MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, …...Jul 19, 2017 · A. Fiscal Year 2016/17...

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, July 19, 2017, 1:30 p.m.

255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA, Conference Room “A” City of Antioch: Phil Hoffmeister / Lynne Filson City of Brentwood: Jagtar Dhaliwal / Jeffrey Cowling / Meghan Laporta City of Clayton: Laura Hoffmeister / Mindy Gentry / Rick Angrisani City of Concord: Robert Ovadia / Kevin Marstall / Frank Kennedy Town of Danville: Chris McCann (Chair)/ Steve Lake City of El Cerrito: Stephen Prée / Yvetteh Ortiz / Maria Sanders City of Hercules: Mike Roberts / Jeff Brown / Jose Pacheco / Frank Kennedy City of Lafayette: Donna Feehan (Vice-Chair)/ / Mike Moran City of Martinez: Tim Tucker / Khalil Yowakim Town of Moraga: Edric Kwan / Frank Kennedy City of Oakley: Billilee Saengchalern / Keith Coggins / Frank Kennedy City of Orinda: Larry Theis / Jason Chen City of Pinole: Tamara Miller / Frank Kennedy / Michelle Fitzer City of Pittsburg: Jolan Longway / Fritz McKinley City of Pleasant Hill: Frank Kennedy / Mario Moreno City of Richmond: Joanne Le / Ryan Smith City of San Pablo: Amanda Booth / Karineh Samkian / Barbara Hawkins City of San Ramon: Steven Spedowfski / Robin Bartlett / Maria Fierner City of Walnut Creek: Rinta Perkins / Carlton Thompson / Steve Waymire Contra Costa County: Cece Sellgren Mike Carlson / Julie Bueren CCC Flood Control & Water

Conservation District: Mike Carlson / Tim Jensen

PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR NOW

Next Management Committee Meeting: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 1:30 p.m.

255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, Conference Room A

The Contra Costa Clean Water Program will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities that are planning to participate in Management Committee meetings.

Contact Erica Lashley-Cornell at least 48 hours before the meeting at (925) 313-2360

CONTRA COSTA CLEAN WATER PROGRAM Management Committee Meeting Agenda

July 19, 2017

AGENDA

Introductions/Announcements/Changes to Agenda

05 min. Start by: 1:30 pm

Public Comments: Any member of the general public may address the Management Committee on a subject within their jurisdiction and not listed on the agenda. Remarks should not exceed three (3) minutes.

Regional Water Quality Control Board Staff Comments/Reports:

10 min. 1:35 pm

A. Selina Louie – San Francisco Bay

B. Elizabeth Lee – Central Valley

Consent Calendar: All matters listed under the CONSENT CALENDAR are considered to be routine and can be acted on by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a member of the Management Committee or a member of the public prior to the time the Management Committee votes on the motion to adopt.

05 min. 1:45 pm

A. Management Committee Meeting Minutes – June 21 & June 28, 2017 (Rachel Kraai)

Presentations:

A. Publication of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 7th Edition (Dan Cloak)

15 min. 1:50 pm

B. Program Annual Report Sections C.11./C.12 (Lucile Paquette/Lisa Austin)

20 min. 2:05 pm

Reports:

A. Staff Recruitment Status and Augmentation Strategy (Mike Carlson/Rachel Kraai)

20 min. 2:25 pm

B. Hydromodification Management Technical Report - Update (Dan Cloak)

10 min. 2:45 pm

C. Hydromodification Applicability Maps - Update (Dan Cloak)

15 min. 2:55 pm

D. Stormwater Resource Plan Update (Rachel Kraai)

10 min. 3:10 pm

Information Items

A. Subcommittee Minutes 1. Monitoring Committee Meeting Minutes – February 13 & May 8, 2017 (Lucile

Paquette) 2. Public Information/Participation Committee Meeting Minutes – April 26 & May

24, 2017 (Erica Lashley-Cornell)

5 min. 3:20 pm

Old/New Business:

5 min. 3:25 pm

Adjournment: Approximately 3:30 p.m.

UPCOMING EVENTS and/or DEADLINES

Sept. 25-27, 2017 13th Annual CASQA Conference, Sacramento. For more information visit https://www.casqa.org/events/annual-conference

September 30, 2017

Report on Corporation Yard BMP Implementation and Maintenance: Permittees shall list site specific BMPs; date and result of inspections; and, any follow-up actions, including date of necessary corrective actions implemented in the 2017 Annual Report. See Provision C.2.f.iii.(2) for further details.

September 30, 2017

C.3 Regulated Projects Grandfathering: Permittees shall provide complete list of development projects subject to C.3.b.i.(2) in the 2017 Annual Report. For each such project, specify the type of treatment system required or the specific exemption granted. Permittee must state if there are no projects subject to C.3.b.i.(2). (See Staff Report E in the February 17, 2016 Management Committee agenda packet for further details.)

September 30, 2017

Green Infrastructure (GI) Planning and Implementation: Each Permittee shall submit documentation with its 2017 Annual Report that its GI framework or workplan for development of GI Plan was approved by its governing body, mayor, city manager, or county manager by June 30, 2017. See Provision C.3.j.i.(5)(a) for further details.

September 30, 2017 or sooner

Trash Load Reduction: If a Permittee cannot demonstrate attainment of the 70% mandatory trash load reduction by July 1, 2017, then it shall submit a report of non-compliance with the 2017 Annual Report, or in advance of the Annual Report, that describes actions to comply in a timely manner. (See Provision C.10.f.v.b. for further details on the required report of non-compliance.)

September 30, 2017

Each Permittee seeking exemption from C.12.f. (i.e., requirement to implement a protocol to manage PCB-containing materials and waste during building demolition by July 1, 2019), must submit in their 2017 Annual Report documentation, such as historic maps or other historic records, that clearly demonstrates that the only structures that existed pre-1980 within its jurisdiction were single family residential and/or wood frame structures.

https://www.casqa.org/events/annual-conference

FUTURE PROGRAM COMMITTEE MEETINGS

All meetings held at 220 A Glacier Drive, Martinez, Except for Management Committee which will be held at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, Conference Room A.

July 26 4th Wednesday

Public Information / Participation (PIP) Committee Meeting, 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon

July 26 4 th Wednesday

Development Committee (DC) Meeting, 1:30 p.m. – 3:30 p.m.

August 1 1st Tuesday

Administrative Committee (AC) Meeting 9:30 a.m. – 12:00 noon

August 7 1st Monday

Municipal Operations Committee (MOC) Meeting, 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon

August 14 2nd Monday

Monitoring Committee (MonC) Meeting, 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon

August 16 3rd Wednesday

Management Committee (MC) Meeting, 1:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m.

MONTHLY BASMAA SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS

Times and locations for the BASMAA Subcommittee meetings are subject to change.

Development Committee, 1:30 – 4:00 p.m. (1st Tuesday during odd months while MRP Steering Committee is meeting)

1st Thursday

Monitoring/POCs Committee, 9:30 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.

1st Wednesday

Public Information/Participation Committee, 1:30 – 4:00 p.m. 4 th Wednesday

Trash Subcommittee, 9:30 a.m.-12 noon 4th Tuesday G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Agenda\17 18\MC Agenda 2017-07-19.docx

of 6

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES

June 21, 2017 Attendance:

MUNICIPALITY ATTENDED ABSENT City of Antioch Phil Hoffmeister /

Lynne Filson City of Brentwood Meghan Laporta City of Clayton Laura Hoffmeister City of Concord Robert Ovadia Town of Danville Chris McCann (Vice-Chair) City of El Cerrito Stephen Prée /

Yvetteh Ortiz / Maria Sanders

City of Hercules Frank Kennedy City of Lafayette Donna Feehan City of Martinez Khalil Yowakim Town of Moraga Frank Kennedy City of Oakley Frank Kennedy City of Orinda Daniel Chavarria City of Pinole Frank Kennedy City of Pittsburg Jolan Longway City of Pleasant Hill Frank Kennedy City of Richmond Joanne Le City of San Pablo Amanda Booth City of San Ramon Steven Spedowfski City of Walnut Creek Rinta Perkins /

Carlton Thompson / Steve Waymire

Contra Costa County Mike Carlson Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water

Conservation District

Mike Carlson

Program Staff: Rachel Kraai, Beth Baldwin, Lucile Paquette, Erica Lashley-Cornell Program Consultants: Adrienne Miller (Geosyntec)

of 6

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC/ OTHERS/GUESTS: Will Provost (City of El Cerrito), Allison Candell (Town of Danville), Jeremy Shannon (Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District), Michele Mancuso (Contra Costa County), Derek Crutchfield (City of Vallejo), Scott Alman (Harris and Associates) 1. Introductions/Announcements/Changes to Agenda: Vice-Chair Chris McCann opened the

meeting at 1:38 p.m. Following self-introductions, she asked if there were any announcements or changes to the agenda. Mike Carlson announced that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved a 7% salary increase for the Program Manager position at their June 7 meeting. He stated that the net increase will go up to 10% with a July 1 3% cost of living increase. McCann suggested that Committee members send thanks to all who supported the salary increase effort. Carlson indicated that County Human Resources staff were in process of offering the position to the top candidate. Rachel Kraai gave the Committee an update on the Administrative Analyst recruitment. She stated that she would be interviewing candidates from the County’s Administrative Analyst II eligibility list on July 6. She discussed the ramifications of the Administrative Analyst vacancy on the Program’s work. She reiterated that the Program does not have any staff available to manage the PIP Committee. She met with the PIP Committee Chair and Vice-Chair to discuss this issue and options to mitigate negative impacts. The Chairs indicated that they would like to continue holding PIP meetings, and the Chair volunteered to temporarily take on several of the administrative duties related to running the Committee meetings. Kraai also indicated that until the two vacant positions are filled, Program staff will have reduced scope and/or slow down the schedules of several other projects. She indicated that the projects that would be immediately affected include: Green Infrastructure Plan support, the Stormwater Resource Plan, the development of an RAA strategy for Contra Costa County, and several PIP related activities. Lucile Paquette distributed a memo on storm drain caulk sampling and indicated that BASMAA is looking for sampling sites. She discussed the effort and asked Permittees whether their municipalities could volunteer sampling locations.

2. Public Comments: There were no comments.

3. Regional Board Staff Comments/Reports: Regional Board representatives were not in attendance.

4. Consent Calendar:

of 6

A. May 17, 2017 Management Committee Meeting Minutes

B. APPROVE the Contra Costa Clean Water Program’s Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 7th

Edition

Moved/Seconded (L. Hoffmeister/Carlson) to approve the Consent Calendar.

Ayes: 17 (Cities/Towns of Brentwood, Clayton, Concord, Danville, Hercules, Lafayette, Moraga, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, Contra Costa County, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District)

Noes: None Absent: Antioch, El Cerrito, Martinez, and Walnut Creek Abstain: None

5. Presentations:

A. Fiscal Year 2016/17 Municipal Annual Report Packet: Kraai introduced Adrienne Miller from Geosyntec Consultants. Miller will be assisting the Program with development of the Fiscal Year 2016/17 Annual Report. Miller reviewed the Annual Report documents that had been uploaded to Groupsite. She conducted a page-by-page review of the Annual Report Form and discussed changes from the FY 15/16 Form.

B. BASMAA’s Receiving Waters Monitoring Program Plan for the San Francisco Bay Region and the schedule for its finalization and submission to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board by the July 1, 2017 Deadline: Beth Baldwin delivered a PowerPoint presentation on the BASMAA Receiving Waters Monitoring Program Plan for Trash. She described the relevant permit requirements and detailed the work BASMAA is doing to get the Plan approved and submitted prior to the deadline. She noted that she has been working with project consultants to incorporate feedback received, but that the project had been delayed. Program staff intends to hold a special Management Committee meeting on June 28 for final review and to request formal approval of the Plan. She will post the finalized Plan to Groupsite once it is available.

6. Actions:

of 6

A. APPROVE the Contra Costa Clean Water Program’s Updated “Mobile Cleaners and

Businesses” Trifold Brochure and Accompanying Cover Letter and Distribution Plan: Baldwin reviewed the updated, "Mobile Cleaners and Businesses” brochure with Committee members. She indicated that following approval by the Management Committee, the brochure and a cover letter will be sent to the County’s Print and Mail Department for printing and distribution. Baldwin also stated that she has started work on a Spanish version of the brochure and will inform Management Committee and post it on the Program’s website once it is finalized.

Moved/Seconded (Ovadia/Kennedy) to approve the Contra Costa Clean Water Program’s updated “Mobile Cleaners and Businesses” trifold brochure and accompanying cover letter and distribution plan.

Ayes: 19 (Cities/Towns of Brentwood, Clayton, Concord, Danville, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, Walnut Creek (via email), Contra Costa County, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District)

Noes: None Absent: Antioch, El Cerrito, Walnut Creek Abstain: None

B. AFFIRM the Senior Watershed Management Planning Specialist’s Decision to Enlist Mitch Avalon from Watershed Resources Consulting for Program Technical and Administrative Support for a Cost Not to Exceed $30,000: Kraai reviewed the work that Avalon would be doing to support the Program. As the Management Committee members had discussed enlisting Avalon for Program assistance in several previous Management Committee meetings, there was no discussion or questions from Committee members.

Moved/Seconded (L. Hoffmeister/Spedowfski) to approve the Senior Watershed Management Planning Specialist’s decision to enlist Mitch Avalon from Watershed Resources Consulting for Program technical and administrative support for a cost not to exceed $30,000.


of 6


C. AFFIRM the Administrative Committee’s Decision to Hire a Student Intern for a Cost Not to Exceed $14,000: Kraai reviewed the discussion with the Administrative Committee regarding hiring a graduate student worker to support the Program. She indicated that the Program had selected a candidate with a background in GIS and that he would be available to work for the Program for two months.

Moved/Seconded (Ovadia/Hoffmeister) to approve the Administrative Committee’s decision to hire a student intern for a cost not to exceed $14,000.



7. Reports:

A. Update on the GIS Project Tracking Tool for Reporting TMDL Load Reductions: Paquette reported that the Program had two trainings on the Tracking Tool on June 8 and June 20, and she thanked all who participated and provided feedback. She indicated that Permittees should continue working to input all relevant data into the Tool. She stated that the deadline for inputting projects is July 7.

B. Highlights of the May 10, 2017 Stormwater Inspection Training Workshop for Municipalities: Baldwin informed the Committee that the workshop was successful and well attended by code enforcement staff from several agencies. She stated that the workshop survey results and feedback were very positive.

8. Information Items:

of 6

A. Program Subcommittee Draft Meeting Minutes 1. Development Committee Meeting Minutes April 26, 2017

9. Old/New Business: Kraai announced that California Senate Bill 231 was passed by the State Senate and is headed to the State Assembly. She reported that she was recently contacted by Assembly member Catherine Baker’s staff. She told the Assembly member’s staff that the Program supported the bill and sent them the associated letter of support. Kraai informed the Committee that Dan Cloak will give an update on the HMP Applicability Map project at the July Management Committee meeting. She indicated that Cloak would also be setting up a workshop to go over instructions for Permittee review of the draft maps. She also stated that the next Administrative Committee meeting will be rescheduled to July 11 because of the July 4 holiday.

10. Adjournment:

Vice-Chair McCann adjourned the meeting at 3:51 p.m. RK:elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Minutes&Attendance\16 17\MC Minutes 2017-06-21 draft.docx

of 4

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES June 28, 2017

Attendance:

MUNICIPALITY ATTENDED ABSENT City of Antioch Phil Hoffmeister /

Lynne Filson City of Brentwood Meghan Laporta City of Clayton Laura Hoffmeister /

Mindy Gentry / Rick Angrisani

City of Concord Robert Ovadia Town of Danville Chris McCann (Vice-Chair) City of El Cerrito Stephen Prée City of Hercules Jose Pacheco City of Lafayette Donna Feehan City of Martinez Tim Tucker / Khalil

Yowakim Town of Moraga Frank Kennedy City of Oakley Billilee Saengchalern City of Orinda Daniel Chavarria /

Jason Chen / Larry Theis

City of Pinole Frank Kennedy City of Pittsburg Jolan Longway City of Pleasant Hill Frank Kennedy City of Richmond Joanne Le City of San Pablo Amanda Booth City of San Ramon Steven Spedowfski /

Robin Bartlett / Maria Fierner

City of Walnut Creek Rinta Perkins Contra Costa County Cece Sellgren (Chair) Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water

Conservation District

Mike Carlson

Program Staff: Rachel Kraai, Beth Baldwin, Erica Lashley-Cornell

of 4

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC/ OTHERS/GUESTS: Will Provost (City of El Cerrito), Mitch Avalon (Contra Costa County) 1. Introductions/Announcements/Changes to Agenda: Chair Cece Sellgren opened the

meeting at 1:08 p.m. Following self-introductions, she asked if there were any changes to the agenda. Rachel Kraai informed the Committee that she would like to place an additional action item on the agenda. Since the Program Manager position is still vacant, she requested an action item to authorize Mike Carlson to sign all submittals to the Regional Water Quality Control Board on the Program’s behalf. Mike Carlson is the Program Manager’s Supervisor.

2. Public Comments: No members of the public were in attendance.

3. Regional Board Staff Comments/Reports: Regional Board representatives were not in attendance.

4. Consent Calendar: None

5. Presentations: None

6. Actions:

A. AUTHORIZE Mike Carlson to Sign Future Submittals to the Regional Water Quality Control Boards on Behalf of the Program Manager until the Program Manager position is filled: Kraai explained that the Program needs an authorized person to sign submittals to the Water Boards. Mike Carlson has agreed to act in this capacity, and is the most logical person to take on this role as he is the Program Manager’s supervisor. This authorization will remain in effect until a new Program Manager is hired.

Moved/Seconded (Perkins/McCann) to authorize Mike Carlson to Sign Future Submittals to the Regional Water Quality Control Boards on Behalf of the Program Manager until the Program Manager position is filled. Motion Carried.

Ayes: 16 (Cities/Towns of Brentwood, Concord, Danville, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Moraga, Oakley, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, Walnut Creek, Contra Costa County, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation

of 4

District) Noes: None Absent: Antioch, Clayton, Martinez, Orinda, and San Ramon Abstain: None

B. APPROVE BASMAA’s Receiving Waters Monitoring Program Plan for the San Francisco Bay Region and its Submittal to the Executive Officer of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board by the July 1, 2017 Deadline and DIRECT Contra Costa Clean Water Program Staff to Sign and Certify the Submittal on Behalf of Each Permittee’s Duly Authorized Representative: Beth Baldwin briefly discussed the Plan with Committee members. She thanked all Permittees who provided comments on the draft Plan, and reviewed several of the changes that were made to the Plan based on feedback. Questions were asked and answered.

Moved/Seconded (Carlson/Ovadia) to approve BASMAA’s Receiving Waters Monitoring Program Plan for the San Francisco Bay Region and its submittal to the Executive Officer of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board by the July 1, 2017 deadline and direct Contra Costa Clean Water Program staff to sign and certify the submittal on behalf of each Permittee’s duly authorized representative. Motion Carried.

Ayes: 21 (Cities/Towns of Antioch (via email), Brentwood, Clayton (via email), Concord, Danville, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez (via email), Moraga, Oakley, Orinda (via email), Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon (via email), Walnut Creek, Contra Costa County, Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District)

Noes: None Absent: Antioch, Clayton, Martinez, Orinda, and San Ramon Abstain: None

7. Reports:

A. Program Manager Recruitment Update: Mike Carlson informed the Committee that the Program Manager search continues to be unsuccessful. The County intends to re-advertise the position at the end of July. The County will advertise the position for two weeks and if they don’t receive enough candidates, they’ll extend the list for an

of 4

additional period of time. Kraai suggested advertising the position upfront for a longer period of time in order to reach qualified candidates. Carlson stated he will make the request to personnel. Carlson also requested assistance from Committee members to spread the word about the advertisement and requested that Committee members send him suggestions on where to post the job announcement.

B. Interim Period Planning Strategy: Kraai stated that she is working with Mitch Avalon to create a plan for the Program during the interim period. The first part of the plan is to meet with staff and assist them in further prioritizing their workloads. The second part of the plan is to meet with the newly formed Steering Committee to discuss additional options for Program support including options for an interim Program Manager. Avalon will share the outcomes from these meetings with the Management Committee.

8. Information Items: None

9. Old/New Business: None

10. Adjournment:

Chair Sellgren adjourned the meeting at 1:42 p.m. RK:elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Minutes&Attendance\16 17\MC Minutes 2017-06-28 draft.docx

Date: July 19, 2017 To: Management Committee From: Dan Cloak Subject: Presentation Item A

Publication of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook 7th Edition

Recommendation: Receive a presentation about the publication of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 7th Edition. Background: Following Management Committee approval of a consent item on May 17, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 7th Edition was published to the CCCWP website. A May 17 staff report describes the process for updating the Guidebook, and summarizes the changes made in the 7th Edition. This presentation will describe the process and the changes, and provide opportunity for questions and discussion. Fiscal Impact: None DC:RK.elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Packet\17 18\Shells\Rachel\2017-07\Presentation Item A - Stormwater C.3 Guidebook - 2017-07-19.docx

1

Date: July 19, 2017 To: Management Committee From: Lucile Paquette, Watershed Management Planning Specialist Subject: Presentation Item B Program Annual Report Sections C.11./C.12 Recommendation Receive presentation reviewing the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016/17 Program Annual Report Sections for Provisions C.11./C.12. Permittees should begin updating their Watershed Management Area (WMA) report section for the Program Annual Report as soon as possible. Updates should include detail about projects and enhanced operations and maintenance work that will contribute to the PCB/Hg load reduction estimates. Background Under MRP Provision C.11/C.12.a.ii.(1), Permittees were required to: Identify the watersheds or portions of watersheds (management areas) in which PCBs control measures are currently being implemented and those in which new control measures will be implemented during the term of this permit; MRP Provision C.11/C.12.a.iii. (2) requires:

(2) The Permittees shall report in their 2016 Annual Report the list of watersheds and management areas where control measures are currently being implemented or will be implemented during the term of the Permit (C.12.a.ii(1)) along with the specific control measures (C.12.a.ii(2)) that are currently being implemented and those that will be implemented in these watersheds and management areas and an implementation schedule (C.12.a.ii(3)) for these control measures. In addition to the list of watersheds and management areas, this report shall include: a. The number, type, and locations and/or frequency (if applicable) of

control measures;

2

b. A cumulative listing of all potentially PCB-contaminated sites Permittees have discovered and referred to the Water Board to date, with a brief summary description of each site and where to obtain further information;

c. The description, scope, and start date, of PCBs control measures; d. For each structural control and non-structural BMP, interim

implementation progress milestones (e.g., construction milestones for structural controls or other relevant implementation milestones for structural controls and non-structural BMPs) and a schedule for milestone achievement; and

e. Clear statements of the roles and responsibilities of each participating Permittee for implementation of pollution prevention or control measures identified under C.12.a.ii(2).

The WMAs and control measures were reported in Appendix 11.1. of the CCCWP Program FY 2015-16 Annual Report.

Provision C.11/C.12.a.iii. requires: (3) Beginning with the 2017 Annual Report and continuing in all Annual

Reports, Permittees shall update all the information required under C.12.a.iii(2) as necessary to account for new control measures implemented but not described in the 2016 Annual Report.

In addition, Provision C.11/C.12. b.iii.(2) requires:

Beginning with the 2017 Annual Report, Permittees shall report annually the loads reduced using the default (from the Fact Sheet) or alternative approved assessment methodology to demonstrate cumulative PCBs load reduced from each control measure implemented since the beginning of the Permit term. Permittees shall submit all supporting data and information necessary to substantiate the load reduction estimates, including appropriate reference to the control measures described in the reporting required under C.12.a.

Discussion San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board staff has reviewed the FY 2015-16 WMA reports and has provided comments for improvement for the FY 2016-17 WMA reports. Those comments will be summarized at the July 19th Management Committee meeting. An example template for the FY 2016-17 WMA reports will be presented, and staff will review a timeline and summarize where input will be needed from Permittees. Staff will also answer any questions.

3

Fiscal Impact None. Attachments Any attachments will be handed out at the meeting. LP:RK.elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Packet\17 18\Shells\Lucile\2017-07\Presentation Item A_Program Annual Report Sections c.11_c.12.docx

Date: July 19, 2017 To: Management Committee From: Mitch Avalon, Watershed Resources Consulting Subject: Staff Report A

Staff Recruitment Status and Augmentation Strategy

Recommendation: RECEIVE an update from the Steering Committee on efforts to recruit staff to fill current vacancies and efforts to provide additional staff resources to the Program until the County can backfill the positions, CONFIRM membership of the Steering Committee and role, and AUTHORIZE the Administrative Committee to approve contracts for additional staff resources and request the County execute the contracts. AUTHORIZE the Steering Committee to explore procuring additional staff resources for the GIS project and the Administrative Analyst role if necessary. Background: In May of this year, the Management Committee formed a Steering Committee to address Program staffing and structure issues, including issues associated with the retirement of the Program Manager and the unexpected retirement of the Administrative Analyst. The County’s solicitation and selection process to fill the Program Manager’s position has not been successful to date. The County will be conducting another solicitation, this time with an increased salary, but it will take some time. With Program staff currently reduced by 40% excluding part-time clerical staff, the Management Committee has directed the Steering Committee to investigate means to provide staff resources on a temporary basis until the County can backfill the positions. While the work of the Steering Committee will initially focus primarily on the Program Manager position, the Committee is also charged with additional staffing needs as well as other Program sustainability issues. The Steering Committee currently consists of Rinta Perkins, Robert Ovadia, Donna Feehan, Chris McCann, Steven Spedowfski, Mike Carlson, and Rachel Kraai. Mitch Avalon is organizing and facilitating the Steering Committee meetings.

2

Discussion: The Steering Committee met on July 11, 2017 and identified and analyzed several options to provide staff resources to the Program for a 3 to 9 month time period. The Steering Committee identified the five following options that warranted further consideration:

- Job Share – project level. A City would provide staff with the appropriate skill set to take over the lead of a Program project (the GIS project is an example).

- Job Share – program level. A City would provide appropriate staff to perform the duties of the Program Manager on a half-time or up to full-time basis for at least a three-month period of time.

- Recent Retiree. The County would contact recent retirees who have experience in stormwater permit compliance or a similar field and see if any would be interested in temporarily filling the Program Manager position.

- Consultant. The County would contact consultants with experience in stormwater management to find out if they have anyone available to temporarily fill the Program Manager position.

- Temp Agency. The County would contact temp agencies that provide municipal services to determine if they have anyone available to temporarily fill the Program Manager position.

The Committee identified additional information that would be needed to make a decision on the various options and set a subsequent meeting for two days later. The Steering Committee met again on July 13, 2017. Five recent retirees had been contacted; two were not interested or unavailable, one had failed to reply, and two expressed interest. One temp agency was contacted, Municipal Resources Group, which does not have anyone with specific stormwater experience available for the job at this time. The Committee decided to take an incremental approach to developing a list of qualified applicants. The first steps are to interview the two retirees that are interested as well as send out an e-mail to the Management Committee and the City-County Engineering Advisory Committee to see if there are any City/Town staff available for job sharing. If one of the retirees is a perfect fit to meet Program needs, then the process may end. If not, job sharing will be further explored and an informal request for proposals to consultants will be distributed.

3

Fiscal Impact: The approved Program Budget includes the fully burdened salary of a Program Manager. This position has been vacant since April 1, 2017, creating a budget surplus that grows each day it is vacant. The County has offered and the Program has accepted the assistance of consulting services from Watershed Resources Consulting beginning in June, which is reducing but not exceeding the daily cost of a Program Manager. It is anticipated that the total additional cost of providing temporary staff resources to fill the Program Manager vacancy, in whatever form it would take, will not exceed the budgeted cost of a Program Manager. Attachments: None. MA:RK.elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Packet\17 18\Shells\Rachel\2017-07\Staff Report A - Staff Recruitment Status.docx

Date: July 19, 2017 To: Management Committee From: Dan Cloak Subject: Staff Report B Hydromodification Management (HM) Technical Report – Update

Recommendation: Receive an update on preparation of the HM Technical Report, which is due with the 2016-2017 Annual Report. Background: The Management Committee last received an update on this project in April. At that time, the Committee approved expenditure of $60,000 in project budget contingency to complete the Technical Report and related work. Consistent with the intent noted in the April staff report, staff has directed the prime consultant, Tony Dubin, to expend no more than $20,000 of this amount in advance of a meeting with Water Board planned for June/July, and no more than an additional $20,000 for preparation of the Technical Report submittal following the meeting, leaving $20,000 for responding to the expected minor Water Board staff comments on the report. The following progress was reported in April:

• A project workplan was prepared and provided to Water Board staff.

• The workplan was presented and reviewed in an October 21, 2016 meeting with Water Board staff.

• A summary of the October 21 meeting was prepared and forwarded to Water Board staff to validate the consensus reached and for their review and comment.

• A December 7, 2016 email from Water Board staff was received and reviewed in a conference call with CCCWP staff.

• Field work was completed, including investigations of 15 Contra Costa sites on creeks downstream from areas where development is likely to

2

occur.

• Initial modeling runs were conducted to identify the relative sensitivity of sizing factors to the values of various parameters. Results suggest that minimum HM facility sizes are sensitive to assumptions regarding future increases in watershed imperviousness and the lower threshold for sediment movement (e.g., 0.1Q2 v. 0.2Q2) are somewhat sensitive to facility exfiltration rate to native soils, and are not particularly sensitive to geomorphic parameters such as channel dimensions or slope.

• The results, and the December 7 comments, were reviewed and discussed in a March 21 presentation and meeting with Water Board staff.

Status: Consistent with the project workplan and schedule, since April the project team has focused on modeling how natural variation and uncertainty of values for the “sensitive” variables influences the calculated sizing factors. (The sizing factors are used to determine the minimum size of bioretention facilities and other Integrated Management Practices (IMPs) that must be incorporated into land development projects.) A meeting of the project team with Water Board staff is scheduled for July 20. In preparation for that meeting, the project team prepared and sent to Water Board staff, on July 13, the attached “read ahead” set of slides. The slides include an update on the technical work and also include nomographs showing the relationship between the assumed threshold for incipient motion (e.g., 0.1Q2 or 0.2Q2), the assumed percolation rate of treated runoff into underlying natural soils, the assumed imperviousness of the project watershed once completely built-out, and sizing factors for bioretention facilities. At the July 20 meeting, the project team will also solicit feedback from Water Board staff regarding the sequence and schedule for obtaining a Water Board staff response to the Technical Report and preparing a complete set of sizing factors to replace those in Table 3-6 on p. 39 of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 7th Edition. Implementation of the updated criteria for HM facilities is due by January 3, 2018. Attachment:

• “Read ahead” slides for the scheduled July 20 meeting with Water Board staff

DC:RK.elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Packet\17 18\Shells\Rachel\2017-07\Staff Report B - HM Technical Report Update.docx

Hydromodification ManagementTechnical Report Progress Update (7/20/2017)

7/20/2017

Today’s Agenda

1. Project status update2. Literature review update3. Variables and sizing factors4. Next steps

At the March 20 meetingMaterial covered:1. Review background

• Comparison of Ep to flow duration control• How recommended Ep approach implements permit language

2. Project approach and initial findings• Sources of uncertainty/unknowns• Using fieldwork and sensitivity analysis to address uncertainty/unknowns

3. Opportunities/benefits

Next steps: 1. Complete literature review2. Complete compounded sensitivity analysis3. Combine the results into bioretention sizing criteria

Project Status

Here we are

Literature Review UpdatePurposes:• Justify Ep approach as equivalent to or better than flow

duration control for sizing HM facilities• Support the proposed methods to use Ep to evaluate

appropriate sizing of controls• Make sure we’re not overlooking anything

Status and Completion Steps:• Review complete• Most key issues discussed at previous check-in meetings• Technical report will document results

Literature ReviewPreviously discussed topics:

1. Technical basis for the current MRP Ep standard2. Comparison of Ep and FDC standards3. Strengths and limitations of Ep and FDC sizing approaches4. Basis for direct simulation of Ep versus calculating FDC5. Describe the hydrologic objectives and effects of LID6. Describe the hydrologic performance of bioretention 7. Summarize Program's use of bioretention to meet FDC criteria8. Usage of Ep for LID sizing in previous studies

Remaining topics:1. Compare BAHM and CCCWP approaches (discuss today)2. Summarize calibration of Program model in the 2013 IMP Monitoring

Report (include in Technical Report)

How we implement LIDObjectives• Mandate use of LID to meet Provision C.3.d. numeric criteria• Promote use of LID to meet Provision C.3.g. hydromod criteria• Help designers create attractive, integrated landscapes using LID• Make it easy to prepare submittals and to check compliance

Context, Model, Simplifications

Watershed and Stream Variables:• Rainfall• Hydrology• Geomorphic characteristics

• Gradient, cross-section• Incipient motion threshold

• %Q2• Build-out imperviousness

• Default is 100% impervious

IMP Variables• Infiltration area• Storage• Percolation rate• Orifice maximum flow

Accounting for Multiple Variables

Variable Strategy/Rationale Watershed VariablesRainfall Use an adjustment factor for MAP derived from linear regression

Hydrology Use current values for each of four hydrologic soil groups (A,B,C,D)

Geomorphic IMP size is not sensitive to these variables

Incipient motion Consider variability and uncertainty when selecting sizing factors

Build-out percent imperviousness

Consider variability and uncertainty when selecting sizing factors

IMP VariablesInfiltration area Function of IMP minimum area

Storage Function of IMP minimum area (cross-section is specified)

Percolation rate Consider variability and uncertainty when selecting sizing factors

Orifice max. flow Set equal to incipient motion

Selecting Sizing Factors• Select appropriate sizing factor for this “Base Case”

(=90%± of future development)• Bioretention facility• Hydrologic Soil Group “D”

• Consider how these three variables interact:1. Incipient motion/maximum orifice flow2. IMP percolation rate3. Maximum build-out imperviousness

Incipient Motion / Percolation Rate• Build-out imperviousness = 100%

Below each SF line: Ep <= 1

Sizing Factors for Other Cases1. Select appropriate sizing factor for “Base Case”

• 90%± of future development• Bioretention facility in “D” soils

2. Note representative values of 3 key variables that correspond to this sizing factor

• Maximum build-out imperviousness• Incipient motion• Percolation rate (adjust for A, B, and C soils)

3. Use those values to generate remaining sizing factors• Bioretention in A, B, and C soils• Planter, Bioretention + Vault, Cistern + Bioretention, Dry Well

4. Apply a linear adjustment factor for Mean Annual Precipitation

Schedule

Date Milestone

? Consensus on “base case” sizing factor and methodology

Sept. 30 Submit HM Technical Report with Annual Report

? Water Board staff responds to HM Technical Report

? Consultant team calculates remaining sizing factors

? CCCWP Management Committee approves Guidebook addendum

Jan. 3, 2018 Updated sizing factors in effect in all Contra Costa municipalities

Date: July 19, 2017 To: Management Committee From: Dan Cloak Subject: Staff Report C

Hydromodification Management Applicability Maps--Update

Recommendation: Receive an update on the preparation of Hydromodification Management (HM) Applicability Maps. Background: A 2003 amendment to Contra Costa municipalities’ stormwater NPDES permit required the Permittees to prepare a Hydrograph Modification Management Plan (HMP). The HMP was submitted to the Water Board in mid-2005 and received Water Board approval in mid-2006. Implementation of the requirements began in October 2006 with publication of the 3rd Edition of the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. The 2003 amendment stated that the HM requirements did not apply to developments where the project discharges into creeks or storm drains where the potential for erosion is minimal. The amendment noted such situations may include creeks that are “concrete-lined or significantly hardened downstream to their outfall in San Francisco Bay, underground storm drains discharging to the Bay, and construction of infill projects in highly developed watersheds…” and required that guidelines be included as part of the HMP. Contra Costa’s 2005 HMP included such guidelines; unlike the HMPs prepared for Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo counties, it did not include maps delineating where HM requirements applied. Rather, in Contra Costa, applicants are required to determine the characteristics of drainage infrastructure downstream from their project all the way to the Bay. Projects could be designated to present a “low risk” of causing stream erosion if downstream drainage infrastructure consisted of “enclosed pipes; channels with continuous hardened beds and banks engineered to withstand erosive forces and composed of concrete, engineered riprap, sackcrete, gabions, mats, etc.… channels subject

2

to tidal action [and] channels shown to be aggrading, i.e., subject to the accumulation of sediments.” This same criterion was included for Contra Costa municipalities in the 2009 Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 1.0, Attachment C). The 2015 Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP 2.0) consolidated HM requirements regionally. In this consolidation, rather than being designated “low risk,” some types of projects are exempted outright, including projects “located in a catchment that drains to a hardened (e.g. continuously lined with concrete) engineered channel or channels or enclosed pipes that extend continuously to the Bay, Delta, or flow-controlled reservoir, or drains to channels that are tidally influenced.” Note this language adds a reference to flow-controlled reservoirs but omits the previous reference to aggrading channels. An additional exemption, previously available in Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo counties, but not in Contra Costa County, was included: projects “located in a catchment or sub watershed that is highly developed (i.e., that is 70% or more impervious).” MRP 2.0 also states, in Provision C.3.g.i.: “Permittees that do not have the location-based applicability criteria… shown on existing maps shall develop, or require to be developed, new maps, overlays to existing maps, or other equivalent information that demonstrates whether a project falls under…” either the exemption for hardened drainage or the exemption for highly developed catchments. The provision further states that the maps, overlays, or equivalent information shall be acceptable to the Executive Officer and shall not be effective until accepted by the Executive Officer.” MRP 2.0 Provision C.3.g.vi.(1) states: “New HM Applicability Maps or equivalent information prepared pursuant to Provision C.3.g.i. for those Permittees who do not have an approved Map, shall be submitted, acceptable to the Executive Officer, not later than the second Annual Report following the Permit’s effective date.” This would be the Annual Report due September 30, 2017. CCCWP’s 2016-2017 budget included $100,000 for preparation of the maps. Project Tasks and Results to Date CCCWP staff directed Dan Cloak and Psomas to use current GIS technology and the most recent applicable data, as well as the current criteria in MRP 2.0, to prepare the maps.

3

Methods used and results obtained are described in the attached Psomas memorandum, “Determining HMP Applicability, Technical Memorandum: Mapping Methodology,” dated July 7, 2017.” Project Status and Next Steps Draft maps were completed and were posted to CCCWP’s Groupsite on July 7, along with an earlier draft of the attached memo. Psomas hosted a July 13 webinar to present the work to date and request Permittee assistance to correct the maps based on local knowledge and/or field investigation. Slides from the webinar are attached. Instructions for updating the maps were sent to Permittees on July 14. Permittees are requested to provide map corrections by August 10. Earlier submittals will assist the project team’s workflow. Psomas will produce “Final Draft” maps by August 25, 2017. These will be distributed for Permittee review. The maps and accompanying documentation will be incorporated into the Annual Report for submittal to the Water Board. Fiscal Impact: None Attachments:

• Determining HMP Applicability, Technical Memorandum: Mapping Methodology, July 7, 2017

• Slides from the July 13 webinar

• Permittee HM Map Review Notes (instructions for updating the maps), July 7, 2017

DC:RK.elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Packet\17 18\Shells\Rachel\2017-07\Staff Report C - HM Applicability Map Update.docx

PSOMAS 2017-07-07 Page 1

Determining HMP Applicability Technical Memorandum: Mapping Methodology

Background The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) assists Contra Costa County, the 19 incorporated cities and towns in the County, and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation Districtto comply with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit issued by the California Regional Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region. The permit was reissued in 2015. Permit provision C.3. requires Permittees to “use their land use planning authorities to include appropriate source control, site design, and stormwater runoff pollutant discharges and prevent increases in runoff flows from new development and redevelopment projects.” Permit Provision C.3.g. states requirements for Hydromodification Management (HM) to be applied to applicable new and redevelopment projects. Hydromodification is generally defined as changes in channel form associated with alterations in flow and sediment due to past or proposed future land-use alteration. Hydromodification management has emerged as a prominent issue because degradation of the physical structure of a channel is often indicative of and associated with broader impacts to many beneficial uses, including water supply, water quality, habitat, and public safety. Conversely, reducing hydromodification and its effects has the potential to protect and restore those same beneficial uses. 1 Permit Provision C.3.g.i. defines which new and redevelopment projects are HM projects. HM projects are projects that create and/or replace one acre or more of impervious surface except when one of the following applies:

1. The post-project impervious surface area is less than, or the same as, the pre-project impervious surface area.

1 “Hydromodification Assessment and Management in California” Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Technical Report 667, April 2012


2. The project is located in a catchment that drains to hardened (e.g. continuously lined with concrete) engineered channel or channels or enclosed pipes that extend continuously to the Bay, Delta, or flow-controlled reservoir, or drains to channels that are tidally influenced.

3. The project is located in a catchment or subwatershed that is highly developed (i.e., that

is 70% or more impervious). Provision C.3.g.i. also requires:

Permittees that do not have the location-based applicability criteria… [2 and 3 above] shown on existing maps shall develop, or require to be developed, new maps, overlays to existing maps, or other equivalent information that demonstrates whether a project falls under one of those two criteria.

CCCWP retained Psomas to prepare the maps on behalf of the Permittees.

Assessment of Available GIS Datasets The following municipal and county-wide GIS datasets were requested from the Permittees and evaluated by the Psomas team:

• Stormwater infrastructure (e.g. pipelines and channels)—to determine where infrastructure has been hardened.

• Streams, wetlands, and other water bodies—to determine natural streams and earthen channels that need to be protected..

• Hydrologic basins / sub-basins (if available)—to determine hydrographic areas and natural stream flow directions.

• Digital elevation model (DEM)—terrain data, to be used if hydrographic sub-basins were not available for the entire county and needed to be derived from land topology.

• Datasets from which imperviousness is an attribute or could be derived—to help determine areas where criterion #3 above is met.

The following GIS datasets were received and assessed. Storm Infrastructure Data from Permittees The storm drain infrastructure GIS data received was deemed mostly adequate for determination of hardened stormwater conveyances. Completeness of infrastructure representation will be validated through permittee review of final maps. Observations for these datasets: The quality and completeness of storm drainage infrastructure data received varied from

agency to agency. Overall quality and completeness is unknown. No datasets included the direction of curb flow.. In many cases, it was not possible to determine flow direction from datasets, which were

largely derived from CAD systems.


The data seemed to be most complete for pipes; other conveyances were listed as “channels”, “ditches”, and “creeks,” and the nomenclature was not consistent among the datasets.

Stormwater drainage systems generally, but not always, follow land topography. Psomas used hydrographic sub-basins as a secondary means of determining drainage areas and flow direction. Sub-basins were not available for the entire county; however, =a high-resolution county-wide digital elevation model (DEM) was available. Psomas used the DEM to generate hydrologic sub-basins via standard GIS-based hydro-analysis techniques. CARI and BAARI Streams and Wetlands The California Aquatic Resource Inventory (CARI) and Bay Area Aquatic Resource Inventory (BAARI) stream data was determined to be adequate for determination of tidally influenced channels and to provide a visual reference for non-hardened stormwater conveyances. Observations for these datasets:

• Identify streams as either “fluvial” or “tidal” and “natural” or “unnatural” o “Fluvial Natural” are streams to be protected by HMP o “Tidal” very helpful in identifying tidally-influenced stream / channels o “Unnatural” could indicate hardening or altered alignments with earthen channel

sections. • BAARI data includes wetlands category “bay lands”

Stream / channel data completeness appeared to be good from CAARI/BAARI and other sources. However, no data source provided quality information of whether a channel was earthen, concrete, rip-rap, or some combination thereof. It was concluded that whether a channel was hardened would need to be assessed by visually assessing the available ortho-photography (more about this in the next section). Storm Water Utility Fee—Equivalent Runoff Unit Data The Storm Water Utility Fee (SWUF) Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU) data provided by the County was not useful for determining percent impervious for a geographic area, due to the structuring of the data and large holes in coverage. Observations for this dataset:

• Parcel-based dataset • Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU) can

be converted to percent impervious for the parcel using the formula %Impervious = ERU*3,300 / Parcel SqFt., however:

o Forced ERUs can result in percent impervious > 100% Figure 1. ERUs Assigned to Individual Buildings


o Standardized ERUs assigned to very small parcels result in percent impervious > 100%

• Data does not cover entire county • ERU values not calculated for exempt properties (e.g. local, state, or federal government

owned parcels) • ERU not represented accurately geographically:

o ERUs assigned to individual building parcels—see Figure 1 o Total ERU for single-owner multi-parcels assigned to the parcel that includes the

primary office, examples: trailer parks, DOW Chemical National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) The NLCD impervious data was determined adequate for identifying hydrological areas that are 70% or greater imperviousness. Observations or this dataset: • Percent impervious calculated from

satellite imagery • 2011 raster dataset with 30m

pixel resolution • Percent imperviousness represented

geographically • Good spatial alignment with county

datasets. Contra Costa County GIS Datasets Various GIS datasets supplied by the County were used as basemap information and instrumental supporting the HMP applicability analysis. Observations:

• Parcels—complete and up-to-date • Watersheds—useful for administrative / jurisdictional purposes, but not precisely-aligned

with topography • Sub-basins—not available for entire county • Digital Elevation Model—county-wide coverage with apparent high resolution and quality

Figure 2. National Land Cover Dataset—Impervious


Methodology for Determination of HMP Applicability Areas The following methodology was used to to create a HMP Applicability GIS layer for further mapping and analysis purposes. Step #1—Create Sub-basins Psomas created hydrologic sub-basins based upon topography using the Contra Costa DEM—see Figure 3. The process used hydro-analysis software tools provided with the Esri ArcGIS Desktop—Spatial Analyst software extension. The sub-steps were:

• Fill sinks • Set flow direction • Calculate flow

accumulation • Generate streams (simulated streams based upon flow accumulation threshold) • Determine stream links (stream segments defined by stream confluences) • Create sub-basins

(hydrographic areas) for each stream link

• Convert raster sub-basins to vector sub-basin polygons

The end result was a sub-basin polygon and generated streams polyline vector GIS layers—see Figure 4. Step #2—Perform Overlay GIS Analysis on Impervious Data A GIS overlay zonal analysis was performed to determine the average percent impervious for each sub-basin using the NLCD impervious raster layers as data source. A clip of the results for the Richmond area is shown in Figure 5. The areas in red were

Figure 3. Contra Costa County DEM

Figure 4. Sub-basins and Generated Streams Derived from County DEM


70% or greater impervious and areas in deep yellow were 65% to 70% impervious, i.e. just missing the cutoff. Step #3—Determine Tidal-influenced Areas The BAARI / CARI datasets were used as the primary data source reference to determine tidally-influenced areas. The extent inland that streams and channels were attributed as “tidal” established the boundary limit. Any flat, low-lying, land area between two tidally-influenced stream segments were also determined to be tidally-influenced, since that area shares the same hydrological characteristics. Areas marked “bay lands” were presumed to also be tidally-influenced.

Step #4—Determine Channel Hardening As described in the previous section, there appeared to be no suitable county-wide data source that adequately defined the degree to which a channel was constructed of hardened materials (e.g. concrete, rip-rap). Psomas established channel hardened / non hardened status through visual interpretation of the available ortho-imagery. The following were used as guidelines.

• Curvy streams / channels tend to be natural.

• Straight-line and engineered curve channels tend to be man-made. • Narrow channels with vertical concrete sides are assumed to have hardened bottom. • Lack of heavy vegetation (trees, brush) indicate a hardened channel.

Channel status (hardened/unhardened) will be validated through Permittee staff review of final maps.

Figure 5. Impervious Zonal Analysis Results using NLCD Data

Figure 6. Tidally-influenced Area Defined by BAARI / CARI Data


Step #5—Manually Code Sub-basins for HMP Applicability An “HMP Category” attribute was added to the Sub-basins GIS layer with the following possible coded values:

• Bay Lands—not subject to HMP due to tidal influence. • Tidal Influenced—not subject to HMP as channels / streams are tidally influenced. • Exempt > 70% Impervious—not subject to HMP as sub-basin has average

imperviousness > 70%. • Hardened—not subject to HMP as the area drains to the Bay or tidal-influenced areas

through continuous hardened storm drain infrastructure. • HMP Applicable—contains or drains to an unhardened stream or channel.

Each sub-basin was evaluated manually and assigned to the appropriate HMP Category using the GIS datasets described previously as visual input. An example of the process is depicted in Figure 7. In this example, the stormwater flows from a hill ridgeline bordering the right (East) side of the area and then flows to the left (westwardly) towards the main channel, then North and exiting the area through the main channel in the top left corner. Through interpretation of the ortho-imagery it was determined that this main channel transitions from natural to hardened where the background color changes (you can also see the transition from curvy natural to engineered man-made in the layout of the channel). It was also determined that this main channel stays hardened continuously through to a tidally-influenced area. As a result of the above interpretation, the sub-basins that contained stormwater lines (red) that drained to the natural sections of the channel were coded as “HMP Applicable” (green background). Sub-basins that contained stormwater lines that drained to the hardened section of the channel were coded as “Hardened” (dark grey background). The exception were the sub-basins that extend to the right that start out as urban area and end in undeveloped areas. In those cases, the sub-basin was manually split at the natural-urban boundary and the upper

Figure 7. Sub-basins Assigned HMP Applicability


portions were coded as “HMP Applicable.” In this manner, any new development that expands to the west will fall under HMP requirements and any infill projects within the “Hardened” areas will not. HMP applicability of sub-basins will be validated through Permittee review of final maps. Step #6—Permittee Review A set of HMP Applicability maps have been created, one for each permittee, and distributed to Permittee staff for quality review and red-line markup. The purpose is to validate the interpretations made by the development team with first-hand knowledge of the characteristics of local channels and other stormwater infrastructure. The paper and electronic (PDF) red-line markups will be preserved and changes made by permittees will be recorded in notes as attributes within the sub-basin GIS layer. From this set of markups, the Psomas team will create a final version of the HMP Applicability maps and submit those to individual permittees for final review and approval. Permittee approvals will be documented and archived for historical reference and accountability. Step #7—Merge Sub-basin Polygons The Sub-basin layer with HMP Category attribute and notes will remain the master record. An optimized version of the HMP applicability layer will be created to enhance fast display and analysis within the GIS by merging contiguous areas of HMP applicability.

Figure 8. Completed HMP Applicability GIS Map


Results GIS Layers The result are county-wide GIS layers that can be used for mapping, analysis, and the foundation for the HMP web application to assist in determining HMP applicability for proposed development projects. Observations / Conclusions The densely urban areas of Richmond, El Cerrrito, Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, Concord, Antioch, and Oakley are largely either hardened or tidally-influenced, as expected. Most (or all) of San Pablo, Pinole, Hercules, Orinda, Lafayette, Martinez, Moraga, Danville, San Ramon, Clayton, Pittsburg, and Brentwood, as well as all unincorporated areas of the County, fall under HMP applicability. The large flat low-lying area to the immediate South East of Brentwood is currently coded as “HMP Applicable” due the limited extent of BAARI/CARI designation for Bay Lands or tidally-influenced streams/channels in that area within their datasets. That area should be analyzed to determine if they should be designated as tidally-influenced. Imperviousness of a sub-basin greater than 70% is a high threshold. Only one sub-basin in downtown San Pablo met this threshold that was not already exempt for being tidally-influenced or hardened. High imperviousness, as could be expected, is highly-aligned with urban areas near the Bay that tend to have hardened or tidally-influenced storm infrastructure.

HMP Applicability MappingContra Costa Clean Water Program

1

Draft Map Review Webinar

7/14/2017

Project Team

2

• Dan Cloak—Consulting Lead• Brian Hoefer, Psomas GIS Consultant• Craig Gooch, Psomas Project Director

7/14/2017

Webinar Agenda

1. HMP Applicability Mapping Methodology – 30 minutes

2. Permittee Map Review Tasks – 20 minutes

3. Definitions and Guidelines – 30 minutes

4. Red-line Review Process / Schedule – 15 minutes

5. Additional Q&A / Wrap-up – 5 minutes

3

1. HMP Applicability Mapping Methodology

4

7/14/2017

Desired GIS Datasets

• Stormwater Infrastructure• Locate hardened infrastructure

• Streams, Wetlands, and Waterbodies• Streams and channels that need to be protected

• Hydrologic Basins and Sub-Basins• Establish drainage areas• Use as base unit for classification

• Digital Elevation Model (terrain)• Used to generate sub-basins

• Imperviousness• Any dataset that indicates stormwater impervious percentage

5

7/14/2017

Assessment of GIS Datasets

• Storm Infrastructure from Permittees• Unknown quality and completeness• No curb flow• No flow direction• Non-pipes listed as “channels”, “ditches”, and “creeks” not

consistent

• CARI and BAARI• Identify streams as either “fluvial” or “tidal” and “natural” or

“unnatural”• BAARI data includes wetlands category “bay lands”

6

7/14/2017


• Storm Water Utility Fee (SWUF)• Does not cover entire county• Does not address government exempt• Not accurate geographically

• National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD)• Percent impervious from 2011 satellite

imagery• Represented geographically with good

alignment with county datasets

7

7/14/2017


• Contra Costa County GIS• Parcels—complete and up-to-date• Digital Elevation Model—county-wide coverage with apparent

high resolution and quality• Watersheds—useful for administrative / jurisdictional purposes,

but not aligned with topography• Sub-basins—not available for entire county

8

7/14/2017

Step #1—Create Sub-Basins

• Based upon topology (using DEM)

• Utilized Esri ArcGIS Spatial Analyst hydrographic analysis tools and techniques

9

7/14/2017

Step #2—Impervious Areas

• Overlay percent impervious (NLCD) with sub-basins

• Red > 70%• Yellow > 65%

10

7/14/2017

Step #3—Tidally-Influenced Areas

• Used BAARI and CARI as primary source

• Flat low-lying areas between to tidally-influenced channels included with tidally-influenced

11

7/14/2017

Step #4—Channel Hardening

• Visual Interpretation of Ortho-imagery:• Curvy streams / channels tend to be natural• Straight-line and engineered-curve channels tend to be man-

made• Narrow channels with vertical concrete sides assumed to have

hardened bottom• Lack of heavy vegetation (trees, brush) indicate a hardened

channel

• Hardened channels will be validated through permittee review of final maps

12

7/14/2017

Step #5—Code Sub-basins

• HMP Categories:• Bay Lands—not subject to HMP due to tidal influence

• Tidal Influenced—not subject to HMP as channels / streams are tidally influenced

• Exempt > 70% Impervious —not subject to HMP with average imperviousness > 70%

• Hardened—not subject to HMP as the area drains to the Bay or tidal-influenced areas through continuous hardened storm infrastructure

• HMP Applicable—contains or drains to an unhardened stream or channel

13

7/14/2017

Step #6—Permittee Review

• Draft (first-pass) HMP Applicability maps created for each agency

• Requesting red-line review and submittal• Processing of red-lines by Psomas• Psomas produce draft final maps• Final approval and distribution as part of Annual Report

14

7/14/2017

Step #7—Merge Sub-basins

• Sub-basin layer remains master record

• New layer created for fast GIS display and query

15

2. Permittee Map Review Tasks

16

7/14/2017

Map Review Tasks

• Vulnerable versus Hardened Streams• Review the hardness of streams and channels based upon

knowledge of the local drainage system and field-checking where necessary

• Stormwater Pipe Flow Directions• Review the flow directions of stormwater pipelines, paying

particular attention to any that cross sub-basin boundaries• Portions of sub-basins or entire sub-basins may need to be re-

classified as to HMP applicability

17

Assigning HMP Applicability

18

3. Definitions and Guidelines

19

7/14/2017

Definitions

• Hydro-modification—changes in channel form associated with alterations in flow and sediment due to past or proposed future land-use alteration

• Hardened Channel—a stream or channel is hardened if it is not susceptible to scouring or reshaping as the result of stormwater drainage

• Sub-basin—a hydro-geographic area that drains to a single downstream point

20

7/14/2017

Guidelines

• Overall Objective—protect vulnerable sections streams and channels from hydro-modification by incorporating HMP into new development projects in all drainage basins upstream of those sections

• No Points of Susceptibility—there must be no points of susceptibility at any point of the entire downstream drainage from that sub-basin to either a tidal-influenced area, designated Bay land, or to the Bay/Delta

21

7/14/2017

Guidelines

• Modification to Sub-basin Boundaries—changes to the sub-basin boundaries are appropriate when local knowledge or field investigation is applied

• Developed / Undeveloped Boundary—if a sub-basin is partially-developed and the drainage through the developed portion is hardened and the drainage through the upstream portion is unhardened (natural), then the sub-basin can be divided at the urban/natural boundary

22

7/14/2017

Guidelines

• Gutter and Pipeline Drainage Systems• If drains to a vulnerable stream or channel, then “HMP

Applicable”• If drain to hardened channels all the way downstream, then

“Hardened”

• Undetermined—if it is not known if everything drains to the hardened channel, then “HMP Applicable”

23

4. Red-line Review Process / Project Schedule

24

Whole Sub-basin Red-line

25

Change to: HMP ApplicableReason: Downstream Channelis not hardened

Change Sub-basin Boundary Redline

26

Change to: HardenedReason: Drains to North

Change to: HMP ApplicableReason: Drains to South

7/14/2017

Redline Submittal

• Paper Redline• Mail to Erica Lashley-Cornell at the Contra Costa Clean Water

Program, 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553-4825• Drop off at the CCCWP offices at 220a Glacier Drive

• Electronic Redline (e.g. PDF)• Email to Dan Cloak at [email protected].

• Due date: Thursday August 10, 2017

27

7/14/2017

Final Map Review

• Final Draft Maps—distributed by August 25, 2017

• Final Maps approved and distributed with Annual Report.

28

Questions?

29

Updated 2017-07-14 1 of 3

Permittee Map Review Tasks Permittees are being asked to have their staff red-line the draft HMP Applicability maps provided to them to correct any errors. The review should be performed by permittee agency personnel that are familiar with the local storm drainage infrastructure. It is anticipated that most mapping errors will be revealed by systematically manually inspecting the maps for the following two conditions: 1. Streams and Channels Vulnerable to Hydro-modification versus Hardened An initial determination of where channels are hardened was attempted by visually interpreting available ortho-imagery (satellite photos). Permittee staff should review the hardness of streams and channels, as shown on the draft maps, based on their knowledge of the local drainage system and by field-checking where necessary. 2. Stormwater Pipeline Flow Directions Permittees should review the flow directions of all stormwater pipelines, and should pay particular attention to any that cross sub-basin boundaries. Based on local knowledge of pipe and gutter flow directions, and on field-checking where necessary, portions of sub-basins or entire sub-basins may need to be re-classified as to HMP applicability.

Definitions / Guidelines The following are general definitions and guidelines to follow when reviewing the draft HMP Applicability maps:

• The overall objective is to protect vulnerable sections streams and channels from hydro-modification by incorporating HM into new development projects in all drainage basins upstream of those stream and channel sections.

• A sub-basin is a hydro-geographic area that drains to a single downstream point. Sub-basins were generated by hydrographic computer analysis of the terrain. The sub-basins are being used as representative geographical base unit areas of the drainage system, which are then coded as to their HMP applicability.

• A stream or channel or stream is hardened if it is not susceptible to scouring or reshaping as the result of stormwater drainage, which generally means it is either fully concrete, on the bottom and banks, or has a concrete bottom with rip-rap banks. Generally, only engineered channels are considered “hardened.” A linear accumulation of rip-rap or other measures placed to control localized erosion does not qualify a reach as “hardened.”

• All areas upstream of any non-hardened stream reach are HMP applicable. Therefore, it is not critical to determine the status of a reach that is upstream of a reach known to be unhardened. To put it another way, for parcels within a sub-basin to be considered exempt from HM requirements, there must be no points of susceptibility at any point of the entire downstream drainage from that sub-basin to either a tidal-influenced area, designated Bay land, or to the Bay/Delta.

Updated 2017-07-14 2 of 3

• Changes to the sub-basin boundaries are appropriate when local knowledge or field investigation shows that portions of a sub-basin drain to pipes or hardened channels (all the way downstream) and not to a natural stream. In these cases, the sub-basin should be divided and the subdivided portions assigned HMP applicability as appropriate.

• Stormwater pipelines, as well as concrete curb and gutter flow, are hardened infrastructure. If a gutter and pipeline system drains to a vulnerable stream or channel, then the entire sub-basin, including the areas served by hardened infrastructure, will be coded as “HMP Applicable.” Conversely, if all the gutter and pipeline systems within a sub-basin drain to hardened channels all the way downstream, then the entire sub-basin will be coded as “Hardened.”

• If a sub-basin is partially-developed and the drainage through the developed portion is hardened (using the above definitions) and the drainage through the upstream portion is unhardened (natural), then the sub-basin can be divided at the urban/natural boundary. The upstream portion will be coded as “HMP Applicable” and downstream portion will be coded as “Hardened.”

• If there are both susceptible streams and hardened channels in a sub-basin, and it is not known if all drainage systems drain to the hardened channel, then the sub-basin will be coded as “HMP Applicable.”

Red-Line Instructions Permittees will review draft maps to verify the hardened/unhardened status of channels and the HM Applicability coding of sub-basins—and, where there are errors, correct them through the following red-line markup techniques. Hardened/Unhardened Channels Mark the extent of hardened and unhardened stream channel as precisely as possible. Add any supporting notes, such as source of information, or date field-checked. Entire Sub-basin If the entire sub-basin or multiple sub-basins are incorrectly designated, circle the area and provide the correct designation. Provide a justification for the change. Split Sub-basin As necessary, sub-basins can be split and divided into two or more smaller sub-basins in order to fine tune the HMP-applicability coding. When this is appropriate, draw the split lines as accurately as possible so there is no confusion as to which pipelines, stream sections, and so forth, are contained in each portion. Please provide the correct HM applicability for changed portions and justification for the changes. Red-line Submittal Red-lines can be submitted as red pencil or ink markups on printed paper maps or electronic red-line markups of the PDF file.

Updated 2017-07-14 3 of 3

PDF files (or links to .pdf files) can be sent to Dan Cloak at [email protected]. Paper maps can be mailed to Erica Lashley-Cornell at the Contra Costa Clean Water Program, 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553-4825, or dropped off at the CCCWP offices at 220a Glacier Drive. Red-line should be submitted by close of business on Thursday, August 10. Final Map Review From the red-line submittals a set of final draft HMP Applicability maps will be created and distributed to permittees for final review. The purpose of the final review is to verify that the red-line submittal was implemented correctly.

mailto:[email protected]

Date: July 19, 2017 To: Management Committee From: Rachel Kraai, Senior Watershed Management Planning Specialist Subject: Staff Report D Update on the Contra Costa Watersheds Stormwater Resource Plan Project Recommendation Receive an update on the Contra Costa Watersheds Stormwater Resource Plan (SWRP) Project. Background

In July 2016, the CCCWP was selected to receive a Storm Water Grant Program Proposition 1 Planning Grant for the development of the Contra Costa Watersheds Stormwater Resource Plan. The grant agreement was executed in May 2017. The awarded grant amount is $499,420 with a match amount of $500,540.

The SWRP will use a watershed-based planning approach to develop stormwater management projects which will help meet water quality requirements and provide additional benefits such as flood control, habitat restoration, community enhancement, and groundwater recharge where possible. A SWRP is now required in order to receive stormwater management funding from many different State grant sources. The SWRP will also help Contra Costa municipalities meet the green infrastructure plan requirements of their NPDES stormwater management permits.

Discussion The SWRP Project Team is currently making progress on a large number of activities, including, but not limited to, the following:

• Consolidation of spatial data for the project and an assessment of data gaps • Collection of existing stormwater management project concepts from stakeholder

organizations throughout the county for inclusion in the planning process • Development of the analytical methodology for the planning process including an

assessment of potential modeling tools • Implementation of the stakeholder/public engagement plan • Facilitation of the project’s Technical Advisory Group meetings. The first meeting of

the project’s Technical Advisory Group was held on June 27th

2

• Development of the first quarterly report and project invoice for submission to the State Water Board

In order to develop the first quarterly report and invoice for submission to the State Water Board, Program staff need documentation of all hours Permittees have spent on the project, as these hours can be counted as in-kind match under the grant agreement. Management Committee representatives received an email on July 12th from Contra Costa County Finance staff Shirley Lau requesting that documentation of in-kind labor hours be sent to her by July 21st in order to meet the submission deadline for the quarterly report. Lau’s email also included an updated version of the “SWRP Grant Match Documentation Guidance”. Program staff requests that Management Committee representatives gather all documentation per the updated guidance instructions and submit it to Lau by the July 21st

deadline. At the July Management Committee Meeting, Program staff will discuss project progress. Program staff will also discuss impacts to the project schedule due to the Program Manager and Administrative Analyst position vacancies. Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact to the Group Program is $150,000, which is included in the adopted FY 16/17 and FY 17/18 Group Program budgets. Attachment(s): None. RK:elc G:\NPDES\Management Committee\Packet\17 18\Shells\Rachel\2017-07\Staff Report D_Update on Stormwater Resource Plan Development.docx

Monitoring Committee Meeting Minutes February 13, 2017

MUNICIPALITY ATTENDED ABSENT City of Antioch Phil Hoffmeister (Chair)/Julie

Haas/Wajdowicz County Flood Control District Cece Sellgren/Michele

Mancuso

City of Pinole Tamara Miller/Amelia Timbers

City of Pittsburg Jolan Longway/Alfredo Hurtado City of Richmond Joanne Le City of San Pablo Amanda Booth (Vice-Chair) Program Staff: Lucile Paquette, Rachel Kraai, Fan Ventura, Erica Lashley-Cornell Guests: Helen Fitanides (SPAWNERS) 1. Introductory Remarks: Vice Chair Amanda Booth called the meeting to order at 9:48

a.m., followed by self-introductions, she proceeded to the agenda.

2. Closed Session: Budget Review and Planning: Vice-Chair Booth began the closed session at 9:50 pm. There was nothing to report from the closed session. Paquette discussed additional buffer in budget to assist permittees with individual monitoring-issues/questions. Paquette reported that the Program is going to extend contracts to end of permit term, and explained the reasons going to 3-year contracts versus continual one year contracts, made sense. Staff discussed issues with individual contractors and sought feedback of Permittee’s preferred approach. Paquette introduced the idea of cost sharing on projects of regional benefit between CCCWP Permittees. Amanda explained some options for funding Countywide and regional projects. Option 1: When project comes up, everyone contribute money at that time. Option 2: Start setting aside money every year to make sure funds are available when project is determined. Issues of how much to reserve and equity between Permittees, when a project used to reduce County-wide Mercury/PCBs loads is not in their jurisdiction. Staff explained basic regional funding concepts for benefit of the new Pinole member. This topic is one of politics and needs to be considered by much higher level group than this. Tamara Miller remarked that from a City’s point of view, it is difficult to get local money for regional projects (i.e., PCBs in Richmond; why does Clayton, Pinole have to contribute to that?). Focusing on one thing (i.e., PCBs) will not get it sold The committee concluded that there needed to be a separate meeting to discuss options and determine next steps.

2

Finally, in a non-budget related item, Paquette asked for feedback from Permittees about what the best way to make agencies/people aware of the occurrence of the pesticide toxicity issues in the County. Miller suggested that Staff present the issue with as much neutrality as possible. Paquette added that when the Program becomes fully staffed (Program Manager replaced), that she could compile the information gathered over the past few years for State and Regional efforts, and the two CCCWP Stressor Source Identification projects focused on Pesticide Toxicity, and present it first to the Monitoring Committee and then the Management Committee to remind Permittees of the ongoing issue and why it is a problem.

3. Announcements: Fan Ventura announced that the PIP Committee has tasked the Program subcommittees with providing input for the soon-to-be revamped Program website. She wanted the Committee to look at website pages that are related to monitoring and let them know if the information contained is still valid and concise. Also, if the Committee has any reports or web links that should be on the Website, please let her know within 60 days. The PIP Committee plans to roll-out the new Program website in Spring 2017. Cece Sellgren asked if the domain for Pesticide’s Linger is still owned by the Program. Ventura stated that it is still owned by the Program for now.

4. Approval of Minutes: Moved/Seconded (Sellgren/Mancuso) to approve the November 11, 2016 draft minutes. Item passed unanimously.

5. Mercury and PCBS Controls (Provision C.11 and C.12) A. Status Update for PCBs Source ID: Paquette gave the Committee an update on

the City of Pittsburg’s PCB source property on Willow Pass Road. The City is waiting for the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) to sign off on the operations and maintenance agreement. After the Water Board signs off, the property will be counted for the PCBs TMDL load reduction. Booth stated that the City of San Pablo is still trying to discover the PCB source at her Rumrill Green Streets Project on Rumrill Blvd. San Pablo has received money from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to install bioswales on the property and on Rumrill Boulevard. She’s also looking at getting additional funds from California Natural Resources Agency. She will make a presentation about her project at the Regional Roundtable Meeting on March 28. Michele Mancuso stated she’s still working on the Unincorporated County’s North Richmond PCB referral project.

B. GIS Status and Next Steps for C.11/12 Reporting: Paquette gave a brief summary on the Pollutants of Concern Steering Committee Meetings that have been attended by EPA Staff, Water Board Staff and Regional Permittees. Currently the BASMAA Development Committee and Monitoring Committees have been discussing the minimum data needs for tracking and reporting PCBs. The next Joint BASMAA meeting is planned for March 2nd. CCCWP are cost sharing their GIS platform development with the Alameda County Clean Water

3

Program for Geosyntec’s expertise and participation. Paquette recommended that Permittees look at the C.11. & C.12 section of their FY 2015/16 Annual Reports to determine missing project details for inclusion into the GIS database for the load reduction accounting in the 2017 Annual Report. Paquette will make this announcement to all Permittees at the next Management Committee meeting. Paquette informed the Committee that the Clean Watersheds 4 Clean Bay project is wrapping up. They will hold a project workshop on April 7 to present the outcomes from the grant project. Guidance documents, draft reports and a web portal were developed as resources for Permittees to use when considering PCBs and Mercury source control implementation projects. Paquette will send more information to the Committee when it becomes available.

C. BASMAA Update: Paquette gave an update to the Committee on the upcoming BASMAA regional projects. Consultant EOA is developing a white paper to evaluate utilities, to determine if their vaults and transformers are causing PCBs to get into the receiving waters. The potential outcome from the white paper could be to have the Water Board put it in a 13267 Request to the Utility companies, which could request information from utilities (e.g. locations, concentrations and/or volumes of spills). The BASMAA Board of Directors is also in the process of approving an Interim Accounting Tool and Guidance in 2017. The BASMAA PCBs in Infrastructure Caulk project team will be developing criteria and soliciting for infrastructure that would be a suitable candidate for being sampled. Paquette asked the Committee to send her any such candidates. The BASMAA BMP Effectiveness Monitoring project will be looking at different control measures and sampling that can be done in the current permit term. The BASMAA PCBs in Building Materials project has not gotten started yet but should be in April. Finally, CCCWP has directed Dan Cloak to be on the Project Management Team for the RAA Guidance Document project. Khalil Abusaba, independent of the CCCWP is sitting on the Technical Advisory Committee for the Project. Both Consultants are reporting updates to Staff and Management Committee as needed.

6. Water Quality Monitoring (Provisions C.8.d,e,f,g): A. Monitoring Update: Paquette informed the Committee that Contra Costa

County successfully sampled the overflow from the Marsh Creek Reservoir for

4

mercury and methylmercury samples in the January 8th storm. The sampling is compliant with our Alternative Approach to Pollutants of Concern Monitoring which proposed to collect samples from the Upper Marsh Creek watershed during 2 storms, when the reservoir overflowed. This is the first year in 5 that the reservoir has overflowed. The results will be included into the Final Methylmercury Control Study Report, which is due to the Region 5 Central Valley Water Board in 2018. Paquette reported that further POC sampling for copper and nutrients will be done by the Program in lower Marsh Creek and Walnut Creek this winter.

B. UCMR Report – Paquette asked the Committee if they’d like to include Armand Rubys year’s long study that began in 2012 on pesticide toxicity in the UCMR. The Committee concluded that if it’s not a permit requirement then it should not be included. Booth commented that in the UCMR, the term homeless encampment should be changed to illegal encampment. She said the language assists code enforcement officers who have to remove people who are trespassing in creek areas. Mancuso commented that references to Alamo Creek in the UCMR were inconsistent and confusing. Paquette asked the Committee to send any further questions or comments regarding the report to her by February 24. The Committee will approve the final report at their March 13 meeting and it will need to be approved by the Management Committee on March 15. Paquette also asked the Committee for recommended sites for sampling for bacteria, temperature by April 1, 2017.

7. Old/New Business: Paquette announced that RMP monitoring group SFEI has sampled sites in Contra Costa County. She will update the Committee with those results. She also informed the Committee that the State Water Board has distributed a Lyris Listserv with the receiving waters’ results on a new 303d list. Booth announced that the building that housed the Doctor’s Medical Center in San Pablo will be demolished and turned into a parking lot. She’s recommending to BASMAA to have that building tested for PCBs.

8. Adjournment: 11:55 a.m. Next Monitoring Committee Meeting: March 13, 2017, 10:00 a.m.-12 noon, 220 A Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA LP:elc G:\NPDES\Monitoring Committee\Minutes-Attendance\16-17\2017-02 Mon Com minutes draft.docx

Monitoring Committee Meeting Minutes

May 8, 2017

MUNICIPALITY ATTENDED ABSENT City of Antioch Phil Hoffmeister

(Chair) County Flood Control District Cece Sellgren/Michele Mancuso City of Pinole Amelia Timbers City of Pittsburg Jolan Longway City of Richmond Joanne Le (Phone) City of San Pablo Amanda Booth (Vice-Chair) Program Staff: Lucile Paquette, Erica Lashley-Cornell, Beth Baldwin Guests: Willis Logsdon (UC Berkeley Graduate) 1. Introductory Remarks: Vice-Chair Amanda Booth called the meeting to order at 10:05

a.m.; followed by self-introductions she asked if there were any announcements or changes to the agenda. Lucile Paquette introduced graduate student Willis Logsdon who has expressed an interest in doing an internship with the Program. Paquette asked to remove the approval of minutes from the agenda and she will have them on next month’s agenda. Paquette announced that the BASMAA Interim Accounting Methodology was approved and will soon be implemented. She also announced that Program Analyst Fan Ventura will be retiring next week.

3. Program-Directed Monitoring (Provisions C.8.d,e,f, g) a) Trash Receiving Water Monitoring Plan: Paquette introduced Beth Baldwin

who began her PowerPoint presentation on the draft BASMAA Trash Receiving Water Monitoring Plan (Plan). She described the background of the Permit requirement for the Plan and the work BASMAA is been doing to get the Plan approved and submitted to the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) on or before the July 1, 2017 deadline. After the presentation she asked for feedback from the Committee. Amanda Booth was concerned about the liability issues that may ensue from this plan. She suggested caveats to prevent agencies from suing Permittees over trash and adding language stating that the studies are based on a non-scientific method. She also recommended that the results be reported publically on the Program’s website instead of through CEDEN.

b) WY 2017 Creek Status & POC Monitoring Update: Program staff is getting

permissions, permits and insurance for sampling at different sites throughout the County. The team is currently are focusing on finding targeted sites to

2

sample for bacteria and pesticide/toxicity monitoring.

c) MRP 2 Stressor/Source Identification (SSID) Workplan Planning: Paquette is working with Program consultant Khalil Abusaba on drafting an SSID concept for Monitoring committee review. The SSID project for the MRP 2 Permit term must be based on the table of exceedances reported in the WY 2016 Urban Creeks Monitoring Report. Sampling showed exceedances in temperature, insects and bacteria as well as PCBs. Paquette has recommended that the project look for sources of PCBs and mercury that may be loading directly to the Bay. She gave examples of two properties that could be studied and sampled in the County. She also discussed a second project option investigating the appropriateness of using the California Stream Condition Index in the SF Bay region. She asked the Committee to send her any feedback they have on the project concept. She will introduce the idea at the next BASMAA Monitoring/Pollutants of Concern (MPC) meeting.

4. C.11/12 Mercury and PCBs Controls a) PCBs Source Properties Referrals Update: Paquette gave committee members

an update on the source property referrals to date. The Program is waiting for confirmation from Water Board staff on how they’ll except/enforce referrals from properties located in the eastern portion of the County, so East County Permittees have an avenue to claim pollutant load reductions. She’ll check in them at the June MPC meeting. Booth informed the Committee that San Pablo will get ~14 grams credit for the cleanup at Rumrill Sports Park. Paquette stated that Program consultant’s ADH are still investigating the other PCBs source on Rumrill Blvd to determine if a specific source can be pinpointed.

b) TSCA/WB Clean-Up Site Investigations: Paquette received a spreadsheet on Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) properties from Water Board staff. She is reviewing the spreadsheet to see if any properties have been redeveloped so they can be reported to the Water Board for PCBs load reduction credit. Cece Sellgren requested information on how to get credit for properties that were redeveloped. The Committee discussed options for getting credit for those properties and Booth stated that they do not currently have enough source properties to meet the PCB load reduction requirements in the MRP. Paquette stated she will make an announcement at the next Management Committee meeting that additional source property screening is needed.

c) AGOL PCBs Beta-Testing and Loads Accounting Estimations: There will be a meeting next week with Program consultant’s PSOMAS to discuss the accounting methodology process that will be integrated into the Arc GIS online application for tracking C.3 projects and loads removed from the control measure implementation. Paquette will begin entering the ArcGIS referrals into the database. After the beta testing process has concluded, Permittees will be

3

able to upload their PCBs data.

5. BASMAA Update a) RAA Guidance Document: Paquette discussed the BASMAA regional project

that is developing a guidance document to define the parameters for conducting a Reasonable Assurance Analysis in the Permit area. Program consultant’s Khalil Abusaba and Dan Cloak will be representing Contra Costa on the project committees and she will have an update at the next meeting.

b) C.8/C.11.12 Infrastructure Caulk and BMP Monitoring: BASMAA will have their sampling plan available on May 24. They still need locations to sample infrastructure caulk in roadways and storm drain infrastructure that were built during the 1970s and 1980s. She’ll send more details when available.

c) PCBs in Building Demolition Materials: Paquette informed the Committee that BASMAA still needs a manager for this project. She asked members to check with their municipalities to see if they have appropriate individuals who could volunteer for the assignment.

d) 5-Year Bioassessment Report: This project is an analysis of the data collected during the Creek Status Probabilistic Monitoring Plan that has been occurring during the last 5 years. BASMAA is currently developing a request for proposals, with a goal of the Project being contracted and starting in July. While it is not a permit requirement, the results will be valuable to Permittees and the public.

e) BASMAA POC Steering Committee: The committee is looking at large PCB spills that recently occurred. BASMAA is preparing a utility white paper to get information on spills from local utility agencies. The next committee meeting will be held in late June.

6. Old New Business: Paquette asked the Committee if they will look at the Program’s

current website to see which documents should be placed on the revamped website. She also requested referrals for the upcoming wet season toxicity pesticides study. Helen Fitanides will be at the next Monitoring Committee meeting to discuss the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District’s watershed grants and the work they’re doing in Marsh Creek.

7. Adjournment: 12:28 p.m. Next Monitoring Committee Meeting: June 12, 2017, 10:00 a.m.-12 noon, 220 A Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA

LP:elc G:\NPDES\Monitoring Committee\Minutes-Attendance\16-17\2017-05 Mon Com minutes draft.docx

Public Information/ Participation Committee

Meeting Minutes April 26, 2017

MUNICIPALITY ATTENDED

City of Antioch Julie Haas-Wajdowicz (via conference call) (Vice-Chair)

Town of Moraga: KC Bowman City of Orinda Daniel Chavarria City of Pittsburg Laura Wright(Chair) PROGRAM STAFF Fan Ventura, Erica Lashley-Cornell PROGRAM CONSULTANTS Shelley Cousineau, Anne Staines (Sagent Marketing)

1. Introductions/Announcements: Chair Laura Wright opened the meeting at 10:10 a.m. 2. Approve Meeting Minutes: Fan Ventura passed out a copy of the minutes for Committee

members to review. Moved/seconded (Chavarria/Bowman) to approve the March 22, 2017 meeting minutes. Motion carried. Julie Haas-Wajdowicz abstained.

3. Website Redesign Project Update: Ventura informed the Committee that WebSight Design

is still inputting text into the new website. The Municipal Operations committee will give their input to Ventura at their May 1 meeting. She’ll send a final deadline reminder to the remaining subcommittees to provide input for the website.

4. Public Information and Strategic Outreach Plan: Shelly Cousineau gave the Committee an

update on the work Sagent’s been doing to prepare the strategic outreach plan. She passed out a document titled, “CCCWP Potential Strategies/Tactics,” to Committee members. She explained that Sagent has reviewed each public information provision of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) and her staff has developed tactics and ideas for implementation. Cousineau and Anne Staines then went through a detailed review of each section in the category, “Broad Audience Outreach; Pollution Prevention Message; Electronic and Print; Coordinate Regionally or County-Wide,” with Committee members. They discussed the outreach opportunities that have been formulated for each category. She requested input from the Committee when appropriate and discussed the potential public outreach strategies of each category.

Cousineau explained that Sagent will use the input from this meeting’s discussion and develop a prioritization tool. The tool will feature a rating system for implementation based on whether the outreach tactic meets the minimum MRP requirement, is easy to implement, implementation costs, and the potential short term or long term effect of the tactic. The tool will be prepared and discussed at the next conference call meeting on May 10. She will then take input from that meeting and prepare a finalized spreadsheet for discussion at the May 24 PIP meeting.

5. Committee Roundtable: Wright announced that Pittsburg will be having their Civic Pride Day on May 29th and will also be hosting a watershed program for local school children. Haas-Wajdowicz informed the Committee that Antioch had a litter pick up event for Earth Day and will be participating in Bike to Work month in May.

6. Adjournment: 12:22 p.m.

7. Next Meeting: Wednesday, May 24, 2017, 10:00 a.m. – 12 noon, 220 A Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA FV:elc G:\NPDES\PIP_PEIO\_PIP Committee (CCCWP)\Minutes\16 17\PIP Minutes 2017-04 draft.docx

Public Information/ Participation Committee

Meeting Minutes May 24, 2017

MUNICIPALITY ATTENDED

City of Antioch Julie Haas-Wajdowicz (Vice-Chair) Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District

John Steere

Town of Moraga: KC Bowman City of Orinda Daniel Chavarria City of Pittsburg Laura Wright(Chair) PROGRAM STAFF Lucile Paquette, Erica Lashley-Cornell PROGRAM CONSULTANTS Anne Staines and Shelley Cousineau (Sagent Marketing)

1. Introductions/Announcements: Chair Laura Wright opened the meeting at 10:08 a.m.

Following self-introductions, she proceeded to the agenda. Wright asked to take the approval of minutes off of the agenda and put them on the June agenda.

2. Public Information and Strategic Outreach Plan: Shelley Cousineau produced the Strategic

Plan spreadsheet divided into public outreach requirements from the permit. She indicated that she had used the numeric feedback from the Committee member survey to rank each outreach idea. Anne Staines wanted the Committee to review the spreadsheet to see which ideas were placed into the high, medium and low categories. They discussed the factors that might have led to some of the rankings such as impact, ease, and budget.

After strategizing with the Committee, Staines and Cousineau moved some items that were placed in the medium category up to the purple category and kept the others in the grey category. Cousineau stated that they will use input from the meeting to complete the draft strategic plan.

3. Next Steps with PIP and Strategic Plan Timeline: Julie Haas-Wajdowicz and Wright discussed the option of continuing the Committee without a Clean Water staff person to organize the meetings. They will have a conference call meeting with Rachel Kraai on June 2 to discuss options. She asked Committee members to notify her if they’d like to participate in the call. They will also discuss the option of having Sagent assist with the PIP Committee on a temporary basis.

4. Committee Roundtable: None

5. Next Meeting: Wednesday, June 28, 2017, 10:00 a.m. – 12 noon, 220 A Glacier Drive,

Martinez, CA

6. Adjournment: 12:30 p.m.

elc G:\NPDES\PIP_PEIO\_PIP Committee (CCCWP)\Minutes\16 17\PIP Minutes 2017-05 draft.docx

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, …...Jul 19, 2017 · A. Fiscal Year 2016/17...

Documents

Transcript of MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, …...Jul 19, 2017 · A. Fiscal Year 2016/17...