Executive Briefing on Basin Plan Litigation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Executive Briefing on Basin Plan Litigation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Executive Briefing on Basin Plan Litigation

play fullscreen
1 / 23
Download Presentation
Executive Briefing on Basin Plan Litigation
Download Presentation

Executive Briefing on Basin Plan Litigation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

    1. Executive Briefing on Basin Plan Litigation

    3. Basin Plan Report Summary

    4. Reasons for Study

    5. Porter-Cologne Section 13000 activities and factorsshall be regulated to attain the highest water quality which is reasonable, considering all demands being made and to be made on those waters and the total values involved, beneficial and detrimental, economic and social, tangible and intangible.

    6. Porter-Cologne Section 13240 Each regional board shall formulate and adopt water quality control plans for all areas within the region. Such plans shall conform to the policies set forth in Chapter 1, beginning with Section 13000, of this division and any state policy for water quality control. During the process of formulating such plans, the regional boards shall consult with and consider the recommendations of affected state and local agencies.

    7. P-C Section 13241 Regional Boards must consider the following in setting objectives: Past, present, and probable future beneficial uses Environmental characteristics of the watershed, including quality of water available thereto Water quality conditions that could reasonably be achieved through coordinated control of all factors which affect water quality Economic considerations Need for developing housing Need to develop and use recycled water

    8. P-C Section 13242 Basin Plans must include a program of implementation, including A description of the nature of actions which are necessary to achieve the objectives, including recommendations for appropriate action by any entity, public or private Time schedule for those actions Description of required monitoring

    9. Reasons for Study

    10. Findings

    11. Findings

    12. Findings

    13. Findings

    14. Findings propro

    15. Findings propro

    16. Findings

    17. Findings

    18. How does this affect regulated community? MS4 permit specifies that discharges shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of water quality standards, even during extreme storms. TMDLs are being adopted pursuant to consent decree schedule and the boards propose to adopt them as strict numeric limits

    19. How does this affect regulated community? Example: Santa Monica Bay Bacteria Standards Regional Board inserted a prohibition on dry and wet weather flows exceeding bacteria limits into MS4 permit Agoura Hills estimates $6.8 million required in order to comply with Malibu bacteria TMDL Compliance may not be possible at any cost Environmental groups file lawsuits against LA County and City of Malibu Regional Board issues Notices of Violations to 20 cities alleging exceedances of bacteria limits

    20. How does this affect regulated community? Example: Metals TMDLs Atmospheric deposition and native soils may contribute to exceedances of limits Field studies show limits are far too low Water Board estimated costs for compliance (LA River Metals TMDL) range to $5.7 billion, and are likely too low

    21. How does this affect regulated community? City NPDES and TMDL programs are set to fail, if based on a faulty and unreasonable Basin Plan standards; EPA and Water Boards have effectively shifted the costs of studies to Cities through the TMDL process, instead of completing a comprehensive Basin Plan update; Water Boards continue to issue unreasonable requirements, with no Basin Plan review (December Board letter now indicates that development/ redevelopment should be no more than 5% effective impervious - retroactive to the 2001 permit); 13267 letters for indicator bacteria, not pathogens

    22. Recommendations

    23. Recommendations