New water-quality standards awash in criticism

Paul Clinton

UPPER NEWPORT BAY -- In a blistering critique, environmental lawyers

have taken aim at a controversial water-quality study of the Back Bay.

Heather Hoecherl, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense

Council, called the study a “complete waste of time and resources” in a

Wednesday letter to Orange County Environmental Resources Manager Chris

Crompton.

Crompton is overseeing the study, which is being paid for by the

Irvine Ranch Water District, the Irvine Co. and other members of a

“watershed executive committee.”

Also on Wednesday, Newport Beach Assistant City Manager Dave Kiff

called the study “disturbing.”

If its recommendations are implemented, the study would significantly

realign the way pollutants are measured in the Back Bay.

The study, an examination of the health risks of swimming and other

recreational uses in various sections of the bay, was completed by

consultant EOA Inc.

Federal standards now exist for four groups of substances flowing into

an impaired water body -- sediment, nutrients, pathogens and toxics. The

bay was given the impaired designation in the mid-1990s by the

Environmental Protection Agency.

The standards, known as total maximum daily loads, were implemented by

the agency as a result of a lawsuit brought by Newport Beach resident Bob

Caustin, who founded Defend the Bay.

On Wednesday, Caustin lashed out at the study.

“It’s a very self-serving report for the [Irvine Ranch Water District]

and the Irvine Co.,” Caustin said. “It could put the bay at risk. . . .

They’re trying to make themselves exempt. They want to create their own

rules.”

At a Wednesday meeting of the watershed committee, Caustin urged the

agencies in attendance, including several county cities and other

agencies, to “kill the study.”

Norris Brandt, the water district’s assistant to the general manager,

defended the report.

“We do want it to be an unbiased study,” Brandt said. “Let’s try and

find out what the facts are.”

In her letter, Hoecherl said the study relies on “an erroneously low

number of users” and relies on “unacceptable uncertainty caused by the

numerous assumptions used” in the analysis.

The defense council earlier this month released a comprehensive report

measuring the number of beach closures and postings nationwide. They are

largely the result of increased testing of bacteria in urban runoff.

Jack Skinner, a Newport Beach environmentalist, also objected to the

study. Skinner said he hoped the agencies involved would act in the best

interests of the swimmers who use the bay.

“This can’t be a political decision,” Skinner said. “It has to be a

health decision.”

* Paul Clinton covers the environment and John Wayne Airport. He may

be reached at (949) 764-4330 or by e-mail ato7

paul.clinton@latimes.comf7 .