Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0114.094~. , . . . ., -,". ,,,'I ",.,..-. - January THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Palo Alto, California St.atus of Neggt.iatic.ns on copper Reductions fZQro City Storm Water and Wastewater pischarges Members of the Council: Report in Brief This is an informational report forwarding a draft Memorandum ~f Understanding (MOO) among local government entities in Santa Clara County concerning the discharge of copper to San Fra::1.cisco Bay~ No action by Council is requi"C'"eci. As explained in a previous staff report (CMR:614:93), attachedl~ the July 1.993 discharge permit i 9Bued to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) requires the City to substantially reduce the copper content of the RWQCP discharge to San Franci.sco Bay. In addition, the permit requires the City to negotiate with ot,her Santa Clara County local government entities and prepare a plan for an additional copper discharge reduction of 950 pounds per year, about 5 percent ot Santa Clara County' 8 total average annual copper discharge to the Bay. In order to prepare a plan to achieve the Countywide copper discharge red\lction~ the Santa Clara Valley Non-Point Source Program co-permittees {including Palo Alto) and the three wastewater treatment plants (Palo Alto, SUnnyvale and San Jose) convened the ~South Bay Copper Reduction Dialogue w (Coppe~ Dialogue). The Copper Dialog'-.1e includes ot.her reg".J.latory agencies, businesses and environrr.ental g:::-oups. '-"ith the intent of obtaining broad support for the plan. DiB9u§sion The attached MOU r..as been drafted by a subgroup of the Copper Dialogue. Comments ar'e currently being solicited from all of the Copper Dialogue participants. Staff antic~pate5 that a final MOD will be submitted to Council in late February or early March. No formal action will be required of Council at this time; because the MOU by itself does not con6titut~ a specific commitment of resources. The MOO does~ ho ..... ever; cO!11.mit the City to a subsequent cO'..Lrse of action t.hat :fs 1 ikely to incre3se the existing Non-Point Source Program expenditure of $80,000 by an additional 50 to 100 percent in future years. Such additional resources will be budgeted from Enterprise f~~ds in FY 1994-95 and thereafter. CMR: 1~4: 94 -1- the Storm Drain Staff is taking this commitment into account in budget preparations. It is becauee of these budget implications that both the draft and final MOUs are being sent to Council for review. Final Council approval will be implemented b'}~ virtue of adopt-ion of the 19S4-95 budget. The local gove:.-nrr.e.nt particip:a.nts have deternlined it-is more likely that significan~ reductions above and beyond current permit requirements carr be achieved from controlling discharges from storm drains as opposed to sanitary sewers. Therefore, the MOD contains a list of control meaS'Jre activities directed primarily towards reducing the amount of copper in County storm water runoff (Appendix A} . Preliminary reduction est imates are extremely general in nature due to lack of data. Therefore, the MOU focuses on a commitment to s.tudy and implement control measures, ""ith most reduction ~stimate9 to come at a lat~r date when experience allows the preparation of more accurate estimates. Staff has continued to take the position thct numeric limit::: on storr.:! water discharges are not appropriate at this time due to severe difficulties in monitoring. let alone controlling~ the discharge from large numbers of storm drains+ For this reason, the MOU has been drafted to constitute a commitment to conduct control measure activities~ rather than a cO':nmitment to a numez"ic discharge limitations. The control measure activities are focused on the following sources: ~) Brake pads containing copper; 2} Other vehicle-related copper sources; 3) Copper-based pesticides; 4) Erosion; and 5) Industrial and commercial sources. Respectfully submittcd~ ~ 1\11-1'---_ KELl.Y D. MORk'! M<L~ager~ Environmental ContrQl Programs (i>A.:Ic.F ~ IC. PHILIP BaBEL MZL17ll;Y~liance GLSNN S. ROBERTS Director of ~~lic Works ~m:~ Assistant City Manager -2- Division c-_' __ - .",-" -~:~:~ . . . "-.: ....... ~, <'":,."'" ~£i.::2~." :.~!:~{~, '--~ .................... South Bay Copper Reduction Dialogue MEMORAJ'DUM OF UNDERSTAN'DING 1.7 i94 DRAFT (Falk & Mul".y Comments) SECTION I -PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES The bask goal of chis effort is to aCCQrd priorirj touiare mal:ing reasonable furt.her progress in reducing discharge of copper to the lower South Sa."l Francisco Bay a.OO. its lributaIy creeks and rivers. The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) .')n June 1.6, 1993. adopted Resolution 93-61 to amend its Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Region ('&SLrl Plan), to adopt a wasteload allocation for copper which requires 3' minimum of 20% reduction m average ar.nual copper mass leadmg by the [Santa Clara Valley Nonpoinr Source] Dischar!= (Program) by 1998, The Discha'gers and !be three Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) which discharge [0 Sou<l1 Bay are also required to demonstrate an additional reduction of 950 pounds per year by 1998. Tbe State Warer Resources Control Board has oot approved the BaSln Plan Amendment. In .llddition, in NPDFS pennits issued [0 !be three lower South Bay POTWs, the Regional Bom! bas required by January 31, 1994, submission of a proposal to achieve an additional 950 pounds per year copper discharge reduction in coordination with the Progra..rn. On December 15. 1993, !be Regjonal Boord &IS<) issued a Cease and Desist Order (COO) to !be Program. which required submission to the Board by February I, 1994, m:I June I, 1994, a progress 1 o o report on the de .... ell"'pmeru of an...1 by October 1. 199-'. a final plan acceptable to the Executive Offi.cer designed to reduce annuat copper mass loads in their discharges which ~'ill attain appUcab!e 'Q.'2ter quality standards. The plao must inclu.dc control measures for copper to be identified by the Progrom aad add itioll..a! control measures to .>e implemented by tho: Program in conjunction with the three POlWs which rlischarg~ to South Bay. This Memorandum of Understandmg {MOO) serves as the required PrcposaI. To obtain the broadest possible input on the propow, and to fadhtare cooperative efforts among government, busiDesses and ccncemed citizens, 2 South Bay Cupper Reduetion Dialogue (SBCRD) was established. The SBCRD CVI1.'llsts of Regiona! Board, business. and environme~ advocacy repn:sentatives (Stakeholders) in addition (0 the I:h:ree POTV,'s and the Program. This MOU :has been developed with the input from the SWccholders. SECTION IT • COl'o'TROL MEASlIRE ACTIVITIES The Parties (00 this MOU agree to conduct the control measure activities contained in Appendix A. These activities were selected from a lisl: of poteD!i:!li1 control measure activities ilientifJed by the Stakeholder.; (Appendi, D). Commi.trnent to these activities is SUbject to budget approval by governing Boards and Councils on an annual basis. The FOTVls. Pmgr.m, and Stakeholde", further agree to estimate copper reductions that will be achieved by the Program by the implementation of measures contUned in Appendix A, bill wiU annually update AppendiJl D and AppendL~ C (Copper Source Estimates) as detailed in Section ill (peliodic Updates) of this MOU. Appendb< Cis. compilation of Copper Soum: Esrimales made by the ponies to this agreement and other.. Appendix D is the compilation 2 :~." of potentia! control measure activities d~veloped by the parties during the SBCRD p.oce~s from which the activit~s in AppendLx A were ~iected. The Program's new SWMP shall incorporate the Control Measure Activities contained in Appendix A. The Program shall submit to th: RegiorW Board and Stakeho1ders a progress repon by Apnl I, j 994, and a revised SWMP by O<;leber I, 1994. The S WMP development process shill iB;:lude. but Dot be li.'11ited to, the fenowing: 1. Preparation ofa SWMP outline bi' Febl1lary 1,1994. 2. Establishment by February I. 1994, of. SWMP Task Force chaired by the Program Manager and consisting of appropriate Program co-penniuee representatives with ex-offlCio representatives of tl'-iC Stakeholders, iocluding business and industry representatives. 3. Deve!opmem of, and review by the SWMP Task Force, detailed outlines of tile SWMP chapters. by March I, 1994 . . 4. Prep:ll'2.tion by the Program with c-orrespondi.'1g review by and direction from the SWMP Task Force of draft SWMP chapt~rs in a staged sequence:, and submission of. revised SWMF Ie the Regional Board by October I, \994, pursuant to the requirements of the CDO. 5. Preparation by the Program of the FY 95-96 Program budget, incorporating the revised SW;\.iP by December I, 1994. 3 .".' SECTION III -PERlODIC llPDA TES The: parties to this MOU agree to annl.~3Hy update Appendices C alJd D by OctObel' i of each year in conjun:tion with the Program~s annual reporting procf!ss. F...stima~es of average annual copper reduction'; achie\'ed since Januarj 1. 1990 will be updated in conjunction with submission of the Program's an.."'IUb.1 repoI1. New control measure actjvi~ies being pro~d by the parties for implement3.t~oD will be addt"d to Appendix D annually and incorporated 1nto the SW1vIP to furure updates if estimated aveia~ annual topper r<:ductions fall ~hort of the subject 950 additional pounds PC-f year by 1998. Ineffective control measures \l:m be deJeced from Appendix A and the SVll\1P if the .annual e ... ·ajuation de[('rmines such action to be appropn.... The annual updale process descnbed above will be linked (0 the foU('wing Progrdm acrivities: L The Program's annual report will be submined to the Regionai Board: by Seplernber I of each year_The updated Appendix D Control Measure Activities Chart and AppendIX C will be companenrs of !be annual report. The Control Mea:."Ure Activities contained in the SVlMP will be reprioritized if appropriate. 2. FoUcwing completion of L'>e revised SWMP in i 994, the SWMP Task Force will be converted to an Annual Reporting Task Forc::: to provide for Smkeholder participation in !be annual reporting and SWMP update process. 3. The Progrun Monitoring Plan will be updated "",ually by October 1. if 4 appropriat(!, .in conjunction wilh Lite annual reporting process, and will contain, bet not be limited. to, r:he following ele:rr.erus: a. Routine Monitoring; b. Demonstration and Pllot Level Projects; c, Special Studies; d. Long Term Trend Analysis; e. Control Measure Effe,,'tiveness Studies; f. New Moni~oring Activities; and g. PoinLs of Coordination with BASMAA, the Slate-wide Storm Water Task Fo",., and Others. h. Assessment of relevaru State Water Quality Assessment and Citizen Volumeer Monitoring data. 5 December 9, 1993 THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Pale Alto r California o Status of Neggtiations on Ccpp~r Reduct; ..::ns from City Storm Wat~ and Wastewater Discharges Members of the Council: Report in Brief This is an inforrr.ational report advising Council of the status of preparation of 3. !><!emo.r-andum of understanding aF.long local goveon.ment entities in Samta Clara County concerning the discharge of Copper to San Francisco Bay. No action by Council is required. Background The July 1993 discharge permit issued to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant tRWQCP} requires the City to substantially reduce the copper content of the RWQCP discharge to San Francisco Bay. In addition~ the Permit requires the City to negotiate with other Santa Clara County local government entities and prepare a plan for an additional copper discharge reduction of 950 pounds per year, about 5 percent ct Santa Clara county'S total average annual copper discharge to the Bay. This report focuses specifically on the planning for the additional 9S0 pound Countywide copper di5charge reduction. Discussion In order to achi4;.va the Countywide copper discharge red'JC'_t.ion, all of the Santa Clara Valley Non-Point Source program co-permittees and the three wastewater treatment plants will likely need to take specific actions. To develop a plan for achieving the re~lired discharge l:eduction, the Santa Clara Valley' Wat.er District convened the "South Bay Copper Reduct.ion Dialogue," with t.he intent of obtaining broad support for the plan. The Copper Dialogue includes representatives of the Non-Point So~rce Prograw., the three cities with wastewater treatment. plai1ts (San Jose, SU1U1yvale and Palo Alto) r the Regional Wate.::: Quality Control Board~ area businesses and environmental groups. Through the Copper Dialogue, the participating agencies intend to develop a Memorandum of Underst.anding \MOU} detailing the joint plan to achieve the re~Jired copper reduction. While the group has not selected a final format for the MOU r it is anticipated to contain the following elements; -1- • ;Z1l r-. a table"'''ldentifying sources of copper discharge to San Francisco Bay from the County. • • a list of actions that will be t.aken by the local government er:tities to co::.trol coppe!"" discharges (ex;;tmple attached) ; • principles for aLlocation of programmatic and financial responsibility for pilot f'rograms, source control program development, and implementatior: of control meas'J.res i • protocols for monitoring the di3charge reductions; • procedures fCl!" reporting progress '""ith the plan'.s: implementation; • a road map for implementation of the plan; • a procedure for revisiting elements of the agreement as mere information is obtained about the cost, efficacy, and feasibility of control measures; and • draft permit conditions that allow the Regional Water Quality Control Board to enforce the agreeTent. A draft MOD .... i11 be submitted to Council as soon as it is prepared {probably in January). Any guida!lce from Counci 1 ~'ill be followed. and a final MOU will be prepared and returned to Council as soon as possible. The MOO ... ·ill constitute the plan required by the diBcharge permit and will be submitted to the Regional Wat'=!r Quality Control Board (Regional Board) following action by Council. It does not appear that the current deadline (Januarf 30, 1994) for plan submitt-al allows sufficient time for action by all of the various political jurisdictions in the County. Therefore, an extension of several months is likely to be requested and obtained due to the unique nature of this planning effort. Staff does not anticipate that action items .in the MOlT will require budget chfu,ges in the current fiscal year. It is not yet certain whether FY 1994-1995 action items would require revisions to the budget now being prepared. Staff will report O~ any such issues during the upcoming budget process. Respectfully submitted, ;!£I<OIh- KELLY D. MORAN M~~ager~ Enviror~ental Control Prog~ams GLENN S. ROBERTS Direct,'::lr of Public Works CMR:614:93 -2- PHILIP BOBEL Manager~ Environmental ccmplia...ce Division BERNARD M. STROJNi~ Assistant City Manager "i" status Under Development x Under Research New Researoll Goal/Data Prog.t"am Design or Program Implementa.tion 4 Complete SCV NPS program study to determine n~ount of coppe:r coming from brake pads. Evaluate above study and, if appropriate, -Draft state legislation to ban after market repairs with Q:C!ending pads. -Colisider feaE:ibility of local bans. -Request State OZ' Federal study to ensure availability and safety of non~ copper pans. -Request EPA to ban ,I L copper pads in new cars. Narrative Descr.iption of Control strategy -Elilninate use of copper bearing brake pads, Evaluatioh Criteria Foreoast -Reduction -U.oi t Cost. -other Environmental -Reduction estimates will come 1\'; from SCV NPS @ study. o ::!~". (,.:-! \, .'.