The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2002-02-28DRAFT MINUTES OF AD HOC COMMITTEE RE URBAN RUNOFF MEETING Orange County Sanitation District Thursday, February 28, 2002 A meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on Thursday, February 28, 2002 at 3 p.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Directors Present: Shawn Boyd, Ad Hoc Committee Chair Steve Anderson, Director Don Bankhead, Director Tod Ridgeway, Director Norm Eckenrode, Director Jim Silva, Director/Supervisor Directors Absent: Beth Krom, Director (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Don Hughes Vicki Wilson, County of Orange Bob Beardsley, City of Huntington Beach June Nguyen, LACSD Randy Fuhrman Darrel Canut STAFF PRESENT: Blake Anderson, General Manager Bob Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Bob Ooten, Director of O&M Gary Streed, Director of Finance Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager Tom Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist Jim Colston, Senior Regulatory Specialist Pam Koester, Project Engineer Jean Tappan, Secretary There were no comments by any member of the public. FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY ORANGE C0 UWy S 4RRTATK )N DISTRICT MAR 27 2002 (4) RECEIVE FILE AND APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the January 24, 2002 Ad Hoc Committee meeting were approved as drafted. Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 2 February 28, 2002 (5) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Committee Chair Shawn Boyd did not make a report. (6) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER General Manager Blake Anderson said that AB 1892 has provided some interesting discussions. We're finding that no good deed goes unpunished, as the bill is being looked at with suspicion. Director Tod Ridgeway cited a need to get the correct information out to the public exactly what the bill does, and the same for our plans for disinfection as there are mixed messages going out. He also expressed concern that people are taking positions without any study of the issues. He asked staff to continue to answer questions posed by those who question our actions, as it is our responsibility to educate the public. (7) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel did not make a report. (8) DISCUSSION ITEMS — Items (A-C) A. Discussion on the District's Cooperative Projects Program to Fund Urban Runoff Diversion and Treatment Projects. Pam Koester described the background of the Cooperative Projects Program, which was implemented to reduce inflow and infiltration (1/1) by 20% over a 20- year period. The program budget was set at $142,676,000 with $10 million per year allocated. She described the types of projects approved so far as well as the approach and evaluation criteria. Current program issues were discussed in detail. One of the most important issues is project identification in the county. Of the 28 agencies in Orange County that could submit applications, only 15 have are in the program. Only $3 million has been spent since the inception of the program. More field data is needed on the local sewers throughout our service area to better define the sources of 1/1. Adding urban runoff diversion and treatment projects would require modifying the program requirements to match available funding and could potentially jeopardize our ability to meet the program goals if funding was diverted to urban runoff projects rather than 1/1 projects. Until the District's charter is amended to include treating urban runoff, nothing can be done. Ms. Koester outlined the options: 1) funds are not diverted from the Cooperative Projects budget and a separate urban runoff fund is developed; 2) Cooperative projects budget is expanded to include urban runoff projects; or 3) OCSD would not provide funding for local projects. Director Ridgeway stated that the program would have to readdress the capacity limits if we move to include urban runoff. Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 3 February 28, 2002 Vicki Wilson described what the county would be working on during Year 1 of the new Storm Water Permit. Extensive inspections will be undertaken to better define what Best Management Practices (BMPs) need to be in place. She didn't anticipate the identification of a lot of diversion projects in the first year or so. All structural BMPs need to be evaluated to solve the problems, not just one type. Director Ridgeway felt that constructed wetlands should be the responsibility of the Flood Control District. Ms. Wilson indicated that Sanitation District participation in funding the urban runoff diversion projects would be welcome. Until AB 1982 is passed, the District is limited in its participation. When it passes, there would be no problem with funding those projects. It was mentioned that new developments in the county would not be contributing to the urban runoff problems as permits now include a condition that they must handle the runoff in the development. Most projects will be retrofits in previously developed areas. Staff was directed to continue working with the county to find out how much time it will need to move forward; how do the projects get paid for; and how much urban runoff do we accept, what are the legal aspects, and where do we get the money to pay for it. When alternatives have been identified, a report will be forwarded to the Planning, Design and Construction Committee for consideration before moving it to the Board for approval. B. Orange County's Storm Water Permit Impacts to OCSD. Tom Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist, updated the committee on the permit impacts to the District. Staff will work with permittees in Year 1 of the permit to develop a countywide grease control program, and coordinate construction, industrial and commercial inspections. The countywide grease control program will identify 'hotspots', which are sections of all the sewer system subject to grease blockages, and source control measures of all sources of grease including restaurants. For construction inspections, staff will be coordinating with the County on any proposed OCSD construction activity within a permittee's jurisdiction. We will continue to participate with Orange County Hazardous Materials Strike Force industrial and commercial inspections to coordinate joint inspections and investigations of illegal discharges and illicit connections. A separate set of Wastewater Discharge Requirements (WDRs) will be developed for local sanitary sewer agencies to reduce sewage spills within the Regional Water Control Board's jurisdiction. The District will work with the Regional Board and other local sewer agencies to develop the WDRs, which include the development and implementation of a sewer system management plan, and coordinate with permittees on a countywide public education program. Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 4 February 28, 2002 Year 2 work will focus on development of best management practices and a comprehensive review of the District's urban runoff policy. The District will work with the County as the District evaluates its urban policy and program to make appropriate policy or operation changes, if needed. C. Status of AB 1892, legislation amending Orange County Sanitation District charter to allow treating urban runoff. Jim Colston explained that this bill expands the District's charter to allow treatment of urban runoff. Assemblyman Harmon introduced the bill to the legislature on February 6, 2002 and it has been referred to committee with hearing scheduled for March 9, or thereabout. CASA's legislative committee is scheduled to meet Friday, March 01, 2002, and some concern has been expressed by other agencies that this may force them to handle urban runoff as well. There has also been some discussion about included other agencies in the bill. Scott Baugh, our legislative consultant, has recommended that the District keep a low profile at this time on the bill because it is a local issue and there is support for it. Staff will continue to update the Ad Hoc Committee on the legislative progress of this bill. (9) OTHER BUSINESS, COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF ANY There was no other business discussed. (10) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were none. (11) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. (12) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff meeting is tentatively scheduled for March 28, 2002 at 3 p.m. (13) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 5 February 28, 2002 (14) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 4:27 p.m. Submitted by: ,!)Ilappan, Comm ee Secretary G.•1wp.dtalar3 PoWd Hoc CommitteeslUrban RunoMO22802 Ad Hoc Committee Minutes.doc STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54954.2, 1 hereby certify that the Notice and the Agenda for the Urban Runoff Ad Hoc Committee meeting to be held on Thursday, February 28, 2002, was duly posted for public inspection in the main lobby of the District's offices on Thursday, February 21, 2002. 2002. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 28th day of February, f Penny M. Kyip, Secret Board of Directors Orange County Sanitation District Posted:4 200 2 P.M. By: Signatur G:\WP.DTAWGENDA\AD HOC COMM ITTEES\U RBAN RUNOFF\022802 COMMITTEE POSTING CERTIFICATION FORM.DOC 1� `aye ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT r phone: (7141962-2411 few (714) 962-0356 wwar.oead.eom MEETING NOTICE "ling address: P.Q Bum 8127 Fountain Valley, CA AD HOC COMMITTEE RE URBAN RUNOFF 92728-8127 •treat address: 108" Ellis Avanue FWntain Valley, ca ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 92708-7016 Agencies T.- THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2002 - 3 P.M. Cities DISTRICT'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Anaheim Brea 10844 ELLIS AVENUE Buena Park Cypress FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 Fountain Valley Fullerton Garden Grove Ay6ngwn Beach Irvine A regular meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff will meet at the above La Habra La Palma date and time to discuss issues of mutual interest. Los Alamitos Newport Beach Orange Placentia Santa Ana Seal Beach Stanton Tustin Villa Park Yorba Linda County of Orange Sanitary Districts Costa Mesa Midway Dry Water Districts Irvine Ranch To maintain world -class leadership in wastewater and water resource management ROLL CALL (1) Roll Call: Meeting Date: Februa 28 2002 Meeting Time: 3 D.M. Meeting Adjourned: — Ad Hoc Committee Members Shawn Boyd, Ad Hoc Committee Chair .................... Steve Anderson, Director ......................................... Don Bankhead, Director ........................................... Beth Krom, Director ................................ --............ Tod Ridgeway, Director ......................................... Jim Silva, Director .................................................. Norm Eckenrode, Board Chair ................................ Shirley McCracken, Board Vice Chair ...................... Others Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel .................... DonHughes............................................................. Don McIntyre, Consultant ...................................... Vicki Wilson, County of Orange ............................... Dave Kiff, City of Newport Beach ............................. Bob Beardsley, City of Huntington Beach ................ Scott Baugh, Consultant .......................................... Mike Wellborn, County of Orange ............................ Staff Present Blake P. Anderson, General Manager ...................... Bob Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services ............. David Ludwin, Director of Engineering ..................... Gary Streed, Director of Finance .............................. Bob Ooten, Director of Operations & Maintenance.. Mahin Talebi, Source Control Manager .................... Tom Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist ................... Jim Colston, Sr. Regulatory Specialist ..................... Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager .................. Jean Tappan, Secretary ........................................... c: Lenora Crane AGENDA MEETING OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE RE URBAN RUNOFF ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2002 AT 3 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this agenda has been posted in the main lobby of the Districts Administrative Offices not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All written materials relating to each agenda item are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Secretary. In the event any matter not listed on this agenda is proposed to be submitted to the Board for discussion and/or action, it will be done in compliance with Section 54954.2(b) as an emergency item, or that there is a need to take immediate action which need came to the attention of the District subsequent to the posting of the agenda, or as set forth on a supplemental agenda posted not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date. All current agendas and meeting minutes are also available via Orange County Sanitation District's Internet site located at www.ocsd.com. Upon entering the District's web site, please navigate to the Board of Directors section. (1) ROLL CALL (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM IF NECESSARY (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS (4) APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING A. Approve minutes of the January 24, 2002 Ad Hoc Committee Meeting re Urban Runoff Book Page 1 2 February 28, 2002 Agenda (5) REPORT OF COMMITTEE CHAIR (6) REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER (7) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL (8) AD HOC COMMITTEES DISCUSSION ITEMS (Items A-C) A. Consider revising the District's Cooperative Projects Program to fund Urban Runoff Diversion and Treatment Projects (Pam Koester) B. Status of Orange County's Storm Water Permit and Impacts on OCSD (Tom Meregillano) C. Status of AB1892, legislation amending Orange County Sanitation District charter to allow treating urban runoff (Jim Colston) (9) OTHER BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS IF ANY (10) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING (11) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT (12) FUTURE MEETING DATES The next Urban Runoff Ad Hoc Committee Meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, March 28 at 3 p.m. (13) CLOSED SESSION During the course of conducting the business set forth on this agenda as a regular meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee, the Chair may convene the Committee in closed session to consider matters of pending real estate negotiations, pending or potential litigation, or personnel matters, pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.8, 54956.9, 54957 or 54957.6, as noted. Reports relating to (a) purchase and sale of real property; (b) matters of pending or potential litigation; (c) employment actions or negotiations with employee representatives; or which are exempt from public disclosure under the California Public Records Act, may be reviewed by the Directors during a permitted closed session and are not available for public inspection. At such time as final actions are taken by the Board on any of these subjects, the minutes will reflect all required disclosures of information. A. Convene in closed session, if necessary B. Reconvene in regular session C. Consideration of action, if any, on matters considered in closed session. Book Page 2 February 28, 2002 Agenda (14) ADJOURNMENT GAwp.dtalagenda\Ad Hoc CommitteeslUrban Runoffl022802 AH Committee Agenda.doc Notice to Committee Members: To place items on the agenda, Committee members should contact the Committee Chair or the Secretary ten days in advance of the Committee meeting. Questions on agenda items should be directed to the Staff Contact. Committee Chair.: Shawn Boyd (562) 431-2527 (Seal Beach City Hall) Staff Contact: Bob Ghirelli (714) 593-7400 Secretary: Jean Tappan (714) 593-7101 (714) 962-0356 (Fax) e-mail: jtappan@ocsd.com Book Page 3 DRAFT MINUTES OF AD HOC COMMITTEE RE URBAN RUNOFF MEETING Orange County Sanitation District Thursday, January 24, 2002 A meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff of the Orange County Sanitation District was held on Thursday, January 24, 2002 at 3 p.m., in the District's Administrative Office. (1) The roll was called and a quorum declared present, as follows: AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Directors Present: Shawn Boyd, Ad Hoc Committee Chair Steve Anderson, Director Don Bankhead, Director Beth Krom, Director Tod Ridgeway, Director Norm Eckenrode, Director Directors Absent: Jim Silva, Director/Supervisor (2) APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR PRO TEM No appointment was necessary. (3) PUBLIC COMMENTS OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Don Hughes Larry Paul, County of Orange Vicki Wilson, County of Orange Mike Wellborn, County of Orange Bob Beardsley, City of Huntington Beach Scott Baugh, Legislative Consultant June Nguyen, LACSD Rice Alderton Seema Mehta Randy Fuhrman STAFF PRESENT: Blake Anderson, General Manager Bob Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Bob Ooten, Director of O&M Gary Streed, Director of Finance Lisa Murphy, Communications Manager Tom Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist Jean Tappan, Secretary There were no comments by any member of the public. Book Page 5 Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 2 January 24, 2002 (4) RECEIVE FILE AND APPROVE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the of the August 29, 2001Ad Hoc Committee meeting were approved as drafted. (5) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR Committee Chair Shawn Boyd welcomed the attendees. (6) REPORT OF THE GENERAL MANAGER Bob Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services, provided an overview of why the committee is meeting and a PowerPoint presentation was made on steps that have been taken since the beach closures of 1999 and what still needs to be accomplished. The current voluntary policy for treating urban runoff is for dry weather flows only and a daily limit of 10 million gallons. All diversions require a permit. The discharge through the outfall continues to be monitored to maintain regulatory permit limits, as the environmental community is most concerned about the quality of the discharge. The members of the committee discussed and raised questions on the impacts of a full-blown urban runoff program, including costs to the cities, and the role of the county through its Storm Water Permit. The Regional Board's decision to impose storm water permits on the cities will have a major impact on the program. Mr. Anderson said that he thought it was important that the District take an active part in the development of this county -wide program before it was forced on the agency. (7) REPORT OF GENERAL COUNSEL General Counsel did not make a report. (8) DISCUSSION ITEMS — Items (A-D) A. Status of Orange County's Storm Water Permit. This item will be discussed at the next Ad Hoc Committee meeting on February 28, 2002. B. Discussion on the District's Cooperative Projects Program to Fund Urban Runoff Diversion and Treatment Projects. This program could be a possible funding source, but only if there are impacts to 1/I. Changes to the program would require a policy change by the District's Board of Directors. This item will be discussed further at the next Ad Hoc Committee meeting. C. Proposition 218, "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" —Overview and Impacts to Proposed Charter. Scott Baugh, legislative consultant, discussed the consequences of the wording change to the charter and impacts of Proposition 218 on this program. At this time it is unclear whether Proposition 218 applies to charging a fee for treating urban runoff. A ruling would be required to determine whether any fee was a Book Page 6 Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 3 January 24, 2002 `regulatory' or a 'property' (ownership) fee. There could be challenges to the District's treating urban runoff as it is not now allowed by charter. An amendment to the charter would be required, and because of the timing, a bill would have to be introduced within the next week to get on this year's legislative calendar. D. Recommend a Legislative Proposal to Change District's Charter to Address Urban Runoff. At the January 23, 2002 Board Meeting, the Directors authorized the Ad Hoc Committee to review the proposed wording of the charter change and the ramifications of the program. While the amended wording provides for the authorization to provide urban runoff treatment, it does not require the District to implement the program. How the program is dealt with can be determined at a later date. The pros and cons of the wording were discussed. Motion: Moved, seconded and duly carried to: Authorize legislative consultant to submit amended charter language as proposed for inclusion in the District's charter. (9) OTHER BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS IF ANY There was no other business discussed. (10) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE STAFF TO REPORT ON AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING There were none. (11) MATTERS WHICH A DIRECTOR MAY WISH TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION AND STAFF REPORT There were none. (12) CONSIDERATION OF UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff meeting is scheduled for February 28, 2002 at 3 p.m. (13) CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. (14) ADJOURNMENT The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m. Book Page 7 Minutes of the Ad Hoc Committee re Urban Runoff Meeting Page 4 January 24, 2002 bmitted by- e n Tappan, C mm ttee Secretary iwp.d[a agendalAd Hoc CommifteeslUrban RunofA012402 draft Ad Hoc Committee Minutes.doc Book Page 8 AD HOC COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. z/zs/oz AGENDA REPORT ItQm Number Item Number A. Orange County Sanitation District �+, FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Originator: Tom B. Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist SUBJECT: Cooperative Project Funding — Urban Runoff Diversion Projects GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Information Item Only SUMMARY For the past three years, the District, through its Cooperative Projects Program (Program), has successfully co -funded projects sponsored by local cities within the District's service area to eliminate or reduce inflow and/or infiltration (1/1) of storm water/groundwater from local wastewater collection lines into the District facilities. The goal of the Program is to reduce 1/1 entering the District's facilities by 20%. With a well -established Program in place by the District, local agencies that discharge dry weather urban runoff into the District's facilities have expressed interest in the District's Program and have requested that the District expand its Program to co -fund urban runoff projects that range from dry weather urban runoff diversion systems to other alternative urban runoff treatment systems such .as constructed wetlands. • In deciding whether to expand the Program to cover urban runoff projects, several issues must be considered: Limited Funding in the Program: Although $142 million has been budgeted for the Program, the funds have not been set aside and it is uncertain that this amount of funding will be available throughout the next twenty years. It is also uncertain whether this funding will be sufficient for the Program as currently structured. The Program currently requires local sewer agencies (cities) to prepare master plans and 1/1 reduction plans, conduct TV inspections of local sewers and conduct flow monitoring in order to define site -specific manhole and sewer rehabilitation projects. The District provides 50% funding for all of these activities as well as for the site -specific projects. The District also provides 50% funding for sewer system evaluations, water conservation best management practice (BMP) projects, sewer mapping and storm water, provided that it eliminates street flooding over sewer manholes. It is anticipated that all of the budgeted funds will be needed to meet the Book Page 9 District's 1/1 reduction goal through these various activities. Funding urban runoff projects within the same Program budget may require a restructuring of the Program to reduce either the District's funding portion or the types of activities funded. Reevaluation of Program: The District proposes to conduct a comprehensive flow monitoring project to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the Program and to determine how well the 1/1 projects that were chosen by the Guidance Review Committee meet the intended goal of the Program. The long-term flow monitoring program consists of dividing the District into150 discreet basins and monitoring the sewage flow in each basin. The sewage flow data will be used to prioritize the sources of 1/1 by basin and compare the results with flow data collected by the local agencies. Sewer system evaluations will be conducted to identify site -specific projects and measure the effectiveness of the projects completed to date. This systematic approach will allow the District to focus on the most cost-effective projects first. It may be premature at this point to expand the Program to include urban runoff projects during this evaluation period of the Program. Jurisdiction and Responsibility: The County (County of Orange Public Facilities Department and the County's Watershed & Environmental Programs Office) is designated as the lead agency for water quality activities in Orange County. With no jurisdictional authority of the stormdrain conveyance systems and waterways in Orange County, the District has taken a supportive role toward the County's efforts to improve water quality of recreational waters and environmentally sensitive areas within Orange County through its Urban Runoff Program. Because of this jurisdictional issue and the role in which the District opted to take, it is the County's responsibility to develop and implement a program similar to the District's Program to fund urban runoff diversion projects. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGETIMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) TM:wh G:\wp.dta\agenda\Ad Hoc Committees\Urban RunoH\022802 Coop Funding Urban Runoff Div ar.doc Revised: 2-19-02 (wh) Page 2 Book Page 10 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION N/A ALTERNATIVES No action at this time, pending completion of needs assessment Amend the Program to include urban runoff projects Create a new program to fund urban runoff treatment projects District staff recommends that the Board take no action at this time until completion of needs assessment on whether funding urban runoff projects is a warranted approach for the District to undertake. CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS N/A TM:wh G:\wp.dta\agenda\Ad Hoc Committees\Urban Runoff\022802 Coop Funding Urban Runoff Div ar.doc Revised: 2-19-02(wh) Page 3 Book Page 11 AD HOC COMMITTEE Meeting Date To Bd. of Dir. oz/zs/oz AGENDA REPORT It Number ber Item Number Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Originator: Tom B. Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist SUBJECT: Status Report on the Orange County Storm Water Permit GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Information Item Only SUMMARY • On December 19, 2001, a special Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) hearing was held to adopt the Orange County (OC) Storm Water Permit. The Regional Board did not adopt the proposed OC Storm Water Permit because additional public comments were received during the hearing. The Regional Board has scheduled another special Regional Board hearing on January 18, 2002 to adopt the proposed OC Storm Water Permit. The hearing will be held at the Santa Ana City Council Chambers. Permittee's Concerns of the Proposed Orange County Storm Water Permit Additional Municipal Inspection Requirements and Cost: Permittees are required to prioritize, inspect, and enforce all construction, commercial, industrial, and restaurant sites within their jurisdiction. The cost associated with implementing these additional inspection requirements is $14 million/year based on numbers taken from a Regional Board presentation. Permittees spent approximately $52 million during fiscal year 2000-2001 to meet existing storm water regulations. ➢ The Regional Board has recommended to the County that the County's Health Care Agency, which currently implements a countywide restaurant inspection program, should conduct these inspections, not local wastewater agencies. The County currently disagrees with the Regional Board that the permittees should be responsible for inspecting grease trap devices. • New Development/Significant Re -Development: The Regional Board will implement numeric sizing criteria for all new development and significant redevelopment sites if the County does not submit an acceptable Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the Regional Board by October 1, 2003. Book Page 13 OCSD's Major Concern on the Proposed Permit Proposed General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sewage Collection Agencies in Orange County: A number of beach closures in Orange County have been due to spills, overflows, and leaks from sanitary sewer lines. To address these concerns, the Regional Board has described in the proposed OC Storm Water Permit that a set of separate waste discharge requirements (WDRs) for local sanitary sewer agencies is to be developed. The Regional Board, in cooperation with the District and other local sanitary sewer agencies, has developed proposed WDRs and identified the District to lead a steering committee of all other entities tributary to the District for the purpose of complying with the proposed WDRs. At this time, long-term costs of the proposed WDR regulations are not known. The Regional Board is scheduled to hold a public workshop on the proposed WDRs on January 23, 2002. A report on. the outcome of that meeting will be made at the Ad Hoc Committee meeting. go Urban Runoff Controls and Cooperative Project Funding: With the added cost in implementing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address urban storm water pollution, permittees of the proposed OC Storm Permit may seek funding from the District to fund urban runoff diversion projects. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY Not applicable BUDGET IMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Not applicable ALTERNATIVES Not applicable CEQA FINDINGS Not applicable ATTACHMENTS 1. County of Orange Storm Water Permit Requirements "Impacts to OCSD" matrix TM:wh:mm G:\wp.dta\agenda\Ad Hoc Committees\Urban RunofR022802 Status Report OC Storm Water Pemtil AR.doc Revised: 01/15/02 jt Book Page 14 Page 2 Z W W a W a W a 0 W 0 9 0 LL V Z �a�{ V U 0q '0 CL Q fn c O O� O C aa7 U 7 c E m z V L w L O C c 3 OCR U co: N O* C +• L Yc� IL m N a) cv0iC ��3d 0 c U U0,0-0 a000 �F/5 o 'a N U U) 'c cn a) U a O <a fnEOQ L Q Ucu.>�' Cl) Oa co a� z O o m'0 0 3U Q O Ix a z O H U w a z H z Q 7 Q H co w w 0 U 7 a) L .Q U rZ co a� rn a3 ,C U O a) m a) O c 7 U) a) U c L U 3 E cu 0 d C O U �o C m m cn a) tY c6 O_ O > N O O O C O U6 H z I0 U Q 0 z a w M M O O � �T a� (n cn 0 O � C U U � m c o Q O (0 C. >, ac M C � a) � a)) CD a -a a) E � a) c C L cn a) U N c0 � C O O a) o � .Lr O c co 0 a) U E cn 0 � C U cu c Mn a) -8 a) a) a) a) .a) Q� a-, m c6 7 a) (6 (9 U cc Lf� O U c0 O LO a) O cn a) cn �L .O C6 O_ CO rQ C a) CO O O L � 3 0 cn O a) LO 'y C L L O 3 N O cn a) ... LO N .Q o C w O L a) U a) cu 3 0_ cn-0 c a) L Mn v> _ � M W cM 0 .Q E 0 4) E t C O E m a) U C 0 I y r L O � � L C O C N 0 a3 3 a) co a)- 11 3 0 () � L cn +' jO) C a) � C � a) a) C U ca N a) U) O c 0 U a) Q w .S c O cn cm () U) >, 0 cu CD CD C C cu c ca N O O N L L () O U O a) cu a) cn O E L O U a) Q cn CO m 7 c ca C 0 m O 0 c 0 U cu 0 C� (D cu C O a) Q' c6 C a �a c m U) a) cn 0 M O CD 'O VJ Q U 0 �z U W 0/� L.L z O N O O z w w O 0 z `m .O c Uc + (N C O a) 0_ O 0 U O c O U co a E C c6 a) ca L cu E E a) a a) f� 3 E `o L c cn C O (n O n. C N U 7 () E aa)) O_ 0 U c6 m a) E m c 0 c U) U O Book Page 15 022 $ 0 cower EEE ek ¥§ CO q«�§ 200��§§[� g�0$ f f C& f°- 3 2% @ om� -0 a) ®—, �_£ 2 0 a c k' aQ.cm $ �a)o�ERt »�$$ 0$ e� ®3° ° 0 m � ° 'k §S o C 2 L o 0 2 9 b '\ [» qf§f§\NwE� 2§2\ On3/rgf7S, //cu$ k � 2 f �2 �/ CL f » o q q7 I �/ 5 / �� [ qa /Q> 7 ' /CN CD ° k § k k — k Q = C 0.0 f u \ o� �CU O � /§k �� "2 $ k @£2 2— ko2 27 \$U E§ 2 �2 f Q -0 0 CL -� c5 Q E£ = a) ° ° -0 tE Lu S ° \ > -0 �cu � a) a) 2 a c G CD� §k /%� '� ad co -0 oL- a) 7c 2 3 >a a o= :§ �� 0 7 0 2 a ff2 �� f2 Q \JCL 7 b = �Q E-�� O @ / 2 > : o E . w § m: 6 M kkO 0 0 w m iE 0.022 0 E —0 � � 0 0 R LU O 2M�»U)� 23:f3�k �Ir £C-0 >22/ > 'n - & % M _ cr o E 2 2= o $Kk § 7 c E 2 a-ML— «oE =t= --2CL%& 2««\=CnCL « a 0o=- 5@2< o� 3../ k U 3 7 U 3./. � g O O o g O U) 04 Book Page 16 m m E LT G1 w CD co ca An m gn 10 3 N W (U z W Q LU 7 LU N J r, 0 J 0 Li w to Cas �a �m cv z3 LU £ C L to CY m CD U] = L„ 0 0 2 � U O yv G � L- r N a �cc c LU �CD c Q m LU U) ._ W m 0> LL c Ou � o IL c c c inn L O off' O O (D c a� cc 3 v0i m m l- T �mdv�0 as Via_ Ov o., aim ca c:-0E m _ou3i=��U-�wmma) U)-0 E U� yNM E of >,Q 0("Dm0Ccrn E�NIYU)� O 0 E co 3 w a) 0 c cU0 (n c a y 3 cn IL O O_.-.�� L �a� E Ea.= 0 0 oO u o� �V� y� o co c o-0 COcm mo `�O cc U) °OWUU maa �N m 7 E. m m C 0 CD vi a) 'U cc aa) Q m L c 3 m vi cn 0 n a) ca U Q 0_ 0 z L N N U Q) L N O N U O Q O) c 'c c ca d O) C c a N M aS CY Ev a) z co a E � a z w LU zU z O Q O co U ~ O J a Q c C'f a E W aa) (D Q E L, I ca C U)�U W d C7 30 N LU N LL Cr O z h U co m N O c L c O c 0 U 7 c ccaa 0 0 a U .? CY Ol 0 r) i Book Page 17 7 IL Q � w 2 w O i U) 2 w 2 IL 0 -i w > w � � w 2 k k / » � R (D (D 0 7 7 ? c c c E E E k k k k \ k * -1% >% ] § § a' = 2 @ Q e \ \ k E E E 0 o 0 $ 7 7 k \ k k k k � e ® (D a) a) k k � f f f :3 / $ / 2 R 0 U) cc% E \� E� E Ea $' cc C: �C� ■ o o @ o o0 Q/ @o \ coI -0c � 'a� —a)/ 7 , _ _ $k /R /- 0 2 0 g 0 $7 /7 $7 of w 0 Q w 0 O O O , 0 otE &ca 20$ca Q / z \ \ CO \ § = k ■ o= o o c CL k§\:(D o M � o S2JJ£\c— »A—a)alo2 mE-��w=3 o�\-C@02 OILCL@a)Ea= d � $ e cn /cn 0 :3 0 / a f E E \ k0 .0 00 $0. / 3 . / � $ $ E § _ � 2 2 � E § § § § 2 v k CL \ k k ■ E k co k 0 � � � IL U) w 2 � ul to 2 0)' £ (D ® �23 . o � � o/(k / § f k »77G ) / § \ k Eco _ I/§§§ 0 k � c § / ¥ § CO cc 2 2m § E f� .e £ /: §$ 0 4-- 0 / k 0k f § % CL kƒ (D / CD CD kco 2$ : 0 Eg (D CU � co a 2 » /L)\ 0 0 0 0LE # k / D- k E R cn k k � k CD CL k § Z E 0 E $ c2 ®\ /CL �� —■cu k o � 2 % E E2? CU 0/ %$3 � \\ $k\ %q2 i %CL 2 � § jm/ § . / cc cu �, c = C �p N CU cu N a) 'D CO W tL1 O O U U Q Z Q 4—— 0 M W 3 •- 5ac'0 Z 7 .. U Q (n O -0'O O p c ) C CL 0 a) ,z Q ..� fn C Q U = C ,� L N rtO+ �(n� m O 0 w y a) p L T a3�uQ,o U f0 vLU d 6cuo�c Z(D 0) (0 C U Z 3cOcco°� 0) a) o- o a C +) U O C> U a C C C = a) E C c0 a CD U V >+ C =V- C m U 000f07 E I y a) c C WO y o 10 0 0 �- �cEECO H 'Eon Ia m t: U > y CL o--D c W_ C to N J_ CU C ` N O a) CO a) U — �E=mot a mc" LL = O (D ' o a.G"=o� dN W CO co N C� 0 o � O O UD Book Page 19 AD HOC COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date oz/za/oz To Bd. of Dir. It i Number Item Number Orange County Sanitation District FROM: Robert P. Ghirelli, Director of Technical Services Originator: Tom B. Meregillano, Regulatory Specialist SUBJECT: Status of Assembly Bill 1892 — Orange County Sanitation District's Charter Amendment. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Information Item Only SUMMARY District staff is actively tracking AB 1892 as the Bill progresses through the legislative process. Assembly Member Harmon introduced the District's Bill to the legislature on February 6, 2002 and it is anticipated that a legislative committee will hear the Bill in on March 9, 2002. District staff will continue to update the Ad Hoc Committee on the legislative progress of the District's Bill. PROJECT/CONTRACT COST SUMMARY N/A BUDGET IMPACT ❑ This item has been budgeted. (Line item: ) ❑ This item has been budgeted, but there are insufficient funds. ❑ This item has not been budgeted. ® Not applicable (information item) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION N/A ALTERNATIVES N/A CEQA FINDINGS N/A ATTACHMENTS AB 1892 TM:wh G:\wp.dta\agenda\Ad Hoc Committees\Urban Runoff\022802 ar Harmon Bill Status 1892.doc Revised: 2/19102 (wh) Book Page 21 Page 1 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2001-02 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No.1892 Introduced by Assembly Member Harman (Coauthors: Assembly Members John Campbell and Correa) (Coauthors: Senators Dunn and Johnson) February 6, 2002 An act to add Section 4730.66 to the Health and Safety Code, relating to sanitation districts, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1892, as introduced, Harman. Orange County Sanitation District. The County Sanitation District Act authorizes a sanitation district to acquire, construct, and complete certain works, property, or structures necessary or convenient for sewage collection, treatment, and disposal. This bill would authorize the Orange County Sanitation District to acquire, construct, operate, maintain, and furnish facilities for the diversion of urban runoff from drainage courses within the district, the treatment of the urban runoff, the return of the water to the drainage courses, or the beneficial use of the water. This bill would declare that it constitutes necessary special legislation. This bill would declare that it shall take effect immediately as an urgency statute. Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State -mandated local program: no. 99 Book Page 23 AB 1892 1 2 3 4 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 —2— The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. Section 4730.66 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read: 4730.66. (a) This section applies only to the consolidated sanitation district in Orange County described in Section 4730.65. The powers granted in this section supplement the existing powers of the district. (b) The district may acquire, construct, operate, maintain, and furnish facilities for the diversion of urban runoff from drainage courses within the district, the treatment of the urban runoff, the return of the water to the drainage courses, or the beneficial use of the water. (c) In order to cant' out the powers and purposes granted under this section, the district may exercise any of the powers otherwise granted to a district by this chapter to the extent those powers may be made applicable- (d) Nothing in this section affects any obligation of the district to obtain a permit that may be required by law for the activities undertaken pursuant to this section. SEC. 2. The Legislature funds and declares that a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article iV of the Constitution due to the unique circumstances of the consolidated sanitation district in Orange County. SEC. 3. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: In order to timely provide authority to the Orange County Sanitation District to effectively deal with the urban water runoff problem, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately. W 99 F- Book Page 24 Orange County Sanitation District (714) 962-2411 www.ocsd.com mailing address: P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California 92728-8127 street address: 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018 published on recycled paper 00