Reference Documents

Showing posts with label Farmers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Farmers. Show all posts

Saturday, December 07, 2013

Water Board Meeting Notes

I attended the Regional Water Quality Control Board's meeting today in SLO. Staffer David LaCaro was giving an update to the Board on the status of the wastewater project. John Waddell, Project Manager from the County, was there to answer questions from the Board. The Los Osos regulars were there too of course.

The first and only public comment at Public Forum (comments for items not on the agenda) mentioned CDOs (Cease and Desist orders). You might recall those orders were issued because the LOCSD Board stopped the sewer project in 2005 after a recall election. These orders were "the stick" to get a sewer project going again as the Water Board was NOT pleased, to say the least. This technique was objected to by a group called PZLDF and they went to court to try to overturn these orders. They kept losing in court after higher court—up the food chain—but until they stopped suing the Water Board, the Water Board was not going to drop the CDOs. It finally ended, and you can read about it here, but since the sewer IS being built, the CDOs are meaningless and the desire to drop them was forgotten until now. The request was noted for investigation by the Water Board's legal counsel.

There was a report on a field trip to the sewer project by Water Board Vice Chair Dr. Wolff. It had been attended by two locals, LOCSD District Engineer Rob Miller, the Water Board's Executive Officer Kenneth Harris and board members including  Dr. Wolff. How this trip came into being is a bit of a mystery, as only a large community activist and a local developer represented the public of Los Osos on this trip. I looked back on Water Board minutes and my notes from a meeting on February 1, 2013 and found that Chairperson Young had directed board members Wolff and Hunter to a sub-committee meeting with the County at the that Water Board meeting to study the wastewater plans. I'm not sure what the nexus to this trip might be or why this trip happened. In any case, the report was glowing, that the project was coming along in an organized and clean fashion. Not what some Los Osos members of the audience wanted to hear.

Anyway, not to write a book, but the main points were these:

  • On the water to dewater from the trenches, there was only 10% of the expected amount predicted;
  • Some areas expected to have high groundwater had none;
  • It was clear that both discharge to land and bay were permitted;
  • The Water Board has an unclear, or not much of an, ability to influence the ISJ;
  • There were 12 citizen comments and 3 agency comments on the Draft Basin Plan;
  • The Draft Basin Plan has no timeline to meet the goals;
  • The Basin Plan should hopefully be released in early 2014;
  • Anything Los Osos water purveyors wish to do regarding water improvements requires coastal review;
  • Dr. Hunter had multiple questions on everything and was asked by Dr. Wolff to give other Board members a chance to get their questions out;
  • Private well metering was discussed in the context of getting accurate data for modeling the basin—the Board of Supes can issue ordinances forcing well owners to meter, but politically it is a burning-burning-burning hot potato;
  • Walker Ditch (used for three weeks only) and the Solano pump station property are no longer needed for dewatering;
  • The contractors are rapidly wrapping up dewatering, the flows average 50,000 gallons per day now;
  • Dewatering water is going into a blackberry thicket and a eucalyptus grove where plant uptake helps to remove nitrates;
  • The salts in the dewater water are significantly less than has the seawater in the bay;
  • The dollar per acre foot cost on the recycled water being sold to the farmers is comparable to their pumping costs to give them incentive to use it;
  • Once the resistant farmers see how well the farmers taking the treated water are doing, they will be encouraged to sign up;
  • The Board was VERY unhappy getting Keith Wimer's hugely long Draft Basin Plan comments submitted 5 minutes before the meeting started; several Board members commented on that. The staff will read the document and make comments in May;
  • Some of the public's comments on the wastewater project do not fall into the Water Board's preview;
  • The Water Board cannot assist Los Osos citizens if they do not like their Supervisors, as they are elected;
  • The Regional Water Board has no latitude to change the nitrate limit requirements (none at this time) in the discharge permit, those comments should go to the State Board;
  • Mr. Young and Mr. Harris spoke to the public commenter's and Dr. Hunter's hoopla over the amount of nitrate in the dewatering water going into the bay—
 —the reason we are here today is because of the environmental impacts of the septic flows into the bay....any pumping into the bay is minor compared to what is going in there now. Any nitrate impacts to the bay (if there even are some) are transitory and will self correct (example; the Elkhorn Slough);
  • Mr. Young would rather staff take up issues on saltwater intrusion than those around dewatering water's nitrates.
Great staff report by Mr. LaCaro and very helpful background information from Mr. Waddell, thank you both!

And that was pretty much it. (Meeting time: two and one half hours.)

Our new CSD General Manager was in attendance which was a good thing. Her professional, positive, friendly attitude is vital to the success in the relations between the CSD and the County on the subject of the wastewater treatment plant.





Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Like Water to Dry Farmers. Or, the Latest, Angst-Ridden (Tiny) Sewer-Related Protest


Yes, there is always something to nit-pick over, isn't there? But let's just start with the words of Condition 97 in the Coastal Development Permit for the sewer before we get into the details of the protest.

Condition 97 of the CDP (Here is the whole thing.)

97. Disposal of treated effluent shall be reserved for the following sites/uses in the Los Osos Groundwater Basin:

a.   Broderson (not to exceed 448 AFY on an average annual basis),
b.   Urban re-use within the urban reserve line (as identified in the Effluent Re-Use and Disposal Tech Memo, July 2008),
c.    Agricultural re-use overlying the Los Osos Groundwater Basin,
d.   Environmental reservations (not less than 10% of the total volume of treated effluent).

Total agricultural re-use shall not be less than 10% of the total treated effluent. Disposal shall be prioritized to reduce seawater intrusion and return/retain water to/in the Los Osos groundwater basin. Highest priority shall be given to replacing potable water uses with tertiary treated effluent consistent with Water Code Section 13550.

No amount of treated effluent may be used to satisfy or offset water needs that result from non-agricultural development outside the Urban Reserve Line of the community of Los Osos.


Certain members of the public are trying to rouse a rallying cry around the contract that the County let to an agriculturalist last November. They claim because this farm is not over the basin, there is no sea water mitigation, therefore we should go back to the Coastal Commission and get this 10% of recycled water going to agricultural use changed (to what else is unclear). 

But isn't this just a tad soon? The plant hasn't even started construction yet and won't be finished for a couple more years when water delivery can begin. Over-the-basin farmers may come on board. Don't we want to trade the recycled water for the drinkable groundwater that they pump to use on their crops?

Granted, it took twenty years of education to get the farmer's acceptance for using recycled water on crops in Monterey County. But a lot of that educational work has been done and absorbed by farmers everywhere, especially pushed home with the specter of drought that afflicts many areas in California and wells that start pulling up brackish water. It wouldn't necessarily take twenty years here to get more farmers interested in this program.

The farmers over the basin are basically being asked to trade their groundwater that they would normally pump for the recycled water that the plant would provide. They sit over the same basin that we do. They face the same water challenges that we do, and according to water law in California, they get first dibs on ground water, not us. These are the same people just a few years back that had fifty members of their area sign a protest petition against putting our sewage in their neck of the woods, rather than in town, its origination point. Maybe they'd like to see how this all rolls out? Maybe they would like to see how considerate the conditions of the Coastal Permit are to their area concerning traffic, lighting, noise and smells? Maybe they are a little hesitant for signing contracts for a reason? Don't they deserve some consideration from us, we who asked them to accept the plant in their backyard? I think that they do. 

And this is wayyyyyyyy too soon to nag the Board of Supervisors to ask the Coastal Commission to change recycled water conditions. We need far more information years down the road to see if this if is even a reasonable request.

Meanwhile, we all can get an education from other areas on how this works. Here are a couple of websites that speak to this issue of recycled water usage on farmland:


(Look at the videos.)