A City Council commission wants to ask the state to delay the wastewater discharge permit for Georgia-Pacific’s Palatka paper mill and further study its environmental impacts.
In a 6-5 vote, the Council’s Waterways Commission approved Resolution 2011-607, introduced by Council member Jim Love. The resolution is scheduled to be considered by Council committees next week.
The resolution asks the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to delay the process of issuing Georgia-Pacific a wastewater discharge permit that would allow its Palatka paper mill to discharge treated wastewater directly into the St. Johns River.
It currently discharges into Rice Creek, a tributary of the St. Johns.
“The Council acknowledges that irreparable harm could result from Georgia-Pacific’s
construction of a four-mile wastewater discharge pipeline that will deposit pollution into the St. Johns River, which flows to Jacksonville,” states the resolution.
“The City Council is concerned that the full economic and environmental impacts of Georgia-Pacific’s wastewater discharge have not been fully studied specifically as to the impacts to the St. Johns River downstream from the discharge point,” states the resolution.
It further requests “that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection conduct a more comprehensive and thorough chemical engineering analysis of Georgia-Pacific’s waste stream and ongoing pollution problems and review all viable alternatives to the pipeline prior to issuing a permit in favor of Georgia-Pacific’s request to discharge waste water into the St. Johns River.”
The status of the permit became a little confusing when Melissa Long, water facilities manager with the department, was asked to explain whether Georgia-Pacific could discharge into the St. Johns River if the four-mile pipeline it is constructing to the river was completed.
She explained that the 2002 permit allowed Georgia-Pacific to discharge into the St. Johns.
“If they’ve had a permit since 2002, then why can’t they just build a pipeline and discharge into the river?” asked Council member John Crescimbeni, vice chair of the commission.
“They can. The permit right now is for discharge into the St. Johns River,” said Long.
Crescimbeni asked how the resolution would be received by the state Department of Environmental Protection.
“If this commission and, subsequently, the City Council were to pass this resolution, which states that you delay issuance until the outstanding questions have been answered, do you perceive that as unfriendly to the process?” said Crescimbeni.
“Yes,” said Long. “Because I believe we have done all the things stated in the resolution. I think we have been going through this process for a long time. I don’t think there is any reason we need to go back and do it again.
“That’s not to say that we are not open to new technologies. We are looking into other options if something else were to come about,” she said.
Long acknowledged that the federal Environmental Protection Agency still has questions about the permit.
“It’s not a question about ‘do we issue the permit or not?’ It’s just what’s in that permit. That’s what we are working on,” said Long.
The original discharge permit was granted in 2002. It states: “Construction and operation of a pipeline for a direct discharge into the St. Johns River is authorized by the (FDEP), unless permittee demonstrates an ability to meet applicable water quality standards in Rice Creek.”
Water-quality tests have shown that the mill cannot meet standards in Rice Creek and Georgia-Pacific is currently working on the pipeline to the St. Johns River.
The 2002 discharge permit expired in August 2007, but Georgia-Pacific applied for a renewal in February 2007 and FDEP administratively extended the permit while it drafts a new permit. Georgia-Pacific is working under that extension.
Georgia-Pacific spokesman Kelly Ferguson said Wednesday evening that the company had only just received a copy of the resolution and was reviewing it.
“However, we believe it contains several inaccuracies, including giving the perception that our effluent does not flow into the St. Johns River. Currently, our effluent enters Rice Creek, which then flows directly into the St. Johns,” he wrote in an email.
“The resolution also indicates that more study should be done, which denies the years of work and the $200 million in investments we’ve made to improve our effluent quality and the extensive study that has been done as part of our efforts to meet the state’s water quality standards,” he said.
“Working with the FDEP, we believe we continue to do the right things to meet our regulatory requirements and protect the health of the river,” he said.
Long explained after the commission meeting that the public will have opportunities to comment on the draft permit. The release of the draft will be advertised and public comments will be reviewed as part of the permit process.
“I want us to look at every single aspect of this wastewater issue and see if there is a better way to do it,” Love said after the meeting.
“I don’t think we have looked at every angle other than pouring hundreds of thousands of gallons of wastewater into the river that will affect my children, grandchildren and who knows how long into the future. It will be at the bottom of the St. Johns River for a long, long time,” he said.
State Rep. Lake Ray, a member of the Waterways Commission, was concerned that another round of questioning would not send the right message to businesses like Georgia-Pacific.
“I appreciate the intent of the resolution, but I’m rather concerned with what I continue to see as the process,” said Ray.
“This application has been around for a number of years and, with talking with the FDEP, they have given me repeated assurance that it has met every criteria out there,” Ray said.
“My concern is that we continue the same process, never having certainty of completion. If we keep moving the goalposts on someone, then no one has any assurances of ever being able to do anything,” he said.
St. Johns Riverkeeper Neil Armingeon warned that not answering the questions could also extend the process.
“Whether this resolution moves forward or not, I think it sends a message that this community has some concerns about this process. The process has not been completed and it will not be completed until a draft discharge permit is issued, whatever the process the FDEP goes through,” said Armingeon.
“The way to ‘certainty’ is to seek the solution that all parties agree to, as opposed to coming up with a solution, in my opinion, that is unacceptable. Then we go into the legal arena. That’s where we are headed,” he said.
The resolution will be reviewed by the Council Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee Monday and Recreation, Community Development, Public Health and Safety Committee Tuesday. It could be sent to the full council Sept. 27.
Voting for the resolution were commission members Gary Anderson, Lane Burnett, Caryn Carriero, Scott Shine, Crescimbeni and Council member Don Redman.
Voting against the resolution were Ray, Council Vice President Bill Bishop, Stephen Swann, Ed Fleming and Ray Pringle.
Commission member Penny Thompson was absent.
356-2466