Note: There are no meetings scheduled for July. Take a vacation!!
June Meeting Summaries
June was the month for two very important public seminars. The Growth Management Act and DOE's Nonpoint Strategy.
Relatively few people attended these seminars. Here is a detailed summary of the content of both meetings and an update on the Woburn Leukemia cluster.
Michael Grady, Senior Planner, with Washington's Department of Community Trade and Economic Development was guest speaker at the June 19th CRC seminar.
Michael spoke on the Growth Management Act (GMA). Something about GMA has a tendency to raise blood pressure, voices and the maybe generate a general feeling of tension. At the end of the meeting, blood pressure, voice levels, and the tension were normal.
GMA tries to deal with a prior lack or inability, on the part of communities, to link planning efforts. In years past growth took place in a loose, unplanned manner. Cities spent millions extending services to new clusters of homes or business and much of the cost was a burden to current residents, who had done nothing to cause this cost increase.
In the ideal world it would be better if growth took place where people want it, with power and utilities close by, and with roads able to handle that type of growth (residential or business) and with costs paid for by the new growth. Under GMA communities and counties are responsible for defining:
Capital Facility Plans Land Use Plans Utility Plans
Michael used real maps from a northern county to illustrate some of the issues and principles involved in growth management planning. Using these maps we were the answer to questions like these:
If that county is zoned 1 house to 1 acre what is the impact of surface roads and driveways?
Assuming the same density, what is the impact of thousands of wells to the water supply?
Using the same density, what type of industry or jobs might be available?
How will the community finance and provide services such as fire, police, roads, sewers and water?
What does this zoning say about the future of timber, as an industry, in this county?
What impact could developments like this have on the agriculture or seafood industry?
One comment which really summarizes GMA is: "Build a vision of what your community (city or county) wants to be and then, with your community checkbook, show how it will be paid for."
As our demand for water in the Chehalis Watershed increases it becomes increasingly more important that our growth strategy (in a multi-county watershed) be consistent and supportive. It would not bold well for Chehalis Watershed residents or industry if the basin ended up in a situation which happened in the southwest. There one jurisdiction sued another jurisdiction for appropriating water which impacted their jurisdiction.
June 12 was the evening Kahle Jennings, Washington Department of Ecology (DOE), previewed the DOE strategy to address nonpoint sources (NPS). As you know the CRC is focused on implementation of the Chehalis River Basin Action Plan and this meeting dealt with activities DOE will perform in support of the plan.
This meeting announced support for implementation of the Action Plan. The commitment DOE is making to the Action Plan is key to addressing nonpoint issues.
The material covered is important to all basin residents and the following report attempts to accurately relay that information to you.
Kahle provided an overview, discussed the existing watershed plans and the goals and actions under this NPS strategy.
Overview - Chapter 90.48 of the Revised Code of Washington authorizes and requires regulation of known or suspected sources of pollution. This includes point and nonpoint (diffuse) sources of pollution and potential sources of pollution.
Four basic elements of the State's NPS Program are: education, technical assistance financial assistance and regulation/enforcement.
Solutions to NPS sources of pollution are best achieved through local land use decisions and individual stewardship. Implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) is the accepted method for addressing nonpoint sources of pollution. BMPs include both structural and managerial approaches to controlling pollution.
Part of the foundation for dealing with NPS is a locally developed and managed watershed plan. Once that local commitment has been made, state government can support and promote these efforts with public education, technical assistance, (limited) funding, and back up regulation/enforcement.
A complete NPS Pollution Management Program identifies the primary sources of pollution; evaluates a range of appropriate corrective actions; identifies the ones that are most appropriate for the specific conditions found in the watershed; and results in the implementation of those practices at the specific sites where the pollution is occurring.
Finally, NPS pollution prevention and control programs must include a provision for regulation (i.e. permits) in case the voluntary approach fails to achieve the desired results.
The Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) was established under the Federal Clean Water Act and is required when it has been documented that a body of water fails to meet state water quality standards. Sources of pollution in a such a body of water can be point sources and nonpoint sources such as:
Existing plans - The Chehalis River Basin Action Plan is a locally developed nonpoint source pollution management plan which was approved by DOE in December 1992.
The Action Plan establishes goals, identifies specific issues, and recommends actions for the following nonpoint sources of pollution within the Chehalis watershed:
Goals - The goals of this DOE strategy, in support of the Action Plan, are:
This applies to tributaries of the Upper Chehalis River and specific sections of the mainstems of the Upper Chehalis and Black Rivers.
Planned Activities - DOE intends to achieve the goal by using available state laws, regulations, and resources to control all identifiable sources in the targeted tributaries and along the mainstem. During the next four years, DOE will focus its resources on the major causes of nonpoint source pollution. Any remaining water quality degradation will either be from nonpoint sources of pollution that represent natural conditions, or nonpoint source pollution from sources that can only be controlled through local actions. Voluntary citizen involvement through locally based watershed management - implementation groups will continue to be a key element of local nonpoint source pollution control efforts.
If the combined results of all these efforts do not meet the TMDL goals, then additional wasteload allocation adjustments will have to be made to the NPDES permits for Pe Ell and Centralia.
Under the Action Plan, DOE is associated with a number of tasks, which they plan to implement. Relative to Urban Stormwater DOE will:
Relative to Forest Practices, DOE will:
Relative to Other Nonpoint Sources, DOE will:
Besides these activities there is a need for State implementation of additional NPS pollution controls
In the area covered by the Upper Chehalis TMDL, intensive surface water quality monitoring data indicates that livestock impacts - primarily dairies - are a likely source of water quality degradation. However, livestock impacts are not limited to large or commercial livestock operations.
DOE will target technical assistance and permitting inside the TMDL area to control BOD, ammonia, fecal coliform bacteria, (and total phosphorus in the Black River). Over time the Water Quality Program will implement the Dairy Waste General Discharge Permit. Because of the work load implications for conservation district, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and Cooperative Extension programs, DOE will closely coordinate dairy inspections and permitting activities with the local offices of these organizations in the Chehalis watershed.
Permitting under the TMDL will be preceded by a concentrated effort to inform dairy operators about the requirements of the Dairy Waste General Discharge Permit and bring about voluntary compliance. For the next 15 months DOE will focus on an intensive outreach effort through local conservation districts, Cooperative Extension, and other organizations.
Permit coverage is required only for dairy farms that are a likely source of water quality degradation AND satisfy the definition of a Concentrated Dairy Animal Feeding Operation (CDAFO) under the 1993 Dairy Waste Management Act (Chapter 90.64 RCW).
When a dairy farm is considered a likely source of water quality degradation it will be inspected with the start of the rainy season in late 1997. Dairy farms that are found to have a discharge of pollutants will be required to take corrective action to eliminate the discharge.
Only dairies that can not quickly (generally within 30 days) correct the discharge conditions and meet the definition of a CDAFO will be placed under the Dairy Waste General Discharge Permit. They will remain under the permit until they have ceased to discharge, the discharge conditions have been corrected, and they have demonstrated continuous compliance with the permit for a period of three years.
Under this plan inspections and permitting will be completed by June 30, 1998 and implementation of the remaining corrective actions required under the Dairy Waste General Discharge Permit should be completed on all dairies in the Upper Chehalis Watershed by June 30, 2000. Other livestock operations will be corrected under existing programs administered by local conservation districts and the complaint process.
Septic Systems are also considered a major NPS source. We learned that DOE does not have direct authority over septic systems but DOE will work with local health departments to identify priority areas for corrective action within the Upper Chehalis River and Black River Basins.
Temperature is another problem. Both the Upper Chehalis River Dry Season TMDL Study and the Black River Dry Season TMDL . The most common cause of increased water temperature is loss of riparian canopy vegetation. The TMDL study recommends replanting and protection of riparian canopy in those areas of the basin where temperature is an identified water quality problem. DOE will support actions that are intended to reduce water temperatures (over time). This includes: protection of existing riparian cover as required under the Forest Practices Act (administered by DNR), riparian planting, maintenance and restoration of flow, and protection/restoration of desirable channel morphology.
DOE will also evaluate the use of the Shorelines Permitting process to protect riparian shade in areas where development is occurring.
Another area of interest is local government's management of NPS.
DOE will evaluate the current status of existing programs that local government should be implementing to fulfill their legal obligations to protect water quality. DOE will encourage and/or, where appropriate, require implementation of these local nonpoint source pollution prevention and control programs.
Local opportunities for controlling nonpoint source of pollution include:
Assistance in this DOE strategy can take the form of targeting State grant and loan funds and providing staff assistance. To support implementation of the TMDL, DOE will evaluate its ability to target state grant funds to high priority areas and pollution control activities.
Time schedule - It may take ten or more years to implement all the nonpoint source pollution controls necessary to approach the 100% level of reduction of nonpoint sources recommended in the TMDL study. Intensive follow-up monitoring is scheduled to take place starting July 1, 2001. A detailed TMDL monitoring plan for that intensive monitoring effort is scheduled to be developed by the DOE Environmental Investigation and Laboratory Services Program (EILS) during state fiscal year 1997.
Until then, DOE will track data from:
Effort will be made to coordinate these individual monitoring activities so that the combined results fulfill the three requirements of EPA's definition of an adequate monitoring program:
Last month's newsletter reported on a leukemia cluster. A Massachusetts Dept. of Health Report, April 1996, supplied this follow-up. --Woburn, MA located 13 miles NW of Boston has an extensive industrial history spanning over 130 years. This resulted in the deposition of hazardous materials and waste products.
Beginning in 1979, excavation of a site unearthed significant amounts of industrial waste. In June of 1979 it was learned that two municipal drinking water wells located near the site and in use since 1964 were contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE), perchloro-ethylene, chloroform, and other organic compounds. The contaminated wells were immediately closed. By 1986 21 cases had been diagnosed.
A relationship between exposure and leukemia was identified for exposure which occurred during the time the mother was pregnant. A weaker association was identified for maternal exposure beginning two years before conception and ending at conception of the leukemia case. Although small numbers of cases limit statistical power, a significant trend across exposure categories was identified for the period during pregnancy suggesting a dose response relationship for mothers who drank contaminated water during pregnancy.
For more info contact:
Nonpoint Solutions
- Urban stormwater runoff containing oil and gas residues, fertilizers and pesticides from yards, pet wastes and other pollutants picked up from roads and parking lots;
- Erosion from farmland and forest lands;
- Bacteria and nutrients from failing septic systems;
- Animal waste from commercial and noncommercial livestock operations.
Woburn Update