BMPs are effective. The state-implemented regulatory standards, when coupled with market-driven forest certification programs, and the delivery offorest cost-share programs, collectively drive the accountability offorestry BMP implementation across North Carolina. The recurring monitoring ofBMP implementation reinforces the viability and value ofusing BMPs. The regulatory framework in North Carolina which governs forestry activities are founded upon the use of appropriate BMPs or other equally effective measures to protect water quality. Anecdotally, our agency's personnel have seen a marked increase inthe awareness and implementation offorestry BMPs as a result ofincreased accountabilityplaced uponthe forest industry through voluntary forest certification programs such as SF!, FSC, and Tree Farm. Likewise, when landowners participate in federal or state cost share programs for forest management on their property, the landowners are contractually obligatedto implement forestry BMPs. The essence ofmanaging non point source runoffpollution from forestry sites is based upon the flexibility for each state to identifY and implementrules, procedures, or programs which are most likely to have success in their respective state. ForestryBMP Costs, Funding, and Measures ofSuccess The costs associated with the management ofthe overall water quality and BMPprogram within the N.C. Forest Service can be roughly evaluated for the State Fiscal Year 20I0-2011 by takingthe number ofhours dedicated to water quality and BMP program delivery (27,700 as noted earlier), and applying a conservative personnel pay rate to those hours ($25/hour; not including operating costs or fringe benefits). The resulting cost of$692,500 does not account for individual3!9-Grants or other grants awarded to the N.C. Forest Service during thattime which were specifically used for water quality, BMP, and nonpoint source project implementation. Given the flexibility that the USEPA has in administering stormwater discharges through the NPDES, we encourage a broader application ofthe USEPA's authorities described within Section 319 ofthe Clean Water Actto provide funding assistance to state forestry agencies in the ongoing development and monitoring ofsilvicultural and forest road BMPs. Since 2004, the N.C. Forest Service has produced a "Year in Review" brochure which summarizes water quality and nonpoint source program accomplishments and success stories which have directly resulted from the availability ofSection 319 grants (and other grants)to the N.C. Forest Service. Enhanced monitoring offorest roads, and other forestry-related activities, could bepossible through additional, recurring funding allocations to the N.C. Forest Service, eitherthrough the Section 319-Grant Program or other funding sources. Lessons Learned In 2011 the N.C. Forest Service completed a report summarizing lessons learned from the 2006 revision ofthe state's forestry BMP manual. With the manual having been in-place for a few years, we solicited customer feedback onthe merits and applicability ofthe new forestry BMPs andthe manual itself. This report, entitled "Lessons Learned onthe Revision ofthe North CarolinaForestrv BMP Manual" focuses on the state BMP manual; however it contains some key lessons learned which could be applicable to the USEPA's effort to address stormwater discharges from forest roads in a flexible, non-regulatory and stakeholder-driven process.
{continued on nextpage}Page 4. Date, 2012. North Carolina Forest Service. Docket#EPA-HO-OW-2012..0195 Since the inception offorestry BMPs over 40 years ago, much ofthe focus on training and education has centered upon loggers, foresters, large-acreage land managers, and 'forest operators' who typically have a direct influence on the actions undertaken upon forestland, with regards to timber management, harvesting, road work and similar activities. One lesson learned in retrospect is thatthere needs to be a renewed emphasis offocus to reach nonindustrial private forest landowners. These individual orfamily-owned forests are vital to the sustainability ofour nation's forests, particularly in the eastern halfofthe United States. Reaching outto forest owners will be timeconsuming, costly, and challenging to quantify. But increasing our collective education and training will go a long way towards implementing effective measures for preventing, controlling, or otherwise managing nonpoint source pollution from silvicultural activities. ForestRoad InventoryImpractical Noteworthy in the Notice ofIntent are detailed descriptions ofhow various federal land management agencies inventory, manage, and track the usage ofroads on their lands. While we applaud those federal agencies for their work on this matter, there can be no expectation that non-federal forest owners undertake such a similar inventory oftheir roads. Such an impractical requirementto inventory and report onthe extent offorest roads by each forest property owner in the United States would overwhelm the USEPA or its delegated state agency with data and informationthat frankly would be oflittlevalue; while at the same time could be construed as de-facto permitting or undue property encumbrance. In addition, the coststo our nation's forest owners for inventoryingtheir roads would unquestionably drive more conversion offorest lands to other non-forest land uses, as property owners would continue to be "penalized by policy" for their intent to sustain the forests ofthe United States. To learn more about the potential financial hardship that NPDES permitting for forest roads would incur, we encourage the USEPA to evaluate a 20II reportprepared bytwo professors from N.C. State University, entitled "Potential Administrative and Economic Impacts ofNPDES Permit Requirements for Forest Roads in the South," available atthe following website: http://nafoalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/Road-Permit-Costs-in-Southl.pdf We appreciate this opportunityto contribute our comments regarding this important issue for forestry.



# ;;2l~lOU1 Wib L. Owen Enclosure: Comments of the Southern Group ofState Foresters