HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-02-08; Municipal Water District; 232; Informational Video on Carlsbad Aquafarm. L CARLSBAD -‘UNICIPAL WATER DIStRItFV AGENDA r AB# d-El* TITLE: INFOBMATIONAL VIDEO ON
MTG. a-8-% CAIUSBAD AQUAFABM -
c
F
IEPT. -
IECOMMENDED ACTION:
CITY MGR. t&i@
There is no staff recommendation as this is an informational item only.
ITEM JZXPIANATION:
At the December 8,1993 Encina Wastewater Authority Board Meeting the Board viewed a video
of the CarIsbad Aquafarm facility tour.
This informational video was presented by Mr. Robert Wilkinson of CarIsbad, who is a member
of the Board of Directors for the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation.
This video allows us to become familiar with our business neighbors and their operations. The
attached copy of the En&a Wastewater Authority agenda biI.I dated November 27, 1993
provides background on the recently enacted SheIIfish Protection Act of 1993 and its
relationship with this industry and the Encina Facility
FI!XAL IMPACX
As this item is an informational item there is no fiscal impact noted
ExHIBm
Copy of Encina Agenda BiII
P.85 JfiN--28-94 FRI la:39 ENCINA Id P C F
ENCINh WASTEWhTEK AUTHORtTY
Q
ENCINA WASTEWATER AUTHORITY
*mY A f+ilblic~ Apvc’y uw@rnUW 02011 Awiidd EW1;l.s
CWIV C:drtstJJd, CA 9200Y4 17 1
l’c~lv~,ttor~c~ (6l’J) 4 380.104 I tAX(619) 41&1f161 (Phurc)
r!OV@l~b~:r 2 -: , 139 3 (61 9) 4 11-749 1 (Adrnirr)
Ref: 7035
TO: Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA) Board of Directors
SUBJECT : Shel3,fish Protection Act of 1993
----
On October 10, 1993, Governor Wilsor'~ signed into law SB 417, the Shellfish Protection Act of 1993 (see attached copy). The purpose of this agenda item is to apprisct thcx Board of this new law and to summarfze what it may mean to EWA.
SUMMARY OF THE SHELLFTSH PROTECTION ACT
The stated goal of the Shellfish IqJrot.ection Act (the Act) is to protect commercial shellfish harvesting from the effects of point and nonpoint pollution sources. Toward that end, ifi a commercial shellfish growing area is determined to be threatened by pollution, the Act requires the local Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) to form a technical advisory committee (the Committee) to advise and assist in developing an investigation and remediation strategy.
The Committee's first responsibi1,ity is determine whether additional studies to review any existing data and are needed to identify the source(s) of pollution. If addition<11 studies are needed, the Regional l3oard with the Committee's assistanl:e mwct develop a scope(s) of work. The studies must be undertaken only if funding is available.
Once the sources of pollution hove heen identified, the law requires the Regional Board {a) to order appropriate remedial action, (b) to monitor water quality in the area during implementation of the remedial action, and (c) to provide the n\onitarinq results to the Committee.
The law defines a commercial shc!ll.Pish growing area as one that is certified by the State DepartIt1F!nt: oI:' health Services (DOHS) for shellfish growing and harvesting. The law also states that a
commercial shellfish growing are;:,1 is "threatened" if:
it:
dc:
DOHS has downgraded its classification; The growing area was closed to harvest for more than thirty days a year during the last thrw.2 years; DOHS has classified the growing are{1 as restricted; The Regional Board, Dapnrtment ot Fish and Game, or the California Coastal Commissjon hns determined that the growing area is threatened.
.,. : \VI’. <\I> :.’ ,\.., :,:\‘.!,l:,:,()y i)l5fkl* i, V.:I :I( :I~I~M’~lIlH i:“‘C.l\ 1
Encina Wastewater Authority (EWR) k.+o~lrd 01 DILcctorS -.. . ,.,a. -,-CL-l. vb.rr*L rr.-.c: #.I h P.C. n f 1 Q 0 ‘1
sunyecr: bneLlLIYI1 &+LWLi;l’Lbi’tiii ii;-i. :.;L 1 a +; November 23, 1993 Page 2 Kef: 7035.2
Finally, the Act states that member:: of the! committee must include the following:
a. A commercial shellfish growcx from the threatened area; b. A representative from DOHS; c. A representative from the Dcq~;ntrmnt of: Fish and Game; d, A representative from the Cnlifornia Coastal Commission; e, A representative from each ctltcgory of potential. pollution source ; f. A representative from a local onvironmcntal group; and g. A representative from the lo~:~~l hc.nl.th department.
The Regional Board may also appoint atldit'i,on;~l members to the Committee
and must appoint a chairperson.
SB 417 was introduced by Se-nat.or’ M;'~t'k:; 01' Milrin who apparently was concerned about declining hnrvcsts ~xomcommarcialshollfish harvesting areas in his district (Tamales finy). Tt was followed closely in committee by the commercial ::hcllfisll qrowars (the California Aquaculture Association), possibly DOTiS, and very few others. (For example, the San Diego Regional Rorrrd was not aware of the bill until after: it passed and they were notified of its existence by DOHS staff. EWA staff was informed of the 3,aw during :i subsequent meeting with Regional Board staff on occL.an monitoring-)
The California Association of S;lnit.ation Agencies (CASA) initially lobbied against the bill at the! request of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC). CAM dropped their lobbying effort when CSDOC's concerns appeared to hnve been addressed and no one else in CASA's Legislative Committee c~xpressecl interest in the bill.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO EWA?
A firm by the name 'of Seafarms West, Inc. operates a commercial shellfish growing area in the Ague Hedionda Lagoon. Seafarms West's operation is certified by DOHS. Furthermore, in December 1990, DOHS downgraded Seafarms West's classjfication from@lconditionallyapprovedn to '8restricted'1, following a harvest cIlosure of almost thirty days. (DOHS required the harvest: close!-c! ~!.ft'.t:!r finding elevated coliform levels in Seafarms West's shclll'ish. Ecsfarms West was allowed to resume harvesting under the rte::tric:t.cd cluseif'i.cation, only after installing l'depuration" faci I,iti(% thitt puri.l'y the shellfish prior to marketing.)
In accordance with the dcf init ion:: in tllc! Act, this moans that (a) the Seafarms West growing area is "threatened" by pollution, and (b) the San biego Regional Board will bcz required Lo form a Committee devoted Sobely to identifying and remediating sources of pollution in Agua HE$onda Lagoon. -577 tr 1,, '\ * .>i,k.",, . .1 11"1,',:
fit
EN<:[NA WA!iJt:Lt;~'iI K All't'II<)KIJY
-.*.e ,/' /' I,.lOl, Avc:l\ltL.l lllr I,,,,, . 1 .Ir'l~.t,.lil i ,\ l.'(N)') 'I / : : . I I~i~~},tl,lil~* ((I 1'11 4 (II. ll)*J I
‘r-de’7 Nnrfn l’l,lf~l I,dx. (i,l+t) 4 ili 5dl,! + !iclrrbei “.II.I:I~I f,bllir 4.1, !.:s (I3 IV) 4 ; I-/.7’) t
\.I:- ;r:ryr, ( 11,” :s
@
,‘111111.,. If,,, y14vl I’., 3
Encjma Wastewater Authority (EWA) Lroard of Directors Subject: Shellfish Protection Act. of a99--1 November 23, 1993 Page 3 Ref: 7035.3
While there has never been any conclusive evidence indicating that EWA's ocean discharge is rospansiblc for elevated coliform levels in Agua Hedionda Lagoon, we feel certain thcit EWA will be named as a *'potential pollution sou~cc~~. This will both (a) ensure that we have a place on the Committee, and (b) nrc?ke it. important for us to be pro- active on this issue.
Regional Board staff are not yet certain how and when the committee will be formed. We will. keep the EWA Board apprised as the situation
develops.
SOME HISTORICAL PERSPECFXVE (I.E., WHY S'HOULD WE BE CONCERNED?)
Xn December 1988, DOHS staff cond~~ct.ed (-1 six-day "sanitary survey" of the Aqua Hedionda Lagoon. The survey included bacteriological analyses of 242 water and 12 meat samples Zrom stations in the Lagoon, adjacent to the Lagoon in the ocean, and tributary to the Lagoon. The survey was conducted in response to (2levate.d fecal coliform levels in commercial shellfish harvested from the Lagoon.
The individual conducting the s~~ey concluded on the basis of very limited information that the source of the bacteria was discharges from either the Encina ocean outfall. and/or the City of Oceanside ocean outfall. This was not too surprisiny, given that he had previously mached similar conclusions in the CoLeta/Santa Barbara area and had successfully lobbied the Central Coast Regional Board to require Goleta and Santa Barbara to disinfect ,(chlorinate/dechlorinate) their effluents prior to discharge, The same individual proceeded to request that the San Diego Regional. Board (a) require EWA and Oceanside to pay for a l@wastewater pLume transport. study" and (b) require EWA and Oceanside to begin disinfsctinq their ocxx~n discharges.
EWA spent considerable staff anrl consultant effort analyzing all available data and conducting bacterioloyical analyses at several
stations in addition to our permit.-required stations. The data did not show that our ocean discharqjc? was c;lus ing elevated coliform concentrations. (Similarly, the da'ta far Santa barbara and Goleta did not conclusively indicate that these ocean discharges caused elevated coliform concentrations in locall,y grown shellfish.)
EWA and the City of Oceanside aJ.::o paid for: a consultant to develop a scope of work for a comprehensivca study to determine the source(s) of the problem in Aqua Hedionda Lilqoon. Potential sources that were identified included nonpointrunof? (agricultural, illegal encampments, storm drain, SDG&E power plant, e?-c.) 2)s weI1 (7s ocean discharges. The estimated cost of the resu1ti.q scope: of work was over $700,000.
ENC’INA WA.Sl’LWAT’ER Al17'tlC~I~I1‘Y
6’2Ofl Avcwi&~ CH IIIAY . 1 ,Irl:.l),.l(I. f A ‘11011’) 1) I7 I . Il.lt.:rll~,llt~ ((8 I’ll 4 11~-.l’~*l I
;‘I if)* 1 .1x ((,‘:()I 4 i!\ 1114, 1 - Acll~,~r,i..tI.it~~~’ (ItIt, ,.. I .tt (4. I<)) .: i : 7.1’1 i . , ,“1”1,0,, ,I. ,r..
4rrsx-LL----s’ FKI 18 . :36 ENCING W P c F
c _’
P-82
Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA) Board of Directors Subject: Shellfish Protection Act of 1937 November 23, 1993 Page 4 Ref: 7035.4
In July 1990 a Public Wearing was conducted by the San Diego Regional Board to consider requiring the City of Carlsbad, Encina Water Pollution Control, Facility and the city of Oceanside to implement a shellfish contamination study. As sl result of extensive testimony, the Regional Board agreed with Encina that i,f a study was to be done that state and federal funding sources should be used because of the associated state and nationwide i ssues of nonpaint contamination and questionable shellfish bacterial standards. However, the study was not conducted since a source(s) of funding was never identified.
A second EWA consultant estimated the cost to install and operate chlorination and dechlorination facilities at Encina. The estimated capital cost was over $5 to $6 million, and the estimated operation and maintenance cost was $576,000 per year.
We are concerned that the Act may be used to push again far disinfection of EWA'~ effluent. WC? will try to be pro-active on this issue and will keep the Board apprised 3s developments occur.
2ZTfi>
General Manag
ELM:RWG:am
Attachment
cc: Permits File - Agua Wedionda Lagoon Contamination Barry Martin, . * . Water UtllltI.c:;, City of Oceanside Felix Martinez, General Manager, GOlcta Sanitary District
f .-- IUI’., \ *“‘ill*.,,r ./ !I”,“‘,,~ ci - 1” /
i... ,“,, ,..*,a
ENC:INA WAS’I-I’.WA’f F.K AlJ 11 lC)I<ITY
(12()(, Aw*~td,t ii~lr I.:.,- . \ ,!ll~.ll,rrl, ( 4 ‘J,!IU”! 0 I / 4 . I1.!4y~!10111’ tip 1’J) .l 111. )‘I.$ I
[‘),ir!: bLIX (6: ‘j: t ItI. li!it ’ q ,“%!:lt:l\’ ,)I,!’ ‘i4’ ()‘I:( (“. I ,:\ [I, l’li 1 1 I-,‘*I’1 i @ J
ia,,,l.( #I, ,:., 2