Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/17/2008 AGENDA BACKUPCentral Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 3.c. Consent Calendar Type of Action: ACCEPT CONTRACT WORK/AUTHORIZE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION subject: ACCEPT THE CONTRACT WORK FOR THE SERVICE AIR SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS, DISTRICT PROJECT 7210, AND AUTHORIZE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Gary Rathunde, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: G. Rathunde A. Antkowiak V PJKrki A. Farrell a" James/w. Kelly, General Manager ISSUE: Construction has been completed on the Service Air System Improvements, District Project 7210, and the work is now ready for acceptance. RECOMMENDATION: Accept the contract work for the Service Air System Improvements, District Project 7210, and authorize filing of the Notice of Completion. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None related to this action. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not applicable. Filing the Notice of Completion is advisable under the California Civil Code, Section 3093. BACKGROUND: Service air is used throughout the treatment plant for process level control, equipment operation, and maintenance activities. It is a critical utility system that had limited redundancy and without which the treatment plant cannot reliably operate. In the mid- 1980s, two Atlas Copco air compressors were installed in the Pump and Blower Building to replace the high maintenance, unreliable equipment installed during the treatment plant expansion of the mid 1970s. Normal operation utilizes one air compressor while the second compressor serves as standby. The treatment plant has experienced increases in service air usage resulting in the occasional need to run both compressors simultaneously. Also, the existing compressors were reaching the end of the typical service life of 135,000 hours. This project installed two new compressors and rehabilitated an existing compressor to function as a second standby unit. Additional modifications included three new air dryers, a new 5,000 - gallon air receiver tank, and a new heat exchanger skid to provide cooling for all the equipment. The project also installed a diesel driven compressor in N: \PESUP \Position Papers \Rathunde \7210_Accept.doc Page 1 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 Subject: ACCEPT THE CONTRACT WORK FOR THE SERVICE AIR SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS, DISTRICT PROJECT 7210, AND AUTHORIZE FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION the Solids Conditioning Building to provide backup service air for the plant's cogeneration unit to increase the reliability in the event of a power failure. On January 11, 2007, the Board of Directors authorized the award of a contract for the construction of the project to Monterey Mechanical Company. The Notice to Proceed was issued on February 20, 2007. The work was substantially completed on June 2, 2008. The remaining items of work consist of minor punch -list items, which do not affect the project acceptance. Immediately upon acceptance, the Contractor is relieved of the duty of maintaining and protecting the Contract work. Guaranty and warranty periods required by the Contract and the statutory period for filing of liens and Stop Notices start on the date of acceptance by the Board of Directors. Final payment to the Contractor is made after expiration of the statutory period for filing of liens and Stop Notices, provided no liens or Stop Notices have been filed, and provided the punch -list items have been completed. The total authorized budget for the project is $2,264,000. The budget includes the cost of engineering design, construction management and inspection, testing services, and contractor services. An accounting of the project costs will be provided to the Board at the time of project closeout. It is appropriate to accept the contract work at this time. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Accept the contract work for the Service Air System Improvements, District Project 7210, and authorize filing of the Notice of Completion. N:\PESUP \Position Papers\Rathunde \7210_Accept.doc Page 2 of 3 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 3.d. Consent Calendar Type of Action: INFORMATIONAL subject: ADVISE THE BOARD OF THE CLOSEOUT OF THE LOWER ORINDA PUMPING STATION RENOVATION — PHASE 2, DISTRICT PROJECT 5944 Submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.: Alexandr Mestetsky, Associate Engineer Engineering / Capital Projects REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: Z4 414 a4�� Air) L�'(A A. Me tetsky W. Penny ecki A. Farrell ames M Kelly, General Manager ISSUE: All work has been completed on the Lower Orinda Pumping Station Renovation — Phase 2, District Project 5944, and this project can now be closed out. RECOMMENDATION: Close out the project. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This closeout will result in approximately $400 being returned to the Collection System Program. Attachment 1 shows the project expenditures by category. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The project included a number of upgrades /improvements at the Lower Orinda and San Ramon Pumping Stations, which enhance reliability, maintainability, and safety. The project consisted of bypass and soft -start capabilities on the 250 -hp variable frequency drives for the wet - weather pumps, isolation gates for the new grinders, fuel day tank, modifications to the SCADA system, building security and fire alarm systems, emergency lighting, safety guard rail, and other miscellaneous items. Repair of a creek bank next to the Lower Orinda Pumping Station access road was added to the project. On April 5, 2007, the Board of Directors authorized the award of a construction contract for the pumping station work to GSE Construction Company, Inc. The Contractor was issued a Notice to Proceed that was effective May 21, 2007, with a completion date of May 30, 2008. The Board accepted the project on June 5, 2008. The original construction contract amount was $579,000. There were two (2) construction change orders issued in the total amount of $28,750. In addition, under a separate contract, ArcSine Engineering was paid $40,000 for programming of pumping stations SCADA. The total amount paid to GSE Construction and ArcSine Engineering was $647,750. N: \PESUP \Cbradley \Position Papers \Mestetsky \5944 - LOPS Closeout PP.doc Page 1 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 Subject. ADVISE THE BOARD OF THE CLOSEOUT OF THE LOWER ORINDA PUMPING STATION RENOVATION — PHASE 2, DISTRICT PROJECT 5944 Under a separate contract with Hillside Drilling, Inc., authorized by the Board on September 7, 2006, $66,600 was spent on creek bank stabilization adjacent to the Lower Orinda Pumping Station. The total construction cost for the project, including repair of a creek bank access road, was $714,350. The total authorized budget for the project was $1,130,300, which included a contingency of $115,800. The total project cost was $1,129,900, which is approximately the budgeted amount. The project closeout will result in $400 being returned to the Collection System Program (see Attachment 1 for Expenditure Summary). RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: This item is presented to the Board of Directors for information. No action is necessary. N:\PESUP\Cbradley \Position Papers \Mestetsky \5944 - LOPS Closeout PP.doc Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT 1 LOWER ORINDA PUMPING STATION RENOVATION — PHASE 2 DISTRICT PROJECT 5944 EXPENDITURE SUMMARY ACTIVITY COST Total Budget $1,130,300 Construction Contract (GSE, Inc.) $579,000 Change Orders $28,750 Change Order % of Construction 5% ArcSine Engineering Contract for Programming $40,000 Lower Orinda Access Road Stabilization project construction cost (Hillside Drilling, Inc.) $66,600 Total Construction Amount $714,350 Start -Up Testing (Pumping Stations) $38,000 Engineering, Design, CM, Admin. $377,550 Engineering, Design, CM, Admin. 53% TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $1,129,900 Amount be Returned to Collection System Program $400 NAPESUP\Cbradley \Position Papers \Mestetsky \5944 - LOPS Closeout PP.doc Page 3 of 3 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 3.e. Consent Calendar Type of Action: SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING subject: ESTABLISH AUGUST 7, 2008 AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED REIMBURSEMENT FEES FOR THE PROPERTIES WHICH COULD CONNECT TO JOB 5177 (DANVILLE BOULEVARD, ALAMO), JOB 6421 (AMBERWOOD LANE, WALNUT CREEK), AND JOB 6435 (RAMON COURT, DANVILLE) Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Earlene Millier, Engineering Assistant III Engineering /Environmental Services REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: E. Mlllier K. Darner . Swanson A. Farrell James Kelly General anager ISSUE: When a Reimbursement Fee is proposed for properties that could connect to a Special Facility or a Standard Facility installed by private individuals, the District Code requires a public hearing be held prior to the Board of Directors' adoption of the fee. RECOMMENDATION: Establish the Board's regularly scheduled meeting on August 7, 2008, as the date for a public hearing to receive comments on proposed Reimbursement Fees for properties which could connect to the Special Facilities identified as Job 5177 (Danville Boulevard, Alamo), the Standard Facilities identified as Job 6421 (Amberwood Lane, Walnut Creek), and to the Standard Facilities identified as Job 6435 (Ramon Court, Danville) FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None related to this action. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not Applicable. BACKGROUND: The design and construction of Special Facilities for Job 5177, and the Standard Facilities for Job 6421 and Job 6435 were paid for by private individuals. After a project is completed by the installer and accepted by the District, the installer contributes the project to the District for public use. Non - installer properties may connect to the contributed public sewers. The District Code provides for a Reimbursement Fee to the installer, so that the installer may recover a portion of the cost for the contributed facility. The proposed Reimbursement Fees would be collected from property owners when they connect to the sewer system. The collected fees would then be disbursed to the installers of the projects. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Millier\2008 \PP Set Hearing Reimb Fees 5177, 6421, 6435 7- 17- 08.doc POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 subject. ESTABLISH AUGUST 7, 2008 AS THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON PROPOSED REIMBURSEMENT FEES FOR THE PROPERTIES WHICH COULD CONNECT TO JOB 5177 (DANVILLE BOULEVARD, ALAMO), JOB 6421 (AMBERWOOD LANE, WALNUT CREEK), AND JOB 6435 (RAMON COURT, DANVILLE) The District Code requires that a notice of public hearing be mailed to owners of properties to which the fee could be applicable at least ten days in advance of the date set for the hearing. The notice is to include a general description of the reimbursement fee program, a description of the facility which gives rise to the proposed fee, and the amount of the proposed fee. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Establish the Board's regularly scheduled meeting on August 7, 2008 as the date for a public hearing to receive comments on proposed Reimbursement Fees for properties which could connect to the Special Facilities and the Standard Facilities identified above. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Mi11ier\2008 \PP Set Hearing Reimb Fees 5177, 6421, 6435 7- 17- 08.doc Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 3.f. Consent Calendar Type of Action: Human Resources Subject: AUTHORIZE MEDICAL LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITHOUT PAY FOR INSTRUMENT TECHNICIAN KEVIN KENDALL THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2008 Submitted By: Douglas J. Craig, Initiating Dept /Div.: Plant Operations Director of Operations REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: C. Freitas James A Kelly, Genera Manager ISSUE: Board of Directors' authorization is required for a medical leave of absence without pay in excess of 30 days. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize medical leave of absence without pay for Instrument Technician Kevin Kendall. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Minimal ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Deny extension of medical leave of absence without pay. BACKGROUND: Instrument Technician Kevin Kendall has been off of work since January 3, 2008, due to a medical condition, and went into an unpaid status on June 3. We request that the Board grant Mr. Kendall medical leave of absence without pay through December 31, 2008. Mr. Kendall's status will be reviewed at that time, and further Board action will be requested if appropriate. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize extension of medical leave of absence without pay for Instrument Technician Kevin Kendall through December 31, 2008. N: \POSUP \Correspondence \Position Papers\2008 \Kendall - Leave of Absence.doc Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 3.g. Consent Calendar Type of Action: APPROVE CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE subject: APPROVE CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE FOR BOARD MEMBERS MCGILL AND HOCKETT AT CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF SANITATION AGENCIES (CASA) Submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.: Elaine Boehme Administration Secretary of the District REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: Elaine R. Boehme Secretary of the District J qhes M. elly, 96neral flanager ISSUE: The Board must approve Board Members' attendance at conferences that have not already been approved by inclusion in the 2008 -09 operating budget. Although attendance at this conference has already been approved in the 2008 -09 budget, the Board is being asked to approve it in a separate action because the Conference and Meeting Attendance policy is currently under review and the process for approval of conference attendance not yet finalized. RECOMMENDATION: Approve conference attendance for Board Members McGill and Hockett for the Monterey CASA Conference from August 20, 2008 through August 23, 2008. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The amount of $2,000 per person has been included in the budget for each conference attendance. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: The Board may deny the approval of the conference attendance. BACKGROUND: Board Members McGill and Hockett have requested to attend the 53r Annual CASA Conference. They have both attended several previous conferences. The District is an active member of CASA and District staff also attends these conferences. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Approve conference attendance for Board Members McGill and Hockett to attend the 53r Annual CASA Conference in Monterey from August 20, 2008 through August 23, 2008. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 3.h. Consent Calendar Type of Action: APPROVE CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE subject: APPROVE CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE FOR BOARD MEMBERS MCGILL AND HOCKETT AT WATER ENVIRONMENT FEDERATION TECHNICAL EXHIBITION AND CONFERENCE (WEFTEC) submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.: Elaine Boehme Administration Secretary of the District REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: (�;C&dA,k� Elaine R. Boehme Secretary of the District V James . Kelly, GenerO Manager ISSUE: The Board must approve Board Members' attendance at conferences that have not already been approved by inclusion in the 2008 -09 operating budget. Although attendance at this conference has already been approved in the 2008 -09 budget, the Board is being asked to approve it in a separate action because the Conference and Meeting Attendance policy is currently under review and the process for approval of conference attendance not yet finalized. RECOMMENDATION: Approve conference attendance for Board Members McGill and Hockett for the Chicago WEFTEC from October 18, 2008 through October 22, 2008. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The amount of $2,000 per person has been included in the budget for each conference attendance. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: The Board may deny the approval of the conference attendance. BACKGROUND: Board Members McGill and Hockett have requested to attend the 81S Annual WEFTEC. Member McGill has attended a prior conference and found it to be of benefit to the District. The District is a member of WEFTEC and District staff also attends these conferences. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Approve conference attendance for Board Members McGill and Hockett to attend the 81St Annual WEFTEC in Chicago, IL from October 18, 2008 through October 22, 2008. Agenda Item 5 a.1 AERATION AIR RENOVATIONS CONSTRUCTION STATUS UPDATE DP 7207 Board Presentation July 17, 2008 ■ Reduce Air Leaks ■ Stabilize foundation ■ Grout utilization 47 _- , w ■ Construction Cost for N ew Aeration System (Pipe and Diffusers) $5 - 8 millions ■ Reduces air loss but does not stabilize foundation ■ Replacement Cost for New Aeration T anks (Structures) $60 -100 millions Financial Investnwit ■ Construction Cost of Grouting • Phase 1 $],430,000 • Phase 2 (Subject to Board. approval) $11,570,000 • Potential cost of Additional Grout ■ $500,000 perTank $1000.000 • Total Cost of Grouting Project $4,000,000 ■ Reduces air loss and stabilizes odsting tanks foundation Currei t E ffoit • Finished Grouting Tank 1 Passes A and B (40 plenums /pass; 160 plenums /Tank) • Started installation of coating Results to Date • Foundation appears to be stabilized • Good results from con4nessive tests Grout Issue • Specified 35 gallons of Prime Resin per pleinun box (based on pilot test results) • Utilized 60 gallons of Prime Resin per plenum box • E stimated Quantity of Prince Resin to complete Phase 1 is 4,400 gallons (Beyond specified quantity) • At the bid price of $100/ gal the additional cost is $440,000 • A similar amount of additional grout may be needed if the District proceeds with Phase 2 Summary of Major Change Orders For Phase 1 • Gaskets for T ank 1 passes A & B • Gaskets and Retaining Rings for Tank 1 passes C & D • N ew Pressure Relief Valves • Proposed grout to stabilize foundation 071 1 111 $97,000 $47,000 11 111 • 1 ' • •-1 111 ■ Proceed with completion of work this year since the aeration tanks are critical/ expensive asset ■ Air leaks reduced. ■ Foundation stabilized • E valuate results of completed wank on T ank 1 • If Board concuts with staff's recommendation, staff will attempt to negotiate a change order with the Contractor. A position paper authorizing a change order for additional grout will be brought to the Board on August 7, 2008 • By October 2008 detemmne if Phase 2 should be awarded or re-bid with revised specifications Grout Issue ■ Sika H H (another grout) demonstration Good performance in sealing cracks Used an average of 50 gallons per plenum N eM Step T Hs Year r t n Coat Grout and w ` Tank 1 "C TA K I " TANK 4 TA a wK 2 Passes and D _ Y lugano m: o : Work to start d �, .„ mid August cL ' a .a M 2008 - . _. Questions? Agenda Item 5.a.2) Central Contra Costa Sanitary District July 10, 2008 TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: ANN E. FARRELL, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SUBJECT: HOUSE HEARING ON ASSESSING STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS TO REDUCE DENTAL MERCURY EMISSIONS On July 8, 2008 1 had the opportunity to testify at a hearing before the Subcommittee on Domestic Policy of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the United States House of Representatives. This hearing was a continuation of a series of hearings, the most recent occurring in November of 2007, where members of the House have explored means and methods of reducing mercury in the environment. Several of the participating House members had personal anecdotes of health effects of mercury on themselves or their family members and were very passionate about this topic. This particular hearing focused on the dental industry and the use of amalgam separators. The Subcommittee members felt strongly that a mandatory amalgam separator program should be in place throughout the country. The majority of those testifying supported this concept. The American Dental Association representative was alone in testifying that a voluntary approach is adequate and they objected to mandatory requirements for amalgam separators. Several of those testifying had evidence of the local, state and national dental organizations fighting mandatory amalgam separator programs in their jurisdictions. The Subcommittee was particularly interested in programs that had successfully partnered with local and state dental societies. Those selected to testify had developed successful partnerships with their dental communities that had facilitated the implementation of their mandatory amalgam separator programs. I summarized our program in my five minute presentation and submitted a more lengthy written statement (attached to this memo) which will be posted for public information. The Subcommittee staff summarized the testimonies in a slide demonstrating that voluntary programs are relatively ineffective. Our CCCSD statistics were included, and as you may recall, we saw only 15% of dentists installing amalgam separators during our voluntary program and now have 98 +% participation with our mandatory program. The follow -up questions from the Subcommittee focused on their belief that the American Dental Association should embrace nationwide mandatory amalgam separator requirements. A more detailed summary of the hearing follows. It was prepared by ENS Resources, our CASA lobbyists, who were very helpful in coordinating delivery of our written materials to the hearing location and facilitating the logistics of my trip to Washington, D.C.. I believe my testimony was well received and put a very positive light on Central Contra Costa Sanitary District and our progressive programs. ir.1 NO >RESOURCEs MEMORANDUM TO: Ann Farrell, Director of Engineering, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District FROM: Eric Sapirstein, President, ENS Resources Joshua Mahan, Associate, ENS Resources DATE: July 9, 2008 SUBJECT: House of Representatives Hearing to Assess State and Local Regulations to Reduce Dental Mercury Emissions In our role as lobbyists for the California Association of Sanitation Agencies, we appreciated the opportunity to accompany you to the above hearing and assist with the delivery of the written materials. Your participation certainly casts a positive light on the progressiveness of California Sanitation Agencies. We have prepared the following summary of the hearing for your use. On July 8, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Domestic Policy held a hearing on efforts to reduce dental mercury emissions. The subcommittee heard testimony from the dental industry and state and local governments efforts to reduce mercury emissions. A list of witnesses and a summary of the proceedings follows below. A link to witnesses written testimony can be found here: http: / /domesticpolic .oversight.house. ov /story.asp ?ID =2066 Witnesses List • Michael Bender, Directory, Mercury Project • Dr. Richard Fischer, Former President, International Academy of Oral Medicine & Technology • Curt McCormick, Regional Coordinator, EPA Region 8 • William Walsh, Counsel, American Dental Association • Patricia Magnuson, Industrial Waste Investigator, King County, Seattle, Washington • Ann Farrell, Director of Engineering, Central Costa County Sanitary District • Dr. Mark Smith, Deputy Director & Co- Chair, Massachusetts Department of EPA • Owen Boyd, CEO, Solmetex (Amalgam Separator Manufacturer) ENS Resources, Inc. 1101 141h Street N. W., i Suite 350 Washington, D.C. 20005 / Telephone (202) 466 -3755 Telefax: (202) 466 -3787 www.ensresources.com Use of Mercury y Dentists Lawmakers raised concerns about the use and disposal of dental amalgam, which is used as a restorative material to repair tooth structure, most commonly known as fillings. Dental amalgam is composed of anywhere between 43% and 54% mercury. Witnesses testified that dental amalgam is frequently disposed in dental offices directly down the drain directly into wastewater influent. A study conducted by the World Health Organization in 2005 reported that mercury from amalgam and laboratory devices accounts for 53% of total mercury emissions worldwide. Impacts of Mercury Exposure Lawmakers and witnesses throughout the hearing highlighted the danger of human exposure to mercury as well as the environmental impacts. Exposure to mercury has been shown to carry particular risks to children and pregnant women. Rep. Dan Burton (R -IN) noted that dental amalgam is continually emitted in the form of mercury vapor in fillings, and emphasized the need to use other materials, such as composite or ceramic fillings. Impacts on POTWs Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D -OH) noted in his opening remarks that dental offices constitute the largest source of mercury in wastewater influent. The mercury is concentrated in biosolids, of which 60% is spread as land fertilizer, 20% is incinerated resulting in atmospheric release of mercury, and 15% is land- filled. Mark Bender testified that $250 billion a year is spent on the removal of mercury from POTWs. Efforts to Reduce Mercury Exposure The majority of the testimony surrounded efforts to reduce the amount of mercury entering wastewater streams. Witnesses testified to the relative affordability of installing mercury capturing devices in dental offices, known as amalgam separators, as well as the need for further cooperation from state and local dental associates. One of the main points of contention was whether state and local governments should institute mandatory or voluntary programs to install amalgam separators. Currently, only 9 states require amalgam separators. With the exception of William Walsh of the American Dental Association, the consensus among witnesses was that voluntary programs are significantly less successful than mandatory programs. Cooperation between state and local dental associations is important to incorporating amalgam separator programs. Ann Farrell of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District noted that the development of outreach materials and education of the dental community was valuable in acquiring the cooperation of local and state dental associations. This collaboration led to a 98% compliance rate with mandatory amalgam separators and a mercury influent reduction of 70 %. Curt McCormick of EPA Region 8 indicated that the Clean Water Act provides sufficient authority to require the regulation of mercury at dental offices. ENS Resources, Inc. 1101 14th Street N.W., I Suite 350 Washington, D.C. 20005 / Telephone (202) 466 -3755 Telefax: (202) 466 -3787 www.ensresources.com Outlook This hearing was a follow -up to a November hearing where the subcommittee heard testimony from the EPA and Food and Drug Administration. Panelists appeared particularly concerned about the American Dental Association's reluctance to cooperate with state and local efforts to reduce the introduction of mercury into wastewater streams. Lawmakers urged the ADA to cooperate with state and local governments to become part of the solution. Rep. Dianne Watson (D -CA) introduced legislation in May to require dental offices to warn customers about the health risks associated with amalgam fillings. This bill (H.R. 2101) does not speak to the amalgam separator issue; however, the bill seeks to raise public awareness of the dangers of mercury fillings. The subcommittee plans to continue using their oversight authority to put pressure on federal regulatory agencies to address this issue. The Food and Drug Administration is in the process of moving towards a final regulation on the reclassification of dental amalgam, and has updated its website to note "dental amalgam contains mercury, which may have toxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses." ENS Resources, Inc. 1101 14`h Street N. W., ` Suite 350 Washington, D.C. 20005 i Telephone (202) 466 -3755 Telefax: (202) 466 -3787 www.ensresources.com STATEMENT OF ANN E. FARRELL DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOMESTIC POLICY OF THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ASSESSING STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS TO REDUCE DENTAL MERCURY EMISSIONS Tuesday, July 8, 2008 2154 Rayburn House Office Building IT .2 Tm INTRODUCTION Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. I am Ann Farrell, Director of Engineering for Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ( CCCSD), a special district in Martinez, California, responsible for the collection and treatment of wastewater for approximately 450,000 residents and more than 10,000 businesses in central Contra Costa County. I appreciate this opportunity to discuss our successful program to require dentists in our service area to install amalgam separators to significantly reduce the mercury entering our treatment system and making its way to the receiving water and to the atmosphere. BACKGROUND The San Francisco Bay had been impaired for mercury for many years, due to the historical mercury discharges from upstream gold mining operations. The wastewater treatment facility community had long lobbied for a program to clean up acid mine drainage before focusing on wastewater discharges. However, the regulatory agencies determined that regulating point dischargers, such as wastewater treatment plants, was a more feasible solution and began development of regulatory limits to significantly reduce the amount of mercury wastewater treatment plants such as CCCSD could discharge in our effluent. While there are many sources of environmental mercury, there are none that represent as significant a contributor to domestic wastewater treatment plants as dental amalgam wastes. In 2002, CCCSD conducted a study of the wastewater coming into our plant and found that approximately 50% of the mercury it contained was coming from dental practices. At that time we began encouraging dentists in our service area to voluntarily use Best Management Practices (BMPs) which included installing amalgam separators and other actions to minimize the amount of mercury from amalgam wastes that entered our system. We used an extensive outreach program, with pieces such as the one labeled #2 and attached to this statement, to reach out to the dentists and encourage their participation. We attempted to survey the dental community to determine the number of dentists using BMPs, but received a very poor response to our survey. CCCSD staff also explored the concept of a mandatory amalgam separator program with the local dental community and found little support. The dental community appealed to our elected Board and claimed, accurately, that dental mercury represented a very small proportion of the actual mercury in the environment. At that time, our Board was sympathetic, and instructed staff to continue with outreach materials but not to pursue any type of a mandatory dental amalgam separator program. OUTREACH TO THE DENTAL COMMUNITY As the development of a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for the San Francisco Bay progressed, it became clear in late 2003 that significant reductions in CCCSD's mercury load to the Bay would likely be required. Now, with the changed regulatory situation, District staff wanted to enlist our elected Board and the dental community as partners in our efforts to reduce mercury at the source and avoid the resistance we had experienced in the past. Staff developed additional outreach materials documenting the changes in the regulatory climate and our potential regulatory risk, and began meeting with the local and state dental societies. We received a great degree of cooperation from Patricia Conley of the Contra Costa Dental Society (CCDS) and Roseanne Harding and Theresa Pichay of the California Dental Association (CDA) and thank them for their foresight. After discussions with the dental societies and our elected Board, staff determined that a logical first step would be to conduct an inventory of all dental practices in our service area to see what BMPs were actually being followed. In 2004, we conducted a survey of the dental practices in the CCCSD service area to obtain accurate inventory of the level of BMP implementation the dentists were employing. The use of the BMPs was voluntary but we made completion and submittal of the survey form mandatory so that we could obtain comprehensive data. After analyzing the information obtained from the survey responses, we observed that many of the BMPs were being used by most of the dental practices except that very few had installed amalgam separators; less than 15 %. In addition, we found no significant change in the amount of mercury in the wastewater coming into our treatment plant between 2002 and 2004. We continued our outreach efforts with the dental community, sharing the results of our inventory and emphasizing our anticipated more stringent mercury discharge limitation. An outreach piece used as part of the inventory program is included as attachment #3. Through the assistance of the CCDS, we were able to set up an educational seminar at one of their meetings where we could explain our regulatory situation. The CCDS and CDA arranged for the attendees to receive continuing education credits, and for a variety of amalgam separator vendors to sponsor an equipment fair at the same venue. We were able to show that equipment costs for separators had decreased and that installation costs were not prohibitive. We also emphasized that dentists should be good stewards of the environment and should advertise to their clients that they were taking extra steps to keep mercury out of the environment. At each of our outreach meetings the majority of the dentists were supportive. They acknowledged that it was relatively inexpensive for them to install equipment that would significantly reduce their mercury discharges to the environment. They further suggested that many dentists would likely not make the investment unless a mandatory program was implemented. In a cost competitive environment, it is unlikely that any but the most serious environmentalist would disadvantage themselves by incurring a cost that their neighboring dentist did not. During this same time period, we took the opportunity to recognize any dental practice that voluntarily installed an amalgam separator through our annual Pollution Prevention Awards Program. However, this recognition was only conferred upon thirteen dentists during the voluntary phase of the program. Based on this series of meetings and discussions with CDA and CCDS staff and the CCDS Executive Board, District staff became comfortable that the majority of the dental community would comply with a mandatory amalgam separator program. Staff asked representatives of the CCDS and CDA to address our elected Board to demonstrate that we had worked collaboratively with the professional societies to design the program elements. We then came to the Board with a formal proposal to implement a mandatory dental amalgam program with the endorsement of the CDA and CCDS. The proposal received unanimous support from our Board in April 2006. At the same time, the Board eliminated permit fees for the class of permits that included dental practices. Our Board recognized that the reduction of mercury benefited all CCCSD ratepayers by reducing, or eliminating, the need for costly mercury removal treatment processes at the treatment plant. This decision was seen as a positive step and an indication of our desire to partner with the dental community. DEVELOPMENT OF PERMITTING APPROACH After achieving buy -in by the dental community and the approval of our Board, staff worked on developing the details of the approach. We determined that each dentist would receive a BMP permit which would detail a number of BMPs, including the installation of an amalgam separator. Due to the number of dental practices to be permitted (preliminary estimate in the 300 -400 range), the permitting program would be phased in over a one year period in order to spread out the demand on suppliers and installers. The dentists would be asked to self certify and include some documentation that a separator had actually been installed. If the dental office did not place or remove amalgam fillings, they could apply for a permit exemption if they had not already done so during the inventory project described above. The permitting concepts were developed and reviewed with CCDS and CDA representatives and with our Board to maintain consensus on the program details as we moved forward. IMPLEMENTATION OF PERMITTING PROGRAM The implementation began with the development of the actual permitting materials. Again, the CCDS and CDA were provided with draft copies for input. Attachment #4 contains a sample permit letter and permit. The permit required a self - certification that an amalgam separator had been installed. The permits were mailed in three batches and the compliance dates were staggered to facilitate CCCSD workload but also to ensure that the plumbers and amalgam separator vendors would not be overburdened with all the dentists in the service area having one compliance date. The mandatory permit and certification process was completed in ten months and was complicated because of turnover of dentists at many offices. After the final deadline of December 31 2007 had passed only a few dentists had not submitted the required certification forms. Today, a total of 318 dental practices have been issued a BMP permit and 314 have submitted the required certification forms for a 98 +% compliance rate. The next step in the permitting program is to begin site visits to verify proper maintenance of the separators and proper implementation of other best management practices. Our goal is to visit all offices over a 5 -year period. MONITORING TO ESTABLISH EFFECTIVENESS OF PERMITTING PROGRAM The effectiveness of the program is demonstrated not only by percent compliance, but also by the reduction in mercury in our influent and effluent. A targeted monitoring program downstream of two sites where dental practices are concentrated has shown a significant reduction in mercury within our collection system at these locations. Our influent mercury concentration entering the treatment plant has been reduced over 70% from 0.27 parts per billion (ppb) in 2002 to 0.08 ppb in 2008 (through April). Our effluent mercury concentration being discharged to Suisun Bay has been reduced by almost 50% from 0.029 ppb in 2002 to 0.0148 ppb in 2008. In addition, the variability, or range of results, for both the influent and effluent sampling has decreased since the mandatory program was initiated in 2007 (see the graphs included as Attachment #1 to this testimony). REASONS FOR SUCCESS Our experience has shown that a voluntary dental amalgam separator installation program does not achieve significant results with regards to dental practices installing amalgam separators. While many of the dental community are aware of their potential impact on the environment, they are not motivated to the point where they will devote the time and money to install an amalgam separator without an external driver. However, if you work with your local dental society to roll out a mandatory dental amalgam program with a reasonable time for compliance and involve dentists in the development of the program details, our experience is that the majority of the dentists will readily comply. By mandating amalgam separator installation for all, the playing field is essentially leveled with no competitive disadvantage for a dental practice to comply. In summary, CCCSD staff and our elected Board are extremely pleased with our program. We have significantly reduced the mercury emissions to the environment with the willing cooperation of the dental community. To thank them for their efforts, we have recently sent all dental offices a letter from our Board president and we have recognized them in our customer newsletter. ATTACHMENTS TO STATEMENT OF ANN E. FARRELL BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOMESTIC POLICY OF THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ASSESSING STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS TO REDUCE DENTAL MERCURY EMISSIONS Tuesday, July 8, 2008 2154 Rayburn House Office Building 1. CCCSD Influent and Effluent mercury data from 2002 to 2008. 2. Initial dental outreach Best Management Practice (BMP) brochure. 3. Outreach BMP brochure sent out with Dental Inventory BMP survey. 4. Example of dental BMP permit issued to dental practice with cover letter. 0.080 = 0.070 0 = 0.060 0 C R 0.050 CL 0.040 0.030 NU CL 0.020 0.010 0.000 Attachment 1 Ann Farrell Testimony July 8, 2008 CCCSD Influent (To Wastewater Treatment Plant) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year Influent Annual Average — Influent Monthly Maximum CCCSD Effluent (Discharge to Suisun Bay) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year �- Effluent Annual Average Effluent Monthly Maximum ppm = parts per million (mg /L) 1.200 0 1.000 o = c = 0 0.800 d Q 0.600 0.400 CL 0.200 0.000 0.080 = 0.070 0 = 0.060 0 C R 0.050 CL 0.040 0.030 NU CL 0.020 0.010 0.000 Attachment 1 Ann Farrell Testimony July 8, 2008 CCCSD Influent (To Wastewater Treatment Plant) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year Influent Annual Average — Influent Monthly Maximum CCCSD Effluent (Discharge to Suisun Bay) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Year �- Effluent Annual Average Effluent Monthly Maximum ppm = parts per million (mg /L) don and 7ay0en save you money.', ?­ They're goodfor the environment your patients, and your busi- ness CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT r �_S'Dl cAi-cs Dental Offices and Mercury Pollution Prevention Preventing Pollution at the Source Protecting public health and the environ- ment is the primary responsibility of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD). Besides collecting, treating and safely disposing of wastewater, we also work to effectively prevent pollution at the source. San Francisco Bay is Impaired by Mercury The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) reports that San Francisco Bay is "impaired due to mercury pollution" Mercury is a bioaccumulative toxic heavy metal that can cause detrimental health effects. In the water, some mercury is converted to methylmercury by bacteria or chemical reactions. Methylmercury levels in fish consumed from San Francisco Bay may threaten human health. Dental Offices and Mercury Pollution Prevention Our research shows that dental offices are the major source of mercury in CCCSD's wastewater which is ultimately discharged to San Francisco Bay (see chart on page 4). Despite having one of the most advanced facilities in the country, our treatment process cannot complete- ly eliminate toxic heavy metals such as mercury from our effluent. Pollution prevention is a key aspect of our mission and a requirement of our National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. We currently meet our Federal, Regional and State limits for mercury in our dis- charged wastewater. However, the Regional Board is considering changes to the mercury limit; future reg- ulatory actions may impose tighter limitations that we will not be able to meet. dumped down drains E t Do not clean up a mercury spill with a commercial vacuum cleaner. Appropriately trained personnel should clean the spill. ercury D4111 `Kit Use predosed encap- sulated amalgam; discontinue use of bulk mercury and bulk alloy. 0 P_.04 P P '04 O'.A , PJ4 OVAAi Drain Keep all mercury amalgam waste out of the drains (e.g. excess amalgam, fil- tered wastes) Use a line cleanser or disinfectant that will not solubilize mercury retained in the plumb- ing system. l FA-F%7 49 LK �i Use mercury-free Store scrap amalgam alternatives to waste in a designated, amalgam, when airtight container for appropriate. disposal by the appropriate agency or recycler. Clean or replace chair - side amalgam traps or screens regularly. Install and properly maintain an ISO - certified amalgam separator. Clean or replace central vacuum filters or traps regularly. Central Vacuum Pump so We need your help in developing solutions to this pollution problem. We are hoping that the Best Management Practices described in this brochure are techniques that you will be willing and able to implement in your dental practice; many of them may already be part of your routine. The American Dental Association also endorses use of these BMPs. Currently, these are voluntary measures in our service area. However, if voluntary meth- ods are not effective in reducing the amount of mercury present in our wastewater dis- charge, mandatory mercury- reducing meas- ures may be required for your dental practice. We are hopeful that by working together, this action will not be necessary. Additional information is available on our web site, www.centralsa". i oge e r.. • R work to P140tect our environment. 5033 -11/03 Household Food Waste (1 %) Human Waste Due to Dietary Intake (2 %) Mercury Thermometers (residential) (9 %) Human Waste Due to —_ Amalgam Fillings (18 %) Laundry Graywater (residential) (21%) Permitted Industries (0.3 %) Household Products (0.1%) Dental Offices (47 %) Source: CCCSD Mercury Source Reduction Technical Memorandum, January 29, 2003 rtinez Clyde • Ma • Pacheco • Concord • Pleasant Hill • Clayton \116- - • Walnut Creek OroLafayette • • Alamo • Moraga Danville Sewage collection and wastewater treat- ment (and Household Hazardous Waste collection service) for 302,675 people Wastewater treatment for 135,900 residents in Concord and Clayton by contract and Household Hazardous Waste collection service Household Hazardous Waste collection service only San Ramon Southern • San Ramon E CCCSD' Headquarters Office Building, treatment plant, and HHW Collection Facility are located in Martinez A CCCSD's Collection System Operations Division (sewer main- tenance) is based in Walnut Creek CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SAN ITARY DISTRICT CC $ D1, Dental Offices and Mercury Pollution Prevention ♦ Reducing mercury in wastewater is key Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) is concerned about mercury levels in our wastewater. As part of our operating permit, we are required to meet specific discharge limits. Most of the pollutants in our treatment plant discharges, including mercury, come from our customers. While most of the mercury we receive is removed during the treatment process, the rest has to be discharged into the Bay because no treatment method currently exists to completely remove it from wastewater. Reducing sources of mercury prior to reaching the sewer is the best way to reduce mercury contamination in both air and water. CCCSD currently meets Federal, State and Regional limits for mercury in our discharged wastewater. However, earlier this year the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board slashed the amount of mercury CCCSD will be allowed to discharge into the Bay by 58 %. In order to stay in compliance, we will have to significantly reduce the amount of mercury coming into the treatment plant. This will especially impact our largest mercury contributors - dental offices. ♦ Wastewater from dental offices is a major source of mercury Sources of mercury pollution in wastewater include dental offices, medical facilities, schools, residences, businesses and industry. In a recent surrey of seven major wastewater treatment plants in California, Minnesota, Ohio, and Maine, dentists were identified as the greatest contributors of mercury. CCCSD estimates that approximately 50% of the mercury in our waste- water comes from dental offices. That's more than double the second largest source, residential laundry gray water. The use, removal and improper disposal of amalgam are currently the most significant mercury contributors to our wastewater treatment plant. We estimate that about 88% of the dental mercury discharged to our sewers is from filling removals. Over 32.3 pounds of mercury entered CCCSD's wastewater treatment plant this past year, and our new limit allows the plant to discharge only 4.9 pounds. On average, each dental practice contributes an estimated 0.4 to 0.5 ounces of mercury per year. Mercury dumped down drains will reach the Bay... fi Use predosed encap- sulated amalgam; discontinue use of bulk mercury and bulk alloy. Keep all mercury amalgam waste out of the drains (e.g. excess amalgam, fil- tered wastes). Do not clean up a Use a line cleanser mercury spill with a or disinfectant that commercial vacuum will not solubilize cleaner. Appropriately mercury retained in trained personnel the plumbing system. should clean the spill. N Xq N" :z6ry 0 I I U I I H II Use mercury-free Store scrap amalgam alternatives to waste in a designat- amalgam, when ed, airtight container appropriate. for disposal by the appropriate agency or recycler. Clean or replace chairside amalgam Install and properly traps or screens maintain an ISO regularly. certified amalgam separator. Clean or replace central vacuum filters or traps regularly. ♦ Dental Inventory Program Because CCCSD has identified dental offices as the major source of mercury in our wastewater, we need the help of the dental community to reduce this amount. CCCSD's Board of Directors endorsed a Dental Inventory Program as a first step toward achieving this reduction. The Dental Inventory Program will provide CCCSD with more comprehensive information on what dental offices are discharging and will help to better promote the use of dental Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control mercury sources. All dental offices that generate mercury wastes in CCCSD's service area will be required to complete an Inventory Report Form which identifies the dental office's current BMPs on proper disposal of mercury wastes. By using BMPs, dentists can easily reduce their mercury wastes, which we anticipate will significantly reduce CCCSD's mercury discharge into the Bay. ♦ Mercury pollution prevention is the answer Pollution prevention is the best approach to reduce the release of mercury into the environment. CCCSD's Dental Inventory Program is the next step in our campaign to control mercury pollution. CCCSD already encourages people to bring mercury thermometers, elemental mer- cury, fluorescent lamps and other mercury- containing products to our HHW Collection Facility for proper disposal. It is more effective to contain and dispose of mercury waste at the source than to develop expensive treatment and disposal technologies to manage it after dilution with wastewater. The California Dental Association agrees and has expressed support for State regulations encouraging small businesses to implement pollution prevention practices designed to reduce targeted wastes, including mercury. ♦ Let's work together BMPs are some of the most effective ways to prevent mercury from reaching the sewer. Work with CCCSD as partners in our mercury pollution prevention program by incorporating the BMPs contained in this fact sheet into your office. For more information, refer to the CCCSD web site www.centralsan.org. Together, we can work to protect our environment 5039-11/04 Household Food Waste (1 %) \ Human Waste Due to Dietary Intake \ (2 %) Mercury Thermometers (residential) (9 %) Human Waste Due to -- Amalgam Fillings (18 %) Laundry Graywater (residential) (21%) Permitted Industries (0.3 %) Household Products (0.1%) Dental Offices - (47 %) Source: CCCSD Mercury Source Reduction Technical Memorandum, January 29, 2003 \4 Clyde of • Concord Sewage collection and waste - water treatment (and Household Hazardous Waste collection service) for 303,980 people Wastewater treatment for 135,845 residents in Concord and Clayton by contract and Household Hazardous Waste collection service Household Hazardous Waste collection service only Ithern I Ramon CCCSD's Headquarters Office Building, treatment plant, and HHW Collection Facility are located in Martinez CCCSD's Collection System Operations Division (sewer maintenance) is based in Walnut Creek Central Contra Costa Sanitary District February 28, 2007 FAX: (925) 372 -7635 Mohamed Ali 'o ne a Manager 3189 DANVILLE Blvd Ste. 110 ALAMO, CA 94507 KENTON L. ALM Counsel for the District (510) 808 -2000 Dear Dr. Mohamed Ali, DDS: ELAINE R. BOEHME Secretary of the District DENTAL PRACTICE WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (District) staff have worked with the Contra Costa Dental Society (CCDS) and the California Dental Association (CDA) to develop outreach materials that explain the challenges of mercury source control, especially that of dental amalgam mercury discharged to the District's sewer system. In October 2006, the District, the CCDS, and the CDA held a training on the mandatory amalgam separator program and a separator vendor fair at a Dental Society meeting. More than 100 participants received continuing education credit for attending. Enclosed please find a Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Dental Practice Wastewater Discharge Permit for your practice. There is no fee for this Permit. Central San's Local Discharge Limit, as mandated by State regulation, is very low for mercury discharges to the sanitary sewer system. However, by implementing all the applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs), including the installation and proper operation of an ISO - certified amalgam separator as noted in your Permit, your practice will be considered to be in compliance with this limit. Be sure to keep all records required by the Permit for an on -site visit to your practice to verify compliance. You must complete the required forms and mail them to the District by the deadlines specified in the Permit. The first form for submission is a self- certification form stating that you have installed, operate, and maintain an amalgam separator downstream of all areas where amalgam is placed or removed. A return envelope is enclosed for your use. The District has attempted to identify the dental practices that qualify for exemption from the mandatory amalgam separator requirement before mailing out these permits. If you believe that this requirement does not apply to your practice, please fill out and return the enclosed Exemption Certification. A decision on your application for an exemption may depend on a site visit by District staff. Also enclosed are the District - approved Dental BMPs for the operation of ISO - certified amalgam separators, and a list of Frequently Asked Questions. Workshops to help you or your staff understand and comply with this Permit will be held on March 26, 2007 and April 5, 2007. Please refer to the enclosed flyer for times and locations. Thank you for your time to review and understand the goals and elements of this important program. Please contact me with any questions at (925) 229 -7380 or tpotter @centralsan.dst.ca.us, or Steve Linsley at (925) 229 -7107 or slinsley @centralsan.dst.ca.us. Sincerely, Ti,4� Potte r Timothy Potter, Source Control Program Superintendent TP:cb / Enclosures Recycled Paper Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Dental Practice Class III Wastewater Discharge Permit Dental Practice Name: Mohamed Ali Address: 3189 DANVILLE Blvd Ste. 110, ALAMO, CA, 94507 Responsible Party: Mohamed Ali Effective Date of Permit: March 1, 2007 Renewal Date of Permit: January 1, 2010 Permit Fee: $0 In order to reduce the amount of mercury introduced to the District's wastewater flow, the Permittee shall comply with the following requirements: 1. Install an ISO Standard 11143 certified amalgam separator on: a. all vacuum lines that receive amalgam waste that directly discharge to the sanitary sewer; or b. the central vacuum system upstream from its connection to the sanitary sewer. 2. Certify by mail by August 31, 2007 (using the enclosed certification form) that the separator is installed, operating, and maintained according to manufacturer's specifications. A one -time extension of up to two months may be granted if the Permittee submits written justification for the extension to the District and the District approves the extension. 3. Maintain the amalgam separator(s) in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. Keep a maintenance log per manufacturer's recommendations. Retain amalgam separator maintenance, amalgam waste generation and off -haul records onsite for five years, available for District review upon request. 4. Ensure that all appropriate staff have read and follow the District's "Dental Mercury Best Management Practices" (BMPs) that are included with this permit and available on the District website. 5. Eliminate any and all discharge of x -ray developing fixer and associated rinses unless these solutions are treated to meet the District's Local Discharge Limit for silver of 1 mg /L. 6. Zero discharge of chemical sterilant solutions unless these solutions have been treated to render them nonhazardous. 7. Provide the District with the names of all dentists practicing at this office. 8. Submit an annual Periodic Compliance Report (PCR) to the District's Source Control Section by July 31St of each year using the enclosed form certifying compliance with the conditions of this permit and providing information on permit condition 7 above. 9. Report to the District within 10 days of any changes, permanent or temporary, to the premises or operations that materially deviate from the terms and conditions under which this permit is granted. Permittee's compliance with the requirements of this permit shall be deemed to be in compliance with the District's Local Discharge Limit for mercury (0.003mg /L). Enforcement of violations of Permit Terms and Conditions, and provisions of District Ordinance Title 10, may result in enforcement remedies and penalties provided for in Title 10, Chapter 16. The above -named Permittee is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater to the sanitary sewer, subject to said Permittee's compliance with District Title 10 and the above Permit Terms and Conditions. t� 1 Timothy Potte Source Control Program Superintendent FEB 2 8 2007 Date s. rt - �) July 17, 2008 CSO Project City of Walnut Creek Approval Process Schedule of Public Meetings Meeting Date Design Review Commission (DRC) Study May 7, 2008 Session (Completed) • City staff makes presentation on project • DRC reviews project and provides feedback to applicant before taking a formal vote l Design Review Commission June 4, 2008 (Completed) • DRC votes to recommend project for Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Planning Commission June 10, 2008 (Completed) • Planning Commission approves CUP Design Review Commission July 16, 2008 (Completed, conditional upon approval of • DRC approves project after 20 scale landscape plan and further considering District's CEQA information on maintenance of Cal Trans document as a responsible agency. area adjacent to site) Meeting Time and Location: All meetings held at 7 pm in the City Council Chambers located at City Hall, 1666 North Main Street. v CL 0 0 0 CO) �O Ml Ml =0 n �. _. 0 F �F 0 CL c a lb n a. = 3 0 =. = C In CL CL c o °:Co 00 cc co CD ~' CL 0 = 0 O � n c. c -, o � m -% = CD 0 cD �D O n cD to 3 CO) D '= 0 19 m W a W 3 c r* > cD CL �. CL x U . ? t/ ) to n 1 r* _ O � O 0 =� C 0 (D S C N 7 y CD to CL ' �d CCD cr d 0 c 3 3 CL ° 0 rt (D !S) a1 �Q CL a c 3 cD a. m c a' c co O O D O 0 CD N o GO co _ L C 3 0 m m c°o to N � No N o 0 0 co v CL 0 0 0 CO) �O Ml Ml =0 n �. _. 0 F �F 0 CL c a lb Agenda Item 5.a.5) Board Meeting of July 17, 2008 Written Announcements: General Updates/Follow Up a) Update on Gateway Subdivision Work on the public sewer system to serve the "Wilder Development" (formerly "Gateway" and "Montanera ") in Orinda, across Highway 24 from the California Shakespeare Festival near the Caldecott Tunnel, started on June 24, 2008. The development includes 245 lots for single - family homes, a community center, a private swim club, and sports fields dedicated to the City of Orinda Parks and Recreation Department. The sewer system will include about 26,000 feet of new public main sewer and 150 manholes. The first 2,700 feet of the main sewer follows an emergency access road and recreational trail from the end of Brookside Road off Moraga Way (adjacent to the McDonnell Nursery), into the roadways fronting the first lots to be developed. b) Update on District Internet Site The District's newly redesigned and updated website will be officially launched on Monday, July 21. The website address remains www.centralsan.ora . Please take a look at the site at your convenience and forward any comments to Communication Services Manager Michael Scahill. This is just the first stage of the new website. In the coming months we expect to introduce on -line job applications, videos, simplified e-mail addresses, and elements of our GDI system for customers who want detailed looks into work scheduled for their neighborhoods. c) Update on District Historical Marker Project We are also nearing completion of the District historical marker project as granite markers are now being mounted on a variety of sites. As you may recall, when originally approved by the Board in 2006, the cost of bronze plaques and mounting was in excess of $20,000. I'm pleased to announce that a shift to granite plaques — far less likely to be stolen than bronze ones — and their mountings cost less than half of the original estimate. A press release and a Pipeline article are planned. Agenda Item 5.a.5) Board Meeting of July 17, 2008 Additional Written Announcements: General Updates /Follow Up d) Natural Gas Costs The recent drop in natural gas pricing to below $12.00 per decatherm enabled the District to pre - purchase 1,000 decatherms per day of natural gas for August through October at $11.33 per decatherm. Although this is above the $10.80 budgeted for fiscal year 2008 -2009, this purchase provides the District with protection from price increases caused by hurricanes at this time of year in the gas producing areas of the country. e) Natural Gas Supply Line The 100 -psi natural gas supply line to the treatment plant and Headquarter Office Building (HOB) developed leaks at four locations from corrosion failures. The 30 -year old line runs 4,000 feet along the west boundary of the treatment plant to the south side of the primary treatment tanks, and supplies natural gas to the HOB. There is currently no heat or hot water supplied to the HOB because natural gas has been turned off. Engineering staff has developed a piping modification to re- establish the natural gas supply to the HOB from the 200 -psi gas line serving the rest of the treatment plant. This work should begin early next week. The need for separate, low- pressure natural gas service from Pacific Gas and Electric to the HOB will be evaluated after modifications are completed, and heat and hot water restored. f) County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update /Partnership Contra Costa County has asked the District to partner with them and others in updating and improving integration and risk assessment between jurisdictions for the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The County has received a grant for this project and has contracted with Tetra Tech to organize and coordinate the efforts. The approved plan is a requirement to obtain grant funding from the Federal Emergency Management Association's (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant and the new pre- disaster programs. Staff will be working with the consultant and County while updating the District's plan. m e y e r s I n a v e riback silver & wilson professional law corporation MEMORANDUM DATE: July 11, 2008 TO: Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District FROM: Kenton L. Alm Kenton L. Alm Attorney at Law 510.808.2000 RE: MODIFICATIONS TO PROPOSED DISTRICT CODE CONCERNING OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES AND CHARITY CAR WASHES As part of the ongoing District Code revisions, the Board has provided direction concerning overflow protection devices ( "OPD ") and permitting of charity car washes. Prior to producing the final version of the Code revisions and setting the matter for public hearing, staff and your Counsel wish to provide you with additional drafts of these two provisions to better ensure that proposed language in the final draft of the Code will meet your expectations. With regard to the modifications to Chapter 9.15 (Overflow Protection Devices) the Board directed modification of the proposed language to include alternative number 5 as provided in the staff report. This alternative directed that OPDs would be required for all new construction and upon repair or replacement of existing side sewers (laterals). The intention of the Board was to eliminate a mandatory retroactive requirement for installation of OPDs on all structures. Attachment 1 was an initial attempt to modify the Code language to conform to the Board's direction in the simplest possible manner'. However, this approach may not be appropriate because it does not directly address several issues, including the continuing requirement for OPDs on properties that were constructed at times when, and in locations where, the District's standard specifications and ordinances so required. Your Counsel and staff's understanding is that the Board intends to merely eliminate the retroactive application of a mandatory requirement for installation of OPDs on structures that were constructed at a time where that structure was not required to have an OPD, unless new construction occurs or a side sewer repair or replacement is needed. Attachment 2 is an attempt to make clear that the modifications to the ordinance do not intend to eliminate the existing requirements for those residences and structures which were required at the time of construction to install an OPD. The language in Attachment 2 is somewhat more detailed, nonetheless, it is my recommendation that that this language or similar language 1 Please note that the modifications shown on Exhibits 1 and 2 reflect only changes to the draft language previously brought before the Board. 55512th Street, Suite 1500 1 Oakland, California 94607 I tel 510.806.2000 1 fax 510.444.1108 1 www.meyersnave.com LOS ANGELES • OAKLAND • SACRAMENTO • SAN FRANCISCO SANTA ROSA To: Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District From: Kenton L. Alm Re: MODIFICATIONS TO PROPOSED DISTRICT CODE CONCERNING OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES AND CHARITY CAR WASHES Date: July 11, 2008 Page: 2 be adopted in order to provide greater clarity to property owners that continue to be required to have a functioning OPD. A short history of prior ordinances is included under the Board's findings in an attempt to provide some context for the remaining provisions. An additional modification is included to provide staff with authority to waive permit and inspection fees for overflow protection device installations in an effort to encourage voluntary installations. Separately, draft language is provided with regard to the modifications of Title 10 to incorporate a permit by rule for charity car washes. This language is included as Attachment 3. The language being provided is extremely simple. The approach set forth is to refer car wash organizers to the District's website or staff to obtain information on the appropriate procedures (BMPs) for their circumstances. The BMP information is intended to be provided as a courtesy; however there is no requirement that car wash organizers contact the District or obtain any prior approval of specific BMPs for their car wash. Hopefully, the Attachments capture the Board's intentions with regard to the OPD and charity car wash issues. The Board's preference is solicited as to appropriate version of Chapter 9.15 to be included in the Code revisions. To the extent that these suggested redrafts do not capture the Board's intention, further comment or direction is also solicited. KLA:mcv 1119956.3 Attachment 1 Chapter 9.15 OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES 9.15.010 Overflow protection devices. A. Findings.— The District finds that overflow protection devices are necessary to minimize the volume of sewage overflows and flooding of public and private premises, protect the health and safety of the District, its residents and visitors and the environment, and to minimize damage to District and private property. Proper installation and maintenance of overflow protection devices by property owners and long term leaseholders of residential, industrial and commercial properties constitute an integral part of the private and public sewage collection system designed to convey sewage from buildings throughout the District to the treatment plant. Failure of property owners and long term leaseholders to properly install and maintain overflow protection devices can prevent the proper functioning of the sewage collection system as designed. B. Mandatory Installation and Maintenance. All property owners and long term leaseholders shall install and maintain a overflow protection device on any side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to, the District's sewer system for all new construction, all new connections to District's system, and upon all repairs or replacements of any side sewer. This requirement applies to all such persons, regardless of •�•h�erwhen they acquired or leased the serviced propertybe€oEeE after the date— €erfaal adept i en of this Ghap er. In this Code, the term "overflow protection device" includes both overflow protection devices and backwater check valves and shutoff systems, and any other devices the District may approve from time to time for such purposes. All overflow protection devices shall comply with the requirements of the Standard Specifications and shall be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. 1. New Side Sewer Installations, Alterations, or Repairs to Existing Side Sewer Installations. No person shall install, alter, or repair a side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to the District sewer system without installing a overflow protection device of the type and in the manner prescribed in the Standard Specifications and the permit requirements included in Title 5 of this Code, except as provided for in Section 9.15.020. 2. Maintenance Requirements. All overflow protection devices shall be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. All overflow protection devices shall be accessible at all times and shall be free from any obstructions including, but not limited to, rocks, soil, vegetation, grass, trees, bushes, plants, landscaping, concrete, asphalt or other ground coverings that may impair the function of and accessibility to the overflow protection devices. 3. Elevation and Sizing Requirements. All overflow protection devices shall be installed at an elevation and of a size that protects the property from damage. It is the property owner's or long term leaseholder's responsibility to either confirm that the overflow protection device is at the proper elevation and size, or to obtain competent assistance from a licensed plumber or contractor to confirm its proper elevation and size. If any subsequent modification of the property results in the overflow protection device being undersized or at an improper elevation, the property owner or long term leaseholder shall adjust or replace the overflow protection device to the proper elevation and /or size. C. Failure to Follow the Overflow Protection Device Requirements. Property owners or long term leaseholders whose property is required to be protected by an overflow protection device by this Chapter, shall be responsible for resultant damages as follows. The property or leaseholder whose property has no overflow protection device in violation of this Chapter, or has a defective or improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device, shall be responsible for all damage that results from the lack of such an overflow protection device, or the failure of a defective or improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device to prevent such damage. Should it be determined that property damage is sustained as the result of overflow protection device located at an improper elevation, the property owner or long term leaseholder shall be responsible for any such damage. (Ord. 226 § 2, 2003: Ord. 198 § 3 (Exh. C (part) ) , 1996) 9.15.020 Limited exceptions to requirement for overflow protection devices. A. Findings Regarding Exception Requests. The District finds that some property owners or long term leaseholders who are required to have or install overflow protection devices pursuant to this Chapter may prefer to apply for an exception to the requirements herein for installation of a overflow protection device, or that it may be particularly onerous technically, financially or aesthetically for some properties where overflow protection devices were not installed when the side sewer was first built. The District also finds, however, that failing to install a overflow protection device may pose a serious risk to the health, safety and property of the District, its residents and businesses; hence, if a property owner or long term leaseholder chooses not to install a overflow protection device the property owner or long term leaseholder should bear all liability arising from sewage overflow or flooding caused by the failure to install such an overflow protection device. The District and its officers, agents and employees shall not be liable for any injury or death to any person or damage to any property caused by the failure of a property owner or long term leaseholder to install a overflow protection device. B. Permissible Exceptions to Requirement for Overflow Protection Devices; Waiver and Assumption of Liability. A property owner or long term leaseholder otherwise required to have installed and maintained —an overflow protection device pursuant to this Chapter, for a building which has been previously connected to the District's sewer system without a properly installed overflow protection device may apply for an exception to the requirements herein for installation and maintenance of such an overflow protection device. If a property owner or long term leaseholder applies for an exception pursuant to this Subsection, the exception may be either granted or denied by the District. If the exception is granted, an agreement for an exception will be recorded with the Contra Costa County Recorder's Office wherein the property owner or long term leaseholder expressly assumes the risk of all damage related to any sewage overflow or flooding of the subject property that such an overflow protection device on the side sewer may have prevented or mitigated had an overflow protection device had been properly designed, installed and maintained. C. Procedure for Obtaining Exception. A property owner or long term leaseholder who applies for an exception shall obtain and fill out an application on a form acceptable to the District. The application shall fully describe the technical, cost and /or aesthetic reasons why installation of such an overflow protection device is not possible, practical or preferred. The District shall review the application and grant or deny the application. If the exception is granted, the property owner or long term leaseholder requesting the exception shall execute a recordable agreement for exception acknowledging the owner's assumption of the risk and waiver of liability against the District for all overflows on the property for which the exception is requested. Once executed, the waiver and assumption of risk shall be recorded with the Contra Costa Recorder's Office so as to become part of the subject property's chain of title. The exception may be terminated at any time and installation of an overflow protection device required when, in the discretion of District, modifications to the property or other circumstances render installation of such an overflow protection device to be reasonably practical. (Ord. 226 § 3, 2003) 1122511.1 1122383.11122379.1 Attachment 2 Chapter 9.15 OVERFLOW PROTECTION DEVICES 9.15.010 Overflow protection devices. A. Findings.— The District finds that overflow protection devices are necessary to minimize the volume of sewage overflows and flooding of public and private premises, protect the health and safety of the District, its residents and visitors and the environment, and to minimize damage to District and private property. Proper installation and maintenance of overflow protection devices by property owners and long term leaseholders of residential, industrial and commercial properties constitute an integral part of the private and public sewage collection system designed to convey sewage from buildings throughout the District to the treatment plant. Failure of property owners and long term leaseholders to properly install and maintain overflow protection devices can prevent the proper functioning of the sewage collection system as designed. The District further finds prior District Code standard specifications and ordinances have required the installation of overflow protection devices on new construction of residences and structures since 1960, provided however that from 1960 to 1993 devices were not required for structures where the elevation of the lowest fixture in the structure was above the elevation of the nearest upstream manhole. Since 1993 the District's standard specifications have required overflow protection devices on all new and repaired connections to the District's system and this provision was included in this Code in 1996. B. Mandatory Installation and Maintenance. All property owners and long term leaseholders shall install and maintain aan overflow protection device on any side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to, the District's sewer system for all new construction, all new connections to District's system, and upon all repairs or replacements of any side sewer. This requirement applies to all such persons, regardless of whetheTwhen they acquired or leased the serviced property— beferer— after the date ef ferfaal adeptien f this Chapt^ In this Code the term "overflow protection device" includes both overflow protection devices and backwater check valves and shutoff systems, and any other devices the District may approve from time to time for such purposes. All overflow protection devices shall comply with the requirements of the Standard Specifications and shall be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. 1. New Side Sewer Installations, Alterations, or Repairs to Existing Side Sewer Installations. No person shall install, alter, or repair a side sewer that is connected, or is intended for connection to the District sewer system without installing aan overflow protection device of the type and in the manner prescribed in the Standard Specifications and the permit requirements included in Title 5 of this Code, except as provided for in Section 9.15.020. The District recommends installation of overflow devices on all properties. However, no person whose property was not required to have installed an overflow protection device pursuant to District Codes or specifications at the time of initial construction, will be required to retrofit an existing structure with an overflow protection device until there is a new installation, alteration or repair to the existing side sewer. 2. Maintenance Requirements. All overflow protection devices shall be maintained so as to provide for their continuing function as designed. All overflow protection devices shall be accessible at all times and shall be free from any obstructions including, but not limited to, rocks, soil, vegetation, grass, trees, bushes, plants, landscaping, concrete, asphalt or other ground coverings that may impair the function of and accessibility to the overflow protection devices. - 3. Elevation and Sizing Requirements. All overflow protection devices shall be installed at an elevation and of a size that protects the property from damage. It is the property owner's or long term leaseholder's responsibility to either confirm that the overflow protection device is at the proper elevation and size, or to obtain competent assistance from a licensed plumber or contractor to confirm its proper elevation and size. If any subsequent modification of the property results in the overflow protection device being undersized or at an improper elevation, the property owner or long term leaseholder shall adjust or replace the overflow protection device to the proper elevation and /or size. C. Waiver of Permit and Inspection Fees. In order to encourage installation of overflow protection devices on all structures connected to the District's sewer system, District staff shall have authority to waive permit and inspection fees for the installation of overflow protection devices. This waiver authority shall be solely available for overflow protection device installations and not for other side sewer repair or replacement activities. D. Failure to Follow the Overflow Protection Device Requirements. Property owners or long term leaseholders whose property is required to be protected by an overflow protection device by this Chapter, shall be responsible for resultant damages as follows. The property or leaseholder whose property has no overflow protection device in violation of this Chapter, or has a defective or improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device, shall be responsible for all damage that results from the lack of such an overflow protection device, or the failure of a defective or improperly installed or maintained overflow protection device to prevent such damage. Should it be determined that property damage is sustained as the result of overflow protection device located at an improper elevation, the property owner or long term leaseholder shall be responsible for any such damage. (Ord. 226 § 2, 2003: Ord. 198 § 3 (Exh. C (part)) , 1996) 9 15 020 Limited exceptions to requirement for overflow protection devices. A. Findings Regarding Exception Requests. The District finds that some property owners or long term leaseholders who are required to have or install overflow protection devices pursuant to this Chapter may prefer to apply for an exception to the requirements herein for installation of a overflow protection device, or that it may be particularly onerous technically, financially or aesthetically for some properties where overflow protection devices were not installed when the side sewer was first built. The District also finds, however, that failing to install a overflow protection device may pose a serious risk to the health, safety and property of the District, its residents and businesses; hence, if a property owner or long term leaseholder chooses not to install a overflow protection device the property owner or long term leaseholder should bear all liability arising from sewage overflow or flooding caused by the failure to install such an overflow protection device. The District and its officers, agents and employees shall not be liable for any injury or death to any person or damage to any property caused by the failure of a property owner or long term leaseholder to install aan overflow protection device. B. Permissible Exceptions to Requirement for Overflow Protection Devices; Waiver and Assumption of Liability. A property owner or long term leaseholder otherwise required to have installed and maintained —an overflow protection device pursuant to this Chapter, for a building which has been previously connected to the District's sewer system without a properly installed overflow protection device may apply for an exception to the requirements herein for installation and maintenance of such an overflow protection device. If a property owner or long term leaseholder applies for an exception pursuant to this Subsection, the exception may be either granted or denied by the District. If the exception is granted, an agreement for an exception will be recorded with the Contra Costa County Recorder's Office wherein the property owner or long term leaseholder expressly assumes the risk of all damage related to any sewage overflow or flooding of the subject property that such an overflow protection device on the side sewer may have prevented or mitigated had an overflow protection device had been properly designed, installed and maintained. C. Procedure for Obtaining Exception. A property owner or long term leaseholder who applies for an exception shall obtain and fill out an application on a form acceptable to the District. The application shall fully describe the technical, cost and /or aesthetic reasons why installation of such an overflow protection device is not possible, practical or preferred. The District shall review the application and grant or deny the application. If the exception is granted, the property owner or long term leaseholder requesting the exception shall execute a recordable agreement for exception acknowledging the owner's assumption of the risk and waiver of liability against the District for all overflows on the property for which the exception is requested. Once executed, the waiver and assumption of risk shall be recorded with the Contra Costa Recorder's Office so as to become part of the subject property's chain of title. The exception may be terminated at any time and installation of an overflow protection device required when, in the discretion of District, modifications to the property or other circumstances render installation of such an overflow protection device to be reasonably practical. (Ord. 226 § 3, 2003) 1122507.1 1122383.11122353.1 ATTACHMENT 3 10.12.130 Permit by Rule for Community Carwash Fundraisers. Notwithstanding other provisions of this Title 10 prohibiting discharges without obtaining a District permit, a temporary carwash conducted for the purposes of raising funds for a community organization will be deemed to have a permit by this rule authorizing the discharge of wastewater to the sanitary sewer system if the criteria of this Section are met. For purposes of this Section, a community organization is any non - profit organization exempt from certain federal income taxes under 25 U.S.C. § 501(c), any registered youth organization or church or school group. A community organization is authorized to discharge pursuant to this Section 10.12.130 without prior approval or formally obtaining a permit from the District provided that it complies with best management practices for car washes. A list of the best management practices for charity car washes is provided on the District's website at www.centralsan.org or may be obtained by contacting personnel in the District Source Control Program. 1111595.5 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS - POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 6.a. Engineering Type of Action: AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT Subject: AUTHORIZE THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT TO EXECUTE A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.: Michael Penny, Engineering / Capital Projects Provisional Senior Engineer REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: M.-Penny ki . Swanson A. Farrell K. Alm mes M. K94y. 60eneral Manager ISSUE: The Board of Director's authorization is required for Joint Exercise of Powers Agreements (JEPA) with Contra Costa County and Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute a JEPA with Contra Costa County (County) and Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency (CCCRDA). FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Under the proposed JEPA the District will incur no direct costs. The County will pay for work to protect the sewers. The District will pay for the costs of its own inspection of the work (approximately $25,000). ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: The Board could decline to authorize the JEPA, which is not recommended. Failure to authorize the JEPA could cause the loss of federal grant funds totaling $4,000,000 for the Treat pedestrian bridge. BACKGROUND: In 1985 -86 the District purchased Grants of Easements from the County for our existing and future sewers in the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way from Monument Boulevard to San Ramon when the County purchased the right of way from Southern Pacific Railroad. The grants of easements allow for the adjustment of the easement descriptions once the location of the existing and anticipated future sewers are known. The County has received a federal grant to construct a pedestrian bridge for the Iron Horse Trail over Treat Boulevard. The County must receive right -of -way certification from CalTrans by August to maintain the grant. The District has been working with the N: \PESUP \Cbradley \Position Papers \Penny \5967 - Treat Bridge JEPA PP.doc Page 1 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 Subject AUTHORIZE THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT TO EXECUTE A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY County during the design of the bridge to minimize impacts to District facilities. The alignment of the bridge has it landing within the District easement on the south side of Treat Boulevard over the alignment of the future 66 -inch sewer. Heading north the bridge alignment aerially crosses over the existing sewers, and lands adjacent to, and partially over, the existing 30 -inch sewer north of Treat Boulevard. Staff has negotiated a JEPA that covers the following issues: Allows the County to construct the bridge within the existing sewer easement. Requires the County to construct sewer protection work, which includes a concrete cap over a portion of the 30 -inch sewer and a passive overflow bypass sewer between the existing 30 -inch and 60 -inch sewers. If the sewer needs to be replaced after bridge construction, the bridge landing would need to be removed and replaced or the 30 -inch sewer would need to be diverted to the future 66 -inch A -Line Relief Interceptor upstream of the bridge landing. • Requires the County and CCCRDA to grant new easement areas to the District for the future 66 -inch sewer at no cost. The grant for the new easement areas will contain the same language as the 1986 easement for this area. • Requires the District to quitclaim portions of the existing easement that will no longer be needed after the granting of the new easement areas. • Allows the aerial portion of the bridge to be over the existing and future easements. • Construction inspection, submittal review, and coordination issues. • Mutual indemnity and insurance language. • Contractor warranty of work. • No funds will be exchanged between the parties. Staff is also negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County to establish the process for adjusting the easement descriptions for the easements purchased in the Iron Horse Corridor (IHC) back in 1985 -86. The process described in the MOU will be used for the new easement areas required due to the construction of N:\PESUMCbradley \Position Papers \Penny \5967 - Treat Bridge JEPA PP.doc Page 2 of 3 POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 subject AUTHORIZE THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE SECRETARY OF THE DISTRICT TO EXECUTE A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY the Treat pedestrian bridge and for the remainder of the IHC. District and County staffs have reached agreement on the key issues associated with the needed easement adjustments. The MOU will be brought to the Board at a future date for authorization. The environmental effects of A -Line relief interceptor project were addressed in the Pleasant Hill /A -Line Sewer Overflow Protection Project EIR certified by the Board of Directors on October 2, 1991. All CEQA documentation for the sewer protection work is being handled by the County under the Treat pedestrian bridge project. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Authorize the President of the Board of Directors and the Secretary of the District to execute a JEPA with Contra Costa County and Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency. N:\PESUP \Cbradley \Position Papers \Penny \5967 - Treat Bridge JEPA PP.doc Page 3 of 3 Item 6a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Board Presentation 7/17/2008 Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) Right of Way • Purchased in 1985/86 for - $6M • County Transportation Corridor • Easements Purchased for Existing and Future Pipelines • Key Right — Future Adjustment of Easements Continued Development • Fiber Optics • Other Utilities • Ygnacio Bridge • Proposed Treat Bridge 2 1it n LIM =s Proposed Treat Pedestrian Bridge • Working With County Since 2002: — Impact on Existing Sewers — Maintainability of Existing Sewers — Impact on Future R/W — Constructability of Future Sewer Status of SPRR Right of Way • Using JEPA to Set the Working Relationship on the Treat Bridge • Using MOU to Memorialize the Process to Adjust the Easements • Staffs Met and Established Process • District and County Legal Counsels Have Reviewed, Discussed, and Agreed Upon Process F91 lu Recommendation • Authorize execution of the JEPA with CCC and CCCRDA 5 ��� Contra Costa County P,11,'ftPubfic Works 7MD July 16, 2008 Mr. James Kelly General Manager Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez, CA 94553 Julia R. Bueren, Director Deputy Directors R. Mitch Avalon . Brian M. Balbas Stephen Kowalewski • Patricia McNamee Re: Iron Horse Corridor Easements Dear Mr. Kelly: I would like to thank you and your staff for meeting with Public Works staff on July 10, 2008 to discuss the process for resolving the Iron Horse Corridor easement issues, the draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and the pending Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEPA) for the Treat Boulevard Pedestrian Bridge. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (District) stated that they would like to have the JEPA and the MOU approved by the County Board of Supervisors prior to the District's Board meeting on July 17, 2008. Contra Costa County (County) informed the District that it cannot meet this deadline. Both parties agreed that the current form of the JEPA is acceptable, and the District was informed that the ]EPA is on the Board of Supervisors agenda for approval on July 22, 2008. The County requested the District provide for some other avenue for satisfying their MOU concerns while allowing the JEPA to go through the District's approval process. The County agrees to amend the 2003 San Ramon easement (dated 1/21/03, recorded 5/23/03, document 2003 - 0243028) to use the substantive language from the original 1986 San Ramon easement (dated 11/16/86, recorded 12/31/86, book 13358), for a new easement document that will be drafted and entered into between the County and the District at a future date. The new easement will include a recital section similar to that found in the 2003 easement that describes the two prior easements and their recordation dates. The new easement will be conditioned upon the quitclaim of the 2003 easement. The County agrees that the six other remaining easements granted to the District and recorded in 1985, 1986, 1989, 1997, and 1998 in the Iron Horse Corridor will be amended only to include the subsequently determined physical locations of the easements, but otherwise these easements and the parties' respective rights will remain the same. The District will quitclaim the old easement areas. 'Accredited by the American Public Works Association" 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553-4825 TEL: (925) 313 -2000 . FAX: (925) 313 -2333 www, cccpublicworks.org s u James Kelly - CCCSD July 16, 2008 Page2of2 Beatrice Liu, Deputy County Counsel, and Kent Alm, Counsel for the District, have reviewed the above - described process and both understand and agree with this process. The County will work with the District in resolving how to implement the above changes to the District's easements in the Iron Horse Corridor, and is committed to working with the District toward finalizing the MOU by the end of September 2008. Enclosed are the meeting minutes from the July 10, 2008 meeting. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to call me at (925) 313 -2201. Sincerely, Julia R. Bueren Public Works Director JB:mo:tr Enclosure cc: Mitch Avalon, Deputy Public Works Director Steve Kowalewski, Deputy Public Works Director Karen Laws, Principal Real Property Agent Carla Peccianti, Senior Real Property Agent Mark de la 0, Transportation Engineering John Pulliam, Design Division Jason Chen, Design Division Michele Wara, Administration G: \TransEng \Iron Horse Corridor \CCSD \Ltr 1OJun08 MOU meeting.docx Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: JULY 17, 2008 No.: 6.b. Engineering Type of Action: APPROVE COMPONENTS OF SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN (SSMP) Subject: APPROVE THE LAST FOUR CHAPTERS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MANDATED SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN (SSMP) Submitted By: Initiating Dept /Div.: Raffi J. Moughamian, Assistant Engineer Engineering /Environmental Services REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: cL R. Mough mian/ Godsey C. Swanson A. Far II 7 James M. Oily G. Chesler General Ma ager ISSUE: Board approval of the components of the State of California mandated Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) is required. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the following four chapters of the CCCSD Sewer System Management Plan: • Chapter 7: Design and Construction Standards • Chapter 8: Capacity Management • Chapter 9: Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modification • Chapter 10: SSMP Audits FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Minimal. ALTERNATIVES /CONSIDERATIONS: Not approve the final four chapters of the SSMP. CCCSD would be violating the California State Water Resources Control Board's requirements. This is not recommended. BACKGROUND: On May 2, 2006, the California State Water Resources Control Board approved Order No. 2006 -0003, "Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) for Sanitary Sewer Systems." A component of the Order requires the development of an SSMP. The State requires that the SSMP be approved by the Board of Directors to confirm that the elected officials have endorsed and support the management plan. State requirements include a timetable for this approval process. On July 5, 2007, the Board approved the Plan and Schedule for development of the SSMP. On October 18, 2007 the Board approved the first six chapters of the SSMP. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \PP Approve 4 Chapters SSMP 7- 17- 08.doc POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 subject: APPROVE COMPONENTS OF SEWER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN (SSMP) The final four chapters of the SSMP being presented to the CCCSD Board of Directors for approval are the following: • Chapter 7: Design and Construction Standards • Chapter 8: Capacity Management • Chapter 9: Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modification • Chapter 10: SSMP Audits The final four chapters are attached to this position paper. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Approve the following four chapters of the CCCSD Sewer System Management Plan. • Chapter 7: Design and Construction Standards • Chapter 8: Capacity Management • Chapter 9: Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modification • Chapter 10: SSMP Audits N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesier\2008 \PP Approve 4 Chapters SSMP 7- 17- 08.doc CCCSD SSMP Chapter 7 Design and Construction Standards Chapter 7 Design and Construction Standards The design and construction standards for Developer projects, District projects, and Collection System Operations (CSO) projects are described in this chapter of the SSMP. 7 -1 DEVELOPER PROJECTS Developer projects are projects designed and constructed with private funds. The projects range from housing complexes to shopping centers. 7 -1.A Standards and Specifications for Design and Construction of New and Rehabilitation Projects The District has published minimum design and construction standards for the use of customers, contractors, and engineers beginning in 1956. The title of the document is "Standard Specifications for Design and Construction (Standard Specifications) ". The legal authority for this document comes from the following section of the District's Code. 9.08.010 Planning, design and construction. Public sewers shall be planned, designed, constructed, installed and repaired in accordance with this title and the plans and specifications of the District and the orders of the General Manager. (Ord. 223 § 2(part), 2002; Ord. 198 § 3(Exh. C(part)), 1996) The current version of this document is dated 1993 with recent revisions to sections related to swimming pools, grease traps, and tables and drawings. The section on plan preparation has also been revised. The next major revision will be published during calendar year 2008. Future revisions will occur as needed. Whenever a section or the entire document is modified, a letter is sent to all engineers and contractors who are registered with the District. The Standard Specifications for Design and Construction govern requirements for the design and all work in connection with sewer construction and /or projects financed by private individuals within the jurisdiction of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District in Contra Costa County, California. The Code and all ordinances of the District are considered a part of these Specifications and all plans, profiles, cut sheets, right -of -way documents, and specifications must conform to the standards and requirements herein established. The jurisdiction of the Sanitary District includes the entire sewerage system and its appurtenances from the point of connection with the building plumbing to the discharge terminus of the treatment plant outfall. Ownership and maintenance of the building lateral to the point of connection with the sewer main is the responsibility of the property owner. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 7 7- 17- 08.doc Page 7 -1 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 7 Design and Construction Standards The following is a list of the section titles in the Standard Specifications document: 1. Introduction 2. Definitions and Terms 3. Code Provisions and Policies (Guide for Engineers) 4. Design Standards (Guide for Engineers) — revision packaged separately 5. Plan Preparation (Guide for Engineers) — revision packaged separately 6. Plan Review (Guide for Engineers) 7. Construction Engineering (Guide for Engineers) 8. Example forms 9. Source Control (2002 revision packaged separately) 10. District Permits, Licenses, and Bonds 11. Control of the Work 12. Control of Material 13. Legal Relations and Responsibility 14. Preservation of Property 15. Clearing, Grubbing and Demolition 16. Excavation and Backfill 17. Embankment Construction 18. Sewer Pipe Lines 19. Portland Cement Concrete and Mortar 20. Reinforcement 21. Concrete Structures 22. Castings and Metal Fabrications 23. Abandonment of Lines and Structures 24. Painting 25. Aggregate Base 26. Seal Coats 27. Asphalt Concrete 28. Standard Drawings /Details These standards ensure that infrastructure built in the District's service area will conform to accepted practices and that equipment will operate properly. New developments are of particular interest because the developer is often responsible for constructing new sewer mains, and then dedicates them to the District upon completion of the project. The District must ensure that the new infrastructure will not cause any short term or long term operational problems once the District has ownership of the collection assets. Adherence to the Standard Specifications supports this aim. Project plans must be approved by the District prior to issuance of a construction permit. All plans for sewer projects are reviewed for compliance with District design standards at several points before construction. At least two preliminary reviews and a final review occur before a construction permit is issued. Cut sheets are prepared by the developer's engineer and reviewed by District staff during the final plan review. The trench excavation is staked in field. The cut sheets are compared to the construction stakes in the field. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Ches1er\2008 \SSMP Chapter 7 7- 17- 08.doc Page 7 -2 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 7 Design and Construction Standards 7 -1.13 Standards for Inspection and Testing of New and Rehabilitated Facilities Inspectors use the District's Standard Specifications, the District's Code, approved project plans, the permit, and the construction contract as a basis for inspection. Sewer projects are inspected during construction as to the quality and acceptability of materials furnished, work performed, and to the manner of the performance of construction. The permit states that it is the contractor's responsibility to arrange for timely inspection throughout the project and to coordinate with District Staff. The District inspects and approves work in accordance with Standard Specifications Section 11, "Control of the Work" and section 18, "Sewer Pipe Lines." Inspection occurs during the construction project and at the end of the contractor's one -year warranty period. During the construction a District inspector will inspect the construction of a developer sewer on a regular basis. During critical construction sequences, a District inspector is present at all times. Inspection reports are prepared daily. After trench backfilling and before final acceptance of sewer projects, all sewers are inspected by closed- circuit television, and for new sewer installation, a low - pressure air test is conducted. After the sewer is inspected, a one year warranty period begins. When the warranty is about to expire, the line is re- televised to determine if any defects are present. 7 -2 DISTRICT PROJECTS District projects, also known as Capital Projects, are construction or rehabilitation projects on District owned facilities. These projects are managed by District staff and funded by the District. 7 -2.A Standards and Specifications for Design and Construction of New and Rehabilitation Projects The Standard Specifications are used as guidelines for District projects and only varies from these requirements when existing conditions prevent conformance to the Standard Specifications. Such conditions include existing underground facilities and elevations of connection points to the existing sewer system among others. In cases where materials and construction techniques not covered in the Standard Specifications are used, the District engineers use best engineering practices to approve or develop the design of the new /replacement sewers and pumping stations. The District uses standard General Conditions and project modified Special Conditions and Technical Specifications for bidding and constructing District Projects. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 7 7- 17- 08.doc Page 7 -3 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 7 Design and Construction Standards District sewer projects may be designed by District staff or by consultants. They are reviewed typically at the 10 %, 50 %, 95% and 100% design completion level. District staff also conducts a scope check with CSO staff between 30 % -50% of the design phase ensuring all operational issues are addressed. Construction of District sewer projects is managed and inspected by District staff or contract staff. 7 -2.13 Standards for Inspection and Testing of New and Rehabilitated Facilities Inspectors use the District's Standard Specifications, the District's Code, approved project plans and specifications, and the construction contract as a basis for inspection. Sewer projects are inspected during construction as to the quality and acceptability of materials furnished, work performed, and to the manner of the performance of construction. A District inspector is assigned during construction of District projects. Daily reports are prepared by the inspector. Construction files are archived following the completion of the projects. After trench backfilling and before final acceptance of sewer projects, all sewers are inspected by closed- circuit television, and for new sewer installation, a low - pressure air test is conducted. After the sewer is inspected, a one year warranty period begins. 7 -3 COLLECTIONS SYSTEM OPERATION PROJECT All of the construction projects performed by the Collection System Operation (CSO) Staff consist of spot repairs in pipe segments and manhole repairs /replacements. The typical length of these spot repairs is 6 ft. to 10 ft. CSO staff relies on the District Standards Specifications for Design and Construction for all projects. 7 -3.A Standards and Specification for Design and Construction of New and Rehabilitation Projects CSO projects use the same design and construction standards as the Developer and District projects. 7 -3.13 Standards for Inspection and Testing of New and Rehabilitated Facilities The CSO projects are TV inspected by CSO staff after completion, only if the crew leader, supervisor or manager decides the conditions warrant an inspection. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Ches1er\2008 \SSMP Chapter 7 7- 17- 08.doc Page 7-4 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 8. Capacity Management Chapter 8 Capacity Management This section of the SSMP documents the process to assess the current and future capacity requirements for the collection system. It also describes the capacity assurance plan providing hydraulic capacity for key sewer elements under peak flow conditions. A. Capacity Assessment Various tools and methods are used to evaluate current and future sewer capacity needs /requirements. They are described below: Sewer TV (Pipe Evaluation) Program Capacity issues may result from pipe defects, such as offset joints or collapsed pipes. The District's TV inspection program identifies defects that could cause capacity problems. In 2002 the District began a program to televise and assess the condition of all 1500 miles of gravity line. To date, over 70 percent of the system has been televised and the initial program is expected to be completed by the end of 2009. A subsequent TV inspection program will re- evaluate all lines that received a fair rating to determine the rate of deterioration and also determine a realistic TV inspection frequency. During the inspection process, pipe condition is assessed and severe problems such as blockages or missing pipe (potential for overflow) are immediately referred to the Collection System Operations Department (CSOD) for action. During the assessment process, each pipe defect (roots, grease sag, offset joint, etc.), depending on its severity is given a numerical score which is totaled for each line segment. Line segments scoring 5000 points or more are further analyzed using weighted criteria such as proximity to environmentally sensitive areas (schools, creek, etc.), pipe age, type and size, capacity, maintenance history and the number of stoppages or SSOs on that line segment. This additional evaluation is utilized to determine the size and scope of the District's Collection System Renovation Program. Figure 8.1, is a flow chart highlighting the pipe evaluation process. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 8 7- 17- 08.doc Page 8 -1 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 8 Capacity Management Fiaure 8.1: Pipe Evaluation Flow Chart Maintenance /Cleaning History Capacity can also be affected by the accumulation of roots, fats, grease or other debris in pipes. The CSOD has a goal of cleaning all lines 18- inches and smaller at least once every 60 months. A computerized maintenance management program is utilized to track/schedule the cleaning activity. Based on the results N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 8 7- 17- 08.doc Page 8 -2 Z �d d Q� COT, !SA a c Vvc Q tR c� W0 23S U. m arC o t Z �co0 <1> o°;c d l 0 •a L� Sad CL o�E aa � m v � 0 E _ IL CM 0 ,- - - - - -- ------------- - - - - -- - - - - -, c .� � W ' W , Z L m C C. JQ o 'E: y c COL VvC ca j a cA ' '- - - - - -- ------------- - - - - -- - - - - -' Maintenance /Cleaning History Capacity can also be affected by the accumulation of roots, fats, grease or other debris in pipes. The CSOD has a goal of cleaning all lines 18- inches and smaller at least once every 60 months. A computerized maintenance management program is utilized to track/schedule the cleaning activity. Based on the results N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 8 7- 17- 08.doc Page 8 -2 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 8 Capacity Management of the cleaning, the cleaning schedules /frequencies are adjusted to optimize results and labor utilization. This cleaning data is also utilized in identifying possible segments that need replacement. Collection System Master Plan The Collection System Master Plan evaluates the present and future capacity needs of the District's entire collection system. It identifies specific pipe segments that are capacity deficient. Design capacities for main sewer (8" to 10" in diameter) shall be based on sewers flowing two- thirds full. Design capacities for a trunk sewer (12" and larger in diameter) shall be based on sewers flowing full without surcharge. If a pipe segment surpasses its design capacity a hydraulic grade line calculation /analysis occurs. This study occurs on a five to ten year cycle. A prioritized list of sewer improvement projects are developed where the biggest deficiencies and segments in critical condition get top priority. The District's hydraulic model is used to simulate the District's collection system in different flow scenarios. It will identify capacity deficient pipes throughout the District. The model has been calibrated with an extensive flow monitoring program that verified the model's predicted flows. The flow monitoring program collected flow data for both dry weather and wet weather events at many key structures in the collection system. In general, wet weather flows represent the design flows for the collection system. The model is a land -use based model and is described further in section below titled "ArcSNAP ". The latest changes to land -use data are acquired from cities /county General Plan and Specific Plans and through meetings with city /county planners. These cities and counties include: Martinez, Concord, Clayton, Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, Lafayette, Orinda, Moraga, Danville, San Ramon, and Contra Costa County. The changes are input into the model, ensuring accurate flows are calculated. Up -to -date data on pipe sizes and lengths from the District's geographic information system /collection system database (GDI described in Chapter 6 pg 6 -3), is also input in the hydraulic model. ArcSNAP ArcSNAP is the District's steady -state collection system hydraulic model. It is a land -use based model meaning that each parcel within the District service area contributes a certain flow to the collection system. ArcSNAP models flow for all pipe with a diameter equal to and greater than 10" and all parcels within the District boundary are treated as point loads. It is used extensively during the collection system master plan update to identify deficient pipes. During the design phase of a project the model is used to verify the new design's capacity and to simulate different scenarios where the pipes diameter or alignment vary. Two different design flows are used in the hydraulic model: a 5 year and 20 year sewer events. The 5 year sewer event is used for purposes of near -term planning and prioritization. The 20 year sewer event is used to design for ultimate conditions. These design flows incorporate inflow /infiltration, ground water contributions, base wastewater flow, and peaking N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 8 7- 17- 08.doc Page 8 -3 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 8 Capacity Management factors. The base wastewater flow is a number extracted from the model and used during the design phase of a project, to ensure a proper flushing velocity. Facilities Plan A facilities plan focuses on a geographic area that is known to have capacity concerns, pipe defects, and operational problems or is likely to experience problems in the future. Specific issues, such as pipe deficiencies, maintenance problems, and pumping requirements, are identified and prioritized. These plans do not occur on an annual cycle but occur when potential issues within a specific area are identified. An example of this was completed in 2005 when the Danville Facilities Plan was created and focused on that town's sewer infrastructure. Development Capacity Study When a new development, such as a shopping center or housing complex, is proposed within the District boundary a capacity analysis is performed before project approval is granted. Simulations are performed to determine if the new development will cause capacity issues. If the development causes capacity issues, the developer is required to upsize the capacity deficient pipes directly connected to the development. Special Discharae Permits On occasion, outside parties request to discharge wastewater, as a point load, into the District's collection system. This prompts a review of the discharge. The location and amount of wastewater discharged are examined. A capacity review of the affected area is completed to ensure no sanitary sewer overflows will occur due to the additional flow. For example, a large water municipal water agency occasionally requests to discharge residue after they clean their reservoir. The District works closely with them to ensure the system has enough capacity. Pumpina Station Master Plan The pumping station master plan, last completed in 1986, evaluates the current and future needs of all the District pumping stations. As a result of that Master Plan, significant improvements were made to all the major District pumping stations. ArcSNAP is used to generate current and future flow rates entering each pumping station. Capacity deficiencies are identified, if present, and projects developed to address the issues. Improvement projects are prioritized based on largest deficiencies and critical locations. The next pumping station master plan will occur in fiscal year 2009. B. System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan A flow chart, Figure 8 -2, describes the planning process, system evaluation and capacity assurance plan, for the collection system. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Ches1er\2008 \SSMP Chapter 8 7- 17- 08.doc Page 8-4 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 8 Capacity Management Figure 8 -2: Flow chart describing collection system evaluation and capacity assurance plan. The Capital Improvement Budgeted Plan delineates projects that increase capacity and rehabilitate deficient pipe segments. The fiscal year Capital Improvement Budget provides funding for each project and is approved by the Board of Directors each year. The Capital Improvement Plan is a ten -year plan, prioritizing various District improvement projects. There are four distinct programs within the Capital Improvement Plan and Budget: Treatment Plant, Collection System, General Improvements, and Recycled Water. These documents are updated on an annual basis ensuring the inclusion of critical projects, and a proper prioritization schedule for the upcoming ten -year period. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 8 7- 17- 08.doc Page 8 -5 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications Chapter 9: Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications This chapter measures the effectiveness of the SSMP and describes the SSMP modification process. The parameters that indicate the success of the SSMP are the following: the number of overflows per 100 miles, the overflow cause, and the overflow volume. Other parameters that describe the collection system maintenance and capital improvement program are tracked but are not displayed in this document. These other parameters include, but are not limited to, response time, number of repairs, and customer service rating. This document's main performance indicator is SSO's and will focus on the SSO describing parameters. A. Monitoring and Measurement When an overflow occurs numerous describing parameters are recorded. Tracking these parameters will describe the overall condition of the collection system and determine the effectiveness of the SSMP. The Collection System Operations (CSO) department is responsible for gathering overflow data. Table 1 shows the ratio of overflows per 100 miles of pipe, for the past five years. It is assumed that the District is responsible for 1,500 miles of pipe. This ratio has been decreasing over time. When comparing the 2003 to the 2007 ratio a 40% decrease is present. Table 1: Number of overflow per 100 miles from 2003 to 2007 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 9 8.2 7.1 4.9 5.4 Figure 1 plots the number of overflows categorized by cause from 2003 to 2007. Table 1 lists the cause of each overflow from 2003 to 2007 plotted in Figure 1. An overall declining trend is present in the number of overflows. Root infiltration causes a majority of the overflows each year. Root infiltration is responsible for 63% of all the overflows from 2003 -2007. Figure 2 shows this statistic. The next major cause of overflows is the other category at 17% followed by grease at 10 %, dual causes (meaning two issues caused the overflow such as roots and grease) at 9% and capacity related issues at 0.2 %. The other category includes, but is not limited to, rocks, rags, concrete, and paper. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 9 7- 17- 08.doc Page 9 -1 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications ■ Grease ■ Roots ■ Dual Causes ■ Other ■ Capacity 160 140 120 3 100 0 d 0 80 0 m a Z 60 40 20 0i 2003 2004 2005 Year Figure 1: 2003 to 2007 total number of overflows by year and cause. 2006 2007 Table 2: 2003 to 2007 total number of overflow by year and cause, plotted in Figure 1 gnna 2nna 2nn5 2006 2007 Grease 22 12 12 3 5 Roots 84 79 65 48 50 Dual Causes* 10 10 6 10 12 Other ** 19 21 24 12 14 Ca acit 0 1 0 0 0 * The dual cause category is defined as two issues, such as roots and grease or grease and rags, causing the overflow. ** The other category includes, but is not limited to, rocks, rags, concrete, and paper. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 9 7- 17- 08.doc Page 9 -2 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications Dual Causes 9.2% Capacity 0.2% Grease 10.4 cr.a ro Figure 2: Percentage of overflow causes from 2003 -2007. Figure 3 plots the number of overflows categorized by estimated volume from 2003 to 2007. Each overflow volume is placed in four volume brackets: less than 10 gallons, between 10 and 100 gallons, between 100 and 1,000 gallons, and greater than 1,000 gallons. Table 3 lists the estimated volume of each overflow from 2003 to 2007 plotted in Figure 3. The majority of overflows are less than 100 gallons in each year. 28% of the overflows in 2003 -2007 are less than 10 gallons. 52% of the overflows in 2003 -2007 were between 10 and 100 gallons. These two volume categories make up an overwhelming majority of the spill volume, 80 %. Only 4% of the overflows in 2003 to 2007 were over 1000 gallons which is 20 overflows. Figure 4 shows this statistic. Starting in 2006 the collection system operation staff began to estimate the amount of overflow volume returned to the collection system. In 2006 68% of the total overflow volume was returned back to the collection system, 7% was discharged to a nearby creek, and the remaining 25% was lost. The term lost means that the volume of overflow could have gone into the storm drain, evaporated, or onto open space. In 2007 81% of the overflow volume was returned back to the collection system, 8% was discharged into a nearby creek, and the remaining 11 % was lost. The volume of overflow returned to the collection system has increased by 13 %, during this year period which translated into a 14% decrease in the volume of overflow lost. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 9 7- 17- 08.doc Page 9 -3 CCCSD SSMP 160 140 120 --A ; 100 0 t d 0 80 d a E Z 60 40 20 0 2003 Chapter 9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications ■ <10 Gallons ■ 10 - 100 Gallons ■ 100 - 1,000 Gallons 0>1,000 Gallons 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year Figure 3: 2003 to 2007 total number of overflows by year and volume Table 3: 2003 to 2007 total number of overflow by year and volume, plotted in Figure 3 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 <10 Gallons 37 45 21 21 20 10 - 100 Gallons 72 52 62 38 46 100 -1,000 Gallons 23 22 16 11 11 A,000 Gallons 3 4 8 3 4 N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 9 7- 17- 08.doc Page 9 -4 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 9 Monitoring, Measurement, and Program Modifications 100 - 1,000 Gallo >1,000 Gallons, 4.2% 10 - 100 Gallons, 52.0% Figure 4: Percentage of volume of overflow in 2003 -2007 [lions, 27.8% B. Program Modifications The Environmental Services staff, within the Engineering Department, is responsible for updating and reviewing the SSMP. Relevant collection system data, program shifts, and organizational changes will be updated annually. Engineering staff will keep in close contact with the collections system operations staff to review the SSMP effectiveness and identify area of improvement and change. Engineering and collection system operations staff will annually review the updated SSMP. Meetings and workshops, with pertinent staff, will occur to collect all comments and acquire internal approval on the update to the SSMP. External review, by a consultant or another wastewater agency, could occur if staff deems necessary or helpful. If a major update occurs then the updated SSMP will need to be approved by the Board of Directors. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 9 7- 17- 08.doc Page 9 -5 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits Chapter 10: SSMP Audits This section of the SSMP will describe the audit process and includes an annual audit of the current SSMP. The SSMP is a document that draws upon other documents. As a result the SSMP may not contain the most up to date information but will refer to other documents that do. An audit will be conducted by District staff within the Environmental Services Division. A consultant could be hired to assist District staff if needed. Audit Description The audit will consist of a written report and the completed attached audit worksheet. The written report will describe the successes and failures in implementing the most recent version of the SSMP. It will identify areas within the SSMP which are lacking and need improvement. Current overflow and collection system data will be updated and analyzed. Benchmarking and best management practices (BMPs) will be evaluated and applied. Trends of the data will be developed to determine the effectiveness of the SSMP and collection system programs. Additions or improvements to collection system operations will be documented as well as any planned additions or improvements. Annual Written Report This is the first edition of the SSMP and an annual written audit report is not needed. This edition of the SSMP will serve as a baseline. Annual Report Worksheet This is the first edition of the SSMP and a completed annual audit worksheet is not included in this edition. A blank annual audit worksheet is attached to this chapter of the SSMP to serve as a reference. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -1 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits SAMPLE Sewer System Management Plan Annual Audit Worksheet Name of agency Date of audit Name of auditor System Overview LF of gravity sewer mains LF of lower lateral LF of force mains Total LF of all sewer lines Number of pump stations Population served Current average monthly single family residential sewer rate I. GOALS 1. Are the goals stated in the SSMP still appropriate and YES / NO accurate? (circle one) 2. If you answered NO to question 1, describe content and schedule for updates. II. ORGANIZATION REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Organization chart Phone list 3. Is the SSMP up -to -date with agency organization and YES / NO staffing contact information? 4. If you answered NO to question 3, describe content and schedule for updates. Ill. OVERFLOW EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Data submitted to CIWQS Service call data NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Ches1er\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -2 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits Table 1. Annual SSO Statistics 5. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain an YES / NO up -to -date version of your agency's Overflow Emergency Response Plan? 6. Considering the information in Table 1, is the Overflow YES / NO Emergency Response Plan effective in handling SSOs? 7. If you answered NO to questions 5 and /or 6, describe content and schedule for necessary revisions and implementation. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -3 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of dry weather SSOs Number of wet weather SSOs Total number of SSOs Number of SSOs per 100 miles of sewer per year Number of SSOs < 100 gallons Number of SSOs 100 to 999 gallons Number of SSOs 1,000 to 9,999 gallons Number of SSOs >10,000 gallons Total volume of SSOs Total volume recovered Net volume of SSOs total minus recovered Total volume conveyed to wastewater treatment plant Percent volume conveyed (100 x (Total volume conveyed — Volume of SSOs) / Total volume conveyed) SSOs caused by: Roots Grease Debris Pipe failure Pump station failure Capacity-limited pipe segment no debris Other 5. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain an YES / NO up -to -date version of your agency's Overflow Emergency Response Plan? 6. Considering the information in Table 1, is the Overflow YES / NO Emergency Response Plan effective in handling SSOs? 7. If you answered NO to questions 5 and /or 6, describe content and schedule for necessary revisions and implementation. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -3 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits IV. FATS, OILS, AND GREASE (FOG) CONTROL PLAN REFERENCE MATERIAL List or map of FOG sources in service area List or map of hotspots Cleaning schedules ➢ Restaurant inspection reports or summaries Data submitted to CIWQS Service call data Table 2. FOG Control Statistics 8. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's FOG control program? 9. Considering the information in Table 2, is the current FOG YES / NO program effective in documenting and controlling FOG sources? 10. If you answered NO to questions 8 and /or 9, describe content and schedule for necessary changes. V. LEGAL AUTHORITY REFERENCE MATERIAL Ordinances Enforcement actions 11. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's legal authority? 12. Does your agency have sufficient legal authority to control YES / NO sewer use and maintenance? NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10-4 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of SSOs caused by FOG Schedule Pipes LF Routine Pipes LF Ratio of schedule to routine pipes LF Number of FOG inspections completed 8. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's FOG control program? 9. Considering the information in Table 2, is the current FOG YES / NO program effective in documenting and controlling FOG sources? 10. If you answered NO to questions 8 and /or 9, describe content and schedule for necessary changes. V. LEGAL AUTHORITY REFERENCE MATERIAL Ordinances Enforcement actions 11. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's legal authority? 12. Does your agency have sufficient legal authority to control YES / NO sewer use and maintenance? NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10-4 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits 13. If you answered NO to questions 11 and /or 12, describe content and schedule for necessary changes. VI. MEASURES AND ACTIVITIES a. COLLECTION SYSTEM MAPS REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Summary of information included in mapping system 14. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's maps? 15. Are your agency's collection system maps complete, up- YES / NO to -date, and sufficiently detailed? 16. If you answered NO to questions 14 and /or 15, describe content and schedule for necessary changes. b. RESOURCES AND BUDGET REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) ➢ Current operating budget 17. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's resources and budget? 18. Are your agency's resources and budget sufficient to YES / NO support effective sewer system management? 19. Do your agency's planning efforts support long -term YES / NO goals? NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -5 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits 20. If you answered NO to questions 17, 18, and /or 19, describe content and schedule for necessary changes. c. PRIORITIZED PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Cleaning schedules ➢ List or map of hotspots ➢ Work orders ➢ Service call data ➢ Customer feedback Table 3. Annual Blockage Statistics and Preventive Maintenance Activities 21. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's preventive maintenance activities? 22. Considering the information in Tables 1 — 3, are your YES / NO agency's preventive maintenance activities sufficient and effective in reducing and preventing SSOs and blockages? 23. If you answered NO to questions 22 and /or 23, describe content and schedule for necessary improvements. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -6 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Blockages in the past year Blockages due to: Roots Grease Debris Other 21. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's preventive maintenance activities? 22. Considering the information in Tables 1 — 3, are your YES / NO agency's preventive maintenance activities sufficient and effective in reducing and preventing SSOs and blockages? 23. If you answered NO to questions 22 and /or 23, describe content and schedule for necessary improvements. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -6 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits d. SCHEDULED INSPECTIONS AND CONDITION ASSESSMENT REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Inspection reports ➢ Infiltration and Inflow (1 /1) monitoring studies and reports ➢ Pipe and manhole condition data 24. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's inspections and condition assessment? 25. Are your agency's scheduled inspections and condition YES / NO assessment system effective in locating, identifying, and addressing deficiencies? 26. If you answered NO to questions 24 and /or 25, describe content and schedule for necessary changes. e. CONTINGENCY EQUIPMENT AND REPLACEMENT INVENTORIES REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Funds spent on equipment and materials ➢ Equipment and parts inventory 27. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about equipment and replacement inventories? 28. Are contingency equipment and replacement parts YES / NO sufficient to respond to emergencies and properly conduct regular maintenance? 29. If you answered NO to questions 27 and /or 28, describe content and schedule for necessary arrangements. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -7 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits f. TRAINING REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Employee training records 30. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's training expectations and programs? 31. Do supervisors believe that their staff is sufficiently YES / NO trained? 32. Are staff satisfied with the training opportunities and YES / NO support offered to them? 33. If you answered NO to questions 30, 31, and /or 32, describe content and schedule for necessary improvements. g. OUTREACH TO PLUMBERS AND BUILDING CONTRACTORS REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Fliers /mailings ➢ Mailing lists 34. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's outreach to plumbers and building contractors? 35. Has your agency conducted or participated in any YES / NO outreach activities to plumbers and building contractors? 36. If you answered NO to questions 34 and /or 35, describe content and schedule for future activities. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Ches1er\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -8 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits VII. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Design and construction standards ➢ Ordinances 37. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain YES / NO up -to -date information about your agency's design and construction standards? 38. Are design and construction standards, as well as YES / NO standards for inspection and testing of new and rehabilitated facilities sufficiently comprehensive and up -to -date? 39. If you answered NO to questions 38 and /or 39, describe content and schedule for necessary revisions. VIII. CAPACITY MANAGEMENT REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Capacity assessment reports ➢ CIP SSO data Table 4. SSOs Caused by Hy draulic Limitations 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of SSOs caused by capacity limitations 40. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up -to -date information about your agency's capacity assessment? 41. Has your agency completed a capacity assessment and identified and addressed any hydraulic deficiencies in the system? YES / NO YES / NO NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -9 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits 42. If you answered NO to questions 41 and /or 42, describe content and schedule for necessary activities. IX. MONITORING, MEASUREMENT, AND PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS 43. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's data collection and organization? 44. Is your agency's data collection and organization sufficient YES / NO to evaluate the effectiveness of your SSMP? 45. If you answered NO to questions 44 and /or 45, describe content and schedule for necessary improvements. X. SSMP AUDITS 46. Will this SSMP Audit be submitted with the Annual Report YES / NO to the Regional Water Board by March 15? XI. COMMUNICATION PROGRAM REFERENCE MATERIAL ➢ Mailings and mailing lists ➢ Website ➢ Other communication records such as newspaper ads, site postings, or other outreach ➢ Customer feedback 47. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's public outreach activities? 48. Does the SSMP or Collection System Program contain up- YES / NO to -date information about your agency's communications with satellite and tributary agencies? NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -10 CCCSD SSMP Chapter 10 SSMP Audits 49. Has your agency effectively communicated with the public YES / NO and other agencies about the SSMP, and addressed feedback? 50. If you answered NO to questions 47, 48, and /or 49, describe content and schedule for necessary improvements. N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Chesler\2008 \SSMP Chapter 10 7- 17- 08.doc Page 10 -11 Item No. 6.b. The Sewer System Management Plan L x Chapters 7 -10 ��. Raffi J. Moughamian July 17, 2008 J Status 9 Status Completed and Approved Completed and Approved Regional Board Aug 2007; State Board May 2009 Regional Board Aug 2008; State Board May 2009 WDR Components SSMP Plan and Schedule �a µ Chapter 1- 6 Ch 7: Design and Construction Standards Ch 8: Capacity Management Ch 9: Monitoring Plan Ch 10: SSMP Audit Status Completed and Approved Completed and Approved Regional Board Aug 2007; State Board May 2009 Regional Board Aug 2008; State Board May 2009 Chapter 7 Design and Construction Standards Developer/Property Owners District Capital Projects Collection System Operations Chapter 8 ry Capacity Management Collection System Master Plan Update Facilities Plans Sewer TV Program Sewer Renovation Program Maintenance/Cleaning Chapter 9 Monitoring Plan Collect and Monitor Collection System Data -number of overflows volume of overflows -cause of overflows -ratio of overflows per 100 miles of pipe Chapter 10 SSMP Audits Audits entire SSMP 4�� Occurs Annually Written report on successes or challenges if needed Fill out worksheet Identify areas of improvement Today's Action Approve SSIVIP Chapters SChapter 7: Design and Construction tandards -Chapter 8: Capacity Management Engineering Staff Planning Staff Central Contra Costa Sanitary District ' BOARD OF DIRECTORS POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 No.: 6.c. Engineering Type of Action: ADOPT RESOLUTION Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION REQUESTING THAT CONTRA COSTA LAFCO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR AN OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR FIVE PROPERTIES IN ALHAMBRA VALLEY(DA 168D) Submitted By Curtis W. Swanson, Division Manager REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: -&()—f7 C. Swanson MU/10 Initiating Dept/Div.: Engineering /Environmental Services rPAN x!ls ames M elly General Manager ISSUE: A Board of Directors' Resolution of Application is required to initiate Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO) Out of Agency Service Agreement proceedings. RECOMMENDATION: Find that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and adopt a Resolution of Application to initiate LAFCO Out of Agency Service Agreement proceedings for five properties designated as DA168D. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The District incurs costs to prepare LAFCO applications and pays fees to LAFCO for its processing. LAFCO costs would be recovered as "annexation charges" when properties are connected to the public sewer system. ALTERNATIVESMONSIDERATIONS: The Board could decline to initiate Out of Agency Service Agreements for these properties, which might delay wastewater service to them until they are annexed sometime in the future. Given the timing of planned development of some of these properties, that delay could make a difference as to whether the properties connect to the District for sanitary sewer service or construct individual septic systems. BACKGROUND: The owners of five properties in the unincorporated Alhambra Valley of Martinez have submitted petitions to the District for Out of Agency Service Agreements and Annexation to CCCSD. Three of the properties are already developed and two are pending development with two units each (subsequent to respective minor subdivisions consistent with their existing General Plan and zoning designations). The three developed properties receive public water service from the City of Martinez and have septic tank and leachfield systems. Each of these properties is within the District's Sphere of Influence, but just outside the County Urban Limit Line. The location of each property is shown on Exhibit 1. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Intiate LAFCO 168D 7- 17- 08.doc POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 subject ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION REQUESTING THAT CONTRA COSTA LAFCO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR AN OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR FIVE PROPERTIES IN ALHAMBRA VALLEY(DA 168D) Staff has drafted a Resolution of Application (see Attachment 2) requesting that LAFCO initiate Out of Agency Service Agreement proceedings for the five parcels. These parcels are described below: Al. 1150 Briones Road, unincorporated Martinez; one existing single - family residence; 1.747 acres; 365- 120 -003 -6 A2. 1170 Briones Road, unincorporated Martinez; one existing single - family residence; 2.070 acres; 365- 120 -004 -4 (Al & A2 are adjacent parcels with the same owner) B. 295 Millthwait Drive, unincorporated Martinez one existing single - family residence; 8.72 acres; 37- 130 -013 -9 C. Off Gordon Way, unincorporated Martinez; two planned single - family residences; 11.21 acres; 367- 090 -015 -2 D. Oakridge Lane, unincorporated Martinez; two planned single - family residences; 10.45 acres; 367- 150 -031 -6 Staff believes that the Out of Area Service Agreements for the developed properties are less controversial than the undeveloped properties. Staff intends to first apply for Out of Area Service Agreements for the three developed properties. Depending on how LAFCO acts on these requests, staff would then apply for service agreements for the two undeveloped properties. District staff has concluded that establishing Out of Agency Service Agreements for each property is exempt from CEQA under District CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, since it would allow exterior plumbing alterations to existing structures with negligible expansion of use; District CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, since it would allow sewer service to a limited number of new residences; and District CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the action in question may have a significant effect on the environment. This certainty derives from the need to construct only single- residence - serving laterals to connect these existing and planned structures to existing or approved public main sewers. Adoption of the recommended resolution will establish the Board of Directors' independent finding that establishing Out of Agency Service Agreements for these properties is exempt from CEQA. N:\ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Intiate LAFCO 168D 7- 17- 08.doc POSITION PAPER Board Meeting Date: July 17, 2008 subject. ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION REQUESTING THAT CONTRA COSTA LAFCO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR AN OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR FIVE PROPERTIES IN ALHAMBRA VALLEY(DA 168D) RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION: Adopt a Resolution of Application to initiate LAFCO proceedings for an Out of Agency Service Agreement for five properties in Alhambra Valley, including the finding that establishing Out of Agency Service Agreements for these properties is exempt from CEQA. NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \PP Intiate LAFCO 168D 7- 17- 08.doc INSIDE' 4 ULL �� � f OUTSIDE ULL SITES 0' 0 OUTSIDE ULL I", 1�\ o PLEASA HILL LOCATION MAP N.T.S. OUTSIDE CCCSD AVE -- LEGEND: Al ULL BOUNDARY ® o 4W Q AGREEMENT FEET PROPERTIES Central Contra Costa EXHIBIT Sanitary District PROPOSED OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE 0 ' AGREEMENT PROPERTIES (DA 168D) 1 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT REQUESTING THAT THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR AN OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR FIVE PROPERTIES IN ALHAMBRA VALLEY (DA 168D) WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) proposes to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese- Knox - Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 for an out of agency service agreement; and WHEREAS, the out of agency service agreement is proposed for the following reasons: 1. The owners of five (5) properties within Alhambra Valley have submitted petitions for Out of Agency Service Agreements and Annexation to CCCSD. 2. Three of the properties are already developed, receive public water service from the City of Martinez, and have septic tank systems for wastewater disposal. 3. Two of the properties have pending developments with two units each (subsequent to respective minor subdivisions consistent with their existing General Plan and zoning designations) and their owners are in need of certainty as to the method of wastewater disposal they should install. 4. Each of these properties is within the District's Sphere of Influence, as previously approved by LAFCO. 5. All of the properties are just outside the County Urban Limit Line, but providing sewer service to these properties would not allow service to adjoining properties, since only single- residence - serving laterals would be constructed to connect these existing and planned structures to existing or approved public main sewers. 6. CCCSD has or will assume responsibility for maintenance and operation of the existing or approved public sewer facilities required to provide service to the areas proposed for the Out of Agency Service Agreement. 7. CCCSD requires that all served properties eventually annex to the District (CCCSD Standard Specifications Section 3 -07); and 8. No other sewering agency can reasonably serve these areas. WHEREAS, the five properties are generally adjacent to the existing District boundary, as shown and described on the map attached hereto as Exhbit 1 and by this reference incorporated herein, comprising a total of 34.2 acres, more or less; and WHEREAS, Contra Costa County is the only affected county (the areas proposed for service by CCCSD are in the unincorporated territory of the County known as Alhambra Valley); and no other sewering agencies are involved; and WHEREAS, if the Out of Agency Service Agreement were approved, all of the provisions of the CCCSD Code would become applicable to the properties served, and WENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \Res LAFCO 168D 7- 17- 08.doc WHEREAS, the District intends to include the subject properties in a future annexation application covering a larger number of Alhambra Valley properties similarly situated within an outside - the - Urban - Limit -Line island situated within the Urban Limit Line, but cannot do so now due to the time required to prepare such an application and its associated environmental document; and WHEREAS, staff has concluded that establishing Out of Agency Service Agreements for each property is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District as follows: THAT CCCSD staff is directed to submit this Resolution of Application requesting that the Contra Costa County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) initiate Out of Agency Service Agreement proceedings, as authorized and in the manner required under the Cortese- Knox - Hertzberg Reorganization Act of 2000, together with a complete application package including all other required information, maps, forms, questionnaires, indemnification agreement, fees. THAT adoption of this resolution will establish the CCCSD Board of Directors' independent finding that establishing Out of Agency Service Agreements for each property is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and THAT CCCSD staff is directed to file any necessary CEQA documents with Contra Costa County. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July 2008, by the Board of Directors of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote: AYES: Members: NOES: Members: ABSENT: Members: Gerald R. Lucey President of the Board of Directors Central Contra Costa Sanitary District County of Contra Costa, State of California COUNTERSIGNED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Elaine R. Boehme, Secretary Kenton L. Alm Central Contra Costa Sanitary District District Counsel County of Contra Costa, State of California NAENVRSEC \Position Papers \Swanson\2008 \Res LAFCO 168D 7- 17- 08.doc m OUTSIDE ULL Central Contra Costa Sanitary District o = t INSIDE ULL LL OUTSIDE ULL LL m MARTINE7-- W"- 4 SITES PLEASA HILL LOCATION MAP N.T.S. OUTSIDE CCCSD N, LEGEND: ULL BOUNDARY 0 400 AGREEMENT FEET PROPERTIES EXHIBIT PROPOSED OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE AGREEMENT PROPERTIES (DA 168D) 1 Sewer Service to Item No. 6.c. Alhambra Valley Properties Outside the County Urban Limit Line Curtis Swanson July 17, 2008 Next Steps *Seek Board approval to request Out of Agency Service Agreements for 5 properties. *Apply to LAFCO for 3 developed parcels. *If approved, apply for 2 undeveloped properties. *Continue preparation of EIR for annexation of all 19 properties outside Urban Limit Line. 1 MARTINEZ� INSIDE "`"'°" 4� ULL OUTSIDE ULL\ SITES - -� � � `► r PL.EAS�T HIU LOCATION MAP N.T.S. '— 0 E0 OUTSIDE CCCSD OUTSIDE / a ULL / ,f V � 4 V A \ - -- LEGEND: Al Q ULL BOUNDARY ,® \ o aao \ - -- FE+�� Q AGREEMENT PROPERTIES Central Contra Costa EXHIBIT Sanitary District PROPOSED OUT OF AGENCY SERVICE ' AGREEMENT PROPERTIES (DA 168D) 1