City,
sanitary district waiting for review of Total Maximum Daily Load
appeal
The city of Klamath Falls and
South Suburban Sanitary District are at a standstill in the total
maximum daily load process until at least September as the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality reviews appeals to the order it
issued last December.
“We anticipate by Sept. 30 we’ll
finalize decisions on what we’ll revise in the TMDL,” said Gene
Foster, manager of DEQ’s watershed management section. “We won’t
necessarily make revisions then, but we’ll say these are things
we’ll take up and are willing to revise.”
Total maximum daily loads, more
commonly known as TMDLs, are a mechanism in the federal Clean Water
Act to regulate water pollution.
For the city of Klamath Falls
and South Suburban Sanitary District, called point sources because
they discharge treated wastewater into water bodies, the Klamath and
Lost rivers’ TMDL dictates the amount of pollutants allowed in
effluent.
Point sources must get state
permits to discharge treated wastewater into
water bodies, but they can’t get
new permits until they meet TMDL requirements.
“As far as implementing, we’d
like to see it move forward, but we realize the permit holders will
eventually need to revise and resubmit permits, but we don’t
anticipate them to resubmit those until after the EPA approves the
TMDL,” Foster said.
The Environmental Protection
Agency must give the order final approval, but will delay its review
until the petition process is finished, officials said.
The TMDL order, issued Dec. 22,
would require point sources to reduce phosphorous content by 91
percent — a mandate that could cost city ratepayers at least $6
million in treatment machinery and South Suburban ratepayers between
$60 and $90 million.
In February, the point sources
and non-point sources — Klamath County, Columbia Forest Products,
Klamath Water Users Association, Pacifi-Corp — filed petitions for
reconsideration asking the state to revise the TMDL order, which
also requires reductions in nitrogen, biological oxygen demand and
temperature.
DEQ accepted the petitions
in April and started meeting
with petitioners in June. The results:
Point sources: city of Klamath
Falls, South Suburban
Sanitary District
City Public Works Director Mark
Willrett and South Suburban Sanitary District General Manager
Michael Fritschi said the meeting with DEQ seemed to be more of a
meet-andgreet.
“I don’t have a good feel for …
DEQ’s take,” Willrett said. “It really is kind of vague right now.”
Fritschi said it “looks like DEQ
is pretty firm in its assertions of the validity of the model” used
to conclude phosphorous needs to be reduced dramatically, though
petitioners believe “phosphorous is a little over the top.”
DEQ officials are still trying
to “better identify what the
substantive issues are,” Foster said. Officials want to meet with
point sources again to further discuss issues with technical
details. From there they’ll have internal discussions to decide what
they’re willing to give on.
“I hope they’ll look at
everything,” Willrett said. “We’re trying to be optimistic right
now.”
“We want to take the time and do
it right and respond to petitions,” said Steve K irk, K lamath Basin
coordinator with DEQ. “There’s no mandated schedule … We’ve been
dealing with water quality issues in the Klamath Basin for years.
This is just one more step.”
Non-point sources:
Klamath Water Users Association,
Klamath County, Columbia Forest Products, PacifiCorp
Non-point sources are identified
in the TMDL as indirectly contributing to water pollution, mostly
through water runoff from commercial operations or irrigation.
Despite their petitions for
reconsideration, they still have a June 2012 deadline to write up a
water quality improvement plan to curb their contributions to water
pollution as identified in the TMDL.
Only the K la math Water Users
Association, an irrigator group, has met with DEQ officials.
Columbia Forest Products and PacifiCorp, commercial operations, and
Klamath County, which doesn’t have its own treatment facility, have
meetings scheduled late this month or early next month.
Greg Addington, director of
Klamath Water Users, said the membership’s main issue is they don’t
understand what their responsibility is within the plan they’re
supposed to write.
Non-poi nt sources’ requirements
lack specificity, Addington said, whereas point sources must meet
clear permit obligations.
“We’re trying to get an
understanding of what is required and what it’ll cost,” Addington
said. “It’s a big deal because some of these alleged solutions are
pie-in-the-sky ideas on treatment facilities,” which would be
expensive for irrigation districts, he said.
Foster said DEQ officials wanted
to meet with the Klamath Water Users again to hammer out their
issues, including how irrigators will coordinate with California
TMDL requirements.
While he didn’t sense
concessions on “big issues” like modeling or boundaries, “I don’t
think they were shutting the door on anything,” Addington said.
“Whatever we end up doing with best management practice, we have to
do it in a coordinated fashion with the two states.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any
copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to
those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go
to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml