Snowshoe Property Owners Council (SPOC) files complaint with State PSC

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" background="04b085a3.jpg"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" ><B>The Historic Sharp Farm's Preservation Blog</B></FONT><B>    </B><B> |     </B><A HREF="index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Historic Sharp Farms Preservation Bl"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id68_m.html" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Snowshoe Property Owners Council (SPOC) "><U><B><IMG SRC="03b0e0e0.png" border=0 width="14" height="14" ALT="up" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></U></A><B>   </B><A HREF="id19.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Chronos"><U><B><IMG SRC="03e0e0e0.png" border=0 width="14" height="14" ALT="down" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></U></A><B>     </B><A HREF="id67.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Slaty Fork project under fire from resor"><U><B><IMG SRC="02f0e0e0.png" border=0 width="14" height="14" ALT="previous" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></U></A><B>  </B><A HREF="id69.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="PSD attorneys contract challenged in cou"><U><B><IMG SRC="0300e0e0.png" border=0 width="14" height="14" ALT="next" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></B></U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000" background="04cd2e83.jpg"> <div> <A HREF="id87.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Challenges of 2005 2008 Eminent Domain "><U>Return To Challenges Log</U></A></div> <bR> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000" background="04d07073.jpg"> <div> <I>Snowshoe Property Owners Council (SPOC) files complaint with State PSC</I></div> <div> Original Source: <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.spocnews.com/index.php?section=61" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.spocnews.com/index.php?sectio"><U>http://www.spocnews.com/index.php?section=61</U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> September 29, 2007</div> <bR> <div> In the past, SPOC has taken the stand that it would not oppose the transfer of the Snowshoe sewage treatment plant to the control of the Pocahontas Public Service District (PSD). We have been champions from the beginning of an alternate plan to the proposed $20 million (and counting) regional plant – namely the Eight Rivers Safe Development membrane technology approach. This would entail a feasibility study to see if this alternative would work on the existing Snowshoe plant. Any future development in the valley could have cluster systems for the homes which would be paid for by developers, not the current Snowshoe homeowners, as the regional plant would require. We believe the Eight Rivers plan will be environmentally safe, will enable Snowshoe to be a truly “green” resort, will cost significantly less than the regional plant, and will not entail using eminent domain. (See memos below detailing the history of this planned transfer.)</div> <bR> <div> Our past stand has assumed that the Pocahontas County commissioners would be open to the Eight Rivers plan. Unfortunately, two commissioners (Griffith and Carpenter) have repeatedly opposed anything but a regional plant despite hearing from many well informed people that the regional plant on Sharp Farm would be an environmental disaster. The PSD, driven by developer Scott Millican, will not even listen to any alternative proposal. </div> <bR> <div> Therefore, because the commissioners and the PSD have indicated they will not seriously consider anything but a regional plant, SPOC is seeking to delay the transfer until a study of alternatives can be done. SPOC’s attorney filed a petition to that end with the state PSC on Friday, September 28, 2007. Although Snowshoe president/GM Bill Rock has stated that he is against using eminent domain for a plant and is open to considering all alternatives, we believe the PSD will continue to ignore him and any other groups that may seek to intervene.</div> <bR> <div> We urge you to read information on this site below this posting and to contact those people on the state level who might influence the decision to continue with the transfer. Detailed explanations of the Eight Rivers plan and why it is preferable to a regional plant are cited.</div> <div> The petition will be posted shortly on the West Virginia Public Service Commission website – <A HREF="http://www.psc.state.wv.us" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.psc.state.wv.us"><U>www.psc.state.wv.us</U></A>.</div> <div> __________________________________________________________________________</div> <div> <B>County Commissioners -- 304-799-6063</B></div> <bR> <div> August 11, 2007 -- Following the "State of the Shoe" address by Bill Rock, many homeowners attended a seminar by George Phillips, founder of the Eight Rivers Safe Development Inc. Phillips pointed out the pitfalls of the proposed $20 million sewage treatment plant and explained the concept of membrane technology/cluster systems. This alternative approach to a regional plant would eliminate the issue of eminent domain, be environmentally safe, and would cost less. </div> <bR> <div> Many at the meeting felt it was a "no brainer" to support the plan if it proves viable at Snowshoe, especially in view of the potential for an environmental disaster if a regional plant is built on the proposed site. Phillips gave a thorough explanation of why the limestone-riddled site should not be used. (Scroll down to find more information by Phillips on the plant, the site, and retrofitting the existing plant using membrane technology and visit <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.8riverssafedevelopment.com" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.8riverssafedevelopment.com"><U><B><U>www.8riverssafedevelopment.com</U></B></U></A></FONT>.) </div> <bR> <div> Homeowners were impressed and concerned after the presentation and vowed to speak to their friends and Snowshoe management about their reaction to the Eight Rivers proposal.</div> <bR> <div> SPOC supports the Eight Rivers plan if it is viable here. Please continue to support SPOC's efforts and contribute to the legal fund if you haven't already done so. Once ownership of Snowshoe's current plant is transferred to the county Public Service District (PSD), it is our hope that Snowshoe management will join SPOC in insisting the county commissioners and PSD give every possible consideration to the Eight Rivers plan.</div> <bR> <div> Write or call your local/state representatives; tell them you support investigation of safe and sustainable alternatives to a regional sewage treatment plant that will address the current and future needs of the community without causing irreversible harm to the Upper Elk River watershed.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Pocahontas County Commissioners 304-799-6063</B></div> <bR> <div> State Senator Walt Helmick -- 304-357-7980</div> <bR> <div> U.S. Senator Robert Byrd -- 304-342-5885</div> <bR> <div> U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller -- 304-347-5372</div> <bR> <div> If you want more information on how membrane technology works and how it has been successfully used at other locations, check out the links below:</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.mthotham.com.au/news/MTH_News_30-July-05_2314.htm" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.mthotham.com.au/news/MTH_News"><U><B><U>Effluent recycling for snowmaking</U></B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.zenonenv.com/corporate/corporate.shtml" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.zenonenv.com/corporate/corpor"><U><B><U>Zenon membrane technology</U></B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.zenonenv.com/markets/wastewater/" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.zenonenv.com/markets/wastewat"><U><B><U>Zenon membrane technology</U></B></U></A><B><U> </U></B><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >-- second entry</FONT></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.zenonenv.com/markets/wastewater/municipal_wastewater_treatment.shtml" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.zenonenv.com/markets/wastewat"><U><B><U>Municipal Wastewater treatment</U></B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.zenonenv.com/resources/case_studies/water_reuse/" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.zenonenv.com/resources/case_s"><U><B><U>Wastewater recycling case studies</U></B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.lombardoassociates.com/fayette_county_west_virginia.php" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.lombardoassociates.com/fayett"><U><B><U>Rural Wastewater Planning -- Fayette County</U></B></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.lombardoassociates.com/canaan-valley-west-virginia.php" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.lombardoassociates.com/canaan"><U><B><U>Rural Wastewater Planning -- Canaan Valley</U></B></U></A><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" > </FONT></div> <bR> <div> _____________________________________________________</div> <bR> <div> July 31, 2007 -- We have over $20,000 in the legal fund. Many thanks to the associations and individuals who have contributed. If you have not, please help your neighbors who have so generously donated money for a cause that will benefit all homeowners on the mountain. We are all in this together.</div> <bR> <div> _____________________________________________ </div> <bR> <div> July 10, 2007 -- We have received many questions about the SPOC legal fund and how it will be used. We hope these answers will make our position clear:</div> <bR> <div> l. The legal fund money will not be used for anything other than legal fees and the cost of mailings to homeowners regarding the legal fund.</div> <bR> <div> 2. If the legal funds are not used they will be returned to homeowners.</div> <bR> <div> 3. While we asked for a $100 contribution from homeowners, we will gladly accept any donations that associations or their members deem appropriate.</div> <bR> <div> 4. SPOC DOES NOT plan to try to stop the takeover of the Snowshoe Sewage Treatment facility by the Pocahontas County Public Service District (PSD). We do not feel we would be successful in this.</div> <bR> <div> 5. We DO plan to use the fund for legal advice/representation on how to proceed. After the transfer of the plant is complete, we expect the county commissioners and the PSD to meet with the Eight Rivers Safe Development group to determine if retrofitting the existing plant using "reverse membrane" technology will work. If it is a viable, lasting solution, we expect the county commissioners, the PSD, and Snowshoe management to support the plan. It is a win-win for almost everyone. First, (and in no particular order) the Sharp Farm land will not be seized by eminent domain for a new plant. Second, the environmental concerns will become a moot point. The proposed plant location is considered a potential environmental disaster by several knowledgeable environmental groups, as well as some highly placed state officials. Third, the interim/final proposed rate increases will naturally be much lower because retrofitting is estimated to cost about one-third of the $20 million estimate for a new plant. Therefore, if the Eight Rivers plan can be successfully implemented at the Snowshoe sewage treatment plant, we will legally petition the state to substantially lower the rates Snowshoe homeowners will pay.</div> <bR> <div> 6. A legitimate concern is whether or not the Eight Rivers plan would hinder future development at the bottom of the mountain. We believe the "cluster concept" (explained at the bottom of this page) will resolve this issue. And it will mean that developers will pay for their sewage treatment plants rather than Snowshoe homeowners. George Phillips from Eight Rivers Safe Development has answered this question as follows:</div> <bR> <div> "The concept of clustered systems is basically that you build the treatment capacity at the source of the waste when it is needed. The treatment technology required would be no more than what is required by State Code for that location. For example, a developer could sell lots for individual homes that would be large enough to support a septic system. Or a developer could build several homes on a property and install their own small package treatment plant to treat the waste from these homes. There are several documents on our website</div> <div> (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://EightRiversSafeDevelopment.com" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://EightRiversSafeDevelopment.com"><U>EightRiversSafeDevelopment.com</U></A></FONT>) that describe the advantages of clustered/decentralized treatment. This is the recommended approach to wastewater treatment in rural areas where homes are generally dispersed throughout a large geographical area.</div> <bR> <div> "This approach has been used in Canaan Valley and Fayette County, WV. There are also documents from the Rocky Mountain Institute on our website that describe and recommend decentralized systems.The main advantage over a centralized/regional system is that the cost of a collection system – piping, manholes, pumping stations – is eliminated from the project. These collection costs – which really add no value since it is simply transporting waste from point A to point B - are often 70% of the total project cost. The cost savings allows more money to be invested in the treatment technology – either advanced treatment or larger capacity systems.</div> <bR> <div> "Also with a regional system, there will be a long term cost for inspection/maintenance of the collection system that is avoided or reduced with the decentralized approach. Obviously with smaller collection systems there is a lower risk of leaks (less piping, fewer manholes) than with a large regional system. The decentralized approach also does not limit development to the narrow corridor serviced by the pipeline. Essentially, development could occur at any location and waste treated at the source. This eliminates the need to install additional piping, pumping stations, manholes in the future.</div> <bR> <div> "For example, if someone wanted to develop property in the area south of Linwood toward Clover Lick or down </div> <div> Dry Branch Road, they would build a small package plant or install septics to support their development rather than the PSD installing pipeline/pumping stations to transport the sewage to the regional plant.</div> <bR> <div> "There will also be less controversy with the decentralized approach. With the regional plant concept, as new development occurs there will be a need expand the existing collection system to allow them to tie-in to the regional plant and the PSD will be faced with additional capital costs which obviously will increase fees for existing and new users." </div> <bR> <div> SPOC will try to keep you posted on all events related to this matter in a timely fashion.</div> <bR> <div> _________________________________________________________________________</div> <bR> <div> To read a series of newspaper articles on the proposed sewage treatment plant, click on <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.savethesharpfarm.com/news/index.php" TARGET="_blank" TITLE="http://www.savethesharpfarm.com/news/ind"><U><B><U>www.savethesharpfarm.com/news/index.php</U></B></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> ___________________________________________________________________________</div> <bR> <div> URGENT MESSAGE TO SNOWSHOE HOMEOWNERS</div> <div> June 12, 2007</div> <bR> <div> This is to inform you of actions by Pocahontas County and Snowshoe that directly affect your investment and your homeowner experience. Your personal cash flows relative to your Snowshoe home are about to suffer.</div> <bR> <div> The Pocahontas County Public Service District (PSD) is poised to take over the Snowshoe Water and Sewer Company (i.e., the sewage treatment plant at the resort). In effect, Snowshoe is divesting itself of a plant that loses money. County officials intend to make it profitable by raising rates to the 1,880 Snowshoe property owners. </div> <div> This takeover could happen within a month, causing your sewer rates to quadruple, at the very least, and continue to increase. The PSD has published the rates they plan to impose on Snowshoe homeowners. The PSD is under pressure to pay engineering and legal fees it accrued in planning a new $20 million sewage treatment plant on Route 219 in Slatyfork. If the plant is built, final rates go into effect. (See rates below.)</div> <bR> <div> The project is opposed by regional and national environmental groups that have compelling evidence a plant in that location will be an environmental disaster. </div> <bR> <div> With your help, The Snowshoe Property Owners Council will oppose the rate increases and the new plant, which is not needed. The existing Snowshoe facility can be retrofitted at much less expense using safe, membrane technology. Developers who are pushing for a new plant--and for homeowners to pay for it--can install safe regional cluster plants at their own expense instead of ours. You will not directly benefit from a new plant. Only the developers will, and it will cost them little. </div> <bR> <div> It has been reported that state and county officials have said we are all rich, so we can afford to pay five to ten times higher sewer bills. Snowshoe management and its lawyers have said homeowners don’t care enough to fight back. </div> <bR> <div> Let's prove them wrong. </div> <bR> <div> Help us by contributing to a legal fund that will be used to fight the increased rates and proposed plant. Send a check for $100 (or whatever you can) to SPOC, PO Box 233, Snowshoe, WV 26209.</div> <bR> <div> The proposed increases will cost you more than $100 in a matter of three to four months. This is not the time to "let someone else" pay for this. We need everyone's support to make it work. If the legal fund money is not used it will be refunded to contributors. </div> <bR> <div> Here are the current rates and the increases proposed by the Pocahontas County PSD: </div> <bR> <div> Current monthly sewer rates: Efficiency w/o kitchen $5.73; efficiency $6.55; one bedroom $9.55; two bedroom $11.19; three bedroom $12; four bedroom $12.82; five bedroom $13.91; six bedroom $15; hot tub $l.64</div> <div> Interim monthly rates: Efficiency, one, and two bedroom $33; three bedroom $45; four bedroom $55; five bedroom $60; six bedroom $70; hot tub $4.75 </div> <bR> <div> Final monthly rate schedule: Efficiency, one, and two bedroom $54.45; three bedroom $77.55; four bedroom $88.83; five bedroom $100.65; six bedroom $112.31; hot tub $7.98</div> <bR> <div> _____________________________________________________________________________</div> <div> June 10, 2007</div> <bR> <div> The following is SPOC president Mike Olsen's letter to the WV Infrastructure & Jobs Development Council regarding a request by the Pocahontas County PSD for a $2.5 million dollar loan which would be used in part to secure the Snowshoe plant. Unfortunately the request was granted despite strong public opposition. SPOC will be taking further action on Snowshoe homeowners' behalf to keep the PSD from initiating huge increases in our sewage bills:</div> <bR> <div> May 31, 2007</div> <bR> <div> My name is Michael Olsen and I am president of the Snowshoe Property Owners Council (SPOC). SPOC represents a majority of the homeowners within the Snowshoe Mountain Resort in Pocahontas County. This note is to officially request a tabling of an action planned for a scheduled meeting tomorrow of the Infrastructure Jobs and Development Council. My understanding is that the purpose of the meeting is to authorize a loan to pay for the completed efforts associated with the development of the proposed sewer treatment plant in Pocahontas County.</div> <div> Let me state on behalf of the homeowners that we respectfully ask that you do not grant this loan request at this time for the following reasons:</div> <bR> <div> 1. The homeowners of the Snowshoe resort are currently paying the Snowshoe Water and Sewer Company for these services. Homeowners are not presently members of the public service district which will oversee the proposed sewer plant but will be required to pay for services and fees that are not needed by them. </div> <bR> <div> 2. The homeowners were never consulted about the proposed action by Snowshoe to sell their sewer operations to the PSD. This sale was apparently negotiated by Snowshoe and members of the PSD without consultation with and by future rate payers. The result of this action is to force homeowners to become part of a project that they do not need nor want. </div> <bR> <div> 3. The clever move by Snowshoe and the PSD have left the primary parties who will be charged for these services out of the decision loop and we have had no opportunity to voice appropriate public opposition to this action. Now, the PSD and Snowshoe are trying to expedite the sale and transfer of Snowshoe Water and Sewer to the PSD by encouraging the Council to approve the loan so that as soon as it is approved and the sale and transfer of Snowshoe’s sewer operations completed, the property owners at Snowshoe will find substantial rate increases with an ultimate increase in their sewer bill of, in some cases, 500%. From my perspective, THOSE WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE ACTIONS OF A PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT AUTHORITY IN WEST VIRGINIA (current property owners of Snowshoe Mountain Resort) WILL NOT HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE PUBLICLY THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS ACTION. </div> <bR> <div> 4. We are presently working with legal counsel to determine if this contested annexation of Snowshoe property owners by the Public Service District is indeed legal and secondly, what is our obligation to pay for a loan that was negotiated without our involvement. Our belief is that we do not have to pay for such loans since we had no involvement in this process and we will seek injunctive relief until this matter can be resolved.</div> <div> Economic development is an important ingredient to the well being of all citizens of West Virginia. We as homeowners do not oppose economic development and have enjoyed the fruits of the efforts of the county and Snowshoe to continue to make investments. However, this action will now require us to inform all homeowners that this activity will have a dampening effect on real estate valuations. When this additional cost is built in to the purchase price of a residential unit I have no doubts that it will have a chilling effect upon the future sales of residential property at Snowshoe and the surrounding area. Presently, the real estate market is already soft and likely to continue so for quite some time. It is often these types of breakpoint actions, made without proper consultation with all affected parties, which can further chill economic development.</div> <bR> <div> I am appealing to reason here. There is no need to approve this loan at this time since there are still many remaining questions to be answered regarding the most effective method to handle future sewage treatment needs and that will preserve and protect the environment. The reason this action is being expedited appears to me to be that Snowshoe wants out of the sewage business because its management has been pressured to cut costs. This is evidenced by the rather large cost reductions and layoffs that have already been enacted. Additionally, the sooner this action occurs the less opposition can be expected. Lastly, the plant is not currently needed to serve its present customer base. The proposed plant is needed to support further development and under normal requirements for such development it is the developer and new customers that will have to pay. This is a convenient way for Snowshoe to enhance its development efforts along with those landowners in the valley who plan to develop and not have to pay for it. Thus, it is my sincere hope that the Infrastructure Jobs and Development Council will give thorough and objective judgment to what is going on here and table this action until such time that these issues are completely resolved.</div> <bR> <div> I, or a SPOC representative would be more than happy to present our arguments regarding this matter in an open forum where all arguments, both pro and con can be debated. The long term strategic implications are important to economic development and I am quite certain that if Snowshoe or other developers are sincere in insuring long term development as opposed to short term gains, there are better ways to treat those who have invested in Snowshoe.</div> <div> Personally, I have owned property at Snowshoe for 15 years. I have been through three resort owners and have witnessed the exploitation of land, environment and homeowners. Once a firm has reaped its appropriate internal rate of return, it sells and moves on. The next firm comes in, further exploits and moves on. This scenario is likely to continue under the current ownership of a private equity firm which has already cut services and activities to the bone. The problem is that this continuing cycle has a way of depleting assets without appropriate reinvestment and this will ultimately bring down the real estate values which essentially drive future development of Pocahontas County--not to mention the problems the resort owners can leave behind when the exit. Those long time residents in the county have seen this occur, so it should be nothing new to them. If this cycle continues they are likely to be saddled with an expensive to operate and potentially high-risk sewer plant. This leaves the question of who will cover the high operating and risk liabilities if real estate values decline and the resort endures several years of decline and individual bankruptcies. </div> <bR> <div> I have recently been informed that members of the PSD as well as members of the County Commission of Pocahontas County have intimated that the homeowners of Snowshoe mountain pay the lowest sewer rates in West Virginia and therefore should be charged significant increases in this service and that they can well afford it. While I have no personal evidence to cite here, what bothers me is that this information is what is apparently being spread and will no doubt end up on blogs or other forms of media. My concern is that if future investors in residences or real estate perceive these statements to be true they might feel that they cannot trust the elected or appointed officials to do what is correct by all taxpayers in the county. This will further dampen potential development. </div> <bR> <div> History is full of well meaning elected officials who make short term decisions with long term consequences and in some cases others are left to clean up unwanted problems long after those officials have left office. Please help us reason with all parties here and table this process so as to insure a proper evaluation of the right choices regarding this matter. </div> <bR> <div> I, on behalf of the homeowners of Snowshoe Mountain resort, would appreciate your consideration in this matter</div> <div> ______________________________________________________________________________________</div> <bR> <div> AN ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION TO A NEW SEWAGE TREAMENT PLANT EXISTS. A SUMMARY OF THAT IS BELOW THE LETTER FROM THE EDITOR OF THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER (THE POCAHONTAS TIMES).</div> <bR> <div> April 25, 2007</div> <bR> <div> "Here's What I Think" by Pamela Pritt, Editor, Pocahontas Times</div> <bR> <div> It's about time. Finally, at last week's county commission meeting a Thrasher Engineering representative spoke to the public about the company's plans for the Slaty Fork Wastewater Treatment Plant.</div> <bR> <div> Ken Moran told commissioners his company plans to sit down with 8 Rivers Safe Development president George Phillips to hear more about what he has to say about karst topography and immersible membrane technology.</div> <bR> <div> That conversation should have taken place about three years ago, perhaps not with George Phillips, but with someone who could guide the engineering firm in dealing with karst topography. While I realize the past cannot be undone, I hope the result will be worth the wait, if not the animosity and bad community feelings this project has thrust upon us.</div> <bR> <div> I'm anxious to hear the outcome of that conversation. I hope Thrasher comes up with a plan for the area that's innovative and environmentally sound. I hope they find some other area is suitable for the plant if, in fact, it has to built at all.</div> <bR> <div> Granted, we've only scratched the surface on immersible membrane technology and what it can do in terms of keeping the Slaty Fork area as clean as possible.</div> <bR> <div> But if I were on the Public Service District Board (PSD) and I was given the opportunity to look at a plan that retrofitted Snowshoe Mountain Resort's existing treatment plant, put the effluent into the Shavers Fork of Cheat instead of the Elk and cost estimates were less than half the $20 million pricetag of the traditional plant, plus, and this is a big plus, I wouldn't have to envoke eminent domain, I'd sure as heck take a good long look. And I'd make sure the public was aware of the perusal.</div> <bR> <div> The argument against Snowshoe building its own plant was that it denied development in the valley because the allowable stream degradation would be used by the resort. With Phillips' plan, the resort's effluent has zero effect on the Elk's stream degration. Small cluster systems in developing areas allow for that development to be "off the grid" of U.S. Rt. 219. The downside, I suppose, for developers is that they have to build the plants for those areas. Still, with all the Elk's allowable stream degradation open for development, it's hard to argue that they'll be too financially impeded.</div> <bR> <div> And while the cost of waiting any longer might be a deterrent to both the PSD and the county commission, the cost of pursuing the Sharp Farm location, with eminent domain proceedings a certainty, won't be cheap. It might be several more years before the plant can be built and that will surely increase the cost.</div> <bR> <div> Thrasher and the PSD should take a long hard look at Phillips' plan and ideas. It can't hurt and might be the answer we've all been waiting for.</div> <div> _____________________________________________________________________________________</div> <bR> <div> April 1, 2007 -- The following appeared in the Inter-Mountain Times:</div> <bR> <div> Groups Share Concerns with Lawmakers Over Sewage Plant Site</div> <div> Wednesday March 28, 2007</div> <div> The Inter-Mountain</div> <div> By Cathy Grimes </div> <bR> <div> For more than two years, the issue of the proposed sewage treatment plant being located on the Sharp Farm in Slatyfork has generated fierce controversy in Pocahontas County. </div> <bR> <div> The reasons are twofold: Environmental hazards, the dangers of placing the plant on karst terrain; and the use of eminent domain to take private property. </div> <bR> <div> In an effort to raise awareness to the dangers of the proposed location, The Sierra Club, West Virginia Outdoor Sportsmen, Eight Rivers Safe Development Inc. and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy met with Sens. Walt Helmick, D-15 District, and Clark Barnes, R-15 District, and Delegate Bill Proudfoot, D-37th District, in Charleston earlier this month. </div> <bR> <div> George Phillips, president of Eight Rivers Safe Development Inc., gave a presentation which included photos and images showing prominent karst features, caves, sinkholes and springs of the Upper Elk and Big Springs Fork valleys. </div> <bR> <div> The photos illustrated the dangers of placing million-pound sewage tanks over a karst honeycomb where the risk of collapse of an underground void or cave passage could significantly damage the plant equipment or result in a spill of raw sewage to the surface and underground streams. </div> <bR> <div> "We expressed our concerns with the site and pipeline location," Phillips said. "We also stressed to the senators and delegate the project would not be in the present situation, located on an unsafe and unstable site, had a proper Environmental Impact Statement been prepared as required by West Virginia State Code. </div> <bR> <div> "The lack of the proper EIS is the basis for Eight Rivers Safe Development's legal complaint against the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection," Phillips said. </div> <bR> <div> Regina Hendrix, political chairwoman with Sierra Club and organizer of the meeting, said, "People are just beginning to realize that the proposed sewage treatment plant placed on karst on the headwater of the Elk is a concern of all of us." </div> <bR> <div> The presentation pointed out that underground sewer lines ultimately leak. When the underground line lies below the water table, any leaks at piping joints or manholes result in groundwater entering the system adding to the plant's hydraulic load. This leakage, called infiltration, is so common that design guidelines in the West Virginia State Code -CSR-47-31 recommends that 200 gallons of infiltration per day, per mile of pipeline be factored into plan design capacities to allow for leakage of ground water into the collection system. </div> <bR> <div> In karst, however, the water table is typically below the pipes and the pipes are often exposed to voids and caves which increase the risk for failure. Any leaks from the system will result in raw sewage seeping out and entering the karst groundwater system. </div> <bR> <div> In karst, any contamination is rapidly transported by the water flowing through the underground conduits of caves and underground streams. </div> <bR> <div> "Residents who live in the valley get their water from wells which are part of this underground system," Phillips said. </div> <bR> <div> "Any leak from a failed piping joint or any one of the many manholes will result in raw sewage immediately entering and being transported into the underground streams and caves and will have an immediate and lasting impact on these drinking water sources and public health," Phillips said. </div> <bR> <div> "The whole point of the meeting was to make the senators and delegate aware of other options and to make them aware that these organizations are in full support of Tom Shipley and his efforts," Hendrix said. </div> <bR> <div> Hendrix and others in the delegation including Amon Tracey, president of West Virginia Outdoor Sportsmen; Julien Martin, vice president for State of Affairs with the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy; and Phillips indicated the senators and delegate expressed quite a bit of concern with the dangers of placing the plant on karst terrain. </div> <bR> <div> "Delegate Bill Proudfoot didn't like the idea of putting pipelines through five miles of that terrain," Tracey said. </div> <div> "The senators seemed very concerned about the situation," Julien said. </div> <bR> <div> Helmick told The Inter-Mountain, "the presentation was very enlightening and the knowledge valuable. We knew about the area, but we hadn't known the details in depth." </div> <bR> <div> Helmick said he had been asked by the Pocahontas County Public Service District for help in obtaining funding to be used to evaluate alternative sites and also hire a project coordinator. Helmick indicated they would help with the request, but added, "At the end of the day it's the PCPSD's call; legally we can't do anything with it." </div> <bR> <div> Possible Relocation</div> <bR> <div> One possible solution discussed was moving the plant beside the Elk River, if all the environmental studies were performed and the geology proved stable. However, with this option there would still be the risk involved with transporting 2 million gallons per day of raw sewage up, over and down Cheat Mountain and through five miles of karst terrain. </div> <bR> <div> "A treatment plant down beside the Elk River off the karst in a safe location would be acceptable to my family," said Tom Shipley of the Sharp farm and guest of the conservation organizations "However, even with the plant down beside the Elk River, experts and Pocahontas County citizens still have concerns with the pipeline on karst and related health and safety issues. </div> <bR> <div> "If there is a better proposal by conservation groups and their experts which would alleviate the risk of millions of gallons of sewage being piped through miles and miles of karst and problems of inter-basin transfer which is never good for the environment, my family would support it," Shipley said. </div> <bR> <div> Alternatives to Regional Site</div> <bR> <div> According to Phillips, there are alternatives to a regional plant that are less expensive and would have a positive impact on the karst and groundwater in the Big Spring Fork. </div> <bR> <div> The delegation came to the meeting prepared with one such alternative proposal, one which is endorsed by all the groups represented as well as many other conservation groups. </div> <bR> <div> "This was the first time the senators had heard there were other options out there," Phillips said. "There is a lot more opportunity than what's on the table now." </div> <bR> <div> According to Phillips, one alternative would be to retrofit with state-of-the-art technology the existing wastewater treatment plants at Snowshoe/Silvercreek with a technology called Immersed Membrane, which are micro filters that extract ultra-pure water from the aeration basins of a wastewater plant. </div> <bR> <div> "Often these retrofits result in a two-to-five fold increase in treatment capacity with no increase in plant size," Phillips said. </div> <bR> <div> The immersed membrane system would also eliminate the problem of inter-basin water transfer from the Shavers Fork to the Elk River that would occur if the proposed regional plant is built at Slatyfork. </div> <bR> <div> According to Phillips, "Water from the Snowshoe/Silver Creek systems could be returned to the Shavers Fork Basin, improving the flow and quality of water in the headwaters stream, which is also a premier trout fishery." </div> <bR> <div> The immersed membrane retrofit would cost considerably less than the $20 million to build the proposed Slatyfork plant and "recycling water from wastewater effluent is encouraged by the federal government through grants/tax credits to projects which implement this technology," Phillips said. </div> <bR> <div> According to Phillips, a Pittsburgh-based engineering firm has estimated an immersed membrane retrofit of Snowshoe's facility would cost between $5 million and $8 million, a fraction of the cost estimate for the proposed regional plant. </div> <bR> <div> "Membrane systems are the recommended sewage treatment technology option for environmentally sensitive areas," Phillips said. "The Upper Elk and Shavers Fork Headwaters are world class trout fisheries. In the Big Spring Fork, there are reproducing Rainbow, Brown and Brook Trout and pristine caves and springs. If that does not qualify as an environmentally sensitive area, I don't know what does." </div> <bR> <div> For future development in the valley, Phillips recommended small clustered treatment systems rather than the regional plant approach. Here, small treatment plants are built as development occurs. These plants would only be built as local growth and demand required, saving millions of dollars. </div> <bR> <div> The management and operation of these plants would create additional jobs in the area, such as operators, technicians and engineers. </div> <bR> <div> In addition, according to Phillips, the clustered system approach does not require project funds to be spent on unnecessary and expensive collection/transport systems, the pipeline, manholes and pumping stations required to move the sewage down the valley. </div> <bR> <div> This not only reduces the risk of leaks/contamination in the karst valley, but also allows more of the publicly funded project monies to be spent on treatment capacity/technology where the sewage is generated. </div> <div> The clustered systems approach would allow development to occur anywhere and not just restricted along a narrow corridor that follows the pipeline in the Big Spring Fork Valley. </div> <bR> <div> "Clustered systems are recommended over regional plants by several groups who work to develop wastewater solutions for rural communities," Phillips said. "Locally, the West Virginia Rivers Coalition recommends clustered systems for rural, dispersed communities." </div> <bR> <div> "I'm very pleased with the interest and knowledge these groups and individuals have with the issue," Barnes said of the presentation. </div> <bR> <div> Barnes indicated he also was very aware and concerned with the potential danger to the underground water supply. </div> <div> "It behooves us to back up and take a second look and it's unfortunate that Thrasher Engineering and Region IV people want to move ahead full steam," Barnes said, "because what's done needs to be done right." </div> <bR> <div> Barnes said he isn't a fan of small cluster systems, "because there are no requirements, the state doesn't have control." But he added, "It could be the solution if the Public Service Commission and state of West Virginia required greater long-term accountability and long-term financial viability by the developers." </div> <bR> <div> According to case studies of Economic Analysis and Community Decision Making for Decentralized Watershed Systems, a study prepared for the National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Development Project, Washington University, by the Rocky Mountain Institute, "Using small clustered treatment systems is beneficial financially for communities because of the incremental investment in small systems compared to large upfront investments in centralized capacity systems." </div> <bR> <div> The cluster systems, widely viewed positively by developers and homeowners, according to the study, cites the systems as being a good match with its objectives of avoiding large capital expenditures, avoiding political battles over a new treatment plant, providing cost-effective service to developing areas and providing environmental stewardship through higher levels of treatment than other systems. </div> <bR> <div> According to Phillips, the Canaan Valley Institute, a nonprofit, nonadvocacy organization that is committed to providing high quality wastewater treatment at affordable costs to small, rural, often low-income communities, has said it would be happy to work with the Pocahontas County community to develop a comprehensive wastewater plan. </div> <bR> <div> The plan typically focuses on four components: Community engagement, assessment, identifying options and assisting and coordinating design and implementation. </div> <bR> <div> According to information published by CVI, "The answer for many rural communities lies in managed decentralized systems. Treatment systems that are small and dispersed to serve local needs without relying on expensive sewers to collect sewage." </div> <bR> <div> It further states, "These systems can provide an economically viable, environmental sound alternative to municipal sewer systems and treatment plants." </div> <bR> <div> 2007-2008 ASSESSMENT BUDGET</div> <bR> <div> This letter is also to inform you that the Snowshoe Property Owners Council Assessment Committee failed to reach agreement with Snowshoe management on the 2007-08 budget, and has asked for mediation, as defined in the 1999 Memorandum of Understanding between the Council and Snowshoe management.</div> <bR> <div> As you have probably noticed, the resort has been in a cost-cutting frenzy this year, perhaps at the direction of the new owners, Fortress Investment Group. While it tightens its own corporate belt, resort management has no problem spending homeowner money on what the committee feels is an inflated budget. We hope to resolve these differences through mediation. </div> <bR> <div> In the 2007-08 budget Snowshoe is trying to impose on us, property owners will pay 81.6% of the $3.1 million proposed for fire protection, security, maintenance of common areas and shuttle service. Snowshoe will pay 18.4%. </div> <bR> <div> __________________________________________________</div> <bR> <div> We will keep you posted as events occur and we urge you to contact Bill Rock with your comments on the presentation. He can be reached at <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="mailto:brock@snowshoemtn.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:brock@snowshoemtn.com"><U><B><U>brock@snowshoemtn.com</U></B></U></A></FONT>. Write a letter to the County Commissioners and the PSD, c/o Pocahontas County Court House, Marlinton, WV 24954. Contact SPOC at <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="mailto:SPOCNews@cs.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:SPOCNews@cs.com"><U><B><U>SPOCNews@cs.com</U></B></U></A></FONT> </div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>