Testimony House Committee on Environmental Resources and Energy January 29, 2014 House Bill 1565 Stream Buffers
House Committee on Environmental Resources and Energy Hearing January 29, 2014 – Testimony by Mr. Brian Oram Geologist, Soil Scientist, Educator, and Citizen of Pennsylvania
My name is Brian Oram and I wanted to thank you for this opportunity. I am a licensed professional geologist, soil scientist, and owner of B.F. Environmental Consultants, Inc. I am lifelong resident of Northeastern Pennsylvania and currently reside in Dallas, Luzerne County. I am here today as a citizen and licensed professional in Pennsylvania in support of House Bill 1565.
The proposed house bill makes a slight change to the Clean Streams Law which would eliminate the requirement to use or install an arbitrary 100 foot riparian buffer on all streams and 150 foot a riparian buffer zone for EV and HQ streams. The proposed wording change for HB 1565 is as follows:
“(c) The use or installation of riparian buffers and riparian forest buffers shall not be required under this section. Riparian buffers and riparian forest buffers may be used as a choice among best management practices, design standards and alternatives to minimize the potential for accelerated erosion and sedimentation and to protect, maintain, reclaim and restore water quality and for existing and designated uses.”
The reasons that I support this proposed change:
1. This proposed change in the law will not result in the destruction of riparian zones or significant encroachment or disrupt of these zones because existing environmental permitting processes are already in place to protect these areas. The change in the law will permit the development of a site that permits the design professionals to evaluate all alternatives and select the approach that limits disturbance and manages the potential impacts.
Riparian zones can be divided into three broad zones:
a. Active Zone is the area within the banks of the stream and the channel bottom;
b. Zone 1 is typically associated with the floodway and floodplains; and
c. Zone 2 is typically associated with wetland areas, organic soils, and other transition zones.
Under the current laws in PA, the floodway, floodplains, and delineated wetland areas are protected from direct development and encroachment. With respect to floodways and wetland areas, there are existing permit processes in place to address issues related to encroachment into these zones.
2. The proposed legislative change allows for use of riparian buffers as a site-specific BMP as a function of the stream classification. This approach is consistent with the criteria for HQ and EV streams as already outline in Chapter 93. (Currently, the Chapter 102 regulation is a standard not based on science or a site-specific analysis, but a universally applied arbitrary mandate).
The proposed legislation permits the establishment of riparian buffers zones or maintaining specific riparian buffers that are based on a site-based criteria/analysis. This analysis includes the nature of the proposed development, proposed management system, current conditions, stream classification, and the water quality criteria/biological criteria provide in the law. The proposed change will ensure that riparian buffers are sized and utilized in a manner that is consistent with the provisions of the Clean Streams Law.
3. The proposed change will prevent negative impacts to current or future stream quality.
In most cases, the concept around forest riparian zones is based on the principle that the zone is actively used to manage uncontrolled flow or to control nutrients and sediment. When projects use engineering controls, such as: bioretention devices, rain gardens, wet detention ponds, water reuse, land-based irrigation systems, groundwater recharge, and peak flow retention, treatment is provided by a combination of engineering controls and non-engineering controls that occur and are managed outside of the stream side “riparian zone” and/or wetland areas.
4. Many of the recommendations related to the size of a riparian buffer assume the buffer is the main active control system for post- construction stormwater management and includes provisions that will protect wildlife habitat.
For engineered projects, riparian buffers should not and are not the main system that is used to control sediment, water flow, volume reduction, or even nutrient control. These riparian buffer’s primary role is to further polish that water after it already meets design criteria. However, DEP’s current guidance suggests transporting managed water through the buffer in a pipe or swale directly to the receiving waterbody, which is inconsistent with the true role of the riparian buffer zone.
Criteria for riparian buffers- Buffers and set-backs for a stormwater management system should be based solely on maintaining in stream quality, downgradient use provisions, and biological criteria that are part of Chapter 93. Riparian buffers should not be established in stormwater management regulations to protect the general wildlife habitat for the watershed. Chapter 93 provides wildlife protection to High Quality Waters if the water is a Class A Wild Trout Stream or where the Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish resulted in a score of 83 % compared to a reference site. (Chapter 93)
RIPARIAN BUFFERS: WHAT ARE THEY and HOW DO THEY WORK? (http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/publications/BMPs/table.html
“Most decisions about buffer widths will be a compromise between ideal widths based on environmental goals (wildlife corridors, bank stabilization, and water quality protection) and sociologic or economic constraints. Science-based criteria, for which research data may be available to support an informed decision, include the functional value of the water resource; watershed, site, and buffer characteristics; adjacent land use; and buffer function. The functional value of the water resource is important for determining buffer width in that a highly valued resource may merit a wider buffer for increased protection.”
5. A project can use a riparian buffer zone as an additional management tool, but the minimum buffer should be based on site-specific analysis. This analysis should be site and project specific and be done by licensed professionals and not an arbitrary non-scientific approach.
In the long-run, an arbitrary buffer zone will result in inadequate protection in areas with larger streams were a project proposes using little or no engineering control systems. The minimum size of a riparian buffer zone should be site-specific and a function of the proposed project and proposed engineering and non-engineering controls. The regulations, with this proposed change, will be more effective if they are less restrictive and permit the licensed professional in the state of Pennsylvania to make decisions based on the site-specific conditions, proposed nature of the development, and long-term management for the site.
RIPARIAN BUFFERS: WHAT ARE THEY and HOW DO THEY WORK? (http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/publications/BMPs/table.html
“The current proposed buffer standards in North Carolina use a two-tiered riparian buffer: forested areas near the streams and grassed areas away from the stream. The proposed buffer width is 50 feet: 30 feet of forest and 20 feet of grass (NCDEHNR, 1997). Some streams, however, may need greater and some streams need less buffer width, depending not only on site location but also on the pollutant that is being controlled. For optimal performance, riparian forest buffer systems must be designed and maintained to maximize sheet flow and infiltration and impede concentrated flow”.
6. In Pennsylvania, we have enough examples of well-meaning guidance documents not specifically based on science and designed and package primarily in response to lawsuits. These guidance documents have caused the development of policy in PA that are ineffective, make the goals effectively unachievable, potentially creates future problems, and creates significant other unintended consequences.
Recent examples would be the legislation that developed after the PA Guidance Document on Stormwater Management and the recent attempts to regulate nitrates from individual on-lot septic systems.
We do recommend some proposed wording changes to the proposed House Bill:
With respect to the proposed House Bill, we would suggest a slight wording change to clarify the scope and intent.
We recommend the phrase “and/or” should be included in the proposed language to account for the difference in the level and type of protection afforded to EV streams and HQ streams. The level of protection afforded by the current law is not the same for EV and HQ streams.
and
We would recommend that the size of the buffer be based on a site-specific evaluation that takes into consideration the existing conditions, proposed use, proposed engineering/non-engineering controls, and the proposed long-term management that are proposed by the project.
In conclusion, it is my personal and professional opinion that the change in the regulations would put the sizing and the development of stormwater management systems in the hands of professionals that have been licensed by the State of Pennsylvania and other professionals that provide facts and science-based information to make site-specific and project specific recommendations to meet the goals and objectives of Chapter 102 and to meet the water quality standards in Chapter 93. We should not have a one-size-fits-all approach to stormwater management in Pennsylvania.
Prepared by:
Mr. Brian Oram, PG
B.F. Environmental Consultants Inc.
15 Hillcrest Drive
Dallas, PA 18612
http://www.bfenvironmental.com
http://www.water-research.net
bfenviro@ptd.net
Summary
Proposed Change DOES NOT
1. Eliminate or permit the disturbance of riparian buffers.
2. Does not waive any provisions of the law and makes using a Management Riparian Zone an Option with the size of the riparian zone based on science- therefore, it may be larger or smaller than 150 feet.
3. Provides for flexibility without reducing protection.
4. Does not create new waivers that could be challenge in the courts.
Press Release: Role of Geosciences Secretary of Interior Sally Jewell
Contact: Maureen Moses (mmoses@agiweb.org)
For Immediate Release
EARTH: Interview with Secretary of the Interior, Sally Jewell
Alexandria, VA – EARTH Magazine sits down with Secretary of the Interior Sally
Jewell to discuss the role of geoscience at the Department of the Interior,
which includes the National Park Service, the U.S. Geological Survey and the
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which oversees the offshore development of
both renewable and conventional energy resources.
Secretary Jewell, who began her career as a petroleum engineer, discusses the
role of science in reconciling conflicts in the management of federal lands, and
shares how her transition from the private sector, where she was chief executive
officer of Recreation Equipment, Inc., has provided insight into the management
of DOI’s 70,000 federal employees, and the new 21st Century Conservation Corps
initiative (http://21csc.org/)
Read more online and in the April issue of EARTH Magazine: (http://bit.ly/1dP2DI0)
###
Keep up to date with the latest happenings in Earth, energy and environment news
with EARTH magazine online at http://www.earthmagazine.org/. Published by the
American Geosciences Institute, EARTH is your source for the science behind the
headlines.
###
The American Geosciences Institute is a nonprofit federation of 50 geoscientific
and professional associations that represents more than 250,000 geologists,
geophysicists and other earth scientists. Founded in 1948, AGI provides
information services to geoscientists, serves as a voice of shared interests in
the profession, plays a major role in strengthening geoscience education, and
strives to increase public awareness of the vital role the geosciences play in
society’s use of resources, resiliency to natural hazards, and interaction with
the environment.
HB 343 ESTABLISH STATEWIDE PRIVATE WATER WELL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (former HB 1855)
The bill authorizes the Environmental Quality Board to establish water well construction standards through the adoption of rules and regulations of the DEP that are generally consistent with the National Groundwater Association construction standards.
Specifically, the legislation would establish construction standards, including the decommissioning of abandoned wells, to be followed by water well drillers and owners. Nothing in this legislation requires the metering of homeowner wells.
p. Ron Miller (R-York) serves as Majority Chair of the Committee and Rep. Greg Vitali (D-Delaware) serves as Minority Chair.
Website Provided for Educational Purpose.
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
Join the PA Water Forum on Facebook
Private Well Owner Outreach Program
Location Change for May 1 Hearing Washington County Compressor Station
The new location – VFW Barto Post 6553 at 65 Run St. in Slovan, Washington County.
Immediately following the open house which starts at 6:30 pm- the hearing will start. The anticipated start time is at 7:30 p.m., members of the public may present up to five minutes of formal testimony for the public record. The testimony will be recorded by a court reporter and transcribed into a written document, and DEP will create a written response to all relevant testimony.
Those who wish to present oral testimony should contact DEP Community Relations Coordinator John Poister at 412-442-4203 or register that evening prior to the hearing. Only those who register can give testimony at the public hearing.
For anyone unable to attend the public hearing, written comment should be submitted by the close of business on May 11 to Alan Binder, PA DEP Bureau of Air Quality, Southwest Regional Office, 400 Waterfront Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15222.
Website Provided for Educational Purpose.
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
Join the PA Water Forum on Facebook
Private Well Owner Outreach Program
PPL battles homeowners over drilling royalty checks on forgotten land
“The families of several property owners have used the forgotten rail bed for generations. But an heir to the old Northern Electric trolley line was eventually found: PPL Electric Corp.
PPL officials didn’t even know the company owned the old rail line that once carried passengers from Scranton to Tiffany Corners, just west of Montrose. Cabot Oil & Gas Inc. untangled the mystery of the rail right-of-way last year as it sought to sign mineral leases with landowners. A savvy title searcher had a hunch that the missing link in the ownership chain may have been misfiled in Wyoming County. It was.
PPL’s ownership of the former Northern Electric is clear, but whether it can convince a court to affirm that ownership over competing claims is not as clear.
News broke when mineral rights owners looked over changes to one of the most important financial documents they will ever receive: The Pooling and Unitization Declaration which spells out the number of acres they and others own and the share of royalties they will receive. Those who thought they owned a piece of the former Northern Electric land have seen their piece of the land and royalty pie shrink.”
The rest of the story
Website Provided for Educational Purpose.
Carbon County Groundwater Guardians is a 501(c)(3) IRS approved nonprofit, volunteer organization and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
Join the PA Water Forum on Facebook
Private Well Owner Outreach Program
Experts quizzed on rare blood disorder at Tamaqua forum
http://www.tnonline.com/node/136575
Experts quizzed on rare blood disorder at Tamaqua forum
Reported on Thursday, September 23, 2010
By DONALD R. SERFASS dserfass@tnonline.com
Two years after the discovery of a higher then normal incidence of a rare blood disease in the local area, there are still more questions than answers.
On Wednesday, the Tri-County Polycythemia Vera Community Advisory Committee (CAC) sponsored a public health forum at the Tamaqua Area Auditorium, 500 Penn Street.
The meeting, attended by 75 local residents, afforded the general public an opportunity to discuss health-oriented studies aimed at determining the extent of polycythemia vera (PV) and related myeloproliferative diseases (MPDs) and their possible link to environmental conditions in the area.
Dr. Vince Seaman of the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry presented an overview of ongoing research and introduced several research leaders to answer questions about specific studies and planned activities.
They included representatives from the University of Pittsburgh, Drexel University, Geisinger Health System, the Pa. Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), and the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
Much of the discussion centered on the JAK-2 mutation and screenings. JAK-2 is part of a signaling system in the body that helps tell bone marrow when to start and stop making blood cells. Most people with PV have an acquired mutation in their JAK-2, so the bone marrow makes too many blood cells. People are not born with the JAK-2 mutation.
Dr. Seaman told attendees that Geisinger Health System and Dr. Paul Roda will perform follow-up studies of JAK-2 screenings, conduct additional studies regarding prevalence of the JAK-2 genetic marker, and will work with the medical community regarding treatment practices.
Drexel University investigators will attempt to determine factors that may contribute to the PV cluster in the Tamaqua-Hazleton area by examining environmental and occupational histories of patients with PV and MPD-related disease and comparing them with those free of the diseases.
“They will do a case control study,” said Seaman, explaining that it will compare groups of people who are sick to those who are similar but not sick.
The University of Pittsburgh team is conducting a study that will compare PV rates in the Tamaqua-Hazleton area to those in four counties in the western Pennsylvania coal region to look for similarities and differences in the two areas that might provide clues to the causes of the disease.
“They have co-gen plants there. If co-gen plants have something to do with cancer then it’ll show up there, too,” said Seaman. “The University of Pittsburgh will do a study in the area to see if the number of PV cases has increased, decreased or stayed the same, “because we can’t use Cancer Registry data for that,” explained Seaman.
More screenings, tests to come
The ATSDR has plans for additional JAK-2 screenings and also will perform air and water tests.
The agency is involved in PV data collection and a population study analysis for the JAK-2 marker on a national level “to see if there’s a continuing problem or not,” said Seaman.
The Pa. DEP is doing studies at residences and has conducted water testing, which prompted questions from Merle Wertman, Tamaqua, who’s been dealing with PV for the past seven years.
Wertman receives monthly phlebotomy treatments at St. Luke’s Miners Memorial Hospital.
“They said they took samples around the Still Creek area and didn’t find anything wrong with it,” said Wertman.
But Wertman and wife Linda cannot understand why cancer is popping up along their Washington Street neighborhood.
“We have 14 cases of cancer on our block,” said Linda.
Merle said the block has about 30 homes.
Also on hand was Emery Oakes, 57, who was diagnosed with PV when blood screenings were performed one year ago.
Because of the blood thickness associated with PV, Oakes goes to the hospital and has blood drawn every six weeks.
“They take six tubes out,” he told the TIMES NEWS. He also takes 81 mg of aspirin daily. Oakes lives in the Dutch Hill section of Tamaqua with brother Michael, 52, who tested negative for PV.
The Oakes brothers said their home was subjected to water and radon tests.
For West Penn Township resident Bill Mackey and several others, the session provided an opportunity to question the DEP about Marcellus Shale drilling.
“I want to ask them what chemicals they’re injecting into the ground for fracking. We have a cabin in Sullivan County and they’re drilling around us,” Mackey said.
The meeting was chaired by Tamaqua Mayor Chris Morrison, who urged those in attendance to spread the word about upcoming activities.
“Several of these teams will soon be conducting interviews in our area; so it is critical that we get as much information as possible.” He added: “We have a serious health threat in our area and one that may affect future generations. We need to find out why we have a cancer cluster and eliminate the cause. In the meantime we need to take good care of the patients and their families.”
Morrison credited Sen. Arlen Specter with being the impetus for the research and studies. Specter appropriated a total of $8M to investigate the blood disorder and its unusually high incidence in Carbon, Schuylkill and Luzerne counties.
Members of the volunteer CAC group vowed to continue their work in getting to the bottom of the issue.
The group has been meeting regularly and working with medical professionals, researchers, the media and the public.
“I’d like it to go faster,” said Irene Genther. “Everybody is wanting an answer.” Genther, of Nesquehoning, is a chemist with a background in education, and serves as a volunteer on the CAC board.
Like others on the board, Genther wants to find answers as quickly as possible.
Emergency drought relief loans available for farmers
http://www.tnonline.com/node/135921
Reported on Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Emergency drought relief loans available for farmers
State Rep. Keith McCall said that farmers in Carbon County are eligible to apply for low-interest emergency disaster assistance loans from the federal Department of Agriculture to help recover crop losses associated with the summer’s dry weather.
“The extreme heat and lack of rainfall has had a negative impact on Carbon County’s farmers this year, and I’m glad the federal government is making these loans available to help our farm families stay afloat and keep their farms up and running,” McCall said. “I hope every farmer affected by the drought conditions will apply for this funding.”
Farmers can apply for the loans through the Carbon County Farm Service Agency in Lehighton at (610) 377-6300 or by visiting the department online at www.fsa.usda.gov.
Besides Carbon County, 15 other counties in the region were declared primary disaster areas: Bucks, Chester, Dauphin, Franklin, Fulton, Lehigh, Luzerne, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Northumberland, Schuylkill, Snyder, Union and York.
In addition, 22 counties bordering the primary disaster area were named contiguous disaster areas: Adams, Bedford, Berks, Centre, Clinton, Columbia, Cumberland, Delaware, Huntingdon, Juniata, Lackawanna, Lancaster, Lebanon, Lycoming, Mifflin, Montour, Perry, Philadelphia, Pike, Sullivan, Wayne and Wyoming.
Farmers in all affected counties have eight months from the Sept. 10 date of disaster declaration to apply for the loans, and each application will be considered based on losses, available resources and ability to repay.
Research links pesticides with ADHD in children
May 17, 12:02 AM EDT
Research links pesticides with ADHD in children
By CARLA K. JOHNSON
AP Medical Writer
CHICAGO (AP) — A new analysis of U.S. health data links children’s attention-deficit disorder with exposure to common pesticides used on fruits and vegetables.
While the study couldn’t prove that pesticides used in agriculture contribute to childhood learning problems, experts said the research is persuasive.
“I would take it quite seriously,” said Virginia Rauh of Columbia University, who has studied prenatal exposure to pesticides and wasn’t involved in the new study.
More research will be needed to confirm the tie, she said.
Children may be especially prone to the health risks of pesticides because they’re still growing and they may consume more pesticide residue than adults relative to their body weight.
In the body, pesticides break down into compounds that can be measured in urine. Almost universally, the study found detectable levels: The compounds turned up in the urine of 94 percent of the children.
The kids with higher levels had increased chances of having ADHD, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, a common problem that causes students to have trouble in school. The findings were published Monday in Pediatrics.
The children may have eaten food treated with pesticides, breathed it in the air or swallowed it in their drinking water. The study didn’t determine how they were exposed. Experts said it’s likely children who don’t live near farms are exposed through what they eat.
“Exposure is practically ubiquitous. We’re all exposed,” said lead author Maryse Bouchard of the University of Montreal.
She said people can limit their exposure by eating organic produce. Frozen blueberries, strawberries and celery had more pesticide residue than other foods in one government report.
A 2008 Emory University study found that in children who switched to organically grown fruits and vegetables, urine levels of pesticide compounds dropped to undetectable or close to undetectable levels.
Because of known dangers of pesticides in humans, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency limits how much residue can stay on food. But the new study shows it’s possible even tiny, allowable amounts of pesticide may affect brain chemistry, Rauh said.
The exact causes behind the children’s reported ADHD though are unclear. Any number of factors could have caused the symptoms and the link with pesticides could be by chance.
The new findings are based on one-time urine samples in 1,139 children and interviews with their parents to determine which children had ADHD. The children, ages 8 to 15, took part in a government health survey in 2000-2004.
As reported by their parents, about 150 children in the study either showed the severe inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity characteristic of ADHD, or were taking drugs to treat it.
The study dealt with one common type of pesticide called organophosphates. Levels of six pesticide compounds were measured. For the most frequent compound detected, 20 percent of the children with above-average levels had ADHD. In children with no detectable amount in their urine, 10 percent had ADHD.
“This is a well conducted study,” said Dr. Lynn Goldman of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and a former EPA administrator.
Relying on one urine sample for each child, instead of multiple samples over time, wasn’t ideal, Goldman said.
The study provides more evidence that the government should encourage farmers to switch to organic methods, said Margaret Reeves, senior scientist with the Pesticide Action Network, an advocacy group that’s been working to end the use of many pesticides.
“It’s unpardonable to allow this exposure to continue,” Reeves said.
On the Net:
Pediatrics: http://www.aap.org/
EPA: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/food
Polycythemia Vera CAC workshop meeting
http://www.tnonline.com/node/47692
Polycythemia Vera CAC workshop meeting
Reported on Wednesday, November 18, 2009
The Polycythemia Vera Community Action Committee of Schuylkill, Carbon and Luzerne Counties will have a workshop meeting this Thursday, Nov. 19, at 7 p.m. at the Hometown Fire Company in preparation for a support group and myeloproliferative disorder education summit in early 2010.
The focus of Thursday’s meeting will be to share ideas for what patients need in a support group.
The types of information that polycythemia vera and other MPD patients would find beneficial for the education summit in 2010 will also be discussed. The Myeloproliferative Disorder Foundation is sponsoring both activities.
Patient’s, families, caregivers and the public are welcome to attend Thursday’s meeting. For more information, contact Joe Murphy at (570) 668-9009.