HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 2001/11/06 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
November 6, 2001 4:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
CI1Y OF
CHUIA VISIA
City Council City Manager
Patty Davis David D. Rowlands, Jr.
Stephen C. Padilla City Attorney
Jerry R. Rindone John M. Kaheny
Mary Salas City Clerk
Shirley A. Horton, Mayor Susan Bigelow
The City Council meets regularly on the first calendar Tuesday at 4:00 p.m.
and on the second, third and fourth calendar Tuesdays at 6:00 p.m.
Regular meetings may be viewed at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays on
Cox Cable Channel 17 or Chula Vista Cable Channel 47
AGENDA
November 6, 2001 4:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
· iNTRODUCTION BY CITY MANAGER ROWLANDS OF THE EMPLOYEE OF
THE MONTH - PATRICIA LAUGHLIN, ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN
· OATH OF OFFICE: SCOTT VINSON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION
· PRESENTATION OF A PROCLAMATION TO THE CIVILIAN SUPPORT
PERSONNEL, PROCLAIMING NOVEMBER 7, 2001 AS LAW ENFORCEMENT
RECORDS AND SUPPORT PERSONNEL DAY, ACCEPTED BY ROSEMARY
RODRIGUEZ - FRONT COUNTERJBUSINESS OFFICE, GLADYS RAMOS - CRIME
LAB, SANDY TUCCI - CRIME ANALYSIS/DATA ENTRY, AND MARY CHAVEZ -
ANIMAL CONTROL
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items 1 through 7)
The Council will enact the staff recommendations regarding the following items
listed under the Consent Calendar by one motion, without discussion, unless a
Councilmember, a member of the public, or City staff requests that an item be
removed for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out
a "Request to Speak"form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk
prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed
afier Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of October 9 and October 23, 2001.
Staff recommendation: Council approve the minutes.
2. ORDiNANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROViNG THE SECTIONAL PLANNiNG AREA (SPA) PLANNED
COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR OTAY RANCH, VILLAGE
ELEVEN (SECOND READiNG AND ADOPTION)
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC, has submitted an application and requests approval of a
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan for Village Eleven in Otay Ranch including Planned
Community District Regulations. The proposed ordinance will approve the Planned
Community District Regulations for Village Eleven establishing the zoning regulations
and development standards for the village. (Director of Planning and Building)
Staff recommendation: Council place the ordinance on second reading for adoption.
3 A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDiNG THE FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATiNG
$49,162 OF UNANTICIPATED SEWER FUND REVENUE FOR THE REMAINDER
OF THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, APPROVING ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
COSTS ($37,702), SERVICE AND SUPPLY COSTS ($6,365) AND EQUIPMENT
MAiNTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT COSTS ($5,095) FOR THE WASTEWATER
MAINTENANCE SECTION OF PUBLIC WORKS, AND AMENDING THE
PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 SPENDiNG PLAN TO ALLOW FOR
ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL COSTS ($63,921), SERVICE AND SUPPLY COSTS
($1,365), AND EQUIPMENT MAiNTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT COSTS
($5,095) FOR THE WASTEWATER MAiNTENANCE SECTION OF PUBLIC
WORKS (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDiNG THE FISCAL YEAR 2001/2002 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATiNG
$23,300 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES
DEVELOPMENT rMPACT FEE FUND FOR EQUIPMENT (4/5THS VOTE
REQUn r))
The Wastewater Maintenance Section is currently in need of a Public Works Supervisor.
This request for staff was not submitted during the budget process because it was
anticipated that this position would be tied to the new National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (N.P.D.E.S.). Although this position will assist with the supervision
of additional staff that will be required to comply with the new N.P.D.E.S. permit, this
position is needed now in order for the section to: 1) maintain a proper level of public
contact in dealing with complaints, 2) ensure the work being done by crews is done
safely, and 3) verify that crews are being productive. (Director of Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolutions.
4. REPORT ON REQUEST FOR TECHNICAL PROPOSALS (RFTP) AND PRICE BIDS
FOR OPERATION OF CHULA VISTA TRANSIT (CVT) AND MAiNTENANCE OF
CVT BUS FLEET
The last REP to solicit proposals for operations of CVT and maintenance of the CVT
fleet was issued in February 1993. As a result of the Request for Proposal (RFP) process,
San Diego Transit was selected as the CVT contract operator for a three-year term. Since
then, three extensions to the agreement have been approved by Council, with the latest
being in February 2001. Our current agreement terminates on June 30, 2002. In a
cooperative effort, Transit staff has been working with Metropolitan Transit
Development Board (MTDB) staff to develop and issue an RFTP in a two-step process,
with a service start date of July 1, 2002. (Director of Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report, authorize staff to issue an RFTP for
CVT operations and maintenance for a five-year base term, include a responsible wage
policy, and accept the make-up of the Technical Review Committee, as adopted by
MTDB.
Page 2 - Council Agenda 11/06/01
5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, INC. (EBS), TO PROVIDE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (N.P.D.E.S.)
JURISDICTIONAL URBAN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
In July 2001, the City of Chula Vista advertised a Request for Qualifications, seeking
proposals from qualified consultant firms to provide professional services in the
development of the City's Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (JURMP).
Preparation and submittal of the JURMP is mandated by the N.P.D.E.S. Municipal
Permit Order Number 2001-01, adopted by the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board on February 21, 2001. The objective of the program is to provide
guidelines for the City to ensure compliance with the new requirements of the permit, and
plan for future fiscal and staffing needs. (Director of Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND
MAXWELL ROAD (TF-292)
On October 17, 2001, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids from two
electrical contractors for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Main
Street and Maxwell Road (TF-292). Lekos Electric, Inc. submitted a low bid of
$28,450.00. (Director of Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECLASSIFYING ONE PERMIT PROCESSING COORDINATOR IN THE
PLANNING & BUILDING DIVISION TO PERMIT PROCESSING SUPERVISOR
The addition of duties and changes in the level of responsibility and complexity
necessitates reclassification of one Permit Processing Coordinator in the Planning and
Building Division to Permit Processing Supervisor. (Director of Human Resources)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Persons speaking during Oral Communications may address the Council on any
subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the
agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any issue
not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the
topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to
three minutes.
Page 3 ~ Council Agenda 11/06/01
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as
required by law. If you wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to
Speak"form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the
meeting.
8. CONSIDERATION OF FORMING AND ESTABLISHING COMMUNITY
FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-1 (SAN MIGUEL RANCH), DESIGNATING
IMPROVEMENT AREAS THEREIN, AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY
OF SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN EACH SUCH IMPROVEMENT AREA TO THE
QUALIFIED ELECTORS THEREOF
On June 19, 2001, Council approved the initiation to consider the formation of
Community Facilities District No. 2001-1 (CFD No. 2001-1). On September 25, 2001,
Council approved the resolution of intention to form Community Facilities District No.
2001-1 (CFD No. 2001-1) and set the public hearing for November 6, 2001. CFD No.
2001-1 will fund the construction o£ public facilities, such as roadways for the San
Miguel project. In addition, a portion o£the proceeds may be authorized to be used for
certain Transportation projects, as directed by the City. Adoption of the resolution will
continue the formal proceedings leading to the establishment of Community Facilities
District No. 2001-1. (Director o£Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council open the public hearing and continue it to December 4,
2001.
9. CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITION NO. 80 OF THE
TENTATIVE SUBDiVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE III, CHULA VISTA TRACT 01-
09 APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2001-269
Staff is ready to issue a grading permit for certain areas of Eastlake III, proposing the
diversion of drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes towards Salt Creek. Condition No. 80
requires EastLake to provide monetary compensation to the City of San Diego prior to
issuance of any grading permit for the diverted areas. Said requirement cannot be met at
this time because the City of San Diego has not yet determined the amount of said
monetary compensation. In a recent letter, the City of San Diego advised that they do not
object to the issuance of grading permits for the proposed diversion areas and requested
that compliance with this condition be deferred to Building Permits. Adoption of the
resolution will amend Condition No. 80, requiring the provision of said monetary
compensation prior to issuing building permits for the Eastlake III project. (Director of
Public Works)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public heating and adopt the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITION NO. 80 OF THE
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE III, CHULA VISTA
TRACT 01-09, APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2001-269
Page 4 - Council Agenda 11/06/01
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial
discussion and deliberation by the Council, staff, or members of the public. The
items will be considered individually by the Council, and staff recommendations
may, in certain cases, be presented in the alternative. If you wish to speak on any
item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the lobby) and
submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
10. CONSIDERATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE CITY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
BUDGET iNCLUDING THE ADDITION OF STAFF POSITIONS IN THE
PLANNING AND BUILDING, AND MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION
SERVICES DEPARTMENTS, AND FOR ASSOCIATED CONSULTING SERVICES
AND STUDIES
The comprehensive update of the City's General Plan is a significant undertaking,
requiring substantial investments in time, as well as staff and consultant resources. In
commencing the first step of the effort, on April 11, 2000, Council considered an initial
report on the need for the General Plan Update program, and approved the budget for
hiring a core staff team consisting of a General Plan Project Manager, a Senior Planner
and a Transportation Engineer. The second step was for this core team to then work with
various City department Directors, Assistant Directors and staff to develop a detailed
work program, including all the critical components, steps, time-frames, needed resources
(including consultant services and studies), costs and budgets. The core team was hired
in late-2000 and has been actively working to prepare the complex work program and
budget, along with other related tasks and studies. Adoption of this resolution will
authorize the full work effort. (Director of Planning and Building)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the following resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE CITY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE WORK PROGRAM
AND BUDGET, ADDING 1.0 FULL-TIME-EQUIVALENT UNCLASSIFIED
PLANNING TECHNICIAN II POSITION, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR
2001/2002 BUDGET, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND
AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 ADOPTED SPENDING PLAN
THEREFOR (4/5THS VOTE REQUIRED)
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
OTHER BUSINESS
11. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
A. Scheduling of meetings.
12. MAYOR'S REPORTS
13. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Page 5 - Cotmcil Agenda 11/06/01
CLOSED SESSION
Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by
noon on Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Clerk's office in
accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code 54957. 7).
14. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A)
· Tuchscher Development Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Chula Vista (case no. GIC
758620)
ADJOURNMENT to a Regular Meeting of November 13, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, and thence to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on November 15,
2001, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room.
Page 6 - Council Agenda 11/06/01
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA
(SPA) PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR
OTAY RANCH, VILLAGE ELEVEN.
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of' this resolution is identified as
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and described on Chula Vista Tract 01-11, and is commonly known as
Otay Ranch, Village Eleven ("Property"); and,
WHEREAS, an application to consider a new Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan for
Village Eleven was filed with the City of Chula Vista Plamfing and Building Department on June 7,
1999 by New Millenium, Homes Il, Inc., and Brookfield Shea Otay LLC, (BSO) has subsequently
acquired ownership of' New Millenninna property thereby becoming the applicant ("Applicant");
and,
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch, Village Eleven Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Planned
Community District Regulations ("Project") are intended to ensure that the Otay Ranch Village
Eleven SPA Plan is prepared in accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP),
to implement the City of Chula Vista General Plan for eastern Chula Vista, to promote the orderly
planning and long term phased development of the Otay Ranch GDP and to establish conditions
which will enable the amended Otay Ranch, Village Eleven area to exist in harmony within the
community; and,
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch, Village Eleven SPA Ptamled Community District Regulations
are established pursuant to Title 19 of'the Chula Vista Municipal Code, specifically Chapter 19.48
(PC) Planned Community Zone, and are applicable to the Otay Ranch Village Eleven SPA Land Use
Plan of the Otay Ranch Village Eleven SPA Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch Village Eleven SPA Planned Connnunity District Regulations
establishes zoning regulations adjustments to the Single-Family Three, Single-Family Four,
Residential Multi-Family One, Residential Multi-Family Two, Community Purpose Facility, Mixed
Use, Parks, Open Space, and Schools Zoning Districts located in the Otay Ranch Village Eleven;
alia,
WHEREAS, the Property is also the subject matter of an amendment to the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan (GDP) adopted by City Council by Resolution No. ; and,
WHEREAS, the Project was included in the environmental evaluation of said amended
GDP, which relied in part on the original Otay Ranch General Development Plan Program
Environmental Impact Report 90-01, and the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP)
Amendments/Village Eleven SPA Plan Final Second-Tier Enviromnental Impact Report ("EIR 01-
02") (SCH#2001031120) and Addendum thereto, the candidate CEQA Findings and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program; and,
Ordinance No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said Otay
Ranch Village Eleven Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan (PCM-99-15) and notice of said hearing,
together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the
city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project site
at least ten days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.
September 26, 2001, and October 17, 2001 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
}~lanning Commission and the Plamfing Commission recommended approval of the Project and said
hearing was thereafter closed; and,
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista on the Otay Ranch Village Eleven SPA Plan and adopting the ordinance to approve
the SPA Planned Community District Regulations for Otay Ranch Village Eleven; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVJ~D THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public
hearing held on September 26, 2001, and October 17, 2001 and the minutes and resolutions
resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. These
documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision makers, shall comprise the
entire record of the proceedings for any California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
claims.
1I. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as described and analyzed in the Second-Tier
Final EIR 01-02, and Addendum thereto, would have no new effects that were not examined
in said Final EIR (Guideline 15168 (c)(2)).
III. ACTION
The City Council hereby adopts an Ordinance to the Otay Ranch Village Eleven SPA
Planned Community District Regulations, finding that they are consistent with the City of
Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, Otay Ranch SPA One
Plan, and all other applicable Plans, and that the public necessity, convenience, general
welfare and good planning and zoning practice support their approval and implementation.
Ordinance No.
Page 3
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert Leiter Jotm M. Kaheny
Planning and Building Director City Attorney
II:\PLANNING\Otay Ranch\V age_ \V BSO_SPA ('C_ORD NANCE.doc
Ordinance No.
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 26th day of September, 2001, by the follo~ving vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NAYS: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
1, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular
meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 26thday of September, 2001.
Executed this 26th day of September, 2001.
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
?
EASTLAKE
TRAILS
i EASTLAKE
~ ' VISTAS
EASTLAKE
GREENS
VILLAGE TRAINING
CENTER
SIX FREEWAY
COMMERC
?
(
VILLAGE
SEVEN ~ PANHANDLE
URBAN
CENTER UNIVERSITY
r CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT CIT~ OF CHULA VISTA PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
APPLICANT: PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMEN1 SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
PROJECT O~ay Ranch, Village I t AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
South of OI topic Parkwa Easl of Eastlake Request: Propose a 489-acre site to include 996 single-family lots; 1,308
ADDRESS: Parkway, ~st oi Hunte ~rkway mul~i-famih/dwelling units; 5.5-acre communit~ purpose facility; /1-acre
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: elementary school site; 25 6-acre middle school 8 net acres public park
sites; 10 acres of mixed use commercial uses; 492 acres of open space;
NORTH No Scale PCS-01-11 and 66.2 acres of circulation.
j:\home\planning\cherr flc\locators\pcs0111 cdr 8.28,01
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 11/06/01
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Amending the FY01-02 budget by appropriating
$49,162 of unanticipated Sewer fund revenue for the remainder of the
current fiscal year and approving additional personnel costs ($37,702),
service and supply costs ($6,365) and equipment maintenance and
replacement costs ($5,095) for the Wastewater Maintenance Section of
Public Works; and amending the proposed FY02-03 spending plan to
allow for additional personnel costs ($63,921), service and supply costs
($1,365) and equipment maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095 for
the Wastewater Maintenance Section of Public Works.
Resolution Amending the FY01-02 budget by appropriating
$23~300 from the un-appropriated balance of the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Fund for equipment.
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ,,~a ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes X No _ )
The Wastewater Maintenance Section is currently in need of a Public Works Supervisor. This
request for staff was not submitted during the budget process because it was anticipated that this
position would be tied to the new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(N.P.D.E S.). Although this position will assist with the supervision of additional staff that will
be required to comply with the new N.P.D.E.S. permit, this position is needed now in order for
the section to: 1) maintain a proper level of public contact in dealing with complaints, 2) ensure
the work being done by crews is done safely, and 3) verify that crews are being productive.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1) Adopt the Resolution amending the FY01-02 budget by appropriating $49,162 of
unanticipated Sewer fund revenue for the remainder of the current fiscal year and
approving additional personnel costs ($37,702), service and supply costs ($6,365)
and equipment maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095) for the Wastewater
Maintenance Section of Public Works; and amending the proposed FY02-03
spending plan to allow for additional personnel costs ($63,921), service and
supply costs ($1,365) and equipment maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095)
for the Wastewater Maintenance Section of Public Works.
2) Adopt the Resolution amending the FY01~02 budget by appropriating $23,300
from the un-appropriated balance of the Public Facilities Development Impact
Fee Fund for equipment.
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/06/01
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
The Wastewater Maintenance Section maintains over 350 miles of City wastewater lines to a)
ensure proper and efficient disposal of wastewater, b) protect the health and safety of residents
and visitors, c) enhance the appearance and image of the City, d) reduce the City's liability, and
e) protect the City's investment in sewer and storm drain infrastructure. The major work tasks
include:
a. cleaning all sewer mains on a frequency of one to 1-1/2 years;
b. cleaning "critical" sewer mains monthly;
c. providing an ongoing preventive maintenance program, via physical inspection of
lines, and surveillance with sewer "TV" cameras, to detect potential system failures
and existing problems, such as sewer main breaks;
d. providing timely repairs of sewer mains and laterals, generated by complaints from
residents or from the preventative maintenance program;
e. using the concrete crew to cut out, reform, pour and finish all sidewalks, driveways,
curbs and gutters 'damaged" in the process of making sewer main and lateral repairs;
fi marking out all utilities prior to construction to prevent damage to sewer mains,
laterals, storm drains, and telephone lines to sewer flow recorders;
g. clearing lateral stoppages from residents' property lines to the sewer main, assist
property owners in locating property Iine cleanouts, and use dye testing to determine
if a property is connected to the sewer main, in order to properly bill owners;
h. responding to related emergencies on a 24-hour basis;
i. performing inspections by televising various sewer lines and drainage channels to
provide information to the Advance Planning Section, which is used to help develop
capital improvement projects; and
j. cleaning existing drainage channels and inlets.
The Wastewater/Storm Drain Section is currently comprised of 34 employees, excluding the
three Public Works Supervisors and Public Works Teclmician II. Due to the number of crews
assigned to each supervisor, additional paperwork required to be completed, and the type of
work~ being done by each crew, current staffing levels have become too cumbersome for each
supervisor to handle. Presently, it is difficult for the supervisors to provide each crew and/or
employee with the guidance needed in the field. In addition to verifying work in the field and
handling customer complaints, each supervisor is currently performing more administrative
functions such as inputting data into the Work Management System, completing Sewer Spill
Reports, completing performance evaluations, etc.
~ The Wastewater/Storrn Drain Section routinely performs work that requires: 1) entrance into confined spaces; 2)
shored trenches; and 3) significant traffic control. These types of work require more of the supervisor's time,
experiences and expertise to assure that they are being completed in the safest manner for the employee and the
general public,
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/06/01
Present staff and reporting relationships for each supervisor in the Wastewater/Storm Drain
Section are depicted in the following organizational chart:
Total 11 Total 12 Total 11
Although the proposed reduction in the number of staff supervised by each supervisor is
minimal, reorganizing the Wastewater/Storm Drain Section is needed to optimize the
effectiveness of each supervisor in the field. This will be accomplished by allowing the crews
that perform similar duties, to be placed under one supervisor. This will improve the efficiency
of each supervisor and crew within this section.
Page 4, Item .~
Meeting Date 11/06/01
Proposed staff and reporting relationships for each supervisor in the Wastewater/Storm Drain
Section is depicted in the following organizational chart, by subsections:
Total 9 Total 7 Total 9 Total 9
Therefore, staff recommends approval of a Public Works Supervisor in order to reduce the
number of staff supervised (per individual supervisor) in the Wastewater/Storm Drain Section.
Estimated personnel costs are $37,7022 for the remainder of the current fiscal year and $63,9213
annually, thereafter. Purchasing of safely supplies and laptop computer for the new employee
2 Assumes a start date of 11/23/01 at Step C and includes all benefits and salary and flex plan increases as outlined in
the most recent memorandum of understanding between the City and CVEA.
3 Annual costs include a step increase at one year and include all benefits and a salary increase as outlined in the most
recent memorandum of understanding between the City and CVEA.
Page 5, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/06/01
will cost an estimated $6,365 initially and $1,365 annually, thereafter4.
Approval of a pickup truck and radio are also recommended. Estimated cost is $23,300 initially,
(a one-time expense) and $5,095 annually for equipment maintenance and replacement costs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total impact to the Sewer Fund is $49,162, including personnel costs ($37,702), service and
supply costs ($6,365) and equipment maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095) for the new
position and truck. The ongoing total cost is anticipated to increase to $70,381 annually,
including personnel costs ($63,921), service and supply costs ($1,365) and equipment
maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095). The total fiscal impact to the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Fund for the purchase of a truck and radio is $23,300 (a one-time cost).
Because this position and equipment will be funded by Sewer and DIF funds, there is no fiscal
impact to the General Fund.
H:~ublic Works Operations~A 113 PW Supervisor.doc
4 Includes laptop computer (first year only), safety supplies & equipment, laundry & cleaning service, and phone
service.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING THE FY01 02 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $49,162 OF
UNANTICIPATED SEWER FUND REVENUE FOR THE REMAINqDER OF THE
CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND APPROVING ADDITIONAL STAFF
($37,702), SERVICE AND SUPPLY COSTS ($6,365) A~D EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT COSTS ($5,095) FOR THE
WASTEWATER MAINTENB-NCE SECTION OF PUBLIC WORKS; AND
~ENDING THE PROPOSED FY02 03 SPENDING PLAN TO A~LOW FOR
AJDDITIONAL PERSONNEL COSTS ($63,921), SERVICE ~-ND SUPPLY
COSTS ($1,365) AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT
COSTS ($5~095) FOR THE WASTEWATER MAINTENANCE SECTION OF
PUBLIC WORKS
WHEREAS, the Wastewater Maintenance Section is currently in need of a
Public Works Supervisor; and
WHEREAS, this staff request was not submitted during the budget process
because it was anticipated that this position would be tied to the new National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES); and
WHEREAS, although this position will assist with the supervision Of
additional staff that will be required to comply with the new NPDES permit, this
position is needed now in order for the section to: (1) maintain a proper level of
public contact in dealing with complaints (2) ensure that the work being done by
crews is done safely and (3) verify that crews are being productive; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends approval of a Public Works Supervisor in
order to reduce the number of staff supervised (per individual supervisor) in the
Wastewater/Storm Drain Section.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Chula
Vista does hereby amend the FY01-02 budget by appropriating $49,162 of unanticipated
Sewer fund revenue for the remainder of the current fiscal year and approving
additional personnel costs ($37,702), service and supply costs ($6,365) and
equipment maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095) for the Wastewater Maintenance
Section of Public Works; and amend the proposed FY 02-03 spending plan to allow for
additional personnel costs ($63,921), service and supply costs ($1,365) and
equipment maintenance and replacement costs ($5,095) for the Wastewater Maintenance
Section of Public Works.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt Jg~n M. Kaheny
Director of Public Works City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE FY01-02 BUDGET BY
APPROPRIATING $23,300 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED
BALANCE OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE FUND FOR EQUIPMENT
WHEREAS, in connection with the addition of staff to
the Wastewater Maintenance Section, approval of a pickup truck and
radio are also recommended; and
WHEREAS, the estimated cost of the pickup truck is
$23,300 initially (a one-time expense) and $5,095 annually for
equipment and maintenance replacement costs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
City of Chula Vista does hereby amend the FY01-02 budget by
appropriating $23,300 from the unappropriated balance of the
Public Facilities Development Impact Fee Fund for equipment.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt ~.hn M. Kahe~
Director of Public Works VCity Attorney/
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 11-6-01
ITEM TITLE: Report on Request for Technical Proposals (RFTP) and Price Bids for
Operation of Chula Vista Transit (CVT) and maintenance of CVT Bus
Fleet
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works 0~//
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ? (4/5tbs Vote: Yes No X )
The last RFP to solicit proposals for operations of CVT and maintenance of the CVT fleet was
issued in February 1993. As a result of the Request for Proposal (RFP) process, San Diego
Transit was selected as the CVT contract operator for a three-year term. Since then three
extensions to the agreement have been approved by Council with the latest being on February
2001. Our current agreement terminates on June 30, 2002. In a cooperative effort, Transit staff
has been working with Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) staff to develop and
issue an RFTP in a two-step process with a service start date of July 1, 2002.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council: 1. Accept this report;
2. Authorize staff to issue an RFTP for CVT operations and maintenance for a 5-year base
term, which complies ;vith Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations, in a
cooperative effort with MTDB;
3. Include a responsible wage policy based on MTDB's Policy 32, Section 32.10; and
4. Accept the make up of the Technical Review Committee as adopted by MTDB
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable
DISCUSSION:
In order to increase efficiency and reduce staff time City Transit staff is working with MTDB to
develop and issue an RFTP. Both CVT's and MTDB's existing transit contracts expire on June
30, 2002. Both Transit staffs see this as an opportunity to increase cooperation between our
transit agencies and reduce procurement costs.
Background
The City currently contracts with San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC) to operate our transit
system and maintain our bus fleet. SDTC is responsible for providing the necessary personnel to
support the operating functions ofCVT. SDTC's transit services agreement with the City
terminates on June 30, 2002. Consequently, Transit staff prepared a Council Item requesting
authorization to solicit a Request for Technical Proposals (RFTP) in a two-step competitive bid
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 11-6-01
procurement. This item also included a responsible wage policy based on some elements of
MTDB's Policy 32.
Due to concerns from the Labor Council, and the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU), the
August 28, 2001 Council Item was continued to give staff some time to address the specific
issues. On August 28, 2001, representatives from the Labor Council, ATU, MTDB and City
Staff met with two City Council members to listen and discuss the following issues related to the
proposed RFTP process:
1. The primary concern was that the Council Item excluded Clause (t) of MTDB's
responsible wage policy (Section 32.10, Setting Responsible Wages and Benefits), which
states, "The requirements of this section shall not apply to proposers and contractors
whose vehicle drivers are subject to a collective bargaining agreement."
The Labor Council and ATU representatives felt that excluding this clause would create
an unfair process in which contractors under collective bargaining agreements would not
be able to compete with contractors without similar agreements. They requested that
Clause (f) not be excluded from CVT's RFTP and that it be written just as it is in
MTDB's responsible wage policy (Attachment 1).
2. The Labor Council and ATU representatives were also concerned about the proposed
two-step competitive procurement and how it would affect the existing drivers if a new
contractor were awarded the contract. Staff was instructed to look into the legality of
negotiated or sole-source procurement with the existing contractor instead of conducting
a competitive process.
3. The overall focus of all in attendance was the desire to retain as many of the existing
employees as possible, with whichever process is used, and ensure their wages and
benefits under the new contract match or even exceed those of the current transit
operators. The larger goal is to keep a content, stable, efficient transit workforce here in
the City with minimal turnover and exceptional performance and customer service for the
next five years.
In order to accurately address these issues, the Public Works Director and Transit staff first
consulted with MTDB's General Manager, legal counsel, and staff to find out if negotiated or
sole-source procurements are realistic options. As the regions direct recipient of Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) funds, MTDB must follow all federal procurement requirements when
contracting for transit service. Since CVT is now the recipient of federal capital funding and
operates MTDB provided, federally funded vehicles, the City must also follow these same
guidelines. MTDB's legal council confirmed with the FTA that CVT does come under these
same federal guidelines and we are required to competitively bid transit service (limited to 5 year
contract terms).
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11-6-01
Recommendation
With this FTA requirement confirmed, Transit staff is recommending the same two-step
competitive procurement process as previously proposed with the following changes aimed at
addressing the issues and larger goals of the Labor Council, ATU, and City staff representatives:
1. Include all elements of MTDB's Policy 32 Responsible Wage Policy (Section 32.10),
including Clause (O. This policy sets minimum wage and benefits requirements for
vehicle drivers operating under a transit service contract. The purpose of this requirement
is to: retain fully trained qualified dhvers; provide a quality transit service to transit
patrons; and to reduce absenteeism and driver turnover. The policy itself and the
Responsible Wage Rates spreadsheet is provided (Attachment 1).
2. Require each proposer to include a detailed Driver Retention Plan in their technical
proposals that must provide existing drivers with the following minimum benefits:
Current drivers to carryover existing vacation balances if they do not prefer to
cash it out (available 30 days after contract start up);
· Current drivers to carryover existing sick-leave balances;
· Current drivers to carryover existing seniority rank; and
· Availability of a new vested pension plan.
3. Include an $8.00 minimum responsible wage for bus cleaners and fuelers with same
minimum health benefits as drivers.
The two-step competitive procurement process, whereby transit firms submit a technical proposal
and, if qualified, are moved to the second step where price bids are opened and the lowest
responsive and responsible bidder is awarded the contract, has been successfully used throughout
the transit industry for years. MTDB has been successful in maintaining very high quality and
cost effective transit service using this method over the last two decades without any significant
bidder protests.
Attached for Council's information is a draft of the proposed Technical Qualification Criteria
Table (Attachment 2), which will be used to qualify the prospective bidders in Step 1 of the
procurement process. Both the City and MTDB will be issuing and awarding the RFTP
independently, but for efficiency, MTDB and City Transit staffs recommend a single Technical
Review Committee be formed to review both agencies' proposals based on the Technical
Qualification Criteria. The committee will be composed of staff from the City of Chula Vista,
MTDB, and as well as other regional transit/planning agencies.
Abiding by the FTA's competitive transit procurement regulations and safeguarding current
employee wages and benefits can be attained simultaneously by including the additional
requirements above into the RFTP process. This allows for a balance between providing
responsible wages and benefits for employees and controlling costs in order to have the funding
available for existing services and future service expansions. CVT currently provides
approximately 11,500 passenger trips per weekday and the demand continues to grow each
month. We need to ensure that we continue to make the most efficient use of our funds in order
Page4, Item ~7~
Meeting Date 11-6-01
to meet current and future demands of the developing communities to the east without being
forced to increase fares.
Alternative Option
The City also has the option to turn CVT planning and service operations over to MTDB in
its entirety. MTDB is the policy setting and overall coordinating agency for public transportation
in the region. In August 2000, the MTD Board approved the consolidation of all regional transit
funds; consequently, MTDB is now ultimately responsible for all funding decisions related to
transit services and capital expenditures.
Consolidating CVT service into the MTDB's transit operations function may create some
efficiencies of scale as certain management functions could be combined. There would also be
improved regional coordination and transit service would fall under one dedicated transit board.
There are, however, several disadvantages to turning CVT over to MTDB:
The City would lose direct control of all transit operations and planning functions;
· CVT could lose it's own unique community identity;
· CVT could lose its direct community interaction (requests, complaints, trip planning);
· The City would suffer increased response time to citizen requests and/or concerns;
· The City would likely lose the unique working relationship between the City's transit,
planning, and engineering staffs, which currently work very well together to solve
problems and identify opportunities;
· The City would also need to address issues regarding City owned transit facilities and
impacts on existing City employees.
Timing
Time is of the essence and a final decision needs to be made so that a new contract can be
implemented by July 1, 2002. It is critical that we continue to have a transit provider to avoid
any service disruption. This takes into consideration the significant lead time needed to complete
the two-step competitive procurement process (if approved), as well as the time needed for a
contractor to prepare for the start up ora new contract, If Council desires, it can authorize
issuing the RFTP and direct staffto pursue the Alternative Option in order to avoid any service
provision disruptions. Staff is not recommending any extension to the existing contract since the
maximum 5 years will be up on June 30, 2002 (the end of the current contract).
Page 5, Item
Meeting Date 11-6-01
FISCAL IMPACT: At the time of award this contract would contain no City of Chula Vista
General Fund contribution. The CVT operating and maintenance contract costs will be funded
by MTS pooled TDA Article 4.0 funds.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Policy 32's Section 32.10 and wage table
2) Technical Qualification Criteria Table (Draft)
File: DS-027/035
H:\Transit~A 113 Transit RFP.doc
32.10 Settinq Responsible Waqes and Benefil,,; MTDB will include as part of the bid
documents a minimum wages and benefits requirement for vehicle drivers
operated as a result of a bus, mini-bus, van, or other service contract. The
purposes of this requirement are: to retain fully trained, qualified and
experienced drivers; to provide a high level of quality transit service to the transit
patrons; and to reduce absenteeism and driver turnover.
a. Base Wage Level - In advance of the initiation of a bid process, MTDB
will conduct an analysis to develop minimum wage level requirements for
the term of the COntract A base wage rate, for purposes of the analysis,
is established at $8.35 per hour for July 1, 2000, for drivers after a
training and probation period. The analysis will identify a COst of living
index (based on prior five-year average San Diego Consumer Price
Index) for each future year as a starting point for establishing a minimum
wage each year of the future contract. All existing MTDB--contracted
vehicle driver wage rates and all existing labor agreements of the MTDB-
contracted vehicle ddvers, entered into after the effective date of this
section, will then be reviewed. The initial starting point wage rate based
on the five-year average San Diego Consumer Pr ce
ad'usted to · . . . Index wou d be
J nsure COnsistency w~th ex~st~ng transit service COntracts for
the remaining years of those contracts. Any years in a new contract that
are beyond the termination of an existing contract would be calculated
based on the five-year average San Diego Consumer Price Index.
b. Training Wage Level - MTDB shall set a level no less than 90 percent of
the base wage level after probation. Training pay shall not exceed 160
hours. If additional training is required beyond 160 hours, the employee
shall be paid at the wage level of probation Wage after certification.
c. Probation Wage After Certification _ A driver who is in training and
exceeds 160 hours or who has been certified as a driver shall have a
minimum wage level set by MTDB of no less than 95 percent of the base
wage level for a period not to exceed 90 days after completion of training.
d. The above wage categories shall be established as minimums in the
contract bid requirements and are base driver wage levels excluding
benefits and any performance bonuses. These minimum wage
categories shall app y to full-time and part-time drivers of contract
services.
e. Health Benefits - MTDB shall include in bid documents the requirement
for the contractor to offer full-time and part-time vehicle drivers (20 hours
or more per week) a family health plan based on a minimum employer
contribution. The minimum contribution for the health benefit is
established at $1.25 per hour for July 1, 2000. The health benefit plan
contribution standard would be indexed based on the pdor five-year
average San Diego Consumer Pdce Index for each year of the contract to
be awarded.
f. The requirements of this section shall not apply to proposers and
contractors whose vehicle drivers are subject to a COllective bargaining
agreement.
Attachment 2
TECHNICAL QUALIFICATION~S~C~J]'~ERIA TABLE
.v,c s
QUALIFICATION CRITERIA PASS FAIL
1. Experience of Firm
MANDA TORY CRITERIA The firm (or general partner of the The firm (or general partner of the
firm) must have throe (3) or more firm) has less than three (3) years
years of recent and relevant recent and relevant experience in
experience in providing regularly providing regularly scheduled fixed-
scheduled fixed-route public transit route public transit service.
service, This service must be similar Experience not similar in size, scope,
in size, scope, and complexity and complexity (routes, miles, hours
(routes, miles, hours, vehicles, etc.) vehicles, etc.) to the requested
to the requested service. The service vehicles, etc.). Experience
experience must include at least one does not include at least one year of
year of providing the above services providing services using CNG or
using CNG or LNG powered buses. LNG powered buses.
2. Experience of Staff to be Assigned to ihis project
2.1 Responsible Management Five (5) or more years of recent and Less than five (5) years of recent and
Individual relevant direct experience managing relevant direct experience managing
MANDATORY CRITERIA all aspects of a public transit service all aspects of a public transit service.
similar in scope and complexity Not similar in scope and complexity
(mutes, miles, hours, vehicles, etc.) (routes, miles, hours, vehicles, etc.).
to the requested service.
(See: Exhibit '%")
2.2 On-Site Manager Five (5) or more years general Less than five (5) Or years
MANDA TORY CRITERIA overall experience managing ~ experience managing ~ regularly
regularly scheduled, fixed-mute scheduled, fixed-mute public bus
public bus transit service similar in transit service. Not similar in size,
size, scope, and complexity (mutes, scope, and complexity (routes,
miles, hours, vehicles, etc.) miles, hours, vehicles, etc.)
(See: Exhibit A.)
2.3 On-Site Fleet Maintenance Five (5) or more years experience Less than five (5) or more years
Manager managing 2 the maintenance experience managing 3 the
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 20% functions of a heavy-duty transit maintenance functions of a heavy-
shop (maintaining 35-foot to 40-foot duty transit bus shop. Not similar in
coaches) similar in scope and scope and complexity. Experience
complexity to the requested service, does not include two years of work
At least two of these five years must on CNG or LNG transit coaches.
be with CNG or LNG buses. (See:
Exhibit A.)
2.4 Operations Manager (Assistant Provide detailed skills, experience, Does not adequately describe skills,
On-Site Manager) and attributes to be demanded of the experience, and attributes to be
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 5% individual(s) to be assigned. (See demanded of the individual(s) to be
Exhibit "A".) assigned.
I Managing involves having direct supervisory responsibility for staff, operations, and/or maintenance
personnel.
2 Managing involves having direct supervisory responsibility for maintenance personnel.
A-14
QUALIFICATION CRITERIA PASS FAIL
3. Facilities Maintenance Plan
3.1 Facilities Maintenance Plan Provide details of the process for Does not adequately describe the
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 10% compliance with facility maintenance facility maintenance plan. Lacks a
requirements. Provide for the functional analysis for locating
functional analysis of different functions. No statement regarding
operating, maintenance, and the exclusive use of facilities
administrative functions. Must also identified for services described in
include a statement that facilities are this proposal.
to be used exclusively for services
described in this proposal.
4. Implementation, System Management, and Vehicle Maintenance Plans
4.1 Implementation Plan Comprehensive, detailed plan No comprehensive, detailed
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 5% showing all start-up tasks, (e.g., implementation plan described. The
hiring and training personnel, ~lan is not complete or is
facilities preparation, and vehicle unreasonable. No contingency plan.
preparation). The plan should allow
for flexibility - indicate contingency
plans. Contingency plans must
include a discussion of typical things
that can go wrong at start-up and
how those problems would be
mitigated.
4.2 System Management Plan A comprehensive, detailed program The program is not comprehensive
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 5% showing staffing and equipment or detailed in showing staffing and
commitment, staff responsibilities, equipment commitment, staff
management plans, and quality responsibilities, management plans.
control to ensure continued and quality control.
high-quality transit service.
4.3 Organizational Chart Include an administration, Organizational chad does not show
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 5% maintenance, and operations the relationship of staff/employee/
organizational chart showing the subcontractor positions and levels,
relationship of staff/employee/ and the number of personnel. All job
subcontractor positions and levels, classifications/positions not shown
and the number of personnel. All job with FTEs.
classifications/positions must be
shown with FTEs.
4.4 Vehicle Maintenance Plan Comprehensive, detailed vehicle Vehicle maintenance program not
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA '10% maintenance program including the comprehensive and detailed. Does
number and type of personnel not include the number and type of
directly involved, plan for )ersonnel directly involved. Does
accomplishing preventive not include a plan for accomplishing
maintenance and intervals, general )reventive maintenance, general
repairs, warranty work, wheelchair lift repairs, warranty work, wheelchair lift
maintenance, and required vehicle maintenance, and required vehicle
maintenance. (See: Exhibit"A", maintenance.
Attachment #3)
A-15
QUALIFICATION CRITERIA PASS FAIL
5. Safety and Training
5.1 Safety Compliance Report For companies operating in For companies operating in
MANDA TORY CRITERIA California, submit the latest copy of California, no copy, or not the latest
California Highway Patrol Safety copy, of California Highway Patrol
Compliance Report (CHP 343) and Safety Compliance Report
i the most recent fixed-route project (CliP 343) and not the most recent
report (CHP 343a). 3 fixed route project report
(Clip 343a).4
These reports must indicate
satisfactory ratings. This report These reports do not indicate
should indicate a Iow number of satisfactory ratings. This report
violations per vehicle, Iow relative to indicates a high number of violations
fleet size, and Iow administratively, per vehicle, high relative to fleet size
and/or high administratively.
5.2 Safety Program Submit a detailed safety training and No program provided or
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 10% safe driving program, including hiring unacceptable detailed safety training
criteria, new-hire training, ongoing and safe driving program, including
training, accident/incident hiring criteria, new hire training,
3rocedures, handling passengers ongoing training, accident/incident
special needs, and wheelchair procedures, handling passengers'
lift/securement procedures. Includes special needs, and wheelchair
a program that specifically addresses lift/securement procedures. Does
safety around CNG and related not include a program that
equipment. Includes an injury and specifically addresses safety around
illness prevention program CNG and related equipment. Does
incorporating all employees, not include an injury and illness
equipment, and facilities, prevention program, or includes such
a program that does not incorporate
all employees, equipment, and
facilities.
5.3 Mechanic Training Plan Submit a detailed mechanic training No or unacceptable detailed
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 5% program to incorporate the mechanic training program.
requirements of Exhibit "A",
Attachment #3, Sections 1, 2, and 3.
5.4 Driver Training Plan Submit a detailed fixed-route training No or unacceptable detailed fixed-
ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 5% program for drivers to incorporate the route driver training program.
requirements of Exhibit "A,"
; Attachment #4.
3 For bidders without any California operations, equivalent safety inspections from other states will be accepted if the
inspection applies to: (A) the maintenance program, (B) maintenance program adherence, (C) shop practices,
(D) vehicle conditions, (E) maintenance records, and (F) ddver assignments.
4 For bidders without any California operations, equivalent safety inspections from other states will not be accepted if
verification and comparability to CHP 343/(a) in the areas of the maintenance program, program adherence, shop
practices, vehicle condition, maintenance records, and driver assignments are not given from the issuing state.
A-16
QUALIFICATION CRITERIA PASS FAIL
6. Driver Retention Plan
' ADDITIONAL CRITERIA 20% The contractor is required to submit No plan submitted or plan not
a driver retention plan that is competitive in the marketplace
competifive in the marketplace covedng the base-term period. No
covering the base-term period. This methodology fully explained or
plan should include a methodology to incentives proposed that would
maximize driver retention and cause continued driver retention.
stability of work force. Incentives for Wage level form not completed.
driver retenfion should be provided. Wage levels unreasonable for the
Wage level form complete with marketplace.
reasonable wage levels for the
marketplace.
7, Performance Surety
MANDATORY CRITERIA If Proposer intends to provide a Letter from a corporation surety not
performance bond, technical offer submitted. Letter submitted but
must be accompanied by a letter Proposer is not bondable for required
from a corporate surety satisfactory amount, or the bondable amount is
to MTDB, indicating that Proposer is not shown on the letter. No letter
bondable for the required amount from financial institution concerning
and must be dated within the past Irrevocable Letter of Credit.
30 days. Proposer does not have resources to
furnish Letter of Credit for the
If Proposer intends to provide an required amount.
Irrevocable Letter of Credit, the
technical proposal must be
accompanied by a letter from a
financial institution indicating that
Proposer has the resources to
furnish the Irrevocable Letter of
Credit for the required amount, and
must be dated within the past
30 days.
8. References
MANDA TORY CRITERIA A minimum of three (3) acceptable A minimum of three (3) acceptable
references from three different references not provided. References
clients where the bidder has not from three different clients.
provided satisfactory service Projects not similar in scope and
acceptable to AGENCY on projects complexity. Any of the three
similar in scope and complexity. All references aro not from a public
three references must be from a agency where bidder has provided
public agency where bidder has publicly funded, regularly scheduled
provided publicly funded, regularly fixed-route transit service.
scheduled fixed-route transit service.
Agency shall be able to contact other
transit services operated by Evidence that contractor has a
Proposer in order to establish history of poor service quality
contractor service quality, performance under similar transit
fixed-route bus contracts.
A-17
¥-tt.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item J
Meeting Date 11/06/01
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Approving agreement between the City of Chula
Vista and, Environmental Business Solutions (EBS), Inc., to provide
professional services in the development of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Jurisdictional Urban Runoff
Management Program.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Work~// 0fft//
REVIEWED BY: City Manage ,9~' (4/Sths Vote: Yes_ No X )
In July 2001, the City of Chula Vista advertised a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in seeking
proposals from qualified consultant firms to provide professional services in the development
of the City's Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (JURMP). Preparation and
submittal of the JURMP is mandated by the NPDES Municipal Permit Order Number 2001-01,
adopted by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board on February 21, 2001. The
objective of the Program is to provide guidelines for the City to ensure compliance with the
new requirements of the Permit, and plan for future fiscal and staffing needs.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving an agreement between
the City and Environmental Business Solutions (EBS), Inc. for $56,000 to provide professional
services in the development of the City's JURMP, and as needed consultant services related to
the NPDES to an amount not to exceed $30,000 on a time and materials basis.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality
Control Act, the City of Chula Vista, as a discharger of storm water to the waters of the
United States, is required to maintain coverage under the NPDES Municipal Permit, and
comply with its requirements. On February 21, 2001, the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) adopted the new NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-01
(Permit). The new permit replaces NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 90-42. Order No.
2001-01 is a general permit encompassing all the cities within the San Diego County as well as
the County of San Diego and the San Diego Unified Port District. Each agency covered by the
Page 2, Item ~'
Meeting Date 11/06/2001
permit is referred to as a Copermittee. In total, twenty copermittees are covered under the
permit.
The new permit creates many new responsibilities for the Copermittees, including preparation
and submittal of Jurisdictional, and Watershed Urban Runoff Management Program documents
among many other tasks and requirements. The Watershed URMP document will be
developed jointly by copermittees sharing the same watersheds, and will not be required until
January 31, 2003. However, the JURMPs are to be developed by each agency, and the due
date for submittal of the document to the RWQCB is February 21, 2002. The JURPM will
provide the City with guidelines to improve the quality of storm water and dry weather flows
leaving the City boundaries, and maintain compliance with the permit.
On July 3, 2001, the City sero out Requests for Qualifications to reputable consulting
companies for providing services for development of the City's JURMP. An advertisement
was placed in the Star News on July 13, 2001 for the same purpose. Eleven consulting firms
responded to the notifications and the advertisement, and submitted their Statement of
Qualifications. Subsequently, Requests for Proposals (RFP) were sent out to the above eleven
firms. Five consulting firms responded to the RFP and submitted proposals as follows:
· AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc.
· Brown and Caldwell
· Burns and McDonnell
· Environmental Business Solutions
· RBF Consulting
A selection committee approved by the City Manager reviewed the proposals, and decided to
interview the top four firms. AMEC's RFP appeared to be submitted with fewer specific
details than the others, and forwarded the most expensive proposal, and was, therefore, not
considered for further processing.
On October 8, 2001, the selection committee interviewed the top four firms. Following the
interview and evaluation process, using the standard RFP evaluation procedures, the committee
ranked the consultant firms as follows:
Firm Ranking Total Cost
Environmental Business Solutions 1 $56,000
Brown and Caldwell 2 $94,249
Burns and McDonnell 3 $87,500
RBF Consulting 4 $82,400
The selection of EBS as the most qualified firm for the job was based upon: 1) overall
knowledge of the scope of the work and requirements; 2) excellent references; 3) presentation
in the interview; 4) extensive experience in related engineering and environmental fields; and,
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 11/06/2001
5) reasonable costs. EBS ranked highest because they demonstrated a higher level of
knowledge and expertise in their responses, and provided excellent letters of recommendation
with their proposal, and demonstrated that they can meet the short timeframe for completion of
the contract.
EBS is also prepared to provide and assign one team member to a City workstation in order to
be immediately accessible to the City staff. This "value-added" aspect is offered to the City at
no additional cost, only requiring the assignment of workstation (with the purchase of new
computer), which can be provided at the new Corporation Yard. After the completion of the
JURMP, the new computer will be used by the new NPDES Staff. Based on the criteria
discussed above and the value added aspect, Staff recommends contracting with EBS.
By approving this resolution, the City will enter into an agreement with EBS to provide
professional engineering/environmental services in the development and submittal of a
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program document on a Phased Fixed Fee
Arrangement for a total estimated cost of $56,000, and as needed NPDES consultant services
not to exceed $30,000. Under the Agreement, the City is empowered to delete or add any
items of work that may deem necessary. EBS can provide an additional as needed services as
requested by the City on time and materials basis. Upon such request, the City and Consultant
would meet and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding compensation associated
with said request.
FISCAL IMPACT: In Fiscal Year 2001/2002, the City Council approved a budget for the
preparation of the JURMP using available funds from the Storm Drain Fee revenue (30120-
6301).
File 0780-70-KY181
J :\Engineer\ADVPLAN\NPDES\JURMPA 1 ! 3.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND
ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS (EBS),
INC. TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL
POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(NPDES) JURISDICTIONAL URBAN RUNOFF
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, preparation and submittal of the Jurisdictional Urban Runoff
Management Program (JURMP) is mandated by the NPDES Municipal Permit Order Number 2001-
01, adopted by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board on February 21, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the objective of the Program is to provide guidelines for the City to
ensure compliance with the new requirements of the Permit, and plan for future fiscal and staffing
needs.
WHEREAS, in July 2001, the City of Chula Vista advertised a Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) in seeking proposals from qualified consultant firms to provide professional
services in the development of the City's JURMP; and
WHEREAS, five consulting firms responded to the RFP and submitted proposals as
follows:
· AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc.
· Brown and Caldwell
· Bums and McDonnell
· Environmental Business Solutions
· RBF Consulting
WHEREAS, on October 8, 2001, a selection committee approved by the City
Manager reviewed the proposals, and decided to interview the top four firms and following the
interview and evaluation process, using the standard RFP evaluation procedures, the conmfittee
ranked the consultant firms as follows:
Firm Ranking Total Cost
Environmental Business Solutions 1 $56,000
Brown and Caldwell 2 $94,249
Burns and McDonnell 3 $87,500
RBF Consulting 4 $82,400
WHEREAS, the selection of EBS as the most qualified firm for the job was based
upon: 1) overall knowledge of the scope of the work and requirements; 2) excellent references; 3)
presentation in the interview; 4) extensive experience in related engineering and environmental
fields; and, 5) reasonable costs and EBS ranked highest because they demonstrated a higher level of
knowledge and expertise in their responses, and provided excellent letters of recommendation with
their proposal, and demonstrated that they can meet the short timeframe for completion of the
contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve an Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Environmental
Business Solutions for $56,000 to provide professional services in the development of the City's
JURMP, and as needed consultant services related to the NPDES in an amount not to exceed $30,000
on a time and material basis.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt John M. Kaheny
Director of Public Works City Attorney
Agreement between
City of Chula Vista
and
Environmental Business Solutions, Inc.
for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
This agreement ("Agreement"), dated for the purposes of.
reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified
in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A,
paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the
entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form is set
forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth
on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts:
Recitals
Whereas, the City seeks to comply with all aspects of the 1987 Amendments to the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations, 33 USCA Section
1251 et seq.), the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code 13020 et
seq.) and its implementing regulations, and the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
NPDES Permit Number CAS0108758 and any subsequent amendments thereto; and,
Whereas, in order to comply with Federal and State law, it is necessary for the City to
develop and submit to the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, a Jurisdictional
Urban Runoff Management Program (JURMP) document by no later than February 21, 2002; and,
Whereas, the City has determined that it is necessary to retain the services of Consultant in
order to satisfy JURMP requirements; and,
Whereas, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a
manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to City
within the time frames heroin provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this
Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree
as follows:
1. Consultant's Duties
A. General Duties
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 1
Consultant shall perform all of the services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph
7, entitled "General Duties"; and,
B. Scope of Work and Schedule
In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also
perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and
Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, according to, and within the time frames set
forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Deliverables as are identified in Exhibit
A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this
agreement. The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and
Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defmed
Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this
Agreement.
C. Reductions in Scope of Work
City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the
Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City
and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and, confer for the purpose of negotiating a
corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction.
D. Additional Services
In addition to performing the Defined Services herein set forth, City may require
Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional
Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the scope of services offered by
Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the
"Rate Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed
upon. Ail compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed.
E. Standard of Care
Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Def'med Services or
Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill
ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions
and in similar locations.
F. Insurance
Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and sub-consultants employed by it in
connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss by the
following insurance coverage, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 2
which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or
shall meet with the approval of the City:
Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage
in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9.
Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage
in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each
project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City as an Additional
Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary
Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City in the same manner as members of the
general public ("Cross-liability Coverage").
Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless
Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy.
G. Proof of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Certificates of Insurance.
Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the
commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance
demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least
thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured.
(2) Policy Endorsements Required.
In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and
Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance
Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall
be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager.
H. Security for Performance_.
(1) Performance Bond.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to
provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the
City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or
City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in
said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 3
(2) Letter of Credit.
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to
provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately
preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City
an irrevocable letter of credit callable by the City at thek unfettered discretion by submitting to the
bank a letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of
this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent
to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A.
(3) Other Security
In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to
provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark
in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then
Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount
satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney.
I. Business License
Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with
Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
2. Duties of the City
A. Consultation and Cooperation
City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the
Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve
the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, files and
records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition thereto, City agrees to
provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 10, and with
the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after
authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's
performance of this agreement.
B. Compensation
Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City
periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than
monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate
Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 4
in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated by a
"checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set
forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as
provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12.
All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety
of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable there under is proper,
and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C)
to be charged upon making such payment.
3. Administration of Contract
Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A,
Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent
them in the routine administration of this agreement.
4. Term.
This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory
provisions hereof.
5. Liquidated Damages
The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A,
Paragraph 14.
It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this
Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in performance.
The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay.
Failure to complete the Def'med Services within the allotted time period specified in this
Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of
the time specified for the completion of the respective work assignment or Deliverable, the
consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum Of Liquidated
Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate").
Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused by the
City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the
expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect
of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be
shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work.
6. Financial Interests of Consultant
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 5
A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer.
If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC frier", Consultant is
deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and
disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required
Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 15 of
Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney.
B. Decline to Participate.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not
make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a
governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial
interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement.
C. Search to Determine Economic Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and
represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's
economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political
Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's
knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this
agreement.
D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as au FPPC Filer, Consultant further
warrants and represents that Consultant will not acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest
during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the
Fair Political Practices Act.
E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests.
Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further
warrants and represents that Consultant will irmnediately advise the City Attorney of City if
Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest
for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder.
F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests.
Consultant warrants and represents that neither Consultant, nor Consultant's immediate
family members, nor Consultant' s employees or agents ("Consultant Associates ") presently have
any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 6
the Del'reed Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any
property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other
than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15.
Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment,
remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or
Consultant Associates in connection ~ith Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant
promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement,
or for 12 months thereafter.
Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest
within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for
any third party, which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement,
except with the written permission of City.
7. Hold Harmless
Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and
appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and
expenses (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligent acts, errors,
omissions, or willful misconduct of Consultant, or any agent, employee or subcontractor of
Consultant, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful
misconduct of the City, its officers, or employees. Consultant is entitled to reasonably rely on
information provided by City in performing its Defined Services, unless reliance by Consultant on
certain information would be deemed grossly negligent. Consultant's indemnification shall include
any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents,
or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not.
Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such
suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents or employees. Consultant's
indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the
Consultant.
8. Termination of Agreement for Cause
If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants,
agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement
by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof
at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or
unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 7
prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City, and
Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily
completed on such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of
Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by
Consultant' s breach.
9. Errors and Omissions
In the event that the City Administrator obtains a written opinion of a third party
independent professional environmental consultant that the Consultant has committed acts of
professional negligence, errors or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement,
and the City Administrator determines that such acts have resulted in expense to City greater than
would have resulted if there were no such negligence, acts or omissions, Consultant shall
reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended to
limit City's rights under other provisions of this Agreement.
10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience of City
City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific
written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least
thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished and
unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City,
become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in
this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any
satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials to the effective date of such
termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation
arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein.
11. Assignability
The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any
interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment
or novation), without prior written consent of City. City hereby consents to the assignment of the
portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants
identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants".
12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material
All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures,
systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and
exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under
this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the
United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City. City shall have
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
Page 8
unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public
Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such
reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this
Agreement.
13. Independent Contractor
City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an
independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services
required under this Agreement. City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work
products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all
purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an
employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are
entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation
benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits. Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal
income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible
for the payment of same and shall hold the City harmless with regard thereto.
14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City tmless
a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as
same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this
reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the
implementation of same.
Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the
purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
15. Attorney's Fees
Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the
prevailing party shall be entitled to a judgment against the other for an amount equal to reasonable
attorney's fees and court costs incurred. The "prevailing party" shall be deemed to be the party
who is awarded substantially the relief sought.
Jurisdictional Urban Rnnoff Management Program
~ Page 9
16. Statement of Costs
In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the
preparation ora report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include,
or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar
amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document.
17. Miscellaneous
A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City
Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act
as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever.
B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals
is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or
salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Consultant, nor their principals are
licensed real estate brokers or salespersons.
C. Notices
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this
Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be
deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United
States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt
requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of the designated
parties.
D. Entire Agreement
This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated
herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject
matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified,
waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which
enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought.
E. Capacity of Parties
Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it
has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and
that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 10
F. Governing Law/Venue
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only
in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable,
the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and
performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 11
Signature Page
to
Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Environmental Business Solutions, Inc.
for National Pollutant Discharge .Elimination System (NPDES)
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby
indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to
its terms:
Dated: ,2001 City of Chula Vista
by:
Shirley Horton, Mayor
Attest:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John M. Kaheny, City Attorney
Dated: ~ ~ ~ * ~ o ~ Environme~l I~¢lutions, Inc.
Dart ~-E. Johnsln, CEO
By:
Exhibit List to Agreement
(X) Exhibit A.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 12
Exhibit A
to
Agreemem between
City of Chula Vista
and
Environmental Business Solutions, Inc.
1. Effective Date of Agreement:
2. City-Related Entity:
(X) City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California
( ) Redevelopmem Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the
State of California
( ) Industrial Development Authority of the City of Chula Vista, a
( ) Other: , a [insert business form]
("City")
3. Place of Business for City:
City of Chula Vista,
276 Fourth Avenue,
Chun Vista, CA 91910
4. Consultant:
Environmental Business Solutions, Inc.
8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290
San Diego, CA 92123
5. Business Form of Consultant:
( ) Sole Proprietorship
( ) Partnership
(X) Corporation
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 13
6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant:
8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290
San Diego, CA 92123
Voice Phone (858) 571-5500
Fax Phone (858) 571-5357
7. General Duties:
Consultant shall develop City of Chula Vista's NPDES Jurisdictional Urban Runoff
Management Program (JURMP) document in accordance with the requirements of the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) Municipal Permit Number CAS0108758,
Order No. 2001-01, and per EBS Inc. proposal, within the timeframe established in this
Agreement. Sufficient copies of the JURMP document shall be provided to the City as indicated
under Paragraph 8 below.
8. Scope of Work and Schedule:
A. Detailed Scope of Work:
Consultant shall:
1. Provide all personnel, equipment, and materials necessary to prepare the JURMP
document.
2. Prepare the City of Chula Vista's JURMP in compliance with the requirements of the
NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-01 adopted by the SDRWQCB. A
summary of the Scope of Work is set out in Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of this
document. Full description of each item is given in the Municipal Permit, Order
No. 2001-01 (Attachment 4 to Exhibit A of this document).
3. Provide City with ten copies of the JU-RIVIP document, together with all original data,
maps, computer files, records, etc. The JURMP document shall be in a format
acceptable to the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or as required
in the NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-01.
4. Use billing forms and procedures acceptable to City.
B. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services:
( ) Same as Effective Date of Agreement
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 14
(X) Other: Three working days after the date of Notice to Proceed.
C. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables:
Deliverable No. 1: Provide City with five copies of draft JURMP, together with
all relevant data, maps, computer ties, records, etc.
Deliverable No. 2: Provide City with ten copies of fmal JURMP, together with all
relevant data, maps, computer files, records, etc.
D. Dates for completion of all Consultant services:
1. Submittal of the draft JURMP December 3, 2001
2. Comments from the City to Consultant December 21, 2001
3. Submittal of the f'mal JURMP January 21, 2002
9. Insurance Requirements:
(X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance
(X) Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000.
(X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.
( ) Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial
General Liability coverage).
(X) Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial
General Liability coverage).
10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant:
The City shall provide the Consultant with database files containing information related
to ongoing construction projects, permitting activities and locations of municipal,
industrial and commercial sites within the City's jurisdiction. The City will also
furnish the Consultant, to the extent that they are available, existing City maps, and
any other such information, which may be helpful to the Consultant in the performance
of the service.
Also, the City will furnish to the Consultant, to the extent that is available, existing
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data. This data may include, city boundary,
roads, major project boundaries, drainage basins, parks, right-of-way, contours and
parcels within the project boundary. This data can be furnished in a GIS (.e00, .shp),
or CAD (.dwg, .dxf) format.
The City shall also provide the Consultant, to the extent that is available, and required
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 15
for the performance of the contract, information pertaining to the businesses within the
City.
11. Compensation:
A. (X) Single Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For performance of all of the Defmed Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall
pay a single fixed fee in the amounts and at the times or milestones or for the Deliverables set
forth below:
Single Fixed Fee Amount: $56,000 (see Proposal Attachment 2 to Exhibit A), payable as
follows:
Milestone or Event or Deliverable Amount or Percent of Fixed Fee
(X) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly
advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of
completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase
only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made
hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans, which must be returned
to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is
satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the
compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set
forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at
the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the
compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion ora phase shall
be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts
Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the
City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the
City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance
payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing
that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the
Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not
convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment.
B. ( ) Phased Fixed Fee Arrangement.
For the performance of each phase or portion of the Defined Services by Consultant as are
separately identified below, City shall pay the fixed fee associated with each phase of Services, in
the amounts and at the times or milestones or Deliverables set forth. Consultant shall not
commence Services under any Phase, and shall not be entitled to the compensation for a Phase,
unless City shall have issued a notice to proceed to Consultant as to said Phase.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
Page 16
Phase Fee for Said Phase
· 1. $
2. $
3. $
( ) 1. Interim Monthly Advances. The City shall make interim monthly
advances against the compensation due for each phase on a percentage of
completion basis for each given phase such that, at the end of each phase
only the compensation for that phase has been paid. Any payments made
hereunder shall be considered as interest free loans, which must be returned
to the City if the Phase is not satisfactorily completed. If the Phase is
satisfactorily completed, the City shall receive credit against the
compensation due for that phase. The retention amount or percentage set
forth in Paragraph 19 is to be applied to each interim payment such that, at
the end of the phase, the full retention has been held back from the
compensation due for that phase. Percentage of completion of a phase shall
be assessed in the sole and unfettered discretion by the Contracts
Administrator designated herein by the City, or such other person as the
City Manager shall designate, but only upon such proof demanded by the
City that has been provided, but in no event shall such interim advance
payment be made unless the Contractor shall have represented in writing
that said percentage of completion of the phase has been performed by the
Contractor. The practice of making interim monthly advances shall not
convert this agreement to a time and materials basis of payment.
C. ( ) Hourly Rate Arrangement
For performance of the Defined Services by Consultant as herein required, City shall pay
Consultant for the productive hours of time spent by Consultant in the performance of said
Services, at the rates or amounts set forth in the Rate Schedule herein below according to the
following terms and conditions:
(1) ( ) Not-to-Exceed Limitation on Time and Materials Arrangement
Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in
excess of said Maximum Compensation amount, Consultant agrees that Consultant
will perform all of the Defined Services herein required of Consultant for
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 17
$ including all Materials, and other "reimbursables" ("Maximum
Compensation").
(2) ( ) Limitation without Further Authorization on Time and Materials
Arrangement
At such time as Consultant shall have incurred time and materials equal to
("Authorization Limit"), Consultant shall not be entitled to
any additional compensation without further authorization issued in writing and
approved by the City. Nothing herein shall preclude Consultant from providing
additional Services at Consultant's own cost and expense.
Rate Schedule
CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEE OF CONSULTANT* HOURLY RATE
FOR RATE SCHEDULE, SEE ATTACHMENT 3 TO
EXHIBIT A
* Categories of Employees Anticipated to Perform Work on this Project.
(X) Hourly rates may increase by 2.5% for services rendered after June 31,
2002
12. Materials Reimbursement Arrangement
For the cost of out of pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in the performance of
services herein required, City shall pay Consultant at the rates or amounts set forth below:
(X) None, the compensation includes all costs.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 18
Cost or Rate
( ) Reports, not to exceed $ :
( ) Copies, not to exceed $ :
( ) Travel, not to exceed $ :
( ) Printing, not to exceed $ :
( ) Postage, not to exceed $ :
( ) Delivery, not to exceed $ :
( ) Long distance telephone
charges, not to exceed $ :
( ) Other Actual Identifiable
Direct Costs, not to exceed $ :
13. Contract Administrators:
City: Muna Cuthbert, Civil Engineer
Department of Public Works
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
(619) 691-5278
Consultant: Daniel E. Johnson, CEO
Environmental Business Solutions, Inc.
8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 290
San Diego, California 92123
(858) 571-5500, Extension 234
14. Liquidated Damages Rate: N/A
( ) $ per day.
( ) Other:
15. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest
Code:
(X) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer.
( ) FPPC Filer
( ) Category No. 1. Investments and sources of income.
( ) Category No. 2. Interests in real property.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 19
( ) Category No. 3. Investments, interest in real property and sources of
income subject to the regulatory, permit or licensing authority of the
department.
( ) Category No. 4. Investments in business entities and sources of income
which engage in land development, construction or the acquisition or sale of
real property.
( ) Category No. 5. Investments in business entities and sources of income of
the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the City of
Chula Vista (Redevelopment Agency) to provide services, supplies,
materials, machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No. 6. Investments in business entities and sources of income of
the type which, within the past two years, have contracted with the
designated employee's department to provide services, supplies, materials,
machinery or equipment.
( ) Category No. 7. Business positions.
( ) List "Consultant Associates" interests in real property within 2 radial miles of Project
Property, if any:
16. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman
17. Permitted Subconsultants:
Carey & Associates
Foley & Lardner
Site GEO Engineering Services
18. Bill Processing:
A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time:
(X) Monthly
( ) Quarterly
( ) Other: One time.
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 20
B. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's Billing:
( ) First of the Month
( ) 15th Day of each Month
(X) End of the Month
( ) Other:
C. City's Accoum Number: 30120-6301
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
Page 21
19. Security for Performance
( ) Performance Bond, $
( ) Letter of Credit, $
( ) Other Security:
Type:
Amount: $
(X) Retention. If this space is checked, then notwithstanding other provisions to the
contrary requiring the payment of compensation to the Consultant sooner, the City
shall be entitled to retain, at their option, either the following "Retention
Percentage" or "Retention Amount" until the City determines that the Retention
Release Event, listed below, has occurred:
(X) Retention Percentage: 10%
( ) Retention Amount: $
Retention Release Event:
( ) Completion of All Consultant Services
(X) Other: Delivery and Acceptance of the final JURMP document,
and all relevant attachments as set out in Paragraph 8 of this Exhibit
(May 31, 2002).
J :\Engineer',A DV PLA NXNPDES \JU RMPAgreement .doc
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
Page 22
Attachment 1 to Exhibit A
Scope of Work
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 23
PREPARATION OF JURISDICTIONAL URBAN RUNOFF
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (JURMP) DOCUMENT
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
SCOPE OF WORK
The consultant shall prepare the City of Chula Vista's JURMP in compliance
with the requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-01
adopted by the SDRWQCB. A summary of the Scope of Work is set out in
Exhibit 1 attached to the Request for Proposal (RFP), a copy of which is
included in Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of this document. Full description of
each item is given in the Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-01 (Attachment
2 to Exhibit A of this document). The overall product from this project shall
be an "easy to follow" and stand alone JURMP manual for the City that
identifies existing conditions and issues and provide a set of procedures to be
implemented in order to achieve the program goals of hnproving water
quality conditions in the area. The JURMP shall include providing specific
tasks and submittals to implement the new permit. The City JURMP shall
be consistent and compatible with the Regional JURMP Model that is
currently under development by the Copermittees. The JURMP shall
include but not limited to the following:
1. Preparation of a comprehensive watershed-based database (raw
database will be provided by the City), including inventory of all
construction, municipal land use, existing industrial and commercial
sites within the jurisdiction of the City of Chula Vista. The collected
information shall be organized into database files and shall include
names, addresses, size, production type, Standards /ndustrial codes
(SIC Codes) and other information, etc. required to implement the
requirements of the Permit. The database can be prepared based on
the information already available in the City, such as a business
license list, construction permit records, a list of municipal land use
areas, etc. The collected information shall be organized into
database files, which can be easily retrieved by a Geographical
Information System (GIS).
2. Preparation of BMPs lists to reduce discharge of pollutants and
runoff from construction, industrial, commercial and existing
development sites.
1
3. Establish classification criteria and priority list (using the above
mentioned database) for construction, municipal, industrial,
commercial (high priority only), residential (high priority only) sites,
each site is required to be classified as high, medium and low, based
on the treat it has to water quality.
4. Preparation of site assessment form (check list), for use by City staff
during their site visits, which shall include construction, municipal,
industrial commercial, and residential sites. This form shall include
the required minimum BMPs, how BMPs are to be implemented and
the methods and frequency of inspection.
5. Preparation of the description of the enforcement mechanisms by the
City, which shall include the process for identifying and reporting
non-compliance to the RWQCB, and a list of current non-compliant
sites. This shall apply to all construction, industrial, municipal,
commercial, and residential sites.
6. Preparation of the description of the industrial monitoring program to
be conducted.
7. Preparation of the municipal maintenance program/schedule, which
shall include the system inspection and cleaning, criteria and
frequency for cleaning during the wet and dry seasons, methods of
record keeping and disposal of waste, and ways to complete
maintenance without generating excessive waste.
8. Development of program to minimize the application of pesticide,
herbicides, and fertilizers, which shall include education of
applicators, integrated pest management practices, use of native
vegetation, application, storage, and disposal.
9. Preparation of a work plan to address the requirements of the new
Permit with respect to illicit discharge detection and an elimination
program, which shall include a program to identify and eliminate
IC/ID, a dry weather analytical program to be conducted, a program
for inspection/elimination of illegal connections, response plan for
sewage spills, public participation, etc.
10. Development of public participation program and mechanisms.
11. Development of methods to assess the effectiveness of each element
of the JURMP, which shall include the formulation of measurable
(both direct and indirect measurements) goals that the City can track
on an annual basis.
12. Development of annual and future budget requirements, which shall
include the estimated number of person-hours required (staffmg
needs), for the maintenance of MS4 and the implementation of the
new Permit requirements.
13. Assessment of the City's General Plan, which shall include the
development of suggested language to modify the General Plan to be
consistent with the JURMP and the Permit, and development of an
implementation schedule for the changes to the General Plan.
14. Development of a set of planningqevel guidelines and condition of
approval for new and redevelopment that specify minimum
requirements for source and treatment control BMPs.
15. Assessment and modifications of the City's existing environmental
review checklist, to be consistent with the JURMP, and the new
Permit.
16. Development of education programs, which shall include description,
their contents, forms, frequency, and the targeted communities,
stakeholders, etc.
17. The JURMP shall include and address pollution prevention program
for the non-emergency fire fighting activities.
October 23, 2001
J:\Engineer\ADVPLAN\NPDES\JURMPSCOPE OF WORK2.doc
3
Attachment 2 to Exhibit A
Proposal
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 24
Attachment 3 to Exhibit A
Rate Schedule
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
~ Page 25
JURMP RFP Page 12 of 12 September 10, 2001
EXHIBIT 2
Rate Schedule
CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEE OF CONSULTANT HOURLY RATE
$113.00
Project Manager $97.00
sistant Project Manager $235.00
Attorney $70.00
Staff $55.00
ative Staff
~ DIRECT COST ITEMS ._
Equipment -- $3,000.00
-- '~plies
Other -- $97.00
-- ~ost/Hour ~ --
Schedule of Rates
2001
P/'ofessional Staff
Principal ............................................................................. $165.00
Associate ............................................................................ $135.00
Senior Project Manager ................................................................. $122.00
$113.00
Project Manager .......................................................................
Assistant Project Manager ............................................................... $ 97.00
$ 89.00
Senior Staff Professional ................................................................ $ 79.00
Staff Professional ............................................................. .........
Staff Professional ' ..... $ 69.00
Assistant
Technical Staff
Technician ........................................................................... $ 62.00
Word Processor ....................................................................... $ 47.00
Adminis/rative Assistant ................................................................ $ 42.00
Illustrator ......................................... ~ .................................. $ 55.00
Assistant Illustrator .................................................................... $ 43.00
$ 55.00
Technical Editor .......................................................................
Additional Terms and Conditions
* Expert witness testimony (depositions and trial) will be charged at $250/00 per hour.' Preparation for testimony
and general litigation support will be charged at normal hourly rates.
· Direct proiect expenses (such as field equipment, subcontracted services including drilling, laboratory analyses,
etc., permits, supplies, etc.) will be charged at cost plus 20 percent. Field vehicles will be charged at $10.00 per
hour when used. Mileage in excess of 100 miles per day will be charged at 0.30 cents per mile.
· Per diem will be charged on all projects requiring overnight stays from our office. The per diem rate is $85.00 per
day per person or the federal per diem rate for the area, whichever is greater.
· Overtime will be charged at 125 percent of standard rates for weekday work in excess of 8 hours. Work performed
on holidays and weekends will be charged at 150 percent of standard rates.
· Unused equipment and supplies may be returned only if our vendor agrees to accept the return. In this instance
the supplies will be subject tO the same restocking charge required by our vendor, plus shipping. If our vendor will
not accept these items as a return, the items will be billed as ordered.
· Communications including telephone, facsimile and postage will be charged at 5 percent of the invoiced staff hours.
The rationale and methodology for determining our Sc~hedule of Rates is based on Manual 45c of the American Society
of Civil Engineers.
rovzdzng Econo, mic Environmental Solutions to the Business Community
2001 EQUIPMENT BILLING LIST
ENVIRONMENTAL BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, 1NC.
EQUIPMENT RATE ($)
Drager Kit 25/Day
Drager Tubes 5/Tube
Flow Meter Assembly 100/Day
Gastech Meter 75/Day
Generator 50/Day
Hand Auger 50/Day
Power Hand Held Auger 100/Day
Tube, Caps and Teflon Sheets 5/Tube
Tedlar Bags 20/Bag
Organic Vapor Meter 75/Day
Bailers - Teflon or Stainless 25/Day
Bailers - Disposable 15/F. ach
Bailers - PVC 10/Day
10 ML Visqueen 20' x 100' 100/Roll
Expendable Field Supplias 25/Day
(caution tape, decontamination equipment, ice
sampling jars, etc.)
Hazardous Waste Field Kit 50/Day
(for any field sampling; personal protective equipment
through Level C; protective clothing, respirators, gloves, etc.)
Hazardous Waste Field Kit
(for Level A or B) Quoted/Job Specific
Vehicle 10/Hour
Miles (over 100 per day) .40/Mile
Still Camera 10/Day
Film and Processing 20/Roll
Digital Camera (includes contact sheet & color printing) 15/Day
Sampler 50/Day
Fluid Petroleum Level Meter 75/Day
pPdTemp/Conductivity Meter 50/Day
Water Sampling Pump (with controller) (Gmndfos or equivalent) 125/Day
Water Sampling Pump (DC - low flow) 50/Day
Copies .1 O/Page
Color Copies/Prints (8 V2 x 11) 1.20/Page
Color Copies/Prints (11 x 17) 2.20h?age
Attachment 4 to Exhibit A
Order No. 2001-01
NPDES Permit
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
Page 26
Order No. 2001-01 Page 1 of 52 February 2t, 2001
$:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99401~Permit~S DM uniPermit 3,doc
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SAN DIEGO REGION
ORDER NO. 200'1-01
NPDES NO. CAS0108758
WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS
FOR DISCHARGES OF URBAN RUNOFF FROM
THE MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEMS (MS4s)
DRAINING THE WATERSHEDS OF THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
THE INCORPORATED CITIES OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY,
AND THE
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region (hereinafter SDRWQCB),
finds that:
1. COPERMITTEES ARE DISCHARGERS OF URBAN RUNOFF: Each of the persons in Table
1 below, hereinafter called Copermittees or dischargers, owns or operates a municipal
separate storm sewer system (MS4), through which it discharges urban runoff into waters of
the United States within the San Diego Region. These MS4s fall into one or more of the
following categories: (1) a medium or large MS4 that services a population of greater than
100,000 or 250,000 respectively; or (2) a small MS4 that is "interrelated" to a medium or large
MS4; or (3) an MS4 which contributes to a violation of a water quality standard; or (4) an MS4
which is a significant contributor of pollutants to waters of the United States.
Table 1. Municipal Copermittees
1. City of Cadsbad 11. City of National City
2. City of Chula Vista 12. City of Oceanside
3. City of Coronado 13. City of Poway
4. City of Del Mar 14. City of San Diego
5. City of El Cajon 15. City of San Mamos
6. City of Encinitas 16. City of Santee
7. City of Escondido 17. City of Solana Beach
8. City of Impedal Beach 18. City of Vista
9. City of La Mesa 19. County of San Diego
10. City of Lemon Grove 20. San Diego Unified Port District
2, URBAN RUNOFF IS A "WASTE" AND A "POINT SOURCE DISCHARGE OF
POLLUTANTS": Urban runoff is a waste, as defined in the California Water Code, that
contains pollutants and adversely affects the quality of the waters of the State. The discharge
of urban runoff from an MS4 is a "discharge of pollutants from a point source" into waters of
the United States as defined in the Clean Water Act.
3. URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND RUNOFF CAUSES RECEIVING WATER DEGRADATION:
Urban runoff discharges from MS4s are a leading cause of receiving water quality impairment
in the San Diego Region and throughout the United States. As runoff flows over urban areas,
it picks up harmful pollutants such as pathogens, sediment (resulting from human activities),
fertilizers, pesticides, heavy metals, and petroleum products. These pollutants often become
dissolved or suspended in urban runoff and are conveyed and discharged to receiving waters,
such as streams, lakes, lagoons, bays, and the ocean without treatment. Once in receiving
waters, these pollutants harm aquatic life primarily through toxicity and habitat degradation.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 2 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperrn99-0 l[Permit~SDMuniPer~nit 3.doc
Furthermore, the pollutants can enter the food chain and may eventually enter the tissues of
fish and humans.
There is a strong direct correlation between "urbanization" and "impacts to receiving water
quali¥. In general, the more heavily developed the area, the greater the impacts to receivin§
watem from urban runoff.
These impacts especially threaten envirenmentally sensitive areas (such as Clean Water Act
section 303(d) impaired water bodies, areas designated as Areas of Special Biological
Significance, water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use, and preserves
containing receiving waters designated under the Multi Species Conservation Program within
the Cities and County of San Diego). Such environmentally sensitive areas have a much
lower capacity to withstand pollutant shocks than might be acceptable in the general
cimumstance. In essence, urban development that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on
the environment may, in a particularly sensitive environment, be significant.
4. URBAN DEVELOPMENT INCREASES POLLUTANT LOAD, VOLUME, AND VELOCITY OF
RUNOFF: During urban development two important changes occur. First, natural vegetated
pervious ground cover is converted to impervious surfaces such as paved highways, streets,
rooftops, and parking lots. Natural vegetated soil can both absorb rainwater and remove
pollutants providing a very effective natural purification process. Because pavement and
concrete can neither absorb water nor remove pollutants, the natural purification
characteristics of the land are lost.
Secondly, urban development creates new pollution sources as human population density
increases and bdngs with it proportionately higher levels of car emissions, car maintenance
wastes, municipal sewage, pesticides, household hazardous wastes, pet wastes, trash, etc.
which can either be washed or directly dumped into the MS4.
As a rasult of these two changes, the runoff leaving the developed urban area is significantly
greater in volume, velocity and pollutant load than the pre-development runoff from the same
area.
The significance of the impacts of urban development on receiving waters is determined by
the scope of the project, such as the size of the project, the project land-use type, etc. Large
projects (such as commemial developments greater than 100,000 square feet, home
subdivisions greater than 10 units, and streets, roads, highways, and freeways) generally
have large amounts of impervious surface, and therefore have greater potential to significantly
impact receiving waters by increasing erosion (through increased peak flow rates, flow
velocities, flow volumes, and flow durations) than smaller projects. Projects of particular land
use types also have greater potential to significantly impact receiving waters due to the
presence of typically large amounts of pollutants on site or an increased potential for
pollutants to move off site (such as automotive repair shops, restaurants, parking lots, streets,
roads, highways, and freeways, hillside development, and retail gasoline outlets).
5. WATER QUALITY DEGRADATION INCREASES WITH PERCENT IMPERVIOUSNESS:
The increased volume and velocity of runoff from developed urban areas greatly accelerates
the erosion of downstream natural channels. Numerous studies have demonstrated a direct
correlation between the degree of imperviousness of an area and the degradation of its
receiving water quality. Significant declines in the biological integrity and physical habitat of
streams and other receiving waters have been found to occur with as little as a 10%
conversion from natural to impervious surfaces. (Developments of reedium density single
family homes range between 25 to 60% impervious). Today "% impervious coverage" is
believed to be a reliable indicator and predictor of the water quality degradation expected from
planned new development.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 3 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:tSTORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01[Pem3it~SDM uniPerrnit 3.doc
6. URBAN RUNOFF IS A HUMAN HEALTH THREAT: Urban runoff contains pollutants, which
threaten human health. Human illnesses have been clearly linked to recreating (i.e.,
swimming, su'rflng, etc.) near storm drains flowing to coastal beach waters. Such flows from
urban areas often result in the posting or closure of local beaches.
Pollutants transported to receiving waters by urban runoff can also enter the food chain.
Once in the food chain they can "bioaccumulate' in the tissues of invertebrates (e.g., mussels,
oysters, and lobsters) and fish which may be eventually consumed by humans. Furthermore,
some pollutants are also known to "biomagnify". This phenomenon can result in pollutant
concentrations in the body fat of top predators that are millions of times greater than the
concentrations in the tissues of their lower trophic (food chain) counterparts or in ambient
waters.
7. POLLUTANT TYPES: The most common categories of pollutants in urban runoff include total
suspended solids, sediment (due to anthmpogenic activities); pathogens (e.g., bacteria, viruses,
protozoa); heavy metals (e.g., copper, lead, zinc and cadmium); petroleum products and
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; synthetic organics (e.g., pesticides, herbicides, and PCBs);
nutrients (e.g., nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers), oxygen-demanding substances (decaying
vegetation, animal waste), and trash.
8. URBAN STREAMS AS AN MS4 COMPONENT: Historic and current development make use
of natural drainage patterns and features as conveyances for urban runoff. Urban streams
used in this manner are part of the municipalities MS4 regardless of whether they are natural,
man-made, or partially modified features. In these cases, the urban stream is both an MS4 and
a receiving water.
9. URBAN RUNOFF CAUSES BENEFICIAL USE IMPAIRMENT: Individually and in combination,
the discharge of pollutants and increased flows from MS4s can cause or threaten to cause a
condition of pollution (i.e., unreasonable impairment of water quality for designated beneficial
uses), contamination, or nuisance. The discharge of pollutants from MS4s can cause the
concentration of pollutants to exceed applicable receiving water quality objectives and impair or
threaten to impair designated beneficial uses.
10. COPERMITTEES IMPLEMENT URBAN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS (URMPs):
Copermittee implementation of Urban Runoff Management Programs (URMPs) designed to
reduce discharges of pollutants and flow into and from MS4s to the maximum extent practicable
(MEP) can protect receiving water quality by promoting attainment of water quality objectives
necessary to support designated beneficial uses. To be most effective, URMPs must contain
both structural and non-structural best management practices (BMPs).
11. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs): Pollutants can be effectively reduced in urban
runoff by the application of a combination of pollution prevention, source control, and
treatment control BMPs. Source control BMPs (both structural and non-structural) minimize the
contact between pollutants and flows (e.g., rerouting mn-on around pollutant sources or keeping
pollutants on-site and out of receiving waters). Treatment control (or structural) BMPs remove
pollutants from urban runoff. Where feasible, use of BMPs which utilize natural processes
should be assessed. These types of BMPs, such as grassy swales and constructed wetlands,
can frequently be as effective as less natural BMPs, while providing additional benefits such as
aesthetics and habitat.
12. POLLUTION PREVENTION: Pollution prevention, the initial reduction/elimination of pollutant
generation at its source, is the best "first line of defense" for Coperrnittees and should be used in
conjunction with source control and treatment control BMPs. Pollutants that are never
generated do not have to be controlled or treated. Encouragement during planning processes of
Order No. 2001-01 Page 4 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:tSTORMtSDPERNitT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.floc
the use of pollution prevention BMPs can be an effective means for pollution prevention BMPs to
be implemented, through such methods as education, landscaping, etc.
13. RECEIVING WATER LIMITATIONS: Compliance with receiving water limits based on
applicable water quality objectives is necessary to ensure Ihat MS4 discharges will not cause or
contribute to vioJations of water quality objectives and the creation of conditions of poltution.
14. RECEIVING WATER LIMITATION COMPLIANCE STRATEGY: Implementation of BMPs
cannot ensure attainment of receiving water quality objectives under all circumstances; some
BMPs may not prove to be as effective as anticipated. An iterative process of BMP
development, implementation, monitoring, and assessment is necessary to assure that an
Urban Runoff Management Program is sufficiently comprehensive and effective to achieve
compliance with receiving water quality objectives.
15. COPERMITTEES' RESPONSIBILITY FOR ILLICIT DISCHARGES FROM THIRD PARTIES:
As operators of MS4s, the Copermittees cannot passively receive and discharge pollutants from
third parties. By providing free and open access to an MS4 that conveys discharges to the
waters of the United States, the operator of an MS4 that does not prohibit and/or control
discharges into its system essentially accepts responsibility for those discharges.
16. COPERMITTEES' RESPONSIBILITY BASED ON LAND USE AUTHORITY: Utilizing their land
use authority, Copermittees authorize and realize benefits from the urban development which
generates the pollutants and runoff that impair receiving waters. Since the Copermittees utilize
their legal authority to authorize urbanization, they must also exercise their legal authority to
ensure that the resulting increased pollutant loads and flow~ do not further degrade receiving
waters.
17. THREE PHASES OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT: Urban development has three major
phases: (1) land use planning for new development; (2) construction; and (3) the "use" or
existing development phase. Because the Copermittees authorize, permit, and profit from
each of these phases, and because each phase has a profound impact on water quality, the
Copermittees have commensurate responsibilities to protect water quality during each phase.
In other words, Copermittees are held responsible for the short and long-term water quality
consequences of their land use planning, construction, and existing development decisions.
18. PLANNING PHASE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT: Because land use planning and zoning is
where urban development is conceived, it is the phase in which the greatest and most cost-
effective opportunities to protect water quality exists. When a Copermittee incorporates policies
and principles designed to safeguard water resources into its General Plan and development
project approval processes, it has taken a far-reaching step towards the preservation of local
water resources for future generations.
19. CONSTRUCTION PHASE: Construction activities are a significant cause of receiving water
impairment. Siltation is currently the largest cause of river impairment in the United States.
Sediment runoff rates from construction sites greatly exceed natural erosion rates of
undisturbed lands causing siltation and impairment of receiving waters. In addition to
requiring implementation of the full range of BMPs, an effective construction runoff program
must include local plan review, permit conditions, field inspections, and enforcement.
20. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT: The Copermittees' wet weather monitoring results collected during
the past decade, as well as volumes of other references in the literature today, confirm
substantial pollutant loads to receiving waters in runoff from existing urban development.
Implementation of jurisdictional and watershed URMPs, which include extensive controls on
existing development, can reduce pollutant loadings over the long term.
Order No. 2001-0t Page 5 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORN~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permit~SDMuniPerrnlt 3.doc
21. CHANGES NEEDED: Because the urbanization process is a direct and leading cause of
water quality degradation in this Region, fundamental changes to existing policies and
practices about urban development are needed if the beneficial uses of San Diego's natural
water resources are to be protected.
22. DUAL REGULATION OF INDUSTRIAL AND CONSTRUCTION SITES; Discharges of runoff
from industrial and construction sites in this Region are subject to dual (state and local)
regulation. (1) All industries and construction sites are subject to the local permits, plans, and
ordinances of the municipal jurisdiction in which it is located. Pumuant to this Order, local
(storm water, grading, construction, and use) permits, plans, and ordinances must (a) prohibit
the discharge of pollutants and non-storm water into the MS4; and (b) require the routine use
of BMPs to reduce pollutants in site runoff. (2) Many industries and construction sites are
also subject to regulation under the statewide General Industrial Storm Water Permit or
statewide General Construction Storm Water Permit1. These statewide general permits are
adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board and enfomed by the nine Regional
Water Quality Control Boards throughout California. Like the Copermittees' local permits and
ordinances, the statewide General Industrial and Construction Permits also (a) prohibit the
discharge of pollutants and non-storm water; and (b) require the routine use of BMPs to
reduce pollutants in site runoff.
Recognizing that both authorities share a common goal, the federal storm water regulations at
40 CFR 122.26 (and its preamble) call for the dual system to ensure the most effective
oversight of industrial and construction site discharges. Under this dual system, each
municipal Copermittee is responsible for enforcing its local permits, plans, and ordinances
within its jurisdiction. Similarly, the SDRWQCB is responsible for enfoming both statewide
general permits and this Order within the San Diego Region.
23. EDUCATION: Education is the foundation of every effective URMP and the basis for
changes in behavior at a societal level. Education of municipal planning, inspection, and
maintenance department staffs is especially critical to ensure that in-house staffs understand
how their activities impact water quality, how to accomplish their jobs while protecting water
quality, and their specific roles and responsibilities for compliance with this Order. Public
education, designed to target various urban land users and other audiences, is also essential
to inform the public of how individual actions impact receiving water quality and how these
impacts can be minimized.
24. ENFORCING LOCAL LEGAL AUTHORITY: Enforcement of local urban runoff related
ordinances, permits, and plans is an essential component of every URMP and is specifically
required in the federal storm water regulations and this Order. Routine inspections provide an
effective means by which Copermittees can evaluate compliance with their permits and
ordinances. Inspections are especially important at high-risk areas for pollutant discharges
such as industrial and construction sites.
When industrial or construction site discharges occur in violation of local permits and
ordinances, the SDRWQCB looks to the municipality that has authorized the discharge for
appropriate actions (typically education followed by enforcement where education has been
unsuccessful). Each Copermittee must also provide enforcement against illegal discharges
from other land uses it has authorized, such as commercial and residential developments.
I The "statewide General Industrial Storm Water Permit" refers to State Water Resources Control Board Water Quality
Order No. 97-03-DWQ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit No. CAS000001, Waste
Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Industrial Activities Excluding Construction
Activities. The "statewide General Construction Storm Water Permit" refers to State Water Resources Control Board
Order No. 99-08-DWQ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit No. CAS000002, Waste
Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction Activity.
Order No. 200'1-01 Page 6 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~BDPERMIT~Sdperrn99-01~Permit~SDM unIPer-mit 3.doc
25. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Public participation during the URMP development process is
necessary to ensure that all stakeholder interests and a variety of creafive solutions are
considered.
26. TOXICITY: Urban runoff discharges from MS4s often contain pollutants that cause toxicity, (i.e.,
adverse responses of organisms to chemicals or physical agents ranging from mortality to
physiological responses such as impaired reproduction or growth anomalies). The water quality
objectives for toxicity provided in the Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin, Region 9,
(Basin Plan), state in part "All waters shall be free of toxic substances in concentrations that are
toxic to, or that produce dethmental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic
life.... The survival of aquatic life in surface waters subjected to a waste discharge or other
controllable water quality factors, shall not be less than that for the same water body in areas
unaffected by the waste discharge..., Urban runoff discharges from MS4s are considered toxic
when (1) the toxic effect observed in an acute toxicity test exceeds zero Toxic Units Acute
(TUa=0); er (2) the toxic effect observed in a chronic toxicity test exceeds one Toxic Unit
Chronic (TUc=I).
27. FOCUS ON MAN-MADE POLLUTANTS AND FLOWS: The focus of this Order is on the
control of urban runoff pollutants and flows which are either generated or accelerated by
human activities. This Order is not meant to control background or naturally occurring
pollutants and flows.
28. COMMON WATERSHEDS AND CWA SECTION 303(d) IMPAIRED WATERS: The
Copermittees discharge urban runoff into lakes, drinking water reservoirs, rivers, streams,
creeks, bays, estuaries, coastal lagoons, the Pacific Ocean, and tributaries thereto within ten
of the eleven hydrologic units (watersheds) comprising the San Diego Region as shown in Table
2 below. During its downstream course, urban runoff is conveyed through lined and unlined
(natural, manmade, and partially modified) channels, air of which are defined as components of
the Copermittees' MS4.
Some of the receiving water bodies, which receive or convey urban runoff discharges, have
been designated as impaired by the SDRWQCB and USEPA in 1998 pursuant to Clean Water
Act section 303(d). Also shown below are the watershed management areas (WMAs) as
defined in the SDRWQCB report, Watershed Management Approach, January 2000.
Table 2. Watershed Management Areas (WMAs)
Santa M,~,~,~Ht,~ Santa t~,~,;[,~ Santa Margarita River and I Coliform Bactefia
River (902.00) Estuary, Pacific Ocean Nutr;ents
San Luis Rey River San Luis Rey San Luis Rey River and 1. Colii=orrn Bacteda 1. City of Escondido
(903.00) Estuary, Pacific Ocean 2. Nutrients 2. City of Oceanside
3. City of Vista
4. CountyofSan Diecjo
Carlsbad Carlsbad (904.00) Batiquitos Lagoon 1. Coliform Bacteria 1. City of Carlsbad
San Elijo Lagoon 2. Nutrients 2. CityofEncinifas
Agua Hedionda Lagoon 3. Sediment 3. City of Escondido
Buena Vista Lagoon 4. City of Oceanside
And Tdbutary Streams 5. City of San Marcos
Pacific Ocean 6. City of Solana Beach
7. City of Vista
8. County of San Diego
San Dieguito River San Dieguito (905.00) San Dieguito River and 1. Coliform Bacteda 1. City of Del Mar
Estuary, Pacific Ocean 2. City of Escondido
3. City of Poway
4. City of San Diego
5. Cib/of Solana Beach
Order No. 2001-01 Page 7 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
6. County of San Diego
Mission Bay Pefiasquitos (906.00) Los Pefiasquitos Lagoon 1. Coliform Bacteda 1. City of Del Mar
Mission Bay, Pacific Ocean 2. Metals 2. City of Poway
3. Nutrients 3. City of San Diego
4. Sediment 4. County of San Diego
San Diego River San Diego (907.00) San Diego River, Pacific 1. Coliform Bacteda 1. City of El Cajon
Ocean 2. City of La Mesa
3. City of Poway
4. City of San Diego
5. City of Santee
6. County of San Diego
San Diego Bay Pueblo San Diego San Diego Bay 1. Coliform Bacteda 1. City of Chula Vista
(908.00) Sweetwater River 2. Metals 2. City of Coronado
Sweehvater (909.00) Otay River 3. Toxicity 3. City of Impedal Beach
Otay (910.00) Pacific Ocean 4. Benthic Community 4. City of La Mesa
Degradation 5. City of Lemon Grove
6. City of National City
7. City of San Diego
8. County of San Diego
9. San Diego Unified
Port Distdct
Tijuana River ~juana (911.00) Tijuana River and Estuary 1. Coliform Bacteda 1. City of lmpedal
Pacific Ocean 2. Low Dissolved Oxygen Beach
3. Metals 2. City of San Diego
4. Nutrients 3. County of San Diego
5. Pesticides
6. Synthetic Organics
7. Total Dissolved Solids
8. Trash
29. CUMULATIVE POLLUTANT LOAD CONTRIBUTIONS: Because they am interconnected, each
MS4 within a watemhed contributes to the cumulative pollutant loading, volume, and velocity of
urban runoff and the ensuing degradation of downstream receiving water bodies. Accordingly, inland
MS4s contribute to coastal impairments.
30. LAND USE PLANNING ON A WATERSHED SCALE: Because urban runoff does not recognize
political boundaries, "watershed-based" land use planning (pursued collaboratively by neighbedng
local governments) can greatly enhance the protection of shared natural water resoumes. Such
planning enables multiple jurisdictions to work together to plan for both development and resource
conservation that can be environmentally as well as economically sustainable.
31. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION: Within their common watersheds it is essential for
the Copermittees to coordinate their water quality protection and land use planning activities to
achieve the greatest protection of receiving water bodies. Copermittee coordination with other
watershed stakeholders, especially Caltrans, the Department of Defense, and Native American
Tribes, is also critical.
Establishment of a management structure, within which the Copermittees subject to this Order,
will fund and coordinate those aspects of their joint obligations will promote implementation of
Urban Runoff Management Programs on a watershed and regional basis in the most cost
effective manner,
32. WASTE REMOVAL: Waste and pollutants which are deposited and accumulate in MS4 drainage
structures will be discharged fram these structures to waters of the United States unless they are
removed, These discharges may cause or contribute to, or threaten to cause or contribute to, a
condition of pollution in receiving waters. Once removed, such accumulated wastes must be
charactadzed and lawfully disposed.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 8 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:tSTORM[S DPERMl~Sdperrn99-01\Penlites DMuniPermit 3.doc
33. TOXIC HOT SPOTS: Urban runoff is a significant contributor to the cmatioe and pemistence of
Toxic Hot Spots in San Diego Bay. Califomia Water Code section 13395 requires regional boards to
reevaluate waste discharge requirements 0NDRs) associated with toxic hot spots. The State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted the Consolidated Toxic Hot Spot Cleanup Plan in June
1999. The Plan states: ~The reevaluation [of WDRs associated with toxic hot spots] shall consist of
(1) an assessment of the WDRs that may influence the creation or further pollution of the known
toxic hot spot, (2) an assessment of which WDRs need to be modified to improve environmental
conditions at the known toxic hot spot, and (3) a schedule for completion of any WDR modifications
deemed appropriate."
34. CHANGING THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT APPROACH: In contrast to the conventional
~conveyance" approach, a more natural approach to storm water management seeks to filter and
infiltrate runoff by allowing it to flow slowly over permeable vegetated surfaces. By ~preserving and
restoring the natural hydrologic cycle", filtration and infiltration can graafly reduce the volume/peak
rate, velocity, and pollutant loads of urban runoff. The greatest opportunities for changing from a
"conveyance" to a more natural management approach occur during the land use planning and
zoning processes and when new development projects are under eady design.
35. INFILTRATION AND POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION: Any drainage feature that
infiltrates runoff poses some risk of potential groundwater contamination. Although dependent on
several factors, the risks typically associated with properly managed infiltration of runoff (especially
from residential land use areas) are not significant. The risks associated with infiltration can be
managed by many techniques, including (1) designing landscape drainage features that promote
infiltration of runoff, but do not "inject" runoff (injection bypasses the natural processes of filtering and
transformation that occur in the soil); {2) taking reasonable steps to prevent the illegal disposal of
wastes; and (3) ensuring that each drainage feature is adequately maintained in perpetuity. Minimum
conditions needed to protect groundwater are specified in section F.l.b. of this Order.
36. VECTOR CONTROL: Certain BMPs implemented or required by municipalities for urban runoff
management may create a habitat for vectors (e.g. mosquitoes and rodents) if not properly designed
or maintained. Close collaboration and cooperative effort between municipalities and local vector
control agencies and the State Department of Health Services during the development and
implementation of the Urban Runoff Management Programs is necessary to minimize nuisances and
public health impacts resulting from vector breeding.
37. LEGAL AUTHORITY: This Order is based on the federal Clean Water Act, the Porter-Cologne
Water Quality Control Act (Division 7 of the Water Code, commencing with Section 13000),
applicable state and federal regulations, all applicable provisions of statewide Water Quality Control
Plans and Policies adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board, the Regional Water
Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) adopted by the Regional Board, the California Toxics Rule, and
the California Toxics Rule Implementation Plan.
38. TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS {TMDLs): 40 CFR 122.44 (d)(vii)(B) requires that NPDES
permits contain effluent limitations that are consistent with waste load allocations developed under
a TMDL. Several TMDLs are being developed in the San Diego Region for impaired waterbodies
that receive Copermittees' discharge. Once these TMDLs are approved by the SDRWQCB and
USEPA, Copermittees' discharge of urban runoff into an impaired waterbody will be subject to
load allocations established by the TMDLs.
39. ANTIDEGRADATION: Conscientious implementation of URMPs that satisfy the requirements
contained in this Order will raduoe the likelihood that discharges from MS4s will cause or contdbuta
to unreasonable degradation of the quality of receiving waters. Therefore, this Order is in
conformance with SWRCB Resolution No. 68-16 and the federal antidegradation policy described in
40 CFR 131.12.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 9 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERM Fl~Sdperrn99-Ol~PermiflSDMu niPermit 3,doc
40. CEQA: The issuance of waste discharge requirements for the discharge of urban runoff from MS4s
to waters of the United States is exempt from the requirement for preparation of environmental
documents under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Division
13, Chapter 3, § 21000 et seq.) in accordance with the CWC § 13389.
41. PUBLIC NOTICE: The SDRWQCB has notified the Copermittees, all known interested parties, and
the public of its intent to consider adoption of an order prescribing waste discharge requirements that
would serve to renew an NPDES permit for the existing discharge of urban runoff.
42. PUBLIC HEARING: The SDRWQCB has, at a public meeting on December 13, 2000, held a public
hearing and heard and considered all comments per/aining to the terms and conditions of this Order.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Copermittees, in order to meet the provisions contained in
Division 7 of the California Water Code and regulations adopted thereunder, and the provisions of the Clean
Water Act and regulations adopted thereunder, shall each comply with the following:
A. PROHIBITIONS -- DISCHARGES
1. Discharges into and from MS4s in a manner causing, or threatening to cause, a condition of
pollution, contamination, or nuisance (as defined in CWC § 13050), in waters of the state are
prohibited.
2. Discharges from MS4s which cause or contribute to exceedances of receiving water quality
objectives for surface water or groundwater are prohibited.
3. Discharges into and from MS4s containing pollutants which have not been reduced to the maximum
extent practicable (MEP) are prohibited.
4. Applicable to New Development and Redevelopment:
Post-development runoff containing pollutants loads which cause or contribute to an exceedance of
receiving water quality objectives or which have not been reduced to the maximum extent practicable
is prohibited.
5. In addition to the above prohibitions, discharges from MS4s are subject to all Basin Plan prohibitions
cited in Attachment A to this Order.
B. PROHIBITIONS - NON-STORM WATER DISCHARGES
1. Each Copermittee shall effectively prohibit al_il types of non-storm water discharges into its Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) unless such discharges ara either authorized by a separate
NPDES permit; or not prohibited in accordance with B.2. and B.3. below.
2. Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(d)(2)(iv)(B)(1), the following cetegedes of non-storm water discharges
need only be prohibited from entering an MS4 if such categories of discharges are identified by the
Copermittee as a significant source of pollutants to waters of the United States:
a. Diverted stream flows;
b. Rising ground waters;
c. Uncontaminated ground water infiltration [as defined at 40 CFR 35.2005(20)] to MS4s;
d. Uncontaminated pumped ground water;
e. Foundation drains;
f. Springs;
g. Water from crawl space pumps;
h. Footing drains;
Air conditioning condensation;
j. Flows from ripadan habitats and wetlands;
Order No. 2001-01 Page 10 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDP ERMl~Sdperrn99-01 ~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
k. Water line flushing;
I, Landscape i~gation;
m. Discharges from potable water sources other than water main breaks;
n. Irrigation water;
o. Lawn watering;
p. Individual residential car washing; and
q. Dechlorinated swimming pool discharges.
3. When a discharge category above is identified as a significant soume of pollutants to waters of the
United States, the Copermittee shall either:
a. Prohibit the discharge category from entering its MS4; OR
b. Not prohibit the discharge category and implement, or require the responsible party(les) to
implement, BMPs which will reduce pollutants to the MEP; AND
c. For each discharge category not prohibited, the Copermittee shall submit the following
information to the SDRWQCB within 365 days of adoption of this Order:
(1) The non-storm water discharge category listed above which the Copermittee elects not to
prohibit; and
(2) The BMP(s) for each discharge category listed above which the Copermittee will implement,
or require the responsible party(ies) to implement, to prevent or reduce pollutants to the
MEP.
4. Fire Fighting Flows: Emergency fire fighting flows (i.e., flows necessary for the protection of life or
property) do not require BMPs and need not be prohibited. As part of the Jurisdictional URMP, each
Copermittee shall develop and implement a program within 365 days of adoption of this Order to
reduce pollutants from non-emergency fire fighting flows (i.e., flows from controlled or practice
blazes and maintenance activities) identified by the Copermittee to be significant sources of
pollutants to waters of the United States.
5. Dry Weather Analytical Monitoring and Non-Storm Water Discharges: Each Copermittee shall
examine all dry weather analytical monitoring results collected in accordance with section F.5. and
Attachment E of this Order to identify water quality problems which may be the result of any non-
prohibited discharge category(les) identified above in Non-Storm Water Discharges to MS4s
Prohibition B.2. Follow-up investigations shall be conducted as necessary to identi~ and central any
non-prohibited discharge category(les) listed above.
C. RECEIVING WATER LIMITATIONS
1. Discharges from MSAs that cause or contribute to the violation of water quality standards
(designated beneficial uses and water quality objectives developed to protect beneficial uses) are
prohibited.
2. Each Copermittee shall comply with Part C.1. of this Order through timely implementation of control
measures and other actions to reduce pollutants in urban runoff discharges in accordance with the
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (Jurisdictional URMP) and other requirements of
this Order including any modifications. The Jurisdictional URMP shall be designed to achieve
compliance with Part C.1. of this Order. If exceedance(s) of water quality standards persist
notwithstanding implementation of the URMP and other requirements of this Order, the Copermittee
shall assure compliance with Part C.1. of this Order by complying with the following pmcadure:
a. Upon a determination by either the Copermittee or the SDRWQCB that MS4 discharges are
causing or contributing to an exceedance of an applicable water quality standard, the
Order No. 2001-01 Page 11 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permlt~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
Copermittee shall promptly notify and thereafter submit a report to the SDRWQCB that
describes BMPs that are currently being implemented and additional BMPs that will be
implemented to prevent or reduce any pollutants that are causing or contributing to the
excaedance of water quality standards. The report may be incorporated in the annual update to
the Jurisdictional URMP unless the SDRWQCB directs an eadier submittal. The report shall
include an implementation schedule. The SDRWQCB may require modifications to the report;
b. Submit any modifications to the repod required by the SDRWQCB within 30 days of notification;
c. Within 30 days following approval of the report described above by the SDRWQCB, the
Copermittee shall revise its Jurisdictional URMP and monitoring program to incorporate the
approved modified BMPs that have been and will be implemented, the implementation schedule,
and any additional monitoring required;
d. Implement the revised Jurisdictional URMP and monitoring program in accordance with the
approved schedule.
So long as the Copermittee has complied with the procedures set forth above and are implementing
the revised Jedsdictional URMP, the Copermittee does not have to repeat the same procedure for
continuing or recurring exceedancas of the same receiving water limitations unless directed by the
SDRWQCB to do so.
3. Nothing in this section shall prevent the SDRWQCB from enforcing any provision of this Order while
the Copermittee prepares and implements the above report.
D. LEGAL AUTHORITY
1~ Each Copermittee shall establish, maintain, and enforce adequate legal authority to control
pollutant discharges into and from its MS4 through ordinance, statute, permit, contract or similar
means. This legal authority must, at a minimum, authorize the Copermittee to:
a. Control the contribution of pollutants in discharges of runoff associated with industrial and
construction activity to its MS4 and control the quality of runoff from industrial and
construction sites. This requirement applies both to industrial and construction sites which
have coverage under the statewide general industrial or construction storm water permits, as
well as to those sites which do not. Grading ordinances shall be upgraded and enforced as
necessary to comply with this Order.
b. Prohibit al..~l identified illicit discharges not otherwise allowed pursuant to section B.2 including
but not limited to:
(1) Sewage;
(2) Discharges of wash water resulting from the hosing or cleaning of gas stations, auto
repair garages, or other types of automotive services facilities;
(3) Discharges resulting from the cleaning, repair, or maintenance of any type of equipment,
machinery, or facility including motor vehicles, cement-related equipment, and port-a-
potty servicing, etc.;
(4) Discharges of wash water from mobile operations such as mobile automobile washing,
steam cleaning, power washing, and carpet cleaning, etc.;
(5) Discharges of wash water from the cleaning or hosing of impervious surfaces in
municipal, industrial, commercial, and residential areas including parking lots, streets,
sidewalks, driveways, patios, plazas, work yards and outdoor eating or ddnking areas,
Order No. 2001-01 Page 12 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:\STO RM\SDPERMI~Sdperm99-01 ~Permit~S DM u niPermit 3.doc
etc.;
(6) Discharges of runoff from material storage areas containing chemicals, fuels, grease, oil,
or other hazarrious matadals;
(7) Discharges of pool or fountain water containing chlorine, biocides, or other chemicals;
discharges of pool or fountain filter backwash water;
(8) Discharges of sediment, pet waste, vegetation clippings, or other landscape or
construction-related wastes; and
(9) Discharges of food-related wastes (e.g., grease, fish processing, and restaurant kitchen
mat and trash bin wash water, etc.).
c. Prohibit and eliminate illicit connections to the MS4;
d. Control the discharge of spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than storm water to its
MS4;
e. Require compliance with conditions in Copermittee ordinances, permits, contracts or orders
(i.e., hold dischargers to its MS4 accountable for their contributions of pollutants and flows);
f. Utilize enforcement mechanisms to require compliance with Copermi~tee storm water
ordinances, permits, contracts, or orders;
g. Control the contribution of pollutants from one portion of the shared MS4 to another portion of
the MS4 through interagency agreements among Copermittees. Control of the contribution of
pollutants from one portion of the shared MS4 to another portion of the MS4 through
interagency agreements with other owners of the MS4 such as Caltrans, the Depadmeot of
Defense, or Native American Tribes is encouraged.;
h. Carry out all inspections, surveillance, and monitoring necessary to determine compliance and
noncompliance with local ordinances and permits and with this Order, including the prohibition
on illicit discharges to the MS4. This means the Copermittee must have authority to enter,
saml~le, inspect, review and copy records, and require regular reports from industrial facilities
discharging into its MS4, including construction sites; and
i. Require the use of best management practices (BMPs) to prevent or reduce the discharge of
pollutants to MS4s.
2. Within 180 days of adoption of this Order, each Copermittee shall provide to the SDRWQCB a
statement certified by its chief legal counsel that the Copermittee has adequate legal authority to
implement and enforce each of the requirements contained in 40 CFR 122.26(d)(2)(i)(A-F) and
· this Order. This statement shall include:
a. Identification of all departments within the jurisdiction that conduct urban runoff related activities,
and their roles and responsibilities under this Order. Include an up to date organizational chart
specifying these departments and key personnel.
b. Citation of urban runoff related ordinances and the reasons they are enforceable;
c. Identification of the local administrative and legal procedures available to mandate
compliance with urban runoff related ordinances and therefore with the conditions of this
Order;
Order No. 2001-01 Page 13 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~$TORMtSDPERM mSdperm99-01~Permit~S DMU niPerreit 3.doc
d. Description of how these ordinances are implemented and appealed; and
e. Description of whether the municipality can issue administrative orders and injunctions or if it
must go through the court system for enforcement actions.
E. TECHNOLOGY BASED STANDARDS
Each Copermittee shall implement, er require implementation of, best management practices to ensure
that the following pollutant discharges into and fi.om its MS4 are reduced to the applicable technology
based standard as specified below:
Table 3. Technology Based Standards2
Indust~a~ Activity owned by the Categorical Industry in 40 CFR 122.26 BAT/BCT (pursuant
Co=erm~ee to Statewide General
Indusb~al Permit)
Indust~al Activity AJi other induslz7 MEP
Construction Activity owned by Greatar than or Equal to 5 Acres (or less than 5 acres BAT/BCT (pumuant
the CoDen~titee and Part of a Larger Common Plan of Sale or to Statewide Genera{
Devetopment) Construction Permit)
Construction ActM~ All Other construction MEP
All Other Land Use Activities MEP
Other Sources
MS4s All discharges from MS4s MEP
F. JURISDICTIONAL URBAN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM'
Each Copermittee shall take appropriate actions to reduce discharges of pollutants and runoff flow dudng
each of the three major phases of urban development, i.e., the planning, construction, and existing
development (or use) phases.
Each Copermittee shall implement a Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Pmgrem (Jurisdictional
URMP) that contains the components shown below as described in Sections F.I. through F.8:
F.I. Land-Use Planning for New Development and Redevelopment Component
F.2. Construction Component
F.3. Existing Development Component
a. Municipal
b. Industrial
c. Commercial
d. Residential
F.4. Education Component
F.5. lificit Discharge Detection and Elimination Component
F.6. Public Participation Component
F.7. Assessment of Jurisdictional URMP Effectiveness Component
F.8. Fiscal Analysis Component
2 Pursuant to this Order, each Copermiitee shall ensure that pollutants in runoff from industrial and construction sties within its
jurisdiction have been reduced to the MEP standard before entering its MS4. The industrial and construction site dischargers
themselves however must ensure that pollutants in runoff leaving their sties have been reduced to the BAT/BCT standard pursuant to
either the statawide General Industrial or Construction Storm Water Permti. Runoff from Indus~al and construction sites owned by
municipalities and subject to either the General Industrial or Construclion Storm Water Permits. musl meet the BAT/BCT standard.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 14 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORMtSDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
F. 1. Land-Use Planning for New Development and Redevelopment Component
Each Copermittee shall minimize the short and long-term impacts on receiving water quality from
new development and redevelopment. In order to reduce pollutants and runoff flows from new
development and redevelopment to the maximum extent practicable, each Copermittee shall at a
minimum:
F.l.a Assess General Plan
F.l.b Modify Development Project Approval Processes
F.1 .c Revise Environmental Review Processes
F.1 .d Conduct Education Efforts Focused on New Development and Redevelopment
F.1 .a. Assess General Plan
Each Copermittee's General Plan or equivalent plan (e.g., Comprehensive, Master, or Community
Plan) shall include water quality and watemhed protection principles and policies to direct land-use
decisions and require implementation of consistent water quality protection measures for
development projects. As pad of its Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program document,
each Copermittee shall provide a workplan with time schedule detailing any changes to its General
Plan regarding water quality and watershed protection. Examples of water quality and watershed
protection principles and policies to be considered include the following:
(1) Minimize the amount of impervious surfaces and directly connected impervious surfaces in
areas of new development and redevelopment and where feasible slow runoff and maximize
on-site infiltration of runoff.
(2) Implement pollution prevention methods supplemeni:ed by pollutant source controls and
treatment. Use small collection strategies located at, or as close as possible to, the source
(i.e., the point where water initially meets the ground) to minimize the transport of urban
runoff and pollutants offsite and into an MS4.
(3) Preserve, and where possible, create or restore areas that provide important water quality
benefits, such as riparian corridors, wetlands, and buffer zones. Encourage land acquisition
of such areas.
(4) Limit disturbances of natural water bodies and natural drainage systems caused by
development including roads, highways, and bddges.
(5) Prior to making land use decisions, utilize methods available to estimate increases in
pollutant loads and flows resulting from projected future development. Require
incorporation of structural and non-structural BMPs to mitigate the projected increases in
pollutant loads and flows.
(6) Avoid development of areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss; or
establish development guidance that identifies these areas and protects them from erosion
and sediment loss.
(7) Reduce pollutants associated with vehicles and increasing traffic resulting from
development. Coordinate local traffic management reduction efforts with the San Diego
County Congestion Management Plan.
(8) Implement the San Diego Association of Govemmenrs (SANDAG's) recommendations as
found in the Water Quality Element of its Regional Growth Management Strategy.
Order No. 200'1-01 Page 15 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM[SDPERMmSdperm99-O1\Permit~S DMuniPermit 3.doc
(9) Post-development runoff from a site shall not contain pollutant loads which cause or
contribute to an exceedance of receiving water quality objectives or which have not been
reduced to the maximum extent practicable.
F.l.b. Modity Development Pmiect Approval Processes
Pdor to project approval and issuance of local permits, Copermittees shall require each proposed
project to implement measures to ensure that pollutants and runoff from the development will be
reduced to the maximum extent precticable and will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of
receiving water quality objectives. Each Copermittee shall further ensure that all development will be
in compliance with Copermittee storm water ordinances, local permits, all other applicable
ordinances and requirements, and this Order.
(1) Development Project Requirements
Each Copermittee shall include development project requirements in local permits to ensure
that pollutant discharges and runoff flows from development are reduced to the maximum
extent practicable and that receiving water quality objectives are not violatod throughout the
life of the project. Such requirements shall, at a minimum:
(a) Require project proponent to implement source control BMPs for all applicable
development projects.
(b) Require project proponent to implement site design/landscape characteristics where
feasible which maximize infiltration, provide retention, slow runoff, and minimize
impervious land coverage for all development projects.
(c) Require project proponent to implement buffer zones for natural water bodies, where
feasible. Where buffer zone implementation is infeasible, require project proponent to
implement other buffers such as trees, lighting restrictions, access restrictions, etc.
(d) Require industrial applicants subject to California's statewide General NPDES Permit for
Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities (Except Construction),
(hereinafter General Industrial Permit), to provide evidence of coverage under the
General Industrial Permit.
(e) Require project proponent to ensure its grading or other construction activities meet
the provisions specitied in Section F.2. of this Order.
(f) Require preject preponent to previde preof of a mechanism which will ensure ongoing
long-term maintenance of all structural post-constrection BMPs.
(2) Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs)
Within 365 days of adoption of this Order, the Copermittees shall collectively develop a
model Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to reduce pollutants and
runoff flows from all new development and significant redevelopment projects falling under
the priority project categories or locations listed in section F.1 .b.(2)(a) below. Within 180
days of approval of the model SUSMP in the public process by the SDRWQCB, each
Copermittee shall adopt its own local SUSMP, and amended ordinances consistent with the
approved model SUSMP, and shall submit both (local SUSMP and amended ordinances) to
the SDRWQCB.
Immediately following adoption of its local SUSMP, each Copermittee shall ensure that all
new development and significant redevelopment projects falling under the priority project
categories or locations listed in F.l.b.(2)(a) below meet SUSMP requirements. The SUSMP
requirements shall apply to all priority projects or phases of priority projects which have not
yet begun grading or construction activities. If a Copermittee determines that lawful prior
approval of a project exists, whereby application of SUSMP requirements to the project is
infeasible, SUSMP requirements need not apply to the project. Where feasible, the
Copermittees shall utilize the 18 month SUSMP implementation period to ensure that
Order No. 2001-01 Page 16 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~S?ORM~$DPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permlt~S DMuniPermit 3,doc
projects undergoing approval processes include application of SUSMP requirements in their
plans.
(a) PdorityDevelopmentProjectCategodes- SUSMPrequirementsshallapplytoallnew
development and significant redevelopment projects falling under the pdority project
categories orlocations listed below. Significant redevelopment is defined as the
creation or addition of at least 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces on an already
developed site. Significant redevelopment includes, but is not limited to: the expansion
of a building footprint or addition or replacement of a structure; structural development
including an increase in gross floor area and/or exterior construction or remodeling;
replacement of impervious surface that is not part of a reurine maintenance activity;, and
land disturbing activities related with structural or impervious surfaces. Where
significant redevelopment results in an increase of less than fifty percent of the
impervious surfaces of a previously existing development, and the existing development
was not subject to SUSMP requirements, the numeric sizing criteria discussed in
section F.l.b.(2)(c) applies only to the addition, and not to the entire development.
i. Home subdivisions of 1 O0 housing units or more. This category includes single-
family homes, multi-family homes, condominiums, and apartments.
ii. Home subdivisions of 10-99 housing units. This category includes single-family
homes, multi-family homes, condominiums, and apartments.
iii. Commercial developments greater than 100,000 square feet. This category is
defined as any development on pdvate land that is not for heavy industrial or
residential uses where the land area for development is greater than 100,000
square feet. The category includes, but is not limited to: hospitals; laboratories
and other medical facilities; educational institutions; recreational facilities;
commercial nurseries; multi-apartment buildings; car wash facilities; mini-malls
and other business complexes; shopping malls; hotels; office buildings; public
warehouses; automotive dealerships; commercial airfields; and other light
industrial facilities.
iv. Automotive repair shops. This category is defined as a facility that is
categorized in any one of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-7539.
v. Restaurants. This category is defined as a facility that sells prepared foods and
drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment
stands selling prepared foods and ddnks for immediate consumption (SIC code
5812), where the land area for development is greater than 5,000 square feet.
vi. All hillside development greater than 5,000 square feet. This category is
defined as any development which creates 5,000 square feet of impervious
surface which is located in an area with known erosive soil conditions, where
the development will grade on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or
greater.
vii. Environmentally Sensitive Areas: All development and redevelopment located
within or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to an environmentally
sensitive area (where discharges from the development or redevelopment will
enter receiving waters within the environmentally sensigve area), which either
creates 2,500 square feet of impervious surface on a proposed project site or
increases the area of imperviousness of a proposed project site to 10% or more
o fits naturally occurring condition. Environmentally sensitive areas include but
ara not limited to all Clean Water Act Section 303(d) impaired water bodies;
Order No. 2f10'l-01 Page 17 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~S"FORMtSDPERMIT~Sdperm99-O l~Permit[SDM uniPermlt 3.doc
areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State
Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego
Basin (1994) and amendments); water bodies designated with the RARE
beneficial use by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality
Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); areas
designated as preserves or their equivalent under the Multi Species
Conservation Program within the Cities and County of San Diego; and any
other equivalent envirenmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by
the Copermittees. "Direddy adjacent" means situated within 200 feet of the
environmentally sensitive area. ~Discharging directly to' means outflow from a
drainage conveyance system lhat is composed entirely of flows from the
subject development or redevelopment site, and not commingled with flows
from adjacent lands.
viii. Parking lots 5,000 square feet or more or with 15 or more parking spaces and
potentially exposed to urban runoff. Parking lot is defined as a land area or
facility for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally,
for business, or for commerce.
ix. Street, roads, highways, and ~reeways. This category includes any paved
surface which is 5,000 square feet or greater used for the transportation of
automobiles, trucks, motomycles, and other vehicles.
x. Retail Gasoline Outlets. Retail Gasoline Outlet is defined as any facility
engaged in selling gasoline.
(b) BMP Requirements - The SUSMP shall include a list of recommended source control
and structural treatment BMPs. The SUSMP shall require all new development and
significant redevelopment projects falling under the above pdodty project categories or
rocatlons to implement a combination of BMPs selected from the recommended BMP
list, including at a minimum (1) source control BMPs and (2) structural treatment BMPs.
The BMPs shall, at a minimum:
i. Control the post-development peak storm water runoff discharge rates and
velocities to maintain or reduce pre-development downstream erosion, and to
protect stream habitat;
ii. Conserve natural areas where feasible;
iii. Minimize storm water pollutants of concern in urban runoff from the new
development or significant redevelopment (through implementation of source
control BMPs). Identification of pollutants of concern should include at a
minimum consideration of any pollutants for which water bodies receiving the
development's runoff are listed as impaired under Clean Water Act section
303(d), any pollutant associated with the land use type of the development, and
any pollutant commonly associated with urban runoff;
iv. Remove pollutants of concern from urban runoff (through implementation of
structural treatment BMPs);
v. Minimize directly connected impervious areas where feasible;
vi. Protect slopes and channels from eroding;
vii. Include storm drain stenciling and signage;
viii. Include properly designed outdoor material storage areas;
ix. Include properly designed trash storage areas;
x. Include proof of a mechanism, to be provided by the project proponent or
Copermittee, which will ensure ongoing long-term structural BMP maintenance;
xi. Include additional water quality provisions applicable to individual prior'~ project
categories;
Order No. 2001-01 Page 18 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMI'I~Sdperm99-01~Permit\SDMunlPermlt 3.doc
xii. Be correctly designed so as to remove pollutants to the maximum extent
practicable;
xiii. Be implemented close to pollutant sources, when feasible, and pdor to
discharging into receiving watem supporting beneficial uses; and
xiv. Ensure that post-development runoff does not contain pollutant loads which
cause or contribute to an excoedance of water quality objectives or which have
not been reduced to the maximum extent practicable.
(c) Numedc Sizing Criteda - The SUSMP shall require structural treatment BMPs to be
implemented for all priodty development projects. All structural treatment BMPs shall be
located so as to infiltrate, filter, or treat the required runoff volume or flow prior to its
discharge to any receiving waterbody supporting beneficial uses. Structural treatment
8MPs may be shared by multiple new development projects as long as construc~on of
any shared structural treatment BMPs is completed prior to the use of any new
development project from which the structural treatment BMP will receive runoff.
In addition to mee§ng the BMP requirements listed in item F.1 .b.(2)(b) above, all
structural treatment BMPs for a single priodty development project shall collecfively be
sized to comply with the following numedc sizing criteria:
.Volume
Volume-based BMPs shall be designed to mitigate (infiltrate, filter, or treat) either:
i. The volume of runoff produced from a 24-hour 85m percentile storm
event, as determined from the local historical rainfall record (0.6 inch
3
approximate average for the San Diego County area); or
~h
ii. The volume of runoff produced by the 85 percentile 24-hour rainfall
event, determined as the maximized capture storm water volume for the
area, from the formula recommended in Urban Runoff Quality
Manaqement, WEF Manual of Practice No. 23/ASCE Manual of Practice
No. 87, (1998); or
iii. The volume of annual runoff based on unit basin storage volume, to
achieve 90% or more volume treatment by the method recommended in
California Stormwater Best Manaqement Practices Handbook -
Industrial/Commercial, (1993); or
iv. The volume of runoff, as determined from the local historical rainfall
record that achieves approximately the same reduction in pollutant loads
and flows as achieved by mitigation of the 85 h percentile 24-hour runoff
event;4
OR
3 This volume is not a single volume to be applied to all of San Diego County. The size of the 85~h percentile ston~n event is
different for vadous pads of the County. The Copermit~ees are encouraged to calculate the 85~h percentile storm event for each of
their jurisdictions using local rain data pedinent to their particular jedsdicben (the 0.6 inch standard is a rough average for the
County and should only be used where appropriate rain data is not available). In addition, isopluvial maps contained in the County
of San Diego Hydrology Manual ma.y~e used to extrapolate rainfall data to areas where insufficient data exists in order to
determine the volume of the local 85 percentile storm event in such areas. Where the Copermiltees will use isopluvial maps to
determine the 85th percentile storm event in areas lacking rain data, the Copermgtees shall describe their method for using
isopluvial maps in the model and local SUSMPs.
4 Under this volume criteria, houdy rainfall data may be used to calculate the 85th percentile storm event, where each storm event
is identified by its separation from other storm events by at least six hours of no rain. Where the Copermittees may use hourly
th
rainfall data to calculate the 85 percentile storm event, the Copermiltees shall describe their method for using houdy rainfall data
to calculate the 85~h percentile storm event in the model and local SUSMPs.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 19 of 52 February 21,2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMI~Sdpenn99-01t Permit,S DMuniPermit 3.doc
Flow
Flow-based BMPs shall be designed to mitigate (infiltrate, filter, or treat) either:
i. The maximum flow rate of runoff produced from a rainfall intensity of 0.2
inch of rainfall per hour; or
ii. The maximum flow rate of runoff produced by the 85~ pementile hourly
rainfall intensity, as determined from the local historical rainfall record,
multiplied by a factor of two; or
iii. The maximum flow rate of runoff, as determined from the local historical
rainfall record, that achieves approximately the same reduction in
pollutant loads and flows as achieved by mitigation of the 85~ pementile
hourly rainfall intensity multiplied by a factor of two.
(d) Equivalent Numeric Sizing Criteria ~ The Copermittees may develop, as part of the
model SUSMP, any equivalent method for calculating the volume or flow which must be
mitigated (i.e., any equivalent method for calculating numeric sizing criteria) by post-
construction structural treatment BMPs. Such equivalent sizing criteria may be
authorized by the SDRWQCB for use in place of the above criteria. In the absence of
development and subsequent authorization of such equivalent numeric sizing criteria,
the above numeric sizing criteria requirement shall be implemented.
(e) Pollutants or Conditions of Concern - As part of the model SUSMP, the Copermittees
shall develop a procedure for pollutants or conditions of cancem to be identified for each
new development or significant redevelopment project. The procedure shall include, at
a minimum, consideration of (1) receiving water quality (including pollutants for which
receiving waters are listed as impaired under Clean Water Act section 303(d)); (2) land
use type of the development project and pollutants associated with that land use type;
(3) pollutants expected to be present on site; (4) changes in storm water discharge flow
rates, velocities, durations, and volumes resulting from the development project; and (5)
sensitivity of receiving watem to changes in storm water discharge flow rates, velocities,
durations, and volumes.
(f) Implementation Precass - As part of the model SUSMP, the Copermittees shall develop
a process bywhich SUSMP requirements will be implemented. The process shall
identify at what point in the planning process development projects will be required to
meet SUSMP requirements. The process shall also include identification of the roles
and responsibilities of various municipal departments in implementing the SUSMP
requirements, as well as any other measures necessary for the implementation of
SUSMP requirements.
(g) Restaurants Less than 5,000 Square Feet - New development and significant
redevelopment restaurant projects where the land area development is less than 5,000
square feet shall meet all SUSMP requirements except for structural treatment BMP
and numedc sizing criteria requirement F.1 .b.(2)(c) and peak flow rate requirement
F.l.b(2)(b)(i). A restaurant is defined as a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks
for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment stands selling
prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (SIC Code 5812).
(h) Waiver Provision - A Copermittee may provide for a project to be waived from the
requirement of implementing structural treatment BMPs (F.I .b.(2)(c)) if infeasibility can
be established. A waiver of infeasibility shall only be granted by a Copermittee when all
available structural treatment BMPs have been considered and rejected as infeasible.
Copermittees shall notify the SDRWQCB within 5 days of each waiver issued and shall
include the name of the person granting each waiver.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 20 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SOMuniPermit 3.doc
As part of the model SUSMP, the Copermittees may develop a program to require
project proponents who have received waivers to transfer the savings in cost, as
determined by the Copermittee{s), to a storm water mitigation fund. This program may
be implemented by all Copermittees which choose to provide waivers. Funds may be
used on projects to improve urban runoff quality within the watershed of the waived
project. The waiver program may identify:
i. The entity or entities that will manage the storm water mitigation fund (i.e.,
assume full responsibility for)
ii. The range and types of acceptable projects for which mitigation funds may be
expended;
iii. The entity or entities that will assume full responsibility for each mitigation
project including its successful completion
iv. How the dollar amount of fund contributions will be determined.
(i) Infiltration and Groundwatar Protection - To protect groundwater quality, each
Copermittee shall apply resections to the use of structural treatment BMPs which are
designed to primarily function as infiltration devices (such as infiltration trenches and
infiltration basins}. Such restrictions shall ensure that the use of such infiltration
structural treatment BMPs shall not cause or contribute to an exceedance of
groundwater quality objectives. At a minimum, use of structural treatment RMPs which
are designed to primarily function as infiltration devices shall meet the following
conditions:5
i. Urban runoff shall undergo pretreatment such as sedimentation or filtration prior
to infiltration.
ii. All dry weather flows shall be diverted from infiltration devices.
iii. Pollution prevention and source control BMPs shall be implemented at a level
appropriate to protect groundwater quality at sites where infiltration structural
treatment BMPs are to be used.
iv. Infiltration structural treatment BMPs shall be adequately maintained so that
they remove pollutants to the maximum extent practicable.
v. The vertical distance from the base of any infiltration structural treatment BMP
to the seasonal high groundwater mark shall be at least 10 feet. Where
groundwater basins do not support beneficial uses, this vertical distance criteria
may be reduced, provided groundwater quality is maintained.
vi. The soil through which infiltration is to occur shall have physical and chemical
characteristics (such as appropriate cation exchange capacity, organic content,
clay content, and infiltration rate) which are adequate for proper infiltration
durations and treatment of urban runoff for the protection of groundwater
beneficial uses.
vii. Infiltration structural treatment BMPs shall not be used for areas of industrial or
light industrial activity; areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or greater
average daily traffic on main roadway or 15,000 or more average daily traffic on
any intersecting roadway); automotive repair shops; car washes; fleet storage
areas (bus, truck, etc.); nurseries; and other high threat to water quality land
uses and activities as designated by each Copermittee.
viii. Infiltration structural BMPs shall be located a minimum of 'i00 feet horizontally
from any water supply wells.
As part of the model and local SUSMPs, the Copermittees may develop altemative
restrictions on the use of structural treatment BMPs which are designed to primarily
function as infiltration devices.
5 These conditions do not apply to structural treatment BMPs which allow incidental infiltration and are not designed to primedly
function as infiltration devices (such as grassy swales, detention basins, vegetated buffer stdps, constructed wetlands, etc.)
Order No. 2001-01 Page 21 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~PermiftSDMunlPermlt 3.doc
(j) Downstream Erosion - As part of the model SUSMP and the local SUSMPs, the
Copermittees shall develop criteria to ensure that discharges from new development
and significant redevelopment maintain or reduce pre-development downstream erosion
and protect stream habitat. At a minimum, criteria shall be developed to control peak
storm water discharge rates and velocities in order to maintain or reduce pre-
development downstream erosion and protect stream habitat. Storm water discharge
volumes and durations should also be considered.
F.1 .c. Revise Environmental Review Processes
(1) To the extent feasible, the Copermittees shall revise their current environmental review
processes to include requirements for evaluation of water quality effects and iden~cation of
appropriate mitigation measures. The following questions are examples to be considered in
addressing increased pollutants and flows from proposed projects:
(a) Could the proposed project result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving
waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen,
turbidit~ and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens,
petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding
substances, and trash).
(b) Could the proposed project result in significant alteration of receiving water quality
during or following construction?
(c) Could the proposed project result in increased impervious surfaces and associated
increased runoff?
(d) Could the proposed project create a significant adverse environmental impact to
drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes?
(e) Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream?
(f) Is the project tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water
Act Section 303(d) list. If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the
water body is already impaired?
(g) Is project tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate
already existing sensitive conditions?
(h) Could the proposed project have a potentially significant environmental impact on
surface water quality, to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters?
(i) Could the proposed project have a potentially significant adverse impact on ground
water quality?
(j) Could tbe preposed project cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface
or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses?
(k) Can the project impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat?
F.1 .d. Conduct Education Efforts Focused on New Development and Redevelopment
(1) Internal: Municipal Staffand Others
Each Copermittee shall implement an education program to ensure that its planning and
development review staffs (and Planning Boards and Elected Officials, if applicable) have an
understanding of:
(a) Federal, state, and local water quality laws and regulations applicable to development
projects;
(b) The connection between land use decisions and short and long-term water quality
impacts (i.e., impacts from land development and urbanization); and
(c) How impacts to receiving water quality resulting from development can be minimized
(i.e., through implementation of various soume control and structural BMPs).
Order No. 2001-01 Page 22 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMmSdperm99.01 tPerrnit~S DMuniPermlt 3.doc
(2) External: Project Applicants, Developers, Contractors, Property Owners, Community
Planning Groups
As eady in the planning and development process as possible, each Copermittee shall
implement a program to educate project applicants, developers, contractors, property
owners, and community planning groups on the following topics:
(a) Federal, state, and local water quality laws and regulations applicable to development
projects;
(b) Required federal, state, and local permits pertaining to water quality;
(c) Water quality impacts of urbanization; and
(d) Methods for minimizing the impacts of development on receiving water quality.
F. 2. Construction Component
Each Copermittee shall implement a Construction Component of its Jurisdictional URMP to reduce
pollutants in runoff from construction sites dudng all construction phases. At a minimum the
construction component shall address:
F.2.a. Pollution Prevention
F.2.b. Grading Ordinance Update
F.2.c. Modify Construction and Grading Approval Process
F.2.d. Source Identification
F.2.e. Throat to Water Quality Priorifization
F.2.f. BMP Implementation
F.2.g. Inspection of Construction Sites
F.2.h. Enforcement of Construction Sites
F.2.i. Reporting of Non-compliant Sites
F.2.j. Education Focused on Construction Activities
F.2.a. Pollution Prevention (Construction)
Each Copermittee shall implement pollution prevention methods in its Construction Component and
shall require its use by construction site owners, developers, contractors, and other responsible
parties, where appropriate.
F.2.b. Gradinq Ordinance Update (Construction}
Each Copermittee shall review and update its grading ordinances as necessary for compliance with
its storm water ordinances and this Order. The updated grading ordinance shall raquiro
implementation of BMPs and other measures during all construction activities, including the following
BMPs and other measures or their equivalent:
(1) Erosion prevention;
(2) Seasonal restrictions on grading;
(3) Slope stabilization requirements;
(4) Phased grading;
(5) Revegetation as eady as feasible;
(6) Preservation of natural hydrologic features;
(7) Preservation of riparian buffers and corridors;
(8) Maintenance of all source centrcl and structural treatment BMPs; and
(9) Retention and proper management of sediment and other construction pollutants on site.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 23 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMI'I~Sdperm99-01~Permit~S DlViuniPennlt 3.doc
F.2.c Modify Construction and Gradinq Approval Process IConstruction)
Prior to approval and issuance of local construction and grading permits, each Copermidee shall
require all individual proposed construction and grading projects to implement measures to ensure
that pollutants from the site will be reduced to the maximum extent precticable and will not cause or
contribute to an excoedance of water quality objectives. Each Copermittee shall further ensure that
all grading and construction activities will be in compliance with applicable Copermittee ordinances
(e.g., storm water, grading, construction, etc.) and other applicable requirements, including this
Order.
(1) Construction and Grading Project Requirements
Include construction and grading project requirements in local grading and construction permits
to ensure that pollutant discharges are reduced to the maximum extent practicable and water
quality objectives ara not violated during the construction phase. Such requirements shall
include the following requirements or their equivalent:
(a) Require project proponent to develop and implement a plan to manage storm water and
non-storm water discharges from the site at all times;
(b) Require project proponent to minimize grading during the wet season and coincide
grading with seasonal dry weather periods to the extent feasible. If grading does occur
dudng the wet season, require project proponent to implement additional BMPs for any
rain events which may occur, as necessary for compliance with this Order;
(c) Require project proponent to emphasize erosion prevention as the most important
measure for keeping sediment on site dudng construction;
(d) Require project proponent to utilize sediment controls as a supplement to erosion
prevention for keeping sediment on-site dudng construction, and never as the single or
primary method;
(e) Require project proponent to minimize areas that are cleared and graded to only the
portion of the site that is necessary for construction;
(f) Require project proponent to minimize exposure time of disturbed soil areas;
(g) Require project proponent to temporarily stabilize and reseed disturbed soil areas as
rapidly as possible;
(h) (h) Require project proponent to permanently revegetate or landscape as eady as
feasible;
(i) Require project proponent to stabilize all slopes; and
~1) RequireprojectproponentssubjecttoCalifomia'sstatewideGeneralNPDESPermitfor
Storm Water Discharges Associated With Construction Activities, (hereinafter General
Construction Permit), to provide evidence of existing coverage under the General
Construction Permit.
F.2.d. Source Identification {Construction)
Each Copermittee shall annually develop and update, pdor to the rainy season, a watershed based
inventory of all construction sites within its jurisdiction regardless of site size or ownership. This
requirement is applicable to all construction sites regardless of whether the construction site is
subject to the California statewide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated
With Construction Activities {hereinafter General Construction Permit), or other individual NPDES
permit. The use of an automated database system, such as Geographical Information System
(GIS) is highly recommended, but not required.
F.2.e. Threat to Water Quality Pdoritization (Construction)
(1) To establish priorities for construction oversight activities under this Order, the Copermittee
shall prioritize its watershed-based inventory (developed pursuant to F.2.d. above) by threat
to water quality. Each construction site shall be classified as high, medium, or Iow threat to
Order No, 2001~01 Page 24 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~permit~SDMu niPermit 3.doc
water quality. In evaluating throat to water quality each Copermittee shall consider (1) soil
erosion potential; (2) site slope; (3) project size and type; (4) sensitivity of receiving water
bodies; (5) proximity to receiving water bodies; (6) non-storm water disc~h~a_rges; and (7) any
other relevant factors.
(2) A high pdodty construction site shall at a minimum be defined as a site mooting either of the
following criteda or equivalent cdteda:
(a) The site is 50 acres or more and grading will occur during the wet season; OR
(b) The site is (1) 5 acres or more and (2) tributary to a Clean Water ACt section 303(d)
water body impaired for sediment or is within or directly adjacent to or discharging
directly to a coastal lagoon or other receiving water within an environmentally sensitive
area (as defined in section F.I .b.(2)(a)vii of this Order).
F.2.f. BMP Implementation (Construction)
(1) Each Copermittee shall designate a set of minimum BMPs for high, medium, and Iow threat
to water quality construction sites (as determined under section F.2.e). BMPs are to be
implemented year round.
(2) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require the implementation of, the designated
minimum BMPs (based upon the site's threat to water quality rating) at each construction
site within its jurisdiction year round. If padicular minimum BMPs are infeasible at any
specific site, each Copermittoo shall implement, or require the implementation of, other
equivalent BMPs. Each Copermittee shall also implement or require any additional site
specific BMPs as necessary to comply with this Order, including BMPs which are more
stringent than those required under the statewide General Construction Permit.
(3) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require the implementation of, BMPs year round;
however, BMP implementation requirements can vary based on wet and dry seasons.
(4) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of, additional controls for
construction sites tributary to Clean Water Act section 303(d) water bodies impaired for
sediment as necessary to comply with this Order. Each Copermittee shall implement, or
require implementation of, additional controls for construction sites within or adjacent to or
discharging directly to coastal lagoons or other receiving waters within environmentally
sensitive areas (as defined in section F.1 .b.(2)(a)(vii) of this Order) as necessary to comply
with this Order.
F.2.g. Inspection of Construction Sites (Construction}
(1) Each Copermittee shall conduct construction site inspections for compliance with its
ordinances (grading, storm water, etc.), permits (construction, grading, etc.), and this Order.
Inspections shall include review of site erosion control and BMP implementation plans.
(2) Each Copermittee shall establish inspection frequencies and priorities as determined by the
threat to water quality priodtization described in F.2.e above. During the wet season (i.e.,
October 1 through Apd130 of each year), each Copermittee shall inspect, at a minimum,
each High Priority construction site, either:
(a) Weekly
OR
(b) Monthly for any site that the responsible Copermittee certifies in a written statement to
the SDRWQCB all of the fctlowing (certified statements may be submitted to the
SDRWQCB at any time for one or more sites):
Order No. 2001-01 Page 25 of 52 Februa~J 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMI~Sdperm99-01~Permit~S DMuniPermit 3.doc
Copermittee has record of construction site's Waste Discharge Identification
Number (WDID~) documenting construction site's coverage under the statewide
General Construction Permit; and
ii. Copermittee has reviewed the constructions site's Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP); and
iii. Copermittee finds SWPPP to be in compliance with all local ordinances, permits,
and plans; and
iv. Copermittee finds that the SWPPP is being properly implemented on site.
At a minimum, Medium and Low Pdority construction sites shall be inspected by
Copermittees twice dudng the wet season. All construction sites shall be inspected by the
Copermittees as needed during the dry season (i.e., May 1 through September 30 of each
year).
(3) Based upon site inspection findings, each Copermittee shall implement all follow-up actions
necessary to comply with this Order.
F.2.h. Enfomement of Construction Sites (Construction)
Each Copermittee shall enforce its ordinances (grading, storm water, etc.) and permits
(construction, grading, etc.) at all construction sites as necessary to maintain compliance with
this Order. Copermittee ordinances or other regulatory mechanisms shall include sanctions to
ensure compliance. Sanctions shall include the following or their equivalent: Non-monetary
penalties, fines, bonding requirements, and/or permit denials for non-compliance.
F.2.i. Reportinq of Non-compliant Sites (Construction)
Each Copermittee shall provide oral notification to the SDRWQCB of non-compliaut sites that
are determined to pose a threat to human or environmental health within its jurisdiction within 24
hours of the discovery of noncompliance, as required under section R.I (and B.6 of Attachment
C) of this Order.
Each copermittee shall develop and submit cdteda by which to evaluate events of non-
compliance to determine whether they pose a threat to human or environmental health. These
cdteria shall be submitted in the Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program Document
and Annual Reports for SDRWQCB review.
Such oral notification shall be followed up by a wdtten report to be submitted to the SDRWQCB
within 5 days of the incidence of non-compliance as required under section R.1 (and B.6 of
Attachment C) of this Order. Sites are considered non-compliant when one or more violations of
local ordinances, permits, plans, or this Order exist on the site.
F.2j. Education Focused on Construction Activities (Construction)
(1) Internal: Municipal Staff
Each Copermittee shall implement an education program to ensure that its construction,
building, and grading review staffs and inspectors have an understanding of:
(a) Federal, state, and local water quality laws and regulations applicable to construction
and grading activities.
(b) The connection between construction activities and water quality impacts (i.e., impacts
from land development and urbanization).
(c) How erosion can be prevented.
(d) How impacts to receiving water quality resulting from construction activities can be
minimized {i.e., through implementation of various source control and structural BMPs).
Order No. 2001-01 Page 26 of 52 February 2t, 2001
S:[STORMtSDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
(e) Applicable topics listed in section F.4. of this Order.
(2) Extemal: ProjectApplicants, Contractom, Developem, Property Owners, and other
Responsible Pa~es
Each Copermittee shall implement an education program to ensure that project
applicants, contractom, developers, property owners, and other responsible parties have
an understanding of the topics outlined in section F.2.j.I. above of this Order.
F. 3. Existing Development Component
Each Copermittee shall minimize the short and long-term impacts on receiving water quality from all
types of existing development.
F.3.a. Municipal (Existing Development)
Each Copermittee shall implement a Municipal (Existing Development) Component to prevent or
reduce pollutants in runoff frem all municipal land use areas and activities. At a minimum the
municipal component shall address:
F.3.a.(l ) Pollution Prevention
F.3~a.(2) Soume Idenlffication
F.3.a.(3) Threat to Water Quality Pdodtization
F.3.a.(4) BMP Implementation
F.3.a.(5) Maintenance of Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
F.3.a.(6) Management of Pesticides, Herbicides, and Fertilizers
F.3.a.(7) Inspection of Municipal Areas and Activities
F.3.a.(8) Enforcement of Municipal Areas and Activities
F.3.a.(1) Pollution Prevention (Municipal)
Each Copermittee shall implement pollution prevention methods in its Municipal (Existing
Development) Component and shall require its use by apprepdate municipal departments and
personnel, where appropriate.
F.3.a.(2) Source Identification (Municipal)
Each Copermittee shall develop, and update annually, a watershed based inventory of the
name, address (if applicable), and description of all municipal land use areas and activities which
generate pollutants. The use of an automated database system, such as Geographical
Information System (GIS) is highly recommended when applicable, but not required.
F.3.a.(3) Threat to Water Quality Priodtization {Municipal)
(a) To establish priorities for oversight of municipal areas and activities required under this
Order, each Copermittee shall prioritize each watershed inventory in F.3.a.2. above by
threat to water quality and update annually. Each municipal area and activity shall be
classified as high, medium, or Iow threat to water quality. In evaluating threat to water
quality, each Copermiffee shall consider (1) type of municipal area or activity; (2)
materials used; (3) wastes generated; (4) pollutant discharge potential; (5) non-storm
water discharges; (6) size of facility or area; (7) proximity to receiving water bodies; (8)
sensitivity of receiving water bodies; and (9) any other relevant factors.
(b) At a minimum, the high pdedty municipal areas and activities shall include the following:
i. Roads, Streets, Highways, and Parking Facilities.
Order No. 200t-01 Page 27 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORMtSDPERMiT~Sdperm99-01~Permit\S DMuniPermit 3.doc
ii. Flood Management Projects and Flood Control Devices.
iii. Areas and activities tributary to a Clean Water Act section 303(d) impaired
water body, where an area or activity generates pollutants for which the water
body is impaired. Areas and activ'r6es within or adjacent to or discharging
directly to coastal lagoons or other receiving waters within environmentally
sensitive areas (as defined in section F.l.b.(2)(a)vii of this Order).
iv. Municipal Waste Facilities.
· Active or closed municipal landfills;
· Publicly owned treatment works (including water and wastewater treatment
plants) and sanitary sewage collection systems;
· Municipal separate storm sewer systems;
,, Incineratom;
· Solid waste transfer facilities;
· Land application sites;
· Uncentmlled sanitary landfills;
Corporate yards including maintenance and storage yards for materials,
waste, equipment and vehicles;
· Sites for disposing and treating sewage sludge; and
· Hazardous waste treatment, disposal, and recovery facilities.
v. Other municipal areas and activities that the Copermittee determines may
contribute a significant pollutant load to the MS4.
vi. Municipal airfields.
F.3.a.(4) BMP Implementation (Municipal)
(a) Each Copermittee shall designate a set of minimum BMPs for high, medium, and Iow
threat to water quality municipal areas and activities (as determined under section
F.3.a.(3)). The designated minimum BMPs for high threat to water quality municipal
areas and activities shall be area or activity specific as appropriate.
(b) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require the implementation of, the designated
minimum BMPs (based upon the threat to water quality rating) at each municipal area or
activity within its jurisdiction. If particular minimum BMPs are infeasible for any specific
area or activity, each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of other
equivalent BMPs. Each Copermittee shall also implement any additional BMPs as are
necessary to comply with this Order.
i. Each Copermittee shall evaluate feasibility of retrofitting existing structural flood
control devices and retrofit where needed.
(c) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of, any additional controls
for municipal areas and activi'des tributary to Clean Water Act section 303(d) impaired
water bodies (where an area or activity generates pollutants for which the water body is
impaired) as necessary to comply with this Order. Each Copermittee shall implement,
or require implementation of, additional controls for municipal areas and activities within
or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to coastal lagoons or other receiving waters
within environmentally sensitive areas (as defined in section F.1 .b.(2)(a)(vii) of this
Order) as necessary to comply with this Order.
F.3.a.(5) Maintenance of Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (Municipal)
(a) Each Copermittee shall implement a schedule of maintenance activities at all structural
controls designed to reduce pollutant discharges to or from its MS4s and related
drainage structures.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 28 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMI~Sdperm99-O l~permit~SDMuniPen~it 3.doc
(b) Each Copermittee shall implement a schedute of maintenance activities for the
municipal separate storm sewer system.
(c) The maintenance activities must, at a minimum, include:
i. Inspection and removal of accumulated waste (e.g. sediment, trash, debris and
other pollutants) between May 1 and September 30 of each year;
ii. Additional cleaning as necessary between October 1 and April 30 of each year;
iii. Record keeping of cleaning and the overall quantity of waste removed;
iv. Proper disposal of waste removed pursuant to applicable laws;
v. Measures to eliminate waste discharges dudng MS4 maintenance and cleaning
activities.
F.3.a.(6) Mana~lement of Pesticides, Herbicides, and Fertilizers (Municipal)
The Copermittees shall implement BMPs to reduce the conthbution of pollutants
associated with the application, storage, and disposal of pesticides, herbicides and
fertilizers from municipal areas and activities to MS4s. Important municipal areas and
activities include municipal facilities, public rights-of-way, parks, recreational facilities, gott
courses, cemeteries, botanical or zoological gardens and exhibits, landscaped areas, etc.
Such BMPs shall include, at a minimum: (1) educational activities, permits, certifications
and other measures for municipal applicators and distributors; (2) integrated pest
management measures that rely on non-chemical solutions; (3) the use of native
vegetation; (4) schedules for irrigation and chemical application; and (5) the collection and
proper disposal of unused pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers.
F.3.a.(7) Inspection of Municipal Areas and Activities (Municipal)
At a minimum, each Copermittee shall inspect high pdority municipal areas and activities
annually. Based upon site inspection findings, each Copermittee shall implement all
follow-up actions necessary to comply with this Order.
F.3.a.(8) Enforcement of Municipal Areas and Activities (Municipal)
Each Copermittee shall enfome its storm water ordinance for all municipal areas and
activities as necessary to maintain compliance with this Order.
F.3.b. Industrial (Existing Development)
Each Copermittee shall implement an Industrial (Existing Development) Component to reduce
pollutants in runoff from all industrial sites, At a minimum the industrial component shall address:
F.3.b.(1 ) Pollution Prevention
F.3.b.(2) Source Identification
F.3.b.(3) Threat to Water Quality Prioritization
F.3.b.(4) BMP Implementation
F.3.b.(5) Monitoring of Industrial Sites
F.3.b.(6) Inspection of Industrial Sites
F.3.b.(7) Enforcement Measures for Industrial Sites
F.3.b.(8) Reporting of Non-compliant Sites
Order No. 2001-01 Page 29 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORMtSDPERMl~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
F.3.b.(1) Pollution Prevention (Industrial}
Each Copermittee shall implement pollution prevention methods in its Industrial (Existing
Development) Component and shall require its use by industry, where appropriate.
F.3.b.(2) Source Identification (Industrial)
Each Copermiftee shall develop and update annually a watemhed-based inventory of all
industrial sites within its jurisdiction regardless of site ownership. This requirement is
applicable to all industrial sites regardless of whether the industrial site is subject the
California statswide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated With
Industrial Activities, Except Construction (hereinafter General Industrial Permit) or other
individual NPDES permit.
The inventory shall include the following minimum information for each industrial site:
name; address; and a narrative description including SIC codes which best reflects the
principal products or services provided by each facility. The use of an automated
database system, such as Geographical Information System (GIS) is highly
recommended, but not required.
F.3.b.(3) Threat to Water Quality Priodtization (Industrial)
(a) To establish priorities for industrial oversight activities under this Order, the Copermittee
shall prioritize each watershed-based inventory in F.3.b.(2) above by threat to water
quality and update annually. Each industrial site shatl be classified as high, medium, or
Iow threat to water quality. In evaluating threat to water quality each Copermittee shall
consider (1) type of industrial activity (SIC Code); (2) materials used in industrial
processes; (3) wastes generated; (4) pollutant discharge potential; (5) non-storm water
discharges; (6) size of facility; (7) proximity to receiving water bodies; (8) sensitivity of
receiving water bodies; (9) whether the industrial site is subject to the statewide General
Industrial Permit; and (10) any other relevant factors.
(b) At a minimum the high pdority industrial sites shall include industrial facilities that are
subject to section 313 of Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthodzation Act
of 1986 (SARA); industrial facilities tributary to a Clean Water Act section 303(d)
impaired water body, where a facility generates pollutants for which the water body is
impaired; industrial facilities within or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to
coastal lagoons or other receiving waters within environmentally sensitive areas (as
defined in section F.l.b.(2)(a)vii of this Order); facilities subject to the state,vide General
Industrial Permit; and all other industrial facilities that the Copermittee determines are
conthbuting significant pollutant loading to its MS4, regardless of whether such facilities
are covered under the statewide General Industrial Permit or other NPDES permit.
F.3.b.(4) BMP Implementation (Industrial)
(a) Each Copermittee shall designate a set of minimum BMPs for high, medium, and Iow
threat to water quality industrial sites (as determined under section F.3.b.(3)). The
designated minimum BMPs for high threat to water quality industrial sites shall be
industry and site specific as appropriate.
(b) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require the implementation of, the designated
minimum BMPs (based upon the site's threat to water quality rating) at each industrial
site wtihin its jurisdiction. If particular minimum BMPs are infeasible at any specific site,
each Copermiftee shall implement, or require implementation of, other equivalent
BMPs. Each Copermittee shall also implement or require any additional site specific
BMPs as necessary to comply with this Order including BMPs which are more stringent
Order No. 2001-01 Page 30 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:\STORM~SDPERMI~Sdperm99-O1~Permit\SDM u niPermit 3.doc
than those required under the state, vide General Industrial Permit.
(c) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of, additional conb'ols for
indusbial sites tributary to Clean Water Act section 303(d) impaired water bodies (where
a site generates pollutants for which the water body is impaired) as necessary to comply
with this Order. Each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of,
additional controls for industrial sites within or directly adjacent to or discharging directly
to coastal lagoons or other receiving waters within environmentally sensitive areas (as
defined in section F.1 .b.(2)(a)(vii) of this Order) as necessary to comply with this Order.
F.3.b.(5) Monitorinq of Industrial Sites (Industrial)
(a) Each Copermittee shall conduct, or require industry to conduct, a monitoring program
for runoff from each high threat to water quality industrial site (identified in F.3.b.(3)
above). Group monitodng by multiple industrial sites conducted under group monitoring
programs approved by the State Water Resources Control Board is acceptable.
(b) At a minimum, the monitoring program shall provide quantitative data from two storm
events per year on the following constituents:
i. Any pollutant listed in effluent guidelines subcategodes where applicable;
ii. Any pollutant for which an effluent limit has been established in an existing NPDES
permit for the facility;
iii. Oil and grease or Total Organic Carbon {TOC);
iv. pH;
v. Total suspended solids (TSS);
vi. Specific conductance; and
vii. Toxic chemicals and other pollutants that are likely to be present in storm water
discharges.
F.3.b.(6) Inspection of Industrial Sites (Industrial)
(a) Each Copermittee shall conduct industrial site inspe~ons for compliance with its
ordinances, permits, and this Order. Inspections shall include review of BMP
implementation plans.
(b) Each Copermittee shall establish inspection frequencies and priorities as determined by
the threat to water quality pdoritization described in F.3.b.(3) above. Each Copermittee
shall inspect high pdodty industrial sites, at a minimum:
i. Annually
OR
ii. Bi-annually for any site that the responsible Copermittee certifies in a written
statement to the SDRWQCB all of the following (certified statements may be
submitted to the SDRWQCB at any time for one or more sites):
· Copermittee has record of industrial site's Waste Discharge Identification
Number (WDID~) documenting industrial site's coverage under the
statewide General Industrial Permit; and
Copermittee has reviewed the industrial site's Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP); and
· Copermittee finds SWPPP to be in compliance with alt local ordinances,
permits, and plans; and
· Copermittee finds that the SWPPP is being properly implemented on site.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 31 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permit~SDM uniPermit 3,doc
Each Copermittee shall inspect medium and Iow threat to water quality industrial sites
as needed.
(c) Based upon site inspection findings, each Copermittee shall implement all follow-up
actions necessary to comply with this Order.
(d) To the extent that the SDRWQCB has conducted an inspection of a high priority
industrial site during a particular year, the requirement for the responsible Copermittee
to inspect this site dudng the same year will be satisfied.
F.3.b.(7) Entorcement of Indusb'ial Sites {Industrial)
Each Copermittee shall enforce its storm water ordinance at all industrial sites as
necessary to maintain compliance with this Order. Copermittee ordinances or other
regulatory mechanisms shall include sanctions to ensure compliance. Sanctions shall
include the following or their equivalent: Non-monetary penalties, fines, bonding
requirements, and/or permit denials for non-compliance.
F.3.b.(8) Reportinq of Non-compliant Sites {Industrial)
Each Copermittee shall provide oral notification to the SDRWQCB of non-compliant sites
that are determined to pose a threat to human or environmental health within its
jurisdiction within 24 hours of the discovery of noncompliance, as required under section
R.1 (and B.6 of Attachment C) of this Order.
Each Copermittee shall develop and submit cfiteda by which to evaluate events of non-
compliance to determine whether they pose a threat to human or environmental health.
These criteria shall be submitted in the Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program
Document and Annual Reports for SDRWQCB review.
Such oral notification shall be followed up by a written report to be submitted to the
SDRWQCB within 5 days of the incidence of non-compliance as required under section
R.l(and B.6 of Attachment C) of this Order. Sites are considered non-compliant when one
or more violations of local ordinances, permits, plans, or this Order exist on the site.
F.3.c. Commercial {Existing Development)
Each Copermittee shall implement a Commemial (Existing Development) Component to reduce
pollutants in runoff from commercial sites. At a minimum the commercial component shall address:
F.3.c.(1 ) Pollution Prevention
F.3.c.(2) Source Identification
F.3,c.(3) BMP Implementation
F.3.c.(4) Inspection of Commemial Sites and Sources
F.3.c.(5) Enforcement of Commemial Sites and Sources
F.3.c.(1) Pollution Prevention (Commemial)
Each Copermittee shall implement pollution prevention methods in its Commemial
(Existing Development) Component and shall require its use by commerce, where
appropriate.
F.3.c~(2) Source Identification (Commercial)
Each Copermittee shall develop and update annually an inventory of the following high
priodty threat to water quality commemial sites/saurces listed below. (If any commercial
Order No. 2001-01 Page 32 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:\STORM~SDPERMl'~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermlt 3.doc
site/source listed below is inventor[ed as an industrial site, as required under section
F.3.b.(2) of this Orrier, it is not necessary to also inventory it as a commercial site/soume).
(a) Automobile mechanical repair, maintenance, fueling, or cleaning;
(b) Airplane mechanical repair, maintenance, fueling, or cleaning;
(c) Boat mechanical repair, maintenance, fueling, or cleaning;
(d) Equipment repair, maintenance, fueling, or cleaning;
(e) Automobile and other vehicle body repair or painting;
(f) Mobile automobile or other vehicle washing;
(g) Automobile (or other vehicle) parking lots and storage facilities;
(h) Retail or wholesale fueling;
(i) Pest centrol services;
(j) Eating or ddnking establishments;
(k) Mobile carpet, drape or furniture cleaning;
(I) Cement mixing or cuffing;
(m) Masonry;
(n) Painting and coating;
(o) Botanical or zoological gardens and exhibits;
(p) Landscaping;
(q) Nurseries and greenhouses;
(r) Golf courees, parks and other recreational areas/facilities;
(s) Cemeteries;
(t) Pool and fountain cleaning;
(u) Marinas;
(v) Pod-a~Potty servicing;
(w) Other commercial sites/sources that the Copermittee determines may contribute a
significant pollutant load to the MS4;
(x) Any commercial site or source tributary to a Clean Water Act section 303(d)
impaired water body, where the site or source generates pollutants for which the
water body is impaired; and
(y) Any commercial site or source within or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to
a coastal lagoon or other receiving water within an environmentally sensitive area
(as defined in F.1 .b(2)(a)vii of this Order).
The use of an automated database system, such as Geographical Information System
(GIS) is highly recommended, but not required.
F.3.c.(3) BMP Implementation (Commercial)
(a) Each Copermittee shall designate a set of minimum BMPs for the high pdority threat to
water quality commercial sites/sources (listed above in section F.3.c.(2)). The
designated minimum BMPs for the high threat to water quality commercial sites/sources
shall be site and source specific as appropriate.
(b) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require the implementation of, the designated
minimum BMPs at each high priority threat to water quality commercial site/source
within its jurisdiction. If particular minimum BMPs are infeasible for any specific
site/source, each Copermittee shall implement, or require the implementation of, other
equivalent BMPs. Each Copermittee shall also implement or require any additional site
specific BMPs as necessary to comply with this Order.
(c) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of, additional controls for
commercial sites or sources tdbuta~/to Clean Water Act section 303(d) impaired water
bodies (where a site or source generates pollutants for which the water body is
impaired) as necessary to comply with this Order. Each Copermittee shall implement,
or require implementation of, additional controls for commercial sites or sources within
Order No. 2001-01 Page 33 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDP ERMIT~Sdperm99-01~PermiftSDMuniPennit 3.doc
or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to coastal lagoons or other receiving waters
within environmentally sensffive areas (as defined in section F.1 .b.(2)(a)(vii) of this
Order) as necessary to comply with this Order.
F.3.c.(4) Inspection of Commercial Sites and Soumes (Commerciall
Each Copermittee shall inspect high priority commemial sites and soames as needed.
Based upon site inspection findings, each Copermittee shall implement all follow-up actions
necessary to comply with this Order.
F.3.c.(5) Enfomement of Commercial Sites and Sources {Commemial)
Each Copermittee shall enforce tis storm water ordinance for all cemmemial sites and
sources as necessary to maintain compliance with this Order.
F.3.d. Residential (Existing Development)
Each Copermittee shall implement a Residential (Existing Development) Component to prevent or
reduce pollutants in runoff from all residential land use areas and activities. At a minimum the
residential component shall address:
F.3.d.(1 ) Pollution Prevention
F.3.d.(2) Threat to Water Quality Prioritization
F.3.d.(3) BMP Implementation
F.3.d.(4) Enfomement of Residential Areas and Activities
F.3.d.(l) Pollution Prevention (Residential)
Each Copermittee shall include pollution prevention methods in its Residential
(Existing Development) Component and shall encourage their use by residents, where
appropriate.
F.3.d.(2) Threat to Water Quality Prioritization (Residential)
Each Copermittee shall identify high priority residential areas and activities. At a
minimum, these shall include:
· Automobile repair and maintenance;
·Automobile washing;
Automobile parking;
o Home and garden care activities and product use (pesticides, herbicides, and
fertilizem);
· Disposal of household hazardous waste (e.g., paints, cleaning products);
°Disposal of pet waste;
Disposal of green waste;
Any other residential soume that the Copermittee determines may contribute a
significant pollutant load to the MS4;
· Any residence tributary to a Clean Water Act section 303(d) impaired water body,
where the residence generates pollutants for which the water body is impaired; and
· Any residence wilhin or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to a coastal
lagoon or other receiving waters within an environmentally sensitive area (as
defined in F.I .b.(2)(a)vii of this Order).
Order No. 2001-01 Page 34 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdpenn99-0'i~Permit~SDMuniPermlt 3.doc
F.3.d.(3) BMP Implementation (Residential)
(a) Each Copermittee shall designate a set of minimum BMPs for high throat to water
· ' quality residential aroas and activities (as roquired under section F.3.d.(2)). The
designated minimum BMPs for high threat to water quality municipal areas and activities
shall be area or activity specific.
(b) Each Copermittee shall requiro implementation of the designated minimum BMPs for
high throat to water quality rosidential areas and activities. If particular minimum BMPs
are infeasible for any specific site/soume, each Copermittee shall requiro
implementation of other equivalent BMPs. Each Copermittee shall also implement, or
require implementation of, any additional BMPs as are necessary to comply with this
Order.
(c) Each Copermittee shall implement, or require implementation of, any additional controls
for rosidential areas and activities tributary to Clean Water Act Section 303(d) impaired
water bodies (where a residential area or activity generates pollutants for which the
water body is impairod) as necessary to comply with this Order. Each Copermittee shall
implement, or requiro implementation of, additional controls for rosidential aroas within
or diroctly adjacent to or discharging directly to coastal lagoons or other roceiving waters
within environmentally sensitive areas (as defined in section F.1 .b.(2)(a)(vii) of this
Order) as necessary to comply with this Order.
F.3.d.(4) Enforcement of Residential Areas and Activities (Residential)
Each Copermittee shall enforce its storm water ordinance for all residential areas and
activities as necessary to maintain compliance with this Order.
F. 4. Education Component
Each Copermittee shall implement an Education Component using all media as appropriate to (1)
measurably increase the knowledge of the target communities regarding MS4s, impacts of urban
runoff on roceiving waters, and potential BMP solutions for the target audience; and (2) to
measurably change the behavior of target communities and thereby reduce pollutant roleases to
MS4s and the environment. At a minimum the education component shall address the following
target communities:
· Municipal Departments and Personnel
· Construction Site Owners and Developers
· Industrial Owners and Operators
Commercial Owners and Operators
Residential Community, General Public, and School Children
Quasi-Governmental Agencies/Districts (i.e., educational institutions, water disthcts,
sanitation districts, etc.)
F.4.a. All Target Communities
At a minimum the Education Program for each target audience shall contain information on
the following topics where applicable:
State and Federal water quality laws
o Requirements of local municipal permits and ordinances (e.g., storm water and
grading ordinances and permits)
· Impacts of urban runoff on receiving waters
o Watershed concepts (i.e., stewardship, connection between inland activities and
coastal problems, etc.)
Order No. 2001-01 Page 35 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPFRMl~Sdperrn99-01~Pen'nit~SOMunIPermit 3~doc
* Distinction between MS4s and sanitary sewers
· Importance of good housekeeping (e.g., sweeping impervious surfaces instead of
hosing)
· Pollution prevention and safe alternatives
· Household hazardous waste collection
Recycling
· BMPs: Site specific, structural and source control
· BMP maintenance
· Non-storm water disposal alternatives (e.g., all wash waters)
Pet and animal waste disposal
o Proper solid waste disposal (e.g., garbage, tires, appliances, fumiture, vehicles)
· Equipment and vehicle maintenance and repair
Public reporting mechanisms
Green waste disposal
· Integrated pest management
· Native vegetation
· Proper disposal of boat and recreational vehicle waste
· Traffic reduction, alternative fuel use
· Water conservation
F.4.b. Municipal, Construction, Industrial, Commercial, and Quasi-Governmental (educational
institutions, water districts, sanitation districts, etc.) Communities
In addition to the topics listed in F.4.a. above, the Municipal, Construction, Industrial,
Commercial, and Quasi-Governmental (Educational Institutions, Water Districts, Sanitation
Districts) Communities shall also be educated on the following topics where applicable:
· Basic urban runoff training for all personnel
· Additional urban runoff training for appropriate personnel
Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination observations and follow-up dudng daily
work activities
· Lawful disposal of catchbasin and other MS4 cleanout wastes
· Water quality awareness for Emergency/First Responders
o California's Statewide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Industrial Activities (Except Construction).
· California's State, vide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction Activities
· SDRWQCB's General NPDES Permit for Groundwater Dewatedng
o 401 Water Quality Certification by the SDRWQCB
· Statewide General NPDES Utility Vault Permit (NPDES No. CAG990002)
SDRWQCB Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredging Activities
Local requirements beyond statewide general permits
Federal, state and local water quality regulations that affect development projects
Water quality impacts associated with land development
Alternative materials & designs to maintain peak runoff values
· How to conduct a storm water inspection
Potable water discharges to the MS4
o DechlodnatJon techniques
o H~restatic testing
Spill response, containment, & recovery
· Preventive maintenance
· How to do your job and protect water quality
Order No. 2001-01 Page 36 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM[SDPERMI'~Sdperm99-0t ~PermitiS DMuniPermit 3.doc
F.4.c. Residential, General Public, School Children Communities
In addition to the topics listed in F.4.a. above, the Residential, General Public, and School
Children Communities shall be educated on the following topics where applicable:
· Public reporting information resources
· Residential and charity car-washing
° Community activities (e.g., "Adopt a Storm Drain, Watershed, or Highway~
Programs, citizen rnonitodng, creek/beach cleanups, environmental protection
organization activities, etc.)
F. 5. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Component
Each Copermittee shall implement an Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Component
containing measures to actively seek and eliminate illicit discharges and connections. At a minimum
the Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Component shall address:
F.5.a Illicit Discharges and Connections
F.5.b Dry Weather Analytical Monitoring
F.5.c Investigation / Inspection and follow-up
F.5.d Elimination of Illicit Discharges and Connections
F.5.e Enforce Ordinance
F.5.f Prevent and Respond To Sewage Spills (Including from Pdvate Laterals and Failing
Septic Systems) and Other Spills
F.5.g Facilitate Public Reporting of Illicit Discharges and Connections - Public Hctline
F.5.h Facilitate Disposal of Used Oil and Toxic Materials
F.5.i Limit Inffitration From Sanitary Sewer to MS4
F.5.a. Illicit Discharqes and Connections
Each Copermittee shall implement a program to actively seek and eliminate illicit discharges
and connections into its MS4. The program shall address all types of illicit discharges and
connections excluding those non-storm water discharges not prohibited by the Copermittee in
accordance with Section B. of this Order.
F.5.b. Dry Weather Analytical Monitoring
Each Copermittee shall conduct dry weather analytical monitoring of MS4 outfalls within its
jurisdiction to detect illicit discharges and connections in accordance with Attachment E of this
Order.
F.5.(;.Investiqation / Inspeddon and Follow-Up
Each Copermittee shall investigate and inspect any portion of the MS4 that, based on dry
weather analytical monitoring results or other appropriate information, indicates a reasonable
potential for illicit discharges, illicit connections, or other sources of non-storm water (including
non-prohibited discharge(s)identified in Section B. of this Order). Each Coperrnittee shall
establish cdteria to identify portions of the system where such follow-up investigations are
appropriate.
F.5.d. Elimination of Illicit Discharqes and Connections
Each Copermittee shall eliminate all detected illicit discharges, discharge sources, and
connections immediately.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 37 of 52 February 21,200t
S:~STORM~SDPERMI~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDM uniPermit 3.doc
F.5.e. Enforce Ordinances
Each Copermittee shall implement and enforce its ordinances, orders, or other legal authority
to prevent illicit discharges and connections to its MS4. Each Copermittee shall also
implement and enfome its ordinance, ordem, or other legal authority to eliminate detected illicit
discharges and connections to it MS4.
F.5.f. Prevent and Respond to Sewage Spills (Including from Private Laterals and Failinq Septic
S'¢stems) and Other Spills
Each Cope[mittee shall prevent, respond to, contain and clean up all sewage and other spills
that may discharge into its MS4 from anv soume (including pdvate laterals and failing septic
systems). Spill response teams shall prevent entry of spills into the MS4 and contamination of
surface water, ground water and soil to the maximum extent practicable. Each Copermittee
shall coordinate spill prevention, containment and response activities throughout all
appropriate departments, programs and agencies to ensure maximum water quality protection
at all times.
Each Cope[mil. tee shall develop and implement a mechanism whereby it is notified of all
sewage spills from private laterals and failing septic systems into its MS4. Each Copermittee
shall prevent, respond to, contain and clean up sewage from any such notification.
F.5.g. Facilitate Public Reportinq of Illicit Discharqes and Connections - - Public Hotiine
Each Coperrnittee shall promote, publicize and facilitate public repoding of illicit discharges or
water quality impacts associated with discharges into or from MS4s. Each Copermittee shall
facilitate public reporting through develoPment and operation of a public hotiine. Public
hotlines can be Copermittee-specific or shared by Copermittees. All storm water hotlines shall
be capable of receiving reports in both English and Spanish 24 hours per day / seven days per
week. Copermittees shall respond to and resolve each reported incident. All reported
incidents, and how each was resolved, shall be summarized in each Copermittee's individual
Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report.
F.5.h. Facilitate Disposal of Used Oil and Toxic Materials
Each Copermittee shall facilitate the proper management and disposal of used oil, toxic
materials, and other household hazardous wastes. Such facilitation shall include educational
activities, public information activities, and establishment of collection sites operated by the
Copermittae or a pdvate entity. Curbside collection of household hazardous wastes is
encouraged.
F.5.i. Limit Intiltration From Sanitary Sewer to MS4/Provide Preventive Maintenance of Both
Each Copermittee shall implement controls and measures to limit infiltration of seepage from
municipal sanitary sewers to MS4s through thorough, routine preventive maintenance of the
MS4. Each Copermittea that operates both a municipal sanitary sewer system and a MS4
shall implement controls and measures to limit infiltration of seepage from the municipal
sanitary sewers to the MS4s that shall include overall sanitary sewer and MS4 surveys and
thorough, routine preventive maintenance of both.
F. 6. Public Participation Component
Each Copermittee shall incorporate a mechanism for public participation in the implementation of the
Jurisdictional URMP.
Order No. 2001-07 Page 38 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM\SDP ERMIT~adperm99-01 ~Permit~S DMuniPennit 3.doc
F. 7. Assessment of Jurisdictional URMP Effectiveness Component
a. As part of its individual Jurisdictional URMP, each Copermittee shall develop a long-term
strategy for assessing the effectiveness of its individual Jurisdictional URMP. The long-term
assessment strategy shall identify specific direct and indirect measurements that each
Copermittee will use to track the long-term progress of its individual Jurisdictional URMP
towards achieving improvements in receiving water quality. Methods used for assessing
effectiveness shall include the following or their equivalent: surveys, pollutant loading
estimations, and receiving water quality monitoring. The long-term strategy shall also discuss
the role of monitoring data in substantiating or refining the assessment.
b. As part of its individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report, each Copermittee shall include an
assessment of the effectiveness of its Jurisdictional URMP using the direct and indirect
assessment measurements and methods developed in its tong-term assessment strategy.
F.8. Fiscal Analysis Component
Each Copermittee shall secure the resources necessary to meet the requirements of this Order.
As part of its individual Jurisdictional URMP, each Copermittee shall develop a strategy to conduct
a fiscal analysis of its urban runoff management program in its entirety. In order to demonstrate
sufficient financial resoumes to implement the conditions of this Order, each Copermittee shall
conduct an annual fiscal analysis as part of its individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report. This
analysis shall, for each fiscal year covered by this Order, evaluate the expenditures (such as
capital, operation and maintenance, education, and administrative expenditures) necessary to
accomplish the activities of the Copermittee's urban runoff management program. Such analysis
shall include a description of the source(s) of funds that am proposed to meet the necessary
expenditures, including legal restrictions on the use of such funds.
G. IMPLEMENTATION OF JURISDICTIONAL URMP
Each Copermittee shall have completed full implementation of all requirements of the Jurisdictional
URMP section of this Order no later than 365 days after adoption of this Order, except as stated as
follows: Each Copermittee's local SUSMP must be implemented within 180 days of approval of the
model SUSMP in the public process by the SDRWQCB.
H. SUBMITTAL OF JURISDICTIONAL URMP DOCUMENT
The written account of the overall program to be conducted by each Copermittee within its jurisdiction
during the five-year life of this Order is referred to as the "Jurisdictional URMP Document".
1. Individual - Each Copermittee shall submit to the Principal Permittee(s) an individual Jurisdictional
URMP document which describes all activities it has undertaken or is undertaking to implement
the requirements of each component of the Jurisdictional URMP section F. of this Order.
a. At a minimum, the individual Jurisdictional URMP document shall contain the following
information for the following components:
(1) Construction Component
(a) Which pollution prevention methods will be required for implementation, and how and
where they will be required
(b) Updated grading ordinances
(c) A description of the modified construction and grading approval process
(d) Updated construction and grading project requirements in local grading and construction
permits
{e) A completed watershed-based inventory of all construction sites
Order No. 2001-01 Page 39 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:'~STO RMtSDPERMIT~Sdperm99-OI~Permit~S DM u niPern~lt 3.doc
(f) A completed prioritization of all construction sites based on throat to water quality
(g) Which BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for each priority
category
(h) How BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for each priority
category
(i) Planned inspection froquencies for each priority category
(j) Methods for inspection
(k) A description of enforcement mechanisms and how they will be used
{I) A description of how non-compliant sites will be identified and the process for notifying
the SDRWQCB, including a list of current non-compliant sites
(m) A description of the construction education program and how it will be implemented
(2) Municipal (Existing Development) Component
(a) Which poliution provention methods will be required for implementation, and how and
whero they will be required
(b) A completed watershed-based inventory of all municipal land use areas and activities
(c) A completed prioritization of all municipal aroas and activities based on threat to water
quality
(d) Which BMPs will be implemented, or requirod to be implemented, for each priority
category
(e) How BMPs will be implemented, or roquired to be implemented, for each priority
category
(f) Municipal maintenance activities and schedules
(g) Management strategy for pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer use.
(h) Planned inspection frequencies for the high priority category
(i) Methods for inspection
(j) A description of enfomement mechanisms and how they will be used
(3) Industrial (Existing Development) Component
(a) Which pollution prevention methods will be required for implementation, and how and
where they will be required
(b) A completed watershed-based inventory of all industrial sites
(c) A completed prioritization of all industrial sites based on throat to water quality
(d) Which BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for each priority
category
(e) How BMPs will be implemented, or roquired to be implemented, for each priority
category
(f) A description of the monitoring program to be conducted, or required to be conducted
(g) Planned inspection frequencies for each priority category
(h) Methods for inspection
(i) A description of enfomement mechanisms and how they will be used
(j) A description of how non-compliant sites will be identified and the process for
notifying the SDRWQCB, including a list of current non-compliant sites
(4) Commercial (Existing Development) Component
(a) Which pollution prevention methods will be required for implementation, and how and
where they will be required
(b) A completed watershed-based inventory of high priority commemial sites
(c) Which BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for high priority
sites
(d) How BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for high priority sites
(e) Planned inspection frequencies for high priority sites
(f) Methods for inspection
Order No. 200t-01 Page 40 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:\STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01\Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
(g) A description of enforcement mechanisms and how they will be used
(5) Residential (Existing Development) Component
(a) Which pollution prevention methods will be encouraged for implementation, and how
and where they will be encouraged
(b) A completed inventory of high pdodty residential areas and acflv'rties
(c) Which BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for high pdority areas
and activities
(d) How BMPs will be implemented, or required to be implemented, for high pdodty areas
and activities
(e) A description of enforcement mechanisms and how they will be used
(6) Education Component
(a) A description of the content, form, and frequency of education efforts for each target
community
(7) Illicit Discharges Detection and Elimination Component
(a) A description of the program to actively seek and eliminate illicit discharges and
connections
(b) A description of dry weather analytical monitoring to be conducted to detect illicit
discharges and connections (see Attachment E)
(c) A description of investigation and inspection procedures to follow-up on dry weather
analytical monitoring results or other information which indicate potential for illicit
discharges and connections
(d) A description of procedures to eliminate detected illicit discharges and connections
(e) A description of enforcement mechanisms and how they will be used
(f) A description of methods to prevent, respond to, contain, and clean up all sewage
(including spills from private laterals and failing septic systems) and other spills in
order to prevent entrance into the MS4
(g) A description of the mechanism to receive notification of spills from private laterals
(h) A description of efforts to facilitate public reporting of illicit discharges and
connections, including a public hotline
(i) A description of efforts to tacilitate proper disposal of used oil and other toxic
materials
(j) A description of controls and measures to be implemented to limit infiltration of
seepage from sanitary sewers to MS4s
(k) A description of routine preventive maintenance activities on the sanitary system
(where applicable) and the MS4
(8) Public Participation Component
(a) A description of how public participation will be included in the implementation of the
Jurisdictional URMP
(9) Assessment of Jurisdictional URMP Effectiveness Component
(a) A description of strategies to be used for assessing the long-term effectiveness of the
individual Jurisdictional URMP.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 41 of 52 February 21,200'1
S:~STORM~SDPERM[T~$dperm99-0 l~Permit~SDM uniPermit 3.doc
(10) Fiscat Analysis Component
(a) A description of the strategy to be used to conduct a fiscal analysis of the urban runoff
management program.
(11) Land-Use Planning for New Development and Redevelopment Component
(a) Workplan for inclusion in General Plan (or equivalent plan) of water quality and
watershed protection principles and policies
(b) Development project requirements in local development permits
(c) Participation efforts conducted in the development of the Model SUSMP
(d) Environmental review processes revisions
(e) A description of the planning education program and how it will be implemented
(12) Fire Fighting
(a) A description of a program to reduce pollutants from non-emergency fire fighting flows
identified by the Copermittee to be significant sources of pollutants.
b. Each Copermittee shall submit to the Principal Permittee(s) each part of its individual
Jurisdictional URMP document by the dates specified by the Principal Permittee(s).
c. In addition to submittal of the Jedsdictional URMP document, each Copermittee shall submit to
the SDRWQCB its own adopted local SUSMP consistent with the approved Model SUSMP, as
described in section F.1 .b.(2). of this Order. Each Copermittee's own local SUSMP, along with
its amended ordinances, shall be submitted to the SDRWQCB within 180 days of the
SDRWQCB's approval of the Model SUSMP.
2. Unified - The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit the unified Jurisdictional URMP document to the
SDRWQCB. The unified Jurisdictional URMP document shall be submitted in two parts (the
collected Jurisdictional URMPs and the model SUSMP).
The unified Jedsdictional URMP document submittal shall address the requirements of the entire
Jurisdictional URMP sections F.1 - F.8. of this Order, with the exception of the local SUSMP
requirements (which ara to be implemented 180 days after approval of the model SUSMP by the
SDRWQCB). The unified Jurisdictional URMP document submittal shall contain a section covering
common activities conducted collectively by the Copermittees, to be produced by the Principal
Permittee(s), and the twenty individual Jurisdictional URMP documents. The Principal Permittee(s)
shall be responsible for the development and production of a stand alone Model SUSMP document
meeting the requireroents of section F.l.b.(2) of this Order. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit
the unified Jedsdictional URMP document, including the Model SUSMP, to the SDRWQCB within
365 days of adoption of this Order.
3. Universal Reporting Requirements
All individual and unified Jurisdictional URMP document submittals shall include an executive
summary, introduction, conclusion, recommendations, and signed certified statement. Each
Copermittee shall submit its individual Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program Document
with a signed certified statement. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit a signed certified
statement referring to its individual Judsdicfional Urban Runoff Management Program Document, the
section covedng common activities conducted collectively by the Copermittees, and the Model
SUSMP document meeting the requirements of section F.1 .b.(2) of this Order as produced by the
Principal Permittee(s).
Order No. 2001-01 Page 42 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM[SDP ERMl'~Sdperm99-~'l~Permlt~S DMuniPen~it 3.doc
I. SUBMITTAL OF JURISDICTIONAL URMP ANNUAL REPORT
1. Individual - Each individual Jurisdictional URMP Annuat Report shall be a documentation of the
activities conducted by each Copermittee during the past annual reporting pefied. Each
Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report shall, at a minimum, contain the following:
a. Comprehensive description of all activities conducted by the Copermittee to meet all
requirements of each component of the Jurisdictional URMP section of this Order;
F.I. Land-Use Planning for New Development and Redevelopment Component
F.2. Construction Component
F.3. Existing Development Component (including Municipal, Industrial, Commercial,
Residential, and Education)
F.4. Education Component
F.5. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Component
F.6. Public Participation Component
F.7. Assessment of Jurisdictional URMP Effectiveness Component
F.8. Fiscal Analysis Component
b. Each Copermittee's accounting of all:
(1) Reports of illicit discharges (i.e., complaints) and how each was resolved (indicating
referral source);
(2) Inspections conducted;
(3) Enforcement actions taken; and
(4) Education efforts conducted.
c. Public participation mechanisms utilized during the Jurisdictional URMP implementation
process;
d. Proposed revisions to the Jurisdictional URMP;
e. A summary of all urban runoff related data not included in the annual monitoring report (e.g.,
special investigations);
f. Budget for upcoming year;
g. Identification of management measures proven to be ineffective in reducing urban runoff
pollutants and flow; and
h. Identification of water quality improvements or degradation.
2. Unified - The unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report shall contain a section covedng common
activities conducted collectively by the Copermittees, to be produced by the Principal Permittee(s),
and the twenty individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual Reports. Each Copermfitee shall submit to the
Principal Permittee(s) an individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report by the date specified by the
Principal Permittee(s). The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit a unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual
Report to the SDRWQCB by January 31, 2003 and every January 3'1 thereafter. The reporting
pedod for these annual reports shall be the previous fiscal year. For example, the report submitted
January 31, 2003 shall cover the reporting period July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002.
3. Universal Reporting Requirements
AI~ individual and unified Jurisdictional URMP submittals shall include an executive summary,
introduction, conclusion, recommendations, and signed certified statement. Each Copermittee shall
submit its individual Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program Annual Report with a signed
certified statement. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit a signed certified statement referring to
Order No. 2001-0t Page 43 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMI'I~Sdperm99-01~Pennlt~SDM uniPermit 3,doc
its individual Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program Annual Report and the section
covedng common acfivitJes conducted collectively by the Copermittees as produced by the Principal
Permittee(s).
J. WATERSHED URBAN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
1. Each Copermittee shall collaborate with other Copermittees within its watershed(s) as shown in
Table 4. below to identify and mitigate the highest priodty water qualify issues/pollutants in the
watershed(s).
2. Each Copermittee shall collaborate with all other Copermittees discharging urban runoff into the
same watershed to develop and implement a Watershed Urban Runoff Management Program
(Watemhed URMP) for the respective watershed. Each Watershed URMP shall, at a minimum
contain the following:
a. An accurata map of the watershed (praferably in Geographical Informafion System [GIS]
format) that identifies all receiving waters (including the Pacific Ocean); all Clean Water Act
section 303(d) impaired receiving waters (including the Pacific Ocean); land uses; MS4s,
major highways; jurisdictional boundaries; and inventoried commercial, construction,
industrial, municipal sites, and residential areas.
b. An assessment of the water quality of all receiving watars in the watershed based upon (1)
existing water quality data; and (2) annual watershed water quality monitoring that satisfies
the watershed monitoring requirements of Attachment B;
c. An identification and prioritization of major water quality problems in the watershed caused or
contributed to by MS4 discharges and the likely soume(s) of the problem(s);
d. An implementation time schedule of short and long-term recommended activities (individual
and collective) needed to address the highest pdority water quality problem(s). For this
section, "shod-term activities" shall mean those activities that are to be completed dudog the
life of this Order and "long-term activities" shall mean those activities that are to be completed
beyond the life of this Order;
e. An identification of the Copermittee(s) responsible for implementing each recommended
activity, including the selection of the Lead Permittee(s) and the time schedule for
implementation. In the event that a Lead Permittee is not selected and identified by the
Copermittees in a watershed, the Copermittee identified in Table 4 as the Lead Permittee for
that watershed shall be responsible for implementing the requirements of the Lead Permittee
in that watershed by default;
f. A mechanism for public participation throughout the entire watershed URMP process;
g. A watemhed based education program;
h. A mechanism to facilitate collaborative "watershed-based" (i.e., natural resource-based) land
use planning with neighboring local governments in the watershed.
i. Long-term strategy for assessing the effectiveness of the Watershed URMP. The long-term
assessment strategy shall identity specific direct and indirect measurements that will track the
long-term progress of Watershed URMP towards achieving improvements in receiving water
quality. Methods used for assessing effectiveness shall include the following or their equivalent:
surveys, pollutant loading estimations, and receiving water quality monitoring. The long-term
strategy shall also discuss the rote of monitoring data in substantiating or refining the
assessment.
Order No. 2001-01 Page 44 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:[STORM~SDP ERMl~Sdperm99-O1~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
TaMe4. Copermittees by Watershed
I. County of San Diego Santa Margarita River
Pacific Ocean
1. City of Escondido San Luis Rey River San Luis Rey HU San Luis Rey River and Estuary,
2. City of Oceanside 903.00) Pacific Ocean
3. City of Vis~
4. County of San Diego
1. City of Cadsbad Carlsbad Carlsbad HU (904.00) Batiquitos Lagoon
2. City of Enclnltas San Elijo Lagoon
3. City of Escondido Agua Hedionda Lagoon
4. city of Oceanside Buena Vista Lagoon
5. City of San Marcos and Tfibutary Streams
6. City of Solana Beach Pacific Ocean
7. City of Vista
8. County of San Die,lo
1. City of Del Mar San Dieguito River San Diegudo HU San Dieguilo River and Estuary
2. City of Escondido (905.00) Pacific Ocean
3. City of Poway
4. City of San Diego
5. City of Solana Beach
6. County of San Diego
1. City of Del Mar Pe~asquitos Miramar Reservoir Los Periasquitos Creek
2. City of Poway HA (906.10) Los Periasquitos Lagoon
3. City of San Diego Poway HA (906.20) Pacific Ocean
4. County of San Die9, o
1. City of San Diego Mission Bay Scripps HA (906.30) Mission Bay
Miramar HA(906.40) Pacific Ocean
Tecolote HA (906.50)
1. City of El Cajon San Diego River San Diego HU San Diego River
2. City of La Mesa (907.00) Pacific Ocean
3. City of Poway
4. City of San Diego
5. City of Santee
6. County of San Die,lo
1. City of Chula Vista San Diego Bay Pueblo San Diego HU San Diego Bay
2. City of Coronado (908.00) Sweetwaler River
3. City of Imperial Beach Sweetwater HU Olay River
4. City of La Mesa (909.00) Pacific Ocean
5. City of Lemon Grove Olay HU (910.00)
6. City of NaUonal City
7. City of San Diego
8. County of San Diego
9. San Diego Unlfieri Port
District
I. City of Imperial Beach Tijuana River Tijuana (911.00) Tijuana River and Estuary
2. City of San Diego Pacific Ocean
3. County of San Diego
The Lead Watershed Copen~nittee for each watershed is highlighted
K, IMPLEMENTATION OF WATERSHED URMP
Each Copermittee shall have completed full implementation of all requirements of the Watershed
URMP section of this Order no later than January 31, 2003 unless otherwise specified.
L. SUBMITTAL OF WATERSHED URMP DOCUMENT
The wri[ten account of the overall watershed program to be conducted by each Copermittee during
the remaining life of this Order is referred to as the "Watershed URMP Document". The Watershed
Order No. 2001-01 Page 45 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM\SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
URMP is conducted concurrently with the Jurisdictional URMP.6
1. Each Watershed Specific URMP document shall state how the member Copermittees within each
watershed will develop and implement the requirements of the Watershed URMP section J. of this
Order. The Copermittaes responsible for each of the nine Watershed URMPs are specified in Table
4 above. The Lead Watershed Copermittee for each watershed is highlighted, unless a different
Lead Watershed Copermittee is designated. Each Lead Watershed Copermittee shall be
responsible for producing its respective Watershed URMP document, as well as for coordinafion and
meetings amongst all member watershed Copermittees. Each Lead Watershed Copermittee is
further responsible for the submittal of the Watershed URMP document to the Principal Permittee(s)
by the date specified by the Principal Permittee{s).
a. Each Watershed specific URMP document shall include: (1) A completed watershed map
(2) Awater quality assessment and watershed monitoring needed
(3) Prioritization of water quality problems
(4) Recommended activities (short and long term)
(5) Individual Copermittee implementation responsibilities and time schedules for
implementation
(6) A description of watershed public participation mechanisms
(7) A description of watershed education mechanisms
(8) A description of the mechanism and implementation schedule for watershed-based land use
planning
(9) A strategy for assessing the long-term effectiveness of the Watershed URMP
2. Unified - The unified Watershed URMP document shall contain a section covering common activities
conducted collectively by the Copermittees, to be produced by the Principal Permittee(s), and the
nine Watershed Specific URMP documents. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit the unified
Watershed URMP document to the SDRWQCB by January 31, 2003.
3. Universal Reporting Requirements.
Alt individual and unified Watershed URMP submittals shall include an executive summary,
introduction, conclusion, recommendations, and signed certified statement. Each Coperrnittee shall
submit a signed certified statement covering its responsibilities in the specific Watershed URMP
Document. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit a signed certified statement referring to its
specific Watershed URMP Document and the section covedng common activities conducted
collectively by the Copermittees as produced by the Principal Permittee(s).
Mm SUBMITTAL OF WATERSHED URMP ANNUAL REPORT
1. Watershed Specific - Each Watershed Specific URMP Annual Report shall be a documentation of
the activities conducted by watershed member Copermittees during the previous annual reporting
pedod to meet the requirements of all components of the Watershed URMP section of this Order.
Each Watershed URMP Annuat Report shall, at a minimum, contain the following:
6 As each Copermiffee transitions from conducting its management program only within its jurisdiction to conducting it also
throughout the entire watershed (with neighboring Copermittees), it is expected that many activities will continue on a jurisdictional
level (e.g., enforcement of local ordinances and permits). Implementation of the Watershed URMP is not meant to replace, but to
expand implementation of the Jurisdictional URMP. For this reason, it is necessary to report management activities on both levels.
This can be accomplished either by submitting both a Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report and a Watamhed URMP Annual Report
or by submitting a single Watershed URMP Annual Report that contains two separate sections (i.e., watershed activities and
jurisdictional activities). Ini=ormation need only be repealed once (ta the extent somethingis covered in the Watershed URMP
Annual Report, it need not be covered again the Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report)..
Order No. 2001-01 Page 46 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~S DMuniPen'~it 3.doc
a. Comprehensive description of all activities conducted by the watershed member Copermiftees
to meet all requirements of each component of Watershed URMP section J. of this Order
b. Public participation mechanisms utilized during the Watershed URMP implementation
process;
c. Mechanism for watershed based land use planning;
d. Assessment of effectiveness of Watershed URMP;
e. Proposed revisions to the Watershed URMP;
f. A summary of watershed effort related data not included in the annual monitoring report (e.g.,
special investigations); and
g. Identification of water quality improvements or degradation.
2. Unified - The Unifed Watershed URMP Annual Report shall contain a section covering common
activities conducted collectively by the Copermittees, to be produced by the Principal Permittee(s),
and the nine Watershed Specific URMP Annual Reports. Each Lead Watershed Copermittee shall
submit to the Principal Permittee(s) a Watershed Specific URMP Annual Report by the date
specified by the Principal Permittee(s). The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit the Unified
Watershed URMP Annual Report to the SDRWQCB by January 31,2004 and every January 31
thereafter. The reporting pedod for these annual reports shall be the previous fiscal year. For
example, the repod submitted January 31, 2004 shall cover the reporting pedod July 1, 2002 to June
30, 2003.
3. Universal Reporting Requirements
All individual and unified Watershed URMP submittals shall include an executive summary,
introduction, conclusion, recommendations, and signed certified statement. Each Copermittee shall
submit a signed certified statement covering its responsibilities in the specific Watershed URMP
Annual Report. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit a signed certified statement referring to its
specific Watershed URMP Annual Report and the section covering common activities conducted
collectively by the Copermittees as produced by the Principal Permittee(s).
N. ALL COPERMITTEE COLLABORATION
1. Each Copermittee shall collaborate with all other Copermittees regulated under this Order to
address common issues, promote consistency among Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management
Programs (Jurisdictional URMPs) and Watershed Urban Runoff Management Programs
(Watershed URMPs), and to plan and coordinate activities required under this Order
a. Management Structure - All Copermittees shall jointly execute and submit to the SDRWQCB
no later than 365 days after adoption of this Order, a Memorandum of Understanding, Joint
Powers Authority, or other instrument of formal agreement which at a minimum provides a
management structure for the following:
· Designation of Joint Responsibilities
Decision making
Watershed activities;
Information management of data and reports, including the requirements under this
Order; and
· Any and all other collaborative arrangements for compliance with this Order.
b. All Copermittees shall jointly develop a standardized format(s) for all reports required under
this Order (e.g., annual repods, monitoring reports, fiscal analysis reports, and program
effectiveness reports, etc.). The standardized reporting format(s) shall be used by all
Copermittees and shall include protocols for electronic reporting. The Principal Permittee(s)
shall submit the standardized format(s) to the SDRWQCB no later than 365 days after
Order No. 2001-01 Page 47 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDP ERMFl~Sr~perm99-01~Permit~SDIViuniPennit 3.doc
adoption of this Order.
O, PRINCIPAL PERMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES
Within 90 days of adoption of this Order, the Copermittees shall designate the Principal Permittee(s)
and notify the SDRWQCB of the name(s) of the Principal Permittee(s). The Principal Permittee(s)
may require the Copermittees to reimburse the Principal Permittee(s) for reasonable costs incurred
while performing coordination responsibilities and other related tasks. The Principal Permittee(s)
shall, at a minimum:
1. Serve as liaison(s) between the Copermittees and the SDRWQCB on general permit issues.
2. Coordinate permit activities among the Copermittees and facilitate collaboration on the
development and implementation of programs required under this Order;
3. Integrate individual Copermittee documents and reports required under this Order into single
unified documents and reports for submittal to the SDRWQCB as described below. If a repo~ng
date falls on a non-working day or State holiday, then the report is to be submitted on the following
working day.
a. Unified Jurisdictional URMP Document- The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit the unified
Jurisdictional URMP document in its entirety (including the model SUSMP) to the SDRWQCB
within 365 days of the adoption of this Order.
The Principal Permittee(s) shall be responsible for producing the sections of the unified
Jurisdictional URMP document submittals covering common activities conducted by the
Copermittees. The Principal Permittee(s) shall be responsible for the development and
production of a stand alone Model SUSMP document meeting the requirements of section
F.l.b.(2)~ of this Order. The Principal Permittee(s) shall also be responsible for collecting and
assembling the individual Jurisdictional URMP document submittals covering the activities
conducted by each individual Copermittee.
b. Unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual Reports- The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit unified
Jurisdictional URMP Annual Reports to the SDRWQCB by January 31 of each year,
beginning on January 31, 2003. The reporting period for these annual reports shall be the
previous fiscal year. For example, the report submitted January 31, 2003 shall cover the
reporting period July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002.
The Principal Permittee(s) shall be responsible for producing the section of the unified
Jurisdictional URMP Annual Reports covering common activities conducted by the
Copermittees. The Principal Permittee(s) shall also be responsible for collecting and
assembling the individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual Reports covering the activities
conducted by each individual Copermittee.
c. Unified Watershed URMP Document- The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit the unified
Watershed URMP document to the SDRWQCB by January 31, 2003. The Principal
Permittee(s) shall be responsible for producing the section of the unified Watershed URMP
document covering common activities conducted by the Copermittees. The Principal
Permittee(s) shall also be responsible for collecting and assembling the watershed specific
Watershed URMP documents covering the activities conducted by each individual
Copermittee.
d. Unified Watershed URMP Annual Report - The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit unified
Watershed URMP Annual Reports to the SDRWQCB by January 3'1 of each year, beginning
on January 31, 2004. The reporting period for these annual repods shall be the previous
fiscal year. For example, the report submitted January 3, 2004 shall cover the reporting
Order No. 2001-01 Page 48 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl'~Sdperm99-01~Permit\SDMuniPermit 3.doc
period July 1,2002 to June 30, 2003.
The Principal Permittee(s) shall be responsible for producing the section of the unified
Watershed URMP Annual Reports covering common activities conducted by the
Copermittees. The Principal Permittee(s) shall also be responsible for collecting and
assembling the watershed specific Watemhed URMP Annual Reports covering the activities
conducted by each individual Copermittee.
e. Receiving Waters Monitoring and Reporting Program - The Principal Permittee(s) shall be
responsible for the production and submittal of the Previous Monitoring and Future
Recommendations Report. The report shall be submitted to the SDRWQCB within 180 days
of adoption of this Order.
f. Receiving Waters Monitoring and Reporting Program - The Principal Permittee(s) shall be
responsible for the development and production of the Receiving Waters Monitoring Program
as it is outlined in Attachment B. The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit the Receiving
Waters Monitoring Program to the SDRWQCB within 180 days of adoption of this Order.
g. Receiving Waters Monitoring and Reporting Program ~ The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit
the Receiving Waters Monitoring Annual Report to the SDRWQCB on January 31 of each
year, beginning on January 31, 2003.
h. Formal Agreements/Standardized Formats - The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit to the
SDRWQCB, within 365 days of adoption of this Order, a formal agreement between the
Copermittees which provides a management structure for meeting the requirements of this
Order (as described in section N.l.a.). The Principal Permittee(s) shall submit to the
SDRWQCB, within 365 days of adoption of this Order, standardized formats for all reports
and documents required under this Order.
i. Dry Weather Analytical Monitoring - The Principal Permittee(s) shall collectively submit the
Copermittees' dry weather analytical monitoring maps and procedures to the SDRWQCB
within 365 days of adoption of this Order.
P. RECEIVING WATERS MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
1. Pursuant to California Water Code section 13267, each Copermittee shall comply with Monitoring
and Reporting Program for No. 2001-01 contained in Attachment B of this Order.
2. Each Copermittee shall also comply with standard provisions, reporting requirements, and
notifications contained in Attachment C of this Order.
Q. TASKS AND SUBMITTAL SUMMARY
The tasks and submittals required under this Order are summarized in Tables 5 and 6 below:
Table 5. Task Summary
1 Identify discharges not to be prohibited and B.3. 365 days after One Time
BMPs required for treatment of discharges adoption of Order
not @inhibited
2 Examine fietd screening results to identify 8.5 January 31, 2003 Annually
water qualify problems resulting from non-
prohibited non-storm water discharges, '
including follow-up of problems
3 Notify SDRWQCB of discharges causing or C.2.a. Immediate As Needed
contributing to an exceedance of water
quality standards
Order No. 2001-01 Page 49 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~S DMuniPermlt 3.doc
4 Establish adequate legal authodty to control D.1. 180 days after One 'Time
pollutant discha~es into and from MS4 adoption of Order
5 Assess General Plan to incorporate water F.l.a, 365 days after One Time
quality and watershed protection principles adoption of Order
6 Include Development Project Requirements F.l.b.(1). 365 days after One Time
in local permits adoption of Order
7 Develop Model SUSMP F.l.b.(2). 365 days after One Time
adoption of Order
8 Develop and adopt individual local SUSMP F,l.b.(2). 180 days after One Time
and amended ordinances approval of Model
SUSMP by
SDRWQCB
9 Implement individuar judsdictional SUSMP F,l,b.(2). 180 days after Continuous
approval of Model
SUSMP by
SDRWQCB
10 Revise environmental review processes F.l.c.(1). 365 days after One Time
adoption of Order
11 Conduct education program for municipal F.l.d.(1 ). And 365 days after Ongoing
planning and development review staff, F.l.d.(2), adoption of Order
project applicants, developers, contractors,
community planning groups, and property
12 Implement all requirements of Construction F.2.a. - F,2.j. 365 days after Ongoing
Component of JudedictJonal URMP adoption of Order
13 Notify SDRWQCB of non-compliant F.2.i Within 24 hours of As Needed
consbuction sites that pose a threat to discovery of
14 Implement all requirements of Municipal F.3.a.(1). - 365 days after Ongoing
Existing Development Component of F.3.a.(8). adoption of Order
Judsdictional URMP
15 Implement all requirements of Industrial F.3.b,(1 ) - 365 days after Ongoing
Existing Developmenl Component of F.3.b.(8) adoption of Order
Jurisdictional URMP
16 Notify SDRWQCB of non-compliant F.3.b.8 Within 24 hours of As Needed
industhal sites that pose a threat to human discovery of
or environmental health noncompliance
17 Implement all requirements of Commercial F.3,c.(1) - 365 days after Ongoing
Existing Development Component of F.3.c.(5) adoption of Order
Judsdictional URMP
18 Implement all requirements of Residentia~ F,3.d.(1 ) - 365 days after Ongoing
Existing Development Component of F.3,d~(4) adoption of Order
Jurisdictional URMP
19 Implement all requirements of Education F.4,a. - F.4.c, 365 days after Ongoing
Component of Jurisdictional URMP adoption of Order
20 Implement all requirements of Illicit F.5.a. - F.5. L 365 days after Ongoing
Discharge Detection and Elimination adoption of Order
Component of Jedsdictionst URMP
21 Implement all requirements of Public F.6. 365 days alter Ongoing
Participation Component of Jedsdictionst adoption of Order
URMP
22 Develop strategy for assessment of F.7.a. 365 days after One Time
Jodsdicflonal URMP effectiveness adoption of Order
23 Assess Jurisdictional URMP effectiveness F.7.b. January 31~ 2003 Annually
24 Develop strategy for fiscal analysis of urban F.8. 365 days after One Time
runoff management program adoption of Order
25 Conduct fiscal analysis of urban runoff F.8. January 31,2003 Annually
management program in entirety
26 Develop and implement Watershed URMP J.2. January 31, 2003 Ongoing
27 Execute formal agreement which provides N.l.a. 365 days after One Time
management structure for meeting Order adoption of Order
requirements
28 Develop standan:lized formats for all required N.l.b. 365 days after One Tim~
reports of this Order adoption of Order
29 Develop Previous Monitedng and Future ~ Attachment B 180 days after One Time
Recommendations Report adoption of Order
30 Develop Receiving Watem Monitedng Attachment B 180 days after One Time
Program adoption of Order
Order No. 2001-01 Page 50 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl'~Sdperm99-01~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
31 Implement Receiving Waters Mon[tedng Attachment B 180 days after Continuous
Program adoption of Order
32 Develop d~J weather analytical and field Attachment E 365 days after One Time
screening monitedng map and procedures adoption of Order
33 Conduct dry weather analytical and field Attachment E May 1, 2002 Annually
screenin~ mon~todng
34 Complete NPDES applications for issuance Attachment C At least 180 days One Time
of renewal watershed based permits pdor to expiration of
Order
35 Notify SDRWQCB of any incidence of non- R.1, B.6 of Within 24 houm of As Needed
compliance with this Order that poses a Attachment C discovery of nor~
threat to human or environmental health, compliance
36 Designate Pbacipal Permittee(s) and notify O. 90 days after One Time
SDRWQCB adoption of the
Order
Table 6. Submittal Summary
1 Submit identification of discharges not to be B.3. 365 days after One Time
prohibited and BMPs required for treatment adoption of Order
of discha~es not prohibited
2 Report on discharges causing or conthbuting C.2.a. With individual As Needed
to an exceedance of water quality standards, Jutisdictional URMP
including description of BMP implementation Annual Reports
3 Submit Certified Statement of Adequate D.2. 180 days after One Time
Legal Authordy adoption of Order
4 Submit certified statement if particular high F.2.g.(2). 365 days after As Needed --
pdordy construction sites are to be inspected adoption of Order
monthly rather than weekly in the rainy and as needed
season thereafter
5 Submit report on non-compliard construction F.2.i. Within 5 Days of As Needed
sites that pose a threat to human or discovery of non-
environmental health, compliance
6 Submit report on non-compliant industrial F.3.b.8. Within 5 days of As Needed
sites that pose a threat to human or discovery of non
environmental health. ; compliance
7 Submit to Principal Permittee(s) individual H.1 .a. PHor fo 365 days One Time
Jurisdictional URMP document covedng after adoption of
requirements for all Components Order (Principal
Permiffee(s)
specifies date of
submittal)
8 (This space reserved).
9 Principal Permiftee(s) sba~l submit to H.2.a. 365 days alter One Time
SDRWQCB unified Jurisdictional URMP adoption of Order
document covering requirements for all
Components, including Model SUSMP
10 ~his space reserved).
11 Submit to SDRWQCB local SUSMP and F.1 .b.(2). and 180 days after One Time
amended ordinances H.1 .d. approval of Medal
SUSMP
12 Submit to Principal Permittee(s} individual 1.1. Prior to January 31, Annually
Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report 2003 (Principal
Permiftee(s)
specifies date of
submittal)
13 Principal Permiltee(s) shall submit 1 st 1.2. January 31, 2003 One Time
unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report and Annually
to SDRWQCB Thereafter
14 Submit to Principal Permittee(s) Watershed L. 1. Prior to January 31, One Time
Specific URMP document 2003 (Principal
Permittee(s)
specifies date of
Order No. 2001-01 Page 51 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM[SDPERMI~Sdperm99.01 ~Permit~S DMu niPermit 3.doc
submittal)
15 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit unified L.2. January 31, 2003 One Time
Watershed Specific URMP document to
SDRWQCB
16 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit 2nd ~ L2. January 31, 2004 One Time
unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report
to SDRWQCB
17 Submit to Principal Pe~rnittee(s) Watershed M.1. Prior to January 31, Annually
Specific URMP Annual Repori 2004 (Principal
Permittee(s)
specifies date of
submittal)
18 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit 1st M.2. January 31, 2004 One Time
unified Watershed Specific URMP Annual and Annually
Report to SDRWQCB Thereafter
19 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit 3rd h2 January 31, 2005 One Time
unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report
to SDRWQCS
20 Principal Permittee(s) sha~l submit 2~ M.2. January 31, 2005 One Time
unified Watershed Specific URMP Annual
Report to SDRWQCB
21 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit 4'n unified L2. January 31, 2006 One Time
Judsdicfional URMP Annual Report to
SDRWQCB
22 Pdncipa~ Permittee(s) shall submit 3= unified M.2, January 31, 2006 One Time
Watershed Specific URMP Annual Report to
SDRWQCB
23 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit 5TM unified L2. January 31, 2007 One Time
Judsdicfional URMP Annual Repori to
SDRWQCB
24 Pdncipal Permiftee(s) shall submit formal N.1 .a. 365 days after One Time
agreement between Copermittees which adoption of Order
provides management structure for meeting
Order requirements
25 Principal Permittee(s) shall submit N1 .b. 365 days after One Time
standardized formats for all reports required adoption of Order
under this Order
26 Pdncipal Permittee(s) submits Previous Afiachment B 180 days after One Time
Monitedng and Future Recommendations adoption of Order
Report to SDRWQCB
27 Principal Permittee(s) submits Receiving Attachment B 180 days after One Time
Waters Monitedng Program document to adoption of Order
SDRWQCB
28 Pdncipal Permittee(s) submits Receiving Attachment B January 31, 2003 Annually
Waters Monitoring Annual Report to
SDRWQCB
29 Submit to Principal Penni[tee(s) dry weather Attachment E Pdor to 365 days One Time
analytical monitoring map and procedures after adoption of
Order
30 Pedcipal Permittee(s) submits collective dry Attachment E 365 days after One Time
weather analytical monitedng maps and adoption of Order
procedures
31 Submit to Principal Permittee(s) dry weather Attachment E Prior to January 31, Annually
analytical monitoring results as part of 2003, as part of
individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual individual
Report Jurisdictional URMP
Annual Report
32 Pdncipal Permittee(s) shall submit NPDES Attachment C At least 180 days One Time
applications for issuance of renewal pdor to expiration of
watershed based permits this Order
33 Submit reports of any incidence of non- R.1, B.6 of Within 5 days of As Needed
compliance with this Order that poses a Attachment C discovery of non
threat to human or environmental health, compliance
Order No, 2001-01 Page 52 of 52 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDP ERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permit~SDMuniPermit 3.doc
R, STANDARD PROVISIONS, REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND NOTIFICATIONS
1. Each Copermittee shall comply with Standard Provisions, Reporting Requirements, and
Notifications contained in Attachment C of this Order. This includes 24 hour/5day reporting
requirements for any instance of non-compliance with this Order as described in section B.6 of
Attachment C.
2. All plans, reports and subsequent amendments submitted in compliance with this Order shall be
implemented immediately (or as otherwise specified) and shall be an enforceable part of this
Order upon submission to the SDRWQCB. All submittals by Copermittees must be adequate to
implement the requirements of this Order.
I, John H. Robertus, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of an
Order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, on February
21, 2001.
John H. Robertus
Executive Officer
Order No. 200t-01 Page A-1 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdpe~ng9-01 ~Permit\attachmentsA-Ee*doc
ATTACHMENT A
BASIN PLAN PROHIBITIONS
California Water Code Section 13243 provides that a Regional Board, in a water quality control
plan, may specify certain conditions or areas where the discharge of waste, or certain types of
waste is not permitted. The following discharge prohibitions are applicable to any pemon, as
defined by Section 13050(c) of the California Water Code, who is a citizen, domiciliary, or politicat
agency or entity of California whose activities in California could affect the quality of watam of the
state within the boundaries of the San Diego Region.
1. The discharge of waste to waters of the state in a manner causing, or threatening to cause a
condition of pollution, contamination or nuisance as defined in California Water Code Section
13050, is prohibited.
2. The discharge of waste to land, except as authorized by waste discharge requirements or the
terms described in California Water Code Section 13264 is prohibited.
3. The discharge of pollutants or dredged or fill material to waters of the United States except as
authorized by an NPDES permit or a dredged or fill matedal permit (subject to the exemption
described in Califomia Water Code §13376) is prohibited.
4. Discharges of recycled water to lakes or reservoirs used for municipal water supply or to inland
surface water tributaries thereto are prohibited, unless this Regional Board issues a NPDES
permit authorizing such a discharge; the proposed discharge has been approved by the State
Department of Health Services and the operating agency of the impacted reservoir; and the
discharger has an approved fail-safe long-term disposal alternative.
5. The discharge of waste te inland surface watem, excapt in cases where the quality °f the
discharge complies with applicable receiving water quality objectives, is prohibited. Allowances
for dilution may be made at the discretion of the Regional Board. Consideration would include
streamflow data, the degree of treatment provided and safety measures to ensure reliability of
facility performance. As an example, discharge of secondary effluent would probably be
permitted if streamflow provided 100:1 dilution capability.
6. The discharge of waste in a manner causing flow, ponding, or surfacing on lands not owned or
under the control of the discharger is prohibited, unless the discharge is authorized by the
Regional Board.
7. The dumping, deposition, or discharge of waste directly into waters of the state, or adjacent to
such waters in any manner which may permit its being transported into the waters, is prohibited
unless authorized by the Regional Board.
8. Any discharge to a storm water conveyance system that is not composed entirely of "storm
water" is prohibited unless authorized by the Regional Board. [The federal regulations, 40 CFR
122.26 (b) (13), define storm water as storm water runoff, snow melt runoff, and surface runoff
and drainage. 40 CFR 122.26 (b) (2) defines an illicit discharge as any discharge to a storm
water conveyance system that is not composed entirely of storm water except discharges
pumuant to a NPDES permit and discharges resulting from fire fighting activities. [§122.26
amended at 56 FR 56553, November 5, 1991; 57 FR 11412, April 2, 1992].
9. The unauthorized discharge of treated or untreated sewage to waters of the state or to a storm
water conveyance system is prohibited.
Order No. 2001-01 Page A-2 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~S DPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~affachmentsA. Ee.doc
10. The discharge of industrial wastes to conventional septic tank/subsurface disposal systems,
except as authorized by the terms described in California Water Code Section 13264, is
prohibited.
11. The discharge of radioactive wastes amenable to alternative methods of disposal into the
watem of the state is prohibited.
12. The discharge of any radiological, chemical, or biological warfare agent into waters of the state
is prohibited.
13. The discharge of waste into a natural or excavated site below historic water levels is prohibited
unless the discharge is authorized by the Regional Board.
14. The discharge of sand, silt, clay, or other earthen materials from any activity, including land
grading and construction, in quantities which cause deleterious bottom deposits, turbidity er
discoloration in waters of the state or which unreasonably affect, or threaten to affect, beneficial
uses of such waters is prohibited.
15. The discharge of treated or untreated sewage from vessels to Mission Bay, Oceanside Harbor,
Dana Point Harbor, or other small boat harbors is prohibited.
16. The discharge of untreated sewage from vessels to San Diego Bay is prohibited.
17. The discharge of treated sewage from vessels to portions of San Diego Bay that are less than
30 feet deep at mean lower Iow water (MLLW) is prohibited.
18. The discharge of treated sewage from vessels, which do not have a properly functioning US
Coast Guard certified Type I or Type II madne sanitation device, to portions of San Diego Bay
that are greater than 30 feet deep at mean lower Iow water (MLLW) is prohibited.
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-1 February 21, 21)01
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Selpera~99-01 ~Permit~attachmentsA. Ee.doc
ATTACHMENT B
RECEIVING WATERS MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR
ORDER NO. 2001-0t
Countywide to Watershed Based Monitoring and Reporting Program
The primary objectives of the Receiving Watem Monitoring and Reporting Pmgrem include, but
are not limited to: 1) assessing compliance with Order No. 2001-01; 2) measuring the effectiveness
of Urban Runoff Management Plans; 3) assessing the chemical, physical, and biological impacts to
receiving waters resulting from urban runoff; and 4) assessing the overall health and evaluating
long-term trends in receiving water quality.
Like Order No. 2001-01 in general, the monitoring requirements below are intended to transition
dudng the five-year permit period from a countywide approach to a watemhed based approach.
During the flint two reporting pedodsI of this Order, this monitoring program shall be conducted
and reported on the same countywide basis as previously conducted under Order No. 90-42.
Specifically, all monitoring shall be conducted jointly by all Copermittees under a single contractor
with countywide coordination.
Beginning with the third monitoring period of this Order {unless otherwise directed by the
SDRWQCB Executive Officer) the design of the monitoring program will shift to a watershed
based approach. The monitoring program design, implementation, analysis, assessment, and
reporting shall be conducted on a watershed basis for each of the nine hydrologic units.
Monitoring results shall be assessed and reported on a watershed basis as a single report by the
Copermittees consisting of one common section and nine watershed sections. Monitoring,
analysis, assessment, and reporting shall satisfy the requirements of specified below for each
watershed as applicable.
Order No. 2001-01 may be modified by the SDRWQCB Executive Officer without further public
notice to direct the Copermittees to participate in comprehensive regional monitoring activities in
the Southern California Bight in lieu of specific Order 2001-01 receiving watem monitoring
requirements during the term of this Order.
I. Previous Monitoring and Future Recommendations Report
The Copermittees shall collaborate to develop a "Previous Monitoring and Future
Recommendations Report" that summarizes all previous wet weather monitoring results and
recommends future monitoring activities including the possibility of participating in coordinated
comprehensive regional monitoring in the Southern California Bight. The Principal Permittee
shall be responsible for the writing of the repot1 and submittal to the SDRWQCB within 180 days
of adoption of this Order. At a minimum, the report shall:
A. Summarize the cumulative findings of all previous wet weather monitoring;
B. Identify detectable trends in water quality data and receiving water quality, based on the
cumulative previous wet weather monitoring findings;
C. Interpret the cumulative previous wet weather monitoring findings;
D. Draw conclusions regarding the cumulative previous wet weather monitoring findings;
E. Provide recommendations for future monitoring activities; and
F. Include an executive summary, introduction, conclusion, and summary of
recommendations.
A reporting period is defined as October 1'~ to September 30t~ of any year. The first reporting pedod under this Order
is October 1, 2001 to September 30, 2002.
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-2 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl'~Sdpen~99-01~Permit~attachrnentsA. Ee.doc
ti. Receiving Waters Monitoring Program - - Year Round
Utilizing the findings of the "Previous Monitoring and Future Recommendations Report" discussed
above, the Copermittees shall collaborate to develop, submit, conduct, and report on a year round
countywide or watershed based Receiving Waters Monitoring Program2. The goals of both the
countywide and watershed based Receiving Waters Monitoring Program shall be clearly stated.
The Receiving Waters Monitoring Program goals shall focus on assessing compliance with this
Order, achieving water quality objectives, protecting beneficial uses, and assessing the overall
health and long-term water quality trends of receiving waters. For purposes of conducting the
countywide or watershed based Receiving Waters Monitoring Program, the Copermittees are
encouraged to collaborate with other agencies conducting similar monitoring, such as the Sou[hem
California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP), the California Department of Fish and
Game, or other municipalities in Sou[hem California. Implementation of the countywide or
watershed based Receiving Waters Monitoring Program shall begin within 180 days of adoption of
this Order. The countywide or watershed based Receiving Waters Monitoring Program shall
include, at a minimum, the following components;
A. Urban Stream Bioassessment Monitoring
B. Long-term Mass Loading Monitoring
C. Coastal Storm Drain Out[all Monitoring
D. Ambient Bay, Lagoon, and Coastal Receiving Water Monitoring
E. Toxic Hot Spots Monitoring in San Diego Bay
A. Urban Stream Bioassessment Monitorinq
1~ The Copermiftees shall collaborate to develop and implement an urban stream
bioassessment monitoring program. At a minimum, the program shall consist of
station identification, sampling, monitoring, and analysis of data for 20 bioassessment
stations in order to determine the biological and physical integrity of urban streams
within the County of San Diego. In addition to the urban stream bioassessment
stations, three reference bioassessment stations shall be identified, sampled,
monitored, and analyzed. The selection, sampling, monitoring, and analysis of
bioassessment stations shall meet the following requirements:
a. Each urban stream bioassessment station shall be selected using the following
criteria. Each urban stream bioassessment station shall:
(1) be located within the jurisdiction of a Copermiifee; or
(2) be located within one of the nine watersheds specified in Section J, Table 4
of this Order; and
(3) be representative of urban stream conditions within one of the nine
watersheds specified in Section J, Table 4 of this Order; and
(4) meet the physical criteria of the California Stream Bioassessment
Procedura3; and
(5) to the extent feasible, coincide with the location of an already existing
monitoring station used by the California Department of Fish and Game in
the conduct of the SDRWQCB's Ambient Bioassessment Program.
2 During the first two years, monitoring and repor[ing will be conducted and reported on a countywide basis. Beginning
in the third monitoring period of Order 2001 ~01, the monitoring and reporting program will shift to a watershed based
approach.
3 California Stream Bioassessmect Procedure (Protocol Brief for Biological and Physical/Habitat Assessment in
Wadeable Streams), Carifomia Department of Fish and Game - Aquatic Bioassessment Laboratory, May 1999.
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-3 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachrnentsA.Ee.doc
b. Each bioassessment station shall be monitored twice annually, in May and
October of each year, beginning in May 2001. A minimum of three replicate
samples shall be collected at each station during each sampling event.
c. Sampling, laboratory, quality assurance, and analysis procedures shall follow the
standardized procedures set forth in the California Department of Fish and
Game's California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP). Analysis
procedures shall include comparison between station mean values for various
biological metrics. Sampling, laboratory, quality assurance, and analytical
procedures shall follow the standardized "Non-Point Source Bioassessment
Sampling Procedures' for professional bioassessment set forth in the CSBP. In
the event that the CSBP "Point-Source Professional Bioassessment Procedure"
is performed in place of the "Non Point Source Bioassessment Sampling
Procedure," justification and documentation of the procedure shall be submitted
with the report. Results of the Urban Stream Bioassessment Monitoring shall be
reported annually as part of the overall Receiving Waters Monitoring and
Reporting Program for Order No. 2001-01. Reporting of the bioassessment data
shall follow the format of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
1999 Biological Assessment Annual Report4. The report shall include:
(1) All physical, chemical and biological data collected in the assessment;
(2) Photographic documentation of assessment and reference stations;
(3) Documentation of quality assurance and control procedures;
(4) Analysis that shall include calculation of the metrics used in both the CSBP
and the 1999 Annual Report.
(5) The report shall provide interpretation for comparisons of mean biological
and habitat assessment metric values between assessment and reference
stations.
(6) Utilize a regional index of biological integrity as part of the analysis.
(7) Electronic data formatted to California Department of Fish and Game Aquatic
Bioassessment Laboratory specifications for inclusion in the Statewide
Access Bioassessment database.
d. A professional environmental laboratory shall perform all sampling, laboratory,
quality assurance, and analytical procedures. While valuable, data collected by
volunteer monitoring organizations shall not be submitted in place of professional
assessments.
e. Reference stations shall be selected following the recommendations in the 1999
Annual Report, Hughes (1995)5 and Barbour et. al. (1999)6. Reference stations
shall be evaluated annually by the Copermittees for suitability and the results
included in the annual report. New reference stations will be selected as needed
by the Copermittees.
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board ,1999 Biological Assessment Annual Report. A Water Quality
Inventory Series: Biological and Physical/Habitat Assessment of California Water Bodies. California DepaAment of
Fish and Game Office of Spill Prevention and Response, Water Pollution Control Laboratory. December 1999.
Hughes, R. M. (1995) Defining Acceptable Biologicat Status by Comparing with Reference Conditions in Biological
Assessment and Cfite~a: Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making, Wayne S. Davis and Thomas
P. Simon eds. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, LA.
Badaour, M.T., J Gerritsen, B.D. Synder, and J.B. Stribling {1999) Rapid Bioassessmeat Protocols For Use in
Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macminvertebrates, and Fish. Second Edition. EPA 841-B-99-
002
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-4 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA.Ee,doc
2. The Copermittees shall design and implement a program to conduct standardized
toxicity testing at urban stream bioassessment stations where the bioassessment
data indicates significant impairment. When findings indicate the presence of toxicity,
a Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) shall be conducted to determine the cause(s)
of the toxicity.
B. Lonq-term Mass Lcadinq Monitednq
For purposes of evaluating long-term trends, the Copermittees shall continue to monitor the
five existing long-term mass loading stations as specified in Monitoring and Reporting
Program No. 95-76 and amended by Technical Change Order Nos. 1-4. When findings
indicate the presence of toxicity, a Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) shall be conducted
to determine the cause(s) of the toxicity.
C. Coastal Storm Drain Ouffall Monitoring
The Copermittees shall collaborate to develop and implement a monitoring program for
discharges of urban runoff from coastal storm drain ouffalls. The program shall meet the
following requirements:
1. The program shah include rationale and criteria for selection of storm drain ouffalls to
be monitored.
2. The program shall include collection of samples for analysis of total coliform, fecal
coliform, and enterococci, in addition to any other indicators or pathogens identified
by the Copermittees.
3. Samples shall be collected at both the storm drain ouffall and in the surf zone (at
ankle to knee water depths) directly in front of the ouffall.
4. Samples shall be collected during both dry and wet weather periods.
5. Exceedances of public health standards for bacteda must be reported to the County
Department of Public Health as soon as possible by the Copermittees.
D. Ambient Bay, Lagoon, and Coastal Receiving Water Monitorinq
The Copermittees shall collaborate to develop and implement a program to assess the overall
health of the receiving water and monitor the impact of urban runoff on ambient receiving water
quality. This monitoring shall including San Diego Bay, Mission Bay, Oceanside Harbor; the
Pacific Ocean coastline, coastal lagoons and estuaries, and all Clean Water Act section 303(d)
water bodies or other environmentally sensitive areas as defined in F.l.b(2)(a)vii of this Order.
E. Toxic Hot Spots Monitoring in San Diego Bay
The Copermittees shall collaborate to develop and implement a program to assess the relative
contribution of urban runoff on Toxic Hot Spots in San Diego Bay.
Ill. Submittal of Receiving Waters Monitoring Program Document
The Principal Permittae shall submit to the SDRWQCB the countywide or watershed based
Receiving Waters Monitoring Program within 180 days of adoption of this Order. The regional or
watershed based Receiving Waters Monitoring Program shall describe how the Copermittees will
meet the requirements of the components outlined in Section II of this Attachment.
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-5 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA. Ee.doc
iV. Submittal of Receiving Waters Monitoring Annual Reports
The Principal Permittee shall submit the Receiving Waters Monitoring Annual Report to the
SDRWQCB on January 31 of each year, beginning on January 31, 2003.
V, Monitoring Annual Report Requirements
A. Monitoring reports shall provide the data/results, methods of evaluating the data,
graphical summaries of the data, and an explanation/discussion of the data for each
monitoring program component listed above.
B. Monitoring reports shall include an analysis of the findings of each monitoring pragram
component listed above. The analysis shall identify and prioritize water quality problems.
Based on the identification and prioritization of water quality problems, the analysis shall
identify potential soumes of the problems, and recommend future monitoring and BMP
implementation measures for identifying and addressing the sources. The analysis shall
also include an evaluation of the effectiveness of existing control measures.
C. Monitoring reports shall include identification and analysis of any long-term trends in
storm water or receiving water quality.
D. Monitoring reports shall provide an estimation of total pollutant loads (wet weather loads
plus dry weather loads) due to urban runoff for each of the watersheds specified in
Section J, Table 4 of Order No. 2001-01.
E. Monitoring reports shall for each monitoring program component listed above, include an
assessment of compliance with applicable water quality standards.
F. All monitoring reports shall use a standard report format and shall include the following:
1. A stand alone comprehensive executive summary addressing all sections of the
monitoring repod;
2. Comprehensive interpretations and conclusions; and
3. Recommendations for future actions.
G. All monitoring reports submitted to the Principal Permittee or the SDRWQCB shall
contain the certified perjury statement described in Standard Reporting Requirements in
Attachment C section B.10.d.
H. Alt monitoring repods shall be reviewed pdor to submittal to the SDRWQCB by a
committee (consisting of no less than three members). All review comments shall also
be submitted to the SDRWQCB.
I. All monitoring reports shall be submitted in both electronic and paper formats.
J. All monitoring repods shall describe monitoring station locations by latitude and longitude
coordinates, frequency of sampling, quality assurance/quality control procedures and
sampling and analysis protocols.
K. Monitoring programs and reports shall comply with Section VI of Attachment B, as well as
Attachment C.
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-6 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permlt~attachmentsA.Ee.doc
VI. Standard Monitoring Requirements
A. All monitoring activities shall meet the following requirements:
1. Monitoring and Records [40 CFR 122.41(j)(1)]
Samples and measurements taken for the purpose of monitoring shall be representative of
the monitored activity.
2. Monitoring and Records [40 CFR 122.41(j)(2)] [California Water Code § 13383(a)]
The discharger shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and
maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring
instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this Order, and records of all data used to
complete the application for this permit, for a pedod of at least three years from the date of
the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be extended by request
of the SDRWQCB at any time.
3. Monitoring and Records [40 CFR 122.21(j)(3)]
Records of monitoring information shall include the information requested in
Attachment B and the following:
a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) analyses were performed;
d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such analyses.
4. Monitoring and Records [40 CFR 122.21(j)(4)]
Monitoring results must be conducted according to test procedures approved under 40
CFR part 136 unless other test procedures have been specified in this Order.
5. Monitoring and Records [40 CFR 122.21(j)(5)]
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsities, tampers with, or knowingly
rendem inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this
Order shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $'10,000, or by
imprisonment for not more than two years, or both. If a conviction of a person is for a
violation committed after a flint conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment
is a fine of not more than $20,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment of not more than
four years, or both.
6. Monitoring and Records [40 CFR 122.41(k)(2)]
The Clean Water Act provides that any pemon who knowingly makes any false statement,
representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or required to be
maintained under this permit, including monitedng reports or reports of compliance or non-
compliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than six months per violation, or by both.
7. Monitoring Reports [40 CFR 122.41(I)(4)
Monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals specified elsewhere in this Order.
Order No. 2001-01 Page B-7 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SOPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee,doc
8. Monitoring Reports [40 CFR 122.41(I)(4)(ii)]
If the discharger monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by the permit using
test procedures approved under 40 CFR part 136, unless otherwise specified in the Order,
the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data
submitted in the reports requested by the SDRWQCB.
9. Monitoring Reports [40 CFR 122.41(I)(4)(iii)]
Calculations for all limitations which require averaging of measurements shall utilize an
arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified by the SDRWQCB in the Order.
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-1 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-0 l~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
ATTACHMENT C
STANDARD PROVISIONS
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND
NOTIFICATIONS
STANDARD PROVISIONS
1. DutyTo Comply [40 CFR 122.41(a)(1)]
The discharger shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under
Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants and with standards for sewage
sludge use or disposal established under Section 405(d) of the Clean Water Act within
the time provided in the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions or
standards for sewage sludge use or disposal, even if this Order has not yet been
modified to incorporate the requirement.
2. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity Not a Defense [40 CFR 122.41(c)]
It shall not be a defense for the discharger in an enforcement action that it would have
been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance
with the conditions of this Order. Upon reduction, loss, or failure of a treatment facility,
the discharger shall, to the extent necessary to maintain compliance with this Order,
control production or all discharges, or both, until the facility is restored or an alternative
method of treatment is provided. This provision applies, for example, when the primary
source of power of a treatment facility fails, is reduced, or is lost.
3. Duty to Mitiqate [40 CFR 122.41(d)]
The discharger shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or
prevent any discharge or sludge use or disposal in violation of this Order which has a
reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment.
4. Proper Operation and Maintenance [40 CFR 122.41(e)]
The discharger shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems
of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the
discharger to achieve compliance with the conditions of this Order. Proper operation and
maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality
assurance procedures. This prevision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary
facilities or similar systems which are installed by the discharger only when the operation
is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of this Order.
5. Permit Actions [40 CFR 122.41(f)] [California Water Code § 13381]
This Order may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause including, but
not limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this Order;
b. Obtaining this Order by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully all relevant facts;
c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or
elimination of the authorized discharge; or
d. A determination that the permitted activity endangers human health or the
environment and can only be regulated to acceptable levels by permit modification or
termination.
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-2 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl~Sdpen~99-01~Permit~attachments.a~Ee.doc
The tiling of a request by the discharger for modification, revocation and reissuance, or
termination of this Order, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated
noncompliance does not stay any condition of this Order.
6. PrepertvRiohts [40 CFR122.41(g)] [California Watar Code §13263(g)]
This Order does not convey any property rights of any sort or any exclusive privilege.
The requirements prescribed herein do not authorize the commission of any act causing
injury to persons or property, nor protect the discharger from liabilities under federal,
state, or local laws, nor create a vested right for the discharger to continue the waste
discharge.
7. Inspection and Entry [40 CFR 122.41(i)] [California Water Code § 13267(c)]
The discharger shall allow the SDRWQCB, or an authorized SDRWQCB representative,
or an authorized representative of the USEPA (including an authorized contractor acting
as a representative of the SDRWQCB or USEPA), upon presentation of credentials and
other documents as may be required by law, to:
a. Enter upon the discharger's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located
or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this Order;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under
the conditions of this Order;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and
control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this Order;
and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring compliance with
this Order or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act or California Water
Code, any substances or parameters at any location.
8. Bypass of Treatment Facilities [40 CFR 122.41(m)]
a. Definitions
(1) "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a
treatment facility.
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to property,
damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or
substantial and permanent loss of nataral resources which can reasonably be
expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does
not mean economic loss caused by delays in production.
b. Bypass not Exceedincl Limitations
The discharger may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent
limitations of this Order or the concentrations of pollutants set forth in Ocean Plan
Table A or Table B to be exceeded, but only if it also is for essential maintenance to
assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of
paragraphs c. and d. of this provision.
c. Notice
(1) Anticipated bypass. If the discharger knows in advance of the need for a bypass,
it shall submit prior notice, if possible, at least ten days before the date of the
bypass.
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-3 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99*01\Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
(2) Unanticipated bypass. The discharger shall submit notice of an unanticipated
bypass as required in section B.7 of Attachment C.
d. Prohibition of Bypass
Bypass is prohibited, and the SDRWQCB may take enforcement action against the
discharger for bypass, unless:
(1) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe
property damage;
(2) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary
treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal
pedods of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if adequate back-
up equipment should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable
engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods
of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance; and
(3) The discharger submitted notices as required under paragraph c. of this section.
The SDRWQCB may approve an anticipated bypass, after considering its
adverse effects, if the SDRWQCB determines that it will meet the three
conditions listed above in paragraph d.(1) of this section.
9. Upset [40 CFR 122.41(n)]
a. Definition "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and
temporary noncompliance with technology based effluent limitations because of
factors beyond the reasonable control of the discharger. An upset does not include
noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed
treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or
careless or improper operation.
b. Effect of an Upset An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought
for noncompliance with such technology based permit effluent limitations if the
requirements of paragraph c. of this section are met. No determination made dudng
administrative review of claims that noncompliance was caused by upset, and before
an action for noncompliance, is final administrative action subject to judicial review.
c. Conditions Necessary for a Demonstration of Upset A discharger who wishes to
establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed,
contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that:
(1) An upset occurred and that the discharger can identify the cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The permitted facility was at the time being propedy operated;
(3) The discharger submitted notice of the upset as required in section B.7 of
Attachment C of this Order; and
(4) The discharger complied with any remedial measures required under Provision
A.5. of Attachment C of this Order.
d. Burden of Proof In any enforcement proceeding the discharger seeking to establish
the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof.
10. Other Effluent Limitations and Standards [40 CFR 122.44(b)(1)]
If any toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance
specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is promulgated under Section 307(a) of
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-4 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdpenm99-01\Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
the Clean Water Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and that
standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitafion on the pollutant in this Order,
the SDRWQCB may institute proceedings under these regulations to modify or revoke
and reissue the Order to conform to the toxic effluent standard or prohibition.
11. The discharger shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse impact
on the environment resulting from noncompliance with this Order, including such
accelerated or additional monitoring as may be necessary to determine the nature and
impact of the noncomplying discharge.
12. The provisions of this Order are severable, and if any provision of this Order, or the
application of any provision of this Order to any circumstances, is held invalid, the
application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this Order,
shall not be affected thereby.
13. The discharger shall comply with any interim effluent limitations as established by
addendum, enforcement acfion, or revised waste discharge requirements which have
been, or may be, adopted by this SDRWQCB.
B. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Duty to Reaoelv [40 CFR 122.41(b)] This Order expires on February 2t, 2006. If the
discharger wishes to continue any activity regulated by this Order after the expiration
date of this Order, the discharger must apply for and obtain new waste discharge
requirements. The discharger must file a Report of Waste Discharge in accordance with
Title 23, California Code of Regulations not later than 180 days in advance of the
expiration date of this Order as application for issuance of new waste discharge
requirements.
2. Duty to Provide Information [40 CFR 122.41(h)] The discharger shall furnish to the
SDRWQCB, SWRCB, or USEPA, within a reasonable time, any information which the
SDRWQCB, SWRCB, or USEP^ may request to determine whether cause exists for
modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this Order, or to determine compliance
with this Order. The discharger shall also furnish to the SDRWQCB, SWRC8, or
USEPA, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this Order.
3. Planned ChanRes [40 CFR 122.41(I)(1)] The discharger shall give notice to the
SDRWQCB as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the
permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
a. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one of the criteria for
determining whether a facility is a new soume in 40 CFR Part 122.29(b);
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or increase the
quantity of pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants which are
subject neither to effluent limitations in this Order, nor to notification requirements
under 40 CFR 122.42(a)(I); or
c. The alteration or addition results in a significant change in the dischargers sludge
use or disposal practices, and such alteration, addition, or change may justify the
application of conditions in this Order that are different from or absent in the existing
Order, including notification of additional use or disposal sites not reported during the
permit application process or not reported pursuant to an approved land application
plan.
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-5 February 21,200t
S:~STORM\SDPERMIT~Sdperm99401~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
4. Anticipated Non-Compliance [40 CFR 122.41(I)(2)] The discharger shall give advance
notice to the SDRWQCB of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which
may result in noncompliance with the requirements of this Order.
5. Transfers [40 CFR 122.41 (I)(3)] This Order is not transferable to any person except after
notice to the SDRWQCB. The SDRWQCB may require modification or revocation and
reissuance of this Order to change the name of the discharger and incorporate such
other requirements as may be necessary under the Clean Water Act or the California
Water Code in accordance with the following:
a. Transfers by Modification [40 CFR 122.61(a)]
Except as provided in paragraph b. of this reporting requirement, this Order may be
transferred by the discharger to a new owner or operator only if this Order has been
modified or revoked and reissued, or a minor modification made to identify the new
discharger and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary under the
Clean Water Act or California Water Code.
b. AutomaficTransfers [40 CFR 122.61(b)]
As an alternative to transfers under paragraph a. of this reporting requirement, any
NPDES permit may be automatically transferred to a new discharger if:
(1) The current discharger notifies the SDRWQCB at least 30 days in advance of the
proposed transfer date in paragraph b.(2) of this reporting requirement;
(2) The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and new
dischargers containing a specific date for transfer of permit responsibility,
coverage, and liabitity between them; and
(3) The SDRWQCB does not notify the existing discharger and the proposed new
discharger of his or her intent to modify or revoke and reissue the Order. A
modification under this subparagraph may also be a minor modification under 40
CFR Part 122.63. If this notice is not received, the transfer is effective on the
date specified in the agreement mentioned in paragraph b.(2) of this reporting
requirement.
6. Twenty-four Hour Reoortin(~ [40 CFR 122.41(I)(6)]
Each Copermittee shall develop and submit criteria by which to evaluate events of non-
compliance to determine whether they pose a threat to human or environmental health.
These cdteda shall be submitted in the Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management
Program Document and Annual Reports for SDRWQCB review. Using these criteria the
discharger shall report any noncompliance with this Order or any noncompliance that
may endanger human health or environmental health. Any informafion shall be provided
orally to the SDRWQCB within 24 hours from the time the discharger becomes aware of
the cimumstances. A written description of any noncompliance shall be submitted to the
SDRWQCB within five days of such an occurrence and contain a descdpfion of the
noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and
times, and if the noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is
expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent
recurrence of the noncompliance. The following shall be included as information which
must be reported within 24 hours under this reporting requirement:
a. Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in this Order;
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-6 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMl'~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachm entsA-Ee.doc
b. Any discharge of treated or untreated wastewater, including reclaimed or recycled
wastewater, resulting from pipeline breaks, obstruction, surcharge or any other
circumstance;
c. Any discharge or spill of raw or potable water not authorized by this order or resulting
from pipeline breaks, obstruction, surcharge or any other circumstance;
d. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in this Order;
e. Any spill or discharge of non-storm water not authorized by this Order. Non-storm
water discharges not prohibited by the Copermittees pursuant to Section B of this
Order need not be reported under this section; and
f. Any violation of this Order.
7. Other Non-Compliaece [40 CFR 122.41(I)(7)]
The discharger shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported elsewhere under
other sections of this Order at the time annual reports are submitted. The reports shall
contain the information listed in part B.6 of Attachment C of this Order.
8. Other Information [40 CFR 122.41(I)(8)]
Where the discharger becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a
Report of Waste Discharge, or submitted incorrect information in a Report of Waste
Discharge, or in any report to the SDRWQCB, it shall promptly submit such facts or
information.
9. SiQnatorv Requirements [40 CFR 122.41(k)(1) and 40 CFR 122.22]
All applications, reports, or information submitted to the SDRWQCB shall be signed and
certified.
a. All Reports of Waste Discharge shall be signed as follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the purpose of this
section, a responsible corporate officer means: (a) a president, secretary,
treasurer, or vice-president of the corporation in charge of a principal business
function, or any other person who performs similar policy- or decision-making
functions for the corporation; or (b) the manager of one or more manufacturing,
production, or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or having
gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second-quarter
1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to
the manager in accordance with corporate procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor,
respectively; or
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal or other public agency: by either a principal
executive officer or ranking elected official. For purposes of this section, a
principal executive officer of a Federal agency includes: (a) the chief executive
officer of the agency; or (b) a senior executive officer having responsibility for the
overall operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency (e.g., Regional
Administrators of USEPA).
b. All reports required by this Order, and other information requested by the SDRWQCB
shall be signed by a person described in paragraph a. of this reporting requirement,
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-7 February 21,200t
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdpermgg-0t~PermiflattachmentsA-Ee.doc
or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized
representative only if:
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described in paragraph a. of this
reporting requirement;
(2) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility
for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity, such as the position of
plant manager, operator of a well or a well field, superintendent, position of
equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility
for environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative
may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named
position.); and,
(3) The written authodzation is submitted to the SDRWQCB.
c. If an authorization under paragraph b. of this reporting requirement is no longer
accurate because a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall
operation of the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph
b. of this reporting requirement must be submitted to the SDRWQCB prior to or
together with any reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized
representative.
d. Any person signing a document under paragraph a. or b. of this reporting
requirement shall make the following certification:
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared
under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure
that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted.
Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted
is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware
that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
10. Except for data determined to be confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, all reports prepared
in accordance with the terms of this Order shall be available for public inspection at the
offices of the SDRWQCB. As required by the Clean Water Act, Reports of Waste
Discharge, this Order, and effluent data shall not be considered confidential.
11. The discharger shall submit reports and provide notifications as required by this Order to
the following:
Phil Hammer
STORM WATER UNIT
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SAN DIEGO REGION
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD SUITE A
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1324
Telephone: (858) 467-2952
Fax: (858) 571-6972
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-8 February 21, 2001
S:\STORM[SDPERMmSdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
Eugene Bromley
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IX
PERMITS ISSUANCE SECTION (W-5-1)
75 HAWTHORNE STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105
12. Unless otherwise directed, the discharger shall submit throe copies of each report
required under this Order to the SDRWQCB and one copy to USEPA.
C. NOTIFICATIONS
1. California Water Code Section 13263(q)
No discharge of waste into the waters of the state, whether or not such discharge is
made pursuant to waste discharge requirements, shall create a vested right to continue
such discharge. All discharges of waste into waters of the state are privileges, not rights.
2. The SDRWQCB has, in prior years, issued a limited number of individual NPDES permits
for non-storm water discharges to municipal storm water conveyance systems. The
SDRWQCB or SWRCB may in the future, upon prior notice to the Copermittee(s), issue
an NPDES permit for any non-storm water discharge (or class of non-storm water
discharges) to a municipal storm water conveyance system. Copermittees may prohibit
any non-storm water discharge (or class of non-storm water discharges) to a municipal
storm water conveyance system that is authorized under such separate NPDES permits.
3. Enforcement Provisions [40 CFR 122.41(a)(2)] [California Water Code §§ 13385 and
13387]
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates section 301,302, 306, 307,
308, 318 or 405 of the Act, or any condition or limitation of this Order, is subject to a civil
penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day for each violation. The Clean Water Act provides
that any person who negligently violates sections 301,302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of
the Act, or any condition or limitation of this Order, is subject to criminal penalties of
$2,500 to $25,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment of not more than one year, or
both. In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a negligent violation, a person
shall be subject to criminal penalties of not more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment of not more than two years, or both. Any person who knowingly violates
such sections, or such conditions or limitations is subject to criminal penalties of $5,000
to $50,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment for not more than three years, or both.
In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a knowing violation, a person shall
be subject to criminal penalties of not more than $100,000 per day of violation, or
imprisonment of not more than six years, or both. Any person who knowingly violates
section 301,302, 303, 306, 307, 308, 318 or 405 of the Act, or any condition or limitation
of this Order, and who knows at that time that he or she thereby places another person in
imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a
fine of not rnore than $250,000 or imprisonment of not more than 15 years, or both. In
the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a knowing endangerment violation, a
person shall be subject to a fine of not more than $500,000 or by imprisonment of not
more than 30 years, or both. An organization, as defined in section 309(c)(3)(B)(iii) of the
Clean Water Act, shall, upon conviction of violating the imminent danger provision, be
subject to a fine of not more than $1,000,000 and can be fined up to $2,000,000 for
second or subsequent convictions.
4. Except as provided in Standard Provisions A. 10. and A.11. in Attachment C of this Order,
nothing in this Order shall be construed to relieve the discharger from civil or criminal
penalties for noncompliance.
Order No. 2001-01 Page C-9 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~$DPERMI~$dperm99-01 ~Pennit~attachmentsA. Ee.doc
5. Nothing in this Order shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or
relieve the discharger from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the
discharger is or may be subject to under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
6. Nothing in this Order shall be construed to preclude institution of any legal action or
relieve the discharger from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established
pursuant to any applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section
510 of the Clean Water Act.
7. This Order shall become effective on February 21, 2001, provided the USEPA Regional
Administrator has no objection. If the Regional Administrator objects to its issuance, this
Order shall not become effective until such objection is withdrawn.
8. This Order supersedes Order No. 90-42 upon the effective date of this Order.
Order No. 2001-01 Page D-1 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~S DPERMITtSdperm99-01tPermit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
ATTACHMENT D
GLOSSARY
Beneficial Uses - The uses of water necessary for the survival or well being of man, plants, and
wildlife. These uses of water serve to promote the tangible and intangible economic, social, and
environmental goals "Beneficial Uses" of the waters of the State that may be protected against
include, but are not limited to, domestic, municipal, agricultural and industrial supply; power
generation; recreation; aesthetic enjoyment; navigation; and preservation and enhancement of
fish, wildlife, and other aquatic resources or preserves. Existing beneficial uses are uses that
were attained in the surface or ground water on or after November 28, 1975; and potential
beneficial uses are uses that would probably develop in future years through the implementation
of vadous control measures. "Beneficial Uses" are equivalent to "Designated Uses" under federal
law. [California Water Code Section 13050(f)].
Best Available Technology (BAT) - BAT is the acronym for best available technology
economically achievable. BAT is the technology-based standard established by congress in
CWA section 402(p)(3)(A) for industrial dischargers of storm water. Technology-based standards
establish the level of pollutant reductions that dischargers must achieve, typically by treatment or
by a combination of treatment and best management practices, or BMPs. For example,
secondary treatment (or the removal of 85% suspended solids and BOD) is the BAT for
suspended solid and BOD removal from a sewage treatment plant. BAT generally emphasizes
treatment methods first and pollution prevention and soume control BMPs secondarily.
The best economically achievable technology that wilt result in reasonable further progress
toward the national goal of eliminating the discharge of all pollutants, as determined in
accordance with regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency Administrator.
Factors relating to the assessment of best available technology shall take into account the age of
equipment and facilities involved, the process employed, the engineering aspects of the
application of various types of control techniques, process changes, the cost of achieving such
effluent reduction, non-water quality environmental impact (including energy requirements), and
such other factors as the permitting authority deems appropriate.
Best Conventional Technology (BCT) - BCT is an acronym for Best Conventional Technology.
BCT is the treatment techniques, processes and procedure innovations, operating methods that
eliminate amounts of chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of pollutant constituents to
the degree of reduction attainable through the application of the best management practices to
the maximum extent practicable.
Best Management Practices - Best Management Practices (BMPs) are defined in 40 CFR 122.2
as schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other
management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the United States. BMPs
also include treatment requirements, operating procedures and practices to control plant site
runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material storage. In the
case of municipal storm water permits, BMPs are typically used in place of numeric effluent limits.
Bioaccumulate - The progressive accumulation of contaminants in the tissues of organisms
through any route including respiration, ingestion, or direct contact with contaminated water,
sediment, pore water, or dredged material to a higher concentration than in the surrounding
environment. Bioaccumulation occurs with exposure and is independent of the tropic level.
Bioassessment - The use of biological community information to evaluate the biological integrity
of a water body and its watershed. With respect to aquatic ecosystems, bioassessment is the
Order No. 2001-01 Page D-2 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdpermg9-01~Permit~attachmentsA.Ee.doc
collection and analysis of samples of the benthic macroinvertebrate community together with
physical/habitat quality measurements associated with the sampling site and the watershed to
evaluate the biological condition (i.e. biological integrity) of a water body.
Bioconcentrafion - A process by which there is a net accumulation of a chemical directly from
water into aquatic organisms resulting from simultaneous uptake and elimination by gill or
epithelial tissue. Bioconcentration differs from bioaccumulation in that bioaccumulation refers to
the progressive concentration of contaminants in the tissues of organisms through multiple
pathways.
Biocriteria - Under the Clean Water Act, numerical values or narrative expressions that define a
desired biological condition for a water body that are legally enforceable. The U.S. EPA defines
biocriteria as: 'numerical values or narrative expressions that describe the reference biological
integrity of aquatic communities inhabiting waters of a given designated aquatic life
use...(that)...describe the characteristics of water body segments least impaired by human
activities."
Biological Integrity - Defined in Karr J.R. and D.R. Dudley. 1981. Ecological perspective on
water quality goals. Envimnment~ 5:55-68 as: "A balanced, integrated, adaptive
community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional organization
comparable to that of natural habitat of the region." Also referred to as ecosystem health.
Biomagnicafion - The transfer and progressive increase in tissue concentrations of a
contaminant along the food chain. Because some pollutants can be transferred to higher trophic
levels, carnivores at the top of the food chain, such as predatory fish, birds, and mammals
(including humans), obtain most of their pollution burden from aquatic ecosystems by ingestion.
Thus, although such pollutants may only be present in receiving waters in iow concentrations,
they can have a significant impact to the integrity of the ecosystem through biomagnification.
Clean Water Act Section 402(p) - [33 USC 1342(p)] is the federal statute requiring municipal
and industrial dischargers to obtain NPDES permits for their discharges of storm water.
Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Water Body - is an impaired water body in which water quarity
does not meet applicable water quality standards and/or is not expected to meet water quality
standards, even after the application of technology based pollution contreis required by the CWA.
The discharge of urban runoff to these water bodies by the Copermittees is significant because
these discharges can cause or contribute to violations of applicable water quality standards.
Contamination - As defined in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, contamination is
"an impairment of the quality of waters of the state by waste to a degree which creates a hazard
to the public health through poisoning or through the spread of disease. 'Contamination' includes
any equivalent effect resulting from the disposal of waste whether or not waters of the state are
affected."
Designated Waste - Designated waste is defined as a "nonhazardous waste which consists of
pollutants which, under ambient environmental conditions at the waste management unit, could
be released at concentrations in excess of applicable water quality objectives, or which could
cause degradation of waters of the state." [CCR Title 27, Chapter 3, Subchapter 2, Article 2,
Section 20210; WC Section 13173]
Effluent Limitations - Limitations on the volume of each waste discharge, and the quantity and
concentrations of pollutants in the discharge. The limitations are designed to ensure that the
discharge does not cause water quality objectives to be exceeded in the receiving water and
does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
Order No. 2001-01 Page D-3 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~S DPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~PermiflattachrnentsA.Ee.doc
Effluent limitations are limitations of the quantity and concentrations of pollutants in a discharge.
The limitations are designed to ensure that the discharge does not cause water quality objectives
to be exceeded in the receiving water and does not adversely affect beneficial uses. In other
words, an effluent limit is the maximum concentration of a pollutant that a discharge can contain.
To meet effluent limitations, the effluent typically must undergo one or more forms of treatment to
remove pollutants in order to lower the pollutant concentration below the limit. Effluent limits are
typically numeric (e.g., '10 mg/l), but can also be narrative (e.g., no toxics in toxic amounts).
Erosion - When land is diminished or warn away due to wind, water, or glacial ice. Often the
eroded debris (silt or sediment) becomes a pollutant via storm water runoff. Erosion occurs
naturally but can be intensified by land clearing activities such as farming, development, road
building, and timber harvesting.
Grading - The cutting and/or filling of the land surface to a desired slope or elevation.
Hazardous Waste - Hazardous waste is defined as "any waste which, under Section 600 of Title
22 of this code, is required to be managed according to Chapter 30 of Division 4.5 of Title 22 of
this code." [CCR Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 11, Adicle 1]
Illicit Discharge - Any discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer that is not composed
entirely of storm water except discharges pursuant to a NPDES permit (other than the NPDES
permit for discharges form the municipal separate storm sewer) and discharges resulting fram fire
fighting activities.
Inert Waste - Inert waste is defined as one that "does not contain hazardous waste or soluble
pollutants at concentrations in excess of applicable water quality objectives, and does not contain
significant quantities of decomposable waste." [CCR Title 27, Chapter 3, Subchapter 2, Article 2,
Section 20230]
MEP - MEP is the acronym for Maximum Extent Practicable. MEP is the technology-based
standard established by Congress in CWA section 402(p)(3)(B)(iii) that municipal dischargers of
storm water (MS4s) must meet. Technology-based standards establish the level of pollutant
reductions that dischargers must achieve, typically by treatment or by a combination of treatment
and best management practices (BMPs). MEP generally emphasizes pollution prevention and
source control BMPs primarily (as the first line of defense) in combination with treatment methods
serving as a backup (additional line of defense). MEP considers economics and is generally, but
not necessarily, less stringent than BAT. A definition for MEP is not provided either in the statute
or in the regulations. Instead the definition of MEP is dynamic and will be defined by the following
process over time: municipalities propose their definition of MEP by way of their Urban Runoff
Management Plan. Their total collective and individual activities conducted pursuant to the Urban
Runoff Management Plan becomes their proposal for MEP as it applies both to their overall effort,
as well as to specific activities (e.g., MEP for street sweeping, or MEP for municipal separate
storm sewer system maintenance). In the absence of a proposal acceptable to the SDRWQCB,
the SDRWQCB defines MEP.
In a memo dated February 11, 1993, entitled "Definition of Maximum Extent Practicable,"
Elizabeth Jennings, Senior Staff Counsel, SWRCB addressed the achievement of the MEP
standard as follows:
"To achieve the MEP standard, municipalities must employ whatever Best Management
Practices (BMPs) are technically feasible (i.e., are likely to be effective) and ara not cost
prohibitive. The major emphasis is on technical feasibility. Reducing pollutants to the
MEP means choosing effective BMPs, and rejecting applicable BMPs only where other
effective BMPs will serve the same purpose, or the BMPs would not be technically
Order No. 2001-01 Page D-4 February 21, 2001
S:[STORM~SDPERMIT~S[/penn99-01~PermiflattachmentsA-Ee.doc
feasible, or the cost would be prohibitive. In selecting BMPs to achieve the MEP
standard, the following factors may be useful to consider:
a. Effectiveness: Will the BMPs address a pollutant (or pollutant source) of
b. Regulatory Compliance: Is the BMP in compliance with storm water regulations
as well as other environmental regulations?
c. Public Acceptance: Does the BMP have public support?
d. Cost: Will the cost of implementing the BMP have a reasonable relationship to
the pollution control benefits to be achieved?
e. Technical Feasibility: Is the BMP technically feasible considering soils,
geography, water resources, etc?
The final determination regarding whether a municipality has reduced pollutants to the
maximum extent practicable can only be made by the Regional or State Water Boards,
and not by the municipal discharger. If a municipality reviews a lengthy menu of BMPs
and chooses to select only a few of the least expensive, it is likely that MEP has not been
met. On the other hand, ifa municipal discharger employs al/applicable BMPs except
those where it can show that they are not technically feasible in the locality, or whose
cost would exceed any benefit derived, it would have met the standard. Where a choice
may be made between two BMPs that should provide generally comparable
effectiveness, the discharger may choose the least expensive alternative and exclude the
more expensive BMP. However, it would not be acceptable either to reject all BMPs that
would address a pollutant source, or to pick a BMP base solely on cost, which would be
clearly less effective. In selecting BMPs the municipality must make a serious attempt to
comply and practica/solutions may not be lightly rejected. In any case, the burden would
be on the municipal discharger to show compliance with its permit. After selecting a
menu of BMPs, it is the responsibility of the discharger to ensure that all BMPs are
implemented.,
Municipal Storm Water Conveyance System - (See Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
or MS4).
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) - MS4 is an acronym for Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System. A Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System is a conveyance or system of
conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs,
gutters, ditches, natural drainage features or channels, modified natural channels, man-made
channels, or storm drains): (i) Owned or operated by a State, city town, borough, county, parish,
district, association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to State law) having jurisdiction
over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, storm water, or other wastes, including special
districts under State law such as a sewer district, flood control district or drainage district, or
similar entity, or an Indian tdbe or an authorized Indian tdbal organization, or designated and
approved management agency under section 208 of the CWA that discharges to waters of the
United States; (ii) Designated or used for collecting of conveying storm water; (iii) Which is not a
combined sewer; (iv) Which is not part of the Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTVV) as
defined at 40 CFR 122.2.
Historic and current development make use of natural drainage patterns and features as
conveyances for urban runoff. Urban streams used in this manner are part of the municipalities
MS4 regardless of whether they are natural, man-made, or partially modified features. In these
cases, the urban stream is both an MS4 and a receiving water.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) - These permits pertain to the
discharge of waste to surface waters only. All State and Federal NPDES permits are also WDRs.
Order No. 200t-01 Page D-5 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
Non-hazardous Solid Waste - Non-hazardous solid waste means all putrescible and
nonputrescible solid, semi-sold, and liquid wastes, including garbage, trash, refuse, paper,
rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and
parts thereof, discarded home and industrial appliances, manure, vegetable or animal solid and
semi-sold wastes and other discarded solid or semi-solid waste; provided that such wastes do not
contain wastes which must be managed as hazardous wastes, or wastes which contain soluble
pollutants in concentration which exceed applicable water quality objectives or could cause
degradation of wasters of the state." [CCR Title 27, Chapter 3, Subchapter 2, Article 2, Section
20220]
Non Point Source (NPS) - Non point source refers to diffuse, widespread sources of pollution.
These sources may be large or small, but are generally numerous throughout a watamhed. Non
Point Sources include but are not limited to urban, agricultural, or industrial areas, roads,
highways, constsuction sites, communities served by septic systems, recreational boating
activities, timber harvesting, mining, livestock grazing, as well as physical changes to stream
channels, and habitat degradation. NPS pollution can occur year round anytime rainfall,
snowmelt, irrigation, or any other soume of water runs over land or through the ground, picks up
pollutants from these numerous, diffuse sources and deposits them into dyers, lakes, and coastal
waters or introduces them into ground water.
Non-Storm Water - Non-storm water consists of all discharges to and from a storm water
conveyance system that do not originate from precipitation events (i.e., all discharges from a
conveyance system other than storm water). Non-storm water includes illicit discharges, non-
prohibited discharges, and NPDES permitted discharges. An illicit discharge is defined at 40
CFR 122.26(b)(2) as any discharge to a municipal storm water conveyance system that is not
composed entirely of storm water except discharges pursuant to a separate NPDES permit and
discharges resulting from emergency fire fighting activities.
Nuisance - As defined in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act a nuisance is "anything
which meets all of the following requirements: 1) Is injurious to health, or is indecent, or offensive
to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable
enjoyment of life or property. 2) Affects at the same time an entire community or neighborhood,
or any considerable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance or damage inflicted
upon individuals may be unequal. 3) Occurs during, or as a result of, the treatment or disposal of
wastes."
Numeric effluent limitations - The typical method by which effluent limits are prescribed for
pollutants in waste discharge requirements implementing the federal NPDES regulations. When
numedc effluent limits are met at the "end-of-pipe', the effluent discharge generally will not cause
water quality standards to be exceeded in the receiving waters (i.e., water quality standards will
also be met).
Person - A person is defined as an individual, association, partnership, corporation, municipality,
State or Federal agency, or an agent or employee thereof. [40 CFR 122.2].
Point Source ~ Any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance, including, but not limited to,
any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock,
concentrated animal feeding operations, landfill leachate collection systems, vessel, or other
floating craft from which pollutants are or may be discharged.
Pollution - As defined in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, pollution is "the alteration
of the quality of the waters of the State by waste, to a degree that unreasonably affects the either
of the following; A) The waters for beneficial uses; or 2) Facilities that serve these beneficial
uses." Pollution may include contamination.
Order No. 2001-01 Page D-6 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee. doc
Pollutant - A pollutant is broadly defined as any agent that may cause or contribute to the
degradation of water quality such that a condition of pollution or contamination is created or
aggravated.
Pollution Prevention - Pollution prevention is defined as practices and processes that reduce or
eliminate the generation of pollutants, in contrast to source contTo[, treatment, or disposal.
Post-Construction BMPs - A subset of BMPs including structural and non-structural controls
which detain, retain, filter, or educate to prevent the release of pollutants to surface waters during
the final functional life of development.
Pre-Development Runoff Conditions - The runoff conditions that exist onsita immediately
before the planned development activities occur. This definition is not intended to be interpreted
as that period before any human-induces land activities occurred. This definition pertains to
redevelopment as well as initial development.
Receiving Water Limitations - Waste discharge requirements issued by the SDRWQCB
typically include both: (1) "Effluent Limitations" (or "Discharge Limitations") that specify the
technology-based or water-quality-based effluent limitations; and (2) "Receiving Water
Limitations" that specify the water quality objectives in the Basin Plan as well as any other
limitations necessary to attain those objectives. In summary, the "Receiving Water Limitations"
provision is the provision used to implement the requirement of CWA section 301(b)(1)(C) that
NPDES permits must include any more stringent limitations necessary to meet water quality
standards.
Sediment - Soil, sand, and minerals washed from land into water. Sediment resulting from
anthropogenic sources (i.e. human induced land disturbance activities) is considered a pollutant.
This Order regulates only the discharges of sediment from anthropogenic sources and does not
regulate naturally occurring sources of sediment. Sediment can destroy fish-nesting areas, clog
animal habitats, and cloud waters so that sunlight does not reach aquatic plants.
Storm Water - "Storm water" is as defined urban runoff and snowmeit runoff consisting only of
those discharges which originate from precipitation events. Storm water is that portion of
precipitation that flows across a surface to the storm drain system or receiving waters. Examples
of this phenomenon include: the water that flows off a building's roof when it rains (runoff from an
impervious surface); the water that flows into streams when snow on the ground begins to melt
(runoff from a semi-pervious surface); and the water that flows from a vegetated surface when
rainfall is in excess of the rate at which it can infiltrate into the underlying soil (runoff from a
pervious surface). When all factors are equal, runoff increases as the perviousness of a surface
decreases. Dudng precipitation events in urban areas, rain water picks up and transports
pollutants through storm water conveyance systems, and ultimately to waters of the United
States.
Toxicity - Adverse responses of organisms to chemicals or physical agents ranging from
mortality to physiological responses such as impaired reproduction or growth anomalies). The
water quality objectives for toxicity provided in the Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin,
Region 9, {Basin Plan), state in part... "All waters shall be free of toxic substances in
concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human,
plant, animal, or aquatic life.... The survival of aquatic life in surface waters subjected to a waste
discharge or other controllable water quality factors, shall not be less than that for the same water
body in areas unaffected by the waste discharge".... Urban runoff discharges from MS4s are
considered toxic when (1) the toxic effect observed in an acute toxicity test exceeds zero Toxic
Units Acute (Tua=0); or (2) the toxic effect observed in a chronic toxicity test exceeds one Toxic
Unit Chronic (Tuc=l). Urban runoff discharges from MS4s often contain pollutants that cause
toxicity.
Order No. 2001-01 Page D-7 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.cloc
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) - The TMDL is the maximum amount of a pollutant that can
be discharged into a water body from all sources (point and non-point) and still maintain water
quality standards. Under Clean Water Act section 303(d), TMDLs must be developed for all
water bodies that do not meet water quality standards after application of technology-based
controls.
Urban Runoff - Urban runoff is defined as all flows in a storm water conveyance system and
consists of the following components: (1) storm water (wet weather flows) and (2) non-storm
water illicit discharges (dry weather flows).
Waste - As defined in California Water Code Section 13050(d), "waste includes sewage and any
and all other waste substances, liquid, solid, gaseous, or radioactive, associated with human
habitation, or of human or animal origin, or from any producing, manufacturing, or processing
operation, including waste placed within containers of whatever nature prior to, and for purposes
of, disposal."
Article 2 of CCR Title 23, Chapter 15 (Chapter 15) contains a waste classification system which
applies to solid and semi-solid waste which cannot be discharged directly or indirectly to water of
the state and which therefore must be discharged to land for treatment, storage, or disposal in
accordance with Chapter 15. There am four classifications of waste (listed in order of highest to
lowest threat to water quality): hazardous waste, designated waste, nonhazardous solid waste,
and ined waste.
Water Quality Objective - Numerical or narrative limits on constituents or characteristics of water
designated to protect designated beneficial uses of the water. [California Water Code Section
13050 (h)]. California's water quality objectives are established by the State and Regional Water
Boards in the Water Quality Control Plans.
As stated in the Porter-Cologne Requirements for discharge (CWC 13263): "(Waste discharge)
requirements shall implement any relevant water quality control plans that have been adopted,
and shall take into consideration the beneficial uses to be protected, the water objectives
reasonably required for that purpose, other waste discharges, the need to prevent nuisance, and
the provisions of Section 13241 ."
A more comprehensive list of legal authority containing water quality objectives applicable to this
Order can be found in Finding 37 and in Section VII Directives Discussion Underlying Broad
Legal Authority for Order 2001-01 pp. 61-63.
Numeric or narrative limits for pollutants or characteristics of water designed to protect the
beneficial uses of the water. In other words, a water quality objective is the maximum
concentration of a pollutant that can exist in a receiving water and still generally ensure that the
beneficial uses of the receiving water remain protected (i.e., not impaired). Since water quality
objectives are designed specifically to protect the beneficial uses, when the objectives are
violated the beneficial uses are, by definition, no longer protected and become impaired. This is
a fundamental concept under the Porter Cologne Act. Equally fundamental is Porter Cologne's
definition of pollution. A condition of pollution exists when the water quality needed to support
designated beneficial uses has become unreasonably affected or impaired; in other words, when
the water quality objectives have been violated. These underlying definitions (regarding
beneficial use protection) are the reason why all waste discharge requirements implementing the
federal NPDES regulations require compliance with water quality objectives. (Water quality
objectives are also called water quality criteria in the Clean Water Act.)
Order No. 200t-0t Page D-8 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdpermg9-01~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
Water Quality Standards - are defined as the beneficial uses (e.g., swimming, fishing, municipal
drinking water supply, etc.,) of water and the water quality objectives necessary to protect those
uses.
Waters of the State - Any water, surface or underground, including saline waters within the
boundaries of the State [California Water Code Section 13050 (e)]. The definition of the Waters of
the State is broader than that for the Waters of the United States in that all water in the State is
considered to be a Waters of the State regardless of circumstances or condition. Under this
definition, a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) is always considered to be a Waters
of the State.
Waters of the United States - Waters of the United States can be broadly defined as navigable
surface waters and all tributary surface watam to navigable surface waters. Groundwater is not
considered to be a Waters of the United States. Under this definition (see below), a Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) is always considered a Waters of the United States.
As defined in the 40 CFR 122.2, the Waters of the U.S. are defined as: "{a) All waters, which
are currently used, were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or
foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(b) All interstate waters, including interstate "wetlands;" (c) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, "wetlands," sloughs,
prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds the use, degradation or destruction
of which would affect or could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: (1)
Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes;
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce;
or (3) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate
commerce; (d) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States
under this definition: (e) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs {a) through (d) of this
definition; (f) The territorial seas; and (g) "Wetlands" adjacent to waters (other than waters that
are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a) through (f) of this definition. Waters of the
United States do not include prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an
area's status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the
Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with the EPA."
Watershed - That geographical area which drains to a specified point on a water course, usually
a confluence of streams or rivers (also known as drainage area, catchment, or river basin).
Order No. 2g01-01 Page E-I February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMITISdperm99.01~Permit~attachrnentsA. Ee.doc
ATTACHMENT E
DRY WEATHER ANALYTICAL AND FIELD SCREENING MONITORING
SPECIFICATIONS - URBAN RUNOFF
Dry we?her analytical and field screening monitoring consists of (1) field observations; (2) field
screening monitoring; and (3) analytical monitoring at selected stations. Pursuant to section F.5
of this Order, the purpose of dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring is to detect and
eliminate illicit connections and illegal discharges to the MS4 using frequent, geographically
widespread dry weather discharge monitoring and follow-up investigations. Each Copermittee
shall conduct the following dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring tasks:
1. Develop MS4 Map
Each Copermittee shall develop or obtain an up-to-date labeled map of its entire municipal
separate storm sewer system (MS4) and the corresponding drainage watersheds wiffnin its
judsdicfion. The use of a Geographic Information System (GIS) is highly recommended, but not
required. The accuracy of the MS4 map shall be confirmed dudng monitoring activities (See
Task 6).
2. Select Dry Weather Analytical Monitorinq Stations
Based upon a review of its past Dry Weather Monitoring Programs, each Copermittee shall
select dry weather analytical monitoring stations within its jurisdiction. Stations shall be either
major outfalls or other ouffall points (or any other point of access such as manholes)
randomly located throughout the MS4 by placing a grid over a drainage system map and
identifying those cells of the grid which contain a segment of the MS4 or major outfall; or,
stations may be selected non-randomly provided adequate coverage of the entire MS4
system is ensured and that the selection of stations meets or exceeds the requirements given
below. The dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring stations shall be
established using the following guidelines and criteria:
a. A grid system consisting of perpendicular north-south and east-west lines spaced ¼ mile
apart shall be overlayed on a map of the MS4, creating a series of cells;
b. AIl cells that contain a segment of the MS4 shall be identified and one dry weather
analytical monitoring station shall be selected in each cell;
c. Stations should be located downstream of any sources of suspected illegal or illicit
activity;
d. Stations shall be located to the degree practicable at the farthest manhole or other
accessible location downstream in the system within each cell;
e. Hydrological conditions, total drainage area of the site, traffic density, age of the
structures or buildings in the area, history of the area, and land use types shall be
considered in locating stations;
f. Detem~ining Number of Stations: Based upon review of previous Dry Weather Monitoring
Programs, each Copermittee shall determine a minimum number of stations to be
sampled each year with provisions for alternate stations to be sampled in place of
selected stations that do not have flow.
3. Complete MS4 Map
Each Copermittee shall clearly identify each dry weather analytical monitoring station on its
MS4 Map as either a separate GIS layer or a map overlay hereafter referred to as a Dry
Weather Analytical Stations Map. Each Copermittee shall confirm that each drainage area
within its jurisdiction contains at least one station.
Order No. 2001-01 Page E-2 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~SDPERMIT~Sdperm99-01~Permit~attachmentsA-Ee.doc
4. Develop Dry Weather Analytical Monitodnq Procedures
Each Copermittee shall develop written procedures for dry weather analytical and field
screening monitoring (consistent with 40 CFR part 136), including field observations,
monitoring, and analyses to be conducted at a minimum between May 1st and September 30t~
of each year. The dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring program shall be
designed to emphasize frequent, geographically widespread monitoring to detect illicit
discharges and illegal connections. At a minimum, the procedures must be based on the
following guidelines and criteria:
a. Determining Sampling Frequency: Dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring
shall be conducted at each identified station at least once between May 1s~ and
September 30~h of each year or as often as the Copermittee determines is necessary to
comply with the requirements of Section F.5 of the Order.
b. If flow or ponded runoff is observed at a dry weather analytical monitoring station and
there has been at least seventy-two (72) hours of dry weather, make observations and
collect at least one (1) grab sample. Record general information such as time since last
rain, quantity of last rain, site descriptions (i.e., conveyance type, dominant watershed
land uses), flow estimation (i.e., width of water surface, approximate depth of water,
approximate flow velocity, flow rate), and visual observations (i.e., odor, color, clarity,
floatables, deposits/stains, vegetation condition, structural condition, and biology).
c. At a minimum, collect samples for analytical laboratory analysis of the following
constituents:
(1) Total Hardness
(2) Surfactants (MBAS)
(3) Oil and Grease
(4) Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos
(5) Cadmium (Dissolved)
(6) Copper (Dissolved)
(7) Lead (Dissolved)
(8) Zinc (Dissolved)
(9) Enterococcus bacteria
(10) Total Coliform bacteria
(11) Fecal Coliform bacteria
d. At a minimum, conduct field screening analysis of the following constituents:
(1) Specific conductance (calculate estimated Total Dissolved Solids).
(2) Turbidity
(3) pH
(4) Reactive Phosphorous
(5) Nitrate Nitrogen
(6) Ammonia Nitrogen
e. If the station is dry (no flowing or ponded runoff), make and record all applicable
observations and select another station from the list of alternate stations for monitoring.
f. Develop criteria for dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring results whereby
exceedance of the criteda will require follow-up investigations to be conducted to identify
the source causing the exceedance of the criteria.
Order No. 2001-01 Page E-3 February 21, 2001
S:~STORM~S DPERMIT~Sdperm99-01 ~Pen~it\attachmentsA-Ee.doc
g. Dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring stations identified to exceed dry
weather analytical monitoring cdteda for any constituents shall continue to be screened in
subsequent years.
h. Develop procedures for source identification follow up investigations in the event of
exceedance of dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring result criteria.
These procedures shall be consistent with procedures required in section F.5.c. of this
Order.
i. Develop procedures to eliminate detected illicit discharges and connections. These
procedures shall be consistent with each Copermittees Illicit Discharge and Elimination
component of its Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Plan as discussed in section
F.5 of this Order.
5. Submit DP/Weather Analytical Monitorinq Map and Procedures
Each Copermittee shall submit its dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring map
(including the MS4, drainage watersheds, and station locations) and dry weather analytical
monitoring procedures to the Principal Permittee as part of its Jurisdictional Urban Runoff
Management Program Document on the date prescribed by the Principal Permittee. The
procedures shall, at a minimum, address all issues included in sections 1-4 of this Attachment.
The Principal Permittee shall collectively submit the dry weather monitoring analytical maps and
procedures to the SDRWQCB within 365 days of adoption of this Order. Implementation of dry
weather analytical monitoring under the requirements of this Order shall commence by May 1,
2002.
6. Conduct Dry Weather Analytical Monitorinq
Until the Dry Weather Analytical and Field Screening Monitoring Program is implemented under
the requirements of this Order, each Copermittee shall continue to implement the Dry Weather
Monitoring Program most recently implemented pursuant to Order No. 90-42. Starting May 1,
2002, each Copermittee shall conduct dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring in
accordance with its storm water conveyance system map and dry weather analytical and field
screening monitoring procedures as described in Tasks 1 - 4 above. If monitoring indicates an
illicit connection or illegal discharge, conduct the follow-up investigation and elimination
activities as described in submitted dry weather analytical and field screening monitoring
procedures and sections F.5.c. and F.5.d. of this Order.
During monitoring, the accuracy of its MS4 map and shall be confirmed. Correct any
inaccuracies in the either the MS4 map or the Dry Weather Analytical Stations Map and
resubmit the corrected maps in the next annual report.
7. Summarize and Repod Dry Weather Analytical Monitorinq Results
As part of its individual Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report, each Copermittee shall
summarize and repod on its dry weather analytical monitoring results. The data shall be
presented in tabular and graphical form. The reporting shall include analytical monitoring
results, as well as follow up and elimination activities for potential illicit discharges and
connections. Dry weather analytical monitoring reports shall comply with all monitoring and
standard reporting requirements in Attachments B and C of Order 2001-01. The Principal
Permittee shall submit to the SDRWQCB the individual dry weather analytical monitoring
reports as part of the unified Jurisdictional URMP Annual Report on January 3'1,2003, and
every year thereafter.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 11/6/01
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Accepting bids and Awarding of
Contract for the Installation of "Traffic Signal at the Intersection of
Main Street and Maxwell Road (TF-292)' in the City of Chula Vista.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~~ I~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager¢!~e0/ ~ (4/5tbs Vote: Yes No X
On October 17, 2001, the Director of Public Works received sealed bids from two (2) Electrical
Contractors for the "Installation of Traffic Signal at the Intersection of Main Street and Maxwell
Road (TF-292)". Lekos Electric, Inc. submitted a low bid of $28,450.00.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept bids and award a Contract for the
"Installation of Traffic Signal at the Intersection of Main Street and Maxwell Road (TF-292)" in
the City of Chula Vista, to Lekos Electric, Inc., in the amount of $28,450.00.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
This signal installation project was approved and funded by the Corporation Yard element of the
Public Facilities DIF in the City's Capital Improvement Program for 2001-02. Traffic Signal
equipment was purchased ahead of schedule due to recent equipment shortages and anticipated
delay of delivery. Most of the equipment was tested and is now ready for installation. The work
to be done will include the installation of L.E.D. indications for both the traffic signal and
pedestrian module. Other equipment installations consist of cabinet, mast arm, signs, safety
lighting, meter pedestal, EVPE, conduit, pull box, video detection, conduits and cables. An
interconnect hardwire will also be installed in this intersection from Nirvana Avenue to
Brandywine Avenue.
Staff anticipated that the actual installation work would cost less than $50,000.00; therefore,
informal bids were solicited from eight (8) electrical contractors, and on October 17, 2001 the
Director of Public Works received bids from two (2) electrical contractors to install the traffic
signal at the subject intersection. The bids received were as follows:
1. Lekos Electric, Incorporation $28,450.00
$35246.9fi
The low bid, submitted by Lekos Electric, Inc. is below the Engineer's estimate of $30,175.00 by
$ 1,725.00 or 6.1%. Staff's base bid estimate was based on average prices for similar type of
work completed within the last two years. Lekos Electric, Inc. has done work for the City and
that work has been satisfactory.
Environmental Status
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work involved in this project
and determined that the project is exempt for CEQA under both CEQA Guidelines. Section
15061(b) (3) and Section 15303, Class 3 (new construction or conversion of small structures).
Disclosure Statement
A copy of the Contractor's disclosure statement is attached as Exhibit "B".
Form of Agreement
The Contract will be let on the City's standard Public Works Contract form. The City Attorney
will approve the final form of the contract.
FISCAL IMPACT:
FUNDS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION
A. Contract Amount (Installation) $28,450.00
B. ~ity~PUrChaSed Equipment
(Controller, Standards, Video Detection and
$65,000.00
EVPE System)
C. Design, Inspection, and Administration
(Approximately 15%) $15,000.00
(± 10% of the Contract amount) ; $11,550.00
TOTAL $120,00.00
FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR CONSTRUCTION
$120,000.00
DIF - Corporation Yard
TOTAL
The above action awarding of the contract will authorize a total expenditure of $120,000.00
from the CIP project. There is an additional estimated cost of $3,500.00 associated with this
project for annual energy and maintenance costs.
Attachments:
Exhibit A-CIP DETAIL SHEET
Exhibit B- CONTRACTORS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Prepared By: MLCM
J:\Engineer~AGENDA~A 113 'FF292.doc
EXHIBIT "A"
°
~ ~ ~ ~ i0 ~ o
EXHIBIT "B"
THE CITY OF CEI-UrLA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters which w/Il require discretionary
action by the Council, Planning CommissiOn and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of
disclosure of certain ownership or fmancial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of
Chula Vista election must be filed. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all p~rsons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the
application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
2. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals with a $1000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names
of any person sm'Wing as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or
trustor of the trust
4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent
contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in th/s matter.
EXHIBIT "B"
5. Has any person* associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official** of the
City of Chula Vista as it relates to tl'fis contract w/thin the past 12 months? Yes No ~
If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official** may have in this contract.
6. Have you made a conwibution of more than $250 within the~ ~past twelve (12) months to a current
member of the Chula Vista City Council? Yes No ~
If Yes,
which
Council
member?
7. Have you or any member of your governing board (i.e. 'Corporate Board of Directors/Executives,
non-profit Board of Directors made contributions totaling more than $1,000 over the past four (4)
years to a current member of the Chula Vista City Council? Yes No~.~If Yes, which
Council member?
8. Have you provided more than $300 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City
of Chula Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (Th/s includes being a source of nicome, money to
retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes __ No_ ~ If Yes, which official** and what was
the nature of item provided?
Signature of Contractor/Applicant
Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant
* Person is defined as: any individual, fnvn, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club,
fraternal organization, corporation, estate, Irust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city,
municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as
a un/t
** Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, plarwcn, g Commissioner,
Member of a board, comrmssion, or cormmttee of the City, employee, or staff members.
C:\MARl~pecs\TF292specs.doc ~ "5
RESOLUTION NO. 200 l-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ACCEPTiNG BIDS AND AWARDING
CONTRACT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF "TRAFFIC
SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND
MAXWELL ROAD (TF-292)" IN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA
WHEREAS, on October 17, 2001, the Director of Public works received the following
sealed bids from two (2) contractors for the Installation of Traffic Signal at the intersection of
Main Street and Maxwell Road (TF-292):
Contractor Bid Amount
Lekos Electric, Inc. $28,450.00
HMS Construction $34,246.00
WHEREAS, the Iow bid, submitted by Lekos Electric, Inc. is below the engineer's
estimate of $30,175.00 by $1,725.00 or 6.1% which estimate is based on average unit prices
received recently on similar types of projects; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends awarding the contract to Lekos Electric, Inc. who has
done work for the City and that work has been satisfactory; and
WHEREAS, the City's Enviroiunental Review Coordinator has reviewed the work
involved in this project and determined that the project is exempt from CEQA under both CEQA
Guidelines, Section I5061(b)(3) and Section 15303, Class 3 (new construction or conversion of
small structures).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby accept bids and award the contract for the Installation of "Traffic Signal at the
intersection of Main Street and Maxell Road (Tf-292)" in the City of Chula Vista to Lekos
Electric, Inc. in the amount of $28,45.00.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby
authorized to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Chula Vista.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt Jgt~M. Kaheny ..~ }
Director of Public Works (3'~y Attorney Q.j~
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 11/6/01
ITEM TITLE: Resolution Reclassify one Permit Processing Coordinator in
Planning and Building Division to Permit Processing Supervisor.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Human Resources C~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~4 ~ (4/Sth Vote: Yes __ No X )
The addition of duties and changes in the level of responsibility and complexity necessitates
reclassification of one Permit Processing Coordinator in the Planning and Building Division to
Permit Processing Supervisor.
RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt the resolution authorizing the reclassification of the
Permit Processing Coordinator to Permit Processing Supervisor to be effective November 16, 2001.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION
It is recommended that the Permit Processing Coordinator in the Planning and Building Division be
reclassified to Permit Processing Supervisor and salary adjusted accordingly. The scope of this
position's duties and responsibilities has changed and expanded significantly since its inception two
and half years ago. The demands and responsibilities of the position include supervision of the
Building Division permits counter and the business license functions. The business license program
was added recently to this position along with the supervision of additional staff. This position is
responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operations of both of these areas, along with records
management, research and archiving as it relates to permit processing and the business license areas.
Also included is the coordination, management and enhancement of the "Permit Plus" automated
permitting and tracking system for citywide use and integrating the business license processing into
the tracking system. Agencies locally and regionally were surveyed for comparable positions to
assess external salary comparison but limited salary comparison data was available. Several internal
comparisons were used to determine the scope and level of responsibility of this position and
appropriate salary placement. Based on the above, scope ofduties, level ofresponsibilities assigned
and internal relationships within the city, salary placement for this classification is recommended at
an annual E-Step salary of $66,382.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this salary adjustment for the fiscal year is $4,973 and $7,121
on an ongoing basis. No appropriation is necessary, as the department should have sufficient
salary savings to absorb this increase this and next fiscal year.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RECLASSIFYING ONE PERMIT
PROCESSING COORDINATOR IN PLANNING AND
BUILDING DIVISION TO PERMIT PROCESSING
SUPERVISOR
WHEREAS, the addition of duties and changes in the
level of responsibility and complexity necessitates reclassifi-
cation one Permit Processing Coordinator in the Planning and
Building Division to Permit Processing Supervisor; and
WHEREAS, this position is responsible for overseeing
the day-to-day operations of the Building Permits counter and the
business license functions, along with records management,
research and archiving as it relates to permit processing and the
business license areas; and
WHEREAS, this position also is responsible for the
coordination, management and enhancement of the "Permit Plus"
automated permitting and tracking system for citywide use and
integrating the business license processing into the tracking
system; and
WHEREAS, several internal comparisons were used to
determine the scope and level of responsibility of this position
and it is recommended that an annual E-step salary of $66,382 be
assigned.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby reclassify one Permit
Processing Coordinator in Planning and Building Division to Permit
Processing Supervisor at an annual E-step salary of $66,382 to be
effective October 19, 2001.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Candy Emerson John M. Kaheny~
Director of Human Resources City Attorney"
J:[attorney[reso[reclasslfy permit processing
Page 1, Item ~
Meeting Date 11/06/01
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to take public testimony on the formation of Community
Facilities District No. 2001-1 (San Miguel Ranch) and to consider the
authorization to levy special taxes and to incur a bonded indebtedness secured
by such special taxes
A) Resolution of the City Council of the City o£Chula Vista,
California, Forming and Establishing Community Facilities District No. 2001-
1 (San Miguel Ranch),Designating Improvement Areas Therein and
Authorizing Submittal of Levy of Special Taxes within each such
Improvement Area to the Qualified Electors thereof
B) Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, Declaring Necessity to incur Bonded Indebtedness for each
Improvement Area of Community Facilities District No. 200 I-1 (San Miguel
Ranch), Submitting to the Qualified Electors of each such Improvement Area,
a Proposition to incur a Bonded Indebtedness Secured by the Levy of a
Special Tax within such Improvement Area to Finance certain types of Public
Facilities and giving Notice thereon
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~' f"' W'
,fid 0 (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
It is recommended that this item be continued to the meeting of December 4, 2001.
.l:',cngineer\aGEN DA\CAS I 10601 -contd doc
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 11/06/01
ITEM TITLE: A) Public Hearing on the Amendment to Condition No. 80 of the
Tentative Subdivision Map for Eastlake III, Chula Vista Tract 01-
09 approved by Council Resolution No. 2001-269.
B) Resolution Approving an Amendment to Condition
No. 80 of the Tentative Subdivision Map for Eastlake III, Chula
Vista Tract 01-09 approved by Council Resolution No.2001-269.
/
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Public Works~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~'~ D~ (4/5tbs Vote: Yes No X )
Staff is ready to issue a grading permit for certain areas of Eastlake III proposing the diversion
of drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes towards Salt Creek. Current condition No. 80 requires
Eastlake to provide monetary compensation to the City of San Diego prior to issuance of any
grading permit for the diverted areas. Said requirement cannot be met at this time because the
City of San Diego has not yet determined the amount of said monetary compensation. In a
recent letter, the City of San Diego has advised that they do not object to the issuance of
grading permits for the proposed diversion areas and has requested that compliance with this
condition be deferred to building permits. Tonight, Council will consider an amendment to
said condition No. 80 requiring the provision of said monetary compensation prior to issuing
building permits for the Eastlake III project.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council conduct a public hearing on the proposed
amendment to Condition No. 80 of the Tentative Subdivision Map for Eastlake III, Chula Vista
Tract 01-09 and approve the resolution amending said condition as described in the above
titles.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Eastlake III proposes to divert 243 acres naturally draining to the Otay Lakes to the Salt Creek
Basin (see Attachment 1). Condition No. 80 of the Eastlake III Tentative Map requires
Eastlake to provide monetary compensation to the City of San Diego for water loss prior to
issuance of any grading permit for the diverted areas. The Public Works Department is ready
to issue a grading permit for certain areas of Eastlake III proposed for diversion. In a letter
dated October 16, 2001 (see Attachment 2) the City of San Diego acknowledges that, although
they have been working with Eastlake for several months, the complexity of the monetary
compensation issue will require policy decisions which may take another six months to be
finalized. They do not object to Chula Vista issuing a grading permit at this time and have
Item C~
Meeting Date 11/06/01
requested that compliance with this condition be deferred to building permits issuance. The
new building permit threshold for providing the required monetary compensation would allow
Eastlake to continue their ongoing grading operation, while providing at the same time,
additional time to the City of San Diego for resolving the associated policy issues.
The amended condition will accomplish the following: I) the monetary compensation will be
required prior to first building permit issuance (anticipated for March of 2002), and 2)
provides flexibility for issuing building permits in the event that resolution of the monetary
compensation issue is further delayed. If this happens, Eastlake will be require to provide, as
a condition precedent to issuing the first building permit, the following: 1) evidence acceptable
to the City Engineer demonstrating that Eastlake has negotiated in good faith with the City of
San Diego regarding said monetary compensation, and 2) a sufficient cash deposit for
guaranteeing said monetary compensation to the City of San Diego. The amount of said cash
deposit shall be determined by the City Engineer at his/her sole discretion. The original and
amended text of Condition No. 80 are presented in Attachment 3.
FISCAL IMPACT: None to the General Fund
Attachments: 1. Eastlake III Proposed Diversion
2. City of San Diego letter dated 10/16/01
3. Condition No. 80 - Original and amended text
EVW001/ldt
H:\HOME\ENGINEER\AGENDA\Amended Condition No. 80 of Eastlake II1 TM.doc
129 ac
WOODS --
)
.~ Proposed Basin Limits ',,
Area being Diverted ~. ,, Lower
~ Otay
~ Reservoir
1 ~ ~ll Salt Creek/Otay Lakes Divide ~
95 ac
VISTAS ,t
243 ac Acres being Diverted ~
,, 19 ac
Note: Refer to Technical Reports for additional
detail on diversion of urban runoff
Source: Cinfi Land Planning 2/01
'FIGURE 4.4-4
NO SCALE Urban Run-off Diversion
THE
CITY
October 16, 2001 : ~]' 200! ': '~/
Mr. Clifibrd L. Swanson
Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Engineering Divisio~
276 Fou~h Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910-2631
De~ Mr. Swanson:
Subject: Eastl~e III Urban Runoff Diversion
~is is in response to your letter dated October 12, 2001, regarding City of Chula Vista issuance
of a mass-~ading pe~it to The Eastlake Company prior to finalizing issues related to monetaw
compensation tbr divened water loss. The City of San Diego (City) has been working with ~e
Eastlake Company for several months to resolve the issue ofmonetaw compensation. However,
the complexity of this issue will require City policy decisions which are not expected to be
finalized for another six months. The City does not desire to delay this project. ~erefore, the
City has no objections to the City of Chula Vista issuing a mass-~ading pe~it at this time. The
City will continue to develop a policy dealing with this compensation issue and shall continue
coordinating with The Eastlake Company.
The City hereby requests the City of Chula Vista to withhold issuance of any building pe~its for
this project until this issue is resolved. It is our understanding that The Eastl~e Company will
not need building pe~it issuance within the next six months. This time frame will allow the
City ~d The Eastl~e Company to finalize this compensation issue.
Please contact Jesus M. Meda, Senior Civil Engineer, at (619) 527-7432, if you have ~y
questions or comments.
Mark Stone
DepUty Director, Water Operations
jm
cc: Kent Floro, Assistant Deputy Director, Water Operations
Bob Collins, Watershed Manager
Jesus M. Meda, Senior Civil Engineer, Water Operations
Wa~e[ ~e~a[tment * 21~7 ~miai*o ~h011os * Son Die~0.
Te{ (619) 527 7470 Fox (619~ 527-7412
Attachment 3
· ORIGINAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL No. 80 OF THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE III, CHULA VISTA TRACT No 01-09,
APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No 2001-269
Prior to approval of the first grading permit for the Project (including off-site
areas) draining towards the Upper or Lower Lake Reservoirs, the Developer shall
provide written evidence, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating that
financial arrangements have been made with the City of San Diego regarding
monetary compensation for any water loss resulting from the proposed diversion
of drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes watershed. Said financial arrangements
shall be in a form approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and
Building.
· AMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL No. 80 OF THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE III, CHULA VISTA TRACT No 01-09,
APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No 2001-269
Prior to approval of the first building permit within the area naturally draining
towards the Otay Lakes Reservoirs in the Project, the Developer shall provide
written evidence, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating that financial
arrangements have been made with the City of San Diego regarding monetary
compensation for any water loss resulting from the proposed diversion of
drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes watershed. Said financial arrangements
shall be in a form approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and
Building. In the event that Developer desires to pull building permits for the
Project and that no financial arrangements have been reached between the City of
San Diego and Developer regarding said monetary compensation, the City of
Chula Vista may issue building permits if the Developer provides both of the
following items:
1. Evidence acceptable to City Engineer demonstrating that developer has
negotiated in good faith with the City of San Diego regarding said monetary
compensation; and
2. A cash deposit guaranteeing said monetary compensation to the City of San
Diego. The amount of said cash deposit shall be determined by the City
Engineer at his/her sole discretion and shall be sufficient to cover the
estimated amount of the monetary compensation to the City of San Diego.
City shall hold the cash deposit until financial arrangements regarding said
monetary compensation have made with the City of San Diego, and expend
said cash deposit solely for providing monetary compensation to the City of
San Diego in the event of developer's default in providing the required
monetary compensation. Any unexpended amount of said cash deposit,
included any interest earned, shall be released to the Developer upon
fulfillment of the monetary compensation requirement.
JSEngineer~AGENDA\New Condition No. 80a.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENT)MENT TO
CONDITION NO. 80 OF THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION
MAP FOR EASTLAKE III, CHULA VISTA TRACT 01-09
APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2001-269
WHEREAS, staff is ready to issue a grading permit for certain areas of Eastlake III
proposing the diversion of drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes towards Salt Creek; and
WHEREAS, current Condition No. 80 requires Eastlake to provide monetary
compensation to the City of San Diego prior to issuance of any grading permit for the diverted
areas; and
WHEREAS, said requirement cannot be met at this time because the City of San Diego
has not yet determined the amount of said monetary compensation; and
WHEREAS, in a recent letter, the City of San Diego has advised that they do not object
to the issuance of grading permits for the proposed diversion areas and has requested that
compliance with this condition be deferred to building permits; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending an amendment to Condition No. 80 requiring the
provision of said monetary compensation prior to issuing building permits for the Eastlake III
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve an Amendment to Condition No. 80 of the Tentative Subdivision Map
for Eastlake III, Chula Vista Tract 01-09 approved by Council Resolution No. 2001-269 as set
forth in Attachment 3, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full.
Presented by Approved as to form by
John P. Lippitt John M. Kaheny
Director of Public Works City Attorney
I:',attomcy\~cso\EL ( ondition 80
Attachment 3
· ORIGINAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL No. 80 OF THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE III, CHULA VISTA TRACT No 01-09,
APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No 2001-269
Prior to approval of the first grading permit for the Project (including off-site
areas) draining towards the Upper or Lower Lake Reservoirs, the Developer shall
provide written evidence, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating that
financial arrangements have been made with the City of San Diego regarding
monetary compensation for any water loss resulting from the proposed diversion
of drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes watershed. Said financial arrangements
shall be in a fom~ approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and
Building.
,, AMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL No. 80 OF THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE 111, CHULA VISTA TRACT No 01-09,
APPROVED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No 2001-269
Prior to approval of the first building pemrit within the area naturally draining
towards the Otay Lakes Reservoirs in the Project, the Developer shall provide
written evidence, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating that financial
arrangements have been made with the City of San Diego regarding monetary
compensation for any water loss resulting from the proposed diversion of
drainage runoff from the Otay Lakes watershed. Said financial arrangements
shall be in a form approved by the City Engineer and Director of Planning and
Building. In the event that Developer desires to pull building permits for the
Project and that no financial arrangements have been reached between the City of
San Diego and Developer regarding said monetary compensation, the City of
Chula Vista may issue building permits if the Developer provides both of the
following items:
1. Evidence acceptable to City Engineer demonstrating that developer has
negotiated in good faith with the City of San Diego regarding said monetary
compensation; and
2. A cash deposit guaranteeing said monetary compensation to the City of San
Diego. The amount of said cash deposit shall be determined by the City
Engineer at his/her sole discretion and shall be sufficient to cover the
estimated amount of the monetary compensation to the City of San Diego.
City shall hold the cash deposit until financial arrangements regarding said
monetary compensation have made with the City of San Diego, and expend
said cash deposit solely for providing monetary compensation to the City of
San Diego in the event of developer's default in providing the required
monetary compensation. Any unexpended amount of said cash deposit,
included any interest earned, shall be released to the Developer upon
fulfillment of the monetary compensation requirement.
H:\ENGINEER\New Conditio~. No. 80.doc ~'* ~J
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.: ~3
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of the comprehensive City General Plan Update work
program and budget including the addition of unclassified staff in the
Planning and Building, and Management and Information Services
Departments, and for associated consultant services and studies.
Resolution Approving the City General Plan Update Work
Program and budget, adding 1.0 FTE unclassified Planning Technician II
position, and amending the FY 2001-2002 budget, appropriating funds
therefore, and amending the FY 2002-2003 adopted spending plan
therefore.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building ~ ~/' j
Director of Management and Informatio~ - ' n ServicerS/
~(c ~ (4/5thsVote: Yes X No )
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ff~ p ~
The comprehensive update of the City's General Plan is a significant undertaking requiring
substantial investments in time, as well as staff and consultant resources. The General Plan
provides the long-term blueprint for the physical development of the City, typically covering a
twenty-year period. General plans are normally updated every five to ten years. Although some
individual elements were revised in conjunction with the Otay Ranch General Development
Plan in 1993, and the Housing Element was updated in December 2000, Chula Vista's General
Plan has not been comprehensively updated since 1989.
In commencing the first step of the effort, on April 11, 2000, the City Council considered an
initial report on the need for the General Plan Update program, and approved the budget for
hiring a core staff team consisting of a General Plan Project Manager, a Senior Planner and a
Transportation Engineer. The second step was for this core team to then work with various
City department directors, assistant directors and staff to develop a detailed work program
including all the critical components, steps, time-frames, needed resources (including
consultant services and studies), costs and budgets. This information would then be returned
to Council for action to authorize the full work effort. The core team was hired in late-2000
and has been actively working to prepare the complex work program and budget, and has also
been working on several other tasks and studies. This report presents the complete work
program and current budget request for Council action.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution approving the proposed
City General Plan Update Work Program; and adding 1 unclassified Planning Technician I1 to
Page 2, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
the Department of Planning and Building; and amending the FY 2002 budget, appropriating
$1,087,812 for new staff, consultants and supplies and services from the General Fund; and
appropriating $13,500 for computers and furniture from the Public Facilities DIF fund; and
appropriating $185,963 from the merged RDA project area to the Bayfront RDA project area
for a loan repayment; and amending the adopted FY 2003 Spending Plan, adding $118,630 for
staff costs to be offset by CIP reimbursements.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
The following report is structured into four main components:
Summary of prior actions regarding General Plan Update staffing and budgets.
Review of the proposed General Plan Update Work Program (a synopsis of its
component projects, work performed to-date, and highlights of any related budget
requests is presented in Attachment 5).
· Summary of the General Plan Update staffing and consulting services needs, their
costs, and the related budget requests before Council.
· Fiscal Impacts.
Background-
As presented in the original report to Council on April 11, 2000, a comprehensive update of
the General Plan is critical at this time for a number of key reasons:
1. The rapid growth in the eastern part of the City needs to continue to be carefully planned,
and community concerns (i.e. the rate of growth and associated traffic impacts, the
east/west polarization of the community) need to continue to be addressed.
2. It provides an excellent opportunity to thoroughly evaluate plans for adjoining, future
development areas such as Eastern Otay Mesa.
3. The western portion of the community is in need of revitalization through careful
planning and public/private investment.
4. A "vision" should be developed for each of the City Redevelopment areas so that
desirable businesses can be recruited and necessary public improvements can be
constructed.
The update of the City's General Plan also provides an excellent opportunity to communicate
with citizens regarding progress made since the last General Plan Update (1989), and to hear
their issues and concerns, and how they want their neighborhoods and the City as a whole to
develop in the future.
Page 3, Item No.: ! E)
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
Over the last twelve years, a great deal has occurred and many changes have taken place
within the City; most notably a growth in population of approximately 49,000 or 36%, growth
through annexations of 21 + square miles or 70%, as well as changes in the demographic
make-up of the community. It is staff's belief that now is the time to re-evaluate where we are
as a City, and to work with the citizens and other stakeholders to determine the future course.
Summary of Council's Prior Actions on April 11, 2000-
In commencing the first phase of the General Plan Update effort, on April 11, 2000, the City
Council considered an initial report outlining major work elements for the General Plan Update
program, and approved the budget request for hiring a core staff team consisting of a General
Plan Project Manager, a Senior Planner and a Transportation Engineer.
While the initial outline provided the general steps for the General Plan Update, it was not
detailed enough to create an accurate estimate of all of the various steps, time-frames and
necessary resources and funding to conduct and complete such a complex project. As a result,
the proposal was for the three-person core team to work with various City department
directors, assistant directors and staff to establish an internal administrative structure, and
develop a detailed work program including all the critical components, steps, time-frames,
needed resources (including consultant services and studies), costs and budgets. This
information would then be returned to Council for action to authorize the complete work
effort.
The core team was hired in late-2000 and has been actively working to prepare the complex
work program and budget, along with participating in a number of other related preparatory
tasks and studies. Most notable among those is formulation of the joint South Bay Transit First
Study with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB), which focuses on the role
of transit in strategic land use planning, and has taken a forefront in shaping the General Plan
Update work program. The following sections present for Council consideration the complete
General Plan Update work program and budget requests created with the input of the Planning
and Building, Community Development and Public Works Departments, the General Plan
Update Management Team, and the Office of Budget and Analysis.
Summary of Proposed General Plan Update Work Program and Current Statuses-
The current General Plan Update Work Program (see Synopsis in Attachment 5) has been
structured around the following eighteen (18) "projects" which have been grouped into 5 major
categories. The major categories and the projects build from the initial outline of work
elements previously presented to the Council in April 2000.
Page 4, Item No.: /0
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
Program Preparation and Administration
Project WP. Work Program Preparation
Project 1. Program Administration
Project 2. Public Information and Participation Program
Project 3. Base Maps and Style Manual
Project 4. Community Definition
Areawide Studies
Project 5. Regional Commercial Analysis
Project 6. Demographic and Housing Profile
Project 7. Transportation Analysis \ Transit Study
Project 8. Public Facilities and Services Analysis
Project 9. Environmental and Open Space Analysis
Project I0. Economic Development Strategy
Project 11. Telecommunications and Technology Assessment
Project 12. Fiscal Impact Model and Analysis
Project 13. Land Use Distribution Analysis
Community Visioning
Project 14. Community Vision Plans
General Plan Document and EIR Preparation and Adoption
Project 15. Draft Update of General Plan
Project 16. Environmental Impact Report
Project 17. Final Updated General Plan
Implementation
Project t 8. General Plan Update Implementation Program
The Work Program Synopsis and Progress Update in Attachment 5 provides a summary
description of each of the "project" components, along with a brief status report on the
progress of work to-date. As applicable, references are also provided where a particular
project has a related budget request as part of this report.
General Plan Update Staffing, Consulting Services, Costs and Schedule-
The total cost of the comprehensive General Plan Update was initially estimated in the April
11, 2000, report to Council to be between 1.5 and 2 million dollars over a 2 to 3 year period.
/0'¢
Page 5, Item No.: /~
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
Those were preliminary estimates based upon a then skeletal work program. Completion of
the more detailed work program and schedule presented in this report has shown that those
estimates were largely accurate.
As presented below, direct costs associated with the 3-year Update for staff, consultants and
miscellaneous supplies and equipment will total $1,997,028. This includes $848,426 for the
core team which Council previously approved in April 2000, and new costs of $1,148,602.
With regard to schedule, since November 2000 when the core team was hired, they have
focused much of their time in initiating the South Bay Transit First Study with MTDB, and in
participating in the Regional Commercial Analysis regarding the EUC and Bayfront
commercial project proposals. As a result, completion of the General Plan Update from this
point forward will take just over 2 years. When added to the year which has already passed,
the overall process will have spanned between 3 and 3.5 years (see Attachment 1).
As presented in Attachment 2, the proposed budget for the General Plan Update consists of
four (4) major components:
1. The existing Core Team which already received budget approvals in April 2000.
2. New GP Team staff consisting of a full-time, unclassified Planning Technician II
position, and a half-time, hourly GIS Specialist. These costs have not been budgeted
and are part of this budget request.
3. Needed consultant services and studies, which have not been budgeted and are part of
this budget request.
4. Necessary miscellaneous costs for supplies and services for the program, office
equipment for new staff, and costs for presentation equipment, which have not been
budgeted and are part of this budget request.
As noted, components 2, 3 and 4 are the focus of the current budget request, and the requested
resources and costs for each of those is as follows:
New GP Team Staff
Costs associated with the two new staff (full-time Planning Technician II, and half-time,
hourly GIS Specialist) for the entire duration of the Update is $147,803. The current
budget request is for costs associated with Fiscal Years 2001-'02 and 2002-'03
($109,297). As unclassified positions, they will not create ongoing budget impacts and
are at-will for the timeframe of the General Plan update project. In addition, the City
will incur $13,500 in non-recurring costs that will be funded by the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee Fund to purchase staff equipment.
Page 6, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
As noted in the work program synopsis in Attachment 5, the Planning Technician II and
half-time GIS Specialist positions are critical to the collection, analysis and production of
all the base information, graphics and maps to support the Update process. They will
provide services to each of the staff teams (refer to Attachment 3), and will also serve as
coordinators for the collection and dissemination of information with the numerous
consultants and outside agencies. Ultimately, they will also produce all of the graphics
and maps to be included in the General Plan Update document.
The April 2000 report to Council initially envisioned the need for an additional g-time
Secretary position for the Update project. Since that time, the Planning and Building
Department has reviewed its clerical staffing program and has recently hired another
secretary to support the Environmental and Community Planning sections. As a result,
the request for a new General Plan secretary position is being deleted, and replaced by a
request for funds for contract clerical services within the Department. As shown in
Attachment 2, the total cost of $41,800 is roughly equivalent to the base cost for a half-
time Secretary for the 2.5 year duration of the General Plan Update process (through
December 2003). The current budget request of $31,515 covers Fiscal Years 2001-'02
and 2002-'03, and is included in "miscellaneous supplies and equipment" discussed
below.
The half-time equivalent is based on the current work load of the existing, temporary
Secretary position which provides support to the Advance Planning and Growth
Management & Special Projects sections. That position also spends half of its time
providing general clerical support to the overall Department. Under the current proposal,
this existing position would cease those general support duties, and in exchange assume
the clerical responsibilities for the General Plan Update. Those half-time general duties
would then need to be absorbed by other existing clerical staff. In order to create that
capacity, we have identified tasks currently performed by the other existing clerical staff
which could readily be performed through contract clerical service such as Spanish
translation for notices, preparations of large mailings, and backfill during vacations.
Consulting Services and Studies
As summarized in the discussions of the various components of the overall work program
(see Attachment 5), there are a number of consulting services and studies required to
prepare the General Plan Update. Following is a summary list along with the associated
costs that are part of tonight's budget request:
Project Management and Administration $ 27,500
Public Outreach and Participation $ 96,000
Technical Studies $210,000
Environmental Baseline Studies $100,000
Fiscal Impact Analysis $ 40,000
Environmental Impact Report $400,000
Page 7, Item No.: / 0
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
The total cost for these services and studies is $873,500. With the exception of the EIR,
all the studies and services will commence during FY2001-02. Based on the need for the
results from other studies, the EIR preparation will not commence until FY2002-03.
Miscellaneous Supplies and Equipment
This $127,300 component of the budget covers supplies and equipment costs for the
duration of the Update project. The current budget request of $105,015 covers a range of
items which include office equipment for the new staff (furniture, computers, etc),
contract clerical services (discussed previously), overall office supplies and postage,
laptop computer and projector for making and facilitating public presentations, and
handheld computers for each team for use in project management, scheduling and field
work.
Additional Costs -
Additional costs associated with the overall General Plan Update, which are not part of the
current request, above, are noted for context:
· Costs for time spent by existing City staff positions (in-kind services) over the next
2+years. Since these are all existing positions, these "costs" have already been
budgeted as part of overall departmental budgets. Some of these costs will be
reimbursable from various non-general fund revenue sources as shown on
Attachment 4. It should also be noted that these "costs" were not reflected in the
initial General Plan budget estimate in April 2000 since much of the work is
associated with ongoing workload and projects which will benefit the General Plan,
but would also have been done otherwise.
· Costs for existing consulting services and studies which have already been
appropriated. These include the joint MTDB South Bay Transit First Study, the
Economic Development Strategy, the Regional Commercial Analysis, and the
Wastewater and Drainage Master Plans.
· Direct costs to be incurred in FY 2003-'04 for staff and miscellaneous supplies and
services, estimated to total $60,790, to cover the final six months of the Update
program (through December 2003).
FISCAL IMPACT:
The current appropriation request before Council totals $1,087,812 which includes the one new
Planning Tech II position and one half-time hourly GIS Specialist (see Attachment 4). Of that
amount, the total net impact to the General Fund will be $99,451 in FY 2001-'02. The vast
Page 8, Item No.: //0
Meeting Date: 11/06/01
majority of the total amount ($992,130) is for the General Plan Project which is to be funded
through:
* TransDIF Admin $ 96,472
* Sewer Service Revenue $ 43,475
* Public Facilities DIF $196,128
· Bayfront RDA $185,963
· Merged RDA $417,335
· CDBG $ 35,488
* General Fund $ 17,269
In addition, other FY 2001-'02 appropriations from the General Fund are needed for Planning
and Building staff ($69,989) and an hourly GIS Specialist ($12,193). $13,500 is to be
appropriated from the Public Facilities DIF fund for startqup furniture and equipment.
In addition, $185,963 must be appropriated from the merged RDA fund to repay a loan from
the Bayfront RDA fund, so that sufficient funds will be available in the Bayfront RDA fund to
appropriate to this project.
The FY 2002~'03 Adopted Spending Plan for Planning and Building will be increased by
$92,128, and for MIS Department by $26,502, for staff and associated supplies and services to
fund the second year of this effort. This expense will be offset completely by CIP
reimbursements, resulting in no net General Fund impact.
Anticipated costs for FY 2004 of $60,790 will be considered during the FY 2004 budget
process.
In addition to hard costs, staff hours will also be contributed in order to complete the project.
Although staff has not currently identified other alternative funding sources (e.g., grants), to
help further offset General Fund costs, it is anticipated that such sources will likely become
available during the timeframe of the project.
Attachments
1. Overall Project Timeline
2. l~udget Summary Spreadsheet
3. Staff Organizational Structure Diagram
4. Appropriations and Budget Amendments Spreadsheet
5. General Plan Update Work Program Synopsis & Progress Update
J:\PLANNING\ed\GP Budget\Final GP Budget al 13 11-06 01.doc
H:\PLANNING\Final GP Budget al 13 11-06-01.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE - BUDGET OVERVIEW (10/29101)
BUDGET ITEM ACT. COSTS ESTIMATED COSTS COST
FY '00-'01 FY '01-'02 I FY '02-03 FY '03-04 TOTALS
Existing Core GP Team
GP Project Manager $56,993.42 $113,129.06 $113,129.06 $56,564.53 $339,816.07
Transportation Engineer $8,481.62 $93,101.16 $97,755.71 $48,877.86 $248,216.34
Senior Planner $35,707.70 $87,251.54 $91,622.86 $45,811.44 $260,393.56
Subtotal: $t01,182.74 $293,48t.76 $302,507.65 $151,253.83 $848,425.97
New Addit. GP Team
Planning Tech II (FT) $22,414.31 $48,188.33 $24,805.81 $95,408.45
GIS Specialist (1/2 T) $12,193.11 $26,501.72' $13,698.95 $52,393.78
Subtotal: $34,607.42 $74,690.05! $38,504.76 $147,802.23
New Consultants I Studies
Project Management System $27,500.00
Public Partic. Program Development $11,000.00
Key Person Interviews $15,000.00
Citizen Survey $30,000.00
Meeting Facilitation $40,000.00
Demographic/Housing Profile $25,000.00
Transportation Analysis $115,000.00
Public Facilities (Non-engineering) $50,000.00
Telecommunications & Technol. $20,000.00
Environmental Baseline Studies $100,000.00
Fiscal Impact Analysis $40,000.00
Environmental Impact Report $400,000.00
Subtotal consultants/studies: $473,500.00 $400,000.00 $0.00 $873,500.00
~liscellaneous
Supplies $24,000.00 $24,000.00 $12,000.00 $60,000.00
Office Equipt. for new staff $13,500.00 $13,500.00
Contract clerical services $11,575.00 $19,940.00 $10,285.00 $41,800.00
Other (presentation equiptment) $12,000.00 $12,000.00
Subtotal: $61,075.00 $43,940.00 $22,285.00 $127,300.00
Current Budget Request Totals: $569,182.42 $518,630.05 $60,789.76 $1,148,602.23
Already Budgeted Core Team $101,182.74 $293,481.76 $302,507.65 $151,253.83 $848,425.97
New Staff, Consultants & Misc~ $569,182.42 $518,630.05 $60,789.76 $1,148,602.23
$101,182.74 $862,664.18 $821,137.70 $212,043.59 $1,997,028.20
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 4
Chula Vista General Plan Update
Work Program Synopsis
And
Progress Update
(October 30, 2001)
The following provides a summary of each of the General Plan Update project components,
along with a brief status report on the progress of work to-date. As applicable, references are
also provided where a particular project has a budget related request for Council consideration.
Program Preparation and Administration -
Proiect WP - Work Program Preparation
This component consists of tasks centered around the identification of major issues and
goals, and the preparation of the work program being presented tonight, and constitutes
the framework for all subsequent efforts. Examples of some of the key tasks are:
An initial review of the current General Plan, and of Chula Vista planning history to
identify major trends, policies, projects, milestones and the evolution of the General
Plan.
· Review of various City plans and programs, and identification of their relationship to
the General Plan Update.
· Familiarization of staff in city departments, and other agencies, with the Update in
order to foster support and collaboration, and to obtain their input on issues and
needs.
A number of efforts in these regards have occurred including a "mini-retreat" in
November 2000 of City Administration and affected Department Directors, Assistant
Directors and the core team to identify mission and vision statements, key issues, internal
and external planning and coordination processes, and program organization. Sine that
time, the team has continued to establish coordination with City departments and outside
agencies including SANDAG, neighboring cities and the County, MTDB, and other
service providers.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page I
ATTACHMENT 5
Project 1. Program Administration
This component includes project and financial management tasks and ongoing
coordination and support activities for the overall General Plan Update. These functions
will be carried out on a continuing or recurring basis throughout the process. Major task
areas cover the topics of establishing an accounting, tracking, and management system
for staff and consultant resources, researching and securing financial resources, setting up
and administrating various management and advisory committees, establishing an
organizational structure for the various staff work groups, setting up a filing and
documentation system, and defining policies for handling project processing requests
involving General Plan amendments during the course of the Update.
A number of items have been accomplished in this area, including:
· Establishment of several organizational groups including a General Plan
Update Management Team involving City Administration, and Department
Directors and Assistant Directors which meets bi-weekly; a weekly meeting of
the GP Core Team with Planning Department managers; and weekly Core
Team coordination meetings.
· Establishment of a staff organizational structure consisting of a series of
"teams" which will address land use matters within three main sub-areas of
the City, and will each be responsible for several of the Areawide Studies (see
Attachment 2).
· Initial establishment of a project management and scheduling system, and a
staff time accounting and financial management system.
· Preparation of a draft Council Policy on General Plan Amendments which
proposes criteria and a process for Council consideration and determination on
whether and how to process requests for General Plan Amendments received
during the course of the General Plan Update. The Planning Commission has
reviewed the draft policy which will be forwarded for Council action in the
near future.
· As was noted earlier, the General Plan Update is an extremely complex
project whose timeliness and success will be centered around the ability to
concurrently manage multiple, interrelated projects and associated staff and
consultant resources, and to simultaneously coordinate with a number of
internal committees and groups, outside agencies, and the public. In order to
handle these demands, the Plarming and Building and Management and
Information Services (MIS) Departments have been discussing the expanded
use of the Microsoft Project (MS Project) scheduling and management
sofiware.
Gcneral Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 2
· MS Project has been used by the Planning Department for some time to
manage individual large-scale development projects in eastern Chula Vista.
Another feature of the software called "Project Central", which has not been
used to-date, allows for the ability to view the combined resources and
scheduling issues from many individual project efforts. This capability fits
exactly with the critical management needs of the General Plan Update. As a
result, Planning and MIS have been working with Automation Associates, Inc.
(a Solana Beach firm that specializes in adapting Microsoft products to
specific user needs), on a proposed program for implementing use of the
City's "Project Central" software using the General Plan Update as the pilot
project. A request for $27,500 for these services is included in the proposed
budget.
Project 2. Public Information and Participation Program
One of the key components will be the public participation strategy. Public participation
is critical to the success of the comprehensive General Plan Update effort. This is
particularly true in the older, western portions of the City where contact and involvement
with residents has been limited in the past. The focus of this project is to design and
implement a public information and participation program that will encourage the
involvement and input of the various stakeholder groups in the community, and the
public at-large. It will also incorporate regional information and tools (e.g., from
SANDAG's Region 2020 Program), and involve representatives of other organizations.
Currently, there are four phases for this program, which am linked to the major phases of
the overall General Plan Update Work Program:
1) The public information process, which occurs on an ongoing basis.
2) Public input during the Areawide Studies process.
3) Public input during the Community Visioning process.
4) Public input during the Plan Alternatives and Plan Adoption process.
The tasks associated with these phases encompass a broad array of techniques and
mediums intended to maximize community input and dialog, and to ensure that input is
received from all segments of the community including residents, property owners and
businesses. These techniques and mediums include such things as periodic articles and
newsletters, a number of different public presentation forums, the City inter- and
intranet sites, key person interviews, citizen surveys, and community workshops and
meetings. A broad-based General Plan Advisory Committee is also contemplated.
Staff also has, and will continue to have, contact with other cities and counties
(including the City and County of San Diego) who are (or recently have) conducting
comprehensive General Plan updates in order to learn what they
have determined were the most effective methods to increase public participation.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 3
4
While the basic components of a typical public information and participation program
are presented in the work program, the General Plan Management Team, in discussion
with the Office of Information, has determined that it would be beneficial to have an
outside specialist work with staff and management to prepare a framework strategy for
the organization, coordination and scheduling of the program. As a result, the general
plan team has contacted and initially met with the firm of MOORE IACOFANO
GOLTSMAN, Inc.(MIG), to obtain a proposal for their services to develop a
framework strategy. MIG has a fairly extensive resume of public outreach and
participation efforts with cities on various high profile and sometimes controversial
projects, including General Plan updates. Staff has reviewed and discussed a proposal
from MIG for these services, and has included a component in the General Plan Update
budget request.
Currently, there are four components of the budget proposal (totaling $95,000) that are
associated with public outreach and input;
· $10,000 for developing the strategy and framework for the outreach effort with
MIG,
· $15,000 for conducting key person interviews,
· $30,000 for a citizen survey, and
· $40,000 for the conduct and facilitation of community meetings.
As part of the framework effort with MIG, staff will review and refine the proposed,
comprehensive outreach program, and will return to Council for final review and
direction prior to commencing the program. Should any of the current budget proposals
require revision based on the final framework strategy, they will be included in the report
to Council.
Project 3. Base Maps and Style Manual
This project will center around use of the City's Geographic Information System (GIS),
and will determine the basic contents and format of maps, aerial photography and other
graphics to be used at both report-size and presentation-size scales. Specific thematic
maps will be created by overlaying additional layers of information on the base maps
generated. A manual establishing an attractive and consistent format for all maps,
graphics and reports prepared as part of the General Plan Update, including the General
Plan document itself, will also be produced.
As noted in the detailed work program, the Update process and products will require a
significant amount of maps, graphics and other documents to support them. Reliance on
the City's GIS will be foundational to this effort. As a result of the tremendous technical
needs of the Update, the work program indicates the need for a half-time GIS Specialist
position. Costs for that position are $52,394
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 4
through December 2003. Funding for the remainder of FY2001-'02 and FY 2002~'03
are part of the current budget request. Once this position is on-board, the final work in
establishing the style manual and base map formats for the General Plan Update can be
completed.
Proiect 4. Community Definition
Every city is composed of different communities. Knowing the varying characteristics of
the City's diverse communities is critical to understanding the needs, opportunities and
constraints associated with each area. This project will evaluate and identify proposed
community areas for the City of Chula Vista in order to:
· Organize the City's Planning Area into manageable units for statistical and planning
purposes;
· Provide a framework for recognizing and addressing the City's diversity and varying
needs and priorities in different areas; and
· Support effective delivery of public services and promote community identity and
pride.
The effort will consist of several key phases including an initial identification and review
of various "community area factors" (such as Census Tract boundaries, school attendance
areas, and commercial centers and community facilities), an evaluation of community
area options and hierarchies ranging from large General Plan subareas, down to smaller
community and neighborhood boundaries, and finally the completion of a community
areas boundary map for use with initial community involvement efforts, and in the
structure and preparation of various studies and component parts of the General Plan
Update documents. The General Plan team has completed a draft for the first two phases,
and will use this a basis for fmther work in developing community characterizations that
will help to set priorities for the later Community Vision Plan efforts.
Areawide Studies-
It is critical that Citywide baseline studies are completed in order to determine the current
status of the City's infrastructure (i.e. water, sewer, roads) and resources (i.e. open space,
MSCP), and to act as a basis from which to plan and evaluate future demands and needs.
These studies will also provide demographic and statistical information regarding how the
City has changed and grown over the past 10 years (demographic make-up, household size,
income levels, etc.), and what we can expect for the future. Together, these studies will form
the informational and technical foundation for much of the General Plan.
Work in some areas has already been recently completed. For example, the City has already
completed the Library and Fire Station Master Plans, the Police Facilities Master Plan and
Strategic Plan, the MSCP Subarea Plan, and an update to the Housing Element. The Parks
Master Plan is nearing adoption and the Greenbelt Master Plan is well underway. There are
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 5
9 additional studies, however, that need to be completed as part of the Areawide Studies
work program as described below, some of which are already underway.
Proiect 5. Regional Commercial Analysis
This analysis will describe potential market support over time for regional shopping
centers in South San Diego County and Chula Vista in particular, assess potential effects
on existing commemial facilities, and also address other land use relationships and
planning issues associated with commemial development alternatives.
The study is currently being conducted in cooperation with a consultant (Economic
Realty Advisors (ERA)), and is centering around an analysis of current land use
proposals for the Eastern Urban Center and Freeway Commercial areas in Otay Ranch,
and major commercial development alternatives for the southern Bayfront area. These
developments represent the future major retail centers in the City, and the analysis is
intended to evaluate several key factors including whether the market can support the
projects, what effects any or all of the projects would have on existing retail
developments such as Chula Vista Center, and what if any changes need to be made to
avoid redundancy and competitiveness between the proposed and existing major
commercial sites in the City.
The analysis work has already been budgeted through the Community Development
Department, and the General Plan Core Team has been, and will continue to be,
significantly involved in the effort.
Project 6. Demographic and Housing Profile
This project is a key component of the Update effort as it will provide the foundation of
demographic and other statistical information upon which many other portions of the
General Plan will rely. The profile will provide a broad array of important information
encompassing historic perspectives, changes since the last General Plan update, existing
conditions, and trends and forecasts. It will include information on the makeup of the
community as a whole, and various sub-communities and neighborhoods in terms of
ethnicity, age, employment, income levels, household sizes, family characteristics, etc.
It will also provide all the physical land use and zoning information. Major data
sources to be used include the City's Land Use Inventory and Geographic Information
System, the 1990 and 2000 Census', and SANDAG's regional forecasts.
The release date of 2000 Census data is a critical factor in determining the schedule for
completing this study. As a result, the Demographic and Housing Profile will be
prepared in steps. The Redistricting File which contains select information on population
and ethnicity has been received, and is being structured into the City's GIS. Further
demographic profiles by place and Summary File 1, which includes selected population
and housing characteristics, are in the process of being released by SANDAG. Summary
File 3, which contains financial and employment information is not expected until mid-
2002.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 6
While the General Plan team has initiated preparatory activities and coordination with
the City's Planning and GIS Divisions, and SANDAG, the core of this work rests with
the Planning Technician and GIS Specialist positions that are part of tonight's budget
request.
Project 7. Transportation Analysis & MTDB Transit Study
This project will result in a Transportation Analysis that emphasizes the critical link
between transportation and land use, and will include three main components; traffic and
circulation, transit, and other modes such as the pedestrian and bicycle network, and rail,
aviation and marine facilities. It will evaluate roadway levels of service, transit service
levels (bus, light rail and other alternatives), as well as transportation demand
management principles such as staggered work hours, tclccommuting, etc. The analysis
will document changes since the last General Plan Update, assess trends, and identify
existing and projected conditions and needs for roadways, transit and other modes of
travel.
To further the "smart growth" and land use distribution concepts embodied in
SANDAG's Region2020 Growth Management Strategy, and the Metropolitan Transit
Development Board's (MTDB) Transit First regional transit strategy and implementation
plan, the role of transit in strategic land use planning has taken a forefront in the General
Plan Update work program. Adoption of MTDB's Transit First vision, the accelerated
pace of development in Otay Ranch and eastem Chula Vista, initiation of the Chula Vista
General Plan Update and the County's East Otay Mesa Specific Plan Amendment, among
other recent developments, have generated renewed interest in progressing with transit
planning and implementation in the South Bay.
On May 29, 2001, the City Council budgeted $157,500 to fund the City's share of a joint
transit planning program with MTDB, and to retain The Mission Group (Alan Hoffman)
as the City's expert policy and technical advisor. As a result, the General Plan Core team
has been focusing much of its efforts over the last six months with MTDB to scope,
define and initiate the joint South Bay Transit First Study which will also involve the
City of San Diego, National City and thc County of San Diego. The Study will address
both long-range, and short- to mid-range transit facilities and services for the South Bay
and Chula Vista, along with a phased implementation strategy and funding plan. It will
also result in the selection of at least one "showcase" project in Chula Vista to be
implemented within 3-5 years.
The focused planning efforts will identify specific routing, station locations, service
characteristics and appropriate technologies, as well as linkages with other components of
the transit system, including Chula Vista Transit service. This effort will be structured
around an evaluation of where higher density and intensity land uses and mixed use can
potentially be accommodated in concert with future transit corridors, and areas around
transit stations and stops. It would address bus service provided by Chula Vista Transit
and connections with other carders, and light rail service. The Study outcomes would
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 7
l~ .., ?
provide a foundation for further land use planning activities to be conducted as part of the
Land Use Distribution Analysis and Community Vision Plan portions of the General Plan
Update work program, and would also factor directly into completion of the General
Plan Traffic Impact Report and Transportation Analysis.
At present, the General Plan staff and MTDB have completed the scope-of-work and
schedule for the South Bay Transit First Study, the RFP has been released, and consultant
selection will occur during November. A contract should be awarded by MTDB in
December with the work commencing in January 2002. The Study is scheduled to be
completed in March 2003. As noted above, Council has already budgeted funds for this
study.
With regard to the overall General Plan Transportation Analysis, Traffic Study and
Circulation Element update, the staff team has completed a Draft RFP for consulting
services, and a request for $115,000 to fund those services is included in tonight's budget
request. The RFP will be finalized and released subsequent to budget approvals. It is
worth note that much of the early efforts in this work program involve land use
inventories and related information bases for which the Planning Technician and GIS
Specialist positions in tonight's budget are needed.
Project 8. Public Facilities and Services Analysis
Foundational to our Growth Management Program, it is extremely important as the City
grows and changes over the next 20 years that there is an understanding of the current
conditions, as well as the projected need, for the complete range of public facilities and
services. In order to assess the information needed for the General Plan Update, each of
the analyses and plan formulations will generally involve a four-part approach as follows:
documentation of existing conditions; an evaluation of capacity surpluses/shortfalls, and
opportunities and constraints; an iterative analysis in responding to anticipated growth
and alternative General Plan land use scenarios; and finally, completion of a master plan
based on the adopted General Plan. The various master plans will also include a phasing
and financing component.
The needed analyses can generally be divided into three groups; engineering-related
matters of City responsibility, non-engineering-related matters of City responsibility, and
those matters which are the primary responsibility of other agencies. The following
provides an overview of the facilities and services to be covered in each of those
categories, along with the status of any relevant plans. Recent studies have been
completed in several of the areas and can be incorporated into the General Plan Update.
Several others have already been budgeted for, and the remainder are the subject of
tonight's budget request. As a result, and since it is anticipated that SANDAG and the
other affected agencies will be able to assist the City with technical information and
support in completing some studies, a lump-sum of $50,000 is included in the budget
request to cover consulting services or other costs (see Attachment 4).
Gencral Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page
8
Engineering-related / City: Wastewater (sewer) and Drainage.
Funding of $150,000 each has already been budgeted through the City's Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) for preparation of the Wastewater and Drainage
Master Plans. Draft scopes-of-work are currently being prepared for review,
and the RFP's for consulting services will be released before the end of this
year.
Non-Engineering-related / City: Police, Fire, Libraries, Parks & Recreation,
Public Buildings and Services, Cultural Arts, Solid Waste
The Police Facilities Master Plan and Police Department Strategic Plan were
adopted in 2000, and provide a large part of the information needed for the GP
Update. An update to the 1998 Library Master Plan was also prepared and is
pending adoption. A citywide Parks Master Plan was also recently completed and
is pending adoption. A revision to the Civic Center master Plan, including the
new Police facility was also just adopted by the City Council. Analyses
regarding cultural arts and solid waste will need to be prepared with the General
Plan Update, and are part of the $50,000 budget request.
Other Agencies: Water, Schools, Energy, Correctional Facilities
The City will need to work with the affected providers at both the regional and
local level to prepare facility and service analyses for all these topics, which are
also part of the $50,000 budget request.
Project 9. Environmental and Open Space Analysis
This study would incorporate a number of programs that the City is currently actively
engaged in such as the MSCP Subarea Plan, the Otay Valley Regional Park plan, Otay
River Valley Watershed planning, the Greenbelt and Trails Master Plan, CO2 Reduction
Plan strategies, and Water Conservation and Air Quality Improvement Plan guidelines.
This analysis would both evaluate and identify the importance that the open space and
natural systems provide to the City by creating natural buffers between developed areas,
providing visual relief, and preserving and enhancing habitat and resource area values.
The Analysis will also encompass a number of "environmental baseline studies" that
will gather and present the range of information necessary to support preparation of the
General Plan Update EIR. Consultant assistance would be obtained to compile baseline
data and identify issues for air quality, water quality, habitat areas and values, natural
hazards, hazardous material, noise, cultural and historic resources, agricultural lands,
scenic resources, and mineral resources. It is intended that a single consultant be
retained to compile the baseline studies, and tonight's budget request includes $100,000
to cover those services.
Gcneral Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 9
t ? 1
Project 10. Economic Development Strategy
Preparation of a citywide Economic Development Strategy was launched in late 2000 by
the Community Development Department in cooperation with the consulting firm
Economic Realty Advisors (ERA). The Strategy will create a vision for shaping the
City's economic development future and also include priorities, programs and policies for
implementation. This is particularly important as it will be utilized to determine the
appropriate mix and location of commercial, office and industrial uses. It is important
that the types of commercial or industrial development are consistent with the City's
needs in terms of economic benefits, job production and meeting the service needs of the
community.
Development of the Strategy will lead to preparation of a new Economic Development
Element or section as part of the General Plan Update. Interim products from this effort
will also provide useful information that will assist other components of the General Plan
Update, such as the Regional Commercial Analysis, Land Use Distribution Analysis and
the Fiscal Analysis. An organizational structure for project oversight and coordination,
including a Blue Ribbon Committee and Steering Committee is already in place, as well
as a public and business involvement program. In addition, representatives of the
General Plan Update Team hold monthly coordination meetings with Economic
Development Strategy staff, and will continue to participate in preparation of the
Strategy. Council has previously approved and budgeted $161,025 for this effort. The
current schedule anticipates completion of the Strategy by July 2002.
Proiect 11. Telecommunications and Technology Assessment
Rapid changes in telecommunications, automation and technology have dramatically
affected the overall community in the way it conducts business, interacts with
government and other service providers, and goes about the affairs of day-to-day living.
General plans have not traditionally addressed this topic. This project would work with
different providers, the City's Management and Information Services Department, and
other knowledgeable parties to prepare a telecommunications and technology assessment
that reflects regional considerations and anticipates the role of technology over the time
horizon of the General Plan Update. This effort would produce an issue paper on
telecommunications and technology, providing a "futurist's" perspective.
The Assessment will consist of three major tasks:
1. Identifying existing telecommunication facilities, trends and forecasts.
2. Assessing the need for wired and wireless infrastructure to support existing
and anticipated future telecommunications, and identifying other potential
technological changes and ways that the community can position itself to meet
future needs, and take best take advantage of future opportunities.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 200 I
Page 10
3. Preparation of a report that summarizes issues, opportunities and constraints,
and provides policy recommendations. The report will form the basis for a
new Telecommunications and Technology section of the General Plan.
The budget request includes $20,000 for retaining a "futurist" type consultant to assist the
City with visioning and provide other expert advisory services.
Project 12. Fiscal Impact Model and Analysis
Development of enhanced fiscal impact modeling capabilities will help determine the
costs and benefits associated with various types of land uses. The General Plan Update
Fiscal Impact Model and Analysis will also identify potential threats to the City's
revenue base, and opportunities to retain and expand revenues. This project will build
upon existing fiscal impact models to evaluate cost and revenue implications, and provide
the framework for assisting evaluation of alternative development scenarios later in the
General Plan Update process.
The Public Facilities and Services Analysis, Transportation Analysis and Land Use
Distribution Analysis will identify the timing of public improvements and services
relative to development phasing, and the Fiscal Impact Model will help determine the
adequacy of anticipated revenues to fund the needed improvements and services.
Following adoption of the General Plan Update, the Model is also intended to be used to
help evaluate the general revenues and costs associated with major development projects
or changes in land use.
Commencement of this work is not anticipated to occur until the latter half of year 2002
when necessary support information will exist. While the work program is based upon
the integral involvement of staff of the City's Office of Budget and Analysis, it is also
anticipated that some expert consulting services will be needed. A modest $40,000 has
been included in the proposed budget for these services.
Project 13. Land Use Distribution Analysis
As was previously noted under the Transportation Analysis project, the direction of
SANDAG's Region2020 Growth Management Strategy, the joint MTDB South Bay
Transit First Study, and "smart growth's" principles of integrating transit and land use
planning have taken a forefront in shaping the General Plan Update program. This is
furthered by the fact that the City has been a leader in implementing many aspects of
"smart growth" through the new urbanist planning efforts in Otay Ranch.
The Land Use Distribution Analysis will initially seek to identify other areas of the
City, especially in western Chula Vista, where opportunities may exist to integrate
higher density, intensity and mixed-use concepts along existing and planned transit
corridors and station locations. The Analysis will also address the services, streetscape,
and urban design considerations necessary to create a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere to
take people from their homes to business and to transit facilities.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 11
In this role, the Land Use Distribution Analysis will interact with the Transportation
Analysis, Public Facilities and Services Analysis and other Areawide Studies. These
alternative land use distribution approaches will also help set the stage for the
Community Vision Plans work, which will ultimately form the basis for the final
formulation of General Plan level land use alternatives. It will also provide guidance as to
the appropriate land uses and densities in western Chula Vista to facilitate both
redevelopment and rehabilitation efforts. The Analysis will be conducted by staff and
supported by information provided through the other above noted studies. There are no
separate consultant or other costs associated with this effort.
Project 14. Community Vision Plans
This project will stress public outreach efforts to involve local residents and stakeholders
in identifying the needs of their communities, and in recognizing what the constraints
and opportunities are for each community. This visioning process brings people together
to develop a shared image of what they want their community to be like.
The genesis of this effort will come from the initial community and neighborhood
boundaries identified in the Community Definition project. As noted earlier, the
Definition project will be closely associated with information from the Demographic and
Housing Profile, and from information gathered in the early phases of the Public
Information and Participation Program. Once this information has been evaluated, the
actual number and location of Community Vision Plan areas can be determined. Each
conununity vision plan would become a single project proceeding on a generally parallel
track with the vision plans for other areas.
These "vision plans" would not be extremely detailed, but rather are intended to show
each individual community's desires, and to identify base policy provisions and
guidelines in concert with overall City needs. Detailed implementation planning efforts
(Specific Plans, etc.) would occur subsequent to adoption of the General Plan Update.
These "vision plans" would assist the City Council and staff immediately in the
following ways:
a. By helping determine whether a development proposal for the area is consistent with
the adopted vision, whether it is feasible, and what (if any) level of financial support
or other assistance the City should provide.
b. By assisting in development of the City's Capital Improvement program by providing
clear direction for targeting monies for infrastructure improvements.
c. By making it known to the residents of the individual communities that the City is
interested in understanding what their, issues, concerns and desires are
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 12
Project 15. Draft Update of General Plan Document
This project will produce the revised General Plan document in draft form. It will be
prepared in sufficient detail to allow drafting of the Environmental Impact Report. The
project includes definition and evaluation of broad alternatives, selection of a preferred
alternative, and drafting of all the revised General Plan Elements.
The alternatives will build upon information generated through the Land Use Distribution
Analysis and Transportation Analysis, along with other areawide studies and the
Community Visioning process. The altematives would be presented at a series of public
workshops as part of the Public Information and Participation Program.
Project 16. Environmental Impact Report
The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is envisioned as a Master and Program level
document. The EIR will be prepared in parallel with the revised General Plan, and the
project description would reflect the Draft General Plan revisions. The products of
earlier tasks, particularly the Areawide Studies, will provide baseline information and
initial analysis to be reflected in the EIR. The EIR will assess alternatives idemified
through Project 15, Draft Update of General Plan Document, and include additional
analysis of the topics addressed in the Areawide Studies.
Recommended mitigation measures from the EIR are expected to result in modifications
to the Draft General Plan Update. This effort will also address environmental thresholds
and produce an EIR that can be used in subsequent environmental reviews for various
implementation plans.
Due to the scope and breadth of the General Plan subject matter, the EIR is anticipated
to be a fairly complex undertaking requiring significant consultant resources. A large
amount of tonight's budget request ($400,000) is associated with preparation of the EIR
While this is a significant expense, it should be noted the as a "master" or "program"
level EIR, the document is designed to provide an assessment framework which will
streamline the preparation of future environmental reviews associated with General Plan
implementation efforts. As a result, the front-end expenditure will save money in the
longer-term.
Proiect 17. Final Updated General Plan Adoption Process
The Final Draft General Plan would be prepared based upon the preferred alternatives.
It would incorporate all of the elements required by State law as well as others deemed
necessary by the City Council and City staff.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 2001
Page 13
Public hearings would be held on the Draft EIR and the Draft General Plan at
both the Planning Commission and City Council levels. The public hearings
will enable further public input to be provided. At the conclusion of the
hearings, the documents could be certified/approved.
Project 18. General Plan Update Implementation Program
This project would occur after the final General Plan adoption, and would
generally consist of four major components:
Identifying and securing the resources for carrying out programs to
implement the Plan including Specific Plans, Zoning Ordinance
amendments, etc., as well as for ongoing monitoring of progress and
periodic review and revisions.
· Obtaining the approval of any external agencies (such as the Coastal
Commission) that may need to sign off on certain General Plan revisions.
· Providing staff training regarding the Update and its implementation.
· Publicizing and promoting the Update, and providing for electronic and
other forms of access to the information in the updated General Plan.
The specifics of this work will depend upon the outcomes of the final General
Plan adoption, and are therefore are not fully identified in the current proposed
work program, nor are the associated staff and other resource requirements and
costs included in the current budget.
General Plan Update Work Program / Progress Synopsis
October 30, 200 I
Page 14
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE CITY GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE WORK PROGRAM AND BUDGET, ADDING 1.0 FTE
UNCLASSIFIED PLANNING TECHNICIAN II POSITION, AND
AMENDING THE FY 2001-2002 BUDGET, APPROPRIATING
FUNDS THEREFORE, AND AMENDING THE FY 2002-2003
ADOPTED SPENDING PLAN THEREFOR
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista General Plan ,,vas last updated in July 1989;
and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2000, the City Council approved the hiring of a 3-
person core staff team for the General Plan Update project; and
WHEREAS, the comprehensive update of the General Plan is a significant
undertaking requiring substantial investments in time, as well as staff and consultant
resources, and supplies and equipment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Council's action in April 2000, the General Plan core
team has initiated the project and developed a detailed work program defining all the
required components, steps, time frames, needed resources (including consultant services
and studies), costs and budgets; and
WHEREAS, the related, necessary budget amendments and appropriations are
presented in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and made a part hereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista approves the overall work program and budget for the General Plan Update;
adding one unclassified Planning Technician II in the Planning and Building Department,
and one half-time, hourly GIS Specialist in the Management and Information Services
Department; and amending the FY 2001-2002 budget, appropriating $1,087,812 for new
staff; consultants and supplies a~d services from the General Fund; and appropriating
$13,500 for computers and furniture from the Public Facilities DIF fund; and
appropriating $185,963 from the merged RDA project area to the Bayfront RDA project
area for a loan repayment; and amending the adopted FY 2002-2003 Spending Plan,
adding $118,630 for staff costs to be offset by CIP reimbursements; all in accordance
with the specific amounts and funds presented in Exhibit 1.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter John. Kaheny ~_.~-
Planning and Building Director Ct~srAttoroey
o
o