|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Activist calls permit precursor to dumping
by Kristina Leighton, Wake Weekly Staff Writer
Local activists may have won the battle when Butner dropped a request to increase sewage discharged into Falls Lake in January, but they say they're still fighting the war.
Neuse Riverkeeper Dean Naujoks said that though Butner's request is on hold, the state Division of Water Quality has already approved the trade of pollution credits. In December, the DWQ approved a change to the Neuse River Compliance Association's permit, which reflected the controversial trade of 61,130 pounds of nitrogen pollution credits to Butner from a Pamlico County company 200 miles away. The Neuse River Compliance Association is the organization that oversees major sewage treatment plants in the area. The possible addition of pollutants to the lake elicited a loud public outcry last fall. Hundreds showed up to protest the move at two public hearings. Many expressed concerns that the nitrogen -- a byproduct of the wastewater treatment process -- would have detrimental effects on the quality of drinking water drawn from the lake. Falls Lake provides drinking water to 340,000 people across the region, including those in Wake Forest, Rolesville and Raleigh. The desire to trade nitrogen credits came from Butner's need to accommodate future growth in southern Granville County. Butner applied last year to expand its treatment facility and increase its water and sewer discharge into Falls Lake from 5.5 million gallons per day to 7.5 mgd. To do that, Butner also needed to increase the amount of nitrogen it was legally allowed to put into the lake. The town then sought out and purchased 61,130 pounds of nitrogen pollution credits from the Bay River Company in the Neuse River estuary. The Environmental Protection Agency said the move would be the largest such pollution credit transfer in the United States. Though the town purchased 61,130 pounds of nitrogen credits, Butner only applied to use 21,000 pounds of those credits in its application last fall. Environmentalists and others opposed to the plan worried that adding more nitrogen will promote further algae growth in the lake, which has already shown signs of distress. Algae growth disrupts aquatic life and is believed to cause health problems in humans. In January, the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency that manages the town of Butner, withdrew its request, and agreed to allow further study of the water quality in Falls Lake over the next two years. Just before the withdrawal, however, the DWQ quietly approved the modification to the Neuse River Compliance Association permit, which reflected the controversial trade. Naujoks said the agencies acted in bad faith when they "tried to sneak the increased pollution allocation into the Compliance Association permit, without the ability of the public to comment." Public notice and a public comment period are not required for minor modifications to the Neuse River Compliance Association permits. Naujoks said he doesn't believe the modifications could be classified as minor. "The DWQ was required to open the permit modification to public comment," he said in a formal petition dated Monday contesting the decision. "This was not done, and subsequently prevented those with concerns about the ... permit (from expressing) their objections." Naujoks said that after the recent controversy over Butner's proposal to transfer the credits, the division should have recognized the public's interest in the issue. "By issuing this permit modification, the Division of Water quality has taken a major step toward allowing the largest pollution trade ever proposed in the U.S. to occur without the ability of the public to weigh in on the matter," he said. DWQ representatives could not be reached for comment. In a note to Naujoks, DWQ engineer Mike Templeton said Butner will not be able to apply any of the nitrogen credits to what it is allowed to discharge without once again applying to expand its facility. The state Office of Administrative Hearings has yet to set a hearing date to evaluate the contested decision.
Last Updated On: March 3, 2005
Copyright 2005 The Wake Weekly