Trash Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Los Angeles River ... IGumprecht, Blake (1999) The Los Angeles

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Trash Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Los Angeles River ... IGumprecht, Blake (1999) The Los...

  • Trash Total Maximum Daily Loads

    for the

    Los Angeles River Watershed

    September 19,200 1

    California Regional Water Quality Control Board

    Los Angeles Region

    320 West Fourth Street

    Los Angeles, California 900 13

  • This page intentionally left blank

  • I. INTRODUCTION -LEGAL BACKGROUND ........................................................................... ..........1

    11. DEFINITIONS................. 2 ;.............................................................................................................................

    111. PROBLEM STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................... 3

    A. DESCRIPTION WATERSHEDOF ME 3... ........................................................................

    USESOF THE WATERSHEDB. BENEFICIAL .......... ................................................................................ ...... 4

    C. WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES 12

    D. IMPAIRMENT OF BENEFICIAL USES 12

    E. EXTENT 14OF THE TRASHPROBLEM IN THE LOS ANGELES RIVE

    IV. NUMERIC TARGET .................................................................................................................................. I 6 V. SOURCE ANALYSIS .......................................................................................... I 7 i..........................................

    VI. WASTE LOAD ALLOCATIONS .............................................................................................................. 17

    A. DEFAULT BASELINE WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION 6. REFINED BASELINE ALLOCATIONWASTE LOAD C. BASELINE WASTE LOAD FOR CALTRAN ALLOCATIONS D l BASELINE WASTE LOADALLOCATIONS PERMIITEEFOR MUNICIPAL

    V11. BASELINE MONITORING ....................................................................................................................... 21 A. LAND USEAREAS TO BE MONITORE B. GENERAL BASELINE PLAN REQUIREMENMONITORING TS 24..........................................................................

    C. BASELINE MONITORING PLAN ..... D. ALTERNATIVE BASELINEMONITO

    VIII. IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLIANCE .......................................................................................... 26 A. COMPLIANCE DETERMINATIO 7

    8. COMPLIANCE STRATEGIES.................. 9

    1. Full Cap tu re Treatment S y s t e m 0 2. Partial Cap tu re T rea tm 0 3. E x a m p l e s of Imp lemen ta t i on S t ra teg i es I

    IX. COST CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 34 A. CURRENT COST OF TRASH CLEAN-UPS B. COST OF IMPL

    1. C a t c h Basin l n s e 2. FullCaptu 3. Endof Pip 4. Cost C o m p a r i s o n

    BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................................................... 41 APPENDIX I ............................................................................................................................................................ 43

    September 19,2001 Los Angeles River Trash TMDL

    8907

  • USES OF SURFACE WATERS OF THE LOS ANGELES RIVETABLE I . BENEFICIAL R ...................................................... 8

    FOR LONGBEACH: IS MEASURED INTONNAGE

    TABLE 3.AVERAGECOMBINED FOR CONTROL PILOT STUDY TABLE2. STORM DEBRIS COLLECTION SUMMARY DEBRIS ............... 16

    TOTAL LOADS OUTFALLS AT 3 L I T E R MANAGEMENT

    (LMPS) SITES.................................................................................................................................................20

    TABLE 4.A PRELIMINARY AND VOLUME FOR FREEWAYS BASELME WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION FOR WEIGHT ....... 20 TABLE 5. DEFAULTWASTELOADALLOCATIONS AS CUBIC FEET OF UNCOMPRESSED TRASH AND %. (EXPRESSED

    REDUCTION.) ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 1

    TABLE 6. BASELINE PLANDUEDATES.............................................................................................. 25 MONITORING TABLE 7. COMPL~ANCE 28SCHEDULE......................................................................................................................

    TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF POSSIBLE TRASH REDUCTION IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES ........................................ 34

    FORLONGBEACH: ...........................................................................

    TABLE 1 0 . COSTS OF RETROFITTING THE URBAN PORTION OF THE WATERSHED WlTH CATCH BASM INSERTS .

    (AMOUNTS IN MILLIONS) .................... ........................................................................................................... 36

    TABLE 9. STORM DEBRIS SUMMARY BILLINGS 35

    TABLE 1 1 . COSTSASSOCIATED WITH LOW CAPACITY GROSS POLLUTANT SYSTEMS.............37 VORTEX SEPARATION

    TABLE 12. COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH LARGE CAPACITYVORTEX GROSS POLLUTANT SYSTEMS.........38 SEPARATION

    TABLE 13. COSTS ASSOCIATEDWITH VSS................................................................................................................ 38

    . COSTS FOREND ....................................................................................................39TABLE 14 SAMPLE OF P~PE~ 'ETS TABLE 15. COSTCOMPARISON 40(AMOUNTS IN M~LLIONS).......................................................................................

    FIGURE A. WATERBODIES WATERSHEIN THE LOS ANGELES RIVER

    6 FIGURE B. FLETCHER OCTOBER 26. 1999 DRIVE: GREATEGRET. .............................................................................

    FIGURE C.TRASH WAITING FOR PICK-UP AT LOS FELIZ BOULEVARD

    AFTER SUNDAY. OCTOBER 16, 1999, CLEAN-UP ....................................................................................... 15

    FIGURE D. EXAMPLE 2. CIP( x AFTER YEAR5......................................................................................................... 33

    September 19. 2 0 0 1 Los A n g e l e s R i v e r T r a s h TMDL

    8908

  • I. Introduction - Legal Background The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (hereinafter

    referred to as the "Regional Board") has developed this total maximum daily load (TMDL) designed to attain the water quality standards for trash in the Los Angeles River. The TMDL has been prepared pursuant to state and federal requirements to preserve and enhance water quality in the Los Angeles Basin River Watershed.

    The California Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region, also known as the Basin Plan, sets standards for surface waters and groundwaters in the regions. These standards are comprised of designated beneficial uses for surface and ground water, and numeric and narrative objectives necessary to support beneficial uses and the state's antidegradation policy. Such standards are mandated for all waterbodies within the state under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. In addition, the Basin Plan describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the region. The Basin Plan implements the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act (also known as the "California Water Code") and serves as the State Water Quality Control Plan applicable to the Los Angles River, as required pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act (CWA).

    Section 305(b) of the CWA mandates biennial assessment of the nation's water resources, and these water quality assessments are used to identify and list impaired waters. The resulting list is referred to as the 303(d) list. The CWA also requires states to establish a priority ranking for impaired waters and to develop and implement TMDLs. A TMDL specifies the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still meet water quality standards, and allocates pollutant loadings to point and non-point sources.

    The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has oversight authority for the 303(d) program and must approve or disapprove the state's 303(d) lists and each specific TMDL. USEPA is ultimately responsible for issuing a TMDL, if the state fails to do so in a timely manner.

    As part of California's 1996 and 1998 303(d) list submittals, the Regional Board identified the reaches of the Los Angeles River at the Sepulveda Flood Basin and downstream as being impaired due to trash.

    A consent decree between the USEPA, the Santa Monica BayKeeper and Heal the Bay Inc., represented by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), was signed on March 22, 1999. This consent decree requires that all TMDLs for the Los Angeles Region be adopted within 13 years. The consent decree also prescribed schedules for certain TMDLs. According to this schedule, a Trash TMDL for the Los Angeles River watershed must be approved before March 2001.

    This Trash TMDL is based on existing, readily available information concerning the conditions in the Los Angeles River watershed and other watersheds in Southern California, as well as TMDLs previously developed by the State and USEPA.

    September 19,2001 I Los Angeles River Trash TMDL

    8909

  • II. Definitions

    The definitions of terms as used in this TMDL are provided as follows:

    Baseline Waste Load Allocation. The Baseline Waste Load Allocation is the Waste Load Allocation assigned to a permittee before reductions are required. The progressive reductions in the Wa