HomeMy WebLinkAbout29 - Discharge of Primary Treated Effluent Off of the CoastlineITEM 29
TO: Members of the Newport Beach City Council
FROM: Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution in Opposition to the Discharge of Primary Treated Effluent
off of the Orange County Coastline
RECOMMENDED 1 - Adopt Resolution 2001 -_ opposing the discharge of primary treated effluent
ACTION: off of the Orange County coastline; and
2 - Direct staff to transmit the Resolution to the Orange County Sanitation
District, the US Environmental Protection Agency (Region 9), and the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region.
QUICK UPDATE Your Council will recall that on July 24, 2001, we held a Study Session to learn
& SUMMARY: more about the Orange County Sanitation District's (OCSD) proposal to apply
for a new 5 -year discharge permit from US EPA and the Regional Board that will
allow OCSD to continue to discharge a mix of 50% primary and 50`Yo secondary
treated wastewater off of the Orange County coast.
At the July Study Session, Council members were generally opposed to OCSD's
proposal to re -apply for the same permit. While Study Sessions do not result in
decisions, staff listened to the Council's comments and said that we would take a
proposed resolution opposing the permit to the City's Harbor Quality Citizens'
Advisory Committee. We did so - the Committee voted unanimously on
September 13, 2001 to recommend that the Council adopt the resolution that is
attached to this Staff Report.
BACKGROUND: All of north and central Orange County's wastewater - or sewage - is received
and processed by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), a single -
purpose special district formed in 1921 as the Joint Outfall Sewer (JOS) agency.
The 1920s saw sewage treatment and disposal start at a treatment plant in
Fountain Valley and end at a 24" cast -iron surfzone outfall at the Santa Ana
River mouth releasing "screened wastewater" into the ocean.
Both the JOS /District and the Outfall changed in scope over the years. The JOS
became an alliance of sanitation districts (called the Counhj Sanitation Districts of
Orange Counh/ or CSDOC) in 1948. The late 40s and 50s saw new treatment
facilities in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach and a new 7,200' long, 78"
diameter ocean outfall off of Huntington Beach that terminated at an ocean
depth of 60'.
Newport Beach City Council
Page 2
OCSD Outfall History
Today, the now - consolidated OCSD serves about 2.35 million people across 24
cities and 470 square miles in north and central Orange County, including the
residents and businesses of Newport Beach (see OCSD territory map in
Attachment A). OCSD's 650 -mile wastewater collection system takes in about
241 million gallons per day of wastewater. OCSD produces about 533 wet tons
of wastewater biosolids each day and sends another 236 million gallons per day
of effluent out a 5.1 -mile ocean outfall ( "Outfall").
OCSD (www.ocsd.com) is administered by a 25- member Board of Directors that
includes representatives from the District's municipal sewering agencies, 2
sanitary districts, one water district, and from the Orange County Board of
Supervisors. Mayor pro Tempore Tod Ridgeway serves as Newport Beach's
representative to the OCSD Board of Directors. The District employs almost 500
staff members.
Wastewater Treatment at OCSD. OCSD, like many sanitation agencies, has
facilities to treat wastewater using the following process:
• Preliminary Treatment & Odor Control. To control odor, OCSD adds
sodium hydroxide within trunklines before wastewater reaches the
treatment plant. Once at the plant, OCSD adds hydrogen peroxide for odors.
The wastewater then flows through bar screens to catch large solids and grit
chambers to pull out small gritty things like coffee grounds and sand.
• Primary Treatment. In this phase, settleable solids fall from the wastewater
in large clarifiers. OCSD adds ferric chloride and an anionic polymer here to
"clump' small solids. Finally, the District skims oil and grease from the
surface of each clarifier. About 70% of solids settle out here - these solids are
later used for fertilizer after additional treatment.
• Secondary Treatment. Wastewater from the primary treatment phase is
attacked by bacteria that consume organic wastes. The bacteria are assisted
by OCSD's "trickling filter" which sprays the wastewater over rocks and
"activated sludge" which exposes the wastewater to a variety of aerobic
microorganisms.
.Secondary treatment with activated sludge removes about 95% of viral
pathogens. Since about 90% of solids are removed by the time effluent
finishes secondary treatment, the lower amount of total suspended solids
(TSS after secondary is usually <30 mg /liter) allows for more effective
chlorination - if necessary - to remove even more pathogens.
I
Page 3
See Attachment B for a graphic of these processes (graphic provided by OCSD).
Some sewering agencies that produce reclaimed water (like the Irvine Ranch Water
Distrct) use a fourth step - Tertiary Treatment - to "polish" the wastewater
further. Tertiary treatment may include sending the wastewater through sand or
charcoal filters, reed beds, or grass plots. Disinfection using ultra- violet light can
also be used at this stage of the treatment process.
The Federal Clean Water Act - Section 301(h). The federal Clean Water Act
(1972) required publicly -owned treatment works (POTWs) to achieve full
secondary treatment capability by July 1977. At the time, some agencies argued
that full secondary treatment might be unnecessary since some POTWs discharge
wastewater into deep waters with large tides and substantial currents. In
response, Congress added Section 301(h) to the Act - this section allows for the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) to, upon request of a
POTW, conduct a case -by -case review of treatment requirements and,
potentially, waive the Act's secondary treatment requirement via the issuance of
a permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES).
Section 301(h) has been amended several times since 1979, but it still allows
wastewater treated at a level less than full secondary to be discharged into deep
ocean environments. In 1990, about 60 sanitation agencies (out of about 15,000
agencies) held permits with waivers - today, about 36 such permits remain.
According to US EPA, the majority of Section 301(h) waiver recipients are small
POTWs that discharge less than 5 million gallons per day (MGD), although the
flows from these small POTWs represent only 4% of the 620 MGD of wastewater
under the Section 301(h) program. Recall that OCSD's discharge is 236 MGD of
the 620 MGD authorized under the waiver program nationwide, making OCSD
the largest agency in the nation using the Section 301(h) waiver.
From US EPA's Website on the 301(1) Waiver
Any POTW applying for an NPDES Permit with a Section 301(h) waiver must
meet the criteria within the Clean Water Act, including:
• Existence of and compliance with water quality standards.
• Protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous population of fish, shellfish,
and wildlife.
Page 4
• Allowance of recreational activities.
• Establishment of a monitoring program.
• Satisfactory toxics control programs, including an approved pretreatment program.
• No additional treatment requirements for other sources as a result of the waiver.
• No increase in effluent volume or amount of pollutants discharged above limits in
301(h) modified permit.
• Protectionof public watersupplies.
OCSD's Permit to Discharge Less Than Full Secondary out the Outfall. OCSD
first received a permit (Order 84-1, Permit #CA0110604) with a Section 301(h)
waiver in 1985. US EPA and the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board, Santa Ana Region, issued the Permit. Because NPDES permits typically
are in effect for five years, OCSD's first permit expired in February 1990. OCSD
reapplied for - and received after a regulatory delay - a renewed 5 -year Permit
from US EPA and the Regional Board using Section 301(h)'s waiver provisions.
The term of the current (2nd) Permit (Order 98 -5, same permit number) is June 8,
1998 -- June 7, 2003.
The Permit sets limits on pounds of solids, biological oxygen demand and
concentrations of other chemicals and parameters of concern. It also allows
OCSD to discharge a mix of 50% primary treated wastewater and 50% secondary
treated wastewater out the ocean outfall. As noted, about 236 million gallons per
day of this 50 -50 mix goes out the 5.1 -mile Outfall (with diffusers at about 4.5
miles out at about 185 -200' depth). Please see Attachment B for a graphic that
shows the Outfall and diffuser process (graphic provided by OCSD).
OCSD must reapply for another 5 -year renewal of the Permit in December 2002.
Prior to the December deadline, OCSD staff tells us that the OCSD Board of
Directors will evaluate their options for discharge and determine what level of
treatment the district will use in the future. The term of this 3m Permit would be
June 2003 through June 2008.
OCSD believes that a 3m Permit using the waiver is appropriate for the following
reasons:
• OCSD's 20 years of monitoring has not shown an adverse public health
impact of the current Outfall use. Ongoing testing (with UCI) off of
Huntington Beach will test a hypothesis that bacteria from the Outfall may
reach the shoreline - if so, OCSD has said (presentation on July 14, 2001):
If testing indicates that (additional pathogen reduction) is necessary, we will apply
additional treatment technology, such as:
— Secondary treatment + disinfection
— Filtration +disinfection; or
-- Microfiltration
• OCSD's monitoring programs have not shown an adverse environmental
impact of the current Outfall use. OCSD says that "liver pathologies are seen
in some fish, but are decreasing," that "since early 1990s, effects relating to
the Outfall have not been seen," and that no State.consumption advisories
associated with the Outfall exist today.
Ll
Page 5
OCSD's Monitoring Program
• In order to appropriately reflect OCSD's 1999 Strategic Plan that directs
OCSD to meet changing population and economic conditions, meet
regulatory requirements, minimize operational costs, use existing facilities
efficiently, and to distribute costs fairly, OCSD says that any treatment
alternative used for the Outfall must:
— Be technically feasible
- -Meet regulatory requirements
-- Protect public health and environment
Meet city and local agency requirements
— Provide reliable service
Water Quality Concerns in Summer 1999. In Summer 1999, high levels of
indicator bacteria off of the surfzone and shoreline along Huntington Beach led
officials with the Orange County Health Care Agency (OC HCA) to close
significant stretches of the beach in July and August. A new law that took effect
that same summer (AB 411; Wayne, 1997) directed officials to close beaches when
officials know of or suspect a sewage spill.
With vital beaches closed during high visitor season, OCSD, the County of
Orange, the City of Huntington Beach, California State Parks, the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board (Santa Ana Region), and others embarked
upon an expensive and extensive testing program to determine the cause of the
high bacteria levels. At least $5 million has been spent to date on Huntington
Beach - related studies (and expert reviews of the studies).
Experts from the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP),
the University of Southern California's Sea Grant program, the University of
California, Irvine (UCI), and more participated in the studies and reviews (which
continue today). To date, there is no consensus on what caused the high bacteria
counts. Theories as to the cause of the high bacteria include/ included:
• Sewage leaking from sewer lines at the Huntington City and State Beach restrooms;
• Sewage leaking from Huntington Beach's sewer system or OCSD's trunklines;
Page 6
• Urban runoff (animal waste, bird waste, trash, and more) from storm drains and
channels that drain into the Ocean off of Huntington Beach;
• Urban runoff carried to the surfzone from the Santa Ana River (including from the
Newport Slough area);
• Bird waste from the Talbert Marsh - with the Marsh possibly incubating and
promoting more bacteria; and
• Bacteria in wastewater from the OCSD ocean outfall returning to shore thanks in part
to an electrical generation plant's effects on the "thermocline" (an ocean temperature
differential that typically exists parallel to the water surface but 15' to 20' deep) that
might otherwise block the wastewater's intrusion to the shoreline.
A Focus on the OCSD Outfall. The last theory identified above - a theory
studied by Dr. Stanley Grant of UCl and which is under investigation today -
sparked calls by environmental groups and beach advocates like the Surfrider
Foundation (www.surfrider.orQ) and the Natural Resources Defense Council
(www.nrdc.or¢) for OCSD to go to full secondary treatment upon expiration of
the current 5 -year Permit.
Grant told a UCI newspaper in late 2000 that:
"there is no strong evidence that the outfall is the source, but it's quite a
complex problem ... we [have] to do a really carefid study of all the currents
keeping track of where (the sewage isJ going at what time, which wasn't really
done."
Opponents of a third 5 -year Permit issued with a Section 301(h) waiver argue
that:
• Any modern sewering agency in an urban coastal environment should treat all
wastewater to full secondary regardless of any outfall's ocean depth or currents.
• Orange County's residents and businesses - who use beaches and receive their
economic benefit - will be willing and able to pay the full cost of protecting ocean
waters to current federal standards (full secondary).
Two Newport Beach residents - Dr. Jan Vandersloot and Dr. Jack Skinner - have
argued the following regarding a new 5 -year Permit using the Section 301(h)
waiver:
"The basis for continuing ... the waiver (Pennit) ... is that the OCSD, through
its monitoring program, is showing no harm to the environment or public
health. However, OCSD's own monitoring reports show statistically significant
incidences offish liver lesions near the outfall, showing possible hann to the
environment, and the beach closure and postings in Huntington Beach show
possible harnt to public health... The (wastewater) plume's motion depends on
currents and waves, and is present off the shore of Newport Beach as well as
Huntington Beach. The potential exists that the plume may show up on the
beaches of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach depending on the internal
waves, upwellings, and wind."
Dr. Jan Vandersloot
Letter to HQCAC dated April 5, 2001
"I recently learned that ... OCSD perfonned a study in the fall of 1996 known
as the 20 -meter (fecal colifonn) stud. This study tested ocean water quality on
ten different daps (in 1996) ... to determine if the wastewater plume was
Page 7
moving shoreward.... The findings of this study are troubling because it appears
that, intennittently, the wastewater plume moves towards the beaches. On
November 20, 1996, bacterial readings indicate that the plume did reach the
beaches in West Newport...
"These studies indicate that there is a strong possibility that, intermittently,
bacterial contamination from the outfall can reach the shoreline and thereby pose
a threat to swinmiers...
"Based on the above evidence (more evidence listed in letter), I believe that there
should not be a renewal of... (a Pennit reflecting a continued waiver of Section)
.... 301(h) ... (by OCSD)"
Dr. Jack Skinner
Letter to HQCAC dated April 28, 2001
Experts disagree, but the 1996 OCSD 20 -Meter Fecal Colifonn Study to which Dr.
Skinner refers suggested that the Outfall's wastewater plume may have extended
so close to Newport's beaches that it caused bacteria counts that - if AB 411's
standards had been in place - would have caused postings of Newport's ocean
beaches northward of the Newport Pier on or about November 20,1996.
Going Forward — Proposals, Options and Costs. As noted above, OCSD may
apply for a 3 d Permit using the Section 301(h) waiver and the same discharge
(50 -50 mix) of primary and secondary treated wastewater out the Outfall - but
only if the summer 2001 tests off of Huntington Beach disprove the theory that
the Outfall contributes to surfzone and nearshore water quality problems
(Alternative #1- the least expensive -- on Page 8 of this Staff Report).
Other options are available to OCSD to kill or remove pathogens (viruses and
bacteria) present in the 50 -50 mix. These include:
• Filtration of Primary + Disinfection of all Discharge Effluent (Alternative
#2). OCSD believes that this method (where the Primary effluent is sent
through a filter then both the post - filter Primary and the 50% Secondary are
disinfected using UV light) is about $100 MN more expensive than
Alternative #1. Alternative #2 is both less expensive than going to full
secondary and may actually be one of the two most effective alternatives for
killing or removing pathogens.
• Microfiltering the 50% Primary before mixing it with the 50% Secondary
(Alternative #3). This method (whereby the Primary effluent is filtered
through screens small enough to catch most, if not all, bacteria particles and
many viruses) may also achieve near complete removal of pathogens on the
Primary half while costing slightly less than Alternative #2.
• Full Secondary Treatment of all Effluent (Alternative #4). This method
would treat all Outfall material to a secondary treatment level (second most
.costly alternative - causes some reduction in pathogens).
• Full Secondary + Disinfection (Alternative #5). This method would treat all
Outfall material to a secondary treatment level, then would disinfect the n
Page 8
post- secondary effluent using chlorine or UV light (most costly alternative,
but it assures near - complete removal of pathogens).
As noted, these alternatives are summarized - with appropriate footnoting that
notes estimations in both cost and effectiveness - on the next page. In reviewing
these alternatives, OCSD staff suggests that we:
"not confuse the issue of a clean shoreline with treated wastewater releases 4 miles out...
It may not be prudent to change operations at OCSD if the hope is that ocean postings
and closures (often based on contamination from urban runoff, birds, and more) will go
away. At the very least, (decision- makers) should wait until (the) intensive testing this
summer (to determine if OCSD's treated wastewater is traveling to shore) is complete."
Questions for Newport Beach. OCSD's ultimate decision regarding whether to
apply for a renewed permit with a Section 301(h) waiver will directly impact the
City of Newport Beach and its residents and businesses. The decision raises the
following questions:
• Will full secondary treatment of the Outfall discharge lead to water quality
improvements at the surfzone? What other water quality impairments -
urban runoff, vessel waste, or bird waste - might be as or more determinate
of ocean water quality than discharges out the Outfall?
• What "message" should the City send to OCSD regarding this issue - is the
"go to full secondary' message the only one that appropriately reflects a
beach city's concern for ocean water quality?
• What about treatment processes involving less than full secondary treatment
- are these more cost - effective and beneficial than full secondary?
• Given that full secondary doesn't kill all viruses nor eliminate all bacteria, is
full secondary good enough? Assuming our goal is the cleanest ocean water
possible, is full secondary + UV disinfection more appropriate?
• How will residents and businesses in Newport Beach react to sewer rate
increases should OCSD's treatment process be expanded?
Recent Actions. As noted, your City Council spent about an hour on this matter
at a Study Session held on July 24, 2001. The Harbor Quality Citizens Advisory
Committee (HQAC) discussed this issue twice - on May 3, 2001 and again on
September 13, 2001. At the September 13 meeting, the Committee voted
unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution
(see Attachment D) relating to the waiver.
The city councils of Seal Beach and Huntington Beach both have taken official
city positions in opposition to a renewed permit using the Section 301(h) waiver.
Finally, in more recent days, Dr. Jack Skinner and Nancy Skinner have further
examined test results at a water testing station known as "C2" This station -
just off of the Newport Pier and between 1/4 and Ih of a mile from our beaches -
appears to show that the wastewater plume comes alarmingly close to Newport's
ocean beach swimming areas. A letter from Dr. Skinner discusses this
information and is attached (Attachment C).
O c`
O
u
0
ii/
}
}
z
z
0
O
0
0
0
00
E 0
o
h
0 C
_
O C
O
O
: O
N
Q
Q
(D
Q
0
CD U)
0
E
E
tq
ol
E
�
Q
Q
Q
• �'
'• N
N
N
N
N
n 0
• }
}
}
}
}
p
•
6
•
N
Na
O
N O
O N
O
001
r
• >
E
0
Q
m
v
N
o
O
m
0 0
E
Z
of
m
°
v
N
N d
»
ea
yj
d m
m o c
L � �
N C «
O
O
O
O
O
8 O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O O
O
O
O
2 5
C
O
O
O
O
� • �
C O) O) N
d c>
w
w
w
w
w
U
0
00
0
00
°o
°c
•
p Q
O
O
O
O
O
01 (0 9 WD
M.
tl
tl
001
001
r
i
C O
•-
w
r
es
r
w
r
w
w
a T
N O O E
❑__ E
8 E E -- z'
•
C
O
N
N
T y
W
v h E
..
m
�. �'
.o inal� <
x+
m
Co
E-O
>
=
rr/�
N 0 O N
n00 E =u
�
E
CO
+
C N O N T,FO
co .0
d U
10 0 0 d a
E =
° U
(0
<0
W L' Uc �i m
�a0
o
0o
(0 N 9 9
ao °o �ipm
••
C
o
00
U
U
N "'sj a
O
LL]
N
[n
N
U)
O N Q IS N
C
C L
O
.-. C
W
U
w
0 0
(0
O
0
X
0
0
0
<0
'= h N
U N
>
> h
II II II II II II
•
LL i5 U)
LL
u-
r N m C i0 M
•
ii/
OCSD Oreaa Oarfau
Page ]0
THIS AGENDA This Agenda Item asks the Council to adopt a resolution formally opposing any
ITEM: attempt by the Orange County Sanitation District to apply for a new wastewater
discharge permit using the waiver provisions of the federal Clean Water Act.
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Map of OCSD Service Area
Attachment B - OCSD's Treatment Process
Attachment C - Letter from Dr. Jack Skinner
Attachment D - Resolution 2001 -_
ATTACHMENT A
Map of the OCSD Service Area
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
LA HABRA qa
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY BREA
FULLERTOh! YORBA
PLACENTIA LINDA UE
LA
PAR KA
PAL MA ANAHEIM VILLA +
CYPRESS PARK
LOS STANTON ORANGE
ALAMITOS
3
GAR DEN
WESTMINSTER GROVE ( ]
:H �
MIDWAY TUSTIN
HUNTMOTO CITY SANTA
H jrnllhITAlKl ANA
11 LublA IRVINE
MESA
PACIFIC r��f
L =/
OCEAN
l01
SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY
14
13
stelvater Treatment Basics:
Tools of the Trade
SOURCE CONTROL + TREATMENT + OUTFALL
240 million gallons
per day (MGD)
• Depth
• Distance
• Dilution
steivater Treatment Basics:
Our Outfall Works
P !N y '
NO.f1lP {/
Huntington P
�'• Beach A." �e
~` PLANT
HunPierton �. N0.2
9
Nepart
In
`K
Beac �'
120 -inch Outfall
4'/, Miles Out Ne p`:� con
200 Feet Deep PIK Baf ` i I
Pier
.tit Mile Long
Diffuserwith 500 ports
+stewater Treatment Basics:
w Our Outfall Works (contd)
200 Feet Deep
}♦ .500 Ports in a Mile Long Diffuser. —►�
Attachment C
John F. Skinner, M.D.
1724 Highland Drive DIPLOMAT£
Newport Beach, California 92660 AMERICAN BOARD OFMTERNALMEDICINE
Phone/Fax (949) 650 -5588
jsldnneEmd q aol.com
September 13, 2001
Newport Beach City Council
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92663
RE: OCSD's 301(h) waiver
Dear Mayor Adams and Members of the City Council:
I am writing to ask you to oppose the renewal of the Orange County Sanitation
District's 301(h) waiver.
Earlier this year I learned that the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD)
performed a study in the fall of 1996 known as the 20 -Meter Study. This study
tested ocean water quality on ten different days between September 26, 1996, and
November 25, 1996, to determine if the wastewater plume was moving shoreward.
There were five sample sites located at the 20 -meter depth contour. Three samples
were taken at each offshore sample site (at surface, bottom and mid - depth). No
samples were taken closer to shore than the 20 -meter depth at the time of this study
with the exception of the samples taken at ankle depth right at the beach.
To the best of my knowledge, this study was never released to the public or included
in OCSD's yearly marine monitoring reports. However, this information was
available to OCSD before they applied to renew their current waiver, which was
issued in June 1998. The study was only discovered by the public in January 2001.
The findings of this study are troubling because it appears that, intermittently, the
wastewater plume moves toward the beaches. On November 20, 1996, bacterial
readings indicate that the plume did reach the beaches in West Newport. This is
shown on the enclosed chart marked "Figure 9." Note the elevated total coliforms
at the Newport Beach shoreline sampling locations and the exceedingly elevated
Newport Beach City Council page two
September 13, 2001
fecal coliform levels taken near the ocean bottom at the 20 -meter sampling sites,
stretching all the way from off the Huntington Beach power plant to off the Newport
pier. The three numbers in the boxes next to the offshore sample sites represent the
surface, mid -depth and bottom fecal coliform counts.
Also enclosed is a color graphic showing a composite of all of the bacteriological
results from the same 20 -meter fecal coliform study. The ocean bottom fecal
coliform samples equaled or exceeded 400 MPN (most probable number) in the area
circled in red, showing that the wastewater field comes very close to Newport's
beaches.
Nancy was told by Bob Ghirelli and George Robertson of OCSD that, at times, the
wastewater plume comes up the Newport Canyon (at depth) to station C2, located
close to the end of Newport Pier. The C2 sampling site is between a quarter of a
mile and a half mile from Newport's beaches. We have asked OCSD for the
bacteriological data on station C2 and have received some of it, confirming that,
intermittently, the plume does move up the canyon.
Recently, an extensive plume study was done on November 27, 2000, by OCSD, the
results of which are shown on the enclosure marked Figure 27. Again, it shows that
the wastewater plume is coming toward the shore, especially near the power plant in
Huntington Beach. Please note how far the plume has moved toward shore from the
end of the outfall.
Based on the above evidence, I believe that there should not be a renewal of
OCSD's 301(h) waiver.
These studies indicate that there is a strong possibility that, intermittently, bacterial
contamination from the outfall can reach the shoreline and thereby pose a threat to
swunmers.
Secondary treatment with activated sludge removes about 95 percent of the viral
pathogens. The lower suspended solids present in secondary treated sewage allow
chlorination to be more effective should that prove necessary. Perhaps the only safe
Newport Beach City Council page three
September 13, 2001
solution is to treat the entire effluent to the tertiary level to be used for reclamation
purposes and eliminate all ocean discharges. Treating sewage to less than the
secondary level becomes a disincentive to reclamation since all reclaimed water
must go through the secondary process and beyond.
In the past, Nancy and I have opposed the granting of 301(h) waivers to sanitation
districts with short outfalls but until recently, we had not been concerned about the
Orange County Sanitation District's discharge four and a half miles off the coast.
However, we have had second thoughts about the safety of OCSD's ocean
discharge because of recent evidence that there is shoreward movement of the
wastewater plume.
In order to protect the health of swimmers using Newport's beaches, I urge you to
vote to deny the waiver.
Thank you for giving this your consideration.
Sincerely,
az'
(JZHN F. SKRMER,
Encls: 3
ry Iv
v v
v
P
v
W,
or
MwNiill
>1
-D
D
0
E
0
co
0'>
C>
E
0
Z
E
�2
E
0
IR,
W,
LL
mrss
Ul
v v
c7
gar
ry Iv
v v
v
P
v
W,
or
MwNiill
>1
-D
D
0
E
0
co
0'>
C>
E
0
Z
E
�2
E
0
IR,
W,
LL
tC
co
Mi. Mix
mcn -
4v.
Wtv
T"
is
0
.j
E
M
ch
Total Coliform (MPN)
®
> 6000
6000
7500
A
7000
6500
6000
5500
5000
1500
1000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
®
< 0
Total Coliform (MP
> 2000
2000
1675
1750
1625
1500
1375
1250
1125
1000
675
750
625
500
375
250
125
0
®
< 0
Figure 27
..
Bottom Contour
V Pc� r
J,
i
i
I
..... .
Bottom depth surface planes of Total Coliform (MPN) for November 27,
2000.
Omn66 Counly Sanitation DIslrLI, Califotnb.
Attachment D
Resolution 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
IN OPPOSITION TO THE DISCHARGE OF PRIMARY TREATED
EFFLUENT OFF OF THE ORANGE COUNTY COASTLINE
WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach is a member agency of the Orange County
Sanitation District (OCSD); and
WHEREAS, OCSD is a special district that provides wastewater collection, treatment, and
disposal services to 21 cities with about 2.35 million residents in central and northern Orange
County, including the residents and businesses of Newport Beach; and
WHEREAS, OCSD uses a 10' diameter Ocean Outfall to discharge approximately 236
million gallons per day of wastewater from OCSD's 2.35 million customers; and
WHEREAS, 50% of the wastewater discharged out the Ocean Outfall is wastewater treated
to a primary treatment level and 50% is wastewater treated to a secondary treatment level; and
WHEREAS, the Ocean Outfall that sits 190' below the ocean surface about 4.5 miles offshore
from the Santa Ana River mouth between Huntington Beach and Newport Beach; and
WHEREAS, this discharge creates a wastewater plume in the ocean that can be up to 6 miles
long, 2 to 3 miles wide and 100 feet thick; and
WHEREAS, OCSD's 20 -Meter Fecal Coliform Study in 1996 showed that the wastewater
plume may - under certain wave, tidal, and current conditions - approach the shoreline where
it can contaminate the beaches and swimming areas of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach;
and
WHEREAS, data from testing station C2 - between 1/4 and 1/2 of a mile off of the ocean
beaches of Newport Beach - may show that the wastewater plume approaches swimming areas
used by thousands of visitors daily; and
WHEREAS, the 1972 federal Clean Water Act requires most Publicly -Owned Treatment
Works (POTWs) to treat all wastewater to full secondary levels before such wastewater can be
discharged from a treatment facility; and
WHEREAS, the Act authorizes POTWs to request a waiver of this full secondary
requirement from the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) under Section 301(h) of
the Act as long as the POTW can show that the less - then -full- secondary discharge does not
harm the environment or harm public health; and
WHEREAS, OCSD requested and was granted a waiver under Section 301(h) by US EPA in
1985, with an extension granted in 1998; and
WHEREAS, the current waiver (as extended) expires on January 1, 2003; and
WHEREAS, as projected by a 1999 Environmental Impact Report associated with OCSD's
Strategic Plan, full secondary treatment of wastewater reduces nearly all parameters of ocean
pollution including levels of fecal coliform bacterial and viruses, and
WHEREAS, sanitation agencies in Los Angeles County have not applied for new waivers
under Section 301(h) and are in the process of treating all wastewater at full secondary levels;
and
WHEREAS, all or a significant portion of the additional expense of constructing and
maintaining facilities associated with full secondary treatment at OCSD will likely be borne by
the ratepayers of OCSD, including the residents and businesses of Newport Beach; and
WHEREAS, Newport Beach relies upon a safe, clean ocean to sustain its quality of life and
its economic and tourism base; and
WHEREAS, the residents of Newport Beach use the ocean and its beaches for health,
recreation, and business endeavors, including fishing, boating, and swimming; now, therefore
be it
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that it hereby opposes any
extension of or application for a waiver of full secondary discharge requirements under Section
301(h) of the federal Clean Water Act by OCSD; and be it also
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that it hereby supports the
full secondary treatment of all wastewater discharged into OCSD's Ocean Outfall; and be it also
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that it hereby urges its
resident and business population to join with the Council in advocating for safer, less
environmentally impactful wastewater discharge into the Pacific Ocean and in recognizing and
accepting the community-wide obligation and financial costs that he therein.
ADOPTED this 25th Day of September, 2001.
GAROLD B. ADAMS
Mayor of Newport Beach
ATTEST:
LAVONNE HARKLESS
Newport Beach City Clerk