HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/1990, C-5 - CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (CITY) AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REGIONAL WAT MEETING 1A$ TE:1990
ail►aiillii'' 'I11 city of san LUis osIspo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT REM NUMBER:
FROM: William T. Hetland w� Prepared By: John E. Moss
Utilities Director Wastewater Division Manage /
SUBJECT: /
Consent Decree between the City of San Luis Obispo (City)
and the State of California, Regional. Water Quality Control
Board (State) , for Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution approving and authorizing the Mayor to
execute the Consent Decree between the City and the State
for completing the necessary Wastewater Treatment Plant
Improvements and achieving compliance with the City's
Wastewater Discharge Permit.
DISCUSSION:
BACKGROUND
On June 12, 1987, the State issued the City Cease and Desist
Order No. 87-113 which established a time schedule for
compliance with the discharge limitations contained in the
City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit No. CA0049224 . A complaint for civil
action has been brought by the State against the City for
alleged violation of certain limitations in the NPDES
permit. It is the desire of both the City and the State to j
resolve the issue without protracted litigation and expense.
The Consent Decree is a court document used to resolve the
claims of the State and to insure compliance by the City.
BASIC ELEMENTS
The Consent Decree contains four (4) basic elements, time
schedule, interim discharge limits, a release, and
stipulated penalties.
The time schedule is intended to identify and legally bind
the City to completion of key milestones in completing the
necessary improvements to the City's wastewater facilities.
Staff has made significant effort at negotiating a time
schedule which the City can meet and will guarantee the
State timely completion of the needed improvements.
The interim discharge limits are provided to protect the
City from further penalties for violation of the NPDES
permit limitations for those constituents which the City
currently can not meet and/or may be effected by the
"������i�illll!Illl�1d�I�dlll ®ofN n lues osispo
Nii% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Consent Decree
Meeting of September 18, 1990
Page 2
construction of the treatment plant improvements. These
limits are also to provide the maximum feasible protection
of the receiving stream until the improvements are
completed. The limits have been developed based on the
criteria that the facilities will be operated using standard
engineering practices.
The release provides that the City shall be released of all
civil claims of the State for alleged violations of NPDES
Permit No. CA0049224 that have been or could have been
alleged by the State up to and including the date of entry
of the Consent Decree. This is a significant benefit to the
City as it provides protection from further civil actions
against the City for past violations.
The stipulated penalties are specifically identified
penalties (fines) for noncompliance with the time schedules
and interim limits established in the Consent Decree.
There are also provisions in the document which allow for
negotiation and modification of the above basic elements
should circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the
City develop which would cause violation of the terms of the
Decree.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Consent Decree is in lieu of other civil actions such as
fines and revocation of discharge permits. Failure to enter
into the Consent Decree with the State will result in this
matter being turned over to the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) for resolution. The EPA will require the City
to sign a similar document as well as impose up front
penalties for violation of the. NPDES permit.
CONCURRENCES:
The development of this Consent Decree was done with the
assistance of Mr. James Dragna, outside legal counsel for
the City. Mr. Dragna concurs with the recommended action.
The City Attorney has also reviewed the Consent Decree and
concurs with the recommended action.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Entering into the Consent Decree has no direct or immediate
fiscal impact. The indirect or potential fiscal impacts of
the Consent Decree come in the form of the release and
stipulated penalties discussed earlier. r
i Ccity of San lU1S OBISp0
OUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Consent Decree
Meeting of September 18, 1990
Page 3
ALTERNATIVES:
Council may wish to direct staff to attempt further
negotiations on particular items contained in the Consent
Decree. This alternative is not recommended as negotiations
have already been extensive and the State has indicated that
they will turn the matter over to the EPA for resolution if
the City is unwilling to sign the existing agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution approving and authorizing the Mayor to
execute the Consent Decree between the City and the State
for completing the necessary treatment plant improvements
and achieving compliance with the City's Wastewater
Discharge Permit.
Attachments:
Resolution
Consent Decree Document
approved:
CITY 1A MINI TRA V OFFI
CItY .ATTOP
AEY
zei= .
CITY FINANCE DIRECTOR
- -3
RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series)
APPROVING A CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE WITH THE
CITY'S WASTEWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
WHEREAS, on June 12, 1987 the State of California Regional
Water Quality Control Board issued the City Cease and Desist
Order No. 87-113, and
WHEREAS, Cease and Desist Order No. 113 contained a time
schedule for compliance with' the discharge limitations contained
in the City's wastewater discharge permit, and
WHEREAS, a complaint for a civil action has been brought by
the State against the City for alleged violation of certain
limitations in the permit, and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of both the City and the State to
resolve the issue withoutrotracted litigation and
p q expense,, and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City and the State that
this .Consent Decree will resolve fully the claims of the State.
and the United States against the City concerning alleged
violations of the City's wastewater discharge permit from the
date of permit issuance up to and including the date of entry of
the consent Decree.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo does hereby approve and authorizes the Mayor
- to execute, the Consent Decree between the City and the State for
completing the necessary Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements
and achieving compliance with the City's wastewater discharge
permit. .
C '
6.54
Resolution No. (1990 Series)
Upon motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of ,
1990.
Mayor Ron Dunin
ATTEST•
Pam Voges, City Clerk
APPROVED:
City Admin.istr ive Of cer
�fty//AttoKhe
City Finance Director
C.. AUGUST 30, 1990
JOHN K. VAN de KAMP
Attorney General
R. H. CONNETT .
Assistant Attorney General
BRUCE S. KLAFTER
Deputy Attorney General
6000 State Building
San Francisco, CA 94102
(415) 557-0269
Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California
JAMES J. DRAGNA
Special Counsel
Pepper, Hamilton & Scheetz
444 South Flower Street, i9tfi Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 688-5600
Attorneys for Defendant City of San Luis Obispo
STATE OF CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR COURT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA )
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY )
CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL )
COAST REGION )
Plaintiff, )
V. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.
CITY OF SAN. LUIS OBISPO, ) CONSENT DECREE
Defendant 1
C
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation
of the State of California ( "City" ) , owns and operates a wastewater U
treatment facility located at Prado Road in San Luis Obispo; and,
WHEREAS, discharges from the City's wastewater treatment
facility into San Luis Obispo Creek are governed by the terms of
Order No. 90-12, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
( .NPDES" ) Permit No. CA00492241 issued to the City by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region ( "Board" ) ,
pursuant to Section 13377 of the California Water Code in
accordance with Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. sec.
1342. Hereafter any references to NPDES Permit No. CA0049224 shall
be deemed to include Order No. 90-12 and all subsequent modifica-
tions thereof; and,
WHEREAS, on June 12, 1987, the Board issued Cease and Desist
Order No. 87-113 which established a time schedule for compliance
with the effluent limitations and receiving water limitations in
NPDES Permit No. * CA0049224. On April 13, 1990, the Board amended
Order No. 87-113 with Cease and Desist Order No. 90-14. Hereafter
any references to NPDES Permit No. CA0049224 shall be deemed to
include Cease and Desist Order No. 87-113 and 90-14; and.
WHEREAS, a complaint for a civil action was brought by the
plaintiff, State of California ( "State" ) through the Board against
the City; and,
WHEREAS, the State alleges that the City is in violation of
certain effluent limitations and receiving water limitations in
NPDES Permit No. CA0049224; and,
WHEREAS, the State and the City desire to resolve and settle
this controversy without protracted litigation and expense; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City to use its best efforts
in good faith to achieve and maintain full compliance with the
terms and conditions contained in NPDES Pei-kit No. CA0049224; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the parties that this Consent
Decree will resolve fully the claims of the State and the United
States against the City concerning alleged violations of NPDES
Permit No. CA0049224 from the date of its issuance up to and
including the date of entry of this Consent Decree.
NOW, THEREFORE, upon the pleading and upon consent of the
parties thereto., it it hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as
follows:
i
Consent Decree -3- August 30, 1990
C
I.
JURISDICTION
This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this
litigation and of the parties consenting hereto for the purpose of
entering this Consent Decree. The complaint states a claim upon
which relief may be granted against the City pursuant to Sections
13385 and 13386 of the California Water Code.
II.
APPLICABILITY
The provisions of this Consent Decree shall apply to and be
binding upon the parties hereto, their respective agents,
successors, and assigns.
III.
COMPLIANCE WITH. OTHER LAWS
A. This Consent Decree is not and shall not be interpreted to
be a permit or waste discharge requirements, or a modification of
an existing permit or waste discharge requirements, under Section
402 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 13421 or Section
13377 of the California Water Code. Any new permit, or
modification of the existing permit, must be accomplished in
accordance with applicable Federal and State laws and regulations.
B. This Consent Decree shall not relieve the City of its
obligation to comply with the City's NPDES' permit or waste
discharge requirements, or with federal or State law. Provided
however, that insofar as this Decree establishes a compliance
schedule for a specific effluent limitation or receiving water
limitation that is inconsistent with the City's present or future
NPDES Permit or waste discharge requirements, with any statute or
regulation, or with any administrative order issued to the City,
the State will take no action seeking penalties or seeking a
compliance schedule which is inconsistent with those contained in
this Consent Decree. It is the intent of the parties that the
federal government take no such action and the State also agrees to
use its best efforts to ensure that the United States will take no
such enforcement action.
Consent Decree -4- August 30; 1990
IV.
TERTIARY TREATMENT
A. The City shall achieve tertiary .treatment at its
wastewater treatment facility pursuant to the following schedule:
1. COUNCIL APPROVED PLANS AND SPECS
AUTHORIZE TO BID AUG. 28., 1990
2. PRINT DOCUMENTS SEPT. 10, 1990
3. ADVERTISE FOR BIDS OCT. 10, 1990
4. RECEIVE BIDS JAN. 31, 1991
5. EVALUATE BIDS MAR. 14, 1991
6. AWARD CONTRACT APR. 18, 1991
7. NOTICE TO PROCEED MAY 16, 1991
8. START CONSTRUCTION JUNE 18, 1991
9. COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION DEC. 30, 1993
10. BEGIN UNIT STARTUP AND SHAKEDOWN DEC. 30, 1993
11. UNIT #3 STARTUP COMPLETE-FULL COMPLIANCE OCT. 1, 1994
B. For the purposes of this Consent Decree, the term
"tertiary treatment" means compliance with those , effluent
limitations contained in NPDES Permit No. CA0049224 for 5-day
biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, un-ionized ammonia and
toxicity concentration.
C. Until the City achieves tertiary treatment, the City shall
comply with and, except as provided in Paragraph VI, shall
thereafter maintain full compliance with the Interim Effluent
Limitations set forth ;in Appendix A.
CConsent Decree -5 August 30, 1990
V.
RECEIVING WATER LIMITATIONS
A. The City shall achieve compliance with the receiving water
limitations at its facility pursuant to the following schedule:
1. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION OCT. 15, 1990
SUBMITTAL
2. COMPLETE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS DEC. 15, 1990
3. ARC APPROVAL DEC. 11, 1990
4. REVIEW BY RWQCB AND SWRCB FEB. 15, 1991
5. INCORPORATE COMMENTS^ON 'CONTRACT MAR, 15, 1991
DOCUMENTS
6. COUNCIL APPROVED PLANS & SPECS APR. 16, 1991
7. PRINT DOCUMENTS MAY 16, 1991
C8. ADVERTISE FOR BIDS MAY 17, 1991
9. RECEIVE BIDS AUG. 29, 1991
10. EVALUATE. BIDS SEPT. 27, 1991
11. AWARD CONTRACT OCT. 25, 1991
12. NOTICE TO PROCEED NW. 22, 1991
13. START CONSTRUCTION JAN. 2, 1992
14. COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION DEC. 30, 1993
15. BEGIN UNIT STARTUP & SHAKEDOWN DEC. 30, 1993
16 . UNIT #4 STARTUP COMPLETE-FULL COMPLIANCE OCT. 1, 1994
B. For the purposes of this Consent Decree, "receiving water
limitations". shall mean the receiving water limitations for
temperature, color, pH, MBAS and turbidity contained in NPDES
Permit No. CA0049224.
C^
Consent Decree -6- August 30, 1990
C. Until the City completes the project outlined in V.A. , the
City shall comply with and, except as provided in Paragraph VI,
shall thereafter maintain full compliance with interim limits in
Appendix B.
VI.
INTERIM EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND RECEIVING WATER LIMITATIONS
A. The interim limitations set forth in Appendices A. and B.
may be revised to temporarily permit increased discharges of
pollutants if performance of the facilities at the 'City's
Wastewater Treatment Plant cannot achieve pollutant discharge
levels required by this Consent Decree and the NPDES Permit No.
CA0049224 because of construction of the improvements required by
this Consent Decree. Any such revision shall be effective. only
during construction of improvements required to comply with this
consent decree and shall occur through the following procedures:
1. City shall notify the Board in writing not less than
forty-five (45) days prior to commencing any planned - _
construction activity which the City expects to prevent its
treatment facilities from achieving required *** limitations .
If it is not reasonably foreseeable that a construction
activity will prevent treatment facilities from achieving
required limitations, the City may provide notice to the Board
no later than thirty (30) days after commencing such
construction activity. This notice shall include:
a. A description of the specific construction
activities;
b. A description of the portion of the facilities
which these activities will affect and or have
affected and how the activities will interfere
or have interfered with the functioning of the
facilities;
C. The estimated duration of the construction
activities which will cause or have caused,
increased discharge of pollutants and the proposed
effective term of the revisions to the limitations;
d. The interim limitations) which the City proposes
adding to Appendix A or B; and
Consent Decree -7- August 30, 1990
C�
e. A description of alternative measures considered by
the City to avoid increased pollution discharge and
reasons why these alternatives will not be
undertaken or will not be effective; -and
f. If notice was provided less than forty-five days
prior to undertaking the construction activity, the
reasons why the City could not reasonably foresee
that such activities would prevent the wastewater
treatment facilities from achieving the required
*** limitations; *** and
g. Any other informiation reasonably requested by the
Board to assist in the review . of the City's
proposal.
2. The Executive Officer (OE04 ) shall approve or reject the
request within twenty-one (21) days of receipt thereof. If
the EO fails to respond to the request within forty-five (45)
days, the request shall be deemed to have been approved. : No
request shall be approved if it results in discharge of
untreated sewage to San Luis Obispo Creek, or would cause the
death of fish or a substantial amount of aquatic life in San
Luis Obispo Creek. Revisions of effluent limitations or
receiving water limitations shall be approved only for the
period of time actually required to complete the specific
activities which prevent compliance.
3. If the EO rejects the request, he shall provide the City
with an explan4tion of the bases for the rejection. The
parties shall use their best efforts to reach agreement on
revisions to Appendices A & B. In the event that the parties
are unable to reach agreement within thirty (30) days of
receipt by the City of the Board's determination, the parties
shall submit the matter to the Court for resolution. The City
shall have the burden of proof in the Court proceeding.
B. The interim limitations set forth in Appendices A & B may
be revised to require reduced discharges of pollutants if existing
and future facilities at the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant can
achieve reduced discharge of pollutants when operating according to
standard engineering practices. Any such revision shall occur
through the following procedures:
I. The EO may submit a proposal in writing to the City
indicating in detail the improved interim limitations the
State believes the City Wastewater Treatment Plant is capable
of meeting on a sustained basis, and a statement outlining the
basis for proposed interim limitations. No such proposal
Consent Decree -8- August 30, 1990
shall be made before December 30, 1993. The proposed interim
limitation reduction shall not be more restrictive than the
requirements of any applicable NPDES permit or its equivalent
in effect at the time.
2. The City shall respond. to the proposal within thirty (30)
days of receipt. A response may accept the proposal, reject
the proposal, or suggest alternative interim limitations . If
the City does not respond in writing within sixty (60) days of
receipt of the proposal, then it shall be deemed to have
accepted the proposal and the proposal shall be treated as
incorporated into Appendices 'A or B.
3. The. City .and the EO shall use their best efforts to
resolve any disputes concerning the proposal. If the parties
agree to a modification of the interim limitations, the
modifications will .be submitted to the Court for incorporation
into Appendices A or B through a modification of the Consent
Decree.
4 . - If the parties are. unable to agree within thirty (30)
days of the City's response to the proposal, the parties shall
move the Court jointly for resolution of the dispute. The
City shall bear the burden of proving it cannot achieve the
reduced discharge of Pollutants consistently when the City's
facility is operated according to standard engineering
practices.
VII.
RELEASE
Upon entry of this Consent Decree, the City shall be released
of all civil claims of the State for the City's alleged violations
of the Clean Water Act, the Porter-Cologne Act, the regulations
promulgated thereunder, and NPDES Permit No. CA0049224 that have
been or could have been alleged by the State up to and including
the date of entry of this Decree. The City's performance of all
conditions set forth in Paragraphs IV and V of this Decree shall
constitute full and final settlement of all claims arising out of
or relating to violations of effluent limitations and receiving
water limitations of NEDES Permit No. CA0049.224 occurring on or
after the date of the entry of this Decree until .its termination.
This release does not apply to violations of NPDES Permit No.
CA0049224, other than effluent limitations and receiving water
limitations, which occur on or after the date of entry of this
.decree and the State reserves all rights it has to take action
against the City for penalties, injunction or other remedies
Consent Decree -9- August 30, 1990
provided by law in connection with such violations. This
settlement does not include any NPDES violations which the City has
failed to disclose to the State.
VIII.
CIVIL PENALTY
The City has paid the sum of One hundred and Forty-nine
Thousand Dollars to the Board for the City s alleged violations of
NPDES Permit No. CA0049224, (the Clean Water Act, the Porter-
Cologne Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder) .
I%.
STIPULATED PENALTIES
A. The City shall pay the following penalties for failure to
comply with the Interim Limitations contained in Appendices A & B:
Days of non-compliance Penalty Per day
O7-30 $ 250
31-60 .500
61-180 1,000
Beyond 180 days 31000
B. The City shall pay the following penalties for failure to
comply with the compliance deadlines set forth in Paragraphs
IV.A.3. IV.A.7. IV.A.11, and V.A.16:
Days of non-compliance Penalty Per day
7-30 $ 250
31-60 500
61-180 1,000
Beyond 180 days 3,000
C. For purposes of this Consent Decree, a single incident
which leads to simultaneous violations for more than one pollutant
parameter shall be treated as a violation for only one pollutant
parameter, and a violation of a monthly average limitation shall be
C111deemed a separate violation for each day exceeding the monthly
average limitation.
Consent Decree -10- August 30, 1990
D.. Should the City fail to achieve compliance with tertiary
treatment by October 1, 1994, the City shall incur a penalty of
$25, 000.
E. All penalties due under this Paragraph shall be paid
within thirty (30) days of receipt by the City of a letter from the
Board demanding payment. Payment shall be made according to the
following procedure:
1. ' The full amount of the penalty shall be paid by
check payable to the State Water Resources Control Board.
The decision to demand payment of. any stipulated penalty
under this .Paragraph shall be at the discretion of the
State. . A. copy of the letter demanding payment shall be
submitted to the Court.
2. Should the -City contend that a stipulated penalty
should not be paid or should be reduced, the City may
within thirty (30) days of receipt of the demand for
payment move the court for relief. If the City elects
• not to pay any disputed penalties, and if the City is
ultimately determined to be liable for such penalty, the
City shall pay interest from the date of receipt of the
demand for payment to the date of actual payment. The
interest shall be computed daily at the rate provided for
interest on money judgments pursuant to California Code
Of Civil Procedure Section 685.010.
F. Stipulated penalties paid pursuant to this Paragraph shall
be in addition to, and shall not preclude the use of, any other
remedies or sanctions that may be available to the State to enforce
this Consent Decree. Nor shall the payment of such stipulated
penalties be construed so as to relieve the City from specific
compliance with this Consent Decree or federal or State law.
X.
FORCE MAJEURE
A. If any event occurs that is beyond the reasonable control
of the City that may delay the timely completion of any requirement
of this Consent Decree, including but not limited to limitations in
Appendices A or- B, the City shall notify the Board and the Court in
writing within forty-five (45) calendar days of the time that the
City becomes aware of the event.. The notice shall describe in
detail, the nature of the event and the measures taken to prevent
or minimize the delay. The City will use its best efforts to fake '
Consent Decree -11- August 30, 1990
C"
reasonable measures to avoid or minimize any such delay. Failure
by the City to comply with the notice requirements of this
Paragraph shall render the provisions of this Paragraph void as to
the particular event involved.
B. If the Board agrees that the delay was caused by
circumstances arising from causes beyond the reasonable control of
the City or its contractors, the City will not be subject to any
sanction, including. stipulated penalties, for any violation of this
Consent. Decree caused by such delay. Under such circumstances, the
parties shall request the Court, and the Court shall modify, the
Consent Decree to provide additional time for performance of the
requirement.
C. If the parties are unable to agree that a delay has been
caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the City
or its contractors, or, if the parties are unable to agree on a
modification of this Consent Decree to provide additional time for
performance, the parties shall jointly move the Court to resolve
the dispute. In such proceeding, the City shall bear the burden of
proving: 1) that the delay is or was caused by circumstances beyond
the reasonable control of the City, and 2) , that the additional
time requested is reasonable to compensate for that event.
E. The fact that the parties may have previously stipulated
any delay in meeting any other schedule or date as modified by this
Consent Decree was caused by circumstances beyond the control of
the City, shall not constitute proof that circumstances beyond the
control of the City exist or existed for failure to comply with any
subsequent compliance date. If the City establishes that any
failure to meet a compliance date was due to circumstances beyond
its control, such date shall be extended. The City may not,
however, be relieved of the ultimate duty to comply with all
requirements of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et
seq. , or the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act; California
Water Code Section 13000 et seq.
XI.
COORDINATOR
The State and the City will each designate a single
coordinator and an alternate who will be responsible for directing
all documents related to this Consent Decree to the proper person
for processing and who will track the progress of items in this
® decree. The coordinators shall inform all parties and the Court as
to their names, addresses, and telephone numbers within sixty (60)
days of the entry of this Decree.
J
Consent Decree -12- August 30, 1990
i
XII .
RIGHT OF ENTRY
Any designated representative or contractor of the State may,
upon presentation of credentials, enter upon the premises of the
facility owned, operated and controlled by the City for the
purposes of monitoring compliance with the provisions of the
Consent. Decree. This right of entry shall be in addition to
State's right of entry under applicable law. All inspections and
monitoring by representatives or contractors of the State shall be
reasonable and shall be conducted in a manner that will not
interfere with the safety or operation of the facilities.
XIII.
SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS
The City agrees to submit such further information to the
Board as may be reasonably required in order to ensure compliance
with the terms of this Consent Decree.
$IV.
FUNDING
A. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall limit or otherwise
affect the City's ranking, qualification or ability to obtain
funding for the construction of facilities required pursuant to
this Consent Decree from the State or Federal Governments.
B. The construction schedules and obligations in Paragraphs
IV. and V. herein are calculated on the basis of timely receipt by
the City of a written loan commitment from the State in response to
the City's pending loan application for the construction of
receiving water facilities. If such loan commitment is not
received by February 15, 1991 for the construction of receiving
water facilities, the parties agree to renegotiate the schedules
and obligations for receiving water facilities to reflect the
actual date of the City's receipt of such loan commitments or other
construction financing.
XV.
RETENTION OF JURISDICTION
This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter as may
be necessary or, appropriate for the construction or execution of
this Consent Decree. In the event a dispute arises between the
City and the State regarding compliance with or interpretation of
Consent Decree -13 August 30, 1990
any requirement or provision contained in this Consent Decree,
either party may file a petition with this Court for resolution of
such dispute after making a good faith attempt to resolve the
dispute through negotiations.
XVI.
COSTS
Each party shall bear its own costs and disbursements in this
action.
XVII.
NO WAIVER
Unless otherwise specified herein, any failure or delay by the
Board to enforce a violation of any provision of this Consent
Decree shall not be deemed a waiver of the Board s right to seek
stipulated penalties or otherwise enforce the requirements .of this
Consent Decree.
XVIII.
AMENDMENTS
This Consent Decree may be amended for reasons other than
those set forth in previous sections when: the parties agree; such
amendments do not violate the intent of this Consent Decree; public
notice procedures are followed;. and the parties move the Court
jointly for amendment.
XIV.
TERMINATION
This Consent Decree shall expire after all parties hereto have
certified and the Court has determined that the City has complied
with the terms of this Decree. Upon expiration of this Decree,
this action shall be dismissed with prejudice.
DATED AND ENTERED THIS day of . , 1990
Consent Decree -14- August 30, 1990
APPENDIX A
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
INTERIMEFFLUENTLIMITATIONS
The city shall continue to comply with all effluent limitations in
NPDES Permit No. CA0049224 except effluent limitations for BOD,
Suspended Solids, Un-ionized Ammonia, Toxicity Concentration,
Settleable Solids, Turbidity, and Grease and Oil.
The City shall .achieve compliance with the following effluent
.limitations for discharge to San Luis Obispo Creek from the City of
San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment plant:
Bi-
Monthly Monthly Weekly"
Unit of (60-Day) (30-Day) (7-Day) Daily
Constituent Measure Averave Averacie Average __ Maximum
BOD, 5-Day mg/1 25 35 60 80
lbs/day*\ 1065 1490 2550 3400
kg/day* 485 680 1160 1540
Suspended
Solids mg/1 20 25 40 80
lbs/day* 835 ; 1060 2550 3400
kg/day* 400 480 1160 1540 -
Settleable
Solids ml/l N/A 0. 1 N/A 0.3
Turbidity NTU 10 15 30
Grease a_n_d
oil mg/l N/A 15 N/A 25
lbs/day* N/A 640 N/A 1060
kg/day* N/A 29.0 N/A 490
*For flows less than 5 .10 MGD, mass emission rates shall not ,
exceed the "Maximum Allowable Mass Emission Rate".
Consent Decree -15- August 30, 1990
APPENDIX B
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
INTERIM RECEIVING WATER LIMITATION
The City shall continue to comply with all receiving water
limitations in NPDES Permit No. CA0049224 except receiving water
limitations for temperature, color, turbidity, MEAS, foam, and pH.
The City shall comply with the following receiving water
limitations in San Luis Obispo Creek:
pH 6.0-9.0 with no change more than 1 .0 units.
No interim limit for temperature, color, turbidity, MBAS, or
foam.
sm26:Decree.slo
O