HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-03-31 City Council (4)City Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
DATE:MARCH 31, 2003 CMR:189:03
SUBJECT:REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT REGULATORY
UPDATE
This is an informational report summarizing the status of requirements on the discharge of
treated wastewater from the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP). No action by
Council is required.
BACKGROUND
The RWQCP treats sewage and industrial wastewater and discharges the treated wastewater
to lower South San Francisco Bay. The facility is owned and operated by Palo Alto and
treats wastewater from the East Palo Alto Sanitary District, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills.
Mountain View. Palo Alto. and Stanford University. The discharge is regulated by a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit issued by the San
Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), a State agency.
DISCUSSION
The NPDES permit is issued for a five-year period and will expire in July 2003. A
collaborative process has been established to develop the requirements and provisions of the
new permit. The San Jose and Sunny~ale (the other two plants in the lower South Bay)
permits expire on the same schedule and all three cities are involved in this collaborative
process, along with environmental ~oups, business organizations, and the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
An early draft permit from the Regional Board suggests that mercuD, cyanide, and pathogens
will be the key: issues.
Mercury
The Regional Board is proposing mercury mass (gams/day) limits that could have the effect
of restricting the flow through the plant to a level below the design flow. The City: staff
position is that Pato Alto has one of the most ag~essive mercuu control progams in the
nation and that the flow through the plant need not. and should not be restricted. Such a
restriction would not impact the City of Palo Alto for many years, but could impact other
partner cities within 5-10 vears.
CMR:189:03 Page 1 of 2
Cyanide
The Regional Board is proposing a cyanide concentration limit of 5 parts per billion (ppb)
which the plant hit 25% of the time last year. While the 5 ppb limit was not exceeded, it is
very, likely that it will be exceeded in the future due to anal~ic variability. The cost to the
Ci~ would be $3,000 (minimum) per violation. The Cit-y staff position is that these values
are false positives resulting from interferences in the veo~ difficult analytic procedure at these
e~remely low levels. Testing within the plant demonstrates that "real" cyanide coming into
the plant is destroyed by the treatment processes. Difficulties in analytic procedures are
causing the "hits" in the discharge and the limit should be increased to reflect this situation.
Pathoaens
A study has been underway for a year demonstrating that pathogens (disease-causing
microorganisms) can be controlled with half the previous dose of chlorine. City staff hope
that the Regional Board will modi~ the proposed permit to allow the lower chlorine dosage.
This approach will save dollars and reduce dioxins and other by-products of chlorine
production and use.
The RWQCP has been repeatedly recognized at the local, State, and national level for
excellence in Plant Operations, Industrial Waste Control. and Pollution Prevention. Most
recently the plant received three awards which include: a national award for its Industrial
Waste Progam, a Plant of the Year award in the local chapter of the California Water
Pollution Control Association, and the local Industrial Waste Person of the Year award (Jim
Stuart, Industrial Waste Investigator).
Staff believes that, by demonstrating excellence and taking all reasonable actions to prevent
water pollution, it will be able to negotiate acceptable outcomes to issues outlined above. If
this is the case, the permit could be issued in July without further action. If this is not the
case, Palo Alto may need to appea! the permit. If and when an appeal appears necessar?-,
Council will be advised and any other options presented.
PREPA_RED BY:
DEPAxRTMENT HEAD:
PHIL BOBEL
~/ Manager, En-v~__p ,r!-3"nent a~ c omp lianc e
GLENN S. ROBERTS
Director of Public Works
CITY M_A~-AGER APPROVAL:
ENE-L Y HARRISON
Assistant City.- Manager
CMR:!89:03 Page 2 of 2