Bluebird Sand LLC

Basin near pond

East Lafferty Creek

Sludge path

Crayfish and Fish

Pond Seepage

Pond Work

Dying Fish

Sludge Enters Creek

UPDATE MARCH 20, 2011

A Consent Judgment Decree was filed Friday, March 11th, 2011, resolving settlement terms by agreement in the Izard County litigation filed by ADEQ against Bluebird (BB) in December 2010. That is very fast and a lot of work went into this quick resolution by all parties.

Although not a party to the lawsuit, FNFWR was in active contact with both parties and I’m pleased that one of our suggestions was incorporated into the Decree. BB agreed to upgrade their General Stormwater Permit to an Individual Industrial Stormwater Permit for their operations. This permit requires more design detail and closer scrutiny of water protection, our principle focus. Here is a link to the actual Decree.

A “Letter to the Editor” in a recent Melbourne Times, signed by “the employees of Bluebird” suggests that BB had become a “target” of FNFWR because of “dust” that got into E. Lafferty Creek. As you know, we focus on water, not air issues, but for the record, that is not just “dust” employees are breathing. Some of it contains silica dust, an extremely fine substance that can’t be seen, floats significant distances and can cause severe lung problems, although there are modern ways of reducing the risk.

As for the water issues, local landowners reported repeated discharges to the creek. ADEQ initiated inspections in December of 09 when they found out BB had built and was operating the entire plant and pond without permits. Here are the current inspection reports we have.

As a result of ADEQ’s enforcement actions, BB has filed an “Assessment Report” regarding the damage to E. Lafferty Creek and announced they will clean it up.
Our Board took a position we did not want to see BB shut down, partially because of the job issue and our general philosophy and policy to work with, not against, companies. We do not support the idea that companies be allowed to operate without permits or violate permits just because it produces jobs, especially if the jobs produced are part of a business that puts other jobs at risk by endangering the rivers and streams that bring so much business to our area.
Here is a summation of major points in the Consent Degree:

BB will pay a $125,000 fine in 3 payments.
BB has recently filed for an NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) permit application on their sediment pond. This is a new application for the same permit that began this odyssey in 2009! BB withdrew the former application on their own initiative, claiming they would not have a discharge. They’ve had several. We will follow up by asking for a hearing and reviewing the new application to assure it is adequate, but we are encouraged they are finally going for the correct permits.
The have filed for a new air permit, but will be allowed to continue to operate the dryer as long as they operate within air permit standards. While we do not like the general idea of “operate first and then get the permits” they are apparently operating within their limits, so good enough. There are still questions about what is happening with the water that is used in the drying process, as they cannot discharge into the sediment pond at this time. Also, the pond is being drained and sludge carried away for disposal. Look at some of the pictures of the ponds in the inspection reports. To the casual observer, it looks like water is going everywhere!
They have filed an "Assessment Report" on the damage caused to E. Lafferty Creek for half a mile and proposed a restoration plan. We support BB in cleaning up its mess and look forward to reviewing the proposal.
They will report sampling and production numbers regularly and give ADEQ wide access to their site.
There are financial penalties for non-compliance, although we do not like the "release of liability" provisions in par. 11 of the Order.
There is a production limit of 73,000 tons of material per month can be mined.

I am pleased with this outcome and think it is consistent with the Boards wishes. I accept that no one stakeholder will get everything they want, but a lot of work went into this and I commend ADEQ in getting this settled promptly. I hope Bluebird succeeds in complying and we want to continue in dialogue with BB and their attorney around our mutual interests and concerns. Many thanks to our attorney for his tireless leadership in working with all parties.

A reminder that all of this came about because of a report from David Malland, a local property owner with the courage to speak out and FNFWR's ability to activate people for the hearings in 2009 which eventually engaged ADEQ's staff, inspectors in water and air, PCEC, legal and all of you who worked on this effort. Special thanks to Barbara and Jerry.

The efforts of many people through FNFWR has resulted in significant improvement in the operational design of these plants. All three plants in operation or permitting stages have improved the design of their plants. A strategy of recycling water is a major improvement as well as the installation of filter/press equipment that will create a clay block that can be used to refill the quarry. We want to learn more about this process. We also would point out that these upgrades are in part due to the attention and the active participation of citizens in public policy decisions that impact our water. That is our purpose and we think that is a good idea we plan to continue to pursue.

This includes our efforts to meet with the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission (PCEC) at their monthly meeting. We update them on sand mining in the county and ADEQ is now submitting monthly written updates on Bluebird starting with next meeting in April 2010. ADEQ has also initiated a water testing protocol to determine base line water quality readings on streams the will be affected by sand mining.

While building long-term relationships requires patience, respect and yes compromise, we are dedicated to this path until someone can show us something that works better. Only the future will tell whether these companies’ can actually operate in compliance, but we do not wish to ignore or depreciate the efforts that are being made. Behind the shell of “LLC’s” are real people and people’s lives and lifestyles are at stake. Here’s a simple idea. Let’s work together and “do the right thing” on the front end. Stop the damaging activity “at the source” and nature will straighten it out over time.

While we focus on these individual operations and permits, lets not lose sight of the implications of this industry and the long-term complex impact it will have on our rivers. This conversation needs to be revitalized.

Posted by Gene Dunaway.

Initial application for sediment pond permit
Letter from ADEQ indicating that permit application had been withdrawn
Inspection report December 15, 2009