FY 2015-2016 Annual Report - Home Page | California State ...€¦ · FY 2015-2016 Annual Report ... yards of illegally dumped large debris dumped on County road right-of-way;

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report Permittee Name: Contra Costa County

FY 15-16 AR Form Rev i-1 9/30/16

ATTACHMENT B

Table of Contents

Section Page

Section 1 – Permittee Information ................................................................................................................................. 1-1

Section 2 – Provision C.2 Municipal Operations ......................................................................................................... 2-1

Section 3 – Provision C.3 New Development and Redevelopment ....................................................................... 3-1

Section 4 – Provision C.4 Industrial and Commercial Site Controls ......................................................................... 4-1

Section 5 – Provision C.5 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination ..................................................................... 5-1

Section 6 – Provision C.6 Construction Site Controls .................................................................................................. 6-1

Section 7 – Provision C.7 Public Information and Outreach .................................................................................... 7-1

Section 9 – Provision C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Controls ................................................................................................ 9-1

Section 10 – Provision C.10 Trash Load Reduction ................................................................................................... 10-1

Section 11 – Provision C.11 Mercury Controls ........................................................................................................... 11-1

Section 12 – Provision C.12 PCBs Controls ................................................................................................................. 12-1

Section 13 – Provision C.13 Copper Controls ............................................................................................................ 13-1

Section 15 – Provision C.15 Exempted and Conditionally Exempted Discharges ............................................. 15-1

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report Permittee Information

Permittee Name: Contra Costa County

FY 15-16 AR Form 1-1 9/30/16

Section 1 – Permittee Information

SECTION I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Background Information


Population: 159,725

NPDES Permit No.: CAS612008 (San Francisco Bay RWQCB Permit) and/or CA00883313 (Central Valley RWQCB Permit)

Order Number: R2-2015-0049 (San Francisco Bay RWQCB Permit) and/or R5-2010-0102 (Central Valley RWQCB Permit)

Reporting Time Period (month/year): July 2015 through June 2016

Name of the Responsible Authority: David Twa Title: County Administrator

Mailing Address: 651 Pine Street, 11th Floor

City: Martinez Zip Code: 94553 County: Contra Costa

Telephone Number: (925) 335-1080 Fax Number: (925) 335-1098

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Name of the Designated Stormwater

Management Program Contact (if

different from above):

Cece Sellgren Title: Stormwater Manager

Department: Public Works

Mailing Address: 255 Glacier Drive

City: Martinez Zip Code: 94553 County: Contra Costa

Telephone Number: (925) 313-2296 Fax Number: (925) 313-2333

E-mail Address: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.2 – Municipal Operations


FY 15-16 AR Form 2-1 9/30/16

Section 2 - Provision C.2 Reporting Municipal Operations

Program Highlights and Evaluation Highlight/summarize activities for reporting year:

Summary:

Contra Costa County (CCC) participated in the Contra Costa Clean Water Program’s Municipal Operations Committee. Refer to the C.2

Municipal Operations section of the CCCWP’s PY 2015-16 Annual Report for a description of activities implemented at the countywide and/or

regional level.

County Watershed Program (CWP) staff coordinate with County Public Works Department (PWD) Maintenance Division management and crews

throughout the year to ensure the implementation of stormwater best management practices during municipal maintenance activities.

This PY 2015-16 CCC’s municipal operations recovered 2,810 cubic yards of debris from street sweeping nearly 7,000 curbed miles. Our contractor

continues to provide monthly street sweeping for curbed streets in unincorporated Contra Costa County and provides additional bi-monthly street

sweeping to commercial areas in high trash generating areas.

Road crews recovered 1,595 cubic yards of illegally dumped large debris dumped on County road right-of-way; removed 143 cubic yards of

sediment, vegetation and debris and 368 cubic yards of silt during roadside ditch cleaning; removed 163 cubic yards of debris from cleaning out

1,804 catch basins and collected 58 cubic yards of debris and 2.4 cubic yards of silt from inspecting and cleaning an additional 10,083 catch

basins.

C.2.a. ►Street and Road Repair and Maintenance

Place a Y in the boxes next to activities where applicable BMPs were implemented. If not applicable, type NA in the box and provide an

explanation in the comments section below. Place an N in the boxes next to activities where applicable BMPs were not implemented for one or

more of these activities during the reporting fiscal year, then in the comments section below provide an explanation of when BMPs were not

implemented and the corrective actions taken.

Y Control of debris and waste materials during road and parking lot installation, repaving or repair maintenance activities from polluting

stormwater

Y Control of concrete slurry and wastewater, asphalt, pavement cutting, and other street and road maintenance materials and wastewater

from discharging to storm drains from work sites.

Y Sweeping and/or vacuuming and other dry methods to remove debris, concrete, or sediment residues from work sites upon completion of

work.

Comments:

Prior to each season’s municipal activities (e.g. catch basin cleaning, storm patrol, surface treatment, pavement maintenance, slide repair etc.)

CCC Maintenance crews are trained in each task’s Activity Description/Standard Operating Procedures. These trainings include written

descriptions of the work to be performed, planning criteria, work method, and check points. Throughout each tasks’ Activity Descriptions there are



FY 15-16 AR Form 2-2 9/30/16

numerous references to stormwater pollution prevention practices.

Crews grind and saw cut when necessary. When saw cutting is performed, crews use wet-vacuum systems to recover and properly dispose of all

slurry. The Activity Description for this task specifically addresses this issue: “If saw cutting is performed, ensure that all BMPs are followed e.g.

vacuum all slurry cuttings and loose material and protect drainage inlets.” As an additional storm drain system protection measure, all trucks in the

PWD Maintenance fleet contain spill kits in case of accidental releases, and crews are annually trained in their use.

C.2.b. ►Sidewalk/Plaza Maintenance and Pavement Washing





NA Control of wash water from pavement washing, mobile cleaning, pressure wash operations at parking lots, garages, trash areas, gas station

fueling areas, and sidewalk and plaza cleaning activities from polluting stormwater

NA Implementation of the BASMAA Mobile Surface Cleaner Program BMPs

Comments:

CCC Maintenance crews use dry clean-up methods only, including street sweeping, manual sweeping and wiping with rags. No washing

activities are carried out.



FY 15-16 AR Form 2-3 9/30/16

C.2.c. ►Bridge and Structure Maintenance and Graffiti Removal





Y Control of discharges from bridge and structural maintenance activities directly over water or into storm drains

Y Control of discharges from graffiti removal activities

Y Proper disposal for wastes generated from bridge and structure maintenance and graffiti removal activities

NA Implementation of the BASMAA Mobile Surface Cleaner Program BMPs for graffiti removal

Y Employee training on proper capture and disposal methods for wastes generated from bridge and structural maintenance and graffiti

removal activities.

Y Contract specifications requiring proper capture and disposal methods for wastes generated from bridge and structural maintenance and

graffiti removal activities.

Comments:

Contra Costa County (CCC) Maintenance crews use all appropriate BMPs for road and bridge repair/maintenance work to protect the MS4

system. Crews follow Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbook Maintenance Guide, May 2003. Graffiti and tagging are removed by painting or

wiping with aerosol cleansers. Contracts for major County projects have BMP requirements that contractors must adhere to.

CCC bridge crews utilize drop cloths, silt fencing, straw wattles and filter fabric on storm drains where appropriate. Job sites are always left clean

after work is completed. Graffiti abatement is generally performed by spraying over graffiti with primer paint or wiping off localized tagging, such

as on street signs, with aerosol paint remover and a rag. All waste generated from these activities is taken to the County Central Waterbird Way

Corporation Yard’s hazardous waste storage area and properly disposed of by a hazardous waste management contractor.

On April 7, 2016 Public Works Department (PWD) Maintenance staff attended the Stormwater and Hazardous Substances Awareness and First

Responder Operations Annual Refresher training by the County Watershed Program and a Health Service Department Hazardous Material

Programs Certified Trainer. The training included segments on the Corp Yard’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs), non-storm water

discharges and appropriate best management practices, Emergency Contingency Plan, Hazardous Substances Awareness, Spill Clean-up

Procedures, and basic Hazardous Waste Management and Hazardous Materials Emergency Response. Staff in attendance included 56 crew

staff, 86% of Maintenance staff.

Some bridge and structural maintenance activities are conducted in-house by CCC Maintenance crews whose Standard Operational

Procedures require collection and proper disposal of all wastes, including spoils, in accordance with the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbook

Maintenance Staff Guide, May 2003. The PWD Design/Construction Division is responsible for putting together plans and contract specifications

for more specialized activities such as bridge deck methacrylate treatments and structural repairs. These projects are then bid out for construction

by contractors. CCC’s contractors adhere to the project’s contract specifications and Caltrans Standard Specifications, which include language



FY 15-16 AR Form 2-4 9/30/16

and oversight mandating the proper collection and disposal of all wastes. Construction resident engineers inspect projects and ensure stormwater

BMPs are followed.

C.2.e. ►Rural Public Works Construction and Maintenance

Does your municipality own/maintain rural1 roads: X Yes No

If your answer is No then skip to C.2.f.





Y Control of road-related erosion and sediment transport from road design, construction, maintenance, and repairs in rural areas

Y Identification and prioritization of rural road maintenance based on soil erosion potential, slope steepness, and stream habitat resources

Y No impact to creek functions including migratory fish passage during construction of roads and culverts

Y Inspection of rural roads for structural integrity and prevention of impact on water quality

Y Maintenance of rural roads adjacent to streams and riparian habitat to reduce erosion, replace damaging shotgun culverts and excessive

erosion

Y Re-grading of unpaved rural roads to slope outward where consistent with road engineering safety standards, and installation of water bars

as appropriate

Y Inclusion of measures to reduce erosion, provide fish passage, and maintain natural stream geomorphology when replacing culverts or

design of new culverts or bridge crossings

Comments including listing increased maintenance in priority areas:

PWD Maintenance Division prioritizes maintenance projects according to several criteria for pavement and drainage maintenance, and annual

catch basin/culvert inspection and cleaning. Road projects implement standard BMPs to minimize erosion and sediment transport related to road

construction and maintenance. In addition to assessing structural integrity, road crew inspections assess roads’ impacts to water quality. Water

quality impacts are a basis for scheduling and prioritizing maintenance projects. Road design standards are intended to minimize impacts to

water quality. In order to minimize erosion and impacts to fish passage and stream geomorphology, replacement of culverts and bridge crossing is

only carried out in dry weather and with all required environmental permits in place.

1Rural means any watershed or portion thereof that is developed with large lot home-sites, such as one acre or larger, or with primarily agricultural, grazing or open

space uses.



FY 15-16 AR Form 2-5 9/30/16

County Maintenance crews follow the creek protective BMPs outlined in the Routine Maintenance Agreement (RMA) with the California

Department of Fish and Wildlife for road maintenance activities located adjacent to waterways, including bank stabilization and roadway

shoulder repairs. The RMA requires specific environmental management activities, including preparation of semi-annual notification reports; limits

on heavy equipment usage; measures to protect fish and wildlife resources; and BMPs to minimize disruptions to habitat. If work is near a creek or

waterway a copy of the current Fish & Game RMA is required to be onsite at all times.

C.2.f. ►Corporation Yard BMP Implementation

Place an X in the boxes below that apply to your corporations yard(s):

We do not have a corporation yard

Our corporation yard is a filed NOI facility and regulated by the California State Industrial Stormwater NPDES General Permit

X We have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the Corporation Yard(s)

Place an X in the boxes below next to implemented SWPPP BMPs to indicate that these BMPs were implemented in applicable instances.If not

applicable, type NA in the box. If one or more of the BMPs were not adequately implemented during the reporting fiscal year then indicate so

and explain in the comments section below:

Y Control of pollutant discharges to storm drains such as wash waters from cleaning vehicles and equipment

Y Routine inspection prior to the rainy seasons of corporation yard(s) to ensure non-stormwater discharges have not entered the storm drain

system

NA Containment of all vehicle and equipment wash areas through plumbing to sanitary or another collection method

Y Use of dry cleanup methods when cleaning debris and spills from corporation yard(s) or collection of all wash water and disposing of wash

water to sanitary or other location where it does not impact surface or groundwater when wet cleanup methods are used

Y Cover and/or berm outdoor storage areas containing waste pollutants

Comments:

NA

If you have a corporation yard(s) that is not an NOI facility, complete the following table for inspection results for your corporation yard(s) or

attach a summary including the following information:

Corporation Yard Name

Inspection Date

(1x/year required) Inspection Findings/Results Follow-up Actions

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS CENTRAL MAINTENANCE CORP YARD

9/15/15 NOTICE TO COMPLY - SW05 - AN OPEN 5-GAL BUCKET OF DETACK WITH 2 OTHER 5-GAL BUCKETS W/ DETACK MATERIALS ON LIDS WERE OBSERVED NEXT TO THE SAND SPREADER,

SW05 - CORRECTED SEPT 28 2015



FY 15-16 AR Form 2-6 9/30/16

WHICH IS UPGRADIENT FROM A STORM DRAIN. BY 9/29/15 OR NEXT REAIN EVENT MOVE BUCKETS UNDER COVER OR COVER AND CLOSE OPEN BUCKET

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS EAST COUNTY CORP YARD

9/15/15

CLEAN FACILITY. STORM DRAINS WITH FABRIC CATCHES AND WATTLES ARE CLEAR

NA

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.3 – New Development and Redevelopment


FY 15-16 AR Form 3-1 9/30/16

Section 3 - Provision C.3 Reporting New Development and Redevelopment

C.3.a. ►New Development and Redevelopment Performance

Standard Implementation Summary Report

(For FY 15-16 Annual Report only) Provide a brief summary of the methods of implementation of Provisions C.3.a.i.(1)-(8).

Summary:

(1) County’s legal authority to implement C.3; Contra Costa County’s jurisdiction includes all unincorporated lands throughout the county,

including 17 unincorporated communities. Its legal authority to implement c.3 is equivalent to other municipalities within Contra Costa County

and is recognized as such by the County’s Clean Water Program.

(2) County’s development review and permitting procedures: Applicant submits development application to the County’s Department of

Development and Conservation (DCD). DCD planners are trained to identify projects that may be subject to c.3 requirements and includes them

in the Conditions of Approval for the project’s land use permit: it refers such projects to the Public Works Department’s Engineering Services

Division, which is charged with review and approval of the c.3 regulated project’s Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP), O&M Plan, and O&M

Agreement (which serves to codify the responsibility of the owner toward the project’s O&M Plan.). It also provides a guarantee that the owner

will maintain the project’s SW Treatment Facilities (SWTF) in perpetuity, as SWTF areas are annexed into a special communities facilities district

(CFD) that was created in 2007 to permit the County to inspect SWTFs and enable it to place a lien on owners that did not manage their facilities.

The County’s Watershed Program, advises applicants regarding c.3 requirements, maintains the CFD for the SWTFs, and inspects them annually

(for public projects) and every 3 years for private properties that are annexed into the SWTF CFD.

(3) How water quality effects and mitigation measures are addressed in environmental reviews: The County’s Department of Conservation

(DCD) Current Planning Division and County’s Public Works Department’s (PWD) Environmental Services Division conduct an environmental

impact review of all private and public projects. Project effects to water quality are analyzed specifically in the Hydrology and Water Quality

Section of a standard CEQA Initial Study checklist as well as indirectly in other sections of the checklist such as Biological Resources; for example,

how impacts to water quality might affect special status species. Water quality is also analyzed in federally participating projects through Water

Quality technical studies that support the NEPA process. Project impact avoidance and minimization may include measures such as limitation of

project disturbance area and preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) or a Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP)

that identifies potential impacts caused during construction and provides recommendations to minimize those impacts. Additionally, potential

long-term effects caused by new and impervious surfaces are addressed through the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program (C.3

Guidelines) and regulatory permitting through the State and Regional Water Boards.

(4) C.3 training for appropriate departments (CCCWP will report on training at the countywide level);

(5) Outreach/education efforts to staff, developers, contractors, construction site operators and owner/builders: The C.3 guidelines available on

the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program (CCCCWP) website, www.cccleanwater.org. The CCCCWP sponsored an annual c.3 training

workshop for municipal staff, contractors and consultants June 7, 2016. Finally, County Watershed Program staff regularly meets with applicants to

explain the purpose, process, and technical aspects of c.3 requirements with project applicants.

(6) How County encourages site design measures at unregulated projects subject to Planning/Building Department review: The County has

published a Small Development Project (“C.3 Light”) handbook/guidelines along with a flow chart for the c.3.i (C.3 Light) process that are given



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-2 9/30/16

out at the Dept. of Conservation and Development (DCD)Department’s application counter. The Watershed Planner coordinates actively with

their DCD counterpart regarding site design and source control provisions.

(7) How your municipality encourages source control measures at unregulated projects subject to Planning/Building Department review; See prior

response, (6)

(8) General Plan revisions (if needed) to integrate water quality/watershed protection with water supply, flood protection, habitat protection,

groundwater recharge, and other sustainable development principles and policies: Not applicable, as the Contra Costa County General Plan

update (2008) already includes them.

C.3.b.iv.(2) ►Regulated Projects Reporting

Fill in attached table C.3.b.iv.(2) or attach your own table including the same information.

C.3.c.ii►Design Specifications for Pervious Pavement Systems

(For FY 2015-16 Annual Report only). Submit design specifications for pervious pavement systems that have been developed and adopted on a

regional or countywide basis. If design specifications have been adopted and are contained in a Countywide stormwater handbook, include a

reference to the handbook.

Summary:

No pervious pavement systems have been developed or adopted by Contra Costa County this fiscal year.

C.3.e.iv. ►Alternative or In-Lieu Compliance with Provision C.3.c.

Is your agency choosing to require 100% LID treatment onsite for all Regulated Projects

and not allow alternative compliance under Provision C.3.e.?

Yes X

No

Comments (optional):



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-3 9/30/16

C.3.e.v ► Special Projects Reporting

1. In FY 2015-16, has your agency received, but not yet granted final discretionary

approval of, a development permit application for a project that has been identified as

a potential Special Project based on criteria listed in MRP Provision C.3.e.ii(2) for any of

the three categories of Special Projects (Categories A, B or C)?

Yes

x

No

2. In FY 2015-16, has your agency granted final discretionary approval to a Special

Project? If yes, include the project in both the C.3.b.iv.(2) Table, and the C.3.e.v. Table.

Yes x

No

If you answered “Yes” to either question,

1) Complete Table C.3.e.v.

2) Attach narrative discussion of 100% LID Feasibility or Infeasibility for each project.

C.3.h.v.(2) ► Reporting Newly Installed Stormwater Treatment

Systems and HM Controls (Optional)

On an annual basis, before the wet season, provide a list of newly installed (installed within the reporting year) stormwater treatment systems and

HM controls to the local mosquito and vector control agency and the Water Board. The list shall include the facility locations and a description of

the stormwater treatment measures and HM controls installed.



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-4 9/30/16

C.3.h.v.(3)(a) –(c) and (f) ► Installed Stormwater Treatment

Systems Operation and Maintenance Verification Inspection

Program Reporting

Option 1 – Reporting Site Inspections Number/Percentage

Total number of Regulated Projects (including offsite projects, and Regional Projects) in your agency’s database

or tabular format at the end of the previous fiscal year (FY14-15)

Total number of Regulated Projects (including offsite projects, and Regional Projects) in your agency’s database

or tabular format at the end of the reporting period (FY 15-16)

Total number of Regulated Projects (including offsite projects, and Regional Projects) for which O&M verification

inspections were conducted during the reporting period (FY 15-16)

Percentage of the total number of Regulated Projects (including offsite projects, and Regional Projects) inspected

during the reporting period (FY 15-16) %

2

Option 2 – Reporting Stormwater Treatment System Inspections

Total number of stormwater treatment and HM systems in your agency’s database or tabular format at the end of

the previous fiscal year (FY 14-15)

17

Total number of stormwater treatment systems in your agency’s database or tabular format at the end of the

reporting period (FY 15-16)

20

Total number of stormwater treatment and HM systems inspected in the reporting period (FY 15-16) 10

Percentage of stormwater treatment and HM systems inspected in the reporting period (FY 15-16) 50%3

2 Based on the number of Regulated Projects in the database or tabular format at the end of the previous fiscal year (FY 14-15), per MRP Provision

C.3.h.ii.(6)(b). 3 Based on the number of stormwater treatment and HM systems database or tabular format at the end of the previous fiscal year (FY 14-15), per

MRP Provision C.3.h.ii.(6)(b).



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-5 9/30/16

C.3.h.v.(3)(d)-(e) ► Installed Stormwater Treatment Systems

Operation and Maintenance Verification Inspection Program

Reporting

Provide a discussion of the inspection findings for the year and any common problems encountered with various types of treatment systems

and/or HM controls. This discussion should include a general comparison to the inspection findings from the previous year.

Summary:

A total of 10 storm water treatment facilities (SWTFs) for projects, built since the advent of the c.3 requirements, were inspected for FY ‘15-16.

They consisted of 4 public and 6 private projects. Seven projects’ SWTFs inspected were in compliance, with no corrective action required,

while 3 of them are in compliance, but required relatively minor corrective actions. The two common and minor problem encountered was

trash buildup and insufficient mulch and consequent stressing of plants. Inspection results for FY ‘15-16 demonstrate substantially higher levels

of compliance relative to FY ‘14-15. Two follow-up inspections will be required to ensure that operation and maintenance issues are

corrected.

Provide a discussion of the effectiveness of the O&M Program and any proposed changes to improve the O&M Program (e.g., changes in

prioritization plan or frequency of O&M inspections, other changes to improve effectiveness program).

Summary:

During FY ’15-16, Watershed Management Program staff performed more inspections than the permits required . Private projects that have SWTFs

are inspected every 5 years, and public projects with SWTFs are inspected every year. Five projects (including 3 private and 2 public ones) were

inspected immediately following a major precipitation event to ascertain whether drainage rates of the bioretention basins were performing up to

the standard (5 inches/hour).

The County continues to require parties responsible for operation and maintenance of private C.3 facilities to monitor their facilities through

letter requests of property owners to conduct “self-inspections” of their SWTFs. This requirement reminds property owners that they are

responsible for maintenance of facilities on their property, encourages property owners to ask questions about how to care for their C.3

facilities, and allows the County to gather data about issues property owners are having with C.3 facilities and their maintenance Letters and

maintenance forms were sent in September 2015 (with reminder letters sent in October) to all property owners who have SWTFs that have

been annexed into the Community Facilities District (CFD) to conduct inspections and make repairs before the onset of the rainy season

(October 31). Of 15 letters sent, a total of 8 completed self-inspection forms were received back from owners.

C.3.i. ►Required Site Design Measures for Small Projects and

Detached Single Family Home Projects

On an annual basis, discuss the implementation of the requirements of Provision C.3.i, including ordinance revisions, permit conditions,

development of standard specifications and/or guidance materials, and staff training.

Summary: Summary:



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-6 9/30/16

The Contra Costa Clean Water Program adopted the December 1, 2012 addendum to the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 6th Edition. The

addendum, “Preparing a Stormwater Control Plan for a Small Land Development Project,” includes step-by-step instructions, a project data form,

and standard specifications for runoff reduction measures. Section 1014 (Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance) of Contra

Costa County’s ordinance code requires that applications for development approvals for projects subject to the permit’s new development

requirements include a Stormwater Control Plan meeting the criteria in the most recent version of the Stormwater C.3. The County applied the c.3

“Light” (small projects) for 5 projects in this Fiscal Year.

C.3.j.i.v.(d) ► Green Infrastructure Outreach

On an annual basis, provide a summary of your agency’s outreach and education efforts pertaining to Green Infrastructure planning and

implementation.

Summary:

The County’s CWP including Green Infrastructure (GI) Planning as a training topic in its annual c.3 training workshop for mun icipal staff, contractors

and consultants on June 7, 2016. County Watershed Program staff met and/or corresponded with management in the Department of

Conservation and Development Current Planning Division, the Public Works’ Department Transportation Engineering Division, the Public Works

Flood Control Division, the Public Works Airports Division, and the Public Works Department Capital Projects to review their Capital Improvmenet

Plan list and the requirements to Green Infrastructure Planning in their capital improvement plans. County Watershed staff had discussions with

capital projects staff in the Health Services Department and the Employment and Human Services Department. It was determined that the

Capital Improvement Programs in these two Departments involved interior remodels, and not construction of outside impervious surfaces.

Please also refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report for a summary of outreach efforts implemented at the countywide level.

C.3.j.ii.(2) ► Early Implementation of Green Infrastructure

Projects

On an annual basis, submit a list of green infrastructure projects, public and private, that are already planned for implementation during the permit

term and infrastructure projects planned for implementation during the permit term that have potential for green infrastructure measures. Include

the following information:

A summary of planning or implementation status for each public and private green infrastructure project that is not also a Regulated

Project as defined in Provision C.3.b.ii. (see C.3.j.ii.(2) Table B - Planned Green Infrastructure Projects).

A summary of how each public infrastructure project with green infrastructure potential will include green infrastructure measures to the

maximum extent practicable during the permit term. For any public infrastructure project where implementation of green infrastructure

measures is not practicable, submit a brief description of the project and the reasons green infrastructure measures were impracticable to

implement (see C.3.j.ii.(2) Table A - Public Projects Reviewed for Green Infrastructure).



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-7 9/30/16

Background Information:

Describe how this provision is being implemented by your agency, including the process used by your agency to identify projects with potential for

green infrastructure, if applicable.

County Watershed Management Staff are using “Guidance for Identifying Green Infrastructure Potential in Municipal Capital Improvement

Projects” Memo by Dan Cloak (May 12, 2016) and have sent this guidance memo to management and high level staff s in the Public Works

Department’s Transportation Engineering Division to help identify projects with GI potential.

Summary of Planning or Implementation Status of Identified Projects:

See attached Tables C.3.j.ii. (2)-A and C.3.j.ii. (2)-B for identification of green infrastructure potential for road and other infrastructure-related

County projects. County Watershed Program staff reviewed the Capital Roads Improvement Projects (CRIP) list with Public Works Department

Transportation Engineering Division staff to review and identify those that met specific GI potential criteria in the aforementioned “Guidance for

Identifying Green Infrastructure Potential in Municipal Capital Improvement Projects” memo; projects identified in Tables C.3.j.ii.(2)-A and B fulfill

these criteria. It should be further noted that three other County Capital Improvement project lists for improvements to other County facilities and

buildings were reviewed. None of them included projects that had 10,000 square feet or more of new or redeveloped impervious surfaces to

qualify for having GI potential. Almost all of them were interior renovation projects.

C.3.j.iii.(2) ► Participate in Processes to Promote Green

Infrastructure

On an annual basis, report on the goals and outcomes during the reporting year of work undertaken to participate in processes to promote green

infrastructure.

Please refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report, Section 3 for a summary of efforts conducted to help regional, State, and federal agencies

plan, design and fund incorporation of green infrastructure measures into local infrastructure projects, including transportation projects.

C.3.j.iv.(2) ► Tracking and Reporting Progress

On an annual basis, report progress on development and implementation of methods to track and report implementation of green infrastructure

measures and provide reasonable assurance that wasteload allocations for TMDLs are being met. Please refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report, Section 3 for a summary of methods being developed to track and report implementation of

green infrastructure measures.



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-8 9/30/16



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-9 9/30/16

C.3.b.iv.(2) ►Regulated Projects Reporting Table (part 1) – Projects

Approved During the Fiscal Year Reporting Period

Project Name

Project No.

Project Location10

, Street

Address Name of Developer

Project

Phase

No.11

Project Type &

Description12 Project Watershed13

Total

Site

Area

(Acres)

Total

Area of

Land

Disturbed

(Acres)

Total New

Impervious

Surface

Area (ft2)14

Total

Replaced

Impervious

Surface Area

(ft2)15

Total Pre-

Project

Impervious

Surface

Area16(ft2)

Total Post-

Project

Impervious

Surface

Area17(ft2)

Private Projects

Hemme Estates

MS14-0004

512 Hemme Avenue,

Alamo, CA

Cynthia Erb &

Assoc.

(Alamo, CA )

NA Minor subdivision of

1 parcel into 3 lots +

remainder parcel

Green Valley Creek,

tributary to San

Ramon Creek

5.8 2.8 11,172 37,628 37,628 48,800

Westborough

SD14-9376

1640 & 1660 Tice Valley Blvd,

Walnut Creek, CA

Momo

Development

2013, LLC,

(Danville. CA)

NA Residential

Condominiums, 14

units

Las Trampas Creek,

tributary to Walnut

Creek

1.2 1.2 29,666 2,630 2,630 32,296

MS06-0038 1210 Livorna Rd, Alamo, CA RL Livorna, LLC NA Minor subdivision of

1 parcel into 2 lots

Green Valley Creek,

tributary to San

Ramon Creek

1.14 .68 7,500 2,655 7,065 16,680

Public Projects

10

Include cross streets 11

If a project is being constructed in phases, indicate the phase number and use a separate row entry for each phase. If not, enter “NA”. 12

Project Type is the type of development (i.e., new and/or redevelopment). Example descriptions of development are: 5-story office building, residential with 160 single-family homes with five 4-story buildings to contain 200 condominiums, 100 unit 2-story shopping mall, mixed use retail and residential development (apartments), industrial warehouse.

13State the watershed(s) in which the Regulated Project is located. Downstream watershed(s) may be included, but this is optional.

14All impervious surfaces added to any area of the site that was previously existing pervious surface.

15All impervious surfaces added to any area of the site that was previously existing impervious surface.

16For redevelopment projects, state the pre-project impervious surface area.

17For redevelopment projects, state the post-project impervious surface area.



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-10 9/30/16

C.3.b.iv.(2) ►Regulated Projects Reporting Table (part 1) – Projects

Approved During the Fiscal Year Reporting Period

Project Name

Project No.

Project Location10

, Street

Address Name of Developer

Project

Phase

No.11

Project Type &

Description12 Project Watershed13

Total

Site

Area

(Acres)

Total

Area of

Land

Disturbed

(Acres)

Total New

Impervious

Surface

Area (ft2)14

Total

Replaced

Impervious

Surface Area

(ft2)15

Total Pre-

Project

Impervious

Surface

Area16(ft2)

Total Post-

Project

Impervious

Surface

Area17(ft2)

Comments:

C.3.b.iv.(2) ►Regulated Projects Reporting Table (part 2) –

Projects Approved During the Fiscal Year Reporting Period

(private projects)

Project Name

Project No.

Application Deemed Complete

Date18

Application

Final Approval

Date19

Source

Control

Measures20

Site Design

Measures21

Treatment Systems

Approved22

Type of Operation

& Maintenance

Responsibility

Mechanism23

Hydraulic

Sizing

Criteria24

Alternative

Compliance

Measures25/26

Alternative

Certification27

HM

Controls28/29

Private Projects

Hemme Estates

MS14-0004

3/16/2015 9/30/2015 All

paved

areas

Fire

sprinkler

test valves

Bioretention Owner

responsible,

recorded O&M

CCCWP

C.3

Guideb

NA (Not

Applicable) NA 4 bio-

retention

basins per

18

For private projects, state project application deemed complete date. If the project did not go through discretionary review, report the building permit issuance date. 19

For private projects, state project application final discretionary approval date. If the project did not go through discretionary review, report the building permit issuance date. 20

List source control measures approved for the project. Examples include: properly designed trash storage areas; storm drain stenciling or signage; efficient landscape irrigation systems; etc. 21

List site design measures approved for the project. Examples include: minimize impervious surfaces; conserve natural areas, including existing trees or other vegetation, and soils; construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces, etc. 22

List all approved stormwater treatment system(s) to be installed onsite or at a joint stormwater treatment facility (e.g., flow through planter, bioretention facility, infiltration basin, etc.). 23

List the legal mechanism(s) (e.g., O&M agreement with private landowner; O&M agreement with homeowners’ association; O&M by public entity, etc…) that have been or will be used to assign responsibility for the maintenance of the post-construction stormwater treatment systems.

24See Provision C.3.d.i. “Numeric Sizing Criteria for Stormwater Treatment Systems” for list of hydraulic sizing design criteria. Enter the corresponding provision number of the appropriate criterion (i.e., 1.a., 1.b., 2.a., 2.b., 2.c., or 3).

25For Alternative Compliance at an offsite location in accordance with Provision C.3.e.i.(1), on a separate page, give a discussion of the alternative compliance site including the information specified in Provision C.3.b.v.(1)(m)(i) for the offsite project.

26For Alternative Compliance by paying in-lieu fees in accordance with Provision C.3.e.i.(2), on a separate page, provide the information specified in Provision C.3.b.v.(1)(m)(ii) for the Regional Project.

27Note whether a third party was used to certify the project design complies with Provision C.3.d.

28If HM control is not required, state why not.

29If HM control is required, state control method used (e.g., method to design and size device(s) or method(s) used to meet the HM Standard, and description of device(s) or method(s) used, such as detention basin(s), biodetention unit(s), regional detention

basin, or in-stream control).



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-11 9/30/16



(private projects)

Project Name

Project No.


Date18

Application

Final Approval

Date19

Source

Control

Measures20

Site Design

Measures21

Treatment Systems

Approved22

Type of Operation

& Maintenance

Responsibility

Mechanism23

Hydraulic

Sizing

Criteria24

Alternative

Compliance

Measures25/26

Alternative

Certification27

HM

Controls28/29

drain to

bioretent

ion

planters;

all inlets

to drains

designed

as swale

overflows

& Interior

garages

drain to

sanitary

sewer

Agreement ook C.3

Handboo

k

Westborough

SD14-9376

1/13/2015 3/22/2016 Stenciled

storm

drain

inlets;

Driveway

s &

parking

areas

drain to

bioretent

ion area

Boiler &

fire

sprinkler

test valves

drain to

sanitary

sewer

Bioretention Owner/HOA

responsible,

recorded O&M

Agreement

CCCWP

C.3

Guideb

ook

NA NA Imperviou

s surface

less than 1

acre

MS06-0038 8/20/2007 2/16/2016 Stenciled

storm

drain

inlets

and

garbage

containe

rs; roofs,

driveway

Imperviou

s surfaces

minimized;

irrigation

and

fertilization

of

landscap

e

Bioretention Owner

responsible,

recorded O&M

Agreement

CCCWP

C.3

Guideb

ook

NA NA Imperviou

s surface

less than 1

acre



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-12 9/30/16



(private projects)

Project Name

Project No.


Date18

Application

Final Approval

Date19

Source

Control

Measures20

Site Design

Measures21

Treatment Systems

Approved22

Type of Operation

& Maintenance

Responsibility

Mechanism23

Hydraulic

Sizing

Criteria24

Alternative

Compliance

Measures25/26

Alternative

Certification27

HM

Controls28/29

s, parking

areas,

plaza,

patio,

and

walkway

areas

drain to

bio-

retention

areas;

minimized



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-13 9/30/16



(public projects)

Project

Name

Project

No.

Approval

Date30

Date Construction

Scheduled to Begin

Source Control

Measures31

Site Design

Measures32

Treatment Systems

Approved33

Operation & Maintenance

Responsibility Mechanism34

Hydraulic

Sizing Criteria35

Alternative

Compliance

Measures36/37

Alternative

Certification38

HM

Controls39/40

Public Projects

Comments:

30

For public projects, enter the plans and specifications approval date. 31

List source control measures approved for the project. Examples include: properly designed trash storage areas; storm drain stenciling or signage; efficient landscape irrigation systems; etc. 32

List site design measures approved for the project. Examples include: minimize impervious surfaces; conserve natural areas, including existing trees or other vegetation, and soils; construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces, etc. 33

List all approved stormwater treatment system(s) to be installed onsite or at a joint stormwater treatment facility (e.g., flow through planter, bioretention facility, infiltration basin, etc.). 34

List the legal mechanism(s) (e.g., maintenance plan for O&M by public entity, etc…) that have been or will be used to assign responsibility for the maintenance of the post-construction stormwater treatment systems. 35

See Provision C.3.d.i. “Numeric Sizing Criteria for Stormwater Treatment Systems” for list of hydraulic sizing design criteria. Enter the corresponding provision number of the appropriate criterion (i.e., 1.a., 1.b., 2.a., 2.b., 2.c., or 3). 36

For Alternative Compliance at an offsite location in accordance with Provision C.3.e.i.(1), on a separate page, give a discussion of the alternative compliance site including the information specified in Provision C.3.b.v.(1)(m)(i) for the offsite project. 37

For Alternative Compliance by paying in-lieu fees in accordance with Provision C.3.e.i.(2), on a separate page, provide the information specified in Provision C.3.b.v.(1)(m)(ii) for the Regional Project. 38

Note whether a third party was used to certify the project design complies with Provision C.3.d. 39

If HM control is not required, state why not. 40

If HM control is required, state control method used (e.g., method to design and size device(s) or method(s) used to meet the HM Standard, and description of device(s) or method(s) used, such as detention basin(s), biodetention unit(s), regional detention basin, or in-stream control).



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-14 9/30/16

C.3.h.v.(2). ►Table of Newly Installed41

Stormwater Treatment Systems and

Hydromodification Management (HM) Controls (Optional)

Fill in table below or attach your own table including the same information.

Name of Facility Address of Facility

Party Responsible42

For Maintenance

Type of Treatment/HM

Control(s)

1251 Laverock, Alamo 1251 Laverock, Alamo Owner Bioretention Facilities

Westborough 1700 Tice Valley Boulevard, Walnut Creek Owner Bioretention Facilities

Hemme Estates 512 Hemme Ave. , Alamo Owner Bioretention Facilities

1202 Mountain View Blvd., Walnut

Creek

1202 Mountain View Blvd., Walnut Creek Owner Bioretention Facilities

41

“Newly Installed” includes those facilities for which the final installation inspection was performed during this reporting year. 42

State the responsible operator for installed stormwater treatment systems and HM controls.



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-15 9/30/16

C.3.e.v.Special Projects Reporting Table

Reporting Period – July 1 2015 - June 30, 2016

Project Name

& No.

Permittee Address Application

Submittal Date43

Status44 Description45 Site Total

Acreage

Gross

Density

DU/Acre

Density

FAR

Special Project

Category46

LID Treatment

Reduction Credit

Available47

List of LID Stormwater

Treatment Systems48

List of Non-LID

Stormwater Treatment

Systems49

Not

applicable

43

Date that a planning application for the Special Project was submitted. 44

Indicate whether final discretionary approval is still pending or has been granted, and provide the date or version of the project plans upon which reporting is based. 45

Type of project (commercial, mixed-use, residential), number of floors, number of units, type of parking, and other relevant information. 46

For each applicable Special Project Category, list the specific criteria applied to determine applicability. For each non-applicable Special Project Category, indicate n/a. 47

For each applicable Special Project Category, state the maximum total LID Treatment Reduction Credit available. For Category C Special Projects also list the individual Location, Density, and Minimized Surface Parking Credits available. 48

: List all LID stormwater treatment systems proposed. For each type, indicate the percentage of the total amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Special Project’s drainage area. 49

List all non-LID stormwater treatment systems proposed. For each type of non-LID treatment system, indicate: (1) the percentage of the total amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Special Project's drainage area, and (2) whether the treatment system either meets minimum design criteria published by a government agency or received certification issued by a government agency, and reference the applicable criteria or certification.



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-12 9/30/16

Special Projects Narrative

N/A



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-13 9/30/16

C.3.j.ii.(2) ► Table A - Public Projects Reviewed for Green

Infrastructure

Project Name and

Location44

Project Description Status45 GI

Included?46

Description of GI Measures

Considered and/or Proposed

or Why GI is Impracticable to Implement47

Tara Hills Pedestrian

Infrastructure Project. Dolan

Way, Flannery Road and

Shamrock Drive in the Tara

Hills area of unincorporated

San Pablo.

Install curb ramps along

Dolan Way, Flannery Road

and Shamrock Drive and

pedestrian improvements at

the intersection of Dolan

Way and Flannery Road.

Improve pedestrian

infrastructure by providing

ADA curb ramps and bulb-

outs.

Beginning planning

and design phase

TBD Only potential for GI has been identified. Type

and design of specific GI TBD.

Pedestrian Crossing

Enhancements - Central

and East County. Various

school locations in Central

& East County.

Construct Rectangular Rapid

Flash Beacons (RRFB) and

ADA curb ramps at

designated crosswalks near

schools. Increase driver

awareness at pedestrian

crosswalks near schools.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Balfour Road Shoulder

Widening - Sellers Avenue to

Bixler Road. Balfour Road

between Sellers Avenue

and Bixler Road in Discovery

Bay

Widen 3 miles of Balfour

Road and construct paved

shoulders. Improve safety

along Balfour Road.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Camino Tassajara Bike Lane

Gap Closure Project - Finley

Road to Windemere

Parkway. On Camino

Tassajara from Danville

Construct safety

improvements on Camino

Tassajara to improve bicycle

and vehicle travel from

Danville Town limits to

Beginning planning

and design phase



44

List each public project that is going through your agency’s process for identifying projects with green infrastructure potential. 45

Indicate status of project, such as: beginning design, under design (or X% design), projected completion date, completed final design date, etc. 46

Enter “Yes” if project will include GI measures, “No” if GI measures are impracticable to implement, or “TBD” if this has not yet been determined. 47

Provide a summary of how each public infrastructure project with green infrastructure potential will include green infrastructure measures to the maximum extent practicable during the permit term. If review of the project indicates that implementation of green infrastructure measures is not practicable, provide the reasons why green infrastructure measures are impracticable to implement.



FY 15-16 AR Form 3-14 9/30/16

Town limits to Alameda

County limits.

Alameda County limits.

Complete gaps in the Class 2

bike lanes along Camino

Tassajara.

Marsh Creek Road Traffic

Safety Improvements.

Located on Marsh Creek

Road between the city limits

of Clayton and Brentwood.

Install centerline rumble

strips/stripes; add lighting at

Deer Valley Road and Marsh

Creek Road intersection.

Improve roadway

infrastructure to improve

driver awareness and overall

safety.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Pedestrian Crossing

Enhancements - Central

and East County. Various

school locations in Central

and East County.

Construct Rectangular Rapid

Flash Beacons and ADA curb

ramps at designated

crosswalks near schools.

Increase driver awareness at

pedestrian crosswalks near

schools.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Marsh Drive Bridge

Replacement. On Marsh

Drive over Walnut Creek, 0.2

mi west of Solano Way.

Bridge replacement. The

existing bridge is

approaching the end of its

useful life.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Bailey Road Overlay Project

– State Route (SR) 4 to Keller

Canyon Landfill Entrance.

Unincorporated portions of

Bailey Road from the State

Route 4 westbound on-

ramp to Keller Canyon

Landfill Entrance.

Overlay Bailey Road.

Improve pavement

condition along Bailey Road.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Bay Point Curb Ramp

Project. Various locations

throughout unincorporated

Bay Point.

Install new curb ramps

and/or upgrade existing

curb ramps to meet current

ADA requirements on

roadways planned for

pavement surface

treatment.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Bay Point Sign Upgrade

Project. Various

unincorporated roadways

Replace regulatory and

warning roadway signs to

increase retro-reflectivity

Beginning planning

and design phase





FY 15-16 AR Form 3-15 9/30/16

throughout Bay Point. within the unincorporated

Bay Point area. Increase

traffic safety.

Kirker Pass Road

Northbound Truck Lanes.

Clearbrook Drive, Concord

to the eastern intersection

with Hess Road.

Widen roadway to add truck

climbing lane in the

northbound direction.

Reduce congestion and

improve safety along Kirker

Pass Road.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Pomona Street Pedestrian

Safety Improvements. The

project is located on

Pomona Street at 3rd

Avenue, Pomona Street at

Rolph Avenue and

approximately 700 feet east

of Rolph Avenue.

The project will add bulb-

outs, pedestrian refuge

islands, drainage facilities

and curb ramps at the

intersection of Pomona

Street and 3rd Avenue, and

Rolph Avenue. A raised

crosswalk will be added at

the existing crossing 700 feet

east of Rolph Avenue. The

purpose of this project is to

improve pedestrian safety

along Pomona Street in the

town of Crockett by

improving several existing

crosswalks.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Rodeo Downtown

Infrastructure Project.

Investment Street and

Pacific Avenue in

downtown Rodeo.

Construct sidewalk and curb

ramps along Pacific Avenue.

Improve access to Rodeo

Creek Trail on Investment

Street. Provide continuous

pedestrian improvements in

downtown Rodeo area.

Beginning planning

and design phase



Stormwater Treatment

Demonstration Project.

Public Works Department

parking lot - 255 Glacier

Drive, Martinez.

Construct storm water

treatment facility.

Improvements will provide

offsite stormwater treatment

mitigation.

Accomplished

already

YES Two bioretention basins have been installed in

the parking lot.

County-Wide Curb Ramp

Projects. Various locations

throughout County.

Install new curb ramps

and/or upgrade existing


standards. Upgrade existing

Beginning planning

and design phase





FY 15-16 AR Form 3-16 9/30/16


ADA requirements and

provide ADA access where it

may not currently exist.

County-Wide Operation &

Safety Improvements.

Various locations

throughout County.

Install traffic signage, striping,

signal modifications, and

other small operational and

safety improvements. To

provide improvements to

address operational and

safety concerns on County

roads.

Beginning planning

and design phase



County-Wide Overlay

Project. Portions of Vasco

Road, Pleasant Hill Road,

and Byron Highway.

Provide pavement

rehabilitation on portions of

selected roadways.

Pavement rehabilitation to

extend the life of the existing

pavement.

Beginning planning

and design phase



County-Wide Surface

Treatments. Various

locations throughout

County.

Surface treatments such as

chip seal or slurry seal

includes cleaning the road

surface, weed removal,

sweeping, site cleanup, and

placing striping and

pavement markings. Surface

treatment projects will

refurbish the existing

roadway, extend the life of

the road, and reduce the

long-term maintenance

costs.

Beginning planning

and design phase



County-Wide Traffic

Calming. Various locations

throughout County.

Plan for, design, and

construct traffic calming

devices and other

neighborhood traffic control

devices. To make residential

streets as quiet and safe as

possible, while still providing

access for neighbors and

local businesses.

Beginning planning

and design phase





FY 15-16 AR Form 3-17 9/30/16

C.3.j.ii.(2) ► Table B - Planned Green Infrastructure Projects

Project Name and

Location48

Project Description Planning or

Implementation Status

Green Infrastructure Measures Included

None

NA NA NA

48

List each planned (and expected to be funded) public and private green infrastructure project that is not also a Regulated Project as defined in Provision C.3.b.ii. Note that funding for green infrastructure components may be anticipated but is not guaranteed to be available or sufficient.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.4 – Industrial and Commercial Site Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 4-1 9/30/16

Section 4 – Provision C.4 Industrial and Commercial Site Controls


Summary:

Contra Costa County, representing the unincorporated county communities, is part of Contra Costa County’s Clean Water Program. Contra

County Watershed Program and Public Works Department (PWD) Maintenance staff participate in Contra Costa Clean Water Program’s

Municipal Operations Committee as well as the Commercial/Industrial Inspection Workgroup.

Staff from the County Health Services Department Hazardous Material Division (Haz Mat) and Environmental Health Division (Env. Health)

conduct industrial and commercial stormwater inspections on behalf of Contra Costa County. The County Watershed Program works with Haz

Mat and Environmental Health to review/update the master facility list and the list of facilities scheduled to be inspected. Inspection

frequencies and priorities are based on Contra Costa County’s Industrial and Commercial Businesses Stormwater Inspection Plan. In FY 15-16, the

County conducted 319 inspections of 293 facilities. More detailed information regarding the inspections is provided in the sections below.

The County works with businesses to attain compliance with storm water regulations. For the businesses with recurring potential or actual storm

water violations, Contra Costa County staff continues to work with facilities to attain compliance and to educate businesses and staff. Inspectors

coordinate with the Watershed Program for guidance and suggestions where problems occur. County staff from different departments work

together to communicate and to coordinate to find long term solutions when problems occur or do not appear to work over time. Staff have

meetings and trainings together as appropriate.

Inspectors and County Watershed staff attended the Annual Commercial/Industrial Inspector Training on May 5, 2016. County Watershed staff

conducted training for the Hazardous Materials and Environmental Health inspectors on the Municipal Stormwater Permit, inspections, and

inspection documentation on September 9, 2015. County Watershed and Hazmat staff conducted training for Public Works Maintenance Staff

on the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and First Responder Training on April 7, 2016.

Refer to the C.4. Industrial and Commercial Site Controls section of the CCCWPs FY 15-16 Annual Report for a description of activities of the

CCCWP’s Municipal Operations Committee and/or the BASMAA Municipal Operations Committee.

C.4.b.iii ► Potential Facilities List

List below or attach your list of industrial and commercial facilities in your Inspection Plan to inspect that could reasonably be considered to cause

or contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff.

ATTACHMENT C.4.b.iii.(1) ► Potential Facilities List



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-2 9/30/16

C.4.d.iii.(1)(a) ►Facility Inspections

Fill out the following table or attach a summary of the following information. Indicate your violation reporting methodology below.

Permittee reports multiple discrete violations on a site as one violation.

x Permittee reports the total number of discrete violations on each site.

Number Percent

Number of businesses inspected 293

Total number of inspections conducted 319

Number of violations (excluding verbal warnings) 91

Sites inspected in violation 47 16%

Violations resolved within 10 working days or otherwise deemed resolved in a longer but still timely manner 70 77%

Comments:

Contra Costa County records each compliance issue as a distinct violation. Therefore, a site may have multiple violations. The violations cited in

FY 2015-2016 by Haz Mat and Environmental Health Inspectors are described below.

The following summarizes the observed actual discharges:

1. AT&T Construction Group – The stormwater inspector (inspector) noticed erosion of a streambank due to the placement of a sump and hoses to

prevent flooding. Facility staff removed equipment pumping stormwater and the staff received training on appropriate BMPS for draining

stormwater so as not to create erosion of sediment.

2. Del Valle Produce – The inspector observed bags of trash, debris, and illegally dumped material present. Inspector instructed facility to properly

dispose of trash and debris. Facility personnel cleaned trash and illegally dumped material.

3. EBMUD Pump Station – The inspector noticed debris in the storm drains. Facility staff cleaned the storm drains.

4. JZ Auto Repair – The inspector observed an oil sheen and a small spill. Facility staff cleaned spill and absorbent and covered oil drum.

5. Pinole-Rodeo Autowreckers – The inspector noticed an oil sheen and recommended more effective best management practices (BMPs). The

BMPs recommended included tarping equipment, particularly before rain. Facility personnel implemented the proposed BMPs.

6. Safeway Beverage Plant –The inspector noticed debris in storm drain inlets and that secondary containment had oily water in the bottom.

Facility staff cleaned debris from the storm drains and cleaned the secondary containment pallets.

7. Saigon Noodle and Grill – The inspector observed cardboard outside, spills at the tallow bin area and discovered that the facility washed the

floor mats outside. Facility staff cleaned the tallow bin area, the debris, and began cleaning the floor mats inside the restaurant where the wash

water would drain to the sanitary sewer.

8. The Athenian School – The inspector noticed debris and water pooling in the storm drains. Facility staff cleaned storm drains.

The following summarizes the observed potential discharges:

1. A&B Autotech – The inspector observed scrap/waste metal outdoors. Facility staff removed the scrap/waste metal and had it recycled.

2. Action Metal Recycling (320 Pittsburg Ave) – The inspector observed some secondary containment to be emptied and absorbent to be



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-3 9/30/16

cleaned and asked facility personnel to implement these actions.

3. Anchor Marina (over 10 days to correct violation) – The inspector observed vehicles with spills and leaks and uncovered containers outside.

Facility personnel cleaned the spills and leaks and covered the containers appropriately.

4. Arlington Market – The inspector observed recycling materials stored outside. Facility personnel moved recycling materials inside until the

scheduled pickup.

5. Bay Area News Group – Contra Costa Times – The inspector observed debris and trash near storm drains. The inspector also noted that the

facility failed to submit a Notice of Intent to the State Water Resources Control Board for an Industrial Stormwater Permit. Facility staff removed the

debris and trash and implemented BMPs to remove debris and trash regularly to prevent a discharge to the storm drain system.

6. Bay Cities Refuse Service – The inspector observed overspray outside of the wash area and asked the facility to change their BMPs to eliminate

overspray and to train employees on the BMPs. The facility trained their employees the next day to use practices that prevent overspray.

7. California Thai Restaurant – The inspector noticed small trash and debris on the ground near the dumpster. Facility personnel cleaned the trash

and debris.

8. Central Foods – The inspector observed cardboard outside of the bin. Facility personnel put the cardboard in the bin.

9. Champion Scaffold Services – The inspector observed trash and debris. Facility personnel cleaned the trash and debris.

10. Concord-Cascade – The inspector inspected a pumphouse with a diesel tank where diesel could potentially be pumped to the creek. The

facility plans are being reviewed, a standard operating procedure is being reviewed, a spill, prevention, control and contingency plan is being

prepared and a new berm will be required for secondary containment around the tank.

11. Contra Costa County Corp Yard – The inspector observed open containers of material. Facility staff moved the containers under cover.

12. Del Valle Produce (over 10 days to correct violation) – The inspector observed trash and illegally dumped materials dumped outside the trash

dumpster. Facility personnel disposed of the debris and cleaned the area.

13. Discovery Bay Golf & Country Club – The inspector observed old materials stored uncovered outdoors. Facility personnel covered the

materials with a tarp.

14. Durham School Services – The inspector noticed containers of oil outside and not covered. Facility staff closed the oil containers and moved

them into an inside cabinet.

15. El Grullense – The inspector noticed some trash and debris outside, spills around the tallow bin, and the dumpster bin left open. The inspector

also determined that mats had been cleaned outside. The facility personnel cleaned the trash, debris, tallow bin area, and closed the trash bin.

Facility staff began cleaning the mats inside.

16. El Sobrante Smog & Auto Repair – The inspector observed open containers of metal uncovered and an oily sheen on the ground. Facility staff

covered the containers and used absorbent to clean the oil sheen.

17. Ernie’s Plumbing – The inspector noticed a couple of open containers with liquids. Facility personnel closed and disposed of containers at a

hazardous waste center.

18. Fiberglass Pool Resurfacing – The inspector observed debris on the ground. Facility staff cleaned the debris and was advised to keep outdoor

areas swept up.

19. Great Donuts – The inspector noticed a leaking dumpster. Facility personnel had the dumpster replaced.

20. ITW Angleboard – The inspector saw paper and debris on the facility. Facility staff cleaned the paper and debris immediately and

incorporated regular cleanups into their normal practices.

21. Jackson Land & Cattle LP – The inspector noted that the facility needed to improve their housekeeping. Facility personnel cleaned the area.

22. Jiffy Lube – The inspector observed trash and staining of the parking lot. Facility personnel cleaned the area and had the stains pressure



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-4 9/30/16

washed and the wash water collected.

23. La Finca – The inspector observed a drainage pipe to a drainage ditch. Facility employees capped the drainage pipe.

24. Kleen-Brite Cleaners – The inspector observed a drum with an open bung stored outside. Facility staff closed the drum.

25. McAvoy Yacht Harbor – The inspector noticed parts and debris. Facility personnel moved the debris and cleaned the area.

26. Mid-Valley Agricultural Services, Inc. (over 10 days to correct violation) – Inspector observed empty soil amendment containers. Facility

personnel built covered area under which to store containers.

27. Oliver’s Hardware – Inspector noticed debris and trash on the ground. Facility staff cleaned the facility. Facility personnel are implementing a

regular cleaning schedule.

28. Oliveira Enterprises – The inspector observed diesel fuel leaking from the pump. Facility personnel cleaned the pump and pump area and

disposed of contaminated soil.

29. Pinole-Rodeo Autowrecker – see description of violations and corrective actions above.

30. Safeway – The inspector did not see adequate spill response equipment for facility. Facility staff obtained proper equipment for the dock.

31. Safeway Beverage Plant – The inspector observed debris in storm drains and secondary containment with oily liquids. Facility personnel

cleaned the storm drain inlets and removed and disposed of the oily liquids from the secondary containment.

32. Saigon Noodle and Grill – The inspector observed some trash on the ground, spills around the tallow bin and learned that mats were washed

outside. Facility personnel cleaned the spills and trash and began cleaning mats inside.

33. Sam’s Club – the inspector noticed trash in the parking lot. Facility personnel cleaned the trash. Trash is picked up nightly.

34. Shore Acres Gas/Bay Point Auto Repair – The inspector observed oil and water accumulation on drums and containment pallets. Facility

employees cleaned them.

35. Sierra Pacific Tours – The inspector observed staining and spills, debris, and an open dumpster. Facility personnel cleaned the spills and debris

and closed the dumpster.

36. Starbuck’s Coffee – The inspector noticed garbage open bags and cardboard on the ground. Facility staff cleaned the garbage for proper

disposal.

37. Superstop- The inspector observed an overflowing trash area. Facility staff cleaned the area and has employees clean the area every 2 days.

38. Taco Bell – The inspector observed trash. The manager cleaned the trash and will also coordinate with other businesses.

39. The Conco Companies – The inspector observed trash and debris outside. Facility personnel cleaned the trash and debris.

40. United Truck Repair – The inspector noticed open containers of waste fuel and antifreeze. Facility personnel closed the containers.

41. Universal Building and Supply – The inspector noticed that the dumpster was not covered. Facility staff implemented the practice of covering

the dumpster in between uses and cleaned up the scrap metal on the yard.

42. VV Recycling – The inspector observed some trash along the curb. Facility staff cleaned trash and implemented a program to sweep the

facility daily and put a sock around the storm drain to reduce potential pollutants to the storm drain.

43. Xenia Bistro – The inspector noticed a previous leak from the garbage can. Facility personnel had the garbage can replaced.



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-5 9/30/16

C.4.d.iii.(1)(b) ►Frequency and Types/Categories of Violations

Observed

Fill out the following table or attach a summary of the following information.

Type/Category of Violations Observed Number of Violations

Actual discharge (e.g. active non-stormwater discharge or clear evidence of a recent discharge) 17

Potential discharge and other 74

Comments:

Contra Costa County records each potential or actual potential discharge source as a separate violation.

Therefore, a facility may have multiple violations. The violations are described by facility in the section above

C.4.d.iii.(1)(b) ►Frequency and Type of Enforcement Conducted


Enforcement Action

(as listed in ERP)49

Number of Enforcement

Actions Taken

% of Enforcement

Actions Taken50

Level 1 Notice to Comply/Warning Notice 74 81%

Level 2 Notice of Violation 17 19%

Level 3 Administrative Order/Cost Recovery 0 0%

Level 4 Referral to State/Federal Agencies 0 0%

Total 91 100%

49

Agencies to list specific enforcement actions as defined in their ERPs. 50

Percentage calculated as number of each type of enforcement action divided by the total number of enforcement actions.



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-6 9/30/16

C.4.d.iii.(1)(c) ►Types of Violations Noted by Business Category


Business Category51

Number of Actual

Discharge Violations

Number of Potential/Other

Discharge Violations

Auto Dismantler 2 0

Auto Maintenance/Repair (Diesel Engines, Motors, Transmission) /Sales, Grounds Maintenance, Parts Dept, Tire Repair/Sales

3 3

Beverage Manufacturing 1 1

Boat Storage 0 3

Building services and supply 0 2

Concrete/Decorative Concrete 0 1

Construction 1 1

Dry Cleaner 0 1

Farm/Farm & Storage Yard/Orchard 0 2

Gas Station & Mini Market 0 1

Hardware Store 0 1

Manufactured Home Community 0 1

Metals/Appliance Recycler 0 2

MFG, Angleboard 0 1

News Service 0 1

Plumbing 0 1

Public Corp Yard 0 1

Recycling/Recycling Operations 0 2

Resurfacing 0 1

Retail Store 0 1

Supplies for Water Treatment and Resources 1 0

51

List your Program’s standard business categories.



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-7 9/30/16

Truck Repair 0 2

Truck/Bus Storage 0 3

Café 1 5

Convenience Store 0 1

Fast Food Establishment 0 1

Golf Course 0 1

Grocery 2 8

Marina 0 13

Restaurant 5 13

School 0 1

C.4.d.iii.(1)(d) ►Non-Filers

List below or attach a list of the facilities required to have coverage under the Industrial General Permit but have not filed for coverage:

Unincorporated County identified one non-filer during FY 15-16: the Bay Area News Group, 2505 Dean Lesher Drive, Concord, CA 94520.

C.4.e.iii ►Staff Training Summary

Training Name

Training

Dates Topics Covered

No. of

Industrial/

Commercial

Site

Inspectors in

Attendance

Percent of

Industrial/

Commercial

Site

Inspectors in

Attendance

No. of IDDE

Inspectors

in

Attendance

Percent of

IDDE

Inspectors

in

Attendance

Stormwater

Inspection

Refresher

Training

September

25, 2015

Stormwater Permit

Conducting Stormwater Inspections

Documentation of Inspections

20 100% 20 100%

Stormwater

Pollution

Prevention

Training for

Public Works

Maintenance

April 7, 2016 Stormwater vs. sanitary drains

Stormwater Permit

Contaminants and Best Management

Practices

Trash/Litter Reduction Requirements

Enforcement and Documentation

Hazardous Substance Awareness and First

NA NA 56

(potential

identifiers of

IDDEs)

86%



FY 15-16 AR Form 4-8 9/30/16

Responder Operations Training

Commercial

/Industrial

Stormwater

Inspection

Training

Workshop

May 5, 2016 Stormwater Inspections under MRP 2.0

Inspecting Public Works Corporation

Yards

Inspecting Mobile Businesses

Talkin’ Trash

21 100% 21 100%

Comments:

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.5 – Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination


FY 15-16 AR Form 5-1 9/30/16

Section 5 – Provision C.5 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination


Provide background information, highlights, trends, etc.

Summary:

Illicit discharges are often identified by citizens, Public Work Maintenance staff, Environmental Health staff, or Hazardous Materials staff. When

discharges are identified, staff makes the appropriate contacts for the situation. For example, if hazardous materials are identified or the

substance is unknown, Hazardous Materials staff are contacted.

Hazardous Materials, Environmental Health, Public Works Department Maintenance, and County Watershed staff responded to, referred,

documented and followed up on 68 illicit discharge complaints. Of these, 21 of the incidents reached the storm drains or waterways, and 55 of

68 incidents were resolved within 10 business days or less.

Contra Costa County participates in the Clean Water Program’s Municipal Operations Committee. Staff works with Clean Water Program Staff to

receive and pass on information from the County’s 1-800-No-Dumping line. Additionally, staff work with inspectors and code enforcement officers

to investigate the responsible party of the illicit discharge, determine more information, educate them, and if appropriate, clean up the

discharge, or impose fines, cost recovery, or other measures.

Refer to the C.5 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination section of the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report for description of activities at the

countywide or regional level.

C.5.c.iii ►Complaint and Spill Response Phone Number

List below or attach your complaint and spill response phone number

1-800-No-Dumping (800-663-8674)

Provide your complaint and spill response web address, if used

http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/depart/cd/recycle/illegal-dumping.htm (only for information, not for reporting incidents)

Is a screen shot of your website showing the central contact point attached? X Yes No

If No, explain:

Provide a discussion of how the central contact point (complaint and spill response phone number and, if used, web address) is being publicized

to your staff and the public.

http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/depart/cd/recycle/illegal-dumping.htm

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.5 – Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination


FY 15-16 AR Form 5-2 9/30/16

The 1-800-No-Dumping phone line goes to the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) staff. CCCWP staff disseminates information during

business days. After hours, callers are directed to call 911 in the event of an emergency or can be forwarded to the Contra Costa County

Hazardous Materials dispatch if the discharge is hazardous. This is publicized on Contra Costa County’s website, on CCCWP’s website, is

communicated by County Staff to citizens.

C.5.d.iii.(1), (2), (3) ►Spill and Discharge Complaint Tracking

Spill and Discharge Complaint Tracking (fill out the following table or include an attachment of the following information)

Number Percentage

Discharges reported (C.5.d.iii.(1)) 68

Discharges reaching storm drains and/or receiving waters (C.5.d.iii.(2)) 21 31

Discharges resolved in a timely manner (C.5.d.iii.(3)) 55 81

Comments:

See program explanation in the C.5 Program Highlights and Evaluation section.

C.5.f.iii ►MS4 Map Availability

Discuss how you make your MS4 map available to the public and how you publicize the availability of the MS4 map.

Citizens are able to come to the counter at Public Works and request information and some maps can be obtained online.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.6 – Construction Site Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 6-1 9/30/16

Section 6 – Provision C.6 Construction Site Controls

C.6.e.iii.(1) ►Hillside Development Criteria

What criteria is your agency using to determine hillside

development areas?

Local criteria such as maps of

hillside development areas or

other written criteria

X

The permit definition of projects on

sites with ≥ 15% slope

Attach a copy of hillside development area maps or provide your written criteria below, if applicable.

Description: Not applicable, as the County does not have a Hillside Development Ordinance.

C.6.e.iii.2.a, b, c ►Site/Inspection Totals

Number of High Priority Sites (sites disturbing < 1 acre of

soil requiring storm water runoff quality inspection)

(C.6.e.iii.1.a)

Number of sites disturbing ≥ 1 acre

of soil

(C.6.e.iii.1.b)

Total number of storm water runoff quality

inspections conducted (include only High Priority

Site and sites disturbing 1 acre or more)

(C.6.e.iii.1.c)

3 16

113

Comments:

Sites inspected were primarily for residential land development. No notices of violations were issued; only verbal warnings were needed.



FY 15-16 AR Form 6-2 9/30/16

C.6.e.iii.2.d ►Construction Activities Storm Water Violations

BMP Category Number of Violations52

excluding Verbal Warnings

% of Total Violations53

Erosion Control 0 NA

Run-on and Run-off Control 0 NA

Sediment Control 0 NA

Active Treatment Systems 0 NA

Good Site Management 0 NA

Non Stormwater Management 0 NA

Total54

0 100%

52

Count one violation in a category for each site and inspection regardless of how many violations/problems occurred in the BMP category. For example, if during one inspection at a site, there are 2 erosion control violations, only 1 violation would be counted for this table.

53Percentage calculated as number of violations in each category divided by total number of violations in all six categories.

54The total number of violations may count more than one violation per inspection, since some inspections may result in violations in more than one category. For example, during one inspection of a site, there may have been both an erosion control violation and a sediment control violation. For this reason, the total number of violations in this table may not match the total number of enforcement actions reported in Table C6.e.iii.1.e.



FY 15-16 AR Form 6-3 9/30/16

C.6.e.iii.2.e ►Construction Related Storm Water Enforcement

Actions

Enforcement Action

(as listed in ERP)55

Number Enforcement

Actions Issued

% Enforcement Actions

Issued56

Level 157

23 100%

Level 2 0 0%

Level 3 0 0%

Level 4 0 0%

Total 23 100%

C.6.e.iii.2.f, g ►Illicit Discharges

Number

Number of illicit discharges, actual and those inferred through evidence at high priority sites and sites that disturb 1 acre or

more of land (C.6.e.iii.1.f)

0

Number of sites with discharges, actual and those inferred through evidence at high priority sites and sites that disturb 1 acre

or more of land (C.6.e.iii.1.g)

0

55

Agencies should list the specific enforcement actions as defined in their ERPs. 56

Percentage calculated as number of each type of enforcement action divided by the total number of enforcement actions. 57

For example, Enforcement Level 1 may be Verbal Warning.



FY 15-16 AR Form 6-4 9/30/16

C.6.e.iii.2.h, i ►Violation Correction Times

Number Percent

Violations (excluding verbal warnings) fully corrected within 10 business days after violations are discovered or

otherwise considered corrected in a timely period (C.6.e.iii.1.h)

NA %58

Violations (excluding verbal warnings) not fully corrected within 30 days after violations are discovered

(C.6.e.iii.1.i)

NA %59

Total number of violations (excluding verbal warnings) for the reporting year60 0 100%

Comments:

NA

C.6.e.iii.(4) ►Evaluation of Inspection Data

Describe your evaluation of the tracking data and data summaries and provide information on the evaluation results (e.g., data trends, typical

BMP performance issues, comparisons to previous years, etc.).

Description: C.6 Inspections are conducted by inspectors from both the County Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) and by

the Public Works Department (PWD); both DCD and PWD inspector forms are consistent in their reporting. Violation trends are similar to last year’s

with no written warnings or NOV’s issued; only verbal ones (there were two last year; 13 this year).

C.6.e.iii.(4) ►Evaluation of Inspection Program Effectiveness

Describe what appear to be your program’s strengths and weaknesses, and identify needed improvements, including education and outreach.

Description:

Contra Costa County continues to be involved in both the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program’s Development Committee and the Bay

Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association’s Development Committee. Please refer the C.6 Construction Site Control section of the

CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report for a description of activities at the countywide or regional level.

Enhancements originally made in PY 12-13, were continued in the current period for the Contra Costa County inspection program:

Training sessions have been conducted for County Watershed Program staff and for Grading Inspectors who are with Building Inspection

of the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) and for Construction Inspectors with the Public Works Department (PWD) at

58

Calculated as number of violations fully corrected in a timely period after the violations are discovered divided by the total number of violations for the reporting year. 59

Calculated as number of violations not fully corrected within 30 days after the violations are discovered divided by the total number of violations for the reporting year. 60

The total number of violations reported in the table of Violation Correction Times equals the number of initial enforcement actions, i.e., this assumes one violation is issued for several problems during an inspection at a site. The total number of violations in the table of Violation Correction Times may not equal the total number of enforcement actions because one violation issued at a site may have a second enforcement action for the same violation at the next inspection if it is not corrected.



FY 15-16 AR Form 6-5 9/30/16

the close of the rainy season every two years. This year’s took place on June 14, 2016 (see below for details about the topics covered).

There was a C.3 related workshop/training that included inspection updates.

The method for tracking inspections of projects continues to track separately inspections conducted by different departments, notably

DCD and PWD, and inspections conducted within different sections of an overall project. This ensures that there is continuity of

inspections by the same inspector for follow-up of construction site issues, and should increase the number of construction site stormwater-

specific inspections overall that are conducted for larger projects with discrete sub-projects.

The County Watershed Program has provided inspectors with guidance regarding designation of High Priority projects and participates in

the final c.6 inspections.

C.6.f ►Staff Training Summary

Training Name Training Dates Topics Covered

No. of Inspectors

in Attendance

CCCWP Construction Inspection Training

Workshop

June 14, 2016 1. C.6 Requirements Overview – Highlights on the MRP 2.0 Requirements

2. Municipal Perspective - Hillside Project Policy

3. C.6 BMPs Tool Box & BMP Resources 4. MRP 2.0 and General Construction

Permit Overlap and Differences

5. Inspections, Documentation, and

Reporting

8

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.7 – Public Information and Outreach


FY 15-16 AR Form 7-1 9/30/16

Section 7 – Provision C.7. Public Information and Outreach

C.7.b.i.1 ►Outreach Campaign

Summarize outreach campaign. Include details such as messages, creative developed, and outreach media used. The detailed outreach

campaign report may be included as an attachment. If outreach campaign is being done by participation in a countywide or regional program,

refer to the separate countywide or regional Annual Report.

Summary:

Refer to Section 7 in the CCCWP’s FY 1516 Annual Report for summary of activities related to planning and development of an Outreach

Campaign.

C.7.c. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Education

Local stormwater phone number(s) (925) 313-2392

Local/Regional stormwater website(s) www.cccleanwater.org

Outreach:

Refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report, Section C.7 “Public Information and Outreach” for details on how the CCCWP maintains and

publicizes the stormwater point of contact and provides stormwater pollution prevention education.



FY 15-16 AR Form 7-2 9/30/16

C.7.d ►Public Outreach and Citizen Involvement Events

Describe general approach to event selection. Provide a list of outreach materials and giveaways distributed.

Use the following table for reporting and evaluating public outreach events

Event Details Description (messages, audience) Evaluation of Effectiveness

Provide event name, date, and location.

Indicate if event is local, countywide or regional.

Identify type of event (e.g., school fair,

creek clean-up, storm drain stenciling,

farmers market etc.), type of audience

(school children, gardeners, homeowners

etc.) and outreach messages (e.g.,

Enviroscape presentation, pesticides,

stormwater awareness)

Provide general staff feedback on the event

(e.g., success at reaching a broad spectrum of

the community, well attended, good

opportunity to talk to gardeners etc.). Provide

other details such as:

Success at reaching a broad spectrum

of the community

Number of participants compared to

previous years.

Post-event effectiveness

assessment/evaluation results

Quantity/volume of materials cleaned

up, and comparisons to previous efforts

May 2016 “Bringing Back the Natives” Garden

Tours

Refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report, Section 7 Public Information and Outreach for a

full description of the events and activities and an evaluation of their effectiveness.

Website: CCCleanWater.org Community

Calendar

Refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report, Section 7 Public Information and Outreach for a

full description of the events and activities and an evaluation of their effectiveness.

Friends of Marsh Creek Watershed (FOMCW)

weekly Marsh Creek water monitoring on 7 sites,

ongoing year round, local.

Monitoring of water quality in Marsh Creek

and its tributaries under direction of an

aquatic toxicologist

108 volunteer attendees, including

Independence High School Outdoor Wetland

Program students and interns.

Native garden habitat restoration, 7/2/15, 2370

Harbor View, Martinez, CA. Local event.

Invasive weed removal by Alhambra HS

students through Friends of Alhambra Creek

2nd of two native garden habitat restorations

with 15 high school volunteers each.

El Sobrante Library Creekside Park Project, 7

restoration workdays during reporting period,

local.

Trash cleanup, creek bank restoration,

native plant demonstration garden planting

Removed 50 cu. ft. of trash, 100 cu. ft. of weeds,

installed interpretive signs, 9 volunteers, 139

hours.

Maintenance and establishment of 11 native

plant gardens along the “Alhambra Native Plant

Trail” in Martinez, various dates, local.

Various work projects through the Friends of

Alhambra Creek to establish new and

maintain existing native plant habitat.

Scope of project widened to include new

gardens at John Swett Elementary School, and

at a local community garden.



FY 15-16 AR Form 7-3 9/30/16

New Leaf Academy HS, ongoing monthly, local. Education and training of alternative HS

students in aquatic habitat pollution,

pollution prevention, concepts of basic

chemistry and hydrology, and water quality

monitoring techniques.

The unique program material and activities

seem to be a hit with both students and staff

judging from feedback and website content.

John Marsh outreach day, 10/17/2015, local. Education and outreach 800 attendees

Oakley 4th of July celebration, regional. Education and outreach Approximately 8000 attendees.

Striped Bass Fishing Derby, Antioch, 10/24/15,

local.

Education and outreach Approximately 50 participants.

“Aqua Team” internship program at Richmond

High School 2015-2016, local.

Education, outreach, trash assessments,

cleanups & sorting. Guided biotic surveys

(insects, trees, macro invertebrates).

14 student interns involved in year round

program at Richmond HS. 32 weekly after-

school meetings or events, including monitoring

workshops, outings, student-led community

outreach and presentations, construction of an

outdoor classroom.

Rodeo Creek Trash Assessments, 5X per year,

lower Rodeo Creek, local.

Trash assessment of lower Rodeo Creek

trash “hotspot.”

Provided all trash assessments required by the

CCC NPDES permit.

Rodeo Creek cleanups, 5/30/15 and 9/19/2015,

10/17/15 (not previously reported), local.

Trash cleanup. 74 volunteer “days”, 719 lbs (32 cubic yards) of

trash removed.

San Pablo Creek water quality monitoring,

monthly, 4 sites, local.

Water quality monitoring. Trained intern sampled and recorded basic

water quality parameters.

Rodeo Creek Trail restoration and maintenance. Planting and weeding. 12 volunteer “days”

Nature walks, San Pablo Creek, 6/3/15, 7/8/15,

8/5/15, local.

Education Educational walks conducted by local

professionals.

Crockett Sugar Coty Festival, 7/19/15, local. Outreach Recruit volunteers among est. 2500 attendees.



FY 15-16 AR Form 7-4 9/30/16

C.7.e. ►Watershed Stewardship Collaborative Efforts

Summarize watershed stewardship collaborative efforts and/or refer to a regional report that provides details. Describe the level of effort and

support given (e.g., funding only, active participation etc.). State efforts undertaken and the results of these efforts. If this activity is done regionally

refer to a regional report.

Evaluate effectiveness by describing the following:

Efforts undertaken

Major accomplishments

Summary:

Refer to the CCCWP’s C.7 section of the FY 15-16 Annual Report.

C.7.f. ►School-Age Children Outreach

Summarize school-age children outreach programs implemented. A detailed report may be included as an attachment.

Use the following table for reporting school-age children outreach efforts.

Program Details Focus & Short Description

Number of

Students/Teachers

reached Evaluation of Effectiveness

Provide the following

information:

Name

Grade or level (elementary/

middle/ high)

Brief description, messages, methods

of outreach used

Provide number or

participants

Provide agency staff feedback. Report any

other evaluation methods used (quiz, teacher

feedback etc.). Attach evaluation summary if

applicable.

Refer to the CCCWP’s C.7 section of the FY 15-16 Annual Report.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.9 – Pesticides Toxicity Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 9-1 9/30/16

Section 9 – Provision C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Controls

C.9.a. ►Implement IPM Policy or Ordinance

Is your municipality implementing its IPM Policy/Ordinance and Standard Operating Procedures? X Yes No

If no, explain:

Report implementation of IPM BMPs by showing trends in quantities and types of pesticides used, and suggest reasons for increases in use of

pesticides that threaten water quality, specifically organophosphates, pyrethroids, carbaryl, and fipronil. A separate report can be attached as

evidence of your implementation.

Trends in Quantities and Types of Pesticides Used61

Pesticide Category and Specific Pesticide Used Amount62

FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21

Organophosphates 0

Product or Pesticide Type A

Product or Pesticide Type B

Pyrethroids 0

Product or Pesticide Type X

Product or Pesticide Type Y

Carbamates

Product or Pesticide Type X 0


Fipronil 0

Product or Pesticide Type X


Indoxacarb Reporting

61

Includes all municipal structural and landscape pesticide usage by employees and contractors. 62

Weight or volume of the product or preferably its active ingredient, using same units for the product each year. Please specify units used. The active ingredients in any pesticide are listed on the label. The list of active ingredients that need to be reported in the pyrethroids class includes: metofluthrin, bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, beta-cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, lambdacyhalothrin, and permethrin.



FY 15-16 AR Form 9-2 9/30/16

not required

in FY 15-16

Diuron Reporting

not required

in FY 15-16

Diamides Reporting

not required

in FY 15-16

IPM Tactics and Strategies used:

The County’s IPM Committee developed a form for documenting pest management decision making process. Since then, the Departments have

been using this form to document decisions for various pests. This year, the Public Works Roadside and Flood Control Maintenance Division

developed a document for grazing as a vegetation management tool. The Committee recommends that the Departments continue to use the

form to document pest management decisions in the Departments. In this fourth and historically worst year of drought in California, the IPM

Advisory Committee made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on increasing the use of sustainable landscaping and reducing turf

around County buildings. The Grounds Division undertook a pilot turf conversion at the Pittsburg Health Center where about 70% of the turf was

removed and replaced with drought-tolerant and mulched landscaping. This project is estimated to save one million gallons of water per year

while greatly reducing the need for pesticides.

C.9.b ►Train Municipal Employees

Enter the number of employees that applied or used pesticides (including herbicides) within the scope of their duties this reporting

year. 34

Enter the number of these employees who received training on your IPM policy and IPM standard operating procedures within this

reporting year. 34

Enter the percentage of municipal employees who apply pesticides who have received training in the IPM policy and IPM standard

operating procedures within this reporting year. 100%

Type of Training:

Local tailgate training, CCCWP’s April 6, 2016 “How Pesticides Affect Soil Quality – A One Day Bay Friendly Course”



FY 15-16 AR Form 9-3 9/30/16

C.9.c ►Require Contractors to Implement IPM Did your municipality contract with any pesticide service provider in the reporting year? X Yes No

The IPM Coordinator and the County's contractor work together closely and discuss difficult issues that arise. The IPM Coordinator often provides

advice and research for the contractor. The IPM Coordinator reviews each work order requesting service of the County's contractor and is in

regular contact with the contractor about the progress of the structural IPM program. The IPM Coordinator approves the short list of pesticides that

can be used to combat pests in buildings (mainly baits and botanical oils) without posting and reviews and approves requests from the contractor

for the occasional use of pesticides not on that list for unusual pest situations. The contractor sits on the County's IPM Advisory Committee and its

subcommittees, reports at each meeting, and receives guidance from the Committee.

C.9.d ►Interface with County Agricultural Commissioners

Did your municipality communicate with the County Agricultural Commissioner to: (a) get input and assistance on

urban pest management practices and use of pesticides or (b) inform them of water quality issues related to

pesticides, X

Yes

No

If yes, summarize the communication. If no, explain.

Refer to the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report, Section C.9 Pesticide Toxicity Controls for a summary of the CCCWP’s communication with Contra

Costa County Agricultural Commissioner.

County Watershed Program staff chair the County’s Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee to the Board of Supervisors. The

committee made up of representatives of local non-profit organizations, local agricultural interests, and general citizens examines

Did your municipality report any observed or citizen-reported violations of pesticide regulations (e.g., illegal handling

and applications of pesticides) associated with stormwater management, particularly the California Department of

Pesticide Regulation (DPR) surface water protection regulations for outdoor, nonagricultural use of pyrethroid

pesticides by any person performing pest control for hire.

Yes

X

No

If yes, provide a summary of improper pesticide usage reported to the County Agricultural Commissioner and follow-up actions taken to correct

any violations. A separate report can be attached as your summary.



FY 15-16 AR Form 9-4 9/30/16

C.9.e.ii (1) ►Public Outreach: Point of Purchase

Provide a summary of public outreach at point of purchase, and any measurable awareness and behavior changes resulting from outreach (here

or in a separate report); OR reference a report of a regional effort for public outreach in which your agency participates.

Summary:

The C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Control section of the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report for information on point of purchase public outreach

conducted countywide and regionally.

C.9.e.ii (2) ►Public Outreach: Pest Control Contracting Outreach Provide a summary of outreach to residents who use or contract for structural pest control and landscape professionals); AND/OR reference a

report of a regional effort for outreach to residents who hire pest control and landscape professionals in which your agency participates.

Summary:

See the C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Control section of the CCCWPs FY 15-16 Annual Report for information on pest control contracting outreach

conducted countywide and regionally.

C.9.e.ii.(3) ►Public Outreach: Pest Control Operators

Provide a summary of public outreach to pest control operators and landscapers and reduced pesticide use (here or in a separate report);

AND/OR reference a report of a regional effort for outreach to pest control operators and landscapers in which your agency participates.

Summary:

See the C.9 Pesticides Toxicity Control section of the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report for a summary of public outreach to pest control operators

and landscapers.

C.9.f ►Track and Participate in Relevant Regulatory Processes

Summarize participation efforts, information submitted, and how regulatory actions were affected; AND/OR reference a regional report that

summarizes regional participation efforts, information submitted, and how regulatory actions were affected.

Summary:

During FY 15-16, we participated in regulatory processes related to pesticides through contributions to the CCCWP, BASMAA and CASQA. For

additional information, see the Regional Report submitted by BASMAA on behalf of all MRP Permittees.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.10 – Trash Load Reduction


FY 15-16 AR Form 10-1 9/30/16

Section 10 - Provision C.10 Trash Load Reduction

C.10.a.i ► Trash Load Reduction Summary

For Population-based Permittees, provide an estimate of the overall trash reduction percentage achieved to-date within the jurisdictional area of

your municipality that generates problematic trash levels (i.e., Very High, High or Moderate trash generation). Base the estimate on the information

presented in C.10.b i-iv and C.10.e.i-ii. Provide a discussion of the trash estimate below, including whether the applicable trash reduction

performance guideline or deadline was attained. If not attained, include a discussion of next steps (e.g., development of a detailed plan or report

of non-compliance).

Trash Load Reductions

Percent Trash Reduction in All Trash Management Areas (TMAs) due to Trash Full Capture Systems (as reported C.10.b.i) 5.5%

Percent Trash Reduction in all TMAs due to Control Measures Other than Trash Full Capture Systems (as reported in C.10.b.ii) 37.6%

Percent Trash Reduction due to Jurisdictional-wide Source Control Actions (as reported in C.10.b.iv) 0

SubTotal for Above Actions 43.1%

Trash Offsets (Optional)

Offset Associated with Additional Creek and Shoreline Cleanups (as reported in C.10.e.i) 0.5%

Offset Associated with Direct Trash Discharges (as reported in C.10.e.ii) 0%

Total Estimated % Trash Load Reduction in FY 15-16 43.6%



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-2 9/30/16

C.10.a.i ► Trash Load Reduction Summary

For Population-based Permittees, provide an estimate of the overall trash reduction percentage achieved to-date within the jurisdictional area of

your municipality that generates problematic trash levels (i.e., Very High, High or Moderate trash generation). Base the estimate on the information

presented in C.10.b i-iv and C.10.e.i-ii. Provide a discussion of the trash estimate below, including whether the applicable trash reduction

performance guideline or deadline was attained. If not attained, include a discussion of next steps (e.g., development of a detailed plan or report

of non-compliance).

Discussion of Trash Load Reduction Estimate: A combination of changes in trash calculation methods and budgetary constraints caused Contra

Costa County to fail to meet the 70% trash reduction requirement. Consequently the County intends to take several actions to achieve 70% by July

2017.

Trash Reduction Strategy Potential Trash

Reduction Benefits

Anticipated Costs

Existing Trash Reduction Activities 43.6% ~$560,000/yr for contractor + $10,000 for staff

monitoring of effectiveness

Install trash capture devices in the Montalvin Manor and

NE Bay Point neighborhoods

7.5%

Inlet trash capture: $420,000 (installation) +

$355,000/yr (maintenance)

Design and implement a Direct Discharge Reduction

Program to address illegal dumping directly into streams,

primarily from homeless encampments

Up to 15%

$50,000 to plan & write

$200,000+/yr to implement

Increase on-land clean-ups using contractors at strategic

locations to achieve a cleaner standard

0 - 14.4%

Additional $136,000 /year for contractor clean-ups

Pass a polystyrene food ware ordinance 3-5% $20,000 to plan & implement + $5,000/year to

monitor

Community based trash abatement 3-5% +? $20,000 to start + $10,000 year

TOTAL Trash Reduction 86.5 - 90.5% $1,186,000 + $580,000/yr



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-3 9/30/16

C.10.a.iii ► Mandatory Trash Full Capture Systems

Provide the following:

1) Total number and types of full capture systems (publicly and privately-owned) installed prior to FY 15-16, during FY 15-16, and to-date, including inlet-based

and large flow-through or end-of-pipe systems, and qualifying low impact development (LID) required by permit provision C.3.

2) Total land area (acres) treated by full capture systems for population-based Permittees and total number of systems for non-population based Permittees

compared to the total required by the permit.

Type of System # of Systems Areas Treated

(Acres)

Installed Prior to FY 15-16

Connector Pipe Screen 50 104.31

Bioflex Trash Guard – Top Hat 79 19.33

Bioflex Trash Guard - Crescent 10 147.17

Installed in FY 15-16

0

Total for all Systems Installed To-date 139 270.81

Treatment Acreage Required by Permit (Population-based Permittees) 140

Total # of Systems Required by Permit (Non-population-based Permittees) 1



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-4 9/30/16

C.10.b.i ► Trash Reduction - Full Capture Systems


1) Jurisdictional-wide trash reduction in FY 15-16 attributable to trash full capture systems implemented in each TMA; 2) The total number of full capture systems installed to-date in your jurisdiction;

3) Since the effective date of MRP 2.0 (January 1, 2016), the percentage of systems that exhibited significant plugged/blinded screens or were >50% full when

inspected or maintained;

4) A narrative summary of any maintenance issues and the corrective actions taken to avoid future full capture system performance issues; and

5) A certification that each full capture system is operated and maintained to meet the full capture system requirements in the permit.

TMA Jurisdiction-wide

Reduction (%)

Total # of Full

Capture

Systems

% of Systems Exhibiting

Plugged/Blinded Screens

or >50% full

Summary of Maintenance Issues and Corrective Actions

Bay Point 4.2%

139

30%

The full trash capture systems are inspected about 3 times per

year. The method of recording this information is being

reviewed and revised so that the appropriate information is

collected, recorded, and communicated, as appropriate for

each inspection. The methods of cleaning these systems are

also being reviewed and alternative equipment explored so as

to be more efficient.

El Sobrante .9%

Pacheco .3%

Total 5.5%

Certification Statement:

Contra Costa County certifies that a full capture system maintenance and operation program is currently being implemented to maintain all

applicable systems in manner that meets the full capture system requirements included in the Permit.



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-5 9/30/16

C.10.b.ii ► Trash Reduction – Other Trash Management Actions (PART A)

Provide a summary of trash control actions other than full capture systems or jurisdictional source controls that were implemented within each TMA,

including the types of actions, levels and areal extent of implementation, and whether actions are new, including initiation date.

Note that additional county-wide actions include C.4 inspections. Inspectors observe trash at facilities and have facility personnel clean the area

and improve regular housekeeping practices. These actions are challenging to monitor and obtain trash reduction credit for these potential

reductions at this time.

TMA Summary of Trash Control Actions Other than Full Capture Systems

Alamo,

Diablo,

Blackhawk

None

Alhambra

Valley Road The trash control action implemented includes: on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012.

Alhambra

and Reliez

Valley

None

Bailey Road The trash control action implemented includes: on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012.

Bay Point

The trash control actions implemented include: on-land cleanups conducted by both a County contractor (2012) and through the

County’s Adopt-a-Road volunteer program implemented in 2010; enhanced street cleaning, increased frequency on the main

commercial streets since 2009; and partial trash capture devices, automatic retractable screens (ARS) screens. The ARS screens

are installed in the curb inlets of catch basins with full trash capture (FTC) systems and maintained at the same time as the FTC

systems, about 3 times per year.

Bethel Island None

Byron None

Byron Airport None

Castro

Ranch Road The trash control action implemented includes: on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012.

Clyde None

Crockett/Port

Costa

The trash control actions implemented include: enhanced street sweeping, increased frequency in the commercial and high trash

areas, has been performed since early 2015; and on-land cleanups have been conducted by a County contractor since 2014.

Discovery None



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-6 9/30/16

Bay

El Sobrante

The following trash control actions have been implemented in El Sobrante: enhanced street sweeping, increased frequency in the

commercial and high trash areas, since early 2015; on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012; and partial full trash

capture devices, ARS screens, since 2013. The ARS screens are installed at the curb inlets of catch basins with FTC systems and

maintained at the same time as the FTC systems, about 3 times per year.

Franklin

Canyon Rd The trash control action implemented includes: on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012.

Kensington None

Kirker Pass

Rd The trash control action implemented includes: on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012.

Knightsen None

North

Richmond

The trash control actions implanted include: enhanced street sweeping, increased frequency in high trash areas, since 2012; on-

land cleanups conducted by a County contractor since 2012.

Pacheco


areas, since early 2015; and partial trash capture devices, ARS screens, since 2013. The ARS screens are installed in curb inlets at

catch basins with FTC systems and maintained at the same time as the FTC systems, about 3 times per year.

Pinole Valley

Rd None

Rodeo

The trash control actions implemented include: enhanced street sweeping, increased frequency in residential areas generating

high levels of trash, since 2012; enhanced street sweeping, increased frequency in the commercial area and high trash areas, since

early 2015; and on-land cleanup of residential and commercial areas by a County contractor since 2012.

San Pablo

Dam Rd Trash control actions include: on-land cleanups by a County contractor since 2012.

Uninc

Antioch None

Uninc

Brentwood None

Uninc

Clayton None

Uninc

Concord Trash control actions include: on-land cleanups of residential and commercial areas by a County contractor since 2012.

Uninc

Martinez

Trash control actions implemented include: enhanced street sweeping, increased frequency in the commercial and high trash

areas, since early 2015; and on-land cleanup of residential and commercial areas by a County contractor since 2012.



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-7 9/30/16

Uninc Moraga

None

Uninc

Oakley None

Uninc

Pittsburg None

Uninc

Pleasant Hill None

Uninc

Richmond


areas, since early 2015; and on-land cleanups of the high trash areas by a County contractor since 2012.

Uninc San

Ramon

In unincorporated San Ramon, the trash control action implemented has been regular on-land cleanups through the County’s

volunteer Adopt-a-Road program, since 2010. Visual assessments will be incorporated in the coming year to assess this area.

Uninc Walnut Creek

None



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-8 9/30/16

C.10.b.ii ► Trash Reduction – Other Trash Management Actions (PART B)


1) A summary of the on-land visual assessments in each TMA (or control measure area), including the street miles or acres available for

assessment (i.e., those associated with VH, H, or M trash generation areas not treated by full capture systems), the street miles or acres

assessed, the % of available street miles or acres assessed, and the average number of assessments conducted per site within the TMA; and

2) Percent jurisdictional-wide trash reduction in FY 15-16 attributable to trash management actions other than full capture systems implemented

in each TMA.

TMA ID

or (as applicable)

Control Measure Area

Total Street Miles or

Acres Available for

Assessment

Summary of On-land Visual Assessments

Jurisdictional-wide

Reduction (%) Street Miles or Acres

Assessed

% of Applicable Street

Miles or Acres

Assessed

Avg # of Assessments

Conducted at Each Site

Alamo/Diablo/Black NA 0.0 0.0 0 0.0

Alham Valley Road 3.3 0.9 25.9 1 0.6

Alham&Reliez Valley NA 0.0 0.0 0 0.0

Bailey Road 0.9 0.4 40.0 1 0.7

Bay Point 6.5 2.2 34.5 3 4.5

Bethel Island 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0

Byron 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0

Byron Airport Zone 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0

Castro Ranch Road 0.4 0.2 50.4 1 0.1

Clyde NA - - - -

Crockett/Port Costa 1.1 0.5 45.4 3 0.4

Cummings Skyway 3.5 0.8 21.9 1 3.2

Discovery Bay NA - - - -

El Sobrante 1.9 0.5 24.9 3 0.8



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-9 9/30/16

Franklin Canyon Rd 2.3 0.6 25.1 1 0.9

Kensington NA - - - -

Kirker Pass Rd 3.1 0.7 21.1 1 6.6

Knightsen NA - - - -

North Richmond 10.5 1.3 12.7 3 5.5

Pacheco 1.2 0.3 28.5 3 0.4

Pinole Valley Rd NA - - - -

Rodeo 3.7 1.4 38.9 3 4.7

San Pablo Dam Rd NA - - - -

Uninc Antioch NA - - - -

Uninc Brentwood NA - - - -

Uninc Clayton NA - - - -

Uninc Concord 0.2 0.0 24.3 3 0.1

Uninc Martinez 1.2 0.5 41.0 3 0.2

Uninc Moraga NA - - - -

Uninc Oakley NA - - - -

Uninc Pittsburg NA - - - -

Uninc Pleasant Hill NA - - - -

Uninc Richmond 9.4 1.3 14.1 2 8.9

Uninc San Ramon NA - - - -

Uninc Walnut Creek NA - - - -

Total 11.6 23.6 32 37.6



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-10 9/30/16

C.10.b.iv ► Trash Reduction – Source Controls

Provide a description of each jurisdictional-wide trash source control action implemented to-date. For each control action, identify the trash reduction

evaluation method(s) used to demonstrate on-going reductions, summarize the results of the evaluation(s), and provide the associated reduction of

trash within your jurisdictional area. Also include the total % reduction credit for all source controls up to the maximum 10% allowed by MRP 2.0.

Source Control

Action

Summary Description &

Dominant Trash Sources and Types Targeted Evaluation/Enforcement Method(s)

Summary of Evaluation/Enforcement

Results To-date

%

Reduction

Total

Reduction

Credit (%)

NA

C.10.c ► Trash Hot Spot Cleanups

Provide the FY 15-16 cleanup date and volume of trash removed during each MRP-required Trash Hot Spot cleanup during each fiscal year

listed. Indicate whether the site was a new site in FY 15-16.

Trash Hot Spot

New Site in

FY 15-16

(Y/N)

FY 15-16 Cleanup

Date(s)

Volume of Trash Removed (cubic yards)

FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16

CCC-SF01 Grayson Creek @

Center Ave N 6/22/2016 169 lbs. 340 lbs. 74 lbs. 65 lbs. 35 lbs.

CCC-SF01 Rodeo Creek @ 7th

Street N 6/18/2016 114 lbs 257 lbs. 118 lbs. 120 lbs. 306 lbs

CCC-SF03 Wildcat Creek @

Verde N 4/16/2016 388 lbs. 1145 lbs.

(includes

Earth Day

activities at

additional

sites)

55 lbs. 87 lbs. 240

CCC-SF04 San Pablo Creek @ El

Sobrante N 4/23/2016 115 lbs. 360 lbs. 85 lbs. 92 lbs. 16 lbs



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-11 9/30/16

C.10.d ►Long-Term Trash Load Reduction Plan

Provide descriptions of significant revisions made to your Long-term Trash Load Reduction Plan submitted to the Water Board in February 2014.

Describe significant changes made to primary or secondary trash management areas (TMA), trash generation maps, control measures, or time

schedules identified in your plan. Indicate whether your trash generation map was revised and is attached to your Annual Report.

Description of Significant Revision Associated

TMA

Contra Costa County is submitting a revised Long-Term Trash Load Reduction Plan separately. All

C.10.e. ► Trash Reduction Offsets (Optional)

Provide a summary description of each offset program implemented, the volume of trash removed, and the offset claimed in FY 15-16. Also, for additional creek and

shoreline cleanups, describe the number and frequency of cleanups conducted, and the locations and cleanup dates. For direct discharge control programs

approved by the Water Board Executive Officer, also describe the results of the assessments conducted in receiving waters to demonstrate the effectiveness of the

control program. Include an Appendix that provides the calculations and data used to determine the trash reduction offset.

Offset Program Summary Description of Actions and Assessment Results

Volume of Trash (CY)

Removed/Controlled

in FY 15-16

Offset

(Jurisdiction-wide

Reduction %)

Additional Creek

and Shoreline

Cleanups

(Max 10% Offset)

N. Richmond volunteers conducted two cleanups of a section of Wildcat Creek in N.

Richmond just upstream and downstream of the bridge at Fred Jackson Way. 5.4

.5%

Direct Trash

Discharge

Controls

(Max 15% Offset)

NA

- -

CCC-CV01 Marsh Creek @

Delta Rd. N 8 lbs. 360 lbs. 12 lbs. 15 lbs. 8 lbs.


Permittee Name: _____

FY 15-16 AR Form 10-12 9/30/16

Appendix XX. Baseline trash generation and areas addressed by full capture systems and other control measures in Fiscal Year 15-16.

TMA

2009 Baseline Trash Generation

(Acres)

Trash Generation (Acres) in FY 15-16 After

Accounting for Full Capture Systems

Jurisdiction-

wide

Reduction via

Full Capture

Systems (%)

Trash Generation (Acres) in FY 15-16

After Accounting for Full Capture Systems and

Other Control Measures

Jurisdiction-

wide

Reduction via

Other Control

Measures (%)

Jurisdiction-wide

Reduction via Full

Capture AND

Other Control

Measures (%) L M H VH Total L M H VH Total L M H VH Total

Alamo/ Diablo/Black 10654 106 0 0 10760 10654 106 0 0 10760 0.0 10,654 106 0 0 10,760 0.0 0.0

Alham Valley Road 2 0 26 0 28 2 0 26 0 28 0.0 13 6 9 0 28 0.6 0.6

Alham& Reliez Valley 1693 8 55 0 1755 1693 8 55 0 1755 0.0 1,693 8 55 0 1,755 0.0 0.0

Bailey Road 3 0 0 8 11 3 0 0 8 11 0.0 7 0 4 1 11 0.7 0.7

Bay Point 1701 621 256 11 2589 1845 543 198 3 2589 4.2 1,955 551 77 6 2,589 4.5 8.7

Bethel Island 3264 158 3 0 3424 3264 158 3 0 3424 0.0 3,264 158 3 0 3,424 0.0 0.0

Byron 157 15 5 0 176 157 15 5 0 176 0.0 157 15 5 0 176 0.0 0.0

Byron Airport Zone 1461 0 0 0 1461 1461 0 0 0 1461 0.0 1,461 0 0 0 1,461 0.0 0.0

Castro Ranch Road 2 0 3 0 5 2 0 3 0 5 0.0 3 2 0 0 5 0.1 0.1

Clyde 85 4 0 0 89 85 4 0 0 89 0.0 85 4 0 0 89 0.0 0.0

Crockett/Port Costa 918 195 66 0 1178 918 195 66 0 1178 0.0 937 182 60 0 1,178 0.4 0.4

Cummings Skyway 0 0 104 0 104 0 0 104 0 104 0.0 39 52 13 0 104 3.2 3.2

Discovery Bay 3786 27 2 0 3815 3786 27 2 0 3815 0.0 3,786 27 2 0 3,815 0.0 0.0

El Sobrante 1502 302 95 0 1899 1533 289 77 0 1899 0.9 1,586 257 53 4 1,899 0.8 1.7

Franklin Canyon Rd 3 0 36 0 39 3 0 36 0 39 0.0 15 12 12 0 39 0.9 0.9

Kensington 552 4 0 0 556 552 4 0 0 556 0.0 552 4 0 0 556 0.0 0.0

Kirker Pass Rd 0 0 0 61 61 0 0 0 61 61 0.0 0 53 8 0 61 6.6 6.6



FY 15-16 AR Form 10-13 9/30/16

Knightsen 129 0 0 0 130 129 0 0 0 130 0.0 129 0 0 0 130 0.0 0.0

North Richmond 163 278 186 18 645 163 278 186 18 645 0.0 325 225 82 13 645 5.5 5.5

Pacheco 287 90 10 0 387 306 75 5 0 387 0.3 335 50 2 0 387 0.4 0.7

Pinole Valley Rd 1 0 5 0 6 1 0 5 0 6 0.0 1 0 5 0 6 0.0 0.0

Rodeo 2105 254 33 33 2426 2106 254 33 33 2426 0.0 2166 244 14 3 2426 4.7 4.7

San Pablo Dam Rd 0 0 135 0 135 0 0 135 0 135 0.0 0 0 135 0 135 0.0 0.0

Uninc Antioch 556 81 3 0 640 556 81 3 0 640 0.0 556 81 3 0 640 0.0 0.0

Uninc Brentwood 292 6 0 0 298 292 6 0 0 298 0.0 292 6 0 0 298 0.0 0.0

Uninc Clayton 230 6 3 0 239 230 6 3 0 239 0.0 230 6 3 0 239 0.0 0.0

Uninc Concord 2750 187 4 0 2940 2753 183 3 0 2940 0.0 2753 185 2 0 2940 0.1 0.1

Uninc Martinez 2253 157 6 0 2415 2253 157 6 0 2415 0.0 2272 139 4 0 2,415 0.2 0.2

Uninc Moraga 271 0 0 0 271 271 0 0 0 271 0.0 271 0 0 0 271 0.0 0.0

Uninc Oakley 388 22 14 0 424 388 22 14 0 424 0.0 388 22 14 0 424 0.0 0.0

Uninc Pittsburg 1327 0 0 0 1327 1327 0 0 0 1327 0.0 1327 0 0 0 1327 0.0 0.0

Uninc Pleasant Hill 42 0 0 0 42 42 0 0 0 42 0.0 42 0 0 0 42 0.0 0.0

Uninc Richmond 595 370 245 0 1210 595 370 245 0 1210 0.0 793 393 24 0 1210 8.9 8.9

Uninc San Ramon 1970 8 8 0 1986 1970 8 8 0 1986 0.0 1970 8 8 0 1986 0.0 0.0

Uninc Walnut Creek 2712 30 0 0 2741 2712 30 0 0 2741 0.0 2712 30 0 0 2741 0.0 0.0

Totals 41852 2929 1300 131 46212 42050 2820 1219 123 46212 5.5 42766 2825 595 27 46212 37.6 43.1

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.11 – Mercury Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 11-1 9/30/16

Section 11 - Provision C.11 Mercury Controls

C.11.a ► Implement Control Measures to Achieve Mercury Load Reductions

C.11.b ► Assess Mercury Load Reductions from Stormwater

C.11.c ► Plan and Implement Green Infrastructure to Reduce Mercury Loads

C.11.d ► Prepare Implementation Plan and Schedule to Achieve TMDL Allocations

C.11.e ► Implement a Risk Reduction Program

Summary:

A summary of countywide and regional accomplishments for these sub-provisions are included within the C.11 Mercury Controls section of the

CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report and/or BASMAA regional reports.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.12 – PCBs Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 12-1 9/30/16

Section 12 - Provision C.12 PCBs Controls

C.12.a ►Implement Control Measures to Achieve PCBs Load

Reductions

C.12.b ►Assess PCBs Load Reductions from Stormwater

C.12.c ►Plan and Implement Green Infrastructure to Reduce

PCBs Loads

C.12.d ►Prepare Implementation Plan and Schedule to Achieve

TMDL Allocations

C.12.e ►Evaluate PCBs Presence in Caulks/Sealants Used in

Storm Drain or Roadway Infrastructure in Public Rights-of-Way

C.12.f ►Manage PCB-Containing Materials and Wastes During

Building Demolition Activities So That PCBs Do Not Enter Municipal

Storm Drains

C.12.g.►Fate and Transport Study of PCBs: Urban Runoff Impact

on San Francisco Bay Margins

C.12.h ►Implement a Risk Reduction Program

Summary:

A summary of Permittee, CCCWP and BASMAA regional accomplishments for these sub-provisions are included within the C.12 PCB Controls

section of the CCCWP’s FY 15-16 Annual Report and/or BASMAA regional reports.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.13 – Copper Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 13-1 9/30/16

Section 13 - Provision C.13 Copper Controls

C.13.a.iii ►Manage Waste Generated from Cleaning and

Treating of Copper Architectural Features

(For FY 15-16 Annual Report only) Do you have adequate legal authority to prohibit the discharge of wastewater to

storm drains generated from the installation, cleaning, treating, and washing of copper architectural features,

including copper roofs? X Yes No

(For FY 15-16 Annual Report only) Provide a summary of how copper architectural features are addressed through the issuance of building permits.

Summary:

Guidance developed by the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program have been adopted by the Building Inspection Division

of the Department of Conservation and Development, which is responsible for issuance of permits related to any projects that might incorporate

architectural copper. These provide for BMPs that shall be implemented during installation and maintenance of copper architectural features,

and appropriate for educational outreach purposes (for property owners and contractors who might develop such projects), and for providing

guidance to development plan reviewers and building inspectors who would be responsible for issuance of permits and conducting inspections

regarding BMPs that should be required. The County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance provides the County with the

authority to require implementation of appropriate BMPs related to the installation or maintenance of architectural copper, and the ability to

enforce against any failure to do so. No enforcement actions have been undertaken for failure to implement appropriate BMPs related to the

installation or maintenance of architectural copper.

(FY 15-16 Annual Report and each Annual Report thereafter) Provide summaries of permitting and enforcement activities to manage waste

generated from cleaning and treating of copper architectural features, including copper roofs, during construction and post-construction.

Summary:

Contra Costa County does not have any ordinances that directly apply to copper architectural features, other than the general stormwater

ordinance.

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report C.13 – Copper Controls


FY 15-16 AR Form 13-2 9/30/16

C.13.b.iii ►Manage Discharges from Pools, Spas, and Fountains

that Contain Copper-Based Chemicals

(For FY 15-16 Annual Report only) Do you have adequate legal authority to prohibit the discharge to storm drains of water

containing copper-based chemicals from pools, spas, and fountains? X Yes No

(For FY 15-16 Annual Report only) Provide a summary of how copper-containing discharges from pools, spas, and fountains are addressed to

accomplish the prohibition of the discharge.

Summary:

Environmental Health Inspectors as well as Sanitary Districts inspect pools, as appropriate. Information is provided to pool owners by Environmental

Health, the Sanitary District, and through the stormwater inspectors.

(FY 15-16 Annual Report and each Annual Report thereafter) Provide summaries of any enforcement activities related to copper-containing

discharges from pools, spas, and fountains.

Summary:

Contra Costa County received 4 complaints of potential illicit discharges from pools or pool related chemicals. Inspectors did not find evidence of

discharges from these complaints.

C.13.c.iii ►Industrial Sources Copper Reduction Results

Based upon inspection activities conducted under Provision C.4, highlight copper reduction results achieved among the facilities identified as

potential users or sources of copper, facilities inspected, and BMPs addressed.

Summary:

FY 15-16 Annual Report C.15 – Exempted and Conditionally Exempted Discharges


FY 15-16 AR Form 15-1 9/30/16

Section 15 -Provision C.15 Exempted and Conditionally Exempted Discharges

C.15.b.vi.(2) ► Irrigation Water, Landscape Irrigation, and Lawn or

Garden Watering

Provide implementation summaries of the required BMPs to promote measures that minimize runoff and pollutant loading from excess irrigation.

Generally the categories are:

Promote conservation programs

Promote outreach for less toxic pest control and landscape management

Promote use of drought tolerant and native vegetation

Promote outreach messages to encourage appropriate watering/irrigation practices

Implement Illicit Discharge Enforcement Response Plan for ongoing, large volume landscape irrigation runoff.

Summary: Contra Costa County requires applicants for development permits to use the C.3 Guidebook to 1) minimize irrigation and runoff; 2)

promote infiltration of runoff where appropriate; and, 3) minimize use of fertilizers and pesticides using pest-resistant plants that are suited to site

conditions (e.g., soil and climate). Contra Costa County has a Green Business Program has certified over 350 businesses, including auto repair

shops, landscapers, printers, grocery and hardware stores, solar panel installers, home remodelers. Contra Costa County financially supports the

“Our Water Our World” (O-WOW) program through the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CWP). O-WOW promotes non-toxic approaches and

methods to address yard and garden pests in two Ace Hardware stores in unincorporated Contra Costa County (El Sobrante and Pacheco).

Contra Costa County financially supported the “Bring Back the Natives” tour through a contribution from the CWP. Contra Costa County has an

active and lively Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee to the Board of Supervisors (IPM Committee). The IPM Committee includes

key County staff (Agricultural Commissioner, County Stormwater Manager, Public Works Department (PWD) Division Manager for Facilities Services

(buildings and landscape management), PWD Division Manager for Maintenance of Road and FCD facilities, citizen representatives from the

environmental community, agricultural community, and citizens at large. At each semi-monthly meeting includes updates from County staff and

contractors regarding pesticide use over the previous two month and anticipated activities in the next two months, updates from the two

subcommittees (most recently focusing on addressing the spread of bedbugs in low income housing and motels Countywide and development

of decision making documents to guide County staff and contractors efforts for use of grazing for vegetation management on County and FCD

owned parcels,

Documents

FY 2015-2016 Annual Report - Home Page | California State ...€¦ · FY 2015-2016 Annual Report ... yards of illegally dumped large debris dumped on County road right-of-way;