20051457 Ver 1_RE Analysis of Georgia Reservoir Permitting Spreadsheet.msg_20110927

Strickland, Bev
From: Smith, Robin [robin.w.smith @ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 6:01 PM
To: Reeder, Tom
Cc: Barsness, Kari K
Subject: RE: Analysis of Georgia Reservoir Permitting Spreadsheet
Attachments: Georgia and NC Reservoir Permitting.doc; Recent North Carolina ReservoirsRWS.docx
Tom —Thanks for the quick analysis. I thought the worksheets looked fine. I have suggested some rewording of the
message to Jeff (mostly editorial) although I did add a paragraph about the permitting of Randleman Dam. (See first
attachment). If you think this is too long for an email, you might turn it into a memo from you to Jeff and attach it to an
email.
I also suggested (in the second attachment) some modifications to the document describing N.C. reservoir projects.
Entirely editorial — mostly to provide explanation in place of some terms that may not be immediately understandable to
people who don't deal with this on a regular basis.
In both cases, make sure that my editorial suggestions have not changed the substance.
If you are comfortable with the suggested changes, go ahead and respond to Jeff by email and cc Kari and me, attachirT7,v
Oiiit's xvoH. W- ets ;.ri4 Vie U.C. reservo 4ocujtett.
`17. i,
:. I &O 1
Asst. Secretary for Environment
N.C. Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh N.C. 27604
(919) 715 -4141
E -mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Reeder, Tom
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 20119:01 AM
To: Smith, Robin
Cc: Barsness, Kari K; Mead, Jim; Fransen, Tom; Reed, Steven; Peele, Linwood; Rayno, Don
Subject: Analysis of Georgia Reservoir Permitting Spreadsheet
Robin — Jim Mead conducted a thorough analysis of the GA Reservoir spreadsheet that Jeff Hudson forwarded to us (that
originated with Butch Smith of Cleveland County) and based on his research he produced the attached revised
spreadsheet that includes the following:
- Two additional worksheets, one is just those "issued" and the other worksheet is all the rest.
- Hyperlinks are included in additional columns to the right regarding the information that Jim was able to find on the
web about these reservoirs
He also added columns for the year studies began and when the project was completed for those that he was able to
locate this information for.
Regarding this information, Jim notes the following:

There are 28 reservoirs noted as "issued ", but 4 or 5 of these are duplicates, so the number is really 23 or 24
- Of those 28, only 5 were "issued" in the last 10 years, plus 3 with an unknown date and 1 with mitigation modification
pending
- It is unclear just what "issued" actually means, and the only way to find out is to contact whoever put this together
- What is more relevant is when the studies for the project began and when it was completed. Jim added those years for
the issued projects for which he was able to locate this information . Of those, many took more than 10 years to study and
complete.
So this information does not support the argument that 28 reservoirs were built in 10 years. What really matters is when they
first started doing the work to develop the project, and when it was completed. This is taking more than 10 years for any
started in the early 1990's — at least based on the information that is available on the internet.
In addition, Linwood and Don examined the all the reservoirs in North Carolina, excluding Randleman, that had been
constructed in the last 20 years. This information is contained in the second attachment. As you can see many of these
reservoirs took less than 10 years from initial planning to completion.
So, based on the information presented in these two documents, I would say that, in general, the permitting processes for
new reservoirs in Georgia and North Carolina is basically equivalent. Simple, straight- forward reservoir projects will be
permitted in an expeditious manner, whereas more complex projects (such as Randleman or Little River) will take longer.
Please let us know if you would like for us to perform any more analysis on this. If you are satisfied with our response, feel
free to forward this on to Jeff. My thanks to Jim, Linwood, and Don for their work on this issue. Thanks.
Tom Reeder
Director, NC Division of Water Resources
Phone: 919 - 715 -3045
email: tom.reeder @ncdenr.gov