Loading...
Res No 142-13-13960RESOLUTION NO. 142 43 -13960 A Resolution authorizing the City Manager of the City of South Miami to sign a letter addressed to the Assistant Attorney General for the United States concerning the consent decree between the United States and Miami - Dade County involving the Miami -Dade County Wastewater Treatment Plants. 6, WHEREAS, the City of South Miami ( "City ") generally s,,,,pai4s the goals expressed i desires an opportunity to review and provide public comments concerning the consent decree which can be found at http: / /www. justice .gov /enrd /ConsentDecrees/ Miami Dade Lodged CD with Appendices.pdf ;and WHEREAS, the consent decree does may not adequately address the risk of storm surge and flooding to the Center District Wastewater Treatment Plant on Virginia Key (Central District WWTP), among other concerns; and WHEREAS, the consent decree addresses the rectification of violations, ongoing management, operation and maintenance, and legal compliance; and WHEREAS, recent devastating weather events, such as "Superstorm Sandy" suggest that regulatory agencies should adopt climate- adaptation strategies; and WHEREAS, Miami -Dade County provides water and sanitary sewer services for the City and others and sound planning for the Virginia Key facility will benefit the residents of Miami -Dade County in the long -term NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA THAT: Section 1. The City Manager, or Acting City Manager is hereby authorized to request an extension of time for the Cif to provide its comments. sign a letter a iz°sped to the Assist nt Attorney GeneFal for the United States that is idefAieal to the one that is hefeto atta Section 2. Severability. If any section clause, sentence, or phrase of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption by vote of the City Commission. 1 a, Res. No. 142 -13 -13960 C 4:. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2 °d day of July 2013. ATTEST: 4, READ AN" YPROVED AS TO FORM, COMMISSION VOTE: LANGI G , LEGAL Mayor Stoddard: E r ON THE Vice Mayor Liebman: f Commissioner Newman: Commissioner Harris: CIT, ATTOR Commissioner Welsh: 2 4 -0 absent Yea Yea Yea Yea 4; k July _, 2013 Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ -ENRD P.O. Box 7611 Washington, D.C. 20044 -7611 Email: pubcomment- ees.enrd @usdoj.gov 41 Re: United States of America, State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and State of Florida v. Miami -Dade County, Florida; Civil Action No. 1:12 -cv- 24400 -FAM (DOJ Ref: No. 90- 5 -1 -1- 4022/1) Consent Decree regarding Miami -Dade County Wastewater Treatment Plants and alleged violations of the federal Clean Water Act, NPDES Permit conditions, and the Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Act - -- Public Comments Submitted by the City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida Ladies and Gentlemen: The City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida, submits the following as public comment on the Consent Decree referenced above. We generally support the goals expressed in the Consent Decree, but we are concerned that the document does not speak adequately to the risk of storm surge and flooding to the Center District Wastewater Treatment Plant on Virginia Key (Central District WWTP). We also question the need for deferral of various implementation plans to prevent or control sanitary sewer overflows, effluent limit violations and to manage, operate and maintain facilities. The County provides water and sanitary sewer services for our municipality and others and for residents of the unincorporated areas. We are served by the Central District WWTP, located on Virginia Key, a sand - barrier island within Biscayne Bay, bounded by the Atlantic Ocean, the City of Miami, the City of Miami Beach, and the Village of Key Biscayne immediately adjacent to the south. Inasmuch as Key Biscayne is directly adjacent to Virginia Key, interconnected by bay and ocean, we discern a compelling interest to ensure that planning and solutions for the Virginia Key facility are sound and effective for the long -term, with due consideration given to foreseeable risks and special circumstances. In February, we communicated various concerns to the County as related to sea level rise and the potential effects of climate change. In response, the County affirmed its intent to incorporate effective storm surge and flood mitigation features in project design for the wastewater treatment plants. But, the County was forthcoming in pointing out that such design considerations were not featured in the Consent Decree negotiations or drafts, because federal and state regulatory agencies historically had not imposed plant siting or hazard risk mitigation requirements, and 6> because the County deemed such requirements to be outside of the particular focus on addressing Clean Water Act violations. As we view the matter, the Consent Decree is concerned with rectifying violations, but also with ongoing management, operations and maintenance, and with ongoing legal compliance. By not addressing the prospects of weather effects or possibly direct wave action on the Virginia Key facility, we are concerned that the Consent Decree ignores a foreseeable risk that potentially could affect operations and legal compliance. If as the County indicated the regulatory agencies have not been concerned with plant siting and mitigation, the experience of "Superstorm Sandy" and other weather events suggests that they should be. President Obama emphasized infrastructure planning in his June 25th policy speech on climate change responses at Georgetown University. We have noted that the County's Sustainability (Green Print) Plan, and the Regional Climate Change Compact and Regional Climate Action Plan adopted by Miami -Dade, Monroe, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, each address climate- adaptation strategies to protect public infrastructure. These policy statements call for infrastructure planning to take into account sea level rise and include flood mitigation measures. Our comments are as follows: 1. The Consent Decree and the capital plans in Exhibit D do not, but should, include appropriate consideration of the risk (if not certainty) of storm surge and inundation affecting the Central District WWTP. As to sea level rise, we appreciate the difficulty in prognosticating, but considering the Virginia Key location, we think the capital plans should include facility hardening, equipment protection and flood mitigation measures. Exhibit D includes an element of flood mitigation for the Northern District facility, but not for the Central District, despite the fact that the Central District is on a low -lying barrier island. In the absence of such features, we are concerned that the Consent Decree, by itself, does not adequately ensure Clean Water Act compliance or protection of public health and safety. 2. The proposed plans allude to, but are unspecific about responses to, Florida legislation mandating cessation of wastewater ocean outfalls and beneficial re -use of treated wastewater. Assuming deep -well injection is the plan for abating ocean outfalls, the 10 or 15 year plans for the Central District should, but do not, address (a) pre- injection wastewater treatment methods to ensure resulting water quality for re -use and for deep -well injection; (b) the substrate geology into which the proposed injection wells will penetrate, including assurances of geologic separation between the injection realm and the Floridan or Biscayne aquifers; and (c) the shore- line location of proposed well- heads, which are exposed to the bay and ocean. 3. We were interested to note that many implementation measures concerning management, operation and maintenance are sequenced over time, thus raising questions about the effectiveness of the Consent Decree. As an example, we question why the Appendix A criteria, which appear to be fully articulated in the Appendix, are required to be incorporated in the County Code only within 180 days of the effective date. We question why nine months is required for a force main criticality and assessment report (section 19 g), why nineteen months are allowed for a sewage overflow response plan (section 19 b), why twenty months are allowed to develop a force main operations and maintenance program (section 19 g), why two years are allowed for submittal of a force main rehabilitation or replacement program, and why seventeen months are allowed for submittal of an operations and maintenance program (section 19 h). 4. We note that various capital improvements are identified in Exhibit D based on "previous investigations ", but that twelve months are allowed for submittal of a financial analysis program. We are unsure of the effects of future modifications that may be made to the capital plans in Exhibit D. 5. We have heard reports of an intended new "western" collection and treatment plant. The Consent Decree is undetailed as to plans for that facility or its capacity, including specifically, its capacity to reduce reliance on the Central District facility. It may be premature to plan in any detail for a new facility, or for phase -out of the Central District facility, but inasmuch as a need is projected for a new facility, it seems reasonable at least for the Consent Decree to approximate the size and prospective capacity of that facility. In sum, our principal question is whether portions of the Consent Decree that pertain to ongoing operations at Virginia Key, requiring substantial new investment in a vulnerable location, without provision for armoring, mitigation or disaster response, are adequate and in the public interest. Respectfully submitted, Steven Alexander, City Manager cc: City of South Miami Commission, and Clerk The Honorable Mayor and Board of County Commissioners, Miami -Dade County July 3, 2013 U.S. Department of Justice ENRD P.O. Box 7611 Ben Franklin Station Washington D.C., 20044 -7611 Email: pubcomment- ees.enrd @usdoj.gov Mr. Bob Perciasepe, Acting Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460 Email: Perciasepe.bobgEpa.gov 6; #; RE: Request for an Extension of the Public Comment Period on the Proposed Consent Decree Between the United States and Miami -Dade County; 78 FR 35315 -02 We are writing to request that the Department of Justice extend the public comment period on the Proposed Consent Decree between the United States and Miami -Dade County to allow for an additional sixty (60) days from the deadline set forth in its publication in the Federal Register on June 12, 2013, The Proposed Consent Decree deals with many complex issues and has a far reaching effect across Miami -Dade County. It is paramount that the level of public participation in the commenting process of the Proposed Consent Decree be as high as possible. The original thirty (30) days provided for comments is an inadequate amount of time to delve into each complex issue of the Proposed Consent Decree. We are sure that there are many others like the City of South Miami who are substantially affected by the Proposed Consent Decree but who will not have adequate time to become aware of the Proposed Consent Decree and to have sufficient time to prepare a meaningful response. &:I 6; Page Two Re: Request for an Extension of the Public Comment Period on the Proposed Consent Decree Between the United States and Miami -Dade County; 78 FR 35315 -02 July 3, 2013 The Proposed Consent Decree came to the attention of the City Commission for the City of South Miami at a Commission Meeting held on July 2, 2013. Please find a copy of a resolution by the City of South Miami attached hereto. All of the Commission members present were very concerned about the treatment plant and its ability to function in the event of a major storm as well as the long -term effects of climate change and rising sea - levels. The Commission has not had sufficient notice to delve into the complexities of the issues that are being raised in this matter. The Commission desires and requests additional time to review the lengthy decree and to evaluate its ramifications. For these reasons, the City of South Miami respectfully requests, through its Acting City Manager, that the commenting period be extended from thirty (30) days to ninety (90) days to ensure that the City will have the opportunity to intelligently respond and to have its concerns heard. Sincerely, Kelly Barket Acting City Manager City of South Miami Enclosure m