HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05071991 - 2.6 �, 006 a
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,AS GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY and
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: MAY 7, 1991
SUBJECT: REPORT ON FEDERAL STORM WATER POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATION
SPECIFIC REQUESTS) OR RECOMMENOATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
I. Recommended Action:
following
1. ACCEPT the/report on the mandated federal regulations requiring storm water pollution
control measures; and
2. ADOPT the attached Resolution with Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, and F-1 indicating the
intent of the County and the Flood Control District to participate with the Cities in a Joint
Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the
urbanized areas of Contra Costa County; and
3. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chairperson to execute the attached agreement, Cost
Payment Agreement for Group Costs between Contra Costa County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District and Contra Costa County, on behalf of the County and
District; and
4. AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director to utilize up to $30,000 in FY 1990-91 County
General Drainage Funds (0330) to commence the drainage system mapping and
collection of data required by the mandatory regulations.
ll. Financial Impact:
The allocation of $30,000 from this years drainage maintenance budget will postpone the
replacement of some of the deteriorated culverts serving the unincorporated county area. It is
expected that the County's share of the program costs in FY 1991-92 will be approximately
$80,000 including staff time. A funding source for this cost has not been identified.
Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE:
_ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON May 7, 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT )
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I hereby certify that tMe Is a true end correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of 00
Board of Supeftors on the date shown.
MFK:Iv ATTESTED. May 7, 1991
a:bo\7.t5 PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board
Of Supervisors and Administrator
Orig. Div: Public Works (AD) ,
cc: See Page Two By ,
FED. STORM WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
May 7, 1991
Page Two
Future funding in subsequent years for actual implementation of control measures is uncertain.
The County's share of said costs could exceed $250,000 annually.
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
On November 16, 1990,the Federal Environmental Protection Agency adopted National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Application regulations for storm water discharges. This
regulation begins the implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act as it relates to the control
of pollutants from entering storm waters. Unfortunately, this mandated program does not
provide any funding for its implementation. In fact, local government will have to pay an
application review fee to the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB)
which will administer the NPDES program for the federal government.
Representatives of SFRWQCB have indicated the City of Concord, the County and the entire
urbanized area of Contra Costa County must comply with the NPDES regulations as a group.
Part I of this permit must be submitted by May 17, 1992. Part I is a program planning activity
in which local governments are required to submit descriptions of existing pollution control
programs and regulations and data on their storm water facilities and the characterization of the
storm waters. Part II of the applications is due May 18, 1993, and it requires a more detailed
analysis of water quality and a detail description of how local government is going to meet the
objectives of the Clean Water Act.
Due to the intertwining of our cities and unincorporated county areas and the structure of the
NPDES program, significant savings can be achieved by local government through a Joint
Municipal NPDES permit. The savings will result from fewer water quality tests, multiple uses of
data generated by members of the group, better solution through the sharing of ideas,
elimination of redundancy in submittal of twenty separate applications, and a reduction in
application fees by 90% or possibly 95%.
During the past two years the SFRWQCB has requested the Cities and Counties of Alameda and
Santa Clara to start a program similar to NPDES under the authority of existing state legislation.
Alameda County (total cost in excess of $1,500,000) and Santa Clara County (total cost in
excess of $2,500,000) are approximately one and two years, respectively, ahead of us. Our
costs to comply with the NPDES regulations should be less, because we will benefit from their
experiences. Santa Clara County has been issued their permit, and they are now ready to
implement their,NPDES program which calls for an annual expenditure of$5,000,000. We have
a much smaller urbanized area so our program implementation costs in FY 1992-93 and future
years should be approximately 30 percent to 50 percent of Santa Clara County's. However, the
cost are still significant. During the next year, long term funding options must be developed.
One possible source of funding is a county wide utility charge to fund the NPDES program and
drainage system maintenance.
Staff members from all the Cities, the County, and the Flood Control District have been meeting
to develop an organization structure for facilitating a Joint Municipal NPDES permit. The group
has prepared the attached Resolution with Exhibits which discuss the costs for Part I, identify
entity responsibilities, and describe the organization for completing the work.
IV. Consequences of Negative Action:
Failure to comply with the mandator NPDES regulations could result in a fine of$25,000 per day
until the County and District are in compliance.
cc: County Administrator
County Auditor
GMEDA Director
Community Development Director
-PW - Accounting
PW - Flood Control
000 b
Adopted this Resolution on MAY 7, 1991 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Powers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION NO. 91/292
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN PREPARATION OF A JOINT NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT APPLICATION FOR
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
WHEREAS on November 16, 1990, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency adopted NPDES
Permit Application regulations for storm water discharges as required by the Federal Clean Water Act;
and
WHEREAS said regulations require the submittal of permit applications and the implementation of
programs to minimize pollutants entering storm waters; and
WHEREAS the State of California San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board has requested
that all of Contra Costa County be covered by one permit and that Part 1 of said permit be completed
by May 18, 1992; and
WHEREAS a joint effort between the Cities, County, and Flood Control District in a single NPDES
application will minimize the cost of the program to all parties; and
WHEREAS it is the intent of the joint effort between the Cities, County, and Flood Control District not
to dictate land use and zoning; and
WHEREAS the success of the application process is dependent upon the cooperation of each
participating entity;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, this BOARD hereby indicates its intent to participate in the
preparation of a Joint Municipal NPDES permit and agrees to share in the group costs and to provide
staff support and detailed information necessary to develop the permit, as described in Exhibits A, B
and C.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT JAMES CUTLER and JOSEPH MURPHY is/are designated as the
COUNTY representative(s) to the proposed NPDES Technical Committee, as described in Exhibit D.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the chairperson is authorized to execute the Cost Payment
Agreement committing County to a maximum contribution of $37.680. (Exhibit F).
MFK:IV I WOW coft that ma Is a tnu and Wrrs d OW Of
an actkon taken and enterw on to minutes of tm
a:7.t5 eoard m supervims an m.date shown.
NPDES\ ATTESTM May 7, 1991
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk W the Board
of&pemlora andAdmUbtrator
Exhibit A: Budget for Group Expenditures and Revenues
(March 1991 thru June 1992) By .Deputy
Exhibit B: Estimate of Mapping and Group Costs for
Cities and County
Exhibit C: Tasks to be Performed by Cities and County at
Their Sole Cost for Part 1 of the NPDES Application
Exhibit D: City-County-District NPDES Joint Municipal Permit
Organization and Implementation Proposal
Exhibit E: Joint Municipal NPDES Permit Application Schedule
Exhibit F: Cost Payment Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 91/292
J 0�i
EXHIBIT A
BUDGET FOR GROUP EXPENDITURES AND
REVENUES
FEBRUARY 1991 thru JUNE 1992
Expenditures Budget
Consultant Fees:
Strategic Planning-Technical Guidance (1) $30,000
Part I: Report Preparation 30,000
Hydrology Data for Pollutant Loadings 15,000
Water Quality Field Screening 50.000
Total Estimated Consultant Fees $125,000
Group Staff Support (Flood Control District) (2) 60,000
Document Reproductions 15,000
Part I NPDES Application Fees 20,000
Contingency 40.000
Total Expenditures Budget $260,000
Revenue Budget
Flood Control District $60,000
City-County Group Costs Contributions (Exhibit B) 200.000
Total Revenue Budget $260,000
(1) A consultant must be.retained to provide the Technical and Steering Committees
technical guidance in NPDES objectives and methods for attaining said objectives.
The consultant would attend all meetings and prepare technical papers for
consideration by the committees.
(2) Group Staff Support by the Flood Control District represent the cost for one staff
person to facilitate the activities of both committees, i.e. make arrangements,
record meetings, collect and distribute data, attend outside meetings as directed,
maintain files,coordinate tasks assigned by the committees,prepare administrative
reports. This activity does not include District costs in providing a representative
on the Technical committee or Steering Committee.
MF -IV
a:npdes.acA
(April 17,1991)
ti
EXHIBIT B
ESTIMATE OF MAPPING AND GROUP COSTS
FOR CITIES AND COUNTY
PROF TA SHARE PROPOSED SHARE ESTIMATE OF TOTAL
ENTITY OF GROUP'COSTS
OF ESTIMATED
COMPUTER:MAPPING ESTIMATED
PERCENTAGE"(1)` GROUP COSTS (2) COSTS (3j COST
Antioch 7.72 $15,440 $16,000 31,440
Brentwood 0.94 1,880 3,000 4,880
Clayton 0.92 1,840 6,000 7,840
Concord 13.84 27,680 28,000 55,680
County 18.84 37,680 55,000 92,680
(unincorporated)
Danville 3.90 7,800 10,000 17,800
EI Cerrito 2.84 5,680 4,000 9,680
Hercules 2.08 4,160 4,000 8,160
Lafayette 2.94 5,880 11,000 16,880
Martinez 3.96 7,920 9,000 16,920
Moraga 1.98 3,960 8,000 11,960
Orinda 2.06 4,120 8,000 12,120
Pinole 2.18 4,360 4,000 8,360
Pittsburg 5.92 11,840 12,000 23,840
Pleasant Hill 3.92 7,840 8,000 15,840
Richmond 10.90 21,800 24,000 45,800
San Pablo 3.14 6,280 4,000 10,280
San Ramon 4.38 8,760 10,000 18,760
Walnut Creek 7.54 15,080 17,000 32,080
•100.00
TOTAL FUNDING FOR GROUP COSTS: $200,000
(1) The allocation of Group Costs to the various entities Is based on the 1990 census for each entity. Other methods for distribution of Group Costs
were evaluated prior to selecting the 1990 census.
(2) The Group Costs represent the costs associated with the various work elements that are performed for the group as a whole.
(3) The computer mapping costs represent the estimated direct costs(Including overhead for computerizing the data required under Part I of the
NPDES application. The data being computerized is Indicated In Exhibit:C.items(2c)and ad and hydrology data This item of work is to be
funded or preformed by each entity. Flood Control District at each entity's option,will preform the work on an actual costs basis.
MFK:ty
a:npdes2.exB
(March 4, 1991)
r
•
EXHIBIT C
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED BY CITIES AND
COUNTY AT THEIR SOLE COST FOR PART I
OF THE NPDES APPLICATION
1. Participation in Technical Committee and Steering Committee meetings including
review of reports and regulations relating to Storm Water Pollution controls.
2. Providing the following data:
a. Description of existing legal authorities to control discharges into storm
waters, including copies of local ordinances.
b. Description of historic use of regulations to control non-storm water
discharges into municipal sewer treatment facilities.
C. Drainage system inventory maps showing all facilities 36-inches in diameter
and larger including natural drainage ways serving water sheds greater than
' 50 acres in area.
d. Maps or data base indicating existing land uses, projected land uses,
landfill sites, sewer treatment plants, identified existing NPDES sites, and
open space-park sites.
e. Description of existing management programs to control pollutants entering
storm waters.
f. Description of existing programs to locate illicit connections to drainage
systems.
g. Description of agencies financial resources relating to storm water pollution
controls.
3. Assist in water quality sampling within their jurisdiction by providing traffic control
and access to sampling sites.
MFKIv
a:npd".exC
(April 17,1991)
4
EXHIBIT D
CITY-COUNTY-DISTRICT NPDES JOINT
MUNICIPAL PERMIT ORGANIZATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION PROPOSAL
• A Technical Committee will be formed consisting of a planning and/or engineering
representative from each city, the county, and the Flood Control District.
• The Technical Committee will establish a Steering Committee to facilitate the
group's efforts/deliberations. The Steering Committee will consist of six
representatives from the Technical Committee representing the following groups:
City of Concord
County
Flood Control District
West County
Central County
East County
• Each city, the county, and the District will have one vote in the Technical
Committee decision process.
• The County Flood Control District will provide one full time person to coordinate
the collection of data, maintain NPDES program files, disseminate information, and
implement the Technical Committee's decisions.
• Each city and the county will be individually responsible for providing the data
outlined in Exhibit B for Part I of NPDES permit application.
• The Technical Committee will evaluate all of the data submitted, direct the
preparation of the various elements of the NPDES permit application by
establishing guidelines, objectives and goals, and develop recommendations on
NPDES issues for consideration by the governing boards of their respective
jurisdictions.
MFKIv
ampdes.axD
(April 17,1991)
W r N
A r r r w r m r O rQM Q)
m E cc �wo� ET)
CD CD m
w) - .30 -UL2m Z2
V
V)
Z
O
r
r r cy
r r r r r r O O O N N
2 •c •` •ccaccc09w CL
ca � c>c
UQ�� m -x, 00
N 0-4
a
W O
w c c
A Oc C a W �_
�j m
y Rf C
cc U ) o •Q a •a N
�, CLE a a
•M ° ate`. O Cj ° > Q cm
0 o — c
Orom � cQ H Qaccc
"O o ccaa Evc NIt -
� ov �• � U cZ M c v E u)
V �MCc E 0Namamz
Z gym `
rn,- Wmmo - eo,t50rnwc,Q
� copOp� �Oc — rCL0 —
IL
-
m a »- o cv •cMa Ma -i .0
Z Oo OEZam c mow > Z c> NNcc
NCd d U jo � a° c a
w — •- oonLo E
W 9) m � EmcmW
cW = o• > > CL
ccno
CL CL
ZJQuj C,' DEC, 0JM _ Z ..
a
LA �Cf� O� O� Or � IL
O v vv 00000 - - r r e
EXHIBIT F
COST PAYMENT AGREEMENT FOR GROUP
COSTS BETWEEN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION
DISTRICT AND
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
This AGREEMENT, entered into on the day of 1991, is
between the Contra Costa County, a political subdivision of the State of California,
hereinafter "COUNTY," and Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District, a political subdivision of the State of California, hereinafter "DISTRICT."
The parties to this AGREEMENT mutually agree and promise as follows:
1: PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK: COUNTY, in conjunction with DISTRICT and
other local government entities, desires to participate in the development of a Joint
Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
application for storm waters. A Technical Committee, hereinafter referred to as
COMMITTEE, has been formed to develop and complete the permit activities. A
statement of the duties of COMMITTEE is contained in Exhibit "D". The permit
process requires the collection, evaluation, and mapping of data, and the
preparation of reports outlining existing practices and proposed activities to meet
the federal NPDES requirements and State of California water quality requirements.
Consultant contracts, hereafter referred to as CONTRACTS, will be executed by
DISTRICT for performing some of this work at the direction of COMMITTEE. This
AGREEMENT is to set forth COUNTY and DISTRICT responsibilities with regard
to group costs and the conditions under which DISTRICT will perform computer
mapping activities for COUNTY at COUNTY's option and expense.
2. COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR GROUP COSTS: COUNTY agrees to
reimburse DISTRICT for its prorata share of the costs for the work outlined in
Exhibit A and additional work authorized by the COMMITTEE. The cost of
DISTRICT's staff person assigned to facilitate the activities of the COMMITTEE is
excluded. COUNTY's maximum obligation without amendment of this AGREE-
MENT is $37,680.
3. COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAPPING COSTS: The permit application
requires the mapping of drainage systems, land use designations, industrial sites,
existing NPDES permitted sites, field screening sites, and watershed boundaries.
The most economical method for handling the data on a short term and long term
basis is through computer data bases. DISTRICT agrees to perform said
computer mapping/data base activities for COUNTY at COUNTY's option and
expense. COUNTY agrees to reimburse DISTRICT for DISTRICT's costs at the
hourly rate for personnel including overhead and the hourly rate for computer
terminal time, said rates shown in Exhibit F-1.
4. COST ACCOUNTING: . DISTRICT shall maintain accounting records for all
expenditures. Group Costs and COUNTY computer mapping costs, if any, will be
kept separate. DISTRICT will bill COUNTY quarterly for costs incurred. COUNTY
shall pay DISTRICT within 45 days of billing.
-Page 1 -
5. INSURANCE AND HOLD HARMLESS:
a) CONTRACTS awarded by DISTRICT shall include provisions requiring the
consultant to: (1) provide and maintain in full force, during the CONTRACT
period,workers' compensation insurance pursuant to state law; profession-
al liability (errors and omissions) insurance with coverage of at least
$500,000; and comprehensive general liability insurance with a combined
single limit coverage of at least $1,000,000; and (2) promise to hold
harmless and indemnify COUNTY, its governing body, officers and
employees to the same extent as promised to DISTRICT. The aforemen-
tioned liability policy shall name COUNTY and DISTRICT, their governing
bodies, officers and employees as additional insureds, and shall contain a
provision that the insurance afforded thereby to the additional insureds shall
be primary insurance to the full limits of the policy, and that if any of the
additional insureds has other insurance or self insurance against a loss
covered by such policy, such insurance or self insurance shall be excess
insurance only.
b) Each party shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless the other party,
its governing body, officers and employees from and against any and all
claims, demands, suits, costs, expenses and liability for any damages,
injury, sickness or death, due to the negligence or willful misconduct of the
indemnifying party, its officers or employees.
c) Although DISTRICT will use its best efforts to ensure that accurate data is
furnished to COUNTY, ' DISTRICT cannot guarantee the accuracy or
completeness of the data furnished under this AGREEMENT. Therefore,
COUNTY acknowledges that the obligation set forth in subsection B above
shall not apply to claims, demands, suits, costs, expenses and liability
arising from or connected with the use by COUNTY of the data furnished
under this AGREEMENT, and COUNTY agrees to defend, indemnify, save
and hold harmless DISTRICT, its governing body, officers and employees
against the same.
d) Nothing in this AGREEMENT is intended to or shall be construed to affect
the legal liability of either party to third parties by imposing any standard of
care different from that imposed by law. The provisions of this section 5
shall survive any termination or expiration of this AGREEMENT.
6. AGREEMENT TERMINATION: COUNTY's execution of this agreement does not
bind the COUNTY in any way to continue participation in the Joint Municipal
NPDES permit application process. COUNTY and DISTRICT each reserve the right
to terminate this AGREEMENT with 30 days' written notice, at which time a final
accounting will occur. Written notification to the following addresses by certified
mail, return receipt requested, constitutes adequate notice.
COUNTY DISTRICT
Contra Costa County Public Works County Flood Control District
255 Glacier Drive 255 Glacier Drive
Martinez, CA 94553 Martinez, CA 94553
In the event COUNTY terminates this AGREEMENT, COUNTY shall be responsible
for its prorata share of all expenses incurred up to the effective date of such
termination. COUNTY shall receive from DISTRICT all data or other information
prepared by DISTRICT for COUNTY at COUNTY's expense.
-Page 2 -
J
7. AGREEMENT MODIFICATION: This AGREEMENT shall be subject to modifica-
tion only with the written consent of both parties. Neither party shall. unreasonably
withhold its consent to the implementation and accomplishment of the overall
purpose for which this AGREEMENT is drawn.
8. AGREEMENT EXPIRATION: Unless earlier terminated under section 6 above,this
AGREEMENT shall expire 45 days following the final filing date of May 18, 1992 or
45 days following an extended final filing date and upon the completion of a report
of final costs and payment of funds.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY and
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL AND WATER
:CONSERVATI ICT
y:
hairman, Board of Supervisors
ATTE T:
Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the.Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
By: ; �.�
Deputy
Recommended for Approval:
J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director
and Chief Engineer
Form Approved:
Victor J. Westman
County Counsel
v
By:
Deputy
a:JEPA.CTY
NPDES(April 25,1991)
-Page 3 -
i
EXHIBIT F-1
RATE SCHEDULE FOR COMPUTER
DRAFTING*
Temporary Junior Drafter $18.48 to $22.89/hour
Senior Drafter $34.58 to $41.40/hour
CAD Operator $37.75 to $45.24/hour
Computer Terminal Time $22.00/hour
* Labor rates are valid through September 1991. Computer terminal time rate is valid for July 1991
through June 1992 Rates will be adjusted thereafter.
MFKIv
a:npdes2.9)d
(AprU 17,1991)
t