From: Susan Hansen
Sent: Thu Jan 07 18:52:56 2016
To: YELTON-BRAM Tiffany
Cc: DECONCINI Nina; HAMMOND Joni
Subject: RE: Re: Bear Creek wastewater discharge
Importance: Normal
Tiffany,
Correct me if I am wrong but there will be no consequences for Molalla for failing to produce a legal lagoon leak test in the proscribed initial timeframe - no consequences for an entire year's delay?
And what about all that discharge into Bear Creek - when will DEQ rule on that issue, since this is the second discharge in 8 months by Molalla of wastewater into Bear Creek.
Susan Hansen
Bear Creek Recovery
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yelton-bram.tiffany@deq.state.or.us
> Sent: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 02:00:49 +0000
> To: foxglovefarm@inbox.com
> Subject: RE: Re: Bear Creek wastewater discharge
>
> Hello Susan
> The two letters are correct. I made some errors in my conversation with
> you on the phone. To assist, here is a chronology of what happened--
> -A lagoon leak test was required as a condition of the permit. The leak
> test results were submitted in September 2015 but were inconclusive
> -DEQ replied with the attached warning letter and memo. This gave
> Molalla to January 25, 2016, to complete an audit of the leak test.
> -The city's attorney contacted DEQ in late November to propose an
> alternative to an audit of the existing test
> -DEQ was supposed to meet with Molalla on December 3rd but that meeting
> was cancelled by the city
> -On December 4th, the city's attorney sent the letter that you have
> proposing the alternative to the audit. The cancelled December 3rd
> meeting was rescheduled to December 10th.
> -Rainstorms began on December 7th. The city asked to cancel the December
> 10th meeting to attend to storm related issues. DEQ agreed and drafted
> the December 7th letter that you have.
>
> This is where I made my mistake. I forgot that we decided to send the
> letter in advance of having the rescheduled meeting, which is now set for
> January 11 and will go into greater detail about expectations on the work
> that the city will do to be able to conduct an accurate test.
>
> The option of requiring the city to drill monitoring wells is still open.
>
> Also attached is the report from the city on the discharge to Bear Creek
> that you requested in your Public Records Request.
>
>
> Tiffany Yelton Bram
> WQ Source Control Manager
> Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
> 700 NE Multnomah St., Suite #600
> Portland OR 97232
>
> Desk 503 229 5219
> Mobile 503 975 0046
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Susan Hansen [mailto:foxglovefarm@inbox.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 3:14 PM
> To: YELTON-BRAM Tiffany
> Cc: DECONCINI Nina
> Subject: FW: Re: Bear Creek wastewater discharge
>
> Dear Tiffany, here is the exchange we are questioning - it sounds like
> David Cole is giving them till August 2016. Please explain whether these
> are official or not - they are posted on the city website. Susan
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Susan Hansen [mailto:foxglovefarm@inbox.com
>>> <mailto:foxglovefarm@inbox.com>]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 12:39 PM
>>> To: YELTON-BRAM Tiffany
>>> Cc: DECONCINI Nina
>>> Subject: Bear Creek wastewater discharge
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Tiffany,
>>>
>>> I failed to note exactly what the rule was about when a violation
>>> period would end and a new one might begin on the issue of Molalla's
>>> discharge of wastewater into Bear Creek. You mentioned there would have
>>> to be a certain period of dry weather and then if discharge had to
>>> continue or begin again it would trigger another violation. Could you
>>> please furnish the exact way that rule goes and tell me how DEQ keeps
>>> track of that issue of a period without rainfall?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Susan Hansen
>>> Bear Creek Recovery
>>>
>>> <Molalla-Final-Permit.pdf>
>>