For the Public Record:
Documented Facts
About the Threat to Greenferry Water
The picture above shows the wellheads of the two
shallow wells managed by the Greenferry Water and Sewer
District (GWSD) in Kootenai County, Idaho. Integral to a
regulated community drinking water system and compliant with
Idaho Rules for Public Drinking Water Systems, these wells
lie only 300 hundred feet south of the Spokane River, bordering
the city of Post Falls. Currently, 400 Greenferry water
hookups accommodate about 1000 customers.
The Greenferry Water and Sewer District is
planning to drill a third well in the same area as the two
existing wells. Before inflation
got out of hand, the new well system was estimated to cost
about one million dollars. A third well would provide
additional underserved firefighting flow and allow
new customer hookups.
In the above photo we can see the
Greenferry wells marked in a red circle to the Northeast of
the proposed subdivision acreage lying inside of the green
line. The superimposed dots in the proposed subdivision area
mark the location of 57 Bayshore Estates residential lots,
each of which would require a septic tank and a 400
square-foot drain field. There is no public sewer system
available in the area so the 57 drain fields would scuttle
their toxic effluent downward into a shallow ground water
trough measuring 1500 feet north/south by 800 feet
east/west.
The fine sand and gravely silt loam of
the northern portion of the proposed subdivision acreage is
documented to be “well-drained.” Its capacity to transmit
water is “moderately high” at up to
2 inches per hour (four
feet in 24 hours). The top of the water table here is
approximately 170 feet below the ground surface. [1]
The extremely permeable sandy loam of
the southern portion of the acreage is even more
“excessively drained.” Its capacity to transmit water is
“high” with its most limiting layer able to percolate water
at up to 6 inches per hour (12 feet in 24 hours). Due to
underground gradient sloping, the top of the water table
underlying this area of the subdivision acreage is
calculated at only 125 feet below the ground surface.
[2]
As bad luck would have it, groundwater
under the proposed Bayshore Estates subdivision
flows from
the south to the north i.e., towards the Greenferry wells.
[3] Cedar Creek drainage from Blossom Mountain to the south
feeds into this reservoir, forcing water pressure under the
proposed subdivision towards the Spokane River. In addition,
the Greenferry wells create a powerful vortex that sucks
underground water towards the pumps.
Two test wells were drilled at the north
end of the proposed subdivision acreage in 2021. These test
wells responded to pumping of the Greenferry wells lying
within 450-550 feet of the test wells. [4] This visceral
interaction is momentous because the test wells were dug
precisely where clusters of septic drain fields are to be
planted if the subdivision is approved.
Older residential areas (established
decades ago) lie mostly to the north and east of the
Greenferry wells. Surface water and septic/drain field
residues from these areas percolate down into ground water.
But underground water flow is to the north towards the
river, mostly sparing the Greenferry wells at this time, it
would seem.
The Mucky New Threat Faced
by
Greenferry Water Drinkers
Each proposed Bayshore Estates septic tank/drain
field system to be embedded in highly permeable soil above
the shallow water table that feeds Greenferry wells is
considered to be an injection well. [5]
Passing through each of 57 new Bayshore Estates
“injection wells” would be approximately
300 gallons per day
of water laden with untreated sewage and household
chemicals.[6] Only sediment would remain in the tanks for
future removal. The untreated tank water would be constantly
discharged into drain fields lying about 5 feet down within
the fast-draining sands and gravels. It is an
established fact that most surface effluent,
including
precipitation, irrigation water and drain field effluent
will seep downward into the water table that feeds the
Greenferry wells.
Over the course of each year, the 57 injection
wells would produce a cumulative 6,241,500 gallons of septic
tank effluent. That discharged waste water would be measured
at 45 milligrams of nitrates per liter (45mg/l),
an extremely high dose not safe for drinking water. [7]
Nitrates are nitrogen molecules, a natural
by-product of human and animal manure. They are avoided in
drinking water because they can cause nausea, vomiting,
diarrhea, abdominal pain, confusion, coma and convulsions,
headaches, hypotension, fainting, methaemoglobinaemia,
cancer, diabetes and dementia. Nitrate pollution cannot be
boiled or chlorinated out of drinking water and it is very
expensive to mitigate. Nitrates easily combine with chemical
components to create the even more deadly and carcinogenic
nitrites. [8]
EPA has set a maximum contaminant level (MCL) in
drinking water for nitrates at
10
parts per million (ppm) (10 mg/L).
[9] Greenferry well water currently tests for nitrates at
slightly below 1 mg/L, and so does the ground water
under the proposed subdivision acreage, as
evaluated in 2021. [10]
In addition to highly toxic nitrates and
nitrites, the 57 proposed Bayshore Estates injection wells
would be loaded with a variety of noxious household
detergents, other chemicals and human pathogens that qualify
as an extreme biohazard in the age of COVID-19. [11]
Although COVID is reportedly a virus, researchers have
discovered that it routinely infects bacteria. This means
that COVID is a bacterophage and it can weaponize common
bacteria found in septage. [12]
Surface Pollution Eventually
Recharges Ground Water
People who depend on
Greenferry well water know that
dumping millions of annual gallons of septic effluent rated
at 45 milligrams of nitrates per liter above a shallow
aquifer water table has serious ramifications.
According to Idaho State ground water flow
model data provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, the
transit time of surface water, including
septage pollution, traveling
from the land surface to a water table 170 deep is under two
months. Travel time of surface water and drain field
effluent to a water table 125 feet deep
is calculated to be
only about one month. [13]
This surface water
seeping into the water table endlessly recharges the
groundwater. Recharge is defined as
water added to the aquifer through the unsaturated zone by
infiltration and percolation following precipitation events.
Eighty-five percent of precipitation becomes deep
percolation that contributes to recharge, with the most deep
percolation occurring in the months of December and January.
[14] USGS data confirms that in the Greenferry well area,
we
can expect an average volumetric recharge of about 10 inches
of surface water, including drain field pollution, to be
added to the entire water table underlying the subdivision
acreage per each year. [15]
For the last 30 years,
official documentation has accumulated showing that GWSD
wells are rooted in the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer (SVRP Aquifer). Here is a 2020 warning from the
website of the Spokane County Department of Environmental
Services:
“Several water quality
studies have been conducted over the last 25 years. Results
of these studies prove conclusively that there was
degradation of the Spokane area's drinking water in
unsewered areas. The major source of this pollution came
from the daily disposal of several million gallons of
wastewater directly into the aquifer from on-site sewage
disposal systems, i.e., septic systems, cesspools and
treatment plants.”[16]
The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality,
in cooperation with the Panhandle Health District 1, has
published many documents confirming the urgency of
protecting SVRP Aquifer water from septic pollution. One of
these documents notes that high levels of nitrates in the
Aquifer have long been a problem underneath or down gradient
from areas with intense housing growth and subsurface sewage
disposal systems. It warns:
“Geohydrologic analysis of the Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer indicates high porosities, permeability's and
transmissivities. Groundwater flow is calculated in some
places to be in excess of 50 feet/day…. Soils developed over
the Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer are well drained to excessively
well drained [exactly like the Greenferry well area.]
The absence of major restrictive layers in the unsaturated
zone results in high potential for contamination from
surface activities. Water quality testing has linked nitrate
contamination of the aquifer with high usage of subsurface
sewage disposal systems….It has already been shown that
nitrates from septic systems are leaching into the
aquifer….Nitrate is extremely stable, soluble in water and
extremely mobile.” [17]
It’s All About the SVRP
Aquifer
In the complex world of Idaho State and
Kootenai County regulatory processes, the perpetual dumping
of nasty effluent from cluster septic systems into sandy
soil above the Greenferry public water supply
apparently
matters only if that water supply is officially considered
to be part of the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer.
Since December
1977, Idaho State law (IDAPA 41.01.01) mandates
only one septic tank per five acres
in SVRP Aquifer zones where there is no sewage treatment
facility available. This law is commonly called the
Five-acre Rule. The rule actually pre-dates the sole source
designation of the SVRP Aquifer by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
In 1978 the EPA published its sole source
aquifer designation for the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie.
That EPA Notice of Intent calls for special care of the SVRP
Aquifer and it mandates focused management of sewage
wastewater. The SVRP Aquifer boundary map produced for this
Notice established the southern SVRP Aquifer boundary as
conveniently lying on the easy-to-define north edge of the
Spokane River. This administrative boundary line,
established 44-year years ago with “limited hydrogeological
data,” [18] has never been legally modified through
legislative rule-making.
By 1992, as both Idaho and Washington regulators
doubled down to study and safeguard the SVRP Aquifer, much
additional hydrogeological data had accumulated. The SVRP
Aquifer boundary began to take on new parameters in official
documents published by both states. That year, the
Department of Environmental Quality (Coeur d’ Alene Region),
and Panhandle Health District 1 cooperated with the Spokane
County Water Management Program to produce an informational
flyer showing SVRP Aquifer boundary evolution. These
agencies used federal funding to produce and circulate this
informational flyer.
The flyer includes the map below showing that
the Greenferry Water and Sewer District area south of the
Spokane River lies inside of the SVRP Aquifer boundary.
You can see a dotted line delineating the
southern boundary of the SVRP Aquifer. The arrow points to
the little pucker of land south of the Spokane River that
contains the Greenferry wells and the proposed Bayshore
Estates Subdivision area. Notice that there is also quite a
sizeable amount of land to the east within the dotted line
south of the river.
Now look below to confirm that this SVRP Aquifer
boundary map published thirty years ago was credited to both
the Idaho DEQ and Panhandle Health, Northern Region. Note
that funding for the map is provided by none other than the
EPA which had established the old 1978 boundary line.
In 2001, Idaho DEQ conducted an assessment
report on Greenferry well number one (well number two was to
be drilled later that year). The report stated that the
operating well was “pumping from the Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer.” It stated that evaluation points were marked
against the well because “both the casing and the seal
terminate in porous material typical of the Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer.” It stated that the well scored six out of six
points possible for hydrologic sensitivity because soils
that drain rapidly are less protective of ground water and
therefore, the well is “moderately susceptible to all
classes of contaminants, mostly because of natural risk
factors associated with the geology of the Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer.” The report also stated that septic systems
“are a
significant potential contaminant source” for Greenferry
water. [19]
Later in 2005, the U. S. Geological Survey, the
premier mapping agency of the federal government, completed
a detailed hydrogeological investigation of the SVRP
Aquifer, which included an update to the aquifer boundary.
This investigation extended the aquifer boundary to include
numerous areas south of the Spokane River, including the
Greenferry wells. The updated USGS boundary is identified by
the green line on the above aerial picture of the Bayshore
Estates Subdivision acreage, as compared to the blue line
which is the outdated 1978 EPA boundary line along the
northern shore of the Spokane River. [20] The green line
boundary delineates the same pucker seen on the 1992
DEQ/Panhandle Health flyer.
In addition, the most
updated hydrogeological information now available from the
Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) shows that the
Greenferry wells are completed in sandy soil within the
Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. A 2020 letter
from IDWR hydrogeologist Daniel Sturgis states: “In
Idaho, the SVRP Aquifer is composed of primarily sands and
gravels related to the outburst flood from Glacial Lake
Missoula. Wells logs on record for the Greenferry system
show their wells are completed in sands and gravels….
The 2005 USGS investigation extended the
aquifer boundary to include areas south of the Spokane
River, including the Greenferry wells.
The IDWR is in the process of
completing an updated investigation of the SVRP Aquifer
boundary. This investigation also finds the Greenferry wells
to be completed in the SVRP Aquifer.” [21]
Greenferry Water Drinkers
(Stakeholders)
Are Greatly Alarmed
Seen above are two children who obtain
their drinking water from GWSD wells rooted in the SVRP
Aquifer. They are holding a stream of flagging approximately
125 feet long. The distance between the children represents
the meager depth of sandy, fast draining sands and gravels
that lie above the top of the shallow water table at the
southern portion of the proposed Bayshore Estates Subdivision
acreage. We can see from this visual why fast-moving
effluent from numerous septic systems could quickly
infiltrate the water table that feeds the adjacent
Greenferry wells.
In 2021, studies of the GWSD wells
conducted by IDWR revealed that the water table in the
Greenferry well area actually rises in the summer due to
spring runoff. In July 2021, the water level rose by 17
feet, a phenomenon which, according to IDWR hydrogeologist
Daniel Sturgis, can be expected every summer. [22] This
would indicate that in July 2021, the water table at the
south end of the proposed subdivision acreage was
approximately 108 feet below the surface exactly where new
cluster drain fields are to be congregated for Bayshore
Estates. The year 2021 was a period of extreme drought. In a
year with normal or above average precipitation, the summer
water table could perhaps rise even higher than 17 feet.
A rising water table level in summer
obviously reduces the transit time of down-draining surface
effluent. And this rising water level occurs at a seasonal
time when people use millions of gallons of irrigation water
on their lawns and gardens. Like precipitation, irrigation water helps carry drain field effluent, lawn chemicals/pesticides and road toxins downward into the water table below.
Stakeholders Have Been Ignored
for Years
In 2018, the developer of the proposed Bayshore
Estates Subdivision applied to Kootenai County for an
extension to his Conditional Zoning Development Agreement
allowing two houses per acre. The Greenferry water community
was acutely aware of the septage threat to Greenferry wells,
so many people submitted petitions plus written and oral
testimony to regulators and Kootenai County officials. [23]
These passionate pleas for more rational planning fell on
deaf ears.
In July 2020, Kootenai County Community
Development recommended preliminary approval of the Bayshore Estates
Subdivision with 57 residential lots. This was despite many
new petitions and public statements reflecting continued
community fears about water degradation. The recommendation
quickly moved to the Kootenai County Board of Commissioners
for final approval.
Once again, hundreds of people dependent upon
Greenferry water urgently petitioned the commissioners
to require that the Bayshore
Estates development group either sewer the subdivision or
abide by the Five-acre Rule. Stakeholders also requested
that the commissioners grant a special hearing on the
subject and the Greenferry issue made local newspaper
coverage.
Fortunately, the commissioners did grant a
special public hearing to be held on Sept 10, 2020. However,
that hearing was remanded (delayed) when the commissioners
received confirmation that DEQ had recommended--and the
Greenferry Water and Sewer District Board had requested--
that the Bayshore Estates developer conduct a Nutrient
Pathogen Evaluation in order to determine whether the
Bayshore Estates project would indeed constitute a public
health threat to Greenferry water.
By Oct 30, the Bayshore Estates developer
completed a Level 1 Nutrient-Pathogen evaluation (NPE) which
produced only simplified and incomplete assumptions. In
November, DEQ opted to require that the developer continue
on with a more detailed Level Two NPE to include test wells.
DEQ Remediation Manager Gary Stevens informed the
Department of Community Development:
“Given the proposed
Bayshore Estates lot sizes are approximately ½ acre and the
subsurface conditions appear to consist of coarse-grained
sediment that would allow the rapid transport of
contaminants to the underlying aquifer, there is an
increased potential for ground water quality impacts and the
site would not meet the acceptable conditions for a Level
1.” [24]
Also in November, during the reprieve granted by
pending studies, Stakeholders went on the
offensive. Idaho law, specifically the Ground Water Quality
Rule, provides remedy for threatening situations like that
faced by the GWSD. Stakeholders submitted a detailed
petition to the State of Idaho,
asking the Idaho Board of Environmental
Quality to officially recategorize the aquifer underlying
the Greenferry wells and surrounding area as a sensitive
resource aquifer at risk. Stakeholders presented the Board
with documentation showing that the water source feeding
Greenferry wells have long been confirmed by various
agencies to lie within the southernmost SVRP Aquifer
boundary.
Regulators Close Ranks to Block
the
Petition for Recategorization
During a Zoom meeting with the
Board of Environmental Quality in February 2021, the
Stakeholder petition was rejected by the Board. This was
upon recommendation of Boise DEQ officials who warned that
if petitioners were to be granted aquifer recategorization
status, the entire SVRP Aquifer boundary across two states
would have to be officially reconfigured. DEQ also warned
that a recategorization effort could take years to thread
through various channels of government, including the Idaho
legislature. [25]
DEQ made it clear that even if the State of
Idaho were to officially recategorize the Greenferry well
area as part of a vulnerable water resource, only officials
at the Panhandle Health District can grant the Greenferry
wells protection under the Five-acre Rule. [26] Stakeholders
find this very peculiar since the 5-acre Rule is applied
under Idaho State law.
Panhandle Health District policies are governed by a
Board of Health appointed by county commissioners of five
northern Idaho counties. Unfortunately, a group of unelected
officials at Panhandle Health District 1 in Kootenai County
have stated that they are unwilling to grant the Greenferry
water community equal rights under
the Five-acre
Rule as enforced by Idaho State law for
all other
SVRP Aquifer water systems since December 1977. They claim
that Idaho law irrevocably binds them to the ancient
and obsolete 1978 EPA boundary that excludes Greenferry
water.
Erik Ketner, environmental health section
manager for Panhandle Health, told Kootenai County in 2020
that PHD recognizes that current information supports the
SVRP Aquifer extending into the Bayshore Estates Subdivision
area, but that rulemaking and legislative approval would be
necessary to amend the current boundary. [27] Ironically, an
earlier generation of Panhandle Health officials were not so
bound, when in 1992 they used EPA funds to circulate the
above referenced SVRP Aquifer flyer showing the Greenferry
well area as part of the SVRP Aquifer protection zone. Of
course, this contradictory situation now leads to much
public confusion and anguish.
Regulators who insist that the 1978 boundary
line excludes the Greenferry wells claim that the GWSD wells
draw from a general resource aquifer. [28] Therefore,
according to their reckoning, Greenferry water is a source
less worthy of protection from septage pollution than ground
water derived north of the Spokane River. However, the State
of Idaho Ground Water Quality Rule clearly provides the
possibility of recategorization protection for
even lowly
general resource aquifers. The Rule states that when a
petition to recategorize a portion of a general resource
aquifer is submitted to the Board of Environmental Quality,
the proper criteria is that the aquifer is used for drinking
water and is in danger of activity that would degrade ground
water quality. [29] This was mentioned in Stakeholders’
petition to the state, but it was ignored by the Board of
Environmental Quality.
Just before Stakeholders met
with the Board of Environmental Quality to discuss the
petition for recategorization of the aquifer at risk, IDWR
officials ran for cover. They sent a letter to DEQ
stating that current IDWR boundary studies are part of an
investigation intended only for discussion and informational
purposes. They reported that IDWR is not currently pursuing
an update to the 2002 ground water management boundary
(defined by the Spokane River). They stated that IDWR must
complete its current evaluations, then form an advisory
committee that could decide to propose boundary alterations.
[30] This slow-motion fiddle faddle will undoubtedly take
years.
Naturally, the IDWR letter
provided further discouragement to the Board of
Environmental Quality in regards to Stakeholder request for
recategorization. This concerted determination by multiple
agencies to block recategorization seems a blatant
contradiction of the Ground Water Quality Rule which states:
“It is the policy of the State of Idaho to maintain and
protect the existing high quality of the State’s ground
water.”
The Greenferry
Water and Sewer District
Board Is Under Pressure
Under duress from the Bayshore
Estates development group to provide water for the proposed
subdivision, the GWSD Board has long expressed serious
concern about pollution from the large number of septic
systems required for the subdivision.
When the Bayshore Estates
developer submitted his 2018 rezone extension request to the
county, GWSD manager John Austin wrote a series of three
letters referencing the Board’s concern that well water
contamination might occur from high-density septic tank
introduction. [31]
In 2020, GWSD Board Chairman Steve
Tanner stated in a letter to the Kootenai County
commissioners that the water table under the proposed
57-home subdivision is completed in an alluvial fan at the
mouth of Cedar Creek where it joins the Spokane River. He
said that this situation provides a significant hydrodynamic
head which can drive groundwater and contaminants towards
the Greenferry wells. He also stated that as the District
acquires additional water rights to increase capacity of its
wells, accelerated pumping might potentially draw septic
contaminants into the wells. [32]
On January 5, 2021, the GWSD Board submitted a letter to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, stating that the Board wanted to go on record as supporting the Stakeholder petition for recategorization and it stated that the Board “is very concerned about protecting the groundwater and its wells from further degradation as a result of development in the District.” The letter stated that the Board would like its wells afforded the same protection as wells located a few hundred yards to the north (of the Spokane River). It concluded that there is ample evidence that recategorization of the Aquifer is justified and appropriate. [33]
The Confined
Aquifer Controversy
During Stakeholders’ meeting
with the Board of Environmental Quality, DEQ officials
lectured the Board with a video on confined aquifers versus
unconfined aquifers like the SVRP Aquifer. A confined
aquifer has a rock or soil layer lying above the water table
that is less permeable and therefore somewhat protective
against infiltration of surface pollutants.
DEQ Boise officials told the
Board that it is possible that the Greenferry wells may be
drilled into a confined aquifer since the static water level
in the well pipes is higher than the water table below. This
assertion was apparently made to convince the Board that 57
septic systems “bleeding” into a general resource aquifer
beneath the Bayshore Estates acreage would be safer than
Stakeholders fear. However, Stakeholders later discovered
from numerous well logs that many wells completed in the
unconfined SVRP Aquifer north of the river also have high
static water levels in their well casings.
DEQ later took the liberty to
pinpoint for Stakeholders a 40-foot layer of gravel which
might be construed as a confining layer. That layer, as
notated in one of the Greenferry well logs, lies at 123 feet
to 160 feet below ground surface, just above the water table
accessed by that well. [34] However, even if that layer of
gravel were to be less permeable than upper layers, it is
useless as a confining layer under the 28 subdivision acres
to the south. Why? Because the top of the water table
on the south end of the subdivision acreage is calculated to
lie only 125 feet beneath the ground surface, which is
higher than the supposed confining gravel band above the
deeper ground water table in the Greenferry well area.
In order to be somewhat
protective, a confining layer would have to be uniform
across the entire subdivision acreage, which is highly
unlikely since the water table slants downwards from the
south towards the north, leaving gravel and rock layers to
vary as the earth descends towards the Greenferry wells. The
engineer who completed the Level 2 NPE study did not use
confining metrics in his computer modeling. He admitted that
if confining layers do exist under the subdivision acreage,
there are no studies to describe how such layers permit
leakage into the water table. [35] This information is
mentioned here to illustrate that DEQ’s confined aquifer
hypothesis for the Greenferry situation does not hold water.
Should a
Developer-financed Study
Condemn Greenferry Wells?
On September 3, 2021 the
Bayshore Estates development group submitted to DEQ its
required Level Two Nutrient Pathogen Evaluation. [36] The
study was funded by the developer. The engineer he selected
to complete the study reportedly had never completed NPE
modeling studies prior to the Bayshore Estates project.
1. The Level 2 NPE report
states that the Greenferry wells and the proposed
subdivision acreage do not lie over the SVRP Aquifer and
it confirms that calculations for the Greenferry well area
are therefore different than those used for modeling SVRP
Aquifer areas. [37]
2. The study concludes with an
“opinion” that the proposed Bayshore Estates septic systems,
producing approximately 17,100 gallons of untreated
wastewater per day, will not exceed DEQ’s
allowed 1.0 mg/L
increase of nitrate pollution within the water table at the
compliance boundary of the proposed subdivision.
3. The study concludes that
sediments appear to be sufficiently deep for adequate
dispersion of septic effluent volume.
4. The study contains no
pathogen transport studies because DEQ states in its
Nutrient-Pathogen Evaluation guidelines that such studies
“cannot be done with enough certainty to be useful.”
[38]
5. The NPE concludes with
this disclaimer: “No warranty, either expressed or implied,
is offered, made, or intended…. Our professional opinions
and recommendations are based on limited observations and
information, and may depend on, and be qualified by,
information gathered previously by others….Property
activities and governmental regulations beyond our control
could change at any time after the completion of our site
work. Therefore, the findings, conclusions, opinions and/or
recommendations presented in the Report are valid only as of
the date of the observations or information upon which they
are based [September 3, 2021]. Even the most rigorous of
professional assessments may fail to identify all existing
conditions.” [39]
With the health of 1000 water
drinkers (and many others in the future) at stake,
Stakeholders feel uncomfortable with “opinions” and
“modeled predictions” that expired on September 3, 2021.
They also have an overwhelming disinterest in a
study which predicts negligible negative effects from
millions of gallons of drain field water leaching into the
aquifer for the next 50 years. After all, this “negative
effect” determination places in question the Five-acre Rule
enforced by Panhandle Health since 1977 across the entire
region-wide SVRP Aquifer protection zone.
In addition, Eric Ketner at
Panhandle Health has admitted to Stakeholders that no
community over the SVRP Aquifer could legally place cluster
septic tanks over the sole source aquifer by simply passing
an NPE. [40]
FIND THE
LEVEL 2 NUTRIENT PATHOGEN EVALUATION HERE
DEQ’s Response to the Bayshore Engineer’s Level 2 NPE
These DEQ letters illustrate how close the
Greenferry water community came, in 2020, to a bureaucratic
rubber-stamping of a public health disaster. When the
Department of Community Development recommended approval for
the Bayshore Estates Subdivision that year, planners,
regulators and commissioners had virtually no concept of the
numerous crucial and technical issues outlined by these
hard-won DEQ documents. Intuitive people coming together in a
great outcry are the reason why the regulatory complex is
now forced to confront this real and grave situation on a
technical basis.
Is Science
Dependent Upon a Line in the Sand?
Of special interest to
Greenferry Stakeholders is a 2016 DEQ study by Gary Stevens, which
evaluated the potential for ground water contamination by
petroleum products transported or stored over the Rathdrum
Prairie Aquifer. [42]
That study concludes that
serious SVRP Aquifer contamination would result from a
subsurface pipeline leaking a small amount (50 gallons per
day) of petroleum hydrocarbons over an extended period of
time. The report shows that this toxic material would
saturate subsurface materials in an area meters wide, create
elevated vertical hydraulic conductivities and result in
rapid downward migration into the underlying aquifer.
Millions of annual gallons of
septage from 57 drain fields inoculating the Greenferry
water table with dangerous elements may have a different
type of hydraulic head than petroleum hydrocarbons. But the
end result is ultimately the same: vertical hydraulic
conductivity and ultimate water pollution.
The DEQ report postulates that
the downward migration of petroleum hydrocarbons would
progress at about one foot per day, requiring about 200 days
to reach the SVRP Aquifer water table at 200 feet under the
ground surface. The Bayshore Estates Level 2 NPE
modeling shows a vertical hydraulic conductivity (downward
thrust) of 2 feet per day calculated for surface drainage,
which is twice the speed of movement ascribed to leaking
hydrocarbon pollution in the 2016 Stevens study.
Should hydrocarbons be
considered more pernicious than pathogen-infested
wastewater? If the NPE concludes that six million annual
gallons of nitrate-contaminated septage would be diluted
before it passes through Greenferry wells why would DEQ
worry about a mere 18,250 annual gallons of petro
hydrocarbon pollution? Would not that pollution also
be sufficiently diluted were it held to the same metric
standards as that used for septage draining into the
Greenferry water table?
More questions from
Stakeholders are these:
1.
Can mucky wastewater,
measured at 45 mg/l, seeping perpetually from 57 drain
fields downward through fast-draining gravels, be cleansed
of its nitrates, household chemicals and pathogens in only
30 to 60 days of transit time when DEQ
warns that fast-draining sands and gravels over shallow water
tables do not provide a sufficient filter for these
pollutants? [44]
2. How can a mere mathematical modeling study convince water drinkers that perpetual millions of gallons of septage draining into acreage adjacent to their wells will leave ground water pure as baby’s breath when for decades, regulators in both Idaho and Washington have documented extreme pollution in waters down-gradient from areas where subsurface sewage disposal systems were used exclusively? [45]
3. Since the Level 2 NPE
offers zero information on pathogen levels to be expected in
the Greenferry water table from 57 new sewage injection
wells, and since virus levels are not routinely tested
in public well water, can Greenferry water drinkers feel
comfortable drinking “contaminant plumes” that may pass
through their wells during a during a long-term viral
pandemic?
Greenferry Stakeholders
Suffer
Dangerous Regulatory Discrimination
The contentious SVRP boundary
argument is of supreme importance to the health and
happiness of current Greenferry water drinkers and also of
57 potential Bayshore Estates parcel buyers (2.5 persons per
household).
Hair-splitters at Panhandle
Health and DEQ dicker and bicker that the 2005 USGS Aquifer
boundary, protective of Greenferry wells, is not
“administrative.” IDWR officials say that their recent
hydrogeological studies confirm accuracy of the 2005
boundary, but they haven’t finished their paperwork.
Meantime, Stakeholders care only about what matters: the
public health first.
In 2021, Kootenai Electric
Cooperative announced in its monthly newsletter that it was
working to service over 54 new high-density subdivisions
mostly north of Interstate 90, which places most if not all
of them over the SVRP Aquifer. [46] Every one of these new
developments is sewered, per state law.
Despite past regulatory
mistakes and errors of judgment, given all of the
information outlined at this Stakeholder website, county and
state regulators have a moral obligation to demand that the
Bayshore Estates developer likewise conform to the same
reasonable regulations that currently protect all other SVRP
Aquifer communities.
Idaho has the right to manage its own resources and Idaho law gives county regulators the authority to put the safety of drinking water ahead of all other concerns. This is why Kootenai County officials are now placing the 5-acre Rule into County Code while emphasizing in an emergency ordinance how vital and important this rule is to the protection of Aquifer drinking water.
The Idaho Administrative Procedures Act Chapter 41 states in
Title 1, Chapter 01.000.01: “Nothing in this Code [Idaho
law] shall be deemed to conflict with the enactment of any
ordinance or rule placing additional restrictions or
limitations which contribute to enhancement of water, air,
land or health quality.”
Therefore,
Kootenai County, which regulates Panhandle Health District
1, can and should legally inform that agency that it may no
longer use EPA’s obsolete SVRP Aquifer boundary line of 1978
(along with the verbiage of IDAPA 41.01.01.110.03.c) to
endanger --with cluster septic tanks-- the drinking water
wells of the Greenferry Water and Sewer District. This is
especially true because the obsolete 1978 boundary was
originally drawn by the U.S. Geological Survey, the very same
federal agency which in 2005 updated that boundary to show
that the Bayshore Estates acreage and Greenferry wells lie
astride the SVRP Aquifer.
In 2022, as the battle for safe drinking water
comes to a head in the Greenferry matter, will the Idaho
regulatory establishment, along with county officials,
ultimately appease the ire of an aggressive developer,
ignore Idaho statutory guarantees of safe public drinking
water and deprive an entire community of the lawful water
protection it deserves?
If so, what will the Greenferry Water and Sewer
District Board ultimately make of that situation?
Stay tuned
for further developments.
1. Level 2 Nutrient Pathogen
Study, Project LCE-2021-002, Inland Earth Sciences,
September 3, 2021, pp. 2-3 and p. 11.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid., p. 5.
4. Ibid., p. 9.
5. Ibid., Figure 15.
6. Ibid., pp. 11-12.
7. Ibid., p. 13.
8. “Nitrate and Drinking
Water from Private Wells,” Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention,
https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/disease/nitrate.html
9. “What are U.S. Standards
and Regulations for Nitrates and Nitrites Exposure?” Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2017.
10. Level 2 Nutrient Pathogen
Study, Project LCE-2021-002, Inland Earth Sciences,
September 3, 2021, p. 8.
11. “CDA Wastewater Testing
for COVID Shows Infected People in the Community,” CDA
Press, June 10, 2020.
12. “Increase of SARS-CoV-2
RNA Load in Faecal Samples Prompts for Rethinking of
SARS-CoV-2 biology and COVID-19 Epidemiology,” Petrillo it
al., Pub Med, May 11, 2020.
13. Ground Water Flow Model
for the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, Spokane
County, Washington and Bonner and Kootenai Counties,
Idaho, U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Geological
Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5044, Prepared
in Cooperation With the Idaho Department of Water Resources,
Washington State Department of Ecology, University of Idaho
and Washington State University, page 15.
14. Ibid. p. 14.
15. Ibid. p. 15.
16. This statement was found
on the website of the Spokane County Department of
Environmental Services, October 2020.
17. The Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer Technical Report, Idaho Department of Health and
Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality, August 1988. See
Abstract and pp. 31-34.
18. Limited data for the 1978
EPA Notice of Intent was confirmed by IDWR hydrogologist
Daniel Sturgis in his June 2020 letter to Stakeholders in
which he stated that current IDWR studies show Greenferry
wells are completed in the SVRP Aquifer.
19. Susceptibility Analysis Worksheet for Greenferry Well Number 0ne, State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, July 12, 2001.
20. Compilation of Geologic, Hydrologic, and Ground-Water Flow Modeling Information for the Spokane Valley—Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, Spokane County, Washington, and Bonner and Kootenai Counties, Idaho Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5227 Ecology, U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey, Prepared in cooperation with the Idaho Department of Water Resources and the Washington Department of Ecology.
21. Letter from IDWR technical hydrogeologist
Daniel Sturgis to Stakeholders, July 7, 2020.
23. Copious public testimony
on the Bayshore Estates rezone issue in regards to water
safety can be found in public records filed by the Kootenai
County Department of Community Development.
24. Letter from DEQ
Remediation Manager Gary Stevens to David Callahan, Director
of Kootenai County Development regarding a Level Two
Nutrient Pathogen Evaluation, November 10, 2020.
25. This is confirmed by
letter from DEQ Drinking Water Protection Administrator Jerri
Henry to Stakeholders, May 27, 2021.
26. Ibid.
27. Ketner’s statement is
found in the Amended Staff Report of the Kootenai County
Department of Community Development in the Matter of the
Application of Bayshore Estates, November 12, 2020.
28. Gary Stevens, DEQ Waste
and Remediation Manager, Northern Region met by Zoom with
the Greenferry Water and Sewer District Board on September
21, 2020. Stevens advised the Board that Greenferry well are
not completed in the SVRP Aquifer, but within a “general
resource aquifer.”
29. Ground Water Quality Rule
IDAPA 58.01.11, Management of Activities With the Potential
to Degrade Aquifers, Section 301.
30. Letter from Daniel
Sturgis, technical hydrogeologist with Idaho Department of
Water Resources to DEQ Remediation Manager Gary Stevens,
January 5, 2021. This letter was in response to DEQ’s
request for information on the various boundary maps
submitted with the Sturgis June 2020 letter to Greenferry
Stakeholders in which Sturgis stated that his studies show
that the Greenferry wells are completed within the SVRP
Aquifer.
31. Letter from the Greenferry
Water and Sewer District Board to Kootenai County Community
Development, February 2018; Letter from the Greenferry Water
and Sewer District Board to Kootenai County Community
Development, July 18, 2018; Letter from the Greenferry Water
and Sewer District Board to Kootenai County Community
Development, Received August 10, 2018.
32. Letter from the
Greenferry Water and Sewer District Board to Kootenai County
Commissioners dated September 2, 2020.
33. Letter dated January 5,
2020 from the Greenferry Water and Sewer Board of Directors
to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality re:
Petition to the Idaho Board of Environmental Quality for
Recategorization of a Portion of the Aquifer at Risk
Pursuant to IDAPA 58.01.23. This letter was
signed by all GWSD Board members.
34. Email from DEQ Ground
Water Bureau Chief Ed Hagan, dated February 17, 2021, to
Stakeholders regarding a gravel layer lying under the ground
at 123 to 163 feet above Greenferry well drilled in 1989.
35. Level 2 Nutrient Pathogen
Study, Project LCE-2021-002, Inland Earth Sciences,
September 3, 2021, p. 11.
36. Level 2 Nutrient Pathogen
Study, Project LCE-2021-002, Inland Earth Sciences,
September 3, 2021.
37. Ibid. pp. 2-3.
38. Nutrient Pathogen
Evaluations, Department of Environmental Quality,
revision date May 6, 2002, p. 4.
39. Level 2 Nutrient Pathogen
Study, Project LCE-2021-002, Inland Earth Sciences,
September 3, 2021, Disclaimer, p. 13.
40. E-mail from Environmental
Health Section Manager for Panhandle Health Erik
Ketner to Greenferry Stakeholders, October 5, 2020:
Ketner stated: “IDAPA 41.01.01 does not include
considerations for utilizing an NP analysis to bypass the
minimum five acre requirement for parcels created after 1977
located within the designated Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer
boundary identified in the rule [the 1978 EPA boundary map].”
41. Letter from DEQ Waste
Management and Remediation Manager Gary Stevens to
Lake City Engineering, dated October 7, 2021.
42. An Evaluation for
Potential Ground Water Contamination by Transport of
Petroleum Products over the Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer,
Ground Water Investigation Report DEQ CRO-01-16, June 2016.
43. Level 2 Nutrient Pathogen
Study, Project LCE-2021-002, Inland Earth Sciences,
September 3, 2021, Summary of Selected Model Parameter
Values, p. 12.
44. DEQ has confirmed that
fast-draining sandy soils over the RSVP Aquifer do not
provide sufficient filtering for septic contamination. In an
e-mail to Stakeholders dated August 13, 2020, DEQ official
Dan McCracken stated: “The
purpose of one dwelling per five acres on septic systems
over the aquifer is to protect the aquifer from potential
contamination from septic effluent. Septic systems rely on
microorganisms in the soils to treat water as it drains
through the soils in a drain field. The soils over the
aquifer drain very quickly [as do the soils of the 28
Bayshore Estates acreage] due to the amount of sand, gravel
and cobble which make the aquifer more vulnerable to the
density of drain fields. We use sewers and centralized
treatment systems in areas over the aquifer that are
developed to a higher density.”
45. The Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer Technical Report, Idaho Department of Health and
Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality, August 1988,
Abstract and pp. 31-34.
46. Powerlines,
Kootenai Electric Newsletter for Cooperative members, August 2021.