Controversy over Portland Water Bureau filtration plant grows

Following years of planning and design, the Portland Water Bureau broke ground on its Carpenter Lane filtration plant in Boring earlier this summer garnering continued pushback from neighbors and the Cottrell Community Planning Organization.

In this fight between the rural residents and the city of Portland agency, there have been a handful of attempted question-and-answer events, meetings and now a Land Use Board of Appeals case in which the Cottrell CPO representatives, alongside six other organizations, are advocating for an appeal of the Multnomah County conditional use permit approval granted in November 2023.

No the project is even more controversial because of the discovery of contaminated soil on the building site that must be removed.

The Portland Water Bureau began planning its new filtration plant in 2017, after a mandate from the Oregon Health Authority required the bureau build a facility to treat Bull Run water for cryptosporidium, a potentially deadly parasite, by 2027. This mandate was to bring the bureau into compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.

The project is being built in conjunction with a nearby facility intended to reduce lead in Portland water pipes. The current estimated cost of the Bull Run Treatment Projects is $2.13 billion. This has increased from a projected $500 million since 2017. It includes direct project costs, indirect costs, inflation, bond reserves, interest costs and a project contingency.

The property for the filtration plant is zoned Multi-use Agricultural 20 acres, which is why a conditional use permit from Multnomah County is required. Other permits also are required for the project, including a Geologic Hazards Permit.

Contamination concerns

In early 2023, the bureau submitted a completed permitting application to the county, triggering a 14-day public comment period. After an appointed hearings officer approved the application, Cottrell CPO representatives and others filed an appeal to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals.

Then, in January 2024, while conducting required testing for DEQ, the bureau found that some of the soil on the planned filtration plant site contained contaminants that exceed allowed screening levels. The agency then applied for a beneficial use determination (BUD), proposing reuse of the soil on site since the levels of contaminants were not within range to pose hazardous to neighboring residents.

The lead screenings were within naturally occurring levels, but according to the bureau’s beneficial use application: “the contaminated soils are impacted by historical chlorinated pesticide use including dieldrin. The soils deeper than 1.5 feet below the surface meet clean fill criteria.”

To address this, the agency has proposed they would stockpile the approximately 116,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil on the property while construction is in progress, placing it above the regional groundwater table. It would be covered with either a geotextile fabric and one foot of clean fill or, if no geotextile is used, a 3-foot cover of clean fill. The protective cover will be maintained and vegetated post construction until stabilized.

The plan and explanations by DEQ and Portland Water Bureau representatives at a June 11 meeting involving the Cottrell CPO, the Pleasant Home Community Association, DEQ and the bureau have done little to assuage the neighbors’ concerns.

While members of the CPO have noted that “DEQ has been great (and) really responsive” to their emails, they continue to feel ignored by the water bureau and like the agency is moving full steam ahead despite lack of a final decision by LUBA.

“This case is tied up at the Land Use Board of Appeals, yet PWB continues on,” Cottrell CPO Secretary Lauren Courter said. “The Portland Water Bureau, and we all have seen this in the last five to six years, they’re keeping us in the dark.”

Courter added that she and others had concerns about when the contaminated soil is disturbed, how the bureau will keep it from being carried by the wind onto the neighboring residences.

“(This soil) hasn’t been disturbed in the way that it’s going to be disturbed by this project,” Courter told those assembled on June 11. “It’s going to be scooped up and piled up next to our residences. Blowing around in the wind until they cap it and cover it and take whatever mitigation measures they’re proposing here. But in the process of excavation, we are being exposed to this potentially. … That’s where I think a lot of the frustration is coming from ... here is that this is a long excavation process. Piles of this dirt are hanging out without any kind of protection, and we do not feel safe.”

Portland Water Bureau contractors mobilized to the site on June 3 and began moving dirt on June 11, as they say they are permitted to by the relevant regulatory authorities.

Water Bureau responds

According to Portland Water Bureau Chief Engineer Jodie Inman, the legacy pesticides found in low concentrations in the soil are “not water soluble or easily stirred up,” so they’ve been deemed not harmful to nearby residents.

They also were commonly used on farmland in agricultural use prior to the 1980s, and by the nursery that once leased this land from the bureau for years after the property was purchased.

“Those legacy pesticides are something that is very common,” Inman told The Post. “They’ve probably been found on multiple other properties in the area and nationwide. It’s really a byproduct of common farming practices and part of the reason those pesticides were not allowed (anymore) or banned was because of their long-lastingness. Even though they were in use decades ago, it was found in very low levels. The levels are not at all harmful, well below any human health hazard. They are not going to make anybody who interacts with the soil sick.”

One option presented to the bureau of how to deal with the soil was to remove it from the site entirely; neighbors asked why this was not the option they chose. But while the bureau sees no substantial cost-saving reason for keeping and reusing the soil in a DEQ-approved way, they argue it could somewhat address another concern the CPO has expressed in the past: the number of truck trips made on Carpenter Lane and neighboring streets.

“There are really true benefits to the community and that is reduction in truck traffic by being able to reutilize it on site,” Inman said. “We try to think about decisions on a project that are more holistic, that consider costs but are not just cost related. And if we were at all concerned about the impact to anybody on the site, we may or may not make different decisions. There is a cost difference, but we also consider other factors such as a measurable reduction in truck trips, which the neighbors have also said is important. We are also thinking about future use of the site if we need to expand. So, even if the DEQ approves re-use on the site, we still may decide to haul off the contaminated soil, depending on what makes the most sense now and in the long-term.”