Thanks for Watching the Water Monitors

Once again The Times hits the mark, clarifying the issue of turbidity monitoring (“Sewage Issue Gets Murky,” Jan. 27), then following up with an incisive editorial (“Stirring Up the Water,” Feb. 3) and some excellent letters from the public regarding the need for full secondary treatment prior to ocean discharge of our sewage.

But is there more to this than meets the eye? Turbidity analysis is not rocket science, but automating its measurement provides a continuous record of treatment efficacy useful for demonstrating compliance with standards. Turbidity is not a clock to be watched. It is measuring the pulse of the treatment process. It is also normal practice to calibrate meter readings with traditional laboratory tests using independent methods.

Both are necessary, but automation is generally more cost-effective, reliable and [makes it] easier to interpret trends. The district has a history of spending money for high-tech equipment to do “world-class” work, then giving up when it finds it difficult to keep it in good working order or the results are contrary to expectations. Thanks to the regional water board staff for doing its job, watching the watchers. And, by the way, treating urban runoff only attempts to divert our attention from the main problem, better sewage treatment.

Irwin Haydock

Fountain Valley