Wednesday, May 25 @ 2:30 pm Public Zoom Meeting

Oklahoma DEQ has invited citizens to speak up about the report they will make to the EPA on the quality of the waters of the state. https://www.deq.ok.gov/water-quality-division/watershed-planning/integrated-report/ See “2022 Integrated Report”

Every two years ODEQ presents a report (required by the Clean Water Act) on the status of all Oklahoma lakes and streams. The report divides creeks and rivers into segments and ODEQ reports what it knows or thinks it knows about the beneficial uses it is obligated to achieve and protect. 

No stream segment is more important to the City of Tulsa than the 7.32 miles of the Arkansas River known as Waterbody ID OK120420010010_10. It starts about where the new Gilcrease expressway crosses the river and ends at I-44 entirely encompassing Zink Lake.

The beneficial uses that are “impaired” are:

• Primary Body Contact Recreation (anything that gets your face wet)

• Fish Consumption

• Warm Water Aquatic Community (all things that support all things that live in the water)

• Agriculture (does the river water kill plants?)

• Aesthetics (requires an expert to look and report what she sees)

All of these uses are impaired because up to date evidence is lacking. Impaired can mean almost good enough or very bad.

Once upon a time the river was sampled then it wasn’t. Sampling the river water is not convenient or cheap. But if it is not done, we will never know if beneficial uses are “supported”, and we will not have benchmarks that can be used to protect the river or measure progress. 

Groundwater flowing under the refineries leaks oil and chemicals to the river in addition to wastewater effluent delivered by a pipe. Typical of urban rivers the city’s stormwater system discharges bacteria from pets, geese, and people (including illegal sanitary sewer connections).

We believe ODEQ can use the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System authority delegated by it by EPA to require the refineries and the City of Tulsa to sample the river. 

Until ODEQ receives the data signs should be posted “Don’t eat the fish and don’t put your face in the water”.

Wednesday, May 25 @ 2:30 pm Public Zoom Meeting Link:

https://www.zoomgov.com/j/1605074224?pwd=c0cvU2FYTlY0dmF6Ty82cVNRTDhMQT09

or by telephone at +1 551 285 1373

Meeting ID: 160 507 4224

Passcode: 802201 

Send any comments to:

Water.Comments@deq.ok.gov 

Remember to refer to: Waterbody ID OK120420010010_10

From ODEQ website:

The Draft Oklahoma 2022 Integrated Report and 303(d) List Public Comment Period (Comment Period ends June 3, 2022)

The Draft 2022 Integrated Report and 303(d) List is available for review and public comment. Expand the “2022 Integrated Report” menu above to view the Draft 2022 Integrated Report and associated documents. The Draft 2022 Integrated Report GIS layers are available to view and download at: https://gis.deq.ok.gov/maps/.

The public meeting for the Draft 2022 Integrated Report will be presented in a virtual format via Zoom. The meeting will be held at 2:30 p.m. on May 25, 2022. Information and instruction for attending the meeting are located in the 2022 Integrated Report Zoom Meeting Public Participation document.

The 2020 303(d) List remains the official list of impaired waters for the State of Oklahoma until the 2022 Integrated Report and 303(d) List is approved by EPA Region 6.

For more videos, check out ARRC's YouTube Channel.

ADD THE 24-HOUR NATIONAL RESPONSE CENTER 

HOTLINE TO YOUR CONTACTS

1-800-424-8802

Anyone who discovers a hazardous substance release or oil spill is encouraged to contact the federal government, regardless of whether they are the responsible party.

EPA has determined that discharges of oil in quantities that may be harmful to public health or the environment include those that:

1. Violate applicable water quality standards; (oil on the water is a violation of Oklahoma’s water quality standards);

2. Cause a film or "sheen" upon, or discoloration of, the surface of the water or adjoining shorelines;

3. Cause a sludge or emulsion to be deposited beneath the surface of the water or upon adjoining shorelines.

Note: The requirement for reporting oil spills stems from the Discharge of Oil Regulation, known as the "sheen rule." Under this regulation, oil spill reporting does not depend on the specific amount of oil spilled, but on the presence of a visible sheen created by the spilled oil.

To learn about the information that National Response Center will want to know, check out: What Information is Needed When Reporting an Oil Spill or Hazardous Substance Release?

The importance of submitting comments to the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) on HollyFrontier's Proposed Revisions to its Class 2 Permit No. 990750960 cannot be overstated. Read the permit here and submit your own comments. 

Attendee consensus during the January 19, 2022 Public Meeting revealed a strong desire for ODEQ representation. Listen to an Audio Recording of the Meeting here. 

Numerous questions asked by the public on January 19th were deemed by HollyFrontier to be outside of the scope of this industry-led meeting. In your comments, ask ODEQ to hold a Public Hearing on Permit No. 990750960 so that members of the public can be informed about the Proposal.

For inspiration, comments authored by Fred Storer, P.E., are provided below. 

Concerns and Questions to Consider Prior to Approval:

Approval of HollyFrontier’s proposal to install a “LNAPL Containment Cap and Collection System” (containment cap) on PSO/AEP property downstream of the under-construction replacement Zink Dam and new pedestrian bridge requires investigation and response to the following:

1. The proposed facility, if it functions according to plan, will only collect oil (or LNAPL, Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid) and allow groundwater to continue to flow to the Arkansas River. Chemicals of concern dissolved in the groundwater are named in HollyFrontier’s RCRA documents. HollyFrontier should estimate the volume of groundwater which will flow through the containment cap and the concentration of chemicals of concern contained in the groundwater. 

2. The LNAPL Recovery Log (Appendix B. Monitoring and Maintenance Forms and Logs) appears to anticipate that recovery from the collection sumps will be entirely LNAPL. Any aqueous phase liquid recovered should be reported and fully analyzed for chemicals of concern. Similarly, the collected LNAPL should be fingerprinted for comparison with the LNAPL plumes mapped in the Conceptual Site Plan. 

3. HollyFrontier should explain how the recovered liquids should be disposed of.  

4. HollyFrontier has expressed 100% confidence in the containment cap, yet, refused to explain (January 19, 2022, Public Meeting) what might be done if their solution is less than successful as would be the case if a visible sheen was still present at the interface between the river and the toe of the containment cap. HollyFrontier must provide a failure-mode explanation.  

5. The containment cap appears to extend past the current shoreline into the river. Has the US Army Corps of Engineers been consulted and what, if any, permit would be required from the Corps?

6. The permit application incorporated by reference the March 25, 2021, financial assurance (FA) provided by HollyFrontier’s Chief Financial Officer (CFO). The CFO’s letter reveals HollyFrontier’s expectations over the next 30 years. Excluding operating and maintenance costs, in 2021 through 2023, HollyFrontier accounts for $8 million for projects and includes the estimated cost of the containment cap. Then, HollyFrontier kicks the can down the road for the next 30 years without any recognition of a long-term solution

The CFO’s letter attributes the $8 million to RCRA “Closure” costs. And the balance, $14.9 million, to RCRA “Post Closure” costs. It is absurd to imply that HollyFrontier will complete Closure based on the $8 million basket of projects. HollyFrontier should be required to explain. Does ODEQ agree that HollyFrontier East can complete Closure in 2023?

7. HollyFrontier has not addressed long-term measures required to recover or immobilize LNAPL and chemicals of concern on the property. HollyFrontier says some of these measures require the ultimate closure of the refinery. No one with an understanding of the petroleum refining business expects the Tulsa refineries to be operating in 2050 or for the groundwater to stop flowing to the river. HollyFrontier should be required to engineer and present a cost estimate for a long-term solution. 

8. The containment cap is a wastewater treatment device. It requires a OPDES (Oklahoma Pollution Discharge Elimination System) permit which is subject to the Oklahoma Water Quality Standards which protect the beneficial uses of the river. 

9. HollyFrontier should provide evidence that PSO/AEP agrees to allow the containment cap to remain in place in perpetuity. Owing to the extensive groundwater contamination that extends throughout the PSO/AEP property, PSO/AEP should be asked for a statement of their understanding, expectations, and willingness to place restrictive covenants on the title to their property.  

10. Various correspondence between HollyFrontier and ODEQ indicates the need for “institutional controls” required for the River Parks Authority leased area. The same potential exposures exist for the PSO/AEP property. HollyFrontier and PSO/AEP should address this issue.

11. Among the citizens present at the public meeting hosted by HollyFrontier on January 19, 2022, there was consensus that ODEQ should have been represented. As interest has developed in the permit revision proposal, questions have multiplied and ODEQ should call a public hearing. 

I believe HollyFrontier’s motivation for the permit request is to prevent the throng of west shore visitors using the pedestrian bridge from noticing oil on the water in hopes that they will be allowed to continue to kick the can down the road until the current executive team reaches retirement age. 

Original Signed By

Fred Storer, P.E.

January 25, 2022

Tulsa

Mr. Arsin Sahba, Corporate Environmental Specialist, from HollyFrontier’s headquarters office in Dallas provided a superficial explanation (three slides) of how the proposed shoreline cap structure is expected to prevent oil from appearing on the water below the New Zink Dam. 

Sahba expressed “100 percent” confidence that oil would no longer appear at the shore after the structure is completed. However, Sahba agreed that chemicals dissolved in the groundwater will continue to flow unimpeded to the river. 

The chemicals which continue to flow are identified in HollyFrontier’s submittals to the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ). They include Benzene, the gasoline additive MTBE, other soluble toxic hydrocarbons, and toxic metals; arsenic, cobalt, and selenium.

HollyFrontier is seeking to amend their agreement with ODEQ to recognize the proposed structure as what ODEQ calls a “remedial action” or what HollyFrontier calls a “final remedial action.” If successful, it avoids a problem that would be obvious when citizens cross the new bridge. 

The proposal does nothing to address the "invisible" problem, i.e.,  toxic materials dissolved in the groundwater flowing to the river. Questions by citizens at the meeting about larger issues involving the refineries were declared not relevant by Sahba. 

The meeting was not attended by ODEQ. However, ODEQ is obligated to receive your comments until February 14, 2022. Comments to ODEQ may be submitted online here. Address comments made by email to Hillary.Young@deq.ok.gov with "Comments Re Permit No. 990750960" in the subject line.

January 19, 2022, 6pm @ Zarrow Regional Library

2224 W 51st St

The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality has called a public meeting “to answer questions” about an application from HollyFrontier for approval to install a “containment cap and collection system” that would attempt to control oil entering the river just south of the under-construction Zink Lake dam.

The source of the oil is one hundred years of burials, spills, and leaks that float in and on the groundwater under the refinery. There is no question regarding the source and responsibility.

In our view the proposal is an experiment. ODEQ refers to the proposal as a “remedial action.” HollyFrontier refers to the proposal as a “final remedial action [...] to mitigate the potential for hydrocarbon sheens from forming along the bank of the Arkansas River.”

Any oil in or on the river is a violation of Oklahoma’s Water Quality Standards and HollyFrontier is responsible for preventing oil and other pollutants from entering the river. These other pollutants are dissolved in the groundwater and will not be removed by the proposed system.

Presumably, HollyFrontier will assist ODEQ in answering questions and will explain how the proposed system is expected to work on January 19. The record will be open for written comments until February 14, 2022.

Plan to attend, hear how the proposal is intended to work, and ask questions.

-- ARRC, Arkansas River Rights Coalition