Public Meeting on GE’s Draft Final NPDES Permit
There was a public meeting on Monday, October 27, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. at the EPA office at 10 Lyman St (next to Gym Fest) in Pittsfield, MA. so that members of the public could discuss the terms of the permit and the
appeals process with a member of EPA’s NPDES Permitting staff.
Members of the public have asked where to find the September 2008
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit issued
by EPA Region 1.
A link to that document is at:
http://www.epa.gov/region01/npdes/permits_listing_ma.html. Scroll down
the page and click on the following permit: Pittsfield (Housatonic River) General
Electric Company (PDF) (24 pp., 77 KB) September 30, 2008
The NPDES permit is under a separate EPA program, and is not being
implemented as part of the work for the GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River
Site.
Jim Murphy
United States Environmental Protection Agency
New England – Region 1
Office of the Regional Administrator
1 Congress Street Suite 1100 (RAA)
Boston, MA 02114-2023
617-918-1028 (phone)
617-918-0028 (fax)
return to top
|
Finally, GE’s Final NPDES Permit has been Issued for Public Comment 9/30/08
Something is seriously wrong with the US Environmental Protection Agency’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (MPDES) permit process! Jane Winn was contacted on September 11, 2008 about comments she made on March 25, 2005 regarding General Electric’s Draft NPDES permit for the Pittsfield site. The final permit for public review and comment was released September 30, 2008 and we were notified October 2, 2008. We were very, very skeptical that EPA could have seriously considered our comments – however, we were pleasantly surprised! The permit is much improved and many of our comments were addressed. Here are some of Jane’s thoughts upon reviewing the final NPDES permit.
I have reviewed the response to comments for the NPDES permit. I am pleased with much of it. My BIGGEST concern is that there is no automatic public access. Yes, I know we could continually FOIA [file a Freedom of Information Act request], but I do not think that should be necessary. I do think it is critical that we be watchdogs on this.
I would like this to have a spot on EPA’s website – that would save EPA from having to mail each of us all the documentation each time. (see page 123 of the permit response to comments – I want the monthly summary of all data collected to be posted – not us having to contact EPA or DEP.)
One other comment – it is really easy to create a Table of Contents for a document. Why the heck didn’t EPA do this for the response to comments?
- I am glad EPA recognized that there are huge informational gaps (as they say at the top of page 18) that they will try to begin to remedy with additional monitoring requirements.
- I am glad that EPA has required system mapping in the SWPPP [Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan] and that the SWPPP be updated annually. I would like to be sure that we have access to those updates as they come out.
- I am glad that they say, on that page 18, that EPA did not consider the use of dilution in establishing PCB limitations and conditions due to the persistence and high rate of bioaccumulation. – I am not sure I believe it given some of the things they said later, but I have to go back and document what those things were that called this into question. I think I may have been confused between old permit references and what is actually in the new permit.
- I am really glad that EPA is requiring GE to come up with a site survey to determine whether there are additional point sources on their facility (page 101 response 23) I want a copy of this site survey as soon as it is produced!!! I also want to right to present evidence of additional sites if we disagree with GE’s survey – including a site, if necessary.
- I really, really like the Permit Re-Opener! Good idea – but we need to be able to see all the data each month and the maps that GE comes up with for their site survey.
- I am concerned that GE could still pick and choose when to sample and could bias the results by picking times to sample that avoid the worst discharges. This is an on-going concern about almost all of GE’s sampling.
See BEAT’s March 2005 comments or the 2005 joint comments by BEAT, Housatonic River Initiative (HRI), and Housatonic Environmental Action League (HEAL).
|
Public Comment Period
(March 2005)
GE has issued a draft National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
draft permit for public comment. This permit gives the conditions for
GE to discharge water into the Housatonic River, Unkamet Brook, and
Silver Lake in Pittsfield, MA. This is actually a renewal of a permit
that expired in 1997. BEAT is extremely concerned about the amounts
of PCBs going into these waterbodies, especially the Housatonic River
ABOVE the current clean up!
There was a public hearing where EPA will record testimony (but not
answer questions) Wednesday, March 23, 2005 TIME: 7:00 pm – 8:45 pm
at the EPA office at 10 Lyman St (next to Gym Fest), Pittsfield,
MA. Written public comments will be accepted until March 25, 2005.
Information about the draft permit may be inspected on EPA’s Website.
Comments were sent to the U.S. EPA, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
Attention: Brian Pitt, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, Massachusetts
02114-2023.
If during the public comment period, significant new questions are
raised concerning the permit, EPA may require a new draft permit or
fact sheet or may reopen the public comment period.
BEAT is working closely with the Housatonic River Initiative (HRI),
Housatonic Riverkeeper, and the Housatonic Environmental Action League
(HEAL) on the NPDES draft permit issue.
return to top |
Some of BEAT’s comments on the NPDES draft permit so far:
1) GE is exceeding EPA PCB standards in every discharge into the
river. These discharges are upstream of the clean up. PCBs are being
detected in the clean portion of the river. The clean up of the river
is in jeopardy.
2) Even though PCB standards are being exceeded, EPA included few
numerical limits in the new permit.
3) GE should be required to determine the amount of PCBs entering
the receiving waters from all the outfalls combined per year. This
should include estimating the amounts entering during unmonitored
storm events. The data should not be pre remediation. This should
be an effective monitoring program testing each individual outflow
not batch testing. Flow measurements from pipes should be monitored
continuously 24 hours a day, 365 days per year. Yard drains (YD),
Overland Flow (OF), and Non-Point source (NP) should be included.
This entire site is contaminated and thus a point source.
4) It is usually a good idea to promote sheetflow and infiltration,
but in this case they may also carry PCB loading from the facility
into the river. GE needs to be able to measure the PCBs carried by
the sheet flow and infiltration at the locations they know it is getting
into the river.
5) Underground pipes, even those that are no longer used and have
been capped, can act as “preferential pathways” for contaminants
to find their way to a waterbody. Water will flow more easily along
the pipe and therefore the pipes act as “preferential pathways”
for the water. Pipes should be tested at their outfalls, but not just
the water coming out of the pipe, but also any water that may have
followed the pipe as a “preferential pathway”.
6) GE should account for and map all pipes under their property,
in particular – the “perforated sub drain lines” that ran
throughout the site and – the pipes that run under the toxic waste
disposal areas.
7) GE should be required to give a complete description of how all
abandoned pipes, floor drains, liquid waste storage areas, underground
storage tanks, etc. were demolished, filled, removed, or left in place.
8) GE should videotape all pipes that run through the site that
have an outfall into one of these waterbodies to show the condition
of the pipe and that there are no unknown connections on the site. This includes city stormwater pipes where they run through GE property.
9) Ditches from the plant should be considered as outflows from the
facility. So should Unkamet Brook which runs through an old GE dumping
ground.
10) What are the by products of the GE plastics operations and are
they being tested.
11) pH levels in some outfalls are excessive in both directions.
12) GE should include the monitoring data on the wells that Pittsfield
Generating Co. has. These data also should include flow (quantity)
as well as PCB and other contaminant levels.
Fresh water criterion continuous concentration for PCB is 0.014
ug/l Human health criteria is 0.000064 ug/l ( measured as total PCB)
Historical points
1) HRI argued this would happen if the consent decree didn’t address
PCB inflow from the plant
2) Stormwater should have been part of the consent decree
3) Permit expired 2/97. Why so long to address this?
4) Will the Pittsfield
Economic Development Authority (PEDA) take on the responsibility
of the storm drains? What about liability?
See BEAT’s March 2005 comments or the 2005 joint comments by BEAT, Housatonic River Initiative (HRI), and Housatonic Environmental Action League (HEAL).
return to top
|
GE NPDES draft permit – Legal notice 2/15/2005
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMONWEALTH OF
MASSACHUSETTS 1 WINTER STREET BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02108 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY NEW ENGLAND – REGION 1 OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION
ONE CONGRESS STREET – SUITE-1100 (CMP) BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02114-2023
EXTENSION OF PUBLIC NOTICE DATE AND NOTIFICATION OF NEW PUBLIC HEARING
DATE OF A DRAFT NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
PERMIT TO DISCHARGE INTO THE WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES UNDER SECTIONS
301 AND 402 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT (THE “ACT”), AS AMENDED,
AND REQUEST FOR STATE CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 401 OF THE ACT. DATE
OF NOTICE: February 15, 2005 PERMIT NUMBER: MA0003891 PUBLIC NOTICE
NUMBER: MA-012-05 NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: General Electric
Company 159 Plastics Avenue Pittsfield, MA 01201 NAME AND ADDRESS OF
THE FACILITY WHERE DISCHARGE OCCURS: General Electric Company 159 Plastics
Avenue Pittsfield, MA 01201 RECEIVING WATERS: Housatonic River (East
Branch), Unkamet Brook, and Silver Lake RECEIVING WATERS CLASSIFICATION:
B, Warm Water Fishery (Housatonic River Watershed) The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, (EPA) and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection (MADEP) have cooperated in the development of a draft permit
for the above identified facility. The effluent limits and permit conditions
imposed have been drafted to assure that State Water Quality Standards
and provisions of the Clean Water Act will be met. EPA has formally
requested that the state certify the draft permit pursuant to Section
401 of the Clean Water Act and expects that the draft permit will be
certified. INFORMATION
ABOUT THE DRAFT PERMIT: A Fact Sheet (describing the type of facility;
type and quantity of wastes; a brief summary of the basis for the draft
permit conditions; and significant factual, legal and policy questions
considered in preparing the draft permit) may be obtained at no cost
by writing, calling, or emailing EPA’s contact person named below: Janet
Labonte NPDES Permit Program EPA Office of Ecosystem Protection One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CMP) Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023 (617)
918-1667 “labonte.janet@epa.gov”
The administrative record containing all documents relating to the draft
permit is on file and may be inspected at the EPA Boston office mentioned
above between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
holidays. The EPA NPDES Records Center phone number in Boston is: (617)
918-1546. And, the administrative record containing all documents relating
to the draft permit is on file and may be inspected at the following
locations: EPA’s Website.
Documents are also available at the locations listed on the original
public notice of December 22, 2004. NEW PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: The Regional Administrator had determined, pursuant
to 40 C.F.R. 124.12, that a significant degree of public interest exists
in this proposed permit and that a public hearing should be held in
Pittsfield, Massachusetts to consider this permit. Accordingly, a public
hearing will be held on the following date and time: DATE:Wednesday,
March 23, 2005 TIME: 7:00 pm – 8:45 pm LOCATION:Berkshire Athenaeum
Library Auditorium, Pittsfield, MA 01201 In accordance with
40 C.F.R. 124.12, the following is a summary of the procedures that
shall be followed at the public hearing: a. The Presiding Officer shall
have the authority to open and conclude the hearing and to maintain
order; and b. Any person appearing at such a hearing may submit oral
or written statements and data concerning the draft permit. PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD: The public comment period for the General Electric Company
draft permit began on December 22, 2004 and is hereby extended until
on March 25, 2005. All persons, including
applicants, who believe any condition of the draft permit is inappropriate,
must raise all issues and submit all available arguments and all supporting
material for their arguments in full by the close of the public comment
permit (See also: 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 124.13). Comments
should be directed to the U.S. EPA, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
Attention: Brian Pitt, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, Massachusetts
02114-2023. If during the public comment period, significant new questions
are raised concerning the permit, EPA may require a new draft permit
or fact sheet or may reopen the public comment period. A public notice
will be issued for any of these actions. FINAL PERMIT DECISION AND APPEALS:
Following the close of the comment period, and after the public hearings
are held, the Regional Administrator will issue a final permit decision
and forward a copy of the final decision to the applicant and each person
who has submitted written comments or requested notice. Within 30 days
following the notice of the final permit decision any interested person
may submit petition to the Environmental Appeals Board to reconsider
or contest the final decision. Requests for formal hearings must satisfy
the requirements of 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 124.74.
GLENN HAAS, DIRECTOR DIVISION OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT MASSACHUSETTS
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LINDA M. MURPHY, DIRECTOR OFFICE
OF ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BOSTON, MA 2/15/2005
Location: MA Date: 2/15/2005
Source: Berkshire Eagle
|
