DOCSLIB.ORG

Open Meeting Clean Water

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Open Meeting Clean Water Environmental Quality Commission Minutes for Public Meeting August 22, 2002 Clean Water Act At 30 Room 125, Capitol Annex, Frankfort EQC Commissioners and Staff Present Speakers/Representatives Present Aloma Dew, Chair Jeff Pratt, Director, Division of Water Betsy Bennett, Vice-Chair Alan Vicory, Director, Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Bob Riddle Commission (ORSANCO) Gary Revlett Hank Graddy, Sierra Club Patty Wallace Lloyd Cress, Kentucky Chamber of Commerce Staff Judi Petersen, Kentucky Waterways Alliance Leslie Cole, Director Jim Villines, Dept for Surface Mining Erik Siegel, Assistant Director Carl Millanti, Division of Air Quality Lola Lyle, Research Analyst Frances Kirchhoff, Administrative Assistant Commissioners not attending Serena Williams Jean Dorton Open Meeting Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) Chair, Aloma Dew, opened the meeting at 1:00 p.m. Approximately 20 people were present. Minutes were approved for the May 30, May 31 and July 30 meetings. It was moved by Betsy Bennett and seconded Patty Wallace to approve the minutes for May 30. It was moved by Betsy Bennett and seconded Bob Riddle to approve the minutes for May 31. It was moved by Patty Wallace and seconded Bob Riddle to approve the minutes for July 30. All minutes were unanimously approved and passed. Clean Water Act: Opening Remarks The focus of the Aug. 22 EQC public meeting was to discuss the future of clean water in Kentucky in recognition of the 30th anniversary of the Clean Water Act. One of the most significant environmental laws in Kentucky is the Clean Water Act, according to EQC Chair Aloma Dew. Ms. Dew stated that 30 years ago, waterways in Kentucky were in crisis. Some 72 percent of Kentucky’s monitored waterways were polluted to the point that they could not be used fully for swimming, fishing or drinking. The Clean Water Act announced a national mission to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s water.” The new law set some important goals--zero discharge of pollutants into navigable waterways by 1985, and waters fishable and swimmable by 1983. As a result the percent of monitored waterways in Kentucky impaired by pollution dropped from 72 percent in 1972 to 34 percent in 1999. But problems still remain. Dew noted that a recent listing of impaired waters in Kentucky included 949 waterways that have exceeded pollution limits. And fish consumption advisories are currently in effect for all waterways in the Commonwealth. EQC has invited state, industry, and environmental leaders to review the accomplishments made under the Clean Water Act as well as the challenges that remain. Clean Water Act: Division of Water Perspective The first speaker was Jeff Pratt, Director of the Division of Water. Mr. Pratt highlighted some of what the Division of Water has been doing to protect the water resources of Kentucky since the passage of the Clean Water Act. 1 C Funding and construction of wastewater facilities. Kentucky has awarded nearly $1.1 billion for 319 projects. These projects have resulted in the elimination of almost 100 package treatment plants—41 on the Big Sandy alone. C Kentucky Pollution and Discharge Elimination System (KPDES). This Division of Water began issuing KPDES permits in 1983 and has permitted 242 municipal facilities and more than 8,700 industrial facilities which includes approximately 4,800 coal mining general permit, 3,000 storm water permits, and 1,400 private and commercial permits. C Non-point source pollution. Since 1990, $32.5 million has been awarded to fund 243 nonpoint projects. Projects include Mammoth Cave area and Triplett Creek. Other non-point source projects include the Kentucky Agriculture Water Quality Act, and storm water management. C Wetlands. Wetlands at one time were considered a nuisance and a breeding ground for mosquitoes. They are now valued for their role for aquatic habitat and the ecosystem and their role in water quality. The Corp of Engineers issued the No Net Loss policy and USDA has the Wetland Reserve program. In a 22-year period, we have seen a small net gain in wetlands. C Designation of outstanding state resource waters. Currently Kentucky has 118 resource waters including wild rivers, underground river systems, lakes, and streams that contain federal and endangered species. Mr. Pratt next reviewed the challenges to protect Kentucky’s water. C Wastewater infrastructure. In 2000, for new sewers alone, $1.3 billion is needed. For wastewater treatment upgrades, $755 million, for sewer rehabilitation, $473 million for a total of $2.79 billion estimated needed for 2000. C Elimination of straight pipes. More than 635 straight pipes have been investigated and 492 notices of violation have been issued. In the 38 county Eastern Kentucky PRIDE area; there are more than 36,000 straight pipes. These counties are not conducive to traditional wastewater septic systems. Alternatives must be found. Time and energy has been put forward to eliminate package plants in the sate, but in some parts of the state, package plants might be a solution to eliminate straight pipes. C Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL). In the 2002 303(d) list contains 949 water bodies not fully supporting use. A significant increase from 1998 with 372 water bodies. Work must be done to reduce this number. C Watershed Management initiative. Water bodies were broken up into basins. Problems are approached by watershed basins allowing the Division of Water to focus their limited resources. This approach increases stakeholder involvement and other agencies. One advantage in the watershed management approach is TMDL development. Each watershed basin is tied to a schedule, which allows the flow of data to monitor progress, to develop TMDLs, and implement actions to address pollution problems. C Non-point source pollution. An estimated 2/3 of the impaired waters are from non-point sources. These sources typically are those that are not regulated. A lot of the projects in the non-point source programs are designed to increase public education and awareness. C Tri-annual review process for the water quality standards. This review of water quality standards will begin this fall. The Division of Water will look at the anti-degradation provision that the U.S. EPA has found deficient in Kentucky’s current regulations. The Division will propose: (1) to add 113 new exceptional waters and reference reach streams; (2) propose e-coli as a criteria for protection of recreational use; (3) propose to add methyl-mercury as criteria to protect public health for fish consumption; (4) propose to lower arsenic criteria for domestic water supply and (5) add several new streams to the list of outstanding state resource waters. Mr. Pratt closed by stating that Kentucky has come a long way in protecting its water, but it still has a long way to go. 2 Questions and Answers Q. In 1998, 300 streams were listed as impaired and in 2002, 900 streams were listed. What was the main reason for this change? A. The main reason is more awareness and more focus on assessments and monitoring of watershed basins. Q. You mentioned that 2/3 of impaired streams are from a nonpoint source pollution. Agriculture is one source but what are other non-point source pollutants? A. Agriculture operations is one, others would be straight pipes, failed septic systems, and land disturbances such as mining and highway construction. Q. How does the Division of Water plan to take on this task of non-point source pollution? A. Additional staff has been approved but with the current budget constraints this is still a challenge. Q. What do you see as the stakeholders’ roles? A. In the area of non-point source pollution for example, the role could be as an active participant with state agencies in the watershed basin program. Q. What percentage of the 949 impaired waterways is the violation for fecal coliform only? A. I have no exact quote, but I think it is a significant portion. Q. Isn’t non-point source pollution the most difficult to solve? It seems to be a monumental task. How are we going to come up with the money for that? A. Failed septic systems and straight pipes are a challenge. Congressman Hal Rogers has come up with a significant amount of funding through the PRIDE program. Is it enough—we don’t know, but it is one source of funding to help. Q. Do you plan to accommodate “X” number of people in “X” amount of time? A. We are just beginning to do that kind of planning and integrate that in the watershed basin approach. Q. Do you get any kind of support or help from County Health Departments in regard to straight pipes? A. Some counties are helpful and some are not. They are stakeholders and we want them to be involved. Q. Are straight pipes a Division of Water problem or a County Health Department problem? A. It is a Division of Water problem if the water from the pipe is polluting a waterway. Q. What is the state’s position on valley fills? Does it consider the practice as breaking the Clean Water Act? A. This is a federal issue and it is in federal court. We will comply with their decision under the 404 and 401 Water Quality Certification. Q. What about the water impacts of proposed power plants? A. Things are in place for water quality, but the bigger issue may be with the water quantity and water supply issues associated with power plants. Q. The Kentucky Post had an article stating the 1998 figure and the 2002 figure of impaired waterways. The 2002 figure is more than twice as many as 1998.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission Annual Report 2017
    Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission Annual Report 2017 Table of Contents To the President and Governors 1 Chairman’s Message 3 ORSANCO States: Working Together to Protect the Ohio River and its Uses 6 Protecting Drinking Water 7 Protecting Aquatic Life 9 Protecting Fish Consumption 11 Protecting Recreational Use 12 Investigating Current Water Quality Issues 13 Public Information, Education, and Outreach 17 2017 Resources Overview 22 ORSANCO Staff 23 Members of the Commission 25 To the President and Governors* The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) is an interstate water pollution control agency created in 1948 by the State of Illinois, the State of Indiana, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the State of New York, the State of Ohio, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of West Virginia with approval of the Congress of the United States. The Commissioners of ORSANCO respectfully submit the following fiscal report of activities for 2017 to: The Honorable Bruce Rauner The Honorable Tom Wolf Governor of Illinois Governor of Pennsylvania The Honorable Eric Holcomb The Honorable Terry McAuliffe Governor of Indiana Governor of Virginia The Honorable Matt Bevin The Honorable Jim Justice Governor of Kentucky Governor of West Virginia The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo and Governor of New York The Honorable Donald Trump The Honorable John R. Kasich President of the United States Governor of Ohio 1 *As of June 30, 2017 The Roebling Suspension Bridge was the first bridge to span the Ohio River. It opened to traffic on January 1, 1867. 2 Chairman’s Message First and foremost, it has been a professional privilege Pickard, while working with him and Clyde Baldwin at and a personal honor to serve this past year as the Kentucky Water Pollution Control Commission over Commission Chairman.
    [Show full text]
  • ORSANCO Annual Report 2011
    The ORSANCO 2011Annual Report Chairman’s Message Table To the President and Governors* of Contents The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) is an interstate water pollution control Chairman’s Message ...........................................................2 agency created in 1948 by the State of Illinois, the State of Indiana, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the State Departing Message from Alan H. Vicory, Jr. ...............3 of New York, the State of Ohio, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the Protecting the River’s Many Uses ..................................5 State of West Virginia with approval of the Congress of the United States. The Commissioners of ORSANCO Managing Water Resources .............................................6 respectfully submit the following report of activities for a water resources program to Among emerging issues in the Ohio “The only constant is change, 2011 to: coordinate the management of River Basin are new methods of Assessing Water Quality ....................................................7 continuing change, inevitable both water quality and quantity. In extracting and processing energy change; that is the dominant 2011, the Commission began the sources and the water quality issues Special Projects ....................................................................9 The Honorable Pat Quinn, Governor of Illinois factor in society today. No process of acquiring foundation surrounding them. Coal, natural sensible decision can be made grants to provide operational gas, and hydropower all present Reducing Nutrients .......................................................... 11 The Honorable Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., Governor of Indiana any longer without taking into support to its newly-formed Water both opportunity and concern. For account not only the world as it Resources Committee. Through years ORSANCO worked to lessen Protecting Drinking Water ............................................ 13 is, but the world as it will be.” The Honorable Steven L.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Unrefined Liquid Hydrocarbons on Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystems of the Great Lakes Basin
    Impacts of Unrefined Liquid Hydrocarbons on Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystems of the Great Lakes Basin Final Report Prepared for: The International Joint Commission January 31, 2018 Blank Page Impacts of Unrefined Liquid Hydrocarbons on Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystems of the Great Lakes Basin Final Report Prepared for: Internal Use Under Contract to: The International Joint Commission January 31, 2018 Prepared by: LimnoTech, Ann Arbor, Michigan Blank page Impacts of Unrefined Liquid Hydrocarbons on Water Quality and Aquatic Ecosystems of the Great Lakes Basin International Joint Commission January 31, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary .....................................................1 2 Project Description .................................................... 5 2.1 Project Tasks ....................................................................... 5 2.2 Project Communication ...................................................... 6 2.3 Project-related Workshops and Symposia ........................ 6 2.4 Project Deliverables ............................................................ 7 2.4.1 Draft Literature Compilation, May 25, 2017 ........... 7 2.4.2 Interim Progress Report, June 30, 2017 .................. 7 2.4.3 Literature Review Update, July 20, 2017................. 7 2.4.4 First Draft Final Report, September 15, 2017 .......... 7 2.4.5 Second Draft Final Report, December 6, 2017 ........ 8 2.4.6 Final Report (version 3), January 31, 2018 ............. 8 3 Science Synthesis ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Spill Probability Analysis
    Hudson River Oil Spill Risk Assessment Volume 3: Oil Spill Probability Analysis Prepared for Scenic Hudson, Inc. One Civic Center Plaza Suite 200 Poughkeepsie, NY 12601-3157 Prepared by Dagmar Schmidt Etkin, PhD Environmental Research Consulting 41 Croft Lane Cortlandt Manor, NY 10567-1160 Deborah French McCay, PhD Jill Rowe and Deborah Crowley RPS 55 Village Square Drive South Kingstown, RI 02879-8248 John Joeckel SEAConsult LLC P. O. Box 243 Wachapreague, VA 23310-0243 Andy Wolford, PhD Risknology, Inc. 3218 Quiet Lake Drive Katy, TX 77450-5721 May 2018 Acknowledgments This project was commissioned by Scenic Hudson, Inc., of Poughkeepsie, New York, under a Professional Services Contract with Environmental Research Consulting (ERC). RPS ASA, SEAConsult LLC, and Risknology, Inc., were all subcontractors to ERC under separate contracts. The HROSRA research team acknowledges the invaluable inputs and discussions with Scenic Hudson over the course of the study period (September 2017 through May 2018), including the selection and development of the hypothetical spill scenarios. The contents of the report, data, analyses, findings, and conclusions are solely the responsibility of the research team and do not constitute any official position by Scenic Hudson. The Hudson River Oil Spill Risk Assessment was conducted as an independent, objective, technical analysis without any particular agenda or viewpoint except to provide quantitative and qualitative information that could be used to work to a common goal of spill prevention and preparedness. The study is intended to inform officials, decision-makers, stakeholders, and the general public about oil spill risk in the Hudson River. The diligent efforts of the RPS SIMAP modeling team of Jenna Ducharme, Matt Frediani, Deborah Crowley, Emily Skeehan, and Matt Bernardo provided the necessary data, results, maps, and graphics that formed the foundation of much of the analysis in the HROSRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmentalism Contained: a History of Corporate Responses to the New Environmentalism
    ENVIRONMENTALISM CONTAINED: A HISTORY OF CORPORATE RESPONSES TO THE NEW ENVIRONMENTALISM Joe Greene Conley II A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY RECOMMENDED FOR ACCEPTANCE BY THE PROGRAM IN HISTORY OF SCIENCE NOVEMBER 2006 UMI Number: 3236171 UMI Microform 3236171 Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 © Copyright by Joe Greene Conley II, 2006. All rights reserved. Abstract This dissertation describes how affected industries responded to the new environmentalism that emerged as a potent political and cultural force in late-twentieth- century America. Through a series of case studies, it traces how large corporations linked to pollution or toxics problems sought to contain the broad environmental agenda embodied in the landmark environmental laws of the 1970s. These companies and trade associations used public relations and advertising campaigns to shape popular perceptions of industrial environmental impacts. They also employed a variety of tactics to strategically manage scientific information on alleged harms, to inject cost and feasibility considerations into federal environmental laws and the regulatory process, and to challenge the policies used by federal regulators to estimate environmental risks. Drawing on internal corporate documents, records of public relations and advertising campaigns, as well as more traditional sources, this dissertation argues that affected industries were a driving force in moving the discourse of environmental politics toward an increasingly narrow, more technical language of cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment, and risk-benefit balancing.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection Guide for Oil Spill Applied Technologies: Volume 1
    ****ATTENTION**** Disclaimer: The information provided in this document by Region III and IV Regional Response Teams is for guidance purposes only. Specific information on countermeasure categories and products used for oil spill response listed in this document does not supersede the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Subpart J, Product Schedule rule. 40 CFR Part 300.900 addresses specific authorization for use of spill countermeasures. Part 300.905 explains, in detail, the categories and specific requirements of how a product is classified under one of the following categories: dispersants, surface washing agents, bioremediation agents, surface collecting agents, and miscellaneous oil spill control agents. Products that consist of materials that meet the definitions of more than one of the product categories will be listed under one category to be determined by the USEPA. A manufacturer who claims to have more than one defined use for a product must provide data to the USEPA to substantiate such claims. However, it is the discretion of RRTs and OSCs to use the product as appropriate and within a manner consistent with the NCP during a specific spill. For clarification of this disclaimer, or to obtain a copy of a current Product Schedule, please contact the USEPA Oil Program Center at (703) 603-9918. This page intentionally left blank. SSeelleeccttiioonn GGuuiiddee ffoorr OOiill SSppiillll AApppplliieedd TTeecchhnnoollooggiieess VVoolluummee II –– DDeecciissiioonn MMaakkiinngg NOTE: This revision of Volume I of the “Selection Guide for Oil Spill Applied Technologies” reflects many changes from the previous versions. Scientific and Environmental Associates, Incorporated and the Members of the 2002 Selection Guide Development Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ashland Oil Spill, Floreffe, Pa — Case History and Response Evaluation
    THE ASHLAND OIL SPILL, FLOREFFE, PA — CASE HISTORY AND RESPONSE EVALUATION Cdr. E. A. Miklaucic U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office Pittsburgh Suite 700, Kossman Building Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/iosc/article-pdf/1989/1/45/1741384/2169-3358-1989-1-45.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 J. Saseen U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Wheeling Field Office 303 Methodist Building Wheeling, West Virginia 26003 ABSTRACT: On January 2, 1988, a storage tank at the Ashland Oil the first time in that location. Fuel height in the tank was less than Terminal, Floreffe, Pennsylvania, near the Monongahela River 24 2 inches from the maximum 46 foot depth, representing 3,857,384 miles upstream of Pittsburgh, suffered an instantaneous and complete gallons of product. failure, releasing 90,000 barrels (about 3.9 million gallons) ofdiesel oil At approximately 5:02 p.m., while returning to the terminal office, into the environment. The speed and volume of the release made ''first the operator described hearing a sound like thunder and turned to aid" almost impossible. Within hours, an estimated 18,000 barrels observe the roof of No. 1338 collapse and a cloud of mist surround the (750,000 gallons) ofdiesel had entered the river. Responders were faced tank area.5 The resulting wavelike surge of diesel fuel crossed facility with a power and communication lines shutdown, contaminated pota- containment berms, inundating the terminal and adjacent property, ble water intakes, oil dispersion from river currents and turbulence creating one of the nation's largest inland oil spills (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development: a Current Awareness Bibliography
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 10-3-1994 Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development: A Current Awareness Bibliography Sue Ann Gardner University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] D. Landry LUMCON Marine Center J. Riley LUMCON Marine Center Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libraryscience Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Gardner, Sue Ann; Landry, D.; and Riley, J., "Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development: A Current Awareness Bibliography" (1994). Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries. 114. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libraryscience/114 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Home Site Map & Search Online at http://www.lumcon.edu//library/eoogd/default.asp aphy ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ EFFECTS OF OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT A CURRENT AWARENESS BIBLIOGRAPHY October 1994 This bibliography is a quarterly compilation of current publications (citations with abstracts) from a wide variety of electronic and print information sources relating to offshore oil and gas development. It is compiled and edited by Sue Ann Lewandowski, and is published at the LUMCON Marine Center, 8124 Hwy 56, Chauvin, LA 70344-2124, 985-851-2875, 985- 851-2874 FAX, www.lumcon.edu/library. All inquiries and requests to receive past or future issues of this publication should be directed to the editor.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Oil Spills and Oil Spill Response
    United States Office of Emergency EPA 540-K-99-007 Environmental Protection And Remedial OSWER 9200.5-104A Agency Response PB2000-963401 December 1999 Oil Program Center Understanding Oil Spills And Oil Spill Response Understanding Oil Spills In Freshwater Environments Introduction OIL SPILLS endanger public health, imperil drinking water, devastate natural resources, and disrupt the economy. In an increasingly technological era, the United States has become more dependent upon oil-based products to help us maintain our high standard of living. Products derived from petroleum, such as heating oil and gasoline, provide fuel for our automobiles, heat for our homes, and energy for the machinery used in our industries. Other products derived from petroleum, including plastics and pharmaceuticals, provide us with convenience and help to make our lives more comfortable. Additionally, non-petroleum oils, such as vegetable oils and animal fats, are increasingly being consumed in the United States. These oils can contain toxic components and can produce physical effects that are similar to petroleum oils. Because they have toxic properties and produce harmful physical effects, spills of non-petroleum oils also pose threats to public health and the environment. Because we use vast quantities of oils, they are usually stored and transported in large volumes. During storage or transport, and occasionally as the result of exploration activities, oils and other oil-based products are sometimes spilled onto land or into waterways. When this occurs, human health and environmental quality are put at risk. Every effort must be made to prevent oil spills and to clean them up promptly once they occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio River Basin Consortium for Research and Education Tiao J
    Ohio River Basin Consortium for Research and Education http://www.orbcre.org Tiao J. Chang, PhD, Executive Director 147 Stocker Center, Ohio University Athens, OH 45701 Tel: 740-593-1462; Email: [email protected] The Ohio River Basin Consortium for Research and Education (ORBCRE) has actively participated in the discussion of the Ohio River Basin Alliance (ORBA, previously Summit and Initiative). Indeed, we have published and provided the white paper for the Columbus meeting (http://www.ohio.edu/orbcre/news/WhitePaperforORBA.pdf; February 23-25, 2010). In further response to ORBA’s drive, we held a retreat at Ohio University (June 18-19, 2010) to discuss what ORBCRE can do to be an integral part of the ORBA for enhancing the general mission and achieving the common goal. The two-day retreat, participated by the executive committee members (http://www.ohio.edu/orbcre/gov/index-2009.html), has made a good progress that is summarized in the following. Inputs provided by guest participants, Ms. Amy Sharp of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mr. Alan Vicory of ORSANCO, Mr. Tim Lohner of AEP, Mr. Joel Allen of USEPA, and Ms. Jeanne Wilson of Senator’s Brown’s Office are gratefully acknowledged. Summary. The following is a brief list of our attributes, strengths and accomplishments that will assist the ORBA’s drive in meeting its goals. • We facilitate a peer to peer interaction in the academic realm. • We have convening authority regarding research and education efforts in the basin. • Applied research expertise with knowledge of emerging environmental and water resources engineering problems focused on the Ohio River Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Water Quality
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Instructional Model: Learning Cycle --------------------------------------------------- 7 Overview of the Ohio River ------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Pre-voyage Lessons ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11 • Introduction to the Ohio River ---------------------------------------- 12 ▬ Activity 1: Connecting to the Ohio River ----------- 13 • Watersheds ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25 ▬ Activity 1: Contour Mapping --------------------------------- 27 ▬ Activity 2: Stream Table ---------------------------------------- 38 ▬ Activity 3: Scavenger Hunt – Finding Local Watershed Influences ------------------------- 45 • Measuring Water Quality ------------------------------------------------- 47 ▬ Activity 1: Water Quality Parameters Past and Present ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 51 ▬ Activity 2: Measuring Water Quality Parameters --------------------------------------------------------------- 64 ▬ Activity 3: Testing the Water -------------------------------- 77 On-Board Exploration ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 79 Post-voyage Lessons ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • EE Harvard Business School Ashland Oil Inc.: Trouble at Floreffe
    "* ""'"", EE Harvard Business School 9-390-017 ~ January 19, 1990 Ashland Oil Inc.: Trouble at Floreffe (A) On Saturday, January 2, 1988 at 5:02 p.m., a 4-milion-gallon storage tank at the Floreffe terminal outside of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, collapsed while being filled, releasing a 3.9-millon- gallon wave of diesel fueL. As the fuel gushed, it slammed into an empty tank nearby and surged over contairuent dikes onto the surrounding properties creatig the first major oil pollution accident for Ashland Oil, Inc., (AOI) in its 64-year history. By nightfall, nearly three quarters of a milion gallons of oil had spiled into the Monongahela River, threatening the drinking water supply of communities in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia, as well as the safety of nearby residents. Over the next three days nearly 200 people participated in the clean-up including AOI employees; the Coast Guard and its Gulf Coast emergency strike force; O.H. Materials Co. of Ohio, a professional hazardous material clean-up company hired by AOI; AOI employees; the Red Cross; and the Audubon Society. On Tuesday, January 5, at 1000 a.m, John HaU, CEO and chairman of the board of AOI, as well as other officers and executives boarded two of six corporate Cessna aircraft to address the media in Pittsburgh at a press conference scheduled for 2:00 p.m that afternoon. Accompanying Hall were Robert Yancey, Jr., president of Ashland Petroleum Company (APC), H.M. Zachem, senior vice president, External Affairs, and J. Dan Lacy vice president, Corporate Cornunications/ AOI.
    [Show full text]