Loading...
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)