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 -1/23/09

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

January 23, 2009

 

4. Water Quality –

 

L.A. County scrambles to defend Long Beach Harbor from storm debris

The Los Angeles Times

 

Wastewater to tap water?

City to consider contentious project during time of drought

The San Diego Union Tribune

 

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

 

L.A. County scrambles to defend Long Beach Harbor from storm debris

The county had been paying a firm to operate a trash-gathering boom across the mouth of the Los Angeles River, but funding ran out.

The Los Angeles Times – 1/23/09

By Louis Sahagun

 

Email Picture

Facing forecasts of wet weather that could flush tons of urban trash out to sea and onto local beaches, Los Angeles County authorities scrambled Thursday to reinstall a boom across the outlet of the Los Angeles River to keep debris out of Long Beach Harbor.

The boom had been decommissioned Monday because the county Department of Public Works ran out of money to keep it operating.

 

The problem, according to a spokesman for the department, was that a company which had been paid $450,000 to operate the boom this year -- and remove the trash it harvested -- had completed its contractual obligations ahead of schedule.

As a result, Frey Environmental Inc. of Newport Beach on Monday was ordered to take the boom out of service while public works authorities sought permission from the county Board of Supervisors to renew its contract.

Complicating matters, the board canceled its meeting Tuesday because several members had traveled to Washington to attend the presidential inauguration. The department said it may not be able to resume Frey's trash removal services until early February.

 

With showers expected over the next several days, runoff from the L.A. Basin may overwhelm defenses in Long Beach and deposit more trash than usual in popular destinations such as Rainbow Harbor. Authorities have hastily devised a stopgap measure: ask Frey to deploy the boom, then find some other means of hauling out the trash it corrals.

"There will not be a gap in hauling out the trash," said Diego Cardena, deputy director of public works. "But who will remove that trash, we still don't know.

"One thing is clear. In the future we will go with larger contracts of about $1.2 million."

Frey Environmental spokesman Joe Frey declined to comment except to say, "The county has asked that we not harvest trash currently."

Mark Abramson, director of watershed programs for the environmental group Santa Monica Baykeeper, expressed dismay over the county's handling of the problem. "We're happy they were able to find the resources to redeploy the boom and protect the ocean and beachgoers from the pollution associated with all debris and trash," he said. "But it's unfortunate that they are not able to foresee these problems."

Much of the trash caught by the boom is vegetation uprooted by storm surges throughout the 834-square-mile Los Angeles River watershed, which includes 44 cities and unincorporated communities and about 9 million people.

Since 2006, Frey has removed 1,847 tons of trash from the river at a cost to the county of about $2.2 million, said Kerjon Lee, spokesman for the department's watershed management division. Now, the county believes it needs about $750,000 to continue the service through this fiscal year.

Tom Leary, who is in charge of Long Beach's storm water division, said the temporary loss of the boom service was "a serious problem."

"It will definitely have an impact on marine habitat and sense of community," Leary said. "But it is also true that the county is a good partner with Long Beach. Each year, it sends us about $500,000 for beach maintenance efforts."

In any case, he pointed out that the boom "has never been the solution" to Long Beach's urban runoff problem. Each year, the city collects roughly 4,500 tons of trash and debris from its shorelines.#

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-trash23-2009jan23,0,4422989.story?track=rss

 

Wastewater to tap water?

City to consider contentious project during time of drought

The San Diego Union Tribune – 1/23/09

 

Highlights

Reclaiming water: A proposed project would clean wastewater to an “ultra-pure” state for drinking.

 

How: Wastewater would first be purified to irrigation standards, then sent through reverse osmosis, and finally treated with ultraviolet light. The water would pumped into the groundwater basin, allowed to percolate through wetlands or stored in a reservoir for at least six months. It would be treated one more time before flowing to faucets.

 

How clean: Water officials say it will be cleaner than water from the Colorado River, one source of the county's water.

 

Escondido is considering reclaiming wastewater for use as drinking water to augment its water supply.

In addition, the inland city stands to save hundreds of millions of dollars by avoiding upgrades to its sewage treatment plant and an ocean outfall pipe if the plan succeeds.

 

Escondido is paying a consultant $50,000 to conduct a feasibility study. It is following the Helix Water District, which serves parts of East County, and the city of San Diego in considering the contentious idea, sometimes derided as “toilet to tap.”

 

The Helix board has approved an $80 million project in hopes of supplying 12 percent to 15 percent of the district's drinking water. An environmental review is being conducted.

 

The city of San Diego has temporarily increased water rates to help pay for an $11.8 million demonstration project at the North City Reclamation Plant at Eastgate Mall in University City.

 

But San Diego's demonstration project has faced protests. Opponents cited national studies indicating that reclaimed water can contain minute traces of hormones, drugs and chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic.

 

In Escondido, the debate has not yet begun because no one knows enough about the proposal yet. The consultant is expected to provide some of the answers.

 

“I have heard all sorts of negative things, but I don't know enough about the technology,” Escondido City Councilman Dick Daniels said.

 

“There are lots of solutions (to increasing the water supply). I haven't heard about them yet,” Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said.

“If it's made clean enough and safe enough to drink, I wouldn't be opposed to it,” Councilwoman Olga Diaz said.

 

Escondido uses about 11.4 billion gallons of potable water each year, about 25 percent of that drawn from the San Luis Rey River and the rest imported. Like all cities, Escondido faces cutbacks to its imports because of the ongoing drought.

 

Escondido's utilities director, Lori Vereker, said the reclamation project would be similar to Orange County's, which uses a three-step purifying process to produce what she calls “ultra-pure” water.

 

In Orange County, the water is first cleaned to a standard fit for irrigation, and then put through reverse osmosis to remove salt. Finally, it is treated with ultraviolet light and hydrogen peroxide to kill any remaining bacteria, said Shivaji Deshmukh, program manager for the Groundwater Replenishment system of the Orange County Water District.

 

The water is pumped into the water basin, where it sits for six months and percolates through the soil for further cleansing before it is pumped up by the water agencies, he said.

 

Tests have shown that the product is cleaner than drinking water from the Colorado River, which has treated wastewater dumped into it by cities along its path, Deshmukh said.

 

Escondido's project likely would be governed by state regulations now being drafted to ensure the safe use of reclaimed water for drinking, a state Department of Public Health official said.

 

Vereker said the wastewater treated through the three-step purifying process could be injected into the groundwater basin, allowed to percolate through wetlands or added to one end of a city reservoir and allowed to flow to the other side before it would be treated and piped to faucets.

 

“It's controversial,” Vereker said. “But we, as a region, are running very, very low on water.”

 

By reusing all of the city's wastewater, cash-strapped Escondido also could avoid upgrading its aging wastewater treatment plant and spending $300 million to increase the size of an outfall pipe used to to discharge treated wastewater into the ocean, Vereker said. Both the plant and the pipe are nearing capacity.

 

Already, the city has run into trouble with the Regional Water Quality Control Board because of its inadequate wastewater facilities. In 2005, the city was fined $1.8 million for 451 instances of discharging inadequately treated wastewater into the Escondido creek and the Pacific Ocean.

 

The fine was negotiated down to $1.3 million this year, and is awaiting the regional board's approval next month.

 

Escondido currently recycles 4 million gallons of its daily production of 13 to 14 million gallons of wastewater, for irrigation and cooling a Sempra power plant. The city has the capacity to reclaim 9 million gallons but does not have enough money to lay the purple pipes, at $2 million per mile, to transport the recycled water to customers. #

 

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jan/23/1m23reclaim23151-wastewater-tap-water/?zIndex=41716

 

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

DWR’s California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff,  for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader’s services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news . DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of California.

 

 

 

No comments:

Blog Archive