management committee monterey regional storm...

NOTICE AND AGENDA

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE for the

MONTEREY REGIONAL STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (MRSWMP)

DATE: August 24, 2016 TIME: 9:30 a.m. LOCATION: MRWPCA Conference Room, 5 Harris Court, Building D, Monterey, California

NOTE: Under the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding for the Monterey Regional Storm Water Pollution

Prevention Program {also referred to as the Monterey Regional Storm Water Management Program, (MRSWMP)}, the Management

Committee (MC) was created to provide overall Program coordination, review, and budget oversight with respect to the NPDES permit.

The MC is to consider permit compliance, with majority concurrence of the Permittees (listed below as Participating Entities), as the

primary objective in approving Program tasks and corresponding budgets. The MC is comprised of one representative from each of the

Permittees. None of the representatives are elected officials or policy makers for the entities they represent.

Stakeholder feedback may either be provided during the “Public Comment” agenda item or the Program Manager may be contacted

regarding any questions or feedback for the Management Committee. Responses to these items will be reported in the Management

Committee Meeting Minutes. Should an interested stakeholder or a member of the public wish to make a presentation to the Group, the

Program Manager should be contacted to schedule the presentation for a subsequent meeting.

Officers: Chairperson: Scott Ottmar, City of Seaside

Participating Entities: City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City of Del Rey Oaks City of Monterey City of Pacific Grove City of Sand City City of Seaside County of Monterey

Other Coordinating Entities: Carmel Unified School District Pacific Grove Unified School District Monterey Peninsula Unified School District Pebble Beach Company

Ex-Officio Members: Association of Monterey Bay Governments Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

AGENDA ITEMS Page #

1. Call to Order / Roll Call n/a

2. Public Comments n/a

CONSENT AGENDA

3. Approve Management Committee meeting minutes for 7/27/16 (Attach. 1) 3

4. Approve Public Education and Public Outreach (PE/PO) Invoice

& Task Summary (Attach. 2) 7

INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION ITEMS

5. Verbal Update from PE/PO Coordinator (E.7 & E.8) n/a

a. Community-Based Social Marketing Results

MRSWMP Notice & Agenda - 8/24/16

of 33

6. Update on PEAIP (E.14)

a. De-brief of 13267 Technical Report Order Submittal n/a

b. Discussion of Program Effectiveness Matrix (Attach. 3) 8

c. Discussion of Second Nature User Agreement (Attach. 4) 10

7. Year 3 Annual Report

a. SMARTS Annual Report Submittal Template (Attach. 5) 17

8. Year 4 Requirements

a. Construction BMP Training Workshop (E.7.b.2.b and 4-3.c) n/a

9. Post-Construction Requirements (E.12)

a. De-brief of August 16 JERT Meeting (Attach. 6) 27

10. Update on Prop 1 Planning Grant for the Development of a

Stormwater Resource Plan n/a

11. Discussion of Trash Amendment n/a

12. Update on SB1298 n/a

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

13. Management Committee Member and Program Manager Reports n/a

ADJOURNMENT / SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING

14. Schedule Next Meeting: Next meeting date is tentatively planned for Wednesday, August 24,

2016 at 9:30am.

15. Meeting Adjournment


of 33

MRSWMP MC Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4

Monterey Regional Storm Water Management Program (MRSWMP) Management Committee

MEETING MINUTES For July 27, 2016

AGENDA ITEMS 1. Call to Order / Roll-Call

Chairperson Ottmar (City of Seaside) called the meeting to order at 9:37 a.m. and performed roll call.

Management Committee (MC) Members: City of Carmel-by-the-Sea – Rob Mullane City of Monterey – Tricia Wotan City of Pacific Grove – Jessica Kahn City of Sand City - Leon Gomez City of Seaside, City of Del Rey Oaks –

Scott Ottmar County of Monterey – Tom Harty

MRSWMP Staff: Program Manager – Jeff Condit

Other: Maris Sidenstecker – PE/PO Coordinator Lisa Emanuelson - Monterey Bay National

Marine Sanctuary Doug Dowden – City of Carmel (Conf.

call) Gina Schmidt - AMBAG Katherine O’Dea – Save Our Shores Dani Banionis – The Offset Project Tamara Anderson – Regional Water

Quality Control Board (Conf. call) Holly Heebink – Pebble Beach

Community Services District

2. Public Comment a. None.

CONSENT AGENDA

3. Approve Management Committee Meeting Minutes for 6/22/16

4. Approve Public Education and Public Outreach (PE/PO) Invoice & Task Summary

Action: On a motion by Harty (County of Monterey), seconded by Gomez (City of Sand City), Management Committee approved the Consent Agenda (6-0, City of Monterey arrived after the vote).

INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION ITEMS

5. Verbal Update from PE/PO Coordinator (E.7 & E.8) a. Sidenstecker (PE/PO Coordinator) provided an update on recent PE/PO Program efforts.

Highlights included:

She has been working to place emblems on storm drains throughout the region

She completed Year 3 Restaurant Outreach.

We received a large number of CBSM Surveys in Year 3

Attachment 1MRSWMP Notice & Agenda - 8/24/16

of 33


We have been running anti-cigarette butt ads on all radio stations throughout the region.

Seaside’s Sustainable Living Tour has been cancelled. We instead partnered with the Green Living Tour in Pacific Grove in early October. We will explore if this is a good opportunity to provide information regarding the ASBS program.

We will be participating at the West End Festival at the end of August.

She is beginning to work on the E.7 Annual Report. 6. Discussion of Year 3 Permit Requirements

a. De-Brief of Integrated Pest Management Training – June 30 Condit and Wotan provided a de-brief of the recent training held for Parks Staff from throughout the region. It was well received and the facilitator did a good job presenting the material. Wotan mentioned that we may wish to provide this type of training again in the future.

b. Schedule for Annual Report Submittal

Condit presented a Staff Report with a proposed schedule for submitting the Year 3 Annual Report through the Water Board’s SMARTS system.

7. Update on Prop 1 Planning Grant for the Development of a Stormwater Resource Plan

The MRSWMP Program was successful in securing a $300,637 Planning Grant to develop a Stormwater Resource Plan (SRP) for the Monterey Peninsula IRWMP. Condit will convene a Primary Stakeholder meeting/call to obtain feedback prior to upcoming grant negotiations (Action Item – Condit).

8. Update on PEAIP

a. Update on MRSWMP GIS Intern Condit shared that the MRWPCA completed interviews for a MRSWMP GIS Intern to assist member efforts. Final negotiations are occurring at present and he is hoping to have someone in place shortly.

b. Discussion of BMP RAM User Agreement Wotan will share a revised User Agreement that they developed with Second Nature (Action Item – Wotan). Condit will negotiate with Second Nature to develop a regional User Agreement including the Cities of Seaside, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Del Rey Oaks, and Carmel-by-the-Sea (Action Item – Condit).

c. Discussion of Program Effectiveness Matrix

Condit presented a draft Program Effectiveness Matrix Template. Members will review and provide feedback to Condit by August 12 (Action Item – All Members). The Matrix will be brought back for further discussion during our August MRSWMP Meeting (Action Item – Condit).

9. Update on Trash Amendment

a. Trash Amendment Considerations and Next Steps Condit presented a Staff Report on potential next steps for the Trash Amendment. An extended discussion ensued.


of 33


Katherine O’Dea, Executive Director of Save Our Shores, provided a brief presentation on the work of Save Our Shores. They have partnered with jurisdictions from Santa Cruz County on storm drain clean ups. They lead California Coastal Clean-Up Day activities, of which MRSWMP is a long-standing sponsor/partner. Save Our Shores has an extensive amount of data from their clean-up efforts that they can make available (Action Item – Condit). Emanuelson (Monterey Bay Sanctuary) reminded members that the Sanctuary has data from the Urban Watch program. Dani Banoinis, Program Manager of The Offset Project, provided a brief presentation on the work of The Offset Project. They work on trash diversion and education and outreach regarding the waste stream. Anderson (Regional Board) mentioned that the State Water Board will host a Trash Amendment training for the Regional Boards on August 18. If members have questions that we wish to have answered by the State Water Board at the training, please forward your questions to Condit by August 12 and he will forward along to Anderson (Action Item – All Members).

b. Rapid Trash Assessment Protocol Members were presented with a Rapid Trash Amendment Protocol that was developed by Region 2 Regional Board. This tool may be useful if a Trash Generation Audit is pursued.

10. Discussion of Year 4 Permit Requirements

Condit prepared a spreadsheet of Year 4 SMARTS Questions/Permit Requirements.

11. Update on Executive Sub-Committee Ottmar provided an update on the recent Executive Sub-Committee meeting that included Dino Pick, City of Monterey; Craig Malin, City of Seaside; Lew Bauman, County of Monterey; and Paul Sciuto, MRWPCA. The Sub-Committee discussed the Prop 1 Planning Grant, the potential for an expanded MRSWMP to meet additional permit requirements on a consistent, cost effective basis; and the Trash Amendment. The Sub-Committee directed Condit, Ottmar, Wotan, and Harty to further explore the possibility of a regional Construction Inspection program to assist with meeting permit requirements.

12. Update on SB1170 Harty informed Members of Senate Bill 1170, an effort to place the responsibility of developing SWPPPs for public works projects on municipalities instead of on the contractors doing the work. Members directed Condit to touch base with the Statewide Stormwater Coalition and CASQA to determine if they are aware, if there is opposition, and if there any opposition actions that need to be taken (Action Item – Condit).

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

13. Management Committee Member and Program Manager Reports


of 33


a. City of Pacific Grove – Kahn informed members that she is transitioning to the City of Scotts Valley. She has enjoyed working with the MRSWMP and will continue to collaborate via the SIN Exchange.

b. City of Carmel – Carmel is looking to recruit an Environmental Compliance Manager in the coming months. The City Council adopted a Beach Bonfire Ordinance, and are now awaiting judgement on an appeal on the proposed program. They are currently performing a fee review.

c. City of Sand City – Gomez mentioned that he is working on new projects that trigger the PCRs.

d. City of Monterey – PCR projects have been time consuming, they are looking at outside assistance. They are reviewing the PCR Review Fee to understand if it is sufficient.

e. County of Monterey – CASQA Conference is Sept. 12-14, the early bird discount ends July 31. Watsonville is hosting a BMP RAM Training at the end of August. There is a JERT Meeting on August 16.

f. City of Seaside – Ottmar mentioned that the City recently hired an Economic Development Director.

g. Program Manager – Condit mentioned that the City of Watsonville is coordinating a Staff Training on the BMP RAM through Second Nature that he will participate in, he has signed up for the CASQA Conference on Sept. 12-14, he will participate in the JERT Meeting on August 16.

ADJOURNMENT / SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING 14. Schedule Next Meeting

The next Management Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, August 24, at 9:30am.

15. Meeting Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 11:59a.m.


of 33

From: Save The Whales To: Monterey Regional Storm Water Management Program PO#: 009595 For Public Education Hours INVOICE PERMIT YEAR 4: July 1, 2016-July 31, 2016 To: Jeff Condit MRWPCA–Administrative Office 5 Harris Court, Bldg. D. Monterey, CA 93940

Total Labor Cost: Maris Sidenstecker: $7,417.50 Michelle Pournia: $80.00 Subtotal Labor: $7,497.50 Services: Storage: $138.00 Indirect: $560.08 Subtotal Services: $8,195.58 Subtotals labor & services: $8,195.58

TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $8,195.58 Please make check payable to: Save The Whales Thank you!


of 33

From: Maris Sidenstecker/ Save The Whales To: Monterey Regional Storm Water Management Program For: Permit Year 4 Public Education Hours

July 1, 2016–July 31, 2016 PO#: 009595

Program Activity

Date/Description Hours

Meetings with PM,

Email with entities

Annual report,

CASQA, PEPO

Budget Reconcile

7/1 Respond to PM re LID and member of the public re: our available

brochures. (1.0)

7/6 Meet with PM. Work on AReport pieces. (4.0)

7/13 CBSM and pieces for AReport. (3.5)

7/15 AReport and past PEPO report to Salinas. (4.0)

7/18 AReport student pre and post surveys. (3.5)

7/19 CBSM data from public surveys. (7.0)

7/20 PM phone call. (0.5)

7/21 AReport student surveys and CBSM. (2.25)

7/22 AReport student surveys and respond to PM email. (8.75)

7/23 AReport. (6.0)

7/23 PM and rescheduling of PEPO meeting. (0.5)

7/27 MRSWMP meeting time. Prepare short summary. Last call to

vendors. (5.5)

7/29 Vendor invoice with overpayment. (0.75)

47.25

School Assembly 7/13 MRWMD assemblies and stats. (1.5) 1.5

Public Events

Coordination

7/13 West End paperwork completed and mailed. (0.5) 0.5

Social Media

Press Release

7/1-7/31 Posted 11 new items. (2.75) 2.75

OWOW Events and

store labeling

7/7 Report to OWOW for outreach done in our stores and asked for stats

from OSH and Home Depot. (3.5)

7/13 OWOW information for stores. (1.0)

7/15 OWOW information to review and ask for stats. (1.5)

6.0

Sustainable Living

Tour Event

7/13 PG living tour. (0.75)

7/21 PG tour details and participating in meetings. (1.0)

7/28 PG living tour coordination, flyer, etc. (2.5)

4.25

VENDOR

Coordination: print,

radio, movie

7/6 Vendor invoices all paid. Check with agents. (1.75)

7/7 Entravision invoice from April not paid-follow up with MRW. (0.75)

7/15 Vendor paperwork, checking on payments to vendors. (2.75)

7/17 Entravision unpaid invoice. (0.5)

7/20 Follow up with Weekly and La Ganga re payments and ask re

prices for ads in future editions. Vendor paperwork, respond to emails,

make calls, etc. (4.5)

7/25 Final sweep to make sure all accounts are paid and closed by each

vendor for the year. Discuss next year proposals. (8.5)

7/26 Vendor accounts and paperwork. (4.75)

23.5

Vendor: TV ads with

partners

7/8 TV ad report for partner (Salinas). (0.5)

0.5

Total Hours (Labor): 86.25 x $86/hr. = $7,417.50


of 33

Appendix 1: <City> of XXXX

Stormwater Program Effectiveness Matrix

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

22

24

39

89

101

121

127

129

145

149

160

164

168

A B C D E F G H I L M N O P Q R

Pollutant(s)

of Concern

CASQA

Outcome Level

Implementation

LevelEffectiveness Level

1 2 3 4 5

FY

13

-14

FY

20

15

FY

20

16

FY

20

17

FY

20

18

NOTES:

E.1.

X

E.2. NEW TRADTIONAL SMALL MS4 PERMITTEES

X

E.3. NON-TRADITIONAL SMALL MS4S PERMITTEES

X

E.4 SMALL MS4 ASBS PERMITEES

E.5 SEPARATE IMPLEMENTING ENTITY

E.6 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ELEMENT

E.7 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAM

E.8 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION PROGRAM

E.9 ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION

E.9.d.ii Implementation Level

Conduct investigations to identify source of suspected

illicit discharges within 72 hours of becoming aware of

the illicit discharge;

Immediately notify responsible partiy to conduct

corrective actions within 72 hours.

√ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens4

Eliminate 100% of identified illicit

discharges

• Reduce occurrence of illegal dumping

• Reduce impacts of illegal dumping on

waterbodies

E.9.e.ii Implementation Level

Include agency roles and responsibilities, complaint

response procedures, how investigations will be

conducted, how clean up is initiated and conducted,

and how reporting is completed and what information is

required

√sediment,

trash,

pathogens2

Respond to 100% complaints and

reports of illegal discharges

• Reduce occurrence of illegal dumping

• Reduce impacts of illegal dumping on

waterbodies

E.10 CONSTRUCTION SITE STORM WATER RUNOFF CONTROL PROGRAM

E.10.c.ii Implementation Level

Permittee shall conduct, at minimum, inspections at

priority construction sites prior to land disturbance

during the rainy season, during active construction and

following active construction. Inspections shall include

assessment of compliance with storm water ordinance.

1. pre-construction E&S BMP inspection; 2. active

construction inspection; 3. final construction inspection

to verify that disturbed soils have been stabilized.

Prioritization criteria shall be based on project threat to

water quality.

√ √ √ √ sediment,

trash, pathogens3

Inspect 100% of high priority sites

and document deficiencies

• Awareness of construction BMPs

• Proper design and implementation of

construction BMPs

E.11 POLLUTION PREVENTION/GOOD HOUSEKEEPING FOR PERMITTEE OPERATIONS PROGRAM

E.11.c.ii Implementation Level

Conduct an annual review and assessment of all

municipally owned or operated facilities to determine

their potential to impact surface waters. The assessment

shall include a. Identification of hotspots (see E.11.c.ii

for factors, prioritization, minimum hotspot facilities) b.

Documentation of the comprehensive assessment

procedures and results, including copies of any site

evaluation checklists.

√ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens3

Inspect 100% of facilities and

document deficiencies

• Awareness of proper implementation of

good housekeeping BMPs

E11.d.ii Implementation Level

a. Develop and implement a site-specific SWPPP

b. SWPPP shall be kept on site at each owned or

operated facility and updated as necessary

c. SWPPP shall address the minimum elements listed in

E.11.d.ii

√ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens3

SWPPPS for 100% of hotspots and




E.11.e.ii.a Implementation Level

Quarterly visual inspections: in accordance with

inspection procedures and checklists developed by

each Permittee, results shall be kept with the SWPPP

including any noted deficiencies and corrective actions

√sediment,

trash,

pathogens3





PROPOSED

MODIFICATION

Effectiveness AssessmentCARRY-

OVER BMPs

Program Effectiveness Assessment

RENEWAL TRADITIONAL SMALL MS4 PERMITTEES

PROGRAM ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

Permit Year

(Implementation Req'd)

Which POC does

this program

element

address?

What is the

highest outcome

level achievable

for this element?

(1-6)

Was this program

element

implemented? 0 = Not Implemented,

0.1 - 0.9 = % Implemented,

1 = Fully Implemented

How effective is this

element at reducing

POCs? L = Low

M = Medium

H = High

Evaluation Method

How will the effectiveness of

this program element be

measured?

(i.e., documentation, opinion

surveys, direct

measurement, etc…)

Water Quality Objective

What is the goal of performing this

program element?

BEST

MANAGEMENT

PRACTICE (BMP)

FROM PREVIOUS

PERMIT CYCLE

PERMIT SECTION and

PROGRAM ELEMENT

• A check mark indicates the year in which the program element will be performed.

• n / a means Not Applicable

template: Program Effectiveness Matrix, May 22, 2015 Page 1 of 2 Printed on 7/26/2016

Attachment 3

1


of 33

Appendix 1: <City> of XXXX

Stormwater Program Effectiveness Matrix

1

2

3

4

5

A B C D E F G H I L M N O P Q R

Pollutant(s)

of Concern

CASQA

Outcome Level

Implementation

LevelEffectiveness Level

1 2 3 4 5

FY

13

-14

FY

20

15

FY

20

16

FY

20

17

FY

20

18

PROPOSED

MODIFICATION

Effectiveness AssessmentCARRY-

OVER BMPs

Program Effectiveness Assessment

PROGRAM ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

Permit Year

(Implementation Req'd)

Which POC does

this program

element

address?

What is the

highest outcome

level achievable

for this element?

(1-6)

Was this program

element

implemented? 0 = Not Implemented,

0.1 - 0.9 = % Implemented,

1 = Fully Implemented

How effective is this

element at reducing

POCs? L = Low

M = Medium

H = High

Evaluation Method

How will the effectiveness of

this program element be

measured?

(i.e., documentation, opinion

surveys, direct

measurement, etc…)

Water Quality Objective

What is the goal of performing this

program element?

BEST

MANAGEMENT

PRACTICE (BMP)

FROM PREVIOUS

PERMIT CYCLE

PERMIT SECTION and

PROGRAM ELEMENT

• A check mark indicates the year in which the program element will be performed.

• n / a means Not Applicable

169

170

171

172

173

174

184

185

187

189

198

208

209

224

240

260

269

287

294

E.11.e.ii.b Implementation Level

Annual hotspot comprehensive inspection: results

shall be kept with the SWPPP including any noted

deficiencies and corrective actions √

sediment,

trash,

pathogens3





6-2.a X X

Promptly correct any hazardous materials inspection

deficiencies reported by County hazardous materials

(CUPA) inspectors√ √ √ √

sediment,

trash,

pathogens3

Correct 100% of hazardous

materials deficiencies

• Ensure proper materials storage

6-7.e X XInspect the MS4's vehicle maintenance facilities annually

and correct 100% of deficiencies noted √ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens3

Inspect facilities and correct 100%

of deficiencies



6-8.b X XInspect the MS4's vehicle washing facilities annually an

correct 100% of deficiencies noted √ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens3

Inspect facilities and correct 100%

of deficiencies



E.11.e.ii.c Implementation Level

Quarterly hotspot visual observations: results shall be

kept with the SWPPP including any noted deficiencies

and corrective actions √

sediment,

trash,

pathogens3





E.11.e.ii.d Implementation LevelNon-hotspot inspections: Inspect each non-hotspot

inventoried facilities at least once per permit term √sediment,

trash,

pathogens3





E.11.g.ii.a Implementation Level

Inspect storm drain systems based on priorities

assigned in Section E.11.f; at a minimum, inspect all

high priority catch basins and systems annually √ √ √

sediment,

trash,

pathogens4

Inspect 100% of high priority catch

basins and systems annually and

document if additional maintenance

is required

• Reduce sediment load and associated

pollutants going from storm drains to water

bodies

E.11.g.ii.b Implementation Level

Clean storm drain systems - develop and implement a

schedule to clean high-priority areas based on the

priorities established in E.11.f √ √ √

sediment,

trash,

pathogens5

Clean 100% of storm drains

systems identified as needing

additional maintenance prior to

November 1 annually



bodies

E.11.g.ii.d Implementation Level

Maintain surface drainage structures - trash removal

from high prioriy areas shall occur at least annually prior

to the rainy season√ √ √

sediment,

trash,

pathogens5

Trash removal from 100% of high

priority areas• Increase trash removal

6-6.a X XConduct street sweeping in accordance with Permit-

specified frequencies √ √ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens5 100% of street sweeping completed



bodies

6-5.a X XDechlorinate and de-brominate swimming pool

discharges before discharge to storm drains √ √ √ √ √ pathogens 4Pool water dechlorinated and/or de-

brominated prior to discharge to

storm drain system 100% of the time

6-11.a X XRegularly inspect and clean municipal facility trash

enclosures √ √ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens4

100% of trash enclosures inspected

and cleaned per the “Sweeping and

Cleaning” program

• Increase trash removal

6-11.b X X Regularly inspect and clean parks √ √ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens4

100% of parks and park trash

enclosures inspected per the

“Sweeping and Cleaning” program

• Increase trash removal

E.12 POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Applicable MS4s to comply

with post-construction storm

water management

requirements based on a

watershed-process approach

developed by Regional Water

Board

The Central Coast Post Construction Requirements (CC-

PCRs) will be implemented, beginning March 6, 2014. √ √ √ √ √sediment,

trash,

pathogens5

Implement the RWQCB's Post-

Construction Requirements for all

new regulated development and

redevelopment projects

• Proper design and construction of erosion

and post-construction BMPs

• Reduce runoff from private property

• Reduce sediment loads in runoff from

private property

E.13 WATER QUALITY MONITORING

E.14 PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENT AND IMPROVEMENT

E.15 TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

E.16 ANNUAL REPORTING PROGRAM

template: Program Effectiveness Matrix, May 22, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Printed on 7/26/2016

Attachment 3

2


of 33

1

SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE AGREEMENT CENTRAL COAST REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES

This software as a service license agreement (“Agreement“) dated ___8/2/16___ (“Effective Date”), is between Monterey Regional Stormwater Management Program aka MRSWMP (“Client”) located at [W. Alisal St. Salinas CA 93901 and 2NDNATURE Software Inc. (2N) located at 500 Seabright Ave #205, Santa Cruz, California 95062 (“2N”). MRSWMP is a regional group representing 5 municipalities (City of Carmel -by- the-Sea, City of Del Rey Oaks, City of Pacific Grove, City of Sand City, and City of Seaside). This single agreement between 2N and Client will provide terms and agreements in effect for each aforementioned municipality. The parties hereby agree as follows:

1. Access and Restrictions.

1.1 Subject to the terms of this Agreement, 2N grants to Client a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable right during the Term to allow its Users (defined below) to access and use the online software applications described in Exhibit A of this Agreement (“2N Software”) solely for Client’s internal business purposes. 2N will provide other support services necessary for productive use of the 2N Software, including the provision of software updates, bug fixes, data monitoring, and technical support (“Support Services”), provided that such Support Services are purchased from 2N. “User” means any Client employee, contractor, or agent, or any other individual or entity, acting on behalf of, and authorized by, the Client to access and use the 2N Software up to the authorized number set forth in Exhibit A. Client’s rights to access the Service will be limited to those expressly granted in this Agreement, and 2N reserves all other rights, title, and interest therein.

1.2 Restrictions. Client is responsible for all activities conducted under its and its Users’ logins on the 2N Software. Client shall not: (i) copy, rent, sell, lease, distribute, pledge, assign, or otherwise transfer, or encumber rights to the 2N Software, or any part thereof, or use it for the benefit of any third party, or make it available to anyone other than its Users; (ii) send or store any personally identifiable information; (iii) send or store infringing or unlawful material; (iv) send or store viruses, worms, time bombs, Trojan horses and other harmful or malicious code, files, scripts, agents or programs; (v) attempt to gain unauthorized access to, or disrupt the integrity or performance of, the 2N Software or the data contained therein; (vi) modify, copy or create derivative works based on the 2N Software, or any portion thereof without prior consent of 2N Software; (vii) access the 2N Software for the purpose of building a competitive product or service or copying its features or user interface; or (viii) delete, alter, add to or fail to reproduce in and on the 2N Software the name of 2N and any copyright or other notices appearing in or on the 2N Software or which may be required by 2N at any time.

1.3 Professional Services. Additional professional services, aside from Support Services, related to the initial set-up and ongoing use of the 2N Software such as training, data import/export, will be set forth and billed at 2N’s current time and materials rates stated in Exhibit A.

2. Term and Termination.

2.1 Term. The term of this Agreement is stated in Exhibit A.

2.2 Termination for Cause. Without limiting the right of a party to immediately terminate this Agreement for cause as provided for in this Agreement, if either party materially breaches any of its duties or obligations hereunder and such breach is not cured within thirty (30) calendar days after written notice of the breach, the non-breaching party may terminate this Agreement for cause as of a date specified in such notice.

3. Proprietary Rights


of 33

2

3.1 2N Rights. Except for the rights expressly granted under this Agreement, 2N retains all right, title, and interest (including all related intellectual property rights) in and to the 2N Software, and all other products, works, software and technology created, used, or provided by 2N in connection with this Agreement.

3.2 Client Data. All right, title and interest in and to the Client Data is owned exclusively by Client and Client may use the 2N Software to create reports and other data exports as needed for the Client’s internal business purposes, which may include sharing reports and other data exports externally. Client grants 2N a license to use, aggregate, collect, process, store, generate, and display Client Data to the extent necessary to maximize the effectiveness of 2N Software.

4. Fees. Client will pay 2N the annual subscription fee as stated in Exhibit A for access to the 2N Software (“Subscription Fee”). Client shall pay the Subscription Fee within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement. Client shall pay 2N the Subscription Fee for any renewal term within thirty (30) days of the start of such renewal term. Should the Agreement be renewed beyond the original one-year Term, 2N reserves the right to increase the Subscription Fee for any subsequent Renewal Term not priced herein. Client agrees to pay all sales, use, value-added, goods and services, consumption, withholding, excise and any other similar taxes or government charges, exclusive of 2N’s income taxes.

5. Disclaimer of Warranties. THE 2N SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS-IS” AND 2N AND ITS SUPPLIERS HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL (AND HAVE NOT AUTHORIZED ANYONE TO MAKE ANY) WARRANTIES RELATING TO THE 2N SOFTWARE, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OR OTHER SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS, AVAILABILITY OF THE 2N SOFTWARE, TITLE, MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE PARTIES ARE NOT RELYING AND HAVE NOT RELIED ON ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES WHATSOEVER REGARDING THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED.

6. Indemnification. Client will indemnify, defend, and hold 2N harmless from any and all claims, demands, suits or proceedings brought against 2N by a third party alleging a violation of a third party’s rights arising from Client's provision of the Client Data.

7. Limitation of Liability. EXCEPT FOR CUSTOMER’S BREACH OF SECTION 1.2 OR AN OBLIGATION ARISING UNDER SECTION 6, NEITHER CUSTOMER, 2N, NOR 2N’s SUPPLIERS, SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE WITH RESPECT TO ANY SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT OR TERMS AND CONDITIONS RELATED THERETO UNDER ANY CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHER THEORY (A) FOR ERROR OR INTERRUPTION OF USE, LOSS OR INACCURACY OR CORRUPTION OF DATA, (B) FOR COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS, SERVICES, RIGHTS, OR TECHNOLOGY, (C) FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR REVENUES, OR FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, WHETHER OR NOT A PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. CLIENT’S RIGHT TO RECOVER DAMAGES FOR ALL CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION FEE CLIENT PAID FOR THE YEAR IN WHICH ANY DAMAGE OCCURRED. THE LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION 7 SHALL APPLY NOTWITHSTANDING ANY FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY LIMITED REMEDY. Any action against 2N must be brought within twelve (12) months after the cause of action occurs.


of 33

3

8. General

8.1 Authority. Client represents and warrants that it has all requisite corporate power, financial capacity, and authority to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under this Agreement.

8.2 Confidentiality. Except as required by applicable laws or regulations, the parties agree that information deemed confidential at the time of disclosure and the terms of this Agreement shall not be disclosed to any third party.

8.3 Notices. Any notice given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given via email (provided receipt is confirmed by the recipient), certified mail or courier, return receipt requested, to the addresses appearing in the preamble of this Agreement, or as changed through written notice to the other party. Notice is deemed effective on the date it is delivered to the addressee.

8.4 Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the California and the federal laws of the United States of America. Each party hereby consents and submits to the exclusive jurisdiction and forum of the state and federal courts in the Santa Cruz, CA in all questions and controversies arising out of this Agreement.

8.5 Force Majeure; Excused Performance. Neither party shall be liable for delays or any failure to perform the obligations under this Agreement due to causes beyond its reasonable control. Such delays include, but are not limited to, fire, explosion, flood or other natural catastrophe, governmental legislation, acts, orders, or regulation, strikes or labor difficulties, to the extent not occasioned by the fault or negligence of the delayed party.

8.6 Independent Contractor. 2N is an independent contractor with no authority to contract for Client or in any way to bind or to commit Client to any agreement of any kind or to assume any liabilities of any nature in the name of or on behalf of Client. Under no circumstances shall 2N, or any of its staff, if any, hold itself out as or be considered an agent employee, joint venture, or partner of Client.

8.7 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. In any arbitration, litigation, or other proceeding, informal or formal, by which one party either seeks to enforce this Agreement or seeks a declaration of any rights or obligations under this Agreement, the non-prevailing party shall pay the prevailing party’s costs and expenses, including but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees.

8.8 No Waiver. The failure of either party at any time to require performance by the other party of any provision of this Agreement shall in no way affect that party’s right to enforce such provisions, nor shall the waiver by either party of any breach of any provision of this Agreement be taken or held to be a waiver of any further breach of the same provision.

8.9 Counterparts; Facsimile. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. The parties agree that a facsimile signature may substitute for and have the same legal effect as the original signature.

8.10 Entire Agreement. This Agreement and its attached exhibits constitute the entire agreement between the parties and supersede any and all previous representations, understandings, or agreements between Client and 2N as to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may only be amended by an instrument in writing signed by the parties. Any terms and conditions included in a Client purchase order or a 2N invoice, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be solely for the convenience of the respective party, and no such term or condition shall be binding upon the parties.


of 33

4

[Signature page follows]


of 33

5

Executed on the dates set forth below by the undersigned authorized representative of Client and 2N to be effective as of the Effective Date.

Client 2NDNATURE Software Inc.

By:

By: Name:

Name: Nicole Beck

Title:

Title: CEO

Date: Date: 8/2/16


of 33

6

EXHIBIT A

2N Software Description

Term

This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and terminate on December 31, each calendar year. Subscription costs from the signed date through Dec 31 2016 is $0/product. Invoices will be issued in December 2016 for annual 2017 subscriptions at $1,500/product. Payment is due by the end of Jan 2017 to continue uninterrupted use within 2Ns tool suite. Upon expiration of the Term, the Agreement will automatically renew for additional Terms of twelve (12) months each (“Renewal Term”), unless either party gives the other notice of non-renewal at least thirty (30) days prior to the end of the then-current Term. The initial terms and each renewal term is collectively referred to as the “Term.”

Product Description Calendar Year/ Fee

BMP RAM

Group code, admin account and up to 3 client users per municipality. Unlimited access to current version of platform. www.bmpram.com Participating Municipalities: City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City of Del Rey Oaks City of Pacific Grove City of Seaside City of Sand City

2016/ $0 2017/$7,500

($1,500 per municipality)

Parcel RAM

Group code, admin account and up to 3 client users per municipality. Unlimited access to current version of platform. www.parcelram.com Participating Municipalities: City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City of Del Rey Oaks City of Pacific Grove City of Seaside City of Sand City

2016/ $0 2017/$7,500


Stormwater TELR

Group code, admin account and up to 3 client users municipality. Unlimited access to current version of platform. www.swtelr.com Participating Municipalities: City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City of Del Rey Oaks City of Pacific Grove City of Seaside City of Sand City

2016/ $0 2017/$7,500


Total: 2016/ $0 2017/Per selections


of 33

http://www.bmpram.com/

http://www.parcelram.com/

http://www.swtelr.com/

7

Support Services

Subject to Section 1.1, Support Services are made available by 2N during the Term. Fees for Support Services are not covered under this Agreement. Fees for these Support Services are being paid for during the Term by a third party on behalf of Client under a separate agreement. Should the user support needs demanded by the Client extend beyond identification of software bugs or user guidance inconsistencies (at 2N’s discretion), a separate support agreement will need to be executed between the Client and 2N. Excessive use of support will require an additional support agreement with 2N.


of 33

DRAFT

Monterey Regional Stormwater Management Program

Year 3 SMARTS Questions and Permit Requirement

Question

#

Page # SMARTS Question Proposed

Answer

Proposed Comments

(Comments for "Yes" answers

are optional)

Supporting Documentation to

Upload to SMARTS

Documentation that you may

wish to collect as future back-

up (in event of audit)

Who is providing this information?

1 1

Per Section E.1., did you continue to implement your

previously approved storm water management plan? If

'No', please provide a brief explanation in the comments

section. (Years 1 - 5)

Yes n/a n/a MRSWMP Guidance Document

MRSWMP PM will place a copy of the

Guidance Document in the FTP Site for

your records.

2 1

If you relied on another entity (co-permittee or SIE) to

implement one or more of the permit requirements did

the co-permittee or SIE meet the permit requirements

that were implemented on your behalf? (Years 1 - 5)

If 'Yes', please attach a copy of the agreement that you

may have with the other entity.

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation.*

Yes

The City/County of xxx is a

participating member of the

Monterey Regional

Stormwater Management

Program (MRSWMP). The

collaborative agreement is

implemented under a

Memorandum of Agreement

(MOA), as opposed to an SIE

or co-permittee structure. On

behalf of its participating

members, the MRSWMP

implements a regional public

education and public outreach

program, coordinates a

regional volunteer stormwater

monitoring effort, and

collaborates on

implementation of a regional

framework to achieve permit

compliance. The MOA is

attached.

MRSWMP Memorandum of

Agreement (MOA) MRSWMP MOA

MRSWMP PM will place a copy of the

MRSWMP MOA in the FTP Site.

5 1

Developed and began implementation of

Enforcement Response Plan as specified by Section

E.6.c.(ii)(a-f)? (pgs. 22-24, Year 3); OR

Implemented the Enforcement Response Plan as

specified in Section E.6.c.(ii)(a-f)? (Years 4-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a Enforcement Response Plan Enforcement Response Plan Jurisdiction-specific

August 24, 2016

Attachment 5

1


of 33

DRAFT

7 1

Developed and began implementation of storm water

public education and outreach program as specified by

section E.7.a.(ii)(a - m)? (pgs. 25-27, Year 2); OR

Continued implementation of storm water public

education and outreach program as specified by

section E.7.a.(ii)(a - m)? (pgs. 25-27, Year 3-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation.

Please click on Upload Attachment button to upload

the corresponding files. You will be navigated to

another screen to upload.

Yes n/a E.7 Annual Report E.7 Annual Report

MRSWMP PM will place the E.7 Annual

Report developed by the PE/PO

Coordinator on the FTP Site to upload

and save for your records.

8 2

Developed and began implementation of a public

education strategy that established education tasks

based on water quality problems, target audiences and

anticipated task effectiveness? (E.7.a.(ii)a, page26)

(Year 2); OR

Continued implementation of a public education

strategy that established education tasks based on

water quality problems, target audiences and

anticipated task effectiveness? (Years 3-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes

The City/County of xxx is a

participating member of the

Monterey Regional


Program (MRSWMP). A

regional PE/PO strategy was

developed in conjuction with

the Regional Board that

established education tasks

based on water quality

problems, target audiences

and anticipated effectiveness. n/a PE/PO Guidance Document

MRSWMP PM will place the PE/PO

Guidance Document developed in

conjunction with Regional Board on the

FTP Site for your records.

9 2

Developed and implemented a training program for

all staff who, as part of their normal job

responsibilities, may be notified of, come into

contact with, or otherwise observe an illicit

discharge or illegal connection to the storm drain

system, as specified by section E.7.b.1.(ii)(a-g),

page 27) (Year 3); OR

Continued to implement the training program for all

appropriate staff? (Years 4-5)

If 'NA', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a

Sreen Shot of Members Only

section of MontereySEA.org

website with Excal Visual IDDE

Training Video. Web Reports

generated by Program Manager

listing employees who

participated in the Excal Visual

IDDE Training Module. Sign-In

sheets for in-house training

exercises.

MRSWMP PM will place Screen Shot

and Web Reports on the FTP Site for

your records.

Attachment 5

2


of 33

DRAFT

11 2

Developed and distributed educational materials to

construction site operators, as specified by section

E.7.b.2(b)(ii)(a-d), (page 29, Year 3); OR

Continued to distribute educational materials? (Years 4-

5)


MRSWMP Construction BMP

Handbook; Sign-In Sheet for

Construction BMP Training

Workshop

MRSWMP PM will place the

Construction BMP Handbook and

Construction BMP Training Workshop

Sign-In sheet on the FTP Site for your

records.

12 2

Updated existing storm water website, as

necessary, to include information on appropriate

selection, installation, implementation and

maintenance of BMPs? (E.7.b.2.(b)(ii)(d), page 29)

(Years 3-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a

The MontereySEA.org website

updated its Construction BMP

section in Year 3. All new

material is included on

www.montereysea.org

13 2

Trained employees on how to incorporate pollution

prevention/good housekeeping techniques into

Permittee operations, as specified by section

E.7.b.3.(ii)(a-d), pages 29-30 (Years 2-5)


Screen Shot of Members Only

section of MontereySEA.org

website with Excal Visual Training

Video. Documentation of

additonal training.

MRSWMP PM will place the Screen

Shot on the FTP Site for your recoreds.

Individual Permittees can provide

documentation of additional training.

14 2

Involved the public in the development and

implementation of activities related to the program, as

specified by section E.8.(ii)(a-e)? (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes,

The Monterey Regional


Program holds public

meetings monthly in

accordance with the Brown

Act. Meeting agendas are

published on the

MontereySEA.org web site. A

summary o fother public

particpation activities

performed in Permit Year 2 by

MRSWMP on behalf of

members is attached. E.8 Annual Report E.8 Annual Report

MRSWMP PM will place the E.8 Annual

Report on the FTP Site to upload and

save for your records.

15 2

Created and/or maintained outfall map? (E.9.a., page

31) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Copy of Outfall Map

Gina Schmidt of AMBAG has previously

forwarded Outfall Maps to Individual

Permittees, or Individual Permittees will

provide their Outfall Map.

25 3

Updated the inventory annually? (E.9.b(ii)(d), page 33)

(Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Copy of the Inventory Individual Permittees

26 4

Developed and implemented procedures to proactively

identify illicit discharges originating from priority areas

identified in Section E.9.a.(ii)(c ), at least once over the

length of the permit term. OR, established a self-

certification program where Permittees require reports

from authorized parties demonstrating the prevention

and elimination of illicit discharges at their facilities in

priority areas at least once over the length of the permit

term? (E.9.b(ii)(e), page 33) (Year 2)

OR

Implemented the procedures established per

E.9.b.(ii).(e).? (Years 3-5)


Copy of Spill Response Plan, or

any other documentation of

procedures. Individual Permittees

Attachment 5

3


of 33

DRAFT

28 4

Conducted monitoring for the parameters listed in Table

1 (page 34), or for parameters selected by Permittee

based on local knowledge of pollutants of concern in

priority areas? (E.9.c(ii)(a), page 34) (Years 2-5)

If tailored parameter action levels, attach justification

and modifications to parameters


Yes (or n/a if

no sampling

completed

due to a lack

of flowing or

ponding)

If you answered n/a, you may

wish to state: Field Sampling

was not conducted duye to a

lack of flowing or ponding. n/a Documentation of the sampling. Individual Permittees

29 4

Verified that indicator parameter action levels in Table 2

(page 35), or tailored parameter action levels were not

exceeded? (E.9.c.(ii)(b), page 35) (Years 2-5)

If tailored parameter action levels, attach justification

and modifications to parameter action levels.


Yes (or n/a if

no sampling

completed

due to a lack

of flowing or

ponding)

If you answered n/a, you may

wish to state: Field Sampling

was not conducted duye to a

lack of flowing or ponding.

If tailored parameter action levels,

attach justification and modifications

to parameter action levels.

Documentation of field sampling.

If tailored parameter action levels,

attach justification and

modifications to parameter action

levels. Individual Permittees

30 4

Conducted follow-up investigations per Section E.9.d. if

the action level concentrations were exceeded?

(E.9.c(ii)(c ), page 35) (Years 2-5)


Documentation of field sampling,

documentation fo follow-up

investigations. Individual Permittees

32 4

Investigated within 24 hours, non-storm water

discharges suspected of being sanitary sewage and/or

significantly contaminated? (E.9.d.(ii)(a), page 36)

(Years 2-5)


Yes n/a n/a Documentation of investigations. Individual Permittees

33 4

Prioritized investigations of suspected sanitary sewage

and/or significantly contaminated discharges over

investigations of non-storm water discharges suspected

of being cooling water, wash water, or natural flows?

(E.9.d.(ii)(b), page 36) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of investigations. Individual Permittees

34 4

Reported immediately the occurrence of any flows

believed to be an immediate threat to human health or

the environment to local Health Department?

(E.9.d.(ii)(c), page 36? (Years 2-5)


Documentation of

investigations/reporting. Individual Permittees

35 4

Determined and documented through investigations the

source of all non-storm water discharges? (E.9.d.(ii)(d),

page 36) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of investigations. Individual Permittees

36 5

Implemented corrective actions to eliminate illicit

discharges as specified in section E.9.d.(ii)(e), page 36.

(Years 2-5)


Yes n/a n/a

Documentation of investigations

and follow-up. Individual Permittees

Attachment 5

4


of 33

DRAFT

37 5

Developed and began implementing a spill response

plan? (E.9.e., page 36) (Year 1); OR

Continued to implement a spill response plan (Years 2 -

5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. *

Yes n/a n/a Copy of Spill Response Plan. Individual Permittees

39 5

Created, maintained, and continuously updated an

inventory of all projects subject to local construction site

storm water runoff control ordinance according to the

minimum requirements listed in section E.10.a(ii)(a-h) ?

(E.10.a., page 37) (Years 1-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. * Yes n/a Copy of Inventory (optional) Copy of Inventory Individual Permittees

41 5

Used legal authority to implement procedures for

inspecting public and private construction projects and

conducted enforcement as necessary? (E.10.c, page

39). (Years 2-5)


Yes n/a n/a

Documentation of Inspections and

follow-up. Individual Permittees

42 5

Conducted inspections, at a minimum, at priority

construction sites prior to land disturbance, during active

construction and following active construction?

(E.10.c.(ii), page 39) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documnentation of inspections. Individual Permittees

43 5

Included in inspection, an assessment of compliance

with the Permittee's construction site storm water

control ordinance and other applicable ordinances?

(E.10.c.(ii), page 39) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of inspections. Individual Permittees

44 5

Active site inspections included inspections of BMP

maintenance, BMP effectiveness and verification of no

pollutant of concern discharge? (E.10.c.(ii), page 39)

(Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of inspections. Individual Permittees

45 6

Based inspection prioritization criteria on project threat

to water quality (includes soil erosion potential, site

slope, project size and type, sensitivity of receiving

water bodies, proximity to receiving water bodies, non-

storm water discharges, projects more than one acre

that are not subject to the CGP and past record of non-

compliance)? (E.10.c.(ii), page 39) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Inspection Prioritization Table

PM will upload a copy of the Inspection

Prioritization Table to FTP site for your

records. Or, Individual Permittees will

provide their own Prioritization Criteria.

46 6

Developed and maintained an inventory of Permittee-

owned or operated facilities within your jurisdiction that

are a threat to water quality, as specified in E.11.a(ii),

page 40. (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Copy of Inventory Individual Permittees

Attachment 5

5


of 33

DRAFT

54 7

Developed and implemented a strategy to inspect

storm drain systems, based on the priorities

assigned in section E.11.f.(ii), page 44.

(E.11.g.(ii)(a), page 45). (Year 3); OR

Continued to implement the strategy to inspect storm

drain systems? (Years 4-5)


Documentation of procedures,

maintenance. Individual Permittees

55 7

Developed and implemented a schedule to clean

high priority catch basins and other systems?

(E.11.g.(ii)(b), page 45) (Year 3); OR

Continued to implement a schedule to clean high priority

catch basins? (Years 4-5)


Documentation of schedule,


56 7

Ensured that each catch basin in high foot traffic

areas includes a legible storm water awareness

message? (E.11.g.(ii)(c), page 45) (Years 3-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a E.8 Annual Report

PM will upload a copy of the E.8 Annual

Report, that includes a section on our

stenciling activities, to the FTP site for

your records.

57 7

Reviewed and maintained high priority facilities and

removed trash and debris from high priority areas

prior to the rainy season? (E.11.g.(ii)(d), page 45).

(Years 3-5)


Documentation of procedures,


58 7

Developed and maintained a procedure to dewater

and dispose of materials extracted from catch

basins that ensures that water removed during the

catch basin cleaning process and waste material

will not reenter the MS4? (E.11.g.(ii)(e), page 45).

(Year 3)

Continued to implement a procedure to dewater and

dispose of materials extracted from catch basins?

(Years 4-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of procedures. Individual Permittees

60 7

Developed and implemented a program that

includes activities listed in section E.11.h.ii(a)(1-8),

page 46, to assess O & M activities and

subsequently developed applicable BMPs?

(E.11.h(ii)(a), page 46) (Year 3); OR

Continued to implement a program to assess O&M

activities? (Years 4-5)


Documentation of O & M

Inspections. Individual Permittees

61 7

Identified all materials that could be discharged

from each of these O&M activities, and which

materials contain pollutants? (E.11.h(ii)(b), page 46)

(Years 3-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a O & M Inspection Forms. Individual Permittees

Attachment 5

6


of 33

DRAFT

62 7

Developed and identified a set of BMPs that, when

applied during Permittee O&M activities, will reduce

pollutants in storm water and non-storm water

discharges? (E.11.h(ii)(c), page 46) (Year 3); OR

Continued to implement identified BMPs for O&M

activities? (Years 4-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a O & M Inspection Forms. Individual Permittees

63 7

Evaluated all BMPs implemented during O&M

activities quarterly? (E.11.h(ii)(d), page 46) (Years 3-

5)


Documentation of O & M

Inspections. Individual Permittees

64 8

Developed and implemented a process for

incorporating water quality and habitat

enhancement into new and rehabilitated flood

management projects? (E.11.i, page 46-47) (Year 3);

OR

Continued to implement the process for

incorporating water quality enhancement into flood

management projects? (Years 4-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of protocols. Individual Permittees

65 8

Implemented a landscape design and maintenance

program to reduce the amount of water, pesticides,

herbicides and fertilizers used by Permittee? (E.11.j.,

page 47) (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of program. Individual Permittees

67 8

Implemented practices that reduced the discharge of

pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers as specified in

section E.11.j(ii)(b)(1-4), page 47-48)? (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of practices. Individual Permittees

68 8

Implemented educational activities for municipal

applicators and distributors? (E.11.j(ii)(b)(1), page 47)

(Years 2-5)


Flyer from Integrated Pest

Management Training Workshop.

PM will upload flyer from Integrated

Pest Management Training Workshop

to FTP site for your records.

69 8

Implemented landscape management measures that

rely on non-chemical solutions, including the measures

specified in section E.11.j.(ii)(b)(2)(a-i), page 47? (Years

2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of practices. Individual Permittees

70 8

Collected and properly disposed of unused pesticides,

herbicides and fertilizers? (E.11.j(ii)(b)(3), page

48)(Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of disposal. Individual Permittees

71 8

Minimized irrigation runoff by using an

evapotranspiration-based irrigation schedule and rain

sensors? (E.11.j(ii)(b)(4), page 48), (Years 2-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation. Yes n/a n/a Documentation of sensors. Individual Permittees

72 8

Recorded the types and amounts of pesticides,

herbicides and fertilizers used in the permit area?

(E.11.j(ii)(c ), page 48) (Years 2-5)


Documentation of pesticides,

herbicides, and fertilizer

applications. Individual Permittees

Attachment 5

7


of 33

DRAFT

73 9

Regulated development to comply with sections E.12.b.

through E.12.l of permit? (E.12.a., page 48) (Years 2-5)


The City/County of xxx

implements the Post

Construction Stormwater

Management Requirements

for Development Projects in

the Central Coast Region as

allowed by Section E.12.k of

the Permit. n/a

Copy of PCR Ordinance, copy of

Stormwater Technical Guidelines

Individual Permittees, MRSWMP PM

will post Stormwater Technical

Guidelines to FTP Site for your records.

74 9

Required implementation of site design measures for all

projects that create and/or replace 2,500- 5,000 square

feet of impervious surface (including single family

homes, that are not part of a larger plan of

development)? (E.12.b., page 48-49) (Years 2-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






75 9

Implemented standards, including measures for site

design, source control, runoff reduction, storm water

treatment and baseline hydromodification management,

on projects that create and/or replace more than 5,000

square feet of impervious surface (Regulated Projects)?

(E.12.c., pages 49 -51) (Years 2-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






76 9

Required Regulated Projects to implement source

control measures? (E.12.d., page 51- 52) (Years 2-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






77 9

Required Regulated Projects to implement LID

standards designed to reduce runoff, treat storm water,

and provide baseline hydromodification management to

the extent feasible, to meet the Numeric Sizing Criteria

for Storm Water Retention and Treatment under section

E.12.e(ii)c., page 53. (E.12.e., page 52-56)? (Years 2-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






78 9

Developed and implemented hydromodification

management procedures for Regulated Projects

that created and/or replaced one acre or more of

impervious surface as specified by section E.12.f?

(pgs. 56 - 57, Year 3); OR

Continued to implement hydromodification management

procedures for Regulated Projects? (Years 4-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






Attachment 5

8


of 33

DRAFT

79 9

Developed and/or modified enforceable

mechanisms to implement E.12.b through E.12.f., if

necessary? (E.12.g., page 58) (Years 3-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






80 9

Implemented an O&M verification program for storm

water treatment and baseline hydromodification

structural controls measures on all Regulated Projects,

as specified by section E.12.h.(ii)(a-e), page 58-60?

(Years 2-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






81 9

Inventoried and assessed the maintenance

condition of structural post-construction BMPs

within your jurisdiction? (E.12.i., page 60) (Years 3-

5)


Yes


implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






82 9

Developed and maintained a plan to inventory, map

and determine the relative maintenance condition of

structural post-construction BMPs as specified by

section E.12.i(ii)(a-d), page 60-61? (Year 3); OR

Continued to implement plan to inventory, map and

assessment of maintenance condition of post-

construction BMPs? (Years 4-5)



implements the Post






the Permit. n/a






84 10

Completed any changes to the landscape code to

effectively administer post-construction requirements?

(E.12.j(ii)(b), page 61) (Years 2-5)


Documentation of changes to

landscape code. Individual Permittees

85 10

Implemented post-construction storm water

management requirements based on a watershed-

process approach as specified by section E.12.k, page

62? (Years 1 - 5) * Yes


implements the Post






the Permit. n/a

Documentation of changes to

landscape code. Individual Permittees

Attachment 5

9


of 33

DRAFT

86 10

Proposed alternative post-construction requirements

that achieved multiple-benefits as specified by section

E.12.l., page 62? (Years 1 - 5) * Yes


implements the Post






the Permit. Alternative

Compliance is an option open

to any project proponent. No

such proposals were

submitted in Permit Year 3. n/a n/a n/a

92 11

Provide a summary of the implementation of the

water quality monitoring program and related

results. (Year 3 - 5)

Upload the Monitoring Study Results.

Per

Jurisdiction

(applies to

City of

Monterey

and County

of Monterey)

93 11

Developed and implemented a Program Effectiveness

Assessment and Improvement Plan (PEAIP) that

includes the minimum requirements listed in section

E.14.a(ii)(a-f), page 70-72)? (Year 2)

Continued to implement the PEAIP? (Years 3-5)


If 'Yes', upload required PEAIP as attachment. Yes n/a

Upload PEAIP Template and

completed Program Effectiveness

Matrix

PEAIP Template and completed

Program Effectiveness Matrix

Individual Permittees. Condit will

upload template to FTP site for your

records.

94 11

Provide a description of implementation of the

Program Effectiveness Assessment and

Improvement Plan, a summary of data obtained

through effectiveness assessment measures and

the short and long-term progress of the storm water

program and an analysis of the data as described

on page 72 of the permit. Upload as an attachment.

(Years 3 - 5) n/a n/a

96 11

Attached TMDL implementation status report that

includes the information listed in section E.15.d(i-iv),

page 74 of permit? (Years 1-5)

If 'No', please provide a brief explanation.* County only

97 11

Optional: If you have any additional information, reports

or attachments that you would like to provide to describe

your storm water program please use the text box

and/or the upload attachment button below. (Years 1 -

5) n/a Optional, per jurisdiction Optional, per jurisdiction Optional, per jurisdiction Individual Permittees.

Attachment 5

10


of 33

1

CENTRAL COAST POST‐CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE SERIES1

SERIES ISSUE #2: DECENTRALIZED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TO COMPLY WITH RUNOFF

RETENTION POST‐CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER CONTROL REQUIREMENTS

Low Impact Development (LID) is a stormwater management approach that seeks to manage rainfall using

distributed and decentralized controls, natural treatment, and runoff volume reduction Stormwater Control

Measures (SCMs). The goal of LID is to mimic the pre‐development hydrologic condition of a site, by

minimizing disturbed areas and impervious cover and by infiltrating, storing, detaining, evapotranspiring,

and/or biotreating stormwater runoff close to its source. Instead of conveying and treating stormwater solely

in end‐of‐pipe facilities located at the bottom of large drainage areas (i.e., centralized stormwater

management), LID manages stormwater through small‐scale landscape practices and designs that preserve

natural watershed processes throughout a project site (i.e., decentralized stormwater management).

What is decentralized enough?

Most LID guidance describes the decentralization approach for small‐scale (e.g., parcel) projects in which one

LID SCM is constructed to manage one Drainage Management Area (DMA) such as the roof area, parking lot, or

sidewalk. The question of adequate decentralization can arise with moderate to large project footprints where

there may be a design imperative to “scale‐up” DMAs and construct larger corresponding SCMs, thereby

resulting in centralized systems that fail to meet a key objective of LID. This guidance applies to projects that

are at least five acres in size and is meant to provide direction to project applicants and plan reviewers on the

appropriate scale for achieving a decentralized approach to managing stormwater runoff to meet Central

Coast Post‐Construction Requirements (PCRs)2. See Note 1 for further explanation of the regulatory context.

Delineating Drainage Management Areas

Delineating DMAs is the key step in achieving a decentralized approach. While a variety of design factors

influence the size of a DMA (e.g., types of SCMs, categories of impervious surface, site gradient, land use), the

PCRs intend for DMA sizing to reflect and preserve natural conditions to the extent possible. This is best

achieved through an initial coarse delineation, followed by a refined delineation as follows:

Coarse Delineation – Conduct this delineation prior to siting development features (e.g., buildings, roads).

Delineate coarser DMAs based on the following elements:

1 The PCR Guidance Series is developed by the Central Coast Joint Effort Review Team (JERT). The JERT is a group of regional stakeholders focused on addressing issues associated with post‐construction stormwater quality control requirements. Water Board staff facilitate JERT meetings, which are focused on issues where regulator input is desired to clarify the pathway to PCR compliance. JERT bulletins are a means to disseminate information, findings, and direction resulting from the JERT to the broader group of PCR stakeholders. 2 Attachment 1 of Resolution No. R3‐2013‐0032: Post‐Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (PCRs).


of 33

2

Natural/existing hydrologic features – DMAs should follow, not bisect, hydrologic features.

Additionally, the project applicant should strive to maintain hydrologic features post‐development. For

example, a project with an existing wetland should delineate the DMA that includes the wetland such

that the wetland does not accept untreated run‐on and the water balance is maintained.

Topography – DMAs should follow topographic grade breaks, similar to drainage catchment areas

assigned for conventional hydrologic/hydraulic calculations.

Watershed processes – Choose appropriate DMA sizes to support the watershed processes that were

present at the project site pre‐development. See Table 1 [Description of Watershed Processes] for help

identifying which watershed processes exist at the project site. Next, Reference Figure 1 [DMA size,

related to percent of project site that is impervious, for retention‐based watershed processes] to

determine the relative importance of delineating smaller DMAs to optimize protection and restoration

of watershed processes.

Refined (Final) Delineation – Conduct a subsequent delineation, after development feature locations are

established3, to define final DMAs. Delineate sub‐drainage areas, from the larger DMAs identified during the

initial delineation, such that stormwater is managed at the source at an appropriate scale. The below land use

based guidelines may be helpful in delineating final DMAs on project areas 5 acres and larger. Please note,

these guidelines are based on general guidance from practitioners, not analytical data, and are not intended to

define regulatory compliance.

3 Note: Project applicant must adhere to site design principles when siting development features [PCRs, Sections B.2.a and B.4.d].


of 33

3

1) Single‐family residential project DMAs are:

Less than or equal to 10 lots

AND Less than 5 acres AND Less than 1 acre of total impervious

area OR

1/4 mile or less road length

2) Commercial, industrial, and multi‐family project DMAs are:

Land use specific (avoid comingling of runoff from multiple

land uses)


area

3) Road project DMAs are:

Local Road – 1/4 mile or less

AND 2 blocks or less in road length


area

OR

Collector Road – 1/8 mile or

less

OR

Arterial Road – 1/8 mile or less

Selecting SCMs for each DMA

Watershed processes are most effectively protected through appropriately sized DMAs and well‐chosen SCMs.

For example, to mimic the interflow watershed process, SCMs should achieve distributed infiltration; to mimic

the evapotranspiration watershed process, SCMs should include vegetation; and to mimic the chemical and

biological transformation watershed process, SCMs should integrate soil and vegetation.

In general, project applicants should strive to protect all watershed processes; however, it is critical to ensure

the significant watershed processes present on the project site are protected. For example, a project located

near a stream or wetland should construct SCMs focused on protecting the interflow watershed process, such

that shallow subsurface flow is preserved (e.g., distributed vegetation/soil‐based shallow infiltration SCMs).

Additionally, if the project is in close proximity to a riparian area, the project applicant should ensure

protection of watershed processes associated with riparian areas. Conversely, an upland project located over a

groundwater basin where the priority watershed process is groundwater recharge, should include SCMs (e.g.,

deep infiltration wells, large‐scale infiltration basins sited over highly infiltration areas with connectivity to

groundwater basins) focused on groundwater recharge and infiltration. Both of these project examples should


of 33

4

also strive to protect other less dominant watershed processes present at the project sites, by considering

SCMs and other site design strategies that achieve multiple benefits. For example, the landscape portion of

new development project sites offers some level of evapotranspiration and chemical and biological

transformations due to the existing vegetation and soil column.

Cautionary notes regarding SCM selection:

Permeable Pavement and Pavers – Depending on the design, permeable pavement and pavers can

provide infiltration opportunities; however, permeable pavement and pavers are not as effective as

bioretention or other plant and soil‐based SCMs in promoting evapotranspiration or chemical and

biological transformations that generally support healthy watersheds and receiving waters.

Centralized Retention/Infiltration Basins – Although some exceptions exist (especially in areas with

well‐draining native soils), centralized basins often lose infiltration capacity over time. Common causes

of decreased infiltration capacity include: compacting basin floor from construction vehicles; using the

basin as a sediment collector during construction resulting in clogged basin; and fine sediment

accumulating in the basin over time. Additionally, infiltrating runoff in one centralized location does

not mimic pre‐development infiltration patterns and may result in seasonal groundwater mounding.

This is especially important where adjacent surface waterbodies rely on the interflow watershed

process.

NOTE 1: Regulatory Context to the Central Coast PCRS

The Central Coast PCRs require project applicants subject to PCRs Performance Requirement No. 3 [Runoff

Retention] to achieve the runoff retention requirements using a decentralized approach to stormwater

management by:

Delineating DMAs4 [PCRs, Section B.4.d.iii];

Mapping or diagraming DMAs [PCRs, Section B.4.d.iii]; and

Accounting for drainage from each DMA using the following measures:

Site design and runoff reduction measures to reduce the amount of runoff; and

Structural SCMs that optimize retention and result in optimal protection and restoration of

watershed processes, such as SCMs associated with small‐scale, decentralized facilities

designed to infiltrate, evapotranspirate, filter, or capture and use stormwater [PCRs, Section

B.4.d.v].

NOTE 2: DMA Size Related to Site Imperviousness

The watershed processes associated with stormwater retention include the following: groundwater recharge

and infiltration, interflow, and evapotranspiration. As the percent imperviousness increases at a site, so does

4 Drainage Management Area (DMA) – Following the low impact development principle of managing stormwater through small‐scale, decentralized measures, DMAs are designated individual drainage areas within a Regulated Project that typically follow grade breaks and roof ridge lines and account for each surface type (e.g., landscaping, pervious paving, or roofs). Stormwater Control Measures for runoff reduction and structural facilities are designed for each DMA. [PCRs Glossary]


of 33

5

the risk of disrupting retention‐based watershed processes, because more of the landscape is capped with an

impermeable layer without vegetation. Therefore, as a project site’s percent imperviousness increases, so

does the need to manage stormwater using multiple dispersed DMAs. Note that in addition to retention‐based

watershed processes, the entire suite of watershed processes benefit from a decentralized approach to

managing stormwater.

Figure 1. General relationship between DMA size and percent of project site that is impervious, for

retention‐based watershed processes.

NOTE 3: Watershed Process Descriptions

Table 1 includes descriptions of watershed processes. Project applicants can use these descriptions to: a) using

field observations, published literature, and common sense identify the significant and less significant

watershed processes present on the project site; b) delineate DMAs that at a minimum protect the significant

watershed processes; and c) spatially distribute and select SCMs that most closely replicate the significant

watershed processes and at a minimum have ancillary benefits for the less significant processes.

Table 1. Description of Watershed Processes. 5

Watershed Process Description

Groundwater Recharge and Infiltration

These closely linked hydrologic processes are dominant across much of California’s intact landscapes. They can be thought of as the inverse of overland flow; precipitation that reaches the ground surface and does not immediately run off has most likely infiltrated. Thus, on virtually any geologic material on all but the steepest slopes (or bare rock), infiltration of rainfall into the soil is inferred to be widespread, if not ubiquitous. With urbanization, changes to the process of infiltration are also quite simple to characterize: some (typically large) fraction of that once‐infiltrating water is now converted to overland flow.

5 Attachment 2 of Resolution No. R3‐2013‐0032: Technical Support Document for Post‐Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region.

0 100

DMA Size

Percent Impervious of Project Site

Smaller

Larger


of 33

6

Interflow Interflow takes place following storm events as shallow subsurface flow (usually within 3 to 6 feet of the surface) occurring in a more permeable soil layer above a less permeable substrate. In the storm response of a stream, interflow provides a transition between the rapid response from surface runoff and much slower stream discharge from deeper groundwater. In some geologic settings, the distinction between “interflow” and “deep groundwater” is artificial and largely meaningless; in others, however, there is a strong physical discrimination between “shallow” and “deep” groundwater movement. Urban development reduces infiltration and thus interflow, as well as reducing the footprint of the area supporting interflow volume.

Evapotranspiration In undisturbed humid‐region watersheds, the process of returning water to the atmosphere by direct evaporation from soil and vegetation surfaces, and by the active transpiration by plants, can account for nearly one‐half of the total annual water balance; in more arid regions, this fraction can be even higher. Development covers soils with impervious surfaces and usually results in the compaction of soils when grading occurs. Native plants are often replaced with turf, which typically has lower rates of evapotranspiration unless irrigated throughout the summer months.

Overland Flow Precipitation reaching the ground surface that does not immediately soak in must run over the land surface (thus, “overland” flow). Most un‐compacted, vegetated soils have infiltration capacities of one to several inches per hour at the ground surface, which exceeds the rainfall intensity of even unusually intense storms. In contrast, pavement and hard surfaces reduce the effective infiltration capacity of the ground surface to zero, ensuring overland flow regardless of the meteorological attributes of a storm.

Delivery of Sediment to Receiving Waters

Sediment delivery into the channel network is a critical process for the maintenance of various habitat features in fluvial systems (although excessive sediment loading from watershed disturbance can instead be a significant source of degradation). Quantifying this rate can be difficult; however, the overriding influence of slope gradient is widely documented. Maintenance of sediment delivery is essential to the health of certain receiving‐water types (as is organic matter delivery), and it is this (long‐term) process that should be considered in Storm Water Resource Plans. Development commonly covers surfaces, and non‐native vegetation may also prevent the natural supply of sediment from reaching the stream.

Delivery of Organic Matter to Receiving Waters

The delivery of organic matter is critical to receiving water health as it forms the basis for the aquatic food web. Delivery of organic matter follows similar pathways as inorganic matter (e.g., sediment). However, the dominant amount and timing of delivery is often associated with the presence, width, and composition of the vegetative riparian zone.

Chemical and Biological Transformations

This encompasses the suite of watershed processes that alter the chemical composition of water as it passes through the soil column on its path to (and after entry into) a receiving water. The conversion of subsurface flow to overland flow in a developed landscape eliminates much of the opportunity for attenuation and transformations within the soil column, and this is commonly expressed as degraded water quality. The dependency of these processes on watershed conditions is complex in detail, but in general a greater residence time of storm water in the soil should be correlated with greater activity for this group of processes.


of 33

management committee monterey regional storm...

Documents