Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2012.08.23 Regular MinutesMINUTES McCall City Council Regular Meeting Legion Hall (McCall City Hall - Lower Level) August 23, 2012 Agenda Call to Order and Roll Call Work Session Approve the Agenda Pledge of Allegiance Public Hearing Public Comment Business Agenda Consent Agenda Adjournment CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL' Mayor Bailey called the regular meeting of the McCall City Council to order at 5:33 p.m. Council Member Aymon, Mayor Bailey, and Council Member Witte all answered roll call. Council Member Scott and Council Member Swanson were absent. A quorum was present. City staff present was Gene Drabinski, Interim City Manager; Bill Nichols, City Attorney; Anne Kantola, Library Director; Dennis Coyle, Parks and Recreation Director; Delta James, City Planner; Ben Gau, Airfield Equipment Operator; Linda Stokes, City Treasurer; Michelle Groenevelt, Community Development Director; and BessieJo Wagner, City Clerk. Council Member Scott joined the meeting at 5:34 p.m. Council Member Swanson joined the meeting at 5:39p.m. WORK SESSION AB 12-164 Solid Waste Management Contract Mayor Bailey gave a brief history of the proposed contract for Solid Waste Management Services by Lake Shore Disposal. He stated that the sample contract presented was the contract that was currently in place between Lake Shore Disposal and the City of Cascade. Mayor Bailey also stated that the purpose of the work session was to determine if the City should pursue a separate contract and the process to accomplish that. The City of McCall residents currently receive solid waste collection through Lake Shore Disposal that has contracted with the County to provide these services. The City of McCall is charged by law with the duty of providing for the preservation and protection of the health and welfare of its inhabitants, and has the power and authority to regulate, control and provide for solid waste disposal under powers conferred by the laws of the State of Idaho. Based on IC 50- McCall City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2012 Page 1 of 8 344 3 — Upon a finding by the City Manager for public safety or necessary protection of public health and welfare and property, the City does not have to do a request for proposal (RFP) for waste disposal. Lake Shore Disposal approached the City of McCall with a proposal to contract directly with the City for solid waste collection. Lake Shore Disposal provided the City a sample contract and various options and their corresponding rates. The Valley County Commissioners approved a Price Increase of 3.6% for solid waste disposal to take effect October 1, 2012. BessieJo Wagner, City Clerk, clarified that by having a separate contract for solid waste management it would give the residents of McCall more options to their current service with the possibility of curbside recycling. There was general discussion regarding the different options such as mandatory versus subscription services, bear proof containers, curbside recycling, and size of containers. There was a general consensus of the Council to pursue a contract. Council also requested that staff review the current City code to evaluate possible amendments if the Council should decide on mandatory service. There was some additional discussion regarding the bear proof containers and whether to make those containers mandatory. There was also much discussion on the implications of making the service mandatory and how that may affect second home owners. Council requested an additional work session to discuss options and review a contract. Mayor Bailey led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance at 6:10 p.m. APPROVE THE AGENDA Mayor Bailey, with the consent of the Council, approved the agenda as presented. PUBLIC HEARINGS AB 12-157 Conditional Use Permit — CUP-12-04: 106 E. Park St. — McCall College at Park Street Professional Center Delta James, City Planner, presented the Conditional Use Permit application submitted to secure use of 6000 sq. ft. of the Park Street Professional Center for adult education classrooms, administrative offices, coffee shop, and bookstore. The applicant proposed to create a student entrance at the rear of the building prior to commencement of use. The proposal included completing stormwater drainage improvements and the reconfiguration of the parking area at the front of the building to back- in parking at such time when the City would complete reconstruction of Park Street (anticipated to be completed by 2015) or no later than October 1, 2017. On July 10, 2012, the McCall Area Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and recommended this Conditional Use Permit application (CUP-12-04) to the McCall City Council with a second public hearing. Ms. James outlined some of the pros and cons of the project stating that the pros include the fact that it is a community college which is outlined in the City's comprehensive plan, site improvements including storm water mitigation and landscaping, formalized parking configuration, and it would utilize vacant space within an existing commercial building. The McCall City Council Regular Meeting Page 2 of 8 August 23, 2012 challenge included not meeting existing code section regarding parking in front of commercial buildings and not adhering to the code uniformly. Woody Woodworth, applicant representative, stated that it had concluded after several meeting with staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, the intent of the code for commercial parking to be in the rear of the building was for the down town business area and Third Street corridor. However, he stated the applicant compromised by creating a student entrance in the rear of the building, as well as the student parking would be in the back of the building. The applicant felt like it would affect the majority of the occupants to not have any of the parking in the front of the building. Mr. Woodworth stated that the applicant had started working on the conditions of the permit to include landscaping and trash enclosures. There was brief discussion regarding the neighbors and any feedback the project received. There was also discussion regarding the parking issues and whether back -in parking was the best solution. Mayor Bailey Opened the Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit — CUP-12-04: 106 E. Park St. — McCall College at Park Street Professional Center at 6:45 Mike Kohout, business owner and occupant of the Park Place spoke in favor of the conditional use permit for a Community College. Brian Williams, McCall resident spoke in favor of the conditional use permit for a Community College. Dr. Dave Hansen retired educator, spoke in favor of the conditional use permit for a Community College. Hearing no further comments, Mayor Bailey closed the public hearing for Conditional Use Permit — CUP-12-04: 106 E. Park St. — McCall College at 6:53 p.m. The Council had some concern about back -in parking. Council Member Swanson moved to approve, Conditional Use Permit CUP-12-04 based upon Council review of the CUP approval criteria (MCC 3.13.02 — see attached Staff Report) and subject to the presented Findings and Conclusions. Council Member Aymon seconded the motion. In a roll call vote Council Member Swanson, Council Member Aymon, Mayor Bailey, Council Member Scott, and Council Member Witte all voted aye and the motion carried. Council Member Swanson amended the motion to include and authorize the Mayor to sign the Square One Investments Development Agreement. Council Member Aymon seconded the motion. In a voice vote all members vote aye and the motion carried. AB 12-156 FY12 Budget Amendment Ordinance Linda Stokes, City Treasurer, presented the FY12 Budget Amendment Ordinance for the appropriation of additional monies to be received from Federal and State grants; appropriation of McCall City Council Regular Meeting Page 3 of 8 August 23, 2012 Fund Balances in the General, Library, and Airport Funds; and an Interfund Transfer from the General Fund to the Recreation Fund. Mayor Bailey opened the public hearing for FY12 Budget Amendment Ordinance at 7:06 p.m. Hearing no comments Mayor Bailey closed the public hearing for the FY12 Budget Amendment Ordinance. Council Member Scott moved to suspend the rules, read by title only, one time only Ordinance No. 903. Council Member Witte seconded the motion. In a roll call vote Council Member Scott, Council Member Witte, Council Member Aymon, Mayor Bailey, and Council Member Swanson all voted aye and the motion carried. Ordinance No 903 was read by title only one time only by BessieJo Wagner, City Clerk. An ordinance amending Ordinance No. 890, the Annual FY12 Budget, to provide for additional monies received by the City of McCall; providing for a title; providing for findings; providing for the adoption of a budget and the appropriation of expenditures of sums of money to defray the necessary expenses and liabilities of the City of McCall, in accordance with the object and purposes and in the certain amounts herein specified for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2011 and ending on September 30, 2012; providing for the levy of a sufficient tax; and providing for an effective date and the filing of a certified copy of this ordinance with the secretary of state. Council Member Scott moved to adopt Ordinance No. 903, amending the FY12 Appropriations Ordinance No. 890 and authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary documents. Council Member Swanson seconded the motion. In a roll call vote Council Member Scott, Council Member Swanson, Council Member Aymon, Mayor Bailey, and Council Member Witte all voted aye and the motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Bailey called for public comment at 7:08 p.m. Hearing no comments, Mayor Bailey closed the public comment. AB 12-159 FY13 Budget Ordinance Adoption Linda Stokes, City Treasurer, presented the FY13 Budget Ordinance. Council adopted a tentative budget in the amount of $17,173,530 on July 13, 2012. Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing at the August 9, 2012 Council meeting regarding the tentative FY13 budget. The budget was updated to reflect the actual growth related to New Construction and the carry forward amounts that were identified just prior to the Council Work Session on July 13, 2012, as well as the approved Local Option Tax funding. The public hearing was left open until August 23, 2012 to receive written comments from the public. No additional comments were received by staff. McCall City Council Regular Meeting August 23, 2012 Page 4 of 8 Amend the note on page 6 of the worksheets regarding the carry forward of $15,000 for the campus plan. It was decided to carry forward the money for the Public Art plan. On Page 12 the $48,000 for the city prosecutor, could be a different number if the city chooses to renegotiate. Council Member Scott moved to suspend the rules, read by title only, one time only Ordinance No. 904 Council Member Swanson seconded the motion. In a roll call vote Council Member Scott, Council Member Swanson, Council Member Aymon, Mayor Bailey, and Council Member Witte all voted aye and the motion carried. Ordinance No. 904 was read by title only one time only by BessieJo Wagner, City Clerk. An ordinance entitled the FY13 Annual Appropriation Ordinance for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2012, appropriating the sum of $17,092,520 to defray the expenses and liabilities of the City of McCall for said fiscal year, authorizing a levy of a sufficient tax. Council Member Aymon moved to adopt Ordinance No. 904 setting the FY13 City of McCall budget appropriation at $17,092,520, and authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary documents. Council Member Witte seconded the motion. In a roll call vote Council Member Aymon, Council Member Witte, Mayor Bailey, Council Member Scott, and Council Member Swanson all voted aye and the motion carried. AB 12-158 Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Member Reappointment Dennis Coyle, Parks and Recreation Director presented the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Member Reappointment of Ed Roper to Council. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee recommended the reappointment of Ed Roper. His appointment expired in July of 2012. Mr. Roper was originally appointed in 2009 and the new term would expire in July of 2015. Mayor Bailey moved to approve the appointment of Ed Roper to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board with the term to expire in July of 2015. Council Member Swanson seconded the motion. In a voice vote all voted aye and the motion carried. AB 12-162 Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Annual Report Irwin Mulnick, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Committee, presented the committee's annual report to Council. The report is attached as Attachment A. AB 12-160 Capital Improvement Project Funding Discussion of Options: 1) A General Obligation Bond, 2) A Supplemental Levy, or 3) A Local Option Sales Tax Peter Borner, Public Works Director, presented the Capital Improvement Project Funding discussion to Council. Mr. Borner stated that there had been some attempt to elicit community members to create a committee dedicated to pursuing the 1% sales tax and had no one show any interest. Mr. Borner stated that as part of the Capital Improvement Plan is the Pavement Management plan and the longer the City waits to implement a maintenance schedule the cost will go up. Mr. Borner asked the Council for direction as to which option to pursue. He also McCall City Council Regular Meeting Page 5 of 8 August 23, 2012 stated that through grant opportunities there will be some significant street and sidewalk projects completed over the next 12-24 months. BessieJo Wagner, City Clerk, stated that with the completion of some of the grant funded projects it would give an opportunity to show the community the potential of what a 1% sales tax could accomplish. She also stated that a 1% sales tax had been successful in other tourist communities and the primary roadblock for McCall would be the community involvement and community education. There was some discussion about pursuing a 1% sales tax and would there be any exclusion of the tax. Mr. Borner suggested that the City start with a citizens committee, a Public Works Advisory Committee, to assist with the public education and project identity of the proposed local option tax. There was some discussion as to what was needed to identify specific projects in an ordinance for a 1% local option tax. Bill Nichols, City Attorney, clarified that public funds could not be used to "market" a local option tax. The City could only provide factual information. The general consensus from the Council was to develop a citizens committee to get some opinion from the community as to whether to pursue a sales tax. AB 12-161 Amendment to Agreement for General Airport Consulting Services with T-O Engineers Dennis Coyle, Parks and Recreation Director, presented the Amendment to Agreement for General Airport Consulting Services with T-O Engineers to the Council. The proposal detailed the delivery of airport management services and the associated costs with T-O Engineers. This proposal would increase the T-O monthly services agreement from $1,000 to $4,000. Also included in the proposal to offset the cost of managing the Airport and to be overall no worse than budget neutral are the: 1. Addition of an administrative assistant to the airport, 2. A change to the "Airfield Equipment Operator" duties to an "Airfield Superintendent", and 3. Additional responsibilities of the Parks and Recreation Director to supervise the Airfield Superintendent. The fully loaded and budgeted cost in the FY13 budget for the Airport Manager was $7,167 per month. The amendment to the T-O agreement included a revised scope of work to reflect professional airport management services. The proposed agreement would be month to month. The agreement proposed that John Anderson would be available approximately one hour a day including two days in McCall each month. General consensus of the Council was that the agreement would be an interim solution not a permanent solution. Council Member Witte moved to approve the amendment to the Agreement for General Airport Consulting Services with T-O Engineers as amended to add to paragraph 11 of the new agreement as a new second sentence "The failure or inability of John Anderson McCall City Council Regular Meeting Page 6 of 8 August 23, 2012 (former McCall Airport manager) to perform services under this agreement as an employee or contractor of Airport Consultant shall qualify as a substantial failure to perform under this agreement", change the date in paragraph 5 to August 31, 2013, and authorize the Mayor to sign all necessary documents. Council Member Scott seconded the motion. In a roll call vote Council Member Witte, Council Member Scott, Council Member Aymon, Mayor Bailey, and Council Member Swanson all voted aye and the motion carried. AB 12-163 Technical Advisory Group Report Status Peter Borner, Public Works Director, distributed a document that outlined concerns from Laura Bettis. (Attachment B). Mayor Bailey also distributed a memo regarding the irrigators and irrigation district (Attachment C). Mr. Borner stated that meetings held with Mr. Maki and Mr. and Mrs. Bettis were productive and informational. Through the process of meeting with the irrigators there have been some operational concerns brought. The two main concerns expressed by the irrigators were they want to apply effluent and run cattle at the same time but the permit stated they have to wait 15 days; and the other concern was with some setback issues that may require some fencing. Mr. Borner stated that the City would continue to move forward to build and maintain relationships with the irrigators. Mr. Borner also stated that he had set up monthly meetings with Dale Caza from the Payette Lakes Recreational Water and Sewer District to discuss operational issues to include the winter storage pond and disposal. He also stated the he would spend time with Mr. Leedom to view the entire pipe line from the mixing station to each of the farmer's fields to assess some issues with aging infrastructure. Mr. Borner also indicated that the City staff was working on a map that would accurately identify all the properties that are being land applied. Mayor Bailey stated that he recognized the importance of maintaining contact with the farmers and that it can be challenging at times to do so as many do not live here full time. He expressed that at the very least an annual meeting should happen between the City and the irrigators to ensure any operational concerns are being taken care of. He also indicated that at least one Council Member along with staff should participate in those meetings. Mayor Bailey indicated that the City had agreed to move forward with the permitting process with IDEQ for land application of effluent. Some farmers feel that they should not need a permit and there could be some issues with the process and some of the requirements. Mr. Borner stated that DEQ would like to see the City obtain these permits and until all the requirements are disclosed the City and the irrigators do not know what the issues will be. Mr. Borner also indicated that there may be some room for negotiations with DEQ in regard to the permits. Mr. Borner updated the Council on the Davis Beach backup generator stating there would be a neighborhood meeting. There had been some concerns expressed about the building and the bathrooms and the City was looking at some options that include taking plans to the Planning and Zoning Commission sometime in November. Mr. Borner also updated the Council on the status of the speed limits on Hwy 55. ITD would like to set up a meeting with the City sometime in September to resolve the speed limit issue. McCall City Council Regular Meeting Page 7 of 8 August 23, 2012 CONSENT AGENDA Staff recommended approval of the following items: • Council Special Minutes — June 26, 2012 • Council Special Minutes — August 6, 2012 • Warrant Registers Dated August 15, 2012 • Payroll Report for Period ending August 3, 2012 • License Report A brief discussion took place regarding items in the minutes and on the Warrant Register. Council Member Scott moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with the minutes corrected, Council Member Swanson seconded the motion. In a voice vote, all voted aye, Council Member Scott abstained, and the motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Without further business, the Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8:56 p.m. tolitso .o `��`'k ` Ca Y +Op I'', o p y S. ATTEST: " > r '. b �a BessieJo agner, Ci lerk Don .. Bailey, Mayor McCall City Council Regular Meeting Page 8 of 8 August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT A 2012 McCall Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Annual Report to City Council Thursday August 23, 2012 AB Members: Chairman: Irwin Mulnick, Vice Chair- Ed Roper Bill McDonald, Corey Nelson, Gusty Laidlaw, Matt Linde Recap of Recreation Programs: # of Participants — FY2010 — 1,308 FY2011 — 1,428 FY 2012 — expected to meet or beat 2011 figures a. List of Programs offered: Youth: Soccer, T-Ball, Softball, Baseball, Skateboarding, Swim Lessons, Science Day Camp and Team Building/Outdoor Games (partnership w/ MOSS), Fishing, Snow - shoeing, Nordic Skiing, Mountain Biking, Tennis Adult: Beginning Fly -tying, Active Communities, Volleyball, Adult Softball, Photo Contest, Indoor Soccer, CPR & AED Training (City Employees), and ASA Umpire Clinic b. On-line registration and payment — PT clerical help for 2.5 months 2. Special Events and Partnerships: a. Mile High Swim b. Cardboard Regatta c. Mt. Madness Youth Softball Tournament (32 teams) d. Leroy Mathews Memorial SB Tournament e. Cross Fit exercise programs in the parks and for high school athletes f. Senior SB Tournament (8/24-8/25) g. MOSS h. Police Department — Bike Rodeo i. Many community events took place in our parks, Triathalon, Paddle Board races, concerts, fireworks, Winter Carnival etc... j. Legacy Park Underwater and Beach Cleanup (September 2012) Staffing: 1. Dennis Coyle (P&R Director), Kurt Wolf (Parks) and Mark Pernell (Rec) 2. 2 employees became certified applicators for noxious weed abatement Recap of Parks Programs: 1. New docks and turf improved at Legacy Park 2. Improvements at Rotary Park - retaining wall & playground equipment. Scenic Byway grant for Rotary Park (sidewalk, retaining wall, etc...) City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT A 3. Dienhard St. pedestrian path completed from Middle School to Post Office 4. Concession Policy, Maintenance Manual and Noxious Weed Management Plan completed 5. Assessment and maintenance of ALL city parks turf and irrigation systems 6. Roosevelt Park completed 7. Centennial Park — under construction still 8. Brown Park Pathway completed September '11 9. Improved relationship between MD school district and Parks and Rec. dept. 10. Carol Coyle- grant funding for multiple projects 11. Bear basin connector trail authorized 12. Striping of Warren Wagon Road with Valley County (Fall) 13. Tying together the vision of the Pathways Master Plan (Irwin was a rep for P&RAB on this committee) Wish list for future projects (no specific order): a. Riverfront Park progression b. Disc golf course c. Rec./Community Center d. Year-round indoor(indoor/outdoor) pool e. Commercial Docking Zone for the waterfront (city property identified north of the Marina Current Projects: Shelter @ Brown Park for weddings/events (October) Coping repair at Harshmann Skate Park (October) Backstop for volleyball court at Legacy Park (August -September) Town to Bear Basin Connector Pathway (October -November) Playground safety -cover at Fairway (August -September) River access in partnership with Lake Irrigation District Seal coating Railroad Grade Pathway (August -September) City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT JDitch Effluent Land Application Contract — Laura Bettis's The following are a beginning list of contract requirements or concerns regarding the renewal of the J Ditch/City ofMcCall contract. This isnot anexhaustive list oranofficial representation ofeverything Harry Bettis may want from the contract. 8Veretain the right tqchange our minds ortoadd tothis list during the negotiation process. Ultimately, m/edowant tqcontinue irrigating asvvehave the last 15 years. We feel it is mutually beneficial to the City of McCall and the farmers to continue the system. 1. Term should beatleast ten years, possibly uptm3O. 2. Screens must be installed at the outlet of pond or at mixing station so that solids are intercepted before reaching the sprinklers, where they are problematic. This will not betotally solved bv screens within the WWTP because some of the solids are debris which accumulates in the pond naturally (parts of pinecones), not just things missed in the treatment process (parts of tampons and other very small pieces ofp|ast|c). Both ofthose classes wfthings shows upinthe sprinklers. 3. VVeare uncertain mtthis time about taking 20O%effluent. VVewould prefer tocontinue with the mixing and then possibly time any 100% effluent applications to coincide with the optimal times for its application. We want to retain a say in the decision about when that application occurs. 4. Permitting process/requirements cannot impact productivity (i.e. greatly increased setbacks, waiting periods for grazing). VVecan't continue doing the land application ifpermit requirements reduce the number of cows/number of days we are grazing the fields or the number of acres available to us. This will require a careful negotiation with DEQ through the permitting process. We believe the Sewer District is making headway on some of these difficult issues. 5 All new requirements of the permit are paid for by City of McCall and/or permitee (possibly Sewer District) — i.e. new fencing, si#nage, water testing, any changes in sprinkler systems tm accommodate changes required byDE[1 6. Pipeline maintenance should be paid by City and/or permitee or at least a "carriage fee" should bepaid toLID for the effluent that goes through the system. 7' Some farmers believe there should be sprinkler system maintenance paid for by City/permitee. We believe that any such maintenance should be a flat fee paid to the farmers based on something like number ofacres where effluent isapplied. |nthatvvaYitw/ou|dbefa|rto everyone and the farmers would have the independence to choose their equipment. Someone shouldn't get paid more just because their equipment breaks down more. VVealso don't want tohave topetition the City/pernniteefor payment. Everyone has regular maintenance and should bear much of that cost as part of their operations, but the City/permitee sharing some of the cost seems appropriate. 8' If more land needs to be added later,there would be an expectation of cost sharing on additional equipment (i.e. new pivots) that would be required' 9. Atthis point, the option ofhaving the Sewer District bethe pernniteemust stay mnthe table, The Sewer Disti ' has shown its continual support for the land application program. The staff City Council Regular Minutes August 23.2O12 ATTACHMENT ufthe Sewer District has shown the most familiarity with this system and far more actual knowledge mfland application rules/procedures through this process. The TAG plan said that this option was still mnthe table and that needs turemain the case. 31S-3O8IPeter 8oernercell City Council Regular Minutes August 23.2O12 ATTACHMENT C 23 August 2012 To: City Council From: Don Bailey Cc: Peter Borner, Bil r Nichols, Gene Drabinski Subject: J-Ditch Farmers and Irrigation District On Friday, August 17, Peter, Jackie, Gene, and I met with Will Maki, John Leedom (Irrigation District), and Ben Rydalch (husband of Laura Bettis) at the corner of Maki Road and Norwood Road. Maki's farm extends along both sides of Norwood and also includes another piece purchased by Maki bordering the south-east corner. See the Google shots enclosed for this property and other views extending along the J-Ditch pipeline. We also visited the location of the mixing station, which is located just off Nisula Road on Simplot property, but accessed through District property; the station is located on the property line; see the Google shot attached. The original CH2 map of the entire area is being revised by City staff to make corrections and bring up-to-date the locations of the served acreage. I've also attached a few photos of the scenes on both farms. We had a fruitful discussion with Maki, Leedom and Rydalch; they expressed gratitude that Ctiy leaders had finally made this first visit (at least since my term on the Council). We plan to visit the Bettis farm on Wednesday August 22. The importance to the farmers for such a visit has never been so strongly expressed before this year, however, to my knowledge. We discussed in general terms our need for the City to extend the current agreements, or negotiate new ones, with the farmers. Our guests listened, but pointed out that some of the rules going forward, after the 2016 irrigation season, as expressed in the IDEQ documents, will be problematic. They especially noted the requirement that no cattle be grazed on the properties sooner that 14 days after irrigating with treated effluent (either mixed as today or applied l00%). So that we understand some of these rules, I've attached a few pages from the "Guidance for Reclamation and Ruse..." document for your review. The entire document can be found on the DEQ website (all 563 pages!); we need to have someone on staff that becomes very familiar with this document. Is it possible that DEQ would relax this grazing delay rule for our system? Perhaps, as the farmers have paid no attention to this delay for fifteen years! And maybe the rule was primarily intended for dairy cows. Visit to the Bettis farm: Peter, Gene and I visited with Laura Bettis and Ben Rydalch for about 1 1/2 hours. We discussed the same issues raised by Maki and Leedom, especially the issues with the DEQ "Guidance ..." document. Their primary concern is the imposed delay of 14 days before cattle can be put back onto an irrigated pasture; currently the cattle feed on fields while they are being irrigated! If they have to wait 14 days, the City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 Page l of 2 ATTACHMENT C grass will be brown or dead before the cattle can be reintroduced, especially with the weather of this summer. They also mentioned the additional fencing, setbacks, signage, etc. to be required over the current practices. Apparently, the District (or JUB staff) has had discussions with DEQ personnel regarding these issues; we need to find out the nature of these discussions and whether or not any rule relaxation had been, or will likely be, granted. Ms. Bettis has written some of her concerns separately and Peter will distribute copies. Please give some thought to the issues raised and how and in what manner the City should deal with the farmers in the future. For example, perhaps the City Council and farmers should meet once or twice a year on a regularly scheduled basis. And perhaps a new collective organization could be formed to handle future issues beyond the expiration of the current contracts. City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 Page 2of2 ATTACHMEV1 ZSSI a V. a..sle earth feet meters Jffir.4 • r I p vA ;fib t 1, 2000 , NAV ; • LL 4cAil 700 A City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Gorda earth feet meters 2000 700 A City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Goggle earth feet meters 1`.1A,cr 1000 500 A City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Google earth feet km -.1Di e MADE _ tJ 12 F-Lropa Tech loloutS Irr'-a+rje 11SC1AFarri Service Agency 1 4000 A City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Google ea it h feet meters r 7012 Goag�e SPOT IMAGE 12 Err ropy Tec:hnWP r 5 1_1SG4-rarrn Serv,Ce Merl Cy 1000 400 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTAC:HMFNT C: Google earth feet meters a Sr r Cac . L Erna€]e USDA F�.i'T' 2000 600 A City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C ,1,;2012Europa ,Lech -a.ogi r, Poo 1 A.4 A �� 5'ky4443e fyiCe,^y feet ste earth meters 1000 500 A City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C pa C1C1 ()A/ -*-. lh b Lf% `\'' 14 A cr-7 krty j?"/ rn+J j Y I� City Council Regular M August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C IMIIM:IMI4Olit. -7,10 n o cm A ° Gc.f Vor' „z, ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Idaho Department of Environmental Quality September 2007 U -r / a _ 7 S^J_? City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Table of Contents Page v Table of Contents Acknowledgements List of Figures x List of Tables xii List of Equations xiv Organization of This Internet Version of the Reuse Guidance xvi Preface xvii Introduction: From Land Application to Reuse xvii Wastewater Land Application Permit (WLAP) Program History xvii Current and Future Directions for the Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater xix Part A: Slow Rate Land Treatment of Wastewater 1. Preparing a Reuse Permit Application for Wastewater Land Treatment1-1 1.1 Required Information 1-1 1.2 Definitions 1-1 1.3 Steps in the Application Process 1-2 1.4 Reuse Permit Application Form 1-5 1.5 Suggested Outline for Preparing the Technical Report 1-5 1.6 Guidelines for Preparing the Site Maps 1-9 1.6.1 Vicinity Map 1-9 1.6.2 Facility Site Map 1-10 1.6.3 Other Site Specific Maps and Drawings 1-10 1.7 Plan of Operation Checklist 1-11 1.8 Reuse Permit, Permit Process Steps 1-11 1.8.1 Typical Steps for a Reuse Permit 1-11 1.8.2 Reuse Permit Application Timing 1-12 1.9 Supplemental Materials 1-13 1.9.1 Standard Municipal Permits 1-13 1.9.2 Standard Industrial Permits 1-41 1.9.3 Program Forms and Spreadsheets 1-69 2. Site Evaluation for Reuse and Land Treatment 2-1 2.1 Environmental Factors 2-2 2.1.1 Climate 2-2 2.1.2 Soil 2-6 2.1.3 Topography 2-24 2.1.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 2-25 2.2 Cropping 2-38 2.2.1 Crop Selection 2-38 September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Table of Contents Page vi 2.2.2 Crop Management 2-39 2.2.3 Evapotranspiration 2-39 2.2.4 Crop Nutrients 2-41 2.3 Sociological Factors and Land Use 2-51 2.3.1 Planning and Zoning Requirements 2-51 2.3.2 Nuisance Conditions 2-52 2.4 References 2-53 2.5 Supplementary Material 2-57 2.5.1 Typical Idaho Soil Chemistry Values — Stukenholtz Laboratory, Inc. 2-57 2.5.2 Typical Idaho Soil Chemistry Values — Western Laboratories, Inc 2-58 2.5.3 Hydraulic Data for Hydrogeological Settings in Idaho 2-60 2.5.4 Well Test Data/ Transmissivity Values for Wells in Idaho 2-61 2.5.5 Hydraulic Conductivities by Rock Type 2-64 2.5.6 Hydraulic Conductivity Zones; East Snake River Plain 2-66 2.5.7 Hydraulic Conductivity and Permeability 2-67 2.5.8 Hydraulic Conductivity Values, Treasure Valley Idaho (DEQ, 2005) 2-68 2.5.9 Ranges in Porosity Values for Geological Materials 2-70 3. Wastewater Constituents 3-1 3.1 Sources of Wastewater 3-1 3.2 Types of Wastewater 3-1 3.3 Wastewater Physical Characteristics 3-2 3.3.1 Color 3-2 3.3.2 Odor 3-2 3.3.3 Temperature 3-2 3.3.4 Solids 3-2 3.4 Wastewater Chemical and Biological Characteristics 3-4 3.4.1 pH 3-4 3.4.2 Dissolved Oxygen 3-5 3.4.3 Biochemical and Chemical Oxygen Demand 3-5 3.4.4 Nitrogen 3-6 3.4.5 Salts 3-6 3.4.6 Metals 3-6 3.4.7 Persistent Organic Chemicals 3-7 3.4.8 Phosphorus 3-7 3.4.9 Pathogenic Organisms 3-7 3.4.10 Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products (PPCPs) 3-9 3.5 References 3-10 4. Hydraulic and Constituent Loading 4-1 4.1 Hydraulic Loading 4-1 4.1.1 Growing Season Wastewater Land Treatment 4-3 4.1.2 Non -Growing Season (NGS) Wastewater Land Treatment 4-12 4.1.3 Runoff Control 4-14 4.2 Wastewater Constituent Loading 4-17 September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Table of Contents Page vii 4.2.1 Constituent Loading Calculation Conventions for Determining Compliance with Permitted Loading Limits in Wastewater Reuse Permits 4-17 4.2.2 Wastewater Constituent Loading Rates 4-20 4.3 References 4-34 4.4 Supplementary Materials for Hydraulic and Constituent Loading 4-40 4.4.1 Cropping Season Table (NRCS Data) 4-40 4.4.2 Agrimet Weather Station Reference Table 4-41 4.4.3 Growing Season Data from Agrimet 4-42 4.4.4 Mean Monthly Precipitation in Idaho 4-48 4.4.5 Calculation of Effective Precipitation 4-53 4.4.6 Maximum, Minimum and Mean Monthly Temperatures in Idaho 4-54 4.4.7 The Leaching Requirement (LR) and LR Calculations 4-69 4.4.8 Irrigation Application Efficiencies 4-79 4.4.9 Determining Site Specific Non -growing Season Hydraulic Loading Rates (HLRngs) 4-79 4.4.10 Non -Growing Season Lysimeter Evaporation Data 4-86 4.4.11 Non -Growing Season Ground Water Impact Screening Tool for Low - Strength Wastewater Loading 4-89 4.4.12 Isopluvials of Precipitation for Runoff Control Design 4-94 4.4.13 Determining Appropriate Wastewater Flows to Apply to Chemical Analytical Data for Constituent Loading Calculations 4-97 4.4.14 Example Calculations 4-98 4.4.15 Significant Figures 4-104 4.4.16 Determining Nitrogen Loading Limit Compliance 4-105 4.4.17 Example Calculations 4-105 4.4.18 Quantifying Soil COD Assimilative Capacity 4-107 4.4.19 Metal and other Trace Element Loading [40CFR 503.13] 4-112 4.4.20 Determining Compliance with Reuse Permit Phosphorus Limits 4-115 4.4.21 Example Calculations 4-115 5. Not Used at This Time 5-1 6. Operations 6-1 6.1 Pretreatment Considerations 6-1 6.1.1 Municipal Pretreatment 6-2 6.1.2 Industrial Pretreatment 6-2 6.2 Not used at this time 6-2 6.3 Lagoons 6-3 6.3.1 Lagoons: Purpose and Need 6-3 6.3.2 Lagoon Design Criteria 6-3 6.3.3 Lagoon Seepage 6-5 6.3.4 Lagoon Operation and Maintenance 6-6 6.4 Grazing Management 6-10 6.4.1 Avoiding Adverse Impacts from Grazing 6-11 6.4.2 Grazing Management Plan 6-11 6.4.3 Grazing on Land Application Sites Irrigated with Treated Municipal September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Table of Contents Page viii Wastewater 6-14 6.5 Buffer Zones 6-16 6.5.1 General Buffer Zone Distances 6-16 6.5.2 Facility -Specific Buffer Zone Distances 6-17 6.5.3 Criteria for Alternative Wastewater Buffer Zones 6-20 6.6 Protection of Domestic and Public Well Water Supplies 6-20 6.6.1 Source Water Protection and the Safe Drinking Water Act 6-20 6.6.2 Source Water Protection under Idaho Rules 6-21 6.6.3 Protection of Domestic Water Supplies 6-21 6.6.4 Protection of Well Water Supplies near Wastewater Land Treatment Facilities6-22 6.7 Site Closure 6-29 6.8 Weed Control at Wastewater Land Treatment Facilities 6-29 6.9 References 6-30 7. Monitoring 7-1 7.1 General Discussion 7-1 7.1.1 Monitoring Objectives 7-2 7.1.2 Monitoring Parameters 7-2 7.1.3 Monitoring Frequency 7-3 7.1.4 Sampling and Sample Location Determination 7-5 7.1.5 Analytical Methods 7-7 7.1.6 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-8 7.1.7 Data Processing, Verification, Validation, and Reporting 7-9 7.1.8 References 7-11 7.2 Ground Water Monitoring 7-12 7.2.1 Alternatives to Ground Water Monitoring 7-13 7.2.2 Monitoring Objectives 7-13 7.2.3 Monitoring Instrumentation 7-14 7.2.4 Monitoring Parameters 7-16 7.2.5 Monitoring Frequency 7-24 7.2.6 Sampling and Sample Location Determination 7-24 7.2.7 Ground Water Compliance Points Monitoring 7-27 7.2.8 Analytical Methods 7-29 7.2.9 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-29 7.2.10 Data Processing, Verification, Validation, and Reporting 7-29 7.2.11 References 7-29 7.3 Soil -water (Vadose) Monitoring 7-30 7.3.1 Monitoring Objectives 7-31 7.3.2 Monitoring Instrumentation 7-32 7.3.3 Monitoring Parameters 7-35 7.3.4 Monitoring Frequency 7-36 7.3.5 Sampling and Sample Location Determination 7-37 7.3.6 Analytical Methods 7-37 7.3.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-38 September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Table of Contents Page ix 7.3.8 Data Processing, Verification, Validation, and Reporting 7-38 7.3.9 References 7-38 7.4 Soil Monitoring 7-39 7.4.1 Monitoring Objectives 7-39 7.4.2 Monitoring Instrumentation 7-40 7.4.3 Monitoring Parameters 7-40 7.4.4 Monitoring Frequency 7-43 7.4.5 Sampling and Sample Location Determination 7-45 7.4.6 Analytical Methods 7-47 7.4.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-47 7.4.8 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-48 7.4.9 Data Processing, Verification, Validation, and Reporting 7-48 7.4.10 References 7-48 7.5 Wastewater Monitoring 7-49 7.5.1 Monitoring Objectives 7-50 7.5.2 Monitoring Instrumentation 7-50 7.5.3 Monitoring Parameters 7-52 7.5.4 Monitoring Frequency 7-56 7.5.5 Sampling and Sample Location Determination 7-57 7.5.6 Analytical Methods 7-60 7.5.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-61 7.5.8 Data Processing, Verification, Validation, and Reporting 7-61 7.5.9 References 7-61 7.6 Crop Monitoring and Yield Estimation 7-62 7.6.1 Monitoring Objectives 7-62 7.6.2 Monitoring Instrumentation 7-62 7.6.3 Monitoring Parameters 7-63 7.6.4 Monitoring Frequency 7-64 7.6.5 Sampling and Sample Location Determination 7-64 7.6.6 Analytical Methods 7-65 7.6.7 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7-66 7.6.8 Data Processing, Verification, Validation, and Reporting 7-66 7.6.9 Crop Nutrient Content Reference Values 7-66 7.6.10 Crop Yield Estimation 7-66 7.6.11 References 7-67 7.7 Supplemental Information 7-69 7.7.1 General Discussion Supplemental Information 7-69 7.7.2 Recommended Contents for a Facility Quality Assurance/Quality Control PIan7-71 7.7.3 Ground Water Monitoring Supplemental Information 7-76 7.7.4 Ground Water Sampling 7-86 7.7.5 Soil -Water (Vadose) Monitoring Supplemental Information 7-96 7.7.6 Soil Monitoring Supplemental Information 7-110 7.7.7 Soil Monitoring for Grazing Management 7-113 7.7.8 Wastewater Monitoring Supplemental Information 7-115 September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and industrial Wastewater Table of Contents Page x 7.7.9 Crop Monitoring and Yield Estimation Supplemental Information 7-138 7.7.10 References 7-151 8. Not Used at This Time 8-1 Part B: High Rate Land Treatment of Wastewater 9. Rapid Infiltration Land Application Permitting Guidance 9-1 9.1 Guidance and Regulations for Rapid Infiltration 9-1 9.2 Site Specific Permitting Considerations 9-1 9.3 References 9-2 10. Not Used at This Time 10-1 11. Not Used at This Time 11-1 Part C: Other Reuse 12. Other Regulatory Requirements Associated With Wastewater Land Application Facilities 12-1 12.1 Domestic Sewage Disposal 12-1 12.2 Plan and Specification Reviews 12-2 12.3 Non -Contact Cooling Water 12-2 12.4 Water Appropriations and Allocations 12-2 12.5 Disposal of Truck Wash Sand & Grit Sumps, Grease Traps and Other Miscellaneous Small Volume Waste/Wastewater 12-3 12.6 Sludge Management 12-3 12.7 Discharges to Surface Waters 12-3 12.8 Designated Special Resource Waters or Sole Source Drinking Water Aquifers12-4 12.9 Ongoing Education 12-4 12.10 References 12-4 12.11 Supplemental Materials 12-5 12.11.1 Wastewater Land Application Sites Overlying Designated Special Resource Water 12-5 Glossary Guidance Index List of Figures Figure 2-1. Average Annual Precipitation — Idaho (USDA-NRCS, 1997 2-4 Figure 2-2. Textural triangle. The major soil textural classes are defined by the percentages of sand, silt and clay according to the heavy boundary lines shown (USDA, 2005)2-8 Figure 2-3. General relationship between soil water characteristics and soil texture. 2-11 Figure 2-4. Design percolation rate vs. NRCS soil permeability classifications for slow rate and rapid infiltration land treatment (EPA, 1981). 2-15 Figure 2-5. Relationships between pH on the one hand and the activity of microorganisms and nutrient availability on the other. The wide portions of the band indicate the zones of September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6- l0 excess precipitation during extended wet periods. In the late summer/early fall, lagoons should be pumped down as necessary to accommodate non -growing season flows, precipitation, etc. In Idaho, storage lagoons are designed to have a minimum of two feet of permanent freeboard. Under normal operations, the freeboard space will not be used for water storage. However, under some conditions, the freeboard space may be encroached upon: • Extremely high precipitation event. • High wastewater generation rates due to rapid population growth, inflow/ infiltration problems or, in industrial systems, plant upsets or unusual operations resulting in greater generation of wastewater. • Inability to lower storage lagoon volume to minimum levels prior to the winter storage season. If a situation arises that could result in approaching a lagoon overflow, contact your regional DEQ office to evaluate the situation and to determine what actions and approvals may be needed. 6.3.4.5 Short -Circuiting Short-circuiting is a condition that occurs when some of the wastewater in a lagoon or basin travels faster than the rest of the flowing water, typically between the inlet and outlet pipes. This problem can be caused by such factors as poor design, sludge accumulation in the lagoon bottom, vegetation that hinders lagoon circulation, and temperature gradients in the water column. Short circuiting is a concern for lagoons that perform treatment or are used for chlorine disinfection. It is less of a concern for lagoons used solely for storage. Short circuiting may cause stagnant conditions in a portion of the lagoon, which result in odor problems depending on the wastewater quality. Short-circuiting can be verified by the use of dye tests and may be corrected or prevented by using curtains or baffles to redirect flow, relocating inlet and outlet pipes, controlling vegetation, and removing excessive sludge deposits from the lagoon. 6.4 Grazing Management Although well managed livestock grazing is an effective method for harvesting crops grown on wastewater land treatment sites, poorly managed livestock grazing can result in negative environmental impacts and pathogen transmission to grazing animals when land applying municipal wastewater. This section discusses livestock grazing on wastewater land treatment sites; avoiding adverse grazing impacts; grazing plans; general, growing and non -growing season grazing conditions; and special considerations regarding grazing on municipal land treatment sites. September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-11 6.4.1 Avoiding Adverse Impacts from Grazing Adverse impacts to the site and the environment caused by livestock grazing can be avoided through careful consideration of nutrient balance and additional nutrient loading rates from livestock manure, compaction of the soil, and the effects of overgrazing. 6.4.1.1 Calculating Nutrient Loading Rates with Grazing Nutrient loading rates should be calculated as described in Sections 4.2.2, including the additional input from manure deposited by grazing animals and the mineralization (nutrient release) rate over time of the manure being considered. Further information regarding these calculations can be found in USDA (1992), Araji and Abdo (No Date), Cogger and Sullivan (1999), and Beegle (1997). 6.4.1.2 Avoiding Soil Compaction If animals are allowed on a land treatment site when soils are wet, substantial soil compaction can occur, leading to decreased infiltration rates, a subsequent increase in the potential for runoff, and reduced plant growth. This problem can be avoided by grazing only when soils are adequately drained and soil moisture is below field capacity, a measure of moisture percentage after rapid drainage. (See further discussion of soil moisture determination in Section 6.4.2.1 and discussion of field capacity in Sections 2.3, 4.4.7, and 7.7.7.) 6.4.1.3 Avoiding Over -Grazing Over -grazing of a site can decrease plant growth and vigor, leading to reduced water and nutrient uptake and increasing the potential for deep percolation and contamination of ground water. Moreover, reduced plant vigor causes long-term reduction in yields and the capacity of the site to support grazing. Over -grazing can be avoided by limiting the number of animals, limiting the time that animals remain on the field or plot, rotating livestock from plot -to -plot based on the amount of remaining vegetation, and adhering to an approved grazing management plan. 6.4.2 Grazing Management Plan To ensure that crop health and soil properties remain effective for wastewater land treatment, a grazing management plan is necessary for both the growing and non -growing seasons. Grazing plans must be reviewed and approved by DEQ before being implemented. The grazing plan should follow the guidance and specifications of relevant sections of the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Field Office Technical Guidance (FOTG), which can be accessed electronically from the following Web site: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/efotg Table 6-1 lists available guidance from NRCS related to grazing management. September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-12 Table 6-1. Relevant NRCS grazing guidance and specifications. Practice Name ' Code Where Applicable Pasture and Hayland Planting 512 Pasture, hayland, or land converted from other uses Grazing Land Mechanical Treatment 548 Native grazing land See also the NRCS National Range and Pasture Handbook, which can be accessed at the following Web site: http://www.glti.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/publications/nrph.htnnl Of particular interest in this publication is Chapter 5, `Management of Grazing Lands.' 6.4.2,1 Conditions for All Wastewater Land Treatment Site Grazing All wastewater land treatment site grazing is subject to the following conditions: ■ Livestock should be on site only until feed is depleted. Minimum leaf length and stubble height before and during grazing should be observed (Table 6-2). ■ There should be no irrigation while livestock are on site. ■ Livestock should be removed if precipitation wets soil such that soil/crop damage may result. ■ A written statement from the permittee to DEQ, stating that the permittee has control over the management of the grazing animals, is needed. ■ There should be no supplemental feeding of livestock while on the wastewater land treatment site. September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-13 Table 6-2. Minimum leaf lengths and stubble heights recommended for grazing (SCS.1986). Column A Column B Column C1 Plant Species - Common Name Minimum Leaf Length Reached Prior To Initiating Grazing (in.) Minimum Stubble Height to Remain Following Grazing Or Hay Harvesting (in.) Kentucky bluegrass 6 3 Smooth bromegrass 8 4 Regar bromegrass 8 4 Reed canarygrass 10 6 Tall fescue 8 4 Orchardgrass 8 4 Timothy 8 4 Ganison creeping (oxtail 10 4 Tall wheatgrass 10 8 Intermediate wheatgrass 10 4 Pubescent wheatgrass 8 4 Siberian wheatgrass 6 3 Crested wheatgrass 6 3 Russian wild rye 8 4 Alfalfa 14 3 Ladino clover 8 3 Red clover 6 3 Alsike clover 6 3 Sweet clover 8 4 Trefoil 8 3 Sainfoin 12 6 Milkvetch 8 4 White dutch clover 4 2 1 This is the minimum stubble height to be remaining at end of grazing period or hay harvest operation. When a grass - legume mixture is harvested for hay, generally use most limiting stubble height for the mixture. In the event there is a significant precipitation event, causing standing water or muddy conditions while livestock are on the site, the livestock should be removed. A determination of soil moisture should then be made to assess whether crop damage and/or soil compaction will result from continued grazing. The surface soil layer can be sampled after the precipitation event and evaluated for soil moisture according to Table 7-25 in Section 7.7.7 utilizing the "feel method". This involves collecting surface soil samples at several places in the field. The soil water status for each sample is estimated by feeling the soil to determine whether soils are like those in the shaded boxes in Table 7-25 (Ashley et al. 1997, and Wright and Bergsrud, 1991). If so, soil conditions may be too wet for grazing. September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-14 Soils having moisture characteristics described in the shade portions of should be allowed to drain to a suitable soil moisture content prior to grazing. General drainage times in days, (from Carlisle and Phillips, 1976 and Donahue et al., 1977) are provided in Table 7-26, Section 7.7.7. 6.4.2.2 Conditions for Growing Season Grazing When developing a grazing management plan specifically for the growing season, the following items should be included: ■ Type and number of animals to be grazed on the site. ■ Identification of times when animals can be put on a plot and when they should be removed, based on plant growth characteristics (plant height or other criteria). Indicate the primary growing season or months anticipated for the grazing season. ■ A schedule for rotating the animals through the site. Include a map showing plot arrangement, location of salt blocks, protein blocks, and water. The grazing management plan should include a schedule for rotating the location of any salt or protein blocks to prevent excessive traffic on any portion of the site. ■ A nutrient balance, accounting for crops grown, crop yield, fertilizers used, and nutrients removed and added by livestock. (See further discussion in Sections 4.2.2.3, 4.2.2.4, and 6.4.1.1) 6.4.2.3 Conditions for Fall "Clean -Up" (Non -Growing Season) There can be appreciable vegetative material left after harvest on fields, as well as along fence rows and ditch banks. Feed value of this post -harvest material often can be utilized by grazing animals. If a wastewater land treatment site is to be grazed solely for the purpose of fall "clean-up" of the site, then the following conditions should be met: ■ Livestock should be on site only after harvest. ■ Livestock should be off site no later than December 31s` ■ No winter pasturing of livestock or supplemental feeding. 6.4.3 Grazing on Land Application Sites Irrigated with Treated Municipal Wastewater This section establishes program guidance on the practice of using treated municipal wastewater to irrigate sites grazed by animals used for dairy or meat production. The Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) and the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality (DEQ) jointly developed this guidance. In February 1990, DEQ established program guidance disallowing grazing on all land application sites using treated municipal wastewater. The primary reasons cited for this September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-15 decision were 1) the potential public health risks and 2) the limited resources of the agency to reasonably insure compliance with grazing management plans. However, with subsequent EPA guidance (1992)as well as regulations developed by neighboring states —indicating that grazing is acceptable under certain conditions, DEQ drafted a recommendation for grazing municipal sites and sought comments from ISDA and the District Health Departments. ISDA and DEQ formed a working committee to revise the draft guidance to address potential health risks to both humans and grazing animals. Table 6-3 presents the mutual recommendation of ISDA and DEQ, with the exception of an increase in waiting time for Class B wastewater to a 3 day minimum. September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-16 Table 6-3. Permissibility of grazing on municipal wastewater land applications sites. Wastewater Class Grazing Approved Grazing Plan Minimum Waiting Period prior to Grazing after Wastewater Application (to allow for soil drainage and pathogen die-off2 Applicability of Odor Provisions3 B Allowed Required 3 to 7 days4 Applicable C Allowed Required 15 to 30 days Applicable D Not Allowed (IDAPA 58.01.17.600.07d) NA NA NA E Not Allowed (IDAPA 58.01.17.600.07e) NA NA NA Notes: 1) See Section 6.4.2 for information on grazing management plans. 2) See Table 6-4 for generalized soil drainage times. 3) See Section 2.4.2 for further discussion of odor and other nuisance conditions. 4) EPA 2006, Section 4.4.2. 6.5 Buffer Zones Buffer zones provide distance between the boundary where wastewater -land application ceases and the following: • Dwellings • Public or private water supplies • Surface water • Areas of public access Buffer distances are established to prote ) the public from exposure to land applied 01N3WHOVII ' Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-18 Table 6-4. Buffer Zone Guidance for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Sites Site Condition Scenarios A B C D E F G H 1 J K L M N O P Wastewater Class and Degree of Treatment Class E: Primary, not disinfected, with organisms too numerous to count (TNTC) (1) X X X X Class D: Primary Disinfected to < 230 CFU/100 ml (1) X X X X Class C: Secondary Disinfected to Q3 CFU/100 ml (1) X X X X Class B: Advanced Secondary Disinfected to <2.2 CFUg/100 ml (l) X X X X Location Suburban or Residential Area X X X X X X X X Rural or Industrial Area X X X X X X X X Mode of Irrigation Sprinkler Irrigated X X X X X X X X Fun-ow/Flood Irrigated X X X X X X X X Resulting Buffer Zone Recommendations Buffer Zone Between: Site and Inhabited Dwellings (in feet) 1000 500 300 100 1000 500 300 100 300 300 50 50 300 300 50 50 Site and Areas Accessible to Public (in feet) 1000 300 50 0 1000 300 0 0 1.00 100 0 0 50 50 0 0 Fencing Type Cyclone w/Barbed Wire X X Woven Pasture Fence X X X X X X X Three -Wire Pasture Fence X X None Required X X X X X Posting Recommendations Required (2) X X X X Required (3) X X X X X X X X X X X X (1) Organisms here are total coliform in concentrations of colony forming units per 100 milliliter (CFU/100 mL). Bacteria coup represents the total coliform bacteria as a median of the last 7 days of bacteriological sampling for which analysis have been completed (2) Signs should read 'Sewage Effluent Application - Keep Out' or equivalent to be posted every 250 feet and at each comer of the outer perimeter of the buffer zone(s) of the site (3) Signs should read 'Irrigated with Reclaimed Wastewater - Do Not Drink' or equivalent to be posted every 500 feet and at each comer of the outer perimeter of the buffer zone(s) of the site 6.5.2 Facility -Specific Buffer Zone Distances General buffer zone distances listed in Section 6.5.1 may not be suitable in certain site - specific circumstances. Facility -specific considerations often may need to be considered. Recommended buffer zone distances, and signing, and posting guidance for bath municipal and industrial wastewater land treatment sites, is provided in the following sections. 6.5.2.1 Municipal Wastewater Buffer Zones Table 6-4 presents specific buffer zone guidance for municipal wastewater. Sixteen different scenarios are presented for existing and new land application systems. To use the table, read vertically, to find applicable site or facility conditions and associated buffer zone, fencing, and posting recommendations. For example, Scenario D uses municipal wastewater with effluent of advanced secondary quality. The wastewater land treatment site is in a residential area, and the wastewater is sprinkle irrigated. Continuing down the column, buffer zone distances, signing, osting requirements are given. Note that Class A wastewater is not included in Table 6- as there are no buffer zones required with this wastewater class. ,? > 77_ rtz. ,� (9 j f ^ 01N3WHOVII ' ATTACHMENT C Errata: Corrections to the Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater. Date 9/2007 Sec. 6, pg. 6-28, Fig. 6-2, Note (4) 9/2007 Sec.4.2.2.5.2, pg. 4-28, 3rd para., 3rd line 9/2007 Sec. 6.5.2.1, pg. 6-18, Table 6-4, ;Footnote (1) 9/2007 Pg.12-27 Correction Reads IDAPA 16.01.08.510.02 & 512 Should Read IDAPA 58.01.08.510.02 & 512 Reads (mg/L) = 0.64 * EC (mhos/cm) Should Read (mg/L) = 0.64 * EC (mhos/cm) Reads Bacterial count represents the total coliform bacteria as a median of the last 7 days of ,bacteriological sampling for which analysis have been completed. Should Read ;Bacterial count represents the total coliform bacteria as a median of the last number of days of bacteriological sampling for which analyses have been completed. For Class B wastewater, it is the last 7 days of bacteriological sampling etc. For Class C wastewater, it is the last 5 days; and for Class D wastewater, it is the last 3 days. There is no total coliform limit for Class E wastewater (c.f. IDAPA 58.01.17.600.07). The address and contact information for Dick Martindale and the Panhandle Health District have changed: 8500 North Atlas Road Hayden, ID 83835 208-415-5100 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-22 The same permitting requirements apply to wells drilled to augment or replace existing wells. Placement of wells in relation to potential sources of contamination, such as wastewater - land application systems, is addressed by DEQ or the District Health Department, depending on the source of contamination and/or the land use activity. DEQ is responsible for regulating, in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act Program in Idaho, the water quality standards for all public water systems. Inspections and technical assistance services are provided to public water systems by both the DEQ and/or the District Health Departments, depending on the number of connections and source of supply. (For further information, see Idaho Statutes Title 39, Chapter 1.) Generally, DEQ provides assistance to all surface water systems and public water systems with more than 25 connections. The Health Districts assist smaller public water systems (10 to 25 connections), individual domestic well owners, and commercial systems on individual wells (DEQ, 2000). 6.6.4 Protection of Well Water Supplies near Wastewater Land Treatment Facilities The buffer zones recommended in Section 6.5.1 (500 feet between domestic wells and a wastewater land treatment site and 1000 feet between a site and a municipal water supply well) are general recommendations and may not be appropriate in all circumstances. The number of domestic and municipal wells, the size of the facility, the local hydrogeology, and the extent of existing or potential contamination are just some of the factors that may indicate the need for a more thorough evaluation of the respective locations of wastewater land treatment sites and wells. The discussion that follows presents an evaluation methodology called the Well Location Acceptability Analysis (WLAA). The WLAA considers the facility type, site constituent loading rate, well proximity to land treatment facilities, hydrogeological setting, and existing and predicted ground water quality, to determine suitability of respective locations of water supply wells and land treatment acreage. Also discussed are descriptions of capture and mixing zone analyses and methods to conduct these analyses. 6.6.4.1 Well Location Acceptability The decision flow chart shown in Figure 6-2 provides guidance on determining the acceptability or non -acceptability of domestic private, shared (non-public), or municipal (public) well locations, or other public water systems (PWS) with respect to wastewater land treatment sites: • "Well/Site Location Acceptable" means the wastewater land treatment site is not likely to cause contamination of the aquifer, and the beneficial uses of the ground water pumped from the well should be maintained. However, the wastewater -land application permit may require monitoring of the well to substantiate that contamination is not occurring at present or likely to occur in the future. September 2007 City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012 ATTACHMENT C Guidance for Reclamation and Reuse of Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Operations Page 6-28 (1) Well = dam etic Jm uricyxi anal or Public Water S.pplY (PWS) (2)Site =veer te-oeterhndtreatmentsrte (3)Ttere may be cane to consider impacts to %.ells out-d(t the '4 mile radius depend.r%ton Ile -specific condlions. (4) IDAPA 18.01,08.51 OfY2 & 512 (51 See IDAPA39.03.09 end IDAPA 58.01 08.51003. (8) IDAPA58.CM/0.900.Di, IDAPA 5801.03.007.17 8 00802d (7) .CZ= Capture Zone T OT = tim e of travel In years (8) Provable requirements for ongoing sampling of ;cell for pram tiers of concern.. (9) 'dZ TOT= Vadose Zcne Time of T revel (10) Grourd Meter quality ',kite e t tier from monitoring yegs orthe Yell in question (11) MZA='OWN Zone Maly* (12) OVN,212 = Ground Water OtlattY Rule, (incl. I DAP A 5'8.01.11 200, 301 a 400.01) (13) D E 0 2008, Section 5.3 f\ location n a aaFptarle (8)! a ,?" Well+See lor�i°1n �assptalie 18) Well vvlhKt ° S mi.nfthe site? (1, 2) VA+dl may nol reed to be Il con ictrei in this enalriis (3) (WellrSite localicn (Si Ye. Existing OW qua!Jlydata? ° (10) Predicted M ZA YT pacts in ComaAnce wth GlArIO P.? (11, 12)7, Well completed 1 n Hydnau9cally isolated- l.mrer aqui i°r ? (5) O +el within 50' of the ° site? (4) MuNdpel Site? CI= B es VWU Si e vatbinC27 �N No TOT =1 yr l �P,1 (UWeliSite lootrsn not-1 aixerilable J % VVel 10drof Yes < Site N (8) J dr5 l�oason rot 'ea vVdl,` ite Well �4e, 1j lavronrul location \,-�a� ble t acceptable 081_1 � r Figure 6-2. Well Location Acceptability Analysis. September 2007 Class C VV+Pd7 Yes VZ.TOT+ CZ TOT less No than 1 yr? (7, 9,13) GO/ [palely data In comphalca avth 0140R? (12) JWelSka location not acceptable City Council Regular Minutes August 23, 2012