Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, August 25, 1995 TAG: 9508250064
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: STEPHEN FOSTER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: BLACKSBURG LENGTH: Medium
"Considering Tech's history of willful violations of environmental regulations, the draft permit is inadequate to ensure protection of public health and the environment," said Shireen Parsons, chairwoman of the Sierra Club New River Group, at a public hearing sponsored by the state Department of Environmental Quality.
Among other things, opponents argued that Tech's plan to determine the amounts of waste that should be applied as fertilizer to various Tech fields, and a groundwater assessment plan certifying the lagoon doesn't leak should be available now, not in the months to come as the permit allows. They also argued that maps showing the location of fields where Tech will spread manure produced by more than 400 head of cattle should be available, so that neighbors could comment.
"I'm mystified" as to why Tech couldn't provide that information in the 18 months since it broke the law by releasing waste from the lagoon into a tributary of Stroubles Creek, said David Sligh, a former DEQ senior engineer and now head of the Virginia chapter of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. "This whole situation is quite absurd" he said, calling for another public notice and public hearing process.
Jeffrey Hancock, the environmental engineer who wrote the permit, addressed in his report several points that Parsons had made in a letter written to the department. For instance, he said the department was not legally required to ask for a nutrient management plan. However, it did, and the plan must be approved by the Division of Soil and Water Conservation. The division should provide a sufficient degree of regulatory oversight, he said. As for the maps, they have been available in DEQ offices for months as supporting material to the draft permit itself, he said.
Opponents of the permit were especially angered because the dairy farm's release of the lagoon waste in February 1994 was a willful violation of the law. They thought Tech should have been punished for the action, which they believe happened more than once.
Several argued that the permit could contain specific punishment if Tech fails to meet the guidelines.
They also claimed that Tech should not be allowed to monitor itself. The permit would require only two outside inspections in 10 years.
"They haven't shown much honor yet," Sligh said.
The head of Tech's dairy science department, William Vinson, attended Wednesday's hearing but did not speak.
Contacted Thursday, he said he had "expressed his disappointment" when learning that the lagoon had been partially drained after it filled to a near-bursting point, but said none the farm's employees was specifically disciplined for it. The ultimate action that will be taken, he said, is that the lagoon will not be allowed to fill up during winter months, when waste cannot be sprayed or injected into grounds that are frozen.
"We're going to empty that lagoon every fall," Vinson said.
Citizens have until Sept. 7 to comment on the permit application. The State Water Control Board will make a decision regarding the permit at its next meeting, probably in October, said W.H. Butler, a member of the board who conducted Wednesday's hearing.
by CNB