In a letter to the California Regional Water Board dated July 8, 2010, Bob Simpson in a discussion of the provisions of the proposed new Water Permit said that ,"Freshwater has no reason to believe that the Facility cannot comply with these other new limits, but it is also true that there is no data demonstrating that it can."

He keeps saying that new standards for oil, grease, pH, certain metals, pesticides and dioxin "have never been applied to the water treatment plant discharge in the past."

He doesn't seem to think the mill should be fined for violations. "... it would be inequitable for Freshwater to be exposed to mandatory minimum penalties for violation of these new limitations, however unlikely the violation."

Mr. Simpson's attitude would probably have worked for him in the past.
He clearly thinks this mill can get by as it has in the past. Historically the Samoa Mill has not had to meet standards. Let's hope that the Water Board of 2010 has learned from the mistakes of the past.  The entire letter and the letter from the Office of Enforcement will be on the Water Board site. The meeting on the Water Permit is July 15, 2010 in Santa Rosa.
dedicated westender
7/12/2010 06:51:46 pm

What is this? some kind of free-for-all? Never-Never-Land?? We apply for permits to not comply with standards and not even expect to comply ever? do we waste taxpayer money holding hearings on projects that are never going to comply? Sounds like Never- Never-Land to me. Enforcement is going to be among priorities. Eureka is going to be at the bottom of the list. Whatever gets approved will be with us for a long long time.

Reply
Freshinup
7/13/2010 04:09:06 am

“Evaluation of the available data, including statistical, graphical, and tabular comparisons, indicates that no significant increase in sediment contaminants or bioaccumulation has occurred as a result of the discharges. Furthermore, there is no evidence that benthic infauna or epibenthic fish and invertebrate communities have been adversely affected by the discharge. These findings are consistent with the improvements resulting from the outfall extension and changes in plant processes.”

Reply
7/13/2010 04:55:02 am

This does not change the basic facts. Freshwater cannot meet standards now and according to Bob Simpson, it is not a sure thing that they can meet them in the future.

Reply
T.P
7/13/2010 05:44:46 am

The basic facts are . They MAY not meet standards when running bleached pulp.
Brown stock has shown to fall within the standards.
And as far as MR Simpson not being sure,, Hows one to be sure with a mill down almost 2 years.And with tighter restrictions then ever to meet.
Gotta run to test ,,,,,
And as far as your post on the OE's letter to the board,,,A bit over stated to what and how they addresed their concerns,,,,,

Reply
Frank
7/13/2010 10:00:24 am

The line in the letter from the OE that stands out in my mind is the one referring to the mill's "long history of violations". This is a fact that cannot be denied and it is basically why those of us living near the mill see it as a long run material threat to our health. Yhe violations over the years are not only water quality violations but violations of air quality standards- - the air I and my family breathe. This is something I'm simply not content for anyone to experiment with for a few jobs and an uncertain chance for profit. Eureka needs entreprenuers with more imagination and vision, not those trying to restart dead vehicles.

Reply
T.P
7/13/2010 12:20:52 pm

I bet if we check the electrical wiring in all of your homes .Your years behind the standards.You would be Violated and fined for it and forced to spend money to fix . Arent you a fire hazerd to your neighbors.
And this home page Wow .Turn up production at night .LOL It runs full out 24/7 people.
We never spend on improvements
.Yet you state we were forced to spend 5 million in 07.
Bits and pieces all jumbeled up ,,Fact,
The permit was "revoked" because it wasnt running ,and didnot look like it would at the time.
Of course you would have a history of violations. when the standerds increase every year. They allow for it .Fine you and move on . Its standerd for all industries to work like that.

Reply
7/13/2010 03:59:55 pm

No the permit was revoked for violations.
It is all part of the public record. The difference is that if my home is not in good repair, I don't expose my neighbors to toxic chemicals and make it hard for them to breathe.

Reply
T.P
7/14/2010 03:45:33 am

Permits are reviewed every 5 years.
It was time for said review. Evergreen was no longer the owner of the mill and permit. It was unclear as to weather or not Freshwater would run,and so they did not persue extending the permit. In order to keep it clear and simple who owed if any fines . Freshwater was informed they would need to get a permit in their name instead of a transfer of at that point was an expired permit. No matter how you read it thats why the permit was revoke at that point. NOT because of some Violations.
FIRES do spew toxics in to the air .
And why you think a few with "breathing" problems out way the many with no problems at all .And the ruin that 100;s of familys are going through . AND I MEAN IN TOTAL RUIN.
HOMES GONE , KIDS PULLED FROM SCHOOLS .EVERYTHING WEVE SPENT A LIFE TIME EARNING GONE. 80 PERCENT OF US STILL LOOKING FOR PETTY PAY JUST TO EAT BEFORE WE SHOOT OURSELFS .
And you want us to feel for some bogus complaints about breathing.
SORRY,,,,,,,,
But your right we dont care,,Anymore than you care about us.
SO good bye ,,,Looking like you guys may win after allllll.
God bless and good health ,,,,

Reply
7/14/2010 04:38:48 am

You are not right that we don't care about the workers. Actually, we probably have more in common with the workers who probably are our neighbors.
Pulp mill workers are the victims. They get the most exposure to the cancer causing chemicals and thereby have the most cancer. We are sorry about the loss of jobs and the economic hardship. Maybe it is time for Humboldt to encourage some clean industries.

As for the breathing problems, they were not rare. Most of the people in my neighborhood experienced it. You may not care about the people who were hospitalized because of mill pollution, but it is a different thing when it is your family. We have medical records to prove hospitalization due to mill pollution especially after breakdowns. We bought air cleaners and closed all our windows, but we still could smell and taste it. We wouldn't go to all the work on this blog if we did not have a personal stake in preventing this mill from ever starting up again.

Reply
T.P
7/14/2010 05:17:16 am

Of course I and WE care about the health of familys. And your right we are your neighbors. Up untill the mill closed. I lived and raised my family on W-Grant. I worked in that mill 15yrs and 15 in another LP mill. I've seen NO greater than usual cancers in the mills.
No breathing problems with my kids or grandkids. None with my neighbors ever were expressed. And only on a few occasions were odors even detected. I,m sorry for you and yours health problems. BUT I submit that they are yours and not most others .
There for my statment of the few with complaints real or physco-sematic. Efecting the needs of so many now out of work ,,,STANDS
Most of us will now most likely have to move away to find work.Wich adds up to 1000's of individuals effected for life.
The mill has been here since 64. ANd if you and yours feel it hurt you so bad. Then if you cared for your family you would have gotten them out of here years ago IF its as bad as you claim it to be . But you stayed WHY ?. But now we move so you can breath . Do I sound mad . Come and tell my kids in person why We are effected so much .when after a life time Working there . We must leave ,,When you didnt seem to care enough to move your family for their needs.

Reply
7/26/2010 05:27:21 am

The study quoted by "freshinup" on the 13th is the HSU study of 1994 that is often quoted by Bob Simpson in support of this fantasy.

The HSU study was conducted before the current outfall was in use, it had been constructed in 1994 but the diffuser had not been installed. The study is meaningless happy talk. They didn't even test in the vicinity of the older inshore outfall.

This is at least intentionally deceptive. An abuse of our local Humboldt State University in order to spin the facts. All it proves is that the fish were happy before the discharge of 15 million gallons of sludge daily for 15 years.

have a peaceful day,
Bill

Reply



Leave a Reply.