Water-Quality Problems at NELH Laid to Cyanotech, Staff Cuts

posted in: November 1997 | 0

In addition to consuming huge quantities of water, Cyanotech Corporation has contributed to problems with water quality.

NELHA’s aquaculture tenants use and dispose of large quantities of seawater into land-based trenches. An Environmental Impact Statement prepared in 1987 to permit disposal of used seawater in trenches suggested implementing a water quality monitoring program. Discharges from aquaculture farms could harm Keahole’s groundwater, seawater, anchialine ponds, and biota without proper monitoring and quick mitigation of problems.

The groundwater is too brackish to drink and is exempt from regulations that limit injection of wastewater into the aquifer. Still, offshore waters are classified as “AA” by the state Department of Health, which means they are to be maintained in their pristine condition. This makes it impossible to discharge liquid waste from aquaculture operations into the ocean off NELHA, since nutrients in the discharged deep seawater and biological waste in the aquaculture discharges would cause changes in the nearshore development.

Under these circumstances, the decision was made to discharge wastewater into trenches, from which it would eventually percolate into the ocean. Even though the groundwater is not a source of drinking water, it was felt that monitoring of the groundwater for changes in chemical quality would provide an excellent opportunity for early detection of potentially significant impacts to the nearshore waters.

For this reason, 26 groundwater monitoring wells were installed around NELHA. Most are placed in groups of three, at depths of 15, 25, and 50 feet, to provide samples at varying depths in the water column.

In 1988, a Cooperative Environmental Monitoring Program (CEMP) was devised to provide data necessary to protect Keahole Point’s environmental resources and to comply with the permit requirements of the various governmental agencies.

It took a few years to work out the bugs, according to the 1990-1991 and 1991-1992 CEMP annual reports. For example, samples degraded after freezing, causing false reading of nitrate, phosphate, and silicate values.

A quarterly report (submitted by NELHA as the 1994-1995 CEMP Annual Report) by NELHA’s former Analytical Laboratory Supervisor Miles Anderson spotlights the potential impacts aquaculture activities have on the Keahole environment. (Anderson has since been laid off.)

In studying data collected from groundwater monitoring wells, Anderson found a direct link between Cyanotech’s activities and high nitrate levels in a well set near the algae-producer’s site.

“The most obvious feature in the groundwater monitoring data from the CEMP is the unusually high levels of nitrate which can clearly be seen in the distinct spikes at well site 4. The well set is located adjacent to the processing facility on the property which is leased by Cyanotech Corporation. Due to the proximity of the wells to the processing plant, a leak or spill of nitrate rich media will percolate into the ground water which is sampled at well set 4.

Anderson goes on to say that the monitoring program had found such spikes have occurred since it began in 1988. Each time a spike was found, he said, the tenant – i.e. Cyanotech- cooperated in “mitigating the situation immediately.” As a result of procedural changes in production practices, he wrote, nitrate levels were reduced to normal in about three months.

The first noticeable jump in nitrogen levels was found in samples collected in December 1989. Cyanotech mitigated the abnormal levels in ground water enrichment, the report states, by adding a recycling step in the procedure it uses to dispose of waste water. This reduced the nitrate discharge, while saving Cyanotech money.

The second spike sprouted from the March 1994 well set results. The spike, according to the report, was traced to a broken pipe leaking nitrate-rich water from Cyanotech’s operation into the ground. After Cyanotech fixed the pipe, the spike subsided.

Spike 3, from the August 1994 samples, was again traced to Cyanotech, the report states, this time, to a leaking holding pond liner. After Cyanotech fixed the liner, the spike subsided.

Samples taken in March 1995 produced a fourth spike. Again, Cyanotech had a leaking holding tank. After it was repaired, nitrate levels in the ground water have returned to normal.

The report further states that observations at well set 3, which lies 300 meters up gradient from the well set affected by Cyanotech, also showed a rise in nitrate enrichment. Though the rise was smaller, the change coincided with the spikes at the other well set.

According to Tom Daniel, scientific and technical director at NELHA, the changes in water quality are not a problem. “There was never any doubt that discharges into these trenches would have local effects on the groundwater,” he says, “but that is not viewed as a problem, since there are no significant uses for that groundwater.”

The monitoring program is so important, Daniel says, that even in the face of staff cutbacks, monthly sampling of the wells continues. “Detection of the high nutrient levels in the wells near Cyanotech’s operations has led to remediation and removal of the problems long before they could have any impact on the ocean,” he told Environment Hawai’i – which translates not only into a benefit for the resources, but for Cyanotech as well, he noted.

NPDES Violations

Apart from the problems NELHA has had in its monitoring program, it has also had trouble complying with terms of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued by the state Department of Health.

The Department of Health sent two letters to Daniel, one on April 10, 1997 and one on July 22, notifying him that NELHA has violated its NPDES permit by not submitting the required Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs). The April letter concerned missing reports for the period of July 1996 through March 31, 1997. The July letter addressed DMRs missing for the period of January, 1, 1997, through June 30, 1997.

“An explanation for the late reports should be sent within 20 days to the clean water branch,” the letters stated. Failure to do so might lead to penalties of up to $10,000 per day for the first set and $2,500 per day for the second.

Daniels response to both letters was that the reports were late because of problems with inadequate staffing and analytical instrumentation failures. Three people are doing a job that six people used to do, he says, adding that NELHA is hiring a fourth person to help reduce the backlog.

Program Cuts

The original staff cuts were taken in 1995, in response to Governor Cayetano’s instruction to NELHA to reduce its operating costs. Among those let go was Miles Anderson, who had been doing the water quality monitoring.

In another cost-cutting move, NELHA has reduced the frequency of surveys conducted in connection with its marine biota monitoring. A February 21, 1995 letter from Daniel to the County of Hawai’i’s Planning Department Director Virginia Goldstein explains, “The marine biota monitoring program, which includes benthic, midwater, and anchialine pond field surveys and census count, has been maintained at a high professional level through contracts with qualified University of Hawai’i researchers who have been performing the biota survey, we have determined that the frequency of these surveys should be reduced to twice per year. This will conform with [West Hawai’i Coastal Monitoring Task Force] guidelines and will allow continuation of the program within the constraints of the State’s current fiscal situation.

“We ask for your concurrence with this proposed change in scope of the CEMP.”

Goldstein’s April 5, 1995 response acknowledged that NELHA’s Special Management Area Use permit only required that monitoring data be submitted to the Country of Hawai’i’s Planning Department once a year. However, before agreeing to the change in frequency, Goldstein wanted to know “what led the applicant and the researchers to conclude that a reduction of survey frequency is warranted as well as how such a reduction would still be in conformance with guidelines” of the West Hawai’i Coastal Monitoring Task Force.

About a week later, Daniel responded. Consultants Richard Brock and Steven Dollar, he said, had reported that their survey results showed that the only discernable variability was to be seen in Brock’s fish censuses and in Dollar’s marine benthic community studies. Both these appeared to be related to wave events that occur throughout the year.

“These large waves, which do dramatically change the subject communities, are generally generated by distant storms unrelated to local weather patterns. None of the data from these surveys suggest any impact from the activities at NELHA. “Under these circumstances, seasonal monitoring of marine biota has little value. We have, in effect, developed a sufficient baseline over the past five years to demonstrate the seasonal stability of the environment and to obviate the need for high frequency monitoring.”

Daniel concluded, “We feel that it would be very unfortunate if declining budgets forced us to utilize less qualified researchers. By reducing frequency, we will be able to maintain the high quality work at slightly lower cost to the State.”

On May 8, Goldstein accepted the reduction in survey frequency for sea and groundwater and marine biota monitoring programs from quarterly to twice a year.

Volume 8, Number 5 November 1997

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *