ETS - Dioxin listing for bay legit, says state

So, they admitted they used the wrong guidelines to determine toxicity - in a previous article in the Eureka Reporter, they even questioned why they were reversing their earlier decisions. It seems they don't understand they are dealing with a biased party who stands to make hundreds of thousands of dollars (maybe more) off influencing their decision.


Dioxin listing for bay legit, says state
John Driscoll/The Times-Standard Article Launched: 02/14/2007 09:57:46 AM PST

Water board staff: More samples confirm decision to site collision

State water quality staff are defending their recommendation that resulted in the listing of Humboldt Bay as dioxin-polluted.

A consultant hired by the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District last month claimed that the State Water Resources Control Board didn't look at all available information, used some bad information, and used the wrong toxicity guidelines in analyzing whether the bay should be on its impaired list for the potent carcinogen.

But the water board staff responded to the letter by Geomatrix Consultants, saying that the board's action was proper.

They admitted they used the wrong guidelines to determine toxicity -- but when that was adjusted, more samples from fish exceeded the guidelines than in the original analysis. Additional data, which should have been included, didn't change the staff's recommendation, the letter reads.

In September 2006, Humboldt Bay was left off the Federal Clean Water Act list. Humboldt Baykeeper, a Eureka environmental group, urged board staff to reconsider, as did the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The new information swayed board staff, and the board approved the change late last year. The EPA then approved the list.
In December, Humboldt County's Board of Supervisors, the Harbor District and the city of Arcata lodged a complaint over the listing, claiming it would have adverse economic effects in the area.

The bay is already considered impaired by sediment and PCBs. Several areas around the bay are contaminated by a now-banned wood preservative that has dioxin as a byproduct, though few sites have been specifically tested for dioxins.

”The Harbor District should be behind this,” said Humboldt Baykeeper's Pete Nichols with. “They should be wanting to address this issue.”

Harbor District Executive Officer Dave Hull said he's not satisfied with the board staff's reply. The contention remains that the staff did a last-minute, incomplete analysis with an inappropriate data set, Hull said, which as a result unfairly stigmatizes the bay as a whole.

”It looks like there's still an incomplete analysis,” Hull said.

The water board will hold an informational meeting on the matter on Feb. 20 in Sacramento. Hull said the goal at the meeting is to convince the board to put the issue on its March agenda for reconsideration.

Based on new public comments, the board could hear the issue again, said board spokeswoman Liz Kanter.

”At this point we aren't delisting it,” Kanter said. “However, as the board sees fit to make a change, they will do that.”

John Driscoll can be reached at 441-0504 or jdriscoll@times-standard.com.