Comments on the DEQ proposed changes to the 401 Certification
by Jim Reed
3/13/97
revised 3/17 go to the end to see (or not be able to see) how much 80 NTU is.
These comment are directed at the Draft manuscript to USACE, Teena Monical,
that is available from DEQ's office at 1102 Lincoln
In a nutshell, (well maybe a turtle shell)
1)80 NTU is too much for the environment!
2)These high turbidities indicate a failed erosion control plan
3)I found several great references for arguing the negative impacts of turbidity effects.
One was mine, J. P. Reed, 1983, on the Effects of Low Levels of Turbidity on Fish
Habitat.
4)Overall the intended clarifications don't seem to be very clear.
5)There is no direction as to what they are required to report.
6)Are there any penalties? Once the plan is approved then what?
The Oregon Administrative Rules, OAR, states that the new or increased discharged
load shall not be granted if the receiving stream is classified as being
water quality limited.
Willow Creek empties into Amazon Creek Division Channel , then into Fern Ridge Res
and then into the Long Tom.
All of these water bodies are water quality limited and turbidity
has a direct effect by degrading the quality further.
The OARs specify no detrimental effects to special natural areas,
How does Willow Creek Nature Preserve fit in here?
Is there a basin wide management plan that accounts for all increased discharges
simultaneously?
From OAR's Antidegradation Policy for Surface Waters section:
(2) In order to maintain the quality of waters in the State of Oregon, it is the general
policy of the EQC to require that growth and development be accommodated by
increased efficiency and effectiveness of waste treatment and control such that
measurable future discharged waste loads from existing sources do not exceed presently
allowed discharged loads except as provided in section (3) of this rule.
If we lower the standard to 80NTU, we are decreasing efficiency
Turbidity measurements needs to be better defined.
Total dissolved solids is not mentioned as a parameter to monitor. It should be, and it easy to do.
Here are a few specifics, with random thoughts :
I was pleased to find out in the initial phases of construction that an independent
contractor would be monitoring the turbidity continuously and reporting to any violations
of being out of compliance as they said they would do in their initial WQ monitoring plan.
( Boy was I surprised)
From the report at DEQ:
Construction phase water resources monitoring plan for the Hyundai Electric America
Facility in Eugene, 2/21/96 by Woodward and Clyde, GeoEngineers, and SRI/Shapirio.
In Section 6-5. Reporting.
If turbidity measurements are found atanytime to exceed the permit limit of 30 NTU
HEA, DEQ, Eugene and TNC will be notified immediately
What has happened in fact was they massaged all the data into a 24 hour average! And
the data is not available. I called an asked to see it. But Woodward and Clyde would
not release it without a directive from DEQ and DEQ essentially said that would be
asking too much of Hyundai!
They collect the data on a 15 minute interval automatically, store it on-site, then
upload it Portland over a phone line.
What you are not seeing is that the turbidity peaks with initial flush of rain as
it runs off the site. With this initial flush is often the highest discharge so overall
magnitude of the soil loss is multiplicative when combine with discharge.
Nowhere is it spelled out what they required to report.
The above report does mentions when, ie Dec 1, but the first quarterly
report was not provided until Feb 1997 for data taken from March 1996 to June 1996.
That seems a little delayed.
What happens when the automated machine breaks down? As happened last spring? Is there any
backup system, like a real technician who could go out and gather the data by
hand.
Construction Condition 1, page 2
"ensure continuation of all on-site and downstream beneficial uses"
What is a :
downstream beneficial use?
on-site beneficial use?
It was best left alone by specifying the on site wetlands..
Is that different from degredation of water quality?
page 3 Section A)
80 NTU is way too high.
If the 80 is exceeded and the erosion control plan is being followed then what?
It seems like the BMP is not good enough.
If the standard is exceeded, then work should be discontinued until the problem is
resolved and a fine imposed for damage done to the environment.
Page 3, item 1.
Keep a log book to show that the inspections have been performed
Page 3, item 2.
Is that an adequate description of a significant rainfall event?
Page 3, item 4.
What are the consequences if the report is not filed on time?
Page 3, item 5.
What is the difference between a documented and a potential erosion control failure
as in part A)
Page 4, item 3.
How is filtered or settled defined?
We saw attempts that could be defined as "filtering" on the site with straw bales.
That really will only work for particles the size of sand which are hard to keep
in suspension. Clays on the other hand are very fine, less than 0.063 mm.
They tried the state-of-the-art filtration system on their settling pond but it failed
because it kept plugging up..
They tried setting with chemicals but that failed as well
Page 4, bottom of the page.
They are changing the word to quantity, shouldn't quality be also considered here?
Page 5, Condition 2.
This is confusing to me, similar to Construction Condition 1
Page 5, Condition 3
The list should also include nitrites, ammonium and phosphates
This will show their impact on aquatic primary production
More ramblings:
Looking thru the OAR for water quality,
http://www.deq.state.or.us/rules/oar41.htm
some key terms pop up.
They include:
no detrimental effects to special natural areas
i.e. :
(D) Outstanding Resource Waters Policy: Where existing high quality waters constitute
an outstanding state or national resource such as those waters designated as extraordinary
resource waters, or as critical habitat areas, the existing water quality and water quality
values shall be maintained and protected, and classified as "Outstanding
Resource Waters of Oregon". The Commission may specially designate high quality waterbodies
to be classified as Outstanding Resource Waters in order to protect the water quality parameters
that affect ecological integrity of critical habitat or special
water quality values that are vital to the unique character of those waterbodies.
The Department will develop a screening process and establish a list of nominated
waterbodies for Outstanding Resource Waters designation in the Bienniel Water Quality Status
Assessment Report (305(b) Report). The priority waterbodies for nomination include:
(i) National Parks;
(ii) National Wild and Scenic Rivers;
(iii) National Wildlife Refuges;
(iv) State Parks; and
(v) State Scenic Waterways.
?? Would TNC fit in here??
Policies and Guidelines Generally Applicable to All Basins
3404l026 (1) In order to maintain the quality of waters in the State of Oregon, the
following is the general policy of the EQC:
(a) Antidegradation Policy for Surface Waters. The purpose of the Antidegradation
Policy is to guide decisions that affect water quality such that unnecessary degradation
from point and nonpoint sources of pollution is prevented, and to protect, maintain,
and enhance existing surface water quality to protect all existing beneficial uses.
The standards and policies set forth in OAR 340-41-120 through 340-41-962 are intended
to implement the Antidegradation Policy;
(2) In order to maintain the quality of waters in the State of Oregon, it is the general
policy of the EQC to require that growth and development be accommodated by increased efficiency
and effectiveness of waste treatment and control such that measurable future discharged
waste loads from existing sources do not exceed presently allowed discharged loads
except as provided in section (3) of this rule.
!!!!Why lower the standard??!!
(3) The Commission or Department may grant exceptions to sections (2) and (6) of this
rule and approvals to section (5) of this rule for major dischargers and other dischargers,
respectively. Major dischargers include those industrial and domestic sources that are
classified as major sources for permit fee purposes in OAR 340-45-075(2).
(a) In allowing new or increased discharged loads, the Commission or Department shall
make the following findings:
(A) The new or increased discharged load would not cause water quality standards to
be violated;
(B) The new or increased discharged load would not unacceptably threaten or impair
any recognized beneficial uses. In making this determination, the Commission or Department
may rely upon the presumption that if the numeric criteria established to protect
specific uses are met the beneficial uses they were designed to protect are protected.
In making this determination the Commission or Department may also evaluate other
state and federal agency data that would provide information on potential impacts
to beneficial uses for which the numeric criteria have not been set;
(C) The new or increased discharged load shall not be granted if the receiving
stream is classified as being water quality limited
under OAR 340-41-006(30)(a), unless:..
It turns out that Willow Creek empties into Amazon Creek Division Channel , then into
Fern Ridge Res and then into the Long Tom, then the Willamette.
Visit The Water Quality Limited Site:
http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/303dlist/w_mette.htm
and find that Amazon Creek Division Channel , Fern Ridge Res and Long Tom are
all water quality limited.
Amazon for D.O. in summer, Fern Ridge for turbidity, and Long Tom for temperature in summer.
All are limited for Water Contact Recreation (Fecal Coliform).
(i) The pollutant parameters associated with the proposed discharge are unrelated
either directly or indirectly to the parameter(s) causing the receiving stream to
violate water quality standards and being designated water quality limited; or
It is!:
Turbidity has dramatic effects on temperature under certain env. conditions as shown
by me, Reed et al 1983, as well as few other folks.
These soil erosion is part of a larger basin wide problem.
The turbidity does not go away. It just migrates downstream. Some of the fine particles
eventually will settle out in Fern Ridge Res. Then winds will continually resuspend
them from the shallows. This was such a problem in one lake, that it was drained
every 4 yr and sorghum planted on the lake bottom to flocculate the suspended particles
so that people could recreate on the lake without being covered with mud (ASCE 1975).
Downstream in the Columbia over 10 million cu yards of sediments are dredged annually
in the 50 mile stretch from Portland towards the mouth( based on 1965 data) ASCE
1975.
I have refs for effects of low levels of turbidity, such as we are talking about here,
on:( I'll update them as time permits 3/13/97)
stream primary production
macrophyte development in lakes
reduced feeding rates in fish
increased predation on salmonid smolts
changes in fish habitat structure
blocked spawning migrations of stripped bass at 300 NTU
decreased primary production in ponds with concomitant decrease in fish production
Toxics get a free ride on suspended clay particles (WQ of the lower Columbia, USGS
1994)
(iii) Effective July 1, 1996, in waterbodies designated water-quality limited for
dissolved oxygen, when establishing WLAs under a TMDL for waterbodies meeting the
conditions defined in this rule, the Department may at its discretion provide an
allowance for WLAs calculated to result in no measurable reduction of dissolved oxygen. For this
purpose, "no measurable reduction" is defined as no more than 0.10 mg/L for a single
source and no more than 0.20 mg/L for all anthropogenic activities that influence
the water quality limited segment. The allowance applies for surface water DO criteria
and for Intergravel DO if a determination is made that the conditions are natural.
The allowance for WLAs would apply only to surface water 30-day and seven-day means,
and the IGDO action level; or
DO is linked directly to temperature, and temperature is influenced by turbidity under
the appropriate env. conditions
(iv) Under extraordinary circumstances to solve an existing, immediate, and critical environmental
problem that the Commission or Department may consider a waste load increase for
an existing source on a receiving stream designated water quality limited under OAR
340-41-006(30)(a) during the period between the establishment of TMDLs, WLAs and LAs
and their achievement based on the following conditions:
(I) That TMDLs, WLAs and LAs have been set; and
(II) That a compliance plan under which enforcement actions can be taken has been established and is being implemented on schedule; and
Is there any such compliance plan with enforcement actions for Hyundai?
(III) That an evaluation of the requested increased load shows that this increment
of load will not have an unacceptable temporary or permanent adverse effect on beneficial uses; and
(IV) That any waste load increase granted under subparagraph (iv) of this paragraph
is temporary and does not extend beyond the TMDL compliance deadline established
for the waterbody. If this action will result in a permanent load increase, the action
has to comply with subparagraphs (i) or (ii) of this paragraph.
This needs to be better defined:
(c) Turbidity (Nephelometric Turbidity Units, NTU): No more than a ten percent cumulative
increase in natural stream turbidities shall be allowed, as measured relative to a control
point immediately upstream of the turbidity causing activity.
However, limited duration activities necessary to address an emergency or to accommodate
essential dredging, construction or other legitimate activities and which cause the standard
to be exceeded may be authorized provided all practicable turbidity control techniques have
been applied and one of the following has been granted:
Where is upstream?
Is it the gulley above the site or where the turbiditiy enters the river?
Total dissolved solids is not mentioned as a parameter to monitor:
When, in fact, the soil erosion that leads to increased turbidity also increases the total dissolved solid load. A large fraction, 66% for my 1983 data, of the total NTU measurement originates from the "dissolved" portion.
from OAR
(o) Total Dissolved Solids: Guide concentrations listed below shall not be exceeded
unless otherwise specifically authorized by DEQ upon such conditions as it may deem
necessary to carry out the general intent of this plan and to protect the beneficial
uses set forth in OAR 34041442:
(A) Columbia River . . . . . . . . . . . 500.0 mg/l;
(B) Willamette River and Tributaries . . 100.0 mg/l.
This 100mg/l std is easily exceeded (? double check this figure?). The dissolved load is often 10 times the total suspended load as measured by filtration
Is there a basin wide management plan?
What if there are other operations causing increased pollutants?
Is each allowed to pollute to the max without regard to the whole system?
Additions on 3/17/97
All of the waters in Oregon are in the public trust.
Meaning that they belong to everyone.
This hearing is a case where the company with the money is coercing the
system so they can pollute with impunity. They feel they are above the law,
can challenge the standards and want to degrade the environment even more.
They are seeking permission to abuse a public resource for the sole benefit of
a private individual, as corporation is so considered.
How will society benefit from the lowering of this standard?
They need this permission only because they refuse to act on the Erosion
control plan that they had promised to follow in order to build in the
wetland, and destroy 15? acres of prime wetlands in the process.
It is not hard to stop erosion, you just need to protect the barren ground from
the direct impact of raindrops.
The Soil scientists and Sedimentation engineers have models to predict
exactly how much sediment will come off the land given know soil
characteristics, slope of the land, intensity of rainfall and the cover on the
land.
So just how much is 80NTU?
According to Benfield and Minello 1996, Relative effects of turbidity and
light intensity on reactive distance and feeding of an estuarine fish,
Environmental Biology of Fishes, 46:211-216, 80 NTU means that
you couldn't see your hand under two inches of water!
According to Lewis 1996, Turbidity controlled suspended sediment
sampling,Water Resources Research 32(7):2299-2310, 80 NTU is
about 300 mg/l Suspended Sediment Concentration. (The
portion of fine clays that pass thru the filter are not measured and total
sediment could easily be 2 to 3 fold higher)
The law is written such that construction activities can increase turbidities
by 10% above background. Since it appears that the streams in the area
run 30-50 NTU, that would mean an increase of 3-5 NTU. Well, DEQ felt this
was unreasonable and upped the standard to 30 NTU, double the background.
From aerial photos taken 7/96, I measured the Hy site to be 62 acre area,
(known in some places as the ecological foot print). During construction, this
area was mostly barren. When 1" of rain falls on 62 acres, 112,500 cu ft of
water will run off. If the sediment in the water is 142 ppm, or about 40 NTU,
One ton of top soil will be removed in this one storm event.
That is, for every 1" rain storm, one ton, and more likely
more, of soil will be lost.
1996 was another record rainfall year for Eugene. We got over 90 inches of
rain. How much top soil was lost from the Hyundai site during construction?
Well, it is not really lost because it will turn up downstream in the 303-D,
water quality limited streams.
Less than 1 mile away is Amazon Creek Diversion Canal then it flows within
another 5 miles into Fern Ridge Reservoir, a water quality limited reservoir by
turbidity. Assuming the water is flowing a slow 1-2 mph, these soils will be in
Fern Ridge Reservoir in 3 to 6 hours.
Waters from Fern Ridge then flow into the Long Tom River, which is water quality
limited by temperature. They then flow into the Willamette River, which is water
quality limited by temperature all summer long.
Turbidity under the wrong env conditions, ie hot summer days, low winds, shallow
mixing layer in lakes, can increase temperature to lethal limits for fish as I
found in North Carolina, Reed et al 1983.
Go to my Hyundai and Wetlands page for more links
Send me mail jpreed@efn.org with your comments