Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
May 25, 2007
4. Water Quality
Water board seeks larger contamination fine;
By J. Michael Kennedy, staff writer
In the realm of big fines for doing bad things to the land, this was supposed to have been a $4-million whopper.
The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, a partnership of 24 independent special districts, was prepared to pay that amount after years of negotiation to cover environmental damage done in the
But in a surprise move late Wednesday, the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board switched gears and said $4 million wasn't enough — despite the fact that it ranked as the largest settlement ever agreed upon by a
So it is back to the bargaining table, much to the chagrin of the sanitation districts and the elation of those who contended the fine was too small to make up for the damage done.
"I think a couple of the board members weren't satisfied with the penalty," said sanitation districts spokesman Ray Tremblay. "From the districts' perspective, we're very disappointed with the board's action."
Not so for the likes of rancher Eugene Nebeker, a former water board member who called the move a "victory for the interest of the entire valley."
The decision only added to the woes of the county sanitation districts, which late last year agreed to pay more than $2.5 million to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and Santa Monica Baykeeper to settle a dispute over a spill that sent more than 800,000 gallons of sewage into the ocean and coastal groundwater supplies.
The $4 million in fines for the
In
As far back as 2000, then-state Sen. Pete Knight, a former test pilot, introduced a resolution calling for an end to the effluent overflow because it attracted birds that were in turn dangerous to air traffic. And in that resolution, he pointed out that the first order to fix the problem was given in 1993.
The issue in Palmdale centers on effluent disposal that has caused or contributed to nitrate pollution of groundwater. A portion of the settlement money was to be used to help pay for a recycled-water distribution system.
But Nebeker argued that the fine was only about half the monetary benefit gained by ignoring cleanup orders for years. In a letter to water board executive officer Harold Singer, Nebeker said the message was to "violate your enforcement orders as long as you can, take the regional board decisions to court and you will save considerable money."
He also said the water board was in the difficult position of not having enough funds to stay in the same league with polluters who took matters to court rather than comply with regulatory orders.
Nebeker acknowledged that seeking a larger penalty would delay water projects that would have gone forward with the settlement and that it would cost Lahontan more money to keep the negotiations going.
"I hope we can get a better solution for the whole valley so Lahontan has an easier time of dealing with it in the future," he said.
Tremblay, the sanitation districts spokesman, said the result was upsetting because, until Wednesday night, both sides had an agreement that should have been routinely approved by the board. He said the $4 million in fines had been earmarked for the
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-water25may25,1,7765424.story
####
No comments:
Post a Comment