August 15, Re: University of California, Santa Barbara Storm Water Management Plan

Transcription

1 August 15, 2008 Mr. Brandon Sanderson Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board 895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101 San Luis Obispo, CA Re: University of California, Santa Barbara Storm Water Management Plan Dear Mr. Sanderson: Please accept the following comments on the University of California, Santa Barbara s (UCSB) June 2008 Draft Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP), which are hereby submitted by Santa Barbara Channelkeeper. Channelkeeper is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting and restoring the Santa Barbara Channel and its watersheds, and for the past five years we have been reviewing and commenting on the draft SWMPs of municipalities throughout Santa Barbara County with the goal of ensuring that they will meet the requirements of California's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) (hereafter General Permit ) and will be effective in protecting water quality and reducing the discharge of pollutants to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP). Unfortunately, Channelkeeper finds that UCSB s SWMP falls short of meeting the General Permit s requirements in numerous respects. We strongly recommend that the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) require substantial improvements to UCSB s SWMP before approving it, along the lines we outline below. It is particularly important that UCSB have a strong SWMP in place in light of the significant construction and expansion of the University s facilities and population that will occur as a result of the 2008 Long Range Development Plan soon to be adopted. General Comments The General Permit requires municipalities to assess the appropriateness and effectiveness of the BMPs identified in the SWMP in terms of improving water quality and beneficial uses. Unfortunately, UCSB s SWMP fails to include provisions for such assessment, which will impede the University s ability to evaluate and improve the SWMP over time. Channelkeeper urges the RWQCB to require the addition of effectiveness assessment Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the SWMP. Additionally, Channelkeeper finds that the SWMP lacks adequate specificity in many of the BMPs it proposes to implement. Channelkeeper also notes that many of the SWMP s measurable

2 2 goals (MGs) are not in fact measurable and as such will not enable the University, the public nor the RWQCB to evaluate the effectiveness of individual control measures and the SWMP as a whole. MGs are described in the Phase II Rule as BMP design objectives or goals that quantify the progress of program implementation and the performance of BMPs. They are objective markers or milestones that will be used to track the progress and effectiveness of BMPs in reducing pollutants to the MEP. At a minimum, MGs should contain descriptions of actions that will be taken to implement each BMP, what is anticipated to be achieved by each goal, and the frequency and dates for such actions to be taken. 1 According to the General Permit, MGs should be quantitative and measure progress through the development, implementation and evaluation of each BMP and should enable measurement of the BMPs effectiveness in reducing pollutants over the life of the permit. We provide specific recommendations for improving several of the proposed MGs in the comments on particular BMPs below. Finally, the SWMP fails to describe the direct links between the particular BMPs proposed and the pollutant sources they attempt to address, as required by the General Permit. The SWMP must be amended to identify specific BMPs that address the pollutants of particular concern at the University and surrounding areas. Public Education and Outreach Website: The University s intent to target its stormwater program website towards children is misguided. It is far more appropriate to target UCSB students and staff (young adult students and adults). In addition, the MG to simply review the site yearly is inadequate; the site needs to be updated regularly (i.e. monthly), and it must include the most recent version of the SWMP as well as the annual SWMP implementation reports, the stormwater hotline, and information about what people can do to reduce stormwater pollution. Rainy Season Public Service Announcements: Channelkeeper applauds the University for committing to conduct PSAs prior to the rainy season, but the MGs for this BMP need to identify the target audiences, and should establish numeric goals for the number of people in these target audiences it aims to reach. Finally, Table 4-3 says UCSB will develop a PSA in both English and Spanish, but the text of the BMP on page 4-3 says only an English PSA will be developed; the Spanish version needs to be added to the text. Employee Education: The University s statement that it will integrate stormwater awareness and pollution prevention into selected meetings at least once a year is impermissibly vague. The target audience and a plan for how to reach that audience need to be laid out in the SWMP. The training materials should also be posted on the website. Stormwater Awareness Brochures and Posters: The University should not only develop brochures and posters addressing the specific pollution sources identified but should also target the general student and faculty population by addressing the range of individual/residential sources of stormwater pollution, such as pet waste, lawn and garden care, car washing and household hazardous waste. The distribution MG must lay out the timing and frequency for posting posters and distributing brochures, and brochure distribution needs to be broadened beyond just new employee orientation and staff/faculty trainings to include University-wide 1 U.S. EPA, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s,

3 3 events as well as the student center and other gathering places. Finally, the University must include documentation of the number of brochures and posters distributed as a MG. Public Survey: This BMP will be utterly ineffective if the University does not analyze and utilize the results of the survey to tailor its public education efforts. This must be added as a MG. Public Involvement and Participation Channelkeeper notes that the University s SWMP presents very little opportunity for involvement of the University population in stormwater management. We strongly urge that BMPs be added to provide opportunities for students and staff to participate in regular creek or beach clean-ups or volunteer water quality monitoring efforts, and to create a student stormwater task force to engage the University population in stormwater pollution prevention efforts, such as facilitating a student stormwater watch or adopt-a-storm drain program. SWMP Public Review: This BMP needs to specify how long the public will be given to comment on updates to the SWMP, and should include a MG to hold at least one public workshop annually to explain the SWMP and proposed updates and provide a forum for discussion. Moreover, UCSB needs to commit to incorporating comments it receives from the public into its annual SWMP implementation reports before submitting them to the RWQCB. UCSB Campus Stormwater Working Group: It is unclear whether this working group already exists or if the University intends to create it, and to whom its meetings will be open. UCSB must provide greater detail and MGs for creating the working group (if it doesn t yet exist), establishing its mandate and objectives, specifying intended outcomes, articulating who the members will be and who will be invited to participate, and explaining how the meetings will be advertised. Santa Barbara County Phase II Intergovernmental Meetings: The University should commit to attend 100% of these meetings. Community Environmental Awareness Events: This BMP belongs under the Public Education and Outreach MCM. Stormwater Lectures: Once again, the target audience for this BMP the general public - is not the primary audience the University should be targeting; its primary targets should be University students and staff. With those target audiences in mind, UCSB should develop BMPs and MGs to deliver stormwater management information through course curricula, including but not limited to Bren School, environmental engineering and other environment-oriented courses of study. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination This MCM lacks critical BMPs required by the General Permit, most importantly a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges. Channelkeeper calls on the RWQCB to require substantial revisions of this MCM to ensure that UCSB develops, implements and enforces an effective illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) program.

4 4 Storm Sewer Map: A MG must be added explicitly committing to the creation of a distinct storm sewer map, as the existing MGs simply state that surveys will be conducted and GIS files maintained. Department Safety Representative IDDE Training: Department staff need to be trained not only how to detect and report but also how to eliminate illicit discharges. Visual Inspections: The SWMP is unclear as to what facilities will be inspected and with what frequency. While conducting dry weather inspections of stormwater outfalls is an important BMP, the University needs to develop and implement a far more robust and proactive field investigation program in order to effectively identify and abate illicit discharges. This program must set out a systematic plan and schedule for regular inspections of areas that have a significant potential to discharge pollutants to the MS4, and should be tailored over time based on results of previous inspections and tracking of complaints made to the stormwater hotline. The primary MG for this BMP should be to eliminate 100% of illicit discharges identified. Moreover, the University must add a MG to develop a tracking system that records the time, location and nature of illicit discharges detected in addition to their number, placement (?) and resolution in order to track patterns of violations and repeat offenders, and this information must be conveyed in annual SWMP implementation reports. The aim of the final MG, EH&S will identify opportunities to improve public education and outreach, and provide recommendations for appropriate procedural modifications to eliminate pollution, is extremely unclear and must be clarified. Stormwater Hotline: Channelkeeper strongly recommends that this BMP be implemented in Year 1 rather than waiting until Year 2. We also urge that all calls to the hotline be investigated within 24 hours regardless of the day or time the call was made; that the University articulate and establish MGs for how it intends to make people aware that the hotline exists; that the number of calls as well as the time, location and nature of illicit discharges reported and the University s actions to investigate and eliminate the discharge all be documented; and that the University analyze the patterns that emerge from the aforementioned documentation and utilize that information to focus its IDDE efforts. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Policy and Enforcement: The General Permit requires MS4 operators to effectively prohibit, through ordinance or other regulatory mechanism, non-storm water discharges into the MS4 and implement appropriate enforcement procedures and actions (emphasis added). Adequate means of enforcing the stormwater pollution prevention policy, such as specific enforcement procedures, sanctions and escalating fines for non-compliance, must be added to this BMP in order to comply with this General Permit requirement. Community Hazardous Waste Collection Center: The University must add a MG articulating how it intends to advertise the collection center to the public. Construction Site Runoff Control Erosion and Sediment Control Standard: The General Permit demands an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to require erosion and sediment controls, as well as sanctions or other effective mechanisms to ensure compliance. It does not appear that UCSB s proposed Erosion and Sediment Control Standard will contain the requisite regulatory authority or compliance assurance mechanisms. Moreover, the MGs do not commit to applying the standard to all relevant construction contracts. Implementation of the University s 2008 Long Range Development Plan

5 5 (LRDP) will involve major construction throughout the University s property, and since the General Permit requires the reduction of storm water discharges from construction activity disturbing less than one acre if that construction activity is part of a larger common plan of development that would disturb one acre or more, the University must apply its construction runoff control BMPs to all construction projects that are part of the LRDP regardless of their size. Construction Site Inspections and Inspector Training: It is unclear that University officials will have adequate authority to enforce implementation of erosion and sediment control BMPs. The SWMP states on page 7-3 that, By way of contract, D&C has the authority to enforce requirements and terminate contracts if a contractor is found to be in violation of the Construction Stormwater General Permit or UC Santa Barbara erosion and sediment control and waste control policies and/or contract provisions (emphases added). This authority needs to be clearly spelled out in the erosion and sediment control standard, and standard language must be added to all construction contracts that binds the contractor to comply with the standard and the NPDES permit requirements. Use of the three-step method of enforcement noted in the text on page 7-3 must be added as a MG. In addition, construction inspectors must be trained every year, not just in Years 1, 3 and 5, and the number of hours of such training should be included in the MG. Finally, the University should develop and implement a comprehensive construction site tracking system that records basic site information, including the precise location, contractor, size in acres, proximity to natural and man-made hydrologic features, project start and anticipated completion dates required inspection frequency and items to be inspected at each inspection, and results of all inspections. The tracking system should also document complaints or reports submitted by the public, all violations and associated enforcement actions taken, and any follow-up inspections to ensure correction. Improved Project Planning, Design and Approval Process: This BMP belongs in the Post Construction Stormwater Management MCM. This is one of the most important BMPs in the entire SWMP, and UCSB s SWMP glosses over and provides utterly insufficient details about the planning, design, review, approval, permitting and tracking processes undertaken by the University to ensure that development projects do not have detrimental post-construction impacts on water quality. The University needs to provide far more detail on how these processes ensure that runoff quality and quantity are adequately considered. In addition, it is vitally important that development projects specify BMPs and control measures to protect water quality in the early stages of design. As such, the SWMP should make it clear that final BMPs must be selected, sized and sited in order for CEQA review to be completed, rather than at a later stage in the development process. Post Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment UCSB s SWMP fails to satisfy several of the new requirements outlined in the RWQCB s February 15 th Notification to Traditional Small MS4s for Enrolling under the State s General Permit, including a schedule for development and adoption of control standards for hydromodification; BMPs and/or other control measures to establish and maintain a minimum 30-foot buffer zone for riparian areas and wetlands; and evaluation of program effectiveness and progress toward water quality goals. Channelkeeper urges the RWQCB to require the University to add such measures.

6 6 Design Professionals Training: Staff who design and conduct plan reviews for development projects must be trained not only in the principles of post-construction stormwater management and low impact development, but also in the applicable regulations and practical knowledge and skills needed to enable them to recognize aspects of proposed projects that will impact water quality and to properly condition projects with appropriate BMPs and mitigation. Moreover, staff must receive such training annually rather than just once during the five-year permit term, and they should be tested to evaluate the effectiveness of the training. Channelkeeper strongly urges that this MG be amended accordingly. Riparian, Wetland and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Protection: The University s MG of assuring all policies related to the use of buffer zones are adequately incorporated into project design after the final LRDP is adopted is insufficient and does not satisfy the RWQCB s requirement as outlined in its February 15, 2008 Notification letter to include BMPs and/or other control measures in the SWMP to establish and maintain a minimum 30-foot buffer zone for riparian areas and wetlands. UCSB must amend its SWMP to explicitly include such BMPs, and to present a satisfactory and effective strategy for how it intends to implement these BMPs. LRDP and UCOP Policy on Green Building Design and Clean Energy Standards: Channelkeeper finds that the mitigation measures proposed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the 2008 LRDP limiting or prohibiting application of copper and other decorative finishes; limiting or eliminating sandblasting or pressure washing where copper or zinc finishes are present; installing and maintaining technologies effective at removing sediments and otherwise treating runoff; and sizing proposed storm drain improvements appropriate - will be insufficient to protect downstream water quality from the impacts of the massive development envisioned in the LRDP. Channelkeeper finds these measures to be impermissibly vague, and the proposed mitigation - to remove sediments, treat runoff and increase the sizing of storm sewer pipes to be outdated and reactive rather than state-of-the-art and proactive. Conveying runoff as quickly as possible to the nearest storm drain and treating large volumes of runoff at the end of the pipe are no longer the favored and most effective means of addressing the increases in volume, velocity and pollutant loads of stormwater that result from development. Channelkeeper has strongly urged the University in comments on the LRDP DEIR to take advantage of the opportunity presented by the major changes to UCSB property envisioned in the 2008 LRDP to instead implementing innovative low impact development strategies campus-wide to retain and treat as much runoff on site as possible. With regard to the proposed MGs, all new development and redevelopment projects stemming from the LRDP no matter the size must be conditioned with appropriate construction and postconstruction runoff controls, not just those disturbing one acre or more. The General Permit requires the reduction of storm water discharges from construction activity disturbing less than one acre if that construction activity is part of a larger common plan of development that would disturb one acre or more, and the LRDP is unquestionably a larger common plan of development. Moreover, simply referring in the SWMP to undefined campus policies and water quality mitigation measures to be defined at a later date in the Final LRDP EIR is insufficient and impermissibly vague. The University must include in the SWMP an explanation of such policies and how they will satisfy the requirements of the General permit to control postconstruction runoff from the substantial amounts of development that are planned for the University in the coming years under the LRDP.

7 7 Inventory and Maintenance of Structural Stormwater BMPs: The SWMP must contain a commitment by the University to not only maintain structural BMPs but also to conduct routine inspections to ensure their functionality, with a MG that outlines the frequency of such inspections. In addition, the University must add a BMP to inspect all structural and nonstructural BMPs required pursuant to conditions of approval applied to permits for development and redevelopment projects to ensure that they are installed and continue to function effectively and as required. Hydromodification: While Channelkeeper appreciates the City s proactive effort to lay out a strategy to develop a watershed-based hydromodification management plan and to present draft hydromodification control standards, we find that the strategy and standards do not conform to the requirements laid out in the RWQCB s February 15, 2008 Notification letter. This section needs to be modified to comply with those requirements. Interim Hydromodification Control Standards: The proposed interim measures - adoption of basin sizing criteria established by the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, continued adherence to policies within the 1990 LRDP (which are completely undefined in the SWMP), and a requirement to design and construct detention basins or other flow reduction control measures for development of sites greater than 10,000 square feet do not satisfy the requirements of the RWQCB s February 15, 2008 Notification letter nor its July 10, 2008 follow-up letter, which provides an additional six months for the development of interim hydromodification control standards. The SWMP must be revised accordingly to satisfy these requirements. Finally, UCSB s SWMP contains no regulatory mechanism requiring the implementation of post-construction runoff controls as required by the General Permit. This is one of the most important tools required by the General Permit, and UCSB s SWMP must include such a mechanism, along with enforcement provisions to ensure compliance with design requirements, in order to reduce pollutants in post-construction runoff, particularly in light of the considerable construction that will be taking place at the University in the near future pursuant to the 2008 LRDP. The University must include a BMP and associated MGs to develop such a regulatory mechanism. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations Campus Operations and Maintenance Program Facility and Housing Operations and Maintenance Program: UCSB must add BMPs to ensure that outdoor waste and materials storage areas are covered and have secondary containment to prevent releases or spills to storm drains. With regard to spill control and stormwater pollution prevention training, 100% of all relevant staff must receive such training annually, not just 90%. Landscaping: The University should establish a MG to reduce the use of pesticides and fertilizers by a certain percentage each year. University Vehicle and Equipment Fueling, Maintenance and Cleaning: Again, 100% of fleet services staff must receive spill control and stormwater pollution prevention training annually, not just 90%. Hazardous Materials Management: A BMP should be added here and to the pesticide management section to ensure that hazardous materials and pesticides are stored in covered areas

8 8 that have secondary containment to prevent releases to storm drains. The BMP fact sheet related to appropriate storage, handling and disposal of hazardous wastes should be distributed to all facilities and staff that house or handle hazardous waste, rather than simply posting it at each storage location and disseminating it at PF trainings. Food Service Operations: The SWMP should augment the waste and recycling receptacles BMP to include a requirement to repair dumpsters immediately if they are found to be leaking. Once again, 100% of Campus Dining Services staff must receive spill control and stormwater pollution prevention training annually, not just 90%. Trash Control and Recycling: All outdoor waste and recycling receptacles should be lidded to prevent overflow and discharge to storm drains. Finally, the University lacks a BMP to ensure that its contracts with outside contractors whose work may impact water quality explicitly require implementation of pollution prevention BMPs and compliance with General Permit requirements. This BMP should be added as should associated MGs to evaluate contractor compliance with these requirements, take enforcement action where necessary, and achieve 100% compliance by contractors. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the UCSB s SWMP. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions regarding the above comments. Sincerely, Kira Redmond Executive Director