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 - 1/22/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

January 22, 2008

 

4. Water Quality

 

NEW RIVER CLEANUP:

Feds face suit over New River cleanup - Imperial Valley Press

 

RUNOFF ISSUES:

State to curb toxic runoff; Caltrans agrees to drastically reduce the poisonous stew that drains from Southland roads into waterways - Los Angeles Times

 

Caltrans to reduce runoff from freeways; State officials settle lawsuit with 2 groups - Ventura County Star

 

PERCHLORATE:

Rialto to evaluate its city attorney - Inland Valley Daily Bulletin

 

 

NEW RIVER CLEANUP:

Feds face suit over New River cleanup

Imperial Valley Press – 1/19/08

By Victor Morales, staff writer

 

CALEXICO — The potential for federal agencies to face legal action for not doing enough to clean up the New River is becoming more likely as river advocates get closer in their legal footing.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the nation’s diplomatic agency with Mexico, the International Boundary and Water Commission, could have to answer to a claim by the Calexico New River Committee that it has violated state and federal water acts.

In addition, a North American Free Trade Agreement commission could see a claim by the committee that the trilateral treaty has failed to enforce its own laws. The EPA could also be petitioned to consider the New River as a Superfund site, which will mandate the parties responsible for the river’s pollution to clean it.

The river is considered to be one of the dirtiest in North America and originates in Mexico. It runs north through the Imperial Valley and comes within a mile of homes in Calexico and Brawley.

Lawyers for the committee are evaluating the three options, committee Executive Director Miguel Figueroa told board members Wednesday. Figueroa said all three options are viable.

“We are certain that those three options we can get something out of them. We will focus on all three. It’s just a matter of time before one begins to show promise,” Figueroa said Friday.

Superfund status is one of the options many of the committee board members are pinning their hopes on. Committee board member Jose M. Lopez stressed that an assessment on the river, a requirement for Superfund consideration, is essential.


“If the money is going to come down from anywhere, it’s going to come down from the Superfund. If we don’t get that assessment, we are fried,” Lopez said.

The assessment could be paid for independently and board members are still weighing funding options. Either way, it will be required that the committee engages the public, said committee attorney John C. McCaull of Sonoma.

“This is where we will need support from congressional members to oversee this process and push for Superfund designation,” McCaull said in a letter to the committee. McCaull could not be reached Friday to elaborate.

McCaull indicated he would continue to establish the legal basis to file a separate lawsuit against the USEPA and IBWC, the nation’s biggest environmental agencies. Specifically, such a complaint would claim that the Federal Clean Water and California Water Quality Control acts were violated by the agencies when allowing the maximum daily load of pathogens to exceed established standards in the New River.

“We do not appear to have any statute of limitations or sovereign immunity defenses that would bar us from pursuing a legal claim,” McCaull said.

Another federal and diplomatic agency, the Commission on Environmental Cooperation, created under the environmental arm of NAFTA, could face a claim by the committee that it has failed to enforce its environmental laws. The agency’s decree allows anyone living in the U.S., Mexico or Canada to make a claim concerning the enforcement of environmental legislation of any of the three counties.

McCaull indicated in his letter that he has conducted all the research necessary and stands ready to make such a claim upon approval by the committee. The committee voted unanimously Wednesday to authorize him to proceed. #

http://www.ivpressonline.com/articles/2008/01/20/local_news/news07.txt

 

 

RUNOFF ISSUES:

State to curb toxic runoff; Caltrans agrees to drastically reduce the poisonous stew that drains from Southland roads into waterways

Los Angeles Times – 1/19/08

By Dan Weikel, staff writer

 

Millions of gallons of polluted runoff from state highways in Los Angeles and Ventura counties will be prevented from contaminating local waters and beaches every year under a court agreement reached Friday between Caltrans and environmentalists.

Caltrans vowed to reduce storm water pollution by 20% below 1994 levels along more than 1,000 miles of state highway in the region, according to the agreement in federal court with the Natural Resources Defense Council and Santa Monica BayKeeper.

Storm water that drains off highways can be a toxic brew of trash, oil, rubber, brake dust and microscopic bits of metal. Solvents, fertilizers and pesticides, along with human and animal waste, are often swept into the mix.

Most of the plans to install pollution controls must be completed by 2011, and environmental groups expect the reductions to be achieved by 2015.

The two sides have battled in court since 1993.

"This represents a major step forward in the control of storm water runoff -- the largest source of water pollution in the state," said David S. Beckman, a defense council attorney.

In an average year, more than 6 million gallons of oil run into California's waters from roads and sidewalks, the state Environmental Protection Agency reports.

Tests of some Caltrans drains in the Los Angeles area have revealed contamination so foul it qualifies as hazardous waste.

Toxic storm water runoff from roads and highways can harm fish, sea urchins, shrimp, birds and microorganisms, research shows.

Approved by U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie, the storm water agreement replaces an April 2004 court settlement in which Caltrans promised to install filtering systems where appropriate when repairing, improving and building highways.

For existing freeways, Caltrans had agreed in 2004 to treat runoff wherever feasible for improvement projects involving more than three acres, such as widenings and interchanges.

Storm water controls vary from simple devices, such as drain filters and screens, to complex equipment that removes sediment and debris. Detention basins, sand traps, and strips of vegetation are often used to filter storm water before it reaches a storm drain or waterway.

Beckman said it appeared to NRDC and BayKeeper about a year ago that Caltrans was having problems complying with the 2004 court settlement, which was reached after more than a decade in court. Negotiations began, Beckman said, to avoid pursuing a contempt citation against Caltrans.

Unlike the earlier settlement, the new agreement requires a set reduction in runoff and avoids the previous piecemeal approach by allowing Caltrans to consider entire highway corridors when formulating a storm water strategy.

"Not setting goals has been standard operating procedure when regulating storm water discharges in the state. Now we are setting an end goal," Beckman said. "Hopefully, this new approach will provide a model for local governments, transportation agencies and industries."

Caltrans attorneys were either unavailable Friday or declined comment. But in a statement, Douglas R. Failing, Caltrans district director for Los Angeles and Ventura counties, said the settlement meshes with the agency's goals.

"It is something we have been trying to achieve all along," Failing said. "What is important is that a methodology has been identified that we feel will work in this urban area of Los Angeles."

Under the agreement, Caltrans will examine 1,000 miles of freeway in Los Angeles and Ventura counties and develop plans by 2011 for reducing storm water pollution.

Caltrans also will supplement its existing efforts to reduce contaminated runoff with innovative practices that have performed well in recent studies. The new methods include porous pavement that can absorb pollutants before storm water enters watersheds.

In the past, Caltrans has been concerned about the cost of storm water controls, both locally and statewide. The agency estimated a few years ago that equipping highways in Los Angeles County with filtering devices could approach $5 billion -- a figure that environmentalists have disputed.

Beckman said the approach outlined in the new agreement should hold down costs. Caltrans, he added, has realized that their original cost estimates were too high and that the agency can treat runoff for a fraction of the total cost of a highway project. #

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-caltrans19jan19,1,7258493.story

 

 

Caltrans to reduce runoff from freeways; State officials settle lawsuit with 2 groups

Ventura County Star – 1/19/08

By Charles Levin, staff writer

 

Caltrans has settled a 14-year-old lawsuit with two environmental groups over polluted runoff that flows from state roads into the ocean.

 

Under the agreement announced Friday, the state Department of Transportation agreed to reduce runoff from freeways in Los Angeles and Ventura counties by 20 percent when compared with 1994 levels.

 

Agreeing to a specific figure is groundbreaking in environmental litigation, said David Beckman, director of the Coastal Water Quality Project for the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of two plaintiffs in the case.

 

Controlling toxic runoff is one of the few areas of environmental law that does not have quantifiable standards, Beckman said.

 

"Not only are we going to keep 6,000 pounds of pollution out of Ventura and Los Angeles County waters, but this agreement hopefully blazes a path that others will follow," Beckman said Friday.

 

Douglas Failing, director of the California Department of Transportation's District 7, which includes Ventura and Los Angeles counties, was traveling Friday and unavailable for comment.

 

In a media statement, Failing said, "This settlement isn't really a change in what we were trying to accomplish statewide. It is something we have been trying to achieve all along. What is important is that a methodology has been identified that we feel will work in this urban area of Los Angeles."

 

The Defense Council and Santa Monica Baykeeper filed the suit in 1994. The suit charged Caltrans with failing to enforce the federal Clean Water Act by not reducing runoff from roads. Polluted storm runoff — a toxic brew of motor grease, pesticides and other compounds — doesn't penetrate asphalt surfaces like those on freeways, parking lots and sidewalks. Most of it instead drains to the ocean.

 

On average, more than 6 million gallons of oil run into California's waters from roads and sidewalks, environmentalists say.

 

A federal judge ruled in favor of the two environmental groups in 1994, Beckman said. However, Caltrans dragged the matter on for years with legal challenges, he said.

 

The agreement to resolve the matter "is forward thinking and I hope a turn of the page," Beckman said of Caltrans.

 

"But it's taken them a long time to move from a position of strident opposition to meeting their Clean Water Act opportunities to (making) it part of their basic standard operating procedure."

 

Under the agreement, Caltrans will use sand traps, catch basins and new types of porous pavement that traps polluted runoff and absorbs contaminants.

 

The Resources Defense Council will identify specific watersheds in both counties where cleanup work will take place. Caltrans will then examine about 1,000 miles of freeway in those watersheds. The agency also must submit pollution-reduction plans for each watershed by 2011. The cost of the work is unclear.

 

Paul Jenkin, environmental director of the Surfrider Foundation's Ventura County chapter, called the settlement good news.

 

"I hope it not only sets the stage for Caltrans improvements but for our local agencies to recognize this as a significant problem," Jenkin said of urban runoff. #

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/jan/19/caltrans-to-reduce-runoff-from-freeways/

 

 

PERCHLORATE:

Rialto to evaluate its city attorney

Inland Valley Daily Bulletin – 1/21/08

By Jason Pesick, staff writer

 

RIALTO - The City Council will evaluate behind closed doors the performance of its city attorney, who is handling legal efforts to clean up contamination of the city's drinking water.

 

It is not clear if the council will take any action involving Bob Owen, who also had a hand in the city's court battle to eliminate its Police Department.

 

Mayor Grace Vargas said Monday that the city has spent too much on legal costs.

 

"And I think now is the time for the change," she said.

 

Rialto has a contract through 2010 with Owen and his small law firm to serve as city attorney.

 

The contract paid the firm $729,402 when it was signed in 2003. That amount increases by 2 percent a year.

 

The cost of breaking the contract now is $500,000.

 

Owen did not return calls seeking comment Monday.

 

"Obviously, the mayor is a little bit ahead of me, but I think there's going to be some - probably some frank discussions," said Councilman Ed Scott. "All options are open."

 

Owen, who has been city attorney for more than 15 years, has overseen the city's legal efforts to get contamination of the local drinking water cleaned up. The city has spent about $20 million on that effort. Only about $3 million of that money has been spent on treatment for the primary contaminant, perchlorate. The council has authorized an audit of all the perchlorate expenses, but it has not yet been released.

 

In 2005, the City Council voted to replace the Police Department with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department - a decision it later reversed after a tough legal battle in which the city had to hire a Bay Area law firm.

 

 The city lost the court fight against its police officers union on a legal technicality because city officials did not meet with the union before voting to eliminate the department.

 

"I think there's just a number of issues that I intend to address with litigation, legal fees and those kinds of things," Scott said.

 

On Friday, Councilwoman Winnie Hanson said she would not support an effort to remove Owen.

"I'm very satisfied with our city attorney," she said.

 

"There's always times when people are going to second guess everything."

 

She characterized what she thought the discussions would be about: "We're looking at not so much performance but values and do we or do we not need a bigger or better or different-type representation."

 

She also said there are "developments" within Owen's professional life that she said are "exciting" but did not elaborate.

 

Vargas said it was Owen's responsibility to keep the city from spending so much on perchlorate.

 

"And I guess most of us are in agreement on that."  #

http://www.dailybulletin.com/search/ci_8038978?IADID=Search-www.dailybulletin.com-www.dailybulletin.com

####

No comments:

Blog Archive