Go to: OVERVIEW
(SaveOurCounty) DETAILS
(listener)
PLANNING SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENT EROSION
Report corrections & broken links to Webmaster Get updates on local issues
Richard L. Latterell
PO Box 763
Shepherdstown, WV 25443
November 8, 2004
WV Department of Environmental Protection
Public Information Office
Attn: Anne Howell
601 57th Street
Charleston, WV 25304
RE: Comments on draft WV/NPDES permit, Appl. No. WV0022349
Dear WV Department of Environmental Protection:
I offer the following comments on the draft permit applied for by the City of
Charles Town to discharge additional effluent into Evitts Run as a result of
the expansion of the current sewage treatment plant.
I am very concerned that the conditions of the DEP draft permit will allow
significant further degradation of Evitts Run and the Shenandoah River. I urge
the DEP to revise the draft permit to tighten restrictions forcing the Charles
Town Sewage Plant to treat effluent in such a way that it will be much cleaner
when it flows into Evitts Run and/or the Shenandoah than it would be under the
draft permit that is the subject of these comments.
The draft permit will allow significant increases in bacteria, lead,
biodegradable materials, and ammonia compared with the April-August 2004
averages. Evitts Run, a trout stream stocked regularly by WVDNR, already shows
signs of degradation. Benthic surveys conducted by the Jefferson County
Watersheds Coalition (JCWC) from 1998 through 2003 have shown that whereas
Benthic communities in all reaches of Evitts Run show evidence of chronic
impairment, the most extreme levels of impairment occurred in the mid-reaches
downstream from the Charles Town Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Profuse algal blooms observed in these same mid-reaches of Evitts Run are
symptomatic of over-nutrification. Further evidence in support of this
hypothesis is the reported increase in bacterial (Fecal Coliform) contamination
downstream from Charles Town/Ranson (site of the sewage treatment plant). A
recent survey by JCWC (Fall, 2004) revealed excessive concentrations of Fecal
Coliform at nine stations spanning all reaches of Evitts Run. However, the most
striking variation was the 8-fold increase in E. coli concentrations
downstream compared with upstream of the Charles Town sewage treatment
plant.
Granted these data do not establish a causal relation between
over-nutrification indicated by algal blooms and a profusion of Coliform
bacteria -- and impairment of benthic communities. Regardless, combined
evidence represented by these indicators of impaired water quality suggest that
Evitts Run is unable to adequately process and abate the load of pollutants
that are currently discharged into it. Increases in pollutant discharges of the
magnitudes requested by the permit would overwhelm the system and accelerate
further degradation of Evitts Run.
Similar considerations also apply to the Shenandoah River re either direct or
indirect discharges of sewage effluent from the Charles Town sewage treatment
plant. The Shenandoah River is the most polluted stream in Jefferson County
(See USEPA303D list). Some of the highest concentrations of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB¹¹s) in North America have been recorded from lower reaches of
the Shenandoah. Mercury is so abundant in food chains of the Shenandoah waters
and sediments that advisories against consumption of at least some species of
fish have been issued. Recently, USEPA denied a discharge permit to a proposed
subdivision on grounds that the proposed receiving stream was so feeble that
70,000 gals. of undiluted sewage effluent would be discharged directly into the
lower Shenandoah on a daily basis. Further degradation of the Shenandoah
consequent on additional direct or indirect discharges of sewage effluent from
the Charles Town facility would be unconscionable.
I urge that the DEP redraft and strengthen the permit and fact sheet to:
-- "hold the line" on current standards for treated sewage effluent
discharges;
-- provide antidegradation determinations for each pollutant (60 CSR 5-5.6);
-- mandate precise measurement and prompt reporting of lead levels in treated
effluent;
-- require statistically representative effluent sampling. The current practice
of four samples per month, only on Wednesdays, has too much variance to be
"representative" as required by law, and allows too much delay to
help the plant or the public fix problems before they harm citizens.
-- Explain how DEP developed the permit. Law requires calculations in the fact
sheet.
Thank you for consideration of my comments.
Sincerely,
Richard L. Latterell