This is a site mirroring the emails of California Water News emailed by the California Department of Water Resources

[Water_news] 4. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: WATER QUALITY - 7/9/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

July 9, 2007

 

4. Water Quality

 

PERCHLORATE:

City strategy in lawsuit questioned - Inland Valley Daily Bulletin

 

WASTEWATER ISSUES:

Colfax seeks to avoid dirty water suit; Treatment plant violations cited in notice to city - Auburn Journal

 

LAKE HODGES WATER QUALITY:

Pipeline progress raises concern about water quality at Lake Hodges - North County Times

 

ALGAE BLOOMS:

Potentially deadly algae blooms in Siskiyou County lakes - Associated Press

 

SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD ISSUES:

Water cops face board member shortage - North County Times

 

LAKE BERRYESSA:

Deal may not end pain for lake residents; Settlement over Berryessa sewage woes could come at a hefty price - Napa Valley Register

 

SUISUN FLEET ISSUES:

Suisun fleet breakup plan vexes officials - Associated Press

 

Editorial: Ship-disposal discord - Contra Costa Times

 

 

PERCHLORATE:

City strategy in lawsuit questioned

Inland Valley Daily Bulletin – 7/9/07

By Jason Pesick, staff writer

 

RIALTO - City officials see their fight to clean up perchlorate-contaminated drinking water as a classic underdog story - a modest city going to court to get big corporations and the Pentagon to clean up a mess.

 

To City Attorney Bob Owen, it's like David and Goliath, with Rialto as David - of course.

 

It might take more than a slingshot to do the job, though.

 

It might take $300 million to clean up contamination discovered in 1997.

 

Thus Rialto has armed itself with a team of top-tier lawyers to pursue lawsuits against suspected polluters.

 

City leaders say they're on a righteous quest, but some water-cleanup experts and others who have dealt with similar challenges call it folly.

 

Taking on the likes of the Defense Department, Goodrich, and Black and Decker during the past decade has already cost the city the equivalent of the Police Department's annual budget.

 

Critics want to know what that money has bought beyond constant delays in court and before state regulatory boards. They also want to know why the city didn't seek the help of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as other communities with similar problems have.

 

"It's just beyond imagination how much money they've spent on this thing," said Anthony "Butch" Araiza, general manager of the West Valley Water District, which also serves water to Rialto residents.

 

Owen said the city has spent about $18 million on lawsuits, legal investigators, water treatment, public relations and community meetings.

 

It sounds good to say the city shouldn't spend so much on attorneys, Owen said, but the city would have to pay much more to clean up the mess.

 

"Everybody hates lawyers," he said. "We know that."

 

Residents foot the bill

 

Rialto's legal battle is funded largely by a surcharge for customers of the city's water utility.

 

The surcharge starts at $6.85 a month and rises based on usage. The city water agency serves about half of Rialto, meaning about half the residents fund the formidable perchlorate effort.

 

West Valley Water and the Fontana Water Company serve the rest.

 

If Rialto wins its case in court, residents will be reimbursed, Owen said.

 

The council also has allocated $5 million from General Fund reserves to escalate the legal effort last year.

 

Rialto's best hope at getting perchlorate cleaned up quickly is the State Water Resources Control Board, which has planned August hearings on the contamination.

 

The board could order three suspected polluters, Goodrich, Pyro Spectaculars and Emhart Industries, which the city says is really Black and Decker, to remove the contamination.

 

"There's been a wealth of evidence that's been generated as a result of Rialto's litigation," said Kurt Berchtold, assistant executive officer for the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and member of the advocacy team that will argue alongside Rialto during the state hearings.

 

But the companies' legal maneuvers have delayed those hearings numerous times. The state water board took over cleanup efforts because the Santa Ana board couldn't move forward.

 

"It's gone from bad to worse to untenable," said Michael Whitehead, president of the San Gabriel Valley Water Company, which owns Fontana Water.

 

Whitehead and Araiza have publicly talked about the benefits of bringing in the EPA to take over the cleanup.

 

The hearing delays have upset environmentalists as well.

 

"The corporations know how to use the legal system," said Penny Newman, executive director of the Riverside- based Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, which will be a party in state hearings.

 

She defended the city's strategy and the amount of money it has spent.

 

"When you've been harmed, you go after the person who harmed you, which can be difficult for people of limited income," she said.

 

The idea is simple: Polluters should clean up their messes.

 

"Is it an Erin Brockovich scenario? You bet," Rialto City Administrator Henry Garcia said at a council meeting.

 

But "Erin Brockovich" is the wrong movie to emulate because the contamination is too complicated, Whitehead countered. He suggested watching "A Civil Action," in which the EPA takes over because the case costs too much money to put on in court.

 

"It's a very conventional legal strategy. It's also a failed legal strategy," Whitehead said.

 

He and Araiza recommend using the model the San Gabriel Valley used to clean up contaminants including perchlorate: a regional coalition of entities working with the EPA.

 

Comparing situations

 

To remove perchlorate discovered in 1997 from Baldwin Park, Whitehead said the San Gabriel Valley Water Company spent less than $1 million on legal fees. Polluters and the U.S. government paid most of the cost.

 

Wayne Praskins, an EPA Superfund project manager, said that if a polluter refuses to follow an EPA cleanup order but is found responsible in court, the polluter faces penalties of three times the cleanup cost.

 

"I think going with EPA and the Superfund program is probably the strongest mechanism a city or community has I'm always amazed that people - communities - shy away from that," Newman said.

 

But the EPA doesn't have super powers. The San Gabriel Valley was already a Superfund site as early as the mid-1980s, which made it easier and faster to get perchlorate cleaned up.

 

"It's a tough comparison," Praskins said. "It took a long time to reach agreements in the San Gabriel Valley."

 

To Owen, the city attorney, comparing the Rialto-Colton Basin cleanup to that of the San Gabriel Valley is like comparing apples to oranges. The EPA started looking at contamination in the San Gabriel Valley in the 1970s. When it was looking at whether to go the EPA route, Rialto looked at a number of Superfund sites, and in every case it took between 17 and 27 years to start cleaning the contamination up, Owen said.

 

"And that was simply unacceptable to us."

 

The EPA has followed the case but hasn't yet decided whether to take over, Praskins said.

 

A combination of factors kept the EPA from taking the lead from the get-go. Rialto thought the EPA would take too long. Owen has also said he was afraid a large Superfund site in the city would create a stigma.

 

EPA officials also thought state regulatory agencies could handle the case.

 

Berchtold speculated that Whitehead and Araiza might be pressing for an EPA takeover because the state would probably not order cleanup of some West Valley and Fontana wells.

 

A fault separates those wells from the Rialto-Colton Basin, and Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board staffers said they can't prove the suspected Rialto-area polluters caused the contamination in those wells.

 

Whitehead says the board is in over its head.

 

Despite the fault, Araiza prefers a regional approach and said Rialto is selfish for excluding other water agencies.

 

"I just don't understand being that territorial about this."

 

Owen said he's just looking out for Rialto. He doesn't want to divide money equally because the problem doesn't affect all agencies equally.

 

Rialto's City Council is getting uncomfortable with the cost. The council called for an audit of how much the city has spent on perchlorate, but members insist there will be no strategy change.

 

The newest councilman, Joe Baca Jr., thinks there should be.

 

"I'm concerned about there being a blank check out there for the attorneys," he said.

 

He said he can't even find out how much the city has spent.

 

"We have to look at it as a regional approach," he said.

 

Owen, on the other hand, doesn't want to change course now.

 

"This city's involved in possibly its largest legal battle ever in its history," he said.

 

"Now is not the time to blink."

 

What is perchlorate?

 

Perchlorate is used to produce such explosives as fireworks and rocket fuel.

 

It flows from industrial sites on Rialto's north end through the city and into Colton.

 

It's not clear how dangerous perchlorate is, but a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released last year says even low concentrations of perchlorate can affect the thyroid gland. Treatment systems remove perchlorate from the water before it reaches residents.  #

http://www.dailybulletin.com/search/ci_6330114

 

 

WASTEWATER ISSUES:

Colfax seeks to avoid dirty water suit; Treatment plant violations cited in notice to city

Auburn Journal – 7/8/07

By Michael Athhouse, staff writer

 

COLFAX - Colfax City Manager Joan Philippe is hopeful that the city can avoid costly litigation in a potential federal lawsuit against the city.

City Attorney P. Scott Browne has not had a chance to fully examine a 60-day notice of intent to sue by Allen and Nancy Edwards and the Environmental Law Foundation, Philippe said recently.

The Edwards own a farm just outside Colfax city limits and downstream from the wastewater treatment plant. The Environmental Law Foundation is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of human health and the environment.

The notice, received by the city on June 26, indicates that the plaintiffs intend to sue the city of Colfax under the federal Clean Water Act.

 

A press release dated June 22 from the plaintiffs' attorney, Daniel Cooper with Lawyers for Clean Water, Inc., states that the city committed "approximately 1,200 violations at the treatment plant in the past five years."

Cooper said a federal lawsuit is necessary.

"We have lost confidence in the state's willingness to enforce the law," Cooper said in a June 25 interview.

Edwards referred questions last Monday to Cooper.

"Ultimately, we don't want that water on our land," Cooper said.

Philippe said Monday that receipt of the 60-day notice is among the steps that must be taken before a suit is actually filed.

"They indicated that they would like to settle," she said. "But the effluent limitations are already being met."

Mayor Sharon Gieras is afraid that defending against a lawsuit will hurt residents.

 

"Any lawsuit will only cost the city sewer ratepayers more," Gieras said Monday. "I don't understand why now. We're finally getting started on the new plant and they're filing a suit. We need to get the plant done and, hopefully, this won't stop us."

 

According to a June staff report from the Central Valley Water Quality Control Board, the regulatory body that oversees the Colfax wastewater treatment plant, the plant has a checkered past.

There have been many violations and a $351,000 penalty levied against the city in 2003 for non-compliance.

However, Central Valley Water Quality Control Board Assistant Executive Officer Kenneth Landau acknowledged that the city has made great strides toward compliance.

"For Colfax, recently they have been complying," Landau said. "It's much better than it used to be."

According to a June staff report, there have been no violations this year and only four since July 2006.

The Central Valley Water Quality Control Board still has concerns, however, regarding the permit for the interim plant, Landau said.

In a meeting between water quality control board staff and Philippe, Colfax City Engineer Tom Leland and wastewater treatment plant operator Tom Parnham last week, those concerns were discussed.

"The biggest issue was what volume of flow the city needs to generate," Landau said. "We thought we had it right based on the information we had."

City administrators contend that the amount allowed in the upcoming permit would put the plant into immediate violation.

 

An administrative decision was made by water quality control board staff to postpone the permit hearing for the Colfax wastewater treatment plant from September to October. This was not only to allow sufficient time for the city to compile the necessary data, but also to give the water quality control board time to review it, Landau said.

To comply with state law, Colfax's Philippe explained Monday, the data would have to be received and posted by the water quality control board before July 10 to be placed on the September meeting agenda.

The primary problem with the proposed permit requirements was that the amount of flow to be allowed from the plant was too low, Philippe said.

"Part of the confusion comes from filing the permit applications for both the interim plant and the new plant," Philippe said.

Landau also has indicated that the Central Valley Water Quality Control Board is also concerned about the ammonia and nitrate output.

 

"Ammonia is toxic to fish and nitrates are unhealthy for humans," he said. "We've told them (Colfax) to minimize the amount of ammonia, but as the ammonia is reduced, nitrate levels increase."

The new plant's design should provide the means for the reduction in both, Landau said.

Although the plant has not had a violation yet this year, due to "unconventional" tertiary treatment at the plant, Landau cannot say that the effluent is safe even though the available means of measurement would indicate that it is.

Tertiary treatment is a process that disinfects and filters the effluent providing adequate health protection for downstream users.

Landau indicated in one word whether he would be willing to have the effluent from the Colfax facility on his land. "No," he said, adding that landfills, wastewater treatment plants and the like are not usually desired neighbors under any circumstances. #

http://www.auburnjournal.com/articles/2007/07/09/news/top_stories/02water09.txt?pg=3

 

 

LAKE HODGES WATER QUALITY:

Pipeline progress raises concern about water quality at Lake Hodges

North County Times – 7/8/07

By Quinn Eastman, staff writer

 

DEL DIOS ---- The San Diego County Water Authority's progress in building a pipeline between Lake Hodges and Olivenhain Reservoir makes long-standing concerns about treating Hodges' sometimes green water more urgent, water officials said last week.

The idea of mixing Lake Hodges' sometimes green water with cleaner Olivenhain Reservoir water has posed treatment concerns to water officials for the last few years, but a theoretical problem is about to become a practical one.

 

Blasting for a 1.25-mile tunnel under Del Dios Highway finished last summer and the pipeline almost connects the man-made Hodges just south of Escondido and the reservoir over the hills to the west.

 

 

Construction of the underground pump station that will move Lake Hodges water has moved into high gear. Contractor Archer Western has been working double shifts to excavate the 120-foot hole that will contain the pump station and is scheduled to be finished next year.

"I think the water-quality issue has become imminent because pump storage is supposed to start in September 2008," said Kim Thorner, general manager of the Olivenhain Municipal Water District, last week.

The pipeline and pump station are part of the San Diego County Water Authority's Emergency Storage Project, designed to move water around the county in case of an emergency such as an earthquake.

The pump station is expected to add 40 megawatts to the region's peak power capacity, enough for 26,000 homes, Water Authority construction manager Jeremy Shepard said Tuesday.

It is also expected to make money ---- $5 million per year, by some estimates ---- by pumping water uphill at night when electricity is cheap and having it flow downhill to make electricity during the day.

But the Olivenhain water district, which includes parts of Encinitas, Carlsbad, Rancho Santa Fe and 4S Ranch, is objecting to allowing Hodges water to mix with the reservoir water it taps for its customers. District officials are discussing legal action to prevent it, according to a presentation by Thorner.

Lake Hodges contains levels of decaying organic matter and manganese that will foul Olivenhain water treatment equipment, the presentation says.

Rain washes sediment, oil and fertilizers from 250 square miles into the artificial lake, whose water level has fluctuated widely in the last few years.

A drought in the 1990s left the lake's waters low enough to allow willow trees to grow in shallow areas near Interstate 15, but the wet winter of 2004-05 flooded the trees.

Engineering studies say that upgrading Olivenhain's McCollum treatment plant to handle Hodges water could cost between $40 million and $60 million, Thorner said.

A joint committee of Water Authority member agencies has started work on an operations plan that will say when water can be moved in and out of Lake Hodges, Water Authority spokesman John Liarakos said Tuesday.

A draft plan is expected in November.

The operations plan will probably have "trigger points" for Hodges' water contaminant levels when the pipeline will need to be shut off, he said.

The operations plan will also say how much the level of Lake Hodges can be expected to rise and fall, but Liarakos said it will probably be less than a foot. Moreover, the pump station can be expected to be more active in the summer when the region's electricity demand is higher, he said.

Although the city of San Diego owns Lake Hodges and its dam, the city doesn't get any water from the lake. The Santa Fe Irrigation District gets about 30 percent of its water from Lake Hodges, which is treated at its R.E. Badger Filtration Plant.

State bond money could be available for either the Olivenhain district or the city of San Diego if an expensive technical fix is necessary. #

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/07/08/news/inland/22_23_167_7_07.txt

 

 

ALGAE BLOOMS:

Potentially deadly algae blooms in Siskiyou County lakes

Associated Press – 7/7/07

 

Potentially deadly algae is blooming in two lakes near the Oregon border, prompting health warnings and calls for the demolition of dams that form the reservoirs along the Klamath River.

 

The blue-green algae is growing for the third consecutive summer in Iron Gate Reservoir and Copco Lake.

 

Federal, state, local and tribal officials are warning swimmers and boaters to stay away from the algae blooms in the Siskiyou County lakes between Yreka and Ashland, Ore. The blooms appear blue, green, white or brown and can be found in foam, scum or mats floating on the water.

 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency warned this week that contact with the algae can produce skin rashes, mouth ulcers, vomiting, diarrhea or cold- and flulike symptoms. In rare cases, liver failure or death can result.

 

Pets and young children are most at risk because they are most likely to swallow or inhale the toxic slime, the EPA said.

 

The health warning renewed calls from the Karuk Tribe to demolish the dams that form the reservoirs on the Klamath River.

 

Tribal leaders, along with environmental and fishing organizations, say Portland, Ore.-based PacifiCorp should destroy the dams to improve declining salmon runs.

 

PacifiCorp provides more than 1.6 million customers with energy from coal, hydro, renewable wind power, gas-fired combustion turbines, solar and geothermal sources. #

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/07/07/state/n143400D69.DTL&hw=water&sn=091&sc=132

 

 

SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD ISSUES:

Water cops face board member shortage

North County Times – 7/7/07

By Gig Conaughton, staff writer

 

SAN DIEGO ---- The agency responsible for policing water pollution in San Diego County is so short of board members that it can't even vote on some issues, officials said this week.

John Robertus, executive director of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, said Friday that the nine-member board has been short three members for six months ---- and down at least one member for more than a year. The board enforces laws on water quality from Laguna Beach to the U.S.-Mexico border.

 

Combined with the fact that sitting board members have had conflicts that have forced them to recuse themselves, the lack of members has forced the board to forgo voting on two important issues: approving a new stormwater permit for Orange County, and amending a cleanup order for San Marcos' Bradley Park, which adorns an old landfill that is leaking pollutants.

 

 

Local environmental leaders said Friday that the governor's office hasn't kept up with its appointments ---- and that the board member shortage was causing delays that could hurt the public. The regional board has nine members appointed to four-year terms by the governor that represent different interests, from government, to industry to agriculture to water quality. They vote on roughly 50 enforcement actions and pollution discharge permits a year.

A spokeswoman from the governor's office said Friday that it was working with the state Assembly and Senate to find new candidates to appoint.

Activists call delays harmful

Ed Kimura, chairman of the Sierra Club's water subcommittee, said the delays could be costly.

"The environment can only wait so long," he said. "Names have been submitted, we're just waiting to hear from the powers that be in Sacramento."

Meanwhile, Marco Gonzalez, another prominent environmental activist routinely seen at the board's meetings, said delaying action on some issues such as the Orange County stormwater permit and the Bradley Park cleanup was only the tip of the problem.

He said that because each board member is appointed to represent specific areas, the public is not well represented when the board is incomplete. Gonzalez is co-founder and partner of Coast Law Group, a firm that fights for environmental causes.

The water board is designed to be made up of people with designated areas of expertise. Currently, San Diego's board is missing two members, one with expertise in water quality and one with a background in industrial water use.

Robertus said the regional board's staff is ready to bring the Orange County stormwater permit and the Bradley Park issue to the board for a vote.

But the board does not have a quorum that would let it vote in either case. In the Orange County situation, two members recused themselves, Robertus said, because they have ties to Orange County and a city in that region, both of which would be regulated by the new stormwater permit.

In the Bradley Park issue, two members recused themselves because they've had ties to the city of San Marcos.

Robertus said the city of San Marcos is being denied its right to appeal the order the regional board gave it in 2005 to monitor and clean up the park. Polluted water apparently seeped from a buried landfill at the site into storm drains flowing to the sea after rains.

San Marcos officials maintain that the county of San Diego ---- which operated the landfill from 1948 through the late 1960s ---- should be charged with the cleanup because the city and county had a contract making the county responsible for the landfill.

The regional board has extended its cleanup order twice, the last time in January. But because of the board member shortage and the board members recusing themselves, the board can't vote on the city's request to include the county in the cleanup order.

"We can have a hearing, but we can't vote," Robertus said.

Board has dealt with shortage before

This is not the first time that San Diego's water cops have faced a short-handed board.

In late 2000, the board was missing three members because the governor's office had fallen behind on appointments. At that point, the board faced a shutdown because terms of two more members were to expire. A shutdown was averted when new appointments came on the scene.

The regional board said at the time that if it were left without a five-member voting quorum, the agency's staff would be able to issue lower-level enforcement orders. But major enforcement would have come to a sudden halt, they said.

In 1999, the Lahontan Region 6 board in south Lake Tahoe was forced to cancel seven of its 10 scheduled meetings because it did not have enough members.

San Diego's regional board does not appear to be headed for an abrupt shutdown. But environmental activists said they were still concerned with the current shortage of board members.

"Extremely concerned," Gonzalez said.

"We feel it's a real problem in San Diego," he added. "Anytime you have less people, you have less opportunity for leadership and appropriate discourse."

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/07/07/news/top_stories/22_14_427_6_07.txt

 

 

LAKE BERRYESSA:

Deal may not end pain for lake residents; Settlement over Berryessa sewage woes could come at a hefty price

Napa Valley Register – 7/7/07

By David Ryan, staff writer

 

A lawsuit brought by the state attorney general against a small Lake Berryessa water agency is nearing a formal settlement, Napa County lawyers say.

In February 2006, then-State Attorney General Bill Lockyer filed a lawsuit against the Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District, which is a group of 348 parcels — some developed, some not — on the far northern shore of Lake Berryessa, just east of Pope Valley proper.

The state accused the agency of habitually dumping partially-treated sewage into the Lake Berryessa watershed since at least 1995. That year, the state accused the district of spilling 50,000 gallons into the watershed.

The lawsuit — and $400,000 fine — became a flash point for the county to begin addressing some of the long-neglected needs of the district it had been the steward of for decades. The county’s point man on the district, District Principal Engineer Nate Galambos, devised a plan to both clean up the infrastructure and appease the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control District. The water district rules over the Putah Creek watershed, which includes Lake Berryessa.

 

Galambos’ plan was to raise water rates, while finding a way to issue a $5.2 million bond to fix the district. Those steps, he hoped, would show the water district that progress was being made.

Unfortunately for residents, the rates rose stratospherically. Water use that would draw a $40 bill under the old rates now cost at least $260. In some cases, residents who normally paid $200 were seeing bills north of $1,000 under the new rate structure.

As unpopular as the new rates were, however, some residents realized there was no other option for the district than to pursue the bond. The Napa County Board of Supervisors, which as the LBRID board of directors runs the district, voted unanimously in February to levy the $5.2 million bond — almost a year after the lawsuit was filed.

Earlier in September, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law allowing the water district to roll the cost of the fines levied against them into the cost of repairing infrastructure. For the Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District, this would have meant they could have avoided paying the $400,000 fine because the cost of repairs well exceeded the cost of fines.

Yet as the lawsuit moves toward formal settlement, county lawyers say the water agency  is being “prosecutorial” in its aim to levy the fine, allowances for repairs be damned.

“This particular board wouldn’t even consider it,” said Janice Killion deputy county counsel.

That creates a tall order for the Lake Berryessa water district.

“What’s difficult is it’s a little district with very few residents, so it was very difficult for it to pay the fines and get the repairs done,” Killion said, adding that she believed state regulators are so stubborn in part because of their workload. “We are one of 100 districts that find their way on the board’s agenda. They just take a very aggressive prosecutorial stance rather than work with the districts to come to a solution.”

Killion estimated it could be mid-July before a formal settlement is reached. #

http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2007/07/07/news/local/doc468f2d0136fee004364138.txt

 

 

SUISUN FLEET ISSUES:

Suisun fleet breakup plan vexes officials

Associated Press – 7/7/07

By Scott Lindlaw, staff writer

 

SAN FRANCISCO - Water-quality officials and environmentalists raised concerns Friday over the Bush administration's abrupt decision to move full-steam ahead with breaking up old warships rotting in California's "mothball fleet."

 

The federal Maritime Administration announced Thursday that it would lift its moratorium next month on disposing of the ships.

 

A collection of more than 50 troop transports, tankers and other vessels are rusting in limbo northeast of San Francisco.

 

Such a step would set in motion the towing of some vessels from Suisun Bay, a shallow estuary, to the former Naval Air Station in Alameda, where the warships would be scrubbed of sea life before being hauled to a ship-breaking facility in Texas.

 

That scrubbing causes toxic paint to flake off into the water, and that is what worries environmentalists and state water-quality regulators.

 

"It looks like they're using San Francisco Bay waters as a dumping ground," said Michael Wall, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council who has followed the issue.

 

Saul Bloom, executive director of Arc Ecology, a San Francisco environmental group working to make the ghost warships disappear, said the Maritime Administration "seems to be the one agency that is most committed to ignoring the nation's environmental regulations."

 

Bloom said he was disappointed that the agency intended to scrub the warships at Alameda, a military base near Oakland that was shuttered a decade ago and portions of which are currently Superfund cleanup sites. The ship-scrubbing could complicate ongoing cleanup efforts, he said.

 

Moreover, Bloom said he was dismayed that the Maritime Administration had not committed to obtaining permits under the Clean Water Act for the scrubbing.

 

Bruce Wolfe, executive officer of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, said his agency - charged with enforcing clean-water standards - does not want to demand such permits from the Maritime Administration.

 

Insisting on permits would slow the removal of the ships from Suisun Bay, Wolfe said. "We would much rather come to an agreement with them on what are the best management practices they'd use" for scrubbing the warships, Wolfe said.

 

Still, Wolfe said he had several concerns about the Maritime Administration's announcement.

 

Just last week, staff for the agency's head, Sean T. Connaughton, had pledged to provide the state with the results of tests the administration had conducted on a contaminant-containment system used on ships in Virginia, he said. The system uses six-foot-wide scrubbers to filter the paint-laden water, Wolfe said.

 

The Maritime Administration also had promised that hull cleaning in the bay area would start with a pilot program. The project as described in Connaugton's letter makes no provision for a "pause" to study the possible pollution generated by the first few ships, Wolfe said.

 

Wolfe said he also wants answers about the maintenance of dozens of ships that would remain indefinitely in the Suisun Bay Reserve Fleet. Even under the most optimistic projections, the Maritime Administration only has the budget to move 15 old ships out of three facilities nationwide in the next year, Wolfe said.

 

That is the same number that Connaughton pledged to move out of Suisun Bay within a year. That would still leave nearly 40 decaying.

 

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board was preparing a letter to the Maritime Administration to inquire about those concerns, Wolfe said.

 

Under a congressional order, the Maritime Administration had a 2006 deadline to dismantle ships in reserve fleets classified as no longer useful. That hasn't happened because of budget shortfalls, a shortage of facilities that can dismantle the giant ships and environmental concerns.  #

http://www.thereporter.com/search/ci_6322018

 

 

Editorial: Ship-disposal discord

Contra Costa Times – 7/9/07

 

DESPITE THE THREAT of pollution, the U.S. Maritime Administration will resume cleaning the hulls of ships that have been decaying in Suisun Bay. The vessels will be towed to Alameda, where their hulls will be scraped before they are towed to Texas for dismantling.

 

It is long past time that the 74 rusting ships in Suisun Bay be scrapped. But the process is needlessly complex, costly and threatening to the Bay and Delta environment.

 

Also, communications between the Maritime Administration and the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board could be a lot better.

 

Water board chief Bruce Wolfe said the announcement on ship cleaning by Maritime Administrator Sean Connaughton violates a federal promise last week to first give the state the results of tests on pollution containment operations on ships in Virginia.

Wolfe said Maritime Administration representatives promised state officials that the test results from the Virginia pilot program would be examined before cleaning begins in Alameda.

 

Also, Wolfe said he was promised that hull-cleaning in the Bay Area would start with its own pilot program.

 

However, Connaughton's announcement Thursday on cleaning the ships implied that there would not be a review of the Virginia results, nor was there any mention of a Bay Area pilot program.

 

The problem with cleaning hulls in the Bay Area is the danger that metals and other pollutants will not be contained and will be allowed to become an environmental threat.

 

The Maritime Administration says cleaning can be done in a safe manner. Perhaps, but the communication from Connaughton is not reassuring. Nor is there any mention of the environmental threat posed by the ships before they are moved.

 

Many have been anchored in Suisun Bay for decades, and 21 are not slated for the scrap yard.

 

Of course, the environmental threats and costs associated with cleaning the hulls locally before the ships are towed to Texas is the result of a highly questionable Coast Guard policy.

 

The Coast Guard insists that the hulls be scraped clean so that possible invasive species on the ships' bottoms are not transported to Texas.

 

Never mind that every year thousands of ships visit Texas ports from all over the world without having their hulls checked for invasive species.

 

Yet the Coast Guard will not relent on forcing the Maritime Administration to clean the hulls of a mere 53 vessels, which comprise an insignificant percentage of the ships that dock in Texas every year.

 

Removing the decaying hulks of long-since-useful ships from Suisun Bay should not be such a major problem.

 

There is no good reason why the ships cannot all be towed as they are to Texas or other places where the cost of scrapping them is reasonable.

 

Instead, we have a display by our federal government of a lack of common sense, poor communications and a disregard for regional officials, taxpayers and the environment. #

http://www.contracostatimes.com/search/ci_6331904

####

No comments:

Blog Archive