Written on 11/05/06
Candidate Forum a Success
The Candidate Forum on November 1 at the Oconee County Library was quite successful. More than 60 people showed up. The questions asked were excellent.
District 46 Georgia Senate candidates Bill Cowsert and Jane Kidd and District 113 Georgia House candidate Becky Vaughn spent more than two hours taking questions on topics such as education funding, preservation of the county’s natural resources, immigration, transportation and incentives given to businesses wishing to locate in the county.
After promising to either attend the Forum or send a representative, incumbent District 113 representative Bob Smith did neither. His son read an apology from Mr. Smith and then departed. The statement said Mr. Smith had a commitment to attend a meeting in Savannah.
I had spoken personally with Mr. Smith on October 12 when he failed to respond to my email message of October 9 inviting him and the other three candidates to the forum. Mr. Smith said he had received my email, but he had concerns about the open format. Yet he promised to attend the Forum or send a representative, and he said he hoped to attend in person. His campaign manager, Gabriel Sterling, raised additional questions about the format in a series of email messages in the next two weeks. The day before the Forum, Mr. Sterling relayed a message to me through a colleague that two hours was more than Mr. Smith was willing to commit, but he would attend.
In the apology for not attending read by his son, Mr. Smith said the Savannah meeting was of a legislative committee dealing with technical colleges in the state.
The Forum was organized by citizen groups Citizens for Oconee’s Future, Citizens for South Oconee County, Friends of Barber Creek, Friends of the Apalachee and Oconee Citizens for Responsible Growth. Representatives of these five groups posed the first questions.
I’ve listed the question posed by Karen Kimbaris for Friends of Barber Creek below as well as the full responses of the candidates. Karen’s question dealt with the state Environment Protection Division, which is very important for our work.
I’ve also listed a question by Charlie Baugh of Citizens for Oconee’s Future. Charlie’s question dealt with House Bill 218, which the 2005 General Assembly voted on but did not pass. The Bill, roundly attacked by news media and citizen groups around the state, would have allowed governments, including ours in Oconee County, to make secret developmental deals. This is a particularly important issue for us because of County efforts to lure businesses to Oconee. The Orkin tract at SR316 and US78 has been marketed extensively by the state and the County, including this spring when a pharmaceutical company was courted. Only after the fact did we hear what kinds of promises were made. Included in them was a promise of sewage services. The discharge was targeted for Barber Creek!
I wish I could provide a transcript of all of the questions and responses. That would take much more time than I have. I hope these two questions and answers are helpful.
Please vote on Tuesday. As these two questions indicate, it really will make a difference who is elected to represent us at the General Assembly in Atlanta.
Question by Karen Kimbaris from Friends of Barber Creek: Our group has found it very important to work with the state Environmental Protection Division in our efforts to get the stormwater ordinance passed and also to get hearings on a permit to discharge to wastewater into Barber Creek. What can you do as a representative of our county to assist us in working with the Envirommental Protection Division.
Jane Kidd
Well, we can make sure they are responsive. And if that is a problem then that is something you would call a state Senator or a state Rep about and try to make sure that that is taken care of. I think of lot of it is an education process for the community and for all involved. The rivers are so important that to use any river for that kind of intensive wastewater treatment is a very sensitive issue and I think you need to be assured of the technical assistance to make it work well or you need to look at other options and other locations for the wastewater treatment. It is very expensive and costly enterprise but it usually is handled with bonds and that is an option you have to look at and make sure it is done the way you need it to be. And complain. A lot of people don’t complain enough. I know you all have done it at lot and rightly so. I applaud your group for being as active as you have been and showing up at the meetings. Every T needs to be crossed and ever I dotted before you sign on to a plan that is potentially going to leave a river very dirty and maybe irreparable.
Bill Cowsert
I don’t really think from the state legislature level you can micro manage the EPD. There may be certain rules or regulations or laws that we have to pass that they have to live by. I think part of it is your priorities. That is really reflected as much in funding as anything. I don’t believe the EPD has been adequately funded. If you are sitting there voting on the budget and allocation of the resources, we need to fund the EPD so they can do their job and let those experts do their job. We have some very qualified people there that would like to enforce better than they are able to but they just don’t have the resources to do it. You learn when you sit at these forums. This is the sixth or seventh we have sat at. We have heard a lot of these questions before. But you learn a lot from other people’s answers and from the questions. One thing I picked up on last week is that there are certain impact fees paid by the developers that is dedicated to environment protection but doesn’t necessarily get there in the budget. That is something I would like to see and plan to do in the Senate. Let’s make sure that these funds, like trust funds we set aside, go to the EPD, in the case of your question.
Becky Vaughn
I very much agree with Bill on several things. It bothers me in the state legislature and I’ve seen it happen a lot that we pass these laws about what you can and can’t do and it sounds great. Especially when you go back home and you say I supported this and I supported that. But then they don’t fund the enforcement. So it looks good on the books but if there is nobody there to follow up then it might as well not have been passed. I learned a lot about the problems that the EPD in my work in as head of the Georgia Council on Substance Abuse. As many of you know, methamphetamine has gotten to be a huge issue in this state and obviously impacted a lot of the work I do. But it has become a serious environmental problem. They are being called constantly about cleanup and this kind of stuff. They don’t have the workforce they need to do what you are talking about much less jump into a new area. And we have kind of a history of doing that. In education we said what the schools can do and what the schools can’t do and yet we don’t fund the mechanism to make that happen. There are some dynamite, dedicated people at EPD. I mean just very dedicated to what they do but they cannot get to everything they know is out there and it is very frustrating to them too. I cannot micro manage EPD but I do think one of the roles of your representative and your senator is if you are having trouble getting a response as Jane said you do call them and say this is supposed to happen and I cannot get people to response. It is a time sensitive issue. You cannot file a complaint and they get around to it 18 months later. That goes along with the urgency. If we are going say that this is part of the state and say that these are the rules then you’ve got to fund the enforcement or quit and go home.
Question by Charlie Baugh, Citizens for Oconee’s Future: Last year there was a bill introduced in the House, House Bill 218, that would have allowed secret negotiations for development opportunities at the local level. It would have allowed totally secret negotiations to occur to the point of a deal being made before citizens would have had input. I would like to know how you would vote if that comes up again in the future.
Jane Kidd
I voted against 218...I always side on the need for the public to know especially when it is public money and private citizen’s money being spent. 218 went too far and shielded the information way too long and the deal was actually going to be done before the information was disclosed to the public and that was too far and too closed so I would not vote for it again...
Bill Cowsert
I think we need to reach a consensus as a community, as a state, as to what type of incentives we are willing to give to induce businesses to locate here. That is really what 218 was about when the state is offering incentive packages to industries to try to induce them to locate in the state of Georgia...As a general philosophy I believe in open government...In this particular area there has to be some level of privacy or you are tying your hands behind your back to be able to negotiate at all...We will never win in these competition unless we have some level of secrecy...
Becky Vaughn
I would have voted against that bill. It went absolutely too far in terms of keeping from public disclosure things likes records, agreements, impact assessments, those types of things...There is a fine line there, but when you look at other states, the ones that are willing to take it far down the line and keep things secret are ones that don’t have a lot to attract business and so they are trying to play the game this way in terms of making those types of offers...My standard answer is: masks are for Halloween, they are not for government.
Bob Smith voted for HB 218.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
Written 10/23/06
County Eyes Apalachee for Wastewater
Oconee County has received a preliminary allocation from the state of Georgia to discharge up to 2 million gallons per day of treated waste water from the Rocky Branch sewage plant into the Apalachee River.
Such a Waste Load Allocation (WLA) is required before the County can seek permission to discharge into the Apalachee. So far, the County appears not to have followed up on the allocation. It has until June 13, 2007, to do so.
The request for the WLA for the Apalachee is one of at least four such requests the County has made of the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) since 2003. The County has made two requests for WLAs for the Middle Oconee River and one for Barber Creek. One of the Middle Oconee requests also included a request for Calls Creek.
The County has used the WLA for Barber Creek by requesting an application to begin discharging 1.0 million gallons per day (MGD) of treated sewage water into the creek. The state EPD has drafted a permit for the County and sought public comment. At least 60 letters have been sent to the state asking for a hearing on that draft permit. No decision has yet been announced on the requests for a hearing.
Oconee County has refused to adopt a Waste Water Treatment Master Plan, though it has received two drafts of plans from its consultants, Jordan Jones & Goulding of Atlanta, and it indicated after the first draft was received that a plan would be adopted. The lack of a plan makes it difficult to understand exactly why the County is seeking WLAs for the Apalachee and other streams.
County officials have given conflicting statements about plans for future sewage treatment in the County.
The WLA given to Oconee County is the first given by the state for direct discharge into the Apalachee. Jeffrey Larson, manager of the Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement Program at EPD, wrote to me on August 18, 2006, saying that two permits for discharge into the Apalachee watershed already have been issued by the EPD, and that "two waste load allocations have been granted for direct discharges to the Apalachee River."
Both of the allocations Mr. Larson is referring would seem to be for Oconee County, as the WLA the County received is actually for two separate discharges, one of 1.0 MGD and the other of 2.0 MGD. The County could use one or the other.
The County wrote to the EPD back in April of 2005 requesting "two separate" planning level waste load allocations (PWLA) "for discharges of 1.0 and 2.0 MGD, respectively, into the Apalachee River."
The letter, written on behalf of the County by Jim Sunta of Precision Planning, Inc, of Lawrenceville (PPI), said that discharge into the Apalachee "may also be feasible as an alternate to Barber Creek." But the letter further said that "the County believes that future development may eventually require an ultimate expansion of the Rocky Branch WRF (Water Reclamation Facility) to 2.0 MGD."
In fact, PPI, in the Antidegradation Review it produced for the County in December of 2005, said that "Preliminary studies have indicated that once the proposed project (expansion of Rocky Branch to 1.0 MGD) is completed, the facilities can be upgraded to produce as much as 4.0 MGD of reuse quality effluent without requiring additional land or encroaching on existing buffer areas."
The discharge into the Apalachee would be "approximately 3,000 feet downstream of its crossing by U.S. Highway 78," according to the April 28 letter to the EPD. The waste water would be pumped from the Rocky Branch plant along Hog Mountain Road much of the way to the Apalachee.
Expansion of the Rocky Branch plant to 4.0 MGD is contrary to the recommendation of Jordan Jones & Goulding (JJG). In the March 2004 Draft Report Wastewater System Master Plan, JJG recommended the following:
* Construction of a new Middle Oconee Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) by 2012 that discharges treated flow to the Middle Oconee River. The initial capacity of the plant would be 2.0 MGD, with an expansion to 4.5 MGD by 2017.
* Expand the existing Calls Creek Water Pollution Control Plan to 1.0 MGD in 2009. When this capacity is exceeded around 2012 and the Middle Oconee WPCP is operating, Calls Creek would be decommissioned.
* Expand the Rocky Branch LAS to 0.9 MGD in 2008. By 2015, flows to Rocky Branch would exceed this capacity. At this time, it should be decommissioned or retained as a source of reclaimed water for secondary use in the surrounding area.
In February 2005, JJG released the Final Report Utility Department Long Range Wastewater Strategies. It recommended the following:
* Construction of a new Middle Oconee Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) by 2012 that discharges treated flow to the Middle Oconee River. The initial capacity of the plant would be 2.0 MGD (million gallons per day), with an expansion to 4.5 MGD by 2017.
* Expand the existing Calls Creek Water Pollution Control Plan to 1.0 MGD in 2009. When this capacity is exceeded around 2012 and the Middle Oconee WPCP is operating, Calls Creek would be decommissioned.
* Expand the Rocky Branch LAS to 1.0 MGD in 2008. Continue operation of this plant through 2025. Possibly decommission the Land Application System LAS portion of the facility when other capacity is available.
In a story in The Oconee Enterprise of Sept. 21, 2006, Gary Dodd, Oconee County Utility Department Director, said:
"One suggestion by our consultants was the phasing out of existing plants like Calls Creek. It was not acceptable because EPD will not allow any additional loading on the Middle Oconee."
Assistant Utility Department Director Chris Thomas, in an e-mail message he sent me on March 24 of this year, said:
"...(W)e will continue to pursue a regional wastewater plant on the Oconee River that will handle the needs of Oconee and Athens."
In that same message, Mr. Thomas acknowledged that the Antidegradation Review prepared by PPI for the County does indicate that the Rocky Branch plant could be expanded to 4.0 MGD of discharge. Mr. Thomas added:
"As far as we are aware it (the Review) does not mention that Barber Creek would be capable of receiving an additional 3 MGD of effluent and we have not requested a waste load allocation for the additional 3 MGD."
In late 2003, just before the JJG draft Master Plan was released, the EPD granted Oconee County WLAs of 0.67 MGD, 1.0 MGD and 2.0 MGD for Calls Creek and 1.0 MGD and 2.0 MGD for the Middle Oconee River. All allocations were valid until December 16, 2004. The Calls Creek plant was upgraded in 2004 and currently has a permit to discharge 0.67 MGD of treated water into Calls Creek.
In July of 2004, Oconee County sought WLAs of 2.0 MGD and 4.5 MGD for the Middle Oconee River. On June 15, 2005, the EPD wrote to the County, rejecting the requests. The letter states:
"Water Quality modeling results show that there is no available assimilative capacity for oxygen demanding constituents in the Middle Oconee and Oconee Rivers downstream of the proposed discharge. The results of the WLA indicate that a WLA cannot be granted to this new facility in the Middle Oconee River at this time."
Both the Middle Oconee River and the Oconee River border Oconee County. David Bullard of the EPD has indicated (in an email message of late September that was forwarded to me) that Oconee County’s second request was denied "because the Athens facilities have been allocated the permittable assimilative capacity in this section of the river."
If the EPD grants the request for a hearing on Oconee County’s request for a permit to begin discharging treated wastewater into Barber Creek, we can ask for an explanation of the on-again off-again WLAs for the Middle Oconee. We also should be able to get an answer on how much more treated sewage water the EPD believes Barber Creek can handle.
Barrow County has been granted a permit to discharge 1.5 MGD of treated wastewater into Barber Creek from a plant it is building in Statham.
The WLA for the Apalachee was granted to Oconee County on June 14, 2006, though this has not been discussed openly. I knew that a request had been made because of an open records request made regarding the Rocky Branch facility late last year.
I asked Chris Thomas of the County Utility Department on September 23, 2006, if the state had responded to the County’s request for a waste load allocation. He indicated three days later he would "look into it" for me. On September 29, he wrote back saying I could get a copy of the state’s response if I came to the Utility Department office to pay for the copying ($0.50). I did so a few days later.
In fact, I should have been given this document in response to an open records request I filed with the County for Mr. Dodd on August 11, 2006. In that letter, I wrote:
"Pursuant to the Georgia Open Records Law (O.C.G.A § 50-18-70 et seq.) (the "Law"), you are hereby requested to make available for review and copying all files, records and other documents in your possessions that refer, reflect or relate to the County’s request for a permit to discharge wastewater from the Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant into Barber Creek and that were produced after February 24, 2006."
Clearly the WLA for the Apalachee is related to the request for the Barber Creek permit. The documents even say that. Clearly, County officials are not interested in helping citizens understand all the options being considered.
Let’s hope the EPD grants the request for a hearing.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Written 9/24/06
Confusion Surrounds County Plans
A resident of a nearby subdivision along Barber Creek relayed to me a comment a neighbor had made to her recently. The comment illustrates how much confusion exists in the community about Oconee County’s plans to expand its Rocky Branch sewage plant and begin dumping treated wastewater into Barber Creek.
My friend said her neighbor argued that the County’s plans actually would be a good thing, because the water from the sewage plant would increase the volume of the stream in the summer when the creek has little water.
In fact, the County says it is unlikely to release water into the Creek during summer or other drought periods. At those times, the County says, it will have lots of customers for its "reuse quality water."
The County will be dumping water into Barber Creek when it cannot sell the water for irrigation. When the creek is full because of heavy rains, the county is going to be most in need of the permit is it seeking from the state Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to discharge treated sewage water into Barber Creek.
In sum, my friend’s neighbor misunderstands one of the prime features of the County’s proposed plans for Barber Creek.
Given the complexity of the issue, the inherent uncertainty about how a nonexistent plant actually will operate, the confusing answers given by some county officials, and the poor coverage given the issue by most of the media, such confusion is not so surprising.
Confusion surrounding the key issue of how sewage plant discharge is monitored illustrates these points. I sent Gary Dodd, director of the Oconee County Utility Department, and his assistant, Chris Thomas, an e-mail message on August 20 of this year asking what monitoring is done at the existing Calls Creek plant, and what monitoring would be done at an expanded Rocky Branch facility. The Rocky Branch facility will use the same design as is used at Calls Creek.
The next day, Mr. Thomas, who generally tries to be helpful, wrote me the following reply:
"Most of the sampling of Calls Creek is voluntary. The EPD does not require us to sample the Creek unless there is a potential problem. We sample the creek to establish base lines and to ensure that our effluent is not having any negative effects on the environment. Also, GA EPD samples creeks that receive effluent periodically. This sampling is unannounced and we seldom hear of the results. If the board (Oconee County Board of Commissioners) approves the upgrade (to the Rocky Branch plant), we will begin sampling Barber Creek in the same manner."
I told Mr. Thomas I’d like to review data the County had on Calls Creek, and he wrote me on August 22 saying he had "contacted the wastewater plant and asked them for any sampling info that they have retained. I will let you know when I get a response."
I’ve never heard any more from Mr. Thomas on the topic.
I have subsequently learned through an open records request that the EPD had 20 samples drawn from Calls Creek in 2004 as part of a state-wide study of water quality. The County’s Calls Creek plant was modified and updated in 1995 and given a permit by the EPD to discharge 0.4 million gallons per day (MGD) of water into Calls Creek. In 2004, the plant’s capacity was expanded to 0.67 MGD.
David Wenner, a water scientist in the Department of Geology at the University of Georgia and an active member of Friends of Barber Creek and of the Upper Oconee Watershed Network (UOWN), took a look at the data for 2004. Here’s David’s response:
"I looked over this data as well as that from UOWN and don't off hand see any real numbers that indicate a problem. The only ones of possible concern are some of the bacteria data. They are high on a couple of dates. Elevated values are often seen following a rain event due to storm water runoff into the creeks ( presume this is the case with these data). This is pretty normal for most streams in the area."
Kathy Methier from the EPD subsequently told me that the County is obligated to do self monitoring and to file a report to the state for each permit it has. So the County must have done this for Calls Creek as well as for the existing Land Application System (LAS) the County operates at Rocky Branch. She said this is called a Discharge Monitoring Report, or DMR.
She said, in addition, the state does independent, unannounced facility monitoring to check on the self monitoring data. This is called a Compliance Sampling Inspection, or CSI. There should be reports for Calls Creek and Rocky Branch as well.
I’ll file an open records request for access to these data shortly.
Such monitoring data are important, because plants do not always operated perfectly. James Holland, Altamaha Riverkeeper, made this observation in response to an e-mail message I sent out about the Rocky Branch plant:
"The state of Georgia is doing a lousy job at maintaining water quality discharges from industrial pipes as well as municipality discharges...Some...examples are the waste water treatment plant for Dublin and Brunswick along with most any small town that uses oxidation ponds to treat sewage."
Another person, who has inside knowledge of the operation of the EPD, said:
"The joke is that almost any kind of sewage treatment plant is permitted, there is little monitoring, there are few penalties for misconduct and in the end,... when spills occur, nobody at the EPD will shut down a plant because effluent will back up if they do that."
A story on the front page of the Metro section of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on September 15, 2006, underscored the point. South Fulton residents complain that a sewage treatment plant in their neighborhood stinks frequently and, in the view of some, is creating a health hazard.
Unfortunately, the newspapers serving Oconee County have not explored issues of plant operation and not done a good job generally of covering the story of the proposed Rocky Branch expansion.
The Banner-Herald mostly has ignored the story. The Oconee Leader ran one very good story in its September 7 issue. The Oconee Enterprise has consistently gotten the story wrong.
The Enterprise front-page story on September 21, 2006, was clearly the worst piece of reporting on the topic. It contained the following quote from Oconee County Utility Department Director Gary Dodd about the quality of the water to be discharged from the plant:
"You wouldn’t want to drink it (the water from the proposed Rocky Branch plant) because of the implications, but we are planning dual water lines in new subdivisions that want them, ‘grey’ water suitable for lawns, washing cars and dogs and such benign uses."
Mr. Dodd and the Enterprise reporter should know quite well that the Oconee County ordinance on use of "reuse quality" water recommends against precisely the kinds of uses he was discussing. That ordinance, passed in March of 2005, stipulates that reuse water should NOT be used for the following: "drinking, food preparation, hand washing, automobile washing, or irrigation of fruits and vegetables." The ordinance, available on the county’s web site, is based on state standards for use of the water.
The state standards on use of "reuse quality" water are available on the EPD website and in the Library (5/3/06 entry) on the Friends of Barber Creek web site, www.barbercreek.org. The state documents specifically recommends against any use that brings the water in contact with the skin. The document, on page 13, gives the following guideline for use of the water:
"The customer shall not allow reclaimed water to be used for consumption (human or animal), interconnecting with another water source, sprinkling of edible crops (gardens), body contact recreation, filling of swimming pools, or sharing a common reclaimed service between properties."
The Enterprise article of September 21 also is in error about the nature of the proposed changes for the sewage plant on Rocky Branch Road. The article says that the current Land Application System (LAS) "will be expanded to treat one millions-per-day of reuse quality water." Actually, the current LAS treatment facility is going to be eliminated, and a new plant will be built, if the County gets its permit.
The County currently has a permit to dispose of 0.4 MGD of water at the existing Rocky Branch facility by spraying it on hayfields on the site. The County will retain its current ability to spray water on the hayfields. When the fields are wet due to heavy rains, however, the water will go into Barber Creek, unless some other customer wants the water. That is unlikely to be the case, of course, since these other customers also will not need irrigation water at that time.
The County has no permit to dump treated sewage water into Barber Creek at present. That, rather than the LAS, is what the permit is all about.
The Enterprise also allowed Mr. Dodd to counter argue the recommendation of the consulting firm it hired, Jordan Jones & Goulding (JJ&G), to develop a Wastewater System Master Plan for Oconee County. JJ&G, an engineering and consulting firm based in Atlanta and with offices around the country, recommended phasing out the Rocky Branch and Calls Creek plants over time in favor of a plant on the larger Middle Oconee River.
According to Mr. Dodd, as quoted in the Enterprise, JJ&G made a mistake in not knowing that the state would not grant a permit for a plant on the Middle Oconee River. Yet the County has continued to use JJ&G, most recently for permitting to draw water from the Oconee River for the planned new reservoir on Barnett Shoals Road. The Enterprise did not point out this inconsistency, or ask Mr. Dodd to explain.
There is good reason to doubt Mr. Dodd’s assertion about the EPD’s unwillingness to grant a permit for the Middle Oconee. In a meeting I had with Mr. Dodd on March 22, he claimed that the EPD would not grant a permit for the Apalachee River. Jeffrey Larson, manager of the Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement Program at EPD, wrote to me on August 18, 2006, saying that EPD "has no policy or strategy for not issuing discharge permits to the Apalachee River."
The Enterprise, which has a history of challenging authority in the County, seems to think its job in this case is to promote the County’s plans for sewage treatment rather than ask questions about them. In this way, the paper’s coverage is very close to that of Ms. Kate McDaniel who runs the web site, A Positive Vision for Oconee County. At least Ms. McDaniel does not claim she is providing objective coverage of the issue.
The issue before the county is complex. The County has promised developers sewage treatment capacity it does not have. The County also has no agreed upon plan for how to develop that capacity. It has refused to hold open discussions on the two drafts of a Wastewater System Master Plan prepared for it by JJ&G.
In other words, the County is flying in the dark. It is hardly surprising that citizens in the County are confused about what is being proposed and its consequences.
On September 16, while walking my dog along Barber Creek behind my house, he and I spotted an otter swimming upstream. It has been several years since I’ve seen otter in the creek, and I was pleased to see one again. River otters eat a variety of fish and shellfish, as well as small land mammals and birds. It suggests to me the creek still has some life in it, despite all the development in the County and the poor protection it has been given from stormwater runoff by the County.
The County’s plans for sewage treatment are a potential threat to that otter. How serious the threat is in difficult to know. What I do know is that the otter cannot ask the County and the state to discuss all the options and be clear about them. So we have to do that.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Written 9/22/06
Barber Creek Permit Request Not Likely the Last
Anyone who thinks the current request by Oconee County for a permit to dump 1 million gallons per day of treated wastewater into Barber Creek from the Rocky Branch sewage plant will be the last should read carefully the lengthy article on sewage treatment in the Sept. 21 issue of The Oconee Enterprise.
Oconee County Utility Department Director Gary Dodd is quoted as saying that the Georgia Environmental Protection Division will not give the county a permit to discharge treated water into the Middle Oconee River. So the current sewage plants, including Rocky Branch, will have to be expanded in the future.
There is good reason to doubt Mr. Dodd’s assertion. In a meeting I had with Mr. Dodd on March 22, he claimed that the EPD would not grant a permit for the Apalachee River. Jeffrey Larson, Manager of the Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement Program at EPD, wrote to many of us on August 18, 2006, that EPD "has no policy or strategy for not issuing discharge permits to the Apalachee River."
The County hired Jordan Jones & Goulding to develop a Wastewater System Master Plan. JJ&G recommended phasing out the Rocky Branch and Calls Creek plants over time in favor of a plant on the larger Middle Oconee River.
Mr. Dodd is quoted in the Enterprise as saying this recommendation is not "acceptable" because JJ&G did not take into consideration that the EPD would not grant any permits for the Middle Oconee.
OK. The Enterprise often gets things wrong. The front page headline is pretty silly: "Oconee has traveled a long path from the outhouse." Even if Dodd is misquoted in places in the article, however, the thrust of what he is quoted as saying is consistent with the County’s reluctance to take seriously the advice of its consultants.
We need a hearing on these issues. We have an extension on the deadline for writing to the EPD. We need to generate more letters so we get the hearing and can learn exactly what the EPD is willing to consider in terms of permits.
The alternative is that Rocky Branch is going to be expanded from its current 0.4 MGD of discharge into a spray field to 4.0 MGD. In January 20, 2006, Mr. Dodd informed the Oconee County Board of Commissioners that the Rocky Branch facility "can be upgraded to produce as much as 4.0 MGD of reuse quality effluent without requiring additional land or encroaching on existing buffer areas."
The likelihood is that Barber Creek is going to be targeted for much more than the 1.0 MGD covered by the current permit.
Please write immediately, and send me a note saying you did so. Write a second time if you can. Or print out the letter below and get a neighbor to sign it. Send it in yourself or fax it if necessary.
Thanks
Lee
DATE
Linda MacGregor, Branch Chief
Water Protection Branch
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division
4220 International Parkway, Suite 101
Atlanta, GA 30354
FAX 404 675 6247
Dear Ms. MacGregor:
The Oconee County Board of Commissioners is seeking NPDES Permit No. GA0038806 for the Rocky Branch Water Reclamation Facility on Rocky Branch Road. The permit is to provide for a discharge flow of 1.0 million gallons per day of treated wastewater to Barber Creek.
In the September 21, 2006, issue of The Oconee Enterprise, Oconee County Utility Director Gary Dodd is quoted as saying the EPD will not grant Oconee County a permit for the Middle Oconee River, making it necessary to expand its existing Calls Creek and Rocky Branch facilities.
INSERT A LINE HERE ABOUT HOW BARBER CREEK AFFECTS YOU.
The Middle Oconee is much larger than Barber Creek. I ask that you hold a public hearing on the pending request so that I can voice my concerns and so that I can learn how the EPD makes its decisions about which streams can handle sewage treatment plant discharge.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
Barber Creek Permit Request Not Likely the Last
Anyone who thinks the current request by Oconee County for a permit to dump 1 million gallons per day of treated wastewater into Barber Creek from the Rocky Branch sewage plant will be the last should read carefully the lengthy article on sewage treatment in the Sept. 21 issue of The Oconee Enterprise.
Oconee County Utility Department Director Gary Dodd is quoted as saying that the Georgia Environmental Protection Division will not give the county a permit to discharge treated water into the Middle Oconee River. So the current sewage plants, including Rocky Branch, will have to be expanded in the future.
There is good reason to doubt Mr. Dodd’s assertion. In a meeting I had with Mr. Dodd on March 22, he claimed that the EPD would not grant a permit for the Apalachee River. Jeffrey Larson, Manager of the Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement Program at EPD, wrote to many of us on August 18, 2006, that EPD "has no policy or strategy for not issuing discharge permits to the Apalachee River."
The County hired Jordan Jones & Goulding to develop a Wastewater System Master Plan. JJ&G recommended phasing out the Rocky Branch and Calls Creek plants over time in favor of a plant on the larger Middle Oconee River.
Mr. Dodd is quoted in the Enterprise as saying this recommendation is not "acceptable" because JJ&G did not take into consideration that the EPD would not grant any permits for the Middle Oconee.
OK. The Enterprise often gets things wrong. The front page headline is pretty silly: "Oconee has traveled a long path from the outhouse." Even if Dodd is misquoted in places in the article, however, the thrust of what he is quoted as saying is consistent with the County’s reluctance to take seriously the advice of its consultants.
We need a hearing on these issues. We have an extension on the deadline for writing to the EPD. We need to generate more letters so we get the hearing and can learn exactly what the EPD is willing to consider in terms of permits.
The alternative is that Rocky Branch is going to be expanded from its current 0.4 MGD of discharge into a spray field to 4.0 MGD. In January 20, 2006, Mr. Dodd informed the Oconee County Board of Commissioners that the Rocky Branch facility "can be upgraded to produce as much as 4.0 MGD of reuse quality effluent without requiring additional land or encroaching on existing buffer areas."
The likelihood is that Barber Creek is going to be targeted for much more than the 1.0 MGD covered by the current permit.
Please write immediately, and send me a note saying you did so. Write a second time if you can. Or print out the letter below and get a neighbor to sign it. Send it in yourself or fax it if necessary.
Thanks
Lee
DATE
Linda MacGregor, Branch Chief
Water Protection Branch
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division
4220 International Parkway, Suite 101
Atlanta, GA 30354
FAX 404 675 6247
Dear Ms. MacGregor:
The Oconee County Board of Commissioners is seeking NPDES Permit No. GA0038806 for the Rocky Branch Water Reclamation Facility on Rocky Branch Road. The permit is to provide for a discharge flow of 1.0 million gallons per day of treated wastewater to Barber Creek.
In the September 21, 2006, issue of The Oconee Enterprise, Oconee County Utility Director Gary Dodd is quoted as saying the EPD will not grant Oconee County a permit for the Middle Oconee River, making it necessary to expand its existing Calls Creek and Rocky Branch facilities.
INSERT A LINE HERE ABOUT HOW BARBER CREEK AFFECTS YOU.
The Middle Oconee is much larger than Barber Creek. I ask that you hold a public hearing on the pending request so that I can voice my concerns and so that I can learn how the EPD makes its decisions about which streams can handle sewage treatment plant discharge.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Written 9/13/06
Getting Information on County Plans Difficult
Getting information on the County’s efforts to get a permit to discharge treated wastewater from its Rocky Branch sewage treatment into Barber Creek has proven to be quite a challenge.
Back in March, the County ran two public notices in The Oconee Enterprise about a public hearing on the issue to be held March 14. Both of these notices said three documents related to the request were available for review by the public in the Utility Department office.
The second of these notices ran in the paper on the 23rd, and I went to the Utility Department office the next afternoon and asked to see the documents. The receptionist said she had never heard of these documents, was unaware of the public notices, and had no idea where the documents might be.
A few days later I got a call from Utility Department Director Gary Dodd telling me I could see the documents, but only in his and Chris Thomas’ presence. Mr. Thomas is Mr. Dodd’s assistant.
I went back to the Utility Department office on March 3 to review the documents, which, as they said, I was able to review only in their presence. I did make arrangements to copy those I needed. Some of them, it turned out, I had obtained earlier through an open records request.
On August 11, in anticipation of Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) action on the Oconee County permit request, I filed an open records request in the County asking Mr. Dodd for "all files, records and other documents in your possession that refer, reflect or relate to" the county’s permit application.
I went to the courthouse on August 22 to review the documents and make copies of what was available.
Two key documents were not made available: The County’s application for the permit, which was submitted to the EPD on June 29, and the draft of the permit, which the County received from the EPD on August 14.
I e-mailed Mr. Thomas on August 28 after I had reviewed again all the materials I had received and asked him for the application. He wrote me back the next day saying he did not have a copy. He said it was sent in by the engineers (Precision Planning, Inc., of Lawrenceville), and no copy existed in the Utility Department Office. A day later he said he had an electronic copy and would make it available to me.
On September 5, I visited Mr. Thomas’ office to get the application and asked for a copy of the draft permit as well. He made a copy for me, charging me $.25 per page to make the copies, which is the County’s standard charge. (The County also charges for time employees spend in searching records at $16.02 per hour. I was billed for 6 hours and 45 minutes on August 22.)
Ironically, on September 7 the County ran another legal notice in The Enterprise announcing that the EPD is considering issuance of a permit to begin discharging treated wastewater from Rocky Branch into Barber Creek. The notice said that the permit application, draft permit and other information were available for review either in Atlanta at the EPD or at the Office of the Oconee County Board of Commissioners.
The Georgia EPD has not been very helpful either. On August 28 I wrote to Jeffrey Larson, head of the Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement Program, which is handling the Oconee County permit request, asking for a copy of the draft permit. I still have not received it.
On August 30, I called Mr. Larson’s office and left a message on his voice mail asking for a copy of the Oconee County Permit Application, for data on EPD monitoring of Calls Creek, where Oconee County has its second waste treatment plant, and for the draft permit for the Rocky Branch plant.
Stephanie Heath, Georgia Open Records Act Secretary II at the EPD, called me back later that day and left a message on my voice mail. She said she was calling on behalf of Mr. Larson. When I called her back the next morning, however, she said she would not help me obtain any of the documents I requested unless I came to the EPD offices in Atlanta. She told me she had no idea what a Permit Application even looked like.
I called Mr. Larson back shortly after talking to Ms. Heath and left another message asking him once again to call me. I informed him that Ms. Heath has been less than helpful.
Ms. Heath called me back on September 5 and informed me she would send me a copy of the Oconee County Permit Application but would not provide any additional information unless I came to Atlanta. I received the copy of the application from her a few days later.
On September 7, I filed an open records request with Mr. Larson asking for data on Calls Creek. I have heard nothing from him. By law, he is required to respond within three days of receipt of the request.
I guess my view of these documents is different from the view held by most of the officials. I know I paid for them. I think they are mine. I’m willing to be patient in reviewing them, but I feel I should be aided in doing so.
Mr. Thomas generally has gone out of his way to provide information and to answer questions. But I shouldn’t have had to ask for the Application for the Permit, which was produced in the period covered by my open records request, or for the draft permit, which arrived in the County office before my request was fulfilled.
The County should be putting these key documents on its web site so citizens can access them more easily. If the subcontractors are not providing documents in electronic format, the County should find others who will do so. The same goes for the EPD.
If the County and state officials are not willing to be second-guessed by the citizens who pay their salaries, they should find different jobs. Being second guessed goes with public service.
Getting Information on County Plans Difficult
Getting information on the County’s efforts to get a permit to discharge treated wastewater from its Rocky Branch sewage treatment into Barber Creek has proven to be quite a challenge.
Back in March, the County ran two public notices in The Oconee Enterprise about a public hearing on the issue to be held March 14. Both of these notices said three documents related to the request were available for review by the public in the Utility Department office.
The second of these notices ran in the paper on the 23rd, and I went to the Utility Department office the next afternoon and asked to see the documents. The receptionist said she had never heard of these documents, was unaware of the public notices, and had no idea where the documents might be.
A few days later I got a call from Utility Department Director Gary Dodd telling me I could see the documents, but only in his and Chris Thomas’ presence. Mr. Thomas is Mr. Dodd’s assistant.
I went back to the Utility Department office on March 3 to review the documents, which, as they said, I was able to review only in their presence. I did make arrangements to copy those I needed. Some of them, it turned out, I had obtained earlier through an open records request.
On August 11, in anticipation of Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) action on the Oconee County permit request, I filed an open records request in the County asking Mr. Dodd for "all files, records and other documents in your possession that refer, reflect or relate to" the county’s permit application.
I went to the courthouse on August 22 to review the documents and make copies of what was available.
Two key documents were not made available: The County’s application for the permit, which was submitted to the EPD on June 29, and the draft of the permit, which the County received from the EPD on August 14.
I e-mailed Mr. Thomas on August 28 after I had reviewed again all the materials I had received and asked him for the application. He wrote me back the next day saying he did not have a copy. He said it was sent in by the engineers (Precision Planning, Inc., of Lawrenceville), and no copy existed in the Utility Department Office. A day later he said he had an electronic copy and would make it available to me.
On September 5, I visited Mr. Thomas’ office to get the application and asked for a copy of the draft permit as well. He made a copy for me, charging me $.25 per page to make the copies, which is the County’s standard charge. (The County also charges for time employees spend in searching records at $16.02 per hour. I was billed for 6 hours and 45 minutes on August 22.)
Ironically, on September 7 the County ran another legal notice in The Enterprise announcing that the EPD is considering issuance of a permit to begin discharging treated wastewater from Rocky Branch into Barber Creek. The notice said that the permit application, draft permit and other information were available for review either in Atlanta at the EPD or at the Office of the Oconee County Board of Commissioners.
The Georgia EPD has not been very helpful either. On August 28 I wrote to Jeffrey Larson, head of the Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement Program, which is handling the Oconee County permit request, asking for a copy of the draft permit. I still have not received it.
On August 30, I called Mr. Larson’s office and left a message on his voice mail asking for a copy of the Oconee County Permit Application, for data on EPD monitoring of Calls Creek, where Oconee County has its second waste treatment plant, and for the draft permit for the Rocky Branch plant.
Stephanie Heath, Georgia Open Records Act Secretary II at the EPD, called me back later that day and left a message on my voice mail. She said she was calling on behalf of Mr. Larson. When I called her back the next morning, however, she said she would not help me obtain any of the documents I requested unless I came to the EPD offices in Atlanta. She told me she had no idea what a Permit Application even looked like.
I called Mr. Larson back shortly after talking to Ms. Heath and left another message asking him once again to call me. I informed him that Ms. Heath has been less than helpful.
Ms. Heath called me back on September 5 and informed me she would send me a copy of the Oconee County Permit Application but would not provide any additional information unless I came to Atlanta. I received the copy of the application from her a few days later.
On September 7, I filed an open records request with Mr. Larson asking for data on Calls Creek. I have heard nothing from him. By law, he is required to respond within three days of receipt of the request.
I guess my view of these documents is different from the view held by most of the officials. I know I paid for them. I think they are mine. I’m willing to be patient in reviewing them, but I feel I should be aided in doing so.
Mr. Thomas generally has gone out of his way to provide information and to answer questions. But I shouldn’t have had to ask for the Application for the Permit, which was produced in the period covered by my open records request, or for the draft permit, which arrived in the County office before my request was fulfilled.
The County should be putting these key documents on its web site so citizens can access them more easily. If the subcontractors are not providing documents in electronic format, the County should find others who will do so. The same goes for the EPD.
If the County and state officials are not willing to be second-guessed by the citizens who pay their salaries, they should find different jobs. Being second guessed goes with public service.
Monday, September 04, 2006
Written 8/30/06
Records Request Reveals Stormwater Negotiations
An open records request I filed earlier this month produced some interesting insights into the behind-the-scenes negotiations regarding the stormwater ordinance Oconee County passed on August 1.
The documents show that the state Environmental Protection Division scolded Oconee County for wanting to weaken its stormwater ordinance to satisfy developers. The County ignored that advice, however, and weakened the ordinance anyway. The EPD used the same arguments we used against the weakened ordinance. Luckily, our pressure resulted in a much stronger ordinance in the end.
Amy Morrison, stormwater/environmental coordinator for the county, indicated in a letter she wrote to the Land Use and Transportation Committee members on April 7, 2006, that she revised the ordinance originally presented to the public in September of 2005, at "the request of the BOC." BOC stands for Board of Commissioners.
The stormwater ordinance presented in 2005 applied state standards for stormwater management to the whole county; the revisions Ms. Morrison made in early 2006 greatly weakened the ordinance and restricted those standards to the already built out part of the county, labeled as "urbanized" by the EPD.
In a telephone conversation I had with Ms. Morrison on July 10, she said that she had been instructed to weaken the ordinance by her boss, Mike Leonas, the public works director. She said she was told by Mr. Leonas that the change was at the request of Melvin Davis, chairman of the BOC.
At the public hearing in October of 2005, no one asked that the stormwater ordinance be weakened. Ms. Morrison said in our telephone conversation, however, that the development community did not want the original stormwater ordinance because it would force builders to spend more money.
Shortly after I spoke with Ms. Morrison on July 10, I telephoned Mr. Leonas, and he confirmed that he had asked Ms. Morrison to make the changes in the original ordinance. He said Mr. Davis told him in a conversation some time after the public hearing on October 24, 2005, to change the ordinance. Mr. Leonas said he remembered that there had been an email message following the verbal request from Mr. Davis.
The open records request shows that Alan Theriault, administrative officer of the county, who, like Ms. Morrison and Mr. Leonas, works for Mr. Davis, sent an email message to Ms. Morrison on November 15, 2005, instructing her to make the changes in the ordinance. It was copied to Mr. Davis and Mr. Leonas.
In that message, Mr. Theriault said: "(Y)ou will begin the process of combining the 3 separate ordinance into a single document that pertains to the urbanized areas of the County only (italics in original)." Ms. Morrison also was told to proceed with a change in the original Notice of Intent that the county had filed with the EPD regarding the stormwater ordinance.
Lisa Perrett, environmental specialist at EPD, wrote to Mr. Davis on November 28, 2005, stating her displeasure with the change requested by Ms. Morrison. "EPD is greatly concerned with the proposed approach," she wrote.
Ms. Perrett said Oconee County, if it did not apply the state standards countywide, "may be allowing potentially inferior stormwater control measures to be utilized." She pointed out that the definition of the urbanized area of the county was based on the 2000 Census and that "the County has recently been experiencing a tremendous amount of growth." She continued: "(T)he majority of the currently defined urban area is already developed."
In sum, Ms. Perrett made all the same arguments with Mr. Davis that citizens did. Unfortunately, we didn’t know the letter existed until now.
The Perrett letter, in its entirety, is in the "library" on the web site of Friends of Barber Creek, www.barbercreek.org.
Lee
Records Request Reveals Stormwater Negotiations
An open records request I filed earlier this month produced some interesting insights into the behind-the-scenes negotiations regarding the stormwater ordinance Oconee County passed on August 1.
The documents show that the state Environmental Protection Division scolded Oconee County for wanting to weaken its stormwater ordinance to satisfy developers. The County ignored that advice, however, and weakened the ordinance anyway. The EPD used the same arguments we used against the weakened ordinance. Luckily, our pressure resulted in a much stronger ordinance in the end.
Amy Morrison, stormwater/environmental coordinator for the county, indicated in a letter she wrote to the Land Use and Transportation Committee members on April 7, 2006, that she revised the ordinance originally presented to the public in September of 2005, at "the request of the BOC." BOC stands for Board of Commissioners.
The stormwater ordinance presented in 2005 applied state standards for stormwater management to the whole county; the revisions Ms. Morrison made in early 2006 greatly weakened the ordinance and restricted those standards to the already built out part of the county, labeled as "urbanized" by the EPD.
In a telephone conversation I had with Ms. Morrison on July 10, she said that she had been instructed to weaken the ordinance by her boss, Mike Leonas, the public works director. She said she was told by Mr. Leonas that the change was at the request of Melvin Davis, chairman of the BOC.
At the public hearing in October of 2005, no one asked that the stormwater ordinance be weakened. Ms. Morrison said in our telephone conversation, however, that the development community did not want the original stormwater ordinance because it would force builders to spend more money.
Shortly after I spoke with Ms. Morrison on July 10, I telephoned Mr. Leonas, and he confirmed that he had asked Ms. Morrison to make the changes in the original ordinance. He said Mr. Davis told him in a conversation some time after the public hearing on October 24, 2005, to change the ordinance. Mr. Leonas said he remembered that there had been an email message following the verbal request from Mr. Davis.
The open records request shows that Alan Theriault, administrative officer of the county, who, like Ms. Morrison and Mr. Leonas, works for Mr. Davis, sent an email message to Ms. Morrison on November 15, 2005, instructing her to make the changes in the ordinance. It was copied to Mr. Davis and Mr. Leonas.
In that message, Mr. Theriault said: "(Y)ou will begin the process of combining the 3 separate ordinance into a single document that pertains to the urbanized areas of the County only (italics in original)." Ms. Morrison also was told to proceed with a change in the original Notice of Intent that the county had filed with the EPD regarding the stormwater ordinance.
Lisa Perrett, environmental specialist at EPD, wrote to Mr. Davis on November 28, 2005, stating her displeasure with the change requested by Ms. Morrison. "EPD is greatly concerned with the proposed approach," she wrote.
Ms. Perrett said Oconee County, if it did not apply the state standards countywide, "may be allowing potentially inferior stormwater control measures to be utilized." She pointed out that the definition of the urbanized area of the county was based on the 2000 Census and that "the County has recently been experiencing a tremendous amount of growth." She continued: "(T)he majority of the currently defined urban area is already developed."
In sum, Ms. Perrett made all the same arguments with Mr. Davis that citizens did. Unfortunately, we didn’t know the letter existed until now.
The Perrett letter, in its entirety, is in the "library" on the web site of Friends of Barber Creek, www.barbercreek.org.
Lee
Written 9/4/06
Rocky Branch to Treat Industrial Waste
We still need letters sent to the state Environment Protection Division if we are going to get a public hearing on the County’s request to begin dumping treated wastewater from the Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant into Barber Creek.
Here’s another reason to want that hearing: The Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant will treat INDUSTRIAL waste as well as residential waste.
In July the pharmaceutical company Novartis announced that it was bypassing Georgia and building its influenza vaccine plant in North Carolina instead.
The Georgia location that Novartis was considering was at Georgia Highway 316 and U.S. Highway 78. The land is referred to as the Orkin Tract. It lies in Oconee and Clarke Counties.
The Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant in Oconee County would have treated the waste from Novartis had it located here. The treated water would have gone into Barber Creek. The County has said it will seek other pharmaceuticals for the site.
During the speculation before Novartis announced its decision, I started an email exchange with Chris Thomas in the Oconee County Utility Department about special procedures that would be in place to protect citizens who live along Barber Creek should a vaccine manufacturer locate at the Orkin Tract.
That exchange is posted on the Friends of Barber Creek web site, in the library. The exact URL is http://www.barbercreek.org./barbercreek/library.html. The item was posted on 7/15/06. You can see for yourself what would happen.
Clearly, some safeguards are in place. But they depend on a lot of monitoring, which we need to insist is in place should the EPD grant a permit to Oconee County. Here’s a summary of what Mr. Thomas said.
First, the federal Environmental Protection Agency requires pharmaceuticals to pretreat their waste before discharging into sewer systems.
Second, the County also sets limits on what can be put into its sewage system, Mr. Thomas said.
Third, the plants can "handle higher loadings than their influent flows would normally bring." In other words, the plant should be able to handle the inflow even if it didn’t meet the pretreatment standards.
Finally, Mr. Thomas wrote, "These safeguards along with stringent effluent monitoring and
limits at the wastewater plants insure consistently safe discharges into streams and rivers as required under the rules of NPDES permitting."
NPDES refers to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, the permit program that requires all those discharging pollutants into waters of the United States to obtain a permit.
Mr. Thomas subsequently explained that Oconee County’s pretreatment limits "mimic" the federal standards, and, in fact, at present the Georgia Environmental Protection Division "regulates all significant industrial users for the County due to our small number of users...Oconee is in the process of implementing it's own pretreatment program, but it will be some time before we complete all of the requirements necessary."
Mr. Thomas also said "I may have been confusing when I referred to the stringent monitoring of the plants effluent. Although all treatment plants are closely monitored to ensure protection of the environment and public health, I was referring to the reuse limits. Reuse limits are more stringent than most plants in the state operate under."
In other words, the plant will be following state standards for production of "reuse" quality water.
How closely this is going to be monitored is something that we all should be concerned about, particularly if the Orkin Tract is developed as planned. The state has made it clear it would love to have another company such as Novartis locate here.
This is the kind of question we can pose at a public hearing on the Oconee County permit request if the EPD grants us a hearing. But we have to write and ask. Here is a draft letter:
DATE
Linda MacGregor, Branch Chief
Water Protection Branch
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division
4220 International Parkway, Suite 101Atlanta, GA 30354
Dear Ms. MacGregor:
The Oconee County Board of Commissioners is seeking NPDES Permit No. GA0038806 for the Rocky Branch Water Reclamation Facility on Rocky Branch Road. The permit is to provide for a discharge flow of 1.0 million gallons per day of treated wastewater to Barber Creek.
TELL HOW BARBER CREEK AFFECTS YOU AND YOUR PROPERTY.
I am aware that the state and local officials have tried to get a major pharmaceutical manufacturer to locate at the Orkin Tract in the county in the past and have said they will continue to do so. I also know that the Rocky Branch facility would be the treatment plant for effluent from the manufacturer.
I ask that you hold a public hearing on this request so that I can learn about state standards on pretreatment of industrial waste and monitoring procedures that will guarantee the safety of the water flowing into Barber Creek, should you grant a permit to Oconee County.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
Please let me know when you write. I am keeping a tally.
Thanks
Lee
Rocky Branch to Treat Industrial Waste
We still need letters sent to the state Environment Protection Division if we are going to get a public hearing on the County’s request to begin dumping treated wastewater from the Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant into Barber Creek.
Here’s another reason to want that hearing: The Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant will treat INDUSTRIAL waste as well as residential waste.
In July the pharmaceutical company Novartis announced that it was bypassing Georgia and building its influenza vaccine plant in North Carolina instead.
The Georgia location that Novartis was considering was at Georgia Highway 316 and U.S. Highway 78. The land is referred to as the Orkin Tract. It lies in Oconee and Clarke Counties.
The Rocky Branch Waste Treatment Plant in Oconee County would have treated the waste from Novartis had it located here. The treated water would have gone into Barber Creek. The County has said it will seek other pharmaceuticals for the site.
During the speculation before Novartis announced its decision, I started an email exchange with Chris Thomas in the Oconee County Utility Department about special procedures that would be in place to protect citizens who live along Barber Creek should a vaccine manufacturer locate at the Orkin Tract.
That exchange is posted on the Friends of Barber Creek web site, in the library. The exact URL is http://www.barbercreek.org./barbercreek/library.html. The item was posted on 7/15/06. You can see for yourself what would happen.
Clearly, some safeguards are in place. But they depend on a lot of monitoring, which we need to insist is in place should the EPD grant a permit to Oconee County. Here’s a summary of what Mr. Thomas said.
First, the federal Environmental Protection Agency requires pharmaceuticals to pretreat their waste before discharging into sewer systems.
Second, the County also sets limits on what can be put into its sewage system, Mr. Thomas said.
Third, the plants can "handle higher loadings than their influent flows would normally bring." In other words, the plant should be able to handle the inflow even if it didn’t meet the pretreatment standards.
Finally, Mr. Thomas wrote, "These safeguards along with stringent effluent monitoring and
limits at the wastewater plants insure consistently safe discharges into streams and rivers as required under the rules of NPDES permitting."
NPDES refers to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System, the permit program that requires all those discharging pollutants into waters of the United States to obtain a permit.
Mr. Thomas subsequently explained that Oconee County’s pretreatment limits "mimic" the federal standards, and, in fact, at present the Georgia Environmental Protection Division "regulates all significant industrial users for the County due to our small number of users...Oconee is in the process of implementing it's own pretreatment program, but it will be some time before we complete all of the requirements necessary."
Mr. Thomas also said "I may have been confusing when I referred to the stringent monitoring of the plants effluent. Although all treatment plants are closely monitored to ensure protection of the environment and public health, I was referring to the reuse limits. Reuse limits are more stringent than most plants in the state operate under."
In other words, the plant will be following state standards for production of "reuse" quality water.
How closely this is going to be monitored is something that we all should be concerned about, particularly if the Orkin Tract is developed as planned. The state has made it clear it would love to have another company such as Novartis locate here.
This is the kind of question we can pose at a public hearing on the Oconee County permit request if the EPD grants us a hearing. But we have to write and ask. Here is a draft letter:
DATE
Linda MacGregor, Branch Chief
Water Protection Branch
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Environmental Protection Division
4220 International Parkway, Suite 101Atlanta, GA 30354
Dear Ms. MacGregor:
The Oconee County Board of Commissioners is seeking NPDES Permit No. GA0038806 for the Rocky Branch Water Reclamation Facility on Rocky Branch Road. The permit is to provide for a discharge flow of 1.0 million gallons per day of treated wastewater to Barber Creek.
TELL HOW BARBER CREEK AFFECTS YOU AND YOUR PROPERTY.
I am aware that the state and local officials have tried to get a major pharmaceutical manufacturer to locate at the Orkin Tract in the county in the past and have said they will continue to do so. I also know that the Rocky Branch facility would be the treatment plant for effluent from the manufacturer.
I ask that you hold a public hearing on this request so that I can learn about state standards on pretreatment of industrial waste and monitoring procedures that will guarantee the safety of the water flowing into Barber Creek, should you grant a permit to Oconee County.
Sincerely,
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
Please let me know when you write. I am keeping a tally.
Thanks
Lee
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)