Minutes 03/24/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TUESDAY MARCH 24, 1981 - favorable resolution of the downstream release criteria at Philpott. A second option would be a joint action with the county. This could be by sharing in the raw water, treatment, and transmission facilities available at Philpott Reservoir. A joint action with the county could also entail the Smith River intake at Koehler along with increased transmission and expansion of the city's existing filter plant to account for both city and county requirements. 4. It is recommended that if further examination of a joint venture with the county at either the existing city filter plant site or the Philpott site is pursued, the city and the county jointly determine demand requirements, cost sharing estimates, and financing alternatives for the plant, line, and operation and maintenance costs. -.. Impact Of Regulatory Requirements On Alternatives In addition to the State Water Control Board's enforcement of riparian rights which require the discharge below any intake facility of at least the 7-day 10-year low flow, the city must obtain permission from Henry County to impound and withdraw water from within the county's boundaries. Although the law appears vague as to intakes, as is the case of Smith River, it is clear as to its application to impoundments. Section 15.1-332.1 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, provides that "no...municipality shall impound any waters in the Common- wealth within the boundaries of another county...without first obtaining the approval of such county..." In the absence of such approval from Henry County, the city would seek the convening of a special court to request a variance in the law. Not only does this law effect the proposed impoundment on Reed Creek, but also the raising of the city's existing dam on Beaver Creek. Thus, whatever alternative is selected, the city should immediately seek permission from the county to construct the improvements. If the county's response is negative, the city should seek appeal at once through the courts with substantiating data in order that a ruling can be made expeditiously. ,,- The Virginia State Water Study Commission as a part of its task to evaluate Virginia's present and future water source needs is presently examining the authorization of non-riparian use (legalization of interbasin transfer) when there is an outstanding social need and no other alternatives are available. The Commission will call upon the General Assembly to consider the above as a part of its proposal to alter riparian doctrine by giving water management authorities a role in the resolution of water disputes. Other regulatory requirements applying to all the water source alternatives discussed in this report are the technical reviews by the State Health Department and State Water Control Board and the submittal and approval of the Corps of Engineers' permit for construction of structures within "navigable" or tributaties to navigable waters. The Corps should be contacted prior to submittal of the permit package. A report from Wiley & Wilson, presented by this firm's Mr. Garland Page, on the status of interim improvements and the schedule for long-range improvements to the City's Water Pollution Control Plant, indicated that current interim improvements should be completed by April 1, 1982