Pentachlorophenol Contamination>>
Clean Water Act Helps Manage Hazards>>
ERF and Mateel Take Legal Action>>
Successful Environmental Protection>>

Summary
When the Pacific Lumber Company (PL) purchased Louisiana Pacific’s (LP) Carlotta mill site and Yager Creek log deck in 1986, they also inherited the toxic history of LP’s previous operations. That history, combined with PL’s lack of required storm water permits for handling contaminated runoff from the sites, lead to a 1997 lawsuit by the Ecological Rights Foundation (ERF) and the Mateel Environmental Justice Foundation (Mateel). The suit demanded that PL clean up the mess they inherited, as well as the one they subsequently created.

Pentachlorophenol Contamination
Prior to its federal ban in the mid-1980’s, timber companies commonly used Pentachlorophenol (penta) as a wood preservative. Penta is a toxic fungicide that contains dioxin and furans, some of the most harmful chemicals known. These chemicals are extremely potent carcinogens. They disrupt the human endocrine system and are particularly harmful to developing fetuses. They are extremely long-lived, bioaccumulate in the tissues of fish, and biomagnify as they move up the food chain.

A common practice of mill sites at that time was to apply penta liberally, which resulted in contamination of the soil beneath the site. LP was no exception. Penta had been used to prevent blue stain, a fungus that grows on freshly sawn wood. LP sprayed penta on wood as it came out of the saw and the planer. This meant penta dripped off the wood and contaminated the ground around the green chain and planer.

This contamination, coupled with the significant annual rainfall in the north coast region, caused the penta to contaminate surface and ground waters, and washed into Yager Creek and then into the Eel and Van Duzen Rivers. These rivers are sources of community drinking water and also provide habitat for endangered runs of salmon and steelhead.

When PL purchased the Yager Creek and Carlotta mill sites and log decks in the late 1980’s, penta was already federally banned for use in sawmills. Because of the enduring nature of these preservatives, however, PL continued to flush these highly toxic chemicals into community waterways.

In addition, PL then contributed its own blend of problems to the mix. Diesel equipment is used extensively on PL’s log-decks, which causes leaks of used engine oil, hydraulic fluid, gasoline, and diesel fuel. Because of a lack of storm water containment or management on the sites, these fluids and petrochemicals would wash off the site, polluting surface waters running through and near the site.

Clean Water Act Helps Manage Toxic Hazards
Thankfully, the federal Clean Water Act requires management of such toxic hazards. But enforcement often falls on the shoulders of citizens and organizations that are most directly impacted by the damaging effects of such corporate irresponsibility. The federal Clean Water Act requires sawmills to obtain a permit for storm water discharges associated with industrial activity and to develop Best Management Practices to control storm water pollution. These requirements are designed to reduce or eliminate any pollution from the site. Facilities are then required to monitor their storm water discharges for pollutants and report the results to their Regional Water Quality Control Board.

PL’s Yager Camp log deck had no permit and, hence, no storm water containment or management. Though PL had sent a Notice of Intent to comply with storm water regulations, PL had done no follow-through, and, therefore, no plan was in place and there had been no annual monitoring of the site. In addition, while PL’s Carlotta mill had a storm water plan, it was woefully insufficient. Both sites had unpaved surfaces, which became saturated with toxic chemicals and were vulnerable to erosion.

ERF and Mateel Take Legal Action
In November of 1996, ERF and Mateel notified PL that they were violating the federal Clean Water Act and California’s Health and Safety Codes. Under the citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act, ERF and Mateel filed a civil complaint against PL for the company’s continuing violation of both federal and state storm water regulations. Among these violations were failures to comply with the State of California’s General Permit for industrial storm water discharge, unpermitted discharge of contaminated storm water, and violation of procedural requirements for the federal Clean Water Act.

Pacific Lumber’s initial response to the lawsuit was an attempt to prove that both ERF and Mateel had no “standing,” or legal legitimacy, to sue them for actions in an area where ERF and Mateel members did not have “regular and continuous contacts” with the waterways in question. While members of the organizations did enjoy the Eel and Van Duzen rivers and their tributaries, PL charged, that did not constitute enough contact for members of those organizations, who did not live on those rivers, to sue on these charges. The trial court judge agreed with PL’s assertion, and ruled that ERF and Mateel had no legal standing for the case.

ERF and Mateel appealed this decision, however, and won a precedent-setting appeal, which held that not living in an area does not preclude individuals from protecting it from environmental destruction. This crucial appellate success has since helped many other environmental advocates get into court to protect areas far from human habitation, such as roadless and wilderness areas.

Another pre-settlement victory of the case were the numerous improvements PL made to its Carlotta and Yager Camp log decks after the 60-day notice of intent to sue, but prior to a settlement being reached. These included much better monitoring, installation of equipment to remove oil from the water used in washing equipment, a detailed plan to monitor and clean up the penta contamination, and the installation of barriers to prevent run-off into Yager Creek. These improvements were undertaken in an effort to lessen the environmental charges asserted in the Complaint.

Finally, five years after the case was initially filed, PL settled with ERF and Mateel, and, in a Consent Decree, agreed to numerous changes to their Carlotta and Yager Camp operations. While numerous changes had already been made over the course of their negotiations, there were still many modifications of both sites that needed to occur to ensure compliance with both State and Federal laws.

One of these modifications was that PL pave both log decks and improve their settlement ponds to ensure a more effective storm water containment system. Paving log decks makes it much easier to clean up wood waste. Unpaved log decks often have three feet of mud mixed with sawdust and bark. As the sawdust and bark rot, they dump bacteria, phenols and acidic water into nearby creeks. This reduces the amount of oxygen available for aquatic organisms, which are the base of the aquatic food chain.

In addition, PL agreed to pay $60,000 to the Eel River Watershed Improvement Group to be used toward restoration of waterways within the Van Duzen River Drainage.

Successful Environmental Protection
ERF and Klamath celebrated many successes from this case: pre-settlement log deck modifications, the victorious appeal upholding citizens’ right to fight to protect places where they do not live, and PL finally complying with federal and state pollution-control laws to clean up their log deck and mill site practices. 

Click here for more information on other mill site cleanup successes