Huntington Beach Closure Investigation: Technical Review

Huntington BeachClosure Investigation: Technical ReviewOctober 2000

Acknowledgements

Graphic Design: Angel Lemus Cover photo courtesy of: James McDermott

U SC Sea Grant wishes to thank the members of thetechnical review panel who contributed to boththe Huntington Beach closure public review and to

this report. The panel, led by Dr. Stephen Weisberg,devoted a great amount of their time and expertise inproducing this document. Their views reflect a vastresource of knowledge ranging from environmentalengineering to microbiology.

We would also like to acknowledge the OrangeCounty Sanitation District for requesting this review,

and we thank all of the municipalities and agencies thatparticipated: the City of Huntington Beach, OrangeCounty Department of Public Works, Huntington BeachState Park, the County of Orange Health Care Agency,URS Greiner Woodward Clyde, and the State WaterResources Control Board. We hope this type ofcooperative and forward-looking approach to bettermanagement of future beach contamination issues willserve as a model for other agencies and municipalitiesfacing similar problems.

Editors: Judith Lemus, Ph.D. and Stephen Weisberg, Ph.D.

The Sea Grant Program at the University of Southern California's Wrigley Institute forEnvironmental Studies, has served the Southern California coastal region for over 25 years, fundingresearch, transferring results to government agencies and user groups, and providing information

about marine resources, recreation and education to the public. Sea Grant research and outreach projects cover a broadspectrum of areas, with particular emphasis on topics related to the "Urban Ocean," USC Sea Grant's thematic focus.USC Sea Grant is part of the Pacific Area Sea Grant Network

University of Southern California Sea Grant ProgramUSCSG-TR-01-2000

Huntington Beach Technical Review 1

INTRODUCTION

This report is the result of a technical review of thesource investigation studies conducted during theclosure of Huntington Beach in the summer of

1999. For a two-month period, large sections ofHuntington Beach were closed due to excessive levels ofindicator bacteria in the water. Because this closureoccurred over such a large area during the peak summerseason, it represents one of the largest known losses inthe U.S. to recreational activities and revenues due tobacterial contamination. Approximately $2 millionwere spent in attempts to identify the source of thecontamination.

The University of Southern California Sea GrantProgram, at the request of the Orange County SanitationDistrict (OCSD), convened an independent review ofthe scientific studies and management actions that wereundertaken during and subsequent to the beachclosure. Ten experts from various disciplines wreinvited to participate in the review during a three-dayworkshop held from February 28 to March 1, 2000.

The questions that were addressed during the review,and which will form the basis of this report, are:

1) Were the proper studies conducted and were thedata properly interpreted?

2) What is the next set of studies that should beconducted near Huntington Beach?

3) What are the generic, longer-term researchpriorities that will facilitate future source investigations?

4) What are the lessons learned that could betransferred to others facing a similar challenge?

Prior to the workshop, the panel reviewed data andtechnical reports from investigations conducted byOCSD, the City of Huntington Beach, the OrangeCounty Health Care Agency, and several independentcontractors. During the workshop, managers andtechnical staff from these agencies gave presentationsand were interviewed by the panel. The investigationsfocused on several major areas that will be referred toin this report: beach bacterial data; the OCSD outfallplume; onshore sewage pipes; groundwater sources;

and urban runoff and coastal marsh sources.This report is a written summary of a public oral

report given by the panel at the end of the three-dayworkshop. We hope that it will be useful to techniciansand managers in identifying key areas that should beaddressed both before and during a contaminationevent. While it is beyond the scope of this report todiscuss policy and management measures that wouldprevent contamination spills, our aim is to help othersreduce the impacts of these events by suggesting studiesand procedures that will facilitate source identificationand mitigation.

BACKGROUND/HISTORY

In response to the initial beach closing, a risk-basedsource investigation was initiated by OCSD, along withseveral other agencies: Orange County Health CareAgency, State Department of Parks and Recreation, theCity of Huntington Beach, and the Santa Ana RegionalWater Quality Control Board. Possible sources ofbacterial contamination were prioritized according to:1) their potential to contain human fecal material, and2) the potential concentration of fecal coliform bacteria.

Huntington State Beach.

2 Huntington Beach Technical Review

Dye studies Rhodamine dye was injectedinto the effluent and trackedfrom the OCSD outfall pipe.

To determine if the nearshore(buried) portion of the OCSDoutfall pipe was leaking and totrack the offshore plume.

September 30, 1999 No evidence of dye shorewardof the diffuser (offshore) portionof the pipe. Offshore plume wastracked moving downcoast andshoreward.

Talbert Marsh (TM) and SantaAna River (SAR) water qualityand citrus studies

Water quality and nutrientparameters were monitoredthroughout TM and over outfall.Grapefruit and oranges weredropped at the ocean outlets ofTM and SAR and tracked.

To determine if a transportmechanism to surf zone existedfor the effluent water from TMand SAR.

August 30 and September 16, 1999.

Many of the fruit washed ashoreonto Huntington Beach in theareas of highest bacterialcounts. The water qualityresults did not confirm thephysical info from the citrusstudy.

TM and SAR overnight studies Densities of all 3 indicatorbacteria were measured at theoutlets to TM and SAR at 30min. intervals overnight.

To determine whether bacterialeave TM or SAR at low tidesand enter the surf zone.

September 8-9, 1999 Inconclusive - high bacterialevels on the beach did notcorrelate with water samplescollected at the TM and SantaAna River outlets.

UCI Talbert Marsh tidaltransport study

Hydrology, bacteriology andchemistry of water flowing inand out of TM wascharacterized.

To determine if the TalbertWatershed is a significantsource of indicator bacteria tothe nearshore area ofHuntington Beach.

December 7-21, 1999 Pump station dischargesincreased the nearshore loadingof total coliforms, but timingand magnitude of loadings wereaffected by a number ofparameters. TM also appearedto be a significant source ofepisodic nearshore loading ofEnterococcus during the studyperiod.

Hydropunching Using a hydraulic ram, near-surface groundwater wassampled via a peristaltic pump.

To determine if the beddingaround sewer lines, power plantlines, or local groundwater wasfunctioning as a transportationmechanism for bacterialcontamination.

August 9-28, 1999 No contaminated samples werefound.

Monitoring Wells Groundwater sampled from five30 to 60-foot wells viaperistaltic pump.

To determine if there was aplume migrating to surf zonefrom Coast Trunk line or otherfacilities.

July 29-30 No contaminated samples werefound.

Offshore triangle Water quality samples werecollected simultaneously fromsites along the beach, along theoutfall pipe and from differentdepths along three offshoretransect lines.

To determine if the offshoreportion of the OCSD outfallpipe was contributing to thebeach contamination.

August 13, 1999 Offshore samples did notcontain significantly elevatedlevels of bacteria.

Picket Line Water quality samples takenalong a transect parallel toshore.

To determine if the OCSDoffshore discharge was comingonshore.

May, July and August 1999

None of the samples hadsignificantly elevated levels ofbacteria.

Closed circuit televisioninspection of sewageinfrastructure

Visual inspection of OCSD,Huntington Beach and StatePark sewer lines.

To identify breaks, joint offsetsor significant root infiltrationthat could cause leakage.

June 30 to October 7, 1999

Identified breaks were repaired,with no effect on beachcontamination levels.

STUDY DESCRIPTION PURPOSE TIME FRAME RESULT

Huntington Beach Technical Review3

Huntington Beach Aerial Location Map

City/County Stormwater Pump Stations

OCSD Surfzone Monitoring Stationsfrom Santa Ana River (0) in ~1,000 ft incrementsNorth and South, 6N ~6,000 ft North of River


I. Were the proper studiesconducted and were the dataproperly interpreted?

Overall, the panel was impressed by the level of effortexpended by the local agencies in response to thiscontamination event. Given that OCSD is a sanitationdistrict, the panel recognized that their logical firstconcern was to insure that the contamination was notcaused by sewage. They felt that the investigations ofsewer lines and groundwater contamination pathwayswere thorough and that the studies were properlyconducted. Later investigations that focused on thestormwater drainage systems and the offshore plume weremore limited in scope, as these studies tended to beintense spatial surveys conducted for short periods oftime. The panel was able to identify several ways in whichthese latter studies could have been improved, but thepanel recognized that they had the advantage of viewingthe situation in hindsight. Given the short time period inwhich decisions had to be made, and the economic,political and public relations pressures that needed to bedealt with simultaneously, they felt that managementauthorities in Orange County should be commended forthe intensity and breadth of their response.

The panel also thought that the data were properlyinterpreted. There were three primary sources ofcontamination that were considered during theinvestigations: the onshore sewage pipes, the offshoresewage outfall, and the stormwater drainage systems.The panel thought that local officials reached the properconclusion that drainage from land-based sources wasthe most likely source of the contamination in Augustand September.

Onshore Pipes And GroundwaterThe onshore sewage pipes along the beach were an

obvious source of potential contamination, but thestudies conducted convincingly eliminated thispossibility through three lines of evidence: 1) Alack of volume lost in any of the metered pipes; 2)thorough inspection using pressure testing andCCTV of all pipes that were potential sources; and3) the absence of bacterial contamination in the

numerous groundwater samples collected.

The panel further thought that while pipe leakage intogroundwater needed to be investigated, it was not alikely source given the bacterial patterns observed onthe beach. Groundwater flux occurs too slowly to causethe large spatial scale of contamination that occurred onthe beach. Also, it is a relatively consistent source oncecontaminated and is unlikely to produce the highdegree of temporal variability in bacterialconcentrations observed along Huntington Beach.

Offshore Sewage OutfallThe panel concurred that onshore transport of the

OCSD outfall plume was an unlikely source of the beachbacterial contamination based on three lines ofevidence: 1) There was a strong thermocline in thearea during the period of the beach closures, whichwould keep the plume submerged and away fromshore; 2) None of the samples collected in the picketline studies conducted 1000 m from shore containedhigh bacterial concentrations; 3) Normal dispersiveprocesses associated with plume transport suggest thatthe observed contamination on the beach would bespread over broader spatial scales; and 4) The plumehad never been observed to come to the HuntingtonBeach shore in more than 20 years of monthly plumetracking studies.

Stormwater Conveyance SystemsThe panel concluded that the Talbert channel

stormwater conveyance system was the most likelysource of bacterial contamination along HuntingtonBeach based on four lines of evidence: 1) The highbacterial concentrations that were found in thestormwater forebays and which were subsequentlypumped into the conveyance system; 2) The citrusstudies that tracked the transport of Talbert Channeldischarge water onto the contaminated beach areas; 3)The tidal signature of the beach contamination wasconsistent with tidally influenced drainage from landbased sources; and 4) Diversion of stormwater frompump stations upstream of Talbert Marsh into thesewage system mitigated almost all of the beachcontamination.


While the panel felt that drainage from the TalbertChannel was the most likely source of bacterialcontamination to the beach, they also expressedconcern about three unresolved issues that limit thestrength of this conclusion. First, in none of thesampling was there a spatial pattern of decreasingcontamination concentration from the channel to thecontaminated beach. The panel suggested severaltransport mechanisms that could account for thelack of a clear concentration gradient, but thestudies that were performed did not allow forevaluation of these hypotheses. The next section ofthis report identifies some of the studies that shouldbe conducted to retrospectively evaluate thesemechanisms.

Second, there was limited evidence that sand on thebeach across the entrance to Talbert Marsh limited tidalexchange between the Talbert Channel and the oceanduring the initial period of beach contamination. Thepanel placed less emphasis on this evidence, as the directobservations were anecdotal and conflicted with the factthat samples were taken at the Talbert Channel soon afterthe contamination occurred. There was secondaryevidence of blockage from the lack of tidal influence atthe gauging station upstream of the marsh, but the gaugewas located far enough from the mouth that exchangewas probably limited. Given the importance of thisinformation, documentation of flow from land basedsources was one area that the panel thought should havebeen improved during the investigations.

Third, there was limited bacterial data for the SantaAna River, which could have also been a source. Thepanel felt that the Talbert Channel was the more likelysource, but the limited data collected from the SantaAna River (at 2.5 miles upstream) had fecal/totalcoliform ratios that were similar to those found on thebeach. If the Talbert Channel outlet was bermed,perhaps the Santa Ana River was the source of theinitial beach values.

Better Contaminant CharacterizationWhile the panel generally felt that the appropriate

studies were conducted in this emergency situation,

they also felt that the investigation could have beenimproved in a few ways. The first of these is bettercontaminant characterization. The initial decisions toclose the beach, as well as the direction of thesubsequent investigations, were based largely on thepresumption that sewage was the primary source of thebeach contamination. This conclusion was reachedbased on the high concentration of all three indicatorbacteria measured and the low total:fecal coliform ratio.While the panel agreed that local officials correctly usedthis information to guide early decisions, this was animportant assumption. Without it, the beach mighthave been posted with warning signs, rather thanclosed. Also, the presumption about source led toinvestigations that focused on sewage, rather than onurban runoff. Focusing on potential sewage sourcesat an early date was certainly warranted from a healthrisk-based approach, but the assumption led tolimited data collection from runoff sources during theearly parts of the investigation. Given theimportance of these decisions, the panel suggestedthat a greater level of contaminant characterizationwas warranted.

Talbert Marsh outlet to the ocean at the south end ofHuntington State Beach.


The panel suggested numerous characterizationtechniques that could have been used:

1) SpeciationCurrently-performed routine monitoring for the

presence of indicator bacteria such as total and fecalcoliforms, and enterococci do not address questions ofwhether the source bacteria are human- or animal-generated. Some new methods have recently surfacedthat address this issue. Methods such as ribotyping,DNA fingerprinting, antibiotic resistance, and PCR havebeen used to further characterize the types of bacteriafound in samples, and to determine whether they camefrom human or animal fecal contamination. Not all ofthese tests determine the presence of pathogenic or"disease causing" organisms, and therefore are not anindication of public health risk. Rather, they are tools todetermine the source of contamination, and move a stepbeyond the currently used bacterial indicator tests.

2) Viral testingBacteria, viruses, and protozoans can all be causes of

disease from contact with contaminated waters. However,currently enforced regulations only require the testing ofbacterial indicators as a measure of microbiological waterquality. Specific types of viruses are both causative agents ofa significant portion of waterborne disease and indicators ofthe presence of human fecal contamination. Molecularmethods such as Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase ChainReaction can be used to detect specific groups or families ofviruses. These tests are highly sensitive, can be performedin less than one day, and can provide important informationas to the presence of human fecal matter.

3) Chemical markers (LABs, Coprostanol)Scientists have also used chemical markers, such as

linear alkyl benzenes, caffeine, sterols, andimmunoglobulins to identify sewage as the source offecal pollution. While the sensitivity of these methodscan be affected by dilution, they can be reliable markersof a sewage source when detected.

The panel recognized that their suggestion of bettercharacterization was easier for them in hindsight than it

would have been for participants at the time of theevent. Most of the techniques above are relatively new,expensive, and still in the research phase. Perhaps moreimportant, most of these tests are not rapid, oftenrequiring several days to weeks of laboratory workbefore results are obtained. The history of beach closureevents within the county had been short-term definableevents in which the sources had always been identifiedin shorter time frames than it would take to get resultsfrom these specialty tests. Still, at some time during theevent, probably after a week or two, there should havebeen a realization that this event was different andchallenging enough to warrant the use of non-traditional tools. Use of these tools would not have ledto a different conclusion, though it might have allowedlocal officials to reach their conclusion sooner.

Animal SourcesThe panel felt that local officials should have expended

more effort to ensure that animal sources, particularlyshorebirds or local pets, were not the bacterial source.While the panel believes that birds were an unlikelysource due to the reportedly low bird densities, theywere concerned that the information about bird densitywas too sparse and anecdotal for such an importantproblem. Also, feces from the local pet population canenter the stormwater conveyance system and hence, betransported to the shoreline. The panel believed that oneof the reasons that animal sources were so poorlycharacterized is the presumption that human sewage wasthe primary source of the problem.

Sampling StrategyThe panel felt that the episodic nature of the

contamination suggested the need for selectivelyincreasing the spatial and temporal sampling density atsome time during the investigations. The panel had adifficult time making this recommendation, given theextremely large numbers of samples collected, but theyalso felt that the beach sampling focused more ondetermining the spatial extent of the closure than it didon source investigation. For instance, during theinvestigation sampling occurred at 12 hour intervals,which is certainly intensive, but is still insufficient toassess the importance of tidal influence. The panel


The recommended studies include dye releases, anexpanded set of nearshore transport measurements andnearshore transport modeling. The panel agreed withthe presenter who suggested that the $60 invested in thefruit transport study was one of the better ways moneywas spent during the investigations, as it demonstratedthat material in the near-surface portion of the plumefrom the Talbert Channel could reach the affected beacharea. More sophisticated dye studies that examine thethree-dimensional structure of the marsh plume and itsdilution under a variety of tidal, wind and waveconditions is a logical next step in understandingnearshore transport of Talbert Channel waters.Modeling efforts to aid in understanding theseprocesses are also warranted. Some plans fornearshore transport modeling were presented to thepanel. The panel agreed that development ofnearshore transport models is warranted, butexpressed concern that the proposed one-dimensionalmodel with limited real-time data assimilationcapacity would not be sophisticated enough toaddress the nearshore transport issues.

The panel also suggested that future studies considerother transport mechanisms. One suggested hypothesisis that bacterial transport along the beach could occurvia attachment to particulates or to surface foams.Attachment to particulates might explain the minimaldilution observed and might account for the tidalsignature in beach bacterial levels, as particles wouldbe deposited along the high tide mark and accumulatealong the shore. These transport mechanisms wouldnot be assessed through traditional dye or modelingstudies.

Understanding Marsh DynamicsWhile the panel concluded that the Talbert Channel

was the most likely source of the beach’s bacterialcontamination, they were uncertain about the role of themarsh as a bacterial source. The marsh could possiblyserve as a bacterial source by attracting and aggregatingbirds and other wildlife, and could enhancebioaccumulation and survival of microorganisms due tolow salinity and oxygen. Alternatively, it may be only aneutral conveyance system through which

would have preferred exchanging some of the routine12 hour intensity for sampling at hourly or bihourlyintervals to address not only the tidal effect, but thepersistence of a contaminant patch over a daily cycle.Similarly, there was considerable sampling along thebeach, but almost no sampling of cross-shelftransects. Cross-shelf transects could have providedadditional evidence for the drains as the source ifcontamination was limited to cross-shelf sites closestto the beach.

II. What are the next studies thatshould be conducted nearHuntington Beach?

The next steps taken by local officials are likely toinclude mitigation procedures designed to preventurban runoff from entering coastal waters during dryweather periods. These measures may includediversion of urban runoff to the treatment plant,buffering exchange between the marsh and the beach,or changing land use practices to minimize runoff.However, since these measures can be expensive andbecause there remain some unresolved concerns aboutthe Talbert channel as the source, the panelrecommended several studies that should beconducted to increase certainty about the bacterialsource before long-term control measures areimplemented.

Nearshore TransportThe panel felt that the most pressing need was for

studies of nearshore hydrodynamic processes, includingmechanisms that could transport water-bornecontamination along the shore. The panel wasconcerned that none of the samplings demonstrated abacterial concentration gradient between the marsh,the Santa Ana River, or the offshore plume and theaffected beach areas. Moreover, to accept any of theseas the likely bacterial source, one has to accept that thebacteria could move four miles upcoast with minimaldilution. The few nearshore transport studies thathave been conducted suggest a much higher plumedispersion rate.


contaminated upstream waters reach the ocean. It isalso possible that it serves as a filter, reducing theamount of bacteria originating from upstreamsources. Another possibility is that it serves as astorage system in which bacteria deposit on the bedat low velocities and are resuspended and flushedout at faster velocities that occur with high tides.Understanding which of these mechanisms ispredominant can help ensure that the most effectivemanagement solution is chosen. Understandingmarsh-bacterial dynamics is also a question thatextends beyond this particular site. One aspect ofrestoring Talbert marsh was to relocate its tidalconnection to the ocean from an indirect routethrough the Santa Ana River to a direct connectionto the ocean across the beach. Similar tidalcirculation enhancements are likely to be consideredin other marsh restoration projects in SouthernCalifornia and a better understanding of the role ofmarshes in bacterial dynamics may improve the efficacyof these projects.

Develop A Plume Model While the panel felt that the offshore discharge plume

from the Orange County Sanitation District was anunlikely source of the beach closures, they also felt thatthere should have been real-time data that alloweddefinition of the predominant current direction andlocation of the plume at any time during theinvestigation. Because ocean circulation patterns canchange quickly, real-time data on thermocline strength,current direction and wind patterns, coupled with ananalytic or numerical model of local ocean circulationprocesses, would provide better assurance that theintermittent water quality excursions on the beach werenot the result of intermittent upwelling or changes inplume direction.

Such systems could include a combination of real-time moored systems such as those now being deployedby OCSD, and might also include fly-overs or satelliteimagery (infrared, SeaWiFS, and radar) which could beused retrospectively to further determine whetherupwelling events ever occurred during times of beachclosures. The system should provide for measurements

of currents and density stratification over the watercolumn. The telemetered data should be used as inputto a real time plume model to provide guidance onplume behavior. The panel also felt that plumedefinition should extend beyond the dissolved materialsignature of the plume and consider buoyant particledynamics, such as grease particles. One possibility toconsider is that bacterial particles attached to grease,which can float through the thermocline layer and thenbe transported to shore via surface currents. The panelthought this hypothesis was unlikely, as bacteria levelswere low in the picket line studies and there was noevidence of bacterial attachment to buoyant particles inany of OCSD’s historical offshore sampling, but thetheory is plausible enough to warrant addressing as partof plume definition studies.

III. What are the generic, longer-term research priorities that willfacilitate future sourceinvestigations?

Many of the challenges in responding to theHuntington Beach closure resulted from inadequateknowledge of basic coastal processes and from the needfor better investigational tools. These difficulties extendbeyond Huntington Beach to other closure situationsand can only be resolved through investment inproactive research to develop these tools before they arerequired at the time of an investigation. The panelidentified seven research areas that, if implemented,should improve the speed and accuracy of futureclosure investigations.

Better source characterizationmethodologies

One of the critical decisions in the Huntington Bachinvestigations was whether the bacteria originated froma human source. If the source was human, then thesource investigations would have focused on potentialleaks from the onshore sewage transport infrastructureor on flow from the offshore outfall; alternatively, if thesource was non-human, the investigations would havefocused on land-based runoff or animal populations near


the beach. Most investigations of short term eventspresently rely on the ratio of fecal to total coliformbacteria to make this determination. This is aninadequate tool when the economic resources of a beachcommunity depend on rapid and reliable mitigation ofthe problem.

Several new techniques have the potential to providedirect evidence of source origin, but all are in the earlystages of development and require further testing beforethey can be relied on as a core technology. For example,antibiotic resistance profiles of bacteria have been usedto differentiate between human and non-human fecalsources, since the bacteria that infect people andlivestock are often resistant to different antibiotics.However, this method has been tested in only a fewareas of the country. Biologists are already using highlydiscriminatory DNA fingerprinting techniques, such asPulsed Field Gel Electrophoresis, to identify microbialdisease agents in water and seafood; however, a sharedlibrary of gel patterns that can be used to identify a highpercentage of the samples doesn’t yet exist. Methodsinvolving polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and DNAmicroarrays are being developed, but are still expensiveand require specialized technology that is not availablein the typical microbiological laboratory. Moreover, allof these new methods require further testing onenvironmental samples (especially those from nearshoremarine environments) which present challenges due totheir variability in salinity, temperature, enzymes,dissolved organic matter, total suspended solids, etc.

Understand the relationship betweenindicators and pathogens

The decision to close Huntington Beach was based onthe assumption that the high bacterial counts originatedfrom a human source. While there are certain pathogensthat only originate from human sources, the relationshipbetween indicator bacteria and pathogens is poorlyunderstood, particularly for bacteria associated withurban runoff. Health departments continue to relyheavily on indicator bacteria because they are more rapidand less expensive to measure than pathogenic microbes,but this reliance requires a better understanding of therelationship between concentrations of indicator bacteria

and the presence of pathogens of concern, includingthose from non-human sources. This can beaccomplished through correlative studies in whichindicator bacteria are measured simultaneously withpathogenic bacteria and viruses from a variety of differentsource materials. Additionally, these studies can becombined with epidemiological investigations to linkindicators and pathogens to potential public health risk.

Better nearshore transport modelsOne of the difficulties that the Huntington Beach

investigators faced in defining the source of beachbacteria resulted from a limited understanding abouttransport of water, particulates and pollutants throughthe surf and nearshore coastal zone. Most physicaloceanographic studies have focused on large-scaleoffshore circulation patterns that are driven by longerterm meteorological patterns. Few studies haveexamined coastal shelf circulation processes and evenfewer have studied their interaction with nearshoresources in the surf zone. Near coastal processes canbe complex, confounded by local topography andshort-term weather patterns. However, transportmodels are essential for helping to direct sourceinvestigations and are also necessary to betterunderstand the conditions that would permit shore-based discharges to move along the surf zone withminimal dilution.

Adherence of bacteria to particles and surface films

The studies conducted at Huntington Beach were based onthe assumption that the bacteria move through the watercolumn as if they were in solution. An alternative hypothesisis that bacteria adhere to particles, in which case theirmovement could differ from simple water movement patterns.Depending on the size of particles to which they were attached,bacteria could potentially be transported as part of bed load, orcould be deposited on the beach at high tide. These differentdynamics would affect transport rates and impact bacterialdistribution and concentrations. Similarly, bacteria from theOCSD outfall were thought to remain offshore because of thedensity barrier imposed by the thermocline. While this wouldbe true for dissolved materials, it might not be true if bacteriaadhered to oil droplets and floated to the surface. At low enough


densities, these materials would not be apparent as a sheen butcould still be transported towards shore under the proper windconditions. Addressing these hypotheses requires studies todetermine the extent to which bacteria attach to particles and, ifso, to what size and type of particles.

Rapid detection techniques Currently used methods for both speciation and

characterization of bacterial species in beach watersgenerally require around 24 hours, a limitation imposedby the use of culturing techniques. Culture techniques,although decades old and well-established, are limitedbecause of the long incubation time required for bacterialgrowth. New molecular methods involving polymerasechain reaction and DNA microarrays have the potentialto considerably reduce the time for bacterial results tobe reported. This time reduction will improve thehealth department warning systems. Whereaswarnings are presently provided 24-48 hours after thesample is taken because of the culturing time, newrapid techniques may take less than an hour andprovide the opportunity for same day warnings to thepublic. With respect to source investigations, rapidtechniques will provide the opportunity to follow asource in near-real time. This can be particularlyadvantageous in circumstances such as occurred atHuntington Beach in which the gradient patterns aretidally influenced and hard to define by sampling atpreselected times.

Better characterization of urban runoffsources

Urban runoff was cited by the Panel as the most likelysource of the Huntington Beach bacterial contamination.The City of Huntington Beach has responded by divertingtheir runoff to the OCSD treatment plant during thesummer months, which is an effective treatment of thesymptom, but not the cause. Addressing the causerequires identification of the upstream sources, which hasnot yet been attempted in Huntington Beach and has notbeen successfully accomplished in many watersheds whereit has been attempted. Successful upstream sourceidentification will require development of sophisticatedrunoff models and land-use specific runoff characterizationstudies necessary to populate these models. Similar

models have been developed in temperate regions of thecountry where runoff is moderated by rainfall events, butconsiderably more focus is needed in the arid southwestwhere human activities such as over-watering of lawns andwashdown are the principal sources of freshwaterconveyance.

Role of marsh in bacterial dynamics Many southern California marshes have been

hydrologically altered through land development and nolonger have a tidal connection to the ocean. Many of thepotential marsh redevelopment projects in SouthernCalifornia involve restoring or enhancing tidalcirculation. Marshes are often thought of as naturalfilters that serve as effective buffers between land-basedsources of pollution and the ocean, but severalpresenters to the panel expressed concern that restoringtidal circulation, such as occurred in the Talbert Marshrestoration, yields new or enhanced ocean outlets forupstream urban runoff. Concerns were also expressedthat marshes may attract birds and other mammals,which are sources of bacteria. Currently, there is littlescientific information to assess whether marshrestoration projects improve ocean water qualitybecause the fate of bacteria that enter marshes fromanimal or upstream sources is poorly understood.Developing a scientific foundation for the role ofmarshes in bacterial dynamics is a necessary precursor

South facing view of Talbert Marsh


for assessing and addressing concerns expressed aboutthe value of marsh restoration projects.

IV. What are the lessons learnedthat could be transferred to futureevents in Huntington Beach orelsewhere?

Previous discussions in this report have focused onthe summer 1999 event at Huntington Beach. Thissection outlines some of the lessons that the panel felthad application to similar events occurring at othertimes or in other places.

Contingency PlansWhile most of the proper studies were conducted

during the Huntington Beach investigations, most of thedecisions were made on an ad hoc basis. Nocontingency plans were in place and there was no cleardelineation of who was responsible for leading theeffort. Many of the participants met each other for thefirst time during the investigations, when quickdecisions were necessary.

The panel recommended that all counties andmunicipalities develop contingency plans for suchevents. These plans should clearly identify the roles andresponsibilities of all parties, and include a decision treethat outlines the procedures to be followed undervarious contamination scenarios. The State WaterResources Control Board is presently developingguidance documents for tracking the sources of beachbacterial contamination that should be helpful in thispart of contingency planning (this guidance is requiredfrom the State Board in response to Assembly Bill 538).

Part of defining roles and responsibilities is identifyingwhether, and which, local organizations have thelaboratory capacity to support source investigations.Even counties with substantial laboratory capacity, suchas Orange County, may still need additional support withspecialty analyses. Trying to identify and developcontractual relationships with outside laboratories oruniversity specialists can cause unnecessary delays in theinvestigations if they are not initiated well in advance.

Part of contingency planning is developing anintegrated data base that would include GIS mapping ofall sewage pipes and storm drains. In the HuntingtonBeach investigations, knowledge about different aspectsof these systems resided within different organizationsand this transfer of knowledge was inefficient forsupporting real-time decisions. For instance, theOrange County Sanitation District led most of thestudies, but they have no responsibility for storm drainmaintenance and were not even aware of the existenceof the Talbert Channel storm drain forebays until late inthe investigations.

Another part of contingency planning is selecting anorganization to lead the investigation. Although thepanel complimented the work, they questioned whetherthe OCSD was the proper leader for the HuntingtonBeach investigations. Even though OCSD hasoutstanding laboratory facilities and a well-trained staff,their main responsibility in this situation was todetermine whether a sewage leak was the cause. Thepanel wondered if an organization that had primaryresponsibility for storm drains had led the investigationwhether it would have started with, or moved more

Talbert Channel D2 adjacent to the Banning Ave. StormWater Pump Station


quickly to, a focus on urban runoff sources. The panelrecommended that the leadership role is moreappropriately placed with a regulatory or public healthagency with responsibility for looking across all sources.

A Comprehensive Monitoring Program The problem at Huntington Beach was quickly

identified because Orange County has an ongoingcomprehensive monitoring program. Orange Countybeachgoers should be assured that they can swim safelybecause of this program, which samples several timesper week during the summer and measures threeindicators, making it one of the most comprehensiveprograms in the nation. In most others areas of thecountry, swimmers would not have been appropriatelyprotected. There are several states, and manyindividual counties outside of California, which do nothave any ongoing beach water quality monitoringprograms. This should be corrected, as the problemsencountered at Huntington Beach are not unique tothat location.

While Orange County’s monitoring program forassessing beach health is good, its monitoring ofupstream watersheds is poor and is not coordinatedwith its coastal water monitoring. Such programsshould be coordinated. Several studies have shownthat urban runoff and non-point source pollution area major cause of impaired coastal water quality.Routine sampling should be conducted tocharacterize all potential sources of bacteria enteringthe ocean. Similarly, critical sources of pollutionwithin watersheds should be identified and monitoredbefore a crisis event. In Huntington Beach, routinemonitoring of forebay discharges might have led toearly focus on, and action to reduce risk from, theupstream sources.

Routine Maintenance of PipingInfrastructure

The piping systems that transfer sewage totreatment plants are important potential sources ofbacterial contamination. In the Huntington Beachinvestigations, much expense and effort was spent toeliminate these pipes as the source of contamination.

While better source characterization may havelessened the need for these studies in HuntingtonBeach, the large expenditures and concern about thispotential source underscores the need for a preventiveinspection and maintenance schedule to ensureconfidence in the integrity of the sewage pipes beforea spill event occurs. Much of the piping infrastructurein Orange County, as in other areas of the country, isold and in need of continuing maintenance. Visualinspection by means of closed circuit TV is a directand effective method for monitoring pipe integrity.Metering systems located at strategically placedlocations in the system would allow real-timeassessment of system integrity.

Independent Decision-MakingThe panel commended the Orange County Health

Department for their courage and perseverance inmaking beach closure decisions to protect publichealth. The circumstances surrounding theirdecisions were difficult: the contamination wasintermittent, the data supporting whether this was asewage spill were equivocal, particularly later in theevent, and there was strong economic pressure tokeep beaches open. There can be arguments madethat the beaches could have been posted with warningsigns instead of closed in August and September, butthe panel felt the proper decisions were made and thatthe Health Care Agency was the appropriate lead inthese decisions. In public health matters,conservative measures are warranted.

Even more important than the decision itself, thepanel was highly complimentary of the County forrelying on its experts and insulating the decision fromthe political process. In the short term, the decisionswere painful to local businesses and met with somepolitical resistance. However, in the long term, thecitizens of Orange County and their visitors should feelcomfortable that when their beaches are open they aretruly clean. Independence creates credibility, which istoo important to risk in the vital tourism industry.Independence also ensures that the political forcesremain focused on solving the problem, rather than ondebating the symptom.


ALFRED P. DUFOURDirector

Microbiological and Chemical Exposure Assesment Research Division

Dr. Dufour received his Ph.D. in bacteriology fromUniversity of Rhode Island and his M.P.H. from YaleUniversity. Currently he is the director of the Microbiologicaland Chemical Exposure Research Division, EnvironmentalProtection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory,Cincinnati, Ohio. He holds an adjunct professorappointment in the Department of Civil and EnvironmentalEngineering and the University of Cinncinati. Dr. Dufour hasserved on dozens of committees and working groupspertinent to water quality and environmental health. He iscurrently a member of the working group on waterborneCryptosporidiosis through the Centers for Disease Controland Prevention. Dr. Dufour has received six EPA awards, wasawarded a patent, and has been involved with many nationaland international organizations, including World Health andthe Pan American Health Program.

JERRY ALAN GALTChief

HAZMAT, NOAADr. Jerry Galt was the Chief of the Hazardous Materials

Response Division (HAZMAT) of the Office of Response andRestoration in the National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration (NOAA) until his recent retirement. He hasworked for NOAA since 1973. He directed a multi-disciplinary program combining theoretical research and real-time applications at accidental spill scenes. His Division worksto maintain a state-of-the-art capability in tracking the fate andeffects of pollution on both the water and in the atmosphere.He has directed the modeling component of spill response,including forecasting pollutant trajectories with respect tospecific areas or biologically important environments, to wellover one thousand oil and chemical spills during his career.Under his direction, microcomputer-based models have beendeveloped to estimate pollutant movement and effects in theair and water.

Dr. Galt graduated from the University of Washington in1963 with a B.S. in physics, received a M.S. in Oceanographyin 1967, a B.S. in math in 1967 and a Ph.D. in PhysicalOceanography in 1969. From 1970-1973 he served as anassistant professor at the Naval Postgraduate School inMonterey. From 1974 to the early 1980s he was an affiliateprofessor in the Oceanography Department of the Universityof Washington.

MARK GOLDExecutive Director

Heal the BayDr. Mark Gold is the Executive Director of the local

environmental group, Heal the Bay. Founded in 1985, Heal theBay is a non-profit group of more then 10,000 membersworking through a combination of research, education, publicoutreach and advocacy to make Santa Monica Bay and SouthernCalifornia's coastal waters safe and healthy for people andmarine life. Dr. Gold completed his doctoral dissertation inUCLA's Department of Environmental Science and Engineeringand has since worked on a wide variety of water quality andcoastal natural resources issues ranging from sewage treatmentto contaminated sediments to wetland restorations. He isconsidered one of the region's foremost experts in urban runoffpollution, and influences governmental water policy at thelocal, state and federal levels.

MARLENE A. NOBLEResearch OceanographerU. S. Geological Society

After receiving her Ph.D. in Physical Oceanography fromUniversity of Rhode Island in 1983, Dr. Noble began hertenure at the U. S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA. Shehas been designing and implementing research programs tostudy circulation on the continental shelf and withinsubmarine canyons for over 25 years at USGS in Woods Hole,MA. Dr. Noble has published extensively, notably receivingthe best-published paper in the Bulletin of the Association ofEngineering Geologists, 1994.

Dr. Noble developed a program in 1992 to determine thecirculation and sediment/pollutant -transport pathways on thePalos Verdes shelf and within Santa Monica Bay. Informationobtained has been used in the ongoing federal lawsuit againstDDT manufacturing companies. Also, results from theprograms in Santa Monica Bay will help us determine the ratesof sediment or pollutant transport in the region and thereasons that deposits of fine sediments have widely varyingthickness along similar isobaths.

RACHEL NOBLEResearcher

Southern California Coastal Water Research ProjectDr. Rachel T. Noble shares a joint position as an environmental

microbiologist for both the Southern California Coastal WaterResearch Project (SCCWRP) and USC’s Wrigley Institute forEnvironmental Studies (WIES). Dr. Noble has performed researchon the roles of native marine virus populations in marine microbialfood webs, and also on the detection and fates of humanpathogenic viruses and bacteria in the coastal ecosystem. Dr.Noble has recently been one of the coordinators for large scalestudies on the shoreline microbiology that examine potentialpublic health risk due to human pathogens along the shores ofSouthern California from the Mexican border to Santa Barbara. Inaddition, she has been involved in the development of noveltechniques for the rapid and quantitative detection of humanpathogenic viruses in the coastal waters of southern California.

Technical Review Panel


ERIC REICHARDCoastal Program Chief

USGS Water Resources DivisionDr. Eric Reichard received his B.A. in Economics from the

University of Rochester and his M.S. and Ph.D. inGeohydrology from Stanford. He served as a research fellowat the Harvard School of Public Health. Currently, Dr.Reichard is the Coastal Program Chief for the USGS WaterResources Division, California District. His research interestsinclude geohydrologic modeling, groundwater management,and environmental risk assessment. Dr. Reichard was theproject chief for the Coachella Valley Study, Oxnard PlainOptimization Study, and the Santa Clara River Study. Since1995, he has been the project chief for the Los Angles BasinGroundwater Management Study that analyzes geohydrologyand geochemistry of Los Angeles and evaluates alternativewater-management plans.

PHILIP ROBERTSSchool of Civic and Environmental Engineering

Georgia Tech UniverstityDr. Roberts is an authority on the fluid mechanics of outfall

diffuser mixing and the development and application ofmathematical models of wastewater fate and transport. He hasextensive international experience in marine waste disposalincluding the design of ocean outfalls, review of schemes,numerical modeling, and oceanographic field work programdesign and data interpretation. His mathematical models andmethods have been adopted by the U.S. EPA and are widelyused. Dr. Roberts is a regular lecturer at the EPA Mixing ZoneWorkshops on the use of mathematical models and on outfalldesign for the Pan American Health Organization. He conductsresearch on diffuser mixing processes and has publishedextensively in this area. For this research he was awarded theCollingwood Prize of ASCE in 1980, and was UPS FoundationVisiting Professor at Stanford University in 1993-94. Dr.Roberts has lectured widely on outfall design around the worldand is presently Co-Chairman of the Specialist Group onMarine Wastewater Disposal, International Association onWater Quality, London. He was also responsible for thephysical modeling of dilution for the Boston Harbor tunneledoutfall diffuser. This outfall, presently under construction, willbe the worlds largest when completed in 1999.

JOAN ROSEDepartment of Marine Sciences

University of South FloridaDr. Rose is an international expert in water pollution

microbiology. A full professor in the Department of MarineSciences at the University of South Florida, her currentresearch is focused on contamination of recreational marinewaters and she is running a program called "Healthy Beaches"that utilizes molecular and pathogen monitoring techniques.Dr. Rose has authored or co-authored more than 120manuscripts in environmental microbiology and hasappeared on Dateline and Eye on America addressing water

quality and waterborne disease issues. She is currentlyserving on the Water Science and Technology Board of theNational Academy of Sciences and on two National Academycommittees on "Climate and Health" and "Prioritization forDrinking Water Contaminants." Dr. Rose served as Presidentof the Florida Environmental Health Association and asPresident of the Florida Branch of the American Society forMicrobiology. She has been involved in the investigation of 8waterborne outbreaks of Cryptosporidium in the U.S.,United Kingdom and Canada, including the outbreak inMilwaukee where 400,000 people were ill and 100individuals died.

DAVID B. ROSENBLATTAtlantic Coastal Bureau

New Jersey Department of EnvironmentalProtection

Mr. Rosenblatt assumed the position of Chief of the AtlanticCoastal Bureau in the DEP’s new Division of WatershedManagement in January 1999. Immediately prior, he had beenin the DEP’s Office of Enforcement Coordination (OEC)developing policy and standardizing enforcement procedures.In OEC he also developed and managed the DEP's smallbusiness compliance assistance program, Greenstart. He hasdesigned and conducted coastal water quality studies and hasmanaged New Jersey's coastal recreational beach program fortwenty years. Mr. Rosenblatt also manages the Clean ShoresProgram, which uses state inmates to remove floatable debrisfrom estuary shores to prevent beach closings. Mr. Rosenblatthas a B.S. in Environmental Science from Cook College ofRutgers University (1976) and an M.A. in Teaching from theCollege of New Jersey (1997). He is currently the co-chair ofthe Quality New Jersey Environmental Focus Group. QualityNew Jersey is a joint business and government non-profitassociation to assist in the implementation of continuousimprovement processes to enhance the State. He has beenworking with QNJ for 10 years.

STEPHEN B. WEISBERGExecutive Director

SCCWRPDr. Stephen Weisberg is Executive Director of the Southern

California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) wherehe specializes in the design and implementation ofenvironmental monitoring programs. He serves as chair of theSouthern California Bight Regional Monitoring SteeringCommittee, which is responsible for developing integratedregional coastal monitoring for the Southern California Bight.He also serves on the Steering Committee for the US GlobalOcean Observing System (GOOS) and on Technical AdvisoryCommittees for the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Program, theUniversity of Southern California Sea Grant Program, and theSouthern California Wetlands Recovery Program. Dr. Weisbergreceived his undergraduate degree from the University ofMichigan and his Ph.D. from the University of Delaware.

This publication has been produced with support from the National Sea Grant College Program,National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, under grantnumber NA 86 RG 0054, and by the California State Resources Agency. The views expressed hereindo not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its sub-agencies. The U.S. Government isauthorized to reproduce and distribute copies for governmental purposes.

The National Sea Grant Program is a network of 29 university-based programs in coastal and GreatLakes states involving more than 300 institutions nationwide in research, education and the transferof technology regarding coastal, marine and Great Lakes issues. Sea Grant is supported by the U.S.Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), inpartnership with the states and private industry.

Published by the Sea Grant Program, Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. October 25, 2000.(USCSG-TR-01-2000)

Copies are available from:USC Sea Grant ProgramLos Angeles, CA 90089-0373213-740-1961 • fax 213-740-5936email: [email protected]://www/usc.edu/go/seagrant

© 2000 University of Southern California Sea Grant Program

Huntington Beach Closure Investigation: Technical Review

Documents