Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · BILL · 116th Congress · H.R. 4611 (Introduced in House) — To modify permitting requirements with respect to the discharge of any pollutant from the Point Loma Wastewater Treat... · Sec. 2

Sec. 2. Findings

811 words·~4 min read·/bill/116/hr/4611/ih/section-2

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Congress finds the following: In 1972, Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, which required publicly owned treatment works to achieve secondary treatment capability by 1977. In 1994, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California determined that upgrading the City of San Diego’s Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant (in this Act referred to as the Point Loma Plant ) to secondary treatment standard would not be in the public interest, being excessively costly without producing additional environmental benefits.
The Point Loma Plant currently meets all the requirements of secondary treatment except for the removal of total suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand. At the direction of Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency (in this Act referred to as the EPA ) requested that the National Research Council advise the agency on ways to improve wastewater management in coastal urban areas. The resulting study Managing Wastewater in Coastal Urban Areas produced several important findings, including— biochemical oxygen demand discharged through a well-designed outfall is generally not of ecological concern in open coastal waters; total suspended solids can be adequately controlled by advanced primary treatment and high dilution outfalls; and over-control is particularly likely along ocean coasts, but nevertheless full secondary treatment is required regardless of cost or lack of benefits.
Past reviews by the City of San Diego, the EPA, the State of California, and scientists affiliated with the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the University of California, San Diego, and other organizations have concluded the Point Loma Plant does not have any known significant adverse effect on the ocean environment outside the immediate area of the discharge. The ocean outfall for the Point Loma Plant discharges effluent 4.5 miles from the coast at a depth of over 300 feet, one of the longest and deepest ocean outfalls in the world.
Implementing full secondary treatment standards at the Point Loma Plant will cost approximately $1,800,000,000. Implementing full secondary treatment standards at the Point Loma Plant is contrary to the national interest, in that it will compromise views from the Cabrillo National Monument and interfere with the Navy’s use of adjacent property. The City of San Diego generates all the energy it needs to operate the Point Loma Plant onsite through co-generation. Implementing full secondary treatment will turn a green facility into one of the region’s largest energy consumers, requiring the purchase of over $17,000,000 each year in electricity and producing more than 100,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions annually.
Implementing full secondary treatment standards at the Point Loma Plant will require removal of 1,250,000 tons of earth from environmentally sensitive habitat immediately adjacent to the Point Loma Ecological Reserve. Recognizing the unique situation surrounding the Point Loma Plant, Congress adopted the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act (OPRA). OPRA allowed the Point Loma Plant to avoid conversion to full secondary treatment and instead operate under a modified permit according to standards contained in sections 301(h) and 301(j)(5) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as modified by OPRA.
The City of San Diego has complied with all requirements of OPRA and the results have been significant, including reduction in the discharge of total suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand, advanced ocean monitoring, and construction of 45,000,000 gallons per day of treatment capacity to produce reclaimed water at a cost of approximately $340,000,000. This Act will capitalize on the record of improvements initiated under OPRA and provide a framework for further enhancements to the City of San Diego’s water and wastewater systems, increased potable water reliability, and additional meaningful environmental protection.
The City of San Diego has completed its Water Purification Demonstration Project showing that municipal wastewater can successfully be treated to levels suitable for potable reuse. The City of San Diego completed its Recycled Water Study in 2012 describing how wastewater can be diverted from the Point Loma Plant to new treatment facilities to generate water suitable for potable reuse. Through the construction and operation of new treatment facilities to produce 83,000,000 gallons per day of water suitable for potable reuse, the City of San Diego is expected to reduce the total suspended solids discharged by the Point Loma Plant to the same or lower levels as would be achieved by implementing full secondary treatment, while creating an important new local source of water.
The City of San Diego currently relies on imported water for over 85 percent of its water supply. A new local source of water can significantly reduce the environmental impacts of importing water to San Diego from the Colorado River and the California Bay-Delta by offsetting the City’s demand for imported water. Due to the severe drought in California, the 2014 water allocation from the State Water Project was only 5 percent of normal, forcing water agencies to draw down water reserves, implement mandatory conservation measures, and search for new, dependable sources of water.
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.