Resolution No. 100491
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
K&I
WE
RESOLUTION NO. 10,049
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VERNON APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY .OF
VERNON AND THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST
SHARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COORDINATED
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE LOS ANGELES RIVER AND
TRIBUTARIES METALS TMDL (REACH 2)
WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved
the Los Angeles River Metals Total Maximum Daily Load (the "LAR Metals
TMDL") as an amendment to the regional Water Quality Control Plan for
the Los Angeles Region (the "Basin Plan") on December 22, 2005 and the
LAR Metals TMDL became effective January 11, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the LAR Metals TMDL organizes the six 303(d) listed
reaches and tributaries of the Los Angeles River into responsible
jurisdictional groups or reaches; and
WHEREAS, the LAR Metals TMDL addresses impairments for
selenium, zinc, lead, copper, and cadmium, and even though not all
reaches or tributaries were listed as impaired, metal allocations were
developed for upstream reaches and tributaries that drain to impaired
reaches; and
WHEREAS, in September 2007, the Los Angeles Regional Water
Quality Control Board (the "Board") adopted a Total Maximum Daily Load
("TMDL") which limits the amount of heavy metals such as copper, lead,
zinc, cadmium and selenium that can be carried by runoff into the Los
Angeles River, which TMDLs are enforced through the State and Federal
Discharge permits such as the Municipal Stormwater National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES"); and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the purpose of the TMDL program for metals is to
clean-up impaired surface water bodies, to return those water bodies
to their most beneficial use and to maintain clean-up levels, once
Mclean -up has been attained; and
WHEREAS, the Board has divided the Los Angeles River into
six different jurisdictional groups or reaches and the City of Vernon
has approximately 300 acres of drainage area in Reach 1 and is located
within Reach 2; and
WHEREAS, the City of Vernon is required to prepare and
implement an Implementation Plan for both Reach 1 and Reach 2 designed
to reduce the amount of metal pollutants in the Los Angeles River and
its tributaries, in addition to providing compliance with the TMDL
load allocations; and
WHEREAS, the first compliance deadline for a submittal of a
draft Implementation Plan is January 11, 2010 with a final Plan
submitted by July 11, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the cities within Reach 1 and Reach 2 have joined
together and established a Technical Committee for each Reach to
assist with the preparation of a coordinated Implementation Plan and
said Committee has determined the most cost effective and expeditious
means to develop an Implementation Plan is to. secure the services of a
qualified private consulting and engineering firm; and
WHEREAS, the Technical Committees for both Reach 1 and Reach
2 have recommended Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. as the consultant to
prepare both coordinated Implementation Plans; and
WHEREAS, since the coordinated Implementation Plans will
require administration, invoicing of participating local agencies,
bill payments and auditing, the cities participating in the
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25,
26
27 .
28
collaborative planning effort have requested the administrative
services of Gateway Cities Council of Governments ("Gateway COG") for
Reach 1 and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments ("SGVCOG")
for Reach 2 (collectively, the "Council of Governments") to facilitate
the successful development of both the draft and the final
JImplementation Plans; and
WHEREAS, the participating cities desire to enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement with the respective Council of Governments
memorializing the terms and conditions under which the respective
lCouncil of Governments would provide administrative services, the
funding of the costs being shared by the cities for the preparation of
the draft and final Implementation Plans and the costs incurred by the
respective Council of Governments; and
WHEREAS, the estimated budget for the coordinated
Implementation Plan for Reach 1 is a sum not to exceed $200,000 and
the estimated budget for Reach 2 is $251,435.00, with the City of
Vernon's share estimated at $9,732.04 with $4,866.02 due upon
execution of the Memorandum of Agreement for Reach 1 and $7,284.31 for
Reach 2 with $3,642.15 due upon execution of the Memorandum of
Agreement for Reach 2, subject to all agencies executing the
Memorandum of Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Memorandum of Agreements for Reach 1 and Reach
2 were created to satisfy as many local requirements as possible so
that all the participating cities could execute the Agreements and
take advantage of the cost advantages, and City staff will work to
resolve any issues that may arise with the staff of the Council of
Governments for the protection of the City of Vernon, if it becomes
necessary; and
- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24.
25
26
27
WE
WHEREAS, by memo dated August 13, 2009, the Director of
Community Services & Water has recommended that the City Council
approve the Memorandum of Agreement for the administration and cost
sharing of the development of the coordinated Implementation Plan for
Reach 2 with the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments for an
estimated budget of $251,435.00, with the City of Vernon's share
estimated at $7,284.31, depending upon the number of agencies signing
the agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Vernon has
determined that, pursuant to the provisions of 'subsection (a) of
Section 2.27 of the Vernon City Code, it is in the public interest and
necessity to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the SGVCOG to
11prepare an Implementation Plan in a cost efficient and expeditious
manner for the City of Vernon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF VERNON AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby
finds and determines that the recitals contained hereinabove are true
(land correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby
approves the Memorandum of Agreement with the San Gabriel Valley
Council of Governments Regarding the Administration and Cost Sharing
for the Development of the Coordinated Implementation Plan for the Los
Angeles River and Tributaries Metals TMDL (Reach 2), in substantially
the same form as the copy which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated by reference.
SECTION 3: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby
authorizes the Mayor or Mayor Pro-Tem to execute the Agreement for,
- 4 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and on behalf of, the City of Vernon and the City Clerk, or Deputy
City Clerk, is hereby authorized to attest thereto.
SECTION 4: The City Administrator, or his designee, is
authorized to pay the SGVCOG in accordance with the invoices
submitted, with the first invoiced payment of fifty percent.(50%).due
upon signing of the Memorandum of Agreement, the second invoiced
payment of fifty percent (50%) due on or about December 15,.2009 and,,
if necessary, a third invoiced payment due on or about July 15, 2010
for any adjustments or additional expenses.
Since the number of cities signing the Memorandum of
Agreement may increase or decrease, the City's share of costs may need
to be adjusted accordingly, therefore, the City Council of the City of
Vernon hereby approves and authorizes the City Administrator, or his
designee, to pay such increased or decreased share of costs as
invoiced by SGVCOG respecting the Memorandum of Agreement adopted
herein.
SECTION 5: The City Administrator, or his designee, is
hereby authorized to make whatever nonsubstantive changes, upon advice
of counsel, to the Agreement and the City Administrator, or his
designee, upon advice of counsel, is authorized to execute any and all
related documents that become necessary to implement and carry out the
purpose of this resolution.
SECTION 6: The City Council of the City of Vernon hereby
directs the City Clerk, or her designee, to send two executed
Agreements to SGVCOG.
- 5 -
1 SECTION 7: The City Clerk of the City of Vernon shall
2 certify to the passage, approval and adoption of this resolution, and
3 the City Clerk of the City of Vernon shall cause this resolution and
4 her certification to be entered in the Book of Resolutions of the
5 Council of this City.
6 APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of August, 2009.
7
8
9 Name: Hilario Gonzales
10 Title: Mayor
11 ATTEST:
12
MANUELA GIRON, C'ty Clerk
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6 -
1
.2
3
4
5
6
7
8
91
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ss
(COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I, MANUELA GIRON, City Clerk of the City of Vernon, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 10,049, was
duly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of
Vernon at a regular meeting of the City Council duly held on Monday,
August 24, 2009, and, thereafter was duly signed by the Mayor or Mayor
Pro-Tem of the City of Vernon.
Executed this day of August, 2009, at Vernon, California.
(SEAL)
izz
MANUELA GIRON, -C ty Clerk
- 7
EXHIBIT A
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
AND
THE CITY OF VERNON
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE COORDINATED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE LOS ANGELES RIVER
AND TRIBUTARIES METALS TMDL (REACH 2)
This Memorandum of Agreement ("Agreerent") is made and .entered into as of the date
of the last signature set, forth below by and .between the San Gabriel Valley Council .of
Governments, a California joint powers authority ("SGVCOG"), and the City of Vernon, a
California municipal corporation ("City"); (hereinafter "Party" or "Parties") with respect to the
following:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the mission of the SGVCOG includes environmental planning and
providing technically sound science and analyses to its member cities and agencies; and
WHEREAS, Seventeen of the SG, VCOG'.s member cities are located within. the Los
Angeles River Reach 2 watershed, and the SGVCOG has established effective working
relationships with the adjacent Councils of Governments; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG has previously entered into interagency agreements,
successfully partnering with various cities, SCAG, :and CALTRANS to undertake projects and
studies of regional significance; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region ,("Regional
Board") adopted the Los Angeles River and Tributaries. Metals Total Maximum Daily Load
("TMDL" or "Los ,Angeles River Metals TMDL") in September of 2007, with the intent of
improving water quality -in the Los Angeles River andits tributaries; and
WHEREAS, this TMDL regulates the discharge of runoff from thirty five cities; tributary
to Reach 2 of the Los Angeles River and CALTRANS, herein referred to collectively as the
"Regulated Entities" or singularly a "Regulated Entity", requiring a high degree of organization
and cooperation from the local watershed agencies; and
WHEREAS, this. TMDL requires the. preparation of a Coordinated Implementation Plan
("CIP") by the Regulated Entities, that is designed to reduce the amount of metals pollutants in
the Los Angeles River. and its tributaries; and
WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles and the City of Los Angeles will be
independently preparing separate Implementation Plans; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities agree to prepare a draft by January 11, 2010 and a
final CIP by July 11, 2010 and to adopt and provide the initial funding of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities have agreed to establish a Technical Committee to
provide technical oversight for the development of the CIP, and
WHEREAS, the participating Regulated Entities desire the SGVCOG to provide
administrative services relating to the CIP, including contracting for the development of both the
draft and final CIP and other related activities; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG has agreed to provide such administrative services to the
Regulated Entities to facilitate the successful implementation of the CIP; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities have agreed to share in fully funding the costs of the
development of. the CIP, including those costs incurred by the SGVCOG in administering this
Agreement, based on the cost allocation formula contained in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG and the Regulated Entities agree to employ a consultant to
prepare the CIP, and the Regulated Entities are willing_ to pay the consultant for its services
through the SGVCOG; and
WHEREAS, SGVCOG will execute similar cost -sharing agreements with all other
Regulated.Entities before this agreement becomes enforceable, unless stated otherwise elsewhere
in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth
herein, the Parties do hereby agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are fully incorporated as part of this
Agreement.
Section 2. PuXpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a mechanism whereby
the Regulated Entities cooperatively fund the development of the CIP and provide funding to the
SGVCOG such that the SGVCOG can administer the necessary professional services contracts to
develop the CIP on behalf of the Regulated Entities.
Section 3. Cooperation. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another to attain the
purposes of this Agreement.
Section 4. Voluntary Nature. Individual Regulated Entities can request approval from
the Regional Board to develop separate Implementation Plans. This Agreement is voluntarily
entered into for the development of the CIP and is applicable to only those Regulated Entities
that are signatory to this Agreement.
Section 5. Term. The term of this Agreement shall remain and continue in effect until
completion of the CIP, and acceptance of the CIP by the Regional Board.
2
Section 6. Coordinated Implementation Plan. The Los Angeles River Metals TMDL
requires the Regulated Entities; to develop a CIP which shall include: implementation methods,
an implementation schedule, proposed milestones and any applicable revisions to the TMDL
effectiveness monitoring plan. The CIP that is developed under: this Agreement is only
applicable to those Regulated Entities that are a party to this Agreement and have fulfilled all
terms of this Agreement.
Section 7. Assessment for Proportional Costs of the CIP The City agrees to provide
funds. to the SGVCOG based on the funding formula established in. Exhibit A and, the estimated
development. costs in Exhibit B attached hereto. and made a part of this Agreement by this
reference. The SGVCOG will invoice the City upon the execution of this Agreement as set forth
in Section 9 below, based on allocated CIP costs, which includes all administrative costs incurred
by . the. SGVCOG in . the performance of its duties under this Agreement. The SGVCOG
administrative costs ;include compensation for staff time, audit expenses, and costs incurred in
administrating agreements;. Any overpayment or underpayment. of the IP costs shall be credited
or billed to the City in the .next invoice or it shall be reimbursed at the termination of this
Agreement.
Section 8. Role of the SGVCOG. The SGVCOG shall enter into substantially and
materially similar agreements with each of the Regulated. Entities wishing to participate in the
CIP to, effectuate the„CIP, .invoice and collect from the Regulated Entities the estimated amounts
based on the cost allocation. formula in Exhibit A.
Section 9. Invoice and Pavment.
a) The SVCOG shall invoice each Regulated Entity for fifty (50) percent of the
estimated cost of the preparation of the CIP on or about July 15, 2009. A second
invoice for fifty (50). percent of the estimated cost shall be sent to the Regulated
Entities by the SGVCOG on or about December 15, 2009. If necessary, a third
invoice will be sent on or about July 15, 2010 for any adjustments or additional
expenses. incurred by the SGVCOG.
b) Late Payment Penalty —.Beginning as of October 15, 2009, any payment that is late
shall be subject to interest on the original amount due from the date that the payment
first became due.. The interest rate shall be equal to the Prime Rate in effect when the
payment first became due,plus one percent for any payment that is made from 1 to 30
days after the due date. The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due
plus five (5) percent shall apply for any payment that is made from 31 to 60 days after
the due date,. The Prune Rate in effect when the payment first became due plus ten
(10) percent shall apply for any payment that is made more than 60 days after the due
date. The rates shall, nevertheless, not exceed the maximum allowed by law.
c) Delinquent Payments— A Regulated Entity's payment is considered to be delinquent
180 days after being invoiced by the SGVCOG. The following procedure may be
implemented to .attain payments from the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities per
instructions from the Technical Committee: 1) verbally contact/meet with the
manager from the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities, 2) submit a formal letter to
3
(O a
the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities from the SGVCOG attorney, and 3) notify
the Regional Board, that the delinquent Regulated. Entity or Entities are no longer a
participating member of the CIP. If a Regulated Entity or Entities remain delinquent
after the above procedures, then any delinquent amount(s) will be distributed in the
following invoice amongst all remaining Regulated Entities proportionate to each
Entity's area as it relates to the overall .remaining total Regulated Entities area,
excluding the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities and all references to the
delequentRegulated Entity will be removed from the CIP. The Technical Committee
will revise Exhibit A to show the recalculated costs z for each, participating Regulated
Entity; these revised exhibits will be sent to the SGVCOG and included with the
annual invoices to the Regulated Entities.
d) Interest Accrual — Any interest accrued on the funds collected per this Agreement
during the term of this Agreement shall be redeposited into the' appropriate account
and used for development of the CIP. The SGVCOG shall report on an annual basis
to the Technical Committee the amount of interest accrued by the CIP account(s).`
Section 10. Independent Contractor.
a) The SGVCOG is and shall at" all times remain a wholly independent contractor for
performance of the obligations described in this Agreement. The' SGVCOG officers,
employees and agents performing such obligations shall at all times be under the
SGVCOG's exclusive control. The Regulated Entities shall not have control over the
conduct of the SGVCOG or any of its officers, employees or agents, except as set
forth in this Agreement. The SGVCOG, and its officers, employees, or agents are not
and shall not be deemed to be employees of the Regulated Entities.
b) No employee benefits shall be available to the SGVCOG in connection with the
performance of its obligations under. this' Agreement. The SGVCOG is solely
responsible for the payment of salaries, wages, other compensation, employment
taxes, worker's compensation, or similar taxes for its employees for performing
obligations hereunder.
c) The Regulated Entities will retain control of the consultant(s)' work product and the
schedule` for submitting the CIP to the Regional Board. The SGVCOG will use
reasonable efforts to work with the RegulatedEntities to ensure that the draft CIP is
submitted by January 11, 2010 and the final CIP is submitted by July 11, 2010.
However, the Regulated Entities recognize that the draft CIP -is due by January 11, .
2010 and that this deadline might not be met: despite the best efforts of the SGVCOG
and the Regulated Entities.
Section 11. Indemnification.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, the City and `the SGVCOG agree to save,
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each other from any and all liability; claims, suits,
actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, and regulatory proceedings,
losses, expenses, or any injury or damage of any kind whatsoever, whether actual, alleged
4
or threatened, attorney fees, court costs, and any other costs of any nature without
restriction incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising out of, the performance
of this Agreement, and attributable to the fault of the other. Following a determination of
the percentage of fault and or liability by agreement between the Parties or a court of
competent jurisdiction, the Party: responsible for liability to the other will indemnify the
other Party to this Agreement for the percentage of liability determined.: The SGVCOG
shall not have any duty to save,, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless, and the Regulated
Entities shall save, indemnify, defend, and, hold harmless the SGVCOG from any
Regional Board Notice of Violations or third -party litigation resulting from failure of the
Regulated Entities to meet the compliance deadlines in the Los Angeles River Metals
TMDL for submission of the draft and final CIP..
Section 12. Termination of Agreement.
Either Party may terminate this Agreement for any reason, in whole or part, by giving the
other Party thirty (30) days written notice thereof, The City shall be responsible for the
allocated costs of CIP activities incurred up to ;the date of the termination. SGVCOG
shall notify in writing all Regulated Entities within fourteen (14) days of receiving
written notice from any Regulated Entity that intends to terminate this Agreement.
5
Section43. Miscellaneous.
a) Notices. All notices which any Party is required or desires to give hereunder shall be
in writing and shall be deemed given when delivered personally or three (3) days after
mailing` by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) to the following
address or as such other addresses as the Parties may from time to time designate by
written notice in the aforesaid manner:
To `SGVCOG: Nick'Conway
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
3452 E. Foothill Blvd, Suite 910
Pasadena, CA 91107
To City of Vernon: Manuela Giron
City Clerk
4305 Santa Fe Avenue
Vernon, CA 90058
b) Separate Accounting and Auditing. The SGVCOG agrees to establish a separate
account to track the revenues from the Regulated Entities and the expenses, from of
the CIP. Quarterly financial statements and the annual audit will be made available to
all of the participating Regulated Entities.
c) Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each
Party to this Agreement and their respective heirs, administrators, representatives,
successors and assigns.
d) Amendment. The terms and provisions of this Agreement may not be amended,
modified or waived, except by an instrument in writing signed by the Parties.
e) Waiver. Waiver by any Parry to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant
of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or
covenant. Waiver by any Party to any breach of the provisions of this Agreement
shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent
breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement.
f) Law to Govern, Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed, and
governed according to the laws of the State of California. In the event of litigation
between the Parties, venue in the state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County
of Los Angeles.
g) No Presumption in Drafting, The Parties to this Agreement agree that the general
rule that an Agreement is to be interpreted against the Party drafting it, or causing it
to be prepared shall not apply.
C1i
h) Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties
with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous
agreements, whether written or oral, with respect thereto.
i) Severability. If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement is
declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected
thereby and this. Agreement shall be read and constructed without the invalid, void, or
unenforceable provision(s).
j) Countemarts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each
of which shall be an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute but one
and the same instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts shall have been
delivered to both Parties to this Agreement.
k) Legal Representation. All Parties have been represented by counsel in the
preparation and negotiation of this Agreement. Accordingly, this Agreement shall be
construed according to its fair language.
1) Procurement. All participating Regulated Entities have reviewed the procurement
procedures used in the selection of the consultant(s) for consistency with their
individual procurement practices.
m) Agency Authorization. Each of the persons signing below on behalf of a Party
represents and warrants that he or she is authorized to sign this Agreement on behalf
of such Party.
n) Contact Person. The municipal staff contact person for this agreement shall be
Samuel Kevin Wilson
Director of Community Services
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
on. their behalf, respectively; as follows:
DATE: CITY OF VERNON
Hilario Gonzales, Mayor
ATTEST:
Manuela Giron, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Laurence Wiener, City Attorney
DATE:
ATTEST:
INSERTNAME , Secretary
8
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS
Nicholas T. Conway, Executive Director
S muk
AMM
0
EXHIBIT A
Agency
Watershed Are
acres* .Percentagex ..
�r
> Est�rt�ated Colt Sh re � tks<
a .;#4.. Seryc5,
Costs
COSt * .-..ra
Alhambra
4878
4.25792%
$ 9,641.42
$ 1,064.48
$ 10,705.90
Arcadia
6995
6.10581%
$ 13,825.69
$ 1,526.45
$ 15,352.15
Bell
1671
1.45859%
$ 3,302.75
$ 364.65
$ 3,667.40
Bell Gardens
1604
1.40010%
$ 3,170.32
$ 350.03
$ 3,520.35
Bradbury
494
0.43120%
$ 976.40
$ 107.80
$ 1,084.20
Caltrans
3815
3.33005%
$ 7,540.39
$ 832.51
$ 8,372.90
Commerce
4193
3.65999%
$ 8,287.51
$ 915.00
.$ 9,202.51
Compton
6044
5.27570%
$ 11,946.03
$ 1,318.92
$ 13,264.96
Cudahy
729
0.63633%
$ 1,440.88
$ 159.08
$ 1,599.96
Downey
3621
3.16071%
$ 7,156.95
$ 790.18
$ 7,947.12
Duarte
1084
0.94620%
$ 2,142.54
$ 236.55
$ 2,379.09
El Monte
4605
4.01962%
$ 9,101.83
$ 1,004.91
$ 10,106.74
Glendale
0
0.00000%
$
$ -
$ -
Huntington Park
1933
1.68728%
$ 3,820.60
$ 421.82
$ 4,242.42
Irwindale
994
0.86764%
$ 1,964.65
$ 216.91
$ 2,181.56
La Canada Flintridge
3637
3.17467%
$ 7,188.57
$ 793.67
$ 7,982.24
Long Beach
3182
2.77751%
$ 6,289.26
$ 694.38
$ 6,983.63
Lynwood
3079
2.68760%
$ 6,085.68
$ 671.90
$ 6,757.58
Maywood
759
0.66252%
$ 1,500.17
$ 165.63
$ 1,665.80
Monrovia
8080
7.05289%
$ 15,970.21
$ 1,763.22
$ 17,733.43
Montebello
5386
4.70134%
$ 10,645.49
$ 1,175.34
$ 11,820.82
Monterey Park
4931
4.30418%
$ 9,746.17
$ 1,076.05
$ 10;822.22
Paramount
2013
1.75711%
$ 3,978.72
$ 439.28
$ 4,417.99
Pasadena
14575
12.72226%
$ 28,807.64
$ 3,180.56
$ 31,988.21
Pico Rivera
1547
1.35035%
$ 3,057.66
$ 337.59
$ 3,395.25
Rosemead
3277
2.86043%
$ 6,477.03
$ 715.11
$ 7,192.13
San Gabriel
2662
2.32361%
$ 5,261.47
$ 580.90
$ 5,842.37
San Marino
2413
2.10626%
$ 4,769.32
$ 526.57
$ 5,295.89
Sierra Madre
1900
1.65848%
$ 3,755.37
$ 414.62
$ 4,169.99
South El Monte
1615
1.40970%
$ 3,192.06
$ 352.43
$ 3,544.49
South Gate
4780
4.17238%
$ 9,447.72
$ 1,043.09
$ 10,490.82
South Pasadena
2187
1.90899%
$ 4,322.63
$ 477.25
$ 4,799.88
Temple City
2561
2.23545%
$ 5,061.84
$ 558.86
$ 5,620.71
Vernon
3319
2.89710%
$ 6,560.04
$ 724.27
$ 7,284.31
* The percent area is calculated by excluding the areas for LA County and the City of Los Angeles.
** The amounts shown are estimates only. Actual costs will be based on the cost sharing formula and are
contingent upon accurate acreage information and final contracting cost from consultant(s) and SGVCOG.
Cost allocation = (Agency acres/total acres of participating agencies) x total costs = agency cost share.
E
EXHIBIT B
CON
523 West Sixth Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, California 90014
tel: 213 457-2200
fax: 213 627-8295
June 4, 2009
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
Subject: Los Angeles River Reach 2 Subwatershed Metals TMDL Implementation Plan -
Revised proposal
Dear Ms. Kennedy,
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) will develop a Los Angeles River (LAR) Metals TMDL
Implementation Plan ("Plan') for the LAR Reach 2 subwatershed ready for submittal to the
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) by January 11, 2010.
Project tasks include:
Task 1— Characterize Subwatershed
An overall LAR watershed characterization was completed for the City of Los Angeles. CDM
will refine the characterization to reflect only the LAR Reach 2 subwatershed.
Task 1.1— Conduct Data Review
Review existing data to identify data gaps where additional Reach 2 data may be
available. Compile and review additional data as available and incorporate into data
analyses (GIS and water quality).
Task 1.2 — Characterize LAR Reach 2 Subwatershed
Revise existing LAR watershed characterization to reflect only Reach 2 subwatershed
characteristics, including: (1) GIS layers; (2) hydrologic and water quality characteristics;
and (3) characteristics that affect structural BMP siting, (e.g., groundwater depth, soil, and
environmentally sensitive areas).
Task 1.3 —Assess Water Quality and Pollutant Loads
Revise existing LAR watershed water quality assessment to include only Reach 2
subwatershed metals water quality data. Conduct prioritization analysis using modeling
tools, to identify which catchments contribute the highest loads of metals.
consulting • engineering • construction • operations
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 2
Task 1 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum 1(TM1) - TM1 summarizes the Reach 2
subwatershed characterization, including data sources, data gaps (and how they were
addressed), data analysis methods and findings. Attachments include maps, figures and
tables illustrating subwatershed characteristics.
Task 2 - Develop Range of Urban Runoff. Management Options
Under this task CDM will lay the foundation for the Plan by locating priority areas for BMP
implementation, identifying potential structural and non-structural controls, and conducting
a preliminary screening of BMP opportunities to select the best options for additional analysis
under Task 3.
Task 2.1— Identify Reach 2 Subwatershed Collaboration Opportunities (Optional)
Identify opportunities to implement BMPs cooperatively with other planned
subwatershed management activities. Activities include meetings with key stakeholders
with interests/plans for stream restoration and green infrastructure projects.
Task 2.2 - Develop Categorical BMP Opportunities
Develop a categorical BMP opportunities list for the Reach 2 subwatershed (e.g., infilI/
redevelopment, new development, street retrofit, and habitat restoration). Evaluate the
applicability of these opportunities to the subwatershed to provide a foundation for BMP
selection.
Task 2.3 — Identify Potential Structural and Non-structural BMP Opportunities
Identify potential non-structural and distributed/regional structural BMPs for the Reach 2
subwatershed. Potential structural BMPs will be tailored to maximize water quality
improvement in the most cost effective manner and be limited to publicly -owned parcels.
Task 2.4 — Conduct Preliminary BMP Screening
Develop a BMP decision matrix with screening criteria (e.g., cost, feasibility, effectiveness,
and environmental benefits) and associated weighting factors to evaluate potential BMP
opportunities identified in Task 2.3. The outcome is a ranked BMP list.
Task 2 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum (TM2) - TM2 provides a ranked list of non-
structural and structural BMPs for potential implementation in the subwatershed.
Supporting documentation will include the categorical BMP opportunities available,
range of BMPs considered, and the method for screening and ranking BMPs.
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 3
Task 3 - Develop BMP Implementation Alternatives Recommendations
Prior to starting Task 3, CDM will conduct a meeting with the client to determine the specific
direction of Task3. Task 3 further analyzes the screened list of BMPs developed in Task 2 and
prepares a final recommended list of BMPs for implementation. CDM will apply categorical
BMP implementation concepts on up to two alternatives to extrapolate the watershed -wide
benefits that may be achieved toward meeting the TDML metals loading allocations. This
task's project budget is based on the following: CDM will target identification of up to 10 non-
structural, BMPs, and up to 20 distributed and up to 2 regional structural BMP projects. The
actual number of non-structural and structural BMPs analyzed (e.g., field investigations,
quantitative analysis, and cost analysis) will be decided by the client prior to implementation
of Task 3. If the number of BMPs is changed, the Task 3 scope of work and budget will be
modified, as appropriate.
Task 3.1— Conduct Field Investigations
Conduct limited field investigations to provide confirmation of the viability of the highest
ranked BMP opportunities identified in Task 2. The field investigations will not include
detailed site assessments such as underground utility conflicts.
Task 3.2 — Quantify Water Quality Improvements
Quantify water quality improvements expected from implementation of the highest
ranked BMP opportunities. This analysis will link categorical BMP implementation in
Reach 2 with the range of potential outcomes towards achieving compliance with TMDL
requirements.
Task 3.3 — Select Final BMPs
Based on the outcomes of Tasks 3.1 and 3.2, CDM will develop a final list of BMPs for
implementation. The final list will include up to 10 non-structural BMPs, and up to 20
distributed and up to 2 regional structural BMP projects.
Task 3.4 — Prepare Cost Analysis
CDM will develop planning -level cost estimates for BMPs selected in Task 3.3. Analysis
includes engineering, construction, and operation and maintenance costs.
Task 3 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum 3 (TM3) - TM3 identifies the final BMPs for
implementation. This TM will include:
■ Summary and proposed schedule for non-structural BMP implementation;
■ Tabular lists (by Reach 2 subwatershed) with graphical representation (e.g., GIS, aerial
photographs) of structural BMP recommendations;
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 4
■ A phased implementation plan and schedule (based on prioritization of selected
BMPs);
■ Expected water quality improvements (metals concentrations or loadings) in urban
runoff during implementation (based on implementation schedule); and
■ Planning level capital and operation/maintenance costs.'
Project site plans, concept reports or preliminary design reports are not included in Task
3.
Task 4 - Project Meetings and Workshops
Task 4.1— Participate in Project Meetings
■ Project kickoff meeting to review the scope of work, project management and
communication procedures, project schedule, and discuss any data needs.
■ Monthly meetings to review progress, resolve issues of concern and, if necessary,
request data. CDM will prepare an agenda for review and prepare meeting notes. (10
meetings)
i Biweekly teleconferences to review project status. (20 teleconferences)
Task 4.2 - Conduct Stakeholder Workshops, (Optional)
CDM will participate in up to two 2-hour stakeholder workshops. CDM will prepare a
presentation, provide a facilitator, and prepare agenda and meeting discussion summary.
Task 4 Deliverables - Meeting or workshop participation, meeting agendas, meeting notes or
summaries, and presentation materials, as needed.
Task 5 - Prepare Los Angeles River Reach 2 Metals TMDL Implementation Plan
The Plan is due to the Regional Board by January 11, 2010. A final submittal, that addresses
Regional Board comments on the draft, is due by July 11, 2010. Project tasks and deliverables
include:
Task 5.1— Develop Draft Plan
CDM will prepare a Draft Plan using the information developed for TMs 1, 2 and 3. Prior
to preparation of the draft, an outline will be developed for review and approval.
Task 5.2 — Prepare Final Plan
CDM will prepare a Final Plan ready for Regional Board submittal based on Draft Plan
comments and provide 10 color paper and 50 electronic CD copies.
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 5
Task 5.3 — Prepare Revised Final Plan
CDM will review Regional Board comments on the Final Plan and prepare
recommendations for resolution. Based on client discussions, CDM will prepare a Revised
Final Plan for Regional Board submittal. Ten color paper and 50 electronic CD copies will
be provided.
Task 5 Deliverables - Draft, and final TMDL Implementation Plans ready for submittal to the
Regional Board. Paper and electronic copies of the plans as noted above.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (213) 457-2200.
Very truly yours,
Hampik Dekermenjian, PE
Vice President
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
cc, Richard Meyerhoff
DRAFT
CDM
Estimated Budget for the Development of Los Angeles River Reach 2
Metals TMDL Implementation Plan
Direct
Tasks
Labor
Costs
Task 1 - Watershed Characterization
$24,410
$600
Task 1.1 - Data Review
$2,580
Task 1.2 - Characterize Watershed
$6,130
Task 1.3 - Assess Water Quality and Pollutant Load
$6, 570
TM1 Preparation
$9,130
$500
Task 2 - Develop Range of Management Options
$62,965
$2,000.
Task 2.1- Identify Collaboration Opportunties (Optional)
$14,230
$750
Task 2.2 - Develop Categorical BMP Opportunities ,
$8, 350
$250
Task 2.3 - Identify Potential Non-Structural/Structural BMPs
$13,970
$250
Task 2.4 - Conduct Preliminary BMP Screening
$13,970
$250
TM2 Preparation
$12,445
$500
Task 3 - Develop and Evaluate Management Strategies
$65,105
$1,750
Task 3.1- Conduct Field Investigations
$16, 920
$750
Task 3.2 - Quantify Water Quality Improvements
$14, 600
$250
Task 3.3 - Select Final BMPs
$11, 280
$250
Task 3.4 - Prepare Whole Life Cycle Cost Analysis
$9,660
$250
TM3 Preparation
$12,445
$250
Task 4 - Meetings and Workshops
$27.,830
$1,000
Task 4.1 - Project Meetings
$13,320
$250
Task 4.2 - Stakeholder Workshops (Optional)
$14,510
$750
Task 5 - Prepare TMDL IP
$39,876
$1,000
Task 5.1 Prepare Draft Plan
$16,990
$250
Task 5.2 Prepare Final Plan
$11,830
$250
Task 5.3 Prepare Revised Final Plan
$11,055
1 $500
Total
$220,185
$6,250
Total Cost
$226,435
CITY CLERKf S OFFICE
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 31, 2009
TO: S. Kevin Wilson, Director of Community Services & Water
FR Nelly Giron, City Clerk
RE: Resolution No. 10,049 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Vernon
Approving and Authorizing the Execution of a Memorandum of Agreement By
and Between the City of Vernon and the San Gabriel Valley Council of
Governments Regarding the Administration and Cost Sharing for the
Development of the Coordinated Implementation Plan for the Los Angeles River
and Tributaries Metals TMDL (Reach 2)
Transmitted herewith is a copy of Resolution No. 10,049, referenced above, which was approved
by City Council on August 24, 2009, along with a copy of the fully executed agreement.
Thank you.
NG:dj
C: Resolution No. 10,049
Agreement 09-107
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
L*7�aww
III
3452 East Foothill, Suite 910, Pasadena, California 91107-3142 Phone: 626 564-9702 PAX: 626 564-1116 E-Mail SGVG ( ) ( ) sgvcog.org
Omcrws
President
Thomas King
Vice President
Angel Carrillo August 26, 2009
2"d Vice President
David Spence
Manuela Giron, City Clerk
3rd Vice President City of Vernon
Barbara Messina
4305 Santa Fe Avenue
MEMBERS Vernon, CA 90058
Alhambra
Arcadia
Azusa Subject: Metals TMDL Coordinated Implementation Plan
Baldwin Park
Bradbury Dear Ms. Giron:
Claremont
Covina Enclosed please find one executed copy of the Memorandum of Agreement for the
Diamond B"` Duarte Coordinated Implementation Plan for the LA Rivers Metals TMDL. We have retained
El Monte one copy for our records.
Glendora _
Industry Should you have further questions, please contact me at (626) 564-9702.
Irwindale
La Cahinla Flintridge Thank you,
La Puente
La Verne
Monrovia
Montebello
Monterey Park
Pasadena Nicholas T. Conway
Pomona
Rosemead
San Dimas
San Gabriel
San Marino
Sierra Madre
South Ll Monte
South Pasadena
Temple City
Walnut
West Covina
First District, LA County
Unincorporated Conununilies -
Fourth District, LA County
Unincorporated Communities
Fifth District, LA County
Unincorporated Camm« nilies
SG Water Districts
E XECUTWE D[RECT0R -
Nicholas T. Conway
MEMORANDUM. OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
AND
THE CITY OF VERNON
REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION AND COST SHARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE COORDINATED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE.LOS ANGELES RIVER
AND TRIBUTARIES METALS TMDL (REACH 2)
This Memorandum of Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of the date
of the last signature set forth .below by :and .between the San Gabriel Valley Council of
Governments, a California joint powers authority ("SGVCOG"), and the City of Vernon, a
California municipal corporation ("City."); (hereinafter "Party" or "Parties") with respect to the
following:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the mission of the SGVCOG includes environmental planning and
providing technically sound science and analyses to its member cities and agencies; and
WHEREAS, Seventeen of the SGVCOG's member cities are located within the Los
Angeles River Reach 2 watershed and the SGVCOG . has established effective working
relationships with the adjacent Councils of Governments; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG has previously entered into interagency , agreements,
successfully partnering with various cities, SCAG, and CALTRANS to undertake projects and
studies of regional significance; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region ,("Regional
Board") adopted the Los Angeles River and Tributaries Metals Total Maximum Daily Load
("TMDL" or "Los: , Angeles River Metals TMDL") in September of 2007, with the intent of
improving water quality, in the Los Angeles River and. its tributaries; and
WHEREAS, this TMDL regulates the. discharge. of runoff from thirty five cities tributary
to Reach 2 of the Los Angeles River and CALTRANS, herein referred to collectively as the
"Regulated Entities or singularly a "Regulated Entity", requiring a high degree of organization
and cooperation from the local watershed agencies; and
WHEREAS, this TMDL requires the preparation of a Coordinated Implementation Plan
("CIP") by the Regulated Entities that is designed to reduce the amount of metals pollutants in
the Los Angeles River andlits tributaries; and
WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles and the City of Los Angeles will be
independently, prepanngi Implementation Plans; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities agree to prepare a draft by January 11, 2010 and a
final CIP by July 11, 2010 and to adopt and provide the initial funding of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Regulated Entities have agreed to establish a Technical Committee to
provide technical oversight for the development of the CIP, and
WHEREAS, the participating Regulated Entities desire the SGVCOG to provide
administrative services relating to the CIP, including contracting for the development of both the
draft and final CIP and other related activities; and
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG has agreed to provide such administrative services to the
Regulated Entities to facilitate the successful implementation of the° CIP; and `
WHEREAS; the Regulated Entities have agreed to share' in fully funding the costs of the
development of, the CIP, including those costs incurred by the SGVCOG in administering this
Agreement, based on the cost allocation formula contained in Exhibit A; and,
WHEREAS, the SGVCOG and the Regulated Entities agree to employ a consultant to
prepare the CIP, and the Regulated Entities are willing to pay the consultant for its services
through the SGVCOG; and
WHEREAS, SGVCOG will execute similar cost -sharing ' agreements with all other
Regulated'Entities before this agreement becomes enforceable, unless stated otherwise elsewhere
in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth
herein, the Parties do hereby agree as follows:'
Section 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are fully incorporated as part of this
Agreement.
Section 2. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a mechanism whereby
the Regulated Entities cooperatively fund the development of the CIP and provide funding to the
SGVCOG such that the SGVCOG can administer the necessary professional services contracts to
develop the CIP on behalf of the Regulated Entities.
Section 3. Cooperation. The 'Parties shall fully.cooperate with one another to attain the
purposes of this Agreement.
Section 4. Voluntary Nature. Individual Regulated Entities can request approval from
the Regional Board to develop separate Implementation Plans. This Agreement is voluntarily
entered into for the development of the CIP and is applicable to only those Regulated Entities
that are signatory to this Agreement.
Section 5. Term. The term of this Agreement shall remain and continue in effect until
completion of the CIP, and acceptance of the CIP by the Regional Board.
P?
Section 6. Coordinated Implementation Plan. The Los Angeles River Metals TMDL
requires the Regulated Entities; to develop a CIP which shall include: implementation methods,
an implementation schedule, proposed milestones and any applicable revisions to the TMDL
effectiveness monitoring plan. The CIP that is developed under, this Agreement is only
applicable to those Regulated Entities that are a partyto this Agreement and have fulfilled all
terms of this Agreement.
Section 7. Assessment for Proportional .Costs of the CIP The City agrees to provide
funds. to the SGVCOG based on the funding formula established in Exhibit A and. the estimated
development costs in Exhibit Ba attached hereto , and made a part of this Agreement by this
reference. The SGVCOG will invoice the City upon the execution of this Agreement as set forth
in Section 9 below, based on allocated CIP costs, which includes all administrative costs incurred
by . the. , SGVCOG in . the performance of its duties under this Agreement. The SGVCOG
administrative costsJnclude compensation for staff time, audit expenses, and costs incurred in
administrating agreements. Any overpayment or underpayment of the CIP costs shall be credited
or billed to the City in the next invoice or it, shall be reimbursed at the termination of this
Agreement.
Section 8. Role of the SGVCOG. The SGVCOG shall enter into substantially and
materially similar. agreements .with each of the Regulated Entities wishing, to participate in the
CIP to, effectuate theUP, .invoice and collect from the Regulated Entities the estimated amounts
based on the cost allocation formula in Exhibit A. -
Section 9. Invoice and Pa- : ent.
a) The SVCOG shall invoice each Regulated Entity for fifty (50) percent of the
estimated cost of the preparation of the CIP on or about July 15, 2009. A second
invoice for fifty (50)_ percent of the estimated cost shall be sent to the Regulated
Entities by the SGVCOG on or about December 15, 2009. If necessary, a third
invoice will . be sent on or about July 15, 20,10 for any adjustments or additional
expenses. incurred by the SGVCOG.
b) Late Payment Penalty — Beginning as of October 15, 2009, any payment that is late
shall be subject to interest on the original amount due from the date that, the payment
first became due. The interest rate shall be equal to the Prime Rate in effect when the
payment first.became due plus one. percent for any payment that is made from 1 to 30
days after, the due date. The; Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due
plus five (5) percent shall apply for any payment that is made from 31 to 60 days after
the due date.: The Prime Rate in effect when the payment first became due plus ten
(10) percent shall apply for any payment that is made more than 60 days after the due
date. The rates shall, nevertheless, not exceed the maximum allowed by law.
c) Delinauent Payments — A Regulated Entity's payment is considered to be delinquent
180 days after being invoiced by the SGVCOG. The following procedure may be
implemented to attain payments from the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities per
instructions from the Technical Committee: 1) verbally ,contact/meet with the
manager from the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entities, 2) submit a formal letter to
3
the delinquent Regulated Entity or Entitiesfrom the SGVCOG attorney, and 3) notify
the Regional' Board. that the delinquent Regulated. Entity or Entities are no longer a
participating member of the CIE. If a Regulated Entity or Entities remain delinquent
after the above procedures, then any delinquent amount(s) will be distributed in the
following invoice amongst all remaining Regulated Entities proportionate to each
Entity's area as it relates to the overall remaining total Regulated Entities area,
excluding the delinquent Regulated Entity. or Entities and all references to the
delequent Regulated Entity will be removed from the CIP. The Technical Committee
will revise Exhibit A to show the recalculated costs for each participating- Regulated
Entity; these revised exhibits will be sent to the SGVCOG and included with the
annual invoices to the Regulated Entities.
d) Interest Accrual — Any interest accrued on the funds collected per this Agreement
during the term of this Agreement shall be redeposited into the appropriate account
and used for development of the CIP. The SGVCOG .shall report on an annual`basis
to the Technical Committee the'amount of interest accrued by the CIP acount(s).'
Section 10. Independent Contractor.
a) The SGVCOG is and shall-at'all times remain wholly independent"contractor for
performance of the obligations described in this Agreement. The`SGVCOG officers,
employees and agents performing such .obligations shall at -all times be' under the
SGVCOG's exclusive control. The Regulated Entities shall not have control over the
conduct of the SGVCOG or any of its officers, employees or agents, except as set
forth in this Agreement. The SGVCOG, and its officers, employees, or agents are not
and shall not be deemed to be employees of the Regulated Entities.
b) No employee benefits shall be available to the -SGVCOG in connection with the
performance of its 'obligations under. this Agreement. The SGVCOG is solely
responsible for the payment of salaries, wages, other compensation, employment
taxes, worker's compensation, or similar taxes for its employees for performing
obligations hereunder.
c) The Regulated Entities will retain control of the comultant(s)' work product and the
schedule for submitting the CIP to the Regional Board. The SGVCOG will use
reasonable efforts to work with the Regulated'Entities to ensure'that the draft CIP is
submitted by January 11, . 2010 and the final CIP is submitted by July 11, 2010.
However, the Regulated Entities recognize that the draft CIP is due by January 11,
2010 and that this deadline might not be met despite the best efforts of the SGVCOG
and the Regulated Entities.
Section 11 Indemnification.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, the City and the SGVCOG agree to save,
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless each other from any and all liability, claims, suits,
actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, and regulatory proceedings,
losses, expenses, or any injury or damage of any kind whatsoever, whether actual, alleged
rd
or threatened, attorney fees, court costs, and any other costs of any nature without
restriction incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising_ out of, the performance
of this Agreement, and attributable to the fault of the other. Following a determination of
the percentage of fault and or,liability by agreement between the Partiesor a court of
competent jurisdiction, the Partyy, responsible for liability to the, other will indemnify the
other Party. to this Agreement for the ,percentage of liability determined:: The SGVCOG
shall -not have any, duty to save,, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless, and the Regulated
Entities shall save, indemnify, defend,. and. hold harmless., the, SGVCOG from any
Regional Board Notice of Violations or third -party litigation resulting from failure of the
Regulated Entities to meet the compliance, deadlines in the Los Angeles: River Metals
TMDL for submission of the draft and final CIP.
Section 12, Termination of Agreement.
Either Party may terminate this Agreement for any reason, in whole or part, by giving the
other Party thirty (30) days written notice thereof. The City shall be responsible for the
allocated costs of CIP activities incurred up to the date of the termination. SGVCOG
shall notify in writing all Regulated Entities within fourteen (14) days of receiving
written notice from any Regulated Entity that intends to terminate this Agreement.
5
Section 13.° Miscellaneous.
a) Notices. All notices which any Party is required or, desires to give hereunder shall be
in writing and shall be deemed given when delivered personally or three (3) days after
mailing 'by registered or certified mail (returnreceipt requested) to the following
address or as such other addresses as the Parties may from time to time designate by
written notice in the aforesaid manner: '
To SGVCOG`. Nick Conway
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
3452 E. Foothill Blvd, Suite 910
Pasadena, CA 91`107
To City of Vernon: 1Vlanuela Giron
City Clerk
4305 Santa Fe Avenue
Vernon CA 90058
b) Separate Accounting and Auditing. The SGVCOG agrees to establish a separate
account to track the revenues from the Regulated Entities and the expenses from of
the CIP. Quarterly financial statements and the annual audit will be made available to
all of the participating Regulated Entities.
c) BindingEffect. ffect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each
Party to this Agreement and their respective heirs, administrators, representatives,
successors and assigns.
d) Amendment. The terms and provisions of this Agreement may not be amended,
modified or waived, except by an instrument in writing signed by Parties.
e) Waiver. Waiver by any Party to this Agreement of any term, condition, or covenant
of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or
covenant. Waiver by any Party to any breach of the provisions of this Agreement
shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent
breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement.
0 Law to Govern, Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed, and
governed according to the laws of the State of California. In the event of litigation
between the Parties, venue in the state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County
of Los Angeles.
g) No Presumption in Drafting_ The Parties to this Agreement agree that the general
rule that an Agreement is to be interpreted against the Party drafting it, or causing it
to be prepared shall not apply.
M
h) Entire Agreement. ' This. Agreement ,constitutes the, entire agreement of the Parties
with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous
agreements, whether written or oral, with respect thereto.
i) Severability. If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement is
declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected
thereby and this Agreement shall be read and constructed without the invalid; void, or
unenforceable provision(s).
j) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, .each
of which shall be an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute but one
and the same instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts shall have been
delivered to both Parties to this Agreement.
k) LegalRepresentation. All Parties have been represented by counsel in the
preparation and negotiation of this Agreement. Accordingly, this Agreement shall be
construed according to its fair language.
1) Procurement. All participating Regulated Entities have reviewed the procurement
procedures used in the selection of the consultant(s) for consistency with their
individual procurement practices.
m) Agency Authorization. Each of the persons signing below on behalf of a Party
represents and warrants that he or she is authorized to sign this Agreement on behalf
of such Party.
n) Contact Person. The municipal staff contact person for this agreement shall be
Samuel Kevin Wilson
Director of Community Services
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
ontheir behalf, respectively, as follows:
DATE: �t C CITY OF VERNON
` 7
-At
rio Gonzales, Mejor
ATTEST:
Manuela Giron, City lerk
APP VE S TO FO
Laurence Wiener, City -Attorney
DATE:
ATTEST:
IN ERT NAME , Secretary
8
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS
_Z�L - (,fir?
Nicholas T. Conway, Execu a Director
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
Alhambra 4878 4.25792% $ 9,641.42
R71- .
M1�`[`k^ �
$ 1,064.48 $ 10,705.90
Arcadia
6995
6.10581%
$ 13,825.69
$ 1,526.45
$ 15,352.15
Bell
1671
1.45859%
$ 3,302.75
$ 364.65
$ 3,667.40
Bell Gardens
1604
1.40010%
$ 3,170.32
$ 350.03
$ 3,520.35
Bradbury
494
0.43120%
$ 976.40
$ 107.80.
$ 1,084.20
Caltrans
3815
3.33005%
$ 7,540.39
$' 832.51
$ 8,372.90
Commerce
4193
3.65999%
$ 8,287.51
$ 915.00
$ 9,202.51
Compton
6044
5.27570%
$ 11,946.03
$ 1,318.92
$ : 13,264.96
Cudahy
729
0.63633%
$ 1,440.88
$ 159.08
$ 1,599.96
Downey
3621
3.16071%
$ 7,156.95
$ 790.18
$• 7,947.12
Duarte"
1084,
0.94620%
$ 2,141.54
$ 236.55
$ 2,379.09
El Monte
_4605
4.01962%
$ 9,101.83
$ 1,004°:91-
$ 10;106.74
Glendale
0
0.00000%
$ -
$ -
. $ -
Hunting -ton Park
1933
1.68728%
$ 3,820.60
$ 421.82
$ 4,242.42
Irwindale
994
0.86764%
$ 1,964.65
$ 216.91
$ 2,181.56
La Canada Flintridge
3637
3.17467%
$ 7,188.57
$ 793.67
$ 7,982.24
Long Beach
3182
2.77751%
'$' 6,289.26
$ 694.38
..$-_ 6,983.63
Lynwood
3079
2.687.60%
$ 6,085.68
$ 671.90
- $ :.6,757.58
Maywood
759
0.66252%
$ 1,500.17
$ 165.63
$ 1;665.80
Monrovia
8080
7.05289%
$ 15,970.21
$ 1,763.22
$ 17,733.43
Montebello
5386
4.70134%
$ 10,645.49
$ 1,175.34
Monterey Park
4931
430418%
$ 9,746.17
$ 1,076.05
$ °10;822.22
Paramount
2013''
1.75711%
$ 3,978.72
$ 439.28
$ 4;417.99
Pasadena
14575
12.72226%
$ 28,807.64.
$ 3,180.56
$ 31,988.21
Pico Rivera
1547
1.35035%
$ 3,057.66
$ 337.59
$ 3,395.25
Rosemead
3277
2.86043%
$ 6,477.03
$ 715.11
$ 7,192.13
San Gabriel
2662
2.323615/.
$ 5;261.47
$ 580.90
$ . 5,842.37
San Marino '"
2413
2.10626%
$ . 4,769.32
$ 526.57
$ 5,295.89
Sierra Madre
1900
1.65848%
$ 3,755:37
$ 414.62
: $ 4,169.99
South El Monte
1615
1.40970%
$ 3,192:06
$ 352.43
$ 3,544.49
South Gate
4780
4.17238%
$ 9,447.72
$ 1,043.09
$ .10,490.82
South Pasadena
2187
1.90899%
$ 4,322.63
$ 477.25
$ 4,799.88
Temple City
2561
2.23545%
$ 5,061.84
$ 558.86
$ 5,620.71
Vernon
t 3319
2.89710%
$ `6,56004
$ 114.27
$ 7,284.31
t
* The percent area is calculated by excluding the areas for LA County and the City of Los Angeles.
** The amounts shown are estimates only. Actual costs will be based on the cost sharing formula and are
contingent upon accurate acreage information and final contracting cost from consultant(s) and SGVCOG.
Cost allocation = (Agency acres/total acres of participating agencies) x total costs =agency cost share.
9
EXHIBIT B
COM
523 West Sixth Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, California 90014
tel: 213 457-2200
fax: 213 627-8295 ,
June 4, 2009
Ms. Sheila Kennedy'"
Subject: Los Angeles RiverReach2 Subwatershed Metals _TMDL Implementation Plan -
Revised proposal
Dear Ms. Kennedy,
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM) will develop a Los Angeles River .(LAR) Metals TMDL
Implementation Plan ("Plan') for the LAR Reach 2 subwatershed ready for submittal to the
Los Angeles'Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) by January 11, 2010.
Project tasks include:
Task 1— Characterize Subwatershed
An -overall LAR watershed characterization was completed for the City of Los An CDM
will refine the characterization to reflect only the LAR Reach 2 subwatershed.
Task 1.1 Conduct Data Review
Review existing data to identify data gaps where additional Reach 2 data may be
available. Compile and review additional data as available and incorporate into data
analyses (GIS and water quality).
Task 1.2 - Characterize LAR Reach 2 Subwatershed
Revise;existing LAR watershed characterization to, reflect only Reach 2 subwatershed
characteristics, including: (1) GIS layers; (2) hydrologic and water quality characteristics;
and (3) characteristics that affect structural BMP siting, (e.g., groundwater depth, soil, and
environmentally sensitive areas).:
Task 1.3 Assess Water Quality and Pollutant Loads
Revise existing LAR watershed water quality assessment to include only Reach 2
subwatershed metals water quality data. Conduct prioritization analysis using modeling
tools, to identify which catchments contribute the highest loads of metals.
consulting • engineering • construction • operations
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009 "
Page 2
Task 1 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum 1 (TM1) - TM1 summarizes the Reach 2
subwatershed characterization, including data sources, data gaps (and how they were
addressed), data analysis methods and findings. Attachments include maps, figures and
tables illustrating subwatershed `characteristics.
Task 2 - Develop Range of Urban Runoff. Management Options
Under this task CDM will lay the foundation for the Plan by locating priority areas for BMP
implementation, identifying potential structural and non-structural.controls, and conducting
a preliminary screening of BMP opportunities to select the best options for additional analysis
under Task 3.
Task 2.1— Identify Reach 2 Subwatershed Collaboration Opportunities (Optional)
Identify opportunities to implement BMPs cooperatively with other planned
_subwatershed management activities. Activities include meetings with key stakeholders
with interests/plans for stream restoration and green infrastructure projects.
Task 2.2 — Develop Categorical BMP Opportunities
Develop a categorical BMP opportunities list for the Reach 2 subwatershed (e.g., infill/
redevelopment, new development, street retrofit, and habitat restoration). Evaluate the
applicability of these opportunities to the subwatershed to provide a foundation for BMP
selection.
Task 2.3 — Identify Potential Structural and Non-structural BMP Opportunities
Identify potential non-structural and distributed/regional structural BMPs for the Reach 2
subwatershed. Potential structural BMPs will be tailored to, maximize water quality
improvement in the most cost effective manner and be limited to publicly -owned parcels.
Task 2.4 — Conduct Preliminary BMP Screening
Develop a BMP decision matrix with screening criteria (e.g., cost, feasibility, effectiveness,
and environmental benefits) and associated weighting factors to evaluate potential BMP
opportunities identified in Task 2.3. The outcome is a ranked BMP list.
Task Deliverable, Technical Memorandum (TM2) - TM2 provides a ranked list of non-
structural and structural BMPs for potential implementation in the subwatershed.
Supporting documentation will include the categorical BMP opportunities available,
range of BMPs considered, and the method for screening and ranking BMPs.
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 3
Task 3 - Develop BMP Implementation Alternatives Recommendations
Prior to starting Task 3, CDM will conduct a meeting with the client to determine the specific
direction of Task3. Task 3 further analyzes the screened list of BMPs developed in Task 2 and
prepares a final recommended list of BMPs for implementation. CDM will apply categorical
BMP implementation concepts on up to two alternatives to extrapolate the watershed -wide
benefits that may be achieved toward meeting the TDML metals loading allocations. This
task's project budget is based on the following: CDM will target identification of up to 10 non-
structural BMPs, and up to 20 distributed and up to 2 regional structural BMP projects. The
actual number of non-structural and structural BMPs analyzed (e.g., field investigations,
quantitative analysis, and cost analysis) will be decided by the client prior to implementation
of Task 3. If the number of BMPs is changed, the Task 3 scope of work and budget will be
modified, as appropriate:
Task 3.1— Conduct Field Investigations
Conduct limited field investigations to provide confirmation of the viability of the highest
ranked BMP opportunities identified in Task 2. The field investigations will not include
detailed site assessments such as underground utility. conflicts.
Task 3.2 — Quantify Water Quality Improvements
Quantify water quality improvements expected from implementation of the highest
ranked BMP opportunities. This analysis will link categorical BMP implementation in
Reach 2 with the range of potential outcomes towards achieving compliance with TMDL
requirements.
Task 3.3 - Select Final BMPs
Based on the outcomes of Tasks 3.1 and 3.2, CDM will develop a final list of BMPs for
implementation. The final list will include up to 10 non-structural BMPs, and up to 20
distributed and up to 2 regional structural BMP projects.
Task 3.4 — Prepare Cost Analysis
CDM will develop planning -level cost estimates for BMPs selected in Task 3.3. Analysis
includes engineering, construction, and operation and maintenance costs.
Task 3 Deliverable, Technical Memorandum 3 (TM3) - TM3 identifies the final BMPs for
implementation. This TM will include:
■ Summary and proposed schedule for non-structural BMP implementation;
■ Tabular lists (by Reach 2 subwatershed) with graphical representation (e.g., GIS, aerial
photographs) of structural BMP recommendations;
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 4
■ A phased implementation plan and schedule (based on prioritization of selected
BMPs);
■ Expected water quality improvements (metals concentrations or loadings) in urban
runoff during implementation (based on implementation schedule); and
■ Planning level capital and operation/maintenance costs.
Project site plans, concept reports or preliminary design reports are not included in Task
3.
Task 4 - Project.Meetings and Workshops
Task 4.1— Participate in Project Meetings
■ Project kickoff meeting to review the scope of work, project management and
communication procedures, project schedule, and discuss any data needs.
■ Monthly meetings to review progress, resolve issues of concern and, if necessary,
request data. CDM will prepare an agenda for review and prepare meeting notes. (10
meetings)
■ Biweekly teleconferences to review project status. (20 teleconferences)
Task 4.2 — Conduct Stakeholder Workshops (Optional)
CDM will participate in up to two 2-hour stakeholder workshops. CDM will prepare a
presentation, provide a facilitator, and prepare agenda and meeting discussion summary.
Task 4 Deliverables - Meeting or workshop participation, meeting agendas, meeting notes or
summaries, and presentation materials, as needed.
Task 5 - Prepare Los Angeles River Reach 2 Metals TMDL Implementation Plan
The Plan is due to the Regional Board by January 11, 2010. A final submittal, that addresses
Regional Board comments on the draft, is due by July 11, 2010. Project tasks and deliverables
include:
Task 5.1— Develop Draft Plan
CDM will prepare a Draft Plan using the information developed for TMs 1, 2 and 3. Prior
to preparation of the draft, an outline will be developed for review and approval.
Task 5.2 — Prepare Final Plan
CDM will prepare a Final Plan ready for Regional Board submittal based on Draft Plan
comments and provide 10 color paper and 50 electronic CD copies.
4
Ms. Sheila Kennedy
June 4, 2009
Page 5
Task 5.3 — Prepare Revised Final Plan
CDM will review Regional Board comments on the Final Plan and prepare
recommendations for resolution. Based on client discussions, CDM will prepare a Revised
Final Plan for Regional Board submittal. Ten color paper and 50 electronic CD copies will
be provided.
Task 5 Deliverables - Draft, and final TMDL Implementation Plans ready for submittal to the
Regional Board. Paper and electronic copies of the plans as noted above.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (213) 457-2200.
_Very truly yours,
A
1
Hampik Dekermenjian, PE
Vice President
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
cc: Richard, Meyerhoff
- DRAFT
CDM
Estimated Budget for the Development of Los Angeles River Reach 2
Metals TMDL Implementation Plan
Direct
Tasks
Labor
Costs
Task 1 -Watershed Characterization
$24,410
$500
Task 1.1 - Data Review
$2,580
Task 1.2 - Characterize Watershed
$6,130
Task 1.3 - Assess Water Quality and Pollutant Load
$6,570
TM1 Preparation
$9,130
$500
Task 2 - Develop Range of Management Options
$62,965
$2,000.
Task 2.1 - Identify Collaboration Opportunties (Optional)
$14,230
$750
Task 2.2 - Develop Categorical BMP Opportunities
$8,350
$250
Task 2.3 - Identify Potential Non-Structural/Structural BMPs
$13, 970
$250
Task 2.4 - Conduct Preliminary BMP Screening
$13,970
$250
TM2 Preparation
$12,445
$500
Task 3 - Develop and Evaluate Management Strategies
$66,105
$1,750
Task 3.1 - Conduct Field Investigations
$16,920
$750
Task 3.2 - Quantify Water Quality Improvements
$14, 600
$250
Task 3.3 - Select Final BMPs
$11,280
$250
Task 3.4 - Prepare Whole Life Cycle Cost Analysis
$9, 860
$250
TM3Preparation
$12,445
$250
Task 4 - Meetings and Workshops
$27,830
$1,000
Task 4.1 - Project Meetings
$13,320
$250
Task 4.2 - Stakeholder Workshops (Optional)
$14,510
$750
Task 5 - Prepare TMDL IP
$39,875
$1,000
Task 5.1 Prepare Draft Plan
$16,990
$250
Task 5.2 Prepare Final Plan
$11,830
$250
Task 5.3 Prepare Revised Final Plan
$11, 055
$500
Total
$220,185
$6,250
Total Cost
$226,435
RECEIVED
1=116 1 8 Z009
APPROVED AUG 2 4 '09 CITY COUNCIL
C11Y CLERK'S OFFICE, STAFF REPORT
COMMUNITY SERVICES & WATER DEPARTMENT
CITY CLERK DISTRIBUI
DATE: August 13, 2009
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Samuel Kevin Wilson, Director of Community Services & Water
RE: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) — Metals Total
Maximum Load (TMDL) — Implementation Plan for Reach 1 and Reach 2 —
Gateway Cities Council of Governments and San Gabriel Council of
Governments Memoranda of Agreement
The U. S. EPA approved the Los Angeles River Metals TMDL as an amendment to the regional
Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (Basin Plan) on December 22, 2005 and the
TMDL became effective January 11, 2006. The LAR Metals TMDL organizes the six 303(d) listed
reaches and tributaries of the Los Angeles River into responsible Jurisdictional Groups or Reaches. This
TMDL addresses impairments for selenium, zinc, lead, copper, and cadmium, and even though not all
reaches or tributaries were listed as impaired, metal allocations were developed for upstream reaches and
tributaries that drain to impaired reaches. Selenium, most probably, leaches from natural areas with high
selenium containing soils in the Santa Monica Mountains. Zinc, lead, copper and cadmium may be
associated with industrial discharges to sewage treatment plants, runoff from roadways, parking lots, and
other areas associated with vehicle usage, and atmospheric deposition over the entire watershed.
Several segments or reaches of the Los Angeles River have been identified by the Los Angeles
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as having exceeded water quality objectives for a
variety of metals. For this reason, the Federal Clean Water Act requires a Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) be developed to restore the impaired waterbodies to their full beneficial uses. Consequently, in
September 2007, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Board) adopted a TMDL
which limits the amount of heavy metals such as copper, lead, zinc, cadmium and selenium that can be
carried by runoff into the Los Angeles River. TMDLs are enforced through the State and Federal
Discharge permits such as the Municipal Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES). The purpose of the TMDL program for metals is to: 1) to clean-up impaired surface water
bodies, 2) to return those water bodies to their most beneficial use, 3) to maintain clean-up levels, once
clean-up has been attained.
The Regional Board has divided the Los Angeles River into six different jurisdictional groups or
reaches. The City of Vernon is required to prepare and implement an Implementation Plan designed to
reduce the amount of metal pollutants in the Los Angeles Rivers and its tributaries, in addition to
providing compliance with the TMDL load allocations. The City of Vernon is located within Reach 2 and
has approximately 5 square miles that are tributary to the Los Angeles River. In addition, the City has
approximately 300 acres of drainage area in Reach 1. The City requested that it be allowed by the Board
to be deleted from Reach 1 but the Board denied the request. The City will now have to participate in the
development of an Implementation Plan for each Reach.
The first compliance deadline for a submittal of a draft Implementation Plan is January 11, 2010
with a final Plan submittal by July 11, 2010. Initially, the County of Los Angeles was to take the lead to
prepare the Implementation Plan and that each City would contribute a fair share of the plan development
costs. However the County of Los Angeles has .decided to prepare a plan only for the unincorporated
areas in the County of Los Angeles and not participate in a collaborative planning effort. This decision
has left all other cities, including City of Vernon, to quickly formulate an implementation plan. The cities
within Reach 1 and Reach 2 have joined together and established a Technical Committee for each Reach
to assist with the preparation of a coordinated Implementation Plan. The Technical Committees,
comprised of staff from many cities, has determined that the most cost effective and expeditious means to
develop an Implementation Plan is to secure the services of a qualified private consulting and engineering
firm.
In Reach 1, the Technical Committee determined that the consultant preparing the
Implementation Plan for all the areas of the City of Los Angeles, Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. (CDM)
has completed the preliminary analysis and reach characterization study for the City of Los Angeles that
encompasses a significant portion of Reach 1. Through this work, CDM would be able to efficiently
begin and create an implementation plan. Initially, the Technical Committee for Reach 2 requested
proposals from two private consulting firms — CDM and Tetra Tech, the consultants preparing the
Implementation Plan for the County of Los Angeles. Tetra Tech subsequently declined the opportunity to
submit a proposal but CDM has provided a comprehensive proposal. Due in part to the time constraints
of meeting the deadlines imposed by the Regional Board, the. Technical Committees for both Reach 1 and
Reach 2 have recommended CDM as the consultant for the preparation of both coordinated
Implementation Plans. CDM's proposed scope of work for each reach can be found in Exhibit B of the
MOA for each reach.
Since the coordinated Implementation Plan will require administration, invoicing of participating
local agencies, bill payments and auditing, the Cities, in order to expedite the preparation of both plans,
have requested the Gateway Cities Council of Governments (Gateway COG) for Reach 1 and the San
Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) for Reach 2 to provide administrative services to
facilitate the successful development of both the draft and the final Implementation Plans. The Cities will
enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the respective Council of Governments. The
agreement will consist of the Gateway COG and the SGVCOG providing administrative services and the
Cities sharing in fully funding of the costs of the Implementation Plan and the costs incurred by the
Gateway COG and the SGVCOG. Cities can choose not to participate in these MOAs, however, for those
cities it would necessitate the city preparing its own Implementation Plans.
For Reach 1, the estimated budget for the coordinated Implementation Plan is not to exceed
$200,000 and for Reach 2, the estimated budget for the coordinated Implementation Plan is $251,435.00.
Exhibit A of each MOA illustrates the details of the cost sharing. The first invoice will be 50% of the
estimated final cost of the coordinated Implementation Plan and is due upon signing of this Memorandum
of Agreement with the understanding that all agencies will execute the agreement. The second invoice for
50% of the final cost will be sent on or about December 15, 2009. According to the cost allocation
formulas, the City of Vernon's allocation cost for Reach 1 will be $9,732.04 with $4,866.02 due upon
execution of this agreement. According to the cost allocation formulas for Reach 2, the City of Vernon's
allocation is approximately $7,284.31 of which $3,642.15 will due upon execution of the MOA.
The City Attorney has reviewed the agreements and has several comments on the form and
content of the agreements. However, these agreements are identical for all the cities and were
created to satisfy as many local requirements as possible so that all cities could execute. City
Staff recommends acceptance of the conditions set by both Council of Governments and will work to
resolve any issues with the staff of the two COGS.
It is recommended that the City Council approve the Memorandum of Agreement for the
administration and cost sharing of the development of the coordinated Implementation Plan for Reach I
with the Gateway Cities Council of Governments and the Memorandum of Agreement for the
administration and cost sharing of the development of the coordinated Implementation Plan for Reach 2
with the San Gabriel Council of Governments for the Los Angeles River and Tributaries Metals Total
Maximum Daily Loads.
COMMUNITY SERVICES &WATER DEPARTMENT
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Donal O'Callaghan, City ib�r "
FROM: Samuel Kevin Wilso Dir of CbmmuWly Services & Water
DATE: August 13, 2009
SUBJECT: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination, System (NPDES) —Los Angeles River
Metals Total Maximum Daik Load (TMDL) — Implementation Plan for Reach 1
and Reach 2 — Memoranda of Agreement
The U. S. EPA approved the Los Angeles River Metals TMDL as an amendment to the
regional Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (Basin Plan) on December 22,
2005 and the TMDL became effective January 11, 2006. The LAR Metals TMDL organizes the
six 303(d) listed reaches and tributaries of the Los Angeles River into responsible Jurisdictional
Groups or Reaches. This TMDL addresses impairments for selenium, zinc, lead, copper, and
cadmium, and even though not all reaches or tributaries were listed as impaired, metal
allocations were developed for upstream reaches and tributaries that drain to impaired reaches.
Selenium, most probably, leaches from natural areas with high selenium containing soils in the
Santa Monica Mountains. Zinc, lead, copper and cadmium may be associated with industrial
discharges to sewage treatment plants, runoff from roadways, parking lots, and other areas
associated with vehicle usage, and atmospheric deposition over the entire watershed.
Several segments or reaches of the Los Angeles River have been identified by the Los
Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as having exceeded water quality
objectives for a variety of metals. For this reason, the Federal Clean Water Act requires a Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) be developed to restore the impaired waterbodies to their full
beneficial uses. Consequently, in September 2007, the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control
Board (Board) adopted a TMDL which limits the amount of heavy metals such as copper, lead, zinc,
cadmium and selenium that can be carried by runoff into the Los Angeles River. TMDLs are enforced
through the State and Federal Discharge permits such as the Municipal Stormwater National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The purpose of the TMDL program for metals is to: 1) to
clean-up impaired surface water bodies, 2) to return those water bodies to their most beneficial use, 3)
to maintain clean-up levels, once clean-up has been attained.
RECEIVED
AUG 13 2009
The Regional Board has divided the Los Angeles River into six different jurisdictional groups
or reaches. The City of Vernon is required to prepare and implement an Implementation Plan
designed to reduce the amount of metal pollutants in the Los Angeles Rivers and its tributaries, in
addition to providing compliance with the TMDL load allocations. The City of Vernon is located
within Reach 2 and has approximately 5 square miles that are tributary to the Los Angeles River. In
addition, the City has approximately 300 acres of drainage area in Reach 1. The City requested that it
be allowed by the Board to be deleted from Reach 1 but the Board denied the request. The City will
now have to participate in the development of an Implementation Plan for each. Reach.
In Reach 1, the Technical Committee determined that the consultant preparing the
Implementation Plan for all the areas of the City of Los Angeles, Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc.
(CDM) has completed the preliminary analysis and reach characterization study for the City of Los
Angeles that encompasses a significant portion of Reach 1. Through this work, CDM would be able
to efficiently begin and create an implementation plan. Initially, the Technical Committee for Reach 2
requested proposals from two private consulting firms — CDM and Tetra Tech, the consultants
preparing the Implementation Plan for the County of Los Angeles. Tetra Tech subsequently declined
the opportunity to submit a proposal but CDM has provided a comprehensive proposal. Due in part to
the time constraints of meeting the deadlines imposed by the Regional Board, the Technical
Committees for both Reach 1 and Reach 2 have recommended CDM as the consultant for the
preparation of both coordinated Implementation Plans. CDM's proposed scope of work for each
reach can be found in Exhibit B of the MOA for each reach.
Since the coordinated Implementation Plan will require administration, invoicing of
participating local agencies, bill payments and auditing, the Cities, in order to expedite the preparation
of both plans, have requested the Gateway Cities Council of Governments (Gateway COG) for Reach
1 and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) for Reach 2 to provide
administrative services to facilitate the successful development of both the draft and the final
Implementation Plans. The Cities will enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the
respective Council of Governments. The agreement will consist of the Gateway COG and the
SGVCOG providing administrative services and the Cities sharing in fully funding of the costs of the
Implementation Plan and the costs incurred by the Gateway COG and the SGVCOG. Cities can.
choose not to participate in these MOAs, however, for those cities it would necessitate the city
preparing its own Implementation Plans.
For Reach 1, the estimated budget for the coordinated Implementation Plan is not to exceed
$200,000 and for Reach 2, the estimated budget for the coordinated Implementation Plan is
$251,435.00. Exhibit A of each MOA illustrates the details of the cost sharing. The first invoice will
be 50% of the estimated final cost of the coordinated Implementation Plan and is due upon signing of
this Memorandum of Agreement with the understanding that all agencies will execute the agreement.
The second invoice for 50% of the final cost will be sent on or about December 15, 2009. According
to the cost allocation formulas, the City of Vernon's allocation cost for Reach 1 will be $9,732.04 with
$4,866.02 due upon execution of this agreement. According to the cost allocation formulas for Reach
2, the City of Vernon's allocation is approximately $7,284.31 of which $3,642.15 will due upon
execution of the MOA.
The City Attorney has reviewed both agreements and has the enclosed comments. I have
reviewed the comments and recommend that we execute the agreement because we can work with the
staff of the COGS to resolve all the issues. These agreements are identical for all the cities and were
created to satisfy as many local requirements as possible so that all cities could execute. Since they
are multiparty agreements, they are difficult to change to fit every situation. The City of Vernon has
the option to remove itself from the process with 30 days notice but we would have to derive our own
Implementation Plan which would, in all probability, cost more than the contributions made in the
agreements.
It is recommended that you schedule the consideration these two agreements. I recommend
that you request the City Council approve the Memorandum of Agreement for the administration and
cost sharing of the development of the coordinated Implementation Plan for Reach 1 with the
Gateway Cities Council of Governments and the Memorandum of Agreement for the administration
and cost sharing of the development of the coordinated Implementation Plan for Reach 2 with the San
Gabriel Council of Governments for the Los Angeles River and Tributaries Metals Total Maximum
Daily Loads.