Below find a letter to the trustees of the Urbana Champaign Sanitary District outlining our position on water sales by the district. This letter was precipitated by UCSD’s consideration of water sales to two different proposed facilities – the Cronus fertilizer plant near Tuscola, IL and Sunrise Coal’s “Bulldog” coal mine in Vermilion County, IL. PRN believes that it is necessary for UCSD to adopt a formal policy to help guide considerations of water sales.
For background information on the water sales currently being considered, go here. The UCSD draft policy statement, to which this letter is a response, can be found here.
—–
Dear Trustees Lenik, Lyke and Putman:
Thank you for presenting the District’s draft policy on effluent sales for public review and comment. The sale of effluent by the District is a new and serious consideration with long term implications for the Champaign Urbana community. As I stated at the public meeting on May 8th, it appears that the contemplated sale to Cronus is being made without due consideration of the potential ramifications and long term consequences. Likewise, the policy reads as if it has been hastily drafted to facilitate the sale. We hope you will use the invitation from Cronus as an opportunity to develop a policy for the future, rather than feel compelled to act quickly, according to a timeline set by Cronus. We need a policy that helps protect our water supply and promotes the health of local, cherished streams. The comments we heard on May 8 demonstrated overwhelming interest in protecting these streams and in planning for the future.
To that end, we offer the following comments on the draft policy. The numbered paragraphs correspond to those in the draft.
Paragraph 1. The meaning of “financially beneficial” is unknown, as is the meaning of “influences.” Although policy statements tend to be more general in nature, if the document is too vague or overbroad how is the public, or the board for that matter, to determine whether a contemplated sale is consistent with the policy? Please provide some clarification as to the meaning of these terms. The policy should require the sale price to be commensurate with market value in a comparable market, and reflect the opportunity cost of foreclosing the option to meet unforeseen local needs.
Paragraph 2. Likewise, there is no indication what a “substantial contract” is. Is the potential Cronus contract substantial? What about the Bulldog Mine proposal? We suggest that the policy clarify which proposals will be subject to public input and that the policy require the Board to seek public input and to strongly encourage and facilitate such input. A public meeting and public comment period should be required elements of sale proposal considerations. Moreover, public comments should be sought after the public has been provided with a credible analysis of the impacts of the choices to be presented to the board for decision.
Paragraph 5. Maintaining flow (including flow variability) needed to support existing uses, including recreational uses such as fishing and paddling and aquatic life uses should be a requirement in any sale of effluent. Stating that sustaining a minimum level of flow is highly desirable is simply not enough and it not consistent with the District’s mission of protecting the natural environment. Decisions regarding flow maintenance for the protection of uses should be made after expert consultation with both a hydrologist and an aquatic biologist. The impact of diversions on water quality must also be expertly determined.
Paragraph 6. We believe that consumptive uses should be minimized, not simply “discouraged.”
Paragraph 7. I cannot understand this paragraph as currently written and I doubt many others can either. The Mahomet Aquifer, upon which we heavily rely for our water supply is currently being used at an unsustainable rate. We are using the water faster than it can be recharged by precipitation. Groundwater recharge should be a priority in assessing water sales. Proposals that allow for recharge of the Mahomet Aquifer should be given priority. The District should not assume that the proposal from Cronus is the only one it will receive.
Paragraph 8. This paragraph is so vague I cannot see how it provides any guidance. The policy should encourage water conservation, discourage consumptive uses, promote energy conservation and prioritize aquifer recharge wherever possible.
In addition, the policy is too narrowly drawn and should be amended to reflect broader community interests. We recommend the following additions:
- Local economic benefits of effluent sales should weigh far more heavily than economic benefit elsewhere.
- Effluent sales should favor industries that employ “green” or sustainable practices.
- Consideration must be given to potential future demands on the receiving streams. For instance, though the Board may say no to a deal with Sunrise Coal, the mine may still be developed and may use water withdrawals from the Salt Fork. The need for a margin of safety regarding stream flows and potential future withdrawals should be evaluated.
- Effluent sales should not interfere with existing or planned stream restoration efforts.
- The implications of potential future regulatory requirements should be considered in any potential effluent sale.
- Consideration must also be given to the impact on area streams when influent is significantly reduced such as during the summer months when the population decreases dramatically and at certain times of the day when water use is low, generating less influent.
Finally, it appears that the District has put the proverbial cart before the horse. Staff seems to be negotiating contract terms with Cronus before we even know what the environmental impact of reduced flows will be, and as stated earlier, before a final effluent sale policy is in place. A sound water use policy should establish a formal procedure regarding how water sale proposals will be evaluated by staff and the Board and vetted to the public.
Thank you for consideration of these comments. We look forward to working with you on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Kim Knowles
Staff Attorney, Prairie Rivers Network
