Dedicated to promoting the welfare of our neighborhood, our community, and our environment.
This article originally appeared in Inside EPA Weekly Report on January 27, 2012. It is reprinted here with permission of the publisher, Inside Washington Publishers. Copyright 2012. No further distribution is permitted.
Click here to view article (pdf format): EPA Takes Steps To Resolve Civil Rights Concerns IEPA 01-12.pdf
View the DRAFT Report from EPA Civil Rights Executive Committee here: Recommendations for Developing a Model Civil Rights Program at The Environmental Protection Agency
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 29, 2011
Contacts:
Janette Brimmer, Earthjustice, 206-343-7340 ext. 1029
Dvija Michael Bertish, Rosemere Neighborhood Association, 360-281-4747
Brett VandenHeuvel, Columbia Riverkeeper, 503-348-2436
Tacoma, WA.—A Washington state county’s controversial development standards appear to violate federal laws to protect clean water, according to a preliminary ruling by a U.S. District Court Judge.
The decision, issued December 28 by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald B. Leighton, means Clark County must comply with federal clean water laws, like other cities and counties in the state, to protect rivers, streams and salmon threatened with extinction. The ruling applies to development projects permitted or approved by the county on or after the court’s order while a related state court appeal is pending.
Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center, represented by Earthjustice, challenged Clark County’s failure to protect threatened salmon.
“Many cities and counties in our state are working hard to clean up polluted waterways and now Clark County must finally do the same,” said Janette Brimmer, an Earthjustice attorney who is representing the groups. “The ruling recognizes that everyone needs to do their share to protect our precious streams, rivers and salmon and that Clark County, like everyone else, must follow the law.”
Last year, the neighborhood and conservation groups prevailed before the state Pollution Control Hearings Board, which hears appeals of state environmental regulations and permits. In January of this year, the Board rejected the county’s “alternative” plan for managing polluted stormwater runoff finding that it violated the County’s stormwater permit and was too weak to prevent significant harm to already stressed rivers and streams.
The County’s inadequate “alternative” plan was developed in a compromise with the Department of Ecology (Ecology), which oversees the federal Clean Water Act. Stormwater runoff a major source of water pollution because it is a stew of toxic metals, oil, grease, pesticides, herbicides, bacteria that runs off pavement into streams and rivers.
Clark County refused to implement the required development runoff standards. After finding Clark County in violation of its stormwater permit, the Department of Ecology yielded to county pressure and agreed to allow Clark County to retain inadequate stormwater standards for development in exchange for a promise to implement taxpayer-funded mitigation projects. The controversial approach did not protect streams polluted by development runoff and shifted the burden of protecting clean water from developers to local taxpayers.
As noted by the federal court, the Board had found the program to be illegal in several important respects. Specifically, the Clark County program:
• Is not based on any science and fails to protect water quality and salmon.
• Unlawfully exempts development projects that “vested” prior to April of 2010.
• Unlawfully allows Clark County to shift resources from its existing retrofit program to mitigate for new development.
• Unlawfully fails to require “low impact development” at new development and mitigation sites.
Clark County appealed the Board decision in state court and refused to comply with the Board’s decision, forcing clean water advocates to take the matter to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to enforce the Clean Water Act.
Judge Leighton’s preliminary ruling agreed that the clean water advocacy groups have demonstrated a likelihood of success on their claims that Clark County’s inadequate development standards for polluted runoff violate the Clean Water Act and that irreparable harm to the environment is the result.
The judge therefore imposed an obligation on the County to follow the original requirements of its stormwater permit; the same requirements that over 100 other cities and counties in Western Washington have been complying with since 2008.
Judge Leighton’s order states:
“Environmental injury, by its nature, is often permanent or at least of long duration” (page 11)
“The public interest favors compliance with environmental laws” (page 12) and the Clean Water Act requires strict enforcement to effectuate its purpose of protecting sensitive aquatic environments” (id)
“…More than 100 cities and counties in Western Washington are subject to the Phase I [stormwater] Permit’s default flow control standard and are apparently able to comply with its requirements.” (id)
“Our association applauds the judge’s order because it reinforces that we need to do everything we can to stop undermining water quality,” said Dvija Michael Bertish of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association. “Clark County has ignored the public’s concerns about stormwater violations,and we hope the court’s decision will bring the County back into
compliance with the law in order to protect the water and endangered species.”
“Columbia River salmon and our communities need clean water,” stated Brett VandenHeuvel, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper. “Clark County must take steps to reduce pollution.”
The clean water groups include Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center. They are represented by attorneys Janette Brimmer and Jan Hasselman of Earthjustice.
A copy of the ruling is available here: SJOrderGrantingPreliminaryInjunction12-28-11.pdf
To view this Press Release in pdf format click here: For Immediate Release:Federal Judge Suspends County’s Inadequate Polluted Runoff Standards.pdf
##
I-5 Interstate Bridge Over Columbia River
Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center (“PEAC”), the Environmental Legal Clinic of Lewis & Clark Law School, has submitted comments on behalf of a coalition of environmental groups on the Columbia River Crossing Project (“CRC”) Final Environmental Impact Statement.
PEAC clients include Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Coalition for a Livable Future, the Northeast Coalition of Neighborhoods, Northwest Environmental Defense Center, Columbia Riverkeeper, the Portland Audubon Society, Oregon Public Health Institute, Upstream Public Health, and Association of Oregon Rail and Trail Advocates. PEAC also states that although it specifically represents these groups, it is “in fact representing the concerns and views of a broad and diverse coalition of groups.”
To date, CRC has established a pattern of ignoring input from these environmental and stakeholder groups concerned about the proposed bridge design impacts to our sole source aquifer, surface and groundwater resources, salmon, air quality, general public health concerns and other environmental impacts.
In this document PEAC details all these concerns and the various technical reports behind them, finding,
Overall it is remarkable how much incomplete and missing analysis is found when the public reviews this FEIS, which has already cost Oregon and Washington taxpayers more than $130 million. This would be Oregon’s largest public works project, and its taxpayers and the taxpayers of Washington are entitled to a much more thorough and complete analysis, a true comparison of all reasonable alternatives that “sharply defines the issues and provide[s] a clear basis of choice among options” (40 C.F.R. § 1502.14), and a meaningful opportunity to review and comment on all of those things in a supplemental DEIS.
While the coalition is not “anti-bridge”, it does charge CRC with the responsibility to not harm our environment, destroy our resources or our community and to be fiscally responsible.
PEAC concludes with,
For all the reasons set forth above, PEAC respectfully requests, on behalf of its clients listed below, that the responsible federal agencies and the CRC Task Force withdraw the CRC FEIS and issue a corrected Supplemental DEIS for public comment.
You can read the entire PEAC document “Comments on September 2011 Final Environmental Impact Statement for I-5 Columbia Crossing Project” here: PEAC_Comments_on_CRC_FEIS
(pdf format – please note this is a fairly large document a may take a moment to open)
EPA has released the initial results of its testing at Camp Bonneville, the former US Military installation in Clark County, Washington.
EPA is conducting assessment of the known and suspected release of hazardous substances at Camp Bonneville to determine whether it warrants listing under the Superfund Program following a petition from Rosemere Neighborhood Association (RNA).
The first round of samples was collected last May (2011) and EPA’s report on that testing can be found http://www.epa.gov/region10/pdf/sites/camp_bonneville/bonneville-p1-sample-results.pdf.
The second round of data was collected in August (2011) and that report is expected in January 2012. Following the secondary reports, EPA will score the site to determine Superfund status upon which a final report will be released.
RNA brought the Superfund petition in 2009 citing faulty clean-up efforts at the site where live munition drills and chemical warfare had been conducted for decades. RNA contended in its petition that contamination from buried military munitions and chemicals, including the continued rise of measured perchlorate and RDX, has leached into the soil and groundwater at the site. RNA was also concerned that the plume of toxic chemicals had become mobile threatening Lacamas Creek. Lacamas Creek feeds into Lacamas Lake and ultimately into the Columbia River.
EPA’s latest data reveal – as suspected by RNA – that the plume has traveled and has become larger, possibly entering the creek flow or infiltrating below the creek to the opposite shore. Although RNA had raised these concerns to the Washington State Department of Ecology for years, Ecology officials had maintained that topography would prevent any additional test wells from being established. Based on RNA’s petition and subsequent discussions regarding hydrologic flow, EPA successfully installed additional testing wells in suspect areas that proved the plume had moved.
The danger to surrounding groundwater and surface water would have gone undiscovered had it not been for the Superfund petition brought by RNA. Following the incomplete clean-up led by Mike Gage and BCCRT, property ownership of Camp Bonneville was to go back to Clark County over a month ago, but the transfer of ownership has been stalled due to a dispute that Gage has with the Washington State Department of Revenue. All other contractors who worked on the initial phases of clean-up at the site have paid their taxes, but Mike Gage has thus far refused to pay his taxes. Apparently clean-up will be stalled until Gage’s tax dispute is resolved.
Around $28 million has been spent on the Bonneville clean-up thus far including extensive efforts to alleviate the contaminated goundwater plume. The groundwater contamination was initially caused by munitions that had been buried in landfills. The landfills were evacuated but during that process the backhoes began to sink and they were not able to remove all of the contaminated soil. As a result, much of the contaminated soil was left behind and the remaining holes were filled with porous, loamy soil that was extremely permeable and allowed the plume to become mobile.
EPA Camp Bonneville page can be found here: http://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/cleanup.nsf/sites/CB
Direct link to the Camp Bonneville Phase 1 Sample Results Report is here: http://www.epa.gov/region10/pdf/sites/camp_bonneville/bonneville-p1-sample-results.pdf
UPDATE:
Responding to the EPA test results announcement, Clark County Department of Public Works Project Manager, Jerry Barnett, said, “The county will meet with Ecology and the EPA to determine the significance of these results. Findings include perchlorate in sediments and subsurface water adjacent to Lacamas Creek at concentrations below cleanup levels.”
However, while EPA might agree to discuss site assessment as a process, it is premature to be discussing the “significance” of the data. As explained above, EPA management will not conduct its complete review of the data until next year after all phases of testing have been completed.
The Washington Department of Ecology also announced Thursday that it is opening a period of public review and comment on an updated legal agreement for the cleanup of Camp Bonneville. Under the proposed Amended Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree between Clark County and Ecology, Clark County will take the lead role in the cleanup of Camp Bonneville. Ecology will accept comments on the proposal from Oct. 14 through Nov. 17, 2011.
For more information go to Ecology’s website here: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/news/2011/277.html
For the amended decree, click here: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/gsp/Sitepage.aspx?csid=11670
You can send comments to Ecology on the draft documents from Oct. 14 through Nov. 17.
Here’s how you can submit comments:
By US Mail:
Ben Forson, Site Manager
Washington Department of Ecology
Toxics Cleanup Program
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600.
By Email to:
bfor461@ecy.wa.gov
Train unloading coal at Millennium terminal in June 2011
Rosemere Neighborhood Association and Longview based Land Owners and Citizens for a Safe Community have prevailed in their efforts to bring substantial pollution reduction changes to the Millennium Bulk Logistics coal terminal in Longview. The settlement was finalized just days before the community groups planned to file a federal Clean Water Act suit in federal district court against Millennium and their Australian parent company Ambre Energy. Millennium claimed to be operating under a permit first issued to Reynolds Aluminum over 20 years ago.
The agreement creates substantial new limits on the operation of the facility and requires Millennium to obtain a new pollution permit that will update the outdated pollution limits which are now two decades old.
A summary of key points from the settlement is below. The entire settlement document can be found here: FINAL Settlement Agreement RNA & LCSC vs MBTL
Under the agreement with Rosemere Neighborhood Association & Landowners and Citizens for a Safe Community, until Millennium Bulk Terminals/Longview receives a new Clean Water Act discharge permit from Ecology, Millennium must:
This article originally appeared in Inside EPA Weekly Report on September 2, 2011. It is reprinted here with permission of the publisher, Inside Washington Publishers. Copyright 2011. No further distribution is permitted.
Click here to view article (pdf format): Equity Advocates Issue ‘Demands’ For EPA To Reform Civil Rights Agenda
This article originally appeared in Inside EPA Weekly Report on August 12, 2011. It is reprinted here with permission of the publisher, Inside Washington Publishers. Copyright 2011. No further distribution is permitted.
Click here to view article (pdf format): Agencies’ Pact Seen Forcing Action To Address Environmental Justice
Train unloading coal at Millennium terminal in June 2011
MEDIA RELEASE
–FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE –
August 9, 2011
CONTACTS:
Gayle Kiser, LCSC
(360) 749-7029
Dvija Bertish, Rosemere
(360) 281-4747
Longview, WA – Community groups from Longview and Vancouver Washington have filed formal notices of suit for violations of the federal Clean Water Act against the corporation planning to export coal from Longview to China. The sixty-day notice of suit is a legal prerequisite to filing the Clean Water Act suit that will be filed in the Federal District court in Tacoma sixty days from today. The suit targets the fact that Millennium Bulk Terminals and its parent company Ambre Energy are currently importing, storing and exporting coal to their Longview facility absent any permits that allow for such activities under the Clean Water Act.
For complete Press Release please click here: MEDIA RELEASE_8-9-2011
To view complete 60 Day Notice please click here: 8-9-11_FINAL_ 60_DAY_ Ambre_ Energy
More about this story from The Daily News Online: Groups sue Millennium over alleged Clean Water Act violations in Longview
This article originally appeared in Inside EPA Weekly Report on July 8, 2011. It is reprinted here with permission of the publisher, Inside Washington Publishers. Copyright 2011. No further distribution is permitted.
Click here to view article (pdf format): EPA Faces New Suit For Stalled ‘Rights’ Petitions
This Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan is the next stage in Rosemere Neighborhood Association’s effort to obtain Superfund status for Camp Bonneville. (Click HERE to view previous articles on RNA Superfund Petition for Camp Bonneville)
Environmental Protection Agency contractors, Ecology and Environment, Inc., of Seattle, will collect soil samples for lab analysis from all over the site and will be installing additional monitors in wells to test groundwater contamination as well as in-stream monitoring in Lacamas Creek.
The Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan details where sampling will occur and how it will be analyzed to determine what clean-up needs to be achieved to ensure public health and safety. Data gathering began May 16 2011, and will take about a year before beginning a report on findings to make recommendations on superfund status.
View the plan here (NOTE: this is a large file – please be patient! Allow a couple of minutes for it to download): Camp Bonneville_Final Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan
