When (in January 2011) the President ordered the EPA to open its ears, and take public comments regarding its regulatory practices, Portland had an opportunity to shine a new spotlight on EPA’s LT2 regulation and the unnecessary expenditures it forces upon our city. Our City Hall submitted, via lazy online form, a handful of disjointed, poorly crafted paragraphs in which only 3 sentences even mentioned LT2. Compare that with New York City’s response to this opportunity – they submitted over 100 pages, on letterhead, with scientific data detailing the flaws of LT2 and its blunt application across all water systems – and you see in New York a city that defines action.
When (in July 2011) New York City’s meaningful, relentless efforts to extract LT2 reform (and save billions of dollars) manifested an official EPA agreement to review and reform LT2 madness, Portland had an opportunity to freeze all spending on every LT2 related project (Powell Butte tanks, Kelley Butte Tanks, Mt. Tabor disconnect). But they didn’t. Instead, our City Hall allows our Water Bureau to move forward with these projects under the claim that they were “in the long-range plan anyway”. We’ll apparently need them in 50 years; never mind we can’t afford to upkeep them for the next 50 years until we need them; never mind that we already have more storage than we can use even without these new tanks; and never mind that the “long-range plan” from which these source was written 20 years ago, based-on what have become obviously incorrect consumption projections, and that the very Consultant who wrote this “long-range plan” now hopes we’ll stick to it no-matter-what because he’ll make billions on the construction of said projects.
Those citizens that read everything related to this issue know that PolitiFact just plain doesn’t get it, that Portland’s City Hall has NOT contributed meaningfully to this fight since 2009, and that there are more than enough examples of this kind of inept inaction to make even the most polite Portlanders hot under the collar.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
Join Senator Schumer. Pretty please.
Early this summer, Mayor Blumberg of New York City blasted the EPA for failing to reform the reservoir mandate, known as LT2, even after an Executive Order directed EPA to evaluate the cost and burden of its regulations. The Wall Street Journal reported on this letter from Blumberg’s office to EPA in an article titled “City Lashes Out at EPA” (read it here).
On July 20, Senator Charles Schumer of New York ardently criticized the senselessness of LT2, its costs, and its public health value as he called on the EPA to urgently reform this piece of regulation. You can see the letter he sent the EPA, and the press release around that letter here. A quote from Senator Schumer, about the mandate to cover reservoirs:
Actions
Concerned citizens are encouraged to contact their Congressional delegations this week; press them to follow suit supporting Schumer's efforts at LT2 reform. It could save us.
Senator Ron Wyden:
Portland phone: 503-326-7525
DC phone: 202-224-5244
DC Fax: 202-228-2717
Online form: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/
Senator Jeff Merkley:
Portland Phone: 503-326-3386
Portland Fax: 503-326-2900
DC Phone: 202-224-3753
DC Fax: 202-228-3997
Online form: http://merkley.senate.gov/contact/
Representative Earl Blumenauer:
Portland Phone: 503-231-2300
Portland Fax: 503-230-5413
DC Phone: 202-225-4811
DC Fax: 202-225-8941
Online form: https://forms.house.gov/blumenauer/webforms/issue_subscribe.html
On July 20, Senator Charles Schumer of New York ardently criticized the senselessness of LT2, its costs, and its public health value as he called on the EPA to urgently reform this piece of regulation. You can see the letter he sent the EPA, and the press release around that letter here. A quote from Senator Schumer, about the mandate to cover reservoirs:
New Yorkers have seen their water bills rise year after year after year, and the last thing they should be forced to do is pay more for a hugely expensive, questionable project when more cost-effective alternatives exist. While we must ensure that our city’s water supply remains pure, there is more than one way to skin this cat, and the EPA’s rigidity here would impose an unnecessary burden on New York City rate payers without improving public health in a significant way.The coalition of businesses, public health leaders, environmental advocates, and neighborhood associations that joined together this year to press local officials for a logical approach to LT2 compliance, has now written a letter to Senator Wyden calling on our Congressional delegation to join Senator Schumer in his efforts to secure reform to this unnecessary mandate... when this letter is public, I'll link to it.
Actions
Concerned citizens are encouraged to contact their Congressional delegations this week; press them to follow suit supporting Schumer's efforts at LT2 reform. It could save us.
Senator Ron Wyden:
Portland phone: 503-326-7525
DC phone: 202-224-5244
DC Fax: 202-228-2717
Online form: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/
Senator Jeff Merkley:
Portland Phone: 503-326-3386
Portland Fax: 503-326-2900
DC Phone: 202-224-3753
DC Fax: 202-228-3997
Online form: http://merkley.senate.gov/contact/
Representative Earl Blumenauer:
Portland Phone: 503-231-2300
Portland Fax: 503-230-5413
DC Phone: 202-225-4811
DC Fax: 202-225-8941
Online form: https://forms.house.gov/blumenauer/webforms/issue_subscribe.html
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Convincing the Public
We have a water bureau administrator that doesn’t feel the need to conserve public dollars as acutely as he should. Shaff’s response to drain the reservoir was an overreaction that he himself admitted was not scientifically inspired but rather based on something he called, “the yuck factor.” This characterization is unprofessional, irresponsible, and frankly, almost unbelievable coming from a bureau director charged with managing a resource whose management is supposed to be wholly based in science. The water bureau has seized an opportunity to play on unfounded fears that will help them gain public support for unnecessary and expensive reservoir burial projects.
Several public health professionals, including one from OSU have made clear statements that there really is no public health impact from 6-8 ounces of an unwanted fluid landing in 7.8 million gallons of water. From what I saw of the surveillance video (in news reports online) it looked like the water level was low, low enough that the urine would have landed on the wall, not anywhere near the water (and likely it evaporated). It is my belief that this was a non-story, and a non-public health issue made into one to suit the PR plan.
Several public health professionals, including one from OSU have made clear statements that there really is no public health impact from 6-8 ounces of an unwanted fluid landing in 7.8 million gallons of water. From what I saw of the surveillance video (in news reports online) it looked like the water level was low, low enough that the urine would have landed on the wall, not anywhere near the water (and likely it evaporated). It is my belief that this was a non-story, and a non-public health issue made into one to suit the PR plan.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Treatment Variance application reveals a stale plant design, flawed testing, and more nonsensical behavior
This morning I read just one section of the Treatment Variance Application Portland Water Bureau submitted to the state Drinking Water Program this week. LT2 is outlandishly expensive. Even the variance is going to cost us (testing at high volumes takes money). LT2 is also completely void of benefit to us, because we don’t have the problem LT2 is trying to fix. So, to summarize, LT2 is expensive and unnecessary for Portland’s pristine Bull Run Water. And yet, in section 6.5 of the variance application PWB just filed with the state, PWB makes the case for conducting useless LT2 tests even MORE frequently and at higher volumes than LT2 requires. Wha? If a useless test is no good, then doing even more of them is better? Well, it will funnel a little more money to PWB’s consulting buddies (a.k.a. their future employers) so somebody is getting something out of this, right?
In section 6.4.2, PWB lets slip that the UV plant design we are paying for right now (to wait on the shelf, just in case we don’t get our variance) will be stale, and possibly need “updating” (cha-ching). And the land use and environmental permits they are buying now, will likely also have to be redone (cha-ching). This is good planning? I don’t generally pack my potato salad the week before the picnic, because, that isn’t actually efficient preparation. If there is the possibility the UV plant design will be STALE by the time we need it, surely they built a clause into the contract that allows for a brief review for updating. Oh no, silly me, I keep forgetting. The principle is “funnel more money” not “conserve limited public resources.”
But most upsetting of all (it gets more upsetting) is the trigger to build the $100 million UV plant and the flawed testing protocol PWB put on that trigger. With so much at stake ($100 million dollars + future operating expenses) on the line for just two inconclusive test results, wouldn’t it seem prudent to be particularly careful when negotiating the test method. We wouldn’t want to choose a test method with well-known flaws, that the scientific community has identified as producing high false positives which overstate public health risks. Yet, rather than make the case for how much the science of Crypto testing has changed since EPA suggested testing Method 1622/23 as the standard for LT2 tests, PWB stated in the variance application they would employ flawed testing Method 1622/23. Almost unexplainable.
In section 6.4.2, PWB lets slip that the UV plant design we are paying for right now (to wait on the shelf, just in case we don’t get our variance) will be stale, and possibly need “updating” (cha-ching). And the land use and environmental permits they are buying now, will likely also have to be redone (cha-ching). This is good planning? I don’t generally pack my potato salad the week before the picnic, because, that isn’t actually efficient preparation. If there is the possibility the UV plant design will be STALE by the time we need it, surely they built a clause into the contract that allows for a brief review for updating. Oh no, silly me, I keep forgetting. The principle is “funnel more money” not “conserve limited public resources.”
But most upsetting of all (it gets more upsetting) is the trigger to build the $100 million UV plant and the flawed testing protocol PWB put on that trigger. With so much at stake ($100 million dollars + future operating expenses) on the line for just two inconclusive test results, wouldn’t it seem prudent to be particularly careful when negotiating the test method. We wouldn’t want to choose a test method with well-known flaws, that the scientific community has identified as producing high false positives which overstate public health risks. Yet, rather than make the case for how much the science of Crypto testing has changed since EPA suggested testing Method 1622/23 as the standard for LT2 tests, PWB stated in the variance application they would employ flawed testing Method 1622/23. Almost unexplainable.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Bad day
Commissioner Amanda Fritz was the only Commissioner willing to stand with businesses and citizens today, and she was the only Commissioner to vote against Portland Water Bureau’s rate hike request which includes funding for millions of dollars in unnecessary and premature LT2 project spending.
Commissioners Nick Fish, Dan Saltzman and Randy Leonard had nothing to add to clarify (justify?) their vote to move forward with these expenditures, even in the face of new legal evidence there are ways to avoid replacing our reservoirs. Mayor Adams only spoke enough to put a plug in for his “Mayor’s Budget”, by way of thanking the Water Bureau for acting on his request to trim the hike by 1%.
The business community, public health community, low-income housing advocates, labor and union advocates, environmental activists, and joe citizen all oppose this move. They oppose the rate hike, they oppose the LT2 expenditures. Yet, the majority of our Commissioners voted to approve a course that will give us double digit rate hikes for years to come. It’s a bad day for a "city that works".
Commissioners Nick Fish, Dan Saltzman and Randy Leonard had nothing to add to clarify (justify?) their vote to move forward with these expenditures, even in the face of new legal evidence there are ways to avoid replacing our reservoirs. Mayor Adams only spoke enough to put a plug in for his “Mayor’s Budget”, by way of thanking the Water Bureau for acting on his request to trim the hike by 1%.
The business community, public health community, low-income housing advocates, labor and union advocates, environmental activists, and joe citizen all oppose this move. They oppose the rate hike, they oppose the LT2 expenditures. Yet, the majority of our Commissioners voted to approve a course that will give us double digit rate hikes for years to come. It’s a bad day for a "city that works".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)