Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources September 21 19991 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee September 21, 1999 The meeting was called to order at 9:32 a.m. by Committee Chair Connie Hoag in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Also Present: Absent: Kathy Sutter None Tom Brown OTHER BUSINESS RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS TO AMEND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT IN CONSIDERATION OF THE SAFETY OF ALL CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES (AB99 -365) Hoag read the resolution approved by Walla Walla County. Sutter stated she would support the resolution and wanted to expand it to include other items of legislation that have to do with public safety, which may be experiencing trouble because of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Brown suggested carrying it further to include other matters of public health and safety, not just transportation issues. Hoag recommended, 'CBE IT HEREBY RESOLVED... effects of transperta proposed projects on threatened...." She suggested Sutter create a draft resolution to bring forward at the next Natural Resources meeting on September 28. LETTER TO GOVERNOR LOCKE FROM TOM COWAN, NORTHWEST STRAITS COMMISSION, REQUESTING THAT THE GOVERNOR DELIVER THE KEYNOTE ADDRESS AT THE MARINE RESOURCE COMMITTEE TRAINING CONFERENCE (AB99 -158B) Hoag stated the Northwest Straits Commission is putting together a training conference that will include all the committees from the different areas. They would like Governor Locke to be the keynote speaker. If the Natural Resources Committee is in favor of that request, then Cowan asks that they sign the letter. Brown stated he did not support Governor Locke and will not sign the letter. Sutter stated this is going to be a meeting of all of the Marine Resource Committees. It is appropriate for the Governor to be there to become more informed on salmon issues. It should be brought before the full Council for consideration. She so moved. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Motion to bring forward to Council carried 2 -1 with Brown opposed. Hoag stated she wanted the committee to consider a resolution amending resolution 99 -023, establishing a Whatcom County Marine Resources Committee as provided for under the Northwest Straights Commission (AB99- 158B). The organizing meeting was held recently. When established, the intent was to include commercial and sport fishers. The committee found out there isn't a single commercial fisher on the committee. Sutter questioned whether one applied. Hoag stated they didn't, but they need to be at the table. Sutter stated the committee members should make sure the fishers are aware of it, but the council can't force the fishers to be at the table. Hoag suggested changing the language to require the presence of a commercial fisher and a sport fisher. That would ensure those two representations are at the table. Sutter questioned what would happen if no one volunteered. Hoag stated she didn't think that would happen. She knew of commercial fishermen who may be willing to participate. Robin Dexter, commercial fisherman, stated he could provide a handful of names of people that may be interested. Hoag stated there is an extra representative with scientific expertise, and the committee may recommend including an extra person with a scientific background. It is important to have strong scientific expertise on the committee. Hoag stated she would bring forward to the next committee meeting a resolution to amend the resolution that formed the committee. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. UPDATE ON DRAYTON HARBOR SHELLFISH PROTECTION DISTRICT (AB99 -091) Chris Woodward, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Coordinator, distributed the progress report from the Northwest Indian College and the Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Progress Report dated September 21, 1999 (on file). Sea -K Fish Processors, a source of potential problems, had a pump in the sump area that showed high levels of fecal coliform bacteria growth. That pump has been replaced. It had been damaged due to power outages and had not been working properly. They sealed the pump area. The Department of Ecology (DOE) suggested they install a chlorinator spray system or a bank of ultraviolet (UV) lights Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 in that area to reduce the fecal colonies before it is put into the wastewater stream. The Port of Bellingham might have some stake or responsibility, since they are the landlord. Blueprints of the area around the marina will be provided by DOE so they will be able to see where all the sewage lines are hooked up. Hoag questioned whether Sea -K Fish Processing has to engage in DOE's suggestion to install the chlorinator spray system or a bank of ultraviolet (UV) lights. Woodward stated it is a suggestion, but it is not positive they will do it. This would be in lieu of hooking up their processed water to the sewage treatment plant. Hoag asked if DOE knows why the fecal counts are high. Woodward stated one assumption is the bird manure. Julie Hirsch, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Data Management Consultant, stated they took the first sample on Friday since the pump was replaced. Woodward stated the State Department of Health (DOH) officially downgraded the rest of Drayton Harbor to prohibited status. The pollution sources identified by the DOH sanitary survey were the two marinas near the mouth of Drayton Harbor, sewage from the City of Blaine sewage collection system, processed wastewater discharges from seafood processors on Marine Drive, runoff contamination associated with stormwater events, farm management practices in the Dakota and California Creek watersheds, pollution entering the harbor from Semiahmoo Bay, birds and waterfowl, and marine mammals. She liked the idea the fish processors are taking a serious stand. One problem they encountered was that they asked DOE to follow up on the (Toxics Reduction Engineer Exchange) TREE agreement that the council supported for the fish processing area. It is a total environmental audit that goes through the entire building and their paperwork to determine what needs to be fixed. If there are problems, they will work on how they are going to solve those problems. They can't get information from DOE about where the status of that agreement is. It was a good faith effort for the fish processors to initiate an agreement with DOE. Hoag stated they continue to get very high counts in that area. Sutter asked if the audit helps them to pinpoint problems or is for the purpose of sanctioning regulatory penalties. Woodward stated it is to find out the problems and determine the solutions. The Port also agreed to support it. Hoag suggested the committee send another letter to DOE. Brown asked if it the study requires funding from DOE. Woodward stated there are no funding problems. It is funded by DOE. No money needs to change hands. Brown stated DOE funds it, so it might be a budgeting problem. Woodward stated DOE was very excited because it would be the first fish processor who they would be able to audit. Hoag suggested a letter asking about the status of the agreement. The committee concurred. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Woodward stated the citizen's group created a priority of projects regarding the marina area. Data shows that the water quality in the Blaine marina area continues to be in very large amounts above what it should be. Those are continuous results. As a priority project, the advisory group created a project to go to the City of Blaine, Port of Bellingham, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and DOE to follow through on testing the integrity of all the sewer lines in the marina area, from the railroad tracks to lift station #1. All businesses in the area are still hooked up to the old clay line, not the new fiberglass line. Brown stated a past problem was that they only required one sewer line to be installed. He believed it was difficult to shut off the sewer line for testing. There is not a holding capacity. He questioned whether that was a problem and how that could be resolved. Woodward stated they could do testing in the evening hours when the businesses are closed. They need to determine the integrity of all the lines. The old clay line is where they feel the problem may be. This was an issue at Blaine City Council meetings long ago, and was never resolved. They need to start on a project or else they won't see any water quality changes in the harbor. They can test as much as they want, but until they start doing investigative work and getting the problems solved, they are not going to see anything change. Woodward stated DOE proposed to use the $9,000 fine levied against the City of Blaine to go toward testing the sewer line. She created a letter of recommendation for contributing matching funds from the County. The City of Blaine and the Port should also be involved. When they get to the point of fixing things, the City and Port will need to put forth the manpower or funds to fix it. DOE has not decided to use the $9,000 yet. Sutter stated the committee should also include in their letter to the DOE a request to use that money. She asked how much is being done to explore the pollution contribution that may be coming from Canada. Woodward stated there haven't been any studies of that done by Canada or people in the State of Washington. They have a tide information book that says there are few days in which the tide comes into Drayton Harbor. Sutter asked if that would take into account time and distance. She also asked if that indicates there is not a problem. Woodward stated it is an indication but not an absolute. Sutter suggested working jointly with Canadian jurisdictions. Woodward stated they have already begun that process and have been in contact with people in Canada. Sutter suggested the Council of Governments (COG) draft a letter to some of the governmental agencies in Canada requesting their cooperation, if needed. Hoag stated the information indicated it might be Blaine's sewer that they are dealing with, if they are looking at a source outside the Harbor's mouth. They repeatedly get high numbers in the marina. Woodward stated it needs more investigation. They propose to work with Western Washington University graduate students to do a study. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Brown stated that two years ago a gentleman was on the committee who was a farmer and a fisherman and had a lot of wisdom. Everything he predicted has so far come true. This gentleman's knowledge of water and tides will come into bearing. Brown stated he was hesitant to keep funding things until they know for sure the major sources of the pollution. Hoag stated that is what they are zeroing in on. They don't know the sources. This study will provide that information. Woodward stated DOH did a circulation study in the harbor. The water from the marina moved directly over Mr. Menzie's shellfish beds. Hirsch stated she wanted to answer questions about finding out about potential impacts from Canada. The Port added two stations in Semiahmoo Bay, one in the path of the incoming tide. That was a part of the water quality certification requirement for the Blaine moorage expansion project. Michael Cochrane, Northwest Indian College (NWIC), stated he has done supplemental sampling in the marina. He went with the Port and took duplicate samples. He hadn't seen the Port's results, but his results were very high in the marina area. Testing was done on an incoming tide. They picked up two stations on the outside that are indicative of the incoming water. The counts were low. The new station J was at 710, which was off the crab fishing dock at the mouth of the harbor. Hoag asked where stations L and M are located. Cochrane stated they are at the border at the buoy that marks the international boundary. Brown asked about the depth of the samples. Cochrane stated they were surface samples. Hoag asked if the new sampling locations are on the maps that they were given. Woodward stated it is not on the GIS map, but on another map. Hoag asked if stations J or L would pick up the information if there was something coming around the spit. Cochrane stated that information would not be picked up at those stations. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Cochrane stated station J might pick up that information. DOH did a hydrographic study assuming that there was a total upset in the Blaine sewer treatment plant. He showed that, even a total upset of a million fecal coliform per one hundred milliliters (ml), there wouldn't be a significant increase in fecal coliform at the mouth of the harbor because of the dilution on an incoming tide. Hoag stated because they don't have the sources positively identified, she would rather see data than modeling. She asked if they could begin testing that side of the spit. Cochrane stated that would not be unreasonable. They could switch station L over to that area. Hoag stated she didn't want to drop a station, but wanted to add one station. Cochrane stated they could ask the Port of Bellingham to add the station. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Brenner asked if water coming from the border would have had enough agitation to not show up completely on the surface. Cochrane stated fecal die off faster when exposed to sunlight. Also, they tend to adhere to small particles, such as silts. Primarily the reason they do surface sampling is because they are lighter and would float. Brenner asked if stations L and M would capture all areas of water from Canada. Cochrane stated those stations are for all water coming into the harbor on a floodtide. He'd seen the results of the stormwater monitoring they are doing on the beaches at White Rock, British Columbia (B.C.), which is the only data he'd seen for that area. By and large, they have significant counts off the beaches during storm events, but given the flows that are pushing those counts and the amount of water that dilutes the counts, he didn't see the cause of the water quality pollution coming from across the border. Sutter stated all the reports give a nod to the effect from wildlife. She questioned whether they could get an estimate of how much they are actually contributing. Cochrane stated no one has tried to isolate different wildlife populations to establish fecal coliform impacts for those sources. That would be a very intensive effort. Sutter stated that might provide an indication of whether they should do more studies. Cochrane stated if they did that study and assumed a worse -case scenario, then they would be assuming everything washed off the top of the roosting areas gets washed into the water, which would predict a rainfall event. What they have are high counts during times of no rainfall. They have data establishing high counts during dry weather conditions. Brown stated the City of Seattle had to close areas that were contaminated from seals and other marine mammals. Hoag stated there has been discussion at the Drayton Harbor Committee about this. This is a flyway. At the times when there are thousands of birds there, they don't see any higher counts than when there are fewer birds. The stations in which they are picking up higher counts are not areas where there are typically animals. Woodward stated DOH did some sampling on the seal haul out. Hirsch stated she was asked by the citizen's committee to do monthly updates of DOH information. Informal sampling was done off the breakwaters when large numbers of wildlife were observed. She had that data on cormorants and seals that were hauled up. The data showed that the number of fecal coliform on the last 30 sampling dates by the DOH. The Semiahmoo breakwater showed low numbers when sampled. It was a small data set and there was no control of any other variables. Hoag asked if the water would be coming toward or going away from the breakwater. Hirsch stated she would need to look at the data points and whether there was any rain on these occasions. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Brenner stated last summer was dry. It might have been that the rainfall didn't have a lot to do with it. She asked for an explanation of when the breakwater was used by seals and birds. Hirsch stated Don Lennartson of DOH did the sampling. He counted and documented the number of animals and birds using the docks. Hoag asked if they would go over the matrix. Woodward stated they would finish the data management information, then move on to the matrix. Hirsch presented the data management portion of the progress report. She is a consultant to Wizards Environmental for the data management tasks. One task is to develop a coordinated water quality- monitoring plan incorporating existing work plans by January 2000. The existing plans she obtained from all the different agencies have been reviewed. They have been trying to coordinate with other projects that might overlap with theirs. One is the watershed management effort. They have initiated contact with that effort. She went through their scope of work and hopes to work more closely with that effort. The Drayton Harbor data management work group has provided input. Their coordinated monitoring plan is approximately halfway done. It is to develop a long -term framework for looking at the problem. The data management subcommittee will begin in October in preparation of the monitoring plan for Portage Bay. Facilitation of the data management subcommittee has been productive. They have scoped for the existing work plan and sampling. They have also created ideas for prioritization and future monitoring. They plan development of a database for existing and future water quality data by April of 2000. There are data collection matrices that outline all the agencies at all levels that collect water quality monitoring data in Drayton Harbor. They are making an effort to exchange data with Canada. Those matrices are updated regularly. She converted a lot of the data from hardcopy to spreadsheet format. Some of the communications and conversion has taken longer than they thought. They have been preparing maps and reports due June 1, 2000 that summarize water quality data. The committee requested information on where the sampling was done. They created the GIS maps showing that information, and revisions are being done. The monthly update of DOH information is an interim water quality assessment until June 2000, when they will have the actual report. There was an opportunity for a unified education effort. She wanted to ensure they had something going for this round of Public Involvement and Education (PIE) grants. Education is geared toward behavior changes of people such as boat owners and pet owners. The Conservation District will submit that proposal. They have put in a request for funding to the County Health Department for the development of that concept. They need a positive action that the agencies could feel good about. Woodward stated Hirsch has done a lot of work on the PIE project. The agencies are agreeing on the project for both Portage Bay and Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection Districts. The Conservation District has the draft PIE report. Hoag asked about the data and a map of the harbor with the DOE sampling sites. The second map has DOH sampling site 18 at the same location as station J. She asked where they could look at the results of DOH samples taken. Hirsch stated it is in the packet of information she provided. Stations nine and ten are no longer being sampled. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Hoag asked why they would drop station nine, which received very large counts. Brenner questioned the location of stations nine and ten. Hirsch stated she would have to check an old map. Hoag asked the meaning of the minimum amounts and maximum amounts, and the geomean. Hirsch stated station eight at the 90th percentile means it is quite high. It is at least one magnitude higher than the standard, which is 43. It is in the hundreds rather than the tens. Brown asked why stations three, four, and five look like they have the same readings, but the geomeans are off. Hirsch stated the geometric mean is an average of the last 30 samples. Because of the nature of bacteriological data, a geometric mean is used, and tends to flatten out results. Hoag asked if it translated into showing which stations are consistently higher, even though the highs and lows shown are the same. Hirsch stated that was correct. Hoag asked if any readings on the chart are located in the marina. Hirsch stated the ones for the marina are on the next page. The order of magnitude is when something is 120 instead of 12, or 1,200 instead of 12. It is regarding the tens, hundreds, or thousands. Hoag asked if the ambient monitoring update is on data in the open harbor and within the marina. Hirsch stated the DOH has a standard random sampling protocol and a certain number of stations they test all the time. The stations inside the marina are extra monitoring they do called restoration monitoring. It is the same testing method. There are two different sets of data used for different purposes. It is the same test on the same day. Within the marina, there are no shellfish beds, they don't know if they are looking at the standard to see whether or not there would be a contribution to the decline in water quality over the shellfish beds. The actual standard must be met in the samples taken over the shellfish beds in the harbor. Brown stated he was trying to find a contribution. Sometimes they need to test toward the bottom to find a site that tests high and would show a break in a pipe, for example. Hoag stated included in the packet is a copy of the sanitary survey from the GO] W Brenner stated the survey talks about agricultural waste and Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association's (NSEA) action to fence off three miles of stream bank along California and Dakota Creeks. She asked about the total amount of farmland and whether it was farmland that was fenced off. Woodward guessed that they fenced off streams and creeks that livestock had access to. Brenner asked about the percentage of streams and creeks that are now fenced, in which animals would readily have access. Woodward stated DOE just finished their inspections of all dairies. That issue would be covered in the individual farm plans. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Sutter stated the farm plans only apply to dairies. There are farms other than dairies in the creeks. Hoag stated the data showed repeatedly that the counts coming from these creeks and rivers are not anywhere near high enough to account for the pollution. Brenner stated she only wanted to know how the three miles of stream bank fit into the situation. Woodward stated there was only one dairy the DOE fined when they did the inspections. Hoag stated the incoming tide is when they are having the high counts. If the creeks were causing a problem, it should show on the ebb tide. Brenner stated she didn't believe the dairies were the problem. She asked about the replacement of on -site sewage systems (OSS). Woodward stated they installed alternative systems. Brenner stated her concern was they don't have control over sources such as wild animals and birds. She asked what is next. Woodward stated that is why they want to move into the implementation stage. She called a meeting with EPA to discuss what happens next. One thing they need to be clear about is that there is not one source that may contribute more than other sources. If there is, they won't find out until they start doing the investigative report. Brenner stated things are getting worse when everyone is trying to improve things. Hoag stated there are some things that have been fixed, but the problem has not been resolved. They have focused on the marina and the contribution coming in from outside the mouth. There are very high numbers at the marina. Now they are shifting focus to other things, such as doing smoke and dye testing for leaking sewer pipes around the marina. Brenner stated it doesn't sound like the pollution is coming from outside the harbor. Woodward stated there is a difference between "outside" and Canada. Hoag stated there is a Blaine sewer treatment outfall near the mouth of the harbor. The Toxics Reduction Engineer Exchange (TREE) study is important because they've been told that fish - processing water does not contain fecal coliform, but every time the fish processing area is tested, the results are off the scale. They need to find out what is going on in that area, and that is where the committee is proceeding. They are trying to get testing and camera work done to find out where the high numbers are coming from. Woodward stated the fish processor outfall is outside the mouth of the harbor. It is the old sewage treatment line. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Sutter asked if they have a prioritized project list. Woodward stated they do. It is attachment two. They would like to start with sewage lines. Brown stated he hoped they don't have the EPA come in and make regulations when they don't know what the problems are caused by. Woodward stated the meeting with EPA is strictly informational for them. Dave Ragsdale will be sitting in on the meeting. He told her he may not even say anything. He just wants to hear what people say. Brenner was concerned they keep focusing on things such as OSS and agriculture, which contribute. However, there may be some contribution from a big contributor they haven't figured out yet. Woodward stated that is why they want to start looking at the lines. Margaret Kardell, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee, thanked the members for understanding that the DOH station 18 and station J are the same site. She has been asking for more testing on the flow coming in. There are few samples at site 18. The samples they have show very low counts. Also, there may be a cause by the marina. Regarding the long -term approach to this, the biggest problem is lack of responsibility. Cooperation with DOE is poor. This pollution problem is going to go on. She suggested they choose a main agency, such as the County Health Department, to care for the area and the pollution problems long -term. Analysis has to be instantaneous to do any good, however it takes months and years. They don't have anyone who is responsible. The Port has not inspected the pipes under the marina section. No one is responsible for fixing the broken pipes. Agencies are working separately. They should think long -term about appointing a responsible agency. Brown stated they are looking at the seafood processors as a source. He questioned if the seafood processing is producing as much as they were. Kardell stated they have statistics about their workdays. They don't have basic information and statistics. The City of Blaine engineer had asked for flow meters to monitor what is coming into the various lines. Brenner asked about the central agency. Kardell stated that at the moment the advisory group is the central group. Woodward stated Barry Hill was under the impression the shellfish districts would be under the umbrella of the Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) #1, when the districts are done with their work. Brenner asked if the County Health Department is helping financially to check out the pipes. Hoag moved to send a letter to the Port of Bellingham requesting additional sampling at the mouth of the Semiahmoo spit, opposite of station J. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.) Sutter asked how close it would be to the Semiahmoo marina site. Hoag stated that is inside the harbor. She wanted a site outside the harbor. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Motion carried unanimously. Woodward stated they are doing the monthly meetings and implementation agency meetings. They are at the point in the program to look at projects and getting responsible agencies in to fund and support what they are trying to do. They put in for a project proposal with the County Health Department to match the DOE funding of $9,000. The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study is a while away. She was not sure it would happen in Drayton Harbor. Brenner asked about task five under objective one, and where the funding will come from. Woodward stated they will understand more after their meeting with the Health Department. Sutter asked if the TMDL study would be done in 2000. Woodward stated that is next year. It is on a five -year schedule. Hoag stated they had asked it be done earlier and questioned whether it was beneficial to do one in that location. Woodward stated it takes a year for setup, a year for sampling, and a year for result evaluation. It is at least three years down the road. They may be able to get this information without the TMDL study because they will do the sampling and also provide the location of the high -count areas. The TMDL study is not going to get them any closer to finding solutions. Brown asked if it would offer more testing than what is being done now. Woodward stated it is still tested once per month. TMDL tests are once per month. She didn't know if they need more at this point to get the solutions. She is not going to wait three years. Woodward stated the monitoring program is task two under objective two. That is being done by Michael Cochrane. All of the information that County Health has gathered is under objective three. They have done a great job cleaning up all the failures that were identified. Brenner asked the number of systems that have not been fixed. Woodward stated there is one system that was not fixed. It is going to court. Woodward stated the County Health Department has completed their matrix plan. Nothing is being done by DOE on objective four regarding the control of stormwater sources. The City of Blaine is developing a stormwater utility and there are plans to include a monitoring component. The City of Blaine smoke tested the lines. They found one large illicit connection that was acres in size. It was an enormous contributor to the sewage problem. They sent out 40 correction notice letters. Brown asked about task one, objective five. Woodward stated the DNA testing was complete, but inconclusive. Hoag asked about whether task two, objective five referred to the impact or the location. Woodward stated it referred to the location. The task is complete, but they are not happy about it. They never saw the final report on that information from the City or DOH. No one can find it. Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Woodward stated DOE just did their farm inspection program in Drayton Harbor, so they are done with that task. She was unable to get an update on how many dairies have been inspected in Drayton Harbor. It is an ongoing process. Brenner asked why funding for items that are the major problems is not there, while there is more than enough funding for the smaller sources. She asked about a final report on the sewage line. Nothing has been completed regarding the marina. Hoag stated task four, objective seven, was regarding indications of major violations, but nothing has occurred. They will add that complaint to the letter to DOE. Hirsch stated there is not enough motivation for some agencies to do these activities. Sutter asked if the EPA has enough teeth to motivate the DOE. Hoag stated it might be beneficial to send a copy of the letter to the State legislators. Hoag asked for Cochrane's report. Sutter asked about coordinated water sampling with State DOH that has not been submitted. She asked if that was a DOE task. Woodward stated that was a DOE and Port of Bellingham task. Hoag stated that only said they would sample at the same time. Woodward stated she received an e -mail from DOH that informed the Port of when they would be doing their sampling. Cochrane stated he normally does quarterly reports; this information is only for July and August, as his quarter is up at the end of this month. He discussed his report (on file). He didn't expect September's results to change significantly. Cain Creek and the Cain Creek outfall still have high counts, but because of low flow, he didn't expect they had much of an impact on the harbor. Most of Dakota Creek has remained the same. Station DG went up, but the rise is an anomaly due to a one- time event that created a count of approximately 1,000. Hoag questioned whether that event resulted in a fine. Cochrane stated he didn't think so. There was an event on August 16 where everything in the county went high due to a large rainfall. The average jumped up because of that high count. The average on D4 went down. Woodward stated the violation Hoag referred to was in the spring, so it didn't affect these numbers. Cochrane stated the number one stations on all creeks are the stations at the mouths of the creeks. This quarter, he took samples during tidal influence, so the counts are low at the mouths, but they are indicative of what is coming out of the creek. They are indicative of the immediate dilution that happens when the tidal influence hits the mouth. They are almost within class A water quality standards in Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Dakota Creek and California Creek. Counts at station C3 were up. The counts are normally high in that area. Brown asked how often he tested. Cochrane stated he tests two to three times per month. Hoag asked if "N" designates nitrates. Cochrane stated it designates the number of samples he took during the quarter. Sutter asked if Western Washington University (WWU) is sampling at the same stations, and she questioned their results. Cochrane stated he reviewed their historical data in his preliminary report. They showed similar numbers in the same magnitude. There are no inconsistencies between their testing and his testing. Hoag asked about the spring violation, they are still going to see the numbers rise every time it rains. Bill Goff, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee, stated the Cain Creek outfall is Blaine storm sewer discharge at the railroad tracks. Sutter stated they have seen a decrease in counts. Goff stated counts just went up again. Cochrane stated it was down this quarter. Hoag stated that this quarter all the tests were over 200. Last time, only 86% of the tests were over 200. Even though they didn't have as high of a spike, they are consistently getting more high tests. Cochrane stated that was correct. As far as the water quality standard goes, when they start discharging freshwater into the marine water, there is a conflict of values. There is a freshwater class A standard of what is coming out of the pipe, which is 100 with no more than 10 percent exceeding 200. When it hits marine water, class A marine water standards apply, which are 14. It is an entire order of magnitude of difference. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Connie Hoag, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 9/21/99, Page 13