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 -9/24/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

September 24, 2008

 

4. Water Quality -

 

 

Sewage spills draw lawsuit

The Stockton Record- 9/24/08

 

Editorial

EPA drops ball again

Contra Costa Times- 9/24/08

 

Agency to use chloramines to disinfect water

The Antelope Valley Press- 9/23/08

 

++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Sewage spills draw lawsuit

The Stockton Record- 9/24/08

By , Staff Writer

 

A conservation group has followed through on its threat to sue the city for sewage spills and alleged violations of its permit to release treated wastewater.

 

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Sacramento, says 1,530 sewer overflows were reported in Stockton over the past five years, endangering human health and the environment.

 

The city has failed to maintain the sewer system and put off repairs for lack of funding, said Stockton environmentalist Bill Jennings, who heads the plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.

 

"There is a problem," Jennings said Tuesday. "The city is going to have to be much more aggressive in maintaining its facilities to lessen the number of spills that are occurring."

 

John Luebberke, Stockton assistant city attorney, said officials hadn't yet reviewed the suit and would wait to comment on it.

 

"These matters are pretty complicated," he said.

 

Stockton's wastewater plant discharges up to 55million gallons per day of treated wastewater into the San Joaquin River, just upstream of the Port of Stockton. The wastewater reaches the plant via more than 900 miles of pipes from 38,000 sewer connections across the city.

 

Jennings' group and a coalition of south San Joaquin Valley farmers have placed at least some of the blame for the Delta's water quality woes on the discharge of treated wastewater from cities such as Stockton. While ideologically opposite, both groups filed notices of intent to sue the city in July.

 

A spokesman for the farmers group, the Coalition for a Sustainable Delta, said Tuesday that the coalition had not yet filed suit.

 

Up and down the Central Valley, 64 cities release wastewater into rivers and streams that ultimately feed into the Delta, Jennings said. If Stockton were the only discharger, the detrimental effect on the Delta would be less, he said.

 

He said, however, that the number of spills in Stockton per mile of pipe greatly exceeds the state average. When these spills occur, wastewater drains into gutters and the city storm system, emptying into the Delta and harming wildlife.

 

The problem predates privatization of city waterworks in 2003, a move later undone by a court ruling, Jennings said.

 

"(Stockton's wastewater) is part of the thousand and one cuts that are destroying this estuary," he said.

 

A statement on the city Web site says wastewater at the plant is processed "to ensure that any water that is emptied into the Delta meets the highest standards to protect our environment."

 

Residents can help prevent spills, too, by not pouring grease down sink or toilet drains, among other strategies, the city says. Grease or oil can clog sewer lines, causing them to back up or even break.#

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080924/A_NEWS/809240330/-1/rss14

 

 

 

Editorial

EPA drops ball again

Contra Costa Times- 9/24/08

THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY has, once again, played ball with the White House while threatening public health.

 

 The latest case is about perchlorate, a component of rocket fuel that has been linked to thyroid problems in pregnant women, newborns and young children nationwide. The toxic component, also contained in fireworks, is showing up much too often in water supplies.

 

Yet while the ingredient has been found in at least 395 sites in 35 states at levels high enough to pose health risks, the EPA, according to a report in the Washington Post, caved in to pressure from the Bush administration and the Pentagon, a la emission standards, and decided there's no need to eliminate perchlorate from drinking water.

 

The EPA's conclusion in a draft claims the clean-up level for perchlorate would not result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public water systems."

 

What the report doesn't say is this avoids potentially costing the government billions of dollars in cleanup costs and it keeps the Defense Department away from nasty lawsuits with upset contractors. Who wants to go through all of that trouble just for the sake of public health concerns?

 

Like its lack of action with greenhouse gas emissions with intense pressure from Bush and the auto industry, the EPA is ignoring that this harmful ingredient is showing up mainly as a result of defense and aerospace activities, according to congressional investigators. The Defense Department used perchlorate for decades in testing missiles and rockets, and, had the EPA set standards, the Pentagon would've been held liable. The Pentagon has strongly denied it influenced the EPA.

 

There was an example in Redlands where Lockheed Martin was responsible for polluting water supplies due to perchlorate contamination. What federal officials should be concerned with is the contamination isn't limited to water near testing sites. In 2004, the California Department of Food and Agriculture found perchlorate in 32 samples of milk taken in Alameda, San Joaquin and Sacramento counties.

 

Levels of the chemical are being found in the Colorado River, a main water source for this state and 20 million people, due to contamination from Lake Mead via Las Vegas. It has also been found in lettuce and other foods.

 

Due to EPA's inaction, California stepped up last year and thankfully laid down its own regulation, a drinking water standard of 6 parts per billion. Massachusetts also has its own regulation, but these two states cannot do it alone.

 

The EPA said it will take final action by the end of the year, but we don't hold out much hope the agency will change its mind. We urge the next administration to take action and, with congressional support, force the EPA to set standards and clean up our water supplies.#

http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_10538875?nclick_check=1

 

 

 

Agency to use chloramines to disinfect water

The Antelope Valley Press- 9/23/08

By ALISHA SEMCHUCK, Staff Writer

 

Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency has announced it plans to switch from chlorine to chloramines to disinfect drinking water early next year.

 

AVEK decided to use chloramines to comply with Environmental Protection Agency regulations mandating lower levels of potential carcinogens called trihalomethanes, but some AVEK customers, most notably Rosamond Community Services District, oppose the switch, citing other potential health risks.

 

"As with chlorine, chloramines will be safe for residents and pets like dogs and cats," said a Sept. 12 AVEK letter to Antelope Valley businesses. "But as with chlorine, chloramines must be removed or neutralized for kidney dialysis and aquatic animals. Chloramines may also affect swimming pool water, emergency water drums, some businesses and private water storage tanks."

 

The switch is expected to take place between January and March, the letter said.

 

Chloramines form when ammonia is mixed with chlorine. AVEK's switch to chloramines is intended to lower the levels of trihalomethanes, or THMs, which form in water from the California Aqueduct when chlorine, used as a disinfectant, comes into contact with natural organic substances, such as decaying plant matter. THMs have been correlated to a high incidence of certain types of cancer. Studies on the use of chloramines have not produced that same conclusion.

 

But Rosamond Community Service District officials say they will refuse to accept water treated with chloramines. Rosamond's board members met people who claim assorted health concerns, including red, burning watering eyes; breathing difficulties; and skin rashes.

 

"Working with AVEK, we can solve the problem," said Jack Stewart, general manager of Rosamond Community Service District.

 

The Rosamond board will decide how to deal with the issue after hearing the results of a report from Montgomery Watson Harza, a consulting firm hired by AVEK to work on the project.

 

AVEK's board authorized the $35,000 study to compare two ways Rosamond can accept water deliveries from AVEK without being subjected to the chloramines.

 

One involves adding enough additional chlorine to offset the ammonia. The other would be for Rosamond to tie into the AVEK water delivery system at a point before the ammonia is added.

 

Stewart said he didn't know which the Rosamond board would choose, and they can't decide until they hear the details of both methods and the cost for each.

 

Though Rosamond officials still haven't determined how to handle the chloramines, Stewart said, "whatever is decided, we can be ready by mid-January," when AVEK wants to go online with the process.

 

Whether all AVEK's customers can meet the Jan. 15 date is uncertain.

 

"We're getting some feedback from a few customers that may not be ready at that time," said Michael Flood, AVEK engineer. "We want to work with them, but also make sure folks don't put it off."

 

As for Los Angeles County Waterworks District 40, AVEK's biggest customer, meeting the Jan. 15 date is not a problem.

 

"We will be ready by Jan. 15," said Adam Ariki, the waterworks division chief. "For the most part, we're ready (now). We've already converted all our disinfection facilities for the use of chloramines."

 

It cost the county in excess of $8 million for that project, which involved 18 facilities, Ariki said.

 

"It's a huge cost for us. But in the long run, the use of chloramines is the most reliable and cost-effective disinfection method. There is a lot of misconception about the use of chloramines," he said, disagreeing with contentions the compound causes health problems.

 

"Chloramines have been used as a disinfectant for a very long time - a century, as far as I know," Ariki said. "Two-thirds of the water companies throughout the state use chloramines."

 

The EPA estimates 68 million people use chloramine-treated water, based on a 1998 survey.

 

The EPA says studies show fewer trihalomethanes or other possibly carcinogenic byproducts form when chloramines are used in place of chlorine. Because it lasts longer, chloramines also offer greater protection against bacteria regrowth in systems with large storage tanks, the EPA says.

 

"Drinking water with chloramine levels that meet the EPA stands are associated with minimal to no risk, and should be considered safe," the EPA Web site states. However, people who use chloramines treated with higher than the "maximum residual disinfectant level" could experience irritating effects to eyes and nose, stomach discomfort or anemia. Experts agree the use of chloramines requires careful monitoring and a precise ratio of chlorine to ammonia.

 

Chloramines have a potential for nitrification and corrosion "if the treatment process is not carefully controlled," the EPA Web site notes.

 

Corrosion results if the compound leaches lead and copper in plumbing pipes. Nitrification can occur because of a loss of disinfectant residual when bacterial oxidation converts ammonia to nitrite, then to nitrate.

 

People on home dialysis must use special filters on the medical equipment, or they can die. People with aquariums, including pet shops, also must use special filters. Young children should not drink water with elevated nitrate levels.

 

The Metropolitan Water District, which serves cities and towns in six Southern California counties, has used chloramines since the mid-1980s.

In that time, no residents have contacted MWD about health issues, according to an agency spokesman.

 

Nonetheless, there's the cost involved and the feasibility of converting to chloramines for some smaller water companies, whose managements believe they have no choice.

 

John Ukkestad, general manager of White Fence Farms Mutual Water Company on Lancaster's west side, said the firm is not ready for the switch. The firm, owned by the property owners it serves, has 500 customer connections and last year used 218 acre-feet of water purchased from AVEK, which was blended with well water. An acre-foot equals 325,851 gallons, enough to supply the average single-family household for a year.

 

"I'm not ready," Ukkestad said. "I've been waiting for AVEK to do its outreach, to inform people. If they expect us to do the outreach, they should let us know. There needs to be some clarification. I don't know what's expected of us."

 

Ukkestad said he received the Sept. 12 notification from AVEK. He said he wants to meet with Flood and Russ Fuller, AVEK's general manager, plus all 20 other entities to discuss the project and get a clearer picture of how it works.

 

"AVEK needs to get with each customer and show us the most economical way to do our conversion," he said.

 

Ukkestad said he can't be sure he will be ready by mid-January, unless that meeting occurs soon.

 

AVEK customer Quartz Hill Water District is in a similar fix, said its general manager, Chad Reed.

 

"We are doing everything possible to be ready for the mid-January date," Reed said. "The 15th would be a great date. One of the biggest concerns the Quartz Hill Water District staff has had with the conversion to chloramines is the lack of a firm date."

 

If AVEK doesn't meet that date, but Quartz Hill implemented the change to its system, that will be a problem, Reed said. At that point, Quartz Hill will have chloramine-treated water pumped from the ground. If the surface water from AVEK is still being disinfected with chlorine at that time, it will throw off the critical ratio needed for blending the two water sources.

 

"Obviously, we're not happy about (the conversion), "but we lack other options," Reed said.#

http://www.avpress.com/n/23/0923_s4.hts

 

 

 

 

No comments:

Blog Archive