THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, June 26, 1994 TAG: 9406260109
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY TONI WHITT, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: 940626 LENGTH: Long
It has taken nearly four years for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to hand in a study on two existing water plants, and the process isn't over yet. An administrator with that state's fisheries division said Virginia Beach should be prepared for the same.
{REST} Gene Zuerlein, the assistant division administrator for the fisheries division of the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, said the more complicated a project, the longer it will take, especially if there is opposition.
``With the pipeline between states and the other stuff, like the effects on wetlands, it will take a few years, unless you get people who will cooperate and work together,'' Zuerlein said.
Virginia and North Carolina have long been embroiled in a bitter battle over Lake Gaston, which straddles their border. North Carolina officials say the 76-mile pipeline project could hurt fish populations, like the striped bass, by lowering the level of the lake and river during extreme drought. They also argue that it may hurt economic development by limiting future industry that might want to withdraw water.
Virginia officials say North Carolina is simply using delay tactics to kill a viable and reasonable project.
On Thursday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said it
must prepare an in-depth environmental impact study before it can make a decision on whether the $142 million pipeline can be completed.
The commission, a quasi-judicial board that falls under the U.S. Commerce Department, reversed the findings of its own draft environmental assessment completed nearly a year ago. That assessment said the pipeline would have no significant impact on the environment.
In calling for an environmental impact statement, the commission also set aside a 1984 environmental statement done by the Army Corps of Engineers. North Carolina officials have argued that the Corps study was not adequate, mainly because it dealt with the broad question of potential water sources for the entire Hampton Roads region, rather than focusing on the pipeline.
Commission chairwoman Elizabeth Moler said early studies, including the Corps statement, contained outdated cost estimates for alternatives to the pipeline.
The commission's approval is necessary to allow Virginia Power, which uses the lake as a hydroelectric project, to give Virginia Beach access to the lake.
In May, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requested the environmental study. Moler said that request, along with support for the study from other federal agencies, including the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, contributed to her decision to call for the new in-depth study.
A commission spokesman said the agency has already begun setting up dates and times for public hearings in North Carolina and Virginia to allow citizens and politicians an opportunity to decide the scope and breadth of the new environmental study.
The commission is supposed to be insulated from the politics of Washington. As a quasi-judicial agency, the commission is supposed to make its decisions based on the law and environmental mandates. It receives input from the public and politicians only during public hearings. U.S. Rep. Owen B. Pickett, D-2nd, on Friday hinted that the commission may have been influenced by politics - though he did not offer any proof of those allegations.
During the hearings, Virginians can offer the past environmental assessments for consideration in the new study. They can also argue that the scope of the study should be narrowed, to allow it to be done quickly.
Once the scope of the study is decided, and past studies, reports and written statements are submitted, the commission's staff will begin a technical study of the lake and the Roanoke River, said Bob Cecil, the commission's spokesman.
Based on the studies of water, fish, wildlife, plants and other environmental factors, staff members will draft a report that will indicate the pipeline's impact on the environment.
In Nebraska, farmers and environmentalists battled over an existing hydroelectric plant originally licensed by the regulatory commission. The controversy began 10 years ago when the two water plants along the Platte River asked to be relicensed. The plants have been operating on a temporary license since the battle began.
The Lake Gaston pipeline must be relicensed in the year 2001. Two weeks ago, North Carolina filed a motion with the commission arguing that the pipeline permit should be considered as part of the relicensing of the entire project.
The commission has not made a decision on North Carolina's request. If granted, it would further delay the pipeline. But Moler said that the pipeline permit and relicensing can be dealt with separately.
``At this point, they are not linked,'' she said. ``The relicensing is seven years away.''
In Ohio, an environmental impact study with a limited scope and no controversy took nine months to complete, Cecil said.
``Generally they hope to get them out in one and a half years,'' he said. ``But that depends on the issues and the parties and the complexity of the situation.''
Cecil said ``any number of technical things,'' including stream flows, oxygen in the water, and species of plants, fish and wildlife in and around the water can be included in the study.
``Anything that is part of the controversy has to be examined in some detail,'' Cecil said.
Once the scope of the study is decided, the testing is done, and all the reports are submitted and read, the regulatory commission will issue a draft report. The regulatory commission will then hold another round of public hearings to get comments on the draft report. Then a revised study is done based on those comments.
In Nebraska, the infighting and opposition led to a complete revision of the original draft - which took two years once all the comments were in.
From his experience, Zuerlein said, a study on a new pipeline should include the need for the pipeline, options to the pipeline, the project's history, the lake's history, water quality and quantity, agricultural uses, recreational uses, and the plant and wildlife surrounding the lake. Then, he said, it should get to the technical aspects.
``With a perfect draft, the minimal time would take two years,'' he said.
by CNB