smith mountain project draft shoreline management plan ... 2010 review matrix 12 31 10.pdfdraft...

1

Smith Mountain Project

Draft Shoreline Management Plan Comments

December 31, 2010

Date

Received

Agency/Source Section Comment Appalachian’s Response

11/16/10 Mark A.

Moorman

General

Copy of changes and copy of the final Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission (FERC) approved document requested. Site visit

requested.

Appalachian Power Company (Appalachian or AEP) contacted Mr.

Moorman and agreed to send final SMP and provided contact information

for site visit.

12/9/10 Office of the

Governor

General The work of the Steering Committee is in all ways consistent with

Virginia law and regulation regarding the protection and

conservation of natural resources. Similarly, the comments of the

Tri-County Re-licensing (TCRC) committee represents an effort to

balance preservation of natural resources, the rights of property

owners, and the opportunity for badly needed economic growth in

the area, and conforming with all state requirements regarding

natural resource protection.

Appalachian agrees that the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP)

regulations reflect state regulations regarding the protection and

conservation of natural resources.

11/19/10 Leesville Lake

Association

(LLA)

Glossary Active Erosion: Final sentence seems both restrictive and incorrect.

There IS erosion now, will be in the future, over and around solid

rock formations. We should not foreclose probability–the likely

need to combat any and all erosion where ever it occurs. Suggest-

Delete final sentence.

The final sentence was deleted. Appalachian will make a field

determination of whether active erosion is occurring or not.

12/6/10 Virginia

Department of

Health (VDH)

Glossary Boat Slip: Per VDH regulations, a boat slip is “a designated

watercraft docking area. One boat slip can accommodate only one

boat at a time.” Please be advised when evaluating the existence of

slips at a boating facility, any project that provides a mooring or

dockage, whether it is a three-sided slip or two cleats along a dock is

counted as a mooring and will directly affect the number of sanitary

fixtures required. When making an application to the Local Health

Department, the owner will be required to submit information on the

total vessel capacity of the docking facility. The total number of

vessels a docking facility is designed to carry will affect the owner’s

ability to apply for exemptions to The Commonwealth of Virginia

Sanitary Regulations For Marinas and Boat Moorings

Regulations (Regulations) and is used in determining the type of

onsite system and its design to support existing marina activities.

Appalachian believes its definition of a boat slip to be consistent with

VDH regulations. However, on applications for commercial facilities,

Appalachian will request the information so as to provide accurate

information to the Virginia Department of Health

2

Date

Received


12/6/10 Virginia

Department of

Health

Glossary The draft SMP also includes a definition for ‘marina” and

“community dock”. The SMP defines a marina as, “a facility

situated on a lakeshore that provides launching and secure

moorings for water-borne craft and other services such as sale of

supplies, fuel, and marine equipment sales and repair services.:

A “community dock” is defined as, a boat dock or pier containing

three or more slips directly related and adjunct to a subdivision,

cluster development, condominium, or planned development, owned

and controlled by the owners of the lots of such subdivision or

development, and which may be used adjunct to the use of the

individual lots or units within the subdivision or development and

which has a commonly owned or shared walkway. The Regulations

provide for two types of boat facilities; marinas and other places

where boats are moored (OPWBAM). The definition of a marina,

“is any installation operating, under public or private ownership

which provides dockage or moorage of boats (exclusive of paddle or

rowboats) and provides, through sale, rental or fee basis, any

equipment, supply or service (fuel, electricity or water) for the

convenience of the public or its leasee, renters or users of its

facilities.” The definition of OPWBAM , “is an installation

operating under public or private ownership, which provides

dockage, moorage or mooring for boats (exclusive of paddle or

rowboats) either on a free, rental or fee basis or for the convenience

of the public.: This definition usually covers a variety of scenarios

that are associated with or referred to as community docks. It is

important to note that VDH project evaluation is based on the total

number of slips and their defined use.

Appalachian believes its definition for marina is consistent with the

definition set forth in the VDH regulations.

Appalachian has amended its definition for a “community dock”

eliminating the minimum number of slips so as to be more consistent

with the VDH definition of Other Places Where Boats are Moored.


Association

Glossary Boat Slip: Suggest instead- “A designated watercraft docking area

confined on at least two parallel sides.”

Two parallel sides are not required to moor a boat. A boat can be moored

utilizing one side or even a mooring buoy. However, in recognition of

reservoir fluctuations, Appalachian agrees that more than one side is

beneficial. As such a determination was made that that two sides,

whether perpendicular or parallel, constitute a boat slip, provided a

floating structure has been incorporated into one or either of the

aforementioned scenarios.

3

Date

Received


In addition, a mooring buoy constitutes a slip and as such requires a

permit from Appalachian. The definition was amended to include

mooring buoys.

12/6/10 Smith

Mountain Lake

Association

(SMLA)

Glossary We recommend that the definition of “slips” recognize that boats

must be moored by at least four points to be stable, therefore

requiring two parallel side lines. The existence of cleats on the side

of a dock does not create a “slip” as they are used for temporary tie-

ups in many areas and locations.

See note above regarding definition of a boat slip. Regarding cleats,

Appalachian concurs that cleats do not constitute a slip but provide

temporary mooring for visitors or visits home to replenish supplies when

spending the day on the lake. However, on applications for commercial

facilities, Appalachian will request the information so as to provide

accurate information to the Virginia Department of Health

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

Smith

Mountain

Chamber of

Commerce

(SMCC),

respectively

Glossary P vi

Reword – Boatslip – A designated watercraft docking area, confined

by two parallel sides. One boat slip can accommodate only one boat

at a time. See Figure 1

Two parallel sides allows for four mooring points, which is the best

method for securing a watercraft in a permanent berth.

See notes above regarding definition of a boat slip.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P vi

Delete – Carrying Capacity

There has been no issue, in fact Appendix C, Boating Density

clearly shows no issues.

Although carrying capacity is not currently an issue; it should be

continued to be monitored to ensure sustainment of the resource.

Assessment of capacity guidelines is a common planning tool. The

Virginia Outdoors Plan includes guidelines for outdoor recreation

planning.


Association

Glossary Dock Delineation Line: Suggest adding- “easement” in the

definition for sake of consistency and clarity; it’s in previous SMP

and also a word more common to laymen.

The word “easement” could be misinterpreted to imply the conveyance of

a property right that does not exist. It is Appalachian’s desire to

minimize any confusion regarding the term. An easement is an interest

which one person has in the land of another. The intent of the line at

issue is to delineate the dock construction limits between adjacent

properties, so “dock delineation line” is the more appropriate

terminology.

12/6/10 SMLA Glossary We think “boat covers” need to be specifically excluded from the

definition of “enclosures” in the glossary. These covers are no more

Automatic boat covers include frames which could extend beyond the

dock’s slip and as such, could impact 1/3 of the cove, proximity to travel

4

Date

Received


damaging to the aesthetics of the lake than large boats in slips and

quite frankly are more pleasing to many people than a large old boat

that may be in disrepair and that blocks the view of adjacent slips.

Docks are not “living rooms” in a house and should not be treated as

such.

lanes, navigation lanes and the line of sight between lateral marks. As

such, boat covers should be considered part of the structure.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P viii

Reword – Enclosure –An area of a dock that is bound by four walls

constructed of any materials. A boat cover is not an enclosure.

Appalachian modified its definition to state that a boat cover is not

an enclosure.


Association

Glossary l Fairway: Delete second “an”; revert to earlier used “the.” The

“an” is a pandora’s box; it’s nonspecific with respect to what is THE

open end of a boat slip in cases of multiple slips and/or the main

direction of boat travel. Only “the” can be rationally applied to the

primary opening on a dock and the primary boat direction of travel.

The original definition assumed that docks are constructed perpendicular

to the shoreline and slips are directly opposite one another across the

fairway and such is not always the case. Insertion of “an” will allow a

more accurate interpretation of the slip depending on the specific site and

orientation of existing slips.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P viii

Add – Footprint – The outer dimension of the dock or pier measured

at the water’s surface. Used to calculate the total area of the

structure.

Footprint should not include roof overhangs less than three feet,

access structures (walkways) under allowable limits and access

structures for ADA requirements. Counting roof overhangs in a

dock’s total square footage calculation is inconsistent with standard

building codes and thus adds to confusion with county inspections

and dock building contractors.

The term “footprint” was used in the 2003 SMP with regards to

replacement of destroyed structures. It was never utilized to determine

the total area of the structure. The term has been replaced with “location”

so as to minimize any confusion.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P viii

Reword – Habitable structure – A structure suitable for living and

containing bathroom facilities

Bathrooms are the standard for defining a habitable structure

Docks are intended to be water dependent structures. Bathrooms,

kitchens and sleeping quarters can and should occur outside of the project

boundary. Therefore, the definition utilized in the shoreline management

plan includes all three uses.


Association

Glossary Lift / Tram: Suggest delete “individual.” Needlessly restrictive.

Limits capacity to carry boat-related items, kayak, canoe, and a

The intent of allowing an individual tram to be located within the project

boundary is to aid in accessibility of handicapped or disabled individuals;

5

Date

Received


wheel chair-borne person who is likely to need assistance of another

person. May also impose an ADA non-compliant condition on

commercial and public entities. Suggest- “…to access to a private

dock or pier by no more than four people at one time and to a

commercial or public dock or pier by no more than eight people at

one ti”e."no more that eight perople (sic) at one ti”e." Add wo“d

"T”am" is as Steering Committee voted/approved.

not the transportation of equipment or a quantity of persons e.g. those

who could be carried in a gondola.

Tram was defined in the November 1, 2010 draft.


Association

Glossary Marina: Suggest revising to re“d "..craft and/or other services,

including but not limited to, the sale of ”."“ "”nd" alone is

restrictive. Other additions are as the Steering Committee

voted/approved.

Insertion of “or” would allow slips to be constructed without any

amenities outside of the project boundary for the public to enjoy. It is

Appalachian’s recommendation that the general public who would be

renting slips also have access to other services e.g. the sale of food, the

provision of gas, supplies, access to a boat ramp, etc.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P ix

Rewo– -- Mari– -- A facility situated on a lakeshore which provides

launching and secure moorings for water-borne craft and may also

provide supplies, fuel and marine repair services.

This definition better reflects the variety of marinas in the project

and is consistent with the Virginia Department of Health Definition

See note above regarding the definition of a marina.

12/6/10 SMLA Glossary The definition of “Project Boundary” in the glossary implies that

this is a fixed geographical line. In fact, the 800’ contour constantly

moves into the residents property due to erosion if the shoreline is

not protected, resulting in an uncompensated taking. SMLA

recommends that the definition be changed to indicate that the

boundary is fixed at the 800’ contour line as determined by the

original lake survey.

The definition is accurate. Property owners are encouraged to maintain

their properties to avoid avulsion or accretion. In some cases, the project

boundary may be defined by a meets and bounds survey.


Association

Glossary Scrub /Shrub: Suggest this be defined and added to Glossary. A definition for scrub/shrub was added.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P x

Rewo– -- Structu– -- A physical building which includes but is not

limited to boat docks and piers.

Adding parts to the definition makes it more complicated to inspect

and adds to confusion.

Appalachian desires to clarify the elements that require permits to occupy

and use project lands and waters.

Illegible Anonymous Glossary Trampolines are not permanent structures subject to AEP’s

regulatory authority. They are generally only on the water from

Under its license, Appalachian may grant permission for certain types of

use and occupancy of project lands and waters, but it must supervise and

6

Date

Received


Memorial Day to Labor Day and so should not be included in the

allowable dock square footage.

If concerns are being raised as to being visual eyesores, why not

require them to be taken down after the summer season (they’re up

then for only one fourth of the year). Size can be regulated

according to shore frontage. Only a few companies seem to make

them. Overton’s carries 15, 20, and 25ft. trampolines in diameter.

The result of this rule will be, once again, to make the lake a less

attractive place to young kids. Trampolines are generally their

favorite activity on the whole lake, and the are much safer than their

land-based counterparts.

control the occupancies for which it grants permission. Trampolines

occupy and use project lands and waters and like floating docks, can

impact 1/3 of the cove, navigation, and others’ ability to utilize their

shoreline and the public’s ability to access the shoreline. As such,

trampolines fall under Appalachian's licensing responsibilities.


Association

Glossary Wetlands: Suggest using only Army Corps of Engineers definition. The following definition provided by the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality will be utilized: “Wetlands (Wetland areas)“

Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at

a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal

circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted

for life in saturated soil conditions. Areas meeting the criteria are

wetlands regardless of being formally field-delineated in accordance with

federal or state law and regulations. Activities in wetlands may require

federal and/or state permits in addition to any permits that may be

required by Appalachian Power Company.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Glossary P xi

Reword -- Wetland -- Those areas that are inundated or saturated by

surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to

support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a

prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil

conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and

similar areas. Except in certain situations defined in US Army COE

delineation manual, evidence of a minimum of one positive wetland

indicator from each parameter (hydrology, soil, and vegetation)

must be found in order to make a positive wetland determination.

• Both the CE (Federal Register 1982) and the EPA (Federal

Register 1980) jointly use this definition

See note above regarding definition of a wetland.

7

Date

Received


• A wetland must to be delineated in accordance with the ACOE

Wetland Delineation Manual, as this is Federal and State code.

Consider including the Wetland Cross Section and photograph at the

end of this matrix in the SMP.


Association

Glossary Woody Debris: Strongly suggest reverting to definition in previous

SMP; e.g., delete "or over" here. We should limit removal of trees

and woody material to that which is in the water, and do all we can

to preclude disruptions of shoreline/banks. Overhanging

trees/woody material provide shade for fish and prevent/mitigate the

ill effects of erosion/sediment

Appalachian concurs that vegetation should not be removed

unnecessarily. However, if, for example, vegetation must be removed for

the installation of riprap, then those portions which extend over and into

the water should be utilized as fish structure.


Association

1.3 Goals and

Objectives #1- I fully support "protecting" and I favor "improving." But I have

reservations about the meaning and implications of "enhancing,"

particularly as it is associated with streambed and riparian areas,

wetlands, habitat and spawning areas. This SMP allows for broad-

brush classifications/designations of areas which would be "off

limits" to human activity. That would prohibit the range of

enjoyment people experience on and around the lakes. Consider

both the number and the expanse of interpretations of riparian area

(below). Suggest: If "enhancing" remains, include it and your

definition of it in the Glossary, perhaps citing 3-4 examples of what

is meant & not meant--see #2) .

www.coastal.ca.gov/wetrev/wetglos.html;

www.pima.gov/cmo/sdcp/kids/gloss.html;

www.pskf.ca/publications/glossary.html;

www.jcw.org/edglossary.htm; www.mondaycreek.org/glossary.html

The referenced goal is “Protecting and enhancing environmental

attributes such as streambed and riparian areas, wetlands, habitat and

spawning areas.” The Conservation/Environmental shoreline

classification is utilized where important resources have been identified.

Development must be carefully considered to ensure protection of the

resources.

The planting of vegetation, installation of fish habitat and installation or

retroactive best management practices are examples of enhancing

environmental attributes.


Association

1.3 Goals and

Objectives

# 2 - "Enhancing" should neither prohibit nor significantly restrict

trimming/removing vegetation, building docks/piers, emplacing

riprap/seawalls, or activities that reduce water safety, water quality

or enjoyment on and near the lakes. Some natural

environments/scenic qualities are not as desirable as many that have

been man-engineered. Suggest- Avoid foreclosing options that can

lead to better/more quality, safety, enjoyment.

“Enhancing” need not be interpreted negatively. It can also mean

allowance of vegetation to be removed to improve scenic views from

land to the water.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and TCRC, Bedford 1.4 Project P 6 Such statement is inaccurate and as such, need not be included.

8

Date

Received


12/7/10 County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Area

Description

2nd

para

Add – Shoreline erosion in certain areas of the project has eroded

beyond the original project boundary. In these cases the project

boundary is determined by the original survey.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.1.3

Ecological

Resources

P 10

2nd

bullet

Add -- Wetland areas which usually show evidence of a minimum

of one positive wetland indicator from of the following parameters

in order to make a positive wetland determination.

(1) Vegetation. The prevalent vegetation consists of

macrophytes that are typically adapted to areas having hydrologic

and soil conditions described in a above. Hydrophytic species, due

to morphological, physiological, and/or reproductive adaptation(s),

have the ability to grow, effectively compete, reproduce, and/or

persist in anaerobic soil conditions.

(2) Soil. Soils are present and have been classified as hydric,

or they possess characteristics that are associated with reducing

soil conditions.

(3) Hydrology. The area is inundated either permanently or

periodically at mean water depths < 6.6 ft, or the soil is saturated to

the surface at some time during the growing season of the prevalent

vegetation.

This change is consistent with Federal and State Code

The referenced data was collected between February 2001 and August

2003 utilizing a visual shoreline reconnaissance. To change the

definition would make the data no longer applicable. If actual wetland

plants, soil conditions, or inundation standards were not met, the

shoreline still had sufficient vegetation or scrub/shrub habitat to meet the

parameter to classify the shoreline as Conservation/Environmental or

Impact Minimization Zone.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.1.3

Ecological

Resources

P 10

3rd

bullet

Reword -- Scrub-shrub habitat adjacent to a wetland

Consistency with the accepted definition of a wetland

See note above regarding addition of scrub/shrub definition.

12/6/10 SMLA 2.1.7

Recreation Use

Density

It is SMLA’s position that boat density and “carrying capacity”

determinations are not valid parameters in the determination of

shoreline classification. This is a concept that has no validity at

present in the Smith Mountain Project.

Appalachian disagrees. Although carrying capacity is not currently an

issue; it should be continued to be monitored to ensure sustainment of the

resource and social conditions. Recreational values could be diminished

if the lakes become over-crowded .

9

Date

Received


12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.1.7

Recreation Use

Density

P 12

Eliminate density mapping as a parameter in determining Shoreline

Classification (based upon the Appendix C map, it should have

negligible impact). Recreation Use Density Calculations should be

used for informational purposes only. It should not be used as a

determinate for shoreline classification as density varies diurnally

and by season and constantly changing patterns of use.

• Using boat density mapping as a parameter to classify shoreline

uses limits private access while it ignores public access and usage

patterns.

• The Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP)

does not define acceptable densities for boating.

It’s somewhat surprising that the Appendix C map doesn’t reflect

the high usage pattern around Halesford Bridge, the commercial

center of the lake.

Boating density data helps determine where additional development

should and should not be planned Assessment of capacity guidelines is a

common planning tool. The Virginia Outdoors Plan includes guidelines

for outdoor recreation planning.

Section 2.1.7 was corrected to reflect the appropriate source.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.2.1 Mapping

Revision

Process

P 13

The resolution of the maps in Appendix D is not sufficient to

determine the impact of proposed mapping changes.

Perhaps the maps could be overlaid with the County GIS systems.

Such a system would also enhance the protection of sensitive

shoreline.

Additional maps at a reduced scale have been produced and included

in Appendix D

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.2.1 Mapping

Revision

Process

P 13

Add – 5. Wetlands must be designated in accordance with the Army

Corps of Engineers (ACOE or COE) Wetlands Delineation Manual.

If there is a discrepancy between the shoreline classification and this

manual, the manual prevails and Appalachian will change the

shoreline classification, update affected maps and notify the FERC

staff.

See note above regarding wetland definition.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.3 Shoreline

Classifications

P 14

Campgrounds and marinas should be consistently classified as high

density commercial, because they are operated for profit and are

expected to generate heavy amounts of boat traffic.

Parts of existing marinas are classified low density. Mitchell’s Point

and Lakeside Marinas are 2 examples.

It is our understanding that campgrounds were classified based

Shorelines were classified as High Density Commercial in 2003 if the

structures within the project boundary were: 1) considered to be

commercial marinas, 2) located between Hales Ford Bridge and a point ½

mile from the bridge either upstream or downstream; or 3) zoned for

commercial use. Shorelines were classified as High Density Multi-Use if

cove or channel width and boating density met a certain parameter, or the

structures within the project boundary were existing multi-use residential

10

Date

Received


upon their existing docks when the initial shoreline surveys were

completed. Some were classified HD Multi-use because they had

larger multiple docks and others that had many single docks were

classified as low density even though they may serve as many or

more campers than some HD campgrounds.

Campgrounds provide affordable public access for families,

including tourists that prefer camping over rental homes and hotels.

To restrict campgrounds to a lower density of docks threatens their

continued existence.

type facilities. Shorelines were classified as Low Density if areas were

not otherwise classified or if the shoreline had existing single family

docks and piers. Campgrounds were classified based on any of the

aforementioned parameters. To classify otherwise, would beg for a

definition of campground

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.3 Shoreline

Classifications

P 14

High Density Multi-Use 2nd

bullet

Delete last sentence

• Unclear as to intent

• Vacation of property lines is a local government function

• Likely to be unenforceable if lines already vacated and docks

exist

May be a consideration for future development

Appalachian acquired its property rights via tracts of land. Docks serving

homes must be located within the same original tract and may not be on

different tracts. Appalachian agrees that vacation of property lines is a

function of local governments. However, vacation of property lines may

not occur to circumvent having docks and homes on the same parcel.

Appalachian recognizes that vacation of property lines can occur but

Appalachian will not issue permits for docks that serve homes that are

located on a different tract.


Association

2.3 Shoreline

Classifications High Density Multi-Use:

Second bullet - Vacation is a prerogative of counties as the Steering

Committee (SC) has emphasized. Also, with respect to access,

strongly suggest - Retaining wording of previous SMP; e.g., “Such

access could be in the form of multi slip common dock areas and/or

an access ramp with a courtesy dock…”. If the setbacks are met,

there's no legitimate reason to preclude both a boat launch and a

community dock with slips.

See note above regarding docks and the homes that they serve being on

the same original parcel.

Previous wording was inconsistent. Elimination of “or” will make the

statement consistent with other areas and accomplish Appalachian’s

original intent.


Association

2.3 Shoreline

Classifications Conservation/Environmental:

This appears to me to combine and expand the meanings of Impact

Minimization Zone and Conservation/Environmental. I'm

uncomfortable with the implications. Does it not severely limit

development of all types along shorelines (perhaps not by denying

permits but by forcing applications for variance, a typically long and

frustrating process; and one that could injure Appalachian's

reputation). Does it not deem nearly one quarter of Leesville Lake's

shoreline unusable? Some of my discomfort (and potential blackeye

for Appalachian) would be set aside if the SMP uses only the Army

The combination of Conservation/Environmental and Impact

Minimization Zone shoreline classifications does not change the current

process for obtaining a structure adjacent to such shoreline.

11

Date

Received


Corps of Engineers definition of wetlands and also defines

scrub/shrub in the most applicable/narrowest of terms.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.3 Shoreline

Classifications

P 15

Conservation/Environmental, 3rd

Sentence

Reword -- The specific resources that need protection are

recreational opportunities, scenic beauty, water quality, fish and

wildlife habitat, wetlands and associated scrub-shrub habitat, and

cultural sites.

Virginia has no stream buffer requirement, however, streams are

protected if streambeds within the project boundary are delineated

as wetlands.

“Cultural sites” has been added. Such recommendation excludes

streams as a resource and Appalachian disagrees with such

recommendation. Streams and rivers that function well, with healthy

aquatic ecosystems, bring benefits to the entire lake and the counties who

use the lake as a public water source. Well-functioning streams and

rivers provide better flood control, reintroduction of wildlife species,

better protection of wetland areas, improved aesthetics for clean and

well-functioning waterways, stabilized stream banks, improved habitat

for fish, amphibians, insects, and other aquatic organisms that compose a

balanced ecosystem food chain, cooler waters, which make it easier for

fish to survive.

Additional permits may be required for work conducted within streams

and classifying streams as Conservation/Environmental. The

classification ensures any proposed structures undergo additional review

by state agencies that may require those additional permits.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.3 Shoreline

Classifications

P-15

Add a new Island classification that would address the erosion threat

while preserving scenic shoreline attributes and access, and allow

stabilization with a permit issued by Appalachian.

Islands are considered scenic treasures, but their existence is

threatened by shoreline erosion.

A new Island Protection Classification has been created.


Association

2.4 Parameters High Density Commercial

The three bullets seem to connote a kind of reverse grandfather

clause. The addition of the dates seems to prohibit property zoning

by county's.

The parameters express conditions for defining the High Density

Commercial shoreline classification. The addition of the dates clarified

the application of the parameters. Any future commercial development

would have to occur at Hales Ford Bridge as originally requested by the

counties or fall under the Low Density Use Commercial shoreline

classification.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

2.4 Parameters P 17

3rd

bullet

5th

bullet

6th

bullet

The parameter, “undeveloped islands,” has been deleted as a

parameter as a new island shoreline classification has been created.

Scenic areas have been identified.

12

Date

Received


respectively 7th

bullet

Conservation / Environmental

Delete undeveloped islands

Either delete or define/list these specific scenic areas

Delete – as USFWS found the project no longer impacts Roanoke

logperch

Delete – as Virginia has no stream buffer requirement and

delineated wetlands would protect sensitive streams

Scenic classification was a one-time event and cannot be repeated

for every scenic view

The parameter regarding Roanoke Logperch Habitat has been

modified to state: “Areas identified as Roanoke Logperch Habitat by

either the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or the Virginia

Department of Game and Inland Fisheries.”

12/3/10 Bedford

County

2.4 Parameters Shoreline designated Conservation/Environmental should only be so

designated after a formal delineation of wetlands and confirmation

of their existence by either the Corps of Engineers or a certified

wetland delineator

See note above regarding wetland definition. Appalachian will consult

with local and federal authorities prior to any filing for a variance from

the FERC to determine the exact location and extent of any wetlands.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.4 Parameters P 17

Add a new Island parameter that would address the erosion threat

while preserving scenic shoreline attributes and access, and allow

stabilization with a permit issued by Appalachian.

Islands are considered scenic treasures, but their existence is

threatened by shoreline erosion.

See note above regarding new Island Shoreline Classification.

12/6/10 SMLA 2.5 Regulations We object to the rather casual language in the first paragraph of 2.5,

Regulations. Certainly APCO must adapt to the varying problems it

encounters in managing the SMP. It must be free to interpret the

language of the SMP but it cannot make new rules without approval

of the FERC. Our recommendation is that when complex issues

arise they should be explored first with the TRC and, if new rules

are required, they be taken to FERC for approval.

Appalachian develops policies based upon its license requirements,

existing goals and available information. It agrees to consult with the

Technical Advisory Committee on appropriate issues.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

2.5 Regulations SMP regulations need to be consistent with Federal, State, and

Local regulations. For example,

• Dredging regulations should match Army COE regulations and

applicable State code;

•Wetland delineation should match US Army COE regulations

Licensees must ensure that proposed uses and occupancies are consistent

with the purposes of protecting and enhancing the environmental values

of the project, while safely operating and maintaining the project. In

general, SMP rules and regulations are consistent with the intent of

Federal, State and Local regulations. However, on occasion SMP rules

and regulations may be more restrictive in order to protect identified

resources and in other cases, local regulations may be more restrictive.

13

Date

Received


(USACE) “Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1,

January 1987, Final Report” (Federal Manual_ and applicable state

code;

•Land disturbance measures should match Virginia Erosion and

Sediment Control Program

http://www.dcr.virginia/gov/soil_and_water/e_and_s.shtml and

applicable codes;

•Stormwater controls should match the Virginia Stormwater

Management Program

http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/soil_and_water/stormwat.shtml and

applicable local codes

•Building regulations should match local codes and industry

standard definitions

•Shoreline classifications should generally reflect upland uses and

be consistent among those uses

Regarding wetlands, Appalachian agrees to consult with federal and state

agencies regarding the type and extent of any wetlands prior to filing any

variance requests with the FERC.

Land disturbance measures and stormwater controls are largely the

function of the local governments and those local governments are

encouraged to comply with, enforce and even adopt more stringent

regulations to protect the resources within their jurisdictions.

An example of local governments being more restrictive would be the

height requirement on docks. Appalachian’s maximum height

requirement for structures within the Low Density Use classification is 26

feet. Depending on the zoning, Franklin County’s height restriction may

be 18 feet. Should the localities desire to adopt more stringent

regulations, they may do so. However, Virginia Code Ann. § 15.2 -1226

provides that counties may by ordinance regulate the land below the 800

foot elevation contour concerning the location, size and length of docks,

provided those ordinances do not conflict with the rights and

responsibilities of Appalachian under its federal license for the Project.

The SMP does not set forth building regulations; such is the requirement

of the local governments.

Requiring shoreline classifications to reflect upland uses would eliminate

much of the High Density Commercial classification around Hales Ford

Bridge. The existing shoreline classifications are based on a hierarchy

and upland uses; they were designed to be flexible depending upon how

the counties regulate the upland property. The shoreline classifications

allow for different uses but at different densities.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

2.5 Regulations P 18

Add -- … Members of the SMP Technical Review Committee will

be consulted, and if necessary, local, state, and federal agencies,

during such decision making processes.

This ensures a comprehensive deliberative process would be

Appalachian agrees to consult with a Technical Advisory Committee on

appropriate issues.

14

Date

Received


respectively followed.

12/7/10 Tri County

Lake

Administrative

Commission

2.5 Regulations Throughout the document there is a requirement that docks "shall

not encroach closer than thirty (30) feet to a lateral mark or other

navigation aid". We would like to emphasize that the majority of the

positions for the 200+ navigation aids currently on Smith Mountain

Lake were determined by agencies such as APCO, TLAC and

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Thus it would

seem unwarranted for a resident to be penalized in some manner in

the future because of a marker placed by an agency years ago. It is

possible that some markers were placed less than 30' from docks and

as long as the dock is not blocking the site of a navigation aid

inappropriately (e.g. a shoal marker may be placed in a location in

which the site is blocked by a dock from certain angles) there should

be no reason for any action to be taken. Recommended language to

protect residents from such unwarranted consequences is included

on the matrix of comments that was provided by TCRC.

The language was adapted from the Bedford County Dock Ordinance that

existed at the time the 2003 SMP was implemented. Appalachian

recognizes that there are existing docks located within thirty (30) feet of a

lateral mark and those docks may continue to exist and may even be

expanded despite their nonconforming nature. However, the expansion

must occur at least 30 feet from the aid to navigation. Appalachian’s

regulation represents a fair balance between existing structures and the

protection of public safety structures.

Since, 2003, there has been very few applications for modifications

within 30 feet of an aid to navigation and Appalachian worked with the

applicants to expand the structures in different locations.

SMLA 2.5 Regulations A theme running through our thoughts about the document is that all

the proposed SMP regulations must be in conformance with local,

state and federal regulations and laws and general practice.

Conversely, when there are such regulations/laws existing at the

local, state and/or federal level, they should be referenced as such

and not repeated, paraphrased or their language otherwise included

in the SMP. An example would be the determination of wetlands.

The Corp of Engineers has a manual that clearly spells out the

parameters that determine wetlands.

See note above regarding license compliance. Appropriate rules are

repeated for the convenience of the property owner trying to develop his

or her shoreline without having to go to multiple sections within the

document.

11/30/10 Reg Anderson 2.5 Regulations SeaDoo 'attachments' to floating or stationary docks - these

standard ready-made and installed items are appendages that should

not be included in the square footage of the Dock itself, unless, it

protrudes into the space of other docks or boating traffic. There are

many existing cases that an appendage inside the dock space

between the dock and the shoreline that should require NO special

visit or permit from AEP or the County. THIS MUST BE

ADDRESSED and put to rest.

All floating structures can impact others’ ability to utilize the shoreline or

to navigate open waters and as such, must be included in the square

footage calculations, the 1/3 of the cove regulations, setbacks, etc.

Otherwise the expansion could be limitless and the amount of personal

watercraft, considered to be watercraft, could be unlimited.

15

Date

Received


11/30/10 Reg Anderson 2.5 Regulations Dock enclosures: why is there a limit on size, as long as there are

no kitchen or bathroom facilities? The dock square footage is

limiting in itself.

According to its license, Appalachian is allowed to issue permits for

docks, piers and similar structures. Uses on docks should be limited to

those uses that are required because the structure is over the water i.e.

“water-dependent” uses. Uses that can occur outside of the project

boundary should occur outside of the project boundary. A 72 square foot

enclosure is allowed for storage only. The allowance of enclosures and

the size were intended to be a convenience for property owners so that

they do not have to carry life jackets, skis, wake boards and other boating

accessories to the home but the size was small enough not to be habitable.

12/5/10 Robert Gilmore i am probably like many people who realized too late that i needed

to submit documentation for my dock because it is "non-

conforming" - we had recently built our house and were in the

process of doing a lot of the finishing work that we could not afford

to pay someone else to do - and i guess we plain missed the

newspaper and other print notifications.

my dock was permitted and inspected by franklin county and was

built in the summer of 2000 - no modifications have been made to it

since.

my idea is - you have date stamped aerial photographs why cant you

use those photographs to document what my dock, shoreline and

vegitation (sic) looked like as your "cut-off" date and compare that

to what exists today - you will find that there have been no changes

being made since the original construction.

i am not sure of exactly how many people, especially those that are

not full time lake residents have been caught in this mess, much less

full timers like myself who i guess just didnt pay close enough

attention.

Appalachian filed the SMP with the FERC in August of 2003. According

to that SMP, existing nonconforming structures did not have to be

modified to meet the new regulations set forth in the SMP and at the

request of the counties, Appalachian included within the SMP the

opportunity for property owners to file documentation regarding existing

nonconforming structures in case the structure was destroyed by

accident,, natural event, or the intentional or wrongful act of another

party so that the structure could be replaced. Two years was given to

provide the documentation. Appalachian notified property owners of the

opportunity and throughout the process itself, steering committee

members were encouraged to keep their members or the people whom

they represented, informed of the process and the decisions made. Filing

the documentation was not mandatory.

Some of the documentation that has been filed has been for structures that

are not considered to be nonconforming while other documentation has

been filed indicating that even if the structure is destroyed, a structure

meeting the 2003 SMP could be built.

Appalachian encourages Mr. Gilmore to compare his structure to the

SMP regulations to determine what could be rebuilt if the structure is

destroyed.

12/3/10 Bedford

County

2.5 Regulations We believe there should be no limit set as the level of maintenance

that may be performed on an existing dock/structure so long as such

repair does not alter the footprint, number of slips, size of the

As previously stated, in the development of the 2003 SMP, it was

determined that existing nonconforming structures did not have to be

modified to meet the new regulations set forth in the SMP.

16

Date

Received


enclosures nor rookline (sic) on said dock/structure. Simultaneously, the counties asked for docks to be able to be

reconstructed in their original location should they be destroyed by some

act of nature. Appalachian agreed provided documentation was provided

indicating the exact location. The 50% maintenance rule was the result

of this exception. Property owners are encouraged to maintain their

docks. However, complete replacement requires compliance with the

SMP. In addition, many maintenance activities require county building

permits and as such a permit is required from Appalachian. The

allowance to replace structures, if destroyed, was intended to be the

exception, not the rule.


Association

2.5 Regulations 2.5.1 - High Density Commercial

#14 - I've heard that the water level on Leesville Lake cannot rise

over the 620 foot contour NGVD without spilling over the dam (that

a number of years ago it reached 615 and caused the dam to shift).

Irrespectively, the wide range of water levels at Leesville Lake

impacts the shoreline, the water quality, the safety and the

construction of docks/piers--especially their height--on the lake in

vastly different ways than do the water levels at SML. Suggest: The

SMP recognize the salient differences between the two lakes.

#16 & #20 - The measurement should not be based on "base

elevation" but rather on a contour line. Requiring measurements

from a base elevation is expensive (accuracy requires a survey),

onerous (can only be done at low water at Leesville Lake) and

unnecessary. Suggest: All measurements be based on contour lines.

It is Appalachian’s opinion that the SMP addresses the differences

between the two reservoirs. However, the LLA may wish to provide

specific examples for Appalachian to review.

#16 & #20 Base elevation is a contour line and the only way to determine

if a dock will have water under all water levels is to document the

location of the lower elevations.

As for the dam shifting, such did not occur.

12/7/10 Smith

Mountain

Chamber of

Commerce

2.5 Regulations We believe that too many of the SMP regulations seek to prevent

some imagined harm that no one has yet documented. We would

request that APCO go back and ask these questions of each

regulation: 1) What is the real and measurable harm that is currently

being done to the environment that demands some immediate

controls? And 2) Exactly how does this regulation reduce or correct

that harm? If APCO can honestly answer those questions with solid

facts backed by impartial research, then the regulation should stand.

Otherwise, it may be unnecessary and over-reaching and should not

Regulations were developed to implement goals identified to enhance and

protect the scenic, recreational and environmental values of the project.

The Environmental Assessment for the new license issued on December

15, 2009 identifies the benefits of the SMP.

17

Date

Received


be imposed without further study and documented

evidence of real harm to the environment. We envision a world

where AEP and FERC work hand in hand with community groups,

businesses, and lake residents to continue the kind of stewardship of

the lake that we have been doing for the last 50 years.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 18

Item 7

Add – The 30’ rule is not applicable to existing docks,

ALSO APPLY THIS CHANGE TO REGULATIONS FOR:

• High Density Multi-use

• Public Use

• Low Density Use

• There may be cases where markers are closer than 30’.

See note above regarding 30’ distance requirement from aids to

navigation.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 19

Reword – 9. In all cases there shall be a minimum watercraft passage

lane of 30 feet.



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

• Article 415 – does not assign Appalachian safety responsibilities

State code establishes a 50’ no wake from docks

The minimum watercraft passage lane was developed for narrow coves.

For example, a 90 foot cove would allow 30 foot structures on either side,

leaving 1/3 or 30 feet for navigation. Such distance may be sufficient if

only docks are at the back of the cove and boats are not parked at the

ends of the docks but if there is a ramp in the back of the cove allowing

an unlimited amount of traffic, additional area is necessary to

accommodate the additional traffic. 50’ is Appalachian’s

recommendation for such scenario.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 19

Item 10

Delete last sentence



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

• Article 415 – does not assign Appalachian safety responsibilities

State code establishes a 50’ no wake from docks

Such recommendation would eliminate any fairway distance between

structures without slips and the potential for access to the shoreline.

18

Date

Received


12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 19

Reword -- 13. Permittees are allowed one (1) enclosure per service

dock that may not exceed maximum of 200 square feet (inside

dimensions). No food preparation would be allowed.

Increased enclosure size on a service dock will allow the marina to

better serve the point of sale needs of its customers and enhance

their economic viability. Uses could include petroleum dispensing,

pump-out of boat holding tanks, boat rental, moorings, and retail

operations including sale of boat supplies, ice, and food and drink

items in sealed containers for off premise consumption.

According to its license, Appalachian is allowed to issue permits for

docks, piers and similar structures. Uses on docks should be limited to

those uses that are required because the structure is over the water i.e.

“water-dependent” uses. Uses that can occur outside of the project

boundary should occur outside of the project boundary. A 48 square foot

enclosure is allowed on service docks for cash registers, etc.

Convenience stores can be built outside of the project boundary.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 20

Item 15.

Eliminate paragraphs d) and e)



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

Unenforceable variables

d) has been eliminated and e) has been relocated to the introduction

of the regulation.

ALAC 2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

heightened interest in the following areas:

Section 2.5.1, Item 16—Minimum water depth requirements.

Docks are water dependent structures and as such require water. On

average, boats on SML have a 2-3 foot draft while personal watercraft

and pontoon boats have a 1 foot draft.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 20

Item 16.

Eliminate minimum water depth requirements



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

This is an unnecessary restriction as commercial entities and

individuals have little economic incentive to build unusable docks

See note above regarding minimum water depth requirements.

19

Date

Received


and piers.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 21

Item 25

Delete -- “and with VDGIF boat ramp standards.”



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

Compliance with all local, state and federal regulations is sufficient

The VDGIF boat ramp construction standards include several methods,

are well thought out and reasonable given that the ramp would serve the

public. Appalachian sees no reason why someone who was putting in a

ramp would not want to comply with the recommended standards.

The regulation has been modified to provide the website.

(www.dgif.virginia.gov/boating/building-boat-rmps.asp).”

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 22

Item 33

Reword -- 33. Under any and all circumstances, permanent

sanitation facilities including restrooms, drainfields and other

sanitation facilities that existed prior to the implementation of the

Shoreline Management Plan (August 31, 2003) may not be

expanded nor shall habitable structures be allowed to be expanded.



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

To bring it into conformance with:

State Code § 15.2-2307. Vested rights not impaired; nonconforming

uses.

The entire article can be found at

http://leg1.state.va.us/000/cod/15.2-2307.HTM

The proposed change deletes two words at the end of the sentence, “or

rebuilt”. Appalachian does not believe that such referenced uses are

consistent with project uses and purposes. They may continue to exist.

However, if destroyed they may not be rebuilt. Appalachian believes to

be a fair and balanced solution.

There is no requirement to make revisions to the nonconforming structure

provisions of the SMP to address a vested right issue under Va. Code

Section 15.2-2307. This does not involve the administration of a zoning

ordinance by a locality under Chapter 22 of Title 15.2 of the Virginia

Code, and thus is not a question of vested rights under Virginia law.

Appalachian has acquired and retained all interests in lands necessary or

appropriate to carry out project purposes. It has acquired those property

interests either by fee simple ownership of project property, or by

purchasing flowage easements. The flowage easements provide that any

use of the shoreline in question shall be deemed to be made under a

revocable license from Appalachian and not adverse to any right, title,

interest or privilege of Appalachian.

By order dated July 5, 2005, the FERC approved the SMP dated August

31, 2003. Under that SMP, to be considered part of the nonconforming

structures provisions, property owners were required to provide to

Appalachian by August 31, 2005 documentation of any structures already

20

Date

Received


built below the 795 foot contour NGVD on Smith Mountain Lake and the

613 foot contour NGVD on Leesville Lake. The revisions currently

proposed for the revised SMP reflect that August 31, 2005 deadline, and

incorporate it into the nonconforming structure provisions of the SMP.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 23

Item 34

Reword -- 34. Trees and woody material that extend from the

shoreline into the lake and that have to be removed for the

installation of docks, piers, ramps, riprap or other structures may

voluntarily be collected, bundled and sunk along the shoreline in

water no greater than 20 feet deep so as to replace fish habitat.

Bundling techniques are available in the Habitat Management Plan

that is part of the License for the Smith Mountain Project issued

December 15, 2009.



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

There is concern unless this woody debris is properly bound and

inspected before it is sunk, it could present a safety issue. As there

are no known Federal, State or local regulations either permitting or

preventing disposal of woody debris in this manner, perhaps a

compromise would be to make this a voluntary provision.

“May voluntarily” in lieu of “shall” would make replacement of the

woody debris optional and Appalachian’s compliance with the FERC

approved Habitat Management Plan questionable.

The purpose of the Habitat Management Plan is to identify measures for

protecting, enhancing and creating habitat within Project lands and waters

and to outline how this will be accomplished over the the term of the new

license. The goal of the plan is to maintain the abilty to allow for the

construction of private access to the Project waters while protecting and

enhancing the habitat along the shoreline.

Woody debris can be bundled and sunk below stationary portions of

docks. The regulation has been rewritten so as to allow property

owners to propose manmade alternatives, such as those identified in

Appendix H of the SMP.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 23

Item 35 (Any vegetation that needs to be removed for the

installation of the dock shall be replaced in accordance with Section

2.5.11)

Reword – 35. Projects involving land-disturbing activities equal to

or greater than 10,000 square feet must comply with the Virginia

Erosion and Sediment Control Law and all applicable regulations

adopted in accordance with that law. Projects involving land-

disturbing activities equal to or greater than one acre, must comply

with the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and the Virginia

The Erosion and Sediment Control Program and the Stormwater

Management Programs are based on the principles of 1) conserving trees

and other vegetation at each site by planting additional vegetation,

clustering tree areas, and promoting the use of native plants and 2)

clearing and grading of forests and native vegetation at a site should be

limited to the minimum amount needed to build lots, allow access, and

provide fire protection. A fixed portion of any community open space

should be managed as protected green space in a consolidated manner.

However, the amount of vegetation typically contained within the project

boundary that would have to be removed for a viewshed, access to the

21

Date

Received


Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit Regulations

adopted in accordance with the Act. Project specific questions can

be directed to the respective County government or in certain cases

to Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

Christiansburg Regional Office.

Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program:

http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/soil_and_water/e_and_s.shtml

Virginia Stormwater Management Program

http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/soil_and_water/stormwat.shtml



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

• To conform with State and Local Codes

• Thresholds are a better approach as most construction activity has

associated with it some amount of land disturbance.

• Dock construction over the past 40 years has had little if any

negative environmental impact

• Docks due provide cover and are attractors for certain species like

bass, perch and bluegills

Docks Avg Coverage sq ft Total Coverage

sq ft Total Coverage Acres Total Project Coverage

SML 7,524 1,500 11,286,000 259

1.1%

LVL 146 1,500 219,000 5

0.0%

Docks Avg Width ft Total Width ft

Total Shoreline Covered mi Total Shoreline

Coverage

SML 7,524 40 300,960 57

11.4%

LVL 146 40 5,840 1

1.1%

shoreline, or installation of dock would be exempt under the

recommended programs.

Docks provide coverage for larger species. Since all of the fish species

are dependent upon each other, a balance of fisheries and habitat must be

promoted.

22

Date

Received


12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

P 23

Item 37 (structures adjacent to shoreline classified as

Conservation/Environmental shall maintain a setback of 30 feet

from the Conservation/Environmental classification).

Reword -- 37. Any proposed construction (including shoreline

stabilization) adjacent to shoreline classified as Conservation /

Environmental shall take appropriate measures to ensure there is no

impact to sensitive habitat or cultural resources.



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

• There is no scientific basis for a fixed setback, nor is there a

Federal or State code dealing with fixed setbacks.

• Every situation is different and each permit near these sensitive

areas should detail necessary protective measures, based upon a

site visit from responsible Agencies.

The Conservation/Environmental shoreline classification protects

resources such as streams, wetlands, scrub/shrub habitat, recreational

opportunities, scenic beauty, water quality, and fish and wildlife habitat.

As these resources are diverse, Appalachian chose a fixed distance for a

setback with the intention of monitoring that setback to determine if it is

adequate or in need of expansion or reduction.

The regulation has been revised to state “Any proposed construction

(including shoreline stabilization) adjacent to shoreline classified as

Conservation/Environmental shall maintain an appropriate setback

of at least 30 feet from the edge of the Conservation/Environmental

shoreline in order to ensure there is no impact to sensitive areas.”

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.1 High

Density

Commercial

Regulations

Add – 38. Permits for commercial boat docks, piers and ramps shall

be granted for a three year period, and may be extended if progress

is being made.

• The surrounding Counties encourage and in some zoning districts

require submittal and subsequent approval of a Conceptual Plan

of Development

• These Concept Plans are approved for the life of the project, so

long a progress is being made

To allow for a longer period for major construction projects

The time allowed for construction is covered in the terms and conditions

of the permit issued to occupy and use project lands and waters.

ALAC 2.5.2 High

Density Multi-

Use

heightened interest in the following areas:

Section 2.5.2, Item 27—Treatment of docks built prior to August

31, 2003.

Appalachian believes this comment to be too vague for Appalachian to

respond.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and TCRC, Bedford 2.5.2 High P 27 To include pilings would allow the structure(s) to be replaced in

23

Date

Received


12/7/10 County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Density Multi

Use

Regulations

Item 28

Reword -- 28. Docks, piers and similar structures constructed

within the 795 foot contour NGVD of Smith Mountain Lake and the

613 foot contour NGVD on Leesville Lake prior to the

implementation of the Shoreline Management Plan (August 31,

2003) do not need to be modified to meet the new requirements.

These structures may continue to exist despite their nonconforming

nature and may be expanded with a permit from Appalachian,

provided the nonconforming aspect of the structure is not increased.

Maintenance of all structures, including pilings, is encouraged.



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

• Modifications required to meet License Article 415. Use and

Occupancy. … The licensee shall also ensure, to the satisfaction

of the Commission's authorized representative, the use and

occupancies for which it grants permission are maintained in

good repair and comply with applicable state and local health

and safety requirements.

• And to bring it into conformance with State Code § 15.2-2307.

Vested rights not impaired; nonconforming uses. The entire

article can be found at http://leg1.state.va.us/000/cod/15.2-

2307.HTM Prior SMP regulations required owners of non-

conforming structures to document them and file that

documentation with Appalachian prior to 31 August 2005.

Appalachian was supposed to notify these property owners that

this documentation was acceptable.

1. Proper notifications (registered letters) were not sent to affected

property owners, so many were unaware of this requirement

2. It is unclear if Appalachian ever notified property owners of the

acceptability/suitability of this documentation

3. Appalachian is being inconsistent in eliminating the 31 August

2005 requirement in high density commercial but not in all

perpetuity and such is not consistent with the goals of the SMP. See

previous notes.

Appalachian did not require property owners to file the documentation.

Appalachian notified property owners of this determination.

Appalachian recognizes and appreciates the benefits that commercial

entities provide to the general public and as such extends greater

privileges.

24

Date

Received


other classifications

4. Property owners of docks constructed prior to the SMP (those

having no permit) should be able to rebuild the original

structure provided they can show the structure existed prior to

SMP implementation.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.2 High

Density Multi

Use

Regulations

P 28

Item 29

Reword – 29. Property owners of nonconforming dock structures

that existed prior to the implementation of the SMP (August 31,

2003) and that are located within the 795 foot contour NGVD of

Smith Mountain Lake and the 613 foot contour NGVD on Leesville

Lake that have been destroyed by accident, natural event, or the

intentional or wrongful act of another party may replace the

destroyed structure with another structure in its original location.

Any destroyed structure that has not been rebuilt within two (2)

years shall be rebuilt in conformance to the provisions of this Plan.

Only the location may be replaced; all other aspects must meet the

Shoreline Management Plan rules in effect at the time. A permit is

required from Appalachian Power.



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

Modifications required to bring it into conformance with State Code

§ 15.2-2307. Vested rights not impaired; nonconforming uses. The

entire article can be found at http://leg1.state.va.us/000/cod/15.2-

2307.HTM

The suggested language omits the documentation requirement and the

setback from the Conservation/Environmental shoreline classification.

Please see notes above regarding setback to ensure no impact to sensitive

areas as well as notes above regarding vested rights.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.2 High

Density Multi

Use

Regulations

P 28

Item 30

Delete



Appalachian believes its existing nonconforming structure language is

fair. Structures do not need to be modified to meet the new regulations,

nor are the structures vested. They may continue to exist despite their

nonconforming nature and may even be expanded provided the

nonconforming aspect is not expanded.

25

Date

Received


• Public Use

• Low Density Use

Covered in Item 29 above

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.2 High

Density Multi

Use

Regulations

P 29

Item 31

Delete



• Public Use

• Low Density Use

Violates State Code § 15.2-2307. Vested rights not impaired;

nonconforming uses. The entire article can be found at

http://leg1.state.va.us/000/cod/15.2-2307.HTM

Item 31 clarifies Appalachian’s position regarding existing and proposed

sanitation facilities. Such uses are not vested.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.2 High

Density Multi

Use

Regulations

P 29

Add – 36. Permits for multi-slip boat docks, piers and ramps along

high density multi-use shoreline shall be granted for a three year

period, and may be extended if progress is being made.

To allow for a longer period for major construction projects

The construction period for structures is addressed in the terms and

conditions of the permit to occupy and use project lands and waters. The

terms and conditions can be modified where appropriate.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.3 Public

Use

Regulations

P 35

Item 14

Reword – 14. Only floating docks or uncovered piers shall be

considered for public use areas, with the exception of boathouses,

fishing piers, and covered docks for storage of government service

boats.

Covering of fishing piers increases public use and benefits ADA

users

Appalachian does not object to covered fishing piers and has

modified the section accordingly.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

2.5.3 Public

Use

Regulations

P 41

Add – 24. Permits for public use boat docks, piers and ramps shall

be granted for a three year period, and may be extended if progress

is being made.

To allow for a longer period for major construction projects and

The construction period for structures is addressed in the terms and

conditions of the permit to occupy and use project lands and waters. The

terms and conditions can be modified where appropriate.

26

Date

Received


respectively government funding restrictions.

ALAC 2.5.4 low

Density Use

Regulations

a heightened interest in the following areas:

Section 2.5.4, P67, Fig. 1—Calculation of dock total sq. ft. is very

unclear and seems to be arbitrary.

The purpose of Figure 1 is not to explain how a dock’s square footage is

calculated but to define what is considered to be a slip and what is not.

12/5/10 Jack Harrison 2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

Secondly, I understand the need for standards related to dock

placement, size and function but the regulations concerning the use

of the dock space within the footprint in my opinion goes too far and

results in overregulation. Why does it matter if my storage

enclosure is large or small as long as its within the footprint ? Why

is the environment harmed if I want to screen in a portion of the

dock space for the comfort of my family and our guests ? I think

this merits further discussion as well. If nothing else to explain the

reasoning behind the current regulations.

Docks, serving single family homes and that are located adjacent to the

Low Density Use shoreline classification are allowed to have enclosures

no greater than 72 square feet in the back 10 feet of the dock. The

purpose of the enclosure is to provide storage of boating accessories. The

location requirement was included so as to limit the viewshed impact

from the land to the water and from the water to the land.

Appalachian issues permits for docks, piers and similar structure, all of

which are considered to be water-dependent structures. Appalachian

does not issue permits for habitable structures. Uses that are not water-

dependent can occur outside of the project boundary.

9/30/10 and 10/25/10 Bart Wilner 2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

Please explain why the graduated schedule of dock size per length

of shoreline was not included in the SMP, despite endorsement by

the Steering Committee. Arguments regarding cumulative effects

and additional work are weak.

Appalachian conducted a review of the SMP in conjunction with a

Steering Committee, representing stakeholders from state agencies, local

governments and various non-governmental organizations. Although

Appalachian consulted with this Steering Committee through the review

process, it was not was required to abide by all of its recommendations.

Appalachian has developed the revised SMP taking into consideration all

requests and concerns and new data available to it through the relicensing

process. FERC will review the document and public comments to

determine if the regulations proposed are appropriate.

Currently, Appalachian allows for structures up to 1500 square feet on a

lot with 100-300 linear feet. Docks up to 2,250 square feet are allowed

on lots with 301-600 linear feet of shoreline. Additional shoreline allows

for larger structures. It is Appalachian’s opinion that to increase the size

of the docks would impact access to the shoreline, increase the number of

personal watercraft (as their ramps are not considered to be slips but

counted as square footage), and decrease the amount of project lands and

27

Date

Received


waters available to the public. Further, future subdivision of lands and

the creation of additional nonconforming structures could be a concern.

Or in other words, a property owner of a large parcel of land who has a

significant amount of shoreline could potentially obtain a large dock or

docks based upon that amount of shoreline and subsequently subdivide

the property and potentially obtain additional docks for the new lots, thus

circumventing the purpose of the SMP.

Property owners could purchase additional property or buy lots with

greater amounts of shoreline should they wish to have larger structures.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

P 42

Table 2.5-1 – Modify table to graduate dock size limits for every 50’

of shoreline. For each addition 50’ of shoreline allow the dock area

to increase by 125 sq ft to a maximum of 3,000 sq ft.

• Current guidelines fail to recognize the additional spacing

provided by larger lots with wider shoreline

• The cumulative impact of this change would be negligible

Docks Avg Coverage sq ft Total Coverage

sq ft Total Coverage Acres Total Project Coverage

SML 7,524 1,500 11,286,000 259

1.1%

LVL 146 1,500 219,000 5

0.0%

Docks Avg Width ft Total Width ft

Total Shoreline Covered mi Total Shoreline

Coverage

SML 7,524 40 300,960 57

11.4%

LVL 146 40 5,840 1

1.1%

See note above regarding larger docks based on smaller increments of

graduated shoreline.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

P 43

Item 13

3rd

Sentence

Trams may be located outside of the project boundary without

Appalachian approval. Should a property owner wish to have a tram

within the project boundary, medical documentation will be required in

28

Date

Received


County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Reword -- Lift systems or trams designed for individual

transportation may be installed.

• There should be no medical needs test (doctor’s note) for a

property owner, some trams are a safety enhancement for steep

lots and may result in less disturbance on steep slopes.

The property owner may also have guests or relatives that require

the use of a tram.

order to obtain a permit.

Trams can be installed on an 80% incline. Localities are encouraged to

consider the scenic and environmental ramifications of the linear removal

of vegetation on steep slopes.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

P 43

Item 15

Reword 2nd

sentence -- Docks may also be placed in accordance

with dock locations that are shown or described on a recorded

document …

It does not have to be a developer’s plat as long as the easement is

properly described.

Appalachian’s language does not require the dock to be shown or

described on a recorded document. The verb “may” is used. The

localities’ proposed language eliminates the ability for property owners to

obtain waivers from their adjacent property owners. The intent of the

language is to have adequate spacing between structures. Adjacent

property owners may grant waivers to allow encroachments over the dock

delineation lines or to reduce the setback requirement.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

P 67

Figure 1

A permanent mooring structure requires two parallel sides so that 4

tie points can secure the watercraft. Modify the drawings

accordingly

Counting open water into the calculation of a docks square footage

makes no sense, in the case where the slip has only one parallel side.

See previous discussion on boat slips.

12/6/10 Donna Pittman 2.5.4 Low

Density Use

Regulations

After reviewing the Lake Weekly article and your information for

homeowners on SML, I found that I need clarification . Our son has

CP and uses a wheelchair. What are the guidelines for handicap

accessibility from our shore to the dock and water? We purchased a

pontoon that will accommodate a wheelchair and we have a life vest

for him. He loves the water! It is not possible to use a ladder for

him now. We will need to provide a separate water entrance for our

son.

If you do not have guidelines in place yet, this is the perfect time to

review (ADA) disability requirements. I am sure this is important to

many lake property owners and their guests. Thank you so much for

your time.

Appalachian currently allows for access to the shoreline. Applications

are on-line at www.smithmtn.com. Please contact the Shoreline

Management Office at 540-489-2556 should you have any questions.

12/6/10 SMLA 2.5.8 Shoreline With respect to erosion, sedimentation and shoreline stabilization, The SMP rules and regulations are based on federal, state and local codes

29

Date

Received


Stabilization

and 2.5.9

Dredging

and/or

Excavation

let’s create an SMP that forces all parties, including APCO, to abide

by state and local codes and regulations. Insistence on this principle

alone would simplify the language proposed for the revision and not

create another set of regulations that may conflict with local/state

codes.

and identified resources in need of additional protection.

Appalachian does not require the stabilization of shoreline nor dictate

how such stabilization should be done. Options are provided within the

SMP and permits will be granted provided there is active erosion.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

General

Riprap is mitigation in itself, as it protects the lakes from upland

erosion, shoreline erosion and the nutrient enrichment resulting from

erosion. Armoring of the shoreline using riprap has positive

environmental and fishery benefits. Through the efforts of residents

over 1,500,000 feet of shoreline in SML has been successfully

stabilized, halting active erosion along that shoreline and preventing

sediment buildup in critical shallow water habitat, important for the

spawning of nesting species. Properly installed riprap also adds

structure, in which fry can seek cover and develop.

Installation of riprap should be encouraged and those policies in the

SMP that mandate replacement of dead and dying trees, if they are

removed need to be eliminated. If vegetation is removed for riprap

installation, the grounds above the riprap need to be stabilized to

prevent erosion following E&S regulations.

Mitigation is defined as the act of lessening or minimizing the severity of

losses, effects or damages. Appalachian has never required erosion

control as mitigation nor has anyone requested riprap as mitigation.

Riprap has its benefits including shoreline protection and if properly

placed, fish habitat. Riprap would not, however, replace the intricate

structure provided by woody debris in the water and does not absorb

nutrients, provide nutrients, habitat, etc.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 70

3rd

para

Delete discussions of coconut fiber rolls and hay bales

• This is risky advice in an active erosion area as these techniques

require maintenance, replacement of hay bales and fiber rolls.

• These techniques have high potential to degrade into scenic

blight.

If there is active erosion a more proven and lower maintenance

option in placement of riprap either at the shoreline or out from the

shoreline to absorb wave action.

The referenced bioengineering technique is not a requirement but an

option. Property owners are encouraged to consider all options. The

bioengineering technique may be well suited in areas of limited wave

action i.e. streams or backs of coves which may not need structural

protection.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 70

4th

para

Delete

• Live plantings are more appropriate to stream banks that are

There are stream banks within the project boundary. The bioengineering

technique is optional.

30

Date

Received


SMCC,

respectively

occasionally flooded during high flow events.

• Lakeshore is a much different environment

• Let’s wait until the erosion study is complete and its results are

evaluated

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 71

Figure 5

Delete

• This is applicable stream beds and not to project shoreline

Ironically this diagram encourages riprap installation below the

stream forming flow, which would be akin to stabilizing actively

eroding project shoreline caused by wave action with riprap.

See note above regarding stream banks and bioengineering techniques.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 72

Figure 6

Modify the figure to eliminate reference to stream flow

• This diagram encourages riprap installation below the stream

forming flow, which would be akin to stabilizing actively eroding

project shoreline caused by wave action with riprap.

The figure illustrates a reasonable technique for stabilizing actively

eroding or unstable steep project shoreline

Appalachian does not see the need to alter the diagram provided by the

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Streams exist within

the project boundary.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 73

Figure 7

Modify the figure to eliminate reference to stream flow

• This diagram encourages riprap installation below the stream

forming flow, which would be akin to stabilizing actively eroding

project shoreline caused by wave action with riprap.

The figure illustrates a reasonable technique for stabilizing actively

eroding or unstable steep project shoreline

See note above regarding modifications to USDA diagrams.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 73

3rd

para

Replace with -- Projects involving land-disturbing activities equal to

or greater than 10,000 square feet must comply with the Virginia

Erosion and Sediment Control Law and all applicable regulations

adopted in accordance with that law. Projects involving land-

disturbing activities equal to or greater than one acre, must comply

The Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law would not prohibit

riprap in a Conservation/Environmental shoreline classification which

was designated as such because of cultural resources, significant fish

habitat, etc.

Bulkheads are not prohibited by local governments

31

Date

Received


with the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and the Virginia

Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Permit Regulations

adopted in accordance with the Act. Project specific questions can

be directed to the respective County government or in certain cases

to Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

Christiansburg Regional Office.





• To conform with State and Local Codes

• Thresholds are a better approach as most construction activity has

associated with it some amount of land disturbance.

• Shoreline stabilization over the past 40 years has had positive

environmental impacts

o Improved water quality

o Properly installed riprap provides structure in shallow water

habitat for fry

o Shallow water habitat adjacent to stabilized shoreline has

less sediment and a better nesting/spawning environment

• Stabilization of actively eroding shoreline should be encouraged

Local ordinances differ.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 73

Item 1

Add -- Stabilization at the back coves to trap sediment and

encourage the formation of a wetland can be considered.

Trapping sediment from naturally eroding streams within the project

actually will benefit the project by encouraging a wetland to form

when the sediment is trapped.

Adding riprap along shoreline of properties located in the backs of cove

where there is no active erosion would be considered as unnecessary fill.

Adding riprap in a linear fashion across the back of cove to catch

sediment would also be considered fill and could impact someone’s

ability to access the project.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Regulations

P 73

Item 3

Reword -- 3. Shoreline stabilization less than 500 linear feet would

qualify under the U.S. Army of Engineers (ACOE) nationwide

permit #13 (bank stabilization) provided the activity is part of a

single and complete project, does not impact a delineated wetland

The definition for wetland provided by the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality has been incorporated into the SMP.

32

Date

Received


and is the minimum needed for erosion control.

11/30/10 Reg Anderson 2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

Beaches: What harm does sand cause to the waterway or bottom?

Fish habitat is no worse than rip rap and as a fisherman is better in

that the sunfish and bass can nest in the sand but cannot in rip rap.

Wave action causing sand to migrate into the lake is not a hazard or

deterent to the fishery. Many of my clients do not understand the

reasoning to not allow this water feature..and I have no valid reason

except it is not allowed.

Sand is considered to be fill and as such can reduce water depths,

especially in the backs of coves. Appalachian encourages shorelines to

be vegetated to the greatest extent possible for aesthetics, water quality

and habitat.

11/08/10 Anonymous 2.5.8 Shoreline

Stabilization

The SMP should be amended to allow single family homes to have a

sand play area, similar to a golf course sand trap, for kids. Locating

this sand area behind the rip rap within a minimum width area for

grass between the rip rap and the trap should alleviate erosion

concerns.

There are numerous sand beaches around the lake dumping

considerable sand into the lake and reducing shore water depths.

New home owners have no ability to create a sand play area for

children. Allowing sand “traps” along the shoreline behind the

ripap with minimum erosion protection might encourage

grandfathered sand beaches immediately adjacent to the water to

adopt the more environmentally friendly version. New home

owners would also not feel so penalized in their options for play

areas for their children.

See note above regarding beaches. Sand traps, as described, can be

located outside of the project boundary.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.9 Dredging P 75

Items 1 thru 12

This entire section should be eliminated and replaced with the

following:

1. Nationwide Permit (19) Minor Dredging (3/18/2002)

Dredging of no more than 25 cubic yards below the plane of the

ordinary high water mark or the mean high water mark from

navigable waters of the United States (i.e. ,Section 10 waters) as

part of a single and complete project. This nationwide permit does

not authorize the dredging or degradation through siltation of coral

reefs, sites that support submerged aquatic vegetation (including

The proposed language ignores the protection of identified resources and

would not allow Appalachian and the Virginia Department of Game and

Inland Fisheries to monitor the total amount dredged under Nationwide

Permit (19). Specifically, the proposed language would allow for the

dredging of the original bottom under certain conditions, dredging

between the 793 and 795 foot contour elevations which has been

identified as important fish habitat, dredging during fish spawning

(February 15 to June 15), and dredging/excavation of vegetated area

below the 613 foot contour elevation at Leesville Lake.

33

Date

Received


sites where submerged aquatic vegetation is documented to exist,

anadromous fish spawning areas, or wetlands or, the connection of

canals or other artificial waterways to navigable waters of the

United States (see 33 CFR 322.5(g)). (Section 10 and 404)

2. Nationwide Permit (35) Maintenance Dredging of Existing

Basins (3/18/2002) Excavation and removal of accumulated

sediment for maintenance of existing marina basins, access channels

to marina basins or boat slips, and boat slips to previously

authorized depths or controlling depths for ingress/egress whichever

is less provided the dredged material is disposed of at an upland site

and proper siltation controls are used. (Section 10)

3. Dredging and or excavation requiring ACOE and/or VDEQ

approval must also be approved by Appalachian. Applications for an

Appalachian permit must also include any additional required

permits.

These modifications eliminate duplication of permit language and

confusion

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

There needs to be greater recognition of, and utilization of, the study

of the Vegetative Cover Regulations by the SMLA Buffer

Landscape Committee that was submitted to the Steering

Committee. These recommendations are based on governmental

agency recommendations rather than generalities pieced together

that have no “expert” backing. SMLA strongly encourages effective

buffering of the lakes. We need to more effectively adopt the

principles of low impact development. Perhaps it is time to consider

incentives rather than punitive measures. We recommend offering

an increase in dock size of 10 to 20% in exchange for a buffer

and/or shoreline that meets the requirements of being “low Impact

Development” and the recommendations submitted to you by the

SMLA Buffer Landscape Committee. We also recommend that the

references in the Appendix stating that only native plants be used be

changed to say that “native plants or cultivars” be used.

The SMLA plant list has been incorporated into Appendix F. Further, the SMLA’s recommended restoration buffer is being utilized in

Appalachian’s mitigation policy.

Low impact development techniques such as green roofs, permeable

pavers, rain barrels, rain gardens, etc, are largely activities that would

occur outside of the project boundary and as such, Appalachian

encourages the counties surrounding the Smith Mountain Project to

consider incorporating the techniques into their ordinances or at a

minimum, lake organizations could promote them.

Appalachian believes the current dock sizes are adequate without

incentives to become larger.

Appalachian does not see the need to alter the documents provided by the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Virginia Department of

Conservation but has noted the allowance of cultivars in the SMP

34

Date

Received


text.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

Need to properly define the “function of the buffer” The “function of the buffer” is site specific. One lot may have all canopy

trees while another has canopy and understory trees, ground cover and

woody debris hanging over the water. The depth of the buffer is also site

specific. Each function is assessed and efforts are made to work with the

property owner to accomplish his or her goal(s) and replace or even

enhance that function.

12/3/10 Bedford

County

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

The language related to dead and dying trees should be amended to

better reflect FERC’s guidance in Article 20. We believe AEP has

too narrowly defined their responsibility for maintenance of the

required buffer as instructed in Article 20.

Article 20 states, “The Licensee shall clear and keep clear to an adequate

width lands along open conduits and shall dispose of all temporary

structures, unused timber, brush, the clearing of lands or from the

maintenance or alteration of the project works. In addition, all trees

along the periphery of the project reservoirs which may die during

operations of the project shall be removed, All clearing of the lands and

disposal of the unnecessary material shall be done with due diligence and

to the satisfaction of the authorized representative of the Commission and

in accordance with appropriate Federal, State, and local statutes and

regulations.”

Appalachian believes Article 20 is associated with the original

construction of the project and project operations. Article 406, Habitat

Management Plan supplements the original license language so as to

protect, enhance and create habitat within Project lands and waters.

12/3/10 Bedford

County

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

We endorse the vegetative buffer plan and lists of plants as proposed

by the Smith Mountain Lake Association (SMLA) during Steering

Committee deliberations for any mitigation that might be required.

See note above regarding inclusion of the SMLA plant list.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

P 77

2nd

para

Delete and Replace with – Projects involving land-disturbing

activities equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet must comply

with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law and all

applicable regulations adopted in accordance with that law.

Projects involving land-disturbing activities equal to or greater than

one acre, must comply with the Virginia Stormwater Management

Act and the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP)

Such referenced regulations would require reseeding an area but not

necessarily, replacing the vegetation or its function that has been

removed.

Property owners make application to remove and replace the function of

the buffer and Appalachian assesses the proposal, compares the proposal

to the Shoreline Management Plan, and approves the proposal, requests

modifications or denies the request.

35

Date

Received


Permit Regulations adopted in accordance with the Act. Project

specific questions can be directed to the respective County

government or in certain cases to Virginia Department of

Conservation and Recreation Christiansburg Regional Office.





• Who determines and or measures the function or effectiveness of

the buffer?

• Buffer widths of less than 35 feet are not effective

• Buffer widths need to be 100’ or greater to affect water quality

• Depending upon slope and soil characteristics an effective buffer

could require up to 300’

This rewording offers sufficient protections for buffer function and

the Stormwater Management Program offers a variety of Best

Management Practices to ensure effective control of stormwater.

At a minimum, buffer widths less than 35’ benefit streambank

stabilization, the aquatic food web, aquatic habitat, and water

temperature.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

P 78

Item 1

Delete and replace with …

1. Provide for reasonable view of the water

• A landscape plan is required before a vegetative removal

permit will be issued

• Trees and shrubs may be pruned or removed to provide a view

of the water. Pruning (not topping) rather than removal of

trees should be encouraged. Pruning up (limbing) of trees for

a view of the water is allowed up to 25% of leaf bearing

limbs.

• The trees or shrubs that are removed should be replaced with

native plants. A list of native plants can be found in Appendix

F.

• When trees are removed, restoration / establishment standards

are found in the Chesapeake Alliance Riparian Buffers

The text has been revised to allow trees to be limbed not more than

20% up to 14 feet.

The text has been revised to indicate that trees and shrubs may be

pruned but not topped.

The referenced replacement chart requires more vegetation to be

replanted than what Appalachian has proposed.

The statement, “Vegetation removal, especially on steep slopes,

should be avoided in order not to destabilize the bank and prevent

erosion. Removal of trees on a steep slope can increase the

probability of a slope failure, and could result in the costly

installation of E&S measures and replanting” will be incorporated

into the introduction.

Likewise, the following statement has been incorporated into the

36

Date

Received


Guidance Manual, Appendix D, Table A. (see Replacement

Density--Table 2.5-2

• Vegetation removal, especially on steep slopes, should be

avoided in order not to destabilize the bank and prevent

erosion. Removal of trees on a steep slope can increase the

probability of a slope failure, and could result in the costly

installation of E&S measures and replanting.

• If land disturbance exceeds more than 10,000 sq feet, County

E&S permits are required.

• Erosion resulting from land disturbance into the project waters

is prohibited, regardless if less than 10,000 sq ft is disturbed.

• Land disturbance equal to or greater than one acre requires a

Stormwater Management Plan

• The end result is to achieve a framed vegetative view of the

water that is both functional and attractive, from both the

property and water.

This rewording offers sufficient protections for buffer function

introduction, “Land disturbance permits and approved Stormwater

Management Plans may be required by the county in which the property

is located.”

The localities’ amounts of disturbance are different and subject to change

and as such, Appalachian will not reference an exact amount. For

example, Sec. 7-11 of the Franklin County Erosion and Sediment Control

Ordinance states: Permit required for land-disturbing activities.

1. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, no land-disturbing

activity shall commence prior to the issuance of a land-disturbing permit

by the program authority.

2. A land-disturbing permit is required if:

(a) The area of land disturbance is 10,000 square feet or greater; or

(b) The area of land disturbance is 3,000 square feet or greater, and the

area of land disturbance is located within 200 feet of any surface water.

3. A land-disturbing permit is not required if:

(a) The area of land disturbance is less than 10,000 square feet, and such

area is located more than 200 feet from any surface water; or

(b) The area of land disturbance is less than 3,000 square feet, and such

area is located within 200 feet of any surface water.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

P 79

Replace Table 2.5-2 with the following:

2.5-2 Replacement Density

For every 400 square foot unit (i.e. 20’ x 20’) plant

1. One canopy tree @ 1.5”- 2” caliper or large evergreen @ 6’

2. Two understory trees @ .75” – 1.5” caliper or evergreen @ 4’

Or one understory tree and two large shrubs @ 3’ – 4’

3. Three small shrubs or woody groundcover @ 15’ – 18”

The referenced chart was taken from the Riparian Buffers modification

and Mitigation Guidance Manual which states that replacement occurs

when part of the buffer vegetation has been removed, such as to create a

vista, and woody vegetation has to be put back into the buffer.

Restoration occurs when a large amount of vegetation has been removed,

such as to eliminate an invasive species or when a violation has occurred

and the buffer must be restored by the planting of woody vegetation.

The referenced table is the restoration chart not the replacement chart.

Appalachian is interested in replacing the function of the buffer or

enhancing the function of that buffer, not developing a uniform density of

plantings around the lakes.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

P 79

Item 2

Delete and Replace with …

The proposed language neglects the importance of replacing vegetation

and does not require vegetation to be replaced.

37

Date

Received


County and the

SMCC,

respectively

Regulations 2. Construct Access Paths to the Shoreline and/or Dock or Pier

• Access paths should be sited to fit into the character of the

land; the path should avoid existing vegetation and wind

around existing large trees and shrubs, where possible.

• Where possible permeable materials are favored over hard

pavement

Erosion into the project waters is prohibited, regardless if less than

10,000 sq ft is disturbed.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

P 80

Item 3


3. Construct erosion control measures along the shoreline

Modifications are allowed to the vegetation within the project

boundary in order to construct erosion control measures along the

shoreline.

The proposed language neglects the importance of replacing vegetation

and does not require vegetation to be replaced.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

P 80

Item 4


4. General maintenance to the vegetated area

• Maintenance of the landscape buffer is encouraged

• Removal of invasive vegetation is allowed

• On project lands that have not been developed or otherwise

disturbed, Appalachian has maintenance responsibilities to

enter and to cut, burn and/or remove dead or dying trees,

bushes, driftwood and other objects and debris which may be

located below the 800’ contour.

• Once a landowner disturbs / modifies vegetation on project

lands, the property owner assumes maintenance responsibility.

• Dead and diseased plants that are removed should be replaced

with native plants. A list of native plants can be found in

Appendix F and to a replacement density IAW Table 2.5-2.

• Appalachian has the responsibility IAW Standard License

Article 20 – to remove all trees along the periphery of project

reservoirs that die during operations of the project.

Appalachian does not have maintenance responsibilities to enter and to

cut, burn and/or remove dead or dying trees, bushes, driftwood and other

objects and debris which may be located below the 800 foot contour.

See previous note regarding Article 20.

38

Date

Received


Changed to be consistent with flowage easement language and

Standard License Article 20 requirements

12/6/10 Department of

Conservation

and Recreation

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

'Scientists consider the multi-tiered buffer (with mature canopy

trees, understory trees and shrubs and groundcover) to constitute the

ideal buffer that will accomplish the maximum buffer functions. '

A 100-foot buffer is generally considered the minimum depth to

provide adequate removal of nutrients, silt and pollution.

Natural vegetative buffers naturally enhance habitat foe native

wildlife'

'..buffer strips .. are extremely important to the protection of water

quality. [They] filter sediment and nutrients, maintain desirable

water temperatures, and provide many of the essential requirements

of forest stream ecosystems.. It is recommended that all [buffers] be

a minimum of 50 feet in width, measured from the top of the stream

bank. This 50-foot SMZ is a managed forest; within this managed

area up to 50 percent of the basal area or up to 50 percent of the

forest canopy can be harvested.

Tidal streams are unique in that they often encompass wide areas of

adjacent grasslands. For the purposes of establishing SMZ width,

measure from the edge of the grassland/woodland area. The goal I s

to have at least 50 feet of undisturbed vegetation between the edge

of the grassland area and the timber harvest area. Land immediately

adjacent to the tidal marsh should not be disturbed by equipment.'

This comes from Dept. of Forestry, who do work all over the state.

All this could be adapted in your plan. I know you do not have any

tidal areas, but there areas where there is an artificial fluctuation in

water levels, this could apply.

Appalachian believes its Vegetative Cover Regulations and the Variance

process required for development within the Conservation/Environmental

shoreline classification accomplish the intent of maintaining the function

of the existing buffer. The Commonwealth is encouraged to implement a

100 foot buffer on its lands and localities are encouraged to require

additional buffers through its ordinances. Property owners are also

encouraged to implement buffer strips without being regulated to do so,

so as to improve water quality.

39

Date

Received


12/7/10 Department of

Conservation

and Recreation

2.5.11

Vegetative

Cover

Regulations

The definition of a Streamside Management Zone (SMZ) for Forest

Harvesting Operations from page 125 in our BMP Manual is:

"Streamside Management Zone (SMZ) – An area of reduced

management activity on both sides

of the banks of perennial and intermittent streams and bodies of

open water where extra precaution

is used in carrying out forest practices in order to protect bank edges

and water quality."

Now the width of that buffer varies depending on the type of

waterbody that is being protected (warm water fishery, cold water

fishery, or municipal water supply). generally speaking though the

SMZ requirement on a forest harvesting operation is 50 feet from

the edge of the stream channel or edge of the water body. This is a

managed area that timber removal can occur from.

For purposes of Riparian Forest Buffer establishment on open areas

adjacent to streams (afforestation of treeless sites) the standards are

slightly different with a minimum buffer width of 35 feet up to 300

feet on either side of the stream. These are the requirements for

establishment of a Riparian Forest Buffer under most of the cost-

share programs available to landowners.

Depending upon the slope, Appalachian’s project boundary may or may

not be 35 feet in width. However, Appalachian believes its Vegetative

Cover Regulations and the Variance process required for development

within the Conservation/Environmental shoreline classification

accomplish the intent of maintaining the function of the existing buffer.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

2.5.12 Woody

Debris

P 81

Delete the last two sentences

Installation of docks and riprap offer positive environmental

benefits and replacement dead and dying trees attached to the

shoreline in residential areas is aesthetically necessary.

Docks provide coverage for fish but not the smaller intricate habitat

needed by smaller species to be protected from larger predators.

Tidy/clean lawns contribute to poor water quality and diminished fish and

wildlife habitat. Lawns devoid of vegetation also invite nuisance wildlife

e.g. geese.

Wildlife depends on both dead and live habitat. Dead trees provide

habitat for turtles and birds. Dead and living trees help protect the

shoreline from erosion. Recognizing that property owners may not have

the same appreciation for dead trees, Appalachian will issue a permit for

40

Date

Received


its removal provided the vegetation is replaced but any woody debris that

is removed must be replaced. Appalachian has amended the language to

allow property owners to propose manmade alternatives.

12/5/10 Jack Harrison 2.5.15

Limitations

My 1st comment is related to one line in the SMP that concerns

geothermal loops. The SMP simply prohibits these installations and

I feel that is somewhat shortsighted given today's cost of energy, the

drive towards energy indepandance (sic) and the prospect of higher

prices to come. While I can understand that geothermal use of the

lake should be regulated with standard designs and practices, to

simply prohibit it is not the way to go. I would favor additional

discussion on this issue.

Geothermal loops can be installed outside of the project boundary.

12/16/10 SMLA 3.1 Permitting

Responsibilities

As we have consistently stated in the Steering Committee meetings,

we feel that we must find a solution to the problem of transferring

the permit when a property is sold. We understand legal issues exist

but they need to be explored in greater depth instead of simply

dismissing this serious issue.

Appalachian may issue permits to occupy and use project lands and

waters under certain conditions and is required to supervise and control

the uses for which it grants permission. Permits are personal rights and

thus are not transferable. Upon transfer of property, Appalachian may

issue a permit to the buyer. Buyers need to be aware of the terms and

conditions of utilizing a structure which is located within a federally

licensed project. Appalachian believes the current administrative process

is the best process for monitoring and enforcing compliance.

12/16/10 SMLA 3.1 Permitting

Responsibilities

We also feel strongly that vesting of structures built prior to the

August 31, 2005, deadline must be honored. It should not be the

objective of the SMP to force all older structures into compliance

with today’s, or tomorrow’s, SMP.

See previous notes regarding non-conforming structures language of the

SMP.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

3.1 Permitting

Responsibilities

Real Estate Closings: Appalachian should record permits with the

deed and allow them to transfer with the property rather than having

to expire when a sale takes place. Virginia allows only two methods

to transfer title, either by will or by deed. This approach is

consistent with practices in Virginia and ensures that the dock

structure is always assigned to a responsible property owner. The

delays to real estate closings have caused many sales to be cancelled

altogether. The impact on property values, tax revenues, and

personal hardships is enormous.

Structures should be built according to the permits issued and there

would be no problems at the time of closing. Property owners are

encouraged to do their own inspections before contacting Appalachian.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

3.1 Permitting

Responsibilities

P 82

Suggest a rewrite of this section to be more consistent with standard

It leaves too much open for interpretation for Appalachian to issue a

permit to a property owner granting permission to construct a dock that

41

Date

Received


Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

construction and building practices

• The criteria for inspection should be substantial compliance with

SMP regulations.

• Appalachian should issue permits for dock construction,

bounded by SMP regulations. Preliminary diagrams of docks

and dimensions might be helpful to understand what the

applicant is requesting, however, the end result (as-built

structure) should be inspected to SMP requirements (e.g.

number of slips, setbacks, square footage, length, 1/3 cove rules,

etc.) As-built drawing should be provided to Appalachian

following the final inspection.

• Currently docks are inspected against preliminary drawings,

which has often resulted in unnecessary and expensive

modifications to the structure, even requiring punitive mitigation,

regardless if the structure met SMP requirements.

• This revised process is compliant with intent of Article 415 to

regulate uses, is consistent with the buildable area concept

elsewhere in this plan, and will result in less effort for both the

licensee and the applicant.

• Key to the success of this approach is a continuous and ongoing

education and awareness plan for property owners, local

Governments, dock builders, general contractors, dredgers,

excavators, landscape architects and surveyors. An effective

education and awareness plan will reduce violations and

encourage voluntary compliance.

• According to the FERC’s Guidance for Shoreline Management

Planning at Hydropower Projects, April 2001, Shoreline

Management Policies, Permits and Guidelines:

A permit and guideline component of the SMP should be specific

enough to be easily understood and implemented, while being

flexible enough to allow for a variety of proposals.

meets the SMP. It is important and more economical for all involved to

agree upfront on the structure to be built than to make costly repairs or

removal of the structure after the dock is constructed.

Appalachian issues permits for structures that property owners prepare

and submit and according to the terms and conditions of the permit

issued. No modifications or design changes can occur without prior

Appalachian approval. Minor changes have not historically required

mitigation. Appalachian recently modified its mitigation policy allowing

floating modifications within 30 days and structural modifications within

60 without requiring mitigation.

Appalachian has agreed to conduct annual meetings with dock builders,

contractors, etc. regarding SMP rules and regulations.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

3.4 Variance

Process

P 85

2nd

para

Reword – Uses and activities within areas of the project boundary

Appalachian agrees to consult with the appropriate federal and state

agencies to determine if wetlands are present. Even if wetlands are not

present, there would be sufficient vegetation or other resource present to

42

Date

Received


County and the

SMCC,

respectively

that are designated Conservation/Environmental are prohibited

unless a variance can be obtained, or a wetland delineation

determines a wetland does not exist, or the shoreline classification is

in error.

classify the shoreline as Conservation/Environmental. Appalachian will

not request a reclassification of the shoreline because wetlands are not

present.

12/16/10 SMLA 3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

Mitigation should not be used as punishment. If a structure is not

built as called for in the permit, APCO’s obligation, specifically

under its license, is to force conformance by withholding the permit

or requiring changes in the structure. In other words, require that the

problem be fixed. We also feel that there should be no mitigation

required for the installation of rip-rap. The positive effects of

protection of the shoreline outweigh any temporary loss of

vegetation. We also need to acknowledge that docks provide fish

habitat. Watch the fishermen on the lakes. They primarily fish the

docks. A study of Duke Power lakes in North Carolina in the ‘90’s

concluded that the majority of the fish habitat consisted of the

docks.

As previously stated, Appalachian has recently modified its mitigation

policy to encourage the timely correction of violations.

There is no mitigation required for the installation of riprap. If vegetation

is removed for the installation of riprap, then it must be replaced.

Appalachian has proposed modifications to its shoreline stabilization

regulations to allow property owners to remove less vegetation should

they so desire. In addition, bioengineering techniques are suggested.

12/7/10 Tri County

Lake

Administrative

Commission

3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

The draft SMP provides opportunities for mitigation in certain

instances. This approach seems inappropriate and could allow for

APCO staff to make decisions to "punish" or "not punish" based on

their feelings of a certain situation or homeowner. Based on the

License's requirement for conformance we do not believe that such

mitigation should be included in the SMP.

Several entities and individuals requested that the mitigation policy be

included in the SMP and as such, the policy has been included.

12/6/10 SMLA 3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

That then leads to a principle we have termed “substantial

conformance”. Construction over water carries with it difficulties

beyond those encountered in construction on land. It is our position

that if, on your final inspection, you find variances from the permit

sketch, you make a determination as to whether what has been

constructed generally carries out the intent of the original sketch and

meets all the requirements of the regulations pertaining to that

shoreline classification. If it does, the permit should be issued

without further demands. There is no need to create a major

approval problem as long as the finished structure meets the

building codes and the overall SMP regulations. This is standard

practice for local government in approving construction.

Appalachian concurs with and utilizes the “substantial conformance”

principal provided the variances between what has been approved and

what has been constructed do not violate the regulations set forth in the

SMP.

43

Date

Received


12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

P 86

Table 3.4.1

Reword – Delineated wetlands

Reword -- Undeveloped Islands Develop a plan to protect the land

within the project boundary of these islands to conform with

applicable State and local regulations.

Appalachian has modified the parameter to state “Vegetation

including wetlands” and included the other parameters included in

the Conservation/Environmental shoreline classification. The

parameter, undeveloped islands, has been deleted.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

P 87

2nd Sentence

Delete from … In lieu of cancelling the permission to use and

occupy the project lands and waters through the beginning of

Section 3.6

• The license requires the offense to be corrected, as there is no

basis for mitigation in Article 415 … If a permitted use and

occupancy violates any condition of this article or any other

condition imposed by the licensee for protection and

enhancement of the project's scenic, recreational, or other

environmental values, or if a covenant of a conveyance made

under the authority of this article is violated, the licensee shall

take any lawful action necessary to correct the violation. For a

permitted use or occupancy, such action includes, as necessary,

canceling the permission to use and occupy the project lands and

waters and requiring the removal of any non-complying

structures and facilities.

Mitigation is the act of lessening or minimizing the severity of losses,

effects or damages and Appalachian believes mitigation to be preferable

over canceling permission to use and occupy projects lands and waters

and removal of the structure. Mitigation is limited to uses which will

benefit project lands and waters.

Appalachian recently implemented its new policy allowing 30 days for

property owners to either remove unauthorized floating additions (and 60

days for unauthorized structural additions) or obtain a permit that meets

the SMP without having to mitigate with the hopes that property owners

will have an incentive to diligently pursue compliance. Further,

Appalachian has reduced the amount of vegetation that has to be planted.

In case of a violation, Appalachian does detail how the unauthorized

addition violates the SMP, which defines the project’s scenic,

recreational, and environmental values and outlines the process for

correction and compliance.

44

Date

Received


• Mitigation amounts to assessing a penalty or fine and neither the

FERC nor Appalachian have the authority to act as sheriff, judge

and jury.

• In the case of a violation, Appalachian should detail how the

violation harmed the project's scenic, recreational, or other

environmental values, and detail what the violator has to do to

correct the offense.

• For example, building a dock without a permit, would require the

violator to obtain a permit and if the non-permitted dock failed to

meet SMP requirements, modify the structure to comply with

SMP regulations.

Removing vegetation without a permit would require the violator to

prepare a landscape plan to replant to a specified density (Table 2.5-

2) and to use native vegetation.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

Mandatory mitigations for SMP violations even when such

violations are corrected. A spirit of achieving SMP compliance

should be the focus as opposed to enforced punishment.

See note above regarding new mitigation policy.

12/3/10 Bedford

County

3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

We do not believe any mitigation should be required or enforced if

structures are brought into compliance with the SMP within sixty

(60) days of notice of violation.

See note above regarding new mitigation policy.

12/3/10 Bedford

County

3.5 Monitoring

and

Enforcement

Bedford County questions AEP’s authority to require and enforce

such mitigation requirements.

Appalachian manages the Smith Mountain Pumped Storage Project in

accordance with the terms of its license and the applicable FERC rules

and regulations. Under its License, Appalachian has the authority to

grant permission for certain types of use and occupancy of Project lands

and waters and to convey certain interests in Project lands and waters.

However, permission is granted only if the proposed use and occupancy

is consistent with the purposes of protecting important natural,

environmental, recreational and scenic resources. Appalachian has the

continuing responsibility to supervise and control the uses of, and ensure

compliance with, the covenants of the instrument of conveyance for any

interests that it has conveyed under its FERC license.

Appalachian either owns the project boundary in fee or has the necessary

property rights to grant permission for certain uses and to require

compliance with those uses. Uses are by revocable permit and all

45

Date

Received


property rights are recorded with the appropriate clerks of the circuit

court. In addition, the SMP approved by FERC in 2005 provided that

individuals may be required to plant or pay for the planting of vegetative

materials within the project boundary in the event that vegetation is

removed without a permit. (Art. 2.5.11.)

12/6/10 SMLA 3.6 SMP

Review and

Update

The proposed SMP contains language requiring the creation of a

Technical Review Committee (TRC). We would like to see this

addressed more fully. We suggest that the Committee should

include all stakeholders as the current Steering Committee does.

Discussions created by the Steering Committee meetings have been

enriched by the different points of view. The rules for the TRC

should allow issues to be debated in ways other than having face-to-

face meeting. This could include electronic formats, conference

calls and voting by proxy.

Appalachian has proposed a smaller working committee composed of

those who can contribute technically and without political or personal

motives.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

3.6 SMP

Review and

Update

Technical Review Committee: Appalachian should establish a

standing advisory committee to assist in the development of new

regulations or modifications to existing regulations, composed of

SMP Steering Committee members.

Consultation with a Technical Advisory Committee is voluntary not

mandatory and Appalachian has proposed a smaller, more technical

committee with whom to work.

12/2/10. 12/3/10, 12/6/10 and

12/7/10

TCRC, Bedford

County,

Franklin

County and the

SMCC,

respectively

3.6 SMP

Review and

Update

P 88

1st Sentence

Reword – AEP will consult annually, and on an as needed basis,

with a Technical Advisory Committee composed of members from

the SMP Steering Committee.

• The Steering Committee provides the best representation of

stakeholders.

• The proposed Technical Advisory Committee fails to have

representation from NGO’s, TLAC and residents

See note above regarding the proposed Technical Advisory Committee.

12/2/10 Franklin

County

Appendix D

Shoreline

Classifications

Request to reclassify recently acquired Smith Property to Public Use

based on deed restrictions which limit developments to public

education, training and recreation

Appalachian has modified its Shoreline Classification maps so that

the shoreline classification of the Smith Property is Public Use

12/6/10 SMLA Implementation

or

Administration

And finally (for general comments) we feel strongly that APCO

must strive for a greater level of customer service. People should be

able to visit the office without appointments, phone calls must either

be answered directly or returned promptly and a receptionist should

be able to spell out, and provide help with, the procedures in

Appalachian’s office hours are from 8:30 to 5 PM, Monday through

Friday. Appointments may be requested any time during these hours.

Appointments allow for greater efficiency as Appalachian has time to

research pertinent issues. Establishing appointments also allows for

confidentiality and security.

46

Date

Received


applying for a permit as is done in all local county Building Permit

offices.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

Implementation

and

Administration

Appalachian needs to enhance its customer service for lake residents

and contractors.

See note above regarding customer service.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

Implementation

and

Administration

Customer Service: Appalachian should establish regular customer

service hours where individuals and contractors may get answers to

questions and assistance with permit applications. The lack of

customer service hours was a serious contributor to confusion,

misunderstanding, and hard feelings.

See note above regarding customer service.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

Implementation Education: Appalachian should provide sufficient training and

guidance for contractors, realtors, developers, etc. whose business

involves work requiring conformance to SMP guidelines and

permits in order to prevent confusion and misunderstandings before

they become conflicts.

Appalachian has agreed to hold annual work shops with dock builders,

contractors, etc. to help them understand the importance of the permitting

process and constructing what has been authorized.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

Administration Time Goals: Appalachian should set permit and inspection

processing time goals. This has been the number one complaint

from owners and contractors. Contractors are being delayed months

for payment on jobs completed that owners claim Appalachian is

holding the permit approval up for other violations that the

contractor had nothing to do with.

Appalachian has internal goals for issuing permits for low density single

family docks. The problem, as Appalachian sees it, is incomplete

applications are submitted, causing unnecessary delays. Property owners

are encouraged to work with surveyors and dock builders to obtain a

drawing that reflects a structure that will fit into the physical setting in

which the property owner plans to build and property owners are strongly

encouraged to construct the structure for which they get permission to

build.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

Implementation Employee Training: Appalachian needs to improve training and

guidance for employees to avoid as much as possible differences in

interpretation of SMP regulations and inconsistencies in their

application.

Appalachian employees regularly consult with one another so as to have

consistent interpretations.

12/6/10 Franklin

County

Implementation Provide sufficient training and guidance for contractors, realtors,

developers, etc. whose business involves work requiring

conformance to SMP guidelines and permits.

See note above regarding proposed educational efforts.

12/3/10 Bedford

County

Implementation Bedford County indicated a concern as to the level of customer

service provided by AEP for citizens and businesses seeking to

comply with the SMP and hopes that the implementation of the new

SMP can be undertaken in a more “user friendly” environment that

Through implementation of its new mitigation policy, consultation with a

Technical Advisory Committee and implementation of work shops with

contractors and other interested parties, Appalachian is committed to

working with property owners and the business community to implement

47

Date

Received


focuses on educating the community to the requirements of the SMP

and offers reasonable opportunity to comply before penalties are

enforced.

the goals necessary to protect and enhance the Project’s scenic,

recreational and environmental values.

smith mountain project draft shoreline management plan ... 2010 review matrix 12 31 10.pdfdraft...

Documents