This document summarizes information presented by Thomas M. Leahy about the Lake Gaston water transfer project. It discusses how Virginia Beach needed a new water supply, pursued the Lake Gaston project to transfer 60 million gallons per day from the Roanoke River Basin via a 76 mile pipeline, and the extensive permitting and environmental review process over 15 years to approve the project. It also compares past and current costs of the Lake Gaston project versus alternative water sources like desalination and wastewater reuse.

1. 3
Old Dominion University
Lake Gaston Project Field Trip
November 1, 2014
Thomas M. Leahy, P.E.
Director of Public Utilities

2. North Carolina & Virginia
 Discharge 15 inches/yr
 No structural water
shortages except in the
coastal plain
 In the coastal plain,
topography and wetlands
preclude new reservoirs
 Coastal plain aquifers are
over-stressed
 SE Virginia is a major
metropolitan region in the
coastal plain – much of
water is interbasin transfer

3. The City of Virginia Beach, VA
 Virginia Beach is the largest City
in the state, but it had no water
supply
 Dependent upon Norfolk for
surplus supply
 Surplus was in adequate since
1976
 The City restricted water often,
including five consecutive
years: 1992-97
 In 1982, Virginia Beach decided
to pursue the Lake Gaston
Water Transfer

4. The Lake Gaston Water Transfer
60 MGD from the Roanoke River Basin

5. The Lake Gaston Water Transfer
76 mile, 60-inch Diameter Pipeline

7. The Lake Gaston Water Transfer:
Roanoke River Basin to Virginia Beach
 Average flow in Roanoke River – 8,000 cfs
 Lowest monthly and yearly flow (regulated
by upstream dams)– 2,000 cfs
 60 mgd (93 cfs) is 4.7% of drought flows
 Transfer does not reduce minimum daily
flows which are regulated by mandated
releases from downstream dams
 Transfer does increase the duration of low
flows during drought periods

8. Permits for Water Projects
 Federal Permits
 Corps of Engineers: Rivers and Harbors Act and
Clean Water Act
 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 Coastal Zone Management Act (NOAA)
 State Permits
 DEQ: Clean Water Act 401 Certification
 DEQ: VA Water Protection Permit (instream flow)
 DEQ: NPDES/VPDES
 Local Permits (Zoning, CUP, Local Consent)

9. National Environmental Policy Act - NEPA
 Any agency with approval jurisdiction must
conduct public interest/environmental review
 If the Environmental Assessment (EA) results in
a FONSI – then approval may issue
 If the project might harm the human or natural
environment, a more detailed Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) including an analysis of
need and alternatives will be prepared
 If the EIS concludes that the project is not
needed, there is a better alternative, or has
unacceptable impacts, the agency can reject or
modify the applicant’s proposal

10. VA Beach Evaluation of Alternatives
 New reservoirs: Would not pass the environmental
reviews – wetlands, irreversible habitat losses, etc
 Particularly in the Coastal Plain
 Regional Groundwater Aquifer: could not provide
sufficient quantities long-term
 Seawater Desalting: Too expensive (at that time)
 Wastewater Reuse: Not feasible (at that time)
 Alternatives to the Gaston pipeline were the
subject of extensive regulatory and legal debate
 History supports regulatory decisions at that time, but if
project were attempted today, desalting and/or potable
reuse would be more viable

11. Lake Gaston Project Permits and
Environmental Studies
 Corps of Engineers, FERC, NOAA
 1983 – 1995: Three EA’s, two EIS’, one CZMA
Review (similar to EIS)
 Three District Court rulings, two Appellate
Court rulings, two refusals by Supreme Court
to grant an appeal
 Every study and every ruling upheld the need
for the project and that the project was the
best overall alternative – but took 15 years

12. Cost of Lake Gaston Water
Transfer vs Desalination
Source Date LG Water
Transfer
Seawater
Desalination
Desal/LG
Ratio
US Army Corps
of Engineers
1984 $1.26/kgal $3.90/kgal 3.1
Virginia Beach 1986 $1.16/kgal $3.83/kgal 3.2
Federal Regulatory
Energy Commission
1995 $1.153 B
50-yr NPV
$3.673 B
50-yr NPV
3.2
Virginia Beach 1998 $2.79/kgal $5.69/kgal 2.0
Virginia Beach
Consultant
2004 $307 M
25-yr NPV
$632 M
25-yr NPV
2.1

13. But the times, they are a’changing
 Gaston Water: $2.25 - $3:00/1000 gallons
 Seawater Desalination
 Carlsbad/San Diego: 50 mgd, $6.00/1000 gallons
 Huntington Beach: 50 mgd, $4.40/1000 gallons
 Tel Aviv, Israel: 165 mgd, $2.00/1000 gallons
 Potable Wastewater Reuse - OCWD
 Microfiltration, Reverse Osmosis, UV/H202
 Direct injection into water supply aquifers (30%
of total recharge to the aquifer)
 70 mgd, $2.61/1000 gallons

14. VA Coastal Plain Aquifer Cross-Section
McFarland & Bruce, 2006

15. About 60% of Sea Level Rise May Be
Due to Land Subsidence

16. Groundwater Withdrawals From Deep
Aquifers May Be Causing Most (or all) of
Land Subsidence
What is
Being
Measured
How is it Being
Measured
Who is Doing
the Measuring
Numberof
Stations
Date Range of
Measurements
Mean
mm/year
Low
mm/year
High
mm/year
Estimated
average
global sea-
level rise Various IPCC2 NA 1961–2003 1.8 NA NA
Aquifer
compaction Extensometer USGS3 2 1979–1995 –2.6 –1.5 –3.7
Land
subsidence
Geodetic
survey NGS4 17 1940–1971 –2.8 –1.1 –4.8
Land
subsidence Fixed GPS NOAA/USCG5 3 2006–2011 –3.1 –2.7 –3.4
Relative sea-
level rise Tidal station NOAA6 4 1927–2006 3.9 3.5 4.4
Southern Chesapeake Bay region data

17. Largest Groundwater Permits
FACILITY
TOTAL PERMITTED
Q (MGD)
PERMITTED Q
(% of all Permits)
REPORTED USE
Q (MGD)
West Point Mill Water System 23.03 20.07% 20.09
Franklin Virginia Mill 20.61 17.96% 9.08
City of Chesapeake 11.00 9.59% 3.50
James City County Service Authority 8.83 7.69% 5.41
WTWA (Suffolk and Isle of Wight) 8.34 7.27% 3.51
City of Newport News 7.00 6.10% 1.53
Hercules Incorporated 6.67 5.81% 2.74
City of Norfolk (wells in Suffolk) 3.74 3.26% 0.06
City of Franklin 2.88 2.51% 0.93
Cogentrix Virginia Wells A thru F 2.60 2.27% 0.18
Colonial Williamsburg 1.84 1.61% 1.40
Smithfield Packing Co. Inc. - North Division 1.40 1.22% 0.00
Town of Smithfield 1.27 1.11% 0.86
Smithfield Packing Company, Inc. 1.20 1.05% 0.00

18. QUESTIONS?