STOPPER
VALLEY FILLS LAWSUIT
On February 11, 1998 the Raymond Proffitt Foundation filed a lawsuit against the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and its Secretary, James Seif, in federal court to stop the state from issuing illegal valley fill permits. The lawsuit was filed under the citizens lawsuit provision of the federal mining law, and seeks to hold DEP's valley fill program illegal until the federal Office of Surface Mining (OSM) has made a decision on amendments to Pennsylvania's Coal Refuse Disposal Law .
In particular, the Proffitt Foundation opposes the issuance of a valley fill permit to Vesta Mining Company in Washington County to construct a coal refuse disposal site for 21.6 million tons of coal refuse from a deep longwall mine. The site would obliterate 2 miles of perennial stream and seeps, three and one-third acres of wetlands and 225 acres of woodlands. In addition, the site is located over a previously deep-mined area that is supported only by coal pillars. It is a disaster waiting to happen.
Over two and one-half years ago the Proffitt Foundation issued a Notice of Intent to sue DEP if it did not submit its valley fills program to the federal government for review and if it issued any permits under its illegal program. DEP submitted its program to OSM and that office is still deciding on the legality of Pennsylvania's valley fill law. But with the issuance of the Vesta permit, the Proffitt Foundation was forced to file its lawsuit.
The Proffitt Foundation's main argument against the Pennsylvania Coal Refuse law is that it allows for the destruction of streams and wetlands. Yet, other federal and even state laws prohibit the elimination of existing uses of waterways. Why should there be one law for sewage plants and factories, and another law for mining?
It was the Proffitt Foundation that in 1996-1997 forced the federal Environmental Protection Agency to promulgate strong antidegradation laws for Pennsylvania. Those laws prohibit the elimination of existing uses of a stream, and protect high quality and exceptional value waterways.
The Proffitt Foundation also has appealed the Vesta permit to the state Environmental Hearing Board on behalf of members who live adjacent to and at the bottom of the site.
Opposition to valley fills has come from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service , the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission, Pennsylvania Game Commission, and numerous citizen and environmental groups. Only DEP supports this practice.
NESHAMINY NEWS
by Delaware RiverKeeper Network
Neshaminy Watershed Floods
Dark Hollow Park Threatened
Recent flooding along the Neshaminy damaged properties, lives and livelihoods, putting fear in residents' hearts and inflicting serious financial loss. Over-development and poor stormwater controls have led to continuing flooding problems throughout the Neshaminy Watershed. The County completed the Neshaminy Creek Stormwater Management Plan in 1992 in an attempt to prevent stormwater run-off from drowning out those downstream from development. However, the Plan has never been fully implemented at the municipal level, allowing floodplain, wetland, headwater and stream corridor destruction while the flooding continues.
Now the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has renewed their proposal to construct the Dark Hollow Dam on the main stem of the Neshaminy Creek, near the border of Warwick and Buckingham Townships, as a potential solution to lower Neshaminy flooding. The dam project was cancelled years ago as uneconomical and environmentally costly and the Stormwater Management Plan was developed as a non-structural approach to control flooding, improve water quality and groundwater recharge, and protect the Creek's watershed.
The proposed Dark Hollow Dam will not solve the flooding problems in the basin. The dam was designed more than 20 years ago when land use in the watershed and the hydrology of the Creek were very different. Even then, the dam offered limited flood stage reduction for the lower Neshaminy, where the worst flooding has historically occurred. The dam would do nothing to address flooding caused by all the development below the dam site and would do nothing to prevent the increase of stormwater throughout the watershed.
If constructed, the dam would alter the flow of the Neshaminy, undermining its ecological health, and would destroy one of Bucks County's most unique and irreplaceable natural gems, Dark Hollow, which has been a county park since 1989. Dark Hollow Park is a quiet, beautiful place to hike, canoe, watch wildlife, and enjoy the solitude of nature. It is home to the Neshaminy Palisades, remarkable overhanging rock cliffs that have been appreciated throughout history by native Americans, early colonial settlers, and residents up to the present day.
How the stormwater woes of the Neshaminy are addressed is in the hands of those who care about the Creek and live in its watershed. We are asking you to join with us to tell the County Commissioners, municipal officials, and the NRCS how you want this done. Your help is needed to fight for effective stormwater management to control flood damage, stop the over-development of the watershed's lands, and protect Dark Hollow. There are meetings and events planned over the next two months that can help you learn more about the issues and get involved with others who care. Feel free to contact the Delaware RiverKeeper at 215-369-1188 or e-mail at DRKN@Libertynet.Org to discuss Dark Hollow or receive more detailed information.
Public Input Process Open!
NRCS and Bucks County have formed a steering committee to identify problems, evaluate options, and recommend actions to address flooding in the Neshaminy as part of the NRCS watershed flood study. One round of public hearings has been held and more are scheduled for this spring. Despite news headlines to the contrary, there is no limit on the public's right to submit information. Send letters, make phone calls, submit any and all relevant documents to the committee now and throughout the study. You are needed to send a strong message to the steering committee about how the Neshaminy can be protected and flooding addressed at the same time. Contact the steering committee (and also ask to receive mailings and notices of any public meetings): Neshaminy Creek Watershed Steering Committee, c/o Bucks County Conservation District, 924 Town Center, New Britian, PA 18901-5182, or call BCCD, at 215- 345-7577, with questions.
TIDAL WAVE OF TRASH
On March 2, 1998 Zero Waste America (ZWA) sent the following correspondence to the PA Legislature:
Will you support a comprehensive "Ban on the Disposal of Yardwaste"; into landfills and incinerators?
On Earth Day, April 22, 1998, Zero Waste America (ZWA) will release the results of this poll. ZWA asks members of the PA Legislature to respond by e-mail, fax, or letter to ZWA by Friday, April 17, 1998.
Zero Waste America (ZWA) is polling the entire Pennsylvania Legislature with this question. The implementation of a Yardwaste Disposal Ban would be an important first step in the permanent downsizing of the state's waste stream.
Pennsylvania's current Yardwaste Disposal Ban is a partial measure, not a complete ban. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), yardwaste accounts for an estimated 18% of the annual municipal waste stream. Approximately, one quarter of Pennsylvania’s yardwaste is composted.
Recently, it has been reported in newspapers and on television across the state that Pennsylvania now disposes of more imported waste than in-state waste. Pennsylvania must turn back this "Tidal Wave of
Trash".
Contrary to remarks from DEP, Pennsylvania can do something about it. The state can limit imported trash through the use of "Disposal Bans". By prohibiting internally generated trash from disposal facilities, the state can also prohibit imported trash. The U.S. Constitution requires that states not discriminate between domestic and imported waste. Disposal Bans must be comprehensive and allow no exceptions.
For Disposal Bans to succeed, the DEP needs to implement strategies that will sustain markets for recyclables. The state's heavy reliance on voluntary efforts at waste reduction and recycling, along with an unreliable "free market", has resulted in Pennsylvania becoming the nation’s largest importer of trash. In the past, our state has taken
action to support vital industries. What could be more important than protecting Pennsylvania from trash?
The DEP is incorrect when they claim that proposed federal interstate waste legislation is needed to control imported waste. This legislation will not protect states from waste imports for the following reasons:
1. It does not limit the total amount of trash that can be imported from other states or nations.
2. It only applies to municipal landfills. It does not apply to other commercial or private waste disposal facilities that handle wastes, such as hazardous, radioactive, residual (industrial), medical (infectious), sewage sludge, tires, or other types of waste.
3. It only applies to a fraction of waste disposed in municipal landfills. Other types of more hazardous waste that are disposed in municipal landfills will remain unaffected.
4. As pressure is applied to decrease municipal imports, this legislation could easily result in an increase in more hazardous types of imported waste.
5. It only applies to "unwanted" waste. That could leave economically disadvantaged communities vulnerable to legal and/or economic incentives from the waste industry.
Please join the effort to make Pennsylvania a clean and healthy place to live. Support a Yardwaste Disposal Ban.
DEP on Yardwaste:
http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/airwaste/wm/RECYCLE/FACTS
For more information:
"http://www.ZeroWasteAmerica.com"
CODORUS CREEK
DEP has issued yet another draft wastewater discharge permit on the PH Glatfelter paper mill in Spring Grove, York County. The public hearing is April 23. Call DEP (Ms. Susan Frank) to register at 717-541-7969 no later than April 17. The meeting will be held at the North Codorus Fire Hall beginning at 7:00 p.m. Written comments will accepted until May 14.
Watch Pollution Update for a fact sheet on the draft permit.
Letter to the Editor
I won't bore you with the story of small town USA against a big corporation. At this point, I really don't care to relive the stress of it again. What I would like to do though is simply thank a very special person to me. Lynn Landes was either my first or second contact when faced with an incentrator fight in Morrisville. Lynn spelled it out for me, "You have to get the people out". Although I was skeptical at first, Morrisville quickly responded and our pressure was unrelenting. Lynn also paid for our original flyers out of her own pocket. It meant everything to me that she was making a stand with us. When I go to war, I know who I want standing next to me. If Lynn is typical of your membership, I can easly see why RPF does so well.
Charles Gallagher................................................. Morrisville
Fact Sheet
Enforcing the Clean Water Act:
TMDLs and Water Quality Limited Segments
Today's most significant source of water pollution is non-point source pollution -- pollution which is washed from the land and the air during rain events. While the Clean Water Act has successfully been used to address point source pollution (end of pipe pollution) the provisions for addressing non-point source pollution have been largely ignored by both state and federal governments across the nation. Citizen suits and court rulings are finally forcing the implementation of this essential Clean Water Act mandate.
What does the Clean Water Act require?
After putting into place technology-based controls on point source pollution discharges, the Clean Water Act requires a second strategy. Section 303 of the Act requires states to establish water quality standards for waterways, to identify those streams failing to meet the standards, and to take action to clean them up. The problem is that both the states and the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have failed to implement this 1972 requirement of the Clean Water Act.
In the watershed states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware, the initial work of determining which streams are degraded is far from complete. NJ has assessed only about 1/3 of its stream miles, PA less than 1/7, and DE only 1/4; none have assessed wetlands. Those waterways which have been assessed demonstrate the serious pollution threats facing our waterways -- in New Jersey 77% of assessed stream miles do not meet water quality standards. For Pennsylvania it is 36% and in Delaware 89%.
Across the country, citizen lawsuits are forcing EPA to require the states to fulfill the requirements of Section 303 of the Clean Water Act. Represented by the Widener Environmental Law Clinic, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, American Littoral Society, Sierra Club, American Canoe Ass'n and NJ and PENN PIRGs have brought litigation which is now forcing this process in PA, DE, NJ, MD and VA.
Citizens will play an essential role in the success of this effort. Citizens are needed to help identify polluted waters -- providing history, monitoring data, visual surveys -- to insure the listing process is not marred by financial or political considerations and that the resulting implementation is strong enough to accomplish the job. You don't need to be an expert to participate. All you need is to care about your local stream and be willing to take the time to read the documents and share your thoughts.
Step one: The states must establish water quality standards
Water quality standards are developed to protect and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of waters. Water Quality Standards, which may be numerical, narrative or prevent degradation, ensure that designated and existing uses of waters, such as fishing, boating and swimming, are met at all times.
Step Two: Identifying Water Quality Limited Segments -- i.e. polluted waters
The States are required to identify those waterways which fail to meet state water quality standards even after technology controls for point sources have been implemented. These waters are called Water Quality Limited Segments or WQLSs. A WQLS doesn't have to be an entire stream -- it is usually just a segment of a stream, and may also be a lake, bay or estuary. States must update their identification of WQLSs every two years, circulate it to the public for comment, and then submit it to the EPA for approval.
Step Three: Establishing Pollution Loads
Once the WQLSs are identified the state has to follow up by calculating Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). A TMDL identifies the amount of an offending pollutant (whether a nutrient or a toxic) a stream can assimilate without violating its water quality standards. TMDLs must include a margin of safety to protect against mathematical or data errors. TMDLs are set on a pollutant by pollutant basis. Thermal pollution loads must also be set.
Step Four: Allocating Pollution Limitations
Once the TMDL is complete the state has to allocate the allowable pollution load amongst all of the pollution sources in the WQLS segment. All point and non-point pollution sources are considered: dry air deposition, rainfall, benthic deposits, farm runoff and other "non-point" sources -- not simply point source/permitted discharges.
What Can I Do to Get Involved?
There are a number of critical roles you can play to help ensure the integrity and success of the over-due section 303 process.
1. Help us make sure that the WQLS list includes all polluted waterways. The states are required to make this decision by considering all "existing and readily available information." Citizen input is a key source of information in this process. If you are a water quality monitor, if you walk your stream regularly, if you use your stream for fishing, boating or swimming you have information that is important to the process.
2. Read through any TMDLs issued for your waterway or region -- do the explanations, information and back-up given by the agencies make sense? While special knowledge and skills can help in this review, they are far from essential. Common sense can play a significant role in identifying and solving TMDL shortcomings.
3. Send your information to the Water Quality Division of your state environmental protection agency and carbon copy the Environmental Protection Agency (Region III in Philadelphia for PA, DE, MD and VA; Region II in New York for NJ and NY).
4. Make sure your neighbors are aware when this critical process is taking place in their community. Everybody has a body of knowledge to bring to the table. Everybody needs to be informed and involved.
5. Sign up as a Home Waters Activist with Riverkeeper to get regular, up-to-date information about the WQLS and TMDL lists being proposed for your waterways. Call 1-800-8-DELAWARE
DELAWARE RIVERKEEPER NETWORK, P.O. Box - 326, Washington Crossing, Pa. 18977-0326. Ph. 215-369-1188, Fx. 215-369-1181.
Join
Join the Raymond Proffitt Foundation to protect your Pennsylvania constitutional rights to clean air and water. The annual membership dues are $25, $15 for students and senior citizens. Make out your check or money order to the Raymond Proffitt Corporation (a nonprofit 501 (c) (3) corporation), P.O. Box 723 , Langhorne, PA 19047-0723
<<<<END>>>>