Department of Water Resources
California Water News
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
July 7, 2009
4. Water Quality –
California may adopt more lenient graywater code in August
L.A. Times
Wastewater application before state water board
Lodi News-Sentinel
EPA Takes New Steps To Improve Water Quality
Water Online
State needs to address county's ocean pollution
Ventura County Star
Report: Bay spawning more dangerous bacteria
Oakland Tribune
Suit filed over contaminated water at NC base
S.F. Chronicle
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
California may adopt more lenient graywater code in August
L.A. Times-7/6/09
By Susan Carpenter
California may adopt a more lenient gray water code as early as August. Under the new code, a clothes washer or other single-fixture, residential gray water system, such as a shower, could be installed or altered without a construction permit.
That’s a complete reversal of the present state requirement that homeowners installing systems to recycle the waste water from their sinks, showers, bathtubs and laundry machines conform to Appendix G of the California plumbing code, which requires that gray water systems not only be permitted by the appropriate administrative authority but installed underground with extensive filtering apparatus.
Appendix G went into effect in 1992 at the end of a five-year drought. Its update was required by Senate Bill 1258, which passed last summer, requiring the state's Department of Housing and Community Development to revise the code in an effort "to conserve water by facilitating greater reuse of graywater in California."
The code's revision was scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, 2011, but last week, in response to the state’s continuing drought, representatives from Housing and Community Development submitted the new code to the state’s Building Standards Commission for emergency adoption. If approved, as expected, the new code would take effect Aug. 4.
The new gray water standards divide residential gray water water systems into three types: a clothes washer and/or single-fixture system, a simple system, and a complex system.
According to the Express Terms for Proposed Emergency Building Standards, clothes washer systems use only a single washing machine in a one- or two-family dwelling, while single-fixture systems collect gray water from one plumbing fixture or drain, also in a one- or two-family home; both require homeowners to follow 12 guidelines but neither require permits to install.
Simple systems, which exceed a clothes washer and or single-fixture system but discharge less than 250 gallons per day, and complex systems, which discharge more than 250 gallons per day, each require construction permits, unless exempted by that area’s administrative authority.
The 12 guidelines for clothes washer and/or single-fixture systems are:
1) If required, notification has been provided to the Enforcing Agency regarding the proposed location and installation of a gray water irrigation or disposal system.
2) The design shall allow the user to direct the flow to the irrigation or disposal field or the building sewer. The direction control of the gray water shall be clearly labeled and readily accessible to the user.
3) The installation, change, alteration or repair of the system does not include a potable water connection or a pump and does not affect other building, plumbing, electrical or mechanical components, including structural features, egress, fire-life safety, sanitation, potable water supply piping or accessibility.
4) The gray water shall be contained on the site where it is generated.
5) Gray water shall be directed to and contained within an irrigation or disposal field.
6) Ponding or runoff is prohibited and shall be considered a nuisance.
7) Gray water may be released above the ground surface provided at least two inches of mulch, rock, or soil, or a solid shield covers the release point. Other methods which provide equivalent separation are also acceptable.
8) Gray water systems shall be designed to minimize contact with humans and domestic pets.
9) Water used to wash diapers or similarly soiled or infectious garments shall not be used and shall be diverted to the building sewer.
10) Gray water shall not contain hazardous chemicals derived from activities such as cleaning car parts, washing greasy or oily rags, or disposing of waste solutions from home photo labs or similar hobbyist or home occupational activities.
11) Exemption from construction permit requirements of this code shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any gray water system to be installed in a manner that violates other provisions of this code or any other laws or ordinances of the Enforcing Agency.
12) An operation and maintenance manual shall be provided. Directions shall indicate the manual is to remain with the building throughout the life of the system and indicate that upon change of ownership or occupancy, the new owner or tenant shall be notified the structure contains a gray water system.#
Wastewater application before state water board
Lodi News-Sentinel-7/7/09
The State Water Resources Control Board is scheduled today to make a final decision on Lodi's permit to discharge wastewater.
It had previously postponed a decision on the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance's challenge of Lodi's permit.
The group has concerns about the levels of pollutants in the treated wastewater the city uses for irrigation on fields near the White Slough wastewater treatment plant.
From mid-April to mid-October, the city puts some of its wastewater into 790 acres of farmland and 49 acres of unlined storage ponds.
The regional board has previously approved the city's current permit with the requirement that the city further investigates whether it is contributing to groundwater contamination in the area.
It is unclear what the exact consequences would be if the state sends the permit back to its regional board to be reconsidered.
But if this happens, the city could face additional regulation, leading to costly upgrades to its plant or changes to how the city uses wastewater, said Water Services Manager Charlie Swimley at a previous meeting.#
http://www.lodinews.com/articles/2009/07/07/news/6_regional_090707.txt
EPA Takes New Steps To Improve Water Quality
Water Online-7/6/09
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has made available comprehensive reports and data on water enforcement in all 50 states. This is part of Administrator Lisa P. Jackson's larger effort by to enhance transparency, promote the public's right to know about water quality and provide information on EPA's actions to protect water under the Clean Water Act.
In a memorandum issued last Thursday, Administrator Jackson directed EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) to develop an action plan to enhance public transparency regarding clean water enforcement.
In the memo, she also calls for stronger enforcement performance at federal and state levels and a transformation of EPA's water quality and compliance information systems.
In keeping with this directive, EPA has posted detailed information on the current state of clean water compliance and enforcement in each state, and copies of the latest clean water enforcement and compliance performance reports for each state to the agency's Web site.
EPA also launched new Web-based tools to help the public search, assess, and analyze the data the agency used to help prepare those reports.
These actions are among of several aggressive steps taken by Administrator Jackson to improve the nation's water quality by increasing the transparency and effectiveness of the agency's national Clean Water Act enforcement program.
The administrator's memo directed the agency to take several actions, including:
Improve and enhance the information available on the EPA website on compliance and enforcement activities in each state, showing connections to local water quality where possible; Provide information in a user-friendly format form that is easily understood and useable by the public;
Raise the bar for clean water enforcement performance and ensure enforcement is taken against serious violations that threaten water quality; and
Improve EPA's enforcement performance in states where EPA directly implements the clean water program.
Administrator Jackson directed OECA to work with EPA's Office of Water and to consult closely with EPA's 10 regional offices and the states on the action plan.
After obtaining input from other stakeholders, the assistant administrator of OECA, Cynthia Giles, will report back to Administrator Jackson in 90 days with recommendations.
More information on the state-by-state reports: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/state/srf/index.html
More information on EPA and state enforcement data: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/results/performance/cwa/index.html
Copy of the administrator's memorandum: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/results/performance/cwa/jackson-ltr-cwa-enf.html#
State needs to address county's ocean pollution
Ventura County Star-7/7/09
By Vern Goehring
Opinion
Wednesday, Ventura County beachgoers, surfers, fishermen and outdoor enthusiasts will have a chance to weigh in on six different Southern California marine reserve proposals being considered under the Marine Life Protection Act.
The official question: How to best clean up and protect our ocean environment?
But there’s a big problem — state officials and fishing opponents have so far successfully avoided addressing serious pollution problems, despite the clear mandate and authority in the law. And, missing an opportunity to do something meaningful about water quality is unconscionable.
Poor water quality and the resulting Southern California beach closures are all too common, especially during the rainy season. That’s when accumulated pesticides, herbicides, road oils, bacteria and other assorted water pollutants are flushed out of our communities and watersheds and into coastal waters where swimmers, surfers and fishermen abound.
So, in 1999, the California Legislature passed the Marine Life Protection Act, which was billed as a comprehensive effort to sustain marine habitats and fishing activities using the best readily available science.
Sadly, the task force overseeing the project for the governor and the Fish and Game Commission has consistently failed to consider all environmental impacts on our marine environment. They ignore calls to so something about water quality; implicitly condoning pollution runoff and urban waste being washed into our coastal waters.
Apparently, the governor and his task force feel only adding more no-fishing regulations will magically create healthy oceans. They ignore the fact that no over fishing is going on in California and that commercial and recreational fishing is already heavily regulated by state and federal officials.
They also ignore the reality that if pollution is not seriously addressed the negative consequences will continue to add up, as many scientific indicators now show.
A recent study by CSU Long Beach researchers shows that California sea lions have high levels of DDT and PCBs, both of which were banned decades ago, but linger in waters and sediments. And another recent study shows that mixtures of commonly used pesticides at concentrations found in local waters can be lethal to salmon and steelhead — and presumably many other types of fish — at levels where any one of the pesticides is not lethal.
That’s why Ventura-area fishermen are raising the pollution issue in the face of the rush to place large areas of coastal water off limits to fishing. They are concerned more fishing restrictions will mean less attention paid to pollution in the ocean.
If the past is any indicator, we’ll see an increase in fishing restrictions and then regulators and much of the public will move on to something else, pretending that simply shutting down fishing is a real ecosystem-based management solution. And, why not? The proponents repeatedly claim that marine protected areas will protect the ocean.
But California deserves better.
Recent polls reveal that Californians think new regulations should create broad-based environmental benefit versus putting family fishing businesses out of business or further restricting access for recreation and local-caught seafood.
We must work together to adopt an equitable plan to address ocean protection. To that end, local recreational and commercial fishermen have been working with other interested groups to arrive at an agreement on a network of reserves that promote ocean health, reliable local seafood and recreational opportunities for those in our communities who cannot afford to travel overseas to go fishing.
That’s why we urge all Ventura residents to join with us to ensure a comprehensive balanced effort to protect the ocean.
Without good water-quality protections, restrictive fishing regulations will do little for the overall health of our coastal waters and will directly impact future generations’ ability to enjoy the ocean.#
Vern Goehring of Sacramento is manager of the California Fisheries Coalition.
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/jul/07/state-needs-to-address-countys-ocean-pollution/
Report: Bay spawning more dangerous bacteria
Oakland Tribune-7/6/09
By Ben Nuckols (Associated Press)
The polluted waters of the Chesapeake Bay (Baltimore, MD) are harboring bacteria that's posing an increasing health risk to humans, a bay watchdog group warned Tuesday in a report that criticizes federal environmental regulators.
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation noted increases in Virginia and Maryland of the number of infections from the saltwater bacteria known as Vibrio, some varieties of which can cause life-threatening skin and blood infections and intestinal illnesses.
The report faulted the Environmental Protection Agency for failing to clean up the bay as required under the federal Clean Water Act.
"The thought that you can't swim in the Chesapeake Bay because you may contract a disease or a bacterial infection, that's outrageous, especially if the laws aren't being enforced," foundation president William C. Baker said.
President Barack Obama called the Chesapeake "a national treasure" in a May executive order that put the federal government in charge of cleanup efforts that previously were led by states.
Jeffrey Lape, director of the EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program, did not dispute that the agency has fallen short of its cleanup goals.
"We're on clear record of acknowledging that much more needs to be done to restore the bay," Lape said. "I think we're trending in the right direction. We just still have some challenges to address."
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation report also noted that Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia issued 76 no-swimming advisories and beach closures last year because of unhealthy bacteria levels, typically after significant rainfall.
Health officials in Virginia reported 30 infections from Vibrio bacteria last year, up from 12 in 1999, the report said. Reported cases also rose in Maryland, but a change in reporting requirements may have contributed to the increase.
Rising water temperatures and nutrient pollution are fueling algae blooms that allow bacteria to thrive in the bay, according to scientists quoted in the report.
Watermen have long been aware of the dangers posed by bacteria, but in recent years, swimmers and casual boaters have also suffered serious infections, the report found.
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation interviewed a boater from Newport News, Va., who was hospitalized last year after contracting a Vibrio infection from a small cut on his thumb.
A retired printer was hospitalized in 2005 and was "on the verge of death" after a cut on his leg became infected while swimming in Maryland's Severn River with his grandson, according to the report.
"The thought that it could happen to a grandfather or someone coming into casual contact, playing with their kids, was surprising to us," Baker said. "I think it's going to be surprising to a lot of people."
Lape said the bay is no less safe to humans now than it was a decade or two ago, although he acknowledged that the EPA and other agencies have made little progress on reducing pollution from stormwater.
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation should be applauded for bringing concerns about water quality to the public's attention, he said.
"This report provides very good anecdotal examples of the serious concerns that can be caused by water quality," Lape said.#
Suit filed over contaminated water at NC base
S.F. Chronicle-7/6/09
A woman whose husband was stationed at a North Carolina military base has filed a lawsuit claiming the government knowingly exposed hundreds of thousands of Marines to contaminated drinking water.
Lawyers said Monday the lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for 45-year-old Laura Jones. It says she has lymphoma and now lives in Iowa.
The woman's attorneys allege that chemicals in water at Camp Lejeune had caused health problems including cancers, reproductive disorders and birth defects. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.
A government report earlier this month found tainted water at Camp Lejeune between the 1950s and 1985 can't definitively be linked to health problems.
A Marines spokesman didn't immediately return a message seeking comment.#
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/07/06/national/a110322D78.DTL
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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:
Post a Comment