KC, Laxman Kim, Jared T. Motoki, Michael S.panos/444_09_4_6.pdfKC, Laxman Kim, Jared T. Motoki,...
Transcript of KC, Laxman Kim, Jared T. Motoki, Michael S.panos/444_09_4_6.pdfKC, Laxman Kim, Jared T. Motoki,...
KC, Laxman Kim, Jared T.
Motoki, Michael S.
Outline of the presentation
�Magnitude and cost
�Social and economic benefit �Social and economic benefit
�Technical issues and innovations
�Social problems and policy challenges
Project Location
Overview� On average, 10 MGD of raw wastewater was discharged into
Tijuana River
� Pollution problem existed since the 1930’s.
� "virtual cesspool" of pollution and disease.
� Tijuana city had rapid growth rate � Tijuana city had rapid growth rate (6%)
� Poor waste management
� US Congress Authorized in 1989
� Both the countries agreed in 1990
� Project was jointly regulated by the US- EPA & Mexico’s -CESPT.
Contd.� 1998 the EPA put out a SEIS
regarding secondary treatment options
� Primary effluent discharges � Primary effluent discharges violated federal and state water quality legislation
� Currently, secondary treatment facilities being under construction
Magnitude � Total cost: $439M
� Site area: 75-acres
� Plant capacity:
� 25 MGD (Avg)
� 75MGD (Peak)� 75MGD (Peak)
� South Bay Ocean Outfall
� Total Length: 7.25KM
� submerged length 5.5km and 30m depth
� Current SBOO effluent discharge from IWTP = 25 MGD
Construction
Primary Treatment Plant (1st phase)
� Began in 1994
� Completed in 1997
� Cost of $239 million� Cost of $239 million
South Bay Ocean Outfall
� Began in 1995
� Completed in December 1998
� Cost of $200 million
FinancingUnited States
� Construction = $239.4 million
� Financed South Bay Ocean Outfall - $8 million
Mexico
� Construction = $16.8 million
� Operation/Maintenance = $1.1 million per year
� Completely financing sewage collection system expansion
� Total:
$247.4 million
collection system expansion
Total:
� Current: $16.8+$1.1*12 = $30.0 million
� Will be equal with the US financial contribution in the year 2206, (not counting for inflation).
Before the IWTPBefore the IWTP
� Beach closures were common
� 338 temporary beach
closures/advisories
(1995)
� 3 long-term beach
closures (1995)
� Raw sewage posed a
serious public heath
threat
Social Benefits
� Protects public from
exposure to raw sewage
� Insures safe public access
to beachesto beaches
� Improved sewer
infrastructure in Mexico
� Maintain San Diego’s
appeal as a tourist
destination
Economic Benefits
Economic Benefits
� Tourism
� Third largest segment of its economy
� $5.6 billion annually� $5.6 billion annually
� A two day beach closure in San Diego costs
$30,525 in direct expenses.
� Annual lost revenue from tourism was estimated to be
around $100 million (1993)
Technical Innovations
Innovations of the SBOO
� Tunneling minimized environmental impacts to a
local salt marsh and barrier dune habitat
� The ocean outfall reduces energy and chemical
usage by eliminating the need for chlorination.
� Diffusers were designed to spread effluent to
prevent eutrophication and creating a “dead
zone”.
Technical Issues
� Secondary treatment
� Incompliant with EPA regulations
� Addressing winter storms� Addressing winter storms
� Keeping pace with Tijuana’s rapid growth
Social Problems & Policy
Challenges
�Trans-border Cooperation� Financing
� OperationOperation
�Permits
�Clean Water Act requirements
Conclusion� Provides necessary wastewater treatment to Tijuana,
Mexico.
� Reduces the number of beach closures and minimizes
public health threat.
Allows San Diego to maintain appeal as a major tourist � Allows San Diego to maintain appeal as a major tourist
destination - prevents damage to its tourism industry
and economy as a whole.
� IWTP must build additional facilities to become
complaint with EPA regulations.
THE ENDTHE ENDTHE ENDTHE END
Thank You!Thank You!