On Tuesday, December 1, the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) hosted a public hearing at
Central Elementary School in Fluvanna County to permit the “dewatering” of coal
ash ponds at the Bremo Bluff Power Plant on the banks of the James River, not
far from Fork Union. The proposed permit would allow Dominion to discharge
arsenic, hexavalent chromium, selenium, and several other metals into the river
with little or no prior treatment.
Previously Virginia’s oldest
coal-fueled power plant, the Bremo Bluff operation was converted to a natural
gas-powered facility in June of 2014, which brought an improvement to the
Commonwealth’s overall air quality.
Now, just over a year later, the
proposed wastewater treatment practice promises to harm the water quality of
our nation’s river.
The process of “dewatering,”
simply, is the process of removing liquid from solid substances in wastewater
mixtures. As it stands, Dominion’s draft permit is a reissuance of a
previously-existing permit that now proposes to release cooling water and
treated industrial wastewater associated with the fallow coal ash ponds from
the plant’s coal-burning years into the James River at Bremo Bluff.
In a press release by the James
River Association (JRA) advertising the results of the hearing, a few concerns
were voiced.
First, the draft permit is in
violation of the Clean Water Act. JRA brings further attention to the fact that
the permitting limits established by the VDEQ are significantly higher than
those set in other states, and are inefficient in preserving the aquatic
ecosystem and public health. The James River supports nearly a third of
Virginia residents living in 39 counties and 19 towns and cities, who depend
upon its water for drinking.
Second, there is no mention of
endangered species considerations in the draft plan. The Endangered Species
Act, as it has the power to influence regulations for land- and water-use
practices that even slightly impact the vitality of a struggling species, is a
major player in many environmental protections cases, and will likely be a
popular arguing point for commenters on this issue.
It is worthy of note that the James
River, in the most recent State of theJames report, was given a B- rating for overall ecosystem health, pooling
several contributing factors. Furthermore, wastewater pollution control,
specifically, was given a rating of over 100 percent, citing facility upgrades
and the resulting improvements in nitrogen and phosphorus pollution reductions,
which places the James well ahead of schedule for goals set as part of the
Chesapeake Bay Cleanup.
Still, in its most recent State of theBay assessment, the Chesapeake was rated a D+ for overall health, with a
slow pattern of improvement.
Though, according to these
popularized reports, the James is a relatively healthy environment from a water
quality perspective, as always, it is important that we think progressively.
The James River scores higher than the Bay, but far from perfect. There is
still work to be done, and setting beneficial, responsible precedents in
environmental policy is an important first step.
The public comment period on this
draft permit will remain open until December 14, 2015. Written comments may be
submitted to Beverley Carver at Beverley.carver@deq.virginia.gov. Letters may be
mailed to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, company of Beverley
Caver.
*Originally published in the Rural Virginian
