HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/05/2012 12A Council General Information a .4,,, ,
.,,
4 ,....„
c r,,,,,
k i4.4.;4; .....1,./
. y%
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 101
For Meeting of: June 5, 2012
ITEM TITLE: Council General Information
SUBMITTED BY:
CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE:
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
1. Interim City Manager Morales's letter of resignation
2 5/31/12 Weekly Issues Report
3. Basic motions based on Robert's Rules of Order
4. 6/5/12 Memo to Council from Judge Woodard re First Quarter 2012 Municipal Court Office
Statistics
5. 5/15/12 Letter from WWTP Manager Schafer to Department of Ecology with attachments
a 6. 5/23/12 Letter from Department of Ecology re recognition of Wastewater Treatment Plant
Outstanding Performance award
7. City Meeting Schedule for week of June 4 through 11, 2012
8. Preliminary Future Activities Calendar as of June 4, 2012
9. Preliminary Council Agenda
I
Resolution Ordinance Other
(specify)
Contract: Mail to:
Contract Term: Amount: Expiration Date:
Insurance Required? No
Funding
Source: Phone:
APPROVED FOR City Manager
SUBMITTAL:
1
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
BOARD /COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Click to download
❑ 6 -5 council packet
a ,
MEMORANDUM
May 31, 2012
TO: Honorable Micah Cawley, Mayor
Members of the Yakima City Council
FR: Michael A. Morales, Interim City Manager
RE: Resignation
Per the terms of my agreement with the city, please accept this 30 day notice of
resignation from the position of Interim City Manager, and resignation of employment
with the City of Yakima. My last day in the office will be Friday, June 29, 2012.'
Thank you for the opportunity to serve the city council, city organization, and the
community during the past 18 months of management transition. While challenging, the
experience has been rewarding. I am especially proud of our accomplishments over my
14 year career with the city, and owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to all levels of staff
in the organization. May God bless all of you.
MEMORANDUM
May 31, 2012
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael Morales, Interim City Manager,
SUBJECT: Weekly Issues Report
• STUDY SESSION: There will not be a Council Study Session on June 12, 2012.
• GFI STEERING COMMITTEE: This Committee (Adkison, Coffey, and Ettl) will be
meeting on Thursday, June 7 at 4:30 p.m. at Central Washington Comprehensive
Mental Health.
• REGIONAL FIRE AUTHORITY: This Committee (Adkison, Cawley, and Coffey) will
be meeting on Thursday, June 7 at 6:00 p.m. at Fire Station 86.
• WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS TRAIL DEDICATION: There will be a trail dedication
ceremony on Saturday, June 9 at 11:00 a.m. by the William O. Douglas statue in the
park on the east side of the school.
• CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: The sidewalk on Tieton Drive will be closed from
40 Avenue to 44 Avenue for an undetermined amount of time. This is due to the
construction of the new Eisenhower High School. Motorists and pedestrians should
be aware of heavy equipment in the area and are advised to use alternate routes
when possible.
• WASTEWATER PROJECTS: TTC will be replacing the manhole at the intersection
of Yakima Avenue and Naches starting on Saturday, June 2 around 5 pm. They will
work straight through until the project is complete. The pumping by -pass for the
project requires a large detour and closes most of Naches and Yakima Avenue's
through traffic. City crews will be cleaning the lines that TTC will be using as the by-
pass lines during the project this week. The manhole replacement will be a
complicated project for the contractor.
Crews have been working in the vicinity of 36 Avenue and Chestnut. They are in
the process of repairing a hole in the sewer line.
• FIESTA EN LA CALLE: On Saturday, June 2 from 2 -7:00 p.m., the Madison House
and Pacific Northwest University will be partnering with several community
organizations throughout Yakima to hold "Fiesta en la Calle" a community block
party. This event will highlight many of the community agencies whose services are
available for eastside families.
• JUNE 5 COUNCIL MEETING: As you know, I manage my son's baseball team and
the Yakima National Little League City Tournament begins Saturday. Depending on
wins and losses, I may need to be excused for the June 5 meeting to coach a game.
Jeff Cutter will serve as City Attorney and Acting City Manager for the meeting. Go
Nationals!!
• BASIC MOTION QUICK TIPS: In your packet is a list of basic motions based on
Robert's Rules of Order. A shorter version will be placed at the beginning of your
Council packet.
Basic.Motions
Quick Tips
(Based on Robert's Rules of Order)
Motions
The three most common motions a Council member will make are a motion
to take action, a motion to amend, and a previous question ( "call for the
question ") motion. Others motions used less often include a motion to table,
,a motion to postpone, and a reconsideration motion. Following are brief
descriptions of those common motions that hopefully give you a better
understanding of when and how each is intended to be used. There are
many other elements of parliamentary procedure, but most will never need
to be used in a Council meeting. Above all, in order for a meeting to be
successful, the most important rule is for all involved to demonstrate common
courtesy.
Motion to Take Action - Before an item or issue can be discussed
(debated) by the Council, a motion directing the Council to take action has
to be made and seconded. Without a motion to take action being made
and seconded, discussion by the Council is not appropriate. Motions to take
action have to be seconded, and require a majority vote of the Council in
favor to pass.
- To make a motion to take action a Council member should begin by
saying, "I move..." and then simply, clearly, and concisely state the intention
of the motion. The most common motions to take action are to adopt or to
deny. As an example, a Council member might say, "I move the Council
adopt the contract as proposed." If the motion receives a second, the
Council can then proceed to discuss the item or issue according to the
debate process described in the Council's Rules of Procedure.
* TIP - When making a motion, say what you mean and mean what you say.
Do not go the "I so move" route. Saying "I so move" often results in
confusion for your fellow Council members, the recording clerk, and
citizens watching the meeting. When making a motion, be as exact and
specific as you can and leave no doubt as to what you're asking the
Council to agree to.
Motion to Amend - Motions to take action that are under discussion by
the Council can be amended, but only if a motion to amend receives a second
and is approved by a majority of the Council.
- To offer an amendment a Council member should first be recognized by
the mayor and then make a motion to amend the original motion that is
currently under discussion by the Council. As with any motion, a motion to
amend should be simple, clear and concise. If the motion to amend receives a
second, the Council can then proceed to discuss the proposed amendment.
1
* TIP - A motion to amend can only be approved by a majority of the Council
and cannot fundamentally change the intent of the original motion.
Under Robert's, there is no such thing as a "friendly" amendment. Once a
motion to take action has been made and seconded, the motion
belongs to the Council as a whole. Only the Council as a whole, not the
maker of the original motion, can agree to amend it. Additionally, an
amendment cannot fundamentally change the intent of the original
motion.
Previous Question Motion - A previous question motion most commonly
appears during debate as a "Call for the Question." However, it is also likely the
most misunderstood and misapplied of all parliamentary procedure motions. In
order to end debate immediately, a "Call for the Question" or previous question
motion requires a second AND a two - thirds majority vote of the Council in favor
in order to pass.
- To Call for the Question a Council member should first be recognized by
the mayor and then make a previous question motion or simply say, "I call for the
question." If the previous question motion receives a second, it is voted on
without debate. If the previous question motion passes, debate ends and a vote
is immediately taken on the original motion that was under discussion by the
Council. If the previous question motion fails, debate on the original motion
continues.
* TIP - Do not expect debate to stop and a vote to be taken on the original
motion just because you say, "I call for the question ".
It would be patently unfair, not to mention a serious violation of Robert's,
to allow one member of the Council to end debate by simply saying he or
she wants debate to end. Parliamentary procedure, whether it's Robert's
or some other version, is primarily intended to foster debate, not stifle it.
Ending debate is considered, therefore, a serious matter. That's why a
previous question (or "call for the question ") motion requires a second
AND a two - thirds majority vote of the Council in favor to pass.
Motion to Table - Under Robert's, a motion to table simply proposes
temporarily setting aside a motion that the Council is currently discussing so
that it can address something that is more pressing. A motion to table should
be made only if the group fully expects to return to and deal with the tabled
motion during the same meeting or, at the very latest, the Council's next
meeting.
- To table a motion currently being discussed a Council member
should first be recognized by the mayor and then make a motion to table. If
the motion to table receives a second, it cannot be debated or amended
but must be voted on immediately. A majority vote of the Council in favor is
required for a motion to table to pass.
2
* TIP - An adopted motion-to -table does not kill an original motion under
discussion and, therefore, should only be used in rare circumstances.
The motion to table is nearly as misunderstood and misused as the
previous question motion. An adopted motion to table does not kill an
original motion under consideration by the Council. As mentioned,
under Robert's, a motion to table is only properly used to temporarily
set aside a motion currently under consideration by the Council so that
more urgent business can be addressed. That scenario rarely occurs.
So, a motion to table should rarely be used.
Motion to Postpone - There are two types of motions that can
postpone further discussion and /or consideration of an original motion. A
"motion to postpone to a certain time" must include reference to a specific
meeting at which the original motion will be discussed again. A "motion to
postpone indefinitely" does not include reference to a specific meeting at
which the original motion will be discussed again and if passed, therefore,
effectively kills the motion being considered.
- To postpone further consideration of a motion until another time a
Council member should say, "I move we postpone further consideration of
this motion until..." and then identify a specific meeting at which the motion
will be discussed again. A motion to postpone to a certain time requires a
second, can be debated, can be amended, and must gain a majority vote
of the Council in favor in order to pass.
- To effectively kill a motion being discussed by the Council a Council
member should say, "I move we postpone further consideration of this motion
indefinitely." A motion to postpone indefinitely requires a second, can be
debated, cannot be amended, and must gain a majority vote of the Council
in favor in order to pass.
* TIP - A motion to postpone is an effective strategic tool and can be used to
either put off uncomfortable decisions or avoid them altogether.
A motion that was made and seconded may have sounded just fine
to begin with. But during discussion, issues arise that make voting on
the original motion problematic. By passing a motion to postpone, the
Council is agreeing that it's better not to make a decision on the
original motion rather than to vote it up or down.
Reconsideration Motion - A motion to reconsider allows the Council to
take another vote on an item that had already been decided. However, a
reconsideration vote can only be taken under limited circumstances (see
below). The Yakima City Council Rules of Procedure includes a
reconsideration motion procedure that slightly varies from that found in
Robert's. However, both the Council Rules of Procedure version and the
Robert's version accomplish the same goal of allowing an item previously
decided to receive another vote.
3
- To have the Council vote again on an item that was previously
decided a Council member should say, "I move the Council reconsider its
vote taken on..." and then specify the subject matter of the vote as well as
the date of the vote. A reconsideration motion requires a second, can be
debated, and must gain a majority vote of the Council in favor in order to
pass. If the reconsideration motion passes, the Council can then debate the
original motion again and vote on it.
* TIP - A reconsideration motion can only be made by a Council member on
the prevailing side of the vote on the original motion and has to be
made not later than the end of the next Council meeting.
If the majority of the Council originally voted to deny a motion, then
only a Council member who voted "no" on the original motion can
make a reconsideration motion. Likewise, if a majority of the Council
originally voted to pass a motion, then a reconsideration motion can
only be made by a Council member who voted "yes" on the original
motion. Additionally, a reconsideration motion can only be made at
the same meeting at which the original vote on the item or issue was
taken OR before the end of the next Council meeting.
4
MEMORANDUM
June 5, 2012
TO: The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Michael Morales, Interim City Manager
FROM: The Honorable Susan Woodard, Presiding Judge
Linda Hagert, Court Services Manager
Debbie Baldoz, CPA
SUBJECT: 1st Quarter 2012 Municipal Court Office Statistics
The City of Yakima Municipal Court operation was created in late 1996 and has been an
independent judicial arm of the City since January 1, 1997. The Court adjudicates all traffic
infractions, misdemeanors, and gross misdemeanors cited in the City. The Court operates
with two full time Judges, one of whom presides over the Court's activities, and a part time
Court Commissioner. The City Council adopts the Courts budget annually; the Court is
otherwise independent from City Administration.
Following please find summary statistical reports for Municipal Court 1st Quarter activity
through March 31, 2012. Detailed reports are available from the Office of the Municipal Court.
Prior year totals for 2011 are included for comparison.
The following summary information for each quarter includes:
I. Municipal Court Infraction Statistics
II. Municipal Court Criminal Statistics
III. Public Safety Education Assessment (PSEA) Statistics
IV. Collection Statistics -- Municipal Court Outstanding Time -Pay Contracts
V. Outside Agency Collection Statistics -
DB
2012 1st Qtr MuniCt
Page 1
Yakima Municipal Court -- 1st Quarter 2012
I. Municipal Court Infraction Statistics
2011 2012 Prior 2012
Prior Year Qtrs. January February March YTD Total
Filings -- Proceedings
During Year:
Infractions Filed 9,600 0 701 829 809 2,339
Violations Charged 12,586 0 918 1,106 1,087 3,111
Mitigation Hearings 1,190 0 106 109 97 312
Contested Hearings 292 0 16 32 38 86
Show Cause Hearings 108 0 6 6 6 18
Other Hearings
On Record 2,496 0 178 157 195 530
Total 26,272 0 1,925 2,239 2,232 6,396
Dispositions During Year:
Infractions Paid 2,469 0 145 211 234 590
Failure to Respond 2,812 0 280 289 247 816
Committed 3,877 0 304 275 286 865
Not Committed 166 0 14 12 12 38
Dismissed 1,928 0 167 164 175 506
Amended 9 0 0 0 0 0
Total Disposed 11,261 0 910 951 954 2,815
Municipal Court Traffic
Infraction Revenues $960,485 $59,592 $96,269 $85,599 $241,460
Budget $1,060,000 $1,000,000
DB
2012 1st Qtr MuniCt
Page 2
Yakima Municipal Court -- 1st Quarter 2012
II. Municipal Court Criminal Statistics
2011 Prior 2012 Prior 2012
Year Qtrs. January February March YTD
Total
Filings During Year:
Citations Filed 5,141 0 343 471 415 1,229
Violations Charged 6,132 0 419 551 483 1,453
Trial Settings
During Year:
Non Jury Trials Set 8 0 1 1 0 2
Jury Trials 2,154 0 142 154 94 390
Proceedings:
Arraignments 4,255 0 276 361 366 1,003
Non Jury Trials 1 0 0 0 0 0
Jury Trials 15 .0 0 0 2 2
Stipulations to Record 3 0 1 0 0 1
Other Hearings 5,103 0 397 380 399 1,176
Dispositions:
Bail Forfeitures 11 0 1 0 0 1
Guilty 3,698 0 289 326 298 913
Not Guilty 5 0 0 .. 0 0 0
Dismissed 2,255. 0 220 186 151 557
Amended 329 0 23 29 15 67
Deferred/ Driver 543 0 54 49 48 151
Prosecution Resumed - 125 0 5 8 19 32
Total Disposition 6,966 0 592 598 531 1,721
Criminal Fines Revenue:
DWI Penalties $102,773 0 $5,248 $5,741 $10,777 $21,766
Criminal Traffic 147,886 0 7,315 11,918 16,494 35,727
Non - Traffic Misdemeanor 87,270 0 6,499 14,337 9,135 29,971
Recoupments 186,478 0 13,014 16,974 50,612 80,600
Total Fines $524,407 0 $32,076 $48,970 $87,018 $168,064
dotal Budget $545,000 $555,000
DB
2012 1st Qtr MuniCt
Page 3
Yakima Municipal Court -- 1st Quarter 2012
III. Public Safety Education Assessment (PSEA) Statistics
2011 2012 Prior 2012 .
Prior Year Qtrs. January February March YTD Total
Public Safety $1,416,534 0 $84,802 . $137,675 $152,441 $374,918
Education Assessment
(PSEA) Payments *
* Required payments to State Public Safety Education. Revenue for these payments is included as part of the
total fine. Revenue figures presented are net of these payments.
IV. Collection Statistics -- Municipal Court Outstanding Time -Pay Contracts
As of
03/31/2012
Outstanding Municipal Court Time -Pay Agreements ** $2,537,559
* *After judgment the offender makes arrangements with the court to pay their outstanding fines. If the offender
does not make a payment in 30 days and does not make an effort with the court to make other arrangements to
pay, the account is considered in arrears. A final notice is mailed to the person in arrears. If ignored the account
is then turned over to collection.
The collection agency is mandated by the state of Washington to write off accounts still owing ten years after the
judgment date due to the statute of limitations. The statute of limitations covers all fines and restitution.
V. Outside Collection Agency Statistics
2012 and
Prior Years
Outside
Collection Agency: * **
Accounts Assigned in Prior Years $18,930,300
Accounts Assigned in 2008 4,361,132
Accounts Assigned in 2009 4,868,762
Accounts Assigned in 2010 4,216,404
Accounts Assigned in 2011 6,872,233
Accounts Assigned in 2012 1,355,067
Total Assignments $40,603,898
Dollars Collected Since Assignment
(Cumulative) (as of 3/31/12) $6,713,638
Collection Performance Court Accounts 16.53%
* ** Net of cancellation
DB
2012 1st Qtr MuniCt
Page 4
a
• o Y CITY OF YAKIMA
^ `� AIIIMINII,' c ° ',, WASTEWATER- DIVISION
�'
' _ k , 2220 East Viola F
„ Yakima, Washington 98901
w Phone: 575 -6077 • Fax. (509) 575 -6116
, ' 1 j \'C�kPORA'LF.V �4af
May 15, 2012 ,
Mr. Sanjay Barik, Technical Unit Supervisor
Washington Dept. of Ecology, Water Quality Program
15 W Yakima Avenue, Suite 200
Yakima WA 98902
Mr. Barik,
Attached is a memorandum from our consultant, RIDOLFI, Inc., that describes the City's approach for
developing designs and an engineering report for Ecology's consideration regarding our floodplain
restoration and alternative outfall project.
We think that, as is stated in the memo, the overall water quality of the Yakima River will improve as a
result of our project.
Please provide any comments or suggestions you might have.
Sincere y, \\
Scott Schafer, Manage Wastewater Division
cc.
Donna Smith
Charlie McKinney
Tom Tebb
Colin Wagoner
Yakima .
!? q
II IIV
1999
RIDOLFI
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 26, 2012
TO: Ryan Anderson
FROM: Colin Wagoner
SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Plant NPDES Permit Modification
The City of Yakima Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) currently treats upwards of 15 million
gallons of wastewater on a daily basis. Treated effluent from the WWTP is discharged into the
Yakima River through a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitted
outfall located at river mile 110. This memorandum is developed in response to plans that are
in various stages that will affect the City's ability to discharge at the current location. The plans
are generally related to Gap -to -Gap river restoration, in which the City is a participant and
Yakima County's Upper Yakima Flood Control Zone District is the lead agency along with
several other entities.
Salmon populations were in steep decline, or entirely extirpated, in the Yakima Basin for many
decades during the 20 century. In 1999, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) classified Middle Columbia
River steelhead as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (Conley et al.,
2009). In 2002, a large study sponsored by the US Bureau of Reclamation (Stanford et al.,
2002) identified the Gap to Gap reach as having the most potential for floodplain and salmon
habitat restoration if levees are set back. Since then, several planning efforts have identified
floodplain restoration and levee setback in the Gap to Gap reach of the Yakima River as an
action item to restore listed steelhead species and other salmonid species, including the Middle
Columbia River bull trout which are listed as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in
1998 (USFWS, 2002).
In 2006, the Washington Department of Ecology changed its water quality standards from
"Class based" standards protecting general characteristic uses to "Designated Use" based
standards. The designated uses of the Yakima River in the Gap to Gap reach include salmonid
spawning and rearing.
Yakima County is developing plans to set back or remove various levees in the Gap to Gap
reach including the Drainage Improvement District 1 (DID #1) levee downstream of the State
Highway 24 bridge on the east bank of the Yakima River. These setbacks will increase flood
control to the Yakima Valley residents and will restore some of the natural riverine and
ecological processes to the floodway (USBR, 2010). These are important projects for restoration
of designated uses in the Yakima River. The proposed levee setbacks may result in an avulsion
of the primary channel away from its current location to a new alignment further east, which
could result in the WWTP. outfall discharging to a dry or partially wetted channel.
Ecology Memo May 2012
Y �
To plan for this change, the City of Yakima is considering an alternative WWTP outfall location
that is not dependent on the Yakima River's current alignment. In a related effort, the City is
pursuing the project as an opportunity to restore off - channel habitat in the City -owned floodplain
terrace to the south the WWTP.
The memorandum addresses the WWTP's approach to maintaining compliance with NPDES
permit requirements with an alternative outfall configuration.
WWTP Current Permit Requirements
The WWTP's current NPDES permit (no. WA0024023) was issued by the Washington State
Department of Ecology (Ecology) September 30, 2011 and expires on September 30, 2016.
The permit places limits on five effluent parameters:
• Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
• Total suspended solids (TSS)
• Total residual chlorine'
• pH
• Fecal coliform bacteria
Biochemical oxygen demand, TSS, residual chlorine, and fecal coliform bacteria are regulated
using average monthly and average weekly concentrations (fecal coliform uses a geometric
mean value). pH is regulated using daily maximum and minimum values. The permitted limits
are provided below in Table 1.
Table 1. Permitted Effluent Limits
Parameter Units Average Weekly Limit Average Monthly Limit
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand mg /L 45 30
Total Suspended Solids mg /L 45 30
Total Residual Chlorine mg /L 0.0355 0.0149
Fecal Coliform Colonies /100 200 100
Bacteria* mL
Daily Min Daily Max
pH standard 6 9
units
`Fecal coliform uses a geometric mean rather than a standard average. For more information
on calculation of a geometric mean see Ecology publication number 04 -10 -020.
Effluent limits set by the NPDES permit are based on two mixing zones in the river identified as
the acute and chronic mixing zones. These mixing zones dilute the released effluent to meet
aquatic life and human health criteria. For acute exposure, the required dilution factor is 1.9,
' Total residual chlorine only applies to emergency periods when the normal UV disinfection bank is not
operating.
Ecology Memo May 2012 2
and the mixing zone extends from 3.1 feet upstream to 31 feet downstream of the outfall.
Chronic exposure requires a dilution factor of 10. The chronic mixing zone extends from 31 feet
upstream to 310 feet downstream of the outfall. Both the acute and chronic mixing zones are
50 feet wide and extend from the bottom of the river to the water surface.
Dimensions of the acute and chronic mixing zones are based on a low river - discharge scenario
that occurs over 7- consecutive days and has a 10 -year recurrence interval period. This flow is
commonly referred to as the "7010." For the Yakima River the 7010 discharge is 835 cubic
feet per second (cfs). The current WWTP effluent limits are set on the basis that adequate
dilution will be achieved at the 7010 flow within the dimensions described above using 2.5% of
the 7010 for acute mixing, and 25% of the 7Q10 for chronic mixing. During normal, higher
flows effluent dilution factors are greater than the minimums identified in the permit.
The WWTP has maintained an excellent record of compliance with NPDES permit
requirements, and incurred only one effluent violation in the past 31/2 years for residual chlorine.
Permitted parameter values in WWTP effluent are generally well below NPDES regulatory limits
as can be seen in Table 2.
Ecology Memo May 2012 3
V
Table 2.Effluent Parameter Summary Statistics for 2006 -2010
Parameter Units Weekly Average Range Monthly Average Range
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand mg /L 5 to 15 5 to 15
Total Suspended Solids mg /L 6 to 13 4 to 16
Total Residual
Chlorine* mg /L N/A N/A
Fecal Coliform Colonies /100
Bacteriat mL 5 to 50 5 to 50
Average Daily Min Average Daily Max
standard
pH units 6.3 6.8
*Residual chlorine only applies during emergency periods when the ultraviolet disinfection bank
is not in operation. This did not occur during the period of record examined, so no data has
been provided.
t Fecal coliform uses a geometric mean rather than an arithmetic mean. For more information
on calculation of a geometric average see Ecology publication number 04 -10 -020.
Proposed Alternative Outfall Configuration
Possible future avulsion of the Yakima River channel is one of the primary drivers for relocating
the existing outfall to a new location. In order to avoid depending on the river channel position
to continue discharging WWTP effluent in the future, the new outfall would diffuse treated water
into a series of conveyance channels that run through the middle of the current floodplain
(Figure 1). The project design is being developed to maximize restoration of off - channel and
floodplain habitat development for the benefit of Endangered Species Act listed species,
designated used species, and for supporting designated uses.
The conveyance channels will carry most of the effluent to the Yakima River. This system will
run northwest to southeast and will be approximately 1,000 feet long. Adjacent to the primary
conveyance system, a separate surface channel will collect conveyance channel losses after
they are allowed to mix with groundwater Mixing with groundwater will provide some thermal
regulation of the effluent that reaches the secondary channel network, since process records
indicate that summer temperatures are above 20°C, the recommended maximum for salmonids,
for an extended period. This secondary surface channel network will be designed and built with
the primary goal of creating new off - channel habitat for native fish species. The restoration
project will incorporate in- channel woody debris and riparian vegetation to provide shade,
increase diversity, and moderate water temperatures. The total length of the secondary channel
network is approximately 2,000 linear feet.
Groundwater elevation data collected at the site, indicate that groundwater flows across the
floodplain to the southeast. Comparison between river stage data, and groundwater data
demonstrate that monitoring well MW -05 is located outside the hyporheic zone that is influenced
by the river, while monitoring well MW -06 is located within the hyporheic zone (Figure 1). The
secondary channel network will be constructed to a depth that intercepts the lowest local
Ecology Memo May 2012 4
groundwater elevation to a depth of two feet . Seasonal low- groundwater elevations in the
floodplain are approximately 12 feet below ground surface As the groundwater from the
western boundary of the floodplain is expected to provide a continuous source. of dilution along
the entire length of the secondary surface channel network. Observations made over the past
four months indicate that some hyporheic water is also expected to enter the secondary surface
channel network, particularly during periods of high river stage. Hyporheic contributions are
expected to follow the secondary surface channel network back to the confluence of the project
and the Yakima River and provide additional dilution to the effluent in the lower project reaches.
This conceptual design for the alternative outfall provides both reliable conveyance for the
majority of the plant effluent, and new off - channel habitat for native fish species throughout the
year. Additionally this system is not dependent on the position of the Yakima River's main
channel. The secondary surface channel network will provide both thermal refuge in the
summer, and low- energy off - channel habitat in the winter, both of which have been identified as
critical links to restoring the health of native fisheries (Mantua et al., 2011). Groundwater and
hyporheic contributions to the secondary surface channel network flows will be returned to the
Yakima River and the project's confluence with the main channel. Data collected by the USGS
(Vaccaro, 2011) indicates that this reach of the Yakima River gains a modest flow from
groundwater discharge. The proposed alternative outfall project will continue to discharge
comparable volumes of groundwater into the Yakima through the surface channel network, thus
leaving the total flows in the river unchanged.
Alternative Outfall NPDES Permit Compliance
Presently effluent compliance with the NPDES permit requirements is demonstrated just after
the UV bay in the WWTP before water discharges to the outfall in the Yakima River. Permitted
parameter values are set based on the total dilution that will be achieved once the effluent
released is allowed to mix with a portion of the river flow. Because the alternative outfall system
will not discharge directly into the Yakima River, but rather into a series of conveyance channels
and secondary surface channels, an extended mixing zone will need to be established.
The Washington Administrative Code provides four conditions for establishing an extended
mixing zone (Section WAC 173-201A-400-12):
"Exceedences from the numeric size criteria in subsection (7) and (8) of this section
and the overlap criteria in subsection (9) of this section may be considered by the
department in the following cases:
a. For discharges existing prior to November 24, 1992, (or for proposed
discharges with engineering plans formally approved by the department
prior to November 24 1992).
b. Where altering the size configuration is expected to result in greater
protection to existing characteristic uses.
c. Where the volume of water in the effluent is providing greater benefit to the
existing or characteristic uses of the water body due to flow augmentation
2 Seasonal low -stand elevations for groundwater in the project area were measured to be 983.9 feet
above sea level at monitoring well MW -05, and 981.1 feet above sea level at monitoring well MW -06.
Ecology Memo May 2012 5
!
than the benefit of removing the discharge, if such removal is the remaining
feasible option -
d. Where the exceedence is clearly necessary to accommodate important
economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located
Conditions b., c., and d. are applicable to the alternative outfall. Based on the standards
identified in the Washington Administrative Code the alternative outfall will:
• Result in the creation of new off - channel habitat, which provides greater benefit and
characteristic use of the existing floodplain than does the current condition.
• Accommodate the planned levee setback in this reach of the Yakima River.
• Allow for restoration of natural processes in the river channel that have been previously
limited or actively fought to protect infrastructure such as the current outfall.
Ecology granted an extended mixing zone to the Selah WWTP (NPDES Permit WA- 002103 -2)
which discharges to Selah Ditch approximately 3,000 feet upstream of its point of discharge to
the Yakima River. The Selah facility outflows augment the total flow in the extended mixing
zone, which provides over - wintering habitat for juvenile salmonids.
Similarly, the alternative outfall for the Yakima WWTP is intended to enhance off - channel
habitat by providing flow to an area that is seasonally dry. Most of the undiluted effluent will be
conveyed into an extended mixing zone on the north end of the project reach. These
conveyance surface channels will terminate in the porous river gravels found in the side
channels of the Yakima River (Figure 1). Dilution of this flow will occur in the main river
channel, side channels, and hyporheic zone in what can be defined as an extended mixing
zone.
A relatively small fraction of the conveyance channel flows will seep out of the channels, mix
with groundwater, and enter the secondary surface channel network. This water will combine
with some groundwater and hyporheic water captured by the surface channels as they flow
south. It is estimated that dilution equivalent to what is currently allowed in the existing NPDES
permit will be reached within a relatively short (300 to 500 foot) distance downstream of the
secondary surface channel network's confluence with the main Yakima River channel.
Historic effluent data provides a baseline for what the conveyance system that connects to the
upper portion of the extended mixing zone will release. Currently the water is relatively nutrient
rich, slightly acidic, and warmer than the river throughout the year. By the time that the outfall is
completed the WWTP will have completed two additional treatment phases to reduce phosphate
and nitrogen concentrations in the effluent However temperature is expected to remain
elevated relative to the river. It is not clear how quickly effluent will be diluted once it is released
into the extended mixing zone, but this can be evaluated by monitoring water quality in side
channels and comparing water quality parameters to the concentrated effluent.
3 The WWPT is currently working on an Enhanced Biological Nutrient Removal project and installation
of struvite recovery systems that are expected to be online before the conveyance channels are
constructed.
Ecology Mertes May 2012 6
Additional monitoring in the secondary surface channel network will also be performed since the
level of dilution in these channels can only be generally estimated (see above). Because these
channels are designed for use as native fish habitat water temperature in particular will need to
be monitored regularly. Nutrient levels are also expected to be elevated in the channels since
effluent is expected to make up a large fraction of the total water volume.
Extended Mixing Zone Uncertainties and Proposed Evaluation Approach
Water quality in the Yakima River downstream of the point of discharge from the proposed
alternative outfall system is expected to be equivalent to, or slightly improved over existing
conditions. However, determining the rate of mixing between river water and effluent in the
extended mixing zone is a complex and difficult problem since the physical system in which
mixing is occurring is both large and highly anisotropic.
As an example, we consider changes in temperature effects to the river from the existing outfall
to the extended mixing zone. Temperature effects from the existing WWTP outfall into the
Yakima River are relatively minor under most circumstances since the effluent is released into a
comparatively large and turbulent water body. As a result, effluent is quickly mixed with river
water over a short downstream distance. In the proposed extended mixing zone temperature
effects may be more significant since the side channel flows and turbulence are reduced from
those in the primary river channel. Additional complications that are expected to influence the
water temperature include:
• Thermal segregation between the warmer effluent and cooler river water
• Shading over some portions of the riparian channels
• Side channel geometry
• Lateral and subsurface flow though the porous river gravels between the primary and
side channels
• Hyporheic water contributions to the side channels
• Changes in side channel flows associated with changes in river stage
Modeling may provide some a gross indication of groundwater / surface water interactions. A
simple model will be developed to evaluate dilution and thermal spreading at a coarse scale.
However, the large number of complications, which vary spatially throughout the extended
mixing zone make detailed modeling impractical, since any model will require significant
simplification of the real physical system to meet model parameter requirements.
Evaluation of other water quality parameters such as nutrient loading are expected to be even
more complex than the temperature effects, in part because temperature effects cascade to
other parameters. Additional environmental processes such as nutrient sorption onto organic
carbon or digestion by pelagic communities make reliable of the system still more difficult.
Therefore, in recognition of these complexities and challenges, we believe a combined
approach of qualitative analysis during the planning phase followed by empirical data collection
within the extended mixing zone remains the best approach to evaluating the extended mixing
zone's performance.
Ecology Memo May 2012 7
per;;
References
Conley, A., J. Freudenthal, D. Lind, P. Mees, R. Visser. 2009. Yakima Steelhead Recovery
Plan. Yakima Basin Fish and Wildlife Recovery Board, Yakima WA
Mantua, N., I. Tohver, and A. Hamlet. 2009. Climate change impacts on streamflow extremes
and summertime stream temperature and their possible consequences for freshwater
salmon habitat in Washington State. Climatic Change number 102: pages 187 -223.
Stanford, J., E. Snyder, M. Lorang, D. Whited, P. Matson, and J. Chaffin. 2002. The Reaches
Project: Ecological and Geomorphic Studies Supporting Normative Flows in the Yakima
River Basin, Washington. Project Number 1997 -04700 (BPA Report DOE/BP-
00005854 -1). Bonneville Power Administration, Portland OR.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. (USBR). 2010. Yakima River Geomorphology and Sediment
Transport Study: Gap to Gap Reach, Yakima WA. Technical Report Number SRH -2010-
08.Prepared for the County of Yakima, Washington. November
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (USFWS). 2002. Bull Trout Draft Recovery Plan: Middle
Columbia Recovery Unit. October. Available at:
http: / /www.fws.00v /pacific /bulltrout /RP /Chapter 21 %20Middle %20Columbia.pdf
Vaccaro, J.J. 2011. River - aquifer exchanges in the Yakima River basin, Washington: U.S.
Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011- 5026.98 pages.
Washington Department of Ecology.Fact Sheet for NPDES Permit Number WA- 002103 -2 City
of Selah Publically Owned Treatment Works.
Ecology Memo May 2012 8
. , .
. .
. . 4 .. .
0 0.1, . - . 'I' ". .1?. .. •
' 0
_ 'it ) \ . 4
a
.... ........,, . s ...
so
r Existing Outfall to
• " ..
, , , ' f *t. Yakima River
i - • s • * " 0 <(- JP '
-
— — - . I"' ..., NI • Subsurface Conveyance
I 3 .
7 :1 . System
. frIl
4 ....,. .
_ i
, L
II.
\.tt:''''
- -
- 4.....t Fenced Area
Meht
-, .."7 .
. 2, .. .
- 4111111 Daylighted Conveyance
System
. _. . .
*: „, - •••'... ,
' I .,_ , d” .& ^ •;it '
. • t N ',...:".' . a
11.
- , :
Capture Conveyance Losses
1 - % .a
Ilk: • to Groundwater
• • .,„ _ - I .1
•
Modified, •
• ' Billy's Pond. "
,
— ■A''' ',.. '. ,..i. A ,
.47 . Secondary Surface Channel
a Network Dug to 2' Below
1 ..■ 4. 66-11 - 1- .ib.
t
• Groundwater Elevation
i
off -- : ; .,,,, .: •
._ , •
, ..-
,
LEGEND y-s _ i,
ii .0-_ i
• Monitoring Well t.. , .../C4c. 0 Proposed Phase I
0
Conveyance
..,
Secondary e
Surface Channel t. . Downstream Edge for
Subsurface ik
',.., N Chronic Mixing Zone
) 0 ,
Conveyance !
6 t .,
Daylighted '
. -j l it -
Conveyance SITE STATISTICS:
t , DIMENSIONS
' Bike Trail i ' ProjectSite: 111 Acres
Billy's Pond: 46 Acres
. Existing Outfall Road: 2 9 Miles
Trail: 1 Mile
0 260 520 . ,• . j t 'C I, . River from Bridge to S Extent
IIING■INIFeet .r i g ; ' of Project Boundary: 1 Mile
AlPrk
111"1114 ' 1.11i • -• ADDITIONAL INFO , ' ■■ .
WRIA: 37
\ 1 x 1 T 10 ti `...,' ARE Al• RO I - «.' HUC: 1703000302
April 2012 Figure 1
Outfall Alternative Evaluation
e.„ . ...- LI Outfall Alternative Project
II. City of Yakima Wastewater Treatment Division Conceptual Layout
:ft STAT&
w RECEIVED
CITY OF YAKIMA
4 "e Is [;9 '° MAY 2 9 2012
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL
PO Box. 47600 • Olympia, WA 98504 -7600 • 360- 407 -6000
711 for Washington Relay Service • Persons with a speech disability can call 877 - 833 -6341
May 23, 2012
The Honorable Micah Cawley
Mayor of Yakima
129 N 2nd Street
Yakima, WA 98901
Dear Mayor Cawley:
Congratulations! The Yakima Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant is receiving the 2011 "Wastewater
Treatment Plant Outstanding Performance" award. The Washington State Department of Ecology
(Ecology) will issue a news release recognizing the 2011 award recipients that will include the Yakima
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant.
My staff evaluated wastewater treatment plants in Washington for compliance with the effluent limits,
monitoring and reporting requirements, spill prevention planning, pretreatment , and overall
operational demands of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Of
approximately 300 wastewater treatment plants statewide, yours is one of 108 that achieved full
compliance with its NPDES permit in 2011.
It takes diligent operators and a strong management team, working effectively together, to achieve this
high level of compliance. It's not easy to operate a wastewater treatment plant 24 hours a day, 365
days a year, without violations. Ecology appreciates the extraordinary level of effort your plant
operators demonstrated throughout 2011. Talented and proficient operators are critical to successful
plant operations and protecting the health of Washington's waters. Your excellent record proves that
dedicated operators run the Yakima Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and their combined efforts
lead to outstanding compliance.
Please call Donna Smith at 509- 575 -2612 if you have any questions or comments about your award.
Thank you for the excellent service you provide. Congratulations!
Sincerely,
Kelly Susewind, P.E., P.G.
Water Quality Program Manager
two,
CITY MEETING SCHEDULE
For June 4, 2012 — June 11, 2012
Please note: Meetings are subject to change
Monday, June 4
10:00 a.m. City Council Media Briefing — Council Chambers
3:30 p.m. Civil Service Commission Meeting — Council Chambers
Tuesday, June 5
10:00 a.m. County Commissioners Agenda Meeting — Council Chambers
4:30 p.m. City Council Executive Session — Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. City Council Meeting — Council Chambers
Thursday, June 7
9:00 a.m. County Hearing Examiner — Council Chambers
1:00 p.m. County Commissioners Meeting — Council Chambers
3:00 p.m. Bid Opening — Council Chambers
4:30 p.m GFI Steering Committee Meeting — CWCMH
6:00 p.m. Regional Fire Authority Meeting — Station 86
6:00 p.m. Valley Mayor's Meeting — Toppenish
Saturday, June 9
11:00 a.m. William O'Douglas Trail Dedication — Davis High School
- Monday, June 11
8:30 a.m. Pension Board Meeting — Human Resources Conference Room
Office Of Mayor /City Council
Preliminary Future Activities Calendar
Please Note: Meetings are subject to change
eeti "Y" . ,. , -w :Or anizatio r, % .', :x:: :., :.Mlle 3 .. ,
g.' ;.� Y �g n r° .,�._ etingPur'ose ",- - ,Partici' ants'. "' ,:�;;; .,�M`eetfn 3L'ocati ori'':;'�;: : � 4 .
^3
J'
;4:. fCa•.' n , N g n, °,✓EN?"• ,XS:�- Y^ '5. --
q >.
"
s ..
Mon. June 4
10:00 a.m. City Council Media-Briefing Scheduled Meeting Coffey. Council Chambers
Tue. June 5
12:00 p.m. Miscellaneous Issues Scheduled Meeting Cawley, Adkison TBD
4:30 p.m. City Council Executive Scheduled Meeting Council Council Chambers
Session
6:00 •.m. Ci Council Meetin• Scheduled Meetin• Council Council Chambers
Thur. June 7
9:00 a.m. 911 Joint Board Meeting Board Meeting Lover Toppenish
4 30 p m. GFI Steering Committee Scheduled Meeting Coffey, Adkison, CW,CMH
Meeting EttI
6:00 p m. Regional Fire Authority Scheduled Meeting Cawley, Adkison, Station 86
Coffey
6:00 • m Valle Ma or's Meetin• Scheduled Meetin• Cawle Touenish
Sat. June 9
11:00 a m. William O'Douglas Trail Scheduled Event Open Davis High School
Dedication Ceremon
Mon. June 11
30 a m. Pension Board Meetings Board Meeting Coffey Human Resources
Conference Room
Tue. June 12
12:00 • m Miscellaneous Issues Scheduled Meetin• Cawle Adkison TBD
Wed. June 13
10:00 a.m. Council Nominating Scheduled Meeting Adkison, Ensey, Mayor's Office
Committee Bristol
3 30 p m. Planning Commission Scheduled Meeting Ensey Council Chambers
Meeting
5 p m Parks Commission Meeting Scheduled Meeting Adkison Council Chambers
Thur. June 14 � ry
1.00 p.m. Harman Center Board Board Meeting Cawley, Adkison Harman Center
Meeting
1 p.m. Yakima Regional Clean Air Scheduled Meeting Lover Council Chambers
Meeting
3.30 p.m. YAKCORPS Executive Board Meeting Cawley CED Conference Room
Board
5:30 • m. YCDA Board Meetin• Board Meetin• Adkison New Vision Offices
Mon. June 18
1000 a m City Council Media Briefing Scheduled Meeting Ettl Council Chambers
Tue. June 19
12 00 p m Miscellaneous Issues Scheduled Meeting Cawley, Adkison TBD
2•00 p.m. Yakima County Gang Scheduled Meeting Adkison TBD
Commission
4.30 p m. (T) City Council Executive Scheduled Meeting Council Council Chambers
Session
6.00 m. Ci Scheduled Council Meetin Meetin Council Council Chambers
Wed. June 20
12 00 p.m. PAL Board Meeting Board Meeting Coffey PAL Center
PRELIMINARY FUTURE COUNCIL AGENDA
June 12
NO SCHEDULED BUSINESS MEETING
June 19
(T) 4:30 p.m. Executive Session — Council Chambers
6 :00 p.m. Business Meeting — Council Chambers
• Resolution authorizing 2012 budget amendments (Epperson)
• Consideration of resolution approving 2012 Collective Bargaining Agreement
between the City of Yakima and Yakima Police Patrolman's Association
• Review and approve first quarter revenue and expenditure report
• Resolution authorizing execution of agreement with Block by Block to provide
safety, cleaning, and parking management services in the DYBID
• Update on GFI activities
• Approve agreement with Yakima County for 2013 jail services
• Resolution authorizing professional services agreement for jail feasibility study
7:00 p.m. Public Hearing — Council Chambers
• Open record public hearing to consider a Resolution declaring surplus a 5.72 -acre
parcel owned by the City of Yakima, located in Terrace Heights Yakima,
Washington, and authorizing disposal of said surplus property
• Second and final public meeting concerning the 2012 Budget Amendments to
CDBG and HOME funds
• Public hearing to consider: A) Adoption of the Six -Year Transportation
Improvement Program for the years 2013 to 2018, and to amend the Metropolitan
Transportation Plan; and B) Amend the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan
Capital. Facilities Element
5/31/2012
9 AM
1