HomeMy WebLinkAboutSurface Water Work Session January 23 2007I Whatcom County Council
2 Special Surface Water Work Session
3
4 January 23, 2007
5
6 Council Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 10:08 a.m. in the Whatcom
7 County Civic Center Annex, Second Floor Meeting Room, 322 N. Commercial, Bellingham,
8 Washington.
9
10
11 Present: Absent:
12 Sam Crawford Barbara Brenner
13 Dan McShane
14 Seth Fleetwood
15 Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
16 L. Ward Nelson
17
18
19 SURFACE WATER WORK SESSION 1AB2007 -0251
20
21 Bruce Roll, Assistant Director, stated they would discuss updates regarding Swift
22 Creek at the end of the meeting.
23
24 1. LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED - COMPREHENSIVE STORMWATER PLAN
25
26 Bruce Roll, Assistant Director, stated the Council approved a resolution last year to
27 create a stormwater plan. They will discuss the plan and begin discussing the policy issues
28 that the Council will need to consider as they craft a stormwater plan for Lake Whatcom.
29 Today, staff will give the Council information it will need as the issues begin to arise. Also,
30 they will discuss the phase two permit, which was finally submitted on January 17. There is
31 an appeal period through February, after which the permit will be issued. He hopes to have
32 a plan and a proposed funding mechanism before the Council before the end of 2007.
33 There is a parallel course of work going on in Birch Bay. There is a request for proposals
34 (RFP) out for a consultant to create the assessment roll. It should be developed and ready
35 to go by mid - summer. Revenue collection will be guided by the adopted stormwater plan in
36 2008.
37
38 Sue Blake, Public Works Department, handed out today's agenda from CH2MHill (on
39 file). This project is on the fast track. The Council resolution gave a deadline as the end of
40 2007. The schedule allows completion before that.
41
42 Weimer asked about tonight's stormwater meeting with the public at Kulshan Middle
43 School. Roll stated the contract allows the contractor meetings with the public about the
44 stormwater plan. Tonight is the first meeting. They will discuss tonight's public meeting
45 later in this meeting.
46
47 Roll stated the Birch Bay plan was more grass roots - driven. Lake Whatcom has
48 more information and programs already. A lot of that work already exists. It's a matter of
49 packaging the work and identifying gaps. The question is what capital projects they want to
50 do, and how they will be financed.
51
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 1
Bill Derry, CH2MHill, stated he wants to get the Council's initial reactions today, but
the Council will not need to make any decisions. Also, he will discuss what they are going
to discuss with the public at tonight's public meeting.
A lot of work has been done at Lake Whatcom already. The public knows that. He
will build upon the work that is already done by filling in gaps and verifying information. He
will ask the public tonight for more specific information on stormwater problem in their
neighborhoods. That information will lead to specific recommendations for capital projects
and targeted programmatic options.
They are targeted to finish in June, with the plan coming forward in July. The
biggest scheduling challenge is bringing along the public through the process. He read
through the agenda handout. He is working on tasks one and two, and has begun task
three. However, the Council has already agreed on goals, values, and visions over the
years. They are not going to revisit those decisions. They are simply going to identify what
has already been officially adopted for Lake Whatcom.
Task four is an update to what's been done earlier for other studies, including the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, which just came out last
week. Task six is maintenance and operations. One requirement of the NPDES permit is to
know where the stormwater facilities are, do a condition assessment, and to clean them at
least once per year. That's a lot of catch basins to clean every year. They will look at
operations and maintenance in greater detail. In May, they will begin to put the plan
together. Public involvement will be done through three public work shops. The Council
may schedule other public meetings during adoption.
Nelson asked how the public meetings will be advertised.
Scarlet Tang, Public Works Department, stated she assembled the Lake Whatcom
email list. The media is included on the list, but they have not done much to cover the
meeting.
Caskey- Schreiber stated staff could call the reporters directly. That sometimes
works better.
Weimer stated the staff can send out a specific email letting the media and people
know there will be hands on public involvement.
Crawford stated it's likely that the only people who will attend the public meeting are
the same few people who attend all meetings on Lake Whatcom. Try to get more of a
community effort.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, asked the possibility of having another meeting
in a few weeks or a month if the turnout isn't what they hope. The question is whether they
have enough information on what the problems are, and whether they anticipate something
new and substantial to come out of a public involvement meeting.
Roll stated an extra meeting is a possibility. They need to be further along the
project before he worries about it. They will get whatever information they can get from
this first meeting. The subsequent meetings that will engage the audience will be more
important.
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 2
1 Blake stated that if they get enough phone calls from people who didn't know about
2 the meeting but wanted to be involved, she is happy to meet with people and provide
3 additional opportunities for providing input.
4
5 McShane stated staff already knows where a lot of the problems are in the area. The
6 consultant probably does also, from time spent looking around. This is an effort to find out
7 if something is amiss. At some point, having a clear, easy to read base map, and then
8 distribute it to people. People will be able to see if the problem areas they know about are
9 on the map. He's not sure that the staff will be surprised by any information received
10 tonight. Derry stated he agrees. There won't be any new information about sources and
11 contaminants. He wants information about very specific locations and areas. He wants to
12 know what the residents see during events, block -by- block.
13
14 Derry stated he will present findings and alternatives during the March meeting. The
15 draft plan will be ready in June. There will be a workshop mid -June to present the draft
16 plan. That would conclude his part of the public involvement process. Then it goes to the
17 Council in July.
18
19 Nelson asked if they will have enough time to rectify issue that any citizens may
20 have. Derry stated that depends on the issue.
21
22 Roll stated they don't want to force adoption. They want to have this done before
23 December so they can work through the community issues this summer. Keep the timeline
24 as tight as possible. This Council has spent an enormous amount of time keeping this issue
25 in the forefront this year. Don't revisit this next year.
26
27 Desler stated it is a high priority for the administration to finish this project and get it
28 going. Nothing precludes the County from getting this information out to the public via the
29 County website.
30
31 Roll stated this plan would look at things like forest practices and its relationship to
32 stormwater. However, it's not a forest plan. It's not a parks and open spaces plan. It's not
33 a comprehensive watershed management plan.
34
35 Fleetwood stated this Council has regarded the financing of water projects for a long
36 time. They've allocated 61 days to working on this plan. He asked what they will do to
37 glean the alternative revenue sources. Derry stated that outside the 61 days, they are
38 already identifying the alternatives and costs. They've also looked at financing options in
39 Whatcom County already, out at Birch Bay. They basically already know what the options
40 are for financing. He was project manager for the City of Bellingham stormwater financing
41 project. He has background in financing water issues in the lake Whatcom watershed.
42 Within those 61 days, they can quickly list the options for financing.
43
44 Roll stated they will look at global things such as the purpose and functions of a
45 variety of countywide funds, and their relationship to stormwater. They will not be able to
46 create a revenue stream in the watershed that will pay for everything they want to do. The
47 question is how to finance the six -year capital project plan into the future. There is also the
48 issue of how they manage the money. He continues to question what the functions are that
49 they want to achieve and the players who need to be there to make it happen. In the case
50 of Lake Whatcom, there are people in the watershed, but there is also everyone who
51 benefits from the drinking water supply in Lake Whatcom. They can't double -tax people.
52 However, know who the constituents are and who benefits from the work done in the
53 watershed.
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 3
McShane stated he's hearing that this task is easy to accomplish. It would be
beneficial to lay out the mechanisms. One option is creating a sub - district around the lake.
It would be good for the public to know of the various options.
Crawford asked if this does not include anything to do with failing septic systems,
because it's not a stormwater issue. Derry stated it's hard to separate the two. The reality
is that the failing septic tanks wind up in the County's stormwater system. They drain out
into the local County road ditch.
Roll stated the Council would get an update on onsite septic (OSS) systems at the
Joint Lake Whatcom meeting tomorrow night. The City and County have worked hard to
convert as many failing OSS systems as possible.
Crawford stated he would like Mr. Derry to note at the public meeting tonight anyone
who brings up examples or direct knowledge of where that's happening. Derry stated he
will do that. This plan will not get into recreational or other issues. They are not going to
reopen the debates.
Blake stated she will provide an update on the City and County contracts, the Health
Department, and the background regulations to the Joint Lake Whatcom meeting tomorrow
night. She will paint the current picture of the septic system practices in the watershed and
describe what may come up in the future. They will have context for problems brought
forward.
Crawford stated people may see these meetings as an opportunity to voice their
opinions about other issues. He's hearing more about an application to put in wells around
Agate Bay. That is out of the realm of stormwater issues.
Weimer asked if they will address development. He's hearing about Water District
10 possibly extending its sewer service, which will create more development. Derry stated
development will be a part of the discussion with the .public. Regarding utility extensions,
he will have to think about how to address it. They don't want this plan to become the
focus of the land use decisions in the watershed. They will have to find a balance. This
plan will not drive a process to change land use plans. This plan will address the effects of
land use decisions. This plan is not intended to be a public debate that will lead to
resolutions or other decisions. Their process isn't long enough or extensive enough to have
a meaningful debate about land use decisions.
Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated Squalicum Mountain is
a concern that the administration and staff are working on. They are concerned about rural
forestry issues and density adjacent to the watershed. It's driving the concern about how
water would be provided to the top of that mountain for a potential development. Some of
that process will be worked out in the next six months through the emergency ordinance.
Staff will look at the larger set of land use issues, especially rural forestry lands, and at how
clustering relates. This process will inform that other process to help build some staff
recommendations by June.
Derry stated he can inform the process about the technical implications about
stormwater. However, he is not going to run that process.
Crawford asked the result Councilmember Fleetwood was looking for in proposing
this plan.
Surface Water Work Session, 1/2312007, Page 4
1
2 Fleetwood stated the object of this effort is to fill in the holes about stormwater. He
3 hoped this effort would result in a prioritized project list and an aggressive effort to create
4 financing. From this, he gathers they would get recommendations on financing. However,
5 it's another question whether or not they have the political will to finance these things. He
6 hopes they can do that this year. He likes what he hears so far. They are taking steps in
7 the right direction, which is better than nothing.
8
9 Crawford asked if they would analyze existing development, look at the effect it has
10 on allowing pollutants to enter the lake, see what they can do to minimize the pollutants,
11 and identify the associated costs. Roll stated that is correct. There will be capital projects
12 as well as public education. The entire gamut of options will be included.
13
14 Crawford asked if they are not going to say that new development will play a part,
15 because the new, future development is a Council discussion. Roll stated he hopes this
16 exercise looks at existing stormwater regulations to see if they are consistent for achieving
17 goals.
18
19 Nelson asked if Snohomish County has a countywide stormwater district. Derry
20' stated it is still limited to certain areas. It is basically all the urban areas. There are
21 forested areas and rural areas that aren't included. It started out as just the southwest
22 corner of the county, in the urbanized basins. It has incrementally expanded to additional
23 urban areas, to encompass the western half of the county.
24
25 Nelson stated he would like to know how that worked and if that is an option for
26 Whatcom County. He would like more information. Derry stated he was the manager for
27 surface water for Snohomish County when they put that program together. He will provide
28 that information.
29
30 Fleetwood asked if the City Council passed a similar resolution asking for a plan. Roll
31 stated that item will be discussed at the joint meeting tomorrow night.
32
33 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
34
35 Desler stated that this contractor is not expected to develop the specific plan. It will
36 bring forward a series of options with the pros and cons for each, after a review of problems
37 and solutions. He asked if this work was built around post - development stormwater retrofit
38 planning and not around how they were going to plan for development in the future.
39
40 Roll stated it is both. They will look at both developed and undeveloped land
41 throughout the watershed.
42
43 McShane stated there is public concern about development on Squalicum Mountain
44 triggering more development. There is a concern about a cluster division with utilities being
45 run up the mountain. People are concerned that urban development will occur along those
46 utility lines. There is also a preliminary proposal for a place at the south end of the lake
47 that is proposed to have a sewer line, also. That might trigger some discussion. Don't let
48 that topic take over the public meeting.
49
50 He's been hearing that the City of Bellingham's purchase program fund is expended
51 for now. He asked if they visualize an opportunity to inform future purchases from a
52 stormwater retrofit or key land purchase perspective to prevent future development. Derry
53 stated that is a great idea. They can do that, from a stormwater standpoint. They won't
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 5
look at the full range of reasons to buy land. They won't do an exhaustive prioritization of
possible purchases. He will identify whether something is related to protecting a corridor or
an area needed for stormwater facilities.
McShane stated the members of the advisory committee to the City spent a lot of
money buying large tracts of land to keep them from being developed. However, more
resources may be freed, but they may be limited. Some of the members are talking about
being very strategic about where they purchase land. The committee may be receptive to
guidelines or assistance.
Blake stated she attends the Watershed Advisory Board meetings when she can.
One of their goals is to work with the County on identifying stormwater locations to see if
the locations match their needs as well.
McShane stated that is a funding source that may be beneficial to the County. Derry
stated part of his scope is to identify overlapping revenue sources that may be used. They
will think a lot about who benefits and contributes in those 61 days. They will try to find a
balanced mix of funding sources, including City and County sources.
Caskey - Schreiber asked if there would be recommendations for treatment options.
Put forward the best available control technologies in Mr. Derry's opinion, without any
political influence. Put forward what he thinks will be most effective in reversing the trends
in the lake. Let the Council weigh the pros and cons of each option. Derry stated the most
effective option may not be the best option. He agreed that he will provide his opinion on
the most effective methods. The effective stream flows have not been discussed enough. If
they discharge distilled water from every stormwater outfall, they will still have a degraded
stream system, because there is phosphorus in the soil. The biggest change in hydrology
and increase in stream flows comes from removing the forest, not from incrementally
adding pavement. That increases the peak flows and starts to scour the channel. There is
a lot of phosphorus in the soils in the stream channels. As they increase the peak Flows,
they start scouring that out and delivering it to the lake. The filters and swales is a good
debate, but it's only a part of the picture.
Caskey - Schreiber stated she wants the information on what are the most effective
methods, not what is the most politically palatable. Roll stated the Councilmember Caskey-
Schreiber is looking for information to help better clarify the respective output and changes
they would expect from different management options for different practices. Mr. Derry is
saying look at planned clearing and make sure those events don't create problems with
phosphorus. The question is how important stormwater retrofit is compared to land use tied
to forest practices and their relative contributions, depending on the various management
options.
Nelson stated the best solution is moving everyone out of the watershed and
restoring it to its natural habitat. There are degrees of solutions from moving everyone out
of the watershed to paving over the entire watershed. He expects Mr. Derry to put forward
reasonable proposals and their costs.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they can come up with a tier of options.
Derry stated the final permits for NPDES phase two are out. The permits only cover
the urbanized portions of the county, which is the very western end of the lake and Sudden
Valley. The rest of the watershed is not covered. From a policy standpoint, the question is
whether they have separate regulations divided by an arbitrary, Census Bureau, line. That
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 6
1 is something to consider. Also, consider development restrictions. Whatcom County is
2 mostly where it should be. The new permits require the adoption of the most up -to -date
3 State Department of Ecology manual. There will be additional protections they'll talk about.
4
5 Prohibited illicit discharges specifically prohibits car washing. It's not a huge deal,
6 but it will raise eyebrows of the public.
7
8 The total maximum daily load (TMDL) study's ultimate outcome is unknown.
9 However, the TMDL results trump the NPDES permits. Ecology has the option of amending
10 the NPDES permit right now, as a result of something that comes up through the TMDL
11 process. Ecology has the right to tell the County to do something right now. However, the
12 TMDL process has to run its course, first.
13
14 Crawford asked an example of what Ecology may say. Derry stated it could be
15 anything to address phosphorus, such as building more filters within a certain timeframe.
16 Whatcom County should actively participate in the TMDL process, and it is.
17
18 McShane stated the Council's policy is to be an active participant.
19
20 Derry stated there is ongoing discussion of countywide priorities. There are citizen
21 requests and environmental needs. The Council must decide on priorities and funding.
22
23 Roll stated develop a countywide priority process for addressing water resource
24 issues in different geographic areas. Consider the ultimate guiding principles for the
25 process. Look at how financing in the watershed relates to other projects. Hopefully that
26 countywide process will be something the public and County can follow. They will
27 coordinate this and the other project as they go forward.
28
29 Derry stated he doesn't have anything in his scope to address the countywide issue.
30 That's the Council's issue.
31
32 Roll stated it will happen at the same time as the stormwater plan. He wants the
33 two to mesh when they are done.
34
35 Derry stated that the permit requires maintenance of public and private facilities.
36 There must be annual maintenance of catch basins. That sounds like an urban service,
37 which is related to the bigger question that the County must deal with.
38
39 Crawford asked if there are existing maintenance agreements for some of the
40 maintenance measures. Roll stated there are at least nine stormwater ponds inside the
41 watershed and outside the City of Bellingham. In some of those situations, the
42 homeowners associations are to deal with it. The County has never enforced private
43 maintenance. This plan will address how to make sure the facilities are functioning
44 correctly.
45
46 Crawford stated that if the County can regulate and monitor the maintenance of
47 30,000 septic systems, then it should have the same or higher level of accountability for the
48 maintenance of nine stormwater facilities around Lake Whatcom. Roll stated the County
49 can check the facilities, but doesn't have assurances that they will be fixed. A question is
50 who to talk to if there was never a homeowner's association developed in the first place.
51
52 Derry stated that with the septic tank, there is one owner that the County could go
53 to. With a detention pond, there may be 100 owners in a subdivision that don't even know
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2087, Page 7
it exists and that it's their responsibility to maintain it. It takes an annual inspection and
attendance at the homeowner meetings, which is a cost. Staff must explain this to the
homeowners. In a normal residential subdivision, the residents aren't aware.
Nelson stated the County hasn't fully got a handle on how well the septic system
program will work.
Crawford stated that is a topic to be aware of during the public meetings.
Derry stated they will present a Power Point presentation to the public at the public
meeting tonight. They will discuss the adopted goals, list the earlier project work that has
been done, and discuss the conclusions and recommendations. Then he will discuss what
they are going to do and the schedule. After the presentation, they will divide the people
into groups according to sub - watersheds and neighborhoods where they live. Those people
will report on what's going on in their neighborhoods.
Fleetwood asked how much importance they put on this exercise. Derry stated a fair
amount, from two standpoints. First, it shows the public that the government is listening.
Second, it will help to fill in the neighborhood - specific blanks.
Fleetwood stated it seems to be a completely unscientific means of filling in the
blanks. It is limited to the number of people who show up at the meeting, and assumes
that they are completely cognizant of everything that's going in the neighborhood, which
might not be true. Derry stated that's correct. This is one piece of many pieces of
information.
Nelson stated any information from the public is important to know. Unfortunately,
they are not going to get enough community members to participate.
Amy Carlson, CH2MHill, stated she will be open to other comments from the public
later on. They will look at the reported issues to verify them.
McShane stated he does a fair bit of drainage work, and prefers working in the
wintertime. It's easier to figure out where water is going when it's raining. Some key
pieces of information could come from the public.
Bill McCourt, citizen, stated it's encouraging to see this move forward. This will
address current development. He asked if the capital improvement plan will look at existing
development and make recommendations for regional facilities to onsite systems for
homeowners. Derry stated it will. They will look at capital facilities for retrofitting existing
developed areas, including the range of facilities from regional to individual. He doesn't
know yet if he will recommend individual, homeowner actions.
McCourt stated look at a public method of financing. Also, the plan focuses heavily
on best management practices (BMP's). Hopefully the plan will address what they can
expect to see for phosphorus removal and their effectiveness. Current BMP's don't work.
Focus on phosphorus. Last, the scope calls for a six -year capital improvement program.
The agenda talks about a 20 -year capital program. He asked for clarification. Roll stated
that they will plan as far out as they can. The global surface water group is addressing the
County's six -year capital water project list. They need to get into a mode where they have
capital improvement lists that are prioritized and reviewed annually and validated by the
Council and public. They are moving toward that. They will have a project list for Lake
Whatcom and beyond.
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 8
1
2 McCourt stated six years is too small a timeframe. Twenty years is a better picture.
3 Derry stated he agreed.
4
5 Roll stated they want to make sure they know what is coming next. There is short-
6 term and long -term planning.
7
8 Derry stated one reason for the distinction is that six -year improvement plans are
9 standard. The six -year plans are typically projects that have some level of identified'
10 funding and are typically the highest priorities. In most cases, there is a laundry list of the
11 projects that are put off. That becomes a planning horizon beyond six years. He expects to
12 have a list of projects and programs, a prioritizing mechanism, and a list of priorities that
13 becomes the six -year capital improvement program.
14
15 McShane asked if they would do a specific plan for a given district if there is a
16 funding mechanism. Roll stated that he's thinking in terms of global water resources in the
17 county. There is a distinction between how to finance locally and a local project's
18 relationship to big, capital projects. The reason Cable Street is on the road list is because it
19 is primarily funded by the road fund. They need to know the six -year capital water resource
20 list for the county. There may be larger projects that the local funding source can't fund.
21
22 McShane stated this is reminiscent of the South Fork Valley and their priority
23 projects. He suspects that the community will want to know about the Lake Whatcom
24 project list, which may inform the countywide list. He asked about the countywide
25 hierarchy. Roll stated this is stormwater, and there will be many other projects from a
26 watershed management perspective they will want as part of that list. It's difficult to say
27 that a certain priority stormwater project will make other lists.
28
29 Nelson stated goals and objectives will be different for each area. Look at a process
30 versus the goals and objectives for the areas. Roll stated each drainage management area
31 must have local priorities.
32
33 McShane stated a local group must recognize that the County has many things to
34 fund.
35
36 Nelson stated that's why they need a process.
37
38 Desler stated CH2MHil1 did a comprehensive stormwater plan for the county in the
39 early 1970's. It might be useful to see what has been accomplished since then.
40
41 OTHER BUSINESS.
42
43 Kirk Christensen, Public Works Department, introduced a new stormwater engineer,
44 David Wilson, who worked for Snohomish County. He is a professional engineer (PE).
45
46 Nelson asked Mr. Wilson's experience.
47
48 David Wilson, Public Works Department, stated he has experience in fish passage
49 and urban flooding.
50
51 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
52
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 9
Roll stated he wants to discuss Swift Creek. The County applied for a permit in
2005. At that time, someone in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said material
should not leave the site. There have been almost three rounds of maintenance, and they
have reached on site storage capacity. There are issues with potential road closures. There
are issues about what will be the next steps. There is a question of the regulatory oversight
the Public Works Department must work under to move the material. The Health
Department helped force the EPA to define what it means and how it will regulate County
activities. They must understand the relative health risk from a health perspective for the
different activities that people may be associated with when they go near this material.
Jeff Hegedus, Health Department, stated the Health Department has been working
with the EPA to assess the potential risk from asbestos in the sediments in Swift Creek. The
EPA spent a lot of resources. National experts have worked on this effort. The result is the
study on the amount of asbestos in the gravel, and the second result is knowing the
activity -based risk. The draft report is out. Tomorrow is the deadline for comments. The
EPA would like to do a follow -up presentation to the Council at it's next surface water work
session. The result of the study confirms the concern that the agencies have had with the
end uses of that sand and gravel. He will have more information soon.
Caskey - Schreiber asked if someone has informed the guy who used to do a lot of
hauling out of there. Hegedus stated a letter went out to all the community members.
They are fully in the loop.
Caskey - Schreiber asked if the County will have any liability. Hegedus stated this is
private property. The Public Works Department has simply been dredging and leaving the
material on private property. Individuals have come in and cleared the material from the
private property.
Roll stated the EPA has looked only at the area between Oat Coles Road and
Goodwin Road. Any activity above and below that area are not in the EPA's view. Next,
discuss the holistic drainage base long -term management strategy for this area. Since they
are unable to move sediment in that location, the material will be squirted out somewhere
else, and they will have the same debate elsewhere. The EPA and Corps know about those
activities, but aren't going to pursue them.
Also, the EPA is here under national superfund legislation that enables them to go to
a location for one year and spend no more than $2 million. That money will be done
shortly. April 4, 2007 will be one year from the beginning. He has no indication that the
EPA will be here beyond that date.
Hegedus stated they don't have the answer yet about what to do with this material.
He's trying to put together an effort to assess the risk.
Desler stated it seemed like the risk factors were much lower than the worst case
scenario described earlier.
Hegedus stated they are finding that the risks are in the range of one in 10,000 to
one in one million. The EPA threshold for highest acceptable risk is one in 10,000. Some
activities are right on the edge of acceptable risk. Any activity over one in one million is not
considered a risk, and is considered a random occurrence. They are finding an elevated risk
of exposure to this material.
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 10
1 Roll stated the EPA's primary recommendation is more proactive public education.. A
2 questions is whether there are uses for this material. The EPA appears to have left open the
3 door and for being able to work with the material. One way of having public education is to
4 create a label for the material. Explore the role of the local Health Department in
5 regulation.
6
7 McShane stated there is an operation upstream of this area. He asked the County's
8 role in permitting that operation. He asked how that role will influence what happens
9 downstream. Roll stated the permit that goes to the Corps has expired, and a new permit
10 has been submitted. It has a range of options. His goal is that the EPA will provide some
11 clarity for the options during the permit review process. He wants to push the EPA to state
12 its opinion during the permitting process.
13
14 Fleetwood asked the importance of talking with the toxicologist. Hegedus stated it is
15 important. They are also concerned about not waiting until March due to potential flooding.
16 They would like to get past this portion of work where they are assessing risk. They need to
17 get on with the work of identifying the options. Between that, they must work with the
18 public.
19
20 Fleetwood asked about the other organizations besides the County and the EPA.
21 Hegedus stated other organizations include the EPA, Agency for Toxic Substances and
22 Disease Registry (ATSDR), Army Corps of Engineers, State Department of Health, Public
23 Works Department, and Northwest Clean Air Agency. From the beginning, there were
24 concerns of overly -quick risk assessments based on no data. Therefore, the ATSDR pulled
25 in a lot of experts so they can have objective data.
26
27 Weimer asked if they can get some money for the cleanup. Someone from the
28 Department of Ecology said the County could get about $300,000 to $500,000 for cleanup.
29 However, that amount will take care of very little actual cleanup. It seems like there is a
30 lack of reality on the part of some committee members on how big a problem this really is.
31 Roll stated that is true. It will cost over $1 million just to haul one year's worth of material.
32 The EPA is beginning to understand, but some people continue to think they can use the
33 material. In one year, they have more material than they could use in ten or 15 years'
34 worth of County road projects. They must continue to let people know of the size and
35 magnitude of this issue.
36
37
38 ADJOURN
39
40 T meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m.
41
42
43 ��-
44 Jill Nix%,,k"in4k@4, ranscription
446 ``��.0 Ahg 9(920 'ved these minutes on January 30_ 2007.
48 RS4`�� �`[ WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL.
49 CA = WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
50 F .
51�
52
53 Daga Br s,' i Clerk Carl Weimer, Council Chair
Surface Water Work Session, 1/23/2007, Page 11