09/13/2000 - Packet Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting
Servinz Ti ard, Kinz ON, Durham and Unincorporated Area
AGENDA
Wednesday, September 13, 2000
5:30 p.m.
1. Call to Order
Motion to call meeting to order
2. Roll Call and Introductions
Staff to take roll call
1. Approval of Minutes—.August 9, 2000
Motion from Board for minute approval
4. Long Term Water Supply Update—Ed Wegner(60 minutes)
Update on long term water options
);,,Portland Wholesale Contract—Paul Matthews, IUG
➢South Fort/Clackamas Option—Phil Smith, MSA
➢Joint Water Commission—Ed Wegner
5. Informational Items
Items will be discussed briefly if time allows—otherwise printed info will be distributed
■ Portland Summer Supply—Copy of Portland Water Bureau employee newsletter which
summarizes the pumping of the South Shore Wellfields to supplement the Bull Run system.
■ Clute property—The appeal of the minor land partition was denied by the hearings officer.
■ Water Quality Concern—Email from Portland regarding discolored water. Water from one of the
eight wells currently blended with the Bull Run supply showed an elevated level of magnesium.
■ Citizen's interested in Bull Run newsletter—Newsletter does contain some interesting
information regarding the City of Portland's ability to meet future needs with current supply
■ Oregon Environmental Council Report—Copy of OEC report"The Tap Gap"
■ Oregonian article 8-9-2000—"Portland plans to tap wells to meet summer water need"
6. Public Comments
Call for any comments from public
7. Non Agenda Items
Call for any non-agenda items from Board Members. Next meeting date October 11"'
8. Adjournment—Approximate time 7.00 p.m.
Motion for adjournment
• Light dinner will be served at 5:15 p.m.
Executive Session: The Intergovernmental Water Board may go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660(1)(d),
(e), (9&(h)to discuss labor relations,real property transactions,current and pending litigation issues and to consider records that are
exempt by law from public inspection. All discussions within this session are confidential;therefore nothing from this meeting may be
disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session,but must not disclose any information
discussed during this session.
Intergovernmental Water Board
Meeting Minutes
Au ust 9 2000
Members Present; Paul Hunt, Jan Drangsholt, Bill Schederich, Patrick Carroll,
and Norm Penner
Staff Present., Ed Wegner, Kathy Kaatz, and Mike Miller
visitors; Paul Owen, Roel Lundquist and Gretchen Buehner
1. Call to Order
The regular meeting of the Intergovernmental Water Board was called to order at 5:30
p.m.
2. Roll Call and Introductions
Norman Penner is the new representative for the Tigard Water District. He replaces
Gretchen Buehner who will now be the alternate representative.
3. Approval of minutes—July i2, 2000
Commissioner Drangsholt motioned to approve the minutes of the July 12, 2000,
meeting and Councilman Paul Hunt seconded that motion. The motion was unanimously
voted on for approval.
4. Regional Water Consortium Membership—Ed Wegner
Mr. Wegner explained that money has been allotted to continue as a member of the
Regional Water Provider's Consortium. They have been members for the last four years.
Paul Hunt requested that he bring this matter to the attention of the committee.
• The dues to the Consortium for the coming year are $7495.00. Dues have increased
slightly.
■ Last year dues were $7,460.00.
• The allocation for the Regional Transmission Study was an additional $2,000.00.
■ Also member of the Conservation Coalition, Kim Swan represents us. They provide
public service announcements.
We have been sending two checks but will now combine the dues and will be sending
$14,000.00, which is approximately the same amount that was sent last year.
Intergovernmental Water Board 1 August 9,2000
Commissioner Hunt stated that he thought the Consortium was merely a mouthpiece for
Portland Water Bureau. He does not have favorable comments about them. Mayor
Drake is a strong supporter of the Consortium and has also pushed for the Joint Water
Commission. Commissioner Hunt stated he thought it would be best to stick with them
despite his personal feelings.
Commissioner Drangsholt asked about the advantages of membership. Mr. Wegner
responded with the following points:
-� Membership provides a say technically on various committees and input into the
region with the other agencies.
-� It has been a Portland driven organization in the past, however, there has been
considerable criticism jointly by the other agencies involved that has created a
shift. A new chairman has been elected from the Technical Committee, Greg
DiLoreto from the Tualatin Valley Water District. The chairmanship of the board
is out of Oak Lodge (Clackamas). It gives an avenue to build partnerships with
others.
It is also considered better to be at the table than away from it.
The membership fee is based on the number of services and growth impact. The
money is used for such things as the Regional Transmission Study, staff support,
lobbying, fish habitat, 4D Rule and conservation programs.
Mr. Wegner recommends continued participation.
S. Aquifer Storage Recovery—Mike Miller
There have been talks with the City of Beaverton about their ASR Project. Beaverton is
within the same critical ground water area that IWB is located in.
The Aquifer Storage Recovery concept is to take cheap water and pump it into the
ground, using deep aquifers as a reservoir. Then during the summer pump that water
out of the ground for use. It is not a new concept and it has been widely used in other
areas. This practice has not been used much in the Northwest because there usually is
an abundance of water. The City of Salem has tried a pilot project with mixed results.
Beaverton's pilot program has been very successful. Also because Beaverton is a
member of the Joint Water Commission the cost for their water has been very cheap
with their costs for the water being about $.35 per hundred gallons. This program helps
augment the systems.
Beaverton is proceeding with this project. Their ASR Well #1 is off Hansen Road. They
have drilled ASR #2 well at the same site. Their third well is located off Scholls Ferry
Road and Barrows on the West end. The core drillings indicate this site will prove itself
to be well suited for ASR.
Intergovernmental Water Board 2 August 9,2000
Tigard is looking to participate in a joint program and look at ASR for our own existing
system. Propose the use of funds out of the $3,000,000 set aside to explore ASR and
go out for a RFP and have consulting engineer's determine whether or not ASR will fit
within our service area system. We currently have four wells; two are in use. Well #4
off of Beef Bend Rcad is a very deep well and could be used successfully as an ASR.
Well #3 off125th and Walnut has collapsed but could potentially be a good ASR source.
Mr. Miller requested approval to utilize the funds to move forward with the program.
Potentially for short term it is possible to produce 6-10 mgd.
Commissioner Paul Hunt asked what the estimated cost would be. Mr. Miller estimated
it would be around $100,000 for the consulting work.
Commissioner Jan Drangsholt questioned where the water would come from. Mr. Miller
explained that negotiations would need to be made with an agency to acquire water
during the winter months at a cheap rate, i.e., JWC, Lake Oswego, Portland. Portland is
spilling water over the spillways during the winter. We could utilize that water by
putting it in the ground somewhere.
Mr. Miller continued to explain that the ASR process is really making a bubble of water in
the ground and extracting it at a later time. Water Resources has rules and guidelines
stating that only 80% can be withdrawn from what is put in allowing the remainder to
help stabilize the critical ground water area.
Commissioner Drangsholt asked Mr. Miller to explain what factors were involved with
why some of these pilot programs have been successful and some unsuccessful. Mr.
Miller stated it depended on the type of ground, the geologic structure of the ground,
the fault lines, structure of the soils and rock base. The basalt layers in the Bull
Mountain/Cooper Mountain area are very porous and able to hold the water.
Commissioner Drangsholt asked how the water stayed contained? Mr. Miller explained
that there are confining areas and it is not as porous as imagined. Water moves very
slowly, not like a river underground.
Mr. Ed Wegner explained that a geological study would be the first phase of the RFA
study. The consultants will look at the existing wells and the aquifers around there. They
determine where the best depth for placing the bubble will be by core drilling.
Commissioner Penner stated the current wells would be looked at first. Mr. Miller
indicated they would look at the well logs that describe the soils and rocks found when
the well was drilled along with other existing wells and determine the possibility of
utilizing them. They can test the existing water below and see how the introduced
water will react with the rock formations and look at the water chemistry carefully to see
if it is compatible with the existing ground water.
Commissioner Carroll asked whether the water would come back as treated of untreated
water. Mr. Miller indicated it would be treated water that may require chlorine to be
added to the water.
Intergovernmental Water Board 3 August 9,2000
Mr. Wegner stated this is something that the Citizens for Safe Water have been pushing
in Tualatin and Sherwood areas. This would allow us to at least explore the idea.
Commissioner Drangsholt made a motion to approve spending money from
the longterm capital fund for a RFP for ASR. Commissioner Hunt seconded
the motion. The motion passed by unanimous vote,
6. Long Term Water Supply Update—Ed Wegner
Clackamas River— South Fork Group, includes South Fork, Tigard, Lake Oswego,
and the North Clackamas Water Commission.
A staff meeting was held with the member managers. Three things were discussed.
* Development of a timetable
i�, Reviewed the fatal flaw findings
3:� Looked at a rough draft of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
All of the entities contributed approximately $2,800.00 each for Murray Smith and
Associates to go through a program to find any fatal flaws with regulatory agencies by
going to the Clackamas or with Clackamas combining forces to work on a MOU that
would commit the agencies to a water supply source. Following that a formal
Intergovernmental Agreement ORS 190 would be developed to allow us to be a member
of that.
The timetable dates are important. Staff is gathering information on the MOU. We
have included things that we are looking for like water rights, water quality, etc.
Between Sept. 1-20, 2000, the draft of MOU will be compiled. At the Sept. 13 IWB
meeting he suggests spending time in executive session reviewing the contract
document to make sure everything is included. On September 21 the elected official's
South Fork workshop will take place that Patrick Carroll and Paul Hunt should attend to
represent the IWB.
If all proceeds well, we should be able to come back and in the next 60 days sign the
MOU and begin working on a formal Intergovernmental Agreement that would be signed
in early Spring 2001. That will allow agencies the budget process time to fund projects
for further studies.
Re ug latory A eQ ncies
The Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Water Resources, and National
Marine Fishery Services were talked with. Basically there were no fatal flaws found, but
a lot of process, studies and regulations that will need to be followed.
y DEQ's issue is the total maximum daily loads on the river as it compares to water
temperature for fish. They have noted that the Clackamas River's key priorities are
for drinking water and fish habitat. Mitigation for the temperature impact will be
required and covered in the Habitat and Conservation Plan.
Intergovernmental Water Board 4 August 9,2000
y Water Resources liked the approach of expanded service. They are in favor of
municipalities uniting as a coalition to work together. They have no problem with
the Clackamas water rights holders going outside the Clackamas basin to provide
water to the Tigard Water System Area. It is a long process to get all their permits
through (2 years), but not difficult.
y National Marine Fishery Service has rules that change daily. This process has the
greatest impact. Future listings may have an impact. Cutthroat trout will probably
be on the endangered list in October. Also the lamp-ray eel. They will be regulating
and checking the screens on intakes and require them to have a compliance
certificate. A Habitat and Conservation Plan will be required, followed by an
Implementation Plan. Biological assessments also will be required.
The reports for all these agencies will be multi-year projects and will require at least
$500,000 to process the studies. All want their staff to be involved every step of the
way, which is good.
The draft of the MOU involves cooperation. They let us in, we want water rights or
equity ownership and are willing to pay our fair share, and we will all agree to follow the
new regulations of the regulating agencies. Equity ownership will be a major issue.
Joint Water Commission — Hillsboro, Forest Grove, Beaverton, and Tualatin Valley
Water District.
On July 14 Mr. Wegner and Mr. Monahan attended a )WC meeting. JWC staff, who is
also the General Manager and Public Works Director of Hillsboro, made a presentation
with options to Tigard.
:1 Sell no water
Sell water at wholesale rate as wholesale customer
Allow a buy-in with built in termination dates if no additional raw water storage
is developed
Allow a buy-in of current facilities
Their recommendations to the Commission's elected officials were:
1. Authorize the General Manager to provide a water sales agreement for the
remainder of the calendar year 2000 to the City of Tigard.
2. Direct staff to develop an IGA for Tigard to become a participant with built-in
termination if additional source water could not be developed.
3. Direct staff to move forward on research and planning for development of an
additional raw water source.
The only discussion about the last two points was that the built-in termination needed to
be set so there was a ramp down period of time allowed, not a sudden termination.
There was considerable discussion about the sale of water for this year. Forest Grove
was hesitant to allow the sale of surplus raw water. They wante;i each agency to take it
back to each full elected boards, i.e., city council and/or board of directors. It was
ultimately decided that the General Manager would enter into an agreement with Tigard
Intergovernmental Water Board 5 August 9,2000
and he would contact all JWC members who would then decide if they needed to take it
back to their councils or let the managers of the agencies handle it.
The following week they met again and came up with a very good rate of$.40 per
hundred. If it were to cause a problem to TVWD because of their possible peaking, we
would pay an additional $.46 taking it to $.86. It was decided that Hillsboro had enough
excess water to allow the purchase of water right away. The water would come from
the plant through Hillsboro, through Beaverton's system and into Tigard. We could take
up to 1.5 mgd.
With the hot weather of the past few weeks, hydraulically we cannot take water due to
the strain on the system. We will try to take water again, but everyone was depleting
their reservoirs and the hydraulic grade line was low. The agreement is in place and we
will be able to take up to 1.5 mgd from the JWC someday.
Commissioner Carroll asked when the $.46 differential would kick in. Mr. Wegner
explained that if TVWD must take more Portland water than what they are allocated
then they would be hit with a peaking factor. Gary Pippen of TVWD is a very good
operator of the system and knows where his flows are. He thinks he'll be on top of
everything so that we won't be caused to use that water.
We now have another source of water taking up to 1.5 mgd, but not during the heat of
the summer. If we do decide to look at the JWC we may want to put in some pumping
and connections to increase that amount. The JWC is starting a draft of an IGA for
principal points for Tigard to become a member of the JWC. That draft is expected to
be ready at their October meeting, which is after the October IWB meeting. Mr. Wegner
proposed that the IWB meet with the Tigard City Council on Tuesday, October 17, at
their work session to be brought up to date on the JWC proceedings. Notices will be
sent as the date approaches.
Commissioner Drangsholt asked if the dam still would need to be raised. Mr. Wegner
responded in the affirmative. That was one of their three recommendations, to direct
staff to move forward on researching and planning the development of an additional raw
water source. If the dam is raised and we participate in that raising, we would get the
rights to the water. Until that happens, we have no water rights.
Portland Water Bureau
On July 26 Mr. Wegner attended a meeting with the wholesale purchasers. Portland
presented them with a 'straw-hat'contract. They made it clear that it was a
presentation only with nothing to be negotiated at the present time. They have not had
a legal review yet.
They also met again earlier today with the Integrated Utilities Group, which is the
consulting group that was hired to help with the contract negotiations. They went
through only 5 pages out of 28 pages. They will be meeting several more times
between now and Sept. 12 to continue reviewing. At the Sept 13 meeting hope to have
a proposal reflective of the combined thoughts of Tigard, Tualatin, Gresham, Rockwood,
Intergovernmental Water Board 6 August 9,2000
West Slope and Tualatin Valley. The Portland draft is in a strange form. It does not
contain pricing information; they don't use the word peaking, but they do use the word
penalty. Mr. Wegner will fax a copy of Portland's bedrock principals. He shared a few
of them.
■ Any contract will not have an adverse impact on residential ratepayers of the
City of Portland.
■ No existing Portland water system is for sale.
Mr. Wegner spoke with Bob Reich, Finance Director of Portland, and he indicated they
would like to have the contracts ready for adoption by July 1, 2001. Mr. Wegner felt
that was unrealistic. Portland moved slow to get the straw-hat contract and now they
are in a hurry to finalize. They also want to have separate contracts, which is the
concept the Joint Commission is trying to get away from.
Commissioner Schederich asked whether they have predicted when they will have to put
in filtration. Mr. Wegner said they have not addressed that issue. They would only talk
in general terms about the contract and would not talk about facilities development.
Commissioner Schederich asked if the Portland City Council or staff set the bedrock
principals. Mr. Wegner thought they came from the commissioner in charge and staff.
Commissioner Drangsholt requested the phone number and address of Norm Penner.
Kathy Kaatz said she would update the information and bring it to the next meeting.
7. Informational Items
■ Email from Todd Heidgerken regarding the initiative petition filed to require voter
approval for TVWD to utilize Willamette River as a drinking water source.
• July 26th Oregonian article regarding above mentioned initiative
■ Memo from Todd Heidgerken regarding the contract between TVWD/Wilsonville for
the Willamette Water Treatment Plant—Wilsonville has started the construction of
the plant. They are working with US Filter to develop an operations contract.
• Letter from TVWD regarding water rates charged to the City of Tigard
■ Oregonian article (8-2-00) regarding petitions on Willamette River water
■ Memo from CH2M Hill regarding rate model study (Measure 93 —Taxpayer's
Initiative on fees and charges)
■ Oregonian article (8-8-00) regarding suite to halt initiative
■ Oregonian article (8-9-00) regarding Wilsonville's ability to borrow $10 million from
Oregon Economic and Community Development Department
• Memo from Portland Water Bureau on augmenting the Bull Run supply
Mr. Wegner, in referring to the article about someone suing the County Elections Board,
explained that Paul Matthews who is Vice President of Integrated Utilities Group, the
firm we have hired, as an individual has sued the County Elections Director stating that
the Citizen's for Safe Water petition for an ordinance to vote on the Willamette River is
illegal, unfair and unjust. It is an administrative decision. Mr. Matthews has made it
Intergovernmental Water Board 7 August 9,2000
very clear in meetings that he is doing this as an individual. It was decided that he
would not talk about that issue when talking about the Portland contract.
Information is also included about the Clute property neighbors that attended the IWB
meeting last month. They did appeal to the Hearing's Officer. The hearing was several
weeks ago. The Hearing's Officer left the record open for one week for appellant to
make comments (those comments are included), then another week for our response.
The path is a big stumbling stone.
8. Public Comments-None
9. Non Agenda Items-None
10. Adjournment
Commissioner Drangsholt motioned to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Carroll
seconded that motion. All members unanimously approved the dismissal.
Intergovernmental Water Board 8 August 9,2000
Summer Supply
On August 9, the Water Bureau began pumping
water from the Columbia South Shore wellefield to
supplement the Bull Run supply.The decision was a
prudent response to an extended warm,dry summer
.. \
season.
Inflow into the Bull Run reservoirs during July was
2/3 of the historical average.June inflow was about
50% higher than average,but it came when the
reservoirs were full and there was no additionali
storage capacity. Since there is no way to predict
when fall rains will return,the Bureau made the
decision on criteria consistent with the summer
supply plan presented to City Council.
The Bureau's plan is to blend water from the `
wellfield in a ratio of 20%well water to 80%Bull
Run. Starting August 15, the Bureau will also release
30 million gallons a day from Bull Run Lake for
twenty days.Currently the plan is to take 700 million
gallons of water from the wells and 600 million
gallons from Bull Run Lake. Bureau predictions
anticipate this is the amount of water needed to meet
demand if refill of the Bull Run reservoirs is delayed Water Quality Inspector Dave McDonnell is collecting a A
through October 15.We could use more well water if sample from a monitoring well near Blue Lake Park at the
needed, but do not plan to use more than 600 million start of running groundwater.When the wellfield is running,
gallons from Bull Run Lake. the Bureau collects samples from all production wells
once a week.
June Statistics 30 year average Year 2000
Maximum Portland daily temp temperature 74.0°F 76.4°F
(average high for month)
Minimum Portland daily temperature 52.9°F 53.9°F
(average low for month)
Total monthly precipitation in Portland 1.48 inches 1.19 inches
Total monthly precipitation at Headworks 4.00 inches 3.12 inches
July Statistics
Maximum Portland daily temperature 79.9°F 78.4°F
(average high for month)
Minimum Portland daily temperature 56.6°F 57.2°F
(average high for month)
Total monthly precipitation in Portland 0.63 inches 0.15 inches
Total monthly precipitation at Headworks 1.35 inches 0.19 inches
Ed Wegner
120 DAYS=8/11/2000 City of Tigard Water Department cnYOFn�A�
Community(Dewfopment
CITY OFTIGARD S(rapingA Better Community
Washington County, Oregon
NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
Case Number: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003
Case Name: APPEAL OF CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION (d 154TH AVENUE
Name of Owners: City of Tigard Water Department
Name of Applicant: City of Tigard Water Department
Address of Applicant: 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oreqon 97223
Address of Property: 13230 SW 154th Avenue
Tax Map/Lot No.: WCTM 2S105DB, Tax Lot 00600.
A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO APPROVE A
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION. THE CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANTS PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF
REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF
REPORT. THE HEARINGS OFFICER HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 24, 2000 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS
BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER
Item
on Appeal: ➢On June 2, 2000, the City of Tigard approved a request to partition a 1.74 acre lot into 2 parcels. The
property was originally acquired by the Water District for access to the recently completed Menlor
Reservoir. The access is now no longer necessary and the partition would have separated the
access to the reservoir from the remaining 1.35 acres. The 1.35 acres would then be able to be sold
and/or built upon.
On June 16, 2000 an appeal was filed stating that City staff failed to adequately address the following:
public access and egress to the trailhead and park via SW 154"' Avenue, adequate public facilities,
tree preservation, erosion, storm drainage, and nature trail specifications.
ZONE: Multiple-Family Residential, 25 Units Per Acre; R-25. The R-25 zoning district is designed to
accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing
units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED:
Community Development Code Chapters 18.420, 18.705, 18.765, 18.790, and 18.810.
Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Fkequested ❑ Approval with Conditions ® Denial
f
Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to:
® Owners of Record Within the Required Distance ® Affected Government Agencies
® The Affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator ® The Applicants and Owners
The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the
Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard City Hall.
Final Decision:
THE DECISION WAS SIGNED ON AUGUST 17, 2000, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 23, 2000,
The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of
Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
Appeal: A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent with the Oregon Land Use Board
of Appeals (LUBA) according to their procedures.
Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171.
--- Ed Wegner
120 DAYS-8/11/2000 City of Tigard Water Department CITY OF TIGARD
Community(Development
SfiapingA Better Community
CITY OF TIGARD
Washington County, Oregon
'NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER RYTRE HEARINGS OFFICER'
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
Case Number: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003
Case Name: APPEAL OF CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION-(@,l 54 TH AVENUE
Name of Owners: City of Tigard Water Department
Name of Applicant: City of Tigard Water Department
:Address of Applicant: 13125 SW Hull Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223
Address of Property: 13230 SW 1`54t' Avenue
Tax Map/Lot No.: WCTM 2S105DB, Tax Lot 00600.
A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO APPROVE.A
REQU_EST_FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION. THE CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANTS PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS;COMMENTS OF
REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE' PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF
REPORT. THE HEARINGS OFFICER HELDA PUBLIC HEARING ON IDLY 24, 2000.TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS,APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS
BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER..
.Item
on Appeal: >On June 2, 2000, the City ofTigard approved a request to partition a 1.74 acre lot into.2 parcels. The
property was originally acquired by the Water District for access to the recently completed Menlor
• Reservoir. The access is now no longer necessary and the partition would have separated the:
access to the reservoir from the remaining 1.35 acres. The 1..35 acres would then be able to be sold
and/or built upon.
On June 16, 2000 an appeal was filed stating that City staff failed to adequately address the following:
public access and egress to the trailhead and park via SW 154R' Avenue, adequate public facilities,
tree preservation, erosion, storm drainage, and nature trail specifications.
ZONE: Multiple-Family'Residential,-25 Units Per Acre;"R-25. The'R-25 zoning district is designed to
accommodate existing housing of alf types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing
units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED:
Community Development Code Chapters 18.420, 18.705, 18.765, 18.790, and 18.810.
Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Requested ❑ Approval with Conditions Denial
t
Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to:
Owners of Record Within the Required Distance ® Affected Government Agencies
The Affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator The Applicants and Owners
The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the
Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard City Hall.
Final Decision:,
THE" DECISION;WAS.SIGNED ON AUGUST. 17,2 i`20:00, AIdD BECOMES'EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 2!3, 2000,'
The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of
Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
-Appeal: A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent with the Oregon Land Use Board
of Appeals (LUBA) according to their procedures.
Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171.
Page 1 of 1
max'/
I was advised.this morning that over the last couple of days we seem to have
started getting a higher than normal number of customer complainis related
to discolored water. We've been doing some additional tests and we're still
looking into sources for this color. We're also making some operational.
adjustments in attempt to minimize the problem.
Mostly,.I wanted to let you know that: 1) you too maybe getting some calls,
_
2) it is likely us - not just your system, and 3) we are aware of the
problem and working on getting.it resolved ASAP. I will provide a further
update on•Friday.
Thanks for you patience,
Mark Knudson
11 TTX ,.r,IxTc\TUr,rn\r-Ax»nnnn).T4TNA 8/2$%00
CY Page 1 of 1
Just wanted to pass this along. Kim Swan informed me this afternoon that we were receiving a rash of calls
concerning water color. Sometimes when we make large operational changes and-the direction of flow
changes, we will cause water.coloration in our system. This has not°been the case for several weeks. The last
time we had a water color problem that we created was when we brought Beaverton on-line for the first time this
summer:.
Knowing that we hadn't changed our operations, I called Mark Knudson, Water Quality Manager for.Portland
Water to see if they were experiencing the same thing..
We will see water color changes in the Bull Run when draw down occurs within the watershed and they are
pulling water"from deeper levels in the impoundments. Or-we will see a water color problem when mixing the
Columbia Southshore Well Field and the Bull Run causes a chemistry imbalance. Mark stated that Portland was
also seeing an increase in water color problems, but;wasn't going to notify the wholesale purchasers until they
(Portland) could isolate the problem.
What is attached is an e-mail from Mark this afternoon.
Thought you should know.
Mike
fiP-//( -\WnNMnWO,\TEMP\GWIOOOOI.HTM" 8/28/00
Page 1 of 1
On Thursday,,the Water Bureau identified that water from one of the eight
wells currently blended with the Bull Run supply showed an elevated level of
• manganese. This appears to have had the effect of causing slight
discoloration;in the water supply.
The Water Bureau has switched wells to reduce manganese content in the
blended water. In switching wells, no additional discolored water is
entering the system. It will take two or three days for most of the
-discol'ored water currently in the pipelines and reservoirs'to pass through
the system.
The discoloration, like that of from.tannin in fall leaves, is most apparent
in quantity, for example, customers may notice the color in'a full white
bathtub. Customers should not notice any difference in'typicai water uses.
Manganese is a naturally occurring mineral in groundwater and does not have,
adverse health effects. The water quality remains equal to or better than
state and federal standards for safe water.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Knudson, Mark
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 5:24 PM
• > To: Dan Boss (E-mail); Dave Gilbey (E-mail); Dean Fritzke(E-mail); Gary
> Pippin (E-mail); Jim Garner (E-mail); Kim Swan (E-mail); 'Margy Leonard';
>Marty Wegner(E-mail); Mick Wilson(E-mail); Rich Sattler(E-mail); 'mike
> miller'
> Cc- Schenk, Steve; Sheets, Mike;Casson, Kathy;Walker,Ross
> Subject: Writer Quality Complaints
>
> I was advised this morning that over the last couple of days we seem to
> have started..getting a higher than normal number of customer complaints
> related to discolored water. We've been doing some additional tests and
> we're still looking into sources for this color. We're also making some
> operational adjustments in attempt to minimize the problem.
> Mostly, I wanted to let you know that: 1) you too may be getting some
> calls, 2) it is likely us - not just your system, and 3) we are aware of
>the problem and working oil getting it resolved ASAP. I will provide a
> further update on Friday.
> Thanks for you patience,
> Mark Knudson
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW)00001.HTM 8/28/00
Citizens Interested in Bull Run; Inc. More sora e needed!
P.O. Box 3426 g
Gresham, OR 97030 Bull-Run Lake becomes low during the
Phone:. 503 665-4777 summer months. It was never intended to be
Fax: 503=669-9429 like a man-made reservoir. It.nourishes the
e-Mail:" eiibri@teleport.com forest as-it seeps its way underground down to
INTERNET- www.clibri.org the:Bul1.R'un Rover.
On the other hand, a third reservoir on
Fax to the Editor: 503-452-9338 the Bull Run plus a reservoir on the Little
CIIBRI Pipeline - August 2000 Sandy (Little Bull Run) could double the
amount of water available even during the
Spilling Bull Run water summer months.
Why is the Portland Water Bur
for the fish (PWB)reluctant to get the permit process
The Portland Water-Bureau (PWB)is going for the Bull Run reservoir#3?
supposed to furnish,water to people, not fish. Plans for the third,reservoir have"been
People are really"perturbed by the PWB on hold since 1988. That's too long of a delay!
spilling 1.5 billion;gallons of Bull Run water The buck stops at Mike Rosenberger's
for the fish. desk. "As'head of the Water'Bureav' he needs
Under what law (Federal.or State)is 'to hear from you that this is now the time for a
PWB Mandated to do that? needed change.
Where is the water-for-fish theory We want 100% genuine Bull Run
•
Doming from? water. The wells were never intended to be a regular year-around supply:_'They are only for
Does.the PWB know how much. the emergency.back-ub.
temperature has changed in the Sandy River as
a result of the spilling?
How much revenue would 1.5 billion People dont Want the
gallons provide?
treated Willamette River
What is the cost of replacing 1.5 billion,
gallons of water by pumping it from,the TheWilsonville:Citiz s for Safe Wates-
Columbia.Southshore wells? filed a legal.action.in Clackamas County Circuit
One suggestion is to rename the.PWB Court on July 27,,2000 to declare thatthe
the'"Salmon Recovery Bureau." Oregon Health Division(OHD) has illegally
granted a permit to the City of Wilsonville to
construct a.water treatment plant on the
Dilution is the solution? Willamette River. Theproposed plant would
supply drinking water to the residents of
By mixing 80% Bull Runwater with Wilsonville, Tigard, Tualatin, Sherwood and .
20% well water, are Portland water drinkers the areas serviced by Tualatin Valley Water
being fooled into thinking that.the well water is Distrim
really a potable drinking water supply? The OHD must be required to order
How many wells are already unusable? Wilsonville to prepare and file a new Water
Di
Why is PWB using.a source the could System aster Plan prior to construction for
become completely contaminated in 20'years? the new water treatment plant to assure the
residents of Wilsonville and the-residents of
What is the cumulative effect on people, other West Metro communities will receive safe
from minute amounts of pollution? drinking water in compliance with current and
(Continued on Page 2)
CHBRI Pipeline Page "Big Bucks" Vs. •
August 2000
(Continued from page 1) "Volunteer" Citizens
future regulatory requirements projected 0 Here we go again!
forward for a 20 year period, promulgated by
the EPA under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Agencies that are supposed to be
Act. If the OHD will not fulfill its primacy listening to customers' needs are, instead,
authority, the Wilsonville Citizens for Safe using their financial resources to fight against
Water will petition the EPA to force compliance concerned customers. That seems to be the
with the Federal requirements. . short-history version of Portland's Bull Run
protective movement. The Portland Water
Oregon and the Federal Government Bureau has thousands of dollars of our money
PA require that each communityserving
b to produce flashy full-color brochures
300 or more service connections shall provide including ones that they tuck in with our water
a_Water System Master Plan pursuant to the bills. Citizens,have to resort to using non-
Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the color brochures and to pay retail prices for the
Oregon Drinking Water Quality Act,regulated printing.
by the Oregon Health Division which assures
that the quality of the drinking water will be in It has taken 25 years and thousands of
dollars spent by private citizens in order for the
compliance with Federal safe water standards
for a twenty period. U.S. Congress to recognize the need for
protection. We still.have a ways to go in
Wilsonville presently provides well protecting the Little Sandy (Little Bull Run)
water to its.residents and is operating under a and the buffer areas. Hopefully that will not
1986 Water System Master Plan (14 years old) take another 25 years.
which is'limited to the issue of supplying well •
With a Congress and a Presidency that
water. Wilsonville's proposed new.water
treatment plant will supply Willamette River limy be a Lige:which charg%,a its stripes every
surface water. four years, it behooves citizens to continue to
be vigilant and to learn from the resources of
The Citizens for Safe Water have the past.
testified before and have frequently
communicated with the,OHD and Wilsonville ® Now there is a fight happening in
to the effect that neither are in compliance with the suburbs!
Oregon Law ORS 448.131 or Oregon The law firm that represents the
regulations OAR Chapter 3333, Division 061, Tualatin Valley Water District (`I'VWD) has
particularly OAR 333-061-0060(5) been hired by Paul L. Mathews, Senior Vice-
(construction standards for public water - President of Integrated Utilities Group, to file a
systems),which requires that prior to lawsuit against the citizens,'petition,drive. The
construction of a,New Water Treatment Plant TVWD insists that it is taking no part in the law
Wilsonville must submit to the OHD a new suit, but it.isin their interest of usinAhe
Water System Master Plan that assures that=the Willamette River.They, would certainly
water from the'new plant.(Willamette River sympathize.with it.
water) will meet water-quality standards under
the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act:and'the $3 million has already been spent on a
Oregon-Drinking Water Quality Act for the next Pilot project testing whether.the Willamette s
20 year period. water could be purified to federal drinking-
water standards. Hey,that's a lot.of"Big
For more information call: Bucks" that the average°citizen does not have!
Wilsonville Citizens,for Safe Water- ® And hat's merely small-change!
Charles Scott 503-694=5163 US Filter; a subsidiary of Paris.based
Vivendi Water Company, is being offered a •
five-year contract witlh'the later option of
ownership of the Willamette filtration plant.
•
:Get Inv®'lved i
CITIZENS FOR SAFE WATER
Tualatin Valley Water District: On July 6, 2000 the City of Wilsonville
ownership of about 70% of the Willamette river water treatment plant to the Tualatin Valley
Water District.signed an agreement conveying a 49% interest in the existing land and future
development.
On July 18, 200.0 Citizens for Safe Water filed an Initiative Petition with the Washington.
County Elections Division: If 7339 valid signatures are gathered within the Tualatin Valley
Water District an election will be held to ask voters in the water district if a new ordinance
should beadded to� the T governing ordinances which will require the District to hold an
election before the District can use treated Willamette Riverwater as a drinking water source.
• We need help in gathering these signatures-
Please
ignatureslease call' us at 590-2810 if you caa 1►elp us get some signatures. If you can just get one .
signature sheet(20 signatures) filled, it will be a big help.._The TVWD has filed a lawsuit to
stop this petition,: We are also seeking financial contributions to defend this lawsuit.
Tigard: On Sept.21, 1999 Tigard Citizens,for Safe Water's Initiative Petition passed
by 84 Tigard.:City Charter was changed to require a future majority vote of'the people before
Willamett used as a drinking water source.. At this time we are. helping Wilsonville, Tualatin
Valley Water Tualatin in their battles against Willamette river water. Call us'at 590-2818, fax
590-0425, email: dr
j@hevanet.com
Wilsonville: On Sept. 21, 1999 Wilsonville Citizens for Safe Water's Initiative
Petition also passed, and the Wilsonville city charter has been changed to require a future vote
of the people before the Willamette can be used as a drinking water source.However, the city is
challenging the citizen's measure, saying that the city's revenue bond funding measure (which
also passed on Sept. 21) takes the place of the future vote required by the citizen's measure.
Wilsonville Citizens for Safe Water filed.a lawsuit against the City to get a court interpretation
on whether the citizens should get avote on the Willamette water source. The.court will review
the case on Sept. 18. We are seeking contributions'to fund these legalcosts. Please call us at
694-5163.
Wilsonville has moved equipment onto the plant site,and is beginning construction.
Tualatin: On July 28,2000,Tualatin,Citizens for Safe.Water filed an Initiative
Petition in the City of Tualatin. If approximately 1500 valid signatures are gathered, an election
will be held to determine if a new section should be added to the Tualatin City Charter which
would require a future vote of the people before Willamette river water can be used as a drinking
water source. Please call us at 692-2834 if you can help gather signatures or make a contribution.
Sherwood: On July 24,2000, Citizens for Safe Water filed an Initiative petition in
the City of Sherwood. If 935 valid signatures are gathered, an election will be held to determine
if a new section should be added to the Sherwood CityCharter which would require a future vote
of the people before Willamette River water can be used as a drinking water.source. Sherwood
residents are concerned that the City is contracting with Tualatin.Valley Water District
(TVWD)for their water. Tualatin Valley recently acquired a 49% interest in the Willamette
treatment plant, and signed an agreement with Wilsonville which will eventually give TVWD •
controlling interesi in the plant, an U-1 the right to sell uieii snare u:dhe plsrt to outside interests.
We need help in getting these signatures. Please call us at 625-7149'if you can help us get
some signatures.
All of our members are volunteers. You can make a tax deductible contribution to the Tigard,
Wilsonville or Tualatin chapters of Citizens for Safe Water to help us with our expenses (printing,
mailing, advertising, legal, etc.)Please call one of the above phone numbers, or mail your
contribution to: CFSW, P.O. Box 23954,Tigard,Or. 97281. If the donation is for$50 or more,
tell us your occupation. The first$50 per person or$100 per couple qualifies as a tax credit,
which can be deducted dollar for dollar from your tax bill (as opposed to a tax deduction). Thus
you will get the donation back at the.end of the year in tax savings.
•
.Pure E nkf ng Water-
• Comes from°a Protective Forest
Citizens Intauted in Buff Rum Inc,. (WBRV
Citizens Interested in Buil Run, Inc. is concerned with:
i. Informing the public about current events that may not always be reported by
the major media by providing the newsletter the "CIIBRI Pipeline` and by having a site
on the Internet at www►.ciibd.org.
2. Tapping+he resources of the Bull Aur? Open File.
3. Providing a way for individual citizens to directly contact government
agencies and Congress with their. concerns.
4. Supporting the Citizens for Safe Water.
Contributions are taz deductible and should be sent;to:
CIIBRI
P.O. Box 3426
Gresham. OR 97030
Buff R In GWIT (BRIG) .
The Bull Run Interest Group owns and maintains the Bull Run Open File at the
Multnomah County Public Library_
1. This provides an expert file-that is ayailaola to the general public_
.2. They have paid to have made microfiche copies of the earlier parts of the file
available at the. Multnomah County Library and available at the Oregon historical
Center Library.
3: They-add and catalog updated documents which may eventually be made
into future microfiche copies.-
This
opies.This project is funded by the sale of books by Joseph L_ Millers Jr..., M.D.
and is=tax deductible.
® The list of books available and an order form are included in this Pipeline.
BOOKS BY50SEPHL.,MILLER 59?., MD. •
1 . "Bull Run - A World Treasure"
(Available in limited supply) $3.50'
2. "What Good is Free Speech in a Closet?" $4.75$
3. "How to Destroy God's Kingdom & Democracy at the Same Time -
Case Study: Water Supply of Portland, Oregon" $3.45*
4. "Restoring Protection for Buil Run
(and increasing it for the Little Sandy)" $2.54$
* Suggested retail price or,
as long as supply lasts, available for FREE!
fail a dere. tn: . •
Bull Run Interest Group
,c/o Donald Cook, Treasurer
2006 S. Y. Sunset Blvd.
Portland, OR 97201
FAX orders to:
FA. 503-452-9338
Please make checks pavable to "Bull Run interest Group"
•s!and Jo Aunduaoj aa4i9M
!puanrn g4!m 1nuoq>bu.494u► sau►ooaq
aani� a�.auaall!M aye aa�o �t��5id
Gana sadia4s ski a6uvg31nua aa614
load lod ag4 .ua m IfIlopadsa papaou
aq 5,Cnm1» 111M a3uaj!6!A uaz!j!j
a31S3n03b,NO1103HH00 SS3800b
woo•podeia}j56)iaglio :ALAI-e
6ao-1agno-mm. n :atis tau.latu`
6Z1176-699-£05 MU 9 aagwnN S G awnloA
,auo ------OOOZ tsn6-nom-----
LLLti-599-£0.5 Ud ------
0£016 a0 `uaeysa.la tsaaod an1109101d a woad saw00
aateM 6uiNulaa a•md
`ao -we sa,E
y '9z17E x013 •o•d a01401sn ON, aullad!d. J,Jjgl�l
30dlsod`sn 'aul `ung ling ui palsa,Iajul suaZlj10
u011ez1UUBJ0)UPJduoN,
want to help protect our Bull Run
.. drinking water supply and save
&th�e uninhabited. Little Sandy, as a future source.
Membership IJ $15
--77 Enclosed is my donation for. $
Name Phone ( )
Street Apt. #
City State Zip
Donations are tax deductible. Please make check payable to:
$0-BRI9 P.O. Box 3426
Gresham, OR 97030
• Phone: 503-665-4777- INTERNET: www':ciibri.org
Fax: 503-669-9429 a-Mail: ciibri@teieport.com
❑ I am interested in becoming a volunteer.
Tap Ga' pm
s _
ef-T
S- 5
"k
itis § "'Z�
......... _
E}'� A Y� d � ♦ w
mom,
1-5
Vit . `^
.� �_ � a.:• ami_ `�.aS� "i � 3�'
OrrS
4 .
. u� ZIP
x
F �+
Ar
�..._ :a� .::: �, !.....a,�r,... ��.<k', gs_r3 t....� �. .:.�,.� _,�?«x�,...,,..na.«a, �.�. ?s..a � ..u-1 c,•,.. :�
•
Pesto-codes
Drinking
The Tap Gap:
Pesticides in Gregon"s
DrinkingWater
By Hilary Abraham
Oregon Pesticide Education Network (OPEN)
® Oregon Environmental Council
The Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides
6 OSPIRG Foundation
We gratefully acknowledge the support of:
® The Pew Charitable Trusts
1 The Bullitt Foundation
® Turner Foundation
® The Tides Center
as well as numerous individuals who have supported the work of the
Oregon Pesticide Education Network.
The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the
supporting foundations and individuals.
We sincerely appreciate the special contributions that the following individuals
made to this report: Jeff Allen, Norma Grier, Neva Hassenein, Maureen Kirk,
David Leland, Karen Lewotsky, Deloris Scott, Al Sharkey, Sheree Stewart and
Laura Weiss.
July 2000
s
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary ................................................................................................................2
Introduction ......................................................................................................................3
Designed to Kill: Why Pesticides are a Problem ......................................................................4
MobileMenaces ................................................... ....................... ...........r..............4
TheSafe Drinking Water Act .................................................................................................5
The Emperor Has:No Clothes: Caps in Drinking Water Protection ...............—.1, ..........7
The Forgotten Ones: The Absence of Protection........ ...............................................7
One Family's Pesticide Plf9 ht................................ ..................................I........I................8
Truth At the Tap: What's Really in Oregon's Drinking Water........;............I.........................10
• Pesticides in Surface Water......................................................................................11
Pesticides in Ground Water .......................................................................................12
Our Right to Know- Consumer Confidence, Reports .............I..................................13
Citizens of Wilsonville have a Right to Safe:Drinking,Water ..............................................14
An Ounce of Prevention ...............................
............................. ........ ..................................15
Drinking Water Protection Programs: Source Water Assessment Plans ..........._........15
Oregon's Groundwater Protection Act ....................................................................16
Bottled Water and Home Filter Systems: No Escape? .........................................................:17
Knowledge is Power: How a Pesticide Tracking System will Help Close the "Tap Gap" 18
Closing the Gap: Recommendations......................................................................................20
References ........................................................................................................................21
The Tap Gap: Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water !t`►
Site-specific research conducted by the •
Executive United States Geological Survey (USGS)
(Anderson, 1997) found 50 pesticides in
bummary Oregon's Willamette Basin. Drinking water
standards are in place for only eight of those
Pesticides are a broad class of synthetic 50 pesticides detected in the Basin. These
organic chemicals that are applied in both and other gaps in our laws indicate that
urban and rural areas. Once applied, they Oregon's consumers need greater
can move from land to water. This means protection from pesticides in drinking water.
that pesticides can easily contaminate
drinking,water. Because they are inherently Pesticide use data can help drinking
toxic, pesticides in drinking water can pose water providers more effectively protect
serious health risks to the public. drinking water systems and target resources,
alert water providers to potential sources of
Currently, public drinking water systems contamination and inform systems if a water
face challenges to provide clean, safe, source is unsafe to drink. In the long run, a
drinking water to the public because pesticide tracking system will provide the
Oregon has no system in place to track information drinking water providers need
pesticide use. Without a thorough to prevent pesticide contam-ination of water
assessment of where pesticides are applied, systems, in the first place.
public drinking water.providers cannot
assess a water system's susceptibility to The first steps in creating a pesticide •
pesticide contamination. This ` tracking system are currently
way. In 1999 the
information is particularly f Y
important because
�. .,
Oregon"State
the Taws -, - §,., .._ Legislature passed
protecting the 6 House Bill 3602,
public's drinking which if implemented
water supplies effectively, will provide the
contain gaps and public,.drinking water
loopholes. providers, and state agencies
with data on pesticide use. To
Drinking water w effectively put this data to use, the
standards do not exist for most law must be well implemented. The
pesticides used in Oregon. Drinking .,;.w - Oregon Pesticide,Education-Network
water providers.must test for only:23 of (OPEN) coalition has developed an
some 300 pesticide active ingredients Accountability Agenda to ensure that the
registered':for use in Oregon. Drinking Itracking data can be put to work
water standard's are not in place for 90% protecting our drinking water for current
of the pesticide active ingredients and future generations.
used in the state. Routine testing
of drinking'water is conducted for , X $.`
only a handful of the hundreds of ;
pesticides applied in Oregon, each
year.
2
' The Tap Gap: Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Introduction Oregonians get their drinking water from
private wells. These are not regulated, and
there is minimal data on the quality of the
Clean, safe, and abundant drinking water ground-water in rural Oregon (Nelson,
—we all need it to survive. In fact, polls. 1998). ,
indicate that Oregonians rank drinking
water as their number one environmental This report explores the threats
concern (LCVEF, 1999). Their concern is pesticides pose to the drinking water
justified because the safety of Oregon's systems in Oregon. It includes an evaluation
drinking water is not assured. The millions of the ineffectiveness of federal and state
of pounds of pesticides used every year in programs in protecting the public from° '
Oregon threatens the purity of our water drinking water contamination, the benefits'
and places our health at risk. Drinking water of pollution prevention efforts, and:ho.w a
laws fail to adequately address the statewide system to track pesticide use will
thousands of pesticide products widely used address some of the current gaps in
in rural and urban areas.; In addition, consumer prote(tion.
Oregon lacks basic 'information on the
patterns of pesticide use. To effectively This report is not intended to
protect our drinking water.from pesticide discourage the public from relying on public
pollution, the public and drinking water water systems)for drinking water. To the
• providers need to know where and contrary, by highlighting particular gaps
in what quantities specific -utilizedin protection and under efforts
chemicals are applied. like pollution prevention programs this
will promote safer drinking water for
There areapproximately2,652 current and future Ore onians..
public-water syms in-Oregon 3 *`' g
subject to, some level of
regulation under the federal
Safe Drinking.Water Act.
Nearly 87% of the public ,
water systems in Oregon each „.
serve 500 people or fewer.
About 500,000 Oregonians
get their drinking water from
individual home wells, which
are ,not subject to any federal
or state,,public water system
standards (OHD, 2000).
Fifty percent of �" !'
Oregonians rely exclusively on
groundwater for drinking J.
water, 30% rely on surface ; = -- it
water; and about 20% rely y on The active ingredient in"Roundup"
, •
a combination of the two: � � is Glyposate which is regulated
under The Federal Safe Drinking
Approximately 350-400,000 wateract:
3
The Tap Gap: Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water lv�ri
l ® shows that use of cancer-causing pesticides
Designed t in California has increased 127% between
Why Pesticides 1991-1998. Of the 23 pesticides for which
EPA has:developed a drinking water stan-
®„� �, � dard, eight are associated with an increased
risk of cancer. While some of these carcin-
ogens have been banned or otherwise taken
Pesticides are a broad class of chemical out of use, EPA has set a goal of zero for
or biological agents explicitly designed to these chemicals in drinking water.
kill or damage living organisms. Oregon law
defines"pesticides as "Any substance, or Many pesticides, including the widely
mixture of substances intended to be used used herbicide atrazine, have been shown to
for defoliating plants or for preventing, disrupt the hormone (or endocrine) system,
destroying, repelling or mitigating all even at very low levels of exposure. The
insects, plant fungi, weeds, rodents, human endocrine system is vital for healthy
predatory animals reproduction and
or any other formbehavioral
of plant or animal
Water is one of the primary pathways by development,
life which is, .or �which pesticides are transported from their. and the ability to
which the application areas to other parts of the resist disease
1997Colburn,
environment.,Once pesticides reach streams, .
department may ( )
they can be widely dispersed into other Disru, tion'to •
declare to .be a P
pest, which may streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and oceans" the endocrine
infest or be (Boon, 199.8). system can lead
_ detrimental to to impairments
vegetation, in reproduction,
humans, animals, or be present in any alterations in behavior, diminishment of
environment thereof" (Section (h) ORS intellectual capacity, and the erosion.in the
634.006). In Oregon, approximately 300 ability to resist disease: 'Young children
pesticide active ingredients are registered for exposed to endocrine,disrupters can suffer
use each year. (Personal communication: life-.long developmental consequences for
Chris Kirby, ODA). proper brain and hormonal,development.
Various human health problems are Mobile Menaces
associated with pesticides. Short-term Once applied, there are a number of
exposure to certain pesticides can cause paths a pesticide can take to contaminate
nausea, headaches, diarrhea, or convulsions a drinking water source. Surface water
(Porter, 1998). Long--term effects can transports pesticides directly to rivers,
include cancer, fertility problems, endocrine streams or lakes, and Itravels over pavement
disruption, and chronic damage to the to a storm drain.Pesticides can also enter
nervous system. soil by irrigation or rainwater, consequently
leaching into groundwater. Seepage from
Many registered.pesticides have been contaminated surface water is also a source
linked to cancer in either human and/or, of groundwater contamination (Trautmann,
animal studies (U.S. EPA, 1999). In fact, a 1990).
recent California study (Kegley, 2000)
4
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Routes through which pesticides move in the water cycle.
WIND DRIFT
MON
IF V
UFSAN
WASTE"
SPRAY DRIFT
'444'1Sb i\ '3
•S
., k a.
DEPOSIT
r.
a •.
WIND E
EVAPORATION lR
3
GROUND:WATER,,.
DISCHARGETO
Y
. Y i •t aY 'tx
<'t++''.r•'k� +'"s''x`:' .a.'..r +^;. , ' '.,t ." «, t.''b''uw r`�..•.w d`' :y'4"`c+° "+''
The Safe Drinking Water the MCLG is only a "goal" it is not the
/pct enforceable standard.
The federal Safe Drinking Water Act The maximum contaminant level (MCL)
(SDWA), originally passed in 1974 and is the actual enforceable level established by
amended twice since then, established a EPA. The MCL is based on the ability of
system for creating minimum standards for systems to both detect and treat a conta-
drinking water quality. The law directed the minant as well as what is technically and
United States Environmental Protection economically feasible. In other words, unlike
Agency (EPA) to set two levels for the MCLG, the MCL is not strictly based on
contaminants in drinking water—the health considerations (U.S.EPA, 1999).
MCLG and the MCL.
MCLs and MCLGs have been
The MCLG, or the "maximum established for a total of 96 contaminants,
contaminant level goal," is set "...at a level 23 of which are pesticides (see Table A ).
where no known or anticipated health risk Local water providers are required to test
will occur and which allows an adequate for contaminants regulated under the
margin of safety"(U.S. EPA). For some SDWA once every three years (OHD, 2000).
contaminants, the MCLG is zero. However, If a pesticide is detected at a level higher
5
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Table A
Federal Drinking Water
Standards for Pesticides
PotentialPesticide Active MCLG MCL
Ingredient (mg/L) (mg/L) from of Water
Alachlor zero 0.002 Eye,liver,kidney or spleen
problems;anemia;cancer
Atrazine 0.003 0 003 Gardiovascdlr syst:m`}problems,
reproductive diffi"'ities E
Carbofuran 0.04 0.04 Problems with blood or nervous
system; reproductive difficulties.
Chlordane zero 0.002 Liver or nervous system
problems,increases cancer risk -.
2,4-D 0.07 0.07 Kidney,liver,adrenal gland problems
Dalapon 0.2 0:2 Minor kidney changes f
1,2-Dibromo-3- zero 0.0002 Reproductive difficulties;cancer
chloropropane (DBCP)
Djnoseb 0.007 0.00TRe roducttve tlIIcultles
Diquat 0.02 0.02 Cataracts
�nilothall 0.1 0.1
Stomach,,ani! lntestl problems
Endrin 0.002 0.002 Nervous system effects
GI hos
yp ate" 0.7 0 7 Klifiriey -oliem ,reprodirctwe
diff dlties .,
Heptachlor zero 0.0004 Liver damage;cancer
Heptachlor epoxide sero 0.0002 Uuer'damage, cancer
_._r- . .
Hexachlorobenzene zero 0.001 Liver or kidney problems;
reproductive difficulties;cancer
Lindane 0.0002 0.0002 Liver or,k1 ne robiems
Methoxychlor 0.04 0.04 Reproductive difficulties
Oxamyl'(Vydate) 0.2 0.2 Slight nervous system,effects
Pentachlorophenol zero 0.001 Liver or kidney problems;cancer
Pcloram 0.5 0.5 Liver`problems,
Simazine 0.004 0.004 Problems with blood
Toxaphene zero 0.003 Kidney,liver;or thyroid problems;.
cancer';
2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 0.05 0.05 Liver problems
Source:USEPA Primary Drinking Water Regulations
6
The Tap Gap: Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
than the federally established MCL, the Secondly, MCLS do not exist for the vast
drinking water system is considered to be in majority of pesticides commonly used in
violation and,must take steps.,to either Oregon, Water providers are required to
remove the contaminant or seek use of an test drinking water for only, .23 of some 300
alternative water source. pesticide active ingredients used in Oregon,
a mere 7':6% of the potential contaminants.
Public water systems are required to test
only for contaminants that have established A third gap in,protection is regulation of
standards under the SDWA. While water pesticides individually, rafher than how they
providers are. not required to test for any are typically found which is in mixtures. A
other contaminants, they may choose to 1994 national report found, ..:a singie
monitor_for contaminants if they are glass from the tap can contain up to nine
believed to be present in the vicinity pesticides or metabolites" (EWG,,.199'5).
of a drinking water source. Failure to address mixtures of chemicals in
drinking water nay increase`human health
In Oregon, the Oregon State Health risk's associated with,individual contamin-
Division (OHD), has been given the ants. Dr. Warren Porter at the University of.
authority to regulate public water systems Wisconsin is one of the scientists who has
for compliance With:the SDWA. In '1981, explored this problem, and.he concludes:
the Oregon StateLegislature passed the "-Evidence shows that-mixtures of common
Oregon Drinking Water Quality Act. This pesticides—even at so called low concen-
law maintains the same goals as the SDWA, tratioris in drinking water—are implicated
and grants Oregon the authority to develop in damage to the nervous, immune, and
standards for drinking water safety that hormone systems" (Porter, 1998).
exceed those established by the federal Although the EPA has acknowledged this
government. To date,, however, Oregon omission as a gap in drinking water
has not developed standards more stringent protection, neither they not the state of
than those set by EPA. Oregon has acted to adjust,the standard
setting process' to account for mixtures.
The. Emperor Has No
CI®then: Gaps in Drinking Absence
Forgotten Ones: The
Water Protection Absence ®f rotection
Unfortunately, the SDWA fails in several One of the largest problems for the
ways to adequately protect the public from safety of the public's drinking water systems
pesticide pollution. First, the enforceable is not who is regulated, but rather who is
standards (MCLs), are not based solely on not. Nearly half a million Oregonians rely
protecting human health; instead they are on private domestic wells which are not
based in large.part on what is,technolog_ subject to federal or:state water system
ically and economically feasible for a water standards (OH'D, 1998). Since they.are not
system. This is especially problematic for subject to the SDWA, there is no routine
vulnerable members of a population such as monitoring or testing of private wel s.
® the elderly, children, and individuals with Unless individual well owners voluntarily.
immune-compromised conditions, who tend elect to monitor for pesticides, they have no
to be more sensitive to the health effects information about or protection°from
related to pesticides. pesticide contamination.
7
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water Its
�x U—
on a power line, In response,the agency
developed an herbicide program to better
manage the trees in their.- power line corridors,
Spraying in this area began in May of 1997.
However, BPA failed to aaike into account that
� the Sharkeys` spring was <adiacent to,and dov n
hill from,the right of way corridor that was
being sprayed.
Once he learned p(� 1,ic,ides were sprayed
�,a f near the spring Al grew concerned. He i
contacted BPA imme(iiately, and learned the
chemical that had been sprayed was garlon 4, I
whose active ingredient is triclopyr, There is
currently no drinking water sta„lard for either
garlon 4 or its active ingredient Thei efore, 3
Al Sharkey adjacent to the Sharky spring there is no threshold by which to n ieasure a
safe level of protection from the contaminant in
One Family's a drinking water systc3n*i. After the spray, BPA
claimed they had no knowledge a spring was
Pesticide Plight nearby. Al was assured, however,that the
technique they used viould not leach,and the
Al Sharkey rone individual who decided chemical would degrade to harmless
tcide contanr,n,ation of his familyy drinking a
i,�>resig cohstituents within 41 days.
wat 3r supply vias iai too ser+ua ; a problem to
tic} uninon t'yr#.`d_ I'M is ai ,F-.?ri:my year-old n1an i
Skeptical, Al decided to test the spring for S
Who'se family
c;orataminaticn,
ha's owned a just to make
j§..lar ire tF,F, This situation demonstrates the ease with which l
a drinking water source, seemingly isolated from sure. I{e knew
tifal'c f��°oc it Would be
River Valley urban and agricultural practices, can become c,xl�ensive but
since 1944 Unzi d contaminated. It also illustrates how pesticides,
also knew that
two years ago, not properly tracked, evaluated, or used, can the routine
all the members pollute a pristine natural source.
of the Sharkey tasting he dido
} for E,coli and
family were abla,
bacteria
to rely on their own ranch for ail their drinkingp i
wouldn't reveal pesticide contamination, He
water needs, and irrigation of lawn,garden and started taking sample; to a lab in Portland in
shrubs. This spring has supplied the ranch with November of 1997. T he first results were good
clean,fresh,drinking watc!r since 1925,when the news. Garlon 4 was ncat present in the spring,
first water right was is;lie>ci.
After the winter snow pack had r e;Led the i
l
That all changed in 1996. That year the fc;,l:awr�g spring, Al decided to run another
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) �
water test. His family still relied on the spring as l
experienced a power outage becati>e as t.scacx fell wattheir only drinking water source, and he granted
ff
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
to be certain it was safe, Tests in March 1998 from their own land,the Sharkeys were forced
detected garlon 4 at eight parts per billion. BPA to leave their spring for a new public source.
confirmed the chemical's presence;the agency
recommended the Sharkeys terminate use of the The Sharkeys decided to take the rnatter'to
spring and seek an alternative source until a the Department of Environmental Quality,
satisfactory filter system could be installed. DEQ's review and follow-up letter to BPA and
While they waited for a filtration system, AI's Hood River County on July 14, 1999 confirmed
sister hauled water from eight miles away. contamination at the site and indicated further
action was required. Under DEQ's supervision
At Al's insistence,the BPA tested the spring testing by BPA has been conducted and is
again in lune 1998. Testing results showed the ongoing. Results of testing done in January 2000
spring was free of chemicals. The agency confirm both of these chemicals are still present
conducted a follow up test in August of the in the water and soils of the area at various
same year and confirmed the spring water was levels. This includes the Sharkey spring site,the
l safe to drink and chemical free. The Sharkeys
BPA corridor,and also another spring about
resumed drinking from their spring. 300-400 yards uphill from the Sharkey land. This
other spring, called "Rood Spring" comes right
In February 1999,however,things took a out of the mountain on county laird and is a
turn for the worse. BPA's follow up test found
n head water tributary of Alder Creek (formerly
garlon 4 and a new herbicide,tordon. Al's sister Baldwin Creek.) that runs into.the east fork of
resumed hauling the family's water. Hood River. Water from these two springs also
It turns out that Hood River County,on enters the main irrigation system of the East
contract from BPA, had sprayed the corridor Fork Irrigation District,which provides irrigation
twice in 1997 and six times frorn June- water for a great number of orchards and farm
November 1998,with both garlon 4 and tordon. land in the Valley. The Sharkeys, at this time,are
BPA and Hood River County never disclosed to still awaiting additional testing results and the
the Sharkeys' their contractual relationship. The final decision of DEQ an the matter.
Sharkeys only learned of the county's spray
prograrn for the corridor when they went to This situation demonstrates the ease with
the county and reviewed the spray records, which a drinking water source, seemingly
trying to find out who had used tordon, when isolated from urban and agricultural practices,
and where. The County blamed BPA and BPA can became contaminated. It. also illustrates,
found fault with the County. how pesticides,not properly tracked,evaluated,
or used,can pollute a pristine natural source,
J-ioocl River County also awns timber land
IThe Sharks ys, however,were cautious and
adjacent to and above the Sharkey timber lar7d
I (spring location) and the county has a very smart. Al,familiar with many of the toxic effects
active chemical use program they follow in their of pesticides,took the matter of testing into his
tirnber and road management. BPA agreed to no own hands. It cannot be assumed that we are all
I longer spray the area involved, but the county as informed as Al Sharkey. Of the nearly
refused to agree. Apparently,the Sharkeys were
500,000 Oregonians with unregulated water
stuck with a contaminated spring. BPA hooked systems, how may have contaminated sources
the Sharkey's up to Crystal Springs Water and simply do not know?
Company, the closest public water system. After I
sixty-four years of consuming pure spring water
9
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Truth at the Ta knowledge of pesticide contamination of
Tap: drinking water supplies is incomplete.
What's Really in In a number of Oregon's public water
Oregon's Drinking systems pesticides have been detected.
9 Drinking water standards are in place for 12
Water of the 17 pesticides detected. Unregulated
pesticides have been detected because water
systems are required to monitor for certain
Approximately 1210 water systems in pesticides that EPA identifies for future
Oregon must test for pesticides once every regulation. The Oregon State Health
three years (OHD, 1998). Until recently, Division's data indicates that none of the
only minimal data about pesticides in water detected pesticides exceed the MCL (OHD,
supplies were available. Even today, our 1999)
Table B. Currently Registered Pesticides
Detected in Public Water Systems in Oregon 1993-1999
Pesticide Number of Public Water Systems with a Pesticide Detection 13
2,4-D* 6
Atrazine* 5
Pentachlorophen I 5
Lindane* 3
Methyl bromide 3
Carbofuran* 3
Simazine* 3
1,3-Dichloropropene* 3
Cyanide
Dalapon* 1
Methoxychlor' 1
3-Hydroxycarbofuran 1
Glyphosate* 1
Aldicarb Sulfoxide 1
Endothall*' 1
Metolachlor 1
Detections of banned pesticides and of common ingredients in pesticides that have multiple sources in the environment
(e.g.,arsenic,xylene) are not included here
*The government has established a drinking water standard for 12 of the 17 chemicals detected in Oregon's drinking water
Source:Adapted from the active Public Water Systems and Chemical Hits. Summary provided by Oregon Health Division
10
The Tap Gap: Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Pesticides in Surface Between 1991 and 1995, the United
Water States Geological Survey (Anderson, 1997)
conducted water quality research in Oregon's
Thirty percent of Oregonians rely Willamette Basin. The USGS tested for 86
exclusively on surface water as their drinking pesticides, and found 50 in rivers and streams
water source (Nelson, 1998). Because of the of the Willamette River Basin. The most
connection between surface water and frequently detected pesticides were the
groundwater, the quality of surface water is herbicides atrazine and simazine. In one
critical for communities who rely on ground- sample each, the herbicides atrazine and sima-
water for drinking as well (Abrams, 199 1). zine exceeded the MCL (Anderson, 1997).
Two Oregon communities, Corvallis and Drinking water standards exist for only
Adair Village, currently rely on the Willam- eight of the 50 pesticides the USGS
ette River for drinking water. Downstream, detected in the Willamette Basin. Without a
several other communities are considering drinking water standard there is no enforced
building a water treatment plant to use the mechanism to protect human health.
Willamette as a drinking water source. Pesticides without standards will most likely
The data collected to date shows that the not be tested for by the municipal systems
Willamette River is highly susceptible to responsible for drinking water delivery.
contamination by a variety of pesticides.
Table C. Summary of Pesticides Detected in the Willamette Basin
Pesticide Percent Detections Pesticide Percent Detections
Atrazine* 99 Bromacil 15
Desethylatrazine 93 Chlorpyrifos 14
Simazine* 85 Triallate 13
'Metolachlor 85 Carbaryl 13
Diuron 73 MCPA 10
Tebuthiuron 37 gamma-HCH* (Lindane) fi
Pronamide 36 Pendimethalin 6.8
Prometon 35 Trifluralin 6
Metribuzin 31 Dieldrin 5.8
Diazinon 26 Dicamba 5
Triclopyr 23 p,p'-DDE 4.7
EPTC 22 Dimethoate 4.4
Ethoprop 22 Carbofuran* 4
2,4-D* 21 DCPA 4
Dichlobenil 21 Napropamide 4
Terbacil 16 Fonofos 3
*The government has established a drinking water standard for this chemical (continued on next page)
11
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water LU I
Table C. Summary of Pesticides Detected in the Willamette Basin (cont'd)
Pesticide Percent Detections Pesticide Percent Detections
Propachlor 3 Bromoxynil 1
Bentazon 3 Propanil 1
Azinphos-Methyl 1.8 Methiocarb 0.7
Cyanazine 1.8 Oxamyl* 0.7
Propargite 1.2 Butylate 0.6
Malathion 1 cis-Permethrin 0.6
Alachlor* 1 Linuron 0.6
Norflurazon 1 Pebulate '' 0.6
Dinoseb* 1
Source: Anderson,C.,Wood,T& Morace,J. USGS Survey of the Willamette Basin 1991-1995.Rinella,F.& Janet,M. USGS
Seasonal and Spatial Variability of Nutrients and Pesticides in Streams of the Willamette Basin 1993-1995
The government has established a drinking water standard for this chemical
Pesticides in Ground the United States Geological Survey
Water (USGS) detected pesticides in one-third of
the 70 wells tested (Hinkle, 1997). In total,
Testing for pesticides in groundwater has drinking water standards have been
been very limited. In fact, only one study of established for only 11 of the 24 pesticides
pesticides in groundwater has been done in detected in Oregon's ground water (See
Oregon in the last 10 years. In that study, table below).
Table D. Pesticides Detected in Oregon's Groundwater
government
for only 11 of these 24 detected pesticides.Picloram* Fonofos
Desethylatrazine Atrazine* Silvex*
p,p' DDE Diuron Carbofuran*
2,4-Tetrachloroethylene* Propachlor MCPA
Dieldrin Benzene* Simazine*
Pentachlorophenol* EDB*i DCPA (Dacthal)
Aldicarb* Propanil Metolachlor
Dinoseb* zz$romacil Terbacil
(DEQ,1999.Hinkle,1997.Petit,1987)
12
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Our Right to Know: necessarily pose a health risk and that
Consumer Confidence more information is available from the
Reports EPA toll-free hotline (OHD, 1996).
It is the responsibility of the individual
In the 1996 Amendments to the SDWA, public water system to summarize its
Congress recognized that citizens have a specific information and communicate it to
right to know about contamination of their its consumers. The Oregon State Health
drinking water. As a result Consumer Division, who oversees this process,
Confidence Reports (CCRs) are now estimates that in 1999, 82% of Oregon
required from drinking water systems. water systems met this legal obligation. This
CCRs are meant to provide specific means 18% of the community water systems
information about where failed to make this
a community's drinking _ information available to
water comes from, what `' their customers. These
kinds of contaminants people also have a right to
are in that drinking know.
water, and what
preventative methods are Although CCRs are a
necessary to improving good first step in
its quality. Specifically, educating communities
CCRs are required to about their drinking water
provide the following quality, they do not go far
information: enough. Consumers are
given information only
1 Levels of detected about known threats to
regulated their drinking water. As
contaminants, their discussed earlier, this
respective MCLGs and information is limited
MCLs, and notices of because there are
any violations; numerous pesticides for
1 Notice if the system is which no drinking water
operating under a standard or testing exists.
variance or exemption These pesticides may be
and why; present in a community's
water source unknown to
1 EPA definitions for MCLGs, MCLs, and the water supplier or the consumer.
variances and exemptions; and the
statement of health concerns for any Because CCRs do not require an analysis
contaminant that has exceeded the MCL; of what makes water sources susceptible to
1 Levels of unregulated contaminants for contamination, it is safe to say CCRs
which monitoring is required, including represent just a portion of the public's right
radon and Cryptosporidium; to know. If the CCR is to be an effective
right-to-know tool then they must tell the
1 A statement that the presence of whole story.
contaminants in drinking water does not
13
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water LU I
... . . _.__. _....... «.... _.._._.
t
a i
Water. "Of course they say the treatment plant
Citizens of
will remove everything,but they are just looking �
at a small number of pollutants that are kriown.
Wilsonville have When you set up a system to remove a small
number of knawns,you can pat.
yourself on the
a Right to Safe
l back and'say you are doing a goon job. We [the
Drin��C�n Water citizens] are looking at the big picture. t,Ne� vvt€€�it.
9 �//�Y to know they are getting everything out that's sr) I
the river before that water reaches my kitchen y
The lack of drinking water standards for
sink. Right now,there are too marry unanswered
l commonly applied pesticides is currently posing questions about the Wiliamt!tl e to safely say
a real problem for one Oregon community. The that's going to be a reality."
I
l citizens of Wilsonville, Oregon have been fighting
i-he peace of mind Scott and other
construction of a watcr treatr ruent'plant on the
(,)v(.,( tufo years.
Wilsonville community members meed incltldc�s
polluted Willamette River foi-
The reason: ti�tr��r Willamette River is home to better information about all the pesticides in the
pesticide residues€ rand slr=formed fish. Willamette. Currently, drinking water standards
are in place for only eight of the 50 active
While proponents of the Willamette optioningredients pesticides found in the river, This
claim their high-tech f means 4 pesticides do
e _ _,.�
i " not have drinking water 1
treatment plant car,, �� E
� . �
. ;s acct: likely to change byt 1
f produce safe drinking i 1 standards,a sttisatian tfia
water,opponents ;arig€ o I
that given current
. the time viisonviile's i
ri?frsr rt)afiion this is
crtirc ris begin drirakinrf
frons the Willamette.
l +rialii,t >ihl , f.;concerned
rosidt,,nts in Wilsonville,
3tatl ratorzir"d, Citizens for Ri,gardless of how
y --�TlAve ile 9q",aVf" Axa
effective the water
Safe Water,faxed the —Collected 8110 9 _-
treatment plant may be in
a doforstit.d pike minnow -Newberg PC,o f � i I
fish found a atrearn from �� "-� removing identified l
p< Skteletally deformed firs fownd in the Milain".tte Rs er's
Pesticides,there is soca
thc� prc.>pS
o e id int ke Newberg Pool r
g guarantee those pesticides
' r,'}ff n?f)iifleS the toxtc:ity e3i
the0.illarrir-tte River, In '1994, the Oregon without drinking water- standards will be
acccaunted for durinf the t:reatrnent process.
Department of Environnientai Ouality found l
74% of the:juvenile pike minnows had skeletal Before this community is forciad to consume
deformities.I fic'. cause of the deformities Is still
Willamette River water,consun"rers have a richt
unknown. to know what is in that water-,and whether their p
health and their children's health will be, at risk. �
i
i
"How can they say they can adequately l
l
remove all the pollution from the river for l
drinking water when they don't even know �
l
what's snaking the fish sick?" questions Dolor-is
Scott, founder of'tf`Jilsonville`, C.10.7rms for Safe �
l
i
i
i
i
14
F 771
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
An Ounce of technologies and limited options for
alternative supplies.
Prevention
Drinking Water Protection
Treating contaminated drinking water Programs: Source Water
sources can be extremely expensive and may
not remove all pesticides. In most cases, if a Assessment Plans
water system detects a pesticide, it will seek
an alternative drinking water source rather The 1996 Amendments to the federal
than attempt to clean or treat the SDWA also embraced the importance of
contaminated one. However, this option is drinking water protection through the
establishment of source water assessment
also expensive, and becoming increasingly
difficult as Oregon plans (SWAPS). These plans help ensure
grows and community
develops. "Other states are talking to people about levels water systems
that are higher than the MCLs (maximum have good
For smaller contaminant levels). Here, (in Oregon) we information
systems with aren't detecting anything in regulated systems about threats
limited resources that exceeds the standards. We need to keep it local
dr
and options, a this way. drinking water
p Yet,the agricultural sector is growing, quality. This
contaminated and population is increasing. We need to keep information
drinking water something from happening here that is can help
system can create happening in other arts of the countr
serious, even pp g p y' �� communities
serious,
eve Pollution prevention is the best way to do this. focus on
unrespollution
problems. The —David Leland, prevention.
most intelligent
and cost effective Director, Drinking Water Department
way for Oregon to Oregon State Health Division The
keep pesticides out implementation
of drinking water plans for
SWAPs are developed in three
supplies is to prevent them from source pphases. First,
water entering supplies in the first place. the state identifies the watershed or
recharge area for a drinking water source,
Pollution prevention is the most cost- both surface water and groundwater, and
effective approach to keeping pesticides out delineates the hydrology of that area. This
of drinking water because the focus is on area is the vicinity intended for protection.
stopping the pollution from reaching the In the second phase, the state conducts an
water source in the first place. Prevention inventory of all potential sources of
strategies emphasize practices that reduce or contamination. The final stage requires an
even eliminate the leaching of pesticides analysis of how sensitive the water source is,
into groundwater sources and protect given information on its hydrology and
streams from runoff. These practices are potential sources of contamination.
particularly helpful to communities with
limited resources for expensive treatment
15
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water l
In Oregon, SWAPs are done by the who rely on groundwater for drinking are
Oregon Health Division and the Oregon not receiving the full range of protection
Department of Environmental Quality. benefits (Sure, 1998).
These agencies must complete all phases of
the plans by the year 2003. Once the Under the GWPA, no contamination of
agencies have finished their work, a our groundwater is acceptable, and
community water system can opt to programs to prevent degradation are to be
implement the protection plans. SWAPs established. This is in contrast to the more
determine the drinking water systems' typical standards-driven approach, which
susceptibility to contamination and allows a certain amount of pollution and
communities can use them to reduce the prompts no action until those levels are
risk of future drinking water sources. exceeded. Maximum Measurable Levels
However, because community water systems (MML) set under the GWPA are not meant
must put the plans to use with their own to serve as acceptable levels of pollution,
resources, smaller water systems may lack but rather as early triggers for particular
the funding necessary to benefit from the community-based actions to prevent further
information SWAPs provide (Nelson, 1998). contamination (DEQ, 1999).
The Act outlines two responses to
Oregon's Groundwater groundwater quality, depending on the
Protection Act degree of degradation. Whenever
contamination is detected, an "area of
In 1985 and 1986, the DEQ found groundwater concern" is supposed to be
extensive groundwater contamination in declared, and local, voluntary efforts
several rural areas of Eastern Oregon. In initiated. A "groundwater management
response, the Legislature enacted the area" is declared whenever contamination
Oregon Groundwater Protection Act exceeds 70% of the MML for nitrates or
(GWPA) in 1989 to "prevent contamination 50% of the MML for other contaminants.
of Oregon's groundwater resource while In addition, the Act encourages public
striving to conserve and restore this participation at a number of points in the
resource for present and future uses." The process, including in the development of
Act focuses on addressing contamination local action plans. Preventative strategies
from non-point source pollution, such as include identifying pollution threats;
urban and agricultural runoff. What makes recommending alternative practices,
this law notable is its emphasis on pollution conducting education programs, and
prevention and community involvement monitoring wells. The focus on prevention
(ORS. 468.698). makes sense because it can take anywhere
from a few hours to decades for pesticides
Unfortunately, the Ground Water to enter an aquifer after an application.
Protection Act has failed to protect Furthermore, once groundwater is
Oregon's groundwater from contamination. contaminated it is extremely difficult and
DEQ has not been given adequate resources expensive to clean up (ORS. 468. 698).
to fully implement the program, which
requires extensive ground water mapping
and testing. Consequently, communities
16
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Bottled Water available. Some bottled water is certified by
independent testing groups whose standards
and Home Filter meet or even exceed those required for
municipal drinking water. For more information,
Systems: No consumers can contact the International Bottled
Water Association (800-928-3711) or the NSF
Escape? International (800-673-8010;www.nsf.or-Q)
Many Oregonians have tried to address their
concerns about drinking water safety by buying
bottled water or home filtration systems. In
fact, more than half Of Americans drink bottled
water.
Annual sales have tripled over the past 10
years to about $4 billion today. Bottled water
doesn't come cheap,either: Consumers can
spend from 240 to 10,000 tirnes more per gallon
for bottled water than they typically do for tap
water, (NRDC, 2000).
Unfortunately, bottled water is not
necessarily safer than water from the tap. No
one should assume that just because water is
purchased in a bottle it is safer or healthier than
water from the tap. In fact,one fourth of
bottled water, is bottled tap water and there are
significant regulatory gaps,which exempt many
categories of bottled water from health and
safety regulations. I-lome filtration systems, are
no guarantee either: most of these are of
questionable value inaddressing pesticide
contamination.
Consumers must make educated decisions
on choosing between bottled water and their
tap water. First,they can read their consumer "
n
confidence report to learn how safe tap water
is. For more information about tap water safety,
consumers can contact their local water
department or the FPA Safe Drinking Water � "
Hotline at (800-426-4791;www.epa.govf-
safewater). Information on bottled water is also
17
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Knowledge is Department of Agriculture (ODA) must
develop a comprehensive system to collect
Power: How a and organize information on all categories of
pesticide use, including a mechanism to
Pesticide Tracking
identify and track household uses of pesticides.
House Bill 3602 also gives ODA the authority
System will to collect information on retail sales.
y Government agencies and businesses—such as
HelClose the exterminators and farmers—will report
p information about what pesticides they use,
"Tap Gap" Where, when and in what amounts.
Currently, public drinking water systems
face challenges in providing clean, safe
The widespread use of pesticides pollutes drinking water to the public because Oregon
our waters and threatens public health. As of has no system in place to track pesticide use.
today, Oregon has no reliable information on Without a thorough assessment of where
which pesticides are used, where, when, and pesticides are applied, public drinking water
in what amounts. With the passage of House providers cannot assess a water system's
Bill 3602, Oregon is taking its first steps to susceptibility to pesticide contamination. This
collect data on information is
pesticide use. particularly
Without a thorough assessment of where important
Over the past pesticides are applied, public drinking water because the
two years, the providers cannot assess a water system's laws to protect
Northwest Coalition susceptibility to pesticide contamination. the public's
for Alternatives to drinking water
Pesticides (NCAP), supplies
the Oregon State Public Interest Research contain gaps and loopholes. Routine testing
Group (OSPIRG), and the Oregon and monitoring is conducted for only a
Environmental Council (OEC), have waged handful of the hundreds of pesticides applied
a successful campaign to establish a system in Oregon, each year.
to track pesticide use in our state. To date,
over 70 organizations have supported In large public water systems, Oregon's
tracking pesticide use. These Oregon groups drinking water regulations do a good job of
represent drinking water providers, health protecting public health from water-borne
professionals, labor, children's interests, and diseases and certain other pollutants. When it
conservationists, among others. As a result comes to pesticides, however, there are major
of this broad coalition and strong public gaps in protection, and small systems and
pressure, the 1999 Legislature passed a bill domestic well users like the Sharkey family,
requiring reporting of pesticide use. are virtually defenseless. These chemicals are
diverse, widely used, and poorly tested. As
On September 1, 1999 Governor John these pesticides have increased in use over
Kitzhaber signed Oregon's new pesticide the past several decades, our drinking water
tracking law, "to ensure public health and protections have failed to keep pace.
safety and to protect Oregon's water and
environment." As a result, the Oregon Such large gaps in detection, monitoring,
and regulation of pesticides are undermining
18
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
Oregonians' access to clean, safe drinking information about pesticide use is necessary
water, their confidence in the water supply, to better protect the public from contamina-
and their health. These gaps in protection tion. Specifically, the EPA found available
make it impossible to be certain just how data incomplete to demonstrate a strong
widespread and severe pesticide contamina- association between use and detection. As
tion has become. Nevertheless, the evidence concluded by EPA, the remedy to this prob-
clearly shows there are serious problems lem is the collection of site-specific data on
around the state. pesticide use. "Site-specific data on pesticide
use and ground-water sensitivity should be
Many water systems violations are for a obtained... Detailed, publicly accessible, data
failure to monitor. Without proper monitor- on actual pesticide use should include non-
ing, the public is inadequately protected. If a farm as well as farm pesticides, and data
water system fails to monitor and test a water should also be gathered on both farm and
source, there is no effective means by which to non-farm fertilizer use" (USEPA, 1992).
measure the level of pesticide contamination
within that system. Without the information A statewide pesticide tracking system
about contaminants in drinking water, water will also enhance the pollution prevention
providers are unable to adequately protect the benefits of SWAPS. A tracking system will
public. complement the inventories of other
contaminants
Arguably, the that state
largest barrier to "Detailed, publicly accessible, data on actual agencies are
properly scheduled pesticide use should include non-farm as well as currently
testing is cost. The farm pesticides,and data should also be conducting,
current testing meth- gathered on both farm and non-farm fertilizer producing
odology is inefficient use" (USEPA, 1992). more complete
because a water data. A state
system may spend wide tracking
money testing for pesticides that aren't even system can free up state resources used for
used in the community or conversely, may contamination inventory and use those
fail to test for pesticides that are widely used. resources to provide technical assistance to
It can be very expensive to test for many smaller communities. An assessment of poten-
different types of chemicals. This can add up tial contaminants under the SWAPS will pro-
to a large financial burden for a water system. vide smaller and private systems with an
important source of information about pesti-
If apublic water system is equipped with cide contamination around their water systems.
information about pesticide use in their area,
the system could effectively tailor monitoring In general, pesticide use data will help
and testing techniques to target those pesti- drinking water providers to more effectively
cides that legitimately pose a threat. Such protect drinking water systems, target
information could save water systems money resources, and alert water providers to poten-
and increase accuracy of chemical testing. tial sources of contamination and inform sys-
tems if a water source is unsafe to drink. In
In 1988, for example, the EPA conducted the long run, a pesticide tracking system will
a nationwide study to determine the extent provide the information drinking water
of groundwater contamination in the United providers need to prevent pesticide contami-
States. The agency concluded that more nation of water systems, in the first place.
19
The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water I
Closing the Gap- contamination by pesticides and other
chemicals. However, the Legislature has not
Recommendations provided adequate funding to implement
the law, and DEQ has been unable to
effectively carry out its mandate. The
Pesticides are present in Oregon's Legislature should provide an estimated one
drinking water systems, although, as of yet, million dollars to implement the program.
the extent to which pesticides pose a threat
to human health through drinking water is
not fully understood. There are numerous 3. Increase Protection for Small
flaws in the laws designed to protect the Systems and Wells
public's drinking water systems; public
protection efforts do not go far enough. The most vulnerable targets of pesticide
pollution in drinking water systems are
Oregon needs to take the following small, private systems. To be most useful to
steps to protect our drinking water from affected communities, drinking water
pesticide contamination: protection plans should be developed in
conjunction with county land use planning
efforts. Resources should be made available
1. Effectively implement to counties to include drinking water
• . . protection programs in these efforts.
Oregon's 1999 Legislature passed
House Bill 3602, a law that should provide 4. Strengthen Drinking Water
Protection
critical data about pesticide use to the
public and drinking water providers, state
wide. As the Oregon Department of Public water systems spend more money
Agriculture implements this law, it must on system upgrades and treatment than they
ensure that drinking water providers, do on pollution prevention. Funding for
individual well owners, and the public at greater drinking water protection must be a
large have easy access to detailed site- priority for state and local governments.
specific information about pesticide use More of Oregon's tax dollars should be
around their drinking water sources. Such directed towards pollution prevention
information should be comprehensive, programs, public outreach, and human
covering all categories of pesticide use, health assessments for toxic substances, like
including that by households. pesticides. Small community water systems
and private well owners must also have
greater access to resources for these efforts.
2. Fully Fund and Implement Funding invested in sourcewater protection
• . . and information and education about
Protection Act
pesticides and drinking water can begin to
fill in the voids that limit Oregonians'
Passed in 1989, Oregon's Ground Water protection today.
Protection Act is a well-balanced law that
could go a long way toward protecting our
underground water supplies from
20
IT71
III! The Tap Gap:Pesticides in Oregon's Drinking Water
REFERENCE Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS). 468.698. Oregon
Groundwater Protection Act.
Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS). 634.006. Section
Abrams, Robert H. et al., 1991. Legal Control of (h). Oregon Department of Agriculture.
Water Resources Cases and Materials, Second
Edition, American Casebook Series, West Publishing Oregon Health Division. Pipeline. Volume 11. Issue
Company, St. Paul, MN. 3. Spring/Fall 1996.
Anderson, C.W.et al., 1997. Distribution of dissolved Oregon Health Division. Pipeline. Volume 13. Issue
pesticides and other water quality constituents in 5. Special Edition, Fall 1998.
small streams, and their relations to land use, in the Oregon Health Division. Pipeline. Volume 15. Issue
Willamette River Basin, Oregon: United States 2. Spring 2000.
Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigation
Report 97-4268, Portland, OR. Oregon Health Division, 1999. Adaptation:Active
Boon, et al., 1998. Water Quality in the Willamette Public Water Systems and Chemical Hits.
Basin, Oregon 1991-1995. United States Geological Porter K., et al., 1998. Natural Resources Cornell
Survey, Portland, OR. Cooperative Connection "Pesticides: Health Effects
in Drinking Water." See http://pmep.cce.cornell.-
Colborn, Theo, et al., 1997. "Our Stolen Future." edu/facts-slides-self/facts/pes-beef-grw85.htm1.
Penguin Books, New York, NY.
Porter, W.P. et al., 1993. Groundwater Pesticides:
EWG (Environmental Working Group), 1995. "Weed Interactive effects of low concentrations of
Killers by the Glass." See http://www.ewg.org/- carbamates, aldicarb, and methomyl and the triazine
archives/s/archive-water.html. metribuzin on thyroxine and somatotropin and
Eure, Rob. October 28,1998. Agency Fails to Inspect somatotropin levels in white rats. Journal of Toxicology
Well Water. The Wall Street Journal. and Environmental Handbook. 40:15-34.
Hinkle, Stephen R., 1997. Quality of Shallow Scott, Deloris. Personal Communication. June 2000.
Ground Water in Alluvial Aquifers of the Willamette Sharkey, Al. Personal Communication. February-
Basin, Oregon, 1993-1995. U.S. Geological Survey, March 2000.
Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-0842-B,
Portland, OR. Trautmann, Nancy M., et al., 1990. "Pesticide
Management for Water Quality" Department of Soil,
Kegley, Susan, Ph.D., 2000. Hooked on Poisons; Crop, and Atmospheric Sciences, Cornell University.
Pesticide Use in California 1991-1998. San Francisco,
California, Californians for Pesticide Reform. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Water. Fall 1990. National Pesticide Survey Project
Kirby, Chris. February 2000. Personal Summary: Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Phase I
Communication. Report.
LCVEF (League of Conservation Voters Education U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Fund). Poll released October 4, 1999. Water. January 1992. National Pesticide Survey:
Nelson, Dennis, et al., 1999. "Drinking Water Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Phase II
Protection Program Source Water Assessments in Report.
Oregon." Oregon Department of Environmental U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Quality and Oregon State Health Division. Ground Water and Drinking Water Programs.
NRDC (National Resources Defense Council), National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
2000. "Bottled Water: Pure Drink or Pure Hype?" See http://www.epa.gov/safewater/mcl.htm.
See http://www.nrdc.org/water/drinking/nbw.asp. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Water Pesticide Programs List of Chimicals Evaluated for
Quality Division 1999. Report to the Legislative Carcinogenic Potential. August 1999.
Assembly: Groundwater Quality Protection in
Oregon. Portland, OR.
21
For more information. . .
about the right to know about pesticide use, children's health
and alternatives to pesticides, contact:
The Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides
P.O. Box 1393
Eugene, OR 97440-1393
(541) 344-5044; fax (541) 344-6923
www.efn.org/—ncap
The Oregon Environmental Council
520 SW 6th Ave., Suite 940
Portland OR 97204
(503) 222-1963; fax (503) 222-1405
www.orcouncil.org
OSPIRG Foundation
1536 SE 11 th Ave
Portland, OR 97214
(503) 231-4181; fax (503) 231-4007
www.pirg.org/ospirg
Especially for Kids series
TODAY'S The 16th annual series for ages 4 to 10 will continue at 2 p.m-today with a performance by
BESTRattling Thunder.The Native American ensemble will share culture,drumming,dance,stories
and humor of the Dakota Sioux.The programs are held every Wednesday through Aug.16 on
BETthe bandstand,Blue Lake Park,between Marine Drive and Sandy Boulevard,off Northeast 223rd
Z d Avenue in Fairview.The program is free with regular park admission of S3 a car,S6 for buses. =
0`\VV%4 ZAIIX A A/A t O)vl,
i
Portlandplans to twellsop
n �
W.-
,.
to meet sununer water need
and water districts in the metro- The normal simmer use for the - '
The bureau will create a 20 politan area, including Gresham, Bull Run customer base is roughly --. _
Tigard and Tualatin, said Ross 165 million gallons a day, Walker . $
percent well to 80 percent Walker,a bureauspokeswoman.In said.Current use is about 180 mil-
Bull Run mix, which is not recent years,Portlanofficials have lion to 185 million gallons a day.
asked customers to limit the The plan calls for using the 20
ected to affect the taste amount the use dune the hot
y g percent-80 percent blend through
summer months to help avoid Aug. 28, when Portland officials
By DAVID AUSTIN
THE oRecoNinrr shortages. will re-evaluate the water supply
Anticipating that hot weather
June approval for supply plan status.
will stick around into the fall, offi- But under the new summer sup- Wells tapped in 1996
cials with Portland's Water Bureau ply plan approved in June,officials Surveying
will start mixing its pristine Bull can go to the wells in anticipation The city last tapped the wells to
Run reservoir water with supplies of the possibility of a shortage. stretch the summer supply during x dirty work
from its backup wells today. Bull Run, which includes two a string of hot days in 1996. But
reservoirs near Mount Hood,hoids with growth in areas that are part `, of vandals
The move is part of Portland's some of the cleanest, best-tasting of the Bull Run customer base,tap- a' r
summer supply plan, which calls ping wells might become a regular
Ron Este y,project
water in the nation.
for blending 20 percent well water practice. jsuperintendent for
with 80 percent from the reservoir. Walker said the blend from the�, Brownstone Homes
wells won't affect the taste of thele` According to Walker, all the T l
v Next week the bureau will draw . at Gresham Place,
down 30 million gallons of water a water. :water in the city's well system that i
g � oes to customers meets federal � ® examines the water
da from another source, Bull Run Most people won't nonce drat - -�`"� s ' damage in the
y there's a change,"she said."If yo :_safety standards for drinking water.
Lake,to helprefresh the city's sup- } ;t basement garage
p Bu[bureau officials decided not to �..
have a sensitive palate, you rrugh -`- �` .r caused by vandals
Ply. taste a slight variation.But it won I}use two wells that have been found who plugged the
"These are basically routine op- be noticeable." o have traces of solvent contami- _ - j drains and opened
erations, given our weather this She said bureau officials aren't -,nation nearby. - the faucets in a
summer," said Michael Rosen- making a rash decision to use the k "These wells won't be used,"
berger, the bureau administrator. g nearly completed,
wells. Walker said. "They have been a three-story row
"We aren't in a crisis.We don't ex j s - y
pect a shortage. "We're simply looking at what'`:pushed down to the bottom of the f+ house.The vandals
the weather forecast is saying," 'Jist of possibilities." ,,, did an estimated
"Since we can't predict when the Walker said. "The 90-day forecast '�' '- - $20,000 damage,
rain returns, we need to managetold us that we needed to start which will take a
our resources to make sure the evaluating our supply. The hot You can reach David Austin b
:a i
Y r �'"*� =; �..�, �;-. .. month to repair.
= water lasts as long as summer." weather looks like it will go phone at 503-294-5910 or by e _
,u
Portland's system supplies through the month of August and mail at dauidaustin@news.orego- ROBERT BACH
..t?�
roughly half a dozen municipalities probably into September." nian.com. THE OREGONIAN
METRO AREA ROUNDUP
Anthony "Anton" Luis Calde- were auctioned off in February. help of the city attorney's office TROUTDALE crossed Fourth Plain at Rossiter
H I L L S B O R O ron of Lake Oswego will face a The 12-store Kienow's chain was and modeled after one used by [.ane in a crosswalk lit with warn-
Dec. 5 trail on 10 counts of sold for $54 million to Western Clackamas County Fire District 1 Ma or wins Cadillac raffled Ing lights, police stopped vehicles
second-degree sexual abuse. He Properties Trust of Emeryville, since April 1998. y that failed to yield to the pedestri-
Tri-Met closing 4 MAX stops is accused of assaulting a 16-year- Calif., to settle the estate of Presi by Troutdale Boosters Club an.
old girl 10 times at the Oregon dent Juan Young, who died in Since the policy was adopted, Other drivers received tickets
for new switches on weekend g g' Trout
Clackamas County has received The dale Booster Club
Gymnastics Academy in Beaver- 1997. on accusations of speeding,, not
Tri-Met will close four down- ton and at his condominium in no disability claims stemming raffled an off-white, '63 Cadillac wearing a seat belt and license vi-
town Hillsboro MAX light-rail sta- 1994 and 1995. from basketball injuries, said Da- convertible during the weekend olations,police said.
tions this weekend and shuttle Calderon, free on $40,000 bail vid Ward, loss control consultant .to the mayor.
PORTLAND
for SAIF, the county's workers' Metro Councilor, Rod Park City planners work on code
passengers with buses. after being arrested in May, can "
.,
Update on Contract
Negotiations
Intergovernmental
Water Board
Presented by
Paul L.Matthews Integrated Utilities Group,Inc.
September 13,2000
`' Tonight's Agenda
. Financial impacts of contract
. Progress of negotiations
. Outstanding issues
. Next steps
2
„Tigard's Wholesale Rates
51.22
51.14
$1.06
$0.98
V $0.90
$0.62
50.74
$0.66
f0.58
f0.50
1995 1998 19-9-7- 1 1999 2000 2001 2002
—SrCCF $0.59 $1.23 1$0.88 $0.76 1$0.65 1 51.23 $0.81 50.85
Fiscal Year
3
j
Update on Contract Negotiations 1
F
Projected Expenditures
2.50 14.0«
2.00 12.0 0
10.0 f
U 1.59 Rib per CCF 9 9 _
a 1.00 9.0 U
4.0
z
i 0.50
2.0 'c
n 0 1 0.0
1999 2004 2009 2014 2019 2024
Fiscal Year
Total Can wt Cost Appmli ,biy 2132.69 M911-
4
Cost of Water Contracts
600
500
8 400
S
700
3 200
100
0
s
,Tigard Specific Issues
MqW
M Diversity of source of supply
. Lake Oswego
. Joint Water Commission
. Wells,ASR,etc Others
. Allocation of growth-related costs
. Reliability/redundancy
1 6
Update on Contract Negotiations 2
Uplate of Process
• Bureau has bifurcated
process
Institutional
Financial
• General acceptance by our
Group that bifurcated
process will slow down
process
• Issues are fully identified
• Awaiting Straw Man
Contrail
Qssue Refinement Process
ARM
Work group refined list of relevant contract issues
Identified each issue as easy or hard
. 14 easy,19 hard,and 3 easy/hard
Grouped issues into 7 subject areas:
. CIP
. Cost of service
Financial arrangements
Financial management <'
Operations
. Ownership
. Other interesting items
8
Issues Identified
Alternative service levels Exit terms
Benchmarking;Performance Extension of service
measures Financial management
Certainty of payment Future supply development
Certainty of supply Growth impact
CIP planning Impact of merging entities
Common reporting schemes Long term purveyors buy in
Conservation vs.Short term customers
Contract period of Mechanisms to address
agreement funding replacement of
Curtailment assets
Depreciation Methods of financing bull run
improvements
9
Update on Contract Negotiations 3
. Issues Identified (cont.)
i
Minimum purchase Research rate making
Old water/new water pricing examples from other utilities
0&M cost Technical/operational
Ownership advantages
Peak use pricing Transmission and mixing of
Political homework water from other sources
Portland wheeling other Valuation of rate base
sources of supply to Uniformity in customer
customers classes
Rate of return Wheeling to non-contract
Regulator risk customers
Reliability/redundancy
io
Areas Needing Attention
Political reality of the water
Bureau
First white paper deals with -�
general framework
Force the issues before
detailed analysis/negotiations
Process can prevent solution
Bureau can be process bound
Bureau desires multi-lateral
negotiations `-
Future long-term water supply
Financial and cost-of-service
modeling
it
Keys to Successful
Negotiations
. Stay focused on contract issues
. Optimize regional solutions
. Cost-effective production of water
. Work on the key issues
. Avoid divide and conquer
. Avoid monopoly water suppliers--pursue
alternative sources of water
. Be realistic
a
Update on Contract Negotiations 4
PLEASE REGISTER
DATE: S-PTEMBER 13, 2000
MEETING: rntprgovernmental Water Board Meeting
NAME, - (Please Print) (Do You wish to speak?)
Yes or No
katllv\\visitor