King William Reservoir (VA)

Background

February: Newport News produces a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Because of the serious impacts on wetlands, fisheries, threatened and endangered species, and the overall impacts to the Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers, SELC, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Sierra Club and others submit comments calling on Newport News to institute an aggressive conservation program and select the least environmentally damaging alternative.

January: Final EIS recommends construction of reservoir to meet stated need for additional 39 millions of gallons per day (mgd) of water. SELC, based on a report by Sierra Club's expert, argues for an aggressive water conservation plan to reduce the need for additional water supplies.
December: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) issues certification and state permit to Newport News allowing withdrawal from state waters.

January: On behalf of the Alliance to Save the Mattaponi, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers Association, the Sierra Club, and two individual plaintiffs, SELC appeals DEQ's permit. The trial court dismisses the suit on the grounds that the plaintiffs do not have "standing," or the legal right to challenge the decision. Similarly, the Mattaponi Tribe (represented by different counsel) appealed and was dismissed on standing.

May: Institute of Water Resources (IWR) completes study predicting water needs at 16 million gallons a day - less than half the amount Newport News stated in its EIS.
June 4: Colonel Allan Carroll, Norfolk District Engineer, releases draft IWR study. Because of the results showing that the reservoir is not needed and the adverse environmental impacts, he states his intent to deny the permit request.
June 8: Virginia Gov. James Gilmore objects to Col. Carroll's findings, resulting in the elevation of the permit decision to the Corps' North Atlantic Division.

March 2: Virginia Supreme Court rules unanimously that the environmental groups represented by SELC, and the Mattaponi Tribe do have standing to legally challenge the state's permit in court, and remands the case for a hearing on the merits.
July 2: Issuance of Recommended Record of Decision (ROD) by Col. Carroll to deny the permit. Public comment period follows.

October: Gen. M. Stephen Rhoades of the Corps' North Atlantic Division reverses Col. Carroll's recommended permit denial and directs that the permitting process continue.

March: Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences finds that the reservoir intake structure could adversely impact fish, notably American shad.
April-May: Public hearings before the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) on state permit to build the water intake. VMRC votes 6-2 to deny the permit application. Newport News shortly after.
August: Newport News Circuit Court enters final judgment upholding the DEQ permit allowing water withdrawal.

February: Newport News and the VMRC enter into a settlement agreement under which Newport News gets a second hearing before the commission, giving Newport News unprecedented rights not available to other participants. Issue at the hearing and subject of comments is limited to the impact on shad larvae and young and other fisheries from the intake structure.
August: VMRC reverses itself and votes 5-3 for permit, contrary to the recommendations of its own staff and the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences.
December: Corps issues wetlands mitigation plan for public comment.

June: In a letter to the Corps, the US Fish and Wildlife Service raises concerns that significant changes in the project and new information have not been analyzed, including the environmental effects of the proposed restrictions on when Newport News can withdraw water from the Mattaponi.
July: North Atlantic Division of Corps issues draft approval of permit, which will not go into effect pending potential action by Fish and Wildlife Service. SELC and others urge the agency to exercise its right under the Clean Water Act to ask that the Corps' top brass review the project. In addition, the EPA has authority to veto the permit.
November: Corps officially issues permit.

July 17: SELC files suit in U.S. District Court in D.C. on behalf of the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club, Alliance to Save the Mattaponi and Chesapeake Bay Foundation, citing violations by the Corps of the Clean Water Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Chesapeake 2000 Agreement when it granted the permit.
September 6: The State Water Control Board turns down request from Newport News to extend for five years, until 2012, the state permit allowing water withdrawals. This means the city will have to reapply for another permit, which opens the project to further scrutiny by the public.