Description

more
The Aquatic Plant and Algae Management General Permit (permit) is a combined National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit. It covers the in-water and shoreline (including roadsides and ditch banks) treatment of native and noxious plants and algae. It also covers nutrient inactivation treatments. The permit allows the discharge of a specific list of aquatic labeled herbicides, algaecides, biological water clarifiers, adjuvants, marker dyes, and nutrient inactivation products into the freshwaters of Washington. These are comments received on the draft permit.https://data.wa.gov/d/ysrq-tsshCreated: 2015-12-23Modified : 2015-12-23Update by syncSocrata script at: 2017-01-05 01:09:15.545000

Dataset Attributes

  • name
    Text
    {"value"=>"Monica Harle", "count"=>4} (), {"value"=>"Doug Dorling", "count"=>2} (), {"value"=>"Nathan Lubliner", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Michael Felt ", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Pat Berger ", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Mike Ficker ", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Don Russell", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Wen-Ling Tseng ", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Patricia Flug", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Chris OConner", "count"=>1} ()
  • draft_permit_comments
    Text
    {"value"=>"Hi Nathan,\n\nIm sending once again with all 7 attachments - the last email was missing the 7th. The #1 attachments is my current on the 2016 draft permit.\n\nThanks,\n\nMonica Harle\n", "count"=>4} (), {"value"=>"The attached audio file is from the public workshop and hearing held on December 7th, 2015. There were no attendees through the webinar or at the Lacey, WA Ecology headquarters building. There were no public comments provided on the draft permit.", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"My name is Michael Felt and I have been a lakefront resident on Lake Erie for 35 years. I have reviewed your agencys draft NPDES permit and have a few comments related to this draft permit.\n\nPage 26 - SSE1e Shoreline Posting Requirements\n\ne. Remove all old signs at the end of the period of water use restriction.\n\nThis requirement will serve no purpose. All or most of the sinage is removed by the property owners shortly after treatment. There is no reason for the contractor to come back to do this.\nThe posting identifies all the water restrictions.\n\nPage 27 S5 C6 Notification\n\n6. The Permittee must to Ecology, at apampreposttreat@ecy.wa.gov, a copy of the notice, a copy of the notice, the date of distribution, and a list of addresses that the notice was delivered to, no later than one business day following public distribution. \n\nI find this to be an intrusion of my personal space. By demanding the Permittee submit this list to your agency, you are allowing this information to be available to any person or environmental group, locally and nationally, for their own agenda, through the Freedom of Information Act. Other means would appear to be appropriate for Ecology to determine if such notifications have been made. Perhaps such personal information should only be submitted after a complaint of not receiving such notice has been documented to be true.\n\nPage 39 G2 Right of Entry and Inspection\n\nI am against Ecology entering my property without first contacting me and receiving permission. Ecology already has such access through public boat launches. Since the treatment activity typically takes place in the water and not on my property, I am not in favor of allowing any access without first contacting me for approval.\n\n\nMichael J. Felt\nLake Erie Property Owner\n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"I am Pat Berger and I have lived on Sylvia Lake(a small private lake in Pierce County) at the same address for 45 years. With my board I have been through the process of our lake study and IVAMP as required by government agencies(DOE and others) several years ago to allow us to be permitted for treatment of vegetation.\nThere are proposals for changes to the permit that concern me:\nOne is S5E1e Shoreline Posting Requirements\nOur lake is only 12 acres(really a pond by State definition) and a requirement to leave the postings up and have the contractor return to take them down would be another expense to us---and most of us, including myself, take the postings down after the required amount of time listed on the poster. Trust the citizens, we can handle this. There is no public access and we do leave the posting up at the community area for a longer period of time.\n \nTwo is G2 Right of Entry and Inspection\nNo one should be entering private property without permission of the owner without a warrant with specification of reason(unless of course law enforcement sees a crime being committed) Our HOA can grant permission to DOE reps and allow them to enter the lake at our community property if there is a need. There may be a constitutional question here. \n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Nathan,\nPlease note Don Russells response to the iron issue. I copy Dons comments and believe this material needs to be added to the Ecology list for phosphorous inactivation products. Gary Darcy president of the Twin Lakes Homeowners Association is out of the country for the next few months but before leaving requested that I make sure his group also is on record in supporting the addition of iron to the list. Gary Darcy I believe represents over 500 homeowners.\n \nThanks,\nDoug Dorling\nNorthwest Aquatic Ecosystems\nGary Darcy\nPresident twin lakes Homeowners Assoc.\n\n________________________________________\n\nNathan,\n\nFinely granulated elemental (zero valent) iron has a remarkable ability\nto inactivate soluble reactive phosphorus (orthophosphate) by a process\nof adsorption of the phosphate ion to the reactive surface of zero valent\niron and its subsequent conversion to an insoluble iron phosphate coating\non the surface of the iron particle. Zero valent iron has been used for\na number of years now for the removal of pollutants (including phosphate)\nfrom groundwater by passing the pollutant bearing groundwater through a\nzero valent iron and sand barrier.\n\nSeveral years ago I imagined that passing finely granulated zero valent\niron particles through a column of lake water would accomplish the same\nthing as passing groundwater through a bed of zero valent iron and began\nto conduct a series of bench tests to validate the concept and perfect\nthe application technique. The first full scale field experimental\napplication was conducted this past summer in phosphorus polluted Lake\nLorene located in Federal Way. \n\nThe experimental application involved injecting two hundred pounds (two\nfive gallon pails) of zero valent iron as a thin slurry just below the\nsurface of the 54 acre feet of phosphorus polluted water in Lake Lorene. \nThe soluble reactive phosphorus concentration prior to treatment in Lake\nLorene was approximately 35 ppb. The soluble reactive phosphorus\nconcentration post treatment was below phosphorus concentration test\ndetection limits as determined by an Ecology certified test laboratory. \nThis below phosphorus detection limit condition lasted for two months\nafter the application of zero valent iron in spite of continual external\nphosphorus loading of Lake Lorene from Joes Creeks inflowing water that\ncontains very high concentrations (up to 75 ppb) of soluble reactive\nphosphorus.\n\nThere was no adverse impact on pH or aquatic life as a result of the zero\nvalent iron application. The iron phosphate coated iron particles\nsettled to the bottom of the lake and became incorporated into its\nsediment. Because Lake Lorene is shallow and aerated there is little\nlikelihood that the iron bound phosphorus will be released back into the\nwater column. Even if phosphorus was released from sediment under anoxic\nconditions so too would some of the iron become soluble (as ferrous\nions). When orthophosphate ions and ferrous ions are exposed to\noxygenated near surface (photic zone) water the reduced iron (ferrous\nions) and orthophosphate ions will react to form insoluble iron phosphate\nthus inactivating the phosphorus as a nutrient source for cyanobacteria. \nIron is Mother Natures natural orthophosphate inactivation chemical. \nAluminum is not. Furthermore the sulfate ions released during an\naluminum sulfate treatment are alien to the natural composition of lake\nwater and harmful to aquatic life. Under anoxic conditions sulfate ions\nare reduced to sulfide ions that combine with iron to form insoluble iron\nsulfide thus rendering iron ineffective as a phosphorus inactivator. \n\nFor all the above stated reasons zero valent iron should be included as\nan Ecology approved phosphorus inactivation chemical. Zero valent iron\nis compatible with and augments natural lake chemistry, is\nenvironmentally friendly, and relatively simple and inexpensive to apply.\n\n\nDon Russell\n\n\n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"See Attached\nDoug Dorling\n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Nathan,\nMy name is Mike Ficker and have been a lakefront resident on Lake Killarney for 18 years. I have reviewed your agency’s draft NPDES permit and have a few comments related to this draft permit.\n\nPage 26 -S5E1e Shoreline Posting Requirements\ne. Remove all old signs at the end of the period of water use restriction.\nThis requirement will serve no purpose. I have noticed that most of the signage lake-wide is removed by the property owners shortly after treatment Requiring the contractor to come back to the lake after all of the restrictions have expired to remove the few remaining signs will only add additional costs to our treatment program. All of the water use restrictions are identified on the postings. Once my family is aware of the restrictions I typically remove them anyway. \n\nPage 27 S5 C6 Notification\n6. The Permittee must email to Ecology, at apampreposttreat@ecy.wa.gov, a copy of the notice, the date of distribution, and a list of addresses that the notice was delivered to, no later than one business day following public distribution. The Permittee must email a copy of the notice, including the date of distribution, to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR at Todd.Brownlee@dnr.wa.gov no later than one business day following public distribution. The Permittee need not notify DNR for treatments occurring on privately-owned lakes with no public access.\nI find this to be an intrusion of my personal space. By demanding the Permittee submit this list to your agency, you are allowing this information to be available to any person or environmental group, locally and nationally, for their own agenda, through the Freedom of Information Act. Other means would appear to be appropriate for Ecology to determine if such notifications have been made. Perhaps such personal information should only be submitted after a complaint of not receiving such notice has been documented to be true. \n\nPage 39 G2 Right of Entry and Inspection\nRepresentatives of Ecology must have the right to enter at all reasonable times in or upon any property, public or private, for the purpose of inspecting and investigating conditions relating to the pollution or the possible pollution of any waters of the state.\nI am against Ecology entering my property without first contacting me and receiving permission. Ecology already has such access through public boat launches. Since the treatment activity typically takes place in the water and not on my property I am not in favor of allowing any access without first contacting me for approval.\n\nLet me know if you have any questions.\nThanks\n\n\nMike Ficker\n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Nathan,\n\nFinely granulated elemental (zero valent) iron has a remarkable ability to inactivate soluble reactive phosphorus (orthophosphate) by a process of adsorption of the phosphate ion to the reactive surface of zero valent iron and its subsequent conversion to an insoluble iron phosphate coating on the surface of the iron particle. Zero valent iron has been used for a number of years now for the removal of pollutants (including phosphate) from groundwater by passing the pollutant bearing groundwater through a zero valent iron and sand barrier.\n\nSeveral years ago I imagined that passing finely granulated zero valent iron particles through a column of lake water would accomplish the same thing as passing groundwater through a bed of zero valent iron and began to conduct a series of bench tests to validate the concept and perfect the application technique. The first full scale field experimental application was conducted this past summer in phosphorus polluted Lake Lorene located in Federal Way. \n\nThe experimental application involved injecting two hundred pounds (two five gallon pails) of zero valent iron as a thin slurry just below the surface of the 54 acre feet of phosphorus polluted water in Lake Lorene. \nThe soluble reactive phosphorus concentration prior to treatment in Lake Lorene was approximately 35 ppb. The soluble reactive phosphorus concentration post treatment was below phosphorus concentration test detection limits as determined by an Ecology certified test laboratory. \nThis below phosphorus detection limit condition lasted for two months after the application of zero valent iron in spite of continual external phosphorus loading of Lake Lorene from Joes Creeks inflowing water that contains very high concentrations (up to 75 ppb) of soluble reactive phosphorus.\n\nThere was no adverse impact on pH or aquatic life as a result of the zero valent iron application. The iron phosphate coated iron particles settled to the bottom of the lake and became incorporated into its sediment. Because Lake Lorene is shallow and aerated there is little likelihood that the iron bound phosphorus will be released back into the water column. Even if phosphorus was released from sediment under anoxic conditions so too would some of the iron become soluble (as ferrous ions). When orthophosphate ions and ferrous ions are exposed to oxygenated near surface (photic zone) water the reduced iron (ferrous\nions) and orthophosphate ions will react to form insoluble iron phosphate thus inactivating the phosphorus as a nutrient source for cyanobacteria. \nIron is Mother Natures natural orthophosphate inactivation chemical. \nAluminum is not. Furthermore the sulfate ions released during an aluminum sulfate treatment are alien to the natural composition of lake water and harmful to aquatic life. Under anoxic conditions sulfate ions are reduced to sulfide ions that combine with iron to form insoluble iron sulfide thus rendering iron ineffective as a phosphorus inactivator. \n\nFor all the above stated reasons zero valent iron should be included as an Ecology approved phosphorus inactivation chemical. Zero valent iron is compatible with and augments natural lake chemistry, is environmentally friendly, and relatively simple and inexpensive to apply.\n\n\nDon Russell\n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Dear Mr. Nathan Lubliner,\nMy name is Wen-Ling Tseng and have been a lakefront resident on Lake Killarney for a number of years. I have reviewed your agency’s draft NPDES permit and have a few comments related to this draft permit.\n \nPage 26 -S5E1e Shoreline Posting Requirements\ne. Remove all old signs at the end of the period of water use restriction.\nThis requirement will serve no purpose. I have noticed that most of the signage lake-wide is removed by the property owners shortly after treatment Requiring the contractor to come back to the lake after all of the restrictions have expired to remove the few remaining signs will only add additional costs to our treatment program. All of the water use restrictions are identified on the postings. Once my family is aware of the restrictions I typically remove them anyway. \nPage 27 S5 C6 Notification\n6. The Permittee must email to Ecology, at apampreposttreat@ecy.wa.gov, a copy of the notice, the date of distribution, and a list of addresses that the notice was delivered to, no later than one business day following public distribution. The Permittee must email a copy of the notice, including the date of distribution, to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR at Todd.Brownlee@dnr.wa.gov no later than one business day following public distribution. The Permittee need not notify DNR for treatments occurring on privately-owned lakes with no public access.\nI find this to be an intrusion of my personal space. By demanding the Permittee submit this list to your agency, you are allowing this information to be available to any person or environmental group, locally and nationally, for their own agenda, through the Freedom of Information Act. Other means would appear to be appropriate for Ecology to determine if such notifications have been made. Perhaps such personal information should only be submitted after a complaint of not receiving such notice has been documented to be true. \nPage 39 G2 Right of Entry and Inspection\nRepresentatives of Ecology must have the right to enter at all reasonable times in or upon any property, public or private, for the purpose of inspecting and investigating conditions relating to the pollution or the possible pollution of any waters of the state.\nI am against Ecology entering my property without first contacting me and receiving permission. Ecology already has such access through public boat launches. Since the treatment activity typically takes place in the water and not on my property I am not in favor of allowing any access without first contacting me for approval.\n \nThank you for your time and consideration.\n \nBest regards,\n \nWen-Ling Tseng\n", "count"=>1} (), {"value"=>"Mr. Lubliner,\n\nPlease read the attached file for my response to the plans of the Ecology Dept. which will unnecessarily impact homeowners on lakes.\n\nSincerely,\n Christine Devine \n", "count"=>1} ()
  • attachment
    Text
  • attachment_2
    Text
  • factsheet_comments
    Text
  • sepa_determination_comments
    Text
  • notice_of_intent_noi_comments
    Text
  • id
    Number

Related Datasets