The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolutions 86-073 N.C.S. 04/14/1986~~, •' .a F~~SO1Llt10~1 ~®. 86-73 N.C.S. of the City of Petaluma, California AUTHORIZING IRRIGATION PROJECT, CONTRACTING WITH ENVIROTECH, AND APPROVING FUNDING FOR SUMMER, 1986, IRRIGATION SEASON BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The City Council hereby approves funding for the 1986 irrigation season in the amount of $235.000,; and, 2. The City Council awards the contract for management of the irrigation project for the 1986 irrigation season to Envirotech and authorizes execution of the necessary documents; and, 3. The City Council authorizes the expenditure of $105, 000.00 Water Pollution Control Funds distributed as follows: A. $55, 000 for dike repair between Wastewater Treatment Ponds 3 and 6, and B . $50, 000 for dike restoration at Wastewater Treatment Ponds 2 through 5 Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. ccre~/~r~~~~~~i:g . apprgp~reby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the proved as to Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (Adjourned) (~~meeting rm on the .....---~-~t17-.--.... day of ..............~.pS.ll....-....---.-...........--••----•~ 19---8.6, by the following vote: 'ty Attorney AYES: Sobel, Cavanagh, Davis, Woolsey, Tencer, Vice Mayor Balshaw, Mayor NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: --•---•-----~•----.....L/."`-•"-'-``-=•.~'':~.-"::!:: ~S.~.~ .~.J.......... City Clerk CA 10-85 Res. No. ........... 8.6._ 1..3.... N.C.S. e Mayor k~ APR 141986 3A City of Petaluma Memorandum 4/11/86 TO: John Scharer, City Manager FROM: Thomas S. Hargis, Dir. of Public Works/City Engineer RE: ~ Wastewater Report - Irrigation Project In response to~your request, I have pr-epared the following report that addresses the upcoming irrigation season. As shown on the attached proposed Capital Outlay Budget project list., (submitted with companion. report) there are several items necessary to insure 'a successful season. The most imperative is the dike repair between Pond Nos. 3 and 6 - estimated to cost $5.5,000.00. Second in priority would be the dike restoration at Pond Nos. 2 through 5 at an additional $50,000.00. This work should be done early in the Spring of 1.986. The other a-rea of needed improvement for the .irrigation season is the addition of more irrigation equipment to irrigate more of the existing land available as well as to add to the farmlands available to take wastewater under this project. Incorporated.. would be on-site management of the disposal of the wastewater. Staff is considering two. alternative proposals - one from EOS ("Envrotech Operating .Services) and one from a local farmer-operated corporation that would provide the equipment and. on-site management. Staff has not had time to evaluate both proposals in sufficient, depth to make a recommendation to the City Council for a long-term commttment under either proposal and, therefore, recommends that a similar operation to last years of one year leasing of dffe-rent types of irrigation equipment and on-site operation be utilized. ~J ~2~~Uc.dies( City. of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94'953 ATTENTION: Mr. Thomas Hargis, Director of Public Y9orks/ City Engineer SUBJECT: Report/P,roposal to Provide bIanagement Services in Connection with the Irrigation of. Reclaimed Wastewater Gentlemen: In 1984, the City of Petaluma undertook a program to provide reclaimed wastewater fqr irrigation of ranch lands which is consistent. with the May 1, through October 20 ; Retaluma River zero discharge requirements as outlined in the Sean Francisco Bay .Regional Water Quality Control Boards, NPDES Permit Order No: 82-18. In general, the program was designed to irrigate approximately 550 acres of local .ranch, Yantis nearby the City's oxidation. pond wastewater treatment, system.. Each of six ranchers have agreements with the Citp for delivery of reclaimed wastewater tb hydrant turnout structures which allows the individual rancher to set up necessary piping and irrigation appurtenances for spray application on declared acreage. 1984' ,Season During the first, year (1984) of the irrigation program, the pumping and distribution system for' carrying reclaimed wastewater to each rancher Envaotech Ope~atmg Services. One Watecs Park Dnve San, Mateo. Caiiforn~a 9a403 ~a't:51 Bag-929i -16- experienced several difficulties which are typeal~ly expected in the start-up of a new system . Therefore , -application rates- expected for irrigation during 19:84 were not fully acYueved because it was necessary to make minor system modifications for fine 'tuning and optimizing the overall operations. 1985 Season The 1985 irrigation ,season proceeded with. .minimal. system operational difficulties. However, because of the dependency of each rancher to utilize the reclaimed wastewater, it was realized that insufficient usage of water for irrigation created a 'high risk potential for discharge to the Petaluma. River- during- the zero discharge period. Additional steps were taken to provide more equipment to some of the ranchers to increase irrigation in their 'ranches:. Efforts were also made to provide contingency usage of City property to avoid the possibility of discharging reclaimed wastewater to the Petaluma River. These efforts included additional labor for irrigation of ranch lands as well as installing 62.00 ff`. of piping for emergency -flood irrigation of designated City property . To provide further 'insight of our ..recommendations for the 1986 season, the following subsections describe a brief r.eeap of activities which occurred during the 1985 season. A brief summary bf the facts for the 1985 season are as follows: -17- - ,Pond levels were at the lowest possible point (approximately 2 foot water depth in each pond) before. play 1. - Storage capacity at this time was 20' 'I~IG or 5'0 days of storage with. no irrigation 'and included isolation of Ponds Number i and Number 2. - Test runs. on the pumping- systems began Aprll 28th and continued on through the official irrigation dafe o€ I41ay 1. - No major equipment problems were experienced duruig start of season. - Water usage for the first four months was well below the necessary target of 3„0 M'GD as indicated on Table 1. This was due to several reasons,. 'including the fohowing: - Poor weather conditions - seve"ral days of cool and cloudy conditions . - Shortage of equipment to distribute water to declared irrigation acreage:. - l~7ain distribution pipeline ruptures (3 occurrences) which caused isolated shut down periods: for- some of the ranchers. - B';reakdowns on travelling ,guns and time lost in effecting .repairs . - In July a .meeting with the ranchers concluded. more equipment was required to be_ effective in meeting irrigation requirements . - In August, .additional equipment was .rented and set up on Prlendoza's ranch. Temporary workers were `hired to move equipment for optimum usage. -18- - - Iiy September, water levels. in ponds were approaching maximum capacity with appro~.zmately .six days of storage available. .~ - .Again, additional pipe. and equipment were rented and additional temporary workers. were retained. - Permission was granted by both the City and R`VQCB to irrigate and dispose of water in the following areas - 100 acre dredging pond site. - Pinecho ranch - Area along perimeter of ponds - Area beyond pond 9 - Piping was installed to the dredging pond and discharge to this area began Actob'er 4th. It was estimated that approximately 1.0 mgd was discharged to this site until the end of season. - ~Vork was done- by the City to raise the pond leveys back to original grade which allowed for more freeboard and additional storage capacity in the ponds. - By the 12th of October it was evident that the goal of, "no river discharge" would be achieved. - During the season insignificant problems were experienced at the pump stations . However, problems were experienced with Hydrants 8 , 9 , and 14 . System pressure fluctuations caused intermittent interruptions in these hydrant areas. Modifications were made on the'; hydrants which minimized pressure fluctuations to ,~ workable Tevels . -19- Tables I and II in the following pages summarize the actual irrigation water usage versus that required in 1985 ; and actual usage by ranchers alone (period A) versus the' combined efforts (period B) of usage with. ranchers and added Ctp, EOS and regulating support. -20- - :.; t TABLE T Nfonthly Irrigation Rates 1985 Season. MONTH ACTUAL FLOW _ REQUIRED F'L'OW SHORTFALL MAY T.08 MGD 2.6~MGD 1.5 MGO JUNE 1.5 MGD 2.3 MGD .8 MGD JULY 1.2 MGD 2.3 MGD 1.1 MGD AUGUST 1.2 F1GD 2:5 MGD 1.3 MGO SEPTEP~BER 2.:05 MGD 2:7 MGD .7 MGD OCTOBER 4.-99 MGD 2.8.MGp 2.1 MGD AUERAGES% 6 mos. '2 MGD 2:5 MGD .5 MGD -21- o~ RANCH U,5 SALACCI CARDINAUX MGD JUNZE i~1ENDOZA h1ATT E I R BETTINELLI TABLE II Irrigation Rates on Designated Ranches 1985 Season Period A MAY - AUGUST 4. MG or .2 MGD .13.6 MG or .11 MGD 13.8 MG or .11 MGD 31 MG or .26 MGD 12.5 MG or .:1 MGD 30 MG or .25 MGD Period B JCf 1 GI•IDCR - VV I VDLR 11.3 MG or .2 MGD 13.6 MG or .27- 41.6 MG or .83 MGD 44.4 MG or .88 MGD 12.5 MG or .25 MGD 21 MG or .42 MGD TOTALS 126 MG or 1.02 MGD 144 MG or 2.9 MGD 120. days 5'0 days Season average for 1985 = 270 'MG or 1.6 MGD * Period A - Independent Rancher Usage * Period 6 - Combined Rancher and additional City and EOS support