Agenda packet — Vallejo City Council, September 22, 2026 (part 3 of 7)

Page 16 of 181 ends

(1) When considered at the watershed scale, certain land development projects characterized as smart growth or high density can either reduce existing impervious surfaces or create less “accessory” impervious areas and automobile-related pollutant impacts. Incentive LID Treatment Reduction Credits approved by the Water Board may be applied to these Special Projects, which are Regulated Projects that meet the specific criteria listed below in Provision C.3.e.ii.(2). For any Special Project, the allowable incentive LID Treatment Reduction Credit is the maximum percentage of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Special Project’s drainage area that may be treated with one or a combination of the following two types of non-LID treatment systems:
- Tree-box-type high flowrate biofilters
C
ii.

SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 148 of 564 ends

Page 17 of 181 ends

- Vault-based high flowrate media filters
The allowed LID Treatment Reduction Credit recognizes that density and space limitations for the Special Projects identified herein may make 100% LID treatment infeasible.
(2) Prior to granting any LID Treatment Reduction Credits, Permittees must first establish all the following:
(a) The infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures onsite;
(b) The infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures offsite or paying in-lieu fees to treat 100% of the Provision C.3.d runoff with LID treatment measures at an offsite or Regional Project; and (c) The infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with some combination of LID treatment measures onsite, offsite, and/or paying in-lieu fees towards at an offsite or Regional Project. For each Special Project, a Permittee shall document the basis of infeasibility used to establish technical and/or economic infeasibility. Under Provision C.3.e.v, each Permittee is required to report on the infeasibility of 100% LID treatment in each scenario described in Provision C.3.e.ii.(2)(a)-(c) above, for each of the Special Projects for which LID Treatment Reduction Credit was applied. (3) Category A Special Project Criteria
(a) To be considered a Category A Special Project, a Regulated Project must meet all of the following criteria:
(i) Be built as part of a Permittee’s stated objective to preserve or enhance a pedestrian-oriented type of urban design. (ii) Be located in a Permittee’s designated central business district, downtown core area or downtown core zoning district, neighborhood business district or comparable pedestrian-oriented commercial district, or historic preservation site and/or district. (iii) Create and/or replace one half acre or less of impervious surface area. (iv) Include no surface parking, except for incidental surface parking. Incidental surface parking is allowed only for emergency vehicle access, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility,  and passenger and freight loading zones. (v) Have at least 85% coverage for the entire project site by permanent structures.  The remaining 15% portion of the site is to be used for safety access, parking structure entrances, trash and recycling service, utility access, pedestrian connections, public uses, landscaping, and stormwater treatment.
(b) Any Category A Special Project may qualify for 100% LID Treatment Reduction Credit, which would allow the Category A Special Project to treat up to 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1).
(4) Category B Special Project Criteria
(a) To be considered a Category B Special Project, a Regulated Project must meet all of the following criteria:
(i) Be built as part of a Permittee’s stated objective to preserve or enhance a pedestrian-oriented type of urban design. (ii) Be located in a Permittee’s designated central business district, downtown core area or downtown core zoning district, neighborhood business district or comparable pedestrian- oriented commercial district, or historic preservation site and/or district.      (iii) Create and/or replace greater than one-half acre but no more than 2 acres of impervious surface area. (iv) Include no surface parking, except for incidental surface parking. Incidental surface parking is allowed only for emergency vehicle access, ADA accessibility, and passenger and freight loading zones. (v) Have at least 85% coverage for the entire project site by permanent structures.  The remaining 15% portion of the site is to be used for safety access, parking structure entrances, trash and recycling service, utility access, pedestrian connections, public uses, landscaping, and stormwater treatment.
(b) Any Category A Special Project may qualify for 100 percent LID Treatment Reduction Credit, which would allow the Category A Special Project to treat up to 100 percent of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1). (4) Category B Special Project Criteria
(a) To be considered a Category B Special Project, a Regulated Project must meet all of the following criteria:
(i) Be built as part of a Permittee’s stated objective to preserve or enhance a pedestrian-oriented type of urban design. (ii) Be located in a Permittee’s designated central business district, downtown core area or downtown core zoning district, neighborhood business district or comparable pedestrian-oriented commercial district, or historic preservation site and/or district. (iii) Create and/or replace greater than one-half acre but no more than 2 acres of impervious surface area. (iv) Include no surface parking, except for incidental surface parking.  Incidental surface parking is allowed only for emergency vehicle access, ADA accessibility, and passenger and freight loading zones. (v) Have at least 85 percent coverage for the entire project site by permanent structures. The remaining 15 percent portion of the site is to be used for safety access, parking structure entrances, trash and recycling service, utility access, pedestrian connections, public uses, landscaping, and stormwater treatment.

C
ii.

Page 149 of 564 ends

Page 18 of 181 ends

(b) For any Category B Special Project, the maximum LID Treatment Reduction Credit allowed is determined based on the density achieved by the Project in accordance with the criteria listed below. Density is expressed in Floor Area Ratios (FARs ) for commercial development projects, in Dwelling Units  per Acre (DU/Ac) for residential development projects, and in FARs and DU/Ac for mixed-use development projects. (i) 50 percent Maximum LID Treatment Reduction Credit
(a) For any commercial Category B Special Project with an FAR of at least 2:1, up to 50% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1). (b) For any residential Category B Special Project with a gross density24 of at least 50 DU/Ac, up to 50 percent of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above.
(c) For any mixed use Category B Special Project with an FAR of at least 2:1 or a gross density of at least 50 DU/Ac, up to 50 percent of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above. (ii) 75% Maximum LID Treatment Reduction Credit
a. For any commercial Category B Special Project with an FAR of at least 3:1, up to 75 percent of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above.
b. For any residential Category B Special Project with a gross density of at least 75 DU/Ac, up to 75 percent of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above.
c. For any mixed-use Category B Special Project with an FAR of at least 3:1 or a gross density of at least 75 DU/Ac, up to 75 percent of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above. (iii) 100% Maximum LID Treatment Reduction Credit
(a) For any commercial Category B Special Project with an FAR of at least 4:1, up to 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above.
(b) For any residential Category B Special Project with a gross density of at least 100 DU/Ac, up to 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.#.d for the Project's drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above.
(c) For any mixed use Category B Special Project with an FAR of at least 4:1 or a gross density of at least 100 DU/Ac, up to 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area may be treated with either one or a combination of the two types of non-LID treatment systems listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1) above. (5) Category C Special Project Criteria (Affordable Housing) (a) For the purposes of attributing Affordable Housing Credits, affordable housing is defined as preserved housing with deed restrictions running at least 55 years, at rent/mortgage rates (including utilities) no greater than 30 percent of the area median household income (AMI) limits adjusted for household size based on the maximum percentage of AMI for each income category, which are defined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for affordable housing in metropolitan areas as follows: Acutely Low household incomes as 0-15 percent of AMI, Extremely Low household incomes as 16-30 percent of AMI, Very Low household incomes as 31-50 percent of AMI, Low household incomes as 51-80 percent of AMI, and Moderate household incomes as 81-120 percent of AMI.25  To be considered a Category C Special Project, a Regulated Project must additionally meet both of the following      (i) Be primarily a residential development project,26 and (ii) Achieve at least a gross density of 40 DU/Ac.
(b) For any Category C Special Project, the total maximum LID Treatment Reduction Credit allowed is the sum of four different types of credits that the Category C Special Project may qualify for, namely: Affordable Housing, Location, Density, and Minimized Surface Parking Credits. The total maximum LID Treatment Reduction Credit for any Category C Special Project may not exceed 100 percent. (c) Affordable Housing Credits: A Category C Special Project may qualify for Affordable Housing Credits, according to the following criteria. The income limits that shall be used for these criteria are the most current Official State Income Limits (adjusted for household size, and specific to each county), which are defined on the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s website.27, 28  All qualifying affordable housing DUs must be preserved housing with deed restrictions running at least 55 years, at rent/mortgage rates (including utilities) no greater than 30 percent of the total household income. In each Category C Special Project, up to three DUs that are used as building manager’s DUs may be exempted from the deed restriction requirement and may be excluded from the calculations described below in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5)(c)(i)-(ii). The following two steps shall be used to calculate Affordable Housing Credits:    (i) First, the percentage of the project’s DUs in each affordability category are multiplied by the respective credit multipliers, according to the table below, and rounded to the nearest whole number.

C
ii.

Page 150 of 564 ends

Page 19 of 181 ends

(ii) Second, , the credits generated from the table above in the first step in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5)(c)(i) are summed together to produce a weighted sum and rounded to the nearest whole number. Then Affordable Housing Credit is granted according to which weighted sum range (in the table below) that whole number (X) falls into:
(d) Location Credits: To qualify for any Location Credits, a Category C Special Project must first qualify for one of the Affordable Housing Credits in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5)(c).
(i) A Category C Special Project may qualify for the following Location Credits:
(d) Location Credits: To qualify for any Location Credits, a Category C Special Project must first qualify for one of the Affordable Housing Credits in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5)(c).
(i) A Category C Special Project may qualify for the following Location Credits:
a. 5 percent Location Credit: Located within a ¼-mile radius of an existing or planned transit hub. b. 10 percent Location Credit: Located within a planned Priority Development Area (PDA), which is an infill development area formally designated by the Association of Bay Area Government’s/Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s FOCUS regional planning program. FOCUS is a regional incentive-based development and conservation strategy for the San Francisco Bay Area. (ii) Only one Location Credit may be used by an individual Category C Special Project, even if the project qualifies for multiple Location Credits. (iii) One hundred percent of a Category C Special Project’s site must be located within the ¼-mile radius of an existing or planned transit hub to qualify for the corresponding Location Credit listed above. One hundred percent of a Category C Special Project’s site must be located within a PDA to qualify for the corresponding Location Credit listed above.
(iv) Transit Dens
(e) Density Credits: To qualify for any Density Credits, a Category C Special Project must first qualify for one of the Location Credits listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5)( c) .
(i) A Category C Special Project that is a commercial or mixed-use development project may qualify for the following Density Credits:

a. 5% Density Credit: Achieve a gross density of at least 40 DU/Ac b. 10% Density Credit: Achieve a gross density of at least 60 DU/Ac c. 15 percent Density Credit: Achieve a gross density of at least 100 DU/Ac. (ii) Only one Density Credit may be used by an individual Category C Special Project, even if the project qualifies for multiple Density Credits.

C
ii.

Page 151 of 564 ends

Page 20 of 181 ends

(f) Minimized Surface Parking Credits: To qualify for any Minimized Surface Parking Credits, a Category C Special Project must first qualify for one of the Location Credits listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5) (c ) . (i) A Category C Special Project may qualify for the following Minimized Surface Parking Credits:

(a) 5% Minimized Surface Parking Credit: Have no surface parking except for incidental surface parking. Incidental surface parking is allowed only for emergency vehicle access, ADA accessibility, and passenger and freight loading zones. (g) Category C Special Projects receiving final discretionary approval prior to July 1, 2022, may use the Category C Special Project criteria included in the Previous Permit.
(6) Any Regulated Project that meets all the criteria for multiple Special Projects Categories (i.e., a Regulated Project that may be characterized as a Category B or C Special Project) may only use the LID Treatment Reduction Credit allowed under one of the Special Projects Categories (i.e., a Regulated Project that may be characterized as a Category B or C Special Project may use the LID Treatment Reduction Credit allowed under Category B or Category C, but not the sum of both.).
iii. Implementation Level
(1) Provisions C.3.e.i-ii supersede any Alternative Compliance Policies previously approved by the Executive Officer. (2) For all offsite projects and Regional Projects installed in accordance with Provision C.3.e.i-ii, the Permittees shall meet the Operation & Maintenance (O&M) requirements of Provision C.3.h.
(3) Prior to July 1, 2023, Permittees shall implement Provision C.3.e.ii in Attachment I, which are requirements from the Previous Permit. (4) Beginning July 1, 2023, Permittees shall implement Provision C.3.e.ii. iv. Reporting – Annual reporting shall be done in conjunction with reporting requirements under Provision C.3.b.iv.(2).

Any Permittee choosing to require 100% LID treatment onsite for all Regulated Projects and not allow alternative compliance under Provision C.3.e, shall include a statement to that effect in each Annual Report. v. Reporting on Special Projects
(1) Permittees shall track any identified potential Special Projects, including those projects that have submitted planning applications but that have not received final discretionary approval.
(2) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall report to the Water Board on these tracked potential Special Projects using Table 3.1 found at the end of Provision C.3. All the required column entry information listed in Table 3.1 shall be reported for each potential Special Project. Any Permittee with no Special Projects shall so state. For each Special Project listed in Table 3.1, Permittees shall include a narrative discussion of the feasibility or infeasibility of 100% LID treatment onsite, offsite, and at a Regional Project. The narrative discussion shall address each of the following:
(a) The infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures onsite.
(b) The infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures offsite or paying in-lieu fees to treat 100% of the Provision C.3.d runoff with LID treatment measures at a Regional Project. (c) The infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with some combination of LID treatment measures onsite, offsite, and/or paying in-lieu fees towards a Regional Project. Both technical and economic feasibility or infeasibility shall be discussed, as applicable. The discussion shall also contain enough technical and/or economic detail to document the basis of infeasibility used.
(3) Once a Special Project has final discretionary approval, it shall be reported in the Provision C.3.b. Reporting Table in the same reporting year that the project was approved. In addition to the column entries contained in the Provision C.3.b. Reporting Table in the same reporting year that the project was approved. In addition to the column entries contained in the Provision C.3.b. Reporting Table, the Permittees shall provide the following supplemental information for each approved Special Project:
(a) Submittal Date: Date that a planning application for the Special Project was submitted. (b) Description: Type of project, number of floors, number of units (commercial, mixed-use, residential), type of parking, and other relevant information. (c) Site Acreage: Total site area in acres. (d) Total Impervious Surface Created/Replaced: The total impervious surface in acres created or replaced by the project, which is subject to the treatment requirements listed in Provision C.3.e.ii.(1). (e) Gross Density in DU/Ac: Number of dwelling units per acre. (f) Category C Projects: Number of DUs in each AMI Category: For Category C Special Projects only, the number of preserved DUs (DUs with deed restrictions running at least 55 years) that have rent/mortgage rates (including utilities) no less than 30 percent of the Moderate, Low, Very Low, and Extremely Low area median household income levels specified in Provision C.3.e.ii.(5)(c). (g) Density in FAR: Floor Area Ratio.
(h) Special Project Category: For each applicable Special Project Category, list the specific criteria applied to determine applicability. For each non- applicable Special Project Category, indicate n/a.

C
ii.

Page 152 of 564 ends

Page 21 of 181 ends

(i) LID Treatment Reduction Credit: For each applicable Special Project Category, state the maximum total LID Treatment Reduction Credit applied. For Category C Special Projects also list the individual Affordable Housing, Location, Density, and Minimized Surface Parking Credits applied. (j) Stormwater Treatment Systems: List all proposed stormwater treatment systems and the corresponding percentage of the total amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Project’s drainage area that will be treated by each treatment system. (k) List of Non-LID Stormwater Treatment Systems: List all non-LID stormwater treatment systems approved. For each type of non-LID treatment system, indicate: (1) the percentage of the total amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d. for the Special Project's drainage area, and (2) whether the treatment system either meets minimum design criteria published by a government agency or received certification issued by a government agency, and reference the applicable criteria or certification.

C.3.f. Alternative Certification of Stormwater Treatment Systems C i. Task Description – In lieu of reviewing a Regulated Project’s adherence to Provision C.3.d, a Permittee may elect to have a third party conduct detailed review and certify the Regulated Project’s adherence to Provision C.3.d. The third party reviewer must be a Civil Engineer or a Licensed Architect or Landscape Architect registered in the State of California or staff of another Permittee subject to the requirements of this Permit. ii. Implementation Level – Any Permittee accepting third-party reviews must make a reasonable effort to ensure that the third party has no conflict of interest with regard to the Regulated Project in question. That is, any consultant or contractor (or his/her employees) hired to design and/or construct a stormwater treatment system for a Regulated Project shall not also be the certifying third party. The Permittee must verify that the third party certifying any Regulated Project has current training on stormwater treatment system design (within three years of the certification signature date) for water quality and understands the groundwater protection principles applicable to Regulated Project sites. Training conducted by an organization with stormwater treatment system design expertise (such as a college or university, the American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of Landscape Architects, American Public Works Association, California Water Environment Association (CWEA), BASMAA, National Association of Flood & Stormwater Management Agencies, CASQA, or the equivalent, may be considered qualifying training. iii. Reporting – Projects reviewed by third parties shall be noted in reporting tables for Provision C.3.b.

C.3.g. Hydromodification Management C
i. Hydromodification Management (HM) Projects are Regulated Projects that create and/or replace one acre or more of impervious surface except where one of the following applies. All HM Projects shall meet the Hydromodification Management Standard of Provision C.3.g.ii. (1) The post-project impervious surface area is less than, or the same as, the pre-project impervious surface area. (2) The project is located in a catchment that drains to a hardened (e.g., continuously lined with concrete) engineered channel or channels or enclosed pipes that extend continuously to the Bay, Delta, or flow- controlled reservoir, or drains to channels that are tidally influenced. (3) The project is located in a catchment or subwatershed that is highly developed (i.e., that is 70% or more impervious).30 All HM Projects shall meet the HM Standard of either Provision C.3.g.ii or Provision C.3.g.iii. The Hydromodification Applicability Maps developed by the Permittees in the Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Fairfield-Suisun Programs, and the City of Vallejo, under Order No. R2-2009-0074 remain in effect and are provided in Attachment C to this Permit. Permittees that do not have the location-based applicability criteria (Provision C.3.g.i.(2) – (3)) shown on existing maps shall develop, or cause to be developed, new maps, overlays to existing maps, or other equivalent information that demonstrates whether a project falls under one of those two criteria (whether or not areas are subject to HM requirements). Such maps, overlays, or other equivalent information shall be acceptable to the Executive Officer and shall not be effective until accepted by the Executive Officer. ii. HM Standard
Stormwater discharges from HM Projects shall not cause an increase in the erosion potential of the receiving stream over the pre-project (existing) condition. Increases in runoff flow and volume shall be managed so that post-project runoff shall not exceed estimated pre-project rates and durations, where such increased flow and/or volume is likely to cause increased potential for erosion of creek beds and banks, silt pollutant generation, or other adverse impacts on beneficial uses due to increased erosive force. The demonstration that post-project stormwater runoff does not exceed estimated pre-project runoff rates and durations shall include the following:
(1) Range of Flows to Control: FFor Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Permittees, and the City of Vallejo, HM controls shall be designed such that post-project stormwater discharge rates and durations match pre-project discharge rates and durations from 10 percent of the pre-project 2- year peak flow24 up to the pre-project 10-year peak flow. For Fairfield-Suisun Permittees, HM controls shall be designed such that post- project stormwater discharge rates and durations shall match from 20 percent of the 2-year peak flow up to the pre-project 10-year peak flow. (2) Goodness of Fit Criteria: The post-project flow duration curve shall not deviate above the pre-project flow duration curve by more than 10 percent over more than 10 percent of the length of the curve corresponding to the range of flows to control.

C
v.

Page 153 of 564 ends

Page 22 of 181 ends

(3) Standard HM Modeling: Permittees shall use, or shall cause to be used, a continuous simulation hydrologic computer model to simulate pre-project and post-project runoff, or sizing factors or charts developed using such a model, to design onsite or regional HM controls. The Permittees shall compare, or shall cause to be compared, the pre-project and post-project model output for a long-term rainfall record and shall show that applicable performance criteria in C.3.g.ii.(1)-(3) above are met. HM controls designed using the Bay Area Hydrology Model (BAHM) and site-specific input data shall be considered to meet the HM Standard. Such use must be consistent with directions and options set forth in the most current BAHM User Manual.

Modifications to the BAHM shall be acceptable to the Executive Officer, shall be consistent with the requirements of this Provision, and shall be reported as required below:
- Precipitation Data: Precipitation data used in the modeling of HM controls shall, at a minimum, be 30 years of hourly rainfall data representative of the area being modeled. Where a longer rainfall record is available, the longer record shall be used. - Calculating Post-Project Runoff: Retention and detention basins shall be considered impervious surfaces for purposes of calculating post-project runoff. Pre- and post-project runoff shall be calculated and compared for the entire site, without separating or excluding areas that may be considered self-retaining.iii. HM Standard – Direct Simulation of Erosion Potential HM control shall be achieved by maintaining the erosion potential in receiving streams at a value of equal to or less than 1.0. In order to use the Provision C.3.g.iii HM Standard – Direct Simulation of Erosion Potential, for their HM Projects, the CCCWP Permittees shall distinguish the range of situations present within their jurisdictions and incorporate an associated range of sizing factors for HM controls (described below in Provision C.3.g.vi.(2)) to address that range of situations, sufficient to demonstrate that appropriately-sized HM controls in those respective situations would achieve the HM Standard. The CCCWP Permittees shall submit a Technical Report describing and justifying these criteria, subject to the Executive Officer’s approval.
iv. Types of HM Controls
Projects shall meet the HM Standard using any of the following HM controls or a combination thereof:
(1) Onsite HM controls are flow duration control structures, LID features and facilities, and hydrologic source controls that collectively result in the HM Standard being met at the point(s) where stormwater runoff discharges from the project site. (2) Regional HM controls are flow duration control structures that collect stormwater runoff discharge from multiple projects (each of which shall incorporate hydrologic source control measures as well) and are designed such that the HM Standard is met for all the projects at the point where the regional HM control discharges.
(3) In-stream measures shall be an option only where the stream, which receives runoff from the project, is already impacted by erosive flows and shows evidence of excessive sediment, erosion, deposition, or is a hardened channel.In-stream measures involve modifying the receiving stream channel slope and geometry so that the stream can convey the new flow regime without increasing the potential for erosion and aggradation. In-stream measures are intended to improve long-term channel stability and prevent erosion by reducing the erosive forces imposed on the channel boundary.In-stream measures, or a combination of in-stream and onsite controls, shall be designed to achieve the HM Standard from the point where the project(s) discharge(s) to the stream to the mouth of the stream or to achieve an equivalent degree of flow control mitigation (based on amount of impervious surface mitigated) as part of an in-stream project located in the same watershed. Designing in-stream controls requires a hydrologic and geomorphic evaluation (including a longitudinal profile) of the stream system downstream and upstream of the project. As with all in-stream activities, other regulatory permits must be obtained by the project proponent.32 v. Implementation Level
(1) For Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Solano Permittees, HM Projects shall meet the HM Standard in Provision C.3.g.ii immediately. (2) For CCCWP Permittees, HM Projects receiving final planning entitlements prior to Executive Officer approval of CCCWP’s submittal pursuant to Provisions C.3.g.iii and C.3.g.vi.(2) shall use the methods and criteria specified in CCCWP’s Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, 7th Edition (2017), or most current version. Subsequent to Executive Officer approval of CCCWP’s submittal pursuant to Provisions C.3.g.iii and C.3.g.vi.(2), HM Projects shall use the methods and criteria specified (and/or acknowledged and approved) in the Executive Officer’s approval or conditional approval of that submittal; CCCWP Permittees may alternatively implement the HM Standard in Provision C.3.g.ii. vi. Reporting
(1) New HM Applicability Maps or equivalent information prepared pursuant to Provision C.3.g.i, for those Permittees who do not have an approved Map, shall be submitted, acceptable to the Executive Officer, not later than with the 2023 Annual Report. (2) With the 2023 Annual Report, the CCCWP Permittees shall submit a Technical Report subject to the Executive Officer’s approval, consisting of a HM Management Plan describing how the CCCW Permittees will implement the HM Standard specified in Provision C.3.g.iii. The Technical Report shall include:

C
ii.

Page 154 of 564 ends

Page 23 of 181 ends

(a) A complete suite of sizing factors – for each type of HM control that may be used in the County – that is protective of all likely site and watershed characteristics, for sites with soils in Hydrologic Soil Groups (HSG) A, B, C, and D, with equations for adjustments to the sizing factors based on geographic differences (including, but not limited to, annual rainfall intensity and frequency, land use, and other hydrologic characteristics), based on the methods and criteria in the CCCWP Hydromodification Technical Report (September 29, 2017), and pursuant to the recommendations provided in the Water Board’s Response to CCCWP’s Hydromodification Management Memo of November 4, 2020 (March 19, 2021). The complete suite of sizing factors shall ensure each type of HM control achieves the Provision C.3.g.iii HM Standard. For the complete suite of sizing factors, the base case sizing factor for HM controls at sites with HSG D soils shall be 6.5 percent.33 (b) The Technical Report may optionally identify geographic areas or criteria for site-by-site determination, where the use of the prescribed methods, criteria, and suite of sizing factors may result in HM Projects failing to comply with the Provision C.3.g.iii HM Standard. For those areas, the Technical Report shall propose additional onsite mitigation measures, which when implemented in addition to the complete suite of sizing factors specified in Provision C.3.g.vi.(2)(a), ensure that HM controls achieve the Provision C.3.g.iii HM Standard. The additional onsite mitigation measures include, but are not limited to: site grading to produce self-retaining areas, specific guidance on augmentation of HM control design (e.g., increasing the size of the storage layer), and increases to the HM control sizing factors. The additional mitigation measures shall not include: reliance on land development restrictions, or on open space preservation, or on the presence of existing or future HM and LID controls located elsewhere within the catchment. The Technical Report may additionally propose alternative or supplemental methods of compliance with the Provision C.3.g.iii HM Standard, including any combination of: undersized onsite HM controls, additional new HM controls located offsite within the same catchment as the receiving stream, and in- stream controls (e.g., as described in SCVURPPP’s 2005 Hydromodification Management Plan Final Report), which when implemented together achieve the Provision C.3.g.iii HM Standard.(3) Reporting of HM projects shall be as described in Provision C.3.b. (4) Permittees allowing the use of BAHM shall report collectively, with each Annual Report, a listing, summary, and date of modifications made to the BAHM, including the technical rationale. This shall be prepared at the countywide program level and submitted on behalf of participating Permittees. (5) In addition, for each HM Project approved during the reporting period, Permittees shall collect and make available the following information.

Information shall be reported electronically, and, where appropriate, in tabular form. - Device(s) or method(s) used to meet the HM Standard, such as detention basin(s), biodetention unit(s), regional detention basin, or in-stream control(s);
- Method used by the project proponent to design and size the device or method used to meet the HM Standard; - Site plans identifying impervious areas, surface flow directions for the entire site, and location(s) of HM measures; - For projects using standard sizing charts, a summary of sizing calculations used; - For projects using the BAHM, a listing of model inputs; and - For projects using custom modeling, a summary of the modeling calculations with a corresponding graph showing curve matching (existing, post- project, and post-project-with HM controls curves).

C.3.h. Operation and Maintenance of Stormwater Treatment Systems C i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall implement an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Verification Program. ii. Implementation Level – At a minimum, the O&M Verification Program shall include the following elements:
(1) Conditions of approval or other legally enforceable agreements or mechanisms for all Regulated Projects that, at a minimum, require at least one of the following from all project proponents and their successors in control of the Project or successors in fee title:
(a) The project proponent’s signed statement accepting responsibility for the O&M of the installed pervious pavement system(s) (if any), onsite, joint, and/or offsite stormwater treatment system(s), and HM control(s) (if any) until such responsibility is legally transferred to another entity; C
vi.

Page 155 of 564 ends

Page 24 of 181 ends

(b) Written conditions in the sales or lease agreements or deed for the project that requires the buyer or lessee to assume responsibility for the O&M of the pervious pavement system(s) (if any), onsite, joint, and/or offsite installed stormwater treatment system(s), and HM control(s) (if any) until such responsibility is legally transferred to another entity; (c) Written text in project deeds, or conditions, covenants and restrictions (CCRs) for multi-unit residential projects that require the homeowners association or, if there is no association, each individual owner to assume responsibility for the O&M of the installed pervious pavement system(s) (if any), onsite, joint, and/or offsite stormwater treatment system(s), and HM control(s) (if any) until such responsibility is legally transferred to another entity; or (d) Any other legally enforceable agreement or mechanism, such as recordation in the property deed, that assigns the O&M responsibility for the installed pervious pavement system(s) (if any), onsite, joint, and/or offsite treatment system(s) and HM control(s) (if any) to the project owner(s) or the Permittee.(2) Coordination with the appropriate mosquito and vector control agency with jurisdiction to establish a protocol for notification of installed stormwater treatment systems and HM controls.
(3) Conditions of approval or other legally enforceable agreements or mechanisms for all Regulated Projects that require the granting of site access to all representatives of the Permittee, local mosquito and vector control agency staff, and Water Board staff, for the sole purpose of performing O&M inspections of the installed pervious pavement system(s) (if any), stormwater treatment system(s) and HM control(s) (if any).

C
ii.

Page 156 of 564 ends

Page 25 of 181 ends

(4) A database or equivalent tabular format of the following:
(a) All pervious pavement system(s) that total 3000 square feet or more installed at Regulated Projects, offsite, or at a Regional Project. The total square footage should not include pervious pavement systems installed as private-use patios for single family homes, townhomes, or condominiums. (b) All stormwater treatment systems installed onsite at Regulated Projects, offsite, or at a joint or Regional Project. all HM controls installed onsite at Regulated Projects, offsite, or at a joint or Regional Project. (c) All HM controls installed onsite at Regulated Projects, offsite, or at a joint or Regional Project. (5) The database or equivalent tabular format required in Provision C.3.h.ii.(4) shall include the following information for each Regulated Project, offsite project, and Regional Project , and shall be made available to Water Board staff upon request:
(a) Name and address of the project;
(b) Names of the owner(s) and responsible operator(s) of the installed pervious pavement system(s) (if any), stormwater treatment system(s), and/or HM control(s);
(c) Specific description of the location (or a map showing the location) of the installed pervious pavement system(s) (if any), stormwater treatment system(s), and HM control(s) (if any);
(d) Date(s) that the pervious pavement system(s) (if any), stormwater treatment system(s), and HM controls (if any) was/were installed; (e) Description of the type and size of the pervious pavement systems (if any), stormwater treatment system(s), and HM control(s) (if any) installed; (f) Detailed information on O&M inspections. For each inspection, include the following:
(i) Date of inspection.
(ii) Type of inspection (e.g., installation, annual, followup, spot). (iii) Type(s) of pervious pavement systems inspected (e.g., pervious concrete, pervious asphalt, pervious pavers). (iv) Type(s) of stormwater treatment systems inspected (e.g., swale, bioretention unit, tree well) and an indication of whether the treatment system is an onsite, joint, or offsite system.
(v) Type of HM controls inspected.
(vi) Inspection findings or results (e.g., proper installation, proper operation and maintenance, system not operating properly because of plugging, bypass of stormwater because of improper installation or maintenance, maintenance required immediately). (vii) Enforcement action(s) taken, if any (e.g., verbal warning, notice of violation, compliance schedule, administrative citation, administrative order). (6) A prioritized O&M Inspection Plan for inspecting all pervious pavement systems that total 3,000 square feet or more (excluding private-use patios for single family homes, townhomes, or condominiums), stormwater treatment systems and HM controls installed at Regulated Projects, offsite locations, and/or at joint or Regional Projects. For residential subdivisions with pervious pavement systems that include individual driveways, inspection of a representative number of driveways is sufficient. At a minimum, the O&M Inspection Plan must specify the following for each fiscal year:
(a) Inspection by the Permittee of all newly installed pervious pavement systems that total 3,000 square feet or more (excluding private-use patios for single family homes, townhomes, or condominiums), stormwater treatment systems, and HM controls (at Regulated Projects, offsite locations, and/or at joint or Regional Projects) at the completion of installation to ensure approved plans have been followed. For residential subdivisions with pervious pavement systems that include individual driveways, inspection of a representative number of driveways is sufficient; (b) Inspection by the Permittee of an average of 20 percent, but no less than 15 percent, of the total number (at the end of the preceding fiscal year) of Regulated Projects, offsite projects, or Regional Projects. Each inspection shall include inspection of all pervious pavement systems that total 3,000 square feet or more (excluding private-use patios for single family homes, townhomes, or condominiums), stormwater treatment systems, and HM controls installed at the Regulated Project, offsite project, or Regional Project. For residential subdivisions with pervious pavement systems that include individual driveways, inspection of a representative number of driveways is sufficient; (c) Inspection by the Permittee of all Regulated Projects, offsite projects, or Regional Projects at least once every five years. Each inspection shall include inspection of all pervious pavement systems that total 3,000 square feet or more (excluding private-use patios for single family homes, townhomes, or condominiums), stormwater treatment systems, and HM controls installed at the Regulated Project, offsite project, or Regional Project.

For residential subdivisions with pervious pavement systems that include individual driveways, inspection of a representative number of driveways is sufficient; and
(d) For vault-based stormwater treatment systems, Permittees may accept 3rd party inspection reports in lieu of conducting Permittee operation and maintenance inspections only if the 3rd party inspections are conducted at least annually. Information from each 3rd party inspection shall be included in the database or tabular format required in Provision C.3.h.ii.(5) and each inspection shall be clearly identified as a 3rd party inspection. Each 3rd party inspection report must clearly document the following:
(i) Name of 3rd party inspection company.
(ii) Date of inspection.

C
ii.

Page 157 of 564 ends

Page 26 of 181 ends

(iii) Condition of the treatment unit(s) at the time of inspection. (iv) Description of maintenance activities performed during the inspection. (v) Date- and time-stamped photographs of the inside of the vault unit(s) before and after maintenance activities. (7) An Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) for all operation and maintenance inspections that serves as a reference document for inspection staff so that consistent enforcement actions can be taken to bring development projects into compliance. At a minimum, the ERP must contain the following:
(a) Enforcement Procedures – A description of the Permittee’s procedures from the discovery of problems through the confirmation of implementation of corrective actions. This shall include guidance for recognizing common problems with the different types of pervious pavement systems, stormwater treatment systems, and/or HM controls, remedies for the problems, and appropriate enforcement actions, follow-up inspections, and appropriate time periods for implementation of corrective actions, and the roles and responsibilities of staff responsible for implementing the ERP. (b) Enforcement Tools and Field Scenarios – A discussion of the various, escalating enforcement tools appropriate for different field scenarios of problems identified with the pervious pavement systems, stormwater treatment systems, and/or HM controls as well as for different types of inadequate response to enforcement actions taken.
(c) Timely Correction of Identified Problems – A description of the Permittee’s procedures for assigning due dates for corrective actions. Permittees shall require timely correction of all identified problems with the pervious pavement systems, stormwater treatment systems, and/or HM controls.

Corrective actions shall be implemented no longer than 30 days after a problem is identified by an inspector. Corrective actions can be temporary, in which case more time may be allowed for permanent corrective actions. If more than 30 days are required for compliance, a rationale shall be recorded in the electronic database or equivalent tabular system. iii. Due Date for Implementation: Immediate
iv. Maintenance Approvals: The Permittees shall ensure that all pervious pavement systems that total 3,000 square feet or more (excluding private-use patios for single family homes, townhomes, or condominiums), stormwater treatment systems, and HM controls installed onsite, offsite, or at a joint or Regional Project by development proponents are properly operated and maintained for the life of the projects. In cases where the responsible party for a pervious pavement system, stormwater treatment system, or HM control has worked diligently and in good faith with the appropriate State and federal agencies to obtain approvals necessary to complete maintenance activities, but these approvals are not granted, the Permittees shall be deemed to be in compliance with Provision C.3.h. Permittees shall ensure that constructed wetlands installed by Regulated Projects and used for urban runoff treatment shall abide by the Water Board’s Resolution No. 94-102: Policy on the Use of Constructed Wetlands for Urban Runoff Pollution Control and the operation and maintenance requirements contained therein.v. Reporting (1) The database or equivalent tabular format required in Provisions C.3.b.ii.(4) and (5) shall be maintained by the Permittees. Upon request from the Executive Officer, information from this database or equivalent tabular format shall be submitted to Water Board staff for review. The requested information may include specific details on each inspection conducted within particular timeframes, such as several fiscal years. (2) On an annual basis, before the wet season, provide a list of newly installed (installed within the reporting period) stormwater treatment systems and HM controls to the local mosquito and vector control agency and the Water Board. This list shall include the facility locations and a description of the stormwater treatment measures and HM controls installed. (3) Each Permittee shall report the following information in the Annual Report each year:
(a) Total number of Regulated Projects in the Permittee’s database or tabular format as of the end of the reporting period (fiscal year). (b) Total number of Regulated Projects, offsite projects, and Regional Projects inspected during the reporting period (fiscal year). (c) Percentage of the total number of Regulated Projects that were inspected during the reporting period (fiscal year). (d) A discussion of the inspection findings for the year and any common problems encountered with various types of pervious pavement systems, treatment systems and/or HM controls. This discussion should include a general comparison to the inspection findings from the previous year. (e) A discussion of the effectiveness of the Permittee’s O&M Program and any proposed changes to improve the O&M Program (e.g., changes in prioritization plan or frequency of O&M inspections, other changes to improve effectiveness of program).

C.3.i. Required Site Design Measures for Small Development and Redevelopment Projects and Smaller Detached Single-Family Home Projects C i. Task Description – The Permittees shall require all development and redevelopment projects, which create and/or replace ≥ 2,500 ft2 to < 5,000 ft2 of impervious surface, and detached single-family home projects,27 which create and/or replace ≥ 2,500 ft2 to < 10,000 ft2 of impervious surface, to install one or more of the following site design measures:
- Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. - Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas.
- Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. - Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas.

C
ii.

Page 158 of 564 ends

Page 27 of 181 ends

- Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces.10 - Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces.10 This provision applies to all development projects that require approvals and/or permits issued under the Permittees’ planning, building, or other comparable authority.
ii. Implementation Level
(1) Beginning July 1, 2023, Permittees shall implement Provision C.3.i. (2) Prior to July 1, 2023, Permittees shall implement Provision C.3.i in Attachment I, which are requirements from the Previous Permit. iii. Reporting – On an annual basis, discuss the implementation of the requirements of Provision C.3.i, including ordinance revisions, permit conditions, development of standard specifications and/or guidance materials, and staff training.

C.3.j. Green Infrastructure Planning and Implementation C i. Task Description – The Permittees shall continue to implement their Green Infrastructure Plans (completed during the term of the Previous Permit), as may be updated and/or supplemented to comply with this Order, for the inclusion of low impact development drainage design into storm drain infrastructure on public and private lands, including streets, roads, storm drains, parking lots, building roofs, and other storm drain infrastructure elements.(1)   The Plans are intended to serve as an implementation guide and reporting tool during this and subsequent Permit terms to provide reasonable assurance that urban runoff TMDL wasteload allocations (e.g., for the San Francisco Bay mercury and PCBs TMDLs and the Urban Creeks Pesticides TMDL) will be met, and to set goals for reducing, over the long term, the adverse water quality impacts of urbanization and urban runoff on receiving waters.(2)   Over the long term, the Plans are intended to describe how the Permittees will shift their impervious surfaces and storm drain infrastructure from gray, or traditional storm drain infrastructure where runoff flows directly          into the storm drain and then the receiving water, to green—that is, to a more-resilient, sustainable system that slows runoff by dispersing it to vegetated areas, harvests and uses runoff, promotes infiltration and evapotranspiration, and uses bioretention and other green infrastructure practices to clean stormwater runoff. (3)   Green infrastructure project prioritization is described in the Green Infrastructure Plans based on local characteristics and priorities, and therefore green infrastructure projects will typically be designed to achieve multiple benefits in addition to mercury and PCBs load reduction. Furthermore, this Provision establishes a separate impervious surface retrofit requirement for other-than Regulated Projects. ii. Implementation Level
(1) Programatic Implementation
The Permittees shall, individually or in a coordinated manner, update and/or supplement their Green Infrastructure Plans as needed to ensure that municipal processes and ordinances allow and appropriately encourage implementation of green infrastructure, and incorporate lessons learned, by:
(a) Revising implementation mechanisms to include consideration, or reconsideration, of cooperation with non-municipal entities such as schools on green infrastructure implementation, and otherwise updating implementation mechanisms as appropriate. (b) Following through with the development or updates of general plans, specific plans, urban forestry plans, climate change adaptation plans, complete streets plans and other planning documents with a green infrastructure nexus to include language which is more supportive of green infrastructure implementation, as identified by Permittees in their Green Infrastructure Plans. Upon request by Water Board staff, Permittees shall provide justifications for planning documents that they assert do not need to be updated to further support green infrastructure implementation. (c) Developing funding and funding mechanisms identified in the Green Infrastructure Plans, such as by working with the relevant agencies to expand the scope of transportation grants to include allocation for green infrastructure; establishing green infrastructure-based or green infrastructure- incorporating stormwater fees, including work that sets the foundation for additional future stormwater fees; establishing or increasing application review fees, and evaluating other opportunities to leverage municipal approval of private development to fund green infrastructure implementation. (d) Reviewing countywide green infrastructure implementation guidance documents and adapting them as necessary to account for local considerations if this has not already been completed during the Previous Permit term, and otherwise reviewing and updating general guidelines and standard specifications as appropriate.
(e) Continuing to implement the tools developed during the Previous Permit term to track and map completed public and private green infrastructure projects, and making the information publicly available. (f) Continuing to adopt or amend policies, ordinances, and/or other appropriate legal mechanisms to ensure implementation of the Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with the requirements of this Provision, as necessary. (g)   Continuing to conduct outreach and education as follows:
(i)  Conduct public outreach on the requirements of this Provision, including outreach coordinated with adoption or revision of standard specifications and planning documents, and with the initiation and planning of infrastructure projects. Such outreach shall include general outreach and targeted outreach to and training for professionals involved in infrastructure planning and design.

C
i.

Page 159 of 564 ends

Page 28 of 181 ends

(ii) Train appropriate staff, including planning, engineering, public works maintenance, finance, fire/life safety, and management staff on the requirements of this Provision and methods of implementation. (iii) Educate appropriate Permittee elected officials (e.g., mayors, city council members, county supervisors, district board members) on the requirements of this Provision and methods of implementation. (2) Numeric Implementation
(a) By June 30, 2027, the Permittees shall implement, or cause to be implemented, green infrastructure projects within their jurisdictions which are not already defined as Regulated Projects pursuant to Provision C.3.b, such that the impervious surface retrofits listed in Table H-1 of Attachment H are achieved. (b) The Permittees may meet the numeric retrofit requirements listed in Table H-1 of Attachment H on a countywide basis. If Permittees within a given county do not collectively achieve their numeric retrofit requirements, each Permittee within that county shall be separately responsible for achieving its individual retrofit requirement.
(c) Though Permittees may meet their total individual numeric retrofit requirements on a countywide basis, each Permittee shall implement, or cause to be implemented, a green infrastructure project or projects treating no less than 0.2 acres of impervious surface within its jurisdiction, where that project is not already defined as a Regulated Project pursuant to Provision C.3.b. Alternatively, a Permittee may contribute substantially to such a green infrastructure project(s) outside of its jurisdiction and within its County. (d) Impervious surfaces treated by non-Regulated Projects may be counted towards the numeric requirements in Table H-1 of Attachment H.

Impervious surfaces treated by Regulated Projects, beyond the minimum required by Provisions C.3.c-d for such Regulated Projects, may be counted towards the numeric requirements in Table H-1 of Attachment H. If a portion of the impervious surface treated by such a Non-Regulated Project or by Regulated Projects (beyond the minimum required by Provisions C.3.c-d for such Regulated Projects) is later used as part of an Alternative Compliance exchange to offset the treatment required by a Regulated Project pursuant to Provision C.3.e.i, then that portion may no longer be counted towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) retrofit requirements listed in Table H-1 of Attachment H. (e) Projects completed after January 1, 2021, shall be counted towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements. ( f) Projects completed by June 30, 2027, shall be counted towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements. If a project is not completed by June 30, 2027, it may still count towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements, if it is approved and fully funded. Permittees that count such projects towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements shall certify in their Annual Reports that the projects are approved and funded by June 30, 2027. (g) Controls implemented to satisfy Provision C.3 requirements, including the numeric retrofit requirements specified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2), may also be used to satisfy Provision C.11 Mercury Controls requirements, and Provision C.12 PCBs Controls requirements, as long as they satisfy the other aspects of those requirements, such as location (i.e., for PCBs, controls that are implemented in areas of old industrial land use or otherwise in areas with identified relatively high concentrations of PCBs).
(h) Permittees may credit the acreage of impervious surface created or replaced for Regulated Road Reconstruction Projects, specified in Provision C.3.b.ii.(5), towards the Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements specified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2). (i) Permittees with small rural jurisdictions (e.g., whose stormwater conveyance systems are dominated by roadside ditches) may collectively submit a proposal, subject to the Executive Officer’s approval, for pilot projects investigating the use of alternative green infrastructure techniques to comply with the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements, with construction completed by June 30, 2027. If a project is not completed by June 30, 2027, it may still count towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements, if it is approved and fully funded.

Permittees that count such projects towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements shall certify in their Annual Reports that the projects are approved and funded by June 30, 2027. The proposal shall include a discussion describing the small rural jurisdiction, including density, developed versus undeveloped areas, and piped stormwater conveyances versus roadside ditches. (j) Permittees with existing ordinances (or that adopt new ordinances by June 30, 2023) that require Regulated Projects to treat significantly more impervious surface than the minimum required by Provision C.3.c-d, may offset their Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements specified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) by a one-time credit of up to 25 percent, and by no greater than one acre. The claimed offset shall not reduce Permittees’ Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements below 0.2 acres as specified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2)(c). In order to claim this offset, Permittees shall submit a report subject to Executive Officer approval estimating the benefit that will be realized by the adopted ordinance(s) in the current Permit term and the subsequent Permit terms (i.e., until June 30, 2032), as specified in Provision C.3.j.v.(5). The offset claimed shall be no greater than the benefit of the offset estimated in the report. Permittees shall not use the offset prior to Executive Officer approval of the report. (3) Design and other Criteria - Green infrasturcture projects built pursuant to Providsion C.3.j shall:
(a) Comply with Provision C.3.c and Provisions C.3.e-h. (b) Comply with Provision C.3.d. With cause (e.g., significantly constrained area for a BMP, substantially increased costs for that sizing relative to the C.3.j.i.(2)(g) approach outlined in the Previous Permit, significant amounts of run-on from adjacent areas, or other substantial constraints identified by Permittees) and with reporting in their Annual Reports, Permittees may use the Guidance for Sizing Green Infrastructure Facilities in Streets Projects with companion analysis Green Infrastructure Facility Sizing for Non-Regulated Street Projects submitted in June 2019, to size Non-Regulated green streets projects. If so, Permittees must comply with the Water Board’s June 21, 2019, conditional approval of that submittal, which provides qualifiers to, and the conditions under which, the alternative sizing criteria may be used for Non-Regulated green streets projects C
ii.

Page 160 of 564 ends

Page 29 of 181 ends

(4) Long-Term Green Infrastructure Implementation
(a) The Permittees and their representatives may, together with Water Board staff and impartial science experts (e.g., SFEI, SFEP, U.S. EPA Region 9), collectively form a Technical Working Group (TWG) to discuss long-term green infrastructure goals and recommend long- term percentage reductions in Permittees’ impervious surfaces, at individual, countywide and regional scales. The TWG should prioritize discussion of long-term green infrastructure goals for development and redevelopment projects not already captured by Provision C.3.b, and in particular, public road and right of way reconstruction projects that are not already defined as Regulated Projects by Provision C.3.b.ii.(5). The TWG should additionally review BMPs and performance metrics, and should consider linkages to climate change impacts and resiliency. (b) Prior to the submittal of a report containing the TWG’s recommendations for long-term percentage reductions in Permittees’ impervious surfaces – as prescribed by Provision C.3.j.v.(6) – the TWG should meet at a minimum biannually, and subsequent to that submittal should meet at a minimum annually.
iii. No Missed Opportunites
Each Permittee Shall:
(1) Continue to maintain a list of green infrastructure projects, public and private, that are planned for implementation during the permit term and infrastructure projects planned for implementation during the permit term that have potential for green infrastructure measures. (2) Submit the list with each Annual Report and a summary of planning or implementation status for each public green infrastructure project and each private green infrastructure project that is not also a Regulated Project as defined in Provision C.3.b.ii. Include a summary of how each public infrastructure project with green infrastructure potential will include green infrastructure measures to the maximum extent practicable during the permit term. For any public infrastructure project where implementation of green infrastructure measures is not practicable, submit a brief description of the project and the reasons green infrastructure measures were impracticable to implement. iv. Participate in Processes to Promote Green Infrastructure (1) The Permittees shall, individually or collectively, track processes, assemble and submit information, and provide informational materials and presentations as needed to assist relevant regional, State, and federal agencies to plan, design, and fund incorporation of green infrastructure measures into local infrastructure projects, including transportation projects. Issues to be addressed include coordinating the timing of funding from different sources, changes to standard designs and design criteria, ranking and prioritizing projects for funding, and implementation of cooperative in-lieu programs.(2) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall report on the goals and outcomes during the reporting year of work undertaken to participate in processes to promote green infrastructure.
v. Tracking and Reporting Progress
(1) The Permittees shall continue to implement the existing regionally- consistent tracking and mapping tools developed pursuant to Provision C.3.j.i.(2).(d) of the Previous Permit to track and report implementation of green infrastructure measures including treated area and connected and disconnected impervious area on both public and private parcels within their jurisdictions. The methods shall also address tracking needed to provide reasonable assurance that wasteload allocations for TMDLs, including the San Francisco Bay PCBs and mercury TMDLs, and reductions for trash, are being met. The tracking and mapping tools shall be used by Permittees to inform issues relevant to program management, such as life cycle costs, asset management, operation and maintenance frequency, and beneficial design changes. (a) Non-regulated green infrastructure projects built pursuant to Provision C.3.j shall be tracked and mapped in the same manner as Regulated Projects. These projects shall be reported in a separate table from Regulated Projects. (b) The tracking and mapping tools shall include a component that is available to the public, which is advertised on individual Permittee websites and on County stormwater program websites, and as appropriate is advertised in other locations. This component must include the following basic information: a brief description of design (e.g., whether bioretention or bioswale), location, land use type, and area treated. If the tools contain additional information which has not been made available to the public such as detailed design information, incurred or planned O&M costs and O&M frequency, condition assessments, and pollutant loads treated, that information shall be made available to Water Board staff upon request. (c) The Permittees shall certify in the 2023 Annual Reports that the tracking and mapping tools have been completed and are being implemented. (d) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall provide summary reports on the implementation of the tracking and mapping tools and shall provide a link to the component which is available to the public.
(2) In the 2024 and 2026 Annual Reports, report on updates, addenda, and changes to their programmatic implementation, including, but not limited to, the items listed in Provision C.3.j.ii.(1).
(3) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall report on progress made towards the retrofit requirements described in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2).

C
ii.

Page 161 of 564 ends

Page 30 of 181 ends

(4) With the 2026 Annual Reports, Permittees shall provide a summary of lessons learned to-date with regard to Provision C.3.j.ii.(1), including topics such as operation and maintenance, sizing, infiltration and other design criteria for stormwater treatment controls, implementation of tracking and mapping tools, cooperation with non-municipal entities, regional project efforts, funding initiatives and opportunities to leverage municipal approval of private development, education and outreach, and development or updates of plan documents with a green infrastructure nexus. In the summary, Permittees shall also discuss attainment of the numeric retrofit requirements prescribed in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2). In that summary, as applicable, Permittees shall report on how they have addressed deficiencies identified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(1). (5) Pursuant to Provision C.3.j.ii.(2)(i), Permittees whose jurisdictions are dominated by rural areas may collectively submit a proposal, subject to the Executive Officer’s approval, for the use of alternative green infrastructure techniques. This proposal shall be submitted by no later than with the 2023 Annual Reports.(6) Each Permittee that wishes to use the one-time offset specified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(2)(j) shall submit a report estimating the benefit realized by the adopted ordinance(s) in the current Permit term, and until June 30, 2032, by no later than with the 2023 Annual Report, subject to Executive Officer approval. Permittees shall not use the offset prior to Executive Officer approval of the Report. The benefit of the estimated offset shall be no less than the offset claimed during the current Permit term. In each Annual Report, each Permittee claiming the offset shall report on the acreage of retrofit produced by the implementation of the offset in that Fiscal Year, as well as the cumulative acreage of retrofit produced by the implementation of the offset up to that point in time during the current Permit term. (7) By no later than with the 2025 Annual Reports, the Permittees shall collectively submit a report summarizing any TWG efforts and recommendations, as specified in Provision C.3.j.ii.(4).
(8) Pursuant to Provision C.3.j.ii.(2)(f) and Provision C.3.j.ii.(2)(i), Permittees shall certify in the 2027 Annual Report that any projects counting towards the Provision C.3.j.ii.(2) Numeric Implementation retrofit requirements, which have not been completed by June 30, 2027, have been approved and fully funded by June 30, 2027.

C
v.

Page 162 of 564 ends

Page 31 of 181 ends

C.4. Industrial and Commercial Site Controls B
Each Permittee shall implement an industrial and commercial site control program at all sites that could reasonably be considered to cause or contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff. Permittees shall conduct inspections, effective follow-up, and enforcement to abate potential and actual non- stormwater discharges, consistent with each respective Enforcement Response Plan. These combined efforts will prevent the discharge of pollutants and impacts to beneficial uses of receiving waters. Inspections shall confirm implementation of appropriate and effective BMPs and other pollutant controls by industrial and commercial site operators.

C.4.a Legal Authority for Effective Site Management D
i. Task Description – Permittees shall have sufficient legal authority to inspect, require effective stormwater pollutant control, and implement progressively stricter enforcement to achieve expedient compliance and pollutant abatement at commercial and industrial sites within their jurisdiction. ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall have the legal authority to oversee, inspect, and require expedient compliance and pollution abatement at all industrial and commercial sites that may be reasonably considered to cause or contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff. Permittees shall have the legal authority to require implementation of appropriate BMPs at industrial and commercial facilities to address pollutant sources associated with outdoor process and manufacturing areas; outdoor material storage areas; outdoor waste storage and disposal areas; outdoor vehicle and equipment storage and maintenance areas; outdoor parking areas and access roads; outdoor wash areas, for example, areas used to wash restaurant equipment and mats,; outdoor drainage from indoor areas; rooftop equipment; vehicle fueling activities; contaminated and erodible surface areas; and other sources determined by the Permittees or the Water Board Executive Officer to have a reasonable potential to contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff.C.4.b. Industrial and Commercial Business Inspection Plan (Inspection Plan) D i. Task Description – Permittees shall continue to update and implement an Inspection Plan that will serve as a prioritized inspection workplan. This Inspection Plan will allow inspection staff to categorize the commercial and industrial sites within the Permittee’s jurisdiction by pollutant threat and inspection frequency, change inspection frequency based on site performance, and add and remove sites as businesses open and close. ii. Implementation Level –
(1) Facilties to Prioritize for Inspection: Commercial and industrial facilities with the functional aspects and types described below, and other facilities identified by the Permittees as reasonably likely to contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff, shall be prioritized for inspection on the basis of the potential for water quality impact using criteria such as pollutant sources on site, use of pollutants of concern, proximity to a waterbody, and the enforcement history of potential discharges and actual discharges at the facility. Permittees may use a variety of sources to develop and update the business inspection prioritization, including, but not limited to, business license applications, tax records, and inspectors’ observations. The following are some of the functional aspects of businesses and types of businesses that shall be included in the Inspection Plan:
(a) Sites with the following functions or facilities that may be sources of pollutants when exposed to stormwater:
(i) Outdoor process and manufacturing areas
(ii) Outdoor material storage areas
(iii) Outdoor waste storage, handling, and disposal areas (iv) Outdoor vehicle and equipment storage and maintenance areas (v) Outdoor was areas
(vi) Outdoor drainage from indoor areas
(vii) Fueling Areas
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 163 of 564 ends

Page 32 of 181 ends

(viii) Rooftop equipment
(ix) Other sources determined by the Permittee or Water Board as reasonably likely to contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff. (b) Sites that support industrial and commercial activities that have a reasonable likelihood to be sources of pollutants to stormwater and non- stormwater discharges, including:
(i) Industrial facilities, as defined at 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14), including facilities subject to the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (hereinafter the Industrial General Permit); (ii) Vehicle salvage yards;
(iii) Metal and other recycled materials collection facilities, and waste transfer facilities; (iv) Vehicle mechanical repair, maintenance, fueling, or cleaning facilities; (v) Nurseries and greenhouses;
(vi) Resturants and other food service businesses at which food is prepared or that have onsite eating and drinking areas for customers; (vii) Supermarkets or large grocery stores with outdoor waste storage or cardboard compacting areas; (viii) Building trades facilities or yards, corporations yards; (ix) Building material retailers and strorage;
(x) Plastoc Manufacturers; and
(xi) Other facilities designated by the Permittee or Water Board to be reasonably likely to contribute to pollution of stormwater runoff. (2) Inspection Plan – The Inspection Plan shall be updated annually and shall contain the following information:
(a) A description of the process for prioritizing inspections and frequency of inspections. The prioritization criteria shall assign a more frequent inspection schedule to the highest priority facilities per Provision C.4.b.ii.(1). If any geographical areas are to be targeted for inspections due to high potential for stormwater pollution, these areas should be indicated in the Inspection Plan (b) Assign appropriate inspection frequency for each industrial and commercial facility based on the priority established in Provision C.4.b.ii.(2)(a), potential for contributing pollution to stormwater runoff, and commensurate with the threat to water quality. (c) A mechanism to include new businesses that warrant inspections. (d) Total number and a list of all industrial and commercial facilities requiring inspections, within each Permittee’s jurisdiction, based on the prioritization criteria established in Provision C.4.(b)ii.(2)(a). This list shall be updated annually (e) List of facilities scheduled for inspection each fiscal year of the MRP permit term. Each fiscal year’s inspection list shall be added to the Inspection Plan at the beginning of the fiscal year as part of the annual update. Previous fiscal years’ inspection lists shall remain in the Inspection Plan. (f) If a Permittee relies on multiple entities to perform business and commercial inspections, a list of the entities and their responsibilities with regard to this Permit. Describe how the Permittee oversees and coordinates the entities performing inspections and assures that all sites with the potential to pollute stormwater are inspected.
(3) Record Keeping – For each facility identified in Provision C.4.b.ii.(2)(d), the Permittee shall maintain a database or equivalent tabular system of at least the following information:
(a) Name and address of the business and local business operator; (b) A brief description of business activity or pollutant source, including SIC or NAICS code. Examples: outdoor process/manufacturing areas, outdoor material storage areas, outdoor waste storage and disposal areas, outdoor vehicle and equipment storage and maintenance areas, outdoor parking areas and access roads, outdoor wash areas, rooftop equipment, outdoor drainage from indoor areas, and use of mobile businesses for outdoor fueling, washing, etc.; (c) Inspection priority and inspection frequency; and (d) Whether facility requires coverage under the Industrial Center Permit iii. Reporting
(1) Permittes shall include the following information in the 2023 Annual Report:
(a) A brief description of which Permittee entity or entities are responsible for reviewing and approving business license applications or a link to the Permittee’s website for business license applications
(2) Permittes shall make the list required by Provision C.4.b.ii.(2)(d) available upon Water Board request.

D
ii.

Page 164 of 564 ends

Page 33 of 181 ends

C.4.c. Enforcement Response Plan
i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall implement and update, as needed, its Enforcement Response Plan (ERP), a reference document to guide inspection staff in achieving timely and effective compliance from all commercial and industrial site operators.

B
ii. Implementation Level – The ERP shall cotnain the following: B (1) Enforcement Procedures – A description of the Permittee’s enforcement and compliance procedures, from the discovery of problems through the confirmation of implementation of corrective actions. This shall include guidance for appropriate enforcement actions, follow-up inspections, referrals to another agency, appropriate time periods for implementation of corrective actions, and the roles and responsibilities of all persons responsible for implementing the ERP.
(2) Enforcement Tools and Field Scenarios – A discussion of the various, escalating enforcement tools for different field scenarios, including, but not limited to, potential discharges (e.g., housekeeping issues, inadequate waste or materials management, evidence of actual discharges, lack of emergency response plans, lack of BMPs, inadequate BMPs, and inappropriate BMPs); actual discharges (observed or documented flow of unauthorized, illicit, or pollutant-containing stormwater discharges to the MS4); non-compliance with previous enforcement actions; and sites with a history of potential and/or actual discharges.
(3) Timely Correction of Potential and Actual Discharges – A description of the Permittee’s procedures for assigning due dates for corrective actions. Each Permittee shall require timely correction of all potential and actual discharges. Permittees shall require actual discharges to cease immediately.

Corrective actions shall be implemented before the next rain event, and no longer than 10 business days after the potential or actual non-stormwater discharges are discovered. Corrective actions can be temporary, in which case more time can be allowed for permanent corrective actions. If more than 10 business days are required for compliance, the rationale, including the expected time frame for compliance, shall be recorded in the electronic database or equivalent tabular system.
(4) Referral and Coordination with Other Agencies – Each Permittee shall enforce its stormwater ordinances to achieve compliance at sites with observed potential and actual discharges, including compliance required by Discharge Prohibition A.1. For cases in which the Permittee’s enforcement tools are inadequate to remedy the noncompliance, the Permittee shall refer the case to the Water Board, district attorney, or other relevant agencies for additional enforcement. Permittees may also contact and coordinate with Water Board staff for joint inspections and parallel enforcement of large, complex, or noncompliant sites.

C.4.d. Inspection D
i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall conduct inspections according to the Inspection Plan in Provision C.4.b.ii.(2) and the ERP in Provision C.4.c.ii. to enforce its ordinance to prevent stormwater pollution.
ii. Implementation Level
(1) Inspections – Inspections shall be conducted to include at least the following activities:
(a) Observations for appropriate BMPs to prevent stormwater runoff pollution, or unauthorized or illicit discharge; (b) Observations for evidence of unauthorized or illicit discharges, illicit connections, and potential discharge of pollutants to stormwater by the Discharger or contractors, such as and including mobile businesses, that operate on the facility; (c) Observations for noncompliance with Permittee ordinances and other local requirements; and (d) Verification of coverage under the Industrial General Permit, if applicable. (2) Record Keeping – Permittees shall maintain adequate records to demonstrate compliance and appropriate follow-up enforcement responses for facilities inspected. Permittees shall maintain an electronic database or equivalent tabular system that contains the following information regarding industrial and commercial site inspections:
(a) Name of the facilty/site inspected
(b) Inspection date
(c) Industrial General Permit coverage required (Yes or No) (d) Compliance status
(e) Specific problems, including inadequate and ineffective BMPs (f) Type of enforcement (if applicable)
(g) Problem resolution date
(h) Additional comments
The electronic database or equivalent tabular system and any supporting documentation shall be made readily available to Water Board staff or its representative during inspections, audits, or upon request. (3) Data Evaluation – Permittees shall evaluate the frequency of potential and actual non-stormwater discharges by business category. Note trends and, as needed, implement focused inspections or education in subsequent years to address trends. iii. Reporting
(1) Permittees shall include the following information in each Annual Report:

Page 165 of 564 ends

Page 34 of 181 ends

(a) Number of inspections conducted;
(b) Number of each type of enforcement action, as listed in each Permittee’s ERP, issued; (c) Number of enforcement actions or discrete number of potential and actual discharges fully resolved within 10 working days or otherwise deemed resolved in a longer, but still timely manner; and
(d) Frequency of potential and actual non-stormwater discharges by business category.

C.4.e. Staff Training D
i. Task Description – Permittees shall provide focused training for industrial and commercial site inspectors and illicit discharge detection and elimination inspectors annually. Trainings may be program-wide, region-wide, or Permittee- specific. ii. Implementation Level – At a minimum, provide inspection training, within the 5-year term of this Permit, in the following topics:
(1) Urban runoff pollution prevention;
(2) Inspection procedures;
(3) Business Inspection Plan;
(4) Enforcement Response Plan;
(5) Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination; and
(6) Appropriate BMPs to be used at different industrial and commercial facilities. iii. Reporting - The Permittees shall include the following information in each Annual Report:
(1) Dates of training;
(2) Training topics covered;
(3) Total number and percentage of industrial and commercial site inspectors attending training; and (4) Total number and percentage of illicit discharge detection and elimination inspectors attending training.

C.5. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination B
The The purpose of this provision is to implement the illicit discharge prohibition and to detect and control illicit discharges not otherwise controlled under Provisions C.4. – Industrial and Commercial Site Controls, C.6. – Construction Site Controls, and C.17 – Discharges Associated with Unsheltered Homeless Populations. Permittees shall implement an illicit discharge program that includes active surveillance and centralized complaint collection and follow-up to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the MS4. Permittees shall maintain a complaint tracking and follow-up data system as their primary accountability reporting for this provision.

C.5.a. Legal Authority
i. Task Description - Permittees shall have the legal authority to prohibit and control illicit discharges and implement progressively stricter enforcement to achieve expedient compliance.
ii. Implementation Level
(1) Permittees shall have adequate legal authority to address illicit discharges to the MS4, including, but not limited to, the following:
(a) Discharges of sewage, trash, or other potentially polluting or hazardous materials; (b) Discharges of wash water resulting from the cleaning of exterior surfaces and pavement, or the equipment and other facilities of any commercial business, or any other public or private facility, including discharges from mobile cleaning businesses; (c) Discharges of runoff from material storage areas, including those containing chemicals, fuels, or other potentially polluting or hazardous materials; (d) Discharges of pool or fountain water containing chlorine, biocides, or other chemicals; discharges of pool or fountain filter backwash water; (e) Discharges of sediment, pet waste, vegetation clippings, or other landscape or construction-related wastes; (f) Discharges of food-related wastes (e.g., grease, fish processing wastes, restaurant kitchen mat and trash bin wash water) and; (2) Permittees shall have adequate legal authority to prohibit, discover through inspection and surveillance, and eliminate illicit connections and discharges to the MS4.
(3) Permittees shall have adequate legal authority to control the discharge of spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than storm water to the MS4. (4) Permittees shall have adequate legal authority to hold mobile businesses, and the businesses, property managers, property owners, and other associated entities that hire a mobile business, responsible for stormwater pollution discharged by the mobile business operating at their location.

C.5.b. Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) B
i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall implement and update, as needed, its ERP – a reference document for inspection staff to take consistent actions to achieve timely and effective abatement of illicit discharges and compliance from responsible parties.

D
iii.

Page 166 of 564 ends

Page 35 of 181 ends

ii. Implementation Level – The ERP shall contain the following:
(1) Enforcement Procedures – A description of the Permittee’s procedures from the discovery of a problem through the confirmation of implementation of corrective actions. This shall include guidance for appropriate enforcement actions, followup inspections, referrals to another agency, appropriate time periods for implementation of corrective actions, and the roles and responsibilities of staff responsible for implementing the ERP. (2) Enforcement Tools and Field Scenarios – A discussion of the various, escalating enforcement tools for different field scenarios, including, but not limited to potential discharges (e.g., housekeeping issues, evidence of actual discharges, lack of BMPs, inadequate BMPs, and inappropriate BMPs), actual discharges, non-compliance with previous enforcement actions, and sites with a history of potential and/or actual discharges. (3) Timely Correction of Potential and Actual Discharges – A description of the Permittee’s procedures for assigning due dates for corrective actions. Each Permittee shall require timely correction of all potential and/or actual discharges. Active discharges shall be required to cease immediately. Corrective actions shall be implemented before the next rain event, but no longer than 10 business days after the potential and/or actual discharges are discovered.

Corrective actions can be temporary and more time can be allowed for permanent corrective actions. If more than 10 business days are required for compliance, a rationale shall be recorded in the electronic database or equivalent tabular system. (4) Referral and Coordination with Other Agencies – Each Permittee shall enforce its stormwater ordinances to achieve compliance at sites with observed potential and actual discharges, including compliance required by Discharge Prohibition A.1. For cases in which the Permittee’s enforcement tools are inadequate to remedy the noncompliance, the Permittee shall refer the case to the Water Board, district attorney, or other relevant agencies for additional enforcement. Permittees may also contact and coordinate with Water Board staff for joint inspections and parallel enforcement of large, complex, or noncompliant sites.

C.5.c. Spill, Dumping, and Complaint Response Program
i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall implement a program to respond to spills, dumping, and complaints. B ii. Implementation Level
(1) Each Permittee shall have a central contact point for the public and Permittee’s staff to report spills, dumping, and complaints. At a minimum, this central contact point shall include a phone number.Permittees shall also include, as feasible, a user-friendly web address for reporting for spills and dumping or a link to a web-based reporting application. (2) Each Permittee shall publicize the phone number on its website, and, if used, a web reporting address or link to a web-based reporting application, to the Permittee’s staff and the public. The contact information on the Permittee’s website shall be kept up-to-date, and updated at least annually when changed. This central contact point shall be readily searchable and accessible on the Permittee’s website. (3) Each Permittee shall require its municipal staff conducting routine maintenance and inspection activities to report illicit discharges found during their activities to the central contact point so that illicit discharge staff can investigate and track. (4) Each Permittee shall maintain and update, as needed, a spill, dumping, and complaint response flow chart and/or phone tree for the staff responsible for the spill and dumping response program. At a minimum, this flow chart and/or phone tree shall identify staff or positions responsible for receiving the complaints and investigating and abating the complaints. (5) Each Permittee shall maintain and update, as needed, a spill, dumping, and complaint response flow chart and phone tree or contact list for internal use that shows the various responsible agencies and their contacts, who would be involved in illicit discharge incident response that goes beyond the Permittee’s immediate capabilities.
(6) Each Permittee shall conduct reactive inspections in response to spill, dumping, and complaint reports and shall also conduct follow-up inspections, as needed, to ensure that corrective measures have been effectively implemented to achieve and maintain compliance. The start of the investigation of a spill or discharge shall not exceed 3 business days from the date the complaint was received by the Permittee. If additional time is required, the Permittee shall document the rationale for the delay.iii. Reporting (1) Permittees shall provide the following information in the 2024 and 2026 Annual Reports:
(a) The spill, dumping, and complaint reporting phone number and, if used, a web reporting address or a link to a web-based reporting application; (b) A screen shot of the Permittee’s website showing the central contact point; and (c) A discussion of how the central contact point – spill and dumping reporting phone number and, if used, the web address or web-based reporting application – is being publicized to Permittees’ staff and the public.(2) Copies of the phone trees and contact lists required in Provision C.5.c.ii (4) and (5) shall be provided as attachments to, or links in, the 2026 Annual Report. The lists may be redacted to remove references to private cell phone numbers. The unredacted phone trees and contact lists shall be made available to Water Board staff or representatives during audits or inspections, and upon request
C.5.d. Tracking and Case Followup D
i. Task Description – All incidents or discharges reported to the spill, dumping, and complaints central contact point, that might discharge into the MS4, shall be logged to track follow-up and response through problem resolution. The data collected shall be sufficient to demonstrate escalating responses for repeated problems and inter/intra-agency coordination, where appropriate. It is not necessary to track and report data according to this provision if they are tracked and reported according to State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-0003-DWQ, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems.

B
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 167 of 564 ends

Page 36 of 181 ends

ii. Implementation Level – Maintain records for tracking and follow-up to water quality spills, dumping, and complaints that might discharge into the MS4 in an electronic database or equivalent tabular system. The water quality spills, dumping, and complaint tracking system shall contain the following information:(1) Complaint information:
(a) Date that complaint is received by the Permittee;
(b) Type of pollutant; and
(c) Problem Status (potential or actual discharge).
(2) Investigation information:
(a) Date and time investigation of spill or discharge started; (b) Date and time response to illegal dumping report or complaint started; (c) Agency , department, or other entities responding to the complaint or discharge; (d) Type of Pollutant;
(e) Identify the entered storm drain or approximate location, and/or receiving water; (f) Date and time abated; and
(g) Type of enforcement based on the Permittee’s ERP.
(3) Response to discharges or dumping associated with unsheltered populations, including those living in homeless encampments or vehicles, shall be coordinated with the Permittee's Provision C.10 Trash Control efforts, Provision C.17 Homeless Encampment Discharge Control efforts, and other agencies and entities addressing homelessness issues, as appropriate. iii. Reporting
(1) Permittees shall provide the following information in the Annual Reports:
(a) Number of discharges reported;
(b) Number of discharges reaching storm drains and/or receiving waters; (c) Number of discharges resolved in a timely manner; and (2) The electronic database or equivalent tabular system and supporting documentation shall be made available to Water Board staff or representatives during audits or inspections, and upon request.

C.5.e. Control of Mobile Sources B
i. Task Description – Permittees shall have oversight and control of pollutants associated with mobile businesses. ii. Implementation Level – Each Permittee shall implement a program to reduce the discharge of pollutants from mobile businesses. (1) The program should include the following:
(a) Implementation of minimum standards and BMPs for each of the various types of mobile businesses, including, but not limited to, automobile washing, vehicle fueling, power washing, steam cleaning, graffiti removal, and carpet cleaning; D
(b) Implementation of an enforcement strategy that specifically addresses mobile businesses; D (c) Updating and maintaining a mobile business inventory at least annually; C (d) Implementation of an outreach and education strategy to mobile businesses operating within the Permittee’s jurisdiction; and B (e) Inspection of mobile businesses D
(2) Permittees may cooperate countywide and/or region-wide with the implementation of their programs for mobile businesses, including sharing of mobile business information, BMP requirements, enforcement action information, and educational materials.

B
iii. Reporting B
(1) In the 2026 Annual Report, each Permittee shall provide the following:
(a) Minimum standards and BMPs for each of the various types of mobile businesses; (b) Enforcement strategy;
(c) A list and summary of the countywide or regional activities conducted, including BMP requirements, enforcement action information, and educational materials (Permittees’ annual reports may refer to the countywide or regional reports for this information); (d) A list and summary of specific outreach events and education conducted for each type of mobile business operating within the Permittee’s jurisdiction; and (e) A copy of the most recent version of the mobile business inventory. (2) In each Annual Report, each Permittee shall include at least the following: D (a) The toatal number of inspections conducted of mobile businesses; (b) The number of each type of mobile business inspected; and (c) A summary of the enforcement actions taken against mobile businesses during the reporting year.

D
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 168 of 564 ends

Page 37 of 181 ends

C.5.f. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Map D i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall make the current map(s) of its MS4 available to the public. Permittees shall identify information missing from the current MS4 maps and develop a plan and schedule to compile additional storm sewer system information, considering the potential to identify component locations, size or specifications, materials of construction, and condition. This information will be used to update Permittee maps and databases.ii. Implementation Level
(1) Current MS4 Maps – Permittees shall make current maps of the MS4 publicly available, either electronically or in hard copy. Public availability shall be made through a single point of contact that is convenient for the public, such as a staffed counter or web-accessible maps. The MS4 map availability shall be publicized through Permittee directories and web pages. (2) Updates to MS4 Maps – During the current Permit term, each Permittee shall complete the following:
(a) Determine information missing from the Permittee’s current MS4 map(s), which may include Oakland Museum watershed maps, existing MS4 maps or drawings in the Permittee files, or other storm sewer system information databases. (b) Identify and make available upon Water Board request maps of the storm sewer system and other stormwater controls installed after publication of the Oakland Museum watershed maps within the Permittee's jurisdictional area. (c) Develop a plan and schedule for updating the Permittee’s storm sewer system information. Permittees or countywide stormwater programs may work together or with the Oakland Museum of California to develop a plan and schedule for updating existing information, maps, drawings, and databases. The plan will consider the potential to identify storm sewer system component locations, size or specifications, materials of construction, and condition.iii. Reporting
(1) In the 2024 Annual Report, Permittees shall discuss how they make MS4 maps available to the public and how they publicize the availability of the MS4 maps.
(2) Submit a plan and schedule with the 2026 Annual Report to update existing storm sewer system information as described above.

C.6. Control Site Control
Each Permittee shall implement a construction site inspection and control program at all construction sites, with follow-up and enforcement consistent with each Permittee’s respective Enforcement Response Plan, to prevent construction site discharges of pollutants into the storm drains. Inspections shall confirm implementation of appropriate and effective erosion and other construction pollutant controls by construction site operators/developers.

Each Permittee shall in its reporting demonstrate the effectiveness of its inspections and enforcement activities to prevent polluted construction site discharges into storm drains.

C
C.6.a. Legal Authority for Effective Site Management
i. Task Description – Permittees shall have the authority to require effective stormwater pollutant controls to prevent discharge of pollutants into the storm drains, and to implement progressive enforcement to achieve expedient compliance and cleanup at all public and private construction sites. ii. Implementation Level
(1) Permittees shall have the legal authority to require, at all construction sites year-round, effective erosion control, run-on and runoff control, sediment control, active treatment systems (as appropriate), good site management, and non-stormwater management through all phases of construction (including, but not limited to, grubbing, clearing, site grading, filling, excavation, leveling, building, landscaping, and finishing of lots) until the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the installation of permanent erosion control measures. (2) Permittees shall have the legal authority to oversee, inspect, and require expedient compliance and cleanup at all construction sites year-round.

C.6.b. Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
i. Task Description – Each Permittee shall implement and update, as needed, its ERP – a reference document for inspection staff to take consistent actions to achieve timely and effective compliance at all public and private construction sites. ii. Implentation Level – The ERP shall contain the following:
(1) Enforcement Procedures – A description of the Permittee’s procedures from discovery of problems through confirmation of implementation of corrective actions. This shall include guidance for appropriate enforcement actions, follow-up inspections, referrals to another agency, appropriate time periods for implementation of corrective actions, and the roles and responsibilities of all persons responsible for implementing the ERP. (2) Enforcement Tools and Field Scenarios – A discussion of the various, escalating enforcement tools for different field scenarios, including, but not limited to, potential discharges (e.g., housekeeping issues, inadequate waste or materials management, evidence of actual discharges, lack of emergency response plans, lack of BMPs, inadequate BMPs, and inappropriate BMPs); actual discharges (observed or documented flow of unauthorized, illicit, or pollutant-containing stormwater discharges to the MS4); non-compliance with previous enforcement actions; and sites with a history of potential and/or actual discharges.

Page 169 of 564 ends

Page 38 of 181 ends

(3) Timely Correction of Potential and Actual Discharges – A description of the Permittee’s procedures for assigning due dates for corrective actions.

Each Permittee shall require timely correction of all potential and actual discharges. Permittees shall require actual discharges to cease immediately.

Corrective actions shall be implemented before the next rain event, and no longer than 10 business days after the potential or actual discharges are discovered. Corrective actions can be temporary, in which case more time can be allowed for permanent corrective actions. If more than 10 business days are required for compliance, the rationale, including the expected time frame for compliance, shall be recorded in the electronic database or equivalent tabular system.(4) Referral and Coordination with Other Agencies – Each Permittee shall enforce its stormwater ordinances to achieve compliance at sites with observed potential and actual discharges, including compliance required by Discharge Prohibition A.1. For cases in which the Permittee’s enforcement tools are inadequate to remedy the noncompliance, the Permittee shall refer the case to the Water Board, district attorney, or other relevant agencies for additional enforcement. Permittees may also contact and coordinate with Water Board staff for joint inspections and parallel enforcement of large, complex, or noncompliant sites.

C.6.c Best Management Practices Categories C
i. Task Description – Permittees shall require all construction sites to have site- specific, and seasonally- and phase-appropriate, effective BMPS in the following six categories:
(1) Erosion Control
(2) Run-on and Runoff Control
(3) Sediment Control, including entrance/exit and perimeter controls (4) Active Treatment Systems, as necessary
(5) Good Site Management, including materials and waste management (6) Non-Stormwater Management
ii. Implentation Level
The BMPs targeting specific construction site pollutants within the six categories listed in Provision C.6.c.i. shall be site-specific. Permittees may select site-specific BMPs, or BMP combinations, from resources such as:
(1) CASQA BMP Handbook, Construction, December 2019
(2) Caltrans Stormwater Quality Handbooks, Construction Site Best Management Practices Manual, May 2017, and addenda (3) Other BMPs shown to provide equivalent or better protection C.6.d. Plan Approval Process C
i. Task Description – Permittees shall review erosion control plans for consistency with local requirements and the appropriateness and adequacy of proposed BMPs for each site before issuing grading permits for projects. Permittees shall also verify that sites disturbing one acre or more of land have filed a Notice of Intent for permit coverage under the Construction Stormwater General Permit. ii. Implementation Level – Before approval and issuance of local grading permits, each Permittee shall perform the following:
(1) Review the site operator’s/developer’s erosion/pollution control plan or Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to verify compliance with the Permittee’s grading ordinance and other local requirements. Also review the site operator’s/developer’s erosion/pollution control plan or SWPPP to verify that seasonally appropriate and effective BMPs for the six categories listed in Provision C.6.c.i. are planned.28 (2) For sites disturbing one acre or more of soil, verify that the site operators/developers have filed a Notice of Intent for permit coverage under the Construction Stormwater General Permit.
(3) Provide construction stormwater management educational materials to site operators/developers, as appropriate.

C.6.e. Inspections C
i. Task Description – Permittees shall conduct inspections to determine compliance with local ordinances (grading and stormwater) and determine the effectiveness of the BMPs in the six categories listed in Provision C.6.c.i. in preventing the discharge of construction pollutants into the storm drain.

Permittees shall require timely corrections of all actual and potential discharges observed. ii. Implementation Level
(1) Wet Season Notification by September 1 of each year, each Permittee shall remind all site developers and/or owners disturbing one acre or more of soil, hillside projects, and high priority sites to prepare for the upcoming wet season.(2) Frequencey of inspections - Inspections shall be conducted monthly during the wet season at the following sites:
(a) All construction sites disturbing one or more acre of land; (b) All hillside projects (based on the Permittee’s map of hillside development areas or criteria, or if the Permittee does not have a map of hillside development areas or criteria, those projects on sites with ≥15 percent slope) disturbing greater than or equal to 5,000 square feet; and (c) High Priority Sites – Other sites determined by the Permittee or the Water Board as significant threats to water quality. In evaluating threat to water quality, the following factors shall be considered:
(i) Actual discharges of sediment and/or construction-related materials into storm drains and/or waterbodies. (ii) Evidence of sediment and/or construction-related materials discharges into storm drains and/or waterbodies. (iii) Illicit connections, and
C
ii.

Page 170 of 564 ends

Page 39 of 181 ends

(iv) Potential illicit connections
(v) Proximity to receiving waterbodies;
(vi) Non-stormwater discharges; and
(vii) Any other relevant factors as determined by the local agency or the Water Board. (3) Contents of Inspections -Inspections shall focus on the adequacy and effectiveness of the site- specific BMPs implemented for the six categories listed in Provision C.6.c.i.Permittees shall require timely corrections of all actual and potential problems observed. Inspections of construction sites shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) Assessment of compliance with Permittee's ordinances and permits related to urban runoff, including the implementation and maintenance of the verified erosion/pollution control plan or SWPPP (from Provision C.6.d.ii.(1)); (b) Assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the site-specific BMPs implemented for the six categories listed in Provision C.6.c.i; (c) Visual observations for:
(i) Actual discharges of sediment and/or construction-related materials into storm drains and/or waterbodies (ii) Evidence of sediment and/or construction-related materials discharges into storm drains and/or waterbodies. (iii) Illicit connections; and
(iv) Potential Illicit connections
(d) Education on stormwater pollution prevention, as needed. (4) Tracking
All inspections shall be recorded on a written or electronic inspection form. Inspectors shall follow the ERP for all actual and potential discharges discovered during the inspection. Permittees shall track in an electronic database or tabular format all inspections. This electronic database or tabular format shall be made readily available during inspections and audits by the Water Board staff or its representatives. This electronic database or tabular format shall record the following information for each site inspection:
(a) Site Name
(b) Inspection date;
(c) Weather during the inspection;
(d) The department, agency, or other entity performing the inspection. (e) Enforcement Response Level (Use ERP);
(f) Problem(s) observed using Illicit Discharge and the six BMP categories listed in Provision C.6.c.i; (g) Resolution of Problems noted using the following three standardized categories: Problems Fixed, Need More Time, and Escalate Enforcement; and (h) Comments which shall include all rationale for longer compliance times, all escalation in enforcement discussions, and any other information that may be relevant to that site inspection.
iii. Reporting
(1) Each Permittee shall summarize the following information in the Annual Report:
(a) Total number of construction sites requiring inspections during at least part of the Permit year; (b) Total number of active hillside sites disturbing less than one acre of soil requiring inspection; (c) Total number of active sites disturbing one acre or more of soil; (d) Total number of active sites disturbing less than one acre of soil identified as High Priority sites in Provision C.6.e.ii.(2)(c) requiring inspections; (e) Total number of inspections conducted;
(f) Number of enforcement actions taken by type, organized by the categories in each Permittee’s ERP; (g) Number of illicit discharges, actual and potential, of sediment or other construction-related materials; and (h) Number of enforcement actions or discrete number of potential and actual discharges fully corrected prior to the next rain event, but no longer than 10 business days after the potential and actual discharges30 are discovered or otherwise considered corrected in a timely, though longer period (2) In the 2027 Annual Report, each Permittee shall evaluate its respective electronic database or tabular format and the summaries produced in Provision C.6.e.ii.(4). This evaluation shall include findings on the program’s strength, comparison to previous years’ results, as well as areas that need more focused education for site owners, operators, and developers the following year. (3) An electronic copy of the construction site and inspection database(s) shall be made available to the Water Board during inspections, audits, or upon request.

C.6.f. Staff Training C
C
ii.

Page 171 of 564 ends

Page 40 of 181 ends

i. Task Description – Permittees shall provide training or access to training for all staff conducting construction stormwater inspections. ii. ImplementationLevel – Permittees shall provide training at least every other year to staff responsible for conducting construction site stormwater inspections. Training topics shall include information on correct uses of specific BMPs, proper installation and maintenance of BMPs, Permit requirements, local requirements, and the ERP
iii. Reporting – Permittees shall include in each Annual Report the following information:
(1) Dates of traing;
(2) Training topics covered;
(3) Total number of inspectors, including both municipal and non-municipal staff; and (4) The number of inspectors attending each training, including both municipal and non-municipal staff. If there was no training in that year, so state.

C.7 Public Information and Outreach
Each Permittee shall increase the awareness of the community, including diverse socioeconomic groups, government elected officials and staff, and ethnic communities, regarding the impacts of stormwater pollution on receiving waters and potential solutions to mitigate these impacts; positively influence the public’s waste disposal and runoff pollution generation behavior; and involve various citizens in mitigating the impacts of stormwater pollution. Outreach required in other provisions may be conducted under Provision C.7.

B
C.7.a. Outreach Campaigns
i. Task Description – Permittees shall continue to participate in or contribute to outreach campaigns, with the goal of significantly increasing overall awareness of stormwater runoff pollution prevention messages and behavior changes in target audiences.

B
ii. Implementation Level
(1) Target a broad audience with a minimum of one outreach campaign with specific stormwater runoff pollution prevention messages. The outreach campaign(s) should utilize various electronic and print media, and paid and free media, including social media, as practicable, to best reach different demographics. The outreach campaign(s) may be coordinated regionally or countywide. (2) Permittees shall conduct timely evaluations to measure the effectiveness of the outreach campaigns. Effectiveness assessment/evaluation may be done regionally or countywide.

C.7.b. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Education B
i. Task Description – Permittees shall continue to maintain a point of contact to provide the public with stormwater pollution prevention information. ii. Implementation Level
(1) Each Permitteeshall place and maintain information on stormwater issues, watershed characteristics, and stormwater pollution prevention alternatives on its website. In lieu of posting the detailed informational pages directly on their individual websites, Permittees may choose to provide links from their websites to the countywide program’s websites and/or websites for other collaborative efforts between Permittees. Each Permittee shall publicize its website.(2) Each Permittee shall maintain and publicize one point of contact for information on stormwater issues, watershed characteristics, and stormwater pollution prevention alternatives. This point of contact can be maintained individually or collectively, and Permittees may combine this function with the spill and dumping complaint central contact point required in Provision C.5 – Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination.

C.7.c. Public Outreach and Citizen Involvement Events B i. Task Description – Public outreach shall include a variety of pollution prevention messages such as for car washing; proper use, storage, and disposal of vehicle waste fluids; household waste materials disposal; pesticide use; and trash. Public outreach events may include venues such as fairs, shows, workshops, and household waste collection events. Citizen involvement events may include venues such as creek/shore clean-ups, adopt-an- inlet/creek/beach programs, volunteer monitoring, storm drain inlet marking, riparian restoration activities, and community grants. ii.

C
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 172 of 564 ends

Page 41 of 181 ends

C.7.d. Water Stewardship Collaboration D
i. Task Description – Permittees shall individually or collectively collaborate with other organizations to encourage and support community watershed stewardship activities. This may include collaborating with community groups such as local watershed forums and “friends of creek” groups; encouraging and supporting the development of grassroots watershed groups; or engaging existing groups, such as neighborhood associations, in watershed stewardship activities. This may also include collaboration with other organizations that benefit the health of the watershed, such as ReScape California, or collaboration to introduce community watershed stewardship activities into organizations focused on other environmental or sustainability efforts. ii. Implementation Level – Annually demonstrate effort.

C.7.e. School- Age Children Outreach B
i. Task Description –– Permittees shall individually or collectively implement outreach activities designed to increase awareness of stormwater and/or watershed message(s) in school-aged children (K through 12). ii. Implementation Level – Implement annually and demonstrate effectiveness of efforts through assessment.

C.7.f. Outreach to Municipal Officials B
i. Task Description - Permittees shall conduct outreach to municipal officials. One alternative means of accomplishing this is through the use of the Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials program (NEMO) to significantly increase overall awareness of stormwater and/or watershed message(s) among regional municipal officials.
ii. Implementation Level – At least once per permit cycle, or more often.

C.7.g. Tracking and Reporting B
i. Task Description -  Permittees sshall electronically track outreach efforts in a table or spreadsheet. The tracking document should include, at a minimum:
(1) Outreach avevent or campaign type;
(2) Dates;
(3) Target Audience
(4) Nubmer of participants and number of participatnts compared to previous events, if applicable (5) Location(s) or website address, as applicable;
(6) Contact infiormaton for venues and coordinators, if applicable (7) Materials and activities, as applicable;
(8) Level of effort;
(9) Evaluation of effectiviness;
(10) Lessons learned; and
(11) Planned changes in approach or implementation, if any. ii Implementation Level –  The tracking document shall be made available to the Water Board staff during inspections, audits, or upon request. iii. Reporting
(1)  In each Annual Report, each Permittee (or the Countywide Program, if the tracking was done countywide or regionally) shall submit a table listing the types of outreach programs implemented during that Permit year along with a brief description. The table should be a cumulative table showing the number, if applicable, of each type of outreach campaigns or events occurring during each Permit year. (2)  In the 2023 Annual Report, each Permittee shall list the Permittee’s point of contact and the URL for its stormwater pollution website. The Permittee shall discuss how the point of contact and website are publicized and maintained and certify that it has a website dedicated to providing and maintaining information on stormwater issues, watershed characteristics, and stormwater pollution prevention approaches. Changes in this information shall be reported in the Annual Report for the year in which the change occurs. (3)  In the 2027 Annual Report, each Permittee (or the Countywide Program, if the effectiveness assessment/evaluation was done countywide or regionally) shall submit a summary of the effectiveness assessments/evaluations by type of outreach described in Provisions C.7.a through C.7.f. The summary shall include plans for continuing or modifying each outreach type during the next permit term.

C.8. Water Quality Monitoring
C.8.a. Compliance Options B
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 173 of 564 ends

Page 42 of 181 ends

All Permittees shall comply with all the monitoring requirements in this Provision. Permittees may choose any of the following mechanisms, or a combination of these mechanisms, to meet the monitoring requirements:
i. Regional Collaboration. Permittees are encouraged to continue contributing to the Regional Monitoring Collaborative (RMC), which coordinates water quality monitoring conducted by all the Permittees. Permittees are encouraged to consider and assign additional duties to the RMC for purposes of increased efficiencies, particularly, but not limited to, reporting duties. ii. Area-wide Stormwater Program. Permittees may contribute to their countywide or area-wide Stormwater Program, so that the Stormwater Program conducts monitoring on behalf of its members.
iii. Third-party Monitoring. Permittees may use data collected by a third-party organization, such as the Water Board or Department of Pesticide Regulation, to fulfill a monitoring requirement, provided the data are demonstrated to meet the data quality objectives described in Provision C.8.b.

C.8.b. Monitoring Protocols and Data Quality D
Where applicable, monitoring data must be Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) comparable. Minimum data quality shall be consistent with the latest version of the SWAMP Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPrP) for applicable parameters, including data quality objectives, field and laboratory blanks, field duplicates, laboratory spikes, and clean techniques, using the most recent SWAMP Standard Operating Procedures.

C.8.c. San Francisco Estuary Receiving Water Monitoring D With limited exceptions, urban runoff from the Permittees’ jurisdictions ultimately discharges to the San Francisco Estuary. Monitoring of the Estuary is intended to answer questions such as: •Are chemical concentrations in the Estuary potentially at levels of potential concern and are associated impacts likely? • What are the concentrations and masses of contaminants in the Estuary and its segments? • What are the sources, pathways, loadings, and processes leading to contaminant related impacts in the Estuary? • Have the concentrations, masses, and associated impacts of contaminants in the Estuary increased or decreased? • What are the projected concentrations, masses, and associated impacts of contaminants in the Estuary? The Permittees shall participate in implementing an Estuary receiving water monitoring program, at a minimum equivalent to the San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program by contributing their fair share financially on an annual basis.

C.8.d. Low Impact Development (LID) Monitoring D
LID Monitoring is intended to measure compliance and effectiveness of LID controls. It will improve the understanding of the benefit of LID implementation, in particular, green stormwater infrastructure, on pollutant loading and hydrology of receiving waters within Permittees’ jurisdictions, at different space and time scales, and inform the design, construction, operation and maintenance (O&M) and future implementation of LID. LID Monitoring may also be used to calibrate and validate models that estimate pollutant removal effectiveness and inform sizing of LID facilities (e.g., countywide C.3 technical guidance documents, reasonable assurance analysis models, and other sizing and assessment models). LID Monitoring is intended to answer both of the following two management questions:
• What are the pollutant removal and hydrologic benefits, such as addressing impacts associated with hydromodification, of different types of LID facilities, systems, components, and design variations, at different spatial scales (e.g., single control vs watershed or catchment scale), and how do they change over time?
• What are the minimum levels of O&M necessary to avoid deteriorated LID facilities, systems, and components that reduce pollutant removal and hydrologic performance?
i. LID Monitoring Plans D
(1) The Permittees shall, at the regional or countywide level, develop LID Monitoring Plans to implement the requirements in Provision C.8.d.iii-iv. The LID Monitoring Plans shall, at a minimum:
(a) Explain how the study(s) will address both management questions and propose monitoring questions necessary that will address both management questions.
(b) Describe the LID facility(s) or system(s) and study area(s), including the characteristics, land use and management actions within the tributary drainage area to the LID facility(s) or system(s) that will be monitored. (c) List the monitoring stations, monitoring parameters, and associated measurement, sample and analytical methods that will be utilized. (d) Establish a monitoring schedule, including number and type (wet weather and dry weather) of monitoring events for each site, that may result in a greater number of total and/or annual monitoring events than the minimum required in Table 8.d.2, and including a discussion of the allocation of samples between and within sites.
(e) Describe the data evaluation methods, such as statistical analyses to test whether differences in concentrations are statistically significant. (f) Include study-specific Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs), which, at a minimum, are comparable to the SWAMP QAPrP. (g) Provide annual cost estimates for the implementation of the LID Monitoring Plan. (h) Explain how sampling and analytical methodologies will be regionally consistent.

C.8.a. B
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 174 of 564 ends

Page 43 of 181 ends

(2) Permittees shall implement no later than the deadline set forth in Provision C.8.d.v, the approved or conditionally approved LID Monitoring Plans as meeting the requirements herein (including consideration of countywide and regional representativeness and whether the information generated will reliably address the LID Monitoring management questions). ii. Regional Collaboration D
To assist with the development and implementation of scientifically-sound LID Monitoring Plans, to facilitate regional consistency with respect to sampling and analytical methodology, and to make recommendations about allocation of samples between and within different sites, the Permittees shall form and convene a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) which includes impartial science advisors (e.g., SFEI, SCCWRP) and Water Board staff, to review and make recommendations regarding the LID Monitoring Plans (including their study design, analysis methods, results, and conclusions) prior to submission of the LID Monitoring Plans to the Executive Officer. In order to effectuate this review, the Permittees shall submit their draft LID Monitoring Plans to the TAG by March 1, 2023. Prior to the Executive Officer’s approval or conditional approval of the LID Monitoring Plans, the TAG shall be convened at least biannually. Thereafter, it shall be convened at least annually to provide continued feedback regarding the implementation of Provision C.8.d, including but not limited to study design, sample locations, and analysis methods. iii. Methods
Permittees shall implement or cause to be implemented the LID effectiveness monitoring methods listed in Table 8.d.1. i. D
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 175 of 564 ends

Page 44 of 181 ends

iv. Perameters and Intensites
(1) Permittees shall conduct LID Monitoring consistent with the parameters and intensities specified in Table 8.d.2. (2) Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures in 40 CFR part 136 for analyses of pollutants unless another method is required under 40 CFR chapter 1, subchapter N. For PFAS, if there are no standard methods in 40 CFR part 136, Permittees may use other methods, such as those recommended by U.S. EPA for non-potable water and other environmental media. (3) In a given water year, if there are not enough storm events for Permittees to sample (i.e., due to weather/climate), Permittees may certify that in their subsequent LID Monitoring Status Report and perform the missed sample events in the subsequent water year. v. Implementation Level – Permittees shall begin implementation of the approved or conditionally approved LID Monitoring Plans by no later than the start of the 2024 Water Year, which is October 1, 2023.
vi. Reporting – The Permittees shall submit their LID Monitoring Plans for Executive Officer approval by May 1, 2023.

Page 176 of 564 ends

Page 45 of 181 ends

C.8.e. Trash Monitoring D
Trash Monitoring is intended to: 1) verify whether Permittees’ trash control actions to-date have effectively prevented trash from their jurisdictions from discharging to receiving waters, and 2) evaluate whether discharges of trash from areas of Permittees’ jurisdictions where full trash capture equivalency (full trash capture devices or other actions verified with on-land visual trash assessments, as referenced in Provision C.10.b.iii) has been achieved are causing and/or contributing to adverse trash impacts in receiving waters. Trash monitoring shall address the following management and monitoring questions:

Management Questions
• Have Permittees’ trash management actions effectively prevented trash from their jurisdictions from discharging to receiving waters? • Are discharges of trash from areas within Trash Management Areas controlled to a low trash generation level causing and/or contributing to adverse trash impacts in receiving waters?
Monitoring Questions
• What is the trash condition and approximate level of trash (volume, type, and size) within and discharging into receiving waters in areas that receive MS4 runoff controlled to a low trash generation via the installation of full trash capture devices, or the implementation of other trash management actions equivalent to full trash capture systems? SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 177 of 564 ends

Page 46 of 181 ends

• Does the level of trash in the receiving water correlate strongly with the conditions of the tributary drainage area of the MS4? i. Monitioring Components
Permittees shall implement or cause to be implemented the monitoring components as described below, to address each management and monitoring question. Permittees should use comparable assessment methods to facilitate regional consistency. To ensure comparable data, for each monitoring site, Permittees and the TAG shall consider incorporating the implementation of steps 1-6 as specified in the Statewide Trash Monitoring Methods Project Trash Monitoring Playbook into the Trash Monitoring Plan. Permittees and the TAG shall consider adapting and repeating these six steps for all methods specified in Provision C.8.e.ii, to reflect site information that can be collected regardless of method and can increase comparability between methods.

The six steps are as follows:
(1) Event Preparation
(2) Garther Standard Equipment
(3) Set up the Assessment Area
(4) Record the Site Information and Assessment Area Demnsion (5) Record Assessment Area Photographs
(6) Determine, Document, and Map the Locations of Storm Drain Outfalls, Homeless Encampments, and Illegal Dumping Hotspots Which May Impact the Assessment Area.
ii. Monitoring Methods
(1) Permittees shall collect and analyze the amount of trash discharged from MS4 outfalls that drain tributary drainage areas controlled to the Low trash generation level, during storm events that will (or that Permittees estimate are likely to) result in discharges of trash through the MS4 system.

Sampling of MS4 outfalls includes the use of netting devices attached to the end of the outfall pipe (that capture trash discharging through the MS4), or other equivalent end-of-pipe (or in-line) devices and structures, whether existing, modified, or new. The device used to monitor the trash at the end of the MS4 outfall (or in-line, within the MS4) shall not be used itself as the trash control that grants the Low trash generation status to the tributary drainage area; the monitored tributary drainage area may only be controlled to the Low trash generation level by controls upstream of the monitoring device. (2) Permittees shall implement a pilot program to directly (in-stream) sample sections of receiving waters that receive runoff primarily from MS4 outfalls that drain tributary drainage areas controlled to the Low trash generation level, during storm events that will (or that Permittees estimate are likely to) result in discharges of trash through the MS4 system. Permittees should not select in-stream sites that are downstream of direct discharge sites (e.g., homeless encampments and illegal dumping sites). To the extent feasible, in-stream monitoring sites should be co-located with MS4 outfall monitoring sites, as follows: They should be no further than 300 feet downstream or upstream of them; failing that, they should be no further than 300 feet downstream of them, or, any distance upstream of them; failing that, they should be anywhere within the same receiving water; failing that, in- stream monitoring sites do not have to be co-located with MS4 outfall monitoring sites. Sampling a receiving water directly (in-stream) involves the use of trawls, nets, or other equivalent devices, that are designed to capture as much of the width and depth of the receiving water’s cross section (especially the thalweg) as is feasible and safe, during storm events that will (or that Permittees estimate are likely to) result in discharges of trash through the MS4 system. Indirect methods (on-land), such as shoreline and/or streambank assessments, are not a satisfactory surrogate or replacement for these direct measurements of trash within receiving waters.
(3) Permittees may additionally implement shoreline and/or streambank assessment methods (with an appropriate frequency, timing, and assessment length), not to indirectly measure trash loading in MS4 outfalls and receiving waters, but instead to gain a synoptic view of on-land trash conditions adjacent to MS4 outfall and in-stream monitoring sites. Such methods include: the riverine volumetric method, the riverine quantitative tally method, the unoccupied aerial system (UAS) method, or other equivalent methods. The riverine qualitative visual assessment method may be merited but requires additional study, refinement, and calibration, and its use is subject to the Executive Officer’s approval. (4) In order to be able to characterize loading rather than only concentration, Permittees shall directly measure flow at both MS4 outfall sites (flow through the MS4 pipe) and at in-stream receiving water sites (flow through the receiving water). Examples of methods to collect flow data include stream gages, manning’s equation, and other methods recommended in Chapter 3.2 of the International Stormwater BMP Database’s October 2009 Urban Stormwater BMP Performance Monitoring document.47
(5) All methods shall include collection of data on material type. For example, the volume or tally of cigarette butts collected. iii. Monitoring Sites, Events, Frequency, and Intervals (1) Permittees shall conduct MS4 outfall monitoring annually, starting October 1, 2023, at no less than the number of sites and events specified in the table below, according to the approved or conditionally approved Trash Monitoring Plan.

C.8.e. D
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 178 of 564 ends

Page 47 of 181 ends

(2) Permittees shall implement a pilot program for direct in-stream monitoring. Permittees shall conduct this monitoring annually, starting October 1, 2024, at no less than the number of sites and events specified in the table below, according to the approved or conditionally approved Trash Monitoring Plan.
(3) Permittees should monitor storm events that trigger trash discharge and transport trash through the MS4 (e.g., 0.25 inches of rain over 24 hours), and that are preceded by at least 48 hours of limited or no trash discharge from the tributary drainage area. Each wet season, Permittees should sample the first forecasted significant storm event, and at least one storm event that is forecast to be greater than the one-year, one-hour storm event (i.e., full capture design standard).
(4) To the extent possible, Permittees should monitor the same monitoring sites during each year of the Permit term. With cause, justification, and reporting in the Annual Trash Monitoring Progress Report, they can change monitoring sites. (5) Tributary drainage areas to monitoring sites should be representative with respect to the types of trash controls present across the region.

For example, some monitoring sites receive runoff from areas controlled primarily by one type of full trash capture device (e.g., an inlet-based device) while other monitoring sites receive runoff from areas controlled primarily by another type of full trash capture device (e.g., a HDS unit). And/or, some monitoring sites receive runoff from areas controlled primarily by full trash capture devices while other monitoring sites receive runoff from areas controlled primarily by Other Actions.
(6) Permittees are exempt from outfall and receiving water sampling during dangerous and unsafe weather conditions. (7) In a given water year, if there are not enough qualifying storm events for Permittees to sample (i.e., due to weather/climate) – or if safety concerns preclude sampling during a qualifying storm event such that Permittees would not achieve the mandatory minimums set forth in Provisions C.8.e.iii.(1)- (2) – the Permittees may certify that in their subsequent Annual Trash Monitoring Progress Report, and perform the missed sample events in the subsequent water year. (8) Permittees shall use the results of Trash Monitoring to inform and investigate their trash management actions. If Trash Monitoring results indicate that discharges are causing or contributing to adverse impacts in receiving waters, Permittees shall implement new or enhanced actions to comply with the trash discharge prohibition and receiving water limitations. Examples of results that could trigger follow up actions are provided in the Fact Sheet. iv. Regional Trash Monitoring Technical Advisory Group
(1) To assist with the development and implementation of scientifically-sound trash monitoring, the Permittees shall form and convene a Technical Advisory Group (TAG), which includes impartial science advisors (e.g., SFEI) and Water Board staff, to review and provide input on ongoing trash monitoring, site selection, analysis methods, results, and conclusions. Prior to the submission of the Trash Monitoring Plan, the TAG shall meet at least biannually. Subsequent to the submission of the Trash Monitoring Plan, the TAG shall meet at least annually. (2) The Permittees shall solicit input and feedback from the TAG on:
(a) The spatial representativeness of each site;
(b) The adequacy of the methods employed at each site;
D
iii.

Page 179 of 564 ends

Page 48 of 181 ends

(c) The recommended minimum intensity, size, and/or recurrence interval for storms that are sampled; (d) The number of sites and monitoring events, as described in the monitoring schedule in the Trash Monitoring Plan; (e) The timing of sampling during storm events. For example, it is likely that Permittees should prioritize sampling during the rising limb of the hydrograph (and towards the beginning of the rising limb, at that), because that is when most of the trash load is mobilized and discharged to MS4 outfalls and receiving waters;
(f) Implementation of of Provision C.8.e.iii.(8);
(g) Permitting; and
(h) Recommendation for alternative approaches to answering the management and monitoring questions. v. Trash Monitoring Plan - Permittees shall collectively submit a Trash Monitoring Plan by July 31, 2023, subject to Executive Officer approval, that, at a minimum, includes the following information:
(1) Selected site locations (latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates), including maps and characteristics (e.g., type of outfall, receiving water); (2) For each site, describe the land use, trash conditions/levels, trash controls present, and other relevant characteristics (trash generation rates, types of controls present, etc.) of the tributary drainage areas of the MS4, and also delineate the tributary drainage areas of the MS4; (3) A description of factors that were considered when selecting monitoring sites and events, including spatial and temporal representativeness; (4) For each site, a description of the monitoring methods and protocols that will be used; (5) A monitoring schedule, which shall include the timing (of sampling during and between storm events), number and type of monitoring events at each site;
(6) Plans for implementation of Provision C.8.e.iii.(8); (7) A summary of permitting efforts;
(8) Opportunities provided for input and participation by interested parties and scientific experts other than those participating in the TAG; and (9) Input, feedback, and recommendations from the TAG on the capacity of the Trash Monitoring Plan to answer the management and monitoring questions.

C.8.f. Pollutants of Concern Monitoring D
Pollutants of Concern (POC) Monitoring monitoring is intended to assess inputs of select POCs to the Bay from local tributaries and urban runoff, provide information to assess compliance with receiving water limitations, support implementation of TMDLs and other pollutant control strategies, assess progress toward achieving wasteload allocations for TMDLs and help resolve uncertainties associated with loading estimates and impairments associated with these pollutants. In particular, monitoring required by this provision must be directed toward addressing the following six priority POC management information needs: (1) Source Identification - identifying or confirming which sources or watershed source areas provide the greatest opportunities for reductions of POCs in urban stormwater runoff;
(2) Contributition to Bay Impairment - identifying which watershed source areas contribute most to the impairment of San Francisco Bay beneficial uses (due to source intensity and sensitivity of discharge location); (3) Management Action Effectiveness - evaluating the effectiveness or impacts of existing management actions, including compliance with TMDLs and other POC requirements and providing support for planning future management actions; (4) Loads and Status - providing information on POC loads, concentrations, and presence in local tributaries or urban stormwater discharges; (5) Trends- evaluating trends in POC loading to the Bay and POC concentrations in urban stormwater discharges or local tributaries over time; and (6) Compliance with Receiving Water Limitations – providing information to assess whether receiving water limitations (RWLs) are achieved.

Not all information needs apply to all POCs (see Table 8.2 below for details). i. Sampling Methods – The Permittees shall implement or cause to be implemented the monitoring components shown in Table 8.1 to address each of the six POC management information needs.

D
iv.

Page 180 of 564 ends

Page 49 of 181 ends

D
i.

Page 181 of 564 ends

Page 50 of 181 ends

(8) Peramenters and Monitoring Frequency – The Permittees shall conduct POC monitoring consistent with the monitoring intensity and frequency specified in Table 8.2. Monitoring frequencies are described as the total and minimum number of samples that Permittees within a countywide Stormwater Program shall collectively collect and analyze in a Water Year (October 1- September 30). Minimum number of samples that Permittees within a countywide Stormwater Program shall collect by the end of the Permit term to address each monitoring type are also specified. i.

Page 182 of 564 ends

Page 51 of 181 ends

a This column indicates the total number of samples, across all applicable monitoring types (i.e., monitoring types 1-5 from Table 8.1), that must be collected during the Permit term. The number in parentheses indicates the minimum number of samples that must be collected, across all applicable monitoring types, during each of the five years of the permit. For example, 75 total samples must be collected for total PCBs and 60 total samples for mercury by each set of Santa Clara County and Alameda County during the term of the permit. San Mateo and Contra Costa Counties, because of smaller program size, must collect 65 PCBs and 50 total samples for mercury. Permittees must collect a minimum of 8 PCBs and 8 mercury samples every year of the Permit term, including the final year. It is possible that data can satisfy multiple monitoring types. However, the intent of the Permit is to achieve a distribution of monitoring effort across all applicable monitoring information needs. Therefore, no more than 25 percent of samples for any pollutant may be used to satisfy requirements for multiple monitoring categories for that pollutant. This requirement is intended to ensure that monitoring is focused to provide the best information to answer specific management questions. b This column indicates the monitoring types from Table 8.1 that are applicable to this POC along with the minimum number of samples that shall be collected by each set of Permittees (i.e., Santa Clara County, San Mateo County, Alameda County, and Contra Costa County) by the end of the Permit term. The applicable monitoring type(s) is also stated to illustrate the management information need(s) motivating the collected data. For example, each set of Permittees (i.e., the Countywide Programs for Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties) must collect and analyze at least 8 samples to address monitoring types 1-5 in Table 8.1 for both total PCBs and total mercury. Some collected samples may address multiple management questions.
c Permittees, collectively, shall produce or cause to be produced a stormwater monitoring strategy for emerging contaminants (ECs) April 1, 2023 that prioritizes ECs for stormwater monitoring listed in this table and possibly others and establishes an approach for sampling stormwater ECs based on specific or likely physico-chemical properties, sources, transport pathways, and fate of prioritized ECs. Permittees must conduct or cause to be conducted ECs stormwater monitoring to execute the ECs stormwater monitoring strategy at a level of effort indicated in the table. This level of effort can be satisfied either through sampling and analysis of the number of samples indicated in this table or through augmentation of the San Francisco Bay Regional Monitoring Program Emerging Contaminants Monitoring Strategy in the amount of $100,000 per year for all Permittees combined. d Total Total Organic Carbon (TOC) data are not used independently. Rather, TOC can be useful for normalizing PCBs data collected in water and sediment. TOC shall be collected concurrently with PCBs data that should be normalized to TOC. Similarly, suspended sediment concentrations (SSC) samples should be collected and analyzed when water samples are collected that will be used to assess loads, loading trends, or BMP effectiveness for PCBs and Mercury. Hardness data are used in conjunction with copper concentrations collected in fresh water. i.

Page 183 of 564 ends

Page 52 of 181 ends

iii. POC Parameters and Analytical Methods – Samples collected consistent with Table 8.2 shall be analyzed for parameters listed in Table 8.3. Where no laboratory method is listed in Table 8.3, Permittees shall use U.S. EPA or SWAMP-approved methods. There are no analytical methods listed in Table 8.3 for ECs as there are not U.S. EPA-approved methods for most of these contaminants. Monitoring for ECs is investigatory monitoring to provide information on EC loads, concentrations, and presence/absence rather than compliance determination. Accordingly, specification of analytical method is not mandatory. Moreover, the sampling and analysis is likely to be conducted through the San Francisco Bay Regional Monitoring Program, which has a robust and well-established quality assurance process, and the laboratories chosen for the EC analyses will be applying state-of-the-science analytical methods for the detection and quantification of ECs in stormwater samples.

C.8.g. Pesticides and Toxicity Monitoring D
Permittees shall conduct wet and dry weather monitoring of pesticides and toxicity in urban creeks. If a statewide coordinated pesticides and pesticides- related toxicity monitoring program begins collecting data on an ongoing basis during the Permit term, Permittees may request the Water Board modify, reduce or eliminate this monitoring requirement, provided the resultant change would result in overall improvement of pesticide monitoring data collection. In fulfilling the requirements of Provision C.8.g, Permittees may collaborate with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) for data collection and analysis. For data collected through such collaboration, CDPR’s standard operating procedures and quality assurance/quality control methods may be used in place of the SWAMP comparability requirements in subprovisions C.8.b and in C.8.g. i. Toxicity in Water Column - Dry Weather
(1) Field and Laboratory Method – Permittees shall collect grab samples of receiving water using applicable SWAMP comparable methodology. These samples shall be analyzed for the test organisms listed, and by the methods described, in Table 8.4. Toxicity shall be evaluated using the Test of Significant Toxicity (TST) statistical approach. Each sample shall be subject to determination of “Pass” or “Fail” and shall indicate “Percent Effect” from toxicity using nondiluted samples. The TST null hypothesis shall be “mean sample response ≤ 0.75 × mean control response.” A test result that rejects this null hypothesis shall be reported as “Pass.” A test result that does not reject this null hypothesis shall be reported as “Fail.” The relative “Percent Effect” of the sample is defined and reported as: ((Mean control response – Mean sample response) ÷ Mean control response)) × 100. (2) Sample Design/Locations – Sample locations may be selected by Permittees to monitor locations where toxicity could be likely; to coincide with creek restoration sites; or to resample a location where toxicity has been found in the past.

Page 184 of 564 ends

Page 53 of 181 ends

(3) Frequency , Timeframe and Number of Sites – Permittees shall annually collect in the dry season at least the minimum number of samples as shown below.
a The Ceriodaphnia dubia chronic toxicity test design for the survival endpoint is not amenable to the TST, Welch's t-test so the survival endpoint will be determined as a percent effect using the TST approach. A percent effect less than 25 percent will be considered a "pass," and a percent effect equal to or greater than 25 percent will be considered a "fail."
b For Hyalella and Chironomus acute toxicity test methods, the test result will be considered a "pass," regardless of a TST determination of "fail" if the percent survival in the receiving water is equal to or greater than 90 percent. ii. Toxicity Pesticides and Other Pollutants in Sediment - Dry Weather (1) Field and Laboratory Method – The Permittees shall collect grab samples of creek sediment using applicable SWAMP-comparable methodology. These samples shall be analyzed for the pollutants and organisms listed and by the methods described on Table 8.5. Where no laboratory method is listed in Table 8.5, Permittees shall use U.S. EPA- or SWAMP-approved methods. (2) Sample Design/Locations – Samples shall be collected at fine-grained depositional locations. Such sample locations may be selected by the Permittees to monitor locations where toxicity could be likely, or to resample a location where toxicity has been found in the past, for example.

D
i.

Page 185 of 564 ends

Page 54 of 181 ends

a For Hyalella and Chironomus acute toxicity test methods, the test result will be considered a "pass," regardless of a TST determination of "fail" if the percent survival in the receiving water is equal to or greater than 90 percent. The false positive rate (beta error) is 0.05 and the negative rate (alpha error) is 0.25 for these test methods.
(3) Sample Design/Locations – Samples shall be collected at fine-grained depositional locations. Such sample locations may be selected by the Permittees to monitor locations where toxicity could be likely, to coincide with bioassessment sites, or to resample a location where toxicity has been found in the past, for example.
(4) Frequency, Timeframe, and Number of Sites – Permittees shall collect at least the minimum number of samples annually as shown:
iii. Wet Weather Pesticides and Toxicity Monitoring
(1) Field and Laboratory Method – Permittees shall collect water column samples and analyze them for the following parameters using the methods specified in Tables 8.4 and 8.5. For imidacloprid, Permittees shall specify an analytical method that achieves a reporting level of 0.01 ppb. •Pyrethroids: bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, permethrin •Imidacloprid
•Fipronil and its degradates fipronil-sulfone, fipronil-desulfinyl, fipronil sulfide and fipronil amide (amide is optional – do it if lab offers the suite) •Toxicity
(2) Sample Design/Locations – Permittees shall collect samples annually during storm events. Sample locations shall be representative of urban watersheds (i.e., bottom of watershed locations).
(3) Frequency, Timeframe, and Number of Sites – If this (Provision C.8.g.iii) sampling is conducted by the RMC on behalf of all Permittees, a total of ten (10) samples shall be collected over the Permit term, with a minimum of six (6) samples collected by the end of the third water year of the permit term. If this (Provision C.8.g.iii) sampling is conducted by Countywide Stormwater Programs, Permittees shall collect at least the minimum number of samples as shown below:

D
ii.

Page 186 of 564 ends

Page 55 of 181 ends

iv. Follow-up – Permittees shall provide notification in the next Urban Creeks Monitoring Report when analytical results indicate any of the following:
(1) A toxcity test of growth, reproduction, or survival of any test organism is reported as “fail” in both the initial sampling and a second, follow-up sampling, and both have ≥ 50% Percent Effect;
(2) A pollutant is present at a concentration exceeding its water quality objective in the Basin Plan; or (3) For pollutants without water quality objectives, results exceed Probable Effects Concentrations or Threshold Effects Concentrations.53 C.8.h. Reporting D
i. Water Quality Standard Exceedance – When data collected pursuant to Provisions C.8.a.-C.8.g. indicate that discharges are causing or contributing to an exceedance of an applicable water quality standard, the Permittees shall notify the Water Board within no more than 30 days of such a determination and submit a follow-up report in accordance with Provision C.1 requirements. This reporting requirement shall not apply to continuing or recurring exceedances of water quality standards previously reported to the Water Board or to exceedances of pollutants that are addressed pursuant to Provisions C.9 through C.12, C.14, C.18, and C.19, consistent with Provision C.1. ii. Electronic Reporting – The Permittees shall submit to the California Environmental Data Exchange Network (CEDEN) all results from monitoring conducted pursuant to Provisions C.8.d. LID Monitoring, C.8.e Trash Monitoring, C.8.f Pollutants of Concern Monitoring, and C.8.g. Pesticides and Toxicity Monitoring. Data that CEDEN cannot accept are exempt from this requirement. (1) Data shall be submitted in SWAMP formats and with the quality controls required by CEDEN. (2) Data collected during the previous October 1–September 30 period shall be submitted by March 31 of each year. iii. Urban Creek Monitoring Report – The Permittees shall submit a comprehensive Urban Creeks Monitoring Report at the countywide level no later than March 31 of each year, reporting on all data collected during the foregoing October 1–September 30 period. Each Urban Creeks Monitoring Report shall contain summaries of C.8.d LID Monitoring, C.8.e Trash Monitoring, C.8.f Pollutants of Concern Monitoring, and C.8.g Pesticides and Toxicity Monitoring, including the following:
(1) A LID Monitoring Status Report, which, at a minimum, includes the following information:
(a) A Summary summary of the LID Monitoring Methods and study designs used in the preceding water year, at each sampled LID component, facility or system.
(b) A Summary summary table that lists monitoring samples collected during the preceding water year during the Permit term, including at a minimum, the following information for each sample location: Site ID; the name or ID of the LID component, facility or system name; latitude and longitude of the LID component, facility or system; type of LID component, facility or system (e.g., bioretention); characteristics and land use of the tributary drainage area of the LID component, facility or system; other management actions and controls present in the tributary drainage area of the LID component, facility or system; sample dates; and concentrations of parameters measured. (c) A summary of lessons learned, progress made, and interim conclusions, for all samples collected during the previous water year. (d) For all data generated during the preceding water year, a statement of data quality. (e) The raw data generated by the preceding water year, made available to the Water Board and third parties. (f) An outline of steps (including but not limited to study designs, methods and sites) for the upcoming water year. (g) An analysis of the data, including the following:
(i) Indentification and analysis of any trends in stormwater or receiving water quality. (ii) A discussion of the data for each monitoring program component, which includes:

D
iii.

Page 187 of 564 ends

Page 56 of 181 ends

a. Monitoring data relative to prior conditions, beneficial uses and applicable water quality standards as described in the Basin Plan, the Ocean Plan, the California Toxics Rule, and other applicable water quality control plans; b. Where appropriate, hypotheses to investigate regarding pollutant sources, trends, and BMP effectiveness; c. Identification and prioritization of water quality problems; d. Identification of potential sources of water quality problems; e. Description of followup actions;
f. Evaluation of the effectiveness of existing control measures g. Indentification of management actions needed to address water quality problems. (2) An Annual Trash Monitoring Progress Report54,  which, at a minimum, includes the following information:
(a) Narrative description of monitoring conducted, including the number of sites monitored and the number of monitoring events completed; (b) Description of storms events that were sampled, including the date(s) and times when samples were collected, intensity and duration of the storm event, a description of where along the hydrograph the storm event was sampled, and justification used to determine the storm event was of appropriate size to displace and/or mobilize the transport of trash though the MS4 system; (c) Narrative description, including maps, of any MS4 outfalls, homeless encampments and illegal dumping sites, located upstream of each Outfall Monitoring sample site;
(d) Description and the results of data analysis methods, including statistical analyses; (e) Results of lessons learned;
(f) Data quality assurance procedures that were implemented for samples collected; (g) Montioring events (including locations and methods) planned for the subsequent fiscal year(s); (h) A comprehensive detailed discussion of implementation of Provision C.8.e.iii.(8); and (i) Updates of required Trash Monitoring Plan elements. (3)  A Pesticides and Toxicity Monitoring Status Report, which includes the following information:
(a) A complete complete Water Year Summary Table that lists the monitoring sites, with a row for each site. The table columns contain: Site ID; creek name; latitude; longitude; permittee jurisdiction(s); water column toxicity (acute); water column toxicity (chronic); sediment toxicity (acute); sediment toxicity (chronic); and sediment chemistry. For each site, list the site information and check the parameters sampled at that site. Provide a statement of the data quality and an analysis of the data, including:
(i) Discuss monitoring data relative to prior conditions, beneficial uses and applicable water quality standards as described in the Basin Plan, Ocean Plan, and California Toxics Rule and other applicable water quality control plans; (ii) Where appropriate, develop hypotheses to investigate regarding pollutant sources, trends, and BMP effectiveness; (iii) Identify aand prioritize water quality impairments; (iv) Identify and potential sources (and actual, if known) of water quality impairments, and provide sufficient justification for those potential sources;           (v) Describe follow-up actions;
(vi) Evaluate the effectiveness of existing management actions; and (vii) Identify additional management actions needed to address water quality impairments. iv. Pollutants of Concern Monitioring Reports
(1) In each Urban Creeks Monitoring Report, the Permittees shall submit a report describing the allocation of sampling effort for POC monitoring for the forthcoming year (i.e., the water year that began October 1 of that year) and what was accomplished for POC monitoring during the preceding water year. The report shall include (for preceding year and projected for forthcoming year): monitoring locations, number and types of samples collected, purpose of sampling (management question addressed), and analytes measured. Any data not reportable to CEDEN should also be included in the Urban Creeks Monitoring Report due annually on March 31.
(2) Receiving Water Limitations Assessment Report
(a) By no later than March 31, 2023, Permittees shall submit a report with the following information:
(i) Relevant water quality objectives against which to compare monitoring data; (ii) Analytes in addition to those listed in Table 8.2 to monitor based on assessment of the potential that discharges of these analytes may result in levels in receiving waters approaching or exceeding water quality objectives and the basis of the determination; and (iii) Identification of waterbodies to be sampled, sampling locations within those waterbodies, and sampling schedule consistent with the requirements in Tables 8.1 and 8.2.
(b) The report shall be subject to approval by the Executive Officer for compliance and technical adequacy. Upon approval by the Executive Officer, Permittees shall augment the RWLs assessment monitoring required in Tables 8.1 with the analytes identified in the report. (c) By no later than March 31, 2026, or as part of the Integrated Monitoring Report, Permittees shall submit an updated Receiving Water Limitations Assessment Report with proposed monitoring to be conducted during the next permit term.

D
iii.

Page 188 of 564 ends

Page 57 of 181 ends

v. Integrated Montioring Report - By no later than March 31, 2026, Permittees shall submit an Integrated Monitoring Report in lieu of the annual Urban Creeks Monitoring Report. This report will be part of the next Report of Waste Discharge for the reissuance of this Permit. The Integrated Monitoring Report shall report on all the data collected since the previous Integrated Monitoring Report and shall contain the following:
(1) The information described in Provisions C.8.h.iii.(1)-(3), pertaining to the monitoring data collected during the preceding (third) water year of the Permit term; (2) A comprehensive analysis of all data collected pursuant to Provision C.8. since the previous Integrated Monitoring Report,55 and may include other pertinent studies. For LID Monitoring and Trash Monitoring, this shall additionally include a summary of the methods and study designs used in all preceding water years, at each sample location. And, a summary of lessons learned, progress made, data, results, analyses, and conclusions, for all samples collected during all prior water years during the Permit term; (3) For POCs, methods, data, calculations, load estimates, and source estimates for each POC parameter, as applicable; (4) A budget summary for each monitoring requirement (for each yearof the Permit term); and (5) With cause and justification, recommendations for changes to any of the elements of Provision C.8 in future Permit terms. vi. Comprehensive Bioassessment Final Report – By no later than March 31, 2024, the Permittees shall collectively submit a comprehensive analysis of all bioassessment monitoring conducted by the RMC during MRP 1 and MRP 2, for Water Years 2012-2021. vii. Standard Report Content – All monitoring reports shall be clear, concise, and well-organized, and shall include the following information:
(1) An Executive Secretary;
(2) The purpose of the monitoring and brief description of the study design rationale; (3) Quality Assurance/Quality Control summaries for sample collection and analytical methods, including a discussion of any limitations of the data; (4) Brief descriptions of sampling protocols and analytical methods; (5) Sample location description, including water body name and segment and latitude and longitude coordinates; (6) Sample ID, collection date (and time if relevant), media (e.g., water, filtered water, bed sediment, tissue); (7) Concentrations detected, measurement units, and detection limits; (8) Assessment, analysis, and interpretation of the data for each monitoring program component; (9) A listing of volunteer and other non-Permittee entities whose data are included in the report; and (10) Assessment of compliance with applicable water quality standards.

C.9. Pesticides Toxicity Control B
To prevent the impairment of urban streams by pesticide-related toxicity, the Permittees shall implement a pesticide toxicity control program that addresses, within their jurisdictions, their own and others’ use of pesticides that pose a threat to water quality and that have the potential to enter the municipal conveyance system. This provision implements requirements of the TMDL for Diazinon and Pesticide-Related Toxicity for Urban Creeks in the region. The TMDL includes urban runoff allocations for Diazinon of 100 ng/l and for pesticide-related toxicity of 1.0 Acute Toxicity Units (TUa) and 1.0 Chronic Toxicity Units (TUc) to be met in urban creek waters. U.S. EPA phased out urban uses of diazinon in the mid-2000s, and diazinon is no longer detected in urban creeks in the region. Pesticide-related toxicity continues to occur because State and federal pesticide regulatory programs, as currently implemented, allow pesticides to be used in ways that cause or contribute to aquatic toxicity. In adopting the TMDL implementation plan, the Water Board recognized that (1) Permittees must control their own use of pesticides, but Permittees are not solely responsible for attaining the allocations, because their authority to regulate others’ pesticide use is constrained by federal and State law; and (2) because a realistic date for achieving allocations cannot be discerned given the current framework for pesticide regulation, reviewing the implementation strategy every five years, at permit reissuance, is the appropriate timeline. Accordingly, the Permittees’ requirements for addressing the allocations are set forth in the TMDL implementation plan and are included in this provision. Urban-use pesticides of concern (Pesticides of Concern) to water quality include: diamides (chlorantraniliprole and cyantraniliprole); diuron, fipronil and its degradates; indoxacarb; organophosphorous insecticides (chlorpyrifos, diazinon, and malathion); pyrethroids (metofluthrin, bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, beta-cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, and permethrin); carbamates (e.g., carbaryl and aldicarb); and neonicotinoids (e.g., imidacloprid, acetamiprid, and dinotefuran).

C.9.a. Maintain and Implement an Integrated Pest Management Policy or Ordinance and Standard Operating Procedures B All Permittees have developed a pesticide toxicity control program for use of pesticides in municipal operations and on municipal property based on the concepts of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and have adopted an IPM policy or ordinance and standard operating procedures to implement the policy or ordinance.
i. Task Description –The Permittees shall implement their IPM policies or ordinances and standard operating procedures and update their IPM policies or ordinances and standard operating procedures as needed to ensure their use of pesticides does not cause or contribute to pesticide-related toxicity in receiving waters.
ii. Implementation – Each Permittee shall require municipal employees and contractors to adhere to its IPM policy or ordinance and standard operating procedures in all the Permittee’s municipal operations and on all municipal property. iii. Reporting
(1) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall certify they are implementing their IPM policy or ordinance and standard operating procedures, report trends in quantities and types of pesticide active ingredients used, and explain any increases in use of Pesticides of Concern to water quality.

Page 189 of 564 ends

Page 58 of 181 ends

(2) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall provide a brief description (e.g., one or two sentences) of two IPM tactics or strategies implemented in the reporting year. Examples could include non-chemical strategies such as monitoring, mowing weeds, mulching, and redesign of problematic landscapes; preventive actions such as sealing holes and gaps in structures, improving sanitation, and outreach to employees about how their actions contribute to pest presence; and integration of several strategies, such as tackling a rat problem by educating building occupants, improving sanitation, trimming trees away from buildings, sealing holes in the structure, and trapping rodents. To the extent possible, different IPM actions should be described each year, so that a range of IPM actions is described over the permit term. (3) In their 2023 Annual Reports, the Permittees shall provide links to their IPM policies or ordinances and IPM standard operating procedures.

Permittees shall submit updated links in subsequent Annual Reports, if those links change.

C.9.b. Train Municipal Employees B
i. Task Description –The Permittees shall ensure that all municipal employees who, within the scope of their duties, apply or use pesticides are trained in IPM practices and the Permittee’s IPM policy and/or ordinance and standard operating procedures. This training may also include other training opportunities, such as the ReScape California Maintenance Training & Qualification Program, provided both structural and landscape pest control training are provided.
ii. Reporting
(1) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall report the percentage of municipal employees who apply pesticides who have received training in the Permittees’ IPM policy and/or ordinance and IPM standard operating procedures within the last year. This report shall briefly describe the nature of the training, such as tailgate training provided by a Permittee’s IPM coordinator, IPM training through the Pesticide Applicators Professional Association, etc. (2) The Permittees shall submit training materials (e.g., course outline, date, and list of attendees) upon request.

C.9.c. Require Contractors to Implement IPM B
i. Task Description – The Permittees shall include contract specifications requiring contractors to implement IPM, so that all contractors practice IPM on municipal properties. The Permittees shall monitor contractor pesticide applications to ensure that contractors implement their contract specifications in accordance with the Permittee’s IPM policies and/or ordinances and standard operating procedures. Contractor certification as a pest control advisor (PCA) alone is not evidence of IPM implementation. Similarly, IPM certifications awarded to a pest control company may not guarantee that an individual employee will always use IPM strategies. Thus, periodic Permittee observation and verification of contractor performance is necessary. ii. Implementation – Permittees shall periodically monitor their contractors’ activities to verify full implementation of IPM techniques. This shall include, at a minimum, evaluation of lists of pesticides and amounts of active ingredient used. iii. Reporting – In each Annual Report, Permittees shall describe how they verified contractor compliance with IPM policies and any actions taken or needed to correct contractor performance.C.9.d. Interface with County Agricultural Commissioners B i. Task Description – The Permittees shall maintain communications with county agricultural commissioners to (a) get input and assistance on urban pest management practices and use of pesticides, (b) inform them of water quality issues related to pesticides, and (c) report any observed or citizen- reported violations of pesticide regulations (e.g., illegal handling and applications of pesticides) associated with stormwater management, particularly the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) surface water protection regulations for outdoor, nonagricultural use of pyrethroid pesticides by any person performing pest control for hire (https://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/legbills/calcode/040501.htm#a6970). ii. Reporting – In each Annual Report, Permittees shall briefly describe the communications they have had with county agricultural commissioners and report follow-up actions to correct violations of pesticide regulations.

C.9.e. Public Outreach B
i. Task Description – Permittees shall undertake outreach programs to (a) encourage communities within the Permittee’s jurisdiction to reduce reliance on pesticides that threaten water quality; (b) encourage public and private landscape irrigation management that minimizes pesticide runoff; and (c) promote appropriate disposal of unused pesticides.
ii. Implementation – The Permittees shall conduct each of the following:
(1) Point of Purchase Outreach: The Permittees shall:
•Conduct outreach to consumers at the point of purchase; •Provide targeted information on proper pesticide use and disposal, potential adverse impacts on water quality, and less toxic methods of pest prevention and control; and
•Participate in and provide resources for the “Our Water, Our World” program or a functionally equivalent pesticide use reduction outreach program. (2) Pest Control Contracting Outreach: The Permittees shall conduct outreach to residents who use or contract for structural pest control and landscape professionals by (a) explaining the links between pesticide usage and water quality; and (b) providing information about IPM in structural pest management certification programs and landscape professional trainings; and (c) disseminating tips for hiring structural pest control operators and landscape professionals, such as the tips prepared by the University of California Extension IPM Program (UC-IPM).

B
iii.

Page 190 of 564 ends

Page 59 of 181 ends

(3) Outreach to Pest Control Professionals: The Permittees shall conduct outreach to pest control operators, urging them to promote IPM services to customers and to become IPM-certified by EcoWise Certified or a functionally equivalent certification program. Permittees are encouraged to work with the Pesticide Applicators Professional Association; the California Association of Pest Control Advisors; DPR; county agricultural commissioners; UC-IPM; BAMSC; CASQA; EcoWise Certified Program (or functionally equivalent certification program); Bio-integral Resource Center and others to promote IPM to pest control operators.
iii. Reporting – In each Annual Report, Permittees shall describe their actions taken in the three outreach categories above. Outreach conducted at the county or regional level shall be described in Annual Reports prepared at that respective level; reiteration in individual Permittee reports is discouraged.

Reports shall include a brief description of outreach conducted in each of the three categories, including level of effort, messages and target audience C.9.f. Track and Participate in Relevant Regulatory Processes B i. Task Description – The Permittees shall conduct the following activities, which may be done at a county, regional, or statewide level:
(1) The Permittees shall track U.S. EPA pesticide evaluation and registration activities as they relate to surface water quality and, when necessary, encourage U.S. EPA to coordinate implementation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and the CWA and to accommodate water quality concerns within its pesticide registration process; B
(3) The Permittees shall assemble and submit information (such as monitoring data) as needed to assist DPR and county agricultural commissioners in ensuring that pesticide applications comply with WQS; and (4) As appropriate, the Permittees shall submit comment letters on U.S. EPA and DPR re-registration, re-evaluation, and other actions relating to pesticides of concern for water quality.
ii. Reporting – In each Annual Report, Permittees shall summarize participation efforts, information submitted, and how regulatory actions were affected.

Permittees who contribute to a county, regional, or statewide effort shall submit one report at the county or regional level. Duplicate reporting is discouraged.C.9.g. Evaluate Implementation of Pesticide Source Control Actions B i. Task Description – This task is necessary to gauge how effective the implementation actions taken by Permittees are in (a) achieving TMDL targets and (b) avoiding future pesticide-related toxicity in urban creeks. Once during the permit term, Permittees shall conduct a thoughtful evaluation of their IPM efforts, how effective these efforts appear to be, and how they could be improved. ii. Implementation – The Permittees shall evaluate the effectiveness of the pesticide control measures implemented by their staff and contractors, evaluate attainment of pesticide concentration and toxicity targets for water and sediment from monitoring data (collected by Permittees, research agencies, and/or State agencies), and identify additions and/or improvements to existing control measures needed to attain targets, with an implementation time scheduleiii. Reporting – In their 2025 Annual Reports, the Permittees shall submit this evaluation, which shall include an assessment of the effectiveness of their IPM efforts required in Provisions C.9.a-f (including the effectiveness of outreach efforts required by Provision C.9.e); a discussion of any improvements made in these efforts in the preceding five years; and any changes in water quality regarding pesticide toxicity in urban creeks. This evaluation shall also include a brief description of one or more pesticide-related area(s) the Permittee will focus on enhancing during the subsequent permit term. Work conducted at the county or regional level shall be evaluated at that respective level; reiteration in individual Permittee evaluation reports is discouraged.

C.10. Trash Load Reduction
Permittees shall implement trash load reduction control actions in accordance with the following schedule and trash generation area management requirements, including mandatory minimum full trash capture systems, to meet the goal of 100 percent trash load reduction or no adverse impact to receiving waters from trash by June 30, 2025.

D
i. Schedule- Permittees shall reduce trash discharges from 2009 levels, described below, to receiving waters in accordance with the following schedule:
(1)90 percent by June 30, 2023; and
(2)100 percent by June 30, 2025.

Permittees that do not attain the 90 percent compliance benchmark by June 30, 2023, shall submit a revised trash load reduction plan as described in Provision C.10.d and a schedule of implementation of additional trash load reduction control actions sufficient to achieve compliance with the 90 percent compliance benchmark within a reasonable timeframe, and the 100 percent compliance benchmark by June 30, 2025 D
B
ii.

Page 191 of 564 ends

Page 60 of 181 ends

ii. Trash Generation Area Management - Permittees shall demonstrate attainment of the Provision C.10.a.i trash discharges percentage-reduction requirements by management of mapped trash generation areas within their jurisdictions delineated on Trash Generation Area Maps included with their Long-Term Trash Reduction Plans, submitted in February 2014, in accordance with the requirements and accounting set forth in this provision. The February 2014 maps provide the 2009 trash levels and delineate trash generation areas within Permittees' jurisdictions into the following trash generation rate categories:

Low = less than 5 gal/acre/yr;
Moderate = 5-10 gal/acre/yr;
High = 10-50 gal/acre/yr; and
Very High = greater than 50 gal/acre/yr.

Permittees also designated trash management areas on their February 2014 maps encompassing one or more trash generation areas, within which they will implement trash control actions. With the 2024 Annual Report, Permittees shall submit a revised Trash Generation Area Map that includes trash management areas, as well as private land drainage areas (See Provision C.10.a.ii.b) that will be retrofitted with full trash capture devices, or equivalent, by June 30, 2025. The updated trash generation map(s) shall include GIS layers and appropriate metadata (including tables etc.) that identify locations and associated drainage areas of full trash capture systems, and other trash control actions, and shall highlight any revisions or changes from the previous map(s). Permittees may provide access to multilayered GIS maps that account for other trash control action details and locations rather than submitting that information in a document. Maps and data generated through this effort may be used to illustrate progress toward achieving the trash reduction requirements in Provision C.10.a.i.

D
(a) Permittees shall implement trash prevention and control actions, including full trash capture systems or other trash management actions, or combinations of actions, with trash discharge control equivalent to or better than full trash capture systems, to reduce trash generation to a Low trash generation rate or better.

A full capture device or system is a treatment control, or series of treatment controls, including, but not limited to, a multi-benefit project (as defined in the Trash Amendments) or a low-impact development control that traps all particles that are 5 mm or greater, and has a design treatment capacity that is either: a) of not less than the peak flow rate, Q, resulting from a one-year, one-hour storm in the subdrainage area, or b) appropriately sized to, and designed to carry at least the same flows as, the corresponding storm drain. The device(s) must also have a trash reservoir large enough to contain a reasonable amount of trash safely without overflowing trash into the overflow outlet between maintenance events. Types of systems certified by the State Water Resources Control Board are deemed full capture systems. A stormwater treatment facility implemented in accordance with Provision C.3 is also deemed a full capture system if the facility, including its maintenance, prevents the discharge of trash to the downstream MS4 and receiving waters and discharge points from the facility, including overflows, are appropriately screened or otherwise configured to meet the full trash capture screening specification for storm flows up to the full trash capture one-year, one-hour storm hydraulic specification. Actions equivalent to full trash capture are actions that send no more trash down the storm drain system than a full trash capture device would allow, which is essentially no trash discharge except in very large storm flows. The Provision C.10.a.i percent reductions shall be demonstrated by percent of 2009 Very High, High, and Moderate trash generation areas reduced to lower trash generation categories or Low trash generation by the Provision C.10.a.i mandatory deadlines. (b) By July 1, 2025, Permittees shall ensure that private lands that are moderate, high, or very high trash generating, and that drain to storm drain inlets that Permittees do not own or operate (private), but that are plumbed to Permittees’ storm drain systems are equipped with full trash capture systems or are managed with trash discharge control actions equivalent to or better than full trash capture systems. The efficacy of actions equivalent to or better than full trash capture systems shall be assessed with visual assessments in accordance with Provision C.10.b.iii. If there is a full trash capture device downstream of these private lands that is designed, operated, and maintained to control trash discharges from that land area, no other trash control is required.

C.10.b. Demonstration of Trash Reduction Outcomes
i. Full Trash Capture Systems – Permittees shall maintain, and provide for inspection and review upon request, documentation of the design, operation, and maintenance of each full trash capture system, including the mapped location and drainage area served by each system. Permittees shall provide their respective vector control agencies with the names and locations of new and existing full trash capture devices.

D
(a) Inspection and Maintenance – Permittees shall inspect and maintain full trash capture devices to ensure that they are operating appropriately and have sufficient operating capacity to capture trash consistent with the requirements of this Provision. The inspection and maintenance of each full capture device shall be at a frequency sufficient to prevent plugging, including plugging of the 5 mm screen leading to trash overflow and bypass, flooding, or a full condition of the device's trash reservoir causing bypassing of trash. At a minimum, all full trash capture devices shall be inspected and maintained once per year. In High and Very High trash generation areas, all full trash capture devices shall be inspected at least twice per year (and maintained as necessary), with the inspections spaced at least three months or more apart. (b) For catch basin insert type full capture systems, if any such device is found to have a plugged or blinded screen, or is 50 percent full or greater, during an inspection or a maintenance event, the inspection and maintenance frequency shall be increased so that the device is neither plugged nor 50 percent or more full of trash at the next inspection or maintenance event. For high-flow capacity devices, if any such device is found to have a plugged or blinded screen, or exhibits a condition that exceeds the manufacturer's guidelines for requiring maintenance, the inspection and maintenance frequency shall be increased so that the device is neither plugged nor exceeds the manufacturer's guidelines during the next inspection or maintenance event. ii. Maintenance Records – Permittees shall retain device-specific maintenance records, including, at a minimum: device type, date of installation, location, drainage area, date(s) of inspection and maintenance, the capacity condition of the device at the time of inspection and maintenance (full and overflowing or with storage capacity remaining), any special problems such as flooding, screen blinding or plugging from leaves, plastic bags, or other debris causing overflow, any damage reducing function, or other negative conditions. A summary of this information shall be reported in each Annual Report and may be limited to the number of full capture devices maintained that exhibited a plugged, 50 percent or more full, or overflowing condition upon inspection or maintenance. (a) Certification – Permittees shall certify annually that each full trash capture system is operated and maintained to meet full trash capture system requirements. Drainage areas served by an adequately maintained full trash capture system will be considered equivalent to or better than a Low trash generation rate area.

Page 192 of 564 ends

Page 61 of 181 ends

iii. Other Trash Management Actions – Permittees shall maintain, and provide for inspection and review upon request, documentation of non-full trash capture system trash control actions that verifies implementation of each action. Permittees shall also conduct assessment of the action that verifies effectiveness of the action or combination of actions and maintain, and provide for inspection and review upon request, documentation of assessments. (a) Implementation Documentation – Permittees shall maintain documentation of trash control actions that describes each action or combination of actions, the level of implementation, the timing and frequency of implementation, standard operating procedures if applicable, location(s) of implementation actions including mapped location(s) and drainage area(s) affected or description of areal extent, tracking and enforcement procedures if applicable, and other information relevant to effective implementation of the action or combination of actions. (b) Visual Assessment of Outcomes of Other Trash Management Actions – Permittees shall conduct visual on-land assessment, including photo documentation, or other acceptable assessment method (see ProvisionC.10.b.iii.(b)(iv)), of each trash generation area within which it is implementing other trash management actions or combination of actions other than full trash capture, to determine or verify the effectiveness of the action or combination of actions. Permittees may assess and account for one or more trash generation areas in a single trash management area within which a control action or combination of control actions is implemented. The visual on-land assessment method used shall meet or exceed the following criteria:
(i) Conduct observations of the sidewalk, curb and gutter within each trash management area, or locations associated with sources of trash. (ii) Conduct observations at randomly selected locations covering at least ten percent of a trash management area's street miles or at strategic locations, provided they are representative of trash generation in the management area and they will represent the effectiveness of the control action(s) implemented or planned in the management area.
(iii) Conduct observations at a frequency consistent with known or estimated trash generation rate(s) within a trash management area and the time frequency of the control action(s) implemented or planned in the management area. Conduct observations for effectiveness approximately at the halfway point of the interval between instances of recurring trash control actions such as street sweeping and on-land cleanup. (iv) Permittees may put forth substantive and credible evidence that certain management actions or sets of management actions when performed to a specified performance standard yield a certain trash reduction outcome reliably. Permittees shall submit such evidence to the Executive Officer as a submittal separate from any other submittals or reports. If this evidence is accepted by the Executive Officer, the Permittees may claim a similar trash reduction outcome by demonstrating that they have performed these management actions at the specified performance standard. iv. Percentage Discharge Reduction – Percentage discharge reduction from 2009 from Very High generation areas reduced to High, Moderate, and Low, High generation areas reduced to Moderate and Low, and Moderate trash generation areas reduced to Low trash generation category to meet the required total percent reduction (% Reduction) shall be calculated based on the following formula:

Page 193 of 564 ends

Page 62 of 181 ends

v. Source Control – Permittee jurisdiction-wide actions to reduce trash at the source, particularly persistent trash items other than those addressed under previous Permits (foam foodware and single-use plastic bags) may be valued toward trash load reduction compliance by up to ten percent load reduction total for all such actions. To claim a load percentage reduction value, Permittees must provide substantive and credible evidence that new source control actions are being implemented jurisdiction-wide and reduce trash by the claimed value. A Permittee may support its claimed source reduction value with reference studies from other jurisdictions provided that it also provide credible evidence that the chosen source control action would achieve comparable trash reduction if implemented in the Permittee’s jurisdiction. A jurisdiction-wide source control load reduction value cannot be claimed after June 30, 2025. However, Permittees may demonstrate and claim full trash capture equivalence of a source control in specific trash generation areas or in combination with other controls in an area if the control or combination of controls are documented, assessed, and verified in accordance with Provision C.10.b.iii.

VI. Partial Trash Reduction – Curb Inlet Screens – Studies conducted by the Permittees during MRP 2 assessed the benefit of other control measures, such as curb inlet screens in combination with street sweeping, in reducing the amount of trash discharged through MS4s. However, additional information is needed to determine the effectiveness of curb inlet screens in reducing trash within a given trash management area. Permittees may demonstrate through further assessment and study, as described below, that the installation and appropriate maintenance of curb inlet screens, accompanied by street sweeping at an appropriate frequency, within Moderate trash generation areas can effectively reduce the trash generation rate to Low under the following conditions:
a. Permittees shall propose an acceptable method to verify that the area where curb inlet screens have been or will be installed are Moderate trash generating. Permittees shall also propose an appropriate method and frequency of verification, post installation, on the change (if any) in the trash generation rate following the installation of curb inlet screens. b. Permittees shall propose an appropriate street sweeping frequency where curb inlet screens are installed that, when implemented, effectively reduces the area’s trash generation rate to Low.
c. At a minimum, Permittees shall evaluate street sweeping effectiveness based on multiple factors other than frequency, and sufficient to allow a determination of proper and effective street sweeper access. Examples of additional evaluations that could be completed include effectiveness associated with enhanced street/curb accessibility via proper signage, ticketing, and towing vehicles when appropriate. d. The inspection and maintenance of each curb inlet screen shall be conducted at a frequency sufficient to ensure the screen is functioning appropriately, e.g., a screen is not stuck in an open position or plugged, including plugging of the screen leading to opening of the screen under flows less than those described in Provision C.10.a.ii.(a).
e. Permitees shall propose an appropriate method of covering/blocking horizontal surface grates during street sweeping events (to prevent trash from being swept into the grates), and an appropriate method for capturing smaller pieces of trash/debris from entering the MS4 via the horizontal surface grates.
f. Permittees shall submit the results of the additional study, as described above, for Executive Officer approval. The report must appropriately describe and demonstrate the conditions under which the combined use of curb inlet screens and street sweeping effectively reduce the trash generation rate of an area from Moderate to Low.

C.10.c Requirements for Flood Management Agencies D
Flood management agencies must continue to implement requirements for trash capture systems, as specified in Table 10-1, below. Flood management agencies must also implement trash control measures such as trash pickups and installation of trash receptacles, to control Moderate, High, and Very High trash generation areas within their jurisdiction including, but not limited to, parking lots, trailhead areas, and along recreational paths and trails, and demonstrate effectiveness of these trash control measures as specified in Provision C.10.b.iii.

C.10.d. Trash Load Reduction Plans D
D
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 194 of 564 ends

Page 63 of 181 ends

i. Permittes shall maintain, and provide for inspection and review upon request, a Trash Load Reduction Plan, including an implementation schedule to meet the Provision C.10.a Trash Load Reduction requirements. A summary of any new revisions to the Plan shall be included in the Annual Report. The Plan shall describe trash load reduction control actions being implemented or planned and the trash generation areas or trash management areas where the actions are or will be implemented, including jurisdiction-wide actions such as source control ordinances. The Plans may include actions to control sources outside of the Permittees’ jurisdictions that are causing or contributing to adverse trash impacts in the receiving water(s). Permittees that choose to implement such control actions may account for them towards meeting the Provision C.10.a Trash Load Reduction requirements as long as they can demonstrate the controls will be sustained, and they quantify the sustained load reduction benefit (relative to control actions in the trash generation areas or trash management areas in their jurisdiction that drained to the affected receiving water). ii. Permittees shall calculate their trash load reduction, relative to 2009 baseline conditions, without the trash load reduction offsets described in Provision C.10.f, as of June 30, 2023. If that reduction is less than 90 percent, then Permittees shall develop and implement an updated Trash Load Reduction Plan.

Pursuant to Provision C.22.c, the updated Trash Load Reduction Plan shall include a schedule of additional trash load reduction implementation actions sufficient to achieve compliance with the 90 percent compliance benchmark within a reasonable timeframe, and the 100 percent reduction from 2009 levels, achieved through implementation of full trash capture, or other equivalent actions, consistent with the requirements of this Provision, by June 30, 2025. Permittees shall submit their updated Trash Load Reduction Plans with their 2023 Annual Report iii. Permittees unable to attain 100 percent trash load reduction, relative to 2009 baseline conditions, by June 30, 2025, while accounting for credits from new source controls (as described in Provision C.10.b.v) may be granted additional time until December 31, 2025, and East Contra Costa County Permittees until June 30, 2026, to achieve 100 percent reduction via full trash capture, or equivalent, contingent on developing and implementing an approved Direct Discharge Control Plan as described in Provision C.10.f.ii.

C.10.e Impracticability Report D
Permittees may collectively submit a programmatic report by March 31, 2023, for the approval of the Executive Officer, that describes conditions under which it is impracticable to control trash via full trash capture devices. The impracticability report shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
i. A description of the engineering constraints that prevent the installation of full trash capture devices. ii. A process for evaluating and determining impracticability of full trash capture devices. iii. Alternative Controls: The report shall include alternative controls or a combination of controls that may be implemented to reduce trash loads to meet the requirements and deadlines in Provision C.10.a. Examples of alternative controls include, but are not limited to, requiring businesses or property owners to pick up litter, successful implementation of excess trash receptacles and collection services, increased code enforcement or parking enforcement/ticketing/towing, additional trash pick-ups, street sweeping, assessment and execution of cooperative implementation opportunities with Caltrans or neighboring Permittees, curb inlet screens, and long term measures such as pump station or storm drain retrofits, implementation of green stormwater infrastructure that controls trash, or changes to the catchment to allow effective implementation of full trash capture measures. iv. Permittees shall use an approved trash impracticability report in developing the updated Trash Load Reduction Workplans required by Provision C.10.d.

C.10.f Optional Trash Load Reduction Offset Opportunities D i. Creek and Shoreline Cleanup – A Permittee may offset part of its Provision C.10.a trash load percent reduction requirement by conducting cleanup of creek and shoreline areas. The creek and shoreline cleanup efforts should be conducted at a minimum frequency of twice per year, and sufficient to demonstrate sustained improvement of the creek or shoreline area. The maximum offset that may be claimed is ten percent. Offsets for creek and shoreline cleanups will no longer be applicable after June 30, 2025. A Permittee may claim a load reduction offset of one percent for the June 30, 2023 mandatory trash reduction compliance benchmark for each total of trash volume removed from cleanups that is ten percent of the Permittees’ 2009 trash load volume estimates, based on its trash generation maps and average categorical trash generation rates (see Provision C.10.a.ii), in accordance with the following formula:

Page 195 of 564 ends

Page 64 of 181 ends

ii. Direct Trash Discharge Controls – Permittees with an approved Direct Discharge Control Plan (DDCP) may claim up to fifteen percent using the Provision C.10.f.i formula towards offsetting their Provision C.10.a trash load percent reduction requirement. The DDCP shall include a detailed description of control measures the Permittee will implement to control the direct discharge of trash to receiving waters from non-storm drain system sources. Offsets for direct discharge controls will no longer be applicable after June 30, 2025. Permittees wishing to submit a new DDCP pursuant to Provision C.10.d.iii shall submit the DDCP for approval no later than April 1, 2024. Permittees with an existing DDCP approved during the Previous Permit shall submit an updated DDCP for approval no later than January 3, 2023, in order to continue claiming trash load percent reduction offsets. DDCPs shall be sufficient to provide trash reduction benefits equivalent to or greater than the areas not yet in compliance, as calculated using the formula in Provision C.10.b.iv, and shall include: (a) A description of sources of the directly discharged trash; (b) A description of control actions that will be implemented during the permit term to prevent or reduce direct discharge trash loads, including those associated with unsheltered homeless populations and illegal dumping, in a systematic and comprehensive manner; (i) For Permittees whose DDCPs address significant discharges from populations experiencing unsheltered homelessness, systematic and comprehensive implementation of control actions shall include a commitment to, and a plan for, increasing the provision of emergency, transitional, and/or permanent housing, and the following services: trash and sanitary services, and other services which are necessary to reduce discharges associated with unsheltered homelessness, such as RV safe parking areas and pump out services, and social services that can help the unsheltered homeless transition to housing. The DDCP shall prioritize providing housing and services to people experiencing unsheltered homelessness who are living near receiving waters.

The DDCP shall document the existing capacities for housing and services as of the time of the DDCP's submittal, and include projections of changes to those capacities for each subsequent year during the Permit term. (ii) For Permittees whose DDCPs address significant discharges from illegal dumping, systematic and comprehensive implementation of control actions shall include a commitment to, and a plan for, actions that will prevent direct discharges of trash to receiving waters from illegal dumping. Such actions include, but are not limited to, abating illegal dumping sites, providing dumping vouchers (particularly to socioeconomically disadvantaged communities), holding free waste drop-off events, and implementing onsite structural BMPs to prevent direct discharges from illegal dumping sites to receiving waters. The DDCP shall prioritize addressing illegal dumping that occurs near receiving waters. The DDCP shall document existing sites where illegal dumping occurs, controls at illegal dumping sites, voucher and free waste drop-off programs, and include projections for reductions in illegal dumping, increases of controls at illegal dumping sites, and expansions of (or the creation of) programs to control illegal dumping, such as dumping voucher programs and waste drop-off events, for each subsequent year during the Permit term. (iii) For Permittees whose DDCPs address significant discharges from both unsheltered homeless populations and illegal dumping sites, Permittees shall submit DDCPs in compliance with both Provisions C.10.f.ii.b.(i) and C.10.f.ii.b.(ii). (c) A map of the affected receiving water area and associated watershed; and (d) A description of how effectiveness of controls will be assessed, including documentation of controls, quantification of trash volume controlled, and assessment of resulting improvements to receiving water conditions.

C.10.g. Reporting D
Each Permittee shall provide the following in each Annual Report or otherwise by the date specified:
i. With each Annual Report, a summary of trash control actions within each trash management area, including the types of actions, levels of implementation, areal extent of implementation, and whether the actions are ongoing or new, including initiation date. ii. With their 2024 Annual Report, Permittees shall submit a revised trash generation area map or maps, as described in Provision C.10.a.ii. iii. With each Annual Report, a summary of implementation actions and progress toward meeting the July 1, 2025, requirement for all private lands to implement full trash capture systems, or be managed with trash discharge control actions equivalent to or better than full trash capture systems, as required in Provision C.10.a.ii.(b).
iv. With each Annual Report, certification that each of its full trash capture systems is operated and maintained to meet full trash capture system requirements; a description of any system(s) that did not meet full trash capture system requirements (e.g., due to plugging or overflowing); and any corrective actions taken.
v. With each Annual Report, an accounting of its non-full trash capture system trash control actions assessments by providing a summary description of assessments in each of its trash management areas, including the number and dates of observations. vi. Permittees unable to attain the 90 percent mandatory trash reduction compliance benchmark by June 30, 2023, via full trash capture, or equivalent, shall, by June 30, 2023, submit a notice of noncompliance, pursuant to Provision C.22.c and an updated Trash Load Reduction Plan as described in Provision C.10.d.ii.
vii. With their 2023 Annual Report, Permittees shall submit a report evaluating their trash reduction, relative to 2009 baseline conditions, as of June 30, 2023, without including offsets. Permittees unable to meet the 90 percent mandatory trash reduction compliance benchmark without the trash load reduction offsets described in Provision C.10.f shall submit, with their 2023 Annual Report, an updated Trash Load Reduction Plan as described in Provision C.10.d.ii.

Page 196 of 564 ends

Page 65 of 181 ends

viii. Permittees unable to attain 100 percent trash load reduction, relative to 2009 baseline conditions, by June 30, 2025, while accounting for credits from new source control (as described in Provision C.10.b.v) shall, by June 30, 2025, submit a notice of noncompliance pursuant to Provision C.22.c, including a plan to come into compliance with the 100 percent trash load reduction requirement. Permittees may be granted additional time until December 31, 2025, and East Contra Costa County Permittees until June 30, 2026, to achieve 100 reduction via full trash capture, or equivalent, contingent on developing and implementing a direct discharge control plan (DDCP) as described in Provision C.10.f.ii. Permittees, except East Contra Costa County Permittees, that are granted additional time until December 31, 2025, to attain 100 percent reduction via full trash capture, or equivalent, shall submit by December 31, 2025, either a report that confirms that they reached 100 percent trash load reduction by December 31, 2025, or a notice of noncompliance pursuant to Provision C.22.c.ix. By March 31, 2023, Permittees may collectively submit a programmatic report for the approval of the Executive Officer, that describes typical conditions where it may be impracticable to control trash via full trash capture devices, as described in Provision C.10.e. x. With the 2024 Annual Report, Permittees that offset part of their Provision C.10.a trash load percent reduction requirement through additional cleanup of creek and shoreline areas, as described in Provision C.10.f.i, shall submit a summary of the additional cleanup actions implemented, and the benefit to water quality achieved through those actions.
xi. Starting with the 2023 Annual Report, Permittees with approved DDCPs shall provide the following information in each Annual Report for which they use an offset from the implementation of Provision C.10.f.ii towards their trash load percent reduction:
(1) For Permittees whose DDCPs address significant discharges from unsheltered homeless populations, the following information for the current year, and for each prior year of the Permit term: The estimated number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness in their jurisdiction; the estimated number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness living within approximately 500 feet of receiving waters; the estimated portion of those populations provided housing as described in Provision C.10.f.ii.b.(i); the estimated portion of those populations served with the services described in Provision C.10.f.ii.b.(i); the number and scope of sanitation controls and services provided to homeless encampments; the number and scope of trash controls and services provided to homeless encampments; and the number and scope of sanitary cleanouts and other services provided to RVs. Each of these reporting elements shall be accompanied by a narrative description. (2) For Permittees whose DDCPs address significant discharges from illegal dumping sites, the following information for the current year, and for each prior year of the Permit term: The total number of active illegal dumping sites; the number of active illegal dumping sites within approximately 500 feet of receiving waters; the number of illegal dumping sites where trash was collected and the amount of material collected; dumping vouchers provided (and who they are provided to); dumping vouchers used; and outreach and education provided to the public regarding illegal dumping and the availability of dumping vouchers. Each of these reporting elements shall be accompanied by a narrative description. (3) For Permittees whose DDCPs address significant discharges from both unsheltered homeless populations and illegal dumping sites, the Permittees shall report on both Provision C.10.g.xi.(1) and C.10.g.xi.(2) in each Annual Report.

C.11. Mercury Controls
The Permittees shall implement the following control program for mercury. This control program consists of load reduction assessment, source control measures, treatment control measures, measures to reduce risk to consumers of Bay fish, and reporting on all these measures according to the provisions below. The provisions implement the urban runoff requirements of the San Francisco Bay and Guadalupe River Watershed mercury TMDLs for those waters identified therein and reduce mercury loads by approximately 10 kg/yr, making substantial progress toward achieving the urban runoff mercury load allocations established for the TMDLs. The San Francisco Bay mercury TMDL implementation plan calls for attainment of the regionwide, urban runoff wasteload allocation of 82 kg/yr by February 2028. This mercury wasteload allocation represents a load reduction from all urban runoff sources to the Bay of approximately 78 kg/yr compared to loads estimated using data collected prior to development of the TMDL. To measure progress, the TMDL implementation plan calls for attainment of an interim loading milestone by February 2018 of 120 kg/yr, halfway between the 2003 estimated load, 160 kg/yr, and the aggregate allocation. This interim loading milestone has been achieved. The Permittees may comply with any requirement of this Provision through a collaborative effort and are encouraged to do so.

B
C.11.a. Assess Mercury Load Reductions from Stormwater B i. Task Description – The Permittees shall implement an assessment methodology and data collection program to quantify, in a technically sound manner, mercury loads reduced through implementation of pollution prevention, source control, and treatment control, green stormwater infrastructure and other measures taken as part of the mercury control program defined by this provision. A technically sound load reduction accounting system is described in the Fact Sheet and is based on information submitted by Permittees in the January 2014 Integrated Monitoring Report and updated through reporting during the last Permit term as part of Reasonable Assurance Analysis reporting submitted by all Programs in September 2020. This accounting system describes calculation methodologies, data requirements, and model parameters used to quantify the load reduction for each type of control measure. The Permittees shall use the assessment methodology to demonstrate the load reductions achieved during this Permit term as well as progress toward achieving the MRP program area mercury TMDL wasteload allocations. The Permittees shall update this assessment methodology as necessary for use in the subsequent permit term.

Page 197 of 564 ends

Page 66 of 181 ends

ii. Implementation Level – The Permittees shall quantify the mercury load reductions achieved through all the pollution prevention, source control, green stormwater infrastructure, and other treatment control measures implemented during this Permit term as described in Provisions C.11.b through C.11.e.

For this Permit term, the Permittees will achieve a regionwide total load reduction of approximately 10 kg mercury/yr if they implement effective mercury control measures consistent with all requirements of Provisions C.11.b through C.11.g. The Permittee-specific portion of the regionwide mercury load reduction estimate shall be based on the proportion of county population in each municipality.

D
iii. Reporting D
(1) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall submit documentation confirming that all control measures effectuated during the previous Permit term for which load reduction credit was recognized continue to be implemented at an intensity sufficient to maintain the credited load reduction. (2) In the 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report the total loads reduced using the assessment methodologies described and cited in the Fact Sheet to demonstrate cumulative mercury load reduced from each control measure implemented since the beginning of the Permit term. This report shall also include an estimate of load reductions from control measures taking place after the 2026 Annual Report submittal but before the end of the permit term.

Permittees shall submit all supporting data and information necessary to substantiate the load reduction estimates. (3) In their 2026 Annual Report, the Permittees shall submit, for Executive Officer approval, any refinements, if necessary, to the measurement and estimation methodologies to assess mercury load reductions from control measures in the subsequent Permit. Any refinements to the methodologies shall be subject to public review.

C.11.b. Program for Source Property Identification and Abatement D i. Task Description – Permittees shall investigate, using both conventional sampling and laboratory analysis techniques, land areas that likely contribute mercury to municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4s). These investigations will likely focus on land areas where industrial activities occurred prior to 1980 and continue today (i.e., old industrial land use areas). For those properties or land areas found to be contributing substantial amounts of mercury or where high mercury concentrations are found (generally areas with sediment concentrations greater than 0.5 mg Hg/kg), Permittees shall take action to abate the mercury sources into their MS4s or refer the properties to the Water Board for follow-up measures. Historical monitoring data suggest that mercury concentrations on or near source properties are similar to those found in urban areas in general so identification of source properties for referral may be based on presence of high PCBs concentrations (generally 0.5 mg PCBs/kg) alone. For each source property referred to the Water Board, Permittees shall implement interim enhanced operation and maintenance (enhanced O&M) measures in the street or storm drain infrastructure adjacent to the referred source property or implement a stormwater treatment system downstream of the property. These enhanced O&M measures shall be sufficient to intercept historically deposited contaminated sediment in the vicinity of the source area and prevent further contaminated sediment from being discharged from the source area to the storm drain system.ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall investigate the following acreage of likely mercury source properties (accomplished through C.12.b investigations) during the permit term.
•Alameda County:2,620 acres
•Contra Costa County:1,700 acres
•San Mateo County:1,411 acres
•Santa Clara County:913 acres
•Solano County:21 acres
If high mercury concentrations associated with a likely source property are detected, Permittees may submit monitoring information to support estimation of the aerial yield to receive mercury load reduction credit, contingent upon implementation of interim enhanced O&M measures in the street or storm drain infrastructure adjacent to the source property or implementation of a stormwater treatment system downstream of the property. iii. Reporting
(1) In each of the 2022 through 2026 Annual Reports, Permittees shall report progress on the acreage of land areas investigated, including progress toward investigation of 100 percent of the old industrial land use indicated above. The reporting shall indicate what action was taken for the parcels investigated (e.g., abatement, referral, enforcement, etc.). Permittees shall submit all supporting data and information including referral reports. (2) Permittees shall report annually on ongoing enhanced O&M activities associated with all past contaminated property referrals. Prior to all new referrals, Permittees shall submit, for staff review and comment, a detailed description of the enhanced O&M plan for the referred properties. (3) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of reporting under Provision C.11.a.iii(2) on total acreage of land area investigated, area and description of properties referred, description of enhanced O&M measures, and the estimated total mercury mass load reduced (consistent with the approved accounting procedures) resulting from implementing this control measure.

C.11.c Program for Control Measure Implementation in Old Industrial Areas B SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 198 of 564 ends

Page 67 of 181 ends

i. Task Description – Permittees shall implement or cause to be implemented treatment control measures, stormwater diversion to wastewater treatment facilities, redevelopment (provided GSI is implemented in compliance with C.3.b), or other control measures to achieve mercury load reductions.

Permittees have substantial (totaling over 33,100 acres) areas of old industrial land use draining to an MS4 that have not been redeveloped or treated with green stormwater infrastructure or other treatment controls. •Alameda County:9,374 acres
•Contra Costa County:11,199 acres
•San Mateo County:4,450 acres
•Santa Clara County:6,647 acres
•Solano County:1,426 acres
Implementation of treatment control measures on 2,580 acres (which is nearly 8 percent of the land area shown above) will result in a total estimated load reduction of about 108 g mercury/yr (2,580 acres x 70% efficiency x 60 mg mercury/acre/yr estimated yield from old industrial areas, see Fact Sheet) in the area covered by the Permit. Implementation of control measures with efficiency lower than 70% will result in reduced acreage credit (for those lower efficiency control measures) toward fulfillment of the total acreage requirement shown below. The acres credited will be proportional to the ratio of implemented control measure efficiency relative to the efficiency of treatment controls (see Fact Sheet for more explanation and examples). The old industrial land use acreages to be addressed by control measure implementation by the end of the permit term and the estimated mercury load reductions (for 70% control measure efficiency) are shown below. Permittees may comply with this provision element either through implementation of control measures on the following amounts of old industrial land use, based on implementation of 70% efficient control measures, or through accounting for the mass reduction of mercury shown in parentheses. If control measures are less than 70% efficient, the required acreage shall be calculated as set forth above.
•Alameda County:664 acres (28 grams/yr)
•Contra Costa County:664 acres (28 grams/yr)
•San Mateo County:445 acres (19 grams/yr)
•Santa Clara County:664 acres (28 grams/yr)
•Solano County:142 acres (6 grams/yr)
ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall, within the permit term, implement or cause to be implemented control measures (treatment controls, diversion to wastewater treatment plants, redevelopment (provided GSI implemented in compliance with Provision C.3.b), enhanced operation and maintenance controls, or other controls) to comply with the performance metrics in Provision C.11.c.i. Use of conditionally-approved sizing criteria cited in section C.3.j(3)(b) for treatment control systems will be considered provided an analysis is performed, acceptable to the Executive Officer, to determine the reduced effectiveness of the facility sized according to these alternative criteria. If a Permittee chooses to comply by demonstrating mercury load reductions, it shall use accounting methods consistent with Provision C.11.a. Implementation of treatment controls and stormwater diversion in mercury-contaminated catchments not designated as old industrial may count toward fulfillment of the required acreage. In choosing locations for treatment controls and diversions, Permittees should focus on public rights-of-way and storm drain infrastructure in catchments containing known or suspected source areas or evidence of moderate to high mercury or PCBs soil concentrations (generally soil/sediment concentrations greater than 0.3 mg mercury/kg or 0.2 mg PCBs/kg). Treatment control systems must be designed and sized consistent with Provision C.3.d – (Numeric Sizing Criteria for Stormwater Treatment Systems). Permittees may choose to implement diversions to wastewater treatment systems to address this requirement. Because of the higher removal efficiency of wastewater treatment facilities, each acre addressed by routing stormwater to wastewater treatment facilities will be credited as 1.3 acres toward satisfying the treatment requirements provided that the diversion facilities are sized and operated consistent with the sizing requirements used for non-diversion treatment facilities. iii. Reporting B
(1) By March 31, 2023, Permittees shall submit plans and schedules for implementing control measures and stormwater diversion to wastewater treatment facilities in old industrial areas to address mercury load reduction requirements included in this provision. This reporting shall include maps of the areas where control measures are to be implemented, the acreage of these catchments, and a description of design and sizing features all control measures, treatment devices and stormwater diversion facilities implemented for each treated catchment. (2) Beginning in 2023, in each Annual Report Permittees shall submit an account of control measure and stormwater diversion implementation consistent with the plan submitted in March 2023 and any modifications thereto. Reporting shall include maps of the areas treated, the acreage of catchments addressed, and a description of all control measures, installed treatment devices and routing facilities for each treated catchment. (3) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of reporting under Provision C.11.a.iii(2) on all control measures and stormwater diversion measures implemented during the permit term and provide the total acreage treated and an estimate of the total mercury mass load reduced resulting from this implementation.

C.11.d. Mercury Collection and Recycling Implemented throughout the Region B i. Task Description – Permittees shall promote, facilitate, and/or participate in collection and recycling of mercury containing consumer products, devices, and equipment (e.g., thermometers, thermostats, switches, bulbs). Mercury is found in a wide variety of consumer products (e.g., fluorescent bulbs, thermostats, thermometers) that are subject to recycling requirements. These recycling efforts are already happening throughout the Region, and Provision C.11.d requires promotion, facilitation and/or participation in these region-wide recycling efforts to increase effectiveness and public participation.ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall promote recycling of mercury-containing products and make efforts to increase effectiveness of these recycling efforts throughout the region. Recycling of mercury-containing bulbs and thermostats alone results in a regionwide load reduction of approximately 10 kg mercury per year57.
iii. Reporting
(1) In each of the 2023 through 2026 Annual Reports, Permittees shall report on efforts to promote recycling of mercury-containing products and efforts to increase effectiveness of these recycling efforts. Permittees shall also report on the mass of mercury-containing material collected throughout the region along with an estimate of the mass of mercury contained in recycled material using the methodology contained in load reduction accounting system described and cited in the Fact Sheet.

C.11.e. Plan and Implement Green Stormwater Infrastructure to Reduce Mercury Loads D B
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION MUNICIPAL STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT - MRP 3.0 R2-2022-0018 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF VALLEJO AND VALLEJO SANITATION AND FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES LEGEND: C = CITY D = DISTRICT B = BOTH CITY & DISTRICT Responsible Section Agency

Page 199 of 564 ends

Page 68 of 181 ends

i. Task Description – Permittees shall implement green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) projects during the term of the Permit consistent with implementing requirements in Provision C.3.j. Implementation of green stormwater infrastructure will result in a total estimated load reductions of 108 g mercury/yr (see Fact Sheet for basis of estimate).
ii. Implementation Level – The level of implementation is determined by the requirements of Provision C.3.j. iii. Reporting
(1) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of Provision C.11.a.iii(2)) on all green stormwater projects (e.g., parcel-based, street ROW, and regional projects) implemented during the permit term and provide the total acreage treated and an estimate of the total mercury mass load reduced resulting from this implementation. This reporting shall include summary descriptions of the implemented projects including GSI type, location, and area.C.11.f. Prepare Implementation Plan and Schedule to Achieve TMDL Wasteload Allocations B i. Task Description – In 2020, Permittees submitted a Reasonable Assurance Analysis and plan (RAA) demonstrating that sufficient control measures will be implemented to attain the mercury TMDL wasteload allocations by 2028. Permittees shall evaluate the effectiveness of all mercury control measures and update the RAA as necessary. Updates can be focused on those control measures for which new information is available and for control measures not evaluated in previous efforts. Permittees shall also prepare detailed implementation plans for all control measures to be implemented in and inform permit requirements for the subsequent permit term.
ii. Implementation level – Permittees shall update, as necessary, their mercury control measures implementation plan and corresponding reasonable assurance analysis from the previous permit term (2015-2020, MRP 2). The update may be focused on control measures for which new information is available or for those control measures not previously evaluated. The long-term plan must:
(1) Identify all technically and economically feasible mercury control measures to be implemented (including GSI projects); and (2) Include a schedule according to which these technically and economically feasible control measures will be fully implemented; and (3) Provide an evaluation and quantification of the mercury load reduction of such measures as well as an evaluation of costs, control measure efficiency and significant environmental impacts resulting from their implementation. Additionally, Permittees shall identify all specific control measures to be implemented, the intensity of control measure implementation, and the estimated load reduction benefit from control measures implemented during the subsequent permit term. This implementation plan must include:
(4) Identification of all control measures implemented during the current permit term and any additional control measures to be implemented in the subsequent permit term;
(5) A description of the intensity or extent of control measure implementation (e.g., acres treated, acres investigated for source areas, types of roadway projects for which protocols applied, etc.);
(6) Identification of accountability metrics to track during the subsequent permit corresponding to the proposed implementation intensity; and (7) Estimates for load reductions to be achieved through implementation of control measures during subsequent permit term at the proposed intensity. iii. Reporting– Permittees shall submit the updated plan and schedule no later than March 31, 2026.

C.11.g. Fate and Transport Study of Mercury: Urban Runoff Impact on San Francisco Bay Margins B i. Task Description – The Permittees shall conduct or cause to be conducted studies concerning the fate, transport, and biological uptake of mercury discharged from urban runoff to San Francisco Bay margin areas. The studies should focus on near-shore areas contaminated with mercury from historical activity and the expected trajectory of recovery as sources from local watersheds are reduced. ii. Implementation Level – The specific information needs include understanding the in-Bay transport of mercury discharged in urban runoff, the sediment and food web mercury concentrations in margin areas receiving urban runoff, the influence of urban runoff on the patterns of food web mercury accumulation, especially in Bay margins, and the identification of drainages where urban runoff mercury are particularly important in food web accumulation.iii. Reporting – The Permittees shall submit in their 2023 Annual Report a workplan describing the specific manner in which these information needs will be accomplished and describing the studies to be performed with a preliminary schedule. The Permittees shall report on status of the studies in their 2023 Annual Report. The Permittees shall report in the March 15, 2026, Integrated Monitoring Report the findings and results of the studies completed, planned, or in progress as well as implications of studies on potential control measures to be investigated, piloted, or implemented in future permit cycles.C.11.h. Implement a Risk Reduction Program B
i. Task Description – The Permittees shall conduct an ongoing risk reduction program to address public health impacts of mercury in San Francisco Bay/Delta fish. The fish risk reduction program shall take actions to reduce actual and potential health risks in those people and communities most likely to consume San Francisco Bay-caught fish, such as subsistence anglers and their families. The risk reduction framework developed in the previous permit term, which funded community-based organizations to develop and deliver appropriate communications to appropriately targeted individuals and communities, is an appropriate approach. Permittees should work with local health departments, the Bay Area Clean Water Agencies, and the Western States Petroleum Association to leverage resources for this program and to appropriately target at-risk populations.

Page 200 of 564 ends

Page 69 of 181 ends

ii. Implementation Level – At a minimum, Permittees shall conduct or cause to be conducted an ongoing risk reduction program with the potential to reach 3,000 individuals annually who are likely consumers of San Francisco Bay-caught fish. Permittees are encouraged to collaborate with San Francisco Bay industrial and wastewater discharger agencies in meeting this requirement. In year four of the Permit term, Permittees shall evaluate the effectiveness of their risk reduction program.
iii. Reporting – The Permittees shall report on the status of the risk reduction program in each of their Annual Reports, including a brief description of actions taken, an estimate of the number of people reached, and why these people are deemed likely to consume Bay fish. The Permittees shall report the findings of the effectiveness evaluation of their risk reduction program in their 2026 Annual Report.

C.12. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Controls
The The Permittees shall implement the following control program for PCBs. This control program consists of load reduction assessment, source control measures, treatment control measures, measures to reduce risk to consumers of Bay fish, and reporting on all these measures according to the provisions below. The provisions implement the urban runoff requirements of the PCBs TMDL for those waters identified therein. By implementing the PCBs control measure program requirements, Permittees will make substantial progress (an estimated 1.47 kg/yr of additional load reduction) toward achieving the urban runoff PCBs wasteload allocation from the TMDL. Of the 2 kg/yr overall load allocation for urban runoff sources for the entire region,

1.47 kg/yr has been allocated to Permittees, and loads must be reduced to this level by March 2030. This PCBs wasteload allocation represents a load reduction from all urban runoff sources to the Bay of approximately 18 kg/yr (14.4 kg/yr from Permittees) compared to loads estimated using data collected in 2003. The Permittees may comply with any requirement of this Provision through a collaborative effort and are encouraged to do so.

B
C.12.a. Assess PCBs Load Reductions from Stormwater
i. Task Description – The Permittees shall implement an assessment methodology and data collection program to quantify, in a technically sound manner, PCBs loads reduced through implementation of pollution prevention, source control, and treatment control, green stormwater infrastructure and other measures taken as part of the PCBs control program defined by this provision. A technically sound load reduction accounting system is described in the Fact Sheet and is based on information submitted by Permittees in the January 2014 Integrated Monitoring Report and updated through reporting during the last Permit term as part of Reasonable Assurance Analysis reporting submitted by all Programs in September 2020. This accounting system describes calculation methodologies, data requirements, and model parameters used to quantify the load reduction for each type of control measure. The Permittees shall use the assessment methodology to demonstrate the load reductions achieved during this Permit term as well as progress toward achieving the MRP program area PCBs TMDL wasteload allocations. The Permittees shall update this assessment methodology as necessary for use in the subsequent permit term.

B
ii. Implementation Level – The Permittees shall quantify the PCBs load reductions achieved through all the pollution prevention, source control, green stormwater infrastructure, and other treatment control measures implemented during this Permit term as described in Provisions C.12.b through C.12.g.

For this Permit term, the Permittees will achieve an estimated regionwide total load reduction of 1.47 kg/yr PCBs if they implement effective PCBs control measures consistent with all requirements of Provisions C.12.b through C.12.g. The Permittee-specific portion of the regionwide PCBs load reduction estimate shall be based on the proportion of county population in each municipality. iii. Reporting
(1) In each Annual Report, Permittees shall submit documentation confirming that all control measures effectuated during the previous Permit term for which load reduction credit was recognized continue to be implemented at an intensity sufficient to maintain the credited load reduction. (2) In the 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report the total loads reduced using the assessment methodologies described and cited in the Fact Sheet to demonstrate cumulative PCBs load reduced from each control measure implemented since the beginning of the Permit term. This report shall also include an estimate of load reductions from control measures taking place after the 2026 Annual Report submittal but before the end of the permit term.

Permittees shall submit all supporting data and information necessary to substantiate the load reduction estimates. (3) In their 2026 Annual Report, the Permittees shall submit, for Executive Officer approval, any refinements, if necessary, to the measurement and estimation methodologies to assess PCBs load reductions from control measures in the subsequent Permit. Any refinements to the methodologies shall be subject to public review.

C.12.b. Program for Source Property Identification and Abatement B i. Task Description – Permittees shall investigate, using both conventional sampling and laboratory analysis techniques, land areas that likely contribute PCBs to MS4s. These investigations will likely focus on land areas where industrial activities occurred prior to 1980 and continue today (i.e., old industrial land use areas). For those properties or land areas found to be contributing substantial amounts of PCBs or where high PCBs concentrations are found (generally areas with sediment concentrations greater than 0.5 mg PCBs/kg), Permittees shall take actions to abate the PCB sources into their MS4s or refer the properties to the Water Board for follow-up measures. For each source property referred to the Water Board, Permittees should implement interim enhanced operation and maintenance (enhanced O&M) measures in the street or storm drain infrastructure adjacent to the referred source property or implement a stormwater treatment system downstream of the property. These enhanced O&M measures shall be sufficient to intercept historically deposited contaminated sediment in the vicinity of the source area and prevent further contaminated sediment from being discharged from the source area to the storm drain system.

Page 201 of 564 ends

Page 70 of 181 ends

ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall investigate the following acreage of likely PCBs source properties during the permit term. •Alameda County:2,620 acres
•Contra Costa County:1,700 acres
•San Mateo County:1,411 acres
•Santa Clara County:913 acres
•Solano County:21 acres
Based on data collected through investigating land areas for the presence of source properties during the previous permit terms, this level of implementation will result in PCBs load reductions of approximately 740 g PCBs/yr, 50 percent of which would be credited during this permit term contingent upon implementation of interim enhanced operation and maintenance (enhanced O&M) measures in the street or storm drain infrastructure adjacent to the referred source property or implementation of a stormwater treatment system downstream of the property iii. Reporting
(1) In each of the 2022 through 2026 Annual Reports, Permittees shall report progress on the acreage of land areas investigated, including progress toward investigation of 100 percent of the old industrial land use indicated above. The reporting shall indicate what action was taken for the parcels investigated (e.g., abatement, referral, enforcement, etc.). Permittees shall submit all supporting data and information including referral reports. (2) Permittees shall report annually on ongoing enhanced O&M activities associated with all past contaminated property referrals. Prior to all new referrals, Permittees shall submit, for staff review and comment, a detailed description of the enhanced O&M plan for the referred properties. (3) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of reporting under Provision C.12.a.iii(2) on total acreage of land area investigated, area and description of properties referred, description of enhanced O&M measures, and the estimated total PCBs mass load reduced (consistent with the approved accounting procedures) resulting from implementing this control measure.

C.12.c. Programs for Control Measure Implementation in Old Industrial B i. Task Description – Permittees shall implement or cause to be implemented treatment control measures, stormwater diversion to wastewater treatment facilities, redevelopment (provided GSI is implemented in compliance with Provision C.3.b), or other control measures to achieve PCBs load reductions.

Permittees have substantial (totaling over 33,100 acres) areas of old industrial land use draining to an MS4 that have not been redeveloped or treated with green stormwater infrastructure or other treatment controls. •Alameda County:9,374 acres
•Contra Costa County:11,199 acres
•San Mateo County:4,450 acres
•Santa Clara County:6,647 acres
•Solano County:1,426 acres
Implementation of treatment control measures on 2,580 acres (which is about 8 percent of the land area shown above) will result in a total estimated load reduction of about 467 g PCBs/yr (2,580 acres x 10% of area x 70% efficiency x 259 mg PCBs/acre/yr estimated yield from old industrial areas, see Fact Sheet) in the area covered by the Permit. Implementation of control measures with efficiency lower than 70 percent will result in reduced acreage credited (for those lower efficiency control measures) toward fulfillment of the total acreage requirement shown below. The acres credited will be proportional to the ratio of implemented control measure efficiency relative to the efficiency of treatment controls (see Fact Sheet for more explanation and examples). The old industrial land use acreages to be addressed by control measure implementation by the end of the permit term and the estimated PCBs load reductions (for 70 percent control measure efficiency) are shown below. Permittees may comply with this provision element either through implementation of control measures on the following amounts of old industrial land use, based on implementation of 70 percent efficient control measures, or through accounting for the mass reduction of PCBs shown in parentheses. If control measures are less than 70 percent efficient, the required acreage shall be calculated as set forth above. •Alameda County:664 acres (121 grams/yr)
•Contra Costa County:664 acres (121 grams/yr)
•San Mateo County:445 acres (81 grams/yr)
•Santa Clara County:664 acres (121 grams/yr)
•Solano County:142 acres (26 grams/yr)
ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall, within the permit term, implement or cause to be implemented control measures (treatment controls, diversion to wastewater treatment plants, redevelopment (provided GSI implemented in compliance with Provision C.3.b), enhanced operation and maintenance controls, or other controls) to comply with the performance metrics in Provision C.12.c.i. If a Permittee chooses to comply by demonstrating PCBs load reductions, it shall use accounting methods consistent with Provision C.12.a. Implementation of treatment controls and stormwater diversion in PCBs-contaminated catchments not designated as old industrial may count toward fulfillment of the required acreage. In choosing locations for treatment controls and diversions, Permittees should focus on public rights-of-way and storm drain infrastructure in catchments containing known or suspected source areas or evidence of moderate to high PCBs soil concentrations (generally soil/sediment concentrations greater than 0.3 mg mercury/kg or 0.2 mg PCBs/kg). Treatment control systems must be designed and sized consistent with Provision C.3.d (Numeric Sizing Criteria for Stormwater Treatment Systems). Use of conditionally-approved sizing criteria cited in section C.3.j(3)(b) for treatment control systems will be considered provided an analysis is performed, acceptable to the Executive Officer, to determine the reduced effectiveness of the facility sized according to these alternative criteria. Permittees may choose to implement diversions to wastewater treatment systems to address this requirement. Because of the higher removal efficiency of wastewater treatment facilities, each acre addressed by routing stormwater to wastewater treatment facilities will be credited as 1.3 acres toward satisfying the treatment requirements provided that the diversion facilities are sized and operated consistent with the sizing requirements used for non-diversion treatment facilities.

Page 202 of 564 ends

Page 71 of 181 ends

iii. Reporting
(1) By March 31, 2023, Permittees shall submit plans and schedules for implementing control measures and stormwater diversion to wastewater treatment facilities in old industrial areas to address PCBs load reduction requirements included in this provision. This reporting shall include maps of the areas where control measures are to be implemented, the acreage of these catchments, and a description of design and sizing features all control measures, treatment devices and stormwater diversion facilities implemented for each treated catchment. (2) Beginning in 2023, in each Annual Report Permittees shall submit an account of control measure and stormwater diversion implementation consistent with the plan submitted in March 2023 and any modifications thereto. Reporting shall include maps of the areas treated, the acreage of catchments addressed, and a description of all control measures, installed treatment devices and routing facilities for each treated catchment. (3) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of reporting under Provision C.12.a.iii(2) on all control measures and stormwater diversion measures implemented during the permit term and provide the total acreage treated and an estimate of the total PCBs mass load reduced resulting from this implementation.

C.12.d. Program for Controlling PCBs from Bridges and Overpasses C i. Task Description – Permittees shall implement a Caltrans specification (to be developed through proposed requirement in Caltrans stormwater permit, see Fact Sheet for details) to manage, as part of bridge and overpass roadway replacement or major repair, potential PCBs-containing material in bridge roadway expansion joints. Implementation of this specification will result in a total estimated load reductions of 300 g PCBs/yr (see Fact Sheet for calculation details in the program area). Countywide programs and their member municipalities will be credited with a portion of this total load reduction in proportion to their share of population. Load reduction credit for this program will begin upon submittal of documentation demonstrating full implementation of the Caltrans specification for applicable roadway structures. ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall track the development of the Caltrans specification and develop an inventory of bridges in their jurisdictions that includes bridge ownership and a replacement/repair schedule. Finally, Permittees shall, by December 31, 2022, or six months after availability of the specification, implement or cause to be implemented the Caltrans specification during applicable replacement activities that are under the direction of the Permittee.
iii. Reporting
(1) In their 2022 Annual Report or the Annual Report immediately following availability of the specification, Permittees shall include a description of the Caltrans specification for managing PCBs-containing materials in bridge or roadway expansion joints during roadway replacement or repair.

Page 203 of 564 ends

Page 72 of 181 ends

(2) In their 2023 Annual Report, Permittees shall submit an inventory of bridges in the program area that includes bridge ownership and the bridge roadway replacement schedule.
(3) In their 2022 through 2026 Annual Reports, Permittees shall submit documentation confirming the use of the Caltrans specification (once it is available) during all instances of bridge roadway replacement or repair in their jurisdiction during that reporting year and provide an estimate of the volume of material managed and total PCBs mass load reduced resulting from implementation of the specification. (4) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of reporting under Provision C.12.a.iii.(2) an estimate of the total PCBs mass load reduced, consistent with approved accounting procedures, resulting from implementing this control measure.

C.12.e. Program for Controlling PCBs from Electrical Utilities C i. Task Description – Permittees shall (1) develop and implement a program to manage PCBs in oil-filled electrical equipment (OFEE) for municipally-owned electrical utilities in the MRP program area and (2) collaborate with the Water Board to determine PCBs loadings in OFEE from non-municipally owned electrical utilities.
ii. Implementation Level – Permittees shall do the following:
(1) Develop or improve standard operating procedures to respond to, clean up, and report spills and releases from municipally owned OFEE and fully implement these procedures.
(2) Develop and implement a plan to maintain and upgrade municipally owned OFEE. (3) Document the PCBs loads avoided through existing and ongoing OFEE removal and replacement programs. (4) Collaborate with the Water Board to request information from non-municipally owned electrical utilities. Permittees shall utilize the information to (a) determine the locations of PCBs-containing OFEE, (b) improve estimates of the total baseline mass of PCBs in OFEE in the MRP permit area, (c) evaluate the actions the non-municipally owned electrical utilities are taking to reduce or prevent the release of PCBs from their equipment and to respond to potential releases of PCBs from their equipment; and (d) identify opportunities to improve the response and cleanup protocols. iii. Reporting
(1) Permittees shall submit in their 2023 Annual Report the estimated PCBs loads avoided (along with supporting documentation) resulting from the removal of municipally-owned PCBs-containing OFEE through maintenance programs and system upgrades for the period 2002 to the beginning of this permit term (2023).(2) Permittees shall submit in their 2023 Annual Report a description of the improved spill response and reporting practices implemented by municipally owned electrical utilities
(3) Permittees shall submit in their 2024 Annual Report a summary of their plans to maintain and upgrade OFEE for municipally owned electrical utilities.

C
iii.

Page 204 of 564 ends

Page 73 of 181 ends

(4) Permittes shall submit in every Annual Report, beginning with the 2023 report, a summary of the actions undertaken during that reporting year that remove municipally owned PCBs-containing OFEE along with the loads avoided and the details of the calculations and assumptions used to estimate the load reduced.
(5) Permittees shall submit in their 2026 Annual Report, as part of reporting under Provision C.12.a.iii(2), the estimated PCBs loads reduced during the permit term associated with municipally owned OFEE removal resulting from maintenance programs and system upgrades.

C
iii.

Page 205 of 564 ends

Page 74 of 181 ends

(6) Within 12-months of the Water Board transmitting to the Permittees information from the non-municipally owned electrical utilities, Permittees shall submit a report discussing the following, to the extent possible given any data limitations: (a) locations of the PCBs-containing OFEE still in service, (b) previous locations of PCBs-containing OFEE, and (c) opportunities to improve non-municipally owned electrical utilities’ standard operating procedures for spill response, reporting, cleanup, and sampling and analysis.

C.12.f. Plan and Implement Green Stormwater Infrastructure to reduce PCBs loads C i. Task Description – Permittees shall implement green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) projects during the term of the Permit consistent with implementing requirements in Provision C.3.j. Implementation of green stormwater infrastructure will result in a total estimated load reductions of 200 g PCBs/yr (see Fact Sheet for basis of estimate).
ii. Implementation Level – The level of implementation is determined by the requirements of Provision C.3.j. iii. Reporting
(1) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall report as part of Provision C.12.a.iii(2)) on all green stormwater projects (e.g., parcel-based, street right- of-way, and regional projects) implemented during the permit term and provide the total acreage treated and an estimate of the total PCBs mass load reduced resulting from this implementation. This reporting shall include summary descriptions of the implemented projects including GSI type, location, and area.

C.12.g. Manage PCB-Containing Materials and Wastes During Building Demolition Activities B i. Task Description – Prior to issuing a demolition permit, Permittees shall implement the protocol developed during the previous permit term (see Fact Sheet for protocol description) for managing PCB-containing materials and wastes during building demolition so that PCBs do not enter MS4s. Permittees shall also ensure construction sites are inspected during demolition and obtain verification that materials from demolished buildings are appropriately disposed. Provision C.12.g. applies to applicable structures containing building materials with PCBs concentrations of 50 ppm or greater at the time such structures undergo demolition. PCBs from these structures can enter storm drains during and/or after demolition through vehicle track-out, airborne releases, soil erosion, or stormwater runoff. Applicable structures include, at a minimum, commercial, public, institutional, and industrial structures constructed or remodeled between the years 1950 and 1980. Single-family residential and wood frame structures are exempt. Structures that are constructed or remodeled between the years 1950 and 1980 and require emergency demolition to protect public health and/or safety are exempt from implementing the protocol, but they must be reported in accordance to Provision C.12.g.iii.(3)(d). The Town of Clayton is exempt from the requirements of Provision C.12.g. because it has demonstrated it has no applicable structures. Other Permittees may be exempted from the requirements in Provision C.12.g. if they provide evidence acceptable to the Executive Officer in their 2023 Annual Report that the only structures that existed pre-1980 within its jurisdiction were single-family residential and/or wood-frame structures. Implementation of this protocol will result in a total estimated load reduction of 2 kg PCBs/yr (see Fact Sheet for calculation details) in the program area. This constitutes an ongoing rather than a new load reduction. ii. Implementation Level
(1) Permittees shall implement their established protocol prior to issuing a demolition permit.

C
iii.

Page 206 of 564 ends

Page 75 of 181 ends

(2) For demolition of applicable structures containing building materials with PCBs concentrations of 50 ppm or greater approved beginning July 1, 2023, Permittees shall require demolition contractors to provide notification to the Permittees, the Water Board, and U.S. EPA at least one week before any demolition is to occur.
(3) Beginning the 2023 rainy season, Permittees shall inspect demolition sites with applicable structures containing building materials with PCBs concentrations of 50 ppm or greater pursuant to Provision C.6 to ensure that effective construction pollutant controls are used to prevent discharge into the MS4.(4) Permittees shall enhance their construction site control program to minimize migration of PCBs into the MS4 from applicable structures containing building materials with PCBs concentrations of 50 ppm or greater during demolition activities. Enhancements may include inspecting demolition sites monthly during demolition activities in the dry season (May – September) and requiring the demolition contractors to sweep the project sites and the streets around the property with street sweepers that will effectively remove sediment and dust. Implementation of enhancements shall begin no later than July 1, 2023.
(5) For demolition of applicable structures containing building materials with PCBs concentrations of 50 ppm or greater approved after July 1, 2023, Permittees shall verify that PCBs in demolished buildings are properly managed to minimize transport to the MS4 by obtaining official documentation that the building materials with PCBs concentrations of 50 ppm or greater in these demolished applicable structures were disposed appropriately according to state and federal regulations.(6) Permittees may elect to update for use in the subsequent permit term the assessment methodology and data collection program to quantify PCBs loads reduced through implementation of the protocol for controlling PCBs during demolition of applicable structures. iii. Reporting
(1) Each Permittee seeking exemption from Provision C.12.g requirements based on lack of applicable structures must submit in its 2023 Annual Report documentation, such as historic maps or other historic records, that clearly demonstrates that the only structures that existed pre-1980 were single- family residential and/or wood-frame structures.
(2) In their 2023 Annual Report, Permittees shall discuss enhancements to their construction site control program to minimize migration of PCBs from demolition activities into the MS4.

B
ii.

Page 207 of 564 ends

Page 76 of 181 ends

(3) Beginning with their 2023 Annual Report, the Permittees shall provide each of the following items:
(a) The number of applicable structures that applied for a demolition permit during the reporting year; (b) A running list of the applicable structures that applied for a demolition permit since July 1, 2019, the number of samples each structure collected, and the concentration of PCBs in each sample.
(c) For each applicable structure, with PCBs concentrations of 50 mg/kg or greater, include the following: the project address, the demolition date, and a brief description of the PCBs-containing materials.
(d) For each structure that was constructed or remodeled between the years 1950 and 1980 and requires emergency demolition to protect public health and/or safety, provide the following: address, date building was constructed, and date of demolition. (4) Beginning with their 2024 Annual Report, Permittees shall provide the following: whether the site was inspected during demolition, and for those cases where notification and advance approval from the U.S. EPA is not required and were approved for demolition after June 30, 2023, the hazardous waste manifest prepared for transportation of the material to a disposal facility. (5) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees shall submit an evaluation of the effectiveness of the protocol for controlling PCBs during building demolition as well as supporting data. This should be conducted and reported at the regional level on behalf of all Permittees and shall be considered the Report of Waste Discharge for Provision C.12.g for the next permit reissuance. (6) In their 2026 Annual Report, Permittees may submit for use in the subsequent permit term an updated assessment methodology and data collection program to quantify PCBs loads reduced through implementation of the protocol for controlling PCBs-containing materials and wastes during demolition of applicable structures.C.12.h. Prepare Implementation Plan and Schedule to Achieve TMDL Wasteload Allocations B i. Task Description – In 2020, Permittees submitted a Reasonable Assurance Analysis and plan (RAA) demonstrating that sufficient control measures will be implemented to attain the PCBs TMDL wasteload allocations by 2030. Permittees shall evaluate the effectiveness of all PCBs control measures and update the RAA as necessary. Updates can be focused on those control measures for which new information is available and for control measures not evaluated in previous efforts. Permittees shall also prepare detailed implementation plans for all control measures to be implemented in and inform permit requirements for the subsequent permit term.ii. Implementtion level – Permittees shall update, as necessary, their PCBs control measures implementation plan and RAA. The update may be focused on control measures for which new information is available or for those control measures not previously evaluated. The long-term plan must:
(1) Identify all technically and economically feasible PCBs control measures to be implemented (including GSI projects); and (2) Include a schedule according to which these technically and economically feasible control measures will be fully implemented; and (3) Provide an evaluation and quantification of the PCBs load reduction of such measures as well as an evaluation of costs, control measure efficiency and significant environmental impacts resulting from their implementation. Additionally, Permittees shall identify all specific control measures to be implemented, the intensity of control measure implementation, and the estimated load reduction benefit from control measures implemented during the subsequent permit term. This implementation plan must include:
(a) Identification of all control measures implemented during the current permit term and any additional control measures to be implemented in the subsequent permit term;
(b) A description of the intensity or extent of control measure implementation (e.g., acres treated, acres investigated for source areas, types of roadway projects for which protocols applied);
(c) Identification of accountability metrics to track during the subsequent permit corresponding to the proposed implementation intensity; and (d) Estimates for load reductions to be achieved through implementation of control measures during subsequent permit term at the proposed intensity.
iii. Reporting– Permittees shall submit the updated plan and schedule no later than March 31, 2026.

C.12.i. Fate and Transport Study of PCBs: Urban Runoff Impact on San Francisco Bay Margins B i. Task Description – The Permittees shall conduct or cause to be conducted studies concerning the fate, transport, and biological uptake of PCBs discharged from urban runoff to San Francisco Bay margin areas. The studies should focus on near-shore areas contaminated with PCBs from historical activity and the expected trajectory of recovery as sources from local watersheds are reduced. ii. Implementation Level – The specific information needs include understanding the in-Bay transport of PCBs discharged in urban runoff, the sediment and food web PCBs concentrations in margin areas receiving urban runoff, the influence of urban runoff on the patterns of food web PCBs accumulation, especially in Bay margins, and the identification of drainages where urban runoff PCBs are particularly important in food web accumulation. iii. Reporting – The Permittees shall submit in their 2023 Annual Report a workplan describing the specific manner in which these information needs will be accomplished and describing the studies to be performed with a preliminary schedule. The Permittees shall report on status of the studies in their 2023 Annual Report. The Permittees shall report in the March 15, 2026, Integrated Monitoring Report the findings and results of the studies completed, planned, or in progress as well as implications of studies on potential control measures to be investigated, piloted, or implemented in future permit cycles.

C.12.j. Implement a Risk Reduction Program B
B
iii.

Page 208 of 564 ends

Page 77 of 181 ends

i. Task Description – The Permittees shall conduct an ongoing risk reduction program to address public health impacts of PCBs in San Francisco Bay/Delta fish. The fish risk reduction program shall take actions to reduce actual and potential health risks in those people and communities most likely to consume San Francisco Bay-caught fish, such as subsistence anglers and their families. The risk reduction framework developed in the Previous Permit term, which funded community-based organizations to develop and deliver appropriate communications to appropriately targeted individuals and communities, is an appropriate approach. Permittees should work with local health departments, the Bay Area Clean Water Agencies, and the Western States Petroleum Association to leverage resources for this program and to appropriately target at-risk populations.

Page 209 of 564 ends

Page 78 of 181 ends

C.13. Copper
The The Permittees shall implement the following control program for copper. The Permittees shall implement the control measures and accomplish the reporting on those control measures according to the provisions below. The purpose of these provisions is to implement the control measures identified in the Basin Plan amendment necessary to support the copper site-specific objectives in San Francisco Bay. The Permittees may comply with any requirement of Provision C.13 through a collaborative effort.

B
C.13.a. Manage Waste Generated from Cleaning and Treating of Copper Architectural Features, Including Copper Roofs, during Construction and Post- Construction.
i. Task Description – The Permittees shall prohibit the discharge of wastewater to storm drains generated from installing, cleaning, treating, or washing copper architectural features, including copper roofs.
ii. Implementation Level
(1) The Permittees shall require, when issuing building permits, use of appropriate BMPs for managing copper-containing waste during and post- construction.
(2) The Permittees shall educate installers and operators on appropriate BMPs for managing copper-containing wastes. (3) The Permittees shall enforce against noncompliance. iii. Reporting
(1) In the 2022 Annual Report, those Permittees that have not previously done so shall certify that legal authority currently exists to prohibit the discharge of wastewater to storm drains generated from the installation, cleaning, treating, and washing of copper architectural features, including copper roofs.(2) In the 2022 Annual Report, the Permittees shall report how copper architectural features are addressed through the issuance of building permits. (3) The Permittees shall report annually permitting and enforcement activities.

C.13.b. Manage Discharges from Pools, Spas, and Fountains that Contain Copper-Based Chemicals C i. Task Description – Permittees shall prohibit discharges to storm drains from pools, spas, and fountains that contain copper-based chemicals. ii. Implementation Level – The Permittees shall either: 1) require installation of a sanitary sewer discharge connection for pools, spas, and fountains, including connection for filter backwash, with a proper permit from the POTWs; or 2) require diversion of discharge for use in landscaping or irrigation.iii. Reporting (1) In the 2022 Annual Report, the Permittees that have not previously done so shall certify that legal authority currently exists to prohibit the discharges to storm drains of water containing copper-based chemicals from pools, spas, and fountains. (2) In the 2022 Annual Report, the Permittees shall report how copper-containing discharges from pools, spas, and fountains are addressed to accomplish the prohibition of the discharge.
(3) The Permittees shall report annually on any enforcement activities.

Page 210 of 564 ends

Vallejo City CouncilSeptember 22, 2026

Vallejo City Council
September 22, 2026