Shilsholed

Bob from the PSA was kind enough to respond to my rant. After reading his response it’s clear that the sited marina’s are many, many times over limits.  This kind of thing definitely needs to be taken care of.

I still feel that threatening litigation and accepting a settlement to avoid that litigation that doesn’t go directly to fixing the boat yard is pretty lame.  If the yards can’t afford it I don’t think it’s reasonable to say “well, then fold”.  It shouldn’t just be the boat yards responsibility for this. Seattle is a boat town, it plays a large part in the economy and, just because taking care of boats (covered in copper paint and sacrificial leads) is bad for the environment doesn’t mean it should be the sole responsibility of the boat yards to fix. Kind of like suing the city because the oil you’re dumping down the storm drain is making it to the sound.

I don’t think anyone thought that Three Sheets NW headline “Lawsuit threat pushes boatyards the the brink” was taken as PSA killed the economy (no-one’s that daft), but, it is a huge expense at the worst possible time.

Anyway – here’s Bob’s response for anyone interested (colors and fonts are his):

Hi Ben:

Thank you for your email of January 30th, 2010. I share your concern for the survival of our boatyards because I am a boater, too. I trust you will give me the courtesy of sharing my point of view rather than accepting as fact those views expressed in a recent article in Three Sheets Northwest.

• The Three Sheets Northwest article headline, ” Lawsuit threat pushes boatyards to brink,” gives readers the false impression that Puget Soundkeeper Alliance is responsible for the poor economic condition of the boatyard industry. All of us, businesses, non-profits and families are hurting during this awful recession. Puget Soundkeeper Alliance has a long histroyof collaborative work with local businesses, including many boatyards, marinas and members of the Northwest Marine Trade Association.
• Puget Soundkeeper Alliance states in our Notice of Intent to Sue letter that we are willing to discuss effective remedies for the violations addressed in the letter and settlement terms. We suggest that the parties initiate discussions within 10 days so that negotiations may be completed before the end of the 60-day notice period. There is no demand for settlement fees. Each case is unique and the issues in any settlement are unique to that case. Coming into compliance with the law to protect water quality is always one element.
• Puget Soundkeeper Alliance never has accepted penalty payments from defendants. All penalty payments are made directly by defendants to third party mitigation projects conducted by other non-profit organizations to mitigate the damage caused in that watershed. The size of the penalty payment is negotiated between the defendant and Puget Soundkeeper Alliance and is based on the severity of the violations, the duration fo the violations and the unique circumstances of the case.

I would like the opportunity to share some of the steps we have taken with the boatyard industry prior to our recent enforcement actions together with some information on the toxic impact of copper on salmon. I would also like to refer you to our website: http://pugetsoundkeeper.org

• 1995 (revised 1998) Co-wrote the Resource Manual for Pollution Prevention in Marinas. Although this is targeted for a Marina audience the publication deals with many boatyard issues.
• 2005, Participated in the stakeholder process to help Ecology write a Boatyard General Stormwater Permit that protected water quality while employing reasonable and achievable solutions.
• 2007, Wrote and produced a Do It Yourself Boat Repair manual to help boatyards educate their do-it-yourself clients. A common complaint from boatyards was that Do-It-Yourselfers were lax about pollution prevention. 2000 copies were eagerly put into circulation by boatyards.
• February 2007, Co-sponsored a Boatyard Compliance Workshop with Washington Department of Ecology and Northwest Marine Trade Association to help boatyards learn about what to do to come into compliance with their stormwater permits.
• 2007, Partnered with NMTA and three boatyards to implement the Boatyard Stormwater Treatment Technology Pilot Project. Tested three treatment technologies to identify solutions to the boatyard stormwater problem. Six facilities are currently installing the technology identified as most cost effective.
• September 2009, Boatyard warning letter sent to all boatyards in Washington. Recognizing our history of working with this industry, PSA broke with our normal policy of carefully guarding our legal preparations in order to alert boatyards about the seriousness of the issue and the possibility of future legal action. Copies of this letter were sent to NMTA to alert them to the seriousness of this issue.

Science around the toxic effects of copper on salmon

The science is clear, copper is incredibly toxic to salmon. Since 1995, Federal Water Quality standards which are based on scientifically-documented effects to aquatic life, limit dissolved copper to 3.1 parts per billion (ppb) (saltwater) and 5.1-49.5 ppb (freshwater, based on hardness calculation).[1]* In concentrations as low as 3 parts per billion (ppb) dissolved copper has been shown to significantly reduce a salmon’s ability to smell[2]. For salmon, their sense of smell is probably most important. It helps them locate prey, avoid predators and home in on their natal streams. Copper has also been shown to reduce a salmon’s ability to fight disease. In the struggle for survival, successive sub-lethal effects could jeopardize the survival of entire populations.

Copper can also kill salmon outright. Under various conditions (fresh water/ saltwater, adult/juvenile/smolt stage, various water chemistry conditions) copper can kill Chinook salmon at relatively low levels, between 10.2 ppb and 128.4 ppb, with an average lethality of 25.02 ppb (mean acute value). Levels for rainbow trout/steelhead and coho salmon are similar (mean acute values of 22.19 and 22.93), while sockeye salmon and cutthroat trout can tolerate somewhat higher levels[3].

*Since 2007, US EPA has used the Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) (based on pH, hardness and dissolved organic carbon) for establishing water quality criteria for copper in freshwater. Although the new BLM criteria range from 1.6 to 259.6 parts per billion, conditions in the Puget Sound region (slightly acidic, low hardness) favor the low end of this scale (1.6 to 18 ppb).

Boatyard copper discharges

Rather than having to meet water quality criteria for copper, boatyards are required to use adaptive management in their stormwater permits. First they sample their stormwater. When they find it to exceed artificially high benchmarks of 229 ppb for saltwater and 38 ppb for freshwater, they are required to implement level 1, 2 or 3 responses (based on the number of times they exceed the benchmarks). Level 3 is the most serious. A level 3 response is essentially an engineering study and developing a plan to install a treatment system for stormwater.

The exceedances at these 5 boatyards are not minor. The levels that are being discharged are often thousands of times over the levels shown to harm salmon (or hundreds of times over levels shown to kill salmon). For example, one boatyard on this list documented copper discharges at 7830, 5650, 2000, 1148 ppb and failed 13/13 tests for copper. They also failed 7/7 tests for lead, with a high reading of 1340 ppb. Lead is a serious neurotoxin which is regulated by a limit of 55.6 ppb, not a benchmark, making each exceedance a violation. They also did not implement required level 1, 2 and 3 responses and missed required samples on other occasions which are the very structures on which the adaptive management scheme is based.

Boatyards can comply with permits

One high volume boatyard with a history of high discharges installed a stormwater treatment system to bring them into compliance. This brought their discharges down from a range of 189-5500 ppb to 12.5-65 ppb. In addition, after installing the treatment, lead and zinc discharges were reduced to levels below what the measuring equipment could capture.

Cited References:

[1] National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, US EPA, 2005

[2] Sublethal Effects of Copper on Coho Salmon: Impacts on Nonoverlapping Receptor Pathways in the Peripheral Olfactory Nervous System, David H. Baldwin, Jason F. Sandahl, Jana S. Labenia, and Nathaneil L. Scholz, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2003

[3] 2007 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Copper, US EPA, 2007

Additional Reference:

Safety assessment of selected inorganic elements to fry of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), S.J. Hamilton, KJ Buhl, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Fisheries Contaminant Research Center, Yankton, South Dakota 57078, 1990

Again, I share your concern for protecting this valuable boatyard industry and the pastime of recreational boating. I believe that this can be done in a manner that protects water quality and valuable but sensitive natural resources like salmon.

Regards,

Bob Beckman

Puget Soundkeeper® & Executive Director

Puget Soundkeeper® Alliance

5309 Shilshole Ave. NW, Suite 215

Seattle, WA  98107

206-297-7002

206-297-0409 FAX