[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6247417,"mediaKeyId","3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27","parentId",3212948,"title","Central Valley board adopted cease‑and‑desist for Arvin wastewater system; order includes conditional connection restrictions","audioSeconds",290,"startMs",3011000,"endMs",3301000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27&start=3011&end=3301","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27/thumbnail_3011000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6247417/California/Central-Valley-board-adopted-ceaseanddesist-for-Arvin-wastewater-system-order-includes-conditional-connection-restrictions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6247417-7533d4ba3bc86adc121d37ddbd7d6478/orig.mp4?Expires=1773641905&Signature=YTDTs-sxz2GeWoomDWGJzOyPL2tWVG4w1OANLAiUgZcB-6hOd-dAYaYDbosGtnZ56aW50mRCMeuw8e3aOKvyn8HD-jrGT18TqBgjV7d-GKsfGIuMaPK0U9zRHXlxjM8-2TPoKz8rKLTGN1Gj2abpPEO1CLAXQqwUZxjTA~Zmz6Jq1-lOJRLzvRG0aubtCyO3ZtB2K-XtUYz6479-N-B2erYo~kB-8WzW6hf7vrFAqQBwd~o0k9yrSxITmCCTKKbjf95rewlo3YAuG2adznM113gS6Xe9RYXbPof-O5SqsR4LFHW-YOyaABQ4cytZUtK1RyILbk4FRVPkBGK4r0rtxQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","State Water Resources Control Board Meeting","date","2025-05-07T16:09:56Z","article","The Central Valley Regional Water Board adopted a contested cease‑and‑desist order (CDO) in 2023 addressing long‑running operational failures at the City of Arvin’s wastewater treatment facility, regional enforcement staff told the statewide committee.

Regional staff said Arvin self‑reported noncompliance beginning in 2021 after inspectors identified seepage from an above‑grade treatment pond and unauthorized land application at non‑permitted rates. Subsequent inspections found continued use of the degraded pond and emergency discharges to unpermitted areas, including locations with public access. Staff concluded the city lacked adequate storage and disposal capacity to manage its effluent and that restricting new sewer connections would be necessary to allow repairs and protect water quality.

Staff prepared a CDO and brought it to the regional board as a contested hearing after the city declined to accept the draft order. At the hearing, Arvin and other stakeholders argued the connection ban would hamper development revenues needed for repair and that the community is a disadvantaged community with limited financial resources. Staff said the city submitted technical reports that staff judged insufficient and that inspectors documented ongoing discharges and public‑health exposures.

The regional board adopted the CDO. Staff said the order did not impose a blanket prohibition; it barred future connections for projects that did not have a building permit as of the CDO date but included exemptions for projects that alleviate extreme public hardship or public health needs. The order also authorized the regional board’s executive officer to grant additional exemptions based on specific findings that the city demonstrated progress toward corrective actions and that an exemption would not prevent return to compliance. Staff described the CDO as injunctive relief — compliance deadlines and requirements rather than a penalty action — and noted that in this case no monetary penalty was pursued because the community is disadvantaged.

Since adoption, Arvin has sought and received several exemptions for proposed developments, has pursued additional funding and technical support, and has continued monthly meetings with regional staff. The city has hired special counsel and new contractors to assist with compliance work, staff said. Regional enforcement staff said the CDO provided a needed enforceable schedule and authority to focus the city’s efforts and to demonstrate the community’s infrastructure needs to potential funders.

Staff emphasized that enforcement can be a tool to secure repair plans and external resources, not only punishment: the order set enforceable milestones and allowed staff to weigh exemptions carefully while continuing oversight of repairs and public‑health protections.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Water Quality Coordinating Committee (WQCC) meeting 5-2-2025","oneSentenceSummary","Regional enforcement staff said the Central Valley Regional Water Board adopted a contested 2023 cease‑and‑desist order against the City of Arvin for operational failures at its wastewater treatment facility that led to unauthorized discharges and public‑access exposures.","taxTitle","State Water Resources Control Board, Boards and Commissions, Executive, California","taxId",76764,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6247419,"San Francisco Bay board adopted 40% nitrogen‑load reduction permit after decade of science and regional planning",386,3169000,3555000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27&start=3169&end=3555","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27/thumbnail_3169000.jpg","/articles/6247419/California/San-Francisco-Bay-board-adopted-40-nitrogenload-reduction-permit-after-decade-of-science-and-regional-planning","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6247419-3a648fd4f61b448ca75e0f586566321f/orig.mp4?Expires=1773641905&Signature=hVcaonCPYIhcEl40BRnjh4NON26TpFPNBYHCo4HPfiIBNOC1IbJKs9caF2FEPb3kuhtfRQPGiw62x-40fj~TV~PoB1imotOfUH7qNfD0h-eaZOZAMlXbGiy8V3GsYCeKlU6szkDz2iNdbkgedcEFz7O0hKJzkCnkRukVHXJvp6wiHYKFCXI7rI~P3narDRkqEZ6dD24sRm7J8~VKyvU0VT7KUwq-F7j~4y2SWQVVrojfN-Sks2U7iRTQ3vGtBdNSg6sM8RaWv1BFyGYcS1wyoqMZSyEpOuPjRSYNVxemEB6rno4hjPq~byaWmGBEYQPmpYTCeWnaY~~ICMVEhv9MAA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board adopted a nutrient permit in July 2024 that sets aggregate nitrogen reduction goals intended to reduce the potential for harmful algal blooms and low dissolved oxygen events, a board staff presenter said at a State Water Board meeting.

Board staff explained that municipal wastewater treatment plants (about 40 POTWs in the region) historically contributed the majority of nitrogen loads to the bay and that a severe heterosigma bloom in August 2022 — followed by a similar event in 2023 — produced widespread fish kills and public concern. Staff concluded there was “reasonable potential” for effluent nitrogen to cause or contribute to basin‑plan violations of the narrative biostimulatory substances objective; federal permitting rules require effluent limits when reasonable potential exists.

Using modeling and the 2022 bloom as a critical condition, staff translated a protective dissolved‑oxygen criterion into an aggregate load target. Staff said a bay‑wide 40% reduction from the 2022 baseline (about 44,000 kg/day) would reduce nitrogen enough that, even under a severe bloom scenario, sufficient oxygen would remain to protect beneficial uses. The board adopted a bay‑wide compliance approach: if the aggregate load limit is met, dischargers are treated as in compliance; if aggregate limits are exceeded, dischargers with individual exceedances would be in violation.

The permit requires continued monitoring and an ongoing science program funded by the wastewater agencies — staff said the agencies have contributed roughly $15 million to studies over the prior decade and committed to continuing funding of $2.2 million per year. The permit includes interim and final limits, encourages regional planning and coordinated upgrades, and establishes a 10‑year compliance schedule under the state board’s compliance‑schedule policy. Staff noted the compliance schedule was a major topic of stakeholder concern; the regional board directed staff to explore options to allow more time than the maximum 10 years where multi‑benefit projects (for example, water recycling) require longer lead times.

Staff said the board conducted unusually extensive engagement over a decade: phased permits beginning in 2014 and 2019 required monitoring, regional studies and funding for science; the 2019 permit had foreshadowed a need to cap loads in the 2024 permit. Stakeholders included wastewater agencies, environmental groups (some urging deeper cuts), EPA, USGS and many scientists; staff emphasized “joint fact‑finding” and regional collaboration in preparing analyses.

At the July 2024 hearing, the regional board heard more than 50 public speakers, asked questions of staff, and voted unanimously to approve the permit, staff reported. Challenges remain: cost estimates for regional upgrades have been large in public comment (some stakeholders cited multi‑billion dollar regional costs), and agencies pressed for extended time. Staff said the permit’s combined approach — numeric limits, continued science funding and the 10‑year schedule with staff directed to pursue possibilities for additional time when justified — was the path the board adopted to balance science, cost and practicability.

Board staff said implementation is ongoing and will include monitoring, regional planning, and continuing collaboration with regulators, researchers and wastewater agencies.","The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board adopted a wastewater permit that establishes interim and final aggregate nitrogen load limits intended to reduce the risk of harmful algal blooms, asks utilities to fund ongoing science, and includes a 10‑year compliance schedule and regional planning expectations.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6247420,"State board says conservation regulation succeeded after extensive stakeholder work",1282,1818000,3100000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27&start=1818&end=3100","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27/thumbnail_1818000.jpg","/articles/6247420/California/State-board-says-conservation-regulation-succeeded-after-extensive-stakeholder-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6247420-e3f3e0a4e32cf83b5acda8c6077eee9d/orig.mp4?Expires=1773641905&Signature=QVYMr6t-GlbKCawQamy56UdTbPJbASKug28R0TfgMoiNNCjey~cRAHjKkHP0Tjy-7U4LZZ1U-wnlIqrLSvFtE6Krml4TOPWwP7YgzPqbA1LBDYzn5HwfV1P5BbSpXop5VZHkxwXAF8Cu6d0Egew-EJf8G3KWY-mK35Edl7t49B8Tn2a6eNz9XRQ83VbmK6OztNN5P5AHe4m66FcVbCSt~6HhAQsOPOIxbrlHJnemKkfrVC~waDgQspOnjciJV7hDJt~gGQeObe8COnQYx0NDDgHvb0l0-s38WBr7~-rd-V7blfbKINxnguL5ffYzx94UI0~WTcEtF5kpp2qMQSFlAA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The State Water Resources Control Board’s executive director told a water quality coordinating committee meeting that the board adopted the regulation implementing the 2018 conservation legislation after a period of intensive stakeholder engagement and internal revision.

The regulation replaced a uniform percent‑reduction approach with a budget‑based system that required urban water suppliers to calculate a water use objective (budget) each year, combining indoor per‑capita indoor use set by statute, outdoor use standards set by the board, system loss budgets and limited variances for special circumstances. The rule also included a ‘bonus’ incentive for potable recycled water use.

The regulation began formal rulemaking in August 2003 and drew substantial public pushback from many urban suppliers, academic critics, and media reporting, the board’s executive director said. After a contentious comment period and a long workshop, the board directed staff to convene multi‑stakeholder work groups during November–December 2023. Staff ran more than 20 multi‑hour work‑group meetings that grouped technical and policy concerns and produced options and clarifying language, the executive director said.

Staff described three principal elements used to carry the regulation forward: skilled staffing, expanded engagement, and adaptation of the regulatory approach. Adaptations emphasized more time for compliance and alternative compliance pathways rather than lowering the rule’s long‑term efficiency trajectory, staff said. The board then held a series of briefings comparing positions (water supplier, environmental groups, staff) and iterated specific changes before presenting a revised regulation to the board in mid‑2024.

At adoption in July 2024 the board set interim schedules and reporting obligations; the regulation applies to the state’s ~400 largest urban suppliers, covering roughly 95% of statewide delivered supply, and phases in increasingly stringent objectives through 2040. The rule includes indoor use components set by statute, outdoor residential standards set by the board, a system‑loss budget, and credits for potable recycled water. Staff estimated long‑term statewide savings of about 400,000 acre‑feet by 2040 from the regulation’s standards.

The executive director and staff emphasized the central role that the work‑group process played in moving the project from confrontation to compromise. While some environmental commentators said the final rule provided too much flexibility, others, including research groups, praised the board for listening and adjusting the implementation approach. The board and staff continue to implement and support suppliers in meeting the new water budgets.

Implementation details, including annual supplier budget calculations, reporting expectations and alternative compliance pathways, remain in effect as the board and staff carry forward monitoring and support work.","State Water Board staff described how the 2018 “making conservation a way of life” regulation — a shift from percent‑reduction targets to supplier‑specific water budgets — was revised through heavy stakeholder engagement and work groups before the board adopted the rule in July 2024.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6247411,"Central Valley staff say Delta methylmercury TMDL will need rethinking; current targets likely unattainable with present tools",214,7100000,7314000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27&start=7100&end=7314","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27/thumbnail_7100000.jpg","/articles/6247411/California/Central-Valley-staff-say-Delta-methylmercury-TMDL-will-need-rethinking-current-targets-likely-unattainable-with-present-tools","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6247411-f57bbad20a118ad41f96020b21c864a6/orig.mp4?Expires=1773641905&Signature=ArysTWXKzpUUIn3ltqNQVaEc4yrqqloGLb6YyaTzhgeRHbIxd2CMyTzWVoqhBhJrFYpFKvOaB2zcSZpSncLCWk777wBI27UM90nFaCRzyUEu4IZhjeOeAsINKDl53pzxXTkJoVnMFVl9J3II3-WZ-ZbTMsML8a5mkoRyEhMmR~2QSRzzIFSaxNsx~saGVTxVj16RanZEMryqelzXvtdAlyGGaObJCAj3gLfQ~j9UQ~fAjga0SPQ105q~PW9NadcGfWkla7M32aZD7V3hymLbwOJcUFj0v9qYi--pWBTJoBIFD63N5q603V-K9kZXBDWF3o-o18b5HPxB3rRGuEumzg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Central Valley Regional Water Board staff told the statewide water committee that the 2010 Delta methylmercury total maximum daily load (TMDL) and its one‑meal‑per‑week fish tissue goals pose serious technical and policy challenges and likely cannot be met with current tools or costs the region could reasonably bear.

Staff summarized the history: the methylmercury TMDL carved the Delta into nine subareas, set fish‑tissue targets for trophic‑level 3–4 predators and back‑calculated aqueous methylmercury goals and load allocations. Implementation was phased and relied on past technical work and decades of remediation and monitoring. Staff said subsequent research and monitoring show methylmercury “is far more stubborn” than originally expected and that even large reductions of controllable inputs would not achieve the one‑meal‑per‑week tissue targets.

Staff pointed to multiple reasons: legacy mercury in sediments from historical mining; upstream inputs from large watersheds; biogeochemical methylation processes in Delta sediments and water columns; and food‑web accumulation that produces high tissue burdens in top predators. Staff gave a notional example that reducing a small source (an illustrative 1 gram source) could cost more than a billion dollars while having negligible effect on Delta tissue burdens. The region also faces equity considerations: tribes and subsistence fishers rely on Delta fish; several communities (including tribal, Hmong and other subsistence fishing populations) asked for greater access to fish resources and would be affected by any permanent consumption advisories.

Staff said the region must now engage in ‘tough conversations’ with tribes, subsistence fishers, regulated parties and other stakeholders to reframe objectives, consider realistic risk‑management options and allocate responsibility for large, long‑term remediation work. They cautioned that there was no obvious engineering or policy quick fix, that remediation is costly and that the TMDL will require careful re‑examination to set feasible objectives and strategies compatible with equity considerations.

The presentation urged the board and staff to prepare for difficult decision‑making, emphasize transparency and culturally sensitive outreach, and weigh the limits of local authority (e.g., many mercury sources are historical or upstream) when communicating next steps.","Central Valley Regional Water Board staff cautioned that the 2010 Delta methylmercury TMDL’s long‑term tissue‑based targets cannot be met with currently available controls or reasonable expenditure, and flagged major equity and technical challenges for reformulation and stakeholder communication.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6247414,"State launches wastewater needs assessment; East Orosi named candidate for sewer‑system administrator",454,11229000,11683000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27&start=11229&end=11683","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3212948-e02402522e006b87741e74b3edef6c27/thumbnail_11229000.jpg","/articles/6247414/California/State-launches-wastewater-needs-assessment-East-Orosi-named-candidate-for-sewersystem-administrator","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6247414-5bdbcab83fcfd8de21c57f819d0a7ad4/orig.mp4?Expires=1773641905&Signature=HTvvSQY7-e1bifc1Y7l905acSFpn7uEuf8WvaZ3t5LwLeTanKMn6CUb7sZsvdZx883WxejsBiE2g60HboGz9jZ3wUaoJ~PbYNt4~8HwYmV7LmlutRKixG7swQ~TsBhUcqY1m7e1nEeS9sZJjtHMTmDFXKbWvULOBi3piAqt6gN8AdvCWdJ~vCq55ZstUwigtEKytLZkrekGBU-vNvqDgVpfDuuNjYKPS9Ut9JQbMUKMCCYTuDL1bjz5SvnJB63AOZGky6XCVn2pkU2mxUqoneFPMFhtWGyv-PUW--KASH7Z1qLqJRYhJO8uPnJBi4D3GcA6qlfGBG98GUPegZCGZfQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","State Water Resources Control Board staff told a water quality coordinating committee that the board is implementing a statewide wastewater needs assessment and piloting sewer‑system administrator authority under new state law to address communities without adequate sanitation.

Staff said the human right to water movement and earlier drinking‑water needs work inspired parallel attention to sanitation. The board contracted a multiyear study (UCLA as lead investigator under a $4 million contract) to create a statewide inventory of inadequate and at‑risk wastewater systems, develop a risk framework and map communities with sanitation needs. The needs assessment is planned in two phases: Phase 1 (baseline assessment, advisory group engagement and roadmap) is near completion with a Phase 2 start scheduled later in 2025 to create a public working list, mapping tools and cost/solutions analysis to inform future planning and investments.

Staff described legislative tools: SB 1215 (2018) authorizes wastewater consolidation and provides a framework to encourage or require connections of failing on‑site systems to sewers, prioritizing disadvantaged communities; AB 805 (2024) creates a sewer‑system administrator authority and a process to designate inadequate sewer systems and appoint administrators who provide technical, managerial and financing support while a longer‑term solution is developed.

As an initial AB 805 action, staff said the board notified East Orosi Community Sewer District in February 2025 that it qualified for the administrator process; a public meeting was held in April 2025 with Tulare County proposed as administrator and broad community support at the meeting, staff reported. The board’s next step is a water‑quality order and a resolution of findings to be signed by the executive director; the administrator will then produce feasibility, community engagement and post‑administrator transition plans.

Staff emphasized major data gaps and the need to coordinate with regional boards and technical assistance providers. They said advisory‑group meetings have already included representatives from regional boards, community technical assistance organizations, wastewater associations and community groups. Work under the UCLA contract will produce inadequacy and risk criteria for MPDS, WDR, on‑site systems and collection systems and estimate costs for capital and operations for candidate solutions. Staff cautioned that current legislative authority and funding are limited and that the needs assessment will provide the basis for prioritizing future policy, funding and technical‑assistance needs.

Staff urged continued regional engagement and multiple funding and partnership paths — including state, federal and philanthropic resources — and said the assessment is expected to inform statewide strategy and local implementation once phase 2 reporting is complete (contract work runs through 2027).","State Water Board staff described a statewide wastewater needs assessment underway (multiyear contract led by UCLA) and explained that, under AB 805, the board has initiated an administrator‑designation process for the disadvantaged community East Orosi as a pilot to move sanitation work forward.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Central Valley board adopted cease‑and‑desist for Arvin wastewater system; order includes conditional connection restrictions

San Francisco Bay board adopted 40% nitrogen‑load reduction permit after decade of science and regional planning

State board says conservation regulation succeeded after extensive stakeholder work

Central Valley staff say Delta methylmercury TMDL will need rethinking; current targets likely unattainable with present tools

State launches wastewater needs assessment; East Orosi named candidate for sewer‑system administrator