Newport Bay’s Health Risks Low, Study Says

A controversial new study of Newport Bay--parts of which have been off-limits for decades--found low health risks for swimmers and concluded that attempts to curtail urban runoff pollution would be costly and inefficient.

The study, which was quickly attacked by environmentalists and some city officials, was conducted to help regional water board officials develop a plan to reduce the amount of bacteria flowing into the bay. The plan, mandated by the federal Clean Water Act, will eventually regulate every source of runoff in the bay’s 125-square-mile watershed, potentially regulating fertilizer use, car washing and lawn watering.

The $261,000 study was funded by state water regulators, the Irvine Ranch Water District, the Irvine Co., and several cities. It was conducted by Eisenberg, Olivieri and Associates, an Oakland-based environmental consulting firm.

The study investigated the health risks to swimmers, the sources of Newport Bay’s pollution and the cost of cleaning it up.

The findings drew strong criticism.

“If federal regulators, including the U.S. EPA and state regulators rely upon this study, it would lead to more people getting sick,” said Dave Kiff, assistant city manager of Newport Beach. “It is not based on good science and therefore the study can do a lot of damage to the bay by potentially leading to the loosening of state regulations.”

Heather Hoecherl, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, called the study a “complete waste of time and resources” in a letter to Orange County’s environmental resources manager.

The northern portion of Upper Newport Bay has been off-limits to swimmers and shellfish harvesting since 1974. Other portions of the bay have been restricted in recent years because of high bacteria counts. The area is on the nation’s list of severely impaired water bodies because of high levels of pathogens, toxics, nutrients and sediment.

On Friday, Harbor Patrol Beach, Harbor Marina at Pacific Coast Highway, 43rd Street Beach and part of 33rd Street Channel were posted with signs warning that swimming in these spots is a health risk.

Though urban runoff from San Diego Creek has long been cited as the culprit for high bacteria counts in the bay, the study says it would be more cost-effective to fight sewage releases from boats and fecal bacteria emanating from people swimming and recreating in the water.

Kiff said the study underestimated the number of potential swimmers, which skewed the benefit of cleaning up runoff that flows into the bay. Many people avoid the water because of bacterial concerns but would use the bay if it were less polluted, he said.

Kiff also also said the study underestimated both the number of viruses and the life span of a virus traveling in the bay.

County environmental manager Chris Crompton said the study, which will be finalized by the end of the month, will be reviewed by an independent panel of experts.

“A number of issues have been raised. It would be prudent to have some other people review it when it’s final to make sure we’re on firm ground,” he said. “It’s very important we get it right.” Water district officials managed the study because the agency has microbiological expertise, Crompton said.

However, critics charge that the water district has a conflict of interest, since the reclaimed water it sells to customers in Irvine eventually flows into the bay.

“The Irvine Ranch Water District and the Irvine Co. and other dischargers upstream are trying to change state law and EPA standards selectively so they don’t have to clean up their urban runoff,” said Bob Caustin, founder of Defend the Bay, which successfully sued the EPA to get them to put standards on what can flow into the bay.

Water district spokesman Norris Brandt discounted criticism: “I think because we’re administering it, there’s a perception that we’re driving the study. That is not our intent.”

He said the district supports independent third-party review. “Our intent is to make sure that it’s a factual study that’s unbiased and looks at the science and health, and protects the health of the bay and the people [who] use the bay,” he said.