Laserfiche WebLink
Mountain, he said if the project impacts streams we could get restoration credit. <br /> <br /> It was pointed out that if Buck Mountain is already preserved there would be no <br />benefit for compensation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brian Watson, Game and Inland Fisheries, said an opinion would need to be <br />given on whether an endangered species can be moved. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said the Corps is obligated to require replacement for lost aquatic <br />resource function and there can be no net loss nationwide. He said it is difficult to <br />quantify functional improvement. He said that if endangered species are involved it may <br />require a biological assessment. If an endangered species is in jeopardy a opinion is <br />issued by Game and Inland Fisheries. He said some species can be moved, but to get to <br />that point is pretty involved. <br /> <br />Mr. Hassell said DEQ does not require permits for maintenance dredging. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said the Corps does not require permits for maintenance dredging, <br />with caveats. He said if removal requires dropping the level of the water then a permit is <br />required, but if there is hydraulic dredging no permit is required. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ellen Gillensky, Marine Resources, said that a state permit for maintenance <br />dredging is needed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schwin said the Corps is interested in where the dredged material is dumped <br />and that may require a permit. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gaffney asked about taking advantage of lower reservoir levels in the fall to <br />do maintenance dredging. <br /> <br /> Ms. Gillensky said we can apply for a permit for opportunity dredging. She said <br />the key things that will be looked at are the purpose, need and where the material will be <br />disposed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Thomas said we are looking at using our existing infrastructures more <br />efficiently. She asked if putting a value on maintaining the present infrastructure is a <br />concept in the permitting process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hassell said DEQ never expressed opposition to dredging, but said it is very <br />expensive. He said the problem was with the bladder. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hassell said that it is a myth that suspended solids are higher when the James <br />River is low. He said people are discouraged from laying claim to the James River if <br />they do not need the water. Mr. Hassell said he does not think RWSA would get a permit <br />for the James River for maximum demand. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch asked what assurances we would have that water would be available <br />from the James River. <br /> <br />Mr. Gaffney asked about phasing in projects. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hassell said that ifRWSA had a two phased plan to raise the Ragged <br />Mountain dam and a pipeline to the James, DEQ would probably issue a permit for both <br />phases. He said there would not be a sunset clause in this situation for the James River. <br />He said it is a legitimate concern about laying claim as other applications are in now for <br />the James River. He said that RWSA's project would not be looked at the same as other <br />applications because a lot of water would be returned to the system in our situation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tony Watkinson said what is drawn into the system from the James River <br />would be looked at as well as what the impact is if the river is low. <br /> <br />Regarding projects for future water need, Mr. Hassell said the drought demand <br /> <br /> <br />