Accomplishments

Fecal Total Maximum Daily Loads for Santa Monica Bay Beaches
In January 2002, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) adopted a dry-weather Fecal Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Santa Monica Bay beaches. A TMDL is the maximum amount of a pollutant, in this case fecal bacteria, that a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards set to protect the beneficial uses of that water body. The Santa Monica Bay fecal bacteria TMDL for dry weather will prohibit any beach from exceeding the state health standards during the summer months (April through October). All beaches must be cleaned up and in compliance by 2006. For dry weather conditions outside of the summer month time period (November through March), no beach in Santa Monica Bay will be allowed to exceed bacterial standards more than 3 times of the daily dry weather days sampled.

In December 2001, the Regional Water Board unanimously approved the wet weather fecal bacteria TMDL. The new regulations will protect the health of swimmers and surfers by greatly reducing fecal bacteria at beaches in wet weather. The regulation covers 44 beaches from Palos Verdes to Ventura County line. Santa Monica Bay watershed cities and the County will have 10 years to reduce the number of days that exceed state health standards to a number less than or equal to water quality conditions seen at pristine beaches in undeveloped watersheds, such as Leo Carillo Beach in Malibu. This averages out to about 17 days for Venice, Santa Monica, Pacific Palisades and Malibu Beaches. As a point of comparison, Malibu Surfrider Beach currently exceeds water quality standards more than fifty days per year. Under no circumstances will beaches be allowed to have water quality worse than exists today, which is critical for those beaches that only exceed water quality standards about five times a year or less.

The State Water Resources Control Board subsequently unanimously approved both bacteria TMDLs. These were the first major beach TMDLs in the state to be adopted. This process was a result of a 1998 consent decree entered into between Heal the Bay, the Santa Monica Baykeeper, NRDC, and the EPA.

EPA's draft Implementation Guidance for Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria, 2002 version.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency or USEPA was expected to issue the final draft Implementation Guidance for Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria, 2002 version in April 2003. This document is meant to provide guidance to States for the adoption and implementation of federal bacteria standards into their beach management programs. California already did this when it adopted AB-411. Heal the Bay has worked hard over the past two-years (with the U.S. EPA's staff in Washington D.C.) to develop a document that will help states develop conservative and effective public health programs at recreational beaches. However, the only piece of good news in the document is that EPA requires States to use both the geometric mean and single sample bacteria standards at beaches.

As mentioned in earlier sections, there are a significant number of shortcomings with the guidance document, each of which further reduces the health protection of recreational water users. The first major issue with the document is the fact that the EPA is allowing States to nearly double the acceptable risk level at freshwater beaches, from 8 illnesses per 1000 swimmers to 14. Also, EPA supports the use of a variable standard for bacterial indicators depending on beach usage. In other words, EPA says that it is acceptable for a beachgoer to swim in more contaminated water at Leo Carrillo Beach in Malibu than at Venice City Beach, simply because Leo Carrillo Beach is frequented by fewer people. The proposal calls for allowing enterococcus densities to be three times higher at less frequented beaches, which means swimmers and surfers will have a much greater chance of getting sick. Finally, EPA did not provide any justification for "allowable risk rates" - the number of acceptable illnesses among recreational water users.

EPA's National Beach Guidance and Grant Performance Criteria for Recreational Waters
Last year, the USEPA published the National Beach Guidance and Grant Performance Criteria for Recreational Waters (otherwise known as the nationwide beach water quality monitoring and public notification program). As currently written, however, there are considerable shortcomings in the program as proposed. For example, USEPA will allow for monthly sampling frequencies at some beaches, no required timeframe in which to notify the public of water quality exceedances, no consistent sampling techniques, and no required and consistent method by which to notify the public when beach water quality has been exceeded. USEPA's original goal (to develop a national standardized monitoring and reporting program for beaches) will simply not be achieved with the program as it's proposed. The program neither adequately guides health officers to establish meaningful monitoring programs, nor does it provide beachgoers with adequate health protection. Finally, USEPA has failed to incorporate key components from California's statewide beach bathing water monitoring and public notification program into this program. USEPA should have developed a rigorous, model beach program that would protect public health, and through which states that would implement all or most of the program would be eligible for increased Federal BEACH funding amounts. USEPA refused to do this because many eastern states want continued funding of their inadequate monitoring programs.

Criteria for Listing a Beach on the State's List of Polluted Waters 303(d) list
The Clean Water Act requires states to identify beaches that are too polluted to be safe for swimming and then to clean these beaches up to applicable health standards.

Heal the Bay has made a number of recommendations to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) on the methodology used to identify impaired beaches for this list (also called a 303(d) list):

1. Listing should be based primarily on the number of exceedances of the State microbiological health standards (both the single sample and geometric mean standards) as demonstrated by historical routine monitoring data and other sources of water quality data such as special studies.
2. A minimum of 3 to 5 years of data should be analyzed when making a listing decision.
3. Listing decisions should not be influenced by information that is not directly related to water quality at the beach such as whether enforcement action is occurring or can be taken, the source of the contamination, or whether a TMDL is an "appropriate" means of mitigating the problem.
4. The number of exceedances that result in the listing of a beach should be determined by comparing the beach to a reference beach. Arbitrarily allowing a 10% or even 4% rate is not supported by existing monitoring data. An analysis of historical daily monitoring data from Santa Monica Bay beaches shows many beaches have exceedance rates below 4%, indicating that very low exceedances rates can be achieved even though natural sources of fecal bacteria exist.
5. Beaches that are permanently posted with warning signs should automatically be listed.
6. Rain advisories should be used in the listing process for beaches that are not monitored at least weekly during wet weather or during the non-AB411 season.

In addition to these recommendations, at beaches impacted by flowing storm drains or freshwater outlets, Heal the Bay urged the SWRCB and the local health agencies to relocate routine monitoring stations so that they would be directly in front of the stormdrain, which would help identify impaired beaches and polluted outlets. Currently, routine monitoring occurs anywhere from directly in front of the drain to 83 yards from the drain, depending on the monitoring agency. Thus, by using monitoring data from stations located away from the drain, the state is allowing a de facto mixing zone around the storm drain. In the mixing zone, water quality can exceed standards but the beach is not identified as impaired. In other words, the state is taking away the beneficial use (swimming) along these sections of beach. The state is allowing this to occur although swimmers and surfers can often be found directly in front of flowing storm drains and creeks.

Malibu Creek Fecal Bacteria TMDL
Malibu Creek and Lagoon are polluted with fecal bacteria at levels that often greatly exceed the State health standards for swimming. The pollution could be coming from many sources, including urban runoff, horse related activities, and malfunctioning septic systems. A TMDL, or pollution limit, would solve this serious problem if it is developed and implemented effectively. Unfortunately the Bacteria TMDL recently proposed by the EPA for Malibu Creek is seriously flawed, and Heal the Bay believes it will not solve the fecal bacteria problem in the Malibu Creek watershed or achieve the goal of a clean and safe Surfrider Beach. The proposed TMDL is based predominately on fecal coliform densities even though epidemiological studies conducted by the EPA itself showed E. coli, not fecal coliform, is associated with health risks from swimming in polluted freshwater. The TMDL also fails to address enterococcus loads into Malibu Lagoon and from the Lagoon to Surfrider Beach: generally the most polluted beach along Santa Monica Bay. Finally, the TMDL uses a completely inappropriate reference site (the saltwater Leo Carillo beach) to determine how many days the Malibu Creek watershed will be allowed to exceed health standards due to the impacts of bacteria from natural sources, such as birds and wildlife. Based on this reference site, the EPA is proposing to allow three days of exceedances of health standards during the dry season, even though the TMDL did not demonstrate any need to allow exceedances due to natural sources. In addition, the TMDL potentially violates the Clean Water Act's antidegradation provision and fails to include a required margin of safety. Heal the Bay believes the proposed TMDL, once in place, will not restore the beneficial use (swimming) throughout Malibu Creek watershed and, importantly, at Surfrider Beach. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board is planning to revise the TMDL by the end of this summer.

Rapid Methodologies for Detecting Bacteria Indicators and other Potential Indicators of Fecal Contamination
Through the California Beach Initiative, the State of California is funding research on the rapid detection of microbiological indicators of fecal contamination. Rapid detection technology has the potential to greatly improve protection of public health at recreational waters and our ability to track and identify sources of fecal contamination. Several methodologies look promising, however, there are many technical hurdles that must be tackled before we see these technologies used routinely in beach monitoring such as high detection limits, specificity issues, and viability measurement problems. Measuring specific strains of bacteria is not compatible with the currently available epidemiological data and measuring specific viruses has limited use because we currently do not know the etiology of many illnesses associated with swimming in fecal contaminated waters. In addition, detection limits of the methods, often related to the required prefiltration and concentration of the sample, are much greater than levels of fecal contamination that may cause illness. Heal the Bay believes it will be several years before a rapid methodology for beach monitoring is ready for routine use on the beach. One methodology that increases the speed of the chromogenic substrate method currently used by many public health agencies may be available sooner and could speed up detection from 18 to 24 hours to around 6 hours.

San Diego's Mission Bay Health Effects Study
Beginning this Memorial Day, the Southern California Coastal Waters Research Project, UC Berkeley, and the County and City of San Diego will initiate the first ever epidemiological study at an enclosed beach on the Pacific Coast. The study will include a number of beach locations in Mission Bay and conclude this summer. Researchers will attempt to determine if there are health risks associated with swimming at polluted beaches in Mission Bay. Also, researchers will attempt to find the actual pathogenic viruses that can make swimmers sick. The results should be out before our next annual Beach Report Card.

Recommendations

• Advocate for Year-Round Postings along the Entire Length of Beach Impacted by Flowing Storm Drains
In southern California, there is little consistency among counties monitoring storm drain impacted beaches regarding where to collect a sample, when to post a warning sign, and where to post the warning sign. For example, samples are collected from the wave wash (where the creek, river, or storm drain meet the ocean water) to as far as 83 yards from the drain, depending on the county. Also, state regulations require posting a warning sign when samples exceed the single sample standard, but give local health departments discretion to post a warning sign if the 30-day geometric-mean standard is exceeded. The counties of Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles and the City of Long Beach post a warning signs if there is a single sample exceedance; the County of Orange will post warning signs for both a single sample standard or 30-day geometric mean exceedance; and the County of San Diego will initially only post warning signs on a single sample exceedance but will continue that posting if subsequent sampling causes an exceedance of either the single sample or 30-day geometric mean standard. Lastly, the location of the warning sign depends on where the samples are collected and therefore is highly variable.

To address these three points, Heal the Bay recommends permanently posting warning signs along the entire length of beach adjacent to flowing storm drains where water quality may fail to meet the State health standards for both the single sample and 30-day geometric mean standards. This is based on the results of the Storm Drain Plume Dispersion study Heal the Bay completed with the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP), and represents a change from the current posting protocol implemented by health agencies.

The Storm Drain Plume Dispersion study looked at how fecal bacteria discharged from storm drains disperses along the shoreline and the impacts on the plume by ocean and discharge conditions. The study shows that the length of beach made unsafe for swimming is beach-specific depending on local beach topography, and can vary over the course of a few hours. The study also shows that beach health standards can be exceeded at distances much greater than that covered by monitoring stations routinely sampled be local health agencies (well over 100 yards in some cases). Based on these results, Heal the Bay believes the protocol typically used by County health agencies for posting warning signs may not be adequately notifying swimmers of potential health risks around freshwater outlets in Southern California.

We recommend the following improvements to the current system:

1. The beach adjacent to a polluted storm drain or freshwater outlet should be posted with warning signs over the entire length of beach where water quality is affected by the plume of fecal bacteria discharging from the drain. .
2. Since the length of beach where water quality may be impacted by high fecal bacteria levels is beach-specific, we recommend this length be determined by completing multiple sampling events at multiple locations around the drain under varying oceanographic conditions.
3. Once the length of beach impacted has been determined, the routine monitoring location should be moved to the wave wash (the location where the creek, river, or storm drain effluent meets the ocean). The beach should remain permanently posted until routine monitoring at the drain shows fecal bacteria densities are below all health standards.

• Advocate for increased funding for California's shoreline monitoring program from EPA's BEACH program
Currently, the State receives $535,000 to implement a statewide shoreline water quality monitoring and public notification program at popular beaches. State allotments are based on three criteria: the length of the beach season, the amount of beach miles, and estimated beachgoers. Although California receives the largest grant available for this program, the allotment criteria used by EPA has a major shortcoming that has prevented California from receiving additional funds to cover the cost of monitoring. The problem with the allotment methodology is the lack of criteria for determining the strength of a state's monitoring program or public notification protocol. EPA does not provide an incentive or disincentive to move states beyond even the most basic water quality monitoring and public notification program. For example, states may monitor for only one fecal bacteria indicator, or may not notify the public about water quality exceedances in a timely manner, yet those states receive full funding while other states, such as California, monitor for three fecal bacteria criteria, and notifies the public immediately of any water quality exceedances. Heal the Bay believes EPA should consider the quality of the monitoring program when allocating funding to the States.

• Advocate for Improved Public Notification of Poor Water Quality at Open-ocean Beaches
Most of the beaches in Southern California are located on the open ocean, receive excellent natural flushing by the incoming swell, and and are not located near a source of human sewage. At these "open-ocean" beaches Heal the Bay believes health agencies should use the discretion afforded to them in State regulation (AB-411) to consider factors such as historical water quality, the magnitude of the exceedance, and the number of indicators that exceed the standards when deciding if a warning sign should be posted. Currently, most counties rigorously post warning signs when the single sample standards are exceeded. Recent research, however, indicates high variability in fecal bacteria densities can occur at open-ocean beaches. This high variability combined with the lag time of 18 to 48 hours from sample collection time to posting time can result in erroneous public notification of water quality. Thus, at open-ocean beaches where there are no potential sources of human sewage, Heal the Bay supports the State regulation that allows health officials to consider multiple factors before posting a warning sign. In contrast, exceedances of the geometric mean standards at open-ocean beaches can indicate a chronic water quality problem. However, currently, most health agencies do not post the beach with a warning sign when the geometric mean standards are exceeded. Heal the Bay urges health agencies to post open-ocean beaches with warning signs when the geometric mean standard is exceeded and to conduct a sanitary survey to find the source of the contamination.

• Advocate for the Los Angeles County, Department of Health Services to resume weekly water quality monitoring at Mothers' Beach in Marina del Rey
Since September 2000, the County has not done any shoreline monitoring at Mothers' Beach, relying solely on the City of Los Angeles' single sample location. As has been demonstrated in past years in our Beach Report Card, water quality at Mothers' Beach and other enclosed beaches can vary significantly within a short distance. Mothers' Beach is the only enclosed beach in all of southern California with only one sampling station. Other enclosed beaches, such as Kiddie Beach in Ventura County, Baby Beach in Orange County, and Avalon Beach on Catalina Island, which are much smaller in beach area, have multiple monitoring stations to better characterize overall water quality. By reducing the total number of samples collected and beach area covered, County Health Services has, in effect, deprived the public of their right to know about accurate water quality conditions, and thus impacted their ability to make an informed decision about attending this beach. Unfortunately this situation will not improve until the approval of the Total Maximum Daily Load for fecal bacteria in Marina del Rey, which will require additional sampling locations at Mothers' Beach.

• Ensure best management practices are implemented and promote implementation of tidal circulation improvements at enclosed beaches
Beaches such as Kiddie Beach in Channel Island Harbor, Mothers' Beach in Marina del Rey, Cabrillo Beach in Los Angeles Harbor, Baby Beach in Dana Point Harbor and a number of beaches in Mission Bay all received fair to poor water quality marks, and all are popular with children and young families. Whether the pollution problem is due to a lack of tidal circulation or the beach's proximity to a pollution source, young beachgoers are far too frequently exposed to poor water quality conditions. One of Heal the Bay's highest priorities is to ensure that these chronically polluted beaches are cleaned up.

• Encourage agencies to monitor water quality at popular beaches year-round (beyond the AB411 required dates of April-October)
Year-round monitoring provides winter beachgoers (usually surfers who frequent the beach due to winter swells) with important information about water quality. In California there is no set beach season. Surfers, swimmers, divers, wind-surfers, and kayakers use the water year-round, so all of these ocean enthusiasts have the right to know about water quality at their favorite beaches on a year-round basis.

• Assist Northern California Coastal Counties in developing their monitoring programs and databases
Heal the Bay will continue to work, where needed, with the Environmental Health Departments in Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo to ensure that the necessary resources exist for them to develop adequate monitoring and public notification programs and database systems.

• Advocate for the State to enforce Sanitary Survey Protocols as established in AB 538 and The Ocean Plan
In an effort to do more than just notify beachgoers of potential water quality problems at their favorite beaches, AB 538 was passed to require sanitary surveys (source investigations) to be completed at those beaches where water quality problems exist. The intent was to determine where beaches with water quality problems existed, identify the causes of impairment, and implement the necessary strategies to abate the pollution source. The requirement of a source investigation is not a new concept - it was stipulated by the Ocean Plan in 1988. However, the state never enforces or requires municipalities to conduct these surveys when exceedances occur. The Ocean Plan states that ".if a shore station consistently exceeds a coliform objective or exceeds a geometric mean.the Regional Board shall require the appropriate agency to conduct a survey to determine if that agency's discharge is the source of the contamination." (State Water Resources Control Board Ocean Plan 1997) AB 538 states that source investigations shall be conducted "if bacteriological standards are exceeded in any three weeks of a four-week period, or for areas where testing is done more than once a week, 75 percent of testing days that produce an exceedence of those standards.

• Advocate for full funding of the Beach Water Quality Source Identification and Technical Assistance Projects
Two years ago, Governor Davis, as part of the Clean Beach Initiative, allocated $1.5 million for research on rapid pathogen indicators and pathogen source identification efforts. The results of their research effort should be available before next year's Beach Report Card. Unfortunately, this funding was only a fraction of the amount needed to adequately study beach pollution issues. Given the importance of coastal tourism to the California economy - the Natural Resources Defense Council estimated that $37 billion was generated by coastal tourism in their 1999 "Testing the Waters: A Guide to Water Quality at Vacation Beaches" - Heal the Bay strongly recommends that $20 million be allocated to conduct necessary scientific studies, including pathogen detection and quantification methods, a source identification methodology, a characterization of runoff sources and reduction in nuisance flows, and health-effect studies for wet-weather exposures, and multiple exposures. On a positive note, the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project will soon release a study on the effectiveness of a variety of state-of-the-art microbiological source identification techniques methods used for identifying and quantifying fecal pollution sources. Although funding research in this economy presents major challenges, understanding beach pollution problems, their cause, the fate and transport of pathogens and pathogen indicators, and the human and marine impacts of exposure to polluted runoff and pathogens, will help us to better protect our coastal resources. This recommendation has been echoed by the State Water Resources Control Board's Beach Water Quality Workgroup.

This page :: Top

Previous section :: State & Federal Legislation

Next section :: Appendix A: Thresholds & Grading