Environmental groups are incensed that the regional water quality board postponed a vote on enforcement of water quality standards. Since the issue cannot be aired again until September, it will leave beachgoers swimming in polluted waters during summer months, they say.
By Ward Lauren / Special to The Malibu Times
Local coastal environmental groups were up in arms last week as the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board opted to postpone a vote to adopt enforceable clean water standards at area beaches that would have taken effect July 15. The next opportunity to vote on the issue will probably not be until the board’s September meeting, said Jonathan Bishop, executive officer of the board.
The motion that was to be considered would require local cities and Los Angeles County to comply with new beach water quality standards every day during the summer months. The standards, measured as total maximum daily loads, require local beach waters and discharges from storm drains to be free of unhealthy levels of fecal bacteria.
The new standards resulted from a 1999 lawsuit by the three environmental organizations: National Resources Defense Council, Heal the Bay and Santa Monica Baykeeper. A federal court consent decree obligated the Environmental Protection Agency and the water board to set new, lower limits for water pollutants that degrade Southern California waters.
Once adopted by the board, as expected at last week’s meeting, any violation of the new standards would be an express violation of the Federal Clean Water Act, punishable by fines or other enforcement action.
“All three groups testified … and we basically expressed our dismay, in a very strong manner, that the regional board seemed more concerned about potential litigation than protecting the public health of the millions who swim and surf in Santa Monica Bay,” said Mark Gold, executive director of Heal the Bay. “Everything that happens nowadays involving stormwater or the maximum daily loads seems to wind up in court because the cities end up suing over it. It costs a lot of money for clean water, and they just don’t want to spend it.
“I think it’s important to note that we’re talking about water quality during the summer,” he added. “We understand stormwater is a lot tougher, will take a lot more time to clean up, but all the cities and the county have had three and a half years to comply with these new daily standards, and just watch, there will be many beaches that won’t qualify with them now.”
Tracy Egoscue, executive director of Santa Monica Baykeeper, said, “We informed the board that they were failing to conduct what we feel is a mandatory duty under the Clean Water Act and that they have absolutely no discretion to do so. They’ve known about this and ostensibly prepared for it since it was passed in 2002. So to say that they weren’t ready or that they have some problems is a whole other issue.
“We always have the ability to compel them through a lawsuit, of course. Hopefully not, but if we have to we will to get them to act as quickly as possible. By waiting until September we’ll have missed the opportunity to have meaningful enforcement for an entire beach season.”
The standards would apply to all Santa Monica Bay beaches from Palos Verdes to the Ventura County line during dry weather between April and October. Heal the Bay’s Annual Beach Report Card found that the five most polluted beaches in the state were all in Los Angeles County, and that 37 percent of the county’s beaches monitored last summer were frequently unsafe for swimming. One of the chief goals of the environmental groups’ lawsuit was to make waters in the Los Angeles region “fishable and swimmable” as required by the 1972 federal Clean Water Act.
David Beckman, a senior attorney with NRDC and director of its Coastal Water Quality program, said, “This refusal to act puts back on the shelf standards that would have protected millions of Los Angeles beachgoers this summer from exposure to bacteria and viruses that can make them sick. If the board does not promptly adopt these new protections, we intend to force it to do so.”
As to why the board did not vote on the issue, Bishop said, “I pulled it from the agenda based on the wide-ranging comments that were received and our needs to address them before the board had a chance to vote on it.”
Bishop said the comments came from a number of cities and Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and were substantial in nature.
“We want to get everything lined up correctly because it’s going to be a contentious issue, so we want to make sure what we finally approve is unassailable,” he said.
Regarding the environmental groups’ concerns and their complaints about missing the summer beach season, Bishop said, “I understand their concerns; it was an unfortunate circumstance, but the beaches won’t go unprotected. The environmental community has been adamant that the best way is to have a waste load allocation and that’s what we will be doing. We also have a prohibition against exceeding water quality standards, and I will be enforcing that.”
He said the board could not take up the issue at its August meeting because a 30-day notice is required on anything that is proposed, and a change needed to be made on the proposal. This did not give it time to be brought up at the next meeting on Aug. 3.
“My board directed me at the meeting yesterday in no uncertain terms to bring it back to them in September if at all possible,” Bishop said, “and that’s what I plan to do.”