; and (C) over-control is particularly likely along ocean coasts, but nevertheless full secondary treatment is required regardless of cost or lack of benefits. (5) Past reviews by the City of San Diego, the EPA, the State of California, and scientists affiliated with the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the University of California, San Diego, and other organizations have concluded the Point Loma Plant does not have any known significant adverse effect on the ocean environment outside the immediate area of the discharge. (6) The ocean outfall for the Point Loma Plant discharges effluent 4.5 miles from the coast at a depth of over 300 feet, one of the longest and deepest ocean outfalls in the world. (7) Implementing full secondary treatment standards at the Point Loma Plant will cost approximately $1,800,000,000. (8) Implementing full secondary treatment standards at the Point Loma Plant is contrary to the national interest, in that it will compromise views from the Cabrillo National Monument and interfere with the Navy’s use of adjacent property. (9) The City of San Diego generates all the energy it needs to operate the Point Loma Plant onsite through co-generation. Implementing full secondary treatment will turn a green facility into one of the region’s largest energy consumers, requiring the purchase of over $17,000,000 each year in electricity and producing more than 100,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions annually. (10) Implementing full secondary treatment standards at the Point Loma Plant will require removal of 1,250,000 tons of earth from environmentally sensitive habitat immediately adjacent to the Point Loma Ecological Reserve. (11) Recognizing the unique situation surrounding the Point Loma Plant, Congress adopted the Ocean Pollution Reduction Act (OPRA). OPRA allowed the Point Loma Plant to avoid conversion to full secondary treatment and instead operate under a modified permit according to standards contained in sections 301(h) and 301(j)(5) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as