.\.1:. ,~, . .'",.' ;~,d ~'.it'. l' ;;¡~: ,~.-
,.- ...... -- :l:.~ .(" "~~. THE EDWARDS AQUIFER~.,~; ~'¡, ':.,'¡'., '\-"'--"", SAN ANT01V1Õ'.'- MANDA . . TES.-' ", FOR. - , ~ " .-: ""':"., ~.~:, . .. :,. " ,;.'" ~ .;;:.::';/'-:" " -~ . "'" WATER QU.JTY PROTECtION " .:.r ..?" :,..;1, ., , ~
, .
. J
t~~T.~ .'.~ ~~~. .J .June 1994 CITY OF SAN ANTONIO OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
June 22, 1994
TO TH CITIZENS OF SAN ANONIO:
Since Januai, 1994, the San Antonio City Counci along with the chais of the Plannng Commssion, Zoning Commssion and the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees have been meeting as a
Commttee of the Whole to discuss water qualty in reference to land use activities over the Edwards Recharge Zone. Our discussion focused on the area withi the City's jurisdiction, which is less than 2% of the total recharge zone. Our review included functional responsibilities related to staf and other agencies as well as explorig practica recmmendations which would update their efforts since the 1987, The Edwards Aquifer: Perspecives for Local and Regional Action report and its resolution on non-degradation of the aquifer. These organitional steps coupled with increasingly stricter guidelies for pollution control and prevention best amplifY the need for continued study of potential contamination and ongoing actions to educate and implement activities for prevention.
The commttee found that its approach must be expanded to include a comprehensive watershed management approach that takes into account federal, state and local requirements. This new approach would allow for prudent, responsible land use activities that with proper enforcement and oversight can occur over the recharge zone, transition zone and drainage areas as well as creeks and streas which flow through Bexar County. This approach coupled with physical programs such as drainage and flood plain management wil ultimately protect water quality for the aquifer and the streams and watercourses that cross Bexar County.
Water quality protection of our creeks and streams, now a national mandate as the stormwater program afects us al wi dimsh the potential for pollution as raiwater and other sudace materials channel throughout the County over sensitive areas.
Therefore, protecon of the Edwards Aquifer is important to al of us. It begins with education about how the system works, an awareness of its unique characteristics and a respect for its greatness.
Sjpcerely, ø j~ l~jJt i~f/ ~Ol~ I 'Mayor
MAILING: CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS P.O. BOX 839966 CITY HALL (210) 299-7060 SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78283-396 FAX # (210) 270-4077 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ...... -0 -0 -0 -0 ...... -0 . . . -0 . . .
Current Status ...... 1
Edwards Recharge Zone Statistics ...... 2 Description of Edwards Geology ...... 4 Rules and Policies ...... 16 Work Program ...... 48
Committee of the Whole ...... 63
. -0 -0 -0 ...... -0 -0 . . -0.. -0 -0 -0 ...... -0 ...... -0 . -0 . . . -0 -0 -0 . . -0
. . . . -0 -0 . -0 -0 ...... -0 ...... -0 . . -0 -0 -0 ...... -0 . -0
Recommendations ...... 86 Issues ...... 87 Index of Issues ...... 88 i. Regulatory Requirements ...... 91 Chapter 35--UDC ...... 92 Stormwater ...... 109 Chapter 34-- Water ...... 116 II. Organiational Programming ...... 127 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission...... 128 Techncal Improvements ...... 135 Emergency Measures ...... 144 III. Potential Activities ...... 148 Future Study ...... 149
Implementation Policy...... 154 Index of Implementations ...... 155 i. Regulatory Requirements ...... 157 Chapter 35--UDC ...... 158 Stormwater ...... 181 Chapter 34-- Water ...... 186 II. Organiational Programing ...... 192 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission ...... 193 Techncal Improvements ...... 198 Emergency Measures ...... ' ...... 206 III. Potential Activities ...... 210 Future Study ...... 211 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix...... 216
Chronology ...... 217
Resolution of Non-Degradation . . . . -0 . . . . . -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 ...... -0 ...... -0 . . . . . 231
Studies Preformed -0 . . -0 ...... -0 ...... -0 . . -0 -0 . -0 . . . -0 ...... -0 . . . -0 233
Table of Permitted Uses (1993) ...... 239
Public Hearing on Chapter 313--Edwards Rules ...... 252
City Coullcil Resolution No. 94-13-12 ...... 254
City of San Antonio statement submitted on March 31, 1994 257 at TNRCC annual public hearing on Edwards Rules
Chapter 313 Edwards Rules ...... 264
Identified Caves and Sinkoles in Bexar County ...... 298 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The San Antonio Water System wishes to specially acknowledge the City Council of San Antonio, the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees, the Chairman of Planning Commssion and the Chairman of Zoning Commssion for their involvement and support as the Commttee of the Whole in preparation of this document.
City Council
Mayor Nelson Wolff
District One District Six Councilman Roger Perez Councilwoman Helen Ayala
District Two District Seven Councilwoman Ruth Jones McClendon Councilman Bob Ross
District Thee District Eight Councilwoman Lynda Bila Burke Councilman Bil Thornton
District Four District Nine Councilman Henr Avila Councilman Howard Peak
District Five District Ten Councilman Juan F. Solis, III Councilman Lyle Larson
San Antonio_ Water System Board of Trustees
Clifford E. Morton, Chairman Victor Miramontes, Trustee
Diane D. Rath, Vice Chairan Pablo S. Escamila, Trustee
Curtis E. Neal, Jr.,Secreta Christina L. Garcia, Trustee
Mayor Nelson Wolff, Ex officio
Chairman of Planning Commssion Chairman of Zoning Commission
Phil Garay Michael A. McMahon
i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS "''''.t,\"If!''4å~'''''",\ #r"""" This report is øTi suIt of theJ'hard'~~k and personal dedication of a number of peo Ie. Special r'ecogni tiorl should go to the following: n/',,"" ~( San u ¡",P"'''''''"" y""".;".';;-. .~.~~ Jf"ø-'- ~\:.~ Joe A. Ace..es...... P .E., PresidØ'n t/C.E.~Õ~'c~'",,,,,,,,, Rebecca Qulitanilla Cedillo...... Vice President of Plannlig ) lH~:.~-c.;~C¡;."::~t~. Aqui ~t Studies Division Staff "\ \\ u
R. Hal ty...... Manager, Aquifer St udies Di Ji,sion'c~~':i. K' M. Nixon 't, 'D K ren E. Stahn lJ ~J;i" Mi elle Marlar ");":è '~\ Pe er Z. Gatica \\ ;1
E Ii ~ater Depar~~ent Staff . ~\, 't iJ 3" ~y Aldean...... '.7¡1;~.... :~"''':,:'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' Director, Storm wa ter Depart:g,eni t F ank Salazar ,ø";'" ...... ,.,...... Manager, Storm wa ter Departm~ent .¿Ø)~.f#~#" '-:q~~\,: r-'c":"';','-"",;,,,;-,,'l'¡"'''~''"~,'~ ~ I, ,i~i ø;' to 'øQ Planning Dep'~len t ~ ! ""~x~(,,,- " j!ß Dave Pasley ,AICP...... ~'...... l...... DiEector of P I ann i n g"'t""m-AJ':''\'¡t, Ñ ,i i\ !1 San An tot:'¡ ~~'Fie D,,1 ep JÇt=1'~' m 1 t ,':$f'~ ii "'\~jl .£':0,_ ,(-' ¿j,Y Joe Cande ano.., ...... I ~i ..¡;...... íi nl.' ...... ""'''':9. .,J...... h. ;'."H'-'"''As; is,t'~ Fire"".c,lnef .l' T e x as N at"l cra~I=RJeso I ii u r c Jkt5unsLrv~ ~ at io1.t:Ø IJ Co mm(' i st~idti: Richard Garci a,,,,,,,,,,;;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, l""""'" ,Re~i onal Manager John Mauser...... '.1"r .". ,., .".,.,rn .".. .,1.,. ...~ """Fi~. ld Investigator ,Edwards Program Edwards taterí:r ~District~ii G~li ri1M Rick Illgner...... V...... "_:~.b~"Jl...... e:nJ,~ra anager ~ ,...... "'ø,,,,,,.""r"'~.""""~. ~-"..''''''\''."._C''~0'".'h. Mike Albach...... '~':'::-...... Di vision Manag'è'r"õ'f-..Rsla.nning .,",,,,,,~~=~.=g",~',,,,,, "~""~'.' " ,c="~="=~"'Y,,==;En~vLi''I''0'n~m'e'I:.t:al-~M'a''n'agg'e~;iri;g;¡:g', Pape-Dawson Engineers, Inc.
Gene Dawson, Jr...... Engineer
ii CURRENT STATUS EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE STATISTICS EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE STATISTICS March, 1994
Edwards Recharge Zone Area (All Figures Approximate)
~ Total 5 county. area 1500 sq. mi. 960,000 acres
~ Bexar County area 175 sq. mi. 112,000acres(11.6%)
~ City of San Antonio ERZ (Of Total) 28 sq. mi. 17,920 acres (1.8%)
~ City. of San Antonio ERZ (Of Bexar) 28 sq. mi. 17,920 acres (16.0%)
~ Shavano Park ERZ 1.92 sq. mi. 1,229 acres
~ ~ollywoOd Park ERZ 1.56 sq. mi. 998 acres
~ Hill Country Vilagt ERZ .58 sq. mi. 371 acres
~ Developed ERZ with San Antonio C.L. as%of San AntonioTotalERZ 21 sq. mi. 13,440 acres (75%)
~ Deyeloped ERZ with San Antonio C. L.
as % of Bexar County Total 21 sq. mi. 13,440 acres (12%)
~ Underground storage ta sites on
ERZ San Antonio City Limits 27
~ Underground storage tank sites on TZ with San Antonio City Limits 110
~ Single wall underground storage tank
sites on . the ERZ with San Antonio City Limits 3
~ Single wall underground storage ta sites. on the TZ with San Antonio City Limts 63
3 DESCRIPTION OF EDWARDS GEOLOGY PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE EDWARS AQUIR
There are' three basic components to the Edwards. Aquifer system:
(1) the Drainage Area of the Edwards Plateau
(2) the Recharge Zone along the Balcones Escarpment, and (3) the. Artesian/Reservoir Area (including Transition Zone) afthe edge of the Gulf Coastal Plain.
Precipitation fallng on the drainage area. is transported by streams to the Balcones Fault Zone, where it penetrates the ground and recharges the aquifer. Tle groundwater then
moves by gravity though the pore spaces in the. limestone fromareas where the water levels
are at higher elevations to areas where the water levels are at lower elevations (toward the
major springs). Water is withdrawn by wells or discharged at the springs. If there were no wells, in the long run the average spring discharges would exactly offset the average annual recharge.
The "aquifer" often refers to the combintion of the recharge zone. and the. artesian zone. These areas total about 3600 square miles. The aquifer spans 180 miles from Brackettile, in Kiney County on the west, to Kyle, in Hays County on the east, and ranges from 5 to 30 miles wide.
Drainage Area
. About 4,400 square miles in 13 counties: Edwards, Real, Bandera, Kerr, Gilespie, Kendall, Blanco, as well as parts of Kiney, Uvalde, Medin, Bexar,Comal and, i Hays Counties. i I I.i . The drainge basin in' ths . area funnel. stormwater run-off into streams that flow across the recharge area. Since most. aquifer recharge occurs .tho~gh streambeds, ths funneling effect is an importt function of the drainge' area. . The Edwards Plateau is composed of Edwards and Glen Rose limestones. Since the Edwards limestone is porous, some of the run-off in ths area is stored temporarily after a rawal. Stream that originte flOm the' drainage area continue to flow for long period .. a.fer raintorms. ,. becausetbe water,storedninJhe limestone slowly migrates out of the rock to sustain the base flow of the streams.
. The land surface on the Edwards Plateau ranges in altitude from 2300' msl in the west to about 100' msl in the east. Vegetation is priarily woodlands' (oak,
mesquite and cedar), with large areas cleared for livestock grazing.
5 PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE EDWARS AQUIR
Recharge Zone
. About 1Soo square miles directlysouth ' of the drainage ~rea, including parts of Kinney, Uvalde, Medina, Bexar, Comaland Hays Counties.
. In this area. many closely. spaced, nearly vertical faults occur along the relatively narrow BalconesFaultZone,exposing. fractured. Edwards .Lime.stone at the land surface. As the streams originating in the Drainage Area cross this zone, much of their, flow percolates though the streambeds into the aquifer. All major streamsín the region except the Guadalupe River lose water to the aquifer. Sinkoles and cavern are common in this area. i' i . During, low-flow periods, virtally all streamflow is reciiarged to the . aquifer. The \
streams in the western part of the plateau. . are thus generally dry when they reach the Gulf Coastal Plain, except during floods when streamflow exceeds the recharge rate.
. The, NuecesRiver Basin accounts for 58% of the aquifer's average total recharge.
The Bexar County portion of the recharge zone (some 175 square miles) accounts for only 10% of annual recharge. Only about 34.S square. miles (2.3 %) . of the recharge zone iswithnthe citylimits ofSah Antonio. Approximately 11.6% of the recharge zone is located in Bexar,. County.
Artesian/Reservoir Area
. The Aresian/Reservoir Area (including the tranition zone) consists of about 2100
square' miles,. directly . south of the rechage zone.. Ths. includes. parts of. Kiney,
Uvalde, Medina, Be~ar, Comal and Hays Counties, and. very small portions of AtascosaandGuadaIupe . Counties.
. In ths area, the Edwards Limestone is buried beneath Del Rio Clay and other confing formations..' . The .. Edwards Formation. averagesaboutSOO. feet. thick in this area, and itslopes down to about 100 feet below the Jandsurface at the southern
edge of th ZOiie.
. Ths area consists of many pore ...spacesand..a complex network.ofsQlutionopenigs,
with a great capacity for storig and moving .water. The groundwater in ths area moves generally east and then norteast, toward the spring openigs.
. The part of ths area with the greatest porespace and' the highest yielding wells is a relatively narrOW band from near San. Antonio. norteastward though the vicinty
of Comal and San Marcos Springs. Wells in ths band commonly yield 600-700 gallons per minute. . A single artesian well in southwest Bexar County, at the Living
Waters catfish farm, produces about 40 milion gallons per day.
6 PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE EDWARS AQUIR
. The . ,transition zone is generally that ..area where geologic formations including portions of the Del Rio Clay, Buda. Limestone, Eagle Ford GrouP,... Austin Chalk,
Pecan Gap Chalk, and Anacacho Limestone crop out in proximity to and soutli and southeast of the. recharge zone and . where. faults, fractures, and Qther geologic features present a possible avenue. for recharge of surface ,water .to the Edwards Aquifer. The transition zone is also idtmtified. as that area designated as such' on official maps. in the offices of the . Texas NaWralResourceConservation Commission
(TNRCC) .and. appropriate....underground water. conservation districts. The.transition zone ....is . primarily used in boundary definition for Petroleum Storage Tank' issues by TNRCC.
. . A groundwater divide in Kinney County separates ths region from another water bearing section of Edwards Limestone which extends though Del Rio (San Felipe
Springs) and into.Mexico. Another groundwater divide in Hays County separates the San Antonio section of the aquifer from the region which supplies Barton Sprigs~ in Austin.
. L The "Knppa Gap", an undergrouiid structure., in. the aquifer in western Medïn County, retards the flow of water from west to. east, but does not separate, the aquifer
into. isolated sections. ..' It causes., the water in the "Uvalde pool" of the aquifer .to i . remain at higher elevations than the .water in the "San Antonio ..pool." edge of tlie resetvoirarea is defmed.by a "bad waterline," which . The southernseparates . high quality waterfrombr:ickish to saline water(:: i,oomg/Lof dissolved solids) to the south.. and at lower elevations. The potential for movement of ths boundary isthesubjeèt of a. long-term study by the. U.S,. Geological . Survey, the Edwards Underground Water District and the San Antonio Water System..
. The quality of water in . the reservoir. surpasses all federal . dring water standards. Gas chlorintion is the only treatment which is required before water is introduced into the. San Antoiiodistrbution system.
. Conventionay ,the water level in the Edwards ismeasured at the "1-17 "well (A Y -68-
37-203) at Fort San Houston in San Antonio. The level in ths well is very closely
. correlate .. with-the rate of discharge at . Cornal.. Sprigs. Historical-data are- -as follows:
Record High (6/14/92): 703.2' msl Record LOw (8/17/56): 612.5' msl Long Term' Average: 663.8'msl
7 . PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE EDWARS AQUIR
Groundwater Flow
Water in the aquifer moves generally south from the recharge zone. to the artesian zone, and then east and norteast toward natural discharges at springs. The rate of movement is
extremely high in comparison with sand aquifers. Estimates at several sites range from 2 to 31 feet per day, 2 but local transmission rates of as . much as 1000 feet per day have also beenhydrology. recorded. 3 The variation in flow velocities reflects the ' aquifer's complex geology and Changes. in aquifer well levels, however, reflect changes in pressure within. the confined zone of the aquifer -- notthe actual movement of water underground. For this reasoh, recharge events raise well levels essentially instantaneously . across a wide . area. Correspondingly, pumpage at 'one site quickly affects well. levels' miles. away. i i, Spring Discharges
Before there was any pumping, the aquifer was held · in a natural balance between recharge and the spring discharges. There are five major sprigs in the region: Leona (in Uvalde), San Antonio and SaiiPedro'(in San Antonio), Comal. (New Braunfels), and San Marcos. Comal and San Marcos Springs are the largest in. Texas. A number. of other. sprigs. also flow intermittently i whenever current recharge raises the level of the aquifer to ,sufficient
elevations. If there were no pumping from the, aquifer, in the long run these spring
discharges would stil (after some time Jag) 'exactly offset the aquifer's recharge.
. _____u....____..____.._ 2R. W.MaCiå:y~t.ÁSiiaii, and R.L. Rettan, AppÍication and uÁralysis . of Borehole
Data for the . Edwards Aquifer' in the San Antonio. Texas Region. Lp-139 (Austin: Texas
Departent oJ Water Resources, 1981).
3 A. E.Ogden, . R. A. Quick, S. R. Rothermel, 'D. L. Lundsfordand C. C.Snider, Hvdrog:eological and Hydrochemical . Investigation . of the Edwards Aquifer. in the San
Marcos Area. Texas. Report RI-86 (San Marcos: Edwards Aquifer Research and Data Center, 1986).
8 PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE EDW ARS AQUIR
Water in Storage
The total volume of water stored in the aquifer is estimated to be between 25 and 55 milion AF. 4
. This. is more than the total in all of the surface reservoirs in Texas combined.
. However, much of this water iswithin smaH openings in the rock matrix, not in larger openings where most groundwater is produced. Therefore the total. amount which could actually be. pumped is unkown.
. Within the range of historical experience, each! foot decline in the J-17 well is associated with about 40,000 AF of total pumping and spring discharge. 5 This. ratio between water level and water volume is approximately constant down to the recorded minium of 612' msl. Whether it would remain constant below that level is unkown. . Assuming this ratio does remain constant down to the level of San Marcos Springs (575' msl),there would be about 1.8 milionAFavailtlble between the point where Comal Springs go dry and the point where San Marcos Springs' would go dry.6
The Bad Water Line7
II The bad water line" is the boundar between high quality water and brackish to Saline water ()o.1 ,OOmg/L of dissolved solids), at lower levels in the Edwards limestone. This line extends along the southern edge' of the aquifer froin Brackettile to Austin.
. This nonpotable water has beeIl found to. both horizontally and vertically below the
freshwater aresian zone. If the fresh water aquifer level is lowered because of groundwater pumpage or decreased recharge, ths water could. migrate from the
deeper part of the aquifer.
4 R. L. Maclay, "Edwards Aquifer in the San Antonio Region: Its Hydrology and Managemeiit",SoutJ Tex:as (Jologic . So~iety Bulletin. HJ:ecenib~r1989.
5 Techncal Advisory Panel to the Special CoIlttee in the Edwards Aquifer, Techncal Factors in Edwards Aquifer Use and Management. (Austin: '1990).
6 Techncal Advisory Panel Report
7 All discussion in this section is based' on the report of the Techncal Advisory Panel to the SpeciaL Committee on the Edwards Aquifer. 9 PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE .EDWARS AQUIR
ì . Increases in salinity of well water could result in public water supplies that would not i 1 meet the state Department. of Health water quality standards. Ground water in some wells along the bad water line 'did d~teriorate in the drought of the.. 1950s. Hôwever, good. quality water returned. quickly when the water levels rose again. after the i drought.
. Movement of the bad water line could also jeopardize the quality of the spring flows, i particularly at Comal Springs (which are . less than2 miles fromthis boundary) and
San Marcos Springs (1/2 mile from this line) . Deterioration in the quality of spring
water, .could result. in the loss of aquatic. biota within the. springs and the aquifer. j However, . there are no specific data to describe the impact which water quality
changes. . might . have '.. on . these organisms, and .no . watel' quality changes have'. been i ' observed to date at either location. . J
. Flow' from the bad, water zone to. the. freshwatetzoneise.videncedbya small
increase in sodium and chloride which has been observed at Barton.. Springs in Austin
as spring discharge declines... Although Barton Springs is isolated hydrologically from
the. San " Antonio region of the. aqiiifer, ths suggests . that . a.. similar' mechanism could work at Carnal and Saii.Marcos Springs.
District, and the . The U.S. Geological Survey, The EdwardsUnderground Water San
. Antonio Water System have un4erten ' a long. term study. of the potential for
moveinent . of the, bad water line and its possible effects. Ths study involves a network of monitoring wells in Bexar, Comal and Hays Counti.es. Recharge
. The Edwards. isiiniqueamong groundwater,. aquifers in its . ability to recharge large' quantities
of water quickly. On average, ths recharge is offset by discharges, both from natural springs and by pumping.
. Recharge.comes priary from surface streans flowing over the fractured Edwards
limestone which is exposed atthe surface of the land in the recharge zone. Asinall
amount also comes from the iniltration of rainwater falling directly over the
recharge zone.
. Two-thds of the rechage occurs in the western counties of the aquifer region, about
10% in Bex~.. CoUPty"and . mostoLthe,restu inCoinaIC_Otloty'uThe n Çitygf Sail,.
Antonio includes about 34.5 square miles (0.4%) of the area of the recharge zone.
Percentages of recharge by county and by river basin are in Tables 1 and 2.
the . Data on quality of recharge have been calculated, by U.S. Geological Survey since
1934. The long term average recharge (1934-1991) is approximately 651,7ooAF/YR.
. The average recharge, however, is subject to extreme varation from year to year.
of 43.700 Actual recharge has. ranged from a low acre-feet in 1956 (at the height of acre-feet in 1987. the drought in the 1950s) to over 21 milion
10 PHYSICAL CHARCTERISTICS OF THE EDWARS AQUIFER
. The variation increases the stress on the environment at Comal and San Marcos Springs. Comal Springs dried up completely from June to November, 1956, resulting in a loss of some species until they were reintroduced from San Marcos Springs in 1975.
. A verage annual rainfall in the region ranges from 21. 16 inches in Brackettvile to 33 . 8 inches in San Marcos. Historical data on rainfall in the region is contained in Table 3.
. A verage rainfall over the last two decades has been substantially above the long term average for the region. This has increased the spring discharges and held down the demand for pumping in recent years, thus obscuring a developing imbalance between recharge and total discharges.
. The historical balance between recharge and discharges (springs, pumping, and total) is in table 4.
11 SuTTC;li ~:c: f"l"WAFl05 H, '---'~':£? .~;.-~':;! ~~-:(': -: ,-7-- , r "". ., j ~ - ''''-' , ). t~ ' - /;; - t- ~__4.~-: ..(---r--- ~~~ -- -".'-' --..¡ --1 "- 1'-" ./1 ~. \'-2." Jert!."M/' . , ~J;"..' __ ~_ __ v.i-~i(~. ;__~'=I' "'-,L.. en..,ENDAl, ~ .',-..,."'" . - ~ .,~":.. -~..~ " " --~-' , ,(J---._-7' Vi J .~'-.. ) .EAL.. 'r- ~"'\ : J""'i '1\"'""~ 'f ~Ei~,,\ ,7/' Jl"'. ;.1l r- ,EDWARDS " .0"' ;,~/-- --'?" PLATEU -,~~ - J' -' "--' / i ..d( I t ~ \-rI'Ç--;;;.-;';T'-" '. ¡ 'I)t.'-'Il .. JH)-' ¡l \ , /1"-\" ",\ L ' I,:;"" .?'r- ~'\ . ",,,,,,:"\- ... ~ j¡'i( ".'i ~ b~E;- ~~:---4"'" ,--__:-;':_J_: ~ ¡ j\ (" ...f¡r~h'. fAlO()~ .
~L-' 1 '- y '. I .. ì I- N ;.; (- b;~"- ~ I '= .~
NORT SOUT ~lJtl1 ~"'i ~CømøtarEDWAROS PlteAU · I. 20 JO MUS Ad 110m B_u, Reiiii, EXTION I' ',1 ',," andBoIn,19l Catcment area o 10 20 3) KI ¡;....,...... Appr1e "'.'. rege are Art area-Includes some unconfined areas within the ~ frhwate zo immediate adjacet to the redare ar r'-¡ i I Conlact Drae di i l.-----"'1 Re of st th lo war to Edwas aqui ,__... TE ~ - - - "Ba" lin '" SlVlW!II¡P: L ) Dir of gm-w ii \~I -." \. ",~~.,,~'"'\'\""."~ /r I -- Faul- -Am sh re ve moveen \ ( i 1 Sprig '-.. ! LOCATION MA Noiio sce DIGRTIC CR SEN Figur 1. Hydloc seg. Table 1. Average Recharge by River Basin, \1934~1991
Nueces Helotes Cibolo - West Frio - Creek - Creek- Nueces Dry Frlo Sabinal Salado Dry CQ.a Blanco Rivers Rivers River Creek ' Creek River I TOTAL 114.8 125. 1 . 39.7 101.7 60.5 67.5 103.6 38.8 651.7
Percent 17 .6% 19.2% 6.1% 15.6% 9.3% 10.. 4% 15.9% 6.0% I 100 . 09, Source: E~Bulletin 51.
Table 2. Average Recharge by County ,1934 - 1990
Kinne Uvalde Medina Bexar Coiial Ha s TOTAL , .. Recharg~ Area VJ Square .Ues 301.30 551.91 217 . 09 174.97 157 . 59 144 . 20 1,547.06 Percent 19 . 48% 35.67% 14.03% 11.31% 10. 19% 9 . 32% 100 .0% Average .Annual Recharg~* Aci'.e -feet ** 428,300 * * 67 , 200 103,500 37 , 800 636 , 700 .* *:* Percent 67.26% 10.55% 16.25% 5.94% I 100 . 0%
"Estì.ates basedonallocatìonot drainage basin areas by county, using average recharge from 1934 through 1990 (637,700AF). hQata c9.bined with Uvalde County; not avaUable separately. Sourcè: EUWD,unpubUshed' data.. ...-... W' Cõ\ollli=i.-;: :iim I'l1rcos 1945 22.37 26;60 29.57 30.46 39.38 31.74 1946 26.41 14.16 29.65 45.17 61.60 52.24 1947 22.67 NA 18.98 17.32 27.52 27.53 1948 18.31 NA 28.82 23.64 19.88' 21.27" 1949 34.41 NA 39.90 40.81 43.21 36.22 1950 18:27 15.28 24.91 19.86 21.13 21. 10 1951 16.07 15.63 24.05' 24.44 24.84 30.88 1952 18.24 23.16 24.56 26.24 33.87 39.91 1953 18.34 21.44 20.61 17.56 30;06 33.39 i 1954 15 :6Ø 14.72 11.92 13.70 10.,12 13.42 1955 18.36 20.87 21.21 18. i8 I 23.12 26.44 1956 9.29 11.29 15.54 14.31 18.41 18.37 1957 39.30 40.03 35.09 48.83 51.88 46.51 1958 39.03 41.18 I 41.60 39.69 36.40 39.08 1959 31.51 27.02 30.68 24.50 40.45 43.47 1960 23.98 26.24 32.37 29.76 34.28 45.48 1961 26.26 27.24 27.36 26.47 15.70' 30,02 ¡ 1962 14.12 13.58 f7.85 23.90 27.40 28.47 1963 16.70 18.99 18.90 18.65 23;41 19;90 1964 22.30 23.78 28.29 31.88 30.65 30.27 1 1965 26.21 29.41 30.80 36.65 45.16 45.00 1966 20.87 21.54 29.46 21.44 25.98 27.12 1967 20;10 23.89 30.33 29.26 '31.74 26.41 ) 1968 25.20 29.88' 31.91 30.40 35.97 37.13 1969 33.38 33.05 32.30 31.42 33.01 36.59 1970 13.59 22.13 30.96 22.74 35.23 32.30 i 1971 31.01 31.00 32.96 31.80 29.43 31.10 1972 15.49 21.10 25.43 31.49 42.02 31.90 1973 30.85 ;SS.14' 47.82 52.28 51.66 47.91 ¡ 1974 30.94 20.93' 36.41 37.00 42.85 31.28' 1975 24.92 23.65, 25.84' 25.67 35.82 48.64 1976 46.04 40.82 45.21 39.13 49.06 47.46 J 1977 19.90 17.06 19.40 29.64 24.83 27.69 1978 18.48 21.28 24.64 35.99 36.35 33.08 1979 32.35 31.44 28.83 36.64 3~.72 38.74 1980 23.05 22.67 21.27 24.23 33.69 29.56 1981 26.24 30.19 27.40 36.37 43.23 49.62 1982 23.35 18.44 2'.99 22.96 21.04 22.47" 1983 24.45' 23.33 20.92' 26.11 34.13 36.95 1984 15.3!' 20.67 21.19' 25.95 20.90 8.26' 1985 5.76' 23.67 2,1.94 41.43 37.26 33.54 . 1986 j 29.86 29.62' 36.01 42.73 47.14 42.20 1987 36.39 38.36 40.09 37.96 37.33' 37.94 .1988 15.20 13.52 H 9.a1' ,19.01 ... 16.21' 21.50 1989 j 18.65 17.26 16.01 22.14 20.99 25.46 199 24,73 30.06 27.01 38.31 24.58d 35.14' 1991 21.77 35.16 34.54 42.76 58.Ò9 5 'l 49
I Years of Record 91 74 89 108 ) 96 91 Long Term Average 24.12 25.27. 28.33 28.62 32.34 33.80 'Inconletedata;not inçluded in long term average. Source: EUW Bulletin 51.
14 \ i nousanc;s or acre - feet per year) Spring PUli.ng Total 'fear Recharge - Recharge DisCharges Discharges Discharges Discharges 1945 527.8 461.5 153.3 614.8 - 87.0 1946 556.1 428.9 155.0 583.9 -27.8 1947 422.6 426.5 167.0 593.5 170.9 1948 178.3 281.9 168.7 450.6 - 272.3 1949 508.1 300.4 179.4 479.8 28.3 1950 200.2 272.9 193.8 466.7 - 266.5 1951 139.9 215.9 209.7 425.6 - 285.7 1952 275.5 209.5 215.4 424.9 - '149.4 1953 167.6 238.5 229.8 468.3 - 300.7 1954 162.1 178.1 246.2 424.3 - 262.2 1955 192.0 127.8 261.0 388.8 - '196.8 1956 43;7 69;8 321.1 390.9 . 347.2 1957 1,142.6 219.2 237.3 456.5 68.1 1958 1,711.2 398.2 219.3 617.5 1,093.7 1959 690.4 384.5 234.5 619.0 71.4 1960 S24.8 428.3 227.1 655.4 169.4 1961 717.1 455.3 228.2 683.5 33.6 1962 239.4 321.1 267.9 589.0 . 349.6 1963 170 .1' 239.6 276.4 516.0 . 345.3 1964 4,13.2 213.8 260.2 474.0 . 60.8 1965 623.5 322.8 256.1 578.9 44.6 1966 615.2 315.3 255.9 571.2 44;0 1967 466.5 216." 341. 3 557.4 . 90.9 1968 88.7 408.3 251.7 660.0 224.7 1969 610.5 351.2 307.5 658.7 . 48.2 1970 661.6 397.7 329.4 727. 1 . 65.5 1971 925.3 272.7 406.8 679.5 245.8 1 1972 756.4 375.8 371.3 747.1 9.3 1973 1,486.5 527.6 310.4 838.0 648.5 1974 658.5 483.8 377.4 861. 2 - 202.7 i , 1975 973.0 . 540.4 327.8 86.2 104.8 1976 894.1 503.9 349.5 853:4 40.7 1977 952.0 580.3 380.6 960.9 . 8.9 j 1978 502.5 375.5 431. 8 807.3 . 304.8 1979 1,117.8 523.0 391.5 914.5 203.3 1980 406.4 328.3 491.1 819.4 - 413.0 I 1981 1,44S.4 407.3 387.1 794.4 654.0 1982 422.4 333.3 453.1 786.4 .. 364. a
198 420.1 301.6 418.5 720.1 " 300.0 1984 197.9 in.5 529.8 702.3 - 504.4 198 1,003.3 334.0 522.5 856.5 146.8 ul98 _n 1~153. 7 388.1 ' 429:3n 81'7.3 336.4 1987 2,003.6 558.0 364.1 922.0 1,081.6 1988 355.5 369.8 540:0 909.7 -554.2 1989 214.4 224.1 542.4 766.6 - 552.2 1990 1,123.1 240. 489.4 730.0 393.2 1991 1,508.4 354. 436.0 790.3 718.1
Source: EUWO Bulleti n 51.
15 RULES AND POLICIES CITY OF SAN ANTONIO NON-DEGRAATION RESOLUTION
In October, 1987, the City Council passed Resolution 87-47-72 which endorsed and
formalized. the City of San AntOniO'5 policy tOWard groundwater protection for the Edwards Aquifer. The resolution addressed the following: 'ì i 1. That .thegoal to.. maintain the high. quality of the Edwards
Aquifer for use in the region be established as a high priority.
2. That the recoIlendations. made. .by the City Council Aquifer
Comnittee be adopted as policy.
The City Council recognied, this. policy as a major determing factor in the. region's growt and., recognied its responsibilty to protect . the water quality. of the Edwards Aquifer. . The
non-degradation... policy.... strengtened .. . the City's efforts in 'providing. loc.al. enforc.emel1tover
land use activities onthe Recharge. Zone. Thepolic.y was embodied in the report entitled,
'The Ed\Vards Aquifer: '.. Perspectives.. For Local and Re~ional . ,Action" . , Non-degradation requirements... in the report provided..animplementation .program'for San Antonio and other entities to protec.tthe Edwards water quality. The resolution also recognied the need for
a comprehensive' . regional and local . groundwater. program.
i
j
I
17 TACCHAPER313 TNRCC EDWARS, AQUIR PROTECTION PROGRA ROLES
In 1970 the. Texas Water Quality Böard issued the first Edwards ,Aquifer Rules, establishig the first rules . regulating development ,on the Edwards. Aquifer Recharge,' Zone. The rules provide, d restrictions, . fO,r w, aste, disp, osal, onth,e Ed,.. w, ards, Re. charg", e"Zo, n,e",. Be,tween ,1, 971"and ì i 1974, waterqualìtyissues were brought to the forefront whenthe devtlopmentknown asthe I i San Antonio Ranch was started. While the San Antonio Ranch.controversy was fought in
the.courts~ ".the , Texas amended., the Edwards ' AquiferRules.in 1974.to v¡ ater Quality Board expand and strengthen the rules. In the early 1980's, after a reor~~niatiqn i oLthestate
agencies, the power ,tq '. enforce .,theEdwards Aquifer Rules JeU..to the' Texas, Water COniission , now the TeXas, Natural ,Resource ConservationCoinission .' (TNRCC).
According to state law,TNRCC is required to hear testimony regarding protection of the
Edwards Aquifer and proposed .cpangesto the Edwards AquiferRulesori an annual basis. The Edwards. A.quifer Rules, have,beenanende~ . contiIuously since ,thefirstniles were released in 1970. The last changes to the Edwards Aquifer Rules became effective on i March 21, 1990.. The amendments are outlined in Attchnent 2. The following is a brief Edwards.synopsis of the current TNRCCregulations Aquifer: (Chapter 313) tq protect .the. water quality of the
SUBCHAPTER A:
313.1 States thepurpöseoftherulestoregulate the activities that
pose direct theats to the .. water quality.of the . Edwards. Aquifer. Ths section makes an. iiporttstatement ,tht, "nothg.ii ths subchapter, is intended to ,restrct the powers of the commssion
or any other governental ,entio/ to prevent, . correct, or. curtil
activities tht result or might result in pollution of theECwards Aquifer. II "
313;2 Dermes and limits the applicabilty of these , rules, tö.the
Edwards Aquifer and no other aquifers in the state of Texas.
313.3 Contain deIintiöns. of term used in' the rules.
313.4 the Re(lires .. ~PProvaI ,of aW ater ,~ollution.. Abatenient, Plan by Texas Natural, Resource Conservation. 'Commssion for all I- Prol'se ,reguate development ,on the Rechage ,Zone. ,.The I . . .setìón also.speifes'tleIhöñfatiöfiwmcnmUstbenprõvìâed--n .I relatig to the contents of the Water Pollution Abatement Plan.
313.5 Requires the approval of organed, sewage collection system
plan, and, specifications, by . the . Texas NaniralResource
Conservation Commssion for all organied sewage colle.ction lines on, the Rechage Zone. Describes design, constrction,
and testing inormation which must be provided to the state.
18 .. .' TACCHAPER313
TNRCC EDWARS AQUIR PROTECTION PROGRA RULES
313.6 Requires, that no new or increased discharges from. Wastewater Treatnent.or Disposal Systems occur on. the Recharge Zone. Provideseffl\lent.treatment. standards that must be niet by
existing Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems.
313.7 Reserved
313.8 PróyidesrequireIlents for plugging..abandonêd wells' on the recharge' zone.
313.9 Prohibits specific . activities. on the Recharge Zone and Transition ZoneQf tlie Edward.sAquifer.
313.10 Contain.requireinents . for~esign of new Underground ..' Storåge TaIls (UST) an~upgraningof existing UST .. systenisusedto store hydrocarbons 01' hazardous materials on the Rechage Zone:
313.11 Contain requirements for . the. design of new above-ground
storage tank cmd. their ,containent/drainge.. " areas on the Recliarge . Zoneand..Transition...Zont."oftheEdwards' Aquifer.
313.12 Provides fot.. consideration of ..... exceptions.. ..,to.. .theChapter · '3 1 3 rules.
313,.13 Provides fOr reviews of decisions by the Executive Director of
the Texas NaturalResource Conservation Commssion' based on justifiable ..'interest.
313.14 Provides forënforceme.nt by the. Texas Natural Resource
Conservation CoIIssion for noncompliance withChapter 313 rues.
313.15 ReCgnes' the. authority of undetgrôundwater conservation
distcts in general, to preserve, prevent waste of, and protect . thquaityof~underground water,".
SUBCHAPTER B:
313.21-27 Describes requirenients for application submitts, requests for approvals, and review-related fees.
A reprit of the T AC .. Chapter 313 . Edwards Aquifer PIotection Program Rules may be found in the appendix of ths document.
19 SMOKE TESTING
Requirements under Chapter 31J of the Edwards Board Order charge the San Antonio Water
System with the responsibilty to inspect and evaluate sanitary sewers withi the Edward's
Aquifer Recharge Zone on a 5-yearcontinuing basis. .' The affected area is divided into five
s,ubareas. Each year 20%. of the total area is completed.
The.. inspection and evahiation of the Sanitary .Sewer System begins with a visual inspection and docuiientation,of the manhole condition.,. After visual inspection is completed, a physical
inspection of the integrity of the Sewer lateral,. sewer mains andclean..outsbegin.. . A smoke test
audits the physical condition of the sewer main and lateral liie. , Smoke testing consists of ì blockig. segme.Iits ofth. esan..d ta.... ry sew. er an. d.'. v." isu.a.,. 1.1. y. inpect.m....g.. fo..r th... e. p. .rese.nce of s.nio. ke ,le..akS l , . iIlthe system. If smoke is detected on private propert or commercial business,. notification is posted .imediately.to inorm.theowner.of their responsibilty.
All d~ficienciesofthemainsewer . and manholes are reported to the.. San Antonio Water System' s
COnstrction Departent. Defects.in the santary sewer, in the Edwards Aqiiifer Recharge
ZOlie, with the. City limts, are. reported...tothe City.ofSanAntoniods.,.Building.Insp~ction
DepartentJor '. repair. . All deficiencies in sewer . laterals.arethenreportedto .'. thehomeowIler
or ,business owner for. reniedial., action: ,.. All .correspondeIlce . isdoclJentedfor . appropriate
corrective . actionplai. and follow follow-up. A fOrmal report documenting inpections, 'up
measures is . sent .tothe. Texas Natural .'.ResourceConservation CommssiOJ;i.(TNRCC) . Follow
up by the City ,...San Antm1IoWater ...System, homeo\Vner,. or.businessownerisin0nitoredby the
also forwardect to StormwaterDeparent to inure compliance; thsinf'ormation is the TNRCC.
The purpose , of ths . audit is to identif actual . or potential sources . of pollution. attbuted. to the
sanitary. sewer system in the Edwards Aquifer Rechage . Zone and inure an expeditious schedule
for corrective action is followed.
20 WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLANS
The Edwards Aquifer Rules (TAC 313.4) requires that an'application known às a Water Pollution Abatement Plan (wAP) be submitted for new development , on the Edwards Aquif~r Recharge Zone. While initially thes~ reports were usually little more than a few
pages in length, they have expanded into extensive tepons. The type of WPAP to be submitted wilLdepend on the nature 'of the proposed project. The City Council Coinittee in their. report THE EDWARS AOUIFER: PERSPECTIVES FOR LOCAL AND REGIONAL ACTION made recommendations " for increasing,..the role of both the. City ofSanAntonioándthe Edwards Underground W.ater
District in, reviewing new developmentoatheRecharge . Zone. Currently, .. four copies of each 'WPAP . must be submitted tOithe Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission forr~view..The copiesar~ distributed to both the local Distrct.lJoffce.andtheState office of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commssion" the San ,Antonio Water
System, and'the Edwards Undergr()uiid Water Distrct. Both the San Antonio Water System and the Edwards Underground Water Distrct have 30 days to review the WPAP and make comments back to the Texas Natural Resource. Conservation Commission office regarding recommendations,., and concern. . The , Texas, Natural Resource, Conservation Commssion reviews the cOmments made'.by the twoJocal ,authorities." lfthey approve these cOmments, they . wil. be included in, the. Texas, Natural Resource. Conservation Commissipn's 'letter' of approval as special conditions.
21 GUIDELINES FOR REQULATEDDEVELOPMENT ON THE EDWAR AQUIFER REHARGE ZONE
i NO, EOWARDS RULES DO NOT APPY
lI, ClYNO' lIAP' 1l --Il ,~ STAn: HT OI HAiNCISo SUl ANSlOl FACl.IT TI APVAI OfPUHS AEo-O.
TECHCAL REPORT ENVIROIiENT AL BASIC INFOFU,lA TION MAP GEOLOGAL STUDY HAE. ADRE . L HllU Of 1l0P LOC TI .. (us! Z. li TO I' IlFlCATI Of SlIF TECN NI. FOR STOR lATE l'UTION ICAH REGE FE- TUll i. Ii TO Pl BY , COHTIl' ,L ~T SITE PLN lIN EXTI l'UTAHS FR . GEOGT. . -i COOI EH S-iAH NOT AECl Fall 1l- :i OWN AECHl FLTlI OPS LE TH 25 . :l 'CE OI ENEE 4. Il Of SHE FAlY RES 4. PROCT COACT OF SI __ 'PU lIASTtATE COLETION OI 1lAI LOTS 5 TRTI . IlSI'AL ACR OI UR II SI
HYDROCAR STORAGE
REllWETS WASTE'TE COECTI UHD SVSTDi L£ DETI lIAS CI II Il WAU' COI. _ATE DI wm CS LI. AN..AI: FE LOTS SVSTDi SEWAGHOOITAlS , . ~oI. CL i L_ ,FI l8VECOlI
. TI IIVl "ACAGEINI',YØTIWAV AEOl ll1O INllTI
ABBREVIATIO DENIAL WPAP-WATE Pl ~ OAY TO 181Q iu AI' TO TNI TNR -TEX Hl11,-- CClAT1 CI CS ~n¡I'-sM'__ uses '-I STA TI CI' SU SAliS -SAN ANT_ lIATI SYTD æ PREPARED BY: WATER RESOURCe DEPAATMENT JANU#r /99
22 EDWARS AQUIR TECHNICAL GUIANCE MANAL
The Texas Natual Resource ,Conservation Commission has developed a Techncal Guidance
Manual to assist the regulated community incompliance with the Edwards Aquifer Regnlationsas detailed in 30 Texas Adminstrat;.ve Code (T AC) Chapter 313, also known -1 as the "Edwards Rules". , Th~ San Antoni() Water System participated ,inthe development I i of this Technical Guidance Manual, as well as, other city agencies and regulatory authorìties
(Le. City of Austin, Baron Springs, Edwards Underground ,Water District,etc.) which are located oii,orhave jurìsdictionoverregulated activities on the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
Ths Techncal Guidance Manualisexpected to aid the regulated community by providing
design criteria , for non point source 'filtration design and' by providing, recognied alterntives
(Best Mangement Practices) which can be utilized. A large part of the Techncal ,Guidance
Manual is based on requirements from the City of Austin and the Lower Colorado River
Authorìty, as well as, requirements set fort in the U.S. EPA National Pollutat Discharge System Elimination System (NPDES).
It is hoped that the Techncal Guidance Manual wil provide a mean to addresS some of
the problems which arise from lánd use activities on the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone and possibly aid in future "Edwards Rules" changes. If successful, ths document may be
adopted as par of the TAC Chapter 313 rules.
23 ZONING REPORTS
On October 2, 1975, City Council established the Edwards Recharge Zone Overlay District. Development with ths District is under tighter restrictions than the Chapter 313 Rules in order to prevent containation to the citizens of San Antonio water supply and to protect the public's health.
Under the rules of the Unified Development Code, if an applicant asks for a change of zonig within the Edwards Recharge Zone District, the San Antonio Water System is responsible for performing a site assessment and providing a report for first, the Zoning Commission's review and secondly the City Council's review. The report provides a site description, identification of potential recharge features, an assessment of their sensitivity, environmental concern associated with the land use, a recommendation whether to approve or disapprove the land use, and specific recommendations that an applicant should follow if the land use is approved. If City Council approves the land use and the recommendations, then the applicant must adhere to each one. Restrctions put into place by the City Council must be at least as strict as the Edwards Aquifer Rules.
24 ~i I
I
i i
i '
i
EDWARDS OVERLAY DISTRICT FRO M THE U NIFI.ED DEVELOPMENT, ~ CODE 1 Division 6. overlay Districts
i
Subdivision A. Edwards Recharge ZOne Oistrict
1" Sec. 35-3100. Purpose.
The Edwards Recharge Zone ) District (ERZDl has been established for locations where the Edwards and associated limestone formations come to the surface to provide a recharqearea for the underground water supply contained ,within these ,formations. The ,. rE!charge area i also can, provide an entrance to the underground water supply for contaminated wate:rnin-off from uses on the recharge zone as well . as "from the ,related sensitive area . Thusthls recharge zone district is designedtd not allow land i toxic, corrosive, ",polluted, "poisonous, radioactive"unpalatable,uses which would produc:e or otherwise dangerous substances ,injurious which, c:oQldotherwise adversely ,affect tothe the waterpublic supply, health ,and or thfareby minimizing the risk of. potential occurrences wherein ,such substances could, ,enter the ,water reservoir. , ,Land 'uses, 'permitted. are those not having ,operations" ' produc:tion, ,or, storage ,of 1 hazardous materials which could contribute contaminants "to tJe water supply.'" Additional land Uses are permitted withapprdpria.te restrictions which will protect against th. spread of contaminants du.eto the operations. 1 Sec. 35-3101. .Boundaries.
j The limits of the Edwards Recharge Zone District (ERZD) are described on Unit.dStates Geo.loqicalSurvey Quadrangle Maps, being
copies of the officj,almaps in the oftices of the ,Texas Water 1 couission, and ,are defined in the TexassAdministrativeCode, ,31 TAC .313.1-313.11. If th.limits of theERZD cannot be accurately determined ,thenthè ,Board Of Ad:) usaent ,shall inte:rret the district boundaries after Obtaining such geologic information as is l~ 'necessaTy from the Edwards Underground Water District or other properly" designatedaqency. Sec. 35-3102. Zoning Classification. Overlay district. The EdwardsRechargeZone District (ERZD) is designeda.(a) an overlay to the regular zoningdistricts~Property located wi1:i1lthis overlay district must also be ,designated as being "w:Lthil'on.-o~--tme--'reqularuzoniiig-dlstricts-.- -Authorlzedn-usèS
must be permitted in both the regular zoning district and the overlay district. (b) "Zoning designation. The zoning designation of pröperty located within the EdwarQs Recharge~one District shall regular zone syiol and the overlay dist.rict Syiolcons asa1st suffi.x.of, ~he For example, if a parcel lszoned R-3 and is also located within the. Edwards Recharge Zone District, the zoning designation Of the 1993 III -47
26 property would be R-3 (ERZO) . In effect, the designation of property as being within the Edwards Recharge Zone District places such property in a new zoning district classification and all procedures and requirements for zoning and rezoning must be followed. Sec. 35-3103. Uses permitted within the ERZD.
Uses permitted by right and with special City Council approval are specified in DivisionS of this article, Permi tted.Uses. It shall be unlawful .for any. person to ,make use of ãny property located within 'the Edwards Recharge Zone District, except in accordance with such tables of permitted uses. Sec. 35-3104. Environmental protection officer report. . (a) The staff recommendation on ,a11 zoninq/rezorting cases,within. the ERZDshall include a report .fr :;the, Environmental Protection Officer. The report shall c.ontaJ.n a I;ackground description, to include a .discussion of the development, ,surro\.ndinguses, geologic factors, on-site poini: and non-point. . pollution sources,. sewer lines, proposed pollution abatement structures , and whether a water pollution abatement plan has been sUbmitted.
(b) The' r$port shall also contain a. . sumation . . of facts.. and implications on the recharge zone; . recommendatio,non zoning, pollution abatement plan needs, and monitorinq requirements; maps of the development and surrounding develoPments; and a copy of written comments which will be forwarded to, the Texas Water Commission. The report shall be JIade available to the applicant.
Sec. 35-3105. Water pollution abatement plan.
As a condition of all zoninqs/re:ioning'swithin theERZO, a. water
pOll\.tion åbatement plan. approved by the Texas Water Commission shall. be required. for all .requlated .developmeot: as established and todefined theby issuanceTexas Administrative of a buildinqCode, permit . 31TAC and/or 313.1 certificate - 313.11, prior of occupancy. Sec. 35-3106.Undergrounà st:oraqe t.anks. (aJAII new and replacement underqround storage tank systems within the ERZO shall comply with this section and the most current regulation. . 1n31 . TAC Chapter .... 334, Underground and A)oveqround storage Tanks, which' is incorporated by refer.ence aii' part of this chapter. Cb) New and replacement underground storage tanks installed within the ERZO shall require tertiary' eontainJent.. The tertiary barrier shall consist of an artificially coi:structedmaterial that is sufficiently thick and impermeable Cat least 10-' em/sec or allow permeation at a rate of no more than O. 25 ounces per square foot per 24 hours for the requlated substance stored) and be able to 1993 111-48
27 direct a release to the monitoring point and permit its detection. The barrier material shall be compatible with the regulated substance stored so that a release from the underground storage tank system will not cause a deterioration of the barrier 'allowing
a release to pass through undetected.
(e) All new and replaeementunderqround storage tank systems shall include a monitoring and detection system able to detect a release between the underground storage, tank and the tertiary barrier. The monitoring and release detection system must be capable of detecting a two-tenths (0..2) gallon per hour leak rate or a release of one. hundred fifty (150) gallons within thirty (30) days such that the probability of detection shall be at least ninety five
(95) percent and the probability of false alarm shall be no greater than five (5) percent.
1993 1II-49
28 Interdepartment Correspondence Sheet
Ci ty Council 1 TO: Environmental Protection Officer II ¡FROM:
1 Planning; Assistant City Maager for Develo¡;ent Services
I COPIES TO: STAF REPORT - ZONING CAE # SUBJECT: Dae i I. SU . - Brief sumaryof report an recarenations. i ' II. BACKGOUI 1. Developnent Description - Describe size ani .întene: use. 2. Surrouning Oses'
_ Decribedevelopnents in the drainage basin with reference to map provide:. 3. Gelogic Factors
- Discuss \oeth any significant geologic featues. 4. Identification of Point an Non-Point Pollution SOurces on the site. _ Listing of thse (i.e. hydrocarbon storage tanks, parking lots, etc.) 5. Seer Lines - Oecr ibe sewer lines. 6. NQte i.ethr a water Pollution Abateent Plan has be suitted. 7. Poll ution Ab tanent Strctures _ Decribe pollution abateent strucures tht are to be built.
III. FINDINGS _ Sumation of facts an implications on the Reharge Zone.
IV. RECMDATIONS zoning, pollution _ Envirormental Protetion Office recamenations on abatement plan nes, an monitoring reqirements. Caents may be provided by th Depatment's Science eaittee. v. ATTACHMS A. Map of th develoi;t. B. Map of surrouning developnents. c. Copyofuwritten caents i.ich wi,ll befQrwde: to the Texas Water Ccission.
ENIRO~ PRO'ION OFFICER II. Department of Environnental Maagenent
i I Approved:
DIREXOR OF ENIRONMENTAL MAGaNl 29 PLATS AN PUD PLANS
The San Antonio Water System, Aquifer Studies Division reviews plats to determine if they reflect the Site Specific Water Pollution Abatement Plan the engineer and/or the developer has approved and any special, zonig requirements.
Prior to March 1993, plats were reviewed by the San Antonio Water System. If the plat was found to be in accordance with the Unified Development Code, an approval letter with' a box to indicate approval or disapproval was checked-off. In March '1993, the Plannng
Commission requested the San Antomo Water System to provide a' written report detailng
staff's assessment of the geologic conditions. which exist at the site and to observe any
possible environmental concern. Until recently" the developer was required to have all Water' Pollution Abatement Plans approved before a plat could be approved. Planng staff determined that the wording, of the Unified ,Development Code requires only, a ,Sewer
Collection System Water Pollution AbatenientPlan be required before a plat could be
approved (Unified Development Code IV-51 Section 35-4210). Now, staff determines if the
Sewer Collection System Water Pollution Abatement Plan has been approved by the Texas Natural Resource., Conservation Commission and whether any special conditions were required which, might affect . a plat. A site specific Water Pollution Abatement. Plan which addresses stormwater run-off is frequently completed and approved by the Texas Natural
Resource COnservation' Commission prior to the platting process however, it is only required prior to release of the building permits.
Planed Unit Development (PUD) plans are currently reviewed to determe if any geologic features exist on the 'site. Any significant geologic featues found to exist on the site are deed recorded. prior to approval by the San AntJnio Water System.' Approval of the PUP plan does not include' a written report. Staff reviews the site with a detailed report at a later date when the site is platted. Staff verifies' the incorporation of any Zonig recommendations into 'thePUD plan prior to approval by the ,San Antonio Water System.
30 ,
I-
I
PLAT ,REGULATIONS FRO M THE J¡I . UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
¡ ,li Division 5. Specifications and Procedure for Plats
Subdivision A. Plat Specifications.
Sec. 35-4201. Plat size. (a) Plats shall be drawn in India ink on linen tracing cloth on sheets ,eighteen (18) inches wide and twenty-four (24) inches long, with a margin of two and one-half (2 1/2) inches on the left side of the sheet, and appropriate margins on the other three (3) sides. Plats; shall be drawn at asca'le of one hundred (100) feet ,to one
) ! (1) inch unless a smaller scale is' approved by the Director of i Planning. Plats which inc,lude one-half (1/2) acre or less in are.a I shall be drawn at a scale offifty (50) feèt to one (1) inch.
(b) Where tIore than one (1) sheet is. necessary to accommodate the entire area to be subdivided, an index Sheet showing the entire subdivision at an appropriate scale shall be attached to the plat. Sec. 35-4202. Plat contents. The plat shall show the following:
(a) The plat nwnerissuecl by the Department of Planning in the upper right corner, scale, 'north arrow, and date.
(b) The name o.f the subdivider anclthenaie of the record owner of the land involved.
(c) Location of the . subdivi.ion with respect to a corner of the surveyor tract or an oriqinalcorner of the original survey of which it is a part giving the dimensions of the s~divisi,on.
) (d) The primary control points, approved by the Director of Pulic Works, or descriptions and ties to such control points, to which all dimensions, angles, bearings, new city block numer. or county . iI block numer,. and. similar data on the plat shaii be referred:. and four (4). points on the perimeter Of. the. subdlvision, iãentifleã by coordinates that relate to the state plane coordinate system.
lines, the exact location and width of all eicis't.inq(e) The tracL boundary .... c)J: recorded streets, easements ,and other rights~of-way intersecting .. tt.n.boundaryor"stree1:s, n easements., "'aridóther rightS-Of-way forming the boundary of the tract being subdivided, and property lines of resiaential lots and other' sites with accurate dimensions, bearing or deflectinq angles and radii, area, and central angles of all curves.
, ¡ (f) Final contour data to show arainage of the sit80f the proposed .I subdivision. If the average grade of the site is five (5) percent or less, the maximum contour interval to be used shall be two (2) 1993 IV-43
32 feet. If ,the average grade exceeds five (5) percent, the maximum contour interval may be increased to five (5) feet.
(g) The name and width of each public and private street or other right-of-way in or adjacent to the subdivision. The riqht-of-way width on all streets and safety lanes shall be displayed by an overall dimension. The dimensions of the division of the ~ ~'~ right-of-way on" public streets between the center , line , of the right-of-way and respective adjacent property line shall be shown. Also , private streets and safety lanes shall be designated as such.
(h) The name of the subdivision, legal description of the property, and a number to identify each lot or site. ei) Location, dimensions, and purpose of liny easement or reservation and location of any high pressùreoil~gas, or gasoline lines. Easements., which are designated to be, converted into public street right-of-way on, a subsequent plat shall be annotated with
ì the following note: IIEasement to expire, upon incorporation into platted public
i street right-af-way.'. . ) (j) Front and side setback lines adjacent to streets.
(k) The city l'imits line and the extraterritorial jurisdiction line if either traverses the subdivision. .' (l) The location map indicating the location of the plat in relation to adjacent streets and at least two ( 2) major thoroughfares in the vicinity.
(m) A surveyor's certificate as follows: STATE .OF TEXA COUNTY OF BEXA
I hereby certify that thls plat is true and correct and was prepared from an actual survey of the property made on the ground under my super,ision.
Registered Public Surveyor Cn) Enqinéét"'. ' c:é'rtifï.c:ate.An engineer's c:ertific:ate is required . i in all cases except when the plat does not require engineering considerations.
I I ,) STATE OF TEXA COUNTY OF BEXA I I hereby certify that proper engineering consideration has been j qiven this plat to the matters of streets, lots and drainage layout. To the best of my knowledge this plat conforms to all 1993 IV-44
33 requirements of the Unified Development Code, except for those 1 variances granted by the Planninq commission of the ei ty 0 I " ReqisteredProfessionai Engineer Sworn to and subscribed before me this the day of , 19_0
Notary Pulic in and for the State of Texas (0) The owner's acknowledgment. If the owner authorizes an agent, he shall file a notarized letter to that effect.
STATE OF TEXA COUNY ÒF BEXA
The owner of land shown on this 'plat, in person ,or through, a duly authorized agent, dedicates to the use of the public forever all streets, alleys, , parks, watercourses,dr.ains, easements and pubiic places thereon shown for the purpose and consideration therein expressed.
Duly Authorized Agent STATE, OF TEXA COUN OF BEXA appearedBefore me, the laowtoundersigned me .tobe authority the. person on thi. whose day personally 'name is subsc:r!bedto the. foregoinq inst:rent, and ac:knowledqedto me that he executed the same for the puroses, and considerations therein expressed' and in' the capacity therein stated. Given under my hand, and seal of office this day of , 19 _ 0
Notary Pulic Bexar County, Texas
10-21-93 IV-45
'1 34 (p) Approval of the Planning Commission or the Director of Planning i as follows: J (1) For minor plats to be approved administratively_
This plat of (namel has been submitted to the City of San Antonio', Texas, and is 'hereby approved by the Director of Planning in accordance with V.T.C.A., Local Governent Code Section 212.0065. Dated this day of , A.D., 19__- BY: Director of Planning
(2) For all other plats.
This plat of (namelhas been submitted to and cohsidered by the Planning commission of the city of San 'Antonio, Texas, and is hereby approved by such commission.
Dated this day of , A.D., 19 __. BY: Chairmn BY: secretary
(q) The county clerk's certificate of authentication as required by the applicable county.
(r) Wastewater EDU note. The numer of wastewater, equivalent
dwelling units (EOO$) paid for this subivision plat are kept on file, at the San Antonlo Water System under the plat numer issued by the Planning Departent.
10-21-93 IV-46
35 \ i b. A narrative report prepared by a registered j professional engineer which includes the following items: 1. The name, address, and phone number of the property owner. 2. Description of the' natui:.e and size of, the proposed development, including projected population. 3~ The pei:c:ent of impervious covei: after, development and cei:tification site will have a positive surface drainage. 4. History and age of the landfill. 5. Site geol()gy, including estimates of past and future ground .settlement. ' '., . 6. Descriptionand depth of refuse fill. 7. Description of planned ,excavations, penetrati()n of any landfill liner, and ultimate disposal site for e~cavated refuse. 8. Depth andinovementof' shal:iow ground water. c. A soil, qas survey for methane. d. , ' A , ,slope stability analysis for all landfill embànkments.
(c) To the Director, of wastewater Management: (1) Two (2), copies of the proposed plat showing, two-foot contours on sites wheretneaverage grade does not exce,ed .five
(5) percent, and five-foc,: con.tours on sites where the average grade exceeds five (5) percent, and the proposed location of all sewer lines.
1(2) ines Two sliowirig (2) copies depths of plans and gradesand profiles of' the of lines the inproposed accordance sewer witli ExbibitA, andoveral! layout map, construction details, and other data as required by Division 6, SUbdivision B of this article.
(3) When a separate sewer system is p:roposed or when connection of a .iieparate, ,syst.m .is. "proposed to.a 'sewer system otlier than the system of. the.. city ,two (2) copies of plans and specificatiariii bel:r.ing approval certification of the State Deparbent, of Health accompanied with a written approval by that statè -agency. - other(4) When ,than, a separate a facility sewage of the treatment city or a facilitymodification is proposed of a treatment faèility other than theclty is requiredbyaqencies having jurisdiction, a copy of the discharge permit from each agency authorized to require 'and issue such permit.
(5) When a separate sewer system is proposed or when service is to be provided by a system other tlian the system ,of the city, a written statement from the owner and operator of the 1993 IV-50
36 system certifying the owner's operational status, approving the proposed system or service; and certifying that operations and maintenance of the system will be in compliance with requirements of all regulatory agencies having juriSdiction.
(6) When a sewer system is proposed within the recharge zone of .theEdwards Aquifer within. the city or its extraterritorial jtirisdiction,written approval or approvals as required by the appropriate state agency having review and enforcement authority ju.risdiction regarding the Texas Administrative Code, 31 'ÌAC 331.1 - 331.11 or the latest revision thereof regulating such, ,systems.
(7) When sewer service for the proposed plat is to be provided by septic tanks, written approval py the appropriate public, agency having installation permit 'and 'operation control jurisdiction. Such written approval shall state that approval for septic tank systems for each proposed property is granted and installation permits will be issued upon request after plat recordation.
(d) To the City Water Board:
(1) Utilit1es layout. TWo (2) copies of the utilities layout showing proposed locations. of utilities, streetlights, fire hydrants,neighborhood delivery and collection box units, and sidewalks shall be submitted. (2) Cost estiinates. , Two (2) copies of detailed cost estimates of. a 1.1 required water system improvements, including private water wells if applicable. (3 ) ~aterweiis. Eviden~c'e that all substandard or abandoned water wells located on the property have been properly pIQgged or a performance bond providing for such plugging to be posted
with the City Water Board.
(4) Separate water system. When a separate water system is planned or, when connection is proposed to a water system other than the C.11:1" , Waterworks' Board of. Trustees or the Bexar Metropolitan Water District, two (2) copies of the plans of the water systeii~s approved by the Statel)part1lent of Healtb shall be submitted.
(5) Water supply and dis-tribution systems plans. Plans ana specifications for water supply and distribution systems. for approval by the Waterwork's Board of Trustees.
(e) To City Public Service: (1) Gas and electric service. A' copy of proposed plat showing gas and electric easements to be dedicated and a copy of the proposed utilities layout showing locations of utilities, streetl ights, fire hydrants, neighborhood del i very and 1993 IV-51 37 P U D PLAN REG ULA T ION S FRO M THE UN IF I ED DEV E L 0 PM E NT CODE Sec. 35-2108. Common areas and facilities. , Adequate provision shall be made for a community association or other legal entity with direct responsibility to, and control by, the property owners involved to provide for the operation and maintenance of all common areas and facilities, including private streets and sidewalks, which are a part of the PUD. The applicant shall submit a legal instrument establishing a plan for the use and permanent maintenance' of the common areas/facilities and demonstrating that the community association is self-perpetuating and adequately funded to accomplish its purposes, and providing the city with written permission for access at any time without liability when on official business, and furter, to permit the city to remove obstructions if necessary for emergency vehicle access and assess the cost of removal to the owner of the obstruction. The instrument must be approved by "the City Attorney as to legal form prior to any plat recordation and shall be recorded at the same time as the plat. Sec. 35-2109. PUD plan.
(a) Requirement. Prior to or simultaneous with the consideration of the initial plat, a PUD plan shall be submi ttèd to and approved by the Planning Commission. The PUD plan shall be submitted in five (5) copies and shall include the following:
(1) Site layout indicating size, location, scale, nort arrow, . and perimeter boundaries and setbacks. (2) Proposed land uses by location, type, density, and size. (3) Maj or physical features such as easements, streams, floodplains, and significant vegetation. (4) Location and dimensions of streets, parking areas, and access control stations, and clear vision areas. (5) Identification of common open space areas and/or the percentage of each lot which is to be reserved as open space, plus the calculations used to determine the reqUired percentages. ( 6) Staging plan if PUD is to be developed in more than one phase.
(7) Plan review fee as specified in Exhibit C. (8) A list of names and addresses of the, owners (as the ownership appears on the last approved ad valorem tax roll) of all property lying within two hundred (200) feet of the boundaries of the PUD, and a map showing the PUD site and all properties within the two hundred (200) foot radius. In lieu of providing the property owner names and addresses, the
6-17-93 II-9 39 applicant may elect to have staff. prepare the list upon payme.nt of the notification list fee specified in Exhibit c. (9) An eiqht and, one-half by eleven (8 1/2 x 11) inch reduced copy and a transparency of the plan.
Cb) Pulic hearinq. Upon submission of the POD plan, the of Planninq shall distribute coptes to appropriate city departmentsDirector
and aqenciesfor review. Upon receipt of reviews ,the, Director of Planninq shall.s,cheduleapublicall required items hearinq ,and
by . the Planninq CQmmission onthe proposed plan and shall provide withinwritten notice of ,thetwo hearinqto hundred the. owners (2,00) feet of th.PUD, boundaries.of real ,property Thenotiee lyinq shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the pUblic hearinq date. . Cc) Plan approval. After..the ,public: heårinc¡ thei- commi,ssion may approve the plan as ,submittea, amend and approve th.plan as amended, . or disapprove the plan. ,If approved, the ,plan with" any amendments shall, be, siqneq, by the ,chairianand, and secretary. oftle commission. ,A copy Of the approved to, the Director, of Buildinq,' InsJ;eetionsPUDplan . shalland other bedistributèd appropriate departments/aqencies for use in issuinq permits.
(d) ,Plan chanqes., Altera,tion.stQa POD plan shall beclassifiedas either substantial or nonsubstantialamendments. Nonsubst:antial amendments may be approved by the Director o,f Planni,ng. Substantial amendments' shall be considered by. thePlanninq
COmmission following the same procedUre reqg approval of ,the plan, ,includinq payment of thei red planfor reviewthe initial fee. The followinq criteria shall be used to identify a substantial amendment: (1) A chanqe which would include a land use not previously permitted under, the approv.d POD zoninc¡.
(2) A chanqewhichwouldalter the land us. type adjacent to a PUD. boundary. (3) A chanq. which would Incl"eas.e the, overall density ot the PUD by more than ten (10) percent. However, in no ins1:ance _y the oVln:all,density Of thtl. puD, ,exce.d that permitted by base zonlnqdistrict. the . (4-) -A -chanqe which'the Director otPlanni~nqdet.ermines would siqnificantly alter the qeneral chai-acteror overall desiqn of the' pian. Sec. 35-2110. Time limit. Anyears approved from PUD the plan date shall of therema,in last validrecorded for a. plat 'periodot or the three date (3~ ot Planninq Commiss ion approval it no plats "are recorded. Ti.e extensions for up to two (2) years may be granted by the Planning 6-17-93 II-I0 40 BUIDING INSPECTIONS AND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
Prior to release of Building Permits on the Recharge Zone, the Building Inspections
Department wilcontact San Antonio Water System (SAWS) to ensure' the applicant, has an approved Water Pollution Abatement Plan, the proper zoning designation and an approved Plat. Aquifer Studies staff checks the fies and forwards a letter approving the request if the
applicant has met all requirements. If the applicant does not have all the proper approvals, the Aquifer Studies Division staff then contacts the Building Permits Section to hold any releases until all proper approvals are received.
If a commercial development is built, the Building InSpections Departent wil contact the Aquifer' Studies Division with a request for a Certificate of Occupancy. San Antonio Water
System staff inpects the development for compliance with the Water Pollution Abatement Plan and the Zonig requirements. If the constrcted development meets the requirements,
Aquifer StUdies Division staff accepts the Certificate of Occupancy. . If not, staff holds acceptance until corrections are made.
1 ,
I
41 CITY OF SAN ANONIO Request for Review
oateReceived: To: Plan Check Division BÛildinq Ihspections Department City of San Antonio
From: San Antonio Water System Aquifer Studies , Division
I i . Subj ec~ : Application Review for Buildinq Permits
LocatioD:
Leqal: Lot Block NeB
TH ABOVE StmJEcl LOCATION IS APPROVED\DISAPPROVED
COMMNTS:
SIGNA'l
DATE 8/93
42 .l;l:l"HI1I Mt:N r OF BUILDING INSPEC"T'IONS RECORD OF' INSPECTION FIESTA TEXA~O FIESTA TEXACO**** C OF 0 REINSPECTION *** Oo335N FM 1604 W BLDG SPACE C OF 0 PERMIT 22a720 ~';,;!.4;1;I~K~Slp~L tfF:l* S::~iOCK RD 'S3I§ñP~ß 9lñ729338 i LOT;: gU(004 NCB 16602 PG 40 SUBWAYS SANDWICHES 8. SALADS SIZE IRR PROP USE: eOKMERICAL SANDWICH SHOP/W/IN CONV/NOALCO
NeLl Z ON E in EASMNT 01 MAOD 0 HD 0 SA OA 0 OF' 0. Di'--TE 0/0/0 AGE NEW FLOOD 0 ERZD 1 PUD 0 FAA 0 -RESULTS OF PREVIOUS INSPE~T~ONS
-~------'------~-~------,~~-----~~- ~- -~,---~--~ ------~ / F: E Q iJ EST 6 275 Ü FOR 1 7 C/O EJfV M GM T RECVD BY JM610.S0 9/20/93 13:46 ATTENTION WATER RESOURCE
- RESUL TS OF THIS INSPECTION ownER/CONTACT :Fl£STA TEXACO IJ3E (TYF'E OF BUSINESS) S.'NOUICH SHOPIW/IN CONV/NOALeo TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION ______tlQr4-(:ONFORMH~G DATE: ...."' OCCUPANCY GROUP ______DISTANCE FRDffCHURCK,SCKOÐL. A,F~1A ' , SQ FT)" " , ' ,'OCCUPANT LOAD"---~--- ',' HOSPITAL, '" ~. ", ------'" -l APF' ROVED -=~- DîšÃPPRÕVED, ' RE -INS PEeT lON FEE "';._ YE S ,___NO ExPLi~NArION OF STATEMENTS--
___7¡pi ~~L .br¿~~JL_4k!lde(í-~_:."71(J~~~" - ~iê.__.. __ ..tl J.kA~'J~ _.~- ~ ...c1l! '-": - ~~~,f - - JtL - _~~_ .tcJe£J'_ __
- _._:._'--'-. - - _.- -_... _... ----._'- ....- -'.- -.------.. -.- -_._-- - _... -',-'.. - - -- -.------.- -.. -,_.. - --'- - _.. ;",- --.... - -- -.- ---.'--~ ------_.- -.--',- -.. ..-.------.------'- 4.-- ~ _ ~______~ ~~_ ~.. ~~~_ _ _ __~_ ____~-- ___~__ _~____~--__.--- _ ___ _:_
- _.------~.-.------"---..-'" - -'-.- - --'.. - - ~.'-- _...._,._.._.__._ __'___,_"" ,--__,'-1_,;-..-'-.-.- ___ _ /
_.- - _.- -'~ - _._~ ------~ -,'-- - --.- --.. ------~-~
-- ~~-._------'------~ ~- --- - ~ ------~------.-- -- -~ ------o H r E: ,.I-./.7 '.1~ TIME: /'l'i(, PlY TO ,'lItTE. ((,?Q~~ ))£Pí7 1 m Ei ;~~ - ~~ 12;£;#-:- - ~ ~~ _f!~l'L ?!~..~"L Pi" . ~nRh ¿9-100 iMAR 13) 500 SAN ANT~NVMT MGNT INSPECTOR
43 PRIATE SERVICE LATERAS ON THE EDWARS AQUIR RECHARGE ZONE
In accordance with section 313.5 (c)(9) of the TNRCC Edwards Aquifer Protection Rules, all private service laterals after installation of, prior to covering, and prior to connecting the private service lateral to an organied sewage collection system must be visually inspected along with the connection to the service system.
Responsibilty for inspecting construction of private sewer laterals on the Edwards Recharge Zone is divided by the boundaries of the city limits. Private service laterals located inside the city limits are constrcted according to provisions provided in the City of San Antonio's Plumbing and Building Codes. Inspection of the laterals are made by the Building Inspections Departent.
Private sewer laterals to be constructed outside the city limits but with the Recharge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer must comply with Aricle iv of the Subdivision regulations of the Unified Development Code. Inspection of these laterals into the extraterrtorial jurisdiction are made by the Stormwater Departent of the San Antonio Water .System. Both the City Plumbing Code and the Unified Development Code establish mium bedding requirements, pipe design specifications, backfll requirements, and conformance standards for connecting to an existing sewer main. Once the private service lateral is found to be constructed in conformity with all applicable regulations, a certificate of approval is issued.
44 Part 3 . Inspection of Private Sewer Laterals wi thin the Edwards Recharge Zone Outside the City Limits
Sec. 35-4275. Authority.
In accordance, with Section 313.5 (c) (9) , Inspection of private sérvice lateral .connections, of 31 Texas AdministratIve Code, Chapter 313 ,Edwards Aquifer, the following prQcedures shall apply within that portion of the Edwards Recharqe Zoneoutsi,de the city limits. to .allprivclte serv.ice la,teral connections., to the City of san, Antonio's, sanitary sewer system. Private ' service, laterals located , inside the city limits shall comply with the provisions of the City's Pluming and Sui IdingCodes. Sec. 35-4276. License, b( ,and insurance requirement.
Before any person may. apply for 'a permit as specified belQ"" he or she shall comply with the license, bond, and insurance requirements set forth .inCh,apter 24, Article III, Division 2, of this code. Sec. 35-4277. Permit required. (a) Application. Prior to connecting a private serv,ice lateral whichRecharge is located outsIde the Zone tö the City's sanitarycity limits sewer within system, the a licensedEdwa.rds masterpl\Uer shall", complete an applica,tion form .and obtain a permit from the .Department .0fPlanning(Water Resources. Management 'Division). ,At ,. the time the application lssUlmitted,the applicant shall .pay to the City of San Antonio. the fee specified in Section 35-C301 of Exhibit C. Such fee is nonrefundàble. (b) Drawings a,nd specifications. , Wh.enever" in the '. opinion of the Director of Planning , drawings and . specifications are required to. show. definitely the nature. and character of the, work for Which the
application .1s made, the applicant shall furnish such plans drawn to scale. (C) Approval. The.. Plannin9 ,Department .shall review the data submitted by the applicant within ten (10l working ,days. If it 'is detel1iried ,that the, application ,data do n,ot "conform with the requirements of this chapter, the applicant may revise any nonconfoniiJ'9, aspects; ,. however, . the. Department shall ,have, an add! tiGna-ifjtv.(-5~)~working~ days- -frOm-the latest- _ date" 'of ,submission to act upon the application. A permit issued -shall be construed as
a license to proceed with the work.
Cd) Validity. A permit shali be valid , fora, period of six (6) months from the date of issuance. If the work authorized by the permit is not commenced within six (6) months or if the work is suspended or abandoned for a period of six (6) months after the work is begun, then the permit shall become inval id. A new application and permit shaii be required to complete the work.
J 1993 IV-72 45 Sec. J 5-4278. Installation and inspection.
(a) , Construction. . All private service laterals shall be installed in strict accordance with the requirements specified in ExhibitH. j-
(b) ,Inspection. After Installation, but prior to covering-, all private service laterals shall be inspected by the Planninq
Department (Water Resources Manaqement . Divisionl, to ens.ure that 1 construction is in a.ccordance with Exhibit H. It shall be .th. dutythe
of the, permitapplicanttoprQvide reasonable advanced notice the Water Resources Manaqement Division when a lateral is., ready forto i inspecti()n.
(c) Reinspection.lf the City inspectQi: finds that the J installation of a private serv,ice lateral is not in, accordance with Exhibit H, the plunier shall):erequired to make the necessary corrections and the ,work shall.be resubmittedforins~ection. For
each reinspect ion ,that is necessary, , the applicant i shall pay an additional fee as specified in '. Exhibit c. Cd) certification.", upon satisfactory completion and inspection of i a private service lateral, the PlanninqDepartmentshall certify, it to have ,been 'constructed in conformity ,with the ,applicable provisions of this chapter. , The Department, shall provide a copY'. of i this certification to the, pel:it applicant" the Wastewater Manaqement Department, . and the Texas Water Commission .
i- Sec. 35-4279. Penalties. J ea) .Nonc:onformingwoi:k. Any plumer whose work does. n.ot conform to the regulations, "and requirements of this chapter, or whose workmanship, or materialsa:re. of inferioi", quality ,Shall ,onnotic:e from the, Director of Planninq ,make the necessary changes or corrections at once. I~thework ,has, not. been. .correctedafter ,ten (lO)daysnotic:e, the Director. shall re(usetoissue any additional permits 1:0 such person until the work has fUlly complied with these requirements.
eb) Permit revocation. The Director of Planninq may revoke a permit, in event Uere has been anyfa.lie statement. or misrepresentation .,8 to. a material fact in the ap~lication or plans upon whlc:bthepeniit approval was based~ No permit fees shall be refunded i. such event.
1993 IV-73 46 S.B. 1477
Nearly all of S.B.1477addresses water supply and the management of the Edwards Aquifer. There is a brief section of the, bil. which addresse,s the" issues of Water quality.
Under S.B. 1477, section 1.08, the new Edwards Aquifer, Authority would have general powers to police the Edwards., Aquifer. As stated in the bil, the new Edwards Aquifer
Authority would have general powers COnsisting of, "allof the, powers, rightS, and privileges necessary ,to mange, conserve" preserve, and protect the aquifer and to increase the recharge of and 'prevent the waste or pollution of water, in, the aquifer."
The Texas Water Code provides for local governmentS ,to continue to maintain pollution control powers and allow for local control, of water qu~lity.
47 WORK PROGRAM
,/ OVERVIEW OF SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM ENVIRONMNTAL RESPONSffILITIES
Upon merging the City Water Board, Wastewater. Departent,Stormwater activities, Water Resources . Program, and the Alamo Conservation and Reuse, District, many of the enyironmental duties which. were performed by the City, of San ,Antonio carried over to the new San Antonio Water System (SAWS).
SAWS main environmental responsibilities include:
1. Evaluating and monitoring development over t1e Recharge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer.
2. Establishment and continued monitoring of the EPA'smandated stormwater sarpling program..
3. Assess the water quality of San Antonio Water System public supply Wells.
4. Review enviroinental .issues, envirOnmental, regulatiofi, and environmental permit applications to determe their impact on, the ,City of San Antonio's water supply and wastewater program.
,5. Compliance with EPA regulations regarding treatment plant effluent, discharge.
6. Monitoring and testing of industrial discharge . into City of San Antonio sew~r lines.
7 ¡ Response to emergency situations and spils which affect San Antonio Water System utilties.
8. Assist in designating and protecting. environmentally sensitive areas.
The San Antonio Water System',is responsible for monìtorig, and evaluating, development
on the Recharge Zone in order to prevent the degradation of water quality with the Edwards Aquifer. Ths requires workig closely with State and Local agencies along with
developers and. ,engireers .. to see that thsobjeçtive is met The. ,process of monitoring development over, the Recharge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer, includes but is not limited
to the '" fOllQwfug:_
1. Reviewing 'Water Pollution Abatement Plans ,(WPAP).
2. Review of zonig and re-zonig requests.
3. Plat andPUD plan revieW for compliance with WPAPs.
4. Review of Sewer Collection System applications (SCS).
5. Review of Aboveground Storage Tanks/Underground Storage Tanks applications. 49 OVERVIEW ÙFSAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM ENVIRONMNTAL RESPONSffILITIES
6. Smoke Testing.
7. Sewer line inspection inside the city limits. and the, extraterritorial jurisdiction 1 (ETJ) . 8. Monitoring th-two (32) water sampling stations in the extraterritorial jurisdiction and within, the, city limits to study the effect of increasing
urbanation over the Edwards recharge zone.
9. Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy.
The fInal assessment ,and recommendations are put into reports to aid City Council, the Zonig Commission, and the Planng Commission in the decision making process. Recommendations and comments are also made i to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission.
Since the City Council Committee on the Edwards Aquifer met and review~dthe separate
röles ,of the regulatory agencies in 1987 and made their recommendations, there has been
. a. closer working relationship, between the Texas Natural Resource, Conservation
COmmission, the Edwards Underground Water District and SAWS in order to protect the
Edwards Aquifer. While not always in agreement, the. communication has improved
therefore improving .assessments made on land use and in evaluating potentially . significant recharge features. Because' of the increase in development activity" the Texas Natural
Resource, Conservation Conuissia.n has been limited by time in the area of enforcement.
SAWS,. working through Building Inspections with the City of San Antonio, has attempted
to. assist the' Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission in the area of enforcement.
The City of San Antonio/San Antonio Water System has begun to implement a
comprehensive protection, program. with stringent measures to achieve the goal of preventing degradation, of,.the, groundwater quality. The comprehensive groundwater/watershed protection program must. include the following components:
a. Establisblg a coordinated work effort for groundwater quality protection and
watershed,- -- -- _.- management; and '
b. The assessment of the risks of pollution of the aquifer from all potential
sources and the takg of measures to reduce those risks; and
c. The prevention of pollution of the aquifer through those sensitive areas determined as the drainage area, recharge 'zone and transition zone; and
d. The monitoring of runoff waters to furter reduce the level of any pollutants over the Edwards ,Aquifer in Bexar. County.
50 OVERVIEW OF SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM ENVIRONMNTAL RESPONSmILITIES
In addition, though an interlocal agreement, SAWS has also been working with the Edwards Underground Water District to monitor the effects of development over the recharge zone by setting up sampling stations and testing stormwater quality.
Participation by Bexar County has been limited in the regulation of the Edwards Aquifer. Their role is mainly in the area of regulating septic tanks.
51 ACTIVITIES TO DATE
ì - CURRNT ACTIVITIES:
In 1977, the City of San Antonio established the Edwards Recharge Overlay District, which established at a local level the first steps to place landuse restrictions though Zoning. Since that time, several amendments and changes to the program have been made.
Currently, ,any proposed regulated activity is subjected to an intense review process by the State, with review and comments by the Edwards Underground ,Water., District, and the San Antonio Water. System. In addition, if required,. the proposed land use is also reviewed as
a part of the zonig and platting. processes where even stricter requirements may be placed on the development by the San Antonio Water System.
Once the proposed developments have been approved and constrcted, both the San Antonio Water System and the City of San Antonio Building Inspections Departent wil
inspect construction to inure that the City Codes, the Unified Development Code, and any other requirements approved during the. review process are met.
While the review and inpection, processes' have been amended several times since 1977, ithe monitoring process has developed slowly. Monitoring, by the, Health Departent has
occurred over the past 20 years, however, the range of chemicals tested for has been limited. i. Studies by theU.S.G.S.havealso occurred ona regional basis. In 1988, the. City of San
I Antonio in cooperation with the Edwards Underground Water District,begaiiestablishig
sampling stations on the Recharge Zone whie the ,City placed other stations along creeks
and streams thoughout the rest of the County. The, sampling stations above the recharge
zone monitor stonnwater which is discharged into stream channels and flows over and
recharges the Edwards.Aquifer. Stations below the recharge zone monitor changing'
conditions as the creeks flow downstream. There are currently thirt-two (32) SamPling stations in place to monitor the stormwater quality. flowing across the Recharge Zone.
52 ACTIVITIES TO DATE
ONGOING INITIATIVES:
Before the merger of the different entities, which noW make up the San Antonio Water
System, the review process , for development on the Recharge Zone was fragmented having been performed by different divisions and departents. Since the merger, communication between the different., entities involved in water quality protection has allowed for a more effective review process and therefore a more effective enforcement policy.
Currently, the San Antonio Water System is workig to comply with.the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination Srstem (NPDES) permit. The Environmental Protection ,Agency
(EPA) has passed regulations ,that require a permit to discharge stormwater, off-site. The dischargedstormwater wil have. to be tested and meet certin requirements under the Clean
Water Act. This means all stormwater run-off wil have to be treated on-site. To meet these new règulations, the. San Antonio Water System" has been workig on. pollution prevention, ordinances, which wil ' be .. enacted. in ,1994' .concurrent with, issuance of San
Antonio's permit by EPA.These' ordinances wil also aid in protecting stormwater quality
' which ,recharges the Edwards Aquifer as well as other sensitive, areas of the county. .
In addition,. ne\\ developments..proposed over the, Recharge Zone are reviewed. to .ensure compliance with current . federal, state, andlocalregulations. San Antonio Water System programs to furter enhance staff continually look for Ilewlyengineered ' technques and protection of the Recharge Zone. It is, the similar goal of abating potential containants from, development, providing for stricter ,development standards and enforcing these measures which has, helped. merge, the, different entities which.make up .the San Antonio
Water System and to not only look to protecting lhe Recharge Zone but to manage entire watersheds.
53 WORK PROGRA
The following work program of recommended po~icy statements ~nd implementation ,provide
the basis for actions to ,betaken by staff to proceed, with a comprehensive water quality program. These .33, recommendations cover regulatory' and techncal.measures to .protect
both the Edwards Aquifer sensitive areas: drainage area, recharge zone and transition zone
as well as provide ,an outlne of steps to protect' our stream '.and watercourses. These "THE " ..EDVVARDS ... AOUIR:. SAN recommendRtions form the core .of this report. . statements ANTONIO MANDATES, FOR. WATER' OUALITYPROTECTION". These and organiations for their review and and program plan were forwarded to citizens
10 and May 19,1994. They were followed by comment at two public hearings htld on May City Council adoption of the recommendations, and direction tost.aff' to proceed with inplementation. BACKGROUN
met for The Committee of the Whole five months, January -May, 1994,to discuss water
over quality in reference, to land. use activities the Edwards Recharge' Zone. The discussion than, 2% of the total recharge focused on the area withn the City'sjurisdictionwhichis less and zone. Review and inormation included the.functional responsibilties related to staff
other. agencies, as, well. as practical recol1endations '.' wlûch. would update ,. efforts begun in
the 1987 report, "The Edwards Aquifer: ' Perspectives for Local and Reeional Action"and , the accompanying resolution. for non-degradation.
staff prepared 33 recommendations in thee major Based on the Committee direction, improvements ,and potential activities. The coinponents--regulatory 'measures, techncal recommendations were .presented to the Comnttee" on April 12, subsequently presented' to citizen andprofessiomll groups and ultiIately discussed at public hearings on May 10 and May 19, 1994.
APPROACH Amendments , ,to, Chapter 35--Unified The recommendations, cover seven basic areas: Development Code, Stormwater, Techncal Improvements, 'Emergency Measures, Chapter 34-~Water Code, TexasNaturalResource Consei:ation Comniission and Future Study issues.
is the awareness of the need Key to the recol1endati(1) _and tiiej,plementation process account all of to intitute a comprehensive watershed management, program that taes into especially Bexar County's streams and watercourses as they traverse. all areas of the aquifer the more sensitive areas. Comprehensive, watershed mangement wil provide a ,more responsible' approach in monitoring the .effects of ,potential, containnts by providing a system of,tracing the containnt sources. It can also establish' a joint look at drainge controls and flood plain protectton to enhance ths basic function of our more significant streams while preserving their aesthetic nature.
54 WORK PROGRA
IMPLEMENTATION
The City Council Committee of the Whole recognied the far reaching impact' that, newly 1 passed ordinances (based on the recommendations) would,have..throughout the.,community. I i While the Committee, of the Whole was meeting, they requested input from 'a diverse group
of individuals · representing. regulating. ,agencies, the development community, neighborhood
associations and environmental groups. Itwas recognied by the Committee. of the Whole that. an implementation process which would allow input from these groups was imperative.
A basic implementation, strategy Rsing subcommittee's. for general ordinance . amendments and a task force for specific recommendations was devised by staff to best review each issue. The following is a brief description of the ,implementation ,process which wil be employed
as a result of the issues and recommendations. brought fort in "THEEDWARSAOUIR:
SAN ANTONIO MANATES FOR WATEROUALITYPROTECTION".
1. Basic Implementation Process
a) 27 of the 33 issues and recommendations wil be reviewed and/or ordinnces written ,by either. the Planng Commission, the Zonig Commission, or the SAWS Board for implementation as Chapter 34--Water Code' or Chapter 35-- Unified Development Code.
b) Based on the issue a form similar to the following process wil beusedJorimplemèntation.
1. Formal 'meeting with the affected City of ,San Antonio Departents to'review the issue.,
2. Meeting with the appropriate Commission subcommittee to review and develop the recommended changes.
3. Finlize the ordinance and review by the San Antonio Water System Legal Departent.
4. Work' session with the appropriate Commission or'SäI Ant6nio ..WätèfSystem' Board.
5. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial
Recorder with subsequent Public Hearig and a . vote by the appropriate Commission to recommend approval of the ordinance.
55 WORK PROGRA
6. 'liB" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended change.
7 . Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote' by City Council to approve the ordinance.
The Bask Implementation process for each issue is anticipated. as a six to nine month process.
2. Task Force Joint Committee Process
a) Six issues and recomnendations were determined to require more extensive study and wil be · subjected to an expanded review process. They are the following:
1. Upgrade single wall Underground' Storage Tanks 2. Tertiary containent' on Transition Zone 3. Greenspace Requirements 4. Density Limits
5. Buffer Zones' for Significant Recharge Features 6. Floodplain Buffer Zones
The. 6 listed recommendations ,wil be' reviewed and ordinances developed by a Task Force comprised of members of the Planng . Commission, Zonig Commission, Land Development Service Committee, Open Space.Committee, and.Aquifer Guardian inUrban Areas (AGUA). Two Petroleum Marketers representatives willbe included in the review process onthe two issues involving Underground Storage Tank. The fmdings of the Task Force "are to be presented to City Council in December, 1994. Once the issue has gone through the Task Force, the issues wil then be developed using the same Basic Implementation process outlined .ab.ove. ,A fini vote approving the ordince ,by City Council establishes it ås law for implementation.
FININGS
The åttcheâ packågeUis the basis for futurcflàl1dusepÓlicyÒverthe rechårgeUzone al1dthe begings of an ,overall ... comprehensive watershed management program. The activities outlined are for ordinnce implementation, internal procedures, criteria and guidelines for enhancing the local water quality program of land use activities within the City'sjurisdiction.
56 PERMITTED USES..ONTHERECHARG.E ZONE 1978 -NOV. 1993 ZONING PROCESS
ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT (15.0%) ~ LOW DENSITY DWELLINGS/ (17.0%) C) -. HIGH DENSITY MILITARY /DWELLlNGS(6.4%) RESERV A TION'(17 .7%) GENERAL RETAIL (10.3%) LIGHT INDUSTRY.(2.0~)7
OFFICE ()ISTRlCT(2.0%) RETAILlCOMMERCIAL .(29.6%) PERMITTED USES ON THE RECHARGE ZONE 1978 - NOV. 1993 ZONING PROCESS
2500
2000
CJ w 1500 00 CJ c: w oa: c: 1000
500
o LOW DENSITY HIGH DENSITY GENERAL RET AI LI OFFICE LIGHT MILITARY ENTERTAINMENT DWELLINGS DWELLINGS RETAIL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT INDUSTRY RESERVATION DISTRICT USE ZONING ACTIVITY ON THE RECHARGE ZONE 1978 - NOV. 1993
1800 1600 ...... _...... _--_...... 1400 ...... _...... __.:...... _-...... 1200 ...... nn...... ~...... n.._'....,..,-:lI...... n...... w ~ 1000 ......
CJ w CD ua: 800 ...... 1 c: 600 ...... n...... 400 ...... 200 o 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89' 90 91 92 93 YEAR
ACREAGE i
) ~ ~ i ~ ëi ..c 'U. ë¡¡ a:. lJ Z f\i oN èi ,,' lJ CJ (Y 0: en 00 c:' en wOO ~ ~ :i~ 0 ..c) II:: ül- 0 i. ;lëi lJ a. a: .li 0C II W a. ::II :::; en ~ .. 5. z i ~ l r!. Of'f' ..~ ~~ (flJ en~ a. / N~ ë I :: li o li. :: L.. 15 ..li :: "c
i N- ~ ~, 'i i :; i ..ex .c -li :g II II. :: a:. j ëi ~ .e "e :i . If IG E . ã. E :; _J '3 . . 0 i a: 0 :i ! = () "0 i c: :: ,Ji ;: Õ ai c: ok ok 60 ,-, -- ~~--_.------, ------'-.---
PLAT ÄØ-VIVl"P ON l1IECH.JR(3E ZONE
1977- SEPT. 1 993 PLATTING PROCESS
1200
...... nn...... ~...... ~...... 10.00-H...... m...~...... :...... m......
W 800-i...... m...... c: I l , .".....~"._"--'...._...... -...... ,...,,.., m c: ~ w 600-1'...... ,..... oa: c: . . " ." . . . , n ...... ~...... ~...... 400-1......
I II .11 77 78 79 8081828384858687888990919293 YEAR
TOTAL.. ACREAGE * Includes Replats .l' I' ã. ' CI W 0: ) (I z: "CI :i Õc i' () N iC W ~ CJ C\ a: ,.0) c: . ' 0) :i CI CI 0)o CD ().~ æ' CD CD Wor g CD a:.r- a: I' 0. a. , CD (j :. to l- W G CD c: e: ~(/ E L( c( -. o. ~. CDW a. v )- CD CW r~ a CD ii or C\ ~ : . ~ ,.CD - CD I- o () CD 0) c: "" CDI' I- I' :: I' c. to0000000 LO V M C\ ,. Sl'Vd:lO hl38~nN
62 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTIVITIES TF : amt 5/19/94 A RESOLUTION NO. §4-26-29 ADOPTING A REPORT ENTITLED THE EDWARDS AQUIFER: SAN ANTONIO MADATES FOR WATER OUALITY PROTECTION ESTABLISHING, POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION DIRECTIVES CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY AS PART OF ACOMPREHElS rUE .leATERDMAGEMENT PROGRA .
* * * * *
WHRE, in 1987, the San Antonio City Council established basic parameters for water quality protection measures for land use activities over the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone through a policy of non-degradation in The Edward Aquifer: Pers~ective for Local and Reqional Action; and
. WHRE, in 1994 ,the Ban Antonio City Council-met to. determine the need to update the current policies to include considerations of all sensitive areas of the Edwards Aquifer including the drainage area, recharge zone and transition zone; and WHRE, the protection of groundwater quality in these areas is . subject to the quality of stream and watercourse drainage whi.ch also must be monitored for quality; and WHRE, such an approach embodies a comprehensive watershed management program to include both water quality and floodplain protection; and WHRE, requirements and efforts of national, state and local units of government to protect water quality must be continued and that such efforts be improved where necessary to implement a comprehensive groundwater/watershed program; and WHRE, the report entitled THE EDWARDS AOUIFER: SAN ANTONIO MADATES FOR WATER OUALITY PROTECTION, outlines a policy and implementation strategy for such a comprehensive groundwater/ watershed management program; NOW THREFORE: BE IT RESOLVE BY TH CITY COUNCIL OF TH CITY OF SAN ANNIO: SECTION 1. The goal of maintaining the current high quality of the groundwater withdrawn or discharged from the Edwards Aquifer for use in the region by preventing the degradation of such water is hereby adopted. SECTION 2. It is necessary to implement a comprehensive protection program with stringent measures to achieve the goal of preventing degradation of the groundwater quality. This body shall participate, along with other units of government, in the 65 development of improvements to the existing protection program and the implementation of a comprehensive protection program to include watershed management for stream quality, drainage and floodplain requirements. The City hereby adopts the Edwards Aquifer: San Antonio Mandates for Water Oualitv Protection, a report establishing policy and implementation directives concerning this goal. A copy of the plan is incorporated herein - by reference. SECTION 3. The costs of such a comprehensive protection program shall be borne by all responsible units of government in proportion to their respective levels of responsibility, and this governing body shall encourage such units of government so share in those costs. SECTION 4. The comprehensive groundwater/watershed protection program must include the following components: a. Establishing a coordinated work effort for groundwater
quality protection and watershed management; and b. The assessment of the risks of pollution of the aquifer from all potential sources and the taking of measures to reduce those risks; and c. The prevention of pollution of the aquifer through those sensitive areas determin~d as th~ drainage area, recharge zone and transition zone; and d. The monitoring of runoff waters to further reduce the level of any pollutants over the Edwards Aquifer in Bexar County. ~ PASSED AND APPROVED this I q day of , 1994.
ATTEST'~ ~ . .. / ft '7,.t ' \~ Clerk UJ
APPROVED AS TO FORM: tit7ih~~~~/ Ii
66 . Excerpt From The Mayor i s Press Conference November 22, i 993 The second anouncement is the convening of City Council into a Committee of the Whole to review aquifer protetion meaures.
. In 1987, I served as a member of Mayor Cisneros' five-member committee on aquifer protection. As a result, a number of major protecaon meaures were underten in the City of San Antonio in the form of local ordinances. Unfortunately, a great dea of misinformation exists concerning ongoing state and local as well as regional effort to monitor and protect the qual~i.y of the City's sole source of water. . - . J . ~ ' . It is time to review those provisions to determine if new actions by the City and the State are required to protect the overal quality of water recharging the Edwards Aquifer.
. Ths Committee of the Whole wil issue a report by May 1 and wil be stafed by . Rebecca Cedilo, Vice President of Planning for the San Antonio Water System. "Becky was our lead staf person on the 1987 committee and the continuity she provides wil make this a very effcient process. The Committee wil reyiew:
. Existing city, Edwards Underground Water Distrct and state laws, regulations .. or ordinancesand.establisbed. policies_addressing recharge quality. protecon
. The status of surface, stonnwater and aquifer water qualty monitoring activities
. The effect, when Senate BUl 1477 is finally cleaed, of this legislation on protection of aquifer water quaty
. Ongoing city initiatives related to water quaty protection
. The relationship between any other city functions, mandates or initiates related to water quality protection
. Any recommendations on area on which this committee should focus regarding water quality issues, revision to city ordinances, subdivision regulations, regional water authority rules or state legislation related to additional protection of aquifer water.
. The Council wil convene as Committee of the Whole in ealy Januar to receive an initial reprt from SAWS staff to begin the review/recommendation process. The Chaien of the Planning and Zoning COI1mission and the SA WS board wil be invited to attend. the f!eetings. u.
. With this report as a guide, aquifer protection and the clea nee for development of additional water resources can go hand in hand to ensure quantity and quality for San Antonio's future water supply.
67 AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON THE EDWARDS AQUIFER Tuesday, January 11th, 1994 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm City Hall, Council Chambers
1 : Introduction
2. Description of Edwards Geology
3. Rules and Policies
4. Work Program
5. Recommendations
6. Appendix
- Chronology
- Studies Performed
- Resolution of Non-Degradation
- Edwards Aquifer. Rules
- Table of Permitted Uses for the Edwards Recharge Overlay District
- Known Significant Recharge Featues in Bexar County
68 WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SITTING AS THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON AQUIFER QUALITY, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL, ON TUESDAY, JANARY 11, 1994. * * * * The meeting was called to order at 3: 15 P.M. by the Presiding Officer, Mayor Nelson W. Wolff, with the fOllowing members present: PEREZ, BILLA BURKE, AVILA, SOLIS, THORNTON, PEAK, LASON, WOLFF. Absent: McCLENDON, AYALA, ROSS. Also present were MS. DIANE RATH, VICE CHAIRPERSON, SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM; OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM; MR. PHIL GARY, CHAIRM OF THE PLANING COMMISSION; and MR. MICHAEL McMAHON, CHAIRM OF THE ZONING COMMISSION.
Mayor Wolff provided a brief background on the City Council Committee on Aquifer Quality, the 1987 study on the Edwards Aquifer, and actions taken since that report. He spoke to the committee's work plan to preserve the quality of the Edwards Aquifer water. Ms. Rebecca Q. Cedillo, Vice-President for Planning, San Antonio Water System, provided committee members with a printed handout of overhead-projected topics to be discussed, a copy of which is made a part of the papers of this work session. She briefly addressed the I-- i three main issues to be discussed today: define the issue, establish I i jurisdiction, and develop recommendations. She then addressed the geographic history of water in Texas, especially the 1,500 square miles that make up the western portion of the Edwards Aquifer. She then spoke to the physical details of the aquifer and its Recharge Zone activity. Ms. Cedillo noted that in 1987, the City Council established a policy of non-degradation of the Edwards Aquifer, and she spoke to potential problems on the Recharge Zone included in matters of transportation and development over the Recharge Zone. She noted that some 34.5 square miles of the Edwards Aquifer lies within the city limits of the City of San Antonio. She discussed the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) Edwards Rules and Technical Guidance Manual, and spoke to the impact of the Edwards Underground Water District (EUWD) and various studies that have been made of the Edwards Aquifer. She then spoke to the 1987 Perspectives Report and its various segments and
( 1) 69 ramifications, and the two City Council Resolutions endorsing the concept of Edwards Aquifer non-degradation, and implementing a program to that end. Ms. Cedillo then discussed three applicable City. Council Ordinances, dealing with tertiary containment, private service lateral inspections, and adoption of Water Pollution Abatement Plans (WPAP). She then spoke to the City Code amendments that need to be made, including certain changes to Chapters 34 and 35 of the City Code. She provided committee members with a printed handout on this matter, a copy of which is made a part of the papers of this meeting. Ms. Cedillo outlined the coming stringent restrictions on stormwater abatement, and spoke to Emergency Management plans designed to cope wi th problems over the Edwards Aquifer. She then spoke to future studies that will be needed and coordinations required. Finally, Ms. Cedillo addressed her concept of the next steps that need to be taken, between now and June, and the need for coordination between the various entities involved with zoning and planning activities over the Edwards Aquifer area. A discussion took place concerning possible input into future committee meetings by various groups and individuals. Discussion then ensued concerning the lack of any current firm backup plan to provide potable water to San Antonio, should something happen to the Edwards Aquifer. A discussion took place relative to the importance of Camp Bullis military reservation to the overall Edwards Aquifer protection, and the actions deemed necessary to enact new laws and regulations to protect the Edwards Aquifer within the City of San Antonio's extra-territorial jurisdiction.
Discussion was held on the need to develop methods of cleaning up any contamination of the Edwards Aquifer, during which discussion Mr. Joe Aceves, President and Chief Executive Officer, San Antonio Water System, addressed details of one entity in Germany where underground water is pulled from the aquifer, cleaned up, and re-inserted into the underground aquifer. He spoke to the need to study the costs invol ved in possible rerouting of the transport of hazardous materials away from the aquifer Recharge Zone. Ms. Cedillo addressed the need to develop a partnership between all involved entities in a cost-sharing program to cope with these problems.
Discussion took place concerning how much of the 1987 s~udy has been implemented, and the need for a plan to cope with any accidental contamination of the Edwards Aquifer.
(2 ) 70 Discussion also ensued concerning the possible purchase of critical properties in order to maintain undeveloped open-spaces, in order to protect the Edwards Aquifer, and the need for a complete, multi-jurisdictional master plan to accomplish this. Another discussion took place on the impact of recharge-sensitive areas of the Edwards Aquifer on the City's proposed May bond-issue election, and a report by SAWS on this matter, due within the next 30 days. It was noted that some 80 per cent of Edwards Aquifer recharge is within the 100-year flood-plain. Mayor Wolff spoke to a possible agenda for the scheduled February meeting of this group, assembled today, including the matter of having the group also hear from other entities. There being no further business to come before the committee, the work session was adjourned at 4: 15 P.M.
(3 ) 71 AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON WATER QUALITY Tuesday, February 8, 1994 City Council Chambers, City Hall 3~OOp.m. - 5:00 p.m.
1 .' Call to Order
2. Introduction and update on Land Use activities over the Edwards Recharge Zone within the San Antonio city limits. 3. Review of Edwards Underground Water District monitoring and reporting responsibilties over the Edwards Recharge Zone.
4. Presentation of development process requirements for Edwards Recharge Zone activities and recommendations.
5. Consideration of Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission regulatory authority though TAC 313, "Edwards Rules."
6. Next meeting--March 8, 1994. - Overview of staff responsibilties and possible expanded coordinating activities - Preliminary discussion of recommendations
7. Adjourn
72 WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, SITTING AS THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON AQUIFER QUALITY, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHABER, CITY HALL, ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1994. * * * * The meeting was called to order at 3: 15 P.M. by the Presiding Officer, Mayor Nelson W. Wolff, with the following members present: McCLENDON, BILLA BURKE, AVILA, SOLIS, ROSS, THORNTON, PEAK, WOLFF. Absent: PEREZ, AYALA, LARSON. Ms. Rebecca Q. Cedillo, Vice President, PI~nning, San Antonio Water System,' provided an overview of the status of the Edwards Aquifer and explained the purpose of today's meeting. Mayor Wolff stated that the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) would be cnducting a public hearing on March 30, 1994 for the purposes of updating its regulations, and recommended that City Council members be prepared to vote on their own recommendations at the Council's March 8, 1994 meeting, recommendations which later will be presented to TNRCC .at its March 30th hearing.
A discussion then took place concerning a March 1, 1994 TNRCC deadline. In response to a question 'by Mr. Thornton, Ms. Cedillo noted tha t SAWS would be preparing its own recommendations to be forwarded to TNRCC. Mr. Scott Hal ty, Manager, Aquifer Studies Division, SAWS, provided a current status report on the Edwards Aquifer and land-use activities over the recharge zone, within the city limits of San Antonio~ He noted that some 67 per cent of development over the recharge zone is single-family residential in nature. He then addressed the amount of commercial development over the recharge zone; the 27 known underground, single-walled storage tanks over the zone and related problems; and spoke to the fact that only about five per cent of the land-use above the zone is industrial in nature. He also spoke to a history of regulations by the four affected governmental units: the state, the Edwards Underground Water District, the City of San Antonio, and Bexar County. Mr. Halty then spoke to certain approaching deadlines of various agencies and processes required for' development over the Edwards Aquifer.
(1 ) 73 Mayor Wolff spoke to the need to do something about the single-walled underground storage tanks over the recharge zone. Mr. Mike Albach, representing the Edwards Underground Water District, spoke to the need for better protection of the recharge zone and his agency's responsibilities relating to that protection. He then addressed the effects of urbanization on the recharge zone and noted that EUWD currently is placing some 18 sampling wells over the area of the recharge zone. He then related the increase in urbanization over the zone to aquifer pollution and urged the City Council to take action to protect the Edwards Aquifer, as he spoke to EUWD's non-degradation policies. Mayor Wolff asked for a copy of the EUWD's recommendations that will be presented to TNRCC at the public hearing, so that the City might study them prior to that submission. A discussion took place concerning recharge features in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, and hydrocarbon problems from underground' storage tanks in a three-county area, including San Antonio. It was noted during the discussion that, of some 250 such tanks over the recharge and transition zones of the Edwards Aquifer in that area, 27 are in the city of San Antonio. Mr. Gene Dawson, Jr., Pape Dawson Engineering, spoke to development requirements over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, from a development engineer's point of view, and certain recommendations, a copy of which is made a part of the papers of this meeting. He then briefly outlined a history of of development regulations over the aquifer and the current process of that development, through a number of agencies. He addressed recharge features of the recharge zone of interest to a geologic engineer, and spoke to examples of responsible development, in his opinion, both residential and commercial, including the Master Water Pollution Abatement Plan, citing the Rogers property development and development of La Cantera. He then spoke to the City of San Antonio's recommendations for development over the Edwards Aquifer and suggested additional recommendations for consideration. Mr. Richard Garcia, Director of Region XIII, Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission, spoke to the impact of TNRCC' s regulations over a 21-county area, especially the Edwards Aquifer area, and the efficacy of the staffs of both the Edwards Underground Water District and San Antonio Water System. He noted that some 88 per cent of the Edwards Aquifer falls within TNRCC's Region XIII area, and urged cooperation of all the parties involved. Mr. John Mauser, Field Investigator, TNRCC, addressed a summary of state law on water in Texas, through the Water Code, and spoke to TNRCC' s rules and regulations for development over the recharge zone, including possible changes to those rules' and regulations as a result of the scheduled hearings in the near-future. Mr. Peak posed a series of question to the various presenters on underground storage tanks, present quality of water in the Edwards Aquifer, Edwards Underground Water District recommendations to be
(2 ) 74 presented to TNRCC at the March 30, 1994 public hearing, adversee effects of urbanization on the aquifer, effects of the ' impervious cover' on recharge, and possible delegation of TNRCC authority.
ci ty Council concurred that the public should have the, time to make their own imput during next month's meeting.
City Council recessed its work session at 4: 58 P.M. in order to convene a Special City Council Meeting dealing with the proposed May 1994 bond issue. The work session resumed at 5:02 P.M.
Discussion resumed on the proposed recommendations to TNRCC. Mr. Thornton spoke to the need for growth-controls over areas outside the City of San Antonio, because of future annexation of some of those areas into the city. He expressed his opinion that the Unified Development Code should be changed to extend San Antonio's invol vement into the extra-territorial jurisdiction area (ETJ), including the need for legislative authority to allow this. Mr. Ross noted that, even if the City could increase its involvement in development in the ETJ, San Antonio would still have an impact on only nine per cent of the recharge zone. He stated his belief that TNRCC should take on more regulation of the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone areas, in place of the city of San Antonio and the Edwards Underground Water District. A discussion then . took place concerning TNRCC versus local control of development in any area. Mayor Wolff informed the Council that the next work session on water quality is set for March 8, 1994.
The work session adjourned at 5:17 P.M.
(3 ) 75 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL COMMITE ON WATER QUALITY Tuesday, March 8, 1994 City Council Chambers, City Hall 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order.
2. Overview of staf responsibilties: - Emergency Management -Lad Use Activities City of San Antonio San Antonio Water System
3. Presentation and discussion of SA WS/EUW recommendations regarding Texas Natura Resource Conservation Commission Chapter 313, "Edwards Rules".
4. Suggested potential local coordination efforts
5. Consideration of recommended strtegies for augmenting local responsibilty and jurisdiction.
6. Next meeting--April 12, 1994. -Continued discussion of recommendations -Begin to formalize implementation strtegies with timetable
7. Adjourn.
76 WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SITTING AS THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON AQUIFER QUALITY, OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHABER, CITY HALL, ON TUESDAY, MACH 8, 1994. * * * *
94-00 The meeting was called to order at 3: 15 P.M. by the Presiding Officer, Mayor Nelson W. Wolff, with the following members present: PEREZ, McCLENDON, BILLA BURK, SOLIS, ROSS, THORNTON, PEAK, LASON, WOLFF. Absent: AVILA, AYALA.
Mayor Wolff stated that, among other things to be undertaken today, the Council will be briefed with a presentation/discussion of the- San Antonio Water System/Edwards Underground Water District recommendations regarding Texas Natural Resource and Conservation Commission Chapter 313, "Edwards Rules". He further noted that the matter will come before City Council at a formal "A" Session prior to TNRCC's scheduled March 30, 1994 public hearing on this matter. . Ms. Rebecca Q. Cedillo, Vice-President for Planning, SAWS, addressed the Council's agenda today, and spoke to an overview of staff , responsibilities. Assistant Fire Chief Joe Candelario spoke to the matter of Emergency Management in San Antonio, and to plans in case of major disaster, such as a hazardous materials spill. He noted that the Ci ty of San Antonio does not have a soil-remediation process yet in place. A discussion took place concerning the possibility of hazardous materials routing and restrictions, and the difficulty of its enforcement, during which Mr. Ross stated his belief that this might be easier to deal with if the restrictions and routing applied only over the Edwards Aquifer area. Ms. Cedillo spoke to a brief history of land-use activities and requirements over the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone, including ERZD zoning requirements and the - use of Wastewater Pollution Abatement Plans. Mr. Scott Halty, Aquifer Studies Division, SAWS, discussed how his office addresses rezoning requests over the recharge zone, and he spoke to the three various stages of stormwater abatement. He then spoke to areas of such regulation, where local regulations often are more stringent than state regulations. He then spoke to close coordination between the San Antonio Water System and both TNRCC and
( 1)
77 EUWD on matters such as development over the recharge zone. Mr. Jay Aldean, Stormwater Department, SAWS, spoke to the stormwater resposibilities of his department, including the 'smoke-testing' of sewer lines over the recharge zone, and sampling procedures at spill-sites, as needed. A discussion then took place concerning the matter of Wastewater Pollution Abatement Plan review within the City of San Antonio's extra-territorial jurisdiction, and the City's possible involvement in controlling ETJ development. It was noted that TNRCC tells the City what it can and cannot do within, the City's ETJ. Mayor Wolff discussed a possible timetable for future committee meetings and City Council formal actions. Mr. Hal ty then made a presentation and led a discussion of the proposed SAWS/EUWD recommendations to be made at the TNRCC public hearing on March 30, 1994. Ms. . Danielle Milam, representing the League of Women Voters, delivered certain comments to the proposed SAWS/EUWD recommendations, including some 10 changes her group is proposing. She asked that the Committee'conservation community' bemeeting given a place on nextagenda. month's Water Quality . Mayor Wolff asked SAWS to review the 10 recommendations made by the League of Women Voters and to provide comments on those recommendations to the League. He then briefly reviewed dates and
possible agendas for future committee meetings. Ms. Cedillo spoke to suggested potential local coordination efforts, and the matter of consideeration of recommended strateegies for augmenting local responsibility and ~ jurisdiction. Ms. Cedillo also discussed the possible agenda for the April committee meeting, the May public hearing, and the City Council formal vote two weeks later. Mr. David Pasley, Director of Planning, discussed certain i tools available to potential entities in controlling development over the Edwards Aquifer reecharze zone, including annexation and 'limited-purpose annexation'. There being no further business to come before the committee, the work session was adjourned at 5: 04 P.M.
(2) 78 AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON WATER QUALITY
Tuesday, April 12 1994 City Council Chambers, City Hall l:0 p.m. - 5~øo p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Overview of Draft Report on Issues and Implementation Measures for Edwards Recharge Zone Activities:
1. Regulatory Requirements * Chapter 35 - Unified Development Code * Stormwater Program * Chapter 34 - Water Code
II. Organiational * Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission * Techncal Improvements * Emergency Measures
III. Potential Activities * Future Study
3. Presentation of citizen comments: * Danielle Milam, League of Women Voters * June Kachtik, Chair, City of San Antonio Open Space Committee
4. Next meeting agenda: * Outline of May 10, 1994 public hearing and presentation * Finize May 19, 1994 as date of consideration time certin
5. Adjourn
NOTE: The May 10, 1994 Public Hearing wil be held at the Henr B. Gonzalez Convention Center - South Banquet Hall at 6:00 p.m.
79 WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, SITTING AS THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON AQUIFER QUALITY, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHABER, CITY HALL, ON TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 1994. * * * *
94-00 The meeting was called to order at 3: 15 P.M. by the Presiding Officer, Mayor Nelson W. Wolff, with the following members present: PEREZ, McCLENDON, BILLA BUR , AVILA, SOLIS, AYALA, ROSS, THORNTON, PEAK, LASON, WOLFF. Absent: NONE.
OVERVIEW OF DRAFT REPORT ON ISSUES & IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES FOR EDWARDS RECHARGE ZONE ACTIVITIES, Ms. Rebecca Q. Cedillo, Vice-President for Planning, San Antonio Water System, reviewed committee actions to date and spoke to the commi ttee' s goal and possible future actions that might be needed in order to protect the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. She reviewed and discussed jurisdictional issues, and spoke to the need to look at comprehensive water protection throughout the area. She then spoke to two 'coming Public Hearings,' the last of which begins the Implementation Program. She addressed the Basic Implementation Strategy and the some 30 recommendations to be addressed. I. REGULATORY REOUIREMENTS Ms. Cedillo discussed proposed changes to Chapter 35 of the City Code, the Unified Development Code, noting that these changes will take perhaps six months to fully implement. They include revision of the "permitted uses" table; plat approval to include all Water Pollution Abatement Plans; high concern recharge features on plats; removal and upgrade of single-wall tanks; requirement for tertiary containment on TZ; green space requirements for the ERZD (Edwards Recharge Zone District); density limits for the ERZD; significant recharge feature buffer zones; floodplain buffer zones; testing of pollution abatement structures; smoke testing; and private sanitary sewer service laterals. During discussion, she noted that the projected life of the single-wall underground tanks is about 20-25 years. She also spoke of the Special Work Group meetings, including Planning Commission, Zoning Commission and San Antonio Water System staff, to take place over the next six months, working on the five "core issues", and the. group's report back to City Council at that time. She also spoke to the
( 1)
80 'time-line' for Chapter 35 requirements. Ms. Cedillo discussed the four issues of the Stormwater Program, including the watershed management approach; revision of development standards/watersheds; pollution prevention ordinance; and clearing and grading ordinance. She spoke to this program as the maj or area of concern for possible pollution to the recharge zone, and addressed the 'time-line' for implementation of the four listed issues. She noted thát SAWS expects to receive its Stormwater Pollution Prevention Permit very soon. Discussing Chapter 34 - Water Code, she spoke to the three issues of concern, those being the well plugging program; the well abandonment program; and extension of the City's jurisdiction into the ETJ (extraterritorial jurisdiction) .
II. ORGANIZATIONAL PLAING Discussing the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC), Ms. Cedillo spoke to Chapter 313 - the Edwards Rules; Water Pollution Abatement Plans; the Technical Guidance Manual; and the Edwards Aquifer Drainage Area, including a hydrologic setting map. In the matter of Technical Improvements, Ms. Cedillo discussed five issues, including education and information; SAWS internal coordination; Significant Recharge Feature assessment flowchart evaluation; mapping of Sensitive Recharge Features; and the Global Positioning Satellite system; and a 'time-line' for their implementation. Relative to Emergency Measures, Ms. Cedillo discussed the Emergency Spill Response Plan and the Emergency Operations Plan for Pulic Supply Wells.
III. POTENTIAL ACTIVITIES. Ms. Cedillo spoke in some detail to matters for future study, including the blasting ordinance; determination of pre-development condi tions over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone; and the Septic' Tank Monitoring Program.
Mayor Wolff thanked the SAWS staff for its hard work in support of these committee-of-the-whole meetings on water quality. Ms. Danielle Milam, representing the League of Women Voters and AGUA, spoke to certain recommendations of AGUA relative to the prevention of pollution of the Edwards Aquifer, calling it a health and economic issue, as well as a policy issue. She spoke to the need to preserve the natural recharge system and enforce rules for development over the recharge zone. She stated that she agrees with most of the SAWS regulatory requirements.
(2 ) 81 Ms. Milam spoke to the need for a ban on any more addi tional underground storage tanks over the recharge zone; coordination of revenue and development plans; and against any tax phase-ins for development activities over the recharge zone. She also spoke in support of acquiring of sensitive areas over the recharge zone. Mayor Wolff thanked her group for its professional assistance to SAWS.
Ms. June Kachtik, Chairperson, Open Space Comii ttee, introduced Mr. George Veni, a hydro-geologist. Mr. Veni displayed and narrated a series of slides, showing the effects of pollution on the Edwards Aquifer. He noted that a single gallon of gasoline could contaminate 10 million gallons of aquifer water.' He spoke to the need to strengthen regulations on development over the recharge zone and addressed examples of that development. He stated his belief that the Edwards Aquifer is slowly being degraded, despite good intentions and non-degradation policies. He identified development over the aquifer as the biggest pollution problem.
A discussion took place concerning the possibility that Council members might be able to tour a cave in the recharge zone area. Ms. Kachtik thanked SAWS for its report and hard work on this matter of water quality, and spoke to the need to preserve open spaces as protection for the Edwards Aquifer. She offered her committee's expertise as the Council moves to the decision-making stage.
Mr. Thornton stated his belief that San Antonio needs ' growth incentives' as well as 'growth controls', and spoke to his concern with regulating all land uses over the recharge zone. He then addressed the need to identify types of desirablre land uses over the recharge zone. In response to a question by Mr. Thornton, Ms. Cedillo discussed the Table of Permitted Uses, and identified those uses that are. harmful to water quality in the aquifer. She spoke to the need for i guidance from the City Council on any identification of recommended land uses over the recharge zone. Mr. Thornton also spoke to the need to identify desirable land uses over the recharge zone, and noted that the city of San Antonio needs to be pro-active in guiding those land uses. In response to a question by Mr. Peak, Ms. Cedillo discussed the 10-mile parameters of the "buffer zone". Mr. Peak urged the inclusion of the Open Space Committee on the commi ttee recommended for the work group study of possible actions in this area. A discussion took place concerning quality control in the recharge zone well-testing.
(3 )
82 Mr. George Rice, author of a report on the Edwards Aquifer, stated that he would be willing to work with SAWS on any questions they might have on the report findings. Mr. Ross spoke in support for Mr. Thornton 's pro-acti ve stance on recharge zone land use recommendations, and urged rapid implementation of some of the recommended new rules for development over the recharge zone. He asked SAWS for a list of priori ties for rapid implementation. Mayor Wolff spoke to the upcoming May 10th Public Hearing in the South Banquet Hall of the Convention Center, noting that the hearing will begin at 7:30 P.M. . He also noted that Bexar County Commissioners Court has been invited to join the City Council for this Public Hearing, since tax phase-in policies will be discussed that affect both governmental entities. There being no further business to come before the commi ttee, the work session was adjourned at 4: 54 P.M.
(4 ) 83 NOTICE OF TH MAY 10, 1994 PUBLIC HEARG:
The Mayor and City Council of the City of San Antonio wil hold a Public heag on Tuesday, May 10, 1994. It wil be held from 6:00 pm to 9:00 pm at the South Banquet Hal, Convention Center in 'Downtown 'San'î\ntonio, 'at "Market"and 'Alamo,Streets.
The Public Heag wil consider the following issues:
6:00 p.m.--7:30 p.m. The City Council Committ of the Whole, along with the Chais of the Plang and Zonig Commissions and the Vice-Chai of the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees wil convene to:
Recive comments on the Propose City Council Committee of the Whole report on the regarding Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone land use protetion meaures -- The Edwards Aquifer: San Antonio Mandates for Water Qnality Protetion.
7:30 p.m.--9:00 p.m. -Te City Council of the City of San Antonio and the Bexar County Commissioners Court wil convene to:
Receive comments on the grating of ta incentives for development over the Recharge Zone.
Citins wishig to be head at the Public Heag ca sign up to sp on either or both issues beging at 5:00 pm.
84 AGENDA --" CITY COUNCIL MEETING~" ~C:.\,'¡t.D t 'JtHO l.\l t Of SAH ~N MUICIPAL PLAA BUILI'TNG.:I f,( CLt:B.\\ CITY COUNCILCHAER~4 ~~~ 'Ó ll' \2~ 44, 103 MAIN PLAZA SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78205 MAY 19, 1994, 1:00 P.M. * * * * 1. Invocation to be announced, and Pledge of Allegiance. TH FOLLWING ITE WILL BE CONSIDER AT TH TIMES INDICATE: 2. 1:00 P.M. - Ceremonial Items.
3 . 3 : 00 P. M . - Pub Ii c Hearinq and Consideration of: A) A Resolution adopting the Edwards Aquifer San Antonio Mandates for water quality protection as a report of the City Council Committee of the whole and directing staff to begin the implementation process of the recommended work program issues and regulatory measures; and B) An Ordinance approving the completion of the Applewhite Reservoir as a storage facility for non-drinking water; planproviding including that the conservation, Reservoir will reuse, be part water of a long,trades, term recharge dams and the construction of a treatment facili ty for water imported from outside Bexar County.
C) An Ordinance calling a Referendum Election on August 13, 1994, to allow voters to approve or reject the Ordinance I.I approving the completion of the Applewhite Reservoir as a storage facility for non-drinking water; providing that the Reservoir will be part of a long term plan including conservation, reuse, water trades, recharge dams and the construction of a treatment facility for water imported from outside Bexar County.
TH MUICIPAL PLA BUILDING ACCESSIBILITY STATE The Municipal Plaza Building is wheelchair accessible. Entrance is provided at 103 Main Plaza and 114 W. Commerce, and at Trevino Street. Limited ADA visitor parking is provided at City Hall, 100 Military Plaza. Assistive listening headphones are available upon request. Deaf persons must request an interpreter 48 hours prior to the meeting, by calling (210) 299-7245/TDD for assistance. Questions regarding this agenda notice should be directed to the City Agenda Coordinator at 299-7080.
85 . RECOMMENDATIONS ISSUES INEX OF ISSUES
I. REGULATORY REQUIRMENTS
CHAPTER 35 -- UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
Revision of the "Permitted Uses" Table Plat Approval Conditions to Include all Water Pollution Abatement Plans Record High Concern Recharge Features onto Plats Prior to Approval Removal and Upgrade of Single Wall Tanks on Recharge & Transition Zones Requirement for Tertiary Containment on the Transition Zone Green Space Requirements for the Edwards Recharge Overlay District Density Limits for the Edwards Recharge Overlay District Significant Recharge Feature Buffer Zones Floodplain Buffer Zones Analytical Testing of Approved Pollution Abatement Structures Smoke Testing Private Sanitary Sewer Service Laterals
STORMWATER
Comprehensive Watershed Management Approach Revise Development Standards as Part of a Comprehensive Watershed Management Approach Pollution Prevention Ordinance Clearing and Grading Ordinance
CHAPTER 34 -- WATER CODE
Well Closure Program Well Abandonment Program Extension of Jurisdiction into Extaterritorial Jurisdiction
II. ORGANIZATIONAL PROGRAING
TEXAS NATURA RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (TNRCC)
Chapter 313, Edwards Rules Water Pollution Abatement Plans Techncal Guidance Manual Drainage Area
88 INDEX OF ISSUES
TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS
Education and Information San Antonio Water System Internal Coordination Significant Recharge Feature Assessment Flowchart Evaluation Mapping of Sensitive Recharge Features Global Positioning Satellte System
EMERGENCY MEASURES
Emergency Spil Response Plan Emergency Operations Plan for Public Supply Wells
III. POTENTIA ACTIVITIES
FUTURE STUDY
Blasting Ordinance Determination of Pre-Development conditions over the Recharge Zone Septic Tank Monitoring Program
89 TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS
Education and Information San Antonio Water System Internal Coordination Significant Recharge Feature Assessment Flowchart Evaluation Mapping of Sensitive Recharge Features Global Positioning Satellte System
EMERGENCY MEASURES
Emergency Spil Response Plan Emergency Operations Plan for Public Supply Wells
III. POTENTIA ACTIVITIES
FUTURE STUDY
Blasting Ordinance Determination of Pre-Development conditions over the Recharge Zone Septic Tank Monitoring Program
90 I
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS CHAPTER 35 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISION OF THE "PERMITTED USES" TABLE
ISSUE:
The City Council Committee of the Whole directed that a review and update of the Zoning "Permitted Uses" within the Edwards Recharge Overlay District, Section 35-3261 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) be performed.
BACKGROUN:
The Edwards Recharge Overlay District was established in 1976 in response to concerns by citizens about development on the Edwards Recharge Zone. Within the Edwards Recharge Overlay District certin uses are prohibited while others require specific City Council approval. This is due to the actions associated with the specific use being environmentally harmful in nature. Some of the uses allowed by the State on the Recharge Zone are banned within the City limits on the Recharge Zone. San Antonio's regulations are more stringent in this regard.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Although the Permitted Uses Table was last amended in 1993, the Section has not been updated in two years. The purpose of the Edwards Recharge Overlay District is to regulate permissible activities on the Recharge Zone. Many of the "Permitted Uses" require City Council (CC) approval before they can be located over the Recharge Zone. The requirement of City Council approval allows City Council the authority to put protective measures in place in order to address site specific environmental concern, essentially adopting a site specific ordinance for each propert under consideration. This also gives City Council the authority to approve or disapprove the use. City Council sets the protective measures and bases their recommendation to approve or disapprove the land use on an environmental assessment based on staff recommendations which include San Antonio Water System.
RECOMMNDATION:
There are a number of Permitted Uses listed that should require City Council approval and others that should be prohibited from existing on the Edwards Recharge Zone that might potentially be environmentally harmfuL. It is recommended that, in order to bring more uniformity to the UDC and after evaluating the nature of the various business', the following should require City Council approval to be located on the Recharge Zone:
Batching Plant Golf course, golf driving range, pitch and Putt Amusement parks Automobile muffler sales & intallation Automobile parking lotI garage (commercial)
93' REVISION OF THE "PERMITTED USES" TABLE
Automobile parts sales Bicycle/lawnmower repair Building specialties, retail Building specialties, wholesale Cabinet or carpenter shop Clothing manufacture Contractor facilty Elevator maintenance, service Farm supplies Feed, seed, fertilizer sales Fix-it shop Freight depot Funeral home or undertaking establishment Golf course and country club Golf driving range Grain miling Lumberyard and building materials Mattress manufacturing, rebuilding Milinery manufacture Milwork and similar wç)Od products manufacture Miniwarehouse Paint and wallpaper store Pet grooming, small anials Racetrack, rodeo, and other equestrian activities Shoe manufacture Sign shop Tamale preparation, wholesale Venetian blind cleaning, fabrication Warehousing
Listed below are businesses that, due to the substances used, endanger the quality of the aquifer. It is recommended that the following land use activities be prohibited on the Recharge Zone:
Insulation manufacture & fabrication Oil well supplies and machinery manufacture Oil well supplies and machiery sales Paper ,products manufacture Poultry processing and live poultry storage completely enclosed Refrigeration equipment manufacture Shoe polish manufacture Tile roofing, water proofing manufacture Vulcaniing, recapping
94 PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS TO INCLUDE ALL WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLANS
ISSUE:
As established in the Unified Development Code, the City of San Antonio requires a plat for land use activity within the City of San Antonio and into the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Plats are r~quired in order to insure conformance to the general plan of the City and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and in particular, to promote the safe, orderly, and healthfl development of the City. Because of the Water Pollution Abatement Plan's role in regulating land use activity for the protection of the water quality of the Edwards Aquifer, the City's sole source of drinking water, the Water Pollution Abatement Plan plays a role in the public health issue as well as a city development issue requiring its complete incorporation into the platting process. BACKGROUN:
The Site-Specific Water Pollution Abatement Plan which is required by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission for all developments, contains an overview of the project, a geologic assessment, and a section which addresses stormwater abatement which affects drainage. In addition, it describes any potentially significant recharge features and rates them as a high, moderate, low, or no concern feature. Currently, there are four types of Water Pollution Abatement plans, a Site-Specific, Sewage Collection System, Underground Storage Tank, and Aboveground Storage Tank.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The City Council Committee in its 1987 report 'The Edwards Aquifer: A Perspective For Local and Regional Action" directed staff to increase its involvement in reviewing development on the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. The Committee expanded the task of staff to include platting activity. Language was placed in the Unified Development Code to require state approval when a sewer system is proposed for the Edwards Recharge Zone. Prior to the revision of impact fees, plat applicants were receiving approval for all Water Pollution Abatement Plans submitted before the release of the approval for a plat. Because Water Pollution Abatement Plans are now broken down into four types, one being for sewage collection systems, the Department of Plannng interpreted the language to only require approval of ths specific type of Water Pollution Abatement Plan before approval of a plat can be granted.
Some of the Plannng Commission members have expressed concerns about the omission of this information.
RECOMMNDATION:
Require approval of all Water Pollution Abatement Plans prior to plat approvaL.
95 RECORD HIGH CONCERN RECHARGE FEATURS ONTO PLATS PRIOR TO APPROV AL
ISSUE:
Plats are required in order to insure conformance to the general plan of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, and in particular, to promote the safe, orderly, and healthful development of the city. Proper development must be insured in order to protect high concern recharge features which can act as a conduit for contaminants to the Edwards reservoir. Whether high concern recharge features should be included on plats is at issue.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council Committee in its 1987 report 'The Edwards Aquifer: A Perspective For Local and Regional Action" directed staff to begin verifying that plats conform to Water Pollution Abatement Plans. From the Committee's report, a flowchart was developed which is used as a guideline in determinng whether a potentially significant recharge feature is a high, medium, low or no concern feature. Currently, Planned Unit Development (PUD) plans allow for the recording of physical features, however, plats currently do not have that requirement.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Water - Pollution Abatement Plans are a large part of the planng process on the Edwards Recharge Zone. A large part of the process is identifying potentially significant recharge features in order to determine how they can be protected and to also determine if stronger engineering design and specifications should be used in order to protect the feature. The Planng Commission has often questioned the location of high concern recharge features which are reported by the San Antonio Water System staff to the Plannng Commission with respect to the propert. The concern of the Planng Commission are related to the location of utilty easements and development in relation to the features.
RECOMMNDATION:
Once the significant recharge feature assessment sheet is revised (3-6 months), this criteria wil be used in establishig the guidelines for determination for plat notation. Staff wil work with the Plang Commission Land Development Subcommittee to determine feasibilty of this issue.
96 REMOVAL AN UPGRAE OF SINGLE WALL TANKS
ON THE RECHARGE AN TRASITION ZONE
ISSUE:
Cllrrently, tertiary containment for underground storage tanks and double-walled piping is required on the Recharge Zone and double-walled tanks and piping are required on the Transition Zone. Several single wall underground storage tank systems were allowed to remain in place on the Recharge Zone and the Transition Zone because they existed prior to the new requirements. The issue of whether these underground storage tank systems be allowed to remain in place should be addressed.
BACKGROUN:
The Recharge Zone was first established by the State in 1970. In 1986, the Transition Zone was delineated to give added protection to the Edwards Aquifer. A study by the EP A showed that underground storage tank systems constituted a considerable containation problem. In 1989 the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) began the systematic upgrade and removal of underground storage tanks state wide. It was discovered that many of the single wall tanks had leaked due to corrosion. There are approximately 27 underground storage tank sites on the Recharge Zone in Bexar County and 106 underground storage tank sites on the Transition Zone withn the city limits. While not all of these systems contain single wall tas and piping, approximately 66 sites contain single containent systems.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Removal and upgrade of an underground storage ta system is a costly project. Because of the large number of single wall sites with each designated area, a program to remove and upgrade these systems would have to be phased in over a period of time to allow the owner/operator to prepare for the transition. Because of the potential for contamination to the Edwards Aquifer, as witnessed by the 1984 release of 10,000 gallons of unleaded fuel on the Transition Zone of which an unkown quantity reached the Edwards reservoir, it.is imperative tht some plan be put into place to remove them before deterioration from age takes place and fuel is released to the subsudace.
RECOMMNDATION:
Establish in Chapter 35 of the Unified Development Code the requirement for removal and upgrade of single wall underground storage tank systems on the Recharge and Transition Zones to meet TNRCC standards. A five year grace period would be allowed for systems on the Recharge Zone and a ten year grace period would be allowed for systems on the Transition Zone in order for the ownerloperator to prepare for the cost of the project.
97 REQUIMENT FOR TERTIARY CONTAINNT ON THE TRASITION ZONE
ISSUE:
The purpose of requiring a tertiary containment to underground storage tanks was to insure protection of the Edwards Aquifer in case of a release. The issue of extending the requirement of a tertiary layer of containment or equivalent technology to the Transition Zone is required because the depth to the Edwards Aquifer is shallow in some places in the Transition Zone and structures, such as water wells, can act as avenues of migration to the Edwards Recharge Zone. BACKGROUN:
In 1984 a large release of fuel occurred on what is now the Transition Zone. The fuel migrated to an Edwards well in which the casing was in poor condition. A part of the fuel entered the well through the casing and made its way down to the Edwards Aquifer. A small amount of the fuel was recovered. The Transition Zone was established in 1986 along with the requirement for double-walled tanks. In 1990, the use of pre-stressed vaults brought to light the idea of a third level of protection, including liners as another choice. In December 1991, City Council passed an amendment to the Unified Development Code which requires tertiary containment on the Recharge Zone. This requirement is stricter than the State's requirement of double-walled tanks on the Recharge Zone. The State and the City both have a requirement of only double-walled tanks on the Transition Zone.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The incident in 1984 showed that contamination from underground storage tanks in the Transition Zone could impact the Edwards Aquifer. Most of the Transition Zone has already been developed. However, the requirement of tertiary containent or equivalent technology would inure the protection of the Edwards Aquifer. While the added cost of a third level of protection to an underground storage tank site that is being upgraded is substantial, it gives the added protection that the Committee deems necessary.
RECOMMNDATION:
Extension of the tertiary containent or equivalent technology should be required for underground storage tank sites that are either new installations or upgrades on the Transition Zone of the Edwards Aquifer. This requirement is deemed necessary to insure protection of the Edwards Aquifer.
98 GREEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE EDWARDS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT
ISSUE:
Requiring a minium percentage of green space area per lot wil protect the quality of water entering the Edwards Aquifer. This measure not only maintains the aquifer quality, it also enhances the aesthetics of the City of San Antonio.
BACKGROUN:
Maintaining a certain amount of green space area to fiter storm water run-off is a relatively new idea with valuable benefits. A green space is a natural area consisting of grasses, trees, or both. Green space should be located in a place where stormwater run-off is prominent, such as stream banks and drainage channels. Water runng over green space area is removed of contaminants much the same way as air is cleaned through an air-fiter.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Escalating development over the Recharge Zone necessitates the limitation of impervious cover allowable for the building of lots. By increasing the amount of green space area, the total impervious cover is decreased, thus enhancing the aesthetic appeal of the area, while simultaneously fitering stormwater run-off.
RECOMMNDATION:
Protecting the Edwards Aquifer, the sole'source of drinkng water for the City of San Antonio, is of utmost importnce to those who rely daily on the continued high quality of the water. Implementing a required green space area for lots located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone is a method of preserving the quality of water in the Aquifer.
99 DENSITY LIMITS FOR THE EDWARDS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT
ISSUE:
At issue for discussion is whether restricting the number of lots per acre permitted on the Recharge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer would provide for less impervious cover. Increasing impervious cover through development is the major point of deliberations related to water quality over the Recharge Zone. By electing to limit the maximum amount of density per acre over the Recharge Zone, the City Council wil aid regulation of development without hindering the city's growth process. The lower the density per acre, the more green space, or less impervious cover, which might be made available to filter stormwater run-off.
BACKGROUN:
Currently there are no specific regulations in place to limit the amount of density per acre over the Recharge Zone. Under the Unified Development Code, Section 35-3351, Table F, the Minum Area in square feet (for house sizes) designates the maximum number of lots possible for each zoning district.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Information from Water Pollution Abatement Plans on fie indicate that the average subdivision consists of approximately four lots per acre on the Edwards Recharge Zone, while the maximum number of lots allowable is ten. As development over the Recharge Zone occurs, the question of whether limiting the permissible density per lot wil increase greenbelt space. By limiting the density, more green space might be made available' to fiter stormwater run-off. This fitering process is of considerable concern when attempting to maintain the current high quality of the Edwards Aquifer. This could potentially enhance the marketing potential of the propert. The issue needs to be further studied to determine if a correlation between density limits and impervious cover can be drawn.
According to Vernon's Texas Codes, Local Governent Law, a city may not govern land use outside of its city limits. This currently restricts providing density limits on the Edwards Recharge Zone in the extraterritorial jurisdiction.
RECOMMNDATION:
This issue should be studied further to allow staff to determine if restricting density limits would increase the amount of green space. It is necessary for a new Zoning designation that establishes a maximum number of lots allowable per acre over the' Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone to limit the current density permitted inside the city limits. This zoning designation would only apply to development within the Edwards Recharge Overlay District and would set a specific maximum on the number of lots allowed per acre. It is recommended that staff furter review the issue and come back to the Committee in December, 1994 with further information and a recommendation. Outside the city limits,
100 DENSITY LIMITS FOR THE EDWARS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT changes would be required to State law governng land use activity through the state legislature. Currently under State Law, the City of San Antonio cannot govern land use outside the City Limits.
101 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR BUFFER ZONES
ISSUE:
Preserve and protect significant recharge areaslfeatures (SRF's) to prevent degradation of recharge water quality resulting from development on the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone by use of designated buffer zones around significant recharge areaslfeatures which are not located in 100 year floodplains or creeks with watersheds of greater than 300 acres draining into or across the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. These buffer zones would be restricted to certain uses in addition to requiring them to be left in an unaltered state.
BACKGROUN:
As recommended in the 1987 report "The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action". an Open Space Policy has been developed by the City of San Antonio (December 1993). One of its goals, is to protect the quality and quantity of groundwater and surface water throughout Bexar County. The use of open space, including buffer zones, is one of the best available technologies for attining this goal.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The Open Space Policy attempts to fulfil several goals, one of which is the utilization of open space as a means to protect the quálity and quantity of groundwater and surface water throughout Bexar County as well as an alternative means to manage stormwater runoff. This goal has two objectives: 1) Protect sensitive recharge features of the Edwards Aquifer System and 2) Promote alternative stormwater management technques that preserve the natural characteristics of the 100 year floodplain in city flood control projects and encourage the use of these technques in private development. Issues which wil need to be addressed by the implementation of this type of program are listed below:
a) Protection of SRF's to prevent degradation of recharge water quality by
utilization of buffer zones around SRF's which are not located within 100 year floodplain or creeks with watersheds of 300 acres or greater;
b) Possible economic losses incurred by owner due to restrictions placed on the land occupied by the buffer zones;
c) Potential liabilty for point source contamination due to vandalism or environmental cries;
d) Potential maintenance responsibilty for an increasing number of sites;
e) Typically, the limited amount of recharge available does not offset the risk of containation.
102 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR BUFR ZONES
RECOMMNDATION:
The City Council Committee of the Whole on Water Quality realizes the imediate necessity for a SRF buffer zone program. The Committee recommends the following:
~ Buffer zones wil be naturally vegetated areas around the designated SRF and . the size of the buffer zone wil be determined on an individual case by case basis;
~ That SRF'S requiring buffer zones be deed restricted to allow no development or effects of development to impinge on the SRF'S;
~ That should the liabilty of contamination or responsibilty for maintenance of the SRF'S prove to be too risky as to not being able to fully protect the quality of recharge water, then the feature should be sealed using a method which is subject to approval prior to implementation.
103 FLOODPLAIN BUFR ZONES
ISSUE:
Protection of significant recharge areaslfeatures (SRF's) to prevent degradation of recharge water quality by utilzation of vegetated buffer zones along 100 year floodplains and creeks with watersheds of 300 acres or more.
BACKGROUN:
As recommended in the 1987 report "The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action". an Open Space Policy has been developed by the City of San Antonio (December 1993). One of its goals is the protection of the quality of groundwater and surface water throughout Bexar County. The use of open space, including vegetated buffer zones, is one of the best available technologies for attaining this goal.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The primary goal of the floodplain buffer zone program is to preserve and protect significant recharge areaslfeatures to prevent degradation of recharge water quality resulting from development on the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone by use of designated vegetated buffer zones along 100 year floodplain or creeks with watersheds of greater than 300 acres draining into or across the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. These vegetated buffer zones would be restricted to certain uses requiring them to be left in an unaltered state.
RECOMMNDATION:
The City Council Committee of the Whole on Water Quality realizes the imediate necessity of a floodplain buffer zone program. The Committee recommends the following:
~ That floodplains requiring vegetated buffer zones be defined as: the 100 year floodplain as designated on the FEMA maps or creeks with watersheds of greater than 300 acres which drain into or across the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone; ~ That these buffer zones wil be naturally vegetated strips parallel to the floodplain in dimensions which wil be determined on an individual case by case basis;
~ That these buffer zones shall be restricted in use to only backlots of large lot single- family residential developments or designated open space areas as defined in the Open Space Policy.
104 ANALYTICAL TESTING OF APPROVED POLLUTION ABATEMENT STRUCTURS
ISSUE:
"Cumulative Effect" of development's impact on water quality and quantity over the Edwards Aquifer. Recharge Zone is a vital issue and it is imperative that this data be gathered on a timely basis. The issue is to obtain present day data used in determinng the effectiveness of approved pollution abatement structures on the quality of the stormwater run-off.
BACKGROUND:
In the 1987 report 'The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action". it was recommended the Edwards Underground Water District should establish a monitoring, sampling, and analysis program for approved abatement facilties associated with approved Water Pollution Abatement Plans. However, this program's full potential has not been realized and the opportnity for obtaining a very large amount of data has been lost. The opportnity for data gathering stil exists through the operators of the facilties.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Analytical sampling and testing can be a costly operational expense. However, the small amount of sampling and testing, in both dollars and man-hours, which would be required by individual businesses or operations, would provide valuable insight on how well we are actually protecting recharge water quality and the effect of development on the Edwards Aquifer.
RECOMMNDATION:
Require the analytical testing of newly installed approved pollution abatement structures by the ownerloperators of the associated activity.
105 SMOKE TESTING
ISSUE:
Testing the Sanitary Sewer Collection System in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (EARZ) to locate defects and maintain the integrity of the system. BACKGROUN:
In 1987 the City of San Antonio was mandated by Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) to implement a program to evaluate the Sanitary Sewer Collection System every five years. The Water Resources Division of the Plannng Department was given this responsibilty. After consolidation of the water entities in May 1992, the newly formed San Antonio Water System's Stormwater Departent continued in this effort.
Two methods of inspection have been considered to accomplish this goal. Each offers some advantages over the other. Television cameras can pick up small or potential ruptures but is an expensive process. Smoke testing offers a unique benefit of testing the lateral connections to the main, as well. as the cost savings over televising. San Antonio Water System (SA WS) has been using the smoke testing method to inspect the existing main sewer lines since the program began.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
In some areas of the region, 30 TAC, Chapter 313 (Edwards Aquifer), is the only form of regulation available to protect the Recharge Zone from potential adverse activities. Consequently, enforcement by SAWS is restricted to the Recharge Zone.
A comprehensive process is needed to insure the sanitary sewer system has not been compromised. Smoke testing of the sewer lines and manholes is currently on a five year on- going inspection process. Smoke testing determines whether structural defects to mains and laterals have occurred. Examples might be off-set or open joints and cracked or crushed lines which could allow exfitration to the EAR. The testing operation does not interfere with sewer system customers. Smoke does not enter the buildings except to pass through roof vents.
When exfitration is identified, the proper agencies are notified and documentation of resolutions are forwarded to TNRCC. Responsible parties are asked to make necessary repairs. RECOMMNDATION:
Smoke testing confirms the integrity of the system. It also tests the private service laterals. It is recommended that SAWS staff work closely with TNRCC to continue the smoke testing program.
106 PRIATE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LATERALS
ISSUE:
Permitting, Certification, and Inspection of Private Sanitary Sewer Laterals in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
BACKGROUND:
The Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (formally the Texas Water Commission) authorizes the City of San Antonio to inspect construction of sewer services in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (EARZ). Inspection of private sanitary sewer laterals is performed in accordance with Chapter 313.5 (c)(9) of Texas Adminstrative Code.
An amendment was approved by the San Antonio City Council March 28, 1991, effective April 7, 1991, authorizing the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) to perform inspections of the EAR outside the City Limits and in Bexar County.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Chapter 313 is, for some areas of the region, the only form of regulation available to protect the Recharge Zone from potential adverse activities, therefore, enforcement by SAWS is limited.
After acceptance of the Sanitary Sewer Collection System by the San Antonio Water System, the following steps are taken by the Stormwater Departent to insure compliance to Chapter 313.5(c)(9) of the 30 Texas Administrative Code.
1. Registered plumbing contractor submits permit application which is reviewed by the Director of Stormwater.
2. After acceptance and approval of plans, lateral permit is issued allowing connection to the sanitary sewer system.
3. Following completion of work, contractor then notifies SAWS Stormwater Inspector for visual inpection of connection.
4. Inspector examines lateral connection for compliance of constrction to code. Final approval is given by Director of Stormwater that all parameters were met. If lateral connection fails inspection, contractor applies for reinpection and the process is repeated until connection is approved.
Inspection of private sewer laterals confrms that sewer intallation in the EAR is in compliance with the Texas Adminstrative Code. Pollution is prevented from containating the EAR due to faulty lateral connections by contractors.
107 PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LATERAS
On average, 500 lateral connections as well as 250 lineal miles of sanitary sewer mains are inspected each year to insure compliance within the 175 square mile Recharge Zone.
SAWS is not authorized to inspect private sewer laterals in watersheds nort of the EARZ. The watersheds located in Bexar County, which drain to the EARZ, are comprised of 160 square miles. It is possible for contamination to occur to the EAR through these. watersheds.
RECOMMNDATION:
The inspection program adminstered by the San Antonio Water System is effective in monitoring the installation of the sanitary sewer system in the EAR. It is recommended that this program continue.
It is recommended that the program for testing and inspection of sewer laterals be expanded to include the watersheds that drain to the EAR. This opportnity can only come by way of amending the state Edwards Rules. This would insure proper installation of sanitary sewers and avoid pollution entering the EAR caused by improperly installed laterals.
108 STORMWATER COMPREHENSIV WATERSHED MANAGEMENT APPROACH
ISSUE:
The aspect of coordinating the federal, state and local programs and procedures relating to stormwater runoff into a comprehensive watershed management approach is becoming a topic of national interest among municipalities.
BACKGROUND:
Currently, within the City of San Antonio, there are numerous agencies dealing with some aspect of surface water. The City of San Antonio has been tasked at different times by these agencies with the responsibilty of adopting one or more their programs. For example, requirements from TAC §313 are imposed on the City through the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) to cover development over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Independent from this, are the federal requirements noted in 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, and 124 that require cities to implement stormwater management plans. In addition, the San Antonio Water System has both state and federal permits to discharge treated wastewater into area surface waters.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The need for clean rivers and streams is obvious. The abilty to plan for water quality is becoming more important. Social infuences on water quality such as subdivision development regulations, permanent open spaces, contaminated water discharge, and natural infuences such as topography, native plants and anials all affect water quality. Some of these items are permanent and cannot be changed.
National water quality although improving, is stil short of the national clean water standards. A redirection of current efforts may be key to accomplishing this goal. The concept is to organie the stream inventory according to the watersheds that drain to them. Each new construction project can then be evaluated on the basis of the anticipated impact to its specific watershed. Watershed targets wil be established for each watershed and eventually become the standard to which all projects are judged for approvaL. Finally and most importntly, effective plannng can be done which wil establish the proper priority for future effort.
Among the different problems, the most significant to this concept is that neither land owners nor cities organied propert boundaries according to watershed boundaries. This makes the enforcement of any true watershed regulation difficult because of different jurisdictional authorities involved.
110 COMPREHENSIV WATERSHED MANAGEMENT APPROACH
RECOMMENDATION:
REVISE DEVELOPMENT STANDARS AS PART OF A COMPREHENSIV WATERSHED MANAGEMENT APPROACH
It is recommended that the City Council begin efforts toward establishing watershed management within San Antonio. The San Antonio Water System, City staff and other community leaders would begin the necessary study to present to Council, a delineation of each watershed and the following list of watershed targets:
1. Flood Control; 2. Urban nonpoint source control; 3. Urban stream protection; 4. Control of specific nonpoint source pollutants; 5. Identify and protect sensitive areas; 6. Restore degraded urban streams.
i i i REVISE DEVELOPMENT STANARS AS PART OF A COMPREHENSIV WATERSHED MANAGEMENT APPROACH
ISSUE:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has mandated, pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulation for storm water discharges, that municipalities adopt a program to control pollution entering the municipal storm drain system originating from developed land.
BACKGROUN:
Federal requirements noted in 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, and 124 require cities to have stormwater management plans. They specifically require medium and large sized municipalities to apply for an NPDES permit to operate a storm drainage system.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The permit requires that any permitted city operating a storm drainage system must have as part of the storm water management plan regulations that impose water quality based controls for new development. The regulations, when adopted, wi1limit the amount of pollution that may enter the municipal storm drain system from newly developed or redeveloped property.
EP A studied urban areas thoughout the country. They determined that all of these areas in some way or another contribute to an increase of pollution of our country's river and streams. This increase in pollution is the target EPA is trying to reduce or eliminate.
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that the San Antonio Water System and City staff study and recommend to Council the appropriate measures to undertake to control, and reduce pollution resulting from urbaniation. It is furter recommended that the concept of Comprehensive Watershed Management discussed earlier, be employed to accomplish this task. Implementation of these controls would result in amendments to the Unified Development Code. It is also recommended that staff return in December, 1994 with an update and status on the EPA Stormwater Permit requirements and the feasibilty of this issue.
112 POLLUTION PREVENTION ORDINANCE
ISSUE:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has mandated, pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulation for storm water discharges, that municipalities adopt adequate legal authority to prohibit the pollution of a municipality's storm Preventiondrainage system. In order to comply, the Ordinance.City of San Antonio wil propose a Pollution . BACKGROUN:
Federal requirements noted in 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, and 124 require cities to have stormwater management plans. They specifically require medium and large sized municipalities to apply for an National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to operate a storm drainage system. One of the conditions of the permit is that any permitted city operating a storm drainage system must have or adopt "adequate legal authority" to control discharges to its system.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The federal code in discussing the "adequate legal authority" falls short of requiring a city to adopt a local permit to control discharges. Therefore, an ordinance that prohibits any discharge of harmful material either to the public health or the environment has been proposed to EP A to meet the minium requirements. This ordinance is known as the Pollution Prevention Ordinance (PPO).
The advantages to this approach are severaL. It should first meet the minium requirement of the permit obligation. The proposed ordinance could also be used as a tool for public education and understanding and it could provide 'a control of the obvious discharge of harmful materials to our future water supply.
Specific local limits have not been established for the discharge of known harmful materials. The City Industrial Waste Ordinance, which deals with pretreatment of the sewer waste stream may in the future act as a model for a revision to the PPO proposed herein.
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that the Pollution Prevention Ordinance be passed by the City Council by summer of this year.
113 CLEARIG AND GRADING ORDINANCE
ISSUE:
The Environmental Protection Agency has mandated, pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulation for storm water discharges, that municipalities adopt a program to control erosion and other material discharge from construction sites.
BACKGROUND:
Federal requirements noted in 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, and 124 require cities to have stormwater management plans. They specifically require medium and large sized municipalities to apply for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to operate a storm drainage system. One of the conditions of the permit requires any permitted city operating a storm drainage system must have as part of the storm water management plan a program to control erosion from construction sites within the city's jurisdiction.
Construction within San Antonio follows the normal permit process. Each contractor applies for a building permit though the City Building Inspections Dept. prior to construction of actual improvements in the ground. Clearing or grading a site has previously been an unregulated part of this process and is performed by land owners at wil.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The building permit process closely follows the Uniform Building Code. Modification to this permit to include a clearing or grading specification is not recommended. However, a new clearing and grading ordinance is proposed to fulfil the requirement from the EP A and simplify the transition of ths requirement into the contracting community. The ordinance establishes a local permit be required prior to any clearing or grading activities can occur on any site with the City Limits of San Antonio.
The advantages to ths approach are severaL. First, it meets the minium requirement of the NPDES permit obligation. Second, the proposed Jrdinance wil not require much more than is currently required directly from contractors by the EP A. Contractors are also currently required to apply directly to EP A for a separate permit on new construction. The approach to this ordinance "piggy backs" the EP A requirement for contractors so they are not excessively delayed in start time to begin construction. Third, the ordinance works in conjunction with EP A to make enforcement of the local permit and the EP A's requirement simultaneous. EP A also becomes a backup enforcement mechanism for the permit established by the proposed ordinance.
The major disadvantage of this ordinance is that it wil add to the cost of construction. Required site erosion control plans wil be costly to do and must be done by registered engineers. Inspections and plans checking service fees from the City wil be borne by the owner or contractor, and additional delays in construction wil also result from this new process.
114 CLEARIG AND GRADING ORDINANCE
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that the Clearing and Grading Ordinance be passed by the City CounciL. The timing for this requirement to be in compliance with the NPDES permit is unkown at this time. It is anticipated that the City wil have one year from the time the permit is issued by EP A to the City to be incompliance.
115 CHAPTER 34 -- WATER CODE WELL CLOSUR PROGRA
ISSUE:
The San Antonio Water System (SAWS), Water Quality Division, has been designated to interpret, modify and monitor the operation of a water well program to assist in the protection of the supply of drinking water for the health and welfare of its customers.
BACKGROUN:
The closure of water wells that are of poor construction andlor are abandoned is being emphasized in modern regulations designed to protect ground water supplies. The Safe Drinking Water Act, Well Protection Rule, addresses potential pollution hazards within a five-mile radius of infuence of public water supply wells. Such hazards as underground petroleum storage tanks, industrial and solid waste sites, private sewage facilities and abandoned wells are identified and monitored relative to any real or potential impact on the public water supply.
The San Antonio City Code gives the Water Quality Division authority to identify abandoned water wells and to communicate the requirement to plug such wells to their owners. A second mechanism the Division has to accomplish, in addition to the plugging of abandoned water wells, is to make inspections of propert plats submitted to the City. The plat wil be disapproved until the plugging of any and all abandoned water wells on the platted property is completed.
Another mechanism for closing abandonedl substandard water wells is the internal procedure that utilizes the Water Well Declaration Form, FNOOl-3 (Attachment A). Potential customers for SAWS water service are required to sign this form to declare the presence or absence of a water well on the propert for which they are making application for water service. If the applicant has a well on his property, he is allowed 60 days after receiving water service from SAWS to plug the well.
POLICY:
The San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees and the SAWS Water Quality Division, .as its agent, is designated in the San Antonio City Code as being responsible for monitoring the plugging, repair and constrction of water wells. The code, however, is not specific in providing details for all operations of the well program. For example, abandoned water wells are to be closed "with such materials and in such manner as, in the judgment of the Board, wil prevent the pollution and containation of the City's water supply. . .", Sections 34-74. The water well program currently in operation also adheres to the rules for water well drilers as defined in 31 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 287 and the Rules and Regulations for Public Water System promulgated in 1992 by the Texas Water Commission (now the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, TNRCC).
117 WELL CLOSUR PROGRA
RECOMMNDATION:
In order to faciltate the closure of substandardl abandoned water wells throughout Bexar County, it is recommended that amendments to Chapter 34-- Water Code be developed to:
1. Approve the Water Well Declaration Form (Attachment A). Designed to establish the presence of a well on the property;
2. Approve the proposed SAWS Customer Service Agreement that is required by TNRCC (Attachment B). This instrument wil faciltate the acceptance of new regulations by the water service applicant by conveying the atmosphere of a partnership for protecting water quality;
3. Approve amendments to Chapter 34 outlnig specific requirements for well.
118 Attachment A
Water Well Declaration Form
119 FNOOl-3
SAN ANONIO WATER SYSTEM WATER WELL DECLATION FORM
Date:
Property Owner (Printed): Telephone # Address of Property in Question:
Address of. Owner (If different from the above):
Lot No. Block N.C.B. Map
PLEASE READ AND SIGN WHICHEVER DECLATION IS APPLICABLE. A. I, the undersigned, do hereby acknowledge that there is a water well, that may be considered substandard/abandoned, on the property for which I am making application for water service. I agree to obtain a Permit from the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and plug said well in accordance with the city Code within 60 days after installation of the water service. Furthermore, I understand that the required plugging of said water well is a condition of my retaining a SAWS water service.
Signature of Owner
Note: Information regarding the well plugging operation and the permit requirement may be obtained by contacting the following:
Water Quality Division 517 Mission Road San Antonio, Texas 78210 Telephone - (210) 534-6400 and Extensions - 150, 153, 155, or 105
B. I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that there is ~ a water ~ell on the property for which I am making application for water service.
Signature of Owner
Water Quality - White Customer - Yellow Mains & Services - Pink 120 Attachment B
SAWS Customer Service Agreement
121 SAWS CUSTOMER SERVICE AGREEMENT
I. PURPOSB. The SU ANNIO WATER SYSTEM is responsible for protecting the drinking water supply from contamination or pollution which could result from improper pluming practices and/or abandoned/substandard water wells. The purpose of this service agreement is to notify each customer of the restrictions which are in place to provide this protection. The utility enforces these restrictions to ensure the public health and welfare. Each customer must sign this agreement before the SAWS will begin service. In addition, when service to an existing connection has been suspended or terminated, the water system will not re-establish service unless it has a signed copy of this agreement. II. PLUMING RBSTRICTIOHS. The following undesirable pluming practices are prohibited by State regulations. A. No direct connection between the public drinking water supply and a potential source of contamination is permitted. Potential sources of contamination shall be isolated ,from the public water system by an air-gap or an appropriate backflow prevention device. B. No cross-coMection between the public drinking water supply and a private water system is permitted. These potential threats to the public drinking water supply shall be eliminated by installing a reduced pressure-zone backflow prevention device or plugging the well. c. No connection which allows water to be returned to the public drinking water supply is permitted. D. No pipe or pipe fitting which contains more than 8. ot lead may be used for the installation or repair of pluming at any connection which provides water for human use. E. No solder of flux which contains more than 0.2 percent lead can be used for the installation or repair of ua.plWling at any connection which provides water for human III. SBRVie.' AGRBBHft. The following are the terms of the service agreement between the SAWS and the customer. A. The Water System will maintain a copy of this agreement as long as the CUstomer and/or the premises is connected to the Water System. B. The CUstomer shall allow his property to be inspected for possible cross-connections and other undesirable pluming practices. These inspections shall be conducted by the
122 , Page -2- SERVICE AGREEMNT
Water System or its designated agent prior to initiating service and periodically thereafter. The inspections shall be conducted during the Water System's normal business hours. C. The Water System shall notify the CUstomer in writing of any cross-connection or other undesirable pluming practice which has been identified during the initial inspection or the periodic reinspection. D. The CUstomer shall immediately correct any undesirable pluming practice on his premises. E. The CUstomer shall, at his expense, properly install, test, and maintain any backflow prevention device required by the Water System. Copies of all testing and maintenance records shall be provided to the Water System. The required plugging of any water well will be accomplished at the customer's expense. IV. BDORCEKH'. If the CUstomer fails to comply with the terms of the Service Agreement, the Water System shall terminate the customer's water service. Any expenses associated with the enforcement of this aqreement shall be billed to the CUstomer.
CUSTOMER'S SIGNATUR: DATB:
123. WELL ABANDONMNT PROGRA
ISSUE:
Chapter 34 of the City Code requires land owners within two hundred feet of an established water supply line, to connect to that line. Some land owners are reluctant to discontinue their use of an existing well that does not met standards at the time of connection.
BACKGROUN:
Since 1959, wells that are approved by the Department of Health more than 100 feet deep and meet with all water standards required for health may continue use of that well. All other wells are considered substandard. As the Water System has grown over the decades, some owners are reluctant to give up on their wells even though they are now connected to the system.
POLICY:
If an applicant has a well on his propert, he is allowed 60 days after achieving water service from San Antonio Water System (SAWS) to plug the well. Many applicants have asked for variances to continue use of the well for hardships, non-potable uses and assurances of another source of water for domestic need. Staff has worked with many applicants in this regard and sees the necessity in formalizing the variance process to insure that quality controls to protect the System are in place for the time period that the well is in use. The variance procedure wil require periodic testing and a definite time period for closure.
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend Chapter 34 of the City Code to require well closure upon tie-in to San Antonio Water System lines. Provide a strict variance procedure if warranted for the applicant.
124 EXTENSION OF JUISDICTION INTO EXTRATERRITORIAL JUISDICTION
ISSUE:
With the increases in development that has occurred in recent years, regulating activities over the Recharge Zone has become an important issue. Through ordinances and criteria found in the Unified Development Code, the City of San Antonio has established jurisdiction within the City Limits that allows for protective measures for the Edwards Aquifer. That same level of protection by the City of San Antonio does not occur within the 5 mile area extending past the city limits known as the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
BACKGROUN:
Of the 1,500 sq. miles of the Edwards Aquifer, approximately 175 sq. miles (11.6 %) lies in Bexar County and accounts for only 10% of the annual recharge. Approximately 34.5 square miles (2.3%) of the recharge zone is within the city limits of San Antonio.
The area 5 miles outside the city limits known as the ETJ allows for future expansion of the City through annexation. The City of San Antonio is limited in their abilty to prevent direct theats to water quality that occur within the ETJ on the Recharge Zone. Zoning, intended to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community by regulating land use, is limited to within the city limits. Subdivision codes, which extend into the ETJ, cannot regulate land use and provide limited protection to the Aquifer. Their purpose is to provide for the orderly division of land and to provide adequate infrastructure in accordance with community standards such as streets, sidewalks, water, sewer, and drainage.
The Texas Water Code §26.177 (Water Pollution Control Duties of Cities) allows for water pollution control and abatement programs for the entire City including the ETJ thus allowing standards set by the City for the protection of the Aquifer to apply to the area within the city limits and the ETJ.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Current measures used in Chapter 35 to extend Zoning authority into the ETJ and to increase the abilty of the City to protect the Aquifer through land use, annexation would be required. Zonig and subdivision regulations are very restrictive in their application. Strengthening the protective measures on the Recharge Zone could be accomplished by modifying the Subdivision codes to increase standards on drainage improvements, pollution abatement, and floodplains, however, each component could take several years for implementation.
125 EXTENSION OF JUISDICTION INTO EXTRATERRITORIAL JUISDICTION
As an alternative, the Texas Water Code §26 .177 allows the City to extend its authority into the ETJ for water pollution control and abatement programs thus allowing for a standardized program addressing storm sewer discharges and urban runoff from rainwater for areas on and off the Recharge Zone. Protecting the quality of water entering the Aquifer and the water entering the drainageways affecting downstream users provides a realistic goal for the local and regional community.
Adoption of an ordinance to include Texas Water Code §26.177 within the City's regulatory powers would allow for a master plan that would include both the City and the ETJ in addressing the water pollution and abatement issues involving the water quality of the Aquifer.
The time involved for review and approval by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and the establishment of programs could become a lengthy process.
RECOMMENDATION:
Protection of the Aquifer is a local and regional concern. Adoption of an ordinance to develop and execute a reasonable and realistic plan addressing water pollution control and abatement programs through the Texas Water Code §26.177 would provide an avenue for the City to address the water quality issue on a larger scale.
126 II
ORGANIZATIONAL PROGRAMMING . i
1-
TNRCC CHAPTER 313 EDWARDS RULES
ISSUE:
The purpose of the Edwards Rules, Chapter 313, is to regulate activities having the potential for causing pollution of the Edwards Aquifer. The "Rules" address those activities that have direct threats to water quality. This issue requires continued monitoring of the "Rules" to promote strict but fair requirements to insure continued protection of our sole source of water.
BACKGROUN:
The Edwards Rules have been in place since 1970. They have been revised and improved to address specific prohibited activities, wastewater collection, construction, storage tanks, protection of recharge features, and water pollution abatement plans. In addition, the "Rules" have been amended to include definition of a geographic area adjacent to the Recharge Zone, called the Transition Zone, to provide for additional protection against leakage from hydrocarbon and hazardous substance storage facilities.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is directed by the Texas Water Code (§26.046) to conduct annual public hearings in the Edwards Region, or any other county where requested by the county commissioners. The last public hearing held in 1992, provided many recommendations and changes to the "Rules". The March 30, 1994 public hearing convened 42 speakers with comments related to specific sections of the "Rules" as well as general statements regarding enforcement, pollution control and agency coordination.
By amending the "Rules" to strengthen its protective goal for the Recharge Zone, TNRCC and all involved utilties must coordinate and cooperate on the procedures for implementation. The criteria to be developed should include considerations for timing, abilty to pedorm and provide pedormance standards for specific requirements related to facilties and for infrastructure. The "Rules" should be flexible to consider technological as well as institutional changes that can occur. Chapter 313 should also continue to consider the role of local entities but be mindful of the needs of counties that are without land use regulatory authority.
Chapter 313 is, for some areas of the region, the only form of regulation available to protect the Recharge Zone from potential adverse activities. Enforcement of the "Rules" is in the jurisdiction of the San Antonio office TNRCC staff (two persons) with the assistance of local entities with the Edwards Recharge Zone (ERZ). Because enforcement of Chapter 313 is limited, it is necessary to empower the local TNRCC staff with authority to issue citations for violations. Enforcement is key to the success of the "Rules". Their restrictiveness is limited only to how well they are followed.
129 CHAPTER 313 EDWARDS RULES
RECOMMNDATION:
Continued review of the "Rules" amendment process is necessary to insure regional applicability of standards for protection. This process wil be in the form of communication with both the local and Austin offices. The communication wil provide for monitoring amendments promulgated by TNRCC with review by the City of San Antonio. Amendments designed to strengthen' the "Rules" wil be submitted for public comment by TNRCC prior to adoption.
The City of San Antonio wil remain committed to following though on the recommendations forwarded to TNRCC and provide updates on their status for inclusion in the "Rules".
130 WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN
ISSUE:
The Edwards Rules require that a Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WP AP) be submitted for new development on the Edwards Recharge Zone. The WP AP process is the heart of the Edwards Rules. Review and comment on the plans is done by Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) staff in cooperation with San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and Edwards District personneL. Coordination of this comment and review system is key to insuring local input to provide the strictest requirements possible for this area.
BACKGROUN:
In 1987, the City Council Committee report recommended an increase in the City of San Antonio's role in reviewing Recharge Zone activities. Since that time, zonig case approval has been conditioned to WPAP adoption. In addition, the City's role in WPAP review and comment has expanded to include field visits, meeting with the applicant, and proposals for modification.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The WP AP has grown in importance from a report of a few pages to extensive plans based on the nature of the proposed project. Applicants must submit site plans, geologic assessments, construction sequencing, description of the proposed development, wastewater and stormwater volumes, pollution prevention measures and methods of protecting significant features.
Coordinating the review of these documents is crucial to insuring that protective measures within the City of San Antonio's jurisdiction are implemented. Recommendations made during the analysis become part of the special conditions. A cooperative spirit between the reviewing entities has fostered a strong team for dilgent oversight of land use activities. Although they do not always agree, the inter-agency communication has improved land use assessments and recharge feature evaluation.
The physical and budgetary limitations placed on the TNRCC staff is further evidence of the need to continue ths collaboration. SAWS, working through the City of San Antonio's Departent of Building Inspections, has attempted to assist TNRCC in enforcement of building standards related to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. Final assessments and recommendations are submitted to the Zoning Commission, the Plannng Commission and the City Council in the decision-makg process as conditions for approval. These final statements are then forwarded to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. ,
131 WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN
RECOMMNDATIONS:
Continued cooperation between the City of San Antonio and TNRCC staff in the review of Water Pollution Abatement Plans is key to establishing and protecting environmentally sensitive areas. The process of monitoring development over the Recharge Zone begins with the submittal of the Water Pollution Abatement Plan. The City's input during the assessment of the proposed uses also aids in making further recommendations in the local development process of zoning and subdivision regulation.
132 TECHNICAL GUIANCE MANAL
ISSUE:
The intent of the Edwards Aquifer Protection program is to regulate activities having the potential for causing pollution of the Edwards Aquifer. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) has developed and distributed a "Techncal Guidance Manual" for use by applicants to help them prepare their material according to Chapter 313 Edwards Rules. As a tool, the "Manual" is a good reference point for establishing regional development standards over the Recharge Zone.
BACKGROUN:
Since 1970, the Edwards Rules have undergone revision and update to meet even stricter standards. As part of that evolution, TNRCC has developed a "how to" users' guide. The Manual provides step-by-step suggestions for compliance in the areas of applications, Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WP AP) requirements, organied sewage collection system criteria, petroleum tanks, temporary sedimentation and erosion control structures and permanent stormwater pollution control requirements.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
By providing a set of examples, the "Techncal Guidance Manual" sets out to educate and inform applicants of the specific requirements in Chapter 313. The document goes a step further by commenting on effectiveness and standards of environmental feature protection.
Protection guidelines in the form of narratives and diagrams ilustrate temporary erosion and sedimentation structures to be used during construction as well as permanent stormwater pollution control requirements. These features are "best management practices" promoted by TNRCC as prudent environmental safeguards. The manual also outlines a resident education program addressing ilegal household and industrial waste discharges into storm sewers. Finally, it clearly delineates residential areas within the Recharge Zone.
The "Techncal Guidance Manual" expands the intent of the Chapter 313 Edwards Rules to assist the regulated communty. The "Manual" is a key first step in establishig a regional approach to pollution education, monitorig and abatement.
RECOMMNDATIONS:
Promotion and use of the "Techncal Guidance Manual" wil establish a means to address some of the concern which arise from development over the Recharge Zone. It can possibly aid in future Edwards Rules changes and, if successful, can be adopted as part of the "Rules". The
"Manual" can also aid local entities to develop their own guidelines for storm water abatement.
133 DRAINAGE AREA
ISSUE:
The Drainage Area is a segment of the Edwards Plateau where rain feeds streams draining toward the aquifer itself. The majority of the streamflows originating in this area and the hil country, as well as runoff from the imediate area, reach the exposed openings of the Recharge Zone and channel into the aquifer. As a conduit for potential recharge, this area must also be protected.
BACKGROUN:
The Drainage Area of the Edwards Aquifer remains a primary concern. It is a vast, large area covering a major portion of the Edwards Plateau. This issue was introduced in the 1987 report "The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action" report as an area of concern. While activities on the Drainage Area can dramatically infuence the Aquifer, its size renders it beyond the scope of the City to regulate.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The Texas Natural Conservation Commission (TNRCC), under the authority granted it by the Texas Water Code, is the only entity which can adequately safeguard the Drainage area.
During the TNRCC's annual public hearing held on March 30, 1994 to consider comments on Chapter 313, Edward Rules, the City again requested establishment of a Drainage Zone. This zone would have boundaries similar to the catchment area where most waters from creeks and streams would channel into the Recharge Z"One for replenishment. The Drainage Zone would be governed as the Recharge Zone, especially in the areas of underground storage tanks, sewer main and lateral construction and inspection as well as stormwater abatement.
RECOMMNDATION:
Continue to urge the TNRCC to formally establish the Drainage Zone as part of the Edwards Aquifer system with thee years and with requirements similar to the Recharge Zone.
134 TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS EDUCATION AND INFORMATION
ISSUE:
Water is a commodity that is easily taken for granted especially in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Education and information about the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone should be encouraged among the Homeowner Associations, Commercial Developers, and the general public located on or traveling on the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone to insure continued protection of our sole source of water.
BACKGROUN:
Increased awareness and protection of the Edwards Aquifer has evolved since the Texas Legislature recognized the significance and uniqueness of the Edwards Aquifer in 1959. The Edwards Rules, Chapter 313 in place since 1970 and revised and improved upon over the years to address issues relevant to the protection of the Edwards Aquifer requires a Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WP AP) when plannng regulated development over the Edwards Aquifer. The Water Pollution Abatement Plan provides developers with the necessary framework to plan their projects within the guidelines of the Chapter 313 rules and regulations. Annual public hearings are provided for in the rules giving an avenue to update and revise the Chapter 313 Edwards Rules with the most recent hearing being March 30, 1994.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
One in four new housing units built in Bexar County are being built on the Edwards Recharge Zone (ERZ). With increase in development on the ERZ, more of the general public wi1live, work, shop, and drive on the ERZ thus providing an opportnity to educate the public on the importance of protecting the quality of the water in the Aquifer.
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) has been designated by the Texas Legislature as the regulatory agency for regulating development over the Edwards Recharge Zone. Water Pollution Abatement Plans are required for regulated development over the Recharge Zone. Water Pollution Abatement Plans described in Chapter 313.4 of the Texas Adminstrative Code defines regulated development as "Any residential subdivision or any public or private industral, commercial, or multi-family construction, with the exception of residential subdivisions in which every lot is larger than five (5) acres and no more than one single-family residence is allowed on each lot. Industrial, commercial, or multi-family construction is considered a regulated development regardless or'lot size" . Water Pollution Abatement Plans currently require the applicant to abide by the rules and regulations set forth in Chapter 313.4 when developing a site. To be included in the WPAP is detailed information about the present status of the site, what wil occur during development and a description of the site upon completion of the project. Currently, San Antonio Water System provides educational materials relating to water quantity, quality, and environmental safety.
136 EDUCATION AN INORMATION
The TNRCC is directed by the Texas Water Code (§26.046) to conduct annual public hearings in the Edwards Region, or any other county where requested by the county commissioners for recommendations on changes to the Rules. By including a requirement into the Chapter 313.4 Rules requiring an applicant provide for educational and informational materials, awareness of the Edwards Aquifer and its unique characteristics is amplified. By educating the public who live, work, shop or drive on the Edwards Recharge Zone, they become more aware and conscientious of the need to protect the Aquifer.
RECOMMNDATION:
Recommend to TNRCC that Chapter 313.4 of the Edwards Rules require the applicant to provide educational materials and information on the Edwards Aquifer upon completion of any regulated activity that satisfies the Water Pollution Abatement Plan requirements. A plan for dissemination of materials and information should be included in the WP AP.
San Antonio Water System should continue their educational programs and look for ways to further educate the public on water quality and quantity issues. ..
137 SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM INTERNAL COORDINATION
ISSUE:
The issue of development is further complicated when more than one department within an agency needs to either review, or study the impact of proposed development. At times, there is a need for personnel from the Stormwater Department to review and comment on plans for certain projects.
BACKGROUND:
Part of the EP A Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) requires that new development should proceed in conformity with the local municipality's development and redevelopment standards. These standards wil exist to control and limit the amount of pollutants that may enter the municipal storm drain system. These standards wil ultimately be reviewed and accepted by the Region VI office of EP A as "in conformance with" permit conditions. Their authority over this issue is through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit that wil be issued to the City of San Antonio later this year.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is directed by the Texas Adminstrative Code (§313.4) to approve Water Pollution Abatement Plans (WPAP) submitted for development over the Recharge Zone. This activity is being performed by personnel from the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) Division of Aquifer Studies. The WPAP also essentially addresses the stormwater requirement imposed by the EP A through the City's SMP. So it is conceivable that these same plans when submitted by the developer, wil also include Stormwater review and comment in conformance with the requirements imposed by the SMP.
In addition, certin projects proposed for the Recharge Zone present unique engineering problems. The Division of Aquifer Studies and the Stormwater Departent wil need to consult with one another to allow for additional input to determine the effectiveness of proposed pollution abatement plans.
RECOMMNDATION:
This issue is noted here to identify an internal adjustment to alert applicants when new plans are submitted to SAWS for approval. SAWS wil work to insure that ths internal distribution of plans and reviews do not delay the certification process.
138 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR ASSESSMENT FLOWCHART EVALUATION
ISSUE:
The current significant recharge feature assessment flowchart which was developed and implemented as a result of the 1987 report "The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action" is in need of revision. There are several situations which arise during geologic assessments where the current flowchart is not flexible enough to provide adequate assessments of potentially significant recharge features which are observed in the field. The issue is to modify the current flowchart so that it be more flexibie and wil provide an assessment which addresses the situation more closely.
BACKGROUN:
In the 1987' report "The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local And Regional Action", a flowchart was developed to aid in the assessment of significant recharge features. This flowchart has been used in the development of Water Pollution Abatement Plans for the past 7 years. Recently, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission has spearheaded a change in . the application and development of Water Polluticn Abatement Plans and several discrepancies in the flowchart have been discussed. Through these discussions, the need for a revision of the current assessment flowchart has been voiced.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The current flowchart should be evaluated and modified as warranted by a committee of individuals currently involved in the development and review of Water Pollution Abatement Plans .
RECOMMNDATION:
Require the analysis and development of a new flowchart to adequately address current situations experienced during the preparation and review of Water Pollution Abatement Plans.
139 MAPPING OF SENSITIV RECHARGE FEATURS
ISSUE:
The unavailabilty or lack of accurate and up-to-date data is a problem faced by local and regional decision makers. Continued mapping of sensitive areas in the Recharge Zone to provide an overview andlor pattern of geologic features is essential to the responsible manageme~t of the Edwards Aquifer.
BACKGROUND:
The Edwards Aquifer area is a karst formation with a Recharge Zone extending from Central Hays County to northern Kinney County. Karst aquifers typically have a large number of caves, sinkoles and other features that function as groundwater flow conduits for recharge.
In 1987, the City Council passed Resolution 87-47-72 which endorsed and formalized the City of San Antonio's non-degradation policy toward groundwater protection for the Edwards Aquifer. The resolution recognied that a comprehensive regional and local groundwater program was needed. A complete and accurate map identifying sensitive areas is an important element in developing local andlor regional plans for Aquifer protection.
Currently the Edwards Underground Water District and the San Antonio Water System each maintain and continually update separate databa3es of sensitive recharge features in Bexar County.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Mapping of significant recharge features is crucial to the knowledge needed to evaluate the recharge zone. A reliable database can be a useful tool to use in implementing policy decisions relating to water quality issues. Development frequently alters or covers up features that could have been identified and put into a useful database. As more data is accumulated, patterns become apparent and give us a better understanding of the network of karst features that are typical of the Edwards Aquifer. This inormation might allow regulating activities to avert potential adverse activities over the Recharge Zone, even in areas where development has taken place and changed the land surface.
The abilty of local and regional officials to make the wisest use of limited funds and staff time in implementing policy issues depends on the availabilty of current accurate water data. One agency needs to be identified as the repository or "clearing house" with each agency submitting data. Methods of gathering data, accuracy standards, and any associated costs need to be agreed upon. A liaison from each agency would interact closely with the lead agency to assure accuracy and usefulness of data. The cost of a cooperative program would depend on the commitment made by each agency.
140 MAPPING OF SENSITIV RECHARGE FEATURS
Non-degradation of the Edwards Aquifer is a combined effort. With each agency sharing an accurate and useful database on the Aquifer sensitive recharge features, informed decisions can be made with assurance.
RECOMMENDATION:
Mapping of significant recharge features of the Edwards Aquifer is an important tool in implementing the City's non-degradation policy on water quality. A central authority with the responsibilty of maintaining a reliable and accurate database, interaction between agencies, agreement on a reliable method of collecting data, and shared administrative costs, is essential to a successful mapping program.
The Edwards Underground Water District currently has a database. However, with limited manpower, changes in management and responsibilties to other counties, their abilty to increase and maintain that database may be diminished.
The San Antonio Water System (SA WS) is continually updating their database on Aquifer sensitive recharge features. By designating the San Antonio Water System as the lead agency, they would bring to the program the stabilty and resources of a utilty, an established network of cooperation with other agencies, an abilty to provide SAWS personnel to the effort, and a centralized location thus making SAWS an excellent choice.
The local community needs to make informed decisions on future water needs. Mapping of sensitive recharge features is an important tool in accomplishing that task.
141 GLOBAL POSITIONING SATELLITE SYSTEM
ISSUE:
The provision for a Global Positioning Satellte system for locating Significant Recharge Features (SRF's) and to map the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone and Transition Zone would allow for taking advantage of this information and putting it to good use.
BACKGROUND:
In the 1987 report 'The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action". the Edwards Underground Water District (EUWD) became the central authority in mapping the Edwards Recharge Zone and locating SRF's. The program has been successful in generating maps of the Edwards Aquifer. Several agencies are involved in gathering substantial knowledge of the Recharge Zone characteristics. These agencies are:
* Unìted States Geological Services (USGS) * The Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin * Edwards Underground Water District (EUWD) * San Antonio Water System
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The Edwards Aquifer is a unique system which requires extensive mapping to aid in understanding its intriGate functions. The increal)ed concern regarding the cumulative effect of development over the Aquifer necessitates not only a good working knowledge of the internal functions of the Aquifer, but adequate mapping of SRF's as welL. The amount of data which is submitted at each site is assessed for development and should be utilized to its fullest potentiaL.
The mapping of Significant Recharge Features is of vital importnce in establishing the exact location and subsequent protection of those SRF's. Mapping wil be used as a guide to implement the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission recommendations .or any other agencies' recommendations concernng development over the Recharge Zone. Mapping wil be used in helping to direct the development over the Recharge Zone.
Mapping is the basis for developing the knowledge necessary for land development and management planng to protect the Edwards Aquifer. The technques and methods used are importnt aspects of the mapping process and have to be clearly defined. The methods for identifying, describing and quantifying Significant Recharge Features must be implemented in a manner based on sound geological and engineering practices. Mapping of Significant Recharge Features provides crucial knowledge needed to protect the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
142 GLOBAL POSITION SATELLITE SYSTEM
RECOMMNDATION:
The use of a Gobal Postioning Satellte System by SAWS wil help in mapping the Edwards Recharge Zone, the Transition Zone, and locate Significant Recharge Features such as caverns, sinkoles, faults, and various structures more accurately. It wil help in the plannng and protection of Significant Recharge Features from development over the Recharge Zone. . It can also be used to locate abandoned wells, underground storage tanks, and sewer lines.
143 EMERGENCY MEASURES EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE PLAN
ISSUE:
The primary role of the San Antonio Water System (SA WS) in an emergency is to protect and miniize the impact of an uncontrolled release or spil to the City of San Antonio's water resources and to the various utilties the system oversees or manages. An Emergency Operations. Plan (EOP) which covers procedures for large scale emergencies (ranging from natural disasters to domestic emergencies) is currently in place for the City of San Antonio.
BACKGROUND:
Under the EOP plan, the San Antonio Water System's primary responsibilties wil be the provision of an emergency water supply for all types of emergency situations and the restoration of normal water service with a minial delay following the emergency. It provides for certain actions by the San Antonio Water System to assure the continued supply of water to the maximum extent possible. According to the plan, the San Antonio Water System wil work together with the City of San Antonio to restore essential services to the populace.
In an effort to prepare for an emergency that pertins to a San Antonio Water System contingency , SAWS has adopted an internal Response Plan which addresses imediate response procedures. The SAWS Plan contains specific actions to be taken by the Stormwater Division and the Aquifer Studies Division. The Stormwater Division measures both the imediate impact that the spil has on the water quality and the long term affect on contamination loads and the city's abilty to meet EPA requirements regarding stormwater run-off. The Aquifer Studies Division identifies any features that are sensitive or significant to the recharge of the Edwards Aquifer at the emergency's location, and determines the best method of protecting that feature.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
Containants can reach the aquifer in a myriad of different ways. With the unregulated transportation of hazardous chemicals over the Recharge Zone, and the constant theat of ilegal dumping, there is a need for an imeriiate Emergency Response Program that designates procedures in the event of an uncontrolled release or spil.
RECOMMNDATION:
The San Antonio Water System has designated three key contact persons to be on call on a rotating basis, who, upon being notified of an emergency, wil notify the other appropriate San Antonio Water System divisions or departments based on the nature of the spil and the utilties affected. Upon notification of an uncontrolled release or spil and depending on the specific conditions and areas impacted, the person on call directs the proper sections (Risk Management, Sewer Maintenance, Wastewater Quality Control, Stormwater, Aquifer Studies Division, Water Quality Control) to respond.
145 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN FOR PUBLIC SUPPLY WELLS
ISSUE:
To provide an Emergency Plan for the San Antonio Water System's (SAWS) Public Supply Wells.
BACKGROUN:
During the years 1949 to 1956 a record drought in Texas brought the water level of the Edwards Aquifer down to a historic low. Some of the water wells experienced a measured increase in the amount of total dissolved solids as the "Bad Water" Line encroached furter to the north. At that time, the City Water Board was unprepared to deal with such an emergency. The San Antonio Water System must not be caught in the same predicament. The San Antonio Water System needs to anticipate potential emergency situations and be equipped to handle them. The transport and bulk storage of chemicals withi the San Antonio region offers a potential for contaminating a public water supply well(s). The City of San Antonio has been fortnate that an incident such as the one in the 50's has not occurred withi city limits.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
As San Antonio strives to prevent the degradation of water in the Aquifer by regulating the activities on the surface, it must also protect the water that is in the process of being distributed to customers. The San Antonio Water System has eighty-nine water wells which are spaced relatively close together. This close proximity places all of the wells at a risk to contamination. If one well becomes containated, there is a possibilty that a well close by wil become contaminated. During a crisis, to be able to provide the level of quality and service that citizens are accustomed to, SAWS must have an Emergency Plan for Supply Wells and be prepared to carr it out should circumstances arise.
The rapidly growing population and the increasing use of the Edwards Aquifer, necessitates the need for a plan of action in the event that a Public Supply Well becomes contaminated.
146 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN FOR PUBLIC SUPPLY WELLS
RECOMMNDATION:
In the event that the San Antonio Water System must implement an Emergency Spil Plan for Public Supply Wells, the San Antonio Water System shall:
a. notify all customers of the status of the emergency; b. imediately shut down water supplies; c. deduce the nature and origin of contamination; d. devise a plan of action to treat the water; e. provide customers with water through the use of SAWS water trucks or designated water pick-up sites; f. begin recirculation of water program.
* The cost and feasibilty of a Water Treatment Plant should be reviewed as a future means of water purification.
147 III
POTENTIAL ACTMTIES FUTURE STUDY BLASTING ORDINANCE
ISSUE:
The regulating agencies have always questioned whether blasting on the Edwards Recharge Zone has caused undetected damage to underground structures. The main concern is the effect on structures which might be sources or avenues for contamination to the Edwards Aquifer s~ch as sewer lines, underground storage tanks, and water wells.
BACKGROUN:
Currently, the State's Edwards Rules, Chapter 313, require blasting for a sewer line be done in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association. The City of San Antonio makes no special conditions for blasting over the Edwards Recharge Zone. The Edwards Underground Water District funded a study on the effects of blasting on engineered structures. The study results have shown that with the use of responsible blasting technques by the contractor, damage to engineered structures can be avoided. However, there is no mechanism in place to verify that these technques are being used.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
The study performed by the Edwards Underground Water District achieved two objectives. The first, was to determine how blasting degrades the integrity of underground structures and secondly, what criteria might be effective to limit facilty degradation. The study concentrated on the affects of blasting adjacent ~o various structures constructed according to city and state specifications. Some structures tested consisted of a sewer line, an underground storage tank and a water well. This report has established some potential relationships between the blast size, the conditions of the blast, and distance to the structure, which may aid in establishing guidelines for blasting on the Recharge Zone.
The report also indicated that there were good correlations between blast strengths, the blast wave, and depth which could be used for developing prediction technques for vibration control during blasting and would reduce risk to damaging structures which might cause contamination to the aquifer.
RECOMMNDATION:
Provide for mandatory reporting of blasting conditions prior to blast and a record of the blast which could be used to verify responsible blasting. Information to be provided to the San Antonio Water System are the following:
1. Date of blast 2. Location Description
1S0 BLASTING ORDINANCE
3. Blaster's Nanie 4. Contractor 5. Purpose of Blasting 6. Number of shots 7. Depth and Diameter 8. Type of Explosive 9. Amount of Explosive 10. Directional or not 11. Utilty map with distances to shot points 12. Utilties contacted 13. Fire Department contacted 14. Type of monitoring device 15. Include copy of monitoring device printout 16. Significant recharge features in the area including map with distances 17. Any comments or special conditions
In addition, the San Antonio Water System staff shall work with the San Antonio Fire Department to set up guidelines for blasting on the Edwards Recharge Zone.
151 DETERMINATION OF PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OVER THE EDWARS AQUIFR RECHARGE ZONE
ISSUE:
Data used to aid in determining the impact of development on the quality and quantity of water entering the interstream areas of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone within Bexar County must be obtained. However, an undeveloped area must be monitored to determine conditions prior to changes in land use. The "Governent Canyon" area can provide such baseline conditions.
BACKGROUN:
The "1987 The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives For Local and Regional Action". recommended that the City of San Antonio and the Edwards Underground Water District (EUWD) utilize respective experience and knowledge obtained from the Water Pollution Abatement Plan review and water quality monitoring to make adjustments and corrections to the regulatory process and to assure the prevention of the cumulative effect of pollution. This statement implies that a basic understanding of the pre-development conditions is needed. However, these pre-development conditions are not fully known because of a lack of available data by both the City and the EUWD.
In 1993, the San Antonio Water System in conjunction with the Edwards Underground Water District and the Texas Departent of Parks and Wildlife, purchased a tract of land known as "Governent Canyon". Much of this 4800 acre tract is located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone and is virally untouched by development. These conditions afford an extremely rare opportnity for scientific study. The data which would be obtained from such studies would be instrumental in the analysis of the potential impact caused by development on the Recharge Zone.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
A comprehensive study must be initiated in order to provide the appropriate agencies with data necessary to analyze the effects of development on water quality with the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Ths effort should include, but not be limited to, water quality and quantity, pollutant loading, and recharge potential of the watersheds being studied.
RECOMMNDATION:
The City Council Committee of the Whole on Water Quality realizes the necessity of obtaining ths valuable information and recommends the following:
~ That the appropriate actions be taken to determine a scope of work, obtain funding and secure a Consultat to proceed with a comprehensive study of the "Governent Canyon" area.
152 SEPTIC TANK MONITORING PROGRA
ISSUE:
Monitoring of septic tanks is proposed for septic systems in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
BACKGROUND:
The City of San Antonio Council Committee on the Edwards Aquifer recommended in their October 1, 1987 report "The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives for Local and Regional Action". section: Septic Tanks Summary Statements," a Septic Tank Monitoring program be implemented by the Edwards District.
POLICY ANALYSIS:
At this time, there is not a policy in place to address the Septic Tank Monitoring Program. A monitoring program to comply with the Council Committee recommendations is needed. Establishing a Septic Tank Monitoring program for testing ensures identification of contaminates exfiltrating from septic tank systems. The program wil include field inspection of all known septic systems existing over the Edwards Recharge Zone. Mapping then identifies concentrated areas of septic systems. These areas can then be studied further to locate migration of wastes to the Edwards. Observation wells wil be dug to determine the extent, if any, of migrating contaminants. This program involves a two phased approach. The first phase would be performed by the San Antonio Water System staff. They would research records, field verify each system and map the locations of these systems. This effort would require extensive coordination with Bexar County staff. A second phase would continue with enhanced studies of the highly dense areas of septic systems with the help of outside consultants to examine the effects of m1grating septic field wastes to the aquifer.
The advantage to ths program is the added protection afforded to the City's water supply. Significant additional costs are incurred in the second phase for the proposed engineering studies.
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that City Council direct the San Antonio Water System staff to proceed with establishig the proposed Septic Tank Monitoring Program. The first phase wil be accomplished by Stormwater personnel without additional staff. The second phase would be proposed to Council after the extent of the "scope of study" is known. It would be reasonable to seek participation from Bexar County to complete the second phase of this study.
153 IMPLEMENTATION POLICY INEX OF IMPLEMENTATIONS i. REGULATORY REQUIMENTS
CHAPTER 35 -- UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
Revision of the "Permitted Uses" Table Plat Approval Conditions to Include all Water Pollution Abatement Plans Record High Concern Recharge Features onto Plats Prior to Approval Removal and Upgrade of Single Wall Tanks on Recharge & Transition Zones Requirement for Tertiary Containent on the Transition Zone Green Space Requirements ,for the Edwards Recharge Overlay District Density Limits for the Edwards Recharge Overlay District Significant Recharge Feature Buffer Zones Floodplain Buffer Zones Analytical Testing of Approved Pollution Abatement Strctures Smoke Testing Private Sanitary Sewer Service Laterals
STORMWATER
Comprehensive Watershed Management Approach Revise Development Standards as Part of a Comprehensive Watershed Management Approach Pollution Prevention Ordinance Clearing and Grading Ordinnce
CHAPTER 34 -- WATER CODE
Well Closure Program Well Abandonment Program Extension of Jurisdiction into Extaterritorial Jurisdiction II. ORGANIZATIONAL PROGRAING
TEXAS NATUR RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (TNRCC)
Chapter 313, Edwards Rules Water Pollution Abatement Plans Techncal Guidance . Manual Drainage Area
155 INEX OF IMPLEMENTATION
TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS
Education and Information San Antonio Water System Internal Coordination Significant Recharge Feature Assessment Flowchart Evaluation Mapping of Sensitive Recharge Features Global Positionig Satellte System
EMERGENCY MEASURES i
I . Emergency Spil Response Plan Emergency Operations Plan for Public Supply Wells
III. POTENTIA ACTIVITffS
FUTURE STUDY
Blasting Ordinance Determination of Pre-Development conditions over the Recharge Zone Septic Tank Monitoring Program
I
156 I
iI . i . REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS CHATER 35 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISION OF THE "PERMITTED USES" TABLE
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend the "Permitted Uses" Table, Article III, Section 35-3261 öfthe Unified Development Code, for uses within the Edwards Recharge Overlay District to require City Council (CC) approval for uses which currently do not require City Council approval and to prohibit certin us~s currently permitted on the Edwards Recharge Zone.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires that a formal ordinance be drafted and formalized to amend the Unified Development Code. The following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
2. Meeting with Zonig Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to the "Permitted Uses" Table (4-6 weeks).
3. Finalize ordinnce and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
4. Work Session with Zonig Commission to review the recommended changes to the "Permitted Uses" Table (2 weeks).
5. Advertise Public Hearig in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Zoning Commission to recommend approval to amend the "Permitted Uses" Table to City Council (1 month) .
6. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to the "Permitted Uses" Table (2 weeks).
7 . Advertise Public Hearing in a COl1mercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearg and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the "Permitted Uses" Table in the Unified Development Code (1 month). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required however, present staff wil work an additional 3 hours weekly.
159 REVISION OF THE "PERMITTED USES" TABLE
TIMTABLE:
If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change through City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
160 PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS TO INCLUDE ALL WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLANS
RECOMMNDATION:
Require approval of all State required Water Pollution Abatement Plans, Texas Adminstrative Code (T AC) Chapter 313, prior to the approval of a plat.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires a change to the Unified Development Code, Aricle iv, Section 35-4213, to implement ths policy. The following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Finalize ordinnce and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Deparent. to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
3. Meeting with the Planng Commission's Land Use Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to the plat approval process (2 weeks) .
4. Work Session with Planng Commission to review the recommended changes to the plat approval process (2 weeks).
5. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Planng Commission to recommend approval to amend the plat approval process to City Council (4 weeks).
6. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to the plat approval process (2 weeks).
7 . Advertise Public Hearig in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearig and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the plat approval process in the Unified Development Code (4 weeks). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required however, present staff wil work an additional 5 hours a week.
COST:
No additional cost wil come from ths requirement.
161 PLAT APPROVAL CONDITIONS TO INCLUDE ALL WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLANS
TIMTABLE:
If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change through City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, . Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
162 RECORD HIGH CONCERN RECHARGE FEATURS ONTO PLATS PRIOR TO APPROVAL
RECOMMNDATION:
Require that all high concern recharge features be recorded onto plats for Plannng Commission review.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires a change to the Unified Development Code, Aricle iv, Section 35-4202, to implement this policy. The following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
3. Meeting with the Planng Commission's Land Use Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to the plat approval process (2 weeks) .
4. Work Session with Planng Commission to. review the recommended changes to the plat approval process (2 weeks).
5. Advertise Public Hearing in "a. Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Plang Commission to recommend approval to amend the plat approval process to City Council (4 weeks).
6. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to the plat approval 'process (2 weeks).
7. Advertise Public Hearig in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearg and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinnce to amend the plat approval process in the Unified Development Code (4 weeks). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required however, present sta~f wil work an additional 5 hours a week.
163 RECORD HIGH CONCERN RECHARGE FEATURS ONTO PLATS PRIOR TO APPROVAL
COST:
No additional cost wil come from this requirement. TIMTABLE:
If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement ths change though City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
164 REMOVAL AN UPGRADE OF SINGLE WALL TANKS ON THE RECHARGE AN TRASITION ZONES
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend Article III, Section 35-3106 of the Unified Development Code, to require the removal and upgrade of single wall underground storage tank systems on the Recharge and Transition Zones to meet Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) standards. A five year grace period would be allowed for systems on the Recharge Zone and a ten year grace period would be allowed for systems on the Transition Zone in order for the owner/operator to prepare for the cost of the project.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires a change to the Unified Development Code, Aricle IV, Section 35-3106, to implement this policy. The following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Extensive study and an expanded review process' of the issue and
recommended guidelines/ordinances by an appointed Task Force.
2. Meeting with Zonig Subcommittee and Petroleum Marketing representatives to recommend changes to the Unified Development Code Chapter 35 (3-6 months) .
3. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Department (1 month).
4. Formal meeting with City Of San Antonio Planng Department to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
5. Work session with Zoning Commission to review recommended changes to the Edwards Recharge Overlay District (2 weeks).
6. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearg and a vote by the Zonig Commission to recommend approval to amend the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks).
7. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks).
8. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent' Public Hearing and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the ERZ Overlay District in the Unified Development Code (1 month).
165 REMOVAL AN UPGRAE OF SINGLE WALL TANKS ON THE RECHARGE AN TRASITION ZONES
STAF:
No additional staff wil be required however, present staff wil work an additional 4 hours weekly.
TIMTABLE: i If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change though i J . City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require
approximately 6-12 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
166 REQUIMENT FOR TERTIAY CONTAINNT ON THE TRASITION ZONE
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend Article III, Section 35-3106 of the Unifíed Development Code, to require tertiary containment for all new installations and system upgrades for underground storage tank sites located on the Transition Zone of the Edwards Aquifer within the City Limits of San . Antonio.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires a change to the Unified Development Code, Article III, Section 35-3106, to implement ths 'policy. The following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Extensive study and an expanded review process of the issue and
recommended guidelines/ordinances by an appointed Task Force.
2. Meeting with Zoning Subcommittee and petroleum marketing representatives to review the recommended changes to the Unified Development Code Chapter 35 (3-6 months).
3. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
4. Formal meeting with City Of San Antonio Planng Deptartent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
5. Work session with Zoning Commission to review recommended changes to the Edwards Recharge Overlay District (2 weeks).
6. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Zoning Commission to recommend approval to amend the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks).
7. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes
to the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks).
8. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the ERZ Overlay District in the Unified Development Code (4 weeks).
167 REQUIRMENT FOR TERTIARY CONTAINENT ON THE TRASITION ZONE l I STAF:
No additional staff wil be required however, present staff wil work an additional 5 hours weekly.
TIMT ABLE:
If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change though City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6-12 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlned above.
168 GREEN SPACE REQUIMENTS FOR THE EDWARS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend the Unified Development Code, Chapter 35, Article III, Division 6, to require a minum percentage of green space area per lot in order to allow fitering of stormwater. Due to t~e importnce of this issue, further study is required to. be performed in cooperation with the Zoning Subcommittee. Therefore, it is recommended that staff return in December, 1994 with a recommended minium requirement for green space and related criteria.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
(A) Prior to the formal implementation process, staff wil work with a Task Force to establish feasibilty measures and criteria for a green space requirement for the Edwards Recharge Zone (3-6 months).
(B) When implemented, ths amendment wil require that a formal ordinance be drafted and adopted to amend the Unified Development Code. When the green space ordinance is in a final form, the following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Deparent (4 weeks).
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
3. Meeting with Special Subcommttee to review the recommended addition to' the Unified Development Code (2 weeks).
4. Work session .with Zonig Commission to review the recommended addition to the Unified Development Code (2 weeks).
5. Advertise a Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearg .and a vote by.Zoning Commission to recommend to City Council the approval of the addition to the Unified Development Code (4 weeks).
6. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended additions to the Unified Development Code (2 weeks).
7. Advertise a Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinnce and add it to the Unified Development Code (~. weeks).
169 GREEN SPACE REQUIMENTS FOR THE EDWARDS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT
ì
I STAF: i i I No additional staff wil be required.
TIMTABLE:
The San Antonio Water System wil be reviewing various policies to establish a satisfactory policy requiring a green space area for lots located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Staff wil come back in December of 1994 with the recommended change to ths issue. Upon acceptance by the Committee of the Whole and formal adoption by City Council to implement this change, it wil require approximately 12-18 months for the formal
review and approval of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
170 i I DENSITY LIMITS FOR -i THE EDWARDS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT
RECOMMNDATION:
"Amend the Unified Development Code, Chapter 35, Aricle III, Division 6, to require stricter limits on lot density withn the Edwards Recharge Overlay District. This issue must work hand in hand with the green space requirements to inure protection of the Edwards Aquifer. Due to the importance of this issue, furter study is also required to be performed in cooperation with the Zoning Subcommittee. Therefore, it is recommended that staff
I come back in December, 1994 with a recommended maximum lot density for the Edwards i iI. Recharge Overlay District.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
(A) Prior to the formal implementation process, staff wil work with a Task Force to establish feasibilty measures and criteria for a density requirement for the Edwards Recharge Zone (3-6 months).
(B) When implemented this amendment wil require that a formal ordinance be drafted and adopted to amend" the Unified Development Code. When the density limit ordinance is in a final form, the following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
3. Meeting with Special Subcommittee to review the recommended addition" to the Unified Development Code (2 weeks).
4. Work session with Zonig Commission to review the recommended addition to. the Unified Development Code. (2 weeks).
5. Advertise a Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by Zonig Commission to recommend to City Council the approval of the addition to the Unified Development Code (4 weeks).
6. liB" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended additions to the Unified Development Code (2 weeks).
171 DENSITY LIMITS FOR -i THE EDWARS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT
7. Advertise a Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance and add it to the Unified Development Code (1 month). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required. TIMTABLE:
The San Antonio Water System wil be reviewing various policies to establish a satisfactory policy requiring lot density limits which are located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Staff wil come back in December of 1994 with the recommended change to ths issue. Upon acceptance by the Committee of the Whole and formal adoption by City Council to implement ths change, it wil require approximately 12-18 months for the formal review and approval of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
172 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR BUFR ZONES
RECOMMNDATION:
Provide for buffer zones for significant recharge areas/features which are not located within the 100 year floodplains or creeks with watersheds of 300 acres or greater. The issue of whether a buffer can be implemented through the Chapter 35, Subdivision regulations through the platting process needs additional study by San Antonio Water System staff and the Legal Department. Recommend that staff, in cooperation with the Zoning Subcommittee, come back in December, 1994 with a recommendation whether to pursue this option. Otherwise this would have to be implemented through the State Legislature by a change in laws governng land use.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
NOTE: State legislation may be required to implement these changes outside of city limits because currently the City has no authority for dictating land use activities outside of city limits.
(A) Prior to the formal implementation process. staff wil work with a Task Force to establish feasibilty measures and criteria for a significant recharge feature buffer requirement for the Edwards Recharge Zone (3-6 months).
(B) If it is determined by staff that this policy can be implemented though the Unified Development Code, then the following review and approval process would be required.
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Deparent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
3. Meeting with Special Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to the Subdivision regulations (2 weeks). 4. Work Session with appropriate Commission (s) to review the recommended changes to the Subdivision regulations (2 weeks).
5. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Planng Commission to recommend approval to amend the Subdivision regulations to City Council (1 month) .
173 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR BUFR ZONES
6. liB" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to the Subdivision regulations (2 weeks).
7. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the Unified Development Code (4 weeks).
If it is determined that ths is not a viable option, then a bil would have to be passed by the State Legislature which meets in 1995.
STAF: Determintions for additional staffing wil need to be made after the Task Force's recommendations. It is anticipated that if policy can be implementated, staffing for maintenance wil be required.
COST:
Cost of possible compensation for land to owners can be extremely high due to the rising value of land on the Edwards Recharge Zone. There is also a potential cost for maintenance staff.
TIMTABLE:
San Antonio Water System staff would come back to the Committee in December, 1994 with a recommendation as to whether ths can be implemented though the Unified Development Code. Upon acceptance by the Committee of the Whole and formal adoption by City Council to implement ths change, it wil require approximately 12-18 months for the formal review and approval of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
An attempt to have "a bil passed in the legislature could not be done until 1995 when the legislature meets.
174 FLOODPLAIN BUFR ZONES
RECOMMNDATION:
Provide protection to Significant Recharge areas/Features(SRF's) on the Edwards Recharge Zone by utilization of vegetated buffer zones along the 100 year floodplains and creeks with watersheds of 300 acres or more located within the Edwards Recharge Zone. Begin implementation process within the city limits as soon as possible. Recommend that staff, in cooperation with the Zonig Subcommittee, come back in December, 1994 with a recommendation whether or not to pursue this option. Otherwise this would have to be implemented though the State Legislature by a change in laws governng land use.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
NOTE: State legislation may be required to implement these changes outside of city limits because currently the City has no authority for dictating land use activities outside of city limits.
(A) Prior to the formal implementation process, staff wil work with a Task Force to establish têásibilty measures and criteria for a floodplain buffer requirement for the Edwards Recharge Zone (3-6 months).
(B) Within the city limits ths policy can be implemented though the Unified Development Code governg zonig. The following review and approval process would be required.
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks).
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
3. Meeting with Special Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to the Unified Development Code (2 weeks). 4. Work Session with appropriate Commission (s) to review the recommended changes to theUni:ted Development Code (2 weeks).
5. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with. subsequent Public Hearing and. a vote by the Zonig Commission to recommend approval to amend Unified Development Code to City Council (1 month).
6. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to Unified Development Code (2 weeks).
i 75 FLOODPLAIN BUFR ZONES
7. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the Unified Development Code (4 weeks).
If it is determined that this is not a viable option, then a bil would have to be passed by the State Legislature which meets in 1995.
STAFF:
Determinations for additional staffing wil need to be made after the Task Force's recommendations. It is anticipated that if this policy can be implementated, staffing for maintenance wil be required.
COST:
Cost of possible compensation for land to owners can be extremely high due to the rising value of land on the Edwards Recharge Zone. There is also a potential cost for maintenance staff.
TIMTABLE:
San Antonio Water System staff would come back to the Committee in December, 1994 with a recommendation as to whether this can be implemented though the Unified Development Code. Upon acceptance by the Committee of the Whole and formal adoption by City Council to implement this change, it wil require approximately 12-18 months for the formal review and approval of the various Commttee's, Commission's and City Council as outlined above.
An attempt to have a bil passed in the legislature could not be done until 1995 when the legislature meets.
176 ANALYTICAL TESTING OF APPROVED POLLUTION ABATEMENT STRUCTURS
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend Aricle III, Section 35-3106 of the Unified Development Code, to require analytical testing of newly installed approved pollution abatement structures on the Recharge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer within the City Limits of San Antonio.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires a change to the Unified Development Code, Aricle III, Section 35-3106, to implement this policy. The following review and approval process wil be required.
1. Meeting with Zonig Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to the Unified Development Code Chapter 35 (3-6 months).
2. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water' System Legal Departent (1 month).
3. Formal meeting with City Of San Antonio Planng Deptartent to review the ordinance (2 weeks).
4. Work session with Zonig Commission to review recommended changes to the Edwards Recharge Overlay District (2 weeks).
5. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Zonig Commission to recommend approval to amend the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks).
6. liB" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes to the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks).
7. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearg and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinance to amend the ERZ Overlay District in the Unified Development Code (1 month). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required, however, present staff wil work an additional 2 hours weekly. TIMTABLE:
If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change though City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above. 177 SMOKE TESTING
RECOMMNDATION:
Smoke testing confirs the integrity of the Sanitary Sewer System and tests private service lateral connections. It is recommended that San Antonio Water System (SAWS) staff work closely with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) to continue the five year smoke testing program.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
SAWS has a program in place to test the sanitary sewer system in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (EAR). The current program is in compliance with existing rules. The Edwards Aquifer Techncal Guidance Document proposes smoke testing be increased to a three year rotation.
These changes recommended by TNRCC to 30 TAC Chapter 13 (Edwards Aquifer) Rules, wil require SA WS to adjust the testing time table from a five year rotating basis to a thee year basis; continuous testing wil be. needed to comply with the new policies. STAF: Increase scheduling for testing wil require two additional inpectors; one vehicle and additional operating equipment and materials. TIMTABLE:
- SAWS recommends that no change be made in the five year smoke testing schedule.
178 PRIATE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LATERAS
RECOMMNDATION:
The permitting, inpection and certification program administered by the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) is effective in monitoring the installation of private service laterals in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (EARZ).
It is reconiended that the program be expanded to include the watersheds that drain to the EAR. This opportnity can only come by way of amending the Unified Development Code.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Currently SAWS has a program in place to permit, certify and inspect private sewer laterals in the EAR.
Subsequent to changes to the Unified Development Code, including approval by SAWS Board, and the City of San Antonio, authorizing extension of SAWS inspection authority to the City of San Antonio's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) is needed.
This opportnity may come by way of amending the Unified Development Code. This would inure proper permitting, inpection, and certification of sanitary sewers and avoid pollution entering the EAR. STAF: The increase in area (ETJ) wil require two additional inpectors; one vehicle and additional operating equipment and materials. Approximately 30 man hours per week wil be required for the expansion of ths program.
TIMTABLE:
Amending the Unified Development Code wil tae one year. The expanded program wil be ready to begin as the code is amended to allow such inpections.
179 " '"
0' = .i " ;:i '" ::II
.~.- i- ~ " I '" i: II l-
tJ Q) \D Q '" i .¡i: Q) tI
0' \D '" 1 ;: w II Z :: .~.- :: i- W ~ i i: ~ II i= '" w tJ Q) C Q i 0 .¡i: 0 tIQ)
l- 0' Z ~ ;:i W II :æ :: .~.- a. i- In ~ '" 0 i i: -i II l- GJ W ..-C tJ .- :: Ql OI ai Q '" W I .~ ~ .¡ C Ql ai ui .c C .¡ ow W 0' 0 OI = .¡ i. - ~ i: II tJ i '" II LL ;: o .- ai .~ GJ ... ii i- i- ;0 - = .¡ :I .¡ .¡ lD .¡ Z ...t i: II ... ai .¡ 't U .. .. Do .- :: .- .~ I ai QQl II .-. ~ II i- .¡Ql=GJ .¡ i- = II 0' 0 .c W .. tI ai .l l- ~ ~ N.¡ ~ = . .. ~ Q)';i:'f~'g i: .. ~ ~ ="'OQli-O l- GJ ~ Q) o i- ... II II ;0 .. .- .- ~ U N O.¡ .i GJ = ii .- ". .¡ = .¡ U .Q LL II 't i: ... .- i: Ql tn 't C :S. N ai t o i- .- II II .. Q) 0 E- Q) ". i- 0 U Q) W .¡ ai ~ el .¡aiii'-liil:: 0 .¡ II .- i: Q . .. .-l.¡ .. 't C ". ~ 0- 0 ai i- II II i-"' i- ..- :: tI i: = ai i: i- ai i: II .¡ II e ... Q Il g ! tn Q) ~ c tI ~ N .. I ~~~S'lã C" ii i- = i- tI E- Il :s el Il U . i- Q) Il 0 i- g ...... tn 0 u I .. ai .-l a: - Q) .. = i '-l i- ~ .. .¡ t' . .i 0 i- II 0 .. ui .. .. II . .¡ .- U .. .¡ .. ai 0- .¡ . W II 8: ~ .-l II ål E- i: .~ . .. :. .i = 0 Ql Q) .-l = l- 0 0 0- U U ~ = = .- .¡ II ...... II .. 0 .-l II .. tI a. C II i: N II U Q) .~0 .- t' ui ;: .- '-l E- ai . ! II .~II ....¡ i- .¡ ~ . Q c( ...II -e = Q) t, ai II . .¡ 0 Q) lD .. l .- .l ...:. '" :. II U 1: Q) = .. 0 II N E- r- i: ai i- E- ~ ~ a '" .- ai i- .- Il 0 ~ ii ~ j E- Cl Q ål Do ~ j ii 180 I.I
STORMWATER COMPRENHENSIV WATERSHED MANAGEMENT APPROACH (inc. DEVELOPMENT STANARS REVISION)
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council begin efforts toward establishing watershed management within San Antonio. San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and City staff would begin the necessary study to present to Council, a delineation of each watershed and watershed targets.
Part of the efforts of watershed management wil encompass the establishment of criteria for addressing storm water quality emanating form new or redevelopment.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Ultimately this process would provide the input for any changes to current city ordinnces and the Unified Development Code to control storm water quality. .
1. A Watershed Management Committee comprised of City and SAWS staff to include affected parties wil conveiie to begin analysis of quantity and quality assessments.
2.. The Committee would intialize the process by dividing the City and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) into manageable watersheds. Targets of water quality would be established for each watershed by the committee.
3. The committee would evaluate the current state of surface water quality
thoughout the' City.
4. The committee would present to SAWS Board and City Council recommendations for a resolution.
5. The commttee would continue to meet to discuss recommendations for new city ordinnces and needed changes to the development standards to meet the established watershed management goals. STAF:
Staff hours wil depend on committee member selections. The amount of time dedicated to this committee would vary, averaging approximately 10 hours weekly.
TIMTABLE:
It is anticipated that this process would tae approximately 3 years. Pending fmal permit status, EPA wil likely allow thee years for the City to adopt new storm water controls for new and redevelopment. 182 POLLUTION PREVENTION ORDINANCE
-i RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that the Pollution Prevention Ordinance be passed by the City Council by summer, 1994.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
This issue requires a change to Chapter 34 - Water, of the San Antonio City Code. The following review and approval process wil be required:
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent;
2. Presentation and recommendation by the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees;
3. City Council to review and approve the recommended ordinance. STAF:
The process of developing and coordinting this ordinance wil tae minial staff time and is not anticipated to draw significant hours. Development of the ordinance has essentially been completed.
TIMTABLE:
This process must be completed prior to the City receiving its EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit. The City has been noted as deficient in this area and is subject to fines if ths ordinnce is not adopted. The timing for receiving the permit is unkown, however it is anticipated that we wil receive the permit later ths year. In order to meet ths deadline it is proposed that the Council adopt the ordinance by the sumer of ths year.
183 CLEARG AND GRAING ORDINANCE
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that the Clearing and Grading Ordinance be passed by the City CounciL. This wil bring the City'sStormwater Management Program in compliance with EPA permit requirements.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
This issue requires a change to Chapter 34 - Water Code, of the San Antonio City Code. The following review and approval process wil be required:
1. Develop ordinance with City of San Antonio Planng and Building Inspections Departent;
2. Finalize ordinance and review by City of San Antonio Legal Departent;
3. Meeting with Planng Commission Subcommittee to review recommended new Grading Ordinance;
4. Work session with Planng Commission to review new Grading Ordinance;
5. Presentation and recommendation by the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees;
6. City Council to review and approve the recommended ordinance. STAF:
The process of developing and coordinating ths ordinance wil tae minal staff time and is not anticipated to draw significant hours. On average several hours per person per week wil be required for each departental representative. Representatives wil include Building Inspections staff, Planng Departent staff, San Antonio Water System (SAWS) Stormwater and Legal staff.
TIMT ABLE:
This process may be completed after the City receives the EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimintion System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit. The timing for this requirement to be in compliance with the NPDES permt is unkown at ths time. It is anticipated that the City wil have one year from the time the permit is issued by the EP A to be incompliance. In order to meet this deadiine, it is proposed that the Council adopt the ordinance by summer of this year.
184 STORMWATER
TIMELINE
..y-Auq Sept-Dee Jan-April May-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April May-Aug sept-Dee Jan-April May-Aug
ISSUES 94 94 95 95 95 96 96 96 97 97 97 .... Watershed Management Approach
Revise Dev. standards/Watershed
Pollution prevention Ordinance
Clearing and Grading Ordinance
97...... Continues beyond the last year of the tiBeline i- 00 en CHAPTER 34 -- WATER CODE WELL CLOSUR PROGRA
RECOMMNDATION:
In order to faciltate the closure of substandard/abandoned water wells throughout Bexar County, it is recommended that amendments to Chapter 34 be prepared.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
The San Antonio City Code - Chapter 34, gives the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) the authority to identify abandoned water wells and inure proper .monitoring and inspection for their closure.
The following steps wil be necessary for implementation:
1. Approve Forms declaring presence of a well on the propert;
2. Approve the SAWS Customer Service Agreement required by Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC);
3. Approve amendments to Chapter 34 outling specific requirements for well closure. STAF:
Existing staff wil provide the necessary manpower.
COST:
Not Applicable
TIMTABLE:
Six to twelve month.
187 WELL ABANDONMNT PROGRA
RECOMMNDATION:
Amend Chapter 34 to require well closure upon tie-in to waterline.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Staff has worked with many applicants rquesting variances for a variety of reasons to meet their domestic needs and feels the necessity of fromalizing the variance process. Chapter 34 needs to be amended to provide a strict variance procedure with ultimate well abandonment. STAF:
One additional staff member may be required by fiscal year 1996 for the additional inspections and monitoring.
TIMTABLE:
Six months to revise Chapter 34. Inspection program to be ongoing.
188 EXTEND JUISDICTION INTO EXTRATERRTORIAL JUSDICTION
RECOMMNDATION:
Extend the City of San Antonio's authority into the extraterritorial jurisdiction to protect the Edwards Aquifer water quality through adoption of Texas Water Code An. 26.177 and Texas Local Governent Code An. 401.002.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Policy can be implemented by adoption into Chapter 34 of the City Code and would require the following review and approval process to be required:
1. Finalize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (4 weeks);
2. Formal meeting with City of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the Chapter 34 ordinance (2 weeks);
3. Meeting with Land Use Subcommittee to review the recommended changes to Chapter 34 (2 weeks);
4. Work Session with Planng Commission to review the recommended changes to Chapter 34 (2 weeks);
5. Presentation and recommendation by the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees;
6. City Council. to review and approve the recommended changes to Chapter 34 (2 weeks);
7. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearg and a vote by City Council to approve the ordinnce to amend Chapter 34 of the City Code (4 weeks).
Even if the City Council adopts ths as an ordinnce, it must stil be approved by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) before the plan can be implemented. Timetable for ths is uncertin. According to the Water Policy Deparent of TNRCC, TNRCC is collecting data though 1996 to establish criteria to develop the rules on implementation procedures for ths program. The City of San Antonio might be able to receive approval on an implementation plan in 1996 after TNRCC establishes the rules for ths program.
189 EXTEND JUSDICTION INTO EXTRATERRITORI JUSDICTION
STAF:
The San Antonio Water System would require the addition of one Planner in position to review water quality protection measures for the extraterritorial jurisdiction.
COST:
The salary of the PÌanner in would be an additional $29,000. A fee for reviewing the proposed development could be used to make up for this additional cost. TIMTABLE:
If, City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change through City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's Commission's, and City Council as outlined above. However, it is uncertin whether TNRCC wil allow implementation of ths program before 1996. Review of the program by TNRCC may tae from 6 months to a year.
190 CHAPTER 34 - WATER CODE
TIMELINE
..."-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April Hay-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April Hay-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April Hay-Aug
ISSUES u 94 95 95 95 96 96 96 97 97 97 .... Well Plugging Program
Well AbandoOlent Program
Extension of Jurisdiction into E~J
ETJ...... Extraterritorial Jurisdiction 97...... Continues beyond the last year of the tiDline .. ..CO II
iI . ORGANIZATIONAL PROGRAMMING TNRCC CHAPER 313 EDWARDS RULES
RECOMMNDATION:
Continued oversight of the "Rules" amendment process is necessary to insure regionwide applicabilty of standards. The City of San Antonio wil remain committed to following though on the recommendations forwarded i. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commissi,?n (TNRCC).
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Chapter 313 is, for some areas of the region, the only form of regulation available to protect the recharge zone. Enforcement is key to the "Rules". Their restrictiveness is limited only to how well they are followed.
Policy can be implementated by:
1. Submitting recommendations for amendments to Chapter 313, Edwards Rules, at March 30, 1994 annual public hearing;
2. Providing updates to the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) Board and City Council on status for their inclusion. STAF:
In-Kind
COST:
Equipment: Not applicable.
. TIMTABLE: 12-18 months
194 WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLAN
RECOMMNDATION:
Water Pollution Abatement Plan (WP AP) review is crucial to protecting the areas within San Antonio's jurisdiction. Final assessments and recommendations are submitted as conditions for approval to the City Council, the Plannng Commission and the Zoning Commission in the decision-making process.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
The WPAP process is linked to zoning case approval, building inspection certification and subdivision regulation activity. Coordination of the comment-and-review system is important to insuring local input to provide the strictest requirements possible for this area.
Implementation would require:
1. Continued coordination of review process with Texås Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) staff;
2. Continued field visits, meeting with applicants and proposals for modification. STAF:
In-Kind
COST:
Equipment: Provide for GPS system TIMTABLE:
Ongoing
195 TECHNICAL GUIANCE MANAL
RECOMMNDATION:
Promotion and use of the Techncal Guidance Manual wil establish a means to address some of the concerns arising from development over the recharge zone. It may aid in future "Edwards Rules" changes and, if successful, could be adopted as part of the "Rules". The "Manual" may also help local entities develop their own guidelines for stormwater abatement.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
The Techncal Guidance Manual expands the intent of Chapter 313 Edwards Rules to assist the regulated community as the stormwater program becomes the next critical phase of environmental protection and area-wide compliance. The "Manual" is a key first step in establishing a regional approach to pollution education, monitoring and abatement.
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission would need to do the following:
1. Monitor use of "Manual" on a trial basis for one year;
L 2. Evaluate effectiveness alld amend where needed;
3. If determined to be beneficial, incorporate into Chapter 313 Rules. STAF:
In-Kind evaluation
COST:
Not applicable TIMTABLE:
12-18 month
196 DRAINAGE AREA
RECOMMNDATION:
Continue to work with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) to urge establishment of Drainage Area as part of the Edwards system. This new zone should be formally in place by 1997 with requirements for development similar to those established for the Recharge Zone.
POLICY IMLEMENTATION:
The Drainage Area channels water from creeks and streams in the Edwards Plateau into the flood plains that flow into the Recharge Zone.
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) would need to do the following:
1. Establish the Drainage Zone as a part of the Chapter 313--Edwards Rules;
2. Prepare requirements similar to those established for the Recharge Zone including but not limited to: underground storage tas, sewer main and lateral construction and inpection and stormwater abatement. STAF: In-kid TIMTABLE:
Three years.
197 TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS EDUCATION AN INFORMATION
ISSUE:
Provide education and information to the public to encourage continued protection of our sole source of water the Edwards Aquifer.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Currently the thee regulatory agencies for the Edwards Aquifer are involved in the education process. The San Antonio Water SYStem (SAWS) has two educational programs in place; the Clean Stream program and the Major Rivers program.
Education and awareness of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone should be encouraged among the Homeowners Associations, Commercial Developers, and the general public located on or traveling over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone though the annual Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission hearing.
In addition, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission has begun to require the posting of signs at the entrances to new subdivisions inorming residents and visitors that they are on the Edwards Recharge Zone.
The Clean Stream program provides information on the abilty of some containants to fiter though the soil and into the Edwards Aquifer, containting our dring water. The program also describes how customers can contribute to the preservation and restoration of our streams and water systems. Information on recycling household hazardous waste such as used oil or standard bathroom cleaners and lawn care chemicals is provided along with tips and guidelines for their safe usage.
The San Antonio Water System maintain a continuing commitment to educating its customers. One of the most effective ways of undertg that education process is by making a long term investment in San Antonio's young people. Accordingly, the San Antonio Water System sponsors the Major Rivers Program in every fourt grade class in Bexar County. Major Rivers is a comprehensive water education curriculum originally developed by the Texas Education Agency and the Lower Colorado River Authority. It addresses the fuctions of Texas river basins and teaches young students about where water comes from, how precious it is, and how they can use it wisely. Major Rivers has been particularly successful and is very popular among elementary school educators.
199 SAN ANTONIO WATER SYSTEM INTERNAL COORDINATION
RECOMMNDATION:
SA WS wil work to inure that the internal distribution of plans and reviews in anticipation of new development requirements and plan submission requirements for stormwater management do not delay the certification process.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
It is anticipated that rèquirements of the EP A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit wil impose on the City the need to revise the Unified Development Code to include controls for storm water quality. When this revision occurs, the plans wil also be reviewed and approved by staff from the Stormwater Departent. STAF:
Plans review is discussed elsewhere. The process of coordinating the distribution of plans wil take minial staff time and is not anticipated to draw significant hours. TIMTABLE: The process of developing ths internal coordination wil occur simultaeously with the discussion and development of new~ regulations to amend the Unified Development Code.
200 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR ASSESSMENT FLOWCHART EVALUATION
RECOMMNDATION:
San Antonio Water System and the City of San Antonio should jointly participate in the re- evaluation of the current assessment flowchart. Recent work by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission in the development of the "Techncal Guidance Manual" could be used to aid in this evaluation.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires a change to the Unified Development Code, Aricle ll, Section 35-3106, to implement ths policy. The following review and approval process wil be required:
1. Meeting with parties involved with the preparation of Water Pollution Abatement Plans to recommended changes to the Unified Development Code Chapter 35 (3-6 months) ;
2. Finlize ordinance and review by San Antonio Water System Legal Departent (1 month);
3. Formal meeting with City Of San Antonio Planng Departent to review the ordinance (2 weeks);
4. Work session with Zoning Commission to review recommended changes to the Edwards Recharge Overlay District (2 weeks);
5. Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by the Zonig Commission to recommend approval to amend the ERZ Overlay District (2 weeks);
6. "B" Session meeting with City Council to review the recommended changes- to the Edwards Recharge Zone Overlay District (2 weeks);
7 . Advertise Public Hearing in a Commercial Recorder with subsequent Public Hearing and a vote by City Councii to approve the ordinance to amend the .ERZ Overlay District in the Unified Development Code (1 month). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required; present staff wil work an additional 5 hours weekly.
201 SIGNIFICANT RECHARGE FEATUR ASSESSMENT FLOWCHART EVALUATION
TIMTABLE:
If the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement this change though City Council adoption of the Committee recommendations, then it wil require approximately 6-12 months for the formal review and approvals of the various Committee's, Commission's, and City Council as outlined above.
202 MAPPING OF SENSITIV RECHARGE FEATURS
RECOMMNDATION:
Designate the San Antonio Water System staff to become the central authority in collecting, organiing and maintainig an accurate database for the Edwards Aquifer.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Direct the San Antonio Water System staff to begin an audit of all the database fies related to the Edwards Aquifer and to begin centralizing it under one database. In addition, continually update this database as new information is received and incorporate data mapped with the new satellte mapping system. STAF:
Wil require an additional 20 hours of work weekly for this program to be effective.
COST:
Requires some additional staffing. Equipment is either already available or has been budgeted. Staffmg for 20 hours work is estimated to cost $15,000. TIMTABLE:
Begin implementation upon acceptance by the Committee of the Whole and adoption by City Council.
203 GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM
RECOMMNDATION:
That San Antonio Water System purchase a satellte mapping system to aid in the following:
a) Mapping the Edwards Recharge Zone; b) ¥apping the Transition Zone; c) Locate and map Significant Recharge Features; d) Locate and map abandoned wells and underground storage tanks.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Approval of fiscal year 1994-95 budget by San Antonio Water System Board
EQUIMENT:
1 - Trimble Pathinder Professional wi MC-V Data Logger, bar code wand, remote antenn kit, carr case, automobile power adaptor, NiCad battery and charger, magnttic antenna mount, Pfmder Software
1 - Trimble Pathinder Base Station wi GPS receiver processing unit, compact antenna and . base mount, 30 meter cable STAF:
At present time, no additional personnel is required
COST:
$25,900 - Currently budgeted by the San Antonio Water System to obtain global positionig system
TIMTABLE:
After approval by the San Antonio Water System Board of Trustees ths recommendation can be in place with 6 months of 1994-95 fiscal year.
204 TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS
TIMELINE
Hay-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April May-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April May-Aug Sept-Dee Jan-April May-Aug
ISSUES 9l 94 95 95 95 96 96 96 97 97 97 .... Education and Informtion
SAWS Internal Coordination
SRF Assessment Flowchart ~val.
Mapping of Sensitive Recharge Features
Global Positioning Satellite System o~ OJ sAWS...... San Antonio Water System SRF...... Significant Recharge Feature 97...... Continues beyond the last year of the tiaeline EMERGENCY MEASURES EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE PLAN
RECOMMNDATION:
The San Antonio Water System provides for an internal Emergency Spil Response Plan in order to protect and miniize the impact of an uncontrolled release or spil to the City of San Antonio's water resources and to the various utilties the San Antonio Water System oversees or manages.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
An internal Emergency Spil Response Plan was developed upon merging the various departments which make up the San Antonio Water System. Once in place, the San Antonio Water System wil work in cooperation with the San Antonio Fire Departent to incorporate the San Antonio Water System plan into the overall City of San Antonio Emergency Spil Response Plan. In addition, the federally mandated National Pollutant Discharge Elimintion System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit requires the submittal of an Emergency Spil Response Plan, for which the City of San Antonio's Emergency Spil Response Plan was submitted, in order to receive approval for a permit. Presently, the permit is expected in late summer, 1994. Once the NPDES Stormwater Permit is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EP A), a review of the permit wil be made and' its requirements wil be presented to the San Antonio Water System Board~ Should additions be made by the EPA that require action by the San Antonio Water System Board, (in relation to the Emergency Spil Response Plan) the following process wil be required:
1. Review of the EP A issued Stormwater Permit by the various Departents including the Legal Departent of the San Antonio Water System to determine if the San Antonio Water System can meet the current and any new NPDES requirements (4 weeks);
2. Work session with the San Antonio Water System Board (2 weeks);
3. Adoption and approval of additional actions by vote of approval by the San Antonio Water System Board (2 weeks). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required.
207 EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE PLAN
COST:
No additional cost wil be required. TIMTABLE:
Currently, ths plan is in place. EPA may require changes to the Emergency Spil Plan which may require the two month pròcess with possible action by the San Antonio Water System Board. Implementation would be imediate.
208 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN FOR PUBLIC SUPPLY WELLS
RECOMMNDATION:
To provide for an Emergency Plan for the San Antonio Water System's (SAWS) Public Supply Wells.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
Requires implementation by approval of the San Antonio Water System Board. The following process wil be required:
1. Finalize plan and review by the various Departments and the Legal Deparent of the San Antonio Water System (4 weeks);
2. Work session with the San Antonio Water System Board (2 weeks);
3. Adoption' and approval of additional actions by vote of approval by the San Antonio Water System Board (2 weeks). STAF:
No additional staff wil be required.
COST:
If additional water trucks are required to distribute water at distribution points then rental of additional water trucks may be necessary at a cost of approximately $270.00to rent a day or a purchase price of approximately $40,000 a truck.
TIMTABLE:
Approximately two month from the time the City Council Committee of the Whole directs staff to implement ths change though City CounciL.
209 III
POTENTIAL ACTIVITIES
. FUTURE STUDY BLASTING ORDINANCE
RECOMMNDATION:
Submit information on blasting conditions on the Edwards Recharge Zone to the San Antonio Water System prior to the issuance of a blasting permit from the San Antonio Fire Departent.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
The San Antonio Fire Departent and the San Antonio Water System have begun a review of the San Antonio Fire Code to determine if ths can be implemented though the current language in the San Antonio Fire Code, Aricle 77. It has been determined that the recommended reporting requirements can be implemented imediately and the San Antonio Fire Marshall wil not issue a blasting permit unless an approval letter is issued by the San Antonio Water System. STAF:
This change alone wil not require an additional staff member, but wil increase the work load of the San Antonio Water System staff by approximately 3 hours weekly.
COST:
Approximately $1000 for trainig costs in blasting procedures and technques. TIMTABLE:
Current language in the Fire Code, Aricle 77 allows for imediate implementation with criteria spelled out for adminstrative procedures. Such procedures can be prepared with a 3-6 month time frame.
212 DETERMINATION OF PRE-DEVELOPMENT OF GOVERNNT CANON OVER THE EDWARS AQUIR RECHARGE ZONE
RECOMMNDATION: The City Council Committee on Water Quality realizes the necessity of obtaining information relating to pre-development areas and recommends the following:
~ That the appropritate actions be taken to determine a scope of work, obtain funding and secure a consultant to proceed with a comprehensive study of the Governent Canyon watershed area.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
The San Antonio Water System and City of San Antonio wil enter into a contractual agreement with a private consultant agreeing to perform the following:.
1. Presentation to City Council on feasibilty (6 months);
2. Development of a scope of work (2 months);
3. Procurement of funds (3 months);
4. Request for proposals (RFP's) from consultants (1 month);
5 . Awarding of contract;
6. Project start up (1 month).
COST:
This project is not currently funded. Total Project estimate - $100,000 - $150,00. STAF:
At present time, no additional personnel are required. Five (5) man-hours per week for coordintion. TIMTABLE:
Approximately 12 to 18 months til project start up.
213 SEPTIC TANK MONITORING PROGRA
RECOMMNDATION:
It is recommended that City Council direct the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) staff to proceed with establishing the proposed Septic Tank Monitoring Program. The first phase wil be accomplished by Stormwater personnel without additional staff. The second phase would be proposed to Council after the extent of the "scope of study" is known. It would be reasonable to seek participation from Bexar County to complete the second phase of this study.
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION:
This issue is proposed for two phases: The first phase would involve SAWS staff and Bexar County personnel assistance. This phase would involve researching and field inspecting known septic systems and mapping those that are currently in use. This phase would take approximately 1 year. During this time, discussions with the county would begin to enlist their participation for the detailed studies of phase two.
The second phase would be proposed to City Council in a report and recommendation on further study needs. The concept for ths approach is to study only the dense areas of septic
system users. The second phase studies would be carried out by outside consultants. These more detailed studies would involve soil sampling and testing and ground water sampling and testing. The results would identify areas where the ground water is being affected by septic tank fields. STAF:
It is estimated that twenty hours weekly of all combined staff from the Stormwater Departent wil be dedicated to this project. TIMTABLE:
The results of phase. one wil be complete with one year and ready to present to Council for approval to enter the second phase.
214 i- '"
CI ~ i- i '" i :. i :! I .~.. k ~ i- i '" d ~ld 0 Q) '4 Q '" i .¡ Co tIQ)
CI '4 '" ~ I W ~ Z .,... .. k '4 W ~ '" I = ~ ld ¡: ~ u II i! '" I ~ tIQ)
CI II '" ~ ~ .~.. k II ~ '" I = ~ld .~8 u .. Q) .. Q '" I l ~ .¡ Q) .i" tI .¡ .. CI 0 .. k " G\ td :." i .¡. ..td .i" .¡
'8 = 0 i. " :. ! 8.! )0 m l M . " ". W ë CI :: C ~ Øi k = i! CI td .~ :i I d .i .¡ :i " "' u = ~- m 1. 1. " 0 " Øi 0 II. u. U' m g .. "'.¡ . - II 0 = . . = . W ... = :i . 0 'E "' oW ii 0 = td CI g Eo :i = ... .~ u . I- "' . . .¡. B" . . :i ..II .¡" ~" ; ~ LL II Q tI 215 APPENDIX i . CHRONOLOGY. I I EDWARS AQUDR / SURACE WATER CHRONOLOGY
1952 San Antonio City Master Plan recommends that San Antonio join with the Corps of Engineers and GBRA to construct Canyon Lake.
1953 CSA tries to participate in the Canyon Lake project. When their request is denied, an appeal is made to the Texas Board of Water Engineers. The matter eventually goes to the Texas Supreme Court.
1955 Some of the early determinations of boundaries and recharge of Edwards Aquifer are made in reports by Willam F. Guyton & Associates and Rob Lowry. This was also the 1st attempt to form the Edwards Underground Water District.
1956 Month-long hearing is held before Texas Board of Water Engineers on Canyon Lake project.
Aug. The Beverly Lodges index well (later replaced by J- 1 7) in San Antonio hit 1956 its record low of 612 ft. msl.
1957 Board of Water Engineers, in 2-1 split vote, sides with GBRA againt San Antonio on the Canyon Lake project. The matter eventually goes to the Texas Supreme Court, with GBRA prevailing. A second attempt to establish the EUWD is made but unsuccessfuL.
1957 Texas Board of Water Engineers designates subdivision No. 1 of the Underground Reservoir iñ the Edwards Limestone, Balcones Escarpment area.
1959 Edwards Underground Water District is created by the 56th Legislature.
1964 Governor Connlly directs the Texas Water Commission to develop a comprehensive state water plan.
Oct. Texas Supreme Court, in case #A-I0989 (City of San Antonio et al vs. The 1966 Texas Water Commission et al), finds that San Antonio is authorized to purchase Canyon Lae water.
1967 State passes Texas Water Quality Act of 1967 and establishes the Texas Water Quality Board. TWQB is charged with maintainig State Water Quality .
218 EDWARS AQUDR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
1968 State publishes first State Water Plan - begins to make water a prominent issue.
1970 TWQB issues first Edwards "Board Order" for Aquifer protection.
1971- San Antonio Ranch Controversy and court fights first raises the issue of 1974 possible pollution of the Aquifer by development; Edwards Aquifer becomes a household word.
1974 TWQB issues an amended "Board Order" for Aquifer protection.
1974 Local environmental groups form an Aquifer Protection Association with the single purpose of raising funds to purchase land on the recharge zone of the Aquifer.
1974 Appeals Court hands down its decision on San Antonio Ranch. The decision essentially stated that development could go forward under the strict guidelines of the Texas Water Quality Board.
1974 Congress passes Public Law 93-943 authorizing construction of Cibolo Reservoir.
Dec. City executes Sewer Service contract with Denton Utilty Co. for Encino 1974 Park MUD. City decides not to oversize outfall line.
1975 GBRA and CWB begin negotiations on Canyon Lake water.
Aug. Representatives of Barshop Ent. fie Zonig case #6207 for 117.017 acres 1975 at southeast corner of US 281 Nand FM 1604. They request a change in zonig to allow single family, multi family and a shopping mall.
Oct. Council passes Ordinance #45792, establishig the Edwards Recharge 1975 Overlay Zone as part of the Zonig Ordinance. Council approves rezoning request for case #6207. City establishes an Aquifer Protection Office with the Public Works Departent to review the type of development proposed over Recharge Zone.
Nov. Aquifer Protection Association begins petition drive to ask council to 1975 overtrn the mall zonig.
Jan. APA secures enough signatures to force a referendum on the mall zonig. 1976
219 EDWARDS AQUIFR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
Feb/ March Referendum - Citizens vote heavily in opposition to the mall. Zoning case 1976 is reversed.
April San Pedro North Ltd. files suit against the City of San Antonio seeking to 1976 overtrn Council's decision on the mall. GBRA contract is finalized by CWB and transmitted to City CounciL.
May Council retains firm of Metcalf and Eddy to determine if the mall zoning 1976 endangers the Aquifer. Council votes down CWB\GBRA contract.
Nov. Metcalf & Eddy issues first phase of report - This report expands M&E' s 1976 function to a consideration of how much development over the recharge zone is safe. Council approves the expansion of the Metcalf & Eddy report.
April First Council elections under 10- 1 districting plan. . 1977
June Council passes Ordinance #48106 bannng all furter development over the 1977 recharge zone until the Metcalf & Eddy study is complete.
June Due to passage of Ordinance #48106 the Encino Park Venture et al sues 1977 City of San Antonio and Bernardo Eureste, Rudy Ortiz, Joe Webb, Joe Alderte, Helen Dutmer, and Frank Wing individually for at least $750,OOO,OOOin damages; suit is later dropped.
July City retains the firm of Ross, Hardies, O'Keefe Babcock, and Parsons to 1977 represent the City in the lawsuit.
Sept. Ross-Hardies drafts, and Council passes, Ordinance #48484, the Interim 1977 Development Ordinance. This ordinance recognies vested rights and permits some development on the recharge zone. It also repealed Ordinance #48106 which precipitated the $750,000,000 lawsuit.
1977 The Texas Water Quality Board is disbanded and the Texas Department of Water Resources is created. 'TDWR is now charged with protecting the Edwards' quality.
Jan. Fourth court of Civil Appeals renders its verdict against the City and 1978 Zonig by referendum in San Pedro Nort Ltd. vs. City of San Antonio on the mall case over the Recharge Zone. The decision is subsequently upheld by the Texas Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the U.S.
220 EDWARS AQUDR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
Feb. Planng Commission's Water Resources Task Force issues its report, 1979 recommending several policies for conservation, regional plannng, and surface water management.
1979 Metcalf & Eddy Study is released; Interim Development Ordinance revoked.
July Council passes resolution #79-35-74 requesting the CWB to proceed with 1979 Applewhite.
1980. City executes a second sewer service contract with Encino Park; Re-affirms it's intention not to oversize the Encino Park Outfall line.
Feb. City authorizes a joint venture of local engineers to do a sewer service 1981 study of the Upper Salado Watershed.
June Council passes resolution 81-34-64 reaffiring its support for Applewhite. 1981
Nov. City receives SAWPAÇ study and implements many of its principles. The 1981 study is never formally adopted by the City CounciL.
1982 Planng Commission forms an Ad Hoc Committee on Water Plannng. It's final report recommends a detailed study on Water Resources guided
by a Techncal Advisory Committee.
Nov. Council and EUWD appoint a Techncal Advisory Committee to define a 1983 scope of work and recommend a consultant firm to undertake a detailed study of the region's water resources.
Dec. Council intrcts the CWB to refrain from entering the Walsh propert. to 1983 conduct geotechncal surveys for Applewhite.
1984 Techncal Advisory Committee starts working and subsequently recommends the firm of CH2M Hil to underte the regional water study.
May Water Conservation Response to Drought and low water levels. 1984
May CH2M Hil submits its report to the joint sponsors; report is accepted. 1986
221 EDWARDS AQUDR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
Nov. The Edwards Underground Water District and Texas Water Commission 1986 enter into a memorandum of trust on Water Quality of the Edwards Aquifer.
June Council and the Edwards District Board form a Citizens Advisory Group 1986 to help reach IATF consensus on the study's recommendations.
Dec. CAG submits its recommendations to Council, IATP and EUWD. 1986
Jan. The Council and Edwards Board establish a Joint Sponsors Committee to 1987 review water issues and recommend legislation that both bodies can support during the 1987 legislative session.
Feb. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issues it's Draft EIS on Applewhite. 1987
March Joint Committee on Water Resources approves a Joint Resolution which 1987 wil serve as the basis for legislative action and describe the principles and policies accepted to date.
March The City and Edwards District endorse legislation that is subsequently 1987 enacted as HB #1942. It requires the Edwards Underground Water District to produce a drought management plan prior to September 1988.
April Council hears Zoning Case HZ87026 fied by representatives of Barshop 1987 Enterprises for a shopping mall on the Recharge Zone near the intersection of PM 1604 and NW Miltary Dr. Council approves zonig but agrees to consider a moratorium on construction over the Recharge Zone.
1987 Council does not act on moratorium, as developers agree to voluntarily hold up cases until a public information meeting is held on May 18, 1987.
May Community meeting, approximately 1,200 citizens at the San Antonio 1987 College Auditorium to hear the presentation. Mayor Cisneros forms the City Council Committee on the Aquifer.
June The Committee begins to meet weekly to discuss various Aquifer water 1987 quality related issues.
222 EDWARDS AQUDR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
Oct. The Committee submits its report to the full City CounciL. Council accepts 1987 the report and indicates implementation.
Oct. The City of San Antonio and the Edwards Underground Water District 1987 reconvene the Joint Committee on Water Resources to be joined later by representatives of the San Antonio, Nueces and Guadalupe-Blanco River Authorities.
July The Joint Committee on Water Resources completed the Regional Water 1988 Resources Plan and submitted to respected entities. City Council approves as Ordinance #67566.
Aug. The Joint Committee reconvened to review the Drought Management Plan 1988 prepared for submittal to the Texas Water Commission by Aug. 1st as required by HB 1942. .
1988 The City Council votes to approve the Applewhite Reservoir as part of the . RWRP as Ordinance #67605.
Aug. Edwards District approves Drought Management Plan in accordance with 1988 HB 1942.
Dec. City Council enacts Ordinance No. 68548 approving a report on Water 1988 Conservation and an overall policy for local implementation.
Jan. San Antonio, the Edwards District, eastern municipalities, SAR, GBRA, 1989 CPS, and CWB establish legislative coalition for the allocation of ground water as part of RWRP. Weir Labatt presided as chair.
Jan. Uvalde and Medina Counties vote to pull out of the Edwards District. 1989
Feb. The City Council reaffirms its Wastewater reuse policy in Resolution #89- 1989 07-11.
March City Council is briefed on status of Ordinance Nos. 67566 water quality and 1989 67605 regional water plan as required.
May Legislative attempt fails for groundwater allocation. The Lt. Gov. and the 1989 Speaker of the House establish a Committee of legislative members to study the Aquifer.
223 EDWARS AQUIFR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
1989 SB 1667 is passed by the Legislature to allow for the creation of the Alamo Conservation and Reuse District by the City of San Antonio.
June GBRA fies lawsuit in the adjudication of rights (underground stream 1989 lawsuit) to water in the Edwards Aquifer and gave notice to Secretary of Interior of alleged violations of Endangered Species Act.
1989 City Council is briefed on the Lake Texana Project and the Carrizo Sands proposal and authorizes the A WCRD to proceed.
Sept. City of San Antonio submits comments to proposed amendments to the 1989 Edwards Aquifer rules on Water Quality.
Nov. Legislative Committee comprised of House and Senate members convene 1989 to study the Aquifer as mandated.
1989 John Birdwell, Commissioner of the Texas Water Commission meets with individual entities to negotiate. and compromise an Edwards allocation strategy.
Jan. Unvalde and Medina counties hold elections for Board members for their 1990 underground districts which was later considered ilegaL.
Feb. Edwards District approves Drought Management Plan Rules requiring 1990 entities to establish individual plans within 60 days.
June The Birdwell negotiations end without agreement which leads to 1990 negotiations conducted by John Folk - Willams.
July The City of San Antonio enacts an Emergency Action Plan for the summer 1990 drought conditions as requested by the Texas Water Commission to be effective until Dec. 1990.
Dec. The City Water Board begin construction of the Applewhite Reservoir. 1990
Jan. The Special Legislative Committee on the Aquifer submits its final report 1991 to the Legislature.
224 EDWARDS AQUDR / SURACE WATER CHRONOLOGY l Feb. The City submits its proposal for water Legislation to include provisions for 1991 regional participation and re-establishes the City's intent to continue its use of the Aquifer as well provide for alternative sources including conservation.
March Consensus reached that mediation attempts failed. 1991
1991 Living Waters Artisan Springs Ltd. begins catfish farm operations, although the actual driling of wells started in late 1988 and early 1989.
April The Lawn Watering Ordinance comes into effect and enforcement begins. 1991
May The City adopts plumbing code revisions to require low-flow toilets and 1991 other water saving devices to be used for new construction and replacement beging one year from effective date of the ordinance.
May The voters of San Antonio vote to abandon the Applewhite Reservoir 1991 Project. Council affirs the election in subsequent vote and directs the CWB to begin measures to abandon the project. CWB in turn sues the City in question of legality of election.
1991 The Sierra Club issues a lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior for its non-enforcement of the Endangered Species Act for the San Marcos and Comal Springs.
1991 Legislation is approved establishig underground water districts for Medina County .
June CWB reported to Council with Applewhite abandonment plan. 1991
Aug. CWB suit regarding validity of Applewhite vote is pending. 1991
1991 First meeting of Mayors Citizens Committee on Water to determine the water needs throughout the year 2040.
225 EDWARDS AQUIFR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
1991 Passage of legislation to place 2 year moratorium on the driling of free- flowing artisan wells of 5, 000 gpm or greater, and to remove aquaculture from the portion of the Water Code stating the water used cannot be considered a waste.
1991 CWB fied objections to TWC issuance of ACRD Permit. i Sept. TWC begins reviewing CPS, CWB, ACRD, and CSA water related 1991 agencies. i. 1991 Joe Aceves is named coordinator for all CSA water related agencies.
i Oct. Mayor Bruce Todd from Austin, begins leading negotiations to develop a 1991 regional solution for managing the Edwards Aquifer.
) 1991 CSA provides part 1 of the stormwater monitoring program to EPA.
Nov. The Texas Attorney General rules ground water regulation was not
I 1991 unconstitutional.
Nov. Living Waters Catfish Farm stops operations due to threats of suits from 1991 EUWD and TWC.
Dec. City Council gives approval for staff to develop plans for consolidating 1991 water agencies.
1991 City Council adopts ordinance requiring triple containent for underground storage tanks on the Edwards Recharge Zone.
Jan. Todd negotiations completed without resolution and TWC steps in as 1992 negotiator.
1992 TWC issues its outline for a concept paper for managing the Edwards Aquifer.
Feb. TWC places all city permits on hold to allow TWC staff time for further 1992 review.
Feb. TWC Chairman John Hall releases concept paper for management of the 1992 Edwards Aquifer.
1992 City Council approves ordinance to consolidate CWB, ACRD, and Dept.of Wastewater Management.
226 EDWARS AQUIFER / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
March Citizens Committee on Water issues reports and briefs Council at "B" 1992 session.
March Attorney General's letter casts doubt on the TWC's authority to regulate 1992 ground water.
1992 Courts do not let Living Waters Catfish Farm resume operations.
1992 The Texas Attorney General issues a clarification to the Nov. 1991 ruling, stating that ground water regulation is constitutional but that 28.011 of the Texas Water Code is not sufficient authority on its own to regulate.
April The TWC releases its interim plan for management of the Edwards 1992 Aquifer. Sets date of April 14 as the deadline for approval by City of San Antonio, EUWD, Medina County, City of Uvalde, County of Uvalde, and Industrial Water Users Association.
1992 City of San Antonio rejects TWC interim management plan.
1992 EUWD also rejects TWC interim management plan.
April TWC declares the Edwards Aquifer to be an underground river and subject 1992 to State intervention.
1992 John Hall Chairman of the TWC meets with the City Council in open session.
1992 Chief U. S. District Judge Lucious Bunton agrees to postpone hearing the Sierra Club lawsuit until August 10.
May House subcommittee on the Edwards Aquifer holds a public hearing to 1992 discuss the proposed emergency rules relating to the TWC designation of the Edwards as an Underground River.
1992 TWC holds a public hearing on the proposed emergency rules regarding the Edwards as state water.
May 14 The Edwards Aquifer hits a record high of 703.2 at the J-17 well. 1992
227 EDWARDS AQUIFR / SURACE WATER CHRONOLOGY
May 19 Consolidation of the San Antonio Department of Wastewater Management, 1992 City Water Board and the Alamo Conservation and Reuse District becomes effective.
May/ June The San Antonio Water System Board holds a series of meetings to receive 1992 comments and testimony to assist in developing a response to the TWC designation to the Edwards Aquifer.
Sept. Rules designating the Edwards as an underground nver are approved by 1992 the Texas Water Commission.
Sept. Austin District Court rules that the Edwards Aquifer is not an 1992 Underground River.
Sept. Judge Bunton sets a special court date for November 16, 1992 to hear the 1992 Endangered Species lawsuit.
Sept. 11 State court invalidates TWC's declaration of "underground river" and voids 1992 Edwards Rules.
Sept. 14 Texas Attorney General Morales files suit against U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1992 Service and the Dept. of Interior charging the two Federal Agencies are ilegally trying to take control of the Edwards Aquifer and thereby "usurp the States sovereignty".
Nov. Judge Bunton hears the Endansered Species Lawsuit in Federal District 1992 Court in Midland Texas.
Feb. Judge Bunton issues his judgment in the Sierra Club et al vs. Manual 1993 Lujan, Jr. (The Endangered Species Lawsuit). His order required protection of Comal and San Marcos Springs with guaranteed spring flows of 100 cfs or greater and gave the Texas Legislature until May 31, 1993 to corne up with a management plan.
April The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Sierra Club reach a settlement 1993 on a Conservation & Recovery Plan which automatically disregards the Fish and Wildlife's appeal of Judge Bunton's ruling.
May 4 San Antonio Water System appropriates $500,000 towards the purchase of 1993 Governent Canyon Property with the purpose of acquiring sensitive lands for recharge.
228 EDWARDS AQUIFER / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
May Senate Bil 1477 is passed by the 73rd Texas Legislature and signed by the 1993 Governor June 11, 1993. This Bil establishes the Edwards Aquifer Authority to be effective September 1, 1993.
Aug. 11 LULAC questions the legality of equal representation through the Voting 1993 Rights Act by minorities on the new Edwards Authority appointed board, and fies for a Dept. of Justice review.
Sept. 1 Projected date for creation of Edwards Aquifer Authority established by 1993 Senate Bil 1477. Authority not established - held up for Justice Dept. review.
Sept. 3 TNRCC's Underground River Rules repealed by Judge Pete Lowry of the 1993 261st District Court of Travis County.
Sept. 22 The catfish farm is issued a water quality permit from the Texas Natural 1993 Resource Conservation Commission.
Nov. 19 Justice Department objects to implementation of SB 1477 that provides for 1993 an appointed Authority.
Nov. 22 Mayor Nelson Wolff announces in a news conference the establishment of 1993 the 2050 Water Resource Committee to address alternate sources of water and the Committee of the Whole to address water quality issues.
Dec. 10 Judge Lucious Bunton issues a ~onditional granting on the appointment of 1993 a Water Monitor to overlook Edwards Aquifer Regional activities.
Feb. 25 U.S. District Court Judge Lucious Bunton formally appoints Mr. Joe G. 1994 Moore Jr. as the Water Monitor for the Edwards Region. Judge Bunton's order outlined the monitor's specific duties and compensation for his activities.
March State of Texas fies suit in federal court challenging the U.S. Justice 1994 Departent's rejection of the Edwards Aquifer Authority created to regulate pumping from the Edwards Aquifer.
March U.S. Justice Department rules the Edwards Underground Water District 1994 and the Edwards Aquifer Authority cannot co-exist. The Aquifer Authority wil not come into existence with power to regulate pumping.
229 EDWARDS AQUIR / SURACE W ATERCHRONOLOGY
March 30 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Public Hearing in San 1994 Antonio on recommendations for changes to Chapter 313 Rules-- Edwards Aquifer Quality.
April 15 Judge Bunton holds status conference on the Sierra Club lawsuit. In this 1994 conference, Sierra Club fies complaint of Endangered Species violations and notifies 40 Federal agencies.
May 5 Chief U.S. District Judge Lucious Bunton's response to Sierra Club 1994 Lawsuit. Rules against relief request by Sierra Club however, allowed that plaintiff's costs not be public information.
May 10 Public Hearing on report by City Council Committee of the Whole 1994 regarding Issues and Implementation for water quality protection of the Edwards Aquifer.
May 19 City Council approves 2050 Plan to include short term recommendations 1994 and calls for August 13 election. The recommendations are: Conservation, Local Reuse, Irrigation Lease Option, Downstream Trades/Applewhite/Reuse and Recharge Dams.
May 19 City Council authorizes staff to proceed with implementation of a 1994 comprehensive water quality program as stated in the report by the City Council Committee of the Whole "The Edwards Aquifer: San Antonio Mandates for Water Ouality Protection" .
230 RESOLUTION OF NON -DEGRADATION "-.
FMS: Imc 9/29/87 .'!
A RESOLUTION NO. 87-47-72 :; ~ )~ ADOPTING THE CONCEPT OF NON-DEGRADATION OF THE...... EDWARDS AQUIFER.
WHEREAS, it is the pol icy and goal of the Edwards Reg ion to maintain the aquifer's current high level water quality; and WHEREAS, the City of San Antonio is a major determinant in the reg ion i s growth and use of the aquifer; and WHEREAS, the City of San Antonio is add~essing its respons ibi 1 i ty by assur i ng the qual i ty of the aqui fer is maintained through a series of actions related to regulatory and administrative measures both local and regional; and WHEREAS, protection of the aquifer should be pursued by a comprehens i ve reg ional groundwater program incl ud i ng such regulatory and administrative measures; NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO: SECTION 1. That the City Council adopt a policy of non-degradation of the groundwater wi thdrawn or discharged from the Edwards Aquifer. SECTION 2. That the components and intent of such a policy be followed as outlined in the Resolution of the Aquifer Committee Report which accepts those measures and adopts and declares a pol icy concerning the protection of the groundwater qual i ty of the Edwards throughout the reg ion (Attacht 1) . PASSED AND APPROVED this 1 r~ day of OCTOBER, 1987.
r~ ~~~~d ATTEST ;.Æk ¡./ ~f 11'lY__ J l/-l"- . CITY CLERK '. - ./''1
APPROVED AS TO FORM: /t1ß)~~1 232 8 ;0; - 47 ._'.1.~~ - . ,.. "! ";.. . . \ STUDIES PERFORMED Aquifer Protection Issues
In 1967, the Texas Water Quality Act created the Texas Water Quality Board and gave it
a mandate to protect the quality of the state's waters. In 1970, TWQB issued its first "Board Order" regulating development over the recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer. The goal was to prevent contamination of the aquifer by pollutants introduced by surface runoff. This was a unique regulation, which had no parallel in any other aquifer in Texas. The Board amended and strengthened this order in 1974.
Meanwhile, the proposed development of "San Antonio Ranch", a federally supported "new town" over the recharge zone in northwest Bexar County, raised public concerns over possible pollution of the aquifer. The Sierra Club and other citizens' groups filed suit to block the federal loan guarantee for the project, but the appeals court upheld HUD' s action in granting this assistance to the developers. i In response to the concern raised in the case, San Antonio Congressman Henr B. Gonzalez introduced an amendment to the Safe Drinking Water Act which provided special protection to an aquifer which is a "sole source" of water in an area. 2 The Edwards was the first aquifer in the United States to be so designated under this provision.
In October 1975, the San Antonio City Council approved rezonig of a 117 acre site at the intersection of U.S. 281 and Loop 1604 for a regional shopping mall. At the same time, it created an Edwards Recharge Overlay Zone in the city's zonig ordinance and established an Aquifer Protection Office in the city Public Works Departent to review developments proposed over the recharge zone. The controversy over the rezonig, however, resulted in a petition drive to force a referendum on the issue, as authorized by the city charter. By January 1976, the Aquifer Protection Association had secured enough petition signatures to call the referendum. The rezonig ordinance was rejected by the voters overwhelmingly. The developers fied suit, and the Texas 'Supreme Court eventually ruled that zonig changes could not be made the subject of a referendum. 3
Meanwhile, in the wake of the referendum, in May 1976 City Council commissioned a major study by consultants Metcalf & Eddy to determine whether the mall rezonig endangered the aquifer. In November, the study was expanded to consider broader questions of how much development could safely be allowed over the recharge zone. In June 1977, the City Council enacted a moratorium banng all development over the recharge zone, pending the outcome of ths study. Suburban developers imediately fied suit, seekig massive damages for an unconstitutional tag of their propert without compensation. In September, the Council adopted an Interim Development Ordinance which recognied vested rights for previously approved projects and allowed some limited development over the recharge zone, and the lawsuit was dropped.
i Sierra Club vs. Lynn, 502 F 2d, 43 (1974). 2 Subsection 142(e) of the Safe Drinkg Water Act. P.L. 93-523.
3 San Pedro North, Ltd., vs. City of San Antonio. 562 S.W. 2d 260 (Tex. Civ. App.-- San Antonio 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.). 234 The final report of the Metcalf. & Eddy study, in 1979, was generally regarded as inconclusive. It recommended further work to identify the most sensitive areas and features of aquifer recharge. City Council repealed the Interim Development Ordinance and development over the recharge zone resumed. Regional Water Resource Study
In 1982, continuing concerns over the lack of a long range water plan prompted the City Plannng Commission to form an ad hoc committee to study the issue. This committee's report recommended a detailed study of long range water resources in the entire Edwards Aquifer region, guided by a carefully structured Techncal Advisory Committee. In November 1983, the City and Edwards Underground Water District agreed to sponsor this study jointly. They created a Techncal Advisory Committee to define the scope of work and recommend a consulting fir to undertke the study. The firm of CH2M-Hil was selected, and subsequently submitted its thee volume report in April 1986.
In June 1986, the Council and the Edwards District formed a Citizens Advisory Group to help in reaching a consensus on the study's recommendations. In January 1987, the City and the Edwards Board created a Joint Sponsors Committee to recommend legislation which both bodies could support in the 1987 legislative session. In March, the Joint Committee recommended a policy that the aquifer "should not be overdrafted during periods of average rainall" -- that is, that long term average withdrawals from the aquifer should not be allowed to exceed the aquifer's long term average annual recharge. It also recommended that the Edwards District's enabling Act should be amended to require the District to develop and implement a Drought Management Plan.
The legislation mandating a Drought Management Plan was passed in 1987 as HB 1942. The same Act increased Bexar County's representation on the Edwards District's Board to six members, thus providing equal representation to the three major constituencies interested in the aquifer. It also authorized 10% of the voters in any county within the District to petition for a referendum to withdraw from the District. City Council Commttee on the Aquifer
In April 1987, another shopping mall zonig case over the recharge zone reignited the controversy of the 1970s over possible pollution of the aquifer. The San Antonio City Council approved the rezonig of a tract near the intersection of Loop 1604 and NW Miltary Highway. In response to the ensuing controversy, the Mayor appointed a Special Committee on the Aquifer to consider the full range of actions necessary to protect the aquifer.
The Committee met throughout the summer of 1987, hearing from a wide range of techncal experts and from a panel of "intervenors" on both sides of the issue. In September, it presented its report,4 which recommended a policy of "no degradation" in the quality of aquifer water. It proposed a wide range of implementing actions, addressed to thè City,
4 The Edwards Aquifer: Perspectives for Local and Regional Action. September 1987. 235. Bexar County, the Edwards District, and various state agencies. Among these was an amendment to the zoning ordinance providing that a zoning change over the recharge zone would not be considered until the Texas Water Commission had approved a Water Pollution Abatement Plan for the development. The Committee's report was adopted by the Council unaniously. Regional Water Resources Plan
Following the report of the Council Committee, the Joint Committee of City Council and the Edwards Board (now called the Joint Committee on Water Resources) reconvened to continue the development of a long range regional water plan. A representative of the downstream river authorities was added to the Committee to ensure that their interests were also considered.
In July 1988, the Joint Committee presented the San Antonio Regional Water Resources Plan. It contained four principal components, in addition to financing recommendations and an implementation program.
First, it recommended a series of conservation programs designed to reduce total regional water consumption by 10% within 10 years. This translated into a reduction of 16 % in municipal water consumption, while no specific goal was set for agricultural conservation.
Second, it recommended that the City of San Antonio underte an ambitious wastewater reuse program to substitute for 131,000 acre-feet of demand on the aquifer by 2040. This would be financed by the city's sewer ratepayers, although the benefits of the program would accrue to the region as a whole.
Third, it recommended a series of projects to develop surface water supplies. It recommended that the Applewhite project be built imediately, since it was the only project which was already permitted and it was already largely designed. It also recommended that work begin on the process to permit Cibolo reservoir (which had been authorized by Congress in 1974) and Cuero/Lindenau, both of which would be needed before the plan's horizon of 2040.
Finally, it recommended a program of groundwater allocation based on recognition
of historic pumping rights. This would iimit pumping from the aquifer to 450,000
acre-feet per year -- a figure that would 'leave at least 150,000 acre-feet of spring discharge for downstream use on the Guadalupe River under average rainfall conditions. Irrigators would be authorized to pump whatever amount was necessary to grow crops on their historically irigated acreage. New users would have a period of seven years to establish similar historic rights. The Edwards District would establish a market for the sale or lease of aquifer water rights. The Edwards District would establish a market for the sale. or lease of aquifer water rights in which agricultural pumping rights would be quantified at 1.5 acre-feet per irrigated' acre. It would also develop a program to purchase existing rights from wiling sellers in order to retire these rights to meet the 450,000 AF limit, and it would become the broker of bulk regional water supplies. 236 The San Antonio City Council adopted this plan in July 1988. The Edwards Board, including the representatives from Medina and Uvalde Counties, approved the concept of the plan but reserved the right to review the proposed implementing legislation.
Soon after the concept plan was approved, however, a movement began in Medina and Uvalde Counties to repudiate it. Petitions were circulated, and in January 1989 both counties voted overwhelmingly to withdraw from the Edwards District.
237 URAN DEVELOPMENT ON THE EDWARS AQUIFER RECHAGE ZONE A SUMMAY OF THE EUW STAF REPORT
The Edwards Underground Water District (EUW) issued a report in August 1993 in response to the growing concern by District staf that the current mechansms in place to protect the Edwards Aquifer from degradation due to urbaniation are not adequate. The report is not a technical report based on techncal data but a narative of the stafrs concerns, mainly targeting the issue of stormwater ru-off.
District staff states that the Edwards "Board Order" rules concernng the aquifer provide insufficient protection from contamation and that it is withi the power of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commssion (TNCC) to requie more stringent measures on water quality protection than are specicaly described in the Edwards Rules. In their report the EUWD staff brig to light varous approaches, in the form of general recommendations, to protecting ground water from contamnation, .
The report states that studies that have been conducted on the effects of urban development on water quality have proven that there is a direct relationship between stormwater pollution and impervous cover, but none of the data is represented. The report goes on to say that as development expands and the amount of impervous cover increases, the amount of infiltration of rainfall into the soil is reduced, causing an increase in stormwater run-off. The increase in the amount of impervous cover reduces recharge to the aquifer and the abilty of contamnated stormwater ru-off to be diluted through natural filtration and adsorption. Currently, no restrictions exist to lit the amount of impervous cover being constructed on the Recharge Zone.
One of the recurring concern through-out the report is the lack of a "cumulative effects" evaluation of the development activities on the Recharge Zone. Due to the rapid pace of development and the current lack of adequate comprehensive standards and regulatory controls, District staff believes that contamation of the aquifer is "iment."
238 TABLE OF PERMITTED USES ¡FOR THE EDWARDS RECHARGE OVERLAY DISTRICT 1993 iii-ii6 240 ZONG DISTCl
Prn'l l'l: USES R-A R-l R-2 R-2A R-3 R-4 R-5 R-6 R-7 R-8 ERD Radio/television sttion with trtte toer CC X Reeation facility X X X X X X X X X X Reistered famly hom X X X X X X X X X X X Ro hou X X X
Scool, elemta X X X X X X X X X X X Sdiool, send X X X X X X X X X X X Stone qu CC CC Tois har Toouse X X X X X University or college Utility infracte CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC
1993 III-ll7 241 Sec. 35-3262. Tale of petted us in nonridential district. ZON DISTCT EE USES 0-1 B-l B-2 B-3 B-4 I-l I-2 ERO Abraive maufacte Acsory us X X X Actylene ga maufacte, storage X X X X X X Aeial suey X CC Air conditionin sales, retail X X X X X -'Cc X X X X Air conditionin/refrigertion service, repair Airprt, nongovertal X X X X X Air prcct maufactin CC CC CC Alcoholic beverage maufacture X X CC Alcoholic beverage, retail sales X X X X X X X Alcohol distillation, storage Al terinjrepairin of appael X Amulance seice X X X X X X Amt paks X X X X X Animl clinic CC 'X X X X X X CC Animl hosital Animl poun or shelter X CC Antique stre CC X CC X Apt hotel X X' X X Apthec X X X X X X X X X Appael an accsory store Apliance repair X X X X X Appliance stre, retail sales X X X X X Arer rae (inoor) X X X X X Arer rae (outdoor) X X X CC Arry X Ar galler or muum CC CC CC CC . CC Arificial lim asly X X X X X Asos prcuct mafacte X X X X X Ashal t proct maufacte X X Athetic fields CC AUditorium CC CC X X X- X CC Autombile auction X X X X X X X X X X X X Autombile glass sales & intallation Autombile maufact X X X X X CC Autombile muffler sales & intallation Autombile paki lot/garge (corcial) X X X X Automile pa sales X X X X X X Autombile rental X X X X X X Autombile repair X X X CC X X X CC 1993 III - iis 242 ZOrIG DISTcr
PE USES 0-1 B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 I-L I-2 ERD Autorbile upolst sales & intallation X X X X Autombile wrer seice X X X Bag cleain X X X CC Bait store X X X Baei (retail) X X X X Baei (wholesle) X X X Ba, savins & loa - X X X X Ba .& beuty eqipmt, wholesle Ba or beuty shop X X X X Batchin plant, tera X X X X X X in B-3 an 8-4 (6 month nmd.murn) CC CC X X CC Batte mafacte X Be an breast X X X
Beverge maufacture X X X CC Bicycle/lawner repair X X X X Billiar palor an pol hall X X X X X Biomical proct maufactin CC Blueprintin ar photostatin X X X X X 'cc
Boiler or ta works X CC Boin hou X X X X X Bot sales, seice or storage X CC X CC Bokbiner X X X X Bokstore X X X X X X
Bolin alley X X X X Brewei X Br, bru maufact X X CC Buildin spial ties, retail X X X X Buildin spial ties, wholesle X X X X X
Buk plant or tel CC CC Buiness college X X X Buiness machine stre X X X X X cainet or cate shop X X X X X Cara an photophic store X X X X X Ca maufact X Cae maufact X X X CC cay maufacte X X X cc cay, nut & confecionery store X X X X X Caas prcct maufacte X X X CC Caival or cir, etc. CC CC CC Cain, crtin, haulin, storage X X X CC ca wa, automtic X X X X CC
1993 III-119 243 1993 1II-120 244 ZONIG DISTcr PE USFS 0-1 B-1 B-2 8-3 8-4 I-1 I-2 ERD
Eleclati. X Elevator mainte, service X X X X Emloyt agen X X X X X X Exnntors X X X X CC Fairgur am stdium Famly hom CC CC CC CC Far eqipmt sales, service or storage X Far sulies X CC X CC X X X X X Fee, se, ferilizer sales X X X X
Felt maufacte X CC Fis maket (wholesle) X X X CC Fis maket (retail) X X X Fix-it shop X X X X X Floorin coerin sales X X X X
Florist (retail) X X X X Floris (wholesle) X Foo locer plant (retail) X X X X Foo proct maufacte X X X CC X X X CC Foo proct (wholesle storage an sale) X X X Foo stre X X X X X Fright depot X X X X Frt am prece, wholesle X X X Frit am prcce, retail X X X X X FUeral hom or urert estalisht X X X
FU dyein, finishin am stri. X X X CC Fuitu repair/upolstrin X X X X CC F\i tu sales, retail X X X X Fuitue sales, wholesle CC X X
Gage sae X X X X X X X X Galine fillin sttion w/seice X X X X CC Gaoline fillin sttion without service or ca wa X X X X X CC Gift shop X X X X X Glass, retail sales X X _ X X X
Glass, wholesle sales X X X X Glass maufacte X CC Go trck CC CC X X CC Golf cour an coti club CC X X X X X X Golf cour, miiatue X X X X X X
Golf drivin rae CC X X X X X X X Grain drin X CC Grain millin X X 1993 III-12l 245 ZONIG DISTcr
PE USES Q-l B-1 B-2 B-3 8-4 I-l I-2 ERD Gro store Gro (wholesle) X X X X X X Group day-ce hom X X X Gu th X X X X X X X X CC Gyit,n ( coial) X X X X Hae sales, retail Ha saes, wholesle X X X X X Hatcher X X X X Hazarous materials haulin or storage X X X CC Head shop CC CC CC CC Heliport Helistop CC CC CC CC CC CC Hobby supply store CC CC CC Hom occution X X X X Hors stale/eqestrian ceter X X X X X X X CC X CC Hosier mafact Hosital or saitaium X X X CC Hotel CC CC CC X X CC HUe maufacted hom X X X X X X X X Ice hous Ice maufact X X X X X Ice cr maufact (wholesle) X X X X Insitution for diildr or aged X X CC Insation maufact & fabrication X X X X X Inteior decratin studo X X X X X Janitorial/cleain service Jewelry store X X X X CC X X X X X Junar or salvage yar CC Kenel X X X CC I.ratory i dental or meical laratory , X X X X X CC Iaratory, retetin X X X X CC X X X CC Lacapin materials X CC laun X X X CC laun, liited to 5 emloyee laun or dr cleain pick-up sttion X X X X CC X X X X X X laun an dr cleain (self-srvice) X X X CC Lether goc or lugage stre X X X X
1993 III - l22 246 ZON DISTcr
PE USES 0-1 B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 I-1 I-2 ERD
Lira X X X X X Li or uniform supply i diape service X Lo office X X X CC IJks th X X X X X liryar an buildin materials X X X X X X X X Machine shop Machines, tols, an constnction X X X X CC eqipm sales an service Mafact hom/overized vehicle sales, X X X CC service or storage Maine an bot maufactin X CC X CC Masage palor X X X CC X X X X Mattress maufactin, reuildin X X, Metal forgin or rollin mill X X X Metal proct fabrication X X CC Milliner (cuom) X X X X X Milliner maufacte X X X Millwork an siilar woo proct maufact X X X X Miiwaous X X X X , Motel X X X X X X Mor vehicle sales, seice or storage X X X Moie retals CC X X X . X
Movin an trfer coy X X CC Muic store X X X X
Namplate (one sqe foot) X Newta X X X X X X Novelty an soenir maufact X X X CC Nuclea or radioactive intntation mafact CC Nuin hom X X X X X
Nury (retail) X X X CC Nu (wholesle) X X X CC Nury scool X X X X X
Office X X X X X X X X Office eqipmt, fuitue maufacture X X CC Office eqipmt & suply, retail X X X X X Office eqipmt & supply, wholesle X X X X X Oil well CC X
1993 III-123 247 1993 III-124 248 ZON D1SlCI
PE USES 0-1 B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 1-l 1-2 ERD -
Racetrck, roeo, an other CC eqestrian activities X Radio or television sttion without trssion toer X X X X X X X Redin ro X X X X X Reeation facility, neighbrhoo X X X X Reeational vehicle pak X X CC
Recin salon X X X X Refrigertion eqipmt maufacture X CC Reistre famly hom X X X X Reerin plant CC Reurt or cafeteria X X X X X
Rifle rae (i.oor) CC CC CC Rifle rae (outdoor) CC CC Ro, boin hous X X X X X Ru an/or cat sales X X X X Rug cleain X X X CC
San or grvel strage X X Sanita lanfill, solid wate facility CC Sdiool X X Serd me X X X X X Self defen inction X X X X
Shoe mafact X X X CC Shoe ¡:lish maufact X CC Shoe repair X X X X X Shoe sales, retail X X X X X Shoe sales, wholesle X X X X
Sign, aderisin X X X X X Sign shop X X X X Silk scin (retail) X X X X Skatebrd trck X X X X Skatin rin X X X
SIll animl breeer X X S¡:rtin goo, retail X X X X Sportin goo, wholesle X X X CC Sta & coin sales, retail X X X X X stationery sales X X X X X
Stocar CC Stone cittin, ronmnt maufacte X X X Stone ronurt sales X X X Stuio for fine ar X X X X X Surical suplies, retail X X X X
1993 III - 125 249
ZONI DISTCT
PE USES 0-1 B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 I-I I-2 ERD wirWell proctdrillin mafactcontrctr x X CC Woc prosii by crtin or X X CC oter prein treatmt Wool pulin an scin X X .
1993 1II-127 251 PUBLIC HEARING CHAPTER 313 EDWARDS RULES EDWARDS AQUIFER RULES PUBLIC MEETIG NOTICE
Th Texa NllUal Rerc Coat Coss coies of al wrllen testy rec.ed up ~ te days wi amuct i publi he be It 7:00 p.m., af th public heini. Coies of wrll tey an Mah 30. 199. it Tti Unien. Oian Orldre questi concin¡ th publ he¡ ~ be ad- Ceter Audorum. San Airo. Tex. dr 10 Heen Stoval. Leal Seil DlVwo. P.O. 1ls hein¡ is scheduJ to ree publi coent OI Box 130. Aust. Teu 7811. or ca (512) th Edwards AAuifer Wlte Qualty Prot Pram 23.(78. an th lNCC's rues adi wite poUut iba is " .A. Texa. on Feb 24. 191. met plans (or reaulated deveJmet over th deinate TADM31. Ma ,fU Ho ree zone o( th Edwards Aquifer pumiant to 30 T AC . 0W. I. 0l 1313. The public he¡ shal be coucte in acrdan Til. .. l.ic ~ with ti Texs Water Co. 126.04. Coollln Th public is enouri¡ed to iand th hurin¡ an to Fi: Ftt 25 1. preænt relevan evidece or "inions conc ~ Ed wars AAuifer Pro&run. Wntteii coenlS whch ar . .. submite prio 10 or duri th public he wi be l' r,zRl,.. 156 MII l, .1914 TtzøRtgis~, inude Í4 ti red. Th Co wi al inud
"'-SMMnDM lOO 410
Å NOTH
~ ~ i I in ~ :) CD
253 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 94-13-12 A RESOLUTION
NO. 94-13-12
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ON THE EDWARS RULES, CHAPTER 313, TO THE TEXAS NATURL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION PUBLIC HEAING OF MACH 30, 1994 ON THE WATER QUALITY IN THE EDWARS AQUIFER. * * * * *...
WHEREAS, the Edwards Aquifer is the sole source of water for five counties including Bexar County; and WHEREAS, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission has been charged by the State Legislature with protecting the Aquifer through the development of rules and orders; and . WHEREAS, the ci ty Council of the ci ty of San Antonio is particularly concerned with safeguarding the quality of the Edwards' water as evidenced by its October 1987 report The Edwards Aauifer: PersDectives for Local and Reaional Action; and WHEREAS, the City Council Committee of the Whole on Water Quality has convened to reestablish the importance of this issue and supports strengthening both local and state regulations to protect our sole source; and WHEREAS, the San Antonio Water system staff has reviewed the proposed revisions to 31 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 313, commonly known as the Edwards Rules and has provided comments and recommendations; NOW THEREFORE:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO 1. That the City Council of the City of San Antonio urges the Texas Water Commission to consider the comments and recommendations of the city of San Antonio.
2. That the attached statement detailing the concerns of the City Council of the City of San Antonio be approved and made a part of this Resolution.
255 EDWARS RULES RESOLUTION NO. Page 2
3. That the staff of the San Antonio Water System be authorized to present this Resolution and the attached statement to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission staff at. the Commiss ion's hear ing on the Edwards Aquifer on March 30, 1994. PASSED AND APPROVED THIS /? iJDAY OF MACH
Attest:~,J CITY CLERK (~ APPROVED AS TO FORM: ::lJni1~t~itlaf
.f TY AT'rORNEY iJ
256 COMMENTS BY CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ON CHAPTER 313 CITY OF SAN ANTONIO COMMENTS REGARDING EDWARS AQUIFER RULES 1- SECTION 313
TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
The San Antonio Water System has reviewed the latest edition of the Edwards Chapter 313 rules. San Antonio has long supported water quaity as a primar issue. As reflected in the October, 1987 report The Edwards Aauifer: Perspective for Local and Regional Action. the San Antonio Water System has made great efforts in cooperation with the Texas Natual Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) and the Edwards Underground Water Distrct to define problems and solutions for Aquifer protection. These are primarly for mapping, hazdous materials, water pollution abatement plan (WP AP' S) and the drainage area. The following statements have been provided to the San Antonio Water System Board of Trutees and approved by resolution by the City of San Antonio City Council on March 17, 1994. On
behalf of the City of San Antonio City Council, the San Antonio Water System's concern are much in keeping with previous comments. The San Antonio Water System greatly appreciates the opportity on behalf of the San Antonio City Council to submit the following comments for review and consideration by the Texas Natual Resource Conservation Commission. .
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHAGES TO THE CHAPTER 313 RULES
The following are recommended changes from the San Antonio Water System to the TAC Chapter 313 rules.
313.4 WATER POLLUTION ABATEMENT PLANS
313.4 (b) (3)
That all residential developments, including single family residential of less than 25 lots, should bePlan. required to provide a geologic . assessment along with a complete Water Pollution Abatement 313.4 (4) (d) (2)
Plans submitted for protection of significant recharge featues discovered durng constrction should be required to be certified by a Texas Registered Professional Engineer.
258 3 13.4 (4) (g)
That Water Pollution Abatement Plans approved prior to 1989 and in which some construction was performed but the development was never completed, must modify their Water Pollution Abatement Plan that was submitted prior to 1989 to address the new requirements of the application.
313.5 ORGANIZED SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEMS
. 313.5 (C) (2) (i)
Sewer line PVC pipe required for gravity collection systems should be upgraded to City of San Antonio standards of SDR 26.
313.5 (C) (5)
Immediate emergency measures for detected defects should be implemented to prevent pollution as referenced in Chapter 26 of the Texas Water Code using such methods as deemed necessar to prevent contamination to the water quality of the Edwards Aquifer. Final repairs should be initiated withn 90 days of detection of strctual defects.
313.5 (C) (11)
Plans submitted for protection of significant recharge featues discovered durng trenching and construction of sewer lines should be required to be certified by a Texas Registered Professional Engineer.
313.8 PLUGGING OF ABANDONED WELLS
Plugging requirements should be strengtened (upgrade Chapter 287), for example:
Verification of borehole conditions should be provided by the rung of a wireline log. Ths log can provide information such as tota depth, casing point, casing condition, and formation tops. Ths information can aid in designig an appropriate plugging program.
I t should be required that the uncased portion of the drlled hole be filled with washed gravel from the bottom up to withn 3-5 feet of the bottom of the casing.
259 F or a length of approximately 8-10 feet on top of the gravel a plug should be put in place using pressure cementing or a non-shrink grout.
Once the plug has set-up, the water above the plug is pumped or bailed out to verify the seaL. (V ery Important)
Then the entire casing, from the top of the plug to the surface is to be pressure cemented or a non-shrink grout be. used.
313.9 PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES
313.9 (a) and (b)
All landfills should be prohibited from being placed on the Recharge Zone and Transition Zone which requires a permit from TNRCC.
313.10 STATIC HYDROCARBON AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE STORAGE
313.10 (1)
The addition of tertiar containment for Underground Storage Tans on the Recharge Zone as well as the Transition Zone should be required.
313.10 (Addition)
That the submittal of an Emergency Spil Response Plan should be a condition of the approval of an underground storage ta facilty.
313.10 (Addition)
That a five year timetable be set up to require the upgrade of existing single wall tas and piping on the Recharge Zone and the Transition Zone to be upgraded to at leas double wall tas and double wall piping. If Tertiar requirements are to be extended to the Recharge Zone and the Trasition Zone, then the systems should be upgraded to ths leveL.
That sites containing underground storage tas be required to test ru-off prior to entering permanent stormwater abatement strctues and upon discharge from said abatement strctue. These analytical tests shall be for an approved list of potential containants and shall be performed by an EP A approved laboratory.
260 313.11 STATIC HYDROCARBON STORAGE IN ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANKS
313.11 (Addition)
That the submittal of an Emergency Spil Response Plan should be a condition of the approval of an aboveground. storage tan- facilty.
313.14 ENFORCEMENT
That the TNRCC staff may be granted more authority to penalize violations in the field and enforcement be expedited for such violations.
Maintenance and upkeep responsibilties of stormwater abatement stctues need to be addressed.
That the manpower be increased for the Edwards Aquifer program in order to provide increased enforcement.
GENERAL COMMENTS
OVERALL POLICY
The City of San Antonio urges the Texas Natual Resource Conservation Commssion stf to begin to develop methodology and criteria for reguating and monitorig cumulative effects of land use activities over the Edwards Recharge Zone. These "cumulative effects" have been occurrng over time and the need to assess water quaity in term of pollutat loading mus be studied. Such studies should be coordinated with appropriate local entities for techncal assistance and provide necessa information.
The TNRCC should estblish formal communcations with the Texas Ralroad Commssion and the Texas Deparent of Transporttion on new constrction, repairs, accidenta spils rromoil and gas pipelines, and tranporttion of hadous materials.
BOUNDARIES
The San Antonio Water System requests the estblishment of a Drainage Zone, similar to the boundaries of the catchment area, to be phased in over the next 3 years with similar regulations that govern the Recharge Zone, especially, in the ar~as of underground storage ta, proper
261 construction and inspectìon of sewer mains and private service laterals, and stonnwater abatement controls.
That buffers be established along 100 year floodplains in the Recharge Zone and a newly established Drainage Zone.
Flòodplaìns would be defined as those desìgnated on the FEMA maps or on creekbeds with watersheds of greater than 300 acres.
INFRASTRUCTURE
That septic tas have a mandatory pumping requirement every 3 years. That new septic ta systems have a monitor well instaled for observatìon and testing puroses every thee years in conjunction with the mandatory pump out of the septic system.
Physical removal and fill operations withn the 100 year floodway should be prohibited unless the project involves the perpendicular crossing of roadway construction, is shown to improve drainage, enhance recharge, or protect water quaity.
The San Antonio Water System is recommending that the Texas Natual Resource Conservation Commission require detaled reporting of conditions surounding blasing on the Recharge Zone. Especially the proximity of a blast to the closest sewer lines, amount of explosive, and monitoring of the blas with a copy of the monitoring device printout. Other items for consideration are the following:
1. Date of blast 2. Location description 3. Blaser's Name 4. Contractor 5. Purose of Blasng 6. Number of shots 7. Depth and diameter 8. Type of explosive 9. Amount of explosive 10. Directiona or not 11. Utilty map with distces to shot points 12. Utilties Contacted 13. Fire Deparent Contacted 14. Type of monitoring-seismic or sound 15. Include copy of monitoring device printout i 6. Signficant recharge featues in the area including map with distances i 7. Any comments or special conditions
262 That Hazardous Material Traps be required in close proximity to sensitive recharge areas, and where highways cross stream chanels based on guidelines set in the "Edwards Aquifer Technical Guidance Manual".
Certification of commercial fertilzer and pesticide applicators operating within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
FEE SCHEDULES
That the TNRCC, for the next legislative session, attempt to change the water code to charge larger fees for larger developments and a fee that is to be set on a per underground/aboveground storage ta basis with no maximum. However, to encourage Master Water Pollution Abatement Plans for large developments or a group of smaller developments willng to develop a single Master Water Pollution Abatement Plan, a credit system on the required fees should be implemented.
City of San Antonio agrees that the fee schedule needs redefining and ths redefining should emphasize that collected fees be placed directly back into the program.
EDUCATION
Education and awareness of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone should be encouraged among the Homeowner Associations, Commercial Developers, and the general public located on or traveling over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
TECHNICAL GUIDANCE MAUAL
In addition, the new "Edwards Aquifer New Techncal Guidance Document" should be used on a tral basis for a period of one year and evaluated for its effectiveness and amended where needed. If it is determned to be a benefit to regulating development on the Recharge Zone it should be considered for adoption into the Chapter 3 i 3 rues.
The City of San Antonio appreciates the opportty to comment on the Chapter 3 i 3 Edwards Aquifer Rules.
263 CHAPTER 313 EDWARDS RULES TEXAS WATER COMMISSION Permanent Rule Changes to Chapter 313 Edwards Aquifer §313.27 Ef fect ive : January 21, 1992
i . Purpose . This .changetr.ansmittal provides the pages reflect changes and additions to the' Têxas Watert.at Commission Volume of Permanent Rules. 2: Explanation of Chanqes. The Texas Water Commission adopted amendments, to 31 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 313 entitled "Edwards Aquifer," Subchapter B, §313. 27. , without changes to the proposed text as published in the October 25, 1991 issue of the Texas Register (16 TexReg 6039). These sections will replace the existing §§313. 21- 313.27. Also attached is a Chapter 313 index reflecting a new printing date and any new changes brought about by this adoption.
265 INDEX
CHAPTER 313 EDWARDS AQUIFER SUBCHAPTER A: EDWARDS AQUIFER IN MEDINA, BEXAR, COMAL, KINNEY, UVALDE AND HAYS, TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES 5313.1 Purpose 53 13 . 2 Applicability §3 13.3 Def ini tions 5313.4 Water Pollution Abatement Plan for Regulated Development §313.5 Organized Sewage Collection Systems 5313.6 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems 5313.7 (RESERVED) 5313.8 Plugging of Abandoned Wells §313.9 Prohibi ted Acti vi ties §313.10 Static Hydrocarbon and Hazardous Substance Storage in Underground Storage Tanks §313.11 Static Hydrocarbon Storaage in Aboveground Storage Tanks 5313.12 Exceptions §313.13 Review of Decisions of the Executive Director 5313.14 Enforcement 5313.15 Underground Water Conservation Districts SUBCHAPTER B: APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND PROCESSING FEES FOR APPROVAL OF PLANS AND AMENDMENTS §313.21 Required Submission §313.22 Person or Entity Required to Apply §313.23 Signatories to Applications 5313.24 Contents of Application §313.25 Application Fees 5313.26 Fees Related to Requests for Extensions §313.27 Fee Schedule SUBCHAPTER C: (THIS SUBCHAPTER is RESERVED.)
Printed: 2/21/92 1 266 55313.1-313.15
Chapter 313 Edwards Aquifer _ Subchapter A . Edwards Aquifer in Kinney, Uvalde, Medina, Bexar, Comal, Hays, Travis, and Williamson Counties 55313.1-313.15 These new sections are promulgated under Texas Water Code, 555.103, 5.105, 26.011, 26.046, and 28.011 which provide the Texas Water Commission with the authority to promulgate rules necessary for the exercise of its jurisdiction and powers provided by the Code and other laws. 5313.1. Purpose. The purpose of this subchapter is to regulate activities having the potential for causing pollution of the Edwards Aquifer. The acti vi ties addressed are those that pose direct threats to water quality. Nevertheless, nothing in this subchapter is intended to restrict the powers of the commission or any other governmental entity to prevent, correct, or curtail activities that result or might result in pollution of the Edwards Aquifer. 5313.2. Applicability. These rules specifically apply to the Edwards Aquifer and are not intended to be applied to any other aquifers in the state of Texas.
5313.3. Definitions. The definitions for the words and terms in 526.001, 526.263, and 526.342 of the Texas Water Code are applicable to this chapter. Those words and terms, when used in this chapter, shall have those definitions unless the context in which they are used clearly indicates otherwise, or those definitions are inconsistent with the definitions listed below. The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise i Abandoned well - A well that has not been used for six consecutive months. A well is considered to be in use in the following cases i (A) a non-deteriorated well which contains the casing, pump and pump colum in good condition; or (B) a non-deteriorated well which has been capped. Appropriate district office - For regulated developments or other activities covered by this chapter and located in Travis and Williamson counties, the appropriate district office is the Texas Printedi 9/25/90
1 267 55313.1-313.15
Water Commission District 14 Office located in Austin, Texas. For regulated developments or other activities covered by this chapter and located in Kinney, Uvalde, Medina, Bexar, Comal, and Hays counties i the appropriate district office is the Texas Water
Commission District 8 Office located in -San Antonio i Texas. Commencement of construction - The initiation of any regulated activity ultimately or directly related to a proposed regulated development. Edwards Aquifer - That portion of an arcuate belt of porous, waterbearing, predominantly carbonate rocks known as the Edwards and Associated Limestones in the Balcones Fault Zone trending from west to east to northeast in Kinney, Uvalde, Medina, Bexar, Comal, Hays, Travis, and Williamson counties, and composed of the Salmon Peak Limestone, McKnight Formation, West Nueces Formation, Devil' s River Limestone, Person Formation, Kainer Formation, Edwards Formation, and Georgetown Formation. The permeable aquifer units generally overlie the less-permeable Glen Rose Formation to the south, overlie the less-permeable Comanche Peak and Walnut formations north of the Colorado River, and underlie the less- permeable Del Rio Clay regionally. - Feedlot/concentrated animal feeding operation - The definition as provided in 5321.32 of this title (relating to Definitions for Commercial Livestock and Poultry Production Operations). Hazardous substance - Any substance designated as such by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, regulated pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 5311, or any solid waste, or other substance that is designated to be hazardous by the commission, pursuant to the Texas Water Code 526.263. Industrial discharge - Any category of wastewater except: (A) thoseor that are primarily domestic in compositionJ (8) thosefeeding emanating operations. from feedlot/concentrated animal Land application system - A wastewater disposal system drainageway.designed not to discharge wastewater . directly into a surface Organized sewage collection system - Any public or private sewerage system for the collection of sewage that flows into a treatment and disposal system that is regulated pursuant to rules of the commission and provisions of the Texas Water COde, Chapter 26. Pollution - The alteration of the physical, thermal, chemical, or biological quality of, or the contamination of any water in the Printed: 9/25/90
2 268 55313.1-313.15
state that renders the water harmful, detrimental, or injurious to humans, animal life, vegetation, or property, or to public health, safety or welfare, or impairs the usefulness of the public enjoyment of the waters for any lawful or reasonable purpose. ..ri-vate ~wage faeil!.tYs - .Qn-eit-e ,~øewerage facilities including septic tanks, pit privies, cesspools, sewage holding tanks, injection wells used to dispose of sewage, chemical toilets, treatment tanks and all other such facilities, systems, and methods used for the disposal of sewage other than disposal systems that are required to operate under a waste discharge permit issued by the commission or its predecessors. Private service lateral - Facilities extending from the building drain to the public sewer or other place of disposal and provided to serve only an individual household or establishment whose operation and maintenance is the sole responsibility of the householder or owner of the establishment's facilities. Recharge zone - Generally, that area where the stratigraphic units constituting the Edwards Aquifer crop out, and including the outcrops of other geologic formations in proximity to the Edwards Aquifer, where caves, sinkholes, faults, fractures, or other permeable features would create a potential for recharge of surface waters into the Edwards Aquifer. The recharge zone is identified as that area designated as such on official maps located in the offices of the Texas Water Commission and the appropriate underground water conservation district. Regulated activity - Any construction-related activity on the recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer, such as, but not limited toi construction of buildings, utility stations, roads, highways, or railroads, clearing, excavation or any other activities which alter or disturb the topographic, geologic, or existing recharge characteristics of a site, or any other activities which may pose a potential for contaminating the Edwards Aquifer. "Regulated activity" does not includei (A) the clearing of vegetation in a 10-foot wide path, as is necessary and for the sole purpose of surveying; . (B) agricultural activities, except feedlots/concentrated animal feeding operations; (C) the installation of natural gas, telephone or electric lines, water lines, or other such utility lines which are not designed to carry and will not carry pollutants, stormwater runoff, or sewage effluent; (D) activities associated with the exploration, development, and production of oil or gas or geothermal resources as defined in 31 Texas Administrative Code 5335.1 of this title (relating to Definitions); or Printed: 9/25/90
3
269 55313.1-313.15
(E) routine maintenance of existing structures that does not involve additional site disturbance, such as, resurfacing of roads, parking lots, sidewalks, or other development- relatedslmilar impervious .activities surfaces in ¥bieh J fence there building, 1. li.ttle or orother no- potential for contaminating groundwater, and/ or there is little or no change to the topographic, geologic, or existing recharge features. Regulated development - Any publicly or privately owned site on the recharge zone, on which industrial, commercial, utility, residential, or road construction is planned, or on which is planned a change in intended land use from the status quo to land use with a potential for contaminating waters of the Edwards Aquifer, as determined by the executive director. -Regulated development" does not include residential subdivisions in which every lot is larger than five (5) acres and no more than one single-family residence is located on each lot. Sewage holding tank - A tank or other containment structure used to receive and store sewage until its ultimate disposal to an approved treatment facility. Significant recharge areas - Sinkoles, caverns, faults, and other geological features where rapid infiltration to the subsurface may occur. Significant recharge feature - Permeable geologic features located on the recharge zone or on the transition zone, s~ch as sinkholes, caves, faults, fractures, bedding plane surfaces, interconnected vugs, or other geologic features, such as reef deposits, through which rapid infiltration - relative to the adjacent rock media - to the subsurface may occur and in which a potential for hydraulic interconnectedness between surface water and the Edwards Aquifer is present. Static hydrocarbons - A hydrocarbon which is liquid at atmospheric pressure and 20° centigrade. Stub out - A wye, tee, or other manufactured appurtenance placed in a sewage collection system providing a location for a future extension of the collection system. Transition zone - Generally, that area where geologic formations crop out in proximity to and south and southeast of the recharge zone and where faul ts , fractures, and other geologic features present a possible avenue for recharge of surface water to the Edwards Aquifer, and including portions of the Del Rio Clay, Buda Limestone, Eagle Ford Group, Austin Chalk, Pecan Gap Chalk, and Anacacho Limestone. The. transition zone is identified as that area designated as such on official maps in the offices of the Texas Water Commission and appropriate underground water Printed: 9/25/90
4
270 SS313 .1-313 .15
conservation districts. Underground water conservation district - Any underground water district created by the Texas Legislature, or any special- purpose districts created by the Texas Water Commission under the Texas Wa,ter Code, Chapter 52, .as 'u.nderground watereonsera;tion districts to conserve, preserve, and protect the waters of an underground water supply. Water pollution abatement plan holder - The person or persons who are responsible for compliance with an approved water pollution abatement plan. Well - A bored, drilled or driven shaft, or an artificial opening in the ground made by digging, jetting or some other method, where the depth of the well is greater than its largest surface dimension, but not including any surface pit, surface excavation, or natural depression. S3l3.4. Water Pollution Abatement Plan for Regulated Development. ( a) Approval by the Executive Director. No person shall commence any regulated activity within any regulated development after the effective date of 'these rules until a water pollution abatement plan for such activity has been filed with and approved by the executive director. With respect to those projects in progress at the effective date of these rules, activities which commenced on or prior to the effective date of these rules are not subject to this Chapter. Activities will be considered on a case-by-case basis to have commenced if the owner has obtained all federal, state, and/or local approvals or permits required to begin physical construction, and if eitheri on-site construction directly related to the development has begun, or the owner has entered into contractual obligations - which cannot be canceled or modified without substantial loss for physical construction to be completed wi thin a reasonable time. As a condition of approval, the executive director may impose additional provisions deemed necessary to protect the Edwards Aquifer from pollution. An application for approval of a water pollution abatement plan for a regulated activity on the recharge zone must be submitted in quadrplicate to the appropriate district office. Only those persons owning, having an option to purchase, having the right to possession and control of the property which is the subject of the water pollution abatement plan, or an agent' authorized to act for the Printed: 9/25/90
5
271 55313.1-313.15
applicant in the process of obtaining approval of a water pollution abatement plan may submit a water pollution abatement plan for review. The executive director must complete review of submittals within 90 days after determi:nin,g_ its ..adminiatrativ:e comple,tene.ss ,which must be done within 30 days of receipt by the office of' the executive director from the appropriate district office, which must submit to the office of the executive director all submittals, with an assessment of administrative completeness and a recommendation for approval or otherwise, within 30 days of receiving quadrplicate copies of the submittal from the applicant or applicant IS agent. Administrative completeness is dependent on receipt by the office of the executive director from the appl icant or appl icant i s agent ( s ) of all required fees and submittals. (b) Contents of a Water Pollution Abatement Plan. A water pollution abatement plan must contain, at a minimum, the following data. ( 1) Required information. The information required under 5313.24 of this Chapter (relating to Contents of Application) , shall include a completed application containing names, addresses, and telephone numers of the applicant (s ) and any agents, such as consulting engineers, authorized to act for the applicant in the process of obtaining approval of a water pollution abatement plan, and any addi tional information requested by the executive director. (2) Site location. The location data and maps shall include i (A) a legible road map with directions - including mileage - which is sufficient to enable the executive director or his agents or employees to locate, travel to, and inspect the site;
(8) a general location map, showing i (i) the site location on a copy (or spliced composite of copies, or pars of them, if necessary) of an official recharge zone map(s) with quadrangle name(s), recharge zone, transition zone, and their boundaries clearly labled; and ( ii) a drainage plan, shown on the recharge zone map, indicating the path of drainage from the regulated development to the Printed: 9/25/90
6
272 55313.1-313.15
boundary of the recharge zone J and (e) a site plan, at a minimum scale of 1 inch to 400 feet, showing i (i) the 100-year floodplain boundaries (if applicable) 1 . (ii) the layout of the development, and existing and finished contours at appropriate, but not greater than five (5) foot, contour intervals J (iii) the location of all known wells (the term "wells" refers to all wells J including water wells, oil wells, unplugged and abandoned wells, etc.); and (iv) any significant recharge features located within the proposed development or within 200 feet down gradient. in the 5-year floodplain. (3 ) Assessment of area geology. For all regulated developments, including residential developments consisting of 25 or more family living units, and the adjacent area located within the 100-year floodplain, for a distance of at least one (1) mile downstream of the regulated development, or to the boundary of the recharge zone, the applicant must submit a report prepared by a qualified geologist describing area and site- specific geology. Where the 100-year floodplain has not been delineated, the applicant shall delineate the 100-year flood plain, showing all applicable data and calculations used to make such a delineation. The geologic assessment must includei (A) aoutcrop geologic of map surface at site-plan geologic scale units, showing faults, the fracture zones, and significant recharge features, specifically identifying caves, sinkholes, and other features, (B) a stratigraphic colum showing at a minimum, formations, thicknesses, and membrs, (e) a narrative description of surface geologic units, including a discussion of lithologic, stratigraphic, and structural features such as faults, fractures, and fracture densities, (D) a narrative description of soil units and soil profile including thickness and hydrologic characteristics; and Printed: 9/25/90
7
273 55313.1-313.15
(E) a narrative description of all 8ignificant recharge features including i (i) location(s) of the recharge feature(s), with cross reference to site-plan map; (ii) sinkoles,type of recharge caves, faults,feature(s), or potentially such as permeable fractures and solution zones; and ( iii) size and character of the area draining to the recharge feature ( s ) . (4 ) Technical report. For regulated developments a technical report shall be included to address the following issues. (A) An assessment ofi . (i) theresidential, nature of thecommercial, development industrial, (whether utility, etc.), including the size of the development in acres, the projected population, the amount of impervious cover expected after construction is complete, the type of cover, such as paved surface or roofing, the amount of parkingsurface expected lots and toother be occupied factors asby appropriate; (ii) the volume and character of wastewater expected to be produced (Wastewater generated . from a development should be characterized as either domestic or industrial, or if commingled, by approximate percentages of each type.); and (iii) the volume and character of stormater runoff expected to occur (Estimates of stormwater runoff quality and quantity should be based on area and type of impermeable cover, as described in subparagraph (i) abve.); (B) a description of the measures that will be taken to prevent pollution of stormwaters originating onsite or upgradient from the site and potentially flowing across the site: (i) during construction; and Printed: 9/25/90
8
274 55313.1-313.15
(ii) after completion of construction; (C) a description of the measures that will be taken to prevent downgrade pollution by contaminated stormwater runoff from the site i (i) during construction; and ( ii) after completion of construction. (D) a description of the measures that will be taken to prevent pollutants from entering recharge features while maintaining or enhancing the quantity of water entering the recharge features i (i) identified in the assessment of area geology; and (ii) identified during excavation, blasting, or construction; and (E) method of disposal of wastewater from the development i ( i) if wastewater is to be disposed of by conveyance to a sewage treatment plant for treatment and disposal, the existing or proposed treatment facility must be identified; or (ii) if wastewater is to be disposed of in private sewage facilities, then the application must be accompanied by a written statement from the appropriate licensing authority, stating that the land in the development is sui table for the use of private sewage facilities or identifying those areas that are not sui table. (c) Deed recordation. The applicant, upon receiving written approval of the water pollution abatement plan for that development, must record in the county deed records that the property is subject to a water pollution abatement plan and must also, upon transferring title to that property, place a restriction in the deed that states that the property is subject to that water pollution abatement plan. However, any landowner may conduct any unegulated activity on the property even though a water pollution abatement plan is approved and recorded. Within 30 days of rec~lving written notice of approval of the water pollution abatement plan from the executive director, the applicant must submit to the executive director proof of application for recordation of notice Printed: 9/25/90
9
275 55313.1-313.15
construction,in the county thedeed applicant recorda. mustPrior submitto commencing to the appropriate district office proof of application for recordation of notice in the county deed records. (d) Notification. (1) Prior to commencing a regulated activity. Prior to commencing any regulated activity on a regulated development, the applicant must notify the appropriate district office of when the regulated activity will commence, and under which approved water pollution abatement plan the regulated activity will proceed. (2) During construction. If any significant recharge features, such as solution openings or sinkoles, are discovered during construction, all regulated activities near the significant recharge feature must be imediately suspended and may not proceed until the executive director has reviewed and approved the methods proposed to protect the aquifer from any potential adverse impacts. The holder of an approved water pollution abatement plan must imediately notify the district office of any significant recharge features encountered during construction before continuing construction. If during construction, any significant recharge feature is found on the site commission staff must respond within one week of the reporting of the discovery of the significant recharge feature to bythe evaluatingappropriate district field relations office, which of the must feature. respond Within one (1) week of receiving plans that show adequate details for completion of a review, the executive director must determine the acceptability, or otherwise, of engineering plans submitted by the applicant or applicant i s agent to demonstrate mitigation of contamination potential associated with the significant recharge feature. (e) Modification of previously approved water pollution abatement plans. The holder of any approved water pollution abatement plan, such as an approved master plan, must notify the appropriate district office in writing and obtain approval from the executive director prior to any of the following. (1) any physical modification to, or any modification in procedures for operation of, any water pollution Printed: 9/25/90 10
276 SS313.1-313.1S
abatement structure - such as ponds, dams, berms, sewage treatment planta, and diversionary structures, ( 2 ) any change in the nature or character of the development from that which vas originally approved or which would significantly impact the viability of the water pollution abatement plan, as determined by the appropriate district office or executive director, ( 3) any development of land identified as undeveloped in the original water pollution abatement plan. (f) Compliance. The application for approval, of a water pollution abatement plan may be conditionally approved by the executive director . The holder of the approved water pollution abatement plan shall be responsible for compliance with this section and any special conditions of an approved plan through all construction phases of the regulated development. Failure to comply with all conditions of the executive director's approval is a violation of this rule. Term of approval. The executive director' a approval of (g) a water pollution abatement plan will expire two (2) years after the date of initial issuance, unless prior to the expiration date, commencement of construction related to the approved water pollution abatement plan has occurred. A written request for the executive director' s approval of an extension must be received no earlier than sixty (60) days and no later than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date of an approved water pollution abatement plan or an approved extension, so that the executive director may approve the request for an extension. Requests for extensions are subject to fees outlined in Subchapter B of this chapter. The executive director i s approved extension will expire six (6) months after the expiration date of the approved water pollution abatement plan or an approved extension. Any requests for extensions received by the commission after the expiration date of an approved water pollution abatement plan or an approved extension will be considered as a new application and will be subject to appropriate fees. An extension may not be granted if the proposed development concept or plan and/or requirements of these rules have changed. If a complete written request for an extension is filed timely under the provisions of this subsection, the water pollution abatement plan shall continue in Printed: 9/25/90 11
277 55313.1-313.15
effect until the executive director makes a determination on the request for the extension.
5313.5 Organized Sewage Collection Systems. (a) Approval of the design of organized sewage collection systems by the executive director. Commencement of rehabilitation or construction related to existing or new organized sewage collection systems on the recharge zone may not occur until design plans and specifications have been filed with and approved by the executive director. An application for approval of plans and specifications for organized sewage collection systems on the recharge zone as provided by subsection (d) of this section must be submitted in quadrplicate to the appropriate district office. The executive director must complete review of submittals within 90 days after d~termining its administrative completeness, which must be done within 30 days of receipt by the office of the executive director from the appropriate district office, which must submit to the office of the executive director all submittals, with an assessment of administrative completeness and a recommendation for approval or otherwise, within 30 days of receiving quadrplicate copies of the submittal from the applicant or applicant t s agent. Administrative completeness is dependent on receipt by the office of the executive director from the applicant or applicant. s agent ( s) of all required fees and submittals. (b) General design of sewage collection systems. Design of sewage collection systems on the recharge zone must be in accordance with Chapter 317 of this title (relating to Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems), adopted by the Texas Water Commission. Approval of the design of sewage collection systems must be obtained from the Texas Water Commission, as specified in 5317.1 of this title (relating to General Provisions) , prior to the commencement of construction. (C) Special requirements for sewage collection systems. In addi tion to the requirements in subsection (b) of this section, sewage collection systems on the recharge zone must meet the following special requirements. (1) Manhole construction and rehabilitation. All manholes constructed or rehabilitated after the effective date of these rules must be watertight, wi th watertight rings and covers. Wherever they are within the 100 year flood plain, the manhole Printed: 9/25/90 12
278 55313.1-313.15
covers shall have gaskets and be bolted. Where gasketed manhole covers are required for more than three manholes in sequence, al ternate means of venting shall be provided. Bricks are not an acceptable construction material for any portion of the manhole. All manholes must be tested to meet or exceed the requirements of paragraph ( 10) of this subsection. (2 ) Piping for gravity and pressurized collection systems. Unless local regulations dictate more-
strinqent standards i ( i) for gravity collection systems, all PVC pipe must have a Standard Dimension Ratio (SOR) of 35 or less; and . (ii) for all pressurized sewer systems, all PVC pipe must have a SOR of 26 or less. All sewer pipes must have compression or mechanical joints, with the exception of private service laterals, in which case solvent weld joints may be used if the pipe diameter is less than six (6) inches. (3 ) Lift station design. Lift stations must be designed and constructed to assure that bypassing of any lift station does not occur. All lift stations constructed on the recharge zone must have auto-dial telemetry capabili ties. The auto-dial telemetry system shall automatically notify, by telephone, several responsible parties of a mal function at the lift station. All lift stations must also have either a back-up power source or. adequate storage in the wet well and collection system, as approved by the executive director, to allow for response and repair time. (4 ) Certification of new sewage collection lines by. a professional enqineer. Owers of sewage collection systems must insure that all new gravi ty sewer system lines' having a diameter greater than or equal to six ( 6 ) inches, all new force mains, and all new private service laterals, are tested for leakage following construction. Such lines must be certified by a Texas Registered Professional Enqineer to meet or exceed the requirements of paragraph (10) of this subsection. The certification must be submitted to the appropriate district office prior to use of the new collection Printed: 9/25/90 13
279 55313.1-313.15
system. New sewer lines and manholes must be tested every five years thereafter in accordance with paragraph (5) of this subsection. (5 ) Testing of existing sewer lines. Owers of sewage .collection .sys-temsmust insut'e that all existing sewer lines having a diameter greater than or equal to six (6) inches, including private service laterals, manholes, and connections, are tested to determine types and locations of structural damage and defects such as offset or open joints, or cracked or crushed lines that would allow exfiltration to occur. Such testing shall commence within one year of the effective date of this chapter, or within one year of the effective date of any former chapter of this title (relating to Edwards Aquifer) (now repealed), and shall be completed within five (5) years of commencement. Every five (5) years thereafter, existing sewer collection systems must be tested to determine types and locations of structural damage and defects such as offset or open joints, or cracked or crushed lines that would allow exfiltration to occur. These test results shall be certified by a Texas Registered Professional Engineer. As soon as possible, but at least within one (1) year of detecting defects, measures to initiate repairs to the sewer collection system must be carried out by the system t s owner. Any necessary repairs must be certified by a Texas Registered Professional Engineer as having been correctly performed. Necessary repairs must be tested within 45 days of completion of the repairs, and the results of such testing must be certified by a Texas Registered Professional Engineer. Both certifications must be submitted to the appropriate district office within 30 days of testing the completed repairs. (6 ) Blasting for sewer line excavation. Blasting for sewer line excavation must be done in accordance with appropriate criteria established by the National Fire Protection Association. Should such blasting result in damage to an already in-place sewer or its appurtenances, the owner of the sewer system and appurtenances must repair and retest such sewer and its appurtenances imediately. The use of sand for pipe embedment and/or backfill in Printed: 9/25/90 14
280 55313.1-313.15
blasted rock shall not be allowed. (7 ) Sewer line -stub outS". Hew collection lines must be constructed with "stub outs" for the connection of anticipated extensions. The location of such "stub outs" must be marked ontne ground such that the location of such "stub outs" can be easily determined at the time of connection of the extensions. Such "stub outs" must be manufactured wyes or tees that are compatible in size and material with both the sewer line and the extension. At the time of original construction, new "stub-outs" must be constructed sufficiently to extend beyond the edge ( s ) of any street pavement under which they must pass to the property line. All "stub-outs. must be sealed with a manufactured cap to prevent leakage. Extensions that were not anticipated at the time of original construction or that are to be connected to an existing sewer line not furnished with "stub outs. must be connected using a manufactured saddle and in accordance with accepted pluming techniques. (8 ) Locating sewer lines within a five (5) year floodplain. Sewer lines shall not be located within the five (5) year floodplain of a drainageway. In an area where the executive director determines that such location is unavoidable, and the area is subject to inundation and stream velocities which could cause erosion and scouring of backfill, the trench must be capped with concrete to prevent scouring of backfill, or the sewer lines must be concrete encased. All concrete shall have a minimum thickness of six (6) inches. (9 ) Inspection of private service lateral connections. After installation of, prior to covering, and prior to connecting a private service lateral to an organized sewage collection system, the owner of the private service lateral line shall provide that a Texas registered professional engineer, Texas registered sanitarian, or appropriate city inspector must visually inspect the private service lateral and the connection to the collection system, and certify it to have been constructed in conformity with the applicable provisions of this section. The owner of the collection system must
Printed i 9/25/90 15
281 55313.1-313.15
maintain such certifications for three years and forward copies to the appropriate district office upon request. Connections may only be made to an approved sewage collection system subsequent to receipt by the executive director of the certification of new construction or repairs, and subsequent testing as required by paragraph (4) or (5) of this subsection. (10) Testing new gravity sewer lines. For all new gravi ty sewer pipe having a diameter greater than or equal to six ( 6 ) inches on the recharge zone, the following requirements shall apply: (A) In-place deflection tests must be performed on all flexible and semi-rigid pipes. The test must consist of pulling a rigid ball or a mandrel sized at 95\ of the inside diameter of the pipe from manhole to manhole. The test must be conducted after the final backfill has been in place at least 30 days. No pipe may exceed a deflection of 5.0\. The test must be performed without mechanical pulling devices. (B) An infiltration and/or exfiltration and/or low-pressure air test must be performed, and the type of test must be specified in the design plans. Copies of all test results must be submitted to the appropriate district office within 30 days of test completion. Tests shall conform to the following requirements: (i) The total infiltration or exfiltration, as determined by water test, must be at a rate not greater than 50 gallons per inch of pipe diameter per mile of pipe per 24 hours at a minimum test head of two feet. If the quantity of infiltration or exfil tration exceeds the maximum quantity specified, remedial action must be undertaken in order to reduce the infiltration or exfiltration to an amount within the limits specified. (ii) Low-pressure air tests must conform to the procedure described in ASTK C-924 or other equivalent procedures. For safety reasons, it is recommended that air testing of sections of pipe be limited to
Printed: 9/25/90
16
282 55313.1-313.15
lines les8 than 36-inch average inside diameter. Lines that are 36-inch average ins ide diameter and larger may be air tested at each joint. The minimum time allowable for the pressure to drop from 3 ~. 5 pounds per square inch to 2.5 pounds per square inch qauge during a joint test, regardless of pipe size, shall be 20 seconds. For sections of pipe less than 36-inch average inside diameter, the minimum time allowable for the pressure to drop from 3. 5 pounds per square inch gauge to 2.5 pounds per square inch gauge must be computed by the following equation i T - O. 0850 ( D) (K) I (Q), where i T - time for pressure to drop 1.0 pounds per square inch qauge in seconds, K - 0.00049 (D) (L), but not less than 1.0, D - average inside diameter in inches, L · length of line of same pipe size in feet, and Q - rate of loss, assume 0.003 cubic feet per minute per square foot (ft! Iminlft sq) of internal surface area. (C) Manholes and wet wells must be tested separately and independently of the collection lines. All manholes must be hydrostatically tested with a maximum-loss allowance of .025 qallon per foot diameter per foot of head per hour. Other testing methods, such as vacuum testing, may be approved on a case-by-case basis by the executive director. (D) Embedmentspecification materials for bedding must meet class or exceedA or B the as described in ASTM C 12, or class I or II as described in ASTM D 2321, and specifications as contained in Chapter 317 of this title (relating to Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems. ) (11) Sewer lines bridging caverns or other solution
Printed i 9/25/90 17
283 55313.1-313.15
features. Sewer lines that bridge caverns or solution features, must be constructed in a manner that viII maintain the structural integrity of the line. When such geologic features are encountered, the location and extent must be reported to the appropriate district office vi thin two (2) working days . of discovering the significant recharge feature (s) . ( 12) Erosion and sedimentation control. A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan must be included with all construction plans. All temporary erosion and sedimentation controls must be installed prior to construction, must be maintained during construction, and shall be removed when vegetation is established and the construction area is stabilized. ( 13) Alternate systems. Where fully supported by relevant information, the executive director may allow or require the substitution of an alternate procedure which provides equivalent environmental protection. (14) Required corrective action. Notwithstanding compliance with the requirements of paragraphs (1)- 13) of this subsection, sewage collection systems
must operate in a manner so as not to cause pollution to the Edwards Aquifer, and any failure, for any cause whatsoever, must be corrected in a manner satisfactory to the executive director. (d) Contents of organized sewage collection system plan. ( 1) Required information. For organized sewage collection systems, the information required under 5313.24 of this Chapter (relating to Contents of Application), shall include a completed application containing names, addresses, and telephone numers of the applicant (s ) and any agents, such as consul ting engineers, authorized to act for the applicant in the process of obtaining approval of plans and specifications related to an organized sewage collection system, and any additional information requested by the executive director. (2) Narrative description of proposed organized sewage collection system. A narrative report - which must at least include a geographic description, and anticipated type of development within the sewage collection system service area - is required. If a Printed i 9/25/90 1S
284 5S313._ '. -1-313.15 i. . ,¿~.~ ~...:
technical report vas subitted under 5313.4 (relating to Water Pollution Abatement Plan), it may be sOOmi tted in lieu of this requirement, provided it addresses the same issues which are collectionrequired in this subsectionsystems. in regard .- to sewage (3) Plans and specifications. Plans and specifications addressing all the requirements in subsection (b) of this section (relating to General Design of Sewage Collection Systems) and in subsection (c) of this section (relating to Special Requirements for Sewage Collection Systems) , must include at a minimum : (A) a map showing location of the sewage collection system lay-out in relation to recharge zone boundaries ~ (B) a map showing the location of the sewage' collection system lay-out, overlaid by topographic contour lines, using a contour interval of not greater than five (5) feet, and showing the area within the 5-year floodplain of any drainageway~ and (C) construction documents prepared under the supervision of, and sealed by, a Texas Registered Professional Engineer, including at a minimum: (i) plan and profile of collection system~ (.ii) construction details of collection system components ~ and (iii) specifications for all collection system components. (e) Notification. (1) Prior to commencement of rehabilitation or construction. Prior to commencing any rehabili- tation or construction related to existing or new organized sewage collection systems on the recharge zone, the applicant must notify the appropriate district office of when related activity will commence, and under which approved organized sewage collection system plan the related activity will proceed. (2) During construction. If any significant recharge features, such as solution openings or sinkoles, are discovered during construction, all construc- tion activities near the significant recharge Printed: 9/25/90 19
285 55313.1-313.15
feature must be imediately suspended and may not proceed until the executive director has reviewed and approved the methods proposed to protect the aquifer from any potential adverse impacts. The holder'of an approved vater pollution abatement plan must imediately notify the district office of any significant recharge features encountered during construction before continuing construction. If during construction, any significant recharge feature 1s found on the site commission staff must respond within one week of the reporting of the discovery of the significant recharge feature to bythe evaluatingappropriate district field relations office, which of the must feature. respond Within one (1) week of receiving plans that show adequate details for completion of a review, the executive director must determine the acceptability, or otherwise, of engineering plans submi tted by the applicant or applicant. s agent to demonstrate mitigation of contamination potential associated with the significant recharge feature. (f) Modification of previously approved organized sewage collection system plans. The holder of any approved organized sewage collection system plan must notify the appropriate district office in writing and obtain approval from the executive director prior to making any physical modification of the approved organized sewage collection system. (g) Compliance. The executive director may impose special conditions of the approval of an organized sewage collection system plan. The holder of the approved organized collection system plan shall be responsible for compliance with this section and any special conditions of an approved plan through all construction phases of the organized sewage collection system. Failure to comply with all conditions of the executive director' s approval 1s a violation of this rule. (h) Term of approval. The executive director' s approval of a new or rehabilitative organized sewage collection system under the provision of this section shall expire two (2) years after the date of initial approval, unless prior to the expiration of the initial two-year period, commencement of construction in accordance wi th the approved organized sewage collection system has occurred, or an extension has been requested. A written Printed i 9/25/90 20
286 55313.1-313.15
application for an extension must be received no earlier than sixty (60) days and no later than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date of an approved plan or an approved extension, so that the executive director may consider.the .i:equest -far .An .extens.ion. Requests .for extensions are subject to fees outlined in Subhapter- B of this chapter. The executive director' s approved extension will expire six (6) months after the expiration of the approved plan or any approved extensions. Any requests for extensions received by the commission after the expiration date of an approved plan or an approved extension will be considered as a new application and will be subject to appropriate fees. An extension may not be granted if the proposed plan or requirements of these rules have changed.
5313.6. Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. (a) General. New discharges or increases in discharge that would create additional loading of treated wastewater are prohibi ted on the recharge zone. Existing permits may be renewed for the same discharge volumes and with the same conditions and authorizations specified in the permit unless the facility becomes substantially non-compliant, as defined in Chapter 337 of this title (relating to Enforcement). New land application wastewater treatment plants located on the recharge zone must be designed, constructed, and operated such that there is no bypass of the treatment facilities or any discharge of untreated or partially treated wastewater. (b) Land application systems. Land application systems that rely on percolation for wastewater disposal, except for licensed private sewage facilities, are prohibited on the recharge zone. Wastewater disposal systems utilizing land application methods, such as evaporation or irrigation, for disposal of wastewater on the recharge zone will be considered on a case-by-case basis. At a minimum, those systems must attain secondary treatment as defined in Chapter 309 of this ti tle (relating to Effluent Standards). Existing permits may be renewed for the same discharge volumes and with the same conditions and authorizations specified in the permit unless the facility becomes substantially non-compliant, as defined in Chapter 337 of this title (relating to Enforcement). (c) Discharge upstream from the recharge zone. ( 1) New or increased discharges zero to five (0 to 5) Printedi 9/25/90 21
287 55313.1-313.15
miles. All new or increased discharges of treated wastewater, other than industrial wastewater discharges, within five (5) miles upstream from the recharge zone shall, at a minimum, achieve the followi-n-g level of effluent .treatment i - (A) five (5) milligrams per liter of carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand, based on a 30-day average, (B) five (5) milligrams per liter of total suspended solids, based on a 30-day average, (C) two (2) milligrams per liter of amonia nitrogen, based on a 30-day average, and (D) one (1) milligram per liter of phosphorus, based on a 30-day average. Discharges five to ten (5 to 10) miles. All new or (2 ) increased discharges, other than industrial wastewater discharges, more than five (5) miles but within ten (10) miles upstream from the recharge zone and any other discharges that the commission determines may affect the Edwards Aquifer must, at a minimum, attain effluent set 2N based on a 30-day average as defined in Chapter 309 of this title (relating to Effluent Standards). More stringent treatment or more frequent monitoring may be required on a case-by-case basis. (3 ) Discharges greater than five (5) miles and entering segments 1428 or 1427. All discharges, other than industrial wastewater discharges, more than five ( 5 ) miles upstream from the recharge zone which enter the main stem or a tributary of Segment 1428 of the Colorado River, or Segment 1427, main stem Onion Creek, or a tributary of Onion Creek must also conform to 5311.43 of this title (relating to Effluent Requirements for All Tributaries of Segment 1428 of the Colorado River and Segment 1427, Onion Creek, and Its Tributaries, of the Colorado River Basin), and to 5311.44 of this title (relating to Disinfection) . More stringent treatment or more' frequent monitoring may be required on a case-by-case basis. (4 ) Industrial discharges zero to ten (0 to 10) miles. Any existing permitted industrial discharger within zero to ten ( 0 to 10) miles upstream of the recharge zone must, at all times, discharge effluent in accordance with permitted limits. Any
Printed i 9/25/90 22
288 55313.1-313.15
application for new industrial discharge permit. for facilities 0 to 10 miles upstream of the recharge zone will be considered on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with appropriate discharge limits applicable to that industrial activity, and with consideration of proximity to .the recharge zone. (d) General design of wastewater treatment plants. Design of wastewater treatment plants must be in accordance with Chapter 317 of this title (relating to Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems).
5313.7. RESERVED 5313.8. Plugging of Abandoned Wells. (a) Well"'plugging requirements. All identified abandoned water wells, including those located near public water- supply wells under the jurisdiction of the Texas Department of Heal th, and other abandoned wells, including injection, dewatering, and monito~ing wells, subject to the jurisdiction of Chapter 287 of this title (relating to Water Well Drillers) must be plugged pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 287 of this title (relating to Water Well Drillers) and all other locally applicable rules, as appropriate. (b) Wellscommission. subject Wells to regulation not subject by to theChapter texas 287 railroad of this title (relating to Water Well Drillers) may be subject to regulation by the Texas Railroad Commission. 5313.9. Prohibited Activities. ( a) Recharge zone. The following acti vi ties are prohibited on the recharge zone i (1) waste disposal wells regulated under Chapter 331 of this title (relating to Underground Injection Control) , . (2) new feedlot/concentrated animal feeding operations 7 (3) land disposal of Class I wastes, as defined in 5335.1 of this title (relating to Definitions); and ( 4 ) the use of sewage holding tans as parts of organized collection systems. (b) Transition zone. The following activities are prohibited on the transition zonei (1) waste disposal wells regulated under Chapter 331 of this title (relating to Underground Inj~ction
Printed i 9/25/90 23
289 55313.1-313.15
Control), and (2) land disposal of Class I wastes, as defined in 5335.1 of this title (relating to Definitions). 5313.10. Static Hydrocarbon and Hazardous Substance Storage in Underground Storage Tanks. Approval of the design of underground storage tanks and related piping systems located on the Recharge Zone and 'lransition Zone for hydrocarbon or hazardous sUbstances, including leak detection systems, spill containment areas, or other control measures, as described in installation of the underground storage tank system. A geologic assessment, describing surface and subsurface geology and emphasizing significant recharge features, shall be conducted at the location of proposed facilities. The geologic assessment shall be submitted with the facility design plans. '10 request approval of the design plans, the applicant shall file a written request with the appropriate district office in quadrplicate. (1) Underground storage tanks. Facilities for the underground storage of static hydrocarbon or hazardous substances shall be of double-walled construction, or of an eqivalent method approved by the executive director. Kethods for detecting leaks in the wall of the storage facility shall be included in the facility l s design and construction. 'lhe leak detection system shall provide continuous monitoring of the facility and shall be capable of imediately alerting the system owner to possible leakages. (2) Bxisting underground storage facili ties. For Kinney, Uvalde, Hedina, Bexar, Comal, and Hays counties, all underground facilities for the storage of static hydrocarbons and hazardous substances which were in existence prior to Decembr 5, 1984, shall be reqistered with the Commission l s San Antonio Office. The registration shall include the location, size, date of construction, and owner of the facility, as well as the substances stored at the facility.
5313.11. Static Hydrocarbon Storaqe in Abveground Storage Tanks. Approval of the design of aboveground storage tans and related piping systems located on the Recharge Zone and Transition Zone for hydrocarbon or hazardous substances, including leak detection systems, spill containment areas, or other control measures, as described in paragraph (1) of this section, shall be Printedi 9/25/90 24
290 55313.1-313.15
obtained from the executive director prior to construction related to the installation of the aboveground storage tank system. A geologic assessment, describing surface and subsurface geology and emphasizing significant recharge features, shall be conducted at the location of proposea facilities. The geologic assessment shall - be's\Umittedwith the -facili"tydesignplans . Tore-q9st approval of the design plans, the applicant shall file a written request with the appropriate district office in quadrplicate. (1) Aboveground storage facilities. Facilities used for the aboveground storage of static hydrocarbon shall be constructed within controlled drainage areas that are sized to capture one and one-half (1 1/2) times the storage capacity of the facility and that direct any spillage to a point convenient for the collection and recovery of the spillage. The controlled drainage area shall be constructed of or in a material suitably impervious to the material being stored. Any spillage from such storage facilities shall be removed from the controlled drainage area for disposal within twenty-four (24) hours of spillage. Static hydrocarbon temporar storage facilities to be used on site for less than one (1) year which do not require a permit from the commission, and permanent storage facilities smaller than l, 000 gallons are exempt from this paragraph. (2) Existing aboveground storage facilities. For Kinney, Uvalde,. Medina, Bexar, Comal, and Hays counties, all aboveground facilities for the storage of static hydrocarbons and hazardous substances, which were in existence prior to December 5, 1984, shall be registered with the Commission i s San Antonio Office. The registration shall include the location, size, date of construction, and owner of the facility, as well as the substances stored at the facility.
5313.12. Exceptions. (a) General. It is the policy of the Commission to strictly enforce this chapter. Nevertheless, situations that would warrant exceptions to these rules will arise. Exceptions to the provisions of this chapter may be granted by the executive director if equivalent protection for the Edwards Aquifer can be demonstrated. Approvals of such requested exceptions will be reviewed Printed: 9/25/90. 25
291 55313.1-313.15
on a case-by-case basis. (b) Procedure for requestinq an exception. (1) Writtento. the requests.provisions A personof this desirinq chapter anmust exception file a written request with the executive director stating in ~detaili (A) the nature of the exception requested; (B) the justification for granting the exception; and (C) any other information that the executive director or his representative reasonably requests. (2) Submittal of requests for exceptions. All requests must be submitted in quadrplicate. 5313.13. Review of Decisions of the Executive Director. (a) Justiciable interest. Any person having a justiciable interest in a matter on which a decision has been made by the executive director under this chapter, and who is aggrieved by the decision, may request the commission to review the decis ion. (b) Request for review. A request for review must be in writing and must specifically state each issue in the decision of the executive director to which the aggrieved person objects. The request for review of the decision must be filed with the commission within thirty (30) days of the date on which the executive director issues his decision, and must be responded to within 60 days of receipt of the request by the office of the executive director. Final commission determination regarding the request for review is å prerequisite to judicial appeal. 5313.14. Enforcement. It shall be unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to comply with any provision of this chapter or of any applicable regulation or order of the Texas Water Commission issued pursuant to this chapter and in accordance with Chapter 26 and other relevant provisions of the Texas Water Code. Any person who is found to be in noncompliance with this chapter or other relevant regulations, orders, and/or laws shall be liable for penalties and may be the subject of enforcement proceedings initiated by the executive director under Texas Water Code, Chapter 26. 5313.15. Underground Water Conservation Districts. The commission recognizes the authori ties, powerll, and duties of
Printed i 9/25/90 26
292 55313.1-313.15
special-purpose districts, created by the Texas Legislature or by the commission under Chapter 52 of the Texas Water Code, as underqround water conservation districts to conserve, prevent waste of, and protect the quality of underqround water. The commission, in order to foster cooperation with local governent, encouraqes districts to assist the commission in its administration of this chapter throuqh carrying out the following functions within the areal extent of their geoqraphic jurisdiction that includes the recharge zone and/or transition zone. (1) Cooperate with licensing authorities in carryinq out the provisions of this chapter. (2) Conduct such geoloqic investigations as are necessary to provide updated information to the executive director reqardinq the official maps of the recharge zone and trans i tion zone. (3) MonitorAquifer. the quality of. water in the Edwards (4) Maintain maps of activities on the recharge zone and transition zone.
Printed: 9/25/90 27
293 SS313.21-313.27
Subchapter B Application Requirements and Processing Fees for Approval of Plans and Amendments S§313.21-313.27
The amended section is promulgated under the Texas Water Code, §26. 0461, as enacted by Senate Bill 434, 70th Legislature, 1987, which provides the commission with -the au.thoritytoimpose fees for the filing of certain plans subject to review by the Texas Water Commission under its rules for the protection of the Edwards Aquifer, and under the Texas Water Code, §5.103 and §5. 105, which authorize the Texas Water Commission to adopt any rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties as provided by the Code and other state law. §313.21. Required Submissions. Required submissions must be filed in quadruplicate with the appropriate district office in order to request approval by the executive director of any plans or amendments to the plans listed as follows. The appropriate district shall provide copies of all submittals to affected incorporated cities and underground water conservation districts having jurisdiction over the area potentially affected by a proposed regulated activity, for purpose of considering timely input from local government entities. (1) Water pollution abatement plans filed under §313.4 of this title (relating to Water Pollution Abatement Plans for Regulated Developments). (2) Sewage collection system plans filed under §313.5 of this title (relating to Organized Sewage Collection Systems). (3) Static hydrocarbons and hazardous substance storage tank system construction or renovation plans filed under §313.10 (relating to Underground Storage of static Hydrocarbons and Hazardous Substances) and §313.11 (relating to Above-Ground Storage of Static Hydrocarbons and Hazardous Substances). §3 13.22. Person or Entity Required to Apply. Unless otherwise provided under this chapter, the owner of an existing or proposed regulated development, sewage collection system, or static hydrocarbons or hazardous substance storage facility for which plans or amendments to plans must be approved under this chapter must file the application for approval. §313. 23. Signatories to Applications. (a) Required Signature. All applications must be signed as follows. (1) For a corporation by a principal executive officer of at least the level of vice-president or by a duly authorized representative. A
Printed: 2/21/92 1 294 SSJ13.21-313.27
representative must submit written proof of the authorization. (2) For a partnership - by a general partner; (3) For a political entity such as a municipality, state, federal or other public agency - by either a principal executive officer or a duly authorized representative. A representative must submit written proof of the authorization. (4) Foran individual or soleproprl~tor : by the individual or sole proprietor, as applicable. (b) Proof of Authorization to Sign. The executive director may require written proof of authorization to sign any appl ication. §J13.24. Contents of Application. (a) Forms provided by the executive director. Applications for approval filed under this chapter must be made on a form provided by or approved by the executive director. Each application for approval must include at a minimum, the following. (1) Name of the .development, subdivision, or facility for which the application is submitted. (2) Location of the project or facility for which the application is submitted, presented with sufficient detail and clarity, so that the project site and its boundaries can be located on a field inspection. (3) Name, address, and telephone number of the owner and, if different, the name, address, and telephone number of all persons signing the application. (4) Information needed to determine the appropriate fee under. S313. 26 (relating to Fees for Requests for Extensions) (A) For water pollution abatement plans and amendments to plans - the total acreage of the regulated development. (B) For sewage collection system plans and amendments to plans - the total linear footage of all lines. (C) For underground and above-ground static hydrocarbons and hazardous substance storage tank system plans - the total number of tanks or piping systems. (5) Any other information relating to the application which the executive director may require. (b) Required information. Each application must also include the following information, as applicable. (1) For water pollution abatement plans, the informa- tion required under S313. 4 of this title (relating to Water Pollution Abatement Plans for Regulated Developments) .
Printed: 2/21/92 2 295 §§313. 21-313.27
(2) For sewage collection system plans, the information required under §313. 5 of this title (relating to Organized Sewage Collection Systems). (3) For static hydrocarbons and hazardous substance storage system plans, the information required under 5313.10 of this title (relating to Under- ground Storage of Static Hydrocarbons and Hazardous Substances) or 5313.11 of this title (relating to
Above-Ground Stor.aae 'of Hazardous Substances). Static 'Hydrocarbon and §313.25. Application Fees. The owner making an application for approval or amendment of any plan under this chapter must pay an appl ication fee in the amount set forth in §313. 27 of this title (relating to Amount of Fees). The fee is due and payable at the time the appl ication is filed. The fee must be sent to the commission's Austin office, accompanied by an Edwar~s Aquifer Fee Application Form, provided by the executive director. Application fees must be paid by check, certified check, or money order, payable to the "Texas Water Commission". If application fees in the correct amount are not submitted, the executive director is not required to consider the appl ication unti i the correct fee is submi tted.
§313. 26. Fees Related to Requests for Extensions. The owner making an application for an extension of an approval of any plan under this chapter must pay $100 for each extension request. The fee is due and payable at the time the application is filed. The fee must be sent to the commission's Austin office, accompanied by an Edwards Aquifer Fee Application Form, provided by the executive director. Application fees must be paid by check, certified check, or money order, payable to the "Texas Water Commission". If application fees in the correct amount are not submitted, the executive director is not required to consider the application until the correct fee is submitted. (1) For water pollution abatement plans, the informa- tion required under §3 13.4 of this title (relating to Water Pollution Abatement Plans for Regulated Developments) . (2) For sewage collection system plans, the information required under §313. 5 of this title (relating to Organized Sewage Collection Systems). (3) For static hydrocarbons and hazardous substance storage system plans, the information required under 5313.10 of this title (relating to Under- ground Storage of Static Hydrocarbons and Hazardous Substances) or §313.11 of this title (relating to Above-Ground Storage of Static Hydrocarbon and Hazardous Substances).
Printed: 2/21/92 3 296 . IDENTIFIED CAVES AND SINKHOLES IN BEXAR COUNTY IDENTIFIED CAVES AN SINKHOLES IN BEXAR COUNTY
1. Bear Cave
2. Black Cat Cave
3. Blowhole of San Antonio (De Zavala Sinkole)
4. Bulverde-Redland Sinkole
5. Cave of the Creek (Mud Creek)
6. Elm Waterhole Cave
7. Genesis Cave
8. Hils and Dales Pit
9. Hornet's Last Laugh Pit
10. Poison Ivy Pit
11. Inwood Hollow Cave
* This is a partial listing of recognied Major Caves and Sinkoles in Bexar County.
299