HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 FUND TMDL STUDIES 06-16-03AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item
Reviewed:
City Manager
Finance Director
MEETING DATE: JUNE 16, 2003
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT D99-128 TO FUND NUTRIENT, FECAL
COLIFORM AND TOXICS TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL)
STUDIES IN THE NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED
SUMMARY
Agreement D99-128 provides for the joint funding of Nutrient, Fecal Coliform, and Toxics studies in
the Newport Bay Watershed pursuant to provisions of Section 303(d) of the Clear Water Act and the
Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit as adopted
by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and the United States Environmental
Protection Agency. This agreement is a Cooperative Agreement between the County of Orange, the
Orange County Flood Control District, the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), The Irvine Company,
the City of Costa Mesa, the City of Irvine, the City of Laguna Hills, the City of Laguna Woods, the City
of Lake Forest, the City of Newport Beach the City of Orange, the City of Santa Ana, and the City of
Tustin.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve Agreement D99-128 "Agreement to Fund Nutrient,
Fecal Coliform and Toxics Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Studies in the Newport Bay
Watershed" and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City's proportionate share of funding for FY 02~03 is $39,278 and is budgeted in the Public Works
Department's current Operating Budget (Account No. 01-401-6010). The City's share for FY 03/04
has been estimated at $43,338 and is included in the proposed FY 03/04 Operating Budget.
BACKGROUND
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has identified Newport Bay as a '~Vater Quality
Limited" receiving water body in accordance with Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. This
designation indicates that applicable water quality standards are not being attained through the
implementation of technology based controls. As a result of the designation, the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) adopted Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL's) for Nutrients and Fecal
Coliform in the Newport Bay Watershed. Subsequently, the Environmental Protection Agency
established TMDL's for 14 toxic contaminants in the Newport Bay Watershed. The RWQCB is currently
developing implementation plans for these toxic TMDL's. A TMDL is a method to implement water
quality standards based on the relation between the sources of pollutants and water quality conditions.
Cooperative Agreement D99-128 to Fund Nutrient, Fecal Coliform and Toxics Total Maximum
Daily Load (TMDL) Studies in the Newport Bay Watershed
June 16, 2003
Page 2
The adopted TMDL's contain requirements for studies, monitoring and the development of programs to
attain TMDL containment reduction targets over a multi-year period. Additionally, the TMDL
requirements have been incorporated in the current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Stormwater Permit issued by the Santa Ana and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control
Board. Each of the parties to the proposed agreement is within the Newport Bay Watershed.
DISCUSSION
This agreement forms the basis of cooperation for the implementation of the adopted TMDL's. The
primary purpose of the TMDL's is to control and reduce the amount of fecal coliform, nutrients and toxic
contaminants entering Newport Bay. The agreement has been developed to provide a long term
funding formula to ensure that the costs of compliance with the TMDL's are shared equitably among the
parties within the Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed.
The cost share allocation for the agreement is divided between the Irvine Company, IRWD, the County
of Orange, the Orange County Flood Control District, and the cities within the watershed. The cost
shares for IRWD and the Irvine Company will remain at 12.5% each for the duration (5 years) of the
agreement. The remaining 75% of the annual cost sharing with the exception of the Orange County
Flood Control District will be allocated to each City and the County of Orange pursuant to a formula
based on population and land area within the Newport Bay Watershed. This formula is the same
formula approved by the cities in the "Amendment and Reinstatement of the National Pollution
Elimination System Stormwater Implementation Agreement" dated June 25, 2002. The Orange County
Flood Control District Allocation will remain fixed at 10% of the 75% cost allocation shared by the cities
and the County of Orange. Based on the formula, the City of Tustin is responsible for 8.37% of the
annual implementation costs. The total budget for TMDL activity for Fiscal Year 02~03 is $625,919 with
the City of Tustin's share being $39,017. The total proposed budget for FY 03~04 is $690,620 with the
City of Tustin's share being $43,051.
The agreement will be in effect until June 30, 2008 and may be amended by unanimous consent of the
parties. The County will prepare and submit a scope of work and budget to all the parties each year
along with an explanation of any recommended program changes and an estimate of each parties
allocation. Each party will review and approve the scope of work and budget in writing. Subsequently,
the County will invoice each party for their annual allocation on July 1st of each year. Interest earned on
the deposit will be credited against the party's share of program costs. Any party willing to terminate its
participation in the agreement shall notify all other parties in writing by March 1st of any year. The
termination would be effective the following June 30th.
Compliance with the requirement of the TMDL's necessitates a watershed wide approach to achieve
significant results that could not be efficiently produced by each party acting alone. It is recommended
that the City Council approve Agreement D99-128 "Agreement to Fund Nutrient, Fecal Coliform and
Toxic Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Studies in the Newport Bay Watershed."
Tim D. Serlet
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
TDS:ccg:Coop Agmt D99-128 to fund Nutrient.doc
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
AGREEMENT TO FUND NUTRIENT, FECAL COLIFORM AND TOXICS TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL)
STUDIES IN THE NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED
THIS AGREEMENT, for purposes of identification numbered D99-128, is made and
entered into this dqy of __, 2003 , by and between the County of Orange
("COUNTY"), the Orange County Flood Control District ("DISTRICT"), the City of Costa
Mesa ("COSTA MESA"), the City of Irvine ("IRVINE"), the City of Laguna Hills ("LAGUNA
HILLS"), the City of Laguna Woods ("LAGUNA WOODS"), the CitY of Lake Forest ("LAKE
FOREST"), the City of Newport Beach ("NEWPORT BEACH"), the City of Orange ("ORANGE"),
the City of Santa Ana ("SANTA ANA"), the City of Tustin ("TUSTIN"), the Irvine Ranch
Water District ("IRWD") and The Irvine Company ("TIC"). The thirteen entities are
hereinafter sometimes jointly referred to as the "PARTIES" and individually as
"PARTY". The cities are hereinafter sometimes jointly referred to as the "CITIES".
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
("REGIONAL BOARD") has adopted Resolution No. 98-9, as amended by Resolution No. 98-
100 amending the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin to
incorporate a Nutrient TMDL for the Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed on April 17,
1998 and Resolution 99-10 amending the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana
River Basin to incorporate a TMDL for Fecal Coliform in Newport Bay on April 9, 1999
pursuant to the provisions of section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act; and,
WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has
established TMDLs for toxic pollutants, San Diego Creek and Newport Bay, California on
June 14, 2002, and the REGIONAL BOARD is developing implementation plans for each of
the toxic pollutants; and,
WHEREAS, the adopted TMDLs contain requirements for studies, monitoring and the
development of programs to attain TMDL reduction targets over a multi-year period;
and,
WHEREAS, the PARTIES intend this AGREEMENT to provide for the performance of
studies, monitoring and development of programs and funding therefore for a period
through to June 30, 2008 after which it is recognized that additional agreements may
2
$
12
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
be necessary for further monitoring, studies and load reduction implementation
projects over the period covered by the TMDLs; and,
WHEREAS, the PARTIES recognize that some expenditures required for compliance
with the TMDLs have been incurred prior to this agreement and that these costs are
incorporated in Exhibit C-1.
WHEREAS the PARTIES have reached agreement on a funding formula, which for the
COUNTY, DISTRICT and CITIES is based on the watershed land area and population applied
to the formula in the Amendment and Reinstatement of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Stormwater Implementation Agreement dated June 25, 2002, and which
for TIC and IRWD is based on a fixed twelve and one-half percent (12.5%) contribution.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the PARTIES agree as follows:
Section 1. PURPOSE. This AGREEMENT is entered into for the purpose of funding
and performing studies, research, monitoring and the development of programs related
to the adopted TMDLs for nutrients, fecal coliform and toxics in San Diego Creek and
Newport Bay watersheds.
Section 2. TERM. The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence upon approval and
execution of this document by all signatories to this AGREEMENT and shall continue
until June 30, 2008, unless sooner terminated as provided in Section 8.
Section 3. FUNDING. Exhibit A, which is attached and by this reference is made
a part hereof, presents the cost share allocations for the PARTIES.
The urban allocation in Exhibit A shall remain at seventy five percent (75%) for the
duration of the AGREEMENT, but the individual cost shares for the COUNTY, DISTRICT and
CITIES will be revised once every year pursuant to the formula provided in Exhibit B,
which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on changes in watershed land
area and population. The percentage share shall be calculated by the COUNTY Public
Facilities and Resources Department, Environmental Resources Section from population,
land area and watershed area data. These calculations shall be completed by January 1
of each year and shall be included in the annual budget proposal. The respective
shares of IRWD and TIC shall remain at twelve and one half percent (12.5%) each for
the duration of this AGREEMENT.
2
l0
12
l?
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
Section 4. PROGRAM BUDGET AND COSTS. The COUNTY shall submit a scope of work and
a budget for the following fiscal year to each of the PARTIES by February 15 of each
year. The budget shall contain an explanation of.any recommended program changes, an
estimate of all planned expenditures and an estimate of the payment required from each
PARTY for the following fiscal year.
The PARTIES shall be permitted to review and approve the program scope of work
and budget for the forthcoming year. Criteria for approval shall be affirmative
written responses from all of the PARTIES. The COUNTY and DISTRICT will constitute
one approving PARTY.
The first year tasks and expenditures for FY 02/03 are six hundred twenty-five
thousand and nine hundred nineteen dollars ($625,919) as shown in Exhibit C-I, which
is attached hereto and made a part hereof. The budget for the scope of work for FY
03/04 is six hundred ninety thousand and six hundred and twenty dollars ($690,620) as
shown in Exhibit C-2, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. The COUNTY
shall be entitled to charge to the program all costs for direct labor, materials,
equipment and outside contract services for costs associated with carrying out the
approved scope of work. Recoverable costs will also include an overhead charge
calculated by the County Auditor-Controller which includes Public Facilities and
Resources Department overhead and County-wide cost allocation plan.
Section 5. PAYMENTS. Within 15 calendar days of the effective date of this
AGREEMENT, the COUNTY shall send the PARTIES an invoice for a deposit which
constitutes their share of the total first year costs identified in Exhibit C-3, which
is attached hereto and made a part hereof. Each of the PARTIES shall pay the deposit
within 45 calendar days of their respective receipt of the invoice.
The COUNTY shall prepare a fiscal year end accounting within 60 calendar days of
the end of the fiscal year. If the fiscal year end accounting results in costs (net
of interest earnings) exceeding the sum of the deposits, the COUNTY shall seek
approval of the excess cost from the PARTIES and shall invoice each PARTY for its
prorated share of the excess cost up to the amount of the revised approved budget.
Each PARTY shall pay the billing within 45 calendar days of the date of the invoice.
l0
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
If the fiscal year end accounting results in the sum of the deposits exceeding costs
(net of interest earnings), the excess deposits will carry forward to reduce the
billings for the following year.
After the initial billing for the program, the COUNTY shall invoice each PARTY
for its annual deposit at the beginning (July 1) of each fiscal year. Each PARTY
shall pay the deposit within 45 calendar days of the date of the invoice. Each
PARTY'S deposit shall be based on it's prorated share of the approved annual budget,
reduced by its prorated share of any surplus identified in the prior fiscal year end
accounting.
Interest earned on the PARTIES' deposits will not be paid to the PARTIES, but
will be credited against the PARTIES' share of the program costs.
Upon termination of the program, a final accounting shall be performed by the
COUNTY. If costs remaining after the deduction of interest costs exceed the sum of
the deposits, the COUNTY shall invoice each PARTY for its prorated share of the
deficit. Each PARTY shall pay the invoice within 45 calendar days of the date of the
invoice. If the sum of the deposits, including interest, exceeds the costs, the
COUNTY shall reimburse to each PARTY its prorated share of the excess, within 45
calendar days of the final accounting.
Section 6. AMENDMENT. This AGREEMENT may be amended in writing only with the
unanimous written approval of the parties.
Section 7. LIABILITY. It is mutually understood and agreed that, merely by the
virtue of entering into this AGREEMENT, each PARTY neither relinquishes any rights nor
assumes any liabilities for its own actions or the actions of other PARTIES. It is
the intent of the PARTIES that the rights and liabilities of each Party shall remain
the same, while this AGREEMENT is in force, as it was before this AGREEMENT was made,
except as otherwise specifically provided in this agreement.
Section 8. TERMINATION. Any PARTY wishing to terminate its participation in
this AGREEMENT shall so notify all other PARTIES in writing by March 1 of any year.
Such termination shall be effective the following June 30. The terminating PARTY
shall be responsible for financial obligations hereunder to the extent incurred in
4
12
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
accordance with this agreement by the PARTY prior to the effective date of
termination. The balance of the PARTIES may continue in the performance of the terms
and conditions of this AGREEMENT on the basis of a revised allocation of cost based on
the funding formula in Exhibit A, provided however, that the pro rata shares for TIC
and IRWD shall never exceed twelve and one-half percent (12.5%).
Section 9. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. The obligation of each PARTY is subject to
the availability of funds appropriated for this purpose, and nothing herein shall be
construed as obligating the PARTIES to expend or as involving the PARTIES in any
contract or other obligation for the future payment of money in excess of
appropriations authorized by law.
Section 10. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Nothing expressed or mentioned in this
AGREEMENT is intended or shall be construed to give any person, other than the PARTIES
hereto, and any permitted successors, any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim
under or in respect of this AGREEMENT or any provisions herein contained. This
AGREEMENT and any conditions and provisions hereof is intended to be and is for the
sole and exclusive benefit of the PARTIES hereto and for the benefit of no other
person, agency or entity.
Section 11. REFERENCE TO CALENDAR DAYS. Any reference to the word "day" or
"days" herein shall mean calendar day or calendar days, respectively, unless otherwise
expressly provided.
Section 12. ATTORNEYS FEES. In any action or proceeding brought to enforce
or interpret any provision of this AGREEMENT, or where any provision hereof is
asserted as a defense, each PARTY shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs.
Section 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT is intended by the PARTIES as
a final expression of their agreement and intended to be a complete and exclusive
statement of the agreement and understanding of the PARTIES hereto in respect of the
subject matter contained herein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or
undertakings, other than those set forth or referred to herein. This AGREEMENT
§
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
supersedes all prior agreements and understandings between the PARTIES with respect to
such matter.
Section 14. SEVERABILITY. If any part of this AGREEMENT is held,
determined or adjudicated to be illegal, void, or unenforceable by a court of
competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this AGREEMENT shall be given effect to the
fullest extent reasonably possible.
Section 15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The terms and provisions of this
AGREEMENT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the PARTIES hereto and
their successors and assigns.
Section 16. NOTICES. Ail notices required or desired to be given under
this AGREEMENT shall be in writing and (a) delivered personally, or (b) sent by
certified mail, return receipt requested or (c) sent by telefacsimile communication
followed by a mailed copy, to the addresses specified below, provided each PARTY may
change the address for notices by giving the other PARTIES at least ten (10) days
written notice of the new address. Notices shall be deemed received when actually
received in the office of the addressee or when delivery is refused, as shown on the
receipt of the U.S. Postal service, or other person making the delivery, except that
notices sent by telefacsimile communication shall be deemed received on the first
business day following transmission.
Director of Public Services
City of Costa Mesa
P.O. Box 1200
Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200
Director of Public Works
City of Irvine
P.O. Box 19578
Irvine, CA 92623-9578
Director of Public Works
City of Laguna Hills
25201 Paseo de Alicia, %150
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
Director of Public Works
City of Laguna Woods
24310 Moulton Pkwy, Ste K
P.O. Box 2220
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Director of Public Works
City of Lake Forest
23161 Lake Center Dr., %100
Lake Forest, CA 92630
Director of Public Works
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Director of Public Works
City of Orange
300 E. Chapman Ave
P.O. Box 449
Orange, CA 92866
Director of Public Works
City of Santa Ana
101 W. 4th St.
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Director of Public Works
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Director, PFRD
County of Orange
P.O. Box 4048
Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048
Director, Water Quality
Irvine Ranch Water District
3512 Michelson Dr
Irvine, CA 92712
Vice President of Environmental Affairs
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904
Section 17. EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT may be executed in
counterpart and the signed counterparts shall constitute a single instrument.
Section 18. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. This AGREEMENT has been negotiated
and executed in the State of California and shall be governed by and construed under
the laws of the State of California. In the event of any legal action to enforce or
12
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
interpret this AGREEMENT, the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent
jurisdiction located in Orange County, California, and the PARTIES hereto agree to and
do hereby submit to the jurisdiction of such court, notwithstanding Code of Civil
Procedure section 394. Furthermore, the PARTIES have specifically agreed, as part of
the consideration given and received for entering into this AGREEMENT, to waive any
and all rights to request that an action be transferred for trial to another county
under Code of Civil Procedure Section 394 or any other provision of law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES hereto have executed this AGREEMENT the day and
year first above written:
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
COUNTY OF ORANGE
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
COUNTY COUNSEL
By:
Deputy
Date:
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF
THIS AGREEMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
By:
DARLENE J. BLOOM
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of
Orange County, California
Date:
Agreement No. D99-128
a political subdivision of the State of
California
By:
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT
a body corporate and politic
By:
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF COSTA MESA
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Costa Mesa
lO
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF IRVINE
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Irvine
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Laguna Hills
12
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF LAGUNA WOODS
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Laguna Woods
,2
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF LAKE FOREST
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Lake Forest
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Date:
TEST:
, 2003
City Clerk
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Newport Beach
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF ORANGE
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Orange
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF SANTA ANA
Date:
, 2003
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Santa Ana
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
CITY OF TUSTIN
Date:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
, 2003
Agreement No. D99-128
By:
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney of Tustin
18
l0
12
18
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT
Date: , 2003
By:
By:
Agreement No. D99-128
Chairman
Attorney for IRWD
l0
12
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
THE IRVINE COMPANY
Date:
, 2003
By:
Agreement No. D99-128
MONICA FLORIAN
ITS: Group Vice President
Environmental Affairs
By:
Pat Brogues
ITS: General Counsel
20
EXHIBIT A
COST SHARE ALLOCATIONS
FOR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS
Costa Mesa
Irvine
Laguna Hills
Laguna Woods
Lake Forest
Urban 75% Newport Beach
Orange
Santa Ana
Tustin
County of Orange
O.C. Flood Control District
Open Space/Undefined Areas '12.5% The Irvine Company
Irvine Ranch Water
Open Space/Undefined Areas '12.5%
District
EXHIBIT B
Cost Share for Urban Component
Based on NPDES Funding Formula
Costa Mesa 15.56 7.58 48.71 110,700 53,920 6.19
I rvine 46.15 45.07 97.66 157,500 153,821 25.13
Laguna Hills 6.63 1.17 17.66 33,800 5,968 0.79
Laguna Woods 3.05 1.91 62.62 16,800 10,521 1.34
Lake Forest 16.80 11.56 68.83 76,600 52,724 7.37
Newport Beach 27.74 16.61 59.88 72,500 43,411 8.33
Orange 23.33 1.6 6.86 132,900 9,115 1.15
Santa Ana 27.35 16.34 59.75 343,700 205,348 19.57
Tustin 11.09 11.09 100.00 69,100 69,100 8.37
County of
Orange 86.85 28.19 32.46 122,534 39,774 11.77
O.C. Flood
Control Districts ............... 10.00
I Source: NPDES Stormwater Permit Implementation Agreement D02-048. Includes Land Area Deductions from agreement
exhibit A-1
2 Percentage of City Land Area in Watershed = Square miles within Watershed/Total Square Miles * 100
3Taken from NPDES budget, which is derived from California State Dept. of Finance data
4Estimated Population in Watershed = Total Population * Percentage of City Land Area in Watershed/100
5Weighted Average Share of Cost = ((Square Miles within Watershed/Total Square Miles of Watershed)*0.5)+((Estimated
Population in Watershed/Total Estimated Population in Watershed)*0.5) x 90
6 Orange County Flood Control District assumes a fiat 10 percent of the total
EXHIBIT C-1
2002-2003 Budget for Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed
Nutrient, Fecal Coliform and Toxics TMDL Programs
Prior Nutrient Monitoring and Reporting, Coordination with RWQCB
Nutrient
Staff (TMDL Implementation Plan Section 2.c) $ 197,809
Nutrient Monitoring and Data Collection (TMDL Implementation Plan
Nutrient
Section 2.c.1 Regional Nutrient Monitoring Program) $ 120,000
Fecal Coliform Shellfish Harvesting Study 1st Year Cost (TMDL Implementation Plan
Section 3.a.ii.a) $ 250,000
Fecal Coliform Fecal Coliform TMDL 2002-2003 Data Analysis (TMDL Implementation
Plan Section 3.a.ii.a) $ 2,200
Toxics Selenium Source Study $ 9,900
All Pro ram Com liance and Annual Re ortin $ 46~010
g P P ~
EXHIBIT C-2
2003-2004 Budget for Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed
Nutrient, Fecal Coliform and Toxics TMDL Programs
Nutrient Algae Survey of San Diego Creek System (TMDL Implementation
Plan Section 2.c. 1 Regional Nutrient Monitoring Program) $ 50,000
Nutrient Aerial Mapping of Algae Distribution (TMDL Implementation Plan
Section 2.c.1 Regional Nutrient Monitoring Program) $ 5,000
Nutrient Nutrient Monitoring and Data Collection (TMDL Implementation
Plan Section 2.c.1 Regional Nutrient Monitoring Program) $ 120,000
Nutrient Nutrient BMP Evaluation Proposition 13 Grant matching funds
(TMDL Implementation Plan Section 2.c.2) $ 100,000
Toxics Selenium Source Study $ 43,400
Fecal Shellfish Harvesting Study 2nd Year Cost (TMDL Implementation
Coliform Plan Section 3.a.ii.a) $ 203,000
Fecal Urban and Natural Source Identification and Characterization
Coliform (TMDL Implementation Plan Section 3.a.ii.d) $ 75,000
Fecal Fecal Coliform TMDL 2003-2004 Data Analysis (TMDL
Coliform Implementation Plan Section 3.a.ii.a) $ 2,200
All Pro ram Com liance and Annual Reportin ~ 92 020
9 ..... ? 9
EXHIBIT C-3
Expenditures for Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed
Nutrient, Fecal Coliform and Toxicx TMDL Programs
2002-2003 2003-2004
Total Urban Component ~ $469,439 $517,965
Costa Mesa $29,042 $32,044
Irvine $:117,947 $130,139
Laguna Hills $3,710 $4,093 ·
Laguna Woods $6,312 $6,964
Lake Forest $34,607 $38,184
Newport Beach $.39,110 $43,153
Orange $5,386 $5,943
Santa Ana $91,850 $101,345
Tustin $39,278 $43,338
County of Orange $55,252 $60,963
O.C Flood Control District $46,944 $51,797
The Irvine Co. (Open Space) $78,240 $86,328
IRWD (Undefined Sources) $78,240 $86,328
L TOTAL[ $625,919 $690,620
Funding formula based on weighted percentage of population and land area (see Exhibit
B)