Looking For Something?

Showing posts with label buckeye lake. Show all posts
Showing posts with label buckeye lake. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Takeaway from Yesterday's Town Council Meeting

Yesterday’s Council meeting was well attended and resulted in several significant decisions and useful information. For those of you unable to attend, Council meetings are now being live streamed over the internet so you can watch without being there.
          As a first item, Tim and Robert addressed the circumstances surrounding the water valve incident at Buckeye prior to Thanksgiving. Using the questions I submitted to the Council, they handed out a response sheet and did a summary presentation. In brief, it is clear to me that there was a lot of misinformation spread about the incident (further addressed below) and the Town handled the entire issue appropriately. 
          Here are the facts addressed. Because Buckeye Reservoir is a stream impoundment, the Army Corps of Engineers requires the Town to keep a certain water flow in Buckeye Creek below the dam. The valve, installed in 1984, is a 4 foot by 4 foot gate about 37 feet under water, controlled by a long iron pipe and screw gate. It is regularly opened to release water. On October 15, representatives of the Town met with representatives of various federal agencies to seek a change in the minimum release requirements. As part of that issue, the Town was asked to install stream flow gauges, as well as inspect and operate the valve. The Town retained an experienced dive contractor to complete this operation. The work needed to be done in the fall in case there was a release, to allow the Laketo refill. Town employees were aware of the risks involved in operating the valve.
          The contractor’s divers worked filming and operating the valve on November 20. At some point in the operation the valve rod bent due to water pressure, leaving the valve partially open and causing water to flow at a high  rate of speed through the valve. A diver working to determine what had occurred was sucked partially into the gate and became stuck. In a 4 hour rescue operation, involving about 45 people, the diver was rescued.  The valve, however, could not be closed until the Lake was drained. Once the Lakewas drained, the valve was closed and is now stuck in that position. The valve is operational, but the mechanism to open and close it will need to be entirely rebuilt. 
          The Town immediately declared a water emergency and implemented its emergency plans. The total cost of responding was about $60,800. An after action meeting has occurred and several issues requiring corrective action identified and implemented. Chief Pudney stated that this was an extraordinary rescue and many similar incidents result in death. Fortunately, this diver has recovered. Various individuals were recognized at the meeting for their efforts during the rescue.
          In other business, new appointments to various Town boards will be made in January and anyone interested in applying should do so. A motion for the Town to financially support the Resort’s bus service failed for lack of a second, but in subsequent discussion it was clear that a majority of the Council believes this is an issue better left to the TDA. By motion, the Council has agreed to allow a second public comment period at the end of each Council session, but only for those items addressed in the agenda. Finally, Council has set a public hearing on the proposed leash law ordinance for the January meeting. It is clear that the proposed ordinance currently has a 3 (Renee, Wendell and Barry) vote majority, but please make your thoughts known to Council. The annual planning retreat will take place in Council chambersJanuary 15 and the public is invited to attend, as well as submit issues and suggestions to Council prior to the meeting.
          Finally, a personal note. It was clear to me from public comments yesterday that social media is the 21st century equivalent of the game of telephone and should not be trusted when it comes to Town issues. If you see something on social media about Town matters, please do not further broadcast it until you have confirmed it with a Town employee or elected official. Two examples will illustrate the problem. First, much of the information spread about the valve problem was simply wrong. Second, the Town and TDA purchased one large ornament. There are no plans to purchase any others and any suggestion to the contrary are also wrong. Please do not spread false information on social media. Thanks and I look forward to seeing everyone at the January meeting.

Friday, November 30, 2018

Buckeye Reservoir Questions to Town Council

This is an email going around the town of Beech Mountain on our water situation. I wanted to share it with you in case you didn't see it. Big thanks to Urs for getting this moving for the December Town Council Meeting. If you are not on the email chain, let me know and I can forward email addresses.

As discussed with Renee, I have drafted a series of questions, attached, answers to which I believe are the minimum needed for taxpayers to have a better understanding of how this incident happened and how to prevent similar events. While I still believe an outside investigation is needed, I hope that these answers and the documentary evidence will
suffice. If any questions are unclear, please let me know. Urs

In order to better understand the facts and circumstances surrounding the loss of water at Buckeye Lake on November 20, 2018 and to ensure we are better prepared in the future, answers to the following questions are needed. In all cases, any documents supporting the relevant answers need to be provided. Any references to Town employees include contractors working for the Town under pre-existing contracts, such as contracts with West Consultants.

The Valve

1. When was the valve at issue installed?
2. What is the valve’s purpose?
3. What state or federal regulatory agencies have any jurisdiction over the valve or its functioning?
4. When was the last time, prior to the day of the incident, that the valve had been opened and closed?
5. What correspondence has the Town had in the past three years with any state or federal agencies about the valve?

The Dive Contract

1. What prompted the Town to contract with a dive company to inspect the valve?
2. Was there a Request for Proposal issued by the Town?
3. If so, describe the scope of work in the RFP.
4. How many bidders were there for the contract?
5. What was the scope of work in the final signed contract?
6. Who selected the contractor?
7. Was the contractor required to have general liability insurance?
8. When was the contract to be performed?
9. Who was to supervise the scope of work?
10. Was the contractor tasked to open and close the valve?
11. If so, was there any discussion about the possible adverse consequences to water levels at Buckeye Lake if the valve could not be closed?
12. Was there any discussion about using a coffer dam or other method to isolate the valve from the lake to facilitate inspection?

The Incident

1. What employees of the Town were present while the divers were at Buckeye Lake?
2. Describe, using eyewitness testimony, what occurred at Buckeye Lake on November 20, 2018, starting from when the divers arrived until the diver was rescued.
3. What, if any, instructions did the divers receive from any Town employee on November 20, 2018, prior to the diver’s leg becoming entangled?
4. Who decided to open the valve on November 20, 2018?
5. Was there any discussion on November 20 about the possible adverse consequences to Buckeye Lake levels if the valve could not be closed?
6. Was there an emergency plan in place in the event that the valve could not be closed?

Emergency Response

1. Did the Town have a written emergency plan to deal with a sudden loss of water at Buckeye Lake?
2. If so, was that plan executed?
3. If so, what were the parameters of that plan?
4. What was the total cost to the Town to supply water by tanker and to supply bottled water?
5. Has there been an after action meeting of Town employees about the incident and the response?
6. If so, what deficiencies were identified?
7. If so, what changes, if any, were proposed to any Town policies or emergency plans?