Regional Sewage Treatment Plant Controversy Timeline

Wednesday August 06, 2008
Geoff Hamill
Staff Writer

DEP = West Virginia Dept. of Environmental Protection
PCC = Pocahontas County Commission
PSD = Pocahontas County Public Service District
PSC = West Virginia Public Service Commission
STP = sewage treatment plant

2002

January 17: DEP issues compliance order for Snowshoe to upgrade its sewage treatment plants.

August: Snowshoe enters into consent orders with DEP regarding past violations of sewage discharge permits, dating back to June 2000.

September 17: During a PCC meeting, landowners, represented by Russell Holt, voiced opposition to Snowshoe’s proposed new STP, which would drain into Cupp Run. The landowners argued that the new STP, to be built on Snowshoe property, would use up the allowable limits for discharge into the Upper Elk River and prevent further development in the valley.

September 20: PSC hearing on request by Snowshoe Water and Sewer to build 180,000 gal./day STP on Snowshoe Road on Cupp Run (future Site 7). Snowshoe planned to build the plant in three phases: Phase I â?? 90,000 gallons; Phase II â?? 45,000 gallons; Phase III â?? 45,000 gallons. Hearing was not completed and was scheduled for completion on January 2, 2003. Landowners in the valley, including Holt, opposed the permit.

2003

January 2: Follow-up PSC hearing ends abruptly when Snowshoe Water and Sewer announces they are withdrawing application to build new STP along Snowshoe Road.

January 7: At PCC meeting, Kermit Friel, of the PSD, and J.D. Morgan, of Snowshoe Water and Sewer, discuss the need for a regional STP.

Feb 15-16: Inspections by DEP reveal continuing violations at both of Snowshoe’s STPs, six months after Snowshoe entered into consent decree with DEP.

March 17: Snowshoe applies to PSC to upgrade its existing treatment plants.

April 3: Holt files notice of intent to sue US EPA, the DEP, and Snowshoe Water and Sewer, Inc. under the Clean Water Act for Snowshoe’s violations and the agencies’ failure to remedy the violations.

May: DEP files suit against Snowshoe for continuing wastewater violations.

May 19: Snowshoe modifies its application to upgrade its STPs to only include interim measures to come into compliance (Phase I), pending a determination if a regional plant could be built to serve Snowshoe and the surrounding areas.

July 1: County applies for funds for regional STP. Estimated total construction cost was approximately $13 million. Estimated monthly cost to customers of the completed plant was $36 a month. Average operating cost of the plant was an estimated $521,354.

July 24: Sharp farm site discussed as possible location for regional STP. The owner of the site, Barbara Sharp Smith, lives in Texas.

August 6: Inspection by DEP reveals numerous continuing violations by Snowshoe Water and Sewer, Inc.

August 18: Follow-up inspections by DEP reveas continuing wastewater violations at Snowshoe.

2004

February 17: Snowshoe representative J. D. Morgan expresses support for regional STP at PSD meeting.

November 17: Snowshoe and PSD present plans for regional STP at Sharp Farm site at meeting of Elk Headwaters Association. The plant would have a maximum capacity of 1.5 million gallons per day and serve customers at Snowshoe, Slaty Fork, Linwood and areas between.

2005

February 1: PSD files formal application to PSC to build STP at Sharp farm site.

February 16: PSD votes unanimously to acquire Sharp property for STP.

March 1: Tom Shipley voices opposition to the eminent domain taking of Sharp farm at PCC meeting. Commission president Joel Callison tells Shipley that an engineering firm had determined the best location for the site and, “I’m not going to change any of that.” Commissioners Reta Griffith and James Carpenter concur with Callison that the project should move forward, as planned.

March 23: PSC refers PSD application to Administrative Law Division because of opposition to project. The PSC had received 10 intervenor requests and 20 letters of opposition to building the project at the Sharp farm site.

May 3: Tom Michael, PSD attorney, says the board is pursuing a set of follow-up studies on the geology of the site and the impact on the Elk River crayfish.

May 5: Shipley runs full-page ad in Pocahontas Times opposing the Sharp farm eminent domain.

June 7: Shipley presents petition with more than 800 names to PSD. The petition acknowledges the need for a STP, but opposed the taking of the Sharp farm site.

June 14: PSC grants extension to due date for Administrative Law Division to make decision on Sharp farm site from August 30 to September 29.

June 23: Public hearing at Marlinton. Michael announces that the PSD is seeking a new site for the STP. “We have every intention of moving away from the existing [Sharp farm] site,” he said.

August 16: Special meeting of the PSD. Michael says Sharp farm is still under full consideration. “We’ve come to two conclusions. One is that there is no engineering or environmental, or historic reason that we can’t use the existing [Sharp farm] site. The other conclusion is that, based on the cost of the other alternatives and the impact on rates, we can’t justify moving it and would recommend that this board stay where we’re at with the existing site,” he said.

October 4 and 5: Formal public hearings by PSC administrative law judge Keith George in Marlinton. County residents, including Dave Sharp, Arol Wulfing, Tom Lanier and John Leyzorek speak out strongly against the use of the site. Thrasher Engineering testified for the PSD that the site was chosen for a variety of reasons including costs. Snowshoe General Manager Bill Rock testifies in support of the project as planned.

November 14: West Virginia Council of Trout Unlimited withdraws support for the Slaty Fork project, citing new information obtained on the potential danger of water pollution in karst terrain.

December 5: PSC administrative law judge Keith George rules that Slaty Fork project should be approved. Rock says, “we are empathetic to the Sharp family but we are glad the judge ruled the way he did.”

2006

January 24: DEP dismisses lawsuit against Snowshoe for wastewater discharge violations.

January 26: Pocahontas Times reports that Governor Manchin will make state property available for the STP if county officials request it.

February 21: PSC authorizes PSD to construct a regional sewage treatment plant at Sharp farm location to service approximately 1,981 customers in Pocahontas County.

April 18: George Phillips proposes at PSD meeting to use state property at Slaty Fork at former Rail Authority site for new STP. Phillips proposes a joint project with WVU to reduce project costs.

May: DEP says STP discharging into Upper Elk River will need a water-cooling system to prevent the discharge from harming trout habitat.

August 3: PSD Chairman Calvin Hill resigns, citing health problems and frustration with the PCC and project planners. Hill was opposed to the use of eminent domain for the STP project.

September 6: WV Supreme Court refuses to hear appeal by challengers of the PSC’s permits for Sharp Farm site for STP.

October: PSD says Slaty Fork STP project will cost an estimated $21.6 million.

November 14: Eight Rivers Safe Development, Inc., chartered by state as non-profit corporation. The organization’s stated purpose was to encourage and advocate the conservation and protection of karst, caves and karst landscapes and to promote safe development in these areas.

November: Snowshoe Property Owners Council (SPOC) sends letter to the Upper Greenbrier Public Service District and the Pocahontas County Public Service District notifying them that property owners and customers of Snowshoe Water and Sewer, Inc., had not been properly and lawfully notified as to the sale of the wastewater treatment facilities or the increase in sewer rates that will result.

November 28: Slaty Fork Farm Owners Association (SFOA) letter to PSD, objecting to the Sharp Farm location. SFOA president G. Ernie Ramos, Jr. writes that his group would like to see the plant moved to state-owned property (former Rail Authority site), out of sight of the highway, where it might have less impact on property values and the quality of life in the community.

December 21: Eight Rivers Safe Development, Inc. files a formal complaint against the DEP for the issuance of a FONSI and failure to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for an STP at Sharp farm site.

2007

February 22: WV DEP files answer in circuit court denying all allegations of Eight Rivers complaint.

March 27: Delegation of conservation groups meet with PCC to voice opposition to proposed STP at Sharp farm site.

April 3: PCC votes unanimously to have the PSD view the presentation by 8 Rivers Safe Development on the dangers of an STP on karst terrain and an alternate plan. Eight Rivers proposed an upgrade of Snowshoes facilities along with smaller cluster STP plants built at intervals as needed in the valley.

May 8: Eight Rivers gives presentation on alternate “cluster” plan to PSD.

May 27: After stating their intention to discuss Eight Rivers’ alternate plan at this meeting, PSD does not discuss it.

June 6: The state Infrastructure and Jobs Development Council votes to fund the $4.5 million first phase of the $17 million Sharp farm STP project after hearing objections from a landowner, several environmental groups and others.
The first phase of the project would transfer Snowshoe’s existing STP, valued at $2 million, to the PSD. The project also would receive a $2.5 million loan from the council and a $5,000 grant from the PCC.

July 3: Members of SPOC address the PSD, informing them that the council has started a legal fund to fight the PSD’s takeover of the treatment facilities at Snowshoe Mountain Resort. SPOC believes the project will unfairly raise their rates.

August 7: At meeting of PSD, members appeared unswayed by the pleas of commissioner Martin Saffer and members of the public who asked the PSD to take a closer look at the environmental, social and economic impacts the plant will have on the resort area and the county as a whole.

August 20: Tom Shipley and six other Slaty Fork residents and landowners request an injunction in Pocahontas County Circuit Court to prevent the takeover of Snowshoe’s STPs and force the PSD to ask state regulators to re-examine its plans for a regional STP.

September 7: Scott Millican appointed to PSD to replace Calvin Hill.

September 7: Circuit Court dismisses Shipley suit because the petitioners had administrative remedies through the PSD.

September 28: SPOC files a complaint with the PSC seeking to block the proposed transfer of the resort’s STPs to the PSD.

October 18, 2007: DEP, Snowshoe Mountain, Inc., and Snowshoe Water and Sewer, Inc. propose a consent decree which required Snowshoe to pay civil penalties for violations of the WV Water Pollution Control Act and ordered Snowshoe to transfer its sewage treatment assets to the PSD. The transfer of property from Snowshoes STPs would cover 95% of the fines.

December 3: Eight Rivers provided comments opposing the proposed consent decree between DEP and Snowshoe. The main objection was that the consent decree committed DEP to a regional STP, with the only proposed site, at that time, being the Sharp farm site.

2008

February 26: PCC President James Carpenter announces the county is turning its sights from the Sharp family farm for the location of the proposed Slaty Fork sewage plant. Three alternate sites included a parcel owned by the State Rail Authority (Site 5) and two parcels owned by Snowshoe Mountain Resort.

March 4: PCC votes unanimously to direct PSD to take Sharp farm out of consideration for a STP site.

April 1: PSD solicits public input to help evaluate the three alternative sites for the STP.

April 15: PCC votes to participate as a stakeholder in the proposed Upper Elk Watershed Association comprehensive plan. Association representative Tolly Peuleche presented PCC with a timeline to develop a “state of the watershed” report and a comprehensive plan. PCC sends a letter to the DEP, the PSD and Snowshoe Utility, dated April 15, requesting a self-imposed “delay or halt to all pending litigation, court and administrative proceedings pending a full and robust community discussion to formulate a cooperative and comprehensive plan for the Elk River Watershed and its environs.”

April 22: SPOC files a supplement to their September 28, 2007 complaint seeking to stop the transfer of Snowshoe’s STPs to the PSD. The supplement included the April 15 letter from the Pocahontas County Commission to DEP, PSD, and Snowshoe Utility requesting a delay in all proceedings.

April 29: Pocahontas Circuit Court approves consent decree between Snowshoe and DEP. Snowshoe would pay $128,000 in fines and transfer its STP assets to the PSD.

May 13: Dave Fleming wins Democratic primary for PCC seat over incumbent James Carpenter. Fleming had stated support for alternatives to a regional STP.

June 5: Responding to SPOC’s complaint, PSC issues order postponing a decision on the transfer of Snowshoe’s STP assets, pending a determination by the PSC on progress in developing a comprehensive watershed plan for the Elk River. The PSC gives all parties 20 days to respond to inform the PSC of progress made towards developing the watershed plan.

July 16: PSD member Scott Millican states his preference for Site #5 at contentious PSD meeting at Snowshoe. Many Snowshoe residents voiced opposition to a regional STP because they feel they would be paying most of the costs for a project that would benefit the entire county.

July 29: After a public comment period, which included several impassioned pleas to protect the Elk River, the PSD votes 2-1 to select Site 7 for the STP. Scott Millican, the nay vote, express concern that sewage would have to be pumped from the valley, which he thinks would create more danger to the environment.