Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-2006-10-04COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. October 4, 2006 PRESENT: Mayor Peterson Alderpersons (9) Coles, Seger, Berry, Clairborne, Tomlan, Zumoff, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan OTHERS PRESENT: City Clerk – Conley Holcomb City Attorney – Hoffman City Controller – Thayer Planning and Development Director – Van Cort Deputy Planning & Development Director – Cornish Community Development Director – Bohn Superintendent of Public Works – Gray Human Resources Director – Michell-Nunn Fire Chief – Wilbur Economic Development Director - DeSarno EXCUSED: Alderperson Korherr PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Peterson led all present in the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: City Administration Committee: Alderperson Coles noted that a Substitute Resolution for Item 9.3 Human Resources - Amendment to Annual Leave Related to Managerial Benefits – Resolution had been distributed. Special Presentations before Council: Mayor Peterson requested the following additions: Presentation of the Mayor’s 2007 Budget Presentation by Pamela Mackesey, Tompkins County Legislator for the 1st District Presentation by the Shade Tree Advisory Committee No Council member objected Mayor’s Appointments: Mayor Peterson stated that she would like to add Item 16.1 – Appointments to the Youth Bureau Advisory Board. No Council member objected Individual Member Filed Resolutions: Mayor Peterson stated that Item 15.1 - Resolution to Approve A Joint Study Group to Investigate Possible Shared Services and Possible Consolidation between the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca had been distributed to Council members. PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS: Mayor Peterson proclaimed the week of October 1-7, 2006 as Cornell Cooperative Extension and National 4-H Week in the City of Ithaca. Mayor Peterson further proclaimed October 10, 2006 as World Mental Health Day. October 4, 2006 2 SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Mayor Peterson presented the 2007 Mayor’s Recommended Budget to Common Council with the following Budget Message: “Like the last several budgets, the 2007 budget has been one that requires difficult decisions. Again, this year, the Mayor’s budget is one that attempts balance— acknowledging years of cutbacks, layoffs, attrition, and huge increases in costs for retirement and insurance, especially health insurance—coupled with the desire to keep taxes low—and also coupled with requests for improved or increased services. The last few years have especially shown the evidence of prior decisions that saved money, at the time, by delaying work, capitalizing operations, and reducing staff. These decisions now show all too well, appearing as complaints about customer service or quality of life issues such as road repairs. This budget takes additional incremental, although small, steps to improve the city’s outlook. This message will highlight areas of the City budget, review the Mayor’s budget goals directive to department heads, and explain how this budget meets these goals. As you know, the earliest step for the budget was to review capital project submissions. Six and a half million dollars of requests were submitted. These requests reflect the needs of each department. A small review committee consisting of the Mayor, the Controller, the Superintendent of Public Works, the Planning Director, and the technical assistance of a Planner, met several times to categorize the requests as “mission critical”, “operating budget”, or put on hold. The proposed capital project list is now set at four and a half million dollars with another half million dollars being moved into the operating budget. It is important to understand this part of the budget as it reflects on the tax levy and the tax rate. It has been the goal of my administration, and the goal of the Controller, to have a sustainable budget that does not rely on placing operational costs into capital costs, a method that ultimately costs the City and the taxpayers more money. The next step was to review departmental budgets in light of the Mayor’s request that budgets be submitted with a 1% increase scenario and a 3.5% scenario. These standards provide snapshots of how a department would function at those levels. For most departments, even the 3.5% goal was a negative budget due to salary increases alone. Most of the final departmental budgets will be higher than 3.5%. There are a variety of reasons. One notable one is reflected by moving certain capital expenses back to operational, where they should be. Examples of this include smaller equipment purchases such as a decibel meter, police radios or small building repairs. A more significant piece is moving smaller, regularly replaced vehicles back into the departmental budgets. Additionally, overtime accounts have been somewhat increased to reflect the true numbers; fuel for vehicles and utility expenses have been adjusted to our best guess. This has resulted in a 2.26% tax rate increase and a 6.1% levy increase. Highlighted details follow: Several departments have received small staff hour increases, or in some cases where customer service complaints are very high, have received a larger increase. The smaller increases are in the Controller, Clerk, and Chamberlain’s office. Larger programmatic changes are in the Building Department (restructuring needed for a very high level of building permits and new, unfunded state mandates for inspection increases commencing in 2007), the Department of Public Works (creating a new Sidewalk Department that will result in better service, less expense, and assistance with snow and ice removal rather than capitalizing the work), and the Fire Department (a Municipal Training Officer). The Streets and Facilities department has created a 5-year plan that moves the city forward in street repair. The need is great as the City is recovering from years of cutbacks. The first year funding is achieved through CHIPS (the State’s October 4, 2006 3 Consolidated Local Street and Highway Improvement program to assist localities in financing the construction, reconstruction, or improvement of local highways). By gradually implementing the additional costs of “catch-up” we hope to get close to a regular maintenance schedule by 2011. Each year predicts around $300,000 for catch- up, about 2 points on the tax rate. A small amount of money is being set aside in restricted contingency for improvement for public information. Many suggestions have been made about this topic and the City will continue to improve in this regard. Efforts such as the construction notification program, Mayor forums and conversations, and the reader friendly budget have been successful. I look forward to additional ideas and resources such as improved Web applications, news bulletins, and Web interactivity. Focus groups will be used to select the best strategies. This budget assumes no changes in meter or parking garage rates. Trash tags will be priced the same. Changes to yard waste pickup will be considered this month. Sustainability initiatives that are expected include results and possible action through the energy performance contract work being undertaken by the City and Johnson Controls. Thus, large building improvement items such as those cited in the Thomas report, are covered under that future program. New vehicle purchase for the Building Department is likely to include an electric vehicle. This is our second contract year for wind power purchase. The new sidewalk program will promote safe, walkable areas of the City and will help reduce car use. A 92-page budget has been presented to you and will take some time to understand. A 6.1% levy is the lowest in 5 years, yet is 2 points over the CPI. The decision to move some programs forward, rather than status quo, has been based on community concerns and infrastructure and building repair necessity.” SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL: Tompkins County Legislature Pamela Mackesey, 1st District representative of the Tompkins County Legislature addressed Council regarding the following items: Proposed cuts to Human Services agencies have been restored in the County budget. A Tompkins County Empire Zone Board is being established to assist business owners in Empire Zones, and the County is looking for members to serve. Legislator Mackesey asked that if any Council member had names of people to serve on this Board to please forward them to the County. Shade Tree Advisory Council Dr. Nina Bassuk, Chair of the Shade Tree Advisory Council (STAC), addressed Council to present the STAC’s annual report that included information on current tree inventories and budgetary issues. A copy of this report is on file in the City Clerk’s Office. Chrys Gardener, Coordinator of the Beautification Project for the City of Ithaca, addressed Council and explained that the group is funded by the hotel room tax and that their goal is to improve the visual quality of downtown, particularly areas visited by tourists. She proposed that the City hire a half-time employee in 2008 to oversee City plantings and volunteers; as well as provide access to City equipment. She further announced that City Forester, Andy Hillman, has been named President of the Society of Municipal Arborists, affiliate of the International Society of Arboriculture. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: Larry Roberts, Chair of the Disability Advisory Council, submitted a letter to Council in support of Gadabout’s request for emergency funding. Robin Palmer, Town of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park. October 4, 2006 4 Lilian Lightborne, addressed Council regarding the CDL program funded by CDBG monies. There have been 12 CDL trainees and now there are 12 new CDL permit holders waiting to take their road test. There are a lot of employers and recruiters looking for people with Class A licenses in the area. She thanked Council for the opportunity to offer these classes. Tom Stern, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding an employment hearing and the right of City employees to speak out on matters of public policy. Joel Harlan, Town of Newfield, addressed Council regarding the dog park and suggested that it be located in the Southwest Park area. He further addressed Council regarding the Inlet Island development plans. Steve Flash, Town of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding Inlet Island development and his proposal for Preferred Developer status. Mary White, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park. Melissa Luckow, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding her opposition to the Inlet Island land swap. Seth Sicroff, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park. Mack Travis, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of the Inlet Island Project and the selection of Steve Flash and Finger Lakes Development, LLC as the Preferred Developer. Thomas Hartshorne, City of Ithaca, addressed Council in support of the hotel project on Inlet Island and the selection of Finger Lakes Development LLC as the Preferred Developer. Brian Zapf, Seneca County, addressed Council in support of an off-leash dog park. Guy Gerard, City of Ithaca, addressed Council regarding the Festival Lands and dog park issues. Jonathan Bernstein, Trumansburg, addressed Council regarding Allen H. Treman Marina and the dog park. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR: Alderperson Berry responded to comments made regarding the dog park, and Washington Park concerns. Alderperson Tomlan announced information regarding the Pride of Ownership Awards and nomination period. Alderperson Clairborne thanked the speakers for their comments and welcomed the high school students in attendance to the meeting. He further responded to comments made regarding the CDL program and what a great opportunity it is for people to develop skills to assist them in finding employment. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: Building Department - Request to Amend 2006 Building Department Authorized Personnel Roster - Resolution By Alderperson Berry: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan WHEREAS, the position of Senior Code Inspector in the Building Department was recently vacated due to retirement, and WHEREAS, the Building Commissioner has reviewed the departmental staffing needs and has determined that the most effective way to fill this vacancy is with the position of Housing Inspector; now, therefore be it October 4, 2006 5 RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Building Department be amended as follows: Delete: One (1) Senior Code Inspector (Grade 17) Add: One (1) Housing Inspector (Grade 15) and be it further RESOLVED, That the funding for this roster change shall be derived from within the existing Building Department budget. Carried Unanimously Youth Bureau - Request to Amend 2006 Youth Bureau Budget - Resolution By Alderperson Berry: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau has been advised by the Tompkins County Workforce Investment Board that they will be receiving $7,515.00 in additional funding for the Summer TANF Employment Program (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), and WHEREAS, the goal of this program is to provide short-term subsidized internships for 50 TANF eligible teens needing assistance in securing summer employment; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2006 Youth Bureau Budget to account for said funding as follows: Increase revenue account: A7310-4820-1202 Federal Aid Youth - YES $7,515.00 Increase expense account: A7310-5120-1202 Part time/Seasonal $6,592.00 A7310-9030 FICA/Medicare $505.00 A7310-9040 Workers’ Comp $418.00 $7,515.00 Carried Unanimously CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: A Local Law to Repeal Chapter 264 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled: “Sewer Use” and enacting in its place a new Chapter 264 entitled: “Sewer Use Requirements” By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca adopted a series of Intermunicipal Sewer Agreements between 2003 and 2005 to modify several existing agreements and adopt several new agreements in order to create a new broader base for intermunicipal cooperation on existing and future wastewater issues, and WHEREAS, the changes incorporated in those agreements resulted in the need to change the City’s current Chapter 264, Sewer Use, to reflect those agreements, as well as an opportunity to update the sewer use provisions to reflect current practice, and WHEREAS, staff and the Special Joint Committee’s (SJC) attorney has produced an updated sewer use law which has been reviewed and approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA or EPA) which is currently being or has been adopted by the Towns of Ithaca and Dryden as the City’s partners in the wastewater plants operation, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works has reviewed these agreements, now therefore October 4, 2006 6 Local Law No. _____ - 2006 BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. The current Chapter 264 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled “Sewer Use” adopted by Common Council on August 5, 1992 by Local Law No. 4-1992 is hereby repealed in its entirety, and in its place a new Chapter 264 is hereby enacted as follows: CHAPTER 264: SEWER USE REQUIREMENTS A LOCAL LAW ENTITLED "SEWER USE REQUIREMENTS" ARTICLE I General Provisions 264-1. Purpose and Applicability 264-2. Administration 264-3. Definitions and Word Usage ARTICLE II Regulation of Wastewater Discharges 264-4. General Discharge Prohibitions 264-5. Specific Discharge Prohibitions 264-6. Specific Pollutant Limitations 264-7. Categorical Pretreatment Standards 264-8. Modification of Categorical Pretreatment Standards 264-9. State Requirements 264-10. Right of Revision 264-11. Dilution Prohibited in Absence of Treatment 264-12. Alternative Discharge Limits 264-13. Pretreatment 264-14. Accidental Discharges ARTICLE III Wastewater Discharge Permits 264-15. Permit Required 264-16. Permit Application Requirements 264-17. Permit Conditions 264-18. Permit Modifications 264-19. Duration of Permits 264-20. Permit Transfer 264-21. Permit Decisions ARTICLE IV Reporting Requirements, Monitoring, and Inspections 264-22. Reporting Requirements 264-23. Signatory Requirements 264-24. Monitoring and Analysis 264-25. Recordkeeping Requirements 264-26. Monitoring Facilities 264-27. Inspection and Sampling 264-28. Slug Control Plans 264-29. Confidential Information October 4, 2006 7 ARTICLE V Hauled Wastewater 264-30. Hauler and Generator Requirements 264-31. Hauled Wastewater Discharge Requirements 264-32. Dumping Location and Timing 264-33. Notification of Dumping 264-34. Dumping Fees ARTICLE VI Enforcement 264-35. Imminent Endangerment 264-36. Other Harmful Discharges 264-37. Publication of List of Violators 264-38. Compliance Orders 264-39. Suspension and Revocation of Permit 264-40. Notice of Violation 264-41. Show Cause Hearing 264-42. Legal Action ARTICLE VII Penalties and Costs 264-43. Civil Penalties 264-44. Criminal Fines and Imprisonment ARTICLE VIII Fees 264-45. Charges and Fees 264-46. Assessment of Charges and Fees 264-47. Surcharges for Certain Conventional Pollutants ARTICLE IX Local Pollutant Limitations 264-48. Purpose and applicability 264-49. Definitions 264-50. Specific pollutant limitations 264-51. Applicability of other requirements and prohibitions ARTICLE X Severability, Repealer, and Effective Date 264-52. Severability 264-53. Repealer 264-54. Effective Date ARTICLE I - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 264-1. Purpose and Applicability A. The purposes of this chapter are the following: Deleted: Septage Discharges Deleted: Septage Deleted: Septage October 4, 2006 8 (1) To set forth uniform requirements for contributors into the wastewater collection and treatment system currently owned jointly by the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca, and the Town of Dryden (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "municipalities") and to enable the municipalities to comply with all applicable requirements under New York and federal law, including, without limitation, the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, and the General Pretreatment Regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. Part 403. Additional municipalities may in the future join in the ownership of this wastewater collection and treatment system. (2) To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the municipalities' publicly owned treatment works ("POTW") which will: (a) interfere with its operations, including interference with the use or disposal of municipal sludge; (b) Pass Through or otherwise be incompatible with the POTW; (c) limit opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal and industrial wastewater’s and sludge’s; or (d) endanger the health or safety of sewer workers. (3) To prevent new sources of infiltration and inflow and, to the extent possible, eliminate existing sources of infiltration and inflow; and (4) To provide for equitable distribution and recovery of the cost of the municipal wastewater system. B. This chapter shall apply to all Users of the POTW in the municipalities and to persons who are, by resolution, agreement, contract, or permit with the municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or POTW, Users of the POTW. § 264-2. Administration Except as otherwise provided herein, the Chief Operator and his or her duly authorized representatives, acting as the agents and representatives of the Special Joint Committee and of the municipalities, shall have the authority to administer, implement, and enforce the provisions of this law chapter. To the extent practicable and consistent with the requirements of the General Pretreatment Regulations set forth at 40 C.F.R. Part 403, the Special Joint Committee shall keep officials in the City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, Town of Dryden, and any other municipality which contracts with the municipalities to discharge wastewater to the POTW, reasonably informed of implementation and enforcement activities involving Users located in their respective municipalities, and shall consult with such officials in appropriate implementation and enforcement activities with respect to Users located in their respective municipalities. §264-3. Definitions and Word Usage A. Definitions. Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the following terms and phrases, as used in this chapter, shall have the meanings hereinafter designated: (1) Act. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., and the regulations promulgated thereunder, as amended from time to time. (2) Approval Authority. The Regional Administrator of the EPA, unless and until New York State receives EPA approval of a state pretreatment program. Once New York State receives such approval, then the Approval Authority will be the Commissioner of the DEC. (3) Authorized Representative. An authorized representative of an Industrial User shall be: (1) a responsible corporate officer, if the User is a corporation, provided Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: the Special Joint Subcommittee and its representative, Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: or Special Joint Subcommittee October 4, 2006 9 that the responsible corporate officer is: (a) a president, vice-president, secretary, or treasurer of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, (b) any other person who performs similar policy- or decision-making functions for the corporation, or (c) the manager of a facility or facilities employing more than 250 persons or having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second-quarter 1980 dollars), provided that the manager has received the authority to sign documents in accordance with corporate procedures: (2) a general partner or proprietor, if the User is a partnership or sole proprietorship, respectively; (3) a member of the governing board or executive office of a governmental entity, if the User is a governmental facility, or (4) a duly authorized representative of the individual designated above if such representative is responsible for the overall operation of the facility from which the industrial discharge originates, or has overall responsibility for environmental matters for the company, provided, however, that the authorization is made in writing by the individual described above, and the written authorization is submitted to the Chief Operator. (4) Five Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand ("BOD5). The quantity of oxygen utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter under standard laboratory procedure for five (5) days at 20 centigrade, expressed in terms of weight and concentration (milligrams per liter (mg/l)). (5) Bypass. The intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of an Industrial User's treatment facility. (6) Categorical Pretreatment Standard. A National Pretreatment Standard, which applies to a specific industrial subcategory and is published at 40 C.F.R. Chapter I, Subchapter N. (7) Chief Operator. The person appointed by the City of Ithaca to supervise the operation of the POTW, or his or her duly authorized representative, including the Pretreatment Coordinator. The Chief Operator and his or her representatives shall be the Special Joint Committee's and municipalities’ authorized agents and representatives in the administration and enforcement of this law. (8) Cooling Water. The water discharged from any use, such as air conditioning, cooling, or refrigeration, to which the only pollutant added is heat. (9) C.F.R. Code of Federal Regulations. (10) DEC. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (11) Direct Discharge. The discharge of treated or untreated wastewater directly into the waters of the State of New York or of the United States. (12) Discharge. See Indirect Discharge. (13) Domestic Source. Any residence, building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or may be discharged to the POTW only sanitary sewage. (14) EPA. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (15) Garbage. The solid waste from the preparation, cooking, and dispensing of food, and from the handling, storage, and sale of produce. (16) Indirect Discharge. The introduction of pollutants into the POTW from any source, other than a Domestic Source, regulated under section 307(b), (c), or (d) of the Act. (17) Industrial User. A source of Indirect Discharge. (18) Industrial Waste. Any liquid, gaseous, or solid waste substance, or a combination thereof, resulting from any process of industry, manufacturing, trade, or Deleted: and¶ approved by the Special Joint Subcommittee Deleted: or Deleted: Subcommittee October 4, 2006 10 business, from any process related to services or activities performed by any public or private institution or facility, or from the development or recovery of any natural resources. (19) Interference. A discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal and which is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's SPDES Permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation), or of the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal by the POTW in accordance with applicable federal, state, or local statutes and regulations or permits issued thereunder, as set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 403.3(i). (20) Municipalities. The City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, and Town of Dryden, collectively, as well as any other municipalities which may in the future become owners of the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility. "Municipality" used in the singular form shall mean any one of the municipalities. (21) National Pretreatment Standard. Pretreatment Standard. or Standard. Any regulation containing pollutant discharge limits promulgated by the EPA in accordance with sections 307(b) and (c) of the Act which applies to Industrial Users, including prohibitive discharge limits established pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 403.5, and Categorical Pretreatment Standards. (22) New Source. Any building, structure, facility, or installation, as described in 40 C.F.R. § 403.3(k), from which there is or may be a Discharge of pollutants, the construction of which commenced after the publication of proposed Pretreatment Standards under section 307(c) of the Act which will be applicable to such source if such Standards are thereafter promulgated in accordance with that section. (23) Pass Through. A Discharge which exits the POTW into waters of New York State or the United States in quantities or concentrations which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's SPDES Permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation). (24) Person. Any individual, partnership, firm, company, public or private corporation or authority, association, joint-stock company, trust, estate, governmental entity, agency or political subdivision of a municipality, of the State of New York, or of the United States, or any other legal entity, or their legal representatives, agents, or assigns. The masculine gender shall include the feminine, and the singular shall include the plural where indicated by the context. (25) pH. The logarithm (base 10) of the reciprocal of the concentration of hydrogen ions expressed in grams per liter of solution. (26) Pollutant. Any element or property of sewage, agricultural, industrial, commercial or municipal waste, leachate, heated effluent, dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, garbage, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials, rock, sand, and cellar dirt, which is discharged into the POTW. (27) Pretreatment. The reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater to a less harmful state prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants into the POTW. The reduction or alteration can be obtained by physical, chemical or biological processes, process changes, or other means, except as prohibited by 40 C.F.R. § 403.6(d). (28) Pretreatment Requirement. Any substantive or procedural requirement related to Pretreatment, other than a National Pretreatment Standard, imposed on an Industrial User. (29) Publicly Owned Treatment Works or POTW. The treatment works, as defined by Section 212 of the Act, owned by the municipalities and known as the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility. This definition includes any devices and systems October 4, 2006 11 used in the storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature. It also includes those sewers, pipes, and other conveyances, which convey wastewater to the POTW's Treatment Plant. For the purposes of this chapter, POTW shall also include any sewers and other facilities that convey wastewater to the POTW Treatment Plant from persons who are, by permit, resolution, contract, or agreement with the municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or POTW, Users of the POTW. (30) POTW Treatment Plant. That portion of the POTW designed to provide treatment (including recycling and reclamation) of municipal sewage and industrial waste. (31) Sanitary Sewage. Liquid and water-carried human and domestic wastes from residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants and institutions, exclusive of ground, storm and surface water and exclusive of industrial wastes. (32) Sanitary Sewer. A sewer that carries liquid and water-carried wastes from residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants and institutions together with minor quantities of ground, storm, and surface waters that are not admitted intentionally. (33) Septage. Human and domestic wastes, including both liquids and solids, in and removed from septic tanks, holding tanks, cesspools, or chemical toilets, including but not limited to those serving private residences, commercial establishments, industries, and institutions. Septage shall contain only sanitary sewage. (34) Sewer. A pipe or conduit that carries wastewater. (35) Sewerage System. Any device, equipment, or works used in the transportation, pumping, storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of wastewater. (36) Significant Industrial User. All Industrial Users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards, and any other Industrial User that discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of processed wastewater to the POTW (excluding sanitary, noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater); contributes a processed waste stream which makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the POTW treatment plant; or is designated as such by the Chief Operator on the basis that the Industrial User has a reasonable potential for adversely affecting the POTW's operation or for violating any Pretreatment Standard or Requirement. Upon a finding that an Industrial User meeting the foregoing criteria has no reasonable potential for violating any Pretreatment Standard or Requirement or for adversely affecting the POTW's operation, the Chief Operator may at any time, upon his or her own initiative or in response to a petition received from an Industrial User, and in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(6), determine that such Industrial User is not a Significant Industrial User. Such a determination may not be made, however, if the Industrial User is subject to a Categorical Pretreatment Standard. (37) Sludge. Waste containing varying amounts of solid contaminants removed from water, sanitary sewage, wastewater or industrial wastes by physical, chemical, or biological treatment. (38) Slug. Any discharge of a non-routine, episodic nature, including, but not limited to, an accidental spill or non-customary batch discharge. (39) SPDES Permit. A State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued pursuant to Section 402 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1342, and Article 17 of the New York Environmental Conservation Law. (40) Special Joint Committee. A committee established by the municipalities and charged with oversight of the POTW, as provided for by agreement among the City of Ithaca and Towns of Ithaca and Dryden. This committee currently consists of representatives from the City of Ithaca and Towns of Ithaca and Dryden, and may in the future include representatives from other municipalities which become joint owners of the POTW. Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: All Deleted: not contain pollutants which the Chief Operator determines may cause problems at the POTW. Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: subcommittee Deleted: of the City of Ithaca's Board of Public Works which is Deleted: subcommittee October 4, 2006 12 (41) Suspended Solids. The total suspended matter that floats on the surface of, or is suspended in, water, wastewater or other liquids, and which is removable by laboratory filtering in accordance with the current Standard Methods. (42) Toxic Pollutant. Any pollutant or combination of pollutants listed as toxic in regulations promulgated by EPA under section 307(a) of the Act, or other Acts, or in regulations promulgated under New York State law. (43) User. Any Domestic Source or Industrial User which discharges wastewater to the POTW. (44) Wastewater. The liquid and water-carried industrial, non-domestic or domestic wastes, including sewage, industrial waste, other wastes, or any combination thereof, from dwellings, commercial buildings, industrial facilities, and institutions, together with any groundwater, surface water, and storm water that may be present, whether treated or untreated, which is discharged into the POTW. (45) Wastewater Discharge Permit or Permit. The document issued to Industrial Users by the Chief Operator for the discharge of wastewater, as set forth in Section 264-15 of this chapter. (46) Waters of the State. All streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, watercourses, waterways, wells, springs, reservoirs, aquifers, irrigation systems, drainage systems, and all other bodies or accumulations of water, surface or underground, natural or artificial, public or private, which are contained within, flow through, border upon, or are within the jurisdiction of the State. B. Word Usage. "Shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive. ARTICLE II, Regulation of Wastewater Discharges §264-4. General Discharge Prohibitions A. No User may introduce into the POTW any pollutant(s) which cause Pass Through or Interference. These general prohibitions and the specific prohibitions in Section 264-5 of this chapter apply to each User introducing pollutants into the POTW whether or not the User is subject to National Pretreatment Standards or any other national, state, or local Pretreatment Requirements. B. An Industrial User shall have an affirmative defense in any action brought against it alleging Pass Through or Interference where the Industrial User can demonstrate that it did not know or have reason to know that its discharge, alone or in conjunction with discharges from other sources, would cause Pass Through or Interference, and either (1) the Industrial User was in compliance with the local limits for each pollutant that caused Pass Through or Interference directly prior to and during the Pass Through or Interference, or (2) if no local limits for the pollutant(s) which caused Pass Through or Interference have been developed, the Industrial User's discharge directly prior to and during the Pass Through or Interference did not change substantially in nature or constituents from the User's prior discharge activity when the POTW was regularly in compliance with its SPDES permit requirements and applicable requirements for sewage sludge use or disposal. §264-5. Specific Discharge Prohibitions In addition to the provisions of Section 264-4 above, the following discharges to the POTW by any User are specifically prohibited: (A) Storm and surface waters, roof runoff, and subsurface drainage. These discharges shall be made only to such sewers as are specifically designated by the Chief Operator as storm sewers, or directly to waters of the State, as may be permitted under an applicable SPDES permit. All existing discharges to the POTW of such waters October 4, 2006 13 shall be disconnected within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the effective date of this law. Groundwater and noncontact cooling water may be discharged to the POTW only if so authorized by a Wastewater Discharge Permit, and only if the Chief Operator determines that sufficient hydraulic reserve capacity exists at the POTW to accommodate such discharges. Authorization for such discharges may be revoked by the Chief Operator in his discretion at any time if he or she determines that the POTW's reserve capacity is no longer sufficient or is needed for other potential discharges, or that such discharge is detrimental in any way to the POTW. Existing unpermitted discharges of groundwater and noncontact cooling water shall be disconnected within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the effective date of this law. (B) Any liquids, solids, or gases which by reason of their nature or quantity are, or may be, sufficient either alone or by interaction with other substances to cause a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW or be injurious in any other way to the POTW, its operation, or the health or safety of the POTW's workers. At no time shall a user discharge a waste stream with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140 degrees Fahrenheit or 60 degrees Centigrade using the test methods specified in 40 C.F.R. §261.21. Unless specifically authorized to do so by permit, no User shall discharge any quantity of the following materials: gasoline, kerosene, naphtha, benzene, toluene, xylene, fuel oil, ethers, ketones, aldehydes, chlorates, perchlorates, bromates, carbides, hydrides and sulfides, dry cleaning fluids, and any other substance which the Chief Operator, DEC, or the EPA has notified the User is a fire hazard or explosive hazard to the system. The preceding list of substances is not a comprehensive list of prohibited substances. If a substance meets the general criteria set out in the first two sentences of this subparagraph, it is prohibited. (C) Solid or viscous substances in quantities or of such size capable of causing obstruction to the flow in sewers or other interference with the proper operation of the POTW including, but not limited to: grease, garbage with particles greater than one-half inch (1/2") in any dimension, animal guts or tissues, paunch manure, bones, hair, hides or fleshings, entrails, whole blood, feathers, ashes, cinders, sand, spent lime, stone or marble dust, metal, glass, straw, shavings, grass clippings, rags, spent grains, spent hops, waste paper, wood, plastics, rubber, tar, asphalt residues, residues from refining or processing of fuel or lubricating oil, mud, or glass grinding or polishing wastes. (D) Wastewater having a pH less than 5.5 standard units, or greater than 11.0 standard units, or wastewater having any other corrosive or caustic property capable of causing damage or hazard to structures, equipment, and/or personnel at the POTW. Wastewater having a pH greater than 9.5 standard units, but in no case greater than 11.0 standard units, may be discharged to the POTW only if so authorized by a Wastewater Discharge Permit, and only if the Chief Operator determines that the wastewater will not pose a hazard to or harm the POTW or treatment plant workers, will not cause Pass Through or Interference, and will not raise the costs of operating the POTW. (E) Wastewater containing pollutants in sufficient quantity or concentration to cause the discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts from the POTW into its receiving waters, or to exceed the limitations set forth in a National Pretreatment Standard, in a Pretreatment Requirement, including the pollutant limitations referenced herein at Section 264-6, or in a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued pursuant to this law. (F) Any pollutants which, either singly or by interaction with other wastes, result in the presence of toxic gases, vapors, or fumes within the POTW in a quantity that may cause POTW worker health and safety problems, or which create a public nuisance, or which create conditions sufficient to prevent entry into the sewers or other portions of the POTW for maintenance and repair. (G) Any substance which may cause the POTW's effluent or other product of the POTW such as residues, sludges, or scums, to be unsuitable for disposal in any manner permitted by law or for reclamation and reuse, or to interfere with the reclamation process. In no case shall a substance discharged to the POTW cause the POTW to be in noncompliance with sludge use or disposal criteria, guidelines, or October 4, 2006 14 regulations developed under Section 405 of the Act; or with any criteria, guidelines, or regulations affecting sludge use or disposal developed pursuant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, the Clean Air Act, or state criteria applicable to the sludge management method being used. (H) Any pollutants, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.) released in a Discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which will cause Interference with the POTW. (I) Any wastewater with objectionable color not removed in the treatment process1 such as, but not limited to, dye wastes and vegetable tanning solutions. (J) Heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW resulting in Interference, but in no case heat in such quantities that the temperature at the POTW Treatment Plant exceeds 40C (104F). (K) Any wastewater containing any radioactive wastes or isotopes of such half-life or concentration as may exceed limits necessary to comply with applicable state or federal regulations. (L) Any sludges or deposited solids resulting from an industrial pretreatment process. Sludges from food processing pretreatment processes may be discharged only if specifically allowed by permit. (M) Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in amounts that will cause Interference or Pass Through. (N) Any trucked or hauled pollutants, except at discharge points designated by the POTW. § 264-6. Specific Pollutant Limitations In addition to the discharge prohibitions set forth in sections 264-4 and 264-5 above, the POTW has developed specific discharge limitations, hereafter referred to as local limits, to prevent Pass Through and Interference and to protect the safety and health of POTW workers. In no case shall a User's discharge to the POTW violate the local limits, as they may be amended from time to time, and which are set forth in separate laws adopted by the municipalities. §264-7. Categorical Pretreatment Standards Categorical Pretreatment Standards which EPA has promulgated for specific industrial subcategories are hereby incorporated by reference. Where Categorical Pretreatment Standards are more stringent than the local limits, Industrial Users in those subcategories shall comply with the more stringent Categorical Pretreatment Standards in accordance with the compliance timetables for each Categorical Pretreatment Standard mandated by EPA. If EPA modifies an existing Categorical Pretreatment Standard or promulgates a new Categorical Pretreatment Standard for a particular industrial subcategory, and that modified or new Categorical Pretreatment Standard contains limitations more stringent than the local limits then upon its effective date the modified or new Categorical Pretreatment Standard shall immediately supersede, for Industrial Users in that subcategory, the local limits. The Chief Operator shall notify all affected Industrial Users of the applicable requirements under the Act, as well as of all requirements imposed by subtitles C and D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. §264-8. Modification of Categorical Pretreatment Standards A. Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 403.7, where the POTW achieves consistent removal of pollutants limited by a Categorical Pretreatment Standard, the Special Joint Committee may apply to the Approval Authority for modification of the discharge limits for a specific pollutant covered in the relevant Categorical Pretreatment Standard in order to reflect the POTW's ability to remove said pollutant. The Special Joint Committee may modify pollutant discharge limits contained in a Categorical Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: Subcommittee October 4, 2006 15 Pretreatment Standard only if the requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 403.7 are fulfilled and prior approval from the Approval Authority is obtained. B. Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 403.13, an Industrial User may apply to the Approval Authority for a fundamentally different factors variance from an applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard if the factors relating to its discharge are fundamentally different from the factors considered by EPA in establishing the Standard. Such a variance can not be granted without the approval of the Approval Authority. §264-9. State Requirements Requirements and limitations on discharges set by the DEC shall apply in any case where they are more stringent than federal requirements and limitations or local limits. §264-10. Right of Revision The municipalities reserve the right to establish by amendment to this or other local laws more stringent limitations or requirements on discharges to the POTW if deemed necessary to comply with the objectives presented in Section 264-1(A) of this chapter. The Chief Operator also has the right to require a specific Industrial User to comply with more stringent limitations or requirements than appear in this or other laws if deemed necessary to comply with the objectives presented in Section 264-1(A) of this chapter. No variances from the limitations or requirements in this or other local laws will be allowed without approval of both the Chief Operator and the Approval Authority. §264-11. Dilution Prohibited in Absence of Treatment Except where expressly authorized to do so by an applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement, no Industrial User shall ever increase the use of process water or in any other way attempt to dilute a discharge as a partial or complete substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with either a Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement. §264-12. Alternative Discharge Limits A. Where appropriate, the Chief Operator may impose mass limitations, concentration limitations, or both types of limitations on an Industrial User's discharge. Mass limitations shall not be less stringent than the equivalent concentration-based limitations set forth in any applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement. B. Where wastewater from a process regulated by a Categorical Pretreatment Standard is mixed prior to treatment with wastewaters other than those generated by the regulated process, the Chief Operator may fix alternative discharge limits applicable to the mixed effluent. Such alternative discharge limits shall be derived by using the combined waste stream formula as specified in 40 C.F.R. § 403.6(e). §264-13. Pretreatment Each Industrial User shall provide necessary wastewater treatment as required to comply with the requirements of this law, including all National Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements. Any facilities required to pretreat wastewater to a level which will achieve compliance with this law shall be provided, operated, and maintained at the User's expense. Detailed plans showing the pretreatment facilities and operating procedures shall be submitted to the Chief Operator for review, and shall be acceptable to the Chief Operator before construction of the facility. The review of such plans and operating procedures will in no way relieve the User from the responsibility of modifying the facility as necessary to produce an effluent which complies with the provisions of this chapter, including compliance with Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements. Any subsequent changes in the pretreatment facilities or method of operation shall be reported to and be acceptable to the Chief Operator prior to the October 4, 2006 16 User's initiation of such changes. Bypasses are prohibited, except as allowed by 40 C.F.R. § 403.17. §264-14. Accidental Discharges A. Plans and Procedures. All permitted Industrial Users, and all other Industrial Users which store or use on-site any substance which, if discarded, would be considered hazardous waste, as that term is defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and its regulations, shall undertake measures to prevent the accidental discharge to the POTW of prohibited materials or other substances regulated by this law. Facilities to prevent the accidental discharge of prohibited materials and other substances shall be provided and maintained at the Industrial User's own expense. Detailed plans showing facilities and operating procedures to provide this protection shall be submitted to the Chief Operator for review, and shall be approved by the Chief Operator before construction of the facility. All existing Industrial Users required to undertake accidental discharge prevention measures shall submit such a plan within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this chapter. No Industrial User which commences discharging into the POTW after the effective date of this law and required to submit such a plan shall be permitted to introduce pollutants into the system until accidental discharge procedures have been approved by the Chief Operator. Review and approval of such plans and operating procedures shall not relieve the Industrial User of the responsibility to modify the User's facility as necessary to meet the requirements of this chapter. B. Telephone Notice. In the case of an accidental discharge by any Industrial User, it is the responsibility of the Industrial User to telephone immediately and notify the Chief Operator of the incident. The notification shall include location of discharge, type of waste, concentration and volume of pollutants and wastewater, and any and all corrective actions taken by the User. C. Written Notice. Within five (5) days following an accidental discharge, the Industrial User shall submit to the Chief Operator a detailed written report describing the cause of the discharge and the measures which have been and shall be taken by the User to prevent similar future occurrences. Such notification shall not relieve the Industrial User of any expense, loss, damage, or other liability which may be incurred as a result of damage to the POTW, fish kills, or any other damage to persons, animals, aquatic life, property, or natural resources; nor shall such notification relieve the Industrial User of any fines, civil penalties, or other liability which may be imposed by this chapter or other applicable law. D. Notice to Employees. A notice shall be permanently posted on the Industrial User's bulletin board or other prominent place advising employees whom to call in the event of an accidental discharge. Employers shall ensure that all employees who may cause or allow such a discharge to occur, or who may know or have reason to know thereof, are advised of the emergency notification procedures. ARTICLE III, Wastewater Discharge Permits §264-15. Permit Required All significant Industrial Users, and all other Industrial Users which discharge any conventional pollutants in excess of the surcharge threshold levels described in Section 264-47 below, shall obtain and maintain current Wastewater Discharge Permits. All Industrial Users whose discharges are of a type specifically identified in this law as requiring a Wastewater Discharge Permit (such as, for example, a discharge with a pH greater than 9.0 standard units, or a discharge of noncontact cooling water) shall also obtain and maintain current Permits. Existing Industrial Users which are required to but do not have a current Wastewater Discharge Permit as of the effective date of this chapter shall apply to the Chief Operator for such a Permit within thirty (30) days after the effective date of this law. Existing Industrial Users which are not required as of the effective date of this law to obtain such a Permit, but which thereafter become required to obtain such a Permit, shall file an application for said Wastewater Discharge Permit with the Chief Operator within thirty (30) days of notification by the Chief Operator that the User must obtain a Permit. All Industrial Users which are required to have such a October 4, 2006 17 Permit and which propose to begin discharging wastewater to the POTW after the effective date of this law shall obtain a Wastewater Discharge Permit before commencing such a discharge. An application for said Wastewater Discharge Permit shall be filed with the Chief Operator at least sixty (60) days prior to the proposed connection or discharge to the Facility. The requirement to obtain said Industrial Wastewater Permits shall be in addition to the requirements to obtain sewer connection or other permits which may be set forth in other laws. §264-16. Permit Application Requirements A. To obtain a new Wastewater Discharge Permit, or to renew an expiring Permit, the Industrial User shall complete and file with the Chief Operator an application in the form prescribed by the Chief Operator, and accompanied by the appropriate fee as indicated on the application. In support of the application for a Wastewater Discharge Permit, the Chief Operator may require the Industrial User to submit, in units and terms appropriate for evaluation, the following information: (1) Name, address, and location of the User (if different from the address); (2) SIC number with at least three (3) digits according to the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, Bureau of the Budget, 1972, as amended; (3) Wastewater constituents and characteristics, including, but not limited to, the concentrations of pollutants referenced in Sections 264-6 and 264-47 of this chapter, as determined by a New York Department of Health-certified analytical laboratory; sampling and analysis shall be performed in accordance with procedures established by the EPA pursuant to Section 304(h) of the Act and contained in 40 C.F.R. Part 136, as amended, and results of said sampling and analysis, identifying the nature and concentration of regulated pollutants contained in each regulated discharge stream, shall be attached as Exhibits to the application; (4) Time and duration of discharges; (5) Average daily and maximum daily wastewater flow rates, identified separately by regulated discharge streams, and including daily, monthly, and seasonal variations, if any; (6) Site plans, floor plans, mechanical and plumbing plans, and details to show all sewers, sewer connections, and appurtenances by size, location, and elevation; (7) Description of activities, facilities, and plant processes on the premises, including all materials which are or could be discharged; (8) Where known, the nature and both daily maximum and average concentrations of any pollutants in the discharge which are limited by any applicable National Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, and a statement regarding whether or not any applicable Pretreatment Requirement or Pretreatment Standard is being met on a consistent basis and, if not, whether additional Operation and Maintenance (O&M) and/or additional pretreatment is required for the Industrial User to meet the applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement; (9) If additional pretreatment and/or O&M will be required to meet the above- described Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, the shortest schedule by which the Industrial User will provide such additional pretreatment or O&M, which shall not be later than the compliance date established for the applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement; The following conditions shall apply to this schedule: (a) The schedule shall contain increments of progress in the form of dates for the commencement and completion of major events leading to the construction and operation of additional pretreatment required for the Industrial User to October 4, 2006 18 meet the applicable Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement (e.g., hiring an engineer, completing preliminary plans, completing final plans, executing contract for major components, commencing construction, completing construction, attaining and maintaining compliance, etc.). (b) No increment referred to in Paragraph 1 shall exceed nine (9) months. (c) Not later than fourteen (14) days following each date in the schedule and the final date for compliance, the Industrial User shall submit a progress report to the Chief Operator including, at a minimum, whether or not it complied with the increment of progress to be met on such date and, if not, the date on which it expects to comply with this increment of progress, the reason for delay, and the steps being taken by the Industrial User to return the construction to the schedule established. In no event shall more than nine (9) months elapse between such progress reports to the Chief Operator. (10) Each product produced by the User, if any, by type, amount, process or processes and rate of production; (11) Type and amount of raw materials processed by the User (average and maximum per day); (12) Number and type of User's employees, User's hours of operation and proposed or actual hours of operation of pretreatment system; (13) Completed New York State Industrial Chemical Survey; (14) Name, title, and telephone number of the Authorized Representative of the Industrial User; (15) A list of any environmental control permits held by or for the User; (16) Any other information as may be deemed by the Chief Operator to be necessary to evaluate the permit application. B. The Chief Operator shall evaluate the data furnished by the Industrial User and may require additional information. After evaluation and acceptance of the data furnished, the Chief Operator may issue a Wastewater Discharge Permit subject to terms and conditions provided herein. §264-17. Permit Conditions A. Wastewater Discharge Permits shall be expressly subject to all provisions of this chapter and all other applicable laws and regulations established by the municipalities or Special Joint Committee. B. In addition, Wastewater Discharge Permits may contain the following: (1) The unit charge or schedule of User charges and fees for the wastewater to be discharged to the POTW; (2) Limits on average and maximum wastewater constituents and characteristics, based on applicable National Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements. (3) Limits on average and maximum rate and time of discharge, and requirements for flow measurement, regulation, and equalization; (4) Requirements for installation and maintenance of pretreatment facilities and of inspection and sampling facilities; Deleted: Subcommittee October 4, 2006 19 (5) Specifications for monitoring programs which may include specification of pollutants to be monitored, sampling locations, frequency of sampling, number, types and standards for tests and reporting schedules; (6) Compliance schedules for the installation of pretreatment equipment and performance of O&M (but in no event may a compliance deadline in a Permit be later than a National Pretreatment Standard compliance deadline); (7) Requirements for submission of reports, including technical reports and discharge reports; (8) Requirements for maintenance and retention of records relating to wastewater discharges and pretreatment equipment operation and maintenance records for a minimum of three (3) years, and affording the Chief Operator access thereto for inspection and copying; (9) Requirements for advance notification to the Chief Operator of any change in operations, and for advance approval by the Chief Operator of any new introduction of wastewater constituents or any substantial change in the volume or character of the wastewater constituents being introduced into the wastewater disposal system; (10) Requirements for immediate notification to the Chief Operator of all discharges that could cause problems to the POTW, including any slug discharges and any other accidental discharges; (11) A statement of the Chief Operator's right to enter Industrial Users' premises and inspect their facilities and operations; (12) A statement of Permit duration in accordance with §264-19 hereof, and in no case more than five (5) years; (13) A statement of Permit transferability in accordance with§264-20 hereof; (14) A statement of applicable civil and criminal penalties for violation of Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements, and of any applicable compliance schedule; (15) Other conditions as deemed appropriate by the Chief Operator to ensure compliance with this law and the Act. §264-18. Permit Modifications A. Wastewater Discharge Permits may be modified by the Chief Operator upon thirty (30) days notice to the permittee. Modifications may be made for the following, or other similar, reasons: (1) Promulgation of or changes to a Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Requirement; (2) Changes in processes used by the permittee, or changes in discharge volume or character; (3) Changes in design or capability of any part of the POTW; (4) Changes to the POTW's SPDES permit; and (5) Discovery that the permitted discharge causes or contributes to Pass Through or Interference at the POTW or poses a risk to POTW worker health or safety. B. Any modifications or amendments to the Wastewater Discharge Permit which include more stringent limitations than those contained in the prior Permit may include a reasonable time schedule for compliance therewith, but no compliance deadline therein October 4, 2006 20 shall be later than the deadline for compliance with an applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard. §264-19. Duration of Permits Wastewater Discharge Permits shall be issued for a specified time period not to exceed five (5) years. A Wastewater Discharge Permit may be issued for a period less than a year or may be stated to expire on a specific date. An Industrial User shall apply for Wastewater Discharge Permit reissuance, on a form prescribed by the Chief Operator, at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the User's existing Permit. If a timely and complete application is made for Permit reissuance, and the Permit is not reissued before the existing Permit expires, then the terms of the User's existing Permit shall remain in effect after its expiration date until the Permit is reissued. §264-20. Permit Transfer Wastewater Discharge Permits are issued to a specific Industrial User for a specific operation. A Wastewater Discharge Permit shall not be reassigned, transferred, or sold to a new owner, new User, or be applicable to different premises or to a new or changed operation without the approval of the Chief Operator, which must be obtained in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed transfer date. No such approval shall be granted absent submission to the Chief Operator of a written agreement between the existing and proposed new permittee which sets forth the date for and terms of the transfer of the Wastewater Discharge Permit and all responsibilities, obligations, and liabilities thereunder. Any succeeding owner or User shall comply with the terms and conditions of the existing Wastewater Discharge Permit and all of the terms and requirements of this law. §264-21. Permit Decisions A. The Chief Operator shall provide all interested persons with notice of decisions concerning the issuance, modification, or transfer of Wastewater Discharge Permits. Any person, including the Industrial User to whom the Wastewater Discharge Permit was issued, may petition the Special Joint Committee for review of the Wastewater Discharge Permit issuance, modification, or transfer decision within twenty (20) days of the date on which the decision was issued. Failure to submit a timely petition for review shall be deemed to be a waiver of Wastewater Discharge Permit review, and the Chief Operator's decision shall become final. B. A petition for review must set forth the Wastewater Discharge Permit provisions or decision objected to, the reasons for the objection, and the alternative provisions, if any, which the petitioner seeks to have included in the Wastewater Discharge Permit. C. The effectiveness of a Wastewater Discharge Permit shall not be stayed pending the Special Joint Committee's review of the petition. The Special Joint Committee's decision concerning the petition for review shall constitute a decision of the municipalities and shall be a final administrative action. ARTICLE IV, Reporting Requirements, Monitoring and Inspections §264-22. Reporting Requirements All Industrial Users must submit the reports required by 40 C.F.R. Part 403 or the Chief Operator. The Chief Operator shall specify the content of such reports to the Industrial Users. These reports include the following: A. Baseline monitoring reports, to be submitted by existing Industrial Users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards within one hundred eighty (180) days after the effective date of the Categorical Pretreatment Standard. These reports are to be submitted by New Sources and sources that become Industrial Users after the promulgation of an applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard, at least ninety (90) days prior to commencement of discharge. These reports shall contain the information required in 40 C.F.R. § 403.12(b), including a statement whether Pretreatment Standards are being met on a consistent basis, and, if not, whether additional O&M Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: Subcommittee October 4, 2006 21 and/or additional pretreatment is required for the Industrial User to meet the Pretreatment Standards and Requirements. This statement shall be reviewed by an Authorized Representative of the Industrial User and certified to by a qualified professional. B. Report on compliance with Categorical Pretreatment Standards, to be submitted by existing sources within ninety (90) days following the date for final compliance with an applicable Categorical Pretreatment Standard, or in the case of a New Source, following commencement of the introduction of wastewater into the POTW. This report shall contain the information required in 40 C.F.R. § 403.12(d), including the nature and concentration of all pollutants in the discharge from each regulated process, and the average and maximum daily flow for these process streams. This report further shall state whether Pretreatment Standards are being met on a consistent basis, and, if not, whether additional O&M and/or additional pretreatment is required for the Industrial User to meet the Pretreatment Standards and Requirements. This statement shall be reviewed by an Authorized Representative of the Industrial User and certified to by a qualified professional. C. Periodic reports on continued compliance, to be submitted by all permitted Industrial Users subject to Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements after the compliance date of such Standard or Pretreatment Requirement, or, in the case of a New Source, after commencement of the discharge into the POTW. All such Industrial Users shall submit such reports to the Chief Operator during the months of June and December, unless required more frequently or at different times in the Pretreatment Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, or by the Wastewater Discharge Permit. All Industrial Users must include in such reports all sampling results for pollutants limited by a Pretreatment Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, or Wastewater Discharge Permit, if the sampling and analyses were performed in accordance with § 264-24 of this law, even if the sampling was performed more frequently than required by the Pretreatment Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, or Wastewater Discharge Permit. In addition, such reports shall include a record of measured or estimated average and maximum daily flows for the reporting period. D. Compliance Schedule Reports, to be submitted by all Industrial Users required to submit compliance schedules or who have compliance schedules imposed on them by the Chief Operator. E. Notification in advance of any substantial change in the volume or character of pollutants in an Industrial User's discharge, including the listed or characteristic hazardous wastes for which the Industrial User has submitted initial notification pursuant to §264-22(K) of this chapter, to be submitted by all Industrial Users. No Industrial User shall introduce new wastewater constituents or substantially change the volume or character of its wastewater constituents without such advance notification and advance written approval of the Chief Operator. F. Notification of change in production level, to be submitted by Industrial users operating under a permit incorporating equivalent mass or concentration limits calculated from a production based standard. These notifications shall be submitted to the Chief Operator within two (2) business days after the Industrial User has a reasonable basis to know that the production level will significantly change within the next calendar month. G. Notification of discharges that could cause potential problems to the POTW, including slug loadings and accidental discharges, to be submitted by all Industrial Users to the POTW immediately when the slug loading or discharge containing the potential problem occurs. If the immediate notification is oral, a written notice specifying the nature and cause of the discharge, and steps taken to eliminate the cause, must be submitted to the POTW within five (5) days. H. Notification of violation, as described in §264-24 below. I. Upset notifications, to be submitted by Industrial Users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards. Such an Industrial User may avail itself of the upset provisions of 40 C.F.R. § 403.16 only where there is an exceptional incident in which there is October 4, 2006 22 unintentional and temporary noncompliance with the Categorical Pretreatment Standard because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the Industrial User. The upset notification must be submitted to the Chief Operator within twenty-four (24) hours of the Industrial User's becoming aware of the upset (if this information is provided orally, a written submission must be provided within five (5) days), and the Industrial User must comply with all requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 403.16. J. Bypass notification, to be provided by all Industrial Users in advance of the bypass, if possible, or within twenty-four (24) hours from the time the Industrial User becomes aware of the bypass, if the bypass is unanticipated. The Industrial User must further comply with all of the requirements regarding bypass set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 403.17. K. Notification of hazardous waste discharge: (i) (a) All Industrial Users shall notify the Chief Operator, the EPA Regional Waste Management Division Director, and the Director of DEC's Division of Hazardous Substance Regulation in writing of any discharge into the POTW of a substance which, if otherwise disposed of, would be a hazardous waste under 40 C.F.R. Part 261. Such notification shall include the name of the hazardous waste as set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 261, the EPA hazardous waste number, and the type of discharge (continuous, batch, or other). If the Industrial User discharges more than 100 kilograms of such waste per calendar month to the POTW, the notification shall also contain the following information to the extent such information is known and readily available to the Industrial User: an identification of the hazardous constituents contained in the wastes, an estimation of the mass and concentration of such constituents in the wastestream discharged during that calendar month, and an estimation of the mass of constituents in the wastestream expected to be discharged during the following twelve months. (b) All existing Industrial Users shall have filed such notifications by February 19, 1991. All Industrial Users who commence discharging after August 23, 1990, shall file the notification no later than one hundred eighty (180) days after the discharge of the listed or characteristic hazardous waste. Any notification under this section need be submitted only once for each hazardous waste discharged. However, all Industrial Users must notify the Chief Operator in advance, in accordance with §264-22(E) of this chapter, of any change in their wastewater discharges. The notification requirement set forth herein does not apply to any pollutants already reported under the self-monitoring requirements set forth in Sections 264-22(A), (B), and (C) above. (ii) Industrial Users are exempt from the requirements of Section 264-22(K)(i) during a calendar month in which they discharge no more than fifteen (15) kilograms of hazardous wastes, unless the wastes are acute hazardous wastes as specified in 40 C.F.R. § 261.30(d) and 261.33(e). Discharge of more than fifteen (15) kilograms of non- acute hazardous wastes in a calendar month, or of any quantity of acute hazardous wastes as specified in 40 C.F.R. § 261.30(d) and 261.33(e), requires a one time notification. Subsequent months during which the Industrial User discharges more than such quantities of any hazardous waste do not require additional notification. (iii) In the case of any new regulations under Section 3001 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act identifying additional characteristics of hazardous waste or listing any additional substance as a hazardous waste, the Industrial User must notify the Chief Operator, the EPA Regional Waste Management Waste Division Director, and the Director of DEC's Division of Hazardous Substance Regulation of the Discharge of such substance within ninety (90) days of the effective date of such regulations. (iv) In the case of any notification made under this Section, the Industrial User shall certify that it has a program in place to reduce the volume and toxicity of hazardous wastes generated to the degree it has determined to be economically practical. 264-23. Signatory Requirements All reports required to be submitted to the Chief Operator shall include the following certification statement: October 4, 2006 23 "I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations." This certification statement shall be signed by an Authorized Representative of the Industrial User. 264-24. Monitoring and Analysis A. If the Industrial User's sampling indicates a violation, the User shall notify the Chief Operator within twenty-four (24) hours of becoming aware of such violation. The User shall also repeat the sampling and analysis and submit the results of the repeat analysis to the Chief Operator within thirty (30) days after becoming aware of the violation. The Industrial User is not required to resample, however, if the Chief Operator performs sampling at the Industrial User's facility at a frequency of at least once per month, or if the Chief Operator performs sampling at the Industrial User's facility between the time when the Industrial User performs its initial sampling and the time when said User receives the results of the sampling. B. The frequency and location of monitoring shall be prescribed in the Wastewater Discharge Permit and shall not be less frequent than prescribed in Section 264-22(C). At the discretion of the Chief Operator, the required monitoring and analysis may be performed by the POTW, in lieu of the Industrial User, in which event the Industrial User is not required to submit the report or compliance certification required therein. C. All analyses shall be performed in accordance with procedures established by the EPA pursuant to section 304(h) of the Act and contained in 40 C.F.R. Part 136 and amendments thereto, or with any other test procedures approved by the EPA. Sampling shall be performed in accordance with the techniques approved by the EPA and shall be performed in such a manner and at such a time that the resulting analytical data is representative of conditions occurring during the reporting period. Samples of the Industrial User's wastewater discharges shall be collected at each point of discharge to the POTW sewerage system. Where 40 C.F.R. Part 136 does not include sampling or analytical techniques for the pollutants in question, or where the EPA determines that the Part 136 sampling and analytical techniques are inappropriate for the pollutant in question, sampling and analyses shall be performed using validated analytical methods or any other sampling and analytical procedures, including procedures suggested by the Chief Operator or other parties, approved by the EPA. 264-25. Recordkeeping Requirements A. All Industrial Users shall maintain records of all information resulting from any monitoring activities of wastewater discharges. Such records shall include for all samples: (i) The date, exact place, method, and time of sampling and the names of the person or persons taking the samples; (ii) The dates analyses were performed; (iii) Who performed the analyses; (iv) The analytical techniques/methods used; and (v) The results of such analyses. All Industrial Users shall also maintain records regarding pretreatment equipment operation and maintenance. October 4, 2006 24 B. All Industrial Users shall keep copies of all such records and reports of operation and maintenance, and monitoring activities and results, for a minimum of three (3) years. The records and reports of monitoring activities and results shall be maintained regardless of whether such monitoring activities are required by this law or the Act. Each Industrial User shall make all records required to be maintained available for inspection and copying by EPA, DEC, and the Chief Operator. This period of retention shall be extended during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the Industrial User or the POTW or when requested by EPA, DEC, or the Chief Operator. 264-26. Monitoring Facilities The Chief Operator may require any Industrial User to provide, operate and maintain, at the Industrial User's own expense, sampling, monitoring and/or metering facilities at the point or points in the facility selected by the Chief Operator to allow inspection, sampling, and flow measurement of discharges to the sewerage system and/or internal piping systems. Sampling and monitoring facilities may be located as approved by the Chief Operator to allow direct access by POTW personnel without the necessity of notice to the Industrial User. There shall be ample room in or near such sampling manhole or facility to allow accurate sampling and preparation of samples for analysis. The sampling and monitoring facilities shall be provided in accordance with the Chief Operator's requirements and all applicable local construction standards and specifications. Construction shall be completed within ninety (90) days following written notification to the Industrial User by the Chief Operator that such facilities must be built. 264-27. Inspection and Sampling A. The Chief Operator may inspect the facilities of any Industrial User to ascertain whether the purposes and requirements of this law and the Act are being met. Persons or occupants of premises where wastewater is created or discharged, or where records pertaining to such discharges are kept, shall allow POTW representatives ready access at all times to all parts of the premises for the purposes of inspection, sampling, records examination and copying, or the performance of any of their other duties. The Chief Operator, EPA, and DEC shall have the right to set up without notice on the User's property such devices as are necessary to conduct sampling, inspection, compliance monitoring, metering operations, and records copying. Where a User has security measures in force which would require proper identification and clearance before entry into its premises, the User shall make necessary arrangements with its security guards so that upon presentation of suitable identification, personnel from the POTW, EPA, and DEC, or their designated agents, will be permitted to enter, without delay, for the purposes of performing their specific responsibilities. B. Where so requested in advance by an Industrial User, and when taking a sample of industrial wastewater, the POTW representative shall gather sufficient volume of sample when practicable so that the sample can be split into two equal volumes. One of the volumes shall be given to the Industrial User, and the other shall be retained by the POTW representative for analysis. 264-28. Slug Control Plans At least once every two years, the Chief Operator shall evaluate whether each Significant Industrial User needs a plan to control slug discharges. The Significant Industrial User shall comply with the provisions of any such slug control plan which the Chief Operator determines to be necessary, including, but not limited to: (A) A description of discharge practices, including non-routine batch discharges; (B) A description of stored chemicals; (C) Procedures for immediately notifying the POTW of slug discharges, including any discharge that would violate a prohibition under 40 C.F.R. § 403.5(b), with procedures for follow-up written notification within five (5) days; and October 4, 2006 25 (D) If necessary, procedures to prevent adverse impact from accidental spills, including those procedures set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(2)(v)(D). 264-29. Confidential Information A. In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 403.14, any information and data concerning a User which is contained in or obtained from reports, questionnaires, Permit applications, Permits, monitoring programs, and inspections shall be available to the public and governmental agencies without restriction, unless the User specifically claims, and is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the public official with custody of the records, that the release of such information would divulge information, processes or methods of production entitled to protection as trade secrets of the User. Any such claim of confidentiality must be asserted at the time of submission in the manner prescribed on the application form or instructions or by stamping or writing the words "CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION" on each page containing such information. If no claim is made, such public official may make the information available to the public without further notice. B. Notwithstanding any claim of confidentiality, any information and data provided to the Chief Operator which is effluent data, as defined at 40 C.F.R. § 2.302 (including, but not limited to, wastewater constituents and characteristics), shall be available to the public without restriction. All other information and data shall be available to the public at least to the extent provided by 40 C.F.R. § 2.302. C. Information determined by the public official with custody of the records to be confidential shall not be made available for inspection by the public, except as provided by 40 C.F.R. § 2.302, but shall be made available upon written request to governmental agencies for uses related to this law and the POTW's SPDES Permit. Information determined to be confidential shall be available for use by the State or any state agency, the municipalities, the Special Joint Committee, the POTW, or by the United States or EPA in criminal or civil judicial or administrative enforcement proceedings involving the User. ARTICLE V – HAULED WASTEWATER 264-30. Hauler and Generator Requirements A. No person shall discharge hauled wastewater (septage or industrial waste) into the POTW's Treatment Plant without a valid DEC permit issued under 6 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 364 and a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued by the POTW. Before discharging a load of hauled wastewater into the Treatment Plant, the hauler shall provide the POTW with a list of persons and facilities from which the hauler picked up wastewater for that load, a statement of the volume and nature of the wastewater, and any other information requested by the Chief Operator. B. The Chief Operator may require generators of hauled industrial waste located within or outside the municipalities to obtain a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued by the POTW and/or to enter into a contract with the POTW or its owners for the acceptance of the hauled industrial waste. Generators of hauled industrial waste must comply with all other requirements of this law. 264-31. Hauled Wastewater Discharge Requirements No person shall discharge into the POTW's Treatment Plant any hauled wastewater containing hazardous wastes. The Chief Operator has the discretion to refuse to accept any hauled wastewater load based on the type, concentration, or quantity of pollutants, or on the capability or capacity of the POTW to treat the wastewater. All hauled wastewater discharges must comply with all Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements. Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: - Deleted: SEPTAGE DISCHARGES Deleted: Septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage, Deleted: Septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage. Deleted: septage October 4, 2006 26 264-32. Dumping Location and Timing No person may discharge hauled wastewater to any locations except those on the POTW treatment plant site designated by the POTW as Hauled Wastewater Receiving Stations, or those locations off the treatment plant site at which the POTW has given the hauler specific permission to discharge. The Chief Operator also may restrict hauled wastewater discharges to certain times, to certain days of the week, or to certain seasons of the year. 264-33. Notification of Dumping Each discharge of hauled wastewater shall be made only with the approval of the Chief Operator. The wastewater hauler shall contact the POTW to obtain permission to discharge hauled wastewater containing materials other than sanitary sewage prior to delivering the wastewater load to the POTW. The Chief Operator may require inspection, sampling, and analysis of each load of hauled wastewater prior to the discharge of the load. Any costs associated with such inspection, sampling, and analysis shall be paid by the wastewater hauler. 264-34. Dumping Fees The POTW shall bill wastewater haulers and/or wastewater generators for dumping fees associated with the discharge of hauled wastewater, pursuant to a schedule of rates as set by the Special Joint Committee or municipalities. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unless and until Tompkins County conveys ownership of its Hauled Wastewater Receiving Station to the municipalities, the POTW shall bill Tompkins County for all discharges of septage and grease. All dumping fees shall include a fee for the cost of solids disposal. ARTICLE VI- ENFORCEMENT 264-35. Imminent Endangerment The Chief Operator may immediately halt or prevent any discharge of pollutants which reasonably appears to present an imminent endangerment to the health or welfare of persons. In the event that the Chief Operator determines that a discharge of pollutants reasonably appears to present an imminent endangerment to the health or welfare of persons, the Chief Operator shall provide informal (oral or written) notice of said determination to the User. Said User shall immediately stop or eliminate such discharge and shall submit written proof of the elimination of the discharge to the Chief Operator within forty-eight (48) hours of receipt of notice of the Chief Operator's determination. If said User fails voluntarily and immediately to halt such a discharge, the Chief Operator shall take such actions as he or she deems necessary to prevent or minimize endangerment to the health or welfare of persons. Such actions include, but are not limited to, seeking ex parte temporary injunctive relief, entry on private property to halt such discharge, blockage of a public sewer to halt such discharge, severance of the sewer connection, suspension of wastewater disposal service, suspension or revocation of a Wastewater Discharge Permit, and institution of a legal or special proceeding. After such discharge has been halted, the Chief Operator may take such other and further actions provided under this Section as may be necessary to ensure elimination of said discharge and compliance with the terms of this law and Wastewater Discharge Permits issued hereunder. If the User provides satisfactory written proof that it has eliminated the cause of the conditions creating the imminent endangerment, the Chief Operator may reinstate the Permit, restore the sewer connection and wastewater disposal service, and perform other activities to allow the User to commence discharging again. 264-36. Other Harmful Discharges The Chief Operator may also halt or prevent any discharge of pollutants which: (A) Presents or may present an endangerment to the environment; (B) Threatens to interfere with the operation of the POTW; or Deleted: septage Deleted: Septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: septage Deleted: The Special Joint Subcommittee shall bill Tompkins County for dumping fees associated with the discharge of septage from private sources, pursuant to a schedule¶ of rates as set by the Special Joint Subcommittee. The Chief Operator shall directly bill the relevant governmental entity for dumping fees associated with the discharge of septage from public entities. All dumping fees shall include a fee for the cost of solids¶ disposal. October 4, 2006 27 (C) Threatens to Pass Through the POTW. In the event of such a discharge, the Chief Operator must deliver a written notice to the User describing the problems posed by the discharge and offering the User an opportunity to respond. If the User does not respond in writing to the Chief Operator within twenty-four (24) hours after delivery of such written notice, then the Chief Operator may undertake such actions, including those described in Section 264-35, as he or she deems necessary to prevent or minimize the effects of such a discharge. If the Industrial User does respond in writing within twenty-four (24) hours, then no immediate suspension of service or of a Wastewater Discharge Permit shall occur, unless the Chief Operator reasonably believes that the User's discharge continues to present or may present an endangerment to the environment or threatens to cause Interference or Pass Through at the POTW. If the User thereafter provides satisfactory written proof that it has eliminated the cause of the conditions creating the harmful discharge, then the Chief Operator may perform activities to allow the User to commence discharging again. 264-37. Publication of List of Violators The Special Joint Committee shall annually publish in the largest local daily newspaper a list of the Industrial Users which, at any time during the previous twelve (12) months, were in significant noncompliance with applicable Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements. For purposes of this provision, an Industrial User is in significant noncompliance if its violation meets one or more of the criteria set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(2)(vii). 264-38. Compliance Orders The Chief Operator may issue compliance orders to Industrial Users not complying with any Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment Requirements, Wastewater Discharge Permits, or any other provisions of this law or the Act. Such orders may, among other things, direct said Industrial User to: (A) Comply immediately with Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment Requirements, Wastewater Discharge Permit provisions, this chapter, or the Act; (B) Comply with Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment Requirements, Wastewater Discharge Permit provisions, this law, or the Act in accordance with a time schedule set forth by the Chief Operator; (C) Increase the frequency of sampling and analysis of the Industrial User's wastewater; and/or (D) Undertake appropriate remedial or preventive action to prevent the possibility of violations in the future. The issuance of or compliance with an order under this section shall not relieve the Industrial User of liability for violations which occur before the order is issued or while the order is effective. 264-39. Suspension and Revocation of Permit A. This section shall govern the ability of the municipalities to suspend or revoke any Wastewater Discharge Permit to any Industrial User in all situations except those described in Sections 264-35 and 264-36 of this chapter regarding discharges which present imminent endangerment or which constitute harmful discharges. In all other situations, the municipality in which the Industrial User is located (or any of the municipalities, if the Industrial User is located outside the municipalities) may suspend or revoke a Wastewater Discharge Permit if it determines that a violation of any provision of the Permit, the Act, or this chapter exists. of the municipalities are named also have the power to suspend Users located outside the City Violations which may lead to such suspension or revocation include, but are not limited to, the following: (i) Failure of an Industrial User to accurately or timely submit the information required in any report; Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: Unless and until all Deleted: on the POTW's SPDES permit, the City of Ithaca shall Deleted: or revoke Wastewater Discharge Permits for all Industrial Deleted: of Ithaca. October 4, 2006 28 (ii) Failure of an Industrial User to allow access to its premises for the purposes of inspection, monitoring, sampling, or records examination or copying by the POTW, EPA, DEC, the United States, or the State; (iii) Failure of an Industrial User to report significant changes in its operations or the constituents, characteristics, or volume of its wastewater; or (iv) Violation of conditions of the Industrial User's permit. B. Before the relevant municipality may suspend or revoke an Industrial Wastewater Permit, it must give the Industrial User a hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth at Section 264-41 below. The final decision as to whether to suspend or revoke a Permit shall then be made by the municipality and shall be a final administrative action. 264-40. Notice of Violation A. Whenever the Chief Operator determines that any Industrial User has violated or is violating any Pretreatment Standard, Pretreatment Requirement, its Wastewater Discharge Permit, or any other provision of the Act or this chapter, he or she may serve upon such User, either personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested, a written Notice of Violation stating the nature of the violation. The Chief Operator may include with the Notice of Violation a Compliance Order directing the User to take specified actions to correct the violations. The Chief Operator or relevant municipality, as described in Section 264-39 above, may also include with the Notice of Violation an Order to Show Cause before the municipality as to why the User's Wastewater Discharge Permit should not be suspended or revoked, or why civil administrative penalties should not be assessed by the municipality against the Industrial User for said violations. Any such Show Cause hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of §264- 41 of this chapter. B. Within thirty (30) days of the date of the Notice, the User shall submit to the Chief Operator a written explanation of the reasons for the violations and a plan for the satisfactory correction thereof consistent with any Compliance Order which the Chief Operator may issue. C. Neither the issuance of a Notice of Violation, nor the submittal of or compliance with a plan of correction or Compliance Order, shall relieve the Industrial User of any liability for violations of any Pretreatment Standards, Pretreatment requirements, Wastewater Discharge Permit, the Act, or this chapter, nor is the issuance of such a written notice required before the municipalities may take any other type of enforcement action against the Industrial User. 264-41. Show Cause Hearing A. Notice Requirements. A notice from the Chief Operator or relevant municipality shall be served on the User specifying the time and place of a hearing to be held by the municipality regarding the violation, the proposed action to be taken, the reasons why the action is proposed, and directing the person to show cause before the municipality why the proposed action should not be taken. The notice of the hearing shall be served personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested, at least ten (10) days before the hearing. Service must be made on an Authorized Representative of the Industrial User. B. Conduct of the Hearing. The municipality shall conduct the hearing and take the evidence, or may designate any of its members, the Special Joint Committee, or the Chief Operator to: (i) Issue in the name of the municipality notices of hearings requesting the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of evidence relevant to any matter involved in such hearings; (ii) Take evidence; Deleted: Special Joint Subcommittee or Deleted: Subcommittee October 4, 2006 29 (iii) Transmit a report of the evidence and hearing, including transcripts and other evidence, together with recommendations to the municipality for action thereon; and (iv) Take any further necessary action as permitted by this chapter or applicable contracts or agreements. C. Testimony Recorded Under Oath. At any hearing held pursuant to this law, testimony taken must be under oath and recorded, either stenographically or by voice recording. The transcript, so recorded, will be made available to any member of the public or any party to the hearing upon payment of the usual charges therefor. D. Orders. After the municipality has reviewed the evidence, it may issue an order suspending or revoking an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit, or assessing civil administrative penalties, and the timing for their payment to the municipality, against the Industrial User. The issuance of such an Order shall be a final administrative action. E. Settlement. At any time after notice of the Show Cause hearing has been served and before the municipality has issued its order regarding permit suspension or revocation or penalty assessment, the municipality may enter into a Settlement Agreement with the Industrial User to resolve the issues raised by the Order to Show Cause. §264-42. Legal Action If any person violates the provisions of this law, the Act, any applicable Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, the conditions and requirements of any Wastewater Discharge Permit issued hereunder, or any order of the Chief Operator or municipality, counsel for the municipality where such person is located (or counsel for any of the municipalities, if such person is not located in any of the municipalities) may commence an action for appropriate legal and/or equitable relief, including, but not limited to, injunctive relief, penalties, and fines, in either state or federal court. The municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or POTW may also ask appropriate officials at the local, state, or federal levels to investigate and bring a criminal action against any Industrial User or person associated with an Industrial User believed to have violated the criminal provisions of this law, the Act, or any other law. ARTICLE VII- PENALTIES AND COSTS §264-43. Civil Penalties A. Any person who violates an Order of the Chief Operator or municipality, or fails to comply with any provisions of this law chapter, the Act, Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, or Wastewater Discharge Permits issued hereunder, may be assessed by the relevant municipality, as described in Section 264-39 above, a civil administrative penalty not to exceed Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) per day for each violation. Each day on which a violation shall occur or continue shall be deemed a separate and distinct offense. B. Any person who violates an Order of the Chief Operator or municipality, or fails to comply with any provisions of this law chapter, the Act, Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Requirements, or Wastewater Discharge Permits issued hereunder, may be assessed a civil judicial penalty not to exceed Five thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) per day for each violation. Each day on which a violation shall occur or continue shall be deemed a separate and distinct offense. C. All civil administrative or civil judicial penalties recovered hereunder shall be paid to the municipality which prosecuted the enforcement action. After reimbursing itself for the expenses of prosecution, the municipality shall pay the balance to the City of Ithaca Joint Activity Fund for POTW expenditures. In addition to the penalties provided herein, the municipalities may recover court costs, court reporters' fees, and other expenses of litigation, as well as recoverable attorneys' fees, in an appropriate legal Deleted: , Special Joint Subcommittee, Deleted: In addition, until and unless all of¶ the municipalities are named on the POTW's SPDES permit, the City Attorney for the¶ City of Ithaca shall have the authority to initiate such court proceedings against violators¶ located outside the City of Ithaca. Deleted: Subcommittee Deleted: , Special Joint¶ Subcommittee, Deleted: , Special Joint¶ Subcommittee, October 4, 2006 30 action against the person found to have violated this law or limitations or conditions of a Wastewater Discharge Permit issued thereunder. D. Nothing in this section shall preclude the municipalities from bringing an action against a User for liability incurred as a result of damage to the POTW, fish kills, or any other damage to persons, animals, aquatic life, property, or natural resources. §264-44. Criminal Fines and Imprisonment A. Any person who knowingly violates any requirement of this law or of any Wastewater Discharge Permit condition or limitation implementing the requirements of this chapter, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall, if the person is not a corporation, be punished by a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) per day of violation, or by imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and if the person is a corporation shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine not exceeding Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) per day of violation. B. Any person who knowingly makes any false material statement, representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document filed or required to be maintained under this chapter or who knowingly falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this chapter, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall, if the person is not a corporation, be punished by a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) per day of violation, or by imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and if the person is a corporation shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine not exceeding Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) per day of violation. ARTICLE VIII- FEES §264-45. Charges and Fees authorized It is one of the purposes of this chapter to provide for the recovery of costs from persons who use the POTW, in order to implement the programs established herein. Charges and fees may include: (A) fees for reimbursement of the costs of setting up and operating the POTW's pretreatment program; (B) fees for monitoring, sampling, inspections, and surveillance procedures; (C) fees for reviewing accidental discharge procedures and construction; (D) fees for Permit applications and modifications; (E) fees for consistent removal (by the POTW) of pollutants otherwise subject to National Categorical Pretreatment Standards; (F) fees for sludge disposal; (G) other fees as the Special Joint Committee may deem necessary to carry out the requirements contained herein. §264-46. Assessment of Charges and Fees The charges or fees for the items enumerated in Section 264-45 above shall be set from time to time in accordance with procedures permitted by applicable laws. Deleted: Subcommittee October 4, 2006 31 §264-47. Surcharges for Certain Conventional Pollutants A. Industrial Users discharging wastewater which exceeds the following concentrations for any of the conventional pollutants listed below shall pay a surcharge for use of the POTW: Level Above Which Surcharge Applies Pollutant (24 Hour Composite, in ppm) _______ ________________________ Chemical Oxygen Demand 350 Suspended Solids 250 BOD5 250 Phosphorus 6 Nitrogen, Total 25 The surcharge shall be calculated to recover the POTW's costs to treat these conventional pollutants to the extent that the concentrations of these conventional pollutants exceed the levels stated above. The surcharge shall be set from time to time in accordance with procedures permitted by applicable laws. The Chief Operator may grant a surcharge waiver to any Industrial User which demonstrates that its exceedances of the surcharge threshold levels are due to innovative water conservation practices. B. The surcharge threshold levels set forth above are not local limits. All Pretreatment Standards and Pretreatment Requirements, including the prohibition against Pass Through and Interference, do apply to discharges of the conventional pollutants listed above. In addition, nothing in this section shall prevent the Chief Operator from exercising his or her right, as described in Section 264-10 of this chapter, to require an Industrial User to comply with specific discharge limits on these pollutants if deemed necessary to meet the objectives of Section 264-1(A) of this chapter. In the event that an Industrial User receives specific discharge limits for any of these pollutants, no surcharge shall apply and violations of the discharge limit by the Industrial User shall instead subject the Industrial User to the enforcement provisions of this chapter. ARTICLE IX, Local Pollutant Limitations §264-48. Purpose and Applicability A. The purposes of this law are to set forth specific discharge limitations (hereinafter referred to as local limits) to prevent Pass Through and Interference, to protect the safety and health of workers at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility (POTW), and to improve opportunities to recycle and reclaim municipal and industrial wastewaters and sludges. B. This law shall apply to all Users of the POTW in the Towns of Ithaca and Dryden and City of Ithaca and to persons who are, by resolution, agreement, contract, or permit with the municipalities, Special Joint Committee, or POTW, Users of the POTW. §264-49. Definitions The definitions set forth in Section 264-3 of this Chapter as they may be revised from time to time, shall apply to the words in this chapter. §264-50. Specific Pollutant Limitations These local limits shall apply at each point of discharge to the sewerage system. In no case shall a User’s discharge to the POTW violate the following specific limitations: October 4, 2006 32 POLLUTANT MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION 30-DAY AVERAGE (mg/l) MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION 24-HOUR AVERAGE (mg/l) Arsenic 0.6 Barium 80 240 Cadmium 2.5 7.5 Chromium, total 8 24 Chromium, hexavalent 1 3 Copper 2 6 Cyanide 0.2 0.6 Iron 180 540 Lead 20 Manganese 8 24 Mercury 1.5 4.5 Nickel 10 Silver 6 18 Zinc 20 35 POLLUTANT DISCHARGE LIMIT INSTANTANEOUS (ppm) Oil & Grease (petroleum based) 50 264-51. Compliance with Applicability of Other Requirements and Prohibitions All Users further shall comply with all other requirements and prohibitions regarding discharges to the POTW set forth in the other local laws, including those specified in each municipality’s Sewer Use Requirements Law as it may be revised from time to time. ARTICLE X Severability, Repealer and Effective Date 264-52. Severability If any provision, paragraph, word, section, or Article of this chapter is invalidated by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions, paragraphs, words, sections, and Articles shall not be affected and shall continue in full force and effect. §264-53. Repealer All regulations, ordinances or local laws, and any parts thereof, which are inconsistent or conflict with any part of this chapter are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency or conflict. §264-54. Effective Date This chapter shall be in full force and effect after its publication, posting, and filing with the New York Secretary of State and upon approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Carried Unanimously City Chamberlain – Approval of Adjustment of Tax Payment Schedule – Resolution By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan WHEREAS, the property located at 45.-1-1 was sold in April of 2003, and October 4, 2006 33 WHEREAS, an error occurred on the deed that caused only a part of the parcel to be considered part of the sale, and WHEREAS, Tompkins County Assessment Department was unsuccessful in contacting the parties involved to correct the error, and WHEREAS, in April of 2005, Tompkins County split the parcel into two, to reflect the filed deed, and WHEREAS, no Certificate of Apportionment was done to notify the tax collectors of the split, and WHEREAS, there were and continue to be delinquent taxes on both the original parcel and on the split parcels, and WHEREAS, inconsistent information about the nature of the delinquent taxes has been provided to the owner of the property and their agents, based on the tax map numbers used when requesting the information, and WHEREAS, the owner has only recently been given a full accounting of all of the taxes due on the property as a whole and as a split parcel and WHEREAS, the owner is requesting an extension of time in which to pay 2004 and 2005 taxes until December 31, 2006, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council grants this request, and be it further RESOLVED, That tax delinquent penalty shall not accrue on the current year taxes until December 31, 2006, and be it further RESOLVED, That the City Chamberlain is authorized to accept the payment of the 2004 and 2005 taxes prior to the payment of the current year taxes provided payment is made by December 31, 2006. Carried Unanimously Human Resources - Amendment to Annual Leave Related to Managerial Benefits - Resolution By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Seger WHEREAS, over the last eight years Common Councils have approved enhanced leave time benefits for some new hires for various reasons, and WHEREAS, Common Council desires to eliminate the inequities that result for longer term managerial staff while at the same time offer benefits that will enable the City of Ithaca to attract and retain candidates of interest, and WHEREAS, upon a recent request to provide enhanced benefits Common Council has requested that the Human Resources Director provide an equitable proposal for improving leave time benefits for all managerial positions; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That managerial annual leave time be enhanced as follows: Proposed Current Length of Service 40 hrs/wk 35 hrs/wk Length of Service 40 hrs/wk 35 hrs/wk 1st Year 10 hrs/mos (3 wks) 9 hrs/mos (3 wks) up to 2 years 10 hrs/mos (3 wks) 9 hrs/mos (3 wks) 2nd – 5th Year 14 hrs/mos (4 wks) 12 hrs/mos (4 wks) 2-7 years 13.5 hrs/mos (4 wks) 12 hrs/mos (4 wks) 5th- 10th Year 17 hrs/mos (5 wks) 15 hrs/mos (5 wks) 7-20 years 17 hrs/mos (5 wks) 15 hrs/mos (5 wks) 10+ Years 20 hrs/mos (6 wks) 18 hrs/mos (6 wks) 20 or more years 20 hrs/mos (6 wks) 18 hrs/mos (6 wks) October 4, 2006 34 and be it further RESOLVED, That the Day After Thanksgiving be deemed a holiday for managerial staff, and be it further RESOLVED, That these changes will go into effect on November 1, 2006. Alderperson Clairborne disclosed that his wife is a managerial employee for the City of Ithaca and would be impacted by this resolution. Alderperson Coles explained that this Resolution was discussed at length at the City Administration Committee meeting. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the proposed Resolution and the impacts that it would have on current staff. Alderperson Zumoff stated that he supported most of the Resolution, but he felt that the 20 hours of leave time per month should only be awarded to employees with over 15 years with the City. Amending Resolution: By Alderperson Zumoff: Seconded by Alderperson Townsend RESOLVED, That the proposed leave time for employees with more than 15 years of service be 20 hrs/month. Ayes (1) Zumoff Nays (7) Coles, Seger, Berry, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan Abstentions (1) Clairborne Failed Mayor Peterson stated that she has direct supervision over department heads and some new employees are hired at a higher salary than department heads who have worked for the City for years, and this is a creative way without raising salaries to recognize employees who have been employed by the City of Ithaca for many years. Main Motion: A vote on the Main Motion resulted as follows: Ayes (7) Coles, Seger, Berry, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan Nays (1) Zumoff Abstentions (1) Clairborne Carried Common Council - Request from Gadabout for Emergency Funding - Resolution By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Berry WHEREAS, the increased cost of fuel has had a negative impact on Gadabout Transportation Services, Inc., and WHEREAS, Gadabout has attempted to contain and reduce costs in other areas of its operation, but the high fuel costs have led to a $55,000 operating deficit as of June 2006, and WHEREAS, Gadabout has requested $25,000 in emergency funding for the remainder of 2006 to help cover their deficit; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes a one-time emergency funding to Gadabout Transportation Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $14,000, and be it further RESOLVED, That funds for said emergency funds shall be transferred from Account A1990 Unrestricted Contingency to A5630-5630 Bus Operation Fees. Alderperson Berry voiced support for the resolution. Alderperson Coles stated that she would provide ridership information and explained that Gadabout receives funding from other municipalities as well. October 4, 2006 35 A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Common Council – Petition for Tompkins County Legislature - Resolution By Alderperson Coles: Seconded by Alderperson Seger WHEREAS, Tompkins County has seen approximately a five million dollar increase in the cost of unfunded mandates, so that in the year 2003 the cost of those mandates totaled $13,769,142 and in the year 2007, the total requested for those mandates is $18,133,520, and WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Legislature, as all other governmental bodies, has been faced with dramatically escalating costs in the delivery of services, and WHEREAS, the Legislature is additionally faced with the dilemma of having to find ways of keeping property taxes as low as possible, and WHEREAS, both the Mayor and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca understand and share in that responsibility with the Legislature, while at the same time also sharing concern about cuts in social and hunger programs, and WHEREAS, cuts in social programs will result either in deeper poverty, reduction of critical services, reduction in recreational opportunities for some county residents; or in increased costs to residents in specific municipalities, and WHEREAS, it will be difficult to ascertain where the municipal boundaries lie for various needs, extreme poverty and hunger, and other social needs in our respective municipalities, and WHEREAS, the Mayor and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca understand both the difficulty of budget decisions, as well as the fact that this is a decision solely within the purview of the Tompkins County Legislature, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Mayor and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca respectfully petition the Tompkins County Legislature not to make the projected cuts in the lengthy list of social programs, among which are critical ones, such as the Human Services Coalition and the Intermunicipal Recreation Partnership Carried Unanimously Alderperson Coles left the meeting at 9:10 p.m. COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES COMMITTEE: Proposal to Identify Potential, Suitable Locations for an Permanent Off-Leash Dog Area on City-Owned Lands - Declaration of Lead Agency By Alderperson Seger: Seconded by Alderperson Gelinas WHEREAS, the Mayor’s Task Force created to consider the possibility of establishing one or more permanent off-leash areas for dogs in the Ithaca area has recommended that such an off-leash area be established by the City on the so-called “Festival Lands” owned by the City, and possibly be extended on to a portion of the adjacent lands of the Allan H. Treman State Marine Park (upon the consent of the State Park), and WHEREAS, the City’s Parks Commission has recommended that the Festival Lands not be used for an off-leash dog area, and WHEREAS, other potential locations for an permanent off-leash area have been suggested, including the City-owned land south of Cherry Street (between the railroad and the Flood Control Channel) and the substitute parkland which is proposed to be designated as the Southwest Natural Area, and WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176 of the City Code provide that no agency may undertake, fund or approve an action until the agency has complied with the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and, if it is an agency of the City of Ithaca, with the City’s Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQRO), and October 4, 2006 36 WHEREAS, SEQRA and CEQRO require that any action be preliminarily classified as Type I, Type II (exempt) or unlisted, and that, from among the involved agencies for any action, a Lead Agency be established for conducting environmental review of the action, in accordance with state and local law, and WHEREAS, the creation of an permanent off-leash area for dogs is an Unlisted Action under both the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and WHEREAS, the involved agencies with regard to approvals that would be required for such a proposed off-leash dog area are the Common Council and the Board of Public Works, and, potentially, New York State Parks or the Town of Ithaca; now therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby declare its intent to find a suitable site, within or in close proximity to the City of Ithaca, where a permanent, safe and attractive off-leash area for dogs could be located; and be it further RESOLVED, That the Department of Planning and Development be directed: (1) to identify potential locations for such an off-leash area for dogs, including but not necessarily limited to part or all of the Festival Lands, the City-owned land south of Cherry Street and the substitute parkland proposed to be designated as the Southwest Natural Area, (2) in consultation with representatives of the dog-owning community and, as appropriate, the Natural Areas Commission and/or the Parks Commission, to develop appropriate, proposed parameters, at least in a conceptual form, for an permanent off-leash area at each such potential location (eg., boundaries, required fencing, parking, etc), and (3) to identify the potential impacts of the development of an permanent off- leash area at each such location, pursuant to SEQRA and CEQRO; and be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby declare itself to be the Lead Agency for the environmental review of the proposed establishment of such an a permanent off-leash dog area at the identified, potential locations, and be it further RESOLVED, That notice of the Common Council’s intent to be the Lead Agency for this action be provided to the Board of Public Works, New York State Parks and the Town of Ithaca, together with a copy of Part 1 of the Environmental Assessment Form for the action, and be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution is not intended to address the question of funding which may be required to implement such an off-leash area for dogs, or to commit the City to such funding, at any particular level or at any particular time. Alderperson Seger explained that the Community & Neighborhood Services Committee members supported this Resolution to find a permanent location for a dog park, and to rescind the leash law at Allen H. Treman Marina. Alderperson Cogan explained that there had been discussions with Tompkins County dog owners regarding this. He stated that he has concerns regarding the environmental quality review and the potential land swap in the area. Motion to Postpone Item 10.1 - Proposal to Identify Potential, Suitable Locations for a Permanent Off-Leash Dog Area on City-Owned Lands - Declaration of Lead Agency By Alderperson Cogan: Seconded by Alderperson Gelinas RESOLVED, That Item 10.1 - Proposal to Identify Potential, Suitable Locations for a Permanent Off-Leash Dog Area on City-Owned Lands - Declaration of Lead Agency be post-poned indefinitely. Alderperson Seger stated that he would not support this motion as this was an attempt at a thoughtful approach to find a permanent dog park. October 4, 2006 37 A vote on the Motion resulted as follows: Ayes (6) Clairborne, Zumoff, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan Nays (2) Berry, Seger Abstentions (0) Carried An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 164 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Entitled: “Dogs and Other Animals,” Regarding Establishment of a Temporary Exemption to the Leash Requirement for Dogs By Alderperson Seger: Seconded by Alderperson Zumoff WHEREAS, the Common Council, while creating the following temporary exemption to the existing City leash law, nonetheless wishes to make clear its intent to engage in a productive dialogue with the State of New York, and the State Parks Commission, regarding the use and ownership of the “Festival Lands” and related issues; now therefore be it ORDINANCE 06- ORDAINED AND ENACTED, by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 164 (“Dogs and Other Animals”), Article III (“Dogs”), Section 164- 9 (“Prohibited Acts”), of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, is hereby amended to read as follows: §164-9. Prohibited Acts. A. Except as otherwise set forth in this Section, a Any owner of a dog or any other person who harbors any dog in the City of Ithaca shall be in violation of this article if such dog: A. 1. Is not restrained by an adequate collar and leash when not on the property of the owner or any other person harboring or having custody or control of the dog. Exemption: Subdivision A above does not apply to owners of dogs whose dogs are off-leash in an area to be established and designated as an off-leash dog park pilot project sponsored by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation and the nonprofit Tompkins County Dog Owners' Group (TCDOG). The dog park is to be located within the boundaries of Treman Marina and the City- owned land adjacent to it as shown on the map entitled "Proposed Dog Park Area" dated May 1992. The part of the dog park located on City land shall be regulated by the Board of Public Works. This exemption shall extend for the one-year trial period of the pilot, but in no event shall this exemption extend beyond August 31, 2002 [Subsections B through I to be renumbered accordingly, ie., as 2 through 9, but otherwise to remain unchanged.] B. Temporary Exemption: Effective as of December 1, 2006, and for the duration of the period described below, Subdivision A.1, above, shall not apply to owners whose dogs are off-leash in the area owned by the City known as the “Festival Lands,” consisting of approximately 15 acres, which area is adjacent to Allan H. Treman State Marine Park and which area is shown as “Parcel B” on a survey map of Cass Park dated August 15, 2001, by T.G. Miller, PC, provided that such owners are in compliance with all rules and regulations established by the Board of Public Works for such off-leash area. A copy of the aforementioned map (or the portion showing the “Festival Lands”) shall be maintained in the office of the City Clerk and posted at said off-leash area. This exemption shall continue until December 1, 2007, unless extended by Common Council. SECTION 2. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of the ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. October 4, 2006 38 SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. Amending Resolution: By Alderperson Cogan: Seconded by Alderperson Gelinas RESOLVED, That the first two Whereas Clauses from the original Resolution be re- inserted to read as follows: “WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is in the process of identifying and evaluating potential, suitable locations for one or more permanent off-leash dog areas within the City or on City-owned lands; and WHEREAS, while such process is underway, and without intending to influence its final outcome in any way, Common Council wishes to ensure that there is a temporary site for appropriate off-leash dog activity, within the City; and” Carried Unanimously Main Motion As Amended: A Vote on the Main Motion as Amended resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously Directive for the Establishment of Rules and Regulations for Temporary Off-leash Dog Area - Resolution By Alderperson Seger: Seconded by Alderperson Clairborne RESOLVED, That Common Council directs the Board of Public Works to establish and post at the site appropriate rules and regulations for the use of the aforementioned temporary, off-leash dog area, together with a map of the so-called “Festival lands,” by or before December 1, 2006. Alderperson Seger stated that he hopes that Tompkins County Dog Owners can work closely with the Board of Public Works on the development of rules. A Vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously PLANNING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: Designation of a Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development - Resolution By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Zumoff WHEREAS, The Inlet Island Urban Design Plan, which was adopted by the Common Council in November of 1998, recommends the revitalization of Inlet Island by developing an attractive, pedestrian-scale, urban waterfront mixed-use neighborhood, featuring waterfront-enhanced private sector uses linked by the public waterfront promenade, and WHEREAS, the development site on Inlet Island is composed of approximately 2.5 acres, composed of tax parcels #52.-1-1.1, #52.-1-1.2, #52.-1-1.3, and #43.-1-4, owned by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (“IURA”) and the City of Ithaca (“City”), and an additional approximately 0.4 acre adjoining parcel of land (tax parcel #43.-1-5) for which the City is in negotiations with the State of New York to acquire, and WHEREAS, subsurface conditions of the development site appear to require remediation of approximately 4,500 to 7,500 cubic feet of contaminated soils from bulk fuel storage uses existing prior to City/IURA ownership, and WHEREAS, on December 7, 2005, the Common Council passed a resolution authorizing the distribution of the Inlet Island Waterfront Development Request for Proposals (“RFP”) and authorizing the Mayor to appoint a Selection Committee to review the responses to the RFP, and to make a recommendation for a preferred developer to the Common Council and the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, and WHEREAS, the City issued the RFP, and received three proposals; one was an incomplete proposal, and one was withdrawn, leaving one complete proposal, submitted October 4, 2006 39 by Stephen B. Flash on behalf of a prospective Limited Liability Company, Finger Lakes Development, LLC, to be formed if selected as the preferred developer, and WHEREAS, Finger Lakes Development, LLC (“Developer”) is an entity to be formed with Stephen B. Flash as managing member, and to include the three original members of the Marina Realty of Ithaca, LLC, the company that completed environmental remediation and development of the Boatyard Grill restaurant and that owns and manages the Ithaca Boating Center marina, and WHEREAS, the Stephen B. Flash/Finger Lakes Development, LLC proposal proposed environmental remediation of the site; development of an approximately 105-room hotel with 15 condominium units by Cayuga Visions, LLC, which will be the ultimate owner and operator of this portion of the project; development of a five-story, 60,000 sq. ft. multi-use building including, retail, office, and museum uses by Social Ventures, Inc.; renovation of the existing covered boat house and enhanced public access to the waterfront; and surface parking sufficient for this proposed project, and WHEREAS, the proposal was reviewed by the Selection Committee, which included the City’s consultant from the National Development Council, a representative of the Ithaca Downtown Partnership, a Common Council member, an IURA member, a representative from the Chamber of Commerce, a member of the City’s Conservation Advisory Council, and a member of the Tompkins County Cayuga Lake Watershed Network, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Department of Planning & Development undertook an analysis of parking supply and demand on Inlet Island that concluded there is a need for additional parking, and WHEREAS, following discussions with the Selection Committee and reviewing the Department of Planning & Development’s study of parking supply and demand on Inlet Island, the Developer revised its proposal to the following proposed $17 - $23 million mixed-use project:  environmental remediation of the site  approximately 100-room hotel  15 condominium units  renovation of the existing covered marina structure and enhanced public access to the waterfront  potential development of some retail use consistent with the waterfront environment,  potential construction of approximately 12 apartments over the existing marina structure, and WHEREAS, after reviewing the proposal and having interviewed the development team in four separate meetings, the Selection Committee concluded that while the submitted proposal does not exactly address the City’s ideal vision for the Inlet Island development site, the Developer has indicated its commitment to being flexible with its development plans, and is qualified and willing to work with the City and IURA to modify the project to address the following issues raised by the Selection Committee:  Urban design  Employment, including work force diversity and living wages  Project scale  Public access and public spaces, especially by alternative transportation means, including by foot, bicycle, boat and bus  Public spaces  Environmental concerns  Project accessory uses, and WHEREAS, City Planning & Development Department staff and the Selection Committee recommend retention of a portion of the development site for construction of surface pubic parking to accommodate existing off-site parking needs, thereby effectively reducing the private sector development site by approximately 0.5 acres, and October 4, 2006 40 WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency recommended the designation of Stephen B. Flash as the Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development at its September 28, 2006, meeting; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby concur with the designation by the IURA to name Stephen B. Flash, as the Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development, and be it further RESOLVED, That Stephen B. Flash is hereby authorized to assign the Preferred Developer designation to Finger Lakes Development, LLC upon its creation and disclosure to the IURA of all principals and/or members, and be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council recognizes that the revised development proposal submitted is not in complete alignment with the City’s original vision for development on Inlet Island, but the Developer and the City/IURA will work towards an agreement on the following issues raised by the Selection Committee, and any additional issues that may arise:  Urban design  Employment  Project scale  Project accessory uses  Public access and public spaces  Environmental concerns and be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor, with the advice of the City Attorney, is hereby authorized and directed to negotiate and sign a Preferred Developer Agreement exclusively with Stephen B. Flash, or his City-authorized assignee, for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development project and that this agreement shall cover topics such as: 1. Project Site – define the boundaries of the project site available for private-sector development; 2. Site Control - provide the Developer with access and site control to seek approvals and financing, and guarantee that the City/IURA will not sell the project site to another developer during the term of the agreement; 3. Future Property Conveyance - identify conditions for future conveyance of the project site to the Developer, including a schedule of project milestones and defining the process for public input as the project continues to be refined; 4. Developer Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of the Developer; 5. City/IURA Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of the City/IURA; and 6. Term – state the term of the agreement. Alderperson Tomlan requested permission to make the changes to the original proposal that she identified in the memo to Common Council dated September 29, 2006. She noted that these clarifications were recommended by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. The specific wording changes included moving Whereas Clause #12 to follow Whereas Clause #9 and adding the language: “precluding inclusion of the proposed five-story, 60,000 sq. ft. multi-use Building to include retail, office and museum uses by Social Ventures, Inc., on the site, and”. The requested changes also include adding language to the third Resolved Clause so it would read as follows: “RESOLVED, That Common Council recognizes that the revised development proposal submitted is not in complete alignment with the City’s original vision for development on Inlet Island, but the Developer and the City/IURA will work towards an agreement on the October 4, 2006 41 following issues raised by the Selection Committee, and any additional issues that may arise:  Urban design  Employment, including work force diversity and living wages  Project scale  Project accessory uses  Public access, especially by alternative transportation means, including by foot, bicycle, boat and bus  Public Spaces  Environmental concerns, and be it further” This proposed new language would also be reflected in Whereas Clause #11. No Council member objected to the incorporation of the requested changes into the Resolution. Amending Resolution: By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan RESOLVED, That the last Resolved Clause be amended to read as follows: “RESOLVED, That the Mayor, with the advice of the City Attorney and approval by Common Council of the terms thereof, is hereby authorized and directed to negotiate and sign a Preferred Developer Agreement exclusively with Stephen B. Flash, or his City-authorized assignee, for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development project and that this agreement shall cover topics including but not limited to: 1. Project Site – define the boundaries of the project site available for private-sector development; 2. Site Control - provide the Developer with access and site control to seek approvals and financing, and guarantee that the City/IURA will not sell the project site to another developer during the term of the agreement; 3. Future Property Conveyance - identify conditions for future conveyance of the project site to the Developer, including a schedule of project milestones and defining the process for public input as the project continues to be refined; 4. Developer Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of the Developer; 5. City/IURA Responsibilities - list the responsibilities and contingencies of the City/IURA; and 6. Term – state the term of the agreement.” Carried Unanimously (8-0) Extensive discussion followed on the floor regarding the concerns that have been raised about a major project being proposed for the site, and public access to the waterway. Alderperson Clairborne thanked Alderperson Tomlan for bringing forth the changes made by the IURA. Alderperson Gelinas stated that he is not comfortable voting on this until the issue with the land swap is settled. Mayor Peterson stated that the developer has been very cooperative. There are components of the plan that may be contentious, and the City would retain the ability to disengage from the preferred developer and the plan. She further stated that the developer is interested in working on this project with or without land swap and would like to work cooperatively with the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the Coast Guard. She also stated that there is no economic incentive for developers to continue work on this site. She further noted that it would be up to the City to determine the process for community input and involvement in the process. Alderperson Berry stated that she appreciates the work that the developer has done, but there is concern regarding the perception surrounding economic development. She October 4, 2006 42 requested more information about what the workforce diversity piece looks like and would like to wait because she doesn’t feel that a hotel is the appropriate development for the area. Alderperson Zumoff stated that a lot of areas on the Island are in a deteriorated condition and this is the start of the process, not the end. The local developer is willing to be flexible and he strongly recommends approval of the Resolution. Alderperson Cogan stated that he had concerns regarding the project not being in tandem with the Inlet Island Design plan, but space is very limited. He thinks it is worth agreeing to this status as long as elements are kept that recognize the public promenade and pedestrian amenities. Alderperson Seger stated that he could not support the Resolution as he would prefer a project that would benefit a larger portion of the community. He further voiced concerns regarding the parking issue in the area and stated that he felt this action is premature as the City does not have full site control yet. Motion to Call the Question: By Alderperson Gelinas: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan RESOLVED, That the question be called on the Designation of a Preferred Developer for the Inlet Island Waterfront Development. Ayes (6) Zumoff, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan, Clairborne Nays (2) Berry, Seger Abstentions (0) Carried (6-2) Main Motion as Amended: A Vote on the Main Motion as amended resulted as follows: Ayes (6) Zumoff, Tomlan, Gelinas, Townsend, Cogan, Clairborne Nays (2) Berry, Seger Abstentions (0) Carried (6-2) NEW BUSINESS: Resolution in Support of the Council of Governments’ Grant Application for New York State Shared Municipal Services Program – Local Health Insurance Incentive Award By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan WHEREAS, The City of Ithaca has joined the Tompkins County Council of Governments, and WHEREAS, the Council of Governments has resolved to apply for an incentive award under the New York State Shared Municipal Services Program, and WHEREAS, the grant will assist the municipalities in Tompkins County to create a local health consortium, and WHEREAS, the health care consortium will seek to develop health care coverage for all municipalities with the intent to provide a net savings to the taxpayers of Tompkins County, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That on recommendation of Common Council, That the Mayor is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the City of Ithaca to all matters related to this grant, and be it further RESOLVED, That the County of Tompkins shall be designated as the Lead Applicant and that the County Administrator is Authorized to act as the contact person for this grant. Carried Unanimously (7-0) October 4, 2006 43 INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: Resolution to Approve A Joint Study Group to Investigate Possible Shared Services and Possible Consolidation between the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca By Alderperson Tomlan: Seconded by Alderperson Cogan WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council and the Town of Ithaca Board, desiring to examine the mutual benefits that could be achieved through possible shared services and possible consolidation measures, have agreed by votes at their respective meetings of May 3, 2006, and May 8, 2006, to pursue such investigation through the establishment of a joint study group, and WHEREAS, the Common Council voted unanimously to create such a study group to investigate, among others, the legal and regulatory aspects of shared services and possible consolidation, the pros and cons of both shared services and consolidation, the financial opportunities and liabilities of consolidation or shared services, an analysis of the property and sales tax scenario for a single jurisdiction, the concept of a new jurisdiction, and a unified comprehensive plan, and to provide an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for each topic area, and WHEREAS, the Common Council voted that the study group would be composed of eight “at-large” members, mutually agreed upon by the City of Ithaca Common Council and the Town of Ithaca Board, with these representatives having knowledge of finance, law, planning, public works, police, or organizational culture, plus one elected official liaison from each jurisdiction, making a total of ten members, and WHEREAS, the Common Council directed that such study group and its chair be nominated by a joint City-Town nomination committee consisting of the Mayor, the Supervisor, one Common Council member, and one Town Board member, and WHEREAS, the nomination committee, consisting of Mayor Carolyn K. Peterson, Supervisor Cathy Valentino, Alderperson Mary Tomlan, and Councilor Peter Stein, has met three times, beginning June 26, 2006, and WHEREAS, the nominating committee has agreed to put forward the names of eight “at-large” study group members, all of whom have agreed to serve, being Lois E. Chaplin, Paul R. Eberts, Nathan Fawcett, Randy Haus, Tom Niederkorn, Wendy Skinner, Stuart W. Stein, and Constance V. Thompson, with Wendy Skinner nominated and agreed to serve as chair, and WHEREAS, Mayor Peterson has nominated Mary Tomlan to serve as the elected official liaison from the Common Council; and WHEREAS, each municipality has agreed to provide staff assistance to the study group, including participation from each municipality’s historian; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca concurs in the naming of the above-cited individuals to the joint City-Town study group. Nominees to City of Ithaca-Town of Ithaca joint study group  Lois E. Chaplin, Extension Associate, Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University; Bicycle and Pedestrian Specialist, Cornell Local Roads Program  Paul R. Eberts, Professor, Department of Development Sociology, and Director of Graduate Studies for the Field of Community and Rural Development, Cornell University  Nathan Fawcett, Special Assistant to the Provost for State-Related Issues, Cornell University; Tompkins Public Library Treasurer and Trustee; formerly served with New York State Division of Budget October 4, 2006 44  Randy Haus, Trumansburg Police Department; former Deputy Police Chief, City of Ithaca; former Tompkins County Undersheriff  Tom Niederkorn, Principal, Planning & Environmental Research Consultants; former City of Ithaca Planning Director  Wendy Skinner, Marketing and Communications Manager, Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit; active in Sustainable Tompkins; former Tompkins County Public Information Officer  Stuart W. Stein, former Member and Chair, Tompkins County Board of Representatives; Professor Emeritus, Department of City and Regional Planning, Cornell University  Constance V. Thompson, Manager, Recruitment and Diversity Recruitment, Recruitment and Employment Center, Cornell University; Steering Committee Member, Alliance for Community Empowerment (ACE) Alderperson Seger questioned why this item did not go through the Governance and Intermunicipal Relations Committee before coming to Common Council for approval. He further asked if this Committee would report to the Governance and Intermunicipal Relations Committee in the future. Mayor Peterson explained that the way the Resolution is written is that the Committee would be reporting directly to Common Council. A vote on the Resolution resulted as follows: Carried Unanimously (7-0) Alderperson Gelinas left the meeting at 10:35 p.m. Motion to Adjourn into Executive Session to Discuss a Personnel Issue – Resolution By Alderperson Cogan: Seconded by Alderperson Berry RESOLVED, That Common Council adjourn into Executive Session to discuss a personnel issue. Carried Unanimously (6-0) Alderperson Cogan left the meeting at 10:37 p.m. Reconvene: Common Council reconvened back into Regular Session with no formal action taken. Commitment to the Implementation of the 2006 Economic Development Strategy for Tompkins County - Resolution Due to lack of quorum, this item was not discussed nor voted upon. It will be placed on the agenda for the November Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. due to lack of quorum. ______________________________ _______________________________ Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC Carolyn K. Peterson, City Clerk Mayor