Editorial: Wastewater from casino should be held to same standards

The Russian River is under constant pressure from an array of
sources, from the drinking water needs of 500,000 people to the
demands of farmers, and the ongoing demands to use its waters to
discharge treated effluent. How the river tolerates these demands
and the abuses of humans is a source of wonder ‹ and a testament to
its resiliency. But a river can only take so much.
The latest threat to the river is a plan by the River Rock
Casino operators to discharge the casino wastewater into two
waterways ‹ one that flows to the Russian River and another
seasonal creek that does not. Discharged wastewater would flow into
one of these creeks year-round, an unheard of situation anywhere
else in the Russian River basin.
Plans also call for the discharges of wastewater to flow through
and onto private property. Neighbors and residents of the casino
have good reason to be outraged at the prospect, which amounts to a
taking of their land and is yet another affront to the rights of
neighbors in the area.
The environmental objections to the plan are numerous. The River
Rock Casino, run by the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians,
is proposing a plan that is lacking many of the environmental
safeguards and protections that are required in any other discharge
plan along the Russian River. But because the casino¹s wastewater
permit is being reviewed by the federal Environmental Protection
Agency, many essential state water quality protections are not
being required.
Imagine if Santa Rosa or another wastewater discharger were
allowed to dump effluent into the Russian River during the summer
months? What other agency would be allowed to test the toxicity of
its effluent every 24 months? What happens if the system fails in
between tests?
Will the casino¹s wastewater be subject to the same testing and
discharge requirements as other local dischargers?
Federal EPA officials seem unaware of the state requirements for
wastewater. This is reason for grave concern.
This issue is larger than just the impacts on Alexander Valley
residents, and has potential impacts for all River users.
It is clear that federal officials must hold more public
hearings on the River Rock Casino¹s discharge permit. A single
hearing is woefully inadequate. Residents, state officials and
downstream users need more information about the discharge plans,
monitoring and safeguards. We also believe that the environmental
impact study is warranted and should be conducted before any permit
is approved. We encourage residents to contact the EPA If you share
these concerns, comments should be sent to: Suesan Saucerman, U.S.
EPA, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco CA 94105. Residents must
demand that federal officials conduct a more thorough review of
River Rock Casino¹s discharge permit and the many related
issues.
‹ Barry W. Dugan