Heal the Bay Blog

Heal the Bay president Ruskin Hartley says we averted a real mess with Atwater oil spill. But what’s next?

In the early hours of Thursday morning, a pipeline carrying oil from Texas to Los Angeles ruptured in the Atwater Village neighborhood of Los Angeles. Over the course of about 45 minutes 10,000 gallons of oil spilled into the streets creating a noxious lake a half-mile long and knee-deep in places. (You can see the impacts on this video.)

It appears that the nearby Los Angeles River was saved by the alert response and quick thinking of the Los Angeles Fire Department. We owe the team a huge debt of thanks. Not only did they get on the scene fast, but they thought creatively about how to stop the oil from flowing into the stormdrain system and hence to the river. 

And one stroke of luck also helped. One business in the industrial section just happened to be a cement plant with ample stocks of sand. The fire department deployed the sand to build berms that contained the spill.

Initial reports indicate that the quick response averted potential environmental impacts. But even so, a few neighbors were taken to local hospitals and potential environmental damage is still being assessed.

We applaud all of the first responders. But we also have to ask, is this a risk we’re prepared to take in our communities and our Bay?

As I write this, the residents of the small South Bay city Hermosa Beach are preparing for a referendum on whether to allow Big Oil to sink 34 oil wells in the heart of their city to tap into oil under the Bay. The oil company tells them to not worry, it’s safe and any spills will be quickly contained. You tell me, is this a risk you’d take?

If you’d like to come out to show your support for keeping oil drilling out of Hermosa, join us for Hands Across the Sand beach cleanup and community rally tomorrow morning (Saturday, May 17).

Kirsten James, Heal the Bay’s science and policy director for water quality, writes that there are a number of reasons to celebrate a recent win in the fight against toxic local waterbodies.

At the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board hearing last week (May 8), something big happened.  An important decision didn’t draw large crowds (only a few high paid attorneys) or make headline news, but it marked an uplifting win for local water quality standards, something that Heal the Bay has been waiting for since 2003.  Let’s start at the beginning.

The Los Angeles Basin Plan – the document that helps guide our region’s water quality protection – requires that surface waters be maintained free of substances in concentrations that are toxic.  So the permits that regulate discharges from wastewater treatment facilities contained numeric toxicity limits for many years to make sure the discharge didn’t make aquatic life die or have non-lethal impacts (for you “Simpsons” fans, think of Blinky).  With the plethora of chemicals being discharged into our wastewater systems, toxicity tests act as a safety net in the permitting system.

However the real-world effectiveness of these toxicity standards fell into question when the Los Angeles County Sanitation District petitioned its permit to the State Water Board in 2003, and the State Board punted on a decision to actually put any teeth into enforcement.  From that point on, permits in our region and others in the state were modified to remove toxicity limits. The watered-down regulations employed a weak “trigger” for regulatory oversight, which basically led to no consequences — even if a discharge could kill aquatic life.

Aerial view of Mugu Lagoon and Calleguas Creek in Ventura County

Meanwhile in 2005, the Regional Board developed a numeric pollution limit (TMDLs) for discharges to Calleguas Creek in Ventura County. Chlorpyrifos, diazinon and other pesticides and toxicants were causing toxicity in the water body.  However, the Regional Board held off on putting the limits in permits because of the State Board indecision.

Frustrated with the State Board’s indecision, the resulting weak permits and the lack of implementation of the TMDL, Heal the Bay released a report in 2009 titled License to Kill that explored the repercussions of failing to include numeric limits in the permits.  Analyzing the data from 2000-08, we found hundreds of instances of toxicity and very little repercussions for polluting our waters. Essentially that meant little to no follow-up from dischargers and no enforcement by the Regional Water Board.

The report prompted the release of a draft statewide toxicity policy (with a proposed numeric limit) back in 2010.  Heal the Bay has attended many hearings and workshops and submitted extensive comments on the 2010 draft and a number of other drafts over the last few years.  Despite our urging and the prompting of environmental groups, fishing groups and others, the State Board has sat on the policy. They have allowed toxic discharges to continue to inland waters with practically no repercussions for the last 11 years.

So last week, our Regional Water Board got tired of waiting and could not justify continuing with the weak toxicity “trigger” regulatory approach.   They unanimously adopted three wastewater treatment facility permits (Camarillo Water Reclamation Plant, Thousand Oaks Hill Canyon Wastewater Treatment Plan and Simi Valley Water Reclamation Facility) with a numeric toxicity limit.

The Regional Board took a prudent step forward to protect water quality and its members should be commended.  I recognize that there are many competing priorities for the State Water Board – most recently drought response.  However, this does not excuse potentially allowing toxic discharge to our state’s waterbodies for so many years.  The State Board should adopt statewide numeric toxicity limits, as was done in the three local permits, and not expose our waterbodies to toxic discharge any longer.   Hopefully the Regional Board action can serve as the catalyst needed to move the State Board forward on the long overdue state toxicity policy.  Aquatic life has suffered long enough.

Feeling a bit spacey today?

Well, have we got an offer for you – a chance to hitch a ride to outer space.

Through a unique partnership with the Urgency Network and the charitable foundation of the rock band Incubus, Heal the Bay supporters have a chance to do what only 500 or so people have ever done before – enter the final frontier and see the surface of the Earth from a spaceship cockpit.

Safely ensconced in a Lynx Mark II, you’ll have a thrill of a lifetime breaking the sound barrier and being thrust into space from a launch pad in the Caribbean island of Curaçao. Reaching the apogee at 100km, you’ll float in silent, pitch-black darkness for a few minutes before descending back to Earth and gliding home.

Going to space has long been the domain of governments, but private space adventure travel has literally taken off. Now you have the chance to hit infinity and beyond. The good news is that you don’t have to be a millionaire to get there.

By donating now to Heal the Bay, you will be automatically entered into a contest to win a seat on the very first Space Expedition Corp. spaceflight, scheduled for late 2015. For every $10 donated to Heal the Bay at the Urgency Network website, you’ll get 50 entries into the sweepstakes, which is being promoted by three dozen other nonprofits as well. The more you give, the greater your chance of becoming an official astronaut. You can win additional entries by completing tasks like signing petitions or sharing the opportunity on Facebook and Twitter.

The contest ends July 21, so start your G-force training now. Whether it’s the land or the ocean, a better planet begins with a better perspective. See you in space!

Heal the Bay president Ruskin Hartley says it’s time to stop flushing billions of gallons of water into the Bay.

I’d been living in Los Angeles for about six months when a three-day storm hit back in February. I had begun to wonder what all the fuss was about stormwater. Could it really be that bad? Now I know the answer is yes — but not just for the pollution it causes.

I was delighted by the waterfalls that popped up in Topanga Canyon. I was saddened to see the torrent of trash flowing down Chautauqua into the ocean. But what really shocked me was when I learned that the three-day storm, in the middle of an historic drought, flushed enough water into the ocean to meet the needs of our region for one-quarter of a year. That’s crazy.

At a time when cities in Northern California face rationing, and farms in the Central Valley lie fallow, we are flushing billions of gallons of water into the ocean. That same water is causing huge environmental problems because of the trash, pathogens, and toxins it carries. There must be a better way.

Fortunately, there is. There is a growing consensus across the region that stormwater is not just a pollutant, but a valuable source of water. Stormwater capture projects, when done well, deliver water quality benefits, water supply benefits, and bring much needed green space into our city. It is true that stormwater capture is not a panacea for our supply needs. But it is an important part of a portfolio of projects to increase local water reliability that includes water conservation, water recycling, and groundwater cleanup. Today we import 90 percent of our water from more than 100 miles away. At the same time, we dump 350 million gallons a day of treated effluent into the Santa Monica Bay from the Hyperion Treatment Plant, and discharge billions of gallons of polluted stormwater into the bay every time it rains. It’s past time to bring these three separate systems together and focus on an approach to integrated water in our region.

There is some great work underway throughout the region to do this and to deal with stormwater pollution. For example, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s Stormwater Capture Master Plan currently in development is looking at infiltration systems built into city streets and improved spreading grounds to refill our groundwater supplies. Countywide, projects are being developed under the MS4 permit to capture and clean up stormwater. More is needed to integrate these projects and look across agency jurisdictions, but that’s not the biggest challenge. What is missing is funding.

In November 2004, voters in the City of Los Angeles approved Proposition O — the Clean Water, Ocean, River, Beach and Bay measure — with an overwhelming yes vote. In the past decade, Prop O has funded dozens of projects, including the restoration of Echo Park Lake and installation of thousands of trash capture devices in storm drains. But as of January 2014, almost $492 million of the $500 million bond was obligated. These projects are helping to get us on track, but there is much more to be done. Without new funding, the rivers, creeks and beaches throughout our region will continue to be polluted.

With the increased consciousness caused by the drought, now is the time for some bold moves. We call on the state legislature to move a water bond that prioritizes investments in local water, including stormwater capture, water recycling, and groundwater cleanup. While they are at it, California lawmakers need to pass reforms that enable municipalities to more easily raise fees for stormwater cleanup. Why should stormwater projects have a higher bar than water supply or refuse pickup? At the local level, we call on our political leaders to prioritize funding for local water, either as stand-alone or part of other infrastructure measures. Potholes may be an annoyance, but water is literally life and death. And at the community level, we encourage everyone to do their part by conserving potable water and capturing stormwater through rain barrels and rain gardens. Become informed about where your water comes from.

It’s an exciting time to be working on water in our region. Join us and be a part of the future of Los Angeles.

Kirsten James, Heal the Bay’s director of water quality, says it’s time to end the stupid toilet-to-tap” debate.

For the last four years I have been a member of the City of Los Angeles’s Recycled Water Advisory Group (affectionately known as “RWAG”).  Led by the L.A. Department of Water and Power and L.A. Bureau of Sanitation, this diverse group of stakeholders from the government, business and nonprofit sectors keep tabs on the city’s efforts to increase water recycling.

Basically, we all want to avoid the downhill spiral that resulted from the toilet-to-tap debate in 2000, in which mayoral candidate Joel Wachs suggested that a DWP plan to recycle treated wastewater near Hansen Dam would result in Valley residents drinking “toilet water” in the future. The media coverage and public uproar eventually lead to the shuttering of the city’s recycling efforts for years.

RWAG didn’t get off to a great start. In fact, many groups were disillusioned early in the process when LADWP’s initial goal of producing at least an additional 50,000 acre-feet per year of recycled water by 2019 was suddenly pushed back to 2029. Now the goal that I hear most often is 59,000 acre-feet per year by 2035. Let’s stick to a goal and make it happen! (To give you some perspective, the city of L.A. uses about 621,000 acre feet of water each year, with an acre foot being about 326,000 gallons. The new goal would result in recycling accounting for a little less than 10% of our water supply, assuming demand stays constant.)

However, reflecting on the last four years, there are significant signs of progress on the recycled water front.   

In October 2012, LADWP adopted its Recycled Water Master Plan, which outlines plans for groundwater replenishment and non-potable reuse strategies within the city. Basically, this blueprint calls for highly treated wastewater from sewage plants to be pumped to other facilities that can supply it for irrigation. Other projects would replenish groundwater by pumping this treated wastewater — which meets all water quality standards — back into the aquifer for further natural cleansing and use. And yes, this reused water would even be used for drinking water — as it’s been done successfully since 2008 in Orange County!

The advanced treatment pilot project that explored treatment technology effectiveness was completed at the Tillman Water Reclamation Plant, and the draft EIR for the project is expected this fall. This is a big deal. However, the project is contingent on the construction of the San Fernando Basin Groundwater Treatment Complex and that costs big money ($600 million-$900 million, according to estimates given during L.A. City Council’s Energy and Environment Committee last week).

There are also non-potable reuse projects popping up around the city. For instance, the Harbor Refineries Pipeline Project will have 40,400 feet of recycled water piping that will convey recycled water to large industrial and irrigation customers by June 2014.

And this week the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board approved a permit amendment to allow the Water Replenishment District’s Alamitos Barrier project to move toward 100% recycled water. The Barrier project, located on the L.A. – Orange County border, uses 43 injections wells to prevent seawater intrusion into groundwater supplies and to replenish Los Angeles County’s Central Basin. The recycling program would save 3 million gallons per day of potable water, the equivalent of serving the needs of 7,000 homes. 

LADWP’s Master Plan also concluded what many of us already knew — the city’s recycled water program is less expensive than the cost of purchased imported water from MWD over the long-term. As an example, the upcoming non-potable projects in Downtown and East Valley are estimated to have a unit cost of $220 and $560 per acre foot, respectively, whereas imported water is running at $890 per acre foot. 

I believe we are ready for widespread recycled water use. Just look at our neighbors in Orange County who are replenishing their groundwater basin with 70 million gallons of treated effluent daily, with plans to reach 100 million gallons by 2015. An outreach study recently commissioned by LADWP found that the majority of residential and commercial customers support the concept behind the proposed groundwater replenishment. And 87% find that action needs to be taken to ensure L.A.’s water supply.  Keep in mind that this was data collected before the Governor’s recent drought declaration, so these numbers will likely climb.

At our RWAG meeting last week we discussed finalizing the “RWAG Consensus Statement,” which outlines the group’s strong support of recycled water to augment the groundwater supply and keeps the door open to exploring direct potable reuse. Even that small move is a measure of how far we have come from the days of toilet-to-tap (which, by the way, is now called “showers to flowers”). With more widespread public acceptance and the increasing pressures on our water supply, it is all the more important that we ramp up these efforts and start exceeding the goals.