Thursday, February 23, 2017

Comment on U.S. Nitrogen LLC Discharge Waters Request

Stan Olmstead
P.O. Box 403
Jonesborough TN 37659
stanolmstead@gmail.com

June 9, 2016

T.D.E.C: Division of Water Resources
William Snodgrass Tower
312 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, 11th Floor
Nashville TN 37243

To the Division of Water Resources - Tennessee
Re: NPDES Permit #TN0081566

Once again we visit the issue of State water quality and the wastewater discharge to the Nolichucky River by U.S. Nitrogen L.L.C.  The following is a comment on the authorization of the renewed National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit number TN0081566 that would authorize discharge of effluent (processed, non-processed and cooling water from production of nitric acid, ammonia, and ammonium nitrate solution,) into the Nolichucky River at Outfall #001, mile 20.8 on the river. U.S. Nitrogen L.L.C.’s proposed discharge of wastewater produced by their newly developed explosive plant near the community of Midway, Tennessee was authorized earlier on June 3, 2014 via the same NPDES permit number, however the permit expired on November 30, 2015. Greene County and the State’s concern of the environment lack the priority necessary for healthy waterways and seek only economic gain? The water intake, the earlier ARAP authorization and the earlier discharge permit (TN0059366) into the Mosheim city treatment plant previously attached to the U.S. Nitrogen’s June 3, 2014 authorization is not addressed in this comment.

Known is the intent of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972; (33 U.S.C. 1251), aka: the Clean Water Act (CWA), is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by preventing point and nonpoint pollution.  The CWA preamble declares that: “Our nation’s waters should be swimmable and fishable”. This legal obligation improves our national waters and the requirement should be improved and continue to be improved in our state and national waters as we look for ways to keep our rivers healthy into the future.  I contend that the state of Tennessee is not being diligent in fulfilling this obligation.

The intent of Tennessee Water Quality Control Act (TWQCA; T.C.A 69-3-102) is to recognize that the waters of Tennessee are the property of the state and are held in public trust for the use of the people of the state, it is declared as public policy that the people of Tennessee, as beneficiaries of this trust, have a right to unpolluted waters. In the exercise of its public trust over the waters of the state, the government of Tennessee has an obligation to take all prudent steps to secure, protect, and preserve this right. It is further declared that the purpose of this is to abate existing pollution of the waters of Tennessee, to reclaim polluted waters, to prevent the future pollution of the waters, and to plan for the future use of the waters so that the water resources of Tennessee might be used and enjoyed to the fullest extent consistent with unpolluted waters.

The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) has primacy with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) oversight to assure that waters, air and soil of the state are not negatively impacted. U.S. Nitrogen and the local government entity processed the proposed development poorly. The local government and U.S. Nitrogen staff in planning this development overlooked a myriad of concerns for safety, air quality, water quality, human health, aquatic health, procedures, and ethical business.

I ask that TDEC re-evaluate the proposal and to deny the discharge as presently proposed for the following reasons.

1.     It is inconsistent with the intent of the Clean Water Act and the Tennessee Water Quality Control Act.
2.     The Tennessee state rules and regulations for water pollution are too lenient for industry and point source pollution as well as failing in non-point source water pollution and cause an accumulative negative impact on our state and national surface and ground waters.
3.     The state’s “de minimus” determination pollutes and is inconsistent with the CWA and TWQCA. The EPA and TDEC should discontinue dilution as a method of accepting pollution discharges. 
4.     Mixing zones are not appropriate to the use of the river for a healthy aquatic bio-system, fishing, water sport recreation and water quality concerns for drinking water and agriculture. These “Mixing Zones” are areas of more concentrated pollution and are injurious to life.
5.     The 7Q10 rule is used specifically to allow pollution up to 5% of the water volume of the river and is too lenient. A near Zero amount of pollutant verses water volume is more appropriate and point and non-point industry should be obligated to comply.
6.     The state by allowing the degradation of waters is inconsistent with the civil rights of our citizens that expect our government; Local, State and National to work in our best interest and prevent the degradation of our waters.

The discharge of this polluted water will alter the ecology of the Nolichucky River and will impact the aquatic life of the river. This impact is not only to the aquatic organisms that are state and federally listed; endangered, threatened or sensitive, but also the non-federally and state listed flora and fauna that are vital for a healthy ecosystem.  The permit draft and other analytical reports on the proposal - nitrate loads, metals and other water contaminants are not clear for the general public to understand. The state by allowing pollutants to enter the Nolichucky River will cause degradation to the aquatic health of the river system and in extension injury to the public. Water contaminated with identified nutrients can cause algal blooms followed by algal die off causing a change in water oxygen availability to aquatic species. Nitrates have specific impacts on life but if metabolized into Nitrites the impacts have a greater negative concern. Temperature of the discharged waters would cause change in the biological oxygen demand of the river.

I ask that a complete and easy to understand report be offered to the public to assure that wastewater have near zero impact to the natural system, agriculture and the public. Waters of the Nolichucky River are impaired and are listed on Tennessee’s 303(d) list of impaired waterways. The alteration of the waterways by earlier water impoundment activities exasperates the pollution issue. Adding additional wastewaters to the already impaired waters will only add an increase of degradation to the river system and the decline of many native species of aquatic life. The farming community near the use area is obviously opposed to U.S. Nitrogen’s use of the water and their concern can be easily seen in the hundreds of “Save Our River” signs and public protest meetings associated with the development in a multi-county area.  Residents appear concerned about water shortage, contaminated culinary water (methemoglobinemia), livestock contamination, contamination of agricultural products and more.

I ask that the water permit identified by TN0081566 be denied and that the rules for de minimis, mixing zone, 7Q10 and quantity of pollutants be changed too extremely low limits or eliminate pollutants altogether from water discharges into the river. If U.S. Nitrogen L.L.C is intent on developing such a large facility to produce nitric acid, ammonia and liquid ammonium nitrate they should prepare a more inclusive analysis and assure all concerned that there will be near Zero impact (Reverse Osmosis) to the environment, water quality and health of the Nolichucky River. Statements have been made that if a development is complete and the infrastructure is in place the likely hood of denial is more difficult. I ask that this common practice and belief that it is to late to deny because development is finished be reversed.

Deny NPDES permit number TN0081566 as it is presently proposed and assure that Exceptional waters of the state are exceptional.



With Respect,


Stan Olmstead

Natural Resource Advocate

No comments:

Post a Comment