Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.a.7) Written Announcements66o.7) Board Meeting of April 7. 2011 Written Announcements District Bud Savings a) Contra Costa County Election Division Savin Staff budgeted $480,000 for the 2010 General Consolidated Election (election cost plus the District's share of candidates' statements). The election cost was originally estimated by the County at $392,392 ($2.00 per registered voter; 198,198 voters). After final billing, the total cost to the District of the election and the candidates' statements was $162,219 - a savings of $287,781 over the budgeted amount. The election cost was reduced to $0.70 per registered voter, with 200,892 voters. Staff Conference Attendance b) Environmental Compliance Superintendent Tim Potter's Attendance at the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) Annual Pretreatment and Pollution Prevention Workshop in St. Louis from May 18 through May 20, 2011 Environmental Compliance Superintendent Tim Potter will be attending the NACWA 2011 National Pretreatment & Pollution Prevention Workshop in St. Louis, Missouri from May 18 -20, 2011. Mr. Potter has been asked to give a presentation on Pretreatment Investigations; gathering information and making a case where he will review the multi -year turbidity investigation that was successfully resolved several years ago. In addition to this speaking request, the conference will cover significant pretreatment and pollution prevention issues that the District needs to address (e.g. proposed federal dental amalgam rule; Contaminants of Emerging Concern; controlling "flushable" products). Mr. Potter's attendance will enable him to make and maintain valuable contacts with pretreatment professionals across the country. This conference is included in the Source Control training budget for fiscal year 2010 -11. CJ Training in Las Vegas, Nevada, Ma 2011 District Staff Attendance at SunGuard OneSolution District staff has recently been contacted by SunGuard, formerly known as HTE, advising that a significant upgrade to the current financial, human resources, training, and utility billing modules, known as OneSolution, is being presented to clients with the intent to migrate all clients to the upgraded version and abandoning the greenscreen and Novoline versions which the District currently operates. Staff has begun to research and evaluate OneSolution, and several key staff received a web based presentation. First impressions of the flexibility and efficiency improvements appear promising. However, staff must become educated on each OneSolution module to ascertain the desirability and feasibility to migrate to the software. The first step was to receive an overall presentation of the system which took place on March 21 st . The next step is to have key staff focus on their module of expertise to evaluate the capabilities, functionality, and advisability for the District to implement the migration to OneSolution. SunGuard holds an annual conference where they create labs for the three versions of software. These labs are used for training and provide the District the opportunity to ask detailed questions with fellow users present to address concerns and complaints as well as processes to accomplish needed tasks. The conference will be held this year in Las Vegas, Nevada in May 2011. The District is sending a total of eight employees from Purchasing (1), Accounting (2), Payroll (1), Information Technology (2), Human Resources (1), and Utility Billing (1) for the specific purpose of addressing any current training needs or current issues but more importantly to attend the labs for OneSolution. The research, identifying weaknesses, issues or concerns, identifying interface issues, mapping migration to One Solution and identifying the impacts of moving to OneSolution will likely take a year, given the current workload. Staff is currently researching the cost to migrate to OneSolution. d) Provisional Human Resources Manager Christopher Ko's Attendance at the 2011 Western Region International Public Management Association for Human Resources OPMAmHR) Conference in Portland, Oregon from April 27 through April 29, 2011 Provisional Human Resources Manager Christopher Ko will be attending the 2011 Western Region IPMA -HR conference in Portland, Oregon from April 27 - 29, 2011. This conference is held annually by the IPMA -HR. The District was recently selected as the Agency Award for Excellence winner under the Small Agency category for our Human Resources /Risk Management Program initiative, and has been invited to attend this conference to accept the award. The conference program also features topics such as employee compensation, labor relations, and succession planning. Project Related Updates e) Advertisement on April 8 and 13, 2011 of the South Orinda Sewer Renovations (Phase--5), District Project 5989 District Project 5959, South Orinda Sewer Renovations (Phase 5), is part of the ongoing collection System Renovation Program. The project will install approximately 11,000 linear feet of 0 -and 8 -inch sewer lines within public right -of- way and easements by using horizontal directional drilling, pipeburst, and open cut methods. Included in the project is the easement sewer construction at Camino Encinas, which was removed from the Hall Drive project last year due to right -of -way issues. This project will be advertised on April 8 and 13, 2011. Bids will be opened on May 3, 2011. The construction cost is currently estimated at $2,774,000. More information will be presented when the Board is asked to approve the construction contract on May 19, 2011. General Updates f) Change to District Travel Policy Staff is currently reviewing the District's Travel Policy. Numerous policies from corresponding agencies have been received and those policies will be compared to the District's. gl Pro-grams Issues Show Cause Letter dated March 21, 2011 Contra Costa Health Services Hazardous Materials The Contra Costa Health Services' Hazardous Materials Programs (HazMat) has issued a Show Cause Letter dated March 21, 2011 notifying the District of a potential filing of an Administrative Enforcement Order for an alleged violation of the Health and Safety Code and the California Code of Regulations at the Moraga Pumping Station. This action stems from an inspection of the station in November of 2010 by a HazMat inspector to assess the District's compliance with the Hazardous Materials Business Plan, Underground Storage Tank, and Hazardous Waste Management Programs. The issue addressed in the Show Cause Letter was the discharge of approximately 700 gallons of a spent antifreeze mixture, in November 2005, into the wetwell at Moraga Pumping Station. The letter alleges this discharge was a hazardous waste disposed at an unauthorized location. Staff is working with HazMat to resolve this matter. The practice of discharging spent antifreeze mixtures into pumping stations wetwells has been discontinued. Spent antifreeze mixtures will be transported off -site as a hazardous waste to an authorized facility for either recycling or disposal. h) Support Letter Sent Out on Assembly Bill 134 The District forwarded a support letter to Assembly Member Roger Dickinson's office of Assembly Bill 134 which would allow the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District to seek a water right to recoup the value of highly treated recycled water. As you know, the District has taken a leadership role in developing and promoting recycled water projects in the service area and fully supports this bill. The attached summary provides the information developed by a workgroup of the California Association of Sanitation Agencies Attorneys Committee. While a number of water agencies continue to oppose the bill, the workgroup felt that the amendments address all the issues raised in the oppose letters, and that, support of the bill would promote the concept that highly treated recycled water is an extremely costly commodity to produce and that wastewater agencies should have the ability to recoup those costs from users. The bill is scheduled to be heard on April 5, 2011 in the Assembly Water Parks & Wildlife Committee. FACT SHEE- AB! t3'4 (Dick (as amended ktarctr 23, 202i� TheC for'SR **s. Proposed Leglslati to Reeapture and Market Its HighQuality Recycled Water Background The need for a reliable water supply is vital to California's economic viability. To help move toward sustainable management of its water supplies, the State has set ambitious water conservation, recycling and self - sustainability goals to be met by 2020. SRCSD has up to 180,000 acre feet per year of treated wastewater that could be marketed and reused to help the State supplement its water portfolio and help achieve its water recycling goals. What does AB 134 do? Does it automatically grant Key Contacts Terrie Mitchell, Manager Legislative & Regulatory Affairs 916/876 -6492 Craig Johns, SRCSD Lobbyist 916/718 -5490 SRCSD a water right? AB 134 does not automatically grant SRCSD a water right. It would simply enable SRCSD to file an application to the State Water Board to obtain such a water right permit for an equivalent amount of water that SRCSD treats and discharges to the Sacramento River. This would provide SRCSD the ability to market and sell its future high - quality water both in and out of the Sacramento region. AB 134 is specific and would apply only to the water SRCSD discharges to the Sacramento River, which accounts for less than 1 - 2% of the river's average daily flows. AB 134 is closely modeled after Water Code section 1485 (enacted in 1961, and amended in 1967), which specifically allows those who discharge wastewater to the San Joaquin River to file an appropriative water right application for the amount of water they discharge, minus calculated losses. The City of Stockton recently received a permit from the State Water Board pursuant to that legislation, allowing Stockton to divert water from the San Joaquin River. W hy is AB 134 necessary? AB 134 will provide an additional procedural option for SRCSD to potentially realize the benefit of its treated wastewater discharges, by allowing SRCSD to obtain a water right permit for water attributable to its discharges of high- quality recycled water. SRCSD would then be able to use or market the water available under that water right permit to a willing buyer. SRCSD's ratepayers and the taxpayers of the Capitol Region may soon be required to finance up to $2.1 billion to upgrade its wastewater treatment facilities, which will then produce some of the highest- quality recycled water in California —water pure enough for unrestricted agricultural and municipal recycled uses -- or dedicated for Delta ecosystem needs. Revenue generated from the sale of this high- quality water could help offset some of the enormous costs associated with the upgrades at SRCSD's wastewater treatment plant that will be necessary to meet the stringent treatment levels recently imposed by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Without other sources of funding, monthly sewer bills could triple for SRCSD ratepayers and new construction sewer hook -up fees could quadruple. SRCSD has the desire and commitment to become a positive partner in Delta ecosystem restoration and water supply reliability -- it now asks the Legislature to provide the self -help tools that SRCSD will need to make this goal a reality. AB 134 could provide a necessary revenue stream for SRCSD to develop recycled and new water supplies for use in and out of the Sacramento region, and help solve the issues now facing the Delta. March 24, 2011 Page 1 Does SRCSD have existing rights to its wastewater? Yes. California Water Code sections 1210 and 1211 currently provide that the owner of a wastewater treatment plant holds the exclusive right to its treated wastewater, and can petition the State Water Board to change the point of discharge, place of use or purpose of use. SRCSD has invoked and confirmed its water rights through this petition process for its existing water recycling facilities. An existing State Water Board order already confirms SRCSD's right to reuse up to 10 mgd of its existing discharge flows at certain places of use specified in the order. Does the wastewater discharged by SRCSD constitute "return flows" that downstream users may acquire a right to? No. Approximately 50 -60% of the water collected and treated by SRCSD is derived from groundwater. Groundwater is considered "foreign water" and is legally distinct from surface water. As such, no downstream water right holder can legally claim a right to SRCSD's recycled water discharges that are derived from groundwater supply. Similarly, where water is diverted to storage away from a stream, a later release of this water from storage is not considered "natural" flow, but rather the flow of foreign waters. In this regard, water that passes through a sanitary sewer system and into a wastewater treatment plant is anything but natural. Through the treatment process, the water has changed significantly, both in its constituents and in the timing of its later return to a stream, after it has been temporarily stored in the sewer collection and treatment system. As a consequence, to the extent that water law concepts are applied, treated wastewater, regardless of its source, should per se be treated as foreign waters. Finally, many downstream water right holders contain the State Water Board's standard Permit Term 25, which provides that if the water available for use under the permit is wastewater, the permit "shall not be construed as giving any assurance that such supply will continue." Would a water right application still need to be filed by SRCSD? Yes. AB 134 would require SRCSD to file a water right application, which would be reviewed and potentially approved by the State Water Board. Interested parties may participate in that water right application and permitting process. Amendments to A6134 (March 23) confirm the State Water Board's authority and discretion to condition any water right awarded to SRCSD to protect legal users of the water, including environmental needs of the Delta. Will AB 134 affect the water rights of others? No. AB 134 is designed to address a very specific situation related to SRCSD's recycled water and provides another procedural tool for SRCSD to sell and transfer water, attributable to its recycled water discharges, to other interested parties. Moreover, AB 134 would not cause any injury to other legal users of water because, like the 1961 legislation that it is modeled after, it allows the State Water Board to grant any water right permit "upon such terms and conditions as in the [State Water] Boards judgment are necessary for the protection of the rights of any legal user of the water." Has SRCSD taken amendments to address concerns of the Water Contractors? Yes. SRCSD has met with dozens of parties interested in AB 134, including many Southern California water suppliers. After these meetings, and in an effort to address concerns and objections raised, SRCSD asked Assembly Member Dickinson to make several, important changes to AB 134. On March 23, 2011, the bill was formally amended to address all of the substantive objections received. Most importantly, amended AB 134 confirms the authority and discretion of the State Water Board to review and, if appropriate, approve SRCSD's potential water right application, subject to terms and conditions the State Water Board may deem necessary to protect all legal users of the water, including environmental needs of the Delta. March 24, 2011 Page 2