34 
non-compliance with State Standards would certainly be expected. 
If, however, sustained currents of greater than 0.31 miles per 
hour towards the beach were found 20% of the time, the possi- 
bility of compliance would still be good since extreme conditions 
were postulated to arrive at this “worst” value. From the current 
data available for the proposed outfall stations, one can only 
say that neither of these conditions seem to prevail, taking the 
year’s measurement aS a whole and, therefore, general compliance 
with State Standards would be predicted, However, if conditions 
at the inshore stations are applied to the proposed outfall 
positions, compliance is dubious. 
One further point needs discussion, and that is the speci- 
fication that no three consecutive samples at any single beach 
station should exceed a count of 10/ml. If the temporary exis- 
tence of a high velocity current brings a slug of effluent into 
the surf zone in less than the critical time, then the slower 
rate of disappearance of coliforms in the surf could result in 
excesSive counts for periods much longer than the existence of 
the current. For example, 24 hours of a sustained current of 
greater than 0.58 miles per hour toward the beach could give 
high beach counts for as much as 48 hours thereafter. Chlorie 
nation of the effluent being discharged subsequent to the 
initial 24 hours would not be effective in remedying the 
Situation. Since currents of this velocity have been measured 
on occasion, one must anticipate occasional difficulties in 
complying with the above standard, even though the frequency of 
such occurrences is low. 
