Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority Community Water Supply Plan Update

1. Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority Community Water Supply Plan Update Public Meeting Monticello High School September 21, 2004 7:00 pm

2. Presentation Agenda • 2002 Community Water Supply Strategy • Need to Update Strategy • Goal for Update • Review of “Short List” Option • Project Schedule

3. 2002 CWS Strategy and Need to Update

4. Basic Components of February 2002 Community Water Supply Strategy • Capital Improvements • Water Conservation • Watershed Protection • Environmental Protection

5. 2002 Strategy – Capital Improvements • SFRR Four-Foot Crest • SFRR Dredging • Restore Mechums River PS and Increase Supply in Ragged Mountain 30-Year 50-Year • James River • Beaver Creek • Reservoir • Other Capital • Options

6. The Need to Update • New “Drought of Record” in 2002 • Improved Modeling Information • Lower Yield for Four Foot Crest • Uncertain Costs and Yield for Dredging DECISION: Update the Capital Improvement Options in the Community Water Supply Plan Based on 50-Year Horizon

7. Update - So Far • Existing Water Supply Adequate Until 2008 • Use of Beaver Creek in Drought Can Extend Adequacy to 2018 • Safe Yield Deficit in 2055 – 9.9 MGD

8. Update – So Far • The “Short List” • James River • Ragged Mountain Expansion • SFRR Four-Foot Crest • SFRR Dredging • Beaver Creek Reservoir

9. The Goal

10. The Goal • Obtain a Federal Permit That ... –Will Achieve 9.9 MGD of Added Capacity Over 50 Years –Acceptable to State and Federal Regulators – Acceptance to Local Community – Issues are Complex and Cross the Jurisdiction of Multiple Agencies

11. Federal and State Requirements To identify the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative taking into account: overall project purposes, feasibility, logistics, and cost. • Water Quality • Wetland Impacts • Stream Impacts • Stream Flows for Expanded Reservoirs • Threatened and Endangered Species • Cultural Resources • Recreational Resources • Highway and Bridge Issues Specific Issues That Must Be Addressed:

12. Federal and State Agencies • U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Norfolk District • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Virginia Department of Environmental Quality • Virginia Department of Health • Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries • Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Planning and Recreation • Virginia Marine Resources Commission • Virginia Department of Historic Resources Division of Resource Services and Review • Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritage

13. Local Agencies • Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority • Albemarle County • Albemarle County Service Authority • City of Charlottesville

14. The “Short List”

15. James River Option • Can Provide All 9.9 MGD Required • Could be Regional Project or RWSA Project • New Water Supply and Treatment Plant • Eventually Abandon Observatory WTP and Transfer from Sugar Hollow to Ragged Mountain • High Cost Among Options; Limited Project Phasing Capability

16. Ragged Mountain Expansion • Can Provide All 9.9 MGD Required • Combines Dam Rehabilitation and Expansion • May Include Mechums Pump Station Restoration; Requires Pipe Replacement from Sugar Hollow • Requires VDOT Approval at I-64 • Lower End of Costs Among Options; Phasing Capability

17. SFRR Expansion • Can Provide Only 2.9 MGD; Must Be Combined with Other Options • Four Foot Crest (Raise Dam by Four Feet) • May Require Bridge Replacements • Moderate Costs When Combined with Other Options; Phasing Capability • Measured Wetland and Stream Impacts Will Be Critical to Feasibility

18. SFRR Dredging • Can Provide Maximum of Approx. 5 MGD; Must Be Combined with Other Options • Volume of Dredged Spoil is Significant; Will Require Large Disposal Site; Environmental Impacts Will Depend on Site • Quality of Spoil Material Not Yet Confirmed • Costs Not Yet Quantified • Long-Term Maintenance Required and Sustainability Uncertain

19. Beaver Creek Reservoir • Crozet System Currently Uses 0.3 MGD; Master Plan Build-Out = Estimated 1.1 MGD Use in Future • Up to 2.6 MGD Available for Urban System; Must Be Combined With Other Options • Existing Reservoir; Low Cost to Implement • Lowers Costs when Combine with Other Options • May Be Used as an Interim Solution

20. Project Schedule

21. Project Schedule • January 2004 – Update Safe Yield Analysis • May 2004 – Identify Alternatives to Meet Future Safe Yield • July 2004 – Narrow alternatives to “Short List” using federal requirements • August 2004 – Initiate evaluation of “Short List” and discussions with regulators

22. Project Schedule • September 2004 – Public Meeting • October/November 2004 – Additional Public Discussions • Winter 2005* - Propose Selected Alternative to RWSA Board of Directors • Winter 2005* - Public Meeting on Proposed Selected Alternative *Schedule Subject to Change Depending on Negotiations with Federal and State Regulators

23. Project Schedule • Spring 2005* - Local Board Approvals of Selected Alternative • Spring 2005* – Make Application for Federal Permit for Selected Alternative *Schedule Subject to Change Depending on Negotiations with Federal and State Regulators