County water authorities may play bigger role with dredging study

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Monday, November 9, 2009

The Albemarle County Service Authority’s (ACSA) Board of Directors is considering whether to pay for certain tasks that were eliminated from a dredging feasibility of the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir. Earlier this year, the authority refused to contribute to a study because the board said dredging the reservoir to its original capacity would not alone be enough to meet the community’s water needs in 2055.

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20091105-ACSA-Dredging

Last month, the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) Board of Directors awarded a contract to HDR Engineering  to perform the study, largely at the request of the Charlottesville City Council. Council agreed to pay for tasks in the study that directly related to adding water capacity at the reservoir. In October, they reduced the scope of work in order to lower the cost of the study.

John Martin (right) asks a question of RWSA Executive Director Tom Frederick

Tom Frederick, Executive Director of the RWSA, has said on multiple occasions since then that the study might not produce an accurate estimate for the cost of dredging. He appeared before the ACSA Board at a special work session held on November 5, 2009.  One item removed from the list of studies was a $25,000 beneficial re-use study, where dredged sediment would be examined to determine its commercial value.

“The more sediment that can be used [commercially], the less that you have to worry about disposing it, which may reduce the cost of dredging,” Frederick said. He added that a contractor may be able to sell the sediment as fill for other construction projects.

Additionally, Frederick said only two potential dewatering sites would be analyzed under the reduced scope, whereas there are at least four possible locations that have been discussed.

“If this community wants to study all four in detail, we’re going to have put up more money than we’ve already offered,” Frederick said.

ACSA Director John Martin (White Hall), a supporter of the adopted community water supply plan, said he wanted to know what role the ACSA could play to make sure the feasibility study provides objective data.

“My personal attitude is that this feasibility study shouldn’t be done at all,” Martin said. “But if it’s going to be done, it should be done right.”

Richard Carter (Jack Jouett) said the ACSA Board should become more proactive in supporting the 50-year plan, but also should make sure that City Council’s concerns are satisfied. Fellow directors agreed, but agreed to take up whether to fund the beneficial re-use study and the study of the two additional dewatering sites at its next meeting on November 19, 2009.

Frederick said that he welcomed additional ideas about the water supply plan, and said the community is benefiting from the discussion.

“We are very hopeful that a much better plan and cost will come forward from the studies we are currently doing than what was offered by Gannett Fleming in August 2008,” Frederick said.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 - Wagner welcomes Frederick and explains why he was invited to speak
• 02:30 - Frederick updates ACSA on where the dredging feasibility study stands
• 04:40 - Frederick says dredging can be done at any time outside of the 50-year-plan
• 07:00 - Frederick traces history of the particular dredging feasibility study
• 08:50 - Frederick says Gannett Fleming's 2004 study of dredging was not a full feasibility study
• 15:45 - Frederick describes why he thinks the reduced scope of the story will be inferior
• 16:45 - ACSA Legal Counsel Jim Bowling asks about what happens in a beneficial reuse study
• 17:45 - Liz Palmer (Samuel Miller) asks why Council reduced number of dewatering sites from 4 to 2
• 19:40 - Palmer asks how much study of dewatering site alternatives will be needed to satisfy Clean Water Act
• 24:15 - Frederick says DEQ and Army Corps of Engineers ratified plan with permits
• 25:00 - Jim Colbaugh (Scottsville) asks what goal of HDR dredging feasibility study
• 27:00 - Frederick explains ramifications of not conducting a beneficial reuse study
• 30:30 - Palmer asks about Schnabel looking at 13 foot increase
• 34:10 - Richard Carter (Jack Jouett) asks logistical question about dredging
• 36:40 - Frederick describes how dredging process would work if someone wants the fill
• 38:00 - Carter asks about the status of the 50 year plan
• 39:15 - Palmer explains some of the logistical challenges of dredging the South Fork
• 40:00 - John Martin (White Hall) asks about how various elements of the feasibility study will be paid for
• 45:40 - Martin asks when first public meeting would be held
• 46:30 - Martin says he wants study to be done right if it is going to be done at all
• 49:30 - Colbaugh asks about the effects of raising the existing dam by 13 feet
• 53:00 - Palmer says Gannett Fleming never produced an exhaustive study of replacing the old dam
• 54:10 - Frederick describes how Schnabel Engineering is approaching the question of studying raising the existing dam
• 57:30 - Palmer said it was her recollection that City Council Edwards directed RWSA to have Schnabel study raising existing dam
• 1:02:45 - Palmer asks question about studying pipeline alternatives
• 1:11:45 - Frederick says supporters of the adopted water supply plan need to be more vocal in their support
• 1:16:00 - Carter says ACSA needs to carefully determine if it wants to be an advocate for existing plan
• 1:20:00 - Palmer asks about Frederick's upcoming trip to Richmond to discuss dam safety concerns with Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board
• 1:22:00 - Frederick says Virginia Dam Safety Division is trying to determine who really owns Raggged Mountain Dam
• 1:26:45 - ACSA Chair Don Wagner comments on the water supply plan
• 1:30:45 - Martin thanks Frederick for his hard work in the face of personal abuse
• 1:31:15 - Frederick said he is getting more e-mails from citizens about restoring Sugar Hollow pipeline